A Study of Green Rating Systems with Case Study Analysis.

H.Ahamed Fazeel Akram*1, Nivedhaa.B1.

1
Kalasalingam School of Architecture (KSOA), Kalasalingam Academy of Research and Education, Krishnankoil,

Tamil Nadu 626 126, INDIA

Email:[email protected]; [email protected].

ABSTRACT
Climate change and the exhaustion of the available natural resources are the biggest challenge to the human kind. Architectural
and Construction industry provide their part of solution to the global citizens through sustainable and green Architecture. This
paper takes a stand on how green certification can increase efficiency through all the available means. A case study also supports
the stand which process us through the reduction of energy consumption and their aftermath from the primary actions that are
taken during designing and construction. This research therefore, recommends Green Certification practice which will provide us
with Environmental Sustenance and Conserving Natural Resources.

Keywords: Sustainable Green Architecture, Efficiency, Natural Resources, Environmental Sustenance, Green Rating Systems.

1. Introduction 2.1.1. BREEAM Assessments Categories:

This paper describes about the Green Rating System for building BREEAM Provide different types of assessments, Including
construction Industries. The term Green Rating System Defines
the Method of Rating the building by using most important ✓ Pre-assessment
determining factor that affect the building like Energy, Water, ✓ Design and Procurement assessment
Carbon Emissions and Transportation. ✓ Management and Operation assessment
✓ Post Construction Reviews
In worldwide context, they are different types of ✓ Covers the whole life cycle of Buildings.
Green Rating Systems in buildings that based on sustainable
2.1.2. BREEAM categories.
development and they are designed for various building projects.
However, there are only few green rating systems are BREEAM include Eight main categories of Environmental
acknowledged and really set for recognizable standard for Impacts. The categories consider topic such as
sustainable Development. The following four systems are
✓ Energy and Water Use
i. BREEAM ✓ Health & Well Being
ii. GRIHA ✓ Pollution
iii. IGBC ✓ Transport
iv. LEED ✓ Materials
v. Green Star ✓
✓ Waste
Which are most popular by means of their credential systems?
✓ Ecology
2. Comparative Review of Green Rated Systems. ✓ Management Processes.

2.1. BREEAM (Building Research Establishments 2.1.3. BREEAM Certified Levels

Environmental Assessment Method)
✓ Pass
It is the world’s leading sustainability assessment method for ✓ Good
master planning projects, Infrastructure and buildings. It ✓ Very Good
addresses a number of life cycle stages such as New ✓ Excellent
Construction, Refurbishment and in – use [1,2]. Globally there ✓ Outstanding
are more than 5,30,000. BREEAM Certified Developments,
since it was first launched in 1990 throughout the UK, EU,
EFTA, member states.

1
2.2. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) ➢ Design and as Built Communities: Performance,
Interiors.
LEED is used throughout North America as well as in more than ➢ Legacy Rating Tools: Education, Health Care,
thirty countries with over six thousand three hundred projects Industrial, Multi Unit Residential, Office Interiors, Retail Centre
currently certified across the globe and over twenty-one projects and Public Building.
registered. It was established in1998 [3].
2.3.2. GREEN STAR Categories.
2.2.1. LEED DESIGNATIONS
Green Rating tools for Individual building and fit out Design,
• LEED – NC – New Construction for commercial, Construction and Operations assess Projects against the
Institutional and High-rise residential Buildings. following categories.[6]
• LEED - EB - Existing Building, which includes criteria
for maintenance, operations and Refurbishments. ➢ Management
• LEED – CI – Commercial Interiors, For tenant’s fir- ➢ Indoor Environment Quality
outs. ➢ Energy
• LEED – CS – Core & Shell which cover a buildings ➢ Transport
structure envelope and basic ➢ Water
Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Systems. ➢ Materials
• LEED – H - Homes a collaborative effort with local ➢ Environment
green homes programs, include single and Multi-unit ➢ Land use & Ecology
Versions. ➢ Emission
• LEED for Schools ➢ Innovation
➢ Governance
• LEED for Retails, which include New Construction and
➢ Design
Commercial Interior Versions.
➢ Liveability
• LEED Neighbourhood Development.
➢ Economic Prosperity
2.2.2. LEED Rating
2.3.2. GREEN STAR Certification.
LEED Rating is achieved through earning points in each of
➢ 4 Star, 5 Star, 6 Star, for Design and as – built
these seven categories:[4]
communities and Interiors.
• Location and transportation. ➢ 1 – 6 Star for Performance
• Sustainable Sites.
• Water Efficiency.
• Energy & Atmosphere. 2.4. IGBC – (Indian Green Building Council)
• Materials and Resources.
• Indoor Environmental Quality. The Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) was formed by the
• Regional Priority (Bonus credit) Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) in 2001. The council is
• Innovation in Design. based out of the CII Green Business Centre, Hyderabad which is
India’s 1st Platinum rated green building. The vision of the
2.2.3. Levels of LEED Certifications: council is to enable ‘Sustainable built environment for all [7].

• Certified 2.4.2. IGBC Rating Categories.

• Gold IGBC Green Buildings Rating Systems addresses green
• Silver features under the following Categories:
• Platinum
❖ Sustainable Architecture and Design
2.3. GREEN STAR ❖ Site Selection and Planning
❖ Water Conservation
Green Star is the green building rating system used in Australia, ❖ Energy Efficiency
and has been adapted and licensed to the new Zealand (Green ❖ Building Materials and Resources
Star NZ) and south Africa (Green Star SA) green building ❖ Indoor air Quality
councils for use in their respective markets. It was launched by ❖ Innovation and Development
the green Building Council in Australia in 2003 [5].
Different Level of green building certification are awarded based
2.3.1. GREEN STAR Rating Schemes. on the total credits earned. However, every green new building
GREEN STAR Rating Schemes Which are: should meet certain mandatory requirements, which are non –
negotiable [8].
2
2.4.3. IGBC Certification. solutions will optimize production and also help them reduce
energy consumption.
IGBC Certification Levels & Recognition, they are
ARCHITECT : Sundaram Architect Pvt. Ltd
❖ Certified – Best Practices
❖ Silver – Outstanding Performance LOCATION : Pocharam, Hyderabad, India.
❖ Gold – National Excellence
❖ Platinum – Global Leadership. GREEN CONSULTANT : EDS

2.5. GRIHA (Green Rated Integrated Habitat Assessment) SITE AREA :43 ACRES

GRIHA is India’s National Rating System for green Buildings. It BUILT-UP AREA : 2.33 million Sq. Ft
has been developed by TERI and is endorsed by MNRE EMPLOYEES : 2600 employees
(Ministry of New & Renewable Energy) [9].
WORKING HOURS : 8.5 hours / day.
It is based on Nationally accepted energy and environmental
principles and seeks to strike a balance between established CLIMATE : Arid
practices and energy concept both National & International [9].
3.1. Planning & Concept.
GHIRA attempts to minimize a building’s resources
consumption waste generation, and overall ecological / • The existing and natural vegetations were preserved and
environmental impact by comparing them to certain National soil erosion and soil runoff were prevented.
acceptable Limits / Benchmarks. • The building is oriented in E-W to its longer axis which
results in lesser solar heat gain [10].
It does so adopt the 5’R philosophy of sustainable development
namely REFUSE, REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE,
REINVENT.

2.5.2. GRIHA Categories.

GRIHA attempts to Quantify aspects such as:

o Energy / Power Consumption

o Waste Generation
o Water Consumption
Figure 1. Plan of Infosys Technologies, Hyderabad.
o Renewable Energy Integration
Restricted building span – 18m
2.5.3. GRIHA Certification Level & Scoring. Window Wall Ratio - < 38%
Certification Level & Scoring, they are
o 50 – 60 Points Certified as a 1 Star GRIHA Rated 3.2. NATURAL LIGHTING:
Building.
o 61 – 70 Points Certified as a 2 Star GRIHA Rated • The windows are categorized into upper panel and
Building. lower panel.
o 71 – 80 Points Certified as a 3 Star GRIHA Rated
Building. UPPER PANEL – DAYLIGHT
o 81 – 90 Points Certified as a 4 Star GRIHA Rated LOWER PANEL – VISION PANEL
Building. • Upper glass provides less amount of glare. The lower
o 91 – 100 Points Certified as a 5 Star GRIHA Rated glass allows lower visible transmittance.
Building. • Horizontal louvers and vertical fins are provided for
shade and also ensures light without any glare all
Note: The Overall Comparative analysis is shown below as through the day.
Table No:1 • 90% of natural light is attained. 78.54% of living areas
are day-light [11].
3. Case Study
Infosys Technologies Limited was started in 1981. They are a
global consulting multinational corporation with more than
228,000 employees. They operate worldwide from 72 cities
across 30 countries. They always believe that sustainable
3
 Wall Insulation U value less than
0.4 W/m2 K

Roof Insulation U value less than

0.34 W/m2 K

Figure 2. Exterior Lighting Factor

Low SHGC with low e SHGC less than 0.2
• Light shelves are provided between the day light panel
glass
and vision panel which delivers daylight deeper into
floors.
U value <1.2
W/m2 K

• High performance Saint Gobin Cullet glasses are used.

The cullet glass with the Argon filling reduce heat
transfer from one to the other pane, by the process of
conduction and radiation.
Figure 3. Light Shelves for deeper penetration of day light • UPPER GLASS - 6mm - 12mm - 6mm
• LOWER GLASS - 6mm - 16mm argon gap - 6mm
• 400 kw solar plant is also installed which generates 7 • External heat gain does not exceed 0.75 W/sqft.
lakh units per annum. • An enormous amount of energy production and
pollution has been controlled by the implementation of
recycled materials all through the construction .
• Low energy materials were used for false ceiling,
internal partitions which would include aluminum,
plywood and tiles.
• The roof has been painted White -HIGH ALBEDO
PAINT, which has an SRI value greater than 75%.
• These paints aid to subordinate the air condition loads.
5% reduction in HVAC energy has been noticed [13].

Figure 4. Interior Lighting Factor

3.3. SUPER EFFICIENT BUILDING DESIGN

• The building is enveloped with insulated walls and

roofs making an optimization of less than 38%.
• The building envelope has also affected with reduction Figure 5.
of heat gain of 1 watt/sf .
• The conventional sodium vapour lamps (250 watt) have
been replaced by LEDS (75W) which are accompanied
with daylight sensors and occupancy lights. This has
resulted in the reduction of daylight consumption by
60%.
4
 SYSTEM UNITIS NEW CONVENTIONAL RADIANT SIDE
DESCRIPTION DESIGN DESIGN
Total HVAC energy :267,00kWh
Total MW 3.5 10.0
HVAC Energy index :26.1 kWh/SQM
electrical
load YEAR Kwh/employee

Transformer MVA 4.0 12.0 2007-2008 297

capacity
2008-2009 266
DG set MVA 5+2.5 15+3
capacity 2009-2010 239

Annual Million 7.5 25 2010-2011 230

energy kWh 2011-2012 203
consumption
2012-2013 178

2013-2014 167
3.4. RADIANT COOLING METHOD`

• An effective method of cooling technology is

achieved by installing concrete slabs embedded • 44% reduction in energy consumption is achieved over.
with polyethylene pipes. This is referred as “CAVE
3.5. WATER EFFICIENCY
EFEECT”.
• The air required by the radiant cooling side is only • Productive fixtures have been installed and recycle of
1/5 because the cooling is done by the radiant waste water is also done. Which has resulted in 51.53%
less water consumption.
slab.
• 30% more efficient than conventional HVAC
systems [14].
FRESH WATER CONSUMPTION (KL)
4

0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

FRESH WATER CONSUMPTION (KL)

3.6. WASTE MANAGEMENT:

CONVENTIONAL SIDE • Nine biogas plants and seven composting plants
Total HVAC energy :428,00kWh with collective volume to process 3.45 million kgs
of waste was initiated
HVAC Energy index :38.4 kWh/SQM • These plants allow us to have a continuous
monitoring and also help us with lesser manual
operational errors.
5
 • The food waste is also processed using the in-
plant.
• Paper waste is sent to Trivandrum campus for
recycling [15].

Figure 6. Biogas plant

Figure 7. Hazardous and Non – Hazardous waste disposed

6
4. Conclusion

• With its significantly unique Green architectural

practices, Infosys is referred as “Best Practices
Guide for High Performance Indian Office
Buildings” by the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.
• The project also consumed only 1/3 of the energy
of the normal building at no extra capital costs.
• 11 buildings have achieved LEED platinum rating.
• 2 buildings have achieved GRIHA 5-star rating.
• They have achieved a sustainable economic
advancement with their radical solutions.

7
8
References

[1] https://www.breeam.com/

[2] Grace, M. BREEAM—A practical method for assessing

the sustainability of buildings for the new millennium.
In Proceedings of the Sustainable Building Conference,
Maastricht, The Netherlands, 22–58 October 2000.

[3] https://new.usgbc.org/

[4] USGBC. LEED for New Construction and Major

Renovation; US Green Building Council: Washington,
DC, USA, 2009.

[5] https://new.gbca.org.au/green-star/

[6] GBCA. Green Building Council of Australia. Available

online: https://www.gbca.org.au/green-star/ (accessed
on 26 June 2017).

[7] https://igbc.in/igbc/

[8] IGBC. Indian Green Building Council. Available online:

https://igbc.in/igbc/ (accessed on 26 June 2017).

[9] http://www.grihaindia.org/

[10] https://www.infosys.com/sustainability/Documents/info
sys-sustainability-report-2016-17.pdf

[11] http://www.grihaindia.org/sites/default/files/sites/defaul
t/files/pdf/case-studies/Infosys-hyderabad.pdf

[12] file:///D:/Griha/Infosys/Case-Study-Infosys.pdf

[13] https://www.infosys.com/SiteCollectionImages/commer
cial-radiant-cooling-building.jpg

[14] http://www.energetica-
india.net/download.php?seccion=articles&archivo=fHX
n6R437P1vOImwyNXbyk4LUie7Fb2kiNMceEUaUJKj
SxVFAsgySZ

[15] https://www.infosys.com/sustainability/environment/Pa
ges/index.aspx.pdf

Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgment

Authors would like to acknowledge the support of Kalasalingam

Academy of Research and Education, KARE, and Kalasalingam
School of Architecture (KSOA).