lolll Eric,

Not that it affects my self estime either, but I've seen some heated arguments for a lot less. So that's why I brought it up..
Just in case some oversensitive people start taking it personnaly lolll I'm impatient about getting some feedback from Grzelakc...

It just doesn't add up...I also forgot to mention this though: When I built my house, the first winter my heat bill was alittle high
compared to what Hydro had budgeted. I realised that my UnderGarage ( which is empty instead of filled with sand ) was letting
a lot of cold air in,, thus obilgating me to heat the basement more...

I finally sprayed the underbelly of the garage slab and put a isolated door to that access.. Problem solved...

Grzelak: Where those electric baseboard heaters? Please explain.

Dave

Sorry to have abandoned the thread for a while, but here it goes.
The styrofoam in the attic is sealed between sheets with caulk and spray foam for any gaps bigger than 1/8". I can trace no infiltration through the ceiling or electrical fixture boxes. The ceiling is warm to the touch which I think is a sign that it is well insulated. The basement is indeed unheated (or heated very little) and there is no insulation in the main level floor. That said, many of my friends with newer 2 by 6 homes use the same energy while heating both the basement AND the main level. I'm horrified to even try and start heating the basement as my bill will likely go up at least 50-70% as a result. And that would be scary and truly nothing to brag about especially given that I paid a premium for ICF walls.

There are things I've done to the house since I last posted. I added a damper to the exhaust fan in the kitchen, I removed trim pieces sprayed some extra foam in some windows but I don't think this stuff is going to make that much difference. If it improves my efficiency another 10% that will be remarkable. My bet is that it wont even be that.

To be honest I have no idea what went wrong. Admittedly, my windows are mediocre (Robert) but they ARE low-e and Argon filled so I'd expect at least half decent thermal performance there. Maybe I'm wrong.

Overall however, I still think the importance of thick insulation and tight envelope is way overstated. For the money I spent on all those insulation extras (attic styrofoam, basement slab styrofoam, ICF walls etc) I could have purchased a geothermal heat pump which would have likely delivered much better results.

PS. I will do a thermal image and a blow test but I'm not sure who I have to talk to around here. Our phone book doesn't even have a "energy audit" section so I have no idea whom I should call. I'm in the greater Saint John area in New Brunswick.

Your local hydro company normally has the infared tool available, try them first or ask them for a referral. Contact an R-2000 builder, they can give you access to who does the blower test, it's mandatory on all R-2000 certified homes.

I don't want to spend your money, but...put some heat on in the basement, hot air rises, now I am guessing here but I'm thinking you are fighting to heat the house if you are heating just the upstairs and the basement which is essentially part of the structure is not being heated it is counter reacting with each other, it's winter time, cold wins, kind of like in the hot summer, heat wins over air conditioning.

I believe you'll find the cost to heat the lower level to be 10% or less. What is the temps in your basement now without heat?

Dave

Below is the 18 month history on my residence. Michigan 48348

I heat a total of 3600 for the 1st and 2nd story. The basement stairway is open so heat does travel to the basment but the registers are not open in basement and the temp is @ 67. The basement is @ 2600 sq ft with 10 ft ceiling.
2" styro under slab
Pella windows, walkout out basement with 12' doorwall and (3) 48 x 36 casements.
ICF basement, 1st, and 2nd floor.
Attic- Blown in celulose @ 20"
120k btu furmace.
Home is facing North

I have just started to use my hw tank for radiant and it should be working within the week. I would expect @ 30% reduction in heating cost. I will post those results when available.
 
Nonetheles, the cost to heat and cool my home are substatially lower then my neighbors with the same sq ft. they are consistently 30-40% higher in the winter and 300% summer.

Taxes are included

Serv.Type	Begin-Read	End-Read	Days	Energy-Used		Monthly-Charge
	12/12/2007	1/14/2008	33
GAS	4012	4242		230	Actual	$241.82
						$241.82
	11/9/2007	12/12/2007	33
GAS	3803	4012		209	Actual	$222.94
						$222.94
	10/12/2007	11/9/2007	28
GAS	3737	3803		66	Actual	$76.79
						$76.79
	9/14/2007	10/12/2007	28
GAS	3704	3737		33	Estimated	$42.93
						$42.93
	8/15/2007	9/14/2007	30
GAS	3689	3704		15	Actual	$24.55
						$24.55
	7/16/2007	8/15/2007	30
GAS	3675	3689		14	Actual	$23.49
						$23.49*
	6/15/2007	7/16/2007	31
GAS	3661	3675		14	Actual	$23.68
						$23.68
	5/16/2007	6/15/2007	30
GAS	3625	3661		36	Actual	$47.74
						$47.74*
	4/17/2007	5/16/2007	29
GAS	3562	3625		63	Actual	$75.03
						$75.03
	3/16/2007	4/17/2007	32
GAS	3410	3562		152	Actual	$167.29
						$167.29
	2/15/2007	3/16/2007	29
GAS	3214	3410		196	Actual	$203.62
						$203.62
	1/17/2007	2/15/2007	29
GAS	2952	3214		262	Estimated	$272.54
						$272.54*
	12/16/2006	1/17/2007	32
GAS	2773	2952		179	Actual	$187.31
						$187.31
	11/15/2006	12/16/2006	31
GAS	2608	2773		165	Actual	$172.54
						$172.54
	10/16/2006	11/15/2006	30
GAS	2511	2608		97	Actual	$104.01
						$104.01
	9/15/2006	10/16/2006	31
GAS	2441	2511		70	Estimated	$81.35
						$81.35
	8/16/2006	9/15/2006	30
GAS	2430	2441		11	Actual	$20.18
						$20.18*
	7/18/2006	8/16/2006	29
GAS	2417	2430		13	Actual	$21.42
						$21.42

grzelakc... so, you have a bunch of gaps less than 1/8in that are not sealed/caulked? There's one right there.

The attic door is the other and the basement is the 3rd. The fact that your ceiling is warm is of no consequence -- heat rises. So, if the room is heated, the ceiling is always going to be warm on the heated side. It's the conducted and convective heat loss through the ceiling, into the cold air space above it that is the issue.

Look at it this way. You only have 13in of cellulose -- not very much for up there. You have gaps all over the styro sheet -- not good. Thus, cold attic air migrates down to the bare joists area all over your attic, through the poor insulation and all those gaps in the styro (cold air falls through all that). The joist area is in direct contact with the warm ceiling below. There's your heat loss migration, right there.

Here's how to get an energy audit in NB (Google is your friend):
http://www.efficiencynb.ca/advisors-e.asp

You may have to wait:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2007/04/25/nb-energywait.html

Your windows may be part of the problem.  Just being "low-e" and argon-filled are no guarantees.  You can get cheap windows from Home Depot that are low-e and argon-filled.

I went to the Roberts website, but didn't see any useful data.  You'd like to know what the U-value and SHGC are.  Those numbers will give you an idea how energy efficient they are.

If you have U-0.50 windows, it hardly matters how well your walls and ceiling are insulated.  It's like a bucket with a hole in the bottom - it doesn't matter how water-tight the material around the hole is.

Also, I'm not a big fan of loose cellulose insulation.  The numbers (R-value) look good, but I suspect the real-world performance is not so good.  Air movement, either by cross-winds through your attic or simple convection current, can render that insulation nearly useless.  Spraying an inch or two of open-cell foam on top of that cellulose might improve your situation. 

------

All that said, I agree that ICF has limited advantage over foam insulation in northern climates.  ICF is great at stopping air infiltration and convection currents.  It's also a fabulous sound-blocker and more forgiving of moisture problems.  But, as you pointed out, it's still only an R-22 wall.  Where you live, the thermal mass is of no real advantage.

A well-built stick-and-foam wall (or SIP) can stop the air movement just as well, and provide you with a significantly higher R-value.  The key is "well-built."  It takes a lot of effort to build a stick wall that tight.  Most stick-framed houses are not built nearly well enough to rival ICF or SIP.   

If your old home, to which you're comparing your ICF home, was tightly constructed and well-insulated, you may not see a substantial reduction in your energy bills.  People moving from a typical stick home to an ICF home certainly will. 

Just my opinion.

------

I don't know how closely your climate matches that of Nova Scotia.  But, here is a cost comparison of different heating fuels.  It looks like you could save some money with a different heating source.

http://www.conservens.ca/consumerinfo/residential/reducingenergybills/existinghomes/spaceheatingcostcomparisons

Something is wrong and things do not add up friend.

you should look into the ISOMAX-TERRASOL technology concept it is intelectually easy and simple to use and cost wise it is very compatible to other geothermal perhaps even cheaper than what you have in canada.

if you have any question contact me at 661-373-5300.
be glad to help you in anyway I can.
Regards,

grzelakc -

I am looking to build ICF - done a lot of reading but am no expert.

All the above posts seem reasonable to me - and I hope they work out for you.

But I wanted to pitch one thing into the mix and see what others say. ORNL website has a real interesting graph on energy savings from ICF in different climates (see URl below) and bottom line for me is that ICF don't seem so great in your northern climate. As you can see from the graph ICF savings in your latitude (equal to Minneapolis) is about 5% where as in Chicago it is about 10% (at R value 20).

I still hope you get your bills down where you need them - but perhaps on this site we should be plugging ICF more to people who live South of Chicago. Maybe above that line SIP is the way to go.

Todd

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/roofs+walls/research/detailed_papers/thermal/index.html

Sorry - on the above link you have to migrate to "Figure 8" to get to the graph I referred to. Todd

Guys - sorry for three posts in a row but.. -

ORNL gives their conclusions below.  I thought they were suppossed to be the guru's here.  They say ICF really is better but how much depends on where you are.

Interestingly - they also say that ICF "performance was significantly worse than walls containing foam core and concrete shells on both sides."

Anyone seen this done?  Is there a commercial system? 

Todd

CONCLUSIONS

Experimental and theoretical analysis of the energy performance of light-weight and massive wall systems was presented in this paper. Dynamic thermal performance of sixteen wall assemblies was investigated for residential buildings and the potential energy savings were presented for ten U.S. climates. It was found that some massive building envelope technologies can help in the reduction of building annual energies.

Several comparative field experiments have demonstrated that in many U. S. locations, heating and cooling energy demands in buildings containing massive walls of relatively high R-values can be lower than those in similar buildings constructed using equivalent R-value with lightweight wall technologies.

The thermal mass benefit is a function of wall material configuration, climate, building size, configuration, and orientation. From ten analyzed U.S. locations, the most beneficial for application of thermal mass are Phoenix, AZ and Bakersfield, CA.

Comparative analysis of sixteen different material configurations showed that the most effective wall assembly was the wall with thermal mass (concrete) applied in good contact with the interior of the building. Walls where the insulation material was concentrated on the interior side, performed much worse. Wall configurations with the concrete wall core and insulation placed on both sides of the wall performed slightly better, however, their performance was significantly worse than walls containing foam core and concrete shells on both sides.

Potential whole building energy savings, available when lightweight walls are replaced by massive walls of the same R-value, were calculated for 143 m² (1540-ft² ) one-story ranch houses located in Minneapolis, Minnesota and Bakersfield, California. For high R-value walls, up to 8% of the whole building energy could be saved in Minneapolis and 18% - in Bakersfield when wood-framed walls were replaced by massive wall systems. Thermal mass layers must be in good contact with the interior of the building in these walls.

Whole building possible energy savings in houses built with ICF walls were estimated as well. Three houses with 74 - 279 m² (800-3000 ft² ) of floor area were simulated for this purpose. It was found that for ten U.S. locations, ICF walls of R- 2.6 and 3.5 m²K/W (15 and 20 hft²F/Btu), the average potential whole building energy savings (ICF house vs conventional wood-framed house) can be between 6 and 8%.

At 6-8% savings.......that's not very encouraging........Where are these locations?

Todd,
For foam in the middle and concrete on both sides, see http://www.dow.com/styrofoam/na/concreteliving/
(STYROFOAM T-MASS Technology)

what is your total energy bill. gas + electric. i have a similar home that i just built with sticks with blowin foam and carefull sealing. i would like to see how it compares but mine is total electric with a heat pump. just moved in in december but my first bill was about $350 for everything and it was very cold here last month.

vhehn,

Here is the electricity bill for the past 2 years.  We have (4) tvs, (2) computers, Satillite with DVR recorder that records all the time,  A/C, well, sump pump.

I dont know if this makes a difference but i switched all my can lights to compact floresence in July @ 50 cans.

<!--THIS IS THE ROW FOR THE PRODUCT NAME AND SERVICE ADDRESS -->   Residential Electric Service -     Usage in KWH Amount Billed Days Billed       2008   2007   2006   2008   2007   2006   2008   2007   2006   JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL 30-Day Average** 722 — — — — — — — — — — — 722 677 748 733 602 669 580 672 795 771 591 425 532 701 7,819 641 1386 537 581 551 455 629 898 621 855 497 567 707 8,284 629 $82.35 — — — — — — — — — — — $82.35 $77.20 $84.73 $82.85 $67.42 $74.96 $63.76 $75.89 $89.25 $87.44 $64.66 $45.81 $57.45 $79.57 $873.79 $71.62 $136.57 $55.14 $60.11 $60.13 $49.38 $69.74 $103.78 $69.39 $97.99 $53.08 $61.31 $77.47 $894.09 $67.91 32 — — — — — — — — — — — 32

Since the thread is labelled, "ICF not worth it" maybe this is not hijacking...

Exactly what is the "cost" of the 48+ people killed last night in tornados, and countless others displaced and lives changed forever? Efficiency alone should not be the mitigating factor for choosing ICF.
In this "me, now" society, perhaps we forget what is really important.
Being a real man of the house means providing the best shelter; a healthy, safe, and comfortable place to live. For the home should be a haven.
Efficiency is just a wonderful bonus at the end of the day. This is why I am dedicated to ICF, it seems to make sense as the most well rounded structure viable for may applications, in many climates.

Back to the $ and cents, I am still interested and learning....


Kevin

Amen Kevin - Amen.

My ICF contractor gave me a picture of a California neighborhood after one of their wildfires - and there is only 1 house still standing - the only ICF on the street.

After learning about it - it's the only structure I'd have my family in.

Todd,

I would love to see that picture... I've always wondered what a ICF house looks after
a fire. Are the walls really salvagable... etc etc

Francis, the fires burnt right past the house and never touched it as I remember the photo.

Dave