The American Gas Association is at it again. If you recall, about a year ago the organization pushed unsuccessfully to repeal Section 433 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. According to that provision, all new federal buildings and older structures undergoing renovations of more than $2.5 million are required to drastically slash their use of fossil fuel. The law sets rigorous but wholly realistic (given today’s technologies) targets culminating in the total elimination of fossil fuels by 2030. As I pointed out in a blog post a year ago, it represents nothing less than the federal adoption of Edward Mazria’s 2030 Challenge.
That groundbreaking piece of legislation is currently threatened. A new energy bill is circulating through Congress called the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013. According to durabilityanddesign.com, the proposed bill, sponsored by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rob Portman (R-OH), “would promote greater use of energy efficiency technology in commercial and residential buildings…”
But of course in the loopy, cynical, alternate reality of Washington, there’s a catch: the AGA is now pushing to include an amendment in the new bill, or introduce separate legislation, that would weaken or eliminate Section 433. Last week more than 350 of our leading architectural, engineering, design, consulting, and construction firms presented a letter to Congress protesting the move. It’s a veritable who’s-who of the built environment, with one conspicuous absence: the U.S. Green Buildings Council.
What gives? When asked about their glaring absence, Roger Platt, Senior Vice President Global Policy & Law at the USGBC, responded, “I wouldn’t read a thing into not being on that particular letter. We’re fully in support of all federal policies that have helped make the vision of the 2030 Challenge so consequential, including those in Section 433. We’re in continuing communication with Rep. Wyden’s office and many other members of the committee, and will be sending in our letter. This is a crucial debate. In our communications, we’re also looking at the short term consequences of the attacks on sustainability that this Senate debate has provoked, not the least of which is an effort to ban the use of LEED by the Federal government.” (more…)
The American Gas Association (AGA) is at it again. If you recall, about a year ago the organization pushed unsuccessfully to repeal Section 433 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. According to that provision, all new federal buildings and older structures undergoing renovations of more than $2.5 million are required to drastically slash their use of fossil fuel. The law sets rigorous but wholly realistic (given today’s technologies) targets culminating in the total elimination of fossil fuels by 2030. As I pointed out in a blog post a year ago, it represents nothing less than the federal adoption of architect Edward Mazria’s 2030 Challenge.
That groundbreaking piece of legislation is currently threatened. A new energy bill is circulating through Congress called the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013. According to durabilityanddesign.com, the proposed bill, sponsored by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rob Portman (R-OH), “would promote greater use of energy efficiency technology in commercial and residential buildings…”
But of course in the loopy, cynical, alternate reality of Washington, there’s a catch: the AGA is now pushing to include an amendment in the new bill that would weaken or eliminate Section 433. Last week more than 350 of our leading architectural, engineering, design, consulting, and construction firms presented a letter to Congress protesting the move. It’s a veritable who’s-who of the built environment, with one conspicuous absence: the U.S. Green Buildings Council. (more…)
Having followed Robin Guenther’s work for some time, when Fast Company named this FAIA and LEED AP one of “The World’s 100 Most Creative People in Business 2012,” I was delighted, but not surprised. The sustainable healthcare design leader at Perkins + Will is known as a strong and persistent advocate for human- and planetary health. Her crusade to increase her own knowledge about our material world gives her the authority of someone with genuine concern for her fellow creatures and long-term experience in the complex filed of health care design. Her advice to the magazine’s readers about the materials we live with every day, is dramatic in its simplicity:
“If they don’t tell you what’s in it, you probably don’t want what’s in it.”
“Consult your nose—if it stinks, don’t use it.”
“Use carbohydrate-based materials when you can.”
With this in mind, I asked Robin to talk about the Health Products Disclosure (HPD) initiative, and how it may change our material world for the better. Read her realistic, but optimistic observations on everything from HPD’s short and long term influence on the built environment, to the power of the design community in creating positive change in the marketplace, and more.
Susan S. Szenasy: You have been an eloquent advocate for patients (in fact anyone who works or visits) in the healthcare segment for as long as I can remember. Your ammo has been finding the least toxic, most healthy products available for the interiors you design. In view of your long and inspiring campaign for healthy interiors, what does the formation of HPD signal to you?
Robin Guenther: The HPD represents a major milestone in the advocacy for safer and healthier building materials. For the first time, we will have access to important, accurate information on the contents of building materials – “a nutrition label,” so to speak, that we can use to inform our specifications. As the HPD information is used to build Pharos, the Healthy Building Network comparative tool, it will accelerate the possibility of independent comparisons of products, another important aspect of this quest. (more…)
Something surprising has happened with many so-called “sustainable” buildings. When actually measured in post-occupancy assessments, they’ve proven far less sustainable than their proponents have claimed. In some cases they’ve actually performed worse than much older buildings, with no such claims.
A 2009 New York Times article, “Some buildings not living up to green label,” documented the extensive problems with many sustainability icons. Among other reasons for this failing, the Times pointed to the widespread use of expansive curtain-wall glass assemblies and large, “deep-plan” designs that put most usable space far from exterior walls, forcing greater reliance on artificial light and ventilation systems.
Before its cancellation, the Anara Tower was planned to be one of Dubai’s tallest buildings, and an icon of sustainability — despite its west-facing glazing, high embodied energy in materials, and, remarkably, a giant non-functional (i.e. decorative) wind turbine. The building offered the consumer packaging of an “image” of sustainability at the apparent expense of real sustainability. Illustration by WS Atkins PLC.
Partly in response to the bad press, the City of New York instituted a new law requiring disclosure of actual performance for many buildings. That led to reports of even more poor-performing sustainability icons. Another Times article, “City’s Law Tracking Energy Use Yields Some Surprises,” noted that the gleaming new 7 World Trade Center, LEED Gold-certified, scored just 74 on the Energy Star rating — one point below the minimum 75 for “high-efficiency buildings” under the national rating system. That modest rating doesn’t even factor in the significant embodied energy in the new materials of 7 World Trade Center.
Things got even worse in 2010 with a lawsuit [“$100 Million Class Action Filed Against LEED and USGBC”] against the US Green Building Council, developers of the LEED certification system (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). The plaintiffs in the lawsuit alleged that the USGBC engaged in “deceptive trade practices, false advertising and anti-trust” by promoting the LEED system, and argued that because the LEED system does not live up to predicted and advertised energy savings, the USGBC actually defrauded municipalities and private entities. The suit was ultimately dismissed, but in its wake the website Treehugger and others predicted, based on the evidence uncovered, that “there will be more of this kind of litigation.”
What’s going on? How can the desire to increase sustainability actually result in its opposite?
One problem with many sustainability approaches is that they don’t question the underlying building type. Instead they only add new “greener” components, such as more efficient mechanical systems and better wall insulation. But this “bolt-on” conception of sustainability, even when partially successful, has the drawback of leaving underlying forms, and the structural system that generates them, intact. The result is too often the familiar “law of unintended consequences.” What’s gained in one area is lost elsewhere as the result of other unanticipated interactions. (more…)
"Winter is coming."
This is the common refrain in the popular book, Game of Thrones, in which kings vie to take over lands. As I thought about the green building policy mess of 2012, I couldn’t help but draw comparisons to Game o…
Bay Area locals are mighty excited about Greenbuild coming to San Francisco in November. The conference theme, “@ Greenbuild,” references the mindboggling array of Internet and technology companies headquartered in our backyards. You know Google, Yahoo, Twitter (co-founder, Biz Stone, will join us at the Greenbuild opening plenary), LinkedIn, Yelp, and YouTube. Smaller social media outlets are also ubiquitous, including StumbleUpon, Reddit, Delicious, Yammer, Pinterest, and many more. Of the 17 companies mentioned in a recent survey on social media for designers, all but one are headquartered here. (Tumblr hails from New York. Rebels!) We also have our host of gaming companies, many of whom tap into social networks; gamejobhunter lists over 120 companies nearby, from tiny start-ups to titans like EA and Zynga.
Our social media bonanza has roots in the original tech boom in Silicon Valley – named after silicon chip innovators – back in the 1970s. What is Silicon Valley exactly? Although the name originally referred to a specific region around Stanford University and San Jose, its tech prowess has spread throughout the region; the San Jose Mercury News recently argued that “Silicon Valley” now includes five Bay Area counties. For many of us, though, Silicon Valley is more about a mindset and an approach to business that’s become synonymous with high tech innovation. It has remained in this area because, as I once learned in a city planning class, companies that demand a stream of employees with the tech sector’s specialized mindset and skillset tend to thrive when they flock together. (San Francisco’s tax break for tech companies probably doesn’t hurt either.)
Autodesk, another Bay Area tech giant,
enjoys a LEED CI Platinum certification for its One Market St. office space.
Photo by David Wakely, courtesy of HOK.
Boucher Grygier Shipping Container House, Innovation and Transition tour, photo courtesy of Jan Grygier
From giant redwoods to adaptive reuse, San Francisco is chock full of memorable sights – green buildings and beyond. At USGBC’s annual Greenbuild International Conference and Expo, held in San Francisco this November, you can sample from two dozen tours of buildings (and much more), specially curated by San Fran insiders.
Every year, the Greenbuild “host committee” of volunteers from USGBC’s regional chapters organizes a series of tours to help visitors learn more about the community and the buildings and the culture of each host locale. This year’s lineup is really impressive. The tour committee, led by Lindsay Baker (Green Team Consultant at Mary Davidge Associates) and Mark Palmer (Green Building Coordinator at City and County of San Francisco), has handpicked 12 half-day tours on Friday and Saturday, plus 12 full-day tours on Saturday.
McGee Salvage House, Berkeley Walking Tour, photo courtesy of Leger Wanaselja Architecture
How did they do it? The criteria for setting up the tours included a focus on educational content, the operational issues, showcasing the Bay Area, showing off unique approaches to green buildings, and making sure that the tours would be fun and interactive. The 25-person committee received a whopping 170 submissions and then scored and grouped them.
We’re excited to announce that the USGBC blog has moved to the new USGBC.org website.
Head there now to check out our recent posts, including:
3 Things You Need to Know About Energy Data & LEED
The Building Happiness Metric, and
How Do I Choose a…
It seems nary a week (or two) goes by without news of yet another “strategic partnership” or acquisition involving Perkins + Will (P+W). Last week brought news that Envision Design—the Washington, D.C.-based architecture firm founded by Ken Wilson and Diana Horvat—had joined the P+W fold. For 13 years, Envision carved out a rather impressive niche as green interiors specialists. They designed offices for Greenpeace, the Environmental Defense Fund, and, three years ago, the LEED Platinum headquarters for the U.S. Green Buildings Council in Washington. We did a major story on the USGBC offices and got to know the firm well. So last week I called Wilson and asked him about the process of being acquired by such a savvy-acquirer. P+W’s approach can be best described as that of a quietly persistent, strategically patient suitor:
On the long courtship: “They first reached out to us about eight years ago. They sent an emissary up from Atlanta. Someone whose firm had recently been acquired by Perkins + Will, who basically said, ‘We did it and it worked out for us.’ We met with them. We drank a lot of very expensive wine. But both Diana and I felt the timing wasn’t right.”
On why they said yes now: “It’s a bitch to run an architecture office these days. And we thought, if we could work something out where we could do less of what we don’t like doing, which is managing the day to day, and more of what we like to do, then we would be interested.”
Marisa Long
External Relations Manager
U.S. Green Building Council
Mark MacCracken, Immediate Past Chair of USGBC’s Board of Directors and CEO of CALMAC Manufacturing Corporation, is embarking on an adventure that’s taken him and his 25-year-old son, Josh, to the Swiss Alps; where they are climbing the Matterhorn, one of the highest peaks in the region, and clearly the most recognizable. Each foot they climb is raising money to build USGBC’s LEED Platinum Project Haiti Orphanage & Children’s Center being designed by HOK Architects.
Marisa Long: What made you decide to climb the Matterhorn?
 |
| Mark with his son, Josh, on a recent climbing expedition |
Mark MacCracken: I was fortunate to first visit Switzerland and Zermatt almost 20 years ago and have been going with my wife Kimberly to ski for many years. The mountain is truly majestic and the lure to climb it was palpable, at least for me. About 10 years ago I mentioned it to my son and we put it in the “bucket” list. Two years ago my son said to me, “Dad, you aren’t getting any younger, I think we need to do this now.” I’m always looking for adventures for my son and I to take together and this seemed like a perfect fit. Knowing my year as Chair of USGBC’s Board of Directors would be very demanding on my time, and needing time to prepare, we set the date for Summer 2012.
ML: What did you have to do to get ready for this trip?
MM: Since it is a pretty dangerous adventure, my wife, Kimberly, laid down the ground rules: I had to take a mountaineering course first and had to get in great condition. Last year I took an extensive mountaineering course, learned all the safety techniques including cravats rescue and climbing in snow with crampons on 60 degree inclines. The week ended with an ascent of Mount Baker in Washington, which is about 11,000 feet. Physically, the Matterhorn climb is very demanding. I spent about two years getting into better shape. One of the best preparation exercises has been climbing the stairs in the 36-story building where I live (New York City). I slowly built up from doing the building two or three times, with no pack, to nine times in succession with 30 pounds on my back. I would take the elevator down, to save the knees and time, which resulted in some interesting conversations and some new friends.
ML: How are you using this opportunity to raise money for Project Haiti?
MM: I’ve wanted to do some type of fundraising for Project Haiti and was looking for a good opportunity that would be challenging and worthwhile. I had the idea to link it to the climb and after supportive conversations with Rick (Fedrizzi, USGBC’s president & CEO) and Roger (Limoges, USGBC’s vice president of organizational development) it became real. At USGBC’s Mid-Year Meeting this summer, I was given the opportunity to speak to all of the attendees during the opening plenary, and I announced my intentions in front of more than 500 USGBC chapter leaders and board members. Within just the first 20 minutes more than 30 people emailed me saying they wanted to make a donation.
I wanted it to be simple for people to donate, so for every foot I climb on the Matterhorn, I asked for a penny to be pledged toward Project Haiti. On the big day, we climb Hornli Hut at 10,000 feet to the peak at 14,800 feet, so each cent would be a $48 dollar donation, rounded to $50 if I made the summit. To incentivize further, my company, CALMAC, agreed to matching the funds I raised through others, up to $10,000. To my surprise some people donated 5, 10 and even 20 cents per foot! Nearly 100 percent of USGBC¹s Board of Directors, and dozens of USGBC Chapter leaders, industry contacts, squash buddies and friends are supporting this cause.
ML: What are you most excited about for this adventure?
MM: Sharing this experience with my son is what I am looking forward to the most. The Swiss Alps are mystical with rolling fields and fantastic snow covered mountains so we will just take it all in. I’m also excited that through this experience, I will be able to contribute to Project Haiti in a meaningful way. I will be thinking about the children and families who will benefit throughout this journey.
William Nutt
Associate, Marketing and Communications
U.S. Green Building Council
Urban Green Council, the New York City chapter of USGBC, held the first-ever EBie Awards on June 28th at the Hard Rock Café Theater. Though this marks the first public s…
Mahesh Ramanujam
Chief Operating Officer
U.S. Green Building Council
“Invent because you must.”
Tom Sachs’ adage is a fitting mantra for our International vision for LEED. As the market and the passion for LEED grows around the world, we must r…
Jeremy Sigmon, LEED® AP BD+C
Director, Technical Policy
U.S. Green Building Council
Even in a still struggling economy, green building policymaking continues. To celebrate some of the impressive progress this year, USGBC partnered with the Nationa…
Jeremy Sigmon, LEED® AP BD+C
Director, Technical Policy
U.S. Green Building Council
Even in a still struggling economy, green building policymaking continues. To celebrate some of the impressive progress this year, USGBC partnered with the National …
Nathaniel Allen
Center for Green Schools Advocacy Lead
U.S. Green Building Council
Earlier this week, the Center for Green Schools at the U.S. Green Building Council co-hosted a reception at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) along…
