Greening Historic Buildings

In April, everything turns green anew. The trees pop, bulbs sprout, and everybody and their brother "goes green." April brings Earth Day, and is often when we see environmental initiatives getting more than their normal share of ink. And, despite (or perhaps because of) sustainability's ever-growing cache, this year is no exception. In the world of preservation, the green-mill is churning out stories, which offer the opportunity to reflect on sustainability and preservation.

Yesterday there was Richard Moe's well-timed, ill-titled Op-Ed in the New York Times yesterday, "This Old Wasteful House." Moe is President of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the Trust's Sustainability Initiatives are to be applauded. They are taking on the serious issues related to climate change and are trying to add meat to the adage "the greenest building is the one that's already built." Moe's Op-Ed focuses on energy-efficiency and embodied energy, and draws attention to the important work ahead for the Trust and the Natural Resources Defense Council. This is but the tip of the iceberg. Still, kudos to the Trust for meaningfully adding to the conversation. Too often "green" is equated consuming something new, building "high-performance" objects and buildings, and steers away from the reduce/reuse/recycle credo.

On that note, yesterday it was announced that the Empire State Building is getting a green facelift to the tune of a LEED Platinum rating largely due to energy-efficiency retrofits. The most significant retrofits are: the overhaul of the cooling plant and the rebuilding of the existing double-paned glass windows to insert a gasseous film between panes resulting in a triple glazing. In her Times article about the retrofit today, Mireya Navarro notes "The largest share of New York City’s greenhouse gas emissions, 78 percent, comes from the city’s buildings, with commercial buildings contributing 25 percent, mostly from the use of electricity and natural gas."

The wasetfulness of New Yorks buildings was basically ignored in Mayor Bloomberg's signature sustainability initiative, PlaNYC, and the problem is therefore left to the private sector. Still, Bloomberg was there to help announce the project as was former President Bill Clinton. In the absence of real targets advanced by the city, incentive programs like LEED serve as green branding for "environmentally responsible" construction. While LEED has its own deficiencies, particularly relating to historic buildings (the subject of another post), the Empires State Building retrofit is an exciting, high-profile, project where it seems that the L in LEED really may mean leadership. By retrofitting this huge building, the Empire State Building will be a powerful example of sustainability initiatives and historic preservation meeting shared goals. Not to mention that Wien & Malkin get to increase the rent.

Some preservationists regard the field's bent toward the cause of sustainability as a distracting diversion, as simply a fad that we will outgrow when it is no longer fashionable. I disagree. I believe it is one way historic preservation can make common cause with other similar movements, such as environmentalism, and make room for more diverse values and priorities
Preservation doesn't have to be/isn't the field of "No." Instead we can say yes to positive, relevant, meaningful changes to existing buildings, which will not only preserve their integrity, but make way for a responsible and attractive future. I'm leery of greenwashing and tend to believe that if we are to take the charge of sustainability seriously, then it must be an implicit factor accounted for in the choices we make, part of our internal calculus. Some day we won't have to make such a big show of how sustainable things are, rather, these concerns will be integrated into our everyday practices. It is a slow train coming, but I'm heartened to see more glimpses of green revealed this April. It seems to get better by the year.