Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Benefits of the green movement
Benefits of the green movement
Benefits of the green movement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Benefits of the green movement
Sustainable buildings are becoming somewhat of a necessity in the world today. As the demand for green building develops, so does the demand for green building materials. Just as the old techniques and building materials seem to disappear in the assembly of things, they are now making a come back. Green building focuses on the efficiency of major resources like water and energy. As the cost for sustainable materials and products are on the decline, building green seems to be the most cost effective kind of design and construction. Looking specifically at green materials and their impact on the production of structures, it is evident that they are a prime choice for building material. The use of green materials should be promoted because they are better for the environment, more healthful for the consumer, and better for the economy. The use of green materials is better for the environment because they have a positive impact on the planet. Looking at our environment today we see a place that has been facing a massive climate change. Scientists have been concerned over global warming for decades. The ongoing increase of the earth’s temperature is believed to be caused by the greenhouse effect (“Global Warming” 27). Building with green materials produces significantly lower greenhouse gas emission. Specifically, wood as a material for building products, requires considerably less energy than other building products such as steel and concrete. Wood product manufacture results in fewer greenhouse gas and other air-polluting emissions (“Green Building Benefits”). Green building also results in waste reduction. In the United States, construction and demolition creates a huge amount of solid waste. Green building limits the waste prod... ... middle of paper ... ...07. Print. "Green Building: Advantages & Disadvantages." Green Building: Advantages & Disadvantages. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2013. . Kneidel, Sally, and Sadie Kneidel. Going Green: A Wise Consumer's Guide to a Shrinking Planet. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Pub., 2008. Print. "A Renewed Commitment to Buildings and Their Social Benefits." U.S. Green Building Council. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2013. . Smith, Alicia Marie. Tips for Going Green. Chicago, IL: Encouragement, 2007. Print. "Stormwater Management." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2013. . "Take Action." Green Building Benefits. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2013. .
---. “Environmentalist for the Twenty-first Century.” IPA Review 52.3 (September 2000): pages 3-8. 3 April 2006 .
...l McKibben Books on Global Warming, Local Economies, Nature, Poplulation Control, Sustainability, and More. Henry Holt and Company, 2013. Web. 25 Apr. 2014.
Construction industry is one of the significant industries in Canada. The low interest rates in Canada fuelled the demand of housing, which brings the Canadian construction industry with a CAGR of 2% between 2008 and 2012 (Companies and Markets, 2013). The fact is that building construction has a considerable effect on the environment. It is a major consumer of raw materials, land and energy, as well as generates a mass of Greenhouse gas and other pollution (USA EPA, 2008). According to the data from Statistics Canada (2012), the construction sector produced 2.1% of total Canadian industrial sector’s GHG emissions in 2008. The purpose of this project is to convince the construction companies in Waterloo region to adapt feasible best practices for GHG emission reduction during construction process. Therefore, guidance for GHG emissions calculation and best practices should be determined firstly.
Wackernagel, M. & W. Rees. (1996) Our Ecological Footprint. Stony Creek, CT: New Society Publishers.
In conclusion to this investigation one thing is clear and that is that recycling reeks benefits to the environment, Recycling material when compared to making material from raw material is a more efficient energy saving and more environmentally friendly way to reuse material that is usually consider as trash such as empty glass, and plastic bottles, or old newspapers. Recycling helps reduce the possible carbon emissions greatly and does reduce the human carbon footprint. But Recycling doesn’t resolve the pollution that is around the world today. Leading to new questions, questions like what about the landfills are they sustainable, and if so for how long. How long until the air becomes unbreathable? How long until Earth becomes its own furnace?
Waste Not, Want Not: if you use a resource carefully and without extravagance, you will never be in need. In a 2009 essay, “Waste Not, Want Not”, writer Bill McKibben argues on the excess of unnecessary waste. To halt climate change, he proposes to convince the reader to shift priorities in waste management and go back to the frugality of simpler times. Bill approaches his argument with a vast amount of informative charged words to convince the reader into taking his side of the argument. The writer’s intended purpose in writing this piece is to make a statement and develop his argument against the unnecessary waste. To make this argument effective, the writer utilizes logic to persuade the audience with overwhelming data and reason. His primary instrument of choice in this essay is using logically charged words followed by factual evidence to back up his claims. Although his use of emotion and pathos are less obvious, but where used, is effective.
Green knew to confront this concern in his talk, he does so by discussing the reliability of the mass timber panels used in these buildings. As it’s hard to light a log on fire with one match, it’s equally as hard to light these specific panels on fire. Even so, if the panels do go up in flames Green reassures the audience that they burn quite predictably. Fire safety signs would be relatively easy to make to ensure these buildings are as safe as those made of concrete and steel. Green continues to prove his credibility when he confronts the issues of deforestation. According to his statistics eighteen percent of greenhouse gas emissions are a result of deforestation, luckily engineers have made models for sustainable forestry. These allow architects and engineers to recognize those trees appropriate for the buildings and how to properly cut them down. He introduces the fact that every thirteen minutes the U.S grows enough trees to make a twenty story building, which will sequester 3,100 tons of carbon dioxide. As opposed to steel and concrete buildings which emit 1,200 tons of carbon dioxide, this statistic proves the net difference of 4,300 tons. Green puts this in perspective when he states that it’s equal to removing nine hundred cars from the road in a year time
In conclusion, the designers and builders of the tower have an undesirable job: creating a building that is functional, modern, sustainable and unique. At the same time it is honoring the memory of the people that died in and around the buildings that stood there before. While the green sustainable features have been criticized for being too expensive, they will do more than save just water, electricity and emissions. They and the grace of the building will inspire a generation of green and safe skyscrapers for the twenty-first century. This building has become one of the safest, environmentally friendly and expensive ever built, but as critics slate the building for various reasons, one cannot take away the determination through political, social and economic status that designers and workers have created such a beautiful building with great meaning.
Kats, G., Alevantis, L., Berman A., Perlman J., & Mills, E. (2003, October). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings: A Report to California’s Sustainable Building Task Force. Retrieved from http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/News/News477.pdf
Whether you are considering building new or simply renovating, there are many verdant options that a company can use to reduce expenses. There is a price difference present between the costs of traditional and eco-friendly building materials. Typically these costs contribute about 2-3% towards the increase on price when choosing to use green building materials (Lawson, 2009). At first you think 2 - 3%, really is not significant at all, however if you consider many of the larger companies easily spends upwards of 5 – 6 million dollars on new constructions. That is quiet a magnitude of money; ranging anywhere from $100,000 – $180,000 in extra investments, depending on the options that are chosen.
Green building has come forth over the past decade as a positive movement to produce high-performance, energy-efficient structures that improve comfort and health for resident, meanwhile, minimizing environmental impacts. Nevertheless, a common sense that green features is expensive and not suitable for affordable housing. Recent studies are showed that green buildings have a modest initial cost premium, but the long-term benefits far exceed the additional capital costs. For this report, I will introduce a financial analysis -Net Present Value (NPV), and discuss the impacts of NPV analysis for green affordable housing.
Globally, green buildings are being recognised and accredited, leading to the introduction of various tools and indices with one common objective that is to evaluate, measure, distinguish and sets apart this uniquely designed buildings from the rest. The Diamond Building carries a Green Building Index (GBI) accreditation, a first in Malaysia. Among the achievement of the ST Diamond Building are:
Buildings and the appliances alone account for 40 percent of America 's energy use and a third of our global warming emissions (NRDC). New buildings will need to meet new energy-efficiency standards that maximize energy savings and existing homes and commercial spaces can be improved to save energy through weatherizing and installing energy efficient heating, cooling and lighting systems. Ultimately, this will not only be energy efficient but also cost effective as well. In the bigger picture, retrofitting just 1 out of every 5 homes would avoid the need to build 13 mid-sized power plants every year. Retrofitting every house in the country would cut as much global warming pollution as taking a half a million cars off the road – and would save more oil and gas than we could extract from drilling in our coastal waters (NRDC). In the long run, creating more efficient communities through homes and buildings, we could cut back on the global warming issues we are dealing
Boggs, Grace Lee, and Scott Kurashige. The next American revolution: Sustainable activism for the twenty-first century. University of California Pr, 2012. Print.
"Eco-Friendly State Laws and Green Mandates." Black News, Opinion, Politics and Culture - The Root. Web. 14 Dec. 2011. .