The Mayor’s Task Force Report On Existing Commercial Buildings divided their recommendations into four themes. In this final post of our series, we address the final theme, “Lead By Example.”
The theme speaks for itself. The task force essentially states that the city must institute change in municipal buildings before it can insist on changes in the private sector. I emphatically agree, if for no other reason than the government needs to understand how the systems work before enforcing their use. San Francisco, under Chapter 7 of the Environment Code leads by example, and there are other examples. The recently launched GreenFinanceSF, a Green Finance program from the SFPUC, is a direct answer to the task force report. Admittedly, we missed it in our last post on the topic, but we’ve updated the post, and we will discuss the program in the future. Please check out the program, it looks great.
Some argue that the private sector is more adept to implement change. The belief that the private sector will lead the way, however, is misguided. The private sector has had years to renovate existing buildings, but the implementation is only on the fringe. Below, please find a quick timeline as to why this is.
The 1960’s and ‘70’s saw a huge surge in societal awareness of sustainability. This was due to hippies, the oil embargo, and in my case, Ranger Rick, Woodsy Owl, the Tearful Native American, and John Denver (among others). Even then, these advocates addressed pollution and environment. Sustainability in construction was considered a fringe movement for those who could afford it. Then, sustainability lost momentum when the price of oil tanked in the 1980’s.
Even when oil prices rose in the ‘00’s, and analysts touted life-cycle cost savings, private developers were unwilling to pay a “green premium” (the cost difference between a green building and a standard building). But in 2001, citing life-cycle costs, energy independence, and social consciousness, California and Oregon required that all new municipal buildings meet high environmental and energy efficiency standards. Other states including Washington, and New York followed, and in 2003, the GSA mandated that all new federal buildings meet LEED Silver standards. Other states including Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Florida joined the green movement.
With such huge markets mandating green, economies of scale took over. To answer the large orders from state and the federal government, manufacturers produced higher volumes of green products thus reducing the price. The municipal contracts created a new green economy, and materials such as denim insulation (pun intended) emerged as viable products. New companies formed and new technologies were invented to answer the call for green supplies. Large contractors altered their methodologies and trained their workforce for the green future.
Legislating incentives to encourage green building helped too. The government, with the help of the taxpayer, led all of this. Let’s be clear. If it were not for government, the green building movement would still be for the eccentric fringe. Period.
I’ve said many times that political parties are a liability to progress. There is no room for partisanship in promoting sustainability and green building. Energy independence is a matter of national security, and as the gulf oil spew shows, clean energy is a matter of protecting our domestic economy (e.g. keeping fisheries open, generating new construction, or creating auto jobs building electric vehicles at the NUMMI plant). There is nothing wrong with government leading the way in green building and energy efficiency. To the contrary, it must be one of their highest priorities. Government involvement in sustainable development creates jobs, and makes us a stronger, more secure nation.
The task force report is very good, but now the hard part begins. It has been six months since the report was issued, and I have not seen any new legislation passed or proposed. GreenFinanceSF is a great program, but that was in the works long before the task force report was issued. According to the San Francisco Examiner, the Mayor was going to propose new legislation, but I haven’t heard about it since. I’m happy to help if that’s what it takes, but let’s keep up the momentum.
Steve Sacks
