"The construction of the new Duchess Park Secondary School is on time..

"students will be moving into their new school in March of next year, right after Spring Break."

The monster self-promo gov't sign on the construction fence reads "to open 2009".

On time huh?

I'm really pleased to see the School district going for Gold LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). Although the costs for gold certification may be around 8-12% higher than normal construction costs, studies have shown that some facilities have seen a 62% return on investment in the first year alone.

I understand the present Duchess Park now costs $120,000/year to heat while the new Duchess Park will costs $60,000 for a larger facility.

I also understand that because a building is LEED certified, some insurance costs, such as medical benefits can be lowered due a better Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ).

Anything that saves money and is better for the staff and students is a clear winner.

This looks like a very wise investment from a money point of view. Using Mr. Stern's figures we get the following:

Based on a perpetual saving of $60,000 per year and let us say a life time of the school of 50 years, then

at 0% interest on a present sum available now, that sum would be $3 million or just a bit under the 8% premium of the construction cost.

If one were able to put the money away into an inverstment at 2% annual return, then the sum would become $1.9 million.

At 3% = $1.55 million
at 4% = $1.3 million
at 5% = $1.1 million
at 6% = $0.95 million

As we drop the school's lifetime, the investment into a LEEDS building becomes even more risky.

In other words, it looks to me like this is a bad investment from a monetary point of view.

However, since I believe there is less dependency on carbon based fuels due to the geothermal component of the energy source, it makes sense from that point of view. In other words, to get us to use alternate energies appears to cost some money.

There is one big BUT, to all of this. I think that the government should be accounting for this variance in cost not in the education budget, but in the switching to alternate fuel budget. Does anyone know whether that is happening?

In other words, as a tax payer, I would like to know how much of the cost of the Friendship Lodge and this school and other buildings that are being built and will continue to be built is attributable to this policy.

BTW, when I wrote: "This looks like a very wise investment from a money point of view." my tongue was so far into my cheek that it was hurting!

Good point Gus. Hopefully some of that carbon tax we pay for goes into the higher LEED certification costs.

LEED certification involves five aspects: Site selection, site selection, water efficiency, materials and resources, energy and atmosphere, indoor environmental quality, and innovation and design. All of these contribute to a building that uses less energy, may actually produce energy, uses materials that have less environmental impact (such as recycled steel), and produce a building where there are less toxins in the air.

What does this mean to a taxpayer like me? Less costs for energy, less costs for materials (a highly efficient geothermal system eliminates the need for miles and miles of ducts), and most of all, reduces employer costs in the form of less absenteeism and sickness. 92% of employer costs are for employees wages, benefits, etc.

Plus LEED certified buildings can bring about a savings of $50-$70 per square foot in life cost savings on the building.

I don't know about you, but as a taxpayer, I'd rather see my dollars being spent on LEED certification. Matter of fact, the next house I build will be LEED certified.

Also, I was erroneous on my earlier figures. Gold LEED certification costs are 2.2% higher than normal building.

I think that Mr. Stern is perhaps offering information gleaned from a website or from glossy brochures offering only the positive spin on LEED. Those who promote LEED are not seeing the forest for the trees. Like the much vaunted ISO system, a lot of the requirements for the implementation and maintenance of LEED is common sense, an attribute that did not use to be in short supply. All of the claims about life cycle costs and return on investment and lower medical benifits costs etc, ad infinitum are made by the inventors of LEED, and the political slavedogs that lap up all of the good news. It's a NEW DEAL! LEED to the rescue! Our planet will be saved! HOORAY!
Statements such as "a highly efficient geothermal system eliminates the need for miles and miles of ducts" just do not make sense. I have one question; without ducts, how is ventilation of the indoor spaces addressed? A heat pump (the device that is at the heart of a geothermal system) is not a ventilation fan. And claims of 2.2% higher cost over 'normal' building construction costs sound extremely out to lunch to me.
metalman.

Metalman, if you wish to read the same stuff I read, here are my references. Most are peer-reviewed journals and take some time to read. I'm proud to say I've done my homework. Have you? By the way, most of these articles don't have a lot of pictures and contain language that I'm sure I could help you with. I do suppose though that you would have been the type to argue with me on how flat the world is in another time. By the way, the term common sense is a misnomer as no such thing exists and if it does, please quantify your statements to me and please don't give the "glossy brochure" version that your parents or grandparents gave you.

Beekman, G.B. (1998). Water Conservation, Recycling and Reuse. Water Resources Development, 14(3), p. 353-364.

Beyer, S. (2006). The Green Olympic Movement: Beijing 2008. Chinese Journal of International Law, 5(2), p. 423-440.

Bowyer, J. (2007). GREEN BUILDING PROGRAMS - Are They Really GREEN? Forest Products Journal, 57(9), 6-17.

Creech, D., & Musselwhite, N. (2008). Buildings for the Next Billion. Economic Development Journal, (7) 2, p. 15-22.

Garrison, L. (2009, March). Going Green: State Tax Incentives and Alternative Energy. Journal of State Taxation, 27(3), 43-66. Retrieved September 18, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.

Gibson, F., Lloyd, J., Bain, S., & Hottell, D. (2008). Green Design and Sustainability in Sport and Recreation Facilities. The SMART Journal, 4 (2), p. 26-33.

Gorgolewski, M., (2006). The implications of reuse and recycling for the design of steel buildings. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 33, p. 489-496.

Heerwagen, J. (2002, July). Sustainable Design Can Be an Asset to the Bottom Line. Environmental Design & Construction, 5(4), 35. Retrieved September 15, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.

Hodges, C.P. (2005). A facility manager’s approach to sustainability. Journal of Facilities Management, 3(4), p. 312-324.

Kroll, K. (2009). Certifiably Green. Building Operating Management, 56(6), p. 41-43.

Kwong, B. (2004). Quantifying the Benefits of Sustainable Buildings. AACE International Transactions, Retrieved September 1, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.

Landers, J. (2009). LEED Ratings, Examination Systems Undergo Upgrades. Civil Engineering, 79 (3), p. 30-32.

McAuley, T., (2008). Understanding Green Building Cost and Value. AACE International Transactions, Retrieved September 1, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.

Miller, N., Spivey, J., & Florance, A. (2008). Does Green Pay Off? Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, 14(4), p. 385-399.

Nalewaik, A., & Venters, V. (2009). Costs Benefits of Building Green. Cost Enghineering, 51(2), p. 28-34.

Pedone, K. (Dec.-Jan. 2006). Environmentally Friendly Buildings. Facility Manager. Retrieved August 21, 2009, from http://www.iaam.org/facility_manager/pages/2006_Dec_Jan/Feature_2.htm

Rangwala, K. (2008). A Green Paradigm. Economic Development Journal, 7(3), p. 27-
32.

Reis, R., Bilec, M.M., Gokhan, N.M., & Needy, K.M. (2006). The Economic Benefits of Green Buildings: A comprehensive case study. The Engineering Economist, 51(3), p. 259-295.

Roper, K.O., & Beard, J.L. (2006). Justifying Sustainable Buildings-Championing Green Operations. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 8(2), p. 91-103.

Sinha, R. (2009, June). Green Building: A Step Towards Sustainable Architecture. ICFAI Journal of Infrastructure, 7(2), 91-102. Retrieved September 18, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.

Walters, M. (1999). Going for Green. Geographical, 71 (9), p. 50-55

Watson, R. S. (2009). Harvesting Tax Benefits of Green Building Incentives. Journal of Accountancy, 208(2), p. 44-48.

Wolff, A. (2007, March 11). Going, Going Green. Sports Illustrated. 106 (11), p. 36-42. Retrieved September 1, 2009 from Academic Search Premier database.

That is an impressive list, Mr. Stern.
Obviously you have read a lot of other people's research on the topic of sustainable buildings and related green practices. Since I obviously touched a nerve, please accept my apology. Now, I have to say that your thinly veiled insults are not called for in this circumstance. As one who obviously enjoys combing through academic tomes and databases, you are obviously well educated sir. Is it possible then, that you could deign to be perhaps a touch more understanding of those who lack your level of education and sense of purpose? For my part, in commenting on your research practices, I strayed from my original goal of stating that I do not have a lot of faith in LEED. It is my opinion that it is too soon to judge the real results of LEED implementation. In theory it looks great, but will it prove out in the long run? Nobody knows, LEED has not been with us long enough.
metalman.

Touche metalan, there is not enough evidence of LEED certification as many of the buildings have not gone through a full cycle of life. However, we need to try something don't we? Do we continue to building structures that are costly in the long run or build structures that are sustainable and save you and me (taxpayers) money?

And yes, I do apologize if you felt slighted.

Nice to see that we agree on something, at least. I look forward to learning more.
metalman.