One of the partners in the office cornered my and asked me about CSI’s GreenFormat. I stared at him blankly and confessed that I never heard of it. He said, “Aren’t you Mr. CSI?” Apparently not. Am I living under a rock or has CSI not promoted this format?
What can someone tell me about GreenFormat so I can impress the boss?
I believe “GreenFormat” is actually “Part 3 - Green” - a standard component of CSI’s TournamentFormat (along with “Part 1 - Tee” and “Part 2 - Fairway”).
Tournament Format is divided into 18 Divisions, popularly known as holes, each of which is divided into these three parts. Over the years, many have tried to add a Division 19, but CSI has steadfastly resisted expansion of the format beyond the original 18 Divisions, viewing Division 19 as outside the proper scope of the tournament.
TournamentFormat is jointly promulgated by CSI (the Construction Sports Institute) and CSC (Construction Sports Canada).
Comment on the Beta Version of GreenFormat
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/sec_CSIWeekly.asp?TRACKID=D4YPDFNS58ZE2YGBPEPS8ELNF73UVDLR&CID=30&DID=13645
In 2005, CSI charged the Sustainable Facilities Task Team with creating a product data guide that would track the green properties of building materials and components used during construction. After months of development work, the initial result of these effortsGreenFormat: A Reporting Guide for Sustainable Criteria of Productswill soon be available for a limited beta test.
GreenFormat will provide a standardized format for reporting information about the sustainable attributes of construction products. This information will be stored in a Web-accessible database that allows users to sort and view the data in various ways to best suit a projects needs. The database will offer an additional benefit to manufacturers: a way to present clear, consistent, and concise information on the lifecycle qualities of products to specifiers.
Read Supporting Sustainability with GreenFormat (PDF), an excerpt from CSI’s Construction Specifier Magazine.
Watch Home - Construction Specifications Institute for the latest news about GreenFormat.
Complete this form to recieve email notices about GreenFormat.
Supporting Sustainability with GreenFormat (PDF)
http://www.csinet.org/s_csi/docs/13700/13644.pdf
Also see previous Sustainable Facilities Guide?? (incorrect label - document is dealing with products not facilities) discussion under Institute Discussions - Peggy White describes the document in that discussion.
We need to get Division 19 established as part of the TournamentFormat. Its just a matter of moving TournamentFormat into the “real world”; nobody leaves the field after 18. The difficulty is how does one establish the three Parts for Division 19?
Nice, Robert E.
I think TournamenrFormat also has it’s own PageFormat known in this region under the colloquial term “scorecard.” PageFormat is used to log the “work results.” It is prepared in spreadsheet format of rows and columns. Some may even call it a “Schedule” which should be signed under seal.
Hackers are usually assigned the task of compilng the schedule. Flogger may also be interchanged for hacker.
Inspite of repeated objections of other industry insiders and gurus, we use Division 19 as a post participation analysis to share “lessons learned from the fairway” and add to our NEAT (No Excuses After This) file database.
The entire system can be corrupted by the overuse use of prevarication by hackers (floggers).
See what you have starded Robert E.
GreenFormat (or the development of it at least) was marketed pretty heavily by CSI at Greenbuild this past November. I’ve had a few questions about it, too – since it appears that every firm in town sent a number of representatives to Greenbuild…
GreenFormat sounds like the modern cousin of Spec Data including the expansion from 10 points to 14 points to keep pace with MasterFormat 2004
it DOES have a better logo than Spec Data…
As a manufacturer, I am continually asked to document the “green” attributes of my products. The documentation requests vary widely from firm to firm and project to project. This way of doing business is inefficient for all involved and subjective to boot.
I am surprised this isn’t a bigger issue on this forum.
I am of the opinion that GreenFormat, or something like it, is critical to the design community. There is a pressing need for a way to bridge the information needs from building certification processes to the specifications…Am I missing something?
I suggest reviewing ASTM E2129 Standard Practice for Data Collection for Sustainability Assessment of Building Products. It’s easily obtain and offers a level of uniformity. I like it because it defines terminology and contains 2 tables for data collection on a product by product basis in each Division, including Division 1. It helps when data collecting for LCA or product comparison. I’m surprised that the manufacturers haven’t promoted this document to reduce the data requests.
The questions are generally a yes or no response but may not be comprehensive depending on your desired specific information. When I use it, I ask the manufacturer to tell me what additional questions I should be asking relative to its product. It keeps the questions focused on a sustainable intent.
Anon:
Great point. ASTM E2129 is a good tool for documenting sustainability. The problem is that you have so much data and, unlike GreenFormat, you cannot go to a central location to pull down specific attributes for your project.
Both GreenFormat and 2129 could serve the same purpose but GreenFormat seems like it has the potential to be more dynamic. 2129 is not a web based tool and GreenFormat is.
I’m not sure either is the answer but GreenFormat seems, to me, to be the best option now
I have lots of questions about GreenFormat.
Who will be researching and verifying manunfacturer compliance with its claims (quality assurance/control)?
At GreenBuild, I saw booth after booth claiming LEED approval or LEED certification for products. How can that be? LEED doesn’t certify or approve products. So when a manufacturer states in its GreenFormat form that it’s LEED approved or certified, where is the credibility of the data? Why do I trust that manufacturer and the database as a whole?
Another question - Who will be updating the data and on what time frame?
Will this database require a subscription or fee for use? Who pays - the manufacturer, user, or both? Will users pay for it if the data lacks credibility?
GreenFormat will provide a standardized format for reporting information about the sustainable attributes of construction products. I don’t believe the word LEED is even mentioned in the draft document.
The format includes:
Manufacturers will enter product information into GreenFormat through an objective questionnaire form, organized in a consistent format. Its 14 categories of questions are:
RE: LEED “Approval” from the Anon post above
When a manufacturer notes that they have “LEED Approved” or “LEED Certified” products, basically they are working off the fact that in the past they have supplied said products on a LEED certfied job and were approved.
There is no such thing as a specific product that is certified and no matching product database. Worse yet some manufacturers really stretch it when they promote their green- you can offer the ability to help with LEED if you manufacture within 500 miles of the site- so something that simple makes people believe they are “green” or “LEED Approved”
LEED is really not the greatest process- then again most of you on this board know that.
Hope all of you are well- and a Happy and Healthy Holiday season to you all.
Take care
Max Perilstein
(Colin- sorry for posting Anon- I am password challenged…)
I understand that some manufacturers might make statements about their products being LEED “approved”. This simply shows a lack of understanding about the process. The best a manufacturer can hope for is that their product helps to support a green/sustainable strategy.
Robert makes the point very well. GreenFormat, and for that matter ASTM E2129, do not “certify” or “approve” products. They are meant to document attributes of products. They are both limited to the extent that they are self-reporting but offer a standardized format for providing and requesting objective green/sustainable information.
Thanks for the input,
Regards,
Marty
FYI, there’s a new player in the green scorecard/labeling arena this month: Pharos. See http://www.pharosproject.net/, then click on factsheet. Nice visual indicator (“lens”), too soon to tell if it will take off.
Hello
As a way of explaining what GreenFormat is all about, I’ve copied some of my posting in October, 2006 from the previous Institute discussion list on 4Specs on GreenFormat to post here. The following is a general description of GreenFormat and how it will serve the construction community:
GreenFormat
The Construction Product Sustainability Information Reporting Guide
PLAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Introduction: GreenFormat is a tool that has two components. First, GreenFormat begins with a reporting questionnaire formatted to enable the collection of substantiated construction product sustainability information. The second component is a relational database of the product information collected via the GreenFormat questionnaire. The intent is that this will be an electronic tool, both for the data collection and for the database itself. Designers using the database will be able to print reports on specific products based on their queries within the database.
General Plan: The intended plan is for CSI to create a relational database of construction product sustainability information based on manufacturer responses to the GreenFormat questionnaire. This database will bring value to CSI, to manufacturers, and to designers.
General Organizational Structure: Sustainable information which is reported in GreenFormat is grouped into broad categories. The broad categories are then divided into sub-categories. Individual topics and questions concerning sustainability are included within these sub-categories. The categories are generally organized from the more important topics to less important topics.
There is much flexibility that can be accommodated within the structure established. As sustainability issues evolve within the construction industry, new topics and questions can be added in the appropriate category and subcategory, and existing topics and questions which become obsolete or change can be dropped. The structure can be applied to all construction products and product categories.
Re Anon’s suggestion that E2129 is preferrable, I would mention that the is a big difference between using E2129 and using GreenFormat. E2129 is a questionaire without metrics - great questions, for sure, but the individual using it must verify the accuracy of any responses they may receive. GreenFormat’s questions are all tied to directly to metrics.
If you’re interested in participating in the development of this product, you can go to CSI’s main website to sign up for the Beta Test, which will be coming along early next year. We will welcome your feedback.
The December issue of The Specifier will have a short article on GreenFormat written by the Chair of the Sustainable Facilities Task Team, John P. McCaffrey.
Thanks,
Peggy