Building Green, Making Green: The cost of environmentally friendly design

With the growing popularity of environmentally friendly construction comes an ever-increasing variety of materials and systems.

The techniques used in these green buildings tout varying levels of energy efficiency, environmental impact and recycled content.

One aspect, however, seems to hold true regardless of how many green ideas are incorporated into a building’s design: Environmental awareness doesn’t have to come with additional cost.

The key, according to many in the building and manufacturing industry, is design.

“It’s not like a lot of more practical mechanical systems can’t contribute toward being incredibly energy efficient,” said Jason Hainline of Environmental Market Solutions Inc., or EMSI, in Springfield. “It’s about design.”

Cost differences

Developers who tout green materials and systems say it’s not overwhelmingly costly to make a sizable environmental impact.

A study by the U.S. Green Building Council showed that construction costs of the average Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design-certified building were nearly identical to the average noncertified project, while LEED Silver and Gold certifications added only about 2 percent to the cost.

Projects that cost significantly more due to green features usually include “all the bells and whistles,” Hainline said.

One example is the $4 million addition and renovation on the downtown Discovery Center, completed in late 2006.

CEO Emily Fox estimates that the green aspects of the project, including rooftop gardens and photovoltaic solar panels, increased upfront cost by 5 percent to 7 percent, though that extra investment should be recouped in “a few years.”

Matt O’Reilly’s $3 million south-side Green Circle Shopping Center is incorporating green techniques to the tune of about 20 percent more cost than traditional construction.

Dan Chiles and his brother, Mike, are also in the green game, redeveloping the Emerald Building at 309 South Ave. into residential condominiums that they intend to sell. They plan to use such techniques as natural lighting and radiant floor heat.

While the cost is still being determined – bids can’t go out for the work until the pair get approval from the State Historic Preservation Office – Dan Chiles said he compares his building to a hybrid car.

“Our initial costs will be higher, but the operating costs and the comfort will be better,” he said.

New materials

Environmental impact comes in a variety of forms.

Rogersville-based Accelerated Interiors LLC offers a line of commercial finish materials made from recycled or waste materials.

One example is Paperstone, a solid surface for countertops, bathroom partitions and exterior panels that’s made from recycled paper. The product, which comes in three thicknesses, ranges from $45 per square foot to $70 per square foot – comparable to the cost of low-end granite or stone.

Accelerated Interiors manager Roger Hoskins said selling these types of materials is more about making a difference than making a buck.

“The incremental cost of a green product over a standard product is very little, and you’re doing the right thing by helping the environment,” he said.

EMSI’s Hainline, though, said the biggest impact on cost comes back to the design.

“It’s really about using available types of systems,” he said, pointing out that many “new” techniques – water collection systems and buildings oriented to take advantage of natural light and ventilation – are just new technology applied to time-tested ideas. “How you design them to be incorporated into a project can mean incredible energy efficiency at a cost-effective rate.”

Chiles said that there is also a social cost to consider – and that social cost could be quantifiable in the not-so-distant future.

“We have the obligation to do something for the planet,” he said. “Carbon taxes are coming, which will drive up the cost of electricity, and we’re likely to see other taxes on activities that produce carbon. A building like the Emerald will be well equipped to deal with both of those.”

Return on investment

Systems are available for those developers looking to make a dramatic impact – on both the environment and their utility bills.

Springfield-based Power Source Solar Inc. installs battery-style solar systems. President Nathan Jones said his systems cost about $15 per watt of energy produced. The average home needs a minimum system capacity of 5,000 watts.

As for the return on the solar investment, Jones said it’s difficult to quantify.

“The cost of these systems almost has to be viewed from a self-satisfaction standpoint,” he said.

He added that battery systems are the only option to store solar energy in Missouri, as the state does not allow consumers to return extra energy they produce back into the power grid. If such a system were allowed in Missouri, as it is in 37 other states, the cost of installing the systems would shrink to $8 per watt, and efficiency would increase as the need for individual batteries is removed from the system, Jones said.

Green Incentives

The monetary benefits go beyond lower heating and water bills.

The federal government offers grants and loans to commercial and agricultural projects implementing solar, wind, geothermal, fuel cell and other renewable energy systems.

Grants are available for up to 25 percent of the project cost, with a maximum of $500,000 per project, and loans covering up to half the cost, with a maximum of $10 million.

Federal tax credits are also available for businesses putting solar systems or solar hybrid lighting into service; the credits cover 30 percent of the cost. For more information on federal incentives, go to www.dsireusa.org.

Insurance companies also are beginning to see the benefits. Fireman’s Fund, a California-based national insurer, now offers a Green Property Upgrade, which covers the cost of rebuilding with green materials after a property loss.

While there are no incentives currently available from state or local government in southwest Missouri, City Utilities does offer rebates for businesses that replace outdated commercial lighting.

Businesses can receive up to $5,000 to replace traditional T-12 fluorescent fixtures with more efficient T-8 lamps. The utility estimates a company that saves 25 kilowatt-hours in demand would save about $2,000 a year.