Slides presented by Mark Woolbright in Washington, DC.at the USGBC headquarters on 1-20-2010

1. Similarities Between Green
Walls, Green Roofs and the Research
That Keeps Them Moving Forward
By
Michael Furbish of Furbish Company, LLC
Mark Woolbright of Greenwall Ventures, LLC

2. Your eye goes right
to the Green Wall
in this picture,
doesn't it.

3. Could you
imagine a solid
concrete wall
here instead?

4. Annuals and
perennials mixed
for great aesthetics.

5. A 54 foot tall slope hidden in there by
vegetation!

6. Green walls are
easy on the eyes.

7. Hardy natives offer various
growth habits that obscure th
lines of an improved area whi
restoring needed habitat.

8. The right plant in the right place
can have awesome results that
last.

9. Green Wall 101
• What constitutes a “green wall”?
• Our intended definition of a green wall.
• History of green walls starting in Europe and why.
• Why has St. Louis been one of the only green walls
markets in the United States?
• Other green wall markets in the United States.
• Green walls are a conceptually different way to
manage grade changes.
• Effects of regionalized product availability and no
consistent message or information portal.
• Benefits and applications of green walls are similar to
green roofs but in need of published data.

10. This is Hardscape
and it is everywhere.
Can Green Walls
begin to overtake
them as the
mainstream , rather
than the niche?

11. Hardscape vs. Landscape
Conventional retaining wall vs. Vegetated retaining wall

12. Aesthetically attractive alternative to hardscape
Vegetated
Retaining Wall
Conventional
Retaining Wall

13. The “big” questions!
• Why do you want it green?
• How do you get it green fast?
• How do you keep it green?
• Does it require maintenance and if
so, is it intensive?
• Does it have benefits beyond just
holding back an embankment?

14. Solid concrete walls
are not as easy on
the eyes.

15. Why Choose A Green Retaining Wall Over A
Traditional Retaining Wall
A green retaining wall minimizes the impact of a needed structure while
increasing “green space” lost in development.
 A green wall reduces the “Heat Island” effect by moderating fluctuations
in temperatures at and near the structure day and night.
 A green wall is another stormwater management tool as they help reduce
surface water runoff and filter pollutants from the water and air around it.
 A green wall can be a key component in a sustainable development plan
and signifies an awareness of the need to make a difference.
 A green wall is cool on the eyes, reduces glare and may increase worker
productivity as it fosters a greater sense of well-being.

16. •Green walls minimize
the Impact of
large structures.

17. A Green Wall Is:
 A water treatment plant
 An air filtration plant
 A storm water management tool
 An energy conservation tool
 A low impact development tool
 A capital savings tool
 A habitat
 A worker productivity tool
 A public relations tool
 A sales tool
 A noise reduction tool

18. Green Walls start out
pretty boring
And end up pretty
exciting.

19. Just planted with hardy vines
and junipers.

20. Same wall after
3 years of
growth.

21. Just planted with Sedum
like a green roof would
utilize.

22. Same wall after 2
years of growth.

23. Project Notes:
The completed Reinforced
Soil Slopes were dusted
with
Topsoil and spray seeded
with hearty native plant
material.
Construction
Phase

24. Project Notes:
The vegetation will require
NO maintenance and
serves
to minimize the impact of
these large cost effective
structures.
Completed
project the next year.

25. Roadway Slope Disappears into Habitat
Before After

26. Thermal Performance of Biowalls
B. Retzlaff1, D. Gerstenecker1, L. Richter1, and M. Woolbright2
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville1, Green Wall Ventures2
ABSTRACT
Eighteen circular (7-foot diameter) green walls (donated by Hercules Manufacturing of St. Louis) have been located on the SIUE campus. The project is designed to evaluate the
plant growth and performance of five Sedum species and one unplanted wall on north, south, east, and west wall aspects. In addition, the temperature of the wall, growing
RESULTS
G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re s 1 0 /3 0 /0 8 G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re s 0 4 /0 3 /0 9
medium, and plant surfaces have been monitored on the same north, south, east, and west wall aspects. One of the Sedum species ('Bertrum Anderson') did not survive the first
year of the study and we have replaced this species with mixed Sedum plugs. Walls planted with Sedum spurium and Sedum phedimus have approximately 75% growth media 30 100
coverage after one year. Further, plant surface temperatures are less than wall block surface temperatures while the growing medium (Ameren Bottom Ash) has the greatest P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m
surface temperature. North and east wall aspects have the lowest afternoon surface temperatures - more than 25 degrees F lower than west and south aspects. Our data 25
80
indicates that living wall systems have the potential to reduce the urban heat flux and that species selection may impact the thermal benefit.
T em perature ( F)
T em perature ( F )
20
o
o
60
15
40
10
20
5
INTRODUCTION
0 0
tro l nche
n m
d im u
s spp. riu m tro l nche
n
a tic u
m
d im u
s spp. riu m
C on a tic u Phe um Spu C on Phe um Spu
e rg ru ts c h Sed e rg ru ts c h Sed
Im m Kam Im m Kam
Green (living) walls may be used to help cool cities and reduce the Urban Heat Island Effect. When the plants of a green wall grow to maximum G re e n W a ll T y p e G re e n W a ll T y p e
coverage, their shade and evaporation should help to reduce the amount of heat that would have been absorbed by the wall material. Evaluation of Fig. 2 Fig. 3
the biowalls planted at SIUE is needed to determine which plant species provide the greatest thermal benefits. This study evaluated the surface
temperatures of 4 different Sedum species walls, a mixed Sedum species wall, and a control wall with no plant species. Our hypothesis was that Mean temperatures of the plants, medium, and blocks per species in the months of October, 2008
planted walls would have lower surface temperatures than unplanted walls. and April, 2009).
G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re s o n S o u th A s p e c t 1 0 /3 0 /0 8 G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re o n S o u th A s p e c t 0 4 /0 3 /0 9
SIUE PROJECT MATERIALS AND METHODS 50
P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m
120
P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m
A
40 A A 100
Green Wall Setup – 3 replicates of 6 Green Walls each planted with one of four Sedum species, one with no plants (the control wall), and one with B
C
B A
B
mixed Sedum plug in a completely randomized design. (Fig. 1)
T em perature ( F )
B C
Tem perature ( F)
80
o
o
30
C C
Green Wall Species - Sedum immergrunchen, Sedum kamshaticum, Sedum phedimus, and Sedum spurium 60
The mixed Sedum species wall included S. spurium, S. sexangulare, S. cauticola, S. 20
40
kamshaticum, and S. album 10
Green Wall Medium - Bottom Ash mixed with composted pinebark donated by Ameren UE (Retzlaff et al., 2008) 20
Green Wall Blocks - Donated by Hercules Manufacturing of St. Louis (Retzlaff et al., 2008) 0
tro l n s p.
0
tro l n m s spp. riu m
C on nche a tic u
m
d im u m sp riu m C on nche a tic u d im u Spu
e rg ru ts c h Phe u Spu e rg ru ts c h Phe um
Project monitoring – wall surface temperatures on the north, south, east, and west aspects were taken monthly for 8 months. We began in Im m Kam
G re e n W a ll T y p e
Sed Im m Kam
G re e n W a ll T y p e
Sed
September of 2008 and concluded in April 2009. An infrared thermometer was used to collect temperatures at the same time each afternoon. A Fig. 4 Fig. 5
one way ANOVA for a completely randomized design was used to test for differences between treatments. A Tukey’s post-hoc test was then used
to rank differences at an alpha level of 0.05 (Proc GLM, SAS version 9.1) Mean temperatures of the plant species, growth medium, and blocks per species from the South
aspect for the months of October and April.
DISCUSSION
G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re s o n N o rth A s p e c t 1 0 /3 0 /0 8 G re e n W a ll T e m p e ra tu re s o n N o rth A s p e c t 0 4 /0 3 /0 9
Significantly different temperatures for the control walls and species planted walls are a desirable outcome for living wall systems. The plant and medium 20 60
can act together as a thermal unit that provide a cooling layer to building material (Sidwell et al., 2008). The study of these thermal environments are to P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m P la n ts B lo c k s M e d iu m
determine how great the benefits in temperature reduction are per plant species throughout changing atmospheric temperatures. This study helps to 15
a
50
promote the idea that green walls can reduce the effects of the Urban heat Island caused by development. The coverage of a plant has a direct correlation a
T em perature ( F )
a A
Tem perature ( F )
40
A
o
o
B
with the temperature of the medium and block it is placed in. The greater the coverage of the species the lower the temperatures the medium and block A A
B
b A
B b
10 30
should be. The dark surface of the medium heats up, but with maximum growth, the plant should provide shade and reduce the amount of heat absorbed. B
The coverage and maximum growth can influence the temperature, and help provide optimal thermal benefits (Koehler et al., 2006). The ability of the 20
living wall to collect rainwater and the process of evaporation are also factors that may lead to cooling of the building material (Koehler et al.,2006). More 5
10
studies are needed to determine how great an influence biowalls can have on the surrounding thermal environment.
0 0
tro l nche
n
a tic u
m
d im u
s spp. riu m
tro l nche
n
a tic u
m us spp. m C on Phe um Spu
C on Phe
d im m Spu
riu e rg ru ts c h Sed
e rg ru ts c h S edu Im m Kam
Im m Kam
G re e n W a ll T y p e G re e n W a ll T y p e
Fig. 6 Fig. 7
Fig. 1 Mean average temperatures of the plants, medium, and block per species from the North aspect fort he
months of October and April. (Medium with different grouping letters are statistically different from one
another)
SIUE PROJECT CONCLUSIONS
Average green wall surface temperatures are not statistically different in October or April (Fig. 1, 2).
The North aspect stayed significantly cooler than the South aspect in April and October (Fig. 4,6; Fig. 5,7).
Planted biowalls have a lower growth medium temperature than unplanted walls in October 2008.
REFERENCES:
Sidwell, A., Gibbs-Alley, J., Forrester, K., Jost, V., Luckett, K., Morgan, S., Yan, T., Noble, B., and Retzlaff, W.,2008. Evaluation of the thermal Benefits of Green Roof
Systems.
Koehler, Dr. Manfred, 2006. Living Wall Systems- A View Back and Some Visions
Retzlaff, W., J. Middleton, M. Woolbright, V. Jost, S. Morgan, and K. Luckett. 2008. Evaluating the performance of the Ecoworks living wall system. Proceedings
Sixth Annual Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Awards, and Trade Show (available www.greenroofs.org).,Baltimore, MD.

27. How about a simple, space
efficient urban garden.

28. Unlike green roofs, the media
is “in the face” and greatly
“behind the face.” This fact
presents the greatest
challenge in design but the
greatest benefits to site
development and the
environment once good
laboratory data is published..

29. Site water runoff

30. Site water runoff for capture in
slope backfill zone

31. 18 test walls are being
set up at the SIUe
field site so Dr. Bill
can start “killing”
plants for our first
trial series.

32. Before the plants are added
to the study walls.

33. Dr. Retzlaff
hard at
work
planting the
walls.

34. The next
season with
growth and a
view of one of
the controls
walls that was
not planted.

35. Spring in
Atlanta, GA. test
trial wall.

36. Summer in the same wall! Trials
like this make it easy to identify the
species that give thermal cover.

37. Thank you for attending
our presentation!