Weigh in on the second public comment draft of LEED v5 here. You can reply to this thread or use the "Post a Question/Comment" button to start a new thread.
The LEEDuser home page has links to comment forums for the other parts of LEED v5.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Mikhail Davis
Director of Global Market SustainabilityInterface
30 thumbs up
October 28, 2024 - 5:33 pm
i understand that Ecosystem Health in the Common Materials Framework is difficult to verify beyond certified fiber or wood sourcing, but I don't agree with arbitrarily assuming that work done on chemical toxicity in the Human Health area will necessarily benefit Ecosystems. Plenty of relatively non-toxic materials, including nitrogen and sulfur compounds from farm and factory emissions, cause immense ecosystem damage every day.
Jodie Thill
Sustainable Design SpecialistFlad Architects
1 thumbs up
October 28, 2024 - 5:43 pm
I understand that USGBC seems to want to avoid preferential treatment of certifiations, but is FSC completely missing from LEEDv5? FSC has changed the game as far as recognizing the healthy management of forests - doesn't that deserve continued recognition by LEED?