Summary
This article guides you through the criticisms of BREEAM and LEED, offering actionable steps to navigate these certifications effectively. It emphasizes a holistic approach to sustainability, prioritizing embodied carbon and whole-life cycle analysis. By understanding these key areas, you can achieve true sustainability and maximize the value of your green building certifications.
Discover how Focus360 Energy can help with BREEAM certification.
** Main Story**
So, you’re thinking about getting a green building certification like BREEAM or LEED, huh? They’ve become pretty popular in construction, and for good reason – they offer a framework for more sustainable practices. But, and it’s a big ‘but’, there’s been some criticism, particularly around embodied carbon and, well, potential greenwashing. Let’s dive in.
The Skeptic’s Corner
You might have heard the arguments already. Architect Andrew Waugh, for example, wasn’t shy about calling BREEAM and LEED “meaningless”, mainly because of how they handle embodied carbon. What’s embodied carbon? It’s all the emissions from making materials, hauling them around, and actually building the thing. Sure, operational emissions—like the energy a building uses day-to-day—are crucial. But embodied carbon can be a huge chunk of a building’s total impact. If you only focus on operational stuff, you’re not getting the full picture, are you?
Then there’s the risk of ‘greenwashing’. Sometimes, developers just chase certifications for the marketing boost, and, I mean, who can blame them? But they might just throw in some easy, visible ‘green’ features to rack up points, while skipping the tougher, but more impactful sustainable choices. It’s a bit like putting solar panels on a gas-guzzling SUV, right?
Getting Real Value
So, how do you make sure your certification actually means something and you’re not just playing at sustainability? Here’s what I reckon:
-
Embodied Carbon First: Do a thorough life cycle assessment (LCA). Figure out exactly what the embodied carbon footprint of your project is. Then, look at materials with lower carbon footprints – think sustainably sourced timber or recycled stuff. And streamline your construction to cut down on waste, because that’s also going to reduce emissions.
-
Think Long Term: Take a whole-life cycle approach. From the initial design to when the building’s eventually torn down, plan everything. Design for deconstruction, so materials can be reused later. Prioritize durable materials and efficient systems to keep operational emissions down for years to come. You don’t want to be replacing equipment every five years. It’s costly and it’s just wasteful.
-
Don’t Just Meet the Minimum: Certifications are a game of points, but try, if you can, to go above the minimum requirements for that shiny certification. Think about innovative tech, and new strategies that could really push boundaries of what we think of green building. For example, I worked on a project a couple of years ago where we implemented a grey water recycling system, and whilst this was not necessary for certification it has reduced water consumption of the building drastically.
-
Performance Matters More Than Points: Certifications, after all, are a way to an end, not the end itself. Your goal? A truly sustainable building that has the least impact on the environment. So, measure real performance, instead of just focusing on the score. This is crucial, because then you are actively creating a building that is better for the environment.
-
Be Transparent: Show your work. Transparency in sustainability reporting builds trust. Get a third-party to verify your environmental claims so everyone knows you’re legit.
The Bigger Picture
If you can tackle the embodied carbon issue, take a full life cycle view, and really focus on genuine performance, your green building certification won’t just be a badge; it’ll mean something real. Embracing a whole-life cycle perspective, and focusing on genuine performance; this will create buildings that aren’t only certified as green but buildings that are also truly sustainable. As of today, May 5, 2025, it’s essential we take these steps seriously to navigate the complex world of green building certifications and build a genuinely sustainable future. Isn’t that what we all want, in the end?
So, a grey water system not *needed* for certification but drastically cuts consumption? Sounds like you were playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers! Maybe BREEAM and LEED need a “thinking outside the tap” bonus.
That’s a great way to put it! The “thinking outside the tap” bonus is exactly what’s needed. It’s about looking beyond the minimum requirements and focusing on innovative solutions like grey water systems to achieve genuine sustainability and improve performance. Let’s encourage more of that kind of thinking in green building!
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
The emphasis on whole-life cycle analysis is vital. Considering deconstruction and material reuse at the design stage can significantly reduce environmental impact and promote a circular economy within the construction industry.
Absolutely! Thinking about deconstruction and material reuse upfront is so important. It’s exciting to see more projects embracing circular economy principles. What are some innovative material reuse strategies you’ve seen implemented?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
The article mentions Andrew Waugh’s criticism of BREEAM and LEED regarding embodied carbon. Given the increasing focus on carbon accounting, how are these certification systems adapting to more accurately and comprehensively assess embodied carbon emissions?
That’s a really important question! It’s great to see the focus on embodied carbon growing. From what I’ve seen, BREEAM and LEED are starting to incorporate more detailed lifecycle assessments and offering credits for using lower-carbon materials. It will be interesting to see if they go further and include specific carbon reduction targets. What do you think?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
Andrew Waugh’s critique about embodied carbon being “meaningless” stings! Perhaps BREEAM and LEED could partner with a carbon dating service? Suddenly, specifying materials would feel like an archeological dig for the *least* ancient options!
That’s a hilarious and insightful point! A “carbon dating service” for building materials – I love that imagery. It really highlights the need to prioritize materials with lower embodied carbon and push for transparency in the industry. It would be fascinating to see that implemented and the difference it would make!
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
Greenwashing, eh? So true! Chasing points is like eco-virtue signalling. Maybe BREEAM and LEED should introduce a “genuine impact” audit, where a panel of grumpy environmentalists grill you on your *real* sustainability efforts.
That “genuine impact” audit idea is brilliant! I think having a panel of experts scrutinize the actual outcomes would push the industry beyond just ticking boxes. It could be a great way to differentiate truly sustainable projects from those that are just ‘eco-virtue signalling’!
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
The article highlights the importance of transparency in sustainability reporting. Beyond third-party verification, could blockchain technology further enhance trust and traceability in material sourcing and carbon accounting within green building projects?
That’s a fantastic point about blockchain! It could offer a new level of transparency in tracing materials back to their source and verifying carbon accounting. Has anyone seen practical implementations of this in construction yet? Would love to hear about real-world use cases and challenges.
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
Third-party verification, huh? It’s like asking a fox to guard the henhouse… but with spreadsheets! Seriously though, independent audits are essential; how else will we know if we’re actually saving the planet, or just rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic?
That’s a great analogy! It perfectly captures the skepticism surrounding self-reporting. Independent audits definitely add a layer of accountability. It’s about more than ticking boxes; it’s about demonstrating genuine commitment. What other mechanisms might increase confidence in sustainability claims?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
Architect Andrew Waugh called BREEAM and LEED “meaningless?” Ouch! So, if certification is just a shiny badge, does that make sustainable buildings the emperor’s new clothes of construction? What happens when the emperor gets rained on, metaphorically speaking?