Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) is an internationally recognized green building certification system, providing third-party verification that a building or community was designed and built using strategies aimed at improving performance across all the metrics that matter most: energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, improved indoor environmental quality, and stewardship of resources and sensitivity to their impacts.

Developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), LEED provides building owners and operators a concise framework for identifying and implementing practical and measurable green building design, construction, operations and maintenance solutions.

LEED addresses both commercial and residential building types. It works throughout the building lifecycle – design and construction, operations and maintenance, tenant fitout, and significant retrofit. And LEED for Neighborhood Development extends the benefits of LEED beyond the building footprint into the neighborhood it serves.

Since its inception in 1998, U.S. Green Building council(citation LEED for existing buildings v2.0 reference guide page pg 11) has grown to encompass more than 14,000 projects in the United States and 30 countries covering 1.062 billion square feet (99 km²) of development area. The hallmark of LEED is that it is an open and transparent process where the technical criteria proposed by USGBC members are publicly reviewed for approval by the almost 20,000 member organizations that currently constitute the USGBC.

The Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) was established by USGBC to provide a series of exams to allow individuals to become accredited for their knowledge of the LEED rating system. This is recognized through either the LEED Accredited Professional(LEED AP) or LEED Green Associate (LEED GA) designation. GBCI also provides third-party certification for projects pursuing LEED.

The development of LEED began in 1993 and was spearheaded by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) senior scientist Robert Watson who, as Founding Chairman of the LEED Steering Committee (until 2006) led a broad-based consensus process that included non-profit organizations, government agencies, architects, engineers developers, builders, product manufacturers and other industry leaders. Early LEED committee members also included USGBC co-founder Mike Italiano, architects Bill Reed and Sandy Mendler, builder Gerard Heiber, builder Myron Kibbe and engineer Richard Bourne; engineers Tom Paladino and Lynn Barker co-chaired the LEED technical committee in 1996.

In 1998 the LEED 1.0 pilot program was released; during the pilot period extensive revisions were made and by March 2000 LEED 2.0 was released to the marketplace.

LEED has grown from one standard for new construction to a comprehensive system of six standards covering all aspects of the development and construction process. LEED also has grown from six volunteers on one committee to more than 200 volunteers on nearly 20 committees and over 200 professional staff in Washington, DC. LEED was created to accomplish the following:

• Define “green building” by establishing a common standard of measurement
• Promote integrated, whole-building design practices
• Recognize environmental leadership in the building industry
• Stimulate green competition
• Raise consumer awareness of green building benefits
• Transform the building market

Green Building Council members, representing every sector of the building industry, developed and continue to refine LEED. The rating systems address eight major areas:

• Location and Planning
• Sustainable Sites
• Water Efficiency
• Energy and Atmosphere
• Materials and Resources
• Indoor Environmental Quality
• Innovation and Design Process
• Regional Priority

The Rating System

LEED has evolved since its original inception in 1998 to more accurately represent and incorporate emerging green building technologies. LEED NCv1.0 was a pilot version. These projects helped inform the USGBC of the requirements for such a rating system, and this knowledge was incorporated into LEED NCv2.0. LEED NCv2.2 was released in 2005. Today, LEED consists of a suite of nine rating systems for the design, construction and operation of buildings, homes and neighborhoods. Five overarching categories correspond to the specialties available under the LEED Accredited Professional program. That suite currently consists of:

Green Building Design & Construction

• LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
• LEED for Core & Shell Development
• LEED for Schools
• LEED for Retail New Construction (planned 2010)

Green Interior Design & Construction

• LEED for Commercial Interiors
• LEED for Retail Interiors (planned 2010)

Green Building Operations & Maintenance

• LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance

Green Neighborhood Development

• LEED for Neighborhood Development

Green Home Design and Construction

• LEED for Homes

In 2003, the Canada Green Building Council received permission to create its own version of LEED based upon LEED-NC 2.0, now called LEED Canada-NC v1.0.

LEED also forms the basis for other sustainability rating systems such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s Labs21.

After four years of development, aligning credits across all LEED rating systems and weighting credits based on environmental priority, USGBC launched LEED v3, which consists of a new continuous development process, a new version of LEED Online, a revised third-party certification program and a new suite of rating systems known as LEED 2009. In response to concerns that LEED’s requirements are cumbersome and difficult to learn, in 2009 USGBC supported the development by BuildingGreen, LLC of LEEDuser, a third-party resource that contains tips and guidance, written by professionals in the field, on applying LEED credits and the LEED certification process.

In LEED 2009 there are 100 possible base points plus an additional 6 points for Innovation in Design and 4 points for Regional Priority. Buildings can qualify for four levels of certification:

• Certified - 40 - 49 points
• Silver - 50 - 59 points
• Gold - 60 - 79 points
• Platinum - 80 points and above

The Department of Defense will break ground this month on a $12.5 million Hazardous Material Response Facility (HMRF) targeting LEED Silver certification from the U.S. Green Building Council.

The design/build team of architecture firm Lord, Aeck & Sargent (Atlanta office) and construction firm The Christman Company (Alexandria, Va. office) was selected from among four shortlisted teams to design and construct the HMRF. The award was a best value decision that included, among other things, the team’s proposed enhancements to the design of an existing facility program as well as its experience in designing and building laboratories and sustainable facilities.

The HMRF will be located on the Pentagon Reservation and will be home to members of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA), a Department of Defense Agency charged with protecting the Pentagon Reservation and other DoD-occupied facilities in the National Capital Region.

When completed in summer 2011, the two-story HMRF will house lab, storage, training, and administrative spaces to be shared by PFPA responders.

Some of the building’s sustainable design features and products will include:

• Use of recycled content materials, including a steel frame with 95 percent recycled content

• Use of regionally sourced materials

• Sunshades for control of solar heat gain and glare

• A high-efficiency air handling unit with a heat recovery wheel and a building management system

• Bike racks and showers

• Low-flow toilets and faucets

In addition, The Christman Company will carry out construction site waste management practices.

Design speaks to safety and permanence

Sheathed in a ground face concrete masonry unit, both smooth and corrugated aluminum panels and a Low-E glass curtainwall with an anodized aluminum framing system, the HMRF’s exterior design will complement other industrial structures on the Reservation.

“The building’s architectural style can be described as ‘contemporary industrial,’” said Dan Nemec, who is Lord, Aeck & Sargent’s project designer and project architect. “Although the exterior uses industrial materials such as corrugated metal panels, they’re scaled and fastened in such a way as to soften the hardness of the material. Furthermore, the smooth machined metal panels are sleek and refined, and large areas of glass allow light to spill into the occupied areas to give the building a contemporary look appropriate to its office and administrative functions.

“Overall,” Nemec continued, “The building’s design - especially the solidness and texture toward the base - lends a feeling of safety and permanence that is appropriate to the function of the building.”

Last September, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its final rule on mandatory reporting of greenhouse gases. The rule requires the largest emitters of greenhouse gases to collect data regarding greenhouse gases and report that data to the EPA.

Even if you aren’t an emitter that is required to collect data and report, you still can do your part to prevent greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting global warming. Here are some tips to keep in mind:

1. Replace incandescent light bulbs: Replace your regular light bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs). Replacing regular light bulbs with CFLs reduces the amount of electricity you use–and also saves you money. CFLs also now come in a variety of colors (e.g., soft white, bright light, daylight) that can better accommodate your lighting needs in the workplace. Not sure about CFLs because of possible disposal issues with the mercury they contain? Watch for the new-generation light emitting diode (LED) bulbs that are starting to come onto the market. These bulbs use even less electricity, with the added benefit of no mercury disposal issues.
2. Use less heat and air conditioning. Just two degrees lower in the winter and two degrees higher in the summer can save you lots of money and prevent thousands of pounds a year of carbon dioxide from being released into the atmosphere. Also, reduce your heating and air conditioning needs by using programmable thermostats, effective insulation, and well-maintained HVAC systems.
3. Reduce, reuse, and recycle: Manufacturing processes emit various types of greenhouse gases into the environment. If you can reduce the amount of manufacturing, packaging, and/or shipping you do, you’ll reduce your emissions.
4. If you drive, drive smart: If you have a fleet of company cars or trucks, make sure that the vehicles are properly maintained, which not only makes them safer but also uses less fuel. Every gallon of fuel that isn’t burned prevents about 20 pounds of carbon dioxide from being emitted. Also, properly inflated tires improve fuel usage by as much as three percent.
5. Plant trees: If you have the room to put trees on your facility, plant some. One tree can absorb as much as one ton of carbon dioxide during its lifetime (and, if located properly, can help cool your facility during the summer). Consider native species first when selecting what trees to plant; they will be better adapted to environmental conditions in your area and require less upkeep.  If you join the Arbor Foundation (membership is only $10) you have the choice to receive 10 free trees or the foundation will plant 10 trees in a national forest for you.  Remember Earth Day is April 22.

If you’re like most people, you’re more than happy to buy green — as long as it also saves greenbacks. A recent study by the Shelton Group found that people who buy eco-friendly products at least occasionally are more interested in spending their money wisely than in improving the environment.

Myth: Never leave the lights on when you leave a room.

Reality

Mom had it right when it comes to incandescent bulbs, but she’d be wrong about today’s compact fluorescent lights. The more often you switch CFLs on and off, the shorter their operating life. In most parts of the country, it’s cheaper to leave fluorescents on if you’ll only be out of the room for 15 minutes or less, according to the Energy Department (www.energysavers.gov). In areas with high electric rates or during peak demand periods, the length of time may shorten to 5 minutes. On average, a CFL bulb costs $2.50 more than an incandescent bulb, but it will save $5.41 annually on your electric bill compared with an incandescent, according to the Energy Department.

If you haven’t converted to CFLs because you fear pollution from the mercury they contain, keep in mind that generating electricity is the main source of U.S. mercury emissions. A 60-watt light bulb will use 480 kilowatt hours of electricity and contribute almost 6 milligrams of mercury to the environment over its lifetime, according to Energy Star. A CFL will use less than a fourth of the electricity and result in a third of the mercury emissions. For more information on properly disposing of CFLs, visit http://www.energystar.gov/cfls.

Myth: You can trust product labels that say “green,” “eco-friendly,” “earth smart” and the like.

Reality

The green-washing machine loves to crank out vague marketing terms, and the Federal Trade Commission has begun to crack down on environmental claims that fail the regulatory smell test (visit www.ftc.gov and search “Sorting Out Green Advertising Claims”). Manufacturers have begun to improve the labeling, consumer information and advice on their Web sites, including lists and definitions of ingredients. Also look for the EPA’s Design for the Environment label.

Myth: Switching to solar is a great way to achieve energy savings.

Reality

Solar systems, even with government incentives, are expensive. The owner of a typical single-family home in the United States wastes almost $350 annually on heated or cooled air that escapes to the outdoors. So for most houses in most places, the first line of defense is to reduce demand, says Bruce Harley, author of “Cut Your Energy Bills Now.” That means tightening up the house and its ductwork, improving insulation, switching to CFLs, upgrading appliances and changing your behavior. After that, if you still want to go solar, you may be able to make do with a smaller system that costs less. For example, instead of a 4-kilowatt photovoltaic system (the size recommended for the average home) — which would cost $16,800 installed after an average state-tax incentive of 25 percent and the federal discount of 30 percent — you might get by with a 2-kilowatt system, which would cost $8,400.

Myth: Energy savings (and tax credits) will eventually pay for replacement windows.

Reality

True, windows are a big energy waster, but you probably have bigger fish to fry. The average cost to replace a window with a high-efficiency model is $300 to $700, and another 50 to 100 percent if you must replace a rotten or damaged frame, according to http://www.CostHelper.com. Through 2010, you can get a tax credit for 30 percent of your cost, up to $1,500, for super-efficient windows (many that are currently Energy Star-approved don’t qualify). Many older homes don’t have huge amounts of window area, and newer houses tend to have more energy-efficient windows that meet existing standards for Energy Star labeling. If you still want to upgrade your windows, you may wait until products meeting new and more rigorous Energy Star standards reach the market in April 2010.

Myth: “Biodegradable” products that return to their natural state save landfill space.

Reality

Modern landfills are designed to keep out sunlight, air and moisture to prevent air and water pollution, thus inhibiting degradation. The FTC’s definition of a biodegradable product is one that will completely decompose within a reasonably short time under customary methods of disposal. Because most landfill garbage won’t pass that test, you’re better off reducing your contribution to solid waste (according to the EPA, the average American generates almost five pounds of garbage a day). At the store, look for a claim of “post-consumer recycled” content, then recycle what you can. Also use sites such as Freecycle.org instead of hauling reusable stuff to the dump.

Myth: You’ll recoup the higher price you pay for a hybrid car in savings at the pump.

Reality

You may not earn back the $3,000-plus premium you’ll pay for a hybrid with savings at the gas pump. Hybrids always run cleaner than gasoline-fueled engines, but they only make financial sense when gas prices are high, you drive a lot and you plan to keep the vehicle for, say, five or more years. (Use our hybrid calculator to compare the ownership costs of a hybrid versus gas-powered vehicle.) Paying the hybrid premium might be worth it as an insurance policy against higher gas prices in the future, says Bradley Berman, editor of HybridCars.com.

Myth: It’s worth paying 20 to 40 percent extra to buy organic because the food is healthier.

Reality

A recent and hotly debated British study asserts that organic food is no more nutritious than conventionally grown food. But this isn’t an all-or-nothing issue: If you want to minimize your exposure to pesticides and save money on organics, too, spring for the organic label only on the Environmental Working Group’s “dirty dozen” — fruits and vegetables that carry the most pesticide residue. They are (from most to least residue): peaches, apples, sweet bell peppers, celery, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, kale, lettuce, grapes (imported), carrots and pears. The clean 15 (from least to most residue) include onions, avocados, sweet corn (frozen), pineapples, mangos, asparagus, sweet peas (frozen), kiwi fruit, cabbages, eggplants, papayas, watermelons, broccoli, tomatoes and sweet potatoes.

Myth: You can reduce your carbon footprint by eating locally grown foods.

Reality

While locavores often cite “food miles” — that is, the distance food is shipped to market — as a reason to eat local, Christopher L. Weber and H. Scott Matthews, professors at Carnegie Mellon University, say that transportation accounts for only 11 percent of total greenhouse-gas emissions associated with food, while 83 percent is related to production. Produce grown close to home may be fresher and taste better. But food grown where conditions are most auspicious will require less fertilizer, pesticides, labor and investment in tools, says Art Carden, who teaches economics at Rhodes College in Memphis. If you really want to reduce the carbon footprint of your diet, cut back on consumption of red meat, which Weber and Matthews say is responsible for producing 150 percent more greenhouse gases than chicken or fish.

Myth: You can neutralize your personal share of greenhouse-gas emissions by buying carbon offsets.

Reality

Measuring your carbon emissions is a squishy science, and measuring the offsets is even squishier. For example, Carbonfund.org sets the cost to offset an airline trip cross-country (round-trip) at $8.92 for .0.89 tons of fumes. Sustainable Travel International charges $45.34 for 1.8 tons. (The price of a carbon offset can vary from $5 to $25 per ton on average. Clean Air-Cool Planet, a nonprofit devoted to climate-science education, says that it’s impossible to prove that buying offsets will “render purchasers carbon neutral.” There’s no clear standard in use for certifying offsets, although the FTC is investigating the issue. For further guidance, read “A Consumer’s Guide to Retail Carbon Offset Providers” Cleanair-coolplanet.org. Also check the fine print on sellers’ Web sites to see whether the criteria for selecting projects are explained and the benefits quantified.

Myth: New homes are more energy-efficient than older homes.

Reality

Homes built over the past decade or so gobble about as much energy as homes built decades ago. That’s because newer homes are bigger, more architecturally complex and full of energy-hogging electronics, says Harley, the author of Cut Your Energy Bills Now. Even a new-home owner will benefit from paying for an energy audit and following through on its recommendations. According to the Home Performance with Energy Star program http://www.energystar.gov, improving energy efficiency will produce utility-bill savings of 20 percent or more.

ReCellular, a leading electronics sustainability firm, recently announced a new partnership with TerraCycle to establish over 1,000 “phone brigades” by the end of the year, building on a similar concept previously launched by TerraCycle. The brigades will collect and donate cell phones, raise funds for local causes and keep e-waste out of landfills.

“Economic, social and environmental sustainability have been at the core of our business long before the term ‘triple-bottom line’ was coined,” says Chuck Newman, CEO and founder of ReCellular. “Today, we are proud to be a part of the emerging green economy, and to partner with an innovative company such as TerraCycle. We look forward to expanding this relationship over the coming months.”

The Phone Brigade program could be a way to earn money for your favorite charity.
The partnership provides a solution for TerraCycle to expand their upcycling efforts to include consumer electronics. First launching the Brigade concept in 2006, TerraCycle pays schools and non-profits to collect 20-ounce soda bottles. Today, more than 20,000 participating locations are part of the Brigades, and the programs have raised more than $100,000 from millions of reused and recycled soda bottles, yogurt cups and snack wrappers. This money, primarily, has been donated to public-school organizations.

According to TerraCycle, the company “decided to expand their upcycling collections to help address the estimated 65,000 tons of cell phones that are discarded every year.” Cell phones contain both hazardous chemicals and valuable materials for reclamation, making them ideal for recycling.

Anyone can sign up to participate in the TerraCycle Phone Brigade, and volunteers will receive donation boxes for collecting and shipping phones. Brigades will be compensated for each item they collect, which provides schools and other grassroots organizations with new ways to fundraise.

The phones will be delivered to the ReCellular phone processing facility, where they will be either refurbished and reprogrammed for reuse, or are recycled to reclaim materials needed to make new electronics equipment.

In 2008, ReCellular collected over 5.5 million phones and raised over $4 million for charities across the country.

Green Energy Center Gets Project of the Year Recognition from U.S. EPA
EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program Recognizes Ohio Landfill Gas to CNG Fueling Operation
NEWPORT BEACH, CA – January 13, 2009
FirmGreen, Inc. (FGI) was recognized today at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) annual conference with a Project of the Year Award for its Green Energy Center (GEC). The high Btu landfill gas utilization project, located near Columbus, Ohio is a public-private partnership with the Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio (SWACO).

“Forward thinking and dedication are key ingredients to successful alternative energy projects like the Green Energy Center,” said Rachel Goldstein, EPA LMOP Program Manager. “It is a win for the environment and the local community.”
FGI used its patented CO2 Wash® landfill gas (LFG) clean-up technology to convert raw LFG that would otherwise be flared into pipeline quality natural gas for a potential array of clean, renewable energy sources. The CO2 Wash unit processes 300scfm of raw LFG into ultra-pure medium Btu methane that powers a 250kW micro turbine to generate electricity for the facility.  The high Btu methane is used as a fuel for SWACO vehicles.  The clean-up technology was invented in Ohio by Acrion Technologies, Inc.
“FirmGreen is much honored to have been selected as EPA’s Project of the Year,” stated Steve Wilburn, founder and CEO of FirmGreen, Inc. “We have worked closely with the Landfill Methane Outreach Program staff for several years and congratulate them on their dedication and support.  The Program is really one of the true success stories within our federal government.”

“By utilizing waste gases generated from SWACO’s landfill, we produce domestic, renewable transportation fuels, improve the environment and generate economic growth.  We are proud of our ongoing partnership with SWACO as we work to clean our air, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, provide clean and affordable vehicle fuels, and spur job creation.”

“Forward thinking and dedication are key ingredients to successful alternative energy projects like the Green Energy Center,” said Rachel Goldstein, EPA LMOP Program Manager. “It is a win for the environment and the local community.”

The GEC demonstrates the technical and economic feasibility of utilizing CO2 Wash as the technology platform for a smaller scale high Btu landfill gas project. The project accomplished its goals with a facilities design that:

•is self-sustaining; the facility generates enough electricity for its own operations.
•demonstrates that smaller landfill operations have a viable LFG utilization option at a competitive cost
•enables landfill and waste water operations to respond effectively to national environmental policy with a single project.

April 22 is Earth Day. 

 What are you doing for earth day and earth week?  Work or home, let us and other readers know.  As an added incentive, we will ramdomly select 1 reader’s comment and send that person a DVD Screensaver, Living Marine Aquarium filmed in HD widescreen.

So let’s hear from you.

Have you ever wondered about what’s inside that box you watch all the time?  Over 40 millions people have at least 1 TV which contain some or all of the hazardous materials listed below.  Many poeple are buying the new LCD or Plasma screen TVs. Hence, the old TV sets are being dicarded into landfills.  The Balitmore Sun recently reported how this could lead to seroius environmental problems. Environmental groups are very concerned about these hazardous materials going into the landfills and our soils.

TV sets and computer monitors are safe when they’re viewed under normal conditions in homes and offices. But when owners discard them, toxic materials inside can leak into the environment if the sets are not properly recycled. Here’s what’s inside:

Lead: Sets with cathode ray tubes (CRTs) contain 4 to 8 pounds. Used in screens and soldered circuit boards. Can cause brain damage, blood disorders, kidney damage and birth defects. Children are particularly vulnerable.

Mercury: Used in lamps of flat-screen liquid crystal displays (LCDs). High levels can contribute to brain and kidney damage, birth defects.

Cadmium: Used in phosphor coating of CRT screens. A carcinogen that accumulates in the body and can cause kidney damage.

Barium: Used inside CRTs. Short-term exposure can cause neurological problems and damage to heart, liver and spleen.

BFRs: Brominated flame retardants are used in wiring. Can disrupt hormones and immune system, especially in children.

PVC: Polyvinyl chloride insulates wires. Can emit toxic fumes when burned in incinerators and can leach out in landfills.

Electronics TakeBack Coalition, Consumer Electronics Association and the EPA are concerned about how this new waste stream will affect the amount of waste and the landfills in the upcoming years. 

What can we do?  Recycle your TV and/or computers properly.  Check with your recycling centers or the EPA to find the best way to keep these hazardous materials out of the landfills.  Be RESPONSIBLE!