Building a green house

The Green home building initiative has its genesis in the Green Movement, which was in its heyday in the 1960s, especially among the Hippies. Thereafter, the Green movement evolved differently in the United States and Europe. The political authority of the green movement gained significantly with the institution of the German Green Party in 1970s. Many more Green political parties came into being notably in Europe and thus an institutional approach to the green movement was in place in Europe. Many of these Green parties formed part of coalition governments in Europe thus giving governmental support to green initiatives quite early on. The German government passed the green legislation tax, one of the first green initiatives in the world.

No such legislative activity took place in the States. In this country, the Green movement has continued its march without any federal support. Initially, building green homes was much more costly to build than regular houses. The American building industry following the pragmatic capitalist line, sought to maximize profits unlike the European builders who had the pressure of the governments and influential NGOs to persevere building green.

Building Biology is a well recognized 30 year old movement in Europe, and the main argument forwarded by its proponents is that indigenously available materials are healthier than concrete, steel and plastic foam construction material. Consequently, over the years, Europeans have been building walls with the help of loam. For insulation, recycled newspaper is a prudent choice. Used bathing water which was till late considered as waste by Americans, can be sensibly utilized for landscaping. The US LEED initiative which aims at bringing green building into the mainstream is still not a federal law. The European proposal to unify all green norms under the French green building norms is a pertinent move that the government would do well to seriously consider.

Houses in the US are usually constructed of wood which is both abundant and economical.\ However, the housing boom in the Untied States led to increased import of timber and thus saw a rapid denuding of tropical rainforest. The US building industry continued to look for profits and overlooked any environmental concerns. In contrast, forest conservation has been a priority with the European nations and this has resulted in them shifting to using quick rowing wood such as bamboo for construction purposes. Little surprise as to the reason Europeans seem far ahead in structuring green homes as against Americans.

Constructing Green houses is not easy, and certainly not low priced. A green house typically costs 0.5 % to 6.5% higher than a standard dwelling. Practically speaking, it might does not make sense investing more in a green house. However, the vital point which most people miss is a critical analysis of the future prospects of Green buildings. Governments across the world are progressively becoming more and more sensitive to environmental issues. The Green Movement is slowly but surely transforming from informal pressure groups into positive governmental action by inclusion of legislations in many parts of the world. One can see that effect in the US where states have already started offering tax rebates to individuals who are opting for green houses.

The green house building phenomena is gaining credibility including a premium in the real estate market. A contributory factor has been the rising oil prices which are shortly predicted to reach $150 and then $200 resulting in an exponential rise in operating costs worldwide. The first effects of this surge in crude oil price will hit the users of electricity generated by Naptha fired plants. The air conditioning bills which till now seemed within limits would cross far over to the danger mark. The knock on effect on every segment of the construction business will only increase the costs. Under these circumstances, an early investment in building a green house would stand in good stead. The reasons are very clear for all to witness. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory predicts that 40 percent of a building’s utility bill for heating, cooling and ventilation can be reduced by incorporating green features in the design stage. Such a prediction will make building green houses an attractive proposition in the future. A simple extrapolation would conclude that such green features would enhance the salability and price of the real estate. Future scarcity of land for housing is making the builders include green features in their ongoing projects. Standard green features such as shared pools, a general rainwater harvesting plant, and common gardens are a de rigueur now a days.

In the not too distant future, customers will insist on houses with green features. This may be forced upon the customers to avoid being penalized by stricter government environmental laws. We already see the effect of Euro IV standard on the automobile industry. 20 years ahead, such a happenstance may become true. Therefore, building a Green House is a safe and a wise proposition.