Chances are you consider yourself someone who wants to be green, or is already well on the road to greening your house and doing your part to help the environment and lead a sustainable life. If you’ve been reading our Articles and Blogs then you no doubt have gotten the message that it’s all about taking responsibility – thinking through every discrete project in your renovation, every product to be used etc., to weigh its contribution to, or detraction from, more environmentally sustainable practices and healthy living.

Accountability goes up and down the chain –manufacturers are to be held accountable for the raw materials they use in their products and their manufacturing processes, the energy they consume and the amount and hazardous quality of the waste they produce; we the consumers are to be held accountable for our choices, whether we inadvertently give the go-ahead to manufacturers who use toxic substances or are responsible for additional energy consumption by purchasing goods produced in remote locations, and last but not least, we are to be held accountable for the amount of energy and resources we personally consume – that’s what I really want to talk about today.

Here’s the rub, and will probably make me very unpopular and potentially subject me to a flurry of hate mail: it’s time for tenants to be held accountable too. To the extent that heat, water use and water heating can be segregated and separately metered and controlled by a tenant, then the tenant should be given control over that system and have to pay for it. If it’s out of sight it’s out of mind, and tenants who don’t see the water bill to quantify how much water they use, nor see the electric bill for hot water, nor the heating bill and the effect it has when the thermostat is turned from 65 to 72 to 80, have no incentive to understand the situation or change it. Everyone should be directly accountable for the energy and resources they personally consume. On the flip side, it is the building owner’s responsibility to make the capital improvements necessary to allow the tenant to effectively lower consumption, this means dealing with heat loss by beefing up insulation, sealing cracks, installing new windows if necessary etc. (see our Article Insulation and the Building Envelope: Controlling Heat Loss and Gain), providing an efficient hot water heating and delivery system so that water, and the energy needed to heat that water, is not wasted (see our Article Water Heating - Understanding Water-Saving and Energy-Saving Measures), eliminating water leaks and so on.

I am not advocating that this be a windfall for landlords. Rents would need to be adjusted downward based on an objective standard for what water, heat and hot water heating bills would be in a particular building. This rent movement theory will work in market-rent apartments, it’s the rent controlled and rent stabilized apartments in NYC that pose the problem yet they can be the worst buildings because the rents, in particular rent control rents, are so low that the owners do not have the funds to make the capital improvements needed to green their buildings, or at a minimum make their buildings as energy efficient as possible by replacing windows, beefing up insulation and installing new efficient heat and hot water systems and so on. It means the rent control and rent stabilization laws will have to change to allow for lowering rents and shifting heat, water and hot water costs to tenants. Rent control tenants believe it is their god –given right not to have to pay for anything, but everyone must change for the greater good and by putting energy use and costs directly in the hands of the user/tenant, the tenant can control those costs.

Segregating heating in an efficient manner is the most difficult task and in large buildings may be unworkable, but in brownstones where the number of units is quite small it is very possible to have separate small gas-fired furnaces and efficient hot water heaters for each unit. Water can be easily segregated by branching feed lines off the main feed with separate meters, or sub-meters. Individual hot water heaters per unit is a very easy objective and can be attached to the main hot water feed line supplying each particular unit.

The US is behind Europe in energy conservation measures because Americans are obsessed with individual rights, like the “right” or should I say the expectation that water, heat and hot water are included in rent, without regard to whether those “rights” are selfishly enforced at the expense of doing the right thing on a large scale. Shifting our urban living paradigm to one that puts the use of energy and water, and its costs, in the control of the actual user is the best way to incentivize conservation.

In today's Op Ed piece Thomas Friedman, I think very ably and correctly, makes the case for a government policy that keeps the price of gas painful to encourage Americans to make fuel efficiency the number-one priority when buying a car.  Car makers will only follow the lead of the population buying the cars, but sometimes it takes a nudge from policy initiatives to encourage the population to do the right thing, and since Americans historically have proven that they act passionately and resolutely when their wallets are threatened, it's good advice. 

However, Friedman also ends by making the case that some day we should "ultimately . . . move our entire fleet to plug-in electric cars"  but that begs the question -- where does that electricity come from to power those plug-in car batteries?  This demonstrates the complexity of the energy/global warming conundrum.  We would need to increase our electricity production.  As coal, with its green house gas emissions, is a predominant fuel for producing electricity in the US at the moment,  ramping up production in that fashion to decrease our dependency on oil is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. 

What we need is a large scale, far-reaching energy plan that provides for increased energy production through alternative, clean means fueled by renewable sources that do not otherwise have adverse affects on other life-sustaining industries (in other words, that we don't grow corn for bio-fuel at the expense of food); then we will have the energy needed to power those electric cars.  

The politicians need to put into place a combination stick and carrot regime - the stick is the forcing of painful gas price measures to encourage fuel economy, and the carrot is creating incentive programs on both industrial and consumer levels.  On an industrial scale the government needs to fund research and finance the development of large scale wind, solar and hydro power electricity generation plants.  On a consumer level both federal and state governments can offer rebate programs to encourage homeowners to buy fuel efficient vehicles, to incorporate micro energy generation systems on their property, and to conduct household energy audits that lead to clearly identifiable measures (like switching to all CFLs, low-flow faucets, beefing up insulation, replacing windows etc.) to cut down  personal energy consumption.  Small steps taken on a large scale can have a big impact.

The following comment was partially posted to the New York Times article "Building Rage", May 15, 2008:

The relationship between homeowner and contractor is fundamentally driven by two competing agendas:

the homeowners want what they want for as little money as possible

This invariably leads to some friction and both sides need to be prepared for it.  The more detail that goes into your planning, the easier your job will be.  Period.  Invest as much time as possible at the outset to spec out what you want. Problem is, every job invariably has some changes.  The homeowner may decide that something just does not look right after all, and you never know what you might find inside the walls, especially in renovating an old historic property like the ones we focus on in ecobrownstone.com.  Changes that are outside the scope of the original specifications, and not the fault of the contractor, will be up-charges. 

One rule of thumb is to add a percentage to your total quoted costs so that up-charges are part of your budget -- I use the following rough scale depending on how big the project is, adjusted up or down depending on how much up-charge risk there is and how much research for accuracy has gone behind all my budgetary cost assumptions, for example there's more risk if you are replacing major systems:

• budget 10% for jobs under $50,000
• budget 7% for jobs between $50,000 and around $250,000
• budget 5% for jobs over $250,000

Of course, if the work you are doing is not through a general contractor but rather is a defined project that you hire a tradeperson direclty to do, then the quoted price is the quoted price if it's spec'ed out correctly, and you don't necessarily need to budget for up-charges.   

That being said, not all changes are major enough to warrant a "change order" and different pricing, and it infuriates homeowners to be presented with up-charges for immaterial changes.   Contractors surely build in some higher-cost risk into their quotes as well and should eat small changes.

One very important aspect of the relationship is that the contractor must keep in mind AT ALL TIMES  that he/she is a guest in someone's house.  Contractors, you don't own it or control it and you play by the house rules.  For instance, no smoking means no smoking in the house nor on the front stoop, or porch, or patio, or garden.  Clean up means clean up.  A meeting at 8AM means 8AM, not 10:30AM.

And a note to Mssrs. Bob and Alan Hanbury who have a contractual clause that workers  “shall not be expected to keep gates and the like closed for animals and children.” -- anyone who has a child or  a pet would be crazy to hire you because you seem to be proud of your blatant disregard for the creatures who live in the house.  In fact, the apparent lack of respect for the homeowner's premises that comes through in that clause makes me think that anyone would be crazy to hire you.  Do you think it's an acceptable risk to leave open a door or gate for a young child to walk out into traffic?  If someone working at your rural neighbor's house in CT forgets to close the gate of the pasture and your neighbor's horse tramples your lawn and flower beds would you be happy?   When the homeowners are careful to be sure their dog has a closed pen so as not to roam freely and you stupidly, carelessly let it get out, you don't think you are responsible it if bites someone? 

On the flip-side, any homeowner who won't let a contractor use a bathroom in their home is inconsiderate and selfish, contractors are human after all -- but make sure they know they can use it or you might have a situation I found on two of my jobs where a particular worker (1) left a pile of crap behind my furnace, and (2) left a plastic bag of sh-t in my hallway!  It never occurred to me that anyone would think they couldn't use the bathroom.  Now I make sure that I tell my contractors that they can use the facilities.  I sympathize with the worry over trampling debris onto new floors, but hey, you're renovating, so make a path of construction paper to the bathroom.

Both sides need to try to be fair. For example, I recently did a job which included replacing a 300 SF worn out kitchen floor of linoleum brick-shaped tiles with a cork floor.  I had experience installing cork tiles, my contractor did not.  I knew the underfloor had to be absolutely smooth and that the layer of old glue left behind after ripping out the tiles  would either need to be removed somehow or the underfloor would need to be replaced or covered with a thin laminate.  I spec'ed the job and installation of specified cork tile, and it was quite clear to me that the bid was way too low, so I told the contractor that he needed to acquaint himself with the product and what was involved, and rebid.  It came in at a higher price, but a fair price. 

A couple of other simple rules:

Homeowners, don't blame your contractor if your indecision delays your job. Contractors, expect penalty decreases if you don't stick to a reasonable timetable to which you previously agreed. 

Contractors, every little change is not material and is not a license to charge more money.  And, you can't charge more because you screwed-up the bid and your costs were in fact higher.

Contractor, you may think the little odds and ends that hang on at the end of a job are not important because the space can be occupied and used, but for the homeowner the most important thing is what the finished product looks like.  The devil is in the detail, and those little odds and ends may affect the impact of the design -- if the homeowners didn't want a new design they wouldn't have embarked on a renovation project and hired you in the first place.   Hold-backs that are significant enough to be felt are incentivizing to get the work done, to pull your crew off another bigger job to tie-up loose ends, and appropriate. 

Bottom line, the more detail that goes into your planning, and the more realistic you are from the outset about expecting changes and a few up-charges,  means there are fewer surprises, fewer changes, a more harmonious relationship and an easier job. 

How delighted I was a year or so ago when Brooklyn Heights sprouted a glowing green bike path on Henry street -- so cheerful and inviting, shouting to the world that NYC is encouraging bikers.  Well, it's at least colorful.  By the tone of the angry comments in this weeks New York Times City Room invitation to submit comments about cycling in NYC to Joshua Benson, the bicycle program coordinator for the New York City Department of Transportation, one would think there is a war going on. 

Biking in New York is dangerous, there's no question about it, you've really got to be alert and we've all got to face the fact that it will take a long time to change people's instincts about how to use the streets, and that goes for all concerned.  If we are making broad behavioral generalizations then we must acknowledge not only that drivers can be reckless when it comes to bikers, but it's time for bikers to admit that they can be reckless when it comes to pedestrians -- if cars have to stop for pedestrians, so do bikes.   Cyclists often behave like quasi motorists and quasi pedestrians.  Judging by some of the  comments submitted to Joshua Benson, some cyclists want to rule the road as motorists, but it's also common practice for cyclists to go through red lights, swerve around and through crowds of pedestrians at top speed going any which way as if they are pedestrians too, drive the wrong way down the street and so on.  Cyclists may feel like they can 'pass' as a pedestrian because they are not in an enclosed vehicle and their feet can touch the ground, but they are in fact a vehicle.  And pedestrians must respect the cyclists right of way in the bike lane (unless there is a red light!).  

Now that we've got the "mutual respect" and "follow the  rules of the road" comments out of the way, it's time to turn our attention to talk of some things that the city can do to further that goal and to make it easier for people to use bikes as a means of transport.  One query I posted to Joshua Benson is regarding bike parking.  Cyclists need a place to safely leave their bikes.  Parking garage owners typically do not accept bikes, maybe it's insurance, maybe some other reason.  The suggestion I  submitted is to develop some kind of incentive program for parking garages to cater to cyclists.  Perhaps a tax credit for setting aside a portion of their car parking spaces for bikes, and for bike parking rates to be at most 1/4 of the car rate since you can get at least 4-6 bikes in one car space.  This could be a profitable undertaking for garage owners and a plus for the city's green goals.

Today the BklynDesigns show opened in DUMBO, and the many souls who braved the inclement weather (like me) were delighted by what they saw.   This year's show clearly demonstrates the realm of industrial design where function and art converge.  The annual show, sponsored by the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce, features products that are designed and/or made in Brooklyn and covers a wide range goods:  furniture, wallpaper, carpeting, lighting, textiles, decorative arts, jewelry and clothing. 

Designing with raw materials that are sustainable or eco-friendly in other ways such as low-VOC and non-toxic, is creeping in, although it is not the focus of the exhibit as many designers were uncertain about whether their products had "green" attributes.  But keep in mind, however, that buying local in itself is "green", and Brooklyn is exploding with creative talent.

By all means, it's a show not to be missed and will be a great way to spend a few hours on Saturday (open 10-7) or Sunday (open 11-6).  The venues are the Dumbo Arts Center, Smack Mellon and St. Ann's Warehouse.  See the link above for more details.   

You're starting a renovation project and it’s likely that your initial focus is contemplating  exactly what you want your home to look like and how you want to occupy the space. Let’s face it, we all want comfort and beauty. However, if you are reading this then you’ve probably already also concluded that comfort and beauty are not your only goals – you care about having a home that is energy efficient, healthy to live in and does not use materials or function in a manner that negatively impacts on the natural environment, and this goal is directly affected by the technical way the space is designed, in particular the mechanical systems, and the choice of materials.

This is the point at which the need for an architect or other designer comes into play. Based on our experience, we’ve basically distilled project planning into two major areas, and the degree of help you need from an architect or designer in each of these categories will dictate the scope of the architect’s role and the consequent cost:

1. Designing for comfort and beauty, and the extent to which your personal style for your home is solidified or whether you want design advice
2. Technical systems design and whole-house systems integration

Why we haven’t used a full service architect for past projects, and why we are using one for this renovation:

Architects are artists and their first inclination is to take on an entire project. The standard operating procedure for architects is to include all measuring and design work with several possible design layouts, multiple room elevations, preparation of “contractor bidding documents”, collection of bids, project management, construction oversight, and dealing with the permit process. For this level of service architects most often charge a percentage of construction costs typically ranging from 10-15%.

You don’t have to go to architecture or design school, however, to have vision for interior design and layout. If you are like me -- a consummate planner and extremely detail oriented, someone who draws multiple scale-drawn floor plans, right down to the inch, to hone down the design to exactly what you want – then you likely also baulk at the notion of paying someone else for design when you’ve done the creative work. Consequently, my MO on all my renovation projects to date has been to do my own designing and to use an expediter with drafting capabilities to draw up and file the necessary plans with the Department of Buildings and the Landmark’s Preservation Commission.  Any experienced builder should be able to work with a simple set of floor plans and a materials list without elevations for every wall, floor and ceiling.  If you are doing a renovation with isolated and discrete, albeit high impact, pockets of change, like new kitchen and bathrooms, and you have an eye for layout and choosing fixtures and so forth, or you can have those layouts done by your fittings supplier (like kitchen showrooms that often offer a free measuring and layout service) then you may also be able to get by with this approach. Depending on the scope of the project (whether the Certificate of Occupancy is changing, for instance) the cost in my experience for an expediter to fully handle the project by drawing up the necessary plans and reports, filing them and ferrying them through the Department of Buildings and the Landmark’s Preservation Commission, has been between $5,000 and $13,000 . This approach saves a lot of money (I’ll get into that in my next blog posting) and eliminates duplication b/c it is likely that any architect you hire will also hire an expediter. But beware, it requires a lot of time, attention and effort on your part.  We are all busy and not everyone has the time or the inclination to plan a project, draw up their own plans, come up with sketches and materials they want to use, work closely with an expediter and see it through. If you fall into this group then you will need a full service architect to handle the entire process.

I also enjoy researching the latest options for fittings, finishes and furniture (try saying that 10-times fast) because I want my projects to present my personal style, so I do not need an architect or designer to take me to showrooms and the like, often a function built in to percentage-based pricing.

Last, the arrangement simply needs to be fair. In a percentage-of-construction-costs fee structure the work is not broken down. In addition to ostensibly paying for design work that I am doing because design would have been included in the percentage fee, there are quite a few aspects of our overall project that are so discrete but pricey, and not requiring any architect input, that it is simply unfair to pay an architect a portion of the costs of those projects -- for example relining all my fireplaces, re-doing the brownstone in the front of the building, stripping the paint from the facade, repositioning my pre-existing iron garden terrace and staircase and other items related to the garden and landscaping.

So , what made this project different from my other projects that made me decide I needed a full service architect rather than just follow my usual bare bones expediter route? Simple: we’re way beyond redesigning interior living spaces. Even if you are like me and are inclined to do the design work yourself, you may feel, as I do on the 168 Clinton St. job, that the changes in the systems may be too extensive to handle on your own. We will be moving plumbing and redesigning heating and hot water systems, introducing some kind of A/C, installing state of the art whole- house high tech capability, redoing lighting, considering solar PV or wind and solar hot water, opening some walls that need structural evaluation, not to mention rethinking every aspect of the building envelope that can affect energy efficiency -- sounds like a lot but, no, this is NOT a gut renovation because nearly all walls and floors and detailing will remain in tact. Although a mechanical engineer, not an architect, will ultimately design and draw the heating/hot water/plumbing and A/C aspects, we want to take a holistic approach and ensure that all the systems are designed to complement each other and that the electrical system is designed to seamlessly mesh with them, so we decided that we needed an architect to pull it all together. The challenge is defining the scope – finding the dividing line between what I need an architect to do and what I don’t need, and how the fee structure will work, which will be the topic of my next blog so check back or subscribe to an RSS feed.

Last night (May 1, 2008) many local manufacturers and an array of industry professionals gathered for an event, presented by NYIRN (the New York Industrial Retention Network) a not-for-profit that promotes NYCs manufacturing sector, to hear a group of building industry and manufacturing specialists give advice on how to “green” a manufacturing process, and how to spec green products. One spoken, and unspoken, theme that ran through the presentations was the concept that you must pay careful attention to detail in both the manufacturing process, in the analysis of the green-ness of products you choose to spec for your job, and in the instructions you give to the professionals working for you (contractors, architects etc.) regarding exactly what your goals are. This is consistent with the advice this website has been giving concerning the need to analyze the issues around every aspect of your renovation project in order to achieve a "green" result.

For example, one of the panelists pointed out that LEED® for Homes sets limited goals for the use of green products because it only deals with products as they are installed on the job site and not with their manufacture.  So, for example, to get LEED® credits you may need to use low or no-VOC adhesives to attach your wood moldings to your walls, but LEED® does not address whether the molding itself is made with low or no-VOC components or has a non-toxic manufacturing process. Look beyond the guidelines and rating systems; they are not meant to allow you to abdicate the analysis decision making process.

It’s all about education, and sometimes your contractor, designer or architect may need to be educated too. Be specific about actual brands of products you want to use and the specific things you want to avoid – see our Article “How to evaluate green products” for guidance on this point.

Also, remember that you the consumer will pay for manufacturing waste and disposal of hazardous substances in the manufacturing process -- the manufacturer doesn’t throw that in for free, it’s built into the cost of goods sold when determining selling price – so putting effort into identifying products that have green manufacturing processes can be beneficial on many levels.

Whenever I pick up a product that was made in China I wonder what human misery has gone into its production.  We need to be conscious consumers -- does anyone really want our children to play with a toy that was produced by another child's slave labor?  Buying locally-produced products not only supports your local economy but also removes support for products produced by abusive labor practices that enslave children, pay unfair wages, or poison the workforce and the planet. 

I realize not every product you may need or want is produced locally, but at a minimum you can look for products produced in countries where child labor protection laws, occupational safety and health regulation, and environmental regulations to reduce green house gases and the release of other toxic chemicals into the environment, are in effect or being implemented. 

China is not the only offender.  The International Labour Organization (ILO) is an agency of the U.N. that, through its International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), provides technical advisory services focusing on the worst abuses to children: hazardous work, forced labour, street-life for children, treatment of girls, and the employment of children who are less than 13 years old.  You can read more about international efforts to eliminate child labor at the International Labour Organization web site, which includes a database of child labor statistics on a country-by-country basis around the world. 

The honeymoon is over. For decades we in the west have enjoyed a constant influx of cheap consumer products, but at the expense of manufacturing jobs in the US. We have indirectly benefited economically, in the form of cheaper goods and more consumer spending power, from the low wages and poorer working and living conditions throughout Asia. But, there is never a free ride. While we filled our homes with the latest electronic gadgets, toys, cars, and bought new wardrobes every year, we did it at the expense of workers who were not paid fairly and worked in poor conditions, and at the expense of our planet as manufacturing was taking place in regions where toxic substances and emissions were not regulated well or at all, not to mention at the expense of manufacturing jobs at home.

China’s staggering growth is related to the western consumer’s insatiable demand for more stuff. More demand equals more manufacturing plants, equals more energy consumption and more pollution. China overtook the United States as the leading emitter of carbon dioxide about a year ago, and its emissions are now increasing about 10 times faster than in the United States.

Currently, prices of Asian goods are on the rise. The global homogenization taking place through technology, information and communication is enabling Asian workers to see how the “other half’ lives, and coupled with rising inflation making it even more difficult for workers to enjoy a reasonable standard of living, the labor force is beginning to demand fair wages and better working conditions just as workers here and in Europe made those demands in the early and middle part of the 20th century. Also, with the world taking notice, Asia is taking seriously the need to better manage its greenhouse gas emissions and we are beginning to see the implementation of cleaner, and pricier, production technologies with the attendant, unprecedented, construction boom. All of this upward cost pressure is becoming too much for Asian manufacturers to absorb , and the cost of goods manufactured in Asia will creep, or in some cases shoot, upwards.

So, how exactly is this good for the green building movement? There are huge macro-economic forces at play here, but it may come down to the age old principles of supply and demand, or in this case demand and supply. As Asian manufacturers start passing on higher costs to consumers, inevitably demand for Asian goods will decrease. Higher priced mass-produced Asian products may approach the price of competing, pricier, goods produced closer to home, increasing demand for products produced locally. Buying locally-produced products is a better choice for the environment because, even if the product is not inherently “green” by virtue of being made from sustainable and/or non-toxic materials or an energy efficient manufacturing process, all things being equal buying local reduces the embodied energy in the product by substantially reducing the amount of fossil fuels burned in the product’s transportation to the consumer. Indeed, under the LEED for Homes guidelines, using materials manufactured within 500 miles of the home earn credits toward LEED certification.

Asian inflation may have the result of stimulating our local economy and, over time, if it’s not cheaper to manufacture overseas, perhaps manufacturers will opt to bring their mass-production operation back to the US, helping the economy overall and not just the green building movement .

Renovating a brownstone can be a daunting task. Over the years we have renovated many, and as we embarked on our latest renovation in Brooklyn we decided, in the face of the global warming catastrophe, rising fuel costs and sustainability issues, to go about it as a “green” project. Starry eyed and gung ho, I dove right in, started researching exactly what it means to be “green” and exactly what is encompassed by “green” building practices. Every inquiry led me in multiple directions, like an exploding star, and I rode a roller coaster of barely contained enthusiasm, to being overwhelmed, to being paralyzed, to finally being able to see the forest for the trees. 

Allow me to explain.  My epiphany started with becoming familiar with LEED®, arguably the best place to start a discussion of green building practices given the recent proliferation of building-size “going for LEED certification” banners cropping up all over the metro area. “LEED” stands for The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, and the LEED Green Building Rating System™ was first developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) in 1998, for commercial construction, as a way to encourage the development and implementation of green building practices. LEED has become the pre-eminent green building rating system in the U.S. measured by dollar value and square footage of LEED certified green commercial projects and number of homes in the program. In 2005 the USGBC launched a pilot LEED for Homes program, and on Dec. 5, 2007, made the LEED for Homes program official.

“Great!” I said to myself. Here’s a set of standards I can follow, I think subconsciously wanting to believe that they made it easy by doing the work for me, eliminating the need for me to research and make decisions because the Guidelines would spoon feed me with what I needed to know to become “green”. Without even looking at the guidelines I decided that I wanted to be the first LEED- certified brownstone under the new LEED for Homes guidelines, despite the fact that I secretly wrinkled my brow at press articles about LEED-certified urban homes touting bicycle racks as a green attribute that earned LEED credits – bicycle racks are a great idea, don’t get me wrong, but we live in NYC with a dense population, local services we can walk to and a great and extensively used mass transit system.  An urban project will have built-in LEED credits in the category that deals with reducing the need for vehicular use due to our location, therefore adding a bicycle rack to the front of a home does not further promote forsaking car transportation. In other words, though a great thing to do, a home bike rack is a low-impact aspect upon which to hang a “green” hat in an urban environment. Nevertheless, I placed blind faith in LEED and wanted to set an example of LEED certification focusing on bigger-impact aspects of renovation, like solar and wind power, overall systems design for reduced energy consumption, water saving measures etc., and to chronicle the process to make it an easier path for others to “be green”.

Then I got into the nuts and bolts of trying to apply the LEED for Homes standards to a brownstone. I became a member of the committee evaluating the new LEED for Homes standards for NYC, and I studied them with a view to their application to brownstones. (see our Article Navigating the Green Building Guidelines Part I: A LEED® for Homes Guidelines Primer -- The Lay Person's Guide)  I quickly discovered that, in order to qualify for certification, the project must be a total gut renovation, right down to the joists and studs -- not very practical or necessary for the vast majority of brownstone renovations, nor, arguably, should it be given that brownstones are historic properties worthy of preservation.  Unnecessarily ripping out all the walls, beautiful architectural moldings and detailing, and floors simply to further the goal of getting a green stamp of approval, seemed hypocritical and indeed not “green” because it adds a tremendous amount to demolition waste and burgeoning landfills, some of which could be toxically laden with lead and asbestos.

So, what’s the point: simple – don’t get hung up on the points. Taking action simply to accumulate credits under a green building guidelines scheme misses the point and tricks people into thinking they are meeting some master criteria handed down from a higher power. Focusing on the points, rather than the issues, adds greater significance than warranted to low-impact actions. The focus, therefore, ought to be on the ISSUES when making decisions about building and renovating, not the credits. Perhaps this is a reason why the motivated and well-intentioned professionals at the USGBC, together with the American Society of Interior Designers, issued the Regreen standards last month, a program for non-gut renovations and remodeling focusing on best practices rather than a rating and certification system.  I urge you not to approach a "green" renovation as a status symbol that requires a third party stamp of approval. 

If you indeed are embarking on a gut renovation for legitimate reasons other than to simply meet the LEED® certification criteria, then by all means go for certification! If, however, you are renovating and don’t need to tear down all your walls and rip out all your floors, then an understanding of the LEED® for Homes guidelines, and the NAHB guidelines as well as Regreen, can help focus you on the issues, some of which you may have never even known existed. An understanding can assist you in making environmentally sound decisions on a project-wide basis, but not dictate decisions simply for the purpose of  earning points under the guidelines as an end in itself.

Since I started this process the National Association of Home Builders has issued “The NAHB Model Green Home Building Guidelines” and has plans to launch in late spring, in cooperation with the International Code Council, the “National Green Building Standard” dealing with single-family construction, remodeling and multifamily construction, which will be submitted to the American National Standards Institute for approval after the public comment period.    (Each of the guidelines will be the subject of an Upcoming Article.)

Confused?  Don't be.  Ecobrownstone™ will guide you through the process, and the first step is to internalize the mantra that "there are no wrong answers, only choices."  We're doing the research and distilling the infomation because, remember, we're renovating a brownstone too.  Through a series of in-depth articles Ecobrownstone™ will help you make sense of the standards by analyzing LEED® for Homes, Regreen, The NAHB Model Green Home Building Guidelines and, when issued, the National Green Building Standards. We will demonstrate how each can be applied to our ongoing case-study brownstone renovation at 168 Clinton St. in Brooklyn Heights, and to vintage urban row-house or townhouse renovations generally. Also check our articles for detailed information on specific aspects of the building process, from Air conditioning to Zero-VOC finishes and furnishings.

The first place to start your green renovation odyssey is to read Start Here:  The Decision Making process for Brownstone and Urban Row-house Green Renovation.