| February 2004 | |||||
|
|
Green Buildings Provide Solid Financial InvestmentsBuilding green is cost-effective, concludes a report commissioned by California's Sustainable Building Task Force, a group of over 40 California state agencies. The report, finished in October 2003, is the most exhaustive cost-benefit analysis of green building's ever undertaken. It found that green buildings have an average 0 to 2% increase in first cost over their conventional counterparts, but that they will recoup 20% of construction costs over 20 years - more than ten times the original investment in green features. The study, "The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings: A Report to California's Sustainable Building Task Force," was led by Greg Kats, principal of Washington, D.C. based Capital E and chair of the LEED(tm) Energy & Atmosphere technical advisory group, with contributions from the California Department of General Services and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. "There's a five-year lag between reality and perception," says Kats. "Five years ago, green buildings were unusual, expensive and it was unclear what the benefits were and cost anywhere from a 5% to 15% cost premium for green buildings," he says. "Now, materials and design processes have become standardized, and more people know how to do it." Integrating "sustainable" or "green" building practices into the construction of state buildings is a solid financial investment. For example, an initial upfront investment of up to $100,000 to incorporate green building features into a $5 million project would result in a savings of at least $1 million over the life of the building, assumed conservatively to be 20 years. This report began with an aggregation of data on actual or modeled costs for 33 green buildings. Largely derived from several dozen conversations with architects, developers and others, the data indicates that the average construction cost premium for green buildings is almost 2%, or about $4/sq. ft. in California, substantially less than is generally perceived. The report concluded that financial benefits of green design are between $50 and $70 per square foot in a LEED building, more than 10 times the additional cost associated with building green. The financial benefits of green buildings include lower energy, waste disposal, and water costs; lower environmental and emissions costs; lower operations and maintenance costs; and savings from increased productivity and health. These benefits range from being fairly predictable (energy, waste, and water savings) to relatively uncertain (productivity/health benefits). Constructing green buildings cost-effectively requires integrated green building design and a careful commissioning process. The commonly higher initial cost of green design and construction can be expected to drop as designers and builders gain experience in building green. Mr. Kats concludes by stating that "the report should permanently lay to rest the myth that green buildings are not cost effective and not ready for prime time." Click here to view the entire report. - TOP - Surveys Show Demand for Sustainable DesignDesign educators, students, and professionals want more green design, according to the results of a recent survey by Metropolis Magazine. The intent of the survey was to gauge what impact sustainability has on design education. The magazine also felt that little of what's called “green’ or “sustainable design” is based on solid theory – but is being attributed more to sporadic experience. The survey was conducted by Audience Profiler, an independent research organization. A questionnaire was posted on the magazine’s Web site and prompted design educators by e-mail to participate. A total of 371 responses were received from deans, department chairs, and professors in nearly all fifty states and Canada.
A slightly larger survey was conducted the prior year by the magazine. Fifty-four percent of 500 Web site respondents agreed that within 5 years, to be considered "good," any design would have to address sustainability, while 93% of practicing design professionals say they would like to know more about green design. Education, though, poses a barrier. While 92% of design educators and 86% of students are interested in green design, only 14% of students say the topic is discussed in studio work. A total of 63 percent of design professionals say they hire recent graduates from architecture and design schools. Of these, 41 percent would prefer to hire a student from a school that incorporates green design. Regarding when is “green design” required, only 5 percent of our respondents said green design is always required on their projects. 34 percent said it is sometimes required, 38 percent said it is rarely required, and 23 percent said it is never required. To view the 2002 Teaching Green Full Survey Report, click here. Finally, also see Green Building Design and Construction Study conducted by Walls & Ceiling Magazine where 67 percent of the respondents said they were involved in making purchasing decisions for environmentally considerate products. - TOP - CCSE Receives “Flex Your Power” Energy Efficiency Award Saving energy may not be the flashiest reason for winning an award, but in a state where every kilowatt counts, this one is like winning an Oscar®. The California Center for Sustainable Energy ( CCSE) recently announced that its “Cool Savings with Cool Roofs” program was selected for a 2003 Energy Efficiency Award given by the State of California’s “Flex Your Power” campaign. The Cool Roofs Program, administered by CCSE Program Manager, Frank White, provided incentives for the installation of highly reflective roofing materials – also called “cool” roofs. By reflecting the solar energy normally absorbed by roof surfaces and transferred as heat into the building’s air-conditioned spaces, “cool” roofs reduce peak electricity demand from air conditioning systems and can provide energy savings up to 40%. As one of five Statewide Regional Program Administrators, CCSE had the most program participants (972), installed the largest amount of “cool” roofing materials (27,797,831 sq ft) and was the only Program Administrator to achieve their targeted load reduction ( MW) goal. - TOP -
|
A total of 67% of those surveyed “Completely Agreed” that sustainability is relevant to their design curriculum. A total of 43% of instructors were discussing the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (California Center for Sustainable Energy, Copyright 2003 www.energycenter.org
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
