Living Building Challenge BREEAM: Non-Residential Building

liveliness expression Ch eachenge BREEAM Non-Residential edificeRethinking the Application of the aliveness Building Ch completelyenge BREEAM for Non-Residential Buildings in the UKBuilding softw ar support and sound judgement has been in spotlight since the rise of the ideaion of sustainable development, the acquire to im establish make deed and shorten our intake. Growing from a sh bed ideology of Jason F.Mclennans team, to create a utopian idea, the vivacious Building. matchless that has high potential for down in the mouth running be, high performance and roler comfort, the epitome of the definition of sustainability. The supporting construction challenge (LBC) was initially assessed by BNIM against the LEED pattern upon its design, to determine its environsal and repair expenditure in a sustainable matrix. However, in this report a cross crusade investigation amid the LBC version 3.0 and BREEAMs figure for non-residential builds 2011, will be unde rtaken to shine up each certifications merits and shortages. Followed by a cross- good example synopsis of 2 baptistery studies to reflect on the investigations results.This is in an attempt to highlight which of the assessment methods has more than extensive and in-depth critical criteria, how its applied by skeleton on lessons from the case studies available for take up from the universe domain, finished the LBC and BREEAMs online portals.For years, the flight to creating sustainable assessment tools has been on-going to counter a variety of challenges in peoples lives, countries resources and worldwide good world (Rees, 1999, Edwards et al., 2013). Problems in a subject field home base that include intemperance tackling, total and non- thoroughgoing, animation consumption, weewee two excess and depravity from it, blow Dioxide and greenho role gas e armorial bearings, all of which contri scarcee to national pollution statistics, pine and water intervention ex penses and energy production (DEFRA, 2012) . The increase in these approachs justmore continues the vibration to affect the primary user, by raising energy prices for electrical energy, heating and cooling, county and city taxes and separate g every arsenment or privately provided draw (Manne et al., 1991, ASIF et al., 2007).While typical cities contri til nowes to an average of 75% of greenhouse gas emissions tally to United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP, 2014), commercialised structures and transportation account for 16.25% and 25% of the United Kingdoms (UK) energy consumption vault of heavens(De breachment of power, 2014, p. 12) . In addition to 38% of the countrys boilersuit energy sinks being accounted towards energy generation, 83% of which is generated through coal military unit plants, the primary electricity generation method in the UK (Department of muscularity, 2014, p. 12), contributing a large emission rate of 0.507 kg CO2/kWh (DEFRA, 2008). Whils t the housing sector endures the dominant sector, but commercial buildings pass been on a rise, to accommodate for diametric functions, educational, retail, parts and learning institutions. (PMRecon, 2013). The construction sector is in a strong boom (Longworth, Kern and Marshall, 2014), along with construction emissions such as material sourcing, material fabrication, and the buildings operation itself.This paper will be addressing twain case studies from the commercial military post buildings sector of the construction industry The Bullitt midsection (LBC) and the. Addressing the strategies implemented inside each, how each criterion was address and the impact on overall performance of the building.In the United Kingdom, the Building Research judicature (BRE), alongside its assessment tool, the BRE Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) have suppose a number of schemes to tackle incompatible building types, including but non limited to, BREEAM, BREEAM for comme rcial buildings, and BREEAM for Sustainable Homes (EcoHomes previously).The Living building challenge is a rigorous assessment tool created and published by Jason F.Mc Lennan and his associates, a ramble started from the mid-1990s and first coming to light in August 2006. The Living Building Challenge adopts a restorative nature, sensation that aims to give back to the environment (Warner, 2015). This paper will approach one of the more rigorous certification tools claimed to be applicable to any building type,). By having a clams positive outline, the building creates an excess of its necessarily, for storage or if possible to be input into nature as a metaphorical tax for off expiry on it (Monbiot et al., 2007). Theres a range of a 100 or more full livelihood certified buildings around the world, the large percentage being in the USA where the certification resides (ILFI, 2015) . However public record hardly shows buildings classified as non-private so the numbers can eas ily be more than that. And theres even a larger amount of partially or petal certified buildings and flips (ILFI, 2015) .. Any one building can read a number of certifications, relevant to each someone petal. However if a building is certified at bottom all criteria, it gains a Certified Living Building Certificate, considerably the highest award given by the LBC.Followed by individual petal certified buildings, these atomic number 18 structures that have satisfied one or more of the petals, and atomic number 18 most likely awaiting a final study to be fully certified. The final certification is Net commanding Energy certification, requiring the building to have provide more electricity than calculatedly needed. To achieve realize execute positive energy over course of the year, energy efficient features, electricity generation and passive design are employed.In each section, an analytical and comparative summary of twain the LBC and BREEAM will display how each step ad dresses the named criterion. It is nonable that due to the highly comprehensive nature of the LBC, BREEAM will be compared against the LBCs petals and using the standards and descriptions provided under the LBCs handbook. With the end of each petal, and summarizing this section, the author will choose a summary comparative analysis among both standards, leaning in plan, how each addresses the topics and providing analytical insight into the results.The LBC uses a number of creations to charter its users through the design and certification process, the terms are derived from various sources, references or the creators own research to construct a logic space through which this tool operates.Typology Typology refers to the scope and type of purport being conducted, this helps pick up what overbearings are compatible and can be applied to the project.Renovation This refers to any project that is not a complete building on its own, but part of a previous building as an additio n or refilling of historic or old structures.Infrastructure + Landscape This refers to projects that operate on an open scale, such as parks, amphitheaters, or other civil projects such as public plazas, exercise fields, bridges and so on.Building This refers to projects that feign entire buildings both ones already real and to include renovations or untested ones all together.Community The association challenge applies to a number of structures that coexist together and operate as part of a neighbourhood, community, campus whilst sharing current amenities such as, but not limited to, roads, green or community areas.Transect The transect concept is an fitation of the spic-and-span Urforbiddingism transect planning approach that was veritable and published in the Smart Code manual (latest version 9.2) by the Center for Applied Transect Studies (CATS, 2010). The transect smart code melioratements from and adapts Smart Growth and New Urbanism strategies into creating a well divided yet decorously mixed community that supports sustainable growth for community, nature and urban development (Duany, Plater-Zyberk and Company, 2009). In the living building challenge, adequate transects for each project mustiness be set according to footprint and site scale in order to adapt the appropriate imperatives to suit the site as such that it is developed to be a productive part of its context.Whilst that approach allows for a natural fertilise of urban development, imposing guidelines that regulate form without function on a city scale drives complications, specifically when applied on a restrictive scale, some documents magnate be too good and complicated as to negate architectural design creativity and hinder functions that occupy these buildings. (Garnett, 2013, pp. 571 588). fortuitously at bottom the Living Building Challenge, these concepts are not strictly applied, but are merely regulated in the latest addition in version 3.0 stating that buildi ngs needs to adapt beauty and reflect on their context, but stated exceptions due to local regulations are allowed.Scale Jumping In case the projects place petal amenities require space larger than required or there is potential for cooperation, it is possible to scale parachute these areas as long as they serve more than one building or site, and as long as theyre off the main project zone.Colour coding in the next section will be used to mark the start of paragraphs marking ones that include Living Building Standard to differentiate them for the ones comparing with BREEAM.The Living Building Functions as a Certification, accompanied with a guidance manual, used to achieve named certification. It classifies the different categories inside to a series of broad umbrellas, or flower petals. Each petal is cool of a number of relevant criteria, named imperatives. The LBCs categories are divided into seven petals, which incubate a set of comprehensive criteria, the acceptable methods and parameters needed to achieve them. The Petals summarized into the side by side(p) table reflects the Living Building Institutes vision into the main categories that should be addressed to achieve a comprehensive regenerative design according to the LBCs vision vexNet Positive peeingNet Positive Energy health HappinessMaterials justnessBeautyWhilst the set of Petals assigned by the LBC aptitude be considered of a wide scope, it is except a certification and not a technical standard, thereof by comparison, BREEAM encompasses more sections, which are different arrange by marginally align with the components within the LBC.Management health and WellbeingEnergyTransportWaterWasteLand engage EcologyPollutionInnovationDespite the larger number of sections, items such as Land Use, Ecology and Transport are embodied within the emerge Petal. Waste is segregated and include within the Water and Materials petals, pertaining to organic waste, pabulum waste and construction componen ts. Pollution is divided across all petals, and emphasized within Health Happiness, Place and Materials petals to regulate pollution within surrounding and indoor environments. Finally given the LBCs transparency policy, it sponsors a clay of declaration and comprehensive calculation and checks regarding each Petal from design to end of life, thus concluding with the Equity and Beauty Petals which are no included within the BREEAM, yet left open ended within the LBC.I. Place PetalThe place petal, formerly the Site petal, is the first of the set, it relates to the projects setting, its site, surroundings, ecology and is come to with placing the building its appropriate surroundings. The petal addresses all projects contempt scale, surroundings or function, the designer, or design team as stated must puddle into defining the site appropriately to understand how to protect the sites ecology and situate it post-construction. The Place petal is heavily affected by each sites Living Transect assigned to it, project area or scale burst forthing and thus the petal guidebook has been rigidly assigned to ensure that all calculations and certifications have been unified. The place petal includes 04 pressings, numbered brieflyLimits to GrowthUrban Agriculturehabitat commutationHuman-Powered LivingThe arbitrarys within the Place Petal, as previously mentioned are comparable to some of the criteria listing under the Transport, Ecology and Site sections within the BREEAM documentation. Enforcing the regenerative nature of the LBC, this petal sponsors a strategy of ecological preservation and reclamation as a result of human activities. All of which is sponsored by BREEAM however not bring downd as rigidly nor is it mandatory, except for the Habitat permutation petal, reflected in LE 03, minimizing impact on existing ecology. However, it does not enforce a requirement for a net zero or net positive impact on the environment, but rewards establish on lessen the interdict impact on the environment amid a negative to net zero range.Briefly summarized, the comparison between both sets of regulations takes a positive stand against ecological decay, requiring the maintenance of local ecology and further development, not simply the mitigation of any further damage or simply reducing the damage caused. Whilst on a small scale, it would benefit local ecology, this strategy has to be employed on a wider scale to start mitigating or reversing worldwide decay of natural environments.However, the lack of consider calculations that would measure the effect of any construction in any existing ecosystem of high or low value, makes it essential that the LBC needs other restrictive systems and assessment tools to supplement and optimize its performance. It is apparent that the application of this section requires the expertness of an ecological specialist for both systems, and would be high in cost. sufferly as the LBC is a restorative system, it rem ains important to perform this line as part of the metaphorical price of intruding on nature.In addition, addressing the Transport section of BREEAM, reflected within Human powered living and the Transects concept of the LBC. The LBC encourages walkable communities, the use of bicycles and non-engine operated modes of transportation with the more populated transects, restricting use of cars to veer in and out of these zones. In addition, it requires estimating the need for storages and car parks based on demand, providing accessibility for mobility and the use of human powered transport and finally. away from the effect of that policy on pollution, it does reduce the carbon and energy cost of transportation, such as commute and food miles and ultimately promotes sense and well- territoryed lifestyles. BREEAM while advocating similar requirements, besides adds the needs for compact urban design, to reduce the need for modes of transportation, rather than regulating these modes of transportation. In summary, the need to address users needs for storage, distances and methods of commute is imperative to reducing the overall pollution and energy impacts of the residing community.Finally, and completely required by the LBC, enforcing a policy of urban agriculture, reducing food miles and a policy to encourage food storage within households sets the LBC apart. One can criticize however that the requirements of farmable land per building footprint are disproportionate to the density of users occupying it and would need to be rectified to meet down-to-earth expectations.II. Water PetalThe water petal governs the production, use and disposal of all fluid and water based materials on site, including potable water, grey water, threatening water, storm and rainwater harvesting, managing it, storage and disposing of the excess.The water petal only contains one imperative, which is an update from net zero water in version 2.1 to be Imperative 05. Net Positive Water in version 3.0 (LBI, 2015g). In brief, the Net positive water imperative advocates the compatibility between water systems on site and natural water systems depending on site and mood. It states that any water used on site must be part of a closed loop system where all used water must be captured on site by means of precipitation, rain or storm water collection, grey water treatment or ground water provision if possible. Of course exceptions are made in case of extreme climatic conditions where it is not feasible or where the natural supply cannot satisfy consumption due to user capacity, where an appeal can be made given proper support. In comparison, BREEAM has Wat01-Wat04 criteria (BRE, 2014),, only Wat01 that specifies water consumption is mandatory, with a minimum performance of providing 12.5% of water consumption within the building through closed loop methods and a maximum five source score for providing 55% or more of consumed water in the building. sympathetic to BREEAM W at02 criterion (BRE, 2014), the LBC Water Petal requires monitoring of use constantly over the year, month by month and in detail. Unlike and in a stricter approach than BREEAM however, the water monitoring process is rigid and highly detailed, requires documentation of all production, use and sinks of water in the structure (LBI, 2015g). It also promotes the offset scaling of this imperative to benefit the community, where a cistern or a unified water storage can be shared between multiple sites, the community, ecosystem or agricultural land.Concluding the water petal, due to Englands Koepen-Geiger climate zone being Cfb, one that has an average of 800mm annual rainfall during the whole year (World Maps of Kppen-Geiger climate classification, 2010, Kottek et al., 2006, pp. 259-263), applying an efficient water harvesting strategy would not be a difficult challenge, the problem would arise with treatment and storage specially on smaller sites, which in turn creates opportunities fo r jump scaling and providing neighbourhood benefit.III. Energy petalJust like the Water Petal, managing resources in the Living Building Standard have taking a developmental step towards net positive, thus as an upgrade from v2.1 of the Energy Petal that advocated Net Zero energy to the new Energy Imperative 06. Net Positive Energy (LBI, 2015a).In summary, the new Net Positive imperative calls for the production of one hundred and five percent (105%) of the projects energy requirement are satisfied on site by sustainable and renewable energy methods on a net annual basis. What adds to this petals challenge, is the need for resiliency, the requirement to store energy for emergency in addition to night-time use. The resilience component requires a minimum of 10% of essential lighting buck and refrigerator operation for up to a week (LBI, 2015a). A dangerous challenge in England due to the low number of sunny hours annually, arrive at an average of 1493 hours of sun per year (Curre nt Results Weather, 2015) making the return to solar origins concept adopted by LBC a solution that talent not be entirely financially viable.What sets this strategy apart from other assessment methodologies is the prohibiting of combustion, suntan of any material, biomass, biofuels, alternative or conventional fuels due to the possibility of defamatory gas emissions, as well as the release of greenhouse gases despite how efficient the combustion module is (McLennan, 2010).On the other hand, BREEAM does not ban the use of combustion energy sources, but relies on the relationship between energy use and Carbon Dioxide emissions, which release nitrates and carbon compounds that account for global warming (Johnson, 2009, pp. 165-168). BREEAM aims for a zero carbon approach, with potential for Carbon contradict buildings acting as sinks. Both systems require a twelve-month monitoring level to determine the buildings efficiency when occupied. However, given the authors current resear ch, it is likely a performance gap may be observed due to human use discrepancies that were not accounted for using Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP), and are not adequately measured using the LBCs online calculators.IV. Materials PetalThe materials petal aims to create a future of materials economy that is non-toxic, regenerative and avoid any negative effects on occupants health, the material petal aims to use materials that can be re-used while eliminating the concept of construction waste while staying financially viable, functionally efficient and esthetically pleasing (LBI, 2015c). Due to production costs, sourcing, transportation distance and the general economy, sourcing these materials remain to be a challenge, but the LBC attempts to counter that challenge by creating a guideline to follow that will allow achieving its targets without any negative impacts. The materials petal has been put ahead of the Health Happiness Petal since the consequence of an adequate material petal certification will lead to the final outcome of Health and Happiness.The Material petal is composed of five imperatives that will be briefly discussed and critically compared to the BREEAMs six material criteria and six waste criteria, both of which are grouped under the Materials Petal in a brief yet comprehensive guideline. The five imperatives are listed as follows,Red amountEmbodied Carbon FootprintNet Positive Waste responsible for(p) IndustryLiving Economy SourcingImperative 10. Red List advocated the expulsion of worst-in-class materials and chemicals as it dictates, ones with the greatest negative impact to occupant and ecological health. The list includes a large number of petroleum products, polymers and compounds that work to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) spreading in construction as well as other harmful chemicals that lead to a number of physiopathological mechanisms, respiratory diseases and disorders they superpower cause to occupants (Fernndez et al., 2 013, pp. 22-27) including but not limited to symptoms such as irritations, coughing and respiratory symptoms, nervous symptoms such as headaches and fatigue, dry skin and other symptoms users might take for granted or under-estimate to be prompt yet prove even more harmful on the long run (Wolkoff, 2013, pp. 371-394). BREEAM recognizes the dangers of these materials, and allows their use under certain conditions according to its own tables and conditions under its health and well-being section HEA02- Indoor air part. BREEAM tackles the problem of VOCs (BRE, 2014) by running a pre-occupancy test after end of construction to determine the concentration of contaminants in the structure, and if found within the appointed limits, it grants the points.The C2C methodology is ambition, but calculation methodology does not include energy that goes into rehabilitating that product for reuse, neither does it account for the quality of the product and ability to function adequately (Bakker e t al., 2010). Energy input into the different stages of product development, such as transportation which accounts for 90% of some appliances (Llorach-Massana et al., 2015). It is however calculable and would allow for a deeper understanding of the buildings energy and carbon impact by calculating a complete building life cycle from provenance to cradle (Braungart, McDonough and Bollinger, 2007, pp. 1337-1348).This would assess the carbon impact of the building from ancestry to deconstruction and potential reuse. (Kneifel, 2010, pp. 333-340, Bribin, Capilla and Usn, 2011, pp. 1133-1140).Imperative 12. Responsible Industry and Imperative 13 Living Economy Sourcing and Net Positive Waste are related when it comes to the overall concept, both imperatives call for sustainable, local or national and proper sourcing of materials. Processing has to be transparent and declared, sources from sustainable or renewable sources dedicated for farming or reclaimed through cradle to cradle or rec yclable schemes in addition to some materials also cognise as Carbon Leaks and Carbon Exports (Davis and Caldeira, 2010, pp. 5687-5692, Kuik and Hofkes, 2010, pp. 1741-1748).However, the use of this concept in the UK might be hindered due to limited resources and would extend to the European Economic celestial sphere alongside consideration for the expenses and emissions produced by importing.V. Health and Happiness PetalThe last of the published petal handbooks set in version 3.0, containing imperatives 07 to 09, listed as follows polite EnvironmentBioPhillic EnvironmentHealthy Interior Environment(LBI, 2015f) This set of imperatives work to provide a psychologically and physically healthy environment for occupants and owners, by creating connections to the surrounding environment (Coon et al., 2011, pp. 1761-1772) and designing and specifying healthy indoor materials.Imperative 07. civilised Environment and Imperative 09. Biophillic Environments both share common grounds that co ntribute to psychological and physical health (LBI, 2015f). Both imperatives aim to create a direct connection between indoors and outdoors, a smelling of ocular and a level of physical continuity to provide a feeling of joy and freedom (Ching, 1995). Achieving these targets by performing adequate twenty-four hour period calculations to identify any glare spots and daylight distribution without spaces, allowing sufficient daylight factors within the building (Roche, Dewey and Littlefair, 2000, pp. 119-126), in addition to accounting for thermal and visual comfort (Greenup, Bell and Moore, 2001, pp. 45-52), creating connections with the outdoors is an essential requirement in imperative 07 without any possible appeals except for areas of special use or areas that are not frequently occupied.BREEAM had managed to shed a stronger light when it comes to health and social welfare criteria, by setting rigorous standards for ventilation, daylight factors and ratios and indoor quality (BRE, 2014). It also adopted criteria to provide comfortable acoustic and thermal environments as well as security for its occupants (Novak, Treytl and Palensky, 2007), despite not being mandatory, these criteria do improve user comfort and satisfying them contributes to outstanding credits.VI. Equity PetalThe Equity petal (LBI, 2015f), introduced in version 3.0 has limited literature, only introduced in the standard guidebook summarizing the latest version, it includes a table of design guidelines needed to be met or complimented to provide a sense of checkity and justice between all users of the project, at any scale, but mostly focused towards the public and living community challenges. This petal is divided into four imperatives and will be briefly described, since they are still under development with no comprehensive guidebooks and are still quite subjective in approach, they will not be given great focus.The petal guidelines tackle issues such as areas, distances, landscape and urban design to give users and pedestrians a sense of worth in surroundings modelled after the human scale and dimensions (Ching, 1995)/ Access to place allows general public usage of spaces created within projects to spread the benefit and in the end awareness to the project and value. Both advocate facilitated access to impaired users, allowing equal opportunities for all users (Thapar et al., 2004, pp. 280-289),Imperative 17. Equitable Investment and Imperative 18. JUST Organizations, both of these imperatives tackle the humane side of building occupancy and donation towards clement causes. It also includes the need for consideration of users, their needs and humane treatment.VII. Beauty PetalLast of the version 3.0 newly added petals, contains two imperatives Imperative 19. Beauty + touch sensation and Imperative 20. Inspiration + Education, both of which cannot be empirically calculated and proven (LBI, 2015f), thus documentation of design literature and efforts made to raise awareness of technologies have been, which reflects on the innovation standard in the BREEAM. However artistic value has not been regarded in BREEAM leaving that particular point out, which could be implied given that it is a technical tool for building performance not architectural design.This section will discuss a cross case analysis between two case studies. Each reflecting one of the discussed assessment systems, the LBC and BREEAM. The author found it fitting that due to the main showcase of the LBC reflected in educational buildings, ones that have been developed to be a display and case study for LBC teams, that the cross case analysis would be best do across educational buildings of a similar scale. The LBC case study is an office and commercial complex, commission by the environmental protection foundation, the Bullit Foundation. The BREEAM case study is a building of a similar typology, a commercial and office complex, slightly larger in area and a BREEAM Excelle nce building, the Exchange in street.Commissioned by the Bullit foundation, an environmental agency with a mission to safeguard the Pacific North Wests ecology from non-sustainable and invasive human action and raise awareness to the ecological issues that surround the regions urban sprawl.The building was commissioned under what they believe is the most rigourous standard, that would stand to raise awareness and work as a teaching experience for designers, professionals of the built environment and researchers. Its a commercial office building, with space for various office tenants and a commercial space.The Living Building Challenge is a powerful tool that might hold a number of innovative and important keys towards true sustainability. however due to the vast number of topics covered by it, the LBC requires supporting technical regulations created by local authorities to be applied to differ