Subscribe

 

  • Button - Digg
  • Button - XML Reddit
  • Button - XML Newsvine
  • Button - XML Del.icio.us
  • Button - XML Feeds
  • Button - GoogleReader
  • Button - MyYahoo
  • Button - Rojo
  • Button - Bloglines

Email
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    Blog Index
    • p (1)
    Sunday
    Jul182010

    Tenants Hate LEED Apartments? Weigh In.

    We at the Institute of Green Professionals and at Consilience: The Blog have had requests from bloggers, and even a couple of academics, to write about their personal experiences as residential tenants in LEED apartment buildings.  From my personal knowledge of these individuals, they are all professionals or academics that have a deep commitment to sustainable development and furthering "green" practices.   However, without exception, they have nothing positive to say about living in a LEED apartment building, that is excluding its LEED-related performance standards.

    Building performance aside, what is it like to live in a LEED apartment building?  Here are samples of common comments. 

    1.  "The AC does not cool the units to a level of comfort that we are accustomed to.  A low of 73 degrees F  is just not comfortable."

    2.  "Water pressure is too low.  I have used water restrictors for years, but the water pressure in this new apartment is so low that the length of my showers is probably tripled and my water consumption has increased."

    3.  "My apartment is in the U.S. south and adequate AC is an absolute necessity.  Aside from arguments that one shouldn't even be living here, the common areas and elevators have no AC.  As "green" as I am in my daily life, I don't like to sweat my way in and out of the building."

    4. "Our building has fewer elevators that other non-LEED buildings of similar size.  Is it possible that they cut back on the cost of elevators to save money to pay for solar panels?  And the resulting wait time for elevators and the uncomfortable crowding is unacceptable."

    5.  "The underground garage has very minimal lighting until movement triggers the larger lights and/or when entry doors are opened.  As I enter the garage it is dark and I feel unsafe.  Additionally, there is a time lag between entering the garage and when all the lights go on - this adds to my sense of unease."

    What are your thoughts?

    Are there any studies on occupant comfort in LEED apartments?

    Are there acceptable levels of inconvenience for a greater good?

    Will there be push-back from tenants and less demand for LEED buildings when 'inconvenience" factors are known?

    ___________

    Grant W. Austin, MAI, MMRS, M.S., MRICS, PLE
    President, Institute of Green Professionals

     

     

     

    Thursday
    Jul082010

    Measuring "Green"

    The following article is reproduced with permission from The Journal of Sustainable Real Estate.  Many of the world's leading academics and professionals are involved in this journal along with the American Real Estate Society and CoStar.  Consider raising your profile by submitting a paper for peer review or alternately write for the "Industry Perspectives" section that does not conform to academic writing standards.
    Grant W. Austin, MAI, MMRS, M.S., MRICS, PLE
    President, Institute of Green Professionals

     

     

     

    A Performance Based
    Real Property Valuation Model


    by Robert Roth Esq.
    Green Envy Development Group, Inc.

    The time for trivializing the state of our environment is behind us.  Our stakes have matured.  With the world’s economies and natural resources fully inter-connected, neighbors on all sides now express their concerns in concert at polluters and deniers of the earth’s vulnerability. 

     

    Likewise, the latest economic downturn demonstrated the inter-connectivity of the world’s economies; whether developed or emerging.  The Great Recession has affected us all.  “Sustainability” as a concept had been reserved in contemplation to management of the earth’s natural resources, but now it surely embraces economic viability in equal weight.

     

     

    In terms of single industries, real estate bears most heavily on the natural world and our economy.  As evidenced by the genesis of The Great Recession, a real estate tumble can spill over into many other ancillary industries, and when in an aggravated condition, it can cloud nearly every industry and burden every checkbook.  As real property valuations go, so goes our economy.

    What has made this recession so great, is that the real estate industry has taken such a pervasive hit.  Valuations, access to mortgage finance, foreclosures, bank failures, litigation, regulation, and others and have converged to affect a systemic failure.  The resulting malaise has proved difficult to shake off.  The question is thereby begged; how can we get the real estate industry directed on a positive course?  The follow up question is whether sustainable principles are expected to act as a central catalyst to a real estate industry recovery.  The answer to both is through the placement of proper value on green buildings.

    In most real estate transactions, mortgage and/or mezzanine financing are requirements to making deals go.  In real estate finance, determining a given property’s market value is pivotal in the decision making process on whether or not collateral is sufficient to lend, and what specific loan terms justify the overall credit risk.  An appraisal report serves the function of offering a real estate professional’s opinion of market value, based on hard data and reasoned analytics. 

    The appraisal’s place in real estate finance is not contested here.  What is contested is how appraisal reports should be modified in their scope and areas for analysis, in how final determinations of market value are demonstrated.  Green buildings in all of their various forms are not currently incentivized in appropriate measure for either residential or commercial properties.  By acknowledging the legitimate values inherent in environmental design and construction, and monetizing perceived benefits of green buildings where possible, the real estate industry will surely go green en masse, and the natural world may catch a break from a financially motivated human race for a change.

    While still an emerging art form, appraising green buildings has taken on several forms and has meandered in many directions.  Over time, the lack of uniformity in appraising and acknowledging green buildings may prove to emasculate all that we have worked for in promoting sustainable real estate.  Simply defining what is considered a green building is an uncertainty.  For the purpose of appraising green buildings, it makes the most sense to subjugate any green building certifications (LEED, Energy Star, Green Globes, Passive House, etc.), and instead, assign priority on the buildings’ performance.  What this reorganization of priorities will do is answer the question as to how much value enhancement building green has with another question, “How green is it”?

    We can come to some reasonable conclusion as to how green a property is, and in turn, delineate where its value enhancements lie, by breaking down any given green building’s constitution into the following areas, which can collectively comprise a Performance Based Real Property Valuation Model:

     

     

    a) Efficiencies (energy, water, and other utilities) 
    b) Potential for future economic rewards (cap and trade, government incentives, financing options, tax relief) 
    c) Sustainability (stewardship of natural resources, urban planning, pollution control) 
    d) Functionality (low VOC, IAQ, fenestration, etc.)

     

     

     

     

    On first inspection, it may be evident that these categories are to some extent analogous to LEED’s major headings on the New Construction and Major Renovation green building standard, which may be so.  However, the difference is, that this Performance Based Real Property Valuation Model is prioritized for certainty and quantifiability in value enhancement to the more esoteric, less quantifiable aspects of green building practices.  The result is to acknowledge the values inherent in green buildings, while remaining in touch with the instruction of hard market data and the general public’s collective appreciation for environmental sensitivity.

    Of course, the query will soon be posed, “Why should we stretch to assign dollar values to green buildings”?  My response is that the government and all of its sanctioned authorities (including Fannie Mae, HUD and Freddie Mac, who set parameters for standardized residential and commercial appraisal forms) routinely theorize, incentivize and subsidize in favor of any number of business practices over the years.  So, why not for green buildings?  Is this cause not noble enough?

     


    Green buildings cut across class lines, show potential to create jobs, are eco-friendly, are timely in terms of combating the effects of The Great Recession, and they are currently under-valued in light of the distressed real properties that they are deemed comparable to in today’s market conditions.  The time to seize market recovery is now, and placing appropriate value on sustainable real estate is how to do it.  Here’s how it will work.
      

     

     

    • Efficiencies:  A baseline is determinable by comparing non-green properties for energy, water and other utility usage, and a monthly savings amount would be determined for the given green building’s utility consumption, based on the cost of utilities at the time of property appraisal inspection.  Actual utility bill comparisons would be preferred, but energy modeling reports from a qualified professional would be acceptable to demonstrate efficiencies on utilities for this purpose.  This monthly savings amount on utilities would be extrapolated over the remaining life of the green building; assumed to be at least 30 years (this is good enough for mortgage loan amortizations and for the IRS tax code).  This accumulated savings would be discounted to present value.  In so doing, we will simply and coherently quantify measurable green building efficiencies.  This calculated figure could then be added to a green building’s appraised valuation. 

     

     

    • Potential for Economic Rewards:  This line item is a bit trickier to determine with certainty.  Therefore, whatever financial rewards are anticipated for the building’s owner or occupants would have to be discounted for time valuation, and also weighed against the likelihood of it being put into effect.  On this line of logic, it is important to note that if and/or when a “Cap and Trade” system is adopted domestically it may not take effect for some period of time in the future.  Furthermore, it is still uncertain that it will be enacted at all.  Lastly, its terms and calculations are not as yet determined.  Therefore, whatever value adjustment would be assigned to a “Cap and Trade” compliance and resulting trade value (within the domestic carbon market which is not yet established) through the use and operation of a given green building would need to be numerically offset against the aforementioned uncertainties in determining a property value enhancement.  Therefore, a maximum of three percent (3%) would be permissible as a property value enhancement in this line item for Potential for Economic Rewards.  This three percent cap would be fair yet realistic; appropriately acknowledging perceived value, while remaining true to reliable data analysis. 

     

     

    • Sustainability:  This line item would be capped at one percent (1%) of value enhancement.   Even though everyone should care much more about the environment, with humanity and business’s accumulated corruption on the earth, placing more than a one percent value adjustment on final appraised valuation for building green would be an attenuation and invitation for withdrawal of common support.  This is where having a LEED, Energy Star, Green Globe or other green building certification would become relevant, if not instructive. 

     

     

    • Functionality:  This line item would encourage the design and construction of structures as productive, healthy places to work and live.  Examples of this line item which are more esoteric and subjective would include Indoor Air Quality (IAQ), fenestration, use of low Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), use of hypo-allergenic construction materials, proximity to public transportation, etc.  These types of building features promote health and happiness.  While some building occupants may not place any value on being healthy, happy or productive within the buildings that they live or work in, it is hereby acknowledged.  Therefore, the minimal one percent (1%) value enhancement cap is appropriate to recognize this sad fact; providing further commentary on human nature and its skepticism for the urgency to take better care of the earth and its denizens.

     

    One may notice that the cost of implementing these green building features is not referenced in this line of logic.  This is by design.  What little allowances the current system of property valuation makes for green buildings does do in halves (by permitting a fractional value enhancement based on the cost of energy related upgrades only) or not at all (see above Potential for Economic Rewards, Sustainability and Functionality).  Market efficiencies in a real estate industry context rarely, if ever, assume value based on the cost of various types of upgrades.  If it did, personal taste would be included and quantified on standardized appraisal forms and accounted for in appraised valuations as matters of degree from, “delightful” to “tolerable” to “heinous.”  Corresponding numerical adjustments would have to be made based upon the appraiser’s assessment on the property owner’s personal taste in finishes.  We know this invites flaws in demonstrating property value, if not laughter, therefore, we omit reference to the cost of these upgrades and focus instead on their effect.  Thus, a performance based valuation system for green buildings takes hold.

    Once we have this valuation model established to place additional and appropriate value on green buildings, the real estate finance infrastructure would surely respond in an accommodating direction.  Furthermore, real estate market players at every level would gravitate to financing and lending opportunities as created from this change in focus towards green buildings and their associated value adjustments.  Did the prior boom and bust cycle in the real estate industry closely trail financing accommodations?  Of course, it did.  The problem with that phenomenon was that the accommodative gap was fueled by relaxed, if not reckless, underwriting and credit standards.  Isn’t a preference for green building practices a more rational and healthy spirit to build a market upturn upon?

     

    Let’s give green buildings a chance.

    Saturday
    May152010

    Lessons in Adept Marketing of a Green Project

    by Grant W. Austin, M.S., MAI, MRICS, PLE

    Take a look at the photo below.  In the far distance is downtown Toronto and in the foreground within a river valley was a brick factory and quarry that began in 1889 and was abandoned in 1984.  The old brick buildings sat idle for nearly three decades until a national charity devoted to greening communities initiated a $55 million project to reinvent the site as a showplace for urban sustainability.

    The sole purpose of this blog contribution is to highlight the multiple methods by which this project has been successfuly marketed to the local government, the community and contributors - it is an exemplary example of how to capture the attention of all key participants for your next project.   Maybe some of the marketing and organizational lessons of this project can take your brownfield to the state of this property where it has just been recognized by National Geographic's Center for Sustainable Destinations as one of the world's best geotourism destinations.

     Continued below the photo . . .

    Here are some of their marketing strategies . . .

    In the News:

    Metronews: Apr. 26 Evergreen profiled in article “Eco heroes honoured” reporting on the Green Toronto Awards http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/live/article/511382--toronto-s-eco-heroes-get-honoured

    Globe and Mail (also carried by CTVNews) Tues. May 4: Brick Works fired up for the future . Detailed article and several photos profiling 16-hectare Evergreen Brick Works site in Toronto's Don Valley. Forest, meadow and wetlands now ...

    Toronto Star: Doors Open supplement kids guide profiles activities planned for kids down at the Brick Works for Doors Open Toronto weekend.

    Canadian Geographic Travel: Issue Summer 2010 – EBW referenced in detail as one of top 3 venues to visit while in T.O.

    Local, Spring 2010 Green Issue – Feature article for regional Beaches publication called Local. The City That Brick Built http://localmagazine.ca/features/the-city-that-brick-built/

    Boston Globe, The art of history The most ambitious of the industrial revival projects is the Evergreen Brick Works in the Don Valley. Few cities can claim such a centrally-located example ... http://www.boston.com/travel/getaways/canada/articles/2010/05/02/the_art_of_history/

    Toronto Star (Thursday May 6) - Toronto a 'laboratory of urban innovation'-  Kaplan works out of the Providence, RI-based “Business Innovation Factory” he ... and the Evergreen Brick Works, the transformation of the Don Valley Brick ... http://www.thestar.com/yourcitymycity/article/802934--toronto-a-laboratory-of-urban-innovation

     

    The blog, Heads up Dad, does a wonderful photo montage/essay walk with kids through the Brick Works and ravine http://blog.headsupdad.com/2010/05/03/sustainable-fun-in-toronto-the-evergreen-brickworks-2/

     Video:

    Time lapse video of EBW parking lot being prepared for Holcim pour: http://www.archive.org/details/TimelapseMay4th2010TorontoBrickworksDonValley

     Events:

    Thursday May 6th our “Peek Behind the Curtains of Evergreen Brick Works evening with Joe Lobko” was positively received by the building community, attended by some 75 builders and architects.   

    Jamie Kennedy and Friends event planned for June 19 at the Brick Works has also been reported in the Post City news: Jamie Kennedy and friends heading to Brick Works Post City On June 19, the Local Food Five will man the hot plates at Evergreen Brick Works, 550 Bayview Ave., home to the smashingly successful farmers' market and ...

     Evergreen Short Video Contest being organized by our curator is making the social media rounds: http://www.workinculture.ca/apps/index.cfm?fuseaction=job.showDetails&jobid=46693&termid=

     

     

    Wednesday
    May122010

    Why is this new free Journal must read?

    Why is this new free Journal a "must read"?

    by Grant W. Austin, M.S., MAI, MRICS, PLE

    Because the arena of "sustainability" is so large and so diverse that we can't know it all but we need to have a general understanding of the bigger picture in order to excel within our small area of expertise.  This new Journal will prove to be a valuable addition to your knowledge - I know, you are inundated with information already and don't have time for another journal - so pick only one or two of the most relevant contributions. 

    In the words of the Journal: "The Journal of Sustainability Education (JSE) serves as a forum for academics and practitioners to share, critique, and promote research, practices, and initiatives that foster the integration of economic, ecological, and social-cultural dimensions of sustainability within formal and non-formal educational contexts.

    JSE is a peer-reviewed, open access trans- and interdisciplinary e-journal. Each issue will include research and practice feature articles, professional and news reports of projects and initiatives, opinion pieces, announcements of educational and research opportunities, and book and other media reviews."

    I invite you to be a contributor.  Features for the March 2011 edition on “Learning and Leading Sustainability” to be guest-edited by Pramod Parajuli and Terril Shorb can be submitted through the JSE online journal system.

     Enjoy.

     



    Smart by Nature:
    Schooling for Sustainability

    By Fritjof Capra and Michael Stone

    In this inspiring essay, Capra and Stone take us beyond the trite use of the word “sustainability” to an operational way of applying it in the educational setting. They outline four universal principles that should guide sustainability education, each with a profound implication for how learning occurs. They then show how the principles can be applied through a “curriculum that is anywhere learning occurs,” including lunchtime in the cafeteria and the design of the school campus. Their book Smart by Nature: Schooling for Sustainability expounds on the principles and learning-anywhere ideas laid out in brief here.

    Continue Reading
     
    By Christopher Haines

    In this thoughtful, and fundamentally practical, down-to-earth essay, Christopher Haines puts architects squarely on the front-lines of sustainability education. He shows us, with real applications based on thoughtful inter-disciplinary analysis, how the complexities an architect faces in designing a building extend their tentacles into every aspect of sustainability—from environment to economics to social and psychological considerations.

    Continue Reading
    Media Review


    Who is TED, and Why Can’t I Talk for More Than 18 Minutes at a Time?

    By Thatcher Bohrman

    The TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) website brings videos of world-class TED conference talks to everyone’s finger-tips. Something about the website gets us hooked, and the daily inspiration for ourselves, and our students, keeps us coming back for more.

    Continue Reading
    Case Study
    Case Study
    Media Review

    Review of Andres Edwards’ Thriving Beyond Sustainability

    By Rick Medrick

    Rick Medrick gives context for Andres Edwards’ new book that takes us beyond sustainability to thriveability. The book suggests that, as the sustainability movement gathers force in the realm of all 3 “E’s” (ecological, economic, social equity), we are at a point of moving towards establishing a newly organized social and ecological environment. Strategies that will allow this to be a thriving environment, according to Edwards, are “SPIRALS:” Scalable, Place-making, Intergenerational, Resilient, Accessible, Life-affirming, and Self-caring.

    Rick Medrick nos da un marco de referencia para el libro de Andres Edwards que nos lleva mas allá de la sustentabilidad a la “thriveability.” El libro propone que, mientras el movimiento de sustentabilidad gana fuerzas en el área de los tres “E’s” (ecológico, económico, equidad social), estamos al punto de establecer un ambiente social y ecológico mejor organizado. Las estrategias que nos permita crear este ambiente de superarse, según Edwards son “SPIRALS”: Escalable, Del Lugar, Intergeneracional, Resiliente, Accesible, Afirmando la Vida, y Auto-Cuidando.

    Continue Reading

      
     ... and much more!  Link here

    .


    Monday
    Apr192010

    FREE book is a "must" for all in sustainability

    FREE Book is a "must" for all in sustainability

    by Grant W. Austin, M.S., MAI, MMRS, MRICS, PLE
    President, Institute of Green Professionals

     

    Everyone involved in sustainable development, call it green or anything sustainable must have this new book.  

    Why?  

    Because in all projects we encounter the financial feasibility issue when it comes to selecting a feature/element that has a sustainable characteristic vs. one that does not.  Few of us will need to read the entire book and most of you will occasionally use it for a reference, but it is important for any client presentation - even a cursory knowledge and application of its contents will place you in the lead-dog position in the eyes of a client.

    Hundreds of facts/issues/characteristics in the book are invaluable, but if I were to pick only one, it would be the "Sustainable Property Cost-Benefit Checklist."  If you are involved in any aspect of sustainability this list has some applicability to your work - architect, engineer, appraiser, land planner, landscape architect, accountant, attorney, IAQ or CSR expert, contractor, consultant, etc.

     Value Beyond Cost Savings can be downloaded for free and a hardbound book is also available for $35 USD.

    ------------------------------

    Tuesday
    Mar162010

    Avoiding Green Legal Liability

    By Gary L. Cole AIA, Esq.

    The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) recently unveiled a new contract addendum for “green building” projects – the ConsensusDocs 310 Green Building Addendum.”  The two most interesting things about it are:  (1) that it exists at all; and, (2) that the AGC has very cleverly taken steps to shield its member-users from what, to some, is the Achilles Heel of the entire “green building” concept:  that in any useful construction or legal sense, the term “green” has no reliable meaning at all.  That the AGC’s new addendum achieves its goals by contractually defining a project’s greenness through actions instead of words is perhaps its most admirable achievement. 

         “Green Building” – “Green Living” – “We’ve gone Green!”  In any real legal sense, exactly what does “green” mean?  And what does “green building” mean?  Ask a hundred people at the next green building conference you attend to define “green building” and I promise that the answers you receive will range somewhere between “energy and resource-efficient humanistic  design and construction” to “a sacred calling to protect Gaia from rapacious bottom-dwelling Industrial-Capitalists.” 

         Don’t get me wrong – it’s not as if green building advocates don’t attempt to define “green” or “green building” – they do, with varying degrees of success.  And I’m not suggesting that a perfect combination of words and sentences that would satisfy everyone’s requirements ever could, or even should exist.  Flexibility can be a good thing and sometimes just stating a set of principles that are given substance primarily through actions is enough.  Like the Ten Commandments, or the slightly lesser – to some – Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation – it’s what you do with them that counts.

         Which is great when you’re preaching to the already-converted, but not so great when trying to convince everyone else, like say, in a court of law, where skepticism and burdens of proof tend to run a little higher.  Sure, thanks to aggressive marketing, the term “green” has evolved enough general meaning in the public mind to be used on bumper stickers and t-shirts with reasonable definiteness – if by “definite” we mean “less vague.”  But for legal contracts involving the transfer of massive amounts construction-related capital, and all the legal liabilities that attach like barnacles to everyone involved – a slightly higher standard of clarity is probably in order.  

         Enter the AGC’s new ConsensusDocs 310 Green Building Addendum, which doesn’t even attempt to define uncertain terms like “green” or “green building” with mere words – it does so through the actions of project’s parties.  And as much as lawyers like words, when constructing contractual bulwarks for our clients, we like actions a lot too.  The AGC’s addendum allocates the responsibility for defining what “green,” and therefore what “green building” means on any given project to the parties who should be responsible for defining it – the owner, its architect/engineering team and a third party referred to as the “Green Building Facilitator” (the “GBF” – who may, or may not be the contractor or construction manager).  After all, unless a contractor is part of a design/build team and/or intends to assume the role of the GBF, then absent shoddy construction, why should it be dragged under when green turns to brown and the finger pointing starts?   Its job is to build, not design.  And it’s certainly not to save Gaia.

         The AGC was kind enough to provide me with a copy of the new addendum to review.  There are no less than ten (10) defined terms that use the word “green” – which at first made me wonder why they didn’t just define “green” for any particular project in the usual way, such as: “ . . . For purposes of this Addendum, the term “green” shall mean and refer to, etc., etc . . . .”  But a little closer look made that clear.  The Green Building Addendum’s real purpose is to identify the roles of relevant parties and to define the methodology they’ll use to plan and implement a project’s sustainability goals.  It also serves to clarify that unless a contractor has specifically accepted the role of Green Building Facilitator, they’re just there to build - planet saving’s outside their scope of work.  

         Here’s a snapshot of how the AGC’s Green Building Addendum goes about that:

         First, the GBF, working with the architect/engineering team, advises the owner on alternatives for achieving a project’s desired “Green Status” – such as a LEED designation goal;

         Second, how a project achieves its Green Status is defined by its “Elected Green Measures” (comprised of the “Elected Physical Green Measures” + “Elected Procedural Green Measures”) which arises from reports and discussions between the owner, its A/E team and the GBF; and

         Third, the details of the first two steps are incorporated with specificity into a project’s plans and specifications – again, not something for which a contractor is usually responsible.

         Of course, the above simplifies a fairly complex procedure, but unless a contractor wants to step into the green center – such as becoming the Green Building Facilitator, or the project is design-build – by using the AGC’s Green Building Addendum, it may avoid being a direct link in the daisy chain of green legal liability by requiring a project’s greenness to be defined by the decisions, work product and actions of other parties.  And if that weren’t clear enough, the addendum wraps it all up with an entire final section on risk allocation.

         So, when a green roof leaks, or an HVAC system underperforms, or a project’s new, imported and unvetted “sustainable” materials off-gas toxic chemicals killing every parakeet within a square mile, or a project doesn’t achieve its LEED designation and the owner doesn’t obtain its proforma-required tax benefits and starts looking around for someone to blame – then the contractor has something of a defense. 

         Will it provide absolute protection when the plaintiff’s attorney lets loose with both barrels of 12 gauge, no. 10 buckshot and names everyone who ever glanced at a project in a lawsuit?  Probably not – but the Green Building Addendum, along with the many other documents produced during discovery that support it by substantiating the relative roles of a project’s parties, might make for a very nice place to start crafting a defense.

         The AGC’s Green Building Addendum is an admirable end-run around the green building movement’s obvious shortcomings – defining what “green” really means.  But perhaps it’s time for green building advocates to convene their own Council of Nicaea and hammer out the canons and doctrinal orthodoxy of green building – take it to the next level – the one that recognizes the inherent legal dangers of vagueness.  It won’t be pretty or easy.  Or, here’s a thought – just start calling green building what it is – maybe:  “energy and resource-efficient humanistic design and construction.”   

         Sure, it’s not as snappy as “green” and might not fit as well on a Prius’s bumper  – but what more do you really need to say?  The time may be approaching for green building when words and actions – not to mention results – must merge into one. 

         Is it possible that’s what the AGC recognized when it created its new Green Building Addendum?

    Wednesday
    Mar102010

    Role of "Green Coaches" and Free Book

    “Answering the Question that Wasn’t Asked”

    by Linda Ramey, Ph. D. Principal, Thumbprint Endeavors LLC

    In case you have not noticed, there are many who are not on board with the impact of humans on the environment.  And while the scientific evidence is growing by the volumes, still there are those who say we need to do more studies, or worse yet, nothing at all to curb our carbon-based fuel consumption.  Our built environment and transportation needs to sustain our western lifestyle, is well, unsustainable.  So, where is the weak link?  Communication.  Education.  The job of taking the data and putting that information into a convincing format to not only educate but to educate those who are facing backwards or still on the fence. 

    In his Keynote talk at the recent Ecobuild Conference, Robert A. Peck, Commissioner, Public Buildings Service for Bob Peckthe U.S. General Services Administration made the point clearly – if we put the same building occupants, with their same habits back into even the Greenest of buildings, we will get less than optimal results. If we want to achieve the results we expect, it will take more than simply constructing more LEED-certified buildings. We need what might be termed Green Coaches, to prod or lead, which ever the case may be, to ensure that peoples’ behaviors are in line with the most sustainable use of resources, energy and space.

    We need to make the most compelling case and convincing arguments, using some psychology to effect long term thinking on the humans and environmental impacts.  Not just data, but wording that swaying people’s thinking and behaviors. How do we convince someone that it is truly in everyone (and everything’s) best interest to do this?  We need to use all the tools in the toolbox and people who know how to effectively use those educational tools.  One example of a type of tool we need in educating would be to employ a type of environmental psychology to achieve results.  Dr. McKenzie-Mohr and other researchers in this field provide tremendous insights about where we have missed the mark on the environment and where we need to steer the message if we are to reach the intended audience and convince them to get onboard.  More on “Fostering Sustainable Behavior” is available at http://www.cbsm.com.

    Another source of information on this topic would be the newly released publication (FREE download!) from the Center for Research on Environmental Decisions at Columbia University. “The Psychology of Climate Change Communication A Guide for Scientists, Journalists, Educators, Political Aides, and the Interested Public”, (www.CRED.Columbia.edu/guide).  Both of these sources represent tools for what I am calling a Green Coach – someone who can take the findings in the reports and explain the importance of the data in everyday terms.

    Think of it this way.  We have all had the experience of sitting through a presentation that appears to be prepared for a different audience.  Or perhaps it was a professor who knew everything there was to know about a topic, except how to explain it to others.  It felt like we were in the wrong room or the presenter really just missed the mark and did not think through or know what we were there to learn.  Maybe it was the style, maybe it was the content, maybe it sailed over our heads or it was too simple, too complex or not enough detail to get at what needed to be said.  That is the case too often today.  For years the information and the warnings regarding climate change have been posted.  Some are heeding the advice.  Others are not.  The data has not changed (indeed, it is now more drastic than previously thought according to a recent MIT study) but the message has not been overwhelmingly heard.

    Back to the toolbox, we need a new format, a new on-target presentation.  And that is where the Green Coaches come in.  They can reach out, connect with our audience.  Yes, we need to present the facts, the findings of the studies but the language and the wording needs to relate the information while addressing the “what does this have to do with me?” questions.   Those personal connections with the general public need to be made to help them to see the impact of their daily decisions.   Scientists, engineers, architects have the much needed data and answers to problems, but sometimes they need to work with those skilled in crafting a message that reaches and educates the building users and the general public.

    Where is the American public getting their information today – TV, newspapers, the web, radio talk shows, tabloids?  Reporting by the media outlets are not effectively getting the job done.  By their very nature, they display attention-grabbing headlines and tease with media blurbs.   Newspaper and popular magazine articles get cut short, often pairing informed scientific statements with un- or ill-informed controversial opinions, implying both as having equal merit.  Those who are unsophisticated media consumers readers and listeners are often confused, disbelieving that any real answers are out there.  With this, the general public is left doubting or saying that they still don’t know for sure what the experts are talking about.  We also have the preachers – but unfortunately they often speak with opposing voices.  With this torrent of technical information (and misinformation), perhaps we need an interpreter, a Green Coach to decipher and spell it out. 

    We need someone who can take the information and translate it to speak to the general public.  Someone who can help to reformat the presentation of the data from those in the know (scientists, engineers, building design, energy and resource conservation experts) and put it into easy to understand language, with the psychological twist that targets the audience we have not been able to reach.  We need what educators call pedagogy.  That means the linkage between the subject matter knowledge and how to facilitate the learning by breaking it down.  Providing a step by step, play by play educational guide for the technical information so it can be easily grasped by novices – that coach who can call the plays to get the sustainable behaviors that secure the end Green result.

    In addition to providing other Green Building services, this role of being “Green Coaches”, is what we do at Thumbprint Endeavors.  We believe that educating and translating to help others more clearly understand data and reports is the often the missing link.  Our Thumbprint Endeavors Team provides this link by developing the personal connections for building occupants that result in their understanding and commitment. Clearly communicating and educating clients provides the desired sustainable behavior changes needed for LEED buildings to achieve the Green results that the designers and owners intend. 

    Linda Ramey, Ph. D. Linda Ramey, Ph.D.can be reached for more information at: www.thumbprintendeavors.com.

     

    Monday
    Mar012010

    Faster Growth than USGBC - Top 5 Reasons Why New Designation is Success

    PRESS RELEASE
    Weston, FL

    The Institute of Green Professionals (IGP) just released a member survey indicating reasons why its membership has grown faster than the initial years of USGBG - an increase of over 530 members in its first 12 months!  Plus, over 100 of the world's most influential sustainability leaders are members. 

    The Institute of Green Professionals is the only education and credentialing membership organization for sustainable development professionals (architects, engineers, land planners, landscape architects, accountants, appraisers, attorneys, IAQ and CSR experts) and others admitted by special application/consideration.  IGP confers the Fellow (FIGP) and Member (MIGP) professional designations to qualified individuals.

    The recent Member survey indicates the top five (5) reasons for becoming a designated member of IGP:

    #1.  The designation is a tool to get clients aware of my specialty expertise in sustainability.   A sample comment from an IGP member:  "I have been generally recognized as an architect who considers sustainability factors in all my projects, but the designation has been an effective marketing tool to highlight this and to more effectively reach out to a wider client base."

    #2.  Personal satisfaction from an independent acknowledgement of my skills.  A sample comment from an IGP member:  " I have been a designated professional (P.Eng) for many years and this respected designation is both a reaffirmation and recognition of my specialty skills."

    #3.  The IGP designation is a competitive advantage.  A sample comment from an IGP member:  "In the increasingly fuzzy world of so-called experts in so many areas of sustainability, this is the one designation that has clear standards, ethics and required experience and education - as IGP becomes more recognized, the comeptitive advantage of members will increase - I got one new client as a direct result of describing my new designation in my company newsletter."

    #4.   Value for the money.  A sample comment from an IGP member:  "I took advantage of the recent membership special at $109 . . .  what a deal! This included my two courses for my FIGP designation, I wrote an article for their blog that got me lots of attention, and the membership certificate is beautiful."

    #5.   Chance of a better job position.   A sample comment from an IGP member:  "Professional certification, beyond my primary designation as an AICP, shows to an employer that I go beyond the regular guy and that my skills are better, that they have been tested by another independent body and that I am the better choice as an employee."

    The IGP survey was completed by 72% of all members as of 2/1/2010 (excluding Honorary Fellows).  The top five responses (above) are reported in order of member importance/response.  

    If you are an IGP member and you would like to make an additonal comment about IGP and why you are a member, please send along. 

    Grant W. Austin, M.S., MAI, MRICS
    on behalf of the IGP Board of Directors

     

    Tuesday
    Feb162010

    Groundbreaking Book Available FREE

    Relevant to everyone involved in sustainability, because it relates to feasibiliy/viability/marketability/property failure and underperformance, is a new book entitled Value Beyond Cost Savings: How to Underwrite Sustainable Properties  by Scott Muldavin, CRE, FRICS, Hon. FIGP.  Don't be misled by the word "underwriting" in the title - it is not just for finance types, but architects, engineers, land planners, landscape architects, appraisers, IAQ experts, attorneys, etc.  This book addresses the value and risk of sustainable property investment - relevant to any sustainability component and expert.  It will help you to better understand the thoughts of the investor/developer, speak their language, understand their decsison-making, and better communicate your contribution to the success of the next project with sustainability components.

    Before you get the entire book, you may want to look at a summary of the book's key conclusions, found in an article entitled Ten Principles for Sustainable Property Underwriting and Valuation  - this is free in the "Articles" section of the Green Building Finance Consortium.

    The entire book Value Beyond Cost Savings is available free - go to the home page of Green Building Finance Consortium.  Let me know what you think - Grant.

    Wednesday
    Feb102010

    Are You Missing Out on the Gold in Green?

    Are Architects and Other Designers Missing Out On the Gold in Green?

    By Gary L. Cole AIA, Esq.

          [Disclaimer:  Nothing in the following article should be construed as legal or accounting advice, nor endorsements of any parties referenced within – the contents are entirely the opinion of the author.  Parties interested in learning more should always consult their tax, legal and other professionals for specific advice and information.]  

    Architects, engineers, contractors and other designers of energy-efficient public projects may be eligible for substantial tax benefits under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 – though it appears than many are unaware of this opportunity to effectively increase their project compensation.

         Under Section 179D of the Internal Revenue Code (the “IRC”) – created as a part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 – owners of energy-efficient commercial buildings, which generally includes federal, state and local properties, may take a tax deduction of up to $1.80/SF square foot of qualifying construction.  The $1.80/SF maximum deduction is allocated at $.60/SF for each of the three following improvements: (1) the interior lighting system; (2) the heating, cooling, ventilating, and hot waters systems; and, (3) the building envelope.

         While that’s great for owners of income-producing commercial properties – how does it help architects, engineers, contractors and other designers increase their compensation on such projects?

         In an apparent effort to incentivize the design and construction of green public buildings, Section 179D of the IRC includes a clever provision that allows owners of “Government-Owned Buildings” to  “. . . allocate the § 179D deduction to the person primarily responsible for designing the property (the designer).

         In other words, since the federal, state or local agency that owns the energy-efficient building doesn’t pay income taxes – and therefore doesn’t need and can’t take tax deductions – they can allocate their tax deducations to the “designer” (defined as “.  .  . the person that creates the technical specifications for installation of energy efficient commercial building property . . .”) of the building.

         Let’s do the math.  Suppose the “designer” designs a 100,000 SF building that qualifies for the maximum deduction of $1.80/SF.  Since 100,000 multiplied by $1.80 equals $180,000, the owner can allocate a tax deduction of $180,000 to the designer.     

         Nice as this is, it’s important to understand that a $180,000 tax deduction doesn’t equal $180,000 cash as it might in the case of a dollar-for-dollar tax credit.  A tax deduction lowers a taxpayer’s taxable income by the amount of the deduction.  The cash value of a deduction is then, roughly calculated by determining how much in taxes a taxpayer does not pay by virtue of having taken a tax deduction that lowers their gross income.  However, in some cases, depending on when the subject building was placed in service and a designer’s particular income and tax history, they may be able to file an amended tax return for an immediate refund.

         A certification of the project, made by qualified individuals, is also required to establish that the property meets the IRC’s energy efficiency requirements.  Companies such as Engineered Tax Services provide assistance in obtaining such certifications, as well as providing other accounting/engineering services (contact Cyndi Lucas at clucas@engineeredtaxservices.com for more information).   

         Also, while the IRC specifies the form of the written allocation of the deduction to be made by the building owner, it doesn’t appear to require an owner to make it since the language says that an owner may, not shall make the allocation.  Architects and other designers may consider negotiating provisions in their service agreements that require owners to properly allocate any tax deductions to them – something always best negotiated before the services are commenced than after.

         Naturally, nothing is simple when dealing with tax issues and architects and other designers should consult their tax and legal professionals to understand how to qualify for this benefit – the requirements are complex and precise – and beyond the scope of this article.  And, what the Government gives, the Government shall also take away as this tax benefit is currently set to expire in 2013. 

         In the meantime, however, architects and other parties who qualify as “designers” may be able to enhance their compensation on energy-efficient public projects by availing themselves of these tax benefits.  

          __________

    Gary Cole is an Illinois and Florida-licensed attorney and an Illinois-licensed architect with over twenty years experience in design, construction and real estate development. He combines his architect's experience and insight in the design and construction industry with his legal expertise to offer a broad range of developer and architect-related services including leasing, property acquisition and disposition; design/construction transactional and litigation matters; public finance, tax-increment financing, tax credit and abatement programs and other development economic incentives; construction, mezzanine and permanent financing; land use matters; legal entity formation and joint venture agreements; state and federal (ADA) accessibility law; historic rehabilitation tax incentives and regulatory compliance; and Green construction and alternative energy facilities development. Mr. Coleis General Counsel and on the Board of Directors of The Chicago-Midwest Institute of Classical Architecture & Classical America.

    Tuesday
    Jan192010

    If you like the movie "Avatar" then "Biophilia"

    Preface by Grant:  Last weekend I saw the movie Avatar.  Not a fan of high-tech graphic sci-fi type movies, I was reluctant to go, although agreed because of the rave reviews.  I was struck by the organic similarities between Avatar and "biophilia"  -- also very similar to Dances with Wolves where Kevin Costner learns the Lakota tribe's language, lifestyle and customs.  I anticipate that most readers will scan this posting and then handily reject it as just "too academic" and lacking professional applicability.   It is more conceptual than the typical meal that is fed to you as a sustainability professional, however, it addresses what may be a much more important issue - at what level humankind will accept sustainability?  At what level will we naturally accept our relationship to nature and the physical world?   Give it a try and let me know what you think.  COMING SOON - surprising news on the tremendous growth of MIGP (Member) and FIGP (Fellow) designated sustainability professionals at the Institute of Green Professionals

     Discussion of "Biophilia"

    by A. Vernon Woodworth, AIA, LEED AP

    The human being is a complex organism with a discriminating consciousness capable of abstract thought, language, and a high degree of technical manipulation of our physical surroundings.  These abilities, along with limitless ambition and imagination, have led to a condition of alienation from our instincts and environment.  Our science, technologies, political systems, belief systems, and patterns of consumption have all evolved to reinforce a duality between self and object, figure and ground, man and nature.  Despite unprecedented material resources and technical ability modern society has led to a sense of alienation and emptiness that has left many wondering where we are headed.  The emergence of radical fundamentalist beliefs, irresponsible economic practices on the part of major corporations, and ongoing evidence of catastrophic environmental collapse all suggest that the prevailing worldview is nearing its denouement, a dramatic moment in the evolution of our species. 

    The new science of ecology, developed in the middle of the 20th C. to explore the interrelationships between species and their environments, began a process of shifting scientific exploration from isolated and ever-smaller phenomena to the systems of interactions that together form an ecosystem.  Simultaneously the relatively recent discipline of psychology began exploring the impact of relationships and environmental conditions on personal development.  It was a psychologist, Erich Fromm, who coined the term “biophilia” to describe a fundamental human emotion.  Fromm was trained as both a social psychologist and a psychoanalyst and held an optimistic view of humanity’s ability to overcome the guilt, alienation, and loss that accompany the development of consciousness.  In his “Humanist Credo” Fromm wrote “I believe that the man choosing progress can find a new unity through the development of all his human forces, which are produced in three orientations.  These can be presented separately or together: biophilia, love for humanity and nature, and independence and freedom”[1]

    The etymology of the term “biophilia” combines “bio-“ (life) with “-philia” (friendship, abiding relationship).  The Harvard natural scientist E. O. (Edward Osborne) Wilson has explored a “biophilia hypothesis” in several books and papers.  This hypothesis suggests an instinctual connection to nature that informs our emotional being at its deepest level.  In one talk Wilson asks “how could our relation to nature, on which survival depended minute by minute for millions of years, not in some way be reflected in the rules of cognitive development that generate the human mind?”[2].  

    In this same talk Wilson mentions totem worship and the power of place as two examples of biophilia.  Totemic culture establishes descent of the family or clan from an animal or nature spirit ancestor as the basis of personal, familial and cultural identity.  Kinship is the ultimate human value expressing the network of relationships upon which society and personality are largely based.  By claiming kinship with an animal or nature spirit a bond is declared with the animate dimension of the natural world.  The phenomenon of totemism, observed in primal societies worldwide, provides a clear example of the dynamic nature of biophilia in human culture. 

    We have all experienced the power of certain places.  Waterfront locations are inherently peaceful while mountains and rivers can inspire awe.  The “dreamtime” mythology of the Australian aborigines describes the origins of natural features in terms of the deeds and exploits of prehistoric creatures who roamed the earth at the time of creation.  The aboriginal people, hunter-gatherers with little material culture, maintain their identity and sense of connection to their belief system by repeating the stories of the dreamtime and visiting the physical features where the vital energy of these mythological beings are manifest.  The dreamtime is an expression of the force of biophilia forming the essential motivating force in a primal human culture.  Other examples of belief systems that fall under the general category of “animism”[3] similarly express the dynamic of biophilia, whereby connection to the life force inherent in the natural world is maintained. 

    As culture and technology evolved and cities were established human attitudes towards nature, along with religious belief systems, evolved as well.  The basis of worship and source of religious energy became increasingly remote from the natural world.  Deities lived on mountaintops or in ethereal realms rather than in rocks and streams.  Nature worship tended to become marginalized, especially in urban centers.  Increasingly nature became something to be tamed and subjugated.  The French sociologist and ethnologist Claude Levy-Bruhl used the term “participation mystique” to describe the psychological relationship of the “primitive mind” with nature.  Swiss psychologist Carl Jung used the phrase frequently as an equivalent of the psychological concept of “projection”, whereby contents belonging to the subject are recognized by that individual only in another.  When projections are withdrawn, Jung observed, the subject may react negatively towards the object which is no longer fulfilling his or her psychological needs.  A similar process can be ascribed to the evolving human relationship to the natural world as technology and cities developed.  Nature went from the sacred container of life to a wild force that required taming, being devalued and often destroyed. 

    The epic of Gilgamesh, perhaps the oldest known written work of literary fiction, can be read as a parable of the evolving psychological relationship of man to nature.  Gilgamesh is a ruler of great power who has become distracted and bored with the business of civilization.  He befriends a half-wild figure named Enkidu who lives as an animal in intimate connection to nature and together they set off on a heroic quest, resulting in Enkidu’s death.  Gilgamesh is inconsolable and goes to great lengths to find the key to immortal life in hopes of reviving his companion, but all his efforts are in vain.  The tale is about more than the limits of human love and power.  This is a tale of the loss of our participation mystique with nature and the awareness of mortality that are the consequence of an independent consciousness. 

    Although increasingly abstract and divorced from nature imagery religious belief systems continued to provide a sense of connection to sacred forces outside the individual self well into the historical era.  The Renaissance era introduced the age of Humanism, a philosophical system that rejected reference to supernatural forces.  As material progress has advanced, particularly since the time of the Industrial Revolution, the consequences on the natural world have become increasingly evident.  Our connection to the natural world that was complete and all-encompassing, then sacred, then tragically disrupted, has now become toxic, imperiling our world and ourselves. 

    The current environmental crisis appears to have stirred the deep layers of our collective psyche where the instinctual force of biophilia resides.  Increased appreciation for the indigenous relationship to nature, countercultural belief systems that emphasize environmental stewardship, and the rising demand for sustainable practices in manufacturing, transportation, and the building sector are all symptoms of an emerging appreciation of our essential relationship to the natural world.  Ecology, once described as a “subversive science”[4], is rapidly replacing the dominant belief system with a new view of the world.  James Lovelock’s Gaia Hypothesis is a provocative expression of this new ecologicalJames Lovelock worldview.  By understanding all life as one interactive super-organism with self-regulatory properties the Gaia hypothesis provides a framework for a new understanding of our place on the planet earth.  This understanding, in concert with an awakening of our instinctual emotional connection to the life force (biophilia), may be our last best hope for avoiding total environmental calamity.  


     [1] Fromm, Erich The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil, 1965. 

    [2] Wilson, E. O. “Arousing Biophilia: A Conversation with E. O. Wilson” Williams College 1990.

    [3] “The belief of animism is probably one of man's oldest beliefs, with its origin most likely dating to the Paleolithic age. From its earliest beginnings it was a belief that a soul or spirit existed in every object, even if it was inanimate. In a future state this soul or spirit would exist as part of an immaterial soul. The spirit, therefore, was thought to be universal.” From “Animism” by Alan G. Hefner and Virgilio Guimaraes. 

    [4] Subversive Science: Essays Towards an Ecology of Man by Paul Shepard and Daniel McKinley (eds.) Boston Houghton Miflin Co. 1969.

    ______________

    A. Vernon Woodworth, AIA, LEED AP, is a registered architect and code consultant with extensive experience in design, construction, code enforcement, and sustainability issues.  For the past 10 years Vernon has chaired the Boston Society of Architects’ Codes Committee, seeking to harmonize the Massachusetts State Building Code with the national model codes.  Vernon has also served as Chair of the AIA Codes Committee (2004) and was a member of the AIA’s Sustainability Task Group in 2006.  He has served on the AIA Board of Director’s Sustainability Discussion Group (SDiG) in 2007 and 2008, and on the AIA's Committee on the Environment (COTE) Advisory Group in 2009.  Vernon is the author of “From Ratings to Requirements: The Greening of Building Codes” which appeared in the 2007 ICC Building Safety Journal, and is a member of the International Code Council's Sustainable Buildings' Technology Committee, charged with producing the new International green Construction Code (IgCC).   Vernon currently teaches in both the Architecture and the Interior Design schools of the Boston Architectural College.

    Friday
    Jan082010

    Mandated Sustainability - here it comes!

     

    Corporate Sustainability is about to Change Forever…Are you Ready?
    by Tad Radzinski

     

    Over the past six months, two significant developments have put in motion a chain of events that will likely change the face of corporate sustainability forever.   Executive Order 13514, signed into effect by President Obama in November, mandates that government agencies must monitor and report their GHG output and comply with other environmental requirements including the reduction of waste and the use of “environmentally preferable materials, products, and services.”  Additionally, the order calls for 95% of all applicable federal contracts to also meet sustainability requirements.  

    In the private corporate sector, in October, Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, instituted the Wal-Mart Sustainability Index, a set of questions to assess the sustainability of suppliers with the goal of conducting a lifecycle analysis and ranking products according to environmental impact.  Wal-Mart rolled out the first phase of this project in October, and suppliers are already scrambling to participate in the Index and improve their sustainability score.

    Between these two initiatives, the federal government with its more than a half trillion dollar procurement budget, and the Wal-mart index which all but guarantees preference to vendors who are implementing sustainable practices across an organization,  businesses and organizations of all sizes, across virtually all industries, will soon be feeling the pressure to kick-up sustainability efforts.

    What does ALL this Mean for YOUR Business?

    Most sustainability watchers agree:  these two developments are just a precursor to what is sure to be mandated sustainability targets in the private and public sector.  Given that, forward-thinking companies, whether they are federal or Wal-Mart vendors or not, are already incorporating more greening into the corporate culture.  From a corporate perspective, as sustainability moves from being an option to a mandate, sustainability will soon provide a key competitive advantage in the marketplace.  

    So how can the average company get ready for what’s coming?  Here’s a short checklist of processes and actions to get you started:

    • Hire or appoint a corporate sustainability officer.  Like any other critical business function, your sustainable program needs a leader.  The federal government agencies are now mandated to fulfill this job function and savvy private companies are doing the same.  One caveat:  if you appoint a sustainability officer with little or no expertise in the field, make sure he or she receives training or consulting services from an experienced and credible agency (e.g., see the courses and designations by the leading credentialing orgainzation for sustainability professionals, the Institute of Green Professionals).
    • Establish a benchmark of your organization’s environmental, economic and social performance.  This is a critical step in establishing goals and developing a comprehensive sustainability program. Remember - if you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.
    • Establish cross-functional teams to develop sustainability programs for your organization. Pulling data from the aforementioned benchmarking exercise will help your team establish realistic and achievable goals.
    • Set initial sustainability goals that will provide quick success.  Look for low/no cost initiatives to reduce environmental impact, such as waste reduction and recycling. This will help build momentum for the program and funding for the more arduous and long- term tasks.
    • Provide sustainability training to all people in your organization as it relates to their specific job functions. The ultimate goal is to make sustainability a part of the culture.
    • Once developed, communicate information on the sustainability program to your entire organization, from employees to customers and other stakeholders.
    • If your company manufactures or supplies products it is important to understand and evaluate the products’ life cycle impacts. This can be done by completing or outsourcing a life cycle assessment (LCA). The LCA will be a valuable tool to help you make changes to the product or service and reduce environmental impacts and overall costs. 

    ---------------------------
    Tad Radzinski is the cofounder and president of Sustainable Solutions Corporation, , a leading provider of corporate sustainability programs. Tad has over 24 years of diversified experience in engineering and sustainable design.  Prior to starting his company, Tad served as the Waste Minimization Program National Expert for the Environmental Protection Agency.

    Tad has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Drexel University (1991) and an M.S. in Water Resources and Environmental Engineering from Villanova University (1995). He serves as an Adjunct Professor at Villanova University teaching graduate classes in Principles of Sustainable Development and Industrial Pollution Prevention. Tad is a registered professional engineer in the state of Pennsylvania (1995), a LEED Accredited Professional (2001), and is trained as an ISO-14001 lead auditor.   Tad can be reached via email at tad@sustainablesolutionscorporation.com or by phone at 610-569-1047.

    Monday
    Dec142009

    The Synergy of Sustainability and Mitigation

    Preface by Grant:  Our guest blogger Barry Reid is highly qualified and he knows his stuff.  However, whether to accept this blog or not was a tough call - I heavily favor blog content where education and information outweigh the push of a specific product or organization - it just doesn't feel right for an education and credentialing organization to do otherwise.  Did I do my job as the gatekeeper on this one?  Also, send along your comments on the contents and product - I don't bowdlerize any response. 

    The Synergy of Sustainability and Mitigation
    By Barry Reid, LEED AP

    Those in the construction industry are fast learning that providing sustainably-built workplaces and homes is the smart thing to do socially, environmentally and economically. The industry is emerging from “green building” into an era where sustainability is table stakes, what you need to do just to get in the game. There is a commitment to implementing and abiding by practices that consistently conserve and efficiently use our limited resources.

    However, an important and relevant adjunct to sustainability is sometimes overlooked by architects, builders and developers – although never by insurers and regulators. By choosing the correct products and building practices, architects and builders can mitigate or even reduce the adverse effects on buildings from severe water damage as a result of wind-driven rain or flooding brought on by severe storms and natural disasters.

    Often, in at-risk areas, sustainable or green building practices end up conflicting with efforts that address mitigation, namely risk reduction to the building envelope and its long-term durability and performance. But sustainability and mitigation are synergistic concepts, and don’t need to be an either/or proposition. At Georgia-Pacific Gypsum, we’re suggesting that these two important issues can be addressed simultaneously at all stages of the building process – from design through final  onstruction.

    This combined effort makes effective use of sustainable products and practices while also taking steps to mitigate or minimize weather-related problems that may occur during the construction process or post-occupancy. It can help make buildings more energy efficient with better indoor air quality, and prevent or reduce weather-related damage.

    Lessons Learned, Courtesy of Mother Nature

    When sustainability and mitigation are not implemented, there can be unpleasant consequences.

    Consider the story of a fictional general contractor – we’ll call him Fred. Working with a design team of architects, consultants and sub-contractors, Fred has followed U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED® guidelines in constructing a one-story suburban office center on a previously developed site. He was diligent in addressing the environmental and health impacts of the building in addition to reducing the building’s overall energy use and water consumption. His team reused building materials from other local projects, selecting materials with high recycled content from regional sources.

    They installed low-water-use toilets and urinals. They selected low-VOC (Volatile Organic Compounds) materials, and designed the building to be energy efficient, using both mechanical and natural ventilation strategies incorporated with natural light planning.

    Among the benefits of Fred’s design and construction practices were lower energy costs, thousands of gallons of water conserved and a healthy building where the workforce was proud to work.

    Unfortunately, Fred did not take into account the building’s location and any natural events that might adversely impact the use, disaster resistance, performance and recovery of the building. And indeed, something bad happened that Fred hadn’t envisioned – a 100-year flood, bringing a torrent of water into the building that finally crested at the two-foot mark. Because the building’s walls were constructed with conventional, paper-faced drywall (used for its recycled content), and the walls were insulated with water-absorbing insulation that was not moisture- or mold-resistant, Fred had to replace thousands of square feet of saturated materials – all of which got a permanent home in a landfill.

    Because mitigation measures were not considered in the construction phase, Fred’s well-intentioned sustainability efforts – that were an investment of an additional one to three percent of the building’s cost – ended up being anything but sustainable.

    On the other end of the spectrum, a builder – let’s call her Jen – remodeled a Victorian home in an area that had recently been rezoned for office use in a coastal region recovering from a devastating hurricane. Jen was determined to closely follow regulations from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for building in special flood hazard areas.*

    * To learn more about the FEMA requirements for construction in special flood hazard areas, visit www.gp.com/fema.

    Jen diligently followed mitigation guidelines, including the use of construction materials highly resistant to flood damage throughout the structure. She employed dozens of mitigation measures, such as installing hurricane shutters on entry doors and on all windows. Her mantra was simple: keep the water out, construct assemblies that dry easily when wet and use moisture-forgiving building materials.

    Unlike Fred, Jen didn’t give much thought to operational efficiencies or “green” methods. Her structure was a fortress that would likely survive a flood, but it was built to minimum standards, which resulted in an inefficient building with high utility costs and marginal comfort for future occupants.

    Sustainability + Mitigation = Durability

    These examples are fictional – but not unrealistic. Too often, building contractors and owners choose one or the other – sustainability or mitigation. A successful high-performance building should be built to last, but if sustainable practices and mitigation measures aren’t selected and implemented together, the building may not last its normal lifetime.

    Sustainability is more than LEED ratings and green certifications. And mitigation is more than risk aversion. A building must be durable from both perspectives.  

    Products that are durable and weather resistant are inherently sustainable, and they are at the center of Georgia-Pacific Gypsum’s product offerings – especially our Dens™ Brand of gypsum panels which are moisture-forgiving due to fiberglass mats and treated cores. They’re designed to mitigate the ill effects of exposure to water over the many stages of a building’s lifecycle.

    If you incur costly re-building due to a weather event, sustainability has been defeated. Homes and buildings should be designed and built to last, and building to sustainability and mitigation standards isn’t difficult. Here are a couple of common examples that demonstrate the concept.

    • Flooding can ruin the interior of a house or building. If you consider sustainability and mitigation at the beginning of the construction process, you’ll create a structure that just might survive flooding. Rigid or closed cell insulation prevents infiltration of water; borate treated lumber framing is water resistant; and non-paper faced drywall, such as DensArmor Plus® interior panels, resists moisture and mold-growth. With proper ventilation these construction materials allow for a drainable, dryable wall that resists mold growth. Even when the materials get wet, they will generally dry out without delaminating or developing mold – making mitigation a matter of time and “airing out” rather than replacing materials. (Note that in catastrophic situations, where polluted waters might sit for days inside structures, any type of gypsum panel and some other building materials would need to be evaluated for contamination by local building officials to determine if replacement is required.)

    • Wind-driven rain can also damage structures when it penetrates openings in soffits, under roofs and other openings such as vents. Sustainability and mitigation are achieved with a tight enclosure that resists moisture. However, the products you use must resist moisture too, so any water that gets in dries out without damaging walls and ceilings.  

    The answer is to create walls that have minimal openings to non-absorbent surfaces such as non-paper-faced drywall. Consider spray foam insulation at the knee walls/edge of the roof structure for your attic insulation strategies to stop wind-driven rain through the soffits.

    Employing sustainability and mitigation together doesn’t compromise the energy efficiency of a tightly built structure, but allows the “forgiveness” needed for the building products to dry out.

    Here are some additional tips to ensure that your projects properly blend sustainability and mitigation.

    Think and plan beyond green. With architects, contractors, owners and insurers at the table from the beginning, sustainability and mitigation are assured. A thorough, upfront assessment of the short- and long-term impact of every aspect of a building’s design, construction, and materials used will lessen the economic, environmental and societal burdens that could occur later.

    For instance, products that allow for draining, cleaning and drying are much better sustainability and mitigation choices than those that lead to tearing out and replacing in the wake of a severe weather event. Fiberglass mat panels – such as Dens™ Brand gypsum panels for use on exterior and interior surfaces of the building enclosure, behind tile in wet areas, in shafts and stairwells, and within a roofing system – can be used along with other water-resistant materials in wall cavities to provide a water management strategy that protects the value of the structure.

    Incorporate green when building to resist weather events. Recurring costs like utility expenses and insurance premiums, as well as the long-term marketability of the structure, should all play a role in when and how you choose building products and processes.

    Construction projects need to be infused with common sense as well as regulatory realities. A few pragmatic practices – like elevating structures in flood-prone regions and leaving the first floor for parking or entryways – can eliminate headaches later. The result will be well-designed and well-built structures that are durable, environmentally sound, economically relevant and socially significant.

    In other words, with a bit of effort, you can achieve the synergy of sustainability and mitigation.

    ©2009 Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC. All rights reserved.

    ________

    Barry Reid, LEED AP, has more than 20 years experience in the Building Products industry. He is Business Development Marketing Manager for Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC, whose current initiatives include integrating sustainable and building science principles into Georgia-Pacific’s building products to enhance the long- term performance of building enclosures in both residential and commercial construction.

     

    Wednesday
    Dec022009

    First Grey Water Irrigation System: Lessons

     Gray Water Irrigation System


    In order to accommodate Abode Communities request to explore water saving measures for landscape irrigation, Khalifeh & Associates Inc. set out to design the first gray water system approved by the County of Los Angeles. 

    At a time when Los Angeles is facing water shortages, Abode Communities (a non-profit developer specializing in sustainable low-income housing projects) was committed to invest the necessary resources for designing and installing an environmentally sound system that would reduce water consumption in their 70 unit senior housing project.

    Khalifeh & Associates explored different ways to meet this challenge and found that the best way to reduce consumption would be to retain, filter, and reuse the discharged water from the project’s onsite laundry facility. The effluent released from the washing machines would be captured in a 750 gallon underground storage tank located nearby the Laundry room. Contractors bid this system to have an installed cost of $60,000 and project that landscape water consumption to be reduced by 90%, giving the system a 25 year payback. The water factors of standard front load clothes washers are 31.5 gallons per cycle, 1 hour cycle time, and there are a total of 7 washers installed onsite. The laundry facility operates 12 hours per day, making its’ water usage 2,646 gallons/day.

    31.5 gallons per wash x 1hr cycle x 7 washing machines x 12 hour occupancy = 2,646 gallons per day

    100% of the effluent released by the washing machines will be captured in an underground storage tank equipped with a small irrigation pump. The effluent from the washing machines require sufficient filtration and treatment before landscape application is done. Dependant on the type of soil, local codes require respective minimum square footage of irrigation area per 100 gallons of estimated daily gray water dispersal. The Soil sample taken by a Geotechnical engineer proved the soil to be in a category requiring 100ft² of landscape area per 100 gallons of gray water. This made the total required area 2,646ft².

    2,646 gallons x 100ft² ÷ 100gallons = 2,646ft² of required landscape area

    The actual total irrigation field onsite is just less than 10,000ft² which is considerably larger than the minimum required area per code. With this information along with plumbing system design drawings and additional calculations, Khalifeh & Associates sought to have their water saving system approved by the Los Angeles County Building and Safety plancheck department. Such a system had never been approved and thus review of the Khalifeh & Associates proposal was extremely thorough. The county wanted to know, without a doubt, that the system would function properly and that well thought out safety measures would be incorporated to address the possibility of system failure.

                    After several attempts to obtain the county’s approval, the engineers at Khalifeh & Associates were able to convince the plancheck department that all of the county’s stringent requirements would be satisfied. Their approval makes the team at Khalifeh & Associates the first consulting engineers to design an approved gray water system in the county of Los Angeles for reducing water consumption and improving the environment.

    Jack Khalifeh is president of Khalifeh & Associates Inc. Consulting Engineers, P.E., a multidisciplined, professional engineering firm specializing in mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection, lighting, sustainable design, commissioning and energy audit services. Jack is a LEED-accredited professional and a member of the U.S. Green Building Council. Visit www.khalifehassociates.com tel:(310)-305-1555

     

    Thursday
    Nov192009

    LEED Silver & Platinum Experiences and Valuable New Source

    Preface by Grant:  Here we have a couple of real-life experiences in the development of a LEED Platinum building.  These brief lessons in the article "Sustainable Facilities - The Standard of the Future" has implications for all experts design-build process.  The author, Keith Pehl, is the president of the multidisciplined professional engineering firm of Optima Engineering, P.A.

    Regarding a great new source:  The Green Building Market and Impact Report 2009 by Rob Watson and Greener World Media has just been released . . . . by the way, Rob is known as the "Founding Father of LEED" and of course, is also a Member of the Institute of Green Professionals. Follow the link (above) to Rob's report.

     

    Sustainable Facilities – The Standard of the Future
    by Keith Pehl

    Sustainable design is a responsible business practice. That’s why it is important for energy efficiency and sustainability to become the accepted standard in commercial construction. Not only will sustainable design help protect our environment and preserve our limited natural resources, it will also save businesses money in the long run. And, the more people know about sustainable design, the more likely they are to embrace the concept for their facility.

    The ultimate goal of sustainable design is to create net zero-energy buildings that produce as much energy as is consumed. The benefits include reduced energy usage, improved indoor air quality, greater water conservation, and optimized operational and maintenance practices.

    Much like the term “fast track” that was popular several years ago, the terms “sustainable” and “energy efficiency” should be part of every building design. You don’t hear the term “fast track” anymore. It was a new concept of speeding up design and construction to deliver a facility faster, but now it is standard operating procedure. Everyone wants their project fast-tracked. I want the same thing to happen for sustainable design.

    While both economically and environmentally beneficial, implementing sustainable design techniques can be challenging, so they require the coordination of everyone involved.

    My company, Optima Engineering, recently worked on a large department store, and we had to account for the impact of lighting on air conditioning and heating equipment. We reduced the total lighting wattage by more than 50 percent, which extended the lamp life and reduced maintenance needs – both sustainable features. The department store’s mechanical engineer installed 80 tons less air conditioning equipment because of the decreased heat emitted from the lighting system during summer. The reduced amount of equipment lowered construction costs and the amount of energy required to run the building.

    However, the mechanical engineer did not account for the reduced heat produced by the lamps during winter, so the first time the heating system was used, the building could not get warm. To fix the problem, they installed electric duct heaters to give the heating system a boost on cold days. The solution still uses less energy overall, and it was a good lesson about how much heat lighting systems can provide for commercial buildings.

    We learned another lesson with our own office, which is certified LEED Platinum. We had an energy model that was 30 percent below the industry baseline, but our energy usage doubled the model when we first moved into our building. After refining the lighting and mechanical controls, we were able to drop below 30 percent of the baseline. The lesson showed that energy modeling does work, but it highlighted the importance of commissioning and constantly monitoring energy usage to keep complex building systems working at peak efficiency.

    One of the easiest ways to create sustainable facilities is to incorporate great design practices without adding to the owner’s budget. The crucial element is good planning. Since it can be difficult to identify sustainable solutions, it’s important to seek out experienced professionals who are familiar with multiple types of facilities and understand the different design techniques required for successful projects.

    In my business, it is important to lead by example. Our 16,000-square-foot LEED Platinum office space is within a LEED Silver-certified building with rooftop solar thermal and solar photovoltaic systems. Solar photovoltaic panels on Optima's roofWe provide tours of our office and our roof at least three times a week. We offer seminars several times a month to educate our clients and the public about renewable energy, energy efficiency and other aspects of sustainable design.

    Convincing facility owners to choose sustainable design is not always easy. That’s why it is also important to teach people about the total cost of building ownership. We have to start thinking more long-term. Sustainable design practices are almost always less expensive when you look at the total cost of ownership rather than the initial capital cost.

    If planned properly, the costs of building sustainable facilities are comparable to “non-green” buildings. And, sustainable buildings bring the added benefits of reducing environmental impacts and providing a healthy working environment.

    __________ 

    Keith Pehl is president of Charlotte, N.C.-based Optima Engineering, P.A., a multidisciplined, professional engineering firm specializing in mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection, lighting, sustainable design, commissioning and energy audit services. Pehl is a LEED-accredited professional and a member of the U.S. Green Building Council. Visit www.optimapa.com

    Wednesday
    Nov042009

    LEED Anxiety: Expectations vs. Reality

    Preface by Grant:  This is a new piece by IGP Fellow, Mark Stetz.  If you are attending Greenbuild in Phoenix, he will be teaching Building Performance Verification - drop by and say hello.  The topic of a disparity between LEED building performance expectations and the reality of its performance is relevant to everyone in sustainable development because it has the potential to impact client/owner satisfaction with the project, occupancy, lease rates, marketability, and value.  Additionally, it has the potential to become a professional liability or "standard of care" issue/dispute.

    USGBC Addresses Performance Anxiety
    by Mark Stetz P.E., CMVP FIGP

    In my last article, I discussed how LEED-certified buildings might not live up to expectations when their performance is objectively evaluated. While newly constructed LEED-certified buildings are designed to be energy-efficient, design intent is not always realized in the construction and commissioning phases. Frankel & Turner [1] showed that despite good intentions, about 20% of the LEED-certified buildings in their study didn’t perform to code.

    The USGBC has been aware of this problem for some time, but now the LEED community and to some extent the general public are also aware of the ‘performance gap’ between expectations and achievement. The release of LEED 3.0 attempts to address this issue by doubling the available points for energy efficiency, raising the threshold against which savings are based, placing added emphasis on measurement & verification, and instituting minimum program requirements (MPRs) that will allow USGBC direct access to utility bill information. Yet the LEED certification process remains fundamentally an intent-based system. 

     Rather than sequestering itself in back rooms and issuing directives, the USGBC is using an open process of soliciting feedback and ideas for improving the LEED program. The Building Performance Initiative committee (BPI) held five meetings across the country and invited stakeholders – developers, owners, architects, and engineers – to discuss the current New Construction certification process. How might it be improved so that LEED certification actually indicates something more than good intentions?

    I attended the Washington D.C. meeting where discussions revolved around whether New Construction certification should use design-based or performance-based methodology.

    In a performance-based system, certification would be granted after occupancy and utility bill evaluation show that the building actually met design intent. One path is to grant conditional certification based on design and final certification based on performance. Another would be to require annual updates based on performance similar to the Energy Star program. The last would be to have buildings certified under the New Construction program enroll in EB/OM.

    Before an actual methodology can be developed, the USGBC and building community still have to decide if New Construction certification should continue to be designed-based or make the leap to performance-based. One proposal – although discussed in somewhat facetious terms but with an element of truth to it – is to make the LEED plaque removable [2]. However, no one volunteered to be the person with the crowbar.

    If the USGBC were a democracy, a performance-based approach would have passed by a wide margin with the Washington crowd, but regions. The San Francisco meeting was unanimous in wanting a performance-based system and they wanted it yesterday; the New York meeting wanted nothing to do with performance verification - so we were told - and felt design intent was sufficient.

    Interestingly, the minimum program requirement of utility-bill access was seen by some owners/developers as being necessary, others felt it to be a deal-breaker and would walk away from LEED certification rather than allow outsiders access to their records. To his credit, Brendan Owens the USGBC's VP of Technical Development, stated he’d opt to lose potential participants rather than sacrifice program credibility.

    Marcus Sheffer, head of the Energy & Atmosphere Technical Advisory Group (EA TAG), spoke regarding pending changes for LEED 2012 and how best to address the performance gap. He believes the role of building modeling should be to evaluate design alternatives, not to try to predict actual building performance with high precision.  Additional questions being addressed include identifying the proper metric to evaluate building performance – is energy use intensity (EUI) the right number, or should a building be evaluated based on energy cost, source energy, carbon dioxide emissions, or some combination of these? The ASHRAE 189P committee is struggling with this same issue.

    Identifying an appropriate baseline and threshold will make a difference in the starting point against which savings or performance is compared. To improve the potential for performance verification, alternative compliance paths for EA5 (Measurement & Verification) are being considered.

    Other barriers to translating intent into performance include architects who are primarily concerned with  aesthetics and functionality rather than building energy use, the lack of a feedback loop between those who pay the utility bills and those who operate the buildings, and contractual or legal barriers that add unnecessary roadblocks.

    As an example of potential legal obstacles, the city of Arlington, VA, now requires all new buildings to seek LEED certification as a condition of occupancy. Requiring a performance review would put their buildings in a Catch-22 situation: a certificate of occupancy requires LEED certification; LEED certification would require occupancy and performance evaluation. Which will come first?

    The fundamental question being asked is: do buildings that don’t achieve their design intent have the right to claim LEED certification? Some argue that yes they do, since LEED certification is recognition that the design is superior to other buildings, but there were several different proposed methods to make certification conditional or even revocable.

    Toward the end of the meeting, Scot Horst explained that the Building Performance Initiative is USGBC’s effort to improve LEED and make it a more useful tool. By collecting utility information on a larger sample of buildings, it is expected that stronger conclusions can be drawn about where the disconnect between intent and performance lies. Unfortunately, conclusions alone are not sufficient. By improving our understanding of the differences, USGBC and ultimately the members of the building community will be in a better position to take action and improve building performance.

    Tom Hicks – head of the BPI- asked those present if there were one thing we could do to improve the process and close the performance gap, what would that be? If you have suggestions, please feel free to use the ‘comment’ section of this blog.

    The final BPI meeting will be held Friday morning (11/13) at Greenbuild to summarize what the USGBC learned from five different meetings and what actions it will recommend.

     

    About the author

    Mark Stetz, P.E. CMVP FIGP is the Principal of Stetz Consulting LLC and an energy engineer specializing in building performance verification and energy audits. He will be teaching Building Performance Verification at Greenbuild in 2009 and Measurement & Verification at the ASHRAE Winter Meeting in 2010 and  can be reached through http://www.stetzconsulting.com.

     

    1. Energy Performance of LEED® for New Construction Buildings, Cathy Turner, Cathy; Frankel, Mark, New Buildings Institute May 2008 http://www.newbuildings.org/measuredPerformance.htm

    2. A Better Way to Rate Green Buildings, Henry Gifford 2009, http://www.EnergySavingScience.com

     

    Sunday
    Nov012009

    Free webinar by "Father of LEED" & IGP Member

    There is a free sneak-preview webinar on Thursday, November 5, 2009 at 12:30pm EST about green commercial building by Robert Watson, Hon. FIGP, the “Father of LEED” called “Building a Sustainable Future: Progress & Trends Toward Improving the Environmental Footprint of Commercial Buildings”: http://bit.ly/GreenBuilding_Webinar_Nov5

    In these fast-changing times it is imperative we have measurement around whether green building choices both provide a very high return on investment and a significant decrease in our environmental impact. This webinar effectively demonstrates LEED certified green building accomplishes these goals while outlining next steps for LEED certification to further contribute to reducing the environmental footprint of buildings in the U.S. and worldwide.

    During this 60 minute webinar a sneak-preview of the Green Building Market & Impact Report will be presented by the report’s author Robert Watson, a Member (Hon. FIGP) of the Institute of Geeen Professionals, GreenerBuildings.com Editor and industry leader. This report is an integrated assessment of the land, water, energy, material and indoor environmental impacts of the LEED for New Construction (LEED NC), Core & Shell (LEED CS) and Existing Building (LEED EB) standards. 

    JohnsonDiversey President & CEO Ed Lonergan will also highlight the importance of sustainability in today’s business environment, offering insights and examples of the company’s work toward improving the sustainability of its customers’ facilities as well as its own. This presentation will detail JohnsonDiversey’s own focus on LEED certification for many of its facilities worldwide.

    Please visit http://bit.ly/GreenBuilding_Webinar_Nov5 for more information or to sign up. 

     

    Friday
    Oct302009

    THE FUN THEORY VIDEOS: How can it work for sustainability?

    How can we change the behavior of building occupants? 

    How can we change the behavior of consumers? 

    The following viral videos provide us with insight.

    Go to the three (3) short videos via this link: 
    THE FUN THEORY.

    Do you have any ideas on how this (fun) can be applied to a sustainability issue? 

    Send us a Comment with your idea.

     

    Tuesday
    Oct272009

    Deconstruction: Vital side of sustainable development

     

    Introduction by Grant:  This guest blog is by Toni Renee "TR" Vierra of eco-Organize in Napa, California.  She is a green building advisor, educator, radio host and active green building organization leader.  Most often we address the construction side of sustainable development but neglect the "deconstruction" side of infill development.  In this brief piece, Toni provides an introduction to this topic and its relevance to our projects and overall goals for the environment.   As always, if you have a topic that educates and shares your sustainable development experience, the good and the bad, send it along to us.

     

    Building Green from the Ground Up
    by
    eco-organize LLC 

    As we look toward a future with mandatory Green Building Ordinances in California and elsewhere, one critical construction component is often overlooked - - site preparation. Regardless of the site – whether there is a pre-existing structure or simply an open field – site preparation typically signals the start of the actual construction process.

    The conventional way to bring down a building is the good ol’ wrecking ball. The building is collapsed into a huge pile of rubble and then transferred to commingled debris dumpsters. All materials are lumped together, many of which take several generations to decompose. Steel – 100 years. Aluminum – 300 years. Plastic – 450 years. Glass never decomposes. Then there is the hazardous waste - - who knows that harm is lurking there. Regardless, this conventional, commingled trash heap isn’t going anywhere soon because, no matter the nature of the material, it is all going to the same place – landfill. 

    There is a better way. 

    Thankfully, the easy alternative is “green” site preparation. Sure it takes a little more planning and coordination but really it just comes down to thoughtful deconstruction, site-sorting, and mindful demolition. With some foresight and creativity, landfill becomes the last option for site preparation by-products. Instead, the lifecycle of the by-products is extended… and everyone wins… and you might even get a tax break for your green efforts.

    This life-cycle extension is at the core of one facet of sustainability that we strive to practice in all we do… cradle to cradle construction. The materials that are “born” to build one structure are recaptured via mindful demolition and “reborn” by reuse or recycling.

    To illustrate the difference between the conventional wrecking ball method and a more environmentally-positive approach, I will share a little about my experiences managing deconstruction projects in California. In each instance, LEED Materials & Resources was used as a guide, a landfill diversion rate of at least 75% always the goal. eco-Organize has proudly achieved a more than 82% diversion rate on all of its projects, the highest rate to date being 99.2%.

    H
    ow is this possible? The answer is fairly easy albeit systematic.

    As background, landfill diversion simply means keeping things out of landfill - - be it by reuse, recycling, or repurposing. Moreover, there are two basic steps to the diversion process: Deconstruction and demolition. Any hazardous waste abatement happens beforehand.

    Deconstruction has two distinct phases. First is the soft-strip where the structural interior and exterior are scoured for reusable and recyclable materials. Reuse should always be the paramount goal, whether the materials are to be reused on-site as part of the new project or integrated somewhere off-site. During this phase, items like reclaimed wood, brick, and rock and reusable or recyclable fixtures and furniture are extracted. By the time this first phase is complete, there should be nothing much left but the structural envelope i.e, walls, roof, and foundation and supporting members.

    T
    he envelope is demolished in the second phase. Here, all the remaining debris is site-sorted, meaning things like /rebar are separated from concrete, clean wood studs are separated from drywall, lathe separated from plaster. Once demolition is complete, there is an assortment of piles i.e., clean wood, drywall, metal. All materials from both phases are parsed out and inventoried. These materials are then transferred by material type to a reuse or recycling facility for processing. Achieving the aforementioned 99.2% landfill diversion rate meant that some 382,220 lbs or 191 tons of debris was reused or recycled, while 3,020 lbs (or a mere 1.5 tons) amounted to strictly waste and was sent to landfill because there was simply no another option. The materials sent to landfill included things like insulation and carpeting, which in some other jurisdictions are also recyclable.

    To put this in perspective, the demolition of a typically 2,500 square foot home can produce over 25 tons of debris.

    You likely are intrigued and, hopefully, inspired by this tremendous result. However, you are also likely asking – “Yeah, but at what additional cost?” Amazingly, the cost differential was minimal. It could have been even more cost-effective in an area with a better variety of recycling and reuse options.

    For this project, I teamed up with demolition contractor Mark Dixon - of Middleton, California. Mark says “it took a little more time but my profit margin was about the same.” For this particular project, Mark calculated that the difference between what it would have cost to do this project the traditional way versus the actual greener approach were “real close.” The main point – There was a nominal increase to achieve an amazing result.

    Disposal costs do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. For instance, had this project been in a city just 20 miles south, approximately 50% would have been saved on the cost of dumpsters alone. This would have actually increased Mark’s profit.

    Between the disposal costs savings and potential money to be made in the reusable building materials market, the monetary advantages of green demolition become easily evident.

    But wait, there’s more. There may be an opportunity for a tax donation benefit for reusable materials. eco-Organize works with our clients to explore all opportunities to make green and sustainable practices easy and affordable, if not profitable. Typically, the generated cost-savings covers eco-Organize’s services and more.

    To bring these projects full circle, you are probably wondering how the demolition debris is escaping landfill. Here’s the scoop. If it’s reusable, it’s reused - either on the existing project or donated for use on some other. As for recyclables - Concrete and asphalt become gravel, dirt is used for topsoil and fill, yard waste is turned into organic compost, wood is sent to a biomass energy facility, and metal, cardboard, paper, plastic, and glass are recycled into a wide range of new materials. New technologies and domestic uses for discarded building materials are on a rapid rise in the United States. As after-market options increase, costs will continue to fall. The bottom line: All of this effort is having a significant impact in our fight against global warming… while saving consumers money and creating jobs.

    With the guidance of an experienced project manager well-versed in landfill diversion options and best practices for sequencing you too can experience amazing results, saving money and time, and in turn benefiting your neighbors and our protecting our planet.

    _____________

     

    Toni Renee Vierra, LEED-AP, is Founder and President of eco-Organize LLC. eco-Organize provides green building and business advice to property owners and the building community.

     

     

     

    Monday
    Oct192009

    Business and Climate Leadership of U.S. Engineering Firm

    Preface by Grant:  Today I have two (2) brief pre-blog comments.  One, on the relevance of this blog to all sustainability professionals and the other on USGBC's Greenbuild coming up in a few weeks.  First, the work/blog of Ron Wilson and his firm M+NLB . . . it is a model of a leading professional practice that has effectively integrated best-practices for the client, environment and corporate citizenship into their business model.  Comment, and tell us what you are doing in your firm.

    Second pre-blog comment:  For the next 60 days, in support of USGBC and Greenbuild 2009, the Institute (IGP) is discounting the regular "professional" member dues of $229 to the "academic" member rate of only $109.  This includes all courses, all benefits, the MIGP (Member) or FIGP (Fellow) designation/credential and the very unique Certificate that is now enjoyed by many of the leading professionals in sustainable development (view the list).  This is the LINK to the MIGP/FIGP quals/application. 

      

    Fighting Climate Change:
    A Once‐in‐a‐Lifetime Opportunity

    by Ron Wilson, Mazzetti Nash Lipsey Burch

    You can’ have missed the historic news a few months ago, when the U.S. House of Representatives passed the first ever cap and trade bill, known previously as “Waxman‐Markey”for its legislative sponsors.

    Among other things, the bill names the six greenhouse gases that will be regulated, establishes a capped system of permits for the emission of these gases and requires that 20 percent of the nation’ energy be generated from renewable sources. Over time, this system will get more stringent and most experts agree that it will become more difficult to emit greenhouse gases in the future.

    It’ easy to see how this cap and trade system will affect direct emitters of greenhouse gases (e.g., utilities) but harder to understand how climate change regulation will unfold in other sectors of the economy.

    As an engineering firm, we work primarily with building owners and corporations who are building or renovating large facilities (hospitals, data centers, laboratories). For several years now, we’e been counseling our clients to think about the impacts of future climate change regulation during the design process, since we’e been convinced that future regulation of greenhouse gases is a “hen,”not an “f.”In the absence of clear law and policy surrounding buildings and greenhouse gases, it can seem overwhelming to try and factor in future decisions when you are managing the building of a new facility. However, we often counsel clients that doing an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and designing a low‐carbon building can provide many valuable side benefits—enefits that usually pay back the initial investment.

    The first benefit is risk mitigation. Although rare today, lawsuits targeting companies with high carbon footprints may become more common in the future. An early, possibly groundbreaking case is that of Kivalina, a tiny and impoverished village of Inuit Eskimos in Alaska. Kivalina is suing nine oil companies, 14 utilities and one coal company, claiming that the defendants' actions are resulting in the destruction of protective ice, exposing the village to severe fall and winter storms that are destroying the village.

    A second major benefit is the ability to provide relatively easy disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions and energy performance of a building. Since buildings (both residential and commercial) are the biggest source of greenhouse gases in the U.S., it doesn’ take a rocket scientist to realize that sooner or later, building owners will soon be required to disclose the energy performance of their facilities.

    Third, building owners that do inventory their greenhouse gas emissions and commit to reducing these emissions usually invest in energy efficiency and renewables, both of which markedly cut energy bills, often paying back these investments in just a couple of years. As Congress debates how to move the overall market to more renewable energy sources, cutting your energy use and investing in photovoltaic panels can put your clients far ahead of your competition.

    Our climate change consulting practice has proven to be a boon to our firm and to our clients, and we see the market for these kinds of services growing quickly as the nation tackles climate change in a concerted way. We’re happy to tell our clients that climate change, while scary, presents a once‐in‐a‐lifetime opportunity to invest in things that save money and the planet at the same time.

    ______________

    Ron Wilson is Principal Electrical / Global Mission Critical Practice Lead for Mazzetti Nash Lipsey Burch, a fullservice mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and technology engineering consulting and design firm. M+NLB was one of the first engineering firms in the U.S. to add a climate consulting practice to their list of client services. The firm is a three-time Practice Greenhealth Champion for Change Award winner, and recently became the first Portland business to receive the BEST Business Center’s new Portland Climate Champion recognition.