Quoted from the New York Times - click for original article
July 11, 2008
All Grown Up, and Glad to Drop
By LOUISE TUTELIAN

GRETCHEN and Michael Harrison’s Tree Top Ranch is 200 acres off the Pacific Coast Highway north of San Francisco, dominated by redwood, Douglas fir and pine trees. It has a five-acre olive grove; apple, peach and pear trees; and a pond with a Finnish hot tub on its bank.

In the four-bedroom, four-bath contemporary concrete and glass house on the property, cedar ceilings soar to 25 feet and an Alaskan wolf pelt is mounted above the oversized fireplace. Sheets of copper sheathe the kitchen appliances. A glossy slab of Hawaiian koa wood in the shape of a surfboard, mounted on a copper wedge, forms the kitchen table.

In the living room, an 11-foot-high wall of glass tilts over a view of distant Timber Cove Point. On the patio, a telescope stands ready to catch glimpses of the point, where waves crash, seals bark and ospreys swoop.

The seemingly idyllic family ranch in Timber Cove, Calif., in Sonoma County, is paradise for Gretchen and Michael, a renowned pediatric surgeon who established the first fetal surgery center in the nation. But for their daughter Brittany, one of the couple’s four grown children, the place once felt like purgatory.

Around the time she turned 11, she began to loathe the regular weekend jaunts to remote Timber Cove, two and a half hours north of the family’s permanent residence in San Francisco. The winding ride was alternately mind-numbing and nauseating, she concluded, and at the end of it there was nothing to do: the closest town, Jenner, has no movies, no pool, no tennis court, and only three stores.

The location of the Harrison ranch is indeed spectacular, but its natural beauty was boring to a tweener who missed the scene at home, and her distaste for the place lasted into her mid-teens.

“I wanted to go to sleepovers,” recalled Ms. Harrison, who is now 22 and recently graduated from U.C.L.A. “I resented being away from friends and missing out on things. I sulked and whined.”

Those days are over. She describes the ranch in superlatives, noting its peacefulness and the house’s palette of copper, slate, stone and cedar. She shows it all off to friends and this year hosted a combined graduation-July 4th party there. That isolated location? It’s a welcome retreat. Nothing to do? Hikes and a dip in the hot tub are welcome diversions.

“I appreciate the escape of it — the absolute clean, fresh air, the stars at night,” she said. “I just love it.”

So what changed? Nothing except Brittany Harrison’s perspective.

IF you keep it, they will come. That’s what some owners of second homes have discovered as their complaining teens become young adults. The same kids who despised being dragged on vacation take a second look at that summer home and see a place to unwind, spread out, and — let’s be blunt — snag free room and board.

The parents get added value, too: quality family time minus the drama of the teen years, a trying passage when many kids recoil at even being seen with their parents, let alone vacationing with them. Once these children hit their 20s, experts say, they are likely to return to a summer home, lured by nostalgic childhood memories and a desire to reconnect with friends and family.

“They are a lot less egocentric and don’t feel the necessity to distance themselves from their parents,” said Jeffrey Jensen Arnett, a professor of psychology at Clark University and the author of “Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road From the Late Teens Through the Twenties.” “It’s more relaxed and comfortable on both sides.”

Laurence Steinberg, a professor of psychology at Temple University and an expert on parent-adolescent relationships, puts it more plainly: “Young adults are living on a very tight budget, and having parents who stock the cabinet with everything you love is huge.”

There is evidence that the shift begins soon after kids leave for college. As a teen turns 20, a second home that once seemed overly familiar and boring may suddenly seem a getaway for a stressed-out and cooped-up student.

By college graduation, the house may have morphed into a landing pad where a newly minted B.A. can job hunt or take far-flung friends. And by the late 20s, when the clan may include boyfriends or girlfriends, spouses and even a new generation of children, some families have successfully recast the second home as a multigenerational meeting place.

For Samantha Fahrbach, 21, the family beach cottage on Fire Island, N.Y., is a respite from her hectic life as a student at Duke University. There are no cars, no Internet service, and only five stores. “I appreciate having an excuse to be cut off out there, away from everything that keeps me connected to everyone else,” said Ms. Fahrbach, whose permanent home is in Larchmont, N.Y.

She didn’t always feel that way.

“When I was 13, and everyone was having their bar and bat mitzvahs, that was definitely the hardest time,” she recalled. “All my friends were at two or more parties every weekend. They were the places to see and be seen in your dress.”

Her mother, Ruth, remembers that year as well. “I was screaming because we had a mortgage and we hardly ever went out to the cottage,” she said. “I could have gone to Paris.”

The situation has now reversed: Samantha and her brother, Max, 24, are annoyed when the two-bedroom cottage and its small guesthouse are rented. They know how to open and close the property for the season, decorate it for Fourth of July and abide by other hallowed traditions.

“They know that come Saturday morning, I want my chocolate doughnut because that’s the ritual,” Mrs. Fahrbach said. “Sam said she hopes I realize if we ever have to sell a house, it has to be the Larchmont house, not Fire Island.”

For a 20-something in the work force, the summer place can provide a cost-effective respite. Page Robinson of New Canaan, Conn., thought Nantucket was “dead” throughout middle school, when he spent all summer at his family’s home there. Now 26 and a reporter for Mergermarket, a financial publication in New York City, he enjoys spending time on Nantucket fishing, hiking, swimming and, of course, partying.

Currently living with his parents in Connecticut to save money, Mr. Robinson will ferry to his family’s gray shingled saltbox at least three times this summer. And he’ll have company. “I always have friends who want to go,” he said.

Referring to all four of her grown children, Sharon Robinson, Page’s mother, said, “We found that when they come back, they never come alone.”

She and her husband, Frank, are rapidly being outnumbered. She recently mounted a wooden sign in her kitchen that reads, “Guests of Guests May Not Bring Guests.” “It wasn’t a joke!” she said.

MARCOS SALAZAR, 29, the author of “The Turbulent Twenties Survival Guide” and creator of www.turbulenttwenties.com, offers a rationale for a summer home’s magnetic pull on the post-college crowd.

“After you graduate, you lose a sense of community,” he said. “Your college ‘family’ gets spread out all over the country. Being able to go to a vacation home with them once in a while helps alleviate that loss.”

The Robinsons have just added an extra living room in Nantucket — a parents-only enclave. Mrs. Robinson said: “I told the architect, ‘No, you don’t get it — this isn’t for togetherness, this is for separateness.’ This is so Frank and I don’t have to play ‘Who’s on First.’ ”

Brian and Joan Drum built not just an addition, but an entirely new house at Lake Naomi, a resort near Pocono Pines, Pa. The Drums, of Millburn, N.J., bought their first home at the lake in 1980, and their two children spent all summer, every summer there with Mrs. Drum. That worked well until puberty.

“Teenage years get a little dicey when you leave your core group of friends,” recalled the Drums’ daughter, Carly Drum-O’Neill, 30. “I pushed to go home earlier in the summer, or take the bus home, or drive home — anything to get home. I felt as if they were torturing me, but it was a rare occurrence when they let me go home.”

Instead, she was expected to attend the kids’ camp on the lake until she aged out, and then become a counselor there. In the process, she became such a superb tennis player that she was recruited by Penn State. Fortuitously, the drive from school to home took her right through the Poconos.

“It was the midpoint of my drive, so we all met there,” she said. “That’s when I started seeing being in the middle of the woods as a relaxing thing.”

Constructed on the same footprint as their previous home but twice its size, the Drums’ new 3,900-square-foot Arts and Crafts-style house has separate suites for their children and spouses. There is also a bunk room for grandchildren and those on the way (Ms. Drum-O’Neill is expecting in August).

“I actually built this house to deal with three families,” said Mr. Drum, the president of Drum Associates, a New York-based executive search firm where his daughter also works.

The house was completed in May and officially opened on Memorial Day — not a moment too soon for Ms. Drum-O’Neill. Since she and her husband, Michael O’Neill, occupy a one-bedroom apartment in Hoboken, N.J., the spacious house on the lake is more seductive than ever.

“You don’t have to ask me twice to go,” she remarked. “I’m ready every weekend.”

Cindy and Bob Evarts are building their dream retirement home in West Virginia, on land Cindy's ancestors helped settle in the 1700s.

They have picked a scenic hilltop site and invested what she called "real money" in architectural plans for a 3,300-square-foot house with a front and back porch and an open great room with a stone fireplace. A couple in their forties, they recently moved from Columbia to Martinsburg, W.Va., to oversee the construction that will be taking place five miles over the mountain in Tomahawk.

As energy costs continue to soar, however, they have become concerned that those expenses could compromise their long-term plans.

"I want to build a house that I can live in till I die, but I don't want the energy costs to be what kills me," Cindy Evarts said.

"We're both teachers, so our fixed retirement is not going to leave a lot of room for skyrocketing energy costs," she said. "I want my dream house, but now that also means a house that is as off the grid as monetarily possible."

Going off the grid means building a house that doesn't connect to traditional utilities such as electric and gas lines. The Evartses probably won't accomplish that. But they, like others who are building or renovating homes now, want to ensure that the energy crisis does not become a financial crisis down the road.

They recently consulted Michael McKechnie, who along with his brother, Pete, owns Mountain View Builders in Berkeley Springs, W.Va. His company designs and builds energy-efficient homes that harness alternative energy sources.

"Most people, just like Cindy and Bob, draw up plans for their dream house, and the tonnage of the house -- how much energy it will take to keep the heating and cooling system running comfortably for the humans inside -- is an afterthought. Nowhere on Cindy and Bob's plans does it mention how much energy a house of this size and shape uses," McKechnie said. "Looking beyond whether or not it is good for the environment, traditional energy sources cost money that you never get back. And these costs are only going up."

McKechnie outlined the major steps to building a house with the lowest possible energy costs and perhaps an eye to going off the grid at some point: "Design your house so it uses the sun's passive energy to its fullest potential, make sure the envelope around your house is tight, invest in renewable energy systems that use the sun and the wind to make free energy, and buy heating and cooling systems that use energy more efficiently."

Here's a closer look at some of the options:

Passive solar design means orienting your house so that it takes advantage of the sun's light. The Evartses had been planning to have the front of their house face the driveway leading up the hill. At the site, McKechnie spread out the blueprints and then took out his compass. He pointed out that the long, window-filled side of the house, situated as planned, faced west.

"A house whose windows face west will heat up too much in the summer sun and not enough in the winter sun -- the opposite of what is desired," he said. "Better that the house's longest side faces a southern exposure. Put your windows on this side, and allow the winter's sun to help warm the house at a cost of zero dollars. Also, with the right awnings or shades on the windows, the high summer sun will be blocked."

As Cindy took in her new potential view, she said, "Who would have thought that by orienting a house differently that you could make your house more efficient?"

Advantage: Energy that costs nothing, unless a couple of trees need to be cut down to allow the sunlight in.

Disadvantages: Most new houses are built in subdivisions where the front of the house faces the street. Passive solar design might mean your house would face the back yard or side yard, and many people would be uncomfortable with this.

Many building practices that have become routine focus on retaining heated or cooled air, such as installing efficient windows. But it's possible to make that envelope even tighter so that even less energy escapes.

· The double-wall system: The house, as planned, is a five- to six-ton house, meaning the energy it takes to heat and cool it would be substantial. McKechnie suggested using a double-wall system.

That means the house's skeleton is built with two exterior, parallel walls, 3 1/2 inches apart, using inexpensive two-by-four lumber. In a double-wall system, the outside wall is covered with plywood and then siding, such as vinyl or brick. The inner wall is covered with drywall, just as it would be in a standard house.

The space created between the walls is then filled with three layers of insulation. Generally, it's R13 formaldehyde-free fiberglass insulation, resulting in an R40 exterior wall. The R value indicates the degree of insulation, and the higher the number, the better-insulated the house. Exterior walls in a standard American house are typically insulated to an R13 level. The first and third layers run vertically, and the middle layer runs horizontally.

This doesn't change the design of the house, but it does tighten the envelope considerably. McKechnie estimated this will increase the cost of the house by only about $4,000 but will lower the heating and cooling energy cost by 40 to 50 percent.

Advantages: Allows a tight envelope to be formed around your house so little energy escapes. Creates deep window sills -- a real plus when decorating.

Disadvantage: Slightly higher initial cost.

Choosing a power source, heating and cooling system, or hot water heater can mean wading through a lot of often-contradictory information. There are two types of systems, those that convert natural energy (solar and wind) and those designed to use traditional energy sources at a higher efficiency rate (high-efficiency heat pumps, geothermal and radiant).

Also, there are tax incentives to consider, something that neither Cindy nor Bob Evarts was aware of.

Tax incentives help save money for those considering alternative energy sources. The federal government offers 30 percent of the cost of installation, up to $2,000, for both solar water heaters and photovoltaic solar electricity systems. These incentives go away at the end of the year unless Congress extends them.

Many states and localities offer incentives, too. (There's a searchable database of these incentives at http://www.dsireusa.org.) In the Washington area, Maryland leads the pack. It already offers up to $2,000 for solar water heaters and $3,000 for solar electricity. As of July 1, the state will also offer grants to homeowners for solar, geothermal and wind systems. Virginia and West Virginia don't offer such incentives. The District's Department of the Environment will be posting details of its Renewable Energy Demonstration Program in July on its Web site, http://www.ddoe.dc.gov. Homeowners can submit a proposal for funding to implement a renewable and replicable energy system.

Systems that use sun or wind to produce energy will take you at least partially off the grid.

· Solar. A photovoltaic system is expensive but an excellent way to go fairly far off the grid. Good, unobstructed southern sun is necessary for the system to work well. The electricity you generate from the sun powers anything in the house.

Advantages: Clean and, once paid off, an investment that keeps on producing. If you make more energy with the sun than you need, it can go into the utility grid, spinning your meter backward and generating a credit.

Disadvantages: Expensive: It would cost $40,000 to $60,000 to take an average American house completely off the grid with solar. The same size house with a double-wall system would cost $30,000 to $40,000. Panels are still a bit bulky.

· Wind. Wind energy has improved dramatically in the past few years. Systems are now quiet, and if the wind blows at more than 8 miles per hour, it creates energy that can be used for anything that requires electricity in your home, including heating or cooling.

Advantages: Takes your system 20 to 30 percent off the grid when there is a good wind. If you produce more energy than you need, it goes into the utility grid, spinning your meter backward and generating a credit.

Disadvantages: No wind, no energy. There are often ordinances on tower height.

Standard heating and cooling systems rely on heat pumps, central air conditioning and gas- or oil-powered furnaces.

· Heat pumps. A high-efficiency heat-pump system provides the same comfort as its standard-efficiency brethren but uses 10 to 20 percent less energy. A heat pump is the most efficient system for the money invested. The expense is about 15 percent to 20 percent more than the cost of a standard system and, as a result, these pay for themselves in three to five years.

Advantages: Refrigerant that's less damaging to the environment than the refrigerant used in standard systems. Zoned systems put energy only where needed instead of everywhere. Why heat the whole house when you need the warmth only on the first floor? Will cool even when outside temperatures top 100 degrees.

Disadvantages: Costs more initially. Needs a backup heat source if temperature goes below 20 degrees outside. This backup can be electric or fossil fuel (propane, fuel oil) and is designed to kick in as needed.

· Geothermal. This system uses the natural heat of the earth to heat and cool a house. It works well in large and small homes but requires electricity to run.

Advantage: Extremely efficient.

Disadvantages: The initial outlay is sizable, and although it is efficient, you remain on the grid.

· Radiant heat. This system consists of pipes installed beneath the floor that heat the floor. Similar to hot water baseboard heat, it is a low-temperature radiator system that runs through every square foot of your floor. Electricity does not work well for this system and so is not recommended. Propane is the fuel of choice, though solar energy can complement this system.

Advantage: Less expensive than geothermal.

Disadvantages: Not necessarily less than high-efficiency heat pumps, especially when you factor in the cost of propane vs. the cost of electricity. Does not cool.

A water heater is one of the biggest energy users in the house. Traditional systems keep a lot of water hot all the time using electricity or gas.

· On-demand hot water. On-demand systems heat water only as it is needed. They have been used throughout Europe since World War II. Important note: If the water needs to be treated, it must be treated before it enters the hot water heating system.

Advantages: Saves energy, cost-efficient.

Disadvantages: You are still on the power grid. The systems that run on electricity do not work nearly as well as those that use propane. Propane costs have almost doubled in the past year.

· Solar water heaters. A water system requires only a couple of solar panels and heats water throughout the year. Given the tax incentives, this system earns back the cost in three to seven years and then keeps going.

Advantages: Tax credits, heats water off the grid.

Disadvantage: Cloudy days mean your backup system, usually electric or propane, will turn on automatically to make sure you are never without hot water.

Many people consider solar-powered electricity too expensive to be viable now. However, the costs of traditional and alternative energy sources are predicted to converge in the coming years as the price of fossil fuels keeps going up and that of alternative sources, particularly solar, keeps coming down.

What does this mean for the home buyer with limited funds but a desire to one day go off the grid? One option is to build a home that is solar-ready. This means roughing in the pipes needed for solar energy and labeling them for later use. Cost? Just the price of the pipes, which is less than $100. This means that if a homeowner decides to convert, contractors do not need to tear down drywall to install the pipes. It is also recommended that the pipes for radiant energy be installed before the concrete is poured, for the same reason.

Cindy and Bob Evarts are fairly sure they will make sure their house's longest side faces a southern exposure, use the double wall system, the solar water heater and, as a minimum, rough in the pipes so the house is solar ready. "Mike actually changed the way we see our house being built," Cindy said. "He opened our eyes to a number of great possibilities."

It might be the ugliest home improvement. Last month, I finally did something about my radon problem.

Two men came and drilled a five-inch-wide hole in my home's bottom floor. They attached a suction system of white pipes and a big round fan to draw air -- and radon -- from underneath the house and vent it out through a black pipe stuck in the roof. The work took six hours and cost $1,200 -- about what I paid a pro to retile my bathroom.

Most homeowners have heard about the health hazards of radon, a radioactive gas that emanates from rocks, soil and water. Outside, it's relatively harmless, but inside it can collect in dangerous concentrations, seeping in through cracks in the home's foundation and other openings. Radon is the No. 1 cause of lung cancer among nonsmokers, and one in 15 homes has an elevated level prior to treatment, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The agency estimates 750,000 to 1 million U.S. homeowners have taken radon-reduction steps over the years and says those steps, along with techniques in new construction, have helped prevent 6,000 deaths.

Despite the risks, radon until recently has ranked pretty low on many homeowners' action lists, including mine. You can't see, smell or taste it, which makes it -- unlike mold -- easy to ignore. The federal government recommends but doesn't mandate remediation for homes with elevated levels. And let's face it: In the scheme of renovations, there are sexier ways to drop 1,200 bucks than drilling a fat hole in the basement.

But as homeowners and builders rush to make dwellings healthier on all fronts -- from nontoxic paints and organic lawns to formaldehyde-free kitchen cabinets -- radon is emerging as a hot button in both new construction and resales. The National Association of Home Builders' Green Building rating program, which kicked off in February, requires installation of mitigation systems in certain radon-prone regions. Last year, the EPA launched a campaign encouraging the use of radon-resistant materials in new construction -- such as plastic sheeting under a home's slab and a built-in vent pipe where a fan can be attached. New studies are examining whether granite and other stone countertops play a role.

"As people become more interested in the green lifestyle, it encompasses radon as well," says EPA spokeswoman Kristy Miller. It has taken time to build public awareness, just as it did with smoking, she says. "We've been on that for 45 years or more. With radon, now we're seeing a culmination of all these issues."

In 2006, 10.6% of single-family detached homes were built with active radon-reduction systems in place, nearly double the percentage in 2001, according to the national home builders group. State and local building codes in nearly half the states mandate some level of radon control, and the number is on the rise, says Peter Hendrick, executive director of the not-for-profit American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists. A number of local groups, like the Pennsylvania Builders Association, encourage members to spend a bit more up front to install radon-reduction systems. "I would encourage any builder that it's the right thing to do -- it's cheap to put in and it's in the client's best interest," says member Frank Thompson of Sweetwater Builders, near Pittsburgh.

RADON REMEDIATION

 

As part of Gwendolyn's renovation, a white pipe (top) was drilled through the garage floor, which shares her house's slab. The pipe then funnels up into the garage's attic (bottom) where a fan pulls the air out from underneath the home and vents it to the outside. The one downside: she can hear a whoosh whenever she parks the car.

As for resales, while no federal or state regulations mandate home radon testing, the U.S. Surgeon General issued an advisory in 2005 urging all Americans to have one done. The majority of states have some form of disclosure law requiring the home seller to inform the buyer about property defects, such as radon -- but only if the seller knows about them. Many experts believe this discourages testing and say a better model is an Illinois law that took effect this year. It requires sellers to provide information about radon risk in general, whether the home has been tested or not.

Meantime, some radon labs say they're seeing a steady rise in testing. Sales of radon test kits have jumped 40% in the past five years at Radon Testing Corp. of America, a major national testing lab in Elmsford, N.Y. "The number of prospective home buyers asking for tests has increased even though the real-estate market has dropped," says RTCA's president, Nancy Bredhoff.

There is concern, though, that the push for more testing and remediation is overkill, burdening home builders and potentially slowing sales in a tough housing market. And while most scientists agree about radon's long-term risks, some question the benefits of reduction efforts. "Only after many years would a successful radon abatement program begun today be likely to reduce the number of lung cancers, and then only by a very small percentage," according to the Web site of the Health Physics Society, a scientific and professional organization focused on radiation-safety issues.

Where I live, in a rocky New York county, the indoor radon average is slightly above the government's recommended take-action level of 4 picocuries per liter of air (pCi/L). My home was built in 1978. When I purchased it in 2003, the seller neglected to stipulate on the required disclosure form if the home had been tested for radon. (In the haste of the deal, I didn't notice.) When I tested, the levels came back between 5 and 13 pCi/L -- a level higher than the EPA standard but not off the charts, according to pros I talked with. Most suggested retesting down the road, and when I did, the levels still hovered around 5 to 6 pCi.

RADON ROADMAP

 

A black vent pipe is all that shows from the outside, barely noticeable to visitors.

PROFESSIONAL TESTING: The U.S. Surgeon General and EPA recommend all homes be tested and fixed if the radon level is 4 pCi/L or more.

Find links to qualified testing and mitigation professionals in your state at www.epa.gov/radon² and via the National Environmental Health Association (www.neha-nrpp.org³) or the National Radon Safety Board (www.nrsb.org⁴). The latter two groups offer proficiency listing/accreditation/certification in testing and mitigation.

DO-IT-YOURSELF TESTING: Inexpensive, easy-to-use radon test kits can be purchased in stores like Home Depot and online at sources including www.radon.biz⁵, www.radonworld.com⁶ and www.rtca.com⁷.

HEALTH INFO: Studies about radon's health effects can be found through the nonprofit American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists (www.aarst.org⁸) and the World Health Organization (www.who.int⁹).

Since my score could present a selling problem later, I decided to take action. Unfortunately I had to start from scratch, installing an "active soil depressurization system," which pulls air from underneath the home and reroutes it outside, often through the roof. These types of systems reduce radon readings below the 4 pCi action-level in 99.9% of cases, according to Bill Angell, chairman of the World Health Organization's Radon Prevention and Mitigation Working Group, which plans this year to release standards for radon resistance in new homes and reduction in old ones. "Virtually never do we find a home we can't get below the threshold for action," he says. Other tactics include sealing basement cracks and installing a special ventilator.

The soil depressurization technique I used is called a "sub-slab suction" system, and involves a fan and piping that is drilled through the floor slab and routed up through hidden areas, like closets, and then typically into an attic and then outside. An alternative is to run the pipe up the home's exterior, where it is more likely to be visible. The cost of fixing an existing home typically ranges from $800 to $2,500; the cost to builders to install similar measures in new homes ranges from $350 to $500.

After checking reputations with local real estate agents, I called several pros for bids. (Many state health departments list qualified contractors; for those that don't, the EPA offers standards to be followed.) Each one pronounced my home "very difficult" because the lower level was all living space (hard to drill a hole inconspicuously) and I had no main attic (Where to put the fan?). The man I ultimately hired, David Barber of Acceptable Environment in Newburgh, N.Y., suggested drilling in my garage, which shares the home's concrete slab, and running the pipe and fan though a small attic space in there.

The upside: It isn't an eyesore. The downside: I can hear the fan's whoosh every time I park the car.

A week after Mr. Barber mitigated, I ran a new radon test. The result: 2.8 pCi/L -- about a point below the federal limit. I'm safer on the home-sale front, but because I am in my home's lower level a lot, I may pay Mr. Barber another $150 to run a second pipe from beneath a lower-level stairwell to the garage attic fan. My goal: getting down to at most 2 pCi/L, a level that puts my lifetime risk of radon-related lung cancer as a nonsmoker at 4 in 1,000, according to the EPA. Meantime, I'm focused on finishing a happier renovation project: the kitchen, where I hope the only gas I'll think about is from my new range.