Katrina says: “Less is More”

October 8, 2007 in Architecture, Design, Future, New Orleans Principles, sustainability, urbanism

The minimal Katrina cottages are appealing to many that weren’t the target demographic at all. Many are discovering that they don’t want a McMansion, or anything even close to it, and are very happy to have something that is small, well designed and not too expensive to heat, and capable of fitting on a small site, too.

The Green Lever of Trademarks

September 25, 2007 in Architecture, Intellectual Property, Media, Sideways Adjectives, sustainability

The United States Green Building Council‘s green building rating system (LEED-Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) has driven the development of many sustainable building products, increased awareness of what needs to be done to make buildings less damaging to the environment, and caused thousands of buildings to be built to better environmental standards than they would have otherwise been. LEED is a voluntary system, which leverages competition to increase it’s impact through the use of a multi-tiered rating system. Buildings which achieve the highest number of point are classified as platinum, next tier is gold, then silver and finally there is a category just called ‘certified.’ This system was introduced in 2000, and in just seven years there have been over 6,500 buildings registered on its website, and about 42,000 professionals have taken the accreditation exam. It’s a system that has a very definite brand identity, which the USGBC has built, with the help of their trademarks on the LEED system. It’s the brand leader in green:

“There’s nothing else out there. LEED is what’s for dinner,” says Auden Schendler, the director of environmental affairs at Aspen Skiing Co. “Plus, it’s a good idea. Previously, nobody knew what a green building was.”

But those are the direct effects; also important has been the generation of market demand for ‘green’ materials and services, a market which has really taken off since 2000, when LEED was created. Thus, even buildings not LEED-registered have become somewhat greener, since they contain products developed to meet the demand created by LEED. The awareness of green strategies has trickled down into mainstream design thought, and changed other non-LEED buildings too. The extent of this can, of course, be debated.

The USGBC itself is an example of the expansion of the NFP (Not-for-profit) sector that I have noted previously:

Assessing LEED is further complicated by the business growth of the Green Building Council. Awarding gold–and silver and platinum–certification has been a gold mine for the nonprofit organization. Once a small operation with seven paid employees, it now fields a 116-member staff and earns 95% of its $50 million annual budget

…

Power-suited developers and hard hats have signed on. More than 6,500 projects have registered for LEED certification since 2000, and new categories such as commercial interiors and existing buildings have been added to the original LEED for new construction. Forty-two thousand people have paid $250 to $350 and passed exams to become “LEED-accredited professionals.” The council’s revenue has been growing at 30% or better a year, with close to 20% coming from certification.

Of course, any time that a market is transformed, as the market for buildings and building materials has been, there will be winners and losers, and enemies will be made. So therefore it is to be expected that there will be those who attempt to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the green building movement. The Wall Street Journal had one prime example last summer, but its securely locked up behind their pay-wall now, so I can’t link to it.

Another example is the article The Green Standard? in this month’s Fast Company; the text in one of the opening paragraphs might lead one to believe that there is some huge flaw in the USGBC LEED rating system:

Old Buildings, Healthy Buildings, Sustainable Buildings

April 2, 2007 in Architecture, Design, Finally, Public Health, sustainability, unplugged

An interesting paper confirms what many concerned with building design have long suspected, but which had lacked (to some degree) empirical support: that older buildings, built according to traditional building practices are healthier than modern buildings built to ‘state of the art’ newer standards. In other words, those old foggies that used drafting boards, and were deeply suspicious of computers actually did know what they were doing. Article published in the Public Library of Science Medicine Journal: