Home Forums General Discussion Return on investment relative to R values Reply To: Return on investment relative to R values

Vicki Cowan

There is some data on this in some of the Beacon research reports which I could pull out for you Nik.  But as Paul says it will vary by location.

But I have to completely agree with Norman – once you’re insulating there’s no cheaper time to maximise the amount – especially when you consider that over time the product R value undoubtedly reduces – if it’s something like macerated paper, then that degradation curve is very fast.  We’ve all seen ceilings that were  “insulated” where all the loft has gone, rats have ripped it apart, blown in products have ended up at one end of the house etc.  They might have had (unlikely) acceptable installed R values but 10-20 years later are virtually ineffective.

Also I have to say insulation is not a product you should be looking for a return on investment for.

I don’t think EECA and Treasury have done us any favours here by focussing on that aspect.  People don’t ask what the return on investment is for their granite sinkbench, family holiday to the Gold Coast, or pretty much any other purchasing decision – from the mundane to the expensive – Auckland is full of heat pumps that have a very poor return on investment because they are almost exclusively being used for cooling. And the winter temperatures are so mild that the payback period if they are used for heating is decades beyond the expected life of the appliance. But people still buy them.

A good level of insulation needs to be regarded as a basic requirement in a house – you don’t live in a house without a front door, a toilet or a roof, you shouldn’t live in one without decent insulation.  That’s why its mandatory in the Building Code.

So yes I could give you some data- send me an email to remind me, but remember using it just perpetuates this focus on the what I think is the wrong thing.

Sorry for the rant – you got me on a Monday morning!