CS-2009 MRpc77: Material ingredient optimization

  • First report, then optimize

    Building on the Material Ingredient Reporting credit, the intent behind this material ingredient optimization credit is to get manufacturers to reduce or eliminate hazardous ingredients in their products. The idea is that they will first need to find out what's in their products—and be rewarded for reporting that—and then take steps to reduce harmful substances.

    This pilot credit gives project teams an immediate way to engage with the expected direction of LEED v4. See the credit language for more details.

  • USGBC

    Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Core and Shell Development

    MR Pilot Credit 77: Material ingredient optimization

    Intent

    This is a pilot credit. To use any pilot credit on your LEED project, be sure to register here. Documentation requirements and additional questions are listed below.

    To encourage the use of products and materials for which life-cycle information is available and that have environmentally, economically, and socially preferable life-cycle impacts. To reward project teams for selecting products for which the chemical ingredients in the product are inventoried using an accepted methodology and for selecting products verified to minimize the use and generation of harmful substances. To reward raw material manufacturers who produce products verified to have improved life-cycle impacts.

    Requirements

    Material ingredient optimization

    Use products that document their material ingredient optimization using the paths below for at least 25%, by cost, of the total value of permanently installed products in the project.

    • USGBC approved program. Products that comply with building product optimization criteria approved by USGBC.
    • GreenScreen v1.2 Benchmark. Products that have fully inventoried chemical ingredients to 100 ppmParts per million. that have no Benchmark 1 hazards:
      • If any ingredients are assessed with the GreenScreen List Translator, value these products at 100% of cost.
      • If all ingredients are have undergone a full GreenScreen Assessment, value these products at 150% of cost.
    • Cradle to Cradle v2 Certified. End use products are certified Cradle to Cradle. Products will be valued as follows:
      • Cradle to Cradle Gold: 100% of cost
      • Cradle to Cradle Platinum: 150% of cost
    • Cradle to Cradle v3 Certified. End use products are certified Cradle to Cradle. Products will be valued as follows:
      • Cradle to Cradle Silver: 100% of cost
      • Cradle to Cradle Gold or Platinum: 150% of cost
    • International Alternative Compliance Path – REACH Optimization. End use products and materials that do not contain substances that meet REACH criteria for substances of very high concern. If the product contains no ingredients listed on the REACH Authorization1 or Candidate2 list, value at 100% of cost.

    For credit achievement calculation, products sourced (extracted, manufactured, and purchased) within 100 miles (160 km) of the project site are valued at 200% of their base contributing cost. For credit achievement calculation, the base contributing cost of individual products compliant with multiple responsible extraction criteria is not permitted to exceed 100% its total actual cost (before regional multipliers) and double counting of single product components compliant with multiple responsible extraction criteria is not permitted and in no case is a product permitted to contribute more than 200% of its total actual cost.

    Structure and enclosure materials may not constitute more than 30% of the value of compliant building products.

    General Pilot Documentation Requirements

    Register for the pilot credit

    Credits 1-14

    Credits 15-27

    Credits 28-42

    Credits 43-56

    Credits 57-67

    Credits 68-82

    Credits 83-103

    Additional questions
    1. Did your project use the actual or default materials cost to determine the total materials cost?
    2. How did your team determine or estimate the actual materials cost? What method was used?
    3. Where there any challenges in determining the total materials cost? What were they?
    4. If applicable, how would using the actual materials cost verses the default materials cost have effected credit achievement?

1 Comments

0
0
Chloe Bendistis Sustainability Project Manager The Sheward Partnership, LLC
Oct 12 2015
Guest
349 Thumbs Up

Feasibility

I recently completed this pilot credit for submission. I understand this Pilot Credit is based on the LEED v4 MR credit and it underwent public approval. However, I think the benefit of Pilot Credits is to provide feedback. Please note these comments below will have no impact on your project pursuing this Pilot Credit, but were provided for discussion purposes only.

I think the structural and enclosure requirement cost limit at 30% is extremely difficult for core and shell commercial office buildings that are primarily structure and enclosure.

Also, I used products that were Cradle 2 Cradle certified at lower levels than noted in the credit language. I think partial credit should be awarded for products that have undergone the rigorous Cradle 2 Cradle certification process.

Lastly, I had a product that was 47% manufactured and extracted within 500 miles. I think the regional bonus should award partial compliance, and the boundary should be expanded to 500 miles.

Post a Reply

Start a new LEED comment thread

Feb 26 2017
Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.

Copyright 2017 – BuildingGreen, Inc.