Do we rate environmentally?

A nice summary of our sustainability status can be found in the build magazine.
I would generally agree with the article. While we have an abundance of materials, knowledge and tools, we still struggle to deliver.

In my personal opinion this is because of financial implications. Good materials and good labour is more expensive than whacking together a simple structure out of cheap materials. Earth and timber buildings, well done buildings, require more labour. A good insulation is deerer than some fibreglass. NB: I use “good” in terms in environmental performance.

Alternative materials need other or even better detailing and will pass slower through council with a risk of consent delays, triggering financial implications down the track for investors.

So the intro of the article is also a good summary:

How green is New Zealand’s built environment? Most professionals would likely agree that, while we have pockets of world-leading practice, there are many areas where our report card reads ‘must try harder’.

via Do we rate environmentally? | BRANZ Build.