The Opportunities of Sustainability, The Dangers of Greenwashing

In some ways to be an environmental builder seems to be an oxymoron.  The process of creating, furnishing and maintaining buildings in our industrialized society is the single largest resources consumer (and waster) of all. For thousands of years, human beings have built shelters for themselves using local and natural materials without 30-year mortgages and landfills. Today the built environment in our culture is a far cry from sustainability in any sense. “The extraction, manufacture and transportation of building materials are major contributors to global environmental problems.”(1.) In other words, we cannot continue on our current path of building and inhabiting those buildings indefinitely.  We are finally starting to feel the pinch in terms of higher utility bills, diminishing quantities of fossil fuels and raw materials, the degradation of our natural world, and growing health care costs due to our polluted environment (both indoor and out).

The construction industry is also the largest contributor to our local landfill via building and remodeling scraps, packaging materials and the disposal of whole buildings no longer deemed usable.  Unfortunately, many of these materials do not return to the earth naturally and will remain in landfills for centuries, perhaps.  Many materials disposed of in landfills are recyclable though, if people are willing to take the time to do so.  Landfills are filling up.  Are you ready to have the next one in your backyard?  We must ask ourselves if we have the individual and collective will to get off the freight train we are on and make the changes necessary to create a truly sustainable culture.

The construction industry has slowly been responding to these problems with the development of green building guidelines.  These ecologically oriented practices focus on conserving energy and natural resources, protecting health, biodiversity and environmental quality.  Standards are beginning to be developed but some are minimal and even arbitrary. How good do we need things to be?  We must ask ourselves what is the ultimate goal and how do we get there.  The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has created a green building rating system called the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program.   There are other green building rating systems emerging.  One called “The Living Building Challenge” dares us to to go further than just a few token products or techniques..  “Sustainability requires that built environments must reach a certain level of  “greenness” if the services of nature are to remain sufficiently viable to serve both present and future generations.” (2.) Sustainability requires us to reorganize our way of life and bring it into alignment with the laws of nature.  One helpful tool in helping us move in a logical sustainable path is a set of guiding principles developed in Sweden called “The Natural Step”. “The core teachings of The Natural Step , because they are scientifically incontrovertible and consensually derived, offer a common ground where people of all walks of life, of disparate beliefs and value systems, can discuss environmental problems without drowning in details or disputes”.(3.)  I imagine we will be hearing of and perhaps working with elements of the Natural Step program in days to come.

In contrast to the sustainable ideal, I’m seeing another trend emerging that is distressing.

Marketing schemes by business leaders are quite often aimed at increasing sales, not necessarily based on the understanding needed to create sustainability.  Much like the food labeling controversy surrounding what is "natural" or "organic", greenwashing is occurring in the construction industry about what practices and materials can really be considered "green" or "sustainable". The interplay of forces affecting energy efficiency, planetary/environmental impact, and particularly the health implications are far reaching and often hidden beneath more immediate concerns of costs, time and aesthetic standards. When we look at the hidden costs of certain choices and begin to examine the subtle implications of generally accepted building practices the equation becomes a bit more unbalanced, even in the world of green building.

One of these hidden costs is called the “total embodied energy” (TEE).  Embodied energy is the energy needed to grow, harvest, extract, manufacture and transport a building product. The city of Portland, Oregon conducted a study in the mid-90’s evaluating reclaimed lumber. Buildings were carefully hand demolished instead of being bulldosed which renders the building materials useless.  The results showed that the recycled lumber had a much lower TEE than new lumber.  In other words we are not currently paying the true costs of building materials.  Government subsidies of the oil industry and the logging industry as well as the degradation of our environment are not presently factored into the “bottom line” when we purchase new products.

In the spring of 2007, TerraChoice Environmental Marketing (a company that consults on green marketing and administers its own labeling and certification program), embarked on a study of green marketing claims of the products in so-called "big box stores" in North America. Research teams recorded each environmental claim they encountered in the stores, along with the product, the nature of the claim, any supporting information, and any references for more information. The teams evaluated many types of products ranging from personal care products to appliances to electronics.

The team identified 1,018 products and 1,753 green claims. TerraChoice found that "all but one made claims that are either demonstrably false or that risk misleading intended audiences."

As a result of its study, TerraChoice identified what it calls the six sins of greenwashing. These "sins" are:

Six Sins of Greenwashing

• The Sin of Hidden Tradeoff - Promoting a single green factor of a product without any attention to other important issues.
• The Sin of No Proof - Unsubstantiated claims. For example, claiming a product was not tested on animals, but with no third party certification.
• Sin of Vagueness - Poorly defined or overly broad claims, such as "chemical free."
• Sin of Irrelevance - A claim that may be true, but is either unimportant or otherwise irrelevant. For example, claiming that a product is "CFC free" is irrelevant because CFCs have been outlawed since the late 1980s.
• Sin of Fibbing - Claims of certification that are false.
• Sin of the Lesser of Two Evils - A claim that may be true, but distracts from greater environmental impacts.

A more detailed explanation  of these “sins” can be found on Wikipedia’s greenwashing entry. “Buyer Beware” once again needs to be our modus operandi.

Some examples of not so green--green building practices follow here.  Keep in mind that my standards may be more particular than others.  See what you think.

Concrete is being promoted as a green building material, and in some ways it is. Fewer trees are used and it will not rot. Nor do termites like it. But the TEE required to make concrete is extremely high. It has been estimated that the production of Portland Cement is responsible for about 8% of greenhouse gas emissions.

Steel studs, again are durable and place a lower demand on our forest ecosystems. Recycled steel is preferred, of course, as the manufacture of steel from raw materials is energy intensive and polluting. It takes nine times more energy to make and transport steel framing than wood framing. There are also electro-magnetic field issues associated with steel stud work. 

Fly ash is a waste product from the cleaning of industrial smokestacks. This recycling effort is being promoted as an aggregate in concrete products and drywall materials. Unfortunately, fly ash can be comprised of toxic components and even be radioactive. We have to be careful how these are used. These do not always make safe building materials.

Oriented Strand Board (OSB) claims the use of waste wood.  It is preferred if only waste wood is used. The glues to bind the wood chips together is formaldahyde based and poses a threat to indoor air quality. Non-formaldehyde based glues are being developed. My experience with this material is that it is not a 100 year product. Will you be able to hand your OSB house down to your children or grandchildren?

Structural Insulated Panel System (SIPS) sandwich a layer of expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam between two layers of OSB and is hailed in some circles. Panelized systems greatly reduce labor costs and in this case reduce energy consumption in the operation of these buildings. While these are worthwhile goals to strive for, what are the costs? While the EPS foam is manufactured without CFCs (?)and HCFCs (?), it is made with pentane and formaldehyde, both known toxins. There is an alternative SIPS panel using compressed straw in its core .

The list goes on and can get complicated.  We go to our supply house and purchase what we always do without a thought.  The average consumer may not have all the information to make a reasoned choice.  Of course, there are realities and constraints we all must deal with that often force a compromise of our ideals. The purpose here is not to diminish any efforts being made to make positive changes.  If we become too idealistic and dogmatic we risk alienating each other.  Change can be a slow process, particularly for the industrial/bureaucratic giant we have come to depend upon.  Buckminster Fuller used to say there is a gestation period for new ways of thinking and being.  This one may be a generation or so long.  Let's hope we have the luxury of time.

“The world we have created today, as a result of our thinking thus far, has problems which cannot be solved by thinking the way we thought when we created them.”  Albert Einstein.

References:

1. A Primer on a Building ; Dianna Lopez Barnett & William Browning;Rocky Mountain Institute, 1995
2. Using The Natural Step As A Framework Toward The Construction and Operation of Fully Sustainable Buildings; Duke Castle; Oregon Natural Step Construction Industry Group, 2001
3. Taking the Natural Step ; Paul Hawken; IN CONTEXT : A Quaterly Of Humane Sustainable Culture, 1995
4. Architectural Resource Guide: Architects/Designers/Planners for Social Responsibility; edited by David Kibbey, self published, 1998
5. Prescriptions for a Healthy House; Paula Baker-Laporte; New Society Publishers, 2001
6. The Art of Natural Building; edited by Joseph Kennedy, Michael Smith & Catherine Wanek; New Society Publishers, 2002
7. Wikipedia