Why should we do that? It's basic message board courtesy for a newbie (and anyone else who hasn't been around a while), before making a post, to search the boards for a thread that's already answered his or her question. Are you that lazy?

Anyway... Who are we to say? Ten years from now, civilization as we know it may not exist. If such was the case, a LEED building might mean that you don't need to render the fat from the human remains you just cannabalized in order to power the fancy lights on the roof that you use to attract unwitting victims, and instead use some solar panels and batteries.

As a 'preservationist,' you might like to know that LEED-EB is something that you might want to focus on. It's a rating system that looks at developing LEED certification for existing buildings.

Regardless of anything else though, you have to understand that LEED is nothing more than a rating system. A scored list of criteria that defines a building to either meet or not meet a particular but arbitrary level of certification. It is as significant or as worthless as the next list. What are you going to use it for?

i get angry when people speak of pursuing LEED as a market sector direction only. real bull shit.

sustainablily is a great idea and it is my passion. when you think of some of the LEED credits such as 'specifying low voc coating to avoid sick building syndrome' the default as architects that infact the standard of care is that we are specifying sick building materials....doesnt make sense. should we not be designing buildings with good air quality as a base design?

the best architecture always follows your passions. if low energy, sustainable lifestyles are you passion, go for it--pursue it in your architecture to the highest level. no owner wants to talk about check list and such. although i am LEED accredidated i have very low regard for the direction USGBC has gone as i think its no more than a manufactures organization to get your product green labled when in fact it may not have anything really green about it.

you can certianly do a LEED certified building without purseing certification. but it will still cost an owner more in fees / equipment specifically engineering and controls, balancing etc. the certification cost that are a throw away is comparing it to a model or standard building to confirm that yours is more efficient.

i have seen estimates in the range of 5-15% more cost to a building for LEED and generally certification cost to 1%. i went to a lecture once with the GSA design excellence courthouse guro [fiener, now with SOM] who stated that for GSA, it was no additional cost [as the buildings were going ASHREA 90.1 anyway which is the core of LEED]

I think it's a good idea and something that can benefit you. I've got the book and read some, good stuff that we all should know anyway.

I do believe it's a great marketing tool and should not be overlooked because of that. It's like [a client] buying a certified BMW. Sure, it's the same beemer that the guy down the street has (for a little less), but you KNOW it's been checked out and is all good. Piece of mind, and the ability to tell people about that with confidence, is worth a lot to your reputation and to the client's, not to mention prospective clients/tenants.

Ultimiately, though, it is one tiny step towards doing something good for the built environment. While I certainly will admit I am no tree hugger, I do love good environmental approaches, solar power (passive/active), etc., and look forward to learning more and becoming LEED certified.

It's kinda a win/win, with the exception of a few $$, but those will be made up with the marketability of you and your client's building. It's nice when good business sense makes for a better product and I hope this trend continues to become standard practice.

after working for a small firm where leed principles were generally applied out of passion, and client request (but could not really afford the actual certification/commissioning/registering to become leed certified) its an odd but interesting comparison to see how larger firms work with it. i work for a studio now that does a lot of higher ed projects, campus buildings, etc. many college campuses are trying to become leed to some degree, by a certain date . . . university of california is the first, and there is much interest from all of our present clients to be involved. it is a little trendy (in the best way) so of course theres competing client groups (my school/library/corporate headquarters/yoga studio is better than yours) and in that sense its a marketing thing. a lot of places (again, im in the institutional/public/educational genere here) use it as a fundraising angle. which seems to be more sucessful that trying to raise money for a building that will suck resources and pollute the neighborhood its trying to be a part of. it makes the firm look good . . . and as far as cost for the client and firm, it is very expensive. usgbc is working to make it more accessible. theres a lot of paperwork. but the building principles do work, and return invested costs, and i cant even imagine what my childhood would have been like if my mother had not worked for 15 years in a 'sick' building, or if my high school had daylighting, or windows at all . . . i personally think the improvement in quality of life is justification enough. and its proven that happy workers = less expensive workers. and as far as the costs associated with becoming a leed ap, i feel like its worth it. it was a hard choice, i paid for it all myself (if your firm will pay for you definitely go for it) and i feel like it was the equivilant of taking a class. it really is if you study the material thoroughly. i dont regret it at all. i would just say, if you go through with it, try to use it as much as possible. i wasent working when i took the test/studied etc, and it wasent totally applicable to the residential projects i was working on . ..i could use some actual practice.

so all that didnt really answer you question . . .
projects ive worked on that couldnt financially obtain leed certification were happy with what we gave them, getting as close as possible to leed req's. we used the leed standard to explain sustainable strategies to clients, its a good educational tool in that sense. and as far as being incorporated into building codes . . . it still blows my mind how irresponsible local government is concerning the environment. i dont know if thats a trickle down effect from higher powers, but in my town the planning board approved building a cvs on 'preserved' wetlands cause the mayor has some friends. and im sure its not going to involve low-voc paint or re-used material. its sad, but i think it will still be a developing system 10 years from now.

the educational aspects are great and make you aware of the positive benefits that can happen through an integrated design process and long term stewardship of buildings, landscapes, and communities. Getting a LEED rating for a building is just a feather in the hat of your firm or for the client. Many projects types don't really apply to the scale and scope that LEED is directed a,t but clearly there are opportunities that can be applied on smaller projects and that's how we approach it. I found it to be a great invigoration for how we could approach many projects and found that many clients are very interested to make those long term quality decisions.

Bottom line it makes sense and clearly can be better for your community and the environment of that community.

i don't think getting leed registered is a waste of time but i think leed certified projects are a definite waste of time + money.

Agree..

that hospital may be the first to get leed certification, but it was only rated one star by morningstar and neither siskel nor ebert gave it a thumb up.

The title of the thread and your post don't ask the same thing:

Being a LEED AP is not a waste of money/time/investment. It is something worth pursuing, if only to educate yourself. However, if you're so inclined, take what you've learned, take the AIA CEUs for the seminar you attended, and never do anything with it. I see the LEED rating system as a great challenge to my skills as a designer, and as an architect

Building certification is an opportunity for building owners to demonstrate their commitment to good business, whether they give a damn about the environment or not. The LEED rating system was established and based on office buildings - though there are many more versions available now - where demonstrable evidence supports the USGBC claims of workplace productivity, reduced absenteeism, and energy efficiencies that give the owner an outstanding return on their investment. Why wouldn't you want to be an architect who is able to be part of that? One of the USGBC's prime goals is the transform the marketplace. I think they're succeeding.

The building certification process is another animal altogether. Have only been through it as a bystander, not as part of the project team. It seems it can be a big headache, depending on the project team, but the challenge is worth it.

The LEED system is still very much in its infancy...USGBC hasn't even come out with all of the LEED rating systems yet (LEED-CS,-H,-ND). There won't be any incentives to do anything dealing with LEED until other forces in the marketplace step in to make a change. In some cases, state and local governments do give financial incentives to have buildings LEED Certified, but until the reviewing cost goes down, independent clients probably won't want to spend the extra doe just to have their building "LEED Certified". It doesn't cost anything extra, however, to follow the guidelines of the LEED system. I don't think you can put a price on people's health and the sustainability of the buildings we design.

As to whether becoming a LEED Accredited Professonal is a waste of time/money/investment... it depends on how you view architectural design. Is it something that should be "green" and "sustainable" because it is our moral responsibility; or should it only be those things if a rating system is forcing us to do it? The more you understand sustainable design, the more you can practice it in the professional realm. The LEED Rating System is only a guide (in my view) of how green design should be practiced. Futhermore, it is still a voluntary system and what better way to make it a manditory system than to join in and participate.

If you want to become accredited to help design better buildings and educate clients, then I don't think it is a waste of time/money/investment. But it you want to become accredited to just add a title next to you name reading: "LEED Accredited Professional," then you're doing it for the wrong reasons.