Technology
New Rating Systems for Green Houses Draw Both Interest and
Conflicts
(archrecord.construction.com - 04/21/05)
By Ted
Smalley Bowen
 |
 |
| The
Cannon Beach Cottage in Oregon, designed by architect
Nathan Good, was given a “green project of the year”
award by NAHB. (Photography: Courtesy Nathan Good) |
New rating systems for green homes have
underscored the steady buzz about green building within the
design and construction community, as well as the desire of
industry groups to exert more influence on how green building
is defined. In January 2005, the National Association of Home
Builders (NAHB) launched its Model Green Home Building Guidelines,
a template for voluntary, self-administered rating systems.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC)
long-awaited LEED for Homes specification is slated for pilot
testing in mid-2005.
The two systems have been developed
with different markets in mind. NAHB’s guidelines are
geared toward mainstream builders. The Green Building Initiative,
a nonprofit organization formed by the Wood Promotion Network
and other industry groups with ties to residential construction,
will work with local builders’ associations to adapt
these guidelines to local markets, according to participants.
In contrast, LEED for Homes is a national rating system intended
for designers, like the other LEED rating systems. Officials
predict the latter will be used mostly for high-end residential
construction as well as affordable multifamily housing, unlike
the mainstream builders targeted by NAHB. Nevertheless, this
group’s new guidelines have been perceived by many as
a preemptive response to the more stringent LEED system.
|
The NAHB guidelines assign points to
projects for energy efficiency, recycling, water conservation,
indoor air quality, reducing the use of pesticides and other
household chemicals, and limiting high-maintenance lawns.
It also encourages a holistic approach to designing green
homes—one that emphasizes environmental issues from the
start; considers the interdependencies of building systems;
and stresses durable, low-maintenance materials. Green building
“is growing exponentially, and NAHB didn’t want
to be caught in the undertow,” says John Loyer, construction
codes and standards specialist for NAHB. “We anticipate
some degree of legislation and code enforcement, and we wanted
to offer not a standard, but a voluntary guideline that could
be used by builders who want to green their construction practices.”
In March, the group sponsored its first green building conference
in Atlanta and gave awards to several projects (all of which
preceded the release of the guidelines).
The NAHB template was drawn up with
input from a committee of industry representatives, builders,
architects, and government and environmental groups. For the
most part, local builders’ associations will handle certification,
says Loyer. The template’s point system and gold, silver,
and bronze awards bear passing resemblance to LEED.
|
 |
| Perkins
Eastman Architects completed a green remodeling of a convent
in Pittsburgh. (Photography: © Denmarsh Photography) |
According to a preliminary LEED for
Homes checklist, baseline requirements include certification
under the Department of Energy’s Energy Star program,
a soil and erosion control plan for construction sites, a
basic water-management plan, third-party verified room air
flow rates, and standards for the building envelope and indoor
environment. It also prohibits the use of tropical hardwoods;
sets limits for landfilling of construction wastes; and requires
a materials durability plan, while giving a significant incentive
for location within developments that meet the LEED for Neighborhood
Developments standards, due out later this year. The latter,
a collaborative effort between the USGBC, the Congress for
the New Urbanism, and the Natural Resources Defense Council,
combines green-building and smart-growth principles.
The NAHB and USGBC developed their ratings
independently, although there was communication between the
organizations, according to officials. Yet, while acknowledging
the USGBC’s stated goal of greening the construction
industry, Loyer says LEED for Homes “is not something
we’ll be recommending to our members.”
The primary difference between the LEED
for Homes specification and the NAHB guidelines is the national
scope of the former, according to LEED for Homes program director
Jim Hackler. “There are more than 40 green-building organizations
in the U.S.,” he says. “There’s interest in
LEED from government agencies and production home builders.
They’re looking for national consistency.” While
the distribution of LEED for Homes might be decentralized
due to the nature of home construction, the quality control,
testing, and rating will remain consistent, according to Hackler.
One criticism of the standard, that it fails to consider regional
differences in climate, materials, and other variables, may
prompt changes in later versions of the standard, he adds.
Who should define green?
|
 |
|
EDG Architects involved future residents in the design
of their building, the Eastern Village Cohousing Condominiums
in Silver Spring, Maryland. (Photography: © Tom Kochel) |
Over the past five years, LEED has
taken root at the federal, state, and local levels, mostly through
design standards for public projects, and it shows signs of
migrating to building codes as well. But in recent months, the
NAHB and an industry consortium, the North American Coalition
on Green Building, have been critical of the USGBC’s standards-
setting processes, opposing legislative and regulatory enforcement
of sustainability measures. The coalition was established in
2003 by General Electric and trade groups representing manufacturers,
forestry and wood-products companies, chemical companies, vinyl
producers, and others dissatisfied with USGBC, which doesn’t
extend membership to trade groups. The coalition contends that
this policy limits the influence of individual companies (though
some coalition member companies are also USGBC members) and
undercuts their claims of a consensus-based process, says Jerry
Schwartz, the group’s cochair. Schwartz, however, did credit
USGBC’s recent decision to use life-cycle analysis when
hashing out standards. “It’s a step in the right direction.
They did a great job of reaching out to trade groups,”
he says.
USGBC president and C.E.O. Rick Fedrizzi
counters, “We feel our broad-based membership has done
an extraordinary job of achieving a consensus-based platform
for action. The only way everyone can profit is through open
and vigorous dialogue, but we also know we must not let dialogue
substitute for progress.”
|
