U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-12-2008, 02:59 PM
 
Location: Western Hoosierland
18,264 posts, read 7,247,768 times
Reputation: 5943

Advertisements

hello, what do you think? has America made progress on going green from a few years ago? are we right on track in terms of errasing our carbon footprint? where live in indiana we the town i live in just completed building a $104,000,000 high school that is completely "Green" here Pedestrian Trails and bikeways receive almost equal funding.
alot of people where i live have caught on to the "Green Movement" and are riding bikes more, using less energy, and recycling more. but that is just where i live. i have heard several towns across have gone completely in the wrong direction. so what do you think are we right on track to going "Green"? What more could America do to erase its Carbon footprint?
considering i live in a Suburb of Indianapolis with a population of almost 30,000(proper) do you think the town i live in has made significant steps in going green?

Last edited by Future Trooper; 06-12-2008 at 03:00 PM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-12-2008, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Sound Beach
2,160 posts, read 6,698,621 times
Reputation: 882
Interesting thought. There are examples popping up that suggest we are. For example...Greensburg KS was basically obliterated by a tornado last year. 95% of the structures in the town were demolished beyond repair. The town has taken a green approach to the rebuilding efforts by following LEED Platnium Level Standards with all new construction.

Tragedy to Triumph - Greensburg Rising — City of Greensburg, Kansas

Now..the question begs...do we really need a monster tornado before we take the step toward sustainability?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2008, 08:53 PM
 
57 posts, read 199,363 times
Reputation: 35
"Going green" is a fad, as it was back in the late 80's, the last time it was tried. Once gas comes back down to $2.**, it will fade away again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2008, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,434,561 times
Reputation: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexei27 View Post
Interesting thought. There are examples popping up that suggest we are. For example...Greensburg KS was basically obliterated by a tornado last year. 95% of the structures in the town were demolished beyond repair. The town has taken a green approach to the rebuilding efforts by following LEED Platnium Level Standards with all new construction.

Tragedy to Triumph - Greensburg Rising — City of Greensburg, Kansas

Now..the question begs...do we really need a monster tornado before we take the step toward sustainability?
we drove through greensburg this past weekend, and it is nice they are going to redo everything green, but man what utter destruction we saw.

I am feeling more safe about our energy crisis now after driving through southeast Colorado and my god the amount of wind turbines was mind boggling, they were every 150-200' and went on for MILES....


it is much more cost effective to do NEW construction to meet green standards than to retrofit older structures. You can spend the amount of a new house on bringing up an existing house to a 5-star or a 10 HERS rated standard. VERY expensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2008, 10:16 PM
 
2,348 posts, read 3,915,158 times
Reputation: 2198
Walking trails? efficency? Mass transit? So basically we are back doing what the rest of the poorer world has been doing for years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2008, 10:23 PM
 
2,348 posts, read 3,915,158 times
Reputation: 2198
104 million for a HS? Don't you think that is a bit high?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2008, 08:49 AM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,764 posts, read 16,838,766 times
Reputation: 9316
k350 wrote:
Walking trails? efficency? Mass transit? So basically we are back doing what the rest of the poorer world has been doing for years.
Leadership arises in the most surprising places, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2008, 09:34 AM
 
Location: The Big D
14,874 posts, read 37,172,881 times
Reputation: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
I am feeling more safe about our energy crisis now after driving through southeast Colorado and my god the amount of wind turbines was mind boggling, they were every 150-200' and went on for MILES....


it is much more cost effective to do NEW construction to meet green standards than to retrofit older structures. You can spend the amount of a new house on bringing up an existing house to a 5-star or a 10 HERS rated standard. VERY expensive.
Are you for or against those windfarms???

I agree on the retrofitting of older structures. On these "going green" tv shows they show them ripping out perfectly good appliances. Oh, they are giving them to charity and Habitat for Humanity is going to put them in a house they are building. Okay....... so now the POOR person that barely was getting by is going to be getting a NON energy efficient appliance that will make their utility bills go higher. That sure helped out a lot . They rip out prefectly good cabinets, flooring, builtins, etc ONLY in order to put in something BRAND NEW when there was nothing wrong w/ the old wood cabinets. Now that NATURAL product that had been faithfully serving its purpose all those years is FILLING UP THE LANDFILLS! Sorry, that show just gets me. I can't help it.

Personally, I don't think we are getting better at all. Whenever something, anything comes on the market that says it is more "energy efficient" it all of sudden has the bandwagon fans behind it. Did they stop long enough to think it ALL THE WAY THRU!?!?!?!??? Like the new lightbulbs that use mercury people are flocking to buy. No one has even considered how to properly dispose of them. Your not supposed to just toss them in the garbage can like you used to. They MUST be disposed of properly. How much do you want to bet that the overwhelming majority of the consumers that have purchased those lightbulbs don't have the slightest clue of how to properly dispose of them. Things like this are what I'm talking about. Before we even get the ENTIRE picture/process worked out people automatically trumpet it to be the ONLY way to go without realizing in the end it could be MORE harmful to the environment.

I'm all for doing things smarter. It just has to be and NEEDS to be thought all the way thru and THOSE things NEED to be made aware to the public. Otherwise we are just spinning our wheels and not really getting anywhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2008, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,434,561 times
Reputation: 946
Quote:
Originally Posted by momof2dfw View Post
Are you for or against those windfarms???

I agree on the retrofitting of older structures. On these "going green" tv shows they show them ripping out perfectly good appliances. Oh, they are giving them to charity and Habitat for Humanity is going to put them in a house they are building. Okay....... so now the POOR person that barely was getting by is going to be getting a NON energy efficient appliance that will make their utility bills go higher. That sure helped out a lot . They rip out prefectly good cabinets, flooring, builtins, etc ONLY in order to put in something BRAND NEW when there was nothing wrong w/ the old wood cabinets. Now that NATURAL product that had been faithfully serving its purpose all those years is FILLING UP THE LANDFILLS! Sorry, that show just gets me. I can't help it.

Personally, I don't think we are getting better at all. Whenever something, anything comes on the market that says it is more "energy efficient" it all of sudden has the bandwagon fans behind it. Did they stop long enough to think it ALL THE WAY THRU!?!?!?!??? Like the new lightbulbs that use mercury people are flocking to buy. No one has even considered how to properly dispose of them. Your not supposed to just toss them in the garbage can like you used to. They MUST be disposed of properly. How much do you want to bet that the overwhelming majority of the consumers that have purchased those lightbulbs don't have the slightest clue of how to properly dispose of them. Things like this are what I'm talking about. Before we even get the ENTIRE picture/process worked out people automatically trumpet it to be the ONLY way to go without realizing in the end it could be MORE harmful to the environment.

I'm all for doing things smarter. It just has to be and NEEDS to be thought all the way thru and THOSE things NEED to be made aware to the public. Otherwise we are just spinning our wheels and not really getting anywhere.
I LOVE the windfarms, it was an awe inspiring site.

I design homes for a living, and Boulder Colorado has just instituted a new energy policy called HERS. if you are at the threshold size and want to add another 10-50 sqft to the house you HAVE to bring the ENTIRE house up to energy standards, or if you disturb the existing drywall you HAVE to bring the ENTIRE house up to the new energy standards which include such things as very very low air infiltration which on a 100 year old home is going to be soo expensive you might as well buy a new house, Solar arrays, Geo thermal heat pumps, residential wind generators and the list goes on and on, the payback takes 15-30 years to recoup the cost of these items that are now being required for homes within the city and county.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2008, 03:50 PM
 
Location: The Big D
14,874 posts, read 37,172,881 times
Reputation: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
I LOVE the windfarms, it was an awe inspiring site.

I design homes for a living, and Boulder Colorado has just instituted a new energy policy called HERS.

which on a 100 year old home is going to be soo expensive you might as well buy a new house,.
Cool. I think there is a need for them and they can be used effectively without disturbing anyone.

Interesting. Now, that is the one thing that MIGHT do more harm than good. There will be great century old homes that need and should be restored to their original beauty w/ some modernization for comfortable living now. What is going to happen though is they are going to lose their appeal and be torn down and replaced w/ homes that all look alike. I think there can be TOO MUCH "conservation" going on that destroys perfectly fine buildings/homes because they don't live up to a certain standard. I really don't want to see that and this is coming from someone that LOVES architecture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top