Like any honeymoon, the first couple of weeks weeks felt like a dreamy holiday away — lounging, pacing around, staring blissfully out the windows and admiring the details — getting to know each other away from reality.

Following this, we moved in for real and began to unpack, post honeymoon. Then the stark reality of the things remaining to do, the real unpacking and the beginning of maintenance slowly set in.

Now, weeks beyond that, we are starting to get to know the systems and get really familiar with each other, the house and us. Hence our first product review, the toilets.

Being a green home, we made every effort to find the best, most accessible and local products for the money and in the case of the toilets, we decided on the Kohler Water Sense — San Raphael™ Comfort Height® Pressure Lite® 1.0 gpf one piece elongated toilet with the Sloan FlushMate power flush!

Basically, this is a great toilet, doing everything it should and looking stylish while doing it. However, being one of those purchases you make blind, or at least not from experiencing it in the show room, I think there are some details worth discussing.

First, when they said power flush, we had no idea. This toilet uses the municipal water pressure to charge up an inner vessel within the tank with a combination of water and compressed air (Flushmate). Then, when you press the handle, a mini jet fighter engine blows one gallon of afterburner at the problem and down the drain, in a  similarly aggressive fashion as the toilet on plane on your honeymoon (If you are one of those people who are used to sitting on the toilet while you flush, I don’t recommend it).

Along with the water savings listed, there should be a sones rating. Cool technology but really loud. The good thing is that it is only loud for a second, then while it charges for a few more seconds, it’s much quiter than a typical toilet. So the trade is even I guess. Now in most plushy homes, this may not be an issue, but in our hard surface and sparsely fixtured place, sound get’s around, and around.

The second comment on the toilet is it’s rather tall. You’ll notice it’s called Comfort Height but we’re not entirely sure why. Perhaps the name calls on the same sense of irony as “Pressure Lite”. I’m 5′-10-3/4″ and the toilet is uncomfortably high at times. My 5′-4″ house boss definitely finds herself with toes pointing to the floor and the kids don’t stand a chance. Apparently Kohler suggests that Comfort Height is the height of an average chair, making it easier to sit and stand up. Indeed, if I was dining on the toilet, ok, but for many a subtle squat position may make the experience more rewarding.

On the positive side, the toilet looks great and is as sustainable as they come. It’s of very high quality, made in the US and uses very little water compared to traditional flushers. It’s important to note that so far, the toilets are also doing fine in combination with our grey water reclamations system which is using recovered sink and shower water for use by the toilets.

A side note is the need for a change of habit. Like many, we have a tendency to use toilet tissue for noses and the toilet for the disposal of such. In the case of the Pressure Lite flushers, they blow the tissue to bits resulting in a pulp solution worthy of paper making that is difficult to flush in one go. So if you are at all itchy to have a completely clear bowl (just paper no solids) then you’ll need to change that habit. The toilet is not a garbage can kids.

However, despite the Kohler San Raphael’s little ironies, I’d have to say we’re getting along just fine.

That said, this is where it ends. In the new home construction market, the incentive cupboard is mostly bare. No way you say. Way. Believe it or not, the majority if not all of the incentives are directed toward the retrofit market, as well as non-profit and commercial – quietly avoiding new homes. Tough question why but the official answer is that the retrofit market has more to gain than the new homes market being that older homes are less efficient, new homes are built to a better standard, so incentives aimed at old homes will be more effective, shooting fish in a barrel. Also, retrofits are a more significant proportion of the voting population… Did I say that.

That said, if the majority of homes that can make a difference are legacy, and new ones represent an insignificant amount, what difference will it make in the grand scheme of things to include them too? How much more would it really cost or what’s it take extra to incentify the few new homes? Strange enough to wonder if there is another reason.

I think if you were to really think about it, you could consider that with time in the equation, putting tax money into an old home to plug this leak and that will bring it up to a moderate, though better, energy standard than it was. Obvious. This will be likely good for another 10-15 years before the next or subsequent owner decides it’s time to reno and improve once again – but likely not before. So, the chance of energy improvements on this legacy before another decade is slim.

On the other hand, putting tax money into a new standard home that could take it from marginally better – and I mean only marginally in many cases with some builders (http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/2009/new_home_nightmares/main.html) – to much better could mean a home that far exceeds legacy standards for the next 25 to 30 years before a reno is required or desired. This equates to almost twice as long. Over simplified logic but logic at that. Because this is at least arguable, it leaves me wondering why new homes could be left out at all when they stand the greater chance of reversing our negative trend of destructive consumption on our planet and resources.

Never the less, this is the case and it’s not about to change.

Enough complaining. There are a few incentives that exist for new green homes worth pursuing. The difficulty in finding and interpreting these is another discussion but with the help of Google and some assistance from our geothermal equipment supplier we were able to locate the following incentives, tax rebates or rumours. I’ll certainly let you know how it goes.

It seems the incentives for new homes are focused around Geothermal, Solar, Wind, Insulation, and of course appliances which include all items installed that become “property” of the home — requiring install rather than furniture — ie. Refrigerators, dishwashers, ovens, HRV’s and built-in fans, AC units, etc.

For us, we will pursue the straightforward — geothermal, appliance and HRV credits or tax deductions. It’s a long shot if insulation has a chance since the wording in the website is very convoluted. For clarity on geothermal, I contacted our Canadian heat pump manufacturer as I believed they should know and happily they turned out to be very helpful.

Randy Waylett – National Sales Manager of Northern Heat Pump says:

“Ontario Government:  http://www.mei.gov.on.ca.wsd6.korax.net/english/energy/renewable/index.cfm?page=geothermal
Ontario Government should match the amount received from the Canadian Government program – $4375 ??

Canadian Government:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/residential/personal/retrofit-homes/retrofit-qualify-grant.cfm?attr=4
Should qualify for rebate of up to $4375 for the geothermal system installation – both retrofit and new system construction

The Ontario Government has been matching the Federal Government rebates which used to be $3500 for the Fed Government program and $3500 matched by the Ontario Government program for a total of $7000.

Please see http://www.mei.gov.on.ca.wsd6.korax.net/english/energy/renewable/index.cfm?page=geothermal and click on Financing A Geothermal System.

Now the Federal Government program has been increased to $4375 and I am assuming the Ontario Government is still matching?? You should check with your installing contractor of the heat pump system who will need to certify the system through the Canadian GeoExchange Coalition (CGC) in order to qualify for these rebates. They should be familiar with the process required and all the paperwork that needs to be filled out in order to get the rebate monies, etc.

Regards, Randy

CGC website:  http://www.geo-exchange.ca/en/geoexchange_financial_support_grants_rsc70.php“

In addition to Randy’s advice, I located:

Geothermal
Retail Sales Tax – 3.4% of Invoice
http://www.rev.gov.on.ca/english/refund/windgeo/
http://www.rev.gov.on.ca/english/notices/rst/44b.html

$8750
http://www.homeperformance.com/ontario-rebates-toronto-hamilton-london-barrie-orillia
http://www.homeperformance.com/ontario-geothermal-rebate-grants-for-geothermal-heating

Real Property – Appliances, lighting, room A/C
http://www.rev.gov.on.ca/english/notices/rst/68.html

HRV
$750
http://www.homeperformance.com/ontario-hrv-rebate-grants-for-heat-recovery-ventilator


To sum up, finding and understanding whether we qualify for grants or rebates has been tedious at best. Many many hours have been spent and up until recently, we have been sure there were none. Though our supplier, 4 Seasons could be educated in this area of understanding, as most certainly it would help them to sell a unit or two, they haven’t offered assistance in this perspective as I can guess is similar with other suppliers for various practical reasons; mainly that information just isn’t available to them any more than it is to you and me.

So the short of it is, do your homework, ensure your supplier is qualified and certified by the CGC to do the work, as is 4 Seasons, and inquire if the supplier is willing to do the paperwork for you or provide guidance as part of the deal up front – you don’t want this to be an additional cost as it can be time consuming.

Last note, the grass is never greener over there for me but the US have a leg up on us with a 30% rebate on the geothermal bill – wow:
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=tax_credits.tx_index#c6

There were some very good and telling questions – many of which were impossible to answer however in such a short time. For example, we are often asked “what does building LEED cost above building regularly?”. A good question but a philosophical one as I’ve highlighted in previous posts. See Rationalizing Building Sustainably or Sustainable Building is Upside Down.

Another great question was were there any hurdles or impedances with the city? Ikes. Again, the answer is deep but in short – some very small practical issues. Yes there were a couple of situations which were unusual and unreasonable. For example when we submitted our finished plans to the city for approval, we were told we couldn’t use cork flooring in the kitchen…

When we asked for a reason, we were told that it wasn’t durable enough for the kitchen — no further explanation. No consideration that it is recycled, recyclable or even that the subjective judgment didn’t take into account the user and their habits for wear. Never-the-less we adjusted the plans to not show cork and resubmitted. Now this seems like no big deal. But think this through. How much time did this cost us and how much money aside from time delay — Branthaven had to do the paperwork to submit twice, go down to the city twice, and have an architect redraw the plans for us and reprint multiple sets, twice. I would estimate that this arbitrary and uneducated off hand conclusion by the city cost us $1000 or more dollars.

So what. In the grand scheme of things this issue is tiny – compared to the mounds of paper and plans, compared to the overall budget. But, if you consider that every dollar we have to make has an exponential negative effect on the ecology and resources than it was more like tens of thousands or piles of carbon footprint. But I think the greater issue is in what the situation represents.

What it represents is a general lack of understanding or engagement by the city. That this person practices in the city without an education on sustainability in even a basic sense is challenging. That this person, independent of the standards within the city, can affect a project that is looking to make change and improve our community is addidng difficulty to an already tedious endeavor. And also that their is no process internally at the city to connect planning, engineering and permitting to understand the needs and differences in LEED or Green builds so that they can have a more communicative and proactive involvement with this leading form of construction within their own fence. This is the real issue – the city is not engaged and doesn’t yet have a process for change management with regard to LEED or sustainability. They suffer, like most of the industry, from ignorance and a passive resistance to change – leaving it for someone else to deal with, the next shift, on another day.

To reach sustainable goals, we all have to get involved, all absorb the R&D costs and do our part. This can’t exclude the city, or any of us.

A week prior to the deadline to our decision, we received an email through our website from Lorie Boucher of Ottawa who is also building a sustainable home with very similar features and had engaged this supplier. She offered a big warning in a very professional manner by explaining in detail what had transpired for her and a second owner in Kingston Ontario to unsatisfactory results – as they put it – disastrous and costly. They pointed out at that time that their homes were yet completed and so they were hoping the supplier would rectify.

With stories in hand I approached Daro in one of our meetings and asked their perspective. The supplier’s retort was that they had not installed the product and that the installers were to blame in both cases. While I listened to this defense, I recalled that Lorie had said that the president of the company did the install himself…

So lesson 1 and 2. One, look for and check references and two, confront any negative references to see how the supplier handles it.

In the end the supplier failed to repair the substandard jobs and as a result the home owners are unhappy with the product and will have to find means to redo or rectify on their own at their own costs.

As a result of this experience we are glad to have moved on to another supplier. Now, one more thing that comes out of this – the power of the web to connect and protect consumers from the false claims, poor workmanship and less than quality products that seem to be prolific in the building industry. By being vocal and looking out for each other, we can create an environment where it is next to impossible to sell consumers down the river.