The REAL Reason that Engineers Resist Going Green

After years of disbelief at the resistance of engineers to implement "green" strategies, I can finally answer the question of why - FEAR. I came to this realization when I was examining some of my own reservations. Despite the fact that I am enthusiastic about sustainability and green design, and have a passion for finding a better way to engineer green, I still have a reservations about implementing green strategies on some projects.  I believe that this is the underlying reason for all engineers, and from my own experience as a civil engineer I have come to understand this to be true for others that I come into contact with.

It's FEAR of the UNKNOWN and FEAR of FAILURE, that drives us to stick with the warm and fuzzy feelings of doing it the same way it has been done for years.  The bottom line is that many green techniques, especially those that are civil engineering related, such as raingardens, bioswales, bioretention, etc are relatively untested.  And the areas where they have been tested, Prince George's County Maryland, Portland, Seattle and so on don't always have conditions that translate well to other parts of the country.  This lack of familiarity and basis for comparison makes it somewhat more risky to design and spec these green techniques.  Without a really solid set of design guidelines, engineers are forced to do some of their own research, make their own judgments and think outside the box.  And while I admit this can be unsettling at times, its one of the reasons that I got into engineering in the first place - to figure things out and find a better way.  I have been feeling my way through it for a number of years and there have been plenty of times where my designs have not turned out quite like I expected.  There have been a different reasons for that; the contractor didn't install it correctly, it wasn't maintained correctly, I made assumptions that were incorrect, etc. but I have learned from all of them, and I think that's the key.  For the most part the "green" techniques available to engineers don't involve anything truly new, they are just different applications of the knowledge set that we already have.  In my opinion, this is engineering in it's purest form - taking knowledge and fact and applying it in a practical way to solve a problem.

I can acknowledge that I sometimes feel some apprehension when implementing a design strategy that hasn't been successfully implemented in my area before, but we can't simply stick to the status quo because of that FEAR.  It's time that we as engineers work to find a better way, rather than just going with the flow and designing like we have for the past 50 years.  To do that we need to come together with our colleagues to vet innovative and practical designs and we need to support those within and outside our own professions to have the confidence and creativity that we need to solve the problems of our typical development process.

Green - So What's It Going to Cost Me?

I have been advocating for and designing green infrastructure and LID solutions for a number of years now.  In those years one of the most common things I hear is "So what's it going to cost me?".  The assumption is always that it's going to cost more, and often they expect it to cost a lot more.  Fortunately, its often less expensive rather than more expensive. This is especially the case with civil engineering (stormwater infrastructure, grading, parking lots, landscape design, etc.).  Clients are naturally incredulous when I tell them that it's going to cost less, so their next statement is usually " Really!?, how much less?".  In answering that question I have found that "well, that depends", doesn't always fly, so I have put together some general cost comparisons for several green vs traditional design elements.

The truth is, it does depend on a number of variables and each situation will be a little different, so in each of my examples below assumptions were made that may not always apply.  For instance, the estimates do not include items that would need to be included in each scenario (pavement etc), only the differences. Nevertheless, they should form a good basis for evaluating the cost and feasibility of green options for site and infrastructure design.

Subdivision Drainage - Raingardens vs. Curb Inlets + Detention Pond(s)
This cost comparison was developed for a potential client that was developing a residential subdivision in middle TN. I was advocating for the use of raingardens and other LID techniques to manage stormwater rather than traditional drainage solutions.  The developer was incredulous and wanted to see a cost comparison, so I developed the one that follows.  The subdivision was a 50 lot subdivision with 1/4 acre lots. The road was 24' wide with curbs and a sidewalk on one side.  The traditional drainage design included curb inlets every 250' with a cross drain and pipe in the ROW that carried stormwater to a detention pond on site. The LID design replaced the curb inlets with raingardens every 300' on each side of the road.  The raingardens were approximately 300 sf in size and did not include an underdrain.  Below is a table with my approximate costs and the assumptions that I made.

I did not include the cost of land that would need to be set aside for detention or stormwater impact fees, which would add to the cost of the traditional drainage system.


Parking Lots - Pervious vs Traditional
The data for this cost comparison is drawn from a small parking lot project with space constraints.  Because of the size and shape of the property, above ground detention was not possible. The possible options included underground detention in the form of pipe or chambers or using pervious pavement (asphalt or concrete) and stone base for storage.

Commercial Site - Raingardens vs Catch Basins + Detention Pond(s)
This cost comparison is based on a 150 stall commercial parking lot.  There is room for a traditional above ground detention pond, so that is the basis for the cost comparison.  As you will see below, the costs are very close for the two options in this scenario.

These are just a few of the potential cost comparisons, but as you can see green does not always cost more.  And the costs of the traditional systems above do not consider the long term costs to communities due to the environmental damage and the increased strain on infrastructure and maintenance.  Those costs are difficult to measure but are equally important or even more important when considering the use of LID practices.

The key to the equation is to consider the whole cost of the systems involved, not just the individual components.  Sustainability is about seeing the big picture and the long view, so its imperative that we include that in the conversation when the costs of going green are discussed.

Blogging Update

To those of you who have been regular followers of my blog, I apologize for the extended delay in posting new content.  I confess that I have gotten busy with project work and have neglected my blog, marketing and other efforts.  It is a sin that I hoped I would not succumb to again - but I did.  However, I have some great posts in the works and I will be rolling them out over the next couple of weeks and months.  Here is a sneak peak of the new content.

So What is this Going to Cost Me? 
The first question that most people are going to ask when you propose a different way to do things is - How much is it going to cost me?  The common mis-conception is that green techniques are always going to cost more, but is that true?

Going Green by Challenging Standard Zoning Regulations

Many planning and zoning regulations, though important and well meaning, make it difficult to "go green" or implement sustainable site solutions.  Some examples are overzealous parking regulations, wide required street widths, etc.  I'll examine some of these regulations and suggest possible alternative solutions that will meet the intent of the regulation and offer a more sustainable solution.

Personal Experiences with Stormwater Best Management Practices

As a design engineer it's easy to get used to designing best management practices and techniques without ever really getting your hands dirty.  Sometimes there is no better design tool and educational piece than some hands on experience with the techniques that you put on plans and in specs.  I pan to install, implement and monitor the performance of several green or LID best management practices and report them in this blog.

So that's where I'm going with this blog in the coming months.  If there is anything specific that you would like me to address with the above topics or any other please comment and I will do my best to include it.  Thanks for following.

An Idiots Guide to LEED for Civil Engineers

"Crap, this fruitcake architect is trying to make me use these fru fru stormwater techniques so he can have his "green building".  He just doesn't understand that its more complicated than just putting some pervious pavement down and installing one of those raingarden things!" - unknown civil engineer.

Does that sound like a civil engineer that you know?  Or maybe it sounds like you, if you're a civil engineer.  I may be beating this to death, but I hear over and over again from architects that the civil engineer is the hardest one to get on board with green buildings or that they contribute the least among the design team toward a LEED project.  It shouldn't be that way, civil engineers should be an enthusiastic and integrated contributer to the LEED process.

There are several ratings systems under the LEED umbrella now, but for the purpose of this post I am going to use the New Construction and Major Renovations (NC) system.  It's the most used and chances are if you are involved with a project, it will be under that system.  I often hear - "oh, you're the civil engineer, we need you for the stormwater credits (2 pts)."  If that's the civil engineer's only input on a LEED project you're missing a lot of opportunities for true collaboration and integrated design.  Civil engineers have the opportunity to provide input on 46 or more of the 110 possible points.  26 of those points are in the Sustainable Sites category and the rest are spread throughout the remaining categories.  Below is list of the credits that I believe benefit from the civil engineer's input, including a brief description of the practices and value that the civil engineer can provide.

Sustainable Sites

• Prerequisite 1 - Construction Activity Pollution Prevention - This one is pretty obvious, even if the local regulations don't require you to do so, you should always be implementing erosion and sediment control plans in compliance with the construction general permit.
• Credit 1 - Site Selection (1 pt) - Although its often not the case, civil engineers should always be a part of the site selection process.  Even beyond the LEED credits, a civil engineers input can often save money, time and headaches.
• Credit 2 - Development Density and Community Connectivity (5 pts) - Again, this comes down to the civil engineer being a part of the site selection process.
• Credit 3 - Brownfield Redevelopment (1 pt) - Civil engineers can be an integral part of the site rehabilitation process and can help to explain the pros and cons of developing a brownfield site and remove some of the uncertainty and fear in selecting such a site.
• Credit 4.1-4.4 - Alternative Transportation (12 pts) - Transportation is what civil engineers do, so their involvement in this credit should be implied.  By providing for public transportation access in the form of site selection or creating new infrastructure, making traveling by bike more appealing, providing infrastructure and parking for low emitting vehicles and keeping parking lot sizes to their minimums, civil engineers can have a tremendous impact on the environmental footprint of a project.  
• Credit 5.1-5.2 - Site Development (2 pts) - Protecting habitat area and maximizing open spaces can be accomplished with creative and efficient grading plans and site layouts, both of which should be designed by or with input from the civil engineer.  
• Credit 6.1-6.2 - Stormwater Design (2 pts) -  This is the typical, give to the civil engineer credit, so the civil engineer's involvement is usually assumed.  The stormwater controls must address quantity and quality to standards that often exceed local standards.  To meet these requirements, the civil engineer should think out side the box and implement innovative best management practices such as bio-swales, raingardens, etc.
• Credit 7.1-7.2 - Heat Island Effect (2 pts) - Civil engineers can help achieve these points for both roof and non-roof credits by recommending appropriate hardscape materials, providing shade from landscaping (new or existing), or assisting with greenroof specification and design. 
• Credit 8 - Light Pollution Reduction (1 pt) - Although the responsibility for this credit falls primarily on the electrical engineer or lighting designer, civil engineers should participate with site light locations, limits of site areas that require artificial light, etc.

Water Efficiency

• Credit 1 - Water Efficient Landscaping (4 pts) -  Civil engineers can assist with eliminating potable water use for landscaping by recommending and designing rainwater catchment systems, wastewater treatment systems for use in irrigation, and designing stormwater management controls (such as raingardens) that divert stormwater to landscape areas and provide for landscape water needs.
• Credit 2 - Innovative Wastewater Technologies (2 pts) -  Civil engineers can accomplish this credit through option 2 by designing on-site wastewater treatment systems that treat 50% of wastewater to tertiary standards.

Energy and Atmosphere

• Credit 1 - Optimize Energy Performance (7 pts) - There are 19 available points in this category, but civil engineers can help achieve up to 7 or more by participating in the site design process.  Building siting and orientation on the site can achieve 25% or more in energy savings and civil engineers can contribute by assisting architects, landscape architects and other engineers with creative and innovative site layout options.

Materials and Resources

• Credit 2 - Construction Waste Management (1 pt) - If the project is on a redeveloped site or other site with existing pavement and/or concrete, civil engineers can write specifications allowing the reuse of the demolished concrete and asphalt in aggregate base, concrete mixes or asphalt mixes.  Doing this reduces raw material use and reduces the amount of waste that must go to a landfill.
• Credit 4 - Recycled Content (1 pt) -  Civil engineers can contribute to the amount of recycled content used on a project by specifying fly ash replacement in site concrete, recycled asphalt pavement, recycled aggregate base and site appurtenances.
• Credit 5 - Regional Materials (1 pt) - The largest ingredient in both asphalt and concrete is the aggregate, which is almost always meets the regional materials requirements of LEED.  While it is usually a small portion of the cost on a project, it can still contribute to the total nonetheless.  

Innovation in Design

• Credit 1 - Innovation in Design (2 pts) -  Everyone on the design team should be trying to achieve innovation in design credits.  The ID credit was established by the USGBC to reward innovative design  and construction strategies that are not specifically accounted for the in the rating system.  4 points are possible in this credit and civil engineers should be able to provide valuable input on 2 or more of those potential points. 

Regional Priority

• Credit 1 - Regional Priority (2 pts) -   Regional priority credits obviously vary by region, and a total of 4 points are possible.  Civil engineers should be able to provide valuable input on 2 or more of those potential points. 

Obviously, if you're a civil engineer you're probably not an idiot.  But, I think that civil engineers as a whole are missing opportunities to be an integral part of the LEED process, which is not smart.  Whether you are a civil engineer or another team member involved with a LEED project I would encourage you to look at the whole process and not limit yourself to a few credits.  In my opinion one of the most important parts of the LEED or green building process is the integrated design process, which hopefully solicits input from the entire team on all aspects of the project design and construction.

Just Say NO ..... to Detention Ponds

Civil engineers design them, landscape architects loath them, developers wonder why we need them and municipal engineers often require them - I hate them.  Retention and Detention ponds have become the standard for stormwater management on commercial and residential projects throughout most of the US.   They were originally intended for flood control and were later incorporated into water quality requirements as well.  They serve in their capacity to attenuate peak flows from new development reasonably well, but their usefulness stops there.  Here are a few of the reasons that I'm not a fan of detention/retention ponds:

1. They take up valuable land - Detention and retention ponds are typically designed for a storm that has a return interval of 20-100 years, so the volume is rarely, if ever, fully utilized.  As a result you have a gaping hole in the ground that is an eyesore, a potential danger to children and basically useless except for those rare occasions when we receive excessive rainfall.  
2. They don't address quantity - Detention and retention ponds rarely address stormwater quantity.  Typical stormwater regulations address the peak flow rate and water quality, but do not address the actual amount of water that runs off of a site rather than soaking into the ground.  Because of that, even well designed sites with detention ponds significantly reduce ground water recharge, which contributes to drought conditions, increases erosion in stream channels, and limits that amount of water available for plant life.  
3. They offer minimal water quality -  Typical stormwater regulations pertaining to detention ponds address water quality in two ways, retention time and/or water quality units.  Often, regulations allow water quality to be addressed by requiring the "first flush" (usually around 1/2" of rainfall) be detained and released over a period of 24-48 hours.  The idea is that most of the dissolved solids will settle out during this period and the water that is released will be reasonably clean.  However, very fine and highly soluble particles will often not settle out during that period, and oils, grease, metals and other contaminates are not effectively removed either.  Proprietary water quality units often perform better but have to be used in combination with a pond or other methods and are usually expensive and maintenance intensive.  

Don't get me wrong, we are better off with detention ponds than without them, but there are more effective methods for managing stormwater.  As with just about anything, one size does not necessarily fit all, and there are going to be times when detention ponds are the best or only solution.  I have designed quite a few detention  ponds, and I am sure that I will design quite a few more, but I will always look to the following methods first and exhaust those possibilities.

1. Raingardens/Bioretention - Call them what you like, raingardens, bioretention, bio-swales etc. they are all variations on the same basic principal - use landscaping and soil to manage and treat stormwater.  Raingardens are very effective at reducing peak runoff rates, increasing groundwater recharge and improving water quality.  They can also reduce potable water use for irrigation and provide for wildlife habitat.  Landscaped areas are often lost opportunities for raingardens because they are raised planting beds.  By depressing those planting beds the aesthetic appeal of the the landscape can be maintained and they can serve the additional purpose of stormwater management.
2. Pervious pavement - Pervious pavement can come in the form of asphalt, concrete, pavers or plastic grids to protect the soil.  Pervious paving systems reduce peak runoff rates, increase groundwater recharge, improve stormwater quality and reduce the heat island effect.  These systems are versatile and cost competitive, especially in areas where land is expensive or difficult to come by.  
3. Wetlands - Wetlands are nature's way of managing stormwater quantity, quality and flow rate and they are very effective in doing so.  Existing, improved, constructed and modular wetland systems can be used to manage stormwater quantity, rate and quality in addition to providing wildlife habitat.  It makes perfect sense to look to the natural world for design cues and wetlands are a good fit for projects that have the space and the right environmental (soil, water source, etc) conditions.
4. Green-roofs -  Green roofs come in all shapes and sizes, intensive and extensive, modular and built up, sloped and flat, but they all have the same basic benefits.  From a stormwater perspective, green roofs reduce peak and total runoff, improve water quality and provide for evapotranspiration.   Other benefits include extended roof life, reduced cooling and heating loads, a reduction in the urban heat island effect, wildlife habitat and aesthetic appeal.
5. Rainwater capture - A tremendous amount of water falls on the roofs of our structures, which usually results in increased runoff.  By capturing that rainfall and reusing it for landscape irrigation and/or grey-water within the building you can save money, water and energy, increase groundwater recharge and improve water quality.

The above methods are just a few of the many best management practices that can be used to manage stormwater rather than detention/retention ponds.  Used alone or in any combination they can provide better stormwater quality, reduced runoff, increased groundwater recharge, peak rate reductions, less potable water use and a host of other benefits.  Another great thing about these best management practices is that they can often save the owner money both in first cost and long term operations and maintenance costs.  I don't know about you, but to me it sounds like a "no-brainer".  

As with many green methods and technologies the biggest deterrent is often lack of knowledge.  Lack of knowledge by the design engineer, the contractor, the owner and stormwater regulators.  The best way to overcome that lack of knowledge is to educate yourself and others and give these best management practices a try.  The best way to learn about them is to design and use them.  The city of Portland and Seattle Washington have very good, readily available resources as well as Prince Georgia's County Maryland and countless other programs that have begun implementing these systems around the country.

A Civil Engineer's Role in Green Rating Systems

There are a half-dozen or more "green" ratings systems available, each with a different set of guidelines and focus.  The civil engineer plays a role in all of these systems, but the level of involvement and opportunity in each can differ significantly.  Most of the systems focus on green buildings but there is also a system with a focus on sustainable sites and a new green rating system with a focus on roads.  Unfortunately, civil engineers have taken a back seat to architects and other engineers in the green building process and don't contribute as much to the process as they could.  That needs to change.  The future of the market is in sustainable design and a civil engineer's familiarity with and ability to work within these green rating systems is vital to long term success.  The number of rating systems is too long to list and describe in this post but the systems below are some of the more well known and pertinent for the civil engineer profession.

1. LEED - The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System is the most recognized and widespread system for measuring green construction projects. The rating systems have grown to include over six different project types including New Construction (with specialty areas including schools, healthcare and retail), Existing Buildings, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Homes and Neighborhood Development.  All of these systems provide opportunities for the civil engineer to be involved with about 20% of the total available points in each system assigned to the site.  By becoming familiar with the entire rating system, not just the site credits, the civil engineer can  add value by understanding the potential synergies among different point categories and contribute to an integrated design approach.    
2. The Living Building Challenge - The Living Building Challenge was developed by the Cascadia Region Green Building Council.  In the words of the International Living Building Institute the Living Building Challenge "...defines the most advanced measure of sustainability in the built environment possible today and acts to diminish the gap between current limits and ideal solutions."  The Living Building Challenge applies to all project types and sizes and is extremely environmentally rigorous. More than any other system it stresses the synergies between the different disciplines and functions of the built environment and how it interacts with the environment and society.  There are opportunities and requirements for civil engineering involvement within this system, and as with LEED, the ability to create synergies between disciplines and areas is extremely important.  
3. Sustainable Sites Initiative - The Sustainable Sites Initiative (SITES) was developed as an interdisciplinary effort between the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center and the United States Botanical Garden.  SITES was created to promote sustainable land development and management practices and was the first rating system to apply to sites with or without buildings.  The SITES system has five focus areas: hydrology, soils, vegetation, materials and human health and well being.  Civil engineers have a great opportunity with this system to take a lead role along with landscape architects in creating sustainable projects.                                                   
4. Greenroads  - The Greenroads Sustainability Performance Metric is a brand new rating system for roadway design and construction.  The system is a joint effort of The University of Washington and CH2MHILL.  It is applicable to new and reconstructed/rehabilitated roads and awards certification at four levels: certified, silver, gold and evergreen.  Greenroads focuses on creating roadways that have less environmental impact, lower lifecycle costs and more positive societal outcomes.  The rating system is based on sustainable best management practices and choices that are backed by empirical evidence and sound engineering.  Greenroads is the first and only widespread rating system that is based solely on engineering practices.  Possibly even more so than the Sustainable Sites Initiative, Greenroads provides an opportunity for civil engineers to be in the driver's seat in creating more sustainable projects.  

This list is certainly not all of the green rating systems currently available or in development, but it does provide a representative list.  All of the above rating systems provide a strong frame work for projects that are better for the environment, society and long term financial sustainability even if certification is not pursued. Now and in the near future both public and private clients are going to demand sustainable designs for their projects and many are going to ask for certification under one of the green ratings systems.  The sooner that civil engineers become familiar and comfortable with these systems the more prepared they will be when the time comes to contribute to a green project.

Steps Toward a Sustainable Small Business - Part 2 of 2

In part one of "Steps Toward a Sustainable Small Business" I focused on internal and operational steps a small business can take to become more sustainable.  In part two, I focus on steps that a business can take to make their service offerings more sustainable.   These steps are most applicable to the architecture, engineering and construction industry, but they should be easily adaptable to any project based industry.  Rather than offering specific technical tips, such as using rain-gardens or green roofs, the steps in this post are more about the process one goes through during a project's lifecycle.  More specific, civil engineering, related technical tips will be the topic of future posts in this blog.  As an engineer I have been trained to study the technical details and theories of a design but experience has taught me that the process is often as important to the end result as the technical details.  I believe that the following 7 steps foster the concepts of sustainablility in the design of any project.

1. Build a Strong Team - Any good project requires a strong team of engaged professionals and this is especially true with projects designed for sustainability.  All of the project stakeholders need to be on board with the goal of creating a sustainable project.  A project manager or leader (often the architect in the building industry) can certainly shepherd the process but you will never be able to create the synergies between different design disciplines that are necessary for a successful and sustainable process unless ALL of the project team is on the same page.  
2. Bring the Team Together Early - Almost as critical as having a strong team is bringing that team to the table early in the process.  If the entire team is not involved with the project planning and design process from the beginning it is often too late to take advantage of many of the cross discipline synergies that create a successful design.  Too often one team member walks the project through the initial phases before seeking input from the rest of the team, and as a result by the time the rest of the team is able to give valuable input much of the design is already complete.  It is critical that the entire team is involved and engaged at the beginning of the project in order to successfully create a sustainable design. 
3. Determine What is Important to the Client - A project is only sustainable if it meets the requirements and goals of the client or end user.  Being green is certainly a noble cause but it isn't sustainable if it blows the client's budget and/or doesn't address the core needs and desires of the client/owner/end user.  Before moving forward with design determine what's important to the client's business or personal ideals and use that as a focus point; for Coke it was water use reduction, for Interface it started with waste reduction.  By focusing on what is important to the client you can create a project that is sustainable for their business and the environment.  
4. Plan for Sustainability - The most successful projects integrate sustainability into the project plan.  While it's possible to implement sustainable design strategies late in the design or construction process it's often difficult and expensive.  As you work through the project objectives and goals create a plan that integrates those goals and objectives into a project that is sustainable by virtue of its design rather than making it an add-on at the end of the project.
5. Look for Synergies - The beauty of good sustainable design is the synergies that can result from looking at a project from an integrated and holistic point of view.  If team members design their part of the project in a vacuum and don't consider the effects on all the other members they miss those synergies. If your project is a building for instance, the civil engineer, architect and mechanical engineer should work together to orient the building in such a way that minimizes site disturbance, and energy use and maximizes daylighting and aesthetic appeal.  Team members must learn to look beyond the traditional responsibilities of their own discipline and search for opportunities to create synergies among the entire design team.
6. Consider Life-cycle Costs - The number one perceived impediment to sustainable or green design is first cost.  Whether sustainable design does cost more upfront and if so how much is matter of debate, but even if it does to stop the discussion there is short sighted.  We need to get past the idea of simple first cost and look at the life-cycle cost of our projects.    In the case of buildings, the operations, maintenance and people cost of a building over its lifetime dwarf the first cost of construction so it's foolish to ignore those numbers.  It's critical to research and discuss how a sustainable design can save money and make money for the client/owner over the life of the project in order to see the true impact of project design.  
7. Sustainable Design is Good Design - Remember that sustainability isn't just about being green, its about solutions that are economically, socially and environmentally sustainable.  Consider the triple bottom line - "People, Planet and Profit."  Most companies are in business to make money, and most of the time that hinges on the people that work in the company so if profit and people are ignored in the name of the environment then the project will ultimately fail.  By focusing on a long term, sustainable solutions we can create projects that are successful economically, socially and environmentally.

A strong team with a plan can create sustainable solutions for any project within any budget as long as the proper steps are taken in the process.  If you are looking for ways to make your projects more sustainable, look first to your project plans and processes before moving on to the technical details of the design.