Compiling a few people's comments here...
Social equity assessment:
It seems like the credit language for NC is repeated for CI and CS. How can these prereqs scale down to projects with smaller scope? I would be nervous submitting a checklist full of "N/A" for a prerequisite but it would be true in the case of many interior, limited scope core/shell, or addition projects.
Provide the checklist with the rating system so teams understand the scope of effort; consider separating the assessment and the community engagement as some projects may not be able to engage (confidentiality, scope, etc).
What do you do for a closed site like an industrial manufacturing site or military base or hospital?
I can see some of the use categories being not applicable for specific space types. Will future guidance include how to address what is not applicable for a project? For instance, a university building that does not have tenants may not be able to evaluate affordability, whereareas a multi-family residential building may not be able to address workforce impacts. How will this be handled?
Carbon Assessment
Can USGBC provide tools that allow project teams to carry out this assessment? Or recommend resources, especially for small scale projects that won't hire a specilized consultant?
What do you do when its part of a master site designed for future growth for manufacturing? How is this taken into consideration?
What if the emissions are not related to electricity or gas?
The language in the MR Prequisite: Assess Embodied Carbon also calls for total GWP of S&E but only mentions certain materials to compare against. How are the other project materials accounted for?
For the "0.5 times the GWP of the covered materials… to account for other upfront embodied carbon, including MEP, interiors, and furnishings" is the covered materials referring to the total GWP or just the materials listed in Table 1? And what is the "0.5 times" based on?
The language in the MR Prequisite: Assess Embodied Carbon specifically says only A1-A3 stages are required, but there's a note in the requirements here saying "plus the A4-A5 emissions for projects that pursue that option". It is unclear what option is referred to that makes A4-A5 emissions a requirement.
The additional 0.25 times the GWP requirement for maintenance at years 10 and 20 seem to include structural materials since it states "covered materials in S&E", however structural materials are meant to last the lifetime of the building, not just 10 years. Most non-structural materials are also meant to last more than 10 years so this requirement seems overly conservative. For certified closed loop products do they reduce from 0.25xGWP to 0.05xGWP or to 0.20xGWP?
If the WBLCA is done assuming a 60 year building lifespan as is typical, does this supersede the 25 year life-span in this prequisite and how does that affect the maintanence requirements stated above.
Integrative Process Credit
Not clear what value this specific credit adds when so many other prereqs and credits require planning and interdisciplinary coordination. Seems like a lot of *documentation* but not a lot of *action* in addition to already required measures elsewhere in the rating system.
Christopher DeJulis
Above Green1 thumbs up
May 24, 2024 - 1:36 pm
We agree with the uncertainty of exactly how the prerequisites will scale with projects and are nervous with the implications of such a subjective set of requirements for a prerequisite. This is additionally a larger concern with sensitive project typologies such as DOD projects or data center projects in which it would be difficult to properly engage community members.
Separatley, by time you may recieve any comments from a reviewer regarding the social equity items, it may be too late to address them resulting in projects becoming ineligible to proceed with certification