Refurbished or repurposed items would be less costly than purchasing new, i.e.: a refurb task chair may be free or half the cost of a new one. The credit lanugage states to "include the total project cost for reused and new furniture. Determine the percentage of reuse ...based on cost..." By cost is it acceptable to use the value rather than the actual purchse cost of the item?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
170 thumbs up
January 26, 2024 - 11:27 am
The LEED v4.1 ID+C Reference guide provides further detail on this: "Reused elements may originate from a previous project space, a third-party reseller, salvage yard, or other documentable source. This cost entered in the calculation will be the actual cost paid or, if the material came from on-site, the replacement value. The replacement value can be determined by pricing a comparable material in the local market; exclude labor and shipping. If a project team receives a discount from a vendor, the replacement value should reflect the discounted price as opposed to the list value. When the actual cost paid for the reused or salvaged material is below the cost of an equivalent new item, use the higher value (actual cost) cost of the new equivalent item in the calculations. When the cost to reclaim an item found on-site is less than the cost of an equivalent new item, use the cost of the new item (or replacement cost). Reuse elements included in this credit can also contribute to MR credit Sourcing of Raw Materials."