1.Third International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries (ICCIDC–III) “Advancing Civil, Architectural and Construction Engineering & Management”July 4-6, 2012, Bangkok, Thailand

(Paper 87, ID 118)Comparative Study of Rating Systems for Green Building in Developing and

Developed Countries

Vyas Gayatri Sachin(Indian Institute of Delhi, India, gayatri_vyas1@yahoo.com)

Jha K. N.(Indian Institute of Delhi, India, knjha@civil.iitd.ac.in)

AbstractConstruction sector is one of the largest end users of environmental resources and one of the largest polluters of manmade and natural environments around the globe. Green buildings have experienced rapid growth in the past several years. Rating systems have been developed to measure the sustainability level of green buildings. The purpose of rating systems is to certify the different aspects of sustainable development during the planning and construction stages and to incorporate best-practice experience for achieving higher certification level. The study reported in this paper is part of a broader study where the objectives are: (1) to compare different rating systems used in developing and developed countries, (2) to identify the roles and limitations of current environmental building assessment methods in ascertaining building sustainability in developing countries, and (3) to compute sustainability and composite index using AHP by utilizing the framework suggested by Ding (2007). Only the first objective is addressed and briefly reported in this paper. In the context of India it is found that the rating systems do not consider economic and climatic conditions. This study may be useful to all the stakeholders involved in the evaluation of green building.

KeywordsGreen building, rating system, sustainable development

1. Introduction

India is the seventh largest country in the world. It has a leading economy and it is home to over one billion people living in various climatic zones. Construction plays a very important role in the country’s economy contributing 8.1 percent of the GDP. Commercial and residential sectors are major markets for the construction industry. These sectors consume a lot of energy throughout the life cycle of buildings, thus becoming a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. As a first step towards green development, Government of India mandated several corporate organisations and institutions to use green practices in their new construction.The green building is a building that has high-efficiency in the use and consumption of natural resources, water, energy, and materials that are used throughout building’s life- cycle i.e. design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and demolition. Green building practices can substantially reduce negative environmental impacts. Green building reduces operating costs, enhances building marketability, and helps in increasing workers’ productivity and health benefits. The environmental benefits include

conservation of natural resources, waste reduction, improvement of air and water quality, and protection of the ecosystem.Green building rating systems are designed to assess and evaluate the performance of buildings from planning, designing, constructing, and operations. Rating system guidelines and standards can be categorized into two groups: those which concentrate on specific building components or areas, and those which identify the buildings as a whole evaluation entity. As the concentrations of different rating systems vary, the same building can be green credited by one while failed to be credited by another at the same time. Sathyanarayanan (2009) reports that in terms of construction workers’ health and safety there is vey little difference between green and non-green projects. He exclaims further that it is not wise to say such buildings as sustainable in terms of workers’ health and safety. India has a varying range of geographic features from north to south and from east to west. Climatic conditions also vary in these regions thus it is felt prudent to consider climatic condition of the region in a green building rating system.In this study different green building rating systems have been compared and classified broadly under developed countries like the USA, UK, and developing countries like India and China. In the next section, an overview of green building rating systems is presented. These systems are subsequently compared on certain important issues such as life cycle assessment, renewability, forest certification, locally produced materials, health and safety of construction worker, project management, and climatic conditions. Subsequently, the results are discussed briefly and conclusions presented.

2. An overview of Green Building Rating Systems

2.1 BREEAM -2011 NC Rating System

The BREEAM (Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method) was first launched in 1990 and was the first green building performance assessment method. This method was developed in the UK. The BREEAM-2011 NC assesses the performance of the building. This rating system is divided in the following areas: management-12%, energy use-19%, health and well-being-15%, pollution-12%, transport-8%, land use and ecology-10%, materials-13%, waste - 7.5% water-6% and innovation where the percentage values represent the weights given to the respective parameter in the rating system.The BREEAM rating system is designed for courts, eco homes, education, industrial, healthcare, multi-residential, offices and new construction. Building life cycle stages covered by the BREEAM-2011 NC are design stage and post construction stage. A certificate of the assessment result is awarded to the individual building based on single rating scheme of outstanding, excellent, very good, good, pass, unclassified with percentage score 85, 70, 55, 45, 30, less than 30 respectively.The BREEAM rating system has made an impact worldwide, with Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, Netherland and other countries using the BREEAM methodology in developing their own environmental building assessment methods. The assessment methods and tools are all designed to help construction professionals understand and mitigate the environmental impacts of the developments they design and build. As BREEAM is predominately a design-stage assessment, it is important to incorporate details into the design as early as possible. By doing this, it will be easier to obtain a higher rating and a more cost-effective result. The methods and tools cover different scales of construction activity. The BREEAM development is useful at the master planning stage for large development sites like new settlements and communities.

2.2 LEED-2011 for India NC Rating System

The LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system has been developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) in 2000. The LEED India green building rating system was developed by IGBC (Indian Green Building Council) in October 2006. The LEED-2011 for India NC

rating system is categorized into sustainable sites-23.63%, water efficiency- 9.1%, energy and atmosphere-31.82%, materials and resources-12.73%, indoor environmental quality-13.63%, innovation in design -5.45% and regional priority -3.64 %. The LEED assessment tool is developed for new construction, existing buildings, commercial interiors, core and shell, homes, neighborhood development, school, and retail. This system awards rating of buildings as certified, silver, gold, and platinum. It uses simple checklist format to rate building performance.The rating system contains one element, indoor air quality (IAQ) management during construction that explicitly addresses construction worker safety and health. The intent of this element is to protect the construction workers and building occupants from potential air quality problems during the construction or renovation process. On successful implementation of an IAQ management plan, the project receives one LEED-NC credit, which is almost negligible and thus underscores the minimal consideration that the rating system gives to construction worker safety and health. It should be noted, however, that other elements within the rating system which are aimed to improve the safety and health of the end-user, such as the use of low-emitting materials, may benefit the safety and health of construction workers as well.

2.3 DGNB Rating System

The DGNB (GeSBC- German Sustainable Building Certificate) rating system was founded in June 2007 by German Federal Ministry of Transport, Construction and Urban Development. The certification was introduced to the real estate market in January 2009.The DGNB rating system is divided into process quality-22.5%, technical quality-22.5%, ecological quality-22.5%, economical quality-22.5%, and social quality- 10%. Purpose of the DGNB certificate is the application for buildings of any kind like offices, high-rises, detached residential homes, infra-structure buildings etc.Level of certification in the DGNB is bronze, silver and gold. The goal of rating system is to create living environments that are environmentally compatible, resource-friendly, and economical and that safeguards the health, comfort and performance of their users.

2.4 Green Star Rating System

Green Star rating system has been built on existing systems and tools in overseas markets, including the British BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) system and the North American LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) system, by establishing individual environmental measurement criteria relevant to the Australian marketplace and environmental context.Green Star certification identifies projects that have demonstrated a commitment to sustainability by designing, constructing, or owning a building to a determined standard. The rating standard is divided under management, indoor environment quality, energy, transport, water, material, land consumption and use, emission and innovation. Level of certification for this system is from 0 to 6 stars.Review of the above three major sustainable rating systems reveals an absence of construction worker safety and health consideration. This indicates that the building industry’s current perspective of sustainability is based on the principles of resource efficiency and the health and productivity of the building’s occupants.

2.5 GRIHA Rating System

GRIHA (Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment) is the Indian national green building rating system. It was developed by TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute) in 2007. This rating system is divided into: sustainable site planning-21.2%, health and well being- 9.6%, building planning and construction-7.7%, energy: end use-36.5%, energy: renewable- 7.7%, recycle, recharge and reuse of water-6.7%, waste management-4.8%, building operation and maintenance-1.9%, and innovation points-3.9%. The GRIHA rates the buildings from 50-60 one star, 61-70 two stars, 71-80 three stars, 81-90 four

stars, and above 90 % five stars. A building is assessed based on its predicted performance over its entire life cycle — from inception to operation. The stages of the life cycle that have been identified for evaluation are: pre-construction, building design, and construction, and building O & M (operation and maintenance). The issues that are addressed in these stages are as follows.

Pre-construction stage (intra- and inter-site issues) Building planning and construction stages (issues of resource conservation and reduction in

resource demand resource utilization efficiency, resource recovery and reuse, and provisions for occupant health and well-being). The prime resources that are considered in this section are land, water, energy, air, and green cover.

Building O&M stage (issues of O&M of building systems and processes, monitoring and recording of consumption, and occupant health and well-being, and also issues that affect the global and local environment).

2.6 GBAS- China

China’s green building assessment method was introduced in 2006 and is a credit-based system. This standard is applicable for evaluation of existing residential buildings, and three kinds of public buildings: office buildings, mall buildings, and hotel buildings. Green building evaluation indicators system consists of six indicators that are: land-saving and outdoor environment- 8 items, energy-saving and energy utilization- 6 items, water-saving and water resources utilization- 6 items, materials-saving and materials resources utilization-7 items, indoor environment quality-6 items and operation management-7 items. This system certifies buildings from 1 to 3 stars.

3 Comparison of different green building rating system

Table 1 shows the comparison between different green building rating system. The symbol indicates presence or consideration of the issue in question in the given rating system. The symbol X indicates absence. For example, life cycle assesement is present/considered in the four rating systems: BREEAM, LEED, DGNB, and GRIHA, while this is not considered in Green Star and GBAS rating systems. The results are discussed in the following section.

Table 1: Comparison of Green Building Rating System

Issue BREEAM Weight LEE

DWeig

htDGN

BWeig

htGreen Star

Weight GRIHA Weight GBAS Weight

Life Cycle Assessment(LCA)1

X X

Life Cycle cost 7% X 11% X 1% XRenewability2 4% 8% 8% 1% 14% 10%Certification of materials used3 0.5% 1% 0.5% 6% X X

Locally Produced Materials4 3% 2% 2% X 1% 5%

Health and safety of construction worker5

X X X X 2% X

Project Management6 12% 2% 4% 18% 4% 17.5%

1 LCA is a way of evaluating materials over their entire lives based on measurable environmental impacts; it eliminates subjectivity from the judgment process.

2 10-years rotation is arbitrary; preference should be given to all renewable materials with an emphasis on those shown to be superior through LCA.3 Points should be given to wood that comes from a sustainable source and is certified through any credible program4 Locally produced materials do not necessarily have less impact on the environment5 Workers health and safety is very important to reduce accident on site.

Climatic condition7 X 4% X X X X6 Project Management is important to achieve economy and reduce construction waste on site.7 In LEED, under regional priority, 1 to 4 are allotted for regional priority to provide an incentive

for the achievement of credits that address geographically-specific environmental priorities.4. Discussion

Life cycle stages considered in BREEAM are: design stage (DS) - leading to an interim BREEAM certified rating, and post-construction stage (PCS) – leading to a final BREEAM certified rating. Further, in BREEAM there are two approaches to the assessment at the post-construction stage: a post-construction review of an interim design-stage assessment and a post construction assessment. Renewability is considered in all the rating systems and in the LEED-NC, 1 point is allotted if 5% of the total value of building materials comes from rapidly renewable sources, defined as 10-year rotation or less. In the BREEAM, 4 credits for construction waste management and 1 credit for recycled aggregate is allotted. In Green star, 5 points for recycling waste storage, recycled content and reuse of materials is allotted. In GRIHA, 5 points is reserved for re-newable energy utilization (partly mandatory), 3 points for re-newable energy based hot- water system, 2 points for waste water treatment, 5 points for water recycle and reuse (including rain-water) and 6 points for Utilization of fly-ash in building structure.In the BREEAM it is mandatory to carry out programme for the endorsement of forest certification (PEFC)- Tier level 3. In the LEED, 1 point is reserved if 50% or more of the wood-based materials and products are FSC certified. In Green star, 2 points are given if Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified timber is used. The BREEAM reserves 1 credit for materials which are transported from nearby area. In Green Star, no credit is allotted for this. In the LEED, one gets 1 point if a minimum 10% of total building materials were extracted, processed and manufactured within a 500 mile radius; a second point for 20% minimum of total building materials. In the GRIHA, 2 points are allotted for minimum 40% usage of flyash (by volume of materials used), for 100% load bearing and no load bearing walls. Health and safety of worker is equally important as of occupant which is not considered in the BREEAM, LEED and Green Star. But in the GRIHA, 2 points are allotted for at least, minimum level of sanitation/safety facilities for construction workers(Mandatory criteria).The BREEAM rating system assigns 12% weightage for project management aspect whereas 18 points are given in Green Star and 6% weightage is given in the GRIHA.

5. Conclusion

Green building is not a simple fusion of green design, techniques, and materials. It is a holistic solution to achieve the concept of sustainable development in the project life cycle including project planning, designing, constructing, operating and demolishing. In this paper different rating systems that are used in developing countries like India, China and developed countries like the USA, UK, Germany are compared and it is observed that life cycle assessment is not included in the Green Star and GBAS but in the BREEAM, it has been considered and 10 points are allotted for life cycle assessment of green building. In the context of developing countries, economy is more important so it is necessary to consider life cycle cost of green building which is not taken into account in the GRIHA, the GBAS, and the LEED.All rating system however considers renewability.

6

As timber is the most important material in building construction and cutting of wood is harmful to environment, points should be given to wood that comes from a sustainable source and is certified through any credible program. Forest certification is not considered in the GRIHA and the GBAS.The authors believe that, similar to end-user safety and health, construction workers safety and health must be considered in green building. Project management is important to achieve economy and reduce construction waste on site. In the BREEAM, Green Star, Green Globe, and the GRIHA, project management aspect is considered.In India, topography and climate changes from north to south and from east to west. For such varied conditions, a rating system should also consider topographical and climatic factor.

6. References

Adler, A., Armstrong, J. E., Fuller, S. K., Kalin, M., Karolides, A., Macaluso, J., and Walker, H. A. (2006) “Green building: Project planning and cost estimating” 2nd Ed., R.S. Means, Kingston, Mass.

Bauer Michael, Mosle Peter, Schwarz Michael (2010) “Green Building – Guidebook for Sustainable Architecture” Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (1e) pp 15-19

Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM -2006). Building Research Establishment, Garston, Watford, U.K., (http://www.breeam.org)

Cassidy, R. (2003) “White paper on sustainability: A report on the green building movement” Reed Business Information, Building Design & Construction, Clearwater, Fla

Ding K.C. (2008) “Sustainable construction- The role of environmental assessment tools” Journal of Environmental Management vol. 86 pp 451-464.

DNGB Rating Standard (2007)Gambatese, J. A., Rajendran, S., and Behm, M. G. (2006) “Building toward sustainable safety

and health”. Proc. ASSE Professional Development Conf., American Society of Safety Engineers Seattle.

Green Star rating standard (2011) – multiunit residential v1- 2 July 2009 updated 16 September.Introduction to National Rating System (2010) “GRIHA, An evaluation tool to help design, build,

operate, and maintain a resource-efficient built environment” Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India and The Energy and Resources Institute New GRIHA Manual, Vol. 1 pp 1-42

John A, (1992) “The sourcebook for sustainable design: A guide to environmentally responsible building materials and processes” Architects for Social Responsibility, Boston.

LEED-NC (2011) “India Green Building Manual from Indian Green Building Council” Rees, W. E. (1989) Planning for sustainable development: A resource book, UBC Centre for

Human Settlements, B.C., Canada. Sathyanarayanan Rajendran Gambatese J. A., and Behm M. G., (2009) “Impact of Green

Building Design and Construction on Worker Safety and Health” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management.ASCE 135, pp 1058-1066 Vol. 10 (1058)

Ugwu O.O., T.C. Haupt (2007) “Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability - a South African construction industry perspective” Building and Environment vol. 42 pp 665–680