[Noisebridge-discuss] Political discussion about housing

Garrett Smith dhtmlkitchen at gmail.com
Thu Nov 5 02:27:49 UTC 2015

On 11/4/15, Rachel McConnell <rachel at xtreme.com> wrote:
> Hi, I'm not as versed in the politics of housing in SF as the posters
> are.  Posters, would you mind laying out the steps in more detail when
> you make your arguments, so I can follow them?  For example, I don't
> know what this means:

The problem is not about whether the poster is for or against LEED.

LEED certification is "sustainable". Black buildings — and NeMa is
black — increase energy demand to cool it during the summer months.
Does this sound sustainable? Or does it sound more like an ironic use
of using the buzzword "sustainable"?

The methane pit is not a functional fire pit. It is for decorative
purpose: to make a flame. It does this while pumping out CH4. Creating
a potent greenhouse gas to fight global warming — Does this sound like
a contradiction to you? Seems glaringly obvious to me, and that's why
I didn't bother spelling it all out for you before.

> "Sustainable housing includes the all-black NEMA building, get LEED
> certified, adjacent to the LEED building with the methane-emitting
> fire pit (dirty burning nat gas, and AIRC CH4 has ~300x the GWP of
> CO2)."
> I can't even tell if the poster is in favor of LEED certification.
> Pretty sure they're against natural gas?
> (Also, Be Nice)

(Starting threads to complain about other threads is selfish and
destroys the continuity of the discussion.)

Thank you,

More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list