URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Renewables
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 200--------------------------------------------------
       Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 29, 2013, 8:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Seattle's Bullitt Center
       The Greenest Commercial Building In The World
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqf0CxftEQ&feature=player_embedded
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-041.gifThe<br
       />Flower metaphor and the Flower IMPERATIVES for a TRUELY GREEN
       BUILDING.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-103.gif
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHtgie2t5UI&feature=player_embedded
       Designed to last 250 years, this TRUELY green building needed
       special permits.
       WHY? Because building a zero carbon footprint building that
       generates it's own power, uses only the water that fall on it
       and recycles ALL OF ITS WASTE so nothing goes into the garbage
       or sewer VIOLATES at least 12 building construction codes in the
       USA!  :o
       Seattle worked with a team to make this, the first of hopefully
       millions of buildings like it, a reality.  :emthup:  :sunny:
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V7Bpd-pydY&feature=player_embedded
       This video from a small drone is shaky but gives a nice outside
       view of the building.
       --- Quote ---
       > A virtually self sustaining office building?
       >
       > The Bullitt Center in Seattle is beyond simply being "green".
       All its water is supplied by rainwater collected in a 56,000
       gallon cistern. They have composting toilets, a grand staircase
       with a view to discourage elevator use, and rooftop
       photovoltaics ready to break even with the energy use of the
       building.
       >
       > The goal is to prove that carbon-neutral office space can be
       commercially viable...and to influence everyone from developers
       to banks to city government to start building along these lines.
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/seattles-bullitt-center.html#sthash.ml95kKqU.dpuf
  HTML http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/shelter/seattles-bullitt-center.html#sthash.ml95kKqU.dpuf
       Another video (vimeo) at the link is quite informative.
  HTML http://greentechadvocates.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Bullitt-energy-use.png
  HTML http://www.millerhull.com/media/nonresidential/Bullitt/Bullitt10.jpg
  HTML http://faculty.arch.tamu.edu/grogers/Land640Posters/Design%20Matters%20Posters%202010/Yi%20Xue2010%20mod.jpg
       [img width=640
       height=580]
  HTML http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/world-s-greenest-office-building-makes-net-zero-look-easy/BullittCenterBenschneider300.jpg/image[/img]
  HTML http://images.gizmag.com/hero/bullitt-center.png
  HTML http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/5174d4b5b3fc4b748700011a_the-world-s-greenest-commercial-building-opens-in-seattle-today-_feature_diagram.jpg
  HTML http://img.timeinc.net/time/2012/graphics/bullitt_0620.jpg
  HTML http://bullittcenter.org/
  HTML http://bullittcenter.org/
       #Post#: 216--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: Surly1
       Date: October 30, 2013, 8:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       This is really compelling stuff.
       Problem (not really) with these posts is, if you watch the
       videos and follow all the links, you can easily put in a couple
       of hours (depending on the length of the vid.)
       Makes me wonder how long it takes you to create one!
       #Post#: 283--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: November 8, 2013, 3:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Surly,
       A large percentage of my material was previously posted at the
       DD (Which promptly would get lost in the posting memory hole).
       So I have read most of it. That said, in the 18 chart post I
       made yesterday I did not go read the detailed report because I
       do trust the source.  ;D
       #Post#: 351--------------------------------------------------
       LEED  (Leadership in Energy &amp; Environmental Design)
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: November 15, 2013, 7:34 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       LEED  (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) Green
       Building) Projects Near 60,000 Globally
       11/15/2013
       Clean Edge News
       The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has released its second
       installment of the LEED in Motion report series: Places and
       Policies. The report states that there are nearly 60,000 LEED
       green building projects across the globe, spanning 10.6 billion
       square feet.    Notably, Canada, India, China, the United Arab
       Emirates and Brazil lead the way for countries with the highest
       number of projects outside the U.S.
       The first section of the report showcases in-depth statistics
       and graphics on LEED projects and areas of growth around the
       world, with a sub-section for projects in the U.S. as well as
       global projects. Canada leads the way in LEED projects outside
       the U.S. with 4,375 projects, followed by India with 1,586,
       China with 1,282, UAE with 816 and Brazil with 717
       LEED-certified green building projects.
       The second section examines domestic and international policies
       and partnerships that support the framework of LEED and drive
       global progress. 400+ localities have LEED-specific policies in
       place. Globally, there are nearly 100 green building councils in
       various stages of development, a LEED International Roundtable
       with members from 30 countries and newly launched Alternative
       Compliance Paths and Regional Priority Creditsfor LEED, which
       provide flexible, regionally-focused approaches to LEED credits
       for projects outside the U.S.
       “LEED is a global phenomenon,” said Scot Horst, senior vice
       president of LEED, USGBC. “People spend 90% of their lives
       indoors; a healthy, resource-friendly and environmentally sound
       indoor environment contributes to the health, happiness and
       well-being of people and is something people from countries
       across the globe are finding value
       in.”
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113185701.png
  HTML http://www.cleanedge.com/Resources/news/LEED-Green-Building-Projects-Near-60,000-Globally
       #Post#: 510--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: December 6, 2013, 9:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       ‘A Terrible Irony’ - Affordable Housing, Unaffordable Energy
       Oakland Local/New America Media, News Feature, Eric K. Arnold,
       Posted: Nov 26, 2013
       Editor’s Note:  In Oakland, buildings account for 56 percent of
       the city’s carbon emissions that drive climate change. That’s
       slightly higher than the state average of 50 percent.
       Nationally, buildings make up slightly more than two-thirds of
       greenhouse gas emissions, making the sector a key area to
       achieve emissions reductions. In the past few years, several
       pilot projects have highlighted the benefits of bringing solar
       and energy efficiency upgrades to affordable housing, including
       public housing. In the second part of a two-part series, Oakland
       Local reporter Eric K. Arnold explores the benefits of energy
       efficiency and renewable energy for low-income residents, as
       well as the challenges to more widespread adoption.
       Read Part 1
       OAKLAND, Calif. –Tassafaronga Village, a mixed-use housing
       development in East Oakland, isn’t your average affordable
       housing project.
       During a site visit, assistant manager Wendy Ruiz and
       maintenance worker Edgar Valencia proudly show off the
       building’s roof: Rows and rows of solar panels – 145 in all --
       efficiently harness energy from the sun.
       So far, the solar investment is reaping big energy cost savings.
       The monthly electricity costs to light common areas such as
       hallways for the entire housing project, Ruiz says, is about $25
       for 137 affordable housing units and $12 for 20 market-rate
       townhouses. The panels require “very low maintenance,” Valencia
       adds. Although residents pay for individual utility use, the
       bills are very low, about $10-$15 monthly, Ruiz says.
       Tassafaronga is the jewel in the crown of the city’s affordable
       housing -- a model for sustainable development that uses less
       electricity from the grid, has a lighter carbon footprint and
       provides benefits to residents and the wider community. While
       the model has proved effective—Tassafaronga has won numerous
       sustainability awards—state and federal budget cuts have
       derailed efforts to further green affordable housing stock in
       Oakland and other cities, leaving developers scrambling to find
       new funding sources.
       The case for energy efficiency in affordable housing
       Energy efficiency is particularly critical in affordable housing
       developments, says Jeremy Hays, chief strategist for state and
       local initiatives at Green For All, an environmental advocacy
       group. According to Hays, apartment buildings built before 1970
       use 55 percent more energy than those built after 1990.
       Oakland has some 8,800 units of affordable housing, not
       including the 3,300 units of public housing overseen by the
       Oakland Housing Authority (OHA), a city agency that administers
       federally-subsidized public housing programs and develops
       affordable housing throughout the city. Many of OHA’s properties
       were built decades ago, and are in need of rehabilitation.
       A 2013 study by the Rocky Mountain Institute found that energy
       costs for federally-subsidized affordable housing are almost 40
       percent higher than energy costs for private homes, and 10 times
       greater[/I] than government investment in energy efficiency.
       This leads, the study found, to “a terrible irony: affordable
       housing saddled with unaffordable energy bills.”
       The disparity means that higher energy costs are passed down to
       property owners and[i] low-income tenants.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png
       :(
       In both affordable housing and public housing units, tenants
       receive federal subsidies, known as Section 8 vouchers. Tenants
       generally contribute 30 percent of their monthly income toward
       rent and utilities, and pay utilities directly, receiving a
       utility allowance, which is supposed to be adjusted annually or
       when rates rise more than 10 percent.
       Low-income residents spend 12 percent of their annual income on
       utility bills – four times the amount that the average American
       spends, according to Green for All.
       Furthermore, affordable housing owners, including public housing
       agencies and non-profit real estate developers, are constrained
       by rising utility bills; energy consumption in the United States
       has steadily increased nearly every year since 1985, a trend
       that shows no signs of reversing.
       As utility bills continue to rise, “we’ll continue to lose
       affordable housing,” Hays says, unless the amount spent on
       utilities can be reduced.
       “Every time you reduce your energy bill, you build in some
       safety for yourself around increased cost,” he noted.
       According to the U.S. Green Building Council, energy efficiency
       saves 30 to 40 percent of consumption at little to no additional
       cost—a significant number, considering that buildings account
       for 75 percent of U.S. electricity use and 36 percent of natural
       gas use.
       Because it creates a win-win situation—lowering utility costs
       while benefitting the environment—utilizing renewable energy and
       energy efficiency has become a growing trend in the affordable
       housing field.
       “Energy efficiency and green building will help the building and
       its systems last longer, which provides positive health benefits
       to residents and lasting benefits to the neighborhood in terms
       of blight reduction,” says Carlos Castellanos, director of Real
       Estate Development at the East Bay Asian Local Development
       Corporation (EBALDC), a non-profit affordable housing
       organization, which has developed more than 1,900 residential
       units.
       Building affordable housing to a green standard
       Built at a cost of $75 million dollars—a figure which includes
       not only building and construction costs, but environmental
       clean-up of neighborhood brownfields—Tassafaronga was the last
       large public housing development in the city to undergo what
       OHA’s Bridget Galka calls a “complete rehabilitation.”
       Originally built in 1964, during the Johnson administration,
       Tassafaronga’s existing 87 units of low-rise public housing were
       dilapidated and run-down, exacerbated by jagged cracks and
       fissures that exemplified the term “concrete jungle” and created
       seismic safety issues to boot. On top of that, the site’s soil
       was highly contaminated by petroleum and pesticides. The
       neglected, blighted area became a haven for crime, prostitution
       and drug dealing.
       After applying for a federal grant from the Environmental
       Protection Agency and creatively tweaking its financing
       model—leveraging Section 8 vouchers to qualify for a bank
       loan—OHA demolished the existing structures, with Galka serving
       as project manager for the revitalization effort.
       In 2010, Tassafaronga opened, offering 157 mixed-income units—a
       combination of market-rate and affordable housing—covering 7.5
       acres. The project has two major panel systems: rooftop solar
       (which powers common electrical systems), and solar water
       heaters. In addition to solar energy, Tassafaronga boasts
       energy-efficient windows, lighting and boiler systems. Other
       green measures include recycled building materials, low-flow
       toilets, rainwater-catchment drains, and paint that releases
       fewer toxic chemicals.
       Tassafaraonga attained LEED Platinum status—the highest
       certification level possible—from the U.S. Green Building
       Council for Environmentally Sustainable Development. Completing
       the project “really bumped up [OHA’s] status as far as being
       super energy-efficient,” Galka said.
       Sustainability as a community model
       The development of Tassafaronga Village highlights how
       sustainability features in affordable housing can transform
       neighborhoods, when combined with holistic urban planning and
       community-oriented development.
       Numerous studies have examined the impact of blight reduction on
       crime in neighborhoods. A 2011 study from the University of
       Michigan noted “Beautifying and maintaining” vacant or blighted
       property “can be an effective crime prevention strategy.”
       In 2011, the Acta Non Verba Youth Urban Farm Project, a
       youth-run sustainable urban gardening project adjacent to the
       redeveloped property, opened on a city-owned plot in a
       neighborhood known for violent crime, drug dealing, and
       prostitution.
       Today, the farm grows sunflowers, cotton, and organic
       vegetables. It also produces cheese and spaghetti sauce that is
       sold onsite. In addition to mitigating the “food desert”
       syndrome common in inner-city neighborhoods by providing a
       source of fresh produce, revenue from the farm goes into an
       education fund for its youth workers.
       As Acta Non Verba Founder and Executive Director Kelly Carlisle
       noted, “on top of beautifying the community within the so-called
       bad part of town, we’ve also allowed elders and youth to
       consider what they’re eating.”
       Further catalyzing East Oakland’s transformation, in 2011, a new
       public library opened up on 81st Avenue, just down the street
       from Tassafaronga Village. Rounding out the neighborhood is
       Acorn Woodland Elementary, an award-winning K-5 school also on
       81st Ave., which opened in 2006 and houses a preventative care
       clinic onsite.
       While the use of sustainability features in Tassafaronga Village
       isn’t solely responsible for the neighborhood’s transition from
       eyesore to community model, it’s unlikely the City of Oakland
       would have redeveloped the land used for the farm had the
       housing development not been rehabilitated and re-envisioned as
       the centerpiece of an uber-green urban planning project.
       Budget cuts jeopardize future green projects
       Despite the benefits of energy efficiency investments in
       affordable housing, financial hurdles hinder greater efforts on
       this front. Even though sustainability and green living models
       have been established in the affordable housing sector, Galka
       says, budget constraints limit what agencies like OHA can
       presently do.
       For instance, Tassafaronga’s funding included $12 million from
       Oakland’s Redevelopment Agency. Yet that sum was locked in prior
       to the statewide elimination of Redevelopment Agencies in 2012.
       After redevelopment funding was cut, developments in the
       pipeline required a larger percentage of OHA funds than in
       previous years. The federal Housing and Urban Development
       department has also slashed its public housing budget.
       The affordable housing sector has also been heavily impacted by
       mandatory sequestration due to federal budget cuts. As the San
       Jose Mercury News reported, OHA faces $11 million in cuts due to
       sequestration in 2013, which could result in the loss of a
       significant amount of Section 8 vouchers. That’s critical to
       projects like Tassafaronga, which leveraged federal housing
       subsidies to qualify for some $23 million in bank loans—nearly
       one-third of the project’s total budget.
       “The reduction of affordable housing funds makes it challenging
       to pay for energy-efficient features,” Castellanos said.
       In the past, federal funds have helped to defray up-front costs,
       he says, but “the long-term savings over operations that
       sustainable features yield doesn’t always communicate well to
       politicians who are trying to reduce budgets at all levels.”
       The challenges which lie ahead for affordable housing are clear:
       Although increased investment in energy efficiency can lower
       energy costs for low-income residents, reduces power
       consumption, provides health benefits, and results in long-term
       cost savings for property owners, unless new funding sources are
       secured, the ability of affordable housing developers to provide
       future sustainability features remains in jeopardy.
       This work was supported by a 2013 New America Media Energy
       Reporting Fellowship in collaboration with SoundVision
       Productions’ Burn: An Energy Journal.
  HTML http://newamericamedia.org/2013/11/budget-cuts-derail-efforts-to-green-affordable-housing.php
       #Post#: 533--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: December 10, 2013, 10:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghhgUmGBjX8&feature=player_embedded<br
       />
       #Post#: 659--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: January 5, 2014, 3:44 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [i]I envy this fellow from Canada (and admire him too!)
  HTML http://www.clker.com/cliparts/c/8/f/8/11949865511933397169thumbs_up_nathan_eady_01.svg.hi.png<br
       />
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif[i]
       SparkyBtheWonderDog
       My bungalow on Prince Edward Island, Canada, is heated right now
       with a solar air heater (Cansolair) and its a very comfortable
       72-75F inside on a cold and snow covered day (19F today,
       although it was -20F yesterday, and it was the same temperature
       inside then too) 3500 miles ENE of Lancaster CA. Ditto with the
       solar hot water panels on the roof. Hot water for ZERO running
       cost as the circulator pumps have their own PV cell, and the
       solar warm air costs me less than $15.00 a year for the 31 Watt
       fan on the Cansolair.
       Within a year, I'll also have solar PV panels, supplying my
       electricity. Its not how warm it is outside, its the SUNSHINE
       and it works even in midwinter way up north about 6 or 7 climate
       zones colder than Lancaster CA. Actually, sunshine works pretty
       well on those cold, crisp, bitter (and cloudless) dry winter
       days, with the sunshine reflecting off the snow onto solar
       panels.
       So, if it works here, it will work ANYWHERE in North America,
       and likely much better than here, which is sunny the way Germany
       is sunny (ie, not exceptionally) Yeah, and even here my solar
       systems ($11K for both) are entirely paid for in house heating
       furnace oil not burned and electricity not used for hot water in
       under 5 years...
  HTML http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg<br
       />
       [i]Agelber NOTE: The above comment was posted after this article
       about an intelligent, far seeing, rational Republican in
       Lancaster, California.  :o
       --- Quote ---
       > [color=navy]Surprising to hear from a Republican? Not so much,
       Parris notes. “The Republican Party is in a quandary because the
       polling shows that the voters support environmental protection.
       It’s the leadership that doesn’t,” Parris said. “You’d have to
       be a moron to discount global warming. I don’t know anybody that
       doesn’t recognize it’s occurring.”
       > Read more at
  HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/04/lancaster-home-solar-mandate-1st-us-world-leads-city-2014/#TxyPjS8dFSIq38E6.99
  HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2014/01/04/lancaster-home-solar-mandate-1st-us-world-leads-city-2014/#TxyPjS8dFSIq38E6.99
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 684--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: January 11, 2014, 5:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       BIOMIMETIC ARCHITECTURE: Green Building in Zimbabwe Modeled
       After Termite Mounds
       by Abigail Doan
  HTML http://gdb.voanews.com/77EFCADE-28C1-40C1-A2BF-CD65159CB48E_mw1024_n_s.jpg
       Biomimicry’s Cool Alternative: Eastgate Centre in Zimbabwe The
       Eastgate Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, typifies the best of green
       architecture and ecologically sensitive adaptation. The
       country’s largest office and shopping complex is an
       architectural marvel in its use of biomimicry principles.
       The mid-rise building, designed by architect Mick Pearce in
       conjunction with engineers at Arup Associates, has no
       conventional air-conditioning or heating, yet stays regulated
       year round with dramatically less energy consumption using
       design methods inspired by indigenous Zimbabwean masonry and the
       self-cooling mounds of African termites!
  HTML http://www.illustrationsof.com/royalty-free-termite-clipart-illustration-65144tn.jpg
       
  HTML http://payload126.cargocollective.com/1/10/326952/4831354/termitemound01.jpg
       
  HTML http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_z1d_7zmpEG4/SiRpRXZgYbI/AAAAAAAABeA/atL0KDuOwjo/s400/The%2BEastgate%2BCentre%2Bin%2BHarare%2B1.jpg
       Termites in Zimbabwe build gigantic mounds inside of which they
       farm a fungus that is their primary food source. The fungus must
       be kept at exactly 87 degrees F, while the temperatures outside
       range from 35 degrees F at night to 104 degrees F during the
       day.
       The termites achieve this remarkable feat by constantly opening
       and closing a series of heating and cooling vents throughout the
       mound over the course of the day. With a system of carefully
       adjusted convection currents, air is sucked in at the lower part
       of the mound, down into enclosures with muddy walls, and up
       through a channel to the peak of the termite mound. The
       industrious termites constantly dig new vents and plug up old
       ones in order to regulate the temperature. :
  HTML http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg<br
       />
  HTML http://bioclimaticx.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/eastgate-zimbabwe-apartment-building.jpg
       The Eastgate Centre, largely made of concrete, has a ventilation
       system which operates in a similar way. Outside air that is
       drawn in is either warmed or cooled by the building mass
       depending on which is hotter, the building concrete or the air.
       It is then vented into the building’s floors and offices before
       exiting via chimneys at the top. The complex also consists of
       two buildings side by side that are separated by an open space
       that is covered by glass and open to the local breezes.
  HTML http://sustainabilityworkshop.autodesk.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/core-page-inserted-images/eastgate_building_-_swl.jpg
       Air is continuously drawn from this open space by fans on the
       first floor. It is then pushed up vertical supply sections of
       ducts that are located in the central spine of each of the two
       buildings. The fresh air replaces stale air that rises and exits
       through exhaust ports in the ceilings of each floor. Ultimately
       it enters the exhaust section of the vertical ducts before it is
       flushed out of the building through chimneys.
  HTML http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ehp.121-a18.g004.png
       The Eastgate Centre uses less than 10% of the energy of a
       conventional building its size.  :o   :emthup:These efficiencies
       translate directly to the bottom line: Eastgate’s owners have
       saved $3.5 million alone because of an air-conditioning system
       that did not have to be implemented. Outside of being
       eco-efficient and better for the environment, these savings also
       trickle down to the tenants whose rents are 20 percent lower
       than those of occupants in the surrounding buildings.
       Who would have guessed that the replication of designs created
       by termites would not only provide for a sound climate control
       solution but also be the most cost-effective way for humans to
       function in an otherwise challenging context?
  HTML http://inhabitat.com/building-modelled-on-termites-eastgate-centre-in-zimbabwe/
  HTML http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu272/Ctthacker/termites/6886.jpg
       SECRET termite thoughts upon viewing the Eastgate Mall:
       It took those monkeys a while, but they finally figured out how
       WE do it!  But they STILL DON'T REALLY GET IT!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif
       
       As all of us smart termites KNOW, altruistic behavior is our
       SECRET. Human greedballs get heartburn when they are faced with
       this so our secret is still safe.
  HTML http://www.imgion.com/images/01/Angry-animated-smiley.jpg
       
       Those dumb shits think we build efficient nests just because we
       don't know any better? How stupid can they be!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/gen152.gif
       Do they think we "co-evolved" with FUNGUS? Don't they understand
       that we don't just farm fungus, we have to avoid the kind that
       kills us too!
       Do they think we have guards at the entrance to decapitate any
       termite with spores from the wrong fungus on them out at the
       hazardous waste site AND replace the guards who immediately
       commit suicide because we don't know any better?
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_2932.gif
       Oh well, that Marx guy has been demonized so Homo SAP will
       probable make great fungus culture for us in a hundred years or
       so. We can wait.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-tv-003.gif
       #Post#: 1035--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: May 2, 2014, 11:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJbVLyst4Ok&feature=player_embedded<br
       />
       Amory Lovins grows bananas in the Rockies and sells electricity
       too (WITHOUT A FURNACE!  :o  ;D).
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMTCNOlozTA&feature=player_embedded<br
       />
       LONG VERSION of first video for non-DOOMERS only.  ;D
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5txQlEI7bc&feature=player_embedded<br
       />
       Energy efficiency 1 of 5 videos: Amory Lovins
       #Post#: 1049--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carbon Neutral Buildings 
   DIR By: Surly1
       Date: May 4, 2014, 8:49 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here's a contrarian view, which when I read it, raised a number
       of questions. As someone who considers not only "green tech" but
       the moral implications seriously, I pass it along. A tip o' the
       Surly Crown of thorns to JD Wheeler, who posted it first.
       "People tend to think that technologies like wind, solar,
       on-site water capture, and so on will empower the average person
       and local communities and loosen the power of centralized power
       structures. But what if the opposite is true? What if all these
       technologies hand the one percent even more power? Under our
       current socioeconomic system, what if these technologies allow
       the one percent to establish their libertarian utopia where they
       don’t need the rest of us and can tear up the social contract
       even further than they already have."
       Why Green Architecture is a Sham
  HTML http://ow.ly/wsAlL
       Some of you may have heard of the green building certification
       system known as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental
       Design) developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, a private
       organization that even though it calls itself non-profit,
       functions as en effective cash cow for its founders. LEED is
       essentially greenwashing for the one percent to feel good about
       themselves even as they tear the fabric society apart. It’s yet
       another meaningless credential so that we can pretend our system
       is sustainable. What’s my evidence?
       Well, here are my two favorite “green” projects, both LEED
       certified so they must be sustainable right? One is a new
       terminal at San Jose International airport built exclusively for
       the private jets of Silicon Valley executives to fly around the
       world (Designboom does not use caps):
  HTML http://www.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/mineta-san-jose-airport-designboom04.jpg
       Your private jet to Dubai awaits at this "green" airport
       extension
       a new development at the mineta san josé international airport
       (SJC) will break ground in january, where private aviation firm
       signature flight support has been granted rights to build and
       operate a $82 million private development on 29 acres on the
       airport’s west side. the company will service and provide a new
       site for the personal aircraft of the principals at google, as
       well as other clients in the silicon valley such as hewlett
       packard. designed by gensler architects, the 270,000 square foot
       LEED gold-certified facility will feature an executive terminal,
       hangars, aircraft servicing resources and ramp space for
       accommodating large business jets such as the boeing’s 737
       business jet and boeing B767. in addition, the airport extension
       will create economic stimulation to the region by opening up 150
       to 200 construction jobs and offering the SJC $2.6 million in
       annual rent.
  HTML http://www.designboom.com/architecture/googles-82-million-corporate-jet-facility-in-san-jose-to-break-ground-12-20-2013/
       Almost 200 jobs constructing a private jet facility for Google
       executives, eh? Someone call Tom Friedman! I guess the wealth is
       finally trickling down after all.
       The other is the Virgin galactic spaceport for the one percent
       to blast off into space for a vacation (even as NASA’s budget is
       perennially cut):
  HTML http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/10/dezeen_Spaceport-America-by-Foster-and-Partners-22.jpg
       Does it get more "green" than a spaceport for the one percent in
       the middle of the desert?
       The Virgin Galactic Gateway to Space, a combined terminal and
       hangar facility, will support up to two WhiteKnightTwo and five
       SpaceShipTwo vehicles. The 120,000 square-foot building has been
       designed by Foster + Partners, working with URS Corporation and
       New Mexico architects SMPC.The Gateway will also house all
       astronaut preparation and celebration facilities, a mission
       control centre and a friends and family area...With minimal
       embodied carbon and few additional energy requirements, the
       scheme has been designed to achieve LEED Gold
       accreditation....Built using local materials and construction
       techniques, it aims to be both sustainable and sensitive to its
       surroundings.
  HTML http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/19/spaceport-america-by-foster-partners/
       "Sensitive to it's surroundings," huh? Note that the space port
       is in THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT! So where is the water for this
       “sustainable” facility coming from? Oddly, the press release
       doesn't say, but now Richard Branson can tout his “environmental
       stewardship”
       Do these projects seems like environmentally responsible green
       building projects designed for a world with less energy and a
       changing climate to you?
       So now you can see what constitutes “green” building today.
       There has been a lot of criticism of LEED, but these two
       projects make that criticism better than anything I could say.
       Thanks to LEED,  the one percenters can purchase a fancy and
       expensive credential to show all the world how environmentally
       sustainable their pleasure domes are to ease their guilty
       consciences. After all, it’s not like private jets and spaceship
       use fuel, right? Here’s another one from the architect’s
       playground from the appropriately named MAD architects:
  HTML http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/24226_4_aoyangParkPlaza4.jpg
       Yet another LEED-certified glass skyscraper in the world's most
       polluted country
       The team explains: “Like the tall mountain cliffs and river
       landscapes of China, a pair of asymmetrical towers creates a
       dramatic skyline in front of the park. Ridges and valleys define
       the shape of the exterior glass façade, as if the natural forces
       of erosion wore down the tower into a few thin lines. Flowing
       down the façade, the lines emphasise the smoothness of the
       towers and its verticality.”
       An additional benefit of this fluid design approach is that the
       ridges draw a natural breeze indoors, providing an energy
       efficient cooling system for building users. The development has
       received LEED Gold certification for its employment of natural
       lighting and air purification systems, as well as intelligent
       building design.
       This perception of the elements eroding natural forms is
       continued to the four smaller buildings found south of the two
       main towers. These office blocks have been shaped to resemble
       river stones, washed smooth and rounded over a long period of
       time.
  HTML http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=24226
       Look, if you want to make a bunch of glass buildings look like
       ancient Chinese cliffs and river-washed stones, I have no
       problem with that. Go for it. What bugs me isn't the design
       itself, nor the cost, but the dishonesty. If you want to indulge
       in design fantasies and stand out from the crowd, that's your
       prerogative, but don’t pretend that you’re somehow being
       "environmentally friendly" by going for a credential like LEED.
       Who are you fooling? And I like the part at the end about air
       purification systems – necessary because of China’s infamous air
       pollution. So your building can get green credits by screening
       out the air caused by the coal-fired power plants fueling all
       the economic growth (which generates more building, etc.).
       Finally, I’ll outsource this one to Lloyd Alter.
  HTML http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2014/04/games.jpg.650x0_q85_crop-smart.jpg
       The one percent enjoying their "green" lifestyle
       The big European engineering and manufacturing powerhouse, ABB,
       is making a push into residential markets with their LivingSpace
       program, full of home automation, security and more. They show a
       truly lovely piece of architecture on the site (sorry about the
       nav button being there), a see-through glass box with some nice
       shades too. But somehow it doesn't seem appropriate to use it as
       a model for "Reducing the energy consumptions of our homes."
       It is a beautiful site with unusual navigation that works well
       once you figure it out that things go sideways when you slide
       your finger down, but McLuhan said that the medium is the
       message, and the medium here is this big honking house. What's
       the message? That instead of building a house with walls, ABB
       will sell you "heaters, air conditioning, lights and blinds that
       automatically work together to create a comfortable atmosphere
       while minimizing energy to the max."
       Perhaps I just don't understand advertising. I would have
       thought that anyone who cared about energy consumption would
       immediately ask themselves "why would I consider living in a
       place like that?" or "how much do I have to pay ABB to make that
       glass box comfortable?"
       The title of the post sums it up: How to reduce your energy
       consumption: Buy a glass monster home and fill it with green
       gizmos (Treehugger)
       Actually, the message is clear and is the same as the three LEED
       projects above -  "green" is a way for the job creators in their
       gigantic mansions to feel good about themselves and the
       direction society is headed.
       Thus, the one percent can live in giant gizmo-filled “green"
       homes and jet off into space from their “green” spaceports while
       the rest of us are forececlosed upon and living in tarpaper
       shacks or under bridges. But I guess our low-impact lifestyle
       won't count as "green" will it? Welcome to the “green economy” –
       it’s a “green” economy if you have the “green” of money (with
       apologies to users of other currencies).
       And that brings me to another conclusion that is
       counterintuitive. People tend to think that technologies like
       wind, solar, on-site water capture, and so on will empower the
       average person and local communities and loosen the power of
       centralized power structures. But what if the opposite is true?
       What if all these technologies hand the one percent even more
       power? Under our current socioeconomic system, what if these
       technologies allow the one percent to establish their
       libertarian utopia where they don’t need the rest of us and can
       tear up the social contract even further than they already have.
       What brought this to mind was finding this old article from
       2009: Inside the Indian Building Hillary Clinton Calls a Green
       Taj Mahal (Treehugger):
       Located in the satellite city of Gurgaon, the ITC Green Center
       is said to reuse all the water that lands on it and recycles all
       the water it uses. Its insulated glass keeps out heat and lets
       in abundant natural light. Ten percent of its wood is certified,
       and its landscaping relies on local plant species. The building
       has reduced its energy and water consumption by 51 per cent and
       40 per cent, respectively.
       When it opened in 2005, it became the world's largest completed
       LEED platinum rated green office building. "If all new buildings
       were designed in the same standards as the ITC Green Centre, we
       could eventually cut global energy use and green house pollution
       by more than 20 percent and save money at the same time," she
       said.
       With lower utility bills, the company will break even on its
       investment (given an extra cost of 12 per cent over a typical
       building) within five years and then begin to see subsequent
       savings.
       "The monument is a building to the future. The Green Centre not
       only represents the promise of a green economy but also
       demonstrates the partnership of India and the US in the 21st
       century," she added.
       Gurgaon is also home to the LEED platinum rated headquarters for
       Wipro. The building has saved the company Rs 1 crore in power
       costs annually, or 55 per cent of its energy consumption. The
       extra cost of its construction—six to eight per cent over a
       normal building—is expected to be recovered in five years.
       The Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) is targeting 1,000 LEED
       certified buildings by 2010, up from 140 last year. Currently,
       green buildings covering 67 million sq ft are being constructed
       all over the country, up from 20,000 sq ft in 2003.
  HTML http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/hillary-clinton-itc-green-center-new-delhi.jpg
       Green Building - good for elites like Hilllary, but bad for us?
       Keep in mind, this is a country where millions of people still
       burn dung for heat and live without electricity or a toilet.
       Ever seen Slumdog Millionaire? And what does this company do?
       As in China, the green building movement remains mostly
       relegated to large corporations, which have more capital to
       invest in sustainable practices and a significant interest in
       burnishing their reputations both at home and abroad.
       In addition to the hospitality and IT industries, the ITC Group,
       the conglomerate behind the center, makes its money through
       tobacco.
       As with SOM's "zero-energy" tower for the China National Tobacco
       Company, talking about health out of one side of your mouth and
       smoking with the other is hardly convincing.
       Guragon, you may recall, is India’s “Voluntary City” a nice
       euphemism for the Neoliberal endgame for all of us. It’s the
       Libertarian wet dream. This is a city where there is no common
       anything; an area of no taxes or governance where it's every man
       for himself. Wealthy corporations pay for everything themselves,
       while the unlucky poor live in squalor. Here is the coverage of
       Guragon:
       Gurgaon  has no publicly provided “functioning citywide sewer or
       drainage system; reliable electricity or water; public
       sidewalks, adequate parking, decent roads or any citywide system
       of public transportation.” Yet Gurgaon is a magnet for “India’s
       best-educated, English-speaking young professionals,” it has 26
       shopping malls, seven golf courses, apartment towers, a sports
       stadium, five-star hotels and “a futuristic commercial hub
       called Cyber City [that] houses many of the world’s most
       respected corporations.” According to one survey, Gurgaon is
       India’s best city to work and live. So how does Gurgaon thrive?
       It thrives because in the absence of government the private
       sector has stepped in to provide transportation, utilities,
       security and more...
  HTML http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2011/06/indias-voluntary-city.html
       So this wealthy tobacco company just buys everything it needs,
       trucks in its privileged employees (just like in Silicon Valley)
       to a gated Elysium while everything outside the walls goes to
       hell and everyone not serving the corporate bottom line is left
       to fend for themselves without even basic infrastructure. This
       is the world the elites are building all over the globe! Behold
       the endgame of anti-government Neoliberalism. It has already
       brought about a radical divestment of the U.S. infrastructure,
       which is literally crumbling and falling down around us. What if
       things like wind and solar allow this situation to get even
       worse? Things like sewage systems, public transportation, and
       the electrical grid are already derided as “collectivism."
       Who cares about making upgrades to the electrical grid we all
       use if you can just slap some solar panels on your multi-million
       dollar home or office building? Who cares about leaks in the
       water system, if you just harvest your own water? Who cares if
       the water is safe to drink for people if you can afford to buy
       your own private water filer? Who cares whether people can
       afford to light and heat their homes if you can just buy your
       own private diesel generator or hydrogen fuel cell and have your
       personal stash of fuel trucked in? It reminds me of Hurricane
       Sandy, when the general public lived without power for weeks
       while the rich lived in comfort and ease in their giant
       McMansions thanks to their diesel-powered generators and solar
       panels. This is the future.
       What if what these technologies really do is allow the rich and
       powerful to abandon society to an even greater extent than they
       already have?
       Now that the one percent don’t even need the commons to provide
       their power or their food anymore thanks to"green" technology,
       what will become of it - public transportation, public sewage
       systems, running water, natural gas, public trash collection and
       snowplowing, and the common electrical grid we're all hooked up
       to?
       What will happen to the rest of us unfortunates who find
       ourselves on the outside of their gated compounds and office
       parks? Will we even have access to electricity and clean
       drinking water? If Guragon is humanity’s future then probably
       not. As the rich collect ever more of society’s wealth, they
       will continue to dismantle the wider society and put it into
       private hands, and "green" technology may actually help them do
       this – gated communities with all the latest “green” amenities –
       solar electricity, solar hot water, on-site water capture and
       filtration, air purifiers, locally grown food, etc., while the
       rest of us will be eating junk food made from processed corn
       while shivering in the dark, dying of cholera, and getting
       asthma from the coal-choked air. And the digital panopticon
       initiated by governments around the world watching us 24 hours a
       day will make sure even the very thought of dissent is strangled
       in its crib.So “green technology” may not be the benefit we all
       assume it is. It may even end up advancing the Neoliberal
       endgame even further.
       Now, to be clear, this is a worst-case scenario. For the record,
       I’m for these technologies and I think they are a good idea to
       cope with an energy descent scenario as well as climate change.
       But I just want to highlight  the potential dark side to these
       technologies and how our current political and social
       arrangements may deploy these technologies in a way which is not
       to the benefit of most people, and may even be to the detriment
       of some, as in Guragon. I think we just assume that these
       technologies will make us all better off without thinking
       through the deeper questions.
       P.S. - Please forgive the title of the post - I know it's a
       sweeping overstatement. I should have probably said LEED is a
       sham. It's just that in my city, entire swaths of the city are
       being bulldozed, people are losing their homes and tent cities
       are springing up, even as massive and expensive condominium
       towers for the wealthy are popping up downtown like dandelions
       in the spring, and most of them have the latest "green"
       amenities and LEED certification (and "certification" is
       literally all it is - just a plaque in the lobby).
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 10
   DIR Next Page