Citation
Research on Green Building Assessment System in China Inspired by Leed V4 and Other Foreign Assessment System

Material Information

Title:
Research on Green Building Assessment System in China Inspired by Leed V4 and Other Foreign Assessment System
Creator:
Zhang, Ye
Place of Publication:
[Gainesville, Fla.]
Publisher:
College of Design, Construction and Planning, University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
Project in lieu of thesis

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of Science in Architectural Studies)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Architecture
Committee Chair:
Nawari, Nawari O
Committee Co-Chair:
Walters, Bradley

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Buildings ( jstor )
Credit control policy ( jstor )
Credit scores ( jstor )
Design evaluation ( jstor )
Ecology ( jstor )
Efficiency metrics ( jstor )
Environmental technology ( jstor )
Land use ( jstor )
Water resources ( jstor )
Water usage ( jstor )

Notes

Abstract:
As a kind of artificial environment, construction has become a significant part of human’s material life and spiritual life. After stepped in 21 century, human beings has begun to shift more attention to the issues of environment and future generations. Therefore sustainability of construction, the concept of green buildings stands out becoming the most popular topic no matter in public or professional academic. ( ,,, )
Abstract:
The United States is one step ahead of the countries in the word in the industry of green building assessment. Among many of the related organizations, USGBC (United Stated Green Building Council) is the most representative and also the most successful. USGBC has made a great achievement on the new generation of green building leading the direction of the entire building industry. To date, USGBC is a national organization and the LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) certification program represents the most cutting-edge green building industry. LEED is not the earliest green building assessment system, however it is the most comprehensive one.
Abstract:
China is developing rapidly and almost every day there are hundreds of new construction projects break ground. That is to say there are tremendous benefits for China to practice the green building assessment. To data the government of China and the Architectural Society of China (ASC) have adopted three green building assessment systems, “Evaluation Standard for Green Building”, “The Technical Assessment Handbook for Ecological Residence of China”, ” Green Olympic Building Assessment System”. Each of above can only represent the requirement for either a specific pried or a particular kind of construction. None of above can is systematic like the LEED did.
Abstract:
Aiming to discover the problems of the green building assessment systems in China, the discussion chapter of my thesis focuses on analyzing and comparing the LEED, “Evaluation Standard for Green Building”, “The Technical Assessment Handbook for Ecological Residence of China”, ” Green Olympic Building Assessment System” from multi-angle like core design concept, evaluation content and evaluation objects. In the end using a case study summarize suggestions to improve green building assessment system in China.
General Note:
sustainable design terminal project

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Ye Zhang. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
1022120846 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EIT7IOR80_1ZBFMA INGEST_TIME 2016-04-21T19:35:06Z PACKAGE AA00034618_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

1 RESEARCH ON GREEN BUILDING ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN CHINA INSPI RED BY LEED V4 AND OTHER FOREIGN ASSESSMENT SYSTEM By YE ZHANG A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2015

PAGE 2

2 © 2015 Ye Zhang

PAGE 3

3 To my parents and all my friends for supporting my academic life

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First of all I thank my committee members Prof. N awari O. N awari and Prof. Bradley S. Walters . As an international student , it take time to a dapt to the academic atmosphere of the United States and also the study habits. Prof. Nawari kept encourage me to speed up my processes of this thesis. I would not be able to finish all the work without him. Prof. Walters offered good suggestions on my framework of the thesis and his patience can always support me with confidence. Their efforts greatly enhanced my graduate student experience. I also want to thank my family and friends. Their u nderstanding and tolerance was the power that support me finish the thesis.

PAGE 5

5 T ABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 5 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 9 A BSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ 12 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ ..................... 15 Green Building ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 15 Green Building Assessment System ................................ ................................ .............. 16 The Development of Green Building Assessment System ................................ ....... 17 BREEAM ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 18 CASBEE ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 23 LEED ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 31 ASGB ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 38 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ............................... 41 CHAPTER 4 CONTRAST AND STUDY ................................ ................................ ................. 43 Advantages and Weaknesses of BREEAM ................................ ................................ .... 43 Advantages and Weaknesses of CASSBEE ................................ ................................ .. 43 Advantages and Weaknesses of LEED ................................ ................................ .......... 44 Advantages and Weaknesses of ASGB ................................ ................................ ......... 46 Comparison between LEED and ASGB ................................ ................................ .......... 46 Foundation Issue ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 47 Assessment Object ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 47 Index category ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 48

PAGE 6

6 Assessment Met hod ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 48 Assessment Result ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 49 Assessment Process ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 49 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 52 Key works and findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 52 Future direction of ASGB ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 53 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 56 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 58

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES TABLE I BREEAM PRODU CTS ................................ ................................ ....................... 19 TABLE II BREEAM ASSE SSMENT INDEX AND DET AIL ................................ ............... 20 TABLE III CERTIFICAT ION GRADE AND THE PR OPORTION ................................ ..... 21 TABLE IV BREEAM ASSE SSMENT PROCESS AND C ERTIFICATION TIMELIN E ..... 22 TABLE V TIMELINE OF GREEN BUILDING ASSE SSMENT IN JAPAN ...................... 24 TABLE VI ASSESSMENT ITEMS INCLUDED IN Q: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALI TY OF BUILDING ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 27 TABLE VII ASSESSMENT ITEMS INCLUDED IN L : ENVIRONMENTAL LOAD REDUCTION OF BUILDIN G ................................ ................................ ..................... 28 TABLE VIII TIME LINE OF LEED ................................ ................................ ..................... 31 TABLE IX LEED CERTIF ICATION CATALOG ................................ ................................ 32 TABLE X ASSESSMENT R ELATIONSHIP AND SCOR ES ................................ ............ 33 TABLE XI DIFFERENCE ABOUT FOUNDATION ................................ ........................... 47 TABLE XII COMPARISON ABOUT INDEX ................................ ................................ ...... 48 TABLE XIII COMPARISO N ABOUT ASSESSMENT R ESULT ................................ ....... 49 TABLE XIV DIFFERENCE S IN CERTIFICATION P ROCESSES ................................ ... 50

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE I BREEAM SCOR ING AND WEIGHTING ................................ ...................... 22 FIGURE II STRUCTURE OF THE CASBEE FAMILY ................................ ..................... 25 FIGURE III DIVISION OF THE ASSESSMENT C ATEGORIES FOR Q: BUI LT ENVIRONMENT QUA LITY AND L: BUILT EN VIRONMENT LOAD BASED ON THE HYPOTHETICAL BOUNDAR Y ................................ ................................ ............... 26 FIGURE IV SCORING A ND WEIGHTING OF CASB EE ................................ ............. 30 FIGURE V BUILDING LI FECYCLE AND 4 ASSESS MENT TOOLS ............................ 31 FIGURE VI LEVELS OF CERTIFICATION ................................ ................................ ... 37 FIGURE VII EVALUATIO N STANDARD OF GREEN BUILDING, 2006 VERSI ON AND ASSESSMENT STANDARD OF GREEN BU ILDING, 2014 VERSION .................. 39 FIGURE VIII STRUCTURE OF A SGB ................................ ................................ ............. 40 FIGURE IX CERTIFICATION PROCES SES ................................ ................................ ... 50

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ASC Architectural Society of China ASGB Assessment Standard for Green Building BEE Building Environmental Efficiency BRE Building Research Establishment BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology CASBEE Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency GBC98 Green Building Challenge '98 GBTools Green Building Tools GOBAS Green Olympic Building Assessment System iiSBE International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment JSBC Japan Sustainable Building Consortium LEED Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design LEED AP LEE D Accredited Professional NABERS National Australian Built Environment Rating System SBS Sick Building Syndrome UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development USGBC United Stated Green Building Council

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Science in Architectural Studies RESEARCH ON GREEN BUILDING ASSESSMENT IN CHINA INSPIRED BY LEED V4 AND OTHER FOREIGH ASSESSMENT SYSTEM By Ye Zhang July 2015 Chair: N awari O. N awari Co chair: Bradley S. Walters Major: Architecture (AE) As a kind of artificial environment, construction has become a significant part of After stepped in 2 1 century, hu man beings has begun to shift more attention to the issues of environment and future generations. Therefore s ustainability of construction , the concept of green buildings stands out becoming the most popular topic no matter in publi c or professional academ ic . The United States is one step ahead of the countries in the word in the industry of green building assessment . Among many of the related organizations, USGBC ( United Stated Green Building Council ) is the most representative and also the most successful. USGBC has made a great achievement on the new generation of green building leading the direction of the entire building indust ry. To date, USGBC is a national organization and the LEED (L eadership in Energy & Environmental De sign ) certification program represents the most cutting edge green building industry . LEED is not the earliest green building assessment system, however it is the most comprehensive one. China is developing rapidly and almost every day there are hundreds of new construction projects break ground. That is to say there are tremendous benefits for China to practice the green building assessment. To data the government of China and the Architectural Society of China (ASC) have adopted three green building asse ssment

PAGE 11

11 Evaluation Standard for G reen B uilding Handbook for Ecological Residence Green Olympic Building Assessment System the requirement for either a specific pried or a particular kind of construction. None of above can is systematic like the LEED did. Aiming to discover the problems of the green building assessment systems in China, the discussion chapter of my thesis focuses on analyzing and comparing the LEED, Eval uation Standard for G reen B uilding Ecological Residence Green Olympic Building Assessment System multi angle like core design concept, evaluation content and e valuation objects. In the end using a case study summarize suggestion s to improve green building assessment system in China.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In order to make the green building have the practical operability, many countries have developed a green building assessment system with per tinence. The goal of "green building" is as much as possible to save energy and resources, reduce the damage to the natural ecological environment and to provide a healthy, comfortable and efficient live, work and activities space for human being. A scientific green building assessment system established can assess a project of construction on all aspects from the "space" and "time". The "space" refers to the comprehensive assessment of the impact of building activities on the living environment, the surrounding ecological environment and the glo bal ecological environment. The "time" is about the comprehensive assessment of life cycle of the construction , including raw materials and mining, transportation, processing, construction, operation, maintena nce, and transformation of and removal of all the links. Assisted by the green building assessment system s mentioned above , so far, many countries in Europe and America has made significant achievements in the utilization of renewable energy use and the co nstruction of energy efficient, green building materials, green building design, indoor environment improvement tec hnology, resource recycling and other key technology research in the ecological field. On the basis of those, most of them gradually develope d kinds of green building integrated technology system which are quite perfect and adapt ed to the local characteristics. Many countries built a number of green building demonstration project s combining with natural ventilation and lighting, geothermal util ization, utilization of solar energy, green building materials, intelligent control and other high technology , and based on those they established specific

PAGE 13

13 assessment system s against the characteristics of their respective geographical environment . Then th e assessment system in turn gave a positive effect on spreading the concept of gr een building and accelerat ing the popularization of green building products. In China , the related researches and practices about the field of assessment system are obviously lagged behind the developed countries such as Europe and the United States. Beginning in 1990, the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology ( BREEAM ) was establish ed by British people , it is the world's firs t green building assessment system. To date, BREEAM have developed into many schemes for establish kinds of assessment targets, like BREEAM In use, BREEAM Refurbishment , BREEAM New Construction, BREEAM Community e tc. In United States, LEED was published in 1993. By this time it has been revised 3 times . Tens of thousands of projects have been certificated by LEED. LEED is the most widely used assessment system in the world. In 1990s, Japan is the first country in Asia have a systematic assessment system for Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency Unlike the European and American countries , the foundation of CASBEE was hosted by Japan government under a context moving the core of national development from economic to the c ultural and national standard of living . Meaning while the first move of China building our own green building assessment system happened in 2001, that is the issuance of the Technical Assessment Handbook for Ecologi cal Residence which mostly applied on the resident constructions. After that With the opportunity to host the Olympic Games in 2008 Green Olympic Building Assessment System (GOBAS) was released in 2003, aiming to se rvice Olympic v enues and other support constructions. Until 2006, the first united assessment

PAGE 14

14 system for a wide national use was released. That was the Assessment Standard for G reen B uilding SGB) published by Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development of the P.R. Chi na. In chapter 2, summary of the s tructure characteristics of each assessment system are lifted out. Focus is on the similarities and differences between LEEDv4 and A SGB. Chapter 3 outlines the methodology employed in this study. In chapter 4, analysis the relationship between ASGB and LEED. A nalysis the c urrent situation and problems about the green building assessment system using in China. In Chapter 5, conclusions are drawn on the barriers to implementation in China, as well as the suggestions to improv e the green building assessment system of China .

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Green Building In the 1930s, R.Buckminster F ull er ( B. Fuller 1895 1953 ), an American architect and inventor had been taken into account to combine science and technology into human development, so as to be able to consume fewer resources to meet the growing demand for human surviva l. B. F ull er expressed a design theory that doing more with less . It means t o make a most abundant, efficient use of limited resources by making the most reaso nable design . It also well implement the circulation of ecology and the principle of recourse recovery . In the 1960s , Paola Soleri, an Italian American architect is the first one who ry. In the 1970s , the o il crisis broke out, which made more and more people realize that the hi gh speed development of human civilization has already made a huge sacrifice on ecological environment, human beings must take effective measures. High resource consumption of the construction industry must change its original development model by reducing the consumption of resources as a sustainable measures . At the same time, all k inds of energy saving technology have been born, such as the use of solar energy, geothermal energy, wind energy and other new energy saving technologies, energy saving building has been concerned by the public . 1980s , with the gradual growth of energy sav ing building industry , more and more the developed countries such as Britain, France, Germany began to pay attention to building energy saving and environmental protection. At the same time, the indoor environm ental problems began to appear. Due to the lon g term living in the enclosure

PAGE 16

16 space , many people suffered from sick building syndrome (SBS) with a serious influence to the physical and mental health. At this point, the research focus of the developed countries is the building indoor environment and its impact for human health. In June, 1992, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development ( UNCED ) was convened in Rio de Janeiro, the capital of Brazil. 183 national delegations, 102 heads of state attended the meeting . The conference determine d the strategy of sustainable development of human beings, approved the " Agenda 21 ", "Rio Declaration as programmatic document s . In the next decade e nergy saving design and harmless design of a rtificial environment bec a me the research focus of this stage . A rchitects propose a 3R principles, meaning reduc ing the use of renewable resources and energy , recycling of buildi ng components or products using , reus ing of the old building repair and building materials . The 3R principle trie d to reduce the impact on th e environment through a variety of environmental protection and energy saving method. In October 1998, Green Building Challenge '98 (GBC98) was convened in Vancouver , Canada. This was an i nternational c onference on green building . 14 countries including Uni ted States, Britain, and Canada attended . The main topic of the meeting is l iv ing environment, experts and scholars from world share d their research results. Besides GBC98, International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment (iiSBE) has made p layed an important role in promoting green building by making Green building Challenge 2005, Sustainable Building Challenge 2011. Green Building Assessment System Green building assessment system is a clear assessment and certification system that would be a part of the whole life cycle of the green building . It would execute a certain

PAGE 17

17 criteria to measure which stage of "green" the target building has reached. At the same time, through establishing a series of index data , green building assessment system would provide a clear and specific regulations to guide and identification of green building practice from various aspects. The particular criteria established for green building can also be using as a certain norms and standards within the scope of the green building market to identify profitable speculation of green building, encourage and promote outs tanding green buildings, achieving the purpose of cleaning the construction market. The establishment of green building assessment system is an important and complicated work. As it relates to a wide range of professional complex, and diverse fields, it requires the collaboration of experts in various fields. Green building system urgently needs modern scientific assessment method as the technical support of its implementation of operation. A concise and user friendly assessment system, a scientific , comprehensive standard of "green building", will make green building truly accepted by people and put into practice. The assessment system and standard will be very beneficial and play an important role in promoting the long term healthy development of the green building industry. The Development of Green Building Assessment System A symbol of the mature development of g reen building is the establishment of a g reen building assessment system. Green building assessment system has made a significant contribution for the practice an d promotion of green building . At present , there are many the mature green building assessment system s in an international wide, like B uilding Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology ( BREEAM ) from British , the Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) from U. S. building,

PAGE 18

18 Green Building Tools (GBTools) made by Canada and other country, National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) from Australia , and Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency ( CASBEE ) from Japan etc. Among these evaluation systems, the major planning a nd land use, energy and atmosphere, indoor environment, water environment, resource utilization, reduce environmental pollution and create a comfort and healthy built environment. BRE EAM Britain as the starting place of the Industrial R evolution, is the first country suffer from the issues the environment pollution. Great Smog of '52 1 occurred in Landon. It lasted from Friday 5 December to Tuesday 9 December 1952, and then dispersed quickly after a change of weather. Government medical reports in the following weeks estimated that up until 8 December 4,000 people had died prematurely and 100,000 more were made ill because of the smog's effects on the human respiratory tract. Then the British government has begun to start remediation environmental issues. Britain is one of the earliest country made the establishment of the environmental protection laws in 1974 . E nvironmental pollution law comprehensive coverage of the problem of air po llution, water pollution, solid waste, environmental noise. After that, the British government moved the core of environment protection strategy to the p revention . Under such a background, in 1990 British launched the first green building evaluation system of the world Building Resear ch Establishment Environmental A ssessment M ethod (BREEAM) 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog

PAGE 19

19 develop ed by Building Research Establishment ( BRE) . After many times of revision it has grow n up to one of the most perfect green building assessment system in the worl d. BREEAM contains a huge family of products, covering domestic and Non domestic building two categories of a variety of building types, and the different stages of the constru ction of the entire life cycle. I ts products include: new construction, Communities In Use , Code for Sustainable Homes and Refurbishment as shown in Table I . Table I BREEAM Products Products Object BREEAM New Construction Contains the court, data center, the ecological housing, education, medical, industrial, multi storey residential, office, prisons, retail and other various types of new construction and new construction of a expansion or reform BREEAM Communities For community level development BREEAM In Use For the operational using building Code for Sustainable Homes From the development of Ecohomes, an standard for the construction of resident BREEAM Refurbishment Contains the refurbishment of domestic and Non domestic building This study focuses on BREEAM New Construction . To abate the impact environmental in a healthy and efficient way during the whole life cycle of the new construction is main task of BREEAM NC . I ntegration and monitor ing clients and their work group the design and procurement process in the key stages of process ing the assessment . The scores of BREEAM New Construction consists 9 indexes and 49 sub indexes of 49 independent assessment contents, plus 19 additional innovative entries. The evaluation of the index class, content s and weight s are shown in T able II . Each of the 49

PAGE 20

20 separate items expresses an environmental impact or problem related with a specific building, and is given a certain score. This score can be obtained when a building has been shown to meet the requirements of the specific performan ce level. Table II BREEAM Assessment Index and Detail NO. Index Contents Weight Total 1 Management Contains the debug and management policies, etc. 12% 100% 2 Health and Wellbeing Control of sound, light, heat and air quality of the building 15% 3 Energy Reduce carbon emissions and energy consumption in buildings 19% 4 Transport Reduce carbon emissions 8% 5 Water Save water resources 6% 6 Materials Reducing material consumption and saving material resources 12.50% 7 Waste Recycling and reuse of waste 7.50% 8 Land Use and Ecology Rational use of land, improve the ecological 10% 9 Pollution Reduction of carbon dioxide other air pollution and water pollution 10% 10 Innovative Approach of new sustainable technology and method 10% 10% The index class of BREEAM provides a simple framework that can be updated with the development of technology. BREEAM cares about the " relative green level environmental performance, it reflecting the relative performance of green building in the specific social and tech nological conditions. It is never an "absolute green level ", when a new technology or method were found, it can be adjusted . According to the environmental performance of assessment target, BREEAM classify the certificated result into 5 grade level, they are OUTSTANDING, EXCELLENT

PAGE 21

21 VERY GOD, GOOD, PASS. Table III shows the proportion of each level in the UK construction market 2 . Table III Certification Grade and the Proportion Grade %Scores % New Construction in UK Outstanding 85
PAGE 22

22 . A full BREEAM New Construction 2011 assessment is undertaken in four to five stages (depending on when the assessor is appointed), comprising registration, pre assessment, initial guidance/design stage assessment, construction and post construc tion review /final certification ( shown as Table IV ) 4 . Table IV BREEAM Assessment Process and Certification Timeline Pre Assess ment PRE Pre Assessment Pre Assessm ent Prepara tion A Appraisal B Desigh Brief Design Stage Assessm ent Design C Concept D Design Developme nt E Technical Design Interim BREEAM Certificat ion F Production Information 4 http://www.peaksustainability.co.uk/the breeam assessment process/ Figure I BREEAM Scoring and Weighting

PAGE 23

23 Pre Cons tru ction G Tender Documentat ion H Ten der Action Constru ction I Modification Constructi on Stage/Post Constructi on Assessme nt K Constructio n to Practical Completion Final BREEAM Certificat ion Use L1 Post Completion L2 In itial Occupation L3 Evaluation From 1990 the first version of BREEAM released to 2015 there are more than 200000 certification projects and 1000000 registered projects. The market share of BREEAM in the UK is higher than any other g reen building assessment system, mainly because the policy and financial support given by the British government, the close relationship that BREEAM kept with market and construction practice and a high level of transparency of BREEAM assessment process. There were some regional governments once announced BREEAM as an enforceable evaluation of new construction projects , such as the government of Wales and Northern Ireland. From 2003 any new construction project that willing to apply for the fund from UK H ousing Association were asked to . From 2005 minimum requirement was . CASBEE The Japanese have a tradition of close relations between government and industry. In 2001 t he Japan Sustainable B uildi ng Consortium (JSBC) was organized to lead a

PAGE 24

24 cooperative academic, industrial and government effort to create a nationally authorized gree n building rating system. The result is called the CASBEE, and it can be used to evaluate impacts throughout the life of a project. According to Professor Shuzo Muraka owners, designers and users to develop high quality sustainable buildings. The system meets both the From the initial a ttention to indoor environmental performance to the present CASBEE system, it had experienced 4 phases (shown as Table V ). Table V Timeline of Green Building Assessment in Japan Phase Evaluation Target New Concept Phase 1 ( Before 1960s) Evaluation focus on indoor environment performance of buildings. In this phase, evaluation always care more about the indoor acoustic environment, light environment, thermal environment, and generally see the regional environment and the global env ironment as an open system, with less consideration of the environmental load of buildings, and more about the indoor private environment. Indoor Environme nt Quality Phase 2 (Late 1960s) The Tokyo Metropolitan air pollution and building of typhoon and oth er issues gradually aroused people's attention, the government began to use environmental impact assessment (EIA) to solve these problems, resulting in the government began to introduce environmental load point into EIA. However the only include building w ind, sunshine shielding, so the content of the environmental load is not comprehensive enough, but it is still the first attempt to extend the evaluate range from private environment into to the public environment. Part of Local Environme nt Issues Phase 3 (1990s) Because of the continuous environmental issues, government began to focus on the concept of building environmental loadings. During this period, the method of world range, BREEAM/LEED/GBTool appeared. Building Environme ntal Loadings, LCA

PAGE 25

25 Phase 4 (After 2000) Introduction of the Building Environment Efficiency (BEE), Built Environment Quality (Q), Built Environment Load (L), the Hypothetical Boundary of building, and the foundation of CASBEE Calculation mothed of BEE, CASBEE CASBEE includes, as shown in Figure II , different assessment tools depending on the size of the building subject to the assessment, such as housing, building, urban areas and cites, all of which are collectively called C ASBEE Family. Figure II Structure of the CASBEE family

PAGE 26

26 This study focuses on CASBEE New Construction . Under CASBEE there are two spaces, internal and external, divided by the hypothetical boundary, which is defined by the site boundary and other elements, with two factors related to the two spaces. Thus we have put forward CASBEE in which the "negative aspects of environmental impact which go beyond the hypothetical enclosed space to the outside (the public property)" and "impro ving living amenity for the building users" are considered side by side. Under CASBEE, these two factors are defined below as Q and L, the main assessment categories, and evaluated separately ( Figure III . Q (Quality): Built Environment Quality Figure III Division of the assessment categories for Q: Built Environment Quality and L: Built Environment Load based on the hypothetical boundary

PAGE 27

27 Evaluates "improvement in living amenity for the building users, within the hypothetical enclosed space (the private property)." Shown as Table VI L (Load): Built Environment Load Evaluates "negative aspects of environmental impact which go beyond the hypothetical enclosed space to the outside (the public property)." 5 Shown as Table VII Table VI Assessment items included in Q: Environmental quality of building Q1. Indoor Environment 1. Sound Environment 1.1 Noise 1.2 Sound Insulation 1.3 Sound Absorption 2. Thermal Comfort 2.1 Room Temperature Control 2.2 Humidity Control 2.3 Type of Air Conditioning System 3. Lighting & Illumination 3.1 Daylight 3.2 Anti glare Measures 3.3 Illuminance Level 3.4 Lighting Controllability 4. Air Quality 4.1 Source Control 4.2 Ventilation 4.3 Operation Plan Q2. Quality of Service 1. Service Ability 1.1 Functionality & Usability 1.2 Amenity 1.3 Maintenance 2. Durability & Reliability 2.1 Earthquake Resistance 2.2 Service Life of Components 2.3 Reliability 3. Flexibility & Adaptability 3.1 spatial Margin 3.2 Floor Load Margin 3.3 System Renewability 5 http://www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/methodE.htm

PAGE 28

28 Q3. Outdoor Environment( On site) 1. Preservation & Creation of Biotope 2. Townscape & Landscape 3. Local Characteristics & Outdoor Amenity 3.1 Attention to Local Character & Improvement of Comfort 3.2 Improvement of the Thermal Environment on Site Table VII Assessment items included in L: Environmental load reduction of building L1. Energy 1. Control of Heat Load on the Outer Surface of Building 2. Natural Energy Utilization 3. Efficiency in Building Service 4. Efficient Operation 4.1 Monitoring 4.2 Operation & Management System L2. Resources & Materials 1. Water Resources 1.1 Water Saving 1.2 Rain Water & Grey Water 2. Reducing Use of Non renewable Resources 2.1 Reducing Use of Materials 2.2 Continuing Use of Existing Structural Frame, etc. 2.3 Use of Recycled Materials as Structural Materials 2.4 Use of Recycled Materials as Non structural Materials 2.5 Timber from Sustainable Forestry 2.6 Efforts to Enhance the Reusability of Components and Materials 3. Avoiding the Use of Materials with Pollutant Content 3.1 Use of Materials without Harmful Substances

PAGE 29

29 3.2 Elimination of CFCs and Halons L3. Off site Environment 1. Consideration of Global Warming 2. Consideration of Local Environment 2.1 Air Pollution 2.2 Heat Island Effect 2.3 Load on Local Infrastructure 3. Consideration of Surrounding Environment 3.1 Noise, Vibration & Odor 3.2 Wind/Sand Damage & Daylight Obstruction 3.3 Light Pollution Once the assessment has been carried out the final score, presented as the BEE (Building Environmental Efficiency), is calculated using the following equation: The use of BEE enabled simpler and clearer presentation of building environmental performance assessment results. BEE values are represented on the graph by plotting L on the x axis and Q on the y axis. The BEE value assessment result is expressed as the gradient of the straight line passing through the origin (0 , 0 ). The higher the Q value and the lower the L value, the steeper the gradient and the more sustainable the building is. Using this approach, it becomes possible to graphic ally present the results of built environment assessments using areas bounded by these gradients. The figure shows how the assessment results for buildings can be ranked on a diagram as class C (poor),

PAGE 30

30 class B , class B+, class A, and class S (excellent), in order of increasing BEE value. (Figure IV ). Corresponding to the building lifecycle, CASBEE is composed of four assessment tools, CASBEE for Pre design, CASBEE for New Construction, CASBEE for Existing Building and CASBEE for Renovation, and to serve at eac h stage of the design process (F igure V ). CASBEE Family is the collective name for these four basic tools and the tools for specific purposes. Each tool is intended fo r the specific purpose and target users, and is designed to accommodate a wide range of building types (offices, schools, apartments etc.). Figure IV Scoring and Weighting of CASBEE

PAGE 31

31 LEED Leadership in Energy and E nvironment D esign ( LEED) is currently the world's most influential green building assessment system, it made by the U .S. Green Building Council ( USGBC) . F rom the initial version 1.0 for new buildings and office buildings to the version 4.0. LEED has experienced a continuous improvement (Table VIII ). Table VIII Time line of LEED Version LEED 1.0 LEED 2.0 LEED 2.1 LEED 2.2 LEED 3.0 LEED 4.0 Year 1998 2000 2002 2005 2009 2015 LEED has three main characteristics: Voluntary , Consensus based Market driven . Figure V Building Lifecycle and 4 Assessment Tools

PAGE 32

32 USGBC was keeping a willing to make LEED into a useful tool to identify green building and also an opportunity for people a better understanding of green building in the very beginning. USGBC set market transformation as a clear goal in the beginning of th e LEED. Any assessment principles of LEED were based on existing and proven technology, USGBC did not blindly use the latest knowledge and technology, but balance d the multiple profit on the basis o f careful consideration. Shown in Table IX , by complementary products lines LEED covered highly percent of the construct ion market in the United States. This study focus on LEED . Table IX LEED Certification Catalog LEED Certification LEED BD+C Building Design and Construction New Construction Core and Shell Schools Retail Healthcare Data Centers Hospitality Warehouses and Distribution Centers LEED ID+C Interior Design and Construction Commercial Interiors Retail Hospitality LEED O+M Building Operations and Maintenance Existing Buildings Data Centers Warehouses and Distribution Centers Hospitality Schools Retail LEED ND Neighborhood Development Plan Project

PAGE 33

33 LEED HOMES Homes and Multifamily Lowrise Multifamily Midrise Assessment index of LEED NC include the Location and Transportation, Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality , Innovation and Regional Priority eight categories . From specific items o f LEED assessment index , we can see that LEED contains three aspects of economic, social and environmental content s (T able X ); however, most of the evaluation indexes are concentrated in the field of the environment. Only a small part of the evaluation ind icators related to social areas, such as the development of density and communi ty ties, public transport, etc. Although from the assessment index of LEED we cannot see the economic indicators, but economic benefits comes with environmental benefits in almo st every indicator of LEED . Table X Assessment Relationship and Scores Catalog Class Sub Catalog Score Environm ent Economic Society Location and Transportation Credit Sensitive Land Protection 1 Credit High Priority Site 2 Credit Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 5 Credit Access to Quality Transit 5 Credit Bicycle Facilities 1 Credit Reduced Parking Footprint 1 Credit Green Vehicles 1 TOTALS 16 Sustain able Sites Prereq Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Credit Site Assessment 1

PAGE 34

34 Credit Site Development Protect or Restore Habitat 2 Credit Open Space 1 Credit Rainwater Management 3 Credit Heat Island Reduction 2 Credit Light Pollution Reduction 1 TOTALS 10 Water Efficiency Prereq Outdoor Water Use Reduction Prereq Indoor Water Use Reduction Prereq Building Level Water Metering Credit Outdoor Water Use Reduction 2 Credit Indoor Water Use Reduction 6 Credit Cooling Tower Water Use 2 Credit Water Metering 1 TOTALS 11 Energy and Atmosphere Prereq Fundamental Commissioning and Verification Prereq Minimum Energy Performance Prereq Building Level Energy Metering Prereq Fundamental Refrigerant Management Credit Enhanced Commissioning 6 Credit Optimize Energy Performance 18 Credit Advanced Energy Metering 1 Credit Demand Response 2 Credit Renewable Energy Production 3

PAGE 35

35 Credit Enhanced Refrigerant Management 1 Credit Green Power and Carbon Offsets 2 TOTALS 33 Materials and Resources Prereq Storage and Collection of Recyclables Prereq Construction and Demolition Waste Management Planning Credit Building Life Cycle Impact Reduction 5 Credit Building Product Disclosure and Optimization Environmental Product Declarations 2 Credit Building Product Disclosure and Optimization Sourcing of Raw Materials 2 Credit Building Product Disclosure and Optimization Material Ingredients 2 Credit Construction and Demolition Waste Management 2 TOTALS 13 Indoor Environmental Quality Prereq Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Prereq Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control Credit Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies 2 Credit Low Emitting Materials 3 Credit Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan 1

PAGE 36

36 Credit Indoor Air Quality Assessment 2 Credit Thermal Comfort 1 Credit Interior Lighting 2 Credit Daylight 3 Credit Quality Views 1 Credit Acoustic Performance 1 TOTALS 16 Innovati on Credit Innovation 5 Credit LEED Accredited Professional 1 TOTALS 6 Regional Priority Credit Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 Credit Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 Credit Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 Credit Regional Priority: Specific Credit 1 TOTALS 4 TOTALS Possible Points: 110 To achieve LEED certification the target must meet all minimum necessary conditions ( Pre requirement ) and to achieve the corresponding level the certification total scores need to reach the corresponding level. LEED's score s in different categories can be a free trade, which reflects the LEED has a certain flexibility . LEED is a quite wide range of evaluation of green bu ilding. LEED final certification level is divided into the following 4 levels (Figure VI) : certification level (40 49), silver (50 59), gold grade (60 79 points) platinum (80 points and above).

PAGE 37

37 LEED certification is divided into two stages of design certification and final certification. To register for d esign certification all materials should be submitted after the completion of construction print ; final certification process was also after the completion of all the construction. All certify will be achieved after the completion of the building . O ther words, all LEED project has to wait until after the completion of the project to assess the certification. That is to say all the LEED certifie d projects must be built up project. The certification process of LEED includes: project registration application application certification. The project team compile the documentation required for the assessment. A t rained assessor is therefore not required, although there is a credit available for appointing a LEED AP (LEED Accredited Professional) as part of the design team. Once all the documentation has been compiled by the project team it is submitted to the USGB C who review the evidence and calculate the score. Assessments are completed either by using an online application procedure LEED Online, or as hard copy. The USGBC allow 25 working days to review LEED submissions although project teams can pay an addition al $10,000 to receive an expedited review which would take 12 working days. LEED Online Figure VI Levels of Certification

PAGE 38

38 submissions take the USGBC 12 working days to assess. The total time between initial submission to the USGBC and issue of the certificate can vary from 27 working days to as many as 65 working days . LEED ONLINE is a powerful too l during the certification . It has the following functions: submit documents to the USGBC for review ing , help checking if the documents fit in requirements of LEED scores, coordinate resources among the members of the project assessment team, publicity of project details management , access the LEED scores related technical information and track LEED certification process of the project . ASGB Evaluation Standard for Green Building (Figure VII) in 2006 . As the introduction of the rating system notes, the purpose is to create a voluntary rating sy stem that will encourage green development: Our country is now in the phase of rapid economic development, ranking world No. 1 in terms of annual building volume, with significantly growing consumption of resources year by year. Therefore, scientific development philosophy must be steadily created and seriously implemented, and the concept of sustainable development must be adhered to, to strongly develop green buildings... The purpose of formulating this standard is to regulate evaluation on green bui ldings and promote the development of green buildings.

PAGE 39

39 Standard of Green Building " is mainly used in the assessment of residential buildings, office buildings, shopping malls and hotel buildings, the standard is in accordance with the principles during the life cycle of the building. The whole life cycle ref ers to the whole process from the planning, design, construction, operation management and the final removal of the building. The basic requirements of green building are: in the whole life cycle, do the maximum of land saving, energy saving, materiel savi ng , water saving and environment protecting while meeting the functional requirements of the building. Assessment index of ASGB consists by six categories ( shown as Fi gure VIII ): Land and environment conservation , Energy saving and energy utilization , Water saving and utilization , Materials saving and utilization , Indoor environmental quality , Operation Figure VII Evaluation Standard of Green Building, 2006 V ersion and Assessment Standard of Green Building, 2014 Version

PAGE 40

40 management . In China, the government and construction industry has a really close relationship. And after ASGB launched, the promotion activities for ASGB were shown as the police with a forcible execution . The first known people were the developers not the public. To them the new assessment standard was like a plus legal process . The public didn't care about if the new assessment system reasonable. As ASGB is the main study target in this thesis, the more detail will be mentioned in the Chapter 4 Contrast and Study. Figure VIII Structure of ASGB Assessment index Land and environment conservation Energy saving and energy utilization Water saving and utilization Materials saving and utilization Indoor environme ntal quality Operation management

PAGE 41

41 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY This study is aiming to find out the improvement space of Assessment Standard of Green Building, comparing with the other foreign green building assessment system. The basic study of this thesis was design to be cross sectional . It means I will make several compariso n between different green building assessment, and analysis the advantages and weakness of them aiming to pick out a most suitable referent for ASGB, the target object of this thesis. T he frame work of this thesis is as the order of literature review, cont rast and study , conclusion. In literature review chapter, there will be a number of information about different green building assessment system. Those related data was searching from the related official website or the official guide book and also the re lated research from the published article or journal. Also a part of data need to be translate from Chinese document, like the Assessment Standard for Green Building itself . The contrast and study chapter will bring some analysis between the different for eign green building assessment systems. Once a most suitable one was selected, it would be treated as an example to be introduced to the ASGB for a more specific comparison. The comparison between ASGB and the chosen one should begin from the structure the n assessment index and assessment processes etc. All the study methodology would be qualitative analysis . The conclusion chapter is the last section of the text part. This chapter is going to focus on the improvement space on ASGB , the unsuitable assessme nt index,

PAGE 42

42 inappropriate model of operation. After that the study target could be extended to wider range, like the green building assessment system, green building industry , in China of course. Based on the above analysis, the last content of conclusion c hapter is the future development direction.

PAGE 43

43 CHAPTER 4 CONTRAST AND STUDY Advantages and Weakness es of BREEAM BREEAM is the first green building assessment system of the world . W ith its many updated version and continuous improvement, more and more detailed performance categories and a large number of indicators were added in to the BREEAM , providing a comprehensive consideration on the important issues of the building environmental pe rformance . In addition, the strong promotion given by British gov ernment had set up an excellent model for the whole world about implementation of the evaluation system from the top down . However, BREEAM contains too many indicators, evaluation content is tedious, evaluation process always need to rely on the profession al assessment division, not as simple as LEED, thus hindering the promotion in a world range . Advantages and Weakness es of CASSBEE CASBEE proposed is different from other evaluation system . It is a more scientific building environmenta l efficiency evaluation method. CASBEE separate two categories of indicators of environmental load and environmental quality, resolved mutual compensation between the two items . T he 5 point scoring were using in the whole properties, enabling a more detail ed distinction on building performance, and qualitative indicators by scoring measures rate method to quantify, reducing randomness. I n the content of assessment , carbon emission evaluation is included in the scope of the evaluation . CASBEE adopted the sof tware to calculate, greatly simplifying the evaluation process. However, CASBEE still has some problems, such as the huge index system, contains four level structure which must rely on software calculation, cannot be used for

PAGE 44

44 simple scoring, the market ori entation is worse than LEED which has a simpler structure of scoring method. The two types of indicators , environmental quality and environmental load are controversial, some indicators can be classified as ether environmental load or environmental quality , the line between the two indicators is fuzzy. At present promotion of CASBEE mainly rely on government from top to bottom, the in the operation of the market remains to be further enhanced. So CASBEE is not as popular as LEED in a wide world range. Advantages and Weakness es of LEED LEED has the following advantages : 1. The biggest advantage of LEED is the market occupancy . The reason it can spread rapidly and become the most influential green building assessment system in the world is its promotion st rategy. In the very beginning the main task of LEED was not to accurately measure the environmental performance of buildings, but to lead a market transformation at first . 2. LEED saw itself as a products for the service market. LEED valued the promotion acti vities and cooperation with the construction industry related personnel (users, designers and experts). USGBC operated a large number of training activities. As a result not only the proceeds from the training activities saved the situation of financial de ficits in the early period while the assessment fee was pretty low, more important, those training activities did a deeply publicity of the LEED assessment system. 3. The LEED evaluation system has a good transparency and participation for the public in the revision process. In the process of revision for the 2012 edition , USGBC had run 3 rounds of public opinion collection on the official website and let the

PAGE 45

45 fe edback of market data decide which the score should not be that easy to get, which is the necessity to become more successful in the market transition . Weakness of LEED: it is not always good to put too many weights on the market promotion. First of all, there is a situation that any project applied for LEED assessment can achieve a high level score in the parts of Energy and Atmosphere as long as using an energy saving equipment. Secondly, some of the performance of energy saving equipment is calculated in accordance with the standards of United States which is basically a high energy consumpt ion life model. In the end the performance of the index is not balanced, especially the high quality of the indoor environment can cover up the lack of energy consumption and environmental impact. LEED for the green building energy saving, section, water, section, indoor environment and other major categories of each individual performance is not set a minimum score to meet . Related data shows , some aspects of the performance of the LEED certificated building are not as good as the general architecture. Acc ording to Newsham 6 , although energy consumption per unit area of LEED certificated buildings is 18 39% less than general building in average, but among those certificated ones there is 28 35% buildings has a higher energy consumption than general building . According to Scofield's research 7 , in the LEED certificated buildings, the small scale building is about 60% of the total, but they consume only 10% of the total energy. While the large scale construction as a number of 10% of the total consume more than half of the total energy consumption . 6 Newsham, G. R., Mancini, S., & Birt, B. J. (2009). Do LEED and Buildings, 41(8), 897 905. 7 Scofield, J. H. (2009). Do LEED 1386 1390.

PAGE 46

46 Therefore, large buildings dominate the LEED energy consumption, meaning LEED certified buildings bring the consumption of the more energy. On the other hand, the environmental impact s of LEED certificated b uildings are also not optimistic. According to the research by Humbert 8 , LEED certificated building is not always conducive to the environment, from the whole life cycle analysis, they has a greater environmental impact than general buildings. Advantages and Weakness es of ASGB ASGB is the official publication of the green building assessment system, which reflects the government's top down guidance, is currently the most important green building rating system in China . However ASGB with similar to a canonical form, not to establish a comprehensive scoring appraisal system, cannot investigate the environmental performance of buildings in a very precise range . It cannot play a positive role of market orientation. C omparison between LEED and ASGB Fro m the three selected foreign green building assessment system, we can easily tell LEED is the most wide use and most reasonable one. The following study will focus on the comparison between LEED and ASGB aiming to f ind out the differences between the two a ssessments systems, and explore the reasons for the differences. 8 Humbert, S., Abeck, H., Bali, N., & Horvat h, A. (2007). Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) A critical evaluation by LCA and recommendations for improvement. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12(Special Issue 1).

PAGE 47

47 Foundation Issue LEED was made by non governmental o rganization USGBC , with a typical American style commercial operation mode. Its o perating process and operating costs involves the interests of developers, government departments, architects and other different groups. The core purpose of LEED is through multi stakeholder coordination the p ursuit of a win win situation. A SGB is compile d by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development of the P.R. China . Under the s upervision from government and voluntary participation by the developers ASBG can guide the green building market. The fully market oriented organization method make s LE ED flexibility and openness which is better than A SGB. Table XI shows the main differences between the two systems . Compare d with LEED, A SGB has advantages in policy intervention, which is conducive to the rapid implementation, while in the market has a di sadvantage . Table XI Difference about Foundation LEED A SGB Organization USGBC Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development of the P.R. China Governmental Organization No Yes Benchmark Private voluntary, consensus based, market driven Government initiated Promotion bottom up top down F lexibility Good normal Assessment Object LEED has a huge products line. Via its complementary products family LEED can easily cover highly percent of the construct ion market in the United States . While ASGB

PAGE 48

48 can only assess the residential and commercial building. That is because of the national condition of China that g reen building market is at the starting stage . Index category Since the development A SGB is based on LEED, the two systems have a similar index class. As it shows from T able XII , the top 5 categories of indicators of two is very similar. LEED is added in the categories of indicators design and innovation of high class and regional priority categories were used to enco urage regional applicability of design performance excellent performance and adju sts the evaluation system, and A SGB not these two factors is reflected in the categories of indicators, but increased the operation management category. Table XII Comparison about Index LEED ASGB Similarity index sustainable sites Economical and outdoor environment water efficiency Water saving and utilization energy & atmosphere Energy saving and energy utilization material & resources Materials saving and utilization indoor environmental quality Indoor environmental quality Different index innovation Operation management regional priority credits Assessment Method ASGB contains a lot of did not quantify the qualitative index, , to judge the performance of building only by assess the building match or not match the corresponding

PAGE 49

49 index, and no like LEED can score according to different performance. The qualitative index i s not clear, and LEED has a clear basis for the formulation of qualitative indicators, such as the specific numerical value. In addition, LEED sets up a number of options for the same indicator, the flexibility of the index score is higher, while the ASGB has no choice of indicators. Assessment Result LEED final certification level is divided into the following 4 levels (Figure VI) : certification level (40 49), silver (50 59), gold grade (60 79 points) platinum (80 points and above). While ESGB according to meet the number of index and preference evaluation results are divided into 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars ( Table XIII). Table XIII Comparison about Assessment Result LEED ASGB Certification Class Scores Proportion Stars Level Achieve Index Number Proportion Certified 40 49 36.4% 44.5% 1 Star 18 29 36.7% 59.2% Silver 50 59 45.5% 53.6% 2 Starts 30 39 61.2% 79.6% Gold 60 79 54.5% 71.8% 3 Starts 40 45 81.6% 100% Platinum 80 110 72.7% 100% Assessment Process The two certification processes are shown as Figure IX. Although the certification process es are very similar, but there still are some differences in p articipation mode, platform authentication, certification, certification fees, incenti ves, training and other aspects (Table XIV) .

PAGE 50

50 Table XIV Differences in Certification Processes LEED ASGB Assessm ent Method Scoring by the experts from USGBC in accordance with the evaluation criteria of item, All design, construction and operation management review based on the data submitted by applicant, no longer conduct on site audit First round, pre review (audit to be whether the material is complete), nex t the core authentication which need experts from specialized organization run the review face to face, in the evaluation meeting, experts can give a flexible authentication in a suitable range, an on site audit with operate after the completion of the bui lding. Experts Team LEED AP certificated Personnel From design units and the green building consulting agencies Figure IX Certification Processes

PAGE 51

51 Assessm ent Tools LEED online paperless service A lot of paper drawings and documents need to be mailed to the ASGB office as the basis of audits Period 3 6 months about 3 4 months Fees Registration fee $900/&1200( member / non member ) Certification Fees depending on the certification phase (design and construction), the type of authentication, and the construction area, from the lowest $2250 to $27500 Registration fee $300 Expert assessment fee about $10000 Mainly used to convene a meeting of experts and professional evaluation of the cost of the project team in advance of the cost. Benefits Police Tax relief, special subsidies, bank lending rates lower, and so on N/A Training Activities a lot, as a promotion method N/A From the T able XIV : 1) ASGB has a more stringent audit, needing for on site inspection. But this kind of audit method has a certain subjectivity, and the assessment process is more time consuming, 2) From the project team's participation, LEED AP certificated personnel can better promote the integration design of the project. 3) LEED online greatly increased the efficiency of the certification, while providing a more effective communication method between the project team and the assessment team. While the assessment process of ASGB i s more difficult to get feedback. 4) Using paper documents submitted will increase the time of certification 5) The Expert assessment fee is not open and transparent. 6) The lack of benefits police reflect the indifference to green building from government.

PAGE 52

52 CHAPTE R 5 CONCLUSIONS Key works and findings This thesis study attempts to find out the solution for the health development of green building assessment system in China in the future. To achieve that, they study begin with a detailed introduction about the three chosen green building assessment which are the most s uccessful and the most advanced in the specific areas. BREEAM from the UK is the first green building assessment system in the world. The assessment methodology that developed by BREEAM was used as a successful example in the other green building assessment system later. CASBEE was the first mature green building assessment system in Asia, instead of the traditional scoring method that divided the scores in different categories, scored th e each categories then made a summation , CASBEE introduced a new methodology that with a concept BEE to calculate the performance of building, a quantization method. LEED from US was a good example to combine the market with a green building assessment sys tem. Beside the advantage that LEED has in assessment, the market promotion of LEED was the most useful experience to learn. After summarizing the characteristics of the 3 successful systems, the most suitable one for the study sample was take n out for the further analysis. In the next chapter, with the summary of the advantages and weakness of the mentioned three successful assessment system and also the pilot version of ASGB . The core study object move to the comparison between LEED and ASGB. A detail comparison next is about the following aspects: Foundation Issue

PAGE 53

53 Assessment Object Index category Assessment Method Assessment Result Assessment Process The comparison shows the difference and similar between LEED and ASGB. There are reason for those diffe rences and similar. Because LEED was the origin example when ASGB was first developed they have some part in common . And it is the national condition that made them different. All though there are gaps between the two different countries but still we can l earn lessons from the advance one, like the market promotion and openness and transparency about the assessment process. As the study above the suggestions for a better and health development of ASGB in future are offered in the next part of conclusions ch apter. Future direction of ASGB The government should introduce the corresponding incentive policies . Although LEED is from USGBC, not the U.S. government, but the promotion of LEED rely on the support comes from U.S. government. In order to strongly sup port and implement LEED certification standards, the United States government introduced a variety of supporting polici es, such as property tax, etc. ASGB s hould increase building classification and formulate corresponding standards . Currently in ASGB types of construction are divided into two categories: residential buildings and public buildings. For the new, expansion, reconstruction of building ASGB did not mention, all participating buildings are depending on the type of

PAGE 54

54 construction to find the co rresponding terms of the assessment. China is currently in the primary stage of th e development of green building. T he new, expansion and renovation projects together and to a unified assessment criteria is not scientific enough. ASGB should be continuousl y improved to meet the requirements of different buildings . ASGB should try e xtensive use of information technology to optimize the green building certification process . LEED online like tools may save a number of resources every year. The promotion and i mplementation of green building in China still needs a course. LEED's success lies not in its content is how rigorous, how perfect, but that it take the market as the center of the open principle, it is to let consumers know that: the purchase of green bui lding will be more value for money, can obtain the relative to other products with a higher return on investment. This is the core factor of the success of LEED in the world. Development of green building in China should be more to put the emphasis on the construction of a fair and transparent operation of the market mechanism, and not in the debate about the accuracy and scientific of evaluation standard for green building provisions. Administrative supervision is one of the important functions of the government, its running condition directly affects the development environment of the green building. In the primary stage of green building, the government should exert the functio n of administrative supervision to clear the market of green building. At l ast, the green building certification process and certification organization establishment of research, there is a serious shortage in China , I hope this a rticle can play a valuable role in the future development of green building assessment system.

PAGE 55

55

PAGE 56

56 LIST OF REFERENCES Lee, W. L., & Burnett, J. (2008). Benchmarking energy use assessment of HK BEAM, BREEAM and LEED. Building and Environment, 43(11), 1882 1891. Roderick, Y., McEwan, D., Wheatley, C., & Alonso, C. (2009, July). Comparison of energy performance assessment between LEED, BREEAM and Green Star. In Eleventh International IBPSA Conference (pp. 27 30). Dickie, I., & Howard, N. (2000). Assessing environm ental impacts of construction: Industry consensus, BREEAM and UK Ecopoints. UK: Building Research Establishment. Murakami, S., Kawakubo, S., Asami, Y., Ikaga, T., Yamaguchi, N., & Kaburagi, S. (2011). Development of a comprehensive city assessment tool: C ASBEE City. Building Research & Information, 39(3), 195 210. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium. (2007). CASBEE (comprehensive assessment system for building environmental efficiency) for home and urban development technical manual. Gowri, K. (2004). Green building rating systems: An overview. ASHRAE journal, 46(11), 56. Crawley, D., & Aho, I. (1999). Building environmental assessment methods: applications and development trends. Building Research & Information, 27(4 5), 300 308. B in Yuan , & Dawei Wa ng . (2007). . , (4), 14 18. Jianping Li . (2010). Differences between LEED and ASGB, LEED . Energy Saving Construction , (5), 64 6 6. Energy performance of LEED for new construction buildings[M]. Vancouver, WA: New Buildings Institute, 2008. Council, U. G. B. (2007). LEED for new construction. US Green Building Council. Japan Sustainable Building Consortium. (2006). CASBEE Technical Manual 20 06 Edition. CASBEE for New Construction Institute for Building Environment and Energy Conservation. Council, U. G. B. (2011). LEED Green Associate. Retrieved on September, 27, 2011. Council, U. G. B. (2008). LEED rating systems. Retrieved September, 11, 2008.

PAGE 57

57 Youwei Wang , & Youguo Qin . (2006). Assessment Standard for Green Building . , 7, 14 17. 2011, D. T. (2011). ASGB [S] (Doctoral dissertation). Luming Li . (2003). Research on green building evaluation system [D] (Doctoral dissertation, : Tianjin University ). FangfangHu . (2010). A comparison of green (Sustainable) building evaluation criteria in China and America ( ) [D] (Doctoral dissertation, : Beijing Jiaotong University ). Weiwei Yu . (2008). A comparative study on the certification system of green building evaluation standards in China and the United States (Doctoral dissertation, Chongqing University ). Ding, G. K. (2008). Sustainable construction The role of environmental assessment tools. Journal of environmental management, 86(3), 451 464. Halliday, S. (2008). Sustainable construction. Routledge.

PAGE 58

58 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Ye Zhang graduated with honors from Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) in 2013 with a Bachelor of Engineering. In the same year, he enrolled in the Graduate School of Architecture & Urban planning, Huazhong Univer sity of Science and Technology. He attended the interdisciplinary program between HUST and Unive rsity of Florida since 2014. Ye Zhang is currently pursuing his graduate degree in Ma ster of Science in Architecture Study in University of Florida. Besides that Ye Zhang is a non famous French horn player carrying a dream of being a world class musician one day.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E2GAWXE5C_KOH27D INGEST_TIME 2016-04-19T21:14:01Z PACKAGE AA00034618_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES