This story was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.
Five homeschoolers pick fist-size garlic cloves, green jalapeños, strawberries, squash and kale on a breezy Thursday morning in late June. They’re volunteering at a local food garden where bright orange marigolds attract bees from a local keeper’s hive.
The 1-acre garden has yielded about 10,000 pounds of produce for six food pantries since it began harvesting in April 2022. Texan by Nature, which manages the garden and was founded by former First Lady Laura Bush, estimates it has served approximately 2,000 people per month in Limestone, Freestone and Leon counties.
Located in Freestone County about 60 miles east of Waco, NRG Dewey Prairie Garden is a part of a massive effort to restore a 35,000-acre lignite coal mine, which stretches mainly into the town of Jewett and used to fuel NRG’s Limestone Electric Generating Station, a 1,688-megawatt power plant. An NRG spokesperson said the coal plant began running on cleaner-burning coal from Wyoming in 2016.
That’s when the company halted mining locally after more than three decades.
Debbie Glaze, a lead gardener for Texan by Nature, says it’s hard to imagine the garden was once a coal mine. The company has set aside 9 more acres to expand the garden, which was started as a pilot project.
Volunteers prepare fresh vegetables donated by the Dewey Prairie Garden for distribution at the Lord’s Pantry of Leon County in Buffalo.
Joe Timmerman/The Texas Tribune
“You wouldn’t think that this could happen,” Glaze said. “I think it is amazing that the ground is actually growing all these vegetables after all that mine digging.”
The Jewett mine’s manager, Michael Altavilla, said he hopes the garden can show how the industry can work with local communities for everybody’s benefit.
“The mining industry has always been seen like we’re the bad guys, we’re destroying the Earth,” Altavilla said. “We want to take people out and show them this form of reclamation, a second purpose, not only mining the coal for energy, but utilizing the ground afterward.”
Company set aside $112 million to restore mine
Lignite was first mined in Texas during the 1850s and was produced primarily from underground mines, but declined in the early 1950s as the oil and gas industry grew in the state. Around the same time, companies began surface mining — which includes strip mining and open-pit mining — to provide fuel for power plants and the concrete industry.
The new mines harvested lignite coal, a form of soft coal that often lies close to the surface. Lignite mining led to bulldozing forests, burying streams, destroying wildlife habitat and leaving the ground contaminated with arsenic, lead and other toxins considered unsafe for human exposure after the mines closed.
In 1975, the Texas Legislature authorized the Texas Railroad Commission, which oversees Texas’ oil and gas industry, to regulate surface coal mining. In 1977, the federal government created a fund to help pay for cleaning up old mines and required companies to restore the land to its prior condition after closing a mine.
A truck drives on a dirt road that winds through a section of the NRG Jewett Mine that is undergoing environmental reclamation.
Joe Timmerman/The Texas Tribune
As part of the federal law, a new agency, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Division, was given responsibility to enforce all the new regulations. The Railroad Commission began requiring companies mining coal in Texas to get a state permit and post a bond for each mining site they operate in the state to pay for restoration later.
But the agency has been criticized for allowing companies to do the bare minimum in cleaning up contaminated soil and water at mining sites and failing to enforce the law, according to a 2019 investigation by The Texas Tribune and Grist.
NRG has bonds totaling $112 million to restore the Jewett mine, a process that began in 1986, a year after mining began. Companies commonly do reclamation work even as they’re still mining a site. The reclamation process can take eight to 12 years.
So far, the company says it has replanted 3,500 acres with native grasses, is creating 700 acres of wetlands and has fully reclaimed 5,590 acres at the Jewett mine.
Moving dirt and replanting old mine pits
About 8 miles from the garden at another end of the mine site, Joe Harris, a 56-year-old Jewett mine reclamation specialist, wears a reflective vest and a hardhat as he prepares to jump into his pickup truck to snap progress photos of the restoration work.
Harris drives up and down the slopes around mining pits to where the dragline, a massive excavator with a bucket, is working. There’s a clear divide in the ground, from the orange-brown dirt at the surface to the gray deposits down in the pits where coal was extracted. The 300-foot-tall excavator, with a bucket the size of a two-car garage, has the first and most crucial step in returning the land to its original form — refilling those holes.
Mark Payne, who’s been working at the mine for 37 years and operating the dragline for 17 years, wears denim on denim and black sunglasses as he operates the machine from an air-conditioned control room inside the machine’s body. Using levers that look like something from an old arcade game, Payne moves about 150 tons of dirt at a time as country music plays on the radio.
Dragline operator Mark Payne excavates and moves tons of dirt at the mine, where he has worked for 37 years.
Joe Timmerman/The Texas Tribune
“We’ve been in this part of the mine trying to fill the hole in for almost a year. It takes quite a long while,” Payne said.
Once the pit is filled with soil, the company is required to plant grasses and vegetation similar to what’s growing nearby.
“During the springtime, we plant bermuda grass, in the summer millet and in the fall they plant rye grass,” Harris said.
Once the seeding is done, the company enters a five-year monitoring period during which the soil and water is regularly tested to check for toxic materials.
Inspectors from the Railroad Commission’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Division make monthly visits to mine sites to review test results and check that the company is following reclamation regulations.
The area that includes the garden was monitored for years, and the bond money was released back to the company in 2013, close to 10 years before the garden began harvesting produce. Recent soil reports submitted to the state show the soil is fertile with no toxic-forming materials present.
Dewey, the farm cat, cools off in the dirt while volunteer gardeners pick vegetables from the Dewey Prairie Garden in Donie.
Joe Timmerman/The Texas Tribune
At another portion of the mine where seeding has already happened, enormous stretches of grasslands are marked by white PVC pipes that have defining stripes: A green stripe means it is under evaluation, while red stripes mean the site has been fully reclaimed.
Harris said the best part of working at the Jewett mine for the past three decades is seeing the land being restored after being here when it was initially scraped to harvest the coal.
“I’ve seen the mining, the clearing, to everything,” Harris said. “I take a lot of pride in this. We want it to look like it was never mined before so when I bring my grandchildren and great-grandchildren, I can say, ‘Look, there was once a mine here.’”
Garden feeds local families
About 16 miles from the mine, garden volunteers deliver zucchini, kale and other produce to a food pantry in Buffalo, a town of about 1,700 where residents have few grocery store options.
Amy Windham, a 37-year-old pantry client and single mother of three, says she always tries to be the first one here because she wants first dibs on the fresh-picked produce.
Volunteers and employees at the Leon Community Food Pantry and Clothes Closet in Jewett work together to cart food to a client.
Joe Timmerman/The Texas Tribune
“Moving up here from Houston, it was such a culture shock because down [in Houston] there is a grocery store on every corner and here it’s only Brookshire [Brothers],” she said. “So that’s the one thing I appreciate about this pantry. The produce is better, you can tell.”
She grabs a cart, and Richard Dahlgrem, 80, a pantry volunteer, helps her pick out groceries. There’s a limit on how much each customer can take depending on the size of their household, but everything is free.
Dahlgrem said it’s nice to see resources from the old mine being poured back to help the community, especially those who are struggling to feed their families.
“What was brought in today is a good indication of what can come from people purposely doing something to help somebody,” he said.
Disclosure: NRG has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
The rules would require that automakers improve fuel efficiency by 2 percent per year for passenger cars and 4 percent per year for light trucks, beginning in model year 2027 and continuing through model year 2032.
The agency, which is a division of the Department of Transportation, said the requirements could achieve an average fleet fuel economy of 58 miles per gallon by 2032, saving 88 billion gallons of gasoline by 2050. That, in turn, could save drivers $50 billion over the lifetime of the vehicles. Current federal standards require automakers to achieve an average fleet efficiency of 49 mpg by 2026.
Combined, the rules could contribute to a dramatic transformation of the automobile industry and its environmental impact. Transportation accounts for 28 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, the most of any sector. “The reality is that the biggest single step America can take to control global warming pollution is to reduce the emissions coming out of tailpipes,” Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign, told Grist.
While neither rule dictates what types of cars automakers produce, they set overall fleet targets that are challenging to achieve without incorporating a lot more zero-emission vehicles like battery-electric cars and trucks. The EPA predicted that its standards, if finalized, would result in EVs making up as much as 67% of new car sales by 2031. If manufacturers were to fall short of these projections, the DOT standards would at least ensure that they make improvements in the fuel consumption of internal combustion vehicles.
The more aggressive efficiency improvements for light-duty trucks will help tackle what Becker called the “truckification” of the nation’s vehicles, but he said the proposed rules should be even stronger, given the NHTSA’s mandate to set the strictest standards possible. Concerned over the threat of supply disruptions after the Middle East oil embargo of the mid-1970s, Congress authorized NHTSA to set mandatory fuel economy standards, called Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, for vehicle manufacturers at the “maximum feasible” amount.
In a statement, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry trade group, did not comment on the specific efficiency targets, but called for a more streamlined regulatory process, rather than having multiple agencies set rules. “Conflicting and overlapping rules are complex and expensive,” said John Bozzella, group president. “The best policy would be a return to a single national standard to reduce carbon in transportation.”
The NHTSA standards would also impact heavy-duty pickup trucks and work vans, requiring a 10 percent improvement per year for many vehicles beginning in model year 2030 and continuing through 2035. Those efficiency gains would save an additional 22 million tons of CO2 by 2050, according to the agency.
Beyond emissions savings, the NHTSA said the new rules would save consumers money at the gas pump and reduce reliance on foreign governments. “Better vehicle fuel efficiency means more money in Americans’ pockets and stronger energy security for the entire nation,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a statement.
There will be a 60-day public comment period, during which NHTSA said it would engage with “consumers, unions, automakers, states, environmental groups and others.” The standards are expected to be finalized by the end of this year or the beginning of 2024.
As heat waves and wildfires cause chaos in North Africa, Europe and North America, climate scientists from the United Nations (UN) have announced that it is almost certain this July will be the warmest month ever recorded.
At a press conference on climate Thursday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned, “The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived,” a UN press release said.
“Today, the World Meteorological Organization and the European Commission’s Copernicus Climate Change Service are releasing official data that confirms that July 2023 is set to be the hottest month ever recorded in human history,” Guterres said. “The consequences are clear and they are tragic: children swept away by monsoon rains; families running from the flames; workers collapsing in scorching heat.”
Chris Hewitt, the World Meteorological Organization’s director of climate services, said that, based on 173 years of data, the eight warmest years on record occurred from 2015 to 2022, and that substantial warming had been happening since the 1970s, UN News reported.
“Climate change is here… And it is just the beginning,” Guterres said, as reported by UN News.
Hewitt made the point that the El Niño weather pattern replacing the cooling La Niña would mean the “almost certain likelihood that one of the next five years will be the warmest on record,” and that “more likely than not” average temperatures worldwide would temporarily go above the 1.5 degrees Celsius mark above pre-industrial levels for a minimum of one of those years.
Guterres emphasized that global action was needed now on the emissions and climate adaptation and finance fronts.
“No more hesitancy. No more excuses. No more waiting for others to move first,” Guterres said in the press release. “It is still possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius and avoid the very worst of climate change. But only with dramatic, immediate climate action. We have seen some progress. A robust rollout of renewables. Some positive steps from sectors such as shipping. But none of this is going far enough or fast enough. Accelerating temperatures demand accelerated action.”
Guterres said world leaders need to take steps immediately, especially those from the Group of 20 richest industrial nations, which emit 80 percent of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, UN News reported.
“We have several critical opportunities ahead. The Africa Climate Summit. The G20 Summit. The UN Climate Ambition Summit. COP28,” Guterres said in the press release. “We need ambitious new national emissions reduction targets from G20 members… And all actors must come together to accelerate a just and equitable transition from fossil fuels to renewables – as we stop oil and gas expansion, and funding and licensing for new coal, oil and gas… And we must reach net zero electricity by 2035 in developed countries and 2040 elsewhere, as we work to bring affordable electricity to everyone on earth.”
Guterres also called for an end to corporations and financial institutions hiding from their culpability and responsibilities.
“Financial institutions must end their fossil fuel lending, underwriting and investments and shift to renewables instead. And fossil fuel companies must chart their move towards clean energy, with detailed transition plans across the entire value chain: No more greenwashing. No more deception. And no more abusive distortion of anti-trust laws to sabotage net zero alliances,” Guterres said in the press release.
Guterres went on to say that extreme weather was “becoming the new normal,” and that wealthy nations needed to support countries “on the frontlines – who have done the least to cause the crisis and have the least resources to deal with it” from the resulting flooding, droughts, heat and fires.
The UN Secretary-General added that developed countries needed to provide $100 billion each year for climate support in developing countries, make sure the Green Climate Fund is replenished and make the loss and damage fund operational at COP28.
Guterres went on to say that a price needed to be put on carbon and that development banks need to make more private finance available at a reasonable cost for developing countries, as well as augment their funding for adaptation, loss and damage and renewables.
“The evidence is everywhere: humanity has unleashed destruction. This must not inspire despair, but action. We can still stop the worst. But to do so we must turn a year of burning heat into a year of burning ambition. And accelerate climate action – now,” Guterres said.
A challenge to London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), which covers almost all of Greater London, by five local authorities has been dismissed by the city’s high court.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan extended the zone intended to reduce pollution in the city of around nine million people to encompass an additional five million in some of the outer boroughs. The extension is to begin August 29.
“This landmark decision is good news as it means we can proceed with cleaning up the air in outer London,” Khan said in a statement, as Reuters reported.
Those who drive vehicles that are non-compliant with ULEZ standards — usually gas-powered cars made before 2006 and diesel vehicles registered before 2015 — are required to pay a fee of £12.50 ($16.07) per day for driving in the zone.
“The decision to expand the Ulez was very difficult and not something I took lightly, and I continue to do everything possible to address any concerns Londoners may have,” Khan said, as reported by The Guardian. “The coming expansion will see 5 million more Londoners being able to breathe cleaner air.”
Former Mayor Boris Johnson originally instigated the ULEZ.
Khan said the ULEZ was needed to tackle the pollution that is causing an array of health issues for Londoners.
“Nine out of 10 cars seen driving in outer London on an average day are already compliant, so won’t pay a penny – yet will still see the benefits of cleaner air. Air pollution is an urgent public health crisis – our children are growing up with stunted lungs, and it is linked to a host of serious conditions, from heart disease to cancer and dementia,” Khan said, according to The Guardian.
Legal action against the ULEZ was brought in February by the city’s outer boroughs of Bromley, Bexley, Hillingdon and Harrow, as well as the Surrey County Council. Their lawyers said that Khan had overstepped his powers and provided a defective government incentive scrappage program for trading in older polluting vehicles for more environmentally friendly ones.
The local authorities expressed great disappointment with the decision, Reuters reported.
Justice Swift said he was “satisfied” that Khan’s decision “was within his powers,” and the vehicle scrappage program was lawful, though “not in depth,” reported The Guardian.
Khan promised to expand the current vehicle scrappage program to “nearly a million families who receive child benefit and all small businesses with up to 50 employees,” as Business Green reported.
Khan said the current ULEZ had reduced nitrogen dioxide pollution in central London by nearly 50 percent.
Currently, only approximately six percent of vehicles entering the ULEZ pay a fee, according to Transport for London, reported The Guardian.
“Everyone involved in the case said they wanted clean air, and now that the ULEZ has been confirmed as legal it is time for everyone to focus on how we support a successful implementation,” said Green Party London Assembly member Sian Berry, as Business Green reported.
Offshore wind energy is getting a major boost in Maine, which has just approved adding 3,000 megawatts of energy provided by offshore wind turbines by 2040. The 3,000 megawatts would be enough to meet about half of Maine’s electricity demand.
Maine Governor Janet Mills signed the law, LD 1895, on Thursday, noting the legislation would contribute to port development with inclusions to still protect lobster fishing areas.
“Offshore wind, done responsibly, offers Maine the opportunity to secure abundant clean energy, stable energy prices, good-paying jobs, and a healthier environment for future generations,” Mills said in a statement.
In previous discussions to expand offshore wind in the state, the lobster industry raised concerns and protested offshore wind development.
“We don’t know how much the electromagnetic field around the cables going to shore is going to affect things on bottom,” lobster fisher Clayton Philbrook told WABI5, a local news station based in Bangor. “Will lobsters go near it? Will they crawl over them? Will it repel them? All of this is information that, as far as I know, there’s been no research done on it.”
In response, the bill notes protections for Lobster Management Area 1, and the law gives preference to offshore wind energy projects designed for areas outside of these lobstering grounds.
The new legislation allows the Governor’s Energy Office to add up to 3,000 megawatts of electricity from offshore wind turbines by 2040 in order to help the state meet its goal of 100% clean energy by 2050. As of 2021, Maine ranks fifth in the U.S. for the portion of wind-powered electricity generation (23%) compared to total electricity generation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The wind turbines for the Gulf of Maine will need to utilize floating platforms, rather than anchoring the turbines to the ocean floor, as The Associated Press reported, because the waters are too deep.
The Maine Department of Transportation will likely choose its preferred location for an offshore wind energy port by 2024, according to the statement on the governor’s office website.
“To combat climate change and invest in Maine’s energy independence, our state has set ambitious goals for renewable energy. It’s clear that this effort will involve offshore wind energy projects,” said Senator Mark Lawrence, who sponsored the amended bill. “We need to have guardrails in place to make sure this is done right and truly benefits Mainers. This bill will mean jobs, lower and more stable energy prices while combating climate change at the same time.”
Construction and the built environment contribute to about 40% of all emissions globally.
The construction and building sector make up 34% of global energy consumption.
Raw resource consumption for construction is predicted to double by 2060.
Building floor area globally is also expected to double by 2060.
Concrete, steel and aluminum alone comprise 23% of total global emissions, Architecture 2030 reports.
Investments in energy-efficient buildings will need to more than double current investments by 2030 to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.
The average green building emits 34% less carbon compared to a standard building.
Buildings that incorporate renewables, energy-efficient design and electrification can reduce energy-related emissions by 90%.
Sustainable buildings can greatly reduce ongoing operational costs. A building with LEED certification typically sees 20% lower operational costs.
Green design can reduce building water use by over 30%.
What Is Green Construction?
A crane lifts a modular unit into place on an apartment building under construction and made mainly of wood in Berlin, Germany on April 22, 2021. Wood is becoming an increasingly viable construction material for taller buildings in Europe and as a means for lowering greenhouse gas emissions created by the manufacture of concrete. Maja Hitij / Getty Images
Green construction involves building structures efficiently and sustainably. This can be done in a number of ways, from using more sustainable building materials or making use of recycled materials, to crafting buildings that minimize energy and water consumption. The idea is to focus on sustainability and eco-friendliness of the building throughout its lifecycle, from the first design and planning stages throughout the construction process and as the building is used, and finally to when the building is eventually demolished.
In addition to protecting the environment, green construction practices should emphasize health and wellness for those who will occupy the building for years to come, whether it’s a small residential space or a large commercial building.
Why Are Sustainable Building Practices Important?
Construction projects and the built environment as a whole are major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. According to Architecture 2030, ongoing construction contributes about 13% of total annual carbon dioxide emissions, while operations of existing buildings make up 27% of annual carbon emissions globally. While emissions dropped during the lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic, emissions quickly rebounded to reach record highs.
Buildings require a lot of energy to build and operate. A 2022 report from the United Nations Environment Programme found that the buildings and construction sector make up 34% of total energy demand. Even though investments in boosting energy efficiency in buildings increased by 16% in 2021, any benefits were counteracted by an increase in the size of buildings.
Further, buildings draw a huge number of resources like raw materials and water. Materials for construction, like steel and concrete, make up about 9% of overall energy-related emissions, and raw resource consumption for construction is expected to double by 2060. Just one square meter of wall can require an average of 350 liters of water to construct.
About two-thirds of all buildings standing today will still exist in 2040, and without retrofitting or renovations to make them more sustainable, they will continue to contribute large amounts of emissions and could even prevent humanity from limiting warming to 1.5°C and the accompanying worst impacts of climate change. According to Statista, the average global annual investment in energy-efficient buildings will need to reach over $536 trillion from 2026 to 2030 in order to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. As of 2022, these investments were around $215 trillion.
Benefits and Challenges of Green Construction
While focusing on green construction practices and a more sustainable built environment is critical to meet Paris Agreement goals and curb the worst effects of climate change, there are many benefits of these practices. But transitioning to new policies and procedures can also come with challenges for building occupants, property owners and builders.
Benefits
Creating a more sustainable built environment isn’t just a perk; it’s a necessity. We’ll need to see sharp increases in green construction investments moving forward in order to reduce emissions and resource consumption and ultimately meet the goals set by the Paris Agreement. Aside from being better for the Earth, though, green construction also offers project stakeholders some financial perks.
Emissions
Green buildings are designed to reduce emissions at every stage of a structure’s lifecycle. In fact, the average green building reduces its carbon emissions by about 34% compared to traditional buildings.
By using less resources, LEED-certified buildings reduce emissions, even outside of minimizing one of the biggest source of building emissions, energy consumption. One study by The Center for the Built Environment at University of California, Berkeley found that buildings certified as LEED for Operations and Maintenance had 50% less emissions from water consumption and 48% less emissions from solid waste compared to conventional buildings.
The Vancouver Convention Centre’s West Building was the first convention center in the world to achieve double LEED Platinum. It features heat recovery systems, two onsite bio-composters and a living roof. Pictured on Oct. 31, 2022 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Mert Alper Dervis / Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
Efficiency
Because green construction incorporates ways to minimize resource demand, these practices can improve building efficiency. Buildings that are Energy Star-certified, for instance, save about 35% energy compared to conventional buildings because they are designed for lower energy consumption.
Green construction can also lead to more efficient water allocation, and sustainable buildings reduce water consumption by about 15% simply by incorporating elements like low-flow faucets or water-saving toilets. Water usage can also be minimized throughout the construction process.
Renewable Energy
Whether building new structures or retrofitting older ones, green construction practices provide opportunities to incorporate renewable energy. Renewable energy sources can greatly reduce emissions for buildings. According to International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), renewables, energy-efficient design, and electrification combined can reduce energy-related carbon emissions by about 90%.
A residential villa with rooftop solar panels in Xiamen, Fujian, China. koiguo / Moment / Getty Images
Long-Term Savings
From making use of recycled or reclaimed building materials to designing structures that use less energy and water, green construction and sustainable buildings can minimize upfront and ongoing resource costs. According to the U.S. Green Building Council, sustainable buildings with LEED accreditation have about 20% lower ongoing maintenance costs compared to conventional commercial buildings. Not only that, but these LEED-certified buildings can save $1.2 billion in energy costs and $149.5 million in water costs.
Challenges
There are a few roadblocks when it comes to constructing or renovating buildings to be more sustainable. But when you compare the challenges to the economic and environmental benefits, the advantages often outweigh the concerns and make green building the best option for our future.
Cost
One big challenge to green construction is the real and perceived upfront costs. Property owners and builders may believe prices for sustainable materials and technologies will cost more to install and implement than conventional products. That may be true, but it isn’t always. Even using reclaimed or recycled materials can lower costs, but project stakeholders will also need to weigh long-term cost savings as well as financial incentives like grants or tax credits for eco-friendly projects.
Sourcing
One thing for project stakeholders to keep in mind with green construction is that finding experts, materials and technology that meet sustainability targets can be more difficult than simply sourcing conventional products. Fortunately, this is quickly becoming less and less of a challenge as green building products and those trained in green construction and design are becoming more available and accessible.
Greenwashing
Just because something is labeled “green” doesn’t always mean it is sustainable. Projects can be described as green construction or buildings may be labeled as green or sustainable, but their improvements could be minimal. Maybe a building is made with “natural materials” including wood linked to deforestation of important wildlife habitats or flooring is made from reclaimed materials but is treated with harsh chemical sealants.
Examples of Green Construction Materials
So how are builders reducing the carbon footprint of new structures? Turning to more sustainable materials is key, considering just three materials — concrete, steel and aluminum — contribute around 23% of all emissions, according to Architecture 2030.
Cross-Laminated Timber
Cross-laminated timber at a lumberyard in Austria. Akos Stiller / Bloomberg
Cross-laminated timber, or CLT, is a strong yet lightweight material made from layered, structural grade wood that is arranged in crossing layers and glued together. It requires less energy to manufacture than concrete or steel and offers some carbon sequestering potential.
Hempcrete
Hempcrete is a long-lasting, fire-, pest- and mold-resistant material made from the inner core of hemp mixed with water and aggregate. In addition to making use of agricultural byproduct of hemp plants, hempcrete is considered non-toxic and a carbon-sequestering material. It is popular for wall or roof insulation.
Workers inspect newly pressed hempcrete bricks at the Afrimat Hemp brick factory in Cape Town, South Africa on April 25, 2023. RODGER BOSCH / AFP via Getty Images
Cork
From interior cork flooring to exterior home cladding, cork is a sustainable building material sought after for its insulating and soundproofing properties. Cork is also reusable, natural and biodegradable. Cork oak is the only tree that can regenerate its bark after the material has been harvested.
Bamboo
Like cork, bamboo regenerates quickly after harvest, with some species growing as much as 35 inches in a day. According to Project Drawdown, living biomass and long-lived bamboo products could total up to 19.60 gigatons of sequestered carbon by 2050. It is ranked as a harder material than some woods, like oak or ash, yet lightweight, making it useful in many construction applications.
Bamboo trunks in a factory in Indonesia. Marc Romanelli / Tetra Images / Getty Images
Rammed Earth
Rammed earth makes use of local materials and minimizes waste. It typically involves compressing damp earth into frameworks to form walls. This material is strong and durable. While rammed earth has typically been considered best in areas with moderate temperatures and minimal rainfall, one study found that rammed earth walls saw only slight erosion, 2 millimeters, when exposed to the elements for 20 years in a wet continental climate.
Reclaimed and Recycled Materials
One significant way to reduce the embodied carbon of a building or retrofit is to use salvaged or recycled materials. In a concept paper, All for Reuse explained that using reclaimed materials could reduce embodied carbon emissions by over 90%. Reusing materials reduces the resources and energy needed to manufacture virgin materials and can even reduce the project cost.
Mycelium
Building… with mushrooms? That’s right. Mycelium is the root-like structures of fungus, including mushrooms. When harvested and dried, mycelium can be made into an incredibly strong material that is waterproof and resistant to fire and mold. As a natural material, mycelium is naturally biodegradable and has potential to work in a variety of different ways for construction. It requires more study and development, but offers a promising future for green construction.
A lampshade made of mycelium-based building material at Permafungi in Belgium, on June 15, 2022. The company grows oyster mushrooms using old coffee grounds from nearby cafés and turns them into insulating panels and lampshades. Daniel Josling / picture alliance via Getty Images
Types of Green Construction Certifications
There are many third-party certifications around the world that can determine whether a building has met specific sustainability- and wellness-focused criteria in order to earn that certification. Typically, designers will need to choose a certificate that they’d like the building to earn, apply, then begin designing to meet the requirements and ultimately earn the certification. From LEED to Passivhaus, here are some popular green building certifications around the world.
LEED
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), established by the U.S. Green Building Council, has a rating system with four major categories: certified, silver, gold, or platinum, with platinum being the highest certification possible for earning the most points toward sustainable design. Projects should reduce emissions, conserve water, enhance human health, protect and boost biodiversity, promote sustainable materials, and improve local quality of life. LEED offers certifications for various types of projects, from residential to building design to building operations to entire cities.
Passive House/Passivhaus
Passive House, or Passivhaus, is an internationally recognized concept as well as a certification for buildings designed to minimize energy use. Developed by Passive House Institute, Passive House buildings may use up to 90% less energy than conventional buildings. In addition to reducing energy demand, Passive House principles are focused on improving the health and well-being of building occupants, through elements like improved ventilation and reduced noise pollution.
WELL
The WELL Building Standard, created by the International WELL Building Institute, includes 10 major concepts for its certification: Air, Water, Nourishment, Light, Movement, Thermal Comfort, Sound, Materials, Mind and Community. Projects earn points toward these concepts, and those points add up to bronze, silver, gold or platinum certification. While WELL is focused more on human health of occupants over environmental benefits, it does incorporate sustainable design elements, like integrating more green spaces, reducing air pollution and utilizing non-toxic materials.
EnergyStar
Many people are familiar with EnergyStar when it comes to home appliances, but this label, administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), can also apply to buildings. EnergyStar commercial buildings can boost energy savings by up to 30% through improvements like installing efficient lighting or using Energy Star-certified products. Commercial buildings can earn a 1 to 100 rating for Energy Star performance, with 1 being the lowest, 50 being average and 100 being a top-performing building.
Living Building Challenge
The International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge is focused on regenerative design and focuses on seven key areas: Place, Water, Energy, Health and Happiness, Materials, Equity, and Beauty. It is one of the most rigorous green building concepts in the world. These projects are designed for self-sufficiency and connection between humans, human habitats and nature. Projects incorporate features like closed-loop water systems, renewables to reach net-positive carbon each year, regular indoor air quality tests and more.
BREEAM
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) ranks buildings from pass, good, very good, excellent to outstanding. The method is focused on water, management, energy, transport, health and wellbeing, resources, resilience, land use, materials, waste, and innovation. Achieving this certification can result in many benefits, including reduced energy use, improved cost savings and increased occupants’ satisfaction.
Sustainable Buildings Around the World
There’s no shortage of examples of sustainable buildings. You may have incorporated green building practices within your own home, perhaps by installing solar panels on the roof or bamboo flooring in your office.
Some projects go above and beyond, earning multiple certifications and even achieving net-zero emissions. Here are just a few top examples of sustainability in the built environment:
Shanghai Tower in Shanghai, China
Aerial view of Shanghai Tower. Yaorusheng / Moment / Getty Images
The Shanghai Tower, opened in 2015 and designed by Gensler, is the second-tallest building in the world and one of the most sustainable. This skyscraper was made with recycled materials and has a design to capture and reuse rainwater and capture wind for natural ventilation. Over 270 wind turbines produce over 150,000 kWh each year. It has earned LEED Platinum certification.
The Edge in Amsterdam, the Netherlands
From a green roof and a facade made of solar panels to the rainwater harvesting system and smart shades that can be controlled by an app, The Edge, designed by PLP Architects, is an impressively sustainable building. In fact, The Edge has earned a 98.3% BREEAM Outstanding ranking.
Bosco Verticale in Milan, Italy
People relax at Biblioteca degli Alberi Milano park (BAM) by the Bosco Verticale in Milan, Italy on May 27, 2023. Emanuele Cremaschi / Getty Images
The residential Bosco Verticale (Vertical Forest) by Boeri Studio is covered in green, encompassing 800 trees, 15,000 perennials and ground-covering plants and 5,000 shrubs. All this plant life has become habitat for birds, butterflies and other wildlife while absorbing carbon, improving shading and insulation and reducing energy costs.
The Crystal in London, UK
The Crystal building on Royal Victoria Dock in east London on Nov. 3, 2020. HOLLIE ADAMS / AFP via Getty Images
Designed by WilkinsonEyre, The Crystal is now home to London’s City Hall and is the winner of many sustainable design awards. It features multiple renewable technologies, from solar and wind power to EV charging stations and geothermal energy; excess energy is sent back to the grid. It has achieved both LEED Platinum and BREEAM Outstanding.
Green Construction and the Future
A sustainable built environment is the future. Whether through designing and building new, energy-efficient projects or retrofitting older buildings to be more airtight or to support renewable energy sources, green construction must amp up for the world to limit warming to 1.5°C, or else suffer from the extreme consequences of unchecked climate change. Even maintaining 2°C warming compared to pre-industrial levels will require building-related emissions to decrease 85%, putting an extreme emphasis and dependence on green construction.
There are many excellent examples of sustainable buildings out there today, and green construction investments are only expected to grow. Focusing on reducing the carbon footprint of the built environment could create value pools worth $800 billion to nearly $2 trillion, and retrofits has the potential to become a $240 billion to $1.1 trillion market by 2036.
While these figures are promising for the future of green construction, the reality is still that this sector needs to ramp up dramatically to decarbonize before the world surpasses the 1.5°C threshold. As one of the biggest contributors to global emissions, the construction industry must put sustainability first moving forward.
Modern clothing is a technological marvel — it’s brighter than ever, more flame-resistant, more water-repellent.
It’s also often toxic. The properties we’ve come to know and expect stem from fossil fuel-derived chemicals that, according to a growing body of research, are making people sick.
There are the brominated azobenzene disperse dyes, which give polyester clothes their bright colors but can cause skin inflammation. There are the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS or “forever chemicals,” which make clothes waterproof but are linked to thyroid disorders and cancer. There are carcinogens like formaldehyde, used for bleaching or to prevent mold, and hormone disruptors like NPEO, used as a cleaning agent.
And then there are the hundreds, if not thousands, of chemicals that we know vanishingly little about. Paltry funding and patchy oversight from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, an independent federal agency, mean the U.S. government isn’t checking most of the clothes we buy for toxicity. When problems do arise for people — when they suspect that their clothing is behind their pesky rash, their wheezing cough, their splotchy skin — they are often disbelieved and offered little to no recourse from manufacturers, whether in the form of reimbursed medical bills or monetary damages.
This all-too-familiar story played out in a big way during the 2010s, when flight attendants at four major airlines began reporting severe reactions to new uniforms made from synthetic fabrics. Headaches, dizziness, loss of memory — even being near other flight attendants who had the clothes on seemed to cause symptoms, in a few cases. For some employees, the reactions were so bad they had to be hospitalized. Others began limiting their time on the plane, and some eventually quit — or were fired for taking too many unexcused absences.
Usually, it’s hard to pin symptoms precisely on clothing, but the flight attendants had all begun wearing the uniforms at the same time and were consistently keeping them on for long periods in a small, enclosed space. This suggested that it was the uniforms, and not another factor, that was causing their symptoms. Public health researchers at Harvard University later analyzed contemporaneous survey data and found a significant increase in the prevalence of rashes, itchy eyes, sore throats, shortness of breath, and other health complaints after Alaska Airlines introduced its new uniforms. (Three of the airlines, including Alaska, eventually ordered new uniforms, but without admitting the old ones had caused health problems.)
Alden Wicker, a sustainable fashion writer, documents the story in To Dye For, her new book on the fashion industry’s toxic underbelly. Hazardous substances have been used in clothes for centuries, she told Grist, but with the advent of fossil fuel-based chemistry, the dangers have multiplied, growing alongside the number of unpronounceable chemicals available to today’s clothiers. Many of these chemicals act in concert with each other: toxic on their own, but potentially even worse when mixed together on the same piece of fabric. Scientists know alarmingly little about how these chemical combinations affect human health.
“We’re just immersed in this miasma of chemicals that researchers know are toxic, and nobody’s protecting us,” Wicker said. Out of the up to 60,000 chemical substances and polymers currently registered for use in various industries, the U.S. only bans three from textiles, and that’s only for children’s products.
Grounded in the firsthand experiences of those flight attendants — some of whom are still fighting for their symptoms to be recognized by their airlines, doctors, and insurance companies — To Dye For reveals how the fashion industry got here and what needs to change to keep people safe.
This Q&A has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.
Q.People tend to think that exposure to toxic substances and chemical pollution in the textile industry primarily happens “over there” in developing countries. But chemicals don’t stay put. How is this a global problem?
A.A lot of the chemicals that people hear about being used in garment factories, not all of them are effectively washed off during the process of creating, dyeing, and finishing fashion. Some can be left behind as residues. More importantly, some are deliberately applied and are meant to stay on for a long period of time — like dyes for things like polyester. Recent research out of Duke has shown that those dyes are ending up in our house dust from the polyester textiles we bring into our homes. And we’re breathing them in or touching them or ingesting them.
Q.There have been toxic ingredients in clothing for a long time, but things seem to have gotten particularly bad over the past century or so. What happened?
A.Fashion has been toxic for hundreds of years. Before the advent of fossil fuel chemicals, it was mostly heavy metals, the sorts of things that would make you sick with undefinable symptoms over a period of years — things like mercury or arsenic, where they build up in the body and it can be hard to identify what’s happening. With fossil fuels, though, we’ve been able to create — and are still creating — thousands and thousands of chemicals.
Now there can be at least 50 individual chemicals on a textile, if not more than that. So if you imagine a textile, you have 50, 100, 1,000 chemicals all layered on it. And then you’re also wearing multiple pieces of clothing, and there’s a lining, and there’s buttons. How are the chemicals mixing on the textile, and how are they working together when they get into the body? These are things we don’t have answers for.
Q.What is the U.S. doing to protect us from these chemicals?
A.Nobody is protecting us.
While the European Union has banned over 30 chemicals specifically for use in textiles, the U.S. has only banned three, and only in children’s products. And the Consumer Product Safety Commission is severely underfunded. As long as it’s from a legitimate company and it’s not a counterfeit, nobody is checking to make sure that these products are free from known hazardous substances. Consumers are just being hung out to dry.
Q.At least there are some industry-led efforts to keep toxics out of clothes, right?
A.I have a lot of respect for ZDHC [Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals], the industry group that has come up with a “manufacturing restricted substance list.” The problem is that it’s voluntary. There’s a bunch of big brands in there, but if you look at them in terms of their market share, they’re not covering much. We can’t rely on brands to take care, to do their research, to require testing, to invest in good partnerships with their manufacturers. We have to make this the baseline for the industry or else this is going to keep happening.
Q.On a systemic level, what needs to change to keep people safe?
A.We are long overdue for an overhaul in this country of the way chemicals are evaluated and regulated. I think the first step is transparency — getting ingredient lists. If people actually saw the long list of deliberately applied dyes and finishes, I think people would be really, really shocked. And then watchdogs and journalists can leverage that information to push for more legislation.
We should also definitely be regulating chemicals by class. There are at least 12,000 different types of PFAS, and we are not going to be able to evaluate every single one for its toxicity. If a chemical is known to be extremely hazardous, we should just ban or regulate or restrict everything in that same class. Same thing for phthalates. Also, we need more funding for research.
Q.On a personal level, how do we protect ourselves from these chemicals?
A.The first thing I would tell people is to always avoid ultra-fast-fashion brands. If you’ve never heard of the brand, if it’s too cheap to be true, if it has a gibberish name, it’s very risky to shop that brand. I would also say look for labels such as Oeko-Tex, Bluesign, or GOTS [Global Organic Textile Standard], which are not perfect, but they indicate that the brand has had things tested. And always wash your clothes before you wear them, with fragrance-free laundry detergent.
