I’ve been thinking a lot about green housing options as I frantically search online for a house or land for us to buy. Of course, my dream would be building (that is, hiring someone else to build) a moderately sized green house on lots of land (half pasture, half wooded). But our budget doesn’t jive with that, exactly, at this point in our lives. (Staying home on one missionary’s salary requires some sacrifices. I’m happy to make them; it just requires more creativity and resourcefulness when shopping for just about anything green.)
(And actually, we could build a wonderful, sustainable home on some nice land, if we didn’t have to follow building code.)
Anyways. We’d love to move somewhere that we could, ideally, stay for a while. Not have to move in five or ten years, unless God calls us to a new place. But the houses I’m seeing in our price range, with even just a little bit of land, are not places I’d like to call home long-term. We’re willing to do work, but some things aren’t even worth working on. We’re thinking of buying some land and building our own house, and we think it can be done. But the sacrifices would be great, and the work would be difficult.
Sometimes, I think the greenest house is one that already exists. Nothing goes into the landfill during a wasteful building process. No energy needed to build it. It’s already there, and by remodeling it in the greenest way, we are making use of something that’s already there (and that someone else may have bulldozed and tossed). We can reuse as much as possible, and ensure that any remodeling follows strict guidelines for our family’s health, as well as the environment.
For us, the biggest problems with buying a house that already exists:
- Older homes are more likely to have hazards that have to be remediated in order to be safe for our family, especially our children (i.e. lead paint, asbestos).
- Homes that already exist on land that we would like to own cost a lot of money.
But I want to know what YOU think. In general, is the greenest house one that already exists, or one that you create?
I don’t have time right now to decide on my opinion to your question, but I read an article recently about green modular houses. If you found land for a decent price, maybe you could afford this type of house. They cost more than a typical modular home, but they looked really cool. Sorry I don’t remember the company that makes them. But a websearch should turn it up.
I think in many ways it is a toss up – building green is becoming a more trendy option now a days and the choices that you can make when building green can be more $$ then when you are refurbishing. For me it would be frustrating to have to compromise what i wanted because we couldn’t afford it (we dream of building on farm land too, which is very do-able here in Gaylord…someday). However – buying an older home you can get yourself into situations that you were not able to forsee when purchasing. This too can cost a lot of money! Personally – I love old homes and even though I dream of building just what I want I still wish that I could build oldness into it…you know? Have you guys looked at some of the land outside of the Kalamazoo/Portage area? It might get cheaper the closer you get out toward the PAw Paw area….
The above is Lisa not Paul….
I, too, would love to live in a green home. However, I live in a good older home (built in ‘74). Given that most of the infrastructure we as a society will have to live with in the next 50 years is already built, greening-up an existing home can be just as rewarding and important.
My home is on a smallish city lot. My wife and I would both love to have somewhere between one and a few acres. Maybe in our next home.
I have spent quite a bit of time researching alternative building techniques using natural building materials. The further away from city boundaries and zoning regulations you go, the more feasible some of these methods become.
You also said you won’t be doing your own building, though. Hiring out the building of the home usually costs more, but you also get a quality product from experienced builders.
Which way should you go? That’s your call.
I had to laugh when I read the comment about living in an “older” home built in ‘74. I refuse to consider a house old when it is considerably younger than I am. Heather can tell you about the older home I used to live in, which was built in ‘88. That’s 1888. It was lovely and fun for kids but my father had a point when he said, “They don’t make things like they used to,” and added, “thank goodness!” Renovation can cost more than demolition and rebuilding — that’s why it’s not done more often.
That said, I do believe that he greenest house (or car, or almost anything) is almost always the one that already exists. Even at today’s prices, you can buy a LOT of gas for the cost of replacing a gas-guzzler with a more fuel-efficient car (for example), and I’m sure the same is true for environmental costs.
There will be a cross-over point in the graph of number of years of ownership vs. ‘greenness,” with the longer you live in the house the better it would be to have one that is more environmentally friendly, but whether that point is 10 years or 1000 I don’t know. I say find the living situation that best fits your overall needs and desires and then make the best environmental choices with what you have.
I was on the web & found your inquiry (I went to school with Peter Venable, who is friends with John & Heather Daley, who are friends with you). My husband is a contractor & subscribes to Fine Homebuilding magazine. In the latest issue, there is a lot mentioned about “green” building & houses + going “green” with the stuff that goes in the houses. Btw, I love looking at your website……
Unless you build a sod house with your own two hands, I’d say that a greener house is one that is all ready built. In the rush to be green, people do not factor in manufacturing costs. How much energy will a new house cost to make vs. taking a pre-existing house and making it green? Usually, the old house wins out in this regard.
Also, a thought is where are you going to build new green house? If you are going to clear virgin forest to build the new home, again, you are doing more damage.
Third, where can you live to reduce commuting time? This will not only impact your energy use (and greeness), but also your interaction with your family.
At any rate, whatever you decide, I wish you the best.
Hi,
Just passing by, I know of a house that was built right in the middle of some very precious pembrokeshire national park. Its the greenest one I know of in existence, I dont know that much about if apart from the only reason permission was given for it was because of its green-ness. Might be able to find more information with more cyber digging.
http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/322550
Regards
Luke Lincoln
Hey! I was in bed this morning and thought about an aspect of a new home that most people are not aware of….
I work at an air quality/heating company. We have a contraption called “Air Advice” that tests the air in peoples homes and then prints out a report showing all kinds of things that are in the air (humidity, radon, allergens, toxins, etc.). Something that I have seen go across my desk the past year in new homes are A LOT of toxins in the air due to the home being newer (due to all the brand new materials that are used – paint, fire retardants, carpeting particles, dry wall dust..the list goes on). These toxins are ‘normal’ for new homes and most people do not know that they are there but they can cause health problems and can/will stick around for a long time. Just something to consider.
Lisa makes a VERY good point. We once had to call 911 for a guest who had a bad reaction to our new carpet. Also, newer homes tend to be more airtight, which is good in terms of energy savings but tends to keep in toxins, not just those given off by new materials but also from cooking, candles, sick kids, and who knows what else.
I agree with Leroy
A New home even a green one should lose out to “greening” up an existing property on the Green front, obviously there is scale factor which could override this but as your not talking about a huge place wouldn’t be a factor.
Reason being only environmental impact of an existing building is running costs ie heating, cooling, lighting & water. All these can be reduce with modern technology
But a new house even green still has these plus building materials transportation of the materials, building waste
I appreciate all your comments. I tend to agree with most of you – an already existing home is probably greener than a newer home.
As for Lisa’s comment on the indoor air quality: True, true. That’s why we would avoid conventional new construction like the Plague. If we do decide to build new, it would be by our own hands, and we would have no carpet, minimal or no drywall, no-VOC paints, etc. But still, any new construction (unless it’s completely natural materials, no modern construction stuff at all) will likely cause some indoor air problems.
The greenest “new” house you can set up is a good, strong tent. It can get cramped after long periods of time and it might be tough during inclement weather, but Mother Earth will appreciate your sacrifice. The next best thing is to buy an existing home and upgrade what you can.
Peter and I were discussing this the other day, and yes, we are also of the opinion that the greener option is to buy an existing house.
Though I suppose it might depend on the location, that older houses in Pittsburgh are much cheaper than newer houses, (or brand new).
I was born after ‘74, but yes, I wouldn’t call that an older home either. I am a fan of the houses built in the early 1900s (I don’t know much about houses built earlier than that). Once you get to the 40s and 50s, I tend to find lots of problems in them, (though the current house we have an offer on was built in 1942… The owner was a stone mason, and built it himself, and it seems to be much better constructed than most (all?) houses I have seen from that time period.
Every time I see the phrase green house I keep thinking of an actual greenhouse -you know with plants. That would get pretty hot in the summer.
My vote goes to an existing home by far. I like the idea of taking care of a home and building up its worth which can even help the worth of surrounding homes. Another thing I’m sure you’ve considered is the farther out you live from where you work and need to buy groceries, etc. the more you drive. If you live in an urban area closer to work/stuff you can walk to things or drive shorter distance. Less driving has a great earth friendly impact!
This might be a matter of perception, but to ME it seems like people living in older neighborhoods actually know their neighbors and talk to them. That opens up to lending a hand or sharing a lawnmower or something. My dad and some families who have been on the block for 30 years or more make an effort to know the new families who move in. Where I live now it’s mostly new homes & condos and it seems like a lot of young people move in and are so busy they don’t take the time to go out and be friendly.