photo originally uploaded by p3p510
Pop quiz: What’s one of the biggest sources of global warming in the United States? Just look around. Chances are you’re reading this from inside a hermetically sealed, continuously heated and air-conditioned, well-lit commercial office building. Such structures, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, are responsible for nearly 20 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. So this week the EPA singled out for praise those energy efficient buildings that qualify for its Energy Star rating – also found on washing machines, dishwashers and other household appliances. Energy Star buildings in 2006 saved $600 million in power costs and reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 11 billion pounds – the equivalent of taking 900,000 cars off the road, the agency said. Such buildings use, on average, 35 percent less energy than conventional commercial offices.
That piqued Green Wombat’s curiosity. What about the headquarters of the 10 big corporations and four environmental groups that have formed the U.S. Climate Action Partnership to press for immediate mandatory greenhouse gas emissions caps and the establishment of a national carbon trading market? Absent from the EPA green building list are the headquarters of US-CAP members Alcoa (AA), BP (BP), Caterpillar (CAT), DuPont (DD), General Electric (GE), Lehman Brothers (LEH), Duke Energy (DUK), FPL (FPL), and PNM Resources (PNM), as well as the HQs for Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Pew Center on Global Climate Change and World Resources Institute. (Click here to download Energy Star building list.)
The only US-CAP member to score an Energy Star rating was California utility PG&E (PCG) for its San Francisco building, which the EPA says uses half the energy of your standard-issue tower. (BP, however, announced in January that an expansion and retrofit of its U.S. headquarters in Maryland will adhere to green building practices, deploying energy efficient heating and lighting systems.) San Francisco, in fact, is chockablock with green skyscrapers, though Green Wombat’s home at One California Street didn’t make the list. Nor did the New York City headquarters of the wombat’s corporate parent, Time Warner (TWX). It should be noted that Salesforce.com (CRM), which Green Wombat took to task recently for its less-than-green marketing practices, is housed in a renovated historic San Francisco building that won an Energy Star rating.
One caveat: It is possible the Climate Action Partnership companies and green groups – or their landlords – simply did not submit an application for the Energy Star rating. Still, more than 3,200 did apply and make the grade. California has the most Energy Star buildings – 779 – with Texas in second place with 367 and North Carolina taking third with 306.
Great comment, GW. We’d be remiss not to point to good information on how to green up buildings, yes? Check out: http://www.fypower.org/bpg/index.html?b=offices. Happy to help you figure out some next steps to green up your space. BOMA also has a “Building Energy Efficiency Program” that you might want to turn your building owner and manager on to. http://www.boma.org
Interesting article, my only concern is that I’d like to see some numbers on the fossil fuel use/greenhouse gas emissions involved in the rebuilding of a new building or adapting a current one to Energy Star levels, versus the amount of same that would be saved each year. I’m all for green buildings, but I doubt that rebuilding all our current buildings to Energy Star code would save enough energy to justify the massive outlay of greenhouse gasses and energy used to make them. But I could be wrong!
Alcoa’s HQ building in Pittsburgh was recongnized for its green architecture. You can read a write-up here by the Green Building Alliance here.
http://www.gbapgh.org/casestudies_Alcoa.asp
Would Wombat take the lead by either encouraging the landowner to become green certified or move to another building?
Leading by example would be great.
Great insights Todd. After the “Inconvenient Truth”,” people are starting to realize the urgency of the problems. Environmentally friendly buildings do not only save us in the long run but can also help bring down energy costs.
Here is an article on how Genzyme cuts down energy costs using natural light enhancement system to bring natural light in through a series of roof-mounted heliostats (also known as mirrors) that are completely automated and track the movement of the sun across the sky.
http://inhabitat.com/2007/02/06/genzyme-center/
nice to know about the facts, which u have given……..sensible work…keep going …for the sake of making our earth a better place to live….