State of the Union 2016: Obama’s focus on environment

Jan 20, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Nora Knox

 

Last week, President Obama delivered the 2016 State of the Union. In his remarks, he declared that as a nation we must make technology work for us when it comes to solving urgent challenges like climate change.

In last year's address, the president emphasized that “no challenge—poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.” This year, he stressed that now is the time to commit to developing clean energy sources.

“Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You’ll be pretty lonely, because you’ll be debating our military, most of America’s business leaders, the majority of the American people, almost the entire scientific community, and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it.

But even if the planet wasn’t at stake; even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record—until 2015 turned out even hotter—why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future?

Seven years ago, we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history. Here are the results. In fields from Iowa to Texas, wind power is now cheaper than dirtier, conventional power. On rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills, and employs more Americans than coal—in jobs that pay better than average. We’re taking steps to give homeowners the freedom to generate and store their own energy—something environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support. Meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly sixty percent, and cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.

Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.

Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from dirty energy. Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future—especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels. That’s why I’m going to push to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet. That way, we put money back into those communities and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system.

None of this will happen overnight, and yes, there are plenty of entrenched interests who want to protect the status quo. But the jobs we’ll create, the money we’ll save, and the planet we’ll preserve—that’s the kind of future our kids and grandkids deserve.”

The president also reminded Congress that in the past year, the United States “led nearly 200 nations to the most ambitious agreement in history to fight climate change—that helps vulnerable countries, but it also protects our children.”

He closed with faith that the American people will uphold our obligations as citizens:

“To vote. To speak out. To stand up for others, especially the weak, especially the vulnerable, knowing that each of us is only here because somebody, somewhere, stood up for us. To stay active in our public life so it reflects the goodness and decency and optimism that I see in the American people every single day.”

Read the full transcript

New Advocacy Intern, Anthony Lucivero

Jan 19, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Anthony Lucivero, Advocacy Fellow


Greetings, U.S. Green Building Council readers! My name is Anthony, and I am extremely excited to come aboard as the new Advocacy Fellow. I attended UMass Amherst for my undergraduate degree in Political Science.  However, during my senior year, I took a course entitled “Sustainable Cities.”  This sparked a great interest in environmental policy and sustainable design, which grew into a major passion and drove me to pursue graduate school. I completed my Master's degree in Sustainability and Environmental Management this past November from Harvard Extension School. 

I previously worked with Grey, our Chapter's Executive Director, at the Sierra Club as part of a coalition concerned with updating the stretch energy code in Massachusetts.  I am looking forward to an eventful and productive spring at the U.S. Green Building Council!

Chapter Endorsement for Joint Statement on Solar Policy Reform

Jan 15, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Derek Newberry, Advocacy Fellow

Last wek, our Chapter–along with 61 other Massachusetts organizations–endorsed the Acadia Center's Joint Statement on Solar Policy. The endorsers, which represent a variety of stakeholders in solar policy, include: business groups, labor, solar companies and organizations, environmental and clean-energy advocates, low-income advocates, religious groups, and community groups.

This broad coalition is pushing for more comprehensive and sustainable solar policy legislation. The statement is a follow-up to the 2015 Next Generation Solar Policy Framework–also endorsed by our Chapter. The endorsers of this Joint Statement strongly oppose House bill H. 3854, and appreciate the Senate's efforts to find a compromise to lift the net-metering caps. This document was sent to legislators to provide an overview of constructive, long-term solutions that will advance solar in Massachusetts, and to highlight the coalition's two most significant objections to the House Bill: 


  1. Problem: No Arbitrary Cuts to Solar Net Metering Credits

    • Cuts to net-metering value should not be made without official public analysis of the benefits and costs of solar. Significant reductions would risk losing the important benefits that solar provides to all ratepayers.
    • Reductions to net-metering credit value would make it virtually impossible to build communtiy solar and low-income solar projects.
  2. Problem: Imposition of Minimum Bills
    • ​​Specifically, this coalition has a problem with two features of this problematic policy:
    1. The language in the bill is in favor of the utilities, resulting in the highest possible minimum bills. In MA rate cases, utilities argue that distribution costs are fixed, reported to be around $30 per resident. This could mean $360 in annual minimum bills for residential solar customers, and potentially much higher bills for larger solar customers such as municipalities or busineses.
    2. Limited grandfathering: Customers and generators with existing investments should be protected from new charges. 

The Joint Statement provides a brief overview of the constructive, sustainable solutions posed in the Next Generation Framework, proposed to legislators in Fall 2015, with one additional component. The key elements of the Framework are:

  1. Suspend and then eliminate the caps on net metering, which undermine solar development without providing benefits to ratepayers.
  2. Initiate an official, publicly-scrutinized analysis of the benefits and costs of solar generation to ratepayers and society at large.
  3.  For certain categories of projects, align the value of net metering credits with the long-run value of solar generation to ratepayers, including any appropriate charges for use of the grid.
  4. Reduce ratepayer costs by reforming the solar renewable energy credit (SREC) programs.
  5. Grandfather existing solar projects under the policies in place when the projects qualified.
  6. Set an ambitious long-term solar goal that contributes substantially to regional energy needs and environmental and public health requirements.
  7. ***NEW*** – Expand current SREC II low-income provisions and create a new low-income and urban solar program to ensure that the benefits of solar are accessible to every resident of Massachusetts and provide employment and training in the clean energy sector.

Our Chapter is eager to see how the legislature collaborates in the coming months to find a solution for this rapidly-growing sector of the green-building industry. 

Efficient buildings help federal energy use get to 40-year low

Jan 15, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager

Published on Written by Posted in Advocacy and policy

 

You may have missed the recent announcement from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) that energy consumption by the federal government is at its lowest point since 1975. This is, as some would say, a big deal and in looking at the contribution of the building sector in achieving this goal, it is in fact a very big deal for green buildings.

While reducing fuel consumption was a meaningful factor in getting to this point, lower energy use in federal buildings was a key aspect in getting to this accomplishment. The analysis from EIA points to the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA), which set requirements to achieve 30 percent reduction in federal building energy use and 65 percent reduction in fossil fuel consumption of new or renovated federal buildings by 2015, as a reason for the downward trend.

While not named specifically, a large portion of the new and renovating buildings meeting these targets and contributing to these energy reductions are LEED buildings. With more than 150 million square feet of federal buildings LEED-certified, it’s clear that LEED is helping federal agencies and departments lead by example and achieve the many benefits of green building. Check out the federal agencies’ impressive accomplishments.

This is good news, but not great news. The agencies must continue to do more to reduce consumption through a number of measures including a continued commitment to performance contracting to help address existing buildings and certifying major renovations and new construction through the LEED rating system.

Let’s keep the government’s commitment to green building going. Stay tuned for information on the General Services Administration review of LEED v4.

What is green building?

Jan 13, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager

Published on Written by Posted in LEED

 

Sustainability is not a one-time treatment or product. Instead, green building is a process that applies to buildings, their sites, their interiors, their operations, and the communities in which they are situated. The process of green building flows throughout the entire life-cycle of a project, beginning at the inception of a project idea and continuing seamlessly until the project reaches the end of its life and its parts are recycled or reused. 

In our guide, An Introduction to LEED and Green Building, the term green building encompasses planning, design, construction, operations, and ultimately end-of-life recycling or renewal of structures. Green building pursues solutions that represent a healthy and dynamic balance between environmental, social, and economic benefits. 

Sustainability and “green,” often used interchangeably, are about more than just reducing environmental impacts. Sustainability means creating places that are environmentally responsible, healthful, just, equitable, and profitable. Greening the built environment means looking holistically at natural, human, and economic systems and finding solutions that support quality of life for all. 

Triple bottom line is also often used to refer to the concept of sustainability. The term was coined by John Elkington, cofounder of the business consultancy SustainAbility, in his 1998 book Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. First applied to socially responsible business, the term can characterize all kinds of projects in the built environment. The triple bottom line concept incorporates a long-term view for assessing potential effects and best practices for three kinds of resources:

  • People (social capital). All the costs and benefits to the people who design, construct, live in, work in, and constitute the local community and are influenced, directly or indirectly, by a project 
  • Planet (natural capital). All the costs and benefits of a project on the natural environment, locally and globally 
  • Profit (economic capital). All the economic costs and benefits of a project for all the stakeholders (not just the project owner)

The goal of the triple bottom line, in terms of the built environment, is to ensure that buildings and communities create value for all stakeholders, not just a restricted few. For example, an energy-efficient building that saves the owners money but makes the occupants sick is not sustainable, nor is a material that has a small carbon footprint but was made in a sweatshop, nor is an eco-resort that displaces threatened species or local people. 

A commitment to the triple bottom line means a commitment to look beyond the status quo. It requires consideration of whole communities and whole systems, both at home and around the world. Research is needed to determine the impacts of a given project and find new solutions that are truly sustainable. New tools and processes are required to help projects arrive at integrative, synergistic, sustainable solutions. 

The triple bottom line requires a shift in perspective about both the costs and the benefits of our decisions. The term externalities is used by economists to describe costs or benefits incurred by parties who are not part of a transaction. For example, the purchase price of a car does not account for the wear and tear it will have on public roads or the pollution it will put into the environment. To shift the valuation process to account for such negative externalities, building professionals require new metrics. The green building process and rating systems have begun to encourage quantification of externalities. The focus has been first on environmental metrics, but the list is expanding to include indicators of social justice and public health. 

Making buildings more healthful, more comfortable, and more conducive to productivity for their occupants has special significance in light of studies conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which found that people in the United States spend, on average, 90% of their time indoors. Occupants of green buildings are typically exposed to far lower levels of indoor pollutants and have significantly greater satisfaction with air quality and lighting than occupants of conventional buildings. Research conducted at Carnegie Mellon University shows that these benefits can translate into a 2% to 16% increase in workers’ and students’ productivity. Even small increases in productivity can dramatically increase the value of a building

Download our guide, An Introduction to LEED and Green Building, to learn more

 

BBRS Meeting

Jan 12, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Anthony Lucivero, Advocacy Fellow

 

On January 12th, 2016, the Board of Building Regulations and Standards (BBRS) held their monthly meeting. The BBRS has authority over building codes and regulations under Massachusetts General Laws, thus giving the board great influence over the effort to green our building infrastructure. The USGBC Massachusetts Chapter attended to see a presentation by the Department of Energy Resources on the stretch energy code.


Brief History of the MA Stretch Energy Code

The stretch energy code was an important aspect of the Green Communities Act passed in 2008.  It sought to cut energy use by 30% and carbon emissions by 40% compared to the base code.  The stretch code allowed municipalities to acquire incentives from the state by achieving energy efficiency. The stretch energy code was a great success, with 161 Massachusetts communities voluntarily adopting the stretch code as of November 3rd, 2015.

However, when the base building code was updated to International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2012, the stretch code was not updated along with it, rendering it effectively obsolete.  The current provisional stretch code now only applies to new commercial construction projects, and only those larger than 100,000 square feet.  For residential construction, the formerly voluntary scoring of a 55 or less on the HERS Index was made mandatory, so homes already using this option would not see any additional requirements.  This is a problem because 98% of Massachusetts’s buildings would no longer be subject to any energy efficiency stretch goals.

Department of Energy Resources Presentation to BBRS 1/12/15

Mr. Ian Finlayson of the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) proposed updating the stretch energy code, and included provisions for all new buildings to be ready for solar PV and electric vehicle charging station installation. These proposed updates met resistance from some BBRS board members.  

In a series of questions, one of the members held that the solar-ready disclosure provisions were too burdensome for developers, and would drive prospective businesses out of the state. This was despite Mr. Finlayson explaining how the solar requirements worked around building designs and restrictions and do not require any design changes, only disclosure.  Others at the hearing also took issue with 4% of parking spaces being reserved for electric vehicle charging stations, feeling it would be unfair to the disabled community who have only won 2% of parking spaces to be designated for them.  

Due to time constraints, the stretch code provision was not discussed, but these proposed codes will be open to a public hearing (date to be determined). Emily Norton, the Massachusetts Chapter Director of the Sierra Club, quickly spoke in support of DOER’s code provisions and how they represent a step forward in reaching Massachusetts’s greenhouse gas reduction goals.

You can read more about the Green Communities Act here and here. More information on the MA stretch energy code is available here.

 

New study concludes with strong evidence of the impact of school design on learning

Jan 12, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager

Published on Written by Posted in Center for Green Schools

 

Until now, it may seem bizarre, but the holistic impact of classroom design on the learning of school pupils has been pretty much an unknown quantity. Although many people intuitively feel that classroom design is important for effective learning, there has in fact been very little real evidence. Of course the challenge is far from simple, as there are a myriad of design factors in play within every classroom.

So the University of Salford’s research team targeted primary (or elementary) school classrooms, where the children are in one space most of their time and for whom there are metrics of their academic progress—an ideal “natural” research design. They then worked from the individual’s perspective to create a comprehensive and novel model of the factors in play (the Stimulation / Individualization / Naturalness, or SIN model). Finally they used multilevel statistical modeling to isolate the effects on learning that attach to the classroom level of analysis.

After three years the UK-based HEAD (Holistic Evidence and Design) study has reached a successful conclusion. Based on a detailed study of 153 classrooms in 27 schools in Blackpool, Hampshire and Ealing, involving 3,766 pupils, we have now established the evidence for how important classroom design is for learning and which of the factors involved are particularly important.  

Based on this large sample it can be seen that variations in the physical characteristics of the classrooms explain 16% of the variation in the learning progress of the pupils who spent a year in these spaces. This is a much bigger impact than most people expected. Half the effect links to the normal comfort (or Naturalness) factors considered, but the other half is driven by factors to do with Individualization and the appropriate level of Stimulation. Interestingly factors to do with the school as a whole are nowhere near as important as the individual classrooms, and effective and less effective classrooms were often found in the same school.

The guide, “Clever Classrooms” provides illustrated advice to teachers and designers as to which factors are especially important. This is underpinned by a refereed journal paper in Building and Environment.

Download the guide: “Clever Classrooms”

Peter Barrett is a Professor in the School of the Built Environment at the University of Salford in the UK. He has wide research interests in optimizing the value and experience of the built environment for users. Previously, Professor Barrett has held prestigious roles, including being President of the UN’s International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction. Over recent years he has been working on a project to understand the link between primary school design and pupils’ learning. This was funded by the UK’s Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).

The nature of LEED: How natural laws inspire and inform green building

Jan 11, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager

Published on Written by Posted in LEED

 

In the late 1990s, a revolutionary idea arrived on the scene, shepherded by an innovative thinker and nurtured by scores of curious and passionate individuals. In the book Biomimicry, Janine Benyus introduced the notion that we could be better off by simply mimicking the ways problems are solved in nature; this idea has proven transformative.

In the book, Benyus lists nine principles that govern and define how nature operates. Not surprisingly, elements of each of these principles are readily identifiable in connection with LEED.

Nature runs on sunlight:

Just as nature is powered by the renewable energy of the sun, LEED promotes the use of renewable energy sources and the purchase of green power. If we were to consistently mimic the ways of nature, we would rely solely on renewable power.

Nature uses only the energy it needs:

We can all learn a lesson from the Center for Green Schools; one of the key ideas taught to the world’s future sustainability natives is to take only what you need, not as much as you want. In addition to encouraging the use of renewable energy, LEED also rewards projects for optimizing energy performance, both newly constructed buildings and existing buildings can receive points for energy efficiency measures.

Nature fits form to function:

This is a no-brainer, but it’s also something we very rarely pay conscious attention to. A tree is rooted in the ground to draw water and nutrients from the soil, it spreads its branches and leaves wide to increase its surface area and soak up the sunlight it needs to produce energy and grow. In the same vein, well-designed buildings and communities that adhere to the principles of biomimicry make optimal use of mass and space. LEED for Neighborhood Development capitalizes on this principle, encouraging urban planners and developers to make the best possible use of the space available and to design for the future.

Nature recycles everything:

Think about it, everything produced in nature is biodegradable. Once the natural life of a pinecone has come and gone, it breaks down into essential elements and compounds that are repurposed. In the built environment, LEED recognizes projects that reduce, reuse or recycle construction materials and that encourage recycling once the building is occupied. Additionally, LEED encourages project teams to engage in a life cycle assessment, considering available resources based on their ability to be repurposed.

Nature rewards cooperation:

Very little in nature exists in isolation. By way of example, plants persist because of pollinators, which in turn feed on the nectar they collect. LEED also rewards cooperative forethought and effort with the integrative process credit. Buildings that are designed with input and analysis from experts of diverse backgrounds capitalize on the differences and similarities between building systems, honoring the synergies that exist.

Nature banks on diversity: 

Diversity is one of nature’s best insurance policies. We know that species with limited genetic diversity have more difficulty adapting to environmental change, and that ecosystems rich with diversity are more stable. Like a living system, LEED has evolved and changed over the years and is now applicable to a diverse body of building types including schools, healthcare spaces, retail facilities and homes.

Nature demands local expertise:

There is a reason the term “invasive species” has such strong connotations, nature’s systems are inherently local. Certain species thrive under specific conditions; local and regional weather patterns matter, as do the types of soil, air particulates and water temperatures. Not only does LEED incorporate regional priority credits, which encourage project administrators to consider geographically specific issues, but LEED also has added incentives for the selection and use of raw materials that are locally sourced. Products and materials that are extracted, manufactured and purchased within 100 miles of a project are valued at 200% of their cost.

Nature curbs excesses from within:

Every natural system has a tipping point, a carrying capacity or a state of disequilibrium that triggers a change. Forest fires are a great example of a natural phenomenon that renews and refreshes, cutting down on excessive growth and allowing for regeneration. A large part of what makes LEED a successful system is the human element; in the end, green building is all about the people. The LEED Dynamic Plaque monitors usage and human experience, allowing building owners and occupants to identify excessive waste or usage and to adapt accordingly.

Nature taps the power of limits:

All living things are governed by limitations; age, climate, population density and many other factors determine how species and systems develop. LEED recognizes the importance of identifying limits and finding creative ways to compensate for them. A building constructed in the heart of a city may have limited parking options, but LEED rewards project administrators and owners for building near public transportation hubs. 

If there is one take away this Earth Day from Janine Benyus’s simple list of natural laws it’s that there is an endless amount we can learn if we just pay attention to our surroundings. Building design and construction is an imaginative process and LEED provides credits in line with the best of what nature has to teach us about sustainable development.

Tomorrow: Don't miss Eric Corey Freed and his new Net Zero Buildings Presentation!

Jan 11, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Celis Brisbin, Programs Manager

 

 

Join us for a discussion:

Eric Corey Freed of the Organic Architect and the Instutite for Living Buildings will be presenting the latest on the Living Building Challenge and the quest for Net Zero on the West Coast. In this workshop, you’ll learn how to rally your project team to achievenet zero energy on your projects.  You’ll discover ways to sell your clients on being committed to never having to pay a utility bill ever again.  Using specific case studies and stories from the field, you’ll develop an arsenal of ideas you can apply to your current projects right now.  You won’t want to miss this workshop by a pioneer in regenerative buildings.  Follow our 20 step process to getting to net zero in your buildings.
 
BONUS:  Includes a never before seen discussion of Seattle’s Bullitt Center, called the “greenest office building in the world” and how they achieved net zero with an EUI of 10.
 
 

When:  January 12th, 2016 8:30 AM – 12:00 PM

Location: 50 Milk St, 18th Floor, “Hemingway” Room, Boston MA, 02109

Chapter Member $ 50.00

Non-Member $ 65.00

 
 
 
 
 
 

BRIEF BIO:

Eric Corey Freed is Founding Principal of organicARCHITECT, a visionary design leader in biophilic and regenerative design.  As a licensed architect, Eric brings over 20 years of experience in helping architects, builders and homeowners use sustainability to improve the design and operational savings for thousands of buildings around the country.  Eric has helped thousands of companies monetize sustainability by showing them how to cut their real estate operations costs in half.
 
Eric co-developed the Sustainable Design programs at the Academy of Art University and University of California Berkeley Extension, and currently teaches at Boston Architectural College.  He has served on the boards of the Inland Empire Chapter of the USGBC, Architects/Designers & Planners for Social Responsibility (ADPSR), as well as the advisory boards of over a dozen other organizations.  
 
He was the founding Chair of Architecture for The San Francisco Design Museum and one of the founders of ecoTECTURE: The Online Journal of Ecological Design.  He’s a regular contributor for Sustainable Industries Journal, Luxe, Natural Home, Metropolitan Home and dozens of other publications.  Eric lectures around the country at over 50 events a year, and his work has been featured in Dwell, Metropolis, Town & Country, Natural Home and Newsweek.  He has been seen on television on Fox News, HGTV, The Sundance Channel and PBS.
 
He was a founding board member and Chair of the Coachella Valley branch of the US Green Building Council, and sat on the Sustainability Commission for the City of Palm Desert where he drafted visionary sustainability policies.  He has received awards from several Mayors, and worked with dozens of municipalities around the country to help implement sustainable policies.
 
Eric is the author of 11 books, including “Green Building & Remodeling for Dummies”, a bestseller with over 200,000 copies in print, and “Sustainable School Architecture.”  His how to book, “Green$ense for your Home” won the 2011 Outstanding Book Award from the American Society of Journalists and Authors.  He is also co-founder of Architect Exam Prep, providing innovative study guides for young architects. 
 
Eric is considered a leader in the field; named by San Francisco Magazine “Best Green Architect” in 2005; “Best Visionary” in 2007; and “Green Visionary” by 7×7 Magazine in 2008.  In 2012, he was named one of the 25 “Best Green Architecture Firms” in the US, and one of the “Top 10 Most Influential Green Architects.”  He also holds a prestigious LEED Fellow award from the US Green Building Council.

OFFER IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:

 

Minding the Gap: Closing the UK's green building “performance gap”

Jan 7, 2016 | Uncategorized

By Derek Newberry, Advocacy Fellow

The UK Green Building Council (UK-GBC) just launched a research initiative to investigate performance standards. This project will examine how the performance of commercial buildings can be improved over their lifetime through better design and construction methods.

The purpose of this new push is to ensure that buildings in the UK live up to the standards that are promised by developers. 

In a statement, the UK-GBC said that there is growing evidence showing that “all too often,” buildings fail to live up to their predicted building performance, otherwise known as the “performance gap.” Many buildings are therefore thought to be using more energy and water than the architects intended.


According to an article on BusinessGreen.com, some experts have warned that the building industry could be vulnerable to a “VW-style” scandal if commercial tenants could take legal action against developers or landlords if a building does not live up to its promised environmental performance.

To address this potential issue and close the performance gap, the UK-GBC task force will consider alternative design and construction strategies. Julie Hirigoyen, the chief executive of the UK-GBC, is hopeful that this research will deliver greener, more energy efficient buildings. In a statement about the project, Ms. Hirigoyen said, “Huge cost, carbon and productivity benefits can be gained through a closer focus on the performance of he buildings we design, construct and operate them.

“Following the COP21 deal, this is just one of the ways in which the UK industry is showing its leadership and ambition.”

The research topic evolved from an earlier project which aimed to examine the building sector's ability to deliver viable, zero-carbon policy for commercial buildings by 2019. The UK government discarded the zero-carbon policy agenda in July 2015, but the group refocused their energies on building performance as a more practical way to deliver reliable carbon savings.

The UK-GBC task force expects to report the results of these findings in April 2016.

Our Chapter is happy to hear that our green building peers across the pond are proactively working to close the performance gap. Green Building councils near and far will get a great boost if customers start reporting cost savings after meeting the high standards in building performance rating systems such as LEED and BREEAM. 

We'll be eagerly watching to see how the results may compare to the performance gap in US buildings–and to see if other green building standards and studies begin to take a new direction after COP21.