The market for green buildings is exploding and the lion’s share of the opportunity exists in retrofits, not new buildings. McGraw-Hill Construction’s latest SmartMarket Report, Green Building Retrofit & Renovation: Rapidly Expanding Market Opportunities Through Existing Buildings, was released at the Green Retrofit Conference in New York recently. The report finds that new buildings represent only 2.5% of the US building market, while retrofitting provides an enormous market opportunity for green builders, owners and building product manufacturers.Currently, green building comprises 5-9% of the retrofit and renovation market activity by value. This equates to a $2-4 billion marketplace for major projects. By 2014, that share is projected to increase by 20-30%, creating a $10-15 billion market for major retrofit projects in only five years.
This country’s 130 million homes together generate more than 20% of the nation’s carbon dioxide greenhouse gas emissions. This is one of the most significant contributing sources in the country to global warming. Existing techniques and technologies in energy efficiency retrofitting can reduce home energy use by up to 40 percent per home on average which would also lower our national greenhouse gas emissions by 160 million metric tons annually by the year 2020. In addition doing so would reduce home energy bills by $21 billion a year and over time these savings would more than pay for the high up-front costs for energy efficiency retrofitting.
I attended an information sessionrecently put on by the vice president of the Delaware Valley Green Building Council, Peter Levasseur. It was an excellent presentation, but if this thing gets any more complicated I may have to….well, I don’t know what I may have to do, but it would probably involved whining about it to deaf ears throughout cyberspace. Actually the changes, in my opinion, are very sensible, they just take a little time to go back and learn. And since human beings are very lazy (no it’s not just me), we don’t like having to learn something even once, let alone twice, and then again in another three years. C’mon didn’t we graduate from school for a reason?
We’re doing a remodeling project which includes installing a new roof. Here in California, we get a lot of sun, so the impact of solar irradiance on solar heat gain is a major concern — either for A/C costs (and thus peak summer energy loads) or on comfort (for those of us who don’t have A/C). Thus, I’ve been looking into solar reflectivity and what has been called the “cool roofs“ movement. There is the Cool Roof Rating Council, “created in 1998 to develop accurate and credible methods for evaluating and labeling the solar reflectance and thermal emittance (radiative properties) of roofing products and to disseminate the information to all interested parties.”
I’m not even talking about the energy savings, cost savings and environmental benefits though. I’m going to focus on tax credits. A number of places have mandated green roofs under certain circumstances; Toronto, Tokyo and Switzerland to name a few. Another approach that’s often more agreeable to building owners and developers is the voluntary opportunity to receive tax credits.
Green roofs, green walls, green parking lots, shade trees, the greening of urban spaces in general, the restoration of urban waterways, wetlands and the re-greening of brownfield areas; can all be thought of as different techniques to nurture a green living skin over regions of urban development. While there are many important differences between each of these separate techniques as well as their underlying technologies they all share a common overarching goal of bringing an analog of the natural living green skin that characterizes the natural landscape back into our urban areas. They all promote the restoration and re-integration of these heavily populated areas back into the surrounding natural environment.
Retrofitting 50 million buildings in the United States, about 40 percent of the building stock, by 2020 to make them energy efficient would create 625,000 permanent jobs, John Podesta, CEO of the Center for American Progress, told CNBC. “There’s probably a $500 billion investment that’s needed, but the vast majority has to come from the private sector,” Podesta added. “The government has a role to play in orienting policy toward getting the financing right.”
The green building studies and reports we spotlight cover the following topics: The potential financial benefits of green retrofits; the importance of overcoming the social and psychological barriers to green building; the use of impact fees to encourage green building; the use of mandates and incentives to promote sustainable construction; feedback from the construction industry on the risks that come with green building; global green building trends; green practices reported by facilities management professionals; and reshaping municipal and county laws to foster green building.
Each spring, Building Design & Construction (BD+C) editors survey the country’s largest AEC firms in the nonresidential building industry. Companies are ranked across six categories—Architects (50), Architect/Engineers (50), Engineers (50), Engineer/Architects (50), Contractors (80), and Construction Managers (20)—based on the volume of commercial, institutional, industrial, and multifamily residential building work completed in 2008. This year, in addition to publishing a list of the top 200 building team LEED APs, they have also published a ranking of the nation’s 150 largest green design firms and a list of 75 of the largest green contractors. The design firms are ranked on billings for work performed in-house. Contractors and construction managers are ranked on the value of construction put in place. For multi-year jobs, only work from the survey year applies.
