As Americans seem increasingly less willing to buy a home, they are becoming more open to investing in "green" features that result in reduced energy costs and clear consciences.
The American Institute of Architects in February found that homeowners are inclined to pay $5,000 more for homes with earth-friendly features such as solar panels or renewable materials. This eco-consciousness also benefits green contractors and architects who, according to AIA chief economist Kermit Baker, are getting more work in the downturn than mainstream builders.
But if they're not careful, homeowners might end up with AstroTurf imitations.
While the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard is the most commonly used green building standard--it was developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, a nonprofit trade organization, and tallies points based on 69 criteria--what's troublesome is that some features are more earth-friendly than others and not given weighted credit. Homes that generate 35% of the property's electricity receive a point, as do homes that house a bike rack.
Instead of relying on this point system exclusively, which works best when there is a comprehensive green plan in place, buyers and homeowners, experts say, would be better served paying attention to an a la carte menu of energy-efficient options.
A home's ability to seal in heat and air tops the list.
"The most important thing is the energy envelope of the house," says Scott Brown, principal of Pine Mountain Builders, a green building company based in Atlanta. The best way to insure a tight seal, he says, is through foam sealants, insulation or windows and doors that keep cool air in during the summer and heat inside during the winter.
Expensive features such as solar panels are another potential pitfall when there isn't a comprehensive green plan. Putting a solar array on a roof will offset energy costs, but if the house is large, or the wood inside non-sustainable, it's not as green as it could be. The durability differences of pine vs. redwood, for example, don't make any difference in your green quotient if one wasn't harvested in a sustainable fashion.
"The key mistake is not taking a global view of what green building is," says Steve Thomas, a "resident" at Planet Green, a green educational media resource owned by the Discovery Channel. "People focus on health issues, supply chain issues, design issues--but you need to look at all of these things together."
What are you doing to live green? Weigh in. Add your thoughts in the Reader Comments section below.
A good first step: your carbon footprint. This, a measure of a home's emissions, is calculated in tons of carbon dioxide output.
Carbon footprints change by state based on energy consumption and state standards for energy cleanliness. An average three-bedroom home in California emits 15 tons of carbon dioxide per year, according to the Nature Conservancy, but that same house emits 46 tons in Ohio. This has to do with differing energy demands (think climate differences) as well as California's cleaner energy production standards. In most states, a home of this size emits 20 to 35 tons per year.
Good ways to immediately cut your carbon footprint are through the use of Energy-Star appliances, compact fluorescent lightbulbs and proper insulation. If you improve your insulation, while keeping your thermostat low, and dump your air conditioner for floor and ceiling fans, you'll reduce your carbon footprint by an estimated 4.5 tons. Installing Energy-Star appliances throughout the home can reduce your property's carbon output by an estimated two tons.
Checking the efficiency of your water heating system also helps. On-demand, tankless water heaters, popular in Japan and much of Europe, use 25% to 35% less energy than conventional tanks. That's because tankless water heaters heat water only as it heads to a faucet or shower head--instead of constantly brewing it in an inefficient tank.
Homes that employ multi-use spaces are another emerging green trend. Every room in a house decreases a home's energy efficiency because more space requires more heating or cooling and, thus, more electricity or gas.
One example: Most families don't use their formal dining room or living room very often outside of holidays, preferring instead to eat in an alcove kitchen or relax in a den. Yet the lightly used rooms consume energy year round. Multi-use spaces combine functions and tailor homes to fit use patterns.
"Houses have to scale to the people," says Brown. "If you have a family of three it's ridiculous to be in a 5,000 square-foot house because you can't recover the energy resources. You could put in the greenest everything, but you'll never catch up if the house is too big."