
Rooftop Vegetables at Noble Rot Restaurant, Portland
Just when you worry that Green Building has gone to mainstream and is being compromised by excessive greenwashing and commercial interest, an event comes along to remind us all that there is great progress to be made, and great people pushing the envelope.
The annual Living Future Conference, hosted by the Cascadia chapter of the US Green Building Council was once again an enlightening, authentic, and frank look at Green Building. Cascadia encompasses a large region from Oregon, Washington, and BC all the way to Alaska. Cascadia has long been the progressive wing of the USGBC and this group of long-time ecologically focused engineers, designers, and professionals pulls no punches (nor does the self proclaimed “militant arm of the chapter,” the Emerging Green Builders). They also have a lot of fun.
It was inspiring to surface issues such as “how do we address the fact that a LEED Silver building can be greener than a LEED Platinum Building?” This is absolutely true, since any green features that exceed the required minimum do not result in additional points; the LEED system rewards diversity of green over being thorough. For example, using 100%of lumber from responsibly managed forests garners no more points than using 50%. It follows that there is no reward for exceeding the minimum compliance. It’s well understand why this is so, and arguably a good strategy, but there needs to be a mechanism whereby a building is recognized for going the extra distance.
I presented on the concept of “Resilience,” something Sim Van der Ryn and I have been discussing for over a year now and have done some preliminary writing about. In particular, we feel that Food & Water are critical issues that are not being addressed adequately. If we cannot find ways to create infrastructure around these fundamental needs for life, the near future cannot be viewed optimistically. Our current Food and Water delivery systems are far too dependent on energy and centralized supply chains that we all recognize as tenuous. The current 1500 miles an average morsel of American food travels is indefensible from a sustainability standpoint, and the fuel and water associated with industrial agriculture is not possible to continue.
To create resilience in these systems, they must be localized and connected to natural cycles and climates. This means disentangling the often questionable adjudications and political arrangements resulting in waste and misuse; indeed, rethinking some of the more dysfunctional institutions and industries delivering basic services throughout our society.
This may appear at face value to be radical thinking; in fact we are witnessing the failure of these institutions before our very eyes, and indeed they are being rethought in this moment. What we are proposing is broader thinking that will create lasting resilience rather than short-term fixes that amount to an attempt to shore up a clearly outdated approach that is only viable due to subsidies that fly in the face of a free market.
On the ground, the goals need to be localized stable economies based on regional infrastructures that can withstand failures in larger infrastructures and institutions that seem likely in our future. Contrary to some agrarian idealism, Resilience relies upon the most proven passive systems for water and agriculture optimized through synergy with the most current technology. Hydroponic and aquaponic (integrated aqualture and agriculture) rooftop greenhouses and integrated site water management systems that intelligently select from multiple water supplies including graywater, rainwater, and recycled wastewater.
Scratching the surface is all that can be done here, but there will be much more to come on the topic of Resilience, and in particular how passive ecological systems can produce resilient local infrastructure to ensure food and water are available to all as we charge headlong into an uncertain future with failing infrastructures and an ailing economy.
Filed under: Uncategorized |