EBS had the pleasure of working on this project over the past year and are very happy with the results we’ve seen. This project isn’t using greenwashing like some and while some of the stats are a bit skewed in terms of actual energy offset, the first year’s data will tell all.
They have a robust Measurement & Verification process in place to ensure they meet their targeted Power Usage Effectiveness (“PUE”) which I believe to be below 1.05 – impressive to say the least!
EBS services included energy modeling for LEED and for the Oregon Energy Trust Rebate program. We’ve experience great success working with Gensler and Logicalis on this most impressive Data Center – kudos to the team!
Unprecedented Green Building Dispute Could Cost Developer Millions
Up until yesterday, the biggest green building dispute I had come across was Shaw Development v. Southern Builders. That case involved $635,000 in damages because a project did not obtain the LEED certification necessary to qualify for state tax credits.
That is chump change compared to the Destiny USA green building dispute that is simmering. Because the mega project allegedly failed to incorporate green building components it had promised the the federal government — including LEED certification — the developer may be penalized $2.3 million by the IRS.
I am going to be writing about this example of LEEDigation for some time. This post will cover just the basics but I will be diving into the messy details throughout the week.
In 2004, federal legislation was passed to create a Green Bond program. Under the program, a few developers received tax-free financing for the construction of green building projects. One of those projects was Destiny USA, which is a proposed 4.5 million square foot retail and entertainment complex in Syracuse, New York. The Destiny USA project received $228 million in tax-free Green Bonds. According to Syracuse.com, the tax-exempt status of the financing saved the developer $120 million. In exchange, the developer of the project, Robert Congel made promises about green building features and LEED certification that would be incorporated into the project.
But what happens if the developer does not satisfy his green building promises? We will likely find out within the next year.
According to an incredible article written by Rick Moriarty of the Syracuse Post-Standard, the project will not include many of the promised green building building components:
There is no 45-megawatt electricity generating plant running on “biofuel” made from soybean oil and recycled cooking grease. If there were, it would be the largest such plant in the nation and consume more than one-third of the total U.S. biodiesel supply.
Nor are there 290,000 square feet of solar panels on the mall’s roofs and other surfaces, enough to blanket six football fields.
The fuel cells that were to make 7 megawatts of electricity, five times more than the nation’s largest existing commercial fuel-cell installation? Nowhere to be seen.
Additionally, there is confusion as to whether the project has received its LEED certification, which was also promised.
The Destiny USA developers are facing a month-end deadline to certify to the IRS that the green building promises were met. If the IRS determines the developer did not meet its promises, the project could lose its tax-exempt status — which reportedly saved the developers $120 million — and be slapped with a $2.3 million penalty.
There is so much more to this story. If you are interested, I would advise you to check back over the coming days as new posts will be frequent. I will also be publishing a white paper describing all of the sordid details.
After walking what seemed like a half mile and took the better part of 20 minutes (the plenary is across two highways from the Exhibit Hall!), I’ve arrive to listed to Rick Fedrizzi and Colin Powell at the Opening Plenary of Green Build 2010.
Rumors existed months ago that President Obama would keynote the event however after much delay we’ll have to settle for Powell. I hesitate to use the word settle however – this guy is hilarious. About half way through his speech, the audience has burst out on several occasions in laughter. Laughter noted but what’s really evident is the lack of audience. An entire row of chairs is empty and the room seems much smaller than Green Build 2008 in Boston and Green Build 2009 in Phoenix. I however wouldn’t be surprised if the Sherpa like trek has something to do with this.
Another interesting point at this years event is the size of the Exhibit Hall. As press, we were notified that approximately 1000 exhibitors were here at Green Build in Chicago which may seem large until you compare it to the 1800 we experience in Phoenix. The conference is claiming 30,000 attendees but that has yet to be determined. A report from the exhibit hall this afternoon will be a better determinant of that – continued this afternoon.
As we decend upon Chicago to immerse ourselves in what is expected to be an epic GreenBuild, I am left to wonder where the industry is headed…
Last year 30,000 plus people moshed through the doors in Phoenix Arizona at Green Build 2009 but after Tuesday night on the showroom floor at Green Build 2010 in Chicago, I am left wondering how many will be pushing through the front doors of the Chicago Convention Center in less than 12 hours. Either way, virtually all of them will be curious about one question: where is the green building industry headed?
The much anticipated Green Outlook 2010 from the folks at McGraw Hill will be out soon and GreenBiz.com’s “State of Green Business” has been released just in time for GreenBuild. The “State of Green Business” is, as usual, written in a passive voice thats tone overly skirts around getting to the point in it’s quest to uncover advancements in “green.” The Green Outlook however is the much more quoted study referencing the potential market value of the green building sector. It is expected to suggest significant growth in this sector continuing the expotential growth it has experience throughout the 2000s.
Whether looking for trends, networking, education, or the “experience,” GreenBuild 2010 in Chicago will forcast exactly where the USGBC is headed. Membership to what was the largest environmental NGO in the world and the fastest growing NGO in the world, has dwindled from 20,000 members to 16,000 during the past 12 months. The showroom floor tonight demonstrated to me that the spending just isn’t there – Kohler who built a monstrosity covering better than 5000 square feet last year with water features galore, occupies maybe 1/5 of that space this year. Although I didn’t make it everywhere Tuesday night, remis is Anderson Window’s massive demonstration, Home Depot’s 2-story structure, and the modular house tours that existed in Phoenix. Where is the USGBC in their growth pattern and how will they continue to impact the green building sector?
This question and other’s remain – to be continued…
Today attention is paid to one of two things regarding green building: energy cost reductions and/or the coveted LEED Plaque. Both are important – one to demonstrate return on investment while the other showcases a company’s ability to “walk the walk.” However within the world of commercial office space, one component of green building should shine above all else – impact of indoor environments on the people who occupy them.
If you haven’t read the University of San Diego study titled “Green Buildings and Productivity,” then you may be missing the largest piece of why green building is so important. The question that CBRE’s Director of Sustainability and folks from the Journal of Sustainable Real Estate address in “Green Buildings and Productivity” is relevant to triple bottom line thinkers but hones in on the crux of why traditional bottom line thinkers are still not sold on green. Green Builders continue their inability to convey value through delivered tangible and tractable economic benefits. Why is this?
The USGBC has failed to convey the importance of life cycle costs to owners and developers and while an overwhelming number of buildings continue to be certified (now over 6000 commercial spaces bear the logo), the meat of the value equation lies in productivity. The question we need to ask is “Do green buildings provide more productive and sustainable environments for workers than non-green buildings, and if so, what is that value?” This question has rarely been addressed and since it bears relative importance, we must first understand the 3 main workforce trends driving this ideal:
1. Gen Y
This group of up and comings are integral to any organization and that trend will only be augmented in the next 10 years – Gen Ys refuse to be part of traditional office environments and have leverage even in today’s job environment.
2. Communication
Office communication is increasingly crucial – team environments and sharing of ideas in the fast pace of today’s world, even more so. Traditional office environments often lack the parameters to foster this type of productivity.
3. Employee Costs
Productivity loss and sick days cost firms the most money and at the same time offer the greatest opportunity for return on investment especially when comparing that to traditional green building efficiencies such as energy and water.
The University of San Diego study finds that an average productivity value added impact per worker to be over $5,000 while the average fewer sick days value added impact per worker was lower at $ 1,250. Combined, that translates to a $153.61/sq ft Net Present Value (Discounted at 10%) and since building green costs relatively little in terms of a total initial increase to project costs, the choice should be as obvious as cost-efficient green buildings’ impact to the bottom line. Since we know that employees and their associated costs are the largest component of most budgets, we must wonder why the correlation between environment and employees is just surfacing. Knowing that a 2008 JLL study found that 70% of corporate executives value sustainability as a “crucial business issue,” we’re left to wonder when the real tipping point for corporate sustainability will begin and the greenwashing will end. As evidence by the overwhelming number of “green” commercial interiors spaces, we certainly know that LEED for Commercial Interiors Certification is where it begins.
Recent Comments