Hi,
I have read in this forum that if no deicer is applied during a performance period that a project would be in compliance with that element of the SSc2 credit requirements.
However, wouldn't the policy still have to spell out a plan that would be compliant? What compliant methodology can be included in the plan that would be capable of doing the job? LEED interpretation 10146 now requires that no more than 5% of the deicer contain sodium or calcium chloride. I know of no economically feasible alternative to sodium or calcium chloride for application on large areas.
Does any one know of a way to achieve this credit for a typical commercial office building with a surface parking lot located in an area that gets a substantial amount of snow?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Trista Brown
Project DirectorWSP USA
456 thumbs up
October 9, 2015 - 6:07 pm
Hi Bill, you're right that the plan still needs to spell out sustainability criteria and metrics for snow and ice removal, even if you don't apply deicer. The LEED Interpretation also raises the bar, as you noted. But the good news is that the requirement that compliant deicers have to be used 20% of the time is still in place... so this means that up to 80% of your deicers can be non-compliant, by weight or volume, and you can still earn the credit. Hopefully using a combination of best practices (reducing treatment areas, using anti-icing products, escalating deicer products based on snow/ice severity, etc) will allow you to hit that 20% threshold over your performance period. Hope this helps!