We have done 8 previous LEED 2009 Gold projects that were pursuing Redlist constraints on top of LEED. And yet we are struggling to find emissions certified adhesives and sealants among all of these previously acceptable products.
It's clear that the new requirements encompass both VOC content and emissions for wet applied products. And that you have to track volumes whether you are doing a VOC budget or not. What is unclear to me is how these things overlap. Is emissions testing measuring things other than VOCs? Is a compound like formaldehyde not a VOC? The reporting is always in terms of TVOC which makes it sound like VOCs are the issue. And yet 0 VOC products still require emissions. Is there any basis for exclusion of the emissions testing predicated on lack of content, like unfinished wood and tile?
Michelle Halle Stern
Senior Sustainability ConsultantGreenwood Consulting Group
120 thumbs up
June 27, 2016 - 4:47 pm
Emissions testing measures VOCs (that is essentially what emits). Wet applied products have content requirements "for the health of the installers and other tradesworkers who are exposed to these products".
Formaldehyde is a VOC, but special in that is has been classified as a known human carcinogen. CDPH standard method is more than just TVOC. The TVOC range is a point of information in addition to the general emissions evaluation.
Zero VOC is not necessarily truly 0; and a 0 VOC product is self-declared as opposed to following a protocol such as the CDPH standard method or one of the accepted 3rd party certifications. Inherently non-emitting materials are exempt from the credit requirements, but their grout and sealers are not:
"Products that are inherently nonemitting sources of VOCs (stone, ceramic, powder-coated metals, plated or anodized metal, glass, concrete, clay brick, and unfinished or untreated solid wood flooring) are considered fully compliant without any VOC emissions testing if they do not include integral organic-based surface coatings, binders, or sealants."
Michelle Rosenberger
PartnerArchEcology
519 thumbs up
June 27, 2016 - 6:08 pm
Hi Michelle,
Thanks for the prompt response. We will write off this category until the market catches up.
Michelle Halle Stern
Senior Sustainability ConsultantGreenwood Consulting Group
120 thumbs up
June 27, 2016 - 10:12 pm
Sure thing. I know Prosoco is on top of things, because Dwayne was the chair of the EQ TAG after me. I can also connect you to others who have done v4 projects who might be able to help. Reach out to me offline.
Kerry Honsinger
Reynolds Ash and Associates6 thumbs up
August 2, 2016 - 1:56 pm
I agree, finding products that have been tested with the CDPH standard method is difficult and the industry is not there yet. Will most likely have to write off this credit because of the "Emissions" requirement for wet applied products.
Amanda Lang
9 thumbs up
February 7, 2020 - 11:34 am
I've had at least one manufacturer push back on the requirement for CDPH testing for "0 VOC" products. I found this article on BuildingGreen really informative and it helped with the "zero VOC" discussion: https://www.buildinggreen.com/feature-shorts/why-zero-voc-was-never-enough.