Green Home and the High Cost Misconception

The popular notion is that green houses are only for those without much regard to how much their house will cost. Have you checked on the latest cost of a solar roof panel?

Firstly, one need not have a solar panel, for one’s house to be green; and secondly, the cost of a green house may not depart far from the cost of a conventional house. Before I proceed, let’s define cost first as it could be many things.

More often than not, when we talk of building or house cost, it’s the initial cost of putting up the house: building materials, labor, supervision, planning, and permits costs. Depending on what “green” or eco-friendly elements you’d want incorporated in your house, the initial cost may exceed or approximate the traditional house’s cost. It could even be lower, if you’d be very judicious.

There, however, are other costs to be considered and thus, must be defined: 1) the operational and maintenance costs, and 2) the life cycle cost. I’d try not to be too technical. The first one is as the name suggests. These are the costs incurred in running, making the house fully functional, and in keeping the house in tip-top shape.

Water and power bills

Cleaning and upkeep cost

Repair and maintenance

Replacement costs

The second one, life cycle cost (LCC) is what is often termed as the cradle-to-the-grave costs. It is inclusive of the initial costs mentioned above, the operational and maintenance costs, and the end of life disposal costs.

As with many things, people misconstrue to consider only the initial cost as the only significant cost. To appropriately appreciate the value of green houses one needs to consider everything, the life cycle cost. Since there need to be made a number of assumptions for future projections, the accuracy of such computations can be suspect; but still, even conservative assumptions can lead to a fairly good conclusion.

I’d work out a case study for us to better appreciate this life cycle cost comparisons, in a future post.

So, are “green” houses more expensive than the more typical kind? Not necessarily. If they do so for the initial cost, they would prove less costly in the long run. It would just be a question of when. The long run, based on some literature on the subject, say, from 2 to 3 years, which for some will not be too long at all.

The consideration on going “green” be it in housing or for day-to-day shopping should not be decided on cost alone, though. The benefits of having a comfortable, healthy, green, clean earth for the “now” and the “tomorrows” should exceed the costs involved in “greening”.

Comments

[Dennis Morada]

Thanks, Architect.

I'll post this up front ASAP. Green Homes in the Philippines should be standard, in light of what is happening.

[Nestor Arabejo]

You might want to check out the exhibit of winning entries of the recent design competition "Ang Pinakamagandang Bahay sa Balat ng Lupa" at U.P. Diliman. The budget cost for these Filipino "green" homes is around Php 750,000.

The exhibit showcases the winning house designs chosen from among 35 entries for the Student Category and 44 entries for the Professional Category, as well as noteworthy entries from the design competition spearheaded by the UP College of Architecture and Lafarge Semento Pilipinas. The design proposals for “the most beautiful house on the face of the earth" reflects the aim to redefine the concept of a “beautiful house,” one that integrates environmental sustainability with the essential principles of aesthetics, functionality and structural soundness well suited for tropical Filipino domestic architecture. The exhibition is curated by Dr. Gerard Lico and will open on September 29 at the Forefront Galley of the University Theater. Exhibit runs until October 23.

Be inspired! That dream "green" home may really be affordable!