REPP logo banner adsolstice ad
site map
Google Search REPP WWW register comment
home
repp
energy and environment
discussion groups
calendar
gem
about us
employment
 
REPP-CREST
1612 K Street, NW
Suite 202
Washington, DC 20006
contact us
discussion groups
efficiencyefficiency hydrogenhydrogen solarsolar windwind geothermalgeothermal bioenergybioenergy hydrohydro policypolicy
Greenbuilding Archive for September 2001
365 messages, last added Tue Nov 26 17:25:56 2002

[Date Index][Thread Index]

[GBlist] re: truly sustainable



David- I appreciate your question deeply and think this is an important way
to look at green- sustainable building. Durability is very high on my list
or priorities. To that end I sometimes use materials which others might not
consider "green"- IF (that's a big if..) the material's life cycle allows
the building to live a longer life. (Note that IMHO an important part of
this equation is that that building be equally adaptable to new conditions
and times over its life.)

One of the difficulties of this  list is the regional specificity required
for building. Folks from all over the world really are interested in this
topic and share this list. But what works -and is durable- here in the upper
mid-west might not work well in San Antonio.  We have a climate that's hard
on lots of building materials- well over 100 degrees F of temperature change
annually (often approaching 150 F)- 32" of rain annually, a 40 pound snow
load, humid summers, etc. (why is it again I live here..?) Our climate is
similar to northern Europe and some of New England. Your climate is
substantially different. Here, we have lots of wood, and in my immediate
area lots of field and quarry stone. While our area wasn't settled until the
early 1800's, the examples of structures which have endured the past 150-200
years are almost all timber and stone. One can, of course, argue that those
are the materials the settlers were used to working with and really the only
substantial materials available then. But we can also look to the places
these settlers came from, which often had similar climates (and, in the case
of much of Europe, a depleted wood resource, due to over-use..). Wood and
stone were the materials of choice there, and indeed when I travel to
northern Europe I see that these are the buildings which endure. Certainly
other organic materials were available- my supposition is that if they were
used they have not survived the test of time in nearly the numbers that
timber and masonry structures have.

I have argued on this list in years past that labor has a very high value.
It needs to be included in the cost of building- over the life/cycle of the
building. Do it right the first time. Do it well, do it adaptively, and
don't worry about doing it over for a long, long time. Look to historic
examples of what has worked over time in your area, and other similar
climates around the world. Our forefathers (usually) new what they were
doing. And time has weeded out examples of those who didn't. 

______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
______________________________________________________________________