Hello,
Just trying to wrap my head around this and looking some clarification.
Credit Substitution Guidance for v4.1.pdf (usgbc.org) indicates that one is allowed to register a project under v4.0 or v4.1 (we registered under v4.0), but can elect to substitute credits from v4.1 as desired. It is my interpretation that the Minimum energy performance and optimize energy performance pre-req and credit must be substituted to the v4.1 standard. Because otherwise, who would elect to do this over v4.0 ever? Why not just stick to requirements of v4 instead of trying to meet all of v4.1. What would the reasoning be and what are the advantages of doing so?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
February 5, 2021 - 2:02 pm
Suppose you were already doing a model to demonstrate code compliance with 90.1-2016. Perhaps someone wants to go above an beyond the minimium, to be at the leading edge of practice instead of lagging behind. I am sure there are many possible reasons. I am reminded of a t-shirt I saw at Green Build many years ago - The Point is Not the Points!