Have you tried to define a ‘green building’?

Do you know the key ratios for energy and environmental performance of a green building?

Do you regard a green building as sustainable?

Test yourself: do you automatically accept everything ‘green’ as ‘sustainable’?

Stop here! Reflect on these questions! Then read on to the bottom of the page and see if you think like we do.

We have rethought the green building and realised that we miss at least two criteria: (1) how it is used by its users and (2) what it is used for. We agree with the Australian researcher Tony Fry: energy efficiency, water conservation, choice of materials and so forth is not enough.

Imagine: you have a building with the highest green performance rating. Everything is electronically controlled. The users cannot interact with their environment and disturb the green functioning of the building by opening windows, turning up lights or alter temperature. Will they like it and do a good job in there or will they spend mental energy on resistance? Will anyone besides the specialised engineers understand how it works and warrant the function?

Imagine again: you have this fantastic green building. The developer rents out the office space to, let’s say, a company which produces paint and related products and is known to pay minimum attention to environmental issues. What is the sustainability factor here? Moreover, will this company at all get the point with the building and enhance its performance?

This is where we think that a ‘green building’, or any other established sustainable concept for that matter, needs to be defined against a total aim and not key ratios. These might lead us astray as shown above. Human resistance will never enhance sustainability either of a building or an object. Nor will recycling if it replaces object longevity or does not limit the amount of products produced.

Kristina Borjesson, WorkingPartner, Designboost