If our LEED project building is a laboratory space are we required to use Labs21 as our benchmark? I know it's probably the preferred method, but is it possible to use other alternative methods? We would prefer to use Case 2 Option 2b because our lab has made great strides in energy use reductions in the last several years after implementing many efficiency measures, so comparing our current EUI to our historical EUIs is favorable for our situation. If not... then a follow-up question: the Labs21 benchmarking tool seems to have a very narrow peer group for our parameters and it does not seem fair to compare our lab to such a small group of peers and conclude that we are not far enough above the average. Is it possible to broaden our parameters and include other climate zones or other variable to broaden our peer group so that the average seems more like an average? Any other tips for Labs21 are appreciated. The tool is so cumbersome (every time we click back to the input values it's all blank and we have to start from scratch... very frustrating piece of software!). Thank you for your advice!!
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Michael Opitz
Director of SustainabilityIconergy
60 thumbs up
March 10, 2014 - 9:24 pm
Alexis:
I'll give you two responses here, and you should pick the one that's most appropriate for your situation.
First, as far as I know, you are NOT required to use Labs21 to benchmark your project. Originally, (back in 2010), the reason LEED added Labs21 was to offer a simple method of showing LEED compliance for labs. In other words, if a project team had no desire or ability to use one of the other compliance options, Labs21 was available. It was not originally intended as a "straight jacket" that would force any project to use a certain compliance method.
Second, with all that said, I have not done a rigorous search of CIRs and Interpretations to see if LEED has issued a formal ruling on this question. So, if you need that level of certainty, you should perform such a search yourself or submit your own CIR.
My suggestion is that you go with your preference: Case 2, Option 2b. You have a strong case, and all else equal, LEED prefers to give you flexibility and to reward recent performance improvements. You should be fine.
Mike
Alexis Thompson
Sustainability SpecialistSellen Sustainability
10 thumbs up
April 24, 2014 - 2:28 pm
Some follow-up on my lab project: I submitted both options for EAp2 (Labs21 as well as historical comparison in Option 2B). The LEED Reviewer denied Option 2B and says, "The project team inquired about using Case 2, Option 2B as a compliance path. Because the building qualifies for the Labs 21 compliance path, which falls under Option 1 in the calculator, thus the Option 1 compliance path must be used. The project cannot use
Option 2." So unfortunately, Mike's instinct that 2B would be accepted was wrong. If you are a lab you are REQUIRED to use Labs21.
Second, regarding the small peer group on our Labs21 tool... the LEED reviewer cited a specific PDF guidance document in my review with step-by-step instructions on how to filter the peer group. I would have LOVED to have access to this document before we started because in our case it's going to adversely affect our EAc1 points so I thought I would share my review with all you lab projects out there. Use this file for Labs21 peer group: http://labs21benchmarking.lbl.gov/docs/Applying+Labs21+Benchmarking+for+...
I have no idea where this file actually lives on the internet; when we started this project I searched high and low for guidance docs on the Labs21 site and could not find anything like this (the site, as aforementioned is very cumbersome and in desperate need of an update). I am unable to find the live link for this guidance doc online so this post may be time sensitive (should the document ever get updated, etc). But this is the link that the LEED reviewer gave me to use and, as a lab, we are apparently bound to these guidelines.