Everything Solar Forum

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Bob,

I'm using the "Reply To Group via Email". Maybe that will get more folks
to chime in.

This post is going to be pretty long (patting myself on the back, etc.),
so my apologies.

About EV's: yes, people who buy a Tesla probably go for sexy. Personal
preference I guess. To me, cost and range per charge are more important
than appearance. In March of 2017, I bought a 2017 Nissan Leaf new off
the lot. While the range per charge for my Leaf was nowhere near what a
Tesla was then, the range I got was, and is, plenty for my needs. Cost
was the deciding factor. I got the cheapest trim package, not because it
was the least expensive, but because that package had everything I
wanted. At the time, Xcel Energy, my local utility, partnered with
Nissan. As an Xcel customer, if I committed to buy a Leaf, Nissan paid
the dealer $10,000 toward the purchase price. After tax, license, dealer
prep etc. the cost of the car was about $34,000. Tack on the Federal EV
tax credit of $7,500 and the car cost less than half price. I've heard
it said that it's better to be lucky than good. The timing on this deal
tends to support that. I've found that an EV is better in cold weather
than an ICE car. Sure, my battery doesn't hold as much charge in cold
temperatures as it does in warm weather, but the same is true for the
lead-acid batteries in ICE cars, and if you let the water-antifreeze mix
get to far on the water side, the ICE engine can freeze up completely,
whereas an EV is always ready to go at the push of a button. Currently,
Xcel and Nissan have got another incentive going, this time with Nissan
paying $6,000 to the dealer, and there's still some Federal tax credit
in the mix as well. Xcel has a big presence in Colorado, so people on
this list living in Colorado should check with Xcel to see what's
available in the way of incentives.

I live in Minneapolis. My house was built in 1921 and it's not suitable
for PV. I don't have a south-facing roof and I have serious shading
issues. Also, my yard is not big enough for ground-mounted PV. Xcel
Energy to the rescue yet again (this post is sounding like an ad for
Xcel!). Several years ago, Xcel (which has numerous wind farms)
instituted a program called Wind Source. Basically, Wind Source is an
accounting program that allows a customer to have...for a modest monthly
fee...part or all of their electric bill charged against the wind power
Xcel generates in 100 watt chunks. Naturally, I signed up for Wind
Source at 100%. Since you have no way to determine how any given
electron at the outlet was generated, going with Wind Source is like
buying a Terrapass for my house. All of the electricity I use at home
is, for all intents and purposes, renewable, and as I charge my Leaf
from an outlet in my garage, my car is wind powered too! My most resent
electric bill shows that last months' Wind Source fee was $10.06. I can
live with that. If anyone in this community who reads this email has an
electric utility that has access to renewable sources of energy, check
with them to see if they offer a program like Wind Source, and if they
don't, suggest to them that they contact Xcel Energy and ask about it.

A few years ago, Minnesota and Xcel Energy teamed up to institute
community solar gardens in this state. The state advertised when
building permits would become available and prospective developers had
to show that they had the financing to follow through with construction.
Over 400 permits were issued on the first day! The program was nearly
overwhelmed! Community solar gardens are a good way for people who, like
me, have homes that are unsuitable for PV, or they just don't like the
look of PV panels. ASES has lots of information about solar
gardens...how they work and how to get into one. Check it out.

Efficiency, my mantra. In 2006 when An Inconvenient Truth came out, I
went hog wild, bought a lot of CFL's and changed every light bulb in my
house. A year later, a couple I know were moving to Portland, Oregon.
They had a pair of nearly new window air conditioners they didn't think
they'd need and didn't want to haul halfway across the continent, so
they said I could have them if I wanted them. I had a pair of air
conditioners and while they still worked as designed, they were somewhat
older so I took the newer ones and swapped out my older ones. A year
after that, I got to wondering if what I had done amounted to anything
significant, so I called up Xcel and asked them for as many years of my
electrical usage as they would give me. I specified usage, not cost.
They sent me the previous three years. This turned out to be perfect.
The oldest year was the year before An Inconvenient Truth and provided
me with a baseline year to compare against the later two years. The
middle year was after changing the light bulbs, and the newest year
reflected the light bulb change and the newer air conditioners. My usage
dropped by 1/3rd! Now that's significant. Efficiency works big time.

I note that often when one home in a neighborhood goes solar, others
start to pop up. I think that there's a strong "Keeping up with the
Joneses." thing going on. That may be shallow, but if it will get more
panels on rooftops, then I'm all for it!

Michael


Original Message:
Sent: 2/20/2021 9:42:00 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Sounds like we're fairly like minded.  Alas, I admit I take my car on long trips sometimes, so I'm driving a Subaru Impreza.  I try to compensate by walking or biking when I'm at home.  I live in Seattle, so most of what I need is very close.  The problem you have with not being about to install PV on your house is common, so great that you found an option.  Great story about you efficiency upgrades.  I wish everyone did them.  Bu then there is the lifesyle issue--my wife calls me "the watt polilce", so that's another barrier, but as we've switched to LEDs, I complain less. I wish everyone was as conscientious as you are, but it seems we're in the minority.

I totally agree that things get adopted when people know someone else who has done it.  We (my group) thinks community spread is by far the most effective method.  Once you tap into the early adopters, everyone else falls into line on their own.   Our thought has been to try to find these people--particularly ones who already say they care about climate change. Exactly what the message is that results in change still isn't clear--I just think the guilt driven approach doesn't work, and the "environment first" only works on a limited audience.  Its got to be at least partly a cultural change away from our "bigger is better" consumer based society I think.  Given the current political climate in the US, I'm not completely optimistic, but maybe those younger than us will surprise us.  I can only hope.

I actually think that deep down most Americans are wanting something better than we have--even the ones who are clinging to the status quo.   It just seems to me that all this consumption is all driven by the fact that so many of us are not very well connected to our communities, and the whole "individualist" thing seems to keep us that way.  Too many employers only care about money, and so there is no real loyalty either way.   How does one feel good about themselves in this system?  Most find a way, but I think in many cases people's hearts hurt for how empty the place they live in feels.  I certainly know many people who defend "the American way  of life", but I don't see how consumerism is inherently American in any way.  Maybe this is more an issue for me because I've lived most of my life in Seattle where most everyone is from elsewhere, and people don't stay put, but I think its much deeper than that.  It just seems me that ultimately once you have the basic necessities, that what matter most for us is our connections to everyone else.  I think if we had more dependent communities, our focus would change so that these economic problems would be less pressing.  I don't really know though.    I only bring this up, because I don't think we can address climate change without addressing the emotional and cultural barriers.


BTW I once rented an off grid house for 3 days--it was one of the earthships in Taos if you're familiar with them.  I think it was around 1999 or 2000.  It was an eye opening experience to live with the limits of a 1990s (or older) era PV system and lead-acid batteries.  As with all "off grid" houses of that era, they're not really off grid--the hot water, and refrigerator were both propane.  It really shows how much energy a typical suburban house uses compared to what one can generate on site.  Of course we can do better now (and those were lousy passive solar buildings anyhow--too much single pane glass).  Living "off grid" is an experience I wish more people could have, but I don't actually know if that would change their minds either, so maybe its not relevant.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 03:07 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

I'm using the "Reply To Group via Email". Maybe that will get more folks
to chime in.

This post is going to be pretty long (patting myself on the back, etc.),
so my apologies.

About EV's: yes, people who buy a Tesla probably go for sexy. Personal
preference I guess. To me, cost and range per charge are more important
than appearance. In March of 2017, I bought a 2017 Nissan Leaf new off
the lot. While the range per charge for my Leaf was nowhere near what a
Tesla was then, the range I got was, and is, plenty for my needs. Cost
was the deciding factor. I got the cheapest trim package, not because it
was the least expensive, but because that package had everything I
wanted. At the time, Xcel Energy, my local utility, partnered with
Nissan. As an Xcel customer, if I committed to buy a Leaf, Nissan paid
the dealer $10,000 toward the purchase price. After tax, license, dealer
prep etc. the cost of the car was about $34,000. Tack on the Federal EV
tax credit of $7,500 and the car cost less than half price. I've heard
it said that it's better to be lucky than good. The timing on this deal
tends to support that. I've found that an EV is better in cold weather
than an ICE car. Sure, my battery doesn't hold as much charge in cold
temperatures as it does in warm weather, but the same is true for the
lead-acid batteries in ICE cars, and if you let the water-antifreeze mix
get to far on the water side, the ICE engine can freeze up completely,
whereas an EV is always ready to go at the push of a button. Currently,
Xcel and Nissan have got another incentive going, this time with Nissan
paying $6,000 to the dealer, and there's still some Federal tax credit
in the mix as well. Xcel has a big presence in Colorado, so people on
this list living in Colorado should check with Xcel to see what's
available in the way of incentives.

I live in Minneapolis. My house was built in 1921 and it's not suitable
for PV. I don't have a south-facing roof and I have serious shading
issues. Also, my yard is not big enough for ground-mounted PV. Xcel
Energy to the rescue yet again (this post is sounding like an ad for
Xcel!). Several years ago, Xcel (which has numerous wind farms)
instituted a program called Wind Source. Basically, Wind Source is an
accounting program that allows a customer to have...for a modest monthly
fee...part or all of their electric bill charged against the wind power
Xcel generates in 100 watt chunks. Naturally, I signed up for Wind
Source at 100%. Since you have no way to determine how any given
electron at the outlet was generated, going with Wind Source is like
buying a Terrapass for my house. All of the electricity I use at home
is, for all intents and purposes, renewable, and as I charge my Leaf
from an outlet in my garage, my car is wind powered too! My most resent
electric bill shows that last months' Wind Source fee was $10.06. I can
live with that. If anyone in this community who reads this email has an
electric utility that has access to renewable sources of energy, check
with them to see if they offer a program like Wind Source, and if they
don't, suggest to them that they contact Xcel Energy and ask about it.

A few years ago, Minnesota and Xcel Energy teamed up to institute
community solar gardens in this state. The state advertised when
building permits would become available and prospective developers had
to show that they had the financing to follow through with construction.
Over 400 permits were issued on the first day! The program was nearly
overwhelmed! Community solar gardens are a good way for people who, like
me, have homes that are unsuitable for PV, or they just don't like the
look of PV panels. ASES has lots of information about solar
gardens...how they work and how to get into one. Check it out.

Efficiency, my mantra. In 2006 when An Inconvenient Truth came out, I
went hog wild, bought a lot of CFL's and changed every light bulb in my
house. A year later, a couple I know were moving to Portland, Oregon.
They had a pair of nearly new window air conditioners they didn't think
they'd need and didn't want to haul halfway across the continent, so
they said I could have them if I wanted them. I had a pair of air
conditioners and while they still worked as designed, they were somewhat
older so I took the newer ones and swapped out my older ones. A year
after that, I got to wondering if what I had done amounted to anything
significant, so I called up Xcel and asked them for as many years of my
electrical usage as they would give me. I specified usage, not cost.
They sent me the previous three years. This turned out to be perfect.
The oldest year was the year before An Inconvenient Truth and provided
me with a baseline year to compare against the later two years. The
middle year was after changing the light bulbs, and the newest year
reflected the light bulb change and the newer air conditioners. My usage
dropped by 1/3rd! Now that's significant. Efficiency works big time.

I note that often when one home in a neighborhood goes solar, others
start to pop up. I think that there's a strong "Keeping up with the
Joneses." thing going on. That may be shallow, but if it will get more
panels on rooftops, then I'm all for it!

Michael


Original Message:
Sent: 2/20/2021 9:42:00 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Bob,

The tone of your last post sounds like you're struggling with a little bit of depression.(my apologies if that's not the case). Maybe I can perk things up a little.

Minneapolis has been recycling waste for a long time now. Each year the city mails out a flyer that features a calendar that shows the dates of pick ups (every other week on the regular trash pick up day) and a list of what the city can handle. It started with a small blue box just big enough to hold three paper grocery store bags full of stuff. The resident had to separate the items. One bag for paper items (one bag would just hold two weeks of newspapers, including the thicker Sunday editions), one bag for cardboard, and one bag for plastics. This went on for quite a while. The recycling rate was OK, but eventually the city installed sorting machinery and replaced the small blue boxes with large light blue wheeled carts. Residents just threw all recycling into the cart and the sorting is done at the central facility after the carts were emptied into the trucks picking up the recycling. The result of the added convenience of the absence of the need for the residents having to presort things, was a skyrocketing of the recycling rate! People responded to the added convenience. This resulted in reducing the pressure on landfills and generated a revenue stream for the city from selling the baled recycled material. Finally, the city instituted an organics recycling program. Smaller light green wheeled carts are supplied to residents to put organic waste into. The organics are hauled off to a site and composted. I'm not sure who does the composting but I seem to recall that the city provides the organics to a company that composts the organics into mulch which the company then sells to gardening centers and big box stores that have gardening departments. The city diverts organics from its landfills and the company makes money. Does Seattle do any of these things?

Have you heard of the Transitions movement? It started in the village of Totnes in England and has spread all over the world. People in transitions communities provide goods and services to each other. Fix it clinics are popular. For instance, if you have a lamp that has quit working, you can bring it to a regularly scheduled clinic and someone with some skill repairing appliances can fix it for you for a small fee. This saves you from having to buy a new whatever it is, and if you happen to really like the item, then all the better. People with sewing skills can repair damaged clothing, or if the item is truly beyond saving, it can be turned into something else...quilts are popular. People with green thumbs teach folks how to grow useful things...from window box herb gardens to turning your yard into an urban mini-farm. And make them pollinator friendly. Transition communities have sprung up in urban areas, usually in official neighborhoods...I live in the middle of Transition Longfellow. Go online and search for Transition Towns. For a related topic, search for Permaculture.

Farmer's Markets. There are several farmer's markets scattered across the Twin Cities. The Midtown farmer's market is just up the street from me. It's an open air market open from early May until the end of October, and many of the vendors who have the ability to continue producing stuff right through the Winter, will take orders over the phone and/or online and ship your order by UPS or Fedex. The advantage of getting at least some of your foodstuffs at a farmer's market is that you get to know the people who grow your food. You can ask them about their farming practices. Farmer's markets aren't just about produce. We have vendors who sell fresh baked goods (my weakness, yum!). Also craftsmen and craftswomen sell at the market. There's a guy who has turned his woodworking hobby into a home-based business. He makes stools, chairs and small tables. There are jewelers. Musicians perform free while the market is open and some of them are pretty good. I've never seen fish at the farmer's market here, but I bet a farmer's market there in Seattle would have various items of seafood for sale. Beside getting absolutely fresh food, the money you spend at the market tends to remain in the local area. Farmers have to buy stuff too.

Just to make sure that there's at least a mention of PV in this post, I've heard of multiple homeowners that want to install PV on their homes, getting together and buying solar panels in bulk to help drive down the cost of their systems. They also often negotiate a lower price with a licensed installer based on a steadier supply of customers. Economies of scale can be powerful.

All of the above are community based contributions to addressing climate change. Cheer up! We've got this! It's not that we should abandon the top down approach on the Federal and/or Statehouse level. We should keep doing that, if for no other reason than to keep the deniers focused on the Feds while those of us at the grassroots get the job done. Occasionally, the top down approach will work. Look at California's mandate for new home construction requiring solar be included upfront. I wouldn't want to try such a thing in, say, Arkansas. Nothing would please me more than for the people in Arkansas to prove me wrong.

Hang in there Bob. We can make it work. In the words of Gene Krantz from Apollo 13, "Failure is not an option!"

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 06:16 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Sounds like we're fairly like minded.  Alas, I admit I take my car on long trips sometimes, so I'm driving a Subaru Impreza.  I try to compensate by walking or biking when I'm at home.  I live in Seattle, so most of what I need is very close.  The problem you have with not being about to install PV on your house is common, so great that you found an option.  Great story about you efficiency upgrades.  I wish everyone did them.  Bu then there is the lifesyle issue--my wife calls me "the watt polilce", so that's another barrier, but as we've switched to LEDs, I complain less. I wish everyone was as conscientious as you are, but it seems we're in the minority.

I totally agree that things get adopted when people know someone else who has done it.  We (my group) thinks community spread is by far the most effective method.  Once you tap into the early adopters, everyone else falls into line on their own.   Our thought has been to try to find these people--particularly ones who already say they care about climate change. Exactly what the message is that results in change still isn't clear--I just think the guilt driven approach doesn't work, and the "environment first" only works on a limited audience.  Its got to be at least partly a cultural change away from our "bigger is better" consumer based society I think.  Given the current political climate in the US, I'm not completely optimistic, but maybe those younger than us will surprise us.  I can only hope.

I actually think that deep down most Americans are wanting something better than we have--even the ones who are clinging to the status quo.   It just seems to me that all this consumption is all driven by the fact that so many of us are not very well connected to our communities, and the whole "individualist" thing seems to keep us that way.  Too many employers only care about money, and so there is no real loyalty either way.   How does one feel good about themselves in this system?  Most find a way, but I think in many cases people's hearts hurt for how empty the place they live in feels.  I certainly know many people who defend "the American way  of life", but I don't see how consumerism is inherently American in any way.  Maybe this is more an issue for me because I've lived most of my life in Seattle where most everyone is from elsewhere, and people don't stay put, but I think its much deeper than that.  It just seems me that ultimately once you have the basic necessities, that what matter most for us is our connections to everyone else.  I think if we had more dependent communities, our focus would change so that these economic problems would be less pressing.  I don't really know though.    I only bring this up, because I don't think we can address climate change without addressing the emotional and cultural barriers.


BTW I once rented an off grid house for 3 days--it was one of the earthships in Taos if you're familiar with them.  I think it was around 1999 or 2000.  It was an eye opening experience to live with the limits of a 1990s (or older) era PV system and lead-acid batteries.  As with all "off grid" houses of that era, they're not really off grid--the hot water, and refrigerator were both propane.  It really shows how much energy a typical suburban house uses compared to what one can generate on site.  Of course we can do better now (and those were lousy passive solar buildings anyhow--too much single pane glass).  Living "off grid" is an experience I wish more people could have, but I don't actually know if that would change their minds either, so maybe its not relevant.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 03:07 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

I'm using the "Reply To Group via Email". Maybe that will get more folks
to chime in.

This post is going to be pretty long (patting myself on the back, etc.),
so my apologies.

About EV's: yes, people who buy a Tesla probably go for sexy. Personal
preference I guess. To me, cost and range per charge are more important
than appearance. In March of 2017, I bought a 2017 Nissan Leaf new off
the lot. While the range per charge for my Leaf was nowhere near what a
Tesla was then, the range I got was, and is, plenty for my needs. Cost
was the deciding factor. I got the cheapest trim package, not because it
was the least expensive, but because that package had everything I
wanted. At the time, Xcel Energy, my local utility, partnered with
Nissan. As an Xcel customer, if I committed to buy a Leaf, Nissan paid
the dealer $10,000 toward the purchase price. After tax, license, dealer
prep etc. the cost of the car was about $34,000. Tack on the Federal EV
tax credit of $7,500 and the car cost less than half price. I've heard
it said that it's better to be lucky than good. The timing on this deal
tends to support that. I've found that an EV is better in cold weather
than an ICE car. Sure, my battery doesn't hold as much charge in cold
temperatures as it does in warm weather, but the same is true for the
lead-acid batteries in ICE cars, and if you let the water-antifreeze mix
get to far on the water side, the ICE engine can freeze up completely,
whereas an EV is always ready to go at the push of a button. Currently,
Xcel and Nissan have got another incentive going, this time with Nissan
paying $6,000 to the dealer, and there's still some Federal tax credit
in the mix as well. Xcel has a big presence in Colorado, so people on
this list living in Colorado should check with Xcel to see what's
available in the way of incentives.

I live in Minneapolis. My house was built in 1921 and it's not suitable
for PV. I don't have a south-facing roof and I have serious shading
issues. Also, my yard is not big enough for ground-mounted PV. Xcel
Energy to the rescue yet again (this post is sounding like an ad for
Xcel!). Several years ago, Xcel (which has numerous wind farms)
instituted a program called Wind Source. Basically, Wind Source is an
accounting program that allows a customer to have...for a modest monthly
fee...part or all of their electric bill charged against the wind power
Xcel generates in 100 watt chunks. Naturally, I signed up for Wind
Source at 100%. Since you have no way to determine how any given
electron at the outlet was generated, going with Wind Source is like
buying a Terrapass for my house. All of the electricity I use at home
is, for all intents and purposes, renewable, and as I charge my Leaf
from an outlet in my garage, my car is wind powered too! My most resent
electric bill shows that last months' Wind Source fee was $10.06. I can
live with that. If anyone in this community who reads this email has an
electric utility that has access to renewable sources of energy, check
with them to see if they offer a program like Wind Source, and if they
don't, suggest to them that they contact Xcel Energy and ask about it.

A few years ago, Minnesota and Xcel Energy teamed up to institute
community solar gardens in this state. The state advertised when
building permits would become available and prospective developers had
to show that they had the financing to follow through with construction.
Over 400 permits were issued on the first day! The program was nearly
overwhelmed! Community solar gardens are a good way for people who, like
me, have homes that are unsuitable for PV, or they just don't like the
look of PV panels. ASES has lots of information about solar
gardens...how they work and how to get into one. Check it out.

Efficiency, my mantra. In 2006 when An Inconvenient Truth came out, I
went hog wild, bought a lot of CFL's and changed every light bulb in my
house. A year later, a couple I know were moving to Portland, Oregon.
They had a pair of nearly new window air conditioners they didn't think
they'd need and didn't want to haul halfway across the continent, so
they said I could have them if I wanted them. I had a pair of air
conditioners and while they still worked as designed, they were somewhat
older so I took the newer ones and swapped out my older ones. A year
after that, I got to wondering if what I had done amounted to anything
significant, so I called up Xcel and asked them for as many years of my
electrical usage as they would give me. I specified usage, not cost.
They sent me the previous three years. This turned out to be perfect.
The oldest year was the year before An Inconvenient Truth and provided
me with a baseline year to compare against the later two years. The
middle year was after changing the light bulbs, and the newest year
reflected the light bulb change and the newer air conditioners. My usage
dropped by 1/3rd! Now that's significant. Efficiency works big time.

I note that often when one home in a neighborhood goes solar, others
start to pop up. I think that there's a strong "Keeping up with the
Joneses." thing going on. That may be shallow, but if it will get more
panels on rooftops, then I'm all for it!

Michael


Original Message:
Sent: 2/20/2021 9:42:00 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

I'm fine, I just am frustrated at the state of the world.  Seattle has a lot of good things...the city buys wind power to supplement its hydro, and promoted PV -- at least for a while.  We have a high recycling rate and a sizable green building community and quite a number of farmers markets as well as one of the biggest food coops in the US.  Good things are happening for sure.  I've heard Minneapolis has decent programs also, and that is a very bike friendly city.  The more local purchases we all make the more we get off the corporate bandwagon.  I think I'm just frustrated that I probably won't live long enough to see all the changes I hope to see.  But like you say, I hoping to be proved wrong.

I do think that bottom up is more effective than top down, but I agree that some top down is necessary. I hate the us .vs. them culture that seems to be so prevalent now.  I believe there are win-wins for everyone, but we're not going to find them until we get past the rhetoric.

It will  be interesting to see where the California mandate end up.  The housing cost there is already pretty absurd in many areas.


------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 21, 2021 08:59 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

The tone of your last post sounds like you're struggling with a little bit of depression.(my apologies if that's not the case). Maybe I can perk things up a little.

Minneapolis has been recycling waste for a long time now. Each year the city mails out a flyer that features a calendar that shows the dates of pick ups (every other week on the regular trash pick up day) and a list of what the city can handle. It started with a small blue box just big enough to hold three paper grocery store bags full of stuff. The resident had to separate the items. One bag for paper items (one bag would just hold two weeks of newspapers, including the thicker Sunday editions), one bag for cardboard, and one bag for plastics. This went on for quite a while. The recycling rate was OK, but eventually the city installed sorting machinery and replaced the small blue boxes with large light blue wheeled carts. Residents just threw all recycling into the cart and the sorting is done at the central facility after the carts were emptied into the trucks picking up the recycling. The result of the added convenience of the absence of the need for the residents having to presort things, was a skyrocketing of the recycling rate! People responded to the added convenience. This resulted in reducing the pressure on landfills and generated a revenue stream for the city from selling the baled recycled material. Finally, the city instituted an organics recycling program. Smaller light green wheeled carts are supplied to residents to put organic waste into. The organics are hauled off to a site and composted. I'm not sure who does the composting but I seem to recall that the city provides the organics to a company that composts the organics into mulch which the company then sells to gardening centers and big box stores that have gardening departments. The city diverts organics from its landfills and the company makes money. Does Seattle do any of these things?

Have you heard of the Transitions movement? It started in the village of Totnes in England and has spread all over the world. People in transitions communities provide goods and services to each other. Fix it clinics are popular. For instance, if you have a lamp that has quit working, you can bring it to a regularly scheduled clinic and someone with some skill repairing appliances can fix it for you for a small fee. This saves you from having to buy a new whatever it is, and if you happen to really like the item, then all the better. People with sewing skills can repair damaged clothing, or if the item is truly beyond saving, it can be turned into something else...quilts are popular. People with green thumbs teach folks how to grow useful things...from window box herb gardens to turning your yard into an urban mini-farm. And make them pollinator friendly. Transition communities have sprung up in urban areas, usually in official neighborhoods...I live in the middle of Transition Longfellow. Go online and search for Transition Towns. For a related topic, search for Permaculture.

Farmer's Markets. There are several farmer's markets scattered across the Twin Cities. The Midtown farmer's market is just up the street from me. It's an open air market open from early May until the end of October, and many of the vendors who have the ability to continue producing stuff right through the Winter, will take orders over the phone and/or online and ship your order by UPS or Fedex. The advantage of getting at least some of your foodstuffs at a farmer's market is that you get to know the people who grow your food. You can ask them about their farming practices. Farmer's markets aren't just about produce. We have vendors who sell fresh baked goods (my weakness, yum!). Also craftsmen and craftswomen sell at the market. There's a guy who has turned his woodworking hobby into a home-based business. He makes stools, chairs and small tables. There are jewelers. Musicians perform free while the market is open and some of them are pretty good. I've never seen fish at the farmer's market here, but I bet a farmer's market there in Seattle would have various items of seafood for sale. Beside getting absolutely fresh food, the money you spend at the market tends to remain in the local area. Farmers have to buy stuff too.

Just to make sure that there's at least a mention of PV in this post, I've heard of multiple homeowners that want to install PV on their homes, getting together and buying solar panels in bulk to help drive down the cost of their systems. They also often negotiate a lower price with a licensed installer based on a steadier supply of customers. Economies of scale can be powerful.

All of the above are community based contributions to addressing climate change. Cheer up! We've got this! It's not that we should abandon the top down approach on the Federal and/or Statehouse level. We should keep doing that, if for no other reason than to keep the deniers focused on the Feds while those of us at the grassroots get the job done. Occasionally, the top down approach will work. Look at California's mandate for new home construction requiring solar be included upfront. I wouldn't want to try such a thing in, say, Arkansas. Nothing would please me more than for the people in Arkansas to prove me wrong.

Hang in there Bob. We can make it work. In the words of Gene Krantz from Apollo 13, "Failure is not an option!"

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 06:16 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Sounds like we're fairly like minded.  Alas, I admit I take my car on long trips sometimes, so I'm driving a Subaru Impreza.  I try to compensate by walking or biking when I'm at home.  I live in Seattle, so most of what I need is very close.  The problem you have with not being about to install PV on your house is common, so great that you found an option.  Great story about you efficiency upgrades.  I wish everyone did them.  Bu then there is the lifesyle issue--my wife calls me "the watt polilce", so that's another barrier, but as we've switched to LEDs, I complain less. I wish everyone was as conscientious as you are, but it seems we're in the minority.

I totally agree that things get adopted when people know someone else who has done it.  We (my group) thinks community spread is by far the most effective method.  Once you tap into the early adopters, everyone else falls into line on their own.   Our thought has been to try to find these people--particularly ones who already say they care about climate change. Exactly what the message is that results in change still isn't clear--I just think the guilt driven approach doesn't work, and the "environment first" only works on a limited audience.  Its got to be at least partly a cultural change away from our "bigger is better" consumer based society I think.  Given the current political climate in the US, I'm not completely optimistic, but maybe those younger than us will surprise us.  I can only hope.

I actually think that deep down most Americans are wanting something better than we have--even the ones who are clinging to the status quo.   It just seems to me that all this consumption is all driven by the fact that so many of us are not very well connected to our communities, and the whole "individualist" thing seems to keep us that way.  Too many employers only care about money, and so there is no real loyalty either way.   How does one feel good about themselves in this system?  Most find a way, but I think in many cases people's hearts hurt for how empty the place they live in feels.  I certainly know many people who defend "the American way  of life", but I don't see how consumerism is inherently American in any way.  Maybe this is more an issue for me because I've lived most of my life in Seattle where most everyone is from elsewhere, and people don't stay put, but I think its much deeper than that.  It just seems me that ultimately once you have the basic necessities, that what matter most for us is our connections to everyone else.  I think if we had more dependent communities, our focus would change so that these economic problems would be less pressing.  I don't really know though.    I only bring this up, because I don't think we can address climate change without addressing the emotional and cultural barriers.


BTW I once rented an off grid house for 3 days--it was one of the earthships in Taos if you're familiar with them.  I think it was around 1999 or 2000.  It was an eye opening experience to live with the limits of a 1990s (or older) era PV system and lead-acid batteries.  As with all "off grid" houses of that era, they're not really off grid--the hot water, and refrigerator were both propane.  It really shows how much energy a typical suburban house uses compared to what one can generate on site.  Of course we can do better now (and those were lousy passive solar buildings anyhow--too much single pane glass).  Living "off grid" is an experience I wish more people could have, but I don't actually know if that would change their minds either, so maybe its not relevant.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 03:07 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

I'm using the "Reply To Group via Email". Maybe that will get more folks
to chime in.

This post is going to be pretty long (patting myself on the back, etc.),
so my apologies.

About EV's: yes, people who buy a Tesla probably go for sexy. Personal
preference I guess. To me, cost and range per charge are more important
than appearance. In March of 2017, I bought a 2017 Nissan Leaf new off
the lot. While the range per charge for my Leaf was nowhere near what a
Tesla was then, the range I got was, and is, plenty for my needs. Cost
was the deciding factor. I got the cheapest trim package, not because it
was the least expensive, but because that package had everything I
wanted. At the time, Xcel Energy, my local utility, partnered with
Nissan. As an Xcel customer, if I committed to buy a Leaf, Nissan paid
the dealer $10,000 toward the purchase price. After tax, license, dealer
prep etc. the cost of the car was about $34,000. Tack on the Federal EV
tax credit of $7,500 and the car cost less than half price. I've heard
it said that it's better to be lucky than good. The timing on this deal
tends to support that. I've found that an EV is better in cold weather
than an ICE car. Sure, my battery doesn't hold as much charge in cold
temperatures as it does in warm weather, but the same is true for the
lead-acid batteries in ICE cars, and if you let the water-antifreeze mix
get to far on the water side, the ICE engine can freeze up completely,
whereas an EV is always ready to go at the push of a button. Currently,
Xcel and Nissan have got another incentive going, this time with Nissan
paying $6,000 to the dealer, and there's still some Federal tax credit
in the mix as well. Xcel has a big presence in Colorado, so people on
this list living in Colorado should check with Xcel to see what's
available in the way of incentives.

I live in Minneapolis. My house was built in 1921 and it's not suitable
for PV. I don't have a south-facing roof and I have serious shading
issues. Also, my yard is not big enough for ground-mounted PV. Xcel
Energy to the rescue yet again (this post is sounding like an ad for
Xcel!). Several years ago, Xcel (which has numerous wind farms)
instituted a program called Wind Source. Basically, Wind Source is an
accounting program that allows a customer to have...for a modest monthly
fee...part or all of their electric bill charged against the wind power
Xcel generates in 100 watt chunks. Naturally, I signed up for Wind
Source at 100%. Since you have no way to determine how any given
electron at the outlet was generated, going with Wind Source is like
buying a Terrapass for my house. All of the electricity I use at home
is, for all intents and purposes, renewable, and as I charge my Leaf
from an outlet in my garage, my car is wind powered too! My most resent
electric bill shows that last months' Wind Source fee was $10.06. I can
live with that. If anyone in this community who reads this email has an
electric utility that has access to renewable sources of energy, check
with them to see if they offer a program like Wind Source, and if they
don't, suggest to them that they contact Xcel Energy and ask about it.

A few years ago, Minnesota and Xcel Energy teamed up to institute
community solar gardens in this state. The state advertised when
building permits would become available and prospective developers had
to show that they had the financing to follow through with construction.
Over 400 permits were issued on the first day! The program was nearly
overwhelmed! Community solar gardens are a good way for people who, like
me, have homes that are unsuitable for PV, or they just don't like the
look of PV panels. ASES has lots of information about solar
gardens...how they work and how to get into one. Check it out.

Efficiency, my mantra. In 2006 when An Inconvenient Truth came out, I
went hog wild, bought a lot of CFL's and changed every light bulb in my
house. A year later, a couple I know were moving to Portland, Oregon.
They had a pair of nearly new window air conditioners they didn't think
they'd need and didn't want to haul halfway across the continent, so
they said I could have them if I wanted them. I had a pair of air
conditioners and while they still worked as designed, they were somewhat
older so I took the newer ones and swapped out my older ones. A year
after that, I got to wondering if what I had done amounted to anything
significant, so I called up Xcel and asked them for as many years of my
electrical usage as they would give me. I specified usage, not cost.
They sent me the previous three years. This turned out to be perfect.
The oldest year was the year before An Inconvenient Truth and provided
me with a baseline year to compare against the later two years. The
middle year was after changing the light bulbs, and the newest year
reflected the light bulb change and the newer air conditioners. My usage
dropped by 1/3rd! Now that's significant. Efficiency works big time.

I note that often when one home in a neighborhood goes solar, others
start to pop up. I think that there's a strong "Keeping up with the
Joneses." thing going on. That may be shallow, but if it will get more
panels on rooftops, then I'm all for it!

Michael


Original Message:
Sent: 2/20/2021 9:42:00 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Bob,

There are bike lanes EVERYWHERE in this town! There is also a county-wide system of bike trails that don't use roadways. They have parallel paths for foot traffic. It's a rails-to-trails system. If you ever visit Minneapolis, bring your bike if you can. There are readily available maps to guide you around our fair city.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 21, 2021 06:02 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I'm fine, I just am frustrated at the state of the world.  Seattle has a lot of good things...the city buys wind power to supplement its hydro, and promoted PV -- at least for a while.  We have a high recycling rate and a sizable green building community and quite a number of farmers markets as well as one of the biggest food coops in the US.  Good things are happening for sure.  I've heard Minneapolis has decent programs also, and that is a very bike friendly city.  The more local purchases we all make the more we get off the corporate bandwagon.  I think I'm just frustrated that I probably won't live long enough to see all the changes I hope to see.  But like you say, I hoping to be proved wrong.

I do think that bottom up is more effective than top down, but I agree that some top down is necessary. I hate the us .vs. them culture that seems to be so prevalent now.  I believe there are win-wins for everyone, but we're not going to find them until we get past the rhetoric.

It will  be interesting to see where the California mandate end up.  The housing cost there is already pretty absurd in many areas.


------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 21, 2021 08:59 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

The tone of your last post sounds like you're struggling with a little bit of depression.(my apologies if that's not the case). Maybe I can perk things up a little.

Minneapolis has been recycling waste for a long time now. Each year the city mails out a flyer that features a calendar that shows the dates of pick ups (every other week on the regular trash pick up day) and a list of what the city can handle. It started with a small blue box just big enough to hold three paper grocery store bags full of stuff. The resident had to separate the items. One bag for paper items (one bag would just hold two weeks of newspapers, including the thicker Sunday editions), one bag for cardboard, and one bag for plastics. This went on for quite a while. The recycling rate was OK, but eventually the city installed sorting machinery and replaced the small blue boxes with large light blue wheeled carts. Residents just threw all recycling into the cart and the sorting is done at the central facility after the carts were emptied into the trucks picking up the recycling. The result of the added convenience of the absence of the need for the residents having to presort things, was a skyrocketing of the recycling rate! People responded to the added convenience. This resulted in reducing the pressure on landfills and generated a revenue stream for the city from selling the baled recycled material. Finally, the city instituted an organics recycling program. Smaller light green wheeled carts are supplied to residents to put organic waste into. The organics are hauled off to a site and composted. I'm not sure who does the composting but I seem to recall that the city provides the organics to a company that composts the organics into mulch which the company then sells to gardening centers and big box stores that have gardening departments. The city diverts organics from its landfills and the company makes money. Does Seattle do any of these things?

Have you heard of the Transitions movement? It started in the village of Totnes in England and has spread all over the world. People in transitions communities provide goods and services to each other. Fix it clinics are popular. For instance, if you have a lamp that has quit working, you can bring it to a regularly scheduled clinic and someone with some skill repairing appliances can fix it for you for a small fee. This saves you from having to buy a new whatever it is, and if you happen to really like the item, then all the better. People with sewing skills can repair damaged clothing, or if the item is truly beyond saving, it can be turned into something else...quilts are popular. People with green thumbs teach folks how to grow useful things...from window box herb gardens to turning your yard into an urban mini-farm. And make them pollinator friendly. Transition communities have sprung up in urban areas, usually in official neighborhoods...I live in the middle of Transition Longfellow. Go online and search for Transition Towns. For a related topic, search for Permaculture.

Farmer's Markets. There are several farmer's markets scattered across the Twin Cities. The Midtown farmer's market is just up the street from me. It's an open air market open from early May until the end of October, and many of the vendors who have the ability to continue producing stuff right through the Winter, will take orders over the phone and/or online and ship your order by UPS or Fedex. The advantage of getting at least some of your foodstuffs at a farmer's market is that you get to know the people who grow your food. You can ask them about their farming practices. Farmer's markets aren't just about produce. We have vendors who sell fresh baked goods (my weakness, yum!). Also craftsmen and craftswomen sell at the market. There's a guy who has turned his woodworking hobby into a home-based business. He makes stools, chairs and small tables. There are jewelers. Musicians perform free while the market is open and some of them are pretty good. I've never seen fish at the farmer's market here, but I bet a farmer's market there in Seattle would have various items of seafood for sale. Beside getting absolutely fresh food, the money you spend at the market tends to remain in the local area. Farmers have to buy stuff too.

Just to make sure that there's at least a mention of PV in this post, I've heard of multiple homeowners that want to install PV on their homes, getting together and buying solar panels in bulk to help drive down the cost of their systems. They also often negotiate a lower price with a licensed installer based on a steadier supply of customers. Economies of scale can be powerful.

All of the above are community based contributions to addressing climate change. Cheer up! We've got this! It's not that we should abandon the top down approach on the Federal and/or Statehouse level. We should keep doing that, if for no other reason than to keep the deniers focused on the Feds while those of us at the grassroots get the job done. Occasionally, the top down approach will work. Look at California's mandate for new home construction requiring solar be included upfront. I wouldn't want to try such a thing in, say, Arkansas. Nothing would please me more than for the people in Arkansas to prove me wrong.

Hang in there Bob. We can make it work. In the words of Gene Krantz from Apollo 13, "Failure is not an option!"

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 06:16 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Sounds like we're fairly like minded.  Alas, I admit I take my car on long trips sometimes, so I'm driving a Subaru Impreza.  I try to compensate by walking or biking when I'm at home.  I live in Seattle, so most of what I need is very close.  The problem you have with not being about to install PV on your house is common, so great that you found an option.  Great story about you efficiency upgrades.  I wish everyone did them.  Bu then there is the lifesyle issue--my wife calls me "the watt polilce", so that's another barrier, but as we've switched to LEDs, I complain less. I wish everyone was as conscientious as you are, but it seems we're in the minority.

I totally agree that things get adopted when people know someone else who has done it.  We (my group) thinks community spread is by far the most effective method.  Once you tap into the early adopters, everyone else falls into line on their own.   Our thought has been to try to find these people--particularly ones who already say they care about climate change. Exactly what the message is that results in change still isn't clear--I just think the guilt driven approach doesn't work, and the "environment first" only works on a limited audience.  Its got to be at least partly a cultural change away from our "bigger is better" consumer based society I think.  Given the current political climate in the US, I'm not completely optimistic, but maybe those younger than us will surprise us.  I can only hope.

I actually think that deep down most Americans are wanting something better than we have--even the ones who are clinging to the status quo.   It just seems to me that all this consumption is all driven by the fact that so many of us are not very well connected to our communities, and the whole "individualist" thing seems to keep us that way.  Too many employers only care about money, and so there is no real loyalty either way.   How does one feel good about themselves in this system?  Most find a way, but I think in many cases people's hearts hurt for how empty the place they live in feels.  I certainly know many people who defend "the American way  of life", but I don't see how consumerism is inherently American in any way.  Maybe this is more an issue for me because I've lived most of my life in Seattle where most everyone is from elsewhere, and people don't stay put, but I think its much deeper than that.  It just seems me that ultimately once you have the basic necessities, that what matter most for us is our connections to everyone else.  I think if we had more dependent communities, our focus would change so that these economic problems would be less pressing.  I don't really know though.    I only bring this up, because I don't think we can address climate change without addressing the emotional and cultural barriers.


BTW I once rented an off grid house for 3 days--it was one of the earthships in Taos if you're familiar with them.  I think it was around 1999 or 2000.  It was an eye opening experience to live with the limits of a 1990s (or older) era PV system and lead-acid batteries.  As with all "off grid" houses of that era, they're not really off grid--the hot water, and refrigerator were both propane.  It really shows how much energy a typical suburban house uses compared to what one can generate on site.  Of course we can do better now (and those were lousy passive solar buildings anyhow--too much single pane glass).  Living "off grid" is an experience I wish more people could have, but I don't actually know if that would change their minds either, so maybe its not relevant.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 03:07 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

I'm using the "Reply To Group via Email". Maybe that will get more folks
to chime in.

This post is going to be pretty long (patting myself on the back, etc.),
so my apologies.

About EV's: yes, people who buy a Tesla probably go for sexy. Personal
preference I guess. To me, cost and range per charge are more important
than appearance. In March of 2017, I bought a 2017 Nissan Leaf new off
the lot. While the range per charge for my Leaf was nowhere near what a
Tesla was then, the range I got was, and is, plenty for my needs. Cost
was the deciding factor. I got the cheapest trim package, not because it
was the least expensive, but because that package had everything I
wanted. At the time, Xcel Energy, my local utility, partnered with
Nissan. As an Xcel customer, if I committed to buy a Leaf, Nissan paid
the dealer $10,000 toward the purchase price. After tax, license, dealer
prep etc. the cost of the car was about $34,000. Tack on the Federal EV
tax credit of $7,500 and the car cost less than half price. I've heard
it said that it's better to be lucky than good. The timing on this deal
tends to support that. I've found that an EV is better in cold weather
than an ICE car. Sure, my battery doesn't hold as much charge in cold
temperatures as it does in warm weather, but the same is true for the
lead-acid batteries in ICE cars, and if you let the water-antifreeze mix
get to far on the water side, the ICE engine can freeze up completely,
whereas an EV is always ready to go at the push of a button. Currently,
Xcel and Nissan have got another incentive going, this time with Nissan
paying $6,000 to the dealer, and there's still some Federal tax credit
in the mix as well. Xcel has a big presence in Colorado, so people on
this list living in Colorado should check with Xcel to see what's
available in the way of incentives.

I live in Minneapolis. My house was built in 1921 and it's not suitable
for PV. I don't have a south-facing roof and I have serious shading
issues. Also, my yard is not big enough for ground-mounted PV. Xcel
Energy to the rescue yet again (this post is sounding like an ad for
Xcel!). Several years ago, Xcel (which has numerous wind farms)
instituted a program called Wind Source. Basically, Wind Source is an
accounting program that allows a customer to have...for a modest monthly
fee...part or all of their electric bill charged against the wind power
Xcel generates in 100 watt chunks. Naturally, I signed up for Wind
Source at 100%. Since you have no way to determine how any given
electron at the outlet was generated, going with Wind Source is like
buying a Terrapass for my house. All of the electricity I use at home
is, for all intents and purposes, renewable, and as I charge my Leaf
from an outlet in my garage, my car is wind powered too! My most resent
electric bill shows that last months' Wind Source fee was $10.06. I can
live with that. If anyone in this community who reads this email has an
electric utility that has access to renewable sources of energy, check
with them to see if they offer a program like Wind Source, and if they
don't, suggest to them that they contact Xcel Energy and ask about it.

A few years ago, Minnesota and Xcel Energy teamed up to institute
community solar gardens in this state. The state advertised when
building permits would become available and prospective developers had
to show that they had the financing to follow through with construction.
Over 400 permits were issued on the first day! The program was nearly
overwhelmed! Community solar gardens are a good way for people who, like
me, have homes that are unsuitable for PV, or they just don't like the
look of PV panels. ASES has lots of information about solar
gardens...how they work and how to get into one. Check it out.

Efficiency, my mantra. In 2006 when An Inconvenient Truth came out, I
went hog wild, bought a lot of CFL's and changed every light bulb in my
house. A year later, a couple I know were moving to Portland, Oregon.
They had a pair of nearly new window air conditioners they didn't think
they'd need and didn't want to haul halfway across the continent, so
they said I could have them if I wanted them. I had a pair of air
conditioners and while they still worked as designed, they were somewhat
older so I took the newer ones and swapped out my older ones. A year
after that, I got to wondering if what I had done amounted to anything
significant, so I called up Xcel and asked them for as many years of my
electrical usage as they would give me. I specified usage, not cost.
They sent me the previous three years. This turned out to be perfect.
The oldest year was the year before An Inconvenient Truth and provided
me with a baseline year to compare against the later two years. The
middle year was after changing the light bulbs, and the newest year
reflected the light bulb change and the newer air conditioners. My usage
dropped by 1/3rd! Now that's significant. Efficiency works big time.

I note that often when one home in a neighborhood goes solar, others
start to pop up. I think that there's a strong "Keeping up with the
Joneses." thing going on. That may be shallow, but if it will get more
panels on rooftops, then I'm all for it!

Michael


Original Message:
Sent: 2/20/2021 9:42:00 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Like it or hate it, money makes the world go 'round. A carbon tax would go a long way towards pushing everyone towards lower-carbon solutions. They might even discover that they like it better; drafty houses are not pleasant.

------------------------------
John Richter
Policy Analyst
GLREA
energyprophet@comcast.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 20, 2021 07:42 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I've found that although the cost for these improvements can be hefty, the bigger issue is how people feel about them. So far they've been sold as being better for the environment, or saving money over the long term, but the community of people who respond to that is apparently not large.  I don't know for sure, but while it seems people bought the Prius for largely environmental reasons, I see people buying Teslas largely because they're cool.   One of the reasons I think EVs will take over is because many people seem them as being cool as opposed to environmental, although clearly the environmental aspect is a motivation also.  There seems to be a certain degree of cool for PV also, but less so. When my house was on the solar tour, people were far more interested in my PV system than all the insulation in my walls, yet its really the insulation that makes it a better house.  In the case of PV, I'm not totally convinced that all of us owning our own systems is the best way, and I've certainly seen scenarios where the power company makes some deal with you to use your roof.  The financial situation with improving energy efficiency is all on the homeowner though.  When I see new construction, its almost always all code-minimum insulation, and so I think crap and more crap.   Its an inferior product.  If the price of energy were to ever skyrocket again like it did in the 70s, that would be financially obvious, but I feel like money can't be the main motivation, but I don't know the answer.  I only know that when people buy houses now, they don't think about insulation, and they don't even really think about indoor air quality--its kitchen appliances, fancy bathrooms etc.  I've seen plenty of houses with expensive appliances, but cheap vinyl windows.  Go figure.  When it comes to existing buildings, the first thing people want to do is redo that dated bathroom and/or kitchen.  The building industry always wants to sell trendy stuff, and then 30+ years later it ends up in the landfill, and the remodel budget goes into that instead of energy upgrades.   Again, this is only what I see, I don't know how widespread it really is.

I'm guessing everyone in Minnesota is about to get a very big energy bill due to the deep freeze, but I'm also betting that not many people will think that means their house is under-insulated.

Anyhow, my point really is that I think its more about changing mindsets.  My thought is that if people looked at skinny 2x4 or even 2x6 walls and thought--wow that's thin, the cost would be less of an issue.  Thick walls and some decent level of air sealing ought to be the norm, because its a better building.   In my view, the issue with PV is really separate--its just a question of where to put it and who owns and maintains it. You're certainly right that energy efficiency makes the PV make more sense, I just don't know that its selling point to the general public.

Maybe someone else will chime in...

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 08:23 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

One of the barriers to PV adoption has been the up front cost of the PV system. This is a serious sticker shock problem and is why the more effecient a home can be made, the smaller the PV system can be for the house to perform as desired. Up front costs can be minimized as well as locking in lower operating costs. It seems to me that that is where marketing can be focused...at least to start with. We need someone in this community who has marketing skills to step up. I'm sure some of this is being done, but it needs to be a lot more visible. Also, there are other ways to get a PV system such as leasing, and in some places, through an assessment on property tax bills...sort of a payment plan that spreads out the cost over time. There must be other ways to get it done as well.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 06:56 PM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I agree that the financing aspect has to be dealt with also. Some banks offer energy efficient mortgages, but they don't seem to be widely advertised.   I've also heard a lot of reluctance about air sealing from homeowners---it feels "unnatural" to them,  but then having a lot of very cold air leaking thru your walls isn't a very pleasant proposition, even for those who don't care much about climate change.  There is also a general resistance to change in the building industry.    So its not just the upfront cost that is a barrier in my experience--there are  multiple barriers.   I participate in a green building group trying to break thru those barriers---but I'm starting to think that the problem is really one of marketing, which really isn't the specialty of anyone in my group.   In my experience its way easier to  sell a PV system than a lot of air-sealing and an HRV.  What's further frustrating is that insulation/air-sealing is not something that is easy or cheap to retrofit, but its relatively affordable up front (I say relatively because I know that an HRV alone adds at least $2k (often more) to the total cost,  and air sealing is a labor cost.

Your point about EVs and the gas tax is interesting--in this case I think EVs will take over no matter what, so its going to have to be addressed.  My current solution is to mostly ride my bike or walk, but I figure my next car will probably be an EV.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 03:05 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Bob,

You make good points. I guess that getting out information about making homes more energy efficient, and why it makes sense from a monetary standpoint, is what's needed. Also, home buyers need to know which lenders are knowledgeable about these issues.

With regard to the part of my previous post about EV's, I received my registration renewal notice in the mail today. This year, the Electric Surcharge is $75.00. Again, if you good folks don't live in Minnesota, what are your states doing about replacing gas tax revenue?

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 19, 2021 07:56 AM
From: Bob Scheulen
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The upfront cost of the HRV is like the upfront cost of PV panels--its pays for itself over time, although its harder to put a savings on the HRV.   The issue with air tightness is that "natural" ventilation (ie air leaks) provide a highly variably amount of fresh air--highly dependent on the weather.  So in order to have sufficient fresh air during moderate, low wind weather, you get excessive air leakage when its -10 and blowing.  So you tighten up.  Up to some level you don't really need an HRV, but what that level is depends heavily on personal choices and to some degree on climate--the less moderate weather you have the more likely you either have enough air leakage or you have the windows open.  The other issue is how careful you are about what gets brought into the house (toxics), but for many people the main "pollutant" is actually water vapor--so mold becomes the issue.  My house in western Washington was measured at 2.3ACH50....tighter than common, but not even close to the .6ACH50 that the passivehouse people build.   I have never needed an HRV, but I'm careful about what I bring in, and we use the bath/kitchen fans to clear moisture.  If I were to build it now instead of 15 years ago, I would make it tighter than I did and heat with a heat pump.

I've never seen an actual saving calculation (ie payback time).   You'd have to calculate your heat loss at both air leakage rates and then for the "tight" version add back the energy to run the HRV, then cost out the savings over time to get the payback period.  Given your cold winter, I'm guessing the savings would be substantial.

But the other issue is that there is cost involved in making the house tight.  Plus my experience is that most builder don't know how.   Its not just sealing around windows and doors, but you have to seal around every penetration, limit the number of penetrations and tape all the sheathing joints--I don't know what you'd do if you don't have sheathing--only that housewrap isn't really an air barrier.

In the green building community, these questions get discussed all the time, because up-front costs are a big barrier to people asking for energy efficient houses.  Often the barrier is just that houses are already expensive, and most customers don't take much of a long term perspective.

------------------------------
Bob Scheulen
bobs@sensiblehouse.org

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 2/17/2021 4:45:00 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Welcome Dave,

Until now, its just been Bob and I posting back and forth so again, welcome. I suggest that you click on View Thread and read our other posts. Bob raises good points and are worth the read.

Bob lives in Seattle. Where in Washington do you live? The pandemic probably precludes a physical get together but it's good to know there are others of like mind nearby.

In one of my other posts, I noted that my house was built in 1921. My walls are pretty thin so I can't use a central HVAC system (no room in my walls for ducting). Last week we had several days where the temperature was quite a bit below zero degrees Fahrenheit (what was Gabriel Fahrenheit thinking when he came up with that scale?). In spite of that, the house maintained a comfortable temperature, so I guess that such space as there is in my walls is crammed full of insulation. No complaints.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 21, 2021 03:56 PM
From: David Large
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Michael

You bring up two good topics.

Relative to the first, Washington state also has a substantial electric vehicle surcharge (which also applies to at least plug-in hybrids like my Chevy Volt) -- in fact I pay more for the Volt's yearly registration than for my Ford F150 pickup -- but it seems fair to me for exactly the reason you suggest, especially since I've only used three tanks of gas in the Volt in four years!

Regarding heat recovery ventilators:  you are correct that some form of external air exchange is mandatory for a tight-envelope house.  When discussing this with interested people, the approach I take is that the alternative is to use conventional exhaust fans in kitchen and baths, with a conventional wall vent somewhere that opens as required to admit make-up air (they do make such things).  With that understanding, there is a clear cost-benefit ratio for purchasing an HRV.

In my house, I use a Zhender 350 HRV that has a tested "efficiency" of around 85%, meaning that the heat from the outgoing air heats (or cools in the summer) the incoming air to 85% of the difference between interior and exterior temperatures.  This, in return reduces the load on the heating system associated with air exchange by the same factor, while drawing only about 40 watts itself.  I check the CO2 levels in the house and under normal family-only load, it stays consistently under 550 ppm.  If we have a larger group here, I just turn it up for the duration of the gathering.

It is then straightforward to calculate a return on investment for the use of the HRV by just comparing the difference in operating costs for the heating/cooling system [assuming you know the heating degree days (HDD) and cooling degree days (CDD) for your location and the energy efficiency of your heating/cooling system] and comparing that with the incremental capital cost for the HRV system.

Dave Large

Original Message:
Sent: 2/17/2021 4:45:00 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Great conversation in here.  In PA, the Pa House voted at the end of last year to impose extra fees for registering EVs.  Here's a link to an article about that:
https://apnews.com/article/technology-legislation-pennsylvania-tax-reform-bills-9e46334660df23c617487808a9cb46cb

I'm not sure if the bill finally passed the Senate or not yet.  But knowing PA, it would pass there too.
Dara

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Dara,

Welcome to the thread.

I expect it will pass. The only question will be if they set it up to be a phase-in like here in Minnesota, or as Mike reports what's happening in Ohio (see Mikes post).

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:15 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great conversation in here.  In PA, the Pa House voted at the end of last year to impose extra fees for registering EVs.  Here's a link to an article about that:
https://apnews.com/article/technology-legislation-pennsylvania-tax-reform-bills-9e46334660df23c617487808a9cb46cb

I'm not sure if the bill finally passed the Senate or not yet.  But knowing PA, it would pass there too.
Dara

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Yes! Exactly!  We need to meet! :-)  Maybe in Harrisburg one of these days on an advocacy day?

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Sure. Just go to my website, the contact page, and use my direct email for possible schedule times....

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 11:10 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Yes! Exactly!  We need to meet! :-)  Maybe in Harrisburg one of these days on an advocacy day?

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Dara, I am not disputing that a solar system on a house for sale has a value, just that it is not necessarily easy to calculate that value. I will take issue to your statement of "free electricity".  The electricity is not "free" if you paid a premium on the house sale price because of the solar system. The electricity you get from the solar system may be cheaper than if you bought it from the electric company, but you paid for that electricity upfront in the house sale premium. The electricity is "free" only if the solar system has no resale value and thus did not influence the sale price, which would be counter to your original argument.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Agreed! Touché 😎

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 02:00 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Dara, I am not disputing that a solar system on a house for sale has a value, just that it is not necessarily easy to calculate that value. I will take issue to your statement of "free electricity".  The electricity is not "free" if you paid a premium on the house sale price because of the solar system. The electricity you get from the solar system may be cheaper than if you bought it from the electric company, but you paid for that electricity upfront in the house sale premium. The electricity is "free" only if the solar system has no resale value and thus did not influence the sale price, which would be counter to your original argument.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Guys,

It's great to see the good discussions from several people.

Regarding what premium a house with an existing PV system should command at the time of sale, I think that a method needs to be developed to determine this. A way to estimate depreciation of the PV system similar to that for vehicles. The output of the system when it was new vs output at expected time of sale. Data on the lifetime of the system components from when they were new so a prospective buyer can easily figure on when they will have to start replacing components. Any lender that deals with car loans will understand this. Also, information on where to get components if the new buyer wants to expand the system's output, as well as a list of questions to ask when looking to expand their system such as what brand(s) of equipment are compatible with the system's existing components. That sort of thing. 

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 02:00 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Dara, I am not disputing that a solar system on a house for sale has a value, just that it is not necessarily easy to calculate that value. I will take issue to your statement of "free electricity".  The electricity is not "free" if you paid a premium on the house sale price because of the solar system. The electricity you get from the solar system may be cheaper than if you bought it from the electric company, but you paid for that electricity upfront in the house sale premium. The electricity is "free" only if the solar system has no resale value and thus did not influence the sale price, which would be counter to your original argument.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Generally speaking, I think value at sale reflects the size of the system. The value added to the house is most likely some portion of the cost that it took to place on the structure or mounting location, rather than some attempt to say the sunshine value going forward is "X". To charge added value for the expected energy going forward is fiction. When you buy a car, you pay for costs and profit to make the car, not the expected miles that you may or may not drive it. In the case of PV and Wind, the energy is free. It is just the initial system cost that gets reflected as added value.
At this point in time with the market, I am not sure there is enough standardization and volume apart from all the other factors (perception, etc..) to "chart" a mathematical formula at time of sale. Variation will be wide across locations.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 07:06 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Guys,

It's great to see the good discussions from several people.

Regarding what premium a house with an existing PV system should command at the time of sale, I think that a method needs to be developed to determine this. A way to estimate depreciation of the PV system similar to that for vehicles. The output of the system when it was new vs output at expected time of sale. Data on the lifetime of the system components from when they were new so a prospective buyer can easily figure on when they will have to start replacing components. Any lender that deals with car loans will understand this. Also, information on where to get components if the new buyer wants to expand the system's output, as well as a list of questions to ask when looking to expand their system such as what brand(s) of equipment are compatible with the system's existing components. That sort of thing. 

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 02:00 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Dara, I am not disputing that a solar system on a house for sale has a value, just that it is not necessarily easy to calculate that value. I will take issue to your statement of "free electricity".  The electricity is not "free" if you paid a premium on the house sale price because of the solar system. The electricity you get from the solar system may be cheaper than if you bought it from the electric company, but you paid for that electricity upfront in the house sale premium. The electricity is "free" only if the solar system has no resale value and thus did not influence the sale price, which would be counter to your original argument.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Regarding the value of a used solar system, I do not think the original cost of the system has any merit because the cost of solar systems have decreased so much. Plus the original cost was subsidized. Unlike cars there is no viable market for for used solar systems to get sale data. (Is there a market for used solar panels? Anybody know?) What is the value today to the new homeowner has to be the value of the electricity going forward minus operating expenses. Think about how you would sell this to a perspective house buyer. "Mr/s Buyer you are going to save $X on your electric bill over the next 10 years, plus you will feel good for be doing something for the environment. So this adds a value of $X/2 (or some other fraction. It needs to be discounted or it has no sale value incentive)"

The problem with data from home sales is that the house value is the big number and the solar system value is the small number, and statistically it will be very hard to separate the two in comparative home sales. I think a better measure is "days on market"  (DOM) which is a standard real estate figure of measure and is in every realtor data base. Days on market is a key measure of the desirability of the house, i.e. how hard is it to sell it. It would be possible to separate average DOM by zipcode/neighborhood for those with and without solar systems.  This would not calculate the exact value of the solar system but would assure the homebuyer that the existence of a solar system is a positive (or potentially negative if that is the way the data indicates) factor.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 09:49 PM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Generally speaking, I think value at sale reflects the size of the system. The value added to the house is most likely some portion of the cost that it took to place on the structure or mounting location, rather than some attempt to say the sunshine value going forward is "X". To charge added value for the expected energy going forward is fiction. When you buy a car, you pay for costs and profit to make the car, not the expected miles that you may or may not drive it. In the case of PV and Wind, the energy is free. It is just the initial system cost that gets reflected as added value.
At this point in time with the market, I am not sure there is enough standardization and volume apart from all the other factors (perception, etc..) to "chart" a mathematical formula at time of sale. Variation will be wide across locations.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 07:06 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Guys,

It's great to see the good discussions from several people.

Regarding what premium a house with an existing PV system should command at the time of sale, I think that a method needs to be developed to determine this. A way to estimate depreciation of the PV system similar to that for vehicles. The output of the system when it was new vs output at expected time of sale. Data on the lifetime of the system components from when they were new so a prospective buyer can easily figure on when they will have to start replacing components. Any lender that deals with car loans will understand this. Also, information on where to get components if the new buyer wants to expand the system's output, as well as a list of questions to ask when looking to expand their system such as what brand(s) of equipment are compatible with the system's existing components. That sort of thing. 

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 02:00 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Dara, I am not disputing that a solar system on a house for sale has a value, just that it is not necessarily easy to calculate that value. I will take issue to your statement of "free electricity".  The electricity is not "free" if you paid a premium on the house sale price because of the solar system. The electricity you get from the solar system may be cheaper than if you bought it from the electric company, but you paid for that electricity upfront in the house sale premium. The electricity is "free" only if the solar system has no resale value and thus did not influence the sale price, which would be counter to your original argument.

------------------------------
Thomas Grant
Director
XanaduEnergy
tjg4@aol.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:33 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I would go even further Dora. PV, solar thermal and wind are the ONLY "items" that actually produce free clean energy (omitting your own high head stream for hydro), which is why the conventional interests fear them so much . Demand destruction .
Relating to this, another twisted verbiage that has been practiced for over 50 years, is that renewable energy is not free. The system and infrastructure costs are obfuscated into the total cost so the FREE aspect of the RE is shadowed and claimed "not free" This is a lie of course because ANY ENERGY production has system and infrastructure costs. If I give you a gallon of #2 fuel oil, what are you going to do with it if you don't have a furnace and all its associated infrastructure? Nothing. The reason this has been practiced of course, is how do you fight against a natural, clean, feel good and FREE energy source if you are the Fossil Fuel Industry? SO obfuscation.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:04 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Thomas -
Actually - I kind of disagree with your first point - What other home improvement (other than maybe energy efficiency projects) actually reduces another regular, monthly budget item and increases the value of your home?  A new kitchen or pool is nice to enjoy, but it doesn't save you money in living your life.  But you're right in that an older system should be valued lower than a newer one.  It's pretty much universally agreed in all the studies I've read so far that a leased system does not increase the value of a home - it has to be purchased.  (I am not an advocate of leasing systems generally.)

However, for a homeowner who buys a home with an existing solar energy system (purchased), even if there's no more tax credit to be had, the solar panels will continue to generate free electricity for decades.  All of those kwhs generated and used in the home are kwhs that homeowner doesn't have to buy from the utility company.  And even if the system is less efficient than it might have been originally, it's still working - no moving parts and no cost for "fuel" ever required.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 03:09 PM
From: Thomas Grant
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

The value of a solar system in a house sale is no different than any other convenience installed by the original owner. You have to consider the age, condition, potentially outdated technology, performance as well as the fact that the original owner pocketed the tax break which was one of the key factors in solar economics. Be really careful in agreeing to take over a leased system as many have an unrealistic escalation factor.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 2/23/2021 2:45:00 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: RE: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Thanks Michael -
Yes, when I said mortgage brokers I meant all lenders that do mortgages - so that they understand the savings the solar system provides and therefore the lower operating costs of the home with solar, and that that means a buyer could potentially afford a more expensive home because the home will cost less to run each month than a home without solar panels.
Lots to think about and educate folks about.

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

A different evaluation

First full disclosure: I am an early adopter (for outside Atlanta). The first system was solar thermal installed in 2005, in 2006 I had an 8 panel. ~1.2kW gird tied "hobby" system installed for a cost of $16K. In 2019 I participated in the Solarize Newton-Morgan Crowdsource project and replaced the original panels with 20, 325W panels and added 30 LiFePo4 batteries to create a hybrid system.  The final installed cost was a little less than $30K. 

I have been uncomfortable using the normal return on investment (ROI) strategy; namely how much electrical generation would it take a solar-electric system to pay for its cost.  Using regular calculations, the small system would not reach ROI for 30+ years.  The 2019 system's ROI is similar.

I did not like the replacement cost model mainly because the system is part solar and part battery and part intelligent controller.  I installed a transfer switch between the controller and the house electric panel.  The switch provides power to several circuits that I wanted powered despite any local grid outage: refrigerators/freezer, computer and communications, HVAC blower (gas heat/electric air conditioning), and kitchen appliances.  The power for these circuits comes from the solar panels or the batteries and only gets grid power if the controller senses insufficient power from the solar/battery system.

I reasoned that this hybrid configuration did not fit the usual ROI calculation. 

The controller, a SolArk 8K, provides several data points that lead me to a value generated calculation.

I calculate the value of the power generated by the solar system per month and compare that value with the amount Georgia Power provided, using the same $/kW charge. Using this formula, last year my solar-voltaic system generated about 46% of my electric energy use.  There were several months where the system generated more energy than I bought from the grid.

If nothing else, this strategy for calculating the value of my solar system gives me a value that eases the pain of installing the system.

When it comes time to sell this house, this value is what will go on the property description.

------------------------------
Julius Hayden
jjhaydeniii@earthlink.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 11:23 AM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels."

You need to add Lenders to your list. Prospective home buyers may just go through their regular bank and not a mortgage broker. There are a lot of banks in this country...there may not be a list of banks that have expertise with solar. Possibly a lot of work to compile such a list.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 23, 2021 10:18 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael -
Yes, it is true and there are a growing number of studies showing that it's true. Here are a couple of links to the Berkeley Labs studies from 2015...we definitely need newer data here:
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/selling-sun-price-premium-analysis (Selling into the Sun 2015)
https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/appraising-sun-six-state-solar-home (Appraising into the Sun 2015)

Here's a more recent study from Zillow:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/05/solar-power-can-boost-a-homes-value-in-these-10-states-the-most.html

I'm always on the lookout for newer research studies also.

Having solar panels on your home SHOULD increase the value (IF you own the system and don't lease it) since it reduces your operating costs for the home (eliminating or reducing your monthly utility bill).  The value would also vary based on age of system and other factors, of course.  I do know that there are fields in the MLS system that realtors should be completing that tell whether a home has energy efficient  features and solar panels.  It's my understanding at this point that many realtors don't actually complete those fields correctly.  And many realtors definitely don't understand how solar energy systems work well enough to explain it clearly and accurately (and confidently) to prospective home buyers.  I'm sure this varies across the country.  In California where solar's been around longer and it's on many more homes, I'm sure the realtors are much more comfortable explaining and selling solar than they might be in Pennsylvania where PA is newer and not as ubiquitous. 

Our goal at ASES will be figuring out where the gaps are (if there are any) and helping to make sure that realtors, appraisers, home inspectors, mortgage brokers, etc are better educated about solar and accurately value solar systems in a home so that the seller gets the true value they deserve and the buyer is comfortable knowing the value they'll be getting because of those solar panels.

That's the goal!  Interested to hear if other folks know about other studies on this (more recent ones!) and have other insights on gaps, needs, etc in this area.

Thanks!

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 07:56 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Dara,

"Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year."

I've heard that homes with exiting solar installed command a higher sale price. This should be looked into, and if it's true, a list of such homes should be made showing the different prices of otherwise similar homes. If a large enough collection of homes ends up being from all over the country, the list should be split up by region (to account for different average housing costs in different regions. Such lists may already exist, and that should be looked into so as to avoid "reinventing the wheel".  Just a thought.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi: I had to laugh when I saw your phrase, "........ do not understand solar". I have been into RE since the 70's. I cannot even count the number of time I have seen that sentence fragment surrounded by the noun(s) of your choice. I learned a long, long time ago that BY THE NUMBERS, Americans energy sense has a direct relationship with the gas pump price. Gasoline goes up, "Oh where can I get some of that RE." Gasoline goes down, "Oh, the upfront cost is not worth it". It is so predictable as to be a cliché at this point. The factor that has somewhat changed in a positive direction after 50 years, is that the willingness to open up the "blinders" regarding other decision points as to a "GO" or "NOGO" verdict has improved. In short, Americans have slightly moved beyond the ROI is the end all. Comfort, LCOE, Environment, etc. (Softer factors) are putting their finger on the scale a bit more. 
I am from PA as well. Really a state in conflict. Politician's have one arm down the NG wells and are trying to profess they have the other pointing at RE. We do have net metering and SREC's though price is pathetic, especially since Covid when everybody dumped SREC's which tanked the price to about $10, was $36 to $47 pre Covid. It is starting to recover some at $21.
Anyway, nice to "see" someone else from PA.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi William - Nice to "meet" you!  I'm in the southeast corner of PA.  Which part are you in?
I agree.  It helps to move the conversation a bit that the price of clean energy has come down so much in the past decade that it truly is now the cheapest electricity ever created in human history. 

Personally, I also think that a huge help would be for a solid, effective, campaign to "out" the huge amounts of money spent on subsidizing fossil fuels at the federal and state levels.  In PA, state taxpayers are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry to the tune of around $4B (yes, that's a B) PER YEAR!  And that doesn't include the federal level fossil fuel subsidies we're all paying for too. So that "cheap" natural gas is isn't really as cheap as it seems - and if we leveled the playing field and got rid of all the subsidies, clean energy would do pretty well now.  (And of course, that doesn't even start to account for the cost of externalities that, of course, we all pay for also.)  If those subsidies were broken out and shown on our utility and gasoline bills - how much quicker would Americans realize that transitioning to clean energy makes economic, as well as environmental sense.  I'd love to make some headway making this information more commonly known. 

Here are some links about PA and federal fossil fuel subsidies.  This one was just published two days ago:
https://www.pennfuture.org/Publication-Buried-Out-of-Sight-Uncovering-Pennsylvanias-Hidden-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies

And the federal level:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:23 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi: I had to laugh when I saw your phrase, "........ do not understand solar". I have been into RE since the 70's. I cannot even count the number of time I have seen that sentence fragment surrounded by the noun(s) of your choice. I learned a long, long time ago that BY THE NUMBERS, Americans energy sense has a direct relationship with the gas pump price. Gasoline goes up, "Oh where can I get some of that RE." Gasoline goes down, "Oh, the upfront cost is not worth it". It is so predictable as to be a cliché at this point. The factor that has somewhat changed in a positive direction after 50 years, is that the willingness to open up the "blinders" regarding other decision points as to a "GO" or "NOGO" verdict has improved. In short, Americans have slightly moved beyond the ROI is the end all. Comfort, LCOE, Environment, etc. (Softer factors) are putting their finger on the scale a bit more. 
I am from PA as well. Really a state in conflict. Politician's have one arm down the NG wells and are trying to profess they have the other pointing at RE. We do have net metering and SREC's though price is pathetic, especially since Covid when everybody dumped SREC's which tanked the price to about $10, was $36 to $47 pre Covid. It is starting to recover some at $21.
Anyway, nice to "see" someone else from PA.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Once again you give me reason to smile and laugh a bit. Back in the middle 90's I started writing TFTD (Thoughts For The Day). I write one now and then when something "triggers" my creative writing side. I numbered them starting with 001. The last one I wrote was number #233 a few weeks ago.
With a bit of irony, here is the very first one I wrote:

​#001.     "Subsidies for renewable energy have always been targeted at the end consumer. Subsidies for conventional fuels have always been paid to the companies or corporations directly, ergo being embedded in the energy cost without visibility to the consumer. This has given rise to the false idea that renewable energy requires subsidization, where as conventional fuels stand on their own two feet. Not True!!"

Central'ish Bloomsburg area.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 07:57 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi William - Nice to "meet" you!  I'm in the southeast corner of PA.  Which part are you in?
I agree.  It helps to move the conversation a bit that the price of clean energy has come down so much in the past decade that it truly is now the cheapest electricity ever created in human history. 

Personally, I also think that a huge help would be for a solid, effective, campaign to "out" the huge amounts of money spent on subsidizing fossil fuels at the federal and state levels.  In PA, state taxpayers are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry to the tune of around $4B (yes, that's a B) PER YEAR!  And that doesn't include the federal level fossil fuel subsidies we're all paying for too. So that "cheap" natural gas is isn't really as cheap as it seems - and if we leveled the playing field and got rid of all the subsidies, clean energy would do pretty well now.  (And of course, that doesn't even start to account for the cost of externalities that, of course, we all pay for also.)  If those subsidies were broken out and shown on our utility and gasoline bills - how much quicker would Americans realize that transitioning to clean energy makes economic, as well as environmental sense.  I'd love to make some headway making this information more commonly known. 

Here are some links about PA and federal fossil fuel subsidies.  This one was just published two days ago:
https://www.pennfuture.org/Publication-Buried-Out-of-Sight-Uncovering-Pennsylvanias-Hidden-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies

And the federal level:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:23 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi: I had to laugh when I saw your phrase, "........ do not understand solar". I have been into RE since the 70's. I cannot even count the number of time I have seen that sentence fragment surrounded by the noun(s) of your choice. I learned a long, long time ago that BY THE NUMBERS, Americans energy sense has a direct relationship with the gas pump price. Gasoline goes up, "Oh where can I get some of that RE." Gasoline goes down, "Oh, the upfront cost is not worth it". It is so predictable as to be a cliché at this point. The factor that has somewhat changed in a positive direction after 50 years, is that the willingness to open up the "blinders" regarding other decision points as to a "GO" or "NOGO" verdict has improved. In short, Americans have slightly moved beyond the ROI is the end all. Comfort, LCOE, Environment, etc. (Softer factors) are putting their finger on the scale a bit more. 
I am from PA as well. Really a state in conflict. Politician's have one arm down the NG wells and are trying to profess they have the other pointing at RE. We do have net metering and SREC's though price is pathetic, especially since Covid when everybody dumped SREC's which tanked the price to about $10, was $36 to $47 pre Covid. It is starting to recover some at $21.
Anyway, nice to "see" someone else from PA.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

So good!  This is something I continually harp on and think could be the key to faster adoption of renewables.  Why keep spending money on something that's more expensive to produce and use AND more expensive for our environment, health, property values, etc?  There has to be a better way to get this REAL AND FACTUAL data out better to the general populace to lay out the fact that "leveling the playing field" now would mean that clean energy sources are a no brainer.  Maybe we should create a separate discussion chain for this topic?

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:12 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Once again you give me reason to smile and laugh a bit. Back in the middle 90's I started writing TFTD (Thoughts For The Day). I write one now and then when something "triggers" my creative writing side. I numbered them starting with 001. The last one I wrote was number #233 a few weeks ago.
With a bit of irony, here is the very first one I wrote:

​#001.     "Subsidies for renewable energy have always been targeted at the end consumer. Subsidies for conventional fuels have always been paid to the companies or corporations directly, ergo being embedded in the energy cost without visibility to the consumer. This has given rise to the false idea that renewable energy requires subsidization, where as conventional fuels stand on their own two feet. Not True!!"

Central'ish Bloomsburg area.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 07:57 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi William - Nice to "meet" you!  I'm in the southeast corner of PA.  Which part are you in?
I agree.  It helps to move the conversation a bit that the price of clean energy has come down so much in the past decade that it truly is now the cheapest electricity ever created in human history. 

Personally, I also think that a huge help would be for a solid, effective, campaign to "out" the huge amounts of money spent on subsidizing fossil fuels at the federal and state levels.  In PA, state taxpayers are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry to the tune of around $4B (yes, that's a B) PER YEAR!  And that doesn't include the federal level fossil fuel subsidies we're all paying for too. So that "cheap" natural gas is isn't really as cheap as it seems - and if we leveled the playing field and got rid of all the subsidies, clean energy would do pretty well now.  (And of course, that doesn't even start to account for the cost of externalities that, of course, we all pay for also.)  If those subsidies were broken out and shown on our utility and gasoline bills - how much quicker would Americans realize that transitioning to clean energy makes economic, as well as environmental sense.  I'd love to make some headway making this information more commonly known. 

Here are some links about PA and federal fossil fuel subsidies.  This one was just published two days ago:
https://www.pennfuture.org/Publication-Buried-Out-of-Sight-Uncovering-Pennsylvanias-Hidden-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies

And the federal level:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:23 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi: I had to laugh when I saw your phrase, "........ do not understand solar". I have been into RE since the 70's. I cannot even count the number of time I have seen that sentence fragment surrounded by the noun(s) of your choice. I learned a long, long time ago that BY THE NUMBERS, Americans energy sense has a direct relationship with the gas pump price. Gasoline goes up, "Oh where can I get some of that RE." Gasoline goes down, "Oh, the upfront cost is not worth it". It is so predictable as to be a cliché at this point. The factor that has somewhat changed in a positive direction after 50 years, is that the willingness to open up the "blinders" regarding other decision points as to a "GO" or "NOGO" verdict has improved. In short, Americans have slightly moved beyond the ROI is the end all. Comfort, LCOE, Environment, etc. (Softer factors) are putting their finger on the scale a bit more. 
I am from PA as well. Really a state in conflict. Politician's have one arm down the NG wells and are trying to profess they have the other pointing at RE. We do have net metering and SREC's though price is pathetic, especially since Covid when everybody dumped SREC's which tanked the price to about $10, was $36 to $47 pre Covid. It is starting to recover some at $21.
Anyway, nice to "see" someone else from PA.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Maybe. It really comes down to RE promotion design. Do you make it all carrot, or stick then carrot. Psychologically speaking, a negative followed by a positive has stronger behavioral change potential, if done right. In this case, out the lies and expose what is in the shadows and then give a positive alternative. It is not an easy task because the dis-information and the money behind it is so massive. As best practices, modularization and quality continue to rise along with price reduction and easy solar monitoring apps., people will increasingly view solar as "mainstream" and business as usual. The rise of PV in small devices and everywhere in-between, has a "normalizing" effect as well. When the tipping point is reached, the question will be, "Why doesn't "X" have solar on it?", be it house, car, etc...

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 11:13 AM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

So good!  This is something I continually harp on and think could be the key to faster adoption of renewables.  Why keep spending money on something that's more expensive to produce and use AND more expensive for our environment, health, property values, etc?  There has to be a better way to get this REAL AND FACTUAL data out better to the general populace to lay out the fact that "leveling the playing field" now would mean that clean energy sources are a no brainer.  Maybe we should create a separate discussion chain for this topic?

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 25, 2021 06:12 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Once again you give me reason to smile and laugh a bit. Back in the middle 90's I started writing TFTD (Thoughts For The Day). I write one now and then when something "triggers" my creative writing side. I numbered them starting with 001. The last one I wrote was number #233 a few weeks ago.
With a bit of irony, here is the very first one I wrote:

​#001.     "Subsidies for renewable energy have always been targeted at the end consumer. Subsidies for conventional fuels have always been paid to the companies or corporations directly, ergo being embedded in the energy cost without visibility to the consumer. This has given rise to the false idea that renewable energy requires subsidization, where as conventional fuels stand on their own two feet. Not True!!"

Central'ish Bloomsburg area.​

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 07:57 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi William - Nice to "meet" you!  I'm in the southeast corner of PA.  Which part are you in?
I agree.  It helps to move the conversation a bit that the price of clean energy has come down so much in the past decade that it truly is now the cheapest electricity ever created in human history. 

Personally, I also think that a huge help would be for a solid, effective, campaign to "out" the huge amounts of money spent on subsidizing fossil fuels at the federal and state levels.  In PA, state taxpayers are subsidizing the fossil fuel industry to the tune of around $4B (yes, that's a B) PER YEAR!  And that doesn't include the federal level fossil fuel subsidies we're all paying for too. So that "cheap" natural gas is isn't really as cheap as it seems - and if we leveled the playing field and got rid of all the subsidies, clean energy would do pretty well now.  (And of course, that doesn't even start to account for the cost of externalities that, of course, we all pay for also.)  If those subsidies were broken out and shown on our utility and gasoline bills - how much quicker would Americans realize that transitioning to clean energy makes economic, as well as environmental sense.  I'd love to make some headway making this information more commonly known. 

Here are some links about PA and federal fossil fuel subsidies.  This one was just published two days ago:
https://www.pennfuture.org/Publication-Buried-Out-of-Sight-Uncovering-Pennsylvanias-Hidden-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies

And the federal level:
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 24, 2021 08:23 AM
From: william fitch
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi: I had to laugh when I saw your phrase, "........ do not understand solar". I have been into RE since the 70's. I cannot even count the number of time I have seen that sentence fragment surrounded by the noun(s) of your choice. I learned a long, long time ago that BY THE NUMBERS, Americans energy sense has a direct relationship with the gas pump price. Gasoline goes up, "Oh where can I get some of that RE." Gasoline goes down, "Oh, the upfront cost is not worth it". It is so predictable as to be a cliché at this point. The factor that has somewhat changed in a positive direction after 50 years, is that the willingness to open up the "blinders" regarding other decision points as to a "GO" or "NOGO" verdict has improved. In short, Americans have slightly moved beyond the ROI is the end all. Comfort, LCOE, Environment, etc. (Softer factors) are putting their finger on the scale a bit more. 
I am from PA as well. Really a state in conflict. Politician's have one arm down the NG wells and are trying to profess they have the other pointing at RE. We do have net metering and SREC's though price is pathetic, especially since Covid when everybody dumped SREC's which tanked the price to about $10, was $36 to $47 pre Covid. It is starting to recover some at $21.
Anyway, nice to "see" someone else from PA.

------------------------------
william fitch
Owner
www.WeAreSolar.com
fcfcfc@ptd.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 02:26 PM
From: Dara Bortman
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Great point, Robert, and one that we at ASES are zeroing in on in our 5 year strategic plan. 

We'll be sharing the Strategic Plan document shortly but to share a little ahead of time (!), one of our identified focus areas is:
 -Education and Workforce Development - Broaden the knowledge base of professions that influence solar adoption. Educate stakeholders about the economic benefits of solar.  Realtors, appraisers and other real estate professionals are our initial focus for the 1st year.

Not only do all realtors not recognize the value of a well insulated, efficient home, but they also don't understand solar - how it works and how it saves the homeowner money - and are instead often scared of it and may tend to avoid homes with solar panels or, worse, share inaccurate or uninformed opinions about solar to prospective homebuyers - leaving the home seller unable to realize the true added value to their home.

Definitely an area that ASES can help with! If you have ideas about how to educate realtors and other real estate related professions about how to value solar accurately, please let me know.

Thanks,
Dara



------------------------------
Dara Bortman
Exact Solar
Yardley PA
dara@exactsolar.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Robert,

Welcome to the thread.

I agree with your point (I'm so transparent), but I think we're going to have to approach the end result from multiple directions. There's no magic bullet, but there may be magic buckshot.

Michael

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 11:56 AM
From: Robert Mellon
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

I just wanted to mention that in our area of western Pennsylvania I don't think most of the realtors understand the value added that air sealing, extra insulation and heat recovery ventilation can add to a property. Hopefully with the growth of the net zero building movement in general more folks in real estate and house financing will get on board and see the benefits.

------------------------------
Robert Mellon
nmellon@verizon.net

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Michael - Here in Ohio they just passed legislation to assess a $200 annual fee for registering your EV, so consider yourself lucky!  I understand the rationale but it should've been based on annual miles driven, not a flat fee.  

This is the first year I've had to pay it.  I owned a 2014 Nissan Leaf from 2015 to 2020, and over that period I averaged about 3000 miles/year (I'm retired), so that's a pretty expensive road tax. If I'd been driving an ICE vehicle getting 30mpg, I would've used 100 gal/year, and our gas tax is 38.5 cents/gallon, so $38.50 vs. $200.00...I think our legislators think we all drive Teslas and can afford to pay the $200.  Or else the logistics of gathering the annual mileage dwarfed their feeble minds!

By the same calculation, that $200 would've covered ~15,000miles/year for someone using a gas pump and 30mpg car.


------------------------------
Mike Curran
Retired from (dare I say it?) Fossil Plant Mgt.
joacchim57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Hi Mike (good name, by the way...no bias on my part [smile]),

Welcome to the thread.

"By the same calculation, that $200 would've covered ~15,000miles/year for someone using a gas pump and 30mpg car."

That sounds like exactly what they've figured...straight one to one comparison. That takes away one of the prime reasons to get an EV in the first place. Call me cynical but I think that that may be what "they" intended under the guise of "Fair use of the roads" all along.

Michael

.


------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 22, 2021 12:23 PM
From: Mike Curran
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi Michael - Here in Ohio they just passed legislation to assess a $200 annual fee for registering your EV, so consider yourself lucky!  I understand the rationale but it should've been based on annual miles driven, not a flat fee.  

This is the first year I've had to pay it.  I owned a 2014 Nissan Leaf from 2015 to 2020, and over that period I averaged about 3000 miles/year (I'm retired), so that's a pretty expensive road tax. If I'd been driving an ICE vehicle getting 30mpg, I would've used 100 gal/year, and our gas tax is 38.5 cents/gallon, so $38.50 vs. $200.00...I think our legislators think we all drive Teslas and can afford to pay the $200.  Or else the logistics of gathering the annual mileage dwarfed their feeble minds!

By the same calculation, that $200 would've covered ~15,000miles/year for someone using a gas pump and 30mpg car.


------------------------------
Mike Curran
Retired from (dare I say it?) Fossil Plant Mgt.
joacchim57@gmail.com

Original Message:
Sent: Feb 17, 2021 02:45 PM
From: Michael Bean
Subject: Costs Not Widely Discussed

Hi all,

I don't know if these topics have been discussed before, and if they have, my apologies.

I have two things I'd like to talk about...one about EV's, the other about energy efficiency.

For the last two years, at least, Minnesota (where I live) has charged an EV surcharge in the area of 70+ dollars when you register your EV. I've not seem this discussed and no one from the Motor Vehicle Department has made an announcement about why this is being done, but I think I have a good idea why. Most (all?) states get a large share of their money for road maintenance from a tax on every gallon of gasoline pumped into an ICE vehicle. EV's carry their weight around on wheels just as ICE vehicles do, so the roads get wear and tear no matter what powers any particular vehicle. As more and more EV's replace ICE vehicles, states are going to feel the pinch to their revenues. Over time, I expect the yearly surcharge will go up. The surcharge is how Minnesota is responding to the fall off of gas tax revenue. How are other states coping?

I've seen a lot of talk about making building envelopes tighter and tighter in new house construction and/or older house retrofits so you don't heat or cool the great outdoors. Occasionally, heat recovery ventilators are mentioned, but no one mentions that such ventilators are not optional. As the building envelope gets tighter and tighter, indoor air pollutants like particles from cooking, having a smoker in the house, volatile chemicals outgasing from a variety of sources, as well as carbonmonoxide from natural gas appliances (a good reason for electric appliances like stoves and/or induction cook tops, etc.). I'm sure there are other sources of indoor pollutants that need to be expelled from the house. Ventilators are a not cheap item, but you rarely hear about the unavoidable need for them. They are a costly item, but if it's explained to anyone looking to get a more efficient house, said person won't get sticker shock and say "The heck with it." and just go with traditional building. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers are working night-and-day to get costs down because the market is huge with a lot of money to be had. What's needed are databases that gather together lists of materials and equipment that improve efficiency when building or retrofitting a house (or any building, really). Maybe what's left of the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (thinking about Energy Star here). The Forest Stewardship Council could be of help. All of this information should be gathered together in one place so builders, contractors and home buyers can find out what's available and what they cost at any given time when decisions need to be made. Has someone already done this?

------------------------------
Michael Bean
Retired
evonrheinhausen@goldengate.net
------------------------------