The Energy-Efficiency Pyramid

Appliances before insulation?
by Doug McEvers

I like the pyramid theme but my list would prioritize insulation before appliances and HVAC would be right after insulation. Much depends on the current R-values and the improvement scenario, same with HVAC, if the furnace is 30 years old and 65% efficient, a 95% replacement looks mighty attractive.

Conservation before 'green bling'
by Kyle

Great! This is the type of public energy education we need out there!!
I live in a progressive community in Maryland. I am constantly frustrated when I see PV panels on 1950s brick ranches with original windows and I can only assume what missed opportunities lurk within. With our current uncapped federal subsides on production and capped subsides on energy conservation improvements It will take more than education alone to stop the problem of spending on production before conservation (thought it is a great place to start). Residential improvement subsidy rules for production need to be rewritten to get the incentives right (maybe a specific HERS score to qualify for a PV subsidy for example). We have a cultural propensity for the techno fix and showing off our values such as being green. For this reason people often go strait for the 'green bling' such as solar, wind turbines, or even ground source heat pumps before conservation. We have to properly educate and incentivize conservation investments first. In the age of global warming their is no other choice. Obviously federal subsidies are not encouraging conservation first but has any states tried to get the incentives right and encourage conservation measures before giving production subsidies?

The only thing I would like to see added to the pyramid is to make explicit about sealing and maintaining windows in rung 4.

Re: Appliances before insulation?
by Kyle

I agree with Doug appliances before insulation seems a bit funny. I don't have cost-ben data in front of me but maybe splitting up the type of insulation job on the pyramid would make sense. I would think simple attic insulation is more cost effective than appliances but maybe doing the stud bays on average would be less cost effective than some appliances? It would be interesting to see the numbers.

Appliances before insulation?
by Martin Holladay, GBA Advisor

Doug and Kyle,
Whether or not to address appliances before insulation or insulation before appliances depends on the circumstances of the house.

If you have a 12-year-old refrigerator, it makes obvious sense to buy a new refrigerator before you spend $2,000 to hire a contractor to blow dense-packed cellulose into your wall cavities.

On the other hand, if your attic has only 3 inches of worn-out dirty fiberglass batts, and your appliances are relatively new, it clearly makes more sense to install 16 inches of cellulose in your attic than it does to replace your appliances.

Fixing Duct Leaks
by Ed Welch

I would think that one of the first items after #3 would be doing a duct blaster test along with the air sealing measures.....then fixing as many leaks as possible, replacing ducts as needed, etc. In CA, they estimate an average home leaks 30%!...seems like a huge energy hog...but we are a moderate climate. In more severe climates, maybe the HVAC contractors are held to a higher standard.

Not every house has ducts
by Martin Holladay, GBA Advisor

Ed,
Remember, the pyramid was created in Minnesota. I assume that many Minnesota homes, like Vermont homes, have no ducts. They have hydronic heat distribution and no air conditioning.

Have to consider the house
by Rob Jones

Nice idea. However, I think I'd first consult 1) a good insulation contractor that also does air leak sealing around the attic and crawlspace, and 2) a good HVAC contractor to inspect and potentially recommend upgrades to the HVAC systems. Without knowing the cost of the high-ticket remedies, being out a few hundred bucks on an audit doesn't do me much good if I can't afford the fix. A good energy rater can probably prescribe the right solutions, but many homeowners would probably still find managing a retrofit pretty confusing.

insulation before appliances...mostly
by Michael Blasnik

If you have a 12-year-old refrigerator, it makes obvious sense to buy a new refrigerator before you spend $2,000 to hire a contractor to blow dense-packed cellulose into your wall cavities"

I'm sorry , but this is bad advice. A 12 year old fridge had to meet 1993 standards and so the saving from a new unit might be about $50/yr and the payback likely 10+ years. Retrofit wall insulation might cost about $1.25/sqft and produce savings of 20 cents/sqft (more if gas prices bounce back) -- giving about a 6 year payback. The wall insulation is more cost-effective and the overall impact on energy use and bills is much larger .

Insulation, if needed, will go before appliances in most homes. Of course, unplugging second fridges goes before that. On the other hand, unplugging cell phone chargers seems sensible but is trivial.

ducts in Minnesota
by Michael Blasnik

Although they have a fair amount of hydronic heat, there are plenty of houses in Minnesota with ducts. But the ducts are in the basement and the basement is in the house, so duct leakage is not a big savings opportunity. Ducts go near the top of the list in regions where they put them in silly places like attics and garages and crawlspaces...

Thanks, Michael
by Martin Holladay, GBA Advisor

Michael,
Thanks for your estimates of energy savings from refrigerator replacement and wall insulation.

Price for Installing Sidewall insulation
by Richard Riegel Burbank

In response to Marcus on the cost of retrofitting walls with cellulose, I would estimate that that $1.25/sf to dense pack cellulose would quite a bit too low. It is very detailed and labor intensive work. We would hope the contractor has an infrared camera to check their work. We would also hope that the crew is following lead safe practices, OSHA safety standards, as well as fully probe the walls with a fill tube connected to a blower that is well maintained and able to dense pack. As a home performance contractor, I would say that $4-6 / s.f. is a better number to use. I think $1.25 is only possible by missing many of the steps I described as well as a very low wage for the employees.

Cellulose pricing
by Brett Moyer

Richard,
If you are charging $4-6 / square foot for cellulose in a 2x4 wall you are ripping people off. If your insulation contractor is charging that much, he/she is ripping you off.

Where's the toilet?
by Andrew Henry

Hi Martin,

The federal energy efficiency rebate program here in Canada provides a rebate for High Efficiency toilets. It takes energy to pump all the water used to flush toilets and there are plenty of 20 L and 13.5 L (5 and 3.5 gallon) toilets still out there. For a family of four, switching their toilet from an old 20 L toilet to a 6 and 3 L dual flush will save the household 119 cu.m/yr (29484 gallons/yr). Switching out 13.5 L toilets will save 72 cu.m/yr (18 564 gallons/yr). From Caroma's calculator.

If a households water is municipal the homeowners will see the savings directly in their water utility bill, and the utility will see the savings in their energy bill.

Homeowner's with their own well and septic system will see the savings directly in their electricity bill as their pump won't need to pump as much water... and they'll be pushing less volume through their septic system which should extend the life of the system as sludge and slime will have more time to settle out in the septic tank instead of ending up in the septic field.

The Maximum Performance (MaP) toilet testing has lots of HET toilets now. Here is the dual flush HET qualified fixtures list from cwwa.ca.

Tangentially, isn't it about time that building codes mandated HET fixtures? The requirement for six litre toilets came into the code quite a few years ago!

Cheers,

Andrew

pyramids make a bad graph
by mike

people only go for the low-hanging fruit. there is a reason the food pyramid doesn't work, either.

Going for the "low-hanging fruit" is the whole point
by Martin Holladay, GBA Advisor

Mike,
I'm not sure I understand your point. You write that "people only go for the low-hanging fruit." If that were true, that would be a step in the right direction — if you are using the term "low-hanging fruit" in the usual way, meaning the most cost-effective measures.

I think that energy-efficiency experts are frustrated by an entirely different phenomenon: the people who start by going after the fruit at the very top of the tree. That's where resources are wasted. Going after the low-hanging fruit is a good thing.