RECESS WATCH: LEED

As we head into the Labor Day weekend (the unofficial end of summer), the Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) continues its “Recess Watch” series with an issue that should be of great importance to taxpayers, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building certification system.  LEED is owned by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) and used by the General Services Administration (GSA) as the exclusive system to certify federal buildings as “green.” TPA has done extensive work over the last year looking for answers about the program (read here and here) including Freedom of Information Act requests that have yet to be answered. The latest developments on LEED come out West from the editorial board at The Oregonian, as it becomes clear once again that the original mission of LEED and the way in which standards for the certification system are being decided are not one in the same.  According to The Oregonian:

The problem for Oregon, and the source of resentment within the timber world, is LEED credit awarded for certified wood. The purpose of this credit is to encourage the environmentally responsible management of forests, and using certified wood can generate one point toward certification for new schools, to use one example. Problem is, only wood blessed by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) qualifies, yet several credible and widely used wood-certification programs exist. These include the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and, for many smaller forests, the American Tree Farm System (ATFS).

This past June TPA looked at the Forest Stewardship Council’s (FSC) certification for wood products and the impact these certification standards have on consumer costs and the lack of significant environmental benefits.  TPA encouraged policymakers to closely evaluate a new study prepared for EconoSTATS at George Mason University in order to fully recognize the implications not only for the timber industry, but also that a FSC monopoly would lead to a $34 billion annual loss to the domestic wood and paper market, while increasing product costs for American consumers by as much as 20 percent.

FreedomWorks also found the connection between LEED and the FSC disconcerting, writing that, “LEED construction certification only awards points for wood certified by the Forest Certification Council (FSC). You may remember FSC from my previous report and the push to create a virtual monopoly for their certification in domestic production. This monopoly, according to a recent study, would severely limit production, destroy jobs and increase costs.”

This is yet more bad news about LEED.  Last year, TPA warned about the “new” LEED standards, known as LEED v.4 (click here to read previous blog posting).  LEED v.4 is now set for official use as it has been approved. TPA warned that adopting LEED standards would be harmful for taxpayers and businesses “by explicitly offering a significant competitive advantage to favored industries, the USGBC is implicitly discouraging and unfairly targeting other industries.  The LEED proposals will negatively impact manufacturers of materials that ironically aid in the construction of energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly buildings.”

LEED is a system that is creating more questions than answers.  Before taxpayers, businesses, and the economy are weighted down with more LEED regulations, all federal agencies need to reevaluate LEED and come up with better alternatives to promote energy efficiency.