Steven: great response, I agree with you.
Just wanted to point out that it isn't all that simple. Especially politics and companies come with 'solutions' that are way too simplistic and often increase environmental problems on a global scale instead of solving them. And I do think it is a global problem first and foremost.
rationalist: I am car free already, actually always have been. Great to hear you are going car free too. Must be a lot harder for you since I live in a historical European town (Delft) which has been made for pedestrians, (almost) everything I need is within a five minute walk and it is an lovely city to walk with the canals and charming houses and all. Plus we have a great bicycle infrastructure and public transport. With my bike I can be in downtown Rotterdam and the Hague within half an hour. On the other hand California has a better climate.
yeah, my whole office thinks I'm pretty crazy for going car-free. Right now I'm just car-lite but they already think it's wierd. Two people have tried to get me to stop biking to work, for safety reasons. The drivers out here really are crazy, but if nobody ever rides bikes because their afraid, how will we show the people in charge of the infrastructure that there is need for more bike-friendly policies/roads/signage?
I had known the arguement about the embodied energy of a car being more than it would ever output in its lifetime, but hadn't known that the same arguement was being applied to solar panels. That makes me sad, but it makes some amount of sense. What about wind power? Is wind turbine production that damaging as well?
It's different with solar panels because it is a technology in its infant state, so I don't see it as negative. There is a lot of space for improvement. Same happened with wind energy, this used to cost more energy than it gives, but because we build them anyway we could learn and improve them. So nowadays they do work positive. (although they do have other issues, but that's another discussion)
Also, what most people also seem to forget is that it takes energy to get oil from the ground and to transport it. I've been told for one liter of oil it takes 0.1 liter to do this. And this number is increasing since we used all the easy reachable oil. And with the high prizes nowadays it has become profitable to exploit the difficult oilfields, like the Canadian oil-sands, which supposedly takes about 0.3 to 0.4 liters of oil for one liter. Another factor is all the energy and pollution from wars we fight for oil, and I don't think there has ever been a war about solar panels or wind energy.
"It's not easy being green"
(Kermit)
WonderK: your initiative really seems to have effect, thanks you!
People are really thinking and changing their behavior. Oh, and I would love to hear something about your bicycle adventures.
rutger, thanks! I am fond of creating a ruckus every now and then.....I intend to try to make a career out of it actually!
As for my bicycle adventures, I am afraid they have stalled a bit. I ordered my bike last month from Dahon, which I was really intent on getting, not only because they seem like great bikes but also because their company mission statement includes a big environmental component. Well, they seem to be a bit behind on their deliveries....apparently their growth has moved a bit faster than their manufacturing capabilities. Which is ironic considering all of the discussions we've been having here.
I will tell you, however, I had a lovely stay in Delft when I visited the Netherlands years ago. We stayed in this cool hostel in the middle of nowhere, it had cows in the front yard! Actually one of my fondest experiences on that trip was renting bikes in Brugges and riding them to a town on the coast of Belgium. Riding back we got lost and my stubborn friend and myself actually separated and took different paths, only to arrive back in Brugges within minutes of each other. Silly Americans. :o)
My archinect friends have definitely helped me to change my behaviour. All the people I know in real life are completely immersed into car culture and consumer culture, so connecting with other people of similar goals is a big support.
Rutger, very good points! Nice to have some logical ideas to bring out in an arguement.
I listened to a interesting podcast the other day about plug-in electric cars (and plug-in hybrids). Check it out: KEXP Presents Mind Over Matters Sustainability Segment It's the interview with Sherry Boschert, president of the San Francisco Electric Vehicle Association.
i recently participated in a LEED charrette on a job with which i'm involved...it's a large scale resort/spa sitting on a geothermal hotspot with lots of interesting potential including ground-coupled heat exchangers for hot water, on-site blackwater treatment plant, underground cistern water storage for irrigation and mechanical chilling, etc...really interesting and potentially LEED-NC-2.2 Silver...we'll see. probably in the mid $30M/USD.
my question here for GTC is...would it be in our best interest to start an official LEED thread related to ongoing LEED projects where folks can talk specifically about things like innovative credits, site preparation points and biohazard remediation?
or should it be rolled up with GTC?
i'd love to run a couple of numbers and things by the group, but don't want to hijack the GTC.
i did the LEED search here on the 'nect, and there are many threads, but they're mostly about the exam, or about whether or not to put LEED AP on your business cards...
i'm thinking of one dedicated to, as mentioned, ongoing LEED projects and their support needs.
World Leaders to Pursue Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions
By William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 7, 2007; 5:06 PM
Leaders of the world's major powers agreed today to pursue "substantial reductions" in greenhouse gas emissions but stopped short of committing themselves to specific numerical targets in apparent deference to U.S. opposition.
I certainly don't mind LEED project talk on GTC. I figure that though we've drifted towards lifestyle issues and products a lot that LEED strategy talk would actually be a bit more in line with the original intent of the thread, if I understand it rightly.
WhatToDo- I've been in the habit of blaming things like that on Dubya, but I find myself wondering today whether the US will immediately commit to such measures when the regime changes, or whether we'll keep doing the same old song and dance?
you know I was thinking the same thing, rationalist. I hate the man...err the regime... so much that it's an easy target (and god knows they are a lot to blame for our current state), but most of the higher-ups have been non-committal about a strict and definitive change ever since we have known we have a "green issue". Though i don't think the next powers-that-be can eff it up much more 9or can they), I am not terribly optimistic about seeing a drastic improvement.
I think it's the political process of the country... the easiest way to get elected is to not take a terribly definitive stance on much of anything, so as a result we frequently get politicians basically trying to do as little as possible while their in office to ensure re-election!
ML- I'm voting for a dedicated LEED project thread, just so we won't have to wade through the larger issues we've been discussing on GTC. Oh, congrats on having a real project to apply all this theory to.
if you install the blackwater treatment and cistern as you described, you're probably looking at gold. the biggest hurdle for hospitality is the non-smoking issue. the solution is to seal each room and positively pressurize the corridors. there are specifics in the ETS pre-req CIR discussion. Grey water recycling for laundry is a big cost savings for the client- plus this is a good simple heat recovery method.
Have you looked at USGBC.org recently? thought they had a (lame) discussion forum set up too. of course, we're much cooler here at archinect then those people at the green building council...
Speaking of politicians.......has anyone been following Mayor Bloomberg's plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions for New York? I have to say that I'm actually kind of impressed.
U.S. adopts limits on clean water law enforcement
Tue Jun 5, 2007 6:25PM EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The landmark U.S. law to fight water pollution will now apply only to bodies of water large enough for boats to use, and their adjacent wetlands, and will not automatically protect streams, the U.S. government said on Tuesday.
Environmental groups said they fear the new policy will muddy the purpose of the federal Clean Water Act and put many smaller bodies of water at risk. Democrats in Congress have introduced legislation mandating protection of creeks, estuaries and other watersheds.
god, can nothing be done ALL the way in this country? Again, this goes back to your point, rationalist, the middle of road gets the votes. As an extreme-left liberal (absolute bleeding heart) I am so turned off by this "appeasing the masses" approach.
Kalyani - I'm not that familiar w/ Bloomberg’s plan (I will research it), but I remember seeing a pbs special (design:e2) on Chicago (attempting to be America’s greenest city) and I was very impressed by the creative and resourceful approach instigated by Mayor Richard M. Daley.
I'm not sure if this has been addressed here...but the design:e2 series is very very good. http://www.pbs.org/designe2/
WhatToDo: yes, I'm familiar with the design:e2 documentary. I've only been able to watch the free 5-10 minutes preview versions of it, but hope to get my hands on a full copy one of these days (thought it was pretty good from what I saw).
Bloomberg's plan is pretty big.....a few hightlights:
-$200 million budget
-wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 30% by 2030
-he's proposing congestion pricing, a system of charging drivers who enter the busiest sections of Manhattan.
-brownfield redevelopment and changes to buiding codes.
Yeah, I just ordered the DVD because I haven't seen it on TV in about a year.
I especially loved the bit on UT Austin's Sergio Palleroni. It was a big reason I applied to their MArch program. Though I was thrilled to be accepted, I am not going for other reasons...
Anyway, as scary as the state of the environment is, it is a very exciting time to be a designer, to be going to school, and to just be in this industry. I think, in the next decade, we will [hopefully] see amazing advancements...or we all just explode. Either way, it will be exciting ;)
So is the congestion tax the major method of paying for all this? Because frankly it sounds pretty pie-in-the-sky to me. I like the idea of the congestion tax, because it seems like you can't really get anywhere by car there already, and more people are just going to make that worse. So by deterring private vehicle traffic, I think there can be big benefits. Mind you I'm looking at this as someone who wouldn't bring a private vehicle into the city anyway (even if I lived there). Anyway from the point of view of a pedestrian or cyclist or public transit user, I think it can only be a good thing. As long as the money to pay for that isn't being taken away from something else necessary (like schools, safety, etc.)
tK - we have two different options for laundry right now, one with ozone injection (?) and another with a greywater recycling component, two different ways to minimize wasted potable water...not sure yet which will be in our best interest...actually, the client's sitting on that now. i'm not convinced i even understand them both entirely yet. i need to get on that.
and smoking? no worries for us on that one, the entire property is smoke free. between the fact that it's california (no smoking in public buildings) and that it's a spa, that won't be much of an issue. but in my opinion, keeping the corridors positively pressurized is always a good mentality in avoiding infringement/exposure between the individually climate controlled rooms and the common areas. but that's not really in our scope anyways...
the real potential here i think for gold cert. is in the optimized energy performance category (EA 1) and innovative credits in the kitchen. at the charrette, the mech. engineers didn't want to get ahead of themselves, so their suggestion to the arch/client/LEED Consultant was to count on a minimum of 10.5-14% better than ASHRAE/Title 24, for 1-2 credits, but the possibility exists to go beyond that given the geothermal options.
we're not architects here, so we're not running the project, but given the scope of the foodservice on this job we've got a major impact on the whole affair. i've actually been pretty impressed both by the arch firm, but especially by the quality of all the consultants too.
i think just in writing this post i realize even more the value of the dedicated thread.
rationalist - i hear you on the merits of LEED talk here, but in my albeit limited exposure to LEED it just gets so darned technical. for people not actively involved in a tangible way in their respective projects it will become extremely BORING. just a thought.
do we need WonderK to weigh in on it...it's her thread after all, no? or is that not how it works around here? still being a relative newb, does the original poster get veto powers on all thread decisions? like stourley's say on the book club? (speaking of which - i can't wait for that book to arrive!)
do the taxis have to pay the tax? I'm assuming that a lot of the congestion (in NYC specifically) comes from taxis. If they do pay, then the fairs will increase and hopefully less people will take taxis and will walk or take public transit instead. That could be quite impactful...or maybe not because people will just pay what is charged...
in a recent trip to london, i was amazed at the congestion pricing system they have there.
if i remember correctly, only taxis and buses are allowed in the central zones during peak times, everyone else pays monstrous congestion fees.
if the taxis (like bloomberg announced recently) all convert to hybrid technology, or some combination hybrid/biodiesel/etc then no worries.
we all need taxis sometimes, and if the congestion were reduced vis a vis fees then maybe the cabbies would be of a happier disposition!
i like much of what i read in bloomberg's proposals, though i am leery of the enforcement mechanism for the congestion pricing.
they'll need to install cameras throughout the high-traffic zones and snap pix of everyones license plates and then using character recognition software they'll be able to automatically identify your car, and send you a bill.
in london's case, i think you have to buy the congestion zone permit BEFORE you enter said zone, otherwise the fee goes way way up.
there's lots of great potential for this type of thing, and bloomberg was pushing for this 10 years ago, long before his public office.
that said, it's still a heavy big-brother-type affair.
as seen in inhabitat:seed magazine and a great article about the chinese efforts in renewable energy.
Authoritarian power can, at certain times, and with specific regard to environmental issues, seem like an advantage. Across China, the government is constructing massive solar- and biofuel-powered eco-cities 30 times the size of the largest green communities elsewhere in the world. Investors in such projects can be confident that government policies will remain constant—and compared with developing democracies like India, which is also pushing renewables, this gives China a certain edge.
"The Chinese advantage is that when they decide something, they can do very dramatic things," says energy analyst Jim Brock. "In 2000, they took 26,000 heavily polluting minibuses off the road in a week [in Beijing]. They cut the pollution by 6 percent just by saying we don't want these cars on the road. Try that in the United States—it wouldn't work."
Just stopping by, I am having to skim the posts for the time being because I've got so much going on out here in LA right now!
Anyway, a couple of thoughts....
mightylittle, you are so cute. Of course you can start a new dedicated thread about LEED stuff! I think its a fine idea. I just started GTC so we could have a running convo about environmental issues, much the same way that Thread Central is a running conversation about the rest of the board. Just make sure you link to it here so we can find it!
PS. I like your "trademark" behind your name :o)
Also I wanted to mention, I think WhatToDo brought up Bloomberg and his proposal for NYC. Ok, Bloomberg is awesome. There are many people who are holding out hope for Bloomberg to run for president, and I actually think he would be a really good candidate. He's very sensible and very progressive, and just an "R" on paper. I actually quite like his ideas and somehow, he always gets things done.
I will read all of your links later. In the meantime, I am off again....gosh, LA's smog makes me so sad. It's so pretty out here but I hate looking up and seeing that hazy skyline. :-/
actually i brought up Bloomberg's plan, but whaterver. so about the congestion pricing.....if i remember correctly, the taxi riders would be paying the extra fee (not the drivers). there are a lot of people fighting him on this idea, but i'm keeping my fingers crossed that it gets passed.
NEW YORK (AP) -- Traffic congestion and devastating pollution are among the ''inconvenient truths'' of our age and could be eased by imposing pay-to-drive fees on Manhattan motorists, Mayor Michael Bloomberg told a legislative panel Friday.
Bloomberg, who normally takes the subway to work, told the lawmakers he got stuck in traffic three times on his way to the special hearing. Read on...
it works on craigslist testing. hmmm...what'd i do wrong? i know. archinect knew i was procrastinating editing those custom detail sheets for the fabricator, and it rejected my attempts at typographic humor.
it would be helpful if the preview window actually worked, but for some reason it doesn't always.
especially on my work computer, sometimes when i hit preview, the screen refreshes and i can see the original post, but then nothing of my own post shows up.
strange indeed.
i always use <> for rich text tags and [] for images and links. oh well.
<strike>DAMMIT!</strike>
take a look here to see what it was supposed to look like.
i'm in the middle of trying to gather as much info i can find on green policies and resources in chicago... it would be nice if we could do this for a bunch of different cities... whaddya think?
postal, I think it's a great idea. Especially for large jurisdictions like Chicago....I know I've spent a great deal of time looking up these types of things for New York.
mightylittle, I like the finished result. I don't know how to make it work though.
alright - apologize for hijacking the thread for my own edification, but if everyone takes a little something from the html tagging clinic here, we'll all have more beautiful posts.
Green Thread Central
Steven: great response, I agree with you.
Just wanted to point out that it isn't all that simple. Especially politics and companies come with 'solutions' that are way too simplistic and often increase environmental problems on a global scale instead of solving them. And I do think it is a global problem first and foremost.
rationalist: I am car free already, actually always have been. Great to hear you are going car free too. Must be a lot harder for you since I live in a historical European town (Delft) which has been made for pedestrians, (almost) everything I need is within a five minute walk and it is an lovely city to walk with the canals and charming houses and all. Plus we have a great bicycle infrastructure and public transport. With my bike I can be in downtown Rotterdam and the Hague within half an hour. On the other hand California has a better climate.
yeah, my whole office thinks I'm pretty crazy for going car-free. Right now I'm just car-lite but they already think it's wierd. Two people have tried to get me to stop biking to work, for safety reasons. The drivers out here really are crazy, but if nobody ever rides bikes because their afraid, how will we show the people in charge of the infrastructure that there is need for more bike-friendly policies/roads/signage?
I had known the arguement about the embodied energy of a car being more than it would ever output in its lifetime, but hadn't known that the same arguement was being applied to solar panels. That makes me sad, but it makes some amount of sense. What about wind power? Is wind turbine production that damaging as well?
It's different with solar panels because it is a technology in its infant state, so I don't see it as negative. There is a lot of space for improvement. Same happened with wind energy, this used to cost more energy than it gives, but because we build them anyway we could learn and improve them. So nowadays they do work positive. (although they do have other issues, but that's another discussion)
Also, what most people also seem to forget is that it takes energy to get oil from the ground and to transport it. I've been told for one liter of oil it takes 0.1 liter to do this. And this number is increasing since we used all the easy reachable oil. And with the high prizes nowadays it has become profitable to exploit the difficult oilfields, like the Canadian oil-sands, which supposedly takes about 0.3 to 0.4 liters of oil for one liter. Another factor is all the energy and pollution from wars we fight for oil, and I don't think there has ever been a war about solar panels or wind energy.
"It's not easy being green"
(Kermit)
WonderK: your initiative really seems to have effect, thanks you!
People are really thinking and changing their behavior. Oh, and I would love to hear something about your bicycle adventures.
rutger, thanks! I am fond of creating a ruckus every now and then.....I intend to try to make a career out of it actually!
As for my bicycle adventures, I am afraid they have stalled a bit. I ordered my bike last month from Dahon, which I was really intent on getting, not only because they seem like great bikes but also because their company mission statement includes a big environmental component. Well, they seem to be a bit behind on their deliveries....apparently their growth has moved a bit faster than their manufacturing capabilities. Which is ironic considering all of the discussions we've been having here.
I will tell you, however, I had a lovely stay in Delft when I visited the Netherlands years ago. We stayed in this cool hostel in the middle of nowhere, it had cows in the front yard! Actually one of my fondest experiences on that trip was renting bikes in Brugges and riding them to a town on the coast of Belgium. Riding back we got lost and my stubborn friend and myself actually separated and took different paths, only to arrive back in Brugges within minutes of each other. Silly Americans. :o)
My archinect friends have definitely helped me to change my behaviour. All the people I know in real life are completely immersed into car culture and consumer culture, so connecting with other people of similar goals is a big support.
Rutger, very good points! Nice to have some logical ideas to bring out in an arguement.
Is this just green-washing by GM:
http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2007/06/20070606_b_main.asp
still, the technology doesn't sound bad.
I listened to a interesting podcast the other day about plug-in electric cars (and plug-in hybrids). Check it out: KEXP Presents Mind Over Matters Sustainability Segment It's the interview with Sherry Boschert, president of the San Francisco Electric Vehicle Association.
i recently participated in a LEED charrette on a job with which i'm involved...it's a large scale resort/spa sitting on a geothermal hotspot with lots of interesting potential including ground-coupled heat exchangers for hot water, on-site blackwater treatment plant, underground cistern water storage for irrigation and mechanical chilling, etc...really interesting and potentially LEED-NC-2.2 Silver...we'll see. probably in the mid $30M/USD.
my question here for GTC is...would it be in our best interest to start an official LEED thread related to ongoing LEED projects where folks can talk specifically about things like innovative credits, site preparation points and biohazard remediation?
or should it be rolled up with GTC?
i'd love to run a couple of numbers and things by the group, but don't want to hijack the GTC.
i did the LEED search here on the 'nect, and there are many threads, but they're mostly about the exam, or about whether or not to put LEED AP on your business cards...
i'm thinking of one dedicated to, as mentioned, ongoing LEED projects and their support needs.
thoughts?
World Leaders to Pursue Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions
By William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 7, 2007; 5:06 PM
Leaders of the world's major powers agreed today to pursue "substantial reductions" in greenhouse gas emissions but stopped short of committing themselves to specific numerical targets in apparent deference to U.S. opposition.
continue reading...
from another article...
"As Bush pushes for voluntary measures, other members endorse goal of halving greenhouse emissions by 2050."
still sounds awfully non-committal...
I certainly don't mind LEED project talk on GTC. I figure that though we've drifted towards lifestyle issues and products a lot that LEED strategy talk would actually be a bit more in line with the original intent of the thread, if I understand it rightly.
WhatToDo- I've been in the habit of blaming things like that on Dubya, but I find myself wondering today whether the US will immediately commit to such measures when the regime changes, or whether we'll keep doing the same old song and dance?
you know I was thinking the same thing, rationalist. I hate the man...err the regime... so much that it's an easy target (and god knows they are a lot to blame for our current state), but most of the higher-ups have been non-committal about a strict and definitive change ever since we have known we have a "green issue". Though i don't think the next powers-that-be can eff it up much more 9or can they), I am not terribly optimistic about seeing a drastic improvement.
I think it's the political process of the country... the easiest way to get elected is to not take a terribly definitive stance on much of anything, so as a result we frequently get politicians basically trying to do as little as possible while their in office to ensure re-election!
ML- I'm voting for a dedicated LEED project thread, just so we won't have to wade through the larger issues we've been discussing on GTC. Oh, congrats on having a real project to apply all this theory to.
if you install the blackwater treatment and cistern as you described, you're probably looking at gold. the biggest hurdle for hospitality is the non-smoking issue. the solution is to seal each room and positively pressurize the corridors. there are specifics in the ETS pre-req CIR discussion. Grey water recycling for laundry is a big cost savings for the client- plus this is a good simple heat recovery method.
Have you looked at USGBC.org recently? thought they had a (lame) discussion forum set up too. of course, we're much cooler here at archinect then those people at the green building council...
Speaking of politicians.......has anyone been following Mayor Bloomberg's plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions for New York? I have to say that I'm actually kind of impressed.
from reuters
U.S. adopts limits on clean water law enforcement
Tue Jun 5, 2007 6:25PM EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The landmark U.S. law to fight water pollution will now apply only to bodies of water large enough for boats to use, and their adjacent wetlands, and will not automatically protect streams, the U.S. government said on Tuesday.
Environmental groups said they fear the new policy will muddy the purpose of the federal Clean Water Act and put many smaller bodies of water at risk. Democrats in Congress have introduced legislation mandating protection of creeks, estuaries and other watersheds.
keep reading...
god, can nothing be done ALL the way in this country? Again, this goes back to your point, rationalist, the middle of road gets the votes. As an extreme-left liberal (absolute bleeding heart) I am so turned off by this "appeasing the masses" approach.
Kalyani - I'm not that familiar w/ Bloomberg’s plan (I will research it), but I remember seeing a pbs special (design:e2) on Chicago (attempting to be America’s greenest city) and I was very impressed by the creative and resourceful approach instigated by Mayor Richard M. Daley.
I'm not sure if this has been addressed here...but the design:e2 series is very very good. http://www.pbs.org/designe2/
WhatToDo: yes, I'm familiar with the design:e2 documentary. I've only been able to watch the free 5-10 minutes preview versions of it, but hope to get my hands on a full copy one of these days (thought it was pretty good from what I saw).
Bloomberg's plan is pretty big.....a few hightlights:
-$200 million budget
-wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 30% by 2030
-he's proposing congestion pricing, a system of charging drivers who enter the busiest sections of Manhattan.
-brownfield redevelopment and changes to buiding codes.
PlaNYC has all of the info.....
Oops, that link doesn't work. Sorry, try this:
PlaNYC
great tip Kalyani! Thanks!
the like was broken, but I found it here
http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/home/home.shtml
Yeah, I just ordered the DVD because I haven't seen it on TV in about a year.
I especially loved the bit on UT Austin's Sergio Palleroni. It was a big reason I applied to their MArch program. Though I was thrilled to be accepted, I am not going for other reasons...
Anyway, as scary as the state of the environment is, it is a very exciting time to be a designer, to be going to school, and to just be in this industry. I think, in the next decade, we will [hopefully] see amazing advancements...or we all just explode. Either way, it will be exciting ;)
the "like" was broken??? I just shouldn't type at all before noon.
thanks I found it...
So is the congestion tax the major method of paying for all this? Because frankly it sounds pretty pie-in-the-sky to me. I like the idea of the congestion tax, because it seems like you can't really get anywhere by car there already, and more people are just going to make that worse. So by deterring private vehicle traffic, I think there can be big benefits. Mind you I'm looking at this as someone who wouldn't bring a private vehicle into the city anyway (even if I lived there). Anyway from the point of view of a pedestrian or cyclist or public transit user, I think it can only be a good thing. As long as the money to pay for that isn't being taken away from something else necessary (like schools, safety, etc.)
tK - we have two different options for laundry right now, one with ozone injection (?) and another with a greywater recycling component, two different ways to minimize wasted potable water...not sure yet which will be in our best interest...actually, the client's sitting on that now. i'm not convinced i even understand them both entirely yet. i need to get on that.
and smoking? no worries for us on that one, the entire property is smoke free. between the fact that it's california (no smoking in public buildings) and that it's a spa, that won't be much of an issue. but in my opinion, keeping the corridors positively pressurized is always a good mentality in avoiding infringement/exposure between the individually climate controlled rooms and the common areas. but that's not really in our scope anyways...
the real potential here i think for gold cert. is in the optimized energy performance category (EA 1) and innovative credits in the kitchen. at the charrette, the mech. engineers didn't want to get ahead of themselves, so their suggestion to the arch/client/LEED Consultant was to count on a minimum of 10.5-14% better than ASHRAE/Title 24, for 1-2 credits, but the possibility exists to go beyond that given the geothermal options.
we're not architects here, so we're not running the project, but given the scope of the foodservice on this job we've got a major impact on the whole affair. i've actually been pretty impressed both by the arch firm, but especially by the quality of all the consultants too.
i think just in writing this post i realize even more the value of the dedicated thread.
rationalist - i hear you on the merits of LEED talk here, but in my albeit limited exposure to LEED it just gets so darned technical. for people not actively involved in a tangible way in their respective projects it will become extremely BORING. just a thought.
do we need WonderK to weigh in on it...it's her thread after all, no? or is that not how it works around here? still being a relative newb, does the original poster get veto powers on all thread decisions? like stourley's say on the book club? (speaking of which - i can't wait for that book to arrive!)
do the taxis have to pay the tax? I'm assuming that a lot of the congestion (in NYC specifically) comes from taxis. If they do pay, then the fairs will increase and hopefully less people will take taxis and will walk or take public transit instead. That could be quite impactful...or maybe not because people will just pay what is charged...
But either way the revenue generated could go to some really good things.
in a recent trip to london, i was amazed at the congestion pricing system they have there.
if i remember correctly, only taxis and buses are allowed in the central zones during peak times, everyone else pays monstrous congestion fees.
if the taxis (like bloomberg announced recently) all convert to hybrid technology, or some combination hybrid/biodiesel/etc then no worries.
we all need taxis sometimes, and if the congestion were reduced vis a vis fees then maybe the cabbies would be of a happier disposition!
i like much of what i read in bloomberg's proposals, though i am leery of the enforcement mechanism for the congestion pricing.
they'll need to install cameras throughout the high-traffic zones and snap pix of everyones license plates and then using character recognition software they'll be able to automatically identify your car, and send you a bill.
in london's case, i think you have to buy the congestion zone permit BEFORE you enter said zone, otherwise the fee goes way way up.
there's lots of great potential for this type of thing, and bloomberg was pushing for this 10 years ago, long before his public office.
that said, it's still a heavy big-brother-type affair.
as seen in inhabitat:seed magazine and a great article about the chinese efforts in renewable energy.
Authoritarian power can, at certain times, and with specific regard to environmental issues, seem like an advantage. Across China, the government is constructing massive solar- and biofuel-powered eco-cities 30 times the size of the largest green communities elsewhere in the world. Investors in such projects can be confident that government policies will remain constant—and compared with developing democracies like India, which is also pushing renewables, this gives China a certain edge.
"The Chinese advantage is that when they decide something, they can do very dramatic things," says energy analyst Jim Brock. "In 2000, they took 26,000 heavily polluting minibuses off the road in a week [in Beijing]. They cut the pollution by 6 percent just by saying we don't want these cars on the road. Try that in the United States—it wouldn't work."
can we vote for al gore to be our dictator?
hi gang!
Just stopping by, I am having to skim the posts for the time being because I've got so much going on out here in LA right now!
Anyway, a couple of thoughts....
mightylittle, you are so cute. Of course you can start a new dedicated thread about LEED stuff! I think its a fine idea. I just started GTC so we could have a running convo about environmental issues, much the same way that Thread Central is a running conversation about the rest of the board. Just make sure you link to it here so we can find it!
PS. I like your "trademark" behind your name :o)
Also I wanted to mention, I think WhatToDo brought up Bloomberg and his proposal for NYC. Ok, Bloomberg is awesome. There are many people who are holding out hope for Bloomberg to run for president, and I actually think he would be a really good candidate. He's very sensible and very progressive, and just an "R" on paper. I actually quite like his ideas and somehow, he always gets things done.
I will read all of your links later. In the meantime, I am off again....gosh, LA's smog makes me so sad. It's so pretty out here but I hate looking up and seeing that hazy skyline. :-/
actually i brought up Bloomberg's plan, but whaterver. so about the congestion pricing.....if i remember correctly, the taxi riders would be paying the extra fee (not the drivers). there are a lot of people fighting him on this idea, but i'm keeping my fingers crossed that it gets passed.
Saw this in the paper this morning.....
NYC MAYOR PUSHES TRAFFIC FEE PROPOSAL
NEW YORK (AP) -- Traffic congestion and devastating pollution are among the ''inconvenient truths'' of our age and could be eased by imposing pay-to-drive fees on Manhattan motorists, Mayor Michael Bloomberg told a legislative panel Friday.
Bloomberg, who normally takes the subway to work, told the lawmakers he got stuck in traffic three times on his way to the special hearing. Read on...
Sorry, Kalyani! I have these mental images of all you girls in my head and I get mixed up......great point, in any case!
No worries WonderK!
<FONT SIZE="-4"><FONT COLOR="GREEN">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="-2"><FONT COLOR="RED">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="-1"><FONT COLOR="GOLD">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="+1"><FONT COLOR="BLUE">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="+2"><FONT COLOR="CYAN">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="+3"><FONT COLOR="GREEN">BUMP!</FONT></FONT>
<FONT SIZE="+5"><FONT COLOR="GREEN">GO GTC!</FONT></FONT>
sorry. i couldn't resist.
Nice try, ml! That didn't seem to work though.
d'oh!
it works on craigslist testing. hmmm...what'd i do wrong? i know. archinect knew i was procrastinating editing those custom detail sheets for the fabricator, and it rejected my attempts at typographic humor.
it was soooo cool though. if you squint while looking at the screen like in the matrix, you can see the beauty in my code!
notice from the snippets of code below the response box that archinect likes [], not <>. That may be your problem...
[FONT SIZE="-4"][FONT COLOR="GREEN"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="-2"][FONT COLOR="RED"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="-1"][FONT COLOR="GOLD"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="+1"][FONT COLOR="BLUE"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="+2"][FONT COLOR="CYAN"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="+3"][FONT COLOR="GREEN"]BUMP![/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT SIZE="+5"][FONT COLOR="GREEN"]GO GTC![/FONT][/FONT]
nope, guess not.
it would be helpful if the preview window actually worked, but for some reason it doesn't always.
especially on my work computer, sometimes when i hit preview, the screen refreshes and i can see the original post, but then nothing of my own post shows up.
strange indeed.
i always use <> for rich text tags and [] for images and links. oh well.
<strike>DAMMIT!</strike>
take a look here to see what it was supposed to look like.
no go on strikethrough. today's clearly not my tagging day.
apologies.
-ml
i'm in the middle of trying to gather as much info i can find on green policies and resources in chicago... it would be nice if we could do this for a bunch of different cities... whaddya think?
postal, I think it's a great idea. Especially for large jurisdictions like Chicago....I know I've spent a great deal of time looking up these types of things for New York.
mightylittle, I like the finished result. I don't know how to make it work though.
like that?
the code is [ size=1 ] or 2 or 3.... I dare you try 9
[ color=______ ] the standard web colors work
what's the tag on the backside?
[/_____ ] 'color' or 'size ' just like urls and images
thanks tK.
i was close.
alright - apologize for hijacking the thread for my own edification, but if everyone takes a little something from the html tagging clinic here, we'll all have more beautiful posts.
and what could be more green than that??
heh.
i've opened a pandora's box of html-ing. now that you have the power, use it wisely!!!!!!
oh, paul doesn't like it when you try tarting up thread titles, beware the curse of per corell...
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.