In case you missed it, the news coming out of Seattle the last four months has not so covertly been undercut by one single, shining topic…. (no, not the Sonics!)… disposable bags!

That’s right. Way back in April, Mayor Nickels decided to wage war against the mighty plastic and paper grocery bag. Since then, it has grown into legend and become the most important story on everybody’s lips.

Today, that war has ended. As of January 1, if you use a plastic or paper grocery bag from a drug,   convenience, or grocery store… you will be charged 20 cents per bag.

You might think I’m being flippant (and ok, maybe a part of me is) but really, I’m only half joking. The news that this topic has generated since April… is a tad unbelievable. Doubt me? In the Seattle Times, everyone from Danny Westneat to Nancy Leson have chimed in, never mind the actual news stories. Want blogs? Try The Stranger, WorldChanging Seattle, Greenhuman…. you get the point (then again I’m also culpable as this is now the second time I’ve posted about this on the blog. hmmmm). Want to read the press release, check out the Rainier Valley Post.

I’m not undermining that disposable bag use is disgusting. According to SPU, there are 360 million disposable bags used every year in-city. But seriously, I have an insane amount of press releases in my in box about this topic on either side. I’ve been a little shocked, actually, given that the mainstream media in this state has given virtually no coverage to issues like greenhouse gas inclusion in SEPA or even the Living Building Challenge. I guess disposable bags are just easier to write about.

Then again my co-worker, Shawna Gamache, used to live in St. Petersburg  (I know, cool right?) and she says it’s the same thing: you bring your own bag or you pay. (She also says public places require you bring toilet paper. Not so sure I like that one.) Come to think about it, when I lived in France they looked at  you with a queasy eye when you didn’t bring your own bag…..

I know I try to bring a reusable bag, but sometimes I forget. Maybe with the city kicking me, I’ll finally remember it when I walk in the grocery door. Or maybe it’ll be yet another daily annoyance.

What do you think about the decision? Am I way off base here or are there more important things we should be worrying (and picketing) about?

In a separate ordinance, the council also banned polystyrene food containers from restaurants and packing from grocery stores beginning Jan. 1, 2009. For more about that, see any of the blogs cited above.

Yesterday I wrote a story about how GreenWorks Realty  of Seattle crunched some numbers, did a little addition… and discovered that even in the not the best (to say the least) housing market over the last year, green homes in King County have sold quicker and for a higher value than their non-green counterparts.

GreenWorks looked at homes sold on the Northwest Multiple Listing Service between September 2007 and May 2008 that were “environmentally certified” - here that means LEED homes, Energy Star, or the Master Builders of King and Snohomish Counties’ Built Green Program.

On average, single family homes sold for four percent more, 18 percent quicker, and were 37 percent more valuable per square foot.

To see more or learn how condos measured up, visit GreenWorks to look at the numbers yourself here. (By the way, this is some of the first analysis of its kind).

Now, recently a pretty high level developer in the Seattle area told me there was no point in developing office space that wasn’t LEED certified anymore, because it is going to lose its value quicker.

Combine that with this research saying green homes sell quicker and for more, and logically, building green seems to make sense.

But there are a lot of challenges to building green, not to mention building green well. I could go off about the issues forever: some green systems are so new they are untested or people don’t know how to install them, it’s difficult to know if something is really green, green is “more expensive….” But I would rather hear from you.

If you can take a moment out of your holiday weekend, answer me this: What stops you from building green? If you work on residential projects, could these numbers convince you to try something new? Do these numbers matter at all and why? Do they matter in your neck of the woods, or is the information too Seattle-area specific?

And is it better for someone to do bad green design or do nothing green at all?

Or heck, you can just answer the poll at right!

I’m all ears. To read the story, press here.

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. 

Readers, you liked the post that directly preceded this one, about how Anne Whitacre, a specifier for Gehry Partners in Los Angeles questioned the claims of green products. In fact, you liked it so much that the long version of it (after  you click ‘more’) directly shot up to the most popular post I’ve ever written.

People read it from Lansing, Mich., from Salt Lake City, from Washington, D.C., from Atlanta, and all throughout Washington and Oregon.

We got interesting comments in our mailbox after running the full editorial too. One reader named Jason wrote, “BINGO! I think Anne nailed it. The second Green design became more about paper work and check lists, is the second green design failed.”  

Another said, “Finally, bang on, thanks for posting that.”

A third said, “People need to use intellect and reason to evaluate the results or benefits of these ideas in relation to short term and long term costs. Further ’sustainable’ does not always mean better and certainly does not mean more efficient. These concepts are meant to make us ‘feel good’ and provide comfort for some imagined guilt for having a successful culture.”

Here’s what I have to say: thank you for responding! My job (and the job of any credible journalist) is to report both sides to the best of my ability, though often (in non-DJC publications of course) I see that only one side of the story gets told. Your thoughts help me see the whole story, so thank you for your input in either direction.

READERS: I am more than happy to investigate these topics and sound them out, but I need to know what you care about. If you like (or don’t like) what we’re doing, comment or e-mail me at katiez@djc.com. If you like (or don’t like) parts of green design, green buildings, green products etc., comment or e-mail me at katiez@djc.com. I promise that I read all my comments and all my e-mails, and want to hear what you have to say, both good and bad.

We have been up and running for just over a month now. Thanks for reading and thanks for your comments. Keep ‘em coming!

Often, I long for your comments though they never come. In response to my post below on the Stranger’s not so pleasant coverage of Seattle City Hall, I got more than I bargained for from Anne Whitacre.

Whitacre is a senior associate at Gehry Partners in Los Angeles, though she spent 30 years working in Seattle at firms like ZGF and NBBJ. She’s a full-time specifier there and deals with products, both green and not green, on a daily basis.

Whitacre isn’t against green buildings or green products as a whole… rather her qualm is how a product’s ”greenness” often trumps whether it actually is a good product.

Among her comments in her very informative letter to me, she said, “I simply do not understand the bally-hooing of LEED buildings. From a design professional’s perspective, there are “good” buildings and there are “bad” buildings, and the procuring of a LEED rating does not automatically turn a “bad” building into a “good” one.”

(more…)

Being a reporter, I’m always struck by how magazines or newspapers choose to put words like “green” in quotations. The designation implies a term is not yet known to the general public and says a lot about a publication’s readership.

Here at the DJC we put quotations around phrases like ”netzero” (a goal of producing all the energy a building uses) or “regeneration” (making a site better than what was originally there), but not LEED or green. Then again, we have a focused readership.

So, while reading Vanity Fair’s third annual green issue last weekend, I was struck by the magazine’s presentation of green buildings, and by its use of quotations around words like LEED “gold,” “living roof,” and “cradle to cradle.”

The coverage raised a question in my mind: when one of the foremost investigative magazines in the country covers green buildings but still assumes its readership doesn’t know much about them,  just how mainstream can green building be?

What do you think, is green building mainstream? 

Three pieces between the magazine’s covers, all written by VF Special Correspondent Matt Tyrnauer, take on the subject. To read an interview with Tyrnauer about the projects, click here. 

The first is a photo and long caption of New York-based Neil M. Denari Architects’ Manhattan condo project called HL23, pictured above left. Denari is designing a 14-floor cantilevered building on a 40-foot-wide lot that gets wider as it gets taller. Vanity Fair uses quotation marks to say it is reaching LEED “gold.”

(more…)

In case you missed today’s DJC Construction Industry Spotlight, let me call attention to a feature that might interest you: a Seattle man is using reclaimed logs that have spent the last 100 years underwater, due to the creation of the Panama Canal, in his Panamanian projects.

His name is Joel Jelderks, he used to do marketing work for Red Bull in Seattle, and now he lives in Panama City, Panama, where he’s developing five projects. Three are historic preservation/recreation projects in the city’s historic Casco Viejo quarter, and two are in the countryside on the Azuero Peninsula.

In the historic buildings, Jelderks is using recovered wood from a Panamanian company called Ardan International Group. When the Panama Canal was constructed, tropical hardwood forests were flooded, creating the 263-mile Lake Gatun. Ardan, working with a company called Gunderboom out of Alaska, trains local people from the Kuna tribe to harvest the underwater trees. For more about Ardan and their products, see their comprehensive Web site here.

“The interior of the trees is an amazing quality of wood. You can’t get the quality of wood anymore without cutting down in a protected rainforest,” Jelderks said. ”A lot of these trees are 400 years old.”

Intriguing idea, eh? But before the wheels in your head start spinning for Seattle projects using Panamanian recovered wood, know that Ardan is very selective about the projects it chooses to supply, though Jelderks says it has a 20-year supply of wood.

If Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and City Council President Richard Conlin get their way, you will be charged a 20-cent “green fee” on all disposable shopping bags from Seattle grocery, drug and convenience stores, starting Jan. 1, 2009.

According to SPU, about 360 million disposable bags are used in Seattle every year, most plastic. That translates to 600 bags for each Seattle resident.

And those handy white foam containers that hold your pho soup or Mexican takeout, pictured at left? Under the proposal, you’ll also stop seeing those. Instead, businesses would have to replace everything from foam plates, cups and egg cartons with a different product by Jan. 1, 2009. Then, they would have to switch to using compostable or locally recyclable packaging by July 1, 2010.

The changes were announced in a proposal today supported by Nickels and Conlin. The legislation isn’t ready yet, but Conlin said it should be finalized, and considered by council, in June.

Nickels said Seattle is the first city in the country (that he knows of) to create a program like this, though cities across the world are adopting similar policies. At least 20 U.S. cities have banned polystyrene food packaging including Portland and San Francisco.                                                                             

Other options include packaging made of corn starch and sugar cane. A spokesperson for local restaurant group Tutta Bella, pictured at right, said at a press conference today that due to the restaurant’s recycling and composting of everything from expired pizza dough to food containers, the waste from all three restaurant locations combined fills only one garbage can per day.

(more…)