Please wait a minute...
 首页  期刊列表 期刊订阅 开放获取 关于我们
English
在线预览  |  当期目录  |  过刊浏览  |  热点文章  |  下载排行
Frontiers of Engineering Management    2015, Vol. 2 Issue (2) : 114-121     https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2015018
Engineering Management Theories and Methodologies
From Green to Sustainability—Trends in the Assessment Methods of Green Buildings
Steve Hsueh-Ming Wang1(), Paula Williams1, Jing Shi2, Huojun Yang3
1. College of Engineering, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage 99514-1629, USA
2. Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, University of Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA
3. Department of Construction Management, North Dakota State University, Fargo 58108-6050, USA
全文: PDF(441 KB)   HTML
导出: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This research investigates recent developments in assessment methods of green buildings and compares the differences in rating systems among the United Kingdom, USA, and Germany. There are indications that the rating systems are moving from green buildings to sustainable buildings. In order to understand the recent research in academic areas, we survey the recent Ph.D. dissertations and literature related to green building assessment. Discussion is provided on the major research areas of green buildings, which cover accountability of life cycle cost, methodology for balancing the three pillars, and government vision and public policy.

Keywords green      sustainability      buildings      assessment      methods      rating systems     
在线预览日期:    发布日期: 2015-11-12
服务
推荐给朋友
免费邮件订阅
RSS订阅
作者相关文章
Steve Hsueh-Ming Wang
Paula Williams
Jing Shi
Huojun Yang
引用本文:   
Steve Hsueh-Ming Wang,Paula Williams,Jing Shi, et al. From Green to Sustainability—Trends in the Assessment Methods of Green Buildings[J]. Front. Eng, 2015, 2(2): 114-121.
网址:  
https://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.15302/J-FEM-2015018     OR     https://journal.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2015/V2/I2/114
Aspects Green Sustainability
Relation to sustainability tripod Only one pillar (environmental improvement) All three pillars (environment health, economy vitality, social justice)
Focus Individual components Interplay of individual components and the whole system
Tactics/strategy Tactical application of activities that involve “picking low-hanging fruit”; promoting individual changes and reforms to make world less unsustainable Strategic discovery of the proper scale that will make successive policy steps and actions easier and less costly by designing and implementing a sustainable, self-balancing system
Political orientation Conventional, “pragmatic realist”, reformist Innovative, visionary, revolutionary
(“going to the roots”)
Scale Individual devices, products, indicators, practices, buildings as most tractable level for greening Cities or regions as the level at which human and social disequilibriums and ecological insults can be dynamically rebalanced
Risks or excesses Green washing Utopian fantasizing or top-down authoritarian policy action
Definition of success Infinite progress of incremental improvements Reduction of ecological footprint to a city or region’s fair Earth-share
Tab.1  Differences: Green vs. Sustainability
Fig.1  The framework agreement of BREEAM. Retrieved from http://www.breeam.org/page.jsp?id=347.
BD+C ID+C O+M ND Homes
Integrative process 2
Sustainable sites 10 10 7
Energy and atmosphere 33 38 38 38
Water efficiency 11 12 12 12
Indoor environmental quality 16 17 17 16
Materials and resources 13 13 8 10
Location and transportation 16 18 15 15
Regional priority 4 4 4 4
Innovation 6 6 6 6 6
Smart location and linkage 28
Neighborhood pattern & design 41
Green infrastructure and building 31
Regional priority credits 4
Tab.2  LEED v. 4 Rating Systems and Possible Points
Fig.2  Distribution of the metrics of the rating systems of LEED.
Fig.3  Building lifecycle and four assessment tools in CASBEE. Retrieved from http://www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/image/Figure 2.2new. jpg.
Perspectives Items Metrics
Environmental quality 6 13
Economical quality 3 11
Social and functional quality 13 47
Technical quality 6 23
Process quality 8 29
Site quality 4 18
Tab.3  The Perspectives, and Number of Items, and Metrics of DGNB
Year Green building rating system Country/ Area/organization Referred system
1990 BREEAM UK Original
1993 IDP (Integrated Design Process) Canada Original
1996 BREEAM Canada Canada BREEAM
1996 HK BEAM (Hong Kong Building Environmental Assessment Model) China’s Hong Kong BREEAM
1998 SB Tool (formerly known as GB Tool) International standard GB Tool
1999 Eko-Profile/Eco-Profile (Okoprofil) NBI Norway Ecoprofile+ ercb
1999 EEWH (Ecology, Energy, Waste and Health) China’s Taiwan LEED, CASBEE
1999 Green Leaf Eco-Rating System Canada LEED, Green Leaf
2000 BREEAM Green Leaf Canada LEED, Green Leaf
2000 LEED US GBC (Green Star Communities)
2000 TQ (Total Quality) Austria GB Tool
2002 CASBEE Japan Original
2002 GEM (Global Environmental Method) UK for Existing Buildings UK Green Globes Canada
2002 Green Leaf ECD Energy and Environment Canada BREEAM, Green Leaf
2003 Green Star Australia Australia GBC BREEAM, LEED
2005 Green Mark Building & Construction Authority
(BCA) Singapore
LEED, Green Star and others not disclosed
2005 Green Globes US US Green Globes Canada
2006 GBAS China GOBAS
2007 CEPAS (Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme) China’s Hong Kong HK BEAM and existing standards
2007 Green Star New Zealand New Zealand Green Star
2007 TQ-B (Total Quality Building) Austria TQ
2007 DGNB, German Sustainable Building Council Germany Original
Tab.4  Development of Green Building Rating Systems from 1990 to 2007
Fig.4  Domain of sustainability.
Fig.5  Spans of the economic, environmental, and social sustainability for product lifestyle management.
Fig.6  The distribution of the research areas of 99 Ph.D. dissertations completed in 2014 in the United States addressing green building evaluations.
1 M.A.A. Abdallah, (2014). Optimizing the selection of sustainability measures for existing buildings (PhD Dissertation). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3672577)
2 P. Arroyo, (2014). Exploring decision-making methods for sustainable design in commercid buildings (PhD Dissertation). Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3640345)
3 S.O. Attallah, (2014). A life cycle analysis approach for the enhancement of sustainability decision-making in the construction industry using agent-based modeling (PhD Dissertation) West Lafayette: Purdue University. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3667973)
4 A. Atkisson, (1998). The compass of sustainability: framework for a comprehensive information system. Version I. In: Walter Leal Frilho (Ed.) Sustainability and University Life (Peter Lang, Germany)
5 G.H. Berghorn, (2014). Life cycle cost-based risk model for energy performance contracting retrofits (PhD Dissertation). East Lansing: Michigan State University. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3631267)
6 M. Braulio-Gonzalo,, M.D. Bovea,, & M.J. Rua, (2015). Sustainability on the urban scale: proposal of a structure of indicators for the Spanish context. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 53, 16–30
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2015.03.002
7 Brundtland Commission. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press
8 BRE. (2012). BREEAM communities technical manual, 2012.
9 CASBEE. (2013). CASBEE–Comprehensive assessment system for built environment efficiency, 2013.
10 G. Castanheira,, & L. Bragança, (2014). The evolution of the sustainability assessment tool SBToolPT: from buildings to the built environment. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, 491791
pmid: 24592171
11 Earth Craft. (2013). The earth craft communities program, 2013.
12 Australia. GBC, (2013). Green Star Communities.
13 German Sustainable Building Council. (2007). Deutsche Gesellischaft fur Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB).
14 K.D. Hogan, (2014). Property tax appraisal for green buildings: energy star certification in Texas (PhD Dissertation). Arlington: The University of Texas at Arlington. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3626698)
15 IISBE. (International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment). (2009). SB tools.
16 IISBE. (International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment). (2013). International initiative for a sustainable built environment: working groups, 2013.
17 A.V. Johnson-Ferdinand, (2014). Spatial decision support systems for sustainable urban redevelopment (PhD Dissertation). Madison: University of Wisconsin, Madison. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3619037)
18 A. Karatas, (2014). Optimizing the sustainability of single-family housing units (PhD Dissertation). Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3646542)
19 K.Y.G. Kwok, (2014). Assessment of building life cycle carbon emissions (PhD Dissertation). University of Kansas. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3611466)
20 J. Langevin, (2014). Human behavior and low energy architecture- linking environmental adaptation, personal comfort, and energy use in the built environment (PhD Dissertation). Philadelphia: University of Drexel. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3638224)
21 S.E. Lin, (2014). Designing-in performance: energy simulation feedback for early stage design decision making (PhD Dissertation). Los Angeles: University of South California. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3628225)
22 The U. S. Green Building Council. (2009). LEED 2009 for neighborhood development.
23 A.D. Vanhoozer, (2014). NASA Ames sustainability base case study: behavioral effects of net-zero energy facility developments in workplace and residential environments (PhD Dissertation). Moscow: University of Idaho. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3668394)
24 S. Viederman, (1993). The economics and economy of sustainability: five capitals and three pillars. Talk delivered to Delaware Estuary Program. New York: Noyes Foundation
25 S.H. Wang,, Y.R. Qui,, C.C. Chen,, & S.P. Chang, (2014). A survey of sustainable design-centered integration for medical additive manufacturing. Advanced Materials Research, 939, 635–643
26 S.H. Wang,, S. Chang,, P. Williams,, B. Koo,, & Y. Qu, (2015). Using balanced scorecard for sustainable design-centered manufacturing. Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Manufacturing Research Conference, MSEC 2015 and NAMRC 43. Charlotte, NC, USA
27 J.O. Wao, (2014). Value engineering methodology to improve building sustainability outcomes (PhD Dissertation). Gainesville: University of Florida. Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing (AAT 3647875)
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 2015 高等教育出版社.
电话: 010-58556848 (技术); 010-58556485 (订阅) E-mail: subscribe@hep.com.cn