In the article “Advancing Sustainable Infrastructure with Envision”, Nelson (2015) shares about the Envision rating system. It is the new reference model adopted worldwide for the best practices for all types of infrastructure, ascertaining their sustainable achievement. She explains that the rating system consists of 60 credits, and awards will be presented in 4 ranks based on the credits achieved. The author reveals that currently there are six projects that have received the award after completing third-party verification. She also emphasises the usefulness of Envision as it can be used in any point in the project life cycle by providing guidance in the decision-making process. I have to agree with the author on the usefulness of Envision because it is the only system that is designed for a vast array of non-building infrastructure projects. Envision expands the concept of sustainability from buildings to non-building infrastructure.

Envision was introduced in 2012, created by the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI). The idea behind Envision is related to LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design), a green building certification program that certifies a building with outstanding sustainable achievements. As quoted by Nelson, Deborah Weintraub, an interim city engineer, “Envision expands our over a decade long use of green rating systems for buildings to civil engineering projects.” Non-habitable structures, such as bridges, treatment plants and other types of civil infrastructure are not what LEED was designed for. (Xlcatlin.com, 2014) Therefore, with the need to be designed with sustainability in mind, Envision was launched.

Envision is a highly flexible system. It covers a wide range of infrastructure project types. (Rowe, 2015) Clark (2014) interviewed the president and CEO of the ISI, Bertera. Bertera mentions that Envision should be thought of as another LEED system. Envision is an assessment tool designed and structured just for non-building infrastructure projects, basically covering what LEED is unable to rate for. Mikel Wilkins, a Dallas-based civil engineer who was mentioned in Clark’s article, used Envision on a pipeline project in 2009. Considering that Envision integrates the social, environmental and economic aspects (Vock, 2015), Wilkins commented that through the rating system a better plan was produced. By doing so, the cost throughout the project lifecycle was measured using the system as well. He ended by praising Envision as a system that works regardless of the scale of the projects. This verifies Envision as a well-rounded system that is similar to LEED, providing the non-building infrastructure community with a complete palette to make themselves sustainable.

In Clark’s article, Wilkins also talked about how the credits in the system helped to mark out more targets after he and his partner opted for Envision. With that, they managed to have more ideas to implement green infrastructure. As Nelson emphasises in the article, Envision guides the decision makers. It allows them to see best practices in civil engineering from another perspective. As a result, it will force them to think out of the box therefore discovering new opportunities to make a project more sustainable. In this way, sustainability can also be achieved in different non-building infrastructure projects by making use of Envision.

However, it cannot be assumed that this is the perfect system for non-building infrastructure projects yet. Envision is the newest and only system for rating non-building infrastructure. As a result this would be the best system so far. The short term effects are satisfying. Then again, there has not been a chance to evaluate the long term effects. There may be underlying long term harm that is not shown at the moment. Nelson mentioned in her article that there had only been six projects evaluated to date. Based on these six projects, it is very hard to come to a conclusion for Envision. As the sample size is still small, I do not consider it to be reliable. More data will be needed in order to prove its reliability. Even so, there is no doubt that this is a promising system. Even though the sample size is small, it is still a good start. The six projects managed to complete third-party verifications and received awards. I think that it has the potential to develop more in the future.

In conclusion, Envision is undeniably a helpful tool as it targets sustainable non-building infrastructure. By integrating the social, environmental and economic aspects into the rating system, it oversees these areas where other rating systems do not. The concept of Envision is akin to LEED. However, both rating systems are on different tracks even though they are leading towards the same goal. I believe with Envision, LEED and the other rating systems, more improvements can be made to the buildings and infrastructures. It would help to sculpt a more sustainable future.

References

Clark, A. (2014, June 26). LEED for roads: Greener infrastructure gains momentum. GreenBiz. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/06/26/envision-greener-infrastructure-momentum

Nelson, D. (2015, June). Advancing sustainable infrastructure with Envision | civil + structural ENGINEER. Retrieved September 19, 2015, from http://cenews.com/article/10098/advancing-sustainable-infrastructure-with-envision

Rowe, J. (2015, July 23). How to Envision Green Infrastructure’s Triple Bottom Line. Retrieved September 21, 2015, from http://sustainability.autodesk.com/blog/triple-bottom-line-for-green-infrastructure/

Vock, D. (2015, September 16). ‘Envision’ System Helps Cities Build Sustainability. government technology. Retrieved 21 October 2015, from http://www.govtech.com/fs/Envision-System-Helps-Cities-Build-Sustainably.html