Bio-based Materials - Landscaping plantings?

It has been looked into and discussed... though no definitive answers on this thread: https://leeduser.buildinggreen.com/forum/green-roof-and-landscaping Can't think of any other threads and nothing came up via search for "planting" and "landscape" in v2009 forum. My subjective sense is that these "materials" are covered via the site credits and don't fit here, but if you can slot them into a CSI section that's included, maybe... Credit language refers to "harvested" and "materials"... not exactly terms you'd use for live plants.

Hi Renee,   Curious if you were successful claiming landscape plants as biobased under LEEDv4. I had also successfully used the Regional material approach you mentioned for LEEDv3 (& LEEDv2) projects. I noticed the latest LEEDv4.1 BPDO calculator (ver 01, rev. 01) Material tab CSI division list now includes a pull-down menu to guide Project teams on the "typical" permanently installed Project material categories.  It follows the same general LEEDv3 MR calculation rationale, including CSI "31.60 Foundations", "32.10 Bases/Ballasts" (which also includes surface paving materials) AS WELL AS "32.90 Planting". To me, it seems a handicap to require (or otherwise advise/strongly encourage?) Project teams to include 32.90 in the total Project material costs without any viable performance contribution option for them - a particular handicap for projects with a sizable landscape budget.....thus, hoping biobased would be an option since regionally grown landscape plants alone will not qualify under LEEDv4.

Sustainable Sites contains a Credit that accounts for "bio-mass" - i.e., vegetation.
Here's the definition for biobased, from the EPA: Biobased materials refer to products that mainly consist of a substance (or substances) derived from living matter (biomass) and either occur naturally or are synthesized, or it may refer to products made by processes that use biomass. (https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?Lab=NRMRL&dirEntryId=231873)
So I would conclude that plants are NOT considered biobased material. Hope this helps.

Renee, We've achieved Regional Material points (under v2009) for landscaping plants and that is still possible for NC-v4 MRc3. Takes work, and may not be worthwhile unless the project has extensive landscaping.

Let's get back to the spirit and concept of the rule here.  The concept for the bio-based Materials and Resources credit (now part of Leadership Extraction Practices in v4, newly achievable with an ASTM test for 50% credit in v4.1) is to replace a more damaging material (typically a non-renewable virgin metal, virgin plastic, virgin petrochemical, etc.) with a material that is renewal/grown and (hopefully) more sustainable.  If the thing you are using is typically made from plants already, this credit should not apply. It wouldn't apply to structural wood (got to get FSC for this same credit) and certainly shouldn't apply to a material that is actually a living plant (unless the plant is replacing something else, I certainly hope we start growing buildings soon!).  

Mikhail, Not in disagreement with the credit intent - but then my counter-point would be that landscape material costs should not be part of the material analysis if irrelevant to the initiative - i.e.- there is no environmental benefit, or viable means to demonstrate improvement in those associated "materials."

Joanna makes a good point. Credit intent is always good to fall back on when there is ambiguity. However, if the LEED language allows it, and even encourages it due to CSI section policy, I'd say it's an open door until USGBC explicitly closes it. To the point above about the definition of "biobased," I don't read that definition as black-and-white on this issue. Like many things biological, it seems more a matter of degrees.