Massachusetts passes sweeping climate law

[EbS-P]

There is also a time factor not being accounted for. In reality those pumps are not all pumping at 100% of the time. Its sized for peak gas demand.

When you do the math, the extra energy load on the grid from switching to EVs is about 25%. And if charging is done during off peak times, then the existing equipment can handle and distribute it (roughly) and the utility makes 25% more money.

And probably not taking into account the waisted energy that was pumped into the tank just to be exhausted as heat. I generally could see how the local grid (that probably is the fact that the station is supplied by limited single phase. I’ll have to look at my local convenience store. I bet it’s 3 phase.

I was surprised by that number of 25%, but I get the same. (Since I googled, I thought to not let that go to waste).

If I do the math using google data, I get this:
-we use 135 billion gallons of gasoline a year in the US (www.eia.gov)
-a gallon of gasoline is 120000 BTU
-that equates to 135E9 * 120E3 = 1.6E16 BTUs in energy from gasoline.
-Using 3412 BTU for a kWh, this equates to 4.7E12kWh.

Googling the total amount of kWhs that the US uses in electricity per year as
3.9E12 kWh. (United Nations statistics division, per google).

That is indeed about 21%.

Adding 25% load to a grid that sometimes already has capacity issues indeed depends a lot on the timing of when that's added. Ideally it'll fill the valleys in the variable load curve during a 24 hr period.

I wonder how much the people will listen to "pls charge at night only", because if they don't, there'll be much more brown-outs.

That estimate does not account for the in efficiency gain if BEVs. But yeah that’s in the ballpark. I imagine time if use billing will become more financially rewarding or the flat rate structure costs will increase substantially to promote charging at night.. I can imagine special rates for an outlet or device that is load interrupted but guarantees a certificate number kwhs per day.

 

[SpaceBus]

As I was noticing my three under-counter garage refrigerators are starting to cycle more frequently (all three installed new ca.2015), I was thinking about this, with regard more to total environmental impact... if such a thing could be easily quantified. It's not unrelated to this thread, as by mandating reductions in the amount of refrigerant used, they have:

1. Decreased the number of years over which the appliance operates efficiently, and increased the number of years in which it will be inefficiently operating in a critically-low refrigerant charge state.

2. Decreased the temperature range at which efficient operation is achieved, increasing the days and nights when it will be operating inefficiently, if installed anywhere outside a home kept near 70F all day/night.

3. Decreased the overall lifespan of the product, causing each of us to landfill them 3x to 8x faster than our parents.

4. Increased manufacturing and transportation energy usage and pollution, due to increased replacement and disposal frequency.

I could go on... but at some point, you need to wonder if perhaps a few ounces more refrigerant is less harmful to the environment, than the solution mandated today.

I have asked the question if older less efficient, but longer lasting appliances (think 50's-70's US made stuff) produces less carbon overall since you aren't replacing stuff every ten years or less. Most people don't keep any appliances for more than ten years, so it's not going to be easy data to quantify.

 

[Ashful]

I have asked the question if older less efficient, but longer lasting appliances (think 50's-70's US made stuff) produces less carbon overall since you aren't replacing stuff every ten years or less. Most people don't keep any appliances for more than ten years, so it's not going to be easy data to quantify.

I think you're onto something here, but aside from replacing too-frequently-failing refrigerators, I think you're making a wrong assumption that people don't keep appliances more than ten years.

I don't know many people who aren't frustrated about the (8 years?) typical lifespan of today's refrigerators, and I also don't know many who replace their range or oven more often than every 20 years. My own kitchen range is 28 years old, still works and looks like the day it was installed. We just finally replaced our 28 year dishwasher a few weeks ago, because the racks were rusting and because we never loved it, but I could have just as easily replaced the racks and kept it another decade if it did a better job of cleaning the dishes.

I see the refrigerator as the primary offender, and according to two refrigeration engineers I know, they both claim the problem is "too little refrigerant from the factory". This causes two primary problems:

1. When installed in a basement, garage, cabin, shop... anywhere the temperature might dip a bit below your kitchen, the small amount of available refrigerant pools in the coldest part of the circuit, away from the pump. This causes the pump to dry cycle, cavitate, and fail. Even before that, it turns your evaporator hot, causing your food to spoil, and people to (incorrectly) think the thing has permanently failed.

2. With such a minimal charge, any small loss which is guaranteed to happen over time, has a proportionally larger impact on the remaining charge.

 

[SpaceBus]

I think you're onto something here, but aside from replacing too-frequently-failing refrigerators, I think you're making a wrong assumption that people don't keep appliances more than ten years.

I don't know many people who aren't frustrated about the (8 years?) typical lifespan of today's refrigerators, and I also don't know many who replace their range or oven more often than every 20 years. My own kitchen range is 28 years old, still works and looks like the day it was installed. We just finally replaced our 28 year dishwasher a few weeks ago, because the racks were rusting and because we never loved it, but I could have just as easily replaced the racks and kept it another decade if it did a better job of cleaning the dishes.

I see the refrigerator as the primary offender, and according to two refrigeration engineers I know, they both claim the problem is "too little refrigerant from the factory". This causes two primary problems:

1. When installed in a basement, garage, cabin, shop... anywhere the temperature might dip a bit below your kitchen, the small amount of available refrigerant pools in the coldest part of the circuit, away from the pump. This causes the pump to dry cycle, cavitate, and fail.

2. With such a minimal charge, any small loss which is guaranteed to happen over time, has a proportionally larger impact on the remaining charge.

The median time for homeownership is thirteen years, up from ten years back in 2008. I would estimate that most homeowners are replacing one or more appliances between the time the home is bought and sold. Going by one of two landfills in my tiny county of 30k people, appliances are replaced frequently. Refrigerators are definitely the worst culprit and the one I had in mind, especially when compared to older stuff. When I was a kid in the 90's we had an old latching refrigerator from the 50's and it still worked.

 

[GrumpyDad]

The median time for homeownership is thirteen years, up from ten years back in 2008. I would estimate that most homeowners are replacing one or more appliances between the time the home is bought and sold. Going by one of two landfills in my tiny county of 30k people, appliances are replaced frequently. Refrigerators are definitely the worst culprit and the one I had in mind, especially when compared to older stuff. When I was a kid in the 90's we had an old latching refrigerator from the 50's and it still worked.

I have a sizable fleet of maytag and whirlpool products in 3 houses. I would never wish owning them on my worst enemy. I or the repair guy (while in warranty) have repaired something on every one of the products at least once. The dishwasher for example has had 15 repairs, to which the repairs are doomed to return as there are design flaws. Most of the repair issues Ive had to deal with are design flaws.
Refrigerator for example, there is a plastic boot that was under sized to allow water to flow to the drip pan. Dust etc would get caught up in the tube, and it would freeze there (bottom freezer) behind the freezer. Eventually ice would build up to the point that water would drip into the bottom of the freezer pull out drawer, and eventually that would fill up with enough ice that water would leak out onto our floors. Eventually maytag released an updated model for this, but it was hard to find out about and even the local repair shop didnt know about it. But I was thankful at least they fixed the issue even though it cost me money/time.

The next refrigerator, to save 15 cents, they put too short of cables running from the main unit through the door and up to the ice maker. After a little over a year the ice maker no longer heats the cubes to dump them, so you end up with a pile of frozen mess. Another well know issue that most people just gave up on. It's a time consuming fix that requires you to remove your door, lay it on the ground connected and vampire tap to diagnose which wire is no longer receiving the current as there are a few. And which wire they shorted that week is a mystery.

Microwave, trim plate doesnt seat properly (trim clip and hole are disproportionately sized) and if bumped will eventually work it's way down with open/door closures into the door frame opening. There is no way around this other than to tape this up and over. Looks awesome.

Washer, doesnt actually wash the clothes because half the time the water sensor is off. Replaced with 'updated' water sensor that actually puts less water in. Dryer that doesnt dry because of a design flaw requiring in depth cleaning internally to remove lint stuck to areas that it just shouldnt get stuck in. Well known issue with this model.

The list goes on and on.

So if you have a maytag or whirlpool, prepare to contribute to the local landfills.

 

[Ashful]

Refrigerator for example, there is a plastic boot that was under sized to allow water to flow to the drip pan. Dust etc would get caught up in the tube... entually that would fill up with enough ice that water would leak out onto our floors.

You and I had the same refrigerator. And yes, mine is now in the landfill. I tossed it, while still working perfectly fine in principle, after just 4 or 5 years of dealing with that stupid frustration and watching it constantly piss water all over my kitchen floor.

Before you ask, yes... I played all the usual games with thawing the whole thing, hair dryer, turkey baster, wasting entire afternoons every third month, trying to clear the drain in that damn drip pan at the back of the ice box. What a complete POS, and utter engineering failure.

But you are wrong on the cost savings. It comes not from under-sizing a drip tube, but by short-cutting the R&D and testing phase, or otherwise conscious decisions that potential warranty repairs will cost less to fix than known problems. Although I'm in industrial (not consumer) products, I have spent my life in engineering and product design. These are the calculations made every day, against assumed impact to the brand name.

 

[GrumpyDad]

You and I had the same refrigerator. And yes, mine is now in the landfill. I tossed it, while still working perfectly fine in principle, after just 4 or 5 years of dealing with that stupid frustration and watching it constantly piss water all over my kitchen floor.

Before you ask, yes... I played all the usual games with thawing the whole thing, hair dryer, turkey baster, wasting entire afternoons every third month, trying to clear the drain in that damn drip pan at the back of the ice box. What a complete POS, and utter engineering failure.

But you are wrong on the cost savings. It comes not from under-sizing a drip tube, but by short-cutting the R&D and testing phase, or otherwise conscious decisions that potential warranty repairs will cost less to fix than known problems. Although I'm in industrial (not consumer) products, I have spent my life in engineering and product design. These are the calculations made every day, against assumed impact to the brand name.

ah, they eventually came out with a new boot for that. It resolved it for me for good.
Now the ice maker spewing/dumping ice all over the floor, was something else I had to retrofit.
As well as the cheap plastic arm breaking as the arm gets stuck from water spray/calcification.
Not to mention, the lovely black mold that grows from the exit , well into the tube about 8' or so that I have to put bleach on pipe cleaners and scrub out every few months.

Yes I do agree they cut on QA/design time. I was in R&D and it's amazing how quickly an org can turn from super careful and cautious to haphazard ....get the next thing out....start on the next thing and the next thing.
BUT
I will tell you that in the moments Ive spoken to the Maytag repairman,...who I might add is a busy busy guy, he said that maytag/whirlpool are obviously focusing on the throw away world - and cannot compete by charging a ton more than the other guy. He sees plastic, and cheap plastic, where metal used to be, thinner plastic, cheaper components like compressors, etc.

AND maybe they know there is no competition really. When you look to pay more for a dishwasher for example, and try to go a bit higher end - read the reviews. People on there pissing and moaning about their 3k dishwasher, 2.5 stars out of 5 in the reviews...well heck, im not spending that kinda dough for problems I can get with maytag.

Sadly im having a better experience overall with Frigidaire now.

 

[begreen]

By what measure is your 2012 unit "doing great"? Have you actually monitored its energy usage over time?

Yes, had a kilo-watt on it when checking on load for the generator. It's still performing well. This is in part due to much better insulation in modern units than those of 20 yrs ago or more.

When you look to pay more for a dishwasher for example, and try to go a bit higher end - read the reviews.

I did that for our dishwasher and found Bosch had the best track record at the time. Ours was installed in 2013. No problems, knock on wood. My SIL went by what looked good in her kitchen and got a Miele. It was out for repair twice in 3 yrs. I just saw a 2 yr old Miele washer on our Freecycle listing. Control board had burned out and they were giving it away. They should have stuck to vacuum cleaners which are very good.

 

[woodgeek]

I just know that down on the micro level, if the city of Kansas City were to adopt an energy code that requires all exterior walls are to be 2x6, not the usual 2x4, me being a framing carpenter, I will be passing the cost of extra labor onto the builder. The builder will then pass that cost, along with the additional material costs onto the buyer. Also, FWIW, there is a huuuuge cost difference between builder grade windows (that meet the minimum energy star requirements) and actual energy efficient windows. Somebody has to pay for these things.

Im not saying that I am against these things, far from it. I would love to have a geothermal heat pump for instance-- I would just never get the ROI. I want to be energy efficient and I think most people do, but I also need to be financially efficient.

I think we agree. These codes aren't written with by politicians with some crazy green agenda. They are written by engineers who are seeing how different choices pencil out, just as you say we should. You don't think 2x6 framing pencils out in your climate.... and its not in the code. You don't think geos pencil out in the climate, and its not in the code.

What IS in the code... energy star windows that you say are cheap! You think those pencil out compared to the single pane windows that predate them (and that I had in my house)? We probably agree that they DO. And they're in the code. And they are cheap bc they are code mandated and manufactured in huge numbers.

What about attic insulation... the code amount seem right to you? Would leaving it off save money in the long run?

Bottom line: you seem to be making my case for me. The existing code seems reasonable on a TCO basis.

There is a lot of $$$ green bling that gets sold to early adopters, but those code-compliant energy star windows in every new house are saving way more energy than some one guy dropping $40k to put a geo on his house.

 

[Ashful]

I did that for our dishwasher and found Bosch had the best track record at the time.

I tried to buy a new Bosch dishwasher earlier this summer, as I've also had (mostly) good luck with Bosch, in other appliances. Unfortunately, they've been on perpetual back order since last December, pretty much everywhere I checked. Some stores did get a big shipment of them in June, but it was only fulfilling backorders from last November and December (2021), with nothing left over for stock. It seems Bosch has had trouble keeping up with demand for dishwashers, at least here in the northeast.

Our ultimate brand selection was governed almost entirely by availability, I think the unit I brought home was down around 8th or 9th on my sorted list of desired models.

 

[Ashful]

...those code-compliant energy star windows in every new house are saving way more energy than some one guy dropping $40k to put a geo on his house.

It will be interesting to see how older windows are treated, in coming years. We've likely all been through the routine of having to bring various items in old houses up to code, which have been fine for 100+ years, but now that we're touching them...

I brought a Flir camera home from work ten years ago, posted a bunch of photos here, if I recall. The summary of that experiment is that my 250 and 300 year old windows radiate much less energy than my spendy 1995'ish double-pane Andersen 400's. Not by a little, either, it was astounding how much better the older windows were. The older windows benefitted from a 2" to 4" air gap between sash and storm, whereas the modern double-pane had only, what... 0.15" air gap?

Now, I also had a few old windows at the time without storm windows, as I was making some repairs. It was clear how bad a 250 year old divided-lite glazed single pane window could be, without a storm window. But that's an exceptional case around here, old windows without storms fall apart quickly, in our climate.

It'll be a shame to watch more old houses with beautiful original windows ruined by aggressive but senseless code, which in the case of windows, has as much potential to reduce as improve efficiency.

 

[woodgeek]

It will be interesting to see how older windows are treated, in coming years. We've likely all been through the routine of having to bring various items in old houses up to code, which have been fine for 100+ years, but now that we're touching them...

I brought a Flir camera home from work ten years ago, posted a bunch of photos here, if I recall. The summary of that experiment is that my 250 and 300 year old windows radiate much less energy than my spendy 1995'ish double-pane Andersen 400's. Not by a little, either, it was astounding how much better the older windows were. The older windows benefitted from a 2" to 4" air gap between sash and storm, whereas the modern double-pane had only, what... 0.15" air gap?

Now, I also had a few old windows at the time without storm windows, as I was making some repairs. It was clear how bad a 250 year old divided-lite glazed single pane window could be, without a storm window. But that's an exceptional case around here, old windows without storms fall apart quickly, in our climate.

It'll be a shame to watch more old houses with beautiful original windows ruined by aggressive but senseless code, which in the case of windows, has as much potential to reduce as improve efficiency.

I agree. I did my own IR measurements. My 1960 single-pane windows with 2010 low-E storms are running about R-3, or U=0.33, waay better than 90s double pane (before low-E tech). And are in excellent condition.

I was not aware that code requirement would require you to rip out old windows. What if they required you to have a storm?

 

[FramerJ]

I think we agree. These codes aren't written with by politicians with some crazy green agenda. They are written by engineers who are seeing how different choices pencil out, just as you say we should. You don't think 2x6 framing pencils out in your climate.... and its not in the code. You don't think geos pencil out in the climate, and its not in the code.

What IS in the code... energy star windows that you say are cheap! You think those pencil out compared to the single pane windows that predate them (and that I had in my house)? We probably agree that they DO. And they're in the code. And they are cheap bc they are code mandated and manufactured in huge numbers.

What about attic insulation... the code amount seem right to you? Would leaving it off save money in the long run?

Bottom line: you seem to be making my case for me. The existing code seems reasonable on a TCO basis.

There is a lot of $$$ green bling that gets sold to early adopters, but those code-compliant energy star windows in every new house are saving way more energy than some one guy dropping $40k to put a geo on his house.

Im following you. Excellent point about the windows. I was just meaning they are cheap quality. But a cheap quality energy star rated window is 10x better than the old single panes you and I grew up with. I also agree about insulation. To be clear, I dont have a problem adopting energy codes. I wish they had energy codes when my house was built in 55. I have no insulation in the walls. All Im just saying is there is a cost. Upfront, which is added to the price of a house. I know and you know whats saves money in the long run but IMO most people when buying a house want the largest they can get, with the most bells and whistles they can get. Insulation is not even a thought. Its not sexy. Ive sat with people wanting a house built and when given the choice between batt insulation and spray foam, most decline the foam. They would rather spend that money on other upgrades, depending on budget. Obviously, if its code, the choice is made for them but the price of the house more than likely will reflect that. I think a lot of people have trouble equating energy savings to dollar savings, especially if its something that takes years to get your money back.

 

[Ashful]

I agree. I did my own IR measurements. My 1960 single-pane windows with 2010 low-E storms are running about R-3, or U=0.33, waay better than 90s double pane (before low-E tech). And are in excellent condition.

I was not aware that code requirement would require you to rip out old windows. What if they required you to have a storm?

No code requirement for that yet, as far as I know, I was just playing the "slippery slope" argument against Massachusetts. Completely hypothetical, but also not too hard to imagine things heading that way.

 

[sloeffle]

Im following you. Excellent point about the windows. I was just meaning they are cheap quality. But a cheap quality energy star rated window is 10x better than the old single panes you and I grew up with. I also agree about insulation. To be clear, I dont have a problem adopting energy codes. I wish they had energy codes when my house was built in 55. I have no insulation in the walls. All Im just saying is there is a cost. Upfront, which is added to the price of a house. I know and you know whats saves money in the long run but IMO most people when buying a house want the largest they can get, with the most bells and whistles they can get. Insulation is not even a thought. Its not sexy. Ive sat with people wanting a house built and when given the choice between batt insulation and spray foam, most decline the foam. They would rather spend that money on other upgrades, depending on budget. Obviously, if its code, the choice is made for them but the price of the house more than likely will reflect that. I think a lot of people have trouble equating energy savings to dollar savings, especially if its something that takes years to get your money back.

Personally I don't understand that mentality. You can replace the kitchen cabinets, counter tops. floors down the road. It costs a hell of a lot more money to retrofit house insulation. Why wouldn't you not want to build the most energy efficient house that you can ? The cost of energy is only going up. Like you said, the average consumer wants the most sq. ft. for their dollar. *sigh*

When I added onto my house a number of years ago, spray foam insulation was double what batt insulation was. I ran the ROI numbers based off of some numbers I found on heating / cooling costs and you could easily see that you would get your money back within 10 - 15 years. Pretty easy sell in my brain. The geo ROI numbers, I don't think those have panned out. But that's probably another topic for another day.

Like you said, 2x6 walls, R60 attic insulation and spray foam insulation aren't "sexy" enough for the average consumer. They'd rather show off their granite counter tops, cathedral ceilings, and fake maple floors to their neighbors.

 

[Ashful]

Personally I don't understand that mentality... Why wouldn't you not want to build the most energy efficient house that you can ?

Why do people sign up for mortgage payments they easily know they can't afford to pay? Why do people live beyond their means, and fail to save for retirement?

Lots of questions, but they all have the same answer.

 

[SpaceBus]

Why do people sign up for mortgage payments they easily know they can't afford to pay? Why do people live beyond their means, and fail to save for retirement?

Lots of questions, but they all have the same answer.

Not everyone who can't save for retirement is a dummy. In fact I would say that most people won't live very comfortably into their retirement, and it has nothing to do with smarts or work ethic. Just look at the average cost of living and wages for any area and you will see that most people can't afford to put away for their retirement and will work till they die or barely scrape by on SSI and/or disability. Otherwise you are implying that the majority of people in the bell curve are lazy and stupid, which statistically isn't possible. There should only be 5-10% of income earners that have a poverty retirement, but that is not the case.

It's not a failing of the people, it's a failing of the system.

 

[EbS-P]

Our housing stock is probably some the longest continuously used infrastructure in the nation. Times between complete renovations are probably at least 50 years. I guess I don’t see why long ROI on infrastructure can’t be passed on to the next owner. Maybe we need to pass laws that when houses are for sale they must disclose the past 12 months complete energy costs on the listing after (or before) the number of bathrooms. Look we are a society that in general prefers cheap over quality. We Would rather have 2800 sq ft that just barely met code than 2000 sq ft that was done really well. Install a 4 ton ac just to avoid any real load calculation.

I’m reflecting on my only two times buying a house, one was new construction and second was a 1968 house that appraised under contract price. The new construction in Maine, had 2x6 walls and I watched other units go up. They were sound but not top quality. No sill plate seal. Daylight could be seen between foundation and sill. Passed inspection.

Both times there was not a second choice that was considered.

What do you do as relatively inexperienced home buyers. Listen to your realtor. He like the new heat pump on the 1968 house and pointed out the hat attic had insulation. We are sold homes and told to look at the amenities on the property, school district, location ect. It the biggest purchase of our lives and we generally let our emotions steer us. We let a home inspector find every window that is painted shut but not mention anything about codes permits. It if they did we probably would ignore them more than half the time. I spent more time reading Amazon reviews the year I bought a house than researching code, best building practices, and how to size an hvac system. All thing that have cost me orders of magnitude more than I spent on Amazon.

 

[peakbagger]

There are certified professionals that do energy audits, sadly it is not required by law. Realtors are agents of the seller not the buyer. Most buyers have to sign a realtor disclosure form that clearly describes that the realtor is agent of the seller, yet the buyers sign it and then immediately assume the realtor is working for them. A good realtor is not going to dissuade them from doing so. There is nothing in it for the realtor to suggest an energy audit, if they did so they would be working against their client the seller.

A good energy audit can be done in less than a day of field time and in most cases will pay for itself in a couple of years. In many cases the realtors do not have a clue on selling energy savings. They typically are far more comfortable selling amenities that a potential buyer is able to see and feel. A typical home sale is "made" at the curb on emotional appeal, that is why curbside appeal is such an important thing. Most folks want the romance and the dream of a new to them house, few if any care how much it will cost them to own.

 

[Ashful]

Maybe we need to pass laws that when houses are for sale they must disclose the past 12 months complete energy costs on the listing after (or before) the number of bathrooms.

You don't need a law for this. I've asked the seller for exactly this information on every home I've purchased. Even when I was buying my first house in my early 20's, I immediately knew utilities were going to be a big part of my budget. Given how thin my budget was at the time, knowing my heating costs was of critical importance, and the seller also knew that sharing this information would help them to secure this buyer. I've never had a seller not willing to photocopy or forward a few electric and fuel bills.

People need to occasionally take responsibility for their own decisions, not rely on the government to legislate common sense.

 

[ABMax24]

Like you said, 2x6 walls, R60 attic insulation and spray foam insulation aren't "sexy" enough for the average consumer. They'd rather show off their granite counter tops, cathedral ceilings, and fake maple floors to their neighbors.

What's sad is this is considered "a well insulated house".

Where I live 2x6 walls with R22 and R60 in the attic is the bare minimum by current building code.

My house is R22/R50, my parents R36/R60, and theirs's is considerably cheaper to heat even though its larger, and stays cool much longer in the summer.

IMO R35/R60 should be bare minimum for code in Canada.

 

[EbS-P]

You don't need a law for this. I've asked the seller for exactly this information on every home I've purchased. Even when I was buying my first house in my early 20's, I immediately knew utilities were going to be a big part of my budget. Given how thin my budget was at the time, knowing my heating costs was of critical importance, and the seller also knew that sharing this information would help them to secure this buyer. I've never had a seller not willing to photocopy or forward a few electric and fuel bills.

People need to occasionally take responsibility for their own decisions, not rely on the government to legislate common sense.

New cars list mileage, appliances list annual costs. Why, to encourage more efficient buying habits. If I thought I couldn’t afford the bills I would have asked for them. I was environmentally minded but didn’t ask for them. My argument for listing total energy cost is to elevate the importance and financial value of good building choices.

 

[sloeffle]

What's sad is this is considered "a well insulated house".

Where I live 2x6 walls with R22 and R60 in the attic is the bare minimum by current building code.

My house is R22/R50, my parents R36/R60, and theirs's is considerably cheaper to heat even though its larger, and stays cool much longer in the summer.

IMO R35/R60 should be bare minimum for code in Canada.

I agree, that is sad.

In backwards Ohio we still build houses using 2x4’s (R-13 walls is minimum, per code ). R-30 is the minimum for attic insulation. Your minimum code should be what ours is too IMHO.

 

[EbS-P]

I agree, that is sad.

In backwards Ohio we still build houses using 2x4’s (R-13 walls is minimum, per code ). R-30 is the minimum for attic insulation. Your minimum code should be what ours is too IMHO.

Extra Attic insulation requires little extra labor if using blown in insulation. I get where 2x6 adds extra cost. I can live with the 2x4 if we lower the minimum air tightness. Blower door tests for the win!

 

[woodgeek]

You guys are so funny. Half the time you worry that someone is going to force a building code on you for something that won't pay off, and then you complain that the code required insulation level (that varies with regional climate) is too little.

The missing factor here is the cheapness of energy. Historically, energy was and IS very cheap. So the optimum level of insulation is surprisingly low. The amount of savings between an R-30 attic and an R-60 attic is quite small, since the heat cost goes like the reciprocal. In my climate, I doubt it would pay. Maybe I did the calc when I had R-30 blown in 10 years ago...

This cheapness of energy... its why we don't all live in passive houses. Or drive Aptera EVs.

And cheap wind, cheap offshore wind, and cheap solar PV are throwing a hard ceiling on energy costs. Folks that are pushing 'energy prices will skyrocket!' headlines... are trying to sell you something.

Yeah yeah, I know there is a gas crisis in the EU. Just a blip. In the long run... no problem.