Blog #18

It’s my last SCORE blog so I’m going to do a mini-reflection on the whole project in this post. Because of things like sailing and having four AP classes, I had a busy schedule. Because of this, I couldn’t visit as many work sites as I had initially planned on and the project became a lot more of an independent study. Not to say I didn’t learn anything. Through having put hours and hours into modeling this final home in sketch up, I’ve grown to realize how difficult it must be to be an actual contractor. I’m doing essentially the same things they do when they reach a build site: look at the plans and build a house according to what they say. I’m doing the same things, and it’s really hard. When I draw a line or build a window, I’m taking the measurements right off of the plans and doing the same things they would. The only difference is that I’m drawing lines on a computer while they are actually using wood and framing tools to build something. If I make a mistake, I can just go back and change what is wrong. I can tweak an angle, lengthen a line, or just delete and remake anything. Compared to in the field, where a mistake like an incorrect measurement means the whole building can come out wrong. I can’t imagine the pressure that must be considering I freak out when I’ve simply inputted a dimension wrong and lose like half an hour of work. In the real world, you can loose materials or even a whole project if you say measure the foundation wrong. Building a home from actual architectural plans has given me a profound respect for the effort that goes into building a home and seeing what I’ve built in sketch up mirroring reality is just a really cool experience. I had fun during SCORE, and can’t wait to finish my paper and present and then be done with high school forever!

Blog #17

Working with the physical printouts of the plans is interesting and difficult at the same time. Rather than having every dimension labeled, the plan itself is instead printed to scale. Using this thing called a scale ruler, you can get the lengths or heights just by measuring. The scale ruler is a tool used by most architects and on both sides front and backwards are labels for different scales like ¼ or 1/8. You measure with the correct scale and then can see in feet how long something would be. This is allowing me to build to scale in sketch up.

As far as the actual modeling is going, I think I’m making a lot of progress. I have the foundation and first floor drawn out to size and I’m working on the second floor. Since it would take too long to do the whole house inside and out, what I’m going to do is a full exterior model with as much detail as I can and only do the interior of the addition. This way, I not only get to practice making an interior scene but I also get to face the challenge of putting it inside an exterior. I’m getting a little worried that I’ve tried to bite off more than I can chew and am sort of afraid I won’t finish it by the end of the week. I will be working for probably four or five hours each day on it and hopefully I’ll have a nice finished product to show in the presentation as a culmination of all that I’ve learnt.

Blog #16

So, I’ve decided to make a change to the final big project I’m working on. As I mentioned in my last entry, what I’m going to be spending the rest of the week on (if I don’t head down to a worksite on the cape sometime next week) is the fully realized 3D model of a home with interior and exterior spaces. On Friday, I was trying to work from imported pictures of the plans for the house. While this sort of worked and allowed me to draw lines on top of the actual plans, an issue I was running into was on accuracy. After I had done the initial floor plan and walls, I revisited the project briefly on Sunday and attempted to put the two floors together. What I found out was that because I was just sort of estimating when drawing on the somewhat blurry plans, whereas it looked nice from a distance, when put together with the other floor, it came out pretty badly. Walls that were supposed to be lined up weren’t, angles of bisecting walls weren’t the same, and it just wasn’t working.

That being said, I’ve made the tough choice and decided to start over and scrap the work I’ve already done on the house and make it a different way. This puts me a quite a few hours back but I think my new strategy will lead to a better final piece in the long run. Rather than trying to draw on a picture of the plans, I’ve just gotten the actual plans printed and I’m going to use a scale ruler and give every line an exact value. This should lead to a very accurate drawing and it will hopefully turn out well. I'll post again on Tuesday or Wednesday to tell you how it's coming along.  

Blog #15

Currently, today of Friday,  I’m working on making a 3D model of a house with an already finished renovation. The model is of a house in Beverly that I looked at a few weeks ago with the renovation. I am making a model of it before and after the renovation, inside and out to show how 3D modeling based off of architectural plans can be used to visualize what the final product will look like. If this turns out well, I’m going to use this as a key part of my presentation because it will hopefully demonstrate the principle I’m attempting to prove. That, and because I’ll have been spending quite a few score days on it, it’s a large part of what I’ve been doing as of late.

Anyways, what's been difficult is making all the dimensions line up. When I click and drag one floor onto the other, I keep running into issues where things simply don’t line up. I’m trying to do it the way I learned in a tutorial video with things like components and groups. If I do that, I hope to be able to make everything line up. The other issue with lining up is when I import the second set of plans with the included addition. Its very tough to make the foundation from the first model line up perfectly with the altered/renovated foundation on the new imported plan. I’m trying to be as accurate as possible but at some point I’m just going to need to keep moving forward and not get bogged down with tiny discrepancies between two floors. Going to continue to work on this at a later date because I’m going to have sailing all day Saturday and possible Sunday. 

Blog #14

So today on Thursday, I measured a house on pleasant street. This process was very long and arduous, and it didn't help that it was about eighty degrees out and humid. So what measuring a house involves is, as you would guess, measuring. Whereas I didn’t need to measure everything on the whole house, I did have to measure everything that was going to be affected by the edition that is being put on. That meant measuring outside wall, distances to windows, and things like that. It also involved going down into the basement and measuring distances there too, like how far a certain wall is from a load bearing beam or the distance from where the traditional foundation ends to where the new one is going to be. What was interesting to learn was all the different techniques used to get accurate measurements. We were using a combination of two different tools, a laser measurer and a tape measure. The tape measure was useful for the little measurements like size of windows of how thick some molding is, while the laser excelled at being able to give you instantly and very accurately things like the height or length of a room. One things we did that was really interesting was how we measured the floor height for the second floor of the house. Since we wanted where the actual floor was, we couldn’t just use the measurement for the ceiling height from the first floor. We instead had to measure each step on the stairs and add them all together to get the height. Tomorrow, I’m probably going to get back to some sketchup stuff.

Blog #13

So today on Tuesday, I have finally finished all my exams. Now, I’ll be able to devote more time to SCORE. I think I remember Mr. Jewett saying in the score meeting that if we have aps during a week, we continue to do the reduced hours that week until the next week. But I’m going to try to get ahead so I’m not having to do the whole six hour days during the last week because I have a lot of big sailing regattas. Anyways, today I helped do an energy audit for a house. An energy audit involves surveying a home and figuring out where it’s losing money and wasting energy. The house I was using value from was a greek revival style home in Georgetown built in the 1880’s. Using a program called MECcheck, I conducted the audit. The software is made according to the Massachusetts Residential Energy Code. The program itself uses three tabs (project, envelope, mechanical). The Project Tab lets you Choose construction type, heating system, and etcetera. You fill all the info like house name, contractor, and the like and then move onto the next tab. The Envelope tab is what the actual room is like. You start with ceiling, choose weather flat, vaulted, then calculate the area of the ceiling in AutoCAD and plug it into the program. Then, from insulation slip, see that an r-38 value insulation being added, plug that into program. After that, add in things like skylights or doors and their area. Lastly, plug in the heating type and press print. Then, when its done, the program comes up with values like whether it passes code and the percentage it is better than code.

Rough Draft

Braden Winn

SCORE Research Paper Rough Draft

Advisor: Daniel Lundergan

Is Green Construction Worth it?

-An argument in favor of building environmentally conscious and sustainable structures

            Intro Human beings have a profound effect on the environment. Over the last two centuries, people have shaped and changed the Earth in both positive and negative ways. The worst effect has been that of induced climate change. Through the use of cars that run on gasoline, factories that are constantly releasing pollutants into the air, construction that creates huge amounts of waste, and anything powered by electricity created through coal powered plants, people are releasing billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It has long been known that increased levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases lead to global warming, and that global warming itself leads to lessened biodiversity, more unstable weather, and melting ice caps. One of the biggest producers of carbon dioxide that is easiest to prevent is that of residential construction. Homes and small buildings are incredibly inefficient and create hundreds of millions of tons of carbon dioxide. Things like old single pane windows and dated construction practices prevent homes from being energy conscious. In recent years, there has been a strong push towards green construction. The benefits are getting larger like improved air quality and rising utility prices making green homes more economically feasible. Costs are going down because of government incentives and programs like LEED increasing awareness and regulating green certifications. Drawbacks like payback times are decreasing. Green construction reduces resource use overall through recycling and more efficient better sealed homes. The benefits gained from green construction and environmentally focused renovations of existing structures such as lower utility costs, a lessened impact on the earth, and a better health situation for occupants makes green construction completely worth the additional building costs up front.

            P1 (LEED) When discussing or researching green construction, the first thing that comes up is LEED. LEED, which is an acronym for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, is a group that regulates green buildings and provides a point based certification and sets the standards for green construction. As defined by the United States Green Building Council “LEED is a voluntary, consensus-based, market-driven program that provides third-party verification of green buildings”(USGBC). They are essentially a middleman between contractors and homeowners as a way of measuring a home’s greenness. The buildings are rated on a point threshold scale, where points are awarded for things like the level of insulation in the basement or using recycled wood for siding. When during construction, a building reaches a threshold of a certain amount of points; it gains LEED certification for whichever threshold it makes it to. Buildings currently can be rated ‘certified’ for reaching 40-49 points, ‘Silver’ for 50-59 points, ‘Gold’ for 60-79 points, and ‘Platinum’ for anything greater than 80 points. On their website, LEED writes that their buildings are designed to lower operation costs and increase asset value, reduce waste sent to landfills, conserve energy and water, be healthier and safer for occupants, reduce harmful green house gas emissions, and allow buildings to qualify for tax rebates. The whole point of LEED is to create a level for builders and buildings to strive to for the benefit of the planet and everyone living on it. It is definitely working because as of February 2013, “Nearly 2.5 billion square feet of building space are LEED certified”(USGBC). The issue is that the majority of buildings are not LEED certified. Most are still incredibly inefficient and wasteful in their construction and maintenance. This needs to change so that the majority are certified rather than not.

P2 (CO2 Emissions) As is, buildings and residential homes put a huge strain on the environment by causing millions of tons of carbon dioxide to be released into the atmosphere through their construction and continued use and energy draw. The US Green Building Council writes, “Buildings are one of the heaviest consumers of natural resources and account for a significant portion of the greenhouse gas emissions that affect climate change. In the U.S., buildings account for 38.9 percent of the nations total carbon dioxide emissions”(USGBC). In figure 9.1, it can be seen that residential and commercial buildings, by their end use, produce over 600 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Together, they exceed industrial and match transportation emissions. That means that through their construction and continued use, buildings account for nearly the same amount of emissions as all the cars in the United States put together. In the diagram, the two pie graphs show that the single greatest producer of emissions in residential and commercial buildings is space condition. Space conditioning is heating or cooling the inside of a building, which requires large amounts of electricity. This produce so many tons of carbon dioxide because of how much electricity is needed to condition a buildings and how much CO2 is created in the production of electricity. The more efficient the homes and buildings can be constructed, the less electricity they will consume and the less environmental impact homes will have.  

P3 (Electricity) One of the biggest problems is the amount of electricity a home uses. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, nearly half of a home’s emissions come from space conditioning. According to a study done by the Environmental Protection Agency, in 2006 “Buildings accounted for 72 percent of [the] total United States electricity consumption”(EPA). The study continues to say, “Out of the total energy consumption in an average household, 50 percent goes to space heating”(EPA). The other half, which can be seen in Figure 9.1, comes from lighting, water heating, refrigeration, and electronics. Reduced use of electricity as a whole is important because the process of harnessing the electricity is just as inefficient as the homes that it powers. The process involves many steps, with each subsequent step reducing the overall efficiency. At the beginning of the process, the electricity starts as coal in the ground. It then gets removed and transported to a refining plant, and after that to a power plant where it gets burned to generate power. It’s then transmitted through high-tension power lines, goes through multiple rounds of transformers, and through power lines all to get the electricity into the inefficient homes and buildings.  According to David Johnston, an architect and leader in the green building movement, “By the time it reaches [homes], electricity has lost 85 percent of the potential energy of the coal used to make it”(Johnston and Gibson, 25). Since the process is so inefficient, total reduced use overall is better for homeowners and the environment. The process is also bad for the environment. According to author Alex Wilson, he writes in his book on green home building that, "In addition to Co2, such pollutants as sulfur oxide, nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulates are emitted from the burning of most fuels and the generation of electricity from fossil fuels"(Wilson, 57). The process of generating electricity is inefficient and bad for the environment, thus a decreased reliance on electricity is the only solution.

P3 (Water) Another area buildings have a huge negative effect is on the water supply. The world right now is in a water crisis. People are using and polluting too much water and the fresh water supply is rapidly decreasing. According to Dr. Miner, an environmental scientist, "At least thirty-six states are facing anticipated local, regional, or statewide water shortages by 2013" (Miner, 151). The reason this is the case is that buildings are incredible inefficient in their use of water. According to the US Green Building Council, "Buildings use 13.6% of all potable water, or 15 trillion gallons per year"(USGBC). The four big water users in a home are toilets, clothes washers, showers, and faucets. Washing machines uses on average 55 gallons of water per load, and the purchase of high efficiency model will save water and electricity What should also be done is to convert existing water fixtures (shower heads and faucets) to newer ones that comply to present day EPA rules. They continue to say how, "Retrofitting 1 out of 100 American homes with water-efficient fixtures could avoid approximately 80,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions (the equivalent of removing 15,000 cars from the road for one year" (USGBC). Water is a finite resource and the sooner buildings stop using as much, the better.

P4 (Materials and Waste) The last area where construction has a great effect on the environment is in the amount of waste that is produced and raw materials that are used.  The USGBC write that, “Buildings use 40% of all raw materials globally (3 billion tons annually)”. To put that in perspective on a smaller scale, Johnston explains that, “Construction of the average 2000-sq-ft. house yields 8,000 to 12,000 lb. of construction waste, most of which ends up in landfills”(Johnston and Gibson, 18). In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency reports that,

"Building-related construction and demolition (C&D) debris totals approximately 160 million tons per year, accounting for nearly 26 percent of total non-industrial waste generation in the U.S. Combining C&D with MSW yields an estimate that building construction, renovation, use and demolition together constitute about two-thirds of all non-industrial solid waste generation in the US."(EPA).

Buildings presently produce huge amounts of waste. The only things that produce more are industrial processes. The solution to this problem is green construction. Green buildings certified by LEED have been proven to have an impact. According to the USGBC, “ LEED projects are responsible for diverting over 80 million tons of waste from landfills, which is expected to grow to 540 million tons of waste diversion by 2030”(USGBC). Green construction is always on the rise and thus so is its benefits.

(P5 What/Why Green Construction) Green constructionas shown in previous paragraphs, things like resource use, emissions, etc. we need to change how we build and use structures and make everything better. This is done through green construction.

What it is, why important, aspects

Environmental Benefits

 -enhance and protect biodiversity and ecosystems

 -improve air and water quality

 -reduce waste streams

 -conserve and restore natural resources (USGBC)

• (USGBC)Green buildings consume less energy:

- Compared to the average commercial building, the LEED Gold buildings in the General Services Administration’s portfolio generally

  -Consume 25% less energy and 11% less water

  -Have 19% lower maintenance costs; 27% higher occupant satisfaction; 34% lower greenhouse gas emissions

-"Green building is ultimately about the relationship of a house and its occupants to the world around them. It's a process of design and construction that fosters the conservation of energy and other natural resources and promotes a healthy environment"(Johnston and Gibson, 6)

Wilson, Alex. Your Green Home: A Guide to Planning a Healthy, Environmentally
     Friendly New Home

-"Providing a highly insulated, airtight building envelope is the number one priority in designing an energy-efficient home"( Wilson, 60)

-"Boosting energy performance of a house when built from standard insulation levels to super insulation saves 19.8 tons of C02 per year"( Wilson, 58)

(P7 Health Benefits)

"On average, Americans spend about 90 percent or more of their time indoors"(EPA)

Air Quality

-"A study at Ball State University suggests that low levels of formaldehyde commonly found in U.S. homes are enough to trigger a variety of symptoms in concentrations as low as .09 parts per million, a level common in many U.S. homes"(Johnston and Gibson, 280)

-"Formaldehyde is a potent eye, upper respiratory, and skin irritant." It is very common in many products made from particleboard like cabinets, counter tops, and shelving. "It off-gasses from these products for years, leading to a number of potential health problems: wheezing, coughing, sneezing and skin irritation, depression, nausea...and is a suspected human carcinogen"(Johnston and Gibson, 280)

   

  -Instead, build with green materials that are carefully chosen to not off gas, be better for the environment

      -Wheatboard is a great alternative to particle board. It is made of recycled wheat stalks, is a renewable resource, and contains no added urea formaldehyde, works the same or better but with no toxic additive

     -pressure treated wood, used in actual structural construction of home (as opposed to particle board which is no load bearing), is treated with formaldehyde as a preservative so the wood doesn't rot

    -alternative is azek

Paul, an associated contractor, prefers to use azek and other similar composite woods because green, no formaldehyde, zero maintenance, last years, don’t rot

-AZEK is a wood substitute that can be used for siding, decking, moldings, and more

-Paul uses it in construction because its durable, last long, doesn't rot, never needs to be replaced

     -doesn't contain formaldehyde, doesn't need to be stained or sealed like regular wood so even less chemicals

(P8 Cost Benefits)

Wilson, Alex. Your Green Home: A Guide to Planning a Healthy, Environmentally
     Friendly New Home

-“Investments in energy efficiency, renewable energy systems, and highly durable or low maintenance materials will pay for themselves over time through reduced operating costs and avoided replacement costs” (pg187)

-"It makes good economic sense to invest more upfront in equipment or products that will save money over time"(pg189)

-"for a light that is on 5 hours per day, the payback for putting in a CFL instead of an incandescent lamp is less than one year; in other words, the one-year life-cycle cost of the 75-watt incandescent lamp is greater than the one-year life-cycle cost of the 23-watt CFL"(pg189)

-"energy-efficient mortgage example: if you live in an energy efficient house, you will spend less money each month for energy; as a result, you can afford to spend more on a bigger mortgage"(pg192)

-If, based on your household income, you would be eligible to buy a conventional house worth $140,000, a lending institution that offers EEMs might let you spend $150,000 on the house. Even though your mortgage payments will be higher, your total monthly bills will be lower (due to the energy savings) than if you paid $140,000 for a home without the energy efficiency upgrades"(192)

-"Energy Efficient green homes appreciate in value faster than conventional homes"(pg193)

-Life Cycle cost: the process of examining the cost or savings of something over time, aka cost of ownership

-Pay-back period: a way to express life cycle cost savings, it is the number of years it will take for energy savings to pay back the added cost of the more energy efficient device

-Energy efficient homes from a subdivision in California are selling for $10 to $25 more per square foot than neighboring conventional subdivisions (193)

-"Average American Family spends $474 per year on water bills"(Miner, 151)

(P6 Windows)

-"R-value is the measure of an insulation's resistance to heat flow and depends on the material, its thickness, and its density"(Miner, 30)

          -the higher the number, the greater an insulation's resistive power. more insulation increases overall R-value

-"U-Value is the inverse of R-Value. Its the a measurement of the heat flow through a material."(Miner, 32)

     -lower number, the better

-"Solar heat gain coefficient is a measurement of the sunlight that passes through a window and is released as heat in a home"(Miner, 32)

    -depends on where you live: hot climate you want a lower SHGC to keep hot sun out, cold climate want high value to provide solar heat 

-"Air leakage is the rate of air infiltration around a window, door, or skylight in the presence of a specific pressure difference across it"(Miner, 32)

      -low air leakage, tight window seal, keeps strong building envelope

Why Upgrade?

-"Modern double or triple pane windows can have up to four times the insulation value as their counterparts from the 1970s"(Miner, 33)

       -more insulation, less heating/air conditioning, save money, save environment

-"Windows are tremendously important for controlling energy flow into and out of buildings"( Wilson, 69)

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/aqa_pre_2011/energy/heatrev3.shtml

(P9 Government Incentives)

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation “"Intent. Green buildings minimize environmental impact and maximize the preservation of open space. Section 19 of the Tax Law is intended to encourage building owners and developers to design, construct and operate buildings that are energy efficient, utilize recycled materials, provide clean air, and incorporate renewable and energy efficient power generation."(Department of Environmental Conservation)

Michigan Legislation "This bill seeks to amend the Michigan Business Tax Act (2007 PA 36) by providing tax credits for "green" housing practices. In this bill "green" in reference to building practices means that there is an emphasis on site conservation with sustainable planning, water conservation/efficiency, energy efficiency/renewable efficiency, conservation of materials/resources, and indoor environmental quality."(Michigan Policy Network)

(P10 Actual Cases of Success)

Pettit, Betsy. "Remodeling for Energy Efficiency." Fine Homebuilding

"Because of the work in the basements and attics, all the homes had increased living area without increasing the footprint of the home. And while the living space increased by 30% to 100%, all of them saw a reduction of energy use that ranged from 30% to more than 100%. While the renovations cost more than $100 per sq. ft. for each home, all were appraised at values exceeding that cost after the renovation was complete."(Pettit, 55-56)

1915 foursqare Home

Followed 7 steps to net-zero energy use 1. Uprgrade mechanical systems 2. bring the basement and crawlspaces inside the house 3. superinsulate and air-seal the roof 4. replace the windows 5. insulate the walls 6. Buy energy star (or better) fixtures, appliances, and lighting 7. add a renewable-energy source

Specs: After renovation, utility costs decrease from $1.68 per sq ft. to 37 cents per sq. ft.

-Gas bills went from $2400 a year to $858 a year

-Electric went from $960 a year to $471 a year

This old house energy overhaul

-farmhouse rated one and a half stars

-cost of improvements would be $12,000 (typically $4000 for retrofitting, this house was bad)

-Financed improvement adding $110 to mortgage

-Electric bill shrank to $1260 a year, saving $1840 annually

-Saved $40 a month or $480 a year, positive investment while helping environment

-helped house get sold, final rating four stars

Net savings after 30 years: $31,891 (assuming 5% annual fuel inflation rate)

Source: Energy Rated Homes of Vermont

(P11 Drawbacks and Criticisms)

Journal of Construction Engineering and Management

"A recent study found that Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified buildings have a recordable injury rate that is 9% higher than traditional, non-LEED buildings. A follow-up study showed that there are distinct aspects of the design elements and means and methods of construction used to achieve LEED certification that have negative impacts on worker safety."(Dewlaney)

             -But the more widespread green construction becomes, the more contractors that will be familiar with the process and the safety issues will resolve themselves

-

"The most significant impacts are a 36% increase in lacerations, strains, and sprains from recycling construction materials; a 24% increase in falls to lower level during roof work because of the installation of on-site renewable energy (e.g., PV panels); a 19% increase in eye strain when installing reflective roof membranes; and a 14% increase in exposure to harmful substances when installing innovative wastewater technologies."(Dewlaney)

             -interviewed 30 contractors with average 18 years of experience, completed at least 4 leed projects, and 100 traditional projects

New York Times Article (Navarro)

Federal Building in downtown Youngstown, Ohio, features an extensive use of natural light to illuminate offices and a white roof to reflect heat.

It has LEED certification, the country’s most recognized seal of approval for green buildings.

But the building is hardly a model of energy efficiency. According to an environmental assessment last year, it did not score high enough to qualify for the Energy Star label granted by the Environmental Protection Agency, which ranks buildings after looking at a year’s worth of utility bills.

The building’s cooling system, a major gas guzzler, was one culprit. Another was its design: to get its LEED label, it racked up points for things like native landscaping rather than structural energy-saving features, according to a study by the General Services Administration, which owns the building.

   -claim builders covet certification  as a way to gain tax credits, attract tenants, charge premium rents and project an image of environmental responsibility

Counterpoint: LEED energy standards have grown more stringent over the years, and construction like the Youngstown federal building, built in 2002, would not be certified under the current version of the program, the G.S.A. study noted. The LEED standard goes through periodic revisions, and this year, the minimum energy requirements needed for the basic LEED certification for new buildings were raised.

Preface to 'How Does Eco-Architecture Impact the Environment?.'"
     Eco-Architecture. Ed. Roman Espejo.

"Garry Stevens, former professor of architecture and design science at the University of Sydney, argues that they are out of touch. "Frankly, we suspect that most of these architectural proponents of sustainable design have only the vaguest idea of the realities of their chosen fetish," he contends. Stevens, for instance, complains that glass-covered buildings do not always effectively reduce radiant heat and cause glare.

Moreover, Stevens proposes that sustainable architecture is "a theory tackling a problem that does not need to be tackled" and ignores the true causes of climate change and the energy crisis. "There are many better targets, and none more so than transportation," he claims. "If the architects so passionately advocating sustainable design really wished to contribute to the cause they profess to espouse, they would not drive a car." In the following chapter, the authors deliberate the sustainability of eco-architecture."

Counterpoint in green building facts notecard about how replacing water fixtures in homes is the equivalent of taking cars off the road, negates his argument

Conclusion

Blog #12

On my first nearly full day off in as long as I can remember (I say nearly because I still have sailing practice from 3-6:30 tonight), I went and visited my supervisor over at a work site in Reading. The house itself is having hundreds of thousands of dollars put into it for a full inside and out renovation. It includes raising the roof, redoing the siding of the house, and moving the two car garage and driveway to the other side of the property. While it is pretty far along, there is still a lot of work being done. While on the site, I saw a worker carrying really long white boards that were incredibly flexible and looked just plain odd. I asked them what they were and they’re called AZEK. He described them as basically a high the plastic substitute for standard wood. Its advantages are that its stain proof, bug proof, doesn’t rot, and many other things. It looks and acts like wood (it can be hammered, drilled, etcetera) but it doesn’t have the same maintenance drawbacks. I looked on the products website and confirmed much of what he said. Something I though about though, was that since its made of plastic, it’s a petroleum product. It made me think about the various environmental impacts that creating these lengths of “wood” cause. Plastic itself is terrible for the environment because it never decomposes whereas if you just used wood on the house, it would eventually break down and turn back into carbon and reenter the earth. I’m definitely going to do a little more research and put a paragraph about AZEK in my paper.