September 22, 2007
Buying Forgiveness for Our Sins -- Carbon Offsets?
I'm obsessed with the idea of combining carbon offsets with home energy conservation programs. Sure, many environmentalists would scoff at me for it, maybe even comparing the practice to the "sale of absolutions" in 19th century Netherlands. Carbon offsets don't make eco-sins go away, but when we do goof up the environment by emitting carbon, they're a way to make some reasonable attempt to undo the damage.
A carbon offset, in brief, is paying to reduce emissions elsewhere instead of reducing your own. So, for each metric ton of carbon dioxide a home still produces after conservation efforts, you buy a metric ton's reduction from a company that directly reduces carbon dioxide emissions through their projects. (On the Emmy Awards show last week, Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart had a funny discussion about carbon offsets. Irreverent, but it made some good points.)
I love the idea that we can build our homes to the best of our technical ability -- achieving high levels of energy performance and carbon reduction that are practical and affordable -- and then "buy away" the rest of our sins through carbon offsets. Some argue that the strategy is lame, because it doesn't reduce the demand for polluting sources of power. Some argue that it encourages people to simply "buy the ability to indulge" instead of changing their fundamental bad behavior, but I disagree. If done right, carbon offsets could reduce the energy demand created by homes significantly, and support the production of and demand for renewable energy. There's the difference: No priest is able to ensure that the money paid for absolution actually eliminates sin, but regulations can ensure that money paid into carbon offsets actually eliminates carbon emitted in another sector.
I love the concept in theory. In practice, the implementation of a reasonable and honest system for delivering on the concept of carbon offsets is proving to be difficult. However, I'll bet you a buck and a beer that in 5-10 years, the system will be ironed out and the concept will be a part of our daily transactions. Call me selfish, but I still want to stay warm and go on vacation while I'm protecting our future. I bet you do, too.
What do you think of the concept of carbon offsets? Would you be willing to pay to help reduce emissions overall, even if you can't do anything more yourself to cut them? Let me know. I want to find out if I'm just a voice in the wilderness.
Posted by Stacy Hunt at 9:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 15, 2007
The Green, Green, Web of Homes
It seems to me that environmentally minded builders are, to put it gently, still a bit hesitant to wave their green flag. At least that's how it looks when surfing the web. Maybe they are still in the traditional mindset that reputation and word of mouth are "plenty good" marketing efforts. Maybe they are just not sure that buyers today are responding to the "green" movement. Maybe they are afraid that by putting up the message front and center they will be pigeon-holed, typecast, marginalized by the other kids at builder school.
Whereas other groups like architects, designers and even big box home improvement chains have attractive, functional, and even (gasp!) educational websites about reducing energy needs, builders, especially green builders, just feel content to post contact information, a few stock images, latest designs, and the occasional case study.
Yawn.
Here's a suggestion, if you want to capture the "green" crowd, put the message front and center on your home page!
I'm not going to point out any examples of the "safe" websites, you know who you are, but there are a few companies out there that do a pretty decent job of explaining their environmental commitment.
For instance
KB Homes has a page that looks at the green building concept through a more expanded lens. Note the mention of awards and recognition from the community; it's OK to toot your own horn if you are doing the right thing.
Abrams Design Build offers an interesting entry to their website, maybe a bit lofty for most buyers, but certainly puts forward the right message. Design build companies have tons of opportunity in updating older homes to greener times, Abrams captures this message well.
Even small builders are getting in on the action. Kingdom Builders in Missoula, Montana have a tab assigned to their environmental commitment right on their home page. They also dedicate most of their persuasive "why use us?" argument to explain the value of building green. You know, getting a more durable, energy efficient, healthy home.
So how about you? How about giving a shout out to a few of your favorite green builder websites? What do you think the most valuable message to green buyers should be and who is succeeding at spreading the message via the web?
Posted by Andrew Hunt at 11:24 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
What's the real cost of building green?
I've been covering green building for a long time now, and one of my pet peeves is hearing people complain about how expensive it is. The assumption that green costs more -- sometimes a lot more -- and consumers just won't pay for it.
It's simply not true. In fact, recent studies show that people think the cost of building green is three times more than it really is! Such overestimates cause slow adoption by builders of good, affordable green-building practices.
Sure, some things (take onsite renewable energy, like solar) cost more. But loads of anecdotal evidence, theoretical modeling, and real life data, such as a study done by green consultants Davis Langdon Adamson, show that green buildings don't have to cost more in theory and usually don't in reality. The US Green Building Council has done numerous studies that have shown that the increased cost in meeting LEED standards is between zero and 3 percent.
Unfortunately, there's just not enough good, consolidated and well-analyzed data about the real cost (and performance, for that matter) of residential green buildings, as there is about commercial green buildings.
I'd like to see builders submit real cost data on their homes as part of the requirements of the new LEED for Homes Program, or any number of other green building initiatives in the country. Anyone involved in the green building industry knows that green doesn't have to cost more, but it's hard to convince people without good data to backing you up.
What has been your experience building green homes? Have you done so with minimal additional cost? Have you backed away from it because you thought you couldn't sell it? I'd like to hear your own story about it. Let me know how you deal with this myth.
Posted by Stacy Hunt at 9:51 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
