“'-

   

'—I
I

WWWNW“MINIMUM“!WWW!!!”WWI

0.4
(CA
_mooco

  

Tm“ ”“‘"‘ ' “‘“W
I" LIBRA R Y A“!
a Michigan State

Ir}
., __- 1
<3.- _'__ -,-1_'—| ‘-
‘I-rv I‘

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

TRENDS IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
TOWARDS ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE
LANSING, MICHIGAN AREA
I972 - 1979

presented by

Kenneth Steven Moss

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.S. degreein BUIIdmg COHStrUCtIOH

Major professor

0-7639

W:
_ p _ 25¢ per day per 1co-
_‘ {A‘s}; f , 3510mm 515nm "Arenas:

‘7 v. '"v Place inbookrctumtonenove

{:‘fi‘wl' a. charge from circulation records

I

 

 

 

 

TRENDS IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
TOWARDS ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE
LANSING, MICHIGAN AREA
I972 - I979

By

Kenneth Steven Moss

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requiements
for the degree of ‘

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Agricultural Engineering
Building Construction Program

I980

Xmm0§w

ABSTRACT

TRENDS IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
TOWARDS ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE
LANSING, MICHIGAN AREA
I972 - T979

By

Kenneth Steven Moss

This study examines the effect energy price increases have had
on increasing the amount of energy efficiency in single family homes
in the Lansing, Michigan, area. A number of market factors in the
construction industry are examined as well as their effect on build-
ers and home buyers. Data on builders' reactions and trends toward
energy efficiency were collected through a self-administered question-
naire. The results indicated that there were a number of factors
besides cost that determine whether energy efficient products or
designs will be used by home builders.

Generally, the needs and desires of the buyer are as important
to the builder as first cost and the builder will change his product
as long as there is an existing market. Builders strongly tend
toward achieving energy efficiency through existing channels and
modes of construction rather than accept new innovations and products
from outside them. Government regulation will probably be the major
force in determining the guidelines and course of energy efficiency

in housing.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his appreciation to Professor
W. 8. Lloyd for his advice and guidance in developing and reviewing
this thesis.

He would also like to express gratitude to Tom Philp, a
graduate assistant in Agricultural Enginnering, for his advice.

Thanks go to the Michigan State Energy Administration for
their assistance and generosity.

To a few friends, Rob Gordon, John Butchart, Karen Fergeson,

and Kati Lane for their humor and moral support, thank you.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .

Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION

Objectives .
Scope and Limitations of. Study
Definitions . . . . .

II. ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MICHIGAN

Energy Conservation Factors-~Consumer Aspects
Income . .
Cost of Energy
Cost of Housing and Extra Initial Cost
Mortgage (interest) Rates
Inflation Rate .
Cost Effectiveness of Innovation

Barriers to Incorporation of Energy Efficient.

Innovations in Residential Construction .
First Cost

Specialization . .

Tradition Orientation . .
Technological Uncertainties .

Personal Tastes .

Economic Uncertainties

III. METHODOLOGY

.The Sampled Community .
Selection of the Sample .
Survey Research Method
Analysis of Data

IV. FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION

Analysis of Data .
Description of Sample Population

iii

Page

Chapter Page

Analysis of Trends Toward Energy Efficiency . . . 23
Space Heating . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Electronic Ignitions . . . . . . . . . . 25
Automatic Flue Damper . . . . . . . . . . 26
Air Conditioning . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Fireplaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Wall Construction . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Insulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 3l
Foundation Insulation . . . . . . . . . . 34
Sheathing. . . . . . . . . . 34
Passive Solar Design Usage . . . . . . . . 36
Passive Design--Discussion . . . . . . . . 39
Active Solar Systems . . . . . . . . 41
Active Solar Systems--Discussion . . . . . . 4l
Builders' View of Home Buyer Concerns . . . . 42
Builders' Comments . . . . . . . . . '. 43

V. GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN ENERGY CONSERVATION . . . 45

Federal Government Goals . . . . . . . . . 45
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . 46
Future Government Involvement. . . . . . . . 47

VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . 49

Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . 52
Suggestions for Future Study . . . . . . . . 54
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

A. QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
B. SPSS COMPUTER PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . 68
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7l

iv

Table

\lO‘Ul-b

0000

ll.
l2.
13.
14.
15.
l6.
I7.
18.
19.

LIST OF TABLES

Average Single Family Home Heating Fuel Usage in
Michigan . . . . . . . . .

End Use Consumption in Residential Subjector .

Average Selling Price of Home Heating Fuels--North
Central Region . . . .

Number of Homes Built by Size of Builder by Year
Type of Builder by Year .
Type by Size by Number of Homes Built by Year

National Averages--Methods of New Home Financing 1979 .

Frequency of Average Number of Bedrooms per House
Frequency of Predominant Floor Area by Year

Frequency of Electronic Ignition Usage in Gas
Furnaces . . . . . . . . . . . .

Frequency of Automatic Flue Damper Installation .
Frequency of Air Conditioning Installation

Frequency of Prefabricated Fireplace Installation
Frequency of Fan Installation with Prefab Fireplaces
Frequency of Window Type Usage by Respondents
Frequency of Glazing Type Usage by Respondents

Attic Insulation for Winter Heating .

Frequency of Insulation Type Usage by Respondents

Frequency of Ceiling Insulation Thickness use by
Respondents . . . . . . . .

Page

20
20
21
22
22
23

25
26
27
28
29
3O
3O
32
33

34

Table Page

20. Frequency of Foundation Insulation Installation by

Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
21. Frequency of Sheathing Type Usage by Respondents . . 35
22. R Values for Various Sheathing Types . . . . . . 35
23. Frequency of House Orientation to the South by

Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
24. Frequency of Window Placement to the South Side . . 36
25. Frequency Use of Topography/Vegetation for Heating or

Cooling. . . . . . . . 37
26. Frequency of Orientation of Living Spaces to South . 37
27. Frequency of Blank .Wall/Bathroom/Storage Space to

North . . . . . 37
28. Frequency Usage of Building Mass for Heat Storage . . 37

29. Frequency/Ranking of Home Buyer Concerns by Respond-
ents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

vi

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

It has become evident that our narrowing energy resources will
result in increasing costs for energy in all forms. The energy
problem has many facets and implications and there is an immediate
need for effective conservation methods. One area where costs have
become of major importance is residential energy consumption.

The American preference is for single family homes which is
also the most energy intensive type of housing. The single family
home has become more common, rising from two-thirds of all American
households in 1940 to over three-quarters at present (Newman, 1975,

p. 39). The main reason why the single family home is such a voracious
energy consumer is straight-forward. Schoen states:

An important principle of energy conservation is that the

more a dwelling is protected from the weather, the less energy
it needs for heating. Thus--a11 other factors being equal--
an apartment uses less energy than a row house (town house) of
the same size, row house less than a semi-detached house and

a semi-detached house less than a free standing single family
home (Newman, 1975, p. 34).

An increasing concern of builder' and homebuyers is how energy
efficient the new single family home should be. Builders are in
essence the final major determinant in what direction energy effi-

ciency in residential homes will take. Since the majority of homes

in the U.S. are speculatively built, it is the builder who generally

1

determines the architectural design, type of heating,* materials,
equipment and other factors. These factors, determined at the time
of construction, once built, may be impossible or difficult and
expensive to change. Furthermore, houses built now will be standing
for forty years or more, saving or wasting energy for that lifetime.
A continuing opportunity to conserve our available energy
is presented in current and future residential construction, which
usually adds an average of 2 million units each year to our heating
and cooling load (Oviatt, 1975, p. 2). Increased efficiency of
energy use would help to slow energy growth rates and help to relieve

pressure on scarce energy resources.

Objectives

 

This study is aimed at examining some general trends builders
in the Lansing vicinity have taken to increase energy efficiency in
single family homes. Research in the construction industry is mini-
mal. While there is a plethora of research and ongoing projects in
the area of energy efficiency, there is a void between the research
and what is actually done as a matter of practice in the construction
industry. In addition to examining the builder's viewpoint, this
study also explores the reasons why certain products and innovations
fail to gain acceptance while others succeed.

The approach to the problem is twofold. First, the market

factors affecting the demand and response toward energy efficiency

 

*Largely determined by availability and price of various
fuel types.

are assessed. Second, data from a survey of local home builders is
analyzed to determine their viewpoint and how they have responded
to the problem.

There are a large number of housing components that could be
improved to increase energy efficiency in the home. This study looks
at some of the most prominent ones, where significant changes would

most likely produce cost effective benefits.

Sc0pe and Limitations of Study

 

Conservation measures can be broken into two basic types. The
first involves voluntary lifestyle changes that do not cost money. The
second involves technical fixes or the use of energy efficient equip-
ment which usually costs money. This study focuses on the latter.

This study directly addresses the status of energy efficiency
in new single family homes. By its nature, only a small segment of
the housing market is being examined since new construction adds only
2 percent per year to the total housing stock. Existing housing is
not considered as well as multiple housing. Since this study is
centered in the Lansing area, the information cannot be generalized
to other areas of the country because of climatic variations, avail-
ability of fuel types and differences in local building practices.

Appliances were not considered in the study for three reasons.
First, they constitute only 15 percent of total home energy consump-
tion (Table 2). Secondly, appliance usage varies from household
to household. Third, many appliances are installed by the homeowner

after occupancy.

The purpose of the questionnaire is to examine trends in con-
struction. Because of the nature of the questions and small size of
respondents, the results do not lend themselves to statistical analy-
sis. The results are only used as possible indicators of certain
trends. The quetionnaire is based on two assumptions.

1. Respondents will accurately record construction
methods and materials they have used since 1972.

2. The survey research design, using questionnaires,

is an appropriate method for collecting data on
builders' activities.

Definitions

 

Space heating system-~The main source of heat supply for a

 

dwelling unit.

Appliances--Equipment designed for a particular use in the

 

household which is not operated by a fossil fuel. Included in those
items commonly thought of as appliances--cooking ranges, lighting,
kitchen appliances, television and small portable appliances.

First cost--The initial investment in a building or product.

 

Life cycle cost--The discounted present worth of total costs

 

of using a building or product over its expected useful life.

Custom builder--Bui1ders who build homes to the specifications

 

of a homebuyer.

Speculative builder--Builders who build homes in advance of

 

their sale, anticipating a market for them.

East North central region--Geographic sector of the U.S.

 

including Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin.

R value (thermal resistance)--The thermal resistance to heat

 

flow and the reciprocal of the thermal transmittance. (R = l/U).

Thermal transmittance--The overall value of heat transmittance

 

(air to air) expressed in units of BTU per hour, per square foot, per
degree Fahrenheit. It is the time rate of heat flow.

Passive solar system--A system that uses gravity, heat flows,

 

evaporation or other acts of nature to operate without mechanical
devices to collect and transfer energy. It usually makes use of
design and materials from which the house is constructed to directly
capture, store and distribute solar heat to its occupants.

Active solar system--Any system that needs mechanical means

 

such as motors, valves, pumps, solar collector plates and related
devices to collect and transfer solar energy.

Heating Degree Day--Unit used to predict seasonal fuel con-

 

sumption for heating. For one day, the number of degree-days is

equal to the number of degress that the mean temperature for that
day is below 65 F. For the heating season, the number of degree

days is the sum of degrees for all days that the mean temperature
falls below 65 F.

Cost Effective--For the purposes of this study, measures are

 

considered cost effective is investment costs, including costs of

money (under several hundred dollars) are recovered in five years or
less, or for larger expenses, measures are considered cost effective
if the homeowner can recover costs within the time he/she expects to

live there.

CHAPTER II

ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MICHIGAN

There have been significant shifts in fuel use for space
heating in the North Central region since 1950. At that time the
most predominant fuel was coal. By 1960 fuel oil was the major heat-
ing fuel for most of Michigan. Since 1970 natural gas has become the
most predominant fuel. The following table shows the percentage

breakdown of fuel type usage in Michigan.

TABLE l.--Average Single Family Home Heating Fuel Usage in Michigan

 

 

Fuel Fraction of Homes Using Each Fuel
Fuel Oil 22.13%
Natural Gas 70.47%
Electricity 2.54%
Propane 2.62%
Coal 2.24%
100.00%

 

Source: Bureau of Mines, 1970 Census of Housing, Michigan
Department of Energy.

In 1975 residential energy use accounted for about 21 percent

of total energy consumption (Newman, 1975, p. 21). Residential energy

use grew at 4 percent per year from 1950 to 1972, double the rate of
increase in the number of households and population growth rate
(Office of Science and Technology, 1972, p. 33). This growth in
energy consumption per household partially reflects and contributes

to increases in our standard of living.

TABLE 2.--End Use Consumption in Residential Subjector

 

 

Space Heating 63.5%
Water Heating 18.4
Air Conditioning 2.7
Lighting 5.9
Other Appliances 9.3
100.0%

 

Source: Institute for Ecological Policies, County Energy Plan
Guidebook, 1979, pp. 4-3.

The East North Central region uses more energy for residen-
tial space heating than any other region in the country, both abso-
lutely and on a per household basis. As seen from the table above,
space heating is by far the most important energy consumer. Space
heating, water heating and air conditioning compromise almost 85 per-
cent of home energy use and are also the factors that the builder has

control over in new home construction.

Energy Conservation Factors--Consumer Aspects
Some basic factors affect the consumer's degree of interest in

an energy efficient home.

Imus.
Generally, the more money a consumer has, the more energy
they will use at home. The Energy Policy Project of the Ford Founda-
tion showed that upper income households with an annual income of
$16,000 or more consumed about twice as much energy as poorer house-
holds (Berman, 1974, p. 17). Paradoxically, the higher income grups
are more likely to have equipment in the home that saves energy as

well as a house and equipment that uses a great deal of energy.

Cost of Energy

 

The major factor that promotes energy conservation is the
high price of energy. The inflation rate for energy sources in
Michigan has been very close to 23 percent per year since 1970 (Energy
Administration, State of Michigan, 1978, p. 1). This present
rate means that energy costs will double every three to four years.
Unfortunately, no one knows how much energy costs may increase
in the next five years, much less for the forty-year life of a new
home. Recent estimates of our energy resources strongly suggest
that increases in energy costs in the future will exceed other
inflationary factors. Additionally, energy costs cannot increase
in any such magnitude without affecting the cots of all manufactured
goods, services, labor and money. General inflation accompanies
increased energy costs, and both contribute to the overall increase

in the cost of housing.

TABLE 3.--Average Selling Price of Home Heating Fuels--North Central

 

 

Region

Year Electricity (¢/kWh) Gas (¢/1003) 011 (¢/9al.)
1973 2.54 NA NA
1974 3.1 NA 34.7
1975 3.51 153.7 37.7
1976 3.73 185.8 40.6
1977 4.05 225.5 47.0
1978 4.31 260.2 49.4
1979 4.62 330.9 71.7
1980 4.9 348.6 96.0
(April)

 

Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Monthly Energy Review
(March 1980).

 

Cost of Housing_and Extra
Initial Cost

 

 

Since 1972 the median selling price of new homes in the U.S.
has been rising at about double the percentage increase of median
family income. According to the Harvard M.I.T. Joint Center Urban
Studies, the number of American families able to afford new homes
has dropped from seven out of ten in 1950 to four out of ten in 1975
to barely 25 percent in 1977 (Fortune, 1976, p. 84). In view of
rapidly rising prices for new homes in the past three years, it is
reasonable Unassume the present figure is even less.

The price of new homes, even without energy efficient inno-
vations, is at a point where many buyers are already borrowing at the

upper limits of their ability to obtain mortgage funds. Many

10

marginal buyers may not be able to consider the extra 5 to 10 percent
(or more) in additional cost, for example, a solar hot water heater
typically entails (Jordan, 1977, p. 11-5). While most potential
homebuyers have some interest in energy efficiency of a new home,
the total overall cost of the house will obviously be a more impor~

tant consideration.

Mortgage (interest) Rates

 

Mortgage rates are obviously intertwined with the total cost
of a new home. Mortgage rates have risen dramatically over the past
five years.

When expenditures are made for energy efficient equipment in
a new home, it usually becomes part of the mortgage, at interest.
This hidden cost is large; and if calculated at a conservative 10
percent for thirty years has the effect of tripling the original
cost. Interest rates depend on the general inflation rate and rises

proportionately (Oviatt, 1975, p. 14).

Inflation Rate

 

Closely tied to interest rates and the cost of energy is the
inflation rate. Expected price increases are imporant to homebuyers

in determining what the future benefits of an investment will be.

Cost Effectiveness of Innovation

 

Whether the innovation is perceived by the homebuyer as cost
effective will influence the desire for inclusion of the product in

the home. While no studies have been done to determine exactly how

11

this is accomplished, it can be assumed to be intuitively determined
by the buyer. Prospective buyers are acutely aware of the increas-
ing burden of energy bills and are becoming more sophisticated in
this area.

Since the cost of energy has been rising faster than new
home prices, inflation, interest rates, and income, it is reasonable
to assume that the desire to obtain an energy efficient home is
becoming an important concern of homebuyers. "Professional Builder"
found that 80 percent of homebuyers are willing to pay $600 extra
to save $100 per year on utility bills (Georgia Institute of Tech-
nology, 1978, p. 21). However, initial overall cost of the new home,
the major factor will far outweigh this.

Barriers to Incorporation of Energqufficient
Innovations in Residential Construction

 

 

The character of the building market is a key element in
understanding the present state of practices and standards which
influence energy conservation in residential construction.

Taken as a whole, the industry can be characterized as
an activity which is highly fragmented, involving many small
operators and consumers; undercapitalized and therefore a
captive of national economic cycles; operating in a very
powerful, somewhat unique and frequenty difficult labor
environment; carrying on basically little research & develop-
ment in comparison to other industries of its size; largely
reinventing the specific team of participant actors to carry
out each specific construction project; and due to all of
these attributes, compromising an extremely risky sector in
the U.S. Economy (Schoen, 1975, p. 51).

First Cost

 

The great majority of residential construction starts are

speculative. Because of the generally speculative nature of

12

residential construction, first costs are given high priority in all
planning, building, financing and marketing of homes. The residen-
tial construction industry, with its associated financial institutions,
is attuned to the market demands where first costs are of overriding
importance and responds to the needs for construction of homes with
techniques designed to reduce first costs.

This is an extremely important point because there are many
technical options available to make more effective use of energy in
supplying the requirements of residential services. However, in most
instances, the implementation of these techniques requires some addi-
tional initial investment which is to be justified by savings in
operating costs, particulaly savings of costs for fuel and electri-
cal power.

Being in a risk averse business, builders are generally
unaccustomed to using life cycle costing as a basis for purchasing
decisions. Usually decisions (especially in the case of speculative
builders) are made on the basis of lowest initial cost, therefore
some new technologies may fail to reach their full potential because

of their high first cost..

Specialization

 

Usually, the various trades involved in homebuilding have
little to do with each other. It is rare that there any of the
specialized functions has either the resources or interest to alone
move a major innovative technique or piece of hardward from its

initial innovation to its hoped for widespread commercial use. A

13

non-aggregated market is slower to diffuse technology than an aggre-
gated market which often means marketing problems for new energy

technologies (Schoen, 1975, p. 52).

Tradition Orientation

 

The residential construction industry is craft based rather
than science based. It operates through a series of craft based
unions each applying separate skills to the construction process.

As a result of this craft orientation, there is a heavy reliance upon
using previous methods. This tends to make the industry tradition

oriented (Schoen, 1975, p. 53).

Technological Uncertainties

 

Potential users may be unsure whether technologies still in
their infancy will perform as advertised. The problem is accentuated
where these technologies have not been sufficiently demonstrated.
Builders do not find "ideal homes" or "dream homes" and similar
demonstrations of new technology adequate to satisfy their questions.
The new innovations must work with a high degree of reliability and
should be of sufficient scale that they are perceived by builders

as realistic possibilities.

Personal Tastes

 

Personal tastes and values are often wedded to existing
technologies. For example, architectural design changes in home
appearance caused by the incorporation of solar space heating may be

an important deterrent to some homebuyers since the designs are

14

different from the traditional ones consumers have accepted over the
years. In general, the industry is motivated to change only when

the needs and desires of the client have changed. These changes have
evolved slowly due to changes in living standards, shifts in popula-

tion, changing employment and recreational needs.

Economic Uncertainties

 

Economic factors such as the general economic climate, infla—
tion and interest rates will affect builders' decisions.

. . depending on the supply and costs of capital within
the national economy, the added financial charges can make the
difference between success and failure for the builder. In
addition, the cost of construction is rising at the rate of
18-24 percent per year of 1 1/2 - 2 percent per month, a
rate not expected to be stemmed in the near future. If new
energy technologies for buildings require installation tech-
niques that increase construction time (construction costs),
it is unlikely they will be accepted rapidly by the industry
even if they have other economic advantages. These character-
istics tend to make the industry very first cost sensitive,
since an easy wasy to reduce the risk introduced by high
finance charges is to reduce initial capital requirements.

New energy devices which have lower operating costs but
higher first costs than do other energy systems may meet
resistances (Schoen, 1975, p. 51).

Economic barriers may diminish soon for new energy tech-
nologies as fuel prices continue to rise and more economical
conservation-oriented techniques become available.

Finally, there is always a measure of normal builder/consumer
resistence to the acceptance of new products. All innovations no
matter how significant require time to become accepted and widely

used.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This section of the study focuses on the extent of progress
builders in the Lansing area have made toward achieving energy effi-
ciency in new single family homes. Within this chapter the discussion
will center on the following points:

1. Description of Sampled Community

2. Sample Design and Selection

3. Survey Research Method

4. Analysis of Data

The Sampled Community

 

The sample of new home builders was selected from the greater
metropolitan area of Lansing, Michigan, and surrounding communities
up to a radius of 18 miles. The Lansing area is a well-defined
community containing a diversity of functions, and strong economic
base. The area is the seat of state government, contains light and
heavy industry (primarily related to the automobile industry) and a
major university. The surrounding area is a productive diversified
agricultural sector. The Lansing area was considered to be a viable
geographical unit containing a representative sample consisting of

urban, suburban, and rural builders.

15

16

Selection of the Sample

 

New home builders were identified and selected from the list-
ings in the Yellow Pages of the Lansing area phone book and the member-
ship list of the Greater Lansing Home Builders Association. All build-
ers were contacted by phone in advance to determine how many homes
they had build (on the average) per year. Those buildings less than
three homes per year were not included in the analysis of the data,
since this was indicative that the individual or company might not be
involved in new home construction as a full time business. Question-
naires were sent to a total of fifty-nine builders within the defined

area.

Survey Research Method

 

The use of a self-administered questionnaire is an efficient
way to collect data on a large number of variables. The questionnaire
was designed by the investigator and mailed to respondents with a
cover letter explaining the purpose of the survey. The data was
collected in March and April, 1980. The questionnaire requested:

1. General characteristics of the builder or company
including size, type (custom or speculative), average
selling price of homes, size of homes built and
extent of housing built through government financing

2. Types of equipment and materials incorporated into
new homes including windows, fireplaces, space heating
systems, and associated energy efficient devices,

insulation and sheathing

17

3. Design characteristics of the builder's homes

4. The builder's interpretation of what factors were
important in determining energy efficiency and
general opinions on the subject.

A number of questions asked for responses to the same ques-
tion for three different time periods--l972, 1975, and 1979--to
determine whether there had been any significant changes in the
response over this time period. Completed questionnaires were
returned to the investigator in self-addressed stamped envelopes.

The majority of responses were coded and keypunched onto
computer cards by the investigator. The cards were processed at the
computer center at Michigan State University using an SPSS (Statisti-
cal Packages for Social Sciences) format. The program was designed
to:

1. Generate frequency tables and statistics to 23 of the

38 questions.

2. Provide cross-tabulations and breakdowns of builders

by size and type and correlate these variables with

responses
Some questions not coded into the program were tabulated and analyzed
by the investigator due to the complexity of developing a program to
analyze certain questions. Also, the number of respondents was
small so it was relatively simple to tabulate and analyze the infor-

mation.

18

Analysis of Data

 

The major emphasis on the data is the builders' responses as
a group. The analysis of responses by size and type did not produce
any significant results and were not considered valid since the num-
ber of respondents when broken into subgroups was too small. Data
from the questions that had responses for the three separate time
periods were assembled into tables in order to easily discern any
distinct trends.

The data does not lend itself to statistical analysis for
several reasons. First, there are few distinct numbers to work with
due to the nature of the questionnaire. Questions were designed for
rather general responses rather than exact numbers which the builder
would probably not have at hand nor be interested in figuring out.
Second,the total number of respondents was too small to lend itself

to statistical analysis.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION

Analysis of Data

 

Description of Sample Population

The data in this investigation is presented in percentages or
whole numbers in reference to the total number of respondents for a
specific year or the entire survey.

A total of thirty-one of the fifty-nine questionnaires were
returned by mail to the investigator (approximately 51 percent
response). It was found that fourteen of the respondents built homes
primarily hithe Lansing/East Lansing area, thirteen in the surrounding
communities, and four in rural areas. Of the total thirty-one
respondents, nineteen had been in business before 1972 and had
collectively built 281 homes for that year. A sum total of twenty-
three respondents were in business by 1975 and collectively built 389
homes for that year. In 1970 thirty respondents were in business and
built 902 homes in that year.

Tables 4 and 5 are illustrative of an imbalance of the respond—
ents. The number of respondents building custom homes is greater than
those building speculative for all three years. However, the specu-
lative builders built more homes on the average, per builder. Small

custom builders made up a third of the respondents for each year but

19

20

TABLE 4.--Number of Homes Built by Size of Builder by Year

 

 

Small Medium Large
Year 1-10 Homes 11-75 Homes 75+ Homes Totals
1972 38 (9)* 243 (10) -- 281 (19)
1975 47 (10) 342 (13) -- 389 (23)
1979 _71_ (11) 621 (17) 210 (2) 902 (30)
156 10% 1206 77% 210 13% 1572

 

*Numbers in parentheses refer to the total number of builders
in that size group for each year.

TABLE 5.--Type of Builder by Year

 

 

Year Speculative Custom Total No. Respondents
1972 7 (151)* 12 (130) 19
1975 7 (166) 16 (223) 23

1979 9 (448) 21 (454) 30

 

*Numbers in parentheses refer to the total number of homes
built by each type for each year.

21

TABLE 6.--Type by Size by Number of Homes Built by Year

 

 

Year Size Speculative Custom Total No. Homes

1972 Small 2 (5)* 7 (33) (281)
Medium 5 (146) 5 (97)

1975 Small 2 (6) 8 (41) (389)
Medium 5 (160) 8 (182)

1979 Small 1 (2) 10 (69) (902)
Medium 7 (346) 10 (275)
Large 1 (100) l (110)

 

*Numbers in parentheses refers to the total number of homes
built by each size/type category.

only built about 9 percent of the total number of homes and are over-
represented. Medium size builders built 80 percent of the homes
although much fewer in number.

Estimates obtained from the questionnaires indicated that
20-30 percent of the 1572 homes built during 1972-1979 were financed
through government programs. The FHA and MSHDA programs were cited
as the two most frequently used. This is consistent with the current
national average for government insured housing.

About three quarters of the homes financed through govern-
ment programs are done so through speculative builders.

It is interesting to note that in 1972, government programs
accounted for 18 percent of all new homes. With the rapidly increas-
ing rise in interest rates at the end of the 1970's, the figure is
up to 33 percent. Government financed housing to date usually has

tighter requirements for making new homes energy efficient as

22

TABLE 7.--National Averages--Methods of New Home Financing 1979

 

 

Type of Financing Percentages

Conventional 69

FHA 13

VA 10

FmHA 2

Other (State Programs) or (ASH) __ji
100%

 

Source: NAHB, Statistical Department, Washington, D.C., 1980.

opposed to the requirements of a conventional loan obtained through
most banks. Government involvement in new home construction will
probably be a key factor in increasing energy efficient requirements.

This will be discussed further in Chapter V.

TABLE 8.--Frequency of Average Number of Bedrooms per House

 

No. Bedrooms/House

Year Res ondents
2 3 4 5 or more p

 

 

1972 - 10 8 1 19
1975 - 14 8 1 23
1979 1 22 6 1 3O

 

The number of bedrooms is usually indicative of the size of
the house. The strong preference for building three bedroom homes

remained stable for all three years.

23

TABLE 9.--Frequency of Predominant Floor Area by Year

 

 

1972 1975 1979
Less than 1,000 sq. ft. -- -- --
1,000 - 1,200 sq. ft. 2 3 6
1,200 - 1,400 sq. ft. 3 3 5
1,400 - 1,600 sq. ft. 1 3 4
1,601 - 1,800 sq. ft. 4 2 3
1,800 - 2,000 sq. ft. 3 4 1
2,001 - 2,200 sq. ft. 2 5 3
2,201+ _4 _;3 _33

19 23 30

 

There was no distinct pattern in the distribution of floor
area. In 1979 there did appear a small tendency toward either small
or very large homes. The use of a basement as the predominant type of

foundation was indicated by all the respondents.

Analysis of Trends Toward Energy Efficiency

 

A vast array of housing characteristics affect energy effi-
ciency although some are more important than others. The investigator
choose some of the more important factors where there is a moderate
to high potential for improvement. The following data and discussions
are an analysis of the extent various selected products and design

factors are being employed by respondents of the questionnaire.

24

Space Heating

 

Because residential space heating accounts for such a large
share of energy use, improvements in new space heating systems could
have significant long-term conservation effects.

Percentages calculated by the investigator showed that gas was
the overwhelming choice of heating fuel for all three years. In 1972
it accounted for the heat source in approximately 90 percent of the
homes built by the respondents. By 1979 this figure had risen to
over 95 percent. Oil made up almost all of the remaining 5 percent.
Additionally, this 5 percent was comprised mainly of the respondents
building in rural areas where gas is usually not available except
in liquified form. Some builders indicated that they had installed
a few heat pumps or electric resistance heating or wood stoves, but
collectively this totalled less than fifteen homes of the total 1572
for all three years.

The main reason for selecting gas as a heat source is its
lower price when compared to other forms of energy. However, there
is also general agreement that natural gas is also the most limited
of fossil fuels (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1977, p. 9). Reserves
in the U.S. have been decreasing stadily over the past ten years and
natural gas shortages have already been experienced in some areas of
the country.

The use of electric resistance for space heating was not an
economical form of heating for the North Central region and is much

more suited to the West and southern regions of the country. Homes

25

using electrical resistanace for heating in Michigan would require
an additional 5 to 6 inches of insulation in the attic and an extra
2 inches in the sidewalls as compared to a conventional gas heated
home (Table 17). Also, electric heating is inherently more wasteful
than direct combustion heating. All other things being equal, and
electrically heated home requires about twice as much fuel per unit
of heat as a gas or oil heated home (Newman, 1975, p. 25).

Heat pumps have generally not found acceptance as of yet in
this area since at present they are only marginally competitive with
gas heat. They also have a significantly higher initial installation
cost than gas or oil systems. Finally, the efficiency of heat pumps

drops off rapidly at temperatures under 20°F.

Electronic Ignitions

 

Electronic ignitions (device which replaced pilot light in
gas furnaces) did not make any headway with the respondents until
sometime after 1975. By 1979 it had gained a fairly solid acceptance
with almost two thirds of the builders installing it in most of all

of their homes.

TABLE lO.--Frequency of Electronic Ignition Usage in Gas Furnaces

 

Degree of Usage

 

 

Year

None Some homes About half Most All Homes
1972 19 -- -- -- -- (19)
1975 19 3 -- -- l (23)

1979 2 6 3 12 7 (30)

 

26

A study by the Rand Corporation showed that the installation
of electronic ignitions on gas furnaces would save 6 percent on the
annual amount of gas used (Dole, 1975, p. 98). State law as of

October 1979 now requires use of electronic ignitions in gas furnaces.

Automatic Flue Damper

 

It is estimated that as much as 75 percent of the heat pres-
ently lost in the exhaust air of conventional heating systems could
be saved through the application of an automatic flue damper. The
automatic flue damper has been found to reduce fuel consumption by
23 percent on gas heating systems (Subcommittee on Energy and Power,
1977, p. 7). The addition of the device adds approximately $125 to
$150 to the cost of a gas system. The device has gained slow

acceptance with the respondents.

TABLE ll.--Frequency of Automatic Flue Damper Installation

 

Degree of Usage

 

 

Year

None Some homes About half Most All homes
1972 18 1 -- -- --
1975 21 2 -- -- --
1979 13 7 3 4 3

 

Air Conditioning

 

New residences and commercial structures account for most

of the growing demand of electricity in the form of air conditioning,

27

heating and appliances. Residential homes now consume 32 percent of
all electricity generated (Roberts, 1973, p. 21). In the fifteen
year period between 1960 and 1975, the number of households with
some form of air conditioning increased at the rate of about 6,000 a
day (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1977, p. 4). Unfortunately, no
data is available on the rate of installation in new homes or by
region. Also, the South and Western portions of the country has
probably accounted for a large portion of this.

The frequency of installation of air conditioning by the
respondents was stable throughout all three years. It is possible
that this is one area where builders in the Michigan area have cut
back to reduce the total cost of the home since an average system
can run $1,000 to $2,000. The greater usage of insulation also

reduces the need for air conditioning.

TABLE 12.--Frequency of Air Conditioning Installation

 

Degree of Usage

 

 

 

Year

None Some homes About half Most All homes
1972 4 9 4 2 -- (19)
1975 4 ll 6 2 -- (23)
1979 6 13 6 2 3 (30)
Fireplaces

 

Traditional masonry fireplaces are very inefficient, deliver-

ing little more than 10 percent of the energy generated to a room

28

while pouring the larger portion of the heat up the chimney. Used in
a home heated by other means, they draw much of the heated air from
other parts of the house, reducing the effectiveness of the principal
heater.

Between 1975 and 1979 respondents made a major shift from
masonry fireplaces to prefabricated or "zero clearance fireplaces."
In this instance it was highly advantageous for the respondents to
change since prefabricted fireplaces can be installed for about one-
third to half the cost of a masonry unit. Additionally, tests wit-
nessed by the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory have shown prefabricated
fireplaces to be approximately 22 percent more energy efficient than
masonry units. Blower systems, which enhance heat circulated from

prefabricated units, have received a much slower acceptance rate.

TABLE l3.--Frequency of Prefabricated Fireplace Installation

 

 

Year Masonry Prefabricated Respondents
1972 17 2 19
1975 17 6 23
1979 9 21 3O

 

While zero clearance fireplaces are highly energy efficient,
the fireplace is today primarily an item of decor and rarely used as

a primary heat source.

29

TABLE 14.--Frequency of Fan Installation with Prefab Fireplaces

 

 

Year None Some homes Half Most All homes
1972 18 -- l -- -- (19)
1975 17 4 2 -- -- (23)
1979 8 12 4 3 3 (30)

 

Wall Construction

 

A definite constraint on insulation thickness is imposed by
the standard stud depth of 3 1/2 inches. While 5 1/2 inch studs
would allow for an additional 2 inches of insulation in the side—
walls, increased costs for framing lumber and an increase in the depth
of all window and door frames (plus added cost of insulation) would
probably offset the benefits in energy savings. Respondents over-
whelmingly indicated the use of the 2 x 4 for sidewall construction.
A few builders indicated they had built several homes incorporating

2 x 6's in the walls in 1979.

Windows

Windows account for a significant percentage of heat loss in
a typical residence due to their high thermal transmittance. On a per
square foot basis, they generally lose five to ten times more heat
than do the ceilings or walls of a home (Eccli, 1976, p. 124).
Although wood is far superior to aluminum in insulative value,
aluminum has gained wide acceptance due to a lower initial cost and
ease of maintenance. According to the NAHB, in 1978 aluminum windows

accounted for 53 percent of all windows installed in new homes while

3O

wood accounted for 36 percent and 11 percent were steel, plastic clad

or other types.

TABLE 15.--Frequency of Window Type Usage by Respondents

 

 

Year Wood Aluminum Respondents
1972 18 1 19
1975 18 5 23
1979 23 7 3O

 

TABLE 16.--Frequency of Glazing Type Usage by Respondents

 

Year Storm Units Double Glazed Insulated Glass Respondents

 

1972 3 5 11 19
1975 3 3 17 23
1979 5 4 21 3O

 

As seen from the data, the use of wood windows and insulated
glass were strong preferences by respondents for all three years.
(This consistent preference for wood is much higher than the national
average.) It is interesting to note that wood windows cost an
average of two to three times as much as aluminum and would add
$1,200 to $1,500 to the cost of a home. The strong preference for
wood is weighted by the custom builders, who accounted for 2/3 of the
questionnaires. Aluminum windows are more widely used by speculative

builders. A breakdown of Table 14 by the investigator into types,

31

custom or speculative, showed that custom builders strongly preferred
wood windows, while speculative builders accounted for the majority
of those using aluminum.

The Small Homes Council has stated that triple glazed win-
dows are cost efficient in areas with an average winter temperature
colder than 30°F or more than 4,500 heating degree days. The Lansing
area averaged 6,909 heating degree days (Daverman Associates, 1977,
p. 25). None of the respondents indicated using triple glazing on
any scale. The extra cost for triple glazing would increase the cost
of an average home (12 - 14 windows) by approximately $1,000.

Apparently, respondents were willing to invest the extra money

in wood frames but not the triple glazing.

Insulation

A very significant reduction in energy use can be accomplished
by increasing the amount of insulation in a home. Thermal insdlation
was not widely used in residential buildings until 1930. Houses since
that period were frequently nominally insulated, either because good
standards were not generally known or because "first cost" was the
controlling factor to the builder. In the 1960's, when energy costs
were still low, it was economical to have an R value of 19 in the
ceiling. Now it is economical to have an R value of 38 or more.

There are basically three different kinds of insulation in use.

1. Loose Cellulose - R value (per inch) 3.7

2. Batt or Blanket - R value (per inch) 2.9 - 3.4

3. Blown Fiberglass (or rockwool) - R value (per inch)
= 2.2 - 2.9.

32

TABLE l7.--Attic Insulation for Winter Heating

 

 

 

Respond-

Gas Oil Electric Electric Heat ents
(Therm) (Gallon) (kWh) Pump. (kWh)

18¢ 25¢ 1¢ 2¢ 3O

24¢ 34¢ 1.3¢ 2.6¢ 33

33¢ 42¢ 1.6¢ 3.3¢ 33

34¢*

36¢ 50¢ 2¢ 4¢ 38

4.7¢*
54¢ 75¢ 3¢ 6¢ 49
96¢*
72¢ lOO¢ 4¢ 8¢ 49
4.7¢
90¢ 125¢ 5¢ 10¢ 57

 

*Prices are as of April 1980.

Note: Figures based on economic analysis by the National
Bureau of Standards and Federal Energy Administration. The previous
table indicates the optimum insulation thickness that will give the
largest long-term savings on heating and cooling for the money
invested in insulation.

33

The R values vary according to the qualify of the work and whether
the insulation completely fills the cavity to be insulated. Ideally
cellulose is the best insulation material for ceilings because of its

high R value and ability to completely fill cavities.

TABLE l8.--Frequency of Insulation Type Usage by Respondents

 

Loose Batt or Blown Rckwl.

 

Year Cellulose Blanket or Fiberglass Respondents
1972 4 7 8 19
1975 9 7 7 23
1979 15 6 9 30

 

Table 18 shows that loose cellulose gained increasing popu-
larity and that by 1979 half of the respondents were using it.
Examination of the data by the investigator also revealed that those
using blown rockwool or fiberglass were generally those who were
placing 12 inches of insultation (as opposed to 10 inches used by
most of those using cellulose) to compensate for the smaller R value.
The R values from respondents with three exceptions ranged from
thirty-seven to forty in 1979.

As seen from Table 17, respondents as of 1979 were generally
installing insulation to an R value adequate for gas heated homes.
At present prices for fuel oil and electric resistance heat an R
value of 49 and 55 is needed to heat the home economically. The
additional cost to both the builder and homebuyers has made these two

methods of home heating uneconomical.

34

TABLE 19.--Frequency of Ceiling Insulation Thickness use by
Respondents

 

Thickness in Inches

 

 

Year Respondents
4 6 8 10 . 12 13+
1972 l 13 2 2 l - 19
1975 - 6 8 7 2 - 23
l 14 13 1 30

1979 -

 

Foundation Insulation

 

Insulation of the foundation has received slow acceptance
from the respondents. Usually the basement is not part of the living
space of the house and probably considered to be an unnecessary
additional cost by the respondents. All respondents were using 3 1/2
inch batt insulation in the sidewalls with an approximate R value of

13.

TABLE 20.--Frequency of Foundation Insulation Installation by
Respondents

 

Year None Some homes About half Most All homes Respondents

 

 

1972 14 4 -- -- 1 19
1975 14 6 1 -- 2 23
1970 7 13 3 1 6 30
Sheathing

Due to the increasingly high prices for lunber, plywood

sheathing was only being used by two of the respondents in 1972.

35

Fiberboard (Celotex), which is also a slightly better insulator and
more workable, was the overwhelming preference for 1972 and 1975.
By 1979 there was a major shift to extruded polystyrene (Styrofoam)
sheathing with 24 of the 30 respondents using it. In addition to
having a high R value, it is lightweight and easier to work with

than plywood or fiberboard.

TABLE 21.--Frequency of Sheathing Type Usage by Respondents

 

Year Plywood, Fiberboard Extruded Polystyrene Respondent

 

1972 2 17 -- 19
1975 2 18 33 23
1979 2 4 24 3O

 

TABLE 22.--R Values for Various Sheathing Types

 

Plywood (1/2 inch) R = .68
Insulating Sheathing (1/2 inch) R = 1.32
Fiberboard (low density 1/2 inch) R = 2.00
Extruded Polystyrene (1/2 inch) R = 4

Extruden Polystyrene (1 inch) R = 5.26

 

Source: ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals, 1972.

 

A survey of several local lumber yards revealed that polysty-
rene sheathing was over twice as expensive as fiberboard or insulat-
ing sheathing, yet the majority of respondents were now using it.

For most, it is probably used to meet increasingly stringent FHA-MPS

36

requirements which now require an R value of 19 in the sidewalls. It
is also probable that it is an excellent selling point to the home-

buyer becuase of its insulative value.

Passive Solar Design Usage

 

Amounts of energy required for heating, cooling, and ventila-
tion are greatly affected by the configuration and layout of spaces
within a building. Respondents were asked the extent they had incor-
porated six of the more common passive design innovations into their
house plans. None of these concepts had made any significant head-

way with the respondents.

TABLE 23.--Frequency of House Orientation to the South by Respondents

 

 

Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 17 l l 19
1975 19 3 l 23
1979 18 11 1 3O

 

TABLE 24.--Frequency of Window Placement to the South Side

 

 

Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 15 2 2 19
1975 16 5 2 23

1979 14 3 3 3O

 

37

TABLE 25.--Frequency Use of Topography/Vegetation for Heating or

 

 

Cooling
Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 13 6 -- 19
1975 16 6 l 23
1979 13 14 3 30

 

TABLE 26.--Frequency of Orientation of Living Spaces to South

 

 

Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 15 4 -- 19
1975 16 7 -- 23
1979 ll 18 l 30

 

TABLE 27.--Frequency of Blank Wall/Bathroom/Storage Space to North

 

 

Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 13 5 1 19
1975 15 8 -- 23
1979 10 18 2 30

 

TABLE 28.--Frequency Usage of Building Mass for Heat Storage

 

 

Year None Some homes Many homes Respondents
1972 19 -- -- 19
1975 23 -- -- 23

1979 24 6 -- 30

 

38

With the exception of the question concerning placement of a
significant amount of window/glass area to the south side, none of the
concepts by themselves could add a significant amount of heat to a
home. Examination of the data by the investigator showed that only
three of the respondents in 1979 were using all of the concepts
together on some frequency to develop a passive solar heated home.
However, respondents felt that passive solar housing was feasible
by a 4:1 margin, even though most of them had not included passive
design in their homes.

Respondents were asked to rank the factors that most deter-
mined why they would not use passive solar design concepts. The most
important factor was that most potential home buyers already had a
certain architectural style in mind. Passive solar design usually
calls for major exterior design changes that conflict with or are
hard to match to traditional designs. Respondents felt that these
contemporary designs were not yet marketable to the public on a large
scale.

Passive design not being worth the added expense (cost effec-
tive) was rated as the second most important factor. The third most
important factor was that other problems and design factors were
more important when building in a subdivision. For example, most
homeowners would like to have their house oriented toward the street
rather than south (if the two directions conflict). Also installation
of solar systems at ideal orientations for optimal performance might
lead to rows of structures with similar or identical roof configura-

tions. A diversity of roof slopes and orientations is an important

39

part of contemporary housing developments (Schoen, 1975, p. 98).
Solar energy systems would have to be adapted to blend in with these
environments,not an easy task. The reliability of passive solar

heating was not seen as a major deterrent by most builders.

Passive Design--Discussion

 

The initial costs for passive solar heating are not fixed by
the costs of any equipment, but are determined largely by the design
and materials which the builder selects. To date, the majority of
passive homes are built by unorthodox designers, owner builders and
architects, not concerned with wide scale marketability of their
final products. These custom designer/builders are generally shel-
tered from the risks of the marketplace. A drawback to speculative
houses is that capital risks are assumed by the builder.

Although passive solar design systems are generally agreed
to be more cost effective than active solar systems, the barrier of
increased initial costs is still there. However, this need not
always be the case. Passive solar homes can be built for an addi-
tional cost of less than 3 percent as well as up to an additional
25 percent. The main question is to what degree the design is expected
to decrease energy consumption in the home.

The acceptance of passive solar design by builders will be
difficult for a number of reasons:

1. There is little confidence in passive design because of
a lack of hard data for proven performance. According to a national

survey of architects, a lack of data indicating proven performance

4D

is one of the most formidable barriers to adopting solar technology
as elements in architectural design (Schoen, 1975, p. 89). This is
aggravated by the number of variables such as local climatic factors,
floor plan layout, window location, and selection of floor and wall
materials, which will affect how well a passive design will work.

2. Lack of finely detailed passive designs aside from
custom plans. This factor is changing rapidly though with the
increasing publication of passive oriented design books.

3. Present tax incentives do not offset the increased costs
enough.

4. Climatic conditions in the Central Michigan area are
highly unfavorable toward solar energy designs. The Lansing area has
twice as many cloudy days as clear ones. Most of these cloudy days
occur during winter when the solar energy is needed the most.
Although diffuse sunlight radiation is available during cloudy days,
it does not provide nearly enough energy that can be utilized on a
clear day.

5. Requirements for a back-up system (needed in most of the
North Central region).

Passive design does offer some advantages. The principles
of passive design are generally simple and there is little need for
additional research except in developing reliable methods for deter-
mining performance of various designs in different locations. There
are relatively small negative consequences should the system not

perform as required.

41

Active Solar Systems

 

The thirty respondents were split evenly when asked whether
active solar systems were feasible in the Lansing area. Respondents
were then asked to rank factors (in order of importance) why active
systems were not feasible to them. As a group, the most important
factor was the unreliability of active systems as a stable heat
source. Ranked second was the added expense. Third, it was not con-

sidered cost effective yet.

Active Solar Systems-~Discussion

 

In addition to the above factors, there are others that also
prevent acceptance of active solar hot water and space heating sys-
tems:

l. The durability of collector systems is still uncertain
since the industry is still young. There are numerous collectors on
the market today which cannot be expected to operate satisfactorily
even for ten years.

2. There is a lack of system performance standards that are
uniformly applicable to all manufacturers products.

3. Climatic factors and low insolation values make the
Lansing area an unfavorable location for active systems.

4. Some architectural design changes are needed to incor-
porate active collectors which might hurt the marketability of the
home. Also, each home has unique heat characteristics which would

require a careful assessment when sizing the collector system.

42

Since 1978 active systems have been competitive with electricity and
marginally competitive with fuel oil in most areas of the country
(Bedzedk, 1978, p. 5). In the Lansing area (as seen from the sections
on space heating and insulation), solar systems will probably have to
become at least marginally competitive with gas prices to become a
serious possible alternative to builders. Ideally, active solar sys-
tems should be available in simple packages which can easily be
installed by existing HVAC contractors. At present, this trend is

just coming into being.

Builders' View of Home Buyer Concerns

 

As seen from Table 29, builders found homebuyers to be pri-

marily concerned about insulation in a new home. Windows ranked

TABLE 29.--Frequency/Ranking of Home Buyer Concerns by Respondents

 

Aspect of Energy Efficiency

 

 

Importance
TYPE 0f Heating . Type of Windows Resistant
System Insulat1on to Heat Loss
lst 6 23 4
2nd 9 15 17
3rd 16 2 9

 

second and the type of heating system was third. There is a signifi-
cant correlation between these results and data in Table 19. Respond-

ents indicating installing high R values (more than banks or most

43

federal financing programs would require), in the ceilings. Extra
insulation has become a major selling point in new homes mostly

because consumer's desire it.

Builders' Comments

 

A number of builders added comments mainly on the subject of
active and passive solar systems. The following quotes are repre-
sentative of the majority of responses.

I would build solar homes if the credits (tax) offset the
costs. Buyers would be there if there was no additional
expense. There is not much market for "guinea pigs" who might
pay for an inferior system now when a better system may exist
in two to five years (a medium-size speculative builder).

In a very short time the energy costs are going to be of
utmost importance. Passive solar with active solar assist is
going to be most marketable. In the future the house that is
not energy efficient will be like owning a '72 Cadillac today
(a medium size speculative builder).

There are so many new gimmicks on the market for solar
heating. If some method was proven effective like traditional
gal force air heat etc., which people knew would work and what
they could save, they would make a decision on whether it was
worth it. I would like to build a solar home if I would sell
them (a medium size custom builder).

We priced a passive solar house in November 1979. The
added cost was over $20,000 more. With today's interest costs
(lo-16%), it would more than erase the fuel savings even with
tax credits. We could only justify this expenditure if we had
the money and could expect a substantial increase in fuel
costs (a small custom builder).

With current technology, it is much better to spend the
money on brick 6 or 8 inch walls, better window and doors, etc.
We will let other perfect new solar ideas--we will be happy to
change after there is conclusive proof and market acceptance.
We think that after the gimmicks have been tossed (out) and the
field tests are complete, someone will come up with an econ-
omically feasible and marketable solar system (a medium size
custom builder).

44

We build a passive solar house in 1978. The system itself
was not totally efficient, but a hydro hearth in the fireplace
used in conjunction with a gas furnace added to efficiency
(a small custom builder)

None of the respondents had plans for installing active

solar systems in 1980 although two answered there was a possibility.

CHAPTER V

GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN ENERGY CONSERVATION

Federal Government Goals

 

Federal legislative action can be broken down into two cate-
gories:
1. Voluntary--including educational, informal and tax
incentives.
2. Mandatory--including construction standards, efficiency
standards for appliances, fuel taxes and
energy prices (energy rate structures)
The federal government's response to the energy situation has generally
been oriented to making do with less energy and developing new
resources (domestically), rather than importing more oil and natural
gas. To date, emphasis has been primarily toward educational and
voluntary measures. However, within the next few years it is apparent
that mandatory measures will come into effect. This will include
deregulation of fuels, uniform building standards, and fuel taxes in
order to stimulate conservation and new technologies.
Three of the six key points of the National Plan for Energy
Research, Development and Demonstration (ERDA-48) are

1. Promoting the role of the private sector in the develop-
ment and commercialization of new energy technologies.

45

46

2. Conservation technologies are to be singled out for
increased attention and are to be ranked with several
supply technologies as being the highest priority for
national action (especially conservation in buildings).

3. Federal programs to assist industry in accelerating the
market penetration of energy technologies with near term
potential (Engery Research and Development Administration,
1976, p. 1).

During the 1970's government involvement to increase energy
efficiency in residential homes has largely been limited to promoting
voluntary conservation, education and distribution of information and
providing tax incentives. Of these three, the educational activities
have probably been the most effective. The effects of voluntary
conservation are not readily measurable and tax incentives have not
been large enough to offset the initial costs of certain innovations,
primarily solar. As the energy problem continued to grow, the govern-
ment can be expected to broaden its activities increasingly into manda-

tory measures exemplified by natural gas deregulation and the

probable implementation of the Building Energy Performance Standards.

Federal Programs

 

A major area where the federal government has been able to
infuence energy efficiency in housing has been through insurance pro-
grams such as FHA, FnMA, and VA loans. These programs currently have
a direct effect on 27 percent of all new home construction in the
U.S. This figure is likely to rise further as long as interest rates
remain high, since loans can be obtained at a slightly lower rate

through these programs.

47

Currently, the nearest approach to a national standard for
thermal insulation in residential construction is the FHA-Minimum
Property Standards for One and Two Family Units. Until early 1970
FHA-MPS requirements forinsulation were nominal. As of 1977 FHA had
requirements of R-19 in the ceiling and R-ll in the sidewalls. It
was not until 1972 that specific insulation standards were called for.
Current FHA standards require R-33 in the ceiling and R-l3 in the
walls. FHA requirements are important since they are often used as
a guideline for banks when making conventional loans. The enforcement
of these rules are not nearly as stringent since the bank is usually
concerned about the overall value of the house structure rather than
any specific aspects. The VA loan program uses FHA standards for
its guidelines.

FnMA has even more stringent standards fin~thermal insulation
although the number of houses affected by this program is small.
Current requirements call for R-38 in the ceilings and R-19 in the

sidewalls. In Michigan, MSHDA guidelines are R13W in the R-3O in

ceilings.

Future Government Involvement

 

The Department of Energy has developed a set of energy con-
sumption "budget levels" which a particular type of building must
meet. The building would be designed to use no more than a pre-
scribed amount of energy each year for heating, cooling and hot water.
The regulations are performance oriented and adapt to regional condi-

tions and building fuctions. The building energy performance

48

standards (BEPS) do not require certain construction techniques and
are supposed to allow the private sector a great deal of flexibility.
Buildings which meet the proposed energy budgets will consume 35-40
percent less energy than recently constructed buildings (Federal
Register, 1979, Vol. 44, p. 68218).

At present prices a typical 1640 sq. ft. home would cost an
extra $1,200 or approximately 75 cents extra per square foot. However,
under the proposed rules, the Department of Energy claims the energy
savings will more than offset the increased construction costs (based
on life cycle costing). The BEPS are generally more stringent than
existing energy requirements by other agencies. For example, in
Michigan triple glazing, R-38 in the ceilings and R-19 in the walls
would be required (Professional Builder, 1980, p. 80). If approved
by Congress this year, the standards will go into effect sometime
during 1981 and become the new construction standards for all federal
agencies such as the FHA, VA, etc. It is probable that these guide-
lines will become the standards for those homes obtained through con-
ventional loans. The BEPS may also be incorporated into model building
codes such as BOCA and the Uniform Building Code which will almost
guarantee widespread enforcement of BEPS.

The most important effect of government policies such as BEPS
is the possibility of 100 percent market penetration of these stand-
ards. Local and state regulations have a much smaller effect. The
costs of implementation and administration of BEPS is expected to be
small since the method of enforcement (in the form of inspections)

already exists through the present building inspection system.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary of Findings

 

This study was a determination of trends toward energy effi-
ciency in new single family homes in the Lansing area. An analysis
of this type is useful in showing what problems forestall further
acceptance and incorporation of energy efficient products and inno-
vations in new homes as well as what progress has been made. A self-
administered questionnaire was used to gather data from home builders
in the Lansing area. Of the thirty-one respondents, two-thirds were
custom builders, most of them of smaller size. Although there were
fewer speculative builders involved in the survey, they were of much
larger size,produced more homes,and are underrepresented.

Builders have concentrated on improving energy efficiency
in homes primarily by increasing the insulation of the building envel-
ope. In addition to increasingly larger amounts of insulation being
used in the ceilings, extruded polystyrene sheathing is becoming widely
used and there was a strong preference for wood, insulated glass
windows.

Gas heating has been the overwhelming preference for new home
builders except in areas where it is not available. Gas is presently

the cheapest present source of heating fuel and a highly favorable

49

5O

choice from both the builders and home buyers point of view. The use
of electronic ignitions for gas furnaces has received favorable
acceptance but this point is now moot in Michigan since is is now
required by state law. However, highly cost effective gas furnace
accessories such as the automatic flue damper has received a much
slower acceptance presumably because of initial cost.

Prefabricated (zero clearance) fireplaces have achieved rapid
acceptance since their initial cost is far below that of a masonry
fireplace. Although secondary compared to the savings to the build-
er, they are also more energy efficient and a useful selling point
to the homebuyer. Another highly cost effective accessory to the
fireplace, the fan system, has received slow market acceptance, pre-
sumably because of first cost again.

Air conditioning was not being installed with as great a fre-
quency as expected by the investigator. However, increased insulation
lessens the need for air conditioning, and the Michigan summer tem-
peratures arerknzthat severe. This is probably one area where build-
ers have cut back to reduce initial costs of the home.

Major energy efficient innovations such as passive and active
solar heating have received no acceptance in the Lansing area for a
number of reasons. In the case of passive design, builders felt
that the main barrier was the buyer preference for more traditional
designs. There were also other problems with passive design when
developing a subdivision, and these factors were considered more

important. Interestingly, the cost factor was ranked third. However,

51

it is probable that all three of these factors are highly important,
since a ranking of factors was rather subjective and shows no indica-
tion of degree. Respondents were more receptive to passive design
rather than active ones.

It is highly likely that government intervention from the
federal level is going to determine the future of energy efficiency
in housing. The present HUD-FHA Minimum Property Standards will
probably become much more stringent within a year or two. The
increased standards may raise the price of a home by an additional
.75 to $1.00 per square foot. These standards will probably be
adopted by banks and affect homes purchased through conventional loans,
although enforcement might not be as rigid as government financed or
insured housing. The use of federal standards for housing is at
present the only way to achieve 100 percent market penetration of
energy conservation policies in new housing.

A variety of factors affect both the builder and consumer in
making choices in the area of energy efficiency. For the buyer, the
rising cost of energy, cost of housing, mortgage rates, inflation,
cost effectiveness, and personal tastes will affect the decision to
buy an energy efficient house. Energy costs have been rising faster
than all other factors and are rapidly becoming an important
consideration. For the builder, first costs, economic factors such
as the cost of borrowing money, internal market characteristics of
the building industry and the builders perception of buyer desires

are factors. In general, most of these barriers will diminish in the

52

near future, once again because of the energy problem. Builders are
most concerned with the needs and desires of the buyer and will tend
toward further improvements in energy efficiency if the buyer desires
it. At present the major emphasis has been primarily on constructing

a weathertight, well insulated building envelope.

Conclusions

 

Continuing changes in energy prices will continue to influence
decisions concerning life cycle and capital costs and this will affect
the use of energy conserving technologies. Economic barriers will
probably diminish as fuel prices rise and more economical conserva-
tion technologies become available. One major factor will be the
deregulation of natural gas, scheduled to occur in stages over the
next few years. It is likely builders will be faced with (or forced
into) accepting new directions in energy efficiency.

In general, innovations at the individual building com-
ponent or subsystem level has fared somewhat better than full build-
ing systems. While some of the components and materials had achieved
wide or moderate acceptance, active and passive solar systems, which
required some modification of house design were not acceptable.
Builders attempt to "fit" energy efficient products to the traditional
house and construction methods. Innovations that require signifi-
cant changes in standard construction are much less likely to succeed.
Builders rarely introduce radical departures in design, materials, or
hardward/subsystems in their developments without extensive proven

performance and market acceptance first. Incorporation of energy

53

efficient innovations in new homes also faces significant barriers
due to the nature of the construction industry and its sensitivity
to first costs.

Builders are highly response to shifts in market demand.
Homebuyers have primarily been concerned with increased insulation
and weathertightness of the home. This has been the primary area of
improvement in efficiency by builders.

While first cost is usually the most important factor to a
builder, this approach is usually not conducive to the best interests
of a typical home buyer since the few hundred dollars saved by mini-
mizing costs might cost the owner a few thousand dollars over the
life of the home. However, many potential buyers still cannot afford
some technologies since the additional expense places the total price
of the home beyond their means.

An additional factor is the rate at which the American family
has been moving. One builder reported to the investigator that the
time an average family will own a house had dropped to under seven
years. This is hardly enough time to recoup costs invested in energy
efficient equipment or designs.

The owner of a custom house faces a different situation.

They are likely to remain there for a much longer time than the owner
of a speculative house. The owner is much more likely to be inter-
ested in getting the most energy efficient house for the money.
Jordan states:

About 20% of the custom houses (approximately 100,000

units/yr.) are designed by an architect, in consultation with
the owner, and constructed by a well-established, high-quality

54

builder. People having houses designed and built for them
will by and large not be extremely sensitive to capital costs
if they are attracted to solar or other energy technologies.
If the buyer has the necessary capital and the architects and
builders have the necessary expertise to incorporate them into
buildings, this could be the most attractive market for solar
installation or an energy efficient products (p. II—5).

It is likely that new innovations will be tested and developed in

the custom home first before entering the larger speculative market.

Suggestions for Future Study

 

Due to the diversity of building materials, products, and
number and types of builders, it is difficult to assess accurately
(numerically) progress toward energy efficiency in housing. On the
whole the instrument used in this study covered most of the major
points, but it might be revised and streamlined to gain more factual
information.

First, the list of energy efficient products could be extended
to include a number of other items such as coefficient of performance
on air conditioners, caulking, door types (door core materials) and
other furnace accessories such as flue restrictors, flue heat exchang-
ers and thermostat types. Also, a higher response rate and specific

hard data could be obtained by shortening the questionnaire so that
only the previous construction year is covered rather than three
separate ones going back seven years.

If possible, a future study should attempt to cover a larger
region or several population sectors within the same geographic area
and obtain a larger sample. Ideally, at least fifty responses should

be obtained. While 50 might not appear to be a large sample, the total

55

number of units that fifty builders might construct would likely
approach 2,000 units. Also, a large sampling would permit cross
analysis of builders by type (custom or speculative) and relative size.
This might show some interesting trends.

The coding of information using SPSS (Statistical Packages for
Social Science) format was an excellent method for analyzing coded
data as opposed to FORTRAN programming. However, questions in which
the respondent was asked to rank answers in some order are difficult
to program. This type of question might be dropped from the program

or given a different approach.

APPENDICES

6O

APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE

61

7.

9.

10.

GENERAL QIJESTIONS

In what year did your company begin building homes?

 

Where have you built the majority of your homes?

[:1 Lansing/East Lansing

D surrounding commities

D rural

Approximately how many homes did you build for each of the following years?

 

 

Were these homes speculative or completely custom built for the following years?

1972

D generally
speculative

D custan

1975

[3 generally
speculative

D custom

D other areas

1 972
1975
1 979
1979
D generally
speculative

[1 custom

During the following years, did you build predominantly on scattered sites or

subdivisions?
1972
D scattered sites
[3 subdivisions

1975

.E] scattered sites

[:1 subdivisions

1979
D scattered sites
1:] subdivisions

What 'was the predominant floor area for your homes for the following years?

1972

[3 less than 1000 sf.
[Z] 1,000 - 1,200 sf.

[Z] 1,200 - 1,400 sf.

[Z] 1,400 - 1,600 sf.

[Z] 1,600 - 1,800 sf.

[Z] 1,800 - 2,000 sf.

[Z] 2,000 - 2,200 sf.

[Z] 2,200

+

How would you characterize the selling price
[jmoderately priced

Dlow

(average)

1975

[:1 less than 1000 sf.
[Z] 1,000 - 1,200 sf.

[Z] 1,200 - 1,400 sf.

[Z] 1,400 - 1,600 sf.

[Z] 1,600 - 1,800 sf.

[Z] 1,800 — 2,000 sf.

[Z] 2,000 — 2,200 sf.

[Z] 2,200 +

1979

D less than 1000 sf.
E] 1,000 - 1,200 sf.
[Z] 1,200 - 1,400 sf.
[Z] 1,400 — 1,600 sf.
[Z] 1,600 - 1,800 sf.
[31,800 2,000 sf.

‘ [Z] 2,000 - 2,200 sf.

[Z] 2,200 +

1:] relatively
expensive

of the majority of the homes you have built?
[:1 higher priced

What was the pedominant number of bedrooms built in your homes during the following years?

1972
[Z] 2
[:1 3
[:1 4

DSormore

1975

[Z] 2
D3
[Z] 4

D S or more

1979

[Z] 2
D3
D4

DSOrmore

Have you built homes between 1972 - 1979 through any government programs or financing?

1:] yes D no

If you answered ze_s_ in question 9, what percentage of your homes were through government
progams or financing? Also rank the following government agencies starting with the

Ones most frequently used.

need. D1_10%

[Z] 10 - 20%

 

FHA

Farmers Home Adm.

 

 

 

[leo - 35% VA
[Z]36 - 50% MSHDA
[:3 50 - 75% Other

[375% +

 

1 = most frequent 2 = less frequent etc. for as many as you

11.

12.

1}.

14.

15.

16.

17.

31mm $31M

What was the most predominant type of window used in your homes for the following
years?

1972 1975 1979

[3 double hung [Z] double hung [3 double hung

.C] sliding [Z] sliding D sliding

D casement E] casement D casement
wood or wood or wood or
a11-inum? aluminum? aluminun?

[Z] wood [Z] wood [Z] wood

[Z] aluninmn D aluminum [:I aluninum

How mam layers of glazing were on these windows? Select one or the appropriate
combination which best describes the number and type you used for the following years.

 

 

1972 1975 . 1979
D 1 [Z] 1 [ZZ] 1
C] 2 [Z] 2 [Z] 2
[:1 3 [:1 3 [Z] 3
D with storm unit E] with storm unit Dwith storm unit
E] themopane window D thermopane window D thermopane window
What was the predominant type of foundation used in your homes for the following
years? g = basement g = crawl space Q = slab 1972
1975 —
1979
Have you used stud sizes other than 2114's in the house walls for the following years?
1972 1975 1979
D yes U yes D yes
D no C] no D no

If you checked yes for any year in question 14, what size was the stud and on what
frequency did you use it?

C] 2x6 D for 'one home

[I other D for a few homes
D for about half
D for many homes
[:1 for all homes

What was the predaninant style of home you built for the following years?

1972 1975 1979
D ranch [j ranch D ranch
[Z] 2 story. [j 2 story [Z] 2 story

UTILITIES AND FIREPLACES

what was the approximate percentage of distribution for the types of central heating
systems you may have instalmedtin homesfog trim-following years?

1972 1975 1979
Gas 5 fi fi
Oil fi g 5
Electric fl 5 5
Heat punm fl 5 5
Other 5 5 fl

 

18. ‘On what frequency were the following features installed along with the central

19.

20.

21.

heating system?

1972

electronic igaition C] none

autunatic flue
damper

humidifiers

central air
conditioning

[:1 a few systems
E] about half

CZ] most

D on all systems

[Z] none

D a few systems
C] about half

Donmost

D on all systems

[3 none.
[3 a few

[:1 about half

D on most

with all
systems

[3 n...
D afew

D about half

[:I on most

D with all
systems

E] none

D a few systems
D about half

D most

D on all systems

Duane

D a few systems
[3 about half

D on most

D on all systems

C] about half

D on most

with all
systems

Unone
E] a few

D about half

Donmost

D with all
systems

1979

[Z] none

D a few systems
E] about hilf

D most

D on all systems

D none

a few systems
D about half

[3 on most

C] on all systems
E] none
[:1 a few

D about half

E] onmost

with all
system

Dnone
Dafew

E] about half

D on most

D with all
systems

On what frequency have you installed the following types of water heaters in
homes for the following years?

Gas
Electric
Other

 

1972

_5
_J
.J

1975

LLL

1979

LLL

What was the predominant type of fireplace installed in the homes you have built

for the following years?

1972

D masonry

E] prefabricated

prefabricated = zero clearance fireplace
1 975

D masonry
E] prefabricated

1979
D masonry
D prefabricated

If you installed any zero clearance fireplaces, how many of these had fans or
blower systems installed with them?

1972
[ZZ] none
E] a...

D about half

[3 most
[3 all

1975

[:1 none
[ZZ] sane

E] about half

D most
E] all

1979

[Z] non.
D some

E] about half

D most
E] all

INSULATION

22. What is the predaninant type of insulation you have used in ceili_._ngs for your

homes for the following years? Also, what was the approximate depth in inches
and/or R value achieved?

1972 1975 1979
. D loose cellulose [:1 loose cellulose D loose cellulose

[Z] batt [Z] batt D batt
[Z] other D other C] other

inches inches inches

 

 

R value R value R value

23. What is the predominant type of insulation you have used in walls for your

homes for the following years? Also, what was the approximate depth in inches
and/or R value achieved?

1972 1975 1979
E] loose cellulose E] loose cellulose D loose cellulose
[j batt [Z] batt [Z] batt

D other D other D other

inches inches inches

 

 

 

R value R value R value

21%. What type of sheathing did you use on your homes for the following years?

1972 1975 1979

[:1 wood sheathing D wood sheathing C] wood sheathing

[ZZI fiberboard sheathing E] fiberboard sheathing E] fiberboard sheathing
[j atyrofoam D atyrofoam E] atyrofoam

25. On what frequency did you insulate around the foundations of the homes you built
for the following years?

1972 1975 1979
[3 none [:l none [:1 none
E] some homes [3 some D some

E] about half [Z] about half [Z] about half

[3 most D most C] most
[Z] all [‘3 all C] all

DESIGN CHANGES

28. This question concerns some possible design changes you may have made in your
homes over the past years. To what extent have you made the following changes:

A) Intentionally oriented the house to within 25' of due south (along and east-west
axis) to take advantage of the sun

1972 1975 1979

E] none CI none [I none

E] some homes C] some homes C] some homes
D many homes D many homes C] many homes

B) Intentionally placed the majority of the windows to the south side of the house
and less on the north and west sides

1972 1975 1979
[Z] none CI none D none
[I some homes [Z] some homes D some homes

lZZlmany [3mm Donny

C) Utilized vegetation (trees for windbreaks or shade) or topography specifically
to aid or protect the bans in heating or cooling

1972 1975

[:1 none E] none

D some homes D some homes E] some homes

[:lmany [:lmany Elm

D) Intentionally oriented the major living spaces (living room, den, bedrooms)
to the south side of the house or where they would receive the most sun exposure

1979

[:1 mm.

1972

E] none

E] some homes

Dmany

1975

D none

D some homes

Bunny

1 979

[3 none

D some homes

[:Imany

E) Intentionally arranged blank walls, garages, bathrooms and storage areas to
the north or west sides of the house

1972

CZ] none

[3 some homes

Bunny

1 975

D none

E] some homes

[Z]many

F) Intentionally made use of brick or masonry floors or walls or other forms
to retain heat from solar energy inside the house

1972 1 975
D none [3 none

D some homes E] some homes [3 some homes

Dmany Dmany Dmany

G) If you marked some or many in part F, briefly specify the methods for storing
heat that you used

1979

[Z] none

 

 

29. How do you feel about the feasibility of "passive" solar heating methods (such as
in question 28, A—F)

D generally feasible D not worthile

30. Of 2the following factors, rank four in order of importance as to why you would not
want to use passive solar heating methods (such as A—F, question 28) in order to
take advantage of solar heat? 1 = most important reason 11 = least important

[3 most home buyers have a certain architectural
style in mind / conflicts with what most
homebuyers would like

D not worth the added expense

D not feasible, especially in a subdivision,
because of other more important considerations

not worth any real economic savings in
energy yet

D not a reliable method of heating in this area

SW QUESTIONS

31. How important did you feel "energy efficient housing" was to new home buyers for
the following years?

1972

[:1 not really important
D some showed concern
D practically all were

1975

D not really important
[:J some showed concern
D practically all were

1979

D not really important
[:1 some showed concern
r] practically all were

32.

33-

1.0
#-

Rank the following in order of importance. What particular aspects in the area
of energy efficiency concern new home buyers the most? 1 = most important

3 = least important

type of heating system in house

insulation
type of windows / resistance to heat loss

 

other (specify)

 

Rank the following in order of frequency. Where do you get most of the house
plans you use for building homes? 1 = most frequent 2 = less frequent etc.
for as many as you need.

developed by my company
brought in by home buyer
from plan'bodks

designed by architect or other company

 

other (specify)

 

 

Do you plan on installing any kind of solar space heating or water heating
equipment on any of your homes this year? (1980)
[3 yes C] no [3 possibly

If you.marked yes in question 3h, on how'many homes and what type of system?

[1 one home E] hot water heating systems mostly
E] a few homes [Z] space heating systems
[Z]1many homes [Z] both

How do you feel about the possibilities of using solar panels for hot water heating
or space heating in this area (around Ingham county) at present?

D generally feasible D not feasible
If you answered not feasible in question 36, rank the following in order of importance
as to why you would not want to install solar panels on homes. 1 = most
important h = least important rank only 4
not a reliable method of heating
still too expensive even with tax credits
not marketable to the public yet
not cost effective in this area

not esthetic or would require other design
changes in the house that would not be worth
the expense

other reasons (specify)

 

 

If you have any additional comments or suggestions, please write them in the space
below.

Thank you for your time, patience and cooperation!

APPENDIX B

SPSS COMPUTER PROGRAM

68

MOSS,RGZ
PW=MOSS
HAL,SPSS

*EOR

RUN NAME
VARIALBE LIST

INPUT FORMAT

N 0F CASES
CROSSTABS
CROSSTABS
CROSSTABS

READ INPUT DATA

APPENDIX B

SPSS COMPUTER PROGRAM

DEFINE,FREQUENCY,BREAKO0WN AND CROSSTABULATE
CASENO,YEAR, TYPE,SIZE, STARTS,AREA,PRICE
ROOMS,NTYPE,CLZNG,EIGHTN,FLUDAMP,AIRCOND,
HEARTH,FAN,CINSUL,CINCH,SHEATH, FINSUL,
0RIENT,GLASPAC,VEG,LIVSPAC,BLNKWL,MASS,

PASFEAS,ASOLAR

FIXED (F2,S,F1.0,1X,2F1.0,1X,F3.0,3FI.0,1X,
2F2.0,1X,3F1.o.1X,2F1.0.1X,F1.0,1X,F2.0,1X,
2F1.0,1X,6F1.0.1X,F1.0.1X,F1.0)

UNKNNON ,

TABLES=STARTS BY TYPE OF YEAR
TABLES=STARTS BY SIZE BY YEAR

TABLES=SIZE BY TYPE BY YEAR

011 11 48 5 2122 000 10 2 8 20 001000
012 11 38 5 3122 000 10 L 10 31 001000
013 12 15645 3122 440 11 2 12 32 111000 1 0
023 21 6434 1111 221 00 2 12 12 001110 1 1

CROSSTABS

CROSSTABS

*SELECT IF
FREQUENCIES
OPTIONS

STATISTICS
*SELECT IF
FREQUENCIES
OPTIONS

STATISTICS

TABLES=SIZE BY NTYPE,EIGNTH,FLUDAMP, AIRCOND,
HEARTH,FAN, CINSUL, CINCH, SHEATH,FINSUL,0RIENT,
GLASPAC,VEG,LIVSPAC,BLNKNL BY YEAR

TABLES=TYPE BY WTYPE,EIGNTH, FLUDAMP,AIRCOND,
HEARTH,FAN, CINSUL,CINCH, SHEATH, FINSUL,0RIENT,
GLASPAC,VEG,LIVSPAC,BLNKNL BY YEAR

(YEAR E0 1) '

GENERAL=ALL

7,8

ALL

(YEAR E0 2)

GENERAL=ALL

7,8

ALL

69

*SELECT IF
FREQUENCIES
OPTIONS
STATISTICS
FINISH

*EOF

70

(YEAR EQ 3)
GENERAL=ALL
7,8
ALL

REFERENCES CITED

71

REFERENCES CITED

Books

Dole, Stephen H. Energy Use and Conservation and Use in the Residen-
tial Sector: A Regional Analysis. Santa Monica, Cal.: The
Rand Corporation, l975.

 

 

Eccli, Eugene. Low-Cost Energy Efficient Shelter. Emmaus, Pa.:
Rondale Press, Inc.,21976.

 

Jordan, Richard C.; Liu, Benjamin Y. H. Applications of Solar
Energygfor Heating and Cooling_of Buildings. New York:
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. ASHRAE-GRP 170, 1977.

 

 

National Association of Home Builders. Cost Effective Site Planning:
Single Family_pevelopment. Washington, D.C.: NAHB, 1976.

 

 

Newman, Dorothy K.; and Day, Dawn. The American Energy Consumer.
Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1975.

 

Schoen, R.; Hirshberg, Alan S.; and Weingart, Jerome M. New Energy
Technologies for Buildings. A Report to the Energy Policy
Project Ef'the Ford Foundation. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger
Publishing Co., l975.

 

 

Roberts, Keith. Towards an Energy Poligy. San Francisco, Cal.:
Sierra Club, 1973.

 

Journals

Department of Energy. "Energy Performance Standards for New Buildings."
United States Regulatory Council, Federal Register. November
28, l979, p. 68218-19.

 

"Is the One Family House BecomingaaFossil?" Fortune (April l976):
84-89, l64—l65.

"Myraid Energy Regulations Affect Builders." Professional Builder 6
(February 1980): 72 and 77.

 

72

73

Documents

Bedzek, Roger. "An Anaysis of the Current Economic Feasibility of
Solar Water and Space Heating." Washington, D.C.: U. S.
Department of Energy, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978.

Daverman Associates, Inc. The Michigan Energy Code. Michigan Depart-
ment of Labor, Bureau of Construction Codes, March 1977.

Energy Research and Development Administration. A National Plan for
Energy Research, Development and Demonstration: Creating
Energy Choices for the Future, Volume 1. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government PrintTng Office, 1976.

 

Georgia Institute of Technology. Building and Marketing the Energy
Efficient Home. Atlanta, Ga.: Georgia Office of Energy
Resources, l978.

 

Office of Science and Technology. Patterns of Energy Consumption in
the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Print-
ing Office, 1972.

 

Okagaki, Alan, and Benson, Jim. County Energy Plan Guidebook,
Creating a Renewable Energy Future. Institute for Ecological
Policies, Fairfax, Virginia, l979.

 

Oviatt, A. E. Optimum Insulation Thickness in Wood Framed Homes.
Portland, Oregon, USDA Forest Service General Technical
Report, PNW-32, l975.

Subcommittee on Energy and Power. "Energy Conservation and Home
Heating Fuels." House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Governmenting Printing Office, 1977.

U.S. Department of Commerce. "Residential Energy Uses." Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Solar Heating and Cooling of Residential
Buildings--Sizing, Installation and Operation of Systems.
Washington, D..: U.S. Government Printing Office, l977.

 

U.S. Department of Energy. Monthly Energy Review, January_l980.
Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1980.

 

142 9420

Ulo

ml’ll
A“
R”
8"
UI
Y“
”1'"
S”
E"

"

|:.|

(Milli

111i