CaGBC National Conference 2010 and defending LEED

So I was able to volunteer at the CaGBC National Conference this year as it was hosted in Vancouver. I found it to be a pleasant experience, although I still enjoyed the Living Future unconference in Seattle this last April.

The theme of the conference was Performance Matters, and it almost seemed as a response to the infamous reports of LEED buliding's energy underperformance that were popular a year or so ago. My general feeling is that LEED is not as bad as most of us would be led to believe.

Sure, the LEED rating systems are far from perfect, and in general there is no way to explain why some points are so much easier to obtain than others, why the radius makes any sense, or why the fact that something is recycled automatically makes it better. However its original purpose was to transform the market, not to be used as a design tool, which is its unfortunate situation today. Additionally, some of the concerns, such the regional characteristics of a project have been addressed to some extent in the latest revision of LEED v3/2009 through the use of regional priority credits, slight increase in some requirements, a lot more points in the Energy category, documentation of energy performance etc.

So LEED is not bad, what is bad is having designers who are LEED accredited professionals (APs) who have a substandard understanding of sustainable building practice. Not to make anyone blush, but there were a few attendees at the conference who were much more interested in checking their emails on their Blackberries and Iphones than in the presentations their employers paid for them to attend.

The truth is that a lot of companies are slow to understand how the green building movement will affect their everyday business in the future. I am guessing that a lot of them are not going to make it. Many of them would be smart to have a little insight into the future of green buildings.

So what is good about LEED?

• Indoor Air Quality: Energy is not everything. In fact, most people may not care too much about how much energy they use, but they do care about their health. As we spend on average 90% of our time indoors, we are usually breathing a lot of toxic stuff as a result of everything that surrounds us, whether it is the adhesives in the carpet, the cleaning products that are used or humidity that has caused mold and spores. LEED takes a stab at addressing this impact which is very relevant in our lives and which may be most important for the elderly and the younger kids.
• Transforming the market: LEED has transformed the market and at least today people have a better understanding of the trade offs and opportunities in green building.
• Productivity gains: Unfortunately very difficult to quantify, but most studies have found a good indication that things promoted in rating systems like LEED: having day lit offices and views improves productivity. Even a small percentage increase in productivity results in an amazing amount of money. In fact, a lot of the people who believe in LEED are not environmentalists but simply people who truly believe that they can make more money by having healthy and happy employees.
• Holistic design: At the very least, LEED is useful in walking people through the important parts of a building's design and delivery as well as pointing out opportunities to improve the quality of their work and the health of the building occupants.
  

So overall, LEED has done much more good to the industry than harm. I anticipate they will get their act together and try to push for more building commissioning and verification of low energy, low water usage and happy occupants. We are all learning to create good buildings, and it is natural to make a few mistakes. Also, we can expect LEED to get better. It has to! Otherwise, GreenGlobes and the Living Challenge are sure to take a big slice of their cake.