From the Editor

As you may have heard, the U.S. Green Building Council has decided to delay the vote on the new versions of LEED (previously called LEED 2012, now called LEEDv4) until June 1, 2013. One of the reasons USGBC President, CEO and Founding Chairman, Rick Fedrizzi cited for the delay is that the community needs “more time to absorb the changes we’re proposing and to get their businesses ready to take the step with us.”

And one of the biggest changes the community needed time to absorb was a change to Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 2, Minimum Energy Efficiency Performance, in the LEED-EBOM system. The current LEED-EBOM requires an Energy Star score of 69 for certification. The new LEED-EBOM would require a 75.

In addition, for buildings that, for whatever reason, couldn’t achieve 75, the new LEED would offer an “alternate compliance path.” If a building could show a 20 percent improvement in energy performance over a baseline comprised of average energy intensity (kBtu/sf) from three consecutive recent years, it could achieve a Certified rating. The caveat here is that any project that uses the alternate compliance path will only be able to achieve that Certified level, no matter how many points it accrues in other areas.

Many in the industry are upset by both of these changes. They say that 75 is too high a bar, and will leave out many sustainable projects from being able to achieve LEED certification. On the other hand, by lowering the bar with the alternate compliance path, LEED will allow certifications (albeit only at the Certified level) of poorly performing energy projects, projects that aren’t nearly as green as, say, a project with a 74 Energy Star score.

At a session at the recent Every Building Conference and Expo (BOMA’s annual trade show) in Seattle, USGBC’s Doug Gatlin addressed the latter issue. He explained that USGBC’s thinks that if poor-performing projects are able to reduce energy use by 20 percent, and continue reduce, there’s a net benefit for all because of the reduction in net emissions. It’s basically a way for LEED-EBOM to be more inclusive in the types of projects it can include. And with recertification as a requirement in LEED-EBOM, those buildings will continue to have to improve energy performance, or certification will be revoked.

Regarding the 75, the justification is simple: LEED is a leadership standard, and as such, must continue to push the market forward in the area of energy efficiency.

All this said, when the new LEED rating systems are unveiled next year (assuming approval by USGBC membership), USGBC is offering an unprecedented two-year grace period in which project teams can choose whether to use the new LEEDv4 or still certify under the current LEED 2009. The goal is to help ease the market into the changes.

As always, I’m interested to hear from you. What do you think of the two major changes to the energy prerequisite in LEED-EBOM? Too steep?  Too lax? How will the changes affect your LEED-EBOM certification goals.  

Cheers,

Greg Zimmerman, editor  

Green Strategies

Considering LEED? Raise Your Energy Star Score First

This article provides tips on how to raise your Energy Star score, if LEED-EBOM is your goal.

In the News

LEED 2012 Delayed to 2012, Renamed LEEDv4

Green Multimedia

LEED Resources From Green Building Certification Institute
In this podcast, Peter Templeton, president of the Green Building Certification Institute, joins Edward Sullivan, editor, Building Operating Management magazine for a chat about GBCI’s role and how it can help facility managers.