• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

More USGBC Fraud

conarb

conarb

Registered User
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
3,505
Location
California East Bay Area
New study at Oberlin College shows more USGBC fraud:

Originally Posted by John N. Scofield

A Re-examination of the NBI LEED Building Energy Consumption Study




John H. Scofield, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH



​
ABSTRACT

A recent study by the New Buildings Institute looked at the energy performance of 121 LEED certified commercial buildings and concluded they were saving 25-30% energy relative to conventional buildings. Here we identify several critical flaws in the NBI analysis and, upon reexamination of the data, reach different conclusions. We find that the average energy consumption by LEED certified buildings is actually higher than the corresponding average for the US commercial building stock.¹


Somebody ought to bring a civil RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) action, or better yet the government bring a criminal RICO action.

¹ http://www.oberlin.edu/physics/Scofi...EC%20paper.pdf
 
Energy savings per se account for very few LEED points (a bike rack and bus stop at the site provide as many). USGBC doesn't have the staff to monitor the ongoing maintenance of the building (and therefore revoking the LEED status of a building). The secret is having a good building engineer and maintenance staff following the O&M plan that makes the building "sustainable" construction.
 
A 2010 Yale study on the health effects of LEED Buildings.

EHHI said:
New federal, state and local laws tied to “Green Building Standards” are on the rise in the United States and throughout the world. As a growing number of governmental regulations are linked to green building standards, certification criteria that insufficiently account for threats to human health are becoming deeply embedded in U.S. law.The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines “green building” as “the practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building’s life-cycle, from site selection to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation and deconstruction.” The green building movement is now thriving in many wealthier nations. The building industry began to establish voluntary programs and standards for energy-efficient development following the rapid surge in energy prices in 1974 after the Mideast oil embargo.

This research report presents a thorough evaluation of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program’s consideration of human health within the built environment, as a basis for proposing changes that would more fully value human health.
Click to expand...
As it is we can sue the architects and builders who design and build these sick buildings, but it's a shame that sovereign immunity protects the entities that force them to design and build sick buildings. This is a secular religion and has no business in the codes.
 
Just like football (oval or round) it's all about POINTS and MARKETING and ACCOUNTING and damn little about performance.

ths crew got together

Designers whould couldn't or wouldn't design

Builders whou could not build.

Accountants who can oly count.

HOW can we market so we can survive?? answer SELL GREEN
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top