Saving through an energy-efficient home
Financial management isn't just about preparing for retirement or reducing taxes. It's also about looking for opportunities to save money over time. One way to accomplish this is by saving energy at home. An energy-efficient home is one that uses less energy on a day-to-day basis-and it can be accomplished with some simple lifestyle changes and eco-friendly home improvements. In some cases, these investments even qualify you for a tax credit, which can help defray your upfront costs. Here, Wealth Enhancement looks at several strategies you can adopt to save through an energy-efficient home.
The benefits of an energy-efficient home
The most obvious benefit of an energy-efficient home is that it may help to lower your energy costs. This matters more now than ever, with energy costs across the United States projected to be 10% higher in 2025 compared to just last year. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that the average energy-efficient home saves up to 25% on utilities compared to similar homes not designed with efficiency in mind. However, the benefits don't stop there.
By lowering energy usage, you can help the planet by reducing your home's greenhouse gas emissions. Your indoor environment might improve as well, with greater air quality and more consistent inside temperatures. Upgrades may even increase your home value, with homes rated as energy-efficient selling for 2.7% above comparable unrated homes.
How to make your home more energy efficient
If you would like to unlock the advantages of an energy-efficient home, here are a few ways to get started:
Get a home energy audit. Many local utility companies offer energy audits to help identify areas for improvement, such as air leaks around windows or doors, poor insulation, or inefficient appliances. Starting here can help you pinpoint where to focus your energy improvement efforts.Make some lifestyle changes. While some energy-efficient upgrades cost money, others simply require you to change some of your habits. For instance, turning off your lights, unplugging unused devices, and closing your blinds during the summer to reduce heat transfer are all easy ways to start saving by reducing energy consumption. Other easy fixes include changing your furnace filter regularly, lowering the temperatures on your thermostat and water heater, using low-flow faucets to conserve water, and even planting trees strategically to gain some shade.Use LED lighting. The case for energy-efficient lighting is strong, with LED bulbs using up to 90% less energy and lasting up to 25 times longer than traditional incandescent lighting.Reinsulate. A home's insulation can shrink over time, resulting in heat loss during the winter and heat retention during warmer months. Properly insulating your attic, walls, and floors can cut your energy bills and make your home more comfortable in the process.Replace your windows. Older homes tend to leak two to four times more air than newer homes, so you can improve energy efficiency by sealing leaks with weatherstripping and caulking. If your windows are older, you may also want to consider replacing them. Newer windows rely on more advanced technology that controls heat transfer, which could help reduce your energy usage by up to 30%.Upgrade your appliances. Just like older windows are less efficient, so are older appliances. By switching to Energy Star-certified appliances, you can reduce energy consumption and improve efficiency. Newer refrigerators, for instance, could reduce energy consumption by up to 9%, and newer dishwashers typically use less water and less energy.Review your heating and cooling systems. Upgrading your heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems can often deliver greater energy efficiency, but there are other changes you can make that also help. For instance, ceiling fans consume 99% less energy than central air conditioning systems. Even switching to a smart thermostat can help by automating and regulating your home's temperature control.Upgrade your water heater. Older water heaters typically hold a reservoir of hot water and expend energy to keep that water hot. Tankless water heaters, however, heat water on demand, which can reduce energy consumption by up to 34%.Go solar. Depending on where you live, you may be able to use solar energy to electrify your home, reducing reliance on the traditional power grid. Installing solar panels is a good way to reduce energy costs and could even result in financial credits if you can sell excess energy back to the grid.
Qualifying for tax credits
Enhancing your home's energy efficiency can deliver ongoing savings over time. You may even be able to defray the initial costs of certain home improvements with the energy efficient home improvement credit. Qualified energy-efficient home improvements made after Jan. 1, 2023, may make you eligible for a tax credit of up to $3,200, claimable for improvements to your primary residence made through 2032. The credit equals 30% of qualified expenses such as home energy audits, residential energy property expenses, and energy efficiency improvements.
The maximum annual credit is $1,200 for energy-efficient property costs and certain energy-efficient home improvements and $2,000 for qualified heat pumps, water heaters, and biomass stoves and boilers. Additionally, the credit has no lifetime dollar limit, which means you can claim the annual amounts for every year you make eligible improvements. That said, beginning in 2025, the credit is only available if the energy-efficient items were produced by a qualified manufacturer, so it's important to check in advance if the items you select qualify.
Bottom line
Making your home more energy efficient can deliver a range of benefits, from reduced utility bills and positive environmental outcomes to potential increases in the value of your home. With available tax credits and potential rebates or incentives from local utility companies, energy-efficient home improvements can be a sound investment that pays off in greater comfort and financial savings over time.
This story was produced by Wealth Enhancement and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
© Stacker Media, LLC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: President to Host Qatar's Prime Minister Amid Gaza Talks
Many Republicans initially balked at slashing $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds more than 1,500 public television and radio stations across the country, including NPR and PBS stations. The Senate on Tuesday voted to take up legislation to claw back $9 billion for foreign aid and public broadcasting, signaling that the Republican-led Congress is poised to acquiesce to President Trump in a simmering battle with the White House over spending powers. The 51-to-50 vote came after Republican leaders agreed to a handful of concessions to win the votes of holdouts who were uneasy with the proposed rescissions. G.O.P. leaders said on Tuesday they would strip out a $400 million cut that Mr. Trump requested to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known as PEPFAR, a move that the White House signaled it would not contest. Even then, some Republican senators refused to support a move that they said would relinquish their constitutional power over federal spending, forcing their leaders to summon Vice President JD Vance to the Capitol to break a tie and ram the legislation through a pair of procedural votes. 'We're lawmakers; we should be legislating,' Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said in a speech on the Senate floor on Tuesday night announcing her opposition to the package. 'What we're getting now is a direction from the White House and being told, 'This is the priority. We want you to execute on it. We'll be back with you with another round.' I don't accept that.' She was joined by two other Republicans in siding with Democrats in opposition to advancing the measure: Senators Susan Collins of Maine, the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Senate Republicans are hoping to approve the package as early as Wednesday. That would send it back to the House, which passed the bill last month but would still need to give it final approval by Friday for the cuts to be enacted. The push to rescind $9 billion in federal funding is part of a broader fight playing out between the White House and Congress as top Trump administration officials, led by Russell T. Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, are moving aggressively and unilaterally to expand the executive branch's control over federal spending, a power the Constitution gives to the legislative branch. In this case, the administration went through a formal process by submitting what is known as a rescissions bill, requesting that Congress go along with its efforts to cancel funds. Such measures are rare and rarely succeed, given how tightly Congress has historically guarded its power over federal spending; the last time one did was more than 25 years ago under President Bill Clinton. But Republicans have shown extraordinary deference to Mr. Trump since he took office in January, and the bill's momentum reflects their willingness to bow to his wishes even when it comes to programs that have historically drawn broad support. The measure would codify moves the administration has in some cases already taken unilaterally to slash federal spending and rein in the size of the government. The bulk of the funds targeted — about $8 billion — is for foreign assistance programs. The remaining $1.1 billion is for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds NPR and PBS. The request has infuriated Democrats, who have accused Republicans of reneging on the bipartisan spending deal they wrote and approved. 'If there's a discrete pot of funding that is not being spent well, if there are cuts that makes sense to include, if there are things that need to be updated, things that need to be reformed, let's have a conversation about what makes sense to rescind and improve as we write those bills in committee,' said Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee. A number of Republicans were also plainly unhappy with the request. It moved forward over the objections of Ms. Collins, who voted on Tuesday against moving it out of her own committee. She had pressed Mr. Vought for details on the measure at a hearing this month, arguing that the request his office submitted to Congress was overly broad. 'The rescissions package has a big problem — nobody really knows what program reductions are in it,' Ms. Collins said in a statement on Tuesday. 'That isn't because we haven't had time to review the bill. Instead, the problem is that O.M.B. has never provided the details that would normally be part of this process.' She said she recognized 'the need to reduce excessive spending' and had backed rescissions initiated by Congress. 'But to carry out our constitutional responsibility, we should know exactly what programs are affected and the consequences of rescissions,' Ms. Collins said. And even some Republicans who voted to advance the package said they were not thrilled with the precedent they were setting. 'It concerns me as perhaps approaching a disregard for the constitutional responsibilities of the legislative branch under Article 1,' Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said. 'This Congress will not be allowed to choose those specific cuts. That will be done by somebody in the Office of Management and Budget in the White House and in this situation, it will amount to the House and Senate basically saying, 'We cede that decision voluntarily to the executive branch.'' Still, Senate Republicans on Tuesday appeared ready to fulfill the rest of the White House's rollback request, which has largely already been enacted by executive order and the Department of Government Efficiency. The bill requires only a simple majority vote to pass. Many Republicans initially balked at slashing $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds more than 1,500 public television and radio stations across the country, including NPR and PBS stations. If the package is enacted, the federal funding for public media will dry up beginning in October. NPR and PBS would survive — they get a small percentage of their funding from the federal government — but the cuts would force many local stations to sharply reduce their programming and operations. Many public broadcasters receive more than 50 percent of their budgets from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 'I'm a supporter of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,' Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, said last month, adding that she was going to try to make sure the funding continued to flow. 'It's a lifeline for many of my small, rural communities.' But last week, Mr. Trump urged lawmakers to support the cuts, and threatened to withhold his support for any Republican who opposed the proposal. White House officials, including Mr. Vought, have made clear that they intend to send Congress additional requests to rescind funds. Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota, who had previously expressed deep qualms with the request, said he would support the package after being assured by top Trump administration officials that they would steer unspent funds 'to continue grants to tribal radio stations without interruption' for next year. 'Some of them are 80 to 85 percent funded by this program,' Mr. Rounds said. 'They wouldn't have survived without this. But they provide emergency services information for some of the most rural parts of our country in some of the poorest counties in the United States.' Benjamin Mullin and Megan Mineiro contributed reporting.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Should You Buy Nu Holdings While It's Below $13?
Nu benefits from being able to tap a huge unbanked and underbanked population, and it can lean on its tech prowess to attract customers. Revenue growth has been impressive, and the top-line gains have fueled rising profits thanks to strong unit economics. At a forward P/E below 23, Nu stock looks like a smart buy. 10 stocks we like better than Nu Holdings › Nu Holdings (NYSE: NU) was previously an investment for Warren Buffett-led Berkshire Hathaway. The conglomerate owned shares from the initial public offering in December 2021 to the first quarter of this year, when it completely exited its position. But just because Berkshire is no longer a shareholder, it doesn't mean the business lacks favorable qualities. In the past 12 months, this fintech stock has fallen 3% (as of July 11). However, it's up 24% in 2025 despite extreme volatility. Shares now trade below $13. Should you add Nu to your portfolio? Nu Holdings is a digital banking pioneer that operates in Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia. It offers customers various financial services that can be accessed via their smartphones. With a tech-forward approach and no physical bank branches, it shouldn't be surprising that it has been growing at a brisk pace. As of March 31, the business had 119 million customers -- essentially double from 60 million three years ago. The home market of Brazil is Nu's most important, where its 105 million customers represent 59% of that country's adult population. Even with such a high penetration, Nu's management says the company currently has only captured 5% of the gross-profit total addressable market in Brazil. There's clearly more potential for its financial performance to rise to get on par with its customer count. Mexico and Colombia are both relatively new markets for the fintech company, and the growth playbook is likely the same. It's all about leaning heavily on technology to provide an exceptional user experience. It will be important for Nu to expand its deposit base because it provides low-cost funding that fuels loan growth. And deposit accounts can be sticky, leading to long-lasting customer relationships. Investors can be optimistic that the growth ahead will still be robust. Nu could continue cross-selling products to existing customers while adding new customers. And in the future, it has other markets in Latin America, albeit smaller ones, that it can tap. The consensus view from Wall Street analysts is that revenue will increase 29% this year, before rising 24% in 2026. This is an encouraging outlook. Many fast-growing enterprises are primarily focused on acquiring new customers and growing their revenue as quickly as possible; producing net income is usually an afterthought. You were previously able to describe Nu this way. But in 2023, the business finally turned the corner financially, reporting positive net income based on generally accepted accounting principles. In 2024, net income was up 91% year over year. Plus, it showed a 74% gain in the first quarter of this year. Not having to deal with the overhead of physical bank branches helps. Nu's unit economics, or the financial situation of each customer relationship, is outstanding. During the first quarter of 2025, its monthly average revenue per active customer was $11.20. And the data shows that the longer a customer stays with Nu, the more lucrative they are for the business. On the other hand, it only costs $0.70 per month on average to serve a customer. It's no wonder that as Nu scales up, it can boost the bottom line. Between 2024 and 2027, diluted earnings per share are set to grow at a compound annual rate of 36%, according to analyst estimates. That's a wonderful forecast that should help drive the stock price higher. With a fintech platform that's clearly resonating with people, rapid revenue growth, and expanding profits, you would be forgiven for assuming that Nu stock trades at an expensive valuation multiple. But this isn't the case at all. As of July 11, investors can buy shares at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of just 22.6. And with Nu Holdings trading below $13, this opportunity looks ripe for the picking. The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Nu Holdings make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,053% vs. just 180% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 873.17%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $680,559!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,005,670!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025 Neil Patel has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Berkshire Hathaway. The Motley Fool recommends Nu Holdings. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Should You Buy Nu Holdings While It's Below $13? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
France Adds Support for Using Most-Potent Trade Tool on US
(Bloomberg) — A growing number of European Union member states want the bloc to activate its most powerful trade tool against the US should the two sides fail to reach an acceptable agreement by Aug. 1 and Donald Trump carries out his threat of 30% tariffs on the US's largest trading partner. The Dutch Intersection Is Coming to Save Your Life Advocates Fear US Agents Are Using 'Wellness Checks' on Children as a Prelude to Arrests LA Homelessness Drops for Second Year Manhattan, Chicago Murder Rates Drop in 2025, Officials Say A French-led charge to deploy the EU's so-called anti-coercion instrument is backed by more than half a dozen European capitals, according to people familiar with the matter. Several member states are more cautious, while others have yet to express a position, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The issue was discussed at a meeting of trade ministers on Monday, the people said. Benjamin Haddad, France's minister for European affairs, said earlier this week that the response from Brussels should include the option of using the tool which gives officials broad powers to take retaliatory action against EU trading partners. Those measures could include new taxes on US tech giants, for instance, or targeted curbs on US investments in the EU. They could also involve limiting access to certain parts of the EU market or restricting US firms from bidding for public contracts in Europe. The first-ever use of the ACI would likely provoke an even wider transatlantic trade war, given Trump's warnings that retaliation against American interests will only invite tougher tactics from his administration. 'In this negotiation, you need to show strength, you need to show force, unity and resolve,' Haddad told Bloomberg Television on Monday. 'We can go further' than the countermeasures announced by the European Commission targeting almost €100 billion ($116 billion) worth of US trade, he said, referring to the ACI. The commission, which leads on trade matters on behalf of the bloc, has so far said use of the tool is premature as negotiations continue. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters on Sunday that 'the ACI is created for extraordinary situations' and 'we are not there yet.' The overwhelming preference among capitals and EU officials is to keep negotiations on track and find a negotiated outcome to the impasse, while maintaining the threat of retaliation with countermeasures that are proportional to the damage from US tariffs. EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic will travel to Washington for further talks with his US counterparts this week, according to commission spokesman Olof Gill. Talks between the US and EU have continued despite Trump threatening in a letter sent over the weekend to impose a 30% tariff on most of the bloc's exports starting next month, alongside existing 25% duties on cars and car parts, and 50% levies on steel and aluminum. EU Commissioner Michael McGrath told Bloomberg Radio on Wednesday that he expects a deal to be reached by Aug. 1, though Brussels was 'surprised and disappointed' to receive Trump's letter. 'These are challenging complex negotiations,' McGrath said. 'We remain focused as an EU on the substantive discussions.' On Tuesday, Trump — who is known for escalating his rhetoric when negotiations bog down — said that he was likely to impose tariffs on some pharmaceuticals as soon as next month. That could hit European drug companies particularly hard. Ongoing Talks Before the latest threats from Washington, EU officials were hopeful they were edging toward a preliminary framework agreement that would allow negotiations to continue beyond the deadline. Under the envisioned accord, the bloc would face a 10% levy on most exports, with limited exemptions for some industries such as aviation and medical devices. The anti-coercion tool was designed primarily as a deterrent, and if needed respond to deliberate coercive actions from third countries that use trade measures as a means to pressure the sovereign policy choices of the 27-nation bloc or individual member states. The instrument was enacted as part of the EU's effort to boost its trade defenses after the US imposed tariffs on the bloc's exports during the first Trump administration. Another factor was China's decision to place restrictions on Lithuanian goods after Taiwan opened a trade office in the Baltic nation. The commission can propose use of the tool but it is then for member states to determine whether there is a coercion case and if it should be deployed. Throughout the process the EU would seek to consult with the coercing party to find a resolution and may also collaborate with like-minded partners facing similar pressure. (Updates with trade chief's trip to Washington in ninth paragraph) Forget DOGE. Musk Is Suddenly All In on AI How Starbucks Is Engineering a Turnaround With Warm Vibes and Cold Foams How Hims Became the King of Knockoff Weight-Loss Drugs Thailand's Changing Cannabis Rules Leave Farmers in a Tough Spot The New Third Rail in Silicon Valley: Investing in Chinese AI ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati
