September 29, 2010

Passive Homes – Deal or No Deal?

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Conferences / Conventions / Events | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

First, thanks to all of you who joined me and the Paladin Law Group at the Annual Meeting of the California State Bar.  It was great to have a lively audience, and I’m happy you enjoyed the presentation.  For those of you who want to find out what the discussion was all about, email me at steve at californiagreenbuildingblog.com.  Now, on to our post.

The New York Times ran two intriguing articles on Sunday.  One article was about Masdar, a space age sustainable city in Abu Dhabi, and the other piece was about passive homes (there’s even a video). As much as I’d love to talk about all the cool new technology in Masdar, I’m writing on the passive homes story since it’s immediately applicable to everyday construction here in California.

Passive homes are not especially new.  They have been around for at least 15 years (if you don’t count my igloo comparison below) We covered them in January 2009, but still they have not caught on in the USA.  The likely reason is the molasses-like speed of change in the United States’ energy policy (cue scowl), but it could also be that passive homes seem a bit daunting.

Passive homes use up to 90% less heating and cooling energy and 60-70% less over-all energy than homes built to most nationwide standards (I’m not sure how they stack up against the new CALGreen codes).  However, to reach these efficiency levels, passive homes maintain an air tight environment surrounded by massive amounts of insulation and a high-tech heat exchanger that allows stale air out without loosing heat. Ironically, in some ways passive homes are similar to igloos or ice caves.  Get in, seal up, and heat the air inside.

Passive homes are extremely popular in Europe – especially middle Europe (e.g. Germany) where the climate is temperate.  Indeed, the NY Times article featured a home in Vermont that has a similar climate to middle Europe.  The sealed nature of the homes leads to two challenges for nationwide implementation.  First, how can one cool the home in the desert or in a hot southern environment? And second, how can one ventilate effectively enough to keep moisture levels down and eliminate the risk of mold?

To get the answers, click the “more” link here (more…)

 

September 8, 2010

The Quick Reference We’ve All Been Waiting For! CALGreen v. LEED v. GreenPoint

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Just Plain Cool, USGBC / LEED, Build It Green / Green Point Rated, Government, Building Code, CALGreen | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[7] Comments 

The burning question everyone is asking: “What is the difference between the new California Building Code (CALGreen) and third party rating systems?”  GOOD NEWS – a very handy and thorough comparison chart has arrived!

The USGBC-NCC, along with AIA California Council, AIA-SF, StopWaste, City of San Francisco, Simon and Associates, and Build it Green formed the Green Building Codes Educational Collaborative.  This group created two matrixes (one for commercial space and one for residential space) as quick reference guides to compare CALGreen to third party systems.  The matrixes are as compact as one could hope.

The commercial matrix compares CALGreen (Commercial) with LEED BD+C.  The residential matrix compares CALGreen (residential) with (GreenPoint) Build it Green and LEED for Homes.

Please click below for the complete packet I just received Friday from the USGBC-NCC.  If you like the content of these documents, please consider a membership with at least one of the groups that helped make the documents possible.

Cover Letter

Commercial Buildings

Residential Buildings

(Full disclosure, I am a member of the USGBCC-NCC, but I receive no compensation for this, or any, post on the CGBB)

 

April 22, 2010

Happy Earth Day! Sustainable Community Interview Special!

Posted by Steve Sacks under Carbon, Energy, Government, Green Economy, Innovators, Interview, Just Plain Cool, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Make Money, Marketing Ideas, People, Photovoltaic, Solar, Sustainable Community | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Geof Syphers is the Chief Sustainability Officer at Codding Enterprises, developer of Sonoma Mountain Village, a One Planet Communities development in Rohnert Park, California that aims to be close to net zero…as a village!

We’ve written about Sonoma Mountain Village (SOMO) before.  Click here to review that post. Now, as an Earth Day special, please enjoy the interview I conducted with Geof a few days ago.  Click here for the full text, or just click on the “Interviews” tab at the top of this page.

The thing that makes the interview so relevant to Earth Day is SOMO is a One Planet Community.  This means that if every community on the planet lived like the residents in SOMO, we would only use the resources available on one Earth.  As it stands now, if everyone on the planet lived like the rest of the United States, we would need multiple Earths to support our lifestyle! (Click here to take a fun, albiet non-scientific, quiz to check your sustainability footprint).

So, Geof, and the group at Codding are onto something.  Enjoy the information in the interview, and have a great Earth Day!

 

March 22, 2010

Ensuring High Performance Buildings Meet Expectations – Part I

Posted by Sarah Grilli under Building and Design, Building Operations, Energy, Government, Innovators, Law, Legislation, and Policy, USGBC / LEED | Tags: , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

It seems that green building made it to primetime in 2009. Not only are individual projects embracing third party rating systems, the past few years has also seen a meteoric rise in popularity of codifying green as hundreds of cities and towns across the country adopted green elements into their building codes. And, just this January, California became the first state to mandate a state wide green building code.

Despite the hype about the use of sustainable building methods, actual systems performance of green buildings is sometimes neglected and often overlooked. This is because much of the energy and building systems post-occupancy performance evaluations are based on pre and mid construction modeling and calculations. People have finally seriously begun to ask the question: are green buildings meeting their performance expectations?

If a building does not perform as promised, it not only fails to deliver, it could lose its marketing edge, lose its tax or government incentives, and could even be faced with a lawsuit over these failed expectations. Thankfully, this was also the year that these concerns began to be concretely addressed. California’s Building Standards Commission (BSC), the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineer’s (ASHRAE), and the US Green Building Counsel (USGBC) all placed greater emphasis on building performance by including heightened commissioning and mandatory post-occupancy performance evaluations in their rating systems or mandates.

California’s new “CALGreen” building codes place emphasis on the typical areas such as site sustainability, water use efficiency, energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality, air pollution, and materials and resources, but also include the often under emphasized requirement of commissioning. Commissioning is added assurance that all the building’s subsystems for HVAC, plumbing, electrical, fire/life safety, and building security are operating as intended by the owner and as intended by the building architects and engineers. It is a key element in achieving reduced energy levels and ensuring a high performance green building. The BSC recognized this and included in the CALGreen building codes a requirement for a pre-construction commissioning plan as well as the mandatory preparation of a commissioning report recommending post occupancy commissioning and systems operation training.

Another major recent development is ASHRAE’s newly released Standard 189.1, published in conjunction with the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and the USGBC. The ASHRAE standard was developed with the intention that it will be adopted and incorporated into building codes. Standard 189.1 increases energy savings over the prior commonly used Standard 90.1. It requires that measurement devices with remote communication capability be installed to collect energy consumption data. Energy subsystems like the building’s HVAC system, or elevators are also required to collect and store data if the subsystems collective load exceeds specified thresholds.  Data must be collected daily with hourly energy use profiles and must be retained for at least 3 years. This will assist building owners and operators as well as local jurisdictions meet their sustainability targets and is intended to complement LEED and other existing green building rating standards.

Finally, the leading market based rating system developed by the USGBC, LEED, released a new version 3.0 last June which includes enhanced commissioning requirements placing further emphasis on building performance… Stay tuned for part II of this post for more information.

 

February 9, 2010

The Grass Is Green And So Is The Stadium

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Building Operations, Finance, Green Economy, Law, Legislation, and Policy, USGBC / LEED | Tags: , , , , , , , |
[2] Comments 

Stadiums.  They’re large, and they’re empty for large amounts of time.  Because of this strange dichotomy, stadiums are incredibly expensive to operate and maintain.  They are also expensive to build.  Construction of the new Yankee stadium cost $1.5 billion.  All that money and a dearth of environmental considerations. Why?!

A few new stadiums are showing better judgment.  The Washington Nationals started the trend a few years ago with the first LEED Silver professional stadium, (more info here).  The Florida Marlins are joining that club with a LEED Silver stadium of their own.  Other venues are showing a commitment to the environment.   The Phoenix Suns, NY Giants and Jets (VIDEO!), NY Mets, San Francisco Giants, and New England Patriots either have or plan environmental efforts or LEED qualifying measures for their stadiums.  The EPA is even helping some of the projects (More info here)

Let’s not forget these efforts are not always smooth.  Remember the labor controversy around the green roof at the Target Center in Minneapolis? (I’m still looking to see how that was resolved – stay tuned).

But, more to the point, public money is regularly required to build these new structures, so implementing green measures should be a required part of the package.  Generally, states are moving to require green municipal buildings, and the federal government already requires it.  How did the new Yankee stadium get city dollars and federal tax breaks and still end up a relic of inefficiency?  It’s disappointing and short-sighted.  The Federal government and many states have long required that large structures for the public must include sustainable measures.  It’s time all publicly financed stadiums get included.  I’m not saying every stadium needs to meet LEED standards, but at 1.5 billion, I’m guessing they could have found some room in the budget for waterless urinals or solar panels. C’mon Yankees, you lead in everything else!

Congratulations to the New Orleans Saints!!  Pitchers and catchers, report in seven days…

 

June 22, 2009

Green Hospitals

Posted by Sarah Grilli under Building and Design, Building Operations, Conferences / Conventions / Events, Law, Legislation, and Policy, USGBC / LEED | Tags: , , , |
Leave a Comment 

A key objective of green building is improving the health of building inhabitants.  The US EPA has reported that Americans spend 90% of their time on average indoors, making healthy indoor environments seem like an obvious choice. And building a healthy environment for healing seems like an even more obvious choice.  Centuries ago, didn’t doctor’s instruct the sick to recuperate  in the countryside partially because something about clean air and a non-toxic environment led to healing? Well, it seems that modern medicine has begun to recall this basic remedy, and the push for greening healthcare environments has finally begun to make some inroads.

In San Francisco last month a partner at our firm, Eric Phillips, spoke at the Greening Hospitals Breakfast Form event organized and sponsored by Turner Construction, HDR Architects, Mazzetti & Associates and Bell, Rosenberg & Hughes. The forum was a chance for hospital employees, contractors and design professionals in the healthcare trade to obtain an inside scoop on the newest offerings from organizations  working to facilitate green hospital construction. Green hospital construction faces specific challenges such as 24 hour energy loads, excessive amounts of chemicals and contaminated wastes, and fragile inhabitants. Healthcare facility owners, designers and contractors also have the additional  legal challenges of complying with strict regulations that ensure the safety of their buildings. In California, OSHPD is the agency overseeing all hospital construction, adding yet another hurdle to building healthcare facilities.

Other speakers at the forum included members from The Green Guide for Healthcare (GGHC)  the USGBC, and the The Global Health and Safety Initiative (GHSI). Each of the speakers  explained how their organizations products and services will assist in creating healthy and green healthcare facilities. GGHC is a voluntary self-certifying system that has been available free on-line since its inception in 2003. GGHC launched a comprehensive certifying system, version 2.2 in January 2007, and the operations section of the toolkit was recently updated in 2008. The GGHC is similar to the LEED products and is based on a point based system where each credit includes an intent, referenced standard, suggested documentation, and potential technologies and strategies. It also includes a section with input by a doctor identifying the health impact of each credit.

The GGHC and the USGBC have had an amicable relationship, and currently, they have been collaborating to create LEED for healthcare, a new LEED product specifically aimed at green health care facility design and construction.  LEED for Healthcare is undergoing a second public comment period, but will likely be released in late fall 2009. 

Lastly, a representative from the GHSI spoke about their organization which is a collaboration of groups and hospitals who’s goal is to promote healthy environments for healthcare facilities. Launched in California in October, 2007, the GHSI seeks to bring together everyone working within the healthcare sector and provide a resource for these organizations and groups. By working in collaboration they aim to transform and green the way that healthcare designs, builds and operates its facilities and products within those facilities by education, outreach and it even providing concrete assistance such as listing product choices on its website.

These organizations are optimistic that their resources will  make it an easier choice for healthcare designers and builders to build healthy facilities. And judging from the strongly positive audience response at the breakfast forum, this is just the beginning of this emerging field. Stay tuned to the California Green Building Blog for further reporting on this exciting topic.

 

April 28, 2009

“New” Bills Propose Zero Net Energy Buildings And Zero-Limits On Net Metering

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Carbon, Energy, Green Economy, Law, Legislation, and Policy | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |
[2] Comments 

Assembly Member, and Speaker Pro Tempore, Lori Saldaña from the 76th Assembly District (based in San Diego County) has sponsored a great idea!  AB 212 proposes to have all new residential buildings in California meet zero net energy by 2020.  AB 212 was sponsored last year, and passed the Assembly before dying in the State Senate (much like AB 1920 which died last year, but was resurrected as AB 920 this session.  Check out our quick update of former AB 1920 below).

AB 212 proposes:

“The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to adopt building design  and construction standards and energy and water conservation standards to reduce the wasteful, uneconomic, inefficient, or unnecessary consuption of energy, including energy associated with the use of water. 
 
This bill would require the commission to adopt, in collaboration with specified parties,  building design and construction standards and energy and water conservation standards to require new residential constructions commenced on or after January 1, 2020, or on a date by which the commission determines that the use of photovoltaic technology is cost effective, whichever is later, to be zero net energy buildings, as defined.”

 

The bill defines a “zero net energy building” as:

“[A] building that implements a combination of building energy efficiency design features and clean onsite or near-site distributed generation that result in no net purchases from the electricity grid on an annual basis and produces enough electricity to  offset the energy use attributable to an onsite use of purchased natural gas.”

 

Of course, we would like to see this bill pass, and we would also like to see it extended to non-residential construction as well!  Critics argue the legislature should focus on refurbishing old construction, and they are correct to that extent.  However, there is no reason to only focus on old construction.  Contrary to the critics, we have full confidence the legislature can walk and chew gum at the same time.  The legislature must address both old and new construction!

We will track the progress of AB212, and report back regularly.  For the full text of AB 212, click here

Also, since we’re on the topic of legislation, remember AB 1920 sponsored by Assembly Member Jared Huffman?  That bill proposed elimination of  limits on net metering (among other things).  Well the bill has been re-introduced as AB 920 and is now in front of the Natural Resources Committee for a vote.  You can read more about the original bill from our previous posts ( click here) and (click here) and our Interview with Assembly Member Huffman (click here).  Our understanding is AB 920 is essentially the same as AB 1920.   Let’s hope AB 920 doesn’t get lost in politics as its predecessor did.

 

April 8, 2009

Free Webcast: Green Building Summit, April 22

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Conferences / Conventions / Events, Free, Green Economy, Incentives and Rebates, Innovators, Materials and Manufacturing | Tags: , , , , , , , , |
[3] Comments 

There are a number free webcasts at the online “Green Building Summit.”  The programs look focused, and the speakers are generally very good.  

Topics include: incentives and regulation; building and operations; nanotechnology and other topics focused on green building and technology.

For more information go to: http://www.brighttalk.com/summit/greenbuilding

 

March 2, 2009

REGREEN Offers Green Advice And Tools For Design And Construction Professionals

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, USGBC / LEED | Tags: , , |
Leave a Comment 

The American Society of Interior Designers’ Foundation and the U.S. Green Building Council have partnered to provide best practice guidelines and targeted educational resources for sustainable residential improvement projects. The Program is called REGREEN, and they offer resources, tips, and tools (including checklists and case studies).

Though primarily focused on design professionals, contractors and developers may find the website helpful as well. It’s straightforward and lacks a lot of the clutter you find on other websites designed with the same purpose in mind. You can find REGREEN at www.regreenprogram.org.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers