It’s a shame to see money wasted in the name of energy conservation. That’s what happens when sensible energy-saving measures are wrapped up in politically correct nonsense, gross exaggeration and a needlessly expensive process.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design – LEED -- is a program promoted by the US Green Building Council that does just that It is mainly governments and nonprofits that follow the whole LEED package.

Management improvement programs periodically sweep through corporate America making that sector susceptible to programs like Quality Circles, Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing, now overlaid with LEED.

Once a few big names get on board with the latest program, it is followed lemminglike by other enterprises until the next management fad replaces it. Hopefully, the fashionable but wasteful LEED program will soon run its course before it gives cost-effective energy efficiency a bad reputation. If the public begins to see efficiency measures bundled with outrageous boondoggles, then the good is tarred along with the bad.

It is not just the totalitarian environmentalists that are now pushing to make the LEED standards mandatory, but the architectural and design engineering community are enthusiastic promoters. That’s because the certification and on-going compliance for LEED requires an enormous amount of design time and special expertise.

A growing vocal minority in the design business is making stinging criticisms of the LEED program. Many budget-pressed enterprises pursue LEED recommendations without the full expensive certification.

LEED advocates say the added cost of building to their standards is small. That may be true for the actual recommended energy measures. It is the certification process that is costly. Proponents of LEED say there are short paybacks and many benefits for the extra costs. But the environmental benefits are subjective.

Claims that workers are happier in a new LEED building may be true, but the same could be said for any new building. Plus, many of the projected savings for LEED buildings are proving difficult to verify.

LEED standards do save some energy. Yet many efficiency improvements are hard to measure. The real issue is the huge waste of money on things that do not save energy.

LEED’s grab bag mix of silly environmental measures and worthwhile energy suggestions has competition with other standard-making groups.

The greatest benefits from energy standards will be achieved when competitive groups meet consumer demands. New technologies and building techniques will develop and gain acceptance.

LEED with its one-size-fits-all standard, questionable benefits and high costs is resistant to change and relying increasingly on mandates for new customers. LEED may not hold up in competition with voluntary energy efficiency programs.

Jim Clarkson advises managers on controlling energy costs.

We welcome your letters

With letters to the editor, please include your name, address, and telephone number for verification. Your telephone number and address will not be published. Our deadline for letters is 2 p.m. Friday. Send them to JerryBellune@yahoo.com