Well, we're winding down the application process with only one more application to go. To be honest, I'm glad there's only one left, because now I'm lost that great momentum that pushed us through so many applications, essays, and portfolios. Basically, its down to finsihing the application form and a 300 word statement of purpose for Washington University. Shorter essays are harder since I need to convey my professional goals, academic interests, and why Wash U in particular would be a good fit for me. I've got a lot written so far, but I may go back to scratch to write this one, or at least the first draft and just pull in elements from other histories and statements.

A reader asked why I had bad experiences with the expanded LEED program. I'll explain. LEED is run by GBCI, or the Green Build Credentialling Institute. LEED standards and requirements change over time, ostensibly to keep abrest of the cutting edge green methodologies, data, and materials, but often times it feels like a Microsoft operating system release: In consistant need of upgrades. When LEED was first launched, from what I have heard from the earliest adapters, the test to become LEED accredited was laughably easy and relatively cheap. It's not the only green standard out there, and I have a sneaking suspicion that this move was simply to get people on board as quickly and massively as possible. Remember betamax? Anyway, maybe its an unfair comparison.
At any rate, over time, the test became harder, more expensive, and it became harder to make LEED certified buildings. Up until last year, to become LEED accredited, all one had to do was to pay $300 and pass a test. The test, if you remember my test preparation, dear reader, was a doosy. Not comperable to an ARE, but still a real tiresome bitch to pass since it involved the memorization of a lot of data and figures which had no purpose being memorized.
Today, to become LEED accredited, you have to pay a few hundred to take an easier test, and then pay another few hundred to take a harder test. That's the change from LEED AP to LEED AP+. Then, to keep your title, you have to pay a biannual fee of $50, which turns out to be small change in comparison to your "credentialling maintainence" hours. Essentially, one is required to spend a number of hours every two years, in perscribed areas of sustainable design and ONLY in officially designated ways. The credentialing maintenence program has been compared to AIA's. Except without the benefit. Understand, the ONLY two benefits of becoming a LEED AP+ is 1) you can get your project an extra point towards LEED and you can put the additional letters on your title. That's it. One point, and the buisiness card recognition that you spent about a hundred hours and a several hundred dollars.

I dont like the direction LEED is taking. Cradle to Cradle is a neat idea, but the founder, who didn't even invent the phrase, whose namesake book was ghostwritten, strikes me a profiteering charlatan, and LEED v3 awards several points for the use of Cradle to cradle "certified" products. You pay for a certificate which involves paying for other certificates. How thick does the shit have to stack before it begins to smell?

The GBC deliberately overstaturated the market with LEED APs. How can they make money if everyone is a star bellied sneech LEED AP? You make a platnum card. LEED v3. LEED AP BD+C. No one but no one is going to get it. It's a collossal, expensive, pain in the ass designation with minimal payback or benefit.

Am I going for it? Yes. I owe it to my company who paid for my orignal LEED test, who sent me to greenbuild (guess who you pay to go to greenbuild?) which really made it even possible for me to get the accrediation with the hours I racked up at greenbuild. My collegue Brad isn't going to go for it, even though he created classes in passing the LEED test at work. Without somehow paying money to the GBCI, its impossible for him to get the number of hours. Is it a load of crap? Mostly. Are there alternatives to LEED? Yes! I'm not against green and sustainable design, I'm against companies whose stated priority is green, but actual priority is the other kind of green.