Walter Yu, P.E., LEED AP

While co-working with several friends in the Outer Sunset today, a friend of mine turned me onto Architecture for Humanity, an open-source architecture project placing sustainable design in the hands of those who need it in developing nations.

As Cameron Sinclair  stated in his TED talk (see video), sustainability is not about putting solar panels on expensive houses or buying a Prius, it’s about survival in the developing world.

For most of us living in developed nations, sustainability means being resourceful and reducing our impact on the environment. However, for those living in developing nations, being resourceful is a way of life.

Architecture for Humanity solicits for projects that need to be build and mobilizes designers to design them. The most important feature is that these projects are built and make a difference in the communities that receive them. The organization connects sustainable design with those who most need them.

As a civil engineer, I understand that design may not be available to everybody, especially those in developing nations. Infrastructure projects are often built for those will deep pockets who are able to foot the hefty design fees.

And rather than operating as a true non-profit, Architect for Humanity leverages private industry practice with humanitarian work to advance its cause of building projects to improve the quality of life for those getting by with less.

In conclusion, it’s inspiring to see sustainable design being applied to help those who are less fortunate.

Building green is more than skin deep.

In my post on styrofoam building blocks, I made a reference to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) or otherwise known as “cradle-to-grave” analysis.

So this recent GreenSource article caught my attention, which discusses  the benefits of LCA and suggests that it be considered in the LEED rating system.

According to the author, the LEED rating system has brought green building to the mainstream, and LCA would bring even more transparency to the LEED rating process.

The main benefit of LCA is its rigorous approach in considering over-looked phases such as building operation and material manufacturing that contribute to environmental impact.

The USGBC (which administers the LEED-rating program) is currently using LCA to inform its project rating system without direct implementation, which is a step in the right direction.

Bringing more transparency and clarity to the rating process would improve information symmetry, a term used by economists to describe the state where both buyers and sellers in a marketplace have equal information about their product.

Information symmetry would be useful between vendors and suppliers, where both parties are aware of product impact and the monetary costs of those impacts.

However, LCA still has a way to go before being a widely-accept form of impact analysis. The assumptions of factors to include and how they are calculated depend on who is performing the analysis. In addition, the most widely-used analysis software, Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings, is still basic in nature and only considers major building materials. As a result, LCA currently suffers from lack of conformity and product data.

In conclusion, LCA is still far from being implemented in LEED-ratings. But as the products considered by LCA grows, it may bring LCA more attention and likelihood of use in the LEED-rating system.

Re-thinking the way we build!

Green building is not always about developing innovative new technologies such as the one I described in my post on green roofing.

Often, simple techniques such as being aware of construction waste and composting can reduce the amount of waste entering our landfills.

Keeping this in mind, the SFGate has an article archive on new ways to build with alternative materials.

For example, one article cites the use of styrofoam (EPS block) as architectural moldings, door & window times and even wall partitions (with plastic bracket supports).

The blocks are laser cut from larger foam blocks and attached onto steel supports, just as wood blocks would be used. They can be cut quickly and precisely, while saving weight.

And though not mentioned in the article, styrofoam would not have any termite issues which are prevalent in North America.

There are some drawbacks, however – styrofoam is not biodegradable and ends up in landfills at the end of its life cycle. Features needing greater detail such as decorative molding still require wood.

As a civil engineer, I’ve seen various uses of styrofoam as a building material. It’s versatile, cost-effective and effective in saving weight. One interesting analysis to see would be the Life Cycle Assessment of the total emissions of wood saved vs. transport and disposal of EPS block to landfills.