Influences of green star rating tool on HVAC system design

Buildings are one of the most significant infrastructures in modern societies. The construction and operation of modern buildings consume a considerable amount of energy and materials, therefore contribute significantly to the climate change process. In order to reduce the environmental impact of buildings, various green building rating tools have been developed. In this paper, energy uses of the building sector in Australia and over the world are first reviewed. This is then followed by discussions on the development and scopes of various green building rating tools, with a particular focus on the Green Star rating scheme developed in Australia. It is shown that Green Star has significant implications on almost every aspect of the design of HVAC systems, including the selection of air handling and distribution systems, fluid handling systems, refrigeration systems, heat rejection systems and building control systems.

The future of sustainable building assessment tools : a case study in Australia

Sustainability issues in built environment have attracted an increasingly level of attention from both the general public and the industry. As a result, a number of green building assessment tools have been developed such as the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and the BRE Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), etc. This paper critically reviewed the assessment tools developed in Australian context, i.e. the Green Star rating tools developed by the Green Building Council of Australia. A particular focus is given to the recent developments of these assessment tools. The results showed that the office buildings take the biggest share of Green Star rated buildings. Similarly, sustainable building assessments seem to be more performance oriented which focuses on the operation stage of buildings. In addition, stakeholder engagement during the decision making process is encouraged. These findings provide useful references to the development of next generation of sustainable building assessment tools.

Green Star points obtained by Australian building projects

The green building trend has increased rapidly worldwide in recent decades as a means of addressing growing concerns over climate change and global warming and to reduce the impact of the building industry on the environment. A significant contribution in Australia is the use of a series of rating tools by the Green Building Council Australia (GBCA) for the certification of various types of buildings. This paper reviews the use of the Green Star system in Australian building construction, and investigates the potential challenges involved in acquiring the certification of Australian buildings by critically analysing a database of most recently certified GBCA projects. The results show that management-related credits and innovation-related credits are the easiest and most difficult respectively to obtain. Additionally, 6-Star green buildings achieve significantly higher points than other certified buildings in the Energy category. In contrast, 4 Star green buildings achieve more points in the Material category than 5 and 6 Star buildings. The study offers a useful reference for both property developers and project teams to obtain a better understanding of the rating scheme and consequently the effective preparation of certification documentation.

Ecologically sustainable development and architecture: the impact of rating tools

The concept of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) has become an important issue – albeit often scarcely applied – in the design of commercial buildings. To encourage the adoption of sustainable strategies in the practice of design and to address the environmental problems caused by these developments, governments and organisations of various countries have proposed the adoption of scorecard rating tools to inform designers of the impact of their decisions and to present a way of establishing project goals and objectives early in the design process. In Australia, the recent introduction of the Green Star Rating Tool (Office Design) is believed to provide the architects with a ‘whole-of-building’ assessment of the environmental impact of their design by creating a checklist against which to benchmark performance. This paper follows the design of a commercial building, evaluating the impact of Green Star in the overall process. The results of the study suggest the need to include the use of scorecard rating tools in a more integrated model, where ESD is considered at every stage of design and construction rather than being a separate component applied only to promote the ‘greenness’ of a building. Rating tools can be an asset to the design team, provided sustainable requirements are reinforced throughout the entire process.

Environmental design : incorporating a rating tool into the design of commercial buildings

Environmental performance assessment or green building rating tools for commercial buildings are one of the more recent responses to encourage green solutions for commercial buildings. This paper discusses the initial stages of a research project that looks at the impact of a rating tool, such as Green Star, on design. There are numerous ways in which an architect can design commercial buildings, but environmental design solutions have consistently failed to become accepted practice. Therefore, how will this tool be incorporated into the building design process? Developed to assist the designer can the inclusion of a rating tool such as Green Star provide an effective framework to encourage the inclusion of environmental design strategies in commercial buildings? A field study, recording the design process of a commercial building, anticipates that a whole building assessment approach towards design, as proposed through the Green Star Rating Tool, will provide an effective framework to set and monitor design targets in order to optimise the environmental design goals in commercial buildings.

A comparison of international and Australian rating tools for sustainability elements of residential property

The Australian housing sector contributes about a fifth of national greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG emissions contribute to climate change which leads to an increase in the occurrence or intensity of natural disasters and damage of houses. To ensure housing performance in the face of climate change, various rating tools for residential property have been introduced in different countries. The aim of this paper is to present a preliminary comparison between international and Australian rating tools in terms of purpose, use and sustainability elements for residential property. The methodologies used are to review, classify, compare and identify similarities and differences between rating tools. Two international tools, Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) (UK) and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Homes (LEED-Homes) (USA), will be compared to two Australian tools, Green Star – Multi Unit Residential v1 and EnviroDevelopment. All four rating tools include management, energy, water and material aspects. The findings reveal thirteen elements that fall under three categories: spatial planning, occupants’ health and comfort, and environmental conditions. The variations in different tools may result from differences in local prevailing climate. Not all sustainability elements covered by international rating tools are included in the Australian rating tools. The voluntary nature of the tools implies they are not broadly applied in their respective market and that there is a policy implementation gap. A comprehensive rating tool could be developed in Australia to promote and lessen the confusion about sustainable housing, which in turn assist in improving the supply and demand of sustainable housing.

Comparison of sustainable community rating tools in Australia

The community is the basic unit of urban development, and appropriate assessment tools are needed for communities to evaluate and facilitate decision making concerning sustainable community development and reduce the detrimental effects of urban community actions on the environment. Existing research into sustainable community rating tools focuses primarily on those that are internationally recognized to describe their advantages and future challenges. However, the differences between rating tools due to different regional conditions, situations and characteristics have yet to be addressed. In doing this, this paper examines three sustainable community rating tools in Australia, namely Green Star-Communities PILOT, EnviroDevelopment and VicUrban Sustainability Charter (Master Planned Community Assessment Tool). In order to identify their similarities, differences and advantages these are compared in terms of sustainability coverage, prerequisites, adaptation to locality, scoring and weighting, participation, presentation of results, and application process. These results provide the stakeholders of sustainable community development projects with a better understanding of the available rating tools in Australia and assist with evaluation and decision making.

International comparison of sustainable rating tools

This paper undertakes an international comparison of global sustainability tools and examines their characteristics and differences. Most importantly, it focuses on which tools from different countries can be directly compared with each other (i.e., is a five-star building with one rating system directly comparable with a four-star rating of another rating system?). The results are designed to provide some clarification of the assessment tools for sustainable buildings, which in turn will assist investors, developers, tenants, and government bodies in making
informed decisions about green buildings. In addition, it is envisaged that removing some of the uncertainty associated with sustainable buildings will increase transparency for stakeholders and facilitate their acceptance.

Selection of solar energy for green building using superiority and inferiority multi-criteria ranking (SIR) method

Green energy is one of the key factors, driving down electricity bill and zero carbon emission generating electricity to green building. However, the climate change and environmental policies are accelerating people to use renewable energy instead of coal-fired (convention type) energy for green building that energy is not environmental friendly. Therefore, solar energy is one of the clean energy solving environmental impact and paying less in electricity fee. The method of solar energy is collecting sun from solar array and saves in battery from which provides necessary electricity to whole house with zero carbon emission. However, in the market a lot of solar arrays suppliers, the aims of this paper attempted to use superiority and inferiority multi-criteria ranking (SIR) method with 13 constraints establishing I-flows and S-flows matrices to evaluate four alternatives solar energies and determining which alternative is the best, providing power to sustainable building. Furthermore, SIR is well-known structured approach of multi-criteria decision support tools and gradually used in construction and building. The outcome of this paper significantly gives an indication to user selecting solar energy.

Sustainable education buildings in Australia : a green star review

In order to promote green building practice in Australia, the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) launched the Green Star rating tools for various types of buildings built since 2003. Of these, the Green Star-Education rating tool addresses sustainability issues during the design and construction phrases of education facility development. It covers a number of categories, including Management, Indoor Environment Quality, Energy, Transport, Water, Materials, Land Use & Ecology, Emissions and Innovation. This paper reviews the use of the Green Star system in Australian education facilities construction and the potential challenges associated with Green Star- Education implementation. Score sheets of 34 education projects across Australia that achieved Green Star certification were collected and analysed. The percentage of green star points obtained within each category and sub-category (credits) for each project were analysed to illustrate the achievement of credits. The results show that management-related credits and ecology-related credits are the easiest and most difficult to obtain respectively. The study also indicted that 6 Green Star education projects obtained particularly high percentages in the Innovation category. The investigation of points obtained in each category provides prospective Green Star applicants with insights into credit achievement for future projects.

Environmental rating tools and residential land development in Australia

Numerous environmental rating tools have developed around the world over the past decade or so, in an attempt to increase awareness of the impact buildings have on the environment. Whilst many of these tools can be applied across a variety of building types, the majority focus mainly on the commercial building sector. Only recently have some of the better known environmental rating tools become adaptable to the land development sector, where arguably the most visible environmental impacts are made. EnviroDevelopment is one such tool that enables rating of residential land development in Australia. This paper seeks to quantify the environmental benefits achieved by the environmental rating tool EnviroDevelopment, using data from its certified residential projects across Australia. This research will identify the environmental gains achieved in the residential land development sector that can be attributed to developers aspiring to gain certification under this rating tool.

Green office interiors in Australia : lessons learnt

In 2003, the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) launched their Green Star rating tools for various types of buildings in order to promote green building practice in Australia. Of these, the Green Star-Office Interior rating tool is designed for building owners, tenants and interior designers to assess the environmental impact of an interior fitout. It covers a number of categories, including Management, Indoor Environment Quality, Energy, Transport, Water, Materials, Land Use and Ecology, Emissions, and Innovation. This paper reviews the usage of the Green Star system in Australian office tenancy fitouts and the potential challenges associated with Green Star-Office Interior implementation. This involves the analysis of score sheets of 66 office interior projects across Australia that achieved Green Star certification. The percentage of green star points obtained within each category and sub-categories (credits) for each project are investigated to illustrate the achievement of credits. The results show that Emission-related credits and Innovation related credits are the easiest and most difficult respectively to obtain. It is also found that 6 Green Star office interior projects perform especially better in the categories of Energy and Ecology than 4 and 5 Star projects. The investigation of point frequency in each category provides prospective Green Star applicants with insights into credit achievement for future projects.

Comparative study on green building supportive policies of pacific-rim countries most vulnerable to climate change

- Problem Climate change is affecting the world in numerous ways such as increased temperatures, sea level rise, and increased droughts and floods. Governments worldwide, especially in the most vulnerable countries, are urged to seek better solutions for sustainable development. The construction industry and buildings have enormous impacts on humans and the environment, meaning green building must be one of the solutions. Government involvement is widely considered as one of the essential and most effective ways to promote green building and drive the construction market towards sustainability. This paper will review green building policy of the Pacific-Rim countries that are most vulnerable to climate change according to the recent Standard and Poor’s ranking, including: Cambodia, Vietnam, Fiji, Philippines, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. Methodology: This paper will review policy related publications including journal and conference papers, portal websites of governments, legislation documents and reports of international organisations. It will focus on the policies and governmental instruments that support the adoption of green building practices. - Findings All six governments have launched climate change adaptation policies, showing a great concern regarding the damages caused by the phenomenon. All countries except Papua New Guinea have promulgated energy efficiency policy and programs which indirectly promote the adoption of green building practices. The comparison study shows that Philippines and Indonesia motivate the adoption of renewable energy generation, energy efficiency and green building through either financial or advocacy instruments, while other four countries tend to implement regulatory tools to mandate energy conservation. Through comparison, Cambodia and Vietnam – the two countries providing vision to develop green building - can learn from Philippines and Indonesia’s policy and instruments. - Research limitations Language differences between the countries and limit of formal sources may pose difficulties in searching for information. While much English language literature exists, sources from Cambodia, Philippines and Indonesia are less accessible. - Takeaway for practice As the paper provides more understanding about the supportive policy of those countries, it will introduce more opportunities for green property developers to invest in construction markets of those Pacific-Rim countries. - Originality There is little research reviewing green building supportive policies of developing and less-wealthy countries that are forecasted to be most vulnerable and most impacted by climate change. The originality of this paper lies in its investigation on how those countries intend to respond to this phenomenon and whether and to what extent they support the green building market by using policy tools.

Developing an ‘as performing’ building assessment

The building profession is increasingly becoming more demanding with respect to building environmental performance. Intentions are to provide best practices into our buildings. In part, this is a response due to the Australian government and other independent organisations that have developed policy on rating tools and performance ranking measures, all with the intention of accomplishing environmentally sustainable buildings.

With rating systems endorsing innovative environmental design solutions, it could be asked: Are our buildings really operating as rated? Do we know whether our designs are in compliance with what was calculated or simulated? Is there a feedback loop informing the design process on successes or failures in our designs or mechanical services?

While ratings continue to focus on ‘by design’ or ‘as built’ rewards, few tools acknowledge perhaps the more crucial bottom line: ‘as performing’. With the exception of an AGBR (Australian Green Building Rating) scheme on actual annual energy consumption, there appears to be no ‘as performing’ assessment. Furthermore, practically every building is a prototype (a one-off) and requires commissioning, programming and scheduling of its services. It would certainly appear that as stakeholders (the procurers, owners, facilities managers and users) of the newly built environment, that what we really want to know is actual on-site confirmation of performance. It is the objective of the Mobile Architecture and Built Environment Laboratory (MABEL), to provide such a service.

Valuation and sustainability : are rating tools enough?

The lack of sufficient financial drivers are preventing significant investment in sustainability because stakeholders have only very limited ability to measure the sustainability of the building or understand the impact upon the value. Valuers are unable to indicate or clarify whether sustainability is affecting market value as there is an absence of detailed market evidence, sales data and lease transactions of sustainable building. Leaving both Valuers and other stakeholders uncertain of the value implication as there is no reliable evidence as to whether sustainable buildings are feasible (Lutzkendorf and Lorenz, 2005). One of the key barriers is the confusion evident in the industry particularly the measurement of sustainability in commercial property. Although a range of environmental rating tools exist for buildings globally in commercial property, the synergy between these tools and identification of the relationship between the measurement and market value is inherently blurred due to the unique nature of the compilation of points attributed in the rating tools for sustainability or energy certificates in commercial property. The paper examines the challenges that face the Valuation profession in assessing the impact of sustainability on market value.