tion, operation, maintenance and eventual
reuse. Critical within this approach are the intentions to
preserve open space and protect watersheds and other sensitive
ecosystems, minimize or avoid waste, provide for recycling and
use recycled materials, minimize energy demand and incorporate
alternative or renewable energy sources, and avoid toxic
substances. Green design is not really a new idea, but is
one that is taking on increasing urgency in a world of rapid
population growth, increasing consumption and diminishing
resources, and there is an ever increasing need for leadership toward
more sustainable practices in the public sector.
CASE FOR GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT TO GREEN
Government institutions exist for the sole
purpose of ensuring the rights, health and well being of
society. Central to this concept is the responsibility of
government to steward public resources not only for the here
and now, but over the long term, in fact, policy making,
legislation and management of systems and infrastructure
strives continuously toward a better future for all.
Environmental building is a means to the same end.
Green development practices are arguably the most
powerful manifestation of stewardship, both in terms of nature
and dollars. It includes explicit goals for sustaining
long term capital value and operational efficiency (and the
inherent savings), rather than the sort of myopic thinking that
tends to dominate so called conventional building practices.
An example of this is the installation of cheaper windows
regardless of the fact that energy costs over the life of the
facility will be greater as a result. From an
environmental perspective, this is a form of deficit spending
whereby avoidable costs are passed along to future generations
so as to capture the benefit of savings for the short term
only.
Modern “green” buildings that
are designed and built on (at least) a 100 year horizon are
inherently different in their conception. They are not
only healthier places to work, low on energy needs (possibly
energy
independent) and longer lasting, but they
have been considered with respect to their next life, that is,
what happens when the current need takes a dramatic turn.
What happens when a government agency is no longer needed
or simply outgrows its current confines? Though often not
considered as such, one of the most sustainable or
“green” decisions that can be made with regard to
building is to avoid new construction in the first place.
Retaining existing building stock and rejuvenating it
through renovation, restoration, preservation, and/or expansion
equates to land conservation (aside from the obvious onsite
benefits) and is certainly a strategy that is advantageous with
respect to the ever thinning taxpayer dollar. But, with
each project in the new construction arena, government has an
opportunity to ensure that this long view mind set becomes a
given in future capital outlays, one could consider it a new
paradigm, where buildings are considered
‘evolutionary’ and have many lives; it’s a
new take on preservation, inspired by the notion of
“feedforward” thinking (versus feedback), where a
little innovation at the front end “feeds” future
operations in such a way that everything has built in
flexibility and nothing is thrown away, as
