FutureAir

Author: futurea6_new

Clean Air and Productivity

January 2019

Finally, something we can all agree on–the value of productivity. In our capitalist economy, employers and employees alike search for ways to increase worker output. Facebook and other large corporations have entire campuses for offices. These campuses provide cafeterias, gyms, and dry-cleaning facilities for employees. As a result, employees spend more time on campus and attentive and less time around town distracted.

The secret to productivity is about the workplace environment, but perhaps it is more intuitive than big business, big perks, and bright colors.

Recent research shows that indoor air quality can affect cognitive functions and our health and well being. Cognitive functions are those mental processes that lead to the acquisition of knowledge and allow us to carry out our daily tasks. And are definitely related to the air we breathe. A study by Harvard Business Review reported a five to six percent increase in worker productivity when the Air Quality Index (AQI) was reported as “good,” or between 0-50, rather than “poor,” or between 150-200 (as published by the EPA).

The researchers explained the variations in productivity as a consequence of particulate matter in the air. Particulate matter enters through our nose, mouth, and skin and enters the bloodstream. It travels to our central nervous system (CNS) and lodges in the brain stem. This causes inflammation of the CNS, cortical stress, and cerebrovascular damage. “Greater exposure to fine particles is associated with lower intelligence and diminished performance over a range of cognitive domains,” the study concludes.

The effects of air pollution on worker’s health have been previously researched but focused on workers in outdoor environments. The Harvard study demonstrated, for the first time, that knowledge-based employees also face the dangers of air pollution indoors.

Indoor spaces are containers for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). VOCs are the by-products of building materials and cleaning supplies and other pollutants often caused by humans. The unusual combination of these compounds makes them uniquely dangerous. A study conducted in 2013, demonstrated how a just-painted room had a similar effect on participants as consuming alcohol (Satish et al).

A study conducted in 2015 tested cognitive functions amongst participants in different building settings. The buildings were divided into “Conventional”, “Green,” or low VOCs, and “Green +” or “Green” with higher ventilation rates. The experiment was conducted for six days, and on two of those days, researchers increased the amount of CO₂ in the air. Each day the participants took a test that examined nine cognitive functions. The “Green” setting demonstrated a 61% increase in cognitive function, while the “Green +” setting showed a 101% increase in cognitive function.

All this knowledge comes at a cost worth paying attention to. The standard for indoor air quality comes from The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). However, recent research shows that these standards do not maximize employee health. The standards strike a balance between what is acceptable and what is affordable. Green buildings are more effective at increasing productivity and reducing health risks, but they cost a pretty penny.

Increased air quality often requires newer systems and greater ventilation which means more energy. A Harvard study found, “doubling the ventilation rate would cost less than $40 per person per year in all climate zones investigated, and would improve the performance of workers by 8%. This was equated with a $6,500 increase in employee productivity per year.” Although the initial cost may be great, “the increased productivity of an employee is more than 150 times higher than the energy costs associated with increased ventilation.” Though green buildings may impact carbon emissions more than necessary.

The workplace, home, and classroom should be spaces that stimulate the mind. If the workplace is a space we feel good in we will be more productive, if the classroom is invigorating it will encourage children to learn, and if the home is comfortable we will relax. For years we have designed spaces to be ergonomically sound and attractive. Now, with environmental insight constantly advancing, we can create spaces to maximize our attention, productivity, and health.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Change, Tom, Graff Zivin, Joshua, Gross, Tal, and Neidell, Matthew, “Air Pollution is Making Office Workers Less Productive,” Harvard Business Review, 2016.
MacNaughton, Piers, Satish, Ush, Guillermo, Jose, Lauren, Cedeno, Flanigan, Skye, Vallarino, Jose, Coull, Brent, Spengler, John, and Allen, Joseph, “The impact of working in a green certified building on cognitive function and health,” Building and Environment, Volume 114, 2017.
UL Environment, “Technical Brief,” Effects of Indoor Environmental Quality on Performance and Productivity, 2016.

Photo
Courtesy of Flickr user OliBac via Creative Commons

Air Pollution under Trump

December 2018

Back in October, President Trump tweeted a bastardized WHO (World Health Organization) map that purported the U.S. had the cleanest air in the world. Although the U.S. has cleaner air than more populated countries in Asian and African regions, it is far from unpolluted, and farther from innocent.

The original WHO map displayed the levels of PM2.5 around the world. PM stands for particulate matter, and PM2.5 denotes small, but inhalable, particles present in the air that can cause serious health issues. PM2.5 comes from coal power plant emissions, automobiles, wildfires, and other sources. The EPA set the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PM2.5 at 12μg/m3 in 2012. The current average for the Northeast region in the United States falls beneath 12. However, in the West and the Rockies, the PM2.5 rises above the standard.

The EPA says, “Despite great progress in air quality improvement, approximately 111 million people nationwide lived in counties with pollution levels above the primary NAAQS in 2017.” According to Apte Research group, the levels of PM2.5 in the air reduce life expectancy one whole year on average. Of course, that average considers the best and worst air quality regions. The Apte Research Group reports life expectancy can be reduced by 0.4 years in the cleanest countries and 1.8 years in the most polluted.

Throughout the Obama administration, the U.S. took steps to create regulations to reduce PM2.5, however, in the wake of Andrew Wheeler’s appointment as director of the EPA, regulations are being rolled back, or in some cases, retrospectively revised. In October, the EPA discontinued its air pollution review panel, which makes regulations revisions easier to achieve.

Despite the looming government shutdown, the EPA on December 28, proposed a revision to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The proposed guideline revision would reduce public health as a factor in determining dangerous air pollutants. The Washington Post reported, “the change would prevent regulators from calculating positive health effects — known as “co-benefits” — that come from reducing pollutants other than those being targeted.”

Evidence suggests that Mercury restrictions prevent an average of 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks annually amongst workers. However, the EPA’s actions now suggest, “it was inappropriate to factor in such co-benefits.” The irony is the EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment. It seems Andrew Wheeler is struggling or doesn’t care enough to follow the compounding effects of air pollution. Perhaps all the PM2.5 in the air is making his thinking hazy.

The correlations are clear, greenhouse gases are the largest emitter of PM2.5. PM2.5 pollutes the air, is hazardous to breathe, and reduces life expectancy. Now is NOT the time to turn back on progress, but to continue building awareness and understand the effects of air pollution on human health in order to live long healthy lives.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Apte JS, Brauer M, Cohen AJ, Ezzati M, Pope CA III, “Ambient PM2.5 reduces global and regional life expectancy,” Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 2018.
Dennis, Brady and Eliperin, Juliet, “EPA to make it harder to tighten mercury rules in the future,” The Washington Post, 2018.
Guillén, Alex, “Trump touts U.S. air quality — under Obama,” Politico, 2018.
Sengupta, Somini, “Air Pollution Is Shortening Your Life. Here’s How Much,” The New York Times. 2018.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Trends.”

Photo
Cheshire, Ohio. Captured by Maddie MgGarvey for The New York Times.

The Age of Supersensing

September 2018

We live in the Age of Super Sensing. That is according to Satoshi Nakagawa. Nakagawa is a professor at the University of Tokyo and the Chief Technology Officer of Sensingnet, Inc., a Tokyo-based AI design, research, and consulting startup in the IoT space. For two years, Sensingnet has hosted an international conference centered around advanced sensing design and technology aptly named “The Age of Super Sensing”.

The 2018 conference, “The Age of Super Sensing,” empathetically asked, “What kind of design can we offer that will help to realize a society of rich diversity?” Speakers included professors from the University of Tokyo and Waseda University, business leaders from fledgling startups like FutureAir and tech giants like Microsoft, and members of the Asahi Kasei Corporation.

Despite varied backgrounds, all speakers expressed an eagerness to make the world a more habitable place through the production and use of socially good technology.

Masayuki Nakao, a professor at the University of Tokyo, highlighted the need for his students to understand and feel discomfort in order to direct their minds toward solutions. Through immersion in discomfort–and evaluation of implications–Nakao’s students are better equipped to address unique solutions, such as new umbrellas and pillows designed to facilitate healthy sleeping patterns.

Katsumi Watanabe, a professor at Waseda University and Adjunct Professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, urged listeners to consider the decision-making process of human beings. Imagine decision-making as the culmination of complex interactions between explicit and implicit processes between listeners and others. This process creates a kind of contagion in cognition and behavior which leads to an interconnectedness between human beings on a greater scale.

Haiyan Zhang, the Innovation Director at Microsoft Research, showcased a set of custom-designed solutions for problems that people face on an everyday basis. A feedback watch solved an inability to write legibly after an early diagnosis of Parkinson’s. A ten-year-old girl with severe memory loss used a specialty tablet to aid in learning and recall.

Simone Rothman, founder, and CEO of FutureAir, a cleantech startup that develops design-forward solutions to address indoor air pollution and energy consumption, spoke of the growing need to measure and manage indoor air quality. Simone believes firmly that which gets measured gets changed. Her company’s first product–SAM™, or Smart Air Manager–includes innovative sensing technology, IoT integration capability, and color-coded feedback to allow for constant IAQ measurement.

The Age of Super Sensing 2018 also announced FICTION, a gallery where “creators, with a passion for conceptualizing a prosperous future, exhibit their prototypes to the public.” The FICTION gallery will be located in New York City, at 525 West 26th Street. It will include exhibitions, workshops, and a “design bar”, which will provide a place for creators to stop in and collaborate on ideas.

Between this announcement and the conference’s panel of lectures, Sensingnet and Satoshi Nakagawa reaffirmed their desire to bring technology and humanity together. The result? A future blissfully free of clichéd dystopian notions and instead full of hope and promise.

References:
Sensingnet, https://www.sensingnet.co.jp/

Photo (Sensingnet)

Familiar tools for cleaner air

September 2018

The great challenge we face with indoor air pollution is knowing our enemy.

Pollutants come from varied sources, such as household cleaning supplies, pets, chemical finishes, paints, cosmetics, etc. Some of these are harmful chemicals that end up trapped in our home and workspaces. Niko Järvinen of Naava, a company that utilizes plant systems to improve indoor air, says the effects of independent chemicals on the human body may be known, but the health effects of chemical interactions indoors remain uncertain.

Further research has demonstrated the correlation between indoor air pollution and short-term health determinants, such as ENT irritation, headaches, fatigue, and dizziness. Additionally, long-term exposure has been associated with hazardous health issues, such as respiratory and heart diseases, cancer, and potential fatalities.

In order to combat the chemical conundrum, Järvinen’s company installs green walls that act as biofilters. Specific plants absorb the air and purify it at the root level then release clean air in return. The resulting air is far from sterile. The biofiltration systems mimic air composition found in nature which serves to improve health. The resulting air maintained 30-50 chemicals rather than the 300+ chemicals found in an office environment without filtration.

There are even more ways to reduce air pollution inside the home or workplace. Recent research from the University of Utah has demonstrated the potential for indoor air pollution mitigation through the use of HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) units. Neal Patwari and Kyeong T. Min set up twelve air pollution sensors in four separate homes. The sensors were distributed inside and outside of the homes. Each home had its HVAC systems set to one of three variables: “Normal,” or HVAC oscillation based on temperature, “SmartAir,” in which the HVAC system operated on temperature and air quality data, and “Always On.”

The experiment concluded that HVAC systems that only responded to temperature data did not clean the air as well as the “SmartAir” or “Always On” settings. The “SmartAir” and “Always On” settings equivalently provided clean air, but the “SmartAir” setting proved 58% more energy efficient! HVAC systems that oscillate according to both air quality and temperature measurements maximize air quality and energy efficiency. But do not forget to clean or change your air filter when necessary.

We may not know the exact sources of indoor air pollution but we can measure and mitigate it. At FutureAir, we are developing SAM to measure air quality so we can act when the air quality is poor–turn on the HVAC, open a window, buy a few plants, or use an essential oil diffuser to reduce pollutants in the home or workplace.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

References
Gillman, Steven, “Artificial forest air and light-based chemical reactions tackle indoor pollution,” Phys.org.
Olson, Annaliese, “Air Quality at Home: 10 Ways to Purify Your Indoor Environment Naturally,” The Environmental Magazine.
University of Utah, “Clear the Air,” EurekAlert!.

Photo
NAAVA

Cleantech Generates Jobs

August 2018

The New Climate Economy (NCE), OVO Energy and Imperial College London have published two independent studies highlighting the financial savings resulting from a transition to a low-carbon economy.

The most significant takeaway is that, through full-scale integration of low-carbon and sustainable technologies into the current global economic system, the NCE stipulates financial benefits of over $26 trillion dollars (USD) through to 2030. This figure is derived by considering not only renewable energy development, but also the issues of smart urban development, the water economy, and numerous land use cases.

A move towards low-carbon alternatives would alleviate high subsidies for fossil fuels–twice as high as those for renewable energy–and feed into the desire for 1,400 major companies and large development banks to future-proof their investments via carbon pricing schemes. Currently, electricity generation is comprised of 65% fossil fuels, more than half of which is coal, while, despite their recent uptake, renewables still only account for 24% of the global energy mix. As capacity for renewable energy is increased, NCE analysts stipulate the associated savings could reach up to $4.2 trillion dollars.

Further stipulations by NCE indicate the creation of 65 million jobs due to the global clean economy and, according to the authors of one of the studies, there are already examples of modern schemes to ensure that the workforce currently employed by the coal industry would not be hard hit. For example, in China four to six million people could potentially retire earlier than is usually possible for workers, to avoid coal workers entering unemployment at the final stages of their work life.

OVO and Imperial College London found that reduction in systems costs such as through thermal storage and electric heating could save up to $5 billion, representing one of the lowest cost pathways to heat decarbonization. Additionally, intelligence EV and vehicle-to-grid charging could create savings of nearly $4.6 billion.

The authors calculated three scenarios with varying degrees of renewable energy penetration, the proportion of electric heating, and the use of EVs. The most ambitious scenario sees 25 million EVs on British roads, 21 million homes equipped with electric heating, and assumes that 93% of electricity comes from renewable sources.

The entailing carbon emissions reduction would be around 65%. This scenario could ensure global temperatures stay within the 2°C target, if it was achieved by 2040, the authors claim.

Toby Ferenczi, OVO’s Director of Strategy, said, “Electrification and the intelligent use of residential energy technologies are absolutely critical to bringing down emissions and powering the future sustainably. This research shows that households up and down the country can each play a role in creating a balanced, flexible, and almost completely renewable energy system while at the same time saving over $258 a year.”

Click here to read the full article.

The Ecological Living Module

August 2018

For as long as there have been people, we have needed shelter: a place we can call home, where we can feel safe from the dangers and stresses of the world. Yet today, despite the millennia of progress that humanity has enjoyed, there are still nearly one billion people who live in informal settlements, often without access to energy and sanitation. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted and advocated for by the United Nations, seeks to provide both decent lives and adequate housing to those people in a manner that also accounts for the impact the housing sector has on our planet.

Achieving this goal in the face of growing urbanization requires smart, new housing solutions. This is where ELM–the Ecological Living Module–comes in. The Ecological Living Module is a collaboration between the UN Environment and UN Habitat, along with partners led by the Yale University School of Architecture and the Yale’s Center for Ecosystems in Architecture (CEA) with Gray Organschi Architects at the design helm. It is a 22-square-meter new eco-housing module intended to spark debate and new ideas on how to redesign the way we live; it was on display throughout July 2018 on the UN Plaza in New York City.

The Ecological Living Module is designed to demonstrate strategies for residential construction that provide high-quality, efficient, and flexible housing while supporting sustainable development in its region of deployment. For the New York City version of the Ecological Living Module, this included materials, systems, and micro-farming produce appropriate for the corresponding locality; as future iterations of the Ecological Living Module are built-out–such as one in Kenya, the home of the UN Environment Programmes (UNEP) and UN Habitat–those same materials, systems, and produce will be substituted accordingly.

Currently, the Ecological Living Module includes systems that encompass waste treatment, thermal comfort, micro-farming infrastructure, indoor air purification, general data & systems integration, water collection & purification, bio-based renewable materials, and solar energy. Some of these systems–such as water collection & purification–are almost completely out of sight, taking the form of rain water and on-site potable water collection, as well as tucked away filtration systems. Meanwhile, features such as the micro-farming wall are immediately visible on the Ecological Living Module as an exterior wall that houses a multitude of local produce. The net effect is a compact housing unit that by virtue of its efficient design illustrates a by-necessity degree of style and modernism.

Part of the Ecological Living Module’s design is also its prefabrication. Every unit is made of prefabricated components that require minimal construction, allowing for scalable shipping and deployment. This kind quick deployment is also a natural fit for relief housing during natural disasters and suggests a multitude of uses for the Ecological Living Module and its future iterations. The time required to prefabricate a single ELM is only 4 weeks, with a requirement of only 2 days to install the module once on site.

The best way to understand the implications of the Ecological Living Module is to visit it for yourself–while it is moving on from the UN Plaza in New York, the ELM will be popping elsewhere in the coming months, so keep an eye out for it. Approaching the ELM, with its micro-farm wall and slanted, solar panel fitted roof, the first thought might be how nouveaux and contemporary its design is. Then, as you step inside to see its compact, yet highly functional interior–complete with kitchen, lofted bedroom, composting toilet / shower room, and sitting room entryway–you’ll witness as form and function come seamlessly together, all in the name of a low cost, sustainable solution to the ever-present problem of providing people what they’ve needed since time immemorial: shelter.

RESET Healthy Buildings

July 2018

RESET Indoor Air Quality

Now, indoor air quality is something that we have discussed previously on our blog. In fact, indoor air quality is the foundation of FutureAir, so the RESET Air Standard is right up our alley. RESET is an Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) certification administered by GIGA. GIGA is an organization that measures the effect of the built environment on human health. RESET, like WELL, places human health at the center of building design. However, RESET is specifically focused on clean indoor air.

Let us refresh about the importance of indoor air quality. First of all, we spend 90% of our time indoors! Research has shown that improving indoor air quality can improve human health. Additionally, improving indoor air quality serves to improve productivity amongst workers. Cleaning our indoor air is a preventative measure that results in a healthier community and a more efficient economy.

RESET’s air quality measurements come from data accumulated over a three month period. Other green building certifications rely on data from a single day–perhaps even a few hours of a day. The three-month long data collection paints a more accurate picture of the long-term indoor air environment. Furthermore, the ongoing data collection allows for occupants to understand the air quality fluctuations within their space and learn how to improve air quality. This ongoing quality control suits the human learning curve and encourages behavior change.

How Does It Work?

The RESET air standard is broken down into two categories–Commercial Interiors (CI) and Core&Shell (CS). The RESET Air CI focuses on individual interiors and their health effects on occupants. The RESET Air CS monitors the health performance of entire buildings.

Unlike other green building certifications, RESET does not have a fixed certification standard. Instead, RESET is performance-based driven by technological measurements. The certification takes into consideration the fluctuations within spaces. Therefore, the certification accounts for the ebb and flow of air quality over time. The certification falls to the individuals to make a case for their projects. Additionally, the certification must be renewed annually.

In order to achieve certification, a project must meet air quality standards as defined by industry best-practices and international standards. Indoor air quality is tracked by RESET certified monitors and averaged for a daily measurement. The average must fall within RESET’s parameters.

RESET IAQ Measurements

RESET evaluates the PM2.5 (Particulate Matter 2.5), TVOC (Total Volatile Organic Compounds), CO2 (Carbon Dioxide), CO (Carbon Monoxide), Temperature, and Relative Humidity. The acceptable measurement for PM2.5 is less than 35 μg/m3 and for TVOC is less than 500 μg/m3. CO2 must fall below 1000 parts per million and CO below 900 parts per million. If a building meets these measurement standards on average it meets certification. RESET also lists High-Performance targets for buildings that meet a more rigorous standard.

In order to measure IAQ, buildings must use Grade A (calibration grade) or Grade B (commercial grade) monitors. In other words, the RESET certification is separate from the technology used to monitor the air. The technology is a third-party resource and expenditure. The certification reviews the IAQ measurements in relation to the defined space and the total number of occupants of the building.

RESET in the Built Environment

RESET has human health benefits as well as economic benefits. RESET certified buildings attract more tenants, retain more employees, and reduce building insurance costs. Recently, as of October 2018, RESET and WELL partnered up to align certification processes in order to capitalize on each certifications strengths. Anjanette Green, of RESET, stated, “This cooperative spirit is exactly what makes me so excited and optimistic for the future of architecture and design.” This collaboration makes human health improvements more accessible and achievable!

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

Resources:
“About GIGA,” GIGA.
PureLiving, “LEED, WELL, RESET – What is the Difference?”, PureLiving: Indoor Environmental Solutions.
“RESET Air v2.0: How to Meet New Standards for Commerical Interiors,” Kaiterra.
“RESET Air Standard for Commercial Interiors v2.0,” RESET.
“WELL and RESET align to make both certifications easier for project teams,” International WELL Building Institute.

Photos:
RESET

WELL Building Standard

July 2018

The WELL Theory

The International WELL Building Institue (IBWI) launched the WELL Building Standard in 2015. The WELL mission is to promote human health within the built environment. We spend ninety percent of our time indoors and health conditions are related to environmental exposure. Health research has begun to evaluate indoor conditions as they affect human health. WELL is founded on this relationship between buildings and their occupants.

WELL is closely related to green building certifications. The Green Building Certification Institue, which administers LEED certification, is a third-party certifier for WELL. However, WELL’s commitment to the betterment of human health and wellbeing sets the WELL standard apart.

The WELL certification evaluates seven environmental conditions, of the built environment, known as Concepts. These concepts are air, water, nourishment, light, fitness, comfort, and mind. The WELL Building Standard “lays out optimal conditions for each [Concept] in an effort to encourage a holistic, integrated approach to sustainability,” according to the Green Building Alliance. Each Concept and its conditions aim to improve specific health areas such as focus, energy, sleep, stress, longevity, development, beauty, alignment and more.

Where does WELL fit in?

Much like the LEED green building certification, WELL uses a stratified certification system. There are two versions of certification: The WELL Pilot Standard and the WELL Building Standard. Each of these categories is then divided into silver, gold, and platinum.

In order to achieve silver certification, a building must fulfill preconditions for each of the seven concepts. To achieve gold or platinum, a building must meet a certain percentage of optimizations for each certification respectively. No certification is considered until all preconditions are met.

Part of the WELL mission is to encourage behavior change. Through WELL, health and wellbeing are incorporated into infrastructure. This building standard requires a commitment from the occupants to ascribe to healthier work routines.

The WELL pamphlet even explains how building conditions directly affect the human body. This information details how WELL standards counter detrimental health effects from indoor building conditions.

Additionally, each of the Concepts and their conditions is fully described in the WELL addenda. The abundance of information available for WELL certification helps to educate people on what constitutes a healthy building. Often, knowledge is the foundation of change.

Ultimately, the IWBI believes “that buildings should be developed with people’s health and wellness at the center of design.”

WELL also stands out amongst other green building certifications because of certification renewals. Every three years buildings must be reevaluated for WELL. This ensures that buildings still have a positive effect on health. Otherwise, it is common for buildings to deteriorate and begin to negatively impact health.

Furthermore, WELL certification can be applied to a variety of building types–multiple family residences, restaurants, or educational facilities.

WELL and the Built Environment

The WELL focus is on human health in the built environment. It incentivizes health and wellbeing over tax breaks. This sets WELL apart from the green building industry. In comparison to LEED, it seems that WELL does a better job at incentivizing behavior change. However, in focusing inward, WELL neglects the effect of buildings on the outdoor environment. Perhaps the administration of WELL certification by the GBI suggests that LEED and WELL are meant to be applied collaboratively.

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for FutureAir

Resources
Knox, Nora, “What is WELL?”, USGBC.
“WELL Building Standard,” Green Building Alliance.
“WELL Building Standard: v1 with May 2016 addenda,” International WELL Building Institute.

Photos
Ellenzweig (Featured)
International WELL Building Institute (in text)

What is LEED?

July 2018

LEED 101

According to the United States Green Building Committee (USGBC), buildings in the U.S. account for thirty-eight percent of CO₂ emissions and seventy-three percent of U.S energy consumption. In the age of climate activism, developers and contractors continuously seek ways to build greener buildings. Additionally, green building corporations offer investors the opportunity to receive tax breaks for green buildings.

The USGBC was founded in 1993 to encourage sustainable practices amongst the building industry. In 1998 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, known as LEED, developed out of USGBC.

The USGBC website defines LEED as “a third-party green building certification program and the globally recognized standard for the design, construction and operation of high-performance green buildings and neighborhoods.” Therefore, LEED is an independent certification process that works with contractors and developers to create environmentally sustainable buildings.

LEED offers four levels of certification: Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Certification is achieved through a point system. To be certified a building must acquire forty to forty-nine points, for silver, fifty to fifty-nine, for gold, sixty to seventy-nine, and for platinum, a building must have eighty or more points.

The certification point system is based on prerequisites and credits. Prerequisites are the necessary standards to be considered for LEED certification and the credits are bonus components kind of like optional points.

The rating system varies among the four categories of building and construction. The four are LEED BD+C, or LEED building design and construction, LEED ID+C, or LEED interior design and construction, LEED O+M, or LEED building operations and maintenance, and LEED ND, or LEED for neighborhood design.

LEED certificates usually run between four and five figures–according to a CityLab article, that is a low price for a large building project. Additionally, LEED buildings receive tax deductions for their environmental benefits such as lower energy consumption and reduced carbon emissions.

LEED in the Building Ecosystem

The foundational motto of LEED is to reward investors for reducing their environmental degradation at every turn of the building process, from using paints with low VOCs (volatile organic compounds) or bamboo flooring to solar panel installation.

The USGBC states, “by promoting a whole-building approach to sustainability, LEED recognizes performance in location and planning, sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection, waste reduction, indoor environmental quality, innovative strategies and attention to priority regional issues.”

However, in recent years, LEED certification has come under fire. LEED certification is sought after for its tax credits, ability to attract tenants, and the ability to charge premium rental rates. However, certification is granted to the building during the construction process without much consideration for the building to maintain LEED standards. Therefore, investors benefit from acquiring the LEED certification without keeping LEED standards.

Furthermore, the point system is not well balanced. Some buildings achieve certification by focusing on green amenities rather than energy efficiency. A New York Times article from 2009 wrote, “some experts have contended that the seal should be withheld until a building proves itself energy efficient, which is the cornerstone of what makes a building green.”

The loopholes in the system existed because there was previously no requirement for buildings to report their energy findings. As of 2009 buildings must record and report energy use information. The certificate can be rescinded if the building does not meet standards.

The LEED certification process is always innovating and improving its commitment to sustainable buildings and energy efficiency. LEED has also lifted the veil on the building industry and its effects on climate change. LEED may be to thank for building sustainability awareness, but can it keep up?

Written by Mollie Wodenshek for Future Air.

Resources:
Anonymous, “Green Building 101: What is LEED”, USGBC.
Barth, Brian, “Is LEED Tough Enough for Climate Change Era?”, CITYLAB.
Navarro, Mireya, “Some Buildings Not Living Up to Green Label”, New York Times.
“This is LEED”, LEED, USGBC, http://leed.usgbc.org/leed.html.

Photo:
Mar-Flex

Want Cleaner Air? Use Less Deodorant

June 2018

Researchers found in a study in February of 2018 that petroleum-based chemicals used in perfumes, deodorants, paints and other consumer products can, taken together, emit as much air pollution in the form of volatile organic compounds, or V.O.C.s, as motor vehicles do.

The researchers said their study was inspired by earlier measurements of V.O.C.s in Los Angeles that showed concentrations of petroleum-based compounds at levels higher than could be predicted from fossil-fuel sources alone.

“These V.O.C.s that you use in everyday products even though it may just be a teaspoon or a squirt or a spray the majority of those kinds of compounds will ultimately end up in the atmosphere, where they can react and contribute to both harmful ozone formation and small-particle formation,” said Dr.Gilman, a research chemist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration involved in the study. In total, the researchers found that forty percent of the chemicals added to consumer products wind up in the air.

To make their calculations, the study’s authors constructed a computer model that simulated air quality in Los Angeles, weaving in data from the chemical composition of consumer goods and tailpipe emissions. This model enabled the researchers to see the fingerprints of the chemical compounds coming from personal care products and, using these fingerprints, they determined that roughly half of the V.O.C.s in Los Angeles air could be attributed to consumer products.

Ravi Ramalingam, who leads the California Air Resources Board’s consumer products and air quality efforts, said he was not surprised that paints and perfumes were making up a bigger share of emissions as cars and trucks became cleaner. He said his agency was surveying the chemical makeup of about 300,000 consumer products sold or used in California, and preliminary results also suggested that emissions from those products were higher than previously estimated, though by a lesser amount than thought.

Galina Churkina, a research fellow at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies who was not involved in the study, noted that the study did not consider emissions related to biological sources like trees and animals. In response, the authors of the study said that there was still more research to conduct around such topics, as there are tens of thousands of chemicals in consumer products, and researchers have not yet pinpointed which chemicals are most likely to form ozone or PM2.5 particles.

Click here to read the full article.