Implementing Plan C – conservation, curtailment and cooperation

NewSolutionsMay-June 2009 Number 18 Change is “green.” Green is used in many Special Report: Part 1 ways and forms – as a noun “green is good,” as an adjective “green building” or LEEDing from Behind: The “green society,” and a verb “we must green the economy.” It also includes the slang Rise and Fall of Green Building version of the verb in the frequent uses of phrases such as “go green,” “green it” and Editor’s Note: The purpose of this, the first Introduction “green up.” of three parts of our Special Report, is to Language sometimes obscures an issue. In the late 1980s interest in energy show the history of the dialogue about LEED Certain “branding” terminology is efficiency and the environment increased. energy performance. Part II will specifically selected with a particularly concise set of The 1987 UN Brundtland Commission’s discuss LEED additional building costs and en- words which form the core of a slogan report defined “sustainable development.” In 1992 the U.S. government’s Energy ergy performance obtained from these costs. or slogans around which a philosophy can be formed, money can be raised and Policy Act included policies for building It will also analyze the USGBC marketing products marketed. One such term that is efficiency. This act called for a 20 percent efforts around this topic. Part III will suggest intended to make us feel we are addressing reduction in energy consumption per options to the LEED rating system. Part II will the challenges of Peak Oil and Climate square foot relative to the 1985 baseline consumption in federal buildings. The be published in June, 2009. government adopted the term “green,” passing several executive orders including three in 1998, 1999, 2000 entitled respec- tively Greening the Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling and Federal Acquisition, Greening the Government through Energy Efficient Management,and Greening the Government through Leader- ship in Environmental Management. At the UIA/AIA (International Union of Architects and American Institute of Architects) World Congress of Architects held in Chicago in June 1993, the presi- dents of the two organizations signed the “Declaration of Interdependence for a Sus- tainable Future.” This convention is recog- nized as a turning point in the history of the green building movement even though the word used was sustainable, not green. It is important to note that sustainable and green are in many cases synonymous. Green has become a word that can be applied to almost anything e.g., a green lifestyle. Its widespread use makes it very difficult to come up with measure- ments that are vital to determining the energy inputs and the waste products of buildings. An old saying,“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it,” is highly appropriate to describe the state of our

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18:  understanding of energy relative to build- USGBC invented and manages the ings. It is unfortunate that green became Leadership in Energy and Environmental the word of choice for buildings, since there Design (LEED) rating system, used to is terminology available that does a better certify buildings as “green.” Green building job of communicating the environmental – as defined by USGBC – is the practice and energy considerations with which we of increasing the efficiency with which are concerned – energy-efficient, high-per- buildings use resources – energy, water and formance, energy rating, low-energy, energy ...with the use of “green,” the materials – while reducing building impacts savers, etc. Of great importance is that these whims of market considerations on human health and the environment are measurable and comparable. during the building’s lifecycle, through Using the color green instead of mea- prevailed, leaving the population better site placement, design, construction, surements may have led to an unnecessary without the tools to understand operation, maintenance, and removal.3 delay in taking steps to resolve fossil fuel 4 the energy and climate implica- LEED has several rating systems, depletion and environmental issues. The including: term “green-wash” has appeared as a result. tions of its purchasing decisions. New Construction – for high performance Green-wash refers to the fact that the word commercial and institutional projects “green” has become a marketing and sales year that the World Congress of Architects Existing Buildings – Operations and slogan to increase product sales based on a initiated the Declaration of Interdepen- Maintenance – for already built structures theme of doing good to save the planet. dence for a Sustainable Future. USGBC Possibly the term energy efficiency is a non-profit organization, comprised Commercial Interiors – for tenant might have been a good choice and have of design professionals and corporations, improvements provided a more focused direction for set- many from the giant building materials Core & Shell – for sustainable design ting baseline standards for energy use. In industry. Its objective is to “promote build- choices for new core shell construction physics the term efficiency is clearly used ings that are environmentally responsible, Schools – for K-12 schools and other in a variety of contexts, including efficient profitable and healthy places to live and school spaces energy use, energy conversion efficiency, work.” Its mission is “to transform the Retail – for special needs of retail spaces energy conservation, electrical efficiency, way buildings and communities are fuel efficiency, lighting efficiency, mechani- designed, built and operated, enabling an Healthcare – for high performance cal efficiency, volumetric efficiency and environmentally and socially responsible, healthcare facilities thermal efficiency. If energy efficiency healthy and prosperous environment that Homes – for residential construction were used, it would be easy to provide a improves the quality of life.” The USGBC Neighborhood Development – for smart wide range of measurements that define in is a well-funded organization with major growth and new urbanism developments physical terms how efficient a building is, corporations and architectural firms on The LEED system is used to measure such as BTUs per square foot or kWh per its advisory board. Its 2007 revenues were the degree of “greenness” of a building. For square meter. $46,000,000. new construction it is a simple checklist At the core of any kind of genuine The Natural Resources Defense Council building science is a precise scientific with a certain number of points (69 in (NRDC) was involved in the formation 5, 6 terminology that is easy to understand of the USGBC, which began with an LEED 2.2, 110 in LEED 2009). To and could be simplified for general use. alliance between a real-estate developer, achieve the lowest certification, labeled Unfortunately, with the use of “green,” the David Gottfried, and a senior scientist for “certified,” at least twenty-six points are whims of market considerations prevailed, NRDC, Rob Watson. Richard Fedrizzi, required in LEED 2.2 and forty points leaving the population without the tools the current CEO of USGBC is quoted as in LEED 2009. The highest certifica- to understand the energy and climate saying, “The great majority of environ- tion, labeled “platinum,” requires at least implications of its purchasing decisions. mental organizations had invested in keep- fifty-two points in LEED 2.2 and eighty It may be that efficiency as a term is not ing companies on the other side of a fence. points in LEED 2009. Note that the larger robust enough since we often squander the David [Gottfried] thought that we could number of points in LEED 2009 does not savings on bigger houses and bigger (and do things differently. If we could invite reflect a higher level of performance but more) appliances. business to the table, we could develop rather a changing of the numerical weight- standards relative to building performance, ings assigned to various options. Table 1 The U.S. Green Building get buy-in at the very top, and be able to shows the breakdown of the older and Council transform the marketplace (italics mine) newer versions. The percent column shows toward sustainable buildings.”2 The term the different distribution of the LEED The U.S. Green Building Council1 “market transformation” is frequently used classifications between the newer and (USGBC) was founded in 1993, the same by USGBC promoters. older versions.

 : New Solutions Number 18 May-June 2009 cation began before 2004. A March 2008 in July 2006 for spec developments. LEED LEED Building History New Buildings Institute (NBI) report on for Neighborhood Development, Retail – Number of Units and LEED Energy Performance10 (partially and Healthcare recently became available. Square Feet funded by USGBC) shows a less robust Information from that report is shown in Since the formation of the USGBC in growth rate (Table 3) than that noted in Table 4. 1993 to the end of 2008 the organization Table 2. Table 4: Breakdown of LEED Programs claims to have certified about 2,100 com- The data sets in Tables 2 and 3 are not mercial buildings with a total area of about identical. The NBI data shows that the LEED Program # of Certified Projects 7 283 million square feet. There are about number of buildings certified between the New Construction (NC) 1,600 5 million commercial buildings in the years 2000-2004 (5 years) is 148 units Commercial Interiors (CI) 479 U.S. with a total area of about 74 billion while the USGBC presentation shows 266. Existing Buildings (EB) 200 8 square feet. In the fifteen years of USGBC The USGBC graphics show an impressive Core and Shell (CS) 157 first year jump while the NBI report shows history certified LEED buildings represent Neighborhood Development (ND) 13 a more gradual buildup. The NBI report about 0.04 percent of the total number of Schools 4 existing buildings and about 0.4 percent of shows 165 units and 240 units for 2005 Retail 36 and 2006 respectively while the USGBC the existing square footage. This is not to Total 2,476 deny any progress to LEED but to point shows 266 and 361 for the same two years. out that the installed base of conventional This difference is clarified somewhat in The early LEED-certified buildings commercial buildings dwarfs the number an April 2009 LEED report Green Building were only in the new construction (NC) of so-called “green” buildings. by the Numbers.11 This report, updated division while commercial interiors and In Table 2, the values of certified monthly, breaks down buildings certified existing buildings are included in later pro- projects and millions of square feet were into the main LEED building categories.12 grams. A comparison of new construction estimated from charts that are part of the The LEED for New Construction rating only would provide a more realistic growth USGBC presentation entitled “About system was first released in 2000. LEED rate and explain part of the difference LEED” on the USGBC website.9 Note: the for Commercial Interiors and Existing between USGBC and NBI data. This New referenced charts do not contain a scale. Buildings became available in 2004 and Solutions deals principally with the energy Other sources show that LEED certifi- LEED for Core & Shell became available performance for New Construction. Table 1: Comparison of Two Versions of LEED LEED Ratings Version LEED 2.2 LEED 2009 LEED ratings are not given by any popu- Points % Points % larly used metrics (such as BTUs of energy Energy and Atmosphere 17 25% 35 2% consumed per square foot per year) but Indoor Environmental Quality 15 22% 15 14% by names of metals including silver, gold Sustainable Sites 14 20% 26 24% and platinum for the levels of certifica- Materials and Resources 13 19% 14 13% tion. Bronze was the original rating for Water Efficiency 5 7% 10 9% the lowest level but was replaced with the Innovation and Design Process 5 7% 6 5% term “certified.” Uses of metal names to Regional Bonus Credits 0 0% 4 4% make an association with Olympic sports Totals 69 100% 110 100% prizes rather than some more scientific way of rating makes measuring and compar- Table 2: Number of LEEDS Certified Projects and Millions of Square Feet ing difficult. Jerry Yudelson, in his book Year Yearly Cumulative Yearly Footage Cumulative Footage The Green Building Revolution, says “Since Number Built Number Built (millions sq.ft) (millions sq.ft.) Americans are competitive and obsessed 2004 266 266 40.5 40.5 with keeping score, the LEED system is 13 2005 266 532 35.4 75.9 particularly well suited to our culture.” 2006 361 893 55.7 131.6 As stated above, LEED has multiple rat- 2007 722 1615 78.4 210 ings which are essentially “grades of green- 2008 513 2128 73.4 258 ness.” One might compare LEED ratings to school grading with platinum being an Table 3: New Buildings Institute Data A, gold a B, silver a C, and certified a D. This nomenclature is somewhat confusing Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 since the term certification, which includes Number 1 4 16 44 83 165 240 all buildings in the four grades, is also the

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18:  title of the lowest grade (certified). Thus point spreads of 13, 13 and 18. LEED has taken root at the federal, state, certified is used in two ways that can be The fourth column (Average [Calcu- and local levels, mostly through design confusing, e.g. the LEED building was lated]) is the calculated average value of standards for public projects, and showed certifiedgold or the LEED building was each of the four ranges. The fifth column signs of migrating to national building certified as certified“ .” (Average [Actual]) is the actual average codes. The USGBC provides an online data- points achieved of the buildings from the The National Association of Home base of LEED projects. The February 2009 fourth column (Average Points) of Table Builders (NAHB) and an industry con- database is in the form of an Excel file of 5. This shows that most LEED buildings sortium, the North American Coalition17 projects, identified by an ID number.14 come in near the bottom of the point on Green Building, have been critical of The summary of this Excel spreadsheet range. the USGBC standards setting processes, showed 19,836 registered buildings and The actual point average for all the which, they say, do not support legislative 4,118,182,283 registered gross square feet. buildings is 34.6 points. This is just two- and regulatory enforcement of sustainabil- Sorting on the “Points achieved” column and-one-half points above the top points ity measures. Bowen says the coalition was and then discarding the entries with no of the certified category. This illustrates established in 2003 by General Electric points, left 2,196 certified projects. These the weakness of using a large number of and trade groups representing manufactur- were sorted into the categories of certified, categories and setting a range rather than ers, forestry and wood-products compa- silver, gold and platinum. The numbers using a more simple numeric scale like the nies, chemical companies, vinyl producers, from this sorted spreadsheet for each Home Energy Ratings System (HERS)15 and others dissatisfied with USGBC. He category are more or less congruent with index. LEED buildings are being certified quotes Jerry Schwartz as saying that the LEED presentations mentioned earlier and within a particular category by achieving coalition contends that USGBC’s policies are summarized in Table 5, which shows the smallest number of points within the limit the influence of individual com- the average points for each category along category range and this is not apparent panies (though some coalition member with the average square feet. without a numeric value for each building. companies are also USGBC members) Table 6 shows the distribution of points and undercut claims of a consensus-based within each category. The second column Concerns about LEED: process. USGBC’s efforts have not been (Range of Points) shows the point range 2005–2006 embraced throughout the building indus- for each of the four categories. The third The first LEED certified building was try, partly because it seeks to set standards column in this table shows the point completed in 2000. Only a small number that might better be done in a more con- spread per category – 7 for certified, 6 for were built in the first few years. As more sensual manner and involve organizations silver, 13 for gold, and 18 for platinum. LEED buildings appeared concerns began that establish building codes. It is not clear why the certified and silver to be expressed. In April 2005, Ted Bowen In August 2005 Randy Udall (one categories have such a narrow spread com- wrote an article, “New Rating Systems of the founders of the Association for pared to the gold and platinum. One could for Green Houses Draw Both Interest the Study of Peak Oil-USA) and Auden combine certified and silver to reduce the and Conflicts,”16 in which Bowen asks Schendler wrote an article entitled “LEED categories to three, with more equivalent who should define “green” and noted that Is Broken – Let’s Fix It.”18 The authors point out that prior to LEED “green Table 5: April 2009 LEED Data building” was all in the eye of the claim- Total Square Average Average Square ant. They suggest that green building has Category Total Units Total Points Footage Points Footage a robust future but LEED may not. They Certified 650 17,712 72,112,657 27.2 110,943 compare the market transformation results Silver 744 24,838 98,197,819 .4 131,986 of Energy Star, which LEED aspires to Gold 686 27,118 91,700,148 9.5 133,674 but has not achieved. Platinum 116 6,253 11,139,696 53.9 96,032 They then discuss their own experience Total 2,196 75,921 273,150,320 34.6 124,385 in building two LEED-rated buildings and conclude that certification rather than Table 6: LEED 2.2 Calculated Average Ratings Comparisons to Actual Ratings environmental responsibility is the focus Range Spread Average Average of LEED. They compliment LEED for Category of Points of Points (Calculated) (Actual) its popularity and for creating the first Certified 26-32 7 29.0 27.2 standard but noted that the USGBC is not Silver 33-38 6 35.5 33.4 receptive to constructive criticism. They Gold 39-51 13 45.0 9.5 summarize their own experiences in a few Platinum 52-69 18 60.5 53.9 succinct points: All 37.9 34.6 1. LEED certification costs too much.

 : New Solutions Number 18 May-June 2009 tively inexpensive floor grate (to keep dirt More debate came in 2006 as the and debris from entering a building) also USGBC continued pushing LEED. In earns one rating point. The much more June Charles Lockwood, who has been expensive and important step of saving active in supporting LEED, published heating and cooling energy in the building an article in the Harvard Business Review by a full 10 percent earns only two rating entitled “Building the Green Way.”22 It points. Clearly reducing operating energy extols the virtues of LEED and quotes LEED’s efforts have not been consumption is not highly ranked in the Turner Construction chairman Thomas C. embraced throughout the build- LEED rating system. Leppert as saying that four industry studies In the same month Ted Bowen of more than 150 sustainable buildings ing industry, partly because published another essay, “Constructive across the United States show that, on it seeks to set standards that Criticism: LEED Green-building Program average, it costs only 0.8 percent more Confronts Critics and Growing Pains.”20 He might better be done in a more to achieve basic LEED certification than refers to the Udall/Schendler article and to construct a standard building. (It does consensual manner.... points out the very low number of LEED not say if this is the category of certified, certified buildings. He too touches on the silver, gold or platinum). Lockwood does 2. There is “point mongering,” an money a builder must spend to obtain not spell out the performance gain from obsession with getting credits. (They list the LEED certification for a project and this investment. He offers some history by the frequent criticism that LEED that the basic LEED certification certi( - noting that the USGBC was a coalition certification is possible without getting fied) is not much more than meeting local of more than 6,000 real estate profession- any energy points.) building codes. He repeats the argument als, government agencies, non-profits and 3. LEED energy modeling is very that LEED is weak in energy efficiency and schools. complicated. notes that large industry players lobby to In July of 2006 Jeff Rominger pub- influence the direction of LEED. 4. There are too few credits for saving lished a paper for the Environmental and The final 2005 complaint about LEED energy. Energy Study Institute entitled “Federal was by the North American Coalition on Green Building Policy and the USGBC.”23 5. There is excessive bureaucracy. 21 Green Building. This group was created This was a survey for an academic thesis 6. Overblown claims of green building in 2003 and consists of 34 organizations that did an excellent job of evaluating benefits are misleading, particularly with an interest in the green building green buildings as well as the various gov- improved worker productivity. movement. The group thinks the govern- ernment programs concerning energy. He The authors suggest that the USGBC ment should not rely solely on LEED notes the popularity of LEED is, in part, analyze the U.S. Department of Energy as a means to ensure building efficiency. due to the fact that the government has no (DOE) “Building America” program They argue that green standards should be guidelines of its own. LEED also provides which they point out is less a PR label and developed through accredited standards a foolproof checklist, with easy steps and more of a real specification. development organizations and suggest a a sort of “roadmap” to LEED’s version of Some months later other commentar- consensus process that provides transpar- green construction. Rominger summarizes ies began, including an article in the Wall ency and ensures meaningful opportunity his view of LEED’s four main areas of for participation by all groups that will Street Journal in October 2005 by Alex weakness: Frangos entitled “Is it Too Easy Being be affected by the standard. The coalition Green?”19 The author notes that while notes that the American National Stan- 1. The high costs of registration and there are no tax credits or other finan- dards Institute (ANSI) is the coordinator certification. cial incentives, builders like the friendly of the U.S. standards process and that the 2. The complexity and bureaucratic “LEED” moniker. Goldman Sach’s 42- Green Building Institute (GBI) is the only requirements for certification. story LEED certified building was high- green building organization recognized by 3. A lack of rigor in the rating system. ANSI as an accredited national standards lighted, noting that it only scored 27 on a 4. A lack of lifecycle analysis after the 69 point scale, one point over the mini- developer for buildings. The group believes initial certification. mum of 26 required for LEED’s lowest that lifecycle analysis should be key in level of certification certified( ). The build- setting building standards. In summary Rominger reviews the publications of ing does little to cut energy use or pollu- the group says that the USGBC process Bowen, Schendler and Udall and provides tion. Frangos points out that builders get is not consensus based and that it is not useful cost information. He notes that one point for a bike rack or electric vehicle grounded in objective scientific criteria some builders spend the money that would charging rack while obtaining 5 percent of with appropriate consideration of lifecycle have to be allocated to LEED certification the building energy from renewables also analysis. The group offered to cooperate in on building improvements, foregoing the gets one point. Installing a simple and rela- achieving such goals. LEED label but getting a better building.

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18:  He discusses the inconsistency between the of energy related to materials (embodied – Leadership in Energy and Environmen- points awarded in the LEED rating system energy). These and many other examples tal Design, or LEED – as well as a very and actual environmental benefit. He says illustrate the fact that the LEED rating sys- human tendency to reach for easy solutions that a point could be awarded for a heat- tem is not performance- or science-based, to difficult problems.” She said that LEED recovery system or for providing bike-com- but is more prescriptive. critics say the standard falls short of what is muters a place to store their bikes. Charles Lockwood, previously men- possible in energy savings. One interesting observation is that tioned green real estate authority and She goes on to say that the LEED many government agencies, most notably consultant, again pushed USGBC green 25-30 percent improvement in energy use the General Services Administration and building in an article “Why Commercial over conventional buildings (a figure that the Environmental Protection Agency, Green Is Growing”25 which was part of was challenged a year later) is well below found it easier to incorporate LEED into a special Wall Street Journal Green Real the 50 percent target adopted by those their building policies than to come up Estate Special section in October, 2007. who have signed on to the Architecture with their own standards. Rominger sug- He notes optimistically that “In less than 2030 initiative. She discusses the objectiv- gests that the U.S. government involve a decade, green has created the biggest ity of the USGBC along with its business itself in addressing the many shortcom- transformation of the U.S. commercial influence pointing out the large revenues ings of LEED, referring to the Sustainable real estate market since the invention of it receives from certification. Kamenetz Building Industry Council’s lobbying for a the skyscraper” and quotes USGBC’s notes that the non-profit USGBC has a “whole building” design approach, wherein president as predicting a 10 percent market 116-member staff and earns 95 percent of it is understood that all the systems of a share by 2010. Lockwood includes com- its near $50 million annual budget. She building are interrelated. ments under the heading “Debunking the notes that forty-two thousand people paid He also recommends that the USGBC ‘Green Costs More‘ Myth,” supporting the $250 to $350 and passed exams to become add lifecycle analysis to its rating systems USGBC position of low or no additional “LEED-accredited professionals.” (This as well as address issues of the cost and costs to “go green.” number is much higher now.) efficiency of the certification process. He Next was an article in November 2007, Kamenetz points out that the limita- concludes that the USGBC should use its “Shades of Green: LEED Certification tions of LEED proceed from its design. leadership position in the green building May Be Flawed, But Even Critics Concede The categories are not weighted, so that a industry to make its rating system both It’s Not Wasted,”26 by David Lewis. Lewis bike rack, to use an oft-cited example, can more efficient and rigorous. He goes on begins with the statement “It’s hard to get a building the same point as buying to say that as the world’s largest energy avoid hype and spin about LEED.” He 5 percent of its energy from renewable consumer, the federal government has the comments that the hype and hope have sources. David White, a climate engineer inherent responsibility to lead and should vastly surpassed its accomplishments, with the German firm Transsolar, is quoted take an active role in developing green noting how few LEED buildings there as saying “I think people have the idea that building guidelines for its agencies, rather are in Colorado. He quotes builders who sustainability is just a collection of exciting than deferring to a third-party’s voluntary say they had already been building in an ideas that you can peel and stick onto your standards. He summarizes by saying that energy efficient way and now must pay building. Unfortunately, the exuberant cre- while any progress at all in increasing money to be certified. LEED requires only ative stuff – the expensive buzz words such energy efficiency and “greening” buildings paperwork, not an actual building inspec- as ‘geothermal,’ ‘photovoltaic,’ ‘double is positive, uniformity and perfecting of tion, as is required by the Green Building facade,’ and ‘absorption chiller’ – only the rating system is vital. Initiative, a USGBC competitor. Some makes sense when the basic requirements, cost increments over conventional building such as a well-insulated, airtight facade Concerns about LEED: were noted with LEED certified being less with good solar control, are satisfied.” than 1 percent and LEED platinum being Kamenetz quotes Rob Watson’s (some- 2007–2008 7 percent. Lewis concludes that many times referred to as the father of LEED) In April 2007, Rik Master, in an article, people found benefit in LEED in spite of acknowledgement of global warming when “To Lead or Just LEED,”24 said “The its weaknesses. he said, “Over the last 10 years, the gravity goal of sustainable design is to reduce a In December 2007 Fast Company mag- of the global environmental situation has building’s energy use, yet, according to the azine published an article entitled “The become more obvious. And so I think, if USGBC, reduced operations energy is one Green Standard?”27 by Anya Kamenetz. anything, we need to redouble our efforts, of the LEED credits least used in certified Her organization had recently moved into and not only go for greater market share buildings.” Next he notes that operat- a LEED gold building and she won- but increased stringency at the same time.” ing energy use accounts for 90 percent of dered what it meant. After beginning to Following on the Fast Company article the energy consumed over the life of the research green building she noted that her (still in December 2007) was one in Slate building. He says that most guidelines, study “exposes some serious cracks in the entitled “It’s Way Too Easy Being Green”28 including LEED, focus on the small part world’s biggest green-building brand name by Daniel Brook. Brook begins by describ-

 : New Solutions Number 18 May-June 2009 ing a home (called Antilia) under construc- ones that would be forthcoming in 2009. tion by an East Indian billionaire which Yudelson quotes Tom Peters, a popular will be 24 stories high and which includes business writer, who says that things need three helipads and a 168-car garage. Despite to be thrown out and redone to make sig- its 38-to-1 car-to-person ratio, the huge nificant progress. This is used to justify the building has been billed by its American changes in the new LEED rating system. architects as a “green” building. Antilia’s Gifford had generated controversy architects, Perkins+Will of Chicago, plan to ...a bike rack, to use an oft-cited with his August article and Nadav Malin evaluate its greenness based on the LEED responded in September 2008 with an criteria. Brook notes critics of LEED see example, can get a building article “Lies, Damn Lies, and... (Another a system that’s easy to manipulate and has the same (LEED) point as buy- Look at LEED Energy Efficiency).”35 more to do with generating good PR than ing 5 percent of its energy from Malin is the chair of the Materials and saving the planet. He notes that the growth Resources Technical Advisory Group for of green design renders the loopholes in renewable sources... the USGBC, a LEED Faculty Member, LEED more serious than ever and that its and a LEED Accredited Professional. He point system creates incentives to design compared the mean (or average) of a set analyzes Gifford’s paper in detail discussing around a checklist. A $395 bike rack is of LEED buildings with the median of a the mean/medium issue. He chides Gifford worth the same under the LEED checklist set of conventional buildings. The report for attacking the study, saying that it is a system as installing a $1.3 million environ- had analyzed 121 of the approximately distraction from the more important issue mentally sensitive heating system, Brook says. 553 buildings that had LEED certifica- about how LEED is being used. Malin says Brook points out that the LEED certifi- tion at the time of the survey, and Gifford the good news is that LEED insiders share cation process may seem woefully oversim- notes this was a small sample and that it many of those same concerns, and are plified, yet it doesn’t even have the benefit excluded some of the poorer performing working on them. He says that everyone of being cheap. Certification can cost more buildings in its final analysis. USGBC agrees that it’s the actual performance, not than $100,000 with all the paperwork and responded that Gifford’s assertions were the prediction, that really matters, and that consultants, a lot of money for smaller based on serious misrepresentations of the more has to be done to improve that actual firms and nonprofits. He asks if these dol- data31 and said that Gifford “combined performance. Malin thinks the energy lars might be better spent on features that different building types.” They denied a savings is about 24 percent. actually make a building green (meaning bias and claimed transparency and a good Gifford responded to this article in the lower energy use) rather than simply win- faith effort. NBI also replied to Gifford form of a blog comment to the original by ning certification. Brook thinks that just with a more measured response by adding noting that LEED is based on the idea that closing the loopholes in the checklist will a section to their web site entitled “Energy anyone can take an eight-hour class, pass a only take the USGBC so far. In Europe, Performance of LEED for New Construc- test to become an accredited professional, which has had baseline standards for tion Buildings – Frequently Asked Ques- and use a checklist or points system to energy efficiency since the mid-1990s, tions about the Study.”32 improve the way buildings are designed, all new buildings are green buildings to Charles Lockwood weighed in again built, and operated. Gifford says this is too some extent. in a May/June article entitled “Green simplistic and that the issue is not if LEED The controversy increased dramati- Real Estate: What You Really Need to is being used properly, but that LEED cally upon the release of a March 2008 Know.”33 Lockwood said that efficiency has created the image of energy efficiency paper entitled “Energy Performance for and a reduced carbon footprint don’t make without actually saving energy. In this LEED for New Construction Build- a building or a corporate campus green. response Gifford again criticizes NBI’s ings,”29 funded by the USGBC and the He notes they are important but that they removal of the worst-performing 16 per- EPA. It was prepared by Washington are only two components of a much larger cent of the buildings from one dataset and State based New Building Institute (NBI). sustainable whole. He then describes all the its comparison to a dataset which hasn’t The conclusion of NBI was that LEED other LEED programs and characteristics. had any buildings removed, saying this is buildings used 25-30 percent less energy. This comment supports the argument that like a tobacco company study that removes In August 2008 Henry Gifford, who does LEED is too diffuse and that energy and the people who died of lung cancer before high performance remodeling of multi- CO2 are secondary in LEED programs to doing an analysis. Commentators on family residential buildings in New York other considerations like materials, water Gifford’s statements on this site noted that city, released a report entitled “A Better and air quality. LEED certifies design, not performance. Way to Rate Green Buildings.”30 Gifford In June, Jerry Yudelson penned an Other comments point out that few archi- claims that the NBI report was inaccurate article “If it Ain’t Broke, Break It! LEED Is tects, mechanical engineers and energy and that it overstated the energy savings of Changing in 2009.”34 This article com- simulators actually look at the measured LEED buildings. He notes that the authors pared the current LEED ratings to new performance of their projects after comple-

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18:  tion. If LEED were to give certification that require buildings to use zero energy based on the second year’s data, design from fossil fuels by 2030. Mazria wants the teams would be more concerned about USGBC to adopt them into LEED. actual performance. In October the prestigious Scientific The debate continued in a September American published an article by Daniel weblog entry “LEED under Scrutiny.”36 Brook entitled “LEED Compliance Not This article discussed the views of Dr. Required for Designing Green Buildings.”38 Joseph Lstiburek, principal of Massachu- ...Version 2.2 of LEED allows Brook begins by looking at a LEED certi- setts-based Building Science Consulting, fied green gas station and comments on who says LEED-certified buildings are no certified buildings to skirt energy how limited LEED certification can be as more efficient than typical structures built performance, since only 10 of an indicator of a building’s environmental in the 1960s. Lstiburek and other critics the 69 credits are what (Vivian benignity and says that too often LEED complain the system puts relatively mild can reward building planners for taking building improvements (such as installing Loftness) calls “hard-nosed some environmentally progressive steps bike racks and being close to mass transit) energy credits.” while ignoring deeper problems. He notes on the same level as aggressive energy-sav- that there are no enforcement mechanisms ing features. He notes that the interest is Block wrote a long article entitled “LEED’s such as spot checking to verify the esti- in obtaining LEED points and not saving Green Promise Sometimes Fall Short.”37 mates or checkups after a building opens energy. Lstiburek challenges the idea of He begins by talking to Juli Kaufmann, to make sure the qualifying equipment or having a green program that does not have co-owner of the green-building firm operations have not changed. energy at the center. He says LEED build- Pragmatic Construction in Milwaukee, Brook says that critics complain that ings have too much glass (50 to 70 per- Wisconsin who says, “It depends on your the system can be manipulated for PR cent) and argues that a building’s outside definition of green. Truly, I would not purposes. By erecting a single green build- walls should be no more than 30 percent accept anything less than gold (as proof) ing, huge companies can gain considerable glass. Glass brings a lot of daylight into a you’re really doing (green) things. Any- media attention. The larger denunciation building, but it is a very poor insulator. thing less is tinkering around the edges or is that the program is trained so intently Lstiburek concludes that the LEED tacking things on.” She adds that LEED’s on specific design features of individual building-rating system is “a sham.” He says two lowest certifications certified( and buildings that it misses the big picture that LEED certified buildings are no more silver) don’t require builders and clients to about energy. efficient than typical structures built in the stretch further than standard construction. Brook also says that many LEED critics 1960s. He calls poorly designed LEED- Block next talks to R. Peter Wilcox, are architects who have been designing certified structures (including Seattle City who is building two of the greenest build- so called green buildings before LEED Hall and a building at Yale University) ings in the world – one a condo and one came into being. Philadelphia architect “energy pigs.” Lstiburek also says “Put that that will use almost no energy. Both will Bob Nalls points out that LEED gives up bike rack in front, and you are going to get get the same LEED rating. Wilcox will live to two points for letting natural light into LEED points....That’s what it’s all about, in the condo but acknowledges “it’s far, far interior spaces to reduce demand for elec- chasing points and not saving energy.” from a truly sustainable building. Here’s a tric lighting but goes on to say that more The article also cites Michael Zatz, building that will be LEED platinum, but sunlight might drive up air-conditioning manager of the commercial building it still has a huge, ongoing carbon foot- demand. “To say I’m going to be able to program for Energy Star. “Does green cer- print.” answer that question by getting a point tification necessarily mean (a building) will Block notes that critics say the USGBC or not getting a point is naive,” Nalls is be energy efficient? The simple answer is a has sacrificed its potential for bold leader- quoted as saying. Auden Schendler, execu- very clear ‘no.’” Zatz noted that it is “pos- ship that could force builders to reach tive director of Community and Environ- sible to have a green-certified building that above the low-hanging green fruit in order mental Responsibility at the Aspen Skiing is not energy-efficient.” Kevin Dickens, to protect its own growth. He says that Company and coauthor with Randy Udall of Jacobs Engineering’s St. Louis office, James Hansen, Al Gore’s adviser on global of the 2005 article “LEED Is Broken is quoted as saying, “One of the things warming, calls the USGBC’s approach – Let’s Fix It,” says this kind of “LEED about LEED that might be a misnomer “business as usual” disguised as green build- brain” thinking occurs when builders are or misunderstood is that people think it’s ing. Hansen described LEED as “almost more concerned with certification than primarily about energy savings.” He says meaningless” in the fight to stop global helping the environment. that this is not the case even though LEED warming. Block also discusses Ed Mazria As noted earlier, some architects bypass raises awareness about energy efficiency. and Architecture 2030’s stance. Mazria is the cost of LEED certification and investin September was a busy month. Dustin pushing governments to adopt standards greater energy efficiency instead. Douglas

 : New Solutions Number 18 May-June 2009 Kelbaugh, a professor of architecture at of huge corporations neck-deep in green- durability and air quality. He notes the key the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor washing hype: Dow Chemical, Honeywell, to global warming and energy security is is overseeing a large addition to one of the Waste Management, General Electric, energy conservation. A real green build- school’s main buildings. Brook quotes him Office Depot. Everybody’s green now.” ing that saves energy is the key factor. He as saying that instead of spending an esti- Beam quotes Joseph Lstiburek as saying, says to first use less glass. Next avoid over mated $100,000 on LEED it makes more “The current green and sustainability craze ventilating, i.e., “build tight – ventilate sense to spend that $100,000 on photo- can be summed up as architects and engi- right.” He criticizes the common use voltaics or better windows or insulation. neers behaving badly.” Beam says Lstiburek of floor supply plenums and challenges Kelbaugh is designing to a better standard, is deeply concerned with reducing energy double facades, arguing one should build the American Institute of Architects’ use and attacks the architecture profession’s one good exterior wall. He notes that green 2030 Challenge. This program, accord- current use of glass fronting that uses more roofs with grass are not energy-efficient. ing to Kelbaugh, “is simpler, it’s free, and energy, purportedly energy-saving double Lastly he challenges carbon offsets as a way it focuses on the sweet spot of reducing facades, and roofs planted with vegetation. to cover up a poor building design. carbon footprint.” Lstiburek is further quoted as saying “The A separate article by Lstiburek called Also in October Edward Keegan wrote architectural profession is in a state of col- “Mis-LEED-ing”43 explains the history of “Promise vs. Performance: A Deeper Shade lapse right now because they’re all talking averages, means and medians. He notes of Green”39 for Architect Magazine. Keegan about saving the planet and social justice. that the NBI study used information from emphasized that the high 2008 gasoline It’s such hypocrisy because their buildings the Commercial Building Energy Con- prices led America to wake up to the are so pitiful.” sumption Survey (CBECS) and quotes reality of energy restraints. He restates the Stephen Del Percio also commented the study’s assertion that the LEED mean high percentage of energy consumed by in November in his article “The Ugly, the is better than the CBECS median. But he buildings. He says that from a marketing Bad, & the Good: Thoughts on Green- argues that the comparison should have and political perspective, the green move- Build 2008.”41 He begins by noting that been to the CBECS buildings built in ment has won major battles but must now failing to educate our industry about the same period as the LEED buildings, “deliver.” He discusses the NBI report and emerging green building risks is a huge 2000-2003. He notes if mean alone were says it raises questions about the profes- mistake, particularly as we head into what compared rather than mean to median then sion’s awareness of building science issues will likely continue to be a particularly the improvement would have been about that will be central to solving our side of brutal economy through 2009. He also 15 percent, not the 24-33 percent claimed. the global warming equation. He quotes comments on the NBI study. Del Percio Lstiburek further expounded on his architect and USGBC board member says “it’s clear that, because points with ideas in a special advertising section in Vivian Loftness as saying, “This disconnect respect to energy consumption are being the December issue of GreenBuilder for – between actual building performance awarded based on a predictive model Environments for Living, an online maga- and design-phase energy modeling – offers and not actual, performance-driven data, zine introduced by Masco Corporation the most important and challenging lesson LEED buildings are not performing as well with the assistance of two building science for the USGBC, architects, engineers, as they should in terms of energy savings, companies – Advanced Energy Corpora- owners, and other building professionals.” and the building science experts who have tion and Lstiburek’s Building Science Loftness also acknowledges that the cur- spent decades analyzing building perfor- Corporation. He says that green building rent Version 2.2 of LEED allows certified mance are being vilified for pointing out is first and foremost about energy. “Eighty buildings to skirt energy performance, the shortcomings of the LEED system.” percent of all environmental damage on since only 10 of the 69 credits are what she Towards the end of November, the planet deals with energy one way or calls “hard-nosed energy credits.” Lstiburek weighed in again with an article another – finding it, transporting it, creat- A month later, in November 2008, Alex that summarizes his thoughts, entitled ing it, or using it.” He says green building Beam penned an article “Green Building “Prioritizing Green: It’s the Energy Stupid.”42 must focus on three main topics – energy and Its Discontents.”40 Beam reported on Lstiburek notes many green buildings don’t efficiency, water efficiency and material the 2008 GreenBuild Conference saying, save energy because they are over-venti- efficiency. He notes, “Of the three topics, “I spent a few hours ogling soy-based resin lated, leak, have thermal bridges and do I think energy is 80 percent of the deal. If toilet bowls at GreenBuild, the internation- not rely on physics. Like others, he thinks you want a green sustainable building... alconference of the U.S. Green Building the problems are beginning to endanger it has to be ultra energy efficient first.” He Council, earlier this week. All the green celebs the “green brand.” He says many of the then says that builders have to shift from have signed up to speak: Bill McKibben, LEED points given are basic to conven- a focus on the building appearance to E.O. Wilson, and Desmond Tutu. The tional ways of building and reward good delivering a building that works, including exhibition hall is a veritable Predators’ Ball conventional building features such as air and duct tightness.

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18:  Concerns about LEED: 2009 including Brendan Owens from USGBC’s LEED Technical Program, Maureen Mahle As the debate moved into 2009, the from Steven Winter Associates, Duncan USGBC announced its changes to the Prahl from IBACOS, a home quality LEED rating system (see Table 1). In a and performance company, and energy January 2009 article, “The New LEED: modeler Maria Karpman from Karpman All About Weightings,”44 author Penny Consulting who debated at a Northeast Bonda describes the first step of a major Sustainable Energy Association (NESEA) change to the LEED rating system. Bonda “LEED has distracted the public, meeting held in Boston. The topic was the notes that the ratings represented scien- question “What’s Right and What’s Wrong and devalued the work of tifically grounded reevaluations that place With LEED?”45 Blog comments began to an increased emphasis on energy use and people who’ve been working appear soon after the debate. carbon emission reductions. She notes that on making good buildings for In a March 13, 2009 entry entitled the USGBC recognized that not all building “Is the LEED Program a Fraud?”46 Kevin 20 years. Now, unless they have considerations are of equal importance, and Ireton quotes Gifford as saying the LEED that this drove the reorganization of LEED ‘LEED AP’ after their name, they rating system is a tragedy and a fraud 2009. She uses the familiar example of the perpetrated on those U.S. consumers might not even get hired.” bike rack, pointing out that a project team who are trying their best to achieve true 48 gets one point if it spends $1,500 on bike environmental friendliness. Ireton also “A Better Way to Rate Green Buildings,” racks and the same one point if they spend says, “Launching LEED and then wait- along with his suggestions for an alterna- $20,000 for LEED certification fees. ing 10 years before studying the actual tive, was published in the Spring 2009 Bonda mentions that the value of performance of certified buildings hardly issue of the Northeast Sun, the magazine credits are now determined through a basic qualifies as ‘leadership’.” of NESEA. He closes his article with the weightings equation which brings together Michael Prager commented on the comment, “The LEED system is not only information on building impacts, building debate in a blog entry entitled “LEED ineffective, but is harmful to the environ- functions and the performance of individ- Controversy.”47 He begins by noting there ment, to the prosperity of the country, and ual credits. She says the tool is complex but are some municipalities that are incor- to effective energy saving methods, which also a logical, transparent framework that porating LEED standards into building are ignored in favor of the image of energy incorporates the best available science. As codes, which was a concern to some efficiency. LEED should be abandoned and noted in Table 1, Energy and Atmosphere participants. He also points out that LEED be replaced with a system that is based on have gone from 25 percent to 32 percent has no performance requirements. Bren- actual verifiable energy use measurements.” of the credits. dan Owens of the USGBC is quoted as LEED 2.2 put similar emphasis on saying “I agree with Henry that before this Conclusion Energy (17 points), Indoor Environment research was done, there was a leap of faith There has been concern with the LEED (15 points), Sustainable Sites (14 points), involved, but the characterization of this as rating system relative to energy and CO2 and Water Efficiency (13 points). LEED a scandal and a con is really unfortunate.” since its inception. Numerous articles have 2009 allocates a greater percentage of Owens also says “LEED is an assessment of been written and debates have occurred. points to Sustainable Sites, Water Effi- potential for a building to perform. That’s “Sustainability” and “green” address issues ciency and, in particular, to Energy and all it is,” and “We could do better to edu- other than energy and CO2, some of which Atmosphere. Bonda asks, “Are the impacts cate the public that the model isn’t good are not measureable. These are important of materials and the importance of human enough yet. We haven’t really gone through but not nearly as critical as energy and its well-being in buildings being diminished and said ‘this is the first step in a 6- or 7- or byproducts. LEED has failed to lead in or are they rightly overshadowed by the 8-step process’.” Prager also quotes Chris the important areas that are measurable. critical importance of climate and car- Benedict, a New York architect who often Initially they adopted a weak status relative bon?” She quotes Scot Horst, chair of the works with Gifford, who says “I would to energy consumption. They did not rec- LEED Steering Committee, who admitted like LEED to go away, and I would like ognize and incorporate accountability and that little attention had been paid to the the USGBC to disappear from the face of verification, unfortunately wasting years Material and Resources credits during the the earth” and “LEED has distracted the that could have provided important feed- weightings exercise because of ongoing public, and devalued the work of people back relative to energy use. They have also work on a lifecycle assessment approach who’ve been working on making good not clearly and honestly communicated that will significantly alter how materials buildings for 20 years. Now, unless they that LEED is not an exemplary indication are considered in projects. have ‘LEED AP’ after their name, they of energy performance. Henry Gifford was back in the news in might not even get hired.” – Pat Murphy March. He was part of a panel of experts Gifford’s analysis of LEED entitled

10 : New Solutions Number 18 May-June 2009 References 21. The North American Coalition on Green Build- 34. “If It Ain’t Broke, Break It! LEED is Changing in ing, November 10, 2005; http://www.apawood. 2009,” by Jerry Yudelson, June 26, 2008; http:// 1. http://www.usgbc.org org/pdfs/unmanaged/CoalitionOnePager.pdf www.igreenbuild.com/cd_3148.aspx 2. “The Green Standard?,” by Anya Kamenetz, 22. “Building the Green Way,” by Charles Lockwood, 35. “Lies, Damn Lies, and….(Another Look at LEED Fast Company, December 19, 2007; http://www. Harvard Business Review, June 2006 Energy Efficiency),” by Nadav Malin, September fastcompany.com/magazine/119/the-green-standard. 2, 2008; http://www.buildinggreen.com/live/index. html 23. “Federal Green Building Policy and the USGBC,” by Jeff Rominger, Environmental and cfm/2008/9/2/Lies-Damn-Lies-and-Are-LEED- 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building Energy Study Institute, STS 300, July 25, 2006; Buildings-iLessi-Efficient-Than-Regular-Buildings 4. http://www.usgbc.org/displaypage.aspx? http://www.sts.virginia.edu/pip/contents/ 36. “LEED under Scrutiny,” by Jamie, September cmspageid=222 alumniandfriends/papers/Rominger_06_r.pdf 17, 2008; https://gbt.buildcentral.com/Articles/ 5. LEED® for New Construction & Major Renova- 24. “To Lead or Just LEED,” by Rik Master (AIA) tabid/58/page/9/action/view/id/42541/Default.aspx tions, Version 2.2, October 2005; http://www.usgbc. of US Gypsum, April 25, 2007; http://www.aia.org/ 37. “LEED’s Green Promise Sometimes Falls Short: org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=1095 aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aias075473.pdf Critics Say Buildings’ Rating System Should Require 6. “Promise vs. Performance: A Deeper Shade of 25. “Why Commercial Green Is Growing,” by More Energy Savings,” by Dustin Block, Dolan Green,” Architect Magazine, October 1, 2008; http:// Charles Lockwood, Wall Street Journal: Green Real Media Newswires, September 5, 2008; http://www. www.architectmagazine.com/industry-news.asp? Estate Special Section, October, 2007, Introduction, egreenideas.com/news.php?view=858 sectionID=1013&articleID=796291&artnum=1 Commercial Real Estate and Homes; http://www. 38. “LEED Compliance Not Required for Design- 7. “About LEED;” http://www.usgbc.org/Display- realestatejournal.com/adinfo/com/20071029- ing Green Buildings: Constructing buildings to the Page.aspx?CMSPageID=1720 commercial.asp LEED standard can conserve energy and materials 8. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ 26. “Shades of Green: LEED Certification May Be – or be exploited for promotional gain,” by Daniel Flawed, But Even Critics Concede It’s Not Wasted,” Brook, Scientific American, October 14, 2008; 9. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx? http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=leed- CMSPageID=1720 by David Lewis, ColaradoBiz, November 1, 2007; http://www.allbusiness.com/environment-natural- compliance-not-required ® 10. NBI Report: Energy Performance of LEED for resources/environmentalism/6779825-1.html 39. “Promise vs. Performance: A Deeper Shade of New Construction Buildings, Final Report, March Green,” by Edward Keegan, Architect Magazine, 4, 2008; http://www.newbuildings.org/downloads/ 27. “The Green Standard?,” by Anya Kamenetz, Fast Company, December 19, 2007; http://www. October 1, 2008; http://www.architectmagazine. Energy_Performance_of_LEED-NC_Buildings- com/industry-news.asp?sectionID=1013&articleID= Final_3-4-08b.pdf fastcompany.com/magazine/119/the-green-standard. html 796291&artnum=1 11. “Green Building by the Numbers,” February 28. “It’s Way Too Easy Being Green,” by Daniel 40. “‘Green’ Building and Its Discontents,” by Alex 2009; http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBC Beam, Boston Globe, November 21, 2008; http:// InTheNewsDetails.aspx?ID=3923 (select PDF Brook, Slate, December 26, 2007; http://www.slate. com/id/2180862 www.boston.com/lifestyle/articles/2008/11/21/ at Reference Page) green_building_and_its_discontents/ 29. “Energy Performance for LEED for New 12. LEED Rating Systems; http://www.usgbc. 41. “The Ugly, the Bad, & the Good: Thoughts org/displaypage.aspx?CMsPageID=222 Construction Buildings,” by Cathy Turner and Mark Frankel, New Buildings Institute, March 4, on Greenbuild 2008,” by Stephen Del Percio, 13. The Green Building Revolution, by Jerry Yudelson, 2008; http://www.newbuildings.org/downloads/ November 24, 2008; http://www.greenbuildingsnyc. page 14, Island Press, October 30, 2007 Energy_Performance_of_LEED-NC_Buildings- com/2008/11/23/greenbuildboston2008/ 14. LEED Project List - PUBLIC (2.3.09) Final_3-4-08b.pdf 42. “Prioritizing Green: It’s the Energy Stupid,” by 15. http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=bldrs_ 30. “A Better Way to Rate Green Buildings,” by Joseph W. Listburek, November 25, 2008; http:// lenders_raters.nh_HERS Henry Gifford, August 13, 2008; http://www.aiact. www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi- 007-prioritizing-green2014it-s-the-energy-stupid 16. “New Rating Systems for Green Houses Draw org/userfiles/file/ COTE/GreenGoals_Resources/ Both Interest and Conflicts,” by Ted Smalley Bowen, LEED_Critique_ Gifford.pdf; http://www.energy 43. “Mis-LEED-ing,” by Joseph Lstiburek, Novem- Architectural Record, April 2005, http://archrecord. savingscience.com/articles/henrysarticles/Building ber 12, 2008; http://www.buildingscience.com/ construction.com/features/digital/archives/0504 RatingSystems.pdf?attredirects=0 documents/insights/mis2014leed2014ing dignews-1.asp 31. Letter from USGBC to chapter leaders rebutting 44. “The New LEED: All About Weightings,” by 17. http://www.apawood.org/pdfs/unmanaged/ Gifford and his comments on that letter 2008; Penny Bonda, January 7, 2009; http://www.interior CoalitionOnePager.pdf http://www.energysavingscience.com/ (Select link design.net/blog/1860000586/post/430038843.html under Why LEED Buildings Use More Energy 18. “LEED is Broken – Let’s Fix It,” by Randy 45. “What’s Right and What’s Wrong With LEED? Than Comparable Buildings, and How To Avoid the Udall, Auden Schendler, August 9, 2005; http:// Building Energy Efficiency;” http://www.nesea. Same Results (in jurisdictions where LEED is not www.igreenbuild.com/cd_1706.aspx org/news/whatsrightandwhatswrongwithleed_59/ required by law). Link is response to USGBC e-mail 46. http://finehomebuilding.taunton.com/ 19. “Is it Too Easy Being Green,” by Alex Frangos, to chapter leaders.) Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2005; http://online. item/5872/is-the-leed-program-a-fraud 32. “Energy Performance of LEED for New wsj.com/article_email/SB112967950603172567- 47. “LEED Controversy,” by Michael Prager Construction Buildings – Frequently Asked Ques- lMyQjAxMDE1MjI5MDYyNzA5Wj.html Created, March 15, 2009; http://michaelprager. tions about the Study;” http://www.newbuildings. com/LEED_doubts_gifford_owens_NESEA and 20. “Constructive Criticism: LEED Green-building org/downloads/LEEDStudy_FAQ.pdf Program Confronts Critics and Growing Pains,” by http://michaelprager.com/print/615 33. “Green Real Estate: What You Really Need to Ted Smalley Bowen, October 26, 2005; http://www. 48. “A Better Way to Rate Green Buildings,” by Know,” by Charles Lockwood, The Leader, Vol. 7 grist.org/news/maindish/2005/10/26/leed/ and Henry Gifford, pages 19-27, , Number Issue 3, May/June 2008; http://www.charleslockwood. Northeast Sun http://www.informedbuilding.com/Informed- 1, Spring 2009 com/pdf/CRELeader%2005-08.pdf Concepts/Main6/LEED-Not-Without-Criticism/

May-June 2009 New Solutions Number 18: 11 New Solutions is published by Special Membership Offer The Arthur Morgan Institute for Community Solutions, a non-profit You can become a Community Solutions member ($35) and receive a copy organization, that has been studying and of Pat Murphy’s new book, Plan C – Community Survival Strategies for Peak promoting small local Oil and Climate Change ($19.95), for a combined cost of just $50 (a savings community for more of $5). In addition, as a member, you’ll receive New Solutions to keep you up than 60 years. to date on what we’re doing and to help you make informed decisions about Subscribe to New Solutions, and how best to adapt to a high satisfaction/low-energy life. become a member. Send your tax-deduct- Please send me a copy of Plan C and enter me on your membership roll. ible contribution of I authorize/enclose payment of $50. $35 (or more) to Community Solutions, VISA/MC number Exp. Date P.O. Box 243, Yellow Springs, OH 45387 or Name on card visit our website. Your contributions will help Signature us continue this work. To receive regular Daytime phone email communica- Street address tions, send us an email at info@ com- City State/Province Zip/Postal munitysolution.org. Email address © 2009 The Arthur Morgan Institute for Send me New Solutions via postal mail via email Community Solutions. All rights reserved. You may also join Community Solutions via phone at 937-767-2161 or online at www.communitysolution.org. Donations to support our work are always welcome.

Nonprofit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Permit No. 51 Yellow Springs, Ohio

P.O. Box 243 Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387 T: 937.767.2161 www.communitysolution.org Return Service Requested