> [Huck DeVenzio speaking]
> Hal Levin and Joel Todd have offered some excellent comments on Life Cycle
> Analyses. While LCAs put some science into comparisons, they do not resolve
> the decision for specifiers -- not even the green-ness of the material, let
> alone in-use green-ness or expense differences or esthetic considerations.
Even for those of us that know little about LCAs the discussion has been
interesting. Specifiers have always had a number of issues to juggle
when making decisions. Any in depth analysis that I have seen regarding
the environmental analysis of materials does little to resolve decisions
for specifiers. Fortunately there ARE sources that try to be unbiased
that are helpful. Environmental Building News has had many worthwhile
reviews of products,(the January issue addresses the environmental impact
issues very well), the AIA Environmental Resource Guide, and Rousseau
and LeClair's "Environmental by Design" are also good publications.
I agree with Hal that value based judgements, and that weighting of the
criteria are important aspects of the process. During several years of
not finding the information I need to help with environmental material
selection, I have evolved my own system. I believe that the criteria
weighting system also has to be flexible to adapt to individual
projects. For example, I would obviously use different criteria
weighting to select materials for a house for a chemically sensitive
client than I would use for a tenant fit-out for a client with a ten year
lease.
Carry on the discussion. We need to get the decision makers thinking more
environmentally!
Keith Robertson M.Arch.
Halifax, Nova Scotia
__________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by Oikos (www.oikos.com)
and Environmental Building News (www.ebuild.com). For instructions
send e-mail to greenbuilding-request@crest.org.
__________________________________________________________________