I took away a very important, very big thought from my conversation with Rob Watson. This big, important thought was based first on a comment from Watson himself:
"We are in a ‘you bet your species’ proposition with unmanageable climate change, so more rapid penetration of LEED is not a problem, rather a prerequisite with regards to solving this global problem."
The second thing that led to my big, important thought was the book Tribes. Here is a particularly salient excerpt:
"Initiating is really and truly difficult, and that’s what leaders do. They see something others are ignoring and they jump on it."
Do you see where I am going with this?
The USGBC was created to improve the built environment because its founders believed our current method of design and construction threatened the planet. That is a huge task. When you are undertaking a project like that, of course you are creating new and bigger risks.
The USGBC is not ignoring risk. Watson’s statements in previous posts clearly show that LEED rating system risks are on his radar. The risks associated with green building aren’t the primary concern for the USGBC; losing the planet to global warming and other environmental risks are.
On the other hand, I am most concerned about the risks associated with green building. While Watson sees green building as a solution to our environmental problems, I see risks stemming from green building projects as a factor that could eventually drag down the green building movement. This is why I want to reduce the risks associated with green building. If the USGBC or the green building industry does not get my message, or your message, on how to reduce green building risks, then shame on us. We aren’t properly conveying our message. Or we aren’t working hard enough to convey our message.
As an attorney and an independent analyst, I see it as my role to make that standard work better, with less risk to all parties. We can’t wait for the USGBC to undertake that task – that is OUR task.