One More Thing to Worry About

The NAHBNational Association of Home Builders, which awards a Model Green Home Certification. Research Center has just announced its “Green Approved” certification for product manufacturers, and the first seal of approval has been issued to Weyerhauser for its iLevel structural wood products. This is an interesting development that comes hot on the heels of the ANSIAmerican National Standards Institute. National nonprofit membership organization that coordinates development of national consensus standards. Accreditation by ANSI signifies that the procedures used meet the Institute’s essential requirements for openness, balance, consensus, and due process. -approved National Green Building StandardNational Green Building Standard Based on the NAHB Model Green Home Building Guidelines and passed through ANSI. This standard can be applied to both new homes, remodeling projects, and additions. , also a product of the Research Center and a group of industry professionals.

The press releases are flying out the door on this, but there isn’t a lick of info on it at either the Research Center or NAHB websites. Maybe the NAHB is just running behind in updating them, but I am concerned that this label is hitting the market without any information about what it actually means. It seems to me that if it has the time to certify a product and send out a press release on it, the least the organization could do is tell us in the industry what it actually means.

New and approved!
It appears that, in this case, the NAHB is following the "mushroom theory" — feed us full of manure and keep us in the dark. Tell us it’s approved, but don’t tell us what “approved” means.

In a slight contrast to the Research Center, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) has just announced its own “environmental services programs,” which is described this way: “Manufacturers may submit their products for UL testing and environmental claims validation. This validation enhances and supports the credibility of sustainability claims, helping to end confusion and giving manufacturers who choose UL validation a competitive edge.” No products or criteria are listed on the program's website yet, but I am hopeful that they will come up with a strong, effective third-party system.

And let’s not forget the other programs out there — GreenGuardThird-party certification program that identifies building products and materials which produce relatively low levels of emissions. GreenGuard is administered by the nonprofit GreenGuard Environmental Institute (GEI). Other GEI programs include the Children & Schools standard, which addresses emission standards for educational facilities, and the GreenGuard for Building Construction Program, a mold risk-reduction program that certifies the design, construction, and ongoing operations of new multifamily and commercial properties., Carpet and Rug Institute, FSCNonprofit organization that promotes forestry practices that are sustainable from environmental and social standpoints; FSC certification on a wood product is an indicator that the wood came from a well-managed forest., SFI, Floor Score, to name a few. It seems that, like the plethora of local and national green building programs out there, we have a big selection of product certifications to wade through, but few methods for comparing or validating one over the other. I feel my head starting to ache.

Product certification that works, most of the time
For product validation, I think I prefer the Energy StarLabeling system sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency and the US Department of Energy for labeling the most energy-efficient products on the market; applies to a wide range of products, from computers and office equipment to refrigerators and air conditioners. model. When I see an Energy Star appliance, I pretty much understand that it has met certain stringent requirements for energy and sometimes water efficiency. Interestingly, Energy Star recently took away its ratings on several appliances made by LG when it came out that the company's testing procedure was understating energy usage. On top of this, LG has agreed to reimburse all the appliance owners for the amount of energy they would have saved if the equipment was as efficient as claimed. I like that type of accountability and would like to see an equivalent at the Research Center and UL. I’ll give them a little time to get their acts together and let us know exactly what “approved” means, but I won’t hold my breath.

I can’t wait to hear what my buddy Michael Anschel thinks about this — if you think I'm a cranky guy, check out his musings on the subject!