Summary Reader Response Essay - Draft 4

 The article by Calrecycle, ‘Green Building Materials' (2023), briefly introduces the benefits of incorporating green building materials into buildings, the selection criteria, and the procedures that lead to the selection of products. Green buildings have many advantages for the environment. Some of the advantages include using renewable sources which leads to lesser electricity and utility bills. The article also states that, the life cycle cost of the building will be reduced by a tremendous amount. There are also other advantages such as better well-being of occupants and freedom in the design of the building. The selection criteria, according to CalRecycle, are separated into five categories: ‘Resource efficiency, indoor air quality, energy efficiency, water conservation, and affordability ‘(para.7). These factors are what building owners consider before selecting appropriate green building materials for their building. The article also mentions that, building owners use ‘research, evaluation, and selection’ (para.14), to narrow down the products that achieve the environmental goal of the building. To be able to select the most suitable material, various tests must be conducted to collect sufficient data on the efficiency of the product. After this step, the data will be evaluated to further cut down the product options. In reference to the options' evaluation score, the webpage suggests that the product with the ‘highest environmental attributes’ (para. 19) will be chosen.

The building sector is a large consumer of energy in Singapore (Hopee et al., 2017; Jain et al., 2017; Siva et al., 2017). Building structures with green building materials are one way to reduce energy consumption. In my opinion, many developers are still hesitant about green buildings as its initial cost is too high and there is the idea that a green building is merely constructed for aesthetic purposes and does not do the environment any good. Despite the downsides, the advantages of green building (in Singapore?) such as lower building lifecycle costs and the government-aided schemes and laws to ensure that green buildings are built for the correct reasons outweigh the disadvantages.

The initial cost of green building is higher than a non-eco-friendly buildings’ initial cost. “Certified green buildings cost up to 5 percent more than regular buildings” (Au-Yong,2018). The initial cost of green buildings is especially costly due to the extra caution and research that is added to the design of the building. To build a green building, specialized architects are hired to design the building, adding onto the initial cost. The ‘green’ materials are specifically selected to incorporate into the building (Calrecycle, 2023). These factors contribute to an expensive upfront cost. *

However, green buildings achieve significant energy and water savings, which exceeds initial capital costs. These savings are achieved by the LED light fittings and natural ventilation that requires lesser electricity and water is conserved by rainwater harvesting and using water efficient fittings around the building. According to the Building Construction Authority, Green Mark study that was conducted on buildings that have achieved either gold, gold plus or platinum green mark rating, the net present value savings per gross floor area only increases as the Green Mark rating of the building increases (BCA, 2020). Therefore, the building's expensive upfront cost is regained through all the energy savings it achieves throughout its lifecycle.

Another criticism is that green buildings are built just for aesthetics and investment purposes only. Snyder states that with the high demand for green buildings some developers are building them with the wrong intention of keeping up with the trends rather than the environmental benefit of green buildings (Snyder, 2008). Adding on to that, green building has evolved from an environmental effort to an investment as it now has huge demand in the market. “Critics see many issues with sustainable investment, including so-called greenwashing, in which companies present a misleading image of environmental responsibility” (Sisson, 2021). This statement clearly states that critics also disregard green buildings due to greenwashing, which is a way companies use fake sustainable methods to just put up an upfront of being a sustainable company when in reality, these methods are not sustainable or do any good to the environment.

Despite this, the government has placed laws in motion that that green buildings are built to serve their purpose. The Singapore government encourages and has invented schemes and programs such as ‘Super Low Energy (SLE) programme in 2018’ and ‘Green Mark Incentive Schemes’ (BCA, 2021) to guarantee that green buildings are built for the betterment of the environment. This also further ensures that green buildings in Singapore serve their purpose and are not solely used for investments. These laws and schemes also aid companies and organizations with the initial cost as it may be too much for smaller SME companies to bear.

In conclusion, green buildings bring more advantages than disadvantages to the building sector. Even though its initial cost is way more than regular buildings, green buildings have a higher amount of energy savings compared to regular buildings. There are companies that use green buildings for investment or to keep up with the trend. However, the Singapore government is very particular about green building laws which ensure that green buildings are built for the betterment of the environment. Furthermore, the government has many green plans for Singapore. This suggests that green buildings are important for our environment, which is why the government is encouraging them on such a large scale.

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Au-Yong, R. H. (2018, January 10). Parliament: Green buildings cost up to 5 per cent more, but savings 'more than offset' costs. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/parliament-green-buildings-cost-up-to-5-per-cent-more-but-savings-more-than-offset-costs

Building Construction Authority. (2023, January 16). Building a greener future. BuildSG magazine.  https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg-emag/articles/building-a-greener-future

Building Construction Authority. (2020, July 15). Green Mark for independent consultancy study on BCA green Mark schemes.  https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg/sustainability/green-mark-for-independent-consultancy-study-on-bca-green-mark-schemes

CalRecycle. (2023). Green building materials. https://calrecycle.ca.gov/greenbuilding/materials/

Snyder, L. (2008, June 1). Green buildings don’t have to compromise longevity, Maintenence. Facilitiesnet. https://www.facilitiesnet.com/green/article/Green-Buildings-Don8217t-Have-to-Compromise-Longevity-Maintenence--8966

Sisson, P. (2021, October 26). As risks of climate change rise, investors seek greener buildings. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/26/business/climate-change-sustainable-real-estate.html

Hoppe, Jain & Siva (2017, May 31). Green buildings in Singapore; Analyzing a Frontrunner’s sectoral innovation system. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/6/919