New LEED MRc7, Certified Wood Credit Fair But Complex

or

How I Learned to Accept a Change from Simple Imperfection to Torturous Accuracy

Yesterday the USGBC released the 2nd draft of the proposal for a new MRc7, Certified Wood credit for LEED-NC, LEED-Schools, LEED-CI, LEED-CS, and LEED-EBOM. You may remember that this was ultimately spurred by the lumber industry's complaints about how their own certification label, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), was unfairly excluded from the LEED credit which only recognized the Forest Stewardship Council's (FSC) more rigorous requirements. You can view the results of a report comparing various lumber certification schemes here. The new proposal is lengthy enough that I thought a summary here, with some commentary, might be useful to you guys.

More Complexity Please

As a result the USGBC's consensus-based process for developing new standards has developed a more inclusive and equitable standard for ranking the standards called the USGBC Forest Certification Benchmark. The new approach is a sort of LEED system within LEED where if a particular forest certification standard complies with over 48 prerequisites and more than 40% of the 32 voluntary credits (sound familiar?), you may attribute the cost of those products towards your "certified wood" percentage needed to earn credit MRc7.

A sample from page 10 of the benchmark requirements

The more a particular scheme complies with with the voluntary requirements, the greater the relative value of that product you may contribute to hitting your 50% (based on cost) certified wood threshold needed to earn the credit (click here for the new LEED-NC credit draft for yourself):

Really compliant schemes now are worth 3x as they actually cost

This may all sound a bit ridiculous, but to be fair, the requirements themselves all seem make good sense and is necessary to thwart claims that the USGBC is in the back pocket of any particular certification body. By establishing a standard for standards, the USGBC can simply point out the deficiencies of any particular standard instead of (seemingly) arbitrarily accepting or rejecting individual groups. I'm by no means a sustainable forestry expert, but given the 1,800 comments received on the first draft I'd be amazed if anything substantial slipped through the cracks.

Please Follow Through With This!

"Building project teams will not be required to determine if a particular forest certification scheme meets the Benchmark’s requirements." So says the executive summary of the proposal, and I can't stress enough how important it is that the USGBC make it extremely easy for LEED APs to find out the status of one certification system over another. If I had it my way, I would only review certification schemes every two years and list all accepted schemes in the reference guide. If it's not in there tough luck, there's always LEED 2011. It's extremely important that I don't need to become an expert on the shifting forest certification system policy... All the USGBC has released on this end of the revisions is the Forest Certification Benchmark Conformance Assessment Process draft, which is a little light on details.

At a minimum, the USGBC should clearly indicate where to find a COMPLETE list of the current status of any particular forest certification system on the USGBC website, preferably on a URL that never changes. This website should be listed not just in the reference guide but also in the rating system itself.

Will my project be affected?

Though the new standard will only be required if you register a project after the date the credit is accepted (still a ways off). Once accepted though, you are permitted to use the new option in existing projects (v2009 or earlier) as an alternative compliance option.

Last Chance to Change

If you're vehemently opposed to this new system or you have some thoughts on how to improve it, you have until October 15th, 2009 to make your voice heard. Anyone can comment, not just USGBC members, but when it comes up for vote it's members only. I'm also curious to hear your thoughts hear, so please share your thoughts by leaving a comment!

Just noticed this is the 100th post!

Corralling Contractors (LEED Submittals)

A recent article on the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) blog titled LEED, Specs, and the Contractor builds on a previous post I put together awhile ago.

Just try getting a VOC submittal from this guy!

I bring this up again because their post is more useful in that it contains links to a standardized Materials Credit Documentation Sheet and a sample manufacturer's claim letter that many of you could probably use. The credit documentation sheet is just a single form that you can require the contractor to fill out for each product covered under the Materials and Resources (MR) and Indoor Environmental Quality (EQ) categories. This helps to make it clear what exactly is needed to show compliance with each credit, and the architect will be able to review submittals for LEED compliance without digging through a bunch of attached documents. It may be necessary to designate which "steps" (see form) apply to each product to avoid confusion and unnecessary work on the part of the contractor.

The CSI post contains more useful advice than what I've discussed here, so check it out! Also, you should thank Richard Moore of Richard Moore Environmental Consulting for making these forms publicly available.

Aware of any other tools or tips that helped your team gather the necessary documentation for these credits? Please let the world know by leaving a comment!

Ecolect Review: Tastes Great, Needs Filling

Ecolect - A Sustainble Materials Community

This is my second review of a site I've find helpful in the tedious process that is sustainable materials selection. The first review covered the Building Green Suite, which is to date still my favorite source for this info. Today we look at Ecolect, which is a young upstart that has the potential to be the next big thing, but still has a little growing to do before I become truly addicted.

The Good

My favorite part about Ecolect is that it will often give you hard numbers about things like recycled content or renewable content right on the site, instead of having to fish through the manufacturers' pages to get what you need. If they're willing to report it, that's enough evidence for me to list on my MRc3-7 templates. If anyone has had an issue with reporting third party figures in these situations, please let us know by posting a comment below.

I really like the interface as well. Though you can't search by MasterFormat divisions, their search bar does a pretty good job of actually returning materials you're searching for. The simple button interface provides large enough pictures to see the material without having to click and move further along.

The Okay

The materials listed on the site are heavily weighted towards finish surfaces, paints, and textiles. This site seems oriented mainly towards interior designers, which could be a good or bad thing depending on your perspective. Many of the products aren't building materials at all, though the site makes no claim to limit themselves to architectural products in the first place. Anyone working on a LEED for Commercial Interiors project will likely find Ecolect very helpful, but those working on LEED Core and Shell buildings may want to spend their time elsewhere.

More Filling Please

By my count a few minutes ago there were 470 materials, and I would estimate that about two-thirds of those are variations on single product types (multiple sheens/colors of low VOC paint, different colors of cork flooring, etc). Again, if you're an interior designer searching for the perfect wall covering this is a bonus, as every option is in front of you. On the other hand, there's really not a whole lot of diversity in product types.

Like a Fine Wine...

In the end, it's hard to create any database that has everything you'd need without some time to grow and mature. Like BuildingGreen, their articles section is starting to feature some interesting, in-depth reviews of larger issues in materials, from biomimicry to bioplastics. A little more volume is all this site needs to make it THE resource for sustainable interiors...

Have a site you'd like to recommend? Please share your experiences with a comment!

via SallyTV!

BuildingGreenSuite review: I love you

It's going to be rare that you see me hawk services for other people, though I'm not necessarily opposed to selling out (if the price is right). If I do you'll probably be able to tell by the giant ads on the side of the page. I want to assure you that I've recieved no money for the advice I'm about to offer.

For an architect, contractor, or LEED consultant spending a decent amount of time tracking down sustainable materials and products, you MUST check out the GreenSpec directory and Environmental Building News. The former offers the most comprehensive directory of sustainable products and materials I've seen, and the latter offers the most concise, accurate, and most importantly independent, reviews of various sustainable products and industries.

Costs

I suggest not subscribing to either independently but rather going ahead and chunking up the $199/year subscription fee for the whole deal. If I remember correctly there's a pretty substantial discount for AIA members, but I'm not sure what that is. Oh, and don't mess around with the paper versions, there are frequent updates online that you need access to.

Honestly, if you're only working on about 1 LEED or sustainable project a year, you can probably get by with what you can find for free, but if you're working on multiple LEED projects at once this is the deal of the century.

Project Database

The suite also gets you access to a thorough database of sustainable projects (often including much sought after financial info), though this is really only an extended version of a freely available database run by the US Dept. of Energy. As of today, the free DOE site has 98 projects while the subscription BG database has 98 LEED and 206 total projects.

GreenSpec Directory

The single greatest aspect of this directory is searchability (spell check says that's a word so I'm going with it). I can view products by LEED credit, and further cross reference them by CSI division. If I browse for "Urinals", I can find a list of ultra-low flow and waterless manufacturers, but the page will also be cross-referenced with articles about the industry in general (in this instance, a great piece on problems with waterless urinals and how to avoid them - the problems, not the urinals). If a contractor sends me some crap submittal about not being able to find low-VOC paint or bamboo flooring, this is where I'll go to prove them wrong. The time savings of finding three sources for a competitive bid in one place is a huge help on public projects as well. I use this site at least 2-3 times a week.

Environmental Building News

I'm a researcher at an architectural firm, and that often means writing reports about various materials and systems. EBN frequently does my job for me, which is probably why I love it so much. The articles are very thorough and always include perspectives from engineers, architects, and the various manufacturers involved. They can be techinical (read: boring, likely as many of my posts), but are always clearly written and easy to understand. My thought is that if you need to know something, you're probably going to have to do some boring reading at some point... I'm on this site at least once a week.

Cons

My only real complaint about the directory is that it stops short of providing hard data. The site will tell you that the carpet has recycled content, but not how much... you're left on your own to slog through the mfr's site for that. I can understand the reasons (these numbers are always changing), but it's still frustrating that there is not a single source for that kind of information.

Other Options

• 4spec.com - Not good for stuff like recycled content, but this more typical construction materials directory has an option of searching by mfr zip code (and CSI designation of course) that works surprisingly well for determining regional content.
• SC Green Building Directory - For those lucky enough to live in (or to a lesser extent, those within 500 miles of) South Carolina will soon have a locally focused green building product and services directory run via the SC Sustainability Institute. Right now they're accepting submissions of product and services and the actual directory is offline. I'll update on progress as it develops.
• Google - A little annoying to use, but at the end of the day it's free and will get the job done.

Did I miss a good info source? Leave a comment below!