One of the more insidious aspects of the recent “green” p.r. rush is the frequent description of “green” attributes as luxury goods and the related sense that somehow, environmental health and leadership are amenities available only to those who can pay for them. That being green requires having green.

While it’s true that green buildings sometimes cost more up front, the premium paid for related benefits is generally recouped through reduced energy bills and increased productivity in 2-4 years, after which the savings represent a significant net gain to owners and residents.

For this reason, there is strong and growing interest by both public and private sectors in the benefits of “green” affordable housing: units that are built in order to minimize monthly energy costs and maximize indoor air quality. Those who stand to benefit the most from reduced monthly energy bills are, of course those with the lowest monthly incomes.  Read more »