CITIES, TOWNS, AND SUBURBS: Toward Zero-Carbon Buildings by Hillary Brown

8/4/2019 CITIES, TOWNS, AND SUBURBS: Toward Zero-Carbon Buildings by Hillary Brown

1/14

The Post Carbon Reader Series: Cities, Towns, and Suburbs

Toward Zero-Carbon Buildings

By Hillary Brown, FAIA


2/14

About the Author

Hillary Brown is Professor at the City College of

New Yorks Spitzer School of Architecture, whereshe also directs the architecture track for CCNYsnew interdisciplinary Masters of Science program:Sustainability in the Urban Environment, organized

jointly with the Division of Science and the GroveSchool of Engineering. A former assistant commis-sioner with the City of New York, she founded theOce of Sustainable Design and co-authored the Citysinternationally-recognized High Performance BuildingGuidelines. As principal of the rm New Civic Works,

she has authored several publications on green buildingsand infrastructure, and is a former board director of theU.S. Green Building Council. Brown is a Fellow of PostCarbon Institute.

Post Carbon Institute

2010

613 4th Street, Suite 208Santa Rosa, California 95404 USA

This publication is an excerpted chapter from The Post Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st CenturysSustainability Crises, Richard Heinberg and DanielLerch, eds . (Healdsburg, CA: Watershed Media, 2010).For other book excerpts, permission to reprint, and

purchasing visit http://www.postcarbonreader.com.
http://www.postcarbonreader.com/http://www.postcarbonreader.com/


3/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS

1 TH PST CARB RAR SRIS

The Empire State Building, its luster dimmed and itsepic height overtaken during the building boom of thelast several decades, is getting a timely makeover. Ledby the Clinton Climate Initiatives team of experts,this iconic American skyscraper is embracing energyefficiency and carbon-emissions reduction. When com-

pleted, the 2.8-million-square-foot landmark will serveas a beacon for the real estate industry gearing up forthe reality of a post-carbon future.

In a city where buildings account for 80 percent of allgreenhouse gas emissions, the Empire State Building

presents a highly replicable model of an environmen-

tally progressive retrofit, in three basic steps.1

1. Sixty-five hundred existing windows will be

reglazed to reduce the buildings winter heat lossand summer heat gain. As daylight better illumi-nates the interior, electric lighting may be reduced,eliminating tons of waste heat.

2. The building will downsize its climate-controlsystems to meet its remaining heating and cool-ing needs more efficiently. With reduced needfor cooling, downsized air-handling systems willsupport comfort and good air quality with lowerenergy expenditure.

3. A new computerized system will give buildingtenants feedback on their energy use, encouragingfurther energy savings.

An anticipated 38 percent reduction in energy usewill rank the project in the 90th percentile of the U.S.Department of Energys Energy Star benchmark sys-tem against comparable office buildings.2 With $4.4

million in projected annual savings, it may repay the$13.2 million cost in just over three years. Co-ownerAnthony Malkin contends that this model processwill inform lawmakers, property owners, and lenderson actions to take, laws and codes to write, and newfinancing programs to support, ultimately yieldingreduced energy consumption, reduced carbon output,higher quality workspaces, and green local jobs.3

As he achieves these goals, Malkin is in stride with aleading generation of forward-thinking building own-ers, architects, engineers, developers, contractors, and

product manufacturers intent on reengineering howbuildings perform. This burgeoning green buildingmovement, now in its second decade, strives to holis-

tically reduce (and eventually eliminate) the negativeimpacts buildings have on local and global ecosys-tems. While energy effectiveness is a leading driver,the movement also encompasses other best practices,including locational efficiency and compact design, siterestoration, stormwater and urban heat-island manage-ment, scaling back raw material and potable water use,and focusing on the quality of the indoor environment.


4/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


Practiced together and done well, these strategies com-bine to yield operating savings in a short time, as wellas a range of tenant health and productivity benefits.

Buildings and Climate Change:efining the Problem

Viewed through a green building lens, conventionally-built buildings are rather poor performers. They gener-ate enormous material and water waste as well as indoorand outdoor air pollution (see box 25.1). As large con-tainers and collection points of human activity, build-ings are especially prodigious consumers of energy.They depend on both electricity and on-site fossil-fuel use to support myriad transactions: transportingand exchanging water, air, heat, material, people, andinformation.

Compared to the transportation and industrial sectors,buildings account for the lions share of U.S. energyuse: 41 percent and growing, likely to over 50 percentby 2050.4 Distributed equally between residentialand commercial users, buildings consume more than

70 percent of all electricity produced.5

With overalldemand increasing at a rate of about 1.5 to 2 percenta year, buildings are the largest single source (43 per-cent) of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.6It is thus through this very local, everyday activity of

powering our facilities that building occupants unwit-tingly participate in global resource depletion and cli-mate change.

Market Transformation So Far

Initially a self-organized effort of builders and archi-tects, the green building movement today is a rapidlygrowing force in urban planning and real estate devel-opment, spanning the commercial, nonprofit, govern-ment, and institutional sectors. Over the last decade,

professionals and organizations within the move-ment have developed countless guidance documents,design tools, and policy models, essentially training

wheels that help to demystify the complex processof rethinking a conventional development project tobe truly green. One of the most widely used tools isthe Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED) rating and certification system, a suite ofguidelines and metrics for improving existing and newbuilding performance, which has been in continuousdevelopment since 1998 by the U.S. Green BuildingCouncil (USGBC). The federal Energy Star program

(a joint venture of the U.S. Department of Energy andthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) has also

proved to be a tremendously effective benchmarkingsystem, identifying best energy efficiency practices forclose to 100,000 businesses and 200,000 homes.7

The reliability of rating systems such as LEED, GreenGlobes, and the National Association of Home BuildersGreen Building Standards has led to their adoption by

Bx 25.1

The Impacts of Buildings

Materials: Construction materialsincluding buildings, roads,

and infrastructure suppliesmake up 60 percent of the total

ow of materials (excluding food and fuel) through the .S.

economy.1

Solid Waste: Building construction and demolition waste

accounts for 60 percent of all nonindustrial waste and more

than 30 percent of the mercury in landlls in the nited States.

Water: ver 12 percent of .S. water consumptionabout

50 billion gallons per dayis from building occupants. The

amount of water used to support municipal, agricultural, and

industrial activities has more than tripled since 1950. 2

Health: Indoor levels of air pollutants in buildings can be two

to ve times higher than outdoor levels. Improved air quality

(and fewer sick days) could potentially reduce .S. health-care

costs on the order of $17 billion to $37 billion.3

1 agner, . Materials in the Economy: Materials Flow, Scarcity, and the

Environment, .S. eological Survey Circular 1221, February 2002

(enver: .S. epartment of the Interior, .S. eological Survey

Information Services).

2 ational Science and Technology Council, Federal Research and

Development Agenda for Net-Zero Energy, High-Performance

Green Buildings, ctober 28, 2008, http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/

buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRAgendaforetZeronergy

HighPerformancereenBuildings.pdf.

3 illiam J. Fisk, How IQ Aects Health, Productivity,ASHRAE Journal

44, no. 5 (2002), 5658, available at http://doas.psu.edu/sk.pdf .
http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdfhttp://doas.psu.edu/fisk.pdfhttp://doas.psu.edu/fisk.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/%20buildingtechnology/documents/FederalRDAgendaforNetZeroEnergy%20HighPerformanceGreenBuildings.pdf


5/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


federal, state, and local government for public worksand publicly funded projects.8 In an increasing numberof locales, rating systems are being used as regulatorymeasures or incentivesboth pushing and pulling themarket. By 2010, LEED or LEED-equivalent ratingsystems had been adopted by thirteen federal depart-ments and agencies, thirty-four state governments, andnearly two hundred local governments. Other institu-tional sectors have followed suit: Fifty-six public school

jurisdictions and institutions of higher education arerequiring LEED standards for individual school build-ings and campuses.9

The private sector has also adopted green build-ing with gusto. In the commercial real estate sector,LEED-certified projects already account for 6 percentof new commercial/institutional construction andare expected to climb sevenfold over the next threedecades, with the 70 percent anticipated growth in newbuilding stock.10 Todays green buildings sell them-selves, surpassing conventional buildings in indicatorssuch as sales value, rental rates, and occupancy.11 Thespillover to the residential sector is only just now begin-ning. The year 2005 saw a 30 percent jump in the num-ber of green home builders, pushed by a proliferationof programs offering developers and other home build-ing professionals a variety of rating systems, guidelines,training, and other services to help advance the marketin green housing. The building manufacturing sectorhas responded vigorously to these trends. Since 2006,markets for green products and building materials havegrown at an annual rate of 23 percent.12

In many ways, the green building movement represents

a broad urge among builders, designers, and citizensalike to proactively respond to climate change and otherenvironmental issues without waiting for governmentalaction. Theres a fierce energy at work that is harnessingmarket forces and industrys collective intelligence todrive change. It may further evidence a deeper culturalchange in attitudes about architecture, moving awayfrom celebrating buildings as commoditiesoften assignature objects of artand rebalancing the design

dialogue from one that is object oriented to one that ismuch more outcome oriented.

Shortcomings and Barriers

Despite its persuasive momentum, the green buildingmovement signifies a mere initial advance toward alow-carbon future. Even as we acknowledge that greenfacilities must be t he building blocks of the resil ient cit-ies of tomorrow, we face significant barriers to a whole-sale shift in the industry. Several challenges dominate.One is the fragmented makeup of the building sector,

which is composed of a vast number of small units,

quite diverse.13 There are no simple mechanisms toinfluence the wide range of decision-makers involved,including owners, tenants, investors, insurers, regula-tors, manufacturers, contractors, and real estate agents.The building sector in 2002 included more than223,000 businesses alone.14

A second obstacle is cost, both real and perceived. Doneright, most cost premiums for building green todaycan be eliminated or otherwise recouped in the short

termbut few investors and developers are willingto make decisions on anything other than a first-costbasis.15 Compounding this drawback is the fact thatincentives to build green are often split, unfairly dis-advantaging the developer who pays for better-perform-ing systems versus the tenants who reap the advantages.For publicly owned facilities, this divide is manifestedin the disconnect between capital and operating bud-gets, normally separately appropriated, where futureoperational savings cannot be used to help finance the

premium costs of efficiency measures.

Alongside such structural obstacles, other forcesimpede the momentum of the green building move-ment. To date, the relatively low cost U.S. consumers

pay for energy (compared to consumers in Europe) inap-propriately lengthens the payback on energy efficiencyimprovements beyond whats considered a tolerablereturn on investment for many stakeholders (i.e., threeto five years). On the implementation side, regulatory


6/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


barriers hinder the uptake of many renewable technol-ogies (photovoltaics, fuel cells, microturbines) owingto grid connection and net-metering permitting issues.Finally, research-and-development funding for newbuilding technologies is disproportionately low in theUnited States compared to other developed countries,estimated at a minuscule 0.02 percent of the estimatedannual value of U.S. building construction.16

Two Bold Paths ForwardDespite the significant successes of the green buildingmovement, its efforts will not significantly lessen thebuilding sectors contribution to energy overconsump-tion and climate instability for many years to come.Over the next twenty-five years, total energy consump-tion is expected to grow by almost 19 percent; it is stillthe dominant driver of our economy.17 During thatsame period, the amount of building stock is expectedto increase by as much as 46 percent.18 Given these

increases, its imperative that we start to decouple eco-nomic health from energy consumptionby reducingdemand while raising the energy productivity of ourbuildings. This basically means providing more service

while consuming less power.

Many energy economists, policy-makers, and progres-sive design thinkers are optimistic on this front. eirextrapolations indicate that substantial efficiency

investments not only may take us half way toward majorgreenhouse gas reduction goals, but also may ultimatelygenerate a net-savings stream that could nance otherclimate protection measures.19 ey foresee that theroll-out of energy-ecient buildings will be composedof two major thrusts: harnessing wholesale the carbon-savings potential of existing building retrots, and radi-cally reducing the carbon intensity of new structures

with zero-energy buildings.

OppOrtunities fOr increasing energy

efficiency in existing Buildings

Given the fact that new construction constitutes a mere2 to 3 percent of our total building stock in a given year,it is not surprising that more than 86 percent of build-ing-related construction expenditures relate to renova-tion.20 Today, there are more than 45 mill ion structuresin the United States (representing billions of occupiedsquare feet), the majority of which will still be in use bymidcentury. This points to the scale of the near-term

opportunity for cutbacks in greenhouse gas emissionsthat may be obtained from retrofits and upgrading ofenergy-consuming systems. In a downturned economy,such actions are much more likely to be undertakenthan new building ventures.21

In fact, market predictions suggest burgeoning greenbuilding activity over the next ve years, with expendi-tures growing from just $2.1 billion to $3.7 billion in

There are more than45 million structures in

the United States, themajority o which will stillbe in use by midcentury.


7/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


2010 to $10.1 billion to $15.1 billion by 2014.22 is pre-diction is corroborated by green building trend tracker

Jerry Yudelson, who found that the fastest growingLEED rating system in 2008 was the LEED program forexisting buildings.23

For impressive results today, commercial building own-ers can pursue the same three-step sequence modeled byowner Anthony Malkin at the Empire State Building:Reduce external energy loads by upgrading the build-ing enclosure, diminish internal loads with daylight-responsive lighting controls and maximized equipmentefficiency, and install smaller heating and cooling sys-

tems, computer controlled, that minimize consump-tion while increasing comfort.

Technology has radically advanced in all these areas.Today, building envelopes may be retrofitted withhigh-performance windows (with interior films andgas fill), external solar-shading devices, extra insula-tion, insulating films, heat mirrors, crack sealing, andother techniques. Considerable savings can be capturedby replacing conventional lighting with high-efficiencyfluorescent or LED (light-emitting diode) fixtures,

using adjustable artificial lighting to make better useof daylight, and upgrading to Energy Star office equip-ment and appliances. Then, after integrating all ofthese efficiency measures, boilers, chillers, fans, pumps,and motors can each be downsized to scales appro-

priate to the newly reduced loads.24 Such synergies pay off handsomely, with performance-based retrofitsearning operational savings of anywhere from 40 to75 percent.25

While efficiency measures with the greatest potential

return often require substantial up-front investmentthat is not easily recoverable within the preferred threeto five years, financing vehicles are becoming more andmore plentiful. These include federal, state, and localtax-credit programs, utility rebates, low-interest loans,and even direct-installation programs operated bythird-party organizations.

Still, much more needs to be done in terms of regulationto accelerate the transition to an energy-smart reality.Upgrading building energy codes, promoting equip-ment eciency, and establishing clean-energy portfoliostandards can hasten this shi. One recent study foundthat upgrading residential and commercial equipmentstandards could cumulatively save 31 quadrillion Btuof energy nationwide in the next decadebetween$48 billion and $103 billion in net present value.26

Quicker routes to carbon reduction may include legisla-tive actions. With the implementation of its Greener,Greater Buildings Plan, New York City will embark onan aggressive campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emis-sions by targeting its 22,000 largest commercial andresidential buildings. Recently enacted legislation closesloopholes in existing energy eciency codes, requiresongoing benchmarking and regular auditing, andencourages lighting upgrades and other easily achiev-able retrots. Building owners will be able to nance

upgrades through revolving-fund loans. Accompaniedby a green skills training program for 19,000 workers,this legislative eort presents a full range of mechanismsto transform New Yorks building stock over time whileraising the bar for other cities nationwide.27


8/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


pOwer dOwn: HOw ZerO-energy Buildings

will lead tHe transitiOn

While building retrofits and renovations offer the larg-est carbon-reduction potential over the next twenty-five

years, new construction plays a key role in advancingthe technologies required to make the products ofthe building industry truly resilient for our energy-uncertain future.28 Environmentalists, policy-makers,and professionals alike foresee that only an acceleratedpowering down of all new commercial and residen-tial facilities will allow us to achieve the necessary swiftcontraction in global carbon emissions. Many of thesetechnological leaps have been demonstrated by a new

class of structures called zero-energy buildings.

A zero-energy building (ZEB) is designed to be opti-mally energy efficient and to satisfy remaining energydemands to the greatest extent with on-site renewablesources. Even if energy is occasionally purchased fromthe grid (e.g., on cloudy, windless days when on-site

wind and solar generators cant meet regular demand),it may be offset on an annual basis by returning surplusenergy to the grid at a different time (specifically, byon-site sources producing more energy than consumedby the building). Thus most zero-energy building are,technically speaking, actually net-zero-energy. In addi-tion, ZEBs that purchase renewably sourcedpower offthe grid may also be designated zero-carbon buildings.

Getting to net zero energy cannot be achieved usingconventional building and operating methods alone.For example, while todays o-the-shelf technologiesmay economically achieve a 30 to 50 percent energy sav-ings for a typical oce building, closer to a 70 percent

reduction must be reached for the remaining demandsto be feasibly satised by on-site renewable energy. 29Here, conventional technologies and best-practice e-ciencies must be coupled with more far-reaching designmeasures:

.. Minimize heating and cooling needs. Integrate com- prehensive passive-design strategies by orientingbuildings for maximum winter sun exposure and/or

summer heat rejection and designing windows andopenings for controlled daylight. Use active-facadesystems with operable windows, movable shading,spectrally selective triple glazing, and considerablyimproved insulation and radiative barriers.

Bx 25.2.

ational Renewable nergy aboratory Research Support Facility

The ational Renewable nergy aboratorys new 218,000-

square-foot Research Support Facility in Boulder, Colorado

is its premiere zero-energy building showcase.1 Situated for

maximum sun, it relies largely on a hybrid of passive measures

and active mechanical systems to meet its annual heating and

cooling needs.

Its climate-sensitive envelope integrates multiple features:

louvers for deep daylighting, and automatic- and manually-

operated ventilating windows. A dark perforated metal screen

shades the buildings long south-facing faades in the summer.

In the winter, air behind the screen rises in temperature by about

50 degrees, and is collected and stored deep within the thermal

mass of the b uildings concrete foundation. Here its combined

with waste heat from the computer labs, for subsequent use

as free building heat. In summer, this thermal storage works in

reverse, as cool night air drawn through the concrete maze is

stored and released during the day for free cooling.

Such advanced passive and active measures are highly

compatible with advanced building intelligenceuser interface

systems that calibrate operations with occupancy levels, provide

live feedback on systems performance, and troubleshoot, all

in service of conser vation. ith building loads thus radically

reduced, the facility can completely self-power using the 1.3 M

photovoltaic array spread across its rooftop and parking areas.2

1 For more information visit http://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/rsf.

html.

2 .S. epartment of nergy, nergy ciency & Renewable nergy,

Zero nergy Buildings atabase. http://zeb.buildinggreen.com/

overview.cfm?projectid=1408
http://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/rsf.htmlhttp://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/rsf.htmlhttp://zeb.buildinggreen.com/overview.cfm?projectid=1408http://zeb.buildinggreen.com/overview.cfm?projectid=1408http://zeb.buildinggreen.com/overview.cfm?projectid=1408http://zeb.buildinggreen.com/overview.cfm?projectid=1408http://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/rsf.htmlhttp://www.nrel.gov/sustainable_nrel/rsf.html


9/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


.. Meet residual energy demand with on-site renewablesources managed with high-performance mechani-cal systems such as ground-source heat pumps,heat recovery, radiant heating, and under-floor airdistribution.

Challenges lie ahead for getting to net zero energy. Notall buildings are candidates. Given the high operatingloads in facilities such as hospitals and laboratories, suf-ficient energy reductions may be impractical. Buildingsin urban locales may have inadequate solar exposureowing to shading by adjacent buildings and may not beable to achieve net zero energy. Also, medium- to high-

rise buildingsor even unusually wide buildingswillbe problematic candidates given the high ratio of solar- panel surface to total floor area required for ZEBs.According to the U.S. Department of Energy, however,although merely 22 percent of buildings today have the

potential to be ZEBs, as technology advances this maytriple by 2025.30

Various enterprises are in place to accelerate this trend.The Department of Energy has set the goal of makingzero-energy buildings fully marketable by 2025. The

2030 Challenge, a voluntary program backed by theAmerican Institute of Architects, the U.S. Conferenceof Mayors, and twenty-five other organizations, has setaggressive national schedules and benchmarks to pushall new buildings and major renovations to be net zerocarbon by 2030.31 The Living Building Challenge, arapidly spreading initiative of the U.S. Green BuildingCouncils Cascadia chapter, has called for a next gen-eration of self-sufficient buildings with net zero energyand net zero water goals, coupled with further strin-

gent resource- and land-use requirements.32

Legislative measures may soon follow these initia-tives. The European Parliament recently called for allnew construction to be zero energy by 2019. In 2007,California energy regulators set a goal for all newhomes to built to net zero energy standards startingin 2020. Many other states and cities will, in all likeli-hood, follow suit.

The Agenda Ahead

If we implement all of these measures at the needed scale

across our nationwide building stock, we will quicklyreap benefits of enormous proportion. Dramatic dropsin overall grid-based power demand, coupled with wide-spread flattening of peak-demand curves, will reduce

power price and volatility for the consumer. This willalso reduce the need for investment in new generationand transmission capacity, allowing our most polluting

power plants to be taken offline sooner.33

In contrast, the consequences of inaction are frighten-ing. The current 2 percent annual rise in U.S. build-

ings energy use means that by 2030 we would need tosupply 23 percent more energy to residential buildingsand 36 percent more energy to commercial buildingsectorson top of already near-unsupportable energydemands.34 The uncertainties we face in a future ofincreasingly expensive energynot to mention the

potentially catastrophic consequences of steadily wors-ening climate changemean that we cant simplybuild more power plants to meet ever-rising demand.Unprecedented industry and governmental leadership,

plus a concerted response by American consumers, willbe required to seriously reduce energy demand overalland meet remaining demand from renewable resources.A mix of mutually reinforcing public and private mea-sures must achieve the following:

.. Create a sense of urgency: Americans must graspthat powering down buildings today is a necessaryand urgent first move toward future-proofing ourcommunities. Focused demonstration, education,and outreach campaigns must prepare the public

and the industry for the order-of-magnitude shiftsrequired ahead: swift advancements in efficiencybased on full integration of passive and active building

measures, and rapid scaling up of distributed solarand other renewable energy technologies.

.. Standardize overall targets: Governmentsif notfederal, then state and localmust take the nextstep and mandate realistic but aggressive targets for


10/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


major retrofits and net-zero-carbon buildings, notonly for public projects but for private propertiesas well. That said, such ambitious and far-reachingmandates are likely to succeed only in concert withthe following measures listed here.

.. Step up energy codes: Building codes must bebrought into alignment with green building rat-ing systems, the best of which are themselves underconstant revision. One example is American Society

of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-ConditioningEngineers (ASHRAE) Standard 189.1, which isaligned with LEED and will shortly be available foradoption by local jurisdictions as a code-enforceablestandard for green buildings.35 Leveling the playingfield for building owners and tenants through suchregulation is a crucial step.

.. Ratchet up equipment standards: Successful federaleorts to standardize minimum performance levelsfor all energy-consuming equipmentfrom appli-

ances and electronics to mechanical systems mustcontinually be enhanced. In the past, these measureshave provided the highest levels of returns.

.. Use carbon metrics: While operational eciencysavings may motivate and reward owners and inves-tors, we cannot depend on these direct inducements,even coupled with many of todays available tax incen-tives, government grants, loans, and other creative

nancing vehicles. Additional market drivers areneeded and may include carbon-based price signalsand valuations of external costs that make eciencyinvestments compelling.

.. Create implementation capacity: Further marketmeasures can relieve building owners of the burdenof tackling specic improvements themselves. ird-

party entitiescompanies, governmental agencies,nongovernmental organizations, and utilities

are increasingly available to undertake efficiencyupgrades, repaying themselves through a share inoperating savings.

.. Address key barriers: Creativity at all governmentlevels is required to remove deep-rooted market bar-riers and disincentives. We must substitute life-cyclecosting methods for todays unilateralrst-cost deci-sionmaking. New mechanisms are needed in leasesand purchase agreements to overcome the disconnectbetween those who pay and those who benet. We

also need to solve technical and administrative bar-riers to interconnecting distributed energy systems

with the grid.

.. Invest in research and development: Research fund-ing levels for green building technologies are sadlydisproportionate to todays carbon-reduction impera-tive. We must promote industry development of themost promising technologies, such as complex active

Powering downbuildings today is a

necessary frst movetoward uture-proofngour communities.


11/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


facades (e.g., automated shades, switchable electro-chromic/thermochromic window glass), next-genera-tion radiant heating/cooling systems, and small-scalecombined heat and power systems.

.. Shift basic paradigms: Zoning codes that ensuresolar access, for example, can promote more univer-sal use of passive solar design. We might also beginto question and discourage, or disincentivize, thearchitecture and building industrys fixation with

vision-glass curtain walls (building facades thatare predominantly glass, seen especially on modernoffice buildings), the most profligate consumers of

energy next to artificial lighting. We need to recog-nize as well that building size matterssquare foot-age directly drives energy and resource consumption.

We need new mental models that decouple spatialsize from statusno more 10,000-square-footgreen homes.

.. Change behavior: e future of buildings alsodepends on thoughtful designs that enlist occupantsas crucial actors in the low-carbon world. Appealingstairways can get people to relinquish elevator habits.

Operable windows, exible settings for workstationlighting and thermal comfort, and in-building dis-

plays of real-time energy consumption all coach occu-pants in more energy-smart behavior. A wide array ofdevicesuser prompts, instant feedback, modelingalternatives, and even peer pressurewill sensitizeus to a new energy reality. Initiating behavior changeand driving an accompanying shi in values are pri-mary keys to a sustainable future.

A full suite of policy initiatives as outlined above is

essential for the shift to a national building stockappropriate to the low-carbon future. To transformthe sociological systems shaping our built environmentand capable of reducing its impacts, we must work tointegrate these measures across time and scale. The fullflowering of todays green momentum can be realized.But it will require a broad base of civic intelligence andstrong political will.


12/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


ndnotes1 The ew York City reener, reater Buildings Plan, YC.

gov, http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/

buildings_plan.shtml.

2 Clay . essler, Renovation of the mpire State Building,

presentation to the .. conomic Commission for uropes

Committee on Housing and and Management, September

23, 2009, http://www.unece.org/hlm/sessions/docs2009/

presentations/11.CC.Rode.pdf; for .S. PA/ nergy

Star program, see http://www.energystar.gov/.

3 Anthony Malkin, mpire State Building, press conference,

ew York, April 6, 2009, http://www.esbsustainability.com/

SocMe/Content/Files/mpire%20State%20Building%20

Co%20Statement.pdf.

4 ational Science and Technology Council, Federal Researchand Development Agenda for Net-Zero Energy, High-

Performance Green Buildings, ctober 28, 2008, http://

tinyurl.com/nze-agenda.

5 .S. nvironmental Protection Agency reen Building

orkgroup, Buildings and the Environment: A Statistical

Summary (ashington C: nvironmental Protection

Agency, 2004), 2.

6 .S. nergy Information Administration,Annual Energy

Outlook 2006, /IA-0383 (2006), February 2006,

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive.html. Building

emissions are currently at 658 million metric tons of carbon

dioxide annually; .S. nvironmental Protection Agency,Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990

2002, PA/430-R-04-003 (ashington C: nvironmental

Protection Agency, 2004), 37 and table 3-6.

7 Marilyn Brown, Frank Southworth, and Therese Stoval,

Towards a Climate-Friendly Built Environment, report for the

Pew Center on lobal Climate Change (Arlington, VA: Pew

Center, 2005), 52.

8 reen lobes, formed by groups in Canada and the nited

States as an alternative to , emphasizes ease of

use, low cost, and user education through its eb-based

application.The ational Association of Home Builders

and the International Codes Council partnered to establisha ational reen Building Standard compliant with the

American ational Standards Institute (ASI) in 2008;

http://www.nahbgreen.org/guidelines/ansistandard.aspx.

9 .S. reen Building Council, Initiatives in overnment

and Schools, September 2009.

10 Rob atson, ed., Green Building Impact Report 2008

(akland, CA: reener orld Media, 2008), 3. Its unclear

whether this growth in market penetration for new buildings

will continue (more likely it will level out).

11 orm Miller, Jay Spivey, and Andrew Florance, oes reen

Pay ?Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, July 8, 2008,

http://www.costar.com/JSR/default.htm. The study cites

rent premiums of $11.33 and $2.40 per square foot, and a

4.1 and 3.6 percent higher occupancy for -certied

buildings and nergy Star buildings, respectively. Sales

premiums include $171 and $61 per square foot.

12 As quoted in Green Building Materials in the U.S., a report

from market research publisher SBI nergy.

13 Commission for nvironmental Cooperation, Green Building

in North America: Opportunities and Challenges (Montreal:

Commission for nvironmental Cooperation Secretariat,

2008), 17.

14 .S. nvironmental Protection Agency reen Building

orkgroup, Buildings and the Environment.

15 Per a worldwide study by the orld Business Council for

Sustainable evelopment, Energy Eciency in Buildings:

Business Realities and Opportunities,http://www.wbcsd.

org/plugins/ocSearch/details.asp?type=ocet&bjectId

=Mj5MTM.

16 Ibid., 56.

17 .S. nergy Information Administration, nergy

Consumption by Sector and Source, table 2 inAnnual

Energy Outlook 2010, ecember 2009, http://www.eia.doe.

gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xls.

18 Martin Adelaar et al., Green Building Energy Scenarios for

2030, reen Building Background Papers (Commission fornvironmental Cooperation, 2008),http://www.cec.org/

Page.asp?PageI=1180&ContentI=&SiteodeI=468&

B_xpandI=.

19 John A. aitner, The Positive Economics of Climate

Change Policies: What the Historical Evidence Can Tell Us

(ashington C: American Council for an nergy-cient

conomy, July 2009); Hannah Choi ranade et al., Unlocking

Energy Eciency in the U.S. Economy (McKinsey & Company,

July 2009).

20 ordon V. R. Holness, Improving nergy ciency in

xisting Buildings,ASHRAE Journal (January 1, 2008), 1.

21 Brown et al., Towards a Climate-Friendly Built Environment, 11.

22 Mcraw-Hill Construction, Smart Market Report, Green

Building Retrot & Renovation: Rapidly Expanding Market

Opportunities through Existing Buildings, ctober 2009.

23 .S. reen Building Council, reen Building Consultants

Top 10 Predicts reen Building rowth espite conomy,

February 2, 2009, from Contractor magazine, http://www.

usgbc.org/ews/SBCInTheewsetails.aspx?I=3966 .

&M is the .S. reen Building Councils rating tool for

building systems upgrades.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.unece.org/hlm/sessions/docs2009/presentations/11.CNC.Rode.pdfhttp://www.unece.org/hlm/sessions/docs2009/presentations/11.CNC.Rode.pdfhttp://www.energystar.gov/http://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://tinyurl.com/nze-agendahttp://tinyurl.com/nze-agendahttp://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive.htmlhttp://www.nahbgreen.org/guidelines/ansistandard.aspxhttp://www.costar.com/JOSRE/default.htmhttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlshttp://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlshttp://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBCInTheNewsDetails.aspx?ID=3966http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBCInTheNewsDetails.aspx?ID=3966http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBCInTheNewsDetails.aspx?ID=3966http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBCInTheNewsDetails.aspx?ID=3966http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1180&ContentID=&SiteNodeID=468&BL_ExpandID=http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlshttp://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_2.xlshttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.wbcsd.org/plugins/DocSearch/details.asp?type=DocDet&ObjectId=MjU5MTMhttp://www.costar.com/JOSRE/default.htmhttp://www.nahbgreen.org/guidelines/ansistandard.aspxhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive.htmlhttp://tinyurl.com/nze-agendahttp://tinyurl.com/nze-agendahttp://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://www.esbsustainability.com/SocMe/Content/Files/Empire%20State%20Building%20Co%20Statement.pdfhttp://www.energystar.gov/http://www.unece.org/hlm/sessions/docs2009/presentations/11.CNC.Rode.pdfhttp://www.unece.org/hlm/sessions/docs2009/presentations/11.CNC.Rode.pdfhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtml


13/14

TAR ZR-CARB BIIS


24 P. Komor, Space Cooling emands from ce Plug oads,

ASHRAE Journal 39, no. 12 (ecember 1997), 4144.

25 Adelaar et al., Green Building Energy Scenarios for 2030.

26 reg Rosenquist et al., Energy Eciency Standards for

Residential/Commercial Equipment and Buildings: Additional

Opportunities, B-56207 (Berkeley, CA: awrence

Berkeley ational aboratory, 2004), 19.

27 The ew York City reener, reater Buildings Plan, YC.

gov, http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/

buildings_plan.shtml.

28 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Residential

and Commercial Buildings, in Working Group III Report:

Mitigation of Climate Change, Bert Merz et al., eds., (ew

York: Cambridge niversity Press, 2007), www.ipcc.ch/

ipccreports/ar4-wg3.htm.

29 B. rith et al.,Assessment of the Technical Potential for

Achieving Net-Zero Energy Buildings in the Commercial

Sector, ational Renewable nergy aboratory, R/TP-

550-41957 (2007), 64.

30 Ibid., 38.

31 Architecture 2030, The 2030 Challenge, http://www.

architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.html .

32 Cascadia Region reen Building Council, The Living Building

Challenge: In Pursuit of True Sustainability in the Built

Environment, 2006, http://www.livingshelter.com/b-

challenge-v1-2.pdf.

33 ew . Pratsch, Zero nergy Buildings, presentation at

the Residential nergy Services etwork 2003 RST

Conference, San iego, www.resnet.us/conference/2003/

presentations/Pratsch.PDF.

34 Commission for nvironmental Cooperation, Green Building

in North America, 42.

35 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-

Conditioning ngineers, www.ashrae.org.

Photo Credits

Page 1, mpire State Buildingcbnamidweekpost.

Page 5, Patrick Corkery, ational Renewable nergy aboratory.

Page 6, ennis Schroeder, ational Renewable nergy

aboratory.

Images markedc are under a Creative Commons license.

See http://creativecommons.org.

AcknowledgmentsCover art by Mike King. esign by Sean Mcuire. ayout by

Clare Rhinelander.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.htmhttp://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.htmhttp://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.htmlhttp://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.htmlhttp://www.livingshelter.com/Lb-challenge-v1-2.pdfhttp://www.livingshelter.com/Lb-challenge-v1-2.pdfhttp://www.resnet.us/conference/2003/presentations/Pratsch.PDFhttp://www.resnet.us/conference/2003/presentations/Pratsch.PDFhttp://www.ashrae.org/http://creativecommons.org/http://creativecommons.org/http://www.ashrae.org/http://www.resnet.us/conference/2003/presentations/Pratsch.PDFhttp://www.resnet.us/conference/2003/presentations/Pratsch.PDFhttp://www.livingshelter.com/Lb-challenge-v1-2.pdfhttp://www.livingshelter.com/Lb-challenge-v1-2.pdfhttp://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.htmlhttp://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.htmhttp://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.htmhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/buildings_plan.shtml


14/14

T : www.p./9780970950062

For a 20% discounT use This source code: 10M9071

(p t t t p tt x.)

T Pt crManaging the 21st Centurys Sustainability Crises

et y richard heinberg daniel lerch

In the 20th century, cheap and abundant energy brought previously

unimaginable advances in health, wealth, and technology, and fed

an explosion in population and consumption. But this growth came

at an incredible cost. Climate change, peak oil, freshwater deple-

tion, species extinction, and a host of economic and social prob-lems now challenge us as never before. The Post Carbon Reader

features articles by some of the worlds most provocative thinkers

on the key drivers shaping this new century, from renewable energy

and urban agriculture to social justice and systems resilience. This

unprecedented collection takes a hard-nosed look at the intercon-

nected threats of our global sustainability quandaryas well as the

most promising responses. The Post Carbon Readeris a valuable

resource for policymakers, college classrooms, and concerned

citizens.

r h is Senior Fellow in Residence at Post Carbon

Institute and the author of nine books, includingThe Partys Over

and Peak Everything. d l is the author ofPost Carbon

Cities.

Published by Watershed Media

PUBLISHED FALL 2010

544 pages, 6 x 9, 4 b/w photographs, 26 line illustrations

$21.95 paper 978-0-9709500-6-2

CITIES, TOWNS, AND SUBURBS: Toward Zero-Carbon Buildings by Hillary Brown

Documents

Transcript of CITIES, TOWNS, AND SUBURBS: Toward Zero-Carbon Buildings by Hillary Brown