Explore the vast range of titles available.

Energy efficiency is regarded as one of the important elements of green building. Every Green Building Rating (GBR) system puts forward a set of criteria for energy efficiency and it is different for each system. A comparative study is done to distinguish between two GBR systems practiced worldwide-LEED and BREEAM, first on the criteria for energy efficiency and secondly on how efficient and effective each system in energy performance improvement. Building energy simulation tool, eQuest is used to obtain annual energy consumption of a case study multi-family dwelling residential building for its various design options. Different design cases were formulated by changing design parameters and the simulation results thus obtained are used for evaluating the performance improvement for energy, calculated as per the criteria for each system. This study primarily looks for the combinations which grab total achievable credits in energy efficiency for a particular system. For LEED, it was found that renewable energy allocation alone has the greater influence in achieving higher credits. For BREEAM, there requires specifically a considerable decrease in HVAC load which can be brought by the means of more natural ventilation or by adopting passive cooling techniques. BREEAM was also found more effective in reflecting any kind of improvement made in terms of awarding credits.

The Paris Agreement requires building retrofitting practices to be more efficient and effective. However, the current practice for building energy retrofitting is lacking behind, and one reason for that is the time-consuming process of energy credit evaluation. Energy performance assessment such as BREEAM-NL in the Netherlands could apply a more automatic approach with the help of building information modelling (BIM) for an efficient building energy retrofitting evaluation process. However, to what extent BIM can help in accelerating energy performance evaluation in the BREEAM-NL certification process is under-examined. This paper first combines literature findings with practical interviews from a case study organization to present a holistic overview of the potential for automating energy-related credits evaluation in BREEAM-NL using BIM. To understand the possible impacts of such transition, a responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed (RACI) matrix is developed to map the impacts on different actors involved. Furthermore, to help practitioners in an organizational context to adopt a BIM-enabled energy credits assessment workflow, the case study organization is studied to (1) understand their current BIM use status; (2) propose a suitable starting point to take toward a BIM-enabled energy performance assessment for building energy retrofitting. Finally, the proposed starting point is demonstrated using a customized application, and the project team’s feedback is used to verify its efficiency and future directions are identified.

Increasing problems regarding pollution and climate change have long been demonstrated by scientific evidence. An important portion of carbon emissions are produced by the building sector. These emissions are directly related not only to the building’s energy consumption, but also other building attributes affecting the construction and operation of existing buildings: materials selection, waste management, transportation, water consumption, and others. To help reduce these emissions, several green building rating system (GBRSs) have appeared during the last years. This has made it difficult for stakeholders to identify which GBRSs could be more suitable to a specific project. The heterogeneity of the GRBS scenario requires the creation of a transparent and robust indicator framework that can be used in any country within the European Union (EU), which is a common EU framework of core sustainability indicators for office and residential buildings Level(s) with the goal to provide a solid structure for building sustainability certification across all countries of the EU. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the most common GBRSs within the EU: Building Research Establishment Assessment Method (BREEAM), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), Haute Qualité Environnementale (HQE), and Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED), and a bottom up comparison of the influence in the final score produced by the indicators stated by Level(s). The indicators studied show a different influence of Level(s) indicators on every GBRS, where LEED and BREEAM were most affected while HQE and DGNB were less so. This paper demonstrates the heterogeneity of current GRBSs in the EU scenario and the difference between sustainability assessments, where DGNB seems to be more aligned to the current EU framework. Finally, the paper concludes with the need to work to achieve alignment between the GBRS and Level(s).

Rating systems for assessing the environmental impact of buildings are technical instruments that aim to evaluate the environmental impact of buildings and construction projects. In some cases, these rating systems can also cover urban-scale projects, community projects, and infrastructures. These schemes are designed to assist project management in making the projects more sustainable by providing frameworks with precise criteria for assessing the various aspects of a building’s environmental impact. Given the growing interest in sustainable development worldwide, many rating systems for assessing the environmental impact of buildings have been established in recent years, each one with its peculiarities and fields of applicability. The present work is motivated by an interest in emphasizing such differences to better understand these rating systems and extract the main implications to building design. It also attempts to summarize in a user-friendly form the vast and fragmented assortment of information that is available today. The analysis focuses on the six main rating systems: the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM), the Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE), the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB), the Haute Qualité Environnementale (HQETM), the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), and the Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool).

Green Building Rating Systems (GBRSs) are typically third-party, voluntary, and market driven standards that measure buildings’ sustainability level by multi-criteria assessment, and encourage the adoption of environmentally, socially and economically sustainable practices in design, construction and operation of buildings (or neighborhoods). GBRSs aim at guiding and assessing the project throughout all its life cycle, thus limiting the negative impact on the environment, as well as on the building occupants’ health and well-being, and even reducing operational costs. Hundreds of GBRSs are now available worldwide, varying in approaches, application processes, and evaluation metrics. BREEAM, CASBEE, Green Star and LEED are among the most applied worldwide. Despite some differences, they all adhere to the same general evaluation structure: project performances ares measured using a set of relevant indicators, grouped per topics such as water management, energy use, materials, site qualities. Each assessed requirement is assigned a score/judgment, the total of which determines the level of sustainability achieved. In addition to regular updates, a current trend is to improve the effectiveness of protocols, making them more comprehensive and accurate, while keeping them easy to use.

Energy accounts for a significant share of carbon emissions, and buildings play a substantial role in this by contributing to both direct and indirect emissions throughout their lifecycle. Enhancing energy efficiency in buildings is a strategy to mitigate these impacts. The main goal of this review is to uncover solutions, trends, and examples of good practices in the field of office buildings. It presents effective cases and a SWOT analysis of LEED, BREEAM, and DGNB certifications, highlighting their contributions to energy efficiency in buildings on an international scale. The paper identifies and outlines similarities and differences between each methodology used to achieve energy efficiency in different buildings and contexts. The findings may allow new ways to improve access and obtain results regarding energy efficiency, thereby supporting building owners and companies in finding more effective solutions. The research highlights the necessity for continual enhancements in these systems, which should involve addressing economic factors, conducting post-occupancy evaluations, and considering lifecycle perspectives. The recommendations encompass standardizing practices, considering costs, conducting regular revisions, managing materials and resources, and incorporating occupancy measures.

One of the consequences of COVID-19 pandemic is the momentum it has created for global changes affecting various aspects of daily lives. Among these, green building certification systems (GBCSs) should not be left behind as significant potential modifications may be required to ensure their versatility for residential buildings due to the new pandemic reality. The present study aims to evaluate the readiness of chosen GBCSs for a proper assessment of existing residential housing sustainability in a post-pandemic world. Based on a literature review of the state-of-the-art data sources and round table discussions, the present study proposes a particular set of sustainability indicators covering special sustainability requirements under pandemic conditions. Then, those indicators are used to evaluate the readiness of selected GBCSs (BREEAM, LEED, WELL, CASBEE) to meet new pandemic-resilient requirements based on their responses to the indicators. The assessment shows that none of the reviewed GBCSs are fully ready to cover all the proposed indicators. GBCSs have differing focuses on particular sustainability pillars, which also affected their responses to pandemic-resilient categories. For instance, WELL rating system successfully responded to the health and safety category, whereas LEED showed better preparedness in terms of environmental efficiency. BREEAM and CASBEE systems have a more evenly distributed attention to all three pandemic-resilient categories (Health & Safety, Environmental Resources Consumption, and Comfort) with an accent on the Comfort category. On a specific note, all GBCSs are insufficiently prepared for waste and wastewater management. In the future, GBCSs should be modified to better adapt to pandemic conditions, for which the current work may provide a basis. As an alternative, brand new standards can be created to face newly arising and evolving post-pandemic requirements.

Building information modeling (BIM) and life cycle assessment (LCA) are two methods that can be helpful when designing buildings with lower environmental impacts. One of the most significant examples of environmental impact assessments in construction is green building certification. Certified buildings have improved performance and greater asset value. In this study, four certification systems were investigated for their potential interconnections with BIM and LCA. The main tasks were (1) to review a BIM-based workflow, (2) assess its usage as an input for the LCA within green certifications, and (3) provide suggestions for developing building models. Building models can be helpful during the design process, but the best results are expected when the specifically described steps are followed. These suggestions aim at improving building models in terms of their usage for green building certifications and particularly for LCA. All the investigated results were clarified and adjusted using a model of a recently finished building in Zug. As reference tools, One Click LCA and a manual process were selected. The outcomes were aligned with those of other studies and confirmed the necessity of good data and management quality for building projects.

Combating climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions are among the European Union’s priorities today. Direct implementation of these priorities is sustainable buildings. This paper analyzes the energy supply of a health resort building with renewable energy sources in the context of the “BREEAM In-Use” sustainability assessment system. The criteria for the “BREEAM In-Use” scoring system are grouped according to the 3E criteria and recommendations are made for the weights of the 3E assessment system criteria. In accordance with the criteria grouping methodology in the article, in the context of 3E criteria, the maximum weight should reach the energy indicator (about 50%), the second most important one is the ecological criterion, and about 16% should only meet the economic criterion.

Comparative analysis of the material criteria embedded in building sustainability assessment tools was performed. The material-related issues were identified, classified, and summarized. A framework, the triple bottom line of sustainability (environment, economy, and society), was used to examine the material assessment criteria, evaluation parameters, and descriptions. The material criteria were evaluated to identify the current features and weaknesses as balanced material assessments for sustainable development. The criteria showed significant differences in their scopes in covering the social and economic aspects beyond the environmental aspect. For comprehensive sustainability assessment purposes, it is essential that adequate attention be paid to all three dimensions. Finally, this paper proposes the indicators of the sustainable material assessment from an analysis of all the material-related items.