Green architect Raphael Sperry answers questions 0

Raphael Sperry.

With what environmental organization are you affiliated?

I'm the president of Architects/Designers/Planners for Social Responsibility, which is a small nonprofit with a national membership and active local chapters in Northern California, Seattle, and New York City.

What does your organization do?

ADPSR has a broad mission of advancing peace, environmental sustainability, and social justice. We organize design professionals to advocate for these values, through government and more often through our daily work. We were founded as an anti-nuclear organization in the '80s, and we became strong proponents of healthy building, natural building, solar power, and other aspects of what has become known as "green building" in the '90s. Now we're trying to tie that to other social changes we want to see, most notably by running a Prison Design Boycott Campaign asking architects and design professionals to pledge not to work on prisons.

What do you really do, on a day-to-day basis?

Four days a week I work as an architect for a small design firm in San Francisco. At present, ADPSR is an all-volunteer organization, so I spend one day a week and the inevitable evenings on ADPSR projects such as writing articles for magazines or letters to the editor, coordinating volunteers, and scheduling presentations and other events. Other active volunteers help schedule our lecture series, deal with membership processing, and manage our popular email listserv. As the organization president, I also spend time thinking about how to get some real funding so we can do more of the outreach work and can support our basic administrative and member functions. If you've got any ideas ...

What long and winding road led you to your current position?

I guess I grew up getting environmental values from my parents, who love hiking and had good left-liberal politics. I took some great natural sciences classes as a geology major in college, but decided that I'd rather do architecture than research science. In architecture school, I discovered I was the "green guy" in my class, but studying science really paid off in understanding energy efficiency and indoor-outdoor climate interactions.

When I started my architecture career, I was focusing on green buildings, and I worked at the Green Resource Center, which was founded by ADPSR to provide public information on green buildings (it has since spun off and is now Build It Green.)

I got more involved in peace activism in 2002-2003 because of the invasions of Afghanistan and then Iraq. As I was active, I got invited to be on the board of ADPSR, which represented a group of architects speaking out for peace. ADPSR, and especially our Northern California chapter, is also very focused on natural building -- our straw-bale construction lecture last year was the most popular with our members. So I was able to combine my interests; now we have an active green-building mission and a renewed social-justice and peace focus, too.

How many emails are currently in your inbox?

Just under 100.

Where were you born? Where do you live now?

I was born and raised in Manhattan, and now I live in San Francisco, so I moved from the densest city east of the Mississippi to the densest city on the West Coast.

What environmental offense has infuriated you the most?

In the green-building sphere, there's a lot of greenwashing going on right now. For instance, the forest industry, through its trade associations, has created a system for labeling wood as sustainably harvested that is basically a sham: the Sustainable Forest Initiative. This is in response to a genuine system created by a consensus collaboration of some forest producers and some environmental groups: the Forest Stewardship Council (even though FSC doesn't go far enough for some enviros I know).

Who is your environmental hero?

This may seem off-topic, but I draw a lot of inspiration from the theory of "Participatory Economics" advanced by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel. I think that the market economy we have is inherently problematic, not only for how it devalues environmental resources and externalizes all sorts of environmental impacts, but because of its incentive and decision-making structures as well. While some of the "ParEcon" ideas may seem far-fetched, these folks do a great job of showing how our current system, if you were to make it up from scratch, would also seem pretty unlikely and is definitely very wasteful and stupid. They suggest how we can solve multiple problems simultaneously, and are brave enough to reject the idea that "there is no alternative" to markets for economic planning. I find their combination of criticism and offering an alternative that is thought-through from first principles (of fairness, justice, diversity, solidarity) to be very strong.

What's your environmental vice?

Not getting outdoors much. I spend way more time typing than walking in the sunshine.

What are you reading these days?

Emma Goldman's autobiography Living My Life. I find her inspiring because she was both incredibly dedicated to her principles (as an anarchist political organizer) and open-minded and willing to learn and change.

What's your favorite meal?

Indian food. I was very sad when the restaurant near my office with the all-inclusive $4.50 vegetarian lunch special closed.

Which stereotype about environmentalists most fits you?

Being earnest.

What's your favorite place or ecosystem?

One of my favorite outdoor places is the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest in eastern California. The little, gnarled trees there are the oldest living things in the known world. It's a kind of minimalist landscape where each tree has its own space and its own life, very tranquil.

What's one thing the environmental movement is doing particularly well?

The majority of people seem to support environmental preservation more and more, and I think these days we are taking advantage of that by partnering with groups that share part of our agenda, like working with ranchers and outdoor outfitters to challenge oil and gas drilling permits (even if we're not winning). In my sphere, green building is growing really fast as we are showing construction companies, developers, and bankers how energy efficiency, compact development, and healthy building are better choices.

What's one thing the environmental movement is doing badly, and how could it be done better?

I've found the debate over strategy -- raised by the "Death of Environmentalism" paper -- very inspiring, but I'm not sure we're benefiting from it yet. My understanding is that a lot of the big environmental groups that have been urged to be more strategic are still focused on the narrow tactics they have established -- like negotiating for marginally higher CAFE standards instead of putting resources into the New Apollo Project or coordinating with other groups that share progressive principles. I think that connecting with the environmental-justice movement, poor people's struggles, and other progressive movements generally is really necessary to be able to challenge the individualistic, intolerant, and destructive values that are so much a part of national debate these days.

If you could institute by fiat one environmental reform, what would it be?

More green building, less sprawl development -- because ADPSR members need the work! But seriously, around 40 percent of national energy use occurs in buildings, and the largest shares of that are heating/cooling and lighting. Also, average Americans spend 80-90 percent of their time indoors, so the health and well-being impacts of indoor environments are hugely important. As for sprawl, there are many more sustainable patterns of occupancy, where people have the option to walk, bicycle, or take transit instead of drive.

What was your favorite band when you were 18? How about now?

When I was 18 it was the Dirty Dozen Brass Band from New Orleans; now it's probably Ali Farka Toure (thanks to the album Talking Timbuktu, which I, and the rest of the residents of Northern California, have drastically overplayed).

What's your favorite TV show?

The Daily Show is the only thing I watch on TV, but I enjoy it deeply.

If you could have every InterActivist reader do one thing, what would it be?

Do a home energy-efficiency project like insulating an old house, upgrading windows to double-panes, planting shade trees, replacing an old refrigerator, or installing compact fluorescent lights.

Raphael Sperry, ADPSR.

How does the public go about reducing the amount of energy used in the home?    -- Daniel Barker, Lakeland, Fla.

When it comes to energy use in buildings, conservation should come first -- way first. Many people want to invest in some cool new energy technology, and while supporting that product development is important, conservation is more so. In residential buildings, insulation and stopping air leakage is the biggest issue by far -- this saves energy (and of course money) both in winter and in summer. Depending on your building, good simple conservation upgrades include adding insulation, weather-stripping, replacing single-paned windows, and upgrading old appliances.

I recently toured a couple of straw-bale homes, and I got pretty excited about them. Have you worked on straw-bale construction?    -- Mike Tate, Denver, Colo.

Many ADPSR members are involved in alternative construction (or "natural building") with various materials, and I had the pleasure of working on a 25,000 square-foot straw-bale, low-energy winery project myself a few years ago. I hope to do more straw-bale work in the future; it's fun and fosters an optimistic attitude about how architecture can heal the world.

I'm wondering whether you think the prison-design boycott will have a net positive effect -- won't it just result in the prisons being designed by people who won't think about the environmental and human impacts of their buildings? It's not (alone, anyway) going to stop prisons from being built, so shouldn't they be built by people who might put in, say, green areas?    -- Grace Burson, New Haven, Conn.

The problem with prisons isn't that they waste energy but that they waste people. Given the injustice built into the U.S. legal system today, we have the highest number of people in jail per capita in the entire world and five to 10 times more than any other industrialized country. Most of these people don't belong in prison, and in any case, the problems people are in for won't be solved in prison anyway. We could save far more money by closing prisons filled with people in for low-level drug crimes and doing community treatment and diversion programs than by making prison operations more efficient or "nicer."

Prisons have been the subject of reform efforts basically since they were conceived, so I think that actually we need to get beyond the idea of the "better" prison. And boycotts do often work, for instance against apartheid in South Africa. ADPSR's Prison Design Boycott Campaign is intended to draw attention to positive alternatives to prison, most notably the necessity for community development to give people more to live for and add to society, instead of degrading it. This is where most architects would rather be spending our time anyway, but the public funding for prisons basically usurps the funds that could go to affordable housing, better schools, community centers, job creation, etc.

What does the ADPSR prison boycott have to do with environmentalism? Why should I care about this as someone who cares about the larger issues of the health of the planet?    -- Adam Weiss, Oakland, Calif.

As for the connection to the environment, I think the most important thing to recognize is that the same mentality that licenses the destruction of the environment is responsible for the U.S. policy of mass incarceration as well. This mentality privileges wealthy individuals (and the corporations they own) and tramples on those with little voice, from endangered ecosystems to people of color. I think to successfully challenge the inequality of the status quo, we must recognize the similarity of these situations and respond with a consistent message of equality, justice, and toleration for all, not just for the few. It is actually more possible to solve the environmental and prison problems together than separately. For Grist readers who agree and happen to be architects, designers, or planners, I hope you'll take a moment to join the prison design boycott's pledge campaign.

What advice would you give those of us exploring careers in green building? What educational background or hands-on experiences are most sought-after by employers?    -- K. Kirkland, Seattle, Wash.

If you're looking for some education and you're willing to be patient, ADPSR is actually publishing in September a whole guide to ecological building programs via our publishing arm, New Village Press.

As for skills, doing green design and green building doesn't get you off the hook for doing basic good design and construction. And in fact, a lot of green design strategies are just commonplace good ideas that the conventional design and construction process has forgotten about or cuts corners on. So be sure you learn the basics first and what it takes to do a good job, and you'll be halfway there. You can bring alternative materials to new employers more convincingly once you've shown that you are comfortable with the conventional materials they know.

As for more specific skills like building-energy modeling, make friends with good consultants in those fields (if that's not what you want to study yourself). Even relatively small projects require multiple engineers and other consultants; knowing who to work with and how to work with them is a great skill to have. Plus, us green-building folks are nice people, too!

Do you have any advice for dealing with zoning people and building inspectors who aren't friendly to nonconventional environmental alternatives?    -- Jan Steinman, West Linn, Ore.

Building inspectors who are unfamiliar with these techniques can be a real obstacle (as can mortgage lenders, incidentally), although they mostly are serious about their role in protecting public safety. If only they put environmental safety on the same level! Various groups have support materials you can use to help building officials get educated, including the Development Center for Appropriate Technology, the California Straw Building Association, and The Last Straw journal. There's also a variety of books on adobe, cob, rammed earth, straw bale, and other methods on the shelves.

My husband and I would like to build our own green home within five years, with straw bales, rammed earth, recycled shipping containers, or other such nontraditional building materials. Can you recommend a particular building material over others? Are there areas of the U.S. that you predict will be more open than others to accepting these buildings as "safe" five years from now?    -- Katherine Wimble, Falls Church, Va.

Different alternative materials lend themselves to different goals, from minimizing energy use to sculpting your house by hand. Please note that the energy-saving benefits of the thermal mass of earth materials are sometimes over-hyped; they are mostly lost if the building exterior is not well insulated by some other material with a high insulation factor (like straw). In my experience, the West Coast, Southwest, and Colorado are the most receptive areas to these techniques, but even here it varies by locality. Many alternatives are applicable almost everywhere, and I hope their use and sophistication will spread!

A furor has come up in New York City that jeopardizes passage of a "green" municipal building law. The issue revolves around Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards and whether Sustainable Forestry Initiative standards should be added to the legislative language. What is the problem with SFI?    -- Nancy Anderson, New York, N.Y.

One of the biggest differences between Forest Stewardship Council and Sustainable Forestry Initiative is that FSC requires third-party certification while SFI does not, so if a forestry company chooses to lie about its forest practices but sell its wood with an SFI stamp, no one would actually know. Because eco-labeled wood is more valuable, the incentive is there for forest companies to do exactly this; even President Reagan said "trust but verify." Another big problem is that SFI has less stringent standards for protecting overall forest ecosystem health -- for instance, clear-cut logging can be allowed under SFI.

But what gets me angriest is that SFI is a program created by the timber industry specifically to compete with the FSC standard in order to muddy the water for consumers and greenwash bad corporate behavior. The folks who drew up SFI could have spent their time working to comply with FSC and protect forests, but instead they chose to intentionally generate disinformation. They are wasting even their own time, and yet they ask us to believe they stand for conservation!

ADPSR awarded our 2005 Lewis Mumford Award for the Environment (Mumford was a famous planner) to Rainforest Action Network for their campaign against SFI.

The latest published draft of LEED version 2.2 seems to have again excluded SFI from counting for LEED points. I'm very happy that the U.S. Green Building Council (publisher of LEED) has taken that stance; I hope this will help to resolve the issue for New York.

Here at the Northern Alaska Environmental Center we would like to set a good example, but it takes a lot of energy to survive in this climate, and we don't have too many options in terms of solar or wind power. Since our boiler needs replacing anyhow, we have been toying with the idea of a wood-pellet boiler. They burn pellets made from sawdust, bark, and other waste, and are highly efficient. Is this a technology you'd recommend? Are there others?    -- Nancy Fresco, Fairbanks, Alaska

In commercial and industrial buildings, investing in energy-efficient lighting, or window treatments that will allow you to use daylight effectively, are great candidates for energy savings. Don't even think of solar panels until you've done these.

In an extreme climate like Alaska, extra insulation will really pay off -- you may even be able to justify triple-paned windows or re-cladding your building in an additional layer of rigid insulation if you compare these measures to your annual fuel costs. You will still need some kind of extra heater (although I've heard of demonstration houses in Scandinavia that are fully heated by a 100-watt light bulb!), and a pellet stove seems like a good idea. To get information about energy use, consider a Home Energy Rating Survey by a licensed energy auditor.

What information or resources are available for public planning commissioners and county supervisors on "retrofitting" existing residential communities that resulted from sprawl development of the '80s and '90s, in order to make these places more "green"?    -- L. Miller, Springfield, Va.

Fighting sprawl is a huge concern both for environmentalists and the majority of planners. The American Planning Association supports policies to reinforce existing urban cores and reduce sprawl. The Congress for the New Urbanism has developed model codes for communities that want a "traditional" downtown. The state of Maryland is a real leader in "Smart Growth" legislation and might have some helpful examples and staff people to answer questions. Even the Centers for Disease Control has published information on the negative health effects of sprawl [PDF] and how to counter them. You should be able to get various resources from these groups. Good luck with rezoning; it's vitally important and a big challenge at all levels!

• Comments