Darby Strong

Playing point. Delivering the rock.

Historic Preservation and Sustainability Can Co-exist

sav1734.jpg
Oglethorpe’s plan for Savannah

Savannah is known for her unique and plentiful city squares that promote open space. Consequently, its present city planning department, the Metropolitan Planning Commission, tends to be examined under a microscope by planning departments and preservation scholars across the country. My impression had been that living under this microscope understandably tended the Board towards “safe decisions” and away from modern and new technologies. It seems that I was wrong, as evidenced by The MPC’s unanimous recent ruling to allow the first solar hot water installation in the Savannah Historic District during this month’s meeting on July 9th.

The homeowners of this precedent setting project are Sara Barczak and her husband Anthony Jernigan – customers of ours at OneWorld Sustainable. I met Sara at Savannah’s Earth Day festival this April. She was holding down the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy booth, while I was representing OWS. We got to talking, and I learned that she was looking into solar hot water for her home. A couple of months later, OWS, together with Sara and Anthony, began the process of submitting an application to the MPC for approval on the installation of the solar-water delivering mechanism, 20 evacuated tubes, to be placed on top of her roof.

In my research to prepare for the application, I spoke with several helpful people across the country who all had experience in attempting to marry sustainability with historic preservation, very new and unchartered territory for me.

Chris Meschuk, a City of Boulder, CO planner, generously agreed to a lengthy phone conversation to explain how Boulder has implemented alternative energy into their General Design Guidelines.

The message was clearly delivered by many planners, from Key West, FL to Ypsilanti, MI, that solar PV and hot water were the least obtrusive instruments to deliver alternative energy. And since these installations are also reversible in that they can be removed, the fear of a more solid commitment and ease of correction are both reinforced. Everyone I spoke with also agreed that the general preference for installation was on a roof NOT facing the street. This gave me pause, since Sara and Anthony’s South facing roof is also street facing. Thankfully, their pitched roof was designed for future solar, remaining virtually invisible from the street, thus helping our chances for an approval come decision time.

In my search to better understand the issues, and in turn to hopefully convince the MPC board to approve our application, I luckily happened upon Kimberly Kooles, a University of Georgia National Alliance of Preservation Commissions (NAPC) staff member. She actually answered the phone, and serendipitously explained that she was crafting her PhD on the very subject of the integration of Sustainability and Historic Preservation. What luck! Kimberly educated me and sent me innumerable articles, research links, and various precedents set throughout the country.

Thanks to Kimberly, I learned that while this subject is fairly new to us all, there is a common thread set forth by both Boulder and Ypsilanti, MI, among others. The thread is this: we need to create energy efficient homes through energy efficiency audits and upgrades, prior to implementing alternative energies for any building. These measures include envelope sealing, HVAC equipment upgrades, appliance upgrades, and more efficient lighting equipment.

I have often used a similar line of thinking while speaking with potential solar customers with the simple analogy of turning up ones heat while simultaneously opening all of ones doors and windows. While we all realize the foolishness in the above scenario, we must work together in educating homeowners to pursue energy efficiency prior to considering solar, wind or geothermal alternatives.

This thinking was presented with our application, as the Barczak/Jernigan home was built twice as efficient as their Georgian neighbors’ homes. It is a new home, built on a previously empty lot within the historic district. And it is this fact, that the home is NOT an historic home, that seemed to allow the board to recommend an approval.

Thankfully, Jack Star attended the MPC meeting and spoke during the public comment period. He stressed the importance and timeliness for the board to consider the future allowances of solar PV and hot water applications within the historic district, including installation on historic buildings. It seems many on the board, most notably Joseph Steffen, are open to this discussion and future attempts at finding a good balance at the intersection of sustainability and historic preservation.

As Chatham County has produced a resolution to become the “greenest county in Georgia” and new Georgia tax credits have taken effect on July 1st, there is no time like the present to tackle this much needed dialogue and resolution. Community cooperation together with individual’s heightened responsibility towards environmental stewardship is the vehicle we need to drive implementation of alternative energy worldwide. The first steps, of course, always begin at home.

P.S. A very sincere thanks to all of the combined efforts that helped make this precedent ruling a reality: Sara and Anthony, their neighbors Anthony Alfonso, Tom Hoffman, and Gretchen Ernest, Bill Traver of OWS, Jack Star, all of the generous sharing of information by various planners across the country, and of course, the MPC Historic Review Board.

The American Solution: Buy More Stuff?

capitalismrocks.jpg
For a clearer view of the above scene, please go here

Buzzcock Market Research in New York City conducted an online survey of over 1,100 consumers in the U.S. and the U.K., attempting to get an idea of how consumers feel about environmentalism and “being green.”

Both countries are similar in that more than 70% of those polled say they actively use energy efficient light-bulbs, and recycle paper and plastic. The most interesting part of the results is how the two countries differ in their results, shown here from a Brandweek article:

U.S. vs. U.K. consumers who:
• Recycle paper: 71% vs. 87%
• Purchase recycled paper: 55% vs. 47%
• Walk rather than drive short journeys: 36% vs. 56%
• Own or lease a hybrid: 4% vs. 1%

In short, Brits change their behaivor and actions to work towards sustainability (a word that only one in three Americans understand, unfortunately) and Americans…well, we shop. Rather than actually recycling the paper that we buy (a basic responsibility), we’d rather go out and get new hybrids and drive them all about town to our extensive sets of strip malls and super stores full of junk, not thinking to drop off the recycling along the way.

This buy-our-way-to-green psyche permeates all that we do, both personally and in our professional lives. As I work to provide sustainability initiatives and alternative energy to builders via green building programs, solar PV systems, and various other sustainable goods and services, the math often does not justify the purchase when exploring sustainable options. One glaring reason is that we fail to look at the real costs of the manufacture of goods and services . Our balance sheets and cost analyses must begin to include the real price unsustainable items wreak on our health and environment. Or, we can just wait for energy costs to rise dramatically (see California), and the payback will begin to make more sense. This scenario, of course, is inevitable and happening now whether we plan for alternative energy solutions, or not.

The real cost we pay as voracious consumers supporting unsustainable business practices is expressed every day, in the form of polluted rivers, a raped Earth, and unhealthy food systems. In animal extinction, toxic waste dumps, and overflowing landfills. And we continuously send the message that we, American citizens, approve of the businesses that produce this mess by rewarding them with increasing profits. We PAY FOR THEIR WASTE ourselves on the backs of our children’s children. We must demand that our companies’ balance sheets include the effects of their products, thus creating incentive for us all to collectively change our actions. And create an economy that rewards sustainability, rather than penalizes ingenuity and positive change.

A paradigm shift is greatly needed, and is ultimately inevitable. Wouldn’t it be a healthier option to freely choose that path, rather than have that path chosen for us, by necessity and survival? While much has been done to create awareness surrounding our dire need for environmental change the world over, it seems we Americans like the fat we have worked so hard to attain, and that trimming it is out of the question.

Perhaps our first step as Americans is to look up the word sustainable. Then, how about we redirect our hard earned (and even harder to come by) American dollars into educating our citizenry and discontinue identifying ourselves as consumers. Stewards of the Earth has a nicer ring to it, don’t you think?

And the Winner is…Diesel

inoxx_02.gif

I have been searching for the perfect used Mercedes diesel for some time now, in hopes of converting it to run on SVO, or straight vegetable oil. It seems that even before the conversion, the diesel will perform better than its’ counterparts.

A new study by the Pardee Rand Graduate School, a non profit that researches public policy issues, finds that the “advanced diesel provides better performance and fuel economy for the price.”

Graham’s team calculated the individual and societal costs and benefits of conventional gasoline vehicles, gasoline-electric hybrids, high-tech diesels and flex-fuel vehicles burning E85 full time. Conclusion: Unless gasoline prices, averaging $3.10 a gallon now, rise above $4 and average $3.50 or more the next few years, or ethanol prices drop a lot, diesel’s the best overall solution; E85’s the worst.

At a time when ethanol organizations, together with GM and Ford, (both pro-ethanol entities and supporters of the Rand school), are ramping up promotion of ethanol fuels, this news is less than encouraging.

I like the closed loop approach of using “waste” to provide a new energy source. Watch out, fast food restaurants. Here I come, and I need your leftover vegetable oil.

via USA Today