Montreal — Here at the Society for College and University Planning’s annual conference, designers from Moseley Architects took a close (and, some might argue, courageous) look at the performance of some of the buildings they had designed for Virginia universities under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program. The buildings were, for the most part, successes — with some interesting caveats.

The Moseley designers, Bryna Dunn and George Nasis, presented data on buildings at the College of William and Mary, Longwood University, Old Dominion University, and the University of Mary Washington. The building at Longwood was the highest-rated structure of the bunch, having attained LEED gold. In each case, Ms. Dunn and Mr. Nasis examined how the buildings had performed compared with the LEED projections for their performance, performance standards under the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, and, if the project was a renovation, its pre-renovation performance.

In most cases, the new or renovated buildings met or outperformed the predictions and standards, the designers said, and any extra money laid out for LEED design will pay for itself within a few years. But there were interesting anomalies. For example, the building for the University of Mary Washington’s graduate college performed worse than the predictions and the standards from April to September. Why? The designers had specified a smaller chiller, but a larger one was installed. The university plans to replace the chiller, Ms. Dunn said.

Ms. Dunn also compared the energy use of the LEED buildings against the average building’s performance on each campus. But here, too, was a curious finding. Except in the case of Old Dominion, the LEED buildings performed at about the same level as the campus average — or worse. That was because most other buildings on the campuses had not been renovated, a step that would add electrical plugs, lighting, and air conditioning — a major energy hog. One paradox of campus renovation, well known among facilities managers, is that a renovated building will often suck more energy, even if it features energy-efficient technology.

But, Ms. Dunn said, such gauges were measuring only a building’s energy performance, not its water conservation, occupant satisfaction, or marketing value. Surveys of occupants have found that they were generally happy with the appearance and atmosphere of the building. But again, there was one compelling anomaly: Thermal comfort always rated poorly compared with other categories.

Ms. Dunn said that was probably because half of the people are too cold most of the time, and half are too hot.