Comments on: Why Does the US Green Building Council Seem So Out of Touch?

By: Skye Dunning

Skye Dunning — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:45:11 +0000

Yes, all the focus on glass
Yes, all the focus on glass is a surprise, since concrete is a USGBC "certified" green material.

It's true that they've done a great amount to at least create awareness of what can/should be done. And it's not surprising that the program has had serious flaws. The surprising thing to me is how long it has stayed that way. It's certainly much better than it was a few years ago, but still a long way to go.

By: jerry

jerry — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 19:10:28 +0000

I say Energy Star creates a
I say Energy Star creates a durable, energy efficient, comfortable home, add Indoor Air quality plus and you're covered. Perhaps USBGC could also do more advocacy for the greenest buildings at the high end as part of their home niche and focus on commercial buildings otherwise; the original goal I thought was to assure all buildings are built and operate green. We have a long way to go!

By: jerry

jerry — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 19:05:03 +0000

I tried LEED for Homes in
I tried LEED for Homes in affordable housing which turned out to be an oxymoron. Since we were targeted the EPA High Performance building program we met the performance goals so LEED was really just about feeding the consultant a ton of paperwork and essentially they were paid to upload it but as the developer I felt like I did all the work and most of it off work hours because it was so burdensome. I felt too that the consultants have no incentive to make sure you get certified despite being very nice people. So I agree this program needs to be reconsidered, become more realistic and streamlined and come back to its collaborative roots.

By: tedkidd

tedkidd — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 02:01:19 +0000

I worked with an architect
I worked with an architect who was taking an old block building and renovating it into offices. Lots of discussion about meeting fresh air requirements with windows, and sizing of equipment. Other companies had recommended 2 rooftop units, 12 and 8 ton. Also recommended was gas water heater with recirc to the bathrooms at either end of the building.

The partner liked my plan better. 2 4 ton hybrids, 2 energy recovery ventilation units, and small electric on demand water heaters.

They eventually abandoned the attempt to get LEED certification. One problem was the building's consumption was less than 50% of what the LEED model suggested. Even though 100% of their energy buy is "renewable", they couldn't meet the 50% of modeled requirement.

They were not interested in following the AP suggestion of leaving windows open and lights on to drive consumption up to 50% of modeled.

By: Leigha Dickens

Leigha Dickens — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:32:57 +0000

Make that “Energy Star.
Make that “Energy Star.” I’d hate to think of what the “Energy Stare For Homes” program would be like! Lots of staring at your power meter and willing it to advance less quickly…

By: Leigha Dickens

Leigha Dickens — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:30:37 +0000

Allison--your statement "
Allison--your statement "the thing that bothers me about LEED is that people who don't even know what the program is about want a LEED certified building or home just because the name has buzz" resonates with me. One the one hand, I think at least trying to go green and jump in on the buzz is better than not trying to be green at all and props to LEED for being the vehicle that has pushed green building into more of the mainstream. On the other hand, I get frustrated by the ofttimes bureaucratic nature of the standard itself--especially when I see folks dropping it because the cost and paperwork are more than they were really bargaining for.

There is an idea out there to just build to LEED standards without getting certified, because of the perception that although healthier materials and improved energy efficiency can pay itself back, certification paperwork itself is just a sunk cost. I seem to recall that at one point my city council was pushing that for new city buildings--not sure what ever came of that. Since a heck of a lot of LEED is funky calculations and paperwork, I don't know how that ends up going in practice.

Regardless, I see LEED as a decent but frustrating tool for considering the sustainability of a building on multiple environmental fronts. If energy is all you care about, other paths like net-zero or Energy Stare are probably way less frustrating. I'd be curious if you Allison or anybody else here had suggestions for a tool that's better than LEED for considering environmental issues like water efficiency, land use, erosion, etc, that aren't just energy consumption?

By: Henry

Henry — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:22:23 +0000

Allison,

Allison,

I completely agree! LEED is a boutique certification that only the wealthy can afford. The benefits are hard to justify considering the costs.

You spoke about burdensome documentation. What about the convoluted (and expensive) process to become a LEED AP (or is it LEED Pro or Green Rater, or is it something else???). I looked into it a while ago and couldn't figure out the proper path. The only thing that was certain was a large pricetag.

By: Kent Robinson

Kent Robinson — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 18:25:50 +0000

LEED v4 is open for public
LEED v4 is open for public comment now through Dec. 10, 2012.
https://new.usgbc.org/leed/v4/#comment

By: Chuck Lohre

Chuck Lohre — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 04:59:35 +0000
The USGBC didn't build that
The USGBC didn't build that building. They leased the space for ten years. I received LEED Platinum on my office project for $9,549. I you take out the $3500 pellet stove and the LEED fees it was done for $4 per square foot. The documentation is simple and straight forward. I'm working on another possible LEED Project now and it was very enjoyable to learn eQUEST and apply it to the Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1. It's a great program and I'd like more people to be encouraged to look into it and learn about high performance buildings that don't cost a lot. Thanks for your article.

By: Glen Gallo

Glen Gallo — Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:12:12 +0000
Great Article. I think USGBC
Great Article. I think USGBC should be applauded for their putting the concept out there branding label. I first looked into the program many years ago and decided it was not for me. At that time the focus was commercial buildings which is not my target market. It seems to me they should drop the energy out of the acronym because it does not seem to be their strong point. As you examine their points it appears to focus on the carbon footprint of the building process but not so much its life cycle energy use. It focuses on the health of the occupants and provides great insight on design from a holistic approach. Really although they promote energy savings it seems to be often overlooked. I am not an AP but have taken several classes my
guess is somewhere in the 80 hour mark or more. I like LEED and the USGBC. I admire the great luxury liner from the shore is it glides into its future. I am interested in where it will travel. I am however not on board