John Davies, a geophysicist and research director at the Fairbanks-based Cold Climate Housing Research Center, got a little choked up today talking about green building. Well, to be fair, he got choked up recounting how Desmond Tutu, at a green building conference last month in Boston, explained to a bunch of builders how the election of Barack Obama had restored "the world's" faith in democracy. Whatever. In any case, Davies' passion for green building was clear.
Davies was giving a primer on the relatively new LEED program for residential buildings (and, more generally, the benefits of building smart) to a Democratic party group here in Fairbanks. The residential certification program, put together by the US Green Building Council, follows the commercial LEED program that's been in place for years. It takes into account everything from site selection and building materials to air quality and energy use. Builders must meet basic criteria in all fields, then earn the extra points needed for certification by doing extra things within any field. Certification comes in different levels -- silver, gold, and platinum -- and can even apply to entire neighborhoods.
The way Davies described it, green building done right is a win-win all around. It's healthier, better for the environment, and saves money. Even if the upfront construction cost is higher, the energy savings make up for the higher costs. (Combined mortgage and utility costs are typically lower, Davies claimed.)
This got me thinking. Surely people consider the "operating cost" of a home before buying or building -- but not like they consider the miles per gallon on a car. I asked Davies about this after and he said people often don't consider operating costs, and would have a hard time estimating those costs if they did. Davies likes the idea of requiring an energy audit upon sale of a house, or even a Energy Star-like rating for a house -- stick it on the breaker box.
When I asked why anyone wouldn't go green, his first answer was "sloth." People have other stuff to do, he said. But it's also a lack of education, he added. Home builders need to know how to design and install the stuff, and homeowners need to know how to maintain it.
Davies tossed out some impressive numbers on green building -- 30 to 60 percent less energy, 70 percent less waste -- and mentioned Obama's ambitious plans for greening the economy. But echoing Tutu, he also warned against aiming too low -- billions of people using small amounts of finite resources won't work in the long run. "Less bad isn't good enough," he said.
We need zero-emissions homes, zero-energy homes, Davies went on. "It's a pretty daunting challenge."
When he first considered the challenge, Davies recalled, he thought, "Zero-energy homes in Fairbanks? How the heck do we do that!?" But that's what we need.
Davies got kind of serious. I could see the former state lawmaker in him.
"We have to get to sustainability," he said, "or eventually Mother Nature will get her revenge."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment