All That Glitters Isn't Green
and Other Thoughts on Sustainable Design
Blueprints Fall 2006
Volume XXIV, No. 4
Recent events only partially explain the growing sense of urgency associated with the green building movement. The nation was riveted by the 2000–01 rolling blackouts in California, and feared other states would share a similar fate—at least until the whiff of price gouging convinced them that it was okay to leave the lights on. Nowadays, price fluctuations at the gas pump are causing consternation among consumers of all kinds, who are wondering what they mean not only to the individual car owner but also to the economy as a whole.
Nonetheless, leading green building advocates were calling for dramatic action well before these perceived crises, though not always using term “green.” Green building was discussed in contemporary terms since as far back as the 1960s “appropriate technology” movement and the 1970s oil crisis (though, as a recent Harvard University report by Becky Russell demonstrates, “green” building during these crises generally meant working toward reduced energy consumption rather than wholesale remodeling of existing structures or rethinking of basic building practices). So, the green building movement certainly owes much of its public prominence to recent energy concerns, but they were not necessarily its direct impetus.
Green with Envy
The construction industry is not alone in having undergone a quiet revolution in practices that reduce energy use and/or environmental damage. As in other industries, designers and builders face many challenges in determining how best to accomplish green goals.
One of the most disturbing trends in the green movement of late is the prevalence of “green-washing”—the deliberate (or occasionally subconscious) effort to misrepresent the environmental impact of a product or initiative. Green-washing has gained a significant foothold in construction as it has in other industries. Many building products promoted as green are green in name only (and are occasionally even painted green for effect!). Such examples, though fairly easy for the seasoned building professional to spot, are often a false bill of goods sold to the eager home-buying public.
But even professionals have been the target of green scams. There are products whose actual energy or environmental performance is either exaggerated or entirely fabricated. The most common aspects in which the truth about a product’s greenness is stretched are those that are more difficult to quantify, such as the amount of embodied energy in a material (i.e., the energy required to manufacture and transport the material, which is often highly undercalculated) or its contribution to a completed building’s impact on the local environmental quality (which most often cannot be predicted without knowing exactly how it will be used).
The most tragic green-washing, though, is one that is found just as commonly among building professionals as it is among the general public. In the consumable products world, consumers are often advised to “buy green,” even when they may have no precipitating need for a given product—in either green or non-green version. In that vein, far too often, the building community’s impulse is to build an entirely new structure; virtually all of the prized examples of green building, in fact, are new construction. The conceptual flaw in this approach lies in buying or building green when simply not buying or building at all would be a more sustainable choice. Often, this is not an option—with a growing population, for instance, in many cases new construction is inevitable. Yet rehabilitating an existing building is often the truly green choice, even though it is one that does not carry as much marketing appeal, design cachet, or professional imprint.
In short, the building industry must realize that in addition to its specific practices, its very professional purpose— that of creating anew—requires some fundamental adjustment. Meanwhile, at the risk of becoming purists, green building advocates need to be a bit more critical of the claims of green products and practices.
I Know Green When I See It
Green buildings, as broad as this label can be—which is why rating systems like LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) have been developed— all share a number of characteristics. All aspects of green construction are meant to optimize both performance and efficiency in land use and siting; material consumption and durability; indoor air quality; energy use; and water consumption. These green performance goals can be achieved in a variety of ways, with products and practices both conventional and innovative. The following examples, which reflect these core green building attributes, are offered as touchstones for those seeking a deeper understanding—and a more faithful definition—of green building.
Infill Development
In some cases, green technologies can make it possible for previously undesirable sites to be developed as infill. One example is how architect Katherine Austin, AIA, was able to help the Burbank Housing Development Corporation build on a Santa Rosa, California, brownfield site where petroleum had been dumped many years before. Even after all the detectably contaminated soil was removed, concerns persisted about deep vapors that might later surface, with detrimental health impacts on the planned Timothy Commons affordable housing community. Austin and the developer discovered a solution in the Liquid Boot, a system that collects belowground fumes through buried, perforated piping and vents them through standpipes that discharge above the building roof. This innovative green technology thus enabled affordable development in an area with existing infrastructure that would otherwise have remained abandoned.
LID
One of the best ways to control stormwater on a specific site is to minimize the amount of asphalt and other impervious surfaces. Permeable materials reduce the amount of runoff and pollutants, allowing the rainwater to be filtered and cleaned as it percolates into the earth and, eventually, the aquifer. Rainwater also may be “harvested” from a building’s roof in above-ground barrels or belowground cisterns, thereby minimizing the amount of stormwater that leaves the site and yielding a reserve that can be used to water the landscape. Chapman Homes of Santa Fe, New Mexico, installed a 1,200-gallon cistern at a cost of $3,000 for a PATH field evaluation. Rainwater from the cistern currently supplies about half of the landscaping needs in this arid region.
More Durable, Mold-Resistant Walls
In a demonstration project in Melbourne, Florida, Mercedes Homes along with PATH and FEMA studied ways to make homes more hurricane resistant and resilient. One effective way to improve the post-storm recovery is by using paperless drywall, or mold-resistant gypsum. Because paper facing supports mold growth, most drywall manufacturers have now introduced products with alternate facings. They come in the same sizes, and are installed identically to conventional drywall, with only about a 10 percent price premium.
Limiting mold growth in any home subjected to water intrusion could save thousands of dollars in repairs and replacement materials while protecting indoor air quality. Using mold-resistant drywall cost an additional $760 for the 2,000-square-foot Melbourne house.
Properly Installing Mechanical Equipment
Bob Black of Access of Sarasota used this practice in a 2,000-square-foot, single-story house he built for a former employee. Black established the attic as a conditioned space by insulating the attic kneewalls and roofline, and as a result was able to downsize the mechanical unit by half a ton. It cost Black $5,000 to spray Icynene insulation along the attic roofline, much more than the cost of conventional fiberglass batts. But this additional cost will be more than recouped over time through lower energy bills. Spraying the roofline also provided additional useable storage in the attic, which now averages only 10 degrees warmer than the living areas, instead of the more typical 60.
Low-flow fixtures
Water conservation is an important tenet of green building. Four entry-level single-family houses located in Bowie, Maryland, used low-flow fixtures to minimize their water consumption. When introduced, low-flow toilets generated complaints about trouble clearing the bowl and frequent clogging. Now manufacturers use wider flush valves and trapways, pressure-assisted flushing, and even dual-flush toilets to allow toilets to use less than 2.5 gallons per flush effectively. Low-flow toilets carry little or no price premium compared to more water-intensive models.
Laminar flow fixtures, which make lower water flow feel more vigorous, also helped reduce water consumption in the Bowie homes. Manufacturers claim that laminar flow controls can reduce water use by as much as 90 percent compared to conventional faucets, showerheads, and hoses. Like faucet aerators that reduce water use
by adding air into the stream, laminar controls are simply screwed into place on the faucet head.
Recycled Wood/Plastic Composite Lumber
Builders working on the Model reModel project, a row house renovation showcase in Philadelphia, chose wood/plastic composite lumber for the decking because it is made from recycled material and is more durable than conventional wood products. This composite lumber typically consists of a 50/50 mix of wood fibers from recovered sawdust and waste plastics, and is more rigid than 100 percent recycled plastic lumber. The plastic encapsulates and binds the wood together to resist moisture penetration and degradation from fungal rot.
Green But Ripe
The green rubric, though often flawed technically and in perception, is still strong. The ironic benefit of green-washing is that it aids in awareness of the broader green movement—the building equivalent of the old adage that being spoken of badly is better than not being spoken of at all. Green building, as a professional, stylistic, and social movement, is comprehensive and comprehensible to most people. It speaks to American building traditions while also liberating the imagination. It usually looks and feels good. Yet, as design professionals, advocates, and consumers, we must always educate ourselves and look beneath the surface when considering products and projects that claim to be environment-friendly. •
