READERS, if you like this post, subscribe to a free reader to make sure you are alerted whenever there’s a new post to the Green Building Blog. Just click on the ‘Subscribe in a Reader’ link at right!

Green building has many elephants in the room and thanks to the current state of the economy, this is a big one: will green building suffer because of the current state of the economy?

The problem with trying to answer this question is that it all comes down to

The road to market-wide green buildings?

definitions: what do you consider to be a green building? Does it need to be certified by a third party operation? Are you talking about all markets - commercial, homes, mixed use etc.?

Assuming you can answer the definition question, another one immediately presents itself: how do we measure how green buildings are doing? Is there any way to realistically measure the buildings that are putting off plans, and then how green building is a factor in that?

I cannot answer these questions without doing a lot of research with time I frankly don’t have. But in the end, it seems like there are two groups out there:

1. The group that thinks yes, green buildings will take a hit because they’re more expensive.

and

2. The group that thinks green buildings are actually more valuable because they cut down on energy use and electricity bills, and will hold their value better in future markets.

Which group do you belong to? Comment on my new poll at right, or tell me more below, to let me know!

P.S. For great coverage about how the market is affecting the Puget Sound region, check out the DJC. On Oct. 13, we ran a story from local contractor’s perspectives. On Oct. 14, we run a story on local architecture and engineering firm’s perspectives. Don’t miss them!

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.

In case you, dear reader, doubt big time American business is interested in the business opportunities of green, look no further to be convinced than the attendance list at a business-oriented event this week.

Amazon. Boeing. Battelle. Microsoft. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Expedia. Seattle City Light. The list read like a who’s-who in Northwest business.

The event was presented by Climate Solutions and McKinsey & Co. It presented a global view of business opportunities, and discussed cost effective strategies for Washington’s place in the market. A panel of leaders talked afterwards about where Washington is.

All the panelists were interesting. But after the event was done, attendees spent most of their time twittering about the perspective of Rob Bernard, chief environmental strategist at Microsoft. It is, after all, Microsoft.

Bernard was appointed to the role last winter. To read more about him (apparently he began his career in construction and building management), visit ‘A blog by Joev’ here.

So how does Microsoft see the world and its role in sustainability?
(more…)