Green Building & Environmental Trends

California: Environmentalists Fight Green Building Code?

Rich Cartlidge — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:25:56 -0500

I have often written about the environmental benefits of green buildings. However, this past week the Los Angeles Times published an article addressing how California environmentalists fought to block California from implementing a mandatory green building code. Since 2004 all new state buildings in California have been required to obtain LEED Silver certification. The Governor of California in an effort to further green building was poised to pass a green building code which would would slash water use, mandate the recycling of construction waste, cut back on polluting materials and step up enforcement of energy efficiency in new homes, schools, hospitals and commercial buildings statewide. The proponents of the green building code had high hopes and David Wells, executive director of the California Building Standards Commission said: "It is going to change the whole fabric of how buildings are built by integrating green practices into our everyday building code""The rest of the nation will be looking at what we have done." The environmentalists, who one would assume would support such an initiative fought adamantly to block its passage stating that it would create confusion in the marketplace by allowing buildings to be certified without the requirement of third party verification which is required by the USGBC and its LEED certification system. Is this the first of many challenges to be brought by environmental groups that new green building codes essentially will amount to claims of "greenwashing?"

What is the True Cost of Going Green?

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 22:27:31 -0500

This past week Elisa Wood of Renewableenergyworld.com wrote a very interesting blog piece focusing on the state of the commercial real estate market and the perceived costs and benefits of green buildings. Ms. Wood focused on what she calls the "ghosts" of green building, the perceived costs of green expenditures which in reality do not actually turn out to be true her post is based on a recent report released by Ceres which can be downloaded here.

The report established the methods by which both direct and indirect property investors can reduce their portfolios energy usage and increase its value:

Establish a baseline measuremen tof energy use across portfolios
Prioritize opportunities for energy reduction using a sequenced approach from ENERGY STAR that focuses first on the worst- performing properties that provide the lowest-cost, easiest opportunities for cutting energy use. Such sequencing includes:
Retro-commissioning buildings, which involves testing building systems to ensure they are operating optimally
Upgrading lighting – Reducing electricity load demand of occupants and equipment – Upgrading and optimizing air distribution systems – Upgrading and optimizing heating and cooling systems
Benchmark on a regular basis ongoing energy use against that baseline For indirect property owners who invest in real estate related funds or stock ownership:
Seek funds with a specific mission of creating or acquiring energy efficient properties
Seek funds with specific goals for energy efficiency improvements in existing holdings
Use proxy voting and direct engagement to address energy efficiency with asset managers and public companies

The report contains very interesting material for all involved in the green building industry and is worthy of a quick read. The findings are very encouraging for the future of the industry and show that people are starting to appreciate the benefits that green buildings can provide.

Use A Green Lease Less You Lose Out

Rich Cartlidge — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:40:31 -0500

Green buildings are unique in many ways but share one common trait with traditionally constructed buildings, without tenants they are of little use to their owners. With tenants comes the need for leases and with green buildings a green lease is a necessity. A green lease is needed from the owner's perspective to ensure that their investment is protected and from the tenant's perspective to ensure that the owner constructs and operates the building in a manner that ensures energy efficiency. Traditionally there have been two types of leases used in the leasing of commercial property, triple net leases and gross leases. A triple net lease is a lease where the tenant pays their monthly base rent, a portion of the building's energy costs, real estate taxes and insurance costs proportionate to their percentage occupancy of the building, and their proportionate share of the buildings public area maintenance. A triple net lease provides no incentive to the owner to increase energy efficiency as the tenants are already paying these costs. On the other hand a gross lease where the tenant pays a monthly rent which covers the tenants insurance, real estate taxes, and public area maintenance.

In buildings which utilize a gross lease the owner would be well advised to take measures to increase the buildings energy efficiency as they will directly benefit from any savings. However, owners continue to fight measures such as those proposed by New York City which would require energy efficiency increases.

So what exactly should a green lease address? The following list while by no means exhaustive provides a good starting point for owners considering implementing green leases:

Require tenants to use energy efficient lighting fixtures which include occupant sensors and not to override these sensors if installed by the owner.
Require tenants to use low flow fixtures to reduce water use.
Permit entry by the owner's agents to monitor building systems on an ongoing basis to ensure that they are operating at their highest possible efficiencies.
Require tenants to utilize low Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) paints, adhesives, and cleaning supplies to ensure the highest possible indoor air quality.
Implement waste management policies which incorporate recycling programs to minimize the amount of waste sent to landfills.
Require that any tenant build-outs are conducted in a manner which will permit upgrading of building systems in the future if more energy efficient systems become available.
Ensure that provisions are in place which clarify what the owner's and tenants rights and cost burdens will be if energy efficiency measures are implemented in the future which either interfere with the tenant's use and enjoyment of the building or which require large capital expenditures by the owner but which pass tangible financial benefits onto the tenant.
A clause which allows the owner to terminate the lease if the tenant's use of the building is inconsistent with its design as a sustainable building.

Image Credit

Maryland: We Do Crabs! We Do Football! We Do Green Homes?

Rich Cartlidge — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 16:58:15 -0500

Today as I drove around Maryland with my mom running day after Christmas errands we passed a development called Spencer's Crossing and my mom asked if I would like to take a look. At first I was slightly perplexed as to why I would want to look at Maryland real estate, but my mom quickly changed my mind by telling me the development was Maryland's first LEED for Homes community! The community is the first in the nation to receive LEED Gold status and Certified Green status by the GE Ecoimagination program.

While the developers make some lofty promises such as 53% reduced heating and cooling costs they back these claims up with two guarantees, which for the lawyers among us translates to an enforceable promise. The two guarantees are unique and perhaps just what the green building movement needs to catch on in the mid-atlantic. The first guarantee is a heating and cooling guarantee which calculates the amount of energy needed to heat and cool the home and then guarantees that your costs will not exceed that amount. The second guarantee a comfort guarantee which assures that the homes temperature will not vary by more than 3 degrees from the center of any conditioned room. I can tell you based on my experience that the home was very well constructed and that I was unable to feel any noticeable drafts.

However, the most impressive feature of these homes was not their excellent construction or luxury features but rather their 60% reduction in property taxes offered as a result of the Baltimore County tax credit which is guaranteed for a period of 3 years and perhaps longer if it continues to be funded. The tax credit is Codified in the Baltimore County Code 11-2-203.2.

Do you think tax credits are the way to promote green building or are performance guarantees such as those provided by the builder of this community the better way to go?

Florida. What do you think about?

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:00:20 -0500

I consider myself truly fortunate to be a resident of Tampa, Florida particularly during times such as this past week when the North Eastern Seaboard where I grew up is covered in snow. The state of Florida is likely associated by most of my readers with Disney World, golf, and vacation. However, what many people don't know is that Florida is home to a variety of robust and diverse ecosystems ranging from the salt marshes along the coasts to the Everglades. Further, Florida, at least the majority of the state, has a very rich history and is perhaps one of the last true frontiers left in America a place where true cowboys raise cattle and reap the harvest of the land. The Florida Legislature has recognized the need to build sustainably moving into the future and to that end have enacted the following legislation.

255.2575 Energy-efficient and sustainable buildings.--

(1) The Legislature declares that there is an important state interest in promoting the construction of energy-efficient and sustainable buildings. Government leadership in promoting these standards is vital to demonstrate the state's commitment to energy conservation, saving taxpayers money, and raising public awareness of energy rating systems.

(2) All county, municipal, school district, water management district, state university, community college, and Florida state court buildings shall be constructed to meet the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, the Green Building Initiative's Green Globes rating system, the Florida Green Building Coalition standards, or a nationally recognized, high-performance green building rating system as approved by the Department of Management Services. This section shall apply to all county, municipal, school district, water management district, state university, community college, and Florida state court buildings the architectural plans of which are commenced after July 1, 2008.

(3) St. Petersburg College may work with the Florida Community College System and may consult with the University of Florida to provide training and educational opportunities that will ensure that green building rating system certifying agents (accredited professionals who possess a knowledge and understanding of green building processes, practices, and principles) are available to work with the entities specified in subsection (2) as they construct public buildings to meet green building rating system standards. St. Petersburg College may work with the construction industry to develop an online continuing education curriculum for use statewide by builders constructing energy-efficient and sustainable public sector buildings and students interested in the college's Green/Sustainability Track in its Management and Organization Leadership area of study. The curriculum developed may be offered by St. Petersburg College or in cooperation with other programs at other community colleges.

While this legislation may not seem very progressive to those of you who live in some of the more progressive cities such as our nations capitol it is a great step forward for Florida. What I find to be the most interesting piece of this legislation is section 3 which encourages the fostering of green building professionals and a continuing education program which can help guide Florida's builders into the future. For additional information regarding Florida's green building and renewable energy initiatives I encourage you to take a look at the excellent resource assembled by DSIRE which can be found here.

Whither the Green?

Rich Cartlidge — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:33:44 -0500

Several months ago my friend Shari Shapiro wrote a blog post Green Building Litigation--Whither the Lawsuits? Now many builders across the nation are wondering whither the green? An article by the Wall Street Journal, Green Builders Await the Green sheds light on a problem that those of us involved in the green building industry have been acutely aware of for some time...the government is dragging its feet on disbursing the green earmarked for green projects. The General Services Administration was allocated 5.5 Billion dollars under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, 2 Billion dollars of which was supposed to be distributed by the end of 2009. Now only two weeks away from the end of the year only 1.5 Billion of that 2 Billion dollars has been distributed! Even more striking, only 89 million dollars has been paid out thus far! So what exactly is taking so long for the green to reach the pipeline?

Are you a contractor who is vying for a part of the 4 Billion dollars that have yet to be allocated? Will 2010 see an explosion of green growth as project currently in the planning stage progress to construction? Will 2010 be the year of green litigation?

Build2Sustain Launches White Paper

Rich Cartlidge — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:16:18 -0500

Today I am very happy to announce that Build2Sustain has launched their white paper addressing sustainable construction and the need to increase transparency and demonstrate ROI. A free copy of the paper can be obtained by filling out a simple form on the Build2Sustain website.

PR Gone Wrong

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:26:55 -0500

Last week I received a very interesting press release from a prestigious builder's PR firm. The email started by explaining the very admirable steps that the builder was taken to be a leader in sustainable building. The measures the builder was taking were extraordinary such as building a carbon neutral headquarters, taking measures to reduce carbon emissions from construction equipment, purchasing offsets to make their entire operation carbon neutral, etc. However, the PR firm committed a major goof which left me feeling like I had been scammed, they capped the press release off by exclaiming how the builder built homes with a completed value of up to 60 Million dollars! How can a 60 Million dollar home possibly even approach being considered sustainable? Perhaps the builder would be best advised not to take measures to appear sustainable and instead serve as an educator to counsel their clients that outrageous extravagance is not needed and that they can build luxury homes without constructing the next McMansion.

Explosive Green Growth

Rich Cartlidge — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:32:14 -0500

Image: Infobarrel

Environment News Service published the findings from the American Institute of Architects (AIA) green study this week and the findings show that America is experiencing explosive green growth.The AIA study shows that 138 cities now have green building programs compared with just 92 in 2007, an incredible 50 percent increase! The Eastern region experienced even greater growth with a 75 percent increase in the number of cities with green programs. However, what I found to be most interesting was the following quote by Christine McEntee, AIA's CEO:

"It is encouraging that cities are recognizing the economic benefits of energy-efficient buildings, and equally encouraging that the number of programs across the country are increasing despite such difficult economic conditions,Our ultimate goal is to achieve carbon neutrality in buildings by 2030 and that all design projects will be sustainable as a matter of course."

In light of this growth what is your city doing to encourage green building and how are you preparing yourself to take advantage of it? While GBET often focuses on the risks of green building it is equally important to focus on the potential rewards. I would love to hear how you and your company are involved in the green building field or what your plans are to enter it.

Redefining Green Building

Rich Cartlidge — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:57:47 -0500

We are all well aware there is an ongoing identity crisis in the green building world. What does it mean to be green? Does it require certification? How will it perform? Blah blah blah. Well today a report (PDF) prepared by the USGBC and Booz Allen Hamilton completely redefined how many will think of green building! All too often when speaking about green buildings and economics we focus on the additional cost to the developer and the environmental benefits rather than the benefits to the overall economy. This study provides some staggering statistics which we here at GBET believe will change the way you think of green....can you say show me the money? According to the study from 2009-2013 green building will:

Support 7.9 Million jobs
Pump 554 Billion dollars into the economy
Provide 396 Billion dollars in wages
Contribution to the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP)
- 2000-2008: $173 billion
- 2009-2013 forecast: $554 billion
Jobs created or saved (includes direct, indirect and induced jobs)
- 2000-2008: 2.4 million
- 2009-2013 forecast: 7.9 million
Wages
- 2000-2008: $123 billion
- 2009-2013 forecast: $396 billion
Energy savings
- 2000-2008: $1.3 billion saved
- 2009-2013 forecast: $6 billion saved

The State Of The Green Building Movement

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:04:46 -0500

Image: Socketsite

Recently here at GBET we have been discussing green building and the economy and more specifically green building and ROI. As an advisory board member of Build2Sustain I am very hopeful that green building will continue to prosper through increased transparency. A recent article posted on Reuters and published by GreenBiz focuses on a report released by Rob Watson. The report makes several interesting findings which if accurate are truly exciting and emphasize the need for attorneys, contractors, and developers to begin participating in green projects before they are left behind. Among the key findings of the report:

The estimate of reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has grown to 780 million VMT to date versus 400 million in 2008. By 2030, the annual gasoline savings are expected to equal current U.S. imports from the Middle East.

• Total water savings from LEED through 2009 is estimated at 15 billion gallons, comprising 0.5% of annual non-residential water use. By 2030, LEED results in nearly 1.3 trillion gallons of saved water, equivalent to 30% of current annual non-residential water use.

• Annual carbon dioxide savings from LEED buildings is approximately 2.9 million tons from energy efficiency and renewables, a figure that is expected to grow to 130 million tons per year by 2020 and almost 320 million tons annually by 2030.

• Based on average materials costs, green building materials represented approximately $7 billion in cumulative spending through 2009, which is expected to reach a cumulative $230 billion by 2030. Moreover, the embodied energy in buildings that are renovated instead of demolished is expected to save as much energy in 2030 as we import this year from Saudi Arabia. In addition, an average of over 60% of construction and demolition waste was diverted from LEED projects, totaling 25 million tons to date.

• An average of at least 580,000 employees are currently enjoying improved indoor environments in LEED buildings at present, and the "green building workforce" is expected to approach 29 million by 2020 and almost 64 million by 2030. The productivity benefits from LEED buildings to date range from $230 to $450 million.

As the United States continues to participate in climate change discussions and to contemplate implementing a carbon trading system through legislative efforts in Washington the estimated carbon dioxide savings from a green building could become even more important in the future. If you are not currently participating in green projects I encourage you to do so. Further, if you are afraid of participating in green projects I would love to hear your reasons.

More Support For Green Buildings

Rich Cartlidge — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:10:54 -0500

Image: www.oceania.rlb.com

This week The National Business Review, a New Zealand publication, ran an interesting piece regarding sustainable buildings and their impact on a company's bottom line. The article which focuses on Green Star rated buildings which are certified by the New Zealand Green Building Council raised several interesting points which green building advocates here in the United States and particularly those who have been following the underperformance of LEED certified buildings are well too aware:

Eighty percent of people believe sustainability is important but only 10% believe they fully understand what it means

Companies have a fear of short term underperformance, and how they will tell their investors in three, six or twelve months that they haven’t met the targets for those periods. But what about in three, six or 12 years – then how would they tell investors they lost larger amounts of money because of not making long term sustainable decisions?

Green buildings might cost more upfront but the evidence suggests that in the long term they will help companies save money and add to their bottom lines. In today's economy it is all too easy to look at short term capital expenditures and to lose view of the bigger picture and the potential for long-term ROI. What are you doing to help individuals understand what sustainability means and to show them the potential for long term ROI?

Green Building Certification: What Are You Afraid Of?

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:02:49 -0500

Back in September a Palm Coast ordinance providing for the fast tracking of building permits, relief from permitting fees and free certification inspection of green buildings by city inspectors hit a roadblock and was tabled. According the the Flagler County News this ordinance was unanimously passed in a modified form this past week. The major sticking point in the original legislation was not resistance to green building itself but rather the provision for unlimited free inspections by city inspectors. The homebuilders group argued that providing unlimited free inspections was going to hurt the business of independent companies who currently provide such services while the city council argued that free inspections would help builders who are currently wary of building green become comfortable with the process. The ordinance is meant to provide an incentive to builders to go green as city manager Jim Landon says:

"In essence what this does is attempts to not require builders and developers to include more environmentally friendly design, but gives them incentives to do so,"

"We changed the ordinance so we will do one certification per builder with the idea that hopefully they will see some value in continuing that program,"

Are green building incentives and mandates being held up by the market or rather by interest groups who fail to see the bigger picture? Palm Coast is taking steps in the right direction it is a shame to see good legislation being watered down the interests of a small group of independent building inspectors, individuals who presumably want to see green building expand.

Green ROI: Making the Business Case for Green Building With Affordable Housing

Rich Cartlidge — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:49:47 -0500

According to an article in the Baltimore Sun the outlook for green buildings in our current economy is perhaps not as dreary as many fear. Enterprise a Columbia, Maryland based affordable-housing financier has revealed they intend to spend more than $4 Billion on the green construction and renovation of affordable homes. The article had several interesting quotes:

The utility savings alone -- an average of about $4,850 over the lifetime of a residence -- are more than the about $4,500 it takes to comply with Enterprise's green-building criteria, the group said. Enterprise leaders launched a green-building initiative five years ago to encourage such work and has been studying the results.

"This is the right direction," said Dana Bourland, vice president of Enterprise's green initiative. "Not only are there financial savings, but there are health benefits and lower carbon emissions. ... We just can't afford not to make sure everything we do its green."

What is particularly interesting about these quotes is the fact that Enterprise has been studying the results of their green building initiative for five years and believes that the results merit a truly impressive investment. What is equally interesting is that there is no mention of a green certification but rather what appears to be a homegrown green-building criteria. Is green building stripped of its fancy labels and certification the wave of the future? Will it be affordable housing which provides the data to demonstrate that green building makes financial sense?

Sustainable Buildings and The Economy

Rich Cartlidge — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:07:33 -0500

We all know that the economy is in bad shape and that the prospective for new construction starts is dim. So what exactly does this mean for the future of green building here in the United States and across the world? Here in the United States there is an increasing trend towards being "greener" and more eco-conscious, which means that many individuals are willing to pay a premium for green features. This willingness of American consumers to pay a premium for green design and construction means that builders have an incentive to build these types of structures. However, a recent article in an Israeli paper Haaretz suggests that green buildings do not carry the same premium abroad.

"I don't want to be the one to tell you," said one apartment purchaser on an Internet forum, "but as someone who has already bought an apartment in the Kfar Sava Hayeroka neighborhood ("Green Kfar Sava"), and I believe I represent the opinion of 90% of the purchasers, it doesn't matter if there is special garbage collection or solar-powered lighting. The reason people buy in the neighborhood when it comes down to it is location, prestige and a good price. You won't find 'greens' among us."

"A contractor would prefer to build a large, spacious lobby or a pool in the building, so the benefit from an upgrade will be visible and the customer will pay accordingly," said Yisrael Kurtz, an urban economic consultant specializing in eco-friendly construction who is also one of the managers of Geo-Green, a subsidiary of the Geocartography Knowledge Group polling and research firm. "In eco-friendly construction, the contractor doesn't know what he will get out of it and if he can charge more, which is a major hurdle for builders in Israel and abroad."

"Currently there is uncertainty and ignorance among contractors and consumers on the subject," Kurtz said. "Therefore it is impossible to conclusively determine the value of a 'green' apartment in Israel. At the Kfar Sava Yeroka project, for example, the apartments are selling for 10% more than second-hand units in the center of the city, but it's possible the higher prices are not the result of 'green' construction but because of high demand for the location and for the project as a result of the lack of new projects in the city."

What I found most interesting is the fact that the article suggests that consumers and contractors are ignorant on the subject of green building. As much as I criticize LEED and the USGBC for their lack of leadership on the energy performance front they have done a greater good for the green building movement here in the United States by educating the public and the building trades about the benefits of green building.

LEED: Gremlins, Energy Modeling, and The Future

Rich Cartlidge — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:05:09 -0500

Today Rob Watson, the father of LEED, replied to my post When LEED Falls Short regarding Dartmouth College's poorly performing LEED certified buildings on his site. Rob had some interesting comments regarding my post such as:

What is striking about this comment and about the (albeit pained) tenor of the blog piece is that LEED is to blame! Forget the architect, forget the engineers, forget the contractors . . . LEED is to blame. I guess it's sort of like, "My bank account can't be overdrawn, I still have checks left!"

The other area where LEED and ASHRAE didn't do very well in the early years was in plug loads, which were essentially excluded from the standards. We are now dealing with a modern campus that is totally wired with 17-inch plasma screens and energy-chewing high-def video games on top of the requisite ear-splitting stereo systems, etc. In all likelihood, none of this was taken into account in Dartmouth's energy modeling.

And let's be frank: Most (not all) energy modeling in the U.S. still sucks. The models themselves are not very good. No one has put much money into developing them or recalibrating the algorithms based on actual detailed building performance measurement.

As its founder I fully understand Mr. Watson's need to defend LEED and to shift the blame for poorly performing buildings to other causes such as poor energy modeling. However, I stand firm in my conviction that LEED is in some ways still to blame. Lets not forget that LEED has requirements for energy modeling! If these energy models are so failed as Mr. Watson claims they are then why isn't LEED and the USGBC doing something to develop a better modeling system? LEED is supposed to serve as a leader in making the buildings of tomorrow more sustainable (a goal which I fully support and the reason I became a LEED AP). I suggest LEED and the USGBC start investing in developing a energy model that accounts for the loads placed on buildings in today's high tech world.

Contractors Are You Ready?

Rich Cartlidge — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:10:34 -0500

President Obama'sExecutive Order 13514 set out standards for the federal government's transition to becoming green. While the order focused on emissions reductions and the greening of data centers it also includes the following requirements for green buildings, courtesy ofReuters:

Obama's executive order lays out similar guidelines for the government's buildings, starting with the ambitious goal that, "beginning in 2020 and thereafter ... all new Federal buildings that enter the planning process are designed to achieve zero net-energy by 2030." Section 2 (g) of the order also includes the following details:

(iv) pursuing cost-effective, innovative strategies, such as highly reflective and vegetated roofs, to minimize consumption of energy, water, and materials;

(v) managing existing building systems to reduce the consumption of energy, water, and materials, and identifying alternatives to renovation that reduce existing assets' deferred maintenance costs;

(vi) when adding assets to the agency's real property inventory, identifying opportunities to consolidate and dispose of existing assets, optimize the performance of the agency's real- property portfolio, and reduce associated environmental impacts; and

(vii) ensuring that rehabilitation of federally owned historic buildings utilizes best practices and technologies in retrofitting to promote long- term viability of the buildings.

As my colleague Chris Cheatham pointed out in his article Four Steps To Green Contracting with the Government contractors need to begin navigating the field of green credentials and positioning themselves for bidding on federal projects in the future. So contractors, are you ready?

When LEED Falls Short

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:33:02 -0500

As a LEED AP it always pains me to see individuals or organizations who become disenfranchised with LEED certification because of building performance issues. What is even worse is when one of these organizations is a well respected college. I firmly believe that for sustainability and green building to evolve and adapt to the needs of the future it must be embraced by today's students. Tragically LEED is falling short of the expectations of Dartmouth College as reported by TheDartmouth. Dartmouth College has constructed five buildings to LEED standards, the McLaughlin Cluster and the McLane and Fahey residence halls have received gold LEED certifications, while Kemeny Hall, the Haldeman Center and the Floren Varsity House have silver certifications. Mr. Shadford, a Dartmouth energy engineer has the following to say about Dartmouth's LEED certified buildings:

I would say that, in general, the buildings are performing better than the older buildings that we have on campus,” “But I would also say that in some cases they are not performing as well as we would have hoped or expected based on energy modeling or design performance parameters that the design teams would have created during the design process.

While Dartmouth has not given up on LEED it appears that at the current time they will not be focusing on certification but rather energy efficiency:

We try to build high-performance buildings, We don’t let LEED drive the decision process.”
“What LEED does give us is an opportunity to think about what we’re doing and find ideas for new things to incorporate into this project,” “We’re trying to figure out how to let people know all the good invisible things that Dartmouth is doing, and LEED certification is just one way of doing it,

Is LEED evolving fast enough to address the concerns of organizations such as Dartmouth or will poorly performing certified buildings signal the demise of LEED? I would love to hear your thoughts.

Green Building Labeling: A Spur For Litigation

Rich Cartlidge — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:01:26 -0500

Poorly performing buildings are perhaps the greatest threat to green building certification systems such as LEED. In an effort to combat these poorly performing buildings a new danger is being created.The USGBC wants to tackle poorly performing buildings by increasing the amount of data available and as part of that goal has laid out their plan for doing so here.(PDF) LEED is certainly moving in the right direction by seeking to make more data available in regards to building's performance. However, a building labeling system such as that being floated by both the USGBC and as part of the Waxman-Markey Climate Bill could derail the momentum of the green building movement and spur litigation.

To be effective a green building labeling system must cover ALL buildings and not just the newer, LEED certified buildings. Whether this label is an actual physical label attached to the building or a "virtual" label where information is stored online and made accessible over the web remains to be seen. A physical label would be less susceptible to fraud but also raise the potential for discrimination.

Preston over at Jetson Green summarized the framework for a labeling system under the the Waxman-Markey Bill as follow:

The Administrator of the EPA shall create the labeling program to apply to both the residential and commercial markets.
The purpose of the labeling program is two-fold: (1) to enable and encourage knowledge about building energy performance of both owners and occupants, and (2) to inform efforts to reduce energy consumption nationwide.
The Administrator is to consider already existing programs, such as Energy Star and the HERS index, while developing a model label.
The Administrator will create a report telling Congress which building types have measurement protocols and labeling requirements with energy performance data (and which don't).
The Administrator is to propose measurement protocols and detail how to complete performance labels.
The Administrator will provide a final rule detailing measurement protocols and requirements for applying the protocols.
The Administrator shall propose a model building energy label within one year after the date of enactment, and the label will show achieved performance (and, interestingly, will not preclude designed performance data).
The Administrator will then publish a final rule containing the label applicable to covered projects.
The Administrator will coordinate with Zero Net Energy Commercial Buildings Initiative to provide labeling demonstration projects for all sorts of different building types.
The Administrator will work with state energy offices or other state authorities to implement the program, and will also work with these officials to encourage use of the labeling program at the local and county level.
States are to implement the label in such a way that the information is available to owners, lenders, tenants, occupants, or other relevant parties that can utilize the information.
Three years after the date of enactment, the Administrator will report to Congress on the effectiveness of the program and the need for any legislative changes.
The Secretary of Energy and the Administrator will use the program in their agencies and try to get other agencies to implement the label.

A building labeling system will surely create litigation. Whether the litigation will involve the actual labels themselves or the methodology and regulations established by the government in the label's implementation remains to be seen. What are your thoughts?

A big thanks to Preston and Jetson Green for their excellent coverage of this topic.

Building "Nutrition" Labels

Rich Cartlidge — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:31:56 -0500

When was the last time you looked at a nutrition label? If you are like me there are certain foods that you know are loaded with calories but you ignore the nutrition label so that you can enjoy your meal without the guilt. So what happens if labels indicating air quality and energy efficiency become standard on the buildings of the future? Will individuals pay attention to the labels or ignore them because ignorance is bliss? Please leave your feedback and check in Monday for an article discussing the implications of requiring buildings to sport "nutrition" labels.

Image Credit: Energyemp