Integrated Building Design Article in LJ

Super excited that my article about Integrated Building Design (IBD), “A Whole Systems Approach: Integrated Building Design,” is in the current issue of Library Journal!!

Rebecca T. Miller, Executive Editor @LJ, had asked me to write this article last year after the LJ Design Institute in South Carolina. I had insisted on asking the panels I moderated about IBD and got a mixed bag of responses from panelists but Rebecca was interested in hearing more.

Writing the article gave me an excellent excuse to talk to some amazing people:

-Victor Canseco, LEED AP and Principal at Sandpebble Builders, Inc. from Southampton, NY: Victor is passionate in an old school way about integrated building design. Speaking with a builder was fantastic as I usually don’t get face time with that side of a project. He really drove home how feasible IBD is and how smart it is for publicly funded projects. Plus I think he’s a pretty fabulous human being as well so there’s that…looking forward to presenting with Victor and his colleagues at the 2011 New York Library Association Conference in Saratoga Springs, NY!

-Amanda Aspenson, LEED AP and Designer with Meyer Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. out of Minneapolis, MN let me talk her ear off! We totally geeked out about IBD and I so appreciated her energy and enthusiasm around the topic. Amanda worked on the IPD Case Studies document cited in the article which I think is inspiring and really gives one the sense that IBD is doable for libraries of all shapes and sizes. Big thank you to Mr. Jeffrey Scherer, founding principal at MSR for connecting me with Amanda! *(P.S. Looking forward to presenting with Jeffrey at the PLA & ALA Conferences in 2012!! More on that soon!)

-Rick McCarthy, a principal architect with PSA-Dewberry, based in Elgin, IL, is not only a library architect but a library trustee which brings a really special angle to the conversation of stakeholder intersections. Rick’s long standing support of sustainably designed buildings is another stroke of luck for me in writing this article.

-David Moore, senior project architect at McMillan Pazdan Smith, based in Greenville, SC was the first person I interviewed and probably one of the most pragmatic people I’ve met. His real world wrangling of library projects with a host of complications and fairly fantastic outcomes was very useful to draw on as I got started writing the article.

I’m relieved the article is finally out there. I can’t wait to hear the feedback. I’m hoping a few brave souls out there give IBD a try for their projects. If there is anyone out there who wants to talk more about this just let me know, I’m very intrigued by the potential of IBD (if you haven’t already picked up on that…) and excited to see some libraries give it a go!

Public Libraries & Local Governments

This publication is a statement on the significant role of public libraries in achieving local sustainability.

Last week the Urban Libraries Council released “Partners for the Future: Public Libraries and Local Governments Creating Sustainable Communities“:

“This report demonstrates how public libraries help local governments achieve sustainability goals in each of the three triple bottom line components* and is intended to both celebrate successes to date and provide a roadmap for  partnerships that are built to last.”

This publication is a call to action for public libraries around the country to be talking to their local municipalities about planning for sustainability. It won’t happen without planning. Many municipalities are taking the lead, particularly in urban areas. They may or may not think to include the library in their plans. Make sure your library is “at the table” for these discussions and wholeheartedly buys in, there is nothing to lose and much to gain. This publication gives you the talking points you need to begin to convince municipal leaders that libraries are essential to a sustainability initiative.

Maybe your municipality has not started to plan a sustainable future for your community yet, the library could take the lead or start the discussion!

*

  • Economic Vitality
  • Environmental Quality
  • Social Equity

Employee Health & Productivity

A study out of Michigan State University earlier this year provides some solid data on the link between green buildings and increased employee health and productivity.

Effects of Green Buildings on Employee Health and Productivity” by Amanjeet Singh, MS, Matt Syal, PhD, Sue
C. Grady, PhD, MPH, and Sinem Korkmaz, PhD was published in the peer reviewed journal, the American Journal of Public Health in July 2010. They focused on the effects of indoor environmental quality (IEQ). IEQ is broader than IAQ (indoor air quality) in that it encompasses  all aspects of the indoor setting including air quality, ventilation, thermal comfort, visual comfort (lighting and views), ergonomics and noise.

“… we found that improved IEQ contributed to reductions in perceived absenteeism and work hours affected by asthma, respiratory allergies, depression, and stress and to selfreported improvements in productivity. These preliminary findings indicate that green buildings may positively affect public health.”

Milwaukee Public Library Rooftop Solar

Interesting tidbits from this article on the Milwaukee Public Library’s rooftop solar array:

  • The library’s solar electric system is projected to generate 40,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of power a year for the next 40 to 50 years.
  • …the new system will produce less than 10% of its electricity needs per year.
  • …solar electric prices dropped 15–20% between the time the library contracted for the system’s installation and the writing of this case study (March 2010).
  • The library’s solar system will pay for itself over about 15 years, which is a third of its projected lifespan. About 75% of the savings will be from electricity generation and 25% from demand reduction.

Part of me wants to say “timing is everything!”

“Are Commercial LED Replacements Ready for Prime Time?”

Article from ecogeek.org:

“Although we are big proponents for LED lighting, the US Department of Energy has recently issued a couple of reports warning that many so-called replacement lamps for fluorescent fixtures are not performing at adequate levels. In most cases, fluorescent tubes are still a better choice, providing more lumens per watt than most LEDs. Although LEDs may eventually replace many other lighting options, they aren’t a magic bullet just because they’re LEDs. You should be careful and find out more about them before making the switch.”

Controlling Humidity

Thought I’d share these helpful articles from BuildingGreen.com on controlling humidity by Alex Wilson.

Why do you want to control humidity in your building?

  • high humidity/moisture can result in mold growth (which can cause allergies and other health problems as well as damage the building)
  • it makes you feel uncomfortable

Mr. Wilson proposes the following solutions for

  1. eliminating moisture sources
    1. fix drainage problems
    2. install gutters
    3. fix leaks in the roof/flashing
    4. insulate cold water pipes to prevent condensation
  2. removing moisture from the air
    1. air conditioners
    2. dehumidifiers

Turn ‘em Off or Leave ‘em On?

Ever have this discussion with someone? Is it more energy efficient to leave lights on or turn them off?

Some speculate that the “start-up” energy it takes to turn on lights is more than it would take to just leave them on, others contend that of course you’d shut them off! Even if you’re just dodging out of your office to visit the WC?

The US Department of Energy weighs in:

Incandescent Lighting

Incandescent lights (or bulbs) should be turned off whenever they are not needed. Nearly all types of incandescent light bulbs are fairly inexpensive to produce and are relatively inefficient. Only about 10%–15% of the electricity that incandescent lights consume results in light—the rest is turned into heat. Turning the light(s) off will keep a room cooler, an extra benefit in the summer. Therefore, the value of the energy saved by not having the lights on will be far greater than the cost of having to replace the bulb.

Fluorescent Lighting

The cost effectiveness of turning fluorescent lights off to conserve energy is a bit more complicated. For most areas of the United States, a general rule-of-thumb for when to turn off a fluorescent light is if you leave a room for more than 15 minutes, it is probably more cost effective to turn the light off. Or in other words, if you leave the room for only up to 15 minutes, it will generally be more cost effective to leave the light(s) on. In areas where electric rates are high and/or during peak demand periods, this period may be as low as 5 minutes.

Fluorescent lights are more expensive to buy, and their operating life is more affected by the number of times they are switched on and off, relative to incandescent lights. Therefore, it is a cost trade-off between saving energy and money by turning a light off “frequently” and having to replace the bulbs “more” frequently. This is because the reduction in usable lamp life due to frequent on/off switching will probably be greater than the benefit of extending the useful life of the bulb from reduced use. By frequent we mean turning the light off and on many times during the day.

A 2008 article in Scientific American gives you license to turn off the lights:

A simple rule of thumb that balances both concerns is to shut off fluorescents if you’re planning to leave a room for more than five minutes, according to Francis Rubinstein, a staff scientist in the Building Technologies Department at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Environmental Energy Technologies Division. Mary Beth Gotti, manager of the GE Lighting & Electrical Institute in Cleveland, agrees. For all practical purposes, “it almost always makes sense to turn the lights off,” Gotti says. “From an environmental standpoint, the best way to save energy is to turn off the things that you’re not using.”

Rubinstein notes that, even for fluorescents, the cost of electricity over a bulb’s lifetime far outpaces the cost of the bulb itself. “Even if you switch on and off a fluorescent light frequently,” he says, “the slight reduction in lamp life is a small effect relative to the energy savings you accomplish by being a good citizen.” Gotti adds that the reduction in lamp life from frequent on-and-off switching can often be counterbalanced by the extension of “calendar life”—the actual passage of time between lightbulb replacements—that results from using the bulb for fewer hours.

#4: Visit Your Local Library

The Daily Green shall be forgiven for calling us a “surprising” way to save money, it’s great that they included us in their best tips for “getting more out of life while helping the planet.” We’re #4:

“Instead of buying small mountains of books, CDs, DVDs and even magazines that you barely use, check materials out of your neighborhood library, or relax inside the quiet halls and browse on site. Over time, you can save a nice pile of cash, and you’ll help divert paper and plastics from landfills.”

New York’s Solar Thermal Roadmap

Renewable Energy World is reporting on New York’s plan to become a leader in the solar thermal landscape:

“By unveiling a solar heating and cooling programme that could create 25,000 new green jobs, generate US$2.6 billion in revenue and see 2 GW of new solar thermal capacity installed in the state over the next decade, New York has revealed its ambition to become America’s national leader in solar heating and cooling.”

New York Solar Energy Industries Association‘s Roadmap’s proposed implementation would save an estimated 6 million gallons of oil, 9.5 million ft³ of natural gas and displace 320 GWh of electricity production annually by 2020, translating into consumer savings of more than $175 million per year.