@[email protected]M to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and [email protected]English • 4 months ago
@[email protected]M to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and [email protected]English • 4 months ago
Archived copies of the article:
The popularity of things like LEED seems to indicate that a lot are willing.
I’d say the majority of architects are more than willing but there are contrarians. LEED does provide an avenue for Architects to get involved but its not without his issues LEED is an interesting program that has its issues. For example there are a lot of credit swap opportunities in LEED that allow u to bypass some of the other requirements that would be more impactful. The core tennents of what LEED is trying to achieve is great, it just doesn’t seem to be rather effective where it counts, production builders that are supplying the majority of housing. These developers stray away from LEED certification due to the extra cost, it takes alot of extra documentation to go for LEED. Documentation that would not be neccissary even if you would choose to build a building that is equal or better than a LEED building. I view the program similarly to Target turning their logo rainbow, low investment for big businesses looking to posture.
The place I see LEED having a real impact is on commercial and industrial buildings. The people who are going to use the building there have a real financial incentive towards efficiency, the power to actually ask for it, and LEED is an easy way for them to specify it.
I agree, it is a good way to get the owners asking for levels of environmentalism that might be out of their expertise, I just wish it had more teeth.
Do they view LEED as something political? Or do they view LEED as something clients want? I think it’s the latter