2018 ENR Green Building Survey

I'll bite. I love the idea of a more useful competition, incentivizng the desire outcomes. Some additional ideas:

1. Publicly published (website?) Operational Carbon Emission Reduction (year/year)
   1. Including Office HQs, Jobsite trailers, Fleet Vehicles+Fuel, Etc.
   2. Metric options: CO2e/$, CO2e/employee, Etc.
2. Ratio of Revenue from Sustainability projects, not absolute value.
   1. Registered LEED, LBC, PH, Etc.
   2. How to include very important non-registered projects, such as ZNE and PV projects?
3. What should the absolute revenue floor be to make the list meaningful? (i.e. not 100 contractors that did one project that year, and it was green)
4. Staff Participation in Continuing Ed (teaching or attending seminars, conferences, Etc.)
5. Corporate Sponsorship of Sustainability Events

Steven, have you seen the scorecard that architect magazine uses. Is there somewhere we can get ahold of it? Regards, Jenn Taranto LEED AP ID+C, BD+C & USGBC Faculty WELL AP & WELL Faculty Director of Sustainability Structure Tone, LLC 711 Atlantic Ave., Boston, MA 02111 t: 617.348.2800 c: 617.593.8750 Twitter: @JennTaranto jennifer.taranto@structuretone.com

Hi Steven, Thanks for your thoughts and the email. I would be interested in also seeing the scorecard that architect magazine uses. One thing to keep in mind is that ENR's "Top" anything lists are based solely on revenue. The "Top Green Contractors" is literally based on the revenue of projects that sought a green building certification of some type. The survey does ask for quantity of LEED and/or other green credential holders, but it does not give a percentage compared to the entire staff. A couple on comments on your proposed metrics: 1. Publicly published (website?) Operational Carbon Emission Reduction (year/year) - many companies are still privately owned and do not publish any reports publically, including a CSR and/or carbon emission data. I do not think this particular metric fair to privately-held companies, as they won't be able to score in this area. At least asking the question about revenue gives all companies - public or private the same opportunity. 2. It would be nice to know what percentage of all of the company's offices have achieved some type of 3rd party sustainable certification (i.e. LEED, WELL, Fitwel, etc.). This would be a fitting tell of the company's that walk-the-walk, and not just talk a good game. Not sure if this should count towards earning the company's place on the Top 100 Green Contractors List, but it would be interesting. 3. It would also be nice to know the percentage of employees who are credentialed with 3rd party green credentials that are required to have continuing education. For example, LEED AP (legacy) should not count. This demonstrates a company's commitment to continuing education for employees to maintain credentials rather than those that have it allowed to go by the way side, aligning with your comment "Staff Participation in Continuing Ed (teaching or attending seminars, conferences, Etc.)." It would also be nice to know how many companies are supporting employees who are "Faculty" of the green organizations, as this too is a commitment the company makes that likely costs them money rather than makes them money. Again, I don't know that this should count towards earning a spot on the list, but would be something that would be interesting to know. 4. I don't think the ratio of revenue from 3rd party certified projects compared to the overall revenue is a fair assessment, as some construction companies, especially those are very large (revenue-based), have a large amount of work in market sectors that simply are not eligible to earn a green certification of any type. I do think the companies that have a market-focus on 3rd party certified green projects should be able to be recognized, therefore an absolute value of revenue is a fair assessment. 5. I believe ENR's survey includes both 3rd party registered and certified projects - the company just had to have revenue for those projects. It only evaluates revenue, not back-log for future projects that are registered, but the work hasn't started yet (no revenue). 6. It would be interesting to see how companies could include ZNE projects, but it is important to note that sustainability/green is not simply about minimizing energy use. There always has been a problem with green washing, therefore the only way to keep everyone on the same playing field is to only count the revenue from "3rd party" projects. There are many large projects that have high revenues, and if they add a visible PV system or urban-scale wind tower for "marketing" this is not the same as making well-informed, value-based decisions that benefit the building occupants or those that actually are following through on what they said they would do, hence being evaluated by a 3rd party. The purpose for creating green building rating systems to begin with was to get everyone on the same page and minimize green washing. With many green building rating systems available, the ENR survey opens the doors to more companies who build parking ramps, etc. 7. I do agree with trying to show a company's commitment to sustainability, therefore knowing what "green" organizations they are members of seems to be important, along with sponsorship of sustainability events, company's commitment to paying for the continuing education of their employees, employee sustainability engagement programs, etc. All construction companies are able to track their spending via their accounting system, but I think this just confirms that some companies have larger marketing and educational budgets than others. But, frankly, where do you start and stop? Do you start to put values on employees' time who volunteer with green organizations on a local and/or national an/or international basis? Again, while this would be great survey information, it seems that if a company makes the ENR Top 100 Green Contractor's list, their effort for marketing and supporting their employees are probably things that contributed to them being awarded any negotiated green projects (demonstrated by the revenue). It speaks nothing to the hard-bid contractors who do a lot of state and/or federal work, which are required to seek 3rd party certifications. 8. What about ENR awards? Should companies earn bonus points for having submitted projects to earn any of ENR's Top sustainable/green project awards? 9. What about companies who have partnerships with the sustainable arm of government agencies such as the EPA and/or DNR? 10. Should companies get penalized for any EPA and/or DNR environmentally-related fines? I think you get where I am going with this. While I do agree that there are many ways to evaluate how green or not green a company is, ENR is simply surveying companies on revenue for all of their "Top" lists - not just the Top 100 Green List. Overall, in my opinion, the more simple, the better. If they expand beyond revenue, I would suggest percentage of their own offices/buildings that have achieved a 3rd party certification (walking the walk), and after that, percentage of their staff that have earned a 3rd party credential who are required to have CEUs (employee engagement/education). All of which are measurable and can be verified, are not subjective, and gives all companies the same opportunity, regardless if they are public or privately held, or how their project work is contracted (negotiated or hard bid). Thanks again for reaching out to the masses and soliciting opinions.

Hi Theresa and all, some additional comments/thoughts: "1. Publicly published (website?) Operational Carbon Emission Reduction (year/year) - many companies are still privately owned and do not publish any reports publically, including a CSR and/or carbon emission data. I do not think this particular metric fair to privately-held companies, as they won't be able to score in this area. At least asking the question about revenue gives all companies - public or private the same opportunity." CM: Determining and publicly disclosing carbon emission data of private companies not obligated to CSR carbon reporting is kind of the point. It doesn't mean that privately owned companies can't participate.  However, verifying the accuracy of disclosed information would admittedly be tricky.  In all cases, we have a carbon problem, very specifically related to energy.  Of course sustainability encompasses much more than energy and atmospheric carbon, but considering that it is THE problem it is remiss to have Green awards that don't include carbon accounting in some way.  I think it would be great if we could collectively determine and agree to how Construction Companies account for operational carbon (what's in and what's out) and standardize carbon reporting practices across our industry at all scales.  Perhaps that could even serve as a model to other industries if we do it well!  Best regards, Conor McGuire

Thanks for the weighting Steven. I was also able to get a copy of the survey that Architect Magazine used in 2017. Attached here. It is an interesting subset of questions. There are questions related to philanthropy, employees/diversity/inclusion/benefits, revenue, projects, 2030 challenge, Rating Systems, material transparency, etc. Take a look at this and we can see what else we might imagine the new criteria to be for contractors.

Thanks Steve! Theresa Lehman , LEED Fellow, LEED AP BD+C, ID+C, WELL AP, Fitwel Ambassador Director of Sustainable Services theresa.lehman@miron-construction.com Miron Construction Co., Inc. PH 920.969.7314 | FX 920.969.7393 1471 McMahon Drive | Neenah, WI 54956 [Earth Day 2018 | How will you make a difference?] Miron Construction Co., Inc. is proud to be an Equal Opportunity Employer. We welcome and encourage ALL qualified applicants to apply for our open career opportunities. This email and attachment(s) may contain privileged and confidential information and are intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Any other use, printing, copying, forwarding or retention of this email, is strictly prohibited.

Appreciate this thread. I’d love to talk further on the carbon emissions front. It’s one of the few things we can fairly accurately track, and control in terms of site emissions, regardless of an owner’s commitment to green building, so I do think it should be included somehow. And we have been having this conversation for years now re: the revenue metric used in the ranking. So fully on board with this! Thanks, Stacy Sent from my iPhone On Apr

Would love to know what everyone is doing to accurately track.

I'm also interested in furthering this discussion. Thanks for posting! 

I'm also interested in furthering this discussion. Thanks for posting! 

I am also interested in this discussion as it comes up every year when the survey results are posted. When is the SCL gathering at Greenbuild? How do I sign up? Thanks!

Yes PLEASE Sent from my iPhone

I’d like to participate in this discussion as well. Thanks. [cid:image001.gif@01D0C2C9.CBAE09A0] Katie Rothenberg / Vice President, Sustainability & Innovation office: (703) 289-9221 / cell: (301) 830-3432 HITT Contracting Inc. / 2900 Fairview Park Drive, Falls Church, Virginia 22042 [hitt_elevating] Washington, DC / Atlanta / California / Charleston / New York / Richmond / Seattle / South Florida / Texas F

I do think we need to have some focus on where we want this group to go and what we want to accomplish. Let's start with an overarching mission of the group.