Capitol Greenroofs - Latest & Highlighted Discussions

Fiber Optic Skylights for Daylighting Applications

Gregory — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:38:08 GMT

Some of our clients who are looking into daylighting solutions to meet LEED requirements are finding fiber optic technology as a way to bring natural light into their buildings. I especially like this equipment because it could work nice in conjunction with a vegetated roof and is not in direct competition for roof space. I have attached their product brochure in our media and file section for those of you who are interested in pricing these products, want to learn more about the various applications for these fiber optic systems or would like to review a product cut sheet and understand better about how these systems function.

Life Cycle Cost Calculator

Todd — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:55:43 GMT

Great posting of the LCC study from Portland. In case folks are not aware, there is a great LCC tool on the GRHC (greenroofs.org) site that was funded and can also be accessed from my companies site, Tremco Roofing (www.tremcoroofing.com). The tool is very involved and complex, so please let me know if I can assist you.

Hope this helps,

Todd C. Skopic, CSI, CDT

tskopic@tremcoinc.com

410.402.0729

Green Rooftops in New York City Now Rewarded with Tax Credits;

Wayne — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:01:14 GMT

Seems like NYC is on the right track with this. It was sent from the Greenroof Alliance of the Metropolitan Area of NYC to me.

Green Rooftops in New York City Now Rewarded with Tax Credits;

State passes bill to encourage roofs that cut energy, reduce sewage overflows

NEW YORK, NEW YORK, Jun. 24 -/E-Wire/-- Building owners in New York City who install green rooftops will now receive a significant tax credit under a bill (A.11226) sponsored by Assemblyman Ruben Diaz Jr. that passed the state legislature today. Under this law, building owners in New York City who install green roofs on at least 50 percent of available rooftop space can apply for a one-year property tax credit of up to $100,000. The credit would be equal to $4.50 per square-foot of roof area that is planted with vegetation, or approximately 25 percent of the typical costs associated with the materials, labor, installation and design of the green roof.

The legislation was championed by the S.W.I.M. (Storm Water Infrastructure Matters) Coalition, comprised of more than 50 city, state and national organizations dedicated to ensuring fishable and swimmable waters around New York through natural, sustainable storm water management practices. The S.W.I.M. Coalition, building off of its recent success in the passage of New York City Local Law 5, advocated for the passage of this green roof tax abatement. Advocacy included working with Assembly Member Diaz, Jr. to sponsor the bill, and meeting with key elected officials in Albany this May to recommend that it be passed this session.

"This tax abatement will act as an economic stimulus by creating living wage green-collar jobs that are pathways out of poverty," said Rob Crauderueff, Director of Sustainable Policy at Sustainable South Bronx and chair of the Storm Water Infrastructure Matters (S.W.I.M.) policy committee.

"Green rooftops can save New York City residents more than $5 million in energy cooling costs, cut greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce overflows of raw sewage by easing pressure on the city's overburdened sewer system - which will help to achieve swimmable and fishable waterways in neighborhoods throughout New York City," said Larry Levine, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC).

Green roofs also address New York's environmental justice problems, explained Kate Zidar, Senior Environmental Planner of Youth Ministries for Peace and Justice. "Green roofs reduce costly environmental burdens, such as poor air quality and sewage treatment processing, in communities throughout New York City, especially environmental justice communities that host more than their share of environmental burdens".

The benefits of green roofs are measurable, according to Dr. Paul S. Mankiewicz, Gaia Institute Executive Director, and board member of the New York City Soil & Water Conservation District. "Each 10,000 square foot green roof can capture between 6,000 and

State Legislature Passes Green Roof Tax Credit Incentive SWIM Press Release June 24, 2008

12,000 gallons of water in each storm event. This is rainfall that will never enter the combined sewer. At the same time, the evaporation of this rainfall will produce the equivalent of between a thousand and two thousand tons of air conditioning, enough heat removal to noticeably cool ten acres of the City. This is a management practice that increases biodiversity and can literally add enjoyable landscape to all the boroughs of New York".

Riverkeeper Chief Investigator Basil Seggos added, "by incentivizing green roof construction, this legislation will enable New York City to become greener, cleaner and more energy efficient. And our waterways will benefit from smaller volumes of raw sewage as a result".

This green roof incentive builds off of the success of a greening initiative in the Bronx. Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, Jr. stated, "My Bronx Initiative for Energy and the Environment has funded fifteen green roofs on non-profits in the Bronx. Because of this Bronx green roof movement, business owners have been seeking green roof funding, similar to the NYSERDA programs for solar panels. This tax abatement will put green roof technology financially in reach of New York City businesses".

Building owners will be able to apply for the credit starting Jan. 1, 2009. This is a pilot program that will expire after March 15, 2013, unless it is extended.

Financing Your Vegetated Roofing System

Gregory — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:09:27 GMT

Lease financing, as an alternative to traditional bond financing or cash, gives customers the opportunity to make their roofing purchase over time, without increasing their capital debt. It allows schools and other public organizations, as well as commercial businesses, to replace or renovate their roofing when they need to, buying valuable time until capital becomes available. The lease arrangement applies to the total roof project cost, including materials, delivery, and installation.

The typical term for repayment is from three to seven years, with a one dollar buyout at the end of the term. Since the lease is considered a maintenance expense, rather than a capital debt, the arrangement frees up capital needed for other building asset investments. Rates are competitive, and, for state and local governments, public hospitals, school districts, colleges, universities, and 501(c)3 organizations can qualify for federal tax exemption. Flexible lease financing options are also available for private sector businesses and other commercial enterprises across the United States.

If you are interested in learning more about financing options for your next project please feel free to give us a call at 301.452.1144.

Damping-off and rot problems on newly planted roofs

Wayne — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:24:24 GMT

I have heard that several newly planted roofs are experiencing damping-off and rot this Spring. Damping-off is a condition that causes the plant to lose vigor and die, in some cases almost overnight. This is caused by several fungi. Plants are vulnerable to attack by these fungi during periods of unfavorable growing conditions. Species of Pythium, Sclerotinia, and Phytophthora are more likely to cause damping-off in cool, wet soils; whereas species of Rhizoctonia, Fusarium and Sclerotium rolfsii may cause damping-off under warmer and drier conditions. This type of injury often damages the leaves and upper stem before the roots are affected. True damping-off may be confused with plant injury caused by planting too deep, high soluble salts, drowning in wet soil, desiccation in dry soil, and death of plants from excessive heat or cold. Rhizoctonia and Pythium do not have an airborne stage. The spread of both fungi depends primarily on the mechanical transfer of resting spores in infested soil. As with most fungi, the spores are spread by the splash of rain water or infected tools.

Symptoms

Typical symptoms of damping-off are rotting stems at or near the soil line and root decay. You generally notice brown stems at or just above the soil line. Infected plants are shriveled, brown, collapsed or stunted. Moldy fungal growth may be seen on affected plants at the soil line. Phytopthera, Rhizoctonia, Fusarium, Sclerotinia, and Sclerotium generally caused damping-off by killing the plant at the soil line. Pythium attacks below the soil line, often at root tips.

Control

The best control of damping-off is to avoid it altogether. Once damping-off has started in a plant bed, it may be difficult to control. Proper soil treatment with heat or chemicals to reduce the level of fungi that cause damping-off is very important. The compost added to the growing mix needs to be properly "Composted" to rid it of any pathogens. The compost added to the growing mix needs to be from a trusted source. The composting time needs to be a minimum of four months with proper aeration, then covering while it cures for four weeks. Proper temperatures of 150F or above must be maintained for eight weeks for sterilization. Chemical control is an effective tool you can use once damping-off is suspected. Check with your University's Agricultural Extension Service for their recomendations.

Summary

Damping-off can be avoided if you take into account that a Greenroof planting is just as suceptable to issues that most gardeners face on the ground. We need to remember that plants aren't just another layer on the roof, they are but living organisms.

800 Buildings in D.C. Region to be Renovated to Save Energy

Wayne — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:47:31 GMT

From Greenroofs.org

"800 Buildings in D.C. Region to be Renovated to Save Energy"

"Nearly 800 buildings in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia will be retrofitted to save at least 20 percent in energy use under a plan announced Wednesday by two public-private partnerships. The scheduled renovations were announced by the Energy Efficiency Partnership of Greater Washington and the Chesapeake Crescent, public-private partnerships that promote green building. The energy savings will be accomplished in a variety of ways, including more efficient heating and cooling systems, windows or roofing."

ANSI Design Guidlines for wind and fire uplift

Wayne — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:43:24 GMT

Code Update: International Code Council Public Comment Form

From Greenroofs.org

"As many of you know, GRHC is working with SPRI to develop ANSI Design Guidelines for wind and fire uplift with a view to having these ready for acceptance by the ICC at its fall meeting on the new 2009 Building Code. GRHC is also working with SPRI to develop a test method for root repellancy. If you are interested in being on the Canvass List for this please email Steven Peck, speck@greeenroofs.org. GRHC Members are encouraged to provide public comments on the overall performance of green roofing systems with respect to fire and wind resistance, and can do so by visiting http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/publicforms.html . The website provides details on how to submit a public comment. You will note on the form, Item #3, requires the author to enter the Code Change proposal number. Code change proposal S-16 is the one that proposes that the IBC reference RP-14 for wind design. Code change proposal S-23 is the one that proposes referencing VF-1 for fire resistance design. In both cases the desired final action would be to approve as submitted. Public Comments are due by June 9."

DOT Greenroof Tour

Wayne — Thu, 22 May 2008 17:11:08 GMT

We had a good group of 20 or so show up to be promptly blown and washed off the DOT roof after 5 minutes. We had a good Q&A with the building owners and management. I will be going back down in June for some pictures and will post them here. The plants look great with about 80% coverage and looks like they will have 100% coverage by mid summer. We supplied 138,000 sedum in 72 cell for this project and it was great to see how they have grown despite being planted in the heat of the 2006 summer. The drought of last summer and the tropical rains of this spring have had no apparent ill-effect on their growth.

I would like to add that it was a very friendly and curious group.

Wayne Mills

New Green Roof Growing Media

Tom — Thu, 29 May 2008 11:51:11 GMT

I ran across this article and thought that I'd share it. Has anyone else heard anything more about this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/magazine/20Build-text.html?ex=1366257600&en=ae7f39e17883bf81&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Green roof plants

Wayne — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:31:30 GMT

Wayne's Wholesale Nursery has good inventory of greenroof plants. We carry 72 cells as well as 3.5" pots and cuttings. Contact us for your next project. www.wayneswholesalenursery.com

Green Materials: Everything but plants...

Marianne — Thu, 08 May 2008 14:37:38 GMT

Commercial Use:

Concrete- Hycrete

Non-toxic waterproofing material that allows concrete to be reusable.

http://www.inc.com/magazine/20071101/long-live-rock.html

Native Plants Should be Considered for Vegetated Roofing Systems

Gregory — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:20:48 GMT

This media clip discusses what the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center has been doing with their research on using native plantings for extensive greenroof systems. As long as the plants moisture, nutrient, aeration/drainage, and sunlight exposure requirements are met technically you should be able to replicate most natural ecosystems. Additional soil amendments might be required such as Mycorrhizae, organic fertilizers (such as cottonseed and kelp meal), and PH stabilizers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zCyyF01CL4

Conveyor belts are a cost effective way to get materials to the roof!

Gregory — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:58:03 GMT

Telescoping conveyor belts that are mounted on trucks are a very cost effective and quick way to get materials to the roof as long as you have the room necessary to setup the equipment. In addition, these systems can not be raised more than 30 degrees and the longest reach that I have encountered can reach 58' in height. Both the boom and the feed conveyor can swing 360 degrees around the truck. Other performance specifications include:

360 cubic yards/hour (275 cubic meters/hour) output

18" (457 mm) belt width

105' reach

Call us the next time you need to move a lot of growing media for your projects!

Architectural Needs/Extras for Green Roofs and Garden Spaces

Marianne — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:09:18 GMT

ReStore

ReStore is a resale business that sells new and used building materials and home improvement items to the general public.

All materials are donated by local retail businesses, building contractors, suppliers and individuals, and are made available for sale to the public at 50% to 90% below retail prices.

Our 16,000 sq. ft. warehouse is filled with hundreds of brand-new and almost-new refrigerators, dishwashers, and other appliances; top-of-the line carpet and tile; never-used cabinets, windows, and doors; and much, much more.

We will gladly accept gently-used materials for resale. Convenient pickup service is available, and all donations are tax-deductible. Call (703) 360-6700 to schedule a pick-up or email to learn more. Learn more about usable and unusable donation items.

Are you able to volunteer your time to collect donations, run the cash register, or stock shelves? We need a steady supply of volunteers to make the ReStore the success we know it can be. Learn more about volunteering at ReStore!

All ReStore proceeds will be used by Habitat for Humanity of Northern Virginia to build safe, decent, affordable homes for families in need.

Habitat ReStore of Northern Virginia
7770-A Richmond Highway (behind Gold's Gym)
Alexandria, VA 22306

restoreinfo@habitatnova.org

(703) 360-6700

Sunday: Closed
Monday through Friday: 10 am - 5 pm
Saturday: 9 am - 5 pm

Creativity+$$$$= Living Walls

Gregory — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:20:13 GMT

If design trends overseas are any indicator on how the building industry in the States might be moving towards, then I wouldn't be surprised to see more living walls used as prominent architectural elements. These "green facades" while aesthetically pleasing will no doubt cost a pretty penny to not only install but to properly maintain. In addition, you have to remember that for many plants you will have to constantly re-circulate water through a drip irrigation system so it make sense to couple these systems with a rainwater catchment system. If you are interested in learning more on how all the bits and pieces of these systems go together we would be more than happy to help with the design of your living wall assembly.

Freestanding Containerized Living Walls

Gregory — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:08:30 GMT

Trellis based systems are one of the most cost effective solutions for clients who are looking to screen areas such as condensors and roof top equipment. If designed properly you can even collect some of the condensate and use that to irrigate the plants in these planters. Also, on the ground level these systems could be used to screen dumpsters, transformers, and other unsightly utilities.

Some manufacturers such as GreenScreen off a similar product that has casters on the bottom and can be moved relatively easily if you want to use this systems on areas such as pool decks of roof top gardens. Also, some of my clients are opting to use the movable units for interior and exterior applications so that they can use less hardy tropical vines and plants and bring them outside for use on terraces during the summer and then when it gets colder "wheel" them back into their atrium or greenhouse. Portable systems are also good for temporary displays and interpretive exhibits and can even used for supports for food production activities.

Some of my favorite plants to use in these containerized planters are Coral Honeysuckle (Lonicera semperivens), Winter Jasmine (Jasminum nudiflorum), and Climbing Hydragea (Hydragea petiolaris). Other perennials such as Clematis also work well when placed in full sun.

Drip Irrigation For Living Walls

Gregory — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:29:15 GMT

Living walls in most cases require a significant amount of water especially if you are planting perennials and other herbasceous plant materials in lieu of succulents and other drought resistant plants typically found on greenroofs. Most of the soil based and synthetic or bio based containment cells rely on a consistent and even moisture supply often not sufficient with just natural rainfall alone.

Using drip tubing for supplemental irrigation is the most common practice and depending on the size of the living walls that needs to be watered and the local building codes the irrigation assembly can be tied into either a rainwater harvesting or greywater system. Some of my clients still elect to tie into potable lines but that is not preferred. In addition, these systems if small enough can be tied into a hose bib as long as the pressure is adequate and devices such as backflow preventers and pressure regulators are used. Additional devices such as timers or soil moisture sensors are encouraged so that the plants moisture requirements are met. I would highly discourage the used of watering by hand especially for walls that are over 8' in height because an even water coverage will not be met.

This system below called out by G-Sky is an example of how this system would be designed based on the number of panels selected. It is important that the manufacturer signs off on and approves any shop drawings that might be prepared by the contractor prior to the installation of the irrigation system especially if the living wall comes with a warranty on the products. If you have any questions when designing or installing your living wall system or irrigation we would be pleased to offer assistance.

Prevegetated Mats- Can "Instant Gratification" Be Cost Effective?

Gregory — Mon, 26 May 2008 14:16:04 GMT

Some of our clients that are up against compressed construction schedules or desire an "instant green" product are finding that pre-vegetated mats are a good alternative to the conventional "planted in place" extensive greenroof and modular tray systems. In most cases these mats are falling around $5-6 per sq. ft. (not including installation or shipping). In some cases, where lightweight systems are desired these systems might even be a little less expensive, especially if you can incorporate local materials and have a large enough roof to take advantage of economies of scale.

Normally, these mats will take between 6 months to grow to about 80% coverage and are often propagated with cuttings at about 35 lbs./ 1,000 sq. ft. These cuttings cost about $10/ lb. for the plant material and what you would expect to pay if you planted plugs 2 plants per sq. ft.

In addition, if you design the assembly properly there is a good chance that you will be able to save about $.25/ sq. ft. on maintenance costs during the normal two year establishment period for traditional built up assemblies. In more temperate climates, you might even be able to get away with less soil depth if you use a moisture retention and drainage mat in conjunction with the pre-vegetated system. Down in the south you can reduce the soil depth down to as much as 2" inches but I would highly recommend having a drip irrigation system in place between two moisture retention mats. Of course knowing your plants moisture and nutrient requirements will ultimately affect your plant selection.

Pre-vegetated mats are perfect for many metal frame and metal deck buildings that can support at least 15 lbs./ sq. ft. of deadloads. These assemblies are already becoming popular for many "big box" retailers, manufacturing facilities, air conditioned warehouses, military institutions, and single and two story structures. We are anticipating that pre-vegetated mats will used on approximately 50% of our projects moving forward because they can also be designed for sloped applications.

So, what do you think can "instand gratification" also be affordable?

Photo credit: Xeroflora

Daylighting and Skylight Options

Gregory — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:55:17 GMT

Installing skylights can be a challenge especially on older structures when you have to cut into the existing substrate "roof deck" to ensure that they are situated properly. Sometimes utilities have to be relocated or the skylight adjusted to work around existing electrical, plumbing lines, or structural supports but in general, these systems are fairly easy to install. The most important part of the assembly is to make sure that the "skylight housing" is well sealed and that you provide for the proper thermal break to ensure that you are not losing energy through the skylight. Normally, we recommend that the curbs of these systems be constructed out of structurally insulated panels or wooden 2"x 12" if you are planning to use it in conjunction with an extensive greenroof. Most off the shelf pre-fabricated systems such as Velux come with a gasketed frames that will overlap the curbs and provide a weathertight seal. The flashing should be conducted per this attached detail or as approved by the manufacturer to ensure that it will meet warranty requirements. If you have any questions on the design for your skylight when used in conjunction with a greenroof assembly just let us know and we would be happy to assist you.

Are We Moving Towards a Mandatory Carbon Cap and Trade Market???

Gregory — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:35:01 GMT

On December 5, 2007, by a vote of 11-8, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee favorably reported "The Lieberman Warner Climate Security Act" to the full Senate with a bipartisan list of cosponsors. This is the first time in U.S. history that a bill mandating economy-wide reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions has been reported out of committee in the Senate or the House.

This is good news for companies who promote "least cost alternatives" for producing alternative energy and for those companies who are already cashing in the the voluntary carbon market and "selling verified emission reductions" (commonly called white tags) on the Chicago Climate Exchange. Greenroofs if properly "aggregated" on a large scale could in fact significantly reduce the cost of these roofing assemblies. Currently, the largest barrier to implementation of the sale of these voluntary GHG emission reductions are the transaction costs to commodize this product. If the "Climate Security Act" gets approved in the next year and a regulated and mandatory carbon trading market is established. "White tags" will become a commonly traded "good" and will significantly help to transform the greenroofing industry. I have attached a link which you all might enjoy as well as some information on the bill. I would welcome any comments and questions from those who might already be trading VER's. This has already become a large component of our corporate sales and is expected to dramatically increase.

Video Clip: Business of Going Green New
Interview with Fred Krupp of The Environmental Defense Fund
By: The Wall Street Journal - Thursday, March 13, 2008
Source: The Wall Street Journal

When it comes to passing climate change legislation, the U.S. Senate has plenty of options to choose from -- nine bills to cut greenhouse gases have been rolled out since the start of the year. Yet none has managed to achieve a groundswell of support among key activist groups. Earlier this month, buzz was generated ahead of the release of the latest climate change bill, a bi-partisan, economy-wide emissions cap-and-trade proposal from Senators Lieberman, Independent-Conn., and John Warner, R-Va. Yet, the bill, officially named America's Security Act of 2007, had barely made its debut, when anticipation began turning to disappointment among environmental and industry interest groups. The bill is designed to cap U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from the electric utility, transportation, and manufacturing industries at 2005 levels by 2012. These sectors -- which are responsible for close to 80% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions -- would then need to reduce emissions 15% below 2005 levels by 2020 and by 70% by 2050. Meeting these targets would effectively lower the total emissions cap each year by 96 million tons, a 1.8% annual reduction of the 2012 cap, according to a report from the law firm Van Ness Feldman. Some of the enthusiasm dissipated among environmental groups who upon review found the bill didn't hit cut emissions as quickly or deeply as they hoped and failed to meet the long-term reduction goals some scientists have suggested are necessary. Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke says when all the bill's provisions are taken into account it will realistically reduce U.S. emissions by approximately 13-19% by 2020 and 51-63% by 2050, an amount the environmental group believe isn't enough. The Sierra Club said the bill was "a significant political step forward for the U.S. Congress, but unfortunately...still falls short of what is demanded by the science and the public." The Union of Concerned Scientists said the bill's long-term emissions cut would "fall shy" of what is needed. The League of Conservation Voters said the bill must move "closer to where the science tells us we need to be." A dress rehersal for the real thing? While the Lieberman-Warner climate change bill is already seen as a long shot, it is also being viewed by some lawmakers and lobbyists as an important dress rehearsal for proponents of emissions caps who hope to prove that public awareness and political will have shifted enough in the past two to three years to the point that a bipartisan, centrist climate change bill could succeed where others have failed. Backers of the bill talk about momentum and claim that this bill has it and the slate of past bills have not. The introduction of the Lieberman-Warner bill "shows growing political momentum," says Betsy Loyless, senior vice president of the National Audubon Society. Some of the pressure to support the legislation is coming from Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., according to those following the issue. Boxer has an upcoming trip to Bali to discuss climate change with world leaders, and she'd like to arrive with some evidence that the Democratically-led Senate can hammer out a mandatory climate change proposal. A sign of progress would be a successful vote to move the Lieberman-Warner bill out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which Boxer chairs.
The authors of the bill see it as a compromise -- a feature they hope will engender additional support. The conventional thinking has been that a climate change proposal would need to be centrist enough to draw sufficient votes from Democrats from energy intensive and coal-burning states and moderate Republicans. But conversely if the bill isn't deemed tough enough by committed environmentalists Boxer risks losing the support of liberal Democrats who have headed calls for action on climate change policy. The question will be whether proponents of a tougher standard abandon the Lieberman-Warner bill altogether or are willing to support a lesser standard to get some type of mandatory policy enacted. Some of Boxer's colleagues have already indicated dissatisfaction with the bill. Sen. Bernie Sanders, Independent from Vermont, who helped crafted what is considered the "gold standard" of climate change legislation, said the Lieberman-Warner bill doesn't lower emissions quick enough. Sanders introduced a bill along with Boxer in January that would lower emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Senator Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. has also called for tougher standards. Both senators sit on the Environment and Public Works Committee, The last two Senate votes on cap-and-trade bills were unsuccessful. A proposal crafted by Lieberman and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was defeated 43-55 in October 2003 and a similar bill was defeated 38-60 in 2005. Environmental groups dissatisfied Among environmental and interest groups there is an obvious rift over the Lieberman-Warner bill. Although the final draft of the bill was stronger than an earlier version in some respects, groups like the Friends of the Earth found plenty of problem spots and concluded that the bill lacked "critical targets and timetables" and is too industry-friendly. The Audubon Society and the Environmental Resources Defense Council want an 80% cut within 50 years. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said the bill "falls short" in several respects, noting that it wouldn't protect low-income Americans from the impact of higher energy costs. U.S. PIRG said the legislation represented a "starting point" that would need significant changes. What happens if those changes don't materialize? Boxer has said she sees the bill as a pragmatic starting point for federal legislation rather than a gold standard. The senator said the bill "will send a strong early signal to the marketplace, which is a very important part of getting where we need to go." On the Republican side of the equation, Warner is seen as a potential draw for other conservatives, though the most likely Republican converts may be those testing the waters of support for climate change policy ahead of the 2008 election cycle. Senators Norm Coleman, R-Minn. and Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., have signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation and are both up for re-election in 2008. Dole has called the proposal a "responsible, market-driven approach." Warner's decision to push for climate change legislation comes at the end of his Senate career. With 28 years in the Senate under his belt, Warner has announced plans to retire in January 2009. But regardless of what Boxer, Lieberman and Warner can achieve in the Senate by making tweaks in the bill, a far bigger issue will be constructing and passing a bill in the House of Representatives. After becoming Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., quickly created a special committee on global warming but it quickly became apparent the committee lacked authority to engineer any legislative success and House Democrats have taken little action on the issue since.

Greenroofs Can Significantly Improve Energy Efficiency

Gregory — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:04:54 GMT

These past couples of months has proven that "grassroot" advocacy in the Commonwealth of Virginia can really make a difference and as organizations such as Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) continue to turn the heat up on Governor Kaine and the General Assembly, we are left considering how can we do our fair share to reduce our own energy consumption and combat global warming.

Some of my clients are turning to Energy Service Companies (ESCO's) as a way to inventory their "green house gas emissions' and to determine their "carbon footprint". By having energy audits prepared and sophisticated building energy simulations conducted, many are finding that their are a whole range of practices that can be put in place to reduce the utility bills. Already most facility managers have gone after the "low hanging fruit" and have implemented lighting retrofits, added occupancy sensors, upgraded building systems such as installing variable speed drives and more efficient HVAC equipment....but now they are turning their focus on improving the performance of their building envelopes.

Installing a high performing "greenroof assembly" on a building might just be the most effective way to reduce energy after other interior upgrades are performed. Some field studies that have been conducted have shown that on single story buildings that have installed greenroofs that the property owners have reduced their HVAC consumption by as much as 25%. Because their are a lot of variables that go into determining how much money could be saved it is best to work directly with a design professional to conduct those complex modeling studies. If you would like we could recommend a number of extremely competent companies who are currently performing these tests.

So, while greenroofs are an expensive tool to increase building performance we are left considering what some of our other options are. Is continuing down the current path of energy generation and consumption even one of those options? We don't think so and neither do some other Virginia residents who oppose the coal-fired power plant proposed by Dominion Power for Wise County. I hope that you enjoy this video segment and would certainly welcome any comments or thoughts on this topic.

http://www.chesapeakeclimate.org/blog/?p=298

Designing a Stormwater Harvesting System

Gregory — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:57:40 GMT

The general rule of thumb when sizing a "cistern" to capture rainfall is that a 1" rainfall from a 1,000 sq. ft. roof will generate approximately 600 gallons of runoff. Seeing that 90% of the storms in the D.C. area are under 1" this is a pretty good metric to use when sizing your tank.

Above ground tanks are the most affordable solution to an underground system and in some cases rainwater that is collected can be gravity fed to water gardens and landscaping. If you can eliminate having to purchase a pump and expensive filtration devices with water level sensors that will be even better because "low tech" solutions offer the quickest payback especially in jurisdictions that offer incentives for collecting roof runoff. If you are interested in designing a stormwater harvesting system for your property we would be more than happy to assist you with the design of an affordable and efficient system that meets your budget.

Cistern volume can be determined by calculating the roof top water yield for any given rainfall, using the following general equation:

Equation V = A² x i x c x 7.5 gals./ ft.³ where:

		V	= volume of rain barrel (gallons)
		A²	= surface area roof (square feet)
		i	= rainfall (1"=.08 ft.)
		c	= coefficient of runoff (.9 for impervious areas)
		7.5	= conversion factor (gallons per cubic foot)

600 gallons = 1000 ft.² x 0.08 ft. x 0.90 x 7.5 gallons/ft.³

Rockville's Stormwater Utility Fee vs. Arlington County Proposed Stormwater Utility Tax

Gregory — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 01:44:41 GMT

On March 27th at 7: 00 p.m. Arlington County will hold a public hearing to discuss the proposed "Sanitary District Tax" which will in essence help to pay for over $8 million worth of stormwater management improvements. While, I am all for helping to pay my fair share to improve our local watersheds and aging stormwater infrastructure. Raising the property taxes system wide by a uniform amount is not an equitable way to generate cash for these improvements. Rarely does charging a uniform tax directly reflect the burden a particular property places on the storm water system. Instead many jurisdictions are instead developing "parcel based tax assessments" which focus on creating stormwater utility fees that are based on the amount of impervious surfaces of a property and then charging them for the runoff that they generate. This "polluter pays" approach is exactly what the City of Rockville is currently voting on and similar to what the District of Columbia is proposing.

In Rockville, charging a tax would place a heavier financial burden on residential properties than on commercial properties. About two-thirds of property tax revenue comes from residential property; the other third from commercial property.

The approach used by most communities with a SWM Utility is a user fee that is based on the amount of impervious surface on properties. Since a vast majority of residential properties in Rockville have roughly the same amount of impervious surface, single family houses would pay a flat fee, estimated to be about $56 in the first year of the program and increasing to about $89 a year in the sixth year.

Other properties, such as apartment complexes, offices and shopping centers usually have more impervious surface, which varies widely between these properties. The owners of these properties would pay a fee based on the actual amount of their impervious surface. The fee approach would result in commercial and institutional properties paying about two-thirds of the total SWM program cost. This is proportional to the amount of stormwater runoff they produce.

The fee in Rockville would be phased in over several years, allowing the program and staffing to build up gradually.

Arlington County considered this "fee for service" option rather than a property tax-based funding mechanism. The most serious disadvantage of a Stormwater Utility is the fact that it would require substantially greater cost and effort to modify existing billing systems and to provide public education and outreach. Whereas the sanitary district tax could be more easily and affordably administered, allowing improvements to the stormwater program to be implemented sooner.

The scariest part of enacting this tax in lieu of a utility fee is that once this system is in place it will always be easier to increase the tax rate than to implement a proper "runoff based fee" as ultimately will only continue to add to our stormwater management funding issues. Also, remember that when imposing new regulations you should always offer a well thought out incentive based toolkit that offers property owners alternative ways to help reduce their impervious footprint. Rain Gardens, rainwater harvesting systems, greenroofs, all help to reduce non-point source pollution and reduce stormwater peak flows significantly affecting the health of our watersheds!

Conceal your flashings to improve membrane life

Gregory — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:05:41 GMT

I keep getting asked if it is absolutely required to conceal your flashings and if the metal counterflashings, sheet metal 'kick plates', and/or copings are worth the up front installation costs....so, I thought that we pose this as a topic for discussion to the rest of the group. If adding these features might add another 10-15+ years to the useful life of the membrane and reduce future maintenance costs....would this be something that you would want to "value engineer" from your project?

Currently, CGR is requiring "upgraded" flashing protection as part of our 25 year total system warranty package....Does this seem like it would be something worth paying a little extra for???? We certainly think so...Let me know if you would like any additional information on these protective devices. Thanks.

Parks atop parking garages.

Jason — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 02:02:27 GMT

See link for an article about park space above parking spaces...

http://580wdbo.com/includes/news/indepth/06732_Maitland-Plans-Public-Parks-on-Rooftops_125652.html

Jason

Extensive Greenroof Assembly over metal decks

Gregory — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:16:48 GMT

What is the best type of assembly to use for structures that incorporate metal decks? Typically, this type of system is most commonly used for smaller commercial buildings and warehouses. The assembly needs to be relatively lightweight (normally less than 30 lbs./sq. ft.) and can feature either a conventional or an inverted roof membrane assembly "IRMA". Personally, I favor the IRMA or protected membrane assembly because the insulation can be removed and re-used and is easier to repair should a leak occur. Many roofers however, still like to use either single ply membranes or two ply modified bit waterproofing membranes where the insulation is located between the membrane and the roof deck. So, what are the advantages of the conventional system versus the IRMA built up roof? Which would you rather prefer?

Welcome to Capitol Greenroofs!

CollectiveX — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:47:24 GMT

Welcome to Capitol Greenroofs!

This site serves as a secure private meeting place providing members of Capitol Greenroofs with tools to centralize communication, synchronize calendars, and share files. Furthermore, the network area enables members to learn more about each other and build deeper working relationships.

Landscape Architectural Design and Construction Services

CollectiveX — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:47:24 GMT