As the mortgage crisis continues to inundate the market with distressed properties, today’s house hunter has no shortage of cheap, foreclosed homes to pick through. Despite all those deals in the previously-owned home market, consumers shouldn’t overlook the potential benefits of buying a new home.

“New homes usually sell higher per square foot than resale homes,” says Jack McCabe of McCabe Research & Consulting. “But their selling points, I think, are pretty strong.”

To help consumers better understand the advantages of new-home buying, we spoke with a handful of experts and compiled a list of seven reasons to choose a new home over a resale:

1. Customization. Many homebuilders allow buyers to participate in the process of designing their property, which helps create a living space specifically tailored to the consumer’s tastes. New-home buyers, for example, can often decide where their bathroom might go, choose their favorite type of flooring or pick the color of the exterior paint. Buyers moving into a subdivision can sometimes even pick the lot they like best. “There is a lot of flexibility for (new home buyers) to kind of put their personal signature on the product,” says Patrick Costello, president of Forty West Builders. “Those kind of things you can’t do with a used house — it’s just not possible.”

2. Building envelope. Building codes have mandated increasingly higher energy efficiency standards since they began to address the issue in the late 1970s, says Kevin Morrow, senior program manager for the National Association of Home Builders’ green building programs. “The most recent International Energy Conservation Code came out in 2009 (and) required roughly 17 percent more efficiency than the codes of three years prior,” he says. “So using that as sort of a gauge to how newer homes should perform from an efficiency standpoint compared to older homes, it’s pretty clear that just as homes meet code, they are going to be more efficient.”

Newly constructed homes use energy more efficiently in two ways, Morrow says. First, they tend to have a tighter-sealed building envelope that helps prevent conditioned air — cool air in the summer, warm air in the winter — from escaping. Features that create this envelope include higher-efficiency insulation, doors, and windows. “Gone are the days of the single-pane window … now I think you are starting to see triple- and quadruple-paned windows,” Morrow says. “These are windows that are designed to really minimize the transfer of heat either from warm to cold or vice versa, and they of course will help the building envelope.”

3. Green appliances. The more energy-efficient mechanics of the house also help reduce utility bills for new-home buyers, Morrow says. Newly-constructed homes often include green systems and appliances — like high efficiency stoves, refrigerators, washing machines, water heaters, furnaces or air conditioning units — that homes built years ago might not. “The conditioning equipment is usually considered to be one of the larger energy consumption devices, but certainly those kitchen appliances matter,” Morrow says. Existing homeowners can always retrofit their property or buy higher-efficiency appliances, but doing so requires a potentially significant expense.

4. Fewer repairs. The features of newly constructed homes should also hold up better than those of existing homes, which may have experienced years of wear and tear, says Evan Gilligan of Mandrin Homes. “People will buy (previously-owned) houses and then the carpet needs to be replaced or it needs to be repainted, or it needs new appliances or the flooring is shot,” Gilligan said. “When they buy a new home in today’s market, it really is new.”

5. Less maintenance. At the same time, today’s new homes are engineered specifically to minimize maintenance requirements. For example, Costello says his company uses composite products for a home’s exterior trim instead of wood, which could rot or need repainting. “You buy a used house you don’t know what you are getting, you might have to do a lot of maintenance,” Costello says. “We are trying to look down the road and make things as easy as possible for the homeowner so they can enjoy living there and not have to be saddled with maintenance.”

6. Warranty. In addition, builders often agree to take care of the repair work that becomes necessary in your newly constructed home for at least the first year. “A new home is generally fully warrantied by the builder for a minimum of a year and most of all the other components are warrantied for extended periods,” says McCabe. So if your roof starts leaking or the heater breaks during the warranty period, your builder will pick up the tab for the repairs. “When you buy a resale home, even if you have a home inspection done, it still does not turn up hidden defects that you don’t find out about a lot of times for two years,” McCabe says.

7. Fire safety. Newly constructed homes often include fire safety features that may not be present in properties built years ago, Gilligan says. “We use fire retardant in our carpeting and in our insulation,” he says. In addition, all newly constructed homes are required to include hard-wired smoke detectors. These devices can provide better protection than battery-operated smoke detectors, which can fail to perform if their battery runs out, Morrow says. “Hard-wired (smoke detectors) run on the electricity of the house and then have a battery backup for if the house power goes out,” he says.

• Confused about the Shoreland Protection Guidelines? 
• The benefits of a Stormwater Management Program?
• Why is Green Home and Landscape Design Important?

 Come and meet the experts!

Enjoy great hors d’ouvres and refreshments!

Bring your business cards and enter to win our raffle!

• Dinner for two at the Inn at Pleasant Lake!
• Dinner and cruise for two aboard the MV Kearsarge!

 When:  Wednesday, July 6th, 5:00 PM — 7:00 PM

Where:  3 Alpine Court, Sunapee

 RSVP Required!   chamberinfo@tds.net  or 603-526-6575 by Tuesday, July 5th at 2pm.

Parking is available beside and behind the building, across the street and in the gravel lot across the river.

Everett Pollard, AIA assoc.,  AIBD, CGP, CGR:

 With over 35 years of designing and building award-winning custom homes in the Lake Sunapee area of New Hampshire, Northcape Design/Build has a reputation for craftsmanship, attention to detail, and for creating homes with enduring value and classic New Hampshire appeal.  From new construction to historic preservation, room additions to major renovations, our team of professional designers, project managers, contractors and craftsmen is committed to crafting projects with exceptional quality and care for our clients.

Daniel Bruzga, ASLA, NHLA. AIA assoc., :

db Landscaping LLC is an award winning professional landscape design and construction company which offers a seamless one-stop shop for landscape/site design, permitting and landscape construction services.  We offer professional services where we work closely with the client, architect and engineer and strive to build lasting relationships with our clients.  Since 2000, db Landscaping LLC has completed entire projects including design, permitting, landscape site work, stone masonry, plantings, grading/drainage, installation of landscape lighting and irrigation.

Charles Hirschberg, PE:

Charlie has been a Civil and Environmental Engineering consultant in the Lake Sunapee area for over 30 years.   When it comes to land use permits Charlie is the consummate expert.  He and his staff have been preparing and working with the N.H. State Dept. of Environmental Services in the preparation of Shoreland Permits since the inception of the Shoreland Act.  CLD has also prepared and presented projects to most of the local boards in all of the Lake Sunapee Region towns.  CLD provides a broad range of Civil Engineering and Survey services and can help you with site design for your next building project.

By Kathleen Donohue and Martha Kerr, Neil Kelly Design/Build Remodeling

Planning a kitchen for multiple cooks can involve many different situations, and in order to meet clients’ needs there’s a lot of information to gather regarding how they use their kitchen. Just accepting a “multi-cook kitchen” description does not give you a clear-enough picture of what is truly needed, and your chances of coming up with just the right design for that client are a shot in the dark until you delve deeper with more targeted questions.

Are the cooks partners in meal preparation, or is there a chief cook and assistants? Is it a multi-generational family where grandparents and children cook along with the mom or dad? Does one of the cooks only prepare salads and hors d’ouvres? Maybe there’s a “designated griller” in the family. The answers to the various scenarios for the particular family will determine how we approach creating the multi-cook kitchen.

To start, we need to identify if the family wants and has room for dual-cooking centers. Can we include two sinks (a cleanup area and a prep sink), or do we include two sinks and two dishwashers? Should refrigeration be “decentralized” and located at point of first use so that each cook has access to the refrigerated items they use most often, or do we carefully locate a single refrigerator so that it is accessible to each cook without crossing their work path or causing a log jam when the door is opened?

If there is room and budget allows, a second sink almost always makes a multi-cook kitchen function better. A prep sink near a cook top, baking center, or prep area can keep cooks out of each other’s way.  More targeted questions will help you to determine if it needs to be a small bar sink or a larger prep sink.

A high-functioning multi-cook kitchen with unlimited space or unlimited budgets will vary greatly from the average multi-cook kitchen. Our everyday multi-cook kitchen would include two work triangles that preferably don’t intersect one another, or do so infrequently. One cook might go from the refrigerator to the second sink and microwave (located to the right of the refrigerator) and one might go from the refrigerator to the primary sink and cooking area to the left of the refrigerator.

Pay special attention to the door swings of appliances. We always draw them open, with dotted lines on the floor plan, so clients can visualize walking through the space while someone else may be accessing them from any particular work center. Try to engage your clients in visualizing working together in a space doing specific tasks. This helps to flesh out any work patterns or tasks they may have forgotten to mention but could be a serious inconvenience once the kitchen is installed.

The ideal multi-cook kitchen — with lots of space and no budget restrictions — would include two sources of refrigeration, a cook top (or perhaps separate cook tops, one two-burner gas and one two-burner magnetic induction) with separate wall ovens, two sinks, and two dishwashers. A microwave drawer might be included in a snack center along with under-cabinet refrigeration. Specialty steam ovens, speed-cook ovens, or convection ovens might also be desired — this is where asking questions about what and how they like to cook can really pay off.

Kitchen design is really all about creating spaces that work for the family that lives in the house.  Appliance placement, sufficient counter surface in the work areas, proper and accessible storage, and really good task lighting are all considerations.

If baking is a primary function, a lowered countertop for the baking center may also double as the work surface for the children who are learning to cook with their parents. If child participation is a primary goal, think about the ages and abilities of the children as you create the different work centers. The foodstuffs, utensils, appliances, and counter surface all need to be accessible.

If the multi-cook kitchen is being designed for a couple who both love to cook and entertain, you will likely be including a beverage center. The center could be located separately in a butler’s pantry or could occupy a multi-use area, such as a corner of an island, the end of a peninsula, or a raised serving area, and might include the coffee/espresso machine, a wine chiller, or under-cabinet refrigerator/ice maker, and perhaps a single drawer dishwasher. This area would also store the wine glasses, cocktail glasses, coffee cups, and other amenities needed for the beverage center.

Finally, a word about islands:  Islands in kitchens that have a 36-inch-high countertop on all four sides provide a great area for family cooking projects. With the counter surface being accessible on all four sides, you could likely have as many as eight people working around the island. If it’s a growing family, perhaps you have stools on one or two sides for the kids to have easy access. Whether it’s a family Christmas cookie project or the girl scout troop making papier-mâché animals, a kitchen island that is maintained at one height provides a fabulous work surface for many hands. Islands are a natural gathering spot, and, as long as they don’t block critical access lanes, they are the perfect multi-use center of any multi-cook kitchen.

Without realistic “comps” that properly value energy-saving features, obtaining a home loan may be difficult.  Passive solar designs that include generous amounts of insulation can save homeowners a great deal of money in operating costs over the life of the house. But getting banks to approve loans that reflect somewhat higher construction costs can be a struggle, sometimes forcing builders to dial back their plans and deliver a less efficient house.

This dilemma was at the heart of a question from a green builder and the topic of this week’s Q&A Spotlight.

Danny Kelly was trying to build a house that would qualify for a Gold or Emerald rating from the National Green Building Standard. It included upgraded insulation, high performance HVAC, a solar water heater, tight building envelope, and passive solar design — in other words, all the features you’d like to see in a house.  The rub was the appraiser who valued the house for loan purposes. “The appraiser and the bank said they do not give any extra ‘credit’ for green features,” Kelly wrote. “One of the comps they used was over 25 years old, so not even on par with a code house from an energy code perspective… [The] bank does not seem interested in helping much either.”

The trouble with finding ‘comps’
In setting the value of a house for loan purposes, real estate appraisers conduct field inspections and also must find sales of similar houses in the same area. Those are called comparables, or comps.

Appraisers make adjustments in value based on the age, size, and condition of houses in the same area that have sold recently. It’s part number-crunching and part intuition.  “Despite my strong personal feelings, most appraisers’ hands are tied by comparable sales in your area,” writes Green Country Homes, a licensed appraiser. “No green comps, no chance for a realistic appraisal.”

Green Country says an “educated appraiser” gave him a $25,000 green adjustment on a $340,000 property last year, only to have it disallowed by the bank review appraiser.  Because comps in the community were so limited, Green Country’s $315,000 appraisal was cut to $285,000 by the bank review appraiser and the buyers walked because they thought they were overpaying by $55,000.  “Green building, in many markets, is like the $1,000 bath faucet,” Green Country says. “The appraiser gives you no extra value for the more expensive faucet that does the same job as the $75 faucet. They have no comparables to justify the market paying more.”

Lower appraisal, lower standards
GBA advisor and builder Michael Chandler detailed the shortcomings of this system in a GBA post last year.  In his case, a customer was approved for a $400,000 home. Despite having a suitable lot and a design that fit his customer’s budget, the bank appraiser would not approve the actual cost of construction.  Because the owners couldn’t come up with any more cash, they had to drop the passive solar and solar hot water features, along with the spray foam insulation that Chandler had recommended. The owners could add a Jacuzzi or a home theater, Chandler complained, but not features that would improve energy efficiency.  “Part of the problem is that the appraisers get their data from a [Multiple Listing Service] that doesn’t necessarily show them what green features are included in the homes that have been sold,” Chandler wrote.

In a GBA column earlier this year, Richard Defendorf said that rules on finding comparables for appraisals can be a real problem.  “In some markets, a dearth of appraisers familiar with green construction — or perhaps even more critically, a scarcity of nearby listings with comparable green features — can frustrate prospective homebuyers and homeowners who wish to refinance,” Defendorf wrote.

So how does this problem get fixed?
“Find another bank,” says Robert Riversong. “Often local savings & loan institutions are both more in tune with the community and more open to different approaches.”  Riversong says he had a client who successfully won a construction loan and a mortgage from an S&L for a super-insulated house even though it was built of rough-sawn lumber with a frost-protected foundation, no central heat and no flush toilet.  That’s the power of a local bank that isn’t hamstrung by rigid national policy.

David Meiland suggested consulting RESNET, the Residential Energy Services Network, and two offices in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

In the long term, it will take more than the understanding of local banks to fix this problem. Changing appraisal rules to allow more realistic adjustments for utility savings, and educating real estate agents on the value of green buildings also would help.

That won’t happen overnight.

Check this out!  A brand new publication, “A Shoreland Homeowner’s Guide to Stormwater Management: protecting your home & environment” by the NH Dept. of Environmental Services provides several simple and cost effective practices that shoreland homeowners can install to address stormwater runoff from roofs, patios, lawns and driveways.

by Jeff Schloss, Extension Professor and Water Resources Specialist, University of New Hampshire

There is often controversy and confusion regarding lawns on shoreland properties.  Some consider lawns inconsistent with the natural shoreland ecology while others want to bring to their shoreland home the same look and feel as the neighborhoods in surburbia that they have grown up with. 

As all vegetation provides at least some water quality functions, a lawn managed in the proper way can still allow for stabilized soils, filtered water infiltration into the ground and some nutrient and pollutant capture.  And, as with all vegetation, lawns sequester carbon dioxide, produce oxygen and, by doing so, cool the planet.  Thus, lawns still make a better alternative to pavement or patios which create greater runoff conditions and impede groundwater recharge. 

Of course, managed improperly, lawns and their care can add to pollutant and nutrient loading to our surface and ground waters, attract nuisance weed plants and insect pests (and even big pests like Canadian Geese!), impact important plant and wildlife species, as well as greatly reduce the available drinkable water supply with their potential need for irrigation.  So, how might you maintain a lawn area to enjoy on your shoreland property (or any property for that matter) while minimizing your impacts to the water quality and natural ecology?

The recent publication, “Landscaping at the Waters Edge: An ecological approach” from UNH Cooperative Extension (extension.unh.edu/resources/) covers the importance of considering how you may landscape your shoreline property for the improvement of water quality as you also enhance the enjoyment and value of your property.  While the publication goes into much greater and more specific detail, the information below is a good start when considering lawns and their potential impacts to water quality.

Everything in moderation.  We often hear from our health providers that moderation is the key to healthy living and the same holds true for natural systems.  Questions to ask yourself here include: How much lawn or open space do we really need for our intended uses?  Do we need to have our open space all as a monoculture of a single type of grass or can we live with a combination of grasses and groundcovers that match our use?  There are many varieties of grasses depending on the type and frequency of use (i.e.; occasionally picnicking to kids playing ball everyday) and site conditions (soils, sun exposure and slope).  Recently developed fescue grasses, for example, require less maintenance (water, mowing and fertilizing) and can even be obtained with symbiotic bacteria in their roots that make the grass better resistant to pests and diseases.  The best approach is a mix of grass species with other groundcovers and white clover (or another low growing legume to naturally supply nitrogen to the soil).  Talk to your county extension educator, landscaper, or garden center expert about your options.

Location, location, location. Yes, the mantra of real estate agents also works well for lawns.  Since a lawn requires additional maintenance that even, when not excessive, can still threaten water quality, locating the lawn as far away from the shore as you possibly can and maintaining a significant buffer area downslope from the lawn with a mix of shrubs and woody plants to make up for this.  A lawn leading right down to the water is the worst thing for the water and it will attract nuisance geese.  It’s a known fact that keeping the vegetation high at the waters edge will discourage geese from coming onto a property.  It also provides many water quality and wildlife related benefits.

Test first, apply later.  It is most important to test your soil before even thinking about applying fertilizers.  Once grass is established, fertilizing more than once a year (unless the yearly dosage is applied in fractions) is generally excessive and can lead to excess nitrogen loading to surface and groundwaters. Lawns tend to need less acidic soils, so sometimes just applying crushed limestone to reduce the acidity can release enough nutrients that were bound to the soil to maintain the lawn.  A soil test will let you know exactly what you need to maintain a healthy lawn.  As will often be the case if the test informs you that only nitrogen is needed, look for low to no phosphorus fertilizer blends (middle number of the N-P-K rating on the bag should be “0”) since phosphorous causes algae blooms in lakes.  Generally, a well-established lawn can survive adequately with no more than one to two pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet.  The best time to apply fertilizer on an established lawn is around mid-September when the grass is still active enough to incorporate the fertilizer into the plants, the summer drought is over and the surrounding vegetation is well established to capture any runoff from your lawn.  Choose slow release fertilizers only, to ensure less polluted runoff.  Many folks apply crushed limestone in the spring and fertilize in the fall.  Some folks have never felt the need to fertilize and others have had their best results just using lake water (which usually contains small amounts of nutrients) for irrigation.  It is really up to you to balance the results you are looking for with the minimum applications needed.  Remember, the NH Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act prohibits applying anything except limestone in areas within 25 feet of the high water line except in some circumstances.

Read the fine print! A recent survey in Maine indicated that many consumers did not realize that “Weed & Feed” products contain both fertilizers and pesticides.  Why pay for and put down something that can potentially threaten the health of pets and children and water quality when you may not need it in the first place?  If you do have weed or insect problems, consult with your county extension educator, landscaper or garden center expert to learn of safer alternative controls.  No matter what you choose to use, always read the application directions and never over-apply.  Many of the plants and animals that form the foundation of the aquatic food web are extremely sensitive to pesticides.

Conserve every drop.  If you are on a public water supply, it is best to choose grass species with low watering requirements or use alternative irrigation supplies like rain barrels or cisterns or even the water directly from the shore.  Summer water demand for lawns can be very significant.  Depending on the species and soil conditions, you should water only when needed, no more than a half inch to an inch total weekly.  You can use a rain gauge or a can to measure rainfall and irrigation amounts.  Early morning watering is preferable to minimize evaporation loss but give the water enough time to infiltrate and to allow the leaf blades to completely dry before night to not encourage disease problems.  Keeping the lawn height at least three inches or higher will also encourage deeper roots which require less water (and a mulching mower blade will allow for those grass clippings to recycle nutrients back into the soil).  Remember that in times of drought and hot summer, lawns are supposed to go dormant.  Letting this happen is the most environmentally friendly thing you can do.

So, the choices are yours—you can have an open space on your property with minimum impact to our waters if you can restrict its size, locate it properly, provide adequate vegetative buffer areas down-slope and use low input design and maintenance methods.

For more information:
Contact Jeff Schloss at jeff.schloss@unh.edu.

Why? Many current buyers are interested in homes that are energy efficient and economical to operate, which are factors that can be dramatically affected by a home’s hot water usage. According to the DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, water heating is the third-largest expense in most homes, accounting for 14% to 25% of a home’s expenses. In some cases, that percentage may even be higher, which means energy-conserving hot water solutions also could result in big cost savings for homeowners in this difficult economy.

Currently, the most popular energy-efficient option for water heating is a tankless water heater, also known as an on-demand system. Unlike a traditional tank that heats a reservoir of water 24 hours a day, a tankless unit activates only as needed. When there is a demand for heated water, cold water travels through the tankless unit, where a gas burner quickly heats it to the preset temperature.

According to www.smarterhotwater.com, a Web site launched by Alabama-based Rheem Manufacturing, the average annual operating cost for a conventional storage is between $230 and $285, nearly twice the cost for a tankless system. They estimate a tankless hot water heater would cost $165 to $170 annually to operate.  Given those numbers, the decision to go tankless might seem simple, but like many other construction technologies, tankless water heater usage in the United States lags behind the rest of the world.

Cost could be a factor since in the U.S. market, tankless heaters cost significantly more than a conventional system. But it also could be a matter of educating the American market about the product. In recent years, manufacturers say awareness has grown significantly, and so has usage, which has seen double-digit increases. Consumers, not builders, are driving the demand for tankless water heaters.

Does that mean that everyone should install tankless in their homes? There are pro’s and con’s. While tankless technology can reduce a home’s energy costs by as much as 25% annually compared to a standard 40-gallon tank heater, there are other considerations. Standard storage tanks now qualify for Energy Star certification. And tankless systems may have other issues that negate its energy performance and lower operating costs.

Here’s a handy guide outlining the pros and cons of tankless water heaters versus conventional storage tanks that you can use to evaluate the options for your situation:

Conventional Water Heater

Pros for Conventional

• Proven technology that builders and home owners know and trust. The straightforward system has been around for years and works well.
• Low product cost and low installation cost. A basic 30-gallon electric tank can be purchased for less than $300. Installation is fairly simple.
• Inexpensive replacement cost. If and when a water heater goes bad, the system can easily replaced with a similar unit for about $500 to $800.
• Energy Star tanks are now available. As of this year, the Energy Star program certifies conventional high-efficiency gas water heaters, so it’s possible to save energy and money. Units must have an energy factor of .62.

Cons for Conventional:

• Conventional tanks are always on. No matter how energy efficient it is, a storage tank cycles on a regular basis to heat and reheat water at a preset temperature, using energy to heat the water whether a homeowner needs it or not.
• Big and bulky. Most storage tanks take up precious real estate in a mechanical or laundry room, especially in smaller homes such as apartments, condos, or townhouses.
• May be inadequate. Depending on the capacity and household hot water needs, a conventional storage tank may not be able to meet demand. “If not sized correctly for peak demand, tank water heaters will run out of hot water,” according to www.smarterhotwater.com. In addition, only about 70% of the hot water in a typical storage tank is available for use.
• Less versatile installation. The unit needs a fairly large space for installation.
• Less durable. The life expectancy of a conventional hot water tank is about 12 to 15 years.

Tankless Hot Water Heater

Pros for Tankless:

• Saves energy. The unit only operates when there is a demand for hot water, which can reduce its energy cost by about 25% annually.
• Highly efficient. The most efficient storage tank has an energy factor of about .67, but, according to Energy Star, some tankless units have energy factors as high as .95.
• Reliable. If a unit is sized properly, a gas tankless heater can deliver a continuous supply of water at a preset temperature (plus or minus one degree) at a rate of typically 2 gallons to 5 gallons per minute. The units never run out of hot water, though the flow rate may be inadequate during times of peak demand, according to www.smarterhotwater.com.
• Compact size. The typical tankless heater is about the size of a small suitcase, which takes up significantly less space than a conventional tank.
• Durable. It has a life expectancy of 20 years or more.
• Versatile. The unit is easy to zone and it can go almost anywhere in the house.
• Tankless units cost about twice as much as traditional storage tanks. A typical tankless unit may cost about $700 and can easily top $1,500.
• Installation is expensive. In addition to the high product cost, installation for the unit and the necessary piping can be pricey. They also need very good venting, which is also expensive.
• Retrofit is pricey and complicated. Unlike a traditional tank, retrofitting a home with a tankless unit is difficult and expensive. “In new construction, the labor time required to install a tankless water [heater] is about the same as a tank water heater,” according to www.smarterhotwater.com. But the equation changes in a remodeling situation. The process is complicated, and the installed costs to replace a tank water heater with a tankless unit can be as high as $3,000.
• Best performance comes from gas units. Though gas-fired tankless units are great performers for whole-house use, electric units are woefully inadequate. Electric units are not Energy Star-rated, Aikens says, and “require significant amounts of energy to use.”

Cons for Tankless:

• Tankless units cost about twice as much as traditional storage tanks. A typical tankless unit may cost about $700 and can easily top $1,500.
• Installation is expensive. In addition to the high product cost, installation for the unit and the necessary piping can be pricey. They also need very good venting, which is also expensive.
• Retrofit is pricey and complicated. Unlike a traditional tank, retrofitting a home with a tankless unit is difficult and expensive. “In new construction, the labor time required to install a tankless water [heater] is about the same as a tank water heater,” according to www.smarterhotwater.com. But the equation changes in a remodeling situation. The process is complicated, and the installed costs to replace a tank water heater with a tankless unit can be as high as $3,000.
• Best performance comes from gas units. Though gas-fired tankless units are great performers for whole-house use, electric units are woefully inadequate. Electric units are not Energy Star-rated, Aikens says, and “require significant amounts of energy to use.”

(Excerpted from Builder Magazine)

New study shatters stereotypes of what motivates buyers.

By: Jennifer Goodman

A new national study of green consumers contradicts several long-held stereotypes about them: The environment is not their top concern, their kids are not influencing them to be green, and while many know what they should do to save the planet, they often don’t do it.  As a result, marketing messages aimed at this group often fall on deaf ears, says Suzanne Shelton, whose Knoxville, Tenn., firm, Shelton Group, conducted the study.

“Most green advertising is created as if there’s one pool of green consumers and they’re all motivated by ‘Save the planet!’ messaging,” Shelton says. “We need a revolution in this thinking. Not all green consumers are the same, they’re not all motivated by the same messages, and they’re not all inclined to buy only green products.”

Released Aug. 21, the Green Living Pulse study polled 1,007 U.S. consumers who at least occasionally buy green products (77% of the population) and found there is no typical “green consumer.”  The study discovered six myths about this group:

Myth 1: Green consumers’ top concern is the environment.
When asked to identify their top concern, the economy, by far, is No. 1 (with 59% calling it their top concern) and the environment falls far behind (8%).

Myth 2: Green consumers’ main motivation when reducing their energy use is to save the planet.
When asked the most important reason to reduce energy consumption, 73% chose “to reduce my bills/control costs” and only 26% chose “to lessen my impact on the environment.”

Myth 3: Green consumers are all-knowledgeable about environmental issues.
For example, the survey asked, “From what you have read or heard about CO2 (carbon dioxide), please place a check beside any of the following statements you think are true.”  Almost half (49%) chose the incorrect answer, “It depletes the ozone layer.”

Myth 4: Green consumers fall into a simple demographic profile.
While the study detected some demographic tendencies, it found that green consumers aren’t easily defined by their age, income, or ethnicity.  

Myth 5: Children play a big part in influencing their parents to be green.
Only 20% of respondents with children said their kids encouraged them to be greener by, for example, promoting recycling and turning off lights.

Myth 6:  If buyers just knew the facts they’d make greener choices.
The study showed that knowledge does not always lead to eco-conscious behavior. Individuals who answered all of the science-related questions correctly did report participating in a significantly higher average number of green activities, such as driving a fuel-efficient car or lowering their thermostat during the winter; however, the 25- to 34-year-old age group consistently answered the questions correctly, yet, on average, this group’s green activity levels were lower than those of older respondents.

“Because green consumers are being stereotyped, and these myths we tested are embraced by marketers as facts, many green messages are falling on deaf ears,” Shelton says. “If these messages were better targeted, more people would be buying green products, conserving electricity, and doing more to save the planet.” 

Jennifer Goodman is Senior Editor Online for EcoHome.

WASHINGTON, Aug. 13 — The number of home builders, remodelers and other members of the real estate and construction industry who hold the Certified Green Professional educational designation now tops 4,000, the National Association of Home Builders announced today.

The milestone is the latest sign that NAHB green building education and training initiatives continue to find an enthusiastic audience, said NAHB Chairman Joe Robson, a home builder and developer in Tulsa, Okla.

The NAHB Research Center, which administers the National Green Building Certification program for new homes, developments and remodeling projects, is also reporting solid growth: More than 350 homes have been certified and there are 4,500 projects in the certification pipeline.

“When the housing market returns, it will be accompanied by increased demand for green and energy-efficient new homes and remodeling projects,” Robson said. “Our members want to ensure they are ready to meet the demand, and that’s why so many are beginning to score and certify their projects or studying and taking classes to obtain their CGP designation.”

Robson noted that the New Hampshire Builders and Remodelers Association will use part of a recent state grant designed to promote greenhouse gas reduction projects to provide members with the coursework needed for the Certified Green Professional designation.

CGPs must successfully complete three days of classroom training, have two years of industry experience and commit to continuing education requirements.

The coursework is now being enhanced to reflect the requirements of building to the National Green Building Standard, the consensus standard for green homes, developments and remodeling projects approved by the American National Standards Institute in January.

In addition, NAHB is creating advanced training for CGPs that will result in a new designation for building practitioners: the Master Green Builder Remodeler. NAHB expects to introduce the designation program early next year, Robson said.

The CGP designation was introduced in February 2008 during the International Builders’ Show and is the fastest growing designation offered by the University of Housing. “That’s no surprise to me,” Robson said. “NAHB members have always been the leaders of the green building movement.”

Everett Pollard of Northcape Design is a Certified Green Professional.

Ask any home buyer or homeowner how many leaks in their roof or spewing plumbing joints would be acceptable. What about gas leaks or faulty electrical circuits? How many doors or windows are allowed to be left out? How large a hole can the builder or remodeler leave in the ceiling, wall, or floor and still call the job complete and satisfactory?

Now, ask that same consumer how much of the energy and water that they pay good money to bring into their homes they are willing to waste every month because of poor design, obsolete products, shoddy workmanship, mediocre materials, and inefficient mechanical systems. (Never mind the fact that their lifestyle and habits will have just as large an impact on these resources—if not more—than the sum of the building quality.)

Most of the studies I have seen estimate that as much as 30% to 40% of the energy brought into American buildings, including residences, for space heating, air-conditioning, ventilation, water heating, and operating appliances is never put to its intended use. It is simply wasted. As for water, these waste estimates range from 15% to 35%, and even higher in some parts of the country.

Does anyone reading this newsletter believe the cost of traditionally produced energy is going to go down? Does anyone on a public water system anywhere in the country think they pay the true cost of sourcing, treating, and delivering a gallon of safe, potable water to the tap? Does anyone know of a city council, a county commission, or other government body that has the political will to charge the electorate the real cost of anything, fearing that people mostly vote their pocketbooks, when they can instead externalize portions of these costs and cloak them by a variety of means?

I am always amazed when I hear builders and remodelers say that their customers are not willing to pay extra for higher quality or performance or that they are only willing to spend more if an acceptable payback can be assured. Sorry, that simply does not fly with me. If this were true then there would only be one model of each product, the cheapest version possible. And somebody please tell me what the ROI is on a brand-new big-screen HD television. Sure, price matters but people don’t make purchasing decisions on price alone.

No, my experience across the 25 years that I delivered homes to my customers was that they invariably chose to buy the best product, component, or system that they could afford. Sure, there were trade-offs. It was regularly necessary to balance the level of performance or price point with the overall budget until an acceptable bottom line was reached. And often they looked to me for my advice on what parts of the project they should prioritize, not only for the sake of resale value, but to help them understand where they could economize with the least impact on their quality of life.

Today, homeowners and home buyers are beginning to look at the long-term ramifications of their selections. They are realizing that operational costs, replacement rates, maintenance expenses, reliability and durability—not just the initial purchase price—are all keys to their ability to afford any dwelling over the long haul.

They are also carefully factoring insurance costs, property taxes, and the soft costs associated with their chosen type of financing vehicle (especially in the case of adjustable rate mortgages) with a keener awareness that keeping the lights on, the appliances running, the water heater fired up and the living space comfortably conditioned all come at a price, month after month, and must be transparent in the calculation.

Industry groups and individual building professionals have got to abandon their outdated circle the wagons mentality when it comes to attempting to forestall regulations requiring higher levels of performance and put an end to the monotonous messaging of denial and fear that only tell part of the affordability story. Trade associations, like NAHB, are not speaking for all of their members when they lobby lawmakers to limit increases in performance regulations to no more than token increments.

Many builders, remodelers, and contractors are already delivering performance that well exceeds the embarrassingly low minimum requirements held forever sacred by the foot draggers. It is time that the achievers are represented and rewarded rather than continuing to protect and defend those who make up the lowest common denominator.

Any building professional who believes it is possible to succeed going forward on the basis of price alone, or that higher building performance will remain voluntary, is in for a rude awakening. At the end of the day, a level playing field, an understanding that the market paradigm has definitely shifted, and a genuine determination to deliver the best performance and highest quality product possible are the keys to successful building, satisfied customers, and a brighter future for everyone.

By Ron Jones, The Gatekeeper @ www.thegreenbuilder.com