Energy Efficient Cities Initiative: Tools & Assessments

Transcription

1 Energy Efficient Cities Initiative: Tools & Assessments Urban Research Symposium Marseille, France June 28-30, 2009 Green Star and NABERS: Learning from the Australian experience with green building rating tools Lily Mitchell, Senior Associate, Baker & McKenzie 29 June 2009

2 Outline What use are green building rating tools? What tools are available? Australian rating tools: Green Star and NABERS Towards convergence? Imagine a green city MVRDV design for city centre for Gwanggyo, Korea

3 How do building rating tools help? Rating tools can help us to determine: What direction we want a city to go in eg efficiency goals for buildings, or whole areas Whether, and to what extent, a particular building helps us get there Rating tools also provide incentives for private sector developers to exceed minimum standards Benefits of being able to advertise a high green rating Types of building rating tools Collection of methods to assess the potential, or performance, of a building in relation to specific sustainability criteria including energy use providing a rating to allow comparisons LEED, Energy Star BREEAM HK-BEAM CASBEE Green Mark NABERS, Green Star

4 Australian building rating tools Feature NABERS (1-5 star) Green Star (1-6 star) Types of Offices, hotels, Offices, retail centres, buildings residential, retail schools Factors assessed Specific: energy/ water/ waste/ indoor environment Design/ Performance performance? Method Performance data compared to benchmark Broad: energy, transport, water, IEQ, materials, land use, management, innovation Design (potential performance) Accrue points for specific features in each category NABERS Similar to: Energy Star (US EPA) Advantages Relatively simple and cheap to obtain a rating (AU $4,000-$10,000) Can focus only on specific aspects, eg energy use Measures actual performance of a building Incentive for ongoing efficient management, improvements Can rate whole building/ base building/ tenancy New or existing Disadvantages Requires 12 months of building operation before rating can be calculated Does not take into account some aspects of sustainability, eg embodied energy, transport Does not indicate areas for improvement Less likely to be used during design phase

5 Green Star Similar to: BREEAM (UK) and LEED (US) Advantages Disadvantages Encourages taking Expensive and timeconsuming process to sustainability into account at design stage obtain a certified rating Covers broad range of (AU $25,000-$100,000) sustainability factors No incentive for efficient Rating does not expire management of building when in operation Provides some indication of areas that can be improved Design rating may not be reflected in performance Not adapted for existing buildings Convergence? National and international trends towards merging/ harmonising tools Recognising confusion in property market, and difficulty of comparing buildings To what extent is this possible, or desirable? Difficult to merge design and performance tools without losing useful features of each one Beneficial to harmonise design tools in different jurisdictions, eg Green Star, LEED, BREEAM

6 Conclusions Tools can be distinguished in different ways, but one of the most important differences is design v performance Each type has a role to play NABERS offers a useful model for other countries looking for performance rating tools that can be applied quite simply & affordably Can be used to set minimum i standards d for building energy efficiency, and measure compliance Internationally, convergence of tools will assist in comparability and may increase uptake of tools