Well the Green Builders Journal is going to take a radical turn.
I started this series of blogs by defining what “Green” means. That led to how one can “measure” being Green. I used the LEED certification process as one way of measuring how Green a project is, and then wrote several Blogs explaining in depth the LEED process and how they define Green. City Ventures is currently building 6 projects to a LEED Gold certification. In that evolution of green building we’re discovering and adopting a new way to be Green.
And it doesn’t involve LEED.
What we’ve discovered as we learn how to produce Green homes is that LEED, while an excellent program on some levels, falls way short on other levels. Being Green for the sake of being Green is one strategy and one that is best suited for using the LEED program. However there are excellent Green strategies available that fall outside the LEED program. As a builder if we choose a Green strategy that LEED does not recognize, than that strategy doesn’t receive any points. As virtually all Green strategies available today cost more money, we’ve found ourselves having to decide between strategies that are green and get LEED points and strategies that are Green that save the homeowner on costs of living but do not earn LEED points.
Which is why we’re taking this radical turn.
City Ventures is devising it’s own Green strategy. It’s called Greenkey. Our goal with Greenkey is to adopt Green strategies that actually save the homeowner money by producing actual cost of living savings. The “list” of what makes a Greenkey home will constantly grow and evolve as we discover new and innovative Green ways of saving homeowners money by building more efficient homes and neighborhoods. The ultimate goal will be when the first Greenkey home is net zero energy. Net zero energy is when the amount of energy consumed by the home is equal to the amount of energy the homes produces.
We believe everyone wants to be Green. If you polled people walking out of the supermarket and asked them if they’d pay more for a Green home, they’d all probably say yes. When the reality of actually having to pay more for something simply because it’s Green actually shows up, most people make a different choice. Mother Earth needs to be saved but not if I have to actually write a check. If the choice is between a $350,000 townhome that isn’t Green next door to a $360,000 townhome that is Green, the real world is that Mother Earth takes a backseat to most people writing that $10,000 check.
That’s why we’ve decided to move past LEED, which is a purely Green program, and towards one that is Green AND reduces the cost of living for each homeowner that chooses to buy. Next Blog I’ll go back to the beginning and bring everyone up to date on our Greenkey strategy and what our first group of projects looks like from a Green standpoint and then where were looking to go in the future.
Until then
Herb
This blog will finish up the discussion of Water Efficiency as it relates to LEED certification. This, the third and final component, deals with Indoor Water Use.
Indoor water use efficiency differs from the previous two components in a way that up until now we haven’t had a chance or need, to talk about. Marketing. If you’ll remember the first component had to do with water REUSE. Other than infrastructure changes, for the most part this very green aspect occurs with little or no notice from the occupant. Even the second component, outdoor water use efficiency, can be implemented in a very green way without compromising anything in the how the property looks or functions. To be a successful green builder, you have to walk the fine line between being green and doing what’s best for the planet, and providing a product that the modern homebuyer has come to expect from a new home and how it lives. The reality of green building is that almost everyone SAYS they want to be green, but if they have to pay extra for it or it changes their way of life in a dramatic fashion, they’ll opt out of being green in a heartbeat.
Which gets us back to the Indoor Water Use efficiency component of LEED.
When it comes to indoor water use, its pretty simple. Wherever it comes out, try and make LESS of it come out, yet still accomplish its purpose. That’s the purest definition of efficiency…accomplishing the same with less. Showers, faucets, toilets, washers & dishwashers are pretty much the extent of our indoor water use, but can you think of five more important aspects of every day life in our modern society? Indoor water use efficiency is achieved by installing faucets and fixtures that lower the output of water to its designated use. Low flow fixtures and faucets definitely accomplish the goal of being efficient but this is where the tricky part of being a green builder in this aspect comes into play. People love their long luxurious showers, they want their dishes sparkling and their clothes soft and clean….and there can be nothing more annoying than having to flush a toilet twice to achieve its intended use. In other words purchasing low flow faucets and fixtures based on cost alone without researching which ones accomplish the goal of efficiency WITHOUT sacrificing function needs to be the absolute goal in this component. Being penny wise and pound foolish here can actually turn out to be very costly to a builder from a customer satisfaction standpoint. That’s why this aspect needs to be carefully planned out and implemented.
The very best low flow faucets and fixtures are NOT inexpensive. That makes this component of LEED a costly green aspect. As with all other products, I imagine the evolution will continue and low flow items will get better and cheaper. The Green Builder will continue to monitor the progress of this evolution but until function and cost become more realistic in how they can affect marketing and customer satisfaction, this expensive aspect of green building will have to be implemented with great caution.
Next time we’ll begin our discussion of another of LEED’s eight categories. We’ve discussed energy and water efficiency over the last several blogs.
Next we’ll tackle “Sustainable Sites”
Until then
Herb
So I left off last time with the word “sustainable”.
If a house, or a neighborhood, a City, or even a Nation, had an unlimited supply of energy, then in theory the demand for energy wouldn’t really matter. Scarcity is eliminated in a world where energy is unlimited, therefore the house, or the City, or whatever, “sustains” itself. It has zero affect on natural resources because nothing is being depleted in order for, whichever entity were talking about, to function.
The idea of anything that REQUIRES energy to function being able to PROVIDE that same energy on its own, is the pure definition of “Sustainability”.
Today, for the most part, the energy required to run our homes comes from electricity and natural gas. Natural gas is obviously a natural resource, and although it doesn’t seem to be limited in supply, clearly it is. At some point in the future the planet will simply run out of natural gas or it will be cost prohibitive to keep looking for it.
Electricity, on the other hand, has to be generated. Although wind and water can generate electricity in almost unlimited supply, most of the electricity we use today comes from coal and oil based generation sources. Coal and oil are obvious natural resources and unless you’ve lived under a rock for the last 50 years, you’re painfully aware of the fact that neither is available in unlimited supply.
By the way I should expand the definition of the word unlimited to include the word “free”. In Economic terms, something is truly unlimited, if and only if, its supply is never ending AND its cost is essentially zero. That’s why I say the Sun is an unlimited supply of energy. Its never ending (except at night) and its free. No one owns it, has a license or lease on it, nor is it difficult to harness. Its just there.
So you can see where I’m heading here.
If the free and unlimited energy from the Sun can be used to generate the electricity we need to power our homes, than not only would we not need to use coal or oil, but we could eliminate the need for natural gas as well. It wouldn’t matter how much energy we demanded to operate our homes because the free and unlimited supply of energy from the Sun means there is zero cost and 100% sustainability for each and every home, neighborhood, City, or Nation that adopts this VERY green strategy.
But is that really true? Is energy the only real aspect of our modern lifestyles that requires natural resources?
I think we know the answer to both is NO.
Next time I’ll explain why.
Until then
Herb