LEED is a scam.  Like all things the government gets involved in its overly complicated and prone to abuse.   

@robbmc Why would you say that the most established green building rating system is a scam? If countries over America, Europe, Asia, and Africa all use LEED for green building, it must have some legitimacy to it, right? Please. If you're going to post comments like that back it up with information or evidence, otherwise keep your unwanted opinions to yourself.

 

@ambalika dalvi, to my knowledge, the study material has changed quite a bit for V4, since they added new building types (there are 21 now), they added Location and Transportation as a new credit category and they shifted around credits between categories. USGBC announced that they'll release study material in the fall. I've been looking at taking the GA exam myself, and I wouldn't suggest taking the V4 exam with the 2009 study guide, the differences are too much.

After you do a few LEED projects you'll understand why it's a colossal waste of time and funds.

Over the past 3-4 years owners have really wised up. That's when the term "designed to LEED specifications" started popping up on marketing material.

Amazingly enough, you still see job posting asking for LEED experience. Maybe they just want to know if you have the patience to navigate a corrupt bureaucratic monopoly.

If you want to pass the test and add something to your name more power to you.

LITS4FormZ Why is LEED a waste of time? Can you provide details on your experience that led you to conclude this?Otherwise,  I feel like you're just frustrated and want to put the blame on some third party. There's a reason there are still job postings for LEED experience. Green building will soon become the norm in architecture. Sustainability and awareness for the natural environment should be included from the beginning of the design process. 

The theory behind LEED is a good idea.  I studied it (or at least the basis behind it) for a couple of years in school.  When I got to the actual application of the LEED system its terrible, its time consuming and expensive.  The actual leed registration is a cost that has no value other than PR or because the government at what ever level is requiring it.  To clarify green building is smart but everyone seems to be able to spin their product to seem green the real skill is knowing enough to see through the BS.What seems to be confused is to become leed certified you have to know how to navigate their crazy system and add up points based on all kinds of things not be a green building expert.  If your savy you can just about build a normal building and by changing out a few products get leed certified.  I haven't worked on a LEED project beyond the initial client asking about it.  When informed it will cost thousands in additional consultant fees as well as the actual cost of the certification they always (in my experience)  decide they aren't interested that much.  They do get to put a plaque on the building though.

Felix I would guess your either a student or someone who's really excited about having LEEP AP after your name.   

good one Robbmc... I've done too many LEED projects to give it any respect. It's just a shopping-list developers and politicians manipulate to make themselves look good.

Felix, I trust you're new at this.... or exceptionally easy to impress.

Robbmc and Non Sequitur, I can agree that the LEED system has its flaws (basically its point system seems to lend itself to just become all about getting points), and it does seem that certification is a really expensive process, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt there. But isn't there some return of investment  in the long run? An example is choosing more energy efficient lighting - LEDs - is more expensive, but the savings you make in electricity consumption eventually cover the extra cost.  Also, V4 seems a lot more streamlined with the certification process. The LEED system can be improved, and some of that's been seen in the newer version, but instead of complaining about it, why can't one choose to be a part of the solution and fix its shortcomings?

Felix, until LEED changes it's accreditation methods it will remain another shade of green-washing. If, for example, a project was looking for accreditation, then it should publicly publish it's energy consumption numbers year after year in order to maintain it's shiny plaque. I have no care for LEED until it starts renewing projects year after year. There have been numerous studies over the last 5-6 years showing that most LEED buildings consume higher amounts of energy than their non-certified equals.

Your point on the LED is moot since energy generation varies greatly across all states and moreover, buying LEDs to offset the points you're loosing by not building showers & bike rooms is one of the problems that irks anyone who takes the time to understand "sustainability" and marketing.

I've worked on projects where we placed sun-shades on the north facade in order to claim we were managing the sun... or something like that. I (we) can't be part of the solution unless you actually try and design sustainable(ish) buildings outside of the confines of LEED... you just don't get the gold star and politicians cannot use your project to boost their ratings.

The example you site about cost over the lifetime of a product is a HARD sale, it seems logical but I've tried and most people just don't buy it.  Government rightfully takes this into account and their use of these products will bring the price down over time.  Building regulations are starting to take effect as well that requires a certain level of sustainable practices.  These are the upside of government involvement and the LEED system.  Downside is EVERYTHING is green now and you can get LEED points for everything and every manufacturer beats the drum.   Typically there is a trade off in cost or durability when dealing with truly green products either it costs more or its not as good.  If it was cheaper and more durable they would have done it that way from the start.   Its easy to say this green flooring is just as good an only cost 50 cents more a square foot, but when you have 100,000 sqft thats 50,000$. I assure you when the project pops budget the fancy green materials are the first thing on the cutting room floor.

  

Felix, I'm afraid you missed the entire point of my last post.

"Over the past 3-4 years owners have really wised up. That's when the term "designed to LEED specifications" started popping up on marketing material."

LEED/Green design has its merits. It's a means to get sustainability into the design conversation early and often. Several of our clients used to mandate that their projects meet a certain LEED level. They would also make meeting that level part of our final payment. Imagine your final payment that typically includes profit/bonuses/etc for the team based on a frustratingly arbitrary bureaucracy. Anyways, our clients also realized that they were paying at a minimum $100,000 for paper work and then they had to buy the plaque on top of it. Then they realized no one gave a shit about the plaque in the end and they could say that they designed their building to meet LEED Gold and people would still be "impressed." Hence the term, designed to LEED [insert level]. 

LEED, like NCARB, answers to no one. Thus they tend to act with impunity which makes dealing with them a serious pain. It's obvious that you're new to this and we all were at one time. In school, professors tend to green wash everything. In the real world when dollars/euros/yuan are real, spending +$100,000 for a plaque is not part of the equation.