UPDATE:  Article picked up by the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/us/31portland.html?hp

Growing vertical - of course there are a number of technical issues with a green wall / screen of this size / location- not to mention cost of maintenance. Challenges to pick plants that can actually grow (thrive) in the intense microclimate created by the facades of the buildings.

From observation, one can well imagine the things that grow on the south side of the house - likely because they get so much sun / early heat…  but you have to water them / mulch them usually for them to thrive… I have to believe that the correct sort of plant can be found to handle the extreme ranges of temperature in this hi-rise case, but then I think we have to stop and ask ourselves - does this plant belong here in this region?  What will it take to make the plant thrive?  At what cost? What are the ramifications of introducing a non-native plant?   I can imagine the effects of the green screen will be great given the harsh conditions in existence in this particular case.  What would be even better is to find some way to measure results.  How much shading provided by greenery, what are the temperature differences?  Would the money be better spent on high performance glass in this case or some other physical, permanence and low maintenance solution - What if the building where wrapped in a stainless steel scrim (low maintenance / recyclable)?  Thinking about the options to consider,  is a green wall of this size and scale worth the effect or is it a green gimmick?

If nothing else - what can we learn about why the existing building is such a failure when measured against the performance criteria driven by today’s understanding of the environment and energy use?

I’d really like to find out more about the cost/benefit analysis on this project - I think as a taxpayer - paying for this - I should be able to find out what the assumptions are - these should be made public - in a fair and public way…

- Another article  by Associated Press - Posted on January 16, 2010 at 2:45 PM: “More recently, green roofs have become established as a way of providing insulation and controlling stormwater runoff, among other benefits, and green walls have begun to emerge as not only pleasing to the eye but also part of highly efficient buildings.

At small scale, green walls can even provide fruits and vegetables, but they are used mostly for energy and environmental benefits: insulation, cleansing urban air, deadening sound, sequestering carbon.”

Plans to upgrade the Federal Building in Portland, Ore., include adding 250-foot-tall trellises with plants to a side of the building and an oversize roof to provide shade.

US General Services Administration/AP

More about the project and some very interesting questions - particularly it would be good to follow up on the question of how this proposal performs in a “life cycle cost / benefit” analysis… What is the “tipping point” at which an intervention such as this makes sense?