(Part of the No Sweat Solutions series.)
What follows is a table with a (very) incomplete list of means of reducing material intensity in building. These means alone could reduce the impact of constructing buildings by about 75 percent or more, and thus greenhouse-gas emissions from construction and destruction of buildings by about half.
Since we have green builders on this site, I invite additions to the list, especially if you can cite sources for impact reduction. I also invite comments on whether any of these are not as green as they appear at first blush.
Note that operations account for a great deal more of the impact of building than construction. So these are green only to the extent they do not compromise operating efficiency.
Table below the fold.
Savings in Building Construction
Methods
Intensity Reduction (%) [1]
GHG Savings (%) [1]
Comments
Rehabilitate, don't demolish [1]; even if only frame and foundation recovered, savings is substantial
75%-90%
50%-80%
% reduction depends on portion of shell saved.
Super Adobe [2]
90%-99%
80%+
Low rise construction only. (cost [3])
Straw Bale Walls [4] - an agricultural waste that makes sturdy comfortable, climate controlled homes.
90%+
80%+
Low rise, other limitations (cost [5]); Unlike many agricultural wastes, more is produced than can be used as a soil amendment; too much straw in soil is a nitrogen robber.
Strawboard [6]
75%
50%
Replaces particle board, fiber board, most manufactured woods.
Bamboo [7] - much less land, water, fertilizer per pound of output than wood. Responsible harvesting may leave roots intact, and plants alive.
90%
80%
Potential to cultivate native U.S. Bamboo [8] and non-native varieties [9] in U.S. or import from Latin American varieties too. (cost [F2] )
Truly sustainably harvested wood and salvaged/recycled wood
90%
80%
Thinning for benefit of forest health not lumber companies--unlike harvest of prime trees, often falsely labeled thinning. True thinning could produce only a tiny percent of what current harvesting yields.
90% [12]
80%
Wood and bamboo frames in building from 4 to 7 stories save substantial impact compared to conventional concrete, brick or metal - common construction methods above three stories.
Wood Efficient Approaches to Design [13]
26%
10%
Cumulative with some other methods.
Geopolymeric Cement [14] (roofing tile as one commercial example [15])
90%
66%
This alternative cement is based on natural silicates, which requires neither limestone nor anything like the amount of energy Portland Cement needs. Economical in uses where greater strength per lb makes up for MUCH higher cost per lb.
Rastra [16] - an efficient insulated concrete form made from recycled EPS plastic and cement
90%+
80%+
Shallow frost protected foundations [17] or buildings up to ten stories.
Pozzalano (fly ash and other waste or natural replacements for a portion of cement in concrete) + recycled steel
50%
25%
Useful to further lower impact of Rastra
Skyscrapers need to make up higher embedded energy with operational efficiency
Skyscrapers will require more embedded impact than shorter buildings. To make up for this, they need to attain operational efficiencies exceeding even "passive" smaller structures. After making them hyperefficient, solar cells can be added to make them net energy exporters. Because skyscrapers are so expensive to construct anyway, in many cases solar cells won't increase their cost by a significant percent, even at current photovoltaic prices.
Panelshake roof [18] - from completely recycled ingredients
90%
80%
Recycling, not extended lifespan, lowers impact.
Linoleum, bamboo, cork, recycled wood, and recycled glass floors
75%-90%
50%-80%
All well known "green floor" techniques
Interface Carpet Tiles [19]
90%+
80%+
All carpet tiles lower intensity over conventional carpets because wear occurs faster in heavily traffic areas. With tiles, just the worn areas may be replaced - extending overall lifespan of carpet. In addition, the tiles are recyclable, and the backing has been designed to be recycled back into itself; that is, you can make backing material for Interface tiles from the old backing from old Interface tiles. In general, Interface is famous for energy efficiency and sustainability.
Unburned clay based finishes [20]
85%
50%
Other natural finishes
?
?
Huge variety, intensity unanalyzed. Some probably produce significant savings.
Low impact site design and grading [21]
75%
50%
Mechanical Equipment (climate control, plumbing, ducting etc.)
75%
50%
Result of operating energy savings in buildings - dealt with in later sections on buildings
Pex [22] - Advanced plastic plumbing as long lasting, and lower impact than copper.
90%
80%
More expensive than copper, but less labor to lay pipe; installed cost is the same or lower. Repairs are less expensive as well. Becoming standard.
Fiberglass window frames21 - Compared to aluminum, based on recycling % figures [23]; also lower impact and longer lasting than vinyl
80%
75%
100% recycled aluminum would have lower embodied impact than fiberglass21, but higher operating impact. Vinyl, though better than aluminum, is a worse insulator than fiberglass
Cellulose insulation [24]
80%
75%
Must be careful not compromise operating efficiency - insulating properties comparable to fiberglass, but not as good as foam.
Glazing, Plastics, natural gas piping, wiring
No savings in processes representing 10% of all embodied impact and energy.
Note: savings include increases in lifespan and durability unless stated otherwise
In total, processes representing 10% or less of all embodied energy and impact in buildings may not be subject to significant reduction. Given the other reductions listed, this means that total embodied impact in building site preparation, construction and finishing can be reduced by 75% to 80% - at essentially zero market cost. Very roughly this would reduce energy consumption in site preparation, building construction, and finishing by a bit more than half.
-----
Footnotes
[F1] % Savings refer to part, construction stage or whatever technology listed replaces - not entire building.
[F2] Asian imports will always be more expensive than native North American wood. For bamboo to be competitive here, North America must turn to closer sources - native or Latin American.
-----
End Notes
[1]Ernst von Weizsacker, Amory B. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins, Factor Four - Doubling Wealth, Halving Resource Use - The New Report to the Club of Rome (London: Earthscan, 1997).
Wayne Trusty and Jamie Meil, The Environmental Implications of Building New Versus Renovating an Existing Structure. Jan 2001. ATHENA™ Sustainable Materials Institute, 23/Aug/2005 .
[2]Ernst von Weizsacker, Amory B. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins, Factor Four - Doubling Wealth, Halving Resource Use - The New Report to the Club of Rome (London: Earthscan, 1997).
Wayne Trusty and Jamie Meil, The Environmental Implications of Building New Versus Renovating an Existing Structure. Jan 2001. ATHENA™ Sustainable Materials Institute, 23/Aug/2005 .
[3] Amazon Nails, Information Guide to Straw Bale Buildingfor Self-Builders and the Construction Industry, 2001). 2003. Amazon Nails, 23/Dec/2003 http://www.strawbalefutures.org.uk/pdf/strawbaleguide.pdf .p2.
[4]Canadian Architect, "Measures of Sustainability - Embodied Energy," Measures of Sustainability, 2002, Canadian Architect, 02/Feb/2003 http://www.cdnarchitect.com/asf/perspectives_sustainibility/measures_of_sustainablity/measures_of_su stainablity_embodied.htm .
[5] Amazon Nails, Information Guide to Straw Bale Buildingfor Self-Builders and the Construction Industry, 2001). 2003. Amazon Nails, 23/Dec/2003 http://www.strawbalefutures.org.uk/pdf/strawbaleguide.pdf .p2.
[6] 4, "Wheat-Straw Particleboard,". Environmental Building News, no. 6 Nov/Dec 1995: Product Review, BuildingGreen.Com, 23/Aug/2005.
[7] International Bamboo Foundation, Bamboo Technologies | About Bamboo. 15/May 2004, International Bamboo Foundation, 26/Oct/2005 http://www.bambootechnologies.com/allabout.htm .
International Network for Bamboo and Rattan, International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR) | Bamboo and Rattan Facts. 2005, International Network for Bamboo and Rattan, 26/Oct/2005 http://www.inbar.int/facts.htm .
International Fund for Agricultural Development, Agricultural Research Grants | Programme for Development and Diffusion of Technologies for Smallholder Bamboo- and Rattan-Based Producers - Phase II. 2005, International Fund for Agricultural Development, 26/Oct/2005 http://www.ifad.org/grants/tags/518.htm .
[8] United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, PLANTS National Database Reports and Topics - Arundinaria Gigantea. 22/Aug 2005, United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service http://plants.usda.gov/cgi_bin/plant_profile.cgi?symbol=ARGI .
[9] David Linvill, Frank Linton, and Michael Hotchkiss, Growing Bamboo in Georgia. 9/May 2001, Cooperative Extension Service - The University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 23/Aug/2005 http://pubs.caes.uga.edu/caespubs/horticulture/GrowingBamboo.htm .
Carol A. Miles, Chuhe Chen, and Tamera Flores, Washington State University Bamboo Research Report 2000 - On-Farm Bamboo Production in the Pacific Northwest, 2000). May 2001. Extension Agricultural Systems Program, Washington State University Research and Extension Center, 23/Aug/2005 http://agsyst.wsu.edu/BambooReport2000.pdf .
[10]Kevin K. C. Cheung, Multi-Storey, Multi-Family Wood-Frame Construction in the USA, 27/Sep/2000). International Conference on the Seismic Performance of Traditional Buildings:Istanbul, Turkey, Nov.16-18, 2000. 15/Nov 2001. International Council on Monuments and Sites: International Wood Committee, 23/Aug/2005 http://www.icomos.org/iiwc/seismic/Cheung-K.pdf .
[11]Laura Soullière Harrison, "National Park Service: Architecture in the Parks (Old Faithful Inn)," Architecture in the Parks: Excerpts from a National Historic Landmark Theme Study, Nov 1986). 26/Feb 2001. National Park Service - Department of the Interior, 23/Aug/2005 http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/harrison/harrison3.htm .
Chateau at the Oregon Caves, Oregon CavesOutfitters - An In-Depth Description of the Chateau. 2003, Chateau at the Oregon Caves, 23/Aug/2005
http://www.oregoncavesoutfitters.com/AbouttheChateau.asp .
[12]Jamie Meil et al., CORRIM: Phase I Final Report - Module J: Environmental Impacts of a Single Family Building Shell - From Harvest to Construction (Review Draft). 23/Aug 2004. Consortium for Research on Renewable Industrial Materials (CORRIM), 23/Aug/2005.
[13] Ann Edminster and Sami Yassa, Efficient Wood Use in Residential Construction: A Practical Guide to Saving Wood, Money, and Forests, 1998). Natural Resources Defense Council, 19/Feb/2006 http://www.nrdc.org/cities/building/rwoodus.asp .
[14]Zongjin Li, Ding.Zhu, and Yunsheng Zhang, Development of Sustainable Cementitious Materials. International Workshop on Sustainable Development and Concrete Technology: Beijing, May 20-21, 2004. 25/Mar 2004, 23/Aug/2005 http://www.ctre.iastate.edu/pubs/sustainable/lisustainable.pdf .p57.
[15]Siloxo Pty Ltd, Siloxo -Melbourne Australia. Siloxo -Products and Services, 15/Aug 2003, Siloxo Pty Ltd, 18/Aug/2004 http://www.siloxo.com/products.htm .
[16]Rastra Found., What is RASTRA®. 16/Mar 2005, Rastra Found., 4/Sep/2005 http://www.rastrausa.com/ .
[17] Rastra Found., What is RASTRA®. 16/Mar 2005, Rastra Found., 4/Sep/2005 http://www.rastrausa.com/ .pp1-2.
[18]Michelle Clark Hucal, "Recycled Roofing,". Environmental Design and Construction, no. Cool Roofing - May 2003 Supplement 1/May 2003, BNP Media, 5/Sep/2005 .
[19]Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L.Hunter Lovins, Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution (Boston: Little, Brown and Company/Back Bay, 2000) "Chapter 7, Muda, Service and Flow" pp.139-141.
[20]Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Material Intensity of Materials, Fuels, Transport Services, Version 2;28.10.2003. May 2004. WuppertalInstitute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, 5/Sep/2005. p3(clay),p8(cement).
American Clay Enterprises, American Clay Finishes™ Clay Veneer Plaster Product Specifications. 18/Dec 2003. American Clay Enterprises, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.americanclay.com/pdfs/ProductSpecs.pdf .
Athena Swentzell Steen and Bill Steen, Artistry in Clay & Lime. 3/Jun 2005, The Canelo Project, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.caneloproject.com/pages/workshops/clayartistry.html .
[21]Michael Clar, Buckeye Development, LLC - Pembrook Woods Low Impact Development. Feb 2000, Buckeye Development, LLC, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.buckeyedevelopment.net/lowimpactdevelopment.htm .
[22]U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing, Affordability and Value Through Housing Technology Program and Services Guide. 20/Jun 2002. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.huduser.org/publications/pdf/guidetoserv.pdf .p3.
[23]The Aluminum Association, Inc., Aluminum Association | Climate Change. 2004, Environment and Climate Change - Conservation, Preservation, and Recycling, The Aluminum Association, Inc., 5/Sep/2005 http://www.aluminum.org/Content/NavigationMenu/The_Industry/Government_Policy/Climate_Change/Climate _Change.htm .
[24] Alex Wilson, "Insulation Materials: Environmental Comparisons,". Environmental Building News 4, no. 1 Jan/Feb 1995, BuildingGreen.Com, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm?fileName=040101a.xml .
More recent data from the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology suggests essentially the same thing.
Barbara C. Lippiatt, BEES 2.0 -Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability Technical Manual and User Guide, Jun/2000). June 2000. Office of Applied Economics, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 5/Sep/2005 .pp 62,65.
A contractor for the EPA analyzed the same BEES database and came to the opposite conclusion:
United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Framework for Responsible Environmental Decision Making (FRED): Using Life Cycle Assessment to Evaluate Preferability of Products, Oct 2000), EPA/600/R-00/095. June 2001. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, 5/Sep/2005 <http://www.lcacenter.org/library/pdf/fred.pdf>.pB-5.
Their conclusion does not seem to match the data. Where BEES database, as added up in manual site shows cellulose requiring about one fifth the energy input (for manufacturing and raw materials combined) as fiberglass, the FRED example shows cellulose requiring more than 20 times the energy per kilogram. Since this varies from every other analysis ever done to be believed it would have to more specific as to where the difference came from.
For example the Minnesota Building Database shows about one tenth the global warming impact for cellulose as fiberglass
University of Minnesota College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Center for Sustainable Building Research, "Minnesota Building Materials Database - Generic Fiberglass Batt," Minnesota Building Materials Database, 26/May 2004, University of Minnesota College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Center for Sustainable Building Research, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.buildingmaterials.umn.edu/07211_batt_bees.html .
University of Minnesota College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Center for Sustainable Building Research, "Minnesota Building Materials Database - Blown Cellulose," Minnesota Building Materials Database, 26/May 2004, University of Minnesota College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Center for Sustainable Building Research, 5/Sep/2005 http://www.buildingmaterials.umn.edu/07210_blown_bees.html .
Home Economics of the JP Green House, Part 1
Slideshow: Reinventing the JP Green House
Comments
View as Flat
Viguerie Posted 7:54 am
23 Apr 2007
Fantastic list, BTW.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 9:47 am
23 Apr 2007
Most of them. Even straw bale homes look just like any other once they've been plastered. Bamboo? Does not have to show, though it looks very pretty and most people who build with bamboo choose to let it show. (By the way you have to be very careful in using bamboo. There is such a thing as an old growth bamboo stand, and there have been some cases of clear-cutting those. Biodiversitist could probably explain some of what you have to do to make sure you use bamboo sustainably.) Strawboard - can't tell the difference once it is painted. None of the flooring looks different other than better. One exception is carpet tile - since after installation you can still see that it is a tile. Don't think it is particularly radical aesthetically though.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 9:48 am
23 Apr 2007
Permalink
Viguerie Posted 1:22 pm
23 Apr 2007
I live in a very conservative part of the country (SW Louisiana) so I think I have a pretty good idea of what is acceptable to middle America. Basically, if it flies here it will fly anywhere. There are some ideas, such as recycled wood (which can fetch a premium price depending on the source) and carpet squares, that are quite acceptable. While other ideas will be dismissed out of hand either because of the aesthetics or because the idea seems "third world." (like bamboo). Developers rule mid sized towns like mine. If we can convince the developers that these technologies are useful then they will make the decision to use them and the general public will follow. I suppose that if we could just price the externalities properly we wouldn't have to convince the developers.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 1:32 pm
23 Apr 2007
At any case, where bamboo framing is legal, it need not be visible at all: after all the 2X4s that frame your average home are not visibile. Of course with bamboo framing you don't have studs to nail stuff into. Also what of truss and wood optimizing framing. Encouraged by HUD and FHA, so probably legal under most building codes. Stronger buildings, lower material costs. Not much used because it has to be done right--which means using well paid skilled labor. But pricing externalities (as you say) might help with this.
Permalink
cleantech Posted 2:57 pm
24 Apr 2007
Businesses need to see the payback calculation for green building measures, even though the final decision might not be completely financial.
Homeowners, however, have no marketing benefit to offset their added investment.
Take for example structural insulated panels, or SIPs. In my own experience, I found that building with SIPs cost nearly double. The energy savings -- in a moderate climate with low electric rates -- would take a lifetime to recover that cost difference.
Denis
Energy Priorities
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 9:21 pm
24 Apr 2007
The one green building technique that can be guaranteed to reduce costs is to build smaller.
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 10:04 pm
24 Apr 2007
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 12:31 am
25 Apr 2007
For example truss building and wood optimization. Extra engineering costs, more skilled labor. But if the techniques were widespread, than as with conventional building techniques you would build up a set of standard methods; you would have some sunk engineering costs that would then be incorporated in all wood frame buildings. Similarly knowledge of how to this would be a standard part of knowing how to frame.
SIP: well SIP is green in saving operating expenses As far as I know building out of metal and foam does not reduce embedded energy. But I wonder about SIP doubling your cost. We have a local builder who specializes in building low-end cheap housing who uses SIP on ocassion. Huge labor savings in the technique done right.
OK - a couple of more examples. Bamboo is a lot more expensive in the U.S. than wood. Part is that it is a boutique material. You are paying extra for green boasting rights and also for aesthetics. On a practical level, the U.S. is still one of the great wood producing nations Canada,next store is even more so. So importing bamboo from Vietnam and China adds costs and embedded energy to bamboo use. But a high percentage of U.S. wood is raised on monoculture softwood plantations in the South. As those are harvested a real argument could be made for replacing them with bamboo stands.
Geopolymeric cement is much more expensive than Portland cement. But I've heard claims that this is because it is made on such a small scale; that a large Geopolymeric cement factory could compete with Portland cement.
Interface carpet is more expensive than conventional, but it also lasts longer. So for someone who puts lots of wear on their carpet (say people with pets or children) it is probably cheaper on life-cycle basis.
Strawboard would cost no more than conventional particle and fiber board if its manufacture were scaled up.
>"cementitious"
It is apparently an actual technical term meaning "cement like". It is used in the title of a technical paper by Chinese authors; English is not their first language. Given what native speakers often do to our language, I think they deserve a break.
Linoleum for a time in history was a cheap substitute for tile. Vinyl and other plastics replaced that; Linoleum lasts about twice as long as vinyl and costs roughly twice as much. As petroleum prices rise I wonder if that cost difference will shrink.
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 5:33 am
25 Apr 2007
Linoleum is an excellent material which is beginning to receive proper attention once more as a warm, colorful, low-maintenance water-resistant floor finish with an excellent environmental track record stretching back eighty years or more. In many applications its durability is much better than twice that of vinyl. Linoleum is originally I believe a brand name which became a generic: Marmoleum is is the most common brand of the product currently available on the market.
Bamboo for flooring etc. is largely imported to the U.S., certainly it can be native-grown and does well in the climate and soils of the southeast U.S. Perhaps too well. Though a beautiful plant with many fine characteristics many species are aggressively invasive. For this reason the planting of bamboo is actually outlawed in many communities. If planted on a large scale it could perhaps become the kudzu of the twenty-first century, squeezing out the native flora and the fauna which depend on it.
Because a material works well in another environment does not mean it will have nothing but good effects in ours. Innovation and invention are essential but so is vigilance and forethought: our mistakes may well outlive us.
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 7:12 am
25 Apr 2007
Which why I suggested Arundinaria Gigantea, which is a native U.S. plant and could replace monoculture softwood plantations in areas where it once flourished. Canebrake was extensively used by the Cherokees as a material for mats, baskets and shelters.
We actually have three native bamboo species in the U.S., river cane, switch cane, and the recently discovered Arundinaria appalachiana.
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 8:09 am
25 Apr 2007
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 9:11 am
25 Apr 2007
Bamboo flooring made sufficiently thick will far outlast linoleum as it dries very hard and resists scratching and gouging also. I use bamboo scrapers to clean my cast iron frying pans all the time.
Other building techniques that deserve mention are cob, rammed earth and hemp/clay or Isochanvre. All of these techniques use earth as the primary material for walls mixed with various amounts of fiber (none to lots) as reinforcement, insulation and fill.
Cob houses exist which predate all known balloon framed houses so it is reasonable to assume that it is a reasonable building material. Likewise for Isochanvre and rammed earth. Houses I have been in made of rammed earth and cob were very comfortable and had a distinct environment due to the even temperature of the thermal mass. Very cozy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cob_(building)
http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/good_wood/hemp.htm
http://www.planetaryrenewal.org/ipr/structural.html
http://www.naturalbuildingnetwork.org/compare_techniques. ...
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 9:17 am
25 Apr 2007
According to this source:
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/bamboo.html
Products made from U.S.-grown bamboo include fishing poles, flutes, furniture, and crafts. Much of this bamboo is harvested from stands in southern Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida.
According to this:
linke
Rivercane is a culturally significant plant for the Cherokee people, being traditionally used as raw material for numerous craft items such as baskets, spears, arrows, blowguns, fish traps, sleeping mats, flutes, and tobacco pipes, as well as shelter building materials.
That sounds like you could at least make flooring out of it. Sounds like you have a point about framing. Apparently the Cherokee did build single story homes from river cane. I wonder if imported species have to be invasive? There are around 200 species of Latin American bamboos. I wonder if some of them could be safely imported. I do know that number of ornamental bamboos have gotten loose and become pests.
Permalink