Sustainable Development: Sustainable or Not?

Law & Regulatory — By Rich Cartlidge on July 7, 2009 at 6:53 am

This week there has been an ongoing poll by the Economist debating whether or not sustainability is sustainable. As of the time of publication 45% of the individuals responding believe that sustainability is unsustainable while 55% believe it is sustainable. While it is my firm belief that sustainability is indeed sustainable and worthwhile the opposition raises a valid point stating ” The fear is that sustainability is watered down and means too many things to too many people.” I find this quote particularly interesting in light of my position on the overuse of the term green and my stance advocating for the use of the word sustainable. Perhaps neither term will ever be appropriate given individuals penchant for misusing the terms for short term financial gain in what is commonly referred to as “greenwashing”. As I have previously mentioned and as this poll and the debate surrounding it suggests perhaps it is time for the legislature to step up to the plate and establish guidelines for the use of the terms “green” and “sustainable” so that consumer confidence is once again restored. Another recent article suggests that while 93% of individuals feel that it is worth the additional costs to build green only 66% believe it is worth obtaining LEED certification.

Still, in this troubled economy, a recent survey of more than 900 U.S. building professionals showed mixed feelings for LEED certification. While 93.4 per cent agreed it was worth the time and effort to build green, just 66.2 per cent said it was worth obtaining official LEED certification, down from 77.4 per cent who felt that way in 2007, according to the third annual green building survey conducted by Los Angeles-based law firm Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis, technical consulting firm Constructive Technologies Group Inc. of Irvine, Calif., and the U.S. construction industry publication Green Building Insider.

Regardless of whether you believe LEED certification to be a valid expenditure I suggest that until terms such as sustainable and green are properly defined the backing of a certification such as LEED is the only means that a purchaser of property has to ensure that what they are purchasing is sustainable and worth the additional cost. To reiterate my past position I believe that in the future terms such as sustainable and green will fade away as the practices that they refer to will become mainstream. However, until that time comes we must all continue doing our part to educate others as to the benefits of sustainably designed, constructed and operated buildings. Until next time, build smart and design sustainably.

Tags: , ,
  • Share on FacebookFacebook
  • Share on LinkedInLinkedIn
  • Digg it!Digg This
  • Subscribe by RSSRSS Feed
  • RichCartlidge
    I have given this more thought and as the folks at REAL building a St. Petersburg, FL based green building company stated at the current time certification/verification is important to the definition of what a "green" building is today. I hope that in the future it is not but at the current time I have to agree with Taylor Ralph, even if a building is not certified to one of the green building certification systems, verification of its energy use is essential if we are to maintain trust in "sustainability" as a viable economic proposition. I recently wrote a blog post over at www.greenbuildingenvirotrends.com discussing the new LEED version 3.0 and how it is closing the perfomance gap between building design and building operation. Unless we as individuals involved in the sustainable building movement do everything we can to ensure that buildings operate up to their specifications sustainabilty will be cast to the wayside as a waste of valuable economic resources which does not merit a ROI. Please let me know what you think.
blog comments powered by Disqus