The Hard Numbers Behind the Value of Healthy Buildings

Back in the early 2000s, when green building was still more of a movement than a market, California’s Sustainable Building Task Force released The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building. It was a groundbreaking attempt to put numbers on what, until then, had been mostly ideals. The report claimed that spending as little as 2% more in upfront costs could return ten times that in savings over the life of a building. The math worked because it didn’t stop at energy and water bills, it tried to quantify things like productivity, absenteeism, and health outcomes. That was bold at the time. For years, owners and investors could easily value lower utility bills, but how do you put a price on fewer sick days or a less stressed workforce?

Two decades later, we’re getting closer to answering that question with real data....   ...more

RSK: Only 2% more in upfront costs? I like the idea that healthy buildings may have a healthier life in terms of return for owners, but some of the measurements in this article are a bit soft. Still, I am all for it if it makes sense.