Archives For green

one-bryant-parkMany people still seem to be interested in the new Bank of America Headquarters at One Bryant Park. Not surprising really—the greenest skyscraper in the world is something to marvel at. As a result, I decided to do a definitive case study on the building so more people could know exactly how green the skyscraper is. Having had the pleasure of working at Cook+Fox and specifically with Rick Cook and Bob Fox, I can speak to their holistic approach to sustainability and scrutiny that they apply to every design challenge. For those that know Rick and Bob, a finished product like One Bryant Park is no surprise.

The new Bank of America headquarters sits on the corner of 6th Avenue and 42nd Street in New York City, overlooking the trees of Bryant Park leading up to the New York Public Library. Owned by the Durst Organization and designed by Cook+Fox Architects, at 54 stories the glass curtain wall skin of the tower rises to 944 and a half feet above the street with a spire that tops out at 1200 feet, making it the second tallest building in the city beneath the Empire State Building. In its 2.1 million square feet, the building seeks to become the greenest skyscraper in the city, and possibly the globe, being the first building of its height to earn a LEED Platinum rating from the United States Green Building Council and the second in the state of New York (after Cook+Fox’s own office.)

It is impossible to find a sustainable solution to a design problem that is not catered specifically to its immediate environment. Cook+Fox started with the site itself as a storehouse of opportunity. There are few concepts more inherently sustainable than density. Placed in the heart of midtown, the decision to build higher with more square feet anchors the project in efficiency from the start. Its location places the building on the same block as two subway stations, now linked beneath the tower, with access to 17 subway lines. Grand Central Station sits only two blocks away to yield an amazing access to the rest of the city and beyond. Utilizing one of the best mass transit systems in the country is essential to supporting more transit growth in our nation and steering the populace away from car usage.

Despite New York’s accomplishments, there are aspects of its aging infrastructure that remain fragile. Today in New York you can order fast delivery of medicines but on the other hand. One of the most prominent examples is its sewage and stormwater system. Like many old, American cities, New York was built in an age known for unbridled expansion and industrial strength—not environmental stewardship. As a result it has a Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) system which means that rainfall brings stormwater flowing into the sewage pipes. Even a small amount of rain can cause the sewers to reach capacity and stress the treatment facilities of the city. To relieve the congestion a mixture of rain and raw sewage overflows directly into the Hudson river. Any effort that minimizes the release of sewage or stormwater from a site lowers the risk of environmental damage by CSOs.

One Bryant Park collects every drop of rainwater that falls on its site, nearly 48 inches per year. A series of collection tanks distributed throughout the floors can store over 329,000 gallons of water that is used for irrigating plants and flushing the building’s toilets. But it does not end there. Greywater treatment on the site takes water from the building and treats it for use in the cooling towers that returns water back to the atmosphere in the form of vapor—essentially completing a cycle back to nature. Cook+Fox helped to cut the building’s water usage by half employing low-flow lavatory sinks and waterless urinals.

The building also stands as a prime example of how our cities can move towards a decentralized energy grid. Right now, our national grid is a bit clunky and kind of like a leaky pipe. For many power plants, pointedly the throng of aging coal plants in the US, as much as 66% of the energy produced can be lost right out of the stack in the form of heat. An additional 7-10% is lost in transmission so collectively three quarters of the energy we produce can be lost before it even gets used. The tower proves to be perhaps the best example to date of tapping into onsite generation. A 4.6-megawatt, natural gas-fired cogeneration plant provides two thirds of the buildings electrical demand and is expected to reach 77% efficiency (zero transmission.)

The usage of the energy is also maximized to provide the least amount of stress on the surrounding grid. At night, while demand in the building is low, the power will be used to make ice in 44 storage tanks in the basement of the building. During the day, this ice is allowed to melt and used to cool the air of the building, drastically lowering its energy consumption during peak hours.

OBP 1When it comes to air quality, the building pushes the envelope again to deliver fresh air to the entire building that is filtered of 95% of particulates. Even more commendable is that the air that leaves the building will thus be notably cleaner than the air that goes in, rendering the structure as a public air filter for midtown. When the air does reach building occupants, it comes through an underfloor air system—a pressurized air plenum beneath removable floor tiles, that brings tempered air closer to occupied space rather than originating from the ceiling.

Sustainability is a cyclical concept knowing that there is no finality to the life of any process or product. Rather it is merely the prelude to another use or stage of existence. In order to minimize the impact of new construction it is vital to use materials that decrease the net lifecycle costs of the project including the material that comes in and the waste that goes out. One Bryant Park managed to surpass its goal of recycling 75% of its construction waste to end at 83%. Additionally, with materials such as concrete with blast furnace slag and 60% recycled steel, the building contains 35% recycled content.

One way to tackle energy savings is by incorporating efficient fixtures for workplace illumination. One Bryant Park chose to tap into more daylight for workspaces, evident by its clear exterior. By using baked frit to reflect light outside of the main vision plane, each floor has floor to ceiling glass that allows light to penetrate deeper into spaces and minimizing the need interior lighting and providing views of the city.

In two industries (New York development and corporate banking) where cost is always paramount it may seem counterintuitive that this team placed so much time and equity in making sure that their building embraced green qualities. Moreover, the fact that a financial institution was convinced that sustainable systems would prove profitable investments is a boon to the movement as a whole. So how did that work exactly? Yes, saving water and energy also saves money but the payback on such systems takes time and is likely not large enough to be considered a revenue stream. What turned heads was looking at how work conditions affected the productivity of employees. While the figures for environmental productivity are constantly debated, consider only 1% of a common working day: 5 minutes. The firm estimated that increasing the 1% increase in productivity of the workers in One Bryant Park would yield $10 million every year (a number clearly visible on the balance sheet.)

In many ways One Bryant Park stands as what will hopefully become a new standard in high rise, urban development. Like any successful ecology, all parts of the building process must be in concert in order to create a product of such caliber. From client, to tenant, to designers and builders, all components of creation and use were necessary to reach such an outcome.

[UPDATE:  An article on New Republic took a stab at trying to diminish the progress of One Bryant Park while also taking a jab at LEED. My response to that article can be found here]

So maybe harder times are not hitting green goals that hard after all. Recent polling efforts targeting how citizens respond to green issues bears some surprisingly strong support for sustainability in the economy. The numbers come as a welcome counter to the Gallup poll that showed a continually declining support for the severity of global warming, suggesting that either support for green efforts were growing soft or that global warming may not be a great front runner for the movement.

ABC Green Polling

The necessity of environmental reorganization may be sinking deeper into the population. The polling questions by the Washington Post/ABC targeted the regulating of Greenhouse Gases by the government and showed considerable support—counter to the conservative voice of opposition with a strong presence in the media as of late. 75% of American voters are pro regulation with 54% being strongly in favor. Similarly, when asked as to their concern about rising costs associated with GHG regulation, 77% said they were concerned. It is reasonable to believe that, for many, despite their concern for higher prices they are still in favor of a more sustainable goal.

NBC Green Polling

The polling of NBC/Wall Street Journal is somewhat tempered, but still positive. Their more pointed question of whether we should regulate GHG if it will raise energy bills revealed 53% being in favor. Moreover, 68% of voters agreed with President Obama’s plans to devote $121 billion over ten years to develop green energy.

If the numbers carry some truth then we may be avoiding one of the worst fears of environmentalists and green company investors: the economic downturn and resulting financial worries will surmount years of growing interest (and capital) for green spending and policy. If sustainability in the marketplace can survive the worst financial crisis since the depression, then we may be poised for meaningful progress.

Real Industrial EcosystemNews of green trends emerging in cities around the world is becoming commonplace to the point that visions of a “green city” are beginning to enter the minds of the populace, appearing in flashy renderings or news articles. The term incites thoughts of 100% solar power or hundreds of wind turbines on buildings or merely just bounding foliage on every corner. I found a prime example in a New York Times article speaking of plans for a Florida city to be run completely by PVs. When environmental critics come along and call such talk “fantasy,” they may not be mistaken because those technological tactics are not the basis for what will make our cities truly sustainable.

The true conversion to a sustainable economy is to rethink how we organize our cities and how their components can work together to achieve new levels of efficiency and production as part of a reflexively beneficial network. An ecology. If we look hard enough we can find instances of this mentality that have actually been successfully attempted. A prime example is i the city of Kalundborg, Denmark where industry and residents work as part of a functioning ecosystem rather than individual entities in close proximity. The names given to describe the creation are numerous: Industrial Symbiosis, Environmental Industry Ecology, Industrial Ecosystem—but they all spell progress. Continue Reading…

A recent article from the New York Times, courtesy of green correspondent Kate Galbraith, highlighted the shift in opportunity for professionals with experience in environmental policy. With a presidential administration so much more committed to tackling issues of ecological stewardship the need for more green veterans continues to rise. Galbraith points to college professors and state level administrators as ripe pickings for higher federal posts. This reminds us that as we highlight the opportunities for national sustainability to generate job growth, one of the most valuable products needed by a maturing market is experienced human capital. At the same time, the move is a bit of a double-edged sword. Continue Reading…

piles of bricksOne cannot talk about sustainability for long without eventually encountering “resources.” Every product stream, mechanical process and human action has a source of incoming energy. Our capitalistic market has a couple of favorites that craft the battlements for daily conflicts between corporations and citizens: wood, oil, water, coal. Businesses stuck in narrow focuses of how to utilize and maximize stores of natural resources are fending environmentalists off with a stick and the fight will only get more painful. Sooner or later they will lose. Our country will no longer drill for new oil and the amount of coal we burn each year will progressively decline. What will define the next surge of resource harvesting in the economy over the next century?

Well renewable energy is an easy pick. Wind and solar power will continue to be perfected to peak levels of efficiency and their position in the marketplace will continue to grow, but one of the greatest latent sources of value in our culture is decidedly unnatural. It is available almost anywhere in the country though its particular characteristics vary from one source to the next. Public demand for it is currently a small portion of the greater marketplace but it will only rise over time. The source is our existing buildings. The resulting growth market is deconstruction. Continue Reading…

Imagine turning off a main road onto the quiet street of a new suburban housing neighborhood. Down the road waits tree-lined streets of energy efficient homes with their organic gardens and hybrids parked in the driveway, but no electric meter hanging on the wall. On the right you pass a building with few windows and judicious planting. Instead of a development “clubhouse” with a substandard weight room that no one uses and cabinets holding communal board games, the structure is actually an anaerobic power plant that takes the food waste of the neighborhood and turns it into the power for their homes. Throughout your trip you travel under no high tension wires. You dip under no telephone poles.

Impossible? Maybe not.

Continue Reading…