texas green schools …

Texas Green Schools …More than just a passing trend

C. Denise Shaw, AIA LEED APPfluger Associates Architects, Inc.

[email protected]

CEFPI Central Texas ConferenceFriday, November 12, 2010

What are the benefits of a green school?• Improved student attendance

– In a study of Green Schools in Washington State, a 15% reduction in absenteeism was noted in the 2005 Washington High Performance School Buildings: Report to Legislature

• Improved student test scores– A 5% increase in student test scores was noted in the same report

• Lower incident of childhood asthma– In a study by Carnegie Mellon Center for Building Performance and

Diagnostics found a 38% average asthma reduction in buildings with improved air-quality

• Reduced teacher sick days• Lower Maintenance & Operations costs

– In a 2005 analysis of 30 high performing schools, Green schools use an average of 33% less energy and 32% less water than traditionally designed schools

(cited from Greening America’s Schools COSTS AND BENEFITS, by Gregory Kats)

Greater Benefits for Students, Teachers, and the Community

According to a survey completed by Turner Construction, a large percentage of executives and organizations involved with Green K-12 facilities rated them more highly than traditional facilities on a range of benefits:

– Community Image (87%)– Ability to attract and retain teachers

(74%)– Reduced student absenteeism (72%)– Student performance (71%)(cited from Turner Market Barometer, 2005 Survey of Green Building PLUS Green

Building in K-12 and Higher Education - http://www.turnerconstruction.com/greensurvey05.pdf)

Notice what is NOT on this list …

Long-Term Cost Savings

• The total costs to maintain Green Education Facilities over 20 years were considered to be lower by 73%

• The average age of an educational institution since their last major renovation was 42 years

(cited from Turner Market Barometer, 2005 Survey of Green Building PLUS Green Building in K-12 and Higher Education - http://www.turnerconstruction.com/greensurvey05.pdf)

Long-Term Cost Savings

• However, most institutions either don’t consider total long-term costs (“lifecycle costs”) or else give them little emphasis in their planning

– Only half the executives involved with K-12 facilities (both Green and traditional) said the school districts typically considered the total lifecycle costs of a project over time. Even among these executives, only 7% said that total lifecycle costs were given more emphasis in planning than initial project costs.

– The report states that the executives often didn’t have much latitude to significantly increase construction costs to install higher efficiency systems. While long-term cost savings is certainly appreciated, the executives primary focus was to maintain the projects’ construction budget and timeline.


Perception vs. Reality for Higher Construction Costs

• When executives were asked about their PERCEPTION of construction costs for Green buildings, executives at organizations involved with Green buildings estimated Green construction costs to be 13% higher than for traditional buildings. Those at organizations not involved with Green buildings put the cost premium at 18%.

• Yet, the ACTUAL average construction cost premium for Green building was only 0.8% for a basic certification under the LEED Green Building Rating System and 3.5% for a LEED Silver certification, based on four separate studies performed on the subject.


How can that be??• The Turner Market Barometer found that projects can incorporate

important Green features with little or no additional cost.

• Select an appropriate site (sites within an urban setting with neighborhood connectivity and public transportation fulfill more credits than a suburban/rural site).

• Properly site the building, to maximize daylighting and exterior views, while considering solar exposure and prevailing winds.

• Be careful and thoughtful in the selection of materials, based on their recycled content and location of the material’s extraction and manufacturing.

• Choose materials with low/no VOC’s wherever possible. The legislation adopted in CA to reduce VOC’s is increasing the availability for these products, and helping to drive down the cost premiums and improve the quality of these materials.

Greening America’s Schools COSTS AND BENEFITS, by Gregory Kats

• After taking a look at 30 high performance schools, Greg Kats found a 1.65% construction cost premium on these schools.

• These same schools averaged a 33.4% decrease in energy consumption and 32.1% decrease in water consumption.

Cited from Greening America’s Schools COSTS and BENEFITS, by Gregory Kats. A Capital E Report.

http://www.chartwell.org/UserFiles/File/Greening_America_s_Schools.pdf

http://www.chartwell.org/UserFiles/File/

Rating Systems in Texas• U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

(LEED) for Schools. – Initially released in December of 2006. LEED for Schools 2009 is the current rating program.– Prior to the release of LEED for Schools, LEED for New Construction was used to certify school

buildings.

• Texas Collaborative for High Performance Schools (TX CHPS)– Founded in 1999 for improving California schools. – Released in early 2009, TX CHPS was developed to meet the needs of Texas schools.– Projects can seek certification as either TX CHPS Verified or TX CHPS Designed– State specific rating programs have been released in Texas, Virginia, California, Massachusetts,

New York, Colorado, Washington, and Northeast US (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Rhode Island), .

• Austin Energy Green Building Program– The nation’s first green building program, started in 1990. – Pickle Elementary School achieved a 3-Star rating in 1999, using the Program’s Commercial

Rating System.

• Green Building Initiative’s Green Globes program– Released in the U.S. in 2005, this rating system has not yet been applied to a Texas School

Certified Green Schools in Texas (1999 – present)14 LEED, 18 AEGBP = 32 total

Current Green Schools (certified and pending) in Texas 73 LEED, 33 AEGBP, 19 TX CHPS Designed, 10 TX CHPS Verified= 135 total

LEED Certified Schools in Texas: 14 schools

LEED Registered Schools in Texas: 59 schools

TX CHPS Designed Schools in Texas: 19 Schools

TX CHPS Verified Schools in Texas: 10 schools

Austin – by the numbers

•0 LEED Certified projects•5 LEED Registered projects•2 TX CHPS Designed projects •0 TX CHPS Verified projects•18 AEGBP Rated projects•15 AEGBP Registered projects

Dallas/Fort Worth – by the numbers

•8 LEED Certified projects•7 LEED Registered projects•8 TX CHPS Designed projects •5 TX CHPS Verified projects

Greater Houston Area – by the numbers


San Antonio – by the numbers


Mandates for Green Schoolsin Texas

• Examples of School Districts requiring compliance with a Rating Program:– Houston ISD– Round Rock ISD– Austin ISD– Spring ISD– Northeast ISD– Humble ISD– Dallas ISD– Fort Worth ISD

• State Legislation – State Bill 300 passed in the 2009 Legislative Session. Requires

a 5% reduction of Districts’ annual electric consumption each fiscal year for six years, beginning September 1, 2007.

– House Bill 2337 filed in 2009 Legislative Session to promote construction of energy efficient, environmentally-friendly schools. Did NOT pass in 2009, but will likely be re-drafted to be submitted in the 2011 Legislative Session

Green School Tools Currently Under Development

• USGBC LEED Existing Buildings for Schools– Reduction of energy consumption, water

consumption, and solid-waste disposal in more EXISTING school campuses

– Improved Indoor Environmental Quality

• CHPS Criteria for Relocatable Classrooms– Criteria released in 2009, provides tools and

resources for manufacturers, school districts, and design teams to specify, build, and acquire high performance relocatable classrooms (cited from Collaborative for High Performance Schools website).

texas green schools …

Documents

green construction costs

green buildings

survey of green building

study of green schools

texas green schools

green education facilities

total lifecycle costs

building performance