LEED-ing to a Greener Planet
In our society a new state of thinking has occurred. We have become obsessed with having more, regardless of the consequences. We have become pleasure-seeking, only thinking of the present and having no care for the future. This new instinctual mindset encompasses our culture from the highest level to the lowest. It threatens the current generation, the future generation, and all the achievements of past generations. This threat is a lack of sustainability in any part of our culture, be it economic, social, or environmental. One sinister problem (producing the majority of the United States waste) was our out-of-date building codes. More specifically- rules and regulations that today?s planners have in place for our buildings life cycle are not meeting today?s more eco-friendly criteria. In response, a bundle of separate agencies in the Construction industry designed environmentally oriented construction rating systems. The agencies objective- to positively push today?s planners, designers and owners to lessening the impact of projects as a whole, making a brighter outlook for future generations to come. But with this new wave of ideals, and responsibility to lessen our carbon footprint on our planet sustainability should also be affordable. Enhancing and restoring environmental values, creating net social benefits and a positive return for owners of the project are also important.
Developed by the US Green Building Council (USGBC), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design better known as ?L.E.E.D? is actually more of a rating system that awards points to the builder for taking various environmentally friendly approaches in their construction process. Builders are awarded points for meeting or exceeding benchmarks set by the USGBC in the following eight categories: innovation and design; location and linkages to the larger community; sustainable sites; water conservation; energy efficiency; material and resources; indoor air quality; and consumer education. Another way the USGBC can ensure economic as well as environmental sustainability in the building industry is by lobbying. Governmental regulations may impact the future of building practices, and so the USGBC encourages developers to prepare for eventual shifts in the political, legal, and social climates that affect the industry.
Sharing the same vision as the founders of the USGBC, there have been other construction standard companies who have planned to revamp their building codes. The Sustainability Rating System (ISI), like the USGBC, uses set objective-based goals that will guide the engineer, owner, constructor, regulator and policymaker to provide more effective levels of reliability, along with building resilience, efficiency, and overall project performance. ISI?s rating system (like L.E.E.D) acknowledges the challenges faced by the many stakeholders charged with delivering and supporting necessary infrastructure projects in an increasingly resource-constrained world. ISI?s solution to this problem was by creating environmentally friendly criteria from the planning process to the demolition of their structures. The criteria includes a series of considerations related to the conceptual and planning bases along with project management and business strategies to promote sustainable infrastructure solutions. A second set of criteria is set in place to promote resources, materials, and water and energy conservation. In total, the rating system promotes consideration of a broad set of project features that encourage high levels of interaction with communities and stakeholders, balancing investments to provide resilience and broad acceptance of benefits and consequences of the proposed project and increasing the wise use of limited resources.
Like LEED and ISI, the United Kingdom followed suit during the green building movement. In 1992 the Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) was developed. In 2000, the system took a leap forward in its evolution, becoming an online assessment and rating tool under the name Green Globes for Existing Buildings. Being used by large developers and property management companies, The Green Building Initiative describes the Green Globe building assessment system as a ?revolutionary green management tool that includes an assessment protocol, a rating system, and a guide for integrating environmentally friendly design into commercial buildings.?
Very similar to the USGBC, for a project to be certified, the project team must fill out a questionnaire. If the project then can pass the board with a minimum exam grade of 40% they would be granted the right for certification. Only after the exam, a third-party verifier visits both the project and the project team at the building site. Interviews are conducted with team managers, and a thorough review process of all documentation regarding points on the project statement is all taken in to account.
The LEED process is done differently, the project team completes documentation and submits it via LEED-Online, to be reviewed by a review team that is never in contact with the team project managers or the project site. Unlike LEED, the Green Globes system requires a trained professional to actually visit the project, interact with the team, and physically examine the project. At the end of Green Globes visit to the construction site, the verifier sends his or her recommendation away to receive the appropriate certification level.
One other important feature of Green Globes is that if points are not available to a project, they do not count in the total of potentially achievable points. In contrast, LEED penalizes projects that, for example, do not build with materials from the building that occupied the lot previously. In LEED the available number of points is fixed, while in Green Globes the total potential number of points is adjusted, depending on the dependent variables of the project. It could be said that Green Globes rates the work of the project team, and does not address issues that are outside of their control, while LEED works to be more thorough by rating both the project team and the owner. LEED?s process is their own way of letting the final certification reflects the efforts of both parties as one unit. And while both LEED and the ISI share many of the same goals, LEED is a nongovernmental organization. So when the standard was set for LEED, it was ensured worldwide, and not just to the United States. This distinction seems to affect many of the different sustainable construction organizations we have today, for example the ICC.
The International Code Council (ICC) was established in 1994 during the green building movement as a non-profit organization dedicated to developing a single set of comprehensive and coordinated national model construction codes. The founders of the ICC are Building Officials, Code Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA), International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), and Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI). Since the early part of the last century, these non-profit organizations developed three separate sets of model codes which were to be used throughout the United States. Although regional code development has been effective and responsive to our country?s needs, three separate agencies saw the need for a single set of codes. The nation?s three model code groups responded by creating the International Code Council and by developing codes without regional limitations; the International Codes. The International Codes (or I-Codes), published by ICC, provide minimum safeguards for people at home, at school and in the workplace. The I-Codes are a complete set of comprehensive, coordinated building safety and fire prevention codes. Building codes benefit public safety and support the industry?s need for one set of codes without regional limitations. Like the ICC, LEED also has a set list of codes for specific infrastructures. Whether it is for schools, existing building operations, or neighborhood development; though the ICC is not a rating system that awards points to the builder for taking various environmentally friendly approaches in their construction process. Instead, the ICC?s obligation to the builder is to provide a service outlining the pros and cons of the builder?s construction plans. As such ICC serves as the base for construction projects, particularly federal properties around the world, and as a reference for many nations outside the United States.
Another divider between ICC and LEED is the ICC?s public forum for altering their codes. For any interested individual or group wanting to submit a code change proposal and participate in the proceedings in which proposals are considered, this is possible. This open debate and participation before a committee of representatives from across the construction industry, ensures a consensus of the construction community in the decision-making process. A major advantage of ICC?s publicly discussed development process is that it allows both the ICC code development committees, and eligible voting members to participate in finalizing the results of each proposal, where LEED was produced by a section of the USGBC?s membership.
More than any other human endeavor, the city environment has direct, long-lasting impacts on the planet. In the United States, many builders and remodelers are going green with the help of the National Associate of Homebuilders (NAHB). While some of the incentive to build green is being dictated by policy makers, increased consumer awareness is also driving the growth in this sector, making green a self-fulfilling prophecy ? the more consumers are exposed to the benefits of green homes, the more demand we will see. Accordingly, the NAHB helps prepare the industry for the increasing interest in sustainable construction by educating and credentialing building professionals, developing acquired skills for green building, and advocating at the national level for credible, voluntary, and market-sensitive green building initiatives. While both the NAHB and LEED seek to guide eco-friendly building with similar processes, there are some significant differences.
Both programs are strong residential green building rating systems. Both are well intentioned,
consensus developed, flexible, voluntary, and tested by third parties. But for minimum certification, LEED requires a certain number of points in the divisions of Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality while the NAHB does not. This leads to the most significant difference. LEED does not require higher point totals within each division when seeking higher tier certification; only the minimum point level is required, allowing a LEED project to be very strong in several categories, but very week in others. This leads me to believe that the finished project completed by the NAHB will be more evenly balanced across the scoring rubric. This latter of the two agencies allows for the entire project to be more well-rounded, which complements our new direction.
In our society a new state of thinking has occurred. We have become obsessed with having more, regardless of the consequences. We have become pleasure-seeking, only thinking of the present and having no care for the future. But as of recently, a new tide is turning for the sustainable construction industry and those affected by it. With continuously updated building codes, along with new standards and non-profit organizations like LEED or the NAHB. The people as a whole now have the initiative and the tools to become sounder, and have less impact with the natural resources around them. The construction companies have a special obligation to become proactive in our progressive eco-friendly era. The USGBC?s LEED building standard has popularly become the idol for all green stainable construction. Laying out guidelines for the world (and more importantly the United States) to start using closed circuit loops for building resources, and design new structures or better yet, renovate old buildings with a ground layering idea that all man makes needs to compliment nature?s qualities.
Works Cited
“Institute For Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI): Rating System.” Institute For Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI): Welcome. 2012. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. ;http://www.sustainableinfrastructure.org/rating/index.cfm;.
“International Code Council.” ICC – International Code Council. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. ;http://www.iccsafe.org;.
Kibert, Charles J. Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley ; Sons, 2008. Print.
“National Association of Home Builders.” National Association of Home Builders. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. ;http://www.nahb.org;.
Reposa, John. “Comparison of USGBC LEED for Homes and the NAHB National Green Building Program.” International Journal of Construction Education and Research 5.2 (2009): 108-20. Print.
