Download pdf - Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Transcript
Page 1: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

������������������� ����������

Simplistic Environmental Assessment Method

Reference Document

Trine Dyrstad Pettersen

February 2000

Page 2: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 2

� �����������

� ������������

� ������ �

2.1 ECOPROFILE FOR BUILDINGS......................................................................................................................3

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE-EFFECTIVE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS (ERCB)....................................4

2.3 COMBINING OF ECOPROFILE FOR BUILDINGS AND ERCB ..........................................................................4

� ������������������������

3.1 ECOPROFILE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDINGS...........................................................5

3.2 ECOPROFILE AS AN INTERNAL MANAGEMENT AND STEERING TOOL. ..........................................................5

3.3 ECOPROFILE AS AN AID IN PROJECT ENGINEERING......................................................................................6

� ������������� �� �

4.1 "EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT" COMPONENT.................................................................................................7

4.2 "RESOURCES" COMPONENT .......................................................................................................................8

4.3 "INDOOR CLIMATE" COMPONENT ............................................................................................................11

4.4 GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF ECOPROFILE FOR A BUILDING .................................................................13

4.5 PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF ECOPROFILE ........................................................................................13

� �����������

Page 3: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 3

�� ����������

Ecoprofile is a method for simplistic environmental assessment of buildings and gives a goodpicture of the building’s resource and environmental profile. A good environmental classificationcan lead to a market advantage in the sale and rental of commercial buildings. Ecoprofile can alsobe used as an internal management and steering tool for the building owner.

The Ecoprofile of a building is divided into three principal components. These components consistof the ”External environment”, ”Resources” and ”Indoor climate”. The principal components aredivided into sub-areas that have different consequences for the principal components and aretherefore weighted. Several of the sub-areas also have underlying sub-areas. Each sub-area andunderlying sub-area contains a number of parameters. There are currently 82 parameters includedin the method. Each of the parameters is individually evaluated and given a grade. A descriptionof the classes is similar to that found in NS 3424 Condition Evaluation of Structures. The gradingscale is from 1 to 3 where:

• Class 1 = Lesser environmental impact• Class 2 = Medium environmental impact• Class 3 = Greater environmental impact

Eventually a class 0 is going to be included that will represent a sustainable construction, but thereis currently no basis for defining such a level. Currently there are levels worked out for parameters that are important for office and residentialbuildings.

�� ������

Today’s Ecoprofile is based on two earlier methods: ”Ecoprofile for Buildings” and”Environmental and Resource Effective Commercial Buildings (ERCB)”. The history behindthese methods and their incorporation into the current Ecoprofile method are presented below.

���� �������� �� �������

In 1994 the Environmental Protection Department created a branch based, public steeringcommittee for the development of a national method for environmental assessment of buildings.The method was meant to be used in the purchase and take-over of existing buildings, inconnection with project engineering and renovations, additions and building of new buildings.

A workshop was arranged in Oslo in June 1995 in which the framework for an environmentalassessment method for buildings was discussed. The method was tested on 11 large commercialbuildings in a pilot project in the fall of 1995 (Fossdal et. al., 1995).

In April 1996 the steering committee delivered the report ”Ecoprofile for Buildings” to theEnvironmental Protection Minister1. The report summarised their experiences in development ofthe method and gave recommendations for further work.

1 In the course of the development work, the method has been variously called ”Green Appraisal”, ”EnvironmentalFacts”, ”Environmental Profile” and ”Ecoprofile for buildings”.

Page 4: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 4

The Environmental Protection Department evaluated the Ecoprofile for buildings concept inconsultation with other affected departments. The Department’s conclusions concerningEcoprofile were summarised in a letter sent to the GRIP Centre in December 1996. The lettergives guidelines for further work, and the GRIP Centre was given among other things theresponsibility for implementation of an operating organisation for Ecoprofile for buildings.

In December 1997 NBI was given the job of completing Ecoprofile for commercial buildings. Theproject’s contents were however changed in the spring of 1998 when it became relevant tocombine Ecoprofile with the environmental assessment method ”Environmental and ResourceEffective Commercial Buildings” that Storebrand and Gjensidige (two Norwegian insurancecompanies) had developed on their own initiative.

���� ������������ ��� ��������������� ��������� ������� ������

In the spring of 1995, Storebrand and four other insurance companies took anenvironmental/political initiative on behalf of the insurance industry. Storebrand followed up thisinitiative by evaluating a possible pre-project associated with real estate management andenvironmental conditions. In February 1996, two meetings were held with participation ofrepresentatives from Storebrand, Norwegian Watershed and Energy works, the Building ServicesDept. from Norwegian Technical University, SINTEF Energy Research Inc. And Enøk TrondheimInc2. After these meetings it was decided that a pre-project entitled ”Environmental and ResourceEffective Commercial Buildings” would be established.

The goal of the pre-project was to develop a tool to map the three principal areas ”Energy/Power”,”Indoor Climate” and ”External Environment” for commercial buildings. The mapping shouldresult in a classification of status for the three main areas, with an associated identification andprioritisation of measures to improve the condition.

The pre-project report was finished in October 1996 (Viken et. al. 1996). The tool that wasdeveloped included the three principal areas ”Energy/Power”, ”Indoor Climate” and ”ExternalEnvironment”, with underlying sub-areas and parameters. The method was tested on fourStorebrand buildings as part of the pre-project.

The pre-project was transformed into a full-fledged project in January 1997 (Garli et. al. 1998).The larger project included parallel surveys to test the method on experts that hadn’t beeninvolved in the development of ERCB and to test the user manual for ”External Environment”.The project also included a comprehensive test of the method on 14 Storebrand buildings and 10Gjensidige buildings, followed by a thorough statistical treatment and evaluation of the results.

���� ������� � �������� �� ������� ��� ����The earlier Ecoprofile for buildings and ERCB have many common threads. The structure in thetwo methods is relatively similar, and many parameters are common. Both methods operatemoreover with principal areas (components), sub-areas and parameters.

The new Ecoprofile is divided into three principal components:��������������� ��������������������������� �����and includes 82 parameters. Each parameter is based on a classification scale(1,2 or 3 or larger, medium or lesser environmental impact. These form the basis for theclassification of the sub-areas.

2 Enøk Trondheim AS changed its name later on to Entro Energi AS.

Page 5: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 5

For most of the sub-areas, the classification is just the average of the classifications of theparameters that make up the sub-area. This type of averaging implies similar weighting for all ofthe parameters within a sub-area. In some cases, however, matrix tables are used to define theclassification of a sub-area.

The sub-areas are thereafter weighted such that each principal component can be given aclassification. The three principal components are not weighted.

All parameters in version 1 of the new Ecoprofile are taken from ECRB or the earlier Ecoprofile.

An Ecoprofile classification does not require use of measuring instruments during the on-siteinspection. Interpretation of the results is best accomplished using the computer programs ”EnøkNormtall”3 and ”Indoor climate in office buildings (IMK)”4. Enøk Normtall is used to calculaterecommended values for energy use in a building. Actual energy use in the building is comparedwith the recommended value. The IMK program is used to calculate the thermal and atmosphericclimate in the building.

�� �����������������������

An environmental evaluation method such as Ecoprofile can in principal be used for threedifferent applications:

1. To ������ ����������������������. A good environmental classification can lead to amarket advantage in connection with the sale or rental of a commercial building.

2. As an �������� ����� ��������������������, where the building owner, throughenvironmental classification, gets a good overview of the building’s environmental conditionand what needs to be done to improve that condition.

3. As an ��������������������������, where the goal is to create a building in a way that therequirements for best classification are achieved for each and every parameter.

It is important to keep separate these three use areas in the development of Ecoprofile, as choice ofuse area can influence both the content and use of the method.

���� �������� �� ������������ ���������� � �������Ecoprofile is well suited as a tool for environmental classification of buildings and has an officialstatus because the method is tied to the GRIP Centre, which is an organisation under theEnvironmental Protection Dept. There is therefore good reason to believe that the method will beof considerable importance in the area of environmental classification of buildings.

To achieve credibility for the Ecoprofile classification system, the inspectors responsible forcarrying out the classification must uphold rigorous standards of competence and neutrality.

���� �������� �� �� ������� ���������� ��� ������� �����An Ecoprofile classification gives an easy-to-understand overview of a building’s environmentalcharacteristics. By improving the environmental characteristics that receive the worst scores in the 3 The Enøk Normtall computer program was developed by Energy Saving International (ENSI), and is distributed byVest-Norsk Enøk.4 ProgramByggerne ANS developed the Indoor Climate in Office Buildings computer program in 1995 in cooperationwith SINTEF Energy.

Page 6: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 6

classification, the building owner and user have the possibility to improve the building’senvironmental standard.

The obtained environmental information must be interpreted if Ecoprofile is to be used as aninternal management tool. By improving the environmental characteristics that receive the worstscores in the classification, the building owner and user have the possibility to improve thebuilding’s environmental standard.

The methodology that includes listing of prioritised measures for improving the standard in eachsub-area is retained in the new Ecoprofile. The new Ecoprofile therefore can also be used as aninternal management and steering tool. If the new Ecoprofile is to be a unique tool for internalmanagement and steering, the method should probably be further developed specially for thatapplication.

The new Ecoprofile used as an internal management and steering tool does not require formaladherence to standards of competence and neutrality for persons who use the tool.

It must be mentioned that it became evident in connection with an interview round concerningEcoprofile in the fall of 1997 that many building owners lacked a tool for internal managementand steering. A willingness to pay for the Ecoprofile method as an internal management andsteering tool was recognised to be greater than for Ecoprofile as a tool for environmentalclassification (Øie og Myre, 1997).

���� �������� �� �� �� � ������� ���������Ecoprofile can, with some adjustments, also be used in the project engineering phase of a buildingas a useful aid in making environmentally friendly choices. A building with good environmentalqualities can in principal be achieved by designing a building such that the best classification isachieved for the different parameters in Ecoprofile. However, the method does not at present givean incentive to go past the best class. For new buildings it will often be desirable to impose stricterstandards than the Ecoprofile requirements for the best classification. An example is the isolationgrade (U-value) for outer facades, where the criterion for best class is given as better than therequirements in the Norwegian Building Code from 1987. A new Building Code with stricterstandards came into effect in 1997. Therefore all new buildings will automatically end up in thebest class.

Life-cycle perspective should receive more emphasis if Ecoprofile is to be used as a projectengineering tool. The choices in the project engineering phase should be made from a total life-cycle analysis where production, operation, demolition and removal of materials are taken intoconsideration. This type of life-cycle perspective is not as relevant in connection withclassification of a building that is already built. A life-cycle analysis implies other problems and tosome extent other parameters than those that are included in today’s method. The best course willtherefore be to develop a specific version of Ecoprofile as a project engineering tool.

The formal requirements of competence and neutrality are not as important for persons usingEcoprofile as a project engineering tool.

Page 7: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 7

�� ����������������

The new Ecoprofile method includes three principal components that are given the designations”External Environment”, ”Resources” and ”Indoor Climate”. Figure 4.1 shows the structure forEcoprofile.

Figure 4.1 Structure for the three principal components of Ecoprofile.

A more detailed description of the three principal components of the new Ecoprofile is givenbelow.

��� !�"������ ����������! ���������

Figure 4.2 shows the structure of the "External Environment" component.

Figure 4.2 Structure of "External Environment" component of Ecoprofile.

Table 4.1 Lists the parameters that are included in the proposed ”External Environment”component of Ecoprofile.

Release to Air(Weight 3)

Release to Ground(Weight 3)

Release to Water(Weight 3)

Waste Management,Toxic Substances

(Weight 2)

Outside Areas(Weight1)

Transport(Weight 2)

External Environment

Release to Air

Release to Ground

Release to Water

Waste ManagementToxic and Environmentally Dangerous Substances

Outside Areas

Transport

External Environment

Energy

Water

Materials

Land

Resources

Thermal Climate

Atmospheric Climate

Acoustic Climate

Actinic Climate

Mechanical Climate

Cross Factors

Indoor Climate

Ecoprofile

Page 8: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 8

Table 4.1 Sub-areas and parameters in ”External Environment” component of Ecoprofile.

�������� ���� �����

Release to Air • ������������ ���������• ��������������� ���������• ����� ��������������������� ���������

Release to Ground • �������������� �����

Release to Water • �� ������������������

Waste Management,Toxic and EnvironmentallyHazardous Substances

• �������������• ������������������������� �������• �������• ����������• !���������• "�����������������������• #� �����������������������• �������������� �������������������������� �����

��������• �$%• �������• #�������������������&��������������

Outside Areas • '���������������������� ������������• (� ����� �������• �������������)���������������������

Transport • �������������������������• %�����������������������������• '�������������������������• *��+�����������������• ������� ���� ����

��� !���������! ���������The second component is ”Resources”, with sub-areas ”Energy”, ”Water”, ”Land” and”Materials” (see Figure 4.3). This structure harmonises with the structure in the LCA method andinternationally recognised environmental evaluation methods such as Green Building Challenge’98.

Version 1 of Ecoprofile includes only the sub-areas ”Energy” and ”Water”, while sub-areas”Land” and ”Materials” will be supplemented in later versions. The ”Energy” sub-area is fromexperience given a weight of 10, while ”Water” is given a weight of 1.

Page 9: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 9

Figure 4.3 Structure of ”Resources” component of Ecoprofile. Classification of ”Energy Use” isdefined in a separate matrix table based on classification of ”Condition of Technical Installations”and ”Real Energy Use”.

Table 4.2 shows the ”Resources” component with associated sub-areas and parameters. In futureversions of Ecoprofile there will probably be more weight assigned to energy use and parametersthat describe this will be included. Furthermore, the ”Flexibility” sub-area will be more fullydeveloped, especially with respect to how use of electricity is evaluated.

Table 4.2 Sub-areas and parameters in ”Resources” component of Ecoprofile.

�������� ���� �����

����!�Flexibility • ������������ ����������������� �������

Energy UseReal EnergyConsumption

�����������������������������,������-

Technical ConditionHeating • "���������������.����������������

• "������������������• (��������)��/�����������0����������1• �����������• �� ������������• ��������������������• '� ������2����������� ������������• �� ����������������������• ������

Ventilation • $��������������������• (����������

Water Consumption

Water(weight 1)

Heating (weight 3)

Ventilasjon (weight 3)

Cooling (weight 1)

Lighting (weight 3)

Outdoors (weight 1)

Operation (weight 3)

Condition of technical installations Real Energy Consumtion Compared with "Normtall"

Energy Consumption(weight 3)

Flixibility(weight 1)

Energy(weight 10)

(Land) (Materials)

RESOURCES

Page 10: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 10

• ��������������• 3�����������������������

Cooling • 4��2�� ���������� ���������• �����������������������������• *���������� • �� �����

Lighting • 4� ��� �������������������������• $����������� ���

Outdoors • 4� ��� • ���� �������0������2���� ����1

Operation • ������ �����������• #�����������������������������• �������������������������������• �������� �������• 5��� ���������� �������05#�1

"����WaterConsumption

• �������������• ������������ ��+������• 4�2�

#$���% 0'������������1

#���������% 0'������������1

Page 11: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 11

��� !#����� ������! ���������The last principal component, ”Indoor Climate”, includes the following five factors:

• �� ��������������� ��� includes air quality, smoke, gases, particulates, dust, smells, etc.• ���� �������� ��� includes temperature, humidity, air motion/draught and radiative

heating/cooling,• �������������� ��� includes light, lighting, radioactive exposure (radon), electric and

magnetic fields,• ��������������� ��� includes sound, noise and sound impression,• ��������������� ��� includes furnishings, form, ergonomy and function.

Figure 4.4 and Table 4.3 show the structure and contents of the ”Indoor Climate” component.

Figure 4.4 Structure of ”Indoor Climate” component of Ecoprofile.

Thermal Climate(weight 3)

Atmospheric Climate(weight 2)

Acoustic Climate(weight 1)

Actinic Climate(weight 1)

Mechanical Climate(weight1)

Ventilation

Cleaning

Moisture

Cross Factors(weight 3)

INDOOR CLIMATE

Page 12: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 12

Table 4.3 Sub-areas and parameters of ”Indoor Climate” component of Ecoprofile.

�������� ���� �����

Thermal Climate �������������������������������������������������� ��3������$��������#������%������ ��03�!1

Atmospheric Climate ���������������������������������������)���������������������� ��������6• �������������+����• �����������������������• ����������������������• ������������������������

Acoustic Climate ������������������������������������)����������������������� �������6• �)�������������������������������������0�%�1.• ������������� ���������������� ���������������������������

�������/• ����������������������� ������������������2������/

Actinic Climate �������������0�� ���������������������1����������������������)����������������������� ��������6• ���� ������������ �������������• �� ��� �������0��)1• ��������� ��� ���������/

Mechanical Climate �������������������������������������)���������������������� ��������6• ����������������������������0���21• ������������������0�� �����1• ��������������������2������0�� �����1

Cross FactorsVentilation �������78�������7�����������������������)��������������

�������� ��������6• ������������������������• ����������������������2�• ��������������������• ����������������)�����������2�• ��������������������������������� �������������2

Cleaning �������-$����� -�����������������������)���������������������� ��������6• ����������• �����������• ������ ������������• ������ ����+���������������

Moisture �������-�������-�����������������������)���������������������� ��������6• �������������������������������� ��������������• ������ ����������������������������• ����� ������������������������

Page 13: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 13

� � $���%��� ����������� � �������� �� � ������A building’s Ecoprofile can be visualised in two ways. The principal components can becombined in a bar graph according to large, medium or small environmental impact for externalenvironment, resources and indoor climate, see Figure 4.5.

Ext. Env. Resources Ind. Clim.

LesserImpact

MediumImpact

LargerImpact

Figure 4.5 Graphical presentation of results at principal component level.

Rose diagrams show more detailed survey results. High values represent a large environmentalimpact, see Figure 4.6.

���

���

���

���

Heating

Ventilation

Cooling

LightingOutdoorenergy use

Operation

Water

Figure 4.6 Graphical presentation of results as a rose-diagram.

�&� '������� ������������ � ��������

The practical implementation of Ecoprofile is shown in Figure 4.7.

Page 14: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 14

��������� ��� ���������������������������������

���� ���&���� '���������

- Evaluate building information- Collect possible add. information- Inspect building- analyse results

Client

Provide information about building

Deliver start package

-Establish contact with operator

- Order Ecoprofile

7KH�VWDUW�SDFNDJH�LQFOXGHV�

- Note about Ecoprofile method and process- Forms for self-reporting- Addtl. Documents as nec. (possible contract, timing details, etc. )

&ROOHFWHG�LQIRUPDWLRQCollected information is used later in theclassification process. Obvious errorscan be revealed during the inspection.

7KH�(FRSURILOH�SURFHVV- Operator learns about bldg. based on drawings and information from customer.- Operator performs inspection of building

- Ecoprofile parameters classified based on criteria.- Helping aids:

Operating organisation performs simplifiedquality control and is the issuer of Ecoprofile .Building information and Ecoprofile resultplaced in national database.

Assessor

Client

Assessor

Report results

The results are reported to the customerand operating organisation

Helping aid:

OperatingOrganisation

- Quality controller- Issuer of Ecoprofile- Place data in national database

Inspectionforms

Data

toolsParameterguidelines

Std. report format

Standardform

��������� �� �� ����������������

Page 15: Ecoprofile Ass Norway Eng

Februar 2000 15

(� )��������

GRIP, 1996, "Økoprofil for bygg", final report from Ecoprofile Committee sent to theEnvironmental Protection Minister, 18. April 1996, GRIP Centre, Oslo.

Fossdal S. et. al., 1995, "Utprøving av MiljøProfil-metoden. Pilotklassifisering av 11 bygg",project report O 7417, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Client: GRIP Centre.

Myhre L., 1997, "Videreutvikling og implementering av Økoprofil for bygg", project reportN7809, Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo, Client: Miljøeffektiv byggebransje.

Myhre L. et.al., 1998, "Sammenslåing av Økoprofil og MRN", Oslo, Client: Grip Centre.

Garli C., Sandberg G., Øie L., Stang J., Viken K.D., Gjervan S. and Karlsen J., "Miljø- ogRessurseffektive Næringsbygg (MRN). Hovedrapport", 16. April 1998, Client: StorebrandEiendom, Gjensidige Eiendom og Norges vassdrags- og energiverk (NVE).

Viken K.D., Haagensen C., Bramslev K.T., Sandberg G. and Øie L., 1996, "Miljø- ogressurseffektive næringsbygg. Rapport forprosjekt", 3. October 1996.


Recommended