Green Star Design & As Built and Green Star …...Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star...

Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors Minor Update

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Consultation Paper

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Consultation Paper

1

initiator:[email protected];wfState:distributed;wfType:email;workflowId:c1ab5ce5893d8e4a84bf8b6cc1146eec



Instructions

We are seeking your written feedback on the proposed updates to Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star - Interiors. Your feedback is important to us and will assist us to ensure the rating tools continue to promote best practice outcomes.

All feedback must be submitted by January 27th 2017.

How to give feedback

This is one of eight consultation papers.

1. Overview

2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3. Building Air Tightness 4. Life Cycle Assessment 5. Structural Engineered Timber 6. Construction Environmental Management 7. Metering & Monitoring 8. Innovation

The Overview paper is a summary of critical issues that you should be aware of. The others provide detail on specific issues.

You can respond to the Overview consultation paper, any of the detailed consultation papers, or all. You can give as much or as little feedback as you wish. You do not need to complete all the questions if you do not wish to. There are two ways to send feedback to us.

1. Respond to questions within the consultation papers then press submit. An email will be sent to GBCA. 2. Send a written submission. You can send us a written submission instead or in addition to written comments in the

consultation papers. Please send your feedback to [email protected].

If you are unsure where to put your comment, don’t worry, all comments will be considered. Just save your comments and press submit and it will be sent to GBCA or send it to us via email.

Further information

If you have questions on how to provide feedback, we will be hosting a free webinar on December 6th at 12:30pm. Click here to sign up. If you missed the date, it will be available for viewing from December 7th free of charge.

For further information or assistance with the submission papers or consultation process, please contact Naomi Martin ([email protected]) or Karl Desai ([email protected]).

Respondent Details

1. Name

2. Company

3. Email

4. Are you submitting on behalf of your company? Y N

2

mailto:[email protected]





Contents Instructions ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Request for Feedback ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Background ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Technical Details ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Introduction of minimum points thresholds for 5 and 6 Star ratings ................................................................................................... 5 Carbon Offsets and Carbon Neutrality ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Performance Pathways – 15E (Green Star – Design & As Built) and 16D (Green Star – Interiors) ................................................... 7 Prescriptive Pathways – 15A, 15B, 15C (Green Star – Design & As Built) and 16A, 16B (Green Star – Interiors) ........................... 8 Innovation Challenge: Carbon Neutral Standard for Buildings ........................................................................................................... 8 Other.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9

Changes to Green Star – Design & As Built ........................................................................................................................................ 10 BASIX Pathway ............................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Modelled Performance Pathway ...................................................................................................................................................... 10

Additional Feedback ............................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Prescriptive Pathway ....................................................................................................................................................................... 13 BASIX scale ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Reference Fitout Pathway in Green Star - Interiors ......................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix A: Minimum Points Threshold Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 16 Appendix B: Points Allocation in BASIX Pathway Analysis ................................................................................................................. 19

3



Request for Feedback This Consultation Paper seeks industry feedback on changes proposed to the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ credit for the Green Star

– Design & As Built v1.2 and Green Star – Interiors v1.2 rating tool updates. These rating tools will be released in the second quarter of 2017. The Paper has been developed with the assistance of the GBCA’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions technical working group.

The Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) has identified a number of amendments to the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ credit to ensure the that the rating system is driving sustainable outcomes in line with GBCA’s revised strategic goals. Some amendments

also serve to ensure the credits continue to meet international best practice.

Due to the extent of potential changes relevant to this credit, GBCA has decided to not produce a draft credit at this stage. As such, this consultation paper contains all the detail required to address the questions at hand. It is recommended though that this document be reviewed alongside a copy of the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ credits for Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors v1.1, as these may provide additional detail or background information.

Unlike other papers in this round of consultation, this paper also seeks to obtain general feedback on issues that may be incorporated into major future updates. Please consider providing feedback on these issues as they will assist GBCA and industry in setting trajectories relevant to the future development of the rating system.

Interested parties are requested to provide feedback on this Consultation Paper no later than Friday 27 January 2017.

Background At COP21 in Paris, the world’s governments committed to action to limit global temperature rises to less than 2°C, and to drive efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5°C. To achieve this target, the Australian Government committed to emissions reductions of 26% to 28% from 2005 levels. This commitment means that carbon neutrality must be achieved by Australia by approximately 2050 or earlier. As the built environment’s share of the emissions budget is approximately 30%, this means net zero emissions by 2050. However, unlike other climate agreements, the Paris Agreement has a target analysis framework and mechanism for review every five years. This means that Australia is required to continuously adjust its reduction targets in line with a trajectory consistent with at least 2°C, with a view to changing that target to 1.5°C.

The GBCA aims to put the built environment on a pathway towards carbon neutrality, by continually improving the guidance and compliance requirements of the existing Greenhouse Gas Emissions credit, while laying the foundations for a carbon positive trajectory.

While the next major release (v2) of all Green Star rating tools is intended to guide industry towards a less than 2°C climate change trajectory, the upcoming minor releases (v1.2) aim to improve the existing credits based on industry feedback, and to test potential options for consideration in further reviews. Further, the GBCA has identified additional items for update relating to the Greenhouse Gas Emissions credit in each rating tool, ranging from the need for additional guidance to the requirements of specific building types.

4



Overview This paper seeks feedback on the following changes for the next minor update to the Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors rating tools:

Introduction of minimum requirements for 5 star and 6 Star ratings. Recognition of carbon offsets and carbon neutrality. Changes to Green Star – Design & As Built: BASIX Pathway and Modelled Pathway.

This paper also seeks general feedback on issues that may be incorporated into future major updates.

Technical Details Introduction of minimum points thresholds for 5 and 6 Star ratings

Since its inception, Green Star for new construction has had a requirement to address greenhouse gas emissions impacts as a conditional requirement to achieve a star rating. While the details have changed over time, the effective conditional requirement can be translated to having a building emit 10% less greenhouse gas emissions than what a typical building, built to code compliance, would emit. This distinction acted as a gate to differentiate Green Star rated buildings from non-rated buildings, and sent a signal that a minimum level of emissions performance was non-negotiable.

Over the past 15 years, more than 1000 new buildings have achieved ratings, on an approximate 50-40-10 split for 4, 5, and 6 star ratings respectively. While on average 6 star rated buildings perform better than 5 star rated, and 5 star rated better than 4, there are cases where a higher star rated building barely achieved any points for reducing emissions. While overall a better building, the labels of Australian Excellence and World Leadership carry an expectation that would not be met by poor greenhouse gas emissions performance.

As such, it is proposed that Green Star – Design & As Built, and Green Star – Interiors v1.2 introduce minimum greenhouse gas emissions thresholds that must be met to achieve a 5 or 6 star certified rating. The thresholds must be met through energy efficiency solutions, or the provision of on-site renewable energy systems. District or near-site solutions may be acceptable, though only if they are zero carbon. Low-carbon, or off-site solutions will not count towards meeting the thresholds.

The introduction of these thresholds, with an efficiency or on-site focus, serves two purposes:

The thresholds introduce a minimum differentiator between star ratings. Regardless of the final points score or sustainability strategy, a 6 star rating is guaranteed to be at least more efficient than a minimum performing 5 star, and so on.

This change aims to send a signal to industry that there are likely to be different trajectories being explored for different star ratings on our road towards carbon neutrality. This is part of a broader project GBCA will consult on at a later stage.

To establish the minimum thresholds, the GBCA carried out a historical analysis on certified projects. The data was standardised to a normal distribution to obtain the probabilities of historically certified projects not having achieved any given threshold, assuming the rule had been in effect since the inception of Green Star. The analysis encompassed all building typologies and comprised of 457 five Star certified projects and 144 six Star certified projects from Green Star – Design & As Built, Green Star – Interiors and all Legacy rating tools.

The analysis distinguished between fitouts and buildings. As they have historically been an outlier in terms of achieving points in greenhouse gas emissions, residential buildings were also analysed separately.

5



0.0%

2.5%

5.0%

7.5%

10.0%

12.5%

15.0%

17.5%

20.0%

22.5%

25.0%

27.5%

30.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Minimum Requirement (points)

Percentage of projects that would not meet the Minimum Requirement

5 Star fitouts 5 Star buildings 5 star residential 6 Star fitouts 6 Star buildings

Chart indicating cumulative failure rate for projects against increasing minimum points thresholds.

The results of this analysis have informed the minimum points thresholds at three different levels of stringency. The suggested options for minimum points thresholds discussed by the greenhouse gas emissions subgroup are listed below. GBCA is proposing to implement Option 1.

Green Star Rating

Minimum Points Threshold in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Credit

Option 1 (Preferred) Option 2 Option 3

4 star 1 (Conditional Requirement) 1 (Conditional Requirement) 1 (Conditional Requirement)

5 star 3 4 6

6 star 6 8 12

1. Do you agree in principle with the proposed introduction of minimum points thresholds for achieving higher star

ratings in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions credit for Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors

projects?

6



2. GBCA is proposing Option 1 to be implemented as the minimum points threshold. Do you agree with this option? If

not, which option do you support? Please detail why.

3. Are there any additional comments that you’d like to provide related to this change?

Carbon Offsets and Carbon Neutrality

Significant suggestions have been made to include the recognition of carbon offsets in the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ credit for Class 3-9 buildings in Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors projects. The carbon offsets would need to be recognised by the National Carbon Offset Standard (NCOS) in order to be claimed. Currently, only the Green Star – Performance Rating tool includes guidance for the use of carbon offsets in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions credit. The suggestion has been made that this approach should align with how GreenPower is currently recognised within the rating tools.

4. In principle, should the use of National Carbon Offset Standard accredited carbon offsets be recognised as a method

for claiming emissions reductions in ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions’ for these rating tools?

Performance Pathways – 15E (Green Star – Design & As Built) and 16D (Green Star –

Interiors)

For projects using the ‘Reference Building Pathway’ in Green Star – Design & As Built (15E) or ‘Reference Fitout Pathway’ in Green Star – Interiors (16D), it is proposed that projects which have committed to purchasing carbon offsets can be rewarded for supporting NCOS recognised projects.

In order to be able to claim this, projects must demonstrate that an offsets contract is in place for a minimum period of ten years after practical completion of the project. Where a project enters into a contract for a period less than ten years, the emissions reduction benefit will be pro-rated.

7



The effective greenhouse gas emissions intensity of the grid electricity supply is reduced in proportion with the proportion of carbon offsets purchased. For Green Star – Design & As Built projects, the offsets can only be applied to the energy consumed in areas of the building or by services which are under the control of the building owner; it cannot be applied to areas or services whose electricity supply is under the control of tenants or other parties who are responsible for their own electricity supply arrangements.

The extent of benefit that can be derived from carbon offsets is limited to the number of points achieved for greenhouse gas emissions reduction due to the building design improvements alone.

5. Do you agree with this approach under the Performance Pathways for demonstrating greenhouse emissions

reductions through the purchase of offsets? If not, please explain why. Do you agree with the length of contract time

periods proposed?

Prescriptive Pathways – 15A, 15B, 15C (Green Star – Design & As Built) and 16A, 16B

(Green Star – Interiors)

For projects using any of the Prescriptive Pathways in Green Star – Design & As Built or Green Star – Interiors, it is proposed that up to two (2) points may be awarded for projects which have committed to purchasing carbon offsets supporting NCOS recognised projects.

The following is the proposed points breakdown:

1 point is awarded where a contract is in place to offset 50% of carbon emissions generated by the project’s energy

consumption through an accredited NCOS project; or 2 points are awarded where a contract is in place to offset 100% of carbon emissions generated by the project’s energy

consumption through an accredited NCOS project.

The length of time of the commitment is for a minimum period of ten years after practical completion. There will be no pro-rated benefit for projects under the minimum period in this pathway.

6. Do you agree with this approach under the Prescriptive Pathways for demonstrating greenhouse emissions reductions

through the purchase of offsets? If not, please explain why. Do you agree with the points to be awarded?

Innovation Challenge: Carbon Neutral Standard for Buildings

With the release of the ‘Carbon Neutral Standard for Buildings’, an Innovation Challenge will be introduced for those buildings that commit to carbon neutrality and initially offset a broader range of emissions from Scope 3 sources as detailed in the standard. In this case, regardless of the feedback received, offsetting would be allowed for Scope 3 emissions, as these are additional to what this

8



credit typically addresses (such as transport emissions). Based on the feedback received on this paper, offsets may be accepted, or limited, for scope 1 or 2 emissions.

More information on this Innovation Challenge will be released once the Carbon Neutral Standard for Buildings is released for consultation.

7. Are there any other comments that you would like to provide with regards to a potential Innovation Challenge on

carbon neutrality?

Other

8. Are there any other comments that you would like to provide with regards to this topic?

9



Changes to Green Star – Design &

As Built The following feedback applies only to Green Star – Design & As Built

BASIX Pathway

Residential projects in New South Wales are currently unable to use the NatHERS rating pathway in Green Star – Design & As Built. This disadvantages projects in NSW, as the number of points awarded in the NatHERS and BASIX pathways are not equitable.

A review of the BASIX pathway is underway but will not be available in time for the next minor update (v1.2). A separate amendment will be released at a later stage.

In the meantime, it is proposed that for the minor release of Green Star – Design & As Built Version 1.2, projects in NSW will be allowed to use the NatHERS pathway.

9. Do you agree with the proposed update to allow all NSW residential projects to use the NatHERS pathway?

Modelled Performance Pathway

The current ‘Modelled Performance Pathway’ is split into two parts: 4 points reserved for the building envelope (Energy Consumption Reduction) and 16 points for a holistic assessment of the building’s greenhouse gas consumption (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction).

This approach requires a comparative analysis between four building models. These building models are:

Reference Building A hypothetical building of the same size, shape, floor area and glazing areas as the Proposed Building, but whose building fabric and building services characteristics are based predominantly on the NCC Section J Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions.

Benchmark Building A hypothetical building that is responsible for 10% less greenhouse gas emissions than the Reference Building.

Intermediate Building

A hypothetical building of the same size, shape, floor area and glazing areas as the Proposed Building, and including all the same building envelope design and performance characteristics as the Proposed Building, but whose building services characteristics are based predominantly on the NCC Section J Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions.

Proposed Building

The building to be rated by the Green Star – Design & As Built rating tool, as designed and modelled by the project team.

The ‘Energy Consumption Reduction’ element is calculated based on comparison of the Reference Building and the Intermediate Building. As per the definitions above, the only variables may be attributed to the building fabric, this component of the credit therefore rewards passive design only.

10



The ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction’ element is calculated based on comparison of the Benchmark Building and the Proposed Building. As per the definitions above, all design variables are reflected in this comparison, including services design strategy and choice of energy sources.

11



The ‘Energy Consumption Reduction’ is a direct comparison of the HVAC system loads between both the Reference and Intermediate Buildings. Other services, such as lighting and vertical transportation, are included in the calculation which are acknowledged as affecting the results of the energy consumption. The rationale of including other non-HVAC components in the calculation are to encourage the most cost-efficient solution without prejudice to any specific part of the building, as compared to a purely HVAC energy based calculation which will only emphasise a higher performing façade.

While the credit is aiming to incentive façade improvements, there are some building typologies, such as warehouses, where the value of an improved façade does not correspond to the benefits in the buildings thermal comfort or energy consumption. This essentially makes the 4 points unachievable, disadvantaging these projects when this sustainability topic is not applicable to them.

To address these building types, it is proposed that a new pathway be introduced where less than 50% of the building’s area is conditioned, the ‘Energy Consumption Reduction’ element will be removed, leaving the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction’

element only. Conditioned floor area has been deemed a suitable determinant for those buildings where this sustainability topic should be made not applicable.

In this scenario, up to 20 points will be made available for a 100% reduction under the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction’

element.

10. Do you agree with the introduction of this new pathway? Are there any situations where this pathway applies that

would lead to an unintended outcome?

With the introduction of building air tightness testing requirements in ‘Commissioning and Tuning’ an alternative mechanism for ensuring façade performance has been introduced. A proposal has been made that this new pathway be also made available for projects that target and achieve the ‘Commissioning and Tuning’ credit.

In this scenario, up to 20 points will be made available for a 100% reduction under the ‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction’

element.

11. Should this pathway be expanded to projects that target and achieve the ‘Commissioning’ and ‘Tuning’ criteria if they

are revised to include building air tightness? What else should be considered, or addressed?

Currently, in order for the total 4 points to be awarded, an improvement of 20% between the Intermediate Building and Reference Building is required to be achieved. Industry representatives have demonstrated that a 20% improvement may not be an appropriate benchmark. For the Version 1.2 update, it is proposed that this benchmark is lowered to a 10% improvement for the full 4 points to be awarded.

12



12. Do you agree with this update to the benchmark to 10%? Are there any situations where this pathway applies that

would lead to an unintended outcome?

Additional Feedback Under this section the GBCA is seeking general feedback and industry views on the topics listed. This feedback will not be specifically used to inform the minor version update (v1.2), but instead may be used to inform future major updates (v2).

Prescriptive Pathway

The intent of the Prescriptive Pathway in the Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star – Interiors Rating tools is to award points based on the project team’s ability to exceed the minimum Section J requirements.

Industry feedback is that number of points available under the prescriptive pathway is not appropriate for all building types. The current prescriptive pathways are:

Building Envelope Glazing Lighting Ventilation and Air Conditioning Domestic Hot Water Building Sealing (subject to Building Air Tightness update) Accredited GreenPower

A review of the prescriptive options outlined in the credit may be necessary to make sure that they are still relevant and updated.

13. Are there any changes to the prescriptive elements listed above that you recommend occur? Is there a need for further

compliance options for the Prescriptive Pathway to account for a greater range of building and fitout types?

BASIX scale

In addition to the interim fix proposed to allow residential projects in NSW to target the NatHERS pathway, the GBCA is conducting a review of the BASIX pathway in terms of how points are awarded. This review is intended to ensure that the points scale under this pathway is equitable when compared with other pathways in the credit.

13



In conducting this review, the best performers from all BASIX outcomes until August 2016 have been identified and classified according to the number of storeys in the building. Those figures are proposed as a basis for the definition of ‘Australian Excellence’

under Green Star. The BASIX Energy Scores of those best performers, excluding outliers, were used to calculate the number of Green Star points those projects would achieve in line with the Green Star calculator. Results are given in the table below.

The first column indicates the number of storeys in the project. The second column provides the best performers’ improvement on the energy target calculated as the difference BASIX Energy Target and the BASIX Energy Score. The third column gives the number of points those projects would achieve in the Green Star calculator.

A strong correlation of the number of storeys in a building and the BASIX Energy outcome is observed, confirming the difficulty to achieve points in high rise residential projects. The best low rise performer, in the range of 1-3 storeys, would achieve 12.4 Green Star points which is consistent with the BASIX scale as is. However, the best performer in the range of 6 or more storeys, would achieve only 6 points under the current scale which may be misrepresenting the actual performance of the building.

Appendix B provides further details on this analysis.

14. Do you support the BASIX scale for point’s allocation is recalculated as a function of the number of storeys based on

the table above?

Reference Fitout Pathway in Green Star - Interiors

GBCA has received a feedback regarding the GHG emissions reference modelling pathway for Green Star - Interiors projects which was adopted from the Green Star – Design & As Built methodology. The GBCA acknowledges that some fitout types have little control over the type of base building systems, or the projects’ building fabric and glazing. Further, there is little guidance available for small power loads. Consequently, it may be required to assess if this methodology is appropriate or if changes are required to improve the way fitouts are being benchmarked within the credit.

Additionally, project plug loads for office type projects are encouraged to use the methodology provided by the ‘NABERS Energy Guide to Tenancy Energy Estimation.’ Guidance for items not included in this methodology are currently being reviewed on a project by project basis for minimal GHG emission reductions. The GBCA seeks to improve this guidance and provide relevant sources for benchmarks on small power loads.

15. Do you have any comments/suggestions on the reference fitout determination methodology for Green Star – Interiors

projects?

Number of Storeys

Maximum IMPROVEMENT ON

ENERGY TARGET

Maximum Green Star points

that would achieve

1 to 3 52 12.4

4 to 5 37 7.6

6 or more 35 6

14



Any final comments / suggestions on any items in the Greenhouse Gas Emissions credit?

15



Appendix A: Minimum Points

Threshold Analysis INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this analysis is to determine relevant figures of the number of points achieved under the ‘Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions’ credit for certified Green Star projects.

This analysis will be used to inform point thresholds for projects targeting 5 and 6 star Green Star ratings. The point thresholds will drive projects to achieve energy efficiency improvements in order to achieve 5 and 6 star ratings, ensuring that they truly represent ‘Australian Excellence’ and ‘World Leadership’ status, respectively.

DATA

In order to carry out this analysis, a sample of 876 Green Star certified projects was selected. The sample comprises new construction building and interiors projects certified from October 2004 to July 2016 under the Green Star – Design & As Built, Interiors and all Legacy rating tools. The sample includes certified projects achieving 4 (275 projects), 5 (457 projects) and 6 (144 projects) Star ratings.

The dataset combines results from the ‘GHG Emissions’ credit with the ‘Energy Improvement’ credit as the credit was named initially. Points achieved under ‘Energy Improvement’ have been scaled up to 20 points available in order to match the points available under ‘GHG Emissions’ credit.

Only final results were taken into account, i.e., in projects that underwent two rounds of assessment, round 1 results are excluded. Data of uncertain integrity has not been included in the dataset.

MEDIAN, MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM POINTS ACHIEVED

2 1

5

9.3 10.0

16.0

20.0 20.0 20.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

4 5 6

Points Achieved

Minimum Median Maximum

16



DATA DISTRIBUTION

The histograms below provide visuals of how points achieved are distributed for 5 and 6 Star Green Star rated new construction buildings and fitouts. Points scored in 5 Star ratings are easily characterised by a normal distribution. However, for 6 Star rated projects a multimodal distribution is the best fit, with a first peak occurring below the median in the 12-13 bin; a second peak occurring at the median in the 16-17 bin; and a third peak occurring at the maximum number of points available in the 19-20 bin.

17



MINIMUM THRESHOLDS

The table below provides the probability of projects achieving a given number of points based on the historical data standardised to a normal distribution. Those numbers provide an indication for the definition of minimum requirements, but do not necessarily translate directly as the percentage of projects that would not achieve a 5 or 6 Star rating when the minimum thresholds are established. Should a threshold be implemented, data distribution would certainly change as projects would be pursuing the minimum thresholds.

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate that there is a strong rationale for introducing a points threshold for 5 and 6 star projects. This will effectively ‘lift the bar’ for projects targeting these ratings to ensure they achieve improved levels of energy efficiency.

Minimum Requirement

(number of points)

5 Star

fitouts

6 Star

fitouts

5 Star

buildings

6 Star

buildings

5 Star

(fitouts +

buildings)

6 Star

(fitouts +

buildings)

1 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

2 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 0%

3 1% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0%

4 2% 0% 3% 0% 3% 0%

5 3% 0% 6% 0% 6% 0%

6 6% 0% 10% 1% 10% 1%

7 9% 0% 17% 1% 16% 1%

8 13% 1% 26% 2% 24% 2%

9 18% 1% 37% 4% 33% 4%

10 25% 3% 50% 8% 44% 7%

11 33% 6% 62% 12% 55% 11%

12 42% 11% 73% 18% 66% 17%

13 51% 18% 82% 26% 75% 25%

14 60% 28% 89% 35% 83% 34%

15 68% 39% 94% 45% 89% 45%

Projects not achieving the minimum requirement

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16Minimum Requirement (points)

Percentage of projects that would not meet the Minimum Requirement

5 Star fitouts 6 Star fitouts

5 Star buildings 6 Star buildings

5 Star (fitouts + buildings) 6 Star (fitouts + buildings)

18



Appendix B: Points Allocation in

BASIX Pathway Analysis

This analysis has been conducted from a dataset sourced from http://datareporting.planning.nsw.gov.au/basix-create-reports and includes all BASIX outcomes until August 2016.

Relevant findings below.

1. Best BASIX performers

The following chart shows the proportion of projects for each improvement-over-target bracket. The large majority achieved between 0 and 9 % improvement only.

Below an extract from the BASIX Target Review – Supporting Research Paper supporting this: “High-rise developments of 6 or more floors did not easily achieve a BASIX +10 target increase. These developments have

a greater proportion of common areas for foyers, lifts and car parking. This results in higher building energy use compared

to other building forms.

Despite considering a range of high-rise designs and technologies, the scenario testing showed that targets above 40 for

water and 25 for energy would be difficult to achieve with current on-site compliance measures alone. Decentralised local

systems, such as distributed cogeneration energy systems, are options that could enable high-rise developments to

achieve significant additional savings in energy consumption. However, the uptake, implementation and ongoing

management and maintenance of these systems present developers and building owners with a number of issues and their

uptake at present is very limited.”

2. Maximum BASIX scores & what is considered Australian Excellence

19

http://datareporting.planning.nsw.gov.au/basix-create-reports

https://www.basix.nsw.gov.au/iframe/images/4050pdfs/BASIX-Target-Review-supporting-research.pdf



Using the definition of Australian Excellence as the maximum improvement over the energy achieved and the maximum scores available from the BASIX dataset, the correlation between the achievable Green Star points under the BASIX Pathway can be seen in the table below. Again, projects with more than 6 storeys are unable to achieve greater than 6 points, or the equivalent to a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the current BASIX Pathway.

3. BASIX pathway scale

According to the analysis, the current scale in the BASIX pathway automatically excludes nearly 90 % of projects. Further, no project so far would achieve even half of the points available under BASIX pathway.

Number of Storeys

Maximum IMPROVEMENT ON

ENERGY TARGET

Maximum Green Star points

that would achieve

1 to 3 52 12.4

4 to 5 37 7.6

6 or more 35 6

20

Green Star Design & As Built and Green Star …...Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star...

Documents

Transcript of Green Star Design & As Built and Green Star …...Green Star – Design & As Built and Green Star...