Why is it that everything that has to do with saving energy or Green is priced just high enough that the ROI is basically not worth the investment. You just have to have a passion for this stuff or want to spend the money for bragging rights. Unless we build it ourselves it isn't worth it.
Sorry about the frustration. It's just a carry over from the world politics.
Marc

In declining order:

Economies of scale: Georgia Pacific has mass production muscle cranking out Densglass Gold. Your average ICF manufacturer does not. Capacity translates to commodity pricing for conventional building products and great deals in periods of oversupply. Not so much in lower-volume green products.

Inefficient sales channels: The box stores and major builders have squeezed out the middlemen in conventional products. By contrast, green manufacturers protect handsome markups for the distributors they feel are essential to sell products to uneducated consumers.

Uneducated consumers: Your average American doesn't worry about energy unless it costs too much, and not a great deal then, because history has taught him or her that energy is also subject to fluctuating commodity pricing.

Lack of a coherent energy policy: The U.S. is unique in the developed world in allowing boom-bust cycles in energy prices -- and feast or famine for green markets that rely on cost-savings as their principal sales pitch. An effective policy requires raising taxes to keep a floor under oil prices as well as offering incentives to go green.

On-again-off-again tax credits: The tax code adds more volatility to green markets with several unhappy consequences: The chances of finding an experienced, competent geothermal contractor, for example, will drop steadily as the year progresses. Horror stories and unimpressive results will dampen consumer zeal. Sharpies will find a way to game the credits as they did solar collectors in the 1980s. (Google American Solar King and limited partnerships.)

The industry's niche market mentality: Green manufacturers and contractors have counted on affluent customers paying up for a green badge of honor, and on DIYers using sweat equity to reduce premium prices. It worked reasonably well gaining a toehold in the late great building boom. It will be less effective as today's customers rip up the rules. "Slab on grade less expensive to build and adapted easily to radiant heat? Then why do I need Warmboard?"

Premium pricing is green building's crazy aunt in the basement (with apologies to Ross Perot.) She's there, but everyone carefully avoids raising the subject.

Why do you think the return on investment is not worth the added expense? Take what I know best, ICFs; for little if any additional cost of ownership (total monthly cost, mortgage and utilities) you can live in a more comfortable safer home that is also less likely to have pests, mold or drafts.

1st reply - Wow what an excellent reply. I really enjoyed reading it. That's a God given gift. Somehow I feel better.

2nd reply - I'm not knocking ICF's or SIP's, I'm looking at vertical ICF's (TF systems) with urethane SIP's on top. If I do it myself, I save big bucks.

But when I think about how tax credits are used for leverage on prices that are too high and the situation our country's in, the reality settles in that space between my ears.
I have been into energy since 1977. I went to solar energy tech school, heating and a/c, Architectual dafting and worked in an electric car plant's R&D. I left this stuff because of the same issues. Now I'm buiilding my final home and I want some good stuff. The frustration came back.
When I was managing a project for a large dairy. I research how we could use 30,000 gallons of return milk every month to create Ethanol. They did it in 1993. It was a successful gov, project. But then they subsidize corn and regulate stuff and all the other methods are not feasible. So let's dump the milk in a mine to straighten out PH the minerals destroyed.
Just like Geothermal. if you have a tight home (under 2000sqft, the ROI wil take too long. The less load the longer the ROI. But everyone wants to sell their stuff even if it means stretching the truth.
OK, I'm apoligizing again. negativity aside (is that a word?), Thank you for your replies, God Bless...
Marc
AllAboutTheCross.com

So, as a "distributor" of a couple of the most widely discussed "green" building products on these forums, (SIPs and ICF's) I'm still hanging in for those "handsome markups" that toddm referred to in his post. (15+ years, but I'm stubborn) Our firm also provides installation and GC services, along with other associated services as needed by individual clients, through our close association with many other G.B.I.P's (Green Building Industry Professionals) eg:
other builders, architects/designers, engineers, etc, and we provide extensive assistance to owner builders.

Also, I can't take issue with many of toddm's comments in his well thought out, albeit somewhat cynical, assessment of the world of "green building".

However, I'm not too sure that we don't often make things more complicated than they need to be, in connection with the subject issues. Now that's not to say that the development of the ideal combination of building systems and materials, geothermal, groundsource heatpumps, solar, etc etc for any specific project, isn't complicated, it usually is. However, it seems to me, and I think that many will agree, that the first consideration in connection with the design of virtually any conditioned structure, is the building envelope, walls, roof, and yes, the floors, and, in many instances, the more exotic technologies may not work for many.

Having said that, and with my sales guy's hat snugly in place, I'm proposing that SIPS (structural insulated panels) are a very viable option for walls, roofs, and sometimes floors, for anyone looking to build a very energy efficient "green" home, for a price that should be comparable to one that is built with conventional framing methods (The caveat here is that the latter is built to a "high level of quality", eg: energy efficiency, structural strength, plumb, level square, etc. etc.)

However, I'd have to say that if one can afford it, it would be hard to beat a home built with ICFs, concrete walls, roof, and floors.

Budget? Finished floor, colored slab on grade, ICF walls, SIP roof. Less budget? SIP walls, SIP roof (slab or raised floor)

By the way, none of these comments are intended to be argumentative or facetious, or in any way to make light of the issues that were the subject of this post, and the subsequent responses, just my attempt to bring a different perspective to the table.

A quick anecdote, and I'll get out of here for now. I was exhibiting our products at a "Green" Event in a famous West Coast City.............................
and I was explaining (for about the 100th time) why the event organizers had invited us (OSB/EPS SIPs) While I'd had varying degrees of success with the first 99 who were posing this question, I did run into a stumbling block with the 100th. It went something like this: I had just completed my brilliant, and well rehearsed, closing statement, something to the effect that "Since over 40% of all energy that is used in the US is for the conditioning of buildings, the "greenest" thing that we can do is to build buildings that use less energy, and a SIP building requires "at least 66% less energy" (to condition) than one that is conventionally framed (US Dept of Energy Quote from about 1999 I think) The questioner, a young, tie dye attired, gentleman, gazed at me with piercing eyes through a dense entanglement of dreadlocks and beard, and then, in a soft but confident voice said................
"NO, THE GREENEST THING THAT WE CAN DO IS NOT TO BUILD ANY NEW BUILDINGS AT ALL" and with a somewhat condescending smile he turned and walked away.

Maybe that's the answer.....................NOT! (I'm not quite ready to retire)

Sad to say, Sipper, your 100th visitor wasn't far off the mark. The first question a green consultant should ask is this one: How much space do you really need? Size is the one area where cost effective construction and green practices mesh perfectly. The zero energy crowd will tell you you're wasting your time if you want more than 400 sf per occupant.
So the first thing you need is someone who can design a small house that lives big, or at least comfortably. The last thing you need is someone with a product to sell. As the old saw goes, puns intended, if all you have is a hammer all the world looks like a nail.
BTW I have nothing against markups; everyone deserves fair compensation for services rendered. It is the protection part I find troublesome. It says pay me whether you need my services or not.

I agree with both toddm and sipper on this and at times I am frustrated that so much attention is brought to wind, solar, and geothermal technologies. They are not bad technologies in the least, but I really wish that more attention be placed on building extremely energy efficient structures FIRST so that there will be less of a need to install as many solar, wind, or geothermal devices. That is what they are doing in Kentucky (Government) with great success and it seems that the idea is spreading from Kentucky out to nieghboring states.

I'm seeing installed ICF wall prices at under $10 sqft turnkey, which is pretty low (IMO) and not a lot more than conventional frame, especially if you are up against 2 x 6 frame. I do wish that the government would offer more tax incentives for "insulation" or energy star rated buildings, but they are not. Perahaps the lobbying group for solar, wind, and geothermal are not as strong as the ICFA or SIPA. Commercially there is some benefit to the energystar, but residential not so much.

Lately there has been much talk about the electric grid. Yes it is true we waste much of our energy pushing if across the grid. However, I would rather see the elimination of the grid. Develop cost effective small scale energy products. This way it can be produced in close proximity to the point of consumption.

Just an example:
A well build energy efficient house (ICF/SIP) with a source of power (Wind, Solar) and a good energy storage system. (Hydrogen used with a fuel cell). Put in LED lights, GEO thermal. Could be a good thing

But, the economies of scale are much better for larger power plants, I.E. its cheaper to build/install/maintain 10 30kW windmills than 100 3kW windmills. I'm not saying that individual houses powering themselves as you mentioned wouldn't be good, I'm just saying that with a redesign of our outdated grid structure and power plants, we could do even better than that.