20 ms·

Does LEED Certification Save Energy? Evidence from Federal Buildings

83 points by throw0101a 6y ago

baybal2 6y ago
The biggest issue I see is that LEEDs allow for a building that looks like a big heat exchanger, and has zero heat insulation to certify for high power efficiency in a cold climate. Canada, and Toronto area had tons of LEEDs certed luxury condos being heated like no tomorrow in Winter. Things are even worse in Vancouver, but that's offset by milder weather. The opposite picture is there in hot climates. Building with exposed balcony slabs, and curtainwalls in +40C° climates, guzzling electricity for aircons. I think the West needs to look up more for economical building designs from nations living in extremes. Gulf countries learned how to build economically in +50C° Nordic ones for -30C° in Winter None of them spend as much as US, and Western Europe on heating, or cooling despite way more severe climates. Building operation is 40% of US total energy bill if we believe CTBUH https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-Energy-Consumption-by-Sector-Source-Architecture-2030-2013-Redrawn-by-CTBUH_fig3_321977968 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-Energy-Consumption-by... . And 40% of building energy bill in US is space heating https://www.epa.gov/rhc/rhc-multi-unit-housing https://www.epa.gov/rhc/rhc-multi-unit-housing All those vanities like PV panels, solar water heaters, rainwater collection, turbines, etc — all totally pale in comparison to just proper thermal design of a building, and slashing its heating bill.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- duxup 6y ago
  I don't know much about LEEDs and maybe that should be updated, but I live in a cold climate and I see a lot of focus on insulation and insulation efficiency, both in new construction and updating old buildings. This idea that there's not a focus on insulation in the west seems kinda strange to me.
  - nraynaud 6y ago
    Same in France, I'm buying a condo and looking into all this for the renovation, and everybody is screaming "insulation by the outside".
    - throw0101a 6y ago
      If you want to make sure things are built properly, look into the topic of "building science": * https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-perfect-wall https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-t... Matt Risinger, a general contractor in Austin, Texas, has a lot of good videos on the topics: * https://www.youtube.com/c/MattRisinger/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/MattRisinger/videos Even if you can't use the same techniques that he does (and pay for some of the premium products), it may be possible to still use some of the general theory / principles.
      - CalRobert 6y ago
        Risinger makes great videos. Doing a 150sqm extension now and plan to apply perfect wall concepts.
      - evanlivingston 6y ago
        Matt's videos are worth watching, but it's important to note most his videos are motivated by his sponsorships and it's often hard to parse out when he's shilling and when he's not. Betters resources with real science can be found at * https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/ https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/ * https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/ https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/
        throw0101a 6y ago
        Just because he's sponsored does not necessarily mean he's wrong: he's been beating this drum for many years before the sponsorships came. Sort by date and check out the potato quality videos from long ago, and you'll see the same principles being talked about. Though certainly, if you're going to do a build yourself, research any specific products to see if they meet your needs, functionally and monetarily. * He tends to build on the higher end of things, and has clients that are willing to pay. Of course he's currently building his own new home, and doing things the way he's talked about. * He's in a warm-humid climate (US Climate Zone 2). Plenty of things I wouldn't do exactly the same since I'm in Canada. But Joe Lstiburek was born and raised in Canada, and lives in the north-east, and he's saying many of the same things when it comes to building science: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek
- etimberg 6y ago
  I live in an apartment in Toronto that is LEED certified. To be honest, it's not that great but for different reasons than you outlines. The insulation is too good and so the building is too warm all year round. My unit can easily be > 24C without any heating running even in winter.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - baybal2 6y ago
    Yep, but probably it has nothing to do with LEEDs, but just Canadian own construction experience that is not even code mandated. LEEDs for example allows for buildings with completely catastrophical thermal design to get certified: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Aqua_Tower_thermal_imaging.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Aqua_Tow... (Chicago)
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - julianlam 6y ago
    Are you sure it's because of the insulation? Many condos are sweltering in the middle spring (even with heat off) because residents living on floors below yours crank the heat and it all rises. When I lived in a condo (Bloor/Yonge), the situation was so bad (12th floor) that if it hit 12°C outside, I needed to turn on the A/C, which is awful from an environmental POV.
    - reedjosh 6y ago
      This and most modern buildings are heated and cooled via a central heating/cooling system which distributes the hot/cold via water. So, it may be even though you don't have the heat 'on' there is still hot water running through your apartment's heating system.
      - baybal2 6y ago
        Yep, and this is why central control, along with temperature sensors make a giant lot of sense to prevent such situation. A simple thermostat is not enough, and even a PID one will not do the job if external thermal influx is not in the model. I once worked on a HVAC controller for hotels in Singapore, and other commercial venues which helped the hotel operator to save on HVAC by packing visitors more closely depending on occupancy. This avoid paradoxical situations of it being chilling cold in some suites with zero aircon use when it is +30 outside because of an unlucky combination of HVAC settings in neighbouring suites.
- lupire 6y ago
  Problem is once someone built a cheap building 30 years ago, it's not worth $200K to tear it down and rebuild for thermal efficiency. And new build buyers want homes that look "normal" or "classic", not experimental (even if experimental is based on proved designs elsewhere.)
  - baybal2 6y ago
    From my experience on short stints in Dubai, and Qatar, single house residentials can well be both. Lots of villas there built with foam concrete exterior walls, in which you are living like in a thermos, and which still look rather conventional. Their highrises are probably a bit more avant-garde than American ones, but nevertheless they sell like cookies.
- wcunning 6y ago
  Joseph Lstiburek talked about this(1) in talks going back to the early 2010s. He bitched about bike racks being worth a LEED point whereas good insulation wasn't really... (1)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA
  - mjevans 6y ago
    Good insulation and isolation can also help substantially with privacy and tranquility. Good airflow can help human health and reducing externalizes that aren't well measured by a single building's certification.
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  > Canada, and Toronto area had tons of LEEDs certed luxury condos being heated like no tomorrow in Winter. Things are even worse in Vancouver, but that's offset by milder weather. That's called Green Washing. Now, Snow Washing is the process in which dirty money is brought into Canada to purchase said assets.
arbitrage 6y ago
a building i used to work in got retrofitted to be leads certified. it got a new front door vestibule. the doors don't hang right, it's obstructive for people with different mobility needs. it leeks air like a tattered balloon. none of the glaring issues in the basement were fixed. it got a leed certification. nobody really cares, it's just all a sham. no real point to leeds certs other than polishing a turd.
- wussboy 6y ago
  “I found a flaw in a LEED certified building, I ignored any other possible beneficial knock on effects of that flaw or other enhancements. Therefore LEED has no beneficial effect, either here or anywhere else.”
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    The point of certifications is that they make particular promises. If those promises are obviously broken, why bother? This is like a priest asking, "so what if God doesn't actually exist?"
andrewla 6y ago
It is interesting that this is surfacing just as another similar scam is making the rounds[1], Well [2]. An older product, apparently, that has now been rebranded and updated to take advantage of fears around COVID. They purport to be a certifications company, like LEED, that can evaluate a business or building and determine if it meets certain arbitrary standards around being "safe" in the health sense. If they can get an insurance company to give a break on liability insurance based on the certification, then they're ready to make bank off of companies looking to attract customers in the wake of COVID. [1] https://twitter.com/WELLcertified/status/1353757841459449857 https://twitter.com/WELLcertified/status/1353757841459449857 [1] https://wellhealthsafety.com/ https://wellhealthsafety.com/
throw0101a 6y ago
RESNET's Certified Home Energy Rating System may be a better system, though I don't think it applies to commercial buildings: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_energy_rating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_energy_rating
- Bjartr 6y ago
  Correct, the R stands for Residential.
orzig 6y ago
Summary: Operational energy efficiency is one of several goals of LEED, and in practice it's not high priority enough to be (statistically significantly) improved, in the sample of buildings they have data on, in the time period they took the data.
ChrisMarshallNY 6y ago
The usual caveat: Any headline that ends with a question mark should be answered with "No"; which is pretty much exactly what the summary says: > If energy efficiency is the primary policy goal, LEED certification may not be the most effective means to reach that goal.
ensignavenger 6y ago
The article points out that LEED certification is about more than just energy efficiency, and a building can obtain LEED certification without being energy efficient by focusing on other LEED areas.
- fatnoah 6y ago
  I worked in a LEED gold building. One summer weekend, I stopped by the office to pick something up and noticed that the AC was still fully operational and keeping the building cool, despite there being no one in the building.
alricb 6y ago
But then we already knew that. https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-007-prioritizing-green-it-s-the-energy-stupid https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-007-p...
bjt2n3904 6y ago
The frustration I have with environmentalism is this. There's this enthusiasm for environmentalism that seems to be blind to outcome. A new standard for buildings, cars, circuit boards -- whatever -- is met with accolades. However, the opponents of such a standard clearly want the planet to die and suffer. It's time to listen to science! Then a decade later, the program is assessed, and found to be ineffective, and the same people who were so enthusiastic shake their heads as if they've always known there would be such problems. Fun story! Bureaucracy doesn't solve problems, it creates them!
- blacktriangle 6y ago
  "There's this enthusiasm for environmentalism that seems to be blind to outcome." I am completely stealing this line, because it explains the modern environmental movement perfectly. I've argued with so many people about the Paris Accords and how they are a terrible idea. Why? Because they heap regulation on the West while sending money to China and India who have no obligation to improve their environmental policy. This will result in even more manufacturing leaving the semi-regulated West and moving to totally unregulated China which will increase net pollution, and that's before you factor in transit pollution. Nobody can explain to me why this is wrong and that Paris Accords are actually terrible for the global environment, but its still awful the US wouldn't sign them because "we have to do something!"
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    > Because they heap regulation on the West while sending money to China and India who have no obligation to improve their environmental policy. Both China and India are signatories of the Paris Accords. They are aiming to meet their targets. The US, at least for the four previous years, wasn't even in the Accords and not trying to do much in that time. There are no regulations in the Accords, just a goal with regards to carbon emissions. If you want minimal regulations to achieve that, either introduce a cap-and-trade system (like Bush 41 did for acid rain), or introduce price signalling via carbon pricing, as recommended from four former Federal Reserve chairs (including Greenspan): * https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org/news/2019/1/17/former-federal-reserve-chairs-and-nobel-economists-solidify-support-for-a-price-on-carbon https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org/news/2019/1/17/forme... > Nobody can explain to me why this is wrong and that Paris Accords are actually terrible for the global environment, but its still awful the US wouldn't sign them because "we have to do something!" Perhaps no one can explain why it's wrong because it is not wrong? The Paris Accords are not about "the global environment", they are specifically about one thing: carbon emission. Specifically reducing them by a certain amount. Why do you think reducing them is bad?
throw0101a 6y ago
The focus of buildings should be: 1. Keeping dry and bulk water out/away. 2. Being as air tight as possible.† 3. Controlling vapour. 4. Being well-insulated. * https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-perfect-wall https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-t... † Air is exchanged in a controlled fashioned: filtered for pollen and other things, and then tempered with an HRV/ERV. Buildings do not need to 'breathe': * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIcrXut_EFA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIcrXut_EFA
- abakker 6y ago
  Certain building materials need to breath. Buildings built with green wood which has more moisture than ambient, and buildings with cast concrete will shed water vapor for some time. If this can be managed, it is fine. Additionally, through all insulation there is an internal temperature gradient. If the there are discontinuities it is possible to get condensation when the temperature / dew point align just wrong. This can happen in in humid climates with inadequate insulation - especially fiberglass where moisture can easily penetrate the fiberglass to reach the colder outside walls. I agree, though. Air tightness and continuous insulation coupled with well-engineered ventilation is best.
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    > Certain building materials need to breath. As explained in the linked video, they actually need to dry. This does not need to happen to the outside environment. IMHO, using the two terms (dry/breathe) interchangeably is causing confusion, as each has certain connotations in many people's minds. The person in that video lives in Austin, Texas, and when he builds or renovates structures he has a stand-alone, whole-house dehumidifier designed into the HVAC system (the client can of course reject the suggestion): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKJnP_6uxcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKJnP_6uxcg > If the there are discontinuities it is possible to get condensation when the temperature / dew point align just wrong. Which, as explained in the first link (BSI-001), is why you want external insulation (if possible); some portion of the insulation being continuous is code in many places nowadays. That way the condensation occurs on the outside of the water/vapour control layer. Joe Lstiburek: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA&t=25m26s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA&t=25m26s This is harder to do with renovations, but is code in most places. In Ontario, Canada the code (IIRC) also specifics what minimum portion of the insulation that should be on the 'outside' of the vapour control layer: the colder the region the more has to be external, so that condensation happens on the outside of the structure. Having it 100% external is ideal, but would cause trade-offs in other aspects of the building, which may not be desirable. An example of such a structure: * During construction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I * Finished: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTwq-qUnr9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTwq-qUnr9I Sadly, last time I checked, there was still no mandatory air tightness test for new builds in Ontario.
macinjosh 6y ago
I once lived in a LEED certified apartment complex. Unfortunately, I do not recall the specifics of their certification. My hot water would never get hot enough. I realized the hot water heater had a device on it to limit how often heating occurred. I promptly disabled it and had normal hot water again. One of the other "green" aspects of the complex was that it only had compact car parking. However, the area I live in is rural/suburban and a very large portion of renters here work in the shale oil fields of the area. These workers drive trucks. Big trucks. The parking lot was always cramped mess. I often pondered the irony there and also how much more carbon was emitted by the body shops fixing all the dented doors.
- dashundchen 6y ago
  That may not have been for LEED, many areas in the US have anti-scalding regulations for buildings or landlords/operators - typically not to exceed 120F at the tap. May have been set low depending on how many taps, distance between the different taps etc.
  - macinjosh 6y ago
    Interesting. The water never got warmer than about 100-105 with the device on. Perhaps it was defective.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  > My hot water would never get hot enough. I realized the hot water heater had a device on it to limit how often heating occurred. My tankless water heater has a temperature limit (120 Fahrenheit), but it's to prevent children from getting scalded.
- ishjoh 6y ago
  > One of the other "green" aspects of the complex was that it only had compact car parking. I think this is one of the things that as I get older gets more and more grating. This 'nudge' is supposed to encourage you to use and buy a smaller car, but instead of you as an individual selecting the car most suited for your needs they've decided that only compact cars should be driven. So now if you have a big family (which in today's age is only 3 kids), or you need your vehicle for work (hi work trucks), or a host of other reasons to have a bigger vehicle, they've intentionally made your life just a little bit worse, and they've done it intentionally.
omosubi 6y ago
LEED is a joke. My dad used to manage a large office building in chicago and the certification was done by the building management itself. The guy collecting the data asked all the tenants for the info and threw out all the reports that made the building look bad. They got leed certification. I'm also for more efficient use of resources but I'm skeptical LEED actually improves this. Also, all those curtain walled buildings are hideous and destroy the built environment.
mistrial9 6y ago
I did a small project for one of the founders of the LEED standard. I am in favor of the project and lacking details right this minute so I won't argue its merits BUT I can say that ... building specs are super useful, at the right time. Changes to a building can be very difficult, time-consuming and expensive, amidst a business model in West that emphasizes short-term money flow constantly. It is hugely difficult to get building owners and their insurance companies, to agree to anything. So this fellow who happens to strongly identify with Stanford University, was a basket case of nerves and ego, with expensive office suite and lots of helpers who appear nervous. I myself laid out a technical argument for a proposed software design, and less than ten minutes in to it, it was clear that the guy was not listening, and then interrupted me to start basically having a fit about different project pressures. My impression after the whole, small project was over was that this is a person who lives in a world of wealth and status, and has to interact with others like that, who do not get along, or are constantly "jousting" .. I believe this fellow means well in the largest ways, but really the feeling overall was more like some kind of Arab Sheik than tech business.. I want LEED and things like it to succeed. I think this is a terribly hard thing to get going in reality. I feel this guy had too much pressure and was sort of losing it in a way ..
- peytn 6y ago
  Normal people worry about having a good job and saving for retirement. People in that world worry about things like UN Sustainable Development Goals. It’s a weird status thing they do, and I’m not sure we’re better off for it. I guess it beats the castle-building days of yore.
maxkwallace 6y ago
LEED sucks. This has been known for a long time. But instead of bashing it, we should be asking: is there an alternative? If not, how could we create one?
- nerdponx 6y ago
  The article authors aren't bashing it: > Trade-offs across LEED attributes account for the absence of energy savings on average. If energy efficiency is the primary policy goal, LEED certification may not be the most effective means to reach that goal.
- evanlivingston 6y ago
  Passivhaus
- specialist 6y ago
  The Correct Answer™ is performance standards, which are incrementally improved over time. How California became far more energy-efficient than the rest of the country https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/31/18646906/climate-change-california-energy-efficiency https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/31/1864690...
rdtwo 6y ago
Leed gold is all about gaming metrics by not making enough bathrooms and then building them on after the certification
hristov 6y ago
It is comforting to see this discussion continues the great HN tradition of having a lively and wide-ranging debate about a complex scientific article or paper without ever bothering to read the article and paper. This is a rather complex paper, so I perused it for about five minutes. As such I consider my self a one eyed man among a hoard of shouting extremely opinionated blind people, so you should all listen to me carefully and follow me as your leader. And now that I have your attention I shall carefully summarize the paper so none of you have to undergo the indignity of perusing it for five minutes. 1. Leeds is not solely for energy efficiency but also for solving other environmental problems such as water use. 2. In buildings where the energy efficiency was the main problem to be solved, the leeds overhaul was actually effective at improving energy efficiency. 3. In buildings where water use was the main problem to be solved, the leeds process was also successful in reducing water use, but actually increased energy use. This is because the water reduction process invariably included complex electrical systems with a lot of sensors and control circuitry that ate up extra power. 4. Considering points 2. and 3. above when you add all the buildings up as a whole, on average energy use did not decrease after a leeds overhaul and certification. My thinking here is that this does not mean LEEDS is a failure. The study shows that there was improvement in every building that underwent the certification, it is just that for some buildings energy wasn't the highest priority. In many parts of the US water use is much more important than energy efficiency. So I am sure for many parts in the US it is a very good trade off to increase energy use for lower water use. (This would certainly be true for the entire southwest, at least). But there is still a lot of room for improvement. The water preservation systems can themselves be made more energy efficient. At first glance, these systems do not do something that requires a lot of energy -- all they do is communication, sensing and opening or closing small water valves. Generally speaking there is a lot to be desired of analog circuit design. Now that we are surrounded by always on always connected electrical devices, this is something we as a nation should start paying attention to. There are a lot of always on circuits that use 10 or 100 times the power they should, just because someone wanted so save 50c on parts or they simply did not how to properly design the thing.
- ggm 6y ago
  Here, have my upvote. For karma points, please keep doing this. Great summary.
stakkur 6y ago
TL;DR: We have two primary findings. First, our estimates show no effect of LEED certification on average energy consumption measured in kBTUs/ft2. Second, the absence ofan effect seems to be driven by trade-offs across LEED attributes. Buildings with higherenergy scores have greater energy efficiency post-certification. Some other attributes, no-tably higher water scores, decrease energy efficiency post-certification. These trade-offs across LEED attributes seems to account for the absence of energy savings on average.
twothamendment 6y ago
I haven't built LEED, but how we build can for sure save energy. After building 3 homes in the USA, some basic updates to building codes would likely do more good than LEED will ever do. It is so hard to convince people that the codes are the minimum. Who wants a product built to the minimum standard? Why doesn't the "market" demand it? Because people want cheap houses and the builder doesn't have to live in it or pay the utility bill. Buyers don't often ask for or compare bills on similar homes, so there is no point to upgrading insulation or HVAC unless you plan to stay in the home. My oh-so-official-and-comprehensive-data: One home I built was very typical for the neighborhood, except insulation and a slightly better HVAC system, nothing exotic. When the power was out and everyone was complaining that their houses were 40 degrees, we were still at 60. Our bills were sometimes half what our neighbors were. What did it take? About $4,000 on a $250,000 build (in 2007). The new owners of the home didn't know what they were getting b/c nobody asks or cares. We keep in touch and they've found the same when comparing to the neighborhood. If you are wondering, no the house didn't sell for more because it saves energy and money - that isn't on a real estate comp. If we would just tweak the building codes just a tiny bit and it would make a huge difference.

83 points by throw0101a 6y ago

The biggest issue I see is that LEEDs allow for a building that looks like a big heat exchanger, and has zero heat insulation to certify for high power efficiency in a cold climate. Canada, and Toronto area had tons of LEEDs certed luxury condos being heated like no tomorrow in Winter. Things are even worse in Vancouver, but that's offset by milder weather. The opposite picture is there in hot climates. Building with exposed balcony slabs, and curtainwalls in +40C° climates, guzzling electricity for aircons. I think the West needs to look up more for economical building designs from nations living in extremes. Gulf countries learned how to build economically in +50C° Nordic ones for -30C° in Winter None of them spend as much as US, and Western Europe on heating, or cooling despite way more severe climates. Building operation is 40% of US total energy bill if we believe CTBUH https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-Energy-Consumption-by-Sector-Source-Architecture-2030-2013-Redrawn-by-CTBUH_fig3_321977968 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/US-Energy-Consumption-by... . And 40% of building energy bill in US is space heating https://www.epa.gov/rhc/rhc-multi-unit-housing https://www.epa.gov/rhc/rhc-multi-unit-housing All those vanities like PV panels, solar water heaters, rainwater collection, turbines, etc — all totally pale in comparison to just proper thermal design of a building, and slashing its heating bill.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
duxup 6y ago
I don't know much about LEEDs and maybe that should be updated, but I live in a cold climate and I see a lot of focus on insulation and insulation efficiency, both in new construction and updating old buildings. This idea that there's not a focus on insulation in the west seems kinda strange to me.
- nraynaud 6y ago
  Same in France, I'm buying a condo and looking into all this for the renovation, and everybody is screaming "insulation by the outside".
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    If you want to make sure things are built properly, look into the topic of "building science": * https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-perfect-wall https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-t... Matt Risinger, a general contractor in Austin, Texas, has a lot of good videos on the topics: * https://www.youtube.com/c/MattRisinger/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/MattRisinger/videos Even if you can't use the same techniques that he does (and pay for some of the premium products), it may be possible to still use some of the general theory / principles.
    - CalRobert 6y ago
      Risinger makes great videos. Doing a 150sqm extension now and plan to apply perfect wall concepts.
    - evanlivingston 6y ago
      Matt's videos are worth watching, but it's important to note most his videos are motivated by his sponsorships and it's often hard to parse out when he's shilling and when he's not. Betters resources with real science can be found at * https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/ https://www.energyvanguard.com/blog/ * https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/ https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/
      - throw0101a 6y ago
        Just because he's sponsored does not necessarily mean he's wrong: he's been beating this drum for many years before the sponsorships came. Sort by date and check out the potato quality videos from long ago, and you'll see the same principles being talked about. Though certainly, if you're going to do a build yourself, research any specific products to see if they meet your needs, functionally and monetarily. * He tends to build on the higher end of things, and has clients that are willing to pay. Of course he's currently building his own new home, and doing things the way he's talked about. * He's in a warm-humid climate (US Climate Zone 2). Plenty of things I wouldn't do exactly the same since I'm in Canada. But Joe Lstiburek was born and raised in Canada, and lives in the north-east, and he's saying many of the same things when it comes to building science: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek
etimberg 6y ago
I live in an apartment in Toronto that is LEED certified. To be honest, it's not that great but for different reasons than you outlines. The insulation is too good and so the building is too warm all year round. My unit can easily be > 24C without any heating running even in winter.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- baybal2 6y ago
  Yep, but probably it has nothing to do with LEEDs, but just Canadian own construction experience that is not even code mandated. LEEDs for example allows for buildings with completely catastrophical thermal design to get certified: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Aqua_Tower_thermal_imaging.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Aqua_Tow... (Chicago)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- julianlam 6y ago
  Are you sure it's because of the insulation? Many condos are sweltering in the middle spring (even with heat off) because residents living on floors below yours crank the heat and it all rises. When I lived in a condo (Bloor/Yonge), the situation was so bad (12th floor) that if it hit 12°C outside, I needed to turn on the A/C, which is awful from an environmental POV.
  - reedjosh 6y ago
    This and most modern buildings are heated and cooled via a central heating/cooling system which distributes the hot/cold via water. So, it may be even though you don't have the heat 'on' there is still hot water running through your apartment's heating system.
    - baybal2 6y ago
      Yep, and this is why central control, along with temperature sensors make a giant lot of sense to prevent such situation. A simple thermostat is not enough, and even a PID one will not do the job if external thermal influx is not in the model. I once worked on a HVAC controller for hotels in Singapore, and other commercial venues which helped the hotel operator to save on HVAC by packing visitors more closely depending on occupancy. This avoid paradoxical situations of it being chilling cold in some suites with zero aircon use when it is +30 outside because of an unlucky combination of HVAC settings in neighbouring suites.
lupire 6y ago
Problem is once someone built a cheap building 30 years ago, it's not worth $200K to tear it down and rebuild for thermal efficiency. And new build buyers want homes that look "normal" or "classic", not experimental (even if experimental is based on proved designs elsewhere.)
- baybal2 6y ago
  From my experience on short stints in Dubai, and Qatar, single house residentials can well be both. Lots of villas there built with foam concrete exterior walls, in which you are living like in a thermos, and which still look rather conventional. Their highrises are probably a bit more avant-garde than American ones, but nevertheless they sell like cookies.
wcunning 6y ago
Joseph Lstiburek talked about this(1) in talks going back to the early 2010s. He bitched about bike racks being worth a LEED point whereas good insulation wasn't really... (1)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA
- mjevans 6y ago
  Good insulation and isolation can also help substantially with privacy and tranquility. Good airflow can help human health and reducing externalizes that aren't well measured by a single building's certification.
908B64B197 6y ago
> Canada, and Toronto area had tons of LEEDs certed luxury condos being heated like no tomorrow in Winter. Things are even worse in Vancouver, but that's offset by milder weather. That's called Green Washing. Now, Snow Washing is the process in which dirty money is brought into Canada to purchase said assets.

arbitrage 6y ago

a building i used to work in got retrofitted to be leads certified. it got a new front door vestibule. the doors don't hang right, it's obstructive for people with different mobility needs. it leeks air like a tattered balloon. none of the glaring issues in the basement were fixed. it got a leed certification. nobody really cares, it's just all a sham. no real point to leeds certs other than polishing a turd.

wussboy 6y ago
“I found a flaw in a LEED certified building, I ignored any other possible beneficial knock on effects of that flaw or other enhancements. Therefore LEED has no beneficial effect, either here or anywhere else.”
- jessaustin 6y ago
  The point of certifications is that they make particular promises. If those promises are obviously broken, why bother? This is like a priest asking, "so what if God doesn't actually exist?"

andrewla 6y ago

It is interesting that this is surfacing just as another similar scam is making the rounds[1], Well [2]. An older product, apparently, that has now been rebranded and updated to take advantage of fears around COVID. They purport to be a certifications company, like LEED, that can evaluate a business or building and determine if it meets certain arbitrary standards around being "safe" in the health sense. If they can get an insurance company to give a break on liability insurance based on the certification, then they're ready to make bank off of companies looking to attract customers in the wake of COVID. [1] https://twitter.com/WELLcertified/status/1353757841459449857 https://twitter.com/WELLcertified/status/1353757841459449857 [1] https://wellhealthsafety.com/ https://wellhealthsafety.com/

throw0101a 6y ago

RESNET's Certified Home Energy Rating System may be a better system, though I don't think it applies to commercial buildings: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_energy_rating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_energy_rating

Bjartr 6y ago
Correct, the R stands for Residential.

orzig 6y ago

Summary: Operational energy efficiency is one of several goals of LEED, and in practice it's not high priority enough to be (statistically significantly) improved, in the sample of buildings they have data on, in the time period they took the data.

ChrisMarshallNY 6y ago

The usual caveat: Any headline that ends with a question mark should be answered with "No"; which is pretty much exactly what the summary says: > If energy efficiency is the primary policy goal, LEED certification may not be the most effective means to reach that goal.

ensignavenger 6y ago

The article points out that LEED certification is about more than just energy efficiency, and a building can obtain LEED certification without being energy efficient by focusing on other LEED areas.

fatnoah 6y ago
I worked in a LEED gold building. One summer weekend, I stopped by the office to pick something up and noticed that the AC was still fully operational and keeping the building cool, despite there being no one in the building.

alricb 6y ago

But then we already knew that. https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-007-prioritizing-green-it-s-the-energy-stupid https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-007-p...

bjt2n3904 6y ago

The frustration I have with environmentalism is this. There's this enthusiasm for environmentalism that seems to be blind to outcome. A new standard for buildings, cars, circuit boards -- whatever -- is met with accolades. However, the opponents of such a standard clearly want the planet to die and suffer. It's time to listen to science! Then a decade later, the program is assessed, and found to be ineffective, and the same people who were so enthusiastic shake their heads as if they've always known there would be such problems. Fun story! Bureaucracy doesn't solve problems, it creates them!

blacktriangle 6y ago
"There's this enthusiasm for environmentalism that seems to be blind to outcome." I am completely stealing this line, because it explains the modern environmental movement perfectly. I've argued with so many people about the Paris Accords and how they are a terrible idea. Why? Because they heap regulation on the West while sending money to China and India who have no obligation to improve their environmental policy. This will result in even more manufacturing leaving the semi-regulated West and moving to totally unregulated China which will increase net pollution, and that's before you factor in transit pollution. Nobody can explain to me why this is wrong and that Paris Accords are actually terrible for the global environment, but its still awful the US wouldn't sign them because "we have to do something!"
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > Because they heap regulation on the West while sending money to China and India who have no obligation to improve their environmental policy. Both China and India are signatories of the Paris Accords. They are aiming to meet their targets. The US, at least for the four previous years, wasn't even in the Accords and not trying to do much in that time. There are no regulations in the Accords, just a goal with regards to carbon emissions. If you want minimal regulations to achieve that, either introduce a cap-and-trade system (like Bush 41 did for acid rain), or introduce price signalling via carbon pricing, as recommended from four former Federal Reserve chairs (including Greenspan): * https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org/news/2019/1/17/former-federal-reserve-chairs-and-nobel-economists-solidify-support-for-a-price-on-carbon https://www.carbonpricingleadership.org/news/2019/1/17/forme... > Nobody can explain to me why this is wrong and that Paris Accords are actually terrible for the global environment, but its still awful the US wouldn't sign them because "we have to do something!" Perhaps no one can explain why it's wrong because it is not wrong? The Paris Accords are not about "the global environment", they are specifically about one thing: carbon emission. Specifically reducing them by a certain amount. Why do you think reducing them is bad?

throw0101a 6y ago

The focus of buildings should be: 1. Keeping dry and bulk water out/away. 2. Being as air tight as possible.† 3. Controlling vapour. 4. Being well-insulated. * https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-the-perfect-wall https://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-001-t... † Air is exchanged in a controlled fashioned: filtered for pollen and other things, and then tempered with an HRV/ERV. Buildings do not need to 'breathe': * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIcrXut_EFA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIcrXut_EFA

abakker 6y ago
Certain building materials need to breath. Buildings built with green wood which has more moisture than ambient, and buildings with cast concrete will shed water vapor for some time. If this can be managed, it is fine. Additionally, through all insulation there is an internal temperature gradient. If the there are discontinuities it is possible to get condensation when the temperature / dew point align just wrong. This can happen in in humid climates with inadequate insulation - especially fiberglass where moisture can easily penetrate the fiberglass to reach the colder outside walls. I agree, though. Air tightness and continuous insulation coupled with well-engineered ventilation is best.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > Certain building materials need to breath. As explained in the linked video, they actually need to dry. This does not need to happen to the outside environment. IMHO, using the two terms (dry/breathe) interchangeably is causing confusion, as each has certain connotations in many people's minds. The person in that video lives in Austin, Texas, and when he builds or renovates structures he has a stand-alone, whole-house dehumidifier designed into the HVAC system (the client can of course reject the suggestion): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKJnP_6uxcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKJnP_6uxcg > If the there are discontinuities it is possible to get condensation when the temperature / dew point align just wrong. Which, as explained in the first link (BSI-001), is why you want external insulation (if possible); some portion of the insulation being continuous is code in many places nowadays. That way the condensation occurs on the outside of the water/vapour control layer. Joe Lstiburek: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA&t=25m26s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkfAcWpOYAA&t=25m26s This is harder to do with renovations, but is code in most places. In Ontario, Canada the code (IIRC) also specifics what minimum portion of the insulation that should be on the 'outside' of the vapour control layer: the colder the region the more has to be external, so that condensation happens on the outside of the structure. Having it 100% external is ideal, but would cause trade-offs in other aspects of the building, which may not be desirable. An example of such a structure: * During construction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8i-93ABo3I * Finished: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTwq-qUnr9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTwq-qUnr9I Sadly, last time I checked, there was still no mandatory air tightness test for new builds in Ontario.

macinjosh 6y ago

I once lived in a LEED certified apartment complex. Unfortunately, I do not recall the specifics of their certification. My hot water would never get hot enough. I realized the hot water heater had a device on it to limit how often heating occurred. I promptly disabled it and had normal hot water again. One of the other "green" aspects of the complex was that it only had compact car parking. However, the area I live in is rural/suburban and a very large portion of renters here work in the shale oil fields of the area. These workers drive trucks. Big trucks. The parking lot was always cramped mess. I often pondered the irony there and also how much more carbon was emitted by the body shops fixing all the dented doors.

dashundchen 6y ago
That may not have been for LEED, many areas in the US have anti-scalding regulations for buildings or landlords/operators - typically not to exceed 120F at the tap. May have been set low depending on how many taps, distance between the different taps etc.
- macinjosh 6y ago
  Interesting. The water never got warmer than about 100-105 with the device on. Perhaps it was defective.
ceejayoz 6y ago
> My hot water would never get hot enough. I realized the hot water heater had a device on it to limit how often heating occurred. My tankless water heater has a temperature limit (120 Fahrenheit), but it's to prevent children from getting scalded.
ishjoh 6y ago
> One of the other "green" aspects of the complex was that it only had compact car parking. I think this is one of the things that as I get older gets more and more grating. This 'nudge' is supposed to encourage you to use and buy a smaller car, but instead of you as an individual selecting the car most suited for your needs they've decided that only compact cars should be driven. So now if you have a big family (which in today's age is only 3 kids), or you need your vehicle for work (hi work trucks), or a host of other reasons to have a bigger vehicle, they've intentionally made your life just a little bit worse, and they've done it intentionally.

omosubi 6y ago

LEED is a joke. My dad used to manage a large office building in chicago and the certification was done by the building management itself. The guy collecting the data asked all the tenants for the info and threw out all the reports that made the building look bad. They got leed certification. I'm also for more efficient use of resources but I'm skeptical LEED actually improves this. Also, all those curtain walled buildings are hideous and destroy the built environment.

mistrial9 6y ago

I did a small project for one of the founders of the LEED standard. I am in favor of the project and lacking details right this minute so I won't argue its merits BUT I can say that ... building specs are super useful, at the right time. Changes to a building can be very difficult, time-consuming and expensive, amidst a business model in West that emphasizes short-term money flow constantly. It is hugely difficult to get building owners and their insurance companies, to agree to anything. So this fellow who happens to strongly identify with Stanford University, was a basket case of nerves and ego, with expensive office suite and lots of helpers who appear nervous. I myself laid out a technical argument for a proposed software design, and less than ten minutes in to it, it was clear that the guy was not listening, and then interrupted me to start basically having a fit about different project pressures. My impression after the whole, small project was over was that this is a person who lives in a world of wealth and status, and has to interact with others like that, who do not get along, or are constantly "jousting" .. I believe this fellow means well in the largest ways, but really the feeling overall was more like some kind of Arab Sheik than tech business.. I want LEED and things like it to succeed. I think this is a terribly hard thing to get going in reality. I feel this guy had too much pressure and was sort of losing it in a way ..

peytn 6y ago
Normal people worry about having a good job and saving for retirement. People in that world worry about things like UN Sustainable Development Goals. It’s a weird status thing they do, and I’m not sure we’re better off for it. I guess it beats the castle-building days of yore.

maxkwallace 6y ago

LEED sucks. This has been known for a long time. But instead of bashing it, we should be asking: is there an alternative? If not, how could we create one?

nerdponx 6y ago
The article authors aren't bashing it: > Trade-offs across LEED attributes account for the absence of energy savings on average. If energy efficiency is the primary policy goal, LEED certification may not be the most effective means to reach that goal.
evanlivingston 6y ago
Passivhaus
specialist 6y ago
The Correct Answer™ is performance standards, which are incrementally improved over time. How California became far more energy-efficient than the rest of the country https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/31/18646906/climate-change-california-energy-efficiency https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/5/31/1864690...

rdtwo 6y ago

Leed gold is all about gaming metrics by not making enough bathrooms and then building them on after the certification

hristov 6y ago

It is comforting to see this discussion continues the great HN tradition of having a lively and wide-ranging debate about a complex scientific article or paper without ever bothering to read the article and paper. This is a rather complex paper, so I perused it for about five minutes. As such I consider my self a one eyed man among a hoard of shouting extremely opinionated blind people, so you should all listen to me carefully and follow me as your leader. And now that I have your attention I shall carefully summarize the paper so none of you have to undergo the indignity of perusing it for five minutes. 1. Leeds is not solely for energy efficiency but also for solving other environmental problems such as water use. 2. In buildings where the energy efficiency was the main problem to be solved, the leeds overhaul was actually effective at improving energy efficiency. 3. In buildings where water use was the main problem to be solved, the leeds process was also successful in reducing water use, but actually increased energy use. This is because the water reduction process invariably included complex electrical systems with a lot of sensors and control circuitry that ate up extra power. 4. Considering points 2. and 3. above when you add all the buildings up as a whole, on average energy use did not decrease after a leeds overhaul and certification. My thinking here is that this does not mean LEEDS is a failure. The study shows that there was improvement in every building that underwent the certification, it is just that for some buildings energy wasn't the highest priority. In many parts of the US water use is much more important than energy efficiency. So I am sure for many parts in the US it is a very good trade off to increase energy use for lower water use. (This would certainly be true for the entire southwest, at least). But there is still a lot of room for improvement. The water preservation systems can themselves be made more energy efficient. At first glance, these systems do not do something that requires a lot of energy -- all they do is communication, sensing and opening or closing small water valves. Generally speaking there is a lot to be desired of analog circuit design. Now that we are surrounded by always on always connected electrical devices, this is something we as a nation should start paying attention to. There are a lot of always on circuits that use 10 or 100 times the power they should, just because someone wanted so save 50c on parts or they simply did not how to properly design the thing.

ggm 6y ago
Here, have my upvote. For karma points, please keep doing this. Great summary.

stakkur 6y ago

TL;DR: We have two primary findings. First, our estimates show no effect of LEED certification on average energy consumption measured in kBTUs/ft2. Second, the absence ofan effect seems to be driven by trade-offs across LEED attributes. Buildings with higherenergy scores have greater energy efficiency post-certification. Some other attributes, no-tably higher water scores, decrease energy efficiency post-certification. These trade-offs across LEED attributes seems to account for the absence of energy savings on average.

twothamendment 6y ago

I haven't built LEED, but how we build can for sure save energy. After building 3 homes in the USA, some basic updates to building codes would likely do more good than LEED will ever do. It is so hard to convince people that the codes are the minimum. Who wants a product built to the minimum standard? Why doesn't the "market" demand it? Because people want cheap houses and the builder doesn't have to live in it or pay the utility bill. Buyers don't often ask for or compare bills on similar homes, so there is no point to upgrading insulation or HVAC unless you plan to stay in the home. My oh-so-official-and-comprehensive-data: One home I built was very typical for the neighborhood, except insulation and a slightly better HVAC system, nothing exotic. When the power was out and everyone was complaining that their houses were 40 degrees, we were still at 60. Our bills were sometimes half what our neighbors were. What did it take? About $4,000 on a $250,000 build (in 2007). The new owners of the home didn't know what they were getting b/c nobody asks or cares. We keep in touch and they've found the same when comparing to the neighborhood. If you are wondering, no the house didn't sell for more because it saves energy and money - that isn't on a real estate comp. If we would just tweak the building codes just a tiny bit and it would make a huge difference.