Custom Home411: Another Look at Cost Effective Energy Effeciency

About the Author

Henry Moreau, began his homebuilding career in 1986 as a carpenter working for one of the last “working homebuilders”, Ted Peagler of Morton MS. From “Mr. Ted” he learned the importance of attention to detail, an acquired a working knowledge of the basics of fine homebuilding. From there he spent several years working for Harrell Construction, and developed a detailed knowledge of structural wood framing. In 1996, he hired a crew and launched his own frame carpentry company, later incorporated as Moreau Building Contractors. By 1998 he had passed the State Board of Contractors exam and was licensed as a residential builder. “One of the problems I started noticing as a general contractor was that I don’t think anyone ever brought me a stock plan and said, this is it, its perfect, don’t change a thing. Field modifications can be made, but too often they are not the best solution to the clients needs; a redesign would be needed to be most effective. The idea of doing design-build was appealing to me early on.” By the year 2000, Mr. Moreau had begun to study residential design in earnest. “All of the college texts I acquired stressed the importance of understanding how buildings are actually put together, and advised spending some time in the construction field to acquire that knowledge.” As energy efficiency came to the forefront of the homebuilding industry, Henry realized that the combined effects of designing for a particular site and personally attending to details was having a huge impact on energy efficiency in a cost effective way.

Another Look at Cost Effective Energy Effeciency

The results of the energy efficiency of my last project has prompted me to look further at information available. I’ve always been a little skeptical of manufacturers claims of energy savings, unless it is supported by outside sources.

There is plenty of support for taking a fully integrated approach to planning for energy efficiency. When I read this article, I found some vindication in my mantra of starting with the planning stage, particularly the site.

The average homeowner is inundated with companies selling their systems and products to improve energy efficiency. Some, I believe are worth the expense, others are inappropriate to our region, and others I am yet to be convinced are worth the expense. (I will keep an open mind and continue to investigate.)

With the issue of HVAC systems, I’ll admit I have a lot more research to do. Some local companies are pushing geothermal, but tell me the cost is nearly double a standard system. I’m not sure what the life expectancy of the system is, but I suspect the “payback” time is longer.

On my last project, the owners and I discussed HVAC equipment with an eye toward cost effectiveness and energy efficiency. We sat down with my HVAC contractor, Bob Hoffman with Central Heating and Cooling in Brandon MS.

When we looked at the SEER ratings and the level of efficiency versus cost, we found that once you moved past 16-18 SEER, the increase in efficiency improved only slightly while the cost skyrocketed. In fact, the "payback" time increased beyond the expected life of the equipment. Need I say there were no units above 18 SEER installed in their home. Kudos to Bob Hoffman for his frankness and integrity.

Evaporative cooling is an alternative method referred to in “green” building literature. However it is not appropriate or effective in high humidity areas such as the Southeast U.S.

Radiant floor heat a great alternative heating method, particularly with slab construction, where the concrete acts as a heat sink. The problem with our area is the large temperature fluctuations we commonly have during the heating portion of the year. If you heat your slab up nice and toasty on a 35 degree night in December, and the next day approaches 70 degrees, you will roast as your slab slowly releases its heat during the day. If this kind of fluctuation was rare, I’d go for radiant. There is a lot of benefit both in cost to operate, and the comfort level.

One of the biggest product lines to hit the market in recent years is the upgraded wall insulation systems. Builders and homeowners are seduced by claims of reducing utility expenses by astounding percentages. I need to look further into validation of these claims. Even some of the manufacturers of these products claim that the improvements are due to the “air tightness” of the system, more than its R-value. If I can do this for the owner with proper attention to detail and a few hundred dollars worth of flashing tape and caulking, do I want to have the owner spend anywhere from 100-800% more for insulating the wall system? I’m going to have to look at this a lot harder before I could recommend the expense.

Radiant barriers are an extremely cost effective way to reduce cooling costs in our climate. These can be retrofitted in an existing attic or installed integral with the roof sheathing with a product known as Techshield. Techshield has a radiant barrier attached to a standard sheet of oriented strand board (OSB )

I forgot to mention in the last post that we did use Tech shield for the roof sheathing.

I guess it’s to validate hard numbers on improvement in efficiency. The only way to really accomplish this would be to build identical homes in identical locations with all systems exactly the same to control for one variable. So until someone comes up with a few million dollars for that experiment (like the federal govt) , I’ll continue to take an approach to cost effective efficiency based on common sense, with an open but slightly skeptical mindset toward looking for improvements.