"The Building of Tomorrow": Event Report on the Panel Discussion at the Austrian Embassy in Washington DC
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus
by Sonja Strohmer
On June 22, within the framework of the Austrian EU Presidency, the
Office of Science & Technology (OST) at the Embassy of Austria in
Washington DC hosted a symposium titled "The Building of Tomorrow" with
US and European design professionals, experts from the policy field and
academia, and representatives from the construction industry.
Over 80 attendees participated in lively discussions with the panelists on
such topics as how to define a "green building," the public reception
of and participation in sustainable building, and how public policy
might hold the key to defining a successful future of building green.
Most of the panelists agreed to share their expertise with an even
broader audience by contributing to this bridges' focus on "Green
Buildings" (see related articles box on the right.) In addition,
international experts on the topics will impart their knowledge on
issues ranging from how to successfully "green" educate people, to how
to make good money by building green.
The path to a sustainable future
The goal of Sustainable Development is to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This means that we have to provide enough energy and material resources for the next generations, an objective that can by achieved by two parallel measures: increasing our resource efficiency and transitioning to renewable resources.
The figure shows the total primary energy demand of the EU. The
"Negajoules" band on top indicates the energy being saved by efficiency
measures, based on 1971 energy usage. The basic message is: The energy
demand is rising, and without efficiency measures the increase would be
even higher. In spite of remarkable energy savings by efficiency
measures, the total demand has not been reduced. Due to the pressure of
an increasing energy demand a significant transition to renewable
resources has not yet occurred and is likely to be marginal further on.
If we wish to provide energy resources for future generations, the
measures have to be deeply intensified. This is also of particular
importance for the protection of the climate.
The following is an interview with Robert H. Donkers, Counselor for Environmental Affairs at the European Commission Delegation in Washington DC. It represents solely the opinion of the interviewee and does not necessarily reflect the position of the European Commission.
bridges: What is the current number of
"green buildings" in Europe? Are there specific goals that the European
Union has set in terms of the increase in sustainable construction?
Rob Donkers: "At this stage, no comprehensive statistics are
available at the EU level concerning the number of "green buildings" in
Europe, due to the fact that there is as yet no common "green building"
definition in the European Union. The concept of "green buildings"
seems to differ slightly between the EU and the US. In the US, the
focus seems to be exclusively on energy efficiency. In Europe the
concept is closer to that of sustainable buildings and sustainable
construction and, apart from energy efficiency, also includes aspects
such as the reduction of CO2 emissions to meet the Kyoto targets and
recyclability of materials.
Green Buildings in the United States—Regulations, Programs, and Trends: an Interview with William Sanders
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus
by Sonja Strohmer
The following is an interview with William H. Sanders III, who serves as the US EPA senior executive representative to the Federal
Green Building Council, and as the executive champion for green
building at EPA.
bridges: What is the current number of "green buildings" in the United States? Are there specific goals that the US has set in terms of the increase in sustainable construction?
Bill Sanders: There are a wide variety of approaches to green buildings, from organizations sponsoring Web sites and other resources with principles of green building and green materials, to certification programs for products (e.g., the Carpet and Rug Institute (CRI) Green Label program, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) wood certification program, Green Seal, etc.), to evolving certification programs for entire buildings and neighborhoods (such as the US Green Building Council (USGBC) LEEDTM certification program). But many green buildings that most would consider to be sustainable were constructed before there were such certification programs around to stamp them "green." And structures are being built today that have many, if not most, of the attributes we would define as sustainable, yet they elect not to pursue an "official" green certification.
"May have changed my life," writes a visitor in the comment book at the
National Building Museum's current exhibition, The Green House: New
Directions in Sustainable Architecture and Design. Much as curators
like to think that their exhibitions change lives, it is rare to hear
it put so succinctly. Yet, on page after page, visitors offer their
thanks, often augmented with an implied "at last"- at last green is
becoming mainstream; at last we can see how to make a difference; at
last architects are making houses green and beautiful; and from the
baby-boomers, at last ideas that were important 30 years ago are
becoming important again. Ideas once marginalized as "back to nature"
movements or "solar architecture" have been transformed into "green"
architecture, which nestles under the broader concept of
sustainability.
What is sustainability? Sometimes it seems we have invented a
complicated term for something that has characterized building for
thousands of years, yet sustainable technologies are not new. The
classic definition of sustainability dates back to the 1992 Earth
Summit, the United Nations Council on Environment and Development
conference in Rio de Janeiro: "Meeting the needs of the present
generation without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their needs." Sustainability is a complex concept, not a new style
of architecture and, interestingly, none of the principles enumerated
at the Earth Summit mentioned architecture in particular. It is a true
cultural shift, requiring each discipline and profession to employ its
unique tools to enroll the general public in effecting change.
If you had asked someone a decade ago, "Can you imagine living in a
green building?" the answer would probably have been, "You mean my
house painted green? Nah, it's not really one of my favorite colors . .
."
Unfortunately it's impossible to think of an equally
ambiguous question in German to compare public awareness of ecological
concepts with that of Austria ten years ago. "Oekohaus" might just be
mistaken for the house of a person with a particular "political
agenda." Perhaps if you asked people what they think of
"Nachhaltigkeit" in Austria or "sustainability" in the US, some might
be at a loss. However, if you asked if they would like to live in a
"Low-Energy House" the results would be quite different from ten years
ago.
This ambiguity forces us to consider the multitude of
meanings bundled under the wide umbrella of "Green Building." Energy
efficiency is often considered a significant part of sustainable
building concepts - indisputably important, but not the only indicator
of an ecologically valuable building. In Europe, people tend to point
their fingers across the Atlantic when discussing energy efficiency and
squandering resources. European houses in general are more efficient in
terms of energy used for heating and cooling. However, this is more an
economic than an ecologically-driven development. Energy is more
expensive for European consumers, so it makes sense to invest in more
efficiency. When it comes to sustainability this competitive edge can
quickly diminish. Here we have to look at the life cycle costs of
materials we use to achieve this goal - for example, the embedded
energy needed for production and demolition of extruded foam insulation
panels.
In the United States, interest in environmentally responsible or "green" buildings is booming. The US Green Building Council (USGBC), launched in 1993, has more than 6,500 member organizations and nearly 4,000 buildings registered within the LEED green building rating system. The two case studies below provide examples of the new direction of the American architectural community. These projects integrate solutions to environmental issues with fundamental building design. Exciting projects from the zero energy movement, as well as studies linking green development with worker productivity and well-being, highlight the promise of the US Green Building movement.
Over the past 15 years, the green building movement has gained
tremendous momentum in the United States. A wide variety of
institutions - private, public, and federal - have become eager to
reduce the environmental impact of new and existing facilities. As the
movement progresses, it is becoming more evident that sustainable
design benefits more than the environment. In fact, sustainable
facilities reap numerous additional benefits, many of which are just
beginning to be recognized as a by-product of green design.
In
the US, green building design began to influence laboratory design in
1999, with the official launching of the Laboratories for the 21st
Century (Labs21) program by the US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in cooperation with the US Department of Energy (DOE). Now with
the co-sponsorship of the International Institute for Sustainable
Laboratories (I2SL), Labs21 is gaining more recognition internationally
and has broadened its mission to address other high performance
facilities. Through partnerships within this industry, the EPA, DOE,
and I2SL are promoting a new era in laboratory design across the United
States. One product of this movement is the Biodesign Institute at
Arizona State University. At the Institute, the term "sustainability"
embodies a broad range of benefits associated with the green elements
of its design.
Top 14 Reasons for Home Builders to Consider Building Green
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus by H. Alan Mooney
The following is an edited version of an article by H. Alan Mooney,
P.E, president of Criterium Engineers. It was reprinted with permission
from the September/October 2006 issue of Mid-Atlantic Builder,
published by the Home Builders Association of Maryland. All rights
reserved.
Building green is getting a lot of attention, with
everyone asking HOW to build green. If you review the Green Building
guidelines of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), you can
see that they are well researched, comprehensive, and somewhat complex
to implement. For most builders, getting to the Gold level would
require a significant commitment of organizational efforts and
resources. So why bother? People are buying your homes. You have been
in business a long time. You have a good reputation. What you are doing
works for you. Building homes is complex enough already! Why bother to
build green at all?
To answer that question, here are 14
compelling reasons why building green makes sense for your business,
your customers, and your role as a community leader.
1. Building
green is no longer a "fringe" concept - it is mainstream. It is
commonsense building practices organized to be quantifiable and labeled
so you can talk about them.
The market for green built homes was $7.4
billion last year. NAHB has forecast that it will grow to $38 billion
in 2010. That's a 5-fold increase in five years, and 14 percent of the
single family market in
2010.
You are
already familiar with most methods and materials used for green
building. This is not a hi-tech, "push the envelope" way to build, but
an organized way to coordinate many established building practices to
produce an energy-efficient home.
The Austrian Passive House Group Visits Canada: Promoting the Building of Tomorrow
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus
by Guido Wimmers
Living in a passive house can be described as a 365-day stay in a
climatic spa. Fresh air flows in constantly, but traffic noise,
insects, dust, soot, and pollen remain outside while no heat is lost.
No cold building surfaces generate asymmetrical radiation temperatures.
All surface areas are equally warm - even the windows. The result is
simply a healthy and comfortable indoor environment.
Although occupants
of passive houses may open windows whenever they want, they won't have
to. A passive house is continuously supplied with fresh air via the
ventilating system and, because of the heat recovery, it always has a
comfortable temperature. This has several advantages: unlike window
ventilation, fine filters in the ventilating system keep out dirt and
pollen; and air quality within the house is always excellent, even when
occupants are away and/or windows are never opened.
The ventilation
system with heat recovery in a passive house is not an air conditioning
system that recirculates inside air. Bacterial growth can be a problem
in recirculation air systems with cooling, but only if they are poorly
maintained. Fan and valve noises are almost completely eliminated by
sound control measures like vibration isolation mounts and low air
speed. Jet nozzles guide incoming air along the ceiling, from which it
uniformly diffuses throughout the room at barely perceptible velocities.
Does this sound like a house you'd like to live in? Welcome to the building of tomorrow!
Innovation and Tradition: Freisinger Windows from the Tyrol to the World
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus
by Paulus Freisinger
Clever
window developments, valuable patents and diverse innovation, and
promotional prizes for unusual window developments - these are the
hallmarks of traditional Tyrolean window manufacturer, Freisinger,
which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary. Marked by a love of
wood as a material, and by a sense of ecological responsibility, this
traditional Tyrolean company is known internationally as the pioneer of
energy-saving wooden windows, particularly for passive house
construction. Passive houses manage without common energy sources and
are currently the ne plus ultra in low energy construction - not least
because increasing oil prices have raised consumers' awareness of
energy-saving solutions and support the passive housing trend.
Freisinger windows are used not only in Austria and Europe, but
throughout the world, for example in Japan, the US, and Israel. To move
innovative developments onto the market more quickly, Freisinger has
founded OPTIWIN , an international business group now comprising 14
European companies, producing Freisinger windows under license. In
September 2006, Freisinger toured Canada with Austrian passive house
element manufacturers and architects to publicize the advantages of
passive house technology and win new licensees for Freisinger Energy
Save Windows. If it were Freisinger's decision, the Austria House at
the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, Canada, would be built as a passive
house.
The buildings in which we live, play, work, and learn have a profound impact on environmental and human health. In the United States alone, buildings account for:
37% of all energy use, including 68% of all electricity use
40% of raw materials consumption
88% of potable water supplies
more than one-third of municipal solid waste streams
nearly 40% of CO2 emissions, the primary greenhouse gas associated with global climate change.
In addition, the US Environmental Protection Agency classifies indoor air quality as one of the top five environmental health risks today. The concentration of air pollutants indoors can be two-to-five times greater than in the outside air. Some concentrations have been measured at more than 100 times greater. (Source:Building Momentum, report prepared for the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works by USGBC, http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Resources/043003_hpgb_whitepaper.pdf)
Designing and building high performance "green" buildings - buildings that improve environmental, economic, health, and productivity performance - is thus critical to the future health of our planet and communities.
Abstract: Since nearly half of this planet's energy consumption is accounted for by the construction and maintenance of the built environment, architects can play a major role by fostering not only sustainable buildings, but entire communities. The key strategy of the most innovative architects is to use nature's example to guide the design process. The American Institute of Architects, the professional community of America's architects for nearly 150 years, is raising the awareness of its members and the public to create more efficient, valuable, healthy, and beautiful communities through sustainable design.
The following is an interview with Christine McEntee, executive vice president and CEO of the American Institute of Architects (AIA). She will share her thoughts with bridges on the different aspects of green buildings and green building policy, especially as related to architects and their historic role as designers.
The American Society of Landscape Architects: Sustainable Design - a Growing Area of Landscape Architectural Practice
bridges vol. 11, September 2006 / Green Buildings Focus
by Nancy Somerville
ASLA and the Profession of Landscape Architecture
Founded in 1899, the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) represents the landscape architecture profession in the United States. Beginning with 11 original members, ASLA now has more than 16,600 members across the US and in 42 countries worldwide. ASLA promotes careers in landscape architecture and advances the profession through advocacy, education, communication, and fellowship. Core ASLA programs and services include Landscape Architecture magazine; LAND Online, the Society's e-newsletter; the ASLA Annual Meeting and Exhibition; LATIS, the Landscape Architects Technical Information Series; the ASLA Professional Awards Program; Professional Practice Networks, which focus on specialty practice areas; and the ASLA Web site http://www.asla.org.
