Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings | Whole Building Design Guide

8/3/2019 Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings | Whole Building Design Guide

1/9

(/index.php)RESOURCE PAGE

by Joel Ann Todd, Environmental Consultant and Kim M. Fowler, Senior Research Engineer, Pacific Northwest National

Laboratory(http://www.pnl.gov/)

Last updated: 12-02-2009

There are now many resources available to support the design of more sustainable buildings(/design/sustainable.php)

and to assess the "green-ness" of these designs. As the field of sustainable design evolves, many in the field are

thinking about measuring the actual benefits of these designsthe performance of buildings that we consider "green."

Numerous projects in the U.S. and other countries are attempting to define the qualitative and/or quantitative measures

of sustainability and the data needed to implement and assess these measures. These efforts are important because

they will enable us to determine:

if we are having the impact on human health and the environment we expected, and

what this achievement is costing or saving.

We will also be able to fine tune our sustainable design strategies as we learn what has the most impact and what is

most cost-effective(/design/cost_effective.php). See also WBDG FunctionalMeet Performance

Objectives(/design/meet_performance.php).

The purpose of this Resource Page is to provide references for various aspects of performance measurement, and to

enable users to learn about what is available in this evolving field. Users are encouraged to email the authors of this

Resource Page at [email protected](mailto:[email protected]) with additional

resources so that the section can be kept up to date.

In addition to the WBDG Sustainable Branch(/design/sustainable.php), an excellent overview of the various benefits of

sustainable design can be found in "Making the Case for Green Building" inEnvironmental Building News, April

2005(http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm?fileName=140401a.xml). This article outlines the range of potential

benefits that could be the subject of performance measurement studies: first cost savings, reduced operating costs,

other economic benefits, health and productivity benefits, community benefits, environmental benefits, and social

benefits.

Different users ask different questions about performance and want different information and levels of detail. High level

measures provide a quick overall assessment of performance on most critical parameters and enable an organization

to report on its overall environmental improvement and the benefits of its sustainable design activities. More detailed

measures can explain unexpected results and enable a building manager to check on problem areas or monitor/tune

ongoing performance of systems(/project/buildingcomm.php).

A. Challenges of Measuring Performance

Measuring performance is challenging for many reasons.

CONCEPTUAL CHALLENGES

There are different concepts or definitions of "performance" and, as a result, we are often talking past one another.

"Performance" can mean: Does the building, as built, exhibit characteristicsthat are green or sustainable? Is the

building routinely operated and maintainedsustainably(/design/optimize_om.php)? Are building upgrades, renovations,

reconfigurationssustainable? What are the environmental resultsof sustainable strategies, in terms of resource

consumption and environmental impacts? What are the savingsrealized from a sustainable building (and costs)? What

are other benefits (and costs)(/design/consider_benefits.php) of sustainable building (social, health, community, etc)?

PRACTICAL CHALLENGES

Actual vs. Modeled Performance. For some metrics, it is relatively easy to obtain actual performance data. For others,

it is more difficult and models or estimations must be used. If models are necessary, it is best to use any relevant

available "actual" data when possible, to better reflect operating performance rather than design performance.

Data Availability. In some cases, data to support performance metrics is not available. For example, individual buildings

Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings

INTRODUCTION

DESCRIPTION
http://www.wbdg.org/design/consider_benefits.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/optimize_om.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/buildingcomm.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/sustainable.phphttp://www.pnl.gov/http://www.wbdg.org/index.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/consider_benefits.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/optimize_om.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/buildingcomm.phphttp://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm?fileName=140401a.xmlhttp://www.wbdg.org/design/sustainable.phpmailto:[email protected]://www.wbdg.org/design/meet_performance.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/cost_effective.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/sustainable.phphttp://www.pnl.gov/http://www.wbdg.org/index.php


2/9

on campuses or military installations may not be separately metered for energy or water use.

Feasibility/Effort Required to Gather Data. In some cases, it might be possible to gather data but it might require more

effort or cost than an agency or organization is willing to expend. For example, an agency might not be willing to

conduct a survey of users to gather data on commuting or satisfaction with aspects of the building.

Data Quality and Consistency. Even when measured data is available, the reliability of the information may be

questionable and the ability to collect the information consistently over a given time period may be difficult. For

example, metrics related to operations and maintenance may not be collected in a consistent manner over time

depending on the sophistication and reliability of the tracking system being used.

Isolating Effects of Individual Buildings. For some aspects of performance, it is very difficult to determine the impact of

a single building as opposed to a development or community. For example, we can measure changes in surface water

quality, but then how can we attribute these changes to design and operational aspects of individual buildings?

Benchmarks for Comparison. For performance measurement to be useful, we need to be able to determine the level of

performance and how it compares to a more typical building in the same climate, with the same occupancies. This

requires the specification of benchmarks. Benchmarks can be a building's performance over time, to measure

improvements that result from renovation or changes in operations, or it can be based on external yardsticks such as

LEED(http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19), EnergyStar(http://www.energystar.gov), or others.

B. Resources for Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings

In recent years, building owners and designers, researchers, and others have begun performing studies related to the

costs and benefits of sustainable design. Some of these studies attempt to address the full impact of sustainable

design, while others emphasize the economic aspects, the environmental impacts, and the social aspects separately.

Other differences in the studies include whether or not the data is measured, modeled, or some combination of both,

whether the information is based on a single building or multiple buildings and the differences in how the baseline or

benchmark is being used.

Table 1 characterizes available studies on key parameters and can be used to identify studies that address questions

of interest; brief summaries of these studies as well as links for further information follow the table.
http://www.energystar.gov/http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19


3/9

Table 1: Available Studies on the Costs and Benefits of Sustainable Design

Resources Focused on the Financial/Business Aspects of Performance: Making the BusinessCase

One of the most persistent questions about sustainable design is its cost - does it cost more to build and operate a

green building and if so, how much more? How long does it take to recoup these costs in operating savings? Which

investments in green design pay back more quickly? What other business benefits are there, such as productivity and

user satisfaction?

Green office space.

Photo courtesy of Interface.

The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings: A Report to California's Sustainable Building Task

Force(http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/greenbuilding/Design/CostBenefit/Report.pdf)(PDF 3 MB) by G. Kats, L. Alevantis, A.

Berman, E. Mills, J. Perlman, 2003.In a review of 33 California state green buildings, this report finds that a

minimal upfront investment of about two percent of construction costs typically yields life-cycle savings of over tentimes the initial investment. The cost data used in the study include energy, water, waste, emissions, operations

and maintenance, and productivity and health and were largely derived from conversations with architects,

developers, and other key individuals. The cost savings estimates were for the state as a whole rather what the

building owners or occupants would experience directly.

The Business Case for Sustainable Design in Federal

Facilities(http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/program/sustainable_businesscase.html) by U.S. Department of

Energy, Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP).This FEMP-sponsored study provides significant

financial evidence from an engineering cost analysis of a prototype office building, case studies, and research

findings that sustainable design is a smart business choice. Both the 20-page executive summary and the longer

resource document provide data and information indicating that sustainable design does not have to increase first

costs and yields economic, social, and environmental benefits to building owners and society.

LEED Cost Study(/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=90) and LEED Applications Guide(/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=238) by

Steven Winter Associates, Inc. for U.S. General Services Administration.The LEED Cost Studydefines costsassociated with LEED ratings. Two building types (new construction courthouses and federal building

modernization) are modeled against two scenarios for each LEED rating (Certification, Silver, Gold), identifying

differential costs of construction, design, and documentation/submission requirements. GSA LEED Applications

Guideoutlines an evaluation process in which the predicted first cost impacts of the individual LEED

prerequisites and credits (developed from the Cost Study) are used as a basis for structuring an overall LEED

project approach.

Federal Sustainable Building Cost and Performance Metrics, U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy

Management Program.Increased interest in the measurement of sustainably design buildings resulted in a

FEMP funded effort to develop sustainable building cost and performance metrics and a protocol for the

application of these metrics. The intent of this work was to provide a relatively simple method for measuring whole

building cost and performance that would generate data that could be used to demonstrate the life-cycle benefits

of sustainable design to an audience, primarily, of financial decision makers. The metrics include measurements

for the cost and performance impact of water, energy, maintenance and operations, waste generation, purchasing,

occupant health and productivity, and transportation. The metrics and protocol are being applied to a set of U.S.Navy facilities where sustainably designed buildings will be compared to similar buildings with more historically

typical designs.

For more information:
http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=238http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=90http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/program/sustainable_businesscase.htmlhttp://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/greenbuilding/Design/CostBenefit/Report.pdf


4/9

Building Cost and Performance Metrics: Data Collection Protocol, Revision

1.0(/pdfs/fowlerbldg_costperf_metrics.pdf)(PDF 1.23 MB) by K.M. Fowler, A.E. Solana, and K. Spees. Richland,

Washington: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2005. PNNL-SA-15217.

Building Cost and Performance Metrics: Data Collection Field Guide, Revision 1.0 by K.M. Fowler, A.E. Solana,

and K. Spees. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, 2005. PNNL-SA-15218.

Building Cost and Performance Measurement Data(/pdfs/fowlerbldg_costperf_meas.pdf)(PDF 113 KB) by K.M.

Fowler. Portland, Oregon: Greenbuild 2004 International Conference and ExpoProceedings, 2004. PNNL-SA-

43119.

e-Building Investment Decision Support (e-BIDS)(http://cbpd.arc.cmu.edu/ebids) by Carnegie Mellon University

and the U.S. Department of Energy.Building on their multi-year health and productivity research in BIDS, the

Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics (CBPD) at Carnegie Mellon has released a DOE supported e-

Bids. This publicly available tool identifies whole building design decisions with the greatest impact on energy as

well as health, productivity, or organizational effectiveness, and the research studies that help to quantify the life-

cycle value of those investments. An ongoing effort, e-Bids outlines the key whole building design guidelines for

high-performance building developed by the CBPD and the Advanced Building Systems Integration Consortium

(ABSIC), an industry-government-university consortium, and the cost-benefit arguments available to date for six of

these guidelines: daylight without glare, high-performance lighting and controls, individual temperature control

through underfloor air, mixed mode conditioning with natural ventilation, commissioning, and cool roofs. For each

of these design actions, the CBPD team developed: standard and best practice definitions; guidelines to achieve

the best practices; cross sectionals of case studies that demonstrate energy and other business benefits; short

summaries of individual case studies; life-cycle cost calculations based on average cost and savings data derived

from case studies; and descriptions of the national impact that includes energy plus other benefits as well as

emission and energy externalities savings.

Costing Green: A Comprehensive Cost Database and Budgeting

Methodology(http://www.davislangdon.com/upload/images/publications/USA/2004%20Costing%20Green%20Comprehensive%20Cost%20Database.pdf)(PDF 368 KB) by Lisa Fay Matthiessen, Peter Morris, Davis Langdon Adamson, 2004.This paper analyzes

extensive data on building first costs to assess the cost of green buildings as compared to other buildings with

comparable programs. The paper looks only at construction costs, since these costs are so important in decisions

regarding sustainable design. The authors conclude that many projects achieve their sustainability goals within the

initial budget or with a very small increase. The paper also includes a budgeting methodology.

Green Buildings, Organizational Success and Occupant Productivity (/pdfs/grn_bldgs_org_success.pdf)(PDF 184

KB) by Judith Heerwagen.This paper explores the wider context of sustainable design, integrating work from

organizational effectiveness and human factors in an effort to broaden our understanding and lay the foundation

for future research on the costs and values of sustainable design. At the present time, the conversation is

dominated by costs because methods for calculating costs are more highly developed and more readily accepted

than methods for assessing benefits and value. A few conclusions:

First, green buildings are relevant to business interests across the full spectrum of concerns, from portfolio

issues (e.g., resale value of property) to enhanced quality of individual workspaces (through improved ambientconditions).

Second, because the potential influence of green buildings is broad, research on green buildings should

address a range of outcomes rather than focusing narrowly on just a few. Outcomes of interest to

organizations include workforce attraction and retention, quality of work life, work output, and customer

relationships.

Third, green buildings can provide both cost reduction benefits and value added benefits. The emphasis to

date, however, has been on costs, rather than on benefits. The need for more data on value added benefits

underscores the importance of studies that focus on these human and organizational factors.

The Human Factors of Sustainable Building Design: Post-Occupancy Evaluation of the Philip Merrill Environmental

Center, Annapolis, MD(/pdfs/human_factors_cbf.pdf)(PDF 473 KB) by Judith Heerwagen and Leah Zagreus for the

U.S. Department of Energy, 2005.The report summarizes the findings from a study of the Philip Merrill

Environmental Center building in Annapolis, Maryland. The building, which houses the Chesapeake Bay

Foundation, was the first LEED Platinum building in the United States. The Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality

Survey, a widely used building evaluation instrument developed by the Center for the Built Environment at the

University of California at Berkeley, was implemented in November 2004, almost four years after the Foundation

moved into the new building. In addition to the survey, a series of interviews and discussion groups were held with

staff one year after the move into the new building. This report includes a detailed summary of the survey findings

with additional clarification of occupant responses gathered from the interviews and discussion groups.

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA)(/resources/lcca.php?r=dd_archprogramming) by Sieglinde Fuller. National

Institute of Standards and Technology, in WBDG. Updated 2008.Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is a method for

assessing the total cost of facility ownership. It takes into account all costs of acquiring, owning, and disposing of a

building or building system. LCCA is especially useful when project alternatives that fulfill the same performance

requirements, but differ with respect to initial costs and operating costs, have to be compared in order to select the

one that maximizes net savings.

Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) Survey(http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/RESEARCH/survey.htm) by the

Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley.Although building occupants represent a

wealth of information about how well a building works, they are rarely asked to provide opinions or information on

workplace or building issues. Surveys of occupant IEQ satisfaction allow designers, developers, owners, operators

and tenants to objectively gauge which building services and design features are working and which are not. In the

past, however, paper or telephone-based occupant surveys have been expensive to administer. For this project
http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/RESEARCH/survey.htmhttp://www.wbdg.org/resources/lcca.php?r=dd_archprogramminghttp://www.wbdg.org/pdfs/human_factors_cbf.pdfhttp://www.wbdg.org/pdfs/grn_bldgs_org_success.pdfhttp://www.davislangdon.com/upload/images/publications/USA/2004%20Costing%20Green%20Comprehensive%20Cost%20Database.pdfhttp://cbpd.arc.cmu.edu/ebidshttp://www.wbdg.org/pdfs/fowlerbldg_costperf_meas.pdfhttp://www.wbdg.org/pdfs/fowlerbldg_costperf_metrics.pdf


5/9

CBE has developed and implemented a cost-effective, web-based survey with automated, easy to understand

reporting. It is currently being implemented in a number of buildings to build up an occupant IEQ database for

research and benchmarking.

Post-Occupancy Review of Buildings and their Engineering (PROBE)(http://www.usablebuildings.co.uk/) by

Partners in Innovation.PROBE (Post-Occupancy Review of Buildings and their Engineering) was a research

project which ran from 1995-2002 under the Partners in Innovation (jointly funded by the UK Government and The

Builder Group, publishers of Building Services Journal). It was carried out by Energy for Sustainable Development,

William Bordass Associates, Building Use Studies and Target Energy Services. PROBE studies include a review

of design intent and site documentation, technical survey (walk-through and spot checks), energy survey with

CIBSE TM22 analysis, envelope pressure test, occupant questionnaire survey, management interviews, designers'

response, and publication of the results. This link contains all of the PROBE studies as well as technical papers

on methodology, critiques and reviews, and other materials.Workplace 20|20(http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?

contentId=18247&contentType=GSA_OVERVIEW)by the U.S. General Services Administration.The WorkPlace

20|20 program, established in 2002, is currently testing federal workplaces that have been developed by integrated

teams of strategic consultants, organizational scientists, designers, and researchers. Although the clients and

contexts vary, the teams work from a common approach. They derive design concepts and solutions from a

grounded understanding of the organization, its goals, its current and desired work practices, and the current and

emerging work styles of its employees. Each of the current workplace projects is being tested pre and post on a

wide array of outcomes developed around the Balanced Scorecard (BSC).

2007 The Cost of Green Revisited(http://www.davislangdon.com/USA/Research/ResearchFinder/2007-The-Cost-of-

Green-Revisited), Lisa Fay Matthiessen and Peter Morris, Davis Langdon, 2007.

Resources Focused on the Environmental Aspects of Performance

Buildings affect all aspects of our environmentair, rivers and streams, soils, plants and animals, oceansthe visible

and invisible network of life on the planet. Reducing the damage caused by buildingsand ultimately creating buildings

that are net contributorsis an important goal of sustainable design. As noted under social, health, and community

measures, it is often challenging to measure actual effects of a single building.

Most information currently available on building performance is contained in case studies that report on strategies

incorporated in the design and some actual results, generally energy and water savings. The High Performance

Buildings Database, described below, is one resource for such case studies.

One specific type of measurement is environmental life cycle assessment (LCA), a compilation and evaluation of the

inputs, outputs, and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle. This "cradle to

cradle" (or cradle to grave) approach is often suggested as a framework for performance measurement that provides a

broader, more comprehensive perspective instead of a focus on only one aspect of performance. LCA can address

individual building products, assemblies or systems, or whole buildings. It is different from life-cycle costing (see

Financial/Business Aspects of Performance section(#finbus)).

STANDARDIZED METRICS AND PROCEDURES FOR BUILDING ENERGY PERFORMANCE, LIGHTING SYSTEM

PERFORMANCE, PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM PERFORMANCE, AND SOURCE ENERGY AND EMISSIONS FROM

ENERGY USE IN BUILDINGS

Energy consumption in buildings can have the largest environmental impact of any aspect of the building. The energy

performance of buildings can be defined in many ways, which can lead to different conclusions. The Performance

Metrics Project (PMP)(http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/highperformance/performance_metrics/) at the National

Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) commercial buildings research activity

whose goal is to standardize the measurement and characterization of building energy performance. This project

produced standard performance metrics and procedures for determining building energy performance, lighting system

performance, PV system performance, and source energy and emissions from energy use in buildings. Another source

of standard of building performance measures is ASHRAE Guideline 14(/references/ihs_l.php?

d=ashrae%20guideline%2014), which presents a detailed description of procedures for measuring and reporting energy

and demand savings geared toward retrofit applications.

In-Depth Case Studies of Energy Performance of Six High Performance Buildingsby U.S. Department of Energy,

National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

An example of comparison graphs available in the NREL studies

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted detailed studies of six buildings to document their

actual performance and to understand the issues that affected the performance levels achieved. Post-occupancy

evaluations(/resources/fpe.php?r=dd_archprogramming) began with extensive building monitoring for at least one year;
http://www.wbdg.org/resources/fpe.php?r=dd_archprogramminghttp://www.wbdg.org/references/ihs_l.php?d=ashrae%20guideline%2014http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/highperformance/performance_metrics/http://www.wbdg.org/resources/measperfsustbldgs.php?r=dd_archprogramming#finbushttp://www.davislangdon.com/USA/Research/ResearchFinder/2007-The-Cost-of-Green-Revisitedhttp://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentId=18247&contentType=GSA_OVERVIEWhttp://www.usablebuildings.co.uk/


6/9

Chesapeake Bay Foundation's Philip

Merrill Environmental Center, Annapolis,

MD

energy flows established from the measured data were used to calibrate building models for energy simulations of

performance. Summaries of this study and lessons learned can be found at:

Evaluation of the Energy Performance of Six High-Performance Buildings:

Preprint(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/38080.pdf)(PDF 507 KB) by P.A. Torcellini, S. Pless, D.B. Crawley. 2005.

11 pp. NREL Report No. CP-550-38080.

Lessons Learned from Field Evaluation of Six High-Performance Buildings:

Preprint(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36290.pdf)(PDF 716 KB) by P. Torcellini, M. Deru, B. Griffith, N. Long, S.

Pless, R. Judkoff, D.B. Crawley. 2004. 16 pp. NREL Report No. CP-550-36290.

The more detailed studies of each of the six buildings, including methods and metrics used, are available as follows:

Analysis of the Design and Energy Performance of the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Environmental Protection Cambria Office

Building(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34931.pdf)(PDF 2.37 MB) by M.

Deru, P. Torcellini, M. Sheffer, A. Lau. 2005. 85 pp.; NREL Report No.

TP-550-34931.

Analysis of the Energy Performance of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation's

Philip Merrill Environmental

Center(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34830.pdf)(PDF 2.94 MB) by B.

Griffith, M. Deru, P. Torcellini, P. Ellis. 2005. 145 pp. NREL Report No.

TP-550-34830.

Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability

(BEES)(http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.html)Developed by

the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) Building and

Fire Research Laboratory with support from the U.S. EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program, BEESmeasures the environmental performance of building products by using the life-cycle assessment approach

specified in ISO 14000 standards. All stages in the life of a product are analyzed: raw material acquisition,

manufacture, transportation, installation, use, and recycling and waste management. Economic performance is

measured using the ASTM standard life-cycle cost method, which covers the costs of initial investment,

replacement, operation, maintenance and repair, and disposal. Environmental and economic performance are

combined into an overall performance measure using the ASTM standard for Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis.

BEES Pleasesolicits data from manufacturers on their products for entry into the BEES database.

Energy Design and Performance Analysis of the BigHorn Home Improvement

Center(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34930.pdf)(PDF 2.09 MB) by M. Deru, P. Torcellini, S. Pless. 2005. 120 pp.

NREL Report No. TP-550-34930.

Energy Performance Evaluation of an Educational Facility: The Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental

Studies, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/33180.pdf)(PDF 2.73 MB) by S.D. Pless,

P.A. Torcellini. 2004. 155 pp. NREL Report No. TP-550-33180.Evaluation of the Energy Performance and Design Process of the Thermal Test Facility at the National Renewable

Energy Laboratory(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34832.pdf)(PDF 2.69 MB) by P. Torcellini, S. Pless, B. Griffith,

R. Judkoff. 2005. 144 pp. NREL Report No. TP-550-34832.

Evaluation of the Low-Energy Design and Energy Performance of the Zion National Park Visitor

Center(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34607.pdf)(PDF 3.35 MB) by P. Torcellini, N. Long, S. Pless, R. Judkoff.

2005. 156 pp. NREL Report No. TP-550-34607.

Green Building Challenge, International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment(http://www.iisbe.org)Green

Building Challenge (GBC) is an international effort that has involved over 20 countries to develop a sustainable

building assessment system, GBTool, tailored for adaptation and use in countries around the world. GBTool

addresses site selection and planning, energy and resource consumption, environmental loadings, indoor

environmental quality, functionality, long term performance and adaptability, and social and economic factors.

Initially developed for assessment of buildings as designed, the 2005 version of GBTool includes criteria for four

phasespredesign, design, construction, and operations, which focuses on actual performance.

High-Performance Buildings Database(http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/database/) by U.S. Department of

Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory.The U.S. Department of Energy supported the High

Performance Buildings (HPB) Database to help improve building performance by showcasing examples of green

buildings and providing a standardized format for displaying performance results. DOE also seeks to standardize

methods for reporting building performance by collecting data on topics such as energy, materials, indoor

environmental quality, and land use. The HPB Database presents information at various levels of detail. An

"Overview" level describes key information, including a project's function and most significant green features. More

detailed information about the project is separated into a series of modules on process, performance, and results.

ISO Sustainability in Building Construction, ISO TC 59 SC 17The International Organization for Standardization

(ISO) establishes voluntary standards that are used around the world. Over the past decade, ISO has, for

example, established standards for LCA that form the foundation for most LCA efforts in the U.S., and other

countries. Currently, ISO is working to establish methodological frameworks for assessment of the environmental

performance of buildings and for environmental product declarations. This work is not complete and draft materialsare not available to the public, but progress on these documents can be obtained from the ISO

website(http://www.iso.org/iso/en/stdsdevelopment/tc/tclist/TechnicalCommitteeDetailPage.TechnicalCommitteeDetail?

COMMID=5595).

LCA into LEED ProjectsThe U.S. Green Building Council is working with stakeholders and LCA experts to
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/stdsdevelopment/tc/tclist/TechnicalCommitteeDetailPage.TechnicalCommitteeDetail?COMMID=5595http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/database/http://www.iisbe.org/http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34607.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34832.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/33180.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34930.pdfhttp://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.htmlhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34830.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/34931.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36290.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/38080.pdf


7/9

consider whether and how LCA should be incorporated into its LEED rating system. Work groups are addressing

goal and scope, methodology, and tools to ensure a rigorous and practical approach. Results of the project will be

available through the USGBC website(http://www.usgbc.org).

LEED for Existing Buildings, U.S. Green Building Council(http://www.usgbc.org)LEED-EB includes prerequisites

and credits based on building characteristics (e.g., availability of public transportation), policies/ procedures and

documentation that they were implemented (e.g., exterior maintenance/ landscaping), actual performance (e.g.,

reduction in commuting frequency through telecommuting), and modeling and calculations (e.g., stormwater

reduction). LEED-EB addresses issues related to site, energy, water, materials, and indoor environmental quality.

U.S. Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI) Database(http://www.nrel.gov/lci) by National Renewable Energy Laboratory,

Athena Sustainable Materials Institute.The U.S. Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Database is a public/private endeavor

managed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the Athena Sustainable Materials Institute,

supported by a variety of Federal agencies, and carried out by BuildingGreen. LCI is a "cradle to grave"accounting of the energy and material flows into and out of the environment associated with producing a material,

component, or assembly and is main input to a life cycle analysis. The primary objective of this project is to create

and maintain a publicly available LCI database for common unit processes. It is expected that the database will

support the expansion of LCA and the development of simplified LCA tools to help us answer many of the

environmental impact questions.

Resources Focused on the Social, Health, and Community Aspects of Performance

This is the least studied and least understood aspect of building performance. In fact, we have not clearly defined the

parameters to be included. It is often challenging to measure actual effects of a given building on social, community,

and health indicators. Note that many of the studies included under Financial/Business Aspects of

Performance(#finbus) also include parameters related to human health and well-being, which also relate to this

category.

Sustainable Measures and Guide to Sustainable Community

Indicators(http://www.sustainablemeasures.com/Indicators/index.html) by Maureen Hart.This website presents

indicators for measuring sustainability of communities: ways to measure how well a community is meeting the

needs and expectations of its present and future members. It explains what indicators are, how indicators relate to

sustainability, how to identify good indicators of sustainability, and how indicators can be used to measure

progress toward building a sustainable community. It also presents lists of potential indicators and data resources.

Using the Results of Performance Measurement

As noted in the Introduction, performance measurement can be used for a wide variety of purposes. Two examples

follow. In the first example, an in-depth assessment of energy performance is used to improve the performance of the

buildings studied and to understand how energy performance can be improved in future buildings. In the secondexample, metrics were developed and are being applied for a "whole building" performance evaluation of sustainably

designed buildings.

In-Depth Case Studies of Energy Performance of Six High Performance Buildingsby U.S. Department of Energy,

National Renewable Energy Laboratory.Commercial buildings account for 18% of U.S. energy consumption and

this number is increasing, primarily because floor area is increasing and the life span of buildings exceeds 30

years. Energy consumption will continue to increase until buildings can be designed to produce more energy than

they consume. Based on this conclusion, DOE's Building Technologies program has established a goal for

marketable zero-energy buildings (ZEBs) by 2025.

To provide information needed to achieve this goal, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) studied six

buildings in detail to understand the issues related to the design, construction, and operation of the current generation

of low-energy buildings. Post-occupancy evaluations(/resources/fpe.php?r=dd_archprogramming) began with extensive

building monitoring for at least one year; energy flows established from the measured data were used to calibratebuilding models for energy simulation performance.

Although all of the buildings achieved energy savings, none of the buildings performed as well as expected. NREL's

detailed analyses identified some of the reasons for the actual performance levels and enabled some of the buildings

to take steps to improve their performance. In addition, the study led to a greater understanding of factors that affect

our ability to achieve energy performance goals. For example, daylighting(/resources/daylighting.php?

r=dd_archprogramming) was less successful than anticipated and peak energy demands were greater, due to such

factors as cloudy conditions during peak demand reducing PV effectiveness. Expectations for occupant behavior were

optimistic. In one building, the energy consumption was considerably higher than models during the design process

predicted. The study was able to determine the cause of the problem so that the owner could take appropriate

remedial steps.

Some of the key conclusions of this exercise include the following:

Owners drive the desire for low-energy buildings

Setting measurable goals is crucial for achieving low-energy buildings

Many decisions are not motivated by cost

Today's technologies can substantially change how buildings perform

An integrated approach to building design(/wbdg_approach.php) is the best way to lower energy use and cost

APPLICATION
http://www.wbdg.org/wbdg_approach.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/resources/daylighting.php?r=dd_archprogramminghttp://www.wbdg.org/resources/fpe.php?r=dd_archprogramminghttp://www.sustainablemeasures.com/Indicators/index.htmlhttp://www.wbdg.org/resources/measperfsustbldgs.php?r=dd_archprogramming#finbushttp://www.nrel.gov/lcihttp://www.usgbc.org/http://www.usgbc.org/


8/9

Energy-efficient buildings(/design/minimize_consumption.php) can be constructed in a variety of climates

We can replicate the ideas and techniques from these buildings into other commercial buildings

Evaluation of the Energy Performance of Six High-Performance Buildings:

Preprint(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/38080.pdf)(PDF 507 KB) by P.A. Torcellini, S. Pless, D.B. Crawley. 2005.

11 pp. NREL Report No. CP-550-38080.

Lessons Learned from Field Evaluation of Six High-Performance Buildings:

Preprint(http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36290.pdf)(PDF 7.16 KB) by P. Torcellini, M. Deru, B. Griffith, N. Long, S.

Pless, R. Judkoff, D.B. Crawley. 2004. 16 pp. NREL Report No. CP-550-36290.

Measuring the Performance of Navy Facilities, U.S. Navy, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.Since 1998, the

U.S. Navy's Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) has had a policy for incorporating sustainable

design principles(http://www2.navfac.navy.mil/doclib/files/cheinst271223109.pdf) (PDF 228 KB) into new buildingconstruction. The policy also states it is the intent of NAVFAC to accomplish this within the given budget

constraints and while meeting customer requirements. The hurdle of a building's first cost has been one of the

biggest challenges for integrating sustainable design into projects at the Navy. Although considerable progress has

been made, to make the next leap in progress the Navy needs to provide actual cost and performance data for

their sustainably designed buildings to demonstrate the benefits they are reaping for the investments being made.

To accomplish the goal of providing actual data on sustainably designed Navy facilities, the metrics developed through

the FEMP Sustainable Building Cost and Performance Metrics project are being used on seven Navy building sets (see

Table 2 for summary of metrics). Each building set includes one sustainably designed building and a similar building on

the same Navy site designed in a more 'conventional' fashion. In addition to using the conventionally designed building

for comparison, industry benchmarks and existing Navy data will be used when available. The building types that are

included in the project are office buildings, barracks, and fitness centers.

Table 2: Building Cost and Performance Metrics for Navy Facilities

Site and building characteristic data (e.g., size of building, number of occupants, etc.) were collected in order to

normalize the performance data for analysis. Meters and data collection systems needed to be put in place for some of

the buildings. The building cost and performance data will be collected for a minimum of 12 months. The data from

these buildings will be used to calculate a return on investment for the sustainably designed facilities, to identify

opportunities for individual building performance improvement, and to develop design guidance on the sustainable

design techniques that appeared to be contributing the greatest to the buildings' performance.

To date the project has involved identifying the target buildings, identifying the current metering capability, and

collecting site and building characteristics data. The first challenge for the project was identifying which sustainblydesigned buildings in the Navy portfolio would be the best candidates. Having buildings that were occupied for more

than 6 months and identifying a 'matching' conventionally designed building at the same site with the same function

proved to be significant limiting factors. Once the buildings were selected the challenge was to clearly identify the

metering needs, which have been greater than expected, and to gather the site and building characteristics for each

building. Once the building meters are in place, the collection of monthly performance data will begin.

Questions about this project can be directed to:

Dennis O. Talton,

R.A.(mailto:[email protected])

Special Assistant for Architecture and

Accessibility

Sustainable Development Program Manager

Naval Facilities Engineering Command, AtlanticPhone: 757-322-4211

Fax: 757-322-4416

Kim M. Fowler(mailto:[email protected])

Senior Research Engineer

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

PO Box 999 K6-10

Richland, WA 99352

Phone: 509-372-4233Fax: 509-372-4370

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www2.navfac.navy.mil/doclib/files/cheinst271223109.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36290.pdfhttp://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/38080.pdfhttp://www.wbdg.org/design/minimize_consumption.php


9/9

WBDG

BUILDING / SPACE TYPES

Applicable and relevant to all building types(/design/buildingtypes.php)

DESIGN OBJECTIVES

Cost-Effective(/design/cost_effective.php), Functional / Operational(/design/func_oper.php), Historic

Preservation(/design/historic_pres.php), Productive(/design/productive.php), Secure / Safe(/design/secure_safe.php),

Sustainable(/design/sustainable.php)

PRODUCTS AND SYSTEMS

Building Envelope Design Guide(/design/envelope.php)

Federal Green Construction Guide for Specifiers:

01 78 23 (01830) Operation and Maintenance Data(/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=8026)

01 91 00 (01810) Commissioning(/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=8031)

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Building Commissioning(/project/buildingcomm.php), Project Delivery Teams(/project/deliveryteams.php), Project

Planning and Development(/project/planningdevelopment.php), Project Delivery and

Controls(/project/deliverycontrols.php)

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Facilities Operations & Maintenance(/om/om.php)

APPLIED RESEARCH

Sustainable and High Performance Building Strategies Research:

Assessing Green Building Performance: A Post Occupancy Evaluation of 12 GSA BuildingsCase

Study(/research/sustainablehpbs.php?a=8), Sponsored by: U.S. General Service Administration (2008)

Assessing Green Building Performance: A Post Occupancy Evaluation of 12 GSA BuildingsWhite

Paper(/research/sustainablehpbs.php?a=7), Sponsored by: U.S. General Services Administration Public Buildings

Service, Office of Applied Science Applied Research (2008)

Energy Efficiency Research:

Energy Savings and Performance Gains in GSA Buildings: Seven Cost-effective

Strategies(/research/energyefficiency.php?a=11), Sponsored by: GSA Applied Research Program (2009)

Quick Start Guide to Increase Data Center Energy Efficiency(/research/energyefficiency.php?a=12), Sponsored by:

GSA Applied Research Program and DOE Federal Energy Management Program (2008)

OrganizationsAmerican Center for Life Cycle Assessment(http://www.lcacenter.org)

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)(http://www.ashrae.org/)

High Performing Buildings(http://www.hpbmagazine.org/), a magazine directed to the entire building

community published quarterly with actual building case studies.

Proposed Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design of High Performance, Green Buildings Except Low-Rise

Residential Buildings(http://www.ashrae.org/publications/page/927), developed by the American Society of

Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) in conjunction with the Illuminating

Engineering Society (IES) and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). The standard is slated to be the

first code-intended commercial green building standard in the United States when published early in 2010.

National Institute of Building Sciences(http://www.nibs.org/) | An Authoritative Source of Innovative Solutions for the Built

Environment

1090 Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 700 | Washington, DC 20005-4950 | (202) 289 -7800 | Fax (202) 289-1092

2010 National Institute of Building Sciences. All rights reserved.Disclaimer(/about.php)
http://www.wbdg.org/about.phphttp://www.nibs.org/http://www.ashrae.org/publications/page/927http://www.hpbmagazine.org/http://www.ashrae.org/http://www.lcacenter.org/http://www.wbdg.org/research/energyefficiency.php?a=12http://www.wbdg.org/research/energyefficiency.php?a=11http://www.wbdg.org/research/sustainablehpbs.php?a=7http://www.wbdg.org/research/sustainablehpbs.php?a=8http://www.wbdg.org/om/om.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/deliverycontrols.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/planningdevelopment.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/deliveryteams.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/project/buildingcomm.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=8031http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/browse_doc.php?d=8026http://www.wbdg.org/design/envelope.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/sustainable.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/secure_safe.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/productive.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/historic_pres.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/func_oper.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/cost_effective.phphttp://www.wbdg.org/design/buildingtypes.php

Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings | Whole Building Design Guide

Documents

Transcript of Measuring Performance of Sustainable Buildings | Whole Building Design Guide