Rino Groenenberg wrote an interesting article about research he did into how the cradle-to-cradle concept can be made financially viable at the building level. He arrived at a number of interesting conclusions and facts:
- The discussion about a sustainable building is limited to energy-efficiency only. And this is about 0.5% of the costs of an organisation. So what are we talking about?
- Rents including energy costs (user remains responsible for the real costs) are an unknown phenomenon in The Netherlands
- A sustainable building has a higher rest value and saves on energy costs
- It can not get more profitable than C2C, provided advantages such as higher productivity, lower environmental costs and image/marketing value are expressed in terms of money
This leads Rino to the point that it does not matter if you would have to pay more for a sustainable or cradle-to-cradle building. C2C will always lead C2€.
I agree with Rino. We have reached the point of no return where we have the obligation to look at our organisation’s total impact on our environment and at all costs and revenues involved.
I remain, curious about other views and opinions on this conclusion.
Read the original article (in Dutch) here Een gebouw als een boom, een stad als een bos | Blog | Duurzaam Gebouwd.