Hi all. I’d like to give the right interpretation about option2. I do understand that Impact reduction of certified product must be satisfied for 3 of the 6 categories at minimum, in order to count the cost of that material. Is it right? And what about the lack of an industry average? How can i demonstrate the impact reduction?
And is lack of an EPD the main diversity with Option 1?
Thanks a lot
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Melissa Vernon
Director of Client EngagementNatural Capital Partners
50 thumbs up
November 21, 2014 - 4:36 pm
That is correct. You must demonstrate that the impacts for 3 out of 6 categories are below industry average, and you must have 3rd party certification of that reduction.
See my comment below about industry averages. In lieu of an industry average, a self-comparison has been deemed acceptable by USGBC.
However, the threshold to hit to achieve this credit is 50% of project cost. I can envision a handful of materials hitting the intent for Option 2, but getting to 50% of cost is a very high bar.
Option 1 is very straightforward and doable with existing materials. UL lists 300 products with EPDs in their Sustainable Products Database. You only need 20 to earn Option 1.
Remigio Antonio Rancan
Civil engineer LEED AP BD+CRemigio Rancan - Urban Resilience Design & Consulting
November 22, 2014 - 3:47 am
Thank you very much Melissa. In order to achieve also the 2th point with option 2, do you think is it possible to :
1) Consider materials used in op 1 with EPD better then others ( “ self comparison” as you suggested) at least for 3 out of 6 categories and count them by cost;
2) Use materials with the criterion in 1) but not in the list of 20 used in op1.
I think that if the objective is a sustainable building and, as you said, 50% is a very high bar, we can count also materials used for op1.
Thanks for your help.