[Equest-users] To whom it may concern: (UNCLASSIFIED)
Paul Diglio
paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net
Mon Jun 27 10:45:01 PDT 2011
John:
I don't know what the US Army's present requirements are, but I commissioned an
emergency response facility in CT a few years ago. The rating system was
SPiRiT, which is based on the Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design Rating System 2.0 (LEED 2.0®), and which is tailored to
Army-specific needs, embodies accepted energy and environmental principles.
SPiRiT takes a "whole building" perspective to help preserve the environment
and improve facility life-cycle management, and to integrate environmentally
responsible practices into the facility delivery process from its design
stages.
Has SPiRiT been eliminated?
Paul Diglio
________________________________
From: "Eurek, John S NWO" <John.S.Eurek at usace.army.mil>
To: Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>; eQUEST Users List
<equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org>
Sent: Mon, June 27, 2011 1:28:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Equest-users] To whom it may concern: (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
LEED does have a monopoly for U.S. Military buildings. Strangely enough
Katherine Hammack how helped start USGBC is now the Assistant Secretary of
the Army (Installations, Energy & Environment). And LEED is required for Amy
buildings, very curious. Like the Halliburton of the green movement.
Like Pasha said, I agree with the goals, but the methods are questionable.
Maybe I've said too much, I can't forget Big Brother is monitoring this site.
Think only double plus happy thoughts.
"Is Freedom is a small price to pay to stop Global Warming?"
John Eurek PE, LEED AP
-----Original Message-----
From: equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of Pasha
Korber-Gonzalez
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 4:04 PM
To: eQUEST Users List
Subject: [Equest-users] To whom it may concern:
Just want to humbly state that I'm not trying to downgrade the intent of
LEED---I support thier intent 1000%; I have disagreements with some of the
approaches that are being taken on our LEED models when they are being
reviewed inconsistantly among a single organization.
USGBC is a monopoly in the clearest sence (i.e. think US Post
Office-monopoly). There is no one out there competing against them or
refuting what they want to "Deem" as THE WAY. Sometimes a little
resistance or maybe a competitor to LEED would help push these issues to the
surface so to get rid of this 'underground suffering' of frustration and lack
of clarity with what GBCI --expects to see.
Many other LEED review comment discussions have also recently revealed the
inconsistency and discrepancy between EAc1 reviewer on the same team.
Cheers,
Pasha
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110627/4dc4e29e/attachment.htm>
More information about the Equest-users
mailing list