Huston Eubank.

What work do you do?

I’m executive director of the World Green Building Council.

What does your organization do?

The World Green Building Council is a union of green building councils from around the world who are working to encourage development of green-building rating systems and accelerate the transformation of the global property industry toward sustainability. Our current members are GBCs in the U.S., Australia, Canada, India, Japan, Mexico, and Taiwan. We are currently reviewing the United Arab Emirates’ membership application, and expect the United Kingdom, Brazil, and New Zealand to join us in the next few months. We are working with many other countries, notably including China, that want to form their own councils.

Building “green” leaves a lighter footprint on the environment, and will save everyone money and resources in the long run while we work toward achieving true sustainability. It takes care and knowledge to build “green,” and a different way of looking at things, but there are many green architects and engineers and developers and manufacturers around the world who are looking for the opportunity to create sustainable buildings, communities, and cities.

What long and winding road led you to your current position?

It was long and winding indeed. After about 20 years of practicing architecture mixed with other things, I took a job with Gensler in Los Angeles in 1991. There I worked on the Sony Pictures (formerly MGM) lot with environmental consultant John Picard; that was pretty much my catharsis. In 1996, I took a job in Portland, Ore., running a pretty comprehensive commercial green-building program for Portland General Electric. Unfortunately, Enron bought PGE (yes, I have an Enron business card), and that was the end of my program. After a fabulous year working in San Francisco with David Gottfried, founder of both the U.S. and World GBCs, at the start of 1999 I joined Bill Browning and Amory Lovins at the Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colo. For the first time in my life, I finally felt like a round peg in a round hole. But 18 months ago, I decided that the opportunity to focus on developing the WGBC was more important. Unfortunately, I couldn’t do it full-time at RMI, so I quit to devote myself to this effort. I think I made a good decision.

Where were you born? Where do you live now?

I’m a gypsy. I was born in South Carolina for some strange reason, but moved to California three weeks later. And I haven’t stopped moving since. Currently, I’m officially living in New Hampshire and “visiting” my new wife in Montreal for extended periods, while going through the Canadian immigration process. Fortunately, my job is completely virtual, so I can go anywhere.

What’s your environmental vice?

I eat meat, and I love to travel.

How do you spend your free time (if you have any)?

I love offshore sailing but have never done enough of it. I would love to sail around the world some day. Meanwhile, I take long walks in the woods and travel to beautiful places that fill me with wonder. I’m also a lap swimmer, and I like to take in foreign films.

Read any good books lately?

Seems like hundreds: in the past year, I’ve read (and recommend) A Short History Of Progress, Collapse, Field Notes from a Catastrophe, 1421, The Tipping Point, The Story of B, Sailing Alone Around the World, Massive Change, Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Theory of Networks, and The Art of the Start, and I’m re-reading Spaceship Earth.

Which stereotype about environmentalists most fits you?

I’m a Pollyanna, which I think is probably the opposite of an environmental stereotype.

If you could institute by fiat one environmental reform, what would it be?

The most realistic would be a very stiff carbon tax, based on the true environmental costs of our carbon blowout party.

Who are your favorite musical artists?

Mississippi John Hurt and Johann Sebastian Bach.

What’s your favorite movie?

A few recent favorites include Where the Green Ants Dream, Microcosmos (an interesting perspective), Travelers and Magicians (a film from Bhutan about serendipity and life), and Genghis Blues. There are so many good films, and, unfortunately, they seldom come from Hollywood. Of course, An Inconvenient Truth is a brilliant exception.

What’s the most amazing thing you’ve seen lately?

The image of Earth taken by the Cassini space probe outbound to Jupiter, from many million miles from Earth. I came across it several months ago on a NASA website, and then saw it again in Al Gore’s movie. When you see Earth from that perspective — just a microscopic blue dot in the void — it makes all our political and military and religious issues here on the surface of the planet seem highly irrelevant!

If you could have every InterActivist reader do one thing, what would it be?

I’m currently reading Thomas Berry’s The Great Work, so I think we all need to get back in touch with nature somehow — deeply. Like go sit in a meadow and contemplate it for a month. But then, I’m speaking to the choir, aren’t I? How about just go enjoy the sunset, and think very hard about our (relatively) unique position in space. And then talk to everybody about it.

Huston Eubank, World Green Building Council.

Eubank on It

What is the No. 1 recommendation you would give to somebody building new construction to make the biggest “green” impact on the environment? Also, what can current homeowners do to help?    — Alicia Bequette, Nashville, Tenn.

There are many very important issues like transportation requirements, water, toxins, and preservation of biodiversity. But if I have to pick one, I’d say pay close attention to the sun, and use every technique you can to harvest its energy and other benefits. Simply orienting typical subdivision homes to address the sun properly can reduce their energy consumption by 30 percent. Using the sun to fullest advantage allows the creation of homes in which a comfortable interior climate can be maintained without active heating (even in very cold climates) and cooling systems (except in very hot, humid climates). This technology is already well demonstrated and being commercialized in other countries. Taking this concept a step further, there are even pilot projects for houses that produce more energy than they consume over a year. For an excellent list of simple things owners of both new and existing homes can do, see the Rocky Mountain Institute’s Home Energy Briefs (and many other resources [PDF]).

What is the relationship between the World Green Building Council and the U.S. Green Building Council? Is the WorldGBC just a tool for the USGBC to push the adoption of LEED internationally?    — Name not provided

The USGBC is a founding member of the WorldGBC and is currently our most important supporter financially. But we operate independently of it, and are proud that the USGBC supports this position. We do coordinate our efforts pretty closely with the USGBC and respond to every international inquiry they share with us. At our founding meeting, we unanimously adopted the position that we would encourage our members to create green-building rating systems that were appropriate to differing cultural, climate, and economic situations in their countries. We believe there is a lot to be learned in that process, and that local consensus development fosters ownership, buy-in, and voluntary participation. Currently, our seven members use four different rating systems. At the same time, however, there is rapidly growing demand for a unified global system, and we have begun to take some steps in that direction, while still respecting our members’ individual needs and priorities.

What sort of government regulations, incentives, and policies work best to promote green building among industrial and residential developers?    — Lynn Phillips, Hancock, N.Y.

There are lots of good, inventive ways that federal, state, and local governments can encourage green building. The USGBC’s LEED website has a list of many ways these jurisdictions are using the LEED system. But as Amory Lovins at the Rocky Mountain Institute likes to say, “Government should steer, not row.” The best incentives for green building are market incentives — the real ones that come from projects being more profitable for the builders, better investments for their owners, and better environments for their occupants. This works for industrial and residential developments as well as it does for commercial office buildings.

What is the most effective way to have old, unacceptable regulations catch up to what the new “green” developers are trying their darnedest to accomplish? Can your organization address this issue and help regulators green up their act?    — Carol Newcomb-Jones, Fort Myers, Fla.

My answer to a lot of these questions is, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” The green building movement is making more and more excellent precedents available, all of which can be cited — by designers, by the public, and by regulators — as examples of good reasons for doing things differently. I think of green building as a new kind of quality control! The way to get the message to your local regulatory people is by involving them in the design process in a new way. Include them in an integrated design charrette for the project and let them become part of the solution — even let them think the cool ideas are their own! These are all things that WorldGBC members advocate. At the end of the day, the project team has to be willing to spend the time to appeal antiquated rules. But if the regulators have been involved in the process all along, the task is much less painful.

I am an environmental engineer who sometimes works with a sustainably influenced architect. We discussed becoming certified to advise people on green building, but there were several certifications out there. Which green-building certification provides a good, balanced approach, taking into account such practical matters as local materials and cost versus benefit? I see builders getting “Energy Star” certifications on buildings that could be improved in so many ways.    — Mary Alford, Gainesville, Fla.

Yes, there are lots of certifications, and that’s why I’m partial to a national program such as the USGBC’s LEED Accredited Professionals (and, hopefully, a related global program some day). Unfortunately, that program does not certify that a person knows a lot about green design, but it does indicate a serious level of interest and commitment that I think is very important. Energy Star is an important program that is making a big difference in building performance. But, on average, LEED is driving a higher level of performance in buildings, and it is much more holistic.

What single change in practice — in terms of resource management or construction specifications — might be the easiest to sell to the mainstream North American populace and the most effective in reversing current energy-usage patterns?    — Donald Eubank, Tokyo, Japan

I see this question comes from a ringer, but it’s a tough question and I really like it, so I’ll tackle it. Both easy to sell to the mainstream and effective? Well, my son, information is a very powerful thing. I’m extremely fond of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive program that the E.U. has recently put into action. It’s an elegant program that simply requires an energy-performance report card be created for all buildings, and energy-performance certificates be made available when buildings are constructed, sold, or rented out. Simply having to make this information available, and having the info available when making decisions about what to buy or lease, is already having a profound impact on individuals’ behavior. The program has been ramping up for several years and just went into full effect this past January. Annual energy cost savings from the program are expected to be about $8.9 billion annually. That ought to get people’s attention.

My son is currently an architecture student, and, looking through his proposed classes for the next several years, I am wondering why there aren’t specific courses on working green. How can the industry practice what they aren’t being taught?    — Lynn Stephenson, Rockford, Ill.

Frustrating, isn’t it? Some schools really “get it” and are into sustainability in very big and exciting ways. And some architecture schools are still teaching theory and aesthetics over everything else, like there’s no tomorrow. Maybe there won’t be if they don’t wake up soon. (One big reason I left hands-on architectural practice was because I hated working on projects where aesthetics were king, functionality and efficiency be damned. I love exciting architecture, but if it doesn’t work, and work well, it can’t really be beautiful.) Seems to me your son has two choices. One is to move to a school that gets it. The other is to grab the reins and force some changes. Often the initiative for schools to change comes from the students themselves; I like to say, “If the people lead, the leaders will follow.” Fortunately, the generation upon whom we are bestowing the mess we (and previous generations) have created does seem to be forcing change.

I am just embarking on a master’s program in landscape architecture and feel there is great potential within the profession to push the envelope on designing ecologically regenerative as well as culturally appropriate and uplifting landscapes, yet there seems to be a surprisingly great disconnect between the disciplines of architecture and landscape architecture. This rift appears to be hindering both disciplines from reaching their optimal potential for sustainable/regenerative design. It also seems that, more often than not, the architects are the ones who are first called upon to make sense of a new development and decide what will be built where, while the landscape architects, who have greater training in environmental considerations, are asked to come in at the end and make the plan work. What do you think it will take to resolve this?    — Lee Krusa, Pomona, Calif.

Integrated design. That’s what it’s called, and that’s what it takes. It’s a central pillar of green design, and hopefully the green building movement is convincing the design professions to make integrated design standard practice. The process starts with all members of the design team — plus the whole community of “stakeholders” in the project — working in a charrette to get their best ideas into an integrated design. The design effort then proceeds in a carefully integrated process, as opposed to the traditional process in which every consultant makes his or her contribution at the “appropriate” time, in a linear fashion. The charrette process can take several weeks, but it also can significantly reduce the overall time required for design. The Rocky Mountain Institute defines charrettes as “intensive workshops that enable design teams to use whole-systems thinking to explore the interconnections among such elements as restorative site development, innovative energy-saving design and engineering, creative functional design concepts, worker productivity enhancements, and strategies to improve environmental sensitivity in design and construction.” I understand the Japanese say design is 80 percent planning and 20 percent doing; that seems about right to me.

I am a student at a small university, and we have made plans for campus growth in the next five or 10 years. How would you suggest I go about researching a green architect who can manage a project that must combine the interests of young students, engaging faculty, and money-managing administration?    — Julia Alexander, Cincinnati, Ohio

This can be a great opportunity. The first thing you have to do is educate yourselves about what you want. Read David Orr’s excellent book The Nature of Design, and then give it to your campus planners and talk to them about doing an integrated plan (ideally in a charrette) that spells out your school’s environmental and other goals (i.e., the goals of the entire school community) for the new construction. Those goals define what you want and can be used to inform the selection of the design team. Green building is not about high-tech solutions; often, the best answers are the most simple. It’s important that you look at the green credentials of the entire design team — not only the architect. Green design needs to be an integral part of their design ethic and process, not some add-on option. And the team needs to be talking about integrated design and showing solid examples of how they do it. Look for real experience building high-performance green buildings, not simply LEED-certified professionals. In part, this can be indicated by LEED-certified buildings in their portfolio, but look closely at the buildings they show you to see how they really work.

I’m starting a course in civil engineering next year and was wondering what advice you would have about getting involved in green construction.    — Russell Jackson, Perth, Australia

G’day way out there in Perth! Get involved in the Green Building Council of Australia. I don’t know if they have a group in Perth yet; maybe you could start one. You will meet cool people and learn valuable stuff — and maybe even find great mentors and your future employment.

How can the WorldGBC help to create green building councils in other countries around the world, and how does the WorldGBC get its funding to help in setting up these councils? Is there government or corporate sponsorship, and, if so, how does this work?    — Name not provided

As you can imagine, starting a new council is an enormous task that requires some very special and dedicated people. The first request we receive from them is for stories about how other councils “did it,” and for copies of all the documents required to “do it.” We are creating a tool kit to meet this need. Before we can go much further, we have an obligation to perform due diligence. Once we’re confident that we’re backing a winner (or, hopefully, a group of winners), we want to help them in every possible way we can to leapfrog over the usual hurdles and reach operational status as quickly as possible. One of the most effective ways to help is to provide seed funding for their startup. The other way is by making experienced people available to help at appropriate times. That’s where things get really tricky, because we are still primarily a volunteer organization. However, we offer some pretty attractive opportunities to companies looking for a global profile, and we are beginning to get their backing for our efforts, along with backing from individuals who believe strongly in our approach. In addition to funding, we are seeking creative ways to partner with leading global organizations.

Have you had any chance to follow the “green” progress of Gensler? I work here now, in the accounting department, and am part of our Green the Office committee. I just wondered how the current state of the architecture world, and its effect on building, grabs you.    — Amy Brzeczek-Ramirez, Tujunga, Calif.

When I left Gensler (in 1996), the attitude about green building was, “We’ll do it when the client asks for it.” I understand the attitude today is, “Every building we do is green.” That may be a bit of a stretch, but I highly commend the attitude — it’s a very important step.

In my humble opinion, green is a very exciting development in architectural design, and some of the most exciting architectural projects today are green buildings. For me it’s like the modern-day equivalent of the gothic rationale for design — buildings that express and celebrate the things that make them work, and derive exciting forms from them. Check out the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco by Renzo Piano and Arup. Or the green high-rise office buildings by Ken Yeang in Asia (see Reinventing the Skyscraper: A Vertical Theory of Urban Design). There have been major exhibits on green architecture, such as Ten Shades of Green and Big and Green, to name two U.S. examples.