Let me ask you a quick question: Does building green cost more initially than traditional construction? If you are like most people, your answer is going to be "yes."

The good news is that several studies have shown that using green construction techniques does not significantly increase building costs. However, the bad news is that the perception among most people – from homeowners to large construction firms – is that green construction practices add to the cost of development. And when it comes to public opinion, perception is reality.

It is easy to see why this misperception is prevalent. From magazine articles to T.V. home improvement shows, the public hears references to higher initial costs with savings over the long term. And in a society that values the here and now, increased initial costs represent a large barrier for adoption.

Although the green building movement has tried to dissuade people from these misconceptions, a new study called Opening the Door to Green Building conducted by the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the United States Green Building Council and Sustainable Rhythm shows that perceptions of green construction are far from reality.

Released on June 18, 2010, the study found that 62% of respondents think there is a significant increase in the costs associated with building green, with 46% of that group thinking the premium for building green was at least 10% - 25% or more.

However, two studies conducted in 2004 and 2006 by David Langdon show that "there is no significant difference in average costs for green buildings as compared to non-green buildings." Another study developed for California's Sustainable Building task force in October 2003 confirms that green construction would increase initial costs by only 2% (with a lifetime savings of 20% in total construction costs).

So, how do we change this perception and, in essence, change people's reality?

In the case of the construction industry, we have to do a better job of understanding who we are talking to and what they want to hear. For example, in the Ohio study, respondents thought that developing messaging that related green building practices as a way to help affect climate change was a bad idea. This may be a reaction to the controversy surrounding climate change studies.

From their perspective, messaging that concentrated on actual cost savings (ROI) and performance data, both immediate and long term, would be more helpful for them and have a better chance of affecting their choices and changing their perceptions.

We should also try to create a bottom up approach. That is, create consumer demand for greener building techniques by educating the public on the financial realities of green building and start replacing assumption with fact.

What do you think we have to do to change these perceptions on costs? Post your comments so we can all read your ideas.