气候变化委员会(CCC)最近在英国发布的一份报告已经开始为大西洋这一边未来的房价敲响警钟。Imagine for a moment if the majority of American and Canadian households were told that their homes may become unsellable in 7-10 years unless they were extensively remodeled?
This is what is happening in the UK, as well as across Europe, with the introduction ofmandatory home energy labelingfor property resales - which are now in place. And, with the proposal to impose a minimum performance level that must be attained before a home is evenallowedto be resold - we decided to look into the likely impact this side of the pond.
We have it on good authority that similar proposals are being drafted in Canada and the US for mandatory energy labeling of new and resale properties – and we cannot help but think that as governments strive to achieve carbon reduction goals, the temptation to force householders to undertake deep energy refits or risk their homes becoming unsellable will also be on the table soon enough.
Is Energy Labeling on homes a good idea?
Well, despite the potential negatives - principally the impact on the prices for resale properties - we're firmly behind labeling the performance of homes.我们认为，有一个稳定的比较点是必要的，而不只是闪亮的装修和“按规范建造”的谈话，用来说服购房者放弃他们辛苦赚来的钱。We would even go so far as to say that the current labeling schemes don't go far enough, because it isn't only about Energy, it should be aboutcarbon footprint,healthy internal air quality, durability, but hey, it's a start. At least the majority of the home-buying public could easily compare between visually similar homes and know which will cost them twice or three times as much to heat and cool!
Which countries around the world have mandatory Energy Labeling for homes?
As can be seen on the table below, the USA and Canada are lagging behind the other member countries of the IPEEC.国际能源效率合作伙伴关系(IPEEC)是一个包括发达国家和发展中国家的高级别论坛。其目的是协调全球合作以提高能源效率，并促进各国政府制定政策以提高能源效率。
IPEEC provides information to decision-makers in major economies, and they are central in exchanging ideas and experiences and helping countries undertake joint projects to develop and implement energy efficiency policies and measuring. It is also a forum for member and non-member economies to share information about various bilateral and multilateral initiatives such as mandatory Energy Efficiency Labeling of Homes.
IPEEC supported initiatives are 'open-source', in that both members and non-members, including private companies, can elect to adopt them. Where we need to pay attention though, is that the IPEEC is coordinating the implementation of the Group of 20 (G20) Energy Efficiency Action Plan, which was agreed by G20 leaders in late 2014 as "the blueprint" for legislation to enforce the initial voluntary international energy efficiency collaboration. Since July 2016, IPEEC is responsible for the Energy Efficiency Leading Programme (EELP) that is for a ‘comprehensive, flexible, and adequately-resourced’ lobbying to reinforce voluntary collaboration on energy efficiency among G20 members and beyond. In other words - this unelected group are charged to influence the policies Governments bring in with reports, science and statistics - and here is the result:
13 of the 20 G20 countries have already brought in mandatory energy rating and labeling of homes. And, we want to make one thing clear, we do feel that overall the energy labeling of homes is a good idea. Homeowners should be able to compare visibly similar homes on the basis of performance as rated by a consistent process. When buying a new car, do most consumers ignore how much gas it's going to use or how fast it goes to 60 (depending on what is most important to that client) ?
As much as homeowners may have the energy-efficiency labeling blow softened by promises of government grants and incentives to upgrade home performance, speaking from experience, this process can be more complicated than anticipated. It often ends up uncovering a mass of hidden problems (likerotting walls caused by air leaks and interstitial condensation) that aren't covered by the grant scheme, and so they end up coming out of the pockets of homeowners.
And who would want this uncertainty being forced on them, this amount of potential hassle and disruption to their families and home life? Especially after 2020! This is precisely why we see a problem in the short to mid-term future of home values in North America, and especially with the high value homes that were built and bought in the last 10 years that people currently think are a good bet for future equity...
Who will this price-drop affect most?
Anyone across North America who has bought a new home in the last 10 years (and there are around 9 million) probably *think* that they will be fine, but that is not necessarily the case.
Unfortunately for them, homes built to basic code (the minimum legal standard a builder is allowed to achieve) are not only woefully inadequate when it comes to Energy Efficiency, but they generally havepoor Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) due to the amount of toxins that off gas from building materialsinto homes.
The energy efficiency time bomb for newer “code built” homes
As the pressure is also now on to significantly improve the performance of new homes under construction, homes that have been built over the last 10 years will rapidly become less desirableto an increasingly educated market, especially as the new building step codes that are being widely adopted are often so much more stringent than existing building codes. Energy efficiency performance has never improved so dramatically as it is at the moment.
In BC, Canada for example, the province has set a goal of having every new building be net-zero energy ready by 2032, and that’s only 10 years away! If you were given the choice when buying a new or nearly new home, would you rather buy a Net Zero Ready home built to exacting Energy Efficiency performance standards, or a regular home in which you throw cash into the furnace every month?
This is precisely why older homes in Europe have lost a significant amount of their value compared to better performing homes. So why should we think it's going to be any different here?
Add in the IAQ problem with newer homes
The US CDC, on their page of the Healthy Housing Reference Manual - entitled Chapter 5: Indoor Air Pollutants and Toxic Materials starts like this :
“Walking into a modern building can sometimes be compared to placing your head inside a plastic bag that is filled with toxic fumes.”
John Bower, Founder, Healthy House Institute
这很难让人安心。有人把脑袋装在塑料袋里吗?我们放一些有毒气体进去怎么样?更好吗?但是等待…
They go on to say, “the air within homes and other buildings can be more seriously polluted than the outdoor air in even the largest and most industrialized cities. Other research indicates that people spend approximately 90% of their time indoors. (这还是在2020年之前!) Thus, for many people, the risks to health from exposure to indoor air pollution may be greater than risks from outdoor pollution.
In addition, people exposed to indoor air pollutants for the longest periods are often those most susceptible to their effects. Such groups include the young, the elderly, and the chronically ill, especially those suffering from respiratory or cardiovascular disease”.
Well heck. So if we bought a regular home, to code, it's poisoning us and our families then... right.
在北美各地，由于在家具和厨房、壁橱等内置家具中使用木纤维和刨花板而暴露在甲醛中，因此越来越多的人在购买新房前考虑进行空气质量测试。
想象一下，如果你的家被鉴定为有甲醛暴露风险，更换所有东西和净化空气的成本可能会超过清除石棉和修复的成本。
Then factor in the fact that energy efficiency may not cut the mustard, and suddenly those twin sinks with granite countertops and the lovely crown molding and in every room doesn't seem as as much of a top priority selling feature any more, now does it?
How does this impact future home values in North America?
Ecohome团队的国际性质使我们能够识别整个建筑行业的平行趋势，即更高性能和更健康的住宅，以及旧住宅的市场价值。
随着北美的普通民众越来越意识到可以选择更健康的材料来建造新房，以及旨在迫使现有房主进行深度能源改造的惩罚性立法开始影响现有住房的转售价值——市场将受到两头挤压。这将影响新的构建和最近的房产的转售。
Having already seen the shockwaves this sent across the European housing market, what we’ve concluded, is that all those homeowners in existing code-built homes with minimal to no significant insulation or air sealing are going to be vulnerable to the same market forces that have affected homeowners in Europe.
如果北美的房主希望避免陷入和许多欧洲人一样的陷阱，他们迫切需要关注这个迫在眉睫的问题。欧洲人已经看到自己的投资在吸引力和价值上大幅下降。
我们如何避免房屋投资的亏损?
说白了，如果你正在考虑搬家，并且正在寻找新的建筑，一定要寻找性能标准高于规范的房屋。And wherever possible, and ESPECIALLY when having a new custom home built - concentrate on energy efficiency, insist on non-toxic building materials, and seriously consider having the home built tothe certification requirements for LEED, Passive House, Net Zero Energyor similar as a priority.
It may also be easier to consider aHigh Efficiency Prefabricated type home-因为这些往往更实惠，同时提供了一个更好的标准的能源效率和空气质量，只要你选择正确的(和Ecohome希望在这方面提供帮助)。
And, when talking to custom home builders and general contractors, don’t let them dissuade you from wanting a home built to a higher standard by warning you of much higher prices for High Performance homes. They really shouldn’t cost that much more - something that Ecohome have proved numerous times - such as whenwe builtCanada’s first LEED V4 Platinum homefor the same budget as code-built, a home described as "A phenomenal achievement"by Canada Green Building Council President, Thomas Mueller.
In our experience, you could expect to pay between a 5 and 10% premium for a better home, which is rapidly recovered from lower bills from monthly energy savings alone. And that doesn’t even touch on greater comfort for occupants, proven higher resale values, and durability, as energy efficient homes equate to more durable homes too. Would we rather own a home designed to last 30 years, or 60 years - at around the same price?
What evidence is there that regular North American house prices will take a hit?
The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy have clearly stated: “The value of energy efficiency in properly implemented construction standards is universally recognized as the easiest and most cost-effective way to help consumers save energy and money, make housing more affordable, and reduce air pollution. All of these benefits are difficult or impossible to capture if not taken into consideration at the time of construction.”
图3。能源效率对欧洲房屋销售价格和租赁市场的影响数据显示，欧洲销售和租赁市场的能源性能证书评级提高一个字母或同等的影响。条形表示95%置信区间。
来源:Mudgal et al2Global: Mudgal, Lyons和Cohen回顾了25项研究，分析了各种能源标签计划对财产价值的影响。这些研究是在2007年至2012年间进行的，涉及欧盟(EPC)、日本(东京绿色建筑计划)、美国(能源之星、绿色点和/或LEED)、新加坡(绿色标志)、瑞士(Minergie)和澳大利亚(ACT House能源评级计划)的自愿或强制性标签项目。大多数论文都研究了标签对销售价格的影响;还有一些还包括租金。
Of the 22 studies considered, 19 showed higher energy performance ratings to have a positive impact on either rental or sales values, or both.
Now please, dont look at the European % differences and find comfort that "oh well, it's not that much."Actually, it is, because what they failed to factor into that graph is the loss in extra value that could have been gained from making the right choices in the first place. Allow us to demonstrate...
High performance homes are a safer investment for future resale values
In just one example close to home, a member of the Ecohome Network team recently put his LEED Platinum certified home on the market in Quebec, this was his experience:
After carefullychoosing healthy building materialsto optimize interior air quality (very important as he has young children and understands the importance of IAQ for his family’s health), as well as building to a very high energy performance, he calculated his build costs at approximately 6% higher than had he built the home to basic code standards.
Over the 3 years he has lived there, the decision to incur the extra cost for better performance resulted in over $3000 of savings on heating and cooling alone, which is even more impressive bearing in mind that Quebec has some of the lowest energy costs in North America. Also realize, that because of these energy savings, his overall monthly household costs (including slightly higher mortgage payments) were actually less than they would have been had he built a regular ‘building code’ standard home.
Yes, you heard right, his monthly bills were lower. He paid a higher mortgage, but that money was offset by much lower month bills, so he had more money in his pocket at the end of the month. Let that sink in for a second.It was actually cheaper for him to live in a better house.
And, if you aren’t convinced yet, there is always the matter of resale. The final closing price for his home was 31% higher than a standard code-built home, and the purchaser specifically sought to buy an independently certified high performance and healthy home. He had 3 visits the day the home was put on the market, and the home was sold by the following day, breaking the local "comparable house" price ceiling by 31%.
So there you have it. He lived cheaper, in a healthier and more comfortable home, then sold it for a premium. So, which is the most expensive choice of new home again?
Which begs the question - if you can build a home that’s healthier, more durable, more comfortable, and that has a higher resale value, all for around the same price as a high-performance and healthy home, why would you build any other way?
If you need to be extremely penny-wise and you*think*you can’t afford to build a more efficient home, then在现实中，你不能不这样做。
Remember - Build Better, Renovate Better, Live Better, with Ecohome.
Now you know more abouttheimportance of building energy efficient and net zero homes, find more about energy green home construction and choosing sustainable and healthy building materials inthe pages below and in the EcohomeGreen Building Guide pages.
Find more aboutgreen home constructionand reapthe benefits of a free Ecohome Network Membership here. |
Comments (0)
Sign Up to Comment