Committee on the Environment

 View Only
Back to discussion forums
Expand all | Collapse all

"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

  • 1.  "Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-03-2010 02:08 PM
    This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Committee on the Environment and Codes and Standards .
    -------------------------------------------
    Dan Heinfeld FAIA, LEED AP of LPA Inc. offers his perspective on how green building certification and related concerns may muddy the waters of achieving reduced energy use, water use, etc.

    What do you think?

    -------------------------------------------
    Mark Wills
    Manager, Codes Advocacy
    The American Institute of Architects
    Washington DC
    -------------------------------------------


    Perspective on Sustainable Design: Focusing on Sustainability 

    by Dan Heinfeld FAIA, LEED AP 

    Posted: December 1, 2010 

    Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy. 

    In my perspective column last year, I stated how glad we all were to have 2009 coming to a close. While I believe that would be the same sentiment for many of us this year, there is a very different attitude being expressed by most of the people that I talk with in the industry. That attitude is that a weak economy, with its lack of real job growth, may be the reality for the foreseeable future of the building industry. While the national unemployment rate hovers at 10 percent, within the building industry, unemployment has been estimated at double that rate. These are difficult times for the building and design industry and it appears that we are finding ways to divert our attention from the great opportunity we have been given by the public's awareness and demands for sustainable projects. 

    We can all honestly thank the U.S. Green Building Council, of which my firm is an active member, for bringing focus and awareness on sustainability to our industry. However, some recent developments in LEED programs and other changes (under consideration by USGBC) seem misguided. We have seen recent improvement in the LEED online process, but the initial launch of LEED Online v3 in 2009 -- and the resultant delays, inconsistent project reviews and delays in processing LEED submittals -- was not one of the USGBC's successes. While there are many areas within the LEED program that can be improved, we are concerned that the USGBC continues to evolve and expand LEED programs at a pace that adds complexity to the system without always adding meaningful benefit.

    For example, the relatively new Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) requirements for continuing education reporting for LEED Accredited Professionals (AP) is too complex and convoluted, as structured, for our office to maintain the credentials of our 160-plus LEED APs. The reason so many LEED APs have not opted into the new program is not that we don't recognize the value of continuing education, but frankly, the last thing that firms in our industry need is more overhead. I would much rather have my staff spend limited overhead hours working in and researching new technologies than filling out cumbersome continuing education forms. 

    Design competitions are not new to the industry, but the variety and numbers that are appearing is also out of balance with the state of the industry. I can't believe that this delivery method is the best for the wholesale number of projects that are actually being procured in that fashion. While I don't believe the industry can sustain this cost burden for long, my real issue with most of the competitions is that they rarely promote sustainability other than giving a certain LEED certification requirement. Typically there is no discussion or goals for energy use and no other sustainable priorities given or weighed. This is not a prescription on how to create projects that are making meaningful reductions in energy use or meeting the 2030 challenge, both now and in the future. 

    Why are these issues important? Because, given the economic conditions where limited resources seem to be our new realities, anything that does not focus on changing the way we work so that our buildings "use less and do more" is just off target. As I stated last year, as a society and culture, we cannot afford the luxury of buildings that don't make real reductions in energy, water and material use. I am still very optimistic and encouraged by the opportunities of how sustainability can lead a design process; but increased complexity in the procedures, reporting and delivery methods that doesn't add real value, is not how to get there.
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 2.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-06-2010 07:38 PM
    While I am not often in the habit of defending USGBC/GBCI policies and processes, I must respectfully comment on Mr. Heinfeld's complaint that his firm can not bear the cost and time burden of maintaining 160 LEED accreditations. The flaw in the LEED accreditation system is not that it is now too onerous; the flaw is that it was not onerous enough up until now. I frankly can't think of another professional accreditation had no prerequisites and was free to keep in perpetuity with no maintenance to speak of. I also think you get what you pay for, and that Mr. Heinfeld is wise to invest in meaningful R&D rather than in bulking up LEED accreditation numbers.

    It seems that many large firms have been in a marketing race to claim the largest number of LEED APs possible, with little regard for whether or not those LEED APs actually work on green projects, or whether those LEED APs actually have enough experience to manage the LEED process. My firm provides green building classes, I've even had firms ask me to help get admin and other non-technical staff LEED accredited to boost numbers.

    As a LEED accredited professional who works on LEED projects all day every day, I am pleased that we will see many of those underutilized LEED accreditations expire. Hopefully, those remaining accredited professionals will truly have some expertise in LEED and green building. Perhaps then the "LEED AP" designation will start to approach the legitimacy of the "AIA" designation.

    On the subject of design competitions, I agree: too many of 'em, and it's not sustainable for the industry. I've lost money on several of those, even the ones we won. However, I'm not sure how that issue relates directly to sustainable design, nor how competitions limit a design team's ability to present a sustainable and cost-optimized project proposal. From my experience, though, many large clients are asking for a life cycle cost analysis in competition proposals, indicating that they are looking beyond mere LEED points, and are understanding the deeper economic benefits of green building.

    -------------------------------------------
    Eric Shamp AIA, LEED AP
    Principal
    Ecotype Consulting
    Redlands CA
    -------------------------------------------

    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 3.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-07-2010 10:17 AM

    In my view the LEED-AP designation has been a catastrophe for the A/E/C industry. Instead of enhancing the profession, LEED has eclipsed it. We now find ourselves in a situation where legions of amateurs actually perceive themselves to be peers of the true professionals. In the public sector it is now common to have experienced licensed architects, engineers, and specifiers subservient to people whose sole connection to the industry is their AP designation.
    -------------------------------------------
    Robert Matschulat AIA
    Architect, Educational Facility Planner
    Edutecture, LLC
    Lakewood CO
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 4.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-07-2010 02:13 PM
    Mr. Robert Matschulat, AIA, you have the courage to say what I've been thinking for far too long.  Thank you for being bold enough to say it.

    You said:
    "In my view the LEED-AP designation has been a catastrophe for the A/E/C industry. Instead of enhancing the profession, LEED has eclipsed it. We now find ourselves in a situation where legions of amateurs actually perceive themselves to be peers of the true professionals. In the public sector it is now common to have experienced licensed architects, engineers, and specifiers subservient to people whose sole connection to the industry is their AP designation. "


    Amen.  It seems what we now have are LEED AP cadd jockeys parading around as if THEY are the architectural experts.  As such, they feel they already have a "License to Design," and that's all they need; they have all but snubbed their noses at becoming licensed architects, never mind learning what it takes and earning the right to put AIA behind their names.  

    I just read on here yesterday where someone was rejoicing over the fact that they think LEED AP has almost reached the level of respect of the designation of AIA.  God help us.  Isn't this new attitude staggering?   Or, do I simply need to adapt to this new reality?

     
    -------------------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------
    Tara Imani AIA
    Principal
    Tara Imani Designs, LLC
    Houston TX
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 5.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-08-2010 11:07 AM

    While I agree that compared to licensure, achieving the LEED Accreditation takes little effort, especially in the early days, I disagree that it has become a catastrophe to the A/E/C industry.  While I have seen an effort by architecture firms to raise their profile with the number of LEED APs rather than by quality sustainable design, I have never experienced, or heard from my professional peers that their experience as a design professional or their role on a project has been made subservient to those only having a LEED AP after their name.

    What I have been seeing is design professions playing catch up to the issues the USGBC has advocated as an integral part of good design.  We pride ourselves as acting in service to our clients and the communities in which we practice.  Whether one becomes a LEED AP or not, sustainable strategies are now, rightly so, integral to good service and good design.  It seems to me that we have the choice of seeing ourselves as victims of a new paradigm, or seeing the value to our profession and our projects these ideas represent and becoming fluent in them.

    -------------------------------------------
    Michelle Dildey Assoc. AIA
    Lodi CA
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 6.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-08-2010 12:50 PM
    "I just read on here yesterday where someone was rejoicing over the fact that they think LEED AP has almost reached the level of respect of the designation of AIA."

    Tara, were you referring to my post? If my yes, you may want to re-read it, because that's nearly the opposite of what I was trying to convey. My apologies if you were referring to something else.

    Also, I believe that if Architects are actually losing control over portions of the scope to LEED AP consultants, those Architects need to look within, rather than lashing out at those LEED consultants and the Owners that hire them. Perhaps the architecture industry needs to figure out why it is not perceived to be able to meet client demands for green buildings.

    I realize that's a provocative statement. However, when we have firms that are more interested in marketing their green building expertise rather than actually developing and refining green building expertise, we have only ourselves to blame. Bulking up the number of LEED AP designations won't help.

    -------------------------------------------
    Eric Shamp AIA
    Owner
    Ecotype Consulting
    Redlands CA
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 7.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-08-2010 01:23 PM
    Hi Eric,

    Yes, I was referring to your post.  Thank you for clarifying what you'd meant by your comment.

    I apologize to you and to anyone who I may have offended.  My most recent experience working for a firm was that few- if any- of the interns were at all interested in getting their license.  I'm not sure how many of them were LEED AP certified.  I know that one of their YAFers had, shortly before I was employed there, recently left the firm to started his/her own firm centered on sustainablilty and green architecture.  They are doing quite well and are highly respected in our city. 

    What I'm concerned about is the perception of architects and interns themselves that, right now, it is more important to learn about one aspect of architecture, sustainability, rather than to treat architectural design as a more integrated process.  It's not just about greening the everything, in my humble opinion.  Is it just about structure?  Program? Aesthetics?  No.  It's about all of those things working together.  Maybe I'm wrong here and I stand to be corrected.  I get it that sustainability can be fundamental to all of those aspects of design that I just mentioned; however, I still don't think we are doing ourselves any favors by elevating the 4 (or 6) letters of LEED AP to mean or infer the equivalent or superiority of one who holds a license to practice architecture.  Should we now add the word "Sustainability" to "Health, Safety and Welfare?" 

    Perhaps where we went wrong, as a profession, is by having allowed non-licensed personnel to become LEED AP certified.  Maybe a prerequisite to becoming LEED AP certified should have been to be a licensed architect first- that would have prevented this misperception by the public and ourselves that anyone without LEED AP is just plain stupid and so 19th century.

    Having said all that, if you look at my profile, you will see that becoming LEED AP certified is one of my professional goals.  As a stay-at-home mom and a part-time business owner outside of architecture, it has not been a top priority for me.  If I had been more actively pursuing architecture projects, it would have already been one of my achieved accomplishments.

    There are no victims here.  There are, however, real inequities in our perceptions of one another.  I think there is too little respect between the generations and this business of to be LEED or not to be LEED has only placed a further wedge between us.


    -------------------------------------------
    Tara Imani AIA
    Principal
    Tara Imani Designs, LLC
    Houston TX
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 8.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-09-2010 11:20 AM
    Tara and others,

    I need to disagree with the suggestion that a LEED-AP candidate should be required to be a registered architect.  I know a number of good LEED-APs who are engineers, interior designers, contractors, developers, facility managers, etc.  Also, should an intern choose not to pursue registration, I may not agree with their choice, but it is their choice.  I don't see how focusing on sustainability, in lieu of a broader practice, is any different from focusing on detailing or computer modeling.

    I think the most important thing is to recognize that all building professionals have their own limitations and that an architect needs to be educated enough  to talk intelligently about a topic or to recognize when they are not able to.  I may trust the judgment of a structural engineer, but that doesn't mean I will defer to them on all things structural.  A sustainability/green design/LEED consultant should be no different.

    If a LEED-AP oversteps the bounds of their own expertise, they should be called to question.  And if a building owner puts undo trust in a LEED-AP, others on the project team should express their concern.  I think we all know that being a LEED-AP doesn't automatically make a person an expert on all aspects of environmentally responsible design, and it shouldn't be treated as though it does.

    I will clarify that I became a LEED-AP in 2002, about a year before I became a registered architect.  Not because I thought it was more important, but because I happened to be ready to take the LEED-AP exam before I was ready to take the ARE.

    -------------------------------------------
    Rebecca Leet, AIA, LEED-AP, CCS, CCCA
    Green Leaf Architecture and Specification Support
    www.greenleafvt.com
    Montpelier, VT
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 9.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-10-2010 09:28 AM
    I have to strongly agree with Rebecca.  To suggest that only architects be allowed to be LEED AP's is to misunderstand the nature of sustainable design and the purpose of the LEED AP credential.

    Sustainability is a truly integrated process and it is not the sole domain of architects.  It is not simply about design, but encompasses everything from manufacturing, construction, and financing to operations and maintenance.  The LEED AP is not a license to design or construct.  Because you have a LEED AP does not mean that you can run an energy model or write the indoor air quality plan for construction operations.  It's purpose is to accredit individuals that have shown a knowledge of what is involved in the process of LEED certifying a building, not designing the facility.

    One of the wonderful things about USGBC is that it brings together all the diverse elements of the building process:  real estate development, construction, facilities management, manufacturing, engineering, architecture, etc.  Architectural design is only one part, and arguably a small part.  Operations and maintenance is every bit as critical, for instance.

    If we, as architects, want to have greater respect, then we have to earn it.  we need to show that we have knowledge, tools, and experience to do so, and that we bring value by what we do.  We also need to  understand that we are just one member of the team.  Unfortunately, we have, as a profession, payed lip service to the issues of responsible design, preferring instead to emphasize ego and 'signature designs'. 

    -------------------------------------------
    Glenn Richters AIA LEED AP
    Benefield Richters
    Knoxville TN
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 10.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-10-2010 11:53 AM
    Hi Glenn,

    I appreciate your, Rebecca, Gisela, and Mary Pat Crozier's comments and perspective on LEED AP and how it is effecting the practice of architecture.  Since I am just now researching how to get certified, I did not know as much about it; in my former post, I was speaking strictly from my (mis)perceptions of it.

    You'd said:
    ///To suggest that only architects be allowed to be LEED AP's is to misunderstand the nature of sustainable design and the purpose of the LEED AP credential.///

    Yes, I agree with you- especially after checking out the GBCI site.  However, what I don't understand is who was able to first attain the LEED AP certification when it was first started back in 2001-2002?

    ///Sustainability is a truly integrated process and it is not the sole domain of architects.  It is not simply about design, but encompasses everything from manufacturing, construction, and financing to operations and maintenance.  The LEED AP is not a license to design or construct.///

    I completely agree with you.  Sustainable design has totally eclipsed all professions for that matter- or encompasses them all.  It just so happens that- it seems to me (again, *my* perception only)- that architecture relies heavily on the use of this designation to add credence to one's professional standing.

    In regards to the fact that other fields can be LEED certified, to that end, I suppose that's why they added the various LEED specialty certifications, as seen in this link:

    http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/professional-credentials/credentials.aspx


    I also found this chart from the GBCI site very interesting, informative to read:

    http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/professional-credentials/resources/at-a-glance/area-of-practice.aspx


    For some reason, this certification has somewhat bothered me.  I guess because it seemed to be based on relatively new scientific data- global warming (which even scientists can't agree on) and possibly based on materials for which the longevity of such has yet to be determined.  But, we have to start somewhere.  To call ourselves "experts" seems ludicrous in an industry we are still trying to define.  But, I guess the same could be said of architecture as we are in a state of continuous revelation as to "what defines good design."

    I read an excellent viewpoint on the topic of 'Sustainability' in the new book by Eric J. Cesal, "Down Detour Road: An Architect In Search of Practice:"   (p. 204):

    "If the public suspects that architects are using the issue of sustainability as a gimmick, to advance their own portfolio and dabble in new technologies, the public will be understandably suspicious.  We must consider architecture in such a way that doing the right thing is more lauded than doing the new thing.  We will always be called upon to do things in new ways-- shifting times and technology demand it-- but we must give up the idea of newness for its own sake.  Only then can a real discussion of sustainability be had."

    Lastly, I don't mean to suggest that anyone on here or in this conversation is using LEED in the way described above.  From my experience, the LEED AP certified people I have met, are very committed to truly "being green" because they care deeply about the environment and their clients and they want, above all, to do what is right.


    Best regards,
    Tara


    -------------------------------------------
    Tara Imani AIA
    Principal
    Tara Imani Designs, LLC
    Houston TX
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 11.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-17-2010 05:36 PM

    Hi Tara, 

    I'm having trouble with part of what you said: 

    "For some reason, this certification has somewhat bothered me.  I guess because it seemed to be based on relatively new scientific data- global warming (which even scientists can't agree on)"

    Because there is no disagreement, except from "junk scientists" who are on the payroll of those corporations making big bucks while spreading disinformation.  Science has the technology to measure climate change, and has done so since the 1950's.
    Construction and operation of buildings uses a very large percentage of total US energy, so that puts our profession in the frontlines of solution-finding.
    Your statement illustrates the difficulty of asking people i.e., ourselves and our clients, to respond effectively to a problem so vast that personal action seems meaningless.  But we must push on, project by project.

    -------------------------------------------
    Michael Beattie AIA
    Michael Beattie Architect PC
    Middletown Springs VT
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 12.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-17-2010 08:12 PM

    Hi Michael,

    Thanks for the information.  I do already subscribe and support the www.architecture2030.org plans and movement.   I am aware of the high energy consumption of buildings during construction and throughout their lifecycles.  I'm sure you have already read the Architecture 2030 CRE (Commercial Real Estate) solution:

    http://architecture2030.org/hot_topics/the_cre_solution

    My understanding of it is that to be sustainable, it would be better to build fewer new buildings (as this would reduce energy consumption and greenhouse emissions by 50%); and the second step would be to renovate existing buildings- that are not currently LEED certified- using green technology (as this would create a lot of jobs across all sectors of the A/E/C industry and would further cut down on carbon footprints).  I realize this is a very simplified summary and maybe I've missed a few key points.  I would like to know what your understanding of the CRE solution is.

    I believe the discussion from which you quoted me was where a few of us were talking about the LEED certification standards, which I am in the process of learning more about.   Similar to others who have voiced their opinions elsewhere (on various LinkedIn architecture groups, etc), I had been a bit hesitant to jump on the LEED bandwagon, largely because it did not come from the AIA and partly due to my own  unwillingness to blindly embrace the USGBC standards without taking time to  learn more about them.   

    Just as being LEED AP doesn't make one an expert, not being LEED AP BC + D doesn't automatically mean that someone is burying their head in the sand against sustainable design.  For one thing, we are required by the AIA to earn 4 SD credits annually and, in Texas, we are required to earn 1 (or 2) CEUs in SD annually to maintain licensure. 

    ///Your statement illustrates the difficulty of asking people i.e., ourselves and our clients, to respond effectively to a problem so vast that personal action seems meaningless.  But we must push on, project by project.///

    I agree with you that, despite whether we understand or agree with all the science behind it, there are some very obvious environmental issues which must be addressed and architects need to lead the way and we must take definitive action. Recently, I attended a series of fantastic webinars on sustainability:


    http://www.greenbuildingpro.com/events/webcasts

    I highly recommend the one titled "Continuous Greening- Retrofits and Facility Management" by Jean Carroon, Principal at Goody Clancy.  She is an awesome speaker with a wealth of knowledge and has put together a very informative slide presentation. 

    Regarding the science of global warming, here is a link I found in a recent discussion post titled "Looking Down the Road..."  This article discusses how there are a good many people who do question the science of global warming:

    http://www.architectmagazine.com/sustainability/a-civil-defense.aspx

    I often refer to Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN's GPS; I watch it weekly and admire his intelligent journalism.  He recently referenced an article by a New York Times journalist that said (paraphrased):  'while we might not all agree on Global warming, due to the many horrendous acts of "Mother Nature" over the past year, I'd call it "Global Weirding."  I think he came up with the perfect term! J

     

     

    -------------------------------------------
    Tara Imani AIA
    Principal
    Tara Imani Designs, LLC
    Houston TX
    -------------------------------------------






    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 13.  RE:"Increased complexities in green programs pose challenges in a weak economy."

    Posted 12-10-2010 12:03 PM


    -------------------------------------------
    Beth Trautwein, AIA, LEED AP
    CH2M Hill
    Gainesville FL
    -------------------------------------------

    There is no doubt in my mind that USGBC was an important development which is hindsight the AIA should have developed.My issues with using this point system to qualify sustainable design is that it is elite and self serving.It is a growing business with large overhead.  It has not been able to stop green washing and has the manufacturing community as part of the organization. 

    The latest V3.0 has reduced the point value and importance of materials used in the development of the buildings in favor of a higher value return in energy consumption reduction.  I am an architect and like Tara Imani, I question architectural immersion in USGBC LEED, supporting large application/review fees, sending in careful documentation and helping our clients get the rating if that is their desire.  

    I obviously felt the needs to understand what USGBC was up to early as I passed the exam under the 2.0 version.  However, I believe that the person who wishes to pursue architecture as a day to day AP of the LEED point system need not be an architect, could be an architect but may make more important contributions to our profession not living the life of total immersion in a point system. Better the Architect that has in depth understanding in the points which are in the realm of his practice which is why I have continued to follow the USGBC's path with interest.


    Original Message
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13