Building Capacity

Resilient Design Promises Better Life Safety, And We Need It, says Alex Wilson

After participating recently in the King County Sustainable Cities Roundtable to discuss “Beyond Net Zero: Resilience, Regeneration, and Social Justice" Alex Wilson agreed to an interview for the Building Capacity Blog. Alex is a long time advocate and leader in the sustainable building movement, going back to the late 70s, when he worked as a solar advocate in New Mexico, then in New England when he was the Executive Director for NESEA (Northeast Sustainable Energy Association), and again when he founded his own company in 1985, BuildingGreen. BuildingGreen has accomplished many things, but is probably most well known for being the publisher of Environmental Building News, which this writer believes is one of the most authoritative publications out there on the subject.

After many years of being at the helm of BuildingGreen, you've chosen a new focus for your energy: the Resilient Design Institute (RDI). Why this and Why Now? I feel like I've accomplished a great deal. At the same time, when I hear what climate scientists are telling us about the risks we're facing, I don't believe we're making rapid enough progress. I'm not really advocating different design strategies; for the most part Resilient Design includes the same kinds of things we've been focusing on with sustainable building. What I am advocating is a different rationale for doing these things: life safety.

So you're chucking the "it's the right thing to do" rationale? Not totally; it is still the right thing to do, and for some in our community, that has provided sufficient motivation. But it's clear that not enough of us are motivated by that.

Isn't that selfish? It definitely puts in a self-interest framework. I'm okay with that as long as what we're doing is creating something that's better for everyone.

You mention the lack of rapid enough progress, and imply that climate change is a primary source of your concern. In addition to "moving" people who haven't been moved before, what do you think this new focus on resilience in the built environment offers? We've been working on mitigating climate change for many years, for example advocating energy efficiency building strategies that reduce carbon emissions. But being realistic about the progress we've made, even in the best case scenario, CO2 levels are going to continue rising; we’ll see a warming trend, lots of impacts due to climate change. Resilience brings in the concept of adaptation.

What is RDI's first project, and how is it going? We’re ramping up. We've organized a great team, including an advisory board of some of the leading thinkers in our field. One of our first tasks is to seek funding for our work, which is fourfold:

1) To be a clearinghouse of practical information on resilient design primarily via our website, but including a series of fact sheets and other informational materials.

2) To provide a think tank to host gatherings of key thinkers and strategists that focus on various aspects of resilience. For example, we're hoping to convene members of the insurance industry, which has an obvious and direct interest in buildings and communities that are more resilient, especially in the face of catastrophic events; or members of the utility industry to discuss "islanding" to enable decoupling in the event of a disaster; or members of the energy modeling software community to discuss the role that such software could play in predicting drift temperatures of buildings without heat or air conditioning. (Editor: Photo shows a  simple exterior hurricane shutter on a house in Florida that not only protects the window during storms, but also provides shade--which will be particularly important during power outages. Credit: Alex Wilson)

3) To advocate the integration of resilience goals into green building policies and practices, both in the course of normal construction and remodel, and in the massive rebuild (and often underutilized) opportunities that occur in the case of a disaster such as Katrina. For example, we have begun conversations with the US Green Building Council regarding LEED pilot credits addressing resilient design. We're also looking at how resilience might be reflected in the International Green Construction Code.

4) To develop a resilient community assessment methodology, and eventually use the results of those assessments to inform recommendations for the development of public policy. I'm talking today to folks in Brattleboro about the possibility of using the Town as a case study for this aspect of our work. We want to learn how to assess the vulnerability of primarily smaller towns, highlighting their resilient features, and identifying areas for improvement. We'll look at the community as a whole, but also key buildings in an emergency. For example, the hospital that is intended to provide shelter in a crisis: does it have operable windows to allow for ventilation during an extended power outage when fuel for the generator might be depleted? Many new hospitals have inoperable windows.

Are there any ways where sustainable building and resilience conflict? I think there are aspects of green building that at some level may be in opposition to resilience. For example, redundancy is an important aspect of resilience, while efficiency is more in line with green building. This is fine; we'll need to rethink some strategies. But in most cases, the sustainability and resilience are synergistic and work well together.

Does it really matter what we call it? Terminology is important. After Hurricane Katrina I spent five years promoting "passive survivability" in articles and talks. Unfortunately the term conjured up a bunker mentality and didn't get the traction I'd hoped for. Resilience has a much more positive feel to it. I did note though that after Hurricane Sandy, the topic of "passive survivability" received significant attention in stakeholder conversations hosted in New York City by the Urban Green. Perhaps the more serious term makes sense once you've been throttled by a storm, and seriously considering how to survive another disaster.

Much of resilience research and application has been focused on the ability of humans to bounce back in surprising or traumatic circumstances. How do you see this applying to buildings? A resilient building is one where you can throw anything at it, and it does okay. Cut off power, heating fuel, throw wind and rain at it, flood it -- a resilient building will hang in there.

It has grit. Exactly. Buildings in general are about providing us with shelter. A resilient building will actually do that even after an event.

Is it possible for a single building to be resilient? Or does it require a certain scale for the resilience concept to be applicable -- for example a neighborhood? You raise an important point. Focusing on the building itself is important; there are a lot of aspects in building design that contribute to resilience, especially in the case of residences and public buildings that serve as emergency shelters. But an equally important contributor to a building's resilience is actually its transportation energy dependence -- which broadens the conversation to location. Looking at the community scale is very important; that's why we're hoping to develop the community assessment methodology I mentioned previously.

Nonetheless, what are some examples of resilient building features in residences? Specific features will be different depending on whether the building is a single family detached or high-rise. But generally, you want to optimize your energy efficiency to maintain reasonably comfortable temperatures even without fuel and/or electricity. In rural areas, one of the biggest challenges is the inability to pump water out of your well if your power goes out. This is where redundancy comes into play. Including a submersible hand pump that can be attached to a food-rated hose or fill buckets in the same well as your electric pump will provide water through a crisis. There are versions now that include features that prevent freezing, so the pump will work in the winter months. (Editor: Photo shows a hand pump made in Maine by Bison Pumps. This pump fits into a standard drilled well and the above-ground portion replaces the sanitary cap on the well casing. The unit can pump from a static head of up to 200 feet. Credit: Alex Wilson.)

Capturing and storing rainwater is another resilient strategy. PV also offers opportunities. The issue right now is that 95% of PV systems out there are grid-tied and will not function with the grid down. There are now inverters that allow use of PV-generated electricity during the day even during power outages. With minimal battery back-up to establish the proper waveform, such systems can be used during the day to re-charge the fridge, pump water, and so forth.

There are also design strategies that are aimed at addressing specific disasters. For example, the Miami Dade Building Code includes "storm design" adaptive strategies to provide better safety in hurricanes and major storms. These should be adopted throughout the eastern U.S. And in areas subject to wildfire (which will likely become more prevalent due to climate-change induced drought) Firewise Construction Practices should be adopted. I think the most common cause of homes burning down in wildfires are from embers blowing through the soffit vents into the attic, so incorporating ember-excluding soffit vents makes sense. In many cases the strategies can be implemented immediately, are pretty intuitive, and very affordable. But not always; super-insulating the nation's housing is far from trivial.

Schools are used a lot as emergency shelter. Any guidance on making schools resilient? For schools an important consideration is daylighting, which will reduce the energy requirements considerably, and reduce the wear and tear on emergency generators during power outages. Within 48 hours of Hurricane Sandy, most generators were no longer working; they were not designed for continuous use or they simply ran out of fuel and no more was available. (Which leads to another needed innovation -- better, more efficient generators.) (Editor: Photo shows a flood barrrier  at the New England Youth Theater. These were deployed when Hurricane Irene came through and prevented hundreds of dollars of damage. While the building was above the 100-year flood elevation, flood water came up to within an inch-and-a-half of the top. Credit: Jerry Stockman.)

Can you differentiate an adaptive design from a resilient design? We tend to use the terms  synonymously. Adaptive design recognizes long term trends that could impact life safety in the future. For example we should assume higher summer design temperatures. For buildings that are not currently in the flood areas but close by, designers should consider the potential for sea level rise. Culverts should be able to handle bigger storms. In Vermont, culverts that were rapidly overwhelmed in Hurricane Irene in 2011 have been replaced with double or triple the capacity.

Do you have any suggestions you'd like to give our readers? Three things: First, with any home addition, renovation, or window replacement project, look for opportunities to improve the building's energy performance. It will make your home, or the homes of your clients safer now and in the future—and it will save money and improve comfort. Second, get involved right away with planning boards to try to influence policies—for example, transportation policies to reduce reliance on the automobile. Pedestrian and bike friendly options are not "just" an amenity, nor just a mitigation measure to reduce carbon emissions, but can now be justified as a smart way to maintain mobility in the event of fuel shortages or outages. Third, RDI would love to hear from you. What ideas do you have to improve resilience at the building and community scale? Please let us know. (Editor: you can email Alex at the Institute's Website)

Kathleen O'Brien is Editor of Building Capacity Blog, and contributes monthly to the Daily Journal of Commerce's Green Building Blog. She has been in the sustainable development field for nearly three decades. She provides consulting on special projects for O'Brien & Company, the firm she founded over 20 years ago, and provides leadership training and mentoring through her legacy project: The Emerge Leadership Project. Her book The Northwest Green Home Primer, is popular with both professionals and the public. Kathleen also had the pleasure of working with Alex at NESEA in the mid-1980s, when solar panels were being taken OFF the white house roof, and the term "green building" had not yet been chris tened. Photo credits: Alex Wilson

Hunter Lovins: On Business Education, Public Service and our Green Future

I recently had the opportunity to interview Hunter Lovins over breakfast at the Streamliner Diner on Bainbridge Island, Washington.

Kathleen: So Hunter, what brings you here?

Hunter: I'm teaching at Bainbridge Graduate Institute this weekend at Islandwood, which is truly a singular honor. BGI remains the MBA program with the deepest and most authentic commitment to their vision -- "changing business for good." If you look at the most recent data projected for our planet's future, all of life is literally at risk. Things have to change. They are going to change. It's a matter of how. Transforming business education, which is what BGI has done, is critical to transforming our business model, which is critical to our survival. One of the things I am most impressed by is BGI's willingness to keep improving an already successful program.

Yes. I noted a similar impression in my post about Vision 2050 this past year. At that point BGI had decided to integrate the Vision 2050 goals into their curriculum, across the board. It's an incredible example of leadership. Speaking of leadership, I know you've met this past week with green team members from some of the most committed cities in the region. What do you think of their work?

I met with some folks on an informal basis, at a potluck hosted by the City of Shoreline's green team, and then got to participate in King County Green Tools' Sustainable Cities Roundtable. What I saw were some truly dedicated and intelligent individuals grappling with all the right questions, and reporting on the fairly sophisticated projects they have underway. There are a million reasons to get discouraged, but the work at the local level is really where much of the work is being done. And you've been pretty successful in the Pacific Northwest providing leadership in sustainable development. 

In what way?

Well, this where the Living Building Challenge came from, for example. And you have the legacy of leaders like Greg Nickels and Ron Sims who years ago recognized that we'd already locked in harm from climate change, and that we needed to look at adaptation not just prevention. One thing I've noticed is that local government leaders in the Northwest are willing to look beyond their jurisdictional borders and beyond serving only constituents. For them it's about truly serving the public and the well-being of all.

What advice would you give to public sector folks working in the trenches?

First I would caution them to prepare for the disruption that climate change will -- not may -- produce. Our best hope is for a soft landing. Cities need to plan for that transition and look at how to provide the basics -- food, water, health care -- using local resources. Second, I would celebrate what you are already doing. For the Sustainable Roundtable discussion, we met in the Kenmore City Hall. This is a LEED Gold Building that narrowly missed Platinum. LEED isn't perfect but it does provide accountability. The quality of light, air, and acoustics was just so high in that building. People feel better and produce more in green buildings. In conventional buildings, everyone's tense with their shoulders up around their ears. Keep up with good, basic green building practices -- performance contracting, transit oriented development, green team management, keeping yourself accountable by using LEED for your public buildings.

One of the issues public servants face is the lack of financial resources, especially with the economic downturn, do you have any suggestions? Foster initiatives that bring businesses together to work on conservation, perhaps through their Chamber of Commerce. Improved profitability through sustainability will both improve your local economy (and thus your tax base), but it will also help meet your goal of sustainability.

Since not all businesses have the resources of a Walmart, my organization has developed a rapid e-learning tool (Solutions @ the speed of business)

to help small businesses (which is what comprises the majority of business in most towns) improve their profitability through sustainable practices.  You can also look at local educational institutions for students that might help coach small businesses in sustainability. We are working with the City of  San Rafael, where students from the Dominican Green MBA program provide this kind of hands-on assistance. BGI's internship program is an obvious  resource for coaches here.

Hunter Lovins, author and a promoter of sustainable development for over 30 years, is president and founder of Natural Capitalism Solutions, a 501(c)3 non-profit in Colorado. She teaches sustainable business management at Bainbridge Graduate Institute (BGI) in Seattle, Washington, and Denver University. She co-founded with Amory Lovins, her then-husband, the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), which she led for 20 years. Named a "green business icon" by Newsweek, a millennium "Hero of the Planet" by Time Magazine, she has also received the Right Livelihood Award, the Leadership in Business Award and dozens of other honors.

Kathleen O'Brien is Editor of Building Capacity Blog, and contributes monthly to the Daily Journal of Commerce's Green Building Blog.  Like Hunter, she has been in the sustainable development field for nearly three decades. She provides consulting on special projects for O'Brien & Company, the firm she founded over 20 years ago, and provides leadership training and mentoring through her legacy project: The Emerge Leadership Project. Her book The Northwest Green Home Primer, is popular with both professionals and laypersons alike.

LEED HC – A Sensible Leap Into Sustainable Health Care

Have you ever been in a hospital or medical clinic, observed the humming machinery, the constant overhead lights, the busy staff, the patients in varying degrees of distress, the human drama, but your first thought is “How much energy is this place consuming?” Congratulations, you are a building science geek. Welcome, you are among friends.

Pacific Northwest Health Care Provider Leaps Forward: I worked in healthcare, clinics and hospitals for many years as a Registered Nurse, then a Nurse Practitioner. My career change to Green Building Consultant felt pretty natural to me as I was always renovating houses on the side. And I have watched with special interest the emergence of LEED© for Healthcare (LEED-HC). So I was delighted to start work on a local LEED-HC project for a great organization where I used to work as a Nurse Practitioner. Group Health Cooperative has committed to LEED-HC Certification for two new or replacement clinics in Washington -- one in Puyallup (see rendering) and one in Burien. These will be among the first in the country to certify under this new Rating System. Along with the owner, CollinsWoerman, University Mechanical, and GLY Construction, are enthusiastically committed to the projects' sustainability goals, and in particular achieving the target for LEED-HC Gold and achieving a 30% energy efficiency improvement over a similar baseline building.

A Little History on LEED-HC:  It grew from the Green Guide for Healthcare (GGHC), a sustainable design “Toolkit” that integrates environmental and health principles into the planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance of healthcare facilities. GGHC originated in 2004 as a joint venture between the Center for Maximum Potential Building systems and Health Care Without Harm, aligning itself with the structure of LEED for New Construction. GGHC piloted 100 facilities, enabling LEED-HC to bypass the US Green Building Council's LEED pilot process. The first draft for LEED-HC  was released in November 2007, and projects began registering in November 2010. To date, there are 26 registered projects in the US ranging from medical clinics and Veterans homes to hospitals and cancer centers.

The Problem: Hospitals, open 24/7, use enormous amounts of energy. There are rigorous ventilation and pressurization needs; heating and cooling demands that vary from the OR to the ER and contribute significant mechanical loads; and intensive water needs. According to Energy Star, the average EUI of a hospital is 468 kBtu/ft2 while the average EUI of an office building is 193 kBtu/ft2. The healthcare sector is reported to contribute 8% of total US Green House Gas Emissions (JAMA, Nov 11, 2009). How can hospitals and medical clinics become high performance buildings, better neighbors and a healthy part of the community where they are located?

A Problem-Solving Tool: Despite the fact that LEED for Healthcare requires a mere 10% energy performance improvement over the baseline (like LEED NC, but its not enough), it  addresses several key aspects of the problem, with several new Prerequisites and Credits that make sense for these massively consumptive facilities, such as:

• Integrated Design: Integrated Project Planning and Design is a Prerequisite. 
• Energy: In Energy & Atmosphere there is a credit for buildings that limit products of combustion, a sure way to become a better member of the community and the planet.
• Daylight: Articulated floor plates that allow more daylight and views for patients and staff earn credit.
• Water: Medical equipment process water must be non-potable -- it's a Prerequisite. New credits for water use measurement and verification (you can’t manage what you can’t measure); and water use reduction for medical equipment, cooling towers and food waste systems.
•  IEQ: In Materials & Resources there is a credit for medical furnishings and mattresses that do not contain harmful chemicals or VOC’s.
• IEQ: While sustainably sourced materials garner credit, they are also required to meet the low emitting requirements in IEQ.
• IEQ: The bar for the low emitting materials credit is raised with the addition of carcinogenic limits for adhesives and sealants; and credit for limiting VOC content for exterior applied products safeguards construction workers and the community.

Respite Care: In addition there are credits for Places of Respite for patients and visitors, a place to heal and recuperate from ongoing treatment. Don’t you feel better already? For in-patients or patients with long wait times, for families waiting even longer for their loved ones, this is a place to rest the eyes, have a view, appreciate some nature and smell some flowers. This is evidence-based design, referencing research indicating improved outcomes for patients with a view of nature rather than a brick wall. Additionally this LEED-HC credit has a requirement for a private outdoor area for staff to take a break, away from patient care. This allows hard working medical staff some time and space to find balance in a stressful workplace. Group Health’s Puyallup Clinic has a green roof and rooftop staff area planned, incorporating shelter, access to nature and privacy. The project design also incorporates a respite area for patients and families adjacent to the ground floor clinics.

Existing Buildings, When a Problem is an Opportunity: Retrofitting existing hospitals and clinics offers tremendous opportunity for reducing energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and CO2. The Community Power Works program is working with all the major local hospitals in the Seattle area to conduct energy upgrades as part of $20 million in federal stimulus grant funding to energy retrofit hospitals, municipal and large commercial buildings. Puget Sound Energy offers customized grants to hospitals for energy retrofits and existing building commissioning. Environmental Purchasing Policies for hospitals such as mercury-free purchasing; buying products with recycled content; requesting reduced packaging; and purchasing reusable products  help reduce their environmental impact. Remember the old days when that bedpan was metal and cold?  It  was cleaned in an autoclave and reused for years. This is much more sustainable than the plastic ones that are often single use in emergency rooms. But I digress. Stay tuned for more postings on Hospitals and Sustainability. 

Colleen Groll, CSBA and Senior Project Associate for O'Brien & Company, Inc.  is consulting on GHC's Puyallup and Burien Projects . In addition to her green building expertise, she brings more than 15 years experience in the health care services sector. She is a regular contributor to the Building Capacity Blog. Colleen recommends additional resources including Practice Green Health, The Healthier Hospitals Initiative, and The Department of Energy’s Hospital Energy Alliance.

Maier Hall at Peninsula College: Early Collaborative Process Yields Healthy, Efficient Building, Gentle to the Site and High on the LEED Scale

When teaching Unit 1 of the 2011 Sustainable Building Advisor course at Seattle Central Community College last Friday, I showed graphs, pictures, comics, and told stories to make a case for an early integrative process as a key for cost-effective sustainable results. As I sat down to write this article about the Maier Hall Project at Peninsula College, I flashed back to a lot of early meetings where the design team diligently worked through the siting of the new building.

The new building replaces four (4) other buildings in a smaller footprint yet increases square footage by three. It is bordered by sensitive areas on three sides, including a patch of virgin forest, wetlands, and a steep slope. As I discussed in my class presentation, the design team, led by Schacht Aslani Architects, responded to these constraints with collaborative problem solving in a series of working sessions resulting in a beautiful and creative design solution.

The L-shape building wraps around the forest grove and creates an edge to the campus at the top of the slope. A breezeway allows students to pass through the building from the campus into the forest and leads them to a viewing platform at the edge of the wetland. The team included a wetland biologist who helped them understand there wasn’t enough water getting to the wetland because of previous development. They couldn’t infiltrate stormwater at building grade because of the proximity of the steep slope, so the team designed a system that sends 90% of the site’s stormwater to the wetland. Rainwater flows from the roof to the wetland in a runnel passing prominently in front of the Hall's front door, helping students understand the environmental story. Additional connection to the natural environment that shaped the building is made on the upper stories through views to the epiphatice (moss) green roof.This solution is just another paradoxical example of creativity being most available when working within constraints.

This creativity and process took significant design team time, early in the process.   Investing the level of effort this team did early in a project can be scary to project managers and owners as it indicates a possible trend towards budget busting.  Fortunately, this project exemplifies how shifting effort earlier in projects and working with an integrated team actually solves problems better and sooner, reducing design effort and minimizing costs. “Working cohesively through the design process, the design team created a synergy that enhanced the project overall," says Chris Edlin, O'Brien & Company's consultant on the project. "For example, it helped avoid the either-or situation where trees, which represent a campus asset, might have been sacrificed for program, which fulfills the college mission (or vice versa)."  Chris also notes that "a less integrated team may not have understood the stormwater/wetland relationship and spent more on pipe and pond stormwater solutions that wouldn’t have benefited the wetland.  The narrow floor plan resulting from the IP is also excellent for natural ventilation and daylighting, thus reducing long term operational costs.

The building is a 65,000 sq.ft., three-story center for fine arts, music, humanities and related instructional programs. The focal point is the 134-seat performance hall, which also serves as a multi-purpose classroom. The hall can be acoustically tuned for music, lectures and films. In addition to targeting LEED Gold, the structure is designed to exceed the current standards of the Architecture 2030 Challenge for reducing energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. Natural ventilation in offices and classrooms and daylight design are key strategies for achieving this goal.

Elizabeth Powers, LEED AP and CSBA, is principal and co-owner of O'Brien & Company, Inc., which just celebrated its 20th anniversary. Elizabeth is principal-in-charge on over three dozen LEED and sustainable building projects for the company. She advised on development of Integrative Process (IP) ANSI Standard, and is a strong proponent of the process for clients who want high performance for common sense budgets. Project photos from Schacht Aslani.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Envisioning a Net-Zero Water Future
Costs & Associated Benefits of LEED Certification
Can My LEED Boundary Look Like an Octopus?
Cool Factor: Youth Green Building Careers Symposia Inspires

"Extreme" Collaboration: Crossing boundaries to achieve sustainable goals mark these initiatives

A number of sustainability initiatives in the Northwest illustrate the power of "extreme" collaboration. Initiated through the research of a PhD student studying the climate change mitigation efforts of jurisdictions within King County, the Cities Climate Collaboration gained momentum through staff members enthused by the idea of learning about and from neighboring cities’ efforts. These champions formed the basis of what has grown into a steering committee, comprised of city and county staff and partner organization representatives.

King County showed early support to the effort, and wrapped planning efforts together with ongoing initiatives, such as the Sustainable Cities Roundtable (now in its third year) and Green Tools. The Collaboration was formally launched on June 9th at a special event Roundtable, where King County Executive Dow Constantine (shown in photo) officially pledged support as a signatory along with several other Mayors. Six mayors have now signed the pledge.

As signatories to the Pledge, King County cities will partner on climate change outreach, coordination of standards, strategies and goals, climate mitigation solutions, and -- sealing the deal as an action-oriented effort – funding commitments for shared resources.  The Collaboration is unique in that the group is grounded in local efforts, experience, and action, but tethered by common higher level commitments such as the US Conference of Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement, and ICLEI membership.

Another noteworthy collaborative model that has emerged includes the City of Seattle’s 2030 District – a public-private partnership effort of property owners, managers, design professionals and City of Seattle to create the nation’s first High Performance Building District. In this case, it’s an effort largely driven by a committed private sector group who in other respects might be seen as competitors – each working to maximize energy savings to their best ability in order to achieve an aggregate energy savings across the entire portfolio of properties within the district. After incubating for a year, 2030 District officially launches this week. Its visionaries hope to become a replicable model for similar collaborations in other cities.

Finally, at a national scale the Emerald Cities Collaborative (EEC) leverages the expertise, assets and skills of the public and private sector to create clean economy cities. Seattle and Portland are two of several early municipal partners who have signed on to the EEC. The EEC is a national non-profit based in Washington, DC that pools the resources of 21 national partners – organizations targeting green economies, the environment and community development – along with local partners such as non-profits, labor and industry groups, workforce development, and training centers, and city signatories to forge energy efficiency and sustainable development solutions at the local level. 

Working together towards a common goal is not unusual. What is unique about these initiatives is the willingness to cross economic, political, and social boundaries that have hitherto seemed uncrossable, making their efforts much more robust, and more ambitious goals attainable. As the father of evolution Charles Darwin said, “In the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.”

Andrea Lewis, CSBA, LEED AP ID+C is Senior Project Associate at O’Brien & Company. She has provided assistance to King County’s Green Tools and Sustainable Cities Roundtables initiatives since 2009 and is a regular contributor to the Building Capacity Blog. King County Photo by Ned Ahrens.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Type of Construction for Passive House System
Interview with City of Kirkland’s Ellen Miller-Wolfe
Interview with Schacht Aslani Architects’ Walter Schacht
How Can Communities Accelerate Change Towards Green Building?

Don’t Touch My Building: Yvonne Kraus, LEED AP balances energy efficient adaptive reuse with historic preservation

As the green building industry’s focus has shifted toward adaptive reuse and retrofitting the existing building stock, the debate about balancing retrofit needs with historic preservation guidelines has moved to the forefront.

In our current work developing an Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy with the City of Ellensburg, this issue is salient. Ellensburg has a historic downtown with an active historic preservation interest group, but this real estate is significantly underutilized. Although street level spaces in the downtown are mostly maintained and leased, upper stories are virtually abandoned. Retrofits could improve energy performance and make these spaces more desirable for tenants who now look for space in modern developments outside of the City core. At the mere mention of revising building codes to allow for incorporation of renewables on existing buildings, however, a protest arose at the thought of installing PV panels on historic buildings.

So do we touch historic buildings to make them more efficient? What can we do, and how do we best balance historic preservation needs with adaptive reuse and energy efficiency goals? These questions have been on my mind for several months now. During a recent trip to The Netherlands, Germany, and Austria, I kept my eyes open to see how these countries are addressing this issue. There’s a visible juxtaposition of old rural villages and brand new renewable energy technology in much of the countryside(s) I visited. In The Netherlands, old wooden windmills sit next to sleek new wind farms and historic straw roof farms have incorporated on-site solar. In Germany, PV blankets the roofs of old barns and farms, and Germany’s solar incentive program has been so successful that the government has had to place it on hold to catch up with demand. In Austria, the roofs of many farms and inns in the 1,000 year old village of Soelden are dotted with solar hot water and PV panels. In my opinion, there is a true beauty in this mix of old and new. Not to mention efficiency and excitement for the future.

Adaptive Reuse is conventionally defined as the process of adapting old structures for new purposes. Much of the debate surrounding adaptive reuse pertains to whether it makes sense to keep the building and retrofit it, or tear down and build new, but that’s another issue that we’ll explore in a future article. New buildings are now designed with rigid and strong exteriors, yet flexible floor plans interiors making adaptive reuse in the future more likely.

Historic Preservation is part of a national movement to protect buildings that are least 50 years old and are associated with, or significant for, historic people or events, architecture, craftsmanship, or design; or are valuable for historical research. At the federal level, the National Park Service (NPS), part of the U.S. Department of the Interior, oversees the National Register of Historic Places which is an official federal list of districts, sites, structures, buildings, and objects that are deemed worthy of preservation. It’s important to know that the National Register is primarily a tool to recognize historic properties - it does not mandate how they must be treated. A listing thus helps to protect a property but it does not restrict property owners. This is where the state and City regulations come in: they can add restrictions to a listed property, and they do this through State Historic Preservation Offices (“shippoes”). Shippoes were federally mandated to carry out provisions of the Act of 1966 and their role is to locate and record historic resources, nominating these resources to the National Register, and providing technical assistance and consultation. There are also some State Historic Registers (Washington State has one: the Dept of Archeology & Historic Preservation) as well as municipal programs that recognize local historic sites or districts, and these come with their own sets of regulations that often go beyond federal regulation in restricting what private property owners can do.

When sustainability planners ponder adaptive reuse, both on old buildings and those on the historic register, the issue of embodied energy comes up. According to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, about 80 billion BTUs of energy are embodied in a typical 50,000-square-foot commercial building. That’s equivalent to 640,000 gallons of gasoline, which is wasted if you tear the building down. On top of that, demolishing that same 50,000-square-foot building creates about 4,000 tons of waste. Construction of the replacement building will take additional energy in construction, natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste. Preservation Green Lab (see resources) is conducting a study that will provide more information on this topic, and we’ll report on this study in the near future.

According to Patrice Frey’s research for “Building Reuse: Finding a Place on American Climate Policy Agendas,” Older buildings can actually be remarkably energy efficient because of their quality of construction, their downtown or central locations, and their use of passive heating and cooling methods. When the GSA examined its buildings inventory in 1999, it found that utility costs for historic buildings were 27% less than for more modern buildings. We need to hold on to buildings that are well designed, that meaningfully link us to our past, and that have plenty of good use left in them.

When considering adapting historic buildings with a sustainable design, consider these key factors:

1. Don’t break the rules. Bottom line, there are standards you must follow outlined in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The standards seem rigid, but there’s significant flexibility as long as you are consistent with the character of the building. Consider it a “design challenge.”
2. Lengthen your planning horizon. This applies whether you are adapting or constructing new, but after a trip to Europe this is at the top of my mind.
3. Be passive. Old buildings relied on passive strategies. Maintaining a passive approach will save money, keep renovations simpler, and make O&M easier.
4. Embodied energy. We’ve already touched on this. We’ll discuss the science behind this in our next post on this topic.
5. Verify operating energy. In doing energy modeling of an existing building, you might find it’s better than you thought it would be. Don’t assume it’s an energy hog because it’s old.
6. Work with your local preservationists. It’s best to develop an overarching strategy to your project, to determine what’s sacred, and what’s open to change. And provide opportunities to learn how historic buildings and sustainability goals overlap.
7. Don’t make assumptions about windows. There may be other ways to amp up a building’s energy efficiency. In the ongoing renovations of the historic Empire State Building the developers took the creative path of upgrading the existing windows rather than replacing them. Floor by floor they are removing  windows, “re-manufacturing” them on-site using local labor (meaning more green jobs!) The result are windows that test to R-8 and “fit.”
8. Take advantage of resources. See below .

Resources:

• Preservation Green Lab: National Trust for Historic Preservation.
• The Sustainability Initiative, National Trust for Historic Preservation.
• The American Institute of Architects Historic Resources Committee.
• The Association for Preservation Technology
• International Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
• The National Park Service Technical Preservation Services.  
• Historic Preservation and Green Building: A Lasting Relationship Feature - Environmental Building News January 2007. 
• Building Reuse: Finding a Place on American Climate Policy Agendas. Patrice Frey, Paul Anderson, Monica Andrews, and Carl Wolf. National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Yvonne Kraus, LEED AP and CSBA and Senior Project Associate for O'Brien & Company, Inc. specializes in green building program development, community and corporate sustainability strategies, and LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M. She is the Project Manager for the City of Ellensburg’s Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy (EECS), and led the development of the Economic Sustainability Strategy for the City of Kirkland (adopted), and of the Sustainability Strategy for the City of Sammamish (under consideration for adoption). The photo of Ellensburg's downtown was taken by Bob Bengford of Makers Architecture, leading a Land Development Code Update for the City concurrent to and integrated with the EECS project.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
LEED EB: O+M's Energy Threshold
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Passive House: A Bit of Overkill
Cracking the Energy Code: What Will It Cost?
Sweet Sustainability on the Ancient St. James Way

Creating Effective Energy Efficiency& Conservation Strategies in Your Community: Getting Started (part 1 of 2)

Creating Effective Energy Efficiency& Conservation Strategies in Your Community: Getting Started

EECS & Strategic Energy Plans: What are they?

Many government municipalities around the country have taken advantage of Energy Efficiency and Conservation (EEC) Strategy Block Grant money authorized by the National Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to fund strategies that reduce energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency in transportation, building, and other sectors as appropriate. For many cities, counties, and states, the funding represents an opportunity to act on commitments to respond to climate change, to identify and capture operational savings now and in the future as a measure of fiscal prudence, and to assist citizens in doing the same.

The Block Grant covers developing and implementing an EEC Strategy, which may include everything from conducting audits, developing financial incentive programs, analyzing and updating codes and enforcement, and implementing public education, among others.  Although the EEC Strategies we’ve seen thus far range in scope and detail, they generally include some form of action or implementation plan. Often this involves project descriptions with budgets and projected results associated with those budgets (such as energy savings, job creation, emissions reductions). The latter justification is used to prioritize and disburse remaining Block Grant monies.

Budgets for implementation can run to the millions. Las Vegas, Nevada’s Implementation Plan  announced in July of 2009 represented a proposed investment of nearly $28 million, including the planning element, and including items such as solar covered parking structures, a solar powered waste water treatment facility, facility and exterior lighting retrofits, financing and incentive programs, upgrading its green building program, and outreach. Charlotte, South Carolina has a more modest budget, roughly $6.5 million. Again, this investment is proposed for a number of different activities, primarily retrofits improving energy efficiency of existing facilities and incorporating renewable technologies. Like several of the EEC Strategies, the Charlotte Strategy proposes that some of this funding be used to staff a position to coordinate implementation.

A couple of good examples of EEC Strategy documents we’ve seen are those developed by Loudon County, Virginia and Topeka, Kansas.

In addition to EEC Strategies, we are also seeing a growing number of “Energy Plans” at the city, county, and state level. Not surprisingly, these are often allied with a concurrent commitment to addressing Climate Change. The City of San Diego’s “Energy Strategy for a Sustainable Future” is a good example of a stand-alone document. Burlington, Vermont’s Energy Plan is a section of the City’s 2006 Municipal Development Plan. King County, Washington, has an Energy Plan that it continues to update as it internalizes ongoing analyses of its operations and transportation energy efficiency measures and impacts.

An outline for an ideal strategic process for developing a community energy plan is provided by the Department of Energy (DOE) in its publication “Community Greening: How to Develop a Strategic Energy Plan.” Like most community strategic planning, the DOE outline proposes a stakeholder process, visioning and goal setting exercises, benchmarking existing conditions, identifying programs to fund as well as ways to fund them, prioritizing those programs, and memorializing all of this in a written document, which is then subject to review and ratification.

What’s Right for Your Community?

Embarking on an EEC Strategy will entail a unique process guided by the champions and leaders within your community, and influenced by resources available for the process. Although the Department of Energy process outline (discussed above) should work for most communities, the devil is in the details. It is our experience in community planning that a one-size-fits-all approach will not succeed. Each plan should be tailored to reflect the goals and interest of the stakeholders and be directly related to city and utility planning efforts. Begin by asking three high-level questions: 

• What planning efforts are already in place that would support an EEC Strategy such as comprehensive and code update cycles, greenhouse gas emissions planning, or community master planning?
• Where is the leadership and strongest support for efficiency and conservation within the community: the building and design sector, policy makers, public? 
• What federal, state or county technical assistance and funding is available to assist with strategic energy planning in your community?

Where to next?

Once you've pondered these questions, we anticipate a hunger for more information. Fortunately, resources abound for local governments seeking assistance with strategic energy planning, removing regulatory obstacles, and developing policies and standards in support of energy efficiency and renewables. A few of our favorites follow. In the meantime, good luck! Whether your motivation is operational savings, civic duty, or environmental protection -- or all of the above -- an EEC Strategy is a worthwhile venture. While it is most certainly an opportunity to save energy, it is also an excellent an non-partisan way to build community -- in itself a transformative gesture.

Resources:

US Dept. of Energy
Community Greening: How to Develop a Strategic Energy Plan www.nrel.gov/applying_technologies/pdfs/community_greening.pdf

US EPA
Sustainable Design and Green Building Toolkit for Local Governments www.epa.gov/region4/recycle/green-building-toolkit.pdf

Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute
Sustainable Community Development Code and Reform Initiative: http://law.du.edu/index.php/rmlui/sustainable-community-development-code-and-reform-initiative

US EPA
Essential Smart Growth Fixes for Urban and Suburban Zoning Codes: www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/essential_fixes.htm

Cascadia Green Building Council
Codes and Regulatory Research Publications
http://cascadiagbc.org/resources/research

Kathleen O'Brien is President of O'Brien & Company, a nationally respected green building consultancy founded in 1991. She is currently Principal-in-Charge for the firms planning, policy and programmatic work (including the Ellensburg project), and has been instrumental in the development of multiple sustainability strategies for government, non-profit, and private sector organizations. She served as an officer on the Cascadia Board of Directors in its early years and has been recognized by the organization as a Cascadia Fellow, a lifetime honorific. She is Editor of Building Capacity Blog.

Katie Spataro is Cascadia’s Research Director for Codes and Standards. Katie’s efforts to assist local governments with identifying obstacles and seeking pathways to support more sustainable development practices has assisted in the creation of policies, programs and code-related curriculum around the region. Katie heads up Cascadia’s Research Department which provides groundbreaking research and technical consulting services to help to further the adoption and understanding of the Living Building Challenge and other high performance policies, programs and standards.

Editors Note: More in depth treatment of the topic is in the fall issue of Cascadia Green Building Councils publication, Trim Tab here: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/95a19dea#/95a19dea/1  

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Interview with SBCA and Built Green Santa Barbara’s Karin Perissinotto
Washington Business Alliance: A Sustainable Approach
Green Building Public Education: Writing to Make a Difference
How Can We Accelerate the Green Building Movement?

How does a community support the use of FSC certified wood in its built environment? Ian Hanna, FSC-US Director of Development, Responds.

There are both direct and indirect ways a municipality can support the use of FSC-certified wood. But for readers who are unfamiliar with the term FSC- certified wood, I should provide a brief definition of the term.

FSC-certified wood is wood that is certified under the standards set the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). FSC-certification is given to companies and landowners to verify that they practice forestry that is consistent with FSC standards.

FSC is a non-profit organization that advocates responsible management of the world’s forests. Our standards ensure that forestry is practiced in an environmentally responsible way that takes into account economic viability, and social responsibility. Although there are other certification programs, FSC is by far the most rigorous and takes great pains to avoid being dominated by industry.

There are many benefits to using FSC-certified wood including the direct and permanent positive impact on the world’s forests and the people living from, in, and around the forest. You might want to check out FSC International or FSC-US websites for more information on these..

Communities that promote green building and/or sustainability in general will find that using FSC-certified wood is directly aligned with these goals. The same is true for communities that make a living from forest products. What are some practical ways to encourage its use?

First: Include specifications for using FSC-certified wood in public sector capital improvement projects. Specifications may require or include a preference for FSC-certified wood by including a deduct (preferred) or alternate to allow pricing FSC-certified wood as part of bid. (Deducts make it less convenient to drop the preference.) Include a list of FSC-certified wood sources in the bid documents.

Second: Provide education as part of the bidding process. When the Bainbridge Island City Hall was being contracted in 1998, it became clear that the “lowest” bidder (and winner of the project contract) knew the least about FSC-certified wood (and certified wood in general). The deduct he offered for FSC-certified wood was extremely high, triggering a strong negative political reaction community wide, as well as a call from the local paper to drop FSC-certified wood from the design. Miller-Hull (the project’s designer), O’Brien & Company (the sustainability consultant), and the Forest Stewardship Council understood this to be a “teachable moment” and organized a presentation at a televised Council meeting. At the conclusion of the presentation the Council voted to send the contractor back to the drawing board, and the bid (and actual cost) for FSC-certified wood was reduced fourfold. The project was able to utilize 70,000 board feet of FSC-certified wood, the largest quantity of wood used by a public project in the Northwest at that time.

Third: Require proof of understanding as part of the bid process. In the recent FSC Local Living Economies Tour (photo) conducted by King County’s Green Tools Program, participants learned that the bid process for the Cedar River Watershed Educational Center required prospective bidders to complete a pre-bid walkthrough as well as provide brief presentation on how the bidder intended to fulfill the project’s requirements for green building materials and FSC-certified wood. As a result of this and specifications with a preference for FSC-certified wood, the wood in the project’s buildings is comprised of 98% FSC-certified wood.

Fourth: Adopt a procurement policy for the municipality in general. The City of Seattle has had a preference for FSC-certified wood products in place for years.

Fifth: Use public projects to demonstrate the feasibility of using FSC-certified wood. One of the nice things about public projects is their access for this purpose. Signage and tours can tell the story to those in the private sector considering FSC-certified wood.

Sixth: Pursue FSC-certification of municipal land. This will create “anchors” of supply, and eliminate the argument that FSC-certified wood is not as available. Two of the mainstays of supply in the Puget Sound region are the Department of Natural Resources South Puget Region and the forestlands within Fort Lewis. In addition to municipal land, communities might work with private landowners who have development interests and might certify some of their forested land in return for permission to develop other property. The circle is completed for communities that are hoping to promote the local economy as part of their overall sustainability when they specific FSC-certified wood from local properties.

Seventh: Incentivize green building generally. FSC-certified wood is widely recognized as a green building material choice. There are several ways to incentivize green building, including providing free technical assistance, and – when construction is more active than it is now – expedited permitting.

Eighth: If your municipality does not own forestland, consider purchasing tree-based carbon offsets. You’ll want to make sure these offsets are based on trees growing in FSC-certified forests. If you want to encourage certification by small landowners, there is a group in the Northwest that has created a carbon offset program (NW Neutral) specifically with small landowners in mind. There may be similar programs elsewhere.

Ninth: Take the long view. If we can all agree that we want to live here forever, we need to be talking about forestry for the next 1000 years – the lifespan equivalent of a Doug Fir. Or even 3500 years, the lifespan of a Yellow Cedar. Government is the appropriate vehicle for taking the long view.

Ian Hanna is the Director of Development at the Forest Stewardship Council U.S. National Office and has been involved in FSC supply chain and market development since 1997. He brings broad perspective having worked across the supply chain in forest management, family forest certification, manufacturing, market development, and sales. With the FSC market quickly coming to scale, Ian is responsible for growing FSC-US's operational and financial capacity to match the needs of the thousands of producers, manufacturers and retailers that have integrated the protections and value FSC offers into their business strategy.

Building Capacity Blog is edited by Kathleen O'Brien, Principal and Founder of O'Brien & Company. Editor's Note: Some of you may not be aware but a very important ballot to revise the USGBC LEED Credits with regard to certified wood is underway. The consensus body is open to individuals employed by USGBC member organizations. If you opted-in and have not yet received information from USGBC regarding voting procedures, please email [email protected]. The ballot will remain open until Nov. 23, 11:59 p.m. ET.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Regulation & LEED Reinforce Waste Prevention and Source Separated Recycling
Interview with the City of Seattle’s Shirli Axelrod

What mechanical systems and fuel choices make sense for homes in a warming world? Alistair Jackson, LEED for Homes Rater Responds

With recent record high temperatures in North America and Russia and massive flooding in Pakistan as I write this, the evidence that climate destabilization is real – whoever or whatever is causing it – continues to pile up.

If we can’t persuade people that they have the power to avert that change – perhaps we need to start talking about adaptability and resilience instead of focusing only on reducing fossil fuel dependence and carbon emissions. This doesn’t mean we’re giving up. Rather, we’re acknowledging our human fallibility. We’re adding suspenders to back up our belts by designing buildings that consume and release less carbon AND that can still keep us comfortable in a destabilized climate.

The first step to this is a climate-responsive envelope. In most climates, this typically means as thermally efficient and air-tight as possible with design details that manage solar gain and natural ventilation to best advantage.

By choosing air-tight, we are already committing to some kind of mechanical system to ensure the indoor air quality is healthy for both occupants and the building itself. On one end of the spectrum, some would argue that an envelope that meets the local energy code is as thermally efficient as you should go – based on cost/benefit and diminishing returns. On the other end, some advocate for thermal performance and air-tightness along the lines of the Passive House US standard or something similar.

Where you stand on that spectrum and why you choose to stand there will determine the direction of your next steps - your mechanical system and fuel choices.

Here in Western Washington, where O’Brien & Company is based, we are blessed with a climate where a well-designed, well-built house should only have a few days of the year when mechanical cooling might be desirable, so we tend to think in terms of heating systems only. In fact, some would say installing mechanical cooling in a residence is anathema to sustainable design. But will that be true in 10 years? Or 20 years when it comes time to replace that aging HVAC system? What if in 2030, we have 30 days when cooling is desirable? Or 40 or 50 days? Cooling could become essential in those conditions. The challenge is to choose systems that can, if necessary, adapt to these changes efficiently. Let’s look at options from both ends of the spectrum for a builder in our home town – Seattle, WA.

Code Compliant Envelope

The code-compliant builder is weighing energy efficiency benefits against current market costs for construction, mechanical systems and fuel. The truly cost-conscious will use electric resistance throughout, but this is not an efficient choice when you look at the percentage of energy in the source fuel that is delivered as heat into the home. In a code-compliant envelope, this means high fuel costs. A central heat source, such as a gas stove, with supplemental electric resistance heat in remote spaces will lower overall energy costs and fuel consumption/carbon emissions. But both these solutions lack no alternate distribution options if you have to change fuel source and/or add cooling.

• For small homes, use a ductless mini-split air source heat pump with an HSPF of 10 to 12 as your primary source. Ventilate with continuous exhaust fan and trickle vents. The new generation of ductless “mini-split” air-source heat pumps offers a great alternative to that gas stove – electric fuel but very efficient and with cooling built in when you need it. If only the utilities would add some new construction rebates to make it more economically attractive.
• For bigger homes, if you’ve got gas, go forced air with the entire system inside conditioned space. Leave room for a DX coil at the air handler and wait for central air heat pump technology to catch up. Air distribution is more adaptable for adding cooling, but less adaptable to changing fuel sources so you’re gambling that natural gas will be available as a cost-effective fuel for buildings for the long term. Also, there’s a duct system in place for filtering and distributing ventilation air to where it is most needed. Use and HRV, ECM fan and smart cycler for best results.
• Switching to hydronic distribution (small water lines instead of large ducts) generally costs a little more up front, but gives you more efficient heat delivery and more fuel source options – combustion, electric resistance, heat pump, and solar thermal all work well with water. But adding a cooling option is trickier due to the complications of condensation – who wants sweaty radiators or floors? And you still have to add fans, and trickle vents or ducts for ventilation.

High Performance Envelope

The high performance builder is focused on the long game, weighing benefit against lifecycle cost rather than first cost. Because the focus is on a super efficient envelope, energy gains and losses are more modest, making “comfort” easier to achieve, but HVAC sizing harder to do. There just aren’t systems small enough for these low load homes. Because the envelope is tight, a balanced ventilation system is necessary, most likely with energy recovery, so air distribution (small diameter ducts) is “built in.” Whatever the house size, heating (and cooling) can be delivered in the central living space, and distributed to the rest of the house via energy recovery ventilation (ERV) system. This works because the envelope leakage losses are so small and the inner surfaces of walls and windows are warm in summer, cool in winter.

• Put a hydronic coil in your ERV:
• • Either plumb it to a gas or electric tank water heater for now;  
  • Or, install a ductless mini-split heat pump for the central living space and wait for the next generation of ductless air-to-water heat pumps from Europe and Asia. 

Choosing a Fuel Source

Above, we’ve suggested both gas and electric solutions for both house types. Is there a preference? We think so. Most of our private utilities say natural gas is clean and efficient and has a relatively low carbon footprint compared to the other fossil alternatives or electricity. But is it really so? The latest ductless mini-split heat pumps offer coefficients of performance (COPs) of 3.5 and getting better. That’s 3.5kWh of heating (or cooling) for every 1 kWh of electricity consumed. That more than offsets the generation and distribution losses of burning gas in a central plant to make electricity.

These systems do cost a little more to install than most of the other “small” systems and they do need a little more maintenance for best performance. But the upside is significant – that’s why they need more support in the marketplace. Many of the utilities continue to favor rebates for high-efficiency gas systems; they would rather you burn gas at the point of use than at the generating plant. They are subsidizing the development of housing stock that’s dependent on a fuel that makes it less adaptable and resilient to a future climate and fuel market that is less than predictable.

We suspect that eventually, energy- and molecule-dense fossil fuels will become too valuable as transportation fuels and chemical feedstock to be used to heat houses, making electricity a home fuel of choice. With PV prices tumbling and incentives improving, an all-electric, low-load, heat pump home might affordably go “near-zero” right now. As an example, look at the Sunnyland Sun House constructed by Living Laboratoriesin Bellingham, WA. The home has achieved high performance on a cost-conscious budget (appealing to both ends of our spectrum!) with a tight efficient envelope, a mini-split heat pump, exhaust-only ventilation and 1.4kW of Silicon Energy’s Washington-made PV. Although this all-electric "net zero-ready" home will collect an unimpressive $140 in rebates from its local utility, it has earned an impressive Home Energy Rating System (HERS) index of 57.

Alistair Jackson, LEED AP, CSBA is Principal in Charge of O’Brien & Company’s Residential Technical Services, and is a LEED for Homes Rater, LEED for Homes Faculty, Energy Star Verifier and Performance Tester, an ARCSA Accredited Professional, and a Built Green Verifier.  He also was a major contributor to The Northwest Green Home Primer on the subjects of energy, fuel futureproofing, and mechanical system choices.

Did you enjoy this article?  You might also like these Building Capacity Blog articles: 
Tips for Optimizing Forced-Air Heating and Cooling Systems Part 1
Cracking the Energy Code: What Will It Cost?
Gut Rehab: Groll Residence Turns 1918 Home from “Leaky” to Green
Type of Construction for Passive House System
Creating Effective Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategies Part 1
Balancing Energy Efficient Adaptive Reuse with Historic Preservation