Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Congressional research reportAug 25, 2017
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and
Issues
name redacted
Senior Specialist in Science and Technology
name redacted
Research Associate
August 25, 2017
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R40147
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Summary
Buildings, whether residential, commercial, government, or special-use, are core components of
the nation’s infrastructure. Their construction, operation, and demolition are increasingly
recognized as major sources of environmental impact. Without significant transformation of
building construction and operations, that impact is expected to increase with population growth
and changes in other demographic and economic factors. One strategy for achieving that
transformation is most widely known by the term green building. However, the term is used
differently by various proponents and practitioners, denoting a continuum of practices, from those
differing minimally from standard practices, to those aimed at providing buildings with a
minimum of environmental impact.
In general, green building can be characterized as integrated building practices that significantly
reduce the environmental footprint of a building in comparison to standard practices. Descriptions
of green building generally focus on a number of common elements, especially siting, energy,
water, materials, waste, and health. Serviceability or utility is also an explicit design element for a
class of green buildings known as high-performance buildings.
One of the most salient features of green building is integration of the various elements. Although
individual elements can be addressed separately, the green building approach is more
comprehensive, focusing on the environmental footprint of a building over its life cycle, from
initial design and construction to operations during the building’s useful life, through eventual
demolition and its aftermath.
The desire to integrate the various elements of green building has led to the development of rating
and certification systems to assess how well a building project meets a specified set of green
criteria. The best-known system is Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED).
Developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, it focuses on site, water, energy, materials, and
indoor environment. Recently, green building practices have found their way into building model
codes and technical standards.
Green building has received substantial attention from government, industry, and public interest
groups. Several federal laws and executive orders have provisions relating to green building.
Among these are the energy policy acts (EPACTs) of 1992 and 2005 (P.L. 102-486 and P.L. 10958), the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, P.L. 110-140), and Executive
Order 13693. EISA and other policy instruments require all federal agencies to implement green
building practices. However, several agencies have programs and activities that have a focus that
goes beyond reducing the environmental impacts of the facilities used by that agency—for
example, by performing research or facilitating the green-building activities of nonfederal
entities. Among those agencies are the General Services Administration, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Office of Federal Sustainability, the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, and the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development.
Green building raises issues relating to performance, cost, market penetration, and the approach
itself. Among the questions Congress may face with respect to such issues are the following: How
well are current green building programs working? How effective are current methods for
coordinating the green building activities of different agencies? To what extent and by what
means should Congress extend its efforts to facilitate and support the adoption and effective
implementation of green building measures? What priorities should Congress give to the different
elements of green building? What actions should Congress do to facilitate the growth of the
scientific and technical knowledge base relating to green building?
Congressional Research Service
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
What Is Green Building? ................................................................................................................. 2
Elements of Green Building ............................................................................................................ 5
Energy ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Water ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Materials.................................................................................................................................... 8
Waste ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Health ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Siting ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Serviceability........................................................................................................................... 10
Resilience ................................................................................................................................ 10
Integration ................................................................................................................................ 11
Balance among Elements ................................................................................................... 11
Balance across Stages ........................................................................................................ 11
Interdependence ................................................................................................................ 12
Green Certifications and Standards ............................................................................................... 13
Green Rating Systems and Certifications................................................................................ 13
Federal Government Use of Certification Systems ................................................................. 17
Green Building Codes and Standards...................................................................................... 18
Legislative and Policy Framework ................................................................................................ 20
Energy Policy Act of 1992 ...................................................................................................... 21
Energy Policy Act of 2005 ...................................................................................................... 21
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 ..................................................................... 22
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ............................................................... 23
Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 ......................................................................... 23
Executive Order 13693 ........................................................................................................... 24
Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance Sustainable
Buildings .............................................................................................................................. 24
Programs and Activities of Selected Federal Agencies ................................................................. 26
General Services Administration ............................................................................................. 26
Department of Energy ............................................................................................................. 28
Environmental Protection Agency .......................................................................................... 30
Department of Defense ........................................................................................................... 31
Office of Federal Sustainability .............................................................................................. 32
National Institute of Standards and Technology ..................................................................... 32
Department of Housing and Urban Development ................................................................... 33
Assessing Green Building Efforts ................................................................................................. 34
Market Penetration .................................................................................................................. 34
Cost ......................................................................................................................................... 35
Performance ............................................................................................................................ 37
Factors Affecting Performance ......................................................................................... 37
Selected Studies ................................................................................................................ 38
Measurement ........................................................................................................................... 40
Progress toward Federal Goals................................................................................................ 41
Approach and Implementation ................................................................................................ 42
Congressional Research Service
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Issues for Congress ........................................................................................................................ 43
Oversight of Federal Green Building Programs ...................................................................... 44
Adoption and Implementation of Green Building................................................................... 44
Priorities among Elements of Green Building ........................................................................ 45
Knowledge Base...................................................................................................................... 45
Tables
Table 1. Percentages of Total Federal Building Floorspace
Under the Jurisdiction of Various Agencies, 2015 ..................................................................... 27
Table 2. Agency Progress Toward Select Green Building Goals as of FY2015 ............................ 42
Contacts
Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 46
Congressional Research Service
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Introduction
The environmental impacts of human activity have been a source of controversy and concern for
many years. Much of the focus over that time has been on impacts such as pollution and the
destruction or degradation of wildlife habitats and ecosystems. Over the past few decades,
however, concerns have increased greatly about greenhouse gases, resource depletion, and
degradation of ecological services such as water supply. Over that time, the impacts of buildings
have come under increasing scrutiny.
There are many different kinds of buildings—residential, commercial, government, and those
with special uses such as schools and hospitals—and they form a large and core component of the
nation’s infrastructure. The construction, characteristics, operation, and demolition of buildings
are now recognized as a major source of environmental impact, including direct effects on the
humans who use them. U.S. buildings consume vast amounts of resources annually in the form of
electricity for lighting and temperature control, drinkable water for indoor and outdoor use, and
construction materials with diverse supply chains and manufacturing processes; they also produce
substantial waste streams throughout their lifecycles, from construction to daily operations to
demolition. Such resource use can impose high environmental and financial costs. For example,
buildings account for about 40% of energy consumption in the United States, producing
approximately 40% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, and costing consumers more
than $430 billion a year in energy bills.1
A building’s location and interaction with its surrounding environment also influences its
ecological and human health impacts. Buildings create impermeable surfaces that can have
substantial effects on stormwater management and associated health and environmental impacts.
A building’s proximity to public transportation affects the energy required to transport occupants
to and from the premises. If an office is not accessible by walking or public transit, for example,
occupants may need to commute by car, contributing to traffic delays, smog, and greenhouse gas
emissions. Occupant health and productivity is also affected by building features that determine
indoor air quality. Most people spend far more time indoors than outside, and the air in buildings
often has substantially higher concentrations of pollutants than the air outside, contributing in
extreme cases to a phenomenon known as “sick building syndrome.”2
These and other undesirable environmental and health impacts can be addressed for construction,
renovation, and operations of both new and existing buildings. Green building is a tool for
transforming the ways in which buildings are designed, built, operated, and demolished that has
generated substantial interest in recent decades. Since emerging as a relatively novel concept in
the 1990s, green building has grown into what many consider a respected approach to building,
with an increasing number of stakeholders. They include, among others, private construction
firms, building owners and occupants, green building certification and standards-developing
organizations, federal and state lawmakers, local code officials, and a variety of government
agencies.
This report discusses the concept of green building, major federal policies and programs relating
to it, and associated issues. Topics covered include how green building is defined, what it consists
of, the major areas of environmental impact it seeks to address, an overview of the tools available
1
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, “Annual Energy Outlook 2015,” DOE/EIA-0383(2015),
April 2015, https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/0383(2015).pdf.
2
Environmental Protection Agency, “The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air Quality,” Overviews and Factsheets,
EPA, August 28, 2014, https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/inside-story-guide-indoor-air-quality.
Congressional Research Service
1
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
for ensuring that a building conforms to green criteria, outstanding issues in the implementation
of green building, an overview of the major statutory and executive authorities that address it, and
programs in federal agencies that involve one or more elements related to it.
What Is Green Building?
Environmentally sensitive building is not a particularly recent phenomenon,3 but the modern
practice of green building began emerging in the 1990s. One milestone in the United States was
the formation in 1990 of the Committee on the Environment within the American Institute of
Architects (AIA),4 followed within a few years by the founding of the U.S. Green Building
Council (USGBC)5 and other organizations. The most prominent federal green building project in
that decade was the “Greening of the White House.”6 From those beginnings, the concept of
green building has expanded to encompass both the movement to promote environmentally
conscious design principles and the set of practices and strategies by which builders seek to
reduce harmful impacts of the built environment.
There is no single consensus definition of green building; efforts exist along a design and
performance continuum. What some call green building is barely distinguishable from standard
building practices. At the extreme, the term can be used in an almost meaningless way, purely as a
marketing tool. Such practices are sometimes called “greenwashing.”7
In contrast, some practitioners aim to provide buildings with environmental impacts that are
greatly reduced from those of typical buildings. Examples include the so-called “zero-impact”
building, which is intended to have no net environmental impact, including but not limited to netzero energy use; and the “minus-impact” building, which would provide a net environmental
benefit (see “Net-Zero Buildings,” below). Most green building efforts have less ambitious
reduction goals.
In general, green building might best be characterized as an integrated approach to building
design, construction, and operations that significantly reduces the environmental footprint of
buildings in comparison to standard practices. The environmental footprint is the overall impact
of a structure or activity on the environment, including the human environment.8
3
For a brief history, see, for example, Robert Cassidy, ed., “White Paper on Sustainability,” Building Design and
Construction Supplement, November 2003, 48 p., https://www.bdcnetwork.com/sites/default/files/
BD%2BC%202003%20White%20Paper%20on%20Sustainability.pdf; Osman Attmann, Green Architecture: Advanced
Technologies and Materials, McGraw-Hill’s GreenSource Series (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010).
4
American Institute of Architects, “AIA/COTE: A History Within a Movement,” 2008, https://network.aia.org/
committeeontheenvironment/home/cotehistory.
5
The U.S. Green Building Council (http://www.usgbc.org) is a U.S. nonprofit cross-sector organization (including
representatives of industry, government, and academia) founded in 1993. The Sustainable Buildings Industry Council
(https://www.nibs.org/?page=sbic), a trade association, also became involved in green building in the 1990s. The
international World Green Building Council (http://www.worldgbc.org) was founded several years later, in 1999. That
organization and others, such as the International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment (http://www.iisbe.org)
may be especially important for green building in China, India, and other developing nations.
6
See The White House, “Greening of the White House,” November 1999, http://clinton4.nara.gov/Initiatives/Climate/
WHgreening.html.
7
Greenwashing refers to the false or exaggerated promotion of a product as green or sustainable.
8
See, for example, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, “Green Building in North America,” 2008,
http://www3.cec.org/islandora/en/item/2335-green-building-in-north-america-opportunities-and-challenges-en.pdf.
Related terms include ecological footprint, which refers to impacts on ecosystems, often measured as the acreage
required to absorb the impact; see for example, Aaron Best et al., “Potential of the Ecological Footprint for Monitoring
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
This characterization captures two common features of the various meanings given to the term.
First, green is a relative concept—a green building is one that is greener than average. Second, it
is not limited to only one factor, such as energy consumption, but involves integration across
several, as is discussed below. The green building approach can be applied to any class of
building: large or small, commercial or residential.
Green builders seek to achieve improvements in environmental performance through a variety of
techniques and strategies, from the implementation of innovative technologies (such as energyefficient heating and cooling systems) to design features intended to influence occupant behavior
(such as placing stairways prominently to encourage their use). Some of these techniques will be
discussed in more detail below. Decisions about which of these techniques will be used are often
made in the design and planning phase, but can impact the environmental footprint of a building
throughout its lifecycle. As a result, green building techniques are most often applied to new
construction, through there is a growing incidence of green renovation and retrofit projects.
The term green building is often used interchangeably with others such as sustainable building,
and that practice is followed in this report. However, the terms may also be used in ways that are
not exactly synonymous. For example, sustainable building may be described as a form of green
building, but with a more stringent goal of indefinitely maintaining environmental footprints that
are small enough that they will not impede future human activity and the functioning of
ecosystems.9
Another term often used interchangeably with green building is high-performance building.
However, high-performance building usually involves other factors such as security in addition to
environmental ones. There are two federal statutory definitions:
a building that integrates and optimizes all major high-performance building attributes,
including energy efficiency, durability, life-cycle performance, and occupant
productivity,10
and
a building that integrates and optimizes on a life cycle basis all major high performance
attributes, including energy conservation, environment, safety, security, durability,
accessibility, cost-benefit, productivity, sustainability, functionality, and operational
considerations.11
(...continued)
Environmental Impacts from Natural Resource Use” (European Commission, DG Environment, May 2008),
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/natres/pdf/footprint.pdf; and Global Footprint Network, “Ecological
Footprint,” 2017, http://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/. Another term is carbon footprint,
which can be characterized as the net amount of greenhouse gases being produced as a result of an activity (see, for
example, James Morton Turner, “Counting Carbon: The Politics of Carbon Footprints and Climate Governance from
the Individual to the Global,” Global Environmental Politics 14, no. 1 [2014]: 59–78, http://repository.wellesley.edu/
cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1084&context=scholarship).
9
These characterizations draw most heavily on descriptions in some documents from the Building Science Corporation
(http://www.buildingscience.com/index_html). Some observers may argue for other characterizations of “sustainable
building,” such as “zero-impact.” See discussion on “Approach and Implementation.”
10
2 U.S.C. §16194(a).
11
2 U.S.C. §17061(12).
Congressional Research Service
3
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Definitions of Green Building
“Green,” “sustainable,” and “high-performance” are among the terms used to denote building practices that reduce
the environmental impacts of components of the built environment. Descriptions and definitions vary among
organizations, as illustrated by the language quoted below:
P.L. 110-140, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. §17061(13))
The term ‘‘high-performance green building’’ means a high-performance building that, during its life-cycle, as
compared with similar buildings (as measured by Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey or Residential
Energy Consumption Survey data from the Energy Information Agency)—
(A) reduces energy, water, and material resource use;
(B) improves indoor environmental quality, including reducing indoor pollution, improving thermal comfort, and
improving lighting and acoustic environments that affect occupant health and productivity;
(C) reduces negative impacts on the environment throughout the life-cycle of the building, including air and
water pollution and waste generation;
(D) increases the use of environmentally preferable products, including biobased, recycled content, and nontoxic
products with lower life-cycle impacts;
(E) increases reuse and recycling opportunities;
(F) integrates systems in the building;
(G) reduces the environmental and energy impacts of transportation through building location and site design
that support a full range of transportation choices for users of the building; and
(H) considers indoor and outdoor effects of the building on human health and the environment, including—
(i) improvements in worker productivity;
(ii) the life-cycle impacts of building materials and operations; and
(iii) other factors that the Federal Director or the Commercial Director consider to be appropriate.
Environmental Protection Agency
Green building is the use of approaches that create buildings and development that are environmentally responsible
and resource-efficient throughout a building’s life cycle, from site selection to demolition or reuse.
General Services Administration
Sustainable design seeks to reduce negative impacts on the environment, and the health and comfort of building
occupants, thereby improving building performance. The basic objectives of sustainability are to reduce consumption
of nonrenewable resources, minimize waste, and create healthy, productive environments.
Green buildings exhibit environmentally responsible intent and perform in a resource efficient manner. They meet the
needs of the occupants that live and work in them in a way that minimizes demand for natural resources and reduces
or eliminates waste. Green buildings save energy, water, materials, protect the indoor environment and are designed
to evolve as occupant needs change. Such buildings are generally more comfortable, healthy, durable and adaptable
over time.
U.S. Green Building Council
Green building is a holistic concept that starts with the understanding that the built environment can have profound
effects, both positive and negative, on the natural environment, as well as the people who inhabit buildings every day.
Green building is an effort to amplify the positive and mitigate the negative of these effects throughout the entire life
cycle of a building.
World Green Building Council
A “green” building is a building that, in its design, construction or operation, reduces or eliminates negative impacts,
and can create positive impacts, on our climate and natural environment. Green buildings preserve precious natural
resources and improve our quality of life.
Sources: Environmental Protection Agency, “Location and Green Building,” March 29, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/
smartgrowth/location-and-green-building; General Services Administration, “Sustainable Design,” May 22, 2017,
https://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/104462; General Services Administration Sustainable Facilities Tool, “What Is
Sustainability,” 2017, https://sftool.gov/learn/about/41/sustainability; Jacob Kriss, “What Is Green Building?” (U.S.
Green Building Council, August 6, 2014), https://www.usgbc.org/articles/what-green-building; World Green Building
Council, “What Is Green Building?” 2017, http://www.worldgbc.org/what-green-building.
Congressional Research Service
4
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Additional objectives may also be considered in the design of high-performance buildings,
including aesthetics and historical preservation.12
The “Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007” (EISA) further refined the concept by
establishing a detailed definition for high-performance green buildings (see “Definitions of Green
Building,” above).
Elements of Green Building
Descriptions of green building generally focus on specified elements, which in various documents
may also be referred to by other terms such as attributes, life-cycle parameters, performance
areas, or impact categories. Commonly cited elements are energy, water, materials, waste, and
health.13 Another is siting, particularly with respect to transportation, ecology, and smart
growth.14 The siting element has increased in prominence over the last several years as more
attention has focused on the built environment beyond the building itself.
Most descriptions do not explicitly include a serviceability, productivity, or functionality element,
but that may be because those would be commonly expected to be integral elements of any
building design. However, they are included explicitly among the objectives for highperformance buildings, which may also consider such others as disaster and climate resilience.
These objectives have risen in prominence in the wake of a number of high-profile natural
disasters, including Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, and the 2011 earthquake and tsunami that
initiated the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdown.15
The goals of a given green building project may vary depending on the needs of the stakeholders,
including a building’s expected occupants. As a result, different elements may be prioritized in
different projects (see “Net-Zero Buildings,” below). Local factors such as climate zone and flood
risk may influence the design process in ways that affect the relative emphasis placed on the
various elements discussed below.
12
Dan Prowler and Stephanie Vierra, “Whole Building Design,” Whole Building Design Guide, August 17, 2017,
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/whole-building-design.
13
Different sources may emphasize different factors. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lists
the following components: energy efficiency and renewable energy, water efficiency, environmentally preferable
building materials and specifications, waste and toxics reduction, indoor air quality, and smart growth and sustainable
development (Environmental Protection Agency, “Components of Green Building,” February 20, 2016,
https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/html/components.html). The Living Future Institute has developed the
“Living Building Certification” with seven “performance areas”: place, energy, materials, water, health and happiness,
equity, and beauty (International Living Future Institute, “Living Building Challenge,” 2017, https://living-future.org/
lbc/).
14
Smart growth is defined differently by different organizations, but the various definitions have in common a set of
planning strategies aimed at managing growth to improve livability and economic viability while reducing
environmental impact. For a detailed discussion, see Environmental Protection Agency, “Our Built and Natural
Environments, A Technical Review of the Interactions Among Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality,
Second Edition,” June 2013, https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/our-built-and-natural-environments.
15
PwC, “Rebuilding for Resilience: Fortifying Infrastructure to Withstand Disaster,” September 2013,
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/psrc/publications/assets/pwc-rebuilding-for-resilience-fortifying-infrastructure-towithstand-disaster.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Energy
A reduced energy footprint is probably the most widely cited element of green building.16
Techniques include
energy efficiency and conservation,17 through such means as energy-efficient
appliances and lighting, weatherization, and daylighting;18
use of alternative, renewable sources of energy, such as solar or geothermal
power or combustion of biomass;
utilization of energy storage technologies, often in combination with on-site
renewable energy generation; and
participation in smart-grid innovations such as demand-response programs.19
Energy is widely considered a crucial element because of the economic costs and environmental
impacts associated with energy use. A 2010 study by the National Academies found the potential
energy savings from widespread deployment of energy efficiency measures to be significantly
higher for buildings than for transportation and industry.20 In a 2015 report on energy
technologies, the Department of Energy estimated that buildings using the best available energy
efficiency technologies would consume about half as much energy on average as those in the
current building stock.21
Federal law sets numeric requirements for reductions in energy use by federal buildings.22 The
energy intensity23 of such buildings declined by more than 22% from 2003 to 2015. Nevertheless,
2015 consumption exceeded the federal goal.24
16
See, for example, Government Accountability Office, “Green Building: Federal Initiatives for the Nonfederal Sector
Could Benefit from More Interagency Collaboration,” GAO-12-79, (November 2, 2011), http://www.gao.gov/products/
GAO-12-79; Alex Lukachko and Joseph W. Lstiburek, “Towards Sustainability—Green Building, Sustainability
Objectives, and Building America Whole House Systems,” Research Report (Building Science Corporation, February
8, 2008), https://buildingscience.com/documents/bareports/ba-0801-towards-sustainability-green-buildingsustainability-objectives-and-building-america-whole-house-systems-research/view. This report compared the different
emphases among several national green building programs for residences. It found that energy efficiency was the only
issue that was a primary focus for all, with indoor environmental quality the next most important.
17
Energy efficiency means using less energy to perform the same function, whereas energy conservation refers to
practices that reduce consumption, often by changing behavior. Using a lightbulb that produces the same amount of
light with less energy would be an example of energy efficiency, while turning off the light when leaving a room would
be an example of energy conservation.
18
Daylighting refers to the practice of designing windows and skylights to utilize sunlight for indoor lighting needs.
19
See the textbox on Smart Buildings and the Internet of Things for more on demand-response and building smart-grid
integration.
20
National Research Council, Real Prospects for Energy Efficiency in the United States (Washington, DC: National
Academies Press, 2010), doi:10.17226/12621.
21
Department of Energy, “Quadrennial Technology Review: An Assessmnet of Energy Technologies and Research
Opportunities,” September 2015, https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/03/f34/quadrennial-technology-review2015_1.pdf.
22
See the section on “Legislative and Policy Framework” below.
23
Building energy intensity is measured in British thermal units (Btu) per gross square foot.
24
Chris Tremper, “Federal Progress Toward Facility Energy/Sustainability Goals” (Department of Energy, June 30,
2017), https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/06/f35/fy16_facility_sustainability_goals.pdf. The energy intensity in
FY2015 was 98,408 BTU per gross square foot (GSF), compared to a goal of 89,163 BTU per GSF, which would
represent a 30% reduction over 2003 levels.
Congressional Research Service
6
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Net-Zero Buildings
A Net-Zero Energy Building (NZEB) meets all of its energy consumption requirements through a combination of
energy efficiency and the use of onsite renewable energy sources such as wind, biofuels, and geothermal power.
NZEBs may sometimes rely on delivered energy from an energy network such as the electricity grid, but they
produce and export enough renewable energy to the network to fully offset what they draw from it. A net-zero
performance target is much more stringent than the “better-than-average” or point-based goals of most green
building rating systems and standards. An even more ambitious target is net-positive energy, which requires producing
more energy on site from renewable energy than is used during the course of a year. Note, however, that an NZEB
need not be highly energy-efficient, provided that it produces enough energy to compensate for what it uses,
“Getting to zero” on energy has been a goal of governments, professional organizations, and other stakeholders since
the mid-2000s. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, P.L. 110-140) directed the Department of
Energy to establish an initiative to develop net-zero energy commercial buildings, with the goal of having achieved netzero energy in all U.S. commercial buildings by 2050. Prominent organizations promoting net-zero building efforts
include the Department of Energy (DOE), its National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) of the Department of Commerce, and nongovernmental entities such as ASHRAE,
the New Buildings Institute, the National Institute of Building Sciences, and the Living Futures Institute.
The concept of net zero has also been applied to other resource areas, as in net-zero water and net-zero waste
buildings. Executive Order 13693 directed federal agencies to design all new buildings greater than 5,000 gross square
feet to be net-zero energy, and, where feasible, net-zero water or waste by FY2030. Net-zero water buildings are
designed to reduce overall water use; maximize alternative sources of water, such as harvested rainwater, grey water,
and reclaimed water; and safely return the balance of all nonalternative water to its original aquafer or watershed.
Net-zero waste buildings are designed to reduce, reuse, recycle, compost, or recover waste streams, resulting in zero
solid waste sent to landfills.
The overall market for net zero buildings is small but growing. According to reports by the New Buildings Institute,
332 NZEB projects were completed or underway in 2016, up from 60 in 2012. Challenges to implementing net-zero
energy include costs, gaps in data and measurement science, and potential trade-offs with indoor air quality associated
with some energy-efficiency techniques. A major focus of NIST’s Net-Zero Energy Residential Test Facility is
demonstrating that extreme energy efficiency can be achieved without compromising indoor air quality as long as
both elements are thoughtfully integrated into the building’s design. A net-zero building is not necessarily a green
building: It may not require environmental design or performance in element areas other than the one specifically
being targeted. Over time, zero-performance targets in multiple performance areas may become incorporated into
green building criteria.
Sources: General Services Administration, Sustainable Facilities Tool, “Net Zero Energy,” 2017, https://sftool.gov/
plan/420/net-energy; Department of Energy, “Net Zero Water Building Strategies,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/
femp/net-zero-water-building-strategies; Paul Hernandez, “Net-Zero Energy Residential Test Facility (NZERTF),”
NIST, June 1, 2016, https://www.nist.gov/el/net-zero-energy-residential-test-facility; Kent Peterson, Paul Torcellini, and
Roger Grant, “A Common Definition for Zero Energy Buildings” (Department of Energy, September 2015),
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/09/f26/bto_common_definition_zero_energy_buildings_093015.pdf; Berkeley
Analytical Associates LLC, Bernheim + Dean, and White + GreenSpec, “High Performance Indoor Air Quality
Specification for Net Zero Energy Homes” (National Institute of Standards and Technology, February 2015),
http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/gcr/2015/NIST.GCR.14-980.pdf.
Given its importance, energy is sometimes mistakenly treated as the predominant or even the sole
element to be considered in green building. However, while a green building almost always
addresses the energy element, a building that focuses solely on energy may not be a green
building: It could have other environmental impacts that outweigh any benefits from its reduced
use of energy.25
25
For an example of other impacts potentially outweighing savings from energy efficiency, see Alex Wilson and
Rachel Navaro, “Driving to Green Buildings.,” Environmental Building News 16, no. 9 (2007): 1–18,
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eih&AN=26824144&site=ehost-live.
Some energy-efficiency measures may also negatively impact indoor air quality (see “Net-Zero Buildings”).
Congressional Research Service
7
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Water
Reducing water usage in buildings can provide cost savings. It can also aid management of water
resources, especially in arid areas and in response to periodic drought elsewhere.26 Reductions
can be achieved through such measures as reduced-flow plumbing fixtures,27 recycling of
wastewater,28 and landscaping designed to reduce irrigation requirements.
Water management may also include how the building and associated land handle rain, on-site
water, and run-off. Development designed to ensure that the way a site handles water is similar to
how it did so before development is called low-impact development, which “uses natural and
engineered infiltration and storage techniques to control stormwater where it is generated.”29
Among the methods used are reduction in impervious surfaces through landscaping, use of porous
materials and green roofs, and use of holding ponds, swales, rain gardens, and similar measures.
Such techniques for water management are sometimes referred to collectively as green
infrastructure (see the section on “Environmental Protection Agency”).
Materials
The materials used in a building, during both construction and operations, can contribute
substantially to the building’s environmental footprint. The choice and use of materials affects
resource depletion, pollution, embodied energy,30 and health. “Environmentally preferable” or
“green-labelled” products can reduce the impact. Such materials may have significant recycled
content, be made from renewable biological resources (so-called “biobased” products), or be
created with processes that use low amounts of energy and produce low amounts of pollutants.31
They may also be designed to reduce health risks such as those from formaldehyde and other
volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
There is some debate about what constitutes an environmentally preferable material. The lack of a
consistent vocabulary for describing the sustainability attributes of materials, as well as
inconsistencies in the measurement methodologies and reporting frameworks used by various
26
See CRS Report R43407, Drought in the United States: Causes and Current Understanding, by (name redacted) and
(name redacted).
27
Federal manufacturing standards for certain plumbing products were established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992
(P.L. 102-486).
28
Much wastewater from buildings can be reused in other applications on site, although some treatment may be
required or preferred. For example, grey water, which is residential wastewater from sources other than kitchens and
toilets, can be reused for irrigation and in toilets.
29
Anne Guillette, “Low Impact Development Technologies,” Whole Building Design Guide, November 3, 2016,
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/low-impact-development-technologies. Low-impact building is sometimes used as a
synonym for low-impact development and sometimes as a synonym for green or sustainable building.
30
Embodied energy can be defined as “the sum of the energy requirements associated, directly or indirectly, with the
delivery of a good or service.”” (Cutler J. Cleveland and Christopher Morris, eds., Dictionary of Energy, Second
Edition [Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014]). For a discussion of the term in the context of building construction, see Ben
McAlinden, “Embodied Energy and Carbon,” Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), May 15, 2015,
https://www.ice.org.uk/knowledge-and-resources/briefing-sheet/embodied-energy-and-carbon.
31
Some federal agencies have developed guidance for obtaining such products (see, for example, Environmental
Protection Agency, “Sustainable Marketplace: Greener Products and Services,” March 9, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/
greenerproducts; General Services Administration, Sustainable Facilities Tool, “Green Procurement Compilation,”
2017, https://sftool.gov/greenprocurement; U.S. Department of Agriculture, “BioPreferred,” 2017,
https://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/).
Congressional Research Service
8
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
eco-labelling systems, can make it difficult to determine whether a given material is preferable to
a substitute.32
Waste
The environmental impacts from a building’s waste stream over its life cycle can be mitigated by
waste-reduction efforts, which fall broadly into four main categories: source reduction, reuse,
recycling, and waste-to-energy.33 The waste from standard demolition and construction processes
can be reduced through more efficient use of materials (source reduction) and recycling or reuse
of waste products.34 Landscaping can be planned to reduce or eliminate chemical pollutants from
grounds maintenance and to recycle waste such as lawn clippings through mulching and
composting. High-efficiency boilers and furnaces can reduce the production of many atmospheric
pollutants. Operational solid waste such as paper and foodstuffs can be recycled or otherwise
processed to reduce their environmental impact.
Health
Several factors can influence the health impacts of buildings. For some, the health effects are
obvious, such as the presence of indoor air pollutants like mold, radon, carbon monoxide,
asbestos, and VOCs. Indoor air quality (IAQ) has a significant impact on occupant health, given
that most people tend to spend a large percentage of each day indoors. Primary techniques for
maintaining high IAQ include ensuring adequate ventilation; providing air filtration; and using
materials without heavy metals, VOCs, asbestos,35 or other potentially toxic substances. Overall
indoor environmental quality (IEQ) includes, in addition to IAQ, factors such as lighting, climate
control, acoustics, and ergonomic design; those may also have significant impacts on the health of
building occupants.36
Siting
Where a building is situated can have significant effects on its environmental footprint.37 For
example, siting of buildings near transportation hubs can facilitate the use of public transportation
32
Jorge L. Contreras, Meghan Lewis, and Hannah Roth, “Toward a Rational Framework for Sustainable Building
Materials Standards,” Standards Engineering 63, no. 5 (September 2011), https://www.researchgate.net/profile/
Jorge_Contreras12/publication/228311359_Toward_a_Rational_Framework_for_Sustainable_Building_Materials_
Standards/links/576bdd1908aead4e3adcfd2c.pdf. See also “Programs and Activities of Selected Federal Agencies” for
a discussion of some of the federal programs aimed at developing standards for, and facilitating the procurement of,
environmentally-preferable materials.
33
Waste-to-energy refers to the recovery of useable forms of energy from waste materials through processes such as
combustion, gasification, and others. EPA ranks waste management strategies from most to least preferred as follows:
source reduction and reuse, recycling/composting, energy recovery/waste-to-energy, and treatment and disposal
(Environmental Protection Agency, “Sustainable Materials Management: Non-Hazardous Materials and Waste
Management Hierarchy,” August 10, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/smm/sustainable-materials-management-nonhazardous-materials-and-waste-management-hierarchy).
34
Environmental Protection Agency, “Sustainable Management of Construction and Demolition Materials,” June 30,
2017, https://www.epa.gov/smm/sustainable-management-construction-and-demolition-materials.
35
Asbestos is present in many older buildings and is still used in some construction materials (Environmental
Protection Agency, “Learn About Asbestos,” December 19, 2016, https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/learn-about-asbestos).
36
General Services Administration, Sustainable Facilities Tool, “Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ),” 2017,
https://sftool.gov/learn/about/1/indoor-environmental-quality-ieq.
37
The WBDG Sustainable Committee, “Optimize Site Potential,” Whole Building Design Guide, May 18, 2017,
http://www.wbdg.org/design-objectives/sustainable/optimize-site-potential.
Congressional Research Service
9
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
and reduce impacts from private automobiles. Site selection may also take into account the
ecological sensitivity of potential sites, to minimize adverse impacts on ecological services38 and
native species of plants and animals. The orientation of building axes and surfaces, and the
building’s proximity to trees and other plantings, affect its heating and cooling requirements.
Climate-related risk factors may also be incorporated into siting decisions. Risks from sea-level
rise, flooding, and extreme weather events, all of which may be affected by climate change, are of
increasing concern to builders, particularly in coastal areas.39
Serviceability
A building that is not useful to its occupants is unlikely to be worth its cost, no matter how small
its environmental footprint. Therefore, productivity and other measures of utility comprise an
important element of green building that is not always discussed. A large percentage of U.S.
workers spend their days in offices, and studies have suggested that IEQ strongly influences
worker comfort and productivity.40
There is some evidence that green buildings can lead to improved productivity among
occupants.41 However, that is not always the case. For example, poor acoustic performance has
been repeatedly observed in certified green buildings, suggesting that trade-offs do sometimes
occur between serviceability and other elements. While serviceability is not generally considered
as a separate element in green-building design, it is explicitly identified as an objective for highperformance buildings and has received increasing attention in green certification systems.42
Resilience
Resistance to hazards such as earthquakes, hurricanes, flooding, subsidence, and forest fires can
increase the useful life of a building and permit it to function when services such as transportation
and utilities are not available. Approaches to resilience include such practices as resistant
construction; locating critical mechanical components on upper levels away from potential flood
waters; on-site power generation, such as through photovoltaic and wind-turbine technology;
rainwater harvesting; and water recycling capabilities. An increasing emphasis has been placed on
climate-resilient design, defined in Executive Order 13693 as assets designed to “prepare for,
38
Potential sites may provide services before development such as air and water purification, erosion control,
recreation, and habitat for beneficial plants, animals, and microorganisms. Site development using standard design and
construction practices can severely reduce such services.
39
For a discussion of how sea-level rise impacts coastal development, see CRS Report R44632, Sea-Level Rise and
U.S. Coasts: Science and Policy Considerations, by (name redacted) and (name redacted)
. For a discussion of coastal
resilience to flooding, see CRS In Focus IF10225, Coastal Flood Resilience: Policy, Roles, and Funds, by (name reda
cted), (name redacted), and (name redacted)
. For a discussion of climate-change science and impacts, see CRS
Report R43229, Climate Change Science: Key Points, by (name redacted).
40
Yousef Al Horr et al., “Occupant Productivity and Office Indoor Environment Quality: A Review of the Literature,”
Building and Environment 105 (August 2016): 369–89, doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.06.001.
41
Greg Kats et al., “The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings: A Report to California’s Sustainable
Building Task Force” (Sustainable Building Task Force, October 2003), http://evanmills.lbl.gov/pubs/pdf/
green_buildings.pdf; and Piers MacNaughton et al., “The Impact of Working in a Green Certified Building on
Cognitive Function and Health,” Building and Environment 114 (March 1, 2017): 178–86,
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.041.
42
See, for example, Taryn Holowka, “Indoor Environmental Quality and LEED V4,” U.S. Green Building Council,
August 15, 2017, https://www.usgbc.org/articles/indoor-environmental-quality-and-leed-v4.
Congressional Research Service
10
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
withstand, respond to, or quickly recover from disruptions due to severe weather events and
climate change for the intended life of the asset.”43
Integration
One of the most salient features of green building is integration. The green building approach
considers integration across (1) elements, in order to improve performance in multiple impact
areas, and (2) stages, in order to minimize environmental impacts throughout the building’s
lifecycle.44
This approach, with its focus on the whole building (see “Whole Building Design Guide,”
below), can lead to better assessment of the overall environmental impact of a building. It also
permits explicit assessment of and balance among potentially competing goals, and it allows
planners to examine how different elements and stages interact and to develop an integrated
strategy. Integration and performance with respect to several elements can be enhanced by the
appropriate use of information technology in building operations (see “Smart Buildings and the
Internet of Things,” below).45
Balance Among Elements
A focus on one element at the expense of others can be counterproductive. For example, energy
efficiency can be improved by sealing the building envelope to prevent conditioned air from
escaping. But an absence of air exchange can result in increased concentration of pollutants in the
building and can impede moisture control, fostering the development of mold and deterioration of
building materials.46 Addressing both energy efficiency and health requires either a compromise
or technologies such as active ventilation with heat exchange. A green building approach reduces
the risk of unanticipated problems by forcing an examination of how actions affecting each
element impact others, so that an overall optimization can be achieved. Nevertheless, in some
cases, such as many renovations, only one or a few factors might be feasible to address. In other
cases, it may make sense to prioritize certain elements at the expense of others due to cost or
feasibility constraints, local environmental factors, or occupant priorities.
Balance Across Stages
A focus on only one stage in the life cycle of a building can lead to savings at that stage but losses
at another. For example, in the absence of sufficient data on the environmental impacts of
developing, manufacturing, installing, using, and eventually disposing of alternative building
materials, a choice that appears to be environmentally sound may in fact not be. Use of concrete
walls provides more insulation on average than use of wood, but has much higher net emissions
of carbon dioxide over its life cycle.47 Far more energy is used in operating a building than in
43
Executive Order 13693, “Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade,” Federal Register 80, no. 57
(March 25, 2015): 15871–84, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-03-25/pdf/2015-07016.pdf.
44
This is called a cradle-to-grave approach.
45
See also, ASHRAE, “An Introduction to Building Information Modeling (BIM): A Guide for ASHRAE Members,”
November 3, 2009, http://cms.ashrae.biz/bim/pdf/BIMGuide_Rev_110309.pdf.
46
See, for example, the documents available at Building Science Corporation, “Building Science Digests,” 2017,
https://buildingscience.com/document-search?term=&field_doc_topic_tid=All&type%5B%5D=7. Note that inadequate
sealing of a building envelope may also permit external pollutants to enter a building and may compromise moisture
control, depending on climate and other factors.
47
Tables 1.6.2 and 1.6.3 in Department of Energy, “2011 Buildings Energy Data Book,” March 2012,
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
11
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
constructing one,48 however, so choices made during construction may need to be balanced with
planning for the postoccupancy stage. A green building approach can reduce such problems by
facilitating an assessment of the impact from actions at one stage on all the others.
Smart Buildings and the Internet of Things
Increasingly, green building design is incorporating Internet-connected technologies. The spread of Internet access and
falling prices for web-enabled technologies have given rise to what has become known as the “Internet of Things”
(IoT). The term refers to networks of “smart” objects that communicate with each other and with computers
through the Internet. A smart object is any noncomputer device with a unique identifier and Internet connectivity.
The IoT and smart technologies have impacted the operations of sectors, such as manufacturing, transportation,
energy, and government services. In a buildings context, IoT has led to the development of a new generation of
“smart buildings.”
There is no universally agreed-upon definition for a smart building, but such buildings usually incorporate resource
monitoring, data analytics, and, in some cases, automation to manage building operations more efficiently. More than
80% of the energy used by a building throughout its life, from construction to demolition, is associated with
operations. Examples of smart building technologies that target environmental performance include networked energy
and water meters, connected thermostats, and automated leak and fault-detection sensors, all of which can be used in
concert to optimize a building’s resource use. Building systems may also be networked with the electricity grid, water
infrastructure, and waste collection systems to leverage operational efficiencies at the neighborhood or city scale. For
instance, buildings can monitor and respond to real-time electricity pricing signals from the grid to shift consumption
to periods of low demand and high supply. This is known as demand-response, and it can be used by smart grids to
reduce the use of inefficient power plants during periods of peak demand, increasing efficiency and minimizing overall
emissions of pollutants.
Integration of the IoT with buildings raises some concerns related to privacy and security. IoT devices are potentially
vulnerable to exploitation from hackers, who may use them to access sensitive information through their connection
to a building’s network, or to influence building operations, such as by turning lights, HVAC, or security systems on
or off. From an environmental perspective, IoT devices may also increase the overall number of energy-drawing
objects in the building. That increase may reduce or even negate savings from measures to optimize building energy
use. Smart building technologies and networked resource management solutions are still evolving, however, and will
likely revolutionize building operations in the long run.
Sources: CRS Report R44227, The Internet of Things: Frequently Asked Questions, by (name redacted)
; National Institute
of Standards and Technology, “Embedded Intelligence in Buildings Program,” July 17, 2017, https://www.nist.gov/
programs-projects/embedded-intelligence-buildings-program; Jim Sinopoli, “Smart Controls,” Whole Building Design
Guide, August 15, 2016, https://www.wbdg.org/resources/smart-controls.
Interdependence
Many elements are also clearly interdependent. For example, use of environmentally preferable
products can affect occupant health, which in turn can affect productivity. A building with on-site
renewable energy generation may be well-prepared to function during periods when power is
unavailable from utilities, such as after a natural disaster. On-site stormwater management can
facilitate the provision of ecological services.
(...continued)
http://en.openei.org/doe-opendata/dataset/6aaf0248-bc4e-4a33-9735-2babe4aef2a5/resource/3edf59d2-32be-458bbd4c-796b3e14bc65/download/2011bedb.pdf. The embodied energy also tends to be higher for concrete.
48
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “Embedded Intelligence in Buildings Program,” July 17, 2017,
https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/embedded-intelligence-buildings-program.
Congressional Research Service
12
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Green Certifications and Standards
Formal systems and tools have been developed over the last few decades that set criteria for green
and sustainable buildings and methods for assessing whether new construction or renovation
projects meet those criteria. The systems and tools fall into one or more of four main categories:
rating systems, certifications, standards, and codes.
Green Rating Systems and Certifications
Given the range and interconnections of elements involved, determining whether a building is
green or sustainable is not straightforward—there is no simple metric for determining how well a
building meets the desired criteria. To address this problem, in the 1990s, some professional
organizations in the building sector developed rating and certification systems that helped to
standardize and define green building practices and raised public awareness of them.
The term rating system is often used interchangeably with certification system, although they
refer to somewhat different concepts. Many systems, such as the well-known Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), combine both rating and certification into a single
system.
Rating systems assign points to buildings for meeting established criteria in various green
building design categories. That results in an overall score and, often, assignment to one of a
number of ranked tiers indicating the level of rigor of the criteria a building attains.
Certification provides validation that a building meets or exceeds specified design or performance
requirements. It is arguably most objective when an independent entity conducts the assessment
and awards the certification. Such a third party must be independent of the builder, contractor,
and designer, as well as the organization that developed the rating system or standard.49
A handful of organizations currently offer rating and certification for green buildings. By far the
most prevalent certification system within the United States is LEED, developed by the U.S.
Green Building Council (USGBC). When it launched in 1998, LEED was among the first
voluntary, consensus-based certification systems in the United States. It quickly became widely
recognized as a benchmark for green building design.50 The number of LEED certifications has
increased annually since the first certification was awarded in 2000.51 As of April 2017, more than
37,300 commercial buildings had been certified by LEED worldwide.52 USGBC has also
expanded the categories of building certifications offered to include new commercial
construction, existing buildings, building interiors, homes, schools, retail, healthcare, whole
neighborhoods, and others (see textbox on “Special-Use Buildings”). Certification is also
49
Stephanie Vierra, “Green Building Standards and Certification Systems,” Whole Building Design Guide, December
9, 2016, https://www.wbdg.org/resources/green-building-standards-and-certification-systems; Contreras, Lewis, and
Roth, “Toward a Rational Framework for Sustainable Building Materials Standards.”
50
Jenny Richards, “Green Building: A Retrospective History of LEED Certification” (Institute for Environmental
Entrepreneurship, November 2012), http://enviroinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/GREEN-BUILDING-ARetrospective-History-of-LEED-Certification-November-2012.pdf.
51
U.S. Green Building Council, “Country Market Brief,” May 15, 2017, http://www.usgbc.org/advocacy/countrymarket-brief.
52
U.S. Green Building Council, “About LEED,” July 2017, https://www.usgbc.org/articles/about-leed.
Congressional Research Service
13
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
available for operations and maintenance of existing buildings (including buildings first certified
when new), with a five-year recertification cycle.53
LEED focuses primarily on six green building elements: location and transportation, sustainable
sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, and indoor environmental
quality.54 It also has credit categories for innovation and for regional priority, which considers
specific factors of importance to sustainability within a specified region.
Special-Use Buildings
Specialized buildings such as schools, hospitals, and data centers have unique mission requirements that pose greenbuilding challenges. They may also have very different resource-use patterns from the average commercial building. As
a result, different categories of special-use buildings require green-building design and construction that is tailored to
fit their particular needs and priorities.
Hospitals, for example, are complex to design and must meet substantial regulatory requirements, even before
sustainability is taken into account. They are among the most resource-intensive buildings, consuming almost three
times as much energy per square foot as a typical office building and posing unique challenges to other elements of
green building such as air quality. Hospitals thus offer substantial opportunities for environmental performance
improvements, but these must be achieved without compromising their primary mission of improving healthcare
outcomes for patients. Some green techniques, such as daylighting and the use of nontoxic building materials, have
obvious benefits for health and wellbeing that translate readily to a healthcare environment. It is unlikely, however,
that a hospital will be able to achieve zero waste, given that hazardous and medical wastes are not as amenable to
recycling or composting as the waste streams from most other building types. Furthermore, some energy and water
conservation techniques may not be appropriate in a hospital setting, where water heating and flow rates must be
tightly controlled for health and safety reasons. Similarly, scientific laboratories and data centers face trade-offs and
challenges in implementing energy-saving features without compromising mission-driven building functions that rely on
higher-than-average building energy consumption.
In recognition of such challenges, some rating systems and standards include guidance specifically tailored to
specialized building types. LEED, for instance, offers new building certification specifically designed for schools, retail
stores, healthcare buildings, data centers, hotels, and warehouses and distribution centers. Agencies such as the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) also offer programs aimed at
integrating green building practices into the design of certain classes of special-use buildings.
Some agencies have reported challenges in complying with federal green building requirements due to the number of
special-use buildings in their inventories. Executive Order 13693 requires 15% of existing federal buildings to be
brought into compliance with the Guiding Principles by FY2025. DOE’s large number of data centers, laboratories,
and accelerators; EPA’s scientific laboratories; and the VA’s hospitals have all proven challenging to bring into
compliance with the Guiding Principles.
Sources: Robert F. Carr and WBDG Health Care Subcommittee, “Health Care Facilities,” Whole Building Design
Guide, April 6, 2017, http://wbdg.org/building-types/health-care-facilities; Energy Information Administration, “2012
Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy Usage Summary,” March 18, 2016, https://www.eia.gov/
consumption/commercial/reports/2012/energyusage/; World Health Organization, “Healthy Hospitals, Healthy Planet,
Healthy People,” Discussion Draft, (May 2009), http://www.who.int/globalchange/publications/
climatefootprint_report.pdf; Government Accountability Office, “Federal Green Building: Federal Efforts and ThirdParty Certification Help Agencies Implement Key Requirements, but Challenges Remain,” GAO-15-667, (July 2015),
http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671618.pdf.
To be LEED-certified, a building must meet a set of mandatory basic requirements for most
elements and must also receive a designated number of the total points that can be earned within
each element from optional items. A building’s total score determines its level of certification:
53
U.S. Green Building Council, “O+M: Initial Certification or Recertification?,” June 3, 2014, https://www.usgbc.org/
articles/om-initial-certification-or-recertification.
54
Brendan Owens et al., “LEED v4 Impact Category and Point Allocation Development Process” (U.S. Green Building
Council, August 2013), https://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/
LEED%20v4%20Impact%20Category%20and%20Point%20Allocation%20Process_Overview_0.pdf. These elements
are related but not identical to those described in the section on “Elements of Green Building.”
Congressional Research Service
14
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Certified, Silver, Gold, or Platinum. While this “checklist” approach has been criticized,55 it
permits comparatively simple assessment of compliance and can facilitate the kind of integrated
consideration of elements that many observers regard as a hallmark of green building. The LEED
rating system is updated periodically; the most recent version, LEED v4, was released in
November of 2013.56
Other rating and certification systems in use in the United States include the following:57
The Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
(BREEAM) is a British system developed in 1990. Though BREEAM rating
systems have been used internationally since then, only the BREEAM In-Use
certification has been introduced in the United States, beginning in 2017.58
BREEAM In-Use is an online rating system for existing commercial building
performance. Unlike LEED, BREEAM In-Use has no prerequisites; any existing
building can use it to benchmark performance and certify subsequent
improvements. BREEAM ratings are Acceptable, Pass, Good, Very Good,
Excellent, and Outstanding, which are signified by between one and six stars.59
Rating levels are based on a building’s score across nine impact categories:
management, health and well-being, energy, transport, water, materials, waste,
land use, and ecology and pollution. To remain valid, certifications must be
renewed annually.
Green Globes was developed in Canada by the Green Building Initiative. It is
based on BREEAM, and has an associated standard (see “Green Building Codes
and Standards”). A building may earn between one and four Globes based on the
number of points earned out of a possible total of 1000.60 Points are distributed
across six elements—site, energy, water, materials and resources, emissions, and
indoor environment—plus project management. Like BREEAM In-Use, Green
Globes has no mandatory provisions or prerequisites that must be met before
certification can be considered; certification and rating level are based solely on
the number of points earned.
The International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge61 offers
three certifications: Living Building Certification, Petal Certification, and Zero
Energy Building Certification. Criteria for certification fall into seven
performance areas, referred to as “Petals”: place, water, energy, health and
happiness, materials, equity, and beauty. Living Building Certification requires a
building to meet requirements in all seven performance areas. Petal Certification
requires compliance with no fewer than three of the seven Petals, one of which
55
See, for example, Andrew J. Nelson and Ari Frankel, “Building Labels vs. Environmental Performance Metrics:
Measuring What’s Important about Building Sustainability” (RREEF Real Estate, October 2012),
http://realestate.deutscheam.com/content/_media/Research_Sustainability_Metrics_in_the_Real_Estate_SectorOct_2012.pdf.
56
For a list of changes in LEED v4, see U.S. Green Building Council, “LEED v4 User Guide,” November 2014,
https://kapost-files-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/published/54886ef033efbe406e00012a/ebook-leed-v4-user-guide.pdf.
57
See also Vierra, “Green Building Standards and Certification Systems.”
58
BREEAM USA, “BREEAM USA Introduces BREEAM In-Use for Existing Buildings,” 2017,
http://www.breeamusa.com/how-it-works/what-is-breeam/.
59
BREEAM USA, “Certification,” 2017, http://www.breeamusa.com/certification/.
60
Green Building Initiative, “How to Certify,” 2014, https://www.thegbi.org/green-globes-certification/how-to-certify/.
61
International Living Future Institute, “Living Building Challenge.”
Congressional Research Service
15
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
must be water, energy, or materials. Zero Energy Certification requires a building
to generate all of its energy needs on site without using combustion. Unlike newbuilding certification under the other ratings systems, which occurs upon
completion of construction, certification under the Living Building Challenge
also requires a 12-month assessment of actual building performance.
Different ratings systems emphasize different aspects of green building. Therefore, whether one
or another is more appropriate may depend on local conditions and priorities. Systems also differ
in the types of buildings for which they offer guidelines and certification; some focus primarily
on new construction, while others are more geared toward existing buildings.
In addition to the comprehensive green certification systems discussed above, some additional
programs exist to certify that a building has taken steps to improve environmental performance
for a single element or in a limited number of performance areas. These include Energy Star
(energy-efficiency),62 Indoor airPLUS (indoor air quality),63 WaterSense (water efficiency),64
Zero Energy Ready Home (energy and air quality),65 and Passive House/ PHIUS+ (energy, water,
and air quality).66 In many cases, a building may be separately certified under more than one of
those programs.
Energy Star
Energy Star is a voluntary labeling program established by EPA in 1992 under authority from the Clean Air Act. It is
now a joint EPA/DOE program. It is designed to overcome market barriers to the adoption of energy-efficient
products and services.
Residential: The agencies work with manufacturers to identify appliances and other products that are cost-effective
and energy efficient. Products meeting the criteria receive an Energy Star label. The agencies provide information
directly to consumers about the thousands of labeled products. Among the product categories included are office
equipment, home electronics, heating and cooling (HVAC), appliances, lighting, and windows. The program has also
partnered with builders to create Energy Star-qualified homes and with lenders to encourage the use of EnergyEfficient Mortgages and “green loans” to promote energy-efficient housing.
Commercial: More than 20 types of commercial and industrial facilities are eligible to earn an Energy Star label. In
addition, EPA offers partnerships to businesses and other organizations that make top-level managerial commitments
to adopt superior energy management. Partners continually assess energy use within their organizations and use an
integrated approach in upgrading buildings. EPA provides standardized measurement tools and a recognition program
to assist and promote these efforts. The Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 required EPA to develop Tenant
Star to recognize commercial building tenants that voluntarily achieve high levels of energy efficiency.
Federal: EPACT 2005 requires federal agencies to purchase either Energy Star products or those designated as
energy efficient by the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). EISA requires additionally that federal agencies
lease only facilities with a recent Energy Star label.
Source: Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy, “Energy Star,” 2017,
https://www.energystar.gov/.
62
Energy Star, “Buildings and Plants,” 2017, https://www.energystar.gov/buildings.
Environmental Protection Agency, “Indoor AirPLUS,” June 9, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/indoorairplus.
64
Environmental Protection Agency, “WaterSense,” July 24, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/watersense.
65
Department of Energy, “Zero Energy Ready Home,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/zero-energy-readyhome.
66
Passive House Alliance, “Passive House Institute US (PHIUS),” 2017, http://www.phius.org/home-page.
63
Congressional Research Service
16
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Federal Government Use of Certification Systems
Several federal statutes and policies impose green building requirements on federal offices and
agencies,67 and some agencies have been using third-party green building certification systems
since the late 1990s. While no certification system meets all of the federal requirements for green
buildings, the General Services Administration (GSA) has recommended that agencies use thirdparty green certification systems,68 and some federal agencies have found the use of third-party
certification systems to have benefits that include simplifying compliance with federal guidelines,
reducing the need for additional staff, and providing a recognizable label to communicate
sustainability efforts within the agency and to the public.69 Several agencies have elected to
establish internal policies on certification under one of the available rating systems.70
EISA required the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with GSA and the Department of Defense
(DOD), to identify a third-party certification system and level that the Secretary “determines to be
the most likely to encourage a comprehensive and environmentally-sound approach to
certification of green buildings” (42 U.S.C. §6834(a)(3)(D)(i)(III)). The Secretary’s
recommendation is to be reviewed and updated every five years, taking into account the results of
a study to be conducted by the Director of GSA’s Office of Federal High-Performance Green
Buildings, which was also established by EISA (42 U.S.C. §17092). As of 2013, GSA
recommended that federal agencies use either LEED or Green Globes,71 and that agencies using
one of these systems should achieve either a LEED Silver rating or Two Globes under the Green
Globes system for new construction and major renovation projects.
Instead of specifying a particular rating system, the 2014 Department of Energy rulemaking on
green building certification sets out minimum criteria for a rating system to be eligible for use by
federal agencies. Those agencies choosing to pursue third-party certification must choose a
system that meets those criteria.72
In addition to federal policies, many states require green building certification or the equivalent
for government buildings, and many cities or counties have such requirements for buildings in the
commercial sector. Some jurisdictions also provide grants or tax incentives for some green
building certifications.73
67
See the section on “Legislative and Policy Framework.”
Dan Tangherlini, Administrator, General Services Administration, “Letter to Ernest Moniz, Secretary of Energy,”
October 25, 2013, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?mediaId=180467.
69
Government Accountability Office, “Federal Green Building: Federal Efforts and Third-Party Certification Help
Agencies Implement Key Requirements, but Challenges Remain,” GAO-15-667 (July 2015), http://www.gao.gov/
assets/680/671618.pdf.
70
Agencies that have adopted a green rating system include the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy,
GSA, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection
Agency. See ibid.; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, “2016 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan,” June 30,
2016, https://www.dm.usda.gov/emd/docs/USDA%202016%20Strategic%20Sustainability%20Performance%20Planupdated.pdf.
71
Dan Tangherlini, Administrator, General Services Administration, “Letter to Ernest Moniz, Secretary of Energy,”
October 25, 2013, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?mediaId=180467.
72
10 C.F.R. §433.300.
73
Daniel C. Matisoff, Douglas S. Noonan, and Mallory E. Flowers, “Policy Monitor—Green Buildings: Economics
and Policies,” Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 10, no. 2 (July 2016): 329–46,
doi:10.1093/reep/rew009.
68
Congressional Research Service
17
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Green Building Codes and Standards
Green building rating and certification systems have served as testbeds for objectives and
practices that have subsequently been incorporated into model building codes and standards.
Unlike rating and certification systems, building codes are often mandatory. While most standards
are not themselves mandatory, they, along with model codes,74 may be incorporated into
mandatory codes or laws.75 This section discusses comprehensive green building codes and
standards that address multiple green building elements. Codes and standards dealing solely with
energy efficiency are not discussed.76
Building codes specify minimum requirements for building design and construction. Historically,
they have focused primarily on health and safety,77 but they can cover many other aspects of a
building’s design or construction, from aesthetics to resource use. The “Energy Policy Act of
1992” (EPACT 1992) established a baseline for energy efficiency in building codes.78 Beyond
such federally mandated minimum requirements, it is left to state and local governments to
determine the contents of the codes that regulate buildings within their jurisdictions. Rather than
create and revise their own codes, however, many state and local jurisdictions adopt or modify
national model codes generated by code development organizations.
Green building codes specify additional requirements for environmental design and performance
that go beyond, and, in some cases, can be layered on top of existing building codes. They are
occasionally referred to as “beyond-code” or “above-code” options, because they exceed
minimum building code requirements. Governments adopting green building model codes can
choose to make them mandatory or treat them as voluntary measures for meeting green building
objectives.
Both model codes and mandatory building codes often incorporate technical standards for
specific components or features. Those standards are created by recognized standards
development organizations (SDOs). Some such organizations have used the standardsdevelopment process to create more general green building standards. The Whole Building
Design Guide defines a standard as “a set of guidelines and criteria against which a product can
be judged.”79 Just as a building may be certified under a rating system, a building that has
achieved a given standard may be certified as having met the criteria of that standard.
74
Model codes are building codes prepared by groups of experts that have no legislative or rulemaking authority.
Model codes gain the force of law when they are adopted as requirements by a jurisdiction (Melvyn Green, Building
Codes for Existing and Historic Buildings [Hoboken, N.J: Wiley, 2012]).
75
For example, the mandatory building code of the District of Columbia for construction, alteration, maintenance, and
so forth includes by reference the International Building Code, a model code created by the International Code Council,
and technical standards developed by organizations such as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. See
District of Columbia Government, “District of Columbia Construction Codes Supplement of 2013,” May 2014,
https://dcra.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcra/publication/attachments/
DCMR%2012_ConstructionCodes_2013.pdf.
76
For more on energy codes, see Department of Energy, “Building Energy Codes Program,” 2017,
https://www.energycodes.gov/.
77
The four primary risk areas historically regulated by building codes include fire safety, speed of exit, structural
integrity, and general health and safety. See Green, Building Codes.
78
For a history of the development of ASHRAE energy efficiency standards and their inclusion in U.S. law, see
Gordon Holness, “Achieving Energy Performance—Going Beyond Codes and Standards,” April 4, 2011,
http://newbuildings.org/sites/default/files/Holness_Beyond_codes.pdf.
79
Dan Prowler and Stephanie Vierra, “Whole Building Design,” Whole Building Design Guide, August 17, 2017,
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/whole-building-design. See text box “Whole Building Design Guide,” below, for
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
18
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
For both green building codes and standards, specific requirements may be achievable by
multiple pathways. Prescriptive pathways specify the precise method of achieving a given
requirement, whereas performance pathways allow designers flexibility in their methods provided
that the projected or modelled end results meet the necessary requirements. A newer option is
outcome-based requirements, which establish a performance target that must be met and verified
through measurement and reporting after construction ends.
Green building standards are sometimes described as code-intended, indicating that they are
written in mandatory, code-enforceable language, and may be adopted by jurisdictions, either as
they are written or with modifications made by the adopting entity. Both codes and standards are
developed through a consensus process that involves multiple stakeholders,80 but SDOs typically
require accreditation by a body such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI),
ensuring that their development process adheres to a set of approved procedures.81 ANSI
standards also require that certification be performed by a third party.
Whole Building Design Guide
The Whole Building Design Guide (WBDG) is a web-based portal providing information on an integrated approach to
the design, construction, and operation of buildings. It is a collaboration among federal agencies and many privatesector and nonprofit organizations. It is hosted by the National Institute of Building Sciences
The site describes the goals of the approach as follows: “Whole Building Design provides the strategies to achieve a
true high-performance building: one that is cost-effective over its entire life cycle, safe, secure, accessible, flexible,
aesthetic, productive, and sustainable.” The most relevant goal for green building is the last. The guide provides design
guidance to federal agencies for all seven goals, as well as a broad range of information and resources to the federal
government, the building industry, and the public.
The whole-building approach promoted by the site involves not only integrated design but also integration of the
teams of people involved, including architects, owners, contractors, operators, community members, and other
stakeholders. The portal provides tools and other resources to promote and facilitate such integration.
Sources: Dan Prowler and Stephanie Vierra, “Whole Building Design,” Whole Building Design Guide, August 17, 2017,
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/whole-building-design; Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, “The Federal
Commitment to Green Building,” 2003, https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/pdf/fedcomm_greenbuild.pdf.
There are two main developers of national green building model codes and standards in the
United States: the International Code Council (ICC) and ASHRAE.82 Their efforts are discussed
below.
The ICC is responsible for the development of a comprehensive family of integrated International
Codes, covering a number of building sectors.83 The ICC International Building Code (IBC) is
(...continued)
further information.
80
The number and types of stakeholders involved in the consensus process differs between code developing
organizations and standards setting organizations.
81
American National Standards Institute, “ANSI Essential Requirements: Due Process Requirements for American
National Standards,” January 2017, https://share.ansi.org/shared%20documents/Standards%20Activities/
American%20National%20Standards/Procedures,%20Guides,%20and%20Forms/
2017_ANSI_Essential_Requirements.pdf.
82
Melissa A. Beutler et al., eds., Green Building and the Construction Lawyer: A Practical Guide to Transactional and
Litigation Issues (Chicago, Illinois: Forum on Construction Law, 2014). ASHRAE was formerly known as the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
83
ICC develops building codes through the ICC Governmental Consensus Process, which includes regulators in the
code-development process. See International Code Council, “CP28-05—Code Development,” December 11, 2015,
https://cdn-web.iccsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/CP28-05.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
19
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
widely used in the United States. In 2012 the ICC released the International Green Construction
Code (IgCC),84 described as “the first model code to include sustainability measures for the entire
construction project and its site.”85
The IgCC functions as an overlay code, meaning that it is fully compatible, and can be adopted in
conjunction with, the full family of ICC codes governing building safety and other features. The
most recent revision was released in 2015. Municipalities choosing to adopt the IgCC as an
overlay may choose from among various compliance pathways and options in order to make the
mandated requirements more or less strict, as well as to account for local climate and other
pertinent factors.
The IgCC covers most building types, with the exception of low-rise residential buildings. The
IgCC refers low-rise residential builders to the ICC 700 National Green Building Standard
(NGBS), an ANSI standard developed in partnership with ASHRAE and the National Association
of Homebuilders (NAHB). The NGBS is structured as a rating system, much like LEED, but can
be adopted by ordinance, much like a model code.86
ASHRAE, USGBC, and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES) have also
jointly released a high-performance green building standard for nonresidential buildings and
residential buildings of more than three stories.87 Known as Standard 189.1, it functions as a
code-intended standard and is offered as a compliance option under the IgCC. The standard
contains requirements in the following areas: site sustainability, energy efficiency and renewable
energy, water-use efficiency, indoor environmental quality, and building impacts on the
atmosphere, materials, and resources. Elements of Standard 189.1 have been incorporated into the
building requirements for Department of Defense properties.88
In 2015, the ICC and ASHRAE announced a partnership to fully integrate Standard 189.1 to serve
as the technical content of the 2018 version of the IgCC. The new code will also be aligned with
the LEED rating system, providing the market with a streamlined set of beyond-code tools.89 In
addition to such national efforts, several state, local, and tribal authorities have developed their
own green building codes.
Legislative and Policy Framework
Several federal laws, executive orders, and other policy instruments have provisions relating to
green building. Selected relevant provisions are described below. However, the list presented in
84
IgCC is developed in cooperation with the American Institute of Architects, ASTM International, ASHRAE, the
Illuminating Engineering Society, and USGBC. The ICC has also developed the International Energy Conservation
Code focused primarily on encouraging building energy efficiency.
85
International Code Council, “Overview of the IgCC,” 2017, https://www.iccsafe.org/codes-tech-support/codes/2015i-codes/igcc/.
86
National Association of Home Builders, “ICC 700 National Green Building Standard,” 2017, https://www.nahb.org/
en/research/nahb-priorities/green-building-remodeling-and-development/icc-700-national-green-buildingstandard.aspx.
87
ASHRAE, “Standard 189.1-2014—Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings,” 2014,
http://www.techstreet.com/ashrae/standards/ashrae-189-1-2014?product_id=1886477.
88
Department of Defense, “United Facilities Criteria: High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements,”
UFC 1-200-02, (December 1, 2016), http://www.wbdg.org/FFC/DOD/UFC/ufc_1_200_02_2016.pdf.
89
International Code Council, “ICC, ASHRAE Outline Roles to Consolidate IgCC and 189.1 in Response to Call from
Industry” (Press Release, July 22, 2015), https://www.iccsafe.org/about-icc/periodicals-and-newsroom/icc-ashraeoutline-roles-to-consolidate-igcc-and-189-1-in-response-to-call-from-industry/.
Congressional Research Service
20
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
this report is not exhaustive. For example, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
(RCRA), as amended (42 U.S.C. §6901 et seq.), requires agencies to procure products with
recycled content. This report also does not include discussion of state and local policies, which
have substantial influence on green building efforts within those jurisdictions.
Energy Policy Act of 1992
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-486), known as EPACT 1992, contained incentives and
requirements relating to efficient use of energy and water in federal, commercial, and residential
buildings. It included, among other matters, provisions relating to state building energy codes,90
energy efficiency in federal buildings and public housing, a pilot program for mortgages for
energy-efficient housing, the development of energy-efficient technologies, and energy and water
efficiency requirements for appliances, plumbing fixtures, and building materials.
Energy Policy Act of 2005
Among other provisions, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58), known as EPACT 2005,
required the development of energy and water conservation programs for congressional buildings
and a reduction in energy consumption by federal buildings of 20% (relative to 2003) by 2015;91
promoted the procurement of energy-efficient products by federal agencies; established a testbed
program for advanced building efficiency; set an energy consumption target for new federal
buildings of 30% below existing standards; and required the application of sustainable-design
principles to new and replacement federal buildings. It also continued authorization of DOE’s
weatherization assistance program.
The act set an improvement goal of 25% by 2012 from a 1990 base for state energy conservation
plans. It also authorized funding for states to administer rebate programs for residential energyefficient appliances, to assist local governments in improving energy efficiency in public
buildings, and for other state activities, including incentives to states to establish building energyefficiency codes that meet or exceed established standards.
It established the Energy Star labeling program as a joint program of DOE and EPA,92 and
established public information and education programs relating to energy conservation. It also set
energy and water conservation standards for various specific products. The act requires agencies
to purchase products that either have an Energy Star label or are designated as energy-efficient by
the Department of Energy.93
EPACT 2005 set energy-efficiency standards for public housing and directed the Department of
Housing and Urban Development to develop a strategy for energy conservation and efficiency.
The act also provided various tax incentives to businesses and individuals for energy and water
efficiency.
90
For a summary, see “National Legislation on Building Energy Codes,” Table 7.3.5 in Department of Energy, “2008
Buildings Energy Data Book,” November 2008, http://web.archive.org/web/20130215004243/http://
buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/docs/DataBooks/2008_BEDB_Updated.pdf. Most states now have energy codes,
although specific requirements vary.
91
This was later modified (see below).
92
EPA began the program in 1992. See “Energy Star” textbox.
93
The Department of Agriculture also administers a labeling and procurement program, for biobased products
(https://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/). The program was established in the Farm Security and Rural Investment
Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-171) and revised in the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-234).
Congressional Research Service
21
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-140), known as EISA, provided
both a general legislative framework for federal green building efforts, including a definition of
high-performance green building94 (see “Definitions of Green Building,” above), and specific
actions and requirements. Titles III, IV, and V relate most specifically to green building.
Title III set efficiency standards for various appliances and electric lighting. It also required the
use of energy-efficient lighting in facilities leased by GSA and further directed that such facilities
adhere to energy efficiency and renewable energy requirements to be set by the agency.
Title IV has provisions relating to residential, commercial, federal, and certain other kinds of
buildings:
Residential. The act increased funding for DOE’s program to provide assistance to lowincome families for weatherization of residences, to improve energy efficiency. It required a
feasibility study by DOE of the unfunded state rebate programs for energy efficiency and
renewable energy that EPACT 2005 had authorized. It also established energy-efficiency
standards for manufactured housing such as mobile homes.
Commercial. The act required DOE to create an Office of Commercial High-Performance
Green Buildings to facilitate the development of green commercial buildings, including zeronet-energy buildings, in partnership with other federal and with nonfederal entities.95
Federal. EISA increased the overall rate of required reduction in total energy consumption of
federal buildings in each agency, from 20% (relative to 2003) to 30% by 2015. It set more
stringent energy goals for new construction and major renovations, requiring them to reach a
65% reduction by 2015, and zero-net energy use by 2030; and it required the identification
and use of a green building certification system for such structures.96 It also set general waterconservation guidelines and stormwater runoff requirements for property development.
Agencies are required to ensure that new building equipment implementing the above
measures is commissioned to be operating at design specifications, to plan for operations and
maintenance of equipment, and to measure energy and water savings. Agencies were also
directed to install advanced metering devices in federal buildings and to record and report
energy use data for metered facilities into a building energy benchmarking system.
Federal buildings must undergo regular evaluations of energy and water use, with the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) issuing scorecards twice per year on agency performance
in energy management. The life cycle over which energy costs are assessed was extended
from 25 to 40 years. Any new major equipment installed must be energy efficient, and the act
accelerated the use of energy-efficient lighting and other cost-saving technologies in GSA
94
EPACT 2005 defined a high-performance building as “a building that integrates and optimizes all major highperformance building attributes, including energy efficiency, durability, life-cycle performance, and occupant
productivity” (§914(a)). See also the definition in the “Whole Building Design Guide” textbox.
95
DOE did not establish an office with that name but performs relevant activities through its Commercial Building
Initiative. See Building Technologies Office, “Multi-Year Program Plan” (Department of Energy, January 2016),
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/02/f29/BTO_MYPP_2016.pdf.
96
Prior to enactment of the law, the George W. Bush Administration criticized it for, among other things, not including
“additional building attributes beyond the energy efficiency and water consumption goals” for high-performance green
buildings (The White House, “H.R. 6 – Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007,” Statement of Administration
Policy.) Only the energy goals in the law are numeric.
Congressional Research Service
22
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
facilities. Any buildings leased by a federal agency must have a recently earned Energy Star97
label.
The act also established an Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings within GSA
to coordinate and facilitate the development of such buildings in the federal sector. GAO is to
perform audits of implementation of these requirements.
Other. The act contains provisions to facilitate the greening of schools, with emphasis on
environmental health and energy efficiency. It also authorized energy-efficiency assistance
for state and local public facilities and institutions of higher learning. It required the
Department of Housing and Urban Development to use updated energy-efficiency standards
for public and assisted housing. It also established green building research and demonstration
projects through GSA, DOE, and EPA.
Title V contains energy-efficiency provisions relating to the U.S. Capitol complex, and amended
provisions in law relating to energy savings performance contracts.98 It also specified certain
actions to promote energy efficiency at executive branch agencies and in the supply of electricity
and natural gas by utilities, and for state and local governments to develop and implement
strategies for energy efficiency and conservation.
Other relevant provisions in the law include authorization of research and development (R&D)
relating to energy efficiency and renewable energy, and loans and other activities to help small
businesses improve energy efficiency.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, ARRA) provided $4.5 billion
to convert GSA facilities to high-performance green buildings. It also provided $250 million to
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for green retrofits of housing. It
permitted states to use a portion of provided education funds for green renovations of public
schools. It also provided funds to various agencies for energy-efficiency improvements to
buildings.
Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015
The Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-11) directs GSA to develop model
leasing provisions to encourage the implementation of energy and water efficiency measures by
tenants in commercial buildings. GSA may use those provisions for leases involving federal
agencies, and it must make them available to state and local governments for their own use. The
act also amended EISA to add provisions regarding improving energy efficiency in tenant spaces.
These include directing DOE to study the feasibility of improving energy efficiency in
commercial buildings through the implementation of energy-efficiency measures in discreet
spaces within those buildings; directing the DOE’s Energy Information Administration to collect
additional occupant energy-use information as part of its Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Surveys; and directing EPA to develop a Tenant Star recognition label as a part of
the Energy Star program.
97
Energy Star is a joint program of EPA and DOE (http://www.energystar.gov; see “Energy Star” textbox).
Department of Energy, “Energy Savings Performance Contracting,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/slsc/energysavings-performance-contracting.
98
Congressional Research Service
23
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
The act also contains provisions related to the establishment of energy conservation standards for
grid-enabled water heaters used as energy storage or demand-response assets, and energy
efficiency benchmarking requirements for federal agencies leasing space in buildings without an
Energy Star label. DOE is also directed to study the impact of state and local performance
benchmarking policies on commercial and multifamily buildings and maintain a public database
of energy-related information on such buildings.
Executive Order 13693
In 2015, President Obama signed Executive Order (E.O.) 13693, Planning for Federal
Sustainability in the Next Decade.99 The order revoked and replaced previous Executive Orders
13423 and 13514, which established green building as a key component of federal efforts to
reduce environmental impacts, improve resource use efficiency, and lower operating costs at
federal facilities.100 E.O. 13693 expanded upon the sustainability goals of the previous orders and
set new targets for federal agencies to achieve by FY2025. Targets include requiring each agency
to reduce building energy intensity by 2.5% annually relative to FY2015, reduce potable water
consumption intensity by 36% relative to FY2007, produce at minimum 25% of total building
electric and thermal energy from clean sources,101 and ensure that all new buildings with more
than 5,000 gross square feet of floorspace are designed to achieve net-zero energy, and, if
possible, net-zero water or waste by FY2030. The order also called for the inclusion of climateresilient design elements in federal buildings, and directed the Chair of the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) to issue revised “Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in
High Performance Sustainable Buildings.” E.O. 13693 directed agencies to ensure that, for
federal buildings of more than 5,000 square feet in area, all new ones and at least 15% (by
FY2025) of existing ones comply with the Guiding Principles, with the ultimate goal of achieving
compliance in the entire inventory.102
According to a GSA analysis, agency efforts to comply with E.O. 13693 led to an 18% increase in
the number of federal sustainable buildings between FY2014 and FY2015.103
Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance
Sustainable Buildings
In 2006, representatives of 19 federal agencies and offices104 signed a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) titled “Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable
99
Executive Order 13693, “Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade.”
Executive Orders 13423 and 13514 were signed by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama respectively.
Both directed federal agencies to bring a portion of the federal real estate inventory into compliance with the “Guiding
Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Building,” among other provisions.
101
Section 19 of E.O. 13693 defines “clean energy” as “renewable electric energy and alternative energy.” “Alternative
energy” is further defined as “energy generated from technologies and approaches that advance renewable heat sources,
including biomass, solar thermal, geothermal, waste heat, and renewable combines heat and power processes;
combined heat and power; small modular nuclear reactor technologies; fuel cell energy systems; and energy generation,
where active capture and storage of carbon dioxide emissions associated with that energy generation is verified.”
102
E.O. 13693 stipulates that the Guiding Principles be applied where life-cycle cost effective.
103
General Services Administration, “Summary of Fiscal Year 2015 Federal Real Property Profile Open Data Set,”
April 2016, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?mediaId=129426.
104
Those agencies were the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, the Interior, Health and Human
Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, and Veterans
Affairs; and the Council on Environmental Quality, the Environmental Protection Agency, the General Services
(continued...)
100
Congressional Research Service
24
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Buildings.”105 The MOU was developed concurrently with the enactment of EPACT 2005 and
contained the first set of five core Guiding Principles for federal high performance and
sustainable buildings: employ integrated design principles, optimize energy performance, protect
and conserve water, enhance indoor environmental quality, and reduce environmental impact of
materials. Subsequent revisions of the Guiding Principles were issued in 2008 and, most recently,
in 2016106 to reflect progress in green building design and to address a broader set of issue areas,
including the health and productivity of building occupants. It also added a sixth overarching
principle to the list: assess and consider climate change risks. See “Guiding Principles” textbox
for more detail.
Guiding Principles
The six Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance Sustainable Building are
Employ Integrated Design Principles. This principle includes use of an integrated project team;
incorporation of relevant performance goals for “siting, energy, water, materials, and indoor environmental
quality”; consideration of the entire life cycle of the building; and methods to verify that performance goals are
met.
Optimize Energy Performance. This involves establishment of an energy performance goal for the entire
building, including reduction in energy costs of 20%-30% below existing standards; and measures to track
performance in comparison to Energy Star benchmarks.
Protect and Conserve Water. This involves reducing indoor use of potable water by 20% and outdoor use
by 50% in comparison to baselines, and reducing runoff.
Enhance Indoor Environmental Quality. This principle requires meeting established standards for
temperature, humidity, and ventilation; controlling moisture to prevent damage and mold; providing daylight in
most spaces that is at least 2% above the amount available directly; using dimming and glare controls; using
materials that emit low amounts of pollutants; and taking other steps to protect air quality in the building.
Reduce Environmental Impact of Materials. This involves using materials with recycled and biobased
(renewable and sustainable) content that is at or above recommended levels, eliminating ozone-depleting
compounds, and recycling at least half of construction waste where possible.
Assess and Consider Climate Change Risks. This principle involves assessing potential impacts and
vulnerabilities to both acute weather events and long-term changes in climate during the life of the building,
enhancing building resilience through the use of fire-resistant design elements, and avoiding construction in
floodplains.
Source: Council on Environmental Quality, “Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings and Associated
Instructions,” February 2016, https://www.fedcenter.gov/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=30813&
destination=ShowItem.
(...continued)
Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, and the
Tennessee Valley Authority.
105
Department of Defense et al., “Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings Memorandum of
Understanding,” 2006, http://wbdg.org/FFC/FED/HPSB-MOU.pdf.
106
Council on Environmental Quality, “Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings and Associated
Instructions,” February 2016, https://www.fedcenter.gov/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=30813&
destination=ShowItem.
Congressional Research Service
25
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Programs and Activities of Selected Federal
Agencies
The federal government owns or leases about 273,000 buildings in the United States, comprising
nearly 3 billion square feet in floorspace (Table 1) and costing nearly $6.1 billion in energy
bills.107 EISA and other policy instruments require all federal agencies to implement green
building practices for buildings they control. Several federal offices provide guidance and support
for the implementation of those requirements.108 Except for GSA and DOD, which together
control three-quarters of all federal building floorspace, this report does not discuss green
building within individual agencies, although such efforts may be significant. However, several
agencies have programs and activities that have a broader focus than reducing the environmental
impacts of the facilities of that agency. This section of the report discusses selected examples.109
General Services Administration
The General Services Administration (GSA) manages about 425 million square feet of space in
over 8,500 buildings, providing workspace for over 1.2 million federal workers.110 In 2010, the
agency announced that it would require all GSA-owned new construction and major renovation
projects to be LEED-certified at the Gold level or above.111 Properties that GSA leases on behalf
of another agency may be either LEED or Green Globes certified at the Silver or Two Globes
levels, respectively.112 By 2020, GSA says that all new buildings will be designed to achieve netzero energy, water, or waste, exceeding the timeframe and requirements of Executive Order
13693. GSA’s Green Proving Ground program conducts evaluations of next-generation building
technologies and recommends those that meet agency standards for deployment throughout
GSA’s property holdings.113
107
Data on federal property holdings comes from the General Services Administration’s Fiscal Year 2015 Federal Real
Property Profile Open Data Set (see footnote 110). The data set reflects information provided by the executive branch
agencies subject to the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990. The data from FY2015 includes only buildings owned or
leased by the federal government in the United States or a U.S. territory. It also excludes properties exempted for
national security reasons. Data on the federal government’s energy consumption and spending comes from the
information for FY2016 in Department of Energy, “Comprehensive Annual Energy Data and Sustainability
Performance,” 2017, http://ctsedwweb.ee.doe.gov/Annual/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=
%2fAnnual%2fReport%2fReport.aspx.
108
These include the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), General Services Administration (GSA), and Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
See the appendices in Government Accountability Office, “Federal Green Building: Federal Efforts and Third-Party
Certification Help Agencies Implement Key Requirements, but Challenges Remain.”
109
Selection was based on the perceived prominence and influence of those programs on the implementation of green
building.
110
General Services Administration, “FY2015 FRPP Open Data Set,” May 2016, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/
getMediaData?mediaId=132270; General Services Administration, “Strategic Plan: Fiscal Year 2014-2018,” July 2014,
https://www.gsa.gov/portal/mediaId/187599/fileName/GSA_FY14-18_GSA_Strategic_Plan.action.
111
General Services Administration, “GSA Moves to LEED Gold for All New Federal Buildings and Major
Renovations” (Press Release, October 28, 2010), https://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/197325.
112
James C. Wisner, Assistant Commissioner, General Services Administration, “Leasing Alert (LA-FY17-03)—Green
Building Rating Certification for New Construction and Tenant Interiors: LEED® and Green Globes,” Memorandum to
Regional Commissioners, Directors, and Officers, (December 13, 2016), https://www.gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?
mediaId=153842.
113
General Services Administration, “GPG Program,” 7/172017, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/102491.
Congressional Research Service
26
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Table 1. Percentages of Total Federal Building Floorspace
Under the Jurisdiction of Various Agencies, 2015
Agency
% of Total
Department of Defense
59
General Services Administration
15
Department of Veterans Affairs
6
Department of Energy
4
Department of Interior
4
Other
12
Source: GSA, “FY2015 Federal Real Property Profile Open Data Set,” https://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/
102880.
Notes: The Federal Real Property Profile data is compiled by the General Services Administration, and is
considered the authoritative source for federal property data. However, it is acknowledged to have outstanding
issues with reliability and data collection. See Government Accountability Office, “High Risk: Managing Federal
Real Property,” accessed July 25, 2017, http://www.gao.gov/highrisk/managing_federal_property/why_did_study.
Several offices contribute to GSA green building efforts, including the Energy Program,
Environment Program, Leasing Program, Office of Design and Construction, and the Office of
Federal High-Performance Green Buildings.114 EISA required GSA to establish the Office of
Federal High-Performance Green Buildings, to coordinate activities relating to such buildings
across federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 17092). The office delivers actionable information to improve
building performance and conducts assessments on existing green buildings. It created and
maintains the Sustainable Facilities Tool (SF Tool), an interactive website supplying green
construction, purchasing, and operations resources and information to federal agencies and other
interested parties.115 Much of the research and recommendations generated by the office’s other
programs are made available on the SF Tool website. The Facility Management Institute is
another GSA initiative intended to assist agencies in improving the operations and management
of federal buildings.116
GSA has several green-building programs and projects that are the result of collaborations with
other agencies and offices. EISA (Sections 433 and 436) directed the Director of the Office of
Federal High-Performance Green Buildings to provide recommendations to the Secretary of
Energy on rating and certification systems that can be used by agencies for meeting federal green
building requirements, based on the results of a study to be conducted by the office every five
years (42 U.S.C. §6834(a)(3); 42 U.S.C. §17092).117 The office must also coordinate with the
Department of Energy on commercial high-performance green building activities under EISA.
114
For more on GSA’s sustainability programs related to buildings, see General Services Administration, “Sustainable
GSA: Buildings,” 2017, https://gsa.gov/sustainability/#/buildings.
115
General Services Administration, “Sustainable Facilities Tool,” 2017, https://sftool.gov/.
116
General Services Administration, “Facility Management Institute,” May 31, 2017, https://www.gsa.gov/portal/
content/160715.
117
The act requires the Director to identify a green building certification system that the Director “deems to be most
likely to encourage a comprehensive and environmentally sound approach to certification of green buildings.” As of
2012, GSA was recommending that agencies choose between USGBC’s LEED certification system, and GBI’s Green
Globes certification system. N. Wang, K.M. Fowler, and R.S. Sullivan, “Green Building Certification System
Review,” PNNL-20966 (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, March 2012), http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/ogp/
Cert_Sys_Review.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
27
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
GSA and DOE cochair the Interagency Sustainable Working Group, which is tasked with
reporting on agency progress toward the goals laid out in E.O. 13693. GSA participates in climate
adaptation planning for buildings as part of the Agency Adaptation Planning Working Group,
which is a subgroup in the Interagency Climate Change Task Force. GSA was also a leader in the
interagency effort to develop sustainable design principles for the federal government,
culminating in the development of the Whole Building Design Guide.118
GSA has also collaborated with the Department of Health and Human Services and New York
City agencies to develop FITWEL, a voluntary certification program to promote occupant health
and wellness through the design of workplaces.119
Department of Energy
Most of the external green building activities of the Department of Energy (DOE) relate to the
energy element (see “Elements of Green Building”), through the Building Technologies Office
(BTO), the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), and the Weatherization and
Intergovernmental Programs Office (WIP) of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE).120
BTO sponsors and performs R&D to improve both commercial and residential energy efficiency.
It is also involved in the development of energy codes and enforcement of appliance and
equipment standards,121 transfer of relevant technologies to the marketplace, and integrated
design of energy-efficient buildings. According to BTO’s Multi-Year Program Plan for 20162020, the office’s long-term goal is to achieve a 50% reduction in energy use intensity in
commercial and residential U.S. buildings compared to 2010 levels.122 A major focus for the
program in the next several years will be on enabling the development of cost-effective net-zero
energy buildings for the residential and commercial sectors.123
BTO has several notable programs, including the following:124
Building America125 is an R&D program in partnership with the building
industry. It focuses on a whole-building, integrated approach to improving energy
savings in residential buildings.
The Commercial Buildings Integration program implements initiatives related to
energy savings in commercial buildings, including improving building design,
118
General Services Administration, “Sustainability Matters,” 2008, https://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/
Sustainability_Matters_508.pdf. For further information, see the textbox “Whole Building Design Guide.”
119
Kevin Kampschroer, “2016 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan” (General Services Administration, June 30,
2016), https://gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?mediaId=151974.
120
Department of Energy, “Building Technologies Office,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/buildingtechnologies-office. See also other programs such as Solar Energy Technologies.
121
For information on DOE enforcement of equipment standards established by EPACT 2005 and other legislation, see
Department of Energy, “Appliance and Equipment Standards Program,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/
appliance-and-equipment-standards-program.
122
Building Technologies Office, “Multi-Year Program Plan.”
123
Ibid.
124
For a full listing of BTO’s programs, see Ibid.
125
Department of Energy, “Building America: Bringing Building Innovations to Market,” 2017, https://energy.gov/
eere/buildings/building-america-bringing-building-innovations-market.
Congressional Research Service
28
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
accelerating market adoption of high-efficiency technologies, and increasing
access to building performance data.126
The Better Buildings Alliance is a public-private partnership that promotes
energy efficiency in commercial buildings through collaboration with members
of the U.S. commercial building community.127
Energy Star is a joint program with EPA that uses voluntary labeling to promote
energy-efficient products. Zero Energy Ready Home is a recognition program
that builds on the requirements of Energy Star and EPA’s Indoor airPLUS
program to recognize builders that achieve a minimum energy efficiency
improvement of 40% over the average new home.128
The Building Performance Database provides public access to data on the energy
performance of commercial buildings.129
The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)130 assists federal agencies in implementing
energy savings and management, including the designation required by EPACT 2005 of energyefficient products for purchase by agencies. It provides assistance with procurement, construction,
operations, and maintenance. It also chairs, along with the GSA, the Interagency Sustainability
Working Group, which is responsible for assisting agencies in implementing sustainable building
design, including technical guidance for implementation of the sustainable buildings requirements
in E.O. 13693. FEMP collects data and issues reports annually on energy consumption by
agencies and on related topics.131
Among other DOE entities, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) collects and reports on
data relating to energy, including that used by buildings, most notably the residential and
commercial energy consumption surveys.132 Some of DOE’s national laboratories also perform
R&D relating to green buildings. The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E)
funds R&D for early-stage energy-related technologies, including several projects focused on
developing innovative, energy-efficient heating and cooling systems for buildings.133
126
Building Technologies Office, “Multi-Year Program Plan.”
Better Buildings Initiative, “About the Better Buildings Alliance,” Department of Energy, 2017,
https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/alliance/about.
128
Department of Energy, “Guidelines for Participating in the DOE Zero Energy Ready Home,” 2017,
https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/guidelines-participating-doe-zero-energy-ready-home. See also the texbox
“Energy Star,” above.
129
Department of Energy, “Building Performance Database,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/buildingperformance-database.
130
Department of Energy, “Federal Energy Management Program,” 2017, https://energy.gov/eere/femp/federalenergy-management-program.
131
Department of Energy, “Federal Facility Reporting Requirements and Performance Data,” 2017, https://energy.gov/
eere/femp/federal-facility-reporting-requirements-and-performance-data.
132
See Energy Information Administration, “Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS),”
Department of Energy, 2017; Energy Information Administration, “Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS),”
Department of Energy, 2017.
133
Department of Energy, “ARPA-E Programs,” 2017, https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=program-listing.
127
Congressional Research Service
29
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a broad range of programs and activities
relating to one or more of the main elements of green building. Notable programs and activities
include the following:
Energy. EPA originated the Energy Star program. The Energy Star Portfolio
Manager can be used to measure, track, and benchmark building energy use. The
agency’s Green Power Partnership supports the procurement of power from
renewable resources by government and private-sector organizations.
Water. EPA administers WaterSense, a voluntary labeling program established in
2006 to promote water efficiency. Manufacturers may earn WaterSense labels for
their products, and landscape-irrigation professionals can be certified under the
program. WaterSense-labelled homes and products are independently certified to
be at least 20% more water efficient than average.134 The Green Infrastructure
Collaborative and related activities promote community adoption of green
infrastructure, a stormwater management approach that uses vegetation, soils,
permeable pavements, and other practices to reduce stormwater runoff and
maintain or restore natural water filtration and storage in built environments.135
Materials and Waste. The Sustainable Materials Management Program
(SMM)136 encourages a life-cycle materials management approach that seeks to
reduce environmental and human health impacts associated with materials use,
from extraction to disposal. SMM provides resources for governments and
businesses on assessing and reducing material use, purchasing recycled materials,
and increasing recycling and reuse of construction and demolition materials.
SMM programs include WasteWise, a public/private partnership in which
participants set goals and report progress on preventing waste, expanding
recycling, and increasing purchasing of recycled materials; and the Federal Green
Challenge, which encourages government agencies to reduce their waste
footprint and water usage, among other goals.
The Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program137 assists federal agencies in
meeting green purchasing requirements. The Comprehensive Procurement Guideline
program identifies recycled products that comply with RCRA requirements.138
Health. EPA supports activities such as R&D and awards programs to develop
safer and more environmentally friendly chemicals, including “green chemistry”
technologies. The Indoor Air Quality Program provides information and tools to
ensure the protection of indoor environmental quality in schools, residences, and
commercial buildings. Indoor airPLUS is a voluntary partnership and labeling
program that specifies minimum air quality design features for homes.
134
Environmental Protection Agency, “WaterSense.”
Environmental Protection Agency, “Green Infrastructure Collaborative,” January 13, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/
green-infrastructure/green-infrastructure-collaborative.
136
Environmental Protection Agency, “Sustainable Materials Management,” July 25, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/smm.
137
Environmental Protection Agency, “About the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program,” March 23, 2017,
https://www.epa.gov/greenerproducts/about-environmentally-preferable-purchasing-program.
138
Environmental Protection Agency, “Comprehensive Procurement Guideline (CPG) Program,” 2017,
https://www.epa.gov/smm/comprehensive-procurement-guideline-cpg-program.
135
Congressional Research Service
30
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Siting. The Smart Location Database139 is a nationwide geographic data resource
that measures neighborhood characteristics such as housing density,
neighborhood design, and transit accessibility to produce a measurement of a
location’s siting efficiency.140 The agency also has a variety of programs and
activities relating to smart growth and sustainability.
EPA has also published resources on implementing green building policies for local governments
and tribal communities.141
Department of Defense
The Department of Defense (DOD) has the largest building footprint in the federal government
(Table 1), with a portfolio that contains more than 276,000 buildings covering 2.2 billion square
feet and located across thousands of sites worldwide.142
DOD issues its own requirements for Department-owned buildings and facilities under the
Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) program.143 UFC documents contain technical criteria and
standards relating to the planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance of DOD
facilities.144 Two recently issued UFC documents contain requirements relating to green building:
UFC 1-200-02 High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements
(2016) provides guidance toward complying with the minimum building
requirements for federal buildings established by EISA, EPACT 2005, the
Guiding Principles, and E.O. 13693. All new construction and major renovations
must comply with these criteria.
UFC 3-210-10 Low Impact Development (2016) provides guidance for
complying with EISA provisions governing stormwater management by using
low-impact development (LID) techniques aimed at infiltrating and storing
stormwater in order to restore site hydrology and mitigate adverse effects of
runoff.145
DOD also sets and reports on a variety of goals aligned with green building objectives through
the annual publication of its Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan (SSPP). The update for
SSPP FY2016 lists department-wide goals for reducing use of facility energy and potable water,
139
The Smart Location Calculator was developed with assistance from GSA (Kevin Kampschroer, “2016 Strategic
Sustainability Performance Plan” (General Services Administration, June 30, 2016), https://gsa.gov/portal/
getMediaData?mediaId=151974).
140
Environmental Protection Agency, “Smart Location Mapping,” April 20, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/
smart-location-mapping.
141
Environmental Protection Agency, “Location and Green Building,” March 29, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/
smartgrowth/location-and-green-building.
142
Department of Defense, “Base Structure Report Fiscal Year 2015 Baseline,” September 2016,
http://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/Downloads/BSI/Base%20Structure%20Report%20FY15.pdf.
143
John Conger, Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, “Department of Defense Sustainable Buildings Policy,”
Memorandum to Assistant Secretaries and Directors, (November 10, 2013), http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/
Sustainability/Hydrology_LID/DoD_Sustainable_Buildings_Policy_(10%20Nov%202013).pdf.
144
Whole Building Design Guide, “Department of Defense: Unified Facilities Criteria Program,” 2017,
https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod/.
145
Department of Defense, “United Facilities Criteria (UFC): Low Impact Development,” UFC 3 210-10, (February 1,
2016), https://www.wbdg.org/FFC/DOD/UFC/ufc_3_210_10_2015_c1.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
31
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
stormwater management, solid waste diversion, construction and demolition debris diversion, and
increasing the percentage of high performance sustainable buildings.146
Some of the service branches of DOD have created their own branch-wide green building goals
and initiatives. The Army issued a directive in 2014, expanding a Net Zero Installations pilot
project into an Army-wide initiative.147 The Air Force uses Sustainability Development Indicators
to ensure that installation development plans consider a wide range of environmental impact areas
and performance elements.148
In December of 2016, DOD and EPA signed a Memorandum of Understanding listing, among
others, goals to work together to implement sustainable and resilient military installations,
promote a sustainable and resilient natural and built infrastructure, and to engage DOD
installations as test beds for innovative technologies.149
Office of Federal Sustainability
The position of Federal Chief Sustainability Officer was originally established under the title of
the Federal Environmental Executive in 1993 by Executive Order 12873. Executive Orders 13423
and 13693 broadened that position to include an Office of the Federal Environmental Executive,
later renamed the Office of the Chief Sustainability Officer, and extended the duties to include
assisting and monitoring the implementation by agencies of the order, including its green building
requirements, and advising the Council on Environmental Quality.150
National Institute of Standards and Technology
The green building efforts of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) are
housed in NIST’s Engineering Laboratory.151 The Sustainable and Energy-Efficient
Manufacturing, Materials, and Infrastructure Program focuses on improvements in measurement
science and data relating especially to intelligent building systems, sustainably engineered
materials, and achieving net-zero energy buildings with high indoor air quality.
A component of this program is the Net-Zero Energy High-Performance Buildings Program,
which is focused on developing building metrics for overall building sustainability and reducing
building energy usage through improvements in specific component areas.152 The Net-Zero
146
Department of Defense, “Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan FY2016,” September 7, 2016,
http://www.denix.osd.mil/sustainability/dod-sspp/unassigned/department-of-defense-strategic-sustainabilityperformance-plan-fy-2016/.
147
John M. McHugh, Secretary of the Army, “Army Directive 2014-02 (Net Zero Installations Policy),” Memorandum
for SEE Distribution, (January 28, 2014), http://www.asaie.army.mil/Public/ES/doc/Army%20Directive%20201402%20(NZ%20Policy).pdf.
148
Department of Defense, “Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan FY2016.”
149
Department of Defense and Environmental Protection Agency, “Memorandum of Understanding Between the
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Office of Policy,” February 2017, http://www.denix.osd.mil/
sustainability/home/success/epa-and-dod-sign-mou/.
150
Council on Environmental Quality, “The Office of Federal Sustainability,” 2017, https://sustainability.gov/
home.html.
151
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “About EL,” NIST, September 26, 2016, https://www.nist.gov/el/
about-el.
152
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “Net-Zero Energy, High-Performance Buildings Program,” July 17,
2017, https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/net-zero-energy-high-performance-buildings-program.
Congressional Research Service
32
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Energy Residential Test Facility (NZERTF), developed under this program, is a laboratory and
demonstration facility dedicated to the development of measurement science needed to achieve
net-zero energy homes.153 NIST has also developed Building for Environmental and Economic
Sustainability (BEES),154 a software tool that uses life-cycle assessment methods to facilitate the
selection of environmentally preferable building products.
NIST has also helped to add resources on climate resiliency for buildings to the U.S. Climate
Resilience Toolkit,155 through participation in the Community Resilience Panel for Buildings and
Infrastructure Systems, which it cosponsors.156
Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administers several mortgage
insurance and home-financing programs that contain provisions intended to encourage the
adoption of green building elements in public housing. The Mark-to-Market program is an
initiative that restructures HUD-insured mortgages for multifamily housing projects. A
component of the program offers financial incentives for green building measures to be
incorporated into eligible housing projects.157 The Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
administers the Energy Efficient Mortgage Program, a program intended to enable homeowners
and buyers to finance the cost of energy-efficiency improvements through their FHA-insured
mortgage.158 The Public Housing Capital Fund and the Public Housing Operating Fund provide
funding to Public Housing Agencies that may be used to make energy and water efficiency
improvements.159
HUD also administers the Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Program, which conducts
research and provides grants to reduce home health hazards relating to lead-based paint, exposure
to mold, moisture, poor indoor air quality, pesticides, dust, and other substances that contribute to
poor health outcomes.160
153
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “Net-Zero Energy Residential Test Facility,” July 23, 2013,
https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2017/04/28/netzerofinal.pdf; National Institute of Standards and
Technology, “Net-Zero Energy Residential Test Facility (NZERTF),” June 1, 2016, https://www.nist.gov/el/net-zeroenergy-residential-test-facility.
154
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “BEES,” December 23, 2016, https://www.nist.gov/servicesresources/software/bees.
155
United States Global Change Research Program, “U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit,” May 17, 2015,
https://toolkit.climate.gov/content/about.
156
Other cosponsors include EPA, HUD’s Office of Economic Resilience, FEMA, and the Office of Infrastructure
Protection of the Department of Homeland Security.
157
Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Programs of HUD: Major Mortgage, Grant, Assistance, and
Regulatory Programs,” 2016, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Programs-of-HUD-2016.pdf.
158
Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Energy Efficient Mortgage Program,” 2017,
https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/housing/sfh/eem/energy-r.
159
See Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Public Housing Programs,” 2017, https://portal.hud.gov/
hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/programs.
160
Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
(OLHCHH),” 2017, https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/healthy_homes.
Congressional Research Service
33
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Assessing Green Building Efforts
The rise in prominence of green building since the 1990s has raised questions about its impacts.
Those questions cover a broad range of issues, including market penetration, cost, actual building
performance, the underlying measurement science, the extent to which legislative goals are being
met, and the general approach and implementation of green building. Those issues are discussed
below.
Market Penetration
The building industry is a substantial component of the U.S. economy. In 2016, the total value of
construction and renovation work in the United States exceeded $1 trillion and accounted for
more than 6% of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP).161 The percentage of the overall
construction market devoted to green building has grown substantially in recent years, spurred by
a variety of factors, from government requirements to the prospect of attractive investment
returns to increasing concerns about environmental degradation and quality of life. In 2005,
according to one analysis, only 2% of new residential and commercial construction in the United
States consisted of green building. By 2013, that percentage was estimated to have grown to
20%.162
Green construction spending in the United States has been growing faster than general
construction spending as a whole.163 Spending on green construction more than tripled from $39
billion in 2008 to $129 billion in 2014.164 One analysis projected that green building activities
will generate $303.4 billion in GDP between 2015 and 2018.165 New institutional construction is
expected to be a large future driver of green building growth in the United States, primarily due to
certification requirements for public buildings and schools.166
The percentage of certified-green floorspace may also be on the rise among existing buildings,
although estimates vary significantly. The National Green Building Adoption Index has reported
a rise in the percentage of office space that has been certified by LEED or Energy Star from 5%
in 2005 to 38% in 2016 for the 30 largest U.S. office markets.167 Nevertheless, there remains a
large portion of the U.S. residential and commercial building stock that was not constructed
161
U.S. Census Bureau, “US Census Bureau Construction Spending Survey,” June 2017, https://www.census.gov/
construction/c30/c30index.html.
162
Alex Herceg and Aditya Ranade, “Cash Is King: Assessing the Financial Performance of Green Buildings,” ACEEE
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry (July 14, 2015), http://aceee.org/files/proceedings/2015/data/papers/2138.pdf.
163
Booz Allen Hamilton, “Green Building Economic Impact Study” (U.S. Green Building Council, September 2015),
https://kapost-files-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/published/56438d353dab34e8a1000061/green-building-economic-impactstudy.pdf?kui=ntZxSELuij0YNSwkwEO_Kw.
164
Ibid.
165
Ibid.
166
Dodge Data and Analytics, “World Green Building Trends 2016: Developing Markets Accelerate Global Green
Growth,” SmartMarket Report, (2016), http://images.marketing.construction.com/Web/McGrawHillConstruction/
%7B9cae5ab2-4ea8-429d-915d49bc72212ebc%7D_World_Green_Building_Trends_2016_SmartMarket_Report_FINAL.PDF.
167
CBRE, “Real Green Research Challenge,” 2017, https://www.cbre.com/about/corporate-responsibility/
environmental-sustainability/real-green-research-challenge.
Congressional Research Service
34
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
according to green building criteria and for which rapid retrofitting or replacement to meet those
criteria does not seem feasible.168
Cost
Green building efforts can impact the financial performance of a building by affecting initial
construction costs, operating expenses, rental rates, and property values, among other factors.
Actual and perceived costs of implementing green building measures have a strong bearing on
design and construction decisions. However, information on true costs is not always easy to
obtain, and such informational barriers can distort perceptions about the economic benefits of
green building. Moreover, researchers have noted that the flexibility inherent in designing
individual green buildings makes generalizing about the cost performance of the market segment
as a whole difficult.169 As a result, empirical evidence of the financial performance of green
building investments is limited.
It is widely believed that the initial costs of green buildings are higher than for conventional
buildings. A survey of construction industry professionals found that higher perceived initial cost
was among the top three obstacles for green building in the United States.170 Such higher costs
can result from several sources. Not only can many features, such as high-efficiency appliances
and high-performance windows, be more expensive than conventional approaches, but design
costs may be higher, and if the building is to be certified, the process may be time-consuming and
expensive in its own right.
There is some evidence, however, that the costs for constructing green buildings are not
substantially higher than those of standard construction. A DOE review of the existing literature
on green-certified buildings concluded that the available evidence shows construction costs for
green buildings to be comparable to those of conventional buildings.171 The use of integrated
design may also result in some reductions in initial costs,172 and some evidence supports that
claim.173
168
According to one 2008 estimate, about 3% of the building stock (more than 300 billion square feet) in the United
States is built new or renovated each year, with a growth rate in the stock of about 1% per year, and a projection that
about three-quarters of the stock will be new or renovated by 2035 (Steven Winter, “Green Residential Building in
North America: A Perspective from the United States,” Background Paper [Commission for Environmental
Cooperation, 2008], http://www3.cec.org/islandora/en/item/2333-paper-4b-residential-green-building-in-north-americaen.pdf). In 2012, commercial buildings had a median age of 32 years. Approximately half of such buildings had been
built before 1980, and 12% since 2003 (Energy Information Administration, “A Look at the U.S. Commercial Building
Stock: Results from EIA’s 2012 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS),” March 4, 2015,
https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2012/buildstock/).
169
Daniel C. Matisoff, Douglas S. Noonan, and Mallory E. Flowers, “Policy Monitor—Green Buildings: Economics
and Policies,” Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 10, no. 2 (July 2016): 329–46,
doi:10.1093/reep/rew009.
170
Dodge Data and Analytics, “World Green Building Trends 2016: Developing Markets Accelerate Global Green
Growth.”
171
Waypoint and JDM Associates, “Energy Efficiency and Financial Performance: A Review of Studies in the Market”
(Department of Energy, December 2015), https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/
attachments/Energy%20Efficiency%20and%20Financial%20Performance_12_2015.pdf.
172
Robert Cassidy, ed., “White Paper on Sustainability,” Building Design and Construction Supplement, November
2003, 48 p., https://www.bdcnetwork.com/sites/default/files/BD%2BC%202003%20White%20Paper%20on%20
Sustainability.pdf.
173
Greg Kats et al., “The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings: A Report to California’s Sustainable
Building Task Force” (Sustainable Building Task Force, October 2003), http://evanmills.lbl.gov/pubs/pdf/
green_buildings.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
35
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Proponents of green building assert that operational cost savings will eventually recoup any
initially higher investment. One way green buildings can create operational cost savings is by
reducing usage of utility resources, and, in some cases, through selling site-generated renewable
energy back to the grid. GSA, for instance, claims to have saved over $340 million in energy and
water costs between FY2008 and FY2015 from efficiency improvements.174 More than two dozen
studies support the contention that green certification is associated with reduced utility
expenses.175 However, utility costs, such as electricity, gas, and water bills, only make up
approximately 19% of a commercial building’s operating costs,176 and evidence is mixed on
whether green certification reduces overall operating expenses.177 There is also evidence to
suggest that green-labeled buildings command price premiums on the real estate market, both in
the amount that renters are willing to pay to use the space, and in terms of overall market value.178
Some features of real estate markets can, however, reduce incentives for investments in green
building. For example, building owners, especially homeowners, often move after a few years,179
reducing the time they would require for a return on their initial investment through potential
utility savings. The problem can be exacerbated if the building is rented or leased. The financial
return on green building investments made by owners would depend on how much of a premium
they could charge current or new tenants. The return for investments by tenants would depend on
the length of their tenure—only long-term tenants would be likely to benefit from making such an
investment.180 This is sometimes called the principal/agent or split-incentive problem.181
Finally, many potential beneficiaries of green building renovations may be limited by constraints
on the availability of capital for such investments, even outside the residential sector. Such
constraints are reported to be a problem with respect to such significant users of energy as
educational institutions, hospitals, and municipalities.182
Cost barriers to the use of green building may continue to decrease as the practice becomes more
widespread and economies of scale lower the initial cost differential. Also, financial incentives,
offered by some states and municipalities, may help to defray higher initial costs, making green
building investments more financially attractive. Some observers argue that costs beyond simple
174
Kevin Kampschroer, “2016 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan” (General Services Administration, June 30,
2016), https://gsa.gov/portal/getMediaData?mediaId=151974.
175
Waypoint and JDM Associates, “Energy Efficiency and Financial Performance: A Review of Studies in the Market”
(Department of Energy, December 2015), https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/
attachments/Energy%20Efficiency%20and%20Financial%20Performance_12_2015.pdf.
176
Alex Herceg and Aditya Ranade, “Cash Is King: Assessing the Financial Performance of Green Buildings,” ACEEE
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry (July 14, 2015), http://aceee.org/files/proceedings/2015/data/papers/2138.pdf.
177
Waypoint and JDM Associates, “Energy Efficiency and Financial Performance: A Review of Studies in the Market”
(Department of Energy, December 2015), https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/sites/default/files/
attachments/Energy%20Efficiency%20and%20Financial%20Performance_12_2015.pdf.
178
Ibid.
179
Between 11 and 13% of Americans move every year (U.S. Census Bureau, “U.S. Mover Rate Remains Stable at
About 12 Percent Since 2008,” The United States Census Bureau, March 18, 2015, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/
press-releases/2015/cb15-47.html).
180
Such arguments about cost problems are often cited as a barrier to wider implementation of green building. See, for
example, Building Technologies Office, “Multi-Year Program Plan.”
181
Florian Bressard et al., “Curbing Global Energy Demand Growth: The Energy Productivity Opportunity”
(McKinsey Global Institute, May 2007), http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resourceproductivity/our-insights/curbing-global-energy-demand-growth.
182
Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
36
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
monetary expenditures should be considered. Such thinking has led to the use of concepts such as
the “triple bottom line”183 in literature on green building. The term refers to the inclusion of social
and environmental returns, in addition to financial ones, in assessing business performance.
Performance
In evaluating the efficacy of green building efforts, it is necessary to distinguish between design
and performance. Much of the focus of green building, including rating systems such as LEED,
has been on design and construction specifications. Historically, actual environmental
performance of green buildings was not incorporated into certification requirements for most
rating systems.
Factors Affecting Performance
There are, however, many factors that can affect operations and potentially degrade the
performance of a building after it has received its green rating. Such factors include inadequate
maintenance of systems, alterations to prescribed building controls, and unintended changes in
building use and occupancy. Consequently, it is not certain that a nominally green building, even
one for which the design and construction are certified, will perform in a manner that is
significantly better or worse than a conventional building. Indeed, there are well-publicized
examples of certified green buildings that have been shown to be extremely resource-intensive
postoccupancy.184
Studies that have evaluated actual green building performance are discussed later in this section.
However, even where greater resource-use efficiency can be demonstrated, savings may be offset
by other factors. For example, green building efforts and related energy-efficiency initiatives
appear to have helped reduce energy-use intensity (see “Measurement”) in U.S. homes built since
2000. Yet, those homes use more total energy on average because they are 30% larger than older
ones and have more electronic appliances and other devices.185
The energy performance of green buildings has received the most scrutiny. Researchers have
shown that there is often a significant difference between the predicted or modelled energy use of
a building and its measured performance. This difference is sometimes referred to as a
“performance gap.” Closing that gap is a topic of ongoing interest and concern to the construction
industry.
In response to such concerns, rating system developers have placed increasing emphasis on
postoccupancy performance assessment. Recent revisions of the LEED rating system have sought
to address critiques centered on the one-time assessment nature of certification by requiring
installation of building-level energy and water meters, the data from which are to be compiled
and reported to USGBC for the first five years following certification. Other systems, such as
BREEAM In-Use and the Living Building Certification, explicitly include performance
parameters within the criteria for certification (see “Green Rating Systems and Certifications”).
183
John Elkington, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Conscientious Commerce
(Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 1998).
184
Richard Conniff, “Why Don’t Green Buildings Live Up to Hype on Energy Efficiency?,” Yale E360, August 25,
2017, http://e360.yale.edu/features/why-dont-green-buildings-live-up-to-hype-on-energy-efficiency; Sam Roudman,
“Bank of America’s Toxic Tower,” The New Republic, July 29, 2013, https://newrepublic.com/article/113942/bankamerica-tower-and-leed-ratings-racket.
185
Energy Information Administration, “Newer U.S. Homes Are 30% Larger but Consume About as Much Energy as
Older Homes,” February 12, 2013, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=9951.
Congressional Research Service
37
Infrastructure: Green Building Overview and Issues
Building codes are also moving toward incorporating performance outcomes into requirements:
the 2015 IgCC included an outcome-based compliance pathway for energy usage, allowing
builders to meet requirements through actual performance.186
Building systems may also be commissioned—that is, independently assessed to ensure they are
designed, installed, tested, and capable of being operated as planned.187 Available data support the
contention that commissioning improves environmental performance, especially for energy
use.188 The process can be used not only for new buildings, but also existing ones, either during
retrofitting or continuing operations.
In addition to certification and commissioning, an organization can develop an environmental
management system (EMS), for which international standards are available.189 To be certified
under the standards, an organization must have an explicit environmental policy that includes
commitments to conform to relevant environmental requirements, continuously improve
environmental performance, and prevent pollution, among other things. Such commitments are
arguably far easier to meet if the EMS includes performance measurement.190
Networked building monitoring and diagnostic tools are becoming increasingly prevalent. Such
tools can allow early fault detection in critical building equipment as well as providing resource
use analytics, allowing building managers to more effectively respond to changing use patterns in
real time. (See textbox “Smart Buildings and the Internet of Things,” above.) For example,
GSAlink, a GSA-developed building diagnostic tool, has been used to identify over 33,000
instances of sub-optimal equipment performance within GSA holdings alone.191
Selected Studies
Many studies have attempted to measure and evaluate green building performance. However, a
lack of consensus on the criteria for defining green building, as well as on the outcomes to be
measured, has made it difficult to compare results between studies.192 Generally, the evidence that
green buildings perform significantly better than conventional buildings is mixed. Recent studies
have shown green buildings to exhibit a wide range of measured energy performance, with some
buildings performing far below design expectations.193 The selected studies discussed below
186
Institute for Market Transformation, “Outcome-Based Pathway Is Voted into the 2015 IgCC” (Press Release,
November 20, 2014), http://www.imt.org/news/the-current/outcome-based-pathway-is-voted-into-the-2015-igcc.
187
Whole Building Design Guide, “Building Commissioning,” November 12, 2016, http://www.wbdg.org/buildingcommissioning.
188
See, for example, Evan Mills, “Building Commissioning: A Golden Opportunity for Reducing Energy Costs and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States,” Energy Efficiency 4, no. 2 (May 1, 2011): 145–73,
doi:10.1007/s12053-011-9116-8.
189
The standard is ISO 14001.
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.