Home improvement - where do I begin?

[SeussTree]

I'd like to do some remodeling and of course make it as energy-efficient as possible.

I need a new water heater and I'd like to redo the kitchen and bath. Soon I will also need a new roof.

There is so much information out there that I am getting overwhelmed.

Should I switch from gas to electric, since my electricity is from wind? And in the future, could I switch it to solar panels?

What's up with the solar panel roof tiles. Does that make sense? Is there an AFFORDABLE option for solar panels yet?

Is there somewhere that lists remodelers who are certified in some way to be "green"?

[XemaSab]

1. Is your house already well insulated?

And are you in LaJolla? :shrug:

[SeussTree]

9. No and no.

I'm looking into the insulating additives for paint right now, since I am painting, but might get more insulation added in the attic and walls too. I was hoping insulating paint might be enough, since to this date I have still not had to turn on the heat (it is a little cold in the house though and I've been watching TV from under a blanket).

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. I'd start here

http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumer/your_home/designing_remodeling/index.cfm/mytopic=10080
http://rehabadvisor.pathnet.org/index.asp

[SeussTree]

10. Thanks, those will be helpful!

[DesertFlower]

3. i'm not ready for a remodel.

my house is only 5 years old. however, i had all my windows tinted last week. it will reduce the need for A/C and i get a 10% tax rebate.

i would have loved to have the house built with solar panels, but the cost was really high.

[SeussTree]

8. Fortunately, the previous owners had put in new windows

and apparently they are very energy efficient. ONE thing they did right ;-)

[zalinda]

4. If you are getting a new water heater

I would suggest a tankless. I have one here in Syracuse NY and it works just fine. It is gas because that is what was available in my basement, but I'm sure they have electric ones. The only problem with them is you have to run the water for about a minute before you get hot water, so we normally wash our hands and brush our teeth with cold water. If you have the money, you may want to put a small tank in to hold the hot water, so you don't have to waste water.

There are many options with them, so you should be able to find one that works for you. The best part, you never run out of hot water, no matter how many people have to take showers.

The Energy Star people may be a good place to start.

zalinda

[SeussTree]

11. That was my original idea.

But I had no idea they cost "thousands". Aren't these just the same water heaters Europeans have been using for decades? Why are they so expensive here?

[zalinda]

13. Lowes has a number to choose from

ranging from $599 to $215. The ones in the $200 range are point of use heaters. We've gotten a long with the $599 one for about 3 years now. It just means that you don't do hot water laundry while someone is taking a shower, and not doing dishes is a caring gesture to the person in the shower, too. But all in all we are pleased with and would get another one.

Here are some of the pluses to it. They last for at least 15 years, but probably more and by the time they wear out, either something new and cheaper will be out, or you can easily repair the unit. It's basically nothing more than a large coffee maker, with water heated on the fly. It takes up much less room and can easily be mounted on a wall, you could almost put it in a wall. It doesn't leak, since water isn't held in the tank. Since it doesn't hold water, you don't have to insulate it. It doesn't use energy when you aren't using it. Car washes use the very same system and have for years. Also, you can use the hot water for cooking, since the water doesn't sit in a tank soaking up whatever is in the bottom of the tank.

The only reason they are expensive is because they are new and not a lot of people use them unlike the tank water heaters.

Oh, and my sister has one, but it doesn't work well for a shower as she is on a well system and it doesn't like working with her pump.

zalinda

[SeussTree]

14. What I've been told is it's not so much the price of the unit

but the INSTALLATION that costs a fortune, because they require new plumbing to accommodate different exhaust requirements or something...

[zalinda]

16. Nope, not really

But, I would check at the place where you plan on purchasing the unit. There was a pretty comprehensive instruction booklet that came with mine. I can look to see if I still have it. If you are handy, you may be able to put it in yourself. If you have to pay someone to put it in, make sure they've done it before, especially if you are paying by the hour. Lowes or other places do have a contractors list, so they can fill you in on prices maybe.

Mine is bolted to a couple of 2x4's bolted to the basement wall, and it's gas powered so the vent was right there. But, if you go electric, I don't think it has to be vented.

Here's a place that has really good prices, installation help and looks to have a good FAQ. http://www.americantanklesswater.com/?gclid=CLr566Hkw48CFQ0ygQodnCtjag

zalinda

[Kolesar]

20. The installation costs of plumbing a high-capacity gas line to the tankless heater are high

... and make the installation "less advantegeous".

I would not refit a house in a climate like yours and mine with a long heating season. Tankless heaters make sense in climates like Texas where the homeowners don't "need" the waste heat from the tank and associated plumbing.

[zalinda]

21. I have no idea what a high-capacity gas line is

The guy who installed it took the gas line that had been in my previous water heater, and used that. It hasn't been a problem. I've had it for 3 years and it works fine. But, like I said, it's in my basement and my basement doesn't get that cold. My water during the winter does get very cold, (so cold it can hurt) but the tankless has kept up with it fine.

I would get another one without a second's hesitation.

zalinda

[bananas]

5. A lot depends on specifics - local climate, size of house, how many people, etc

Check the website of your local gas/electric utilities,
for example SDG&E has a lot of useful information for homes in this area:
http://www.sdge.com/residential/res_energy_efficiency.shtml

It also links to a Fannie Mae website with information on finding contractors,
which you can use even if you're not getting a loan:
http://www.energyloans.org/body_contractors.html

Finding a “good” Contractor is critical if you’re thinking about any home improvement, especially energy efficient home improvement. It’s extremely important to us and our sponsoring utilities. Our policy is to use non-profit and consumer advocate agencies to screen Contractors.

In California, we work with the League Of California Homeowners, a non-profit consumer benefit organization, which does a thorough job of screening Contractors. Here’s a “link” to their website to learn more about what they do and where to find their “approved” Contractors.

League Of California Homeowners

Outside of California, we work with:
Smart Consumer Services

[SeussTree]

12. Hmmmm :-/

The Fannie Mae link for other states besides California seemed promising, except it's a bad link and that group (Smart Consumer Services) doesn't seem to have a working Web site, which never inspires confidence!

[NNadir]

6. Go for the gusto.

Demolish your house and build a Maine Solar House.

About the only environmental drawback I see, beside the fuel required for the oodles of contractors, is the problem you have with all the news crews driving up with fifty news trucks to celebrate how environmental you are.

It will only cost you about $900,000 and it will make you very efficient and climate change gas free.

[jpak]

7. Wrong again

According to the owners, the Maine Solar House cost $300,000 to build.

The PV *and* solar heat *and* solar hot water systems were 15% of the total cost.

(note: there were no solar tax credits or rebates when it was built and the cost of PV systems has dropped dramatically since 1995)

[NNadir]

15. "Only $300,000?"

It's really affordable.

"Only 15%?"

"Just" $45,000?"

Wow. It makes me want to get organically grown oranges flown in for Florida, just thinking about it.

The per capita income of the United States can be found here:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104652.html

Of course, the average inner city person doesn't make the per capita figure. Bill Gates is part of the average.

And of course, there's the matter of land. One doesn't build these sort of things in row houses, or even Condos. By it's nature, this sort of thing would not work in a community served by mass transit. The television crews visiting this monstrosity have burned more energy than it will produce in its life time.

And why are television crews visiting it? Because it's exotic that's why. Real energy solutions are not exotic. They are ordinary.

It's just more cosumerism from yuppies. It is meaningless in the broad context of the environmental disaster we are experiencing. Yuppies are not the cure for this matter. On the contrary, they are big part of the cause of this problem.

[jpak]

17. Ummm... the median price of a single family home in the Northeast is $298K

http://www.realtor.org/Research.nsf/files/MSAPRICESF.pdf/$FILE/MSAPRICESF.pdf

and the Amish have found PV extremely affordable...

Amish in Southern Md. Find Solar Power Plain Practical

http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=1324

The Amish: Solar Champions

http://www.off-grid.net/index.php?p=745

sorry to burst yer bubble (again)

[NNadir]

18. Um...is that including the $45,000 solar installation?

I happen to live in the Northeast. I would say that one out of a thousand, if that many, houses have solar PV systems.

You, of course, are living on another planet and are completely unaware of the lives of peasants.

Speaking of bursting bubbles, it is very, very, very, very, very unlikely that the figures on Realtor.com are remotely connected to 1) What people paid for their houses or 2) what the houses are worth.

If you have never had to work for living, I can see how one can be glib about these things.

The "affordability" of solar energy is measured in its use, and it's use can be found by using something called "data."

Now.

I post the same data here all the time, and am usually met with dumb stares and a host of lazy links to some out of the way local. Then there's the good ole' "I have a cousin who's neighbor's best friend's aunt's lover's dog's vet lives off grid," kind of stuff. Both are really, really, really fun.

Here is the data, which reflects the lives of ordinary Americans, trust fund brats and impoverished single mothers living in vermin infested single rooms alike.

Here's the data again: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/table1.html

As has been the case for the last several years that you've been posting "renewables will save us" happy talk, solar energy is, by far, the weeniest form of energy recorded. It produces 0.08% as much energy as the dangerous fossil fuels about which the anti-nuke religion couldn't care less. It produces 0.3% as much energy as dangerous natural gas. It produces 0.3% as much energy as coal. In fact, it produces only 1% of the energy produced by the entire weeny renewable energy industry, 2.4% as much energy as hydroelectric, 2% as much energy as biomass, and 0.8% as much as nuclear energy. In fact, in the entire world of primary energy supplies, cute solar energy only matches one form of energy in the double digits percentage wise is geothermal and wind. Here solar produces 37.1% as much energy as wind, and 19.2% as much energy as geothermal.

But let's not make like a Greenpeace illiterate and do "percent" talk. Solar energy in this country produces 0.07 exajoules. It is the smallest form of energy recorded by the EIA, and probably the only reason they bother to register it at all is that their staff consists of people called "scientists" who would just like to inject something called "reality" to the oodles and oodles of talk that's gone on since, in 1976, Amory Lovins, latter day Walmart shill, announced the world was ready for solar energy using "technology existing now."

Um...

Well...

By comparison, in exajoules, nuclear energy, by far the world's largest source of climate change gas free energy, - you're against it - produces 8.6 exajoules and the dangerous fossil fuel industry about which the anti-nuke religion couldn't care less - but I'm against it - produces 91.2 exajoules.

Now it's time to mock a scientific unit isn't it? Let's all shout together, "EX-O-JEWEL."

I haven't swallowed turkey in more than 30 years at this point, but I still know a turkey when I see one.

[jpak]

19. No, that was $45K for PV, solar hot water and heat - back in 1995.

Today those systems would qualify for a 30% federal tax credit and $1250 - $2000 state rebate.

These solar systems displaced $3500 in annual heating oil and electricity costs (typical for a non-solar Maine home) and will pay for themselves this year.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.