I'm not sure where this would be appropriate. The project is a LEED CI being built into a LEED Core and Shell project. The windows are 128" wide and the only blinds we can find that fit that width without being seamed contain some PVC content. (our experience with seaming blinds has not been exemplary). In this instance, does this address: Materials and Resources? Controllability of environment? daylighting and views? or does it matter at all?

Robert, we don't have an example filled-out form, but there is a guide with some notes on our page of tipsheets.

I would say 'yes" to leaving them alone. What do you mean by checking them complete? That would imply to me that you've completed documenting them, which you haven't.

I agree with you, James - no one ever said that LEED (or any other rating system) is perfect. It's a starting point, and it's been a good start in my opinion. Now it has to keep evolving. It's simply a tool that we can choose to use, or not. LEED 2009 addressed a number of issues, but I feel very strongly that it needs to go much further. We have a long way to go before we are approaching anything close to real sustainability in architectural design & construction.

The problem we still face in practice is just getting to that starting point. Asking clients (private, not government or institutional) to build to a LEED standard can still be very difficult because of the cost of certification. I know, I know, it's a small percentage of the overall project cost...but try telling that to a client who needs to get the greatest value out of every penny. It's a tough sell, and as the certification costs continue to go up (along with the costs of exams, workshops, reference guides, etc.), it gets harder to make the case.

I agree with something that Rick said in the interview about what happens when people move in and start using a green building. I believe that human behaviour is the greatest challenge of sustainability. We can achieve LEED Platinum or even the Living Building Challenge in our designs, but it doesn't matter if the building occupants don't understand how it works and how their actions are intertwined with the building and its systems. That's the missing link: we have to connect people to their environment, both built and natural. And that requires thinking beyond credits and points.

What is perfect? What I like about LEED is it has created a benchmark to improve the way we build and operate our buildings in a manner that is less destructive to the environment and provides for improved indoor environmental quality. We are early into the widespread adoption of the sustainable building movement in this country. The Europeans have been doing this (particularly the Germans) for decades and have codified the process. Is there room for improvement in LEED? Yes, of course! But there is a means in place to allow for graduated improvements to the rating systems. At some point I expect the rating system to incorporate a means to vet the actual performance of these buildings. After all, we can't expect to control or improve the outcome if there isn't some form of reliable, unbiased feedback, now can we?

That said, to these people who are so quick to throw stones at the rating systems or at the sustainable building movement: I challenge them to offer real suggestions for improvements to the rating system, keeping in mind it is a voluntary system, and the idea is to encourage widespread adoption of its concepts.

Henry (& others) should have read the Development of a California Commercial Building Energy Benchmarking Database & Energy Benchmarking In Commercial Office Buildings DOE papers. They said what NBI said before they said it. :)
"Points-Based Rating Systems, including (LEED), do not allow comparisons against other buildings, rather, they provide standards and guidelines to measure how efficient and environmentally friendly a facility is and compared it to best-practice standards."
"Statistical distributions of office building EUIs developed from CBECS data can be used for comparing the performance of an individual building to others within its respective census division. Median EUIs are more reliable comparators when it is desired to compare the energy use of a sample of local buildings to CBECS census division statistics. Averages can be strongly influenced by a small number of buildings with excessive individual EUIs. This occurs in the CBECS database and will occur in local sampling of office buildings."

Hi,
I'm working on a LEED project with both residental and commercial spaces. The building is a multi-family dwelling with commercial shops at ground level. What type of shops will rent the commercial spaces are not yet decided and will not be decided until the construction of the building is completed. How should I treat the commercial spaces when LEED certifying the whole project building?

Robert, given that it's mixed-use, it's eligible to be certified under LEED-NC or CS. You're correct that LEED for Homes is not an option.
There was  similar forum post about a townhouse project in China that led to an opposite conclusion—it may be worth it to you to review that.

Ryan, would you mind reposting this question to our LEED-CI MRc4 forum? I think you're more likely to get an answer there. Thanks!

Hi Melissa, I'm sure that an essay could be written on this subject. Perhaps you could say something about where you're coming from in looking for this information?
I'll mention a couple key points. In LEED-NC, the main rating system, ground  source heat pumps would be a potential energy efficiency strategy under EAp2 and EAc1. LEED-NC doesn't have a credit specifically for GHG reductions, and the water efficiency credits cover technologies like toilets that consumer water, while heat pumps use water in a closed loop.
I'm not that familiar with where ground-source heat pumps are being used, but anecdotally I would say they're more common in heating climates.
I may be on the losing side of this battle, but I also think it's important to distinguish between geothermal energy, which uses heat from the Earth's mantle to make electricity and provide heat (as is done in Iceland, for example), and ground-source heat pumps, aka geoexchange, which use the Earth's surface as a place to extract or reject heat in a way that increases the efficiency of the system, but in which the Earth does not ADD any energy.