On one unspecified day in February, the 200,000th electric car was sold in the state of California, which is home to about half of all electric cars in the United States. Governor Jerry Brown signed an executive order in March, 2012 establishing a path to 1.5 million zero emissions vehicles (ZEV) in California by the year 2020, and with new and improved electric cars available for purchase and ZEV-friendly codes and legislation, California is getting closer to it’s goal. Forecasts for EV growth vary significantly, from 5% of new car sales in 2020 according to the Ready, Set, Charge initiative and 15% of new car sales in the same period by the California Air Resources Board.

The California Building Code mandates new commercial buildings with parking lots must supply electric vehicle charging spots for all parking lots with more than ten spaces. All new residential construction must also be EV-ready. One- and two-family dwellings are required to have a service panel with the capacity for a 40-amp circuit (sufficient for a 32-amp charging station), and conduit that can support wiring for an 80-amp circuit. Residential developments with seventeen or more units must provide charging for three percent of all parking spaces. The upfront cost of compliance is estimated to be as low as $50.

There is currently one public charger for every ten electric vehicles, and while CalGreen’s updated building code addresses the need for EV-ready infrastructure in new construction, public charging stations are thin on the ground, and where they can be found, wildly inconsistent. The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) banned California’s electric utilities from owning and operating EV charging equipment, partly in the hopes that the private sector would produce more innovation. Another black cloud hanging over public charging stations for ZEV’s in California is that the PUC let NRG, an energy company sued by the state for misconduct, spend $100 million dollars on public charging for electric vehicles, essentially sticking a big chunk of public electric vehicle infrastructure in the middle of a lawsuit.

While policies favorable to ZEV’s are somewhat responsible for helping drive the growing number of electric vehicles on the road, the dropping price of electric car batteries is arguably the major driver of growth. The cost of Li-on battery packs fell an estimated $1000 per kilowatt hour between 2007 and 2014, and the cost currently hovers at a little less than $300 per kilowatt hour. Researchers generally agree that electric car batteries need to be less than $150/kWh to be able to compete with internal combustion vehicles.

Even with an El Nino and the wettest March on record, the prognosis of California’s drought is mixed. In Southern California, El Nino has been a disappointment, but parts of the state have been thoroughly drenched.

The Sierra Nevada snowpack, which provides almost 30% of water used in California, is at about 87% of it’s long-term average. An encouraging sign, but with climate affecting how the snowpack accumulates and melts, the Sierra Nevada snowpack is an unreliable source of water long-term.

Reservoirs in Northern California are filling up, but smaller reservoirs in the southern part of the state remain at low levels. Lake Shasta, the state’s biggest reservoir and a key water supplier for the Central Valley, is just below historical average, and with recent storms, was filling up so fast that the Federal Bureau of Reclamation had to ramp up releases from 5,000 cubic feet per second to 20,000 cubic feet per second, the first time that the bureau has released water into the Sacramento River at such a rate since 2011.

Folsom Lake, another northern California Reservoir, is currently at 115% of it’s average, and as such, the San Juan water district has switched to a 10% voluntary conservation target, abandoning the state’s targets. Other water-rich districts have asked the state to ease conservation demands. This public perception of water abundance, at least in parts of the state, is not entirely accurate, and California’s drought and water usage is a statewide, not regional, issue. The US drought monitor shows much of central and southern California to be in an “exceptional drought.”

In fact, according to most experts, it will take years for California to rebound from this historic drought. The state’s groundwater aquifers have been heavily used during the drought, mostly by farmers drilling wells in the Central Valley. Water tables dropped by 50 feet in some areas, causing the land surface to sink which in turn leads to other problems, such as buckling roads. What’s more, Central Valley farmers pump water out of the ground faster than the aquifers can be replenished even in wet years. Although the state’s reservoirs are, on the whole, rebounding, many are still at levels far below their long-term averages. Moreover, drought is not only a meteorological condition, but is also when demand for water exceeds supply. California uses too much water, and conservation efforts are extremely important for the future, regardless of any El Nino.

San Francisco just became the first major US city to mandate solar panel installation on new construction. Since 2014, California’s Title 24 energy standards have required that fifteen percent of all commercial and residential rooftops in buildings ten floors or fewer be solar ready. While “solar ready” can mean different things, in the context of Title 24, it means that newly constructed buildings need to consider the feasibility of installing solar panels during the design process, and that there must be a sufficiently large unobstructed and unshaded part of the roof where it would be possible to install solar panels.

San Francisco’s Better Roof Ordinance takes Title 24 a step further, requiring that solar panels be installed on the solar ready roof area, effective January 1, 2017. The new ordinance requires electricity generating panels, solar water heating, or a combination of both. Two square feet of living roof, or “green roof”, can serve as a substitute for one square foot of solar.

Roofs are an underutilized potential source of renewable energy, and the legislation itself is explicit in describing San Francisco’s interest in tapping into energy sources that do not contribute to climate change. San Francisco is a coastal city, and as such, it is especially vulnerable to the results of climate-induced rising sea levels. According to the city’s board of supervisors:

“San Francisco is already experiencing the repercussions of excessive CO2 emissions as rising sea levels threaten the City’s shoreline and infrastructure, have caused significant erosion, increased impacts to infrastructure during extreme tides, and have caused the City to expend funds to modify the sewer system.”

The Department of Environment analyzed proposed construction projects in the third quarter of 2014 and found that the required solar panel installation would avoid 26,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year. It would also increase the existing power of the solar electricity systems in place by 7.3 megawatts from 24.8 megawatts. The 7.3 megawatt increase of solar energy can generate enough electricity to power approximately 2,500 homes in San Francisco.

The new ordinance, passed unanimously by the city’s Board of Supervisors, is part of the city’s larger goal of drawing one hundred percent of it’s power from renewable sources by the year 2020. Although San Francisco is the largest US city to require solar panel installation, Sebastopol and Lancaster have mandated solar panels on certain kinds of new construction since 2013.

Concrete is probably not the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of green building materials, but given that concrete is the most common building material in the world, making the concrete manufacturing process greener is extremely important. Manufacturing the portland cement that binds concrete together is a serious CO2 emitter and energy consumption hog, and replacing a portion of portland cement required for concrete mix with fly ash both reduces the environmental impact of concrete and finds use for material that would otherwise end up in a landfill.

The mix that makes up concrete is typically 41% crushed rock, 26% sand, 16% water, 11% portland cement, and 6% entrained air. The portland cement and water form a paste that combines with rock and sand to harden into concrete. Portland cement is not the only type of cement available for making concrete, but it does make up about 95% of the cement market. Portland cement is made from calcium carbonate, silicon, aluminum, and iron, which are mined, crushed, sorted, and then heated to extremely high temperatures in a cement kiln. The heat sources for these cement kilns emit carbon dioxide, but about half of the carbon emissions from manufacturing portland cement come from the chemical reaction that turns limestone into lime (calcination).

In addition to emitting CO2, cement kilns also emit dangerous toxins, including high levels of mercury. Cement kilns have been largely unregulated in the United States, with the Environmental Protection Agency declining to set mercury emission standards for cement kilns until 2008.

There are no commercially viable alternatives to completely replace portland cement, but there are some greener materials that can replace a portion of the portland cement required to make concrete. These materials come from natural sources, such as rice husks, and as byproducts from industrial processes, which keep industrial waste out of landfills but may also introduce other problems into the concrete supply chain.

Fly ash is a by-product of burning coal in a coal-fired power plant, and it is the most widely used portland cement replacement. It can replace up to 40% of portland cement in a standard concrete mix, but can be used to replace up to 70% when used for building larger structures. Like most portland cement substitutes, fly ash improves the performance of concrete by making it less permeable, and it also reduces the amount of water required to make concrete.

Fly ash is, however, far from a perfectly green building material. Fly ash contains trace amounts of heavy metals, such as mercury and arsenic. In 2014, the EPA found that, although concentrations of potentially harmful substances is higher in concrete made with fly ash, these higher levels of heavy metals are below “relevant regulatory and health-based benchmarks.” There is some evidence that suggests that contaminants are less likely to leach out of concrete that is made with fly ash than out of concrete made entirely with portland cement.

LEED has recently introduced a pilot credit to that aims to help eliminate illegally sourced wood from the supply chain. LEED has always rewarded leadership in sourcing materials and this new pilot credit does not replace LEED’s existing certified wood credit. The vast majority of new LEED buildings have not pursued this credit, however. This new pilot credit offers an alternate path to compliance (ACP) that is applicable to both LEED 2009 and LEE v4 systems, that offers a tiered approach to sourcing legal wood and expands the definition of what can be considered legally sourced wood.

Before the approval of this new ACP, the only form of the certification that LEED accepted for wood was Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), but the language in the new pilot credit requires the use of wood from “legal (non-controversial) zources as defined by ASTM D7612-10.”The ASTM designation of “certified wood”includes the American Tree Farm System (ATFS), the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), the Sustainable Forestry Institute (SFI), and the Canadian Standards Association Sustainable Forest Management Standard (CSA) in addition to the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standard.

Although wood may not be the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of illegally trafficked goods, many new buildings, most likely including LEED certified buildings, contain illegally harvested wood. LEED does not currently require that builders vet non-certified wood sources. According to Interpol, illegal logging accounts for an estimated 50% – 90% of all forestry activities in tropical forests, such as the Amazon basin, and accounts for up to 30% of all wood traded globally. Illegal logging also continues to be a problem in protected forests, including those in the United States. Healthy forests absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and deforestation accounts for more carbon emissions than all the shipping, air, rail, and road traffic combined.

The global supply chain for timber is very complex, and it is often extremely difficult to guarantee that wood has been legally sourced. Laws in the US, Europe, and Australia do require, however, that companies must practice due diligence when purchasing wood in order to reduce the risk of buying black market wood.

Summer of 2016 is a big deal here at Integrated Design 360 — it’s our five-year anniversary! The green building industry has, as a whole, grown tremendously over the past five years, and so have we.

Looking back at the past five years in the green building industry, technology has advanced in support of green building and energy efficiency. An increased awareness of water usage and a focus on water conservation has been a silver lining of the devastating California drought. Green building rating systems have improved tremendously. The improving economy has allowed the industry to blossom, and studies have shown that green building is becoming an economically wise choice for builders and business owners as opposed to an expensive but morally correct one.

In the past five years, ID 360 has assisted Vantage Data Centers, a wholesale data company, in meeting their green building goals by building three LEED Platinum Data Centers in Northern California, which comprised the largest LEED Platinum data center campus in the United States. We helped Richmond High pursue CHPS (Collaborative for High Performance Schools) verification. We are helping Safeway, Inc. design a LEED Gold store.

Since 2014, ID 360 has worked extensively with the city of Palo Alto to develop their rigorous Green Building Code, Energy Reach Code, and Electric Vehicle Ordinance. ID 360 developed a streamlined process for compliance with the city’s green building codes, along with video-trainings, webinars, and in-person training events to educate homeowners and builders on the compliance requirements.

This is just the highlight reel, of course. Here at ID 360, we’re looking toward the future and looking forward to supporting the green building industry’s goals of zero net energy and zero net water in support of the Paris agreement for a sustainable future.

Most roofs in a city are covered in asphalt or black tar, reflecting heat and adding little to increase the city’s inhabitants’ quality of life. Green roofs, also known as living roofs take all that otherwise underutilized space and turn it into something useful.

A green roof is the roof of a building that is partially or completely covered with vegetation, a growing medium (soil), and a waterproofing membrane. Green roofs can be classified as extensive, semi-intensive, and intensive. Extensive green roofs provide an ecological protection layer, and are not meant to serve as parks or gardens. Extensive green roofs are best suited to structures with lower load bearing capacity, and are the most low-maintenance type of green roof. Intensive green roofs provide some of the ecological benefits, but also acts as gardens which are meant to be enjoyed. Intensive roofs require significantly more upkeep than extensive roofs. A semi-extensive green roof fall between extensive and intensive roofs interns of the requirements for upkeep and intents for use.

Stormwater retention is a major benefit of green roofs. In a typical urban environment, rainwater flows over paved surfaces into the sewer system and out into nearby bodies of water. Stormwater flowing through an urban environment picks up urban pollutants, damaging water quality. Excessive stormwater runoff can also lead to riverbank erosion and flooding. In cities with sewer systems built before 1930, storm drains are typically combined with the sanitary sewers that take wastewater to water treatment plants. During storms, this can lead to combined sewer overflow, during which untreated wastewater gets dumped into rivers and lakes. Green roofs can reduce peak flow of stormwater runoff by 65% and increases the time for water to flow from the roof to a sewer by three hours.

Green roofs are one of a few strategies cities can take to combat heat island effect. The term “heat island” describes a developed, urban area that is hotter than surrounding rural areas. The annual mean temperature of a city with population of a million or more people can be 1.8—5.4°F , (1—3°C) warmer than in surrounding areas. Growing a layer of vegetation on a roof lowers the temperature of the roof’s surface and the surrounding air.

Green roofs also increase the aesthetic value of roofs. An intensive green roof can provide an attractive space for building occupants, as well as a pleasant view for those in nearby buildings. A green roof can also reduce stress and increase worker productivity.

In the United States, LEED reigns supreme when it comes to green building certification, but BREEAM, a twenty-five-year old British certification system, is migrating to the US. The consulting firm BuildingWise is leading the effort to bring BREEAM to the American market.Trainings in the principles of the program began in August. The BLOC, a city-block renovation project in Downtown Los Angeles, should receive it’s certification in October.

BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology) is available in 70 countries, mostly in Europe. LEED, which is available in 160 countries and territories, has a much broader global footprint, and about 15 billion square feet of space has been LEED certified of May 2016.

BREEAM’s in-use building assessment tool is the main focus of the collaboration between BRE and BuildingWise. BREEAM’s In-Use International Technical Standard is an assessment tool which helps the owners of existing commercial buildings improve operational efficiency and sustainability. It costs $1,000 to register for an online self-assessment, and from there, building owners can choose to work with a BREEAM In-Use Assessor or invest in certification.

BREEAM isn’t coming to the US to replace LEED, but will hopefully offer a complimentary certification system. The latest version of LEED is the most ambitious, but also the most strict, and BuildingWise and other US partners hope that BREEAM will allow builders to inch up their commitment to green building before taking the plunge into LEED.

360 Principal Melanie Jacobson will be moderating “The Road to ZNE: City of Palo Alto Case Study” at the Greenbuild International Conference and Expo. This panel discussion will look at the background and implementation of the City of Palo Alto’s Green Building Vision and Net Zero Energy Roadmap. (For more on the Palo Alto’s road to net zero energy and ID 360’s role in the process, check out our previous blog post on the subject).

The panel discussion will focus on the challenges and opportunities in implementing a program such as Palo Alto’s. The presenters will discuss the process of developing a Net Zero Energy plan within a pre-existing climate action plan, the challenges of meeting the cost-effectiveness requirements set by the California Energy Commission, and working with a city-owned utility and Palo Alto’s existing infrastructure. The presenters will also discuss the community engagement and long-term strategic thinking that allowed the city to pursue to its ambitious green building goals.

Greenbuild, the world’s largest green building conference and expo, will run from October 5th through 7th at the Los Angeles Convention Center. “The Road to ZNE: City of Palo Alto Case Study” will take place Wednesday, October 5th from 2:00 to 3:00 PM.

On October 12th, the US Navy and the CA Energy Commission signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) formalizing a partnership that supports Navy and Marine Corps development of alternative energy sources and sustainable energy projects. The MOU ensures “continued collaboration and information sharing” on energy projects, with a focus on renewable energy and alternative energy sources.

Following the MOU signing, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment Dennis V. McGinn announced that the Navy and Marine Corps will lease 205 electric vehicles for use at California installations, the largest fleet of electric vehicles used by a federal agency. The Navy has also signed agreements to develop solar energy and solar energy with battery storage projects at three Naval installations in California.

California is home to more Navy and Marine Corps installations than any other state, and hosts the largest US Navy Installation, NAWS China Lake, as well as Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, the West Coast base of the US Marine Corps.

Even as climate change efforts continually get voted down in Congress, the US Military has quietly been at the forefront of changing how the federal government uses energy. The Department of Defense has set the goal of meeting twenty percent of its energy needs with renewable energy by the year 2020. The US Navy has a more ambitious goal of deriving half of its consumption from renewable sources by 2020.

“Green building” is most often associated with commercial buildings, public buildings, and privately owned homes, but according to a recent study, the American rental market is getting greener. According to a study by RENTCafe and YardiMatrix, the number of LEED-certified apartment units has grown significantly since 2008, with the number of new, LEED apartments rising by an estimated 32% in 2016. Chicago, IL has the most green certified apartments, with 13,800 LEED-certified rental units on the market, while Cambridge, MA has the most green units per person.

Green apartment living does come with a premium cost. Green-certified apartments bring in higher rents than conventionally built apartments, and the cost difference varies by city. The average rent for a green certified apartment is, on average, $560 more per month than a non-green certified apartment.

Renters generally expressed an interest in green-certified apartments, but a majority of those surveyed indicated a willingness to pay only $100 per month in rent for a green apartment. And yet, a 2012 study in San Diego found that green apartments outperform their non-sustainable counterparts not only in rent, but also in vacancy rates.

Beyond the fact that there is a demand for green, sustainable rental units, is there a difference between the rental premium for LEED-certified or otherwise green-certified buildings and sustainable and energy efficient (SEE) buildings that did not pursue third-party certification? A 2015 study found that, while apartment buildings built with SEE principles did fetch higher rents than non-SEE buildings by 4.7%, the rent premium was double for LEED-certified buildings.

Going green is an investment that can save money over time by reducing energy and other operating costs, and for building owners, going through the process of obtaining LEED certification for a multi-family apartment building can bring in higher rents and reduce vacancy rates.