In Canada, are options available to subsidize conversion of a house into an energy efficient house?
There may be more, but a good starting point would be the ecoENERGY Retrofit Grants and Incentives.  Natural Resources Canada's ecoENERGY Retrofit program provides financial support to implement energy-saving projects. There are different application processes for homes, commercial and institutional buildings and industrial facilities. Together we can reduce energy-related greenhouse gases and air pollution, leading to a cleaner environment for Canada. Also, there was a temporary home renovation tax credit about a year back, but that no longer exists and nothing has replaced it yet.
Honestly, the best way to manage this risk is to manage your savings appropriately. Many experts recommend that maintain a reasonably liquid account with 6-9x your minimum monthly expenses for just this occurrence. I know, easier said than done. Right? As for insurance, I can only speak for what is the case in the US. Here, most mortgages will require you to get PMI insurance until you have at least 20% equity in your house. However, that insurance only protects the BANK from losing money if you can't pay. It doesn't save you from foreclosure or ruining your credit.  Really, the type of insurance you are talking about is Unemployment insurance which all states in the US make available to workers via deductions from their paycheck.  The best advice, I suppose, is to keep your expenses low enough to cover them with an unemployment check until you have accumulated enough savings to get through a rough patch. That may mean buying a less expensive home, or just waiting until you have saved a bigger down payment. If you didn't plan ahead, and you are already in the house, another option might be to extend your mortgage. For example from a 20 to a 30 year to reduce your payments to a manageable level. A more risky option might be to convert to a variable rate loan temporarily, which typically carries a lower interest rate. However, it might be hard to secure a new loan if you don't currently have an income. "Largely, because stock markets are efficient markets, at least mostly if not entirely; while the efficient market hypothesis is not necessarily 100% correct, for the majority of traders it's unlikely that you could (on the long term) find significant market inefficiencies with the tools available to an individual of normal wealth (say, < $500k). That's what frequent trading intends to do: find market inefficiencies.  If the market is efficient, then a stock is priced exactly at what it should be worth, based on risk and future returns.  If it is inefficient, then you can make more money trading on that inefficiency versus simply holding it long.  But in stating that a stock is inefficient, you are stating that you know something the rest of the market doesn't - or some condition is different for you than the other million or so people in the market.  That's including a lot of folks who do this for a living, and have very expensive modelling software (and hardware to run it on).  I like to think that I'm smarter than the far majority of people, but I'm probably not the smartest guy in the room, and I certainly don't have that kind of equipment - especially with high frequency trading nowadays. As such, it's certainly possible to make a bit of money as a trader versus as a long-term investor, but on the whole it's similar to playing poker for a living.  If you're smarter than most of the people in the room, you might be able to make a bit of money, but the overhead - in the case of poker, the money the house charges for the game, in the case of stocks, the exchange fees and broker commissions - means that it's a losing game for the group as a whole, and not very many people can actually make money.  Add to that the computer-based trading - so imagine a poker game where four of the eight players are computer models that are really good (and actively maintained by very smart traders) and you can see where it gets to be very difficult to trade at a profit (versus long term investments, which take advantage of the growth in value in the company). Finally, the risk because of leverage and option trading (which is necessary to really take advantage of inefficiencies) makes it not only hard to make a profit, but easy to lose everything.  Again to the poker analogy, the guys I've known playing poker for a living do it by playing 10-20 games at once - because one game isn't efficient enough, you wouldn't make enough money.  In poker, you can do that fairly safely, especially in limit games; but in the market, if you're leveraging your money you risk losing a lot.  Every action you take to make it ""safer"" removes some of your profit." If possible, I would open a Canadian bank account with a bank such as TD Canada Trust. You can then have your payments wired into that account without incurring costs on receipt. They also allow access to their US ATM network via TD Bank without additional costs. So you could use the American Affiliate to pull the funds out via a US teller while only bearing the cost of currency conversion. If that option can't work then the best route would be to choose a US bank account that doesn't charge for incoming wire transfers and request that the money be wired to your account (you'll still get charged the conversion rate when the wire is in CAD and the account is in USD). Solamon Energy Canada Launches Informative New Website Posted in Renewable Energy Company (Toronto – Posted March 9, 2010) – “Happy days ahead,” exclaimed Chris Black, president of Solamon Energy Corp., as the company published and proudly unveiled a new website to its senior team and to the world today. “We intended the site to simply communicate our offering and the progress of each project for our customers [...] Continue Reading Solamon Energy Canada Launches Informative New Website  SOLAMON ENERGY SCAM SAFETY NEWS-... 1 1 4ppl.com [solamon energy news articles solamon energy renewable energy scam safety news] – il y a 3 mois Solamon announces new executive appointments as company sets new focus. (Toronto) – After completing an exhaustive executive search throughout the summer months, Solamon Energy’s CEO Graeme Boyce is proud to announce today the appointment of Nicolas Del Valle to a position on the senior team as Senior Vice President, and also the promotion of Christian Giles to SVP. “We are leaving the development of the Dominican Republic’s solar market in the very capable hands of Mr Del Valle,” says Boyce, “and, based on our discoveries since May, we’ve shifted Mr Giles to Institutions, where he will deliver non-manufacturing facilities, from airports and arenas to hospitals and universities.” I'm a SEIA member, the organization that authored this report and have been following these reports. The costs mentioned include everything required for development: Panels, inverters, BOS, labor, racking, permitting, engineering and margin. They do not include land (which is rented and paid by cashflows) or subsidies (which are used by developers, not EPCs who are quoting these prices). There are no subsidies in any of the listed items, there are however tariffs on the modules depending on their origin. "I'm assuming when you say ""…put it towards our mortgage payment?"", you mean make additional payments on top of your scheduled payment. Strictly speaking, if the interest on your mortgage is higher than the return you can expect by saving, then yes, your excess savings should be put toward your mortgage.  This assumes that there are no pre-payment penalties, that you really won't miss that money in the short term (i.e. you say you have enough savings for emergencies, so that's good), and that both choices would use after-tax dollars (i.e. mortgage payment vs RRSP contribution in Canada is a huge discussion)." Obviously you're missing that there is no house on the land so the cost comparison between a house and land isn't terribly valid.   The land might not have connections to the municipal sewage/power/electrical and may need zoning changes and permits for those connections.   You're missing that you don't know how to design and build a house so you'll need to hire people for those tasks; then live through the process, headaches, and probable budget overruns. Edit: You're also missing that lending for speculative land development is significantly different from lending for a single family home. You seem to underestimate the risk of this deal for the inverstors. A person purchasing a residence is happy to pay $70K instead of $150K now, and the only risk they take is that the construction company fails to build the condo. Whatever happens on the estate market in two years, they still saved the price difference between the price of complete apartments and to-be-build apartments (which by the way may be less than $150K-$70K, since that $150K is the price on a hot market in two years). However, an investor aiming to earn money counts on that the property will actually cost $150K in two years, so he's additionally taking the risk that the estate market may drop. Should that happen, their return on investment will be considerably lower, and it's entirely possible they will make a loss instead of a profit. At this point, this becomes yet another high risk investment option, like financing a startup.