Can large homes be considered "green"?

3 Comments

  • Adam Moura - 15 years ago

    My initial response was that larger homes (4k sqft and up) would use more materials and likely land and other resources regardless of the techniques employed to achieve green certification. However, if that home and lot interacts with the environment by having lots of trees and a single family, then theoretically it would reduce the population density as well as the use for cars, etc. A larger home with its larger roof (typically) could produce its own solar power and even power some street lights, etc. So I think if a larger home is built with the idea that it is going to interact with the environment and contribute to the community then I see it as being just another example of a green home concept.

  • Steve Bertasso - 15 years ago

    The question of large homes is a much debated topic. Large homes are always going to be a reality in our society. People with money and means want space. The key to building large homes green is not just to ensure the home meets the standard. A change that needs to happen in the rating systems are minimum ratings for a large home. Meaning, a home over 5000 sf should be be considered green if it only meets a bronze or silver level (or equivalent). Modification of the standards to require "large homes" to meet a gold, or higher standard, will ensure better techniques and true reduction of impact on the environment.

    This goes back to my own piece, Shades of Green. Shouldn't we encourage people at all levels to do something green?

  • David Lajeunesse - 15 years ago

    Homes 2000 sq. ft. and larger considered green. Shameful and disappointing.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment