February 2010 PDF Edition
Needed: Sustainable,Scientific, Integrity-Based Energy Policies, Renewable Energy Development in NM, PNM Files New Portfolio Plan, Commentary on PNM Agreement and Renewable Policy in NM, SF County Renewable Energy Financing District, Dreaming NM: The Restoration Economy, Energy Efficient Building Retrofits, Toast, Pancakes and Waffles: Planning for Off-Grid Living, Newsbites, What Ever Happened to “Reduce and Reuse?”, Green Energy, Ecosystems and the Wild, Water – Another View, Small Scale Desalination in Tularosa, Gourmet Delights for Pollinators, Good Jobs / Strong Economy, What’s Going On!
About the author
The Green Fire Times is published by Skip Whitson, edited by Seth Roffman with design by Anna Hansen and webmaster Karen Shepherd. All authors retain all copyrights. If you need to contact a particular author, or want to write for us, please be in touch.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Green Fire Times on February 28, 2010 at 8:14 pm, and is filed under February 2010, Full Edition Downloads. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
In the Green Fire Times we spotlight initiatives that create positive social impacts on climate change, energy independence, and green job development...
about 1 year ago
Dear GTF,
Robert Montoya expounds the virtues of ICF for construction and casts aspersions on both wood and people who live in wood homes. While he asserts that ICF buildings will last for thousands of years, that is somewhat misleading, because ICF is relatively new and it presupposes the building will serve for 1000 years. I can point to wood buildings that HAVE lasted more than a thousand years, but have to qualify that by saying the buildings were designed to perform their function or allow for easy adaptability.
Sadly, in North America, more than 80% of buildings that were torn down were removed because they no longer performed the function the owner needed it to perform. The average house serves for 38 years because we as consumers want something different. Not because the material has failed. (This was from a study conducted by the Athena Institute, the organization selected by USGBC for its Life Cycle Assessment tool for use in LEED.)
This LCA tool also found that ICF buildings have a bigger environmental impact than wood frame (for residences and low-rise office buildings.)
There is no perfect building material. If there was we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.
The task we face as designers and specifiers comes down to a few things:
1. What functions and capabilities need to be designed for in this building over the long term, say 100 years plus?;
2. What are the true impacts of my material, design and operational decisions over the same time frame and do I have a means of assessing current and future impacts of my decisions? (which necessitates an objective LCA tool);
3. Are my decisions likely going to allow the building to be adaptable to deal with future concerns and uses?
4. Does the building need to be built in the first place? I refer to the Summer 2007 edition of the National Trust Forum journal, in which architect Carl Elefante said ‘the greenest building is one that is already built’. I would respectfully argue that the greenest building is one that doesn’t HAVE to be built. If we can develop a culture that values our heritage, designs buildings that are endearing, and considers needs not wants, we will recognize we already have buildings that will meet our needs and be capable of lasting for centuries, regardless of the material.
Finally, what other material comes from what is essentially a solar powered carbon-dioxide sucking machine that stores energy in a beautiful building material? Wood.
I commend Mr. Montoya on his achievements in the green building field, but objectivity is going to play a key role in ensuring we make the right decisions over the long-term. I’d urge him to examine all materials shine and where they need work.
Peter Moonen
Leader, Sustainable Building Coalition