Building high performance homes is *much* more about training, process, and QA than adding more insulation and selecting high efficiency products. The learning curve can be a bit steep, but over time, it doesn’t have to add that much to the cost.

An owner/builder is at a disadvantage because as you know it’s all about the price of land, the value of surrounding housing stock and economies of scale with regards to materials/labor.

The only way to make it happen as an owner/builder is to invest a significant amount of money into the property under the premise that you would ‘break even’ when it came time to sell.

I always council home buyers to look for contractors with a longstanding good reputation because it’s about the only market force working in the buyer’s favor. Check at least three recent references! Seriously, go find a few contractors that have been around for 10+ years under the same name. If you find someone with a reputation to conserve, they’ll either charge what it costs to do it right or decline the job.

Good contractors are reasonable. Steer clear of any situation where construction quality seems obvious problem and no one seems to care. Run whenever poor quality is forced on the customer!

Obviously, I subscribe to the view that good construction drawings from an architect are a fair start on quality. But it takes follow through to make those happen.

Good energy efficient construction is difficult even in high end houses because there is not enough training on the construction side. Even on the commercial side, it usually takes several conversations and emailing tidy research summaries to begin to climb up the hill toward achieving useful envelope design concepts in reality. (I usually start off with a test to see if “air barrier” is understood beyond good ol’ house wrap and then ramp up to moisture barrier positioning within insulation and its impact on condensation.)

For residential construction, it is nearly impossible to find a contractor that knows or cares about actual building science. Pricing is too competitive. Good contractors head toward commercial construction or architecturally designed residential where they can survive.

Which brings me to my point: Builder/market housing is cheap for a reason. It is created as a commodity and it is disposable. Rather than “invest” in such a home, why not reduce your required square feet by about 20% and build something with real quality? It is mind-blowing how large houses are around here and yet, they are all made of paper. They are the Emperor’s New Clothes and it is absurd! Build better than bigger.

It would be really cool if a
It would be really cool if a builder offered an “Energy Star” or “Earthcraft” upgrade on his/her list of other upgrades but I understand that the economies of scale probably make it cost prohibitive.

@Blake, that’s an interesting
@Blake, that’s an interesting question. Older versions of ASHRAE 62.2 (low rise residential ventilation standard) and BPI’s Building Airflow Standard, which was based on the 1989 version of ASHRAE 62, stipulated that a home required ventilation if it tested out below 0.35 ACH at natural air pressure, or 15 CFM per occupant (# of bedrooms + 1), whichever was greater. This was widely interpreted to mean that you either stop air sealing when you reach the limit, or add mechanical ventilation.

Other than the obvious “cliff” this method imposed, a big problem is that ACH-nat cannot be directly measured. The conversion to ACH-nat from ACH50 (as measured by the blower door) were based on an ‘n-factor’ contour map. Very imprecise. So much so that ASHRAE (and the home performance industry in general) have largely abandoned the ACH-nat metric.

Since the 2007 version, ASHRAE 62.2 has instead stipulated a target ventilation rate (CFM) based on floor area and number of bedrooms, along with a formula to take credit for measured infiltration.

To answer your question, the ACH level that fully trades off with mechanical ventilation depends on a number of factors. In my own practice, I begin to think about ventilation below about 3 ACH50, but you’ll find no consensus among home performance practitioners on that (an understatement).

Here’s a handy online calculator that implements the latest ASHRAE 62.2 calculations (2013), making it simple to answer your question for a particular home. If you know the volume, you can back into the ACH50 that fully offsets the need for mechanical ventilation: http://bit.ly/1zjcnpi

Followup: how do I go about getting a blower door test done? Does Alabama Power do them?

You’re welcome, Kerry. Thanks
You’re welcome, Kerry. Thanks for jumping in here and sharing your experience, both with the current tract home you’re having built and your previous one.