We are completing our pursuit of this Pilot Credit. Overall it went well. Here are a few comments and observations:

  • First, I was a bit surprised that there are only two previous comments on this thread. Have others been pursuing this pilot credit but posting comments elsewhere? Also, Atlas –Is there an update on your post?
  • We found that by pursuing the pilot, and explaining the background to the team, we were able help show the ready-mix supplier the benefit of obtaining mix specific EPD’s. While not explicitly required as part of the procurement process, we were able to obtain supplier (and mix) specific EPD’s for all the mixes used on the project. Prior to our project the local market (and state) did not have any mix specific EPD’s in EC3, so hopefully this will help other projects as well.
  • We used EC3 to perform our calculations. Stacy, Phil, and others at Building Transparency were very responsive and helpful as the new concrete EPD’s needed to be added to the tool.
  • One observation for teams to be aware of (and anecdotally I am hearing confusion about). Measuring a percent reduction from the CLF baselines is a different exercise than the reduction one may see as part of the WBLCA credit when measuring compared to industry average data / EPD’s. This is because the CLF baselines / UW methodology also includes an uncertainty factor and uses a burden of the doubt methodology. For example for the project we just completed we performed both WBLCA and the procurement pilot credit.  The WBLCA showed a ~15% reduction in GWP whereas the pilot shows a ~40%. I think this is ok since the credits have different intents, users just need to be aware of the difference.