The Deep Seated Problems Behind LEED and the Other Green Building Programs

The following article, written by Michael Anschel, is reprinted from Remodeling with both their, and the author’s permission:

Ah HA!

It came to me over a series of tweets. An epiphany of sorts, if you will.

The problem with all these green building programs (including the one I helped create) is the thought process that the user is asked to engage in. No amount of revisions or point adjustment will solve this problem. LEED, NAHB, EarthCraft, Build It Green, even the amazing MN GreenStar are all handicapped by the same thing, and this handicap may be part of what is keeping them from getting the deep market penetration they all want.

Here it is:

The programs are written kind of like a building code. Do this. Don’t do that. Test those. Guess at what that is supposed to really mean. (The funny thing is that first NAHB and now USGBC are trying to emulate a codes-style process for writing the standards as well!)

Codes are good for certain things, no question, and they are a critical part of our building process. They keep the unscrupulous in check and provide a minimal thinking path to allow construction to continue in a mildly safe manner.

But codes don’t get their users to think.

Likewise, codes, rules, and regulations are good for finite tasks – usually single component or micro-system components such as bearing capacity requirements, nailing patterns, smoke detector locations, handrail heights.

But codes are horrible at addressing complex systems. What made us think we could take a system as huge as nature and bottle it up in code?

If we are asking people to think about how everything is connected, how everything goes somewhere, how their actions impact other people, and about their relationship with nature, then why the hell are we telling them to check their brain at the door and pick up a code book? It is almost as moronic as suggesting the LEED AP test (an exercise in minutia), or the NAHB Certified Green Professional test (a joke) have the ability to turn someone into a green expert!

Green building requires you to think. In green building, there is no easy path or one-size-fits-all solution. The sooner everyone understands this, the sooner we can get back to the business of green building.

Michael has hit upon many of my pet peeves about the various green building certification programs. What he doesn’t touch upon is cost: The cost to me as a design builder in jumping through their various tests in minutia to get certified; the cost to you to have your project certified silver, gold, platinum, or whatever the rating scheme is. And for my money and your money, you’re not guaranteed to get any better performance out of your building than if you hadn’t paid to have your building certified, or I to be certified. (As recent articles about LEED rated building performance have shown.)

I also agree with Michael that green building makes those of us who do it think (which is what I like about it). But there’s something else at work here too. Something that not only cannot be defined by check lists or green building codes, but also can’t simply be thought: You have to want to design and build green. You have to like designing and building green. It has to be important to the designer and builder. It has to be a part of who they are and how they think. The old saw that “I can design/build whatever you want” doesn’t work with green building. Often times green building doesn’t begin with the building; sometimes it doesn’t even begin with the site! It might begin with a good history lesson, sometimes followed by lessons in the biology, forestry, ecology, and hydrology of the ecosystems surrounding the building site. All necessary to understand how the building and site must work together to fit seamlessly into the local environment. All concepts completely foreign to main stream designers who see this site no differently than the last dozen sites: Land to be re-arranged to their liking so that their vision will work.

To be done correctly green building has to be important to the project team; it has to be a part of who they are and so be the yard stick by which they value their craft.

To paraphrase Michael’s closing sentence: The sooner we get the right attitudes in place, the sooner we can get down to the business of green building.

, , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

3 Responses

  1. Great points, Michael.

    It’s builders like you and Michael Anschel that are doing things right (i.e., considering not just the building design and construction itself but also the ecosystem that encapsulates it).

    Your post and Michael’s original blog article were the inspiration for this one: http://bit.ly/aEjmVq

    Thanks for showing other builders the way, and being an inspiration to many!
    Elaine

  2. Its great to see these comments put forward. In my personal opinion, it is people like us who lead the arguement and hope that the governemnt attempts to keep up with needed changes.

  3. Going green is a trend that is here to stay. Leed certified says a lot in today’s environmentally conscious world. Green printing of marketing material, and green practices in offices all play a major role in becoming a green company.

    Excellent points, thanks!

Leave a Reply

If you are human, count the objects:
Enable this image please
I see:
- +
- +
- +
Ironclad CAPTCHA (Security Stronghold)