Big Green: Fastcompany article on LEED

[Craig Kneeland]

Fastcompany works out of World Trade Center (WTC 7), which is a LEED Gold Core and Shell building, not a LEED Gold NC building.  That means the base building, which can be defined as the area within the building not intended for occupancy, is green.  If the tenants want to occupy green space, it is up to them to make it so.  As the LEED scorecard shows, WTC 7 achieved a single Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1 point, so it's going to be more challenging for the tenants of the building to have low energy bills.  And, like Chris Benedict pointed out at One Bryant Park, the building has floor to ceiling glazing.
 
Setting a performance bar is always a balancing act.  Set it too high, and the market will completely ignore the product; set it too low, and naysayers will have a field day.  This holds true in any market.  Can the USGBC set the LEED bar higher?  Absolutely.  Are they working on it?  Yes, and they have been for years.  Is it fast enough?  No, the progress is frustratingly slow.  Has the market adopted LEED?  Definitely.  Has the US benefitted from LEED?  No question.
 
The energy performance standards of AIA 2030 are consistent with the goals of ASHRAE and, therefore, LEED.  Interestingly, these goals were established before AIA 2030 came on the scene.  AIA 2030 compares energy usage in new buildings to that of existing buildings; ASHRAE compares energy performance in new buildings to an increasingly strict standard.  AIA 2030 has done more to increase awareness of energy efficiency than anything I've seen in more than 25 years in the industry.
 
It is unclear in the article whether the 20% growth in revenue coming from certification is 20% of 100% or 20% of 30%.  I admit to not staying on top of this, but the last I knew, certification fees were pretty much loss leaders, not something that accounted for 67% of the USGBC's increased revenues.
 
The USGBC is a leader in the green building movement, but it is certainly not the entire movement, so there is no need for someone to fear eternal damnation for criticizing the organization and its products.
 
If the USGBC were to mandate the achievement of all 10 Optimize Energy Efficiency points, there might be 10 LEED rated buildings in the country.  However, no one would know about them because green buildings wouldn't be in newspapers, magazines, the internet, TV etc.  Fastcompany probably wouldn't have published this article.
 
Like I said earlier, setting the bar is a balancing act.  Is some progress better than no progress?  I think so.  Is the progress enough?  No.  Mr. Schendler admits mandating a 42% improvement over ASHRAE 90.1-2004 doesn't solve the problem.  That's because new buildings account for about 10% of all buildings in the country.  The big target for carbon reduction is the reduction of energy usage in existing buildings.  The USGBC is the primary player in the green building industry, but energy efficiency has numerous players.
 
Point-mongering is human nature.  The USGBC can hardly be held responsible for that.  I've never met Chris Benedict, but I've heard great things about her for many years.  She is a role model for the industry, but her market share is small.  Is it because her ideas are inferior? Hardly.  Well why?  Human nature. 
 
There is no law that restricts people from exceeding LEED standards.  In fact, a reasonable argument could be made that LEED is akin to codes, setting minimum performance criteria, not maximum.
 
I don't think LEED is perfect, but I do think it's good.  It has accomplished many positive things and done an excellent job of laying the foundation for future growth and improvement.
 
Craig Kneeland
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.biggreen.org/pipermail/biggreen/attachments/20070928/72e8fb03/attachment.html