CI-2009 EAc4: Green Power

We would like to purchase carbon offsets instead of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). Can the LEED v4 EA Credit Green Power and Carbon Offsets be substituted on LEED v2009 projects?

Our project is installing a photovoltaic system that will be directly connected to the building\'s energy system, and which will be net-metered with the utility grid. The system is being financed through a power purchase agreement, which requires selling of the RECs to the public utility. A number of Credit Interpretation Rulings have been issued regarding the conditions which must be met for a project to qualify for renewable energy credits under EAc2. These CIRs seem to provide conflicting language. We are seeking clarification regarding these conditions for LEED-NCv2.2 and LEED-CSv2.0 projects. - CIRs dated 10/3/2006 and 5/16/2006 state that the sale of RECs is allowed from an on-site renewable energy system that claims credit under EAc2 if the building owner or energy system owner purchases a total amount of RECs equal to 200% of the system\'s annual rated energy output each year from another source, which must be Green-e eligible. Per the CIRs, the seller of the on-site RECs must also follow all established guidelines for the sale of RECs and not claim any of the environmental attributes for the on-site system. - An administrative ruling dated 7/19/2007, which updates conditions for on-site renewable systems to achieve EAc2 points, does not make reference to the purchase of 200% RECs as an acceptable method of credit achievement. - However, the same 200% REC purchase compliance path is also outlined in the new LEED 2009 BD&C Reference Guide. - A CIR dated April 15, 2009 rules that a project that hosts a PV system, which does not use the PV and/or the PV is fully financed, owned and sold to third parties, can achieve EAc2 by purchasing a total amount of RECs equal to 100% of the system\'s annual rated energy output. Please confirm that a project pursuing EAc2 under LEED-NC v2.2 (or LEED-CSv2.0) can achieve EAc2 points by utilizing the 200% REC purchase methodology as outlined in the 2006 CIRs and 2009 BD&C Reference Guide, or the 100% REC purchase methodology outlined in the 2009 CIR. We are also seeking clarification regarding the length of time for which RECs must be purchased. The 5/16/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased "each year." Does this mean that RECs must be purchased each year that the system\'s RECs are sold, indefinitely? Alternatively, the 10/3/2006 CIR states that RECs must be purchased for at least ten years. Please clarify if the REC purchase is required for 10 years, or for the entire length of the utility REC purchase agreement.

Our Campus has a 780 kW PV system installed as a joint venture with a Utility, which was made possible by partial funding from the sale of the REC\'s. The system is installed on 10 existing random building rooftops, with another 136 kW phase nearly commissioned on/near a sports field. We pay a small kWh premium, and will take full ownership after 20 years. PV output is dedicated for campus use, utilizing a combination of direct building connections and connections to the campus owned grid. We would like to apply for EAc2 on a campus basis for approximately 9 separate building projects that do not include their own individual PV installations. The cost to buy REC\'s for 10 years for the entire campus system is prohibitive under our current construction budgets. We propose that individual LEED Building Projects apply for EAC2 using the existing onsite PV renewable source, and buy 10-year REC\'s for 100% of the power claimed on the Template, as qualifying on-site renewable energy. The project REC\'s would be redeemed and solely retained by the individual Building Projects, and would not be shared for use on any other projects. Would purchasing REC\'s then restore the "associated environmental benefit" to the on-site generated renewable project energy claimed; and meet the sustainable intent of the credit as indicated in the CIR Ruling dated 7/20/2009?

Can a third party such as a utility company install and operate a Solar PV system on the rooftop of a LEED project, and can the owner achieve EA c2 credit (1%) and possibly an exemplary performance credit (5%) for Core and Shell V2.0 rating system? Intent of Credit: Encourage and recognize increasing levels of on-site renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel energy use. Approach: A new program has been initiated in the San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)territory named Clean Energy Systems. The objective of this program is to find usable roof space (at least 5,000 sf)in high performance buildings such as this project where a Solar PV system can be installed, operated, and maintained by SDG&E. The impetus for this unique program is to use available secure roof top space to increase its renewable energy system portfolio that will help SDG&E get to its 20% overall renewable energy portfolio as required by California State Law. It would be the intent of SDG&E to sign a long-term lease space contract with the Owner of this project and install at least 5,000 sf of Solar PV array up on the roof of this and possibly the other two future buildings (Buildings B and C)in this core and shell complex. As mentioned previously, the motivation of SDG&E will be to grid-tie this renewable energy to assist them in achieving the 20% portfolio threshold. The motivation of the Owner is to achieve at least one and maybe two LEED points even though they will not necessarily be using electricity generated from the Solar PV system. The owner would sign a contract with SDG&E before this project is submitted via LEED Online sometime in the Fall of this year 2008. We would provide evidence to this plus an implementation schedule for installation of the system on at least Building A during design submittals. Confirmation of Credit Intent: We believe this approach does meet the intent of the credit providing renewable energy self-supply in order to reduce the environmental effects of fossil fuel consumption (aka global warming)while providing the developer with very needed LEED points in order to achieve LEED Silver for its Building A project. We also believe that this approach will be occurring more frequently in the near future with progressive utilities offering to lease roof space on LEED-registered buildings for independent Solar PV farms. Please verify that this approach summarized above does fulfill the intent of Credit EA c2.

The project owner wishes to purchase a green power product that is not Green-e certified, but is asserted to comply with the technical aspects of the standard. How do we document equivalence?

Our project is located in Shanghai, China where renewable energy contracts are not directly available from the local utility company ruling out option 1 and option 2 for EAc6: Green Power. Rather than pursue the compliance path involving purchase of Green-e energy certified RECs from the US we would like to purchase Green-e climate certified carbon offsets for the greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the electricity used by the project over the two-year period.Because we do not have a complete picture of the annual energy usage of the space at this time we propose to use the LEED recommended default figure of 8kWh psf per year with a China specific emission factor to determine the necessary volume of offsets required to cover the calculated kWh of energy used (i.e. for two years\' worth of usage).A precedent for this compliance path was set by Haworth with their LEED CI v2.0 fit out in Washington, DC. Please confirm whether this would be acceptable for this project (or this type of project for LEED Interpretation) and advise any additional requirements of which we need to be congnizant when pursuing the alternative compliance path.

The project team is planning on installing a Cogeneration System that will take Biogas and turn it into Electricity to be used wholly on-site. The heat produced by this Cogeneration system will also fully be used on-site to preheat heating hot water and domestic hot water via a heat exchanger and potentially to power an absorption chiller.The building will receive the Biogas from a local Biogas provider and plans to enter into at least a 10 year contract with this provider to supply enough Biogas to the building to fully power the planned Cogeneration system. The contract will stipulate both that enough Biogas will be fed into the pipeline to meet required demands of the Cogeneration system and that the Biogas will be metered to prove that the actual amount of Biogas supplied meets the contracted requirements at all times.Though the Biogas is not being piped exclusively to the site (contractually it is supplied exclusively via project ownership funds), it is transported directly to the site in the existing natural gas pipeline. This approach achieves the exact same net result on the Natural Gas grid as piping Biogas exclusively to the project site in its own dedicated pipeline and allows the project to avoid having to dig up 100s of miles of land and lay a brand new pipeline to the project, something that would have a significantly detrimental effect on the local environment. In an urban environment like where the project is located, there is little or no option to be able to refine and extract Biogas on-site or even very close to a site, so the approach the project team is suggesting is the best and most reasonable alternative.Is this approach acceptable in accordance with the Reference Guide and Addendum 100001081 (November 1, 2011)?

Energy and Atmosphere Credit 6 - Green Power requires energy from renewable sources, defining renewable sources by the Centre for Resource Solutions Green E products certification requirements. In Canada, the CAGBC uses the Ecologo certification from Environment Canada Environmental Choice program for certification of their Green Power credit. This project which is located in Canada, is using the USGBC Core and Shell as there is no Core and Shell through the Canadian Green Building Council as of yet. While Green E certification exists in a small amount of Canadian distributors, most of the Canadian market uses Ecologo. In order to pursue the Green Power credit through the USGBC can the Ecologo certification be used in place of the Green E certification requirements? Will the submittal of the Ecologo certification replace the need to prove equivalency with the Green E certification requirements?

If a project receives an allotment of REC credits from a larger corporation in the required amount and states that the REC credits will not be counted towards or used for any other project within the corporation`s portfolio, will this meet the credit requirements? If yes, what if any additional submittal requirements are necessary to illustrate the intent of the credit has been met?

ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE: Green Power (EA Credit 6.0) Credit Interpretation Request Washington State does not require electric utilities to provide retail open-access. The Seattle Justice is required to purchase electrical power from the local municipal utility, Seattle City Light. Seattle City Light (SCL) wants to prove a LEED electrical energy product that qualifies for the EA Credit 6.0 to any LEED project within SCL\'s service area and proposes the following approach: Seattle City Light estimates that the current resource mix includes 25-28% renewable generation as defined by Green-e, composed of low impact hydro and possibly wind and other renewables. The utility will certify the low impact hydro component, estimated at 25% of the total mix, through the Low Impact Hydropower Institute. SCL will assist projects to "green up" the remaining 25% balance in order to achieve 50% renewable energy content by facilitating the purchase of Green Tags for participating LEED projects. Projects may elect to purchase green tags from existing or new renewable resources from SCL, the Bonneville Power Administration or other providers of green tags. As a part of the Credit documentation, the Seattle Justice Center will write a letter attesting that the mix or renewables serving the LEED project meets the following criteria: 1. SCL supplied renewable power plus Green Tags are equal to 50% of the project\'s energy consumption. 2. The energy and green tag sources meet the Green-e definition of renewable energy, which includes wind, solar, low impact hydro, methane recovery, etc., and, 3. Green Tags purchased have not been double sold, as verified by contract or purchase agreement.

LEED Energy and Atmosphere Green Power Credit Interpretation Request A CIR Ruling dated November 2003, allows the portion of Seattle City Light\'s Low Impact Hydropower Institute (LIHI) certified electrical production to be credited towards satisfying the requirements of LEED-NC v2.1 EA Credit 6.0 Green Power. Since May 2003 when the Skagit Hydropower Project received LIHI certification, Seattle City Light began offering green tags to all retail customers through its Green Up program. Customers have the option to purchase a portion or all of their electricity supply from the Stateline Wind Power Project. Stateline began producing electricity in December 2001. Seattle City Light would now like to provide one renewable power program to LEED and other retail electrical customers that combines the portion of generation certified through LIHI, with the balance of renewable power provided with Seattle City Light green tags, in order to allow projects to meet the requirements needed to satisfy the Green Power Credits available across all LEED products. To define the portion of LIHI provided generation, the following table shows the annual contributions of the LIHI certified Skagit Hydroelectric Project (Gorge, Diablo and Ross facilities), total annual generation, annual averages, and three year averages for the first three years of LIHI certification. (Read in table format) MWH | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 3 Year Average (Headings) Ross MWh | 673,558 | 674,640 | 465,810 | 604,669 Gorge MWh | 854,491 | 855,132 | 644,060 | 784,561 Diablo MWh | 736,778 | 737,626 | 542,715 | 672,373 Total LIHI Certified MWh | 2,264,827 | 2,267,398 | 1,652,585 | 2,061,603 Total Seattle City Light MWh | 9,440,301 | 9,561,757 | 9,711,154 | 9,571,071 Percentage LIHI | 23.99% | 23.71% | 17.02% | 21.54% City Light proposes that LEED Green Power credits within the Seattle City Light service area can be satisfied through a two year contract with Seattle City Light in which 21.54% of the renewable energy requirement is met by LIHI certified power from the Skagit Hydropower Project and the balance provided by green tags from the Stateline Wind Project.

APPROACH As a firm representing several projects seeking LEED certification, we respectfully submit the following Credit Interpretation Request (CIR). In an effort to achieve EA Credit 6 (EAc60), our firm performed due diligence and has identified a wholesale provider of Green Power. Although retail renewable electricity certificate (REC) products exist in the marketplace, these products are not optimal for high-volume purchasers. Potential purchasers of high-volumes of Green Power should have the option to choose a wholesale certificate-based transaction. Such transactions provide the high-volume buyer flexibility to choose the type of generation it wishes to support, the market from which Green Power is purchased (regulated or competitive), the location of the generation facilities, transparent price discovery, a choice of fuel-mix, and most importantly, flexible pricing structures.
PROPOSED SUBMITTAL ELEMENT An element of LEED Version 2.1 EAc60 requires the submittal of "a copy of the two-year electric utility purchase contract for power generated from renewable sources." With respect to the Potential Technologies & Strategies described on page 32 of the LEED Green Building Rating System, it is our position that this Submittal's requirement of an "electric utility purchase contract" does not accurately reflect the type of contract, or financial agreement, entered into when utilizing the following certificate-based procurement strategies: a) "Green-e certified Tradable Renewable Certificates" b) "other power supply that meets the Green-e renewable power definition" Therefore, we request and propose that the following be added or deemed an acceptable EAc60 Submittal: "a copy of the two-year electric utility purchase OR renewable electricity certificate contract for power generated from renewable sources." The interim acceptability and/or inclusion of the proposed language, as part of EAc60 Submittals, is significant in that it accurately reflects the financial agreement between owner, tenant or responsible party, and the seller. Currently, the owner, tenant or responsible party can procure Green Power from sources other than an electric utility or power marketer, therefore we feel that the EAc60 Submittals should be adapted to clearly represent the distinction and to facilitate and encourage an open and competitive Green Power market.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION It is our Intent to encourage the development and use of grid-source, renewable energy technologies on a net zero pollution basis through direct payment and/or support to renewable generation facilities. The direct payment will be outlined in a financial agreement between the project owner, tenant or other responsible party and the owner or operator of the renewable generation facility. We intend to employ the services of a wholesale renewable energy broker to facilitate and structure the financial agreement(s) so as to select the least-cost renewable electricity and /or REC provider(s). Our Green Power procurement strategy includes promoting the development of new capacity through the sourcing of renewable electricity certificates in both competitive and regulated electricity markets, with or without the availability of a green pricing program or retail certificate-based products. Moreover, the Requirements set-forth in EAc60 will be met and/or exceeded in a brokered certificate-based Green Power transaction. The wholesale renewable energy broker will provide documentation guaranteeing the renewable generation facility meets and/or exceeds the criteria and requirements set-forth by the Center for Resource Solutions as defined in \'Attachment C: Green-e National Tradable Renewable Certificate (TRC) Standard\' (http://www.green-e.org/pdf/trc_standard.pdf). In addition, the wholesale renewable energy broker will arrange independent, third-party verification to guarantee the renewable electricity was produced and sold as defined in the contract or transaction agreement. Furthermore, a year-end audit will be performed by an independent, third-party accountant verifying that no double counting of renewable generation has occurred. It is our continued position that the proposed language for the EAc60 Submittal Element will promote the growth and development of the renewable energy industry and related sustainable markets. Therefore, we respectfully request that the Project Manager accept the proposed language referenced above and/or grant EAc60 credit to the owner, tenet or responsible party who submits to USGBC a copy of a two-year renewable electricity certificate contract for power generated from renewable sources.

What is required in order to document equivalence with Green-e certified power

The LEED EB:O&M Reference Guide does not specify precisely when during the LEED application review process Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) must be purchased, it only requires that the RECs meet specific percentages of the building\'s total energy use from the performance period.Our project team would like to wait until after the final review to file an appeal in order to purchase RECs and have EAc4 points included in the project\'s total before accepting certification.Can EAc4 thresholds be met by RECs purchased after the final review when filed through the appeal process?