What is Digg?32 Comments
- FreakyD, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13http://gilglover.com/argon2.jpg
- SPThom, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Is the 17% estimate padded because construction companies aren't as familiar working with green technologies, and want to budget to allow spare time & supplies if they muck up?
- chuckcameron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7LEED also gives credit for using local materials. Building efficiently is about more than just the LEED check list and there are many simple ways to be efficient.
- Ajajadude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The more "green" building practices are used, the more the cost should drop, especially if it becomes standard.
- abryancole, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Choosing "green" also means making wise design decisions to lower the overall carbon footprint of a building, not just choosing building materials. Also, not all areas are overflowing with local materials, a lot are trucked in from across the country in the first place, which makes "green" materials a wiser decision anyway.
- foofightrs777, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5A few years back there was a symposium on this topic at my university. The speaker showed how that over time investing in a green buildings saved corporations much more money than the modest additional investment upfront. Furthermore, there were the added positive PR benefits. Look for this to become really big in the next 5 years.
- Puppetfunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I get it. A green building.....
- mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Two words," No Brainer!"
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think that the "green" is a marketing ploy. Building an energy efficient passive solar house will cost as much as you want to spend on it. You can take an ordinary project home and with some common sense make it efficient. There is a lot of information on the net for customising a house. Limit the glass exposure on the east and west sides of the house. Large glass exposure on the north for the southern hemisphere; reverse it for the northern hemisphere.
Housing is now expensive compared to 25 years ago. I own a custom designed passive solar house. If I was to build again there are some things I would do differently. Realise that housing is an advertising commodity. Do not fall for the hype. You do not live on the outside of the house; unless you have a ego, build a rectangular shaped house. Do not have any internal load bearing walls. Partition the inside space to suit your immediate lifestyle. As you grow older your tastes and lifestyle changes. You can remove the partitions and rearrange to suit. The main thing to consider is that your major expenditure in your house is heating and cooling. Any house can be made energy efficient if you insulate correctly. - Khamel83, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3i work for a sustainable design engineering company and we were just talking about this at our staff meeting today.
- askjeffro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Ford Motor Company did this in the 90's to their most infamous plant, the Baton Rouge Plant.
http://www.thehenryford.org/rouge/livingroof.asp
Project was spear headed with Architect William McDonough, author of Cradle to Cradle.
Special note: Deja vu? Yeah, I posted the same message in the other green story, applicable to both. :) - thax, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The source report has little to no information about actually building more efficient buildings. Maybe the construction cost of large projects is only increased by 5%, but for individual home builders the cost differential is much greater.
- subxero37, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Hey, I thought that was actually pretty funny. Sometimes on Digg some good posts get dugg down for no reason, and someone somewhere else will repeat the same joke almost, and bam, instant +100 diggs. (Not saying that's the case here. I just went way off-topic.)
- askjeffro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Update: I misspoke, there is no "Baton", its just the Rouge Plant. Another digger corrected me in the other thread.
- bugsy187, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Mine's the original. One up that!
- niczar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Shipping" occurs once, while the building will last decades. So you're wrong. KTHXBYE.
- Puppetfunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Mine's Better.
- dallase, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Fittingly... Greensburg, KS is rebuilding green after the EF5 tornado that wiped out 95% of the town.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=3481990&page=3 - bugsy187, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1nice icon
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I think that the "green" is a marketing ploy. Building an energy efficient passive solar house will cost as much as you want to spend on it. You can take an ordinary project home and with some common sense make it efficient. There is a lot of information on the net for customising a house. Limit the glass exposure on the east and west sides of the house. Large glass exposure on the north for the southern hemisphere; reverse it for the northern hemisphere.
Housing is now expensive compared to 25 years ago. I own a custom designed passive solar house. If I was to build again there are somethings I would do differently. Realise that housing is an advertising commodity. Do not fall for the hype. You do not live on the outside of the house; unless you have a ego, build a rectangular shaped house. Do not have any internal load bearing walls. Partition the inside space to suit your immediate lifestyle. As you grow older your tastes and lifestyle changes. You can remove the partitions and rearrange to suit. The main thing to consider is that your major expenditure in your house is heating and cooling. Any house can be made energy efficient if you insulate correctly. - signal15, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2That. Is. *****.
I'm looking into building a new house, and green designs are 50% to 100% more money. Maybe it's the builders/architects/designers cashing in on the green building craze, but it's way higher. - bloggerjul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I recently saw an article several months ago in newsweek that explains that it is significantly higher than 5%, and that using a "green" design would take 5 years for the extra investment to recover.
The design though, was pretty impressive and looked energy efficient...
Someone link up the article! - Hal3000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I does make a difference if you want an edge over your competition...and having lower utility bills does just that. And yes, you can get a lot of free positive press from it also.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Green designs are very expensive and not easily affordable for every one.
http://www.home4fastsale.com - balthisar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Excuse me -- I succumb to the social pressure, get a small car, trade in my comfy car, and you digg me down? And now I go green, which MORE than offsets the carbon use for my comfortable and useful car, and I'm dug down? Why, I ought to go buy a coal burning furnace, keep it at 95 degrees all year, and drive around in a Mack truck if that's the kind of respect that trying and making a real difference is worth. Geesh.
- balthisar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I'm installing geothermal heating/cooling/water at my home for the express purpose of being able to dump my damn tiny little Aveo and get back into a roomy Suburban again without worrying about all the schmucks flipping me their middle fingers. I'm 6'2"; I can't for the life of me figure out how so many people drive around in these damn little things. Yeah, gasoline isn't the same as natural gas and electricity, but the carbon offsets calculator puts me definitely in the clear to do this.
- dylster13, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3It's a lot harder than you think. LEEDs requirements call for "green" building materials which often have to be shipped across the country (thus more CO2) rather than using local materials which are readily available.
- FreakyD, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1read the reply above yours dumbass......
- Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3stupid, these are the greenhouses there talking about
http://www.ritslev.dk/images/2005-06%20green%20house.JPG
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
