What Can The Green Building World Learn From The Health Care Debate?

Posted on August 19, 2009 by Rich Cartlidge

Disclaimer: This is not a political post, just my observations about the health care debate and what the green building community can learn from it.

The definition of green building much like that of the term public option in the health care legislation is open to debate. What criteria does a building need to meet in order to be green? Some individuals argue that a building is not a green building unless it obtains certification either by the USGBC or Green Globes or NAHB. While certification does provide a label and verification of a company or individual's achievement it comes with a cost. Federal projects are now required to be build to LEED silver standards. Does requiring LEED certification miss the point?

Much like the health care bill which has people on edge because of their inability to understand its poorly drafted language, individuals often shy away from green building and in particular certification because they are unable to understand it. This past week I spoke with a contractor who is currently involved in several projects and asked him about his experience with green building and LEED specifically. The contractor replied that his buildings were being built or renovated to achieve high levels of water and energy efficiency but that he did not pursue certification because the system was too complex and "wishy washy".

In order to overcome the resistance of individuals to build green or pursue certification it is the responsibility of builders, contractors, attorneys and the USGBC to clarify the system, remove the mystery and inconsistency between credits, and alleviate the fears of those responsible for paying the certification costs that despite their efforts a building will fall short by missing a credit. In its current form LEED certification while very valuable is skeptically viewed by some individuals in the same manner as medical procedures and diagnostic tests performed by doctors. Is it time for green building certification to become outcome based rather than design and construction based?

Tags: , , , , ,

Closing The Gap So LEED Can Lead The Way

Posted on July 5, 2009 by Rich Cartlidge

One of the biggest criticisms of the LEED certification system is that LEED certified buildings do not live up to their performance expectations. While there has yet to be widespread litigation arising from the gap between expected performance and actual performance a recent change to LEED may soon give rise to both increased litigation as well as better performing buildings. Under LEED versions 1.0 and 2.0 buildings were not required to report energy and water usage. The lack of a reporting requirement was a fact that many building owners who had made promises or implied promises of decreased energy usage to lure tenants and allow them to charge higher rents were likely grateful for considering that many LEED certified buildings were not performing up to their promised levels. Even the best designed building is capable of performing poorly if the owner and management do not properly educate the occupants about the energy saving devices used in its construction. A common example is occupant sensing lighting controls turning off lights when occupants sat still for a prolonged period of time, leading individuals to override the sensors and cause lights to remain on long after occupants had left the room and in numerous cases 24 hours per day. LEED version 3.0 seeks to address this gap between expectations and performance by requiring annual energy and water usage reporting or re-certification every two years. Stephen Del Percio at Green Real Estate Law did a good job of explaining the new system and its potential implications.

The energy reporting obligations imposed under the new system will very beneficial to companies which manufacture systems to facilitate energy usage monitoring. However, the biggest benefit will be to the future owners, operators, and users of such buildings who will now know if their building is performing to its promised standards. Whether this new requirement leads to an increase in litigation or not remains to be seen but it surely is a step in the right direction to establishing the credibility of the LEED system and will help to close the gap between building design and building operation.

Tags: , , , ,