[Greenbuilding] reaching conclusions

Sat Aug 5 01:38:42 CDT 2006

I like your comments and it inspired me to add a few.

Building 'green' has always been an oxymoron. Anyone involved in the
'profession' has probably felt the contradiction strongly. I'm sure most
would agree that it is far easier and perhaps more appropriate to discuss
environmental building than to actually detail it and have it constructed.

Environmental building is an attempt at a structured response to the
question of 'survival' in terms of habitat specifically and as a general
response to life. The environmental question in general is still vague and
so is the response. World culture still has some predominant authoritative
systems in place to deal with daily questions of survival; commerce,
religion, politics and environmental strategies for survival still have to
find a place within these systems.

The environmental response is an odd one in that it crosses boundaries and
has yet to find a repository. It has no place in commerce as its goal is not
to maximize wealth, It has not yet found its way into religion as its
antithetical to belief and it can't play a strong role in the day to day
exigencies that politics controls. 

I feel I can make these comments because I've been involved in designing
green buildings for what seems a long time but it remains a fairly isolated
activity within the mainstream and so remains as you have said a 'fairly
imprecise and fuzzy activity'. 

Best
John

TERRAIN E.D.S.
4465 UPHILL RD
DUNCAN BC
CAN V9L 6M7
PH 250-748-7672  FAX 250-748-7612 CELL 250-246-8541
terrain at shaw.ca 

I had three pieces of limestone on my desk, but I was terrified to find that
they required to be dusted daily, when the furniture of my mind was all
undusted still, and threw them out the window in disgust --Henry David
Thoreau

-----Original Message-----
From: greenbuilding-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:greenbuilding-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Philip
Proefrock
Sent: August 4, 2006 12:03 PM
To: greenbuilding at listserv.repp.org
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] reaching conclusions

I absolutely believe that "Greenness" is fuzzy.

Diversity is as much a green concept as any.  To try to focus on some kind
of final, correct answer seems to me to be completely misguided.  You are
only going to get a specific answer if you ask a specific question, and
"Which is the greenest?" is a pretty broad question.  Diversity allows for
multiple answers, rather than insisting that everything conform to a single,
limited standard.

The statement "The issue of cost is of course a non issue as the building
even at twice the cost of any other building will of course if more energy
efficient recoup any expense eventually," is misguided.  One material may
cost twice as much as another, but have no bearing on the energy efficiency
of a building.  Whether a basement column is wood or steel has virtually no
energy cost to the building.  There are different production and delivery
energy and environmental costs for those two options.  Many of the materials
that go into a building are effectively energy neutral to the operation of
the building; the selection of one over another has a negligible effect on
the energy neds for the building.  Recycled gyp board costs a bit more than
standard gyp board, but it performs the same thermally.  The building owner
will never recoup the additional cost in energy savings.

What standard of greenness are we talking about?  To take one example, I
think many would agree that indoor air quality is one metric of green
construction.  But is it greener to provide every dwelling with a filtration
and ventillation system in order to provide the cleanest indoor air quality,
or is it greener to provide those only to the homes of allergy sufferers and
others who need the advanced filtration, and allow other homes to have open
windows.  Better indoor air quality is greener, but providing it in only
some homes is less taxing on resources than trying to provide it everywhere.
Being less green in some cases ends up being more green in the aggregate.

I don't think green building is ever going to be a single set of absolute
answers.  Construction is always going to involve disruption to the
environment in one manner or another.  So every decision that goes into a
building project is a compromise between what is needed to create a building
and causing disruption of the natural environment.  It's the balance of
choices you make, and that is inherently fuzzy and imprecise.

Philip Proefrock

_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding email list
List info:
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_listserv.repp.org
List email: Greenbuilding at listserv.repp.org
Managed by BuildingGreen, Inc. http://www.buildinggreen.com
      publisher of Environmental Building News and GreenSpec(r)
Hosted and archived by REPP / CREST http://www.crest.org

__________ NOD32 1.1691 (20060803) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com