Let me play devil’s advocate for a minute here, keeping in mind that I really admire ShelterNerd’s work. I’m looking back at an earlier discussion about green building standards and thinking about his post, in part:
<Our HBA’s Green Building
Council…has voted to modify the scoring to reflect local conditions…dropping the global impact section entirely, Which just means you no longer are required to use low-VOC finishes to meet the minimum. (Some of us have been stung badly by LOW VOC floor finishes and we needed to compromise there, but backed it up by adding meat to the indoor air quality section, we’ll re-visit that in a year. During the shake out time we have it as a pass-fail>
Here’s the question: when builders have trouble meeting a green certification scoring system, don’t you just water down the standard when you make it easier to meet by providing more ways to meet it and dropping out the one problematic area (in this case, beefing up IAQ section and dropping the requirement to use low VOC finishes)??
In the course of which, also dropping the entire global impact section in order to “reflect local conditions”. What does that mean? Something like: Builders and buyers around here won’t go for that so we have to drop it? So, we’re changing the standards around some because we don’t like to use low VOC finishes and doing so prevents us from scoring higher.
I’m a HO building a new house and considering the various sorts of certifications I might want to pursue (if I can afford to pay to get the certificate. The materials and systems will be there.)
Because I delve into things a bit, I like to know exactly the what and why. And in this case what I see what looks like monkeying around in the background. So, I want to look into the other certifications and see what they’ve monkeyed around with too.
Educate me here, guys, because I’m your market and your referral source for word of mouth business.
Replies
Yes there is definately a lot of jockeying around in the back ground. The vinyl siding and timber industries are trying to buy influence. We had a little drama in our local where one guy wanted points for re-circulating hot water systems and I didn't want to give them to him because it uses energy when you're not there unless you go for the D'mand system. He won this round and I pulling an end run to switch it back with next years revision. On we go.
Basically I think it's okay to have some back and forth if it brings more players into the green building game. It's not pure but I'd so much rather see 6000 NAHB green houses than 60 LEED-h green houses.
Which is going to get you drunker, a shot of really fine scotch or ten gallons of red red wine?
If our goal is to stop global warming, deal with the energy crises, conserve clean drinking water, minimize storm water flooding and creek siltification, and stop poisoning our children with toxic indoor air then we need to be ready to make a few compromizes in support of the greater good. Even allowing Vinyl siding if it comes to that. (but not on my houses)
All the best
Michael
------------------
"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
Michael--the way they're ending the vinylization of America here is local ordinances (usually at the county level) against it for siding. Windows frames apparently not a part of the ban. I heard that's happening because of some firefighters' advocacy group at the national level. Firefighters getting injured/too much at risk when vinyl houses go up in flames. Never thought about it but however you accomplish it is fine.BTW, I posted on another site's homebuilding forum, mostly homeowners, mostly spending tons of $ on high-end kitchens and geegaws. My post was as to anyone here interested in green building? I'm being ignored as they obsess over their grohe faucets and Viking stoves. Only one response so far: that green building is just the industry's way to get $ out of us.Since my house will have Kenmore appliances I'm thinking the market those folks represent has a ton of $ to spend. They ought to be the first ones in on a better way of building, yet it looks like the production home owners may well lead the way. I don't know how you reach this group without making it fashionable. Any "truth walls" anyone???
It's funny the way the expensive houses are not the ones to go green on a national level. It is much more in the mid and upper mid market that green is getting acceptance and we are seeing that it can be a really effective way for a builder at the bottom of the market. We have a local builder here in Durham NC who worked with us on the adjustment of the scoring tool for NC's high humidity mixed climate (zero points for whole house exhaust fans, much higher thresholds for site design and indoor air quality due to the storm water run off and flooding and the constant battle with mildew.) He sold three homes last January in the 160,000 price range, starter homes. During 2006 working on the guidelines he got his boss to commit to 100% green certified and energy star certified on every house they build (with Vinyl siding but some carefully value engineered upgrades) and his sales jumped to 18 homes per month while his costs for the homes only went up $6000. He'll build 150 homes this year and I'll build three. His houses will use about 80% of code standard energy and mine will use about 38% but he will do more for the energy and global climate crises than I will by a long shot (it remains to be seen who will make a better profit, though he's certainly not complaining) This guy's seeing a 600% increase in sales during a time of generally slumping market conditions and the sub-prime deal especially hitting that lower price range. Good lesson there. Plus he's a nice guy and I really like it when the nice guys finish first.
------------------
"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
BTW, I posted on another site's homebuilding forum, mostly homeowners, mostly spending tons of $ on high-end kitchens and geegaws. My post was as to anyone here interested in green building? I'm being ignored as they obsess over their grohe faucets and Viking stoves. Only one response so far: that green building is just the industry's way to get $ out of us.
I'd be curious to check this site out do you mind giving me the url?
thanks,
Daniel Neuman
Restoring our second Victorian home this time in Alamdea CA. Check out the blog http://www.chezneumansky.blogspot.com/
Oakland CA
Crazy Homeowner-Victorian Restorer
Am I allowed to do that by FHB rules? Well, I hope so. https://ths.gardenweb.comThere's one of the Homesite forums there where there's interest in green/sustainable stuff, but the more active ones (most of them) are totally not into it. SadSpeaking of not being active, Breaktime's green building posts have died since Earth Week. Are we too busy saving the earth? Is there nothing left to say? Or has the lack of consumer interest that drives residential building/remodeling left us with no work to discuss here?????
If our goal is to stop global warming
We need to be very careful about our information sources in re Global Warming. There is no consensus among climatologists about whether man can have any impact on global warming in any time frame less than 3000 years.
There is also zero data about whether the earth will coninue warming for the next 10 years, let alone 3000 years.
There is a consensus among government funded scientists of other disciplens about GW, however only those scientist who state that mankind is responsible for GM can even get funded. That makes the question "Is man-made GW a government
boondoggleprogram," rather than "Is GW a man caused problem."Mars is also experiencing GW at, as near as can be determined, the same rate as earth.
Remember CFCs and the Hole In The Ozone? It is now known that CFCs can not effect the Ozone becasue they can't rise high enough in the atmosphere. And don't feel bad for the CFC maunfacturer, because the CFC patent ran out at the same time the Hole In The Ozone became a manmade problem. Coincidence?
Never forget that Al Gore invented the internet before he invented Global Warming. LOLSamT
There are three kinds of people: Predaters, Prey, and Paladins. The really strange thing is that Prey feels safer from Predators by disarming Paladins.
There is indeed consensus among CLIMATOLOGISTS. The group that everyone is making a big deal about are the TV weather forecasters, who have apparently been manipulated into making idiotic statements that contradict known science.> however only those scientist who state that mankind is responsible for GM can even get funded. This is incredible ####. The Bush administration has repeatedly blocked efforts by responsible scientists within the government or working on government projects to acknowledge the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding global warming. The "can't get funded" canard is pure smoke used by the disbelieving minority to rationalize that overwhelming consensus.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
> It is now known that CFCs can not effect the Ozone becasue they can't rise high enough in the atmosphere.That likewise is ####.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
Whatever
Reason Magazine - Two Sides to Global WarmingClimatologist Roy Spencer Rains on ...Chill out over global warmingDangerous Warming Unlikely, MIT Climatologist Says - by Dr ...
BTW, those are the four top hits on a google for "Climatologist global warming," so just who is spouting **** here and who has done his homework?
Number 9? on the hit list isdeath Threats for man-made-global-warming-doesn't-exist scientistand another;Weather Channel Climatologist Wants Global Warming Skeptics Decertified...
It seems that pro M-MGWers just can't handle the truth. "Silence all scientists who disagree!" seems to be the rallying cry of the M-MGWers.
SamT
Praise the Corporation, for the Corporations' highest concern is the well being of the public.
The MIT 'scientist' has been on OPEC's payroll for $2,500 a day for senate testimony(read lobbying).
These guys are no different than the doctors that appeared in cigarette ads in the 50's.
Just another group of sell-outs that think that their financial well-being is more important than the health of the planet, humans, lakes, rivers, tree frogs.........
Dig deep enough and you'll find a moron that will 'disproove' any true fact for a cost.
Can't we all just get along.....or not.
Dig deep enough and you'll find a moron that will prove any false fact for a cost.
I agree.
And you're right. . . . if one anti-MMGW is suspect, all anti-MMGW scientists are liars. I just wish we could say the same thing for the pro-MMGW scientists.
Sigh.
Everything is the fault of white adult male americans and anybody else who has more than anybody else.
SIIIIGH!
However, you will find that the anti-MMGW crowd almost always say "We don't know enough to say one way or the other," which sounds to me a lot more reasonable than, "It is definately mankinds fault and we gotta 'Do Something About It'."
Furthermore, the MMGW crowd are all jumping on the CO2 bandwagon, well, there are a few who prefer methane, but the fact is that the water vapor in the atmosphere is 30 (thirty) times as effective a greenhouse gas as CO2 and methane combined.
Gone Googling, back soon.
Well, you get your wish. The US Supreme Court has ruled that CO2 is not only an atmospheric pollutant, but that it is the primary ‘greenhouse’ gas causing a warming of the earth.
In the next case, they are going to rule that pi is equal to 3 in order that No Child Be Left Behind in math.
If we can somehow remove all of this 'pollutant' from the atmosphere at once, within 24 hours all animal life on earth will cease, within thirty days all plant life will cease and within a year the earth will be a frozen ball of rock and ice.SamT
Praise the Corporation, for the Corporations' highest concern is the well being of the public.
I get your point and your sentiment.....
The way I feel about it is similar to the way I feel about smoking cigarettes. I smoked for 14 years and even had the luxury of warnings on packages and after school specials and the media campaign that said that Joe wasn't so cool after all, and I still chose to do it.
I also felt the effects of it though thankfully I quit before it really made me sick. Now, on the other hand, someone like my Grandparents that started smoking in the 40's, didn't have a doctor, or a label, or even a cartoon character to tell them it was bad and that it would kill them, but it did. And they knew that. They got up every morning, just like I did and every other smoker out there, and hacked up a bunch of filth from their lungs. There were even doctors in ads that said it might even be good for you.
We know it's bad for us. We can feel it every day. It's convienent to pretend that lung cancer isn't real, but that doesn't make it so.
That's where I'm coming from. I'm not a scientist....obviously. I also don't need irrefutable, every single person on the planet must agree 100% that it is exactly happening this way and no way else kind of proof to know that it ain't good.
We know it's bad for us(and every other living thing on this planet, including the planet itself). We can feel it every day. It's convienent to pretend that global warming/climate change/big liberal heat theory/etc. isn't actually happening to us right now, but that doesn't make it so.
I absolutely agree that the climate is changing.
Where I disagree is with the idea that mankind can possibly have more than a miniscule effect on the change one way or the other.
Here's why:
From 6.5.7 Global Hypsithermal Limit Total solar insolation received at the Earth's surface is ~1.75 x 1017 watts...The power dissipation of all terrestrial vegetation is ~1014 watts...Global energy consumption by mankind reached an estimated 1.2 x 1013 watts... ...the ~1012 watt metabolic output of the global human biomass.
From Nasa
Only 1% of the TSI is absorbed by the upper atmosphere – mostly UV radiation absorbed by stratospheric ozone. About 20 – 24% heads into the lower atmosphere (troposphere) and is absorbed by waver vapor, trace gases, clouds and darker aerosols. The remaining 46 – 50% of visible light penetrates the atmosphere and is absorbed by the land and the oceans.
The total solar energy aborbed by the entire earths' ecosystem is ~3.5 x 1017 watts
The combined energy output of humans and their machines is ~1.313 watts or about 1% of the energy output of the plant biomasses' and less than 1/300 of 1% of what the earth gets from the sun.
In the last 20 years, the output of the sun has changed by 0.1% or thirty times the total annual (1995) energy input to the earth by humans in all forms.
From NOAA, each graph will link to its' home page:
View Image
View Image
View Image
Note in the top image the scale is in calandar dates.
Note that in the last image, the top, long graph is temperature with today being on the far left and the bottom square graph is sea level for the near past.SamT
Praise the Corporation, for the Corporations' highest concern is the well being of the public.
Holy $#@!You win the graph war. Like I said I'm not a scientist......and also not a power point pro, so I give up. I will take my liberal philosophising elsewhere.In fact....in light of your scientific findings...I think I'll take up smoking again...build a coal mine in my back yard and go club some seals.....woo-hoo....we're free from guilt!!!!!!!!Thanks for my newfound freedom proven by graphs and the like.
Edited 4/24/2007 7:41 pm ET by remodelman
It's kinda like racism. Racists don't say that they dislike a particular race "just because". Rather, having made up their minds they then have to concoct some "scientific" basis for their prejudice -- "that race is inferior". Having this "scientific" basis lets them believe what they want without a too terribly guilty conscience, and it even lets them occasionally convince some naive but othewise decent people to believe likewise.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, well I've been intersted in global warming. . .better to say Climate Change, since the mid '70s. It would not suprise me for us to wake up one year and discover a mini ice age or a decades long heat wave.
SamT
Praise the Corporation, for the Corporations' highest concern is the well being of the public.
This from the NASA scientist in charge:
I had another experience later when I was put in charge of a project to determine CFC transport rates from the surface to the upper atmosphere.
Ozone destruction by halogen catalysis is well understood and is easily demonstrated in the laboratory. The observed depletion of the ozone layer at both of the poles was of considerable concern and it was theorized that CFC based refrigerants were at fault. (I am sure everyone remembers that one) Well, anyway, we put together a program using high altitude aircraft and balloons to measure the CFC particle population at various altitudes. Mathematical models based on assumed ozone catalytic destruction had been constructed that predicted the levels to expect at various altitudes so we set about to confirm the model. What we found was that in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres the CFC density was less than five percent of what the model demanded to assign a causal relationship between CFC's and ozone depletion. The measurements were repeated a number of times but we never came close to finding enough halogen compounds to satisfy the model. We had to conclude that CFC's were not a significant contributing factor to ozone depletion and that catalysis did not dominate the process. Some other mechanism was at work. These results were so disappointing to the sponsors of the project we were instructed not to publish our results.
I have viewed subsequent work on both ozone depletion and anthropogenic links to global climate change with considerable suspicion. It is clear that these "scientists" have an ideological dog in the fight and their objectivity is for sale.
Anyway, I thought you might find these instances amusing.
Chuck Ivie
SamT
Praise the Corporation, for the Corporations' highest concern is the well being of the public.
scientist in charge
One of those other pesky things about the southern polar "hole" is that the perimeter of it roughly aproximated the umbral, or shadow, line; and sunlight is a key element in stratospheric chemical reactions. Over most of the globe, one can use a constant value for sunlight, as it typically is constant at that altitude. At the poles, however, the umbral line can be critical.
Some of the details are the divil.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Personally I do belive that global warming is real and a bad thing and caused by humans, BUT I really believed in building green and energy efficiently before there was a global warming theory. I've been a solar builder and a green builder since 1977 because I believe in saving energy. I had a kid with asthma and educated myself about indoor air quality. My father started needing a wheel chair so I learned about handicap accessible and aging in place design. And as soon as there was a reputable third party certification program with a workable definition of what green really meant (NAHB GBI) I signed up as a green builder. Global warming is just a small part of green building. I think it's important but I also think that building durability, storm water containment, water conservation, energy efficiency, indoor air quality, and elegantly resource efficient and beautiful homes are important. Obviously being able to feed my family is important as well. And Green Building is a more profitable way to build homes as well in my experience. So I'll stick with it. Be well------------------"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
Edited 4/23/2007 1:16 am ET by ShelterNerd
Would you mind elaborating on how building green is a more profitable way to build?Thanks.
Any niche market will fetch a premium if you know how to market to it, especially if you're early to the trough.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
Okay. Where exactly in the business end of things does that profitablity come from?If I'm GC on a new house build, and I use a cost-plus contract with an open set of books to the client, where is that profit? Just a higher than usual percentage for me? Or, my usual percentage and the profit comes from higher materials/labor costs?Excuse my ignorance.
The profit comes from where it always does -- filling a need. You ultimately make money the same way that arbitrageurs do -- finding stuff that you can buy/make cheaper than you can sell it. In certain types of markets (eg, green construction) the demand may be relatively higher than supply, either because there is insufficient supply or because most suppliers are "high cost" (due, perhaps, to failure to have the proper skills or apply the proper techniques). You can demand a premium profit/wage in such markets.
So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable Creature, since it enables one to find or make a Reason for everything one has a mind to do. --Benjamin Franklin
If you are working on a cost plus contract and have more work than you can do then you may have a good system that works for you and doesn't need any tweaking. Certainly you could add some green indoor air quality and energy features that would add some cost that you could get a cut on, spray foam insulation looks like a good candidate and green certified floor coverings and HVAC design would also be a target area for this. I actually make a mark-up on m the cost of my energy star certification but I take a lower margin on the foam and solar panels because the foam makes it easier for me to air tighten a house and makes my IAQ system work better. Where the profitability of Green really kicks in is for people who don't have as much work as they would like and/ or are working on a fixed price contract. I have a good friend over in Durham NC who sold three homes @154,000 (including land) last January. This summer he joined our Green Building Council and committed his company to building 100% GBI Green Certified and Energy Star certified. The cost of his homes increased by $6,000 and his sales in January of this year hit eighteen homes. We are experiencing a very minor market down turn here in NC but builders who are associated with Green Building programs like the GBI still have waiting lists. I build fixed price, green and extreme energy star homes (50% more efficient than code.) My clients are very impressed and are willing to pay a premium. Since I'm fixed price and can certify my quality with third party certification from both Energy Star and GBI I get a premium and have a long waiting list so I can avoid the PITA clients. Colorado has a long standing green building program, some builders in that program have claimed a 75% reduction in warrantee costs in their Green Certified homes. Most green building programs give points for durability and require a higher level of workmanship than the code minimum. This results in less warrantee costs and higher profits. So that's where the profitability comes from in as small a nut shell as I can pack it into. Now if we could just get this thread back from the guys who are having so much fun debating global warming... (take it outside y'all)All the bestM------------------"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
Edited 4/24/2007 9:47 pm ET by ShelterNerd
Sorry...I couldn't help myself. I'm currently experiencing the 'we didn't contribute to global warming' sales pitch from within my company right now and it struck a nerve.I'm actually really interested in the GBI and where it stands on the fence concerning green building. As a remodeler that is trying as hard as I can to get my company to move towards green(I'm an employee), the GBI is attractive, (although it's not in Charlotte...is it statewide?) because it means relativeley small steps foward will gain you recognition as a green builder, or a builder of a green project.
Whereas the Healthy Built Homes program in NC seems to be a good bit tougher, even at the bronze? level and forces builders to look at the slightly larger picture.
I personally have a hard time just throwing some green products in a house and slapping a 'green' badge on it(although some folks in my company think that's all there is to it). It really seems like the big picture should be a huge part of this process.
Actually we've done side by side comparisons on GBI and NCHBH and they are pretty comparable as far as stringency. The GBI is more flexible in terms of having fewer items that are required and more of a minimum point requirement with multiple strategies to attain those points. And the NAHB has 235,000 member businesses so getting a foot hold there with green has a better chance of getting green practices adopted nationwide. Check with Southern Energy Management in Charlotte about getting GBI certified, I think they can handle that and Energy Star. The standards will change from year to year (we all just lived through the big tightening of Energy Star requirements last July) Some builders that might squeak in as Bronze today will likely need to tighten up a bit in the coming years. It's an evolutionary and educational process.M------------------
"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
"It's an evolutionary and educational process."You can say that again. Well...I can say that again. I was really intersted in green building when I was getting started in construction about 10 years ago. I didn't find a green builder to work with and got busy with the day to day mayhem. Now, ten years later, I'm seriously pursuing it again and I feel like I'm starting from the beginning. Any certification process is certainly a good thing and a creates a very positive future for building.....and maybe even remodeling...Know any green builders in Charlotte looking for a project manager???......or a carpenter....or......
Have you any experience with Bona low VOC floor finishes?http://www.bona.com/en/US/Country_Start_page/I think there is a learning curve, but I have been pleased with their water-born poly after a decade of use...no problems.A good product like Bona, and some training on it's use could solve one of your problems (our floor guys still used oil-based stains and sealers--the water-born finish works fine over oil-base).
Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out.M------------------
"You cannot work hard enough to make up for a sloppy estimate."
I am a novice at IAQ, VOC's and ventilation ...but
I believe that it is crucial that we learn to select safe materials and control when and WHERE air enters end exits our homes.
If we over-ventilate we waste energy
If we under-ventilate and or choose the wrong materials we will get sick.
Well, as I understand it, one of the main reasons for the VOC restrictions is to reduce photochemical smog. In areas of the country where photochemical smog isn't a significant problem it would seem that VOC restrictions aren't as important as some of the others with more truely "global" impacts.
Additionally, half a loaf is better than none. It's sometimes wise to be "forgiving" in a few areas in order to achieve "buy in" for the overall concept.
Of course, it's a tricky thing -- at some point you risk developing a "tradition" of watering down every onerous regulation, resulting in meaningless gibberish. Effective compromise is very difficult.
Edited 4/15/2007 2:33 pm by DanH
If we look at advances in building science as a continuum (sp?) lowering standards a little to gain a wider acceptance could change what will be considered "normal". Think about insulation. It wasn't so long ago (50, 60 years?) that people poo pooed any insulation in houses - some oldtimers out here still do.
As builders see these certifications are about trying to promote change, which takes time, we are more likely to give them a try, instead of throwing up our hands in frustration and passing off green building as just another marketing trend.
Remodeling contractor who once visited the Glass City.
Edited 4/20/2007 10:02 am ET by jimblodgett