|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Kevin Matthews
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 614
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
svenglezz-ASMEIL
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 99
Location: Toronto
|
 Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 5:37 pm Post subject: |
    |
|
Who is to say that buildings we're not already "green" per say.
For example if you use a heat-pump system the system can transfer the load from one side of the building to the other, and heat-pumps been around long long time....that's just one example, of many.
I believe our construction and manufacturing striving for efficiency is working using the free market to drive the change. Just look at your everyday gas furnace for a home, very efficient but was not always the case.
In my opinion the mechanical and electrical engineer is the LEED it's kind'a redundant, no?
If you have a project and want energy saving etc. let the engineer know at the beginning of the project and they be happy to provide you with comparisons of different m/e systems and saving in energy etc. But the price of systems effect the projects profit so, some projects can withstand the "up-front" costs on some m/e systems and/or the “Cadillac” system over the “Economical” system.
Plus many building can always “upgrade” the systems at no cost to the building owner, in return for the energy saving over so many years, to pay back for the “upgrade” of the system.
I see 2 main markets that should be address more:
1 the glazing vs wall ratio, very very important and can have the largest effect on long term energy use, esp. on air-conditioning and the triple-glass with heavy tint should be used more, but again “costs”, not to mention using shading devices.
2 Solar Panels and again cost vs the elect. load required.
That's my 2 btu's output 
Sven
_________________
ASMEIL Drawings and M&E Designs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sutcac
Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 16
Location: Arroyo Grande, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| svenglezz-ASMEIL wrote: | | But the price of systems effect the projects profit so, some projects can withstand the "up-front" costs on some m/e systems and/or the “Cadillac” system over the “Economical” system. |
One of the main things that ought first be considered in this so-called "green" movement is this concept of profit. Regardless of any other consideration, I think we need to start considering "profit" in a much more long-term sense and to consider the actual life-cycle assessment of every design decision and not just the "up front" "costs".
For too long we have just steamed ahead with construction whose initially hidden, long-term costs are now coming home to roost.
This guy, I think, has some very intelligent things to say about a new paradigm on the manufacture of just about anything, not just structures-
http://www.- abuse alert -/blog/
_________________
Bryce Engstrom:Architect, A.I.A., General Building Contractor, LEED AP
www.engstromarchitecture.com
www.central-coast-project-design-planning-guides.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WalkerARCHITECTS
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 105
|
| Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 8:34 pm Post subject: Sustaining Green Practice |
|
|
Sustainability is a much better term than "green". Simple common sense suggests that waste is bad. Nature wastes nothing! So sustainability is a desired state where built environment puts back as much as it takes and in a manner that heals the world and maintains the equilibrium of our living world. A good but elusive idea.
The Solar Imperative posted again separately this week, establishes the urgency to achieve this equilibrium and firmly grip this idea. To accomplish this will require a deep philosophical foundation and enduring principles.
We build our cities one building at a time and most if not all are built upon some business speculation of making a profit. Market oriented housing will always apply more significance to affordability to make the sale rather than "affordability over life cycle" to heal the city and reduce the carbon footprint.
Can we define a handful of principles that will guide us in our efforts to bring clarity to "GREEN" and sustain the conceptual framework with-in practical limits? It is not likely anyone will build buildings to be sold at market in a price competition with competitors and simultaneously construct a zero carbon building. How do we close the gap, without regulation?
Should we trust free enterprise or should we adopt an international sustainability code?
TLW |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
