Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Design consequences of differences in building assessment tools: a case study
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment, Environmental Strategies.
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Urban Planning and Environment, Environmental Strategies.
2011 (English)In: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, Vol. 39, no 1, 16-33 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Environmental assessment tools for buildings are emerging rapidly in many countries. Do different assessment tools influence the design process and also guide 'green' building projects in different directions? Three assessment tools, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction (LEED-NC), Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and EcoEffect, were tested in a case study project in Sweden: a new multi-storey residential building called Gronskar. The content and results of the three assessment tools were compared in general, while issues in the three core common categories of Energy, Indoor Environment and Materials Waste were compared in more detail. The assessment results for the case study building varied with the three tools, and the design strategies and tactics to improve the overall rating of the building project differed for each tool. This confirms that the tools can influence sustainable building in different directions and illustrates insufficient consensus between assessment tools in terms of issues, criteria and weighting. The divergent results highlight the need for an appropriate structure of assessment tools that are both environmentally relevant and practically useful. 'on assiste dans de nombreux pays a l'emergence rapide d'outils d'evaluation environnementale. Des outils d'evaluation differents influent-ils sur le processus de conception et orientent-ils egalement les projets de batiments << verts >> dans des directions differentes? Trois outils d'evaluation, le systeme Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction (LEED-NC pour les constructions neuves), le Code for Sustainable Homes (Code pour des Logements Durables - CGH) et EcoEffect, ont ete testes dans le cadre d'un projet de construction situe en Suede et utilise comme etude de cas : un nouvel immeuble residentiel a etages multiples denomme Gronskar. Le contenu et les resultats de ces trois outils d'evaluation ont ete compares sur un plan general, tandis que les points relevant des trois principales categories communes - Energie, Environnement Interieur et Materiaux et Dechets - ont ete compares de maniere plus detaillee. Concernant l'immeuble utilise comme etude de cas, les trois outils ont donne des resultats d'evaluation qui differaient, et les strategies et tactiques de conception visant a ameliorer la notation globale du projet de construction etaient differentes pour chaque outil. Ceci confirme que ces outils peuvent influer sur un batiment durable a differents niveaux et illustre le consensus insuffisant entre les outils d'evaluation en termes d'enjeux, de criteres et de ponderation. Ces resultats divergents soulignent la necessite de pouvoir disposer d'outils d'evaluation presentant une structure adaptee pour que ceux-ci soient a la fois pertinents pour l'environnement et d'une utilite pratique. Mots cles: methodes d'evaluation, outil d'evaluation, evaluation des batiments, conception des batiments, Code for Sustainable Homes (Code pour des Logements Durables - CSH), EcoEffect, evaluation environnementale, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), batiment durable.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 39, no 1, 16-33 p.
Keyword [en]
assessment methods, assessment tool, building assessment, building design, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), EcoEffect, environmental assessment, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), sustainable building
National Category
Architectural Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-26332DOI: 10.1080/09613218.2010.513210ISI: 000286821500002Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-78650728649OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-26332DiVA: diva2:371858
Note
QC 20101123 Uppdaterad från accepted till published (20110315).Available from: 2010-11-23 Created: 2010-11-23 Last updated: 2017-12-12Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Environmental Assessment of Buildings and the influence on architectural design
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Environmental Assessment of Buildings and the influence on architectural design
2010 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This licentiate thesis examines environmental assessment tools for buildings. This is done by investigating, analysing, comparing and testing how different environmental assessment tools measure the environmental performance of buildings and examining the consequences this may have on architectural design.

The study begins by analysing three environmental assessment tools: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and EcoEffect. These tools are then tested on a case study building (an eight-storey residential building) to analyse differences regarding assessment results, improvement proposals and potential impacts on architectural design.

One of the environmental impacts assessed in the three tools, namely Climate Change caused by gases having Global Warming Potential (GWP), is then analysed in greater detail from a life cycle perspective by measuring CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq). A basic calculation tool (referred to as the ENSLIC tool), based on life cycle assessment methodology, is used to assess a case study building (a four-storey office building in Gävle). The CO2-eq emissions from a building’s material production and energy use are calculated and the impacts of a number of suggested building improvements and changes of energy sources are analysed. 

The studies show the complexity of assessment tools and different ways to make comparisons. Both similarities and differences between the tools are apparent, regarding hierarchical structure and also on each hierarchical level, from categories to issues and parameters. It is also shown that the choice of environmental assessment tool may have an influence on the architectural design of buildings.

The difficulty with assessing complex buildings is apparent even when only one environmental issue is assessed with the LCA-based ENSLIC tool. Many aspects influence the assessment result. These include energy use, choice of materials and choice of energy sources.

The complexity and difficulty in linking buildings to environmental impact create a need for interactive tools measuring environmental performance, which can be useful as decision support in the early design phase.

Abstract [sv]

Denna licentiatavhandling behandlar miljöbedömningsmetoder för byggnader. Arbetet bygger på undersökningar analyser, jämförelser och tester av hur miljöbedömningsmetoder bedömer byggnaders miljöprestanda och undersöker även vilka konsekvenser som detta kan ha på arkitektonisk utformning.

Forskningen börjar med att tre miljöbedömningsmetoder, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Code for Sustainble Homes (CSH) och EcoEffect analyseras och jämförs. Sedan genomförs en fallstudie där de tre metoderna testas på ett bostadshus (ett åttavåningar högt bostadshus i Stockholm). Skillnader gällande miljöbedömningsresultat och miljöbedömningmetodernas förslag på förbättringsåtgärder samt eventuell påverkan på den arkitektoniska utformningen analyseras och diskuteras.

En av miljöpåverkanskategorierna som bedöms i de tre metoderna, klimatpåverkan orsakad av gaser med inverkan på den globala uppvärmningen, analyseras sedan mer i detalj utifrån ett livscykelperspektiv genom att mäta byggnaders utsläpp av koldioxidekvivalenter (CO2 ekv). Ett förenklat beräkningsverktyg (som här benämns ENSLIC-verktyget), som är baserat på livscykelmetodik, används för att studera en byggnad (ett fyra våningar högt kontorshus i Gävle). Sedan beräknas utsläppet av CO2 ekv från byggnadens material- och energianvändning. Effekten av ett flertal föreslagna förbättringsåtgärder på byggnaden samt byte av energikällor analyseras också.

Studierna visar på miljöbedömningmetodernas komplexitet och presenterar olika sätt att göra jämförelser på. Skillnader och likheter mellan metoderna påvisas gällande hierarkisk struktur och även på varje hierarkisk nivå, från kategorier till enskilda bedömda frågor och parametrar. Dessa skillnader talar för att olika metoder kan påverka den arkitektoniska utformningen av byggnader.

Svårigheten i att bedöma komplexa byggnader belyses även när endast en miljöpåverkan bedöms med det livscykelanalys baserade ENSLIC-verktyget. Många saker påverkar resultatet, framförallt energianvändning tillsammans med materialanvändning och val av energikällor. Den komplexa och svåra uppgiften att länka samman byggnader med deras miljöpåverkan öppnar upp för användande av interaktiva verktyg som mäter miljöpåverkan som kan användas som beslutshjälpmedel i tidiga designskeden.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Environmental Strategies Research – fms, KTH, 2010. 64 p.
Series
Trita-SOM , ISSN 1653-6126 ; 2010-15
Keyword
green building, sustainable building, environmental assessment, assessment tool, architectural design, CO2 (Carbondioxide)
National Category
Civil Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-26159 (URN)978-91-7415-804-5 (ISBN)
Presentation
2010-12-15, Sal E2, KTH, Lindstedsvägen 3, Stockholm, 16:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note
QC 20101123Available from: 2010-11-23 Created: 2010-11-18 Last updated: 2012-03-21Bibliographically approved
2. Environmental Assessment Tools for Neighbourhoods and Buildings in relation to Environment, Architecture, and Architects
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Environmental Assessment Tools for Neighbourhoods and Buildings in relation to Environment, Architecture, and Architects
2016 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This thesis explores Neighbourhood and Building Environmental Assessment Tools’ (NBEATs’) function as assessment tools and decision support, and their relation to environment, architecture and architects. This is done by analysing, testing, and discussing a number of NBEATs (LEED-NC, Code for Sustainable Homes, EcoEffect, LEED-ND, BREEAM-C, and ENSLIC-tool), their manuals and use. Moreover, professionals’ (architects’) self-rated opinions regarding use and knowledge of NBEATs and environmental aspects are surveyed.

Similarities and differences in NBEATs are found regarding: content, structure, weighting and indicators used. Indicators distinguished as procedure, performance and feature are used to varying extents to assess social, environmental and technical aspects. NBEATs relation to environmental sustainability has limitations due to: non-transparency, tradable indicators, relative measures, low criteria levels, limited life cycle perspective, and exclusion of relevant environmental aspects, such as embedded toxic substances, nutrient cycles, land use change, and ecosystem services. Ratings and architecture are influenced by NBEATs in varying ways. Higher criteria levels would probably increase their impact on architecture. Thus more research regarding NBEATs and links to architectural design, theory and practice is welcomed.

There is limited use of NBEATs as decision support in early design phases such as in architectural competitions. Architects rate the importance of environmental aspects high, but few rate their skill in handling environmental aspects high. This calls for increasing knowledge and know-how of environmental strategies and solutions among architects and adaptation of NBEATs to early design processes. The values NBEATs reflect and the values we want them to create is also important. To support ‘environmental’ architecture, an increased socio-eco-technological system perspective is put forward, and other measures besides NBEATs are needed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2016. 112 p.
Series
TRITA-INFRA-FMS-PHD
Keyword
architects, architecture, buildings, environment, environmental assessment tools, environmental sustainability, neighbourhoods
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Research subject
Planning and Decision Analysis
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-192939 (URN)978-91-7729-123-7 (ISBN)
Public defence
2016-10-21, Kollegiesalen, Brinellvägen 8, KTH, Stockholm, 09:30 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note

QC 20160926

Available from: 2016-09-26 Created: 2016-09-23 Last updated: 2017-03-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wallhagen, MaritaGlaumann, Mauritz
By organisation
Environmental Strategies
In the same journal
Building Research & Information
Architectural Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 217 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf