Sunday, February 10, 2008

Lecture Series/ Kroon Building

Last Thursday I began attending a lecture series at Yale in the School of Forrestry and Environmental Science. It was strange, returning to where I spent four years of my life over twenty-five years ago. Funny thing about it is, when I was an undergraduate, I never stepped foot in that building, or for that matter did I venture into that part of the university altogether. Science hill is the area of the university where the math, science folks went, and I was an artsy, writing guy.

So we drove up to Science Hill, got out of the car and headed into the F&ES building. Harassed only one person for directions, and we entered Bowers Auditorium, where, oddly enough, it reminded me of being in a lecture hall in college. The only differences were 1) there were refreshments in the back, and 2) after grabbing a cup of coffee, I sat towards the front because I was actually interested in being there.

The lecturer was Gus Speth, the Dean of the F&ES. His introducer went through the many incredible things Speth has done in his career, then ta-da, Speth stepped up to the podium, and to be totally honest about it, gave a pretty mediocre lecture. Not to say he's a bad lecturer, but the topic was pretty dull. It was about the multiple administrative difficulties he faced over the previous 5 years getting the University to capitulate to the building of the new Krune building, and on the gloriousness of the plan for the building.

I learned a lot about the resistance to new ideas during the lecture even within a supposed bastion for new ideas. Speth seemingly engaged in the academic form of open warfare with the temporary provost of the University for a multi-year stretch. After finally outlasting the temp, he actually got what he wanted, which was to have the university agree to get rid of the Pierson-Sage power plant, virtually an energy dinosaur, which of course, sat adjacent to where the Krune building is to be built.

Throughout the lecture there were several references to the environmentally ground-breaking nature of the building and how those element will provide leadership for the rest of the university and the community at large to move toward a "greener" future. And I sat there and thought about it for a long time, and I realized this is exactly what is wrong with universities and right with them at the same time.

Let's tackle what's right first. The Kroon building is a brilliant building. Brilliant design, brilliant lighting, floor plan, usage of renewable energy sources. All that good stuff. Further, it is in some respects a beacon, a lighthouse offering direction through the fog of grants and red tape and construction costs and varying reports on the virtues of different forms of fuels and energy and passive solar design and fuel cells... on and on and on. Further, in one sense it cost the university nothing. Yale told Speth, "Go ahead, but you have to raise the money," and Speth did, got costs broken down, got estimates, hired architects, designers, construction teams, and tallied it all up and then went out to find private donations. Got donations, and hence, the name "Kroon." (I guess that is better than say the Southwest Airlines Arena, but not much.) Further, went after the power plant, fought the good fight, threatened "the power plant or me!" The power plant had to go. Well done.

But let us talk about leadership for a moment. What does it mean to be a leader? I wonder about that because for the first time, I saw my alma mater as the ivory tower I am sure it always was, but I guess I was too self-absorbed or inebriated to know it. As I look at the design for the Kroon building, I realize that it is unrealistic for anybody but a Yale, or Harvard, or University of Texas, or the Brookings Institute, or Bill Gates to consider building a building like the Kroon building. The cost per square foot must be nearly a thousand dollars, whereas I am a principal in a company that aspires to create green homes for under a hundred dollars a square foot. Now, if you are playing follow the leader, yeh, the Harvard might follow the Oberlin who might follow the Brown who might follow the Sacremento Museum of Fine Art (I'm just pulling these names off the top of my head and they have no correlation to reality other than I know these places exist.) But when you are talking about global warming, what you are shooting for is the entire human population, particularly virulent polluters like the US, to change its behavior. Walking around in a library that uses solar energy is not going to make you wander home and cry out to the misses, "Hey, honey, we need to throw some solar panels on top of this sucker." But I think if someone is buiding a new house and you, as a builder say, "Hey, you know what? I can build your house pretty cheap and still do your electric system solar, cut your bills way down near nothing, and it will be just the house you want. Cost you less than Joe Blow was going to charge." Now that will get people changing. Cheaper, better, greener?

I am not saying Yale is not doing a good thing by building the ultimate green building. But who is going to follow? The question is already out there: how do we face the impending global warming crisis? Al Gore got it out there, and I'm sorry to say, he went to Harvard. But the point is, Yale, we know already. Green is good. Now how do we bring everybody to the table? Making a spaceship modern building, cool and all, but 7, 8, 9 hundred dollars a square foot just is not dealing with the real world.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Green Lists or the Price of Environmental Hip Status

Renovated spaces
Right-sized space
Green Intelligent Design
Healthy non toxic natural materials
Energy Efficiency (Energy Star Appliances)
Day-light spaces
Water efficient fixtures (Toilets, showers heads, sinks)
Quality Construction
Recycled materials & salvaged items from older homes
Local Materials
Organic land care and landscaping utilizing local plants
Southern orientation of the house
Limited or no use of plastics (especially PVC)
Limited or no use of asphalt
Pleasing spaces gracefully integrated with nature


We are in process of building an online directory of Green Products. Please check back as we bring you links to the following categories of products and services.
1. Alternative Building Materials
2. Architectural
a. Residential
b. Small Commercial
c. Large Commercial, Government & Institutional
3. Building Contractors
a. Residential
b. Small Commercial
c. Large Commercial, Government & Institutional
4. Building Control Systems
5. Building Maintenance
6. Cleaning Products
7. Commissioning
8. Consulting
9. Connecticut Produced Products
10. Day Lighting
11. Design Services
a. Residential
b. Small Commercial
c. Large Commercial, Government & Institutional
12. Educational
13. Electricians
14. Energy Audit Services
15. Energy Efficiency
16. Energy Efficient Products
17. Energy Modeling
18. Engineering Services
a. Residential
b. Small Commercial
c. Large Commercial, Government & Institutional
19. Environmental Remediation
20. Financial Services
21. Flooring
22. Furniture
23. Governmental
24. Green Electricity
25. Green Retailers
26. Healthy Products
27. Home Inspections
28. Indoor Air Quality
29. HVAC
30. Interior Design
31. Insulation
32. Land Use
33. Landscape Architecture
34. Landscape Design/Construction
35. Landscape Plants & Materials
36. Legal
37. LEED™ Accreditation/Consulting
38. Lighting Design
39. Lighting Products
40. Lumber
41. Natural Gas
42. Not-for-Profit
43. Office Equipment
44. Organic Land Care
45. Organic Products
46. Paints & Coatings
47. Plumbers
48. Real Estate Services
49. Recycling & Waste Management
50. Recycled Materials & Products
51. Renewable Energy
52. Remodeling
53. Research
54. Retailers
55. Roofing Materials
56. Site Planning
57. Solid Waste
58. Solar
59. Transportation
60. Wall Coverings
61. Wastewater
62. Water Heating
63. Water Management
64. Water Conservation
65. Wind
66. Windows
67. Wood Products

I put this list together off of the Connecticut Green Building Association site. These elements were all listed as being key to building green. So, I would love folks to chime in, item by item, as to what they think it would cost EXTRA (above and beyond normal construction costs without a "green" agenda} per square foot, say to add these elements properly. There are, of course, multiple elements within elements, and I am sure there are folks out there who know exactly what all of the water management costs of going green are, but haven't a clue about environmentally friendly flooring. That's fine. Just chime in on what it is you do know. That would be extremely helpful.

I realize I have set this up like I have a bet on it. "Hey, Bud, I think it will cost only x dollars/ square foot to go whole hog green." "No, f'in' way! It'll cost twice that if a penny." "Wanna bet?"

No, that isn't the impetus for this, but it sure as shootin' could be. Just navigating through the particutlars about a topic I blogged earlier about Green being the province of the spoiled rich when it should be directed toward the affordable housing set instead. Anyway, let's see what we come up with and go from there.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,