The language for SSc2 on deicers is somewhat vague. It simply states that you should use "less environmentally disruptive deicing chemicals, such as magnesium chloride, potassium acetate and potassium chloride, for small areas..." but doesn't say which products are strictly not permitted or should be used for large areas, such as parking lots. Would a sodium chloride product with a sugar-beet or corn-based accelerator that reduces overall salt usage be considered less environmentally disruptive? Would its use qualify for this credit? The LEED reference guide references the MN Winter Parking Lot & SIdewalk Maintenance Manual which does reference these types of deicing products as increasing performance to reduce application rates. However, it also states that impacts are serious but not as long lasting as chlorides. In fact, no product options seems like a clear cut winner. Any thoughts?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
December 28, 2010 - 11:04 pm
I don't have a direct answer to your question, but I do recommend reading our guide to environmentally friendly deicing—link at the top right of this page. I would put an emphasis on the practice, not on the product—a point that is fairly basic but pretty key.
Kathleen Seus
Director, Green PurchasingDelta Institute
12 thumbs up
December 29, 2010 - 2:53 pm
Thanks, Tristan. I will take a look at the guide. And emphasis on practice does make sense.