They built, overnight, a 725-square foot house on the lawn of San Francisco's elegant city hall that demonstrates the potential for manufactured housing to tackle a variety of urgent concerns: affordable housing, global warming, peak oil, water shortages, healthy living and much more.
If there is a significant and growing market for green housing, the tool for ensuring that its benefits are real and not "greenwash" seems to be at hand.
Part of the West Coast Green conference and expo last month, the demonstration home, called mkLotus, was designed by Michelle Kaufmann and built by Xtreme Homes.
Billed as the nation's largest residential green building event, last year the conference was a surprise hit attracting 9,000 people. This year surpassed that number with organizers estimating 12,000 architects, builders, green and renewable energy suppliers, government officials and homeowners attended the three-day event.
Builders of mkLotus used an array of green and renewable technologies to meet proposed LEED residential platinum requirements. The house features a living roof (grass and flowers), solar panels that provide 130% of electricity needs, rain and greywater catchment systems that irrigate the roof and landscaping, and supply half of the house's water needs.
In addition, Concreteworks of Oakland, California, provided counter surfaces of recycled glass, porcelain, tiles, flyash and rice hulls. Folding Nana windows were imported from Germany for maximum cross ventilation when open and high thermal performance when closed. Heating is provided by a hydronic underfloor system and a heat recovery ventilation system.
Tim Schmidt, president of XtremeHomes, said his firm, which has a spawling factory in Oroville, California, is working with developers to supply green production homes. If a mass market is created for these homes, green suppliers such as the ones who contributed to the mkLotus show home, envision the possibility of rapid growth alongside this market.
Factory-built housing offers other benefits besides economic, according to Sheri Koones, author of "Prefabulous."
According to Koones, there is far less waste of material on the site; houses can be built better under supervised conditions; and SIPs (structural insulated panels) make the homes much tighter for heating and cooling; quicker and cheaper to build—and ultimately increase the efficiency of solar photovoltaic and solar water heating systems.
Modular housing, she points out, can produce mansions or cottages. It just depends on the number of modules. Her book surveys the pre-fab/modular housing industry, which she describes as the "best kept secret" in American housing.
If there is a significant and growing market for green housing, the tool for ensuring that its benefits are real and not "greenwash" seems to be at hand. A team of architects and engineers from the U.S. Green Building Council gave a packed workshop a preview of the new LEED standards for residential buildings.
After two and a half years of pilot projects (involving builders on the ground), the standards will be rolled out at the Green Build conference in Chicago Nov. 7-9. LEED for Homes is a voluntary rating system that promotes the design and construction of high performance "green" homes. It considers the efficiency of use of energy, water, and natural resources; minimization of waste; and health and comfort of occupants.
LEED buildings may lower energy and water bills; reduced greenhouse gas emissions, mold, mildew and other indoor toxins, cost less to build and operate, but their acceptance in the slow changing building industry depends on education and market demand. Both of which seem to be coming.
structural insulated panels are a great product. The problem is getting a premium over traditional stick and stucco buildings at sell. People don't recognize the advantages in the reduction in utilities and are not going to pay the extra $$$ for it. So much of housing turns over every 3 to 5 years, that there is little incentive to pay the extra money for structural insulated panels.
I have always wondered if solar people are able to completely recoup the costs of their solar investment at the time of sell or is it deeply discounted as was done with the older home solar features from the 80's. Until recently there have been so few Solar PV systems on homes, I doubt there is any real research on the topic.
In today's Sacramento Bee there is a story about a UC Davis professor who installed 27 pv panels on her 3000 sq ft home for $40,000 (http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/409919.html) She is very happy to have reduced her summer time electric bill from about $450 mo. to about $50. As rates go up I would think this would certainly add to the value of the home on resale. My solar experience has been different so for: I got a bid for $15,000 for six modules (1.5 kW). After utility rebates and tax credit, the net cost would be $11,500. I might have gone for this except the only place on my house where the panels could be placed required cutting down a shade tree, which, in the future would be worth some savings with its afternoon shading. Also, I like trees. So I have gone in for other less expensive (but still usually expensive) efficiency investments: tankless water heater, insulating shades, a window awning, solar powered attic fan, whole house fan, ceiling fans, CF lights throughout, and tuning up my HVAC system. Only the latter four were clearly cost effective for the energy savings. That, plus trailing behind my wife turning off lights, has got my summertime electric bill down to $100 month from a peak of $300. Next investment: either replace my 10-year-old HVAC with a more efficient new model, or fireplace insert. Probably will go for the latter. For the HVAC upgrade I'll pay perhaps $12,000, and for the insert maybe $4000. What do you think?
Jim,
You bring up great points. Has there been any research on the value gained from selling a home with PV? If so, how much did the home appreciate due to the PV system?
In the 80's people did not recognize the advantages in reduced utility bills due to solar electrcity. In contrast, however, the public awareness is increasing dramatically. Every day solar and renewable energy are in the papers and on the news. Wall Street has plenty of coverage as well. When financial institutions (i.e. Wells Fargo) release statements and literature claiming PV as one of the best home additions for increased value, people tend to listen.
Home buyers and owners are starting to realize that saving $150/month, or $1800 annually, is a lot of money. That is 450 Starbucks @ $4 a cup, or your monthly cell phone, internet, TV, etc. Now, look at many homes where people are saving $300+/month...that could be a 50K chunk of mortgage. There is definite resale value in having a PV system, which is why Wells Fargo urges a 1-to-20 ratio of ($1 saved in utility bill) = ($20 increase in property value). It is, afterall, open to market trends. But, even if the value increases only half of stated ratio it can still be greater cost/value than installing a pool, spa, new kitchen cabinets...etc.
John,
I love your description of concrete homes. It's classic. Everything I have read concurrs with your positive assetment. I wish it was popular im my area.
John,
please send me more info about your concrete wall systems.
By the way, our Solar & Radiant Heating Systems are below the common heating systems.
Jim,
Here in Texas we are building insulated sandwich wall concrete homes at, or below the cost of conventional stick frame homes. Coupled with radiant floor heating, solar hot water, efficient light fixtures, and fresh-air heat exchangers, and sensible design, we can build a house at virtually dead even costs with conventional housing. I know this because I do it everyday. Our walls are R-22 equivalent, bullet proof, stronger than any SIPS panel, and you can hang your motorcycle on the wall for decoration, if the feeling moves you. They don't mold, or rot. A strong wind will not blow them over. Bugs don't like concrete, termites face no temptation, they are 100 percent recycleable, and they're pretty! Green building is already here, and it's not cost prohibitive.
Adding PV does drive up the costs. However, if you're over a mile and a half off the grid, PV is cheaper. Some places in west Texas are WAY off the grid.
It doesn't pay to generalize about PV or solar hot water.
Mostly...it depends...
My concern is that no figures were provided for the cost of these homes, except to say they "cost less to build." I suspect that is on the basis of the smaller footprint. Seven hundred and fifty square feet is actually about half what is needed for a comfortable home - I raised my family in one. Another problem is that manufactured homes do not appreciate over time as a conventional home does, Prices go down and insurance rates go up.
There are lots of ways to cut utility bills without spending $40,000 on solar panels - the best ones being to not use compressive air conditioning, to use flourescent light bulbs, and to buy energy efficient appliances.
Only if electricity costs become a greater part of the housing costs would energy efficiency be a real value priced into the resale of the home.
This is obviously the future for we "humans". Build a reasonable footprint sized home by mandate; or social pressure and let the energy savings fuel even more development.
We're moving towards critical mass,..I say moving (not there yet), with LEEDS cert., popular elections coming up, etc. and popular marketing such as this site with SIPS/ICF's, solar hot water/PV in general. One should be able to build now in any part of the country and have very a little "carbon footprint" and one not be concerned if they are not in Florida or California.
An all American electric vehicle will be out starting in 2008 with Chevy leading the way with the Chevy Volt- hopefully! Wow we're gonna lead with something-awesome!
With an efficient SIP shell and solar hot water combined with a 2kW PV on one's home one could pay 1/4 the current energy bill of an inefficient unmodern design or 1/2 the cost (obviously approx.) of todays modern "energy efficient homes" aka "Energy Star Homes". Energy Star is great, but still uses old building techniques that don't take into consideration new shells or the physics of SIPS and ICF.
Imagine having a SIP/ICF home with a small 1.5-2kW PV that saves energy and also stores energy at night for the batteries of the Chevy Volt; worth thinking about.
All the Best,
FB
John, I'm interested in your building skills as well. Please contatc me at hannak028@aol.com , thanks.
I would like to get more info from John Car about efficient prefab concrete wall structures. I would appreciate hearing from others who are developing/using similar building systems.
Thanks - mikpo@mindspring.com
Mr. Carr,
Have you been peeking inside my head? With the exception of R-value, you could be describing what's floating around in my head and marginally been placed on "paper". Please contact me so that I may get more information ... thanks!
Squalo61@gmail.com