It’s Monday and already my mind is on Friday because it’s that dashingly loud holiday called FOURTH OF JULY!

But today I found another reason to think about the holiday, due to an article in my inn box from the Environmental News Network called, ‘8 ways to green your independence day’ by Earth 911.

Greening your Fourth of July? The idea seems outlandish and obvious at the same time, but the article’s suggestions aren’t.

Here are some of the article’s (shortened) ideas:

Celebrate outside to save energy. 

Drink lots of water in large containers. Water will keep you hydrated and using reusable containers will prevent lots of plastic water bottles from ending up in a landfill.

Check to make sure the beach you want to go to is open before you go so you don’t waste gas (FYI all beaches in the city of Seattle are open and awaiting your sun bathing self!)

Use eco-friendly fireworks. Apparently they exist … if you want to find them search for fireworks rich in nitrogen. For more, see the article.

Do you have a Fourth of July suggestion? How about a fourth of July green building suggestion? Mine would be use fireworks far away from buildings so they don’t catch on fire and cause unnecessary rebuilding. Pretty good for an off the cuff idea, hmm?

Environment meetings are interesting but they can tend to be a tad dry. To make them a little more interesting, some groups are adding… well alcohol, to make the party rock.

The only problem? Both these parties are on the same date of July 17!!! What a time to get your eco-groove on.

The Northwest Environmental Business Council hosts a rooftop mixer from 5 to 7:30 on the seventh floor outdoor deck of K&L Gates. This party promises hobnobbing with NEBC board of directors, NEBC members and other colleagues. It also features two drinks per person and hors d’oeuvres by Pyramid Catering. It costs $35 for NEBC members and $45 for non members.

That same day from 5 to 8 p.m., there’s the Seattle Great City Initiative’s Summer Street Scene Party. This one is at the South Lake Union Discovery Center and features food and drink from local companies, local musicians, an “urban design corner” of locally designed sustainability projects, exhibitors on alternative energy and transportation choices, and a “street for people” competition” (click here for more on that).  As far as I can tell, this one is free.

Unfortunately, like I said, both are on the same day so you’re going to have to choose one… unless you’re a particularly active party-goer. Sadly, I won’t be at either as I’ll be on vacation that day, so if you go, tell me how it went!

If you, like me, can’t make it to either, there’s also monthly Greendrinks, which on July 8 only will be hosted in multiple locations. To see if green people are gathering at a bar in your Seattle neighborhood, click here.

Happy eco partying and networking!

I have a story in today’s DJC on the year’s 10 best new green products, according to (our kind of competitor) the Sustainable Industries Journal… but were they really the best?

The products range from odd to ordinary, at least in what their function is. Here are three of them:

I’d never heard of the Solar Tracking Skylight by Solar Tracking Skylights of Chicago but it sure sounds interesting. It’s a self-contained, self-managed skylight with mirrors that move to adapt to the sun’s position. It’s designed to provide light all day, not just when the sun is shining directly above. They’re half the size of typical skylights and customers include Whole Foods, Wal-Mart and the U.S. Military. … and they also look like they came out of a space movie! Yea for space movie products! (If you want to see a video of how it works, visit the Web site at the above link).

Lamberts Channel Glass by Glasfrabriks Lamberts of Bavaria, Germany is a self-supporting column that can be used as interior or exterior walls. They’re made from 40 percent recycled glass and are decidedly pretty, judges said. At left is the product in use at the Nelson Atkins Museum of Art in Kansas City, Mo. One judge, Clark Brockman of Sera Architects in Portland, said, “Let’s just face it, it’s sexy.”

Sexy. Usually a word NOT associated with green building products (or projects for that matter). But judge for yourself from the picture at left….

Then there’s local winner Salvaged Hardwood Tables by Urban Hardwoods of Seattle. Urban Hardwoods has salvaged 3,000 trees, that would have otherwise ended up being wasted,  and turned the wood into tables. This one was salvaged from Kirkland and costs $4,200 for the tabletop.

But like it or not, these are all the opinions of a handful of (granted knowledgeable) judges. Perhaps you too are a judge in disguise. If so, tell me about the best green product not on the list. Post your comments below.

SI assures us all the products are real green products rather than examples of great greenwashing. But how well green products work is also controversial. For more on that topic, click the tag green materials below and read the entry ‘Green products not so great, says Gehry specifier,’ and comments.

Other blog posts on this at Jetson Green and Portland Architecture.

These are three of the 10. To learn about the other seven, read my story here. 

Over the last few days two articles in New York Times affiliated newspapers caught my eye:

Spanish Region Limits Golf Development  by Kevin Brass in the International Herald Tribune is about how the government in Andalusia in “golf-happy Spain” has passed a new law restricting the development of golf courses. One of the golf courses there is pictured at right. The regulations limit how many houses a developer can build around a course and require new courses to use recycled water for irrigation.  It’s an interesting story about the relationship between a crashing housing market, “thirsty” golf courses in an area prone to droughts, and houses.

Plus, it’s always amazing to me how controversial golf courses can be. Doubt me? Read Alex Shoumatoff’s The Thistle and the Bee from Vanity Fair’s green issue.

The New Trophy Home, Small and Ecological by Felicity Barringer in the New York Times is basically a total overview of LEED for homes.

The Hollywood house profiled in the article is LEED platinum and $2.8 million. Kelly Meyer, one of the people behind the house, points out green houses can be stylish, while the article compares LEED platinum to Prada… but not all LEED homes, platinum or not, cost $2.8 million. Sheesh. Some are just Besty Johnson or Eddie Bauer. Though they do tend to be a tad more expensive…  locally Pride + Johnson’s Ashworth Cottages (also platinum and pictured below) cost between $739,000 and $950,000. Read my story on that here.

Barringer highlights LEED for its certification process, but doesn’t mention other programs, like Energy Star homes , are third party certified too. And while describing what third party certification is and how much it costs, there is no mention of why it is needed (to prove that everything works like it says it does) or where some people say it falls short (verifiers don’t actually see buildings, just read and verify the documents).

It barely touches on LEED as a marketing and selling tool… Like it or not, marketing is why lots and lots of people are doing LEED projects. For more on this, read the Building Seattle Green blog’s overview of a study that tackles that topic here.

I’m also interested in why the USGBC isn’t asked to comment. Then again looking at a topic like this in two pages seems momentous to me to begin with. And the reporter did cover a lot of ground. Judge for yourself.

Happy reading everyone!

First off, let’s be clear. I’m not fear mongering, my point isn’t to scare people. But the doomsday scenario of China’s taking over the U.S. housing industry the same way Asia took over the U.S. auto industry was a driving factor behind Parr Lumber’s development of a building science-based efficient home product. 

In case you missed it, I discussed the product (and Asian threat, real or not) in an article last Thursday here.

The product is called the Parr High Performance System. Parr takes an architect’s plans, tweaks them, builds pieces of a house’s frame at a climate controlled plant and assembles the building’s envelope on site. It’s quick, easy and they say more efficient.

Parr says it reduces energy bills, reduces job site lumber waste by 75 percent, shortens the construction schedule, and provides cleaner air and consistent room temperature.

Oh, by the way, Toyota Housing Services has already entered the housing market in San Antonio, Texas.

Apparently, Toyota has been in the housing business since the 1970s. For more information on what the Japanese modular homes look like, see below or click here.

Nate Bond, director of sales at Parr, says houses have been built the same way since the stud frame home was invented in the 1800s. He says something needs to change to keep American homes competitive and efficient. If Asia brings a great, cheap, modular house to the mass American market, he said, “They would take over the U.S. housing market without firing a shot.” What do you think? Is he right?

If he is right, could efficient easy homes be the answer?

For an overview of the housing market from a mortgage planning perspective, check out this post called Brian’s Blog O-Parr-Tunity here.

For more on the Parr product, where the idea came from, how it works and building science, read my story in the DJC here.

Being a reporter, you learn a lot about your beat. But what you write on a day to day basis is often influenced by the press releases you get. It’s unfortunate, but I simply have not found a way to be in five different places at once. Hence, a good PR person, whether private or government, can be a reporter’s best friend (or worst nightmare).

Today I got a press release from the city of Kirkland on its sustainability efforts. So, just for being proactive, I’m going to tell you, dear reader, about all the things Kirkland is telling me.

First off, I don’t live in Kirkland so I can’t really understand the green things that they’re doing… because I don’t see it with my own eyes. But I do know that they’re making a concentrated effort to become a green city. I also know other cities have complained that they don’t have the time or money to think about green issues because they’re thinking about things like affordable housing. Does the balance matter? You decide.

Recently, Kirkland comissioned a survey to study the “sustainability of its economy.” Though I’m not positive what that means, it’s certainly something. According to that press release the survey wanted to figure out where residents shop, what eco-sound products, services or practices should be available or practiced in Kirkland, etc. (P.S., Kirkland people, I’d love to learn more about these results.)

So here’s what Kirkland wants you to know about it’s green-ness: it has won three awards recently for everything from smart planning to counting its greenhouse gas emissions.

It won a 2008 Smart Communities Award from Gov. Chris Gregoire for city-wide zoning regulations that allow for cottage, carriage and two/three unit homes. It won a ICLEI milestone award for conducting a greenhouse gas emission inventory, after which Kirkland adopted reduction goals of 10 percent below 2005 emission levels by 2012, 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 2007 levels by 2050. And it won a Cascade Land Conservancy Stewardship Legal Award for the Green Kirkland Partnership. The partnership commits resources to remove invasive plants and replant parks with native trees and shrubs.

So is Kirkland really as green as it sounds, or does it just have a great pr machine? If you live there I’d appreciate your input, as I don’t and therefore, do not know.

Want to know more about Kirkland’s amazing green-ness? Check out the official site here. More for life in Kirkland? Check out The Eastside Life blog here. Want Kirkland news? Check out Kirkland Views here. And the Kirkland Highlands Real Estate Buzz has some green news here.

Live in another non-Seattle city that can never seem to get out of the Seattle sustainability shadow? Tell me about what your city’s doing below, or e-mail me at katiez@djc.com. I’d love to know what I don’t.

To learn more about the Smart Communities Awards, read the DJC’s story here.

Seattle projects represent a third of nine prestigious awards given out in London yesterday by the Urban Land Institute and the Financial Times.  Winners are The Cascade Land Conservancy, Kennedy Associates and Vulcan.

The Seattle winners are in good company: a fellow winner is the city of Greensburg, Kansas (at right), the current poster child for just how far a city can go to rebuild itself green. If you don’t already know this story, it’s truly a fascinating one that is on its way to becoming a Leonardo DiCaprio-voiced documentary TV show.

Greensburg was a small farming town with a population of 1,389 when 90 percent of its building stock was destroyed by a tornado in 2007. The citizens of Greensburg used the traumatic incident as an opportunity and are rebuilding it as sustainably as they can.

But there’s no place like home and the Seattle winners are also an interesting mix.  We’ve got Vulcan, and if you haven’t heard about Vulcan’s green accomplishments (and you’re from this area) you might be living under a rock. The team is redeveloping South Lake Union as a pilot program for LEED for neighborhood development and uses a lot of green features, etc.

There’s the Cascade land Conservancy who is well known in these parts and won for its 100-year visioning exercise to preserve 1.3 million acres of forest and farmland through incentivizing smart growth.

And there’s Kennedy Associates who operates under the idea that buildings should be developed and managed sustainably because they have a competitive advantage over traditional structures.

The point of the awards was to honor global examples of “ongoing programs that exhibit new ideas and perspectives for best practices in sustainable land use.” Each winner highlights the concept of sustainability in real estate.

It’s some pretty interesting stuff. If you’re interested, check out the winners here. And if you want to read more on what Vulcan’s doing in this area, check out the DJC’s stories. Go here for info on the Westlake/Terry building, go here for Vulcan’s sustainable philosophy, go here for Alley24 (pictures above left) or click here for their award-winning pull-apart sales center.

I’ve spent the last week in Boston and New York, riding subways that people in the Pacific Northwest can only dream about.

But while riding those subways (which are largely, at least in NYC, responsible for why the average person’s carbon footprint is so low) it struck me that green is becoming mainstream so quickly, it’s becoming many things to many different people. And often, because the message isn’t defined, it gets lost.

It happens in the definition of a “green building:” really, does LEED make a building green? What about a regular building that uses Energy Star appliances and PVC-free paint…. that’s in the middle of nowhere?

It happens in materials: FSC wood… is it really green to use South American or European wood, ship it to Asia to be milled and ship it back to use in your Seattle home?

And in happens in advertisements. Take the subway in NYC for example. On one train, overhead signs urged riders to recycle newspapers in recycling bins. On another, overhead signs begged newspaper readers to just throw their papers away to keep the subway clean. If you’re going to advocate one message, which is more important? Recycling or cleanliness?

That example represents the entire green movement. There are so many different messages out there, it’s easy to get lost. Especially if you’re a new “convert,” it’s really easy to be misled. Sometimes it’s intentional “greenwashing,” sometimes it’s just plain confusing.

For Earth Day this year, I got a press release from Horizon Air about how flying between Portland and Seattle was more eco-friendly than driving. I got another from Fairmont Hotels and Resorts and Lexus Hybrid Living on eco-friendly luxury suites in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., that are “the ultimate cosmopolitan experience for environmentally aware travelers.” Guests get organic towels, robes and free use of the Lexus LS 600h hybrid.

Is that really green? Who’s to say. The truth is it’s such a new field and word that just about anything can be spun the right way. And often, what really is “green” just gets lost in the spinning.

To learn more about greenwashing, click the tab below. To see what consumers think about “green” products or share your reviews, check out this site.

When talking density in the Pacific Northwest, Seattle is inevitably compared to Vancouver, BC. Heck, all you have to do is drive through both cities and the differences are staggeringly obvious: Seattle has its traditional tiny section of skyscrapers, all of downtown Vancouver IS skyscrapers.

…. And Vancouver is often lauded for its density. I myself have looked at the two cities (to see past posts, look under tag Vancouver BC) and wondered why Seattle can’t do some of the density wonders Vancouver can. But a recent sprawl analysis from the Seattle-based think tank Sightline says Vancouver’s leadership in smart growth is slipping.

Boiling it down, the report says that in the 1990s, 67 percent of Vancouver’s growth was in compact neighborhoods while between 2001 and 2006, compact growth slipped to 56 percent of new urban and suburban development.

(I don’t know what Seattle’s numbers are in this field).

To conduct the study, Sightline mapped population density trends in the greater Vancouver area using data from the last four Canadian censuses.

Clark Williams-Derry wrote the report. This is a warning signal, rather than an alarm bell, he said. “Greater Vancouver is still a smart growth leader. But in light of BC’s ambitious climate goals and the rising costs of gasoline, the Lower Mainland should redouble its efforts to foster neighborhoods where residents can walk, bike, or use transit to for their daily travel.”

To see the report, go here. To see an animated sprawl map or where exactly sprawl is growing, click here.

Vancouver also has a very nifty Web site totally dedicated to its push for density, which it calls ‘EcoDensity’. To see it, go here. To read about the local fight for and against EcoDensity, go here or here.

P.S. Readers: I will be out of town for a few days so if you don’t see any new posts, now you know why!!!

This week, I (and a packed crowd at Seattle City Hall) heard Svend Auken, Denmark’s former minister for energy and the environment, speak about everything from energy to economics to the U.S.’s responsibility in a climate-conscious world (sign a post Kyoto agreement, lead the way).

Then, I sat down with him in a one-on-one interview to focus his attention a little bit more on buildings. What should we do, I asked? How should the construction industry attack the problem of a changing world?

His answer?  Government.

Government, he said, needs to make very, very strict rules and make it clear to people what they want out of a building. A good way to encourage that, he said, is by requiring an energy goal per square foot of a building rather than a whole-building goal. Once the goal is set, the industry will follow.

Of course government in Denmark is managed differently than government in Seattle and Washington. On multiple occasions, for example, Diane Sugimura, DPD’s director, has expressed exasperation at creating a balance between energy codes and letting untested technologies be used.  As a city government, she’s said, you don’t want to just start using something that might be more efficient but hasn’t been adequately tested. In Denmark, you can be fairly creative as long as you achieve the end energy goal.

But Auken said government has to be very strong on this. Yes, people will moan for a while, he said, but in the end it will make them more creative and will be more profitable (especially in an age of rising oil costs where energy bills are sure to “skyrocket”).

“Once you let architects think in terms of energy efficiency, they get more creative,” he said. “Architects love to do low energy, it’s so much more fun.”

How about it architects? Are energy efficient buildings (like London’s BedZED project above) more fun or a pain in the bum?

For more on Denmark, read my post from last week (click tag ‘Scandinavia’ below). For more on Auken’s talk, what Denmark did and how we could do it, check out my story here.