Advertisement

Critical Analysis of Energy Efficiency Assessment by International Green Building Rating Tools and Its Effects on Local Adaptation

  • Saleh Hamel AlyamiEmail author
Research Article - Civil Engineering
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

The adaptation of green building rating systems (GBRS) as tools for providing a reliable evaluation of specific built environments is becoming increasingly significant, since factors such as regional climatic conditions may hinder the direct application of any GBRS in its non-adapted form. Energy efficiency is one of the central categories for evaluating building performance, although the category is weighted differently by leading GBRS, such as the Building Research Establishment Assessment Method, and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. Moreover, varying climatic conditions in different counties can affect building performance and result in different levels of energy consumption and CO2 emissions. This study focuses on the built environment of Saudi Arabia and seeks to improve the accuracy of its newly established GBRS, namely the Saudi Environmental Assessment Method. After reviewing various existing international GBRS, the study finds that they have a deficiency in their building performance ratio and/or matrix that indicates the differences resulting from various climatic conditions. This can engender unfair building assessments when comparing between two buildings in two different climatic zones. Therefore, it is essential to recognize to what degree the climatic conditions can affect a building’s energy performance within the Saudi Arabian context. In order to address this issue, which is the research question of the study, a critical analysis is conducted that reviews international assessment methods and, employing the building simulation tool IES-VE, assesses three distinct climatic zones: (a) the hot arid climate of Riyadh, (b) the hot humid climate of Jeddah, and (c) the mild hot mountainous climate of Al-Baha. In total, 30 typical building models, 10 in each zone, are subjected to a sensitivity analysis, and the results reveal that the different climatic conditions in Saudi Arabia have a significant effect on building performance. The study therefore concludes developing a climatic conditions ratio/matrix is imperative for enhancing the accuracy of the building assessment method employed.

Keywords

Climatic conditions Green building rating system Energy simulation 

References

  1. 1.
    WGBC: Green building rating tools (2018). https://www.worldgbc.org/rating-tools. Cited Dec 2018
  2. 2.
    Chang, K.-F.; Chiang, C.-M.; Chou, P.-C.: Adapting aspects of GBTool 2005—searching for suitability in Taiwan. Build. Environ. 42, 310–316 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Todd, J.A.; et al.: Comparative assessment of environmental performance tools and the role of the Green Building Challenge. Build. Res. Inf. 29, 324–335 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haapio, A.; Viitaniemi, P.: A critical review of building environmental assessment tools. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 28, 469–482 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ali, H.H.; Al Nsairat, S.F.: Developing a green building assessment tool for developing countries: case of Jordan. Build. Environ. 44, 1053–1064 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alyami, S.H.; Rezgui, Y.: Sustainable building assessment tool development approach. Sustain. Cities. Soc. 5, 52–62 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alyami, S.H.; Rezgui, Y.; Kwan, A.: Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 27, 43–54 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alyami, S.H.; Rezgui, Y.; Kwan, A.: The development of sustainable assessment method for Saudi Arabia built environment: weighting system. Sustain. Sci. 10(1), 167–178 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cole, R.J.: Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods. Build. Res. Inf. 26, 3–16 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kohler, N.: The relevance of Green Building Challenge: an observer’s perspective. Build. Res. Inf. 27, 309–320 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nguyen, B.K.; Altan, H.: Comparative review of five sustainable rating systems. Procedia Eng. 21, 376–386 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cole, R.J.: Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods. Build. Res. Inf. 26(1), 3–16 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cooper, I.: Which focus for building assessment methods—environmental performance or sustainability? Build. Res. Inf. 27(4–5), 321–331 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Crawley, D.; Aho, I.: Building environmental assessment methods: applications and development trends. Build. Res. Inf. 27(4–5), 300–308 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kohler, N.: The relevance of Green Building Challenge: an observer’s perspective. Build. Res. Inf. 27(4–5), 309–320 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crawley, D.; Aho, I.: Building environmental assessment methods: applications and development trends. Build. Res. Inf. 27, 300–308 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rezaallah, A.; Bolognesi, C.; Khoraskani, R.: LEED and BREEAM; Comparison between policies, assessment criteria and calculation methods. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Building Sustainability Assessment (BSA 2012), Porto, Portugal (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chew, M.Y.L.; Das, S.: Building grading systems: a review of the state-of-the-art. Archit. Sci. Rev. 51(1), 3–13 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horvat, M.; Fazio, P.: Comparative review of existing certification programs and performance assessment tools for residential buildings. Archit. Sci. Rev. 48(1), 69–80 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    BRE: BRE homepage (2018). http://www.bre.co.uk/. Cited July 2018
  21. 21.
    USGBC: USGBC homepage (2018). http://www.usgbc.org/. Cited July 2018
  22. 22.
    USGBC: Emirates Green Building Council (2018). https://www.usgbc.org/organizations/emirates-green-building-council. Cited Dec 2018
  23. 23.
    EmiratesGBC: Green Building Rating Tools (2018). https://emiratesgbc.org/academy/green-building-rating-tools/. Cited July 2018
  24. 24.
    Estidama: Home Page, Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council (2015). http://estidama.upc.gov.ae/. Cited Feb 2015
  25. 25.
    breNews: BREEAM launches into the gulf (2018). https://www.bre.co.uk/news/BREEAM-Launches-Into-The-Gulf–511.html. Cited Dec 2018
  26. 26.
    Alyami, S.H.; Rezgui, Y.; Kwan, A.: The development of sustainable assessment method for Saudi Arabia built environment: weighting system. Sustain. Sci. 10(1), 167–178 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hong, T.; Chou, S.K.; Bong, T.Y.: Building simulation: an overview of developments and information sources. Build. Environ. 35, 347–361 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mourshed, M.M.; Kelliher, D.; Keane, M.: Integrating building energy simulation in the design process. IBPSA News 13(1), 21–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    AUTODESK: Home Page (2018). http://usa.autodesk.com/ecotect-analysis/. Accessed Mar 2018
  30. 30.
    ENERGYPLUS: EnergyPlus Home Page (2018). http://www.energyplus.gov. Accessed Mar 2018
  31. 31.
    TAS, E.: Tas Home Page (2018). http://www.edsl.net/main/. Accessed Mar 2018
  32. 32.
    IES-VE: IES-VE Home Page (2018). http://www.iesve.com/. Accessed Mar 2018
  33. 33.
    Al-Homoud, M.: Envelope thermal design optimization of buildings with intermittent occupancy. J. Build. Phys. 33(1), 65–82 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    CDSI: Central Department of Statistic and Information (2014). http://www.cdsi.gov.sa/english/index.php. Cited 2012
  35. 35.
    Lee, W.L.; Burnett, J.: Benchmarking energy use assessment of HK-BEAM, BREEAM and LEED. Build. Environ. 43, 1882–1891 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang, L.; Lam, J.C.; Tsang, C.L.: Energy performance of building envelopes in different climate zones in China. Appl. Energy 85, 800–817 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ryan, L.; Campbell, N.: Spreading the net: the multiple benefits of energy efficiency improvements (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Qader, M.R.: Electricity consumption and GHG emissions in GCC countries. Energies 2, 1201–1213 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lelieveld, J.; et al.: Climate change and impacts in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Clim. Change 114(3–4), 667–687 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    USGBC: USGBC homepage (2011). http://www.usgbc.org/. Cited July 2011

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SGBRU (Sustainability and Green Building Research Unit), Civil Engineering Department, School of EngineeringNajran UniversityNajranSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations