Could this be true? Article in Landscapeonline.com
State of Ohio nixes LEED??? Why would they do such a thing?
They are "deeply concerned that the LEED rating system is becoming a tool to punish chemical companies and plastics makers." They prefer Green Globes, which is more lumber, plastic and generally industry friendly.
LEED has a terrible reputation of preferring certain companies and technologies while outright excluding others. I took the LEED-AP exam for new construction back in June 2009, although I failed the exam by one point. When I prepared for the exam I was outright appalled at the restrictions of vendors and technologies on several credits, including energy commissioning, wood byproducts, etc. Rather than adhere to a rigid system, get back to the basics and focus on simple BMPs. Finally, just because a building is certified at construction, operations and maintenance is heavily overlooked and can create serious cost overruns over time.
Thanks for posting, Mr. Ray. Very interesting.
Frankly, for reasons we've discussed before, even if sponsored by other interests, I hope it's the start of a trend.
There is also the issue that a great many LEED buildings do not perform any better, and in some cases, WORSE than their non-LEED counterparts. Worse even than older buildings. The design of many LEED buildings is far from the most energy efficient possibility. Architects know the "loopholes" to have a building still be LEED, but be an energy hog thanks to floor to ceiling windows, smaller HVAC systems that have to work harder, and poor energy modeling and simulations. They can't even get the solar studies correct most of the time.
Many places are looking to get off of the LEED standard and are instead looking towards revamping building codes to achieve the same goals.
LEED is also private and proprietary, so no other accepted "competition" exists for the rating systems, so many governments are looking at not mandating LEED compliance for public buildings due to this fact. LEED also costs a bunch of money to implement.
The first time that I had a project by a landscape architect with half the alphabet of LEED letters after his name come across my desk in a CE's office, he was proposing several outdoor gas torches and gas fire pits for a summer seasonal resort on Cape Cod where the nights are about 5 degrees cooler than the days in the summer. How is that conserving energy or saving the environment? I thought that was pretty phony.
Oddly enough, I was the landscape architect (with know LEED credentials) on a residential project that got LEED Gold certification. Obviously, most of that had to do with the building, but the landscape had to meet those standards as well.
... the part that is odd to me is that it required a lot of scrutiny and was difficult to permit because it is in the buffer to a wetland. You would think that building there would disqualify you right off the bat. Instead, it is celebrated as being environmentally sensitive. All I did was apply my knowledge of what it takes to mitigate in a buffer to a wetland which more than met the requirements for the house to get certification.
I've said it a bunch of times - being environmentally sensitive is not a niche nor unique to activists. I work on the "dark side" - for clients who want what they want. The fact is that regulation on the local and state level is quite strong in regulated areas. If you work in places that are regulated you'll either learn and adapt or you won't be working their whether you wear socks and sandal or hunting boots on week ends.
Cost of energy is a stronger motivation than a certificate on the wall. Conservation is ever increasing with or without LEED.
I worked on a huge project that never got built. We had a session with a LEED leader, I felt something in my pocket. it was his hand looking for money.
LEED=good design without the high cost as Jason says.