been thinking about this a lot lately every time I look into making the house more efficient, it somehow turns into a way bigger project than expected. like you start with something simple, next thing you know you’re getting quotes that are way higher than you thought, or being told you need to fix 2–3 other things first before it even makes sense. and yeah, I get the whole “it pays off over time” idea, but it feels like that only works if you can actually afford to make the jump in the first place. especially with older houses where nothing is straightforward and everything seems connected. kinda feels like there’s a gap between what sounds good on paper and what actually works for normal people dealing with real budgets. curious how others see it
is it just part of the process, or do you think the whole “efficiency upgrade” thing is still too expensive for most people to realistically do?
Why does “saving energy” always end up costing so much upfront?
byu/Own_Effective_801 inenergy
Posted by Own_Effective_801
12 Comments
This is too vague.
Some energy efficiency projects pay off – think solar, think LED bulbs.
Others don’t: new windows, insulation often.
Also the theory about up front cost could be applied to everything. To get a job you need a fixed address, a car, suitable clothing, a home computer with an internet account and a smart phone. You haven’t even gotten a job yet and you have a mountain of expenses.
I just did it myself. Putting insulation in an attic isn’t that complicated, just a pain. It made the bedrooms way warmer in the winter though, it was worth it.
It’s not specific to energy. It’s part of the [boots theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory), where you need to be able to invest upfront to save money down the road. And for that, you need the money upfront.
It’s the same thing with clothes, household equipment, etc.
Not sure what point you are making. Higher efficiency units have been a thing for over 50 years. Most homes built since 1990 have good insulation. And many older homes were retrofitted with better ceiling insulation starting earlier, in the 1970s after the Oil Shocks. Since then furnaces and AC units have gone from 50% to well over 90% efficiency. If you have older HVAC units then the payback is worthwhile and there may be rebates as well. After that adding solar is the best thing you can do. But none of these fit your narrative. They can all be done one at a time. Stop fussing about and pick the bigest impact item and do it.
What region is your house. Any remodeling is always more expensive than new construction.
Many regions have nonprofit energy audits and advice, sometimes free. They should be able to estimate from a year’s worth of your bill the energy savings. The most accessible and DIY are attic insulation and air sealing. There are inside and outside window treatements. The next step is a heat pump, queue that up before your old HVAC dies.
You can also search your home for leaks with a thermal camera attachment to your phone.
Some locations/utilities have subsidies for energy efficiency and sometimes you find on-bill financing at low to no interest.
Wherever you are, many people in your town have worked through the same questions and done it.
Do a search for energy efficiency programs in your area and ask your utility.
A key point. If it didn’t cost significantly more upfront, it would already be the default.
Short answer, there are lots of things you can do that cost very little which have a huge impact. Air sealing, blinds & UV window coatings, roof and exterior color, ventilation, shade like trees and overhangs, LED bulbs.
Others that cost more but have a big impact and so are also usually worth it, solar, insulation, new equipment (furnace / AC / Stove, fridge etc.), windows doors.
You are right it gets harder with major retrofits, but it’s getting better every year and knowledge of modern building science is getting more sophisticated.
Long Answer:
It’s the same as anything where you put more upfront for a better product that is higher quality, lasts longer, works better, etc. If you buy high end great quality boots, you may only need to buy a pair every 10 years. If you buy the cheapest you will be replacing your boots almost every year. Each choice has a user experience, payback and waste associated. The boots example is often used when explaining why its more expensive to be poor than wealthy. Its totally possible to build a home that barely needs ANY heating and cooling, but the upfront cost often outweighs the savings compared to a half measures. This is especially true when debt is involved where the the cost of the upgrade to offset future costs has an interest rate associated with it, and so has an ongoing cost pushing out the benefit and payback. The cost benefit of almost any energy saving measure can be plotted and there is a sweet spot where it’s a no brainer, usually around the 5-7 year payback. When they get over 7-10 year payback in savings, it usually starts looking less attractive when compared to putting that money somewhere else, like investing or paying down existing debt (opportunity cost, or discount rate etc).
If it was free and saved a lot of money, it would already have been done. Seems obvious?
i work in energy code development. for envelope, it costs more because you are putting more material (insulation, air sealing, etc.) than is required by code. if you want more continuous exterior insulation, and you go beyond a certain thickness, you may need special attachments, etc. It can add up. For systems, well more efficient equipment is more expensive… because it has to be.
saving energy from a non behavioral perspective will always cost more upfront, that is why it is important to look at the life cycle cost effecitviness of doing it.
It doesn’t have to cost a dime. Take shorter, cooler showers. Line dry your laundry. Turn down the heat and turn off the A/C. Empty out the extra fridge or freezer and turn it off. Unplug anything you are not using. Turn off lights when not needed. None of that will cost anything and will save you a bunch.
I think things that cost a lot upfront are things that do indeed save energy but ultimately are there to increase quality of life. Sure new windows save energy but they will never pay for themselves, the only reason to ever do it is because it is really nice to upgrade from single pane to double pane windows.