For your viewing pleasure, pictures of one of our first projects in the historic Oliver community. Thanks to Lloyd Williams, of Clad Construction– you did a wonderful job.

“What we need is a movement of local efforts aimed at changing things that matter at scales that matter, based on the politics of optimism.” – Alex Steffan, worldchanging.com

Today I came across a post on worldchanging.com written by Alex Steffan. Though he claims the catalyst for the piece is his disillusionment with Transition Towns (communities across the globe that have committed to a 12-step greening process), I’ve taken much more from his writing. Most of us are simply too apathetic—sufficiently cognizant of our surroundings only to the point of recycling (sometimes) or subscribing to Sierra Club. Change takes more, and though “living green” on a day-to-day basis is important, we cannot rely solely on the little things to assuage our consciences or repair the economy.

I am going to agree with those who commented on Mr. Steffan’s post—had he condensed a bit he would have been left with something very close to a legitimate manifesto. But I think it served its purpose effectively enough. And, not to shamelessly self-promote, I think he would approve of what we’re doing here at One Green Home.

Read his post for yourself, here, and see what you think.

In case you haven’t already heard, Chicago Based Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill (SOM) was recently awarded the contract to build the entirely new (and green) Central Business District in Beijing. New public transit routes were planned to facilitate walking and building infrastructure was designed to be energy efficient, so much so that 215,000 tons of CO2 emission will eliminated.

Other competitors included KFP, ADPi, China Academy of Urban Planning & Design. The contest itself called for a 3 square kilometre expansion of the city center, which doubled the size of the current CBD.

You can read about SOM’s design on their website here, and I highly recommend looking at their gallery of images– stunning.

Reading Inhabitat’s daily blog today I came across this post referencing a completely silent and visually unobtrusive rooftop wind turbine that has the wind capturing capacity of a medium-sized turbine. Given the current debate in Baltimore County about banning turbines (for more details, read our blog), I found it very intriguing…

You can check out Inhabitat’s blog post here. I also suggest signing up for Inhabitat’s daily newsletter– it’s an interesting read.

Catching up on my NY Times articles today, I came across a piece written in July about statewide model building codes. Up until May of this year, each state had their pick of how to (or how not to) mandate energy efficient construction practices and materials—many adapt the International Energy Conservation Code’s (IECC) model to fit their own “needs” (though the International Residential Code provides an alternative), some have created their own codes, and some have none at all.

The NY Times article I read (you can find it here) cites Austin as a city which has gone above and beyond Texas’s relatively progressive building code, having already claimed an annual efficiency gain of 27%. California, unsurprisingly, is also a significant player—so proactive are their efficiency mandates that the IECC has recently announced the development of a new code for commercial buildings that will use the California Green Building Standards Code as a reference document. And of course we can’t leave out our own home state—Maryland is currently the only one to surpass the 2009 IECC’s model.

And yet some states have yet to join in the fun. Why? It’s all about initial expenses—energy efficient construction practices and materials cost more, and most developers have yet to find a successful means of marketing the long term benefits when the beginning price is so high.

Unfortunately for them, the government is stepping in. In May of this year, Congress passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) establishing a national code. Though not quite as stringent as the IECC’s 2009 model, the baseline will force states that currently operate without a code to meet the energy efficient criteria of the IECC’s 2006 published model. If states with their own codes already meet or surpass the national standards (think California or Florida), no change is necessary. Yet if they are unable or refuse (Alaska, tsk tsk), their federal allowance is cut, and they get a government run enforcement organization put in their backyard. Developers and residents who fail to meet baseline efficiency standards will be subject to prosecution.

Already articles and blog posts are popping up everywhere regarding ACES—does Uncle Sam have the right to turn down our lights? Is this yet another case of big government forcing legislation on the states?

Personally, I think not. With each state following their own set of rules, developers can simply move to where they won’t be forced to pay more to build—like Alabama, Mississippi, or Arizona. The environment should and must be a national cause, and energy efficiency a universal standard. Not to mention the fact that sifting through so many codes and versions of codes and more codes has given me a splitting headache.  

For more information on the IECC’s code, visit http://www.energycodes.gov/implement/state_codes/reports/residential/Residential_Maryland.pdf. For more information about individual state code status, visit http://www.energycodes.gov/implement/state_codes/index.stm. And for more information on ACES, visit http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2454/show.

********************************************************************************************************

CORRECTION (3/5/10, 11:36am)

In response to the following comment received on 3/4/10:

“I realize I’m responding to an old post, but I’d like it if the author or someone could respond to the article’s statement “Congress passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) establishing a national code.”

Unless I’m mistaken, that legislation has only passed the House (by a narrow margin) and today still remains on the Senate committee docket. Furthermore, there appears to be no suggestion of a “national code”- just financial incentives for projects and training within states that already have energy efficiency codes.

If that’s correct, aren’t you counting chickens before hatched- or even conceived?”

The bill in question (H.R.2454 – American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009) was introduced to the House 5/15/09 and passed 6/26/09. It has yet to be passed by the Senate. However, numerous sources, and language within the bill itself, do reference mandating a national baseline for building code standards. Quotes and sources that were not referenced in the above but that do address this issue include:

“On June 26, the United States House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES) by a 219-212 margin.  Among the issues under the purview of this comprehensive energy and climate policy bill, ACES would significantly change American building energy efficiency policy by mandating a new national building energy code and providing for federal enforcement in state and local jurisdictions that cannot or will not comply.

Among the provisions, H.R. 2454 calls for the first national code to achieve 30% energy savings above the baseline code (2006 IECC and ASHRAE 90.1-2004), with the subsequent code to achieve 50% energy savings. States would be required to achieve compliance or demonstrate significant progress towards compliance in 90% of new and renovated building space within seven years of the bill’s enactment.” (Building Codes Assistance Project)

“Section 201 of ACES includes an aggressive policy and timetable for the development and nationwide implementation of improved building energy codes. It encourages independent code-setting organizations to develop the codes, and state and local governments to adopt and enforce them, but quickly provides a federal “backstop” if they do not. ACES directs DOE to establish codes that achieve 30 percent savings within one year of enactment, 50 percent savings by the end of 2014 for homes and 2015 for commercial buildings, and an additional 5 percent savings every three years until 2030. DOE is to give technical and financial assistance to the International Code Council and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers to develop the codes, but would step in if the independent organizations did not meet the targets.

For code implementation, ACES directs states to adopt these or equivalent codes within one year, and to demonstrate high rates of compliance with the codes within two additional years. ACES provides 0.5 percent of all allowance value to states and local governments for this purpose, and States can elect to use value from other allocations for this purpose as well. If States do not meet the compliance targets, they will lose an increasing percentage of their allocation, and if they do not develop codes to meet the targets, DOE would enforce the federal energy code. The Alliance has strongly advocated for a comprehensive provision on codes such as this one because codes are an essential tool for improving the efficiency of new and renovated buildings but are not effectively used in much of the country. We estimate that this provision alone could reduce U.S. energy use in buildings by 8 percent by 2030 for an estimated annual savings of 4 quadrillion Btus.” (Alliance to Save Energy, H.R. 2454 Analysis)

A more detailed breakdown can be found here, and the section within the bill itself that covers this topic can be viewed here.

********************************************************************************************************

Two days ago I made the hour and a half train ride to Philadelphia to attend one of the Building Industry Association’s biannual seminars. Experts, including David Lee (Energy Star Branch Chief) and Philly councilman James Kenney, spoke to an audience of lenders, developers, and homeowners about appraising and financing green construction. Following individual Q&A sessions, a panel of bank officials, an appraiser, a lender, and a green construction consultant assembled to answer direct questions from the audience regarding EEM’s (Energy Efficiency Mortgages), green loans, tax incentives, etc—basically all of the stuff about green construction that no one really understands.

While some questions remained unanswered, or the answer was simply that there isn’t a concrete answer available (for example, how an appraiser quantifies “green” construction techniques), a lot of interesting ideas and tidbits of information were bandied about. David Lee’s presentation on the benefits of sustainable materials was incredibly helpful, and the general enthusiasm of the city officials who attended was refreshing to see. Not to mention the range of expert knowledge exhibited by the Philadelphians who questioned speakers.

And it gave us here at One Green Home an idea—we need to hold a similar seminar in Baltimore. As is often the case, it is the general lack of familiarity with green construction techniques and materials that proves the biggest obstacle for any large-scale green movement. With a (well publicized) panel of our own local officials, together with some national experts like David Lee, I think we could significantly increase a public awareness of and familiarity with what is needed to appraise and finance a green project (among many other related topics).

Thoughts?

To those of you who were able to make it out to the Solar Decathlon on its final weekend, I hope you’ll agree with me when I say simply and admiringly: wow. Despite the inevitably impossible parking and long lines, walking through each of the twenty houses made the hour long trip from Baltimore to DC completely worthwhile. » Continue reading “The Solar Decathlon Concludes”

“On the evening of Wednesday, September 9th the first of nine modular homes was placed floor by floor on their foundations by a 30-ton crane. Two days later, on Friday morning, all nine homes were set and ready for the finish work.  Now Habitat staff, family partners, and hundreds of volunteers are painting, flooring, putting up siding, and doing the finishing carpentry.working on the homes. On October 17 in a Dedication Ceremony, the nine families will receive the keys to their new homes.” (Chesapeake Habitat for Humanity website) » Continue reading “HFH’s 9.9.09″

As scientists and environmentalists have pointed out, green roofs have the ability to sop up greenhouse gases and offset the urban heat island effect. On a smaller scale, rooftop vegetation also contributes to energy conservation—air conditioning costs in summer are typically lessened because of rooftop absorption and reflection of heat, while heating costs in winter decrease with the extra insulation. Less frequent sewage flooding due to storm runoff is yet another pro. So why hasn’t the green roof movement taken over? » Continue reading “Taking Green to a Whole New Level”

The 2009 Solar Decathlon Commences

If you’ve gone to DC in the last week or two you may have noticed a general migration of tourists away from the Smithsonian and toward the typically empty National Mall. That’s because the Washington Monument is no longer the only edifice occupying the space—twenty small-scale buildings are slowly but surely on their way to completion, as universities participate in the US Department of Energy’s 2009 Solar Decathlon.  » Continue reading “Here Comes The Sun”