IS LEED A MONOPOLY?

Gosh, we sure hope not.  We’ve been a little quiet lately as we launched our completely redesigned and enhanced web site this week (www.SERFgreen.org), but the notion of a LEED monopoly is unsettling.   After all, SERF, Green Globes ™ and others have invested significant resources to provide cost-effective, accessible alternative green building certifications.

Still, others make the claim of a LEED monopoly quite forcibly—like the Chattanooga Times Free Press recent editorial.

The Times Free Press’ position has some merit when considering government buildings.  But as to the private sector—the ones who are spending their own money–we find businesses are very open to a market-friendly alternative to LEED.  In fact, we’ve had success with private buildings that are already LEED certified.

Our education partners at Centre for Sustainability and Excellence are helping train new SERF Professionals (SPs) to meet this demand.

SERF may be the new kid on the block, but as the ages have shown—don’t be afraid to bet on David over Goliath.

Who really pays for LEED certification?

Obtaining LEED certification costs a lot of time and money.  The resources required are not limitless and are generally diverted from other uses, though that seems impolite to discuss when pursuing sustainability.

But LEED certification does not, of course, add to a property’s sustainability.  Rather it confirms, or certifies, that objective sustainable criteria have been met.   If anything, the high costs of LEED certification divert funds that may be otherwise be spent on sustainable materials or systems.

In the end, the high cost of LEED ultimately comes from somewhere….or someone. 

I wonder how the retirees of Stockton, California feel about their city’s expense in obtaining LEED Gold certification for their new water plant after having their retirement benefits cut in Stockton’s bankruptcy proceedings.

While hardly the sole culprit of bankruptcy, Stockton’s self-imposed requirement to LEED certify all structures over 5,000 square feet is indicative of City Hall’s feckless finance.

SERF offers a low cost sustainable certification that doesn’t break the bank.  I bet that sounds like a good idea to some good folks in Stockton.

Green parking, chicken houses and bankers

Beginning in 2011, parking structures were deemed unworthy of attaining LEED certification owing to the fact that they are, after all, chock full of those pesky cars.

So great the sin of enabling the proliferation of hydro-carbon fueled vehicles that no amount of energy efficient lighting, designated stalls for alternate fuel vehicles,  reduction of heat island effect and countless other ways to make a parking structure more sustainable has lowered the upturned nose of the USGBC.

In defense of useful structures everywhere, SERF offers Frank Lloyd Wright’s aphorism to regard it as just as desirable to build a chicken house as to build a Cathedral.  Though speaking of design rather than sustainability (setting aside the sustainability inherent in his organic style) Wright spoke here one of his great truths.

To wit, there is nobility to all useful structures and there is a beautiful way to conceive buildings of any purpose.  There is also a sustainable and non-sustainable way to build them.  SERF will be a voice in recognizing structures of all types that choose the sustainable path.

We seem to have at least one soul in the blogosphere who joins in our giggle at LEED’s demonization of private autos.  “Anti-everything crap like this is why many people ignore the green movement. By this logic we should get rid of houses to curb over population. Hey! I bet if we got rid of all the landfills there would be no trash. And if we teardown all the jails there will be no crime too!”

A new sign went up by my office today announcing one of PNC Bank’s new green branches– part of their USGBC approved program for LEED certification by volume submittal.   So a structure filled with bankers is morally superior to a structure filled with the family car.  I wonder how that will go over with the 99%….

My kind of (green) town…

Given the warm reception SERF has received and our growing operations here, it comes as no surprise to us that Chicago recently won the Siemens and U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Sustainability Large Community award.  Leaders from business, real estate and, not least, the City government are clearly unified in making Chicago a global leader in sustainability.

There’s a beautiful symmetry in Chicago’s leadership in sustainable buildings given its preeminent role in the creation of an American architectural style and its endless contributions to the world’s built environment ever since.

How fitting, then, that Chicago’s Soldier Field is now the first NFL stadium to have attained LEED status.  Now that’s putting your money where your mouth is.

LEED Eats its Young

LEED 2012 is just around the corner and, as expected, accessibility will plummet. According to a recent blog LEED 2012: Too much change? , by Allison Beer McKenzie many who were previously committed to LEED have decided to abandon it if the proposed changes are implemented.

What really are the proposed changes? Among the many, here are some I found to be most impractical:

The number of prerequisites will increase from 9 to 15.
SERF ‘s policy is that all of our points are fully fungible. Our applicants select which sections they desire to pursue and which ones make little practical sense to them. Prerequisites also make it practically impossible to perform a compliance evaluation post construction. LEED must now (more than ever) be on the agenda right from the conceptual phase of the project, hence increasing design costs.

Bike racks are now a prerequisite
This is curious as we routinely find this to be the most ridiculed credit in LEED . That it has been made a mandatory requirement suggests a certain disconnect with the marketplace. We recently met with the head of global real estate of a Fortune 500 consumer products company who complained about the impracticality of this credit required for their distribution centers located at freeway interchanges. He threw up his hands and said, “Our employees can’t bike on the freeway, and we wouldn’t let them if they could!”

Fundamental commissioning has been made more stringent. Example, roof assemblies now have to be commissioned
As mentioned in my previous blog Paying (and paying) for the LEED Label– a significant portion of the cost of LEED is related to documentation and third party consultant costs. This added stringency would further increase that cost.

The number of LEED professionals required in the team will be two instead of one in the 2009 version
Need I say more?

Additionally, demands related to other sections including energy efficiency and renewable energy have been raised by about 25% when compared to LEED 2009.

It seems very clear that LEED, which started off as a great market oriented rating system, intended to encourage decision makers to take the plunge into building green has now lost track of its original mission. The LEED clique will get smaller, albeit more “exclusive”, and will continue to drive adherents of Practical Environmental Stewardship to alternative certifications like SERF.