Download Wide variation in how parameters are regarded in environmental

Publications
Publications
Wide variation in how parameters are regarded
in environmental certification systems
Certification systems for buildings can be divided into
two main types, depending on which perspective they are
based: the holistic perspective or the specific perspective.
Daniel Olsson
CIT Energy Management AB,
Gothenburg, Sweden
The first type embraces environmental certification systems which, consequently, often consider a large number
of aspects, from the choice of building materials and the
disposal of waste products to the distance to the nearest stop for public transport. These systems can be said
to quantify a building’s total environmental footprint,
which can, of course, be commendable. However, individual aspects, such as energy performance, can risk being partly overshadowed by all the other aspects and this
is a disadvantage. This would not happen to the energy
performance aspect in an energy certification system,
as this would have a specific perspective. On the other hand, it would be the only question to be addressed
F
or anyone wishing to certify a building there is
an enormous choice of certification systems to
choose between, each one offering its own distinctive approach to the subject. In order to clarify the
differences and likenesses between the best known systems, Swegon Air Academy has published the book
SIMPLY GREEN A quick guide to environmental and
energy certification systems for sustainable buildings.
The proportions of the different categories in each environmental certification system.
BREEAM
Energy
17 %
Indoor
environment
13 %
DGNB
32 %
14 %
Green Star Miljöbyggnad
22 %
5%
14 %
18 %
6%
9%
1%
6%
Materials
11 %
13 %
1%
8%
Waste
7%
Axelrubrik
Water
Site
13 %
Construction
phase
4%
Transport
7%
Economy
92
LEED
2%
4%
13 %
10 %
10 %
1%
11 %
2%
27 %
HQE
CASBEE
18 %
53 %
7%
13 %
38 %
11 %
4%
3%
4%
IGBC
20 %
19 %
20 %
16 %
5%
10 %
<1 %
22 %
19 %
11 %
4%
11 %
1%
10 %
2%
2%
<1 %
20 %
Innovation
9%
5%
Other
10 %
5%
REHVA Journal – May 2013
4%
5%
42 %
20 %
19 %
22 %
15 %
Publications
(though often together with certain indoor environmental criteria). Energy certification systems are therefore
often regarded as ‘single issue systems’.
It is not possible to give a general answer to the question about which type of certification system, or which
specific system, is best: this will, of course, depend on
both the perspective chosen by the property owner as
well as a number of other factors, for example, the benefits to be gained from the certification itself, in which
country the building is located, the cost of the certification process, etc.
A quick look at the environmental certification systems
described in the book will reveal certain common approaches, for instance, with respect to the choices of
what has an affect on the environment. However, a closer look will show that a number of the systems are significantly different, for instance, when it comes to how
different parameters are assessed and weighted, i.e. how
the significance of a particular parameter is judged in
respect to other parameters. Weighting can be carried
out in two different ways: by applying a weighting factor to an individual parameter or to a whole category of
parameters, depending on the scoring method used in
a particular system, or by assessing a larger number of
parameters within the categories on which the system
developers want to put the greatest focus. Some systems have a clearer focus on certain issues than others
and it is interesting to note how these are reflected both
geographically and culturally. For example, the Indian
IGBC system is strongly biased towards the precarious
fresh water situations found around a number of major Indian cities. The Japanese CASBEE system, on the
other hand, is more specific than other systems when it
comes to requirements and measures to minimize damage caused by earthquakes. This system also places great
importance on so-called light pollution, which is most
likely due to prevailing problems in Tokyo and other
major cities. A European example that illustrates local
and cultural aspects is Minergie, the Swiss energy certification system, which, perhaps not unexpectedly, is primarily marketed as a quality ‘Swiss Made’ brand.
One way in which similarities and differences between
systems can be illustrated is by setting them out in a table with corresponding explanations of the parameters
that each system takes into account. Unfortunately, it
would be virtually impossible to comprehend such a table without first actually dictating under which category
headings the systems and their environmental parameters were to be sorted. In the table below, an attempt
has been made along these lines in order to visualize the
differences between the different systems. Note, that no
single environmental certification system shown here is
actually summarized according to the headings in the
table. Subsequently, as there is no universal way of organizing environmental parameters, these headings will
have to suffice. However, four points must be noted:
1) Even if a system actually assesses categories using
the same headings as in the table, it is not necessarily true that the headings always include the
same parameters. This can be illustrated by the
environmental parameter Legionella, which in
some systems is found under the category Indoor
Environment while in others it is found under the
category Water. In the table below it is categorized under Water.
2) In the German DGNB system there is a large
‘sphere’ representing the category Other and this
is because the system places great importance on
issues related to planning and the building process. These parameters have not been given an individual assessment category here because they
are not clearly distinguished in the other systems.
3) Systems with a large proportion of mandatory
parameters (which are not awarded points) are,
to some degree, misrepresented. This is especially
true in the case of LEED, which takes into consideration the categories Waste Management and
Construction Phase but regards them as mandatory measures. This means that these parameters
are not apportioned points in the table, which
can be interpreted as them being of less importance in LEED, which, in fact, is not the case.
4) A number of the certification systems in the table
below are divided into sub-systems, for example, for dwellings and commercial buildings, for
which the assessed parameters and requirements
can vary. The sub-systems chosen for inclusion
in the table have been regarded as being representative of their respective certification systems.
Common to all is that each system is applicable
to new buildings, though not neighbourhoods.
The sub-systems are:
• BREEAM Europe Commercial 2009 Office
• LEED 2009 for New Constructions and Major
Renovations Commercial
• Green Star Office
• HQE International
• CASBEE for New Constructions
• IGBC Green Home
For more information about SIMPLY GREEN visit
www.swegonairacademy.com
REHVA Journal – May 2013
93