Green Building – Guidebook for Sustainable Architecture

Prof. Dr. Michael Bauer

Peter Mösle
Dr. Michael Schwarz

Drees & Sommer Advanced Building Technologies GmbH

Obere Waldplätze 11
70569 Stuttgart
Germany

info.green-building@dreso.com

ISBN 978-3-642-00634-0 e-ISBN 978-3-642-00635-7

DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-00635-7
Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York

Library of Congress Control Number: 2009938435

Original German edition published by Callwey Verlag, Munich, 2007

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or
part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprin-
ting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilm
or in any other way, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication
or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copy-
right Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, and permission for use
must always be obtained from Springer. Violations are liable to prosecution
under the German Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in
this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement,
that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations
and therefore free for general use.

Cover design: wmxDesign GmbH, Heidelberg,

according to the design of independent Medien-Design

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

 By Michael Bauer, Peter Mösle and Michael Schwarz

Green Building – Guidebook for Sustainable Architecture

Table of Contents
A B
The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea Green Building Requirements
Increased Public Focus on Sustainability and Energy Efficiency 10 B1 Sustainable Design 24
Supportive Framework and General Conditions 12 Perceived Use defines the Concept 25
CO 2 Emission Trade 13 Relationship between Level of Well-Being
Rating Systems for Sustainable Buildings 15 and healthy Indoor Climate 26
An integrated View of Green Buildings – Relationship between Comfort Level and
Life Cycle Engineering 20 Performance Ability 27
Operative Indoor Temperature in Occupied Rooms 28
Operative Temperature in Atria 30
Indoor Humidity 32
Air Velocity and Draught Risk 34
Clothing and Activity Level 35
Visual Comfort 36
Acoustics 40
Air Quality 42
Electromagnetic Compatibility 45
Individualized Indoor Climate Control 47

B2 Conscientious Handling of Resources 50

Energy Benchmarks as Target Values for Design 51
Fossils and Regenerative Energy Resources 52
Today’s Energy Benchmark – Primary Energy
Demand for Indoor Climate Conditioning 53
Heating Energy Demand 54
Energy Demand for Water Heating 55
Cooling Energy Demand 56
Electricity Demand for Air Transport 57
Electricity Demand for Artificial Lighting 58
Future Energy Benchmark – Primary Energy Demand
over the Life Cycle of a Building 59
Cumulative Primary Energy Demand
of Building Materials 60
Primary Energy Demand – Use-related 61
Water Requirements 62
 C D
Design, Construction, Commissioning A closer Look – Green Buildings in Detail
and Monitoring for Green Buildings
D1 Dockland Building in Hamburg 146
C1 Buildings 66 Interview with the Architect Hadi Teherani of BRT Architects, Hamburg 147
Climate 67 Interview with Christian Fleck, Client, Robert Vogel GmbH & Co. KG 149
Urban Development and Infrastructure 69 Highly transparent and yet sustainable 150
Building Shape and Orientation 71
Building Envelope 74 D2 SOKA Building in Wiesbaden 154
Heat Insulation and Building Density 74 Excerpts from the Book titled »SOKA Building« by Prof. Thomas Herzog
Solar Protection 80 and Hanns Jörg Schrade of Herzog und Partner, Munich 155
Glare Protection 85 Interview with Peter Kippenberg, Board Member of SOKA Construction 156
Daylight Utilization 86 Robust and Energy-Efficient 158
Noise Protection 88 Optimizing Operations – Total Energy Balance for 2005:
Façade Construction Quality Management 90 Heat, Cooling, Electricity 159
Building Materials and Furnishings 92
Indoor Acoustics 94 D3 KSK Tuebingen 160
Smart Materials 97 Interview with Prof. Fritz Auer of Auer + Weber + Associates, Architects 161
Natural Resources 100 Transparently Ecological 163
Innovative Tools 105
D4 LBBW Stuttgart 166
C2 Building Services Engineering 108 Interview with the Architect Wolfram Wöhr of W. Wöhr – Jörg Mieslinger
Benefits Delivery 109 Architects, Munich, Stuttgart 167
Concepti and Evaluation of Indoor Interview with the Client Fred Gaugler, BWImmobilien GmbH 168
Climate Control Systems 110 High and Efficient 169
Heating 112
Cooling 113 D5 The Art Museum in Stuttgart 172
Ventilation 114 Interview with the Architects Prof. Rainer Hascher and Prof. Sebastian Jehle 173
Energy Generation 120 Crystal Clear 175
Trigeneration or Trigen Systems (CCHP) 121
Solar Energy 124 D6 New Building: European Investment Bank (EIB) in Luxembourg 178
Wind Energy 126 Interview with Christoph Ingenhoven of Ingenhoven Architects 179
Geothermics 127 Sustainably Comfortable 181
Biomass 128
D7 Nycomed, Constance 184
C3 Commissioning 130 Interview with the Architect Th. Pink of Petzinka Pink Technol.
Sustainable Building Procedure Requirements 131 Architecture, Duesseldorf 185
Blower Door Test – Proof of Air-Tightness 132 Interview with the Client Prof. Franz Maier of Nycomed 185
Thermography – Proof of Thermal Insulation and Evidence Efficient Integration 187
of Active Systems 133
Proof of Indoor Comfort 134 D8 DR Byen, Copenhagen 190
Air Quality 135 Interview with the Clients Kai Toft & Marianne Fox of DR Byen 191
Noise Protection 136 Interview with the Architect Stig Mikkelsen, Project Leader
Daylight Performance and Nonglaring 137 and Partner of Dissing + Weitling 192
Emulation 138 Adjusted Climate Considerations 194

C4 Monitoring and Energy Management 140 D9 D&S Advanced Building Technologies Building, Stuttgart 196
Low-Energy Building Prototype 197
Basic Evaluation and Course of Action 198
Indoor Climate and Façade Concept 199
Usage of Geothermal Energy for Heat and Cooling Generation 200

Appendix 202
Preface by the Authors

There are essential challenges for the without decreasing either comfort level constructed and run according to the
future, such as taking a responsible or living standard. The building sec- principles of energy efficiency, climatic
approach towards nature. Also, there tor worldwide uses up to 40% of pri- aspects, and water conservation. This
is the search for an environmentally- mary energy requirements and also a applies even when global outlines to
friendly energy supply that is easy on considerable amount of overall water counteract climate change seem to lie
resources and climate. A further chal- requirements. Meanwhile, the service too far in the future to grasp. Buildings
lenge is the search for clean sources life of both new and renovated build- that show these attributes of sustain-
of drinking water. Aside from novel and ings reaches far into the future. Hence, ability are called Green Buildings. They
more efficient techno­logies than are these buildings considerably influence unite a high comfort level with opti-
currently in place, ad­ditional empha- envisioned energy and water needs for mum user quality, minimal energy and
sis will thus need to be placed on re- the next 50 to 80 years. This means water expenditure, and a means of en-
ducing energy and water requirements that, even today, they must be planned, ergy generation that is as easy as pos-
sible on both climate and resources, eration of Green Buildings. Our cross- ing the level of motivation for erecting
all this under economic aspects with a trade, integrated knowledge stems Green Buildings anywhere in the world,
pay-back span of 5 to 15 years. Green from Drees & Sommer’s performance whether from scratch or as renovation
Buildings are also capable of meeting sectors of Engineering, Property Con- projects. Engineering solutions to make
even the most stringent demands for sulting and Project Management. this happen are both available and eco-
aesthetics and architecture, which is The contents of this book are based nomically viable. Our sustainability ap-
something that the examples given in on the extensive experience of the proach goes even further, incidental­ly.
this book clearly show. Planning these authors and their colleagues – during The CO2 burden resulting from the pro-
buildings, according to an integrated their time at Drees & Sommer Advanced duction and distribution of this book, for
process, requires the willingness of all Building Technologies GmbH – in plan- instance, we have decided to compen-
those involved: to regard the numer- ning, construction and operation of sate for by obtaining CO2 certificates for
ous interfaces as seams of individual such buildings. It documents, through CO2 reducing measures. Hence, you
assembly sections, the synergies of examples, innovative architectural and are free to put all your energy into read-
which are far from being exhausted yet. technical solutions and also the target- ing this book!
An holistic and specific knowledge is oriented use of specialist tools for both We would now like to invite you to
needed, regarding essential climatic, planning and operation. This book is join us on a journey into the world of
thermal, energy-related, aero-physical directed primarily at investors, archi- Green Buildings, to have fun while read-
and structural-physical elements and tects, construction planners and build- ing about it, and above all, to also dis-
product merits, which does not end at ing operators, looking for an energy cover new aspects that you can then
the boundaries of the individual trades. approach that is easy on resources. It use for your own buildings in future.
Further, innovative evaluation and is meant as a guideline for planning,
simulation tools are being used, which building and operation of sustainable Heubach, Gerlingen, Nuertingen
show in detail the effects throughout and energy-efficient buildings.
the building’s life cycle. The examples At this stage, we would also like to Michael Bauer
in this book show that a building can in- thank all the renowned builders and Peter Mösle
deed be run according to the principles ar­chitects together with whom, over Michael Schwarz
of energy and resource conservation the last years, we had the honour of
when – from the base of an integrated planning, executing and operating
energy concept – usage within a given these attractive and innovative build-
establishment is being consistently ings. The level of trust they put in us
tracked and optimized. The resulting is also shown by the statements they
new fields of consulting and planning gave us for this book and the provided
are called energy design, energy man- documentation for many prominent
agement and Life Cycle Engineering. In buildings. For their kind assistance in
this particular field, Drees & Sommer putting together this book, a special
now has over 30 years of experience, as thanks is due.
one of the leading engineering and con- We would be pleased if, by means
sulting firms for the planning and op- of this book, we succeeded in rais-
A B
The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea
C D
10 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

Fig. A 3 State Office

Building in Berlin.
Architects: Petzinka
Pink Technologische
Architektur ®,
Duesseldorf

Increased Public Focus on Sustainability

and Energy Efficiency
Man’s strive for increased comfort and nies across different industries have ing. This constitutes a state of depen­
financial independence, the densifica­ meanwhile come to realize that only a dency that is unsettling to consum­
tion of congested urban areas, a strong responsible handling of resources will ers and causes them to ask questions
increase in traffic levels and the grow­ lead to long-term success. Sustainable about the energy policy approach of
ing electric smog problem due to new buildings that are both environmentally the different nations. Since energy is
communication technologies all cause and resource-friendly enjoy an increas­ essential, many investors and operators
ever rising stress levels in the immedi­ ingly higher standing when compared place their trust in new technologies
ate vicinity of the individual. Quality of to primarily economically oriented solu­ and resources in order to become inde­
life is being hampered and there are ne­ tions. pendent of global developments.
gative health effects. All this, coupled Aside from social and economic fac­ Real Estate, too, is starting to think
with frequent news about the glo­bal tors, steadily rising energy costs over along new lines. End-users look for sus­
climate change, gradually leads to a recent years facilitate the trend towards tainable building concepts, with low
change of thought throughout society. sustainability. Over the past 10 years energy and operating costs, which offer
In the end, it is society that must alone, oil prices have more than dou­ open, socially acceptable and commu­
bear the effects of economic damage bled, with an annual increase of 25% nication-friendly structures made from
caused by climatic change. Due to the between 2004 and 2008. Taking into building materials that are acceptable
rising number of environmental catas­ account both contemporary energy from a building ecology point of view
trophes, there was in increase of 40% prices and price increases, energy sav­ and have been left in as natural a state
between the years of 1990 to 2000 ing measures have become essential as possible. They analyze expected
alone, when compared to economic in this day and age. A further rea­son operating costs, down to building rena­
damage sustained be­t ween 1950 and for the conscientious handling of re­ turation, and they run things in a sus­
1990. Without the implementation of sources is a heavy dependency on en­ tainable manner. Aside from looking at
effective measurements, further dam­ ergy import. The European Union cur­ energy and operating costs, they also
age, which must therefore still be ex­ rently imports more than 60% of its take an increasing interest in work per­
pected, cannot be contained. Compa­ primary energy, with the tendency ris­ formance levels, since these are on the

14
Amount of weather-caused catastrophes

Other 100
Crude oil price in US $ per barrel

Flooding
12 90
Storm
80
10
70

8 60

50
6
40

4 30

20
2
10

0 0
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Fig. A 1 Major weather-caused catastrophes from 1950 to 2000 Fig. A 2 Nominal Development of Crude Oil Prices from 1960 onward
 11

rise for workers in Europe. Only when in part on energy and operating costs developed according to economically
people feel good and are healthy they and are looking for materials that are in viable considerations, whereby the en­
can work at their optimum performance accordance with building ecology con­ tire building life cycle – from concept
level. By necessity, this means provid­ siderations. Green Buildings always to planning stage, from construction
ing both a comfortable and healthy offer a high comfort level and healthy to operation and then back to renatu­
environment. Investors also know they indoor climate while banking on re­ ration – is taken into account. Green
should use sustainable aspects as generative energies and resources that Buildings, therefore, are based on an
arguments for rental and sale, since allow for energy and operating costs integrated and future-oriented ap­
nowadays tenants base their decisions to be kept as low as possible. They are proach.

1 000 000
Net Import in K tons of Crude Oil

900 000

800 000

700 000

600 000

500 000

400 000

300 000

200 000

100 000

0
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Year
EU (25 nations) Germany France Italy Spain United Kingdom

Fig. A 4 European Union Dependency on Energy Imports

A1.04
12 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

Supportive Framework and General Conditions

Owing to rising public interest in sus- the essential building and facility areas This gap can be bridged by the use of
tainable and ecological solutions, the are being considered. This means that Green Building labels, guidelines and
last few years have resulted in the es- many of these areas are unable to ful- quality certificates, since these can at
tablishment of numerous framework fil their true potential when it comes least recommend adherence to more
conditions that facilitate the use of to the possibility of optimisation on an stringent guidelines. The higher de-
energy-saving technologies, energy energy level. Further, legally defined mands placed on true energy efficien­
sources that are easy on resources and critical values for energy consumption cy can also be justified by the fact that
sustainable products for the property are generally below those required for the technology in buildings and facility
sector. Green Buildings. These critical values has a great lifespan. This means that a
The base of a sustainable energy are usually set in a manner that allows CO2 emission limit specified today will
policy can be found in various nation- for marketable products to be used. have long-ranging effects into the fu-
al, European and International laws, Laws and stipulations will, therefore, ture. Today’s decisions, therefore, are
standards, norms and stipulations that always be backward when compared essential aspects in determining future
specify measurable standards of ener­ to the actual market possibilities for emission levels.
gy efficiency for buildings and facili- obtaining maximum energy efficiency.
ties. Further, the norms define the mini-
mum standard for energy efficiency of
buildings and facilities. The norms also
set minimum standards for thermal
com­fort, air quality and visual comfort.
Across Europe, there is currently a
drive to unify these standards. On an
international level, however, the dif­
ferent nations are setting their own
guidelines and these cannot necessar-
ily be directly compared to each other.
The standards are being supported by
a variety of available and targeted
grants for promising technologies that
are currently not yet economical on a
regenerative level. Examples for this in
Germany would be the field of photo-
voltaics, for instance, or of near-surface
geothermics, solar thermics, biogas
plants or energy-conserving measures
for the renovation of old buildings.
In the currently available laws, stan­
d­ards and stipulations, however, not all
 13

CO 2 Emission Trade

From February 2005, the Kyoto proto-

col applies. It is meant to reduce the
levels of global greenhouse gas emis-
sions. The origin of this protocol can
be traced back to 1997. It stands for
an international environmental treaty
where the 39 participating industrial
nations agreed, by 2012, to reduce their equator
collective emission of environmentally
harmful gases, like, for instance, car-
bon dioxide (CO2 ) by a total of 5% when
compared to 1990 levels. Within the
European Community, the target reduc-
over 11.0 7.1 to 11.0 4.1 to 7.0 0.0 to 4.0 no information in t CO2/inhabitants for the year 2004
tion level is 8% , in Germany even 21%.
As Figure A6 shows, most industrial
Fig. A 5 CO2 Emissions Distribution levels per Capita, World Population, for the year 2004
nations fall far short of meeting their
targets at this time.
By means of CO 2 trade, a long-term responds to maximum permitted us- for instance as a result of CO2 emission
corrective measure is supposed to be age. The Greenhouse Gas Budget, which reduction due to energy-savings mea-
achieved for the human-caused green- goes back to 1990, takes into account sures applied there, then the unused
house effect. The environment is here­- future development for each partici- credits can be sold on the open mar-
by considered as goods, the conserva- pating nation. Economies that are just ket. Alternatively, an enterprise may
tion of which can be achieved through starting to rise as, for in­stance, can be purchase credits on the open market
providing financial incentives. found in Eastern Europe, are permitted if its own emission-reducing measures
Politicians have now recognized that a higher degree of CO2 emissions. In- would be more costly than the acqui-
environmental destruction, resulting dustrial nations, however, must make sition of those credits. Further, emis-
from climatic change, firstly cannot on­ do every year with a reduced green- sion credits can be obtained if a given
ly be counteracted by purely economic house budget. enterprise were to invest, in other de-
means and secondly must be regarded For each nation, a certain number of veloping or industrial nations, into sus-
as a serious global problem. For the emissions credits are assigned on the tainable energy supply facilities. This
first time, the idea behind the CO2 trade basis of the national caps on the emis- means that climate protection takes
clearly unites both economical and en- sions in that nation. These credits are place precisely where it can also be re-
vironmental aspects. How precisely assigned to the participating enterpris- alized at the smallest expense.
does CO2 emissions trading work, then? es, according to their CO 2 emissions In Germany, during the initial stage
For each nation that has ratified the level. If the emissions of a given enter- that runs up to 2012, participation
Kyoto protocol, a maximum amount of prise remain below the amount of emis- in the emissions trade process is only
climate-damaging greenhouse gases sion credits that it has been assigned com­pulsory for the following: opera­-
is assigned. The assigned amount cor- (Assigned Allocation Units or AAUs), tors of large-size power plants with a
14 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

thermal furnace capacity in excess ings based on their CO2 market value USA 23%

of 20 MW and also operators of power- is something that, in the not-too-distant China 17%

intensive industrial plants. With this, future, will reach the property sector Russia 7%

ca. 55% of the CO2 emissions poten­- as well. A possible platform for build- Japan 5%

India 4%
tial directly participates in the trade. ing-related emissions trade already ex- Germany 3%

Currently, neither the traffic nor the ists with the EU directive on overall en- Other 25 EU Nations 12%

building sectors are part of the trade ergy efficiency and with the mandatory Rest of the World 29%

in either a private or commercial man- energy passport. Our planet earth only
ner. However, in Europe, efforts are has limited biocapacity in order to re- Fig. A 8 Distribution of CO2 Emissions by World
Nations for the Year 2004
already underway to extend emissions generate from harmful substances and
trading to all sectors in the long run. consumption of its resources. Since the
In other, smaller European nations like, Nineties, global consumption levels ex-
for instan­ce, Latvia and Slovenia, ceed available biocapacity. In order to
plants with a lower thermal output are reinstate the ecological balance of the
already participating in the emissions earth, the CO2 footprint needs to be de-
trade. This is explicitly permitted in the creased. Target values that are suitable
Emissions Trade Bill as an opt-in rule. for sustainable development have been
The evaluation and financing of build- outlined in Figure A7.

India ** Status in 2004

72.17 %
Target oriented on 1990 38.98 %
China **
* Kyoto protocol signed but not ratified
7.93 % Status 2008: Status 2050:
Iceland ** Emissions status in 2002 Number of people: 6,5 Mrd Number of people: 9 Mrd
10.00 %
CO2-Footprint Worldwide: 1,41 gha/Person Target CO2-Footprint Worldwide:
Australia* CO2-Footprint – Germany: 2,31 gha/Person 0,7 gha/Person
CO2-Footprint – Europe: 2,58 gha/Person Measures:
Norway 10.24 % - Energy Efficienty in Construction and
1.00 % Technology
Ukraina -55.33 % - Renewable Energies
0.00 % 2008 – 2050:
Prognosis for the CO2-Footprint of the
Russia -31.96 % World, if no measures are undertaken
0.00 % 2,5

New Zealand 21.32 %

0.00 %
Croatia* -5.47 % 2.0
-5.00 %
Number of planet Earths

Canada -6.00 %
26.58 %

Japan 6.53 % 1.5

-6.00 %
USA* 14.30 %
-7.00 % Ecological dept
Romania -41.06 % 1.0
-8.00 %
Bulgaria -48.98 %
-8.00 % Biocapacity
Switzerland 0.38 % 0.5 reserve
-8.00 %
Monaco* -3.70 %
-8.00 %
0.0
Liechtenstein 18.34 % 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Year
-8.00 %
EU -0.58 %
Ecological Footprint
2050
-8.00 %
-80.0 % -60.0 % -40.0 % -20.0 % 0.0 % 20.0 % 40.0 % 60.0 % 80.0 % Biocapacity

Fig. A 6 Reduction Targets, as agreed in the Kyoto Protocol, and current Standing Fig. A 7 Sustainability wedges and an end to overshoot
of CO2 Emission Levels for the worldwide highest global Consumers
 15

Rating Systems for Sustainable Buildings

Rating systems have been developed marks, the design, construction and en a comprehensive measurable im-
to measure the sustainability level of operation of sustainable buildings pact on their buildings’ performance.
Green Buildings and provide best-prac- will be certified. Using several criteria The criteria either only cover aspects of
tice experience in their highest certi- compiled in guidelines and checklists, the building approach to sustainability,
fication level. With the given bench- building owners and operators are giv- like energy efficiency, or they cover the

System DGNB BREEAM LEED Green Star CASBEE Minergie

(Country of origin) (Germany) (Great Britain)) (USA) (Australia) (Japan) (Switzerland)

Initiation 2007 1990 1998 2003 2001 1998

Key Aspects - Ecological Quality - Management - Sustainable Sites - Management Certification on the 4 Building standards
of Assessment - Economical Quality - Health & Well-being - Water Efficiency - Indoor Comfort basis of “building- are available:
& Versions - Social Quality - Energy - Energy & At­mo­s- - Energy environment
- Technical Quality - Water ­phere - Transport efficiency factor“ (1) Minergie
- Process Quality - Material - Material & - Water - Dense building
- Site Quality - Site Ecology Resources - Material BEE=Q/L envelope
- Pollution - Indoor Air Quality - Land Consumption - Efficient heating
- Transport - Innovation & & Ecology Q … Quality system
Purpose of the - Land consumption Design - Emissions (Ecological Quality - Comfort ventilation
DGNB Certificate: - Innovations of buildings)
Application for Q1 - Interior space (2) Minergie-P
buildings of any kind BREEAM for: LEED for: Q2 - Operation addi­tional criteria
(Office high-rises, Courts, EcoHomes, New Construction, Green Star for: Q3 - Environment to (1):
detached residential Edu­ca­tion, Industrial, Existing Buildings, - Office – Existing - Airtightness of
homes, infrastructure Healthcare, Multi- Commercial Interiors, Buildings L … Loadings building envelope
buildings etc.) Residential, Offices, Core and Shell, - Office – Interior (Ecological effects - Efficiency of
Prisons, Retail Homes, Neighbor- Design on buildings) household
hood Development, - Office – Design L1 - Energy applicances
DGNB for: School, Retail L2 - Resources
- Offices L3 - Material (3) Minergie-Eco
- Existing Buildings additional criteria
- Retail Main Criteria: to (1):
- Industrial (1) Energy Efficiency - Healthy ecological
- Portfolios (2) Resource Con- manner of
- Schools sumption Efficiency construction
(3) Building (optimized daylight
Environment conditions, low
(4) Building Interior emissions of noise
and pollutants)

(4) Minergie-P-Eco
Adherence to
criteria of Minergie-P
and Minergie-Eco

Level of Bronze Pass LEED Certified 4 Stars: ‚Best Practice‘ C (poor) Minergie
Certification Silver Good LEED Silver 5 Stars: ‚Australien B Minergie-P
Gold Very good LEED Gold Excellence‘ B+ Minergie-Eco
Excellent LEED Platinum 6 Stars: ‚World A Minergie-P-Eco
Outstanding Leadership‘ S (excellent)

Fig. A9 Comparison of different Rating Systems for Sustainable Buildings

16 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Certified Silver Gold Platinum

Certified Silver Gold Platinum

40 – 49 Points 50 – 59 Points 60 – 79 Points ≥80 Points

Fig. A 12 LEED® Certification

whole building approach by identify- LEED® – Leadership in Energy and

ing performance in key areas like sus- Environmental Design
tainable site development, human and The LEED® Green Building Rating Sys­-
envi­ronmental health, water savings, tem is a voluntary, consensus-based
materials selection, indoor environmen- standard to support and certify success­-
tal quality, social aspects and econo­ ful Green Building design, construction
mical quality. and operations. It guides architects,
Furthermore, the purpose of rating engineers, building owners, designers
systems is to certify the different as- and real estate professionals to trans-
pects of sustainable development form the construction environment into
during the planning and construction one of sustainability. Green Building
stages. The certification process means practices can substantially reduce or
quality assurance for building owners eliminate negative environmental im-
and users. Important criteria for suc- pact and improve existing unsustain-
cessful assessments are convenience, able design. As an added benefit, green
Fig. A10 LEED® Structure
usability and adequate effort during the design measures reduce operating
different stages of the design process. costs, enhance building marketability,
The result of the assessment should be increase staff productivity and reduce
easy to communicate and should be potential liability resulting from indoor
showing transparent derivation and re- air quality problems.
liability. The rating systems were developed Sustainable Sites

Water Efficientcy
for the different uses of buildings.
Energy & Atmosphere
Structure of Rating Systems The rating is always based on the same
Materials & Resources
The different aspects are sorted in over­- method, but the measures differenti-
Indoor Environment Quality
all categories, like ›energy‹ or quality ate between the uses. Actually, new
Innovation in Design
groups ›ecology‹, ›economy‹ and ›so- construction as well as modernization
cial‹ demands (triple bottom line). For of homes and non-residential build-
each aspect, one or more benchmarks ings are assessed. Beyond single and
exist, which need to be verified in order complete buildings, there are assess-
6%
to meet requirements or obtain points. ments for neighborhoods, commercial 15% 26%

Depending on the method used, indi- interiors and core and shell. The rating
vidual points are either added up or system is organized into five different
initially weighted and then summed up environmental categories: Sustainable 14%
10%
to obtain the final result. The number Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and At-
of points is ranked in the rating scale, mosphere, Material and Resources and
35%
which is divided into different levels: Innovation.
The higher the number of points, the
better the certification.
Fig. A11 LEED® Weighting
 17

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Certified Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding

Certified Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding

30 Points 45 Points 55 Points 70 Points 85 Points

Fig. A15 BREEAM Certification

BREEAM – BRE Environmental Different building versions have been

Assessment Method created since its launch, to assess
The assessment process BREEAM was the various building types. Currently,
created by BRE (Building Research Es- the evaluation program is available
tablishment) in 1990. BRE is the certi- for offices, industry, schools, courts,
fication and quality assurance body for prisons, multiple purpose dwell­ings,
BREEAM ratings. The assessment meth- hospitals, private homes and neighbor-
ods and tools are all designed to help hoods. The versions of assessment es-
construction professionals understand sentially look at the same broad range
and mitigate the environmental im- of environmental impacts: Manage-
pacts of the developments they design ment, Health and Well-being, Energy,
and build. As BREEAM is predominately Transport, Water, Material and Waste,
a design-stage assessment, it is im- Land Use and Ecology and Pollution.
portant to incorporate details into the Credits are awarded in each of the
design as early as possible. By doing above, based on performance. A set of
this, it will be easier to obtain a higher environmental weightings then enables
rating and a more cost-effective result. the credits to be added toge­ther to pro-
The methods and tools cover dif­ferent duce a single overall score. The build-
scales of construction activity. BREEAM ing is then rated on a scale of certified,
Development is useful at the master good, very good, excellent or outstand-
planning stage for large development ing and a certificate awarded to the de-
sites like new settlements and commu- sign or construction. Fig. A13 BREEAM Structure
nities.

Management
10% 12% Health & Wellbeing

12% Energy

15% Transport
Water
7,5%
Materials

Waste
12,5%
19%
Pollution
6% 8% Land Use & Ecology

Fig. A14 BREEAM Weighting

18 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Bronze Silver Gold

Fig. A 18 DGNB Certification Fig. A 19 Certification medals

with DGNB Gold, Silver, Bronze

DGNB – German Sustainable Building fort and performance of their users«. comfort is made possible by high-grade
Certificate (GeSBC) The certification was introduced to building envelopes and the continuous
In contrast to comparable systems, the the real estate market in January 2009. renewal of air.
GeSBC label takes all three sustainabil- It is now possible to certify at three dif­- The evaluation program is available
ity dimensions in account in its assess- ferent levels, »Bronze«, »Silver« and for homes, multiple dwellings, offices,
ment structure, examining ecological, »Gold«. As shown in Fig. A16, site qual- schools, retail buildings, restaurants,
economic and socio-cultural aspects. ity will be addressed, but a se­parate meeting halls, hospitals, industry and
As the result of legislation, the Ger- mark will be given for this, since the depots. Specific energy consumption
man real estate industry already has a boundary for the overall assessment is is used as the main indicator of Miner-
high standard of sustainability. In addi- defined as the building itself. gie®, to quantify the required building
tion to the Energy Passport, the GeSBC quality. The aim of the Standard »Min-
addresses all items defining sustain- MINERGIE ECO® ergie-P ®« is to qualify buildings that
ability to meet the demands. Minergie® is a sustainability brand for achieve lower energy consumption than
The German Sustainable Building new and refurbished buildings. It is the Minergie® standard. The Minergie
Council (DGNB) was founded in June supported jointly by the Swiss Confed- and the Minergie-P ® Standard are pre-
2007 and created the German Sustain- eration and the Swiss Cantons along requisites for the Minergie ECO® as-
able Building Certificate together with with Trade and Industry. Suppliers in- sessment. The ECO® Standard comple-
the German Federal Ministry of Trans- clude architects and engineers as well ments Minergie with the cate­gories
port, Construction and Urban Develop- as manufacturers of materials, compo- of health and ecology. The criteria are
ment. The goal is »to create living envi- nents and systems. assessed by addressing questions
ronments that are environmentally com- The comfort of occupants living or on different aspects of lighting, noise,
patible, resource-friendly and economi- working in the building is the heart of ventilation, material, fabrication and
cal and that safeguard the health, com- Minergie®. A comprehensive level of deconstruction. The affirmation of the

10%
22,5% Process Quality
Ecology Economy Social Quality
Technical Quality

22,5% Ecological Quality

Technical Quality Economical Quality

Social Quality
22,5%
Process Quality
22,5%

Site Quality

Fig. A16 DGNB Structure Fig. A17 DGNB Weighting

 19

question must comprise at least 67% buildings. The maximum value depends
of all relevant questions. The assess- on the type and use of the building.
33%
ment includes two different stages: The maximum value for modernization Health

the pre-assessment during the design in general lies 40% below the values 67%
Construction
Ecology
stage (Fig. A20) and the assessement of new construction. Energy balancing
during the construction stage to verifiy comprises beyond heat loss of trans-
the success of previously planned mea- mission heat input of solar radi­ation,
sures (Fig. A21). internal heat input, heat loss of distri-
bution, storage and transfer inside the Fig. A 20 Minergie ECO®
Weighting Pre-Assessment
Energy Performance Directive building as well as the energy loss by
An important building certification, the energy source through primary pro-
incorporated by the EU, is the Energy duction, transformation and transport.
Performance Certificate. They devel- »Green Building« is an European pro-
oped the prototype of the federally gram setting target values 25% or 50%
uniform Energy Performance Certifi- below compulsory primary energy de- 33% Health
cate. The certificate has been legally mands. Its focus is especially on build- Construction
67%
Ecology
compulsory since 2007 as a result of ings with non-residential use, like of-
the energy saving regulation, which is a fice buildings, schools, swimming pools
part of the EU building laws. For Germa- and industrial buildings.
ny, Energy Saving Regulation defines
maximum values for primary energy Fig. A 21 Minergie ECO®
Weighting Construction Stage
demand and the heat loss by transmis-
sion for residential and non-residential

Fig. A22 Energy Passport

20 The Motivation behind the Green Building Idea

An integrated View of Green Buildings –

Life Cycle Engineering

Green Buildings are buildings of any signers and planners can safely tread of its effects on the entire life-cycle of
usage category that subscribe to the new paths where they may develop a given building. This long-term evalu-
principle of a conscientious handling of novel concepts or products. ation, then, obliges a sustainable han-
natural resources. This means causing Aside from an integrated design and dling of all resources.
as little environmental interference as work approach, and the development The authors consider Life Cycle En-
possible, the use of environmentally- and further development of products gineering to be an integral approach,
friendly materials that do not constitute and tools, sustainability must be ex- which results in highest possible sus-
a health hazard, indoor solutions that panded so that the planners are able tainability levels during construction.
facilitate communication, low energy to gather valuable experience even It unites positive factors from integral
requirements, renewable energy use, during the operation of the buildings. planning and/or design, the manifold
high-quality and longevity as a guide- This is the only way that a constructive possibilities of modern planning and
line for construction, and, last but not back-flow of information into the build- calculation tools, ongoing optimisation
least, an economical operation. In ing design process can be achieved, processes during operation, and con-
order to achieve this, an integrated, something that, until now, does not ap- scientious handling during renaturation
cross-trade approach is required to ply for contemporary building construc- of materials. All this results in a Green
allow for an interface-free, or as inter- tion. This approach is to be expanded Building that, despite hampering nature
face-free as possible, handling of the to encompass renaturation, in order as little as possible, can provide a com-
trades of architecture, support struc- to make allowances for the recycling fortable living environment to meet the
ture, façade, building physics, build- capability of materials used even dur- expectations of its inhabitants.
ing technology and energy while tak- ing the planning stage. In other indus-
ing into account both usage consider- trial sectors, this is already required by
ations and climatic conditions. To this law but, in the building sector, we are
end, innovative planning and simula- clearly lagging behind in this aspect.
tion tools are employed, according On account of consistent and rising en-
to standards, during the design and vironmental stress, however, it is to
planning stages for Green Buildings. be expected that sustainability will also
They allow for new concepts since – by be demanded of buildings in the medi-
means of simulation of thermal, flow um-term and thus not-too-distant fu-
and energy behaviour – detailed cal- ture.
culations can be achieved already dur- The path from sequential to integral
ing the design stage. Attainable com- planning, hence, needs to be developed
fort levels and energy efficiency can on the basis of an integral approach
thus be calculated in advance and this to buildings and is to be extended in the
means that, already during the design direction of a Life Cycle Engineering
stage, it is possible to achieve best approach. This term stands for integral
possible security in regards to costs design and consultation knowledge,
and cost efficiency. Equipped with which always evaluates a given concept
these kinds of tools, Green Building de- or planning decision under the aspects
 21

Overall Global Temperature Rise in °C

a
Fig. A 23 Life expectancy of 5
contemporary components
4
when seen inside the time- Ventilation System
Heating System
frame of possible rises of 3 Glazing
Composite Heat Insulation System
global temperature levels Geothermal Probe/Ground-coupled Heat Exchanger
Concrete Support Structure
2

b
1

0
2000 2020 2030 2040 2080 2100
a: rising world population level, b: stagnation of world population level, Year
no change in energy policy sustainable energy policy

200

Cost Savings in K€
Difference in Life Cycle Costs for two given Buildings:
Interest on Capital, Energy, Maintenance, Operation, Renewal
Cost-savings over the Life Cycle

150

100

50
Renewal and Overhaul Investments –
Building Technology

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40

Overhaul Investments –
Building Envelope
-50

-100
Observation Period in Years
Cost Increase: Capital 2% per Annum, Energy 5% per Annum
Cost Savings in K€

500

400 301 Concrete Steel 80 years

302 Insulation Glazing
303 Composite Heat Insulation System: Façade
300 304 Roof Insulation
401 Gas Holder
Renewal Investments 402 Electric Heat Pump
200 403 Insulated Pipelines
Servicing and Inspection
404 Circular Pumps
Interest on Capital 405
100 406 Heating Ceiling
Maintenance 407 Ventilation System
408 Chiller
Energy
0 409 Re-cooling Units
410 Geothermal Probe/Ground-coupled Heat Exchanger 60 years
411 ICA Technology
-100 Year 5 Year 15
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Usage
30 in32Years
....80...

Fig. A 24 Cost-savings Green Buildings vs. Standard Buildings – detailed observation over the entire Life Cycle

Sequential Planning Integral Planning Life Cycle Engineering

Planning Operation Planning Operation Planning Operation

Recycling

Recycling

Recycling

Building Building Building

Construction Construction Construction

Client Operator/Tenant Client Operator/Tenant Client Operator/Tenant

Architect Architect Architect

Expert Expert Expert

Planner 1 Planner 1 Planner 1
Expert Expert Expert
Planner 2 Planner 2 Planner 2

........ ........ ........

Conceptual Knowledge

Fig. A 25 Development of Planning Methods, from sequential Methodology to Life Cycle Engineering

A3.03