Green paybacks aren’t limited to the big boys
May 20, 2009 by Tom GuayPosted in: Cost Cutting, Green Office, Special Report
Despite vocal complaints from global warming skeptics, the debate is over for many companies. They assume greenhouse gas (GHG) regulation is a done deal, and they’re looking for ways to capitalize in a world where fossil fuels are liabilities.
One strategy emerging is to adopt green building technologies that will reduce GHG emissions related to lighting, heating and cooling.
Cost cutters in green buildings include more efficient plumbing fixtures that reduce water use by more than a third. Other innovations help “green” a building by reducing use of ozone-depleting air conditioning refrigerants and buying renewable energy from wind and solar providers.
But green building techniques also help reduce employee absenteeism.
Those are all part of the reason why the insurance and risk management service provider, DNV built a 90,000 sq. ft. headquarters for its North American operations that meets the U.S. Building Council’s Gold Level, LEED certification, inside and out.
The new DNV headquarters is just outside Houston, and is home to 275 employees who consult on energy, healthcare, climate change, food safety, maritime and transportation issues.
DNV made the green building investments that will save money and have bonafide short-term returns on investment by installing:
- more efficient lighting systems
- timers and motion detectors to turn lights off in empty rooms
- Energy Star rated appliances, and
- special coatings on windows that allow light in but reduce the heat transfer that comes with all that sunlight.
But the company also justifies these energy-saving upgrades by citing harder to quantify benefits, including making office life more pleasant for the employees. DNV’s convinced green building innovations help boost employee satisfaction and productivity, which in turn reduces absenteeism by:
- letting in more natural light
- using more attractive lighting fixtures, which has prompted positive responses from employees who say the new lights are “invigorating,” and
- reducing the new building smell by buying “green” versions of floor coverings made with reduced levels of volatile organic compounds.
DNV’s case study highlights are here.
Tags: GHG emissions, green building, Green Office, renewable energy
GreenandMore.com
Loading ...
May 26th, 2009 at 8:45 am
It hasn’t helped moral here. Our light bulb costs have doubled to account for the motion sensors we installed to save energy (every time you energize a fluorescent bulb it burns off a portion of the cathode). Our pipes are clogging up with uric salts from the waterless urinals that are incapable of flushing them away (enzymes have not worked sufficiently so we now must use acid and high pressure water to remove the deposits). The restrooms with waterless fixtures smell nasty within an hour of when they are cleaned, which has increased our cleaning frequency of the facility using more chemicals. On top of that our recycling program that started off with paybacks of 350-400 dollars a ton is now reduced down to 1-5 dollars a ton which does not even cover the labor costs to collect the materials. Yeah I don’t see how any of this has had much of a positive effect on any of our five hundred employees except our environmental manager and the CEO.
August 21st, 2009 at 3:21 pm
The BIGGEST problem is that lots of people are running down the wrong corridor. EVERYONE knows that NOx (+ sunlight + gas and solvent fumes) = SMOG, so cutting NOx releases definitely helps everyone breath easier. Cuttung overall energy use, and especially electricity- one of the biggest producers of greenhouse gas (CO2, et al) and NOx, is often fairly easy with relatively little cash and usually with a quick payback. Timers on lights rather than occupancy sensors- timed flushing with deodorant inserts rather than special urinals- local on-use water heaters- etc. THINK- DON’T REACT.