Google is your friend...

here is just one article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_energy_rating

Here is a link that might be useful: HERS

Thanks, LuAnn....I have read all that before but what I don't get out of that is if 60 is really good in this day and age. I was looking for some feedback on what others have been seeing in their homes to know if really 60 is good or not. I really don't know where today's standards are in regards to this. I know 100 is the baseline but I don't have a good feel for what kind of home that represents.

HERS 100 point house is least efficient.
goal is a zero energy house with HERS score 0.

however, without ground source heat pump,
solar panels, top tier insulation package etc
most houses that are efficient...(mid to high
range hvac system, better windows, tight
construction) rate in the 60-70 range.

bigger houses have more leeway than smaller
homes. in a small home every componet has
to be just right, where as in larger homes there
are more tradeoffs.

it takes a LOT to get a home below 60 points.
what efficiency upgrades are included in your package?

also...if the energy rater works for the builder, they can
do 'batch testing' meaning one of every 6 homes is tested.
personally I've worked more with homeowners hiring me than with production builders, this way the homeowner
pays for my expertiese rather than the builder. homeowner
can share the info, but verification & testing of home information goes to the homeowner.

production builders can expect you to cut corners & allow things to pass that don't really achieve what was spec'd.
this has been my experience in my 15 years
in the business.
I have worked with (not for) builders who do custom
homes with great success, just these indivuduals are
rare in my area.

100 point home is one that just meets code. goal with
HERS is a minimum of 30% better than code.

best of luck.

Our HERS rating came out to be 52 for a 3k sqft house.

My builder stated basically what energy rater posted that to get HERS even lower would take a lot of work & money.

Fortunately, my builder's schtick is efficient homes so he ticked the right boxes:
mid to highly efficient hvac system, great windows & smart designed tight construction & location.

ok...thanks for the info everyone....keep it coming!

My HERS rating came back at 58 for a 3000 sq ft. house 2 story three car garage. Upgraded insulation and windows, hvac system, solar "ready" but panels not installed.

I'm working on a home plan that has been modeled with a HERS at just under 60. The garage is detached, the home is 4500 sq ft, 25x60' footprint, with ICF basement walls, SIP main and upper floor walls and SIP roof; optional solar panels (not included in this score).

Finding a good energy modeler has been important for determining the cost/benefit ratio of various choices, i.e. SIP panel thickness, window types, etc. In this case it is not worth the extra cost for 2" thicker SIPS since the most important factor at this point is air-tightness over R-value. I also chose an architect and G/C who have experience with energy efficient structures and LEED certification.

Here is an interesting comparison showing HERS vs energy usage (my apologies if the link is too commercial - I have no relation to them, I just wanted to give them proper credit for the idea):

Here is a link that might be useful: Deciphering the HERS Index: Or Trying To

I'm a big fan of sips view west.
why not the 6" panels over the 4"?
least for the roof.

even sips can leak if junctions are not air sealed.
but overall it is the best system around.
having seen thermal scans & blowout of walls
of icf, I'd never use it. sips would be my
hands down choice.floors, walls & roofline.
& I'd park my truck under the house..LOL!

if your contractor has experience with sips
its a great choice.

best of luck.

Thanks energy rater la. I've been a fan of your sage advice and appreciate your well wishes. SIPs don't seem to get a lot of love on this forum so I'm happy to hear you approve. SIP floors even?!? SIPs make sense as this is an urban infill lot and I don't want the house to loom over the 1920s neighbors. The energy savings and noise buffering are also very important.

This is a build in Minneapolis so the choice was between 8" vs. 6" walls, with 10" vs. 8" roof panels. The 8" walls would only save $100/year total in energy costs so not worth the added expense. Good point about the sealing being critical, glad my G/C was well recommended. There will be a full basement (frost line is at about 4'), ICFs seemed the best bet there.

my HERS came in at 49. Air tightness tested out originally at 1.18 @ 50 pac, but we are doing some tweaks and they are retesting this week. I want to get below 1. This is one of the important aspects of your score. The numbers above are all good numbers. People that put focus on efficient home construction and design first, other cosmetics second.
60 is a decent number, and many production builders would think this is a very good number. While it is not bad, things can be improved, but it may not always be cost effective. One thing about HERS is it does not really take into account how you will use your home, so ultimately you will decide how efficient it is. For example, if your home has a lot of gables and complex air barrier plane, it will perform much worse than a simple, solar design with good, properly sized windows yet the HERS rating of either home may be very similar. On the flip side, you can load your home with expensive triple pane windows, but if you are over 18% glass to floor, it will give you a worse score.

As others mentioned, there are things that go into it. The design, materials used in the build, air testing, hvac equipment, water heater, appliances, lighting, etc. This all is taken into account for the score. Unless your builder is responsible for selecting lights, appliances, and the overall home design, window selections, etc, then he can not promise a certain HERS score. Perhaps instead of focusing on a score, discuss options about being Energy Star 3.0 certified. You may get credits from your electric and gas company as well for a certified home. In my area, the rebates add up to about $6000 for 10% better than a 3.0 home.

view west, we do a lot of raised houses, this is hurricane alley and although we are not near the gulf...the bayous flood easily. in certain areas houses are required to be raised 4', most opt for 8' and create garage, garden storage etc under the house.

I agree that the upgrade isn't worth it for walls. but
your cold location R-values differ from our hot humid ones.

years ago we had a sips builder here, it was a sad day when he left the trades & stopped sharing his expertiese here.

lzerarc, I hadn't realized you were building your own home. impressive numbers...but then this is far from your first rodeo. congrats.
have you been keeping up with the ashrae 62.2 & Joe Lstribuk (sp) debate. recently joe released his ventilation strategy. serves hot humid climates much better than ashare. of course...he taught us that back in 2006..but it has been & still is an interesting topic.
well for energy nerds like me!

One of our soon to be neighbors has the same model as we do and got a score of 49. Our builder uses spray foam so I'm not sure if that has a lot to do with it.

From what I read in the information they gave us 60 is a good score and about average these days.

I dont think building scientists and ashare will get along. Same with building codes. These things try to make a one size fits all code, but as well know in the business that can not work.
This is my first high performance home I have done for myself, yes. Better practice what I preach!
Obviously not my first project ;)

Our official HERS score came back at 28... but we were aiming for a very efficient house from the get-go. The overall energy use should be lower once we get the solar installed and the other auxiliary things but even without any of that, 28 is a score we are quite happy with. Our 0.2ACH makes a large difference. Kudos to the builder and his attention to detail on the sealing.

Completed construction on a 3500 sq with 2 car attached garage and my HERS rating was in the low 40's - but that included higher end windows (top line Kolbe) and full foam insulation envelope including foaming the floor of the bonus room over the garage and on and on. In my city we have to build to EarthCraft standards as well. So while I have very low energy costs for a comparative sized home - I am sure I will never see the payback in construction costs to energy savings - but the house lives incredibly 'comfortable' in terms of heating/cooling and consistent temps throughout the home at any given time. It is nice though that my energy costs is less than a 1/3 of what it was costing me to keep my smaller home (2400 sq ft) built in 1927 comfortable.

I'm very impressed when anyone can get below 50. I find 50-60 a pretty achievable sweet spot with an easy payback period. To get below that you're looking at super expensive windows, very upgraded insulation, solar or geothermal. It gets exponentially more and more expensive.

I agree with the above - I should note I was able to get to my mid 40’s score without solar panels or geothermal - I think my biggest driver was high end windows and full foam insulation - including even spraying the 9 foot high poured concrete walls with foam in the unfinished basement space

My 28 was without my solar panels and we don't have geothermal either (just a minisplit). Good passivehaus-certified windows (none of that anderson, pella, or marvin stuff -- even their high-end windows are thermally terrible), lots of dense-packed cellulose insulation (not expensive) combined with a builder paying attention to air sealing and a architect looking out for thermal bridging and other 'passive' sources of loss/gain.

Yeah - dfbdecatur - that is a practice without a reasonable payback period - either financially or energy wise.

Joe has got the right idea. Agree about windows - just looked at an Anderson quote - you want how much for u = 0.28?!?

Anyone concerned about these things should always check with energy raters who can give the best local advice. In NC, we have something called the "HERO" code which is a good place to start for cost effective insulation/window etc standards. Duke Energy will pay rebates for building to that standard and for lower HERS scores. An energy rater will give you cost estimates for misc upgrades - not always perfect but better than someone on a forum in a different climate.

I will probably shoot for 50. Going lower is usually best done by solar in my climate - any by best, I mean cost effective. 2x6 walls with cellulose in my mild climate. Foamed roofline since I am going to have ducts up there. Good window shading and minimize E and W windows.

In Ontario, the most popular "builder's package" in the Ontario Building Code is "J", which scores HERS 61.