Slate's Bizbox
architecture: What we build.

It's Way Too Easy Being GreenThe decidedly dupable system for rating a building's greenness.

By Daniel Brook
Posted Wednesday, Dec. 26, 2007, at 11:24 AM ET

(Continued from page 1)

USGBC officials retain their faith that their program can turn cynics into true believers. "People who in the past have had no environmental concern, because they want the LEED plaque and the marketing that goes along with that, they're thinking about these things," Scott Horst, chair of the LEED steering committee told me when I called him recently. "Even though they may still have a full parking lot, they had to think about how they sized that parking lot, which is something they didn't have to think about in the past."

The USGBC has tweaked its checklist in response to criticism. LEED's revised standards have added so-called innovation points, a catchall category for design concepts that go above and beyond the checklist. The new standards also disqualify any building that doesn't score at least a two out of 10 for energy efficiency. Horst says the next revision of the standards, due out in 2008, will be weighted to give even more importance to energy use.

But closing the loopholes in the checklist will take the USGBC only so far. In Europe, which has had baseline standards for energy efficiency since the mid-1990s, all new buildings are green buildings, at least to some extent. So while American buildings are green by the grace of Goldman Sachs, London offices are green regardless of whether the client cares about the environment, or needs a shot of good PR.

Lately, even the USGBC seems to realize the solution lies not in giving out medals for greenness one building at a time, but in encouraging greener communities. Density is why the average resident of Tokyo uses as much energy in a week as the average resident of Houston uses in a day. The USGBC has launched a pilot program with the Congress for New Urbanism and the Natural Resources Defense Council to grade entire neighborhoods. Rather than looking at green building as a personal (or corporate) virtue, the neighborhood program encourages planners and builders to make more integrated, systematic changes in the way we live. In the meantime, Mukesh Ambani will keep building his very own green skyscraper—and his company will keep building the world's largest oil refinery.

VIEW AS SINGLE PAGE
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Daniel Brook's first book, The Trap: Selling Out to Stay Afloat in Winner-Take-All America, was just reissued in paperback.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Remarks from the Fray:

I agree that some companies that are not green are building their projects to be LEED certified for PR value, but if Goldman Sachs is going to build something there is little value in criticizing them for doing it green, regardless of their history. People change, as do companies and the people that run them.

I think calling out that one absurd residential skyscraper project for that oil billionaire as a reference for what types of buildings are typically getting LEED certified is sensationalism and vastly misrepresents the majority of LEED certified buildings. Until the government stops subsidizing big oil, the most profitable and polluting industry in the world, and starts requiring and subsidizing more sustainable, building/cars, etc... there are going to be others out there like the USGBC organizing a voluntary system for sustainable design.

It's not a perfect system, but at least its striving for the greater good. I find it ironic that the writer is spending their time badmouthing the USGBC while there is a FORD advertisement plastered across the top of this web article.

--SeattleArchitect

(To reply, click here.)

Another questionable practice of LEED certification comes from applications and uses of LEED Compliant and green materials. In our lab remodel the engineers and architects used the check list to spec out materials that met the LEED compliance but did not rationally consider usage of said materials over long term. In specific, countertops made of a recycled paper fiber product were used to meet LEED however in the application usage the manufacturer clearly says the product is not intended for usage in an environment of high moisture, temperature extremes or external uses.

So, the use of this product to meet LEED over conventional P-Lams is rendered redundant and is now in need of replacement, but the project received its little LEED gold star at the time of completion. The lab now shoulders additional costs for replacement of the counter tops until resolution can be sought between those who speced out the LEED product in the first place (More costs in legal fees.)

I am all for "green" buildings but I am also for functionality of those products used to make the building green. The LEED checklist need more thought and oversight.

--Heleva

(To reply, click here.)

(12/26)

Washington Post