What can we learn from D.C.’s green building law?
The following post is by Danielle Rodabaugh:
It’s no secret that decisions made in Washington, D.C., frequently lead the way for progressive industry regulation overhaul. This time, however, the overhaul only affects the district’s construction market rather than the national industry — at least for now.
D.C.'s green building law may have ripple effects elsewhere in the U.S.
The district’s Green Building Act of 2006 was a revolutionary piece of legislation that changed the expectations construction professionals in the district must meet. Since its enactment, construction professionals working in Washington, D.C., have been adjusting to more stringent green building regulations that apply to a wider range of projects than ever before.
The GBA didn’t fully go into effect until Jan. 1, 2012, however, and industry stakeholders continued to scrutinize it through December 2011. Before we delve into how the GBA could affect the future of green building across the country, let’s review the history of this controversial law and take a look at its current state.
The GBA requires that all non-residential buildings within the district larger than 50,000 square feet be built to meet LEED certification standards. Before the GBA, various state and local government agencies across the nation had required that certain publicly funded projects be LEED certified. For example, Colorado has required LEED certification on all state buildings since 2005. However, the GBA extended to include privately funded projects as well.
The U.S. Green Building Council developed Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) guidelines as a way to identify practical and measurable green building strategies. LEED guidelines focus on design, construction, operations and maintenance. Developers, owners and construction professionals can submit their projects for LEED certification, which verifies that a building, home or community was designed and built using techniques aimed at achieving high performance in certain areas of human and environmental health.
The most controversial aspect of the GBA was that it originally included a stipulation requiring contractors to purchase a performance bond guaranteeing their intention to comply with LEED. To put it simply, the bond would hold the contractor financially liable for building a structure that met the minimum LEED standards.
Although performance bonds are commonly required for construction projects, both public and private, the “green performance bond” type required by the GBA simply was not feasible.
Based on the GBA’s initial wording, if a structure failed to meet LEED certification standards, the government could make a claim on the bond to collect money that would be put in a district fund. Construction professionals, surety providers and contract lawyers began discussing how to best handle the new, strange bond requirement. Ultimately, surety providers argued against it.
Because so many parties are involved with any one construction project, surety professionals asserted that the blame could not solely be placed on the lead contractor. As such, they made it clear that the risk associated with such a bond would be far too great for them to back. The state of the GBA remained in limbo for years as rumors and speculation ensued. Finally, less than a month before the GBA was scheduled to go into full effect, the council passed the Green Building Compliance, Technical Corrections, and Clarifications Act of 2012 as an amendment to the GBA.
With the amendment in place, contractors can now choose one of four ways to guarantee that structures will meet LEED certification standards:
• deposit cash in an escrow account (in a financial institution within the district) and name the district on the account
• provide an irrevocable letter of credit from a financial institution authorized to do business in the district
• provide a surety bond secured by the applicant to ensure compliance
• submit a binding pledge that the applicant will fulfill the current LEED standards for commercial and institutional buildings at the certified level within 2 years of receipt of the certificate of occupancy
No matter which option contractors choose, they guarantee that their structures will meet LEED standards. If they fail to do so, they’ll be held accountable for the consequences, financial and otherwise.
When sweeping changes are made to construction standards, a ripple effect frequently follows. Contractors across the country should keep their ears open for discussions about new LEED certification requirements in other areas. As a construction professional, the best way to plan for the future is by learning from the past. Such is the case with the GBA.
Whether you agree or disagree with the GBA, I encourage you to make sure you’re informed of similar changes that could affect your local construction industry. Then, make sure your voice is heard. Those who spoke out against the initial wording of the GBA were successful in arguing their cases.
Knowledge is power; the more informed you are about green building expectations, the better prepared you’ll be to deal with the inevitable changes.
Danielle Rodabaugh is the director of educational outreach at SuretyBonds.com.
Got a green building start-up idea? Here’s help
The following post is by Kathleen O'Brien:
For innovative, entrepreneurial types, green building is a perfect field. It's not business as usual, and although some folks are claiming that green building is now mainstream because many new (and more and more existing buildings) have LEED plaques on them, sustainable building is not the norm. Not even close. Do you have a big idea you'd like to operationalize to help this movement along?
Being a smart innovator doesn't necessarily mean you don't need help mapping out a business to take your idea to market. I recently chatted with Michael "Luni" Libes, author of "The Next Step: Guiding You From Idea to Startup." Luni calls himself a "serial" entrepreneur with six start-ups himself, primarily focused on hyper-intelligent data gathering and mobility products and services — he founded GroundTruth, Inc., Medio Systems and 2WAY, for example.
After years of being asked how he "did" it, he decided to write a book about it. The book takes two "socially" responsible product ideas through their traces, from ideation to business launch and beyond: Bird Watch, a set of tiny radio tags to measure wildlife behavior, and Concrete Battery, an energy storage technology using low-tech flywheels. The book isn't philosophical, it assumes you have an idea that is socially conscious and you wish to bring it to market. As a social entrepreneur myself, it's a delight to see the process so clearly laid out.
The book was just the first step for Luni, as he is now an instructor in social entrepreneurship at the Bainbridge Graduate Institute, and the Entrepreneur in Residence Emeritus at UW's Center for Commercialization. His current "start-up" is aptly named Fledge, which he says is a "conscious company" incubator aimed at helping create companies "fill the unmet needs of conscious consumers." He also organizes social entrepreneurship weekends — he held two in 2012. These are fast-paced idea competition events. They are similar to the "slams" held at recent Living Future Conferences but longer and more intense and definitely more serious about testing ideas generated against the kind of real-world criteria that real-world start-ups have to face.
With the passage of state HB 2239 last year, it became legal to incorporate a for-profit that prioritizes its social or environmental mission over the conventional priority of shareholder profit. In a sense, it expanded the definition of "shareholders" to include all stakeholders (humans and otherwise), not just those who own a piece of the company. This legal basis, and the savvy to take a truly "good" idea to market provided by organizations like Fledge could make a difference for those of us in the green building field. We have long understood that green building can be good business, but some of us would appreciate help turning that philosophy into long term financial sustainability. (If I knew then, what I knew now...)
Kathleen O'Brien is a long time advocate for green building and sustainable development since before it was "cool." She lives in a green home, and drives a hybrid when she drives at all. She continues to provide consulting on special projects for O'Brien & Co., the firm she founded over 20 years ago, and provides leadership training and mentoring through her own conscious start-up: The Emerge Leadership Project.
Light recycler helps businesses dispose of fluorescent lights
The following post is by DJC staff:
People and businesses in Washington are now required to recycle fluorescent light bulbs and tubes. The new law covers residences as well as government, commercial, industrial, office and retail facilities.
Fluorescent tubes and compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) save energy but each light contains a small amount of mercury that can be harmful to humans and wildlife if it is not disposed of correctly. The mercury content in fluorescent tubes ranges from 3.5 milligrams to 8 milligrams or more for older lamps.
The most common types of lights that must be recycled include CFLs, fluorescent tubes and HID (high-intensity discharge) lights, such as mercury vapor, sodium vapor and metal halide lamps. It is now illegal to knowingly place mercury-containing lights in waste bins or landfills. All mercury-containing lights must be placed in a recycling container specifically designed to prevent the release of mercury. Mercury inside a light does not pose a concern while the light is in use and unbroken, but during disposal and waste handling, lamps are broken, releasing mercury vapor and potentially exposing waste handlers or others to mercury.
Mercury in the atmosphere is ultimately deposited back to the earth, rivers and lakes, where it can enter the food chain and accumulate in fish, which humans and other animals eat.
EcoLights was created in 1996 to recycle mercury-containing lights and both PCB and non-PCB ballasts. The company said it is a licensed “final destination” light recycler in Washington state.
Ecolights said almost every component of a fluorescent lamp can be recycled, including metal end caps, glass and the mercury phosphor powder. When lamps are recycled properly, they are crushed and the materials are separated under a continuous vacuum filtration process.
Glass, aluminum and phosphor powder are captured and recycled. Mercury phosphor powder is sent to a mercury retort for recovery of the mercury and rare earth metals in the powder.
EcoLights sells a pre-paid box for recycling. The company ships the box, protective inner bag, and instructions to users, who fill the box with lamps, and return it to EcoLights for recycling. EcoLights then e-mails a certificate of recycling to the user. The company said currently there are no fines or other legal consequences associated with non-compliance.
“EcoLights is committed to being a resource for helping businesses throughout the region understand and comply with the new law,” says Craig Lorch, EcoLights founder. “We want to make sure everyone is prepared for the transition.”
Information about the new law is available on the state Legislature website or at EcoLights.com.
Scrap metal demolition is green, but not always easy
The following post is from Elder Demolition:
About 40 percent of the solid waste produced in the U.S. comes from construction and demolition debris. In 1996, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported that the debris generated from construction and demolition projects totaled 136 million tons. Since then, this figure has increased by 25 percent. Building demolitions are responsible for about 48 percent of this waste, while renovations contribute about 44 percent. Since steel is one of the most popular materials used in construction, green scrap metal demolition is getting a second look.
Builders are diverting metals harvested during demolitions from landfills for reuse in new projects. Instead of tearing down a building as fast as possible, builders deconstruct them in order to salvage parts they can reuse, recycle or sell. Scrap metal recycling isn’t a new concept in the metal industry. Here’s why:
It reduces demand. Steel and other metals have valuable minerals in them, such as nickel and chromium. By choosing to recycle scrap metal waste, you can help reduce the demand for raw materials and the energy required to refine them.
It saves money. Often you can reuse the metal salvaged during a green demolition, thus reducing disposal fees. If there’s metal that you can’t repurpose, there’s the option of selling it or making a tax-deductible contribution to a non-profit building supply company.
You can earn green points. A green demolition may qualify your project for LEED points or a related certification. Builders can also earn points by planning new construction with a future green deconstruction in mind.
Salvaging scrap metal is a time- and work-intensive process. When dismantling an aluminum plant, for example, our company harvested 35,000 tons of structural steel. This involved using steel shears to cut the larger scraps into smaller pieces for transporting. Then the smaller pieces must be gathered and separated from the rest of the construction debris — in many cases, this requires a crew to comb through the site and separate the materials by hand, which is dangerous as well as time-consuming. We’ve found the use of magnets to be the safest and most efficient way to extract scrap metal from a site.
One rookie error demolition companies commonly make is not properly sorting the different types of metal. It’s usually fairly obvious that any copper, aluminum or other precious metals should be separated. However, once these materials have been removed, many crews will simply gather the remaining metals into one load. That means heavy structural steel often gets mixed together with ductwork, metal wall studs, light fixtures and other less valuable metals. At the scrap yard, just a few pieces of these undesirable materials can diminish the value of the heavy steel as much as 20 percent — that’s $25-50 per ton. When you’re hauling 10-12 tons of scrap metal for resale, this can be a costly mistake.
For more information about scrap metal demolition, and site management, stormwater management and eco-friendly opportunities in the area, the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center and the EPA provide a list of green building resources and certification programs available in Oregon and Washington.
Portland-based Elder Demolition has experience with scrap metal demolition, scrap metal recycling and LEED-certified green demolitions.
New module from Marysville solar manufacturer
The following post is by Silicon Energy:
Silicon Energy, a manufacturer of solar photovoltaic modules in Marysville, said it is releasing the Next Generation Cascade Series PV module.
The first generation came out in 2007.
The new module uses less embedded material, which improves performance and output.
Here are some features of the new module:
· Anti-reflective coating on the front glass
· Advanced encapsulant
· Lighter weight mounting hardware
· About 30% fewer roof penetrations to reduce costs and speed up installation
· 12 AWG wire for reduced voltage drop
· Amphenol connectors with a higher current rating and increased reliability
· American Fittings Raintight conduit connectors that improve mechanical and electrical bonding
Gary Shaver, president of Silicon Energy said, “Our relationships with suppliers and research laboratories allows our engineering team to integrate innovative concepts and advanced material sciences into our products. We’re excited to see how architects and building designers integrate our new, even more attractive Cascade Series PV modules into the building envelope and overhead structures to achieve contemporary and functional designs.”
The module has a double-glass, open-frame design to shed water, dirt and snow. Airflow behind the module keeps the system cooler, which boosts performance. Custom mounting hardware colors are available.
Silicon Energy is shipping the Next Generation module to Washington customers and will introduce it in other markets early next year.
Silicon Energy was founded in 2007, and is located in Washington and Minnesota.
Crunch the numbers and preservation wins
The following post is by Kathleen O'Brien:
New is not always better.
I have to confess that I've been a little put off by local historic preservationists self-righteously declaring that "preservation" equals sustainability and leaving it at that. Yes, yes, I understand that recycling buildings intuitively makes sense, but since sustainability sometimes asks us to think counter-intuitively, I needed more. At a recent Sustainable Cities Roundtable conducted by King County's Green Tools Program, I got what I needed.
The previous owner used stacks of wooden pallets to keep the ceiling from falling in on this 104-year-old railroad building in Spokane, but McKinstry bought it and spent $20 million to create high-tech office space for its 150 Inland Northwest employees.
Robert Young, PE, LEED AP, is professor of architecture and director of the Historic Preservation Program at the University of Utah, and author of the new Island Press release, "Stewardship of the Built Environment." He was guest speaker at the Roundtable. Young provided some very satisfying arguments for promoting preservation and building reuse as a sustainability strategy. In making his arguments, he gives equal weight to what he terms SEE (or what some of us have called the "three E's"): social, economic, and environmental factors, and defines stewardship of the built environment as "balancing the needs of contemporary society and its impact on the built environment with the ultimate effects on the natural environment."
The Historic Preservationists have been at their best when justifying conservation due to social factors, and Young does speak to this. What I appreciated is that he also addresses environmental and economic factors in an analytical but highly accessible manner. One of the areas he touched on in his talk was the idea of calculating energy recovery as part of understanding the energy performance of preservation vs. new construction. As Young notes in his book, "the argument for measuring embodied energy to justify the retention of a building is (still) met with skepticism." He claims this is largely because embodied energy is considered a "sunk cost" and therefore not part of decisions about future expenses. I think he would also say it's because of our societal preference for the glitter of "new" vs. the practicality of "existing," which may not be part of the accounting equation, but certainly humming in the background.
In his talk, Young used his own home to compare the energy recovery periods required to simply perform an energy upgrade to his home, to abandon the home and build a new one in the suburbs, or to demolish and rebuild in place. When he accounted for the embodied energy in the new buildings (whether in place or in the suburbs), the energy to demolish the existing building, and operating energy required for the remodeled or new building, it became clear that the remodel was the best choice when considering true energy performance. In scenarios provided in his book, energy recovery calculations result in recovery periods that exceed "the expected useful lives of many buildings being constructed today." And this is without calculating in the transportation energy expenses that are likely to accrue when the new building is built in a greenfield out in the suburbs.
In the economic realm, Young compared the job creation resulting from highway, new, and rehab construction. In jobs per million dollars spent, rehab wins again. Although a small part of the construction activity (Young estimated 5%), rehab creates roughly 5 more jobs per million dollars spent than highway construction, and 2 more jobs per million dollars spent on new construction. If I am interpreting Young's figures correctly, just by turning our economic recovery lens on rehab and away from highways and new construction we could potentially create between 6-12% more jobs per million dollars spent on construction. (And we might actually reduce the environmental, social, and economic negative impacts of sprawl -- even if it's "green")!
Young's talk introduced some great food for thought, but I'm so glad to be reading his book. In his concluding chapter, "Putting it All Together," he provides a list of "challenges" for stewards of the built environment, ranging from advocating outcome-based codes (since prescriptive codes are based primarily on new construction practices) to presenting project lessons learned (both positive and negative) to "decision makers and policy shapers who mediate building preservation and reuse policies." Lots to work on.
Kathleen O'Brien is a long time advocate for green building and sustainable development since before it was "cool." She lives in a green home, and drives a hybrid when she drives at all. She continues to provide consulting on special projects for O'Brien & Co., the firm she founded over 20 years ago, and provides leadership training and mentoring through her legacy project: The Emerge Leadership Project.
When greening your office space, don’t overlook the plugs
The following post is by the New Buildings Institute:
To help commercial building owners and occupants get control of the growing amount of energy used by office equipment and other electronic devices, New Buildings Institute released the Plug Load Best Practices Guide. It is based on research done by Ecova and NBI for the California Energy Commission's Public Interest Energy Research Program, and gives advice on how to save money by reducing energy use in offices.
Plug loads account for 15-20 percent of electricity use on average.
On average, plug loads account for 15-20 percent of electricity use. For offices that have already improved the efficiency of lighting and HVAC systems, that number can be as much as 50 percent. The impact of plug loads can be reduced by up to 40 percent through a combination of no- and low-cost steps such as:
• aggressive power management settings
• inexpensive hardware controllers like timers and advanced plug strips
• occupant-based strategies
When the time comes to replace equipment, buying new energy-efficient models can also reduce energy bills. The guide also gives advice on how to manage energy used by computer server rooms.
According to NBI Senior Project Manager Amy Cortese, "Owners, tenants, purchasing managers, IT directors and building occupants all have a role in managing plug load energy use. Our goal with the Plug Load Best Practices Guide is to help them establish a workable plan for cutting that energy use."
The largest plug load energy users are computers, monitors, imaging equipment, server rooms and computer peripherals. The guide outlines steps for selecting the highest efficiency equipment for a given job when it's time for replacement. "Simple equipment upgrades and making sure that control settings in most office equipment are enabled can make a huge difference," said Cortese.
"Through this research, we found that occupants can and should play a significant role in managing energy use," she said. "This guide will help office managers engage tenants and occupants in learning about these simple measures and ultimately reducing their own energy and utility costs."
The Plug Load Best Practices Guide is part of Advanced Buildings, a set of tools and resources designed to help improve the energy performance of commercial buildings. Funding support for development of the guide was provided by the California Energy Commission's PIER Program.
New Buildings Institute works with commercial building professionals and the energy industry to promote better energy performance in buildings.
You don’t need new windows to save energy and money
The following post is by Brad Kahn:
It’s a question many owners of older homes have asked: Should I replace my single-pane windows or refurbish them? With a torrent of direct mail selling new windows, many people are led to believe the best option to save money and energy is to replace the old windows with new.
Now a new report from Seattle’s Preservation Green Lab sheds light on an answer. And it may be a bit surprising.
The report, Saving Windows, Saving Money: Evaluating the Energy Performance of Window Retrofit and Replacement, concludes that adding storm windows and cellular shades can deliver essentially the same energy savings as full window replacement — at a fraction of the cost.
Applying 80 years of research using energy simulations, the research team found that saving and retrofitting old windows is the more cost effective way to achieve energy savings and to lower a home’s carbon footprint.
Nationally, home energy consumption accounts for 20 percent of total energy use, and Americans spent more than $17 billion on heating and cooling, so the potential impacts of the research are large.
This chart summarizes the key findings across cities and climate zones. The bottom line: Don’t assume you need new windows to save energy and money.
The Preservation Green Lab, a project of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, conducted the research, in partnership with Cascadia Green Building Council and Ecotope. It was funded by the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training.
For a great slideshow about the research and links to the full report visit: http://blog.preservationnation.org/2012/10/02/10-on-tuesday-10-things-you-should-know-about-retrofitting-historic-windows.
Brad Kahn is president of Groundwork Strategies and works with the Preservation Green Lab.
MCA holds its first ‘innovation event’
The following post is by DJC staff:
The Mechanical Contractors Association of Western Washington held its inaugural Mechanical Innovation conference in Seattle last week, with a speech by Denis Hayes of the Bullitt Foundation about his group’s net-zero headquarters under construction on Capitol Hill.
Hayes spoke about the worldwide market for net-zero buildings using his project as an example.
The members of MCA are union plumbing, piping and HVAC contractors.
About 300 people attended the conference, which included sessions about embracing change, innovation and technology. The tech talk was by David Burczyk of Trimble Navigation, a Sunnyvale, Calif.-based firm that provides advanced positioning systems that are used in a variety of fields including surveying and construction.
There was also a panel discussion about sustainable built environments and the participants are shown here: Yancy Wright (Sellen Sustainability), Craig Norsen (The Seneca Group), Robert Willis (PSF Mechanical), Ted Sturdevant (Washington State Department of Ecology), Steve Doub (Miller-Hull Partnership) and moderator Robert Tucker.
Tucker introduced and questioned the panelists about sustainable buildings. They talked about how and why to get involved, as well as the challenges and benefits of such types of projects.
Tucker also delivered the keynote address: “Innovation is Everybody’s Business.”
The breakout sessions included a leadership talk about "Unlocking Your Innovative Smarts" by Bill Stainton, who shared tools and techniques to help people think more creatively in problem-solving, embracing change and unleashing innovation. A technical session presented by Norman Strong of the Miller-Hull Partnership gave a glimpse into the direction of the AEC industry through the eyes of an architect.
25 islanders pitch in to put solar on Bainbridge City Hall
The following post is by Kathleen O'Brien:
In August, a 71.28 kW Community Solar Project installed on the roof of the Bainbridge Island City Hall went live. My husband and I are two of 25 Bainbridge Islanders participating in the project.
In a recent communication from Joe Deets, project manager and principal of Community Solar Solutions with his wife, Tammy Deets, we learned that despite a few initial inverter failures that have been quickly addressed, the system is actually performing better than average.
Jake Wade of Puget Sound Energy said, "The production at City Hall is higher than expected...A good south facing array will usually produce about 1000 kWh per year out of each kW installed. We typically see 120 kWh/kW in August. We show the array at 71.28 kW, so we'd expect 8554 kW out of your system. The Bainbridge Island array actually produced 9950 from 8/2 to 8/31."
Good news of course, but there's nothing "average" about this project. Our household invested in the project because it combines an opportunity to support our community using a sustainable technology and an innovative local investment model. Northwest SEED's website says, "Community energy brings a higher level of economic benefit to local communities than commercially developed projects. Various studies have attempted to quantify this additional benefit, and generally predict 2-5 times the economic benefit will be provided by a project with 100% local equity ownership, versus one owned by an out of area corporation...The actual impact will vary with every community and project, but generally the higher the local ownership stake, the greater the economic benefit to the local community."
It took several years for this project to come to fruition. The seed was planted during a community gathering organized by Joe and Tammy in 2005. But the enabling policy to make the investment possible and attractive to participants was not enacted until 2010 after years of lobbying by Washington State Senator Phil Rockefeller (also a Bainbridge Island resident).
Washington state’s Community Solar Enabling Act provides direct production incentives to owners of community solar projects up to 75 kW. The law grants community solar projects $0.30 for every kWh produced (twice the incentive for individual on-site production). Projects are eligible for incentive multipliers for using modules and inverters manufactured in Washington, encouraging local manufacturing as well as local ownership. To qualify for these community solar incentives, projects must be located on local government property, requiring innovative partnerships between governments, solar developers and community members interested in supporting solar power.
For the City Hall project, all of the above applies. The city of Bainbridge Island agreed to lease its roof (with its fabulous southern orientation) to the community-based investor group, in return for reducing the city's electricity costs (potentially by half). All 297 panels and 30 inverters are from the Bellingham manufacturer Itek Energy, making it Itek's largest single project to date. Seattle-based Sunergy Systems was the contractor selected to install the project.
Part of Community Solar's appeal is that even when you don't have the right site for solar, you can invest in a project that does. Ron and Ann Morford wanted to install solar cells on their roof, but shading from nearby trees foiled their plans. Instead, they were able to invest in the City Hall project because "it was a great way to make an investment in sustainable energy, partner with others from our community, provide much needed savings for our local government, and get a future return on our investment." For the Morfords, it was a "win-win-win" project. It also was a reasonably priced investment, affording participation by regular working folks, such as my husband et moi!
Hopefully this project has paved the way for more like it.
A kiosk will be installed soon in the City Hall lobby to provide information and up to date data on energy production. It will also be the first stop on the Bainbridge Island Solar Tour on Friday from 1 to 4 p.m. You can see the installation and ask questions. The 2012 Solar Tour is Saturday. For more information, go to: http://solarwa.org/2012tour/sites/bainbridge-island.
Kathleen O'Brien is a long time advocate for green building and sustainable development since before it was "cool." She lives in a green home, and drives a hybrid when she drives at all. She continues to provide consulting on special projects for O'Brien & Company, the firm she founded over 20 years ago, and provides leadership training and mentoring through her legacy project: The Emerge Leadership Project.
DJC Green Building Blog
Welcome to the Daily Journal of Commerce Green Building Blog. Our focus is on green building issues in Seattle, the Pacific Northwest and anywhere that might interest you. If you have any comments or questions, please email maudes@djc.com.
Opinions expressed by bloggers are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.
Polls
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.Recent Posts
- What can we learn from D.C.’s green building law?
- Got a green building start-up idea? Here’s help
- Light recycler helps businesses dispose of fluorescent lights
- Scrap metal demolition is green, but not always easy
- New module from Marysville solar manufacturer
Recent Comments
- JakeyM on New module from Marysville solar manufacturer
- JakeyM on Silver lining of the recession: better homes?
- JakeyM on Solar home tour tomorrow
- JakeyM on The 10 best green jobs
- JakeyM on GreenBuild Day 2: bifacial solar panels and natural swimming pools that use plants, not chlorine!
Energy information
- BetterBricks
- Earth Advantage Blog
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Washington State University Extension Energy Program
Green blogs
- Best Green Blogs
- Building Capacity Blog
- Building Seattle Green Blog
- City Tank
- Climate Solutions
- Earth Advantage Blog
- GreenbuildingsNYC
- GreenFab News and Media
- Greenversations
- Inhabitat
- Jetson Green
- Landscape and Urbanism
- Metaefficient
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Portland Architecture
- SeattleScape
- The Greenworkplace
- Thinkspace
Green Building organizations
- Built Green
- Cascadia Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council
- City of Seattle Green Building
- City of Seattle Green Building Program
- DJC.com
- Environmental Services Directory for Washington State
- Green Infrastructure Wiki
- King County GreenTools
- Lifecycle Building Challenge
- Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Resources
- Puget Sound Partnership
- Seattle Great City Initiative
- Whole Building Design Guide
Green events in the Seattle area
- AIA Seattle
- Cascadia Green Building Council Events Calendar
- Master Builders of King and Shohomish County Built Green Events Calendar and News
- Seattle Department of Planning and Development Events