Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
A S tat e - o f - t h e - A r t R e s o u r c e a n d
McArleton
$59.95 USD
I n s t r u c t i o n a l D V D f o r t h e N at u r a l B u i l d e r
NaturalBuildingCompanion_cover.indd 1
L I B R A R Y
Natural Building
c
the
D E S I G N / B U I L D
A Comprehensive Guide to
I n t e g r at i v e D e s i g n a n d C o n s t r u c t i o n | w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n a l DVD
CHELSEA
GREEN
3/20/12 9:28 AM
Chapter 2
Ecology
12
Commercial
Residential
Industrial
Transportation
Greenhouse gas production in the United States in 2005, by sector. Graph by Jacob Deva Racusin; source Emrath and Liu 2007.
There are ecological impacts throughout a products life cycle, from cradle to grave. Illustration by Ben Graham.
Ecology
13
G WP OF MAIN GR E E N H O U S E GA S E S
(in p p b v * )
25,000
23,900
20,000
15,000
10,000
7,100
6,500
5,000
320
CFC-12 (CCI2F2)
Methane (CH4)
1,400
Perfluoromethane (CF4)
21
HCFC-22 (CHCIF2)
Greenhouse warming potential of different greenhouse gases. Graph by Jacob Deva Racusin; source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 1996, 22.
14
Ecology
15
Cre at e Communit y
16
Ecology
17
18
Ecology
Addressing
Challenges of Toxicity
Despite the massive challenge we face in addressing
global warming, we cannot ignore other socioecological impacts of the built environment. As
mentioned earlier, a comprehensive inventory of all
ecological hazards is well beyond the scope of this
book, let alone a chapter. Many materials toxic
impacts are well knownasbestos, lead, mercury,
wood-treatment chemicals such as arsenic and
creosote, ozone-depleting CFC-releasing propellants.
We will therefore highlight a few of the issues that
seem particularly relevant, in that they can be
readily addressed by the adoption of natural building
techniques and materials, or are both underreported
and highly pervasive.
Just as every product has a cradle-to-grave energy
and carbon footprint, so too does each product have a
cradle-to-grave toxic footprint. Understanding where
a materials primary impacts lie along this process
from production to disposal is very important. In
some cases, cradle-side impacts can be remediated
through reuse or recycling, while in others, postconstruction use and disposal issues may lead to
myopic acceptance of a product that will leave an
out-of-sight, out-of-mind legacy of problems for
subsequent generations to facea condition we have
created for ourselves time and time again, from lead
paint to asbestos insulation. Lets look at a handful of
case studies spanning the cradle-to-grave life cycle to
illustrate some of the primary considerations.
P o rtl and Cement
The manufacturing of Portland cement is responsible
for 5% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions worldwide,
and 2% of total CO2 emissions in the United States.
This is due more to the sheer volume of Portland
cement production (3 billion tons worldwide in 2009,
or 900 pounds for every person on the planet) than to
cements embodied carbon, which is lower by weight
19
20
Ecology
21
22
Ecology
23
(MDF), paints, and insulation, our potential exposure via degraded indoor air quality (IAQ) is very
high. In fact, a U.S. governmental study on newly
constructed, inhabited temporary relief housing provided by FEMA for survivors of Hurricane Katrina
in the Gulf Coast region concluded that baseline
levels of formaldehyde in the trailers were sufficient
to cause acute health symptoms.
In 2007, the California Air Resource Board
(CARB) released regulations that dramatically limit
allowable concentrations of urea formaldehyde (UF)
in products; while this does not fully outlaw UF, it
certainly creates incentives for alternative binders for
common products. Already in the marketplace are
many no-added-UF and no-added-formaldehyde
board products in wide distribution that are
performance- and cost-competitive. While these
alternatives all have occupational and productionphase exposure health hazards, they do not have
deleterious effects on IAQ. There are formaldehydefree fiberglass batt insulation products commonly
available, as well as cotton batt insulation to replace
not only the formaldehyde, but also potentially
carcinogenic and highly irritating fiberglass. As
natural builders, our approachwhenever practical
and cost-feasibleis to use all-wood or no-addedformaldehyde casestock cabinet construction, 2 6
tongue-and-groove flooring (in lieu of a subfloor or
phenol formaldehyde-based plywood for a subfloor),
and straw or cellulose insulation.
If avoiding formaldehyde is impossible or
impractical, it is recommended to seal the products
with paint, hard sealer, or other effective barrier to
reduce emissions, or isolate their exposure to the indoor
environment through physical barriers. Additionally,
in all cases and all houses, adequate ventilation rates
and distribution should be designed to help control
IAQ. New product developments, such as wallboards
that absorb formaldehyde and other pollutants from
the air and more effective and affordable air filtration
systems, can assist us in airborne toxin remediation,
and it can be expected that future developments will
come online as the marketplace continues to respond
to this issue.
24
Moving Forward
In reading through this chapter, an appropriate
response might be to feel overwhelmed, frustrated,
or downright terrified by the variety and severity of
ecological and human hazards created by our built
environment in its contemporary form. While we
provided proactive strategies for improving our
design and construction practices with each topic
we covered, and we devote much of the rest of this
bookparticularly in part 3to describing positive
solutions that can be taken in response to these
issues, we now provide some fundamental tools and
principles that we can use to help us take progressive
steps in creating positive change. None of us alone
can bring about the momentum needed to change the
current tide, but by advancing and adopting a major
philosophical shift that is responsive to these pressing
concerns, we can address these problems the way
most major problems in this world are successfully
addressedthrough a collective movement built one
person, and one building, at a time.
Ecology
25
The Living Building Challenge helps buildings such as the Omega Center for Sustainable Living create a paradigm for a new built
environment. Photo courtesy of Omega Institute for Holistic Studies, Rhinebook, NY.
26
D esign fo r Change
We need useful metrics to assist us in making sound
decisions in the design process. Tools such as life-cycle
analysis (LCA) can go a long way toward helping us
understand the impact of one material or system
compared to another based upon a cradle-to-grave
boundary. As identified earlier, there are limitations
in LCA tools in their current form: the quality of
an LCA report relies upon accurate, quantifiable,
and directly comparable data, which is very difficult
to produce to the required breadth and scope. We
believe, however, that as research continues to be
produced and LCA tools become more sophisticated,
designers will be able to effectively use LCA as one of
a set of analytical tools with which to make appropriate
design decisions.