I think the other ways to build a structure are better, I dont see any of the positives of the ICF system beneficial enough to use that method to deliver a comparable house professionally in regards to material, labor, energy use, fit and finish, flexibility, integrating trades, and so on. I disagree with your labor savings comment as well.
As for burning money, I attended a presentation by a former ICF builder with a financial background who models and assists with new home construction, his numbers confirm the energy savings doesnt cover the cost premium over the life of the mortgage, not even close, nor do SIPS btw. I believe he actually commented on feeling bad for the ICF structures he put up knowing what he knows now. Based on his figures, I dont think any of the possible benefits of ICF make up for the money never recovered versus other options which will offer a return on investment. I do think SIPS have promise if you skip the SIP roof.
I think this is fairly obvious to professional contractors which is why you don't see the market penetration, this guy just took the time to run the numbers to confirm it. The guy runs eFree Advisors if you want to look it up, I dont know if his analysis tables are available to the public but they were pretty eye opening. I can't think of any building scientists anywhere that routinely contributes or any of the top high performance builders who put themselves out there, that use or recommend ICF either.
Anybody have any time studies? |