Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Earth bermed homes really frugal and effective?

Are small earth bermed homes a good way to increase energy efficiency
overall?

Or is it a myth that earth berming helps?

Im in northeast Missouri. Contemplating building a small two bedroom
one bath earth bermed home on a gentle slope.... nothing too radical
like the whole house being underground..... but just bermed into the
hill.

Am I OK with this method.... or is above ground construction using
concrete filled styrofoam forms just as effective at energy
efficiency?
 
A

Anthony Matonak

Are small earth bermed homes a good way to increase energy efficiency
overall?

Or is it a myth that earth berming helps?

Im in northeast Missouri. Contemplating building a small two bedroom
one bath earth bermed home on a gentle slope.... nothing too radical
like the whole house being underground..... but just bermed into the
hill.

Am I OK with this method.... or is above ground construction using
concrete filled styrofoam forms just as effective at energy
efficiency?

It all depends on the design and the environment. In general it's
more cost effective to build above ground an use more insulation.
You would need to do cost and thermal performance estimates on
the particular designs you are looking at to know for certain
what works best for you.

Anthony
 
A

alpinekid

Are small earth bermed homes a good way to increase energy efficiency
overall?

Or is it a myth that earth berming helps?

Im in northeast Missouri. Contemplating building a small two bedroom
one bath earth bermed home on a gentle slope.... nothing too radical
like the whole house being underground..... but just bermed into the
hill.

Am I OK with this method.... or is above ground construction using
concrete filled styrofoam forms just as effective at energy
efficiency?

I'm working on one in the high desert of Az. I'll let you know
how it turns out. The one my neighbor has is cool in the summer.
I have never been there in the winter but they say its warm in the winter.

Al
 
B

Bob Peterson

I looked at this very question in the mid 80s. I don't know what the
numbers are today, but back then the payback period of utilities versus
increased upfront cost would have exceeded my lifespan.

Keep in mind modern stick built homes can be made very energy efficient.
many newer home pay no more than $1000 a year on heating and cooling
combined. If you end up paying $25k more for an earth bermed house, you
just never come out ahead if you save only a few hundred a year.

Financially you break even if you spend 7-10 times the amount of annual
energy savings you get on the initial building cost (depending on interest
rates).

OTOH, if you want to live in such a home just cause you want to, that's a
lifestyle issue, and might well be worth the extra money to you.
 
S

Steve Spence

The few I have been in have no heating and cooling bills. The heat from the
appliances and people living within is sufficient to keep it warm. Over
heating is the issue, but dealt with with good air exchange. Added benefits
are less fire risk in forest fire zones, resistance to seismic activity,
reduced visible footprint, and silence.

We give a properly constructed earth bermed house 5 thumbs up.

--
Steve Spence
Renewable energy and sustainable living
http://www.green-trust.org
Discuss vegetable oil and biodiesel
powered diesels at
http://www.veggievan.org/discuss/
 
I'm working on one in the high desert of Az. I'll let you know
how it turns out. The one my neighbor has is cool in the summer.
I have never been there in the winter but they say its warm in the winter.

yes... please let me (and us).... know how it works out
 
We give a properly constructed earth bermed house 5 thumbs up.

OK.... question tho...

Would you NOt build an earth bermed home that doesn't have traditional
duct work and forced air systems?

I really do NOT like forced air heating.... and would instead prefer
electric baseboard heat or even a corn stove. And then just use
window air conditioners for cooling.

Having said that Im wondering if NOt installing duct work in such a
home may contribute to higher humidity levels?
 
M

Mike Wilcox

Steve said:
The few I have been in have no heating and cooling bills. The heat from the
appliances and people living within is sufficient to keep it warm. Over
heating is the issue, but dealt with with good air exchange. Added benefits
are less fire risk in forest fire zones, resistance to seismic activity,
reduced visible footprint, and silence.

We give a properly constructed earth bermed house 5 thumbs up.

--
Steve Spence
Renewable energy and sustainable living
http://www.green-trust.org
Discuss vegetable oil and biodiesel
powered diesels at
http://www.veggievan.org/discuss/

I agree, I can't see where a bermed house would be more expensive, it's standard
construction. Pretty much all you need is a poured foundation, a roof and south
facing exposure ;~)
I'd just build it on one level with south facing glass, everything else like
drainage, insulation, wiring and plumbing would be standard construction.
 
E

Ecnerwal

Bob Peterson said:
Financially you break even if you spend 7-10 times the amount of annual
energy savings you get on the initial building cost (depending on interest
rates).

OTOH, if you want to live in such a home just cause you want to, that's a
lifestyle issue, and might well be worth the extra money to you.

Exactly - it's a payback issue, not a question of whether it "works" (in
isolation from expense). How practial it is in a particular area may
also be climate affected. You are less likely to have moisture/mold
problems in a desert/dry location than a moist/humid location; or, if
you build one in Georgia (or even New York, where I've experienced the
soaking wet floor of a basement apartment in summertime), you probably
still need an air conditioner (or dehumidifier at minimum) to keep the
hot wet outside air from drenching every cool surface inside your bermed
home during summer. In Utah, this is not likely to be a problem most
(all?) of the time. I don't know where Missouri falls on the humidity
spectrum.

When I looked at doing things here in Vermont, it came out much cheaper
to go with a lot of insulation above ground, using structural insulated
panels, than to go below ground with concrete. If you are going with the
foam/concrete/foam (which costs a lot more, here) for tornado or termite
resistance (not big issues here), I doubt it matters much whether it's
buried or not - on the other hand, burying would not hurt, if it didn't
run the cost up much.

You can run the numbers yourself, easily enough - Look up the NREL data
for the site closest to you to get average temperature data, and compare
the amount of energy used to heat/cool with an exposed wall of whatever
insulation level you'll use for an above-ground wall exposed to the
outside air, .vs. the amount used to heat/cool an undergound part of
wall exposed to (guesstimated averages, since a bermed wall is close to
the surface, not deep and steady) of 40F in winter and 65F in summer,
unless you have a local water department which keeps track of soil
temperatures at various depths who can provide you with real numbers to
use.

It's best to put this in proper prespective by modelling the whole house
in a speadsheet, so that you can see the overall effect of the bermed
(or non-bermed) wall on the entire energy use for the house. Windows,
doors, and ventilation make very large impacts on energy use when the
walls, floors, and ceilings are well insulated.
 
S

Steve Spence

I do not use duct work. I never considered "duct work" traditional, and
never used it in a stick built home. We've always used baseboard hydronic
heat. In a super tight home, some ductwork is necessary for fresh air, using
a air to air heat exchanger. Exhaust the stale air, and use it to
preheat/cool the incoming air.

--
Steve Spence
Renewable energy and sustainable living
http://www.green-trust.org
Discuss vegetable oil and biodiesel
powered diesels at
http://www.veggievan.org/discuss/
 
A

Anthony Matonak

Would you NOt build an earth bermed home that doesn't have traditional
duct work and forced air systems?

I really do NOT like forced air heating.... and would instead prefer
electric baseboard heat or even a corn stove. And then just use
window air conditioners for cooling.

Having said that Im wondering if NOt installing duct work in such a
home may contribute to higher humidity levels?

You should consider hydronic heating systems. They typically involve
circulating hot water through lots of plastic tubing under your floor.
Nothing like having warm floors in the middle of winter. Since they
use a hot water heater you can use whatever you want to heat the
water. Commonly this is electricity, gas or propane but there are
a lot of solar water heaters out there and you can buy pellet or
corn fired units as well.

High humidity levels are usually not a concern during heating seasons.

You can also look at some of those micro duct cooling systems. A
central air conditioner with zone control is bound to be better
for a new home build than window air conditioners.

Anthony
 
A

alpinekid

Bob said:
I looked at this very question in the mid 80s. I don't know what the
numbers are today, but back then the payback period of utilities versus
increased upfront cost would have exceeded my lifespan.

Keep in mind modern stick built homes can be made very energy efficient.
many newer home pay no more than $1000 a year on heating and cooling
combined. If you end up paying $25k more for an earth bermed house, you
just never come out ahead if you save only a few hundred a year.

Financially you break even if you spend 7-10 times the amount of annual
energy savings you get on the initial building cost (depending on interest
rates).

OTOH, if you want to live in such a home just cause you want to, that's a
lifestyle issue, and might well be worth the extra money to you.

Besides utilities, a earth berm is also very quite inside. This is a
real advantage. They would make a lot of sense in the city but most
governments have taken away your right to build one or they make it even
more expensive than it needs to be.

You also have a lower wind profile and less of a visual impact on the
area you are building in.

The other thing to consider is the lower risk to future disruption. If
you use less energy even if, because of market forces right now, the
return is not there you are lower your risks in the future.

A purely economic analysis will lead you astray if you do not include
all the factors. That is why nuclear power plants are mistakenly taken
to be a good thing by some people. They don't count all the costs.

I have always found that by doing the right thing even if the economic
analysis doesn't show a saving, you will come out ahead in the long run.

You can think of it as generating good karma or just humility in
accepting the fact that you can not know all the factors so you have to
design by using principles other than money.

In the end you have to be happy. If they will allow it, build what you
want and enjoy the process. You will learn and the next one will be even
better. I do not know anyone who would not change something the next
time around.

Al
 
Ecnerwal said:
...it's a payback issue, not a question of whether it "works" (in
isolation from expense). How practial it is in a particular area may
also be climate affected. You are less likely to have moisture/mold
problems in a desert/dry location than a moist/humid location; or, if
you build one in Georgia (or even New York, where I've experienced the
soaking wet floor of a basement apartment in summertime), you probably
still need an air conditioner (or dehumidifier at minimum) to keep the
hot wet outside air from drenching every cool surface inside your bermed
home during summer...

Norman Saunders wrote "Berming is cost-effective. Burying is not."
I think of berming as at most 3 or 4' of soil against walls, vs soil
up to or over the roof. Seems to me this wouldn't affect humidity much.
When I looked at doing things here in Vermont, it came out much cheaper
to go with a lot of insulation above ground, using structural insulated
panels, than to go below ground with concrete.

Did you count the cost of foundation frost-protection? An inexpensive house
might be made by pushing high spots to the edge of the house to make a flat
site, then building the house, then back-berming the walls, with no digging
down to the frost line, as in a frost-protected warm foundation (tm).

Nick
 
I don't know where Missouri falls on the humidity
spectrum.

Well its pretty humid here in the summer as well....since I set right
next to the Mississippi river....which is the drain culvert of the US.

Missouri has four distinctive seasons. Hot and humid like Texas in
summer time (just shorter season)....... and colder in hell just like
Minnesota in winter (again just shorter length). LOL
 
When I looked at doing things here in Vermont, it came out much cheaper
to go with a lot of insulation above ground, using structural insulated
panels, than to go below ground with concrete.

Well that's why Im asking the question. My gut feeling is that
"could" be the case here in northeast Missouri where I live as well.
But Im FAR from an engineer or construction pro to even know for sure.
If you are going with the
foam/concrete/foam (which costs a lot more, here) for tornado or termite
resistance (not big issues here), I doubt it matters much whether it's
buried or not - on the other hand, burying would not hurt, if it didn't
run the cost up much.

Yes I have considered the foam/concrete/foam method as well. For both
above ground and earth berm BOTH.

Ive also thought abt SIP panels as well.
It's best to put this in proper prespective by modelling the whole house
in a speadsheet, so that you can see the overall effect of the bermed
(or non-bermed) wall on the entire energy use for the house.

I wish I was smart enough to do the above (spreadsheet analysis)...
but Im not.
Windows,
doors, and ventilation make very large impacts on energy use when the
walls, floors, and ceilings are well insulated.

Yep.... realize that doors and windows make a huge impact. So that's
why I will have minimal or no windows at all on north side.... very
few on east west side....and most windows on southern side.

Hopefully....an this is REALLY hoping.... I hope to be able to find a
building sight with good sloping southern exposure. But that may not
be possible to find something so ideal. But I will try. Will put an ad
in paper asking for lot/land with south facing exposure.

My "gut" feeling is that it will "probably" be MOSt cost effective for
me to stay above ground....and use SIP panels vs concrete. But again
that is pure speculation on my part. No hard data to back it up.
Hence the questions abt earth berming and such.
 
Norman Saunders wrote "Berming is cost-effective. Burying is not."
I think of berming as at most 3 or 4' of soil against walls, vs soil
up to or over the roof. Seems to me this wouldn't affect humidity much.

This is what I would do.... berming only. Not burying. Just so you
will know that is what Im thinking when asking my original question
Did you count the cost of foundation frost-protection? An inexpensive house
might be made by pushing high spots to the edge of the house to make a flat
site, then building the house, then back-berming the walls, with no digging
down to the frost line, as in a frost-protected warm foundation (tm).

Interesting! That might be better than trying to find a south facing
sloping lot then huh?

IOW..... you are saying to just push soil up against the walls with a
bulldozer.... on a flat lot....correct?
 
Bob said:
Besides utilities, a earth berm is also very quite inside. This is a
real advantage.

Yes. This is one thing Ive been told abt bermed homes. However Ive
also been told that above ground homes using SIP panels are very quiet
as well. I guess these SIP panels are really good at sound reduction
as well. true?
You also have a lower wind profile and less of a visual impact on the
area yo

Yes. Agreed
I have always found that by doing the right thing even if the economic
analysis doesn't show a saving, you will come out ahead in the long run.

Excellent point! So you are saying that sometimes crunching the
numbers do NOT work....cause the "playing filed" can all the sudden
change in a drastic way....such as energy costs increasing in a spike
fashion. Is this what you are implying? To allow for the "unknowns"
in the future when building a home like Im suggesting... even if it
costs a bit more up front?
 
You should consider hydronic heating systems. They typically involve
circulating hot water through lots of plastic tubing under your floor.

I like the idea of hydronic heat.... but NOT with tubes in the floor.
I think Id rather have baseboard hydronic units. I just don't like
the idea of burying tubes in the floor....and maybe springing a leak.
Also..... I don't like the idea of the "time lag" in starting and
stoping the heat if buried in concrete floor.
You can also look at some of those micro duct cooling systems. A
central air conditioner with zone control is bound to be better
for a new home build than window air conditioners.

Hmmm...... micro duct cooling?!!

Never heard of that. can you explain??
 
A

Anthony Matonak

Interesting! That might be better than trying to find a south facing
sloping lot then huh?

IOW..... you are saying to just push soil up against the walls with a
bulldozer.... on a flat lot....correct?

http://www.nahbrc.org/Docs/SubsystemNav/Foundations/3808_NAHB_fpsf.pdf

I think he means that in many places you have to dig down a bit to place
your foundation below frost depth. If you would normally have to dig
down 4 feet to place your foundation then a 4 foot berm might work as
well without you having to dig.

Anthony
 
Top