2006 SUNY-ESF Green Building Conference
The Economics of Green
May 16-17, 2006
Current/Upcoming GBC Conference
SUNY-ESF hosted the Annual Green Building conference on Tuesday, May 16 and Wednesday, May 17, 2006 on the SUNY-ESF campus in Syracuse, NY.
"The Economics of Green"
Press Release
Presentations
Enable’s Greening Experience - Tracie Baule-Hall
Wood as a Green Building Material - Jim Wilson
Construction Waste Recycling - Michael Deane
LEED and Sustainable Buildings: Contractors Role - Steve Beck
Sponsored by:
Also sponsored by:
Pathfinder Engineers LLP
Pella Windows & Doors
ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
Hill & Markes
and Air-Conditioning Engineers)
Robson Woese Inc.
C & S Companies
Turner Construction
Agenda
Tuesday, May 16th Agenda
Time
Green Building Agenda
8:00 - 8:30
am
Registration and Continental Breakfast, Alumni Lounge, Marshall Hall
8:30 - 9:15
am
Presentation: Enable's "Greening Experience"
Tracie Baule-Hall, Enable
9:15 - 10:00
am
Presentation: Sustainable Buildings and LEED:
The Contractor's Role
Steve Beck, LeChase
10:00 10:15 am
Break
10:15 11:15 am
Presentation: Wood as a Green Building Material
Jim Wilson, Oregon State, Oregon. Topic: Life Cycle Analysis, Consortium for Research on
Renewable Industrial Materials (CORRIM)
11:15 -
Presentation: Construction Recycling
Michael Deane, Turner Construction
12:00 pm
12:00 - 1:15
pm
1:15 - 2:15
pm
2:15 - 2:30
pm
Lunch (provided) Presentation of the USGBC NY Upstate Chapter's Web Site with the new interactive "Green Events" Calendar, presented by Charle-Pan
Dawson, NYSERDA and Bill Burdick, W D Burdick Company
Narrated Tours of the SUNY Campus Green projects - See them all: Fuel Cell, Green Roof, Photovoltaic installation, Biodegradable plastic, Wood Chips and
Biomass
Break
2:30 - 3:15
pm
Round Table Discussion: Question and Answer Session with all of the presenters
3:15 - 4:00
Presentation on Campus Green Building projects
President Neil Murphy
Q&A from the Press
4:15 pm 5:00 pm
Social Hour and Cash Bar available
5:00 - 6:30
pm
Buffet Dinner with keynote address by: Wayne Trusty, Athena Institute, Ottawa, Canada. Topic: Life Cycle Assessment
6:30 - 6:45
pm
Q&A with Wayne Trusty
Wednesday, May 17th Agenda -Earn a total of 7 CEUs for BOTH modules! Seats available!
Time
LEED MODULES -Each Module earns 3.5 Continuing Education Units (CEUs)
8:00 8:30
am
Registration and Continental Breakfast in the Baker Lobby
Room
140
Baker
LEED Module (AM) Understanding LEED Project Cost & Returns
8:30
am 12:30
pm
12:00
pm 1:30
pm
Lunch served in the Alumni Lounge Marshall Hall (provided to registrants who attend the AM session AND the PM session only). View Exhibits
Room
140
Baker
LEED Module (PM) Incorporating LEED into Project Specifications
1:30
pm 5:30
pm
Hear about strategies for building green with no added costs. Get insights on LEED project cost issues including professional fees, construction costs, and lifecycle costs based on current data from LEED-certified projects and available research. Leave with tools to calculate and evaluate cost and benefits of LEED
certification on a given project. Learn how to get maximum benefit from chosen resources.
Learn the basic principles of specifications as they apply to green building. Project team members will be provided with strategies to develop construction
specifications appropriate to project goals and tips for achieving LEED compliance. Enable’s
Greening Experience
Tracie Baule-Hall, Development Director at Enable
4th Annual SUNY-ESF Green Building Conference
The Economics of Green
May 16, 2006
Why did Enable
build ‘green’?
Comparable mission
+
Compatible goals
Why did Enable
build ‘green’?
= Healthy For
economy
people
environment
Who benefits from
our green building?
Participants9healthier for compromised immune
systems
9more comfortable space
9ideal environment to achieve
maximum results from therapies
Who benefits from
our green building?
Employees–
9healthier work environment
9improved morale
9 increased productivity.
Who benefits from
our green building?
Enable –
9energy savings
9reduced operating costs
9stronger marketability
9less absenteeism
9higher productivity.
Who benefits from
green building?
Community –
9better air quality
9economic impact
9reduced solid waste
Primary Goal
¾Construct 30,000 square foot
facility with:
ƒ warm water therapy pool
ƒ wellness center
ƒ conference & training facilities
Initial Challenges
¾Researching
¾Educating
¾Convincing
¾Funding
Ultimate Goal
¾ Receive LEED® certification while:
ƒ Incorporating new technology
ƒ Focusing on collaborative partnerships
ƒ Addressing payback of incremental
costs
Process
¾ Initial charrette held May 2003
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Technical Assistance Study & Modeling February 2004
NYSERDA incentive March 2004
LEED® charrette May 2004
Registered with USGBC August 2004
Finalizing plans. drawings, etc.
Construction began May 2005
Commissioning began January 2006
Certificate of Occupancy issued February 2006
Challenges
¾Integrated Design Approach
¾‘Green’ Washing
¾Justification of LEED point
vs. initial cost vs. incremental
cost vs. payback period
¾Funding
Concepts Explored
ƒ High efficiency:
roofing, windows, lighting & HVAC
ƒ Unique dehumidification for
natatorium
ƒ Building Management System
ƒ Maximizing day lighting
LEED-NC® Certification
A three step process:
ƒ Step 1: Project Registration
ƒ LEED Letter Templates, site access, and
on-line project listing
ƒ Step 2: Technical Support
ƒ Reference Package
ƒ Credit Inquiries and Rulings (CIR)
ƒ Step 3: Building Certification
ƒ Upon documentation submittal and
USGBC review
“THE PROJECT”
SUSTAINABLE SITES
WATER EFFICIENCY
ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE
MATERIALS & RESOURCES
INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
INNOVATION & DESIGN
LEED® (Version 2.1) Credit Summary
Category
Definite
Possible
Sustainable Site (SS)
8
1
Water Efficiency (WE)
3
1
Energy & Atmosphere (EA)
5
1
Materials & Resources (MR)
3
0
Indoor Environmental Quality
8
3
Innovation & Design
2
Sampling of Resources
¾ High-Performance Buildings
http://www.eere.energy.gov/
Detailed profiles of green-building projects to inform and
inspire architects, designers, and builders
¾ Five E's Unlimited
http://www.eeeee.net
information on green building and urban planning
¾ BuildingGreen.com
http://www.buildinggreen.com
Products reviews, news, articles, and more on green building
for architects, designers, and planners
¾ BetterBricks
http://www.betterbricks.com
Resources for architects, designers, and building managers
on using energy efficiency as a design tool and a financial
strategy
¾ Sustainable Sources
http://www.greenbuilder.com
¾ Green Building Virtual Tours
http://www.virtuallygreen.com
virtual tours of LEED-certified buildings, serving architects,
funders and manufacturers in the green building industry
including: Cleveland Environmental Center (Cleveland, OH) TreePeople Center
(Los Angeles, CA) Honda Northwest Regional Facility (Gresham, OR) Jasper
Ridge Field Station (Woodside, CA) San Mateo County Forensics Lab (San
Mateo, CA)
¾ SustainableABC
http://www.sustainableabc.com
dedicated to exploring the connection between ecology and
sustainability as it relates to architecture and design
¾ U.S. Green Building Council
http://usgbc.org
Ultimate resource for LEED certification and accreditation
¾ GreeningUSA
http://GreeningUSA.org
Non-profit organization offering advocacy and education
for sustainable communities defined through twelve traits
Ongoing Challenge
"Always design a thing by considering it
in its next larger context –
a chair in a room, a room in a house,
a house in an environment,
an environment in a city plan."
-Eliel Saarinen, "Time", July 2, 1956
WOOD AS A
GREEN BUILDING MATERIAL
Life-Cycle Assessment of Wood in Residential
and Commercial Construction
Jim Wilson
CORRIM
CORRIM, Inc. and Oregon State University
jim.wilson@oregonstate.edu
541-829-1622
Outline
™ Green building guidelines, standards, and
policy
™ CORRIM’s effort to document wood as
green based on product and building lifecycle studies
™ Example of a whole building and wall
assembly life-cycle studies comparing
wood to steel and concrete
™ Summary
™ Benefits to using wood products for green
building
Green Building Guidelines,
Standards, and Policy
™ Examples of green building guidelines,
certification, and assessment:
– LEED (Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design)
– Green Globes (Green Building Initiative)
– NAHB Model Green Home Building Guidelines
– BEES (Building for Environmental and
Economic Sustainability)
Examples of Green Building to
Certification Standards
Green Globes
LEED
Kelley Engineering Center
Oregon State University
Green Building Guidelines,
Standards, and Policy
™ Washington State Law Mandates
Green Building
April 21, 2005 Olympia, Washington
Washington's Gov. Christine Gregoire signed the high performance
green buildings bill into law which, according to the governor's
office, makes Washington the first state to require that new public
buildings meet "green building" standards of energy efficiency,
water conservation and other environmental standards.
Standard follows LEED for
buildings greater than $5
million.
Green Building Guidelines,
Standards, and Policy
™ U. S. Government Agencies go to
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
(EPP)—USDOE, USDA, others….
– Bio-based products
– Fuel products
Green Building Guidelines,
Standards, and Policy
™ Nations (161) sign Kyoto Protocol to
limit CO2 emissions
™ U.S. government proposes to reduce
“carbon intensity”
™ Governors of seven NE States agree to
reduce CO2 emissions and propose
carbon credit exchange
™ Governors of three Western States sign
Global Warming Initiative
NAHB─How to Get Green
™ Green Building Guidelines say to
“incorporate environmental issues
into project’s decision-making
process.”
™ Green Building Guidelines say to
base “the selection of building
material on their environmental
impact.”
Guidelines—Use Life Cycle Analyses to
Assess Projects
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Raw Material
Product Manufacture
Home Building Process
Maintenance & Operation
Home Demolition
Product Reuse
To Determine Whether a Material
or Home is Green
™ Is it a renewable resource?
™ Does it use resource efficient material?
™ Does environmental data such as energy
consumption and CO2 emissions exist for
material (use Life-Cycle Inventory)?
™ Is Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA) used to analyze
product or building
™ Are there comparisons of environmental
impacts to select best material, building
design, wall assembly, etc.?
Demonstrating Wood is a Green
Building Material
Easy to say but can
it be proved!
CORRIM
Need for Unbiased, Sound
Environmental Data
Consortium for Research on
Renewable Industrial Materials
CORRIM
National effort to
document the
environmental
performance of all wood
products.
CORRIM, Inc.
™ A non-profit corporation
CORRIM
formed by 15 research
institutions to conduct lifecycle inventory (LCI) and
life-cycle assessment (LCA)
studies of wood products.
CORRIM’S Purpose
™ To develop a public database and
models of environmental performance
measures over the life cycles of all
wood products
™ To examine a range of management,
product, and process alternatives to
identify strategies to improve
environmental performance of wood
products and residential buildings
CORRIM’s Research Protocol
CORRIM
™ CORRIM’s research follows
Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI)
and Life-Cycle Assessment
(LCA) international protocol
of ISO 14040s Standards
CORRIM to Provide Environmental
Data for Wood Products
Life cycle inventory (LCI) data for
wood building materials
CORRIM
AthenaTM EIE
LCA Software to
assess performance
Life cycle assessment of
home buildings
US LCI Database
Environmental
database of all US
materials and
processes
CORRIM’S Initial Effort Targeted
Structural Wood Products and Home
Construction
Phase 1 Report
July 2004
Reports, presentations,
publications, and news releases
available on: www.corrim.org
Overview CORRIM’s Phase 1 Research
“Cradle”
Forest
Resources &
Harvesting
PNW and SE
Processing of
Structural Materials
PNW and SE
“Gate-to-Gate”
• Lumber
• Plywood
• Glulam
• LVL
• I-joists
• OSB (SE only)
Construction of
Virtual Residential
Buildings to Code
• Minneapolis wood
and steel designs
• Atlanta wood and
concrete designs
Building
“Grave”
Use and
Disposal
Maintenance
or
Recycle
Output of CORRIM Study
™ LCIs of forest, harvesting, and structural
wood products.
™ LCAs of the construction, use, and
maintenance of residential buildings.
™ Carbon tracking and storage for forest,
wood products, and substitution products.
™ Biomass (wood) fuel use.
™ Sensitivity analyses of LCI and LCA
models.
™ Benefit cost analyses.
Phase 1-- Collected Forest and
Production Data & Studied
Residential Buildings
Minneapolis House
Cold Climate
Atlanta House
Warm Climate
Phase 2—Additional Forests and
Construction Sites
Seattle House
Wet Climate
Minneapolis House
Cold Climate
Atlanta House
Warm Climate
S. Cal. House
Great Climate
Example of Whole House Life-Cycle
Analyses to Compare Building Materials
™ Compared wood- to steel-framed
home for cold climate
™ Compared wood-framed to concrete
block wall home for warm climate
Designed Homes to Local
Building Code
Minneapolis House
Cold Climate
Compared wood- to steelframed house designed to
same R code. The house is
2,062 sq.ft., two story,
concrete basement,
sheetrock, insulation, OSB
sheathing, wood trusses,
vinyl windows, vinyl siding
and asphalt roofing.
Designed Homes to Local
Building Code
Atlanta House
Warm Climate
Compared wood framed to
concrete block exterior walls
designed to same R code.
The house is 2,153 sq.ft., one
story, slab on grade,
sheetrock, insulation, wood
studs, wood trusses, OSB
sheathing, vinyl windows,
stucco siding and asphalt
roofing.
CORRIM’s Life-Cycle Assessment
of Wood Products & Buildings
O2
CO2
Air Emissions
SUN
Log
Management & Harvest
Production
Construction
Water & Land Emissions
Life-Cycle Assessment In Terms of
Environmental Performance Indices
™ Embodied Energy
™ Global Warming Potential
™ Emissions to air, water and land
™ Resource Use
Cold Climate Wood-Framed House
Components by Mass
Sheetrock 5%
Insulation 5%
Metal 3%
Wood 17%
Roofing 5%
Siding 2%
Although referred to as a
wood-framed house, concrete
is the dominant mass, with
other materials playing lesser
roles by mass.
Concrete 63%
Comparison of Wood- to
Steel-Framed House
Wood
450%
400%
350%
300%
250%
200%
150%
100%
50%
0%
Steel
412%
117%
126%
114%
Embodied
Energy
Global
Warming
Air Emissions
99%
Water
Emissions
Solid Waste
Comparison of Wood-Framed to
Concrete Block House
Wood
160%
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Concrete
151%
131%
123%
116%
100%
Embodied
Energy
Global Warming
Air Emissions
Water Emissions
Solid Waste
Comparison of Structural Assemblies
A menu of environmentally rated:
™ Wall assemblies
™ Floor assemblies
™ Roof assemblies
A shopping list of construction
options for contractors, designers,
and architects to select
environmental designs.
Fossil Fuel Consumption for
Warm Climate Exterior Walls
100
90
Concrete-framed wall
results in 150% more
energy use.
MJ per square foot
80
70
60
50
Concrete
40
Plyw ood
30
Vinyl
20
10
Lumber
Stucco
Fiberglass
Fiberglass
Gypsum
Gypsum
Vapor
0
Lumber wall
Concrete wall
Exterior w all designs for w arm climate home
Lumber
Fossil Fuel Consumption for Cold
Climate Exterior Walls
100
90
MJ per square foot
80
70
60
Steel
50
40
30
20
Lumber
EPS
Fiberglass
Plyw ood
Fiberglass
Plyw ood
Vinyl
Vinyl
10
Gypsum
0
Lumber wall
Vapor
Gypsum
Vapor
Steel wall
Steel-framed wall
results
in 30%
Lumber
more
fossil fuel
Plyw ood
use. w/substitutes
Lumber
Exterior w all designs for cold climate home
CORRIM’s Expanded Effort
™ CORRIM to complete Phase 2 research on
wood products this summer, it expands
upon the initial study:
– Extends source location of forest resources
to other regions
– Assess home building in other regions
– Assess low-rise, multi-family home buildings
– Extend wood products to non-structural
products such as hardwood flooring and MDF
– Full product LCI’s and LCA’s
– Component-by-component construction
analyses of walls, floors, roofs and
assemblies.
Summary
™ Wood is Green—Study validates the
environmental friendliness of wood
compared to other common structural
building materials.
™ Material Selection—Study provides ways
to enhance environmental performance
of buildings through material selection
and design.
™ Publicly available database—Study
provides environmental data on
structural wood products.
Benefits to Using Wood Products
™ Wood is a green building material in
comparison to other materials
– Data is available in U.S. LCI Database;
however, for your use it will likely be by
using building guidelines, standards
and design assessment software (i.e.,
AthenaTM, BEES, Bio-based EPP, and
eventually LEED and Green Globes)
Benefits to Using Wood Products
™ Wood is sustainable and renewable
whether for forest, products, or fuel
™ Wood is resource efficient
™ Wood can store carbon in forest,
products, and landfills removing it
from the atmosphere as CO2
−reducing global warming
CORRIM
For more information please see:
CORRIM: www.corrim.org
AthenaTM: www.athenaSMI.ca
US LCI database: www.nrel.gov/lci
NAHB Green Build Guidelines: www.nahb.org/gbg
BEES: www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.html
Green Globes: www.thegbi.com/greenglobes/
Need for Green Building
Which Earth will we have?
THE HOWS AND WHYS OF CONSTRUCTION
WASTE RECYCLING
Prepared for
SUNY – ESF Green Building Conference
May 16, 2006
Michael Deane
East Coast Operations Manager
Sustainable Construction
Turner Construction Company
I would like to speak about:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Brief overview of Turner Green Building Experience
Brief overview of Turner Green Commitments
Recycling Construction on Every Job - Making it work.
How does the leading general builder in the US implement such
a process on an average of 1500 projects per year across 40
Business Units throughout the country?
How does capacity vary and what different responses are
successful in different areas.
Where can it work?
Where is it still an unrealized goal?
Implementation of policy and procedures, progress and
pushback
Turner Green Building Experience
Since Turner Green Building Experience 1995
• Over 150 Projects with Green Building
Elements Completed or Under Construction
• Construction value: Over $10 Billion
• Over 42 million sq. ft.
• 20 LEED Certified Projects
• 50 LEED Registered Projects
• Over 110 LEED Accredited Professionals
• (and counting…)
Turner’s Commitment to Green
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Recycle Construction Waste on All Projects
Greening our Field Offices
Emerging Green Builders
Online LEED Training
Double LEED Accredited Professionals
Advisory Board
Center of Excellence
Why is this Important?
(Hint: its not about chasing LEED points)
• C&D Waste accounts for between 20% and 50%
of all waste sent to landfills
• Diverted material can be reused, reducing use of
virgin materials
• Potential cost savings to Owner
• Potential revenue stream to Hauler
• Good for business
• Good for the planet
Chapter One – Ignorance is Bliss
• January 2005 – this will be easy
• February 2005 – we can’t do that in our market
• March 2005 – No more *#%! forms
Early Wins
• New York – Cardella Carting - Already doing it.
Just get others to follow.
• Boston – Charles George Trucking – Only game
in town. He got it.
• Nashville - Tennessee Waste – Opportunist.
Created a market.
• Waste Management – National Firm wanted to
serve a big client. Already pretty sophisticated.
Early Setbacks
• Ohio – Duh?
• Texas – too much “wide open space”
• Many other places – Hello?
Pleasant Surprises
• Dallas – A number of green projects gets
Management Attention. “Gray Hair” takes over.
• Florida – Ditto. And Ditto. Negotiated rebates.
Innovators
• Ace Waste – market differentiator – committed to
green (business model)
• Construction Waste Management – committed to
green (environmental model)
Results – Year One
• Turning the Queen Mary BUT
• Continuous Improvement BUT
• Low Hanging Fruit
• All or nothing
Results – Year Two (to date)
• More reporting = less spectacular results BUT
• Standardized reporting now a requirement
• Goal One – complete and accurate reporting
• Goal Two – improve performance
The Future – Are We There Yet?
• NO
What Does the Future Hold?
• Deconstruction
CONSTRUCTION WASTE
MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE
2006
David Hodgson, Turner Michigan Green Champion
Ryan Kline, CWMI Manager
Turner Construction Company
May ??, 2006
CWMI 2006 - Objectives
REDUCE
DIVERT
RECYCLE
CWMI 2006 - Benefits
• Develop proficiency in rapidly growing “Green
Building” market
– Approximately 50% of our earnings comes from LEED
projects where construction waste management is a
requirement
• Influence local C&D debris handlers by increasing
demand for diversion
– Several local haulers constantly competing for Turner
contracts
• Earn positive Owner / Public attention
– Every little bit helps in Michigan’s competitive market
CWMI 2006 - Background
ƒ September 2004 – Tom Leppert announces Turner’s
commitment to sustainability
ƒ February 2005 – Turner introduces Construction Waste
Management Initiative (CWMI)
ƒ March 2005 – Business Units begin reporting
ƒ June 2005 – Michigan Green Team issues CWMI Workbook to
Business Unit w/ Presentation to PM’s & PX’s
ƒ October 2005 – Michigan Green Team partners with Michigan
Purchasing to incorporate CWMI language in Subcontracts
ƒ February 2006 – Turner Purchasing provides revised hauler
Subcontract; Turner Sustainable Construction provides revised
Monthly Project Progress Report
CWMI 2006 – Turner’s Mission
• Report waste management activity on
ALL projects.
• Within 3 years, achieve diversion on
100% of projects.
• Within 3 years, achieve
overall diversion rate of 50%.
CWMI 2006 – Michigan’s Mission
• Report on 100% of
Michigan Projects
• Report monthly
• Projects implement
project-specific CWM
Plan
• Develop waste hauling
market by providing
demand for diversion
CWMI 2006 - Procedure
• 1st Step - Be Proactive!!!
• 2nd Step – Remain flexible!!!
“Success is not the result of spontaneous
combustion. You must set yourself on fire.”
- Reggie Leach
CWMI 2006 - Procedure
• Step 3 – Prepare Project Specific
Construction Waste Management Plan
ƒ Site’s logistical parameters
ƒ Haulers’ experience/abilities
ƒ Staff experience/commitments
• Step 4 – Include CWMI in Subcontracts
ƒ Include CWM Plan
ƒ 2nd Tier haulers must also comply
CWMI 2006 - Procedure
• Step 5 – Release hauler subcontract
ƒ Use Form 124 - Rubbish Removal
ƒ Include CWMP & Monthly Report
• Step 6 – Inform workforce
ƒ Tradesmen need to buy-in
ƒ Use CWMI Orientation & Toolbox Talk
CWMI 2006 - Procedure
• Step 7 – Work the CWM Plan
ƒ Inspect boxes for compliance
ƒ Issue backcharges/withold payment when
necessary
• Step 8 – Report Monthly
ƒ Hauler reports to you
ƒ You report to BU CWMI Manager
CWMI 2006 – Procedure
• Step 9 – Follow-up
ƒ Make sure you’re achieving your target
diversion rate
ƒ Flexibility – May need to revise CWM Plan
• Step 10 – Share lessons learned!!!
CWMI 2006 – Project Flowchart
PRECONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
Site Logistics
CWM Plan
Purchase Hauling Services
• Primary Hauler (PA’s)
• Second Tier Haulers (Subcontracts)
Educate Workforce
Work the CWM Plan
REPORT
CWMI 2006 – Reporting Timeline
PREPARE REPORTS
Prepared by Haulers – 26th of previous month to 25th of current month
REQUEST REPORTS
26TH Day of the Report Month
RECEIVE REPORTS
COLLATE REPORTS
SUBMIT REPORTS
Submit to Business Unit CWMI Manager (Ryan Kline) by 1st Tuesday of the Month
CWMI – Monthly Project Progress Report
• Prepared by Sustainable Construction
Division
• Developed with the hauler in mind (let
them do it!)
• Located in Michigan Green
Room on TKN - Michigan
Pharmacia Building Q
CWMI 2006 - Resources
• Form 124 – Rubbish Removal
Agreement
• Construction Waste Management Plan
• CWMI Jobsite Orientation
• CWMI Toolbox Talks
• Local Hauler / Recycler Matrix
• Michigan Green Team
CWMI 2006 – Lessons Learned
DPS Sinai Educational Campus
Learning:
• Inexperience resulted in lower
diversion rates & more staff time
invested
• Late implementation compromised
enforcement
Lesson:
Steep learning curve
=
Poor planning/implementation
CWMI 2006 – Lessons Learned
Metro Hospital
Learning:
• Researched options for
diversion of gypsum wallboard
> found vendor
• Maintaining dialogue with
hauler and subcontractors
Lesson:
Proactive Management
=
Successful Diversion (Currently 67%)
CWMI 2006 – Lessons Learned
Ford Field Parking Deck
Learning:
• Staff transitions resulted in gaps in
communication between project staff.
Lesson:
Lack of communication
=
Lost Diversion
CWMI 2006 – Future Projects
5th Royal Oak
Learning:
• Tight site logistics complicate
CWMI implementation
• Sharing knowledge assisted
project team with expanded
options
Lesson:
Proactive Project Staff
+
Green Team Coordination
=
Optimized Resources
CWMI 2006 – Future Projects
HFHS – West Bloomfield
Learning:
• Project staff included Green Team from start
• Discussing challenges with Architect reduced risk in the
future
Lesson:
Proactive Project Staff
+
Green Team Coordination
=
Improved Potential for LEED Compliance
CWMI 2006 - Strategies
• Contract Compliance
– Include CWMP in all subcontracts
– Enforce compliance through
backcharges/fines
• Educate the Workforce
– Subcontractor PM’s may not explain
requirements to Foremen / Tradesmen
CWMI 2006 - Strategies
• Well-Planned Logistics
– Site Separation vs. Commingled
• Site Separation = Greater Diversion
• Commingled = Reduced Field Management
• Hybrid = Optimal
– Plan for Progress
• Be prepared to adapt CWM Plan for changing
site / construction waste
CWMI 2006 - Summary
•
•
•
•
Set up Site Logistics & CWM Plan
Use available resources
Get everyone on board
Report!!!
Dolan Center
Dalles Middle School
Natomas High School
Questions??
Any questions please send me an email
Mdeane@tcco.com
LEED and Sustainable Buildings
The Contractors Role
TM
LeChase Construction Services LLC
LEED Green Building Rating System
TM
z
z
z
z
z
Of the 7 pre -requisites and 69 available credits:
The Contractor has decision making responsibilities
for 23 credits
The Contractor is responsible for calculations (cost
spreadsheets) for 14 credits
The Contractor is responsible for 30 submittals
The Contractor is responsible for recordkeeping and
tracking for 19 credits
Credit Responsibilities
Sustainable Sites
Point
Credit
Value
SSPR1
PR
SS 1
1
SS 2
1
SS 3
1
SS 4.1
1
SS 4.2
1
SS 4.3
1
SS 4.4
1
SS 5.1
1
SS 5.2
1
SS 6.1
1
SS 6.2
1
SS 7.1
1
SS 7.2
1
SS 8
1
Subtotal
14
Decision Making
Description
Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
Site Selection
Development Density
Brownfiled Redevelopment
Alternate Transportation - Public
Alternate Transporation - Bicycles
Alternate Transporation - Efficient Vehicles
Alternate Transportation - Parking Capacity
Site Development - Protect/Restore Habitat
Site Development - Open Spaces
Stormwater Design - Volume/Treatment
Stormwater Design - Flood Control
Heat Island Effect - Non - Roof
Heat Island Effect - Roof
Light Pollution
Owner Design
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CM
Design
CM
Submittal
Design
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Calculation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CM
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Record Keeping
Design
CM
Contractor “Credit” Responsibility
z
Decision Making Responsibility:
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
SSPR1 – Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
SS5.1 – Site Development, Protect/Restore Habitat
SS7.1;7.2 – Heat island Effect
EAPR1 – Fundamental Commissioning
EA3 – Enhanced Commissioning
MR2.1; 2.2 – Construction Waste Management
MR3.1; 3.2 – Resource Reuse
MR4.1; 4.2 – Recycled Content
MR5.1; 5.2 – Regional Materials
MR6 – Renewable Materials
MR7 – Certified Wood
EQ3.1; 3.2 – Construction IAQ
ID1.1 – 1.4; 2 – Innovation in Design
Contractor “Credit” Responsibility
z
Calculation (cost analysis) Responsibility
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
MR2.1; 2.2 – Construction Waste Management
MR3.1; 3.2 – Resource Reuse
MR4.1; 4.2 – Recycled Content
MR5.1; 5.2 – Regional Materials
MR6 – Renewable Materials
MR7 – Certified Wood
EQ4.1; 4.2; 4.3; 4.4 – Low Emitting Materials
Contractor “Credit” Responsibility
z
Submittal Responsibility
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
SSPR1 – Construction Activity Pollution Control
SS5.1 – Site Development Protect/Restore Habitat
SS7.1; 7.2 – Heat Island Effect
EAPR1 – Fundamental Commissioning
EA3 – Enhanced Commissioning
EA5 – Measurement and Verification
EA6 – Green Power
MR1.1; 1.2; 1.3 – Building Reuse
MR2.1; 2.2 – Construction Waste Management
MR3.1; 3.2 – Resource Reuse
MR4.1; 4.2 – Recycled Content
MR5.1; 5.2 – Regional Materials
MR6 – Renewable Materials
MR7 – Certified Wood
EQ3.1; 3.2 – Construction IAQ
EQ4.1; 4.2; 4.3; 4.4 – Low Emitting Materials
ID1.1;1.2;1.3.1.4;2 – Innovation in Design
Contractor “Credit” Responsibility
z
Record Keeping Responsibility
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
EAPR1 – Fundamental Commissioning
EA3 – Enhanced Commissioning
MR1.3 – Building Reuse; Interior
MR2.1; 2.2 – Construction Waste Management
MR3.1; 3.2 – Resource Reuse
MR4.1; 4.2 – Recycled Content
MR5.1; 5.2 – Regional Materials
MR6 – Renewable Materials
MR7 – Certified Wood
EQ3.1; 3.2 – Construction IAQ
EQ4.1; 4.2; 4.3; 4.4 – Low Emitting materials
MR2.1; 2.2 - Construction Waste
Management
z
z
z
z
z
z
Design to Prevent Waste
Plan for Waste Prevention
Use Construction Methods that prevent
waste
Practice Jobsite Waste Prevention Methods
Purchase to Prevent Waste
Salvage, Reuse, Recycle
Construction Waste Management
z
Design to Prevent Waste
–
–
–
–
–
Design with standard sizes
Specify materials that can readily be
disassembled at the end of useful life
Specify durable, non – toxic interior finishes
Design spaces to be flexible
Consider reusing materials
Construction Waste Management
z
Plan for Waste Prevention
–
–
–
Target specific waste producing practices
Include waste prevention in waste management
plan (Attachment C)
Communicate the waste management plan; at
every meeting, post it and promote it (and the
results)
Construction Waste Management
z
Use Construction Methods that Prevent
Waste
–
–
Wood Construction; use advanced framing
techniques
Consider off site assembly of components
Construction Waste Management
z
Practice Jobsite Waste Prevention Methods
–
–
–
Set up central cutting areas
Recycle concrete forms or choose reusable steel
or fiberglass forms
Practice material storage and handling that
prevents loss or damage
Construction Waste Management
z
Purchase to Prevent Waste
–
–
–
–
Purchase salvaged, recycled or recycled content
materials and equipment
Deliver only the required amount of material to the
site
Use “JIT” ordering and delivery
Replace hazardous materials with non –
hazardous to reduce packaging
Construction Waste Management
z
Purchase to Prevent Waste (cont.)
–
–
–
Choose materials with little or no packaging
Have suppliers deliver materials with sturdy,
returnable pallets and containers
Require vendors to buy back substandard,
rejected or unused materials
Construction Waste Management
z
Salvage, Reuse and Recycle
–
–
–
–
–
Develop waste management plan
Identify reusable or Salvageable materials
Select Salvage removal alternatives
Plan for recycling
Establish what materials can be recycled, what salvaged
materials can be sold or donated to charities (503B)
See Attachment D
EQ3.1; 3.2 - Construction IAQ
z
EQ3.1 – During Construction
–
–
–
Meet or exceed the recommended control
measures of the “SMACNA IAQ Guidelines for
Occupied Buildings Under Construction”
Protect On Site Stored Materials from Moisture
Damage
If permanently installed AHU’s are used during
Construction, install MERV 8 filtration media at all
return air openings
EQ3.1 – Construction IAQ
z
SMACNA Guideline
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Seal all duct openings
Temporary filtration on all return openings (MREV 8)
Use only low emitting materials
Isolate work areas from clean or occupied areas by
temporary partitions and/or negative pressurization
HOUSEKEEPING – DO IT!
Schedule contaminant generating activities to have
minimum impact on IAQ
Use temporary ventilation units are required to maintain
proper ventilation
EQ 3.2 – Construction IAQ – Before
Occupancy
z
z
Flush Out – provide 14,000 cfm of outdoor air per SF
of building area while maintaining at least 60 deg.F
and no greater than 60% rH
Air Quality Testing – conduct baseline testing that
demonstrates that contaminant concentrations are
below acceptable levels
–
–
–
–
Particulate – 50mg (micrograms) per CM (0.00000011# per
CF)
Carbon Monoxide – 9 parts per million and no greater than
2 parts per million above outdoor air
TVOC – 500mg per CM (0.0000011# per CF)
Formaldehyde – 50 parts per billion
Contractor’s Role in LEED
z Questions
Other Sustainable Movements
z
z
z
z
z
Labs21 – offshoot of LEED; will become LEED
category in 2006
Green Guide for Healthcare – includes operational
activities. Project activities should become a LEED
Category in 2007
Green Building Initiative – focused on residential,
NAHB based, should become a LEED category in
2006/2007
ASHRAE Green Guide – focused on HVAC
Talloiries Declaration – University Based
Commitment to Sustainable Campuses
Contractor’s Role in LEED
z
References
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
USGBC NC 2.2 Reference Manual www.usgbc.org
SMACNA; IAQ Guidelines for Occupied Buildings Under
Construction www.SMACNA.org
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
www.nyserda.org
US EPA “Federal Green Spec’s.” www.epa.gov
WBDG “Construction Waste Management Database”
www.wbdg.org
ASHRAE “Engineering for Sustainability”
www.engineeringforsustainability.org
Washington State GSA, “Construction Waste Management”
www.ga.wa.gov/EAS/CWM
Abstract for Presentation by Tracie Baule-Hall,
Development Director at Enable
Board of Directors GreeningUSA
Member US Green Building Council, Upstate Chapter
From A Client’s Perspective…Why Be Green?
The mission of Enable is to provide the highest quality of life for
children and adults with disabilities. The fundamental concept of
green building is to provide the highest quality environment, with
conscious decisions and an integrated design approach impacting both
internal and external atmospheres.
Individuals who receive services through Enable already have physical
and developmental disabilities, many of which are compounded by
environmental sensitivities and depressed immune systems. By
constructing a facility designed with maximum accessibility and special
attention to indoor environmental quality, Enable hopes to
 enhance the benefits of the therapeutic services provided to
individuals with disabilities;
 increase the productivity and retention of qualified staff;
 reduce overall operating expenses through energy and water
conservation;
 reduce absenteeism for staff and participants
Through adherence to green building practices, and striving for LEED
certification, Enable’s 30,000 square foot addition seeks to provide the
ideal environment to achieve maximum results from therapeutic
services.
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
William Burdick
Principal / Senior Creative Director
The WDBurdick Company / WDBurdick.com
Since the mid 80’s, Bill has evolved The WDBurdick Company into an internationally
recognized, full service advertising and communications design firm serving a wide variety
of industries and clientele.
Headquartered in a restored 1874 mission church in Skaneateles Falls, New York, Bill
leads a team of dedicated professionals who help progressive companies implement green
marketing strategies into their existing culture, through a variety of media.
Most recently, the U.S Green Building Council utilized Bill’s services to create marketing
materials to promote its highly successful 2005 Greenbuild International Expo held in
Atlanta, edit LEED reference manuals and supply ongoing consulting and marketing tools
for upcoming USGBC events. Bill is a member of the U.S. Green Building Council
Upstate New York Chapter and holds a BFA degree from the University of Tampa. An
avid motorcycle rider and photographer, he is currently restoring a 100-year-old camp on
Skaneateles Lake utilizing green materials.
The
WDBurdick Company
4592 Jordan Road
Post Office Box 189
Skaneateles Falls, New York
13153-0189
P: 315.685.CRE8 (2738)
F: 315.685.0001
www.wdburdick.com
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster
SEARCH:
HOME | GATEWAYS | ACADEMICS | ADMISSION | DIRECTORIES | VISIT | LOG IN | SITE INDEX
General Information ▼
HOME
Adobe Contribute ▼
STUDENT ORGANIZATION WEB HOSTING
Social Networking
Accessing & Editing Websites ▼
PUBLIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS LOGIN
Digital Signage ▼
THE STAFF
ESF HOME
The page you requested cannot be found.
Search www.esf.edu:
SEARCH:
ESF homepage
Site Index
Directory of Faculty & Staff
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY-ESF | 1 Forestry Drive | Syracuse, NY 13210 | 315-470-6500
Copyright © 2013 | Information | Webmaster