The Austin Green Building Program: an analysis of the program's effectiveness

The Austin Green Building Program: An Analysis of the Program’s Effectiveness. (December 2003) Audrey Kristen Tinker, B.E.D., Texas A&M University; M.S., Texas A&M University Co-Chair of Committee: Dr. Richard Burt Dr. Sherry Bame Current water shortages in the United States and Texas are expected to only worsen so that by 2050, approximately 40% of both U.S. and Texas residents will live in areas of water scarcity (U.S. House Committee, 2003; Texas Water Development Board, 2003). In response to these grim projections, both lawmakers and environmentalists are calling for conservation measures so that future shortages or costly new supply initiatives are avoided. One area where substantial consumption decreases could be made is the municipal sector, which is projected to account for 35% of all water consumed in Texas by 2050 (Texas Water Development Board, 2002). Both organizations and voluntary programs have been established to reduce water consumption in this area. One of the largest and most innovative programs in the state is the Austin Green Building Program (AGBP). It was the first program of its kind in the U.S. that rates new homes and remodels in regards to five categories related to sustainability: energy efficiency, water efficiency, materials efficiency, health and safety and community (City of Austin, 2001). This research identified the factors (weather, home size, lot size, appraised value, and existence of a pool) that effect water consumption for residences qualifying as “Austin Green Homes”, and identified those green features or designs that had the greatest effect on water consumption, that were most commonly included, and the reasons why contractors incorporated them. Non-green features such as temperature, rainfall, home and lot size, appraised value and a pool seemed to have the greatest impact on water

[1]  J. Headley The Relation of Family Income and Use of Water for Residential and Commercial Purposes in the San Francisco-Oakland Metropolitan Area , 1963 .

[2]  Charles W. Howe,et al.  The impact of price on residential water demand and its relation to system design and price structure , 1967 .

[3]  V. Barnett,et al.  Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1975 .

[4]  W. Douglas Morgan,et al.  CLIMATIC INDICATORS IN THE ESTLMATION OF MUNICIPAL WATER DEMAND , 1976 .

[5]  L. Danielson,et al.  An analysis of residential demand for water using micro time‐series data , 1979 .

[6]  Pamela A. Matson,et al.  HUMAN APPROPRIATION OF THE PRODUCTS OF PHOTOSYNTHESIS , 1986 .

[7]  Peter H. Gleick,et al.  The World’s Water: The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources , 2014 .

[8]  Rangesan Narayanan,et al.  A MONTHLY TIME SERIES MODEL OF MUNICIPAL WATER DEMAND , 1981 .

[9]  John C. V. Pezzey,et al.  Sustainability: An Interdisciplinary Guide , 1992, Environmental Values.

[10]  P. Mayer Residential End Uses of Water , 1999 .

[11]  D. D. Baumann,et al.  Urban Water Demand Management and Planning , 1997 .

[12]  Richard T. Bynum,et al.  Handbook of Alternative Materials in Residential Construction , 1998 .

[13]  Raymond L. Anderson,et al.  WATER SAVINGS FROM LAWN WATERING RESTRICTIONS DURING A DROUGHT YEAR, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO , 1980 .

[14]  Paula Baker-Laporte,et al.  Prescriptions for a Healthy House , 2001 .

[15]  David R. Maidment,et al.  INTERVENTION ANALYSIS OF WATER USE RESTRICTIONS, AUSTIN, TEXAS , 1987 .

[16]  A. P. Grima Residential Water Demand: Alternative Choices for Management , 1972 .

[17]  S. Hanke,et al.  RESIDENTIAL WATER DEMAND: A POOLED, TIME SERIES, CROSS SECTION STUDY OF MALMÖ, SWEDEN1 , 1982 .