CESC 612 :Green Buildings
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
Irish Playwright and Nobel Laureate
Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.
Just do what must be done. This may not be happiness, but it is greatness.
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.
LEED, BREEAM, ISI Envision
Green Rating Systems:
Worldwide there are hundreds of building evaluation tools.
Green rating systems differ in that they examine the “expected/measured ” performance of whole buildings.
Among these systems, LEED (Week 4) and BREEAM are the most notable worldwide.
The need to “quantify” sustainable design:
The construction industry is becoming increasingly aware of the need for concern about the negative impact that buildings have on our environment.
The broad question (1987-1999) was: “What is sustainable design?”
The more refined question (2000 – present ) is: “How green is it?”
When working to both create and market sustainable design, it is increasingly important to be able to make definitive assessments so that projects may be quantified, compared and enhanced for future iterations.
Which “shade” of green is the right one?
NAHB
LEED
Green Globes
CASBEE
BREEAM
Green Star
LEED India
Green Pyramid
Estidama
Buildings and Builders Evolve:
Part of our goal is to ensure that evolution is a positive one for humanity and the environment.
A Hunger Games Future???
Capital City, The Districts, or something else???
The “Assessment Tools”:
Different tools have been developed to assist with the ability to “quantify” and “compare” the greenness of buildings:
Assessment tools that address the whole building:
LEED: Assessment tool developed by the USGBC (Week 4)
BREEAM: Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method from British Research Establishment in the UK
Positioning of LEED in the Market:
Test
TestENERGY SAVINGS 30%
CARBON SAVINGS 35%
WATER USE SAVINGS 30-50%
WASTE COST SAVINGS 50-90%
LEED Assessment Criteria:
Land Use and Transportation (LT)
Community Connectivity, High Priority sites, transport links, bikes and green vehicles
Sustainable Sites (SS)
Open spaces, rain water management light pollution reduction
Water Efficiency (WE)
Water use reduction, water efficient landscaping, innovative waste water technologies,
Energy and Atmosphere (EA)
Optimize energy performance, Refrigerant management, Renewable
design, Green power
Materials and Resources (MR)
Recyclables, Building re-use, construction waste management, rapidly renewable materials, certified wood
Indoor Air Quality (IEQ)
Increased ventilation, low emitting materials, Chemical and pollutant
source control, Thermal comfort, controllability of systems
Innovation in Design (ID)
Significant measurable environmental performance strategies
Regional Priority (RP)
Innovation
BREEAM:
Founded by the Building Research Establishment (BRE in the UK) in 1988 and launched in 1990.
In 2016:
BREEAM Overview:
Uses a similar straightforward scoring system that is transparent, flexible, easy to understand and supported by evidence-based science and research.
Has a positive influence on the design, construction, and management of buildings, defines and maintains a robust technical standard with rigorous quality assurance and certification.
BREEAM Rating
% SCORE
Unclassified
<30
Pass
≥30
Good
≥45
Very Good
≥55
Excellent
≥70
Outstanding
≥85
BREEAM Assessment Criteria:
Energy
Operational energy and carbon dioxide
Health and Wellbeing
Indoor and external issues (noise, light, air, quality)
Land Use & Ecology
LEED???
LEED???Type of site and building footprint, ecological value, conservation and enhancement of the site
Materials
Embodied impacts of building materials including life cycle impacts like embodied CO2
Waste
Construction resource efficiency and operational waste management and minimisation
Water
Consumption and efficiency
Management
Management policy, commissioning, site management and procurement
Pollution
Refrigerant Management, leak detection, flood risk, light pollution
Transport
Transport related CO2 and location related factors
The total number of points or credits gained in each section is multiplied by an environmental weighting factor which takes into account the relative importance of each section. Section scores are then added together to produce a single overall score.
BREEAM Scope / Standards:
BREEAM New Construction is the BREEAM standard against which the sustainability of new, non-residential buildings in the UK is assessed. Developers and their project teams use the scheme at key stages in the design and procurement process to measure, evaluate, improve and reflect the performance of their buildings.
BREEAM International New Construction is the BREEAM standard for assessing the sustainability of new residential and non-residential buildings in countries around the world, except for the UK and other countries with a national BREEAM scheme. This scheme makes use of assessment criteria that take account of the circumstances, priorities, codes and standards of the country or region in which the development is located.
BREEAM In-Use is a scheme to help building managers reduce the running costs
and improve the environmental performance of existing buildings. It has three parts
– Parts 1 (building asset) and 2 (building management) are relevant to all non- domestic, commercial, industrial, retail and institutional buildings. Part 3 (occupier management) of the BREEAM In-Use certification scheme is currently restricted to offices.
BREEAM Scope / Standards:
BREEAM Refurbishment provides a design and assessment method for sustainable housing refurbishment projects, helping to cost effectively improve the sustainability and environmental performance of existing dwellings in a robust way.
BREEAM Communities focuses on the master planning of whole communities. It is aimed at helping construction industry professionals to design places that people want to live and work in, are good for the environment and are economically successful.
Type of buildings that can be assessed using the BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 scheme version
The non-d omestic building types which can be affected and rated using th s scheme version are outlined Table – 2. Additional guidance for so me of the building types listed is also provided in the appendices (refer to the footnotes).
Table – 2 :List of non-do mestic building types covered under BREEAM UK New Construction 2014
Prisons
GP sum get Yes
Health refit es an‹J clinic
High security prison Standar d secut ed prison
offen‹ler instLutiolJ and juvenile ords Loca iso
Holding re Jti
Mw courts Cross auld crimin Couf ty cc ut ts
Commercial
Public(non-housing)
Indu tria
Retail
Education 1
Healthcare
General office buildings
Offices with research and development areas (i.e category 1 labs only)
ndustrial unit — warehouse storage/distribution ndustrial unit — process/manufacturing/vehicle servicing
Shop/shopping centre
Retai! pa k/warehouse
‘Over the counter’ service provider e.p. nancial, estate and employment agencies and betting offices Showroom
Restaurant, café and drinkng establishment
Hot food takeaway
Pre-school
Schools and sixth form colleges Further education/vocational colleg ed Higher education institutions
Teaching/specialist ho spitals General acute hospitals
Community and mental health ho spita
Multi res delJt accomlcodatioi /Suoported li ng fac›Iity2
Carter
Resi‹lential
rJstk utions (Ion‹ terns stay)
Resiclential
i Jstk utions (show terns stay)
Assemb y anal su
Carter
Ma‹ isti ates’ courts Civil ustice renti
kSN1il CO uFtS
*outlJ courts ComlJinerl courts
Residential care home Sheltered acrommo‹lation
Residential co Ie‹ e/srIJooI (hal s of resiclence)
Loral authority ser.ure res delJt al arconlmodatio illtary barrack
Hotel, hostel, boardil p auld guest house Secure training rent›
Residential training centre
Algale y,iuseu+t
Day centre, Isa I/civi conJnJulJltycentre Place of worship
Theatre/musio’concert hall FxlJibition/conference hall
Indoor or outdoor sports, fitness and i ecreationrelJt e (Wltñ/WItñOLIt DOOI)
Transpo thub(coach/busstotonondi›ovegroundroi station)
Research auld deve opnJelJt (categni y 2 or 3 laboratories – non-hipIJer eclucat›on)
Cr4che
Not quite the same but…
Kiefer and Rachel Sutherland Fraternal Twins
LEED Categories
Points
1
Location and Transportation
16 pts
(14.5%)
2
Sustainable Sites
10 pts. (9%)
3
Water Efficiency
10 pts. (9%)
4
Energy and Atmosphere
33 pts. (30%)
5
Materials and Resources
13 pts. (12%)
6
Indoor Environmental Quality
16 pts.
(14.5%)
7
Innovation and Design Process
6 pts. (5%)
8
Regional Priority
4 pts. (4%)
*
Integrative Process
1 pt.
Total Possible Points
110 pts.
(100%)
BREEAM’s Relative Strengths
Minimum Standards
BREEAM’s minimum standards, pertaining to specific credits or specific criteria for credits, are tiered based on the target rating, ranging from 4 to 26 credits.
Whereas LEED has a fixed number of prerequisites applicable across all rating classifications.
Energy Consumption / CO2 Reduction
BREEAM encourages reduction in CO2 to zero net emissions in relation to Building Regulations Part L 2010 to achieve maximum points.
LEED targets energy reduction, instead of CO2.
Energy Sub-Metering
BREEAM has a compulsory minimum standard of sub-metering substantial energy uses for Very Good, Excellent and Outstanding ratings. LEED has no energy sub-metering prerequisite.
BREEAM’s Relative Strengths
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
There are no LEED credits for life-cycle costing, therefore it may not
encourage the most environmentally efficient allocation of capital.
Materials
In relation to sustainable materials and life-cycle impacts, BRE has produced the Green Book Live and the Green Guide to Specification which provide useful information for designers, whereas under LEED, designers must rely on a multiplicity of manufacturers’ and/or third parties’ product evaluations/certifications or relatively simplified checklists.
Transport
BREEAM’s travel plan credit is more rigorous in relation to actual accessibility of public transport compared to LEED which does not take account of the routes, hours of service and frequency of service.
LEED’s Relative Strengths
Transparency
LEED’s approach is more consensus-based and transparent compared to BREEAM’s. For example the technical criteria proposed by the various LEED committees are publicly reviewed for approval by USGBC’s c. 15,000 member companies and organizations.
Resources
LEED provides more extensive publicly accessible resources, research and case studies than BREEAM.
BREEAM does not publish data on numbers of buildings certified by type and rating achieved.
Post-Occupancy Evaluation
Post-occupancy evaluation (POE) provides the scheme operators with valuable feedback on the effectiveness of particular credits in terms of their take-up and actual environmental impact, which it can use to disseminate best practice and inform future development of the assessment method
LEED is more rigorous in this regard. Under the compulsory Minimum Program Requirements, all certified projects must commit to sharing with USGBC/GBCI all available actual energy and water usage data for the whole project for a period of at least five years from occupancy.
LEED’s Relative Strengths
Heat Island Effect
LEED has credits for reducing the heat island effect (for example through shading by trees and specifying high solar reflectance materials). BREEAM does not address this, and although it offers credits for green roofs, it is for the purposes of mitigating ecological impact and reducing surface water run- off.
Thermal Comfort
Although both methods address thermal comfort through design, only LEED offers an additional credit for verification – by way of a survey of occupiers between 6 to 18 months of occupancy, and a corrective action plan in the event that more than 20% are dissatisfied with thermal comfort.
Indoor Air Quality
LEED’s indoor air quality credit requirements are more sophisticated than BREEAM’s, driven by the USA’s climate and greater reliance on mechanically ventilated and air conditioned buildings. Furthermore, LEED addresses indoor air quality (IAQ) and mold prevention post-construction. BREEAM has no such requirements.
LEED vs. BREEAM:
When it comes to choosing between the two, the simple truth is there are positives and negatives to both systems. LEED is the clear worldwide leader everywhere except the UK, and that fact alone drastically increases that certification’s visibility. LEED is even gaining ground in Britain. But BREEAM has it’s upsides too, such as more structure to the design process, if less freedom, and less “hassle” getting approval.
Above all it is critical to remember both LEED and BREEAM (and all other green rating sytems) are measurement tools and not crutches for poor designs—the design process should come first and indicate which system works best in each particular situation.
Beyond Occupied Structures:
What other types of structures are in our built environments?
The US: A crumbling nation?
Lot of room for improvement…
Every city / country.
Infrastructure and Sustainability:
It is no longer enough that our public works are operational, that they are constructed on time and within budget.
They too must be designed with sustainability in mind to reflect greater public attitudes and desires.
Why Infrastructure Sustainability is Critical:
We are already building the infrastructure that will be utilized in 2050 and 2100….
The realities of the world in which we live require sustainable approaches:
Diminishing Resources
Exponential Population Growth
Extreme Weather/ Climate Events
ISI and Envision:
Envision
was developed in joint collaboration between the Zofnass Program for Sustainable Infrastructure at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design and the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI). ~2012.
The Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure is a not-for-profit education and research organization founded by the American Public Works Association, the American Council of Engineering Companies and the American Society of Civil Engineers.
What is Envision?
Envision is a tool (similar to LEED and BREEAM) developed to help evaluate the sustainability of civil infrastructure.
This system includes:
A self assessment checklist
The Envision Rating Tool
A credential program for individuals (ENV SP)
A Project Evaluation and Verification Program
A Recognition Program for Sustainable Infrastructure
Advantages:
DRIVE TOWARD RESTORATIAVE PERFORMANCE
DRIVE TOWARD RESTORATIAVE PERFORMANCERestore
Technology Advancement Performance Goals
Sustain
Improve
Whole System Design Reduce, reuse, recycle Phased development
Adaptive Post-life
Conventional
Design Construct O&M Reuse
Disassembly
Project team Owner organization
Affected stakeholders Partner organizations
Regulatory bodies
EXTEND THE USEFULNESS OF THE PROJECT
Team Chartering
Understand/Integrate Community Needs Deliver as Part of Owner Organization Partner with Regulators
What makes Envision Unique?
One of the only programs that applies to non- occupied civil infrastructure.
It includes design, planning, construction and maintenance elements.
It is applicable at any point in an infrastructure project’s life cycle.
It is designed to keep pace with a changing concept of sustainability
Types of Infrastructure Evaluated:
ENERGY
Geothermal Hydroelectric Nuclear
Coal Natural Gas Oil/Refinery Wind
Solar Biomass
WATER
Potable water distribution
Capture/Storage Water Reuse Storm Water Management Flood Control
WASTE
Solid waste Recycling Hazardous
Waste Collection & Transfer
TRANSPORT
Airports Roads Highways Bikes Pedestrians Railways Public Transit Ports Waterways
LANDSCAPE
Public Realm Parks Ecosystem
Services
INFORMATION
Telecommunications Internet
Phones Satellites Data Centers Sensors
Envision Rating System:
60 Credits in 5 Categories
QUALITY OF LIFE
LEADERSHIP
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
NATURAL WORLD
CLIMATE AND RISK
Purpose, Community, Wellbeing Collaboration, Management, Planning Materials, Energy, Water
Siting, Land and Water, Biodiversity Emission, Resilience
QUALITY
OF LIFE
DOWS THE I’FOJECT HELP THE SURROLtN9ING
C(Josh.h i en ‘‹’/ AND r›EVELOP?
PURPOSE
QL1.1 Improve Community Quality of Life
QL1.2 Stimulate Sustainable Growth and Development QL1.3 Develop Local Skills and Capabilities
WELLBEING
QL2.1 Enhance Public Health and Safety QL2.2 Minimize Noise and Vibration QL2.3 Minimize Light Pollution
QL2.4 Improve Community Mobility and Access QL2.5 Encourage Alternative Modes of Transportation QL2.6 Improve Accessibility, Safety & Wayfinding
COMMUNITY
QL3.1 Preserve Historic and Cultural Resources QL3.2 Preserve Views and Local Character QL3.3 Enhance Public Space
QL0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements
EVAtBAfiON CSfTEPIA AND tlMENTAT DN
2. fi/TinuIes of meetings, /e/tezs and memoranda with key slai:eho1deis, canmunij leaoeis and deñsion-méeis for obtaining inoul end Agreement rega/d/rg be /mpac/ assessmentsndp/anned ations
C. +o what edenl has the affected communities been me.aningfrffy engaged in
& P gf0j6C I d9Sl g ft f0CeSS*
I Reports and dociJineniea Test/h otrneetngs desi’g» charrettes and aher activities conduc led k’ir epresenlatives otst!ecied communities
2. £-y/denee oI pto)ecl proeesses for collecting, evalialing and incoiooTaliñg
commuri/y inpu/ in/a file projec/ designs. Oemons/ra/ior a/ he
commlini} needs, plms.
‘ Auknawledgmerls and endorsements by tfie e0n)munij tial ite design
D. Has lie project ownef and lie projeci team designed the project in a way
that improves existing corrmuni conditions and rehabilitates infrastructure
l. Plans, designs /ree/i/ig minutes wilh co tmunily otal:eñoIdeis end der/sin-ma/re/s demOrs/a/ing w LnderstMd/ng o/ corrmr’i condfions and assets, md siJbstar t ve et!ortfi la Tetiabi!ilate.
SOU8CN
W A Wallace, Project SLslainabilily Management Guidelines JnpuDlished
Adapted from The Sustainad’le Sites Initiative: Guidelines and Performance Benchmarks 2009, ifedit 6.1: Promote eqn itabIe site aeveloprrent, Creoit
kELATfiD CxyDfTS
EU.Z Stimulaie Sushinaole Graph and De/elopmeJt
O TO11 ISI, inc. artd Zofnaaa Program for Sustainable Inhastructure 23
Levels of Performance / Achievement:
QL1.1 IMPROVE COMMUNITY QUALITY OF LIFE
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Improved Enhanced Superior Conserving Restorative
No Negative Impact
Online Guidance Materials:
DOES THE PROJECT PRESERVE AND ENHANCE LOCAL RESOURCES?
DOES THE PROJECT HELP THE SURROUh DING COMMUNITY GROW AND DEVELOP?
gUALlTY
OF LIFE
DOES THE PROJECT MAKE A M N1MAL
NEGATIVE Ik1FAC T ON THE SURROUNDING
CUMMIJNIT Y?
ARE THERE HEALTH RISKS FOR EMPLOYEES Oft NEARBY nEs DENTS?
IS THE PROJEC T LOCATED NEAR PURLIC
TRANSPORTATION *
APE LOCAL LIES DENTS EMPLOYED?
L@DERSflIP
DOES THE PROJECT PURSUE SYNERGIES WITH BOTH PRODUCTS AND OTHER SYSTEMS?
DOES THE PROJECT PLAN FOR LONG- TERM MONITOR NG AND MAINTENANCE?
HOW LONG IS THE USEFUL L FE OF THE
SYSTEM?
ARE ALL STAKEHOLDERS ADEQUATELY
INVOLVED?
IS THERE A SUSTAINBILITY MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM IN PLACE?
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
EAGLE TH E PPE lEST MINIMIZ E EHF J?E OF FOSSIL-F UEL BASED E NERVY?
DOES THE PROJECT UTIL1 ZE LOCAL
MATERIALS?
HOW 15 WASTE FROM THE PROJECT HASILEU?
DOES THE PROJECT USE SUSTAINABLE MATERl/tLS, SUCH AS RECYCLED, REUSED, OR CERTIFIED MATERIALS?
REFS TH F PROJ FCT SUNNI CFR THF L I FF SYSI F CF- THE MA LL HIALS U?EfJ, ANU I’LAN FUS HE IR ENIN U F LIF E *
DOES THE PROJE CT PROTECT FRESHWATER AVAILABILITY BY MINIMIZING ITS POTABLE WATER
USE?
NATUtléL
WORLD
DOES THE PROJECT AVOID DEVELOPMENT ON LAND
THAT iS 8ETTER USED FOR HABITATS, RECREATION, OR
THE PRODUCTION OF FOOD?
DOES THE PROJECT AVO BUILDING ON SENSITIVE GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES?
HOW ARE INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGED?
UUESTHE PROJECT PHLSERVE LOCAL HABITATS AND BIODIVERSITY?
DOES THE PROJECT MINIMIZE DISRUPTION TO SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS ?
HOW ODES THE PROJECT MANAGE SOILS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION?
UUES T’H E PRUJEC T MANAGE POLLU J IUN IN STORMWATER AND GROUNDWATERS
£LlHATfi
ANbRlSK
DOES THE PROJECT MINIMIZE GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSIONS?
DOES THE PROJECT REDUCE AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS?
DOES THE PROJECT MANAGE HEAT ISLANDS?
DOESTHEPROJECTPREPAREFOR
SHtRT-TERVHAZARnSl
DOES THE PROJECT PREPARE ron
LONG-TERM AOAPTABILIT Y?
Rating Categories:
Fee Schedule:
Project Size (M)
Non-Member Price
ISI Member Price
Up to $2M
$3,000
$2,400
$2-5M
$8,500
$7,000
$5-25M
$17,000
$14,000
$25-100M
$25,000
$21,000
$100-250M
$33,000
$28,000
Over $250M
Contact ISI for large or multi-phase projects
Project Size (M)
Non-Member Price
ISI Member Price
Up to $2M
$3,000
$2,400
$2-5M
$8,500
$7,000
$5-25M
$17,000
$14,000
$25-100M
$25,000
$21,000
$100-250M
$33,000
$28,000
Over $250M
Contact ISI for large or multi-phase projects
Registration Fee: $1000
Verification Fees:
Appeal Fees: $500 a credit
On par with other Green Rating Systems
Envision Award Levels:
20%
30% 40% 50%
Percentage of Points Achieved
Example Project:
(July 19, 2016) – The Holland Energy Park project in Holland, Michigan recently received the ISI Envision
Platinum Award.
https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=sNeA5TnUGGM
Holland Energy Park:
The first Power Plant to receive this designation.
26 ac / 145 Peak MW Natural Gas Plant: $240 Million
50% Reduction in carbon emissions and almost complete PM control.
2x more efficient than present generation
Surrounded by community parks, trail systems, and actually restores wetland habitat!!!
More Information and Data:
Visit www.sustainableinfrastructure.org to find other ongoing infrastructure projects.
Get certified as an ENV SP
(Envision Sustainability Professional)
Lecture Review:
LEED and BREEAM are two of the most widely recognized environmental assessment methodologies used globally in the industry today. Each has strengths and weaknesses determined by their philosophies and business models.
Green building is not a simple fusion of green design elements, techniques, and materials. Not a Christmas Catalog!
Decisions must be explored to achieve a holistic solution to the concept of sustainable development within the project life cycle.
Lecture Review:
Other Rating Systems, like Envision, are now being created to investigate how sustainable development and green building can be adapted for all construction projects, not just buildings.
All issues related and important to the construction and functionality of our future sustainable smart cities.
The post CESC 612 :Green Buildings George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) Irish Playwright and Nobel appeared first on PapersSpot.
