Changes ahead for L.E.E.D. Projects

This afternoon I was handed a memo regarding the changes being put into place by the U.S. Green Building Council (www.usgbc.com) and an outline of the changes on the scorecard. Our business falls under the materials & resource section, which prior to the changes accounted for 14 of the 69 points (or 20.3%) needed for approval. We track the tonnage of waste diverted from the land fills and recycle the materials. Doing this earns our customers points toward achieving L.E.E.D. approval. Under this new plan buildings will need 110 points for approval, and of those 110, material & resources accounts for 15 points or just 13.6%. After reviewing the memo I started on a journey to understand the logic behind the changes, what I found is the USGBC have revised the "sustainable sites" section, which has 12 points available with consideration given to "alternative transportation" (i.e. access to public transportation, bicycle storage and changing rooms)

In the new L.E.E.D. 2009 (as it is now called) the Energy & Atmosphere section accounts for 26 points, those can be attained for optimizing energy performance and using on site renewable energy resources. To simplify this complicated information, the prominence of materials & resources have been somewhat diminished and in its place is the focus on energy & atmosphere, reducing things such as carbon foot print, if the building runs and operates efficiently and uses less energy it produces less of a carbon foot print, and that also means that the business will avoid having to purchase things such as "carbon credits". Regardless of your view on carbon credits, I think it's obvious that the subject has hit a nerve. I admittedly am no expert, but what I feel like I see through the statistics and jargon is, purchasing carbon credits is far more expensive than hauling waste. Hauling waste is a one time problem, carbon footprint, carbon credits, carbon offset, matters not what you call it, those will exists for the life of the building. I hope that these changes will have a positive impact on building, and buildings, but what I would like to see is how the long term effects will play out on recycling less, every action obviously has a reaction as does ever inaction. Eventually it would seem that while focusing on carbon foot print is important, keeping an ever watchful eye on reusing items that we know can be recycled, as they are already being recycled currently should also be very important as well.

During my Internet "travels" I found some more statistics I thought I would pass along. Buildings consume 40% of all mined and processed materials, 30% of the energy supply, and any typical (non-l.e.e.d.) building project generates 2.5lbs of solid waste per square foot of floor space. (startling when you consider a 200,000 square foot building, which could result in at least 25 10 ton containers.) the need for responsible building is obvious, the planet needs it, consumers need it to help keep energy costs in check. In the end we will all benefit from responsible building processes. The U.S. Green Building council has 15,000 members, the organization was founded in 2000 and has over 14,000 projects approved, with more sites being added all the time.