The Effectiveness of the Green Building Evaluation - Assignment Example

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE GREEN BUILDING EVALUATION AND LABELING SYSTEM The Effectiveness of the Green Building Evaluation and Labeling System Introduction Environmental degradation and pollution has impacted negatively on the global climate and temperature. Man must develop superior and comprehensive methods of protecting the environment. Research has proven that the building and construction industry impacts negatively on the environment and environmental impact analysis need done for all the stages of the building construction. Research paper evaluation and analysis The paper under evaluation is (Vivian W.Y.Tam. (2007) the effectiveness of the green building evaluation and labeling system. Griffith school of Engineering: Griffith University) Section 1 Research questions The research question(s) addressed by the paper include 1) How does GBELS compare with other Enviromental assessment Tools? 2) Does GBELS provide accurate guidelines for the construction? 3) Can GBELS be applied in other countries? 4) How effective is GBELS as an Enviromental assessment tool? 5) In what ways can GBELS implementation be improved? 6) Is the implementation of GBELS cost effective? 7) What are the limitation of using GBELS as an environmental assessment tool 8) Does GBELS provide enough guidelines for its implementation 9) How can GBELS be improved (Vivian, 2007 pg 324&325) Section 2 Background study Environmental conservation is a major concern amid the global society. The construction industry impacts negatively on the environment. Taiwan, in its efforts to promote green building formulated the green building evaluation and labeling system (GBELS) which uses nine indicators to evaluate if a building project is environmentally viable. After implementation in 1999, the government mandated that all state building should undertake the green building design. Green building labels were awarded to building fulfilling at least four indicators. Differing feedback have been received with some claming that some GBELS indicators cant be used at the initial design stages, neglects the designer, clients and contractor needs and is not effective. However, some positive feedback indicates that GBELS helped in power conservation, improvement of project life cycle and promotion of green building. In light of these, this research work evaluated GBELS by examining its effectiveness, implementation, application, scope, current practice as well as reveling its merits and demerits for the purposes of recommending on the methods of improving it and using it internationally. (Chinese architecture and building center, 2007; Lin et al, 2006 and Vivian, 2007) Section 3 (part A) 1) What is the primary objective of this research? The main aim of the research work was to evaluate and analyze the effectiveness and implementation of GBELS its terms of its applicability, suitability as compared to other environmental assessment tools, its merits and limitations as well as its applicability on an international level. 2) What kind of Research method is used? The researcher used the following research methodology tools; Primary data collection through administering of a questionnaire and conducting structured interviews Comparative analysis: comparing GBELS and other environmental assessment tools. 3) How can the author gain data? To obtain the data, the author formulated question on the five main areas of research, these are; Measurement methods Implementation cost Examination methods Green building indicators New green building indicators Secondly, the questionnaires were distributed to 200 people who included architects, consultants, interior designers and developers. Lastly, the author the conducted ten interviews with members selected from the construction supply chain so as to gather more information After collecting the data, selection was done to discard wrongly filled questionnaires. For the comparative analysis the author compared GBELS with BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method), HKBEAM (Hong Kong Building Environmental Assessment Method) and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) (CET, 1999). 4) How can the author present the results? The author tabulated the results to enable easier evaluation and analysis of the results. The factors were ranked based on an index, that is, Where W was the weight given by each factor by the respondent {1(least important)-5(most important)}, A was the highest weight, N was the total number of the sample and was the relative importance index. 5) Why does the author use that way to present the results? The researcher uses this tabulated data due to Mathematical data is easily interpreted and analyzed when tabulated Different statistical tools can be employed to help in data analysis Aid in curtailing of errors and miscalculations Simplifies complex statistical data matching a given item to a given field in the table 6) Why does the author use that method to gain data Administering of questionnaire provides for an adequate means of collecting primary/ first hand information about any given phenomena. The researcher is interested in collecting the views/attitudes of the people in the construction supply chain about GBELS, the most feasible method is to ask them questions or interview them. Interviews and questionnaires are vital primary data collection techniques and furnish the researcher with accurate data about the phenomena or study in question. 7) Advantages of using questionnaire and interview The main advantages of using the questionnaire as data collection techniques include It furnishes the researcher with first hand, accurate and reliable data which when analyzed gives reliable results. It easy to formulate the questions It easy to administer the questionnaire to the respondent Evaluating the data collected from questionnaires is relatively simple as compared to other secondary data collection techniques. The researcher biasness in data collection is eliminated as he does not come into contact with the respondent Consumes less time and money as compared to interviews. Can be used where the respondent does not grant interviews The respondent is able to give comprehensive answers as the questionnaire is confidential. The main advantages of conducting interviews include; Interviews help to gather more information about a given phenomena. Through interviews the researcher gains more detailed information. Section 4 Conclusion From the research work carried out, the researcher found out that; GBELS has shown encouraging results as a green building evaluation tool The GBELS formulas did not provide adequate guidelines for calculating each of the green building indicators. The GBELS formulation may also restrict good green building designs. The researcher was also able to determine that the respondents understood all the GBELS indicators. The researcher also found out that, passing four indicators of the total nine to be awarded a green building label did not motivate the designers, architects and developers. Providing a pass or fail does not promote green building innovations. It was also found out that the client provided no financial support to aid in the design of green buildings. More indictors needed to be added to GBELS. The researcher also found out that GBELS could be applied in other countries with similar weather patterns and temperature as Taiwan and can particularly be implemented in developing countries Section 4 (ii) What ideas does the author get? There is need to review the existing GBELS indicators measurement methods with the aim of simplifying them so that they can be understood by the construction supply teams. There is need for additional indicators such as management, economic, traffic and transport, aesthetic and innovative design. To formulae total score system which helps in evaluating and comparing different green building levels. There is need for the government and clients to provide incentives and motivations to designers to help them formulate and implement green building designs. To formulate a GBELS system that enhances full implementation of the green building design rather than encouraging minimal requirement. 3) Disadvantages of the research The questionnaire was only filled by construction supply chain teams (architects, contractors, developers and interior designers); the data obtained may be biased towards archiving a given objective. It is necessary to incorporate the environmental experts. The research focused more on evaluating the effectiveness of the GBELS leaving the economic benefit that it has archived. The sample size for data collection was too small to make conclusion on a local and international level. The author recommends the use of GBELS aboard based on 74 results from questionnaires which is inadequate. (4) Ideas for continuing the research The researcher hopes to conduct a case study involving 20 building which are designed according to GBELS requirement against those that don’t meet these requirements. The main aim of this research will be to compare the different building where GBELS indicators are applied against those in which did not meet the minimum requirement set by GBELS. From the research, various parameters will be evaluated with the aim of determining the practical effectiveness of GBELS. The researcher will also compare the evaluated building against other building in the world which was designed using other environmental assessment tools such as BREEAM, HKBEAM and LEED. (5) What are the research questions? 1) What is the overall cost of designing and constructing a building when taking into consideration the GBELS indicators? 2) What is the relative cost of building that doesn’t meet GIBEL environmental indicators? 3) What is the relative cost of designing and constructing a building according to the other environmental assessment tools such as BREEAM, HKBEAM and LEED? 4) Which is the most cost effcticve environmental assessment tool? 5) What are the major economic benefits of the building designed and constructed to meet the GIBELS indicators requirement? 6) Can the major economic benefits of the project outweigh the limitation and extra costs incurred during green design and construction? 7) How many building meet all the nine indicators? 8) What is the difference in design and construction cost between those building that meets all GBELS indicators and those that meet the minimum requirement? 9) What incentives can be given to promote green designs? Part B Section 1 It is important to promote the development of green building design and construction. According to previous work done, the effectiveness of GBELS was evaluated. But by just collecting data about how the architects, designers and developers feel about GIBEL may not provide a feasible solution towards improving and enforcing GBELS. There is need to practically quantify the main aspects of GBELS and other environmental assessment tools. This research quantifies the economic benefits of using GBELS. The researcher seeks for all costs and benefits accrued during the construction of a GBELS compliant building against that building that don’t meet these requirement. Also evaluated are the cost and benefits accrued to designing and implementing a house with all GBELS indicators against that building designed to meet the minimum requirement. By identifying the long term cost and environmental benefits archived by implementing GBELS, it can serve as a motivation to the client and to the government to pay the extra (marginal) cost so as to archive a long term benefits. If the clients and the government provide more financial assistance then better environmental assessment tools will be developed and applied in the building and construction industries. In this research the GBELS and other environmental assessment tools are evaluated based on their cost and long term benefits. This helps to practically quantify the best among the three environmental assessment tools. Research methodology Case study is used for this research. The author identifies 20 houses that have implemented GBELS in full, 20 that have implemented GBELS at least four of the requirement and 20 buildings that have not complied with any of the GBELS indicators. The cost and benefits accrued to the design are evaluated. The researcher will also conducts detailed analysis of the costs and benefits of two other assessment tools with a view of determining whether GBELS can be used internationally. Case study data collection Data will be collected by formulating tables that will be filled by the researcher during the case study. These tables have the different aspects of GBELS, their cost and benefits. The table below will be used for the case study analysis. Table 1: showing how the researcher will tabulate the data obtained form the case study. EVALUATION SHEET FOR A SINGLE BUILDING PROJECT GBELS indicator Implemented Floor area covered (F) Total cost incurred during design and implementation (C) In terms of (US $ ) Electrical saving (ES) In terms of (US $ ) Water saving (CS) In terms of (US $ ) Carbon emission saving (CE) In terms of (US $ ) Total saving TS=ES+CS+CE In terms of (US $ ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 After data collection and quantifying different costs and benefits accrued to each GBELS, the cost will be weighted against the benefits. The table shown below will be used for data analysis. Table 2: showing the table the researcher will use for data presentation and evaluation. GIBEL indicator Implemented Total costs Total benefits Specific cost = Specific befits = Advantages Specific benefits – specific cost 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The researchers will identify each of the GBELS indicators implemented and evaluate the specific cost and specific benefits. The difference between the benefits and the cost will determine the advantage of the project. If it is too positive the implantation of GBEL will be very feasible and viable if too negative then it’s not effective. For building without any GBELS indicator, a negative figure was awarded for the benefits section. GBELS will then be compared with other environmental assessment tools such as BREEAM and LEED. The comparisons are based on the cost of implementation. The corrected data will the be analyzed with the aim of drawing conclusions which can be recommended to the client who in turn can accept to fund green design and construction as he has a motivation that the project will be of great benefit to him. Minimization of errors The major sources of errors in conducting this case study are Lack of methods to quantify some of the costs and benefits accrued to the project. Long term benefits are hard to quantify. Some of the contractors may refuse to disclose some information especially financial information. Varying electric power and water costs Lack of proper measurement tools for example the carbon released by a given building is hard to measure Miscalculations Heavy cost will be incurred during data collection The case study will be time consuming. Some of the methods adapted to limit the errors are Use of a large sample to reduce errors: the average of 20 building will give very accurate results. Each parameters/ indicator is evaluated alone. This curtails the difficulties of introducing errors to all the parameters/indicators To avoid miscalculations, the data will be processed using computer and the excel software. To ensure that the collected data is uniform different indexes will be set to depict different indicators. This will help in quantifying the costs and benefits References CET.1999. environmental assessment method for existing office designs. City: center of environmental Technology. Chinese Architecture and Building Center. 2007. The achievement and benefits “Green building evaluation and labeling system” City publishers: Lin, H, T. Sun C, Y; Lin, Y, J.; Chen, C,J. and Shih, J. 2006. Good to be green: green building promotion policy in Taiwan. Taipei, Taiwan: ministry of interior, architecture and building research institute. Vivian W.Y.Tam.2007. The Effectiveness of the Green Building Evaluation and Labeling System. Griffith school of Engineering: Griffith University Read More