To qualify for LEED EBOM, an ENERGY STAR score of 69 or higher was a benchmark many older buildings just couldn’t achieve. The score means that the building performs better than 69% of buildings with a similar use, regardless of age.

If only you could get a few more of those ENERGY STAR scores above 69, you’d have a portfolio full of LEED buildings! This used to be the building owner’s lament, but no more. Now there’s Energy Jumpstart.

The innovative USGBC program is the first pilot prerequisite in USGBC’s Pilot Credit Library. This alternate compliance path will qualify buildings for LEED EBOM if they reduce energy consumption by 20% over a 12-month period, regardless of what their ENERGY STAR score is. Although buildings using this compliance path are only eligible to achieve the LEED Certification rating, it offers a clear route into the LEED system.  USGBC also encourages recertification, so buildings using Energy Jumpstart will have the opportunity to re-certify at LEED Silver, Gold or Platinum in the future.

With Energy Jumpstart, USGBC hopes to determine the effectiveness of a performance improvement path for LEED – the more projects that use the pilot prerequisite to jump into LEED, the better. If you would like to see this option become a permanent pathway, then begin using Energy Jumpstart on your projects and spread the word. Let’s get all buildings running efficiently and reward significant achievement throughout the market.

By the end of 2013, over 1,400 New York City buildings will have to comply with Local Law 87: Audits and Retro-commissioning, the second in a series of laws that make up the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan (GGBP).  In requiring buildings 50,000 SF or greater to perform periodic energy audits, the city hopes to encourage energy efficiency retrofits that typically result in significant energy and cost savings.

Buildings that need to comply with LL87 in 2013 must submit Energy Efficiency Reports demonstrating compliance by December 31, and every 10 years thereafter.

Last year, Urban Green created a Local Law 87 Compliance Checklist and User’s Guide to help property managers and owners understand the steps required to comply and get the most out of the process.  With support from NYSERDA and Con Edison, we’ve presented this information free of charge to over 1,000 building owners, managers, and operators.  That’s a lot of people but it’s not nearly enough.  We’ve undertaken a second round of outreach to more effectively pinpoint  property managers and owners who may need added support in complying with the law and re-tuning their buildings.

Here’s what we did:

For a similar educational program on Local Law 84, which required the same group of large buildings to benchmark their energy and water use, we reached out to owners and property managers overseeing the greatest amount of square footage. This methodology was carried over into LL87 outreach but with some slight modifications using lessons learned from the city’s Benchmarking Report  released last year.
First, we looked in detail at compliance rates for benchmarking and found geographic areas where compliance was much lower than the overall rate of 75%. We then reached out to Business Improvement Districts, various Chamber of Commerce locations, and neighborhood associations within these areas.

In addition, we looked at compliance rates by building sector and reached out to associations serving sectors with below-average compliance.

We’re optimistic that our combined efforts will improve compliance rates for LL87 in 2013 and subsequent years (10% of 13,500 affected buildings are required to report each year).

We continue to deliver presentations and share information about the law through our fantastic volunteer speakers bureau and Checklist mentioned above.  Please contact us if you need to find out how to comply.

The GGBP laws are truly a win-win, as they encourage building practices that reduce energy use and carbon pollution, lower operating costs, and create “green” jobs for New Yorkers who specialize in building audits and commissioning.  We think the tools we’ve developed go beyond helping property managers and owners comply with the law, adding value to the process. With an additional 12,000 buildings affected by LL87, we have our work cut out for us!

For more information on Local Law 87 please click here or email us to request an onsite presentation.

Greenbuild kicked off on Wednesday with a great welcome from San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee and an inspiring presentation about the USGBC’s Center for Green Schools.  Arguing that “where we learn matters,” Geraud Darnis (President & CEO, UTC Climate, Controls & Security, and Urban Green 2012 Gala Honoree) and Rachel Gutter (Director, Center for Green Schools at USGBC) spoke about the educational and social benefits of healthy schools. We worry about what our children eat and what they watch on television, but we often neglect to think about the buildings in which they learn. The Center for Green Schools is trying to change that.  In New York, Urban Green Council’s Emerging Professionals have been involved in sustainability-focused curriculum development at a Manhattan green school under the GELL program, so we’re well aware of the benefits of this type of work.

No presentation about green schools is complete though without a video of adorable children in day-lit classrooms. Gutter obliged and, by the end of the video, the audience at the Opening Plenary seemed fully convinced by the tiny voices that told us  ”where I learn matters.” Now with a young child of my own, those cute little kids totally got me – I was ready to to run out of the conference hall and get to work designing and building a great green school for every child everywhere!

That sentiment would have to wait though, because Rick Fedrizzi was next. I’ve heard USGBC President and CEO Fedrizzi speak on several occasions, and even had a chance to chat with him at Urban Green’s Gala.  Had he not founded USGBC, he could have been a motivational speaker. Fedrizzi’s talks are often inspirational, but this speech at Greenbuild was one of the most rousing I’ve seen.  He seemed fired up and ready to go in a new way. Fedrizzi called on the green building community to collaborate more with other groups and to talk not just to each other, but also to those outside of our circle. Here I was reminded of Urban Green’s conference, Cooling on Climate Change. This concept was exactly what we were arguing there; panelists spoke about climate change messaging and how to better communicate with those concerned about carbon pollution versus those indifferent about mitigating or adapting to a changing climate.

Fedrizzi linked the green building movement to social justice campaigns from women’s suffrage and civil rights to today’s gay rights and marriage equality efforts, all of which required hard work, lots of discussion, and time. Like these movements, widespread acceptance of healthy and sustainable building is not a question of if but of when. The USGBC leader argued for collaboration and, referencing Majora Carter’s sentiment about improving one’s neighborhood, stated “you don’t have to leave this country to build a better one.”

That’s good news and it’s up to us to make the change we want to see.  As we learned at Cooling on Climate Change, to do so requires that we speak about the issues we are concerned about to a variety of audiences. Fedrizzi also reminded us that our mission (healthy buildings, neighborhoods, and cities) is not only a just cause, but also supports a strong economy and offers a sound business case. He called on us to get to the hard work of reaching out and making green building standard building and left us with this mantra to remind us why we are working so hard: “We are right.”

“If you have information that is important to the public, you should try to communicate it.”
-Dr. James Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies

A couple weeks ago Urban Green gathered a NASA scientist, leaders of environmental organizations responding to climate change, academics with expertise in understanding how Americans assess risk and deal with this issue, and design professionals trying to communicate their environmentally responsible intents to clients. As one of the organizers of the event, I was anticipating a good conference full of new information and insight.  What I didn’t anticipate was the fluidity of the morning and the fantastic ability of the speakers to play off of one another to draw out new conclusions and leave the audience with a such clear set of principles for talking about climate change.  Actually, make that carbon pollution.

As noted in our live blog posts and other pieces since the conference, it’s clear that climate change and carbon pollution can be challenging topics for discussion. It’s a global problem that requires immediate action and potential sacrifice to produce benefits in a near or distant future, but it’s not widely viewed as a pressing problem.  It’s easy to think someone else will sort it all out for us. Unfortunately, we know this is not the case, but luckily our speakers discussed a host of ways we can hone our message and get through to our colleagues, clients, and others.

If you were unable to attend or you were in the audience and would like a refresher, we’ve provided an overview below. Urban Green Council members can also take a look at the presentations through our secure weblink.

How to talk about climate change in five easy steps:

1. First and foremost, know your audience. All of our communication experts agreed it’s best to have multiple messages for different groups; family, friends, staff, clients, public, etc. Talk to scientists with graphs and charts, speak to clients about health and cost savings, encourage colleagues with business opportunity and productivity improvements, and stir family members to action with personal benefits to children and grandchildren.

2. Scientific facts alone do not convince many people of the dangers (or existence) of climate change. However, talking about climate pollution and associated health risks, for example, make the problem more real and actionable. According to speaker David Ropeik, the brain is four parts subconscious and one part conscious, which means reason is only one-fifth of the decision-making process. He suggests discussing risks that are local and personal instead of global and abstract.

3. Credibility is key so speak from your area of expertise.  Trusted validators from various fields need to deliver the message. All of us in the green building community from developers to construction workers should be speaking out.

4. Counter specific arguments.  This means you must be well-versed in the arguments made by those who support climate action and those who do not.

5. Talk about solutions and quality of life improvements. Don’t just dwell on the problem without proposing solutions. It can be very dismal as compared to opportunities for improvement. Show how changes that mitigate climate change improve health and quality of life and can also improve business. Panelist Dan Probst of Jones Lang LaSalle argued that you can increase financial returns while reducing carbon pollution.

Once you figured out what to say it’s important to remember to do more than talk; act.  As part of the green building community we have the ability to speak out about climate change and the risk of carbon pollution AND take action in the projects we design, develop, and occupy. Let your organization be a driver of change.

That’s all it takes. For those of you who were there, we would love to hear your comments on the day and what you’ll take away from the conference.  Do you have new ideas on how to speak about climate change? Please add your comments below.

Dr. James Hansen’s keynote address at Cooling on Climate Change

The following was blogged live from our Fall Conference on September 18, 2012 – Cooling on Climate Change: Designing the Message.

NASA’s Dr. James Hansen kicks off our Climate Change conference by diving right into his latest science. He argues that global warming is increasing extreme weather events and he knows this because extreme summer heat anomalies now cover about 10% of land area, up from 0.2% in the 50s. This is based on actual data from the last 60 years, not a computer model.

We’re in trouble but fortunately Hansen has felt an obligation to future generations (specifically his adorable grandchildren) to speak about climate change and the disastrous path we’re currently on. He uses his “climate dice” analogy to explain the probability for unseasonable warm or cool seasons. While it was previously 2:2:2 for hotter, average, and colder, current data shows the dice to be 4:1:1 respectively. One of those hotter sides represents extreme weather that was much less frequent in years past.

There’s Still Time to Mitigate Climate Change!

Dr. Hansen claims there’s still time to make changes and proposes a fee and dividend solution. The fee is collected at the source and the dividend is distributed equally to all legal residents with no part going to the government. It’s a conservative market-based solution. Although energy prices will rise, individuals will be in control of their energy choices and will be able to use their share of the dividend however they see fit, for non-energy uses for example. I like this idea but how will it be implemented?

Hansen also calls on government and private practice to support his efforts to clarify the science by speaking out and helping validate the science.

This month Urban Green will be holding a conference on climate change communication with the goal of bringing together some critical thinkers for a candid discussion about climate change messaging and action.  The topic of this conference derived from a few questions that have been nagging environmentalists for some time now. Why don’t some people believe climate change is happening? Or for that matter, that it’s caused by humans?

This of course excludes those with a vested interest in denying the science (“big oil” etc.).  Instead I’m talking about those individuals who actually aren’t convinced by the overwhelming scientific evidence, not those who are pretending not to believe it for financial or political gain.  A recent poll released by the Brookings Institute in July reveals that “belief” in climate change is literally changing with the weather. Of the 62% of Americans who believe global temperatures are rising, approximately half of those came to this conclusion because of weather changes or warmer temperatures.

What does this mean? It means talking about climate change is more complicated than just explaining the science.  In a recent New York Times article, Beth Gardiner spoke to leading researchers in the field of climate psychology about the inherent difficulty we have engaging “with the more abstract, global dangers posed by climate change.” It’s a fascinating article that concludes that the pitch is as important as the message.  To reach the roughly 40% of Americans who don’t believe and those who will no longer believe when the mercury falls, we’ll want to adjust our narrative.

There’s been a swell of research into this topic from a variety of highly focused academic centers over the last few years, including American University School of Communication, The Yale Project on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC), and George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication (4C), among others.  A collaborative report from the YPCCC and 4C, Global Warming’s Six Americas in March 2012 and November 2011, argues Americans can be described as part of one of six groups in terms of belief in climate change: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, or Dismissive. Nearly 40% of American adults fall into the two most concerned groups while only 25% are in the least concerned groups.  Understanding these categories and the values of these individuals will help us communicate more effectively about climate change.

Once we’ve sorted this out, we’ll have to move on to the next and more challenging question.  If we all agree climate change is happening now and is a significant threat to our well-being, why aren’t we taking more action?  What specifically and practically can the green building industry do to combat climate change?  How do you fight climate change when you’re primary role is not a climate change warrior?

To hear more about these ideas and to participate in the discussion, join us for “Cooling on Climate Change: Designing the Message” on September 18 at Bloomberg. For more information and to register, please visit our website.

On Monday USGBC announced it will postpone voting on the LEED 2012 rating system (now know as LEED v4) until as late as July 2013.  The announcement came in a direct letter to members from USGBC President, CEO and Founding Chairman, Rick Fedrizzi stating “this change is 100% in response to helping our stakeholders fully understand and embrace this next big step.”

The new rating system represents a significant step forward in that there is a focus on performance metrics.  Additionally USGBC is working to better the user experience by improving educational and reference materials and streamlining the credit documentation process.  The primary differences between LEED 2009 and LEED v4 are:

• New Market Sectors – the new system covers data centers, warehouses and distribution centers, hospitality projects, existing schools, existing retail, and mid-rise residential.
• Increased Technical Rigor – improvements to how credits are calculated and documented based on market data, stakeholder input, and technological advancements.
• Credit Weightings – revised point distribution more closely tied to USGBC priorities.

These changes are intended to raise the bar for performance and transform the market.  Still some long-time LEED proponents felt the change was too much, too fast.

By pushing the balloting period back, USGBC lengthens the time for projects to “test drive” LEED v4 with the hope that lessons learned from the beta period will be incorporated into the final version of the rating system. It also ensures LEED 2009 will remain available for registration through 2015, relieving concerns of those just now fully engaged with the current version.

Finally, a fifth public comment period will be opened from Oct. 10 through Dec. 10, 2012 corresponding with Greenbuild 2012 in San Francisco this November, providing an opportunity for more face-to-face discussion and feedback.

The new timeline should allow a more seamless transition to LEED v4 and help designers and manufacturers prepare their businesses for the changes.  For our part, Urban Green Council will be hosting a series of sessions covering the changes in LEED v4 and the implications on green building in New York City. Watch our calendar for updates at the end of the summer.

For a more in-depth look at the implications of this decision and the factors behind it, please see Nadiv Malin’s informative piece in BuildingGreen.

Thanks to everyone who attended The Building Blocks of Sustainable Ops a couple weeks ago.  The content developed by the speakers was insightful and gave an in-depth look into how they created their Sustainable Management programs.

From deferred maintenance at the City to “constant commissioning” at Hines, the presentations dug deep into the key components of maintaining proper operations, training and education, and awards and recognition plans.  We heard about the need for support at a corporate level and the implications of tenant behavior on building performance.

In addition to the photos in our gallery, watch out for video of the training coming soon. You can view the presentation here and download it here (also available from our website).

Thanks to our speakers for what we felt was a really fantastic series of presentation. We’ve been getting a lot of feedback on the training and welcome more input. Please leave your impressions in the comments to this post.

Finally, if you attended the training and would still like to purchase 3 GBCI Continuing Education Credits, you may do so for $75 here.

How is the City of New York going to reduce its carbon emissions 30% by 2017 (30×17)?  Ariella Maron and the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services Energy Management (DCAS DEM) believe one key to significant reductions is improved operations and maintenance. Maron, Deputy Commissioner for DCAS Energy Management argues, “O&M practices are the day-to-day, low-cost yet high-impact activities that building operators can do to keep our facilities running effectively and efficiently.”

New York City owns over 4,000 buildings, from schools and fire stations to government offices, making them one of the largest owners in the city.  And those buildings are responsible for a whopping 64% of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions released by the city.  New York City estimates it will need to reduce GHG emissions by 1.05 million metric tons per year to meet its 30×17 goal and that existing buildings will be the source of 57% of those reductions–substantially more than any other source.  To meet the 30×17 goal outlined in PlaNYC, DEM has laid out an ambitious Operations & Maintenance (O&M) plan.

The plan is based on lessons learned from a yearlong O&M pilot program that resulted in a 17% drop in energy use, at no cost. At least not any operational costs because the pilot focused on helping operators, managers, and building occupants improve performance by measuring energy use, developing equipment maintenance checklists, encouraging conservation, and refining best practices.

DCAS DEM’s Energy Efficiency Operations and Maintenance Plan (EEOMP) is divided into three sections:

• Repairing, maintaining, and operating existing equipment efficiently;
• Increasing training and outreach to improve skills and raise awareness;
• Providing management oversight, accountability, and transparency.

Through the implementation of the EEOMP alone, New York City expects to reduce energy use 10 to 15% annually, saving $51 million and 185,000 metric tons of GHG emissions.

This is both impressive and important. While we are all aware of the importance of greening our existing building stock, the focus often tends to be on building retrofits and infrastructure changes. Of the available real estate that will exist in 2030, 80% of it already exists today. The growth of certifications like LEED for Existing Buildings Operations and Maintenance indicates a shift in the thinking, which is positive.  Retrofits can be a major source of energy savings (NYC estimates 45% of its goal) but are not the only significant one.  Energy retrofits can be cost effective with a short return on investment but they are rarely free and can pose a challenge for smaller buildings.

Changes in operations and maintenance are easily applicable and scalable for multiple building sizes and typologies, assuming you know what changes to make.

Fortunately, DEM is sharing their plan, and Maron will be speaking about the challenges DCAS faced and strategies they developed to overcome them at Urban Green’s upcoming training, the Building Blocks of Sustainable Ops.  In addition, experts from Hines, Jonathan Rose Companies, and Jones Lang LaSalle will also be there to share strategies used in the private sector.

From her experience with city agencies, Maron notes engaging the operators and engineers working within the buildings is critical to the success of any program.  “These are the guys doing the work,” so she says their experience and opinions are invaluable.

In February, the Urban Green Council Chapter Task Force (CTF) for LEED Regionalization 2012 reported to our members its initial findings on priority issues within the chapter boundary – the five boroughs of New York City, as well as Rockland and Westchester Counties. Thanks to member response to our post and a survey sent to Rockland and Westchester county members, the Task Force has been able to attract more participants to contribute to the last phase of LEED Regionalization 2012 – Regional Priority Credit selection. Based on an updated list of regional priority issues, the CTF has now identified three potential credits in LEED 2012 BD+C for each issue. To help us select the six credits that will have the most impact on new construction in your area, please follow this link to fill out the Task Force’s brief survey.

As we approach the end of LEED Regionalization 2012, the CTF is in the process of identifying three credits per priority issue for the other LEED rating systems – EB:O+M, ID+C and LEED for Homes. In conjunction with credit selection, we’re planning an event on April 25 regarding updates to LEED 2012.  Yetsuh Frank will explain the goals behind the updated system and new prerequisites and credits.  At this event members will also have the opportunity to contribute to the credit selection in the various rating systems and hear from the CTF leader, Craig Copeland about the lessons learned in LEED Regionalization 2012.

We’d like to thank the active members in this phase of the Urban Green Council LEED 2012 Regionalization for their time, efforts and contributions, especially Craig and Elly for all their hard work in leading the group:

Kathleen Bakewell, Brook Farm Group LLC
Daniel Bersohn, Buro Happold
Gina Bocra, ENNEAD Architects LLP
Nancy Campbell, Local Initiatives Support Corporation
Andrea Chin, Applied Design Initiative
Craig Copeland, Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects ( CTF Leader)
Eleonora Encheva, Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects
Timothy Howell, Ecological, LLC
Christina Kissel
Joyce Lee, NYC Department of Design and Construction
Marsha Leed, Dvirka and Bartilucci Consulting Engineers
Jennifer Preston, BKSK Architects LLP
Michael Shilale, Michael Shilale Architects LLP
Whitney Smith, Cosentini Associates
Melissa Snyder, Pace Law School