The Value of Value Engineering - Part 1

Over the next few posts I’d like to talk about value engineering, but not in the typical understanding and use of this term and action in the design and construction industry today. Value engineering means taking a project and slicing and dicing it to be within budget. This is done generally through changing materials, or systems (building envelope –floors, walls, roof and/or mechanical), or in more “severe” cases, reducing square footage, and so forth.

Instead, I’d like to talk about value engineering in relation to sustainable design, and the creation of our built environment.

But first, I’d like to talk a bit about paradigm shifts.

Where’s the Easy Button?
We are in the midst of a paradigm shift with respect to how we connect to Earth. For the past several decades, we have seen a rise in environmentalism and environmental responsibility. Indeed, whereas before an environmentalist might be labeled a tree hugger, today it is probably more un-cool to NOT be green, no matter what shade you are; today, green is everywhere. And more and more we are thinking beyond our current wants and needs to ever greater extents -or in some cases, at least starting to. But essentially, we are beginning to truly see that we are not separate from Earth, and are in fact part of Earth, and what we do effects it, just as what Earth does effects us. We are moving from a very linear way of thinking and being, one which is divorced from connection to Earth, to a much more grounded and holistic way of thinking and being.

How we design and build is in no way divorced from this paradigm shift. The thing about paradigm shifts though, is that they’re tough. And I have two examples for you, to help you understand just how tough a paradigm shift is.

The World is Flat. Dammit.
The first one is, flat world / round world. For a very long time, we thought the world was flat. If you sailed past the horizon, supposedly you were toast. But there were those who also thought, hmm, this doesn’t make sense. Let’s test this. So one day someone kept sailing past the horizon and discovered that in fact, it didn’t end, and that by following the stars, the sun, the moon, which are the same everywhere, just positioned differently depending on longitude and latitude, they could in fact arrive back in the place where they started.

Imagine the turmoil this caused. Everything that probably a majority of the population thought was true was no longer true. It changed all the rules.

The next one is humors (also called vapors) and germs. For a very long time, we thought that disease was caused by vapors -essentially, the air itself. But there were those who also thought, hmm, this doesn’t make sense. So they tested and researched and questioned until one day they discovered these dastardly microscopic things called germs.

Imagine the turmoil this caused. Everything that physicians of the time knew, from how they treated sickness, to what sickness was, to even training physicians, was no longer true. It changed all the rules.

It’s Not Easy Being Green
Now we are in the shift between conventional building and green building.

Our conventional way of designing and building is a very economically driven industry, one built primarily on first costs. Now, granted, what isn’t economically driven, but for the sake of this talk, we’ll focus on the design and construction industry. And, to boot, for all we know, perhaps building has been a very economically driven industry since we began building. Picture a Roman Emperor for example, building a building, one which probably still stands today, saying to his builder “yes, yes, I do want the Senate chambers to last and be reflective of our empire, but I don’t want to pay a lot for it; find the cheapest stone you can and build with that.”

Now, however, we are moving to a more holistic way of building, one which also considers the economic impacts of NOT building responsibly. This way of building is nicknamed green building. Believe it or not however, with respect to green building we still have a ways to go -like I said, paradigm shifts are tough and they take time. We are saying in some respects that everything we thought to be true about how we design and build may not be as true any longer. We are also still focused in large part on first costs, rather than long term costs, in spite of new evidence each day that thinking long term makes economic sense. Still though, and in spite of good intentions, the value of the dollar in hand today speaks volumes over the dollar in hand down the road.

Part of this is due in large part to a misunderstanding of what green design is. Green isn’t an add-on. It isn’t merely following the LEED Rating System either -although LEED is an excellent tool and a great place to start. It is also not a linear process, which is how we’ve designed and built for so long.

Turning the Tables
So this is where I want to begin looking at value engineering with respect to green building. But again, I am putting a different spin on the term. Instead of looking at value engineering in the standard light of getting a project within a set budget, which is for the most part, about first costs –which granted, strives to achieve the best possible building, I instead want to look at value engineering in terms of long-term impacts and costs to us, to our legacy, to Earth. Now, I am going to add a caveat to this. In spite of the rise of green building, there are also those who still argue that it is not economically viable. There are others who just aren’t ready to move in the green building direction. This however, is all in the spirit of a paradigm shift, just as someone like me, advancing and challenging our conventional ways of thinking is part of a paradigm shift.

End Part 1.
Next week, I'll start to look at value engineering through the lens of the LEED rating system

Image: Circa 1531 map of the world, from Google Images

Tutu's take on building green

If you didn't attend the United States Green Build Council's annual GreenBuild in Boston this past November 2008, you missed an amazing keynote address by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. I also missed GreenBuild, but thankfully, the USGBC now has GreenBuild365, where you can watch webcasts of master speakers. Tutu's keynote was eloquent, witty, nutty, inspiring and necessary. Tutu never minces words -he tells it like it is, being the extremely important common sense, moral voice that he is. And in this talk, he speaks about God's most magnificent creation, Earth, and the responsibility we in the design and construction industry have towards caring for it.

This important keynote may not be accessible permanently

Even more importantly though, his keynote address I recently found out, may not remain a permanent part of GreenBuild365, as Tutu owns the rights to the webcast. So please take 30-40 minutes and listen now, while you can.

Note: you need to create an account to login to the USGBC site to listen, but it is an easy registration process. USGBC does not sell or give your name/email away either.

Around the United States in 40 Days

Why a mandatory field trip for Obama to assess the effects of climate change is in order

Note: this post has nothing to do with green buildings directly…

We are 17 days away from inauguration day. Personally, I can’t wait. And I think polar bears –not to mention a host of other species, feel the same. Barack Obama has many challenges to tackle after he takes office of course, ranging from the Israel-Palestinian conflict, to Afghanistan, to our economic “crisis” (in quotes because I think we are all learning a great deal about ourselves and money because of this, so maybe not so much a crisis as a much needed whack upside the head from a much wiser elder), to our changing climate. On the latter, Barack Obama has spoken often of a “planet in peril,” and seems ready, willing and able to face the challenges ahead of him on this front; he gets it.

Dear Barack and Michelle…

Dr. James Hansen, the NASA scientist who woke us up to our changing climate, wrote an open letter about just that to the Obama’s just before the new year, a cover letter to a document he authored titled “Tell Barack the Truth – The Whole Truth.” As I read Hansen’s letter and the document, I thought about all the good intentions, and also, all the politicking that is bound to go on. Believe me, I am extremely hopeful and am watching in excitement as I see the tide shifting. But I also recognize that we are more often than not, a reactive society. We tend to talk and talk and talk… and talk some more, and then when something happens, we react. When it comes to Earth, we don’t have time to talk anymore. We’ve talked enough.

The Field Trip

This is when I got my idea for a mandatory field trip for the Obama’s, his entire cabinet, all of Congress, executives from the coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear sectors, climate scientists (from both the climate change proponent and non-proponent camps), and some key environmentalists (like NRDC as an example). I’ll stop there –you get the idea. It would be a 40 day field trip –the government can be run remotely and at most, Obama is 12 hours by plane from DC. They would all travel the United States together, and see first-hand, the impacts of our actions and how we are affecting our climate, our land, our water, our wildlife, and more, in a myriad of ways. They would talk to people of all ages and backgrounds. They would also be required to come to table, together, each evening (in smaller groups of course, with mediators perhaps), to discuss what they saw, how they feel, what can be done, and how we start.

Christ went into the desert for 40 days after being baptized. He returned, further transformed by what he saw and experienced, ready to undertake the enormous task which lay before Him. I can only see the same happening for all participants during the course of this 40 day field trip across the US.

Water Follies

I thought a lot about water Thanksgiving week. I spent it in Scottsdale, AZ, which is, basically, in the desert. I do my best to be conscious of how much water I use at home (Collingswood, NJ), though I’m far from perfect and could do better. And although I inherently understand the increased challenges cities in arid climates face with respect to getting water, actually “living” in the desert for a week made me to think about water much differently. Out there I felt a heightened awareness to how much I was using each time I turned on the tap or shower or flushed the toilet. Even more so, I felt a heightened sensitivity to the lack of water. So I thought a lot about water.

We are used to turning on the tap and having clean, fresh water at our disposal. Humans –as well as every other creature on Earth, need water to survive. It quenches, cleanses, purifies, nourishes, and cultivates, to name a few. And we actually have a finite amount on Earth –precipitation aside. We can’t make water easily either -from scratch that is (okay, actually we can, but it isn’t easy http://science.howstuffworks.com/manufacture-water.htm), although there are some interesting experiments for turning water vapor back into liquid water in large quantities (http://www.waterunlimited.com.au/index.html).

Not to knock Phoenix and Scottsdale, but I spent some time last week reading their 2005 Water Resources Plan (http://phoenix.gov/WATER/wtrpln05.html). The report states that Phoenix has enough to meet current demands for the next 50 years and beyond –although how long beyond equates to isn’t stipulated. They are approaching this very responsibly too, but 50 years is hardly a generation. What about a plan that looks at minimum, say, 500 years into the future? How would this change the approach to and thinking about the plan, as well as future growth for the city?

Thinking about all this also got me musing about resources we use to produce energy. Our current priorities are focused on having enough oil, coal and natural gas. However, we can actually live without these (and although it would require adaptation and change, it wouldn’t mean a return to the Dark Ages). Rarely though, do we hear enough about water and dwindling supplies in the news. We cannot live without water.

The giving of water by one person to another in need is often seen as one of the most charitable acts of humanity. We are taking vast quantities of water from Earth, and even changing the very ecology and hydrology of Earth’s waterways and groundwater sources to meet current demand without replacing in kind. Most of our sources are dwindling. Many are polluted. Do we see the provision of water by Earth as a charitable act? Taking this a step further, are there moral questions around water we as a collective global society need to be asking and answering? Such as, how much growth for a city is too much and what does it need to be limited to or, how does the taking of water for City X deprive flora and fauna both near and far and what steps are we going to take now to ensure that there is enough water for all living things, not just humans, or, what is the long term, i.e.: 500 year, environmental impact of any new commercial or residential building which conducts business as usual with respect to water usage, i.e.: merely meeting minimum standards?

The next version of the LEED rating system, LEED 2009, calls for a mandatory 20 percent water use reduction. That’s a step in the right direction, but we can do better. In reality, we must do better to even consider having water 500 years from now, and beyond. For buildings, this means moving towards a closed loop system, striving to capture and recycle every molecule of water which can possibly be so, for both new and existing buildings. We also need to continue to think outside the box, challenging current accepted standards, codes and practices as well as repairing and restoring our waterways and groundwater supplies. Finally, we need to see water as a gift from Earth for us and for all living things, one to be used with the utmost judiciousness, and the giving of it by Earth understood to be one of the most benevolent acts bestowed upon humankind.