Views: 284
US
Georgia
Nearby States
- Alaska
- Alabama
- Arkansas
- American Samoa
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Washington D.C.
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Guam
- Hawaii
- Iowa
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Massachusetts
- Maryland
- Maine
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Northern Mariana Islands
- Mississippi
- Montana
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Nebraska
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- Nevada
- New York
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Puerto Rico
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Virginia
- Virgin Islands
- Vermont
- Washington
- Wisconsin
- West Virginia
- Wyoming
Don't see it?

Find:
Suwanee
Nearby Cities
Don't see it?

Find:
Neighborhood
Nearby Neighborhoods
Don't see it?

Find:

What goes into a green home?

Melody Parker
Contributions: 94

Melody Parker

Real Estate Agent

View my 4 listings

Contributions: 94

Disc

:1
Photos

:93

View full profile

What is a Green home?

Green homes incorporate environmental considerations and resource efficiency into every step of the building and development process to minimize environmental impact. The design, construction, and operation of a home must focus on energy and water efficiency, resource efficient building design and materials, indoor environmental quality, and must take the home's overall impact on the environment into account. However, many of the processes and technologies that go into a green home happen behind the scenes and behind the walls. What can a homebuyer look for?

Look for an NAHB Research Center Certified certificate, the homeowner's guarantee that the home was built according to one of the levels of green outlined in either the ICC 700-2008 National Green Building Standard or the NAHB Model Green Home Building Guidelines. The NAHB Research Center is the sole certifier recognized by NAHB's National Green Building Program.
Other key components of a green home include:

This information was taken from: http://nahbgreen.org/

Melody Parker
Keller Williams Realty Atlanta Partners

[content removed by moderator for being self promotional]

Flag content

June 01 - Suwanee

RSS

Replies (14)

DanMabTay
Contributions: 52

DanMabTay

Contributions: 52

Q&A

:17
Disc

:35

View full profile

MONEY ONLY

Flag content

June 03

Pasadenan
Contributions: 6751

Pasadenan

Contributions: 6751

Q&A

:2068
Disc

:4540
Photos

:143

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

Grass??

Actually the "greenest" homes I've seen were built in the 1910's by the Green brothers. The architecture was much greener that any LEED certified building that I've seen. And they didn't need any "agency" to judge their work in order for them to design it right.

They didn't rip off their customers either!

So do you Bicycle to work? Why are you using a gasoline engine if you are so concerned about enviromental impact?

You can show your clients properties in one of those peddle carts used in China, and you can peddle for them.

Flag content

June 03

DanMabTay
Contributions: 52

DanMabTay

Contributions: 52

Q&A

:17
Disc

:35

View full profile

This whole "Green" movement is about equal to a "bowel" movement. It is a bad markerting ploy. Most average people cannot afford to replace their Prius battery ($8500.00 every two or three years). Most people cannot afford for Solar panels ($25 - 30,000) with a 30 year payback. Most people cannot afford windmills in their back 40 acres. Most people don't own 40 acres. Most people don't want to ride bicycles 20 miles to work. This whole "green" movement is about raising taxes and nothing more. Cap and Trade is about tax generation for all of the countries of the world too cowardly to CUT services. BELT TIGHTENING is the answer to the problems. Schools should stick with Reading, Writing and Arithmetic and SH**CAN all of the Arabic and Tagolog and Chinese lessons and stick with English. After the kids learn english, mom and dad can spend their own money to teach the kid Swahili, not the taxpayer. The only green I am interested in is money and the cut grass under my feet on Sunday.

Flag content

June 04

Pasadenan
Contributions: 6751

Pasadenan

Contributions: 6751

Q&A

:2068
Disc

:4540
Photos

:143

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

Worse than the taxes, this whole "cap and trade" proposal is about a huge "give away" to the mega corporations! So, they get "credit" for the carbon based energy they presently use; and then, as they increase efficiency, or use renewable energy, or even energy from very highly radioactive sources with power plants that have extreme environmental impacts... they "sell off" their credits to "polute" and make a fortune off their competition.

And since they have the right to "polute" and potential new companies would not, they have locked out the competition, thus they can rig their prices and rip off the public even more.

The mega corporations believe that everything should have a "price", even the air we breath and the rain that comes down, and the sunshine on the streets. They already make sure that people have to pay for seeds rather than replanting from the previous harvest.

But "taxes"? Nope; they ship the jobs overseas to avoid payroll taxes.

Flag content

June 04

jkonstant
Contributions: 1505

jkonstant

Real Estate Agent

Contributions: 1505

Q&A

:562
Disc

:932
Photos

:11

Zillow All-Star

Since May 2009

View full profile

Jeffrey Immelt is on Obama's economic advisory board
Jeffrey Immelt is head of GE
GE owns NBC/MSNBC/etc

GE makes billions on cap&trade
Billions are dumped into NBC/MSNBC/etc
NBC/MSNBC/etc endorse Obama

Or put another way, Obama bails out the media.

I agree we should not be polluting as much as we do. All types of pollution. The whole "Green Scam" is a politcally motivated move to increase tax revenues. Sadly you cannot even have a rational debate on the issue since those that are in favor of all this are so entreanched they cannot even imagine they "might" be a "little" wrong.

Flag content

June 13

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"
Contributions: 5875

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"

Contributions: 5875

Q&A

:2199
Disc

:3608
Photos

:68

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

sustainability is not about spending money, sustainability is not about $30,000 solar panals, its about when faced with two choices, trying to do the right thing. put solar lighting in the living areas so that you dont need lights during the day. using a smart home that doesn't bleed electricity when you are at work. floors that dont feel cold to the touch and are made from materials that grow quickly like sugar cane or bamboo. not cutting open a mountain for your countertop or floor. taking already used material and rather than sticking that in the ground, creating a composite countertop. using heating systems that are more efficient, without compromising on cost(if installed during construction, hydronic heating is only 15% more expensive when compared with a nice forced air unit.)

green construction is one branch of sustainability that, if adopted nation wide, could reduce substantially our dependence on both energy per capita and our national infrastructure, it also will lead to our independence from foriegn strangleholds. this is at the moment a pipe dream, but we are taking our first steps.

Flag content

June 24

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"
Contributions: 5875

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"

Contributions: 5875

Q&A

:2199
Disc

:3608
Photos

:68

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

as far as cost goes, the costs have been and will continue to come down as scale grows, these costs are representative of the specialty and novelty of the industry. green tech is the new qqq... ride the bubble for a while

Flag content

June 24

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"
Contributions: 5875

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"

Contributions: 5875

Q&A

:2199
Disc

:3608
Photos

:68

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

to be fair, melody Parker doesn't have a clue, either...

Flag content

June 24

nvchaz
Contributions: 1617

nvchaz

Contributions: 1617

Q&A

:729
Disc

:821
Photos

:67

View full profile

Another marketing ploy.

Like the hybrids... by the time you calculate the premium vs. the base model it will take 5 years to return the savings and then you have to factor in the battery replacement. We've had small diesels (VW) that are are more cost effective but do not have the foolish cache of the Prius (ego-driven, not ecological driven). Why don't they put a small V-4 high torque diesel in a small pickup like the Ford Ranger? They're doing it in Europe.

When the "green" hype goes away will be the time to go green. Then it will be "cost-effective" requiring no certifications or phony marketing hype.

Flag content

June 24

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"
Contributions: 5875

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"

Contributions: 5875

Q&A

:2199
Disc

:3608
Photos

:68

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

oh i agree completely, but even in the mean time there are partial moves that one can make that involves minor changes to one's life that improve one's carbon footprint and has minimal impact on the wallet.

taking a hybrid car as an example, there is in fact a buisness model in place to roll out an automated battery changing station that will swap a spent battery for a new one in about the same amount of time it takes to pay for the "gassing up" at the atm before hand. there is a huge infrastructure deficit, but solving the battery cost issue and the overnight charge and 250 mile/day limitations of the car would be great progress.

but even without that technology, someone who already has a hummer H3 and drives 20 miles to work might feel "stuck" but what if you live less than a mile from the supermarket? take a walk, save some gas, get a little healthier? buy a nice little $1200 motor scooter and drive around rush hour traffic(pays for itself in 2 years, hummers are gas hogs ^_)^?

likewise in housing the cost of installing a skylight is roughly 300-350 (or 180 if you have the construction workers on your payroll already) but because the added value of supplying natural light in large quantities can increase values by 5-10k if done appropriately, 5-6 skylights in main living areas and bathrooms is easilly justifyable.

bamboo floors offer a very tough (albiet fiberous) wood that insulates better than traditional hardwoods and grows in approximately 1/20 the time, often in otherwise unusable soils.

insulating your homes is costly but what if new constructions were required to use high density blown insulations that offered higher heat retention? the cost to them might be substantially higher, and truly, that cost would have to be passed along (although this is the perfect time for an upward pressure on prices of new constructions, is it not?) and would result in literally hundreds of thousands in savings over a 50-80 year life of the home!

smart circuit electrical systems that allow you to kill circiuts and systems to mitigate vampire losses cost almost nothing (except for labor) is another high cost rennovation that costs nothing for a new construction to add. again saving homeowners thousands over 30 years and more importantly if used correctly lessening demand on the grid. large scale usage could have a huge cumulative impact.

the list goes on

for a home to be "green" it doesnt have to be laden with toys like windmills covering the back 40 acres, all it needs is efficiency. that is the technology we do have access to, in fact most of it is a decade old by now

Flag content

June 25

Pasadenan
Contributions: 6751

Pasadenan

Contributions: 6751

Q&A

:2068
Disc

:4540
Photos

:143

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

As far as lighting, cooling, heating, and insulation efficiency are conserned, that is mandated by California state law (title-24), and there is no "green" program or technology involved.

As far as "smart electrical systems"; that is mostly a gimmic to allow lazy people to not bother turning off things by themselves.

80 years ago, homes in California did not need to be built with air-conditioning as they were designed to remain cool in the summer without it. And really, even with the low efficacy windows used at the time, heating was rarely needed either.

You still don't need the heating nor the cooling, yet most occupants of dwelling units seem to use them all the time. You can do all kinds of things to be more environmentally conscience when building, but you still cannot change how most people would use the space. Nor do most people consider the landfill impacts of what they are "replacing".

Sure, a liquid crystal monitor uses less electricity than a cathode ray tube, but there are manufacturing impacts, and there are disposal costs and implications. And decades ago, households had only one and used it only a couple hours a day? Now households have 5 or 6 that seem to stay on constantly.

And you think there is no power required for those fancy "control" systems? Even the wireless receiver for the garage door opener is drawing power all day long.

As for electric car batteries, people would be foolish to exchange them just to get a quick charge; the life span typically is less than 5 years, and substantually depends on how they are used and how they are maintained. And just think of all the lead used that rarely gets recycled.

Methane fuel cells would be a much better choice; yet we are a long way from getting any kind of "standard" for that; and without a standard, one cannot rely on a company staying in business or that what you have can be serviced or maintained.

Really, for automobiles, the first thing we should be doing is what Brazil did well over a decade ago... modify the emissions control system with the oxygen sensor in the exhaust so that the engine would automatically adjust to run on any kind of fuel.

And the simple solution to getting alternative fuel distribution throughout the market place is to tax gasoline at 300% of full price including all existing taxes. And use this tax strictly for bribing people out of their cars into public transit where there can be economy of scale if the ridership is sufficient.

But no, it has never been about the envirornment, it is only about profit for the few.

Flag content

June 30

Pasadenan
Contributions: 6751

Pasadenan

Contributions: 6751

Q&A

:2068
Disc

:4540
Photos

:143

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

And what about "washing"? In 1849, the "norm" was to bathe once a week. Yet most americans now bathe either every day or every other day. And some bathe twice a day. In Japan, a bathtub full of water is used by the entire household, and often not emptied for several weeks; yet we replace the water for every user each time, and boy do these "americans" love their 20 to 30 minute showers.

And the lawn and the toilets? Why are we using "treated" water instead of recycled water? Doesn't anyone consider the power consumption required for treating the water? Yet the city refuses to provide a recycled water distribution system, and the state has very strict laws against most implimentations.

And how often do americans now wash clothes? Do any even do it by hand, or is it only these "machines"? In most cases, the washing is not even good for the fabrics, which of course is probably why we replace them so often, which has even more environmental impact.

About 4 years ago a manufacturer started producing a "washer/dryer" machine that worked more like a dishwasher, where you do not remove the clothes from the washer to put in the dryer, but the machine goes to a "dryer" cycle. Not only is this more convienient for the user, but it lowers building costs and impacts, AND is more energy and water efficient as the water can be recycled and the drying uses a condensate method that doesn't put waste heat into the room nor out a vent pipe. Yet you still cannot find these for end-consumer purchase. You cannot even get the media to provide any news about them; you can only read about them in trade journels.

Flag content

June 30

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"
Contributions: 5875

NTETS, "Caveat Emptor"

Contributions: 5875

Q&A

:2199
Disc

:3608
Photos

:68

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

you are right, we are taking but our first fledgling steps, but you are wrong to criticize the message or the results.

a single grain of rice, pasa

i think the only way to curb a/c is to have power "rations"

no california's insulation mandate is obviously not sufficient anymore

you can also choose a light colored asphalt shingle the next time you replace your roof ^_)^

Flag content

June 30

Pasadenan
Contributions: 6751

Pasadenan

Contributions: 6751

Q&A

:2068
Disc

:4540
Photos

:143

Zillow All-Star

Since January 2009

View full profile

Obviously you have not read the energy code for California. So I guess I should post the link for you:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/index.html

The code changes every 3 years to take advantage of what ever is considered "state of the art". But still, many homes built in the 1910's and 1920's have energy efficiency provisions most owners, designers, architects and builders presently ignore and have forgotten.

But I do agree with you, no one in Seatle should EVER be allowed to heat their homes as it is a total waste of energy. Nor should they be allowed to use electric lighting nor any computer that uses batteries or utility company power as they are extremely harmful to the environment.

I certainly never heat nor cool my home.

We are not taking our "first fledgling steps"; we have been taking steps backward for centuries. Sure the screw-in base LED lamps to replace incandecent will be a big step forward; but they are not available yet. Sure, pre-fab geo-thermal will be a step forward, but no-one has figured out how to mass produce that yet. Sure, better attention to landscape architecture will help; but most building codes still ignore the importance of living landscape.

The market hype is just that... "hype" with no real evaluation of life-cycle costs nor impacts.

Flag content

June 30

Tools

Create an Email Alert

This alert is for the following:

How often would you like the alert emailed?

Partner Tools

Nearby States

Nearby Cities

Nearby Neighborhoods

What goes into a green home?

Real Estate Agent

Contributions: 94

Replies (14)

Contributions: 52

Contributions: 6751

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 52

Contributions: 6751

Zillow All-Star

Real Estate Agent

Contributions: 1505

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 5875

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 5875

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 5875

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 1617

Contributions: 5875

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 6751

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 6751

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 5875

Zillow All-Star

Contributions: 6751

Zillow All-Star

Main Image

Have a question? Ask it here.

Top Zillow All-Stars Stats

Related Discussions

Discussion What goes into a green home?

Related Articles about News

Guide What Is the Federal Reserve

Guide The Truth About the Mortgage Market

Guide Results of 2008 Q3 Homeowner Confidence Survey

Guide Credit Crisis what you need to know

Guide Pawlenty Vetoes Foreclosure Bill

Be A Good Neighbor

Top Zillow All-Stars

Stats