Kenner Kingston, AIA, LFA, LEED, SEED, Principal, Place Collaborative Inc.
Current environmental trends in our industry cover the gamut of sustainability and regenerative design topics, but the ones that have my attention at the moment are place-based design, water harvest and reuse, net zero energy, deconstruction over demolition and community resilience (with individual beacon buildings playing a key role).

Of all of these, water harvest and reuse is the hardest to fake and has the lowest payback, which helps to explain why it is attempted so rarely even though it is needed most urgently in our bioregion (Great Salt Lake). My observation is that this trend is naturally resistant to greenwashing, which is kind of amazing.

Net zero energy remains the most greenwashed trend of all, even though there is a legitimate, affordable, thoughtful and easy-to-apply third-party certification (ILFI Zero Energy) that scales wonderfully (offsite solutions are allowed in the ILFI’s Zero Carbon option).

So, what’s the most sustainable current trend? Probably material health and safety. It’s not on my trendy topics list because in many ways the goal has been reached. Such great progress has been made in this area over the course of my career, thanks to LEED and Declare, that the average inhabitant of our projects is already benefiting meaningfully from fewer VOCs and Red List substances in the building materials that surround them.

E. Ben Rogers, AIA, NCARB, Principal, FFKR Architects
Practicing in a more conservative part of the state, many of our clients still align with the earliest guidance we received on the LEED process back in 2002. One client famously told us, “The only green we want to be associated with is the kind of green you can save us.” Another client — and a longtime friend — has spent nearly a decade developing a project. He holds a deep respect for the natural environment surrounding his property and wanted that value reflected in his project. However, once the costs associated with implementing those ideas became clear, the scope of green initiatives was reduced to remain financially feasible.

At FFKR, our core design philosophy is rooted in listening to the client. We do not impose initiatives if they are not aligned with the client’s goals. That said, we consistently integrate energy efficiency, effective daylighting and the use of local materials — always within the constraints of the project budget. In the case of my friend’s project, many of the proposed green initiatives, while well-intentioned, bordered on greenwashing: aspirational, but ultimately unachievable. By staying true to our philosophy — listening carefully, respecting budget realities, and prioritizing practical strategies such as energy efficiency and natural lighting — we believe this approach represents a more genuine and sustainable path forward.

Bryan Markkenson, AIA, Drift Studio
When I imagine a healthy future for all Utah families, I picture neighborhoods that are safe and clean. Children are walking or biking to school and after-school activities. Neighbors gather for morning and evening walks. Trees provide ample shade and cool the neighborhood. You can hear and see the birds.

Inside homes and businesses, people are breathing clean air and enjoy a quiet and efficient environment. Right-sized insulation provides a warm building in the winter and a cool house in the summer, without oversized equipment making up the difference. Sunlight is ample and uplifting through appropriately positioned window openings. 

In short, there are many ways to improve the lived experience in Utah and we should be paying attention to all of them. However, there are ways of watering this experience down or covering it in a coating of disingenuous green. Here are a few of the “green flags” to watch out for.

Complying with a baseline for recently updated code versions and calling that sustainable is greenwashing. By not exceeding the baseline, you are doing very little for the homeowner or building owner to reduce future emissions or utility bills. Many developments may call themselves sustainable, claiming to be a step above when, in reality, they have just hit the next code cycle. Incremental improvements in code are great and necessary, but they don’t move the needle to where it needs to be, specifically for our state and our bowl of a city in Salt Lake. A truly green neighborhood or building would demonstrate values that far exceed the code and investigate the boundaries of how to make buildings perform on a higher level.

Car-dependent design is inherently polluting. Suburban communities were originally imagined as an escape — quiet neighborhoods with green lawns and tree-lined streets — but in practice, that vision often trades peaceful living for hours spent in traffic. These areas are typically zoned in ways that separate housing from everyday necessities, increasing reliance on driving. In contrast, compact, higher-density development paired with preserved open space is a proven urban design approach. It supports meaningful access to green space and biophilic connections while also enabling more efficient, livable communities. Denser areas tend to cluster amenities, reduce the need for car trips and support viable public transit, helping people spend less time behind the wheel. In regions like the Salt Lake Valley, where air quality is a serious concern, small gestures like drought-tolerant landscaping do little to offset the broader environmental impact of car-dependent planning. Be careful what you’re signing up for when buying a home, but also consider how to purchase wisely and use your financial choices to further a healthier outcome for everyone.

In general, the use of “green” or “eco” should be approached with caution. For many products, structures and even concepts, the labels used don’t mean much unless they’re backed up by structured verification such as lifecycle assessments, Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) or third-party certifications. Without that, the language can become more branding than evidence. Claims can also be used to gloss over the less sustainable aspects of a product. Take fiber cement board siding. The claim is that it’s durable, long lasting and maintenance-free, but the production process is carbon intensive. Diving into literature can make your head spin and at the end, you may find opposing levels of sustainability within one product and must decide which of your values you will lean on. 

You see a rendering of a building going up around the corner with lush trees, dark green lawns, plants spilling off the green roof and think, “They must have thought this through.” In fact, that building may have one “sustainable” element, such as a green roof, while the building itself took over an entire green field site with a blacktop parking lot in back and ran out of tree budgets for a shady canopy. The high-performance HVAC system may have been value-engineered out, and the least expensive (but most carbon intensive) option was installed.

Further investigation to truly uncover sustainable credibility is almost always warranted. A reputable certification will do much of the work for you. While LEED has its blind spots, if you see a Gold Certified building, you know they have at least exceeded common building practices to attain that status. There are numerous certification criteria floating around. Getting familiar with them can be a quick way to spot truly green buildings or products.

When it comes to solar, electrification and other renewables, our current president may be the most consequential leader in recent history. With the war in Iran pushing oil prices up, countries around the globe are, or already were, starting to invest in alternative energy sources. Solar PV panels have become the go-to renewable energy option; they’re relatively easy to install, work across many types of buildings, and are increasingly paired with battery storage to smooth the ups and downs of energy production. As homes and businesses shift to electric systems, the grid can transition more quickly to cleaner sources of power. Once energy enters the grid, it’s all the same — buildings simply use electricity, regardless of how it was generated. Every new clean energy plant added to the system immediately helps reduce the overall carbon footprint of the power being used.

When our buildings contribute 40% of the carbon emissions in the world, it makes sense to try and integrate proven renewable energy sources in the design and implementation of a building.

Where you may find greenwashing with this proposition is that humans aren’t actually reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The drive for more electricity for our daily lives (never mind the increasing demand from AI and other industrial applications) pushes demand for all sources of energy, and we need to do more to offset our current and future energy needs. Choosing electricity over fossil fuels, as well as using more efficient equipment, appliances, cars, etc., will go a long way to making electricity truly green.

In the end, it’s difficult to ascertain what is truly “green.” Just as you’ve seen protein content touted on all food packaging in recent years, claims of greenness will continue to saturate the building community where there is profit in doing so. The projects and products that stand out tend to be the ones where performance and narrative actually line up. Keep looking out for them, keep educating yourself and keep exceeding the baseline.