Tag:

LEED

ASHRAE 189.1 – 2014 Green Building Standard Is Now Available

Last week the 2014 version of the ASHRAE 189.1 Green Building Standard was published and became available for use.

ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1-2014, Standard for the Design of High-Performance, Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, addresses site sustainability; water-use efficiency; energy efficiency; indoor environmental quality; and the building’s impact on the atmosphere, materials and resources.

Standard 189.1 is an alternative compliance option of the International Green Construction Code. When Baltimore City adopted the IgCC last week, its enactment expressly described that buildings designed in compliance with Standard 189.1 were exempt from compliance with the IgCC. Given the timing of the enactment, Baltimore adopted the December 2011 version of 189.1.

The 2014 standard incorporates 67 addenda, reflecting changes made through the public review process since the standard was last published in 2011. Appendix H gives brief descriptions and approval dates of the addenda included in this new edition.

According to ASHRAE, major changes in the 2014 edition include:

Energy: Significant updates are included to reflect the publication of Standard 90.1-2013, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, including revised building envelope provisions. Fenestration orientation requirements were updated based on new research, as well as changes and updates made to equipment efficiency tables, ENERGYSTAR references and continuous air-barrier requirements.
Energy Performance, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Renewables: Changes and clarifications are included to reflect changes to Standard 90.1. Carbon dioxide emission factors for different energy sources are updated.
- Indoor Environmental Quality: Lighting quality is added to the scope of this section, and requirements are added for lighting controls in specific space types. Requirements for air sealing of filtration and air-cleaning equipment are clarified, and new requirements for preoccupancy ventilation and building envelope moisture management are added.
- Site Sustainability: All site requirements are now mandatory, with prescriptive and performance options moved to the mandatory requirements. Requirements for stormwater management are enhanced, and new requirements added for bicycle parking and for preferred parking for low-emission, hybrid and electric vehicles. New requirements are added for predesign assessment of native and invasive plants.
- Water: More stringent water use requirements are included for toilets, clothes washers, dishwashers and green roofs.
- Building Impacts on the Atmosphere, Materials, and Resources: Requirements are updated for areas to store and collect recyclables, including batteries and electronics. Requirements also are updated for construction waste management and for life-cycle assessment. New requirements are added for multiple-attribute product declaration or certification and for maximum mercury content levels of certain types of electric lamps.
- Construction and Plans for Operation: Requirements related to environmental impacts associated with idling construction vehicles are updated. New requirements are added to reduce the entry of airborne contaminants associated with construction areas.
To appreciate the importance of a republished ASHRAE 189.1, note that the Department of Defense, the largest owner of buildings in North America, that is also the owner or more green building and more LEED certified building than anyone else, based its Unified Facilities Criteria 1-200-02 High Performance And Sustainable Building Requirement on 2009 version of the Standard.

This may also be the last time the ASHRAE publishes 189.1 as an independent standard. In August the International Code Council, ASHRAE, the American Institute of Architects, the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, and the U.S. Green Building Council announced the signing of a memorandum to collaborate on the development of future versions of Standard 189.1.

To order Standard visit www.ashrae.org/bookstore.

11/25/2014 0 comment

Green Building

International Green Construction Code Now Mandatory For All Building in Baltimore

written by Stuart Kaplow

This week, the Baltimore City Council adopted the International Green Construction Code 2012 as an overlay to the City’s building, fire and related codes.

Baltimore, the 26th most populous city in the country, was among the first jurisdictions, in 2007 to mandate that all “newly constructed, extensively modified non-residential buildings” .. “achieve a Silver rating in the appropriate LEED rating system or satisfy the Baltimore City Green Building Standard” (a LEED-like local enactment). That mandatory law had some efficacy with new construction but almost no market impact on renovations as building owners strived to avoid the enactment.

Council Bill 14-0413 repeals that existing law and commencing April 1, 2015 expands its scope and breadth with a new Baltimore Green Construction Code to apply to all new construction and “all repairs, additions, or alterations to a structure and all changes of occupancy” with very few exceptions (.. one or two family dwellings, etc.).

Significantly, the new Green Code does not apply to: structures that achieve a LEED Silver rating; residential and mixed use buildings of five stories or more that comply with the ICC 700 at the Silver performance level for energy and Bronze level for other categories; and, to structures that comply with ASHRAE standard 189.1. The new enactment allows the Code official to accept third party certification of compliance with these alternative compliance paths.

There is an exemption process where the Code official may, in unusual circumstances and upon a showing of good cause, grant an exemption from any specific requirement of the Code.

Sensitive that the port of Baltimore, founded in 1729, is an already built-out older industrial city that has shifted to a service economy, the new Green Code alters the form IgCC with 32 pages of edits, including that it requires “at least 50% of the total building materials used” in a building of 25,000 square feet or greater, must be recycled, recyclable, bio-based or indigenous (within 500 miles), where the form code threshold is not less than 55% of buildings of all sizes.

And the enactment corrects some of the industry bias in the form IgCC when, in pursuit of heat island effect mitigation, Baltimore permits the use of “porous asphalt pavement” in addition to pervious concrete. The form code all but bans asphalt pavement in favor of concrete products (i.e., when the IgCC 2012 mandates heat island mitigation for not less than 50% of site hardscape with material as having a solar reflectance value of not less than 0.30 [.. think light colored concrete and not dark colored asphalt]).

In a first for any American city, buildings are now mandated to have renewable energy systems.

Both with the sunsetting of the Baltimore City Green Building Standard (the green standard that most residential projects pursued in recent years) and that this new Green Code applies to all repairs and renovations (not subject to the prior law), whichever compliance path a builder pursues, will be a sea-change.

While there are co-sponsors, the bill is all but the singular and Herculean effort of Councilman James Kraft. It is rare that a code enactment is not an executive branch bill. And the Councilman’s commitment to the environment is further evidenced by the fact that last evening the City Council also had before it his bill to ban plastic bags.

As progressive as this bill is, it should not be lost that Baltimore is representative of a very limited number of jurisdictions mandating new construction and renovation of both private and public buildings must be green. After the 2014 mid-term elections, many of today’s newly elected conservatives believe that a voluntary, non-mandatory approach to environmental protection is the best hope for stewardship of our planet. It is that same belief that has led to the broad brand and wide market share acceptance of LEED as a voluntary green building rating system. But Baltimore has had a mandate on the books since 2007, so, while there are not 50 shades of green, with alternative compliance paths for achieving green building, this bill is being viewed favorably.

11/19/2014 0 comment

Green Building

Mid Term Election Results Superb For Green Building

written by Stuart Kaplow

Election Day 2014 in which Republicans made big gains in Congress and statehouses across the country portends huge business opportunities for green building.

As more conservative legislative bodies look to enact environmental and energy policies while driving up growth without enacting new mandates or imposing new taxes, enabling voluntary green building is positioned to be part of the new legislative agendas.

The newly elected Republicans are not 1960s Barry Goldwater environmentalists who favored “federal intervention with regards to the environment.” To the contrary, most of today’s newly elected conservatives believe that a voluntary, non-mandatory approach to environmental protection is the best hope for stewardship of our planet. And that is the same belief that has led to the broad brand and wide market share acceptance of LEED. Many believe that burdening business and land owners with yet more government mandates is wrong and will not be efficacious.

The broad failure of the IgCC to be enacted anywhere suggests a building code that goes far beyond life safety is going too far. Further, the fact that ASHRAE 189.1 has only been implemented by the U.S. military is equally damning. Mandatory green codes and green standards will not be popular in conservative legislative bodies.

Additionally, attempting to mandate that a private land owner must build a LEED or Green Globes certified structure misuses the voluntary rating systems. David Gottfried, the USGBC co-founder who unabashedly believes “all building should be green” said in a recent interview, “LEED was designed as a voluntary standard” acknowledging that “some governments have grabbed onto it.” And Jerry Yudelson, the President of GBI (the Green Globes folks), makes clear he does not advocate mandatory green building laws for private building and he sees “a benefit of allowing the freedom of the marketplace to control this rapidly changing field, where performance counts.”

As transition teams for newly elected officials look for environmental and energy policies that will be no cost to government and not burden business, the environmental industrial complex needs to advocate for government policies that allow and incentivize sustainability and green building (including the resultant reduced electricity use, savings in potable water, less solid waste, eliminating toxics, and more). It is time to stop ridiculing people, who are now in control of Congress and many state legislatures, as climate change deniers (making it a moral issue equating them with Holocaust deniers). And it is time to reconsider the abject failure to of the green building community to articulate the advantages of building sustainability that has resulted in green building no longer being the cool kid.

Not only is green building a solution to many of the environmental impacts arising from human activity, but from an economic perspective it is clear that green building is profitable. There is nothing wrong with making a profit while saving the planet.

These elections have presented an opportunity for the green building industry to thrive.

Green building policies that promote innovation and create an environment rich for investment in real estate can save both mankind and its current way of life; and we all can get wealthy building green.

11/13/2014 0 comment

Green Building

DOE Issues Final Rule on Federal Green Building Standards

written by Shari Shapiro

The Federal government has long been a leader in constructing green buildings, and LEED has been the Federal standard of choice. The Department of Energy issued a final rule updating its recommended certification standards and levels for all Federal buildings on October 14, 2014.

The Final Rule does not tell Agencies which rating system to use. Rather, if the Agency chooses to use a rating system, such system must meet the following characteristics:

Allow assessors and auditors to independently verify the criteria and measurement metrics of the system;
Be developed by a certification organization that (i) provides an opportunity for public comment on the system, (ii) provides an opportunity for development and revision of the system through a consensus-based process;
Be nationally recognized within the building industry;
Be subject to periodic evaluation and assessment of the environmental and energy benefits that result under the rating system; and
Include a verification system for post occupancy assessment of the rated buildings to demonstrate continued energy and water savings at least every four years after initial occupancy.

Sounds a lot like LEED to me, so unless something else comes into the marketplace, Federal buildings are likely to use the LEED standard.

The DOE’s rule is based, at least in part, on a General Services Administration (GSA) report on green building rating systems issued on October 25, 2013, and available here. The GSA recommended LEED-2009 Silver or 2 Green Globes v 2010. It also contained a variety of other recommendations, including keeping current with the rating systems as they evolve.

The GSA’s recommendation is an interesting one for two reasons:

(1) the GSA requires its buildings to be LEED Gold, and

(2) the recommendation was not supplemented to recommend LEED v4, even though the GSA did evaluate LEED v4.

Since the Final Rule does not have a recommended rating system, and most agencies are unlikely to parse whether a particular rating system other than LEED complies with these characteristics, the GSA’s recommendations are likely to become the Federal default.

10/21/2014 1 comment

Green Building

Enterprise Green Communities Criteria Being Updated

written by Stuart Kaplow

In 2015 the use of LEED v4 will become mandatory, a new 2015 International Green Construction Code will be available, an updated ASHRAE 189.1 will be published, the new ICC 700 National Green Building Standard will be approved, and there will be a 2015 Enterprise Green Communities Criteria.

In the arena of green building standards, green rating systems and green codes among the widely respected residential rating systems is the Enterprise Green Communities Criteria.

While the Criteria was developed by Enterprise to “provide a clear, cost-effective framework for all affordable housing development types in any location in the country, including new construction and rehabilitation in multifamily as well as single-family buildings,” the Criteria are used in more than just affordable housing.

The current Enterprise Green Communities Criteria, adopted in 2011, are grouped into the following eight categories: 1. Integrative Design, 2. Location + Neighborhood Fabric, 3. Site Improvements, 4. Water Conservation, 5. Energy Efficiency, 6. Materials Beneficial to the Environment, 7. Healthy Living Environment, and 8. Operations + Maintenance, which are not dissimilar from LEED for Homes.

All project types (single family, low rise multifamily, and mid/ high-rise multifamily) and construction types (New Construction, Moderate Rehab, and Substantial Rehab) use that set of Criteria.

There is only one level of Enterprise Green Communities Certification awarded. To achieve certification, projects must achieve compliance with the Criteria mandatory measures applicable to that construction type. Additionally, New Construction projects must achieve 35 optional points and Rehab projects must achieve 30 optional points.

Enterprise Green Communities has certified more than 30,000 homes to date (as compared to more than 132,000 registered with 50,000 certified under the LEED for Homes rating system). Also significantly, the Criteria have been adopted by more than 20 states as a mandatory requirement for allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits, a Federal program that finances roughly 90% of all affordable housing production in the U.S. So, the revision of the Criteria is of great import.

There are two primary opportunities where you can engage with the 2015 Criteria Development Process: First, Enterprise community partners local market offices are currently collecting feedback during the “Local Developer Comment Period” through third quarter 2014. And then, after the efforts of several working groups, Enterprise Green Communities will welcome comments on a draft version of the 2015 Criteria during their public comment period late in the fourth quarter of 2014.

For more information about the 2015 Green Communities revisions process email greencommunities@enterprisecommunity.org

2015 will be a year of great change in green building standards, rating systems and codes. Participating now in the development of the 2015 Enterprise Green Communities Criteria is an ideal way to prepare for what is to come.

08/15/2014 1 comment

Energy Efficiency Green Building

The ABCs of Building Energy Efficiency: Which Building Certification is Right for You?

written by

DOE. LEED. USGBC. EPA. ISO.

The number of certifications for energy efficiency, as well as the organizations that can help guide you, can make your head swim.

Does the EPA have anything to do with LEED? Can the USGBC help me with my DOE?

It can be quite confusing, for sure.

One thing we all know is that greater energy efficiency positively impacts a company’s bottom line and can even contribute to topline growth as more consumers seek out environmentally responsible businesses. Not to mention more efficiency means less carbon that contributes to climate change.

Here we break down three certifications, noting how – and when – they can help you.

LEED. One of the more well-known certifications, you may have seen a LEED plaque on a skyscraper or car dealership. What does it mean? The company or individual incorporated environmentally responsible building practices throughout the construction or renovation to lessen its impact on the environment for the long run. The U.S. Green Building Council offers many resources to guide you through it, offering different levels of certifications to meet your needs.
ENERGY STAR®. If you’re like 87 percent of households in America, you know the ENERGY STAR label when you see it. But did you know that it’s not just found on refrigerators and dishwashers? Commercial buildings and industrial plants in the U.S. can earn ENERGY STAR certification by meeting energy performance standards defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The benefit? Pursuing ENERGY STAR certification creates networking opportunities among companies where they can share best practices, with EPA facilitating these communications. Furthermore, these sites use less energy, are less expensive to operate and have comparatively fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
ISO 50001. Developed by the International Organization for Standardization, the ISO50001 provides organizations big and small with the requirements for the continuous improvement of an energy management system. With ISO, there are no fixed targets for improving energy performance – benchmarks are set by the user organization or regulatory authorities. If your company has met other standards set by ISO, obtaining ISO 500001 usually only requires a few more steps. By establishing frameworks for organizations across many sectors, it is estimated that ISO standards could influence up to 60 percent of the world’s energy use.

There are also several challenges that inspire companies to continue their aggressive greenhouse gas reductions.

ENERGY STAR® Challenge for Industry. There’s another opportunity within the ENERGY STAR program if your site is industrial (think manufacturing, mining, etc.). The Challenge for Industry helps energy managers set goals to improve energy performance. You meet the challenge if your site reduces energy intensity by 10 percent in five years or less. What’s more, you can reapply and be recognized each time your site achieves another 10 percent reduction. Put simply, if you meet the goal, you meet the challenge. Recognition includes a profile on the ENERGY STAR website and a certificate documenting your savings.
Better Buildings, Better Plants Challenge. By joining this U.S. Department of Energy challenge, a company pledges to reduce energy intensity by 25 percent over the next 10 years. Any company in the U.S. manufacturing sector, regardless of size or level of energy management expertise, is eligible for partnership. This challenge is beneficial if you’re looking not only for recognition, but also technical support. Participants receive resources such as a technical account manager, in-plant training sessions for employees and invited guests, and software tools for metrics and development.
ENERGY STAR Partner of the Year. As the EPA’s highest honor for corporate energy management, this distinction recognizes organizations from ENERGY STAR’s 20,000 partners who have made outstanding contributions to protecting the environment through superior energy efficiency. Awards are given in several categories to companies across various industries. Organizations go through a stringent application process to be considered. For example, the Energy Management category honors companies who adopt a continuous energy management strategy across their entire portfolio.

There you have it: three certifications and three types of recognition that not only highlight the energy efficiency of your company, but provide you with resources and best practices to help you do it.

Article by Fastlane, appearing courtesy 3BL Media.

08/01/2014 2 comments

Green Building

Baltimore May Adopt the IgCC Green Building Standard

written by Stuart Kaplow

Last week, an ordinance was introduced in the Baltimore City Council for the purpose of adopting the International Green Construction Code.

The IgCC will be adopted as an overlay in conjunction with existing building, fire and related codes and will apply when a permit is required, except the new green code will not apply to: 1 or 2 family dwellings, multiple family dwellings that contain no more than 5 units, a structure that is LEED Silver certified or higher, or a structure that is ASHRAE 189.1 compliant.

It is necessary to appreciate that Baltimore City was an early adopter when it enacted a green building law in 2007 that, prior to this legislation, remains among the most sweeping of that in any major American city. Today the building code mandates that all newly constructed, extensively modified non-residential, and specific multi-family residential buildings, that have or will have at least 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, must be LEED Silver certified or comply with the Baltimore City Green Building Standard.

So, while it was controversial in 2007 when Baltimore mandating that privately owned building must be constructed green, Bill No. 14-0413 sponsored by Councilman James B. Kraft is being warmly received as providing more and better options for developers. That is under the bill a developer may pursue LEED Silver certification, compliance with ASHRAE 189.1 or build to the IgCC. That menu of options allays the concerns of many who will now be able to determine which green building standard is most efficacious for their project.

But make no mistake, Baltimore is not greenwashing. A change in the existing code is necessitated by the USGBC’s June 1, 2015 effective for LEED v4, when projects will no longer be able to register under LEED 2009, because the Baltimore City Green Building Standard piggybacks on LEED 2009 metrics and forms. A change had to be made. Also driving the bill is an unsettled question in the existing code of the definition of what is extensively modified and subject to the green mandate. In the already built out City of Baltimore many projects have not been required to build green that will now fall within the scope of this new IgCC mandate.

The Maryland legislature enacted enabling legislation permitting local governments to adopt the IgCC in 2011 and Baltimore will be the first to do so. Although as this bill is introduced, Montgomery County, Maryland is preparing legislation to repeal its existing LEED centric mandate replacing it with the IgCC. And the State is drafting regulations to allow use of the IgCC on State capital projects, including schools, where the law had previously required LEED Silver certification.

The first reader version of the bill repeals the current Green Building Standard replacing it with more than 25 pages of modifications to the form 2012 IgCC, and will be available later this week. Significantly for an ordinance that does not grandfather any projects, it contains an uncodified provision where the building code official may grant waivers from the new law for 180 days from its effective date in instances of good cause. Waivers may be key for projects that have been designed, but not yet permitted.

The ordinance boldly describes its purpose to “reduce the negative impacts and increase the positive impacts of the built environment on the natural environment and building occupants.” Mandatory green building has been and remains the law in Baltimore City. This bill makes the flavor of green more palatable.

06/23/2014 1 comment

Green Building

Green Building Bonds as a Game Changing New Source of Capital

written by Stuart Kaplow

Regency Centers Corporation, a publicly traded REIT, completed the sale of $250 million of “green building bonds” on May 14, 2014.

Proceeds from these corporate bonds will be used to fund “eligible green building projects” including the acquisition, construction, development or redevelopment of projects that will pursue LEED certification.

Regency is an owner, operator, and developer of grocery anchored neighborhood and community shopping centers. With 332 retail properties, the REIT’s portfolio encompasses over 43.9 million square feet located throughout the United States. The REIT has 17 LEED registered projects since 2009 (7 of which are under construction) and 7 of which have been certified.

Regency described this source of capital as an opportunity to support an important market as investors seek more socially responsible investment options. This bond issuance also confirms Regency’s commitment and long term view on sustainability, as evidenced by its greengenuity© program, which is the REIT’s “commitment to do all that is practical to reduce its environmental impact in developing and operating shopping centers.”

Only days before the green building bond sale, on May 12, 2014, Regency was honored by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Better Buildings Alliance as an inaugural Green Lease Leader, leading the market by incorporating lease clauses that help overcome market barriers and align tenant and property owner interests to save energy in commercial buildings.

These green building bonds are more specifically 3.75% ten year senior unsecured notes due on June 15, 2024. The interest rate for these green building bonds was lower than other similar, but non-green building bonds offerings by REITs. While bond financing can have higher transaction costs than oft used mortgage backed loans, even in large dollar amounts as in this instance, it is significant that there was strong market demand for these unsecured bonds that drove the lower interest rates.

Green building bonds are a new investment vehicle in the U.S. Until recently green bonds had been issued by the World Bank raising funds from investors to support World Bank lending for projects “that seek to mitigate climate change or help affected people adapt to it,” but while ‘green’ the bonds were not limited to ‘green building’. Since 2008, the World Bank has issued over $6 Billion in green bonds through 65 transactions and 17 currencies. And while several European business entities have issued similar green bonds, this transaction is the first in the U.S. exclusively for green building.

In November 2013, Bank of America issued the first ever U.S. bank green bond, but again its purpose was not limited to green building. The funds of the debenture are being used to finance renewable energy projects such as wind, solar and geothermal. Funds are also being used to finance energy efficiency projects such as lighting retrofits, district heating, co-generation, and building insulation in residential, commercial and public properties. The bank acted as underwriter on Regency’s deal.

As investors seek socially responsible investment options, green building bonds present a game changing opportunity for financing green building. Green building, which arguably offers higher value collateral and reduced risk, will be advantaged by bonds as a cheaper cost of capital all while saving the planet.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

05/29/2014 3 comments

Green Building

What Does OMB Circular A-119 Mean to Green Building?

written by Stuart Kaplow

The U.S. Office of Management and Budget is seeking comments, no later than May 12, 2014, on proposed revisions to Circular A-119, “Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities.”

“Green Globes and LEED are voluntary, consensus based standards” according to Kevin Kampschroer, director of the office of federal high-performance green buildings at the U.S. General Services Administration, referring to the March 2012 U.S. Department of Energy, Green Building Certification System Review.

That is, both of those green building programs are the very type of “voluntary consensus standards” that will be impacted by the revised Circular A-119.

By way of background, in the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Congress provided that federal agencies “shall use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards means as a to carry out policy objectives or activities,” except when such use “is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.” In response to the enactment of the 1995 law, OMB prepared Circular A-119. In light of changes that have taken place in the world of regulation, standards, and conformity assessment since the Circular was last revised in 1998, it is now being updated.

The revised Circular A-119 proposes to “maintain a strong preference for using voluntary consensus standards in Federal regulation and procurement.”

The reliance on non-government standards is not without controversy. That is, created by a particular interest group (arguably a small group of people with shared interests that is exclusive of most people) for a limited purpose at a specific time, be it an ISO, ANSI, ASHRAE or other, standards offer efficacy to a process or product, but can be problematic when the limits of the standard are not appreciated.

Within the green building coterie much is made of the fact that the Green Building Initiative is an ANSI accredited Standards Developing Organization and that its Green Globes 2010 rating system for new construction was ANSI approved. The LEED ratings systems do not pursue ANSI approval and the U.S. Green Building Council points to the fact that “The Foundations of LEED” allows for a flexible and faster adoption of each new version of LEED than the ANSI Essential Requirements permit. Additionally, the ANSI process doesn’t contemplate nor accommodate the participation of thousands of people in a voting consensus body. USGBC expresses pride in offering all its members the right to participate in and vote for each proposed version of LEED.

That ‘inside baseball’ debate within the green building community over the relative merits of ANSI is apparently lost on the federal government that in the 2012 DOE study (described above) determined, Green Globes 2010 and LEED 2009 both contain “the attributes of a voluntary consensus standards body defined in OMB Circular A-119: openness, balance of interest, due process, an appeal process, and consensus.”

Much of the controversy over the emergent Environmental Product Declarations is that most are based on dated European ISO standards originally conceived for other purposes.

Given that the federal government is the largest owner of buildings in North America and is also the owner of more certified green buildings than anyone else, it is of critical importance that any revision to Circular A-119 continue to allow agencies to recognize LEED and Green Globes as voluntary consensus standards.

All are encouraged to review the Federal Register notice and comment here.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

04/17/2014 0 comment

Green Building

The Single Most Significant Change in LEED v4

written by Stuart Kaplow

The newest version of LEED, with the designation LEED v4 is not simply another step in the continuous improvement of the third party verified green building rating system, and while not paradigm shift equal to a Neil Armstrong “giant leap for mankind,” LEED v4 is an all but an entirely new green building certification program.

Among the many modifications from the previous version, LEED 2009, there is a single change that is the most significant, bar none.

The change is buried deep within the LEED Operations and Maintenance Existing Buildings program and is not even in the printed reference guide.

The quick explanation is the change is an alternative method of satisfying the prerequisite that an existing building achieve an Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool energy performance rating of at least 75. Prior to the availability of this alternative compliance path, an existing building that could not achieve an Energy Star rating of 75 was excluded from participating in LEED.

There are nearly 4.9 million existing non-residential buildings in the U.S. If green building is going to save the planet, the huge impact that existing buildings have on the natural environment must be addressed.

Launched in 2004, as of February 1, 2014, more than 2,700 existing buildings are LEED Existing Building –Operations and Maintenance certified, and more than 6,500 buildings are registered pursuing certification. And while that is a respectable number, it is also a ridiculously small percentage of those nearly 4.9 million existing buildings.

As a practical matter the LEED EB-OM Minimum Energy Performance prerequisite is the gatekeeper determining if an existing building can even be a LEED candidate. LEED v4 requires a minimum Energy Star rating of 75. (This is more significantly stringent than LEED 2009 requiring an Energy Star score of 69.) An Energy Star score of 75 means the building is performing better than 75% of similar buildings nationwide. The prerequisite of a minimum score of 75 arguably excludes 75% of all existing buildings from participating in LEED.

David Gottfried, the cofounder of U.S. Green Building Council has often been quoted saying, “USGBC decided that the minimum bar for the ‘L’ level for LEED [i.e., L for Leadership] certification would begin with the top 25% of buildings.” And the very real application of that philosophy is that the maximum potential market for LEED is 25% of existing buildings (as limited by an Energy Star score of 75).

Even with that cap LEED EB-OM certified more than half of all the domestic floor area in the LEED rating system in 2013. So, any change to EB-OM is of paramount import to LEED itself, not to mention the implications for the millions of existing buildings.

In LEED v4, the “Existing Building – Operations and Maintenance” rating system was renamed “Operations and Maintenance: Existing Buildings” and is known as O+M: EB.

LEED O+M: EB encourages owners and operators of existing buildings to implement sustainable practices and reduce the environmental impacts of their buildings, while addressing the major aspects of ongoing building operations, including: exterior building site maintenance programs, water and energy use, environmentally preferred products and practices for cleaning and alterations, sustainable purchasing policies, waste stream management, and ongoing indoor environmental quality. LEED O+M: EB is popular with building owners concerned about costs because it identifies and rewards current best practices and provides an outline for uncovering operating inefficiencies.

The monumental change in O+M: EB is there is an alternative for satisfying the EAp2 prerequisite that an existing building achieve an Energy Star rating of at least 75. There is a v4 pilot credit known as “EAp2 Energy Jumpstart” which is that alternative compliance path.

Existing building that reduce energy consumption by 20% are now LEED eligible. The pilot credit text provides,

Demonstrate energy efficiency improvement, measured by source energy use intensity (EUI), of at least 20%, normalized for climate and building use. The percent reduction is determined by the project building’s energy reduction over the most recent 12 months, and data from three contiguous years of the previous five represents the baseline period. Buildings without four consecutive years of energy data are ineligible.

That is, a building that improves its Energy Star score by at least 20% is LEED O+M: EB eligible! And that is huge.

There are a few limitations on use. This pilot alternative compliance path is only available to projects from Energy Star eligible building types. Today, when Energy Star rating are available for building types from bank branches and barracks to wastewater treatment plants and warehouses, such is not a significant limitation. And there is a 500 project cap on participation in this pilot credit. Which is also not a significant bar to entry when it does not appear any project has yet been certified using the pilot credit.

This is a pilot credit and will no doubt be revised over time, including providing other options for providing energy consumption data to USGBC.

By way of background, USGBC did test this idea. The little used (and still available for LEED 2009 EB:OM buildings) Pilot Credit 67, was the precursor to Energy Jumpstart, offers the same “alternative compliance path requiring projects to achieve an energy improvement of 20% over a 12-month period.”

Available for use now, the single most significant change to LEED O+M: EB, and to the entire LEED v4 green building certification program, is the alternative method of satisfying the prerequisite that an existing building achieve an Energy Star rating of at least 75. LEED certification is now possible for the over 3.6 million buildings (of the nearly 4.9 million existing non-residential buildings in the U.S.) that would otherwise be excluded.

The new pilot credit provides expanded opportunities for USGBC.

Pilot credit EAp2 Energy Jumpstart may be “one small step” for LEED, but it is “a giant leap” for reducing energy use on the planet.

Article by Jacqueline Lusk and Stuart Kaplow. Jacqueline Lusk is a sustainability consultant at Lorax Partnerships and can be reached at jackie@loraxllc.com. Stuart Kaplow is a sustainability and green building attorney and can be reached at skaplow@stuartkaplow.com.

04/11/2014 1 comment

Green Building

LEED Reaches 3 Billion Certified Square Feet

written by Stuart Kaplow

The U.S. Green Building Council is about to announce that there are more than 3 Billion square feet of LEED certified commercial and institutional building.

Three Billion! That is a three followed by nine zeros or three thousand millions.

In a sense of scale, the Earth is only 4.67 Billion years old. The distance to the moon and back is less than 3 Billion feet (actually 2.66 Billion feet at apogee). It is very hard to comprehend how many 3 Billion is. The word Billion may not be as unfathomable as it once was, but 3 Billion square feet of LEED building is nothing less than a market transformation of real estate.

USGBC does acknowledge that 10.5 Billion square feet of construction space is “participating in LEED” and admittedly that number does add another zero.

It was publicly reported that “more than 2.8 Billion square feet” of building space was certified as of January 1, 2014. Then the organization released that 2.9 Billion square feet had been LEED certified, buried in a February 18, 2014 press release. And senior staff at USGBC have at least twice in public comments during the last week hinted that 3 Billion was approaching.

Many folks are aware that USGBC reports each and every day, more than 1.6 million square feet of space is certified using LEED.

Based solely upon the publicly available information it is clear USGBC is within hours of announcing that there are now more than 3 Billion square feet of LEED certified building (not including residential construction). That milestone is significant because LEED has transformed the way we construct buildings and holds the promise of green building mitigating the negative impacts that human activity has on the planet

Platitudes aside, what does that 3 Billion look like? USGBC tells us that as of February 1, 2014, LEED for New Construction & Major Renovations, the first rating system launched in 2000 has more than 19,000 buildings registered and nearly 10,000 certified. But today LEED is much more than new construction ..

LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance launched in 2004 has more than 6,500 registered buildings and nearly 2,700 have been certified. Significantly, the square footage of certified existing buildings has surpassed certified new construction on a cumulative basis. Last year the existing building rating system accounted for approximately 48% of total square footage certified.

LEED for Core & Shell launched in 2006 has more than 4,800 registered buildings and more than 1,450 have been certified.

LEED for Schools launched in 2007 has more than 1,400 registered buildings and more than 640 have been certified. But that number does not take into account projects with K-12 or Higher Education designated as the “space type” (e.g., LEED New Construction or others) which adds nearly 4,000 registered and more than 3,300 certified.

LEED for Retail: New Construction launched in 2010 has more than 550 registered buildings and more than 375 have been certified.

LEED for Healthcare launched in 2011 has more than 200 registered buildings and 2 have been certified. But that number does not take into account projects with healthcare designated as the “space type” which adds nearly 1,460 registered and more than 600 certified.

LEED for Commercial Interiors launched in 2004 has more than 4,100 registered projects and nearly 3,900 have been certified.

LEED for Retail: Commercial Interiors launched in 2010 has nearly 600 registered projects and nearly 300 have been certified.

The use of LEED internationally continues to grow rapidly. At the beginning of 2014, approximately 42% of all square footage pursuing LEED certification existed outside the U.S.

There is much to celebrate. LEED is now a global movement. But the impact of green building is still very small. For those who believe green building is the ideal means of mitigating the negative impacts that human activity has on the planet, it is time to work on the more than 7 Billion square feet registered but not yet certified.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

04/03/2014 0 comment

Green Building

LEED Law Intersects Miracle on 34th Street

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

On March 18th the Tomkins County legislature enacted a new local law providing for up to a 10 year property tax abatement for construction achieving LEED certification.

Tomkins County, New York which includes the Ithaca area, was named for Daniel Tomkins. Tompkins may be best known because he was mentioned by Kris Kringle in the 1947 film Miracle on 34th Street. The onscreen line was incorrect, however, in that Kringle said Tompkins served as Vice President of the United States under John Quincy Adams when in fact he was elected on the ticket with James Monroe in 1816 (.. but you knew that).

In 2012, New York enacted NYCL RPT § 470 enabling local governments to exempt green buildings from real property taxes. For the exemption to apply, the local government must adopt an appropriate ordinance. The state statute describes new construction or improvements and that a project must meet the LEED, Green Globes, American National Standards Institute, or substantially equivalent green building certification standards.

Tomkins County, desiring “to encourage sustainable practices,” enacted Local Law A of 2014, effective on the date of enactment, providing for up to a 10 year property tax abatement for building achieving LEED certification (and the law does not include the other permissible green building rating systems). The amount of the exemption permitted varies by year and by the certification level achieved. LEED Silver, Gold and Platinum projects each are exempted from 100% of property taxes for 3 years and then taxes are re established with a sliding scale over 10 years, with the most generous tax incentives being awarded to Platinum building.

The maximum taxable value to be abated under the proposed law would be $100,000.

The local law was one of the ‘Top 22’ priority projects in the Cleaner Greener Southern Tier Plan, which was developed with input from community residents, businesses, and government to develop a regional sustainability plan to improve the economic and environmental health of the area.

The County is home to Cornell University, Ithaca College and Tomkins Cortland Community College, and these institutions have LEED buildings on campus, but there are no other LEED certified buildings in the Ithaca area.

A real property tax exemption is the most common local government incentive for Green building. In a recent survey of local government green building laws across 100 jurisdictions, overwhelmingly the most often granted incentive for a LEED certified building was an abatement of real property taxes.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

03/24/2014 0 comment

Green Building

EPDs are New and Untested but in Short Order will Dominate

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

An environmental product declaration (EPD) is a method of quantifying the environmental impacts of a product in order to provide a sound basis for making decisions about the use of that product. As explained in my recent blog post, EPDs are Among the Hottest Topics in Green Building. Most simply put, an EPD in analogous to a nutritional label on a box of cereal. But beyond that explanation nothing is simple.

As a threshold matter, EPDs have been a European construct in part to comply with the European Union Integrated Product Policy. There is no similar U.S. law. Credits in LEED v4 related to EPDs are rapidly heightening interest in the U.S.

But just as Metric measurements have not overtaken the English measurements used in the U.S., it is not clear what success those ISO based country specific varied EPDs will find in the U.S.

Among the loudest critics of the LEED v4 Materials & Resources credits related to EPDs is Perkins+Will architect Douglas Pierce, who authored a White paper, “LEED V4 Should Lead On Material Health Transparency By Accepting Only Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) That Comply With the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Truth in Advertising Law”. Pierce highlights that EPDs and their use in LEED V4 “have a large loophole related to toxicity”. The White paper argues that toxicity must be detailed or risk violating the Federal Trade Commission Green Guides.

The White paper is legally not correct, .. but who would seek legal advice from architects (even a well respected architecture firm like Perkins+Will)? However, the White paper is useful in identifying the shortcomings of EPDs and in particular ISO based EPDs.

It is troubling that ISO 14025, specifying the procedures for developing Type III EPDs, was published in 2006, a long time ago in the realm of science and years before the current widely accepted ESEtox toxicity tool even existed.

USGBC has responded to the controversy:

USGBC believes that the coordinated use of EPDs, HPDs and raw material sourcing data – the path that’s been established in LEED v4 – generates information that can be practically acted upon in a way that USETox data reported in an EPD currently cannot be. However, the two paths are not mutually exclusive and USGBC applauds manufacturers who include USETox information as part of an EPD in addition to those that generated EPDs and HPDs.

The reliance on standards created by others, that is by a particular interest group for a limited purpose at a specific time, be it an ISO, ANSI, ASHRAE or other standard offers efficacy to a process or product, but is greatly problematic when the limitations of the standard are not appreciated.

Of note, the federal government is moving toward EPDs not based on the ISO standards, but rooted in TRACI, as described in my recent blog post.

USGBC has since the first version of LEED referenced third party standards and, on balance, it appears that LEED v4 has the bleeding edge materials disclosure ‘stuff’ just about right. And possibly of greatest import, many believe building product and material disclosure and optimization will, in short order, be a bigger business than LEED itself. Our law firm is working with a broad breadth of manufacturers and material suppliers, including their trade groups in this new era of EPDs.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

03/20/2014 0 comment

Green Building

Environmental Product Declaration a Hot Topic in Green Building

written by CleanTechies.com Contributor

An environmental product declaration (EPD) is a method of quantifying the environmental impacts of a product. It is analogous to the nutritional label on a box of cereal. In the context of green building, EPDs will provide a way describing the environmental impact of a building material or product.

EPDs articulate the conclusions of a life cycle assessment. The aim of an EPD is to facilitate the comparison of the range of environmental effects attributable to a product in order to provide a sound basis for making informed decisions.

Life cycle assessment is widely accepted to encompass 5 stages: raw material acquisition, manufacturing, transportation, use, and end of life.

U.S. EPA developed TRACI, the “Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts” that assists in impact assessment for life cycle assessment. TRACI requires consideration of the 5 stages described above. And TRACI facilitates the characterization of environmental impact categories that have potential effects, including: ozone depletion, global warming, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical oxidation (smog), ecotoxicity, human health: criteria air pollutants, human health: carcinogenics, human health: non-carcinogenics, fossil fuel depletion, land use, and water use.

In the U.S. TRACI can provide most of the information required for an EPD. Product and company information would be added.

ISO 14025 (produced by the International Organization for Standards, the world’s largest developer of voluntary standards) describes an “environmental declaration”, as quantified environmental data for a product with pre set categories of parameters based on the ISO 14040 series of standards, but not excluding additional environmental information. The ISO standard establishes the principles and specifies the procedures for developing a Type III environmental declaration. Type III environmental declarations “are primarily intended for use in business-to-business communication, but their use in business-to-consumer communication under certain conditions is not precluded.”

In contrast to TRACI that was created specifically for the U.S. using input parameters consistent with U.S. locations, ISO 14025 was created to play a role in “regional eco-label programmes, such as the European Union Integrated Product Policy”. That observed, ISO 14025 is becoming the early benchmark for EPDs (possibly because Europe is ahead of the U.S. in this arena?).

This post is about Type III EPDs, which require an independent agency to oversee the EPD process, Of note, Type I environmental labels are multi criteria third party programs that award environmental labels to products meeting a set of predetermined requirements. And Type II environmental labels specify requirements for self declared environmental claims made by manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers or anyone else likely to benefit from such claims.

All of this is new, in particular in the U.S. where EPDs are soon to be crucial in green building because LEED v4 and Green Globes both recognize EPDs. The new versions of IgCC 2015 and ASHRAE 189.1-2015 are each considering the use of EPDs. And while EPDs most directly contribute to LEED v4 point in the MRc1 and MRc2, they potentially have some role to play in 21 different LEED credits.

Not only are EPDs key in LEED v4, but EPDs are among the hottest topics in green building.

Article by Stuart Kaplow, appearing courtesy Green Building Law Update.

03/17/2014 1 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts