The gold standard for certifying "green" buildings fails to place enough emphasis on human health and needs to be upgraded, according to a new report from an environmental health group.But don't worry, folks, the gorwn-ups are in charge so just go back to sleep and vote Democrat in November.
The standard - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED - is weighted more heavily toward energy conservation and not enough toward health protection, skewing green-design criteria, concluded Environmental and Human Health, Inc., a Connecticut-based nonprofit dedicated to protecting human health from environmental harms.
"They have to be given great credit for work on energy conservation. And there clearly are environmental quality and health benefits that will accrue from conservation efforts," said John Wargo, professor of risk analysis and environmental policy at Yale University and a lead author of the report, released in May.
"But (LEED) has got some serious problems with respect to environmental quality and human health."
The authors conclude that the task of certifying green design and defining "sustainability" for the nation's houses, offices and communities is simply too large for one nonprofit.More fun here.
Uncle Sam must step in, said Nancy Alderman, the group's president.
"The Green Building Council is setting the green building standards with no oversight," she said. "That's problematic."
Don't forget some $60 billion of the (ahem) stimulus scam went to green jobs. Even a year ago it was deemed a failure, long before the departure of Van Jones.
No comments:
Post a Comment