Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/59979
At the University of Oregon, officials consider the new Lundquist College of Buisness building to be "a huge bill- board" for the school's pro- grams that emphasize corpo- rate social responsilbilty. in summer and the cold in winter, says Graham Wyatt, partner at Robert A.M. Stern Architects, the New York City firm chosen to design the new building. "A green roof holds and filters rain- water, so the quantity of runoff is reduced, stormwater surges are reduced, and the quality of the runoff is improved." At the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, the new building for the College of Management is topped with a white roof instead of the traditional black bitumen roof. By reflecting back the light, the white roof will reduce the heat inside the building and reduce the need for cooling, says Kurt Paquette, chief administrative officer. The building earned a silver LEED rating in 2003. Attention to recycling. Not only is construction waste recycled at environmentally friendly buildings, but some interior finishes are made from recycled products. In addition, green building designers try to use rapidly renewable materials, like bamboo, rather than precious woods. When they do buy wood, they look for the forest industry tag that specifies that the wood comes from forests specifically managed for sustainability. Water conservation. Santa Clara has installed electronic faucets so water doesn't run needlessly; waterless urinals save 40,000 gallons per year per urinal. Reclaimed waste water is used to water the lawn and operate the flush toilets. Cost and Other Hurdles While green buildings can come with a cost premium, careful planning can minimize the extra expense. Says Wyatt, "Studies from the U.S. Green Building Council show that green buildings are distributed across the spectrum. Many conventional build- ings cost more than their green peers." Wyatt's firm recently completed an energy audit of a green building designed a few years ago and determined that the incremental cost of the building's sustainable design features had a demonstrated payback period of just over two-and-a-half years—"a compelling return on investment," he says. Others note that environmentally friendly systems can take years to pay for themselves. However, some products or systems won't cost more than items that would have to be purchased anyway. Green carpet or recycled carpet doesn't cost more than ordinary carpet, says Joe Sugg, Santa Clara's assistant to the vice president for university operations. Paint without formalde- hyde is only minimally more expensive. "The things that are more expensive and don't get any return are the administrative costs, the costs of doing paperwork to achieve LEED certification," Sugg says. Paquette estimates that Georgia Tech spent about $650,000 on LEED-related systems and upgrades—although some of that money would have been spent on necessary features even if they 34 BizEd NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2005 weren't sustainable. Included in that premium was the cost of hir- ing a LEED-accredited professional who worked with the design- ers and engineers to make sure everything met LEED criteria. While some sustainable elements may require more money to install, schools have found inventive ways to afford them. To off- set the cost of installing solar panels, the University of Oregon pre-sold the energy it would generate to a local utility. The school earned tax credits from the state department of energy—but, as a public entity, it doesn't pay taxes, so it transferred those credits to donors making gifts to the building. Selling the Concept Even if costs can be contained, the concept of a green building is sometimes a scary one for stakeholders and donors. Brodie notes that reluctant stakeholders can be sold on green buildings when they understand three things: how the savings can add up over time, how the quality of the environment will be improved, and how sustainability puts them on the cutting edge of design. But Sugg believes stakeholders don't need to be convinced of the advantages of green buildings—they just need to know they're getting a better building. He says, "I compare it to the Americans with Disabilities Act. When it came out in 1990, peo- ple all over my profession said it would cost us a million dollars and we couldn't afford to comply. It turns out that every time we change something on campus that upgrades a building for accessibility, everybody likes it. Everybody likes the ramp that gets you out of the building. Everybody likes the elevators and the automatic doors. Green buildings are like that from the users' point of view. Everybody comes out ahead." Sustainable buildings do require ongoing attention. "We have to make sure the facilities workers don't show up with Tru Value paint or whatever they had on the truck that day," says Paquette. "They can't use medium-density fiberboard or particle board with formaldehyde. Because we're the one that's different, we always have to watch what's going on." Over time, as Georgia Tech commissions more environmentally friendly build- ings, he believes that need for hyperawareness will fade—and green design will become the standard. It's likely that schools and businesses with an emphasis on corporate social responsibility will be the first to embrace green design, but as systems become more widespread and products become more affordable, environmentally friendly design may percolate through to all levels of construction. And once it's "easy to be green," the trend may become standard practice— for corporations and universities alike.