Greener Than Thou

May 28. 2008, BALTIMORE, MD (BE Conference) -  Bentley is convincing everyone at their annual user meeting that it has gone green. Examples abound. Their corporate logo has been redone in green, for one thing. They have reduced their corporate carbon footprint for their big show by coming to Baltimore by bus instead of flying. They've hired Andrew Winston (author of Green to Gold) to let us know that green can represent not only the environment but also the greenback. And if you were to believe what Bentley says, the software itself will now allow AEC professionals to be green by incorporating green tactics during design.

old logo

new Bently logo is way more green

It's not the first time I have heard software companies aligning themselves with the green movement. Autodesk pledged itself to be green when Carl Bass, CEO, led off Autodesk University in 2007. However, my request to interview him on this initiative has gone unanswered.

How green can design software get? Isn't AEC software about turning green fields into concrete and metal? Not so, says Joe Croser, from Bentley's marketing division. He educates me in how Bentley is about sustainable infrastructure. A green building can take the place of a not-so-green building . A roadway can be created using more environmentally friendly materials. Energy analysis can reduce thermal load and lower dependence on air conditioning. And so on.

Ok, I think I get it. Still, it bothers me that Toyota (cited as a successful implementation of green technology) is ultimately not green. Yes, there is the problem with what to do with its old batteries, but also, if we wanted to really be green, shouldn't we not be buying a ton of metal and plastic, even if it takes the shape of a Prius, because the creation and disposal of such materials is ruinous? For Earth's sake, shouldn't we walk?

We feel good about doing these little things: paper instead of plastic, recycle, don't litter -- we even turn in our plastic attendee badges so they can be recycled. All these actions can make you feel like a pretty good green citizen: I've done what I can, what is within my power, what is fairly easy. And it hasn't really cost me much or inconvenienced me too badly.

But are we doing as much as is needed? Is replacing incandescent bulbs with fluorescent ones going to make a significant difference? Are we rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? The ship is still going down, now maybe sinking a tad slower. Maybe what I need is not fluorescent bulbs (which Mr. Winston points out are really an environmental nightmare because of the mercury) but candles. Or better yet, why don't we just go to sleep?

But for now, technology companies tell us something is better than nothing.

Comments

[Joe Croser]

Hi Roopinder, you report our chat accurately with one slight error. i referenced our new tagline "sustaining infrastructure" not "sustainable" as you reported. And yes there is a clear differentiation.

Buddy Cleveland, my colleague and head of our applied research group sums up well the value of "sustaining infrastructure" on his Blog http://communities.bentley.com/blogs/buddy_cleveland_bentleys_blog/archive/2008/06/09/be-keynote-follow-up.aspx

Cheers and great to see you again!

jc

[Robert B. Sandkam]

"Isn't AEC software about turning green fields into concrete and metal?"

Short of a total collapse of the economy, buildings will be built regardless of anything. If Bentley (or anyone else) has software that will help people execute more efficient buildings, in a more efficient manner, then that is a good thing.

"For Earth's sake, shouldn't we walk?"

Yes, we should. The end result of the rising fuel costs is not building more fuel effecient cars cars, it is land use planning that allows us to live where we work. My commute is a mile. I have biked to work every weekday for two solid years. But, I am the fortunate one. I have a fantastic neighborhood close to where I work. Not every body is that lucky (and by not everybody, I mean about 99% of the population). The end game is better land use planning. Unfortunately, it took us about fifty years to get to where we are, and I suspect it will take a minimum of fifty years to fix it.

"But are we doing as much as is needed?"

There are 300 million people in the United States alone. Nothing we do as individuals is ineffective. The economies of scale are simply too great. We should never attempt to convince ourselves that individuals can not make a difference.

Individuals and individual companies can make a difference. Bentley designing and shipping this kind of software is not just a marketing gimmick. It is the marketplace solving a problem and answering a need.

And that is a good thing, because our government is not leading us to make a difference. Read Kennedy's "We choose to go the Moon" speech and imagine that he is talking about solving the energy crisis, instead of sending someone to the moon. Where is that level of commitment from the federal government today? And do we really expect it to emerge with a new administration?

So, instead of acting like "green" software features are a solution looking for a problem, maybe we should recognize them for what they really are: Useful tools, that when put to proper use, can and will make a difference in what we build.

[ralphg]

Perhaps even more green than Mr Wilkinson's ideas is a return to pencil and paper -- mostly made of renewable resources.

[Paul Wilkinson]

Joe Croser's comments reflect the arguments made by many designers when asked about their green credentials, and implicitly suggest that these designers should be investing in yet more Bentley software to make their designs even greener.

However, the software itself may not be developed, delivered and deployed in the greenest manner. Could we, one day, see Bentley software that has been created so as to minimise its carbon footprint? Perhaps web-native CAD software, hosted in energy-efficient data centres, and accessed via the internet by low-energy thin-client PCs?

Probably not, but, hey, I've blogged about it - at http://www.extranetevolution.com/extranet_evolution/2008/06/greener-than-thou.html.

[John Burrill]

Well written, Roopinder. You made an argument that's difficult to swallow but also impossible to dodge.
However, I cite myself as a bastion of the green movement because of my chosen profession.
I want a T-shirt that says 'CADDERS do it in the dark.' Oh and the letters should be green.
I also consider my dual monitor set up eco-friendly because my old 21" CRT's were so heavey that my desk was going to break requiring me to buy a new one and by so doing, kill 30-odd trees to make that signature IKEA particle board.
Oh and my habits are very green. I'm so horribly disorganized on paper that I've abandoned it for the most part and in cases where I have to use it (printing directions since I don't have a GPS device for the FEDS to locate me with) I frequently leave the material in my stead-returning it to the Earth Mother.

[Robin Capper]

Some argue Toyota's Hybrids are total greenwash...

Rinaldo Rinolfi, VP Fiat Powertrain Technologies

"Hybrids should only be used if there is no other, cheaper, way of making a petrol engine more efficient. Unfortunately for Toyota there is"

see my post" It's not easy being green - Are hybrid cars worse?" http://rcd.typepad.com/personal/2007/01/its_not_easy_be.html

[Rande Robinson]

They changed there logo to green. So they must be I saw it on the internet...marketing is a wonderful thing...Isn't it?

[ralphg]

Green is all about selling more of the three 'S's -- $oftware, $ubscriptions, and $ervices.