Government green included, of course.
Can you answer the following questions correctly (take a guess if you like, I did)?
1. Which two of the following are considered sources of potable water in LEED? (Choose two.)
A. irrigation wells
B. captured rain water
C. municipal water system
D. municipally supplied reclaimed waste water
2. For a 200-occupant, all-residential condominium, the architect’s plan indicates the use of bicycle racks that hold 10 bicycles inside the parking structure. What must the architect do to comply with SS Credit 4.2, Alternative Transportation: Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms?
A. replace the bicycle racks with bicycle lockers
B. increase the number of bicycle racks to hold 30 bicycles
C. provide two shower/changing rooms in the parking structure, one for each gender
D. confirm that the bicycle storage location is within 200 yards of the building entrance
(correct answers are: 1 = A,C; 2 = B) (source: Green Building Certification Institute)
If you answered both correctly, you are well on your way to LEED accreditation and likely first dibs on a green career.
Here’s how Wikipedia defines LEED: The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), provides a suite of standards for environmentally sustainable construction.
According to the USGBC (a corporatist entity), “Accredited Professionals (LEED APs) have demonstrated a thorough understanding of green building practices and principles and the LEED Rating System.”
I suspect that at some point, LEED accreditation will be required for all professionals working on building projects — certainly for government projects anyway.
The city school district of Columbus, Ohio, recently adopted the LEED standards. Sure, going green is expensive — adding almost 10% to the cost of a building, but according to Columbus schools facilities executive Carole Olshavsky,”That’s an insignificant cost if you look beyond the immediate building. If you look at the global impact, that’s negligible.”
Yes, simply wave away short-term costs with the promise of a global benefit.
Hey, if you can identify potable water and count bike racks, this gig is yours!
{ 6 comments }
The good thing about LEED is that it is a voluntary certification (for now), however corporatist and misguided. I think it’s actually a useful program to point to when arguing against professional licensure in favor of market-based certification, or against mandatory building codes in favor of competitive building standards. LEED shows people how a system of certification can use market forces to raise industry standards, making anti-competitive licensure requirements unnecessary (even if you disagree with the standards it sets).
While there are arbitrary and obvious points in LEED as you’ve noted, there are some more rigorous points as well. There’s an opportunity here for a competing program to emerge with less paperwork and better requirements.
I have to disagree with the implication that the short term construction costs are a significant burden. As the link below highlights, a 10% increase is near the high end for the full blown platinum certification.
http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Resources/Cost_of_Green_Full.pdf
Granted the cost data provided was generated by the very organization that is behind LEEDs, it is still a useful source for obtaining rough estimates of intial costs. Additionally, the initial capitalization costs of LEEDs buildings has steadily decreased (and will continue to) based on the expansion of Design-Build firms proficient in the process and the further development of sustainable building technology.
It should be also noted that the points required for levels of certification are not all as elementary as Mr. Fedako would lead to believe. Energy reductions of 20 to 30% might sound simple on paper, but execution requires a more thorough know how of building systems and technology.
Pitching LEEDs as an altruistic way of benefiting the earth might make some people sleep well at night, but the bottom line is that many of the sustainable and energy reducing methods employed will ultimately free up operation and maintenance budgets for users of these facilities.
I would like to know if I can purchase a program that can help me estimate the ‘cost premium’ of each lead point and the payback period. I know that there are many variables involved in each point but there has got to be some smart person who has designed a software ‘spreadsheet’ program to help the Owners to make a decision as to what they can afford as a first cost for their GREEN buildings. Please email me your response: sbhide@charronconsulting.com
Thanks!
I would like to know if I can purchase a program that can help me estimate the ‘cost premium’ of each lead point and the payback period. I know that there are many variables involved in each point but there has got to be some smart person who has designed a software ‘spreadsheet’ program to help the Owners to make a decision as to what they can afford as a first cost for their GREEN buildings. Please email me your response: sbhide@charronconsulting.com
Thanks!
LEED can be the green project of the future. But again – going solo can only help us that much. What we need is more such organizations and bodies to come up – with less bureaucratic red tape and faster implementation. Will that happen? Only time will tell!
LEED is obviously a great venture for more greener environment and in future, it would pay a good benefit for sure but an effective and dynamic organization is also required to make the project, a big success and a a project of future. Will it be happen again? i am really curious to know it more….
Comments on this entry are closed.