LAS VEGAS - The Palazzo Hotel and Casino boasts many features of Las
Vegas excess - an indoor waterfall, a smoke-filled gaming area, seven
decorative fountains, and guest suites with three TVs and
power-controlled curtains.
Yet the 50-story complex achieved an
unlikely and lucrative milestone after opening in 2008. A powerful
private organization declared it an environmentally friendly "green"
building, the world's largest at the time.
The designation won its
owner, Las Vegas Sands Corp., a $27 million tax break over 10 years
because a Nevada law puts the private interest group - not the
government - in charge of deciding which buildings are green enough for a
taxpayer subsidy.
The U.S. Green Building Council, a building
industry non-profit, credited the Palazzo for having bike racks in the
garage; room cards telling guests when towels are replaced; landscaping
that does not use grass, which local law prohibits anyway; and preferred
parking for fuel-efficient cars - spots that on a recent week were
occupied by Ford Expeditions, Chevy Tahoes, Range Rovers, Mercedes
E320s, Chrysler 300s, Audi A6s, vans, sports cars and a Hummer.
The
council even sidestepped its own policy and allowed smoking in the
Palazzo casino, a 2.5-acre expanse between the hotel lobby and the hotel
elevators.
Across the United States, the Green Building Council
has helped thousands of developers win tax breaks and grants, charge
higher rents, exceed local building restrictions and get expedited
permitting by certifying them as "green" under a system that often
rewards minor, low-cost steps that have little or no proven
environmental benefit, a USA TODAY analysis has found.
The council
has certified 13,500 commercial buildings in the U.S. as green and
become one of the most influential forces in building design by helping
persuade public officials and private builders to follow its rating
system, known as LEED.
More than 200 states, cities and federal
agencies now require LEED certification for new public buildings, even
though they have done little independent and meaningful research into
LEED's effectiveness. LEED can add millions to construction costs while
promising to cut utility bills and other expenses.
Los Angeles,
Miami, Boston, San Francisco, Baltimore, Washington and roughly 85 other
cities go an extra step and require some private commercial buildings
to follow LEED. And nearly 200 jurisdictions give LEED builders tax
breaks and other incentives.
LEED, or Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design, awards buildings points for features that aim to
minimize emissions, water use, waste and indoor pollutants. A new
commercial building needs 40 out of a possible 100 points for
certification.
A USA TODAY review of 7,100 LEED-certified
commercial buildings shows that designers target the easiest and
cheapest green points by trying to create pleasant and healthful office
spaces; using common building materials; or taking steps with an unknown
effect, such as providing preferred parking for fuel-efficient cars,
bike racks and showers, and posting educational displays about the
building.
Nearly every design team has won a point for including someone who
has passed a LEED exam. Thousands more have won points for giving office
workers their own light switches, views of the outdoors or
temperature-control mechanisms, which can include operable windows or
desk fans. More than 6,000 buildings got credit for using structural
steel or concrete, common building materials that the council considers
green because they are made from recycled material.
Points also
have gone to universities that offer a course on green building, to
employers that give workers a video-game room and fitness center and to
builders for installing a modern fire-alarm system that "minimizes
stresses on the firefighters," council records show.
"People have a
tendency to buy points - they buy that bike rack even though there's no
value in it," said Kansas City, Mo., architect Bob Berkebile, who
helped create LEED in the 1990s and remains a strong proponent. "It's
unfortunate. That's just where we are at this time."
Nearly every design team has won a point for including someone who
has passed a LEED exam. Thousands more have won points for giving office
workers their own light switches, views of the outdoors or
temperature-control mechanisms, which can include operable windows or
desk fans. More than 6,000 buildings got credit for using structural
steel or concrete, common building materials that the council considers
green because they are made from recycled material.
Points also
have gone to universities that offer a course on green building, to
employers that give workers a video-game room and fitness center and to
builders for installing a modern fire-alarm system that "minimizes
stresses on the firefighters," council records show.
"People have a
tendency to buy points - they buy that bike rack even though there's no
value in it," said Kansas City, Mo., architect Bob Berkebile, who
helped create LEED in the 1990s and remains a strong proponent. "It's
unfortunate. That's just where we are at this time."
TABLE: Top options for turning buildings 'green'
TABLE: The least popular green building options
Yet environmentalists and experts widely praise LEED for sparking environmentalism in the building industry.
"LEED
put this on the agenda single-handedly and rallied a mass of people
interested in green buildings who didn't have a framework," said
University of California engineer Arpad Horvath, whose 2006 study
criticized LEED for not considering the lifetime effect of its various
points.
LEED also has expanded the use of green practices such as
energy modeling of buildings and of green products such as low-flush
toilets, low-emitting paints and materials made from wood that is
sustainably harvested.
"LEED has been one of the most significant
drivers of forest conservation in history," said Corey Brinkema,
president of the Forest Stewardship Council U.S., which promotes
sustainable forestry.
Berkebile calls LEED "the most
transformative force in the design and construction industry in my
lifetime by a factor of four. For the first time, (designers) are
starting to consider how a building affects the life and well-being of
the occupants and the vitality of the system in which it operates."
There
are now LEED-certified breweries, stadiums, dormitories, bus depots,
parking garages, shopping malls, libraries, fire stations, warehouses,
boathouses, locker rooms and prison buildings.
LEED's growth has
been driven partly by the building council itself, a 13,000-member
non-profit chiefly run by architects, builders and building suppliers.
Many specialize in - and profit from - the type of design the council
certifies and promotes. The council collects up to $35,000 in fees for
each LEED certification.
Building council members have boosted
their own LEED-related businesses by helping persuade officials to
require or reward LEED certification. LEED also helps developers market
buildings to tenants and investors and collect higher rents and sales
prices, University of California economist Nils Kok said.
"A lot
of the fuel for LEED, to be honest, is marketing advantage," said Bill
Walsh, executive director of the Healthy Building Network, which
promotes non-toxic building materials. "People are interested in how
they get the (LEED) credits, not in thinking deeply about it."
Stacking up easy points
Some
LEED-certified buildings include advanced or costly technology such as
solar panels, on-site water treatment and highly efficient heating and
cooling systems. The Palazzo's seven swimming pools are solar-heated;
sensors reduce air conditioning when hotel suites are empty, for
example.
But LEED does not require designers to take specific
steps beyond meeting minimum standards in water and energy conservation,
recycling and indoor air quality. Designers chart their own course to
certification, choosing from roughly 50 options that range from
minimizing light pollution and storm water runoff to maximizing interior
daylight and ventilation. More options bring higher certification
levels - from Silver to Gold to Platinum - and sometimes bigger tax
benefits.
USA TODAY conducted the first public analysis of the 7,100 LEED
certification records posted on the council website and found that
designers emphasize LEED points that can be won through simple
purchasing decisions and shun labor-intensive options and cutting-edge
technology.
The most popular LEED option - earned in 99.7% of the
buildings - has no direct environmental benefit but generates millions
of dollars for the building council by giving one point if a design team
has a LEED expert. People become experts by passing a LEED course and
paying $550 to $800 to a non-profit that the building council created in
2007.
The building council gets 5% of those fees - $3.3 million
from 2008 through 2010, council tax records show. The council rewards
the inclusion of LEED experts to encourage building designers to learn
about LEED.
More than 90% of the buildings got points for using
indoor paints, adhesives and flooring that aim to protect occupants'
health by emitting fewer contaminants. Widely used, the materials add
little cost or effort and have no impact outside the building.
A
point for low-emitting adhesives "shouldn't cost you anything," says a
LEED user's guide written by BuildingGreen, a consulting and publishing
firm run by former council board member Alex Wilson. Low-emitting
sealants are "an easy, no-cost credit," and low-emitting flooring is "a
pretty easy credit, with minimal additional cost."
Another "easy
to achieve" point, earned by 91% of the buildings, is for using building
materials with recycled content. That includes steel and concrete,
standard building materials that usually yield a point for being made
within 500 miles of a building site.
In total, a downtown office
building can earn 32 of 40 points needed for LEED certification through
measures that the user's guide calls easy or inexpensive.
"We put
in some very easy points," said Rob Watson, a former Natural Resources
Defense Council scientist who led the writing of LEED in the 1990s. "We
wanted people who were six or seven points away (from certification) to
see that if they could get three or four easy points, then LEED was
accessible. We wanted LEED to be accessible both economically and
technically."
At the other extreme, only 14% of buildings generate
renewable energy, and 12% include major water-reduction steps such as
using waterless urinals or treating sewage on site.
"People figure
out the path of least resistance to get to the end goal, and it doesn't
matter if it's LEED certification or 50% energy savings," said Paul
Torcellini, a building researcher at the Energy Department's National
Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Cheap points can add valuable tax
breaks. In Las Vegas, the Palazzo scored just two points above the
minimum needed for its $27 million tax break.
The Tower Companies, a Maryland developer, got a $1 million windfall
by adding last-minute features to an office tower near Washington, D.C.
Aiming for Gold certification when construction began in 2007, company
officials realized when the building was nearly finished that they were
close to reaching Platinum. They added preferred parking spots for
hybrid cars and a system that channels cooling-system water to outdoors
landscaping - and turned a $530,000 property-tax break for Gold into
$1.6 million for Platinum.
The extra money was not the goal, said
David Borchardt, Tower's chief sustainability officer. But the extra
incentive for Platinum certification "more than made up for the cost" of
the two extra features, he added.
The uncertainty of LEED
In 2009, responding to criticism, the building council revised LEED to put more emphasis on energy conservation.
But
the revision increased the uncertainty about LEED and highlights a
central problem: LEED certification is awarded before occupancy. Points
for minimizing energy and water use are based on projections, not on
actual energy and water use.
"That's like the ranking of football
teams before the season starts," said Oberlin College energy expert John
Scofield, who testified before Congress in May.
Designers can
earn up to 19 points for projecting lower-than-average energy use. The
projections come from computer models that analyze hundreds of features
such as insulation and sun exposure. Such models are good at comparing
designs to show which would use less energy. But they are bad at
quantifying actual energy use, which depends largely on how a building
is used and maintained.
"Buildings have a poor track record for
performing as predicted during design," the council itself reported in
2007. "Most buildings do not perform as well as design metrics
indicate."
The Environmental Protection Agency says "it is a
common misconception that new buildings, even so-called 'green'
buildings are energy-efficient." The EPA's voluntary EnergyStar program
certifies only buildings that prove energy efficiency over a year of
occupancy, and rates buildings every year.
A little-noticed study
of Navy buildings in January showed that four of 11 LEED-certified
buildings used more energy than a non-LEED counterpart. Of the seven
others, four were better than their counterparts by 9%, a level of
improvement that is insufficient to earn any LEED points.
"Energy
savings are not closely related to the number of points received,"
concluded the study by University of Wisconsin researchers.
LEED
tries to address the problem by offering one point for buildings that
measure actual energy use. Only 23% of the LEED-certified buildings have
taken that option, USA TODAY found.
Building council Senior Vice
President Scot Horst has long pushed to require LEED-certified buildings
to report their energy use, but faces resistance. "A lot of people
don't want to disclose that information - they feel like somehow their
energy data is like dirty laundry and shows they haven't connected their
ability to use energy wisely," he said.
A new version of LEED,
likely to become mandatory in mid-2015, will require building operators
to write a plan for running a building efficiently and to tell the
council a building's energy and water use for five years. In recent
years, the council has started to review energy and water use for LEED
buildings that volunteer the information and tells owners how they are
doing compared to projections.
The new version would require
low-emitting paints and other items to pass lab tests, and LEED-friendly
building materials to demonstrate a wide range of environmental
benefits.
Horst said that even with some uncertainty, LEED vastly
improves design and "creates buildings that have the ability to do what
they might not do otherwise."
Some officials shun LEED or require
builders only to follow its guidelines without getting certification.
Kentucky law urges school districts to get new buildings certified by
LEED or by the EPA. The overwhelming number opt for the EPA because it's
free and requires energy efficiency.
"We've designed educational
buildings that could easily be LEED-certified, but a lot of school
districts have chosen not to because of the cost of certification itself
and the lengthy documentation process," said Martha Tarrant, a
Lexington, Ky., architect specializing in school construction.
"Districts don't see the value of LEED as worth that cost."
Government-fueled green
Governors,
mayors, state legislators and federal administrators have been forceful
LEED advocates who helped it flourish nationwide. About 26% of
LEED-certified buildings are government-owned.
But officials have
embraced LEED and similar standards "often without fully understanding
their benefits, trade-offs and costs," says a 2009 study by the National
Institute of Building Sciences, a research group that interviewed
building officials, regulators and advocates.
The federal General
Services Administration (GSA), which owns and leases space in 9,600
buildings, gave crucial support in 2003 when it began requiring LEED
certification for its new and substantially renovated buildings. Every
federal department now follows green building practices along with 35
states. Roughly 170 cities give LEED builders tax breaks, grants,
expedited permitting or waivers allowing them to construct larger
buildings than local law allows. Roughly 2,000 developments, buildings
and homes have received $500 million in tax breaks nationwide, USA TODAY
found.
Public LEED buildings typically cost taxpayers extra. In Ohio, LEED
certification for new state-funded schools has added $131 million in
construction costs since 2007. "Soft costs," such as fees to the
building council and to LEED consultants, add about $150,000 to the
price of a new federal building, the GSA estimates.
Governments
seeking to justify LEED often rely on reports funded by the council or
written by council leaders asserting long-term cost savings.
A
widely cited 2004 report for the GSA said that the costs of getting a
building LEED-certified can be "surprisingly limited." The report was
written by Steven Winter Associates of Connecticut. Firm principal
Steven Winter was chairman of the building council from 1999 through
2002 and was on its board through 2004. Winter did not work on the
report, said Andy Hathaway, the firm's head of sustainability
consulting.
Another oft-cited report, which says LEED buildings
use less energy than typical buildings, was funded by the council and
written in 2008 by Mark Frankel when he was a board member of the
council's Pacific Northwest chapter. The report, the largest to date,
studied 121 LEED commercial buildings and said they used on average 24%
less energy than conventional office buildings.
The report also
found that roughly a third of the buildings used more energy than
conventional counterparts. For an individual building, LEED is "a poor
predictor of project-specific performance," the report said.
Researchers
questioned the findings because they encompassed only buildings that
volunteered to reveal energy use. Scofield, the Oberlin professor, said
the report overestimated energy savings, which were nil by one
calculation he made. The Canadian government's National Research Council
said the findings were encouraging because they showed overall energy
savings but "should be considered as preliminary."
The GSA
released its largest report on its green buildings in August 2011, which
studied only 16 of the agency's roughly 40 buildings that were
LEED-certified by the end of 2009. Seven LEED buildings were "not
cooperative" in disclosing energy use, the report said. The report found
13 of the 16 LEED buildings used less energy than typical office
buildings but acknowledged studying only "a small number of buildings."
The
council has advocated for more research. Its strategic plan says the
"lack of data on green building performance makes it difficult to
address perceptions that green building is not cost-effective."
One
researcher says the council tried to suppress a critical 2002 report by
the federal National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that
said some LEED points were too easily earned and that others had only
marginal long-term benefit.
"USGBC wanted NIST to take it off
line, not to publish it," recalled study author Greg Keolian, who is
co-director of the University of Michigan's Center for Sustainable
Systems."They didn't like the findings. They were concerned we were
criticizing LEED." NIST published the report.
Christine Ervin, the
council CEO from 1999 to 2004, said recently that she doubts the
council tried to suppress the report and more likely wanted to make sure
that NIST provided context about LEED.
What happened in Las Vegas ...
The
biggest winner of LEED incentives has been the Las Vegas gaming
industry, and its biggest helper was the Green Building Council, which
agreed to allow smoking in casinos.
Smoking arose as an issue in
2006 when the Nevada State Office of Energy was deciding how to
implement a law that created the nation's biggest tax breaks for LEED
buildings. LEED requires certified buildings either to be non-smoking or
to restrict smoking to contained rooms. Casino resorts wanted the LEED
tax breaks and smoking in their gaming areas.
Tom Hicks, then a
building council vice president, told the state in a crucial September
2006 letter that the council would award LEED certification to every
part of a casino complex except the casino, which the council would
ignore. Hicks cited the "extraordinary health risks associated with
exposure to tobacco smoke." He also said there is "unprecedented
opportunity for market transformation" in Las Vegas. Hicks, now deputy
assistant secretary for energy at the Navy, declined comment on the
issue.
Building council Vice President Brendan Owens said recently
that the council let the Palazzo developers declare the hotel tower and
the casino separate buildings because each has its own ventilation
system - a distinction the council no longer allows for attached
buildings. "I wouldn't go so far as to say they were exploiting
loopholes," Owens said, "but they were exploring the boundaries of the
way the rating system should be applied."
The council's
accommodation let the Palazzo cut $2.7 million a year from its property
tax bill over 10 years and also to avoid sales taxes on some building
materials. The Palazzo is one of seven LEED projects - five of them
casino resorts - that have saved $138 million in sales taxes between
2005 and 2010.
Palazzo officials declined to be interviewed and cited a company report saying the green features reduce energy and water use.
The
author of the tax-break law, former state legislator Chris
Giunchigliani, said the incentives were a viable alternative to
mandatory new-building standards. Writing the law with a neighbor, Lance
Kirk, who led the building council's Nevada chapter, Giunchigliani said
she hoped that LEED buildings would be "a marketing piece" to tell
visitors "we have more than gambling - we have a sustainable
environment."
But the Palazzo's certification shows the need to
improve LEED to require more than common practices such as hotel-room
cards about towel replacement, said Giunchigliani, now a county
commissioner in Las Vegas. "That's good, but that's the industry
standard," she said. "I don't think LEED should be giving credit for the
industry standard."
USA Today