Choosing between energy efficiency or water savings for green building points?

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

Totally hear you on the “shiny points” trap - it’s way too easy to get sucked into the checklist vortex. I’ve seen people pick high-efficiency toilets for the points, but then keep their old drafty windows… and guess what, the place is still freezing in winter. From my end, I usually lean toward energy stuff first, just because it impacts comfort so much - nobody wants to sit in a sauna in summer or an icebox in January. Water savings are great, but unless you’re somewhere with real shortages, the day-to-day impact just isn’t as obvious. Sometimes I wish the points system gave more weight to what actually matters for the people living there, not just what looks green on paper.

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

You nailed it about the points system sometimes missing the mark. I’ve been going through this exact debate for our build, and honestly, energy upgrades just seem to make more sense for daily life - especially in a colder climate. We looked at low-flow everything, but it’s hard to notice the difference unless you’re tracking gallons. Comfort and lower bills are way more obvious when you invest in insulation or better windows. It’s easy to get distracted by what looks good on paper, but living with the choices really puts things in perspective.

Comfort and lower bills are way more obvious when you invest in insulation or better windows.

- Totally get where you’re coming from. In colder climates, energy upgrades like insulation and high-performance windows really do pay off - both for comfort and your wallet.
- Water savings are great, but unless you’re in a drought-prone area, the impact can feel pretty minimal day-to-day.
- I’ve seen clients regret skimping on envelope upgrades, but rarely the other way around.
- That said, sometimes low-flow fixtures are easy wins if you’re close to a points threshold... just depends how much hassle you want.
- You’re right - living with the choices is a whole different story than just chasing points.

I’ve seen clients regret skimping on envelope upgrades, but rarely the other way around.

Couldn’t agree more with this. I once tried to save a few bucks by going for cheaper windows - regretted it every winter. Drafts everywhere, and my heating bill was a joke. Water-saving fixtures are cool, but unless you’re in California or somewhere bone-dry, you just don’t feel the impact as much. If you want to actually *feel* the upgrade every day, envelope improvements are where it’s at. Chasing points is one thing, but living with your choices is what really matters.

I totally get where you’re coming from - after moving into our place, I realized just how much difference a solid envelope makes. We splurged on insulation and better doors, and honestly, it’s the one upgrade I notice every single day. But I keep wondering if there’s a sweet spot? Like, is there a point where you’re just overdoing envelope stuff and should maybe shift focus to water or something else? Sometimes it feels like chasing diminishing returns...

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

You’re spot on about that sweet spot - there’s definitely a point where packing in more insulation or going for the highest R-value doors just doesn’t give you the same bang for your buck. I’ve seen folks obsess over every last air leak, but at some stage, you start seeing smaller gains compared to what you’re spending. Have you looked at blower door test results? Sometimes it’s eye-opening to see how tight is “tight enough.” At that point, I usually suggest shifting gears - maybe to water efficiency or even indoor air quality. Curious if you noticed a change in comfort or bills after your upgrades? That’s usually my measuring stick.

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

I totally get what you mean about hitting that point of diminishing returns. We just finished our build last year, and honestly, I got a little obsessed with sealing up every crack, too. After the third round of caulking and another blower door test, our builder kind of laughed and said, “You’re good, trust me.” Turns out, he was right. Our energy bills dropped a bunch after the first few upgrades, but after that, the changes were barely noticeable.

What really surprised us was how much of a difference the water-saving stuff made. We went with low-flow fixtures and dual-flush toilets, but the real game changer was the rainwater harvesting for irrigation. Didn’t think it’d matter much, but our summer water bill was half what it used to be in our old house. Plus, it was way cheaper to set up compared to the high-end insulation.

Here’s what worked for us, step by step:

1. Started with basic insulation and sealing (attic, exterior walls, windows).
2. Did a blower door test - didn’t chase perfection, just aimed for “very good.”
3. Shifted focus to water: swapped out showerheads, faucets, and toilets for WaterSense models.
4. Added a rain barrel system for the garden.

If you’re stuck choosing, I’d say get your house “tight enough” for comfort and reasonable energy savings, then go after the water points. It’s easier to see a payoff, especially if you’re in a spot with high water rates or drought worries. And honestly, I haven’t noticed any drop in comfort since we stopped fussing over every draft.

Hope that helps a bit. Sometimes it’s just about picking the low-hanging fruit first and not sweating the tiny stuff too much.

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

Funny, I went down the same rabbit hole - spent way too much time and money chasing that last bit of air sealing. At a certain point, you’re just paying for bragging rights, not real savings. What really moved the needle for me was swapping out the old irrigation system for drip lines and a smart controller. Water bill dropped fast, no noticeable impact on comfort, and way less hassle than re-insulating everything again. I’m still a fan of tight envelopes, but after “good enough,” water’s where I saw the most bang for the buck.

I get where you’re coming from - chasing diminishing returns on energy upgrades can be a money pit. But I’d argue it depends a lot on your local climate and utility rates. In my last project, energy costs were brutal, so tightening up the envelope paid off fast. Water savings are great, but if your area’s got cheap water and expensive electricity, the math shifts. It’s all about context... sometimes the “obvious” answer isn’t so obvious once you crunch the numbers.

Honestly, I get the math, but I’ve seen folks regret skipping water upgrades when droughts hit. Our city hiked rates overnight a few years back - nobody saw it coming. Sometimes the “cheap” resource turns expensive real fast. Just something to chew on.

Sometimes the “cheap” resource turns expensive real fast. Just something to chew on.

That’s a fair point, especially with how unpredictable things have gotten lately. I’ve worked on a couple projects where clients were laser-focused on energy efficiency - solar panels, triple-glazed windows, the works - but barely gave water a second thought. Then, bam, summer hits, city slaps on restrictions and suddenly everyone’s scrambling for low-flow fixtures and rain barrels.

I get why people chase the bigger energy rebates, but honestly, I’ve seen more headaches from ignoring water upgrades than energy ones. Out of curiosity, has anyone actually tracked which ends up saving more money long-term? I mean, are we talking a difference of hundreds or thousands over, say, ten years? Sometimes it feels like we’re just guessing and hoping for the best.

Honestly, I think it really depends on the region and utility rates. In some places, water is still dirt cheap compared to electricity, so the payback on water-saving upgrades can be pretty slow. But if you’re in a drought-prone area or somewhere with tiered pricing, those savings add up fast - especially when restrictions kick in. I’ve seen projects where the water bill barely budged after upgrades, and others where it dropped by half. It’s not always predictable, but I wouldn’t say energy headaches are less common - HVAC issues alone can be a nightmare if you cut corners there.

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

Funny timing - I just wrapped up a build where the owners were dead set on water savings because of the local drought rules. We swapped in low-flow everything, rain barrels, the works. Their water bill dropped, but honestly, the real shocker was how much their old HVAC system was bleeding money. Upgrading that made a way bigger dent in their monthly costs than the water stuff did. I guess it really does come down to where you are and what your utility rates look like. Sometimes the numbers surprise you...

CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?

That’s exactly what I’ve been wrestling with - my wallet cares way more about the energy bill than the water, but my conscience keeps poking me about droughts. Where I live, electricity costs are brutal, so putting money into insulation and a heat pump made way more sense for payback. But I do get why folks focus on water if it’s a local pain point. Sometimes you just have to balance what feels right with what actually saves you cash... Not always an easy call.

my wallet cares way more about the energy bill than the water, but my conscience keeps poking me about droughts.

Honestly, I get where you're coming from. Around here, the energy savings stack up fast, especially with rising rates. That said, I’ve seen projects lose points on certifications because they ignored water - local codes can be strict. Sometimes it’s not just about payback but what’ll get your plans through permitting without headaches. If you’re in a drought-prone area, skipping water-saving features can come back to bite you later. It’s a balancing act, but I’d lean toward whatever’s going to keep your project moving smoothly and your long-term costs down.

Title: Choosing between energy efficiency or water savings for green building points?

I hear you on the headaches with permitting and local codes. But honestly, I’ve seen too many projects get tunnel vision on what’ll pass inspection or save a buck up front, only to regret it later. My neighbor put in all the latest energy-saving tech - solar, high-efficiency everything - but skipped low-flow fixtures and rainwater capture because “water’s cheap here.” Fast forward a couple of years, and now there are mandatory restrictions every summer. He’s kicking himself, because retrofitting is way pricier (and messier) than just doing it right from the start.

I get that energy bills sting more month-to-month, but water’s a sneaky one. Rates can jump when you least expect it, especially if droughts keep getting worse. Sometimes it feels like you’re betting on which crisis will hit first... but I’d say don’t underestimate water issues just because they seem less urgent today.

I’ve found that initial cost calculations rarely tell the whole story, especially when it comes to water systems. Energy efficiency upgrades are easy to quantify - there’s a clear payback period, utility rebates, all that. But with water, the math gets murkier. Like you mentioned, rates can spike out of nowhere, and restrictions can hit fast. I’ve seen irrigation bans wipe out expensive landscaping investments in a single season.

One thing I’m curious about is how people are weighing local climate trends in their decisions. For example, in my area, we’re seeing hotter summers and less predictable rainfall. That’s pushed me to prioritize greywater reuse and drought-tolerant landscaping over some of the flashier energy options. Has anyone factored in projected local water scarcity or climate models when deciding which points to chase? Or is it still mostly about what the local code requires right now? Sometimes feels like we’re all just guessing which resource will get scarce first...

Title: Choosing between energy efficiency or water savings for green building points?

- Right there with you - water is way harder to predict than energy. You can model utility rates, but local drought rules? Total wildcard.
- I’ve started looking at regional climate projections, but honestly, they’re not always that helpful for site-specific stuff. Sometimes it feels like you’re just hedging bets.
- Local code is usually the minimum, but I’ve learned the hard way that waiting for code to change means you’re already behind. Lost a bunch of new sod a few years ago when the city changed watering rules mid-summer... not doing that again.
- These days, I lean toward drought-tolerant plants and dual plumbing for future greywater, even if it’s not required yet. Upfront cost sucks, but it’s cheaper than replacing landscaping or retrofitting later.
- Energy rebates are nice, but in my area, water’s turning into the real pain point. If you’re in a spot with unpredictable rain, I’d say water-saving measures are worth bumping up the list.

Title: Choosing between energy efficiency or water savings for green building points?

Honestly, I thought energy was going to be my big concern when I started building, but water’s been the real headache. Our lawn was toast last summer after the city cut watering days with almost no notice. I’m still not sure if it’s smarter to go all-in on rain barrels and drought plants or just skip the grass altogether. Is anyone actually happy with their low-water landscaping? I keep hearing mixed things about how it looks after a couple years.

I hear you on the water headaches - energy gets all the attention, but drought just sneaks up and wrecks your plans. We ditched grass a couple years back and went heavy on native plants and mulch. Honestly, it looked kinda scraggly at first, but now it’s filled in and I’m actually into it. Not everyone loves the "wild" look, though. Rain barrels help, but they don’t stretch as far as you’d think during a dry spell. If you’re leaning low-water, just give it time - it gets better after that awkward first year.