www.breeam.com

Briefing Paper

Josephine Prior, Christopher Ward and Matthew Holden - BREAzita Dezfouli and Adam Mactavish - Currie & Brown

Delivering Sustainable Buildings: Savings and Payback - Office Case Study for BREEAM UK New Construction 2014

2

3

BREEAM has been widely used for over 25 years as a certification and environmental impact assessment method for buildings. Its influence extends throughout the UK and worldwide. It is increasingly used as a standard requirement to ensure quality and sustainable performance on city buildings.

BRE has been working with Currie & Brown (which acquired Sweett Group in 2016) since 2005 to examine and report the implications of meeting various BREEAM standards on costs associated with typical developments including offices (naturally ventilated and air conditioned), healthcare, schools, housing, and retail (Jansz et al, 2005; Surgenor and Butterss, 2008; Abdul and Quartermaine 2014).

In this BREEAM Briefing Paper we review the cost implications of achieving assessment ratings of “BREEAM Very Good” and “BREEAM Excellent” for a model office building described earlier in the 2014 publication Delivering sustainable buildings: savings and payback (Abdul and Quartermaine 2014).

The case study model is a speculative building with five storeys of office accommodation and a central atrium. It is a high quality space, intended to attract tenants with an interest in sustainability. The gross floor area is 13,800 m2, with net office space floor area of 11,150 m2. It is of steel frame construction with concrete floors and glazed curtain walling. Services include air conditioning by fan-coil units served by gas boilers and water-cooled chillers; efficient lighting; and electric, instantaneous hot water to all toilet and kitchen areas.

The new work takes account of several factors including:

• The earlier case was assessed against the energy requirements of Building Regulations Part L2A; 2010 (HM Government, 2010) and BREEAM UK New Construction 2011 (BREEAM, 2011).

• The new case was assessed against both the increased energy performance demands of Building Regulations Part L2A; 2013 (HM Government, 2014); and the updated assessment criteria of BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 (BREEAM, 2014a).

• The new case also examined the difference between BREEAM uplift costs for a building meeting London Plan energy requirements (GLA, 2016); and the same building not so constrained.

• For both the London Plan and the non-London Plan cases, costs were assessed for achieving “Very Good” and “Excellent” BREEAM ratings.

• The base case building therefore has better energy performance and higher capital cost than for 2011.

Once the base case building was established, the same method as the 2011 study was used to identify a menu of sustainable measures to achieve ratings of Very Good and Excellent for BREEAM UK New Construction 2014. Particular attention was paid to the updated energy standards (Ene 01 and Ene 04) and the new and/or updated credits in the Management (Man 02), Health and Wellbeing (Hea 03, Hea 04 and Hea 06), Materials (Mat 03, Mat 05 and Mat 06) and Waste (Wst 05 and Wst 06) categories. The cost implications of these changes are set out in Table 10.

This report describes firstly the main differences arising from the changes to the Building Regulations Part L2A (conservation of fuel and power); and secondly the differences from the 2011 to 2014 version of BREEAM UK New Construction. The cost implications of achieving both BREEAM Very Good, and BREEAM Excellent ratings are addressed for situations with and without the need also to achieve the London Plan energy requirements. Both capital and lifecycle costs are considered. In particular lifecycle costs are examined in respect of energy strategies, and water consumption, including different water supply tariffs. Abbreviations and technical terms are explained in the Glossary.

Introduction

4

Many major developers use BREEAM as a tool for delivering sustainability goals, with occupiers of prime real estate increasingly seeking building space rated as “BREEAM Excellent” or “BREEAM Outstanding”. Planning authorities also use BREEAM as a tool for setting sustainable development (Brundtland, 1987) targets and demonstrating that these are met. BREEAM is applied on large numbers of new buildings, with the majority of office assessments achieving BREEAM Very Good or Excellent ratings (BREEAM, 2014b).

BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 (BREEAM, 2014a) covers nine categories of sustainable design:

• MAN Management• HEA Health and Wellbeing• ENE Energy• TRA Transport• WAT Water• MAT Materials• WST Waste• LE Land Use and Ecology• POL Pollution

Each category includes a number of environmental assessment issues. Each issue is a source of impact on the environment which can be assessed against a performance target (assessment criterion/criteria) and awarded one or more credit(s). Performance targets are more demanding than the minimum standard needed to satisfy Building Regulations or other legislation. The assessment criteria represent good or best practice; are technically feasible; and can be delivered by the construction industry.

In the 2011 study (Abdul and Quartermaine, 2014), the base building model met the requirements of Building Regulations Part L2A 2010 (HM Government, 2010). Various options were identified and costed to achieve the minimum energy and CO2 emission performance requirement for an Excellent rating under BREEAM UK New Construction 2011. This was equivalent to a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions compared to the Building Regulations Part L2A 2010 requirements.

The 2013 edition of Part L2A was released in April 2014 (HM Government, 2014). The energy performance requirements for new buildings were changed to deliver a 9% reduction in CO2 emissions for new non-domestic buildings relative to the 2010 edition.

In order for the base building model to meet the Part L2A 2013 requirements, it was necessary to improve the original base building specification, including improving the efficiencies of the heating, lighting and ventilation systems (Table 1). Meeting the Part L2A 2013 requirements has led to a ~0.5% increase in the capital cost for the building compared to the 2011 base model.

Table 1 Amendments made to the base building model to comply with Part L2A 2013

Building Regulation

Improved elements

Air Permeability Lighting Mechanical

Ventilation

Zones SFP for the terminal units

DHW efficiency

Heating system efficiency

Part L2A 2010 10Office area: 75 Lm/W and 0.9 efficiencyCirculation and toilet areas: T5

SFP 2 W/l/s 0.8 W/l/s 85% 65%

Part L2A 2013 5 75 Lm/W and 0.8 efficiency across all areas

SFP 1.6 W/l/s 0.5 W/l/s 100% 91%

Background

Performance improvement due to Building Regulations Part L2A, 2013

5

A minimum of 5 out of 12 available credits must be achieved for BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Ene 01 Reduction of energy use and carbon emissions, to gain an Excellent rating under BREEAM. The following measures were selected to improve the Part L2A 2013 compliant specification:

• Installation of high efficiency LED lighting in all office areas

• T5 lighting in circulation, toilet and storage areas

Note: Improving U-values did not improve the thermal performance of the building as it increased the cooling load. High efficiency chillers and boilers were specified within the building specification to meet Part L2A 2013 without attempting further improvement.

If the case study building were to be built in London, it would now be required to comply with the London Plan, which demands better energy performance than Building Regulations Part L2A. The London Plan Policy 5.2 energy performance requirements were achieved in the model by applying the services improvements illustrated in Table 2.

Note: Renewable technologies are not required to achieve compliance with Part L2A and are not specifically required to meet either BREEAM Very Good or Excellent ratings, but may be necessary for meeting the London Plan energy performance requirements. In the case of the model office building, a number of renewable technologies were investigated, including photovoltaics (PV). 225 kWp of PVs (equivalent to 1500 m2) was the calculated requirement to meet the London Plan, but

this was not a cost effective option in this case. Consequently air source heat pumps were specified to meet the London Plan requirements.

These services improvements result in a 35.1% reduction in CO2 emissions over the 2013 Part L2A requirements. The reduction in CO2 emissions; improved system efficiencies; and decrease in energy demand arising from these service improvements allow the London Plan model to achieve 8 of the 12 credits available under the BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Ene 01 assessment issue. This meets the minimum requirements for a BREEAM Outstanding rating. This far exceeds BREEAM’s minimum energy performance requirements for any rating, which stipulate a performance improvement progressively better than building regulation requirements Part L2A 2013.

Appendix A summarises the main energy efficiency features for the three scenarios:

1. Meeting the Building Regulations Part L2A 2013 energy performance requirements.

2. Achieving BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Excellent rating but not meeting London Plan energy performance requirements.

3. Achieving BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Excellent rating and meeting London Plan energy performance requirements.

Table 2 Services improvements to meet London Plan Policy 5.2 energy performance requirements

Services Improvement to meet London Plan Policy 5.2 energy performance requirements

Lighting High efficiency LED lighting in all office areas

Heating and cooling High efficiency air source heat pumps with Coefficient of Performance (COP) of 4.5

Mechanical ventilation High efficiency run around coils heat recovery system, with variable heat recovery efficiency linked to airflow rate

Zones terminal units Specification of low Specific Fan Power (0.2 W/l/s) for terminal units

Meeting BREEAM Excellent minimum energy performance requirements

Meeting London Plan Policy 5.2 energy performance requirements

6

Building models complying with the London Plan exceed the minimum energy performance requirements necessary for both Part L2A 2013 and BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Ene 01. This means there would be no additional energy related costs to achieve a BREEAM rating for a London based building. Developments outside London would need additional investment to meet these minimum energy performance standards. In order for the base building model to meet the

current Part L2A 2013 requirements, it was necessary to improve the original base building specification, including improving the efficiencies of the heating, lighting and ventilation systems (Table 1). Meeting the 2013 Part L2A requirements has led to a ~0.5% increase in the capital cost for the building compared to the 2011 model. Table 3 shows the calculated capital costs of the energy systems and features required for each of the three energy scenarios.

The energy related lifecycle costs were calculated over a 25 year period for the two energy strategies achieving a BREEAM Excellent rating; the first not meeting London Plan energy performance requirements; the second meeting London Plan requirements (Table 4).

The costs include an allowance for capital purchase, planned maintenance, scheduled replacement of light fittings and HVAC equipment after 20 years; plus savings from not having to replace T5 luminaires every 8 years. The net present value (NPV) discount rate of 3.5% used for the calculations is based

on the Treasury Green Book rate (HM Treasury, 2013). The figures exclude VAT, statutory charges, capital allowances, tax adjustments and out-of-hours premiums.

Energy retail price data for the “Reference” and “High Prices” scenarios for the Services sector were sourced from DECC Energy and Emissions Projections (DECC, 2015). Table 4 shows the lifecycle savings (non-discounted and discounted) and payback periods for both options to meet BREEAM Excellent in the context of capital costs for energy saving equipment.

The £146,032 cost for Energy Scenario 3 (BREEAM Excellent, meeting London Plan) is not included in the cost of meeting BREEAM Excellent, because this energy performance is required and paid for by complying with the London Plan.

Table 3 Capital costs for different energy scenarios

Energy Scenario BREEAM Ene 01 credits Cost uplift Cost uplift due to

BREEAM Ene 01

1 Part L2A 2013 Building Regulations 0 £0 £0 (0.0%)

2 BREEAM Excellent NOT London Plan 5 £59,610 (0.4%) £59,610 (0.4%)

3 BREEAM Excellent MEETING London Plan 8 £146,032 (1%) £0 (0.0%)

Note: Figures in brackets represent the cost uplift in terms of the % total capital cost of building

Capital costs of the three energy scenarios

BREEAM Excellent energy lifecycle costs over 25 years

7

The base case water consumption for the model office building is that specified in the Wat 01 Water consumption issue in BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 (BREEAM, 2014a). This includes assumptions such as taps with a maximum flow rate of 12 l/min; showers with a maximum flow rate of 14 l/min; urinals with flush rates of 7.5 l/bowl/hour; and WC suites delivering a single flush of 6 litres.

Table 5 shows the water saving options selected to achieve the BREEAM Wat 01 credits. The first Wat 01 credit is achieved by specifying dual flush WCs at full-flush of 6 litres, and reduced flush of 4 litres. No cost is assigned to the first credit, because although 6 litre single flush WCs remain available, the use of dual flush 6/4 litres has become standard practice.

As one might expect, the payback period for investment in energy efficiency options is sensitive to the energy price. The non-London Plan BREEAM Excellent scenario shows short undiscounted and discounted payback periods of 5 years or less for both energy price scenarios. While the London Plan scenario shows longer payback periods, it should be noted that the capital costs for meeting the London Plan requirements are not directly associated with achieving the BREEAM Excellent rating.

Table 5 Water saving options to achieve BREEAM Wat 01 credits

Table 4 Lifecycle costs and payback period for the two energy strategies used to achieve BREEAM Excellent

Wat 01 Credits Water saving options

1 credit • Dual flush toilets (6 litre full and 4 litre reduced flush volumes)

2 credits • Dual flush toilets (6 litre full and 4 litre reduced flush volumes)• Flow regulators to taps

3 credits • Dual flush toilets (less than 6 litre full and 4 litre reduced flush volumes)• Flow regulators to taps

4 credits• Dual flush toilets (less than 6 litre full and 4 litre reduced flush volumes)• Flow regulators to taps• Waterless urinals

5 credits

• Dual flush toilets (less than 6 litre full and 4 litre reduced flush volumes)• Flow regulators to taps• Waterless urinals• Rainwater harvesting installation; tank, distribution pipework and alterations to rainwater drainage design

BREEAMExcellent (Energy)

Energy price scenario

Capital cost

£

Lifecycle savings over 25 years

£

Lifecycle savings over 25 years (discounted)

£

Payback Period

Years

Payback Period (discounted)

Years

Net Present Value (discounted)

£

Annual Gas Saving

kWh

Annual Electricity Saving

kWh

Annual CO2 Saving

kg CO2

NOT London Plan

Reference scenario

59,610

429,906 280,710 3 5 221,100 -20,664 170,087 83,582

High Prices scenario

612,531 401,491 2 4 341,881 -20,664 170,087 83,582

MEETING London Plan

Reference scenario

146,032

539,281 367,677 7 10 527,763 82,660 221,750 131,876

High Prices scenario

806,202 543,439 5 7 580,384 82,660 221,750 131,876

Water consumption lifecycle costs over 20 years

8

Annual water volume savings relative to the base case have been calculated for each of the water saving options in Table 5 using the BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Wat 01 water consumption calculation tool. Tables 6 to 9 illustrate the lifecycle costs, savings and estimated payback periods over a 20 year period for each of the water saving options. Costs include capital, maintenance and utility costs, with a 0.5% annual increase in water tariffs. They exclude VAT, statutory charges, capital allowances, tax adjustments and out-of-hours premiums.

Savings are presented on both an undiscounted (Tables 6 and 8) and discounted (Tables 7 and 9) basis, using a discount rate of 3.5% based on the Treasury Green Book rate (HM Treasury, 2013). The variations in UK water prices are expressed by upper and lower tariffs. The lower tariff (Tables 6 and 7) is £2.07/m3 (Thames Water) and the higher tariff (Tables 8 and 9) is £5.13/m3 (South West Water). Both tariffs were applied in the financial year 2015-16. The costs and savings are cumulative; so the cost of achieving 3 credits includes the cost of achieving the first two.

Table 6 Undiscounted water consumption lifecycle costs and savings for BREEAM Wat 01 credits: Lower annual water tariff of £2.07 per m3

Table 7 Discounted water consumption lifecycle costs and savings for BREEAM Wat 01 credits: Lower annual water tariff of £2.07 per m3

BREEAM Wat 01 Credits

Minimum % improvement over base case to achieve credit(s)

Water savings per annum over base case (m3)

Capital cost over base case (£)

A

Lifecycle cost over base case after 20 years (£)

B

Utility savings over base case after 20 years (£)

C

Net savings over 20 years (£)

D = C - B - A

Payback period (years)

1 >12 2,847 0 0 123,726 123,726 0

2 >25 3,566 1,342 2,000 154,972 151,630 <1

3 >40 5,014 9,427 3,213 217,900 205,260 1

4 >50 6,017 15,565 27,003 261,488 218,921 1

5 >55 6,425 81,565 33,753 279,219 163,902 7

BREEAM Wat 01 Credits

Minimum % improvement over base case to achieve credit(s)

Water savings per annum (m3)

Capital cost over base case (£)

A

Discounted lifecycle cost over base case after 20 years (£)B

Discounted utility savings over base case after 20 years (£)C

Discounted net savings over 20 years (£)

D = C - B - A

Discounted payback period (years)

1 >12 2,847 0 0 87,425 87,425 0

2 >25 3,566 1,342 1,370 109,504 106,792 <1

3 >40 5,014 9,427 2,154 153,969 142,388 1

4 >50 6,017 15,565 18,979 184,768 150,225 2

5 >55 6,425 81,565 23,756 197,297 91,976 18

9

As one might expect, the payback period for investment in water saving options is sensitive to the tariff imposed by the supplier water company. It is worth noting though, that nearly all of the options show undiscounted and discounted payback periods of 2 years or less for both tariffs. For the lower tariff, it is only the 5th credit option (rainwater harvesting installation) that has payback periods longer than 5 years.

Table 8 Undiscounted water consumption lifecycle costs and savings for BREEAM Wat 01 credits: Higher annual water tariff of £5.13 per m3

Table 9 Discounted water consumption lifecycle costs and savings for BREEAM Wat 01 credits: Higher annual water tariff of £5.13 per m3

BREEAM Wat 01 Credits

Minimum % improvement over base case to achieve credit(s)

Water savings per annum over base case (m3)

Capital cost over base case (£)

A

Lifecycle cost over base case after 20 years (£)

B

Utility savings over base case after 20 years (£)

C

Net savings over 20 years (£)

D = C - B - A

Payback period (years)

1 >12 2,847 0 0 306,593 306,593 0

2 >25 3,566 1,342 2,000 384,023 380,681 <1

3 >40 5,014 9,427 3,213 539,958 527,318 <1

4 >50 6,017 15,565 27,003 647,971 605,403 <1

5 >55 6,425 81,565 33,753 691,908 576,591 2

BREEAM Wat 01 Credits

Minimum % improvement over base case to achieve credit(s)

Water savings per annum (m3)

Capital cost over base case (£)

A

Discounted lifecycle cost over base case after 20 years (£)B

Discounted utility savings over base case after 20 years (£)C

Discounted net savings over 20 years (£)

D = C - B - A

Discounted payback period (years)

1 >12 2,847 0 0 216,640 216,640 0

2 >25 3,566 1,342 1,370 271,351 268,640 <1

3 >40 5,014 9,427 2,154 381,536 369,955 <1

4 >50 6,017 15,565 18,979 457,858 423,314 1

5 >55 6,425 81,565 23,756 488,904 383,583 4

10

Table 10 summarises the issues and assessment criteria that were new to or significantly revised in BREEAM UK New Construction 2014, and includes a broad analysis of the likelihood of incurred costs.

Table 10 Issues and assessment criteria new to BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 and cost implications

Issue New Assessment Criteria Number of Credits Cost Implications

Man 02Lifecycle cost and service life planning

Report the capital cost for the building £k/m2 1 No additional cost expected for

provision of cost information

Hea 03 Safe containment in laboratories N/A 2 Not applicable to this office case study

Hea 04 Thermal comfort Incorporate different climate change projections into modelled scenarios 1

Limited additional cost if included within scope of dynamic simulation modelling

Hea 06 Safety and securityPerformance of Security Needs Assessment by Suitably Qualified Security Specialist (SQSS)

1

Additional fees for design team time and involvement of a SQSS, e.g. a Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) (estimated 2 days)

Ene 04 Low Carbon Design Passive design and free cooling analysis 1 Additional fees for architect’s and

engineer’s time (estimated 5-10 days)

Mat 03Responsible sourcing of materials

Additional activity to include a sustainable procurement plan 1

No additional fees or other costs if included within contractor’s existing policy documents

Mat 05Designing for durability and resilience

Assessment of options and design of features to protect building where vulnerable

1

Additional fees for design team time (estimated 1 day). There may be some costs associated with specific measures where gaps are identified.

Mat 06 Material efficiency Resource efficiency design reviews by architect 1

Additional fees for design team time (estimated 2 days). Any material cost savings identified by the review are likely to exceed the cost of undertaking the analysis.

Wst 05 Adaptation to climate change

Development of climate change adaptation strategy 1 Additional fees for design team time

(estimated 5 days)

Wst 06 Functional adaptability Development of adaptability strategy 1 Additional fees for design team time

(estimated 2 days)

Changes to issues and assessment criteria in BREEAM UK New Construction 2014

11

Table 11 Capital cost analysis for BREEAM New Construction 2014 Very Good and Excellent ratings

Scenario: Urban location with good access to transport and amenities

Capital Cost of meeting Industry Standard

Capital Cost uplift £(%) for BREEAM Very Good

Capital Cost uplift £(%) for BREEAM Excellent

Not London Plan compliant £222,500 £66,860 (0.25%) £102,550 (0.65%)

London Plan compliant £308,930 £39,850 (0.15%) £56,300 (0.35%)

Construction costs rose significantly between 2012 and 2016 due to the pre-2012 economic downturn, and the increased construction activity in urban centres including London. Cost inflation is broadly applicable both to baseline costs and BREEAM. Consultancy cost inflation has been less marked than for overall construction; and between 2012 and 2016 some sustainability features (notably photovoltaic panels) have reduced in cost.

Currie & Brown reviewed the costs from the 2011 study (Abdul and Quartermaine, 2014). Where assessment criteria did not change materially in BREEAM UK New Construction 2014, costs were updated using:

• Tendered price estimates for products or services.

• Current consultancy fees expressed as day rates.

• Construction cost inflation indices.

The baseline construction costs for the case study building in the first quarter (Q1) of 2016 increased by ~25% compared to the 2011 study, which used costs from Q1 2012. The baseline cost of the original model building amounted to £27.6 million. General construction cost inflation accounts for the first ~24% with a further ~0.5% needed to meet the updated energy requirements of Building Regulations Part L2A 2013 (HM Government, 2014).

The additional costs associated with achieving BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Very Good and Excellent ratings for the case study office building were established using specific energy strategies, and the estimated costs of individual BREEAM credits, chosen on a commercial basis considering both capital and lifecycle costs.

Table 11 shows the capital cost implications of achieving BREEAM Very Good and Excellent ratings for the case study building for the two scenarios: one compliant with London Plan, and the other not compliant. Appendix B illustrates the BREEAM credits selected for each scenario.

The London Plan compliant model already achieves 8 credits for the Ene 01 assessment issue. Achieving these credits does not contribute to the BREEAM uplift because their cost is included in the London Plan baseline. The London Plan building exceeds the minimum of five Ene 01 energy credits needed for a BREEAM Excellent rating by three credits. For a building not bound by the London Plan, the minimum five credits for Ene 01 must be achieved and paid for as an uplift to baseline costs. The number of additional credits required for the London Plan model to achieve an Excellent rating, is therefore smaller than the number of credits required for the non-London plan scenario.

Several BREEAM credits are achieved by current standard practice for a town centre office development, as this performance is expected by investors and tenants in the

absence of a BREEAM rating. These credits have been included in the meaning of the term “Industry Standard” used in Appendix B. Costs relating to this “Industry Standard” are absent from the BREEAM uplifts (Table 11) because they contribute to the model’s baseline specification.

It is also worth considering the benefits of lifecycle costing rather than capital costs during decision making. For example, water efficiency credits (Wat 01) which have a relatively high capital cost relative to their value expressed as a percentage contribution to the BREEAM rating, have not been sought in this study for the London Plan compliant scenario. However, targeting these higher capital cost credits would lead to reduced lifecycle costs (Tables 6 to 9) as the payback periods from investing in water efficiency are relatively short (less than one year for four credits).

Base case cost increases between 2011 and 2014 models

Capital costs of BREEAM Very Good and Excellent ratings

12

The 2011 office case study (Abdul and Quartermaine, 2014) has been updated to take account of new energy related building regulations (HM Government, 2014); the introduction of higher energy performance requirements for London buildings (GLA, 2016); and the introduction of new performance requirements in BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 compared to BREEAM UK New Construction 2011.

Results suggest that the update from BREEAM UK New Construction 2011 to BREEAM UK New Construction 2014

has had very little impact on the percentage cost uplift of achieving BREEAM Very Good or Excellent ratings, although actual costs are higher due to general increases in construction costs. Table 12 compares the percentage cost uplift to achieve BREEAM Very Good and BREEAM Excellent for the original study “Good location” (Abdul and Quartermaine, 2014) and the two scenarios in this study (non-London Plan and London Plan compliant). All the uplifts across both studies are less than 1% of the original baseline capital cost.

The cost uplift of achieving BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 Excellent ratings is typically less than 1% of the total construction cost. Compared with BREEAM UK New Construction 2011, the percentage uplift is slightly lower because the current model building complies with the higher energy performance required by Building Regulations. Additionally, a number of the BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 credits were deemed to be “Industry Standard” practice for developments of this nature (i.e. an urban development with good access to public transport and amenities).

Analysis of additional costs associated with BREEAM certification at a high standard in terms of energy efficiency and water saving technologies has shown that these costs are relatively modest and that forecast paybacks are quick (typically less than 5 years for energy and less than 2 years for water), with substantial long-term savings.

The challenge for developers and clients is to make sure they consider these issues at an early stage in the design process to secure the benefits and take advantage of a building’s potential to deliver high performance standards by operating them efficiently.

Table 12 Capital cost uplifts for BREEAM Very Good and Excellent for previous and current office case studies

Scenario: Urban location with good access to transport and amenities

Capital cost uplift for BREEAM Very Good

Capital cost uplift for BREEAM Excellent

BREEAM UK New Construction 2011 “Good location” 0.13% 0.87%

BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 NOT London Plan compliant 0.25% 0.65%

BREEAM UK New Construction 2014 AND London Plan compliant 0.15% 0.35%

Conclusions

13

Abdul Y and Quartermaine R (2014). Delivering sustainable buildings: savings and payback. BRE Trust Report FB63. Bracknell, IHS BRE Press, 2014.

BREEAM (2011). BREEAM UK New Construction: Non-domestic buildings 2011. Technical Manual SD5073. BRE Global, Garston, 2012. Available from www.breeam.com/BREEAM2011SchemeDocument

BREEAM (2014a). BREEAM UK New Construction: Non-domestic buildings 2014. Technical Manual SD5076. BRE Global, Garston, 2016. Available from www.breeam.com/BREEAMUK2014SchemeDocument

BREEAM (2014b). The Digest of BREEAM Assessment Statistics Volume 01, 2014. BRE Global, Garston, 2014. Available from http://www.breeam.com/resources

Brundtland G H (1987). Our Common Future. UN World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press, 1987.

DECC (2015). Energy and Emissions Projections: November 2015, Annex M. London, Department for Energy and Climate Change, 2015. Available from www.gov.uk/government/publications/updated-energy-and-emissions-projections-2015

GLA (2016). The London Plan: The spatial development strategy for London consolidated with alterations since 2011. Greater London Authority, London, 2017. Available from www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/current-london-plan

HM Government (2010). The Building Regulations 2010: Approved Document L2A Conservation of fuel and power in new buildings other than dwellings (2010 edition incorporating further 2010 amendments). NBS, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 2010. Available from www.planningportal.gov.uk

HM Government (2014). The Building Regulations 2010: Approved Document L2A Conservation of fuel and power in new buildings other than dwellings (2013 edition incorporating 2016 amendments). NBS, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 2016. Available from www.planningportal.gov.uk

HM Treasury (2013). The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. London, TSO, 2013. Available from www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and-evaluation-in-central-governent

Jansz A, Mistry V and Yates A (2005). Putting a price on sustainability. Report FB10. BRE Trust, Bracknell, IHS BRE Press, 2005.

Surgenor A and Butterss I (2008). Putting a price on sustainable schools. Report FB15, BRE Trust, Bracknell, IHS BRE Press, 2008.

References

14

AHU Air Handling Unit is a device used to regulate and circulate air as part of a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system.

BMS Building Management System is a computer-based control system installed in buildings that controls and monitors the building’s mechanical and electrical equipment such as ventilation, lighting, power systems, fire systems, and security systems.

BRE BRE was originally called the Building Research Station, and later the Building Research Establishment. Since its work has for years extended beyond research and buildings, and from 1997 it has been a private company, it is now simply called BRE. BRE is an independent and impartial, research based consultancy, testing and training organisation offering expertise in every aspect of the built environment and associated industries.

BREEAM (The) BRE Environmental Assessment Method was first launched by BRE in July1990. BREEAM sets the standard for best practice in sustainable building design, construction and operation and has become one of the most comprehensive and widely recognised measures of a building’s environmental performance. BREEAM can be used to assess the environmental performance of any type of building, new and existing, anywhere in the world. BREEAM is an internationally recognised brand.

CoP Coefficient of Performance is a ratio of heating (or cooling) energy generated, to energy input.

DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change. Established in October 2008 to combine energy and climate change functions of the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) respectively. It was disbanded in June 2016 and combined with the Department for Innovation and Skills (DIUS) to form the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) in July 2016.

DHW Domestic Hot Water.

EPRNC Energy Performance Ratio for New Construction. This metric is unique to BREEAM and is used to determine the number of Ene 01 (Reduction of energy use and carbon emissions) credits to award in the BREEAM assessment (BREEAM, 2014a).

GLA Greater London Authority is the administrative body for Greater London (England). It consists of a directly elected executive Mayor of London and a London Assembly of 25 elected members, with scrutiny powers. The GLA is responsible for establishing and delivering the London Plan.

HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air-Conditioning systems, whose purpose is to provide thermal comfort and acceptable indoor air quality.

kWp Kilowatt peak is the peak energy conversion from solar irradiance of a photovoltaic solar panel (module). The value specifies the output power from a photovoltaic module under standard test conditions of 1 kWm-2 solar radiation.

LCC Lifecycle costing (LCC) is an economic analysis used in the selection of alternatives that impact both pending and future costs. It compares initial investment options and identifies the least cost alternatives for a specified period, such as twenty years.

LED A light-emitting diode (LED) is a semiconductor that emits light when a voltage is applied.

Lm/W Lumens per Watt, the light output of a lamp per unit of input power.LmW-1

London Plan The London Plan is the statutory spatial development strategy for the Greater London area. It is written by the Mayor of London and published by the Greater London Authority.

Part L2A 2013 The 2013 edition of the Building Regulations Approved Document setting out conservation of fuel and power requirements for non-domestic buildings.

PV Photovoltaic (cells) produce electrical energy from light. Individual cells are mounted together on solar panels (modules), which in turn are connected together to form a PV array, capable of producing useful amounts of electrical current in buildings.

Glossary

15

RIBA (The) Royal Institute of British Architects is a professional body for architects primarily in the United Kingdom, but also internationally, founded for the advancement of architecture under its charter granted in 1837 and Supplemental Charter granted in 1971.

SPF Specific Fan Power. Term relating to the energy input to a Fan Coil Unit (FCU).

Sustainable Development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations todevelopment meet their own needs (Brundtland G H, 1987).

T5 5/8” diameter tubular luminaire.

Uplift The additional capital cost of achieving a BREEAM UK New Construction rating when all other “obligations” have been taken into account. It can be expressed either as an absolute figure in £; or as a percentage of the “obliged” capital cost.

VRF Variable Refrigerant Flow. A configuration for heating and cooling using refrigerant as the heat transfer medium. A single outdoor condenser unit is used to chill the working fluid which is circulated to multiple separate fan coil units (FCU) within the building.

WC A Water Closet is a device for the disposal of urine and faeces. Cisterns can operate on single flush or dual flush mode depending on design.

16

Model reference Part L2A 2013 Building Regulations

BREEAM UK NC 2014 ExcellentNOT London Plan

BREEAM UK NC 2014 ExcellentALSO London Plan

Building description Modern office, air-conditioned, deep plan, fully glazed

Geometry

No. of storeys 5

Gross Floor Area 13,800m2

Storey height 3.65m, flat roof

Glazing % (equal area per façade) 80%

Location

Region for weather data London

City centre or business park City centre

Orientation North / South axis

Shading (external only) None

Building Fabric and Operation

U-Values Compliant with Part L2A 2013 regulations

Occupancy profile: B1 - Generic Office Area (National Calculation Model)

Environmental conditions

Artificial lighting energy demand 75 Lm/W and 80% efficiency across all areas

108 Lm/W LED system in office areas and T5 in circulation toilet and storage

Lighting controls Manual-on-Auto-off (Parasitic power 0.15)

Ventilation Mechanical

Openable windows No

Infiltration air change rates 5m3/hr/m2

Building Services Strategy

Heating system

Office space Fan Coil Unit - Gas boiler Fan Coil - Heat Pump

Efficiency 91% COP 3

Circulation, toilets and storage Radiators Radiators

Appendix A Energy efficiency options

17

Model reference Part L2A 2013 Building Regulations

BREEAM UK NC 2014 ExcellentNOT London Plan

BREEAM UK NC 2014 ExcellentALSO London Plan

Mechanical ventilation

Type of system Fan Coil Systems (Heating and Cooling) in the staffed area

Distribution system Fan Coil Unit

Specific fan power 1.6 W/l/s

Heat recovery type and efficiency Plate heat exchange, efficiency 70% Variable Heat Recovery

efficiency

Zones Specific Fan Power for the terminal units 0.5 W/l/s 0.2 W/l/s

Cooling

Type of chiller Water cooled chiller - up to 100kW Heat pumps

Co-efficient of Performance (CoP) of chiller/heat pumps 3.3 4.5

Ductwork Leakage Class D

Air Handling Unit (AHU) Leakage Class L1

Hot water

System Instantaneous hot water - electric

Efficiency 1

Pumps

Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) - multiple pressure in the system

Others

Power factor correction >0.95

Renewables No renewables

Basic Building Management System (BMS) OR enhanced, with auto monitoring and alarm for out of range values

Full control

18

Cate

gorie

s and

Issu

esA

sses

smen

t Crit

eria

Num

ber

of

Cred

its

Indu

stry

St

anda

rd

Non

-Lon

don

Plan

Lond

on P

lan

BREE

AM

Ve

ry G

ood

BREE

AM

Ex

celle

ntBR

EEA

M

Very

Goo

dBR

EEA

M

Exce

llent

Man

agem

ent

Man

01

Proj

ect b

rief a

nd d

esig

nSt

akeh

olde

r con

sulta

tion

(pro

ject

de

liver

y)1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Man

01

Proj

ect b

rief a

nd d

esig

nSt

akeh

olde

r con

sulta

tion

(third

pa

rty)

1N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

01

Proj

ect b

rief a

nd d

esig

nSu

stai

nabi

lity

cham

pion

(des

ign)

1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Man

01

Proj

ect b

rief a

nd d

esig

nSu

stai

nabi

lity

cham

pion

(m

onito

ring

prog

ress

)1

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Man

02

Life

cycl

e co

st a

nd s

ervi

ce

life

plan

ning

Elem

enta

l life

cycl

e co

st (L

CC)

2N

oY

esY

esN

oY

es

Man

02

Life

cycl

e co

st a

nd s

ervi

ce

life

plan

ning

Com

pone

nt le

vel L

CC o

ptio

n ap

prai

sal

1N

oY

esY

esN

oY

es

Man

02

Life

cycl

e co

st a

nd s

ervi

ce

life

plan

ning

Capi

tal c

ost r

epor

ting

1N

oY

esY

esN

oY

es

Man

03

Resp

onsib

le c

onst

ruct

ion

prac

tices

Envi

ronm

enta

l man

agem

ent

syst

em

1N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

03

Resp

onsib

le c

onst

ruct

ion

prac

tices

Sust

aina

bilit

y Ch

ampi

on

(con

stru

ctio

n)1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Man

03

Resp

onsib

le c

onst

ruct

ion

prac

tices

Cons

ider

ate

cons

truct

ion

2N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

03

Resp

onsib

le c

onst

ruct

ion

prac

tices

Mon

itorin

g of

con

stru

ctio

n sit

e im

pact

s: u

tility

con

sum

ptio

n1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Man

03

Resp

onsib

le c

onst

ruct

ion

prac

tices

Mon

itorin

g of

con

stru

ctio

n-sit

e im

pact

s: tr

ansp

ort o

f co

nstru

ctio

n m

ater

ials

and

was

te1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Man

04

Com

miss

ioni

ng a

nd

hand

over

Com

miss

ioni

ng a

nd te

stin

g sc

hedu

le a

nd re

spon

sibilit

ies

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

04

Com

miss

ioni

ng a

nd

hand

over

Com

miss

ioni

ng b

uild

ing

serv

ices

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

04

Com

miss

ioni

ng a

nd

hand

over

Test

ing

and

insp

ectin

g bu

ildin

g fa

bric

1N

oN

oY

esN

oY

es

Ap

pen

dix

B

Targ

eted

BR

EE

AM

cre

dit

s

19

Man

04

Com

miss

ioni

ng a

nd

hand

over

Han

dove

r (Bu

ildin

g U

ser G

uide

)1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Man

05

Afte

rcar

eSe

ason

al c

omm

issio

ning

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Man

05

Afte

rcar

ePo

st o

ccup

ancy

eva

luat

ion

1N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Hea

lth a

nd W

ellb

eing

Hea

01

Visu

al c

omfo

rtG

lare

con

trol

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Hea

01

Visu

al c

omfo

rtV

iew

out

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Hea

01

Visu

al c

omfo

rtIn

tern

al a

nd e

xter

nal l

ight

ing

zoni

ng a

nd c

ontro

ls1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Hea

02

Indo

or a

ir qu

ality

Indo

or a

ir qu

ality

pla

n1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Hea

02

Indo

or a

ir qu

ality

Vent

ilatio

n1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Hea

02

Indo

or a

ir qu

ality

Vola

tile

Org

anic

Com

poun

d (V

OC)

em

issio

n le

vels

(pro

duct

s)1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Hea

02

Indo

or a

ir qu

ality

Vola

tile

Org

anic

Com

poun

d (V

OC)

em

issio

n le

vels

(pos

t co

nstru

ctio

n)1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Hea

04

Ther

mal

com

fort

Ther

mal

mod

ellin

g1

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Hea

04

Ther

mal

com

fort

Ada

ptab

ility

for a

pro

ject

ed

clim

ate

chan

ge s

cena

rio1

No

No

Yes

No

No

Hea

04

Ther

mal

com

fort

Ther

mal

zon

ing

and

cont

rols

1N

oY

esY

esN

oY

es

Hea

05

Aco

ustic

per

form

ance

Aco

ustic

per

form

ance

ap

prop

riate

to th

e bu

ildin

g is

achi

eved

in re

latio

n to

: sou

nd

insu

latio

n an

d re

verb

erat

ion

times

2N

oN

oN

oY

esN

o

Hea

05

Aco

ustic

per

form

ance

Aco

ustic

per

form

ance

ap

prop

riate

to th

e bu

ildin

g is

achi

eved

in re

latio

n to

: sou

nd

insu

latio

n, in

door

am

bien

t noi

se

and

reve

rber

atio

n tim

es

3N

oY

esY

esN

oY

es

Hea

06

Safe

ty a

nd S

ecur

itySe

curit

y of

site

and

bui

ldin

g1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ener

gy

Ene

01Re

duct

ion

of e

nerg

y us

e an

d ca

rbon

em

issio

ns

Ach

ieve

Ene

rgy

Perfo

rman

ce

Ratio

for N

ew C

onst

ruct

ion

(EPR

NC)

≥ 0

.375

5N

oN

oY

esN

oN

o

Cate

gorie

s and

Issu

esA

sses

smen

t Crit

eria

Num

ber

of

Cred

its

Indu

stry

St

anda

rd

Non

-Lon

don

Plan

Lond

on P

lan

BREE

AM

Ve

ry G

ood

BREE

AM

Ex

celle

ntBR

EEA

M

Very

Goo

dBR

EEA

M

Exce

llent

20

Ene

01Re

duct

ion

of e

nerg

y us

e an

d ca

rbon

em

issio

ns

Ach

ieve

Ene

rgy

Perfo

rman

ce

Ratio

for N

ew C

onst

ruct

ion

(EPR

NC)

≥ 0

.60

8N

oN

oN

oY

esY

es

Ene

02En

ergy

mon

itorin

gSu

b-m

eter

ing

of m

ajor

ene

rgy

cons

umin

g sy

stem

s1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ene

02En

ergy

mon

itorin

gSu

b-m

eter

ing

of h

igh

ener

gy

load

and

tena

ncy

area

s1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ene

03Ex

tern

al li

ghtin

gEx

tern

al li

ghtin

g1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ene

04En

e 04

Low

and

zer

o ca

rbon

tech

nolo

gies

Pass

ive

desig

n an

alys

is1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Ene

04En

e 04

Low

and

zer

o ca

rbon

tech

nolo

gies

Free

coo

ling

1N

oN

oY

esN

oN

o

Ene

04En

e 04

Low

and

zer

o ca

rbon

tech

nolo

gies

Low

zer

o ca

rbon

feas

ibilit

y st

udy

1N

oN

oY

esN

oY

es

Ene

08En

ergy

effi

cien

t eq

uipm

ent

Iden

tify

unre

gula

ted

ener

gy

cons

umin

g lo

ads

AN

D

dem

onst

rate

a m

eani

ngfu

l re

duct

ion

in u

nreg

ulat

ed e

nerg

y co

nsum

ptio

n

2N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Tran

spor

t

Tra

01Pu

blic

tran

spor

t ac

cess

ibilit

yA

cces

sibilit

y in

dex

3Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Tra

02Pr

oxim

ity to

am

eniti

esPr

oxim

ity to

use

ful l

ocal

am

eniti

es1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Tra

03Cy

clist

faci

litie

sCy

cle

stor

age

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Tra

03Cy

clist

faci

litie

sCy

clist

faci

litie

s (e

.g. s

how

ers,

chan

ging

, loc

kers

, dry

ing

spac

e)1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Tra

04M

axim

um c

ar p

arki

ng

capa

city

Car p

arki

ng c

apac

ity1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Tra

05Tr

avel

pla

nTr

avel

pla

n de

velo

ped

durin

g fe

asib

ility

and

desig

n st

ages

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Wat

er

Wat

01

Wat

er c

onsu

mpt

ion

Ach

ieve

12.

5% im

prov

emen

t ov

er b

asel

ine

wat

er

cons

umpt

ion

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Cate

gorie

s and

Issu

esA

sses

smen

t Crit

eria

Num

ber

of

Cred

its

Indu

stry

St

anda

rd

Non

-Lon

don

Plan

Lond

on P

lan

BREE

AM

Ve

ry G

ood

BREE

AM

Ex

celle

ntBR

EEA

M

Very

Goo

dBR

EEA

M

Exce

llent

21

Wat

01

Wat

er c

onsu

mpt

ion

Ach

ieve

40%

impr

ovem

ent o

ver

base

line

wat

er c

onsu

mpt

ion

3N

oN

oY

esN

oN

o

Wat

02

Wat

er m

onito

ring

Spec

ifica

tion

of w

ater

met

er o

n m

ains

sup

ply

linke

d to

BM

S1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Wat

03

Leak

det

ectio

nLe

ak d

etec

tion

syst

em1

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Wat

04

Wat

er e

ffici

ent e

quip

men

tId

entif

icat

ion

of a

nd re

duct

ion

in

unre

gula

ted

wat

er d

eman

d1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Mat

eria

ls

Mat

01

Life

cycl

e im

pact

sA

naly

sis o

f life

cycl

e im

pact

s of

m

ain

build

ing

elem

ents

usin

g BR

EEA

M M

at 0

1 ca

lcul

ator

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Mat

03

Resp

onsib

le s

ourc

ing

of

mat

eria

lsSu

stai

nabl

e pr

ocur

emen

t pla

n1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Mat

03

Resp

onsib

le s

ourc

ing

of

mat

eria

ls

18%

or m

ore

of a

vaila

ble

Resp

onsib

le S

ourc

ing

Mat

eria

ls po

ints

are

ach

ieve

d fo

r mat

eria

ls to

be

used

in th

e bu

ildin

g

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Mat

05

Des

igni

ng fo

r dur

abilit

y an

d re

silie

nce

Prot

ectin

g vu

lner

able

par

ts o

f th

e bu

ildin

g fro

m d

amag

e an

d pr

otec

ting

expo

sed

parts

from

m

ater

ial d

egra

datio

n

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Mat

06

Mat

eria

l effi

cien

cy

Opp

ortu

nitie

s id

entif

ied

and

impl

emen

ted

to o

ptim

ise u

se

of m

ater

ials

in b

uild

ing

desig

n,

proc

urem

ent,

cons

truct

ion,

m

aint

enan

ce a

nd e

nd o

f life

1N

oN

oY

esN

oY

es

Was

te

Wst

01

Cons

truct

ion

was

te

man

agem

ent

Cons

truct

ion

reso

urce

effi

cien

cy

(≤ 7

.5 m

3 or ≤

6.5

tonn

es o

f w

aste

per

100

m2 )

2N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Wst

01

Cons

truct

ion

was

te

man

agem

ent

Div

ersio

n of

reso

urce

s fro

m

land

fill

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Wst

03

Ope

ratio

nal w

aste

Ded

icat

ed s

pace

pro

visio

n fo

r se

greg

atio

n an

d st

orag

e of

re

cycl

able

ope

ratio

nal w

aste

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Cate

gorie

s and

Issu

esA

sses

smen

t Crit

eria

Num

ber

of

Cred

its

Indu

stry

St

anda

rd

Non

-Lon

don

Plan

Lond

on P

lan

BREE

AM

Ve

ry G

ood

BREE

AM

Ex

celle

ntBR

EEA

M

Very

Goo

dBR

EEA

M

Exce

llent

22

Wst

04

Spec

ulat

ive

floor

and

ce

iling

finish

es

EITH

ER: T

enan

ted

spac

e ha

s fin

ishes

inst

alle

d on

ly in

a s

how

ar

ea; O

R sp

ecifi

c oc

cupa

nt h

as

agre

ed to

the

spec

ified

floo

r and

ce

iling

finish

es

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Wst

05

Ada

ptat

ion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

Stru

ctur

al a

nd fa

bric

resil

ienc

e1

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Wst

06

Func

tiona

l ada

ptab

ility

Func

tiona

l ada

ptat

ion

stra

tegy

stu

dy m

ade

and

reco

mm

enda

tions

ado

pted

in

RIB

A S

tage

D o

r equ

ival

ent

desig

n st

age

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Land

use

and

eco

logy

LE 0

1Si

te s

elec

tion

Prev

ious

ly o

ccup

ied

land

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

LE 0

2Ec

olog

ical

val

ue o

f sit

e an

d pr

otec

tion

of

ecol

ogic

al fe

atur

esPr

otec

tion

of e

colo

gica

l fea

ture

s1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

LE 0

3M

inim

ising

impa

ct o

n ex

istin

g sit

e ec

olog

yCh

ange

in e

colo

gica

l val

ue (n

o ne

gativ

e ch

ange

in s

peci

es)

1N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

LE 0

5Lo

ng T

erm

Impa

ct o

n Bi

odiv

ersit

yM

easu

res

to im

prov

e lo

ng te

rm

biod

iver

sity

are

adop

ted

2N

oY

esY

esY

esY

es

Pollu

tion

Pol 0

1Im

pact

of r

efrig

eran

tsN

o us

e of

refri

gera

nts

in in

stal

led

plan

t or s

yste

ms

3Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Pol 0

2N

Ox

emiss

ions

< 4

0 m

g/kW

h em

itted

NO

x fro

m h

eatin

g an

d ho

t wat

er

plan

t3

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Pol 0

3Su

rface

wat

er ru

n of

fFl

ood

resil

ienc

e –

flood

risk

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Pol 0

3Su

rface

wat

er ru

n of

fSu

rface

wat

er ru

n of

f2

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Pol 0

4Re

duct

ion

of n

ight

tim

e lig

ht p

ollu

tion

Elim

inat

ion

of e

xter

nal l

ight

po

llutio

n th

roug

h ef

fect

ive

desig

n1

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Pol 0

5N

oise

atte

nuat

ion

Noi

se im

pact

ass

essm

ent

1Y

esY

esY

esY

esY

es

Cate

gorie

s and

Issu

esA

sses

smen

t Crit

eria

Num

ber

of

Cred

its

Indu

stry

St

anda

rd

Non

-Lon

don

Plan

Lond

on P

lan

BREE

AM

Ve

ry G

ood

BREE

AM

Ex

celle

ntBR

EEA

M

Very

Goo

dBR

EEA

M

Exce

llent

23

24

BRE Global Bucknalls Lane Watford United Kingdom WD25 9XX

T +44 (0)333 321 8811 E breeam@bre.co.uk www.breeam.com

© BRE Global Ltd 2017

Permission is granted for this report to be distributed only in its entirety, without amendment, and with copyright attribution to BRE Global Ltd.

Every effort has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this report but no warranty is made in respect of any conclusions or opinions expressed herein.

BRE Global Ltd’s liability in respect of this report and any reliance thereupon is disclaimed and BRE Global shall have no liability to third parties to the extent permitted in law.

BREEAM is a registered trade mark owned by BRE (the Building Research Establishment Ltd. Community Trade Mark E5778551). The BREEAM marks, logos and symbols are the Copyright of BRE and are reproduced by permission.

BRE Trust The BRE Trust uses profits made by BRE Group to fund new research and education programmes, that will help it meet its goal of ‘building a better world together’.

The BRE Trust is a registered charity in England & Wales: No. 1092193, and Scotland: No. SC039320.

Copies of the BREEAM technical manuals can be downloaded free of charge from www.breeam.com/technical-standards

Follow us on Twitter@BRE_BREEAM #BREEAM