Perception has held for a long time that "building green" was always more expensive than building in so called "traditional" manners. Of course, we've always argued than almost all extra up-front costs are accounted for before too long, and those that aren't are paid for indirectly via PR, HR or other less easy to quantify benefits.
Well, according to WBSBD those tangible, financial costs may be over-stated by as much as 300%! That should be more than enough to get most construction projects thinking a little harder about engaging in at least some basic green practices.
The whole report is available here. The bottom line suggest that the 17% premium originally suggested for "green" projects is really more like 5%.
| Share |
Green building used to be an obscure luxury, but it's wonderful to see that it's becoming the mainstream these days.
I hope the momentum can carry to other environmental issues and that we can pressure presidential candidates to address our issues.
Meanwhile, I wanted to let you know about a study coming out in early September showing that cleaning up the Great Lakes will have economic benefits that actually outweigh the costs of the whole undertaking.
Look for it online at:
http://www.greatlakes.org/
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.triplepundit.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2038
From Delicious » del.icio.us / wbcsd / green
From Technorati »wbcsd / green /
July 4
July 4
July 3
July 3
July 3
July 3
July 3
July 3
