High Performance Green Building Design - Lessons From Practice
Download as PPTX, PDF3 likes1,101 views
The document presents findings and case studies from the Living Futures 2013 conference, emphasizing collaboration and innovation in sustainable building design. Notable projects and their energy performance metrics are highlighted, illustrating the relationship between client involvement and project outcomes. It also discusses the role of incentives and mandates in shaping decision-making processes in green architecture.
![“We actually came in and added to the goal setting.”
“The design process was much more integrated and each person had to step
outside of their specialized role to make the project a success.”
“Our involvement at that point was much higher than usual on most projects, and
the best early collaborative design that I’ve seen on green projects.”
“We went back and forth and it was a very open and cooperative arrangement.
We never felt that he was telling us, you have to do this.”
“It was probably the greatest asset that we all knew each other and [got] along
really well.”
1Collaboration fuels goal setting
& decision making](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/jyakliving-130908133537-/85/High-Performance-Green-Building-Design-Lessons-From-Practice-40-320.jpg)
High Performance Green Building Design - Lessons From Practice
- 3. One Shelley St. Sydney, Australia
- 4. Manitoba Hydro Place Winnipeg, Canada
- 5. OHSU Center For Health & Healing Portland, OR
- 7. Bank of America Tower New York City
- 9. Epson Atrium
- 11. One Bligh— Sydney, Australia
- 13. Winnipeg, Canada
- 14. Portland, OR
- 19. Perth, Australia 6-Star Green Star
- 22. © 2013 Yudelson Associates
- 28. The World’s Greenest Buildings Promise vs. Performance in Sustainable Design/Stories from Design Practice Living Futures 2013 May 15-17, 2013 Alison G. Kwok, PhD, AIA, LEED AP University of Oregon
- 36. Tillamook Forest Center The Gerding Theater Chartwell School Orinda City Hall E. Portland Community Center Stephen Epler Hall Case Studies
- 37. Design Teams
- 38. Chartwell School Seaside, CA Orinda City Hall Orinda, CA Stephen Epler Hall, PSU Portland, OR Tillamook Forest Center Tillamook, OR The Gerding Theater Portland, OR East Portland Community Ctr. Portland, OR Information 21,000 s.f. completed 2006 Predicted 50% below code Measured EUI 27.9 kBtu/sf/year 13,900 s.f. completed 2007 Predicted 72% below code Modeled EUI: 59.6 kBtu/sf/year 64,400 s.f. completed 2003 Predicted 49% below code Measured EUI: 41 kBtu/sf/year 18,800 s.f. completed 2006 Predicted 30% below code Measured EUI: 99 kBtu/sf/year 55,000 s.f. completed 2006 Predicted 35% below code Measured EUI: 61 kBtu/sf/year 22,000 s.f. completed 2008 Predicted and measured data not available Architect EHDD Architecture San Francisco, CA Siegel & Strain Architects Emeryville, CA Mithūn Architects Seattle, Washington Miller Hull Partnership Seattle, Washington GBD Architects Portland, OR SERA Architects Portland, OR Engineer Taylor Engineering Alameda, CA Taylor Engineering Alameda, CA Interface Engineering Portland, OR PAE Consulting Engineers Portland, OR Glumac Engineers Portland, OR Interface Engineering Portland, OR Project Details
- 39. Digging Deeper
- 40. “We actually came in and added to the goal setting.” “The design process was much more integrated and each person had to step outside of their specialized role to make the project a success.” “Our involvement at that point was much higher than usual on most projects, and the best early collaborative design that I’ve seen on green projects.” “We went back and forth and it was a very open and cooperative arrangement. We never felt that he was telling us, you have to do this.” “It was probably the greatest asset that we all knew each other and [got] along really well.” 1Collaboration fuels goal setting & decision making
- 41. “Our job is to really make sure that, from the very beginning, clients understand what the give and take will be to deliver a more sustainable building.” “We never want to force something that’s innovative, risky, or challenging on the client.” “They were open minded to test new ideas” “When you make good projects, you can only go as far as your clients are willing to go.” 2Innovation requires client buy-in
- 42. “The energy use, particularly the carbon component of that energy, was very important for me.” “It dovetailed into what LEED was at the time.” “It certainly made us more willing to invest more time for the energy modeling because we expected to get some money back.” “Incentives helped the owner look at some of the things they normally wouldn’t have looked at.” “The project was such a small scale that the incentives…are not worth our time to fill out.” 3Mandates and incentives influence, but do not drive, decision-making
- 43. AIA Upjohn Research Initiative US Green Building Council Center for Housing Innovation, University of Oregon National Science Foundation Richard L. Hayes, AIA Knowledge Resources John Forester, Cornell University Research Assistants: Tom Collins, Britni L. Jessup, Kristen B. DiStefano, Amanda M. Rhodes, and Rachel B. Auerbach, University of Oregon Acknowledgements
- 44. Thank you Alison G Kwok, PhD. AIA, LEED AP University of Oregon e-mail: [email protected]
Editor's Notes
- #3: If building energy use is this important to our collective future, why not know what’s going on?
- #4: “What gets measured, gets managed”Without reports, we are flying blind/can’t fixWhy should governments put their faith in green building without performance reports?
- #5: Issue: Average savings is 35% vs. standard (Kats)BUT, about 25% actually underperformOne LEED Platinum building:Modeled at 61% savingsPerforms at 48% savingsUnderperforming buildings hurt validity of green building premise
- #6: Here’s the problem: quite a few green building projects are not meeting their projections.
- #9: Importance of embodied energy; forms a barrier to further carbon reductions
- #10: European stretch goal: 100 kWh/sqm/a PRIMARY energy useEuropean site use median: 135 kWh/sq.m.; 43,000 EUIU.S. Average: 400 kWh/m2/a (2003)50% better than average still not good enough!75% (or more) required2030 Challenge (next slide)Solon: 34,000 Btu/sq.ft./year energy use
- #11: 2030 Challenge:DOE Annual Energy Outlook; Business As UsualAEO (expanded codes)AEO (best available technology)
- #12: Where SHOULD WE be aiming? I decided to find out!LEED Platinum (or equivalent)Built since 2003>50,000 sq.ft. (>5,000 sqm)Non-residential useMust provide energy data for one yearWater data, as available
- #13: Here is a chart of actual performance of 15/19 buildings (no labs/hospitals)Median use = 139 kWh/sq.m. (EUI = 44,000)
- #14: 2000 workers in bldg.; 700,000 sq.ft.Difficult climate:-35C to +35C (-31F – 95F)22-story solar chimney Passive solar designUrban regenerationGreen roofsPassive moisture control111 kWh/sqm/year;35,000 Btu/sq.ft./yr
- #15: Double LEED Platinum, CS/CIFour stories commercial office, with17 stories rental apartmentsUnderfloor air w/chilled beamsDesigned to meet 2030 Challenge targets for 20104 turbines produce 1% of demandSolar water heaters provide 24%Operable windowsHarvested rainwater; 6500 sq.ft. green roofEnergy: 138 kWh/sq.m./year; 44,000 Btu/sq.ft.
- #16: Here is a chart of actual performance of 15/19 buildings (no labs/hospitals)Median use = 139 kWh/sq.m. (EUI = 44,000)
- #17: Double LEED Platinum, CS/CIFour stories commercial office, with17 stories rental apartmentsUnderfloor air w/chilled beamsDesigned to meet 2030 Challenge targets for 20104 turbines produce 1% of demandSolar water heaters provide 24%Operable windowsHarvested rainwater; 6500 sq.ft. green roofEnergy: 138 kWh/sq.m./year; 44,000 Btu/sq.ft.
- #18: Double LEED Platinum, CS/CIFour stories commercial office, with17 stories rental apartmentsUnderfloor air w/chilled beamsDesigned to meet 2030 Challenge targets for 20104 turbines produce 1% of demandSolar water heaters provide 24%Operable windowsHarvested rainwater; 6500 sq.ft. green roofEnergy: 138 kWh/sq.m./year; 44,000 Btu/sq.ft.
- #19: Here is a chart of actual performance of 15/19 buildings (no labs/hospitals)Median use = 139 kWh/sq.m. (EUI = 44,000)
- #20: Double LEED Platinum, CS/CIFour stories commercial office, with17 stories rental apartmentsUnderfloor air w/chilled beamsDesigned to meet 2030 Challenge targets for 20104 turbines produce 1% of demandSolar water heaters provide 24%Operable windowsHarvested rainwater; 6500 sq.ft. green roofEnergy: 138 kWh/sq.m./year; 44,000 Btu/sq.ft.
- #21: Double LEED Platinum, CS/CIFour stories commercial office, with17 stories rental apartmentsUnderfloor air w/chilled beamsDesigned to meet 2030 Challenge targets for 20104 turbines produce 1% of demandSolar water heaters provide 24%Operable windowsHarvested rainwater; 6500 sq.ft. green roofEnergy: 138 kWh/sq.m./year; 44,000 Btu/sq.ft.
- #22: Every building should be beautifulEvery building LEED PlatinumEvery building should aim at “BSAGs”Achieve measured 35 to 45 kBtu/sq.ft. (EUI) performanceDon’t settle for less!BE WILLING to SAY: If it doesn’t perform, it’s not a green building!
- #23: ARE YOU WILLING to SAY: If it doesn’t perform, it’s not a green building?
- #24: ARE YOU WILLING to SAY: If it doesn’t perform, it’s not a green building?
- #37: Case studies of 6 west coast buildings were used to better understand the integrated design processes used in designing and delivering facilities with aggressive low-energy targets. Our objectives were (a) to reveal examples of innovative practices, strategies, or methods used; (b) to highlight market and other barriers that exist; (c) to use case studies as a means of advancing and enhancing architectural education; (d) and to provide lessons-learned from the design process and post-occupancy evaluation to practitioners.
- #38: Architects and engineers from the design teams were interviewed about the projects. Interviewers probed issues related to the design process including: team goals, dynamic, and composition; technologies and strategies employed; follow-up and lessons learned; and firm hiring and culture.
- #39: Specific criteria were used to include a project as a case study: a project had to have been in operation for at least one year and meet the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) energy consumption performance standard of 50% of the regional (or country) average for that building type. 50% was used as the reduction threshold, which corresponded with the 2030 Challenge requirements at the time. Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) was used to describe thousands of kilowatt hours of energy use per square foot of building area per year (kBtu/SF-year)Name the case studies, locations
- #40: However, as useful as these “stories” were in closing the loop, they were essentially just minimally edited transcriptions of the interviewees own words. We felt that we could dig deeper by looking at the words themselves across the cases to explore and reveal nuances and patterns in the narratives. We chose a qualitative analysis approach prevalent in the social sciences where we moved from the raw transcription text to themes in incremental steps.
- #41: Refining/Expanding Goals: Even when clients/owners initiate green goals, the design teams refined and expand upon them.Stepping Outside Their Specialties: The design process was more integrated with team members having to step outside of their specialized role to make the project a success.Early is better: The earlier all team members were involved, the better the goal setting and decision making. Non-hierarchical: success predicated on non-hierarchical teams were members took turns championing and advocating for specific solutions.Previous Relationships: previous working relationships with team members was an asset and improved/smoothed their processes
- #42: Client Initiated Goals:In all case studies examined, clients and owners initiated the green goals (performance, LEED, etc), but relied upon the design teams to propose solutions to meet these goals.Not Forcing Clients to Take Risks: Design teams were reluctant to force design solutions that were unfamiliar or uncomfortable to clients and owners, but some were less risk averse than others.Buy-in is critical: Design teams had to justify their solutions to clients and owners, which strengthened the overall design process.
- #43: Intrinsic Motivation: Motivation to seek high levels of energy efficiency came from internal design goals rather than from external mandates, requirements, or incentives.Synergies: But, some teams were able to find synergies between the two (i.e. LEED requirement dovetails with team goals)Requirements Paid for Design Work: In some cases, mandates helped pay for the extra design work necessary to achieve the team goals.Mandates/Incentives Not As Integrated: It seems that work related to mandates and incentives wasn’t well integrated into the overall design process. A single person might have dealt with these issues.Incentives Not Worth It: some felt incentives were to small to justify the additional paperwork.
- #44: We would like to acknowledge all those who assisted with this research. (Should we acknowledge ACEEE since we presented some of this there as well?)
- #45: Thank you. I would be happy to answer questions or feel free to contact me via e-mail.