Benefits and Structure of Green Building - Essay Example

?Green buildings: Introduction: Global warming and unsustainable development are two of the biggest problems of the contemporary age. The temperatureof Earth has risen in general over the centuries and natural resources are depleting readily, thus making the supply of energy and many things of everyday use endangered in the future. Built environment happen to be one of the most significant contributors of carbon to the atmosphere, and a vast majority of elements e.g. wood whose resources e.g. trees are depleting have conventionally been used in homes. The environment consciousness that has become so widespread in the contemporary age calls for the construction of structures that are environment friendly in terms of reduced carbon emissions and minimal use of depleting natural resources. They are known as green buildings. “In the wake of education regarding global warming, resource depletion, and pollution levels worldwide, green construction has developed as a means of improving building practices so that they do not harm the environment” (Ellis, 2011). Benefits of Green Building: It apparently seems that green buildings only do goof to the environment, though the benefits go much far beyond that. The biggest benefit of green buildings is that they ensure well-being of the humans. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the three most fundamental objectives of the programs centered on green building are “to increase efficiency in the use of water, energy, etc.; to protect the health and increase the productivity of the building’s residents; and to reduce pollution and waste” (Peterson, 2011). According to the statistics recorded by EPA in 2002, as much as 67.9 per cent of the electricity produced in US is consumed by the buildings alone (Peterson, 2011). Building’s share of the electricity consumption needs to be reduced in order to balance the supply and demand of electricity. This is good for the buildings as well. Green buildings use less HVAC equipment. Accordingly, operating cost of green building is lower as compared to that of conventional buildings. Most of the cost incurred in green construction comes either from the installation of new technology or else, retrofitting of old structures, though they prove to be more economical than the technology installed in non-green buildings. For example, the solar panels installed in green buildings are very energy efficient because their source of energy never depletes. Quality of water and air in the green buildings is better than what it is in the non-green buildings. Levels of air pollutants indoor are generally much higher than their levels outdoor. Many of these pollutants, like the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) originate in the materials that are used in the construction of buildings, yet there are other pollutants like the smoke that is generated by humans. Likewise, Asbestos is a material that is used for insulation purposes. It is made up of extremely minuscule fibers that are light enough to float in the air and are taken to the lungs with breath where they can cause serious damage to the lungs. Till 1980s, Asbestos was widely used as a construction material. However, as people began to gain awareness of its potential threats to health, they abandoned its use in construction. Green building makes sure that no such materials are used so that the environment both inside and outside the building becomes conducive for better health. Green buildings reduce waste. They mostly make reuse of materials or use renewable materials including sustainable lumber and plant matter. Recycled metal and stone are some of the primary building blocks of green buildings. Some green buildings even reuse byproducts of industries such as foundry sand, combustion materials as well as debris. One potential outcome of green buildings is that they inculcate motivation in the occupants to save resources and not waste things. Green buildings have a proper mechanism of disposal of waste. In addition to that, “green building furthers the concept of “smart growth,” an umbrella term for architecture and urban planning that takes into account sustainability, human health and safety, and economic expansion” (Peterson, 2011). Structure of green buildings: Since the onset of urge in people to make the buildings greener, architects have been adding numerous piecemeal elements for saving water and reducing the use of electricity in buildings. The structure of green buildings is not much different from the traditional buildings. They do not have to be designed in such a way that would make them look different from the conventional structures. In fact, green buildings have to be very much like the ordinary structures. It is only the addition of certain elements and avoidance of others that lends the “green” tag to a building. Such elements include installation of a solar panel for capturing sunlight, storing and converting it into the mechanical power. It is more of the occupants’ style of living that makes a building greener than installation or removal of elements. Occupants of a green building are very prudent in their use of things. They tend not to waste water, gas, or electricity. A building can not be expected to be green if the occupants living in it adopt such practices that are not consistent with the requirements of sustainable living. Nevertheless, there are certain factors that need to be taken into consideration while designing a green building. For example, there is sufficient water and heat proofing in the green buildings. In these structures, the roofs are covered with thick layer of soil to maintain a low temperature in the building and save it from the effect of hot weather. This obviates the need to install expensive and environment unfriendly HVAC equipment. Moreover, the rooms may have big and wide windows to allow maximum in-pour of sunlight and fresh air to keep the indoor environment enlightened and free of pollutants. These factors may be present in any building. It may not be recognized as a green building, though it may be one! Cost benefit analysis: Green buildings have conventionally been blamed for being more expensive than non-green buildings. Nevertheless, a vast majority of studies conducted on green buildings have discovered that green buildings prove to be economical as compared to the non-green buildings in the long run. There is no doubt that the initial cost of green building construction exceeds that of the non-green building construction, though the green premium originally incurred is totally compensated with the passage of time in terms of reduced utility bills, gains in the employee productivity and a manifold increase on the value of property. In July, 2007, the construction company that offers consultation, David Langdon released a report in which the costs of green buildings were compared with the non-green buildings. The report concluded in these words, As the various methods of analysis showed, there is no 'one size fits all' answer to the question of the cost of green. A majority of the buildings we studied were able to achieve their goals for LEED certification without any additional funding. Others required additional funding, but only for specific sustainable features, such as the installation of a photovoltaic system. Additionally, our analysis suggests that the cost per square foot for buildings seeking LEED certification falls into the existing range of costs for buildings of similar program type. (David Langdon, 2007, p. 11). From this discussion, it can be concluded that it is possible for structures to attain sustainable design in the original budget. A major portion of the utility bills is an outcome of the use of heavy HVAC equipment in buildings. The air conditioners not only consume a lot of electricity, but also add to the global warming. Green buildings adopt technical measures to make the structure heat proof, thus obviating the need to install HVAC equipment, and the cost of living in such buildings is reduced accordingly. Load shedding has become a major concern in many underdeveloped countries. They are running short of electricity, and the supply far lags behind the demand. As a result of this, factories and industries in these poor economies are not able to function sufficiently. This has caused the business activity to decline and the GDP has lowered accordingly. In these countries in particular, if solar energy is used for making the electricity, it will not only be cost effective, but will also promote business, and increase GDP, thus making the economy strengthen. Conclusion: Green building promotes healthy and sustainable living by every sense of judgment. It makes minimal use of natural resources and avoids use of materials that are either not good for health or the environment for both. Green buildings rely upon the sunlight for energy, which is indeed, the cheapest and a never ending source of energy. Initial cost of construction of a green building is more than a traditional building, but the former proves more cost effective than the latter with the passage of time. Occupants have to pay reduced utility bills. Their cost of health care is reduced. Most importantly, the building sells at a higher price as compared to its traditional counterpart. These factors are factual and make the green buildings economical and contradict the controversies about green construction. Green building is the ultimate solution to the widespread energy crisis and global warming in the contemporary world. References: Davis Langdon 2007, Cost of Green Revisited: Reexamining the Feasibility and Cost Impact of Sustainable Design in the Light of Increased Market Adoption. pp. 1-25. viewed, 18 May, 2011, . Ellis, J 2011, What Is Green Construction?, viewed, 18 May, 2011, . Peterson, K 2011, The Human Benefits of Green Building, viewed, 18 May, 2011, . Read More