If you read technical publications, you're bound to run into a recent study published by Henry Gifford that questions (with a reasonable premise) the accuracy of claims made by the programs about energy performance. Bottom line is that Gifford believes that the program's checklist structure rewards designers for predicted performance, but that no one actually checks to see if the buildings, as built, perform to their designers' claims. A colleague of mine (who shall remain nameless, though goodness knows he'd be perfectly happy to be quoted) reminded me this week that the programs are prescriptive - not performance-based. Meaning that although proven energy performance is critical to green building, the LEED programs don't mandate verifiable, measurable performance.

Can it be true? Such an excellent marketing concept and we're building buildings that aren't performing to the label? I truly hope not, or at least, I hope the folks at USGBC will act quickly to cinch up their program to ensure that the most critical factor in green - energy - is being ensured in their buildings. After all, it really doesn't matter what you say - nothing is green when everything is green (thank you, Joe) - it matters what you can measure and verify.

LEED has such an excellent concept, such an excellent organization backing them, and the eye of the media. Here's hoping they get it together soon and respond with vigor to Gifford's claims, or we're all going to have to do a lot of dancing to gain the trust of the public again, no matter how stalwart our green building programs.