Updates to the LEEDv4 Energy Performance Requirements

Expect less EA points.  Depending on how much your certification level hinges on the energy model points, it could result in a lower certification level. What is currently 8 points for 20% energy cost savings will now be 1 point + the emissions reduction points.  For projects that can't afford on-site renewables, the emission reduction points are going to vary based on both the building performance and the grid it gets electricity from.  I'm curious about the potential unintended consequences of how this could promote gas heat because it is still less emissions in many parts of the country compared to electricity from the grid, especially when using to electric reheat.

Hello Aley, great questions....Thanks for the Post! This energy update has been on our radar for a while. What do we hope architects are paying attention to: integrative design process, energy modeling throughout to evaluate design decisions, potentional onsite renewable energy opportunities, actively design towards carbon neutral rather the reactive energy modeling and post-design EUI reporting.  What are we telling our clients: REGISTER PRIOR TO MARCH 1ST!...if registered after, they'll probably slip a cert level and might be in jeopardy of LEED Certified if the programmatic space type includes significant non-regulated energy consumption.   LEED projects moving forward: I am very confused...LEED BD+C continues to increase minimum energy requirements while LEED v5 O+M continues to relax minimum energy requirements (minimum ES of 60 and ASHRAE 62.1 does not need to be met). Interested to learn other's input on this... Thanks Aley!      

Thanks for starting the discussion, Aley. I’m interested in hearing what others are seeing as well, and especially if anyone has heard about the impact of these changes on EApc161 (if any). I second Dave’s feedback about advising teams to register before March 1st if possible. Teams will always have the option to opt into the more stringent requirements, but registering early gives teams more flexibility to meet higher certification thresholds. I also second Cory’s feedback about expecting fewer LEED energy performance points. We looked at the LEED point impact on several projects in our portfolio from the past several years, (labs, res halls/multifamily, and offices; CS/CI/NC; both “traditional” fossil fuel/campus systems and electrified within each occupancy type). We haven’t yet been able to detect a pattern in the results. For example, the impact on electrified projects wasn’t uniformly less severe than on non-electrified projects, likely because project emissions seem to be based on grid emissions rates that may not be favorable to electrified projects. We saw that projects lost anywhere from 1-8 points, usually around 4-6 points. CI projects may have a greater swing because of the smaller margin between point thresholds. LEED v4.1 may be equally or more attractive now for the Optimize Energy Performance Credit. My takeaway thus far is that the ~5 point cushion most of us try to plan for above a certification threshold may be lost with these changes, making achieving the next higher certification level require strategies that project teams wouldn’t have necessarily been planning on. Manage expectations for project teams and owners. The changes are good and making higher certification levels mean something as the industry improves, but teams need to work harder to achieve them. Cheers, Patrick Murphy, PE, LEED AP BD+C, CPHC Associate Principal | Director of Sustainable Design R.G. Vanderweil Engineers, LLP T 617.956.4804 | C 607.621.8047 www.vanderweil.com [cid:image001.gif@01DA43ED.CC3A1680] [cid:image002.gif@01DA43ED.CC3A1680] [cid:image003.gif@01DA43ED.CC3A1680] [cid:image004.jpg@01DA43ED.CC3A1680] From: Dave Hubk