----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SFGate.
The original article can be found on SFGate.com here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/09/09/BU1A19K7LM.DTL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 (SF Chronicle)
Green buildings standard seen as flawed
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Revelations that many buildings certified as green under a broadly
accepted national standard for energy savings are not performing as well
as predicted recently prompted changes to the program and are forcing San
Francisco officials to consider amending city rules that are tied to the
older guidelines.
The certification program, called the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED), is widely seen as the industry standard for
green buildings. It uses a checklist and point system that rewards
energy-efficient building designs and features such as low-flow water
fixtures, bike storage, nontoxic paints and solar power.
Developers have used the stamp of approval as a way to expedite projects
through city bureaucracies and charge high rents. Governments increasingly
demand that new buildings adhere to the rules.
San Francisco boosted its reputation as one of the nation's most
environmentally progressive cities in August 2008 when the Board of
Supervisors and Mayor Gavin Newsom approved an ordinance requiring that
all new large commercial buildings be LEED certified.
The legislation was based on LEED standards established several years ago
and it cemented the rules in place through 2012.
Meanwhile, studies released this summer by the U.S. Green Building
Council, which developed the LEED system, suggested that 25 percent of the
new buildings that have been approved nationwide do not save as much
energy as expected, and most do not monitor their energy use. In June, the
council announced a new requirement: Owners of all newly constructed
buildings must agree to provide utility bills for the first five years of
operation as a condition of certification.
Some construction and energy experts are urging the council to get even
stricter and make certification contingent on meeting specific energy
savings.
Council representatives note a gap between energy predictions made during
buildings' design phases and how much energy they consume when actually
operating. Tracking energy use and making it part of the certification
process is an important development in the LEED system, they say.
"LEED is about how a building is designed, but we've always understood the
building's performance is really critical," said Dan Geiger, executive
director of the U.S. Green Building Council's Northern California chapter.
"This is evolving in the direction that it should evolve."
San Francisco officials said Tuesday the city has long followed stringent
state energy codes for new construction, which has kept building energy
use down even before the rules adopted last year. But LEED's recent
changes mean that the city should review its own rules before they expire
in 2012.
"We need to reconvene the task force that recommended the legislation and
makes some revisions way before 2012," said Rich Chien, the private sector
green building coordinator for the San Francisco Department of the
Environment. "With the changes coming along we could be out of date and we
need to address that."
Architects and other private sector experts focused on the environment say
the LEED certification system has placed green building practices on the
map and that it is now moving into an important phase.
"LEED has done an exceptional job of raising awareness," said architect
Jennifer Devlin of the San Francisco firm EHDD. "And the U.S Green
Building Council recognizes that tracking energy use is vital to the
sustainable building movement."
E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2009 SF Chronicle
No comments:
Post a Comment