Home > Articles By Issue > Career Development >Article June 2004

Interview with Nigel Howard: Dignified Leader Of The LEED Movement
Ethical vision from LEED pays homage to facility professionals.

By Heidi Schwartz

Trained as a professional chemist (or "lapsed chemist," as he refers to himself), Nigel Howard is comfortable applying his scientific background to unconventional issues—particularly with regard to energy and the environment. As director of the Centre for Sustainable Construction at BRE (Building Research Establishment Ltd.) in the United Kingdom, he spent many years examining the impact of buildings on the environment. While there, Howard developed several assessment tools and strategic policy initiatives linked to the preservation of the planet's natural resources.

Now he devotes his time to sustainability efforts in the U.S., where he serves as vice president of the council responsible for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Building Rating Systemª. In addition to directing the overall day-to-day management of the USGBC Washington, DC headquarters office, Howard is the senior spokesperson for LEED. This quintessential diplomat and eloquent representative graciously shared his thoughts regarding goals for LEED and the sustainable efforts of the USGBC.

TFM: How did you become involved with the sustainable design effort in the U.S.?

NH: I was director for the Centre for Sustainable Construction in the U.K., and I had good success getting BREEAM [BRE Environmental Assessment Method] working. I examined the drivers for change and got the right stakeholder groups engaged. It's crucial for a rating system to get the ownership of the people who are going to use it. After that, I left BRE to do some consultancy work, and in just a couple of months, I was invited to come to the U.S. and have a go at getting LEED on its feet. It was a nice challenge, and I never say no to an adventure. So, here I am!

Really, I'm a newcomer; I've only been with the USGBC for two years. Fortunately, I'm in a position to enjoy some of the glory.

TFM: Who or what inspired you to align yourself with environmental concepts?

NH: During my pre-LEED days (when I was searching to find out what I wanted to be), I did some work in materials, contaminated land, water pollution, and energy research. Through this, I became aware of the scale of importance of buildings—they have a significant negative impact on the environment.

Most people take buildings for granted. It's easy. They're big, solid, safe things that just sit there. No one pays much attention to their impact. But in terms of energy use (and the associated pollution and environmental damage), these issues are vitally important. In my case, there was an attraction to doing something that would make a difference. I wanted to feel as though I would be leaving the planet in a slightly better condition.

Unfortunately, in my effort to spread the word about sustainable design, I travel quite a bit. As a result, I get a bit scared that my own footprint on the planet is completely unacceptable. Still, I have to believe that the good I'm trying to do will more than pay back for the journeys that I make. Personally, it's a bit of a conflict.

TFM: What are your main goals for LEED?

NH: One of my most ambitious goals is to experience a complete revision for LEED, taking it from Version 2 to Version 3. In particular, there's the introduction of weighted credits. That will allow us to cope with the fact that water issues, for example, could be massively important in Phoenix, but not so important to Vermont.

There is also the need to untangle some of the intents which are overlapping in the different LEED credits. That should minimize the confusing outcomes.

What we're planning to do is develop a LEED Version 3 framework that will become a blueprint for revisions of LEED. This framework will parallel the development of individual products. Right now, everything is in different stages. The idea is that this framework will serve as the DNA for the next version of LEED.

I can envisage this being a rough process, because we're always going to have products at a different point in their evolution. This is very new thinking. I'm not sure we know exactly how this is going to come out.

TFM: Has the economy had an impact on your goals for LEED?

NH: I don't have any evidence to support that. In fact, my sense is that the downturn has hit the rest of the industry much more. The distinction of green projects allows them to buck the economic trend.

TFM: What role does the end user play in the development of green strategies for the organization?

NH: Facilities managers are unbelievably important, but they need to research and understand their buildings a bit better. LEED for Existing Buildings (LEED EB) is going to give them the tools, language, and frameworks to do just that.

It will also force them to confront how their buildings really operate. They should know how members of the facilities staff see these buildings.

Facility managers spend most of their time listening to complaints; it's like a siege mentality. They don't get enough credit for what they can contribute. But LEED EB allows them to be more proactive. It cuts across all the different aspects; the energy performance which has cost benefits, the health aspects, cleaning, everything.

Then, there are all kinds of creative things that facilities managers can do to reduce the impact of transport to buildings. They can encourage management to institute teleworking schemes, car sharing, desk sharing, and databases that allow staff to find car pool partners. They can institute purchasing programs of materials that have a low impact.

Right now, it's very exciting to see the progress of the pilot for LEED. That's a real opportunity to bring LEED to the facilities manager in a very potent way.

In the past, all the enthusiasm tended to be around new building design, but at National Geographic, the organization's involvement in LEED EB has given a great deal back to the facilities staff. They now have the opportunity to take pride in what they're doing and make a real difference to the organization. The person who headed up the effort was the CFO, and to hear a CFO talk passionately about facilities management is pretty amazing.

[Note: During USGBC's annual Greenbuild International Conference and Expo last November, the National Geographic Society and the Joe Serna, Jr. EPA Headquarters Building (operated by Thomas Properties Group) were recognized as the first projects to complete certification under the LEED EB Rating System—earning Silver and Gold ratings respectively.]

TFM: How should facility professionals overcome apprehension and resistance to green programs?

NH: There's different advice for different levels of management. To the board, they'll need to get something into the annual report which demonstrates how energy performance is improving (which is a cost saving); shows how the environmental impact is decreasing (which is a good thing for investors); and illustrates any improvements in productivity. News like this will appeal to the board and the CFO, particularly when there's a focus on the cost aspects.

But this agenda isn't just environmental. There are social aspects as well. Most staff members will have a new regime to follow, but if facility managers make it easy, there should be a general willingness to participate. It is something that people are naturally vested in. Once again, though, the secret is making things easy and obvious.

I have a concern about buildings that are too complex, because if that's the case, people forget how to use them (or else they use them incorrectly) and it all goes wrong. I don't like the idea of having to have an operating manual for a building. Everything should be so completely intuitive that nobody will get it wrong.

Opening windows is a great example of that. You don't need to tell people how to ventilate the building if you let them open a window.

TFM: Will LEED EB eventually serve as a type of "green commissioning" standard?

NH: We already require commissioning, but there has been quite a backlash because of the cost. It's actually one of the main reasons why people feel LEED is so expensive. In all honesty, these costs should not be as high as they are. We want to promote the 20% commissioning practice that delivers 80% to 90% of the benefits.

The trouble with commissioning is it's one of these "how long is a piece of string?" type arguments. You can commission absolutely everything to any degree, but it's deciding what you need in order to do what you really want. We want to be focused entirely on the things that are going to make the biggest difference.

An important aspect of the 2.2 update for LEED is the commissioning template. It will help people conduct commissioning at the most appropriate, affordable, predictable level for new construction. In this case, it's more about making sure that the building operates in accordance with its original design intent from the day the doors first open.

With existing buildings, it's about the whole facility—management, operation, maintenance, and refurbishing—over its entire lifespan. The emphasis is on continuous monitoring of progress and improvement on what can be done from one year to the next. Essentially, this will be required to maintain certification.

TFM: Can buildings certified under the LEED for new construction rating system (LEED NC) easily transition over to LEED EB?

NH: We would love all new construction buildings to transition over to EB, but there's no way we can make this a requirement. Frequently, we're dealing with a different set of decision makers.

With new construction, there are those who have designed, developed, and put the building in place. They're going against those who are now occupying and operating the building. Fortunately, when you have an occupant who also owns the building, it's easier to make the case to pursue EB.

With LEED NC, the certification doesn't ever lapse, because it's only a snapshot in time. It doesn't guarantee performance is going to continue.

The same goes for EB. It's a snapshot with an annual update that's followed up in periods of perhaps three or five years for recertification. (at whatever level is decided).

TFM: How can facility professionals do more to incorporate green awareness into workplace attitudes and strategic plans?

NH: Obviously, they'll need to get a commitment from upper management. Fortunately, there is a great deal of information available to help demonstrate the business case for green buildings. This can be very powerful towards gaining that commitment.

The business case has many elements. First, there's the potential productivity developments linked to green buildings. There is emerging evidence to support the improved productivity within green buildings.

That productivity issue includes multiple elements as well. First, the building should be healthier. Second, there tends to be lower absenteeism, which results in direct productivity benefits. Just a few percentage points of improved productivity is worth a huge amount of money.

Then there is the direct savings in cost, because a green building should be cheaper to operate. It consumes less energy, and experiences lower water costs.

Finally, there are the public relations aspects. This benefit feeds back into investment decisions, because people want to invest in organizations that have positive environmental and ethical profiles. These companies outperform the average when you look at things like the Dow Jones indices.

The organizations that don't adapt to this movement will be the dinosaurs of tomorrow. They won't be around, because they won't attract the investment. Nor will they attract and retain the best staff, because people really like to work in these buildings—they're simply great places to be.