Showing posts with label green building. Show all posts
Showing posts with label green building. Show all posts

Sunday, February 15, 2009

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

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Green Buildings = Green Mountains


One of my fellow GreenFaith Fellows, Sr. Kathleen Denigan, traveled to W. Va. after our last retreat in early November. As she said, “…I am going to Appalachia to do "the great work" with people who are watching their mountains be massacred to make a bit of energy that will probably be transported to China…” More than likely however, coal being extracted by blasting mountaintops away will stay right here in the US.

Mountaintop removal is the new and improved, fast, cheap way coal companies are extracting veins of coal from Earth –new in that it started in the 1970’s, improved in that it reduces manpower needs and takes less time than digging tunnels and mining by more ‘traditional’ means would, all resulting in less labor costs and increased profit.

The environmental destruction occurring because of mountaintop removal is heart wrenching, not to mention the overall impact on general human community, i.e.: looking to take care of one another versus increasing profit. But so too, is our need for power, more and more of it each year. Just like with water (http://greenbuildingtheology.blogspot.com/2008/12/i-thought-lot-about-water-thanksgiving.html), we expect to plug a device in or flip a switch, and have the device work, or a light go on. Our lives run on electricity. And although we have the ability to purchase wind energy, or install PV –which in all honesty, remains too cost prohibitive for most at present, the fact remains that for the most part, we are all still pretty connected to coal, in some way, however large or small (save for those completely off the grid).

I don’t mean to belittle any of us who are doing what we can to reduce our energy needs. But no matter how hard we try to remove ourselves from coal generating power, the fact remains that we are in some way connected to it. We cannot control –always, who generates power for our office space, nor can we control who generates power for our grocery store, doctor’s office, school, and etc. So in some way, we are probably all connected to mountaintop removal –in fact, you can indeed find out if you are or not by visiting
http://www.ilovemountains.org/myconnection/. You can also watch some videos on mountaintop removal at that site, as well as here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPixjCneseE.

More than likely, we will continue to have coal generated power for many years into the future. This saddens me, because of the destructive environmental impacts we now know coal has, from mining to burning it –it’s not only environmental destruction either, its impacts to general health and well-being of Appalachian communities, as well as those living near the generating stations. But the reality is we won’t be able to make a switch from one form of generation to another in say, a year. And in fairness, we cannot lay blame entirely on coal companies either –although some may feel otherwise. When coal was “discovered” back in the 1700’s and started to be used to create our modern world during the Industrial Revolution, no one thought we’d wind up where we are today with respect to emissions to our air, environmental destruction, and the potential for man-made contributions to climate changes. In addition, the coal industry over many centuries has built an entire industry which supports and sustains families and local economies; relatives from both sides of my family, immigrants, worked in Pennsylvania coal mines in the early part of the 20th century.

However, I am also hopeful that coal companies are looking at ways not just to generate ‘clean coal’ (which I am sorry to those clean coal proponents, I’ve looked at both sides, weighed the facts, discerned about it, and rendered my opinion -there is no such thing as clean coal; you are welcome to yours), but ways to restructure and innovate their companies to focus on and provide renewable and cleaner forms of energy such as wind, solar and geothermal (although the latter does have some environmental impacts as well, and gives off a nasty odor of sulfur). The Saudi’s are hedging bets and investing heavily in solar –even with 18 billion barrels of oil left. Will we be buying power generated by the sun (which provides power for free) from them too in 100 years, via a global grid? They hope so.

So what do green buildings have to do with mountaintop removal? A lot. Buildings require a lot of power. Electricity powers the obvious like lights, computers and servers, vending machines, phone systems but also runs HVAC equipment, pumps, refrigeration equipment and much, much more. Don’t even get me started on what must be needed to operate Google’s servers, and who today, could exist without Google (I ask, tongue in cheek)?

Reducing the amount of power needed for a building overall reduces the need for power in general, which reduces the draw required from the grid, which reduces the amount of power a generating station must generate, which reduces the need for coal, which means, that maybe, just maybe, we won’t need as much coal as fast as we think, which means more time to shift over to newer, renewable forms of power generation to provide power for buildings.

Reducing need can be accomplished many ways: orienting a new building properly on the site to maximize natural daylight penetration, thereby reducing the need for electric light, combining mechanical and natural ventilation, thereby reducing power needed to run heating and cooling equipment, installing the most efficient lamp available for lights, thereby reducing the power needed to keep the light on, providing daylight harvesting, and much more. Much of what I’ve listed can also be implemented during retrofits of existing buildings as well. This all combined with installing renewable forms on the building itself or on the building site, when taking all buildings into account all over the country –new and existing, residential, commercial and industrial, could mean a drastic reduction in the need for coal generated power. That means that maybe more mountaintops won’t be sacrificed to quench our need for electricity.

Psalm 24 says “The Earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it…” so in theory, the coal, natural gas and oil within Earth is His, and one could argue, for us to use. But Genesis also requires that we humans, made in *God’s image, exercise dominion over Earth, that is, act responsibly, in compassion and care for all of Earth, all its creatures and vegetation, all its glory, which God created. I think God challenges us way more often than we think -and in ways we would never think *He might challenge us either. Maybe, just maybe, we really need to be looking at what we want, and asking ourselves in reality, what do we need? Maybe taking the coal, every last vein of it, is like taking the last chocolate in the box when you know you’ve had way too many already, and perhaps leaving it for someone else, say, a few generations from now, might be the better thing to do.

I don’t believe God is particularly happy about seeing the beautiful mountaintops He created decimated for some veins of coal, even if they are reclaimed afterwards. But somehow sticking a few baseball fields on a now flat mountaintop, as I saw in one case, doesn’t seem to equal what was taken and what was sacrificed. There are better ways. Let’s keep working together, at table, in community, to find them. Building green is a great way to start.


*Please always feel free to insert the God of your choice (Mohammed, Buddha, etc.), as well as your perceived gender of God.

Image from www.ILoveMountains.org website.