Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Reference Document
February 2000
7DEOH RI &RQWHQWV
,1752'8&7,21 +,6725< 2.1 2.2 2.3 ECOPROFILE FOR BUILDINGS ......................................................................................................................3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE-EFFECTIVE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS (ERCB)....................................4 COMBINING OF ECOPROFILE FOR BUILDINGS AND ERCB ..........................................................................4
86( $5($6 )25 (&2352),/( 3.1 3.2 3.3 ECOPROFILE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDINGS...........................................................5 ECOPROFILE AS AN INTERNAL MANAGEMENT AND STEERING TOOL. ..........................................................5 ECOPROFILE AS AN AID IN PROJECT ENGINEERING ......................................................................................6
(&2352),/( 0(7+2' 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 "EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT" COMPONENT.................................................................................................7 "RESOURCES" COMPONENT .......................................................................................................................8 "INDOOR CLIMATE" COMPONENT ............................................................................................................11 GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF ECOPROFILE FOR A BUILDING .................................................................13 PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF ECOPROFILE ........................................................................................13
5()(5(1&(6
Februar 2000
,QWURGXFWLRQ
Ecoprofile is a method for simplistic environmental assessment of buildings and gives a good picture of the buildings resource and environmental profile. A good environmental classification can lead to a market advantage in the sale and rental of commercial buildings. Ecoprofile can also be used as an internal management and steering tool for the building owner. The Ecoprofile of a building is divided into three principal components. These components consist of the External environment, Resources and Indoor climate. The principal components are divided into sub-areas that have different consequences for the principal components and are therefore weighted. Several of the sub-areas also have underlying sub-areas. Each sub-area and underlying sub-area contains a number of parameters. There are currently 82 parameters included in the method. Each of the parameters is individually evaluated and given a grade. A description of the classes is similar to that found in NS 3424 Condition Evaluation of Structures. The grading scale is from 1 to 3 where: Class 1 = Lesser environmental impact Class 2 = Medium environmental impact Class 3 = Greater environmental impact Eventually a class 0 is going to be included that will represent a sustainable construction, but there is currently no basis for defining such a level. Currently there are levels worked out for parameters that are important for office and residential buildings.
+LVWRU\
Todays Ecoprofile is based on two earlier methods: Ecoprofile for Buildings and Environmental and Resource Effective Commercial Buildings (ERCB). The history behind these methods and their incorporation into the current Ecoprofile method are presented below. (FRSURILOH IRU %XLOGLQJV
In 1994 the Environmental Protection Department created a branch based, public steering committee for the development of a national method for environmental assessment of buildings. The method was meant to be used in the purchase and take-over of existing buildings, in connection with project engineering and renovations, additions and building of new buildings. A workshop was arranged in Oslo in June 1995 in which the framework for an environmental assessment method for buildings was discussed. The method was tested on 11 large commercial buildings in a pilot project in the fall of 1995 (Fossdal et. al., 1995). In April 1996 the steering committee delivered the report Ecoprofile for Buildings to the Environmental Protection Minister1. The report summarised their experiences in development of the method and gave recommendations for further work.
1
In the course of the development work, the method has been variously called Green Appraisal, Environmental Facts, Environmental Profile and Ecoprofile for buildings.
Februar 2000
The Environmental Protection Department evaluated the Ecoprofile for buildings concept in consultation with other affected departments. The Departments conclusions concerning Ecoprofile were summarised in a letter sent to the GRIP Centre in December 1996. The letter gives guidelines for further work, and the GRIP Centre was given among other things the responsibility for implementation of an operating organisation for Ecoprofile for buildings. In December 1997 NBI was given the job of completing Ecoprofile for commercial buildings. The projects contents were however changed in the spring of 1998 when it became relevant to combine Ecoprofile with the environmental assessment method Environmental and Resource Effective Commercial Buildings that Storebrand and Gjensidige (two Norwegian insurance companies) had developed on their own initiative. (QYLURQPHQWDO DQG 5HVRXUFH(IIHFWLYH &RPPHUFLDO %XLOGLQJV (5&%
In the spring of 1995, Storebrand and four other insurance companies took an environmental/political initiative on behalf of the insurance industry. Storebrand followed up this initiative by evaluating a possible pre-project associated with real estate management and environmental conditions. In February 1996, two meetings were held with participation of representatives from Storebrand, Norwegian Watershed and Energy works, the Building Services Dept. from Norwegian Technical University, SINTEF Energy Research Inc. And Enk Trondheim Inc2. After these meetings it was decided that a pre-project entitled Environmental and Resource Effective Commercial Buildings would be established. The goal of the pre-project was to develop a tool to map the three principal areas Energy/Power, Indoor Climate and External Environment for commercial buildings. The mapping should result in a classification of status for the three main areas, with an associated identification and prioritisation of measures to improve the condition. The pre-project report was finished in October 1996 (Viken et. al. 1996). The tool that was developed included the three principal areas Energy/Power, Indoor Climate and External Environment, with underlying sub-areas and parameters. The method was tested on four Storebrand buildings as part of the pre-project. The pre-project was transformed into a full-fledged project in January 1997 (Garli et. al. 1998). The larger project included parallel surveys to test the method on experts that hadnt been involved in the development of ERCB and to test the user manual for External Environment. The project also included a comprehensive test of the method on 14 Storebrand buildings and 10 Gjensidige buildings, followed by a thorough statistical treatment and evaluation of the results. &RPELQLQJ RI (FRSURILOH IRU %XLOGLQJV DQG (5&% The earlier Ecoprofile for buildings and ERCB have many common threads. The structure in the two methods is relatively similar, and many parameters are common. Both methods operate moreover with principal areas (components), sub-areas and parameters. The new Ecoprofile is divided into three principal components: ([WHUQDO (QYLURQPHQW 5HVRXUFHV DQG ,QGRRU &OLPDWH and includes 82 parameters. Each parameter is based on a classification scale (1,2 or 3 or larger, medium or lesser environmental impact. These form the basis for the classification of the sub-areas.
2
Februar 2000
For most of the sub-areas, the classification is just the average of the classifications of the parameters that make up the sub-area. This type of averaging implies similar weighting for all of the parameters within a sub-area. In some cases, however, matrix tables are used to define the classification of a sub-area. The sub-areas are thereafter weighted such that each principal component can be given a classification. The three principal components are not weighted. All parameters in version 1 of the new Ecoprofile are taken from ECRB or the earlier Ecoprofile. An Ecoprofile classification does not require use of measuring instruments during the on-site inspection. Interpretation of the results is best accomplished using the computer programs Enk Normtall3 and Indoor climate in office buildings (IMK)4. Enk Normtall is used to calculate recommended values for energy use in a building. Actual energy use in the building is compared with the recommended value. The IMK program is used to calculate the thermal and atmospheric climate in the building.
An environmental evaluation method such as Ecoprofile can in principal be used for three different applications: 1. To HQYLURQPHQWDOO\ FODVVLI\ EXLOGLQJV. A good environmental classification can lead to a market advantage in connection with the sale or rental of a commercial building. 2. As an LQWHUQDO PDQDJHPHQW DQG VWHHULQJ WRRO, where the building owner, through environmental classification, gets a good overview of the buildings environmental condition and what needs to be done to improve that condition. 3. As an DLG LQ SURMHFW HQJLQHHULQJ, where the goal is to create a building in a way that the requirements for best classification are achieved for each and every parameter. It is important to keep separate these three use areas in the development of Ecoprofile, as choice of use area can influence both the content and use of the method. (FRSURILOH IRU HQYLURQPHQWDO FODVVLILFDWLRQ RI EXLOGLQJV Ecoprofile is well suited as a tool for environmental classification of buildings and has an official status because the method is tied to the GRIP Centre, which is an organisation under the Environmental Protection Dept. There is therefore good reason to believe that the method will be of considerable importance in the area of environmental classification of buildings. To achieve credibility for the Ecoprofile classification system, the inspectors responsible for carrying out the classification must uphold rigorous standards of competence and neutrality. (FRSURILOH DV DQ LQWHUQDO PDQDJHPHQW DQG VWHHULQJ WRRO An Ecoprofile classification gives an easy-to-understand overview of a buildings environmental characteristics. By improving the environmental characteristics that receive the worst scores in the
3
The Enk Normtall computer program was developed by Energy Saving International (ENSI), and is distributed by Vest-Norsk Enk. 4 ProgramByggerne ANS developed the Indoor Climate in Office Buildings computer program in 1995 in cooperation with SINTEF Energy.
Februar 2000
classification, the building owner and user have the possibility to improve the buildings environmental standard. The obtained environmental information must be interpreted if Ecoprofile is to be used as an internal management tool. By improving the environmental characteristics that receive the worst scores in the classification, the building owner and user have the possibility to improve the buildings environmental standard. The methodology that includes listing of prioritised measures for improving the standard in each sub-area is retained in the new Ecoprofile. The new Ecoprofile therefore can also be used as an internal management and steering tool. If the new Ecoprofile is to be a unique tool for internal management and steering, the method should probably be further developed specially for that application. The new Ecoprofile used as an internal management and steering tool does not require formal adherence to standards of competence and neutrality for persons who use the tool. It must be mentioned that it became evident in connection with an interview round concerning Ecoprofile in the fall of 1997 that many building owners lacked a tool for internal management and steering. A willingness to pay for the Ecoprofile method as an internal management and steering tool was recognised to be greater than for Ecoprofile as a tool for environmental classification (ie og Myre, 1997). (FRSURILOH DV DQ DLG LQ SURMHFW HQJLQHHULQJ Ecoprofile can, with some adjustments, also be used in the project engineering phase of a building as a useful aid in making environmentally friendly choices. A building with good environmental qualities can in principal be achieved by designing a building such that the best classification is achieved for the different parameters in Ecoprofile. However, the method does not at present give an incentive to go past the best class. For new buildings it will often be desirable to impose stricter standards than the Ecoprofile requirements for the best classification. An example is the isolation grade (U-value) for outer facades, where the criterion for best class is given as better than the requirements in the Norwegian Building Code from 1987. A new Building Code with stricter standards came into effect in 1997. Therefore all new buildings will automatically end up in the best class. Life-cycle perspective should receive more emphasis if Ecoprofile is to be used as a project engineering tool. The choices in the project engineering phase should be made from a total lifecycle analysis where production, operation, demolition and removal of materials are taken into consideration. This type of life-cycle perspective is not as relevant in connection with classification of a building that is already built. A life-cycle analysis implies other problems and to some extent other parameters than those that are included in todays method. The best course will therefore be to develop a specific version of Ecoprofile as a project engineering tool. The formal requirements of competence and neutrality are not as important for persons using Ecoprofile as a project engineering tool.
Februar 2000
(FRSURILOH 0HWKRG
The new Ecoprofile method includes three principal components that are given the designations External Environment, Resources and Indoor Climate. Figure 4.1 shows the structure for Ecoprofile.
Ecoprofile
External Environment
Resources
Indoor Climate
Release to Air
Energy
Thermal Climate
Release to Ground
Water
Atmospheric Climate
Release to Water
Materials
Acoustic Climate
Land
Actinic Climate
Mechanical Climate
Transport
Cross Factors
Figure 4.1 Structure for the three principal components of Ecoprofile. A more detailed description of the three principal components of the new Ecoprofile is given below. ([WHUQDO (QYLURQPHQW FRPSRQHQW
Transport (Weight 2)
Figure 4.2 Structure of "External Environment" component of Ecoprofile. Table 4.1 Lists the parameters that are included in the proposed External Environment component of Ecoprofile.
Februar 2000
Release to Ground Release to Water Waste Management, Toxic and Environmentally Hazardous Substances
Outside Areas
Transport
5HVRXUFHV FRPSRQHQW The second component is Resources, with sub-areas Energy, Water, Land and Materials (see Figure 4.3). This structure harmonises with the structure in the LCA method and internationally recognised environmental evaluation methods such as Green Building Challenge 98. Version 1 of Ecoprofile includes only the sub-areas Energy and Water, while sub-areas Land and Materials will be supplemented in later versions. The Energy sub-area is from experience given a weight of 10, while Water is given a weight of 1.
Februar 2000
RESOURCES
Water (weight 1)
(Land)
(Materials)
Water Consumption
Flixibility (weight 1)
Heating (weight 3) Ventilasjon (weight 3) Cooling (weight 1) Lighting (weight 3) Outdoors (weight 1) Operation (weight 3)
Figure 4.3 Structure of Resources component of Ecoprofile. Classification of Energy Use is defined in a separate matrix table based on classification of Condition of Technical Installations and Real Energy Use.
Table 4.2 shows the Resources component with associated sub-areas and parameters. In future versions of Ecoprofile there will probably be more weight assigned to energy use and parameters that describe this will be included. Furthermore, the Flexibility sub-area will be more fully developed, especially with respect to how use of electricity is evaluated. Table 4.2 Sub-areas and parameters in Resources component of Ecoprofile.
6XEDUHDV (QHUJ\ Flexibility Energy Use Real Energy Consumption Technical Condition Heating 3DUDPHWHUV
7\SH RI KHDWLQJ LQVWDOODWLRQ DQG KHDWLQJ VRXUFH
8YDOXHV IRU ZDOOV IORRU DQG FHLOLQJ 8YDOXHV IRU ZLQGRZV +HDWHUKHDW H[FK FRQGLWLRQ HIILFLHQF\ 3LS LVRODWLRQ 5HJXODWLRQ RI SODQW 7KHUPRVWDWLF UDGLDWRU YHQWV 1LJKWZHHNHQG ORZHULQJ RI WHPSHUDWXUH 5HJXODWLRQ RI URRP WHPSHUDWXUH 7DS ZDWHU &RQGLWLRQ RI LQVWDOODWLRQV +HDW UHFRYHU\
Ventilation
Februar 2000
7LPH FRQWUROOHG ,VRODWLRQ RI SLSHV DQG GXFWV /RFNLQJ RYHU KHDWLQJ LQVWDOODWLRQ 6XQ VKDGHV WRZDUG WKH VRXWKHDVWZHVW )UHH FRROLQJ 5HJXODWLRQ /LJKWLQJ LQ RIILFHV DQG FRPPRQ DUHDV &RQWURO RI OLJKWLQJ /LJKWLQJ :DUPLQJ FDEOHV VLGHZDON DQG JXWWHUV 7UDLQLQJ RI RSHUDWRUV 2SHUDWLRQ DQG PDLQWHQDQFH LQVWUXFWLRQV 5RXWLQHV IRU RSHUDWLRQ DQG PDLQWHQDQFH 6HUYLFH DJUHHPHQWV (QHUJ\ PRQLWRULQJ V\VWHP (26 :DWHU FRQVXPSWLRQ :DWHUFRQVHUYLQJ HTXLSPHQW /HDNV
Cooling
Februar 2000
10
,QGRRU &OLPDWH FRPSRQHQW The last principal component, Indoor Climate, includes the following five factors: DWPRVSKHULF HQYLURQPHQW includes air quality, smoke, gases, particulates, dust, smells, etc. WKHUPDO HQYLURQPHQW includes temperature, humidity, air motion/draught and radiative heating/cooling, DFWLQLF HQYLURQPHQW includes light, lighting, radioactive exposure (radon), electric and magnetic fields, DFRXVWLF HQYLURQPHQW includes sound, noise and sound impression, PHFKDQLFDO HQYLURQPHQW includes furnishings, form, ergonomy and function.
Figure 4.4 and Table 4.3 show the structure and contents of the Indoor Climate component.
INDOOR CLIMATE
Februar 2000
11
Atmospheric Climate
Acoustic Climate
Actinic Climate
Mechanical Climate
Cleaning
Moisture
Februar 2000
12
*UDSKLFDO SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI (FRSURILOH IRU D %XLOGLQJ A buildings Ecoprofile can be visualised in two ways. The principal components can be combined in a bar graph according to large, medium or small environmental impact for external environment, resources and indoor climate, see Figure 4.5.
Ext. Env.
Resources
Ind. Clim.
Figure 4.5 Graphical presentation of results at principal component level. Rose diagrams show more detailed survey results. High values represent a large environmental impact, see Figure 4.6.
Heating
Water
Ventilation
Operation
Cooling
Lighting
Februar 2000
13
Client
Uurhhpxhtrvpyqr)
- Note about Ecoprofile method and process - Forms for self-reporting Standard - Addtl. Documents as nec. form (possible contract, timing details, etc. )
8yyrprqvshv
Assessor
Collected information is used later in the classification process. Obvious errors can be revealed during the inspection.
Client
Uur@psvyrpr
- Evaluate building information - Collect possible add. information - Inspect building - analyse results
- Operator learns about bldg. based on drawings and information from customer. - Operator performs inspection of building - Ecoprofile parameters classified based on criteria. - Helping aids: Data Inspection Parameter forms guidelines tools The results are reported to the customer and operating organisation Helping aid: Std. report format
Assessor
Report results
Operating Organisation
Operating organisation performs simplified quality control and is the issuer of Ecoprofile . Building information and Ecoprofile result placed in national database.
Februar 2000
14
5HIHUHQFHV
GRIP, 1996, "koprofil for bygg", final report from Ecoprofile Committee sent to the Environmental Protection Minister, 18. April 1996, GRIP Centre, Oslo. Fossdal S. et. al., 1995, "Utprving av MiljProfil-metoden. Pilotklassifisering av 11 bygg", project report O 7417, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Client: GRIP Centre. Myhre L., 1997, "Videreutvikling og implementering av koprofil for bygg", project report N7809, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Client: Miljeffektiv byggebransje. Myhre L. et.al., 1998, "Sammensling av koprofil og MRN", Oslo, Client: Grip Centre. Garli C., Sandberg G., ie L., Stang J., Viken K.D., Gjervan S. and Karlsen J., "Milj- og Ressurseffektive Nringsbygg (MRN). Hovedrapport", 16. April 1998, Client: Storebrand Eiendom, Gjensidige Eiendom og Norges vassdrags- og energiverk (NVE). Viken K.D., Haagensen C., Bramslev K.T., Sandberg G. and ie L., 1996, "Milj- og ressurseffektive nringsbygg. Rapport forprosjekt", 3. October 1996.
Februar 2000
15