LEED is a voluntary system to measure how sustainable a building is. In my happy thinking, LEED was a stepping stone that would simply dissappear once its underlying benefits were widely understood (we choose to build green because logic compels it). The more sensible evolution, though, might be to codify those parts of LEED that have broad, implementable benefit.
Truth is, in the budget and time constrained world of the construction project, we don't always do what logic compels, but we do tend to do what the building code compels. For example, the International Building Code (used for much of what gets built in the US), requires fire sprinklers in most buildings. And while we know in our bones that fire sprinklers save lives and reduce property damage at a level that probably matches cost (and human life is worth...?), sprinklers would be on the budget chopping block for many projects were they not required by code.
So those pieces of LEED that prove to have irrefutable societal benefit could be moved from the voluntary, experimental world of LEED to enforceable code, so that they would not be sacrificed on the twin altars of the deadline and the budget. LEED could continue to serve indefinitely as a testing lab for the development of code-worthy sustainable construction practice.
Here's one article on the anounced collaboration between the US Green Building Council (LEED) and the International Code Council (International Building Code) to develop a model green building code.
Photo: Georg Hoermann on flickr
[Post-script: Here's the original editorial that prompted the post: Why the World Needs Another Green Building Standard ]
Recent Comments