Team Project Paper # 2 Green Materials

Bud Munson

“Green” materials is a difficult subject for me to write about.  I look at all of the different things that make a given product “green,” and, in every case, you can find the carbon footprint. Sometimes it is from production, sometimes it is from transportation, sometimes it is because of the environmental impacts of construction at the building site, but always there is a footprint.  If you go to the annotated outline in our class “program guide” there is an almost endless list of factors affecting green materials.   I suspect most people will choose a segment of the green materials category and try to write about and argue that a certain product is better than another.  I have difficulty with this because, in most cases, if you take a look at a “Pharos” style analysis of any of these products, you will find some lower impact ratings and some higher, but the truth is they all have a carbon footprint.  The trick would be, to find a low impact rating on products produced in your immediate region or area.  In most cases this is going to be difficult.  Not to shift this paper on “green materials” to the subject of “the importance of place” but, we need to begin to figure out what all of our building needs are, and try to fulfill as many of those needs as we can locally.  Then, when you get to that point, try to develop products with low production footprints.  If you combine these two factors, then you can begin to truly achieve sustainable product profiles. 

I am reluctant to start down a laundry list of products and try to analyze each one for its “greenness.”  The truth is, that no matter how hard we try, if we must continue to build dwellings and work places in this country, and around the world, and we must, standards of sustainability will never be equitable from place to place.  In our country and in other first world countries,  standards of safety, health, and welfare will always require us to use far more than our share of the world’s resources in the homes and buildings we build.  All of this pessimism aside, we can only do what we can do.  I guess if we set goals and standards as a nation to try to make buildings and homes as efficient as possible that is the best we can hope for.  Energy efficiency is, by far, the most valuable aspect of building green.  Over time using less energy has the most impact on the planet as a whole.  However, as time passes, and we all begin to realize that unless we all move out to the middle of the New Mexico desert and build an “Earthship” out of old tires and dirt, everything that goes into the construction of our buildings has its carbon footprint.  Even an “Earthship” has a carbon footprint.  If you consider that “EVERYTHING” in our modern world, and I do mean “everything” that is produced and distributed for use in our modern society has a carbon footprint, it is almost an oxymoron to use the term “green materials.”   I think we are a very long way from having actual “green materials” to use in the construction of our buildings.  I believe that if we are going to make any progress at all in the area of green building materials, we need to set standards that are area specific to each region, then, start making modifications to building codes accordingly.  When you look at the current building codes, they are created on a national and, even, international basis.  From a green building standpoint, that is ridiculous.  There is no way green in one area can constitute green in another.  I believe that the best way to do this is to set up building profiles for varying climate conditions and set parameters, then modify those parameters, as needed, to best suite the products that are available in that area.  Trying to standardize for the whole country or the whole world really doesn’t make any sense at all. 

At this point, I think it is very difficult to push change.  Our entire infrastructure revolves around systems of production and distribution of products that are deeply entrenched in our building systems and the fabric of our everyday lives.  If you try to talk to a builder or a city plans examiner about radical changes to code that could begin to turn the ship, you are invariably met with strong resistance to change.  They must all comply with state and federal standards and will not allow themselves to jeopardize their positions by allowing, or even pushing toward, changes to materials, standards and existing prescriptive paths.  With every product you wish to try to evaluate, and to look for changes, you run into road blocks.  In some cases it is health and safety fears, and, in others, it is a strong and well established business segment and their lobbyists, that creates the resistance. 

All things considered, all we can do is find the best possible and greenest materials to build with.  Developing tools, such as “Pharos” (a recently developed product evaluation library system) to evaluate product footprints, is useful in producing better products.  Tools, such as, eco-labeling to promote the use of materials that are as sustainable as possible can help us in the selection process.  Existing tools, such as Masterspec* and Greenspec,* can help us with materials analysis, and, programs like LEED, Energy Star, and Earth Advantage, can help us find useful guidelines and checklists for making the best materials choices.  Programs, like the Oregon Energy Trust, and state and federal tax credits and rebates can make it easier to make those hard transitions to new products and systems through financial incentives.

I am normally a very optimistic person.  It is not in my nature to look at bad situations as impossible to correct or deal with.  I believe humanity has the capacity to intellectually find its way out of almost any challenge that comes along.  Of all of the challenges we face in the area of “green building,” finding suitable materials is definitely one of the biggest challenges.  Until we can slow down and work together well enough to affect meaningful change to the system, all we can do is use our heads, and be as conscientious as possible in our materials choices.

In all areas of the “green building” challenge, integrated design offers our greatest hope for change.  It is also one of the most difficult areas to affect change.  Because the building industry is a very wide and segmented industry, it is difficult to convince people in all of the disciplines and business categories associated with the building industry to take the time to sit down with each other to begin to work through all of the challenges.  Getting architects, designers, engineers, lenders, appraisers, plans examiners, venders, contractors, sub-contractors, landscapers, inspectors and, finally building owners all on the same sheet of music is daunting, to say the least.  Our only hope, at this point, is that people everywhere are beginning to understand the value and absolute necessity of creating systems and products that meet aggressive standards of sustainability.  Although, in my view, “green materials” are not the highest priority in making meaningful changes to the building industry, they are, most certainly, important.  Americans must begin to be willing to look to every corner of the globe to find product ideas that can meet the sustainable building challenges of our new century.