Though I’ve been involved in the passive house movement for years and on the board for the Phius Alliance Chicago since 2017, this was my first time attending Phius Con. For me, there were two key takeaways from the conference. Retrofits and Cost as a Barrier to Progress.

The conference began with many great talks including a sobering discussion from Andreas Holm about the energy situation in Europe right now. He highlighted the importance of designing for resiliency as well as the short time frame we’re working with. We really only have about 20 years left and that time is going to go fast. 

We really need to address existing buildings which are a huge part of the climate problem and need to be upgraded if we are going to meet our goals. 

Costs Offer Desirable Paybacks for Larger Scale Projects

Another talk on the Phius Con 2022 Design Competition winner 425 Grand Concourse offered balance to the keynote by Andreas Holm highlighted the fact that we have now figured out how to build the necessary buildings at only a slight premium now and that taking into account the ongoing energy and cost savings these buildings will provide, the payback period that developers will have to work with is only 12 years. After that it is all just money in the bank. 

This first photo from the presentation about the building’s development shows that while the building specs aren’t significantly above code, the air tightness is.

They then went on to show the percentage premium of these building upgrades over standard building code. 

In this next slide on the left, they break down the premium for costs of developing to the Phius standard over code which comes to $4,150,000 or $13.35 per square foot. Not a small amount of money. 

The following slide on the right then shows the operating costs for 425 Grand Concourse and how they would compare to a building that was built to baseline developement standards. The operating costs come to $1.55 per square foot or $482,824 for the entire building for the year versus the $3.46 per square foot of a standard built development.

At this rate, the payback period for this building would be 12 years which was a number that made him very happy as a developer. 

They mention that what is not included in the cost analysis are all of the costs associated with health and labor-related cost reductions of avoided risk buy building to the Phius standard including heat-related illnesses, respiratory illnesses and noise-related illnesses.

Cost as Perceived Obstacle by Industry

Precipitate, an architecture, planning, and research consulting firm, had a table in the exhibitors hall where they were asking attendees to place 3 balls into the cups that they felt were the biggest barriers to progress for the Phius movement. Education and cost were by far leading the way when I came up to place my balls. I’ve long been involved in the drive to further education around building science but this demonstration also confirmed for me that cost, or the perception of cost, is a huge factor that really needs illumination.