LEED vs. Green Globes - watch our state duke it out
In today’s marketplace, so many things claim to be “green” that it can be really, really tough to decipher what’s green and what’s greenwashing. Sometimes, green measures even conflict with each other.
Apparently, that’s the case with LEED and Green Globes, at least in Washington State. Green Globes,
administered in the U.S. by the Green Building Initiative, is a green building certification that I have only come across a few times in my travels. LEED is by far and without question the more prominent certification of the two.
However, LEED’s prominence is due in large part to its inclusion in state and city government incentives and requirements. For example, Washington State requires major buildings meet LEED silver or higher to receive public funding. Seattle requires developers meet at least LEED silver to receive a density bonus. Those requirements have gone a long way towards making Washington a leader in its number of LEED certified buildings, and LEED projects on the board.
Senate Bill 5384 would change the state mandated requirements by adding the Green Globes standard as an alternative to LEED silver.
Now, it might surprise some to learn that Cascadia, the region’s go-to organization for green building, is lobbying hard against this. But then again Cascadia is part of the U.S. Green Building Council and the U.S. Green Building Council created LEED, so it stands to reason that it would support LEED certification. The bill is also opposed by the Washington Environmental Council and the Washington Conservation Voters, which represents many different environmental organization statewide.
An advocacy e-mail appeared in my in-box today asking readers to call state legislators to make sure
Green Globes is not included in state law as an alternative to LEED. The e-mail says “Green Globes was created by the timber and chemical lobbies as a much weaker alternative to LEED,” and that it is untested, funded by industry and requires no third party verification.
I don’t know enough about Green Globes to report on whether any of the above allegations are true. I know board members of GBI represent a number of different interests from universities to business. I know a number of industry organizations heavily support their initiatives (though to be fair, industry also supports USGBC).
I also know the actual bill, available here, has a piece in it stating all major projects receiving state funds that are four stories or under must use wood and wood products as building materials in them. Not sure how that fits into the point of the bill and it seems a little odd to me but make of it what you will.
If you’re interested in this topic, Architect Online has an excellent rundown of the two systems by Christopher Swope here that I highly suggest reading. Swope points out that LEED could benefit from a bit of competition.
For still more information, visit GreenbuildingsNYC here.
What do you think? Is LEED too restrictive and is Green Globes the way to go? Is Green Globes a less strict certification? Weigh in by commenting below!
Tags: Cascadia, Greenwashing, LEED, Measuring performance, Seattle, USGBC
Loading ...
February 20th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
The answer to your question is summed up in a joint press release from ASHRAE and the GBI that ironically came out at exactly the same time that your article appeared. FYI, I have pasted it below. One of the other great ironies about this story is that (as everyone here in Canada knows) both LEED and GreenGlobes share common Canadian roots - both are based upon a 1995 Canadian standard, which in turn originated in the late ’80s at the UK’s Building Research Establishment. The claims about GBI being a trojan horse for industry are just the result of ignorance and a claim for bragging rights….. Here is yesterday’s press release:
ASHRAE, GBI Pledge to Collaborate to Promote Building Sustainability
For Release: February 19, 2009
Contact: Mark Rossolo - GBI 503-274-4054 mark@thegbi.org
Contact: Jodi Dunlop - ASHRAE
Public Relations
678-539-1140
jdunlop@ashrae.org
ATLANTA – Through a new memorandum of understanding, ASHRAE and the Green Building Initiative (GBI) will work together to accelerate the adoption of sustainability principles in the built environment.
The agreement was approved by ASHRAE and by the GBI Board of Directors during their winter meetings.
“ASHRAE supports a wide variety of programs that encourage the sustainable design and operation of buildings,” Bill Harrison, ASHRAE president, said. “Tools such as GBI’s Green Globes rating system help to provide metrics through which building owners and operators can gauge a building’s sustainability performance. Pushing forward the built environment to improve sustainability will require a collaborative effort among a myriad of organizations. ASHRAE looks forward to collaborating with GBI and other organizations.”
“The GBI is delighted to finalize this agreement and begin working with ASHRAE on our shared goal of increasing sustainable building principles,” said Ward Hubbell, President of the GBI. “Improving the built environment is an enormous task and we can’t afford to just focus on new construction. An important aspect of this agreement is that both organizations will work to promote the importance of using actual performance data to ensure that our buildings are performing in an efficient and environmentally-friendly manner.”
Specifically, the agreement calls for the two groups to
Promote the design, construction and operation of buildings that are energy-efficient, healthier and environmentally responsible by, among other things, providing education and training;
Provide access to the Green Globes tool;
Promote the link between sustainable design and actual performance outcomes;
Encourage and/or undertake research that identifies specific economic and environmental benefits of green building practices;
Support and promote green building standards, certification programs and rating systems.
ABOUT ASHRAE: ASHRAE, founded in 1894, is an international organization of some 50,000 persons. ASHRAE fulfills its mission of advancing heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration to serve humanity and promote a sustainable world through research, standards writing, publishing and continuing education.
ABOUT THE GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVE: The mission of the Green Building Initiative is to accelerate the adoption of building practices that result in energy-efficient, healthier and environmentally sustainable buildings by promoting credible and practical green building approaches. A not-for-profit education initiative, the GBI is supported by a broad cross section of organizations and individuals with an interest in residential and commercial construction. For more information on the Green Building Initiative, please visit http://www.thegbi.org.
February 24th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
First, I want to make clear that we have no intention of undermining a “competing organization.” Though we are a chapter of the USGBC, we are a separate 501c3 non-profit and don’t receive any profit-share for LEED certifications. In fact, in our testimony before the Senate committee on this bill included a statement of our encouragement of competition for the LEED standard, and our work to develop and promote the Living Building Challenge clearly evidences our position that LEED is not the be-all/end-all of green building standards.
Competition would be very good for the industry and the state. Unfortunately, we don’t believe the Green Globes standard is the right system for Washington in its current evolution, and we do believe that the timber and chemical industries are pushing for its adoption (along with GSI, they were the lead lobbyists at the hearing) in Washington and other states because it weakens those states’ requirements for sustainably produced forest products.
Does Green Globes have some good things to offer? Yes. Is it an equivalent standard to LEED Silver? Not yet.
RE: ANSI certification. It’s our understanding that GBI is working on establishing Green Globes as an ANSI standard, but that work is incomplete.
RE: the timber and chemical industry backing GBI in the development of this standard, here’s an excerpt from an article written by Alex Stangos and published in the Wall Street Journal (3/29/2006):
“The Green Building Initiative, which is led by a former timber-company executive and received much of its seed money from timber and wood-products companies, is promoting a green-building verification program called Green Globes. It says Green Globes is scientifically rigorous. Critics say it is self-serving.”
GBI is actually very forthright about this issue. On their site, they respond to Frangos article:
“To be clear, we have never hidden the fact that the GBI received the bulk of our start-up funding from the Wood Promotion Network, but over the past year, we have worked hard to diversify our funding, as well as develop a governance structure that ensures balance and credibility.”
But the truth is that the timber industry still has a large stake in GBI and Green Globes. At the 2/13 hearing on SB5384, GBI was flanked by Weyerhaeuser, Port Blakely Tree Farms, Green Diamond, and the American Chemistry Council in supporting the bill. It was opposed by Cascadia, the AIA and the Washington Environmental Council.
We hope that Green Globes or some other standard will emerge to challenge LEED with a system that requires the same rigor and engages an equally diverse number of stakeholders in its development. Until that time, we believe that LEED Silver is still a better baseline for state-funded projects. If anything, we wish the state would increase its standard to LEED Gold or better.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Cascadia has since sent out an update on its stance towards Green Globes. To read it, and to get an update on this topic, visit http://www.cascadiagbc.org/events/2009/march/UpdateSB5384.pdf?utm_campaign=Senate%20Bill%205384%20%26%20Other%20Advocacy%20News&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_term=Click%20here.
March 9th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Cascadia may or may not have had a significant effect on getting SB 5384 stalled in committee. But is is evident by their tactivcs that the truth has very little to do with their desperate attempt to remain top dog inthe Green ratings division.
The falsehoods put forth in the mass emailing to Cascadia members is reprehensible and should be beneath any organization that advertises itself as being good stewards for the earth and its inahabitants.
LEED is overly complicated, ovelry expensive, and politically driven in such a way that soon this argument will be moot. A revolt is coming. A true sustainable revolt that will LEED an old irrelevant relic of the past.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:17 am
[...] DJC Green Building Blog ” Blog Archive ” LEED vs. Green Globes - watch … [...]
March 11th, 2009 at 12:52 am
[...] Lastly, the Transit-Oriented Communities bill, which has already had its density provisions gutted, is reportedly now stalled over objections that the affordable housing requirements are too stringent. [...]
April 10th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
[...] DJC Green Building Blog ” Blog Archive ” LEED vs. Green Globes - watch … [...]
May 29th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Competition for LEED in their certification process is an excellent idea. LEED has a tendency to be complicated and costly to document; the all-out war between the two organizations may result in streamlining the process and reworking several credits (IE: EAc4, Enhanced Refrigeration Management, which generally results in oversizing refrigeration equipment… can we say: intent?). Competition also worries me.
Competition might lead to the relaxation of requirements needed for certification. A supplier could in essence support the standard that allows for less eco-friendly materials, allowing the lesser standard to gain headway over the greater. In a world plagued with environmental problems and issues, this is an outcome that we, as inhabitants of this world, can not accept any further.
The competition would need to be monitored, I believe, to keep this from happening. The competition should push to make both methods more streamline, continue to expand responsible decision making in construction and design practices, and provide greater support for our environment.
July 4th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
You do express your point pretty well, as do a lot of blogers on: DJC Green Building Blog » Blog Archive » LEED vs. Green Globes - watch our state duke it out, but I wish you could add a little more references on heating and refrigeration as I find some of your points a little “unconventional” and would appreciate to know of documented similar opinions. I<m not asking that you do research until next Sunday but …
July 7th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Hello,
I would like to know if I may have permission to use the “Green Glode” in a logo design? Please reply back to:
margie@margiestypesetting.com
My client may not want to use it but I would like to know if it is available for use BEFORE I use it in a design.
Thank You,
Margie
July 23rd, 2009 at 3:25 pm
I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future.
September 25th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Love your blog. Love the Earth art. How can someone use it? Please respond asap.
September 25th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Please respond to gagagk@aol.com
Thanks!