Limited Energy Options

The following is from the David Hughes presentation summary given on March 9 to the Alliance for a Sustainable Colorado. We simply can not continue consuming in the way we have accepted as normal in our life time. The car culture, the Wal-mart culture, the suburban culture, the consumer society. . . . all of it, will change. Our children, in our life time, will ask us why we consumed so much and left so little for them. Hughes, a retired geoscientist with the Geological Survey of Canada, makes five essential points.

• The five-fold expansion of global population since 1850 has been made possible by non-renewable fuels, the consumption of which pervades all aspects of society –food, transportation, communication etc. (Before 1850 population growth was relatively flat.)
• The eight-fold expansion of global per capita energy consumption since 1850 has been entirely a result of consumption of non-renewable energy. (Oil, and then natural gas, made cheap goods possible.)
  
• North America consumes a disproportionate amount of energy (5 times the global per capita average). The Developing World understandably aspires to North American energy consumption levels; however, finite non-renewable resources are unlikely to be sufficient to allow this to happen, setting the stage for global conflict over energy. (This will lead to paralysis in addressing global warming.)
  
• The realities of the finite nature of non-renewable energy resources are now becoming evident –peak oil in many producing countries, peak North American natural gas, ten-fold increase in uranium prices since 2000, imports of coal into the US after centuries of self-sufficiency. (Peaks are defined as the point at which production begins an irreversible decline relative to demand.)
• Despite the hype, renewable energy technologies are EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to be able to replace non-renewable energy in existing business-as-usual energy demand forecasts –a sustainable future lies in radically reducing and rethinking energy consumption. (A future that few political leaders are prepared to address, thus requiring individual action and responsibility - sorry no magic bullet.)

Bike-Friendly Homes

Some cities are better suited than others, but note this Realtor who focuses on helping people find homes that are "bikeable". The innovative Realtor who runs 'Tour de Homes' in Portland to show properties in neighborhoods that are bike and alternative transport-friendly is finding that despite a depressed market, business is booming.

Prices are up?

This is a difficult picture to explain. Comparing April 2008 to April 2009 it appears that prices have increased by 2%. Volume is still down 21% reflecting a market that does not believe in itself. Many are having difficulty selling their home and afraid to offer on another with a "sale of property" condition. Look how uneven it is. Prices are down 12% in Niagara-on-the-Lake, but Niagara Falls, Thorold, Pt. Colborne, and Pelham are doing well. I have no explanation.

Residential Sales	2008		2009			Comparison
	# of Listings	Average Sale Price	# of Listings	Average Sale Price	Volume Change		Price Change
NIAGARA-ON-THE-LAKE	22	355,649	18	311,667	82%		88%
NIAGARA FALLS	131	178,668	108	190,735	82%		107%
FORT ERIE	61	180,526	46	160,699	75%		89%
ST.CATHARINES	212	195,595	142	194,576	67%		99%
THOROLD	30	190,467	27	202,848	90%		107%
FONTHILL/PELHAM	23	262,696	26	284,388	113%		108%
WELLAND	87	172,190	58	168,260	67%		98%
PORT COLBORNE/WAINFLEET	35	147,817	37	170,468	106%		115%
LINCOLN/WEST LINCOLN	27	269,306	31	255,132	115%		95%
Totals	628	195,684	493	198,941	79%		102%

The Best Value is Downtown

Linked here is an interesting article by Todd Litman from Planetizen discussing smart growth and the impact on affordability. For years we have put our social housing at the edge of urban development believing that avoiding infill NIMBYism was essential to achieving the housing at all. That was possibly true, but not as true today.

Right now I’m consulting on an AHP project located at the bleeding edge of new development. I regret the decisions that were made not to further pursue a downtown site after our initial effort. Hindsight is great and in retrospect government imposed timing conditions, project size, and the path of least resistance put us on that site. But in the long run we may have not done our residents a favour, especially as transportation costs rise.
That is a rental development, but for ownership – equity building suburban developments, the negative impacts are likely worse. It seems counter intuitive but the case made in this article is persuasive. Litman summarizes saying, “a typical household is likely to be a hundred thousand dollars wealthier in a decade if they choose a smart growth location over automobile-dependent sprawl.”

If we are going through “the great reset” as Richard Florida calls it, toward a new economy and new priorities, the Niagara Growth Strategy needs to be strengthen, not diluted by the pressures of old habits, to ensure we create the right conditions for good transportation options in our urban cores, and between the municipalities. Appreciation for high density urban living, by necessity, will evolve to be the new paradigm. Affordable rental housing efforts need to be there, involving smaller developments, multiple sites, and mixed with and in ownership housing.

Formaldeyde and New Homes

This is from Green Building Elements and repeats a story that is missed over and over again. As bad as asbestos may be - and is as I have two cousins with mesothelioma - formeldehyde is much more common. It is in far to many products and is not labelled.

We recently tested several new homes for formaldehyde in the air. The newest home, advertised as a “green” home, had 300 ppb of formaldehyde. Children in homes with only 30 ppb can have decreased lung function. Between 60 ppb and 120 ppb, children are more likely to have asthma and chronic bronchitis.
At 100 ppb, most adults experience eye, nose, and throat irritation.
Of homes that were less than 2 years old, every home we tested had at least 100 ppb of formaldehyde. The newer homes had 200 - 300 ppb. The 300 ppb concentration we found in the newest home is equal to the 15-minute Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) for occupational exposures. A worker in that home should wear a respirator to remain inside the building for more than 15 minutes. An employer that exposes workers to 300 ppb of formaldehyde should have a Hazard Communication Program to inform workers about chemical hazards and ways to avoid illness.

OREA fails the leadership test

It is sad to see my own people opposing a law that will significantly reduce green house gas emissions. This is a quote from the Ontario Real Estate Association article in their March 2009 Queens Park Plus newsletter. Get with the program folks. Show some leadership.

On February 23, the Government of Ontario introduced Bill 150 the Green Energy and Green Economy Act (GEA), 2009. Included in Bill 150 is a provision that will require all home owners to provide an energy audit report to prospective buyers. Currently, the bill is in the second reading stage of the legislative process. To read Bill 150 in full click here.

While OREA supports the principles of energy conservation and environmental stewardship that are enshrined in the GEA it opposes any policy that imposes unnecessary costs on homeowners and delays on real estate transactions. Instead, OREA supports the existing government program that encourages homeowners, through rebates, to assess the energy efficiency of their home voluntarily.

The Spend/Save Paradox

What to do? Spend! Save!

What?

There was recently a very good article at the Town Square blog on the mixed messages of economists as well as the problem we individually face in ensuring our own future. The message to spend essentially says that it is your patriotic duty to get out and stimulate the economy. OK. And buy what? Go to the Dollar store where nothing purchased effectively stimulates the the local economy? Go to Best Buy and purchase a flat screen TV (made in Korea)? I think not. If we want to stimulate the economy effectively then stop doing what we have done for years. Stop buying the cheapest item and buy something that will give your neighbour a job. It is good for your neighbour and ultimately good for you.

It is also good for the planet as the resources are not shipped to Korea or China and then shipped back as a finished product. From the Town Square blog:

The solution to the Paradox (spend/save) is to demand, consume and produce the local and renewable. Keep whatever shrinking wealth we might have within sight, build local economic muscles, protect local jobs, and begin to construct a sustainable region and home place.

The problem is we don't have an easy understanding of what is made locally. Until we demand and attain meaningful identification of the origin of products we don't have much of a choice.
(editorial cartoon by Tom Toles, Washington Post)

Are We Really Happier as Owners?

The great dream of all is to own your own home. It supposedly is a sign of a successful life. Now with the economic downturn, maybe its time to see if that was ever really as good as it seemed. According to the Wharton School’s Grace Wong in a study of those who own their own homes. Those who own are actually less happy than those who rent.

I find little evidence that homeowners are happier by any of the following definitions: life satisfaction, overall mood, overall feeling, general moment-to-moment emotions (i.e., affect) and affect at home… They are also more likely to be 12 pounds heavier, report lower a lower health status and poorer sleep quality. They tend to spend less time on active leisure or with friends. The average homeowner reports less joy from love and relationships… Contrary to popular belief, I do not find significant differences in family-related time use patterns, family-related affect, number of normal work hours, indicators of stress or measures of self-esteem and perceived control of life by homeownership …

Homeowners are happier on average only on an unadjusted basis. Once household income, housing quality and health are controlled for, they are no happier than renters. What’s more, they report to derive more pain from both the neighborhood and their house and home. This positive pain gap remains stable and robust when health, neighborhood characteristics and financial stress are controlled for. As for the most frequently cited channels of a positive impact by homeownership, namely self-esteem, stress, health and family life, again there is very little supporting evidence in my data… [H]omeowners spend less time on active leisure activities or with friends, which have been documented as some of the most enjoyable affective experiences.

Property values holding their own

These are the latest average sales prices using MLS data. It is clear we are not facing the same difficulties that we hear about in the US. So many buyers and sellers think our economy behaves like our neighbour to the south. No so, at least not now. Look at Niagara Falls and Pelham. Values have not move much at all. For the entire region there is only a 2% drop.

Month = Last November and This November
YTD =November to November

Hardwood Life-Cycle Costs

HardwoodInfo.com has provided an excellent source of information on hardwood floors. Sustainability, indoor air quality and durability are all issues that need to be considered..... and its all very confusing. This .pdf file provides the best help I've seen. Of special note is a Life-Cycle Cost comparison this has been helpful in one our projects.

See the article.....