The Bad News About Green Architecture

I live in Nantucket and work for the Propane company over here. I've seen the inception of the McMansion 20 years ago to todays' layout of guest cotages, pool houses complete with outside commercial kitchens(for that special event!) heated garages and of course the primary dwelling with a movie theatre and full spa and weight room......Scary.. But the green movement as your article says has captured the most wastefull of people and actually allowed them to appear to be green.. Multi millionares purchase a Smart Car (to go along with all the larger ones they have) and head to town for a 400 dollar meal feeling vindicated while their pool is heating and the AC is on back at the "ranch".......? Ya, going green is really more about feeling good than anything.. Buy yourself some window seal kits this winter and you'll save a bunch of money.. Listen to Al Gore and you'll give up your car while the rich "greens" are seen driving "smart".....

McGuigan states that New Orleans shotgun houses "are built high off the ground to resist flood damage." I estimate that the sill plate of the example shotgun house shown in the accompanying picture can't be more than 42" off the ground. As "flood protection" in New Orleans that is laughable.

McGuigan states that New Orleans shotgun houses "are built high off the ground to resist flood damage." I estimate that the sill plate of the example shotgun house shown in the accompanying picture can't be more than 42" off the ground. As "flood protection" in New Orleans that is laughable.

I propose that there be a market for LEED points.

A project may consist of two buildings on a single lot; or two buildings on adjacent lots, or two buildings across the street from each other... or a series of buildings stretched along a transit line.. There should be no impediment, therefore, for a project to consist of two components, one in, say Manhatten, and one in, oh, Bangladesh. The Bangladesh component could certainly furnish sustainable components sufficient to gain the LEED points necessary for the NY component to obtain Platinum certification.

It would be a simple matter to set up a consortium or brokerage house to act as the exchange agent for LEED points.

A solution such as this would have the distinct advantage of acquiring LEED points in areas of the world where construction practices are inherently sustainable, and have a great appetite for cash. The disparity between the cost of complying with LEED requirements in such a place, and the marketing value in the other place would certainly support healthy profits for such an entrepreneurial service.

Saving the planet is a global imperative, is it not? The benefits of such a market are compelling.

Only a few buildings out of any defined subset will be great designs, don't you think? Sustainable features, virtuous or not, certainly do not automatically confer beauty on a building; neither does avoiding them. The whole argument is a red herring. What is more important is a holistic discussion of a building's "beauty", including, yes, a consideration of how long it will remain standing, partially a consequence of its perceived beauty; a consideration of the SERIOUS ugliness associated with many business-as-usual design features- ugliness at the plant that manufactures PVC, the landfill that receives 40% of its waste from construction, and the like; and yes, consideration of the context for the building, witness the tumultuous debate over Britain's proposed eco-towns and the cited silliness of promoting ":green" in Nevada. The asides about LEED leave out any mention of the fact that it is evolving and that its limitations and blind spots are understood, and in the process of being addressed. It will a happy day when every design article or building review comments on these matters, as well as whatever beauty is on display.

"If it isn't appealing no one will care for it. If no one cares for it, it will not last. Beauty is sustainable." Mark Simon, FAIA, Centerbrook

If it isn't appealing no one will care for it. If no one cares for it, it will not last. Beauty is sustainable. Mark Simon, FAIA, Centerbrook

The problem is twofold. Greedy builders are not going to use ICF construction when it costs 15% more to build that way. Never mind that the Isulating concrete forms quickly pay for themselves in saved energy costs. The uneducated buyers just want a fancy looking house. They don't understand that the cheap "stick built" McMansions end up costing them more while the builders profit.

There is and always has been only one green. The label green was seeded the day the father of ecology witnessed a wolf die and then, the subsequent death of an entire ecosystem die in the absence of its wolf. He watched, " a fierce, green fire die" in the fading eyes of the dying wolf. Green Fire signals an ecological consciousness and a comprehension that ecosystems are the living, life-gifting, physical body of ecosystem dependent Earth.

Today, the only green that matters is the salvation and the conservation of Earth's ecosystems and their biodiversity, like the wolf of long ago. All the green buildings, cars and toilet scrubbers are irrelevant -- if mankind continues on his war path of killing the body and face of Earth and pushing biodiversity extinct. The problems with buildings and renewable energies are, inherently, they still kill the body of Earth. Therein lies the enigma; mankind is slathering Earth with buildings, roads to build windmill factories and bury the face of Earth under solar panels. Attempting to go green while killing ecosystems and pushing the animals and plants extinct that create and govern the very life of the entire system is still, butchering the life of Earth.

Every foot of natural, wild landscapes and its wild animals and native plants, is one more foot of dead planet, as life-gifting as Mars. Buildings, roads, construction, slathering, paving, burying, parking lots, freeways and cities, i.e., "heat islands" are all dead planet. Building green buildings and churning up the earth and planting ornamental weeds that are all, so-called green, is like trying to squelch a raging fire with a spray bottle.

The salvation and protection of Earth's ecosystems, and ecosystems' native animals and plants are the only green and will always be the only green. See any green, thriving, life-gifting color of green on Mars? See any wolves? Trees, songbirds, bison, elk, frogs or lizards. Or oxygen? Now, we're talking green. Going, going, going.

There isn't a more apt description of the status quo than what you put across. In fact, at a recent exhibition on Le Corbusier's works, i noticed that the one thing common to all his drawings was a little wind-rose diagram in the corner. God alone knows how (ever since the advent of glass clad monstrosities, with artificial space conditioning) those little guiding symbols have disappeared from our minds and resultantly from our designs. Secondly, beauty is a result of a largely accepted architectural aesthetic: a largely notional / interpretational concept. Who knows how the green movement will transform the larger / acceptable ideas of beauty as we accept them today?

The future is looking fine for Plumbing becoming an exciting feature of the building - it's about time. Sustainable Water Use is more than installing water efficent fixtures and fittings, it takes in a large global view equal to the comments given above. Transport and treatment of water is critical - energy used to transport and treat water is obvious but the GHGs from the wastewater treatment has to be considered (CH3 and N2O). The embodied water of buildings can be equivalent to 20 years of domestic water consumption let alone taking in consideration of replacment of items such as carpet. Studies have show at best there is 15kL to 20kL of embodied water per m2 of a building - the figure is likely to be higher.

As far as architectual appeal of a building, put the plumbing on the outside!!

Beauty in the eye of the beholder

Maybe some of us see the beauty of High Schools like TC Williams in Alexandria
that was built green and is reaping the reduced maint cost of that initial investment.
Home of the mighty mighty Titans, remember?

Don't let people convince you that the look is more important than the function.
Haven't we had enough of the empty branding tweak-n-flip house-of cards mentality.

Don't we just want something that does what it says it's gonna do? For God's sake YES !