Image Credit: johnpicard.com
更多的Musings of an Energy Nerd
您是否曾经为电影票支付8美元，但仍必须在剧院展示主要功能之前坐在剧院的商业消息中？
商业消息是美国开展业务方式的既定一部分，我们都学会了在必要时坐下来。与当地的Cineplex一样，在像Greenbuild这样的主要会议上适用的规则也适用。即使您支付了700美元的票，您仍然必须坐下一些广告。
At national conferences, some speakers are invited because they are experts in their field. Others buy their way on stage.
Atthe opening plenary session of the GreenBuild conferenceon October 4, 2011, in Toronto, the audience listened politely to a commercial message from David Kohler, the faucet-and-bathtub magnate whose plumbing supply company helped fund the conference. At the closing plenary session, conference attendees listened politely to Scott Case, Director of Markets Development for UL Environment, as Case explained what his company, a conference sponsor, was up to.
However, the oddest speaker by far at GreenBuild’s closing plenary session, John Picard, was hard to categorize. Was this another advertisement from a conference sponsor? Or did the invitation for Picard to speak just represent a monumental example of poor judgment on the part of the conference organizers?
Fedrizzi, Bloomberg, and Picard
从所有露面中，皮卡德（Picard）是一位企业家，他在他的硅谷初创公司Soft Power中引起了投资者的兴趣。从10月7日的演讲开始，他似乎是USBGC总裁里克·费德里兹（Rick Fedrizzi）的私人朋友，他们中的两个人喜欢与共和党政客，尤其是纽约市长迈克尔·彭博（Michael Bloomberg）在一起。
皮卡德的演讲是火车残骸 - 更令人着迷，更重要的是，因为它发生在一群人面前的舞台上。
This article is only available to GBA Prime Members
Sign up for a free trial and get instant access to this article as well as GBA’s complete library of premium articles and construction details.
Start Free TrialAlready a member?Log in
28条评论
Interesting Take
While I was not there for this speech, I was at one of his 3 weeks ago at Green Building Focus & granted they where probably different - but the one I attended was an interesting look back at the past, the present & future. While he did talk allot about his projects, (aren't we all megalomaniacs to some extent) he covered many issues & his take on them. While maybe a little lean on things learned that one can take away from, there was some in there & it beats some other seminars I have been to.
Now as for the comment on slices & strangeness - oh how true for many of these organizations conferenceses. I mean I have even heard of this crazy group that meets in a crawl space for wine & discussions... (shoot, now I am never going to be invited to BSC)
http://blog.sls-construction.com/tag/gbfc-3rd One Down（第1天）让我对Picard的讲话进行了看法。建议其他人试图在线检查它的原因之一是您对他经历的速度的观点的回应。
Response to Sean
Sean,
Thanks for your link and for sharing your impressions of another Picard speech. I'm glad that you found his presentation enlightening.
Every speech is different, of course. There were at least three issues apparent at the speech I attended: a lack of coherence; an exaggerated sense of self-importance, and a certainty that technology will save us.
My version of green building differs from that of Picard, and apparently, from that of the USGBC.
One more response to Sean
Sean,
You're right that there is nothing wrong with representing a small slice of a movement. And it's quite possible then techno-skeptics like me represent a smaller slice of the movement than techno-boosters like Picard.
Martin, it seems the jist of
Martin, it seems the jist of your piece is "this guy is nuts", rather than telling us his ideas and why you don't agree with them. It may be that he didn't really have any ideas.
Response to David
David,
对不起，如果我的博客不清楚。
Although I wasn't able to type as fast as Picard was speaking, I was listening carefully. He never gave a coherent explanation of his proposed technology, but my impression was that he hopes to sell energy-monitoring equipment and related software designed for large commercial and multi-unit buildings.
个人ly, I don't think that such software is likely to result in enough reductions of carbon emissions to bring us "to the top of Mount Sustainability" (to use Picard's phrase) by 2020. I think that the vision he painted of a future where our carbon problems are all solved by that date is grandiose and unlikely.
Repulsion
Martin,
From reading your posts about all three days of the conference, it is clear that - despite ample opportunities - you did not stop by the Kool-Aid booth at the trade show.
I attended GreenBuild four years ago and was repulsed at the commercial excess on display, not only at the trade show where you would expect it, but during the keynotes, etc. I can only imagine it has grown since then. It is a shame that conferences such as Buildings XI (ASHRAE) and BEST (NIBS) do not get the same support and attendance. The substance is there and one doesn't feel abused by the commercial overlay while attending to learn about the latest in green building ideas, techniques and research.
Response to Mike Steffen
Mike,
So I guess I'm not the only one to notice a few commercial excesses the the GreenBuild conference. And you're right -- I evidently missed the Kool-Aid booth.
I've never had a chance to attend a BEST conference, but I've been to the "Buildings + Roman Numeral" conference three times. (The most recent one,Buildings XI, was held in December 2010.) It's a great conference -- quite different in tone from the one I just attended in Toronto.
Response to Martin
First, thanks for the response Martin. Hmmm, based off your response & Mike's - I am glad I didn’t make it to this conference, if that is the norm for them. I know you have written numerous blog site reviews, maybe you should consider getting a group tgether and doing a condensed version of different conferences & overall takes from them - 4 USGBC Kool Aid Drinkers, techno heavy but....
On the lines of software & other solutions, I find it interesting that hardly anyone brings up the point about how much energy is wasted measuring & monitoring all these different systems. For example, motion detectors and smart lighting system consume electricity 24x7, the monitoring programs that require a PC, laptop, or server(s) running 24x7, etc...
我知道什么时候进行安全保障一段时间，我们非常意识到我们在每个服务器上放置了哪些程序或监视 - 它与所使用的电源无关，但是所需的空间以及它会减慢服务器的速度。通过利用更多CPU和内存资源来响应。将其恢复到能源效率 - 使用这些3个资源的越多，不仅增加了所使用的功率，而且还会增加产生的热量，这可能非常重要。
Picard @绿色建筑重点
I attended the Green Building Focus Conference that Sean mentioned. I had never heard of Picard before, but sat through his presentation. The impression I got was that he likes to claim he was the first at.. well, everything. 1st LEED hotel, 1st to green the White House, 1st LEED home in CA, designed largest home in the world, etc., etc.
我想问一下他是否有任何首先做的事情。喜欢发明火或纸。
认真地说，他说的越多，就越能使我质疑他的信誉。作为演讲者，这不是您想要的观众外卖。
GreenBuild has had some very notable speakers in the past. The choice of Picard, along with the no-show of Bloomberg, makes me think this was an incredibly poor year. Whether that was attributable to show management or the location's lack of a draw, I wouldn't know.
我的猜测是，该节目在13个月内进入SF时会有所改善。
Second response to Sean
Sean,
You wrote, "Maybe you should consider getting a group together and doing a condensed version of different conferences & overall takes from them."
In fact, GBA has provided many conference reports in the past. Here's a selection:
Carl Seville's Jan. 2009 report from the International Builders' Show
马丁·霍拉迪（Martin Holladay）2009年1月国际建筑商节目中的一份报告
Another one of Martin Holladay's reports from the Jan. 2009 International Builders' Show
Still another report from the Jan. 2009 International Builders' Show
2009年1月的国际建筑商节目的另一份报告
Peter Yost's Feb. 2009 report on the Affordable Comfort conference
Daniel Morrison's report from the March 2009 NESEA conference
Carl Seville's report from the April 2009 Affordable Comfort conference
Richard Defendorf's announcement of the May 2009 National Green Building Conference
Richard Defendorf's announcement of the Sept. 2009 Healthy Buildings International Conference
Carl Seville's Nov. 2009 report from the GreenBuild conference
Alex Wilson's Nov. 2009 report from the GreenBuild conference
Carl Seville's Jan. 2010 report from the International Builders' Show
理查德·防御者（Richard DeffeDorf）2010年1月的国际建筑商会报告
Carl Seville's April 2010 report from the Affordable Comfort conference
Rob Wotzak's announcement of the May 2010 National Green Building Conference
卡尔塞维利亚国家G。2010年5月的报告reen Building Conference
Richard Defendorf's Nov. 2010 announcement of the Colorado Energy Star Summit
Carl Seville's Nov. 2010 report from the GreenBuild conference
Carl Seville's Jan. 2011 report from the International Builders' Show
Martin Holladay's report from the March 2011 NESEA conference
马丁·霍拉迪（Martin Holladay）在2011年3月被动房屋西北会议上的报告
卡尔·塞维尔（Carl Seville
卡尔·塞维利亚（Carl Seville）2011年4月在ACI国家家庭表演会议上报告
Good recap
Thanks for the articles about this year's conference, Martin. I didn't make it this year, and it was nice to get another cynic's perspective on it. It sounds like the rampant commercialism reached new heights this year, in previous years they managed to keep it somewhat in check at least during the keynotes. Somehow you missed my recap of the 2010 conference in your list - (//m.etiketa4.com/blogs/dept/green-building-curmudgeon/greenbuild-expo-2010-recap). While I found the closing plenary cogent and interesting, it did have a very high Kool-Aid quotient in it. At one point, I felt like I was in church or synagogue with people hushing me from several directions when I was trying to talk to some friends.
Response to my fellow cynic and Kool-Aid avoider
Carl,
Sorry to have neglected your reports from the 2009 and 2010 GreenBuild conferences. I've corrected the omissions; links to both reports are now included in my earlier comment.
I know I come off as a cynic -- but I'm actually an optimist and an enthusiastic proponent of green building. But I'm turned off when I see signs that a movement is being corrupted by large sums of money -- and that certainly appears to be the case with the USGBC.
large sums of money
Don't have to stop with the vendors...
Green Building's Tristan Roberts claimed there were ~150,000 LEED APs that had passed the exam as of 2010. With exam costs running from $300 (members) to $450 - and none of this includes training materials. this means the USGBC/GBCI has garnered at least $45M (minus testing center fees) from successful examinations. Taking into account the pass/fail rate of ~30-34% and that number approaches $135M.
但是有一天他们mightrequire actual energy efficiency... You know, since it's in their acronym.
对迈克·埃利亚森的回应
Mike,
Here's some more math: There were 23,000 people at the Toronto conference. If each conference-goer paid $700 for their ticket, the conference grossed $16 million from those fees. But of course they collected more, since every business who wanted a booth on the trade-show floor had to pay for the booth.
First last and in between...
首先是最后一个和之间...金钱规则大多数，我们大多数人都在做，思考和...饮食，当然还有...建造。
很高兴，当我可以在YouTube上看到他在YouTube上的行动时，我没有下跌700美元来看Picard。
Response to Martin, others
Keep one thing in mind: As with all shows, the total number (in this case 23k) includes everyone.
Exhibitors pay $X / sq. ft. to exhibit, but are also given a certain allotment of badges to use for their employees/customers/etc. The employees aren't paying $700 on top of the money paid for the exhibit space, unless they also want to attend the sessions.
Admittedly, some do attend various educational and non-educational events. But I would wager that >51% don't.
我必须做一些挖掘,但我知道我可以鳍d some pretty solid numbers for USGBC's revenues.
Finally, I'll throw my assessment of the 2011 IBS into the list of show reviews:
http://www.greenbuildercoalition.org/news/torch-02-2011#voices
赃物？
How were the tote bags?
对丹的回应
Dan,
The tote bags were smaller than average, which was a good thing. The biggest problem with the swag was the cheap ball-point pen and pad of notepaper included in each bag. Multiplied by 23,000, they represented a lot of waste that ended up in the landfill.
对Mike Collignon的回应
Mike,
Thanks for sharing those numbers.
2009 Greenbuild/USGBC revenues
Here are some facts about the 2009 Greenbuild in Phoenix:
收入s - $9,385,832
花费- $8,441,286
利润 - $ 944,546
For all USGBC events (and the registration fees that go with those), the total revenue was $10,844,791. Believe it or not, that's less than the amount USGBC collected for member dues, LEED certifications or GBCI management fees. And, if you combine their publication sales & royalty fees, then that would also rank higher than the event revenues.
Perhaps the most telling financial items of all:
1. From 2008 to 2009, total USGBC revenues went up $20.5 million. Expenses went up $15.1 million.
2. In 2008, USGBC profited >$8.5 million. In 2009, they profited >$14 million.
USGBC Revenues
USGBC sure does stockpile a lot of cash for a non-profit:http://communicate.usgbc.org/2008/
Go to finances section. CEO makes over $500k / year.
Change in unrestricted net assets 2007 %
收入
会费9082716美元的20%
Education $ 13,617,175 29%
Registration & Certification $ 11,195,462 24%
会议和会议$ 8,435,561 18％
Grants & Sponsorship $ 2,126,120 5%
投资收入$ 978,264 2％
Other $ 1,006,396 2%
In-Kind contribution $ 0
Total revenue $ 46,441,694
花费
Program services
注册和认证$ 8,247,751 23％
Education $ 5,645,799 16%
会议$ 6,615,801 18％
Total program services $ 20,509,351
Supporting services
General and administrative $ 9,988,312 28%
Fund Development $ 225,421 1%
Public Advocacy $ 100,000 <1%
Membership development $ 5,049,306 14%
Total supporting services $ 15,363,039
Total Expenses $ 35,833,449
Change in unrestricted net assets $ 10,569,304
Net assets, beginning of year $ 10,330,968
Net assets, end of year $ 20,900,272
Response to Jesse Thompson
Jesse,
Rick Fedrizzi是您所谈论的首席执行官 - 显然是在促进LEED认证的50万美元以上赚取超过500,000美元的人。
与...相比
The CEO of NAHB, who earned almost 3 times that, in 2009. That, despite taking a net operating loss of over $11.8 million.
实际上，2009年USGBC的收入比NAHB多1200万美元，尽管其中许多差异可以归因于NAHB的投资收入巨大损失。（似乎他们可能需要更好的财务规划师。）
One last thing: In comparing their two shows, IBS brought in over $37.8 million in revenues. Combined with other shows & conferences, NAHB's 2009 total event revenue topped $41.5 million.
Wow!
我认为你的最后一行说,马丁:“我的impression is that the USGBC represents a small slice of the green building movement — and a rather strange one."
Thanks for sharing
马丁，感谢上帝的批判性聆听和观察技巧 - 并以涂层为单位描述了它。
It has been very disappointing to follow the USGBC direction and development over the past few years, and I am glad that more and more people are seeing through the smoke screen.
希望大量的建设性批评能够吸引USGBC的注意力，并将它们重新带回到绿色建筑社区的真实和公正的资产中。
Response to Marcus
马库斯，
非常感谢您的反馈。我很感激。
不幸的是，我并没有真正分享您的乐观信念，即USGBC有可能“重回正轨”。我最近遇到了一个七岁的绿色报告2004年这指出：“例如，一些行业专业人员认为，组织[USGBC]变得过于商业化。他们声称个人产品制造商太明显了，而Greenbuild已成为一个大型广告。”
This trend has certainly not slowed or reversed in the seven years since those words were written.
我同意，马丁
Without making a blatant pitch for my organization, I'll just say one has to look no further than their dues structure to see that it's currently impossible for them to get "back on track".
绵羊服装中的企业官僚机构！
Martin thanks for the "reality check". It does not surprise me that the USGBC or NAHB is all about the money because we live in a corporately controlled capitalistic society. From the initial fees to become credentialed, through the continuing credential maintenance fees it is a constant contribution to their black hole of profit. it is interesting that they label themselves as a non-profit and glean the benefits of a non-profit, yet they post profits that rival some of our major corporations. They do not operate from a philosophy of benevolence or sheer generosity as they promote the ethics and practices of Green Building. That would mean that they would consider offering there certification benefits and personal career accreditation to all, for the ideal of promoting the movement and ultimately the healing of our sick planet. The stark reality is that they are nothing more than a corporate bureaucracy that seeks and obviously successfully obtains massive profits. The only thing that separates them from the other corporations including those that pollute for profit is the product that they sell. Many of us who have participated now see through the "smoke and mirrors" that they operate under yet we need the credentials. I do not see that this will change in the future as they have now figured out how to get applicants to contribute twice to become an AP with specialty. What once was a one step process is now a two step dance. I do not begrudge them profit to operate, but the "fat cat" salary motive to pay "do nothing" insulated bureaucrats, coupled with squeezing every last dollar out of people does not fit the ethics of the cause. It is a choice to achieve accreditation through the USGBC and NAHB, and I chose to participate. On the other hand I also chose not to be a member of either organization. My comments may sound like a complaint to some, but in reality it is only an acceptance of the obvious. As the saying goes "you have to pay to play". In contrast though the playing field needs to be leveled. EJ Palma, LEED Associate, CGP, SUNBUILDERS, Branford CT, USA
Log in or become a member to post a comment.
Sign up Log in