by Mike Powell

Rising environmental quality concerns coupled with rising energy costs have led the once easily overlooked notion of “going green” toward the mainstream. While many Americans have traded in their trucks and SUVs for smaller and more economic cars and replaced some of their outdated home appliances with newer, Energy Star models, others have taken the extra step and constructed or renovated their homes and businesses using green building methods. However, while many businesses must adhere to ever-stricter environmental standards, for most homeowners the decision to adapt green building practices is strictly voluntary.

What exactly is green building? According to Alex Wilson, president of BuildingGreen, Inc. and author of Your Green Home, green building is the “design and construction of buildings that minimizes impacts on the environment while helping to keep occupants healthy”.

In other words, green building practices and techniques may involve the construction or renovation of an entire house to merely making a few minor adjustments such as installing low-flush toilets, low-wattage light bulbs converting to more energy efficient home appliances. From an environmental standpoint, buildings produce over one-third of the world’s greenhouse gases. According to the US Department of Energy, total carbon dioxide emissions from buildings in 2003 were 2.5 billion tons. This amount is approximately equal to the same amount of carbon dioxide released from 450 million cars!

While Austin leads the way in terms of promoting green building practices the rest of Texas seems to be lagging far behind. The state capital ranked number one in a recent research study conducted by San Francisco-based SustainLane Government. Results of the study were based on the amount of attention (and monies) contributed by U.S. cities toward green building and business practices. On the flipside though, recent findings from a survey conducted by the Washington-based Urban Environment Report, which ranked 72 American cities and was based on 200 environmental, health and quality of life criteria, ranked El Paso and Houston at the lowest in regards to the survey criteria.

Recently I had the chance to see just how “green” Austin is while attending their annual Cool House Tour 2007 produced by the Texas Solar Energy Society and Austin Energy Green Building.

The first house I visited on the tour was a 1926 Craftsmen bungalow that had undergone a substantial “green” renovation.

This home had gained quite a bit of local and national notoriety as it was featured on the PBS program This Old House back in 2006. The home was the first green project ever to be televised on the long-running program and was showcased on eight episodes.

The house was relatively easy to locate. The stretch of hybrid cars parked bumper to bumper on either side of the street looked like what could best be described as a Sierra Club keg party. Gaining access inside the house was nearly impossible due to the volume of onlookers and trying to carry on a conversation with owners Michele Grieshaber and Michael Klug was an exercise in futility. Nonetheless, I was able to research the type of green building techniques employed through the This Old House website. The most intriguing part of the house’s renovation was in the builder’s extensive usage of recycled materials.

Much of the framing and flooring of the once dilapidated bungalow was replaced with wood salvaged from an old barn while the second story deck was constructed from a composite material that combined recycled wood and—believe it or not—recycled plastic garbage bags. This composite material is supposed to last longer and require less maintenance than a standard wooden deck.

The next house I visited on the tour was far more modest than the previous one. Homeowner Linda Avitt has lived in her newly converted green home since 1986, but she has been taking small steps over that twenty-one year period to complete that conversion.

“It’s been a long and drawn out process what with the amount of money it takes to ‘go green’,” Avitt said of the financial burdens associated with building green, “a lot of these houses on the tour had big budgets, you know, we are not rich people—it wasn’t cheap by any means.”

One of the more substantial green additions to Avitt’s home are the rain catchment devices, which are immediately noticeable as five strategically placed bright green rain barrels. These barrels are positioned underneath each of the home’s gutter drains.

“Collectively, these [rain] barrels store about 675 gallons of rain water. That’s 675 gallons that would otherwise be watering my driveway and the street below,” Avitt said.

While the ripple effect of Austin’s green building revolution has been fairly small, there are still families and individuals in other parts of Texas who have or are in the process of taking the next step by adopting green building methods.

Two families with ties to TLU have taken the proverbial “next-step” to building green. Marlin and Christa Howze, brother-in-law and sister to Center for Servant Leadership secretary Becky Hruza, have been putting the finishing touches on a 3900 square foot underground house that sits on a 24-acre plot of picturesque trees and tall grass. Nicknamed “The Bunker” because of its precarious location underground as well as its 10-inch thick concrete walls, the Howze home utilizes aesthetics and originality with durability, functionality and sustainability.

Where most homes are built from the ground up, Marlin and Christa’s home was created piece-by-piece or section-by-section using a relatively new building method that revolves around the installation of Insulated Concrete Form (ICF) construction. According to Wilson, these ICF's are “hollow insulated forms, usually made from expand- ed polystyrene (EPS), used for building walls (foundation and above-ground); after stacking and stabilizing the forms, the aligned cores are filled with concrete, which provides the wall structure”.

What results is a very controlled environment within the home that is virtually invulnerable to outside temperature changes and allergens, much like an underground cave. Marlin installed fresh air vents and a state-of-the-art heat pump to counter the negative effects of “cave-like” insulation. The vents circulate outside air into the home while the heat pump sucks out excess moisture and humidity.

What also contributes to the controlled environment of The Bunker is the fact that over two-thirds of its structure is insulated with dirt and native flora. Marlin explained that the earthen canopy provides a much better insulator than what can be found in the average house with standard insulation. He referred to this natural insulation as Geo-Mass Thermal Control.

“You’re talking about huge areas where temperature changes very slowly and it’s moderated by the soil in this house versus in a stick house where it’s moderated by the ground above it,” Marlin said of the six feet of dirt on the roof as well as the sides of his house.

The soil used to insulate Marlin’s home was excavated from the property. The large oval trench formed from the excavation has since filled with rainwater.

“We got a two-fold process,” Marlin said of the artificial pond that formed from the excavation of dirt for his home’s insulation.

The pond serves both an aesthetic and functional purpose. Ducks, cranes, other bird varieties as well as deer frequent this newly formed water source. One has a perfect view of the pond, whether sitting on the front patio or staring out the large living room window.

 Following months and months of research and planning Charla Bailey, director of TLU’s international education programs and her husband Scott Bailey, associate professor of psychology at TLU, are about to begin construction on their new “green home”. The Baileys’ 6.5-acre plot will be the sight of a one-story, stick house with state-of-the-art insulation, water storage, heating and filtration and household appliances.

Without the benefits of 10-inch thick ICFs and Geo-Mass Thermal Control, the Baileys have had to employ creative measures in order to insure the home’s sustainability. One measure relies on the positioning of the house with regards to the land and the sun.

“Our house, the front entrance is facing the north so on the west side we’re minimizing the windows so there is less sun and we are trying to utilize the trees that are already out there to help with the shade around the house,” Charla said.

Although the Howzes and the Baileys took vastly different approaches to the design of their homes, they both agreed on two important facts, in regards to green building on a large scale: 1. design plans frequently change due to the absence of green building technologies, green building materials, specialists and funds; 2. those who invest a large fortune in green building should only expect to receive a small fortune in return.

“Most of green building, the break-even point is way out there, so you are actually building with a conscious effort that you are trying to—not caring about the money so much—because when you go solar…in order to get the power you need to fully supply a house, you’re probably looking at about $100,000 in panels, you know, so like where is the trade-off?” Marlin said of the financial burdens associated with building green.

While the green building revolution has captured the attention of homeowners and businesses alike, the methods and materials associated with green building are relatively new, in some cases experimental, difficult to locate and cost a small fortune to acquire. Hopefully in time greater accessibility and affordability of green methods and materials will grant those who have the desire but lack the resources to build green.

July 2007