|
'Green' Construction Cost Effective
Not too long ago, a "green building" meant the
color a structure was painted.
Not today, though, when environmentally sustainable building
practices are being embraced by owners and builders.
The new building concepts have been spurred by the creation
of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or L.E.E.D.,
certification by the United States Green Building Council,
which is headquartered in Washington, D.C.
|
According to the USGBC, which began the certification process
in 1998, American buildings account for 36 percent of total
energy use, 30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and 30
percent of raw materials use. They generate 30 percent of
the solid waste, and use 12 percent of the potable water supply.
"Green" or "sustainable" structures use
key resources such as energy, water, materials, and land more
efficiently than buildings that are constructed to regular
building codes. Green buildings tend to create healthier work,
learning, and living environments, with more natural light
and better air quality.
In 2001, the USGBC had less than 300 members worldwide. This
year, there are 4,800 member companies alone in the United
States and L.E.E.D. projects under construction have more
than doubled. In 2002, 80 million sq. ft. of L.E.E.D-. certified
space was constructed and this year, more than 180 million
sq. ft. of L.E.E.D. certified space is under construction,
according to the USGBC.
So why isn't everybody building "green?"
"The biggest misunderstanding is the cost," said
Emily Turk, an architect with the USGBC in Washington, D.C.
"People think that building an environmentally friendly
building is expensive, but you can do a green building for
the same cost as a regular building."
The key to effective green building is integration of all
aspects of the process.
Integration begins with site selection and continues with
the design process, including specification of materials and
procedures for construction and operation of the building.
According to the U.S. Green Building Council, green design
and construction practices should significantly reduce or
eliminate the negative impacts of buildings on the environment
and on occupants by addressing five fundamental areas:
Site Planning - A few of the important aspects of
site planning are proximity to efficient transportation, orientation
of the building, site terrain, and vegetation.
Water Use - Designing for minimal use of water, by both
the building and the landscape, use of brown water, and on-site
recycling and water reclamation systems are some of the strategies
used.
Energy Use - The efficient use of energy and the use of
alternate, renewable energy sources should be considered.
Conservation of Materials and Resources - Many design decisions
impact the quantity of materials used and amount of waste
generated during construction. Dimensions may often be adjusted
slightly, resulting in less labor, energy, and materials used.
Indoor Environmental Quality - Because buildings are for
people to use, it is important to lay out space efficiently
for its intended use and to use materials that do not contribute
to indoor pollution.
These five broad categories are inseparably related. A design
optimized for only one of them will rarely result in the least
cost and environmental impact possible for the facility. Treating
the entire site as a unit reveals many possibilities for savings,
both in cost and in environmental impact that would not be
possible without an integrated approach. It is often the case
that using certain green options makes the use of other green
alternatives cost effective and feasible.
A good example is the Santa Fe, N.M., office and warehouse
designed by Albuquerque's Dent and Nordhaus Architect and
constructed by R.C. Green Construction of Santa Fe. Although
the project did not go through a L.E.E.D certification,
innovative construction techniques and energy modeling drastically
reduces the amount of energy consumed at the office/warehouse.
Using a pre-engineered steel frame, the building team butter-flied
the roof to collect rainwater that is channeled to a 10,000-gal.
cistern for irrigation. The project relies on radiant heating
in the floor, and a clerestory on the perimeter creates
enough natural light so lighting fixtures aren't needed
during the day. Operable windows allow for cross- venting
in the office/warehouse and swamp coolers pick up the slack.
"I sure thought it was crazy to use a pre- engineered
frame with a butterfly roof, but it worked," said architect
Stephan Dent. "We did some detailed energy modeling,
and if they operate it the way they should, it will use
a quarter of the energy that a conventional building would."
And all for $62 a sq. ft. in construction costs.
In fact, according to a study performed by Capital E group,
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and participating California
state agencies, the financial savings of green design are
between $50 and $70 per sq. ft. in a L.E.E.D. building.
The study concluded that "a minimal upfront investment
of about 2 percent of construction costs typically yields
life- cycle savings of more than 10 times the initial investment."
The financial benefits were found to be in lower energy,
waste and water costs; lower environmental and emissions
costs; and lower operational and maintenance costs and increased
productivity and health.
"The report should permanently lay to rest the myth
that green buildings are not cost- effective and not ready
for prime time," said Greg Kats, a principal at Capital
E, and the lead author of the report.
>'Green'
Construction Cost Effective
>Sun
to Supply Electricity
>The
Past Meets the Present
>Greening
Your Office Building
>Greening
Your Site
|
print this page
e-mail this page
