Green Starts at Home... Or Does It?

This past month I saw a lot of New Year's articles that addressed going green as a resolution for the upcoming year. Obviously their heart and mind were in the right place. But I wanted to be a bit cynical in this post.

Any home was once an empty piece of land. That piece of land was a special niche in the local ecology. A foot deep of priceless topsoil. Earthworms tilled the soil, butterflies hatching from cocoons on a nearby shrub. All sorts of life forming an interwoven, dynamic web. When you really think about it, that home wasn't built on an empty piece of land, it was built to replace a grassland or a stand of old hardwood trees.

To build this house, people decided to "improve" the land. They built a shell from the carcasses of trees as a shelter, the inhabitants themselves part of the extinction of half of biodiversity and the spoiling of every watershed on the planet. Mankind's capacity to upset nature is only matched by their capacity to delude themselves into thinking they benefit the planet by their presence.


It might sound like I am saying all human development is bad. In fact, that's exactly what I'm saying. But the environment can tolerate a little bad. Just not bad on the scale we've been doing. Going green is all about less bad.

So let's return to the issue of housing. Can going green at home really make a difference? It depends. Housing is a big piece of the puzzle, but the actual houses and what's inside of them aren't the problem. The problem is the way we organize our neighborhoods and cities. The built environment in the US forces a huge energy investment to accomplish anything.

The "go green at home" idea implies that we can save the world from climate change by buying products that are better for the environment. This makes the assumption that buying different things will give us different results. The truth is that we can't buy our way out of this.

Here is a chart showing the best ways to help the environment versus perception:



I'm no environmental saint. My own efforts in this realm pale in comparison to some of my neighbors and family. In reality we all need to go green at home, but it is not the most productive place to start changing. 

The problem is that as a democratic society we are all connected. The choices that people make affect all of us, sometimes in weird ways. When some people stop driving then others are likely to take their place. If people buy a car with a better gas mileage rating then they usually end up driving more miles. On average, its not easy to change social trends in the US through voluntary action.

So without major structural reforms of the built environment I fear that the sacrifices that people make net zero benefits. I applaud all of the efforts that people make, but I believe that going green doesn't begin at home, it begins with good policies. Now, more than ever before, we need to let science guide our policy making decisions rather than whatever it is that people talk about in media. Get active politically if you want to get active in the environment. Do your research, find and support groups and politicians that build their platform on the issues that matter to the environment. It doesn't even cost anything.

Role of Structural Engineers in Sustainable Construction

As more and more structural engineers have been considering their role in sustainability, there have been more resources available. The best sources of useful information concerning structural engineering and sustainable development are the May and June editions of Structure Magazine. This printed publication is made available freely to all NCSEA and SEI members, but anyone can access the online articles.

Sustainability articles typically address either the entire design process or specific strategies. This provides a convenient way to separate them into categories. First up, we have the articles that address design in general:

Overall Design Strategies
Once again, Structure Magazine leads the way with an article "Sustainable Buildings and the Structural Engineer." This article delineates all of the issues that sustainable develop should address and then shows how the structural engineer can impact the design. This is a great way to see all of the ideas laid out in one easy to grasp format.

Another article that I found useful is hosted at GoStructural.com (publisher of the trade magazine Structural Engineer). This is actually a collection of articles all on the same topic of sustainability.

Reuse of existing structures
One of the great things about sustainable development is that it recognizes the importance of historic preservation, or retaining existing buildings of any type. You may have heard the expression "The greenest building is one that's already built." This is the title of an article published by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, written by Carl Elefante. It's a great introduction into how these two topics work together, and a great rallying cry for those who feel that LEED credits don't properly address the issue.

Building on this call to reuse rather than tear-down and rebuild, another Structure Magazine article "Missed Opportunities in Structural Sustainablility" quantifies exactly how effective it would be to reuse a building. The bottom line: very effective. Essentially, this article shows that tearing down a building in just about any condition is the least green thing that can be done.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has issued a whitepaper laying out exactly why reusing buildings is sustainable, extending the definition to include economics, social benefits, and environmental benefits. Another great read for people looking for ways to change policy and public opinion.

Lastly, the NTHP has put up a fun slideshow of pictures of structures submitted by readers that show promise for renovation or adaptive reuse. So here is Reuse it! (a Flickr group). Feel free to add your own.

Minimizing use of materials
An interesting editorial in Structure Magazine on the topic of "Voided Two-Way Flat Plate Slabs". This is a particular strategy of sustainable design called dematerialization. Basically, if you consume fewer resources for a building of similar strength then you are doing good for the environment. Of course, you can't put that sort of strategy into a ratings system (e.g. LEED) because then every engineer will claim they are using less material. The USGBC handled this problem in other trades by creating a baseline case, so the strategy may still work for structural engineering. But few people want to encourage engineers to use less material, so it probably won't be included for that reason.

Maximizing material effectiveness
Another interesting Structure Magazine article addresses materials that act as structure, insulation, and soundproofing. "The Road to Code Acceptance for Autoclaved Aerated Concrete" details how AAC is being (slowly) approved by code provisions, as well as how to use it in your buildings even today by getting a per-project approval from your local jurisdiction.

And finally, news from the Pakistan Straw Bale and Appropriate Building (PAKSBAB). This group has more of a "damn the torpedoes" mentality because there really are no trade groups that would profit from such a low cost building material. So the only way this type of material will ever get used is from prototypes and bona fide living experiments. I wish them the best of luck!

Update: Greenwashing the Construction Industry

In a relevant update to my previous post on greenwashing, Scot Case, of the environmental consulting firm TerraChoice goes before the US Congress and says consumers are being deliberately lied to by corporations claiming environmental benefits to their products. In the article US shoppers misled by greenwash, the study finds that 98% of products claiming green-ness are false or misleading.

This is a great chance for the US federal government to set policies establishing fair market procedures for green products. People want to do the right thing, but they need help.

For those of us in the construction industry, this should serve as a warning. How much can you trust the claims of products available in the market? Third-party objectively verified results are the only way you will know for sure. Thus, LEED certification, Forest Stewardship Council, and similar programs will become the standard for green buildings. Nothing else will be relevant in the long run.

Also, I am happy to report that my greenwashing post was published in the April edition of Modern Steel Construction magazine, see the "Topping Out" section. This post apparently struck a chord with some people, and it was an honor to be selected.

Greenwashing the Construction Industry

By consensus of opinion, “sustainability” means “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Everyone involved in the construction industry, including civil and structural engineers, has a major role to play in sustainability.

Every resource to which we have access is limited in some way, and misallocation of those resources can cause all sorts of environmental, social, and economic distress. The recent global spike in oil prices and resulting economic collapse should remind us that this is not an academic exercise, and governments do not foresee every problem nor act quickly enough to manage the problems. Just over the horizon we can easily guess there will be resource issues concerning water, energy (again), and agricultural products. There is a lot of work to be done in the coming years to figure this all out.

However, there are a lot of companies out there that are still interested in doing business as usual, but making it appear as though they are taking steps towards sustainability. When a company puts out misleading information regarding its environmental policies, puts more emphasis on green marketing than sustainable development, or begins a marketing campaign about new sustainable initiatives before anything is done to support those initiatives, it is considered “greenwashing.” A small percentage of greenwashing is due to honest misunderstandings, but the much larger share is deliberate and shameful (see “Greenwash Brigade” on NPR’s website for an anti-greenwashing group that deserves a bit of attention.)

The most frustrating case I can think of is the attempt by some agricultural firms wanting to dilute the meaning of the term “organic.” Agricultural innovators worked for decades to bring this term to public awareness and as soon as people began to see the benefits and began buying organic products, certain agricultural interests and marketers wanted to get in on the action. However, few were willing to invest the capital to create truly organic products and began to lobby the USDA to change the definition of organic so that it would include their offerings. The organic label largely survived the assault, but the threat still exists.

In the world of construction, similar greenwashing activities are growing more prevalent. The number of TV shows offering “green” construction products or advice is nauseating. Common sense should rule here, but I think there really is no way that gutting an existing house in good shape and replacing all the finishes with green products is going to be ecologically friendly. It's just thinly disguised consumerism and a poorly conceived advertisement.

Sustainability is not something you can purchase at your local home improvement warehouse. It involves a comprehensive plan that addresses many facets of environmental issues and the public welfare. But if you are looking for a shortcut, the old hierarchy of “reduce, reuse, recycle” still applies.

The proper way to spot construction greenwashing is to investigate whether a development has independent third-party credentials. The United States Green Building Council’s LEED program, Energy Star homes, and other third-party certification programs are available. If a building development cannot show these credentials, do they at least offer data to the public so their claims can be evaluated? If none of this is available, it is likely the development is being promoted as green but no steps have actually been taken to promote sustainability.

Sustainability will be a key metric for construction projects of the future; don’t let your standards lapse just because there is money to be made. If you are engaging in greenwashing, it is likely your sustainability credentials and your professional reputation will suffer.