A different framework
Sustainability is more than what gets built…it’s how things are built
Skanska USA expresses its corporate commitment to the triple bottom line through its Sustainability Agenda. The following is the first of a five-part series exploring how Skanska is approaching the triple bottom line for the good of its clients, its respective businesses and for the good of the places we live, play and work.
According to McGraw-Hill’s research, the market for green building in 2012 could end up tallying more than $85 billion. By 2016, they forecast that it will potentially increase to nearly $250 billion. That is tremendous growth, but it will put the focus more and more on the methods owners and contractors use to achieve the savings green building can enable.
It’s an exciting time for green building. In order to be successful, though, we must collaborate with our clients to identify appropriate mid- and long-term solutions to ensure their buildings operate efficiently. Our resolve to help our clients achieve higher energy and environmental performance is more important now than ever as energy prices climb higher and CO2 emissions begin to become commoditized. Owners can control what they build today; they cannot control the price of energy tomorrow. Buildings have long life spans, so the decisions made today have a lasting impact. Owners can feel empowered that today’s green buildings incorporate a decade of lessons learned, providing demonstrable evidence that companies can save money and lower their use of energy and water in significant ways if they are designed and operated thoughtfully.
I would submit that not building high-performing buildings will cost too much: in operation costs, which are easy to measure, and compromised human health and productivity, which are not. Even retrofitting old buildings to LEED standards is a worthwhile investment. The USGBC has reported that buildings that feature high-performance systems can reduce water usage by 40 percent and can cut energy use in half. The resulting reductions in water and energy bills go directly to the bottom line. The USGBC estimates that businesses that green their buildings can anticipate an 8-9 percent decrease in operating costs.
Read more: Building performance also depends on operation, maintenance and occupant behavior.
Comments
I applaud your comments and look forward to the rest of the series. Using the Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) guidelines or criteria for sustainable measurement in construction and real estate is a great jumping off point. Few american general contractors know of or have made the commitment to report on their going progress in sustainable management. It's unfortunate, because it's one concrete way of true contractor involvement. Unlike LEED for designers, there are no real platforms that harness the talent within the construction industry. And, given that the EPA ranks the construction industry third in greenhouse gas emissions and estimates that between 2000 and 2030, 27% of existing building stock and 50% of future building stock will be built, you would think that there should be a greater emphasis on measuring energy and water during the actual build phase (actually, I think you could use the EPA's Portfolio Manager software for this purpose). What builders/owners need are a few incentives (expediting permitting, considerations on loans, etc,...) that emphasize the importance of collecting and using this information. Perhaps, our policy makers also need to take a closer look (which I think California's AB32 examination of transportation and concrete is a start.) Anyway, looking forward to the next installment and would welcome for discussion on the subject.
Leave a comment