team leed white paper - final

8/6/2019 Team LEED White Paper - Final

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/team-leed-white-paper-final 1/25

1

USF LEEDing the way

University of South Florida

Professional Writing

Dr. Francis Tobienne

ENC3250.791B11

August 5th, 2011

Team LEED

Jay Boda - Project Lead

Daniela Hartmann - Editor

Novia Leverentz - Executive Summary Writer

Michelle Nguyen - Interviewer

Samya Thangara - Researcher



2

USF LEEDING the Way

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------3

Introduction: The Path to LEED --------------------------------------------------------- 5

Green AND Gold --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

USF LEEDing the Way ------------------------------------------------------------------- 7

Pros & Cons of LEED Certification ---------------------------------------------------- 8

Pros & Cons of Building with LEED Standards (Without Certification) --------- 10

Building Costs Attributed to LEED ---------------------------------------------------- 11

LEED Standards That Raise Building Costs ------------------------------------------ 13

Arguments Against LEED Certification --------------------------------------------- 13

Benefits of LEED Buildings ------------------------------------------------------------ 15

USF and Going Green: An Interview -------------------------------------------------- 16

Conclusion: Should USF LEED? ------------------------------------------------------ 19

Works Cited ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20

Annotated Bibliography ----------------------------------------------------------------- 22



4

LEED promotes a holistic building approach to sustainability and recognizes performance in

several areas: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy & atmosphere, materials & resources,

indoor environmental quality, locations & linkages, awareness & education, innovation in

design, and regional priority.

Becoming certified is that LEED has its pros and cons. A pro is to be recognized with a

LEED plaque, which provides an institution an excellent reputation for being environmentally

friendly. On the other hand, LEED certification can be looked up as pointless to those who are

more concerned about the actual environmental impact that their project makes.

There are alternatives to being LEED-certified. Other green building standards exist.

Designers can even build to LEED standards and forego the costs to be certified. The energy

savings and sustainability effort is the same, however, skipping the certification can save a lot

of money. Depending on the building‘s size it can be between $2000 up to $24,000 just by

eliminating the accreditation fees.

There is no argument whether it‘s appropriate for USF to ―go green.‖ However, it‘s

prudent in these days of constrained budgets and cuts in funding to public universities to recon-

sider whether it‘s wise to spend precious building dollars on certifications that may be in vogue

today, but may not be tomorrow.



5

Introduction: The Path to LEED

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) is a competitive certification

with a given set of standards. Often, there is controversy as to whether it is beneficial to investin LEED or not. The University of South Florida (USF) is one of the many organizations that is

equipped for this debate with some of the new and existing buildings on its various campuses.

There are many factors to take into consideration when evaluating the importance of LEED

certification. Some of these factors include comparing the potential energy efficiencies and cost

savings between LEED and non-LEED buildings, the associated costs to be labeled and remain

LEED certified, student involvement at USF campuses related to going green, the rationale for

green building initiatives that have and have not chosen to be LEED certified, and the pros and

cons of being LEED certified versus simply building to LEED standards. It‘s important to con-

sider these various areas when deciding whether or not to invest in LEED standards and certifi-

cation.

Green AND Gold

Despite it‘s green programs being relatively young, USF‘s green initiatives go above

and beyond many universities. These initiatives have attracted attention as well as earned theuniversity many awards. The school has institutional programs led by the Office of Sustainabil-

ity as well as student groups leading the way in creating a more eco-friendly and cost-effective

campus.



6

The university is currently working towards building or retrofitting several buildings to

be LEED certified across it‘s multi-campus system including: the Dr. Kiran C. Patel Center for

Global Solutions, Tampa Campus; Science and Technology Building, St. Petersburg Campus;

USF Polytechnic Phase I, Lakeland Campus (in design); and Wellness and Nutrition Center.

USF leverages existing building character and cutting-edge smart design to achieve sus-

tainable buildings for its future. Concrete is used for new construction as well as locally-

procured stucco and brick masonry. Older buildings already using exposed concrete frames and

brick infill are low maintenance and create a distinct architectural flavor. Interior design ele-

ments such as stained concrete floors and unpainted brick, metal, and concrete walls also save

dollars in out-year costs (UOS).

The university looks high and low for sustainability opportunities. Roofs are being upgraded

with higher insulation materials as well as high reflectivity surfaces. At least 15 roofs have

been replaced in the past three years. New buildings also utilize dual-plumbing systems to

harvest rainwater for use in building toilets and urinals. All buildings are being fit with low-

flow and motion-sensing water fixtures to further minimize the impact on the sensitive Florida

aquifer (UOS). These efforts contributed to USF being one of a handful of universities nation-

wide bestowed an institutional ―gold‖ rating from the Association for the Advancement of

Sustainability in Higher Education, the nation‘s leading advocacy group for the green campus

movement. USF only joined the rating program in 2010 and 2011‘s assessment, which was its

“While the Office of Sustainability is only 500 days old, we‟ve managed to address most of

the easy targets, like increasing recycling and changing the light bulbs. Now we need to

focus on the bigger picture, what a sustainable campus should look like

over the longer term.”

E. Christian Wells, Director of USF‘s Office of Sustainability



7

first submission. ―The gold STARS rating USF received proves that we are truly ‗green‘ and

gold,‖ said E. Christian Wells, Director of USF‘s Office of Sustainability (Maddux Press).

The university also scored high marks in areas of

research as well as faculty and student involvement. Of the

54 academic departments on the Tampa campus, 38 have

faculty members actively involved in sustainability re-

search. Additionally, USF‘s past shows an upward trend in

green activity. USF hosted the 2009 statewide Campus and

Community Sustainability Conference; in 2010 launch of

the School of Global Sustainability, and in 2011 opening of

USF‘s first fully-constructed green building; known as the

Patel Center for Global Solutions (Maddux).

USF LEEDing the Way

Beyond low-flow toilets and motion-sensor light

switches, the United States Green Building Council

(USGBC) takes going green to an entirely new level. LEED is literally becoming the

―platinum‖ standard for green building initiatives.

The Washington, D.C.-based USGBC has created an internationally-recognized set of

standards for green compliance and certification. They connect 78 local communities, and

16,000 member companies. Each phase of building must be reviewed by one of the 162,000

LEED credentialed professionals. Despite it‘s 501 c3 non-profit status, LEED is not cheap.



8

According to it‘s website, ―USGBC is the driving force of an industry that is projected

to contribute $554 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product from 2009-2013. USGBC leads an

unlikely diverse constituency of builders and environmentalists, corporations and nonprofit

organizations, elected officials and concerned citizens, and teachers and students‖ (USGBC).

LEED promotes a holistic building approach to sustainability and recognizes perform-

ance in several areas: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy & atmosphere, materials &

resources, indoor environmental quality, locations & linkages, awareness & education, innova-

tion in design, and regional priority (USGBC).

All ideas go a long way towards reductions in energy and increasing sustainability of

both the building and the natural resources used by the building. However, does it really

necessitate the additional costs required for LEED certification to enact these ideas?

Pros & Cons of LEED Certification

LEED certification brings creditability to a green building project. The building is

recognized with a LEED plaque, which provides a good reputation of being environmentally

friendly. This can be useful if your organization wants a positive public image.

Aside from the publicity that LEED certification holds, it also provides measurable



9

confirmation to the owner that the building is built to certain standards and is not just ―green‖ in

the words of the architect. Also reassuring to the owner is that LEED building performance

measurements are documented, which helps both the owner and the architect understand the

outcomes of their particular design choices. As stated in McGraw-Hill Construction, ―Without

LEED requirements for independent review and documentation, there is a tremendous tendency

to compromise design intent due to cost or schedule.‖

A higher level of certification is deemed ―Platinum‖ and can be valuable within certain

categories of buildings in that it waives certification fees. Given that the fees associated with

accreditation are often the biggest drawback, this can be an attractive solution to some. On the

contrary, this level of certification can sometimes include more fees and turn out to be an even

more costly project.

LEED certification can sometimes be an

expensive project. It requires accredited profes-

sionals that can assist in gaining credits that are

essentially free. They also help by generating

ideas for saving money in certain areas. These

cost-saving methods can pay off by allowing op-

portunities for greater expenditure in other areas

of the environmentally conscious building. In

addition to these money saving efforts, a LEED project will have access to additional informa-

tion to assist with constructing their ―green‖ efforts. This will allow them to make more eco-

nomically intelligent decisions than those who are not pursuing the certification.



10

Pros & Cons of Building with LEED Standards (Without Certification)

In the event that an organization chooses not to become LEED certified or is not eligible

by the LEED Rating System Checklist, there are also benefits and drawbacks to simply building

to LEED standards without the professional accreditation. This can save large amounts of

money ranging from $2000 up to $24,000 just by eliminating the accreditation fees.

This method is commonly chosen by those who want the environmental benefits of a

LEED building, but are not particularly interested in the expenditure that is required for the

public image of being LEED certified. The appealing aspect of LEED standards to those who

are budgeting is that many of the features of an environmentally friendly building can be paid

off immediately by the money that is saved in energy costs. The drawback of this aspect is that

it does not take natural human characteristics into consideration. If a building is designed to

operate using the sun as a main source of lighting, someone could naturally turn all the lights

on, thus eliminating the energy saving method.

Another way in which one might rule out LEED certification is through clarification of

LEED standards. Despite popular belief of certification producing the most energy efficient

buildings, they can actually be accredited as LEED with a simple 14% improvement in energy

efficiency. Rather than going through the demanding LEED process, one might simply choose

to build to their own ―green‖ standards and achieve higher energy efficiency.

An additional disadvantage to LEED is that the credit system can hold too much power.

As McGraw-Hill Construction states, ―The design team can become obsessively focused on

getting credits, regardless of whether or not they add environmental value‖ (Willson). This

implies that the building process can be taken over by the need for the strong public image that



13

LEED Standards That Raise Building Costs

LEED does require an enormous amount of standards o be followed, such as: finding a

certified LEED builder (not many options available), follow all codes completely, and fulfill the

rating system (based upon the amount of green material and energy-efficiency attained).

Another aspect that needs to be taken into consideration is the ―soft cost‖, which represents the

expenses associated outside of the construction costs. The documentation required for construc-

tion tends to be known as the biggest burden throughout the entire process, especially for

smaller buildings, because the price varies from $8,000 to $70,000 per project. The price corre-

lates with the LEED team‘s experience in working with green buildings, not the size of the

building itself.

Arguments Against LEED Certification

It is dually noted that green conscientious building is of high importance in the modern

world, however many individuals are speaking out against LEED and choosing not to become

certified. The main reasoning behind their argument is simple: the LEED certification process is

expensive and bureaucratic in nature. Many businesses simply cant afford such a steep price tag

and instead use the LEED certification process as a mere guide.

Others argue against LEED certification because it is not performance based. The point

system by which projects obtain their certification does not take into consideration the perform-

ance of the equipment over time. Thus, it is contended that the actual energy savings may not

pay off. Paul Eldrenkamp, a remodeling contractor who specializes in deep energy retrofitting

spoke out against LEED in the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association (NSEA) forum.

Eldrenkamp made the point that the LEED program is understudied for its level of implementa-

tion (Prager, 2009). Henry Gifford, co-founder of Architecture and Energy Limited, was a



14

fellow panelist in the NSEA forum who echoed Eldrenkamp‘s views in his opening statement:

In his opening statement, Gifford had referred to Newsham et al‘s analysis for the

energy consumption data for LEED certified buildings. His argument is supported by John H,

Scofield‘s re-analysis of the same data in his paper "Do LEED-certified Buildings save Energy?

Not Really…." from the journal Energy and Buildings. In this report, it was found that

Newsham et al‘s study did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that LEED-

certification lowered energy costs. Furthermore, this article claimed there being no difference in

energy savings between LEED certified and non-

certified buildings suggesting that the high costs

of LEED certification are unnecessary.

(Scofield).

Without hard data to support claims of en-

ergy savings, many individuals have found the

LEED certification process to be criminal as

demonstrated by the lawsuit Gifford v. USGBC:

LEED certification. Henry Gifford and Gifford

“The first study we heard was in „07, and even before that, it was becoming law. The study

came out and said that LEED-rated buildings save 25-30 percent compared to a national

database. Well, I did a radical thing. I read the study, and I think there‟s nothing in the

study that supports, related to, or even references the conclusion. I think the conclusion

was invented and stuck on. They found a 24 percent difference between two numbers;

mean energy used by the national database and the median of the LEED buildings. Mean

to mean would have shown that LEED did 29 percent higher.”

Henry Gifford, co-founder of Architecture and Energy Limited



15

Fuel Savings, Inc. filed a class action lawsuit against the USGBC in October of 2010. Using the

inaccurate claims of New Buildings Institute study, Gifford alleged that the USBC participated

in deceptive trade practices, false advertising, and antitrust activities via the LEED rating sys-

tem (Stewart).

In addition to these claims, Gifford asserts that the USGBC allows for self certification

via ―providing third-party verification that a building or community was designed and built us-

ing strategies aimed at improving performance across all the metrics that matter most: energy

savings [. . .]‖ To support this, Gifford contended the following facts: LEED certification (1)

does not require verification of the data submitted in application; (2) does not require actual en-

ergy use data at any stage; (3) is not based on actual building performance data, but rather on

projected energy use; and (4) the USGBC does not have the staff or experience to evaluate

these applications (Stewart).

All in all, not becoming LEED certified can be justified. However, the decision to use

the certification process is still up to the individual project.

Benefits of LEED Buildings

LEED certified buildings are intended to accomplish the followings:

Energy Cost Savings

Emissions Reduction

Water & Wastewater

Health and learning

Indoor air quality

Temperature control

High Performance Lighting

Lower operating costs

Conserve energy and water

Reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions



16

Green buildings use an average of 33% less energy than conventionally designed build-

ings (KATS). ―Potential energy savings will vary but to meet the LEED prerequisite, the build-

ing has to perform better than 10% of ASHRAE 90.1 – 2007 energy standard‖, said Lelia B.

Proctor, Director of Facilities Planning & Construction at University of South Florida.

No doubt that Green buildings provide financial benefits that conventional buildings are

not able to produce. The financial benefits of LEED certified buildings is $70 more per square

foot than conventional buildings. Some green schools are building on the same budget as

conventional schools. Some green schools cost no more than conventional design, while

several schools cost substantially more. Six out of 30 cost at least 3% more than conventional

design while one costs 6.3% more. Typically green schools costs 1% to 2% more, with an

average cost premium of 1.7%, or about $3/square foot (KATS).

Over time, green building design provides an extraordinarily cost-effective way to

enhance student learning, and so much more. The payback to green building is diverse. We

can categorize along three fronts: environmental, economic, and social.

USF and Going Green: An Interview

Professional Writing student, Michelle Nguyen interview with Lelia B. Proctor R.A. (Director

of Facility Planning and Construction) in July 2011 to discuss USF‘s green and LEED

initiatives.

”This important study persuasively demonstrates that it costs little more to build high per-

formance, healthy schools and that there are enormous financial, educational and social

benefits to students, schools and society at large.”

— Edward J. McElroy, President, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO



17

Michelle Nguyen: What is the potential energy efficiencies and cost savings between and

LEED and non-LEED USF Buildings?

Lelia B Proctor: Potential energy savings will vary but to meet the LEED prerequisite, the

building has to perform better than 10% of ASHRAE 90.1 – 2007 energy standard.

MN: What are the biggest reasons USF is using LEED standards verses another Federal/State

green building standards or initiatives?

LBP: President Genshaft signed the American College & University President‘s Climate

Commitment which endorses USGBC LEED (http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/)

USGBC is a nationally recognized, high performance green building rating system that has

been approved and adopted by the Department of Management Services via FL Statue

225.2575. J-TM, 7/25/11: This FS does provide several alternative measurement standards,

including LEED. However only LEED certification is approved by Florida Department of

Management Services (DMS) which has the authority to select a measurement standard for

state facilities. Alternate green building certification programs in FS 225.2575. The Green

Building Initiative‘s Green Globes rating system

The Florida Green Building Coalition standards

Or a ―high-performance green building rating system as approved by the Department of

Management Services.‖

MN: Are there any other green building standards that are sanctioned by the government that

do not required certifications?

LBP: Not to my knowledge.

http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/




http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0200-0299/0255/Sections/0255.2575.html

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0200-0299/0255/Sections/0255.2575.html












18

MN: Are there any other green building standards that are sanctioned by the government that

do not required certifications?

LBP: Not to my knowledge.

General Services Administration (GSA), the Federal Government facilities planning and

construction office: www.gsa.gov . Department of Management Services (DMS), State of

Florida‘s facilities planning & construction office: (http://www.dms.myflorida.com/

business_operations/real_estate_development_management)

Other green building standards:

Voluntary university sustainability self-reporting program (campus wide, not building specific):

The Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System™ (STARS) is a transparent,

self-reporting framework for colleges and universities to measure their sustainability perform-

ance. STARS® was developed by AASHE with broad participation from the higher education

community. (https://stars.aashe.org/)

US Department of Environmental Protection Agency certifies building system products (and

consumer goods), including ―energy management‖; LEED certification program exceeds En-

ergy Star: (http://www.energystar.gov/)

Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) promulgates the Florida Building Code,

including the ―Florida Energy Efficiency Code for Building Construction‖ or Florida Energy

Code. LEED certifications program exceeds this minimum standards: (http://

www.dca.state.fl.us/fbc/committees/energy/energy_forms/1_energy_forms.htm)

MN: Does USF receive Federal or State grant money to help build to LEED standards?

LBP: No

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.dms.myflorida.com/business_operations/real_estate_development_management



https://stars.aashe.org/


http://www.energystar.gov/


http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fbc/committees/energy/energy_forms/1_energy_forms.htm





































































http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/

http://www.gsa.gov/



19

Conclusion: USF and LEED

It‘s clear and reasonable why USF increasingly embraces green initiatives and eco-

friendly sustainability programs. LEED is but one option that USF may employ to achieve

green standards on its campuses. LEED is internationally recognized as the ―platinum‖-

standard in the green building movement. However, USF needs to balance the costs of certifi-

cation with meaningful energy savings for the university and its students. Answers are rarely

black and white. Serious analysis and reflection from university leaders is needed so they avail

themselves of all the facts about green building materials, standards, certification processes, the

associated costs, assessments, and the energy and overall cost savings ratios. Only then should

they make decisions about employing LEED in new USF buildings. This paper details the lar-

ger points that need to be considered. With education budgets shrinking, every new dollar to be

invested needs double or triple value appreciation. It‘s the smart and prudent way to green

USF.



20

Works Cited

Holtry, Matthew. ―USGBC: True Green LEEDereship.‖ TriplePundit. 17 Aug. 2009. Web. 20

July 2011.

Kaplon, Elizabeth. "Student Campus Initiatives." Office of Sustainability. University of South

Florida, n.d. Web. 27 July 2011.

Kats, Gregory. ―Greening America‘s Schools Costs and Benefits.‖ A Capital E Report .

October 2006. Print.

Kay, Sheryl. ―Patel Center for Global Solutions will be first LEED certified building at

USF.‖ St. Petersburg Times. May 29, 2009. Print.

―LEED Certification Information.‖ NRDC: Building Green. n.d. Web. 20 July 2011.

"LEED: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design." GreenBuildingsolutions.org .

American Chemistry Council, 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 July 2011.

Maddux News Wire. "USF Sustainability Initiatives Earn Coveted ―Gold‘." Tampa Bay's

Business News. Maddux News Wire, Feb. 2011. Web.

Martin, Richard. "The LEED Shade of Green: What Makes a Building 'Sustainable?' Good

Question." Architect . 12 Feb. 2008. Web. 28 July 2011.

Prager, Michael. "LEED Controversy." Weblog post. Michael Prager . 15 Mar. 2009. Web. 28

July 2011. Sustainable Initiative. Web. 22 July 2011.



22

Annotated Bibliography

Holtry, Matthew. ―USGBC: True Green LEEDereship.‖ TriplePundit. 17 Aug. 2009. Web.

20 July 2011.The LEED rating system is broken down into a point scale which is described in detail here.It also differentiates between being LEED certified and LEED platinum status. The articleaddresses the importance of the rating system and the thinking, questioning, and change thatis brought upon by the conversations regarding this scale. This website provides us with theinsight that the LEED Rating System provides a consistent system that allows people to think differently about building systems and to share common knowledge when referring to a

―green building‖.

Kaplon, Elizabeth. "Student Campus Initiatives." Office of Sustainability. University of South Florida. n.d. Web. 27 July 2011.

There is a list of nine clubs associated with going green on the USF campus. These studentclubs are open to all students, and it encourages them to take initiative to become a part of theinnovative movement. This website explains each group‘s purpose, and a brief description. Theinformation provided is extremely helpful to those seeking involvement opportunities aroundcampus; in particular, those who choose to take part in ―going green‖. This list of USF clubswill be perfect for describing student involvement related to sustainability. This is a great display of USF‘s effort in taking initiative to adopt new ideas about becoming more environmen-

tally friendly.

Kats, Gregory. ―Greening America‘s Schools Costs and Benefits.‖ A Capital E Report .

October 2006. Print. 27 July 2011.

A report written by Gregory Kats about the costs and benefits of America‘s schools becomingGreen. The report was found on the USGBC website. The author states in his executive sum-mary how many were discourage to build green buildings due to the cost to build and the lack of information regarding the financial benefits of green buildings. Gregory concludes the reportwith ―Greening school design is extremely cost-effective. Green schools cost on average almost2% more, or $3 more per ft2, than conventional schools. The financial benefits of greening

schools are about $70 per ft2, more than 20 times as high as the cost of going green. Only a por-tion of these savings accrue directly to an individual school. Lower energy and water costs, im- proved teacher retention, and lowered health costs save green schools directly about $12/ft2,about four times the additional cost of going green, and enough to hire an additional full-timeteacher.Analysis of the costs and benefits of 30 green schools and use of conservative and pru-dent financial assumptions provides a clear and compelling case that greening schools today isextremely cost-effective, and represents a fiscally far better design choice. Building greenschools is more fiscally prudent and lower risk than continuing to build unhealthy, inefficient

schools.‖



23

―LEED Certification Information.‖ NRDC: Building Green. n.d. Web. 20 July 2011.

This website provides the information on the benefits of LEED certification, how to achieveLEED certification, and tips on getting LEED certified. It states that LEED certification pro-vides proof to the public that the building has achieved your environmental goals. The break-down of the LEED qualifications and the tips that are provided give us a good understandingof whether USF is equipped to invest in LEED certification. Since it does not provide thedrawbacks of being LEED certified, this article will be used solely to gain insight on the benefits and qualifications, rather than making a decision on whether or not being officially

certified is imperative.

―LEED: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.‖ GreenBuildingsolutions.org .

American Chemistry Council, 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 July 2011.

The percentage of the building‘s construction that will go to LEED certified workers is esti-mated at 4.5%-11%, and even up to 30% after all steps are completed; this percentage is the ex-tra cost for having LEED certification. Another aspect that needs to be taken into considerationis the ―soft costs‖, which represents the expenses associated outside of the construction costs.The different costs of building are stated in a cut and dry style. It clearly confirms the high costof building green, but also describes the benefits related to the high costs. The information con-tained in the website allows me to write an outlined description of the costs related to ―LEEDcertified building‖. This will provide readers with a better understanding of the underlying costs

associated with the green building materials and building codes.

Martin, Richard. "The LEED Shade of Green: What Makes a Building 'Sustainable?' Good

Question." Architect . 12 Feb. 2008. Web. 28 July 2011.

LEED approval is an expensive process that can add 15-20% to upfront construction costs.Most developers do not have the resources to front the initial costs and therefore forgo LEEDcertification. Furthermore, projects are being developed that are too advanced for the outdatedLEED rating system making certification out of the question. These concerns, coupled with theextensive restrictions and bureaucratic red tape have given developers incentive to not apply for LEED certification. In this paper, this information was used to support the argument for not becoming LEED certified.

Percio, Stephen Del. "What's Wrong with LEED?" Next American City. 2007. Web. 28 July2011.

LEED certification is a costly process that often lacks in design. Only thirteen percent of LEEDapplicants actually become certified due to these hindrances. Because of the extreme cost andillogical point system, many clients simply choose to use LEED as a mere guide for their green building projects. This article serves to provide more information about the cons of the LEED

rating system, which supports this report‘s section for arguments against LEED certification.



24

Prager, Michael. "LEED Controversy." Weblog post. Michael Prager . 15 Mar. 2009. Web. 28

July. 2011.

This review discussed the NESEA‘s public forum panel discussion concerning the LEED con-troversy. Paul Eldrenkamp discussed the fact that there is no performance requirement and thatthe program lacked sufficient study despite its implementation. Architects like Chris Benedictstated the simple desire for LEED to ―go away‖ due to its bureaucratic manipulation. These in-

dividuals provide support for the argument against LEED certification.

Scofield, John H. "Do LEED-certified Buildings save Energy? Not Really…." Energy and

Buildings 41.12 (2009): 1386-390. Print.

In this publication, Newsham et al.‘s analysis for the energy-consumption data for LEED certi-fied buildings was reevaluated to demonstrate that both the site energy and source energy used by the set of 35 LEED office buildings and Newsham et al.‘s matching CBECS office buildingsare statistically equivalent. Therefore, it was proven that the original report by Newsham et al.offered no evidence in support of LEED-certification lowering energy for office buildings. Be-cause there was no difference in energy savings between the buildings, it is suggested that theastronomical costs of LEED certification is unnecessary. This provides support for the argu-

ment against obtaining LEED certification.

"Special Report: Part 1: LEEDing from Behind: The Rise and Fall of Green Building." Commu-

nity Solutions. The Arthur Morgan Institute for Community Solution, May 2009. Web.

The LEED rating system is not concerned with performance as its main objective tracks issuesother than energy and carbon dioxide byproduct. Because this certification program does notlead in measurable ―green‖ areas, it is demonstrated that, as a program, LEED has adopted aweak energy consumption status without accountability and verification. Because of this lack of attention to energy consumption outside of the initial equipment, LEED is considered to be aninferior program in need of an overhaul. This supports the argument against LEED certification

held by many builders and clients as discussed in this report.

Stewart, James, and Robbie J. Varg. "Gifford v. USGBC: LEED Certification Challenged."MEALEY’S LITIGATION REPORT: Construction Defects 11.12 (2011): 20-22. Lowen-

stein Sandler Attorneys at Law. Jan. 11. Web.

This commentary discusses the lawsuit Gifford v. USGBC: LEED certification in which Gif-ford alleged that the USBC participated in deceptive trade practices, false advertising, and anti-trust activities via the LEED rating system as it does not meet the boasted energy savings. Thiswas supported by Gifford‘s analysis that LEED-certified buildings used 29% more energy than



25

the national average while the NBI claimed that LEED buildings were, on average, 25-30%

more efficient. This allegedly fraudulent misrepresentation was the basis for the lawsuit. This

lawsuit supports the argument against using LEED certification. Because this rationale was

used in various public and private green building initiatives that have and have not chosen to

be LEED certified, it was incorporated into this report.

USF Office of Sustainability. "Green Building Campus Initiatives." USF Green Building Sus-

tainable Initiative. n.d. Web. 22 July 2011.

This is USF‘s main website with a comprehensive overview of efforts undertaken by the Officeof Sustainability located on the main campus in Tampa, Florida. Twelve main initiatives arediscussed with the office‘s mission, history, and programs shown. The Green Building areacontains information relevant to LEED certification efforts at USF. The website does not con-tain complete and detailed information for these initiatives. Department contact information is

provided to obtain such details.

"USGBC: About USGBC." U.S. Green Building Council. U.S. Green Building Council. n.d.

Web. 22 July 2011.

The primary source for all LEED standards and certification requirements are contained in thisreport. This website is extremely comprehensive with details, specifications, standards, andexamples to reference for LEED certification. Sample cases are provided to demonstrate theviability and scalability of using LEED standards in various building situations. The source

provides a baseline for LEED information without any LEED criticism or alternatives offered.

Willson, Myron. Some Pros and Cons of LEED Certification. McGraw-Hill Construction.

Nov. 2008. Web. 26 July 2011.

This website contains the reasons for and against the LEED process in order to provide a bet-ter understanding of the value of LEED certification. It addresses the common concern thatmoney spent on the LEED process will waste funds that could be used to improve the energyefficiency of the building. Why people ―do‖ LEED, and why people do not ―do‖ LEED are both thoroughly stated within this website. This article will provide a basis for our under-

standing on whether or not USF should invest in LEED certifications.

team leed white paper - final

Documents