Green is a relative term. This project demonstrates that "we" modern people need to have a better understanding of our choices and how they impact the environment. "We" cannot allow our decisions to be based upon unfounded claims, marketing ploys, and rumors. We will never be truly green and carbon neutrality is simply a single measure. Declaring carbon neutrality as a holy grail of green-ness is absurd. Proclaiming to be in some form better than another because of this arbitrary measure is also absurd. Self-satisfaction and smugness about being green is silly. Let me put forward several thoughts 1) PV cell arrays are made from rare earth and other minerals (see wiki link below if you want more) that are extracted from the earth. Solar arrays do not themselves burn fossil fuels - calling them environmentally friendly is a whole different argument. 2) I'm pretty sure form looking at the legacy center website fasteners were used in construction (nails, bolts, metal plates) and some other metal based products (tools, forklifts, copper wiring, conduit, etc.) Most of those were not likely 'local' and they are also made from minerals extracted from the earth and refined in an industrial processes. 3) The people who built the building came in cars, wore manufactured clothing, and ate food likely bought from a grocery store - all inherently not green In sum - Carbon neutrality can have some benefits, but is in large a marketing gimmick to make people feel better and sell products (see second link below - PV cells are big business). Greener buildings, and living, is an admirable goal in itself. The need for self-sanctified 'green-ness' actually hurts overall progress. I guarantee that most people who love 'green' topics dislike heavy industry and mining without understanding that they are essential to our current life on earth. Working together we can make progress to better the environment - chasing carbon neutrality is not the answer. To deride the legacy center because it is not "green" is a waste of time. To admire its goal of using materials in a more efficient manner is a good thing. It is about progress, small incremental steps of progress. Falsehood often lurks upon the tongue of him, who, by self-praise, seeks to enhance his value in the eyes of others. - Arnold Bennett http:///wiki/Solar_cell http:///2007/10/01/how-to-profit-as-surge-of-solar-ipos-mark-dawn-of-new-industry-in-china/
A second common criticism of Leopold is that he fails to state clearly why we should adopt the land ethic.  He often cites examples of environmental damage (., soil erosion, pollution, and deforestation) that result from traditional human-centered, "conqueror" attitudes towards nature. But it is unclear why such examples support the land ethic specifically, as opposed to biocentricism or some other nature-friendly environmental ethic. Leopold also frequently appeals to modern ecology, evolutionary theory, and other scientific discoveries to support his land ethic. Some critics have suggested that such appeals may involve an illicit move from facts to values.  At a minimum, such critics claim, more should be said about the normative basis of Leopold's land ethic.