There is more than one way to go green

Like most home builders these days, Frank McCaslin is especially eager to sell his stock of finished houses. But he's passing on the chance to add an environmental seal of approval from the local builders association -- a label that declares Green Built North Texas.

He's not down on going green. He just believes that buyers are most interested in the green that saves money, especially as utility prices soar. So he focuses on simple ways to cut electric and water bills without worrying about issues like salvaging drywall scraps.

"Everything I use is off the shelf," McCaslin said, "and people save a lot."

Conservation used to be primarily a matter of social conscience, but higher energy costs have made it a financial imperative, too. Texas' scorching summers and high electric rates put our utility spending among the highest in the country.

The home-building industry is touting green initiatives here and nationwide, hoping to spark interest in its innovations and help break a terrible sales slump. For consumers, the trend is both promising and confusing. Energy efficiency can cut operating costs significantly, but home buyers have to decide what part of green building matters to them, what's worth the price and, as with any hot trend, what's mainly hype -- known as greenwashing.

McCaslin's approach is old school. He has been building custom homes in Tarrant County since 1976, and energy efficiency is a cornerstone of his sales pitch. He's settled on a dozen techniques that work well in our climate and deliver a measurable return.

It's not complicated; by relying on his experience and common sense, he's found applications that pay off.

That's far simpler than programs, like Green Built, that have the same goal and are establishing national and local standards for green building. They use point systems and a cafeteria-style approach that lets builders and buyers pick among strategies to score bronze, silver or gold designations.

Adding solar panels, for instance, brings a lot of extra points in the ratings from the National Association of Home Builders. And in a North Texas example, Green Built builders can choose among three ways to reduce waste: a rainwater catch system, high-performance fixtures or a drip-irrigation system.

The formal systems have two objectives: to build eco-friendly homes that use fewer resources and to develop a green brand that resonates with buyers.

About 70 builders in North Texas have agreed to adhere to the Green Built standards, including Wall Homes in Arlington, which signed up last week. President Steve Wall said it was the right thing to do and said it would cost less than 1 percent of the home price to meet the rules; that's less than you might expect, because many builders are already using green building techniques.

Still, Wall said, "It'll probably to be difficult to recover all of the costs" because most buyers are unwilling to pay a premium to be green.

The contrast between McCaslin's approach and a formal rating system illustrates the challenge for consumers. It's tough to determine what works best, and new technologies are emerging regularly, often with claims of fantastic savings.

Formal green programs often cost more and deliver less than promised, one researcher says, while low-tech, even obvious moves -- turning off computers at night, for instance -- produce good results.

"Cookie-cutter approaches have a real marketing advantage because everybody can claim they're green," said Todd Myers, environmental director of the Washington Policy Center in Seattle. "But a green seal may be as much about marketing as saving money."

For the research group, he looked at school construction and energy bills to compare the effects of green building. That's more reliable than comparing homes, because sizes and energy use are similar among schools. He found that green schools spend more on energy, in part because they have larger windows (to let in more natural light) and extra systems to recycle air (required for airtight buildings).

A Tacoma, Wash., middle school, built to a high green standard, was projected to save 35 percent on energy. But Myers says it used 25 percent more energy than the average Tacoma middle school.

In the best cases, building supervisors applied their experience and focused on improvements that had the most impact, Meyers said. And on mandates that didn't offer much promise, they did the minimum.

In the past, most home buyers didn't think about green building. Even today, given a choice between extra insulation in the attic and hardwood floors, most choose amenities they see. But the green movement represents a great opportunity for builders because new homes have a decided edge in the efficiency race.

Compared with retrofitting an existing house, it's relatively inexpensive in new construction to upgrade windows, air conditioners and plumbing and install radiant barriers in the walls and attic. Some cities are mandating green building standards, but it's the builders and entrepreneurs who are innovating.

Some building materials, such as insulated panels, are so effective that they can reduce energy costs to a dollar a day, said Bob Morris of the home-builders association in Dallas. And McCaslin uses a recirculating pump on water heaters that, with the flip of a switch, gets hot water to far reaches of the house. That saves water, and for much less than fancy systems.

All of McCaslin's energy steps, from upgraded windows to radiant barriers and compact fluorescent light bulbs, add about $2,730 to the price of his $400,000 homes. He says that most families would save that much in the first year or two.

That's the kind of green everybody appreciates.