BDG23 PRELUDE Fall 2019

Mark Doughty is President of Thoughtforms and an alumni liaison for the
MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative, which focuses on developing and empowering
leaders to act so that humans and nature can thrive for generations
to come. He lives with his family in an all-electric home that generates 70%
more energy than it uses—enough to power a Tesla for 35,000 miles a year.
With all the complexity that can tangle up our modern
lives, the idea of a fresh, luxurious home can be just
the right tonic to brighten a day. That idea, like so
many that flourish in social and traditional media, is
quite seductive. It’s no wonder, then, that people react
strongly when a contrary thought intrudes. But perhaps
it is time to welcome just such a contrary thought as
motivation to pause and reflect on our definition of
the ideal home, in the context of our families and the
broader community.
This past summer, the Town of Brookline proposed a
bylaw that requires all new buildings and gut renovations
to be free of fossil fuel infrastructure.
The proposal was met by some with
grumbling about “big government,”
a reaction that seems more soundbite
reflex than thoughtful response:
after all, the town isn’t all that big and,
at this local level of our democracy,
an engaged citizenry can have a
major influence on the direction
of government. So, rather than
the expressed fear of government
infringement on our freedom, the
source of opposition is more likely the
judgment implied in the proposal—i.e.
“what you’ve been doing all along is
not good”—and fear of change. It is
indeed unsettling to think that the path
we have been obediently following in
homebuilding for a century might be
taking us to the wrong destination.
But, objectively, how much of a course correction does
a move away from fossil fuel imply? Thoughtforms
has built all-electric homes without any observed cost
penalties. The indoor climate in these homes is healthy
and comfortable. The systems themselves are reliable
(which is not surprising—the electric-powered heat pump
was introduced in the 1940’s, 20 or so years after the gasfired
furnace was patented). Perhaps most importantly,
clients who live in these homes are happy with their
homes—in some cases happier than those in fossil fuelfueled
homes.
CONSTRUCTION,
CLIMATE AND
THE POSSIBILITY
OF A FUTURE
Given all this, a bylaw that takes fossil fuel systems out
of the mix seems a matter of substitution rather than an
abrupt detour onto a costly, risk-fraught path. So why isn’t
everyone on board? Inertia.
It’s quite easy to go through each day doing essentially
what we did the day before, expecting similar, predictable
results. Unfortunately, this “business as usual” approach
no longer promises predictable results and is putting our
collective future at risk (read Kerry Emanuel’s What We
Know About Climate Change for a concise review of the
crisis and possible mitigating actions—contact me and
I can send you a copy). If we think of our ideal home in
this context of society and survival,
in-home fossil fuel infrastructure
compounds the problem: while it
may be possible through collective
action to convert the shared electric
grid to fossil fuel-free sources, it will
be much more challenging to convert
infrastructure in every individual home.
Given this reality, and where we are
situated in time, place and opportunity,
building more homes with on-site
fossil fuel infrastructure simply seems
absurd. We are already in a hole and
this proposal tells us: “Stop digging!”
It’s hard to find a builder that doesn’t
profess their commitment to quality.
But how many limit their definition
of quality to the traditional attributes
of craftsmanship and beauty? True
quality includes the health of the
home environment, the lifecycle impact of the home
on our world, and the physical and emotional well
being of the families who live, learn and grow in the
home. As a community, we should invest our time and
resources building homes that make it possible for future
generations to thrive.
Author, educator and environmentalist Bill McKibben
put it aptly when he said, “The problem with climate
change is that it’s a timed test. If you don’t solve it fast,
then you don’t solve it.” This is our opportunity to
contribute to the solution.
64
bostondesignguide.com