COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING

SYSTEMS AND CODES | 1

CHAPTER 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

 In a scenario where India tries to accelerate its development process

and cope with increasing energy demands, conservation and energy
efficiency measures are to play a central role in our energy policy.

 A national movement for energy conservation can significantly reduce

the need for fresh investment in energy supply systems in coming years.

 Energy conservation is an objective to which all the citizen in the country

can contribute for his own benefit, as well as that of the nation.

 Energy Rating systems and energy codes can go a long way in

channelizing the whole process of energy conservation by providing a
systematic checklist that can quantify the savings.

 In India, at present, there are predominantly two rating systems to certify

buildings as green buildings, namely GRIHA and LEED-INDIA. These
rating systems have a predefined set of criteria and there are points for
each one of these criterion. The buildings are required to fulfill the
defined criteria and achieve a certain number of points to be certified

 The Indian Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) had launched the Energy
Conservation Building Code (ECBC) on February 2007. The code is set
for energy efficiency standards for design and construction , where any
buildings that fall under the index can be termed as "ECBC Compliant
Building" 

1.1 Aim of Study

Comparative analysis of various green building rating systems and energy
codes prevalent in India and cursory study of a few building energy rating
systems used internationally. Comparison would also be made to the
prevalent vernacular techniques and materials used in different regions of
India, and how these could be implemented either originally or in innovative
forms to achieve a sustainable building.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 2

1.2 Objectives, Scope and Limitation

1.2.1 Objectives

 To study a few rating systems developed specifically in India as a

response to systems developed abroad.

 Compare a few of these rating systems for their effectiveness for

corporate buildings in metropolises and mega-cities

1.2.2 Scope

The scope of the study includes the following:

 Study of IGBC- LEED rating system, GRIHA rating system developed by

TERI and ECBC code of BEE

 Comparison only in terms of relative weightage accorded to common

parameters in the 2 rating systems mentioned above

 Identification of the other parameters that are not common in these

rating systems and making conjectures regarding their effectiveness
and importance

 Identification of the aspects for which codal provisions exist and how
/why the rating systems include other aspects or leave out certain
aspects

1.2.3 Limitations

 The study would be done primarily for the requirements of a corporate

building.

 Inferences drawn from the two literature studies and the stimulated
building rating study would be used to substantiate the final conclusion.

1.3 Growing importance of energy modeling

In the developed countries the growth rate of energy consumption is only marginally
higher compared to the growth rate of population. For example, in USA, energy
consumption is projected to grow at 1.3% while the population growth rate is projected to
grow at 0.8%. In contrast, in developing countries like India population growth rate is
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 3

expected to grow at 1.3% while the energy consumption rate is expected to grow at 4.3%.
This trend would strain the energy sector to a large extent.

The construction industry in India is growing at a rapid pace and the rate of
growth is 10 % as compared to the world average of 5.2%. Hence energy efficiency in the
building sector assumes tremendous importance. The potential for energy savings is 40 –
50% in buildings, if energy efficiency measures are incorporated at the design stage.

Moreover, as a strong component of the sustainability initiative in buildings,

energy use is rightfully taking its place as a leading metric in evaluating a building’s
performance. Further emphasizing the importance of performance measurement is the
expected roll out of an industry wide “Building Energy Performance” label which is
intended to provide an objective comparison of energy use between buildings.

All the above factors together play an important role in defining the importance
of the Energy Rating Systems in defining the course of design. Different parts of the world
have different standards set according to the conditions prevailing there.
Ex- GRIHA in India, LEED in US, MINERGIE in Switzerland etc.

1.4 Reason why energy rating systems are becoming popular

Architects, real estate professionals, facility managers, engineers, interior
designers, landscape architects, construction managers, lenders and government officials
all use Energy Rating systems to help transform the built environment to sustainability.
Some salient points fuelling the popularity of rating systems are:
 Market recognition for low environmental impact buildings,
 Assurance that best environmental practice is incorporated into a building,
 Inspiration to find innovative solutions that minimise the environmental impact –
 A benchmark that is higher than regulation
 A tool to help reduce running costs, Improve working and living environments
 A standard that demonstrates progress towards corporate and organisational
environmental objectives
 What gets measured gets managed
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 4

CHAPTER 2

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Description

Different parts of the world have different standards set according to the
conditions prevailing there. Ex- LEED in United States, GRIHA in India,
MINERGIE in Switzerland etc.

However, the architects, planners, developers and all those involved in

the construction business now face the dilemma of which rating system or code,
or any independent technique to use for the design and construction of a
sustainable building.
For the purpose of finding a generalized solution to this universal
dilemma, a comparative analysis of the prevailing green building rating systems
and codes in India has been done. Parameters for comparison have been derived
by narrowing down the most popular rating criterions used all over the world. The
study has been done especially for the corporate sector landmark buildings in the
mega-cities.

The systems taken up for comparison are : IGBC LEED , GRIHA and ECBC
codes. Two literature reviews, one of CII –Godrej Green Building Center, Hyderabad,
a LEED Platinum rated building, and the other of Suzlon One Earth, Pune, a
GRIHA Five Star rated building, have been done.

Also, a building simulation of the Research and Training Centre for Sustainable
Development, Ranchi, a self designed hypothetical building, has been done
using both the rating systems independently.

The studies have been used to better understand the individual rating systems
better and also to analyze as to which of the two methods would be more suitable
for the proposed building design.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 5

2.2 Flowchart
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 6

CHAPTER 3

BUILDING ENERGY RATING SYSTEMS

3.1 Different parameters taken up by energy rating systems

3.1.1 Intent
The weightage given to any criterion has certain relationship with the
climatic conditions and practices observed in the region. It also
stems out of certain concerns of global nature. How and why the
amount of weightage has been given to any point needs to be
understood.

3.1.2 Performance requirements

a. Includes detail specifications of types of materials (physical

properties like U-factor, R-value, etc.)
b. Efficient equipments (cooling, heating and lighting)
c. Design parameters such as orientation, shading devices, façade
glazing ratios, thermal mass etc.

3.1.3 Prescriptive requirements

Further elaborate quantitatively/qualitatively on the

recommendations made under the performance requirements
section by specifying the current maximum/minimum requirements

3.1.4 Reference

a. National codes/standards
b. local code/standard
c. In case of absence of a local code/standard a relevant
international
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 7

d. Code/standard are referred.

3.1.5 Specific requirements

3.2 Examples of some of these systems across countries

Many countries have developed their own standards for green building or
energy efficiency for buildings. Some of the major building environmental
assessment tools currently in use include:1

  Australia: Nabers  / Green Star

  Brazil: AQUA  / LEED Brasil

  Canada: LEED Canada  / Green Globes 

  China: GBAS 

  Finland: PromisE 

  France: HQE 

  Germany: DGNB  / CEPHEUS 

  Hong Kong: HKBEAM 

  India: Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) / GRIHA 

  Italy: Protocollo Itaca  / Green Building Counsil Italia 

  Japan: CASBEE 

  Korea: KGBC 

  Malaysia: GBI Malaysia 

  Mexico: LEED Mexico 

  Netherlands: BREEAM Netherlands 

1
wiki/Green building
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 8

  New Zealand: Green Star NZ 

  Philippines: BERDE  / Philippine Green Building Council 

  Portugal: Lider A 

  Republic of China(Taiwan):Green Building Label

  Singapore: Green Mark 

  South Africa: Green Star SA 

  Spain: VERDE

  Switzerland: Minergie 

  United States: LEED  / Living Building Challenge  / Green Globes  /

Build it Green  / NAHB NGBS  / International Green Construction Code
International Green Construction Code (IGCC)

  United Kingdom: BREEAM 

  United Arab Emirates: Estidama 

  IAPGSA Pakistan Institute of Architecture Pakistan Green

Sustainable Architecture

3.3 What are the prevailing systems in India and who are
involved?

In a scenario where India tries to accelerate its development process and

cope with increasing energy demands, conservation and energy efficiency
measures are to play a central role in our energy policy. A national
movement for energy conservation can significantly reduce the need for
fresh investment in energy supply systems in coming years. Energy
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 9

conservation is an objective to which all the citizen in the country can

contribute for his own benefit, as well as that of the nation.

3.3.1 IGBC LEED (Indian Green Building Council Leadership in

Energy and Environmental Design) India rating system
 Indian Green Building Council
 Indigenized version of USGBC LEED (United States Green
Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design)
 Refers local standards / norms
 Global outreach

3.3.2 GRIHA (Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment)

 National Rating System of India.
 Conceived by TERI and developed jointly with The Ministry of
New and Renewable Energy, Government of India. 

3.3.3 Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) 2007

 Developed by India’s Bureau of Energy Efficiency,
 Guidance from United States Agency for International
Development (USAID)
 Significant inputs from various other stakeholders such as
practicing architects, consultants, educational institutions and
other government organizations.

3.3.4 National Building Codes (NBC) guidelines for :

 Erosion & sedimentation control
 Rain water harvesting
 Safety for workmen during construction, etc.,
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 10

3.3.5 MoEF guidelines

 To help the project proponents to work out an EIA.

 Guidelines to bring out specific information on the

environment required for environmental clearance.
 The agencies, which are primarily responsible for the
respective sectors are closely involved in preparing the
guidelines

3.3.6 Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun

 Endangered species

3.3.7 Environmental Information System (ENVIS)

 Wetlands preservation

3.3.8 Wherever local codes / standards available – Global

standards / codes considered
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 11

CHAPTER 4

4.1 SALIENT POINTS COVERED BY SYSTEMS ACROSS THE

WORLD

4.1.1 LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design);

United States, Canada

LEED is a voluntary certification program that can be applied to any building type and any
building lifecycle phase. It promotes a whole-building approach to sustainability by
recognizing performance in key areas:2

Sustainable Sites
Choosing a building's site and managing that site during construction are
important considerations for a project’s sustainability. The Sustainable Sites
category discourages development on previously undeveloped land; minimizes a
building's impact on ecosystems and waterways; encourages regionally
appropriate landscaping; rewards smart transportation choices; controls storm
water runoff; and reduces erosion, light pollution, heat island effect and
construction-related pollution.

Water Efficiency 
Buildings are major users of our potable water supply. The goal of the Water
Efficiency credit category is to encourage smarter use of water, inside and out.
Water reduction is typically achieved through more efficient appliances, fixtures
and fittings inside and water-wise landscaping outside.

Energy & Atmosphere 

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, buildings use 39% of the energy
and 74% of the electricity produced each year in the United States. The Energy
& Atmosphere category encourages a wide variety of energy strategies:
commissioning; energy use monitoring; efficient design and construction;
efficient appliances, systems and lighting; the use of renewable and clean
sources of energy, generated on-site or off-site; and other innovative strategies.

Materials & Resources

During both the construction and operations phases, buildings generate a lot of
waste and use a lot of materials and resources. This credit category encourages
the selection of sustainably grown, harvested, produced and transported products
and materials. It promotes the reduction of waste as well as reuse and recycling,
and it takes into account the reduction of waste at a product’s source.

2
www.usgbc.org
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 12

Indoor Environmental Quality 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that Americans spend
about 90% of their day indoors, where the air quality can be significantly worse
than outside. The Indoor Environmental Quality credit category promotes
strategies that can improve indoor air as well as providing access to natural
daylight and views and improving acoustics.

Locations & Linkages

The LEED for Homes rating system recognizes that much of a home's impact on
the environment comes from where it is located and how it fits into its
community. The Locations & Linkages credits encourage homes being built
away from environmentally sensitive places and instead being built in infill,
previously developed and other preferable sites. It rewards homes that are built
near already-existing infrastructure, community resources and transit, and it
encourages access to open space for walking, physical activity and time spent
outdoors.

Awareness & Education

The LEED for Homes rating system acknowledges that a green home is only
truly green if the people who live in it use the green features to maximum effect.
The Awareness & Education credits encourage home builders and real estate
professionals to provide homeowners, tenants and building managers with the
education and tools they need to understand what makes their home green and
how to make the most of those features.

Innovation in Design
The Innovation in Design credit category provides bonus points for projects that
use new and innovative technologies and strategies to improve a building’s
performance well beyond what is required by other LEED credits or in green
building considerations that are not specifically addressed elsewhere in LEED.
This credit category also rewards projects for including a LEED Accredited
Professional on the team to ensure a holistic, integrated approach to the design
and construction phase.

Regional Priority
USGBC’s regional councils, chapters and affiliates have identified the
environmental concerns that are locally most important for every region of the
country, and six LEED credits that address those local priorities were selected
for each region. A project that earns a regional priority credit will earn one
bonus point in addition to any points awarded for that credit. Up to four extra
points can be earned in this way.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 13

4.1.2 BREEAM (BRE Environmental Assessment Method)

United Kingdom, Netherlands

• Energy: Operational energy and carbon dioxide

• Management: Management policy, commissioning, site management

and procurement

• Health and Well-Being: Indoor and external issues, such as noise, light
and air quality

• Transport: Transport-related carbon dioxide and location-related factors

• Water: Water consumption and efficiency inside and outside the

structure

• Materials: Impacts of building materials, including lifecycle impacts on

carbon dioxide

• Waste: Construction resource efficiency and operational waste

management and minimization

• Land Use: Type of site and building footprint

• Pollution: External air and water pollution

• Ecology: Ecological value, conservation and enhancement of the

building site 3

4.1.3 CASBEE (Comprehensive Assessment System for Building

Environmental Efficiency), Japan

3
http://www.colliers-sustainability.com/resources-information/breeam/
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 14

Figure 1.Definition of Q and L through the hypothetical boundary

Within the Q and L values, buildings are evaluated for the following:

• Q1: Indoor Environment

• Q2: Quality of Service and
• Q3: Outdoor Environment on Site

• L1: Energy
• L2: Resources and Materials and
• L3: Offsite Environment
4

4.1.4 DGNB Certification System

Germany

The German Sustainable Building Council—which is recognized as an official

member of the Green Building Council network—launched Europe’s newest green
building rating system in 2008.
4
http://www.colliers-sustainability.com/resources-information/casbee/
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 15

The German Sustainable Building Certificate has many similar themes as the
more well-known LEED, BREEAM and Green Start systems, but places more
emphasis on Life Cycle Analysis of materials and costs, and it treats the building
location in a different manor.

The system awards points in six topics:

• Ecological Quality,
• Economical Quality,
• Socio-cultural and Functional Quality,
• Technical Quality, and
• Quality of the Process.
The Location Quality is considered separately, but does not contribute to the
overall grade of the building.

Source: www.dgnb.de

Each of the 51 credit categories is given a ‘degree of compliance’ as shown in the

image below.  One through 10 points are given in each of these categories, but
then the category is given a weighting of 1 to 3 in order to account for differences
in importance of each credit to the over sustainability of the building.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 16

Source: www.dgnb.de

Since the launch of the German Green Building Rating System, the German
Sustainable Building Council has developed rating systems for:

New Construction

• Office and Administrative Buildings

• Retail
• Residential (Multifamily Residential Buildings with more than ten
apartments)
• Industrial
• Institutional

Existing Building

 Office and Administrative Buildings

Since October 2010 the German GBRS is available for international projects. The
German SBC achieved that first, through expanding its network of international
partner organizations, and thus adapting its certification system to fit the building
practices and statutory frameworks of the countries involved. Second, the DGNB
is preparing an international certification system for all of the countries which are
not yet represented in the network. This system will bebased on current European
standards and building regulations and will include the necessary European data
sets for preparing life cycle assessments.5

5
http://www.colliers-sustainability.com/resources-information/dgnb/
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 17

4.2 SALIENT POINTS COVERED BY SYSTEMS ACROSS

INDIA

4.2.1 IGBC LEED (Indian Green Building Council Leadership in

Energy and Environmental Design) India rating system

 LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) is one of the world’s

most popular rating systems that first originated in US. It has now been
adopted by many countries like India and Canada, with the necessary
modifications to suit the country’s climate.

 LEED-INDIA promotes a whole-building approach to sustainability by

recognizing performance in the following five key areas:

• Sustainable site development

• Water savings

• Energy efficiency

• Materials selection and

• Indoor environmental quality

 It also pays due credit to innovative design solutions.

The different criterions taken up by IGBC LEED are as follows:

4.2.1.1 Sustainable Sites

• Prerequisite 1 Erosion & Sedimentation Control

• Credit 1 Site Selection
• Credit 2 Development Density
• Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment
• Credit 4 Alternative Transportation
• Credit 5 Reduced Site Disturbance
• Credit 6 Stormwater Management
• Credit 7 Heat Island Effect
• Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 18

4.2.1.2 Water Efficiency

• Credit 1 Water Efficient Landscaping

• Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies
• Credit 3 Water Use Reduction

4.2.1.3 Energy & Atmosphere

• Prerequisite 1 Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning

• Prerequisite 2 Minimum Energy Performance
• Prerequisite 3 CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment
• Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance
• Credit 2 Renewable Energy
• Credit 3 Additional Commissioning
• Credit 4 Ozone Depletion
• Credit 5 Measurement & Verification
• Credit 6 Green Power

4.2.1.4 Materials & Resources

• Prerequisite 1 Storage & Collection of Recyclables

• Credit 1 Building Reuse
• Credit 2 Construction Waste Management
• Credit 3 Resource Reuse
• Credit 4 Recycled Content
• Credit 5 Local/Regional Materials
• Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials
• Credit 7 Certified Wood

4.2.1.5 Indoor Environmental Quality

• Prerequisite 1 Minimum IAQ Performance

• Prerequisite 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control
• Credit 1 Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) Monitoring
• Credit 2 Ventilation Effectiveness
• Credit 3 Construction IAQ Management Plan
• Credit 4 Low-Emitting Materials
• Credit 5 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control
• Credit 6 Controllability of Systems
• Credit 7 Thermal Comfort
• Credit 8 Daylight & Views

4.2.1.6 Innovation & Design Process

• Credit 1 Innovation in Design

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 19

• Credit 2 LEED Accredited Professional

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 20

4.2.2 GRIHA

The criteria have been categorized as follows.

4.2.2.1 Site Selection and Site Planning

Conservation and efficient utilization of resource

Objective – To maximize the conservation and utilization of resources (land,

water, natural habitat, avi fauna, and energy conservation) and enhance
efficiency of the systems and operations.

Criterion 1: Site Selection 

Criterion 2: Preserve and protect the landscape during
construction/compensatory depository forestation.
Criterion 3: Soil conservation (till post-construction). 
Criterion 4: Design to include existing site features.
Criterion 5: Reduce hard paving on-site and /or provide shaded hard - paved
surfaces. 
Criterion 6: Enhance outdoor lighting system efficiency. 
Criterion 7: Plan utilities efficiently and optimize on-site circulation efficiency 

Health and well being during construction 

Objective –To protect the health of construction workers and prevent pollution.

Criterion 8: Provide at least, the minimum level of sanitation/safety facilities for

construction workers.

4.2.2.2 Building Planning and Construction Stage

Objective – To maximize resource (water, energy, and materials) conservation

and enhance efficiency of the system and operations.

Water

Criterion 10: Reduce landscape water requirement. 

Criterion 11: Reduce building water use. 
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 21

Criterion 12: Efficient water use during construction. 

Energy: end use

Criterion 13: Optimize building design to reduce the conventional energy

demand. 
Criterion 14: Optimize the energy performance of the building within specified
comfort limits. 

Energy: embodied and construction

Criterion 15: Utilization of fly ash in the building structure. 

Criterion 16: Reduce volume, weight, and time of construction by adopting an
efficient technology (e.g. pre-cast systems, ready-mix concrete, etc.). 
Criterion 17: Use low-energy material in the interiors. 

Energy: renewable

Criterion 18: Renewable energy utilization. 

Criterion 19: Renewable energy - based hot- water system. 

Recycle, recharge, and reuse of water

Objective– To promote the recycle and reuse of water.

Criterion 20: Wastewater treatment 

Criterion 21: Water recycle and reuse (including rainwater).

Waste management

Objective –To minimize waste generation, streamline waste segregation,

storage, and disposal, and promote resource recovery from waste.

Criterion 22: Reduction in waste during construction. 

Criterion 23: Efficient waste segregation. 

Criterion 24: Storage and disposal of waste. 

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 22

Criterion 25: Resource recovery from waste.

Health and well-being during post-construction occupation

Objective –To ensure healthy indoor air quality, water quality, and noise levels,
and reduce the global warming potential.

Criterion 26: Use of low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paints/ adhesives /

sealants.
Criterion 27: Minimize ozone – depleting substances 
Criterion 28: Ensure water quality. 
Criterion 29: Acceptable outdoor and indoor noise levels.
Criterion 30: Tobacco and smoke control.
Criterion 31: Provide the minimum level of accessibility for persons with
disabilities.

4.2.2.3 Building Operation and Maintenance

Objective – Validate and maintain ‘green’ performance levels/adopt and

propagate green practices and concepts.

Criterion 32: Energy audit and validation. 

Criterion 33: Building operation and maintenance.

4.2.2.4 Innovation

Criterion 34:  Innovation points. 

 Environmental education
 Company policy on green supply chain
 Lifecycle cost analysis
 Enhanced accessibility for physically/mentally challenged.
 Any other criteria proposed by the client
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 23

4.2.3 ECBC (Energy Conservation Building Codes)

• Recognizing the fact that efficient use of energy and its conservation is the
least-cost option to mitigate the gap between demand and supply,
Government of India has enacted the Energy Conservation Act – 2001
and established Bureau of Energy Efficiency.

• The EC Act provides for institutionalizing and strengthening delivery

mechanism for energy efficiency services in the country and provides the
much-needed coordination between the various entities.

4.2.3.1 Important features of Energy Conservation Act include:

4.2.3.1. a) Standards and Labelling

• Evolve minimum energy consumption standards for notified equipment and

appliances.

• Prohibit manufacture, sale and import of equipment and appliances not

confirming to standards.

• Introduce mandatory labelling to enable consumers to make informed

choice.

4.2.3.1. b) Designated Consumers

• Schedule to EC Act provides list of 15 energy intensive industries and other

establishments to be notified as designated consumers (DC). DCs to
appoint or designate energy managers.

• Get energy audits conducted by accredited energy auditors and Implement

techno-economic viable recommendations.

• Comply with norms of specific energy consumption fixed, and

• Submit report on steps taken

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 24

4.2.3.1. c) Energy Conservation Building Codes™

• Central Government to prepare guidelines on ECBC

• To be modified by States to suit local climatic conditions

• To be applicable to new buildings having connected load of 500 kW or

more

4.3.2.2 Scope of ECBC:

• Building envelope
• Mechanical systems
• Service water heating
• Interior and exterior lighting
• Electrical power and motors

4.3.2.3 The ECBC provides design norms for:

• Building envelope, including thermal performance requirements

for walls, roofs, and windows;
• Lighting system, including day lighting, and lamps and luminaire
performance requirements;

• HVAC system, including energy performance of chillers and air

distribution systems;

• Electrical system; and

• Water heating and pumping systems, including requirements for

solar hot-water systems.

4.2.3.4 The code provides three options for compliance:

• Compliance with the performance requirements for each subsystem

and system;

• Compliance with the performance requirements of each system, but

with tradeoffs between subsystems; and

• Building-level performance compliance.

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 25

CHAPTER 5

5.1 LITERATURE STUDY

5.1.1 CII HYDERABAD

CII is internationally renowned building designed using the principles of

Green Buildings and is India’s premier developmental institution, offering
advisory services to the industry on environmental aspects and working in
the areas of Green Buildings, Energy Efficiency, Water Management,
Environment Management, Renewable Energy, Green Business Incubation
and Climate Change activities.6

6
Cii.htm
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 26

Fig-5.1.1 CII –Godrej Green Building Center, Hyderabad

“… Grover has dispelled any notion that aesthetics must be sacrificed

in the effort to make buildings “green.”

Table-5.1.1 Project Details

The centre, through various exhibits and working models, demonstrates

how various green products and environment friendly technologies can be
implemented in industry and building applications.

Below mentioned are some of the CII FACTS compared to normal buildings
that make the green features of CII stand out.

 35% reduction in potable water use.

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 27

 50% savings in overall energy consumption.7

 88% reduction in lighting consumption.

 80% of materials used are either recycled or recyclable.

 20% of the building’s energy requirement is provided by

photovoltaics.

 15-20% less load on AC crediting to aerated concrete blocks used in

facades.

 It’s a Zero water discharge building.

 90% of building daylight.

 75% of occupants have outside view.

 The documented reduction of harmful emissions achieved by the

design, sitting, and construction of the building is 62%for carbon
monoxide, and 63% for hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.

 A large amount of energy- and pollution- was reduced in the

production and transportation of building materials through sourcing
them locally.

Surroundings

 The building was designed to have minimum disturbance to the

surrounding ecological environment.

 This has preserved the majority of the existing flora and fauna and
natural micro – biological organism around the building.

 Extensive erosion and sedimentation control measures to prevent

topsoil erosion have all been taken at the site during construction.

 30% of users exercise alternative modes of transportation: carpools,

bicycles, and cars that run on liquefied petroleum gas, a low-
polluting alternative to conventional gasoline and diesel.
7
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 28

Green Features incorporated in CII Building Project

 Bio-climatic Architecture

 Minimize damage during construction (cost efficiency)

 Occupancy to the natural elements of water flow, air quality,

vegetation, and topography.

 The built form responds to the rocky site.

 The footprint is kept small, and the arrangement of spaces and the
varying levels of the plinth were designed to respect the distinctive
boulders.

 Fenestration maximized on the north orientation

 South side sun glare cut down using Argon glass

 Rain water harvesting

 Large vegetative open spaces

 Swales for storm water collection

 Shaded car park

 Facility for charging electric automobiles and electric pool car facility
for building occupants

 Site location close to bus and rail lines

 Open space in the site exceed the local requirements by more than
25%

 All paved parking & pathways constructed with pervious materials

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 29

Fig-5.1.2-courtyard planning Fig-5.1.3 waste water treatment

Fig-5.1.4 day lighting Fig-5.1.5 views

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 30

5.1.2 Suzlon One Earth                                                

Suzlon Energy Limited

 Suzlon One Earth is Suzlon group global headquarter based at Pune,

India.

 The project has received provisional Five Star Rating under GRIHA
green building rating system.

 Suzlon One Earth is a minimal ecological foot print project keeping with
the spirit of company's mission – 'Powering a Green Tomorrow'.

 The Suzlon campus consists of an office space and Global Learning

Academy.

 It is spread across the site area of 42,500 sq.mts.

 The total built up area is 75,825 sq.mts.

 There are various salient features which enable it to become an iconic

green building.

 Passive design strategies help in ensuring that visual and thermal

comfort is maintained within the building with minimum interventions of
technologies.

 The orientation of blocks is such that the majority of building façades

face North, South, North-West and South-East. This enables adequate
day lighting and glare control.

 Glazing on the first and second floors has been shaded from direct solar
radiation using louvers.

 These also act as important design elements of the building and give it
a visual identity.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 31

 Architectural design of the office block is such that extrusions on various

floors shade portions of the building. Therefore, the building is partly
self-shaded.

 In order to cater to functional interior office atmosphere, break out

spaces have been created in the form of terraces and pavilions which
have been interspersed within building profile.

Fig-5.2.1 suzlon campus

Fig-5.2.2 suzlon campus

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 32

 The HVAC scheme is designed innovatively combining various energy

efficient components like pre-cooling of fresh air, heat recovery/
exchanger mechanisms to minimize the overall energy consumption.

 In totality, Suzlon One Earth with its innovative and integrated design
solutions has managed to reduce its energy consumption 56.5 below
the benchmarked energy consumption by GRIHA.

 The renewable energy systems in the form of BIPV, solar PV and wind
mills are installed to generate approximately 2, 50,000 units of electricity
through renewable sources on an annual basis.

 The project has installed 13.44 kW of BIPV, 55.89 KW capacity of solar

PV and 18 wind mills with power capacity of 4.75 kW each.

 Apart from this, the project has incorporated smart solutions in order to
reduce its water consumption with the help of low-flow fixtures, sensor
based urinals and pressure reducing devices throughout the campus
which ensures that the building requires

 50.34% less potable water than the conventional building requirements.

 In addition, water efficient landscape design that uses higher ratio of

native and naturalized trees, shrubs and ground covers along with high
efficiency sprinkler and drip irrigation systems, reduces the landscape
water requirement by about 50%.

 About 60% of the water in the building is recycled and reused within the
campus.

 The intent of making a green building is also reflected in various

materials used in the structural systems and in the interiors.

 Majority of the materials used for the interiors application have high
recycled content and are low embodied energy materials.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 33

 Overall, Suzlon One Earth has set very high standards for energy and
water management which is reflected in their projected energy and
water savings.

 The Suzlon One Earth campus has taken effective steps to minimize its
environmental impact at various levels while simultaneously projecting a
very contemporary feel to the buildings and spaces, thereby providing
stimulus to the concept that green buildings can be as aesthetically
pleasing and functional as any conventional building and yet can have
minimal negative impact on the environment

 With defined functional need and clear design intent supported with
adequate architectural vocabulary, the interior integrates the user needs
and enhanced productivity with optimized day light harvesting.

 The design takes complete care of the ergonomics, visual connect to

outdoors and optimal usage of space with assigned tasks, shared and
break out zones.

 Landscape is an integral part of the design, complementing the

architecture and functional aspects of the place.

 The landscape incorporates the principles of Xeriscape with efficient

water management systems, use of higher ration of native and
naturalized plant species to sustain and enhance local ecology.

 High efficiency mechanical systems integrated with the efficient building

envelope ensure that the energy consumption of the building is
significantly reduced.

 All the work stations are equipped with task lighting which is governed
by motion sensors turning them on when occupied.

 In addition, all the common areas like parking, washrooms, closed

offices; meeting rooms also employ the same system. This reduces the
lighting load to 0.8 watt/sq.ft.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 34

5.2Rating A Stimulated Corporate Building Campus,

Independently, Using the IGBC LEED And GRIHA Rating
Systems

Centre for sustainable research and training, Ranchi, a hypothetical corporate

building campus, has been taken up and rated using both; the IGBC LEED as well
as GRIHA, independently.

The following assumptions have been made:

• Only the architectural requirements have been dealt with elaborately.

• There is no constraint for budget.

• The required technologies have been made available.

• All the commissioning and auditing have been done according to the
guidelines provided.

• The mechanical and structural requirements have been fulfilled.

This evaluation has been made in order to have a better understanding of

how either of the rating systems work. Also, this study would clearly chalk
out the scope of work for an architect in order to achieve a certain rating for
any building campus.

This comparison would further be used to supplement the conclusion drawn

as to which rating system is more viable for the corporate sector buildings
in the Indian context.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 35
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 36

CHAPTER 6

6.0 Comparative Analysis of IGBC LEED, GRIHA, ECBC, under the

Following Heads:

 Sustainable site selection

 Site planning

 Water efficiency

 Energy performance :

• Renewable energy use

• Green power use

 Environmental consciousness :

• CFC reduction

 Material use -

• Embodied energy

• Vernacular materials

 Resource use

• Recycle and reuse

• Construction waste management

 Technologies :

 Indoor environmental quality:

• Thermal

• Day lighting
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 37

• Views

• Pollutant source control

 Innovation in design

Domains for comparative analysis:

• Relevance with Indian climatic conditions

• Attributes impacting the environment covered by the system

• Indoor environmental quality

• Cost effectiveness

• Incentives for widespread appeal among the construction industry

• Scope for innovations

• Miscellaneous merits and demerits of any given system

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 38

SITE SELECTION
AND SITE
PLANNING
BUILDING
PLANNING AND
CONSTRUCTION
BUILDING
OPERATION AND
MAINTAINANCE
INNOVATION

GRIHA Certification: Detail of Point Distribution 8

8
http://www.colliers-sustainability.com/resources-informatio/
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 39

CHAPTER 7

7.0 Conclusions and Future Scope

• Both IGBC LEED and GRIHA building energy rating systems have their own
set of evaluation strategies ,that, independently are comprehensive and well-
drawn.

• Adopting one rating system over the other cannot be generalized as either
can perform better in a ‘case – specific’ scenario.

7.1 Salient points observed for GRIHA :

• Endorsed by the MNRE.

• Incentives to the buildings for complying.

• Easy to understand, concise.

• More weightage given to elimination of air-conditioning requirements,

therefore, more suitable for the public sector, where traditional
techniques are more appreciated and welcome.

• Specific building materials like use of Fly-ash in the building

construction emphasized. Comparatively less stress on use of
innovative materials.

• Generalized keeping in mind even the small city construction works.

7.2 Salient points observed for IGBC LEED :

• More popular internationally.

• More exposure to International systems and research, as it is an Indian

version of USGBC.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 40

• More lucrative option for the corporate sector with International funding.

• Essentially a big city phenomenon because it has many points

reserved for reusing the pre-existing building, if any.

7.3 Reasons for adopting IGBC LEED over GRIHA for the proposed building:

• IGBC LEED has higher International exposure, making it more

acceptable to Multinational Companies who are prime buyers/
investors of such properties.

• The proposed building necessarily needs to be air-conditioned,

confirming to its landmark stature in the Corporate world. LEED
provides more specific and elaborate guidelines on efficient utilization
of the HVAC system, in contrast to GRIHA, which prophesizes
eliminating HVAC altogether.

• GRIHA has been endorsed by the MNRE as the National Rating

System , under which, any public building registered for GRIHA
certification would be eligible for certain subsidies and incentives like
reimbursement of registration fees and cash incentive for their
architects and consultants, financial support for Solar PV cell
installation, etc.

These subsidies are very much welcome in the public sector buildings, where
budget for construction work is limited.

For corporate sector buildings of a landmark stature, finance is not a problem and
glamour is the watchword.
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 41

LIST OF REFERENCES

References

• LEED_RS_V2-1

• LEED INDIA CS GUIDE

• LEED INDIA NC- REFERENCE GUIDE (Version 1.0) January 2007

• GRIHA Manual Volume I, TERI

• Energy Conservation Building Code (2006), Bureau of Energy Efficiency ,

draft

E-references

• Environmental Building News (Jan. 2000).” What makes a Product Green?”.

Available online: http://wwwepa.gov/greenproducts/publications/waste/greengas.pdf

• Cement and Concrete: Environmental Considerations.( March 1993) Available

online: http://www.buildinggreen.com/features/svw/steel_vs_wood.html

• - Concrete, Fly ash, and the Environment. (Dec.1998) ) Available online:

http://www.buildinggreen.com/features/cem/cementconc.html

Bye-laws

• National Building Codes

 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GREEN BUILDING RATING
SYSTEMS AND CODES | 42

APPENDICES

Annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE): an efficiency description of the ratio of annual
output energy to annual input energy as developed in accordance with requirements of U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) 10CFR Part 430

Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): the ratio of net cooling capacity in Btu/h to total rate of
electric input in watts under designated operating conditions

Energy Factor (EF): a measure of water heater overall efficiency

Envelope performance factor: the trade-off value for the building envelope performance
compliance option calculated using the procedures specified in Appendix 13. For the purposes
of determining building envelope requirements the classifications are defined as follows:
(a) Base envelope performance factor: the building envelope performance factor for the
base design
(b) Proposed envelope performance factor: the building envelope performance factor for
the proposed design

Lighting Efficacy (LE): the quotient of the total lumens emitted from a lamp or
lamp/ballast combination divided by the watts of input power, expressed in lumens per watt.

Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC): the ratio of the solar heat gain entering the space
through the fenestration area to the incident solar radiation. Solar heat gain includes directly
transmitted solar heat and absorbed solar radiation, which is then reradiated, conducted, or
convected into the space.

Space: an enclosed space within a building. The classifications of spaces are as follows for
the purpose of determining building envelope requirements.
(a) Conditioned space: a cooled space, heated space, or directly conditioned space.
(b) Semi-heated space: an enclosed space within a building that is heated by a heating
system whose output capacity is greater or equal to 10.7 W/m 2 (3.4 Btu/h-ft2) of floor
area but is not a conditioned space.
(c) An enclosed space within a building that is not conditioned space or a semi-heated
space. Crawlspaces, attics, and parking garages with natural or mechanical
ventilation are not considered enclosed spaces.

U-factor (Thermal Transmittance): heat transmission in unit time through unit area of a
material or construction and the boundary air films, induced by unit temperature difference
between the environments on each side. Units of U are W/m2-oC (Btu/h-ft2-°F).

Variable Air Volume (VAV) system: HVAC system that controls the dry-bulb temperature
within a space by varying the volumetric flow of heated or cooled supply air to the space 9

9
Energy Conservation Building Code 2006
 i
ABSTRACT

Today even the most advanced building or factory in the world is still a kind of
steamship, polluting, contaminating, and depleting the surrounding environment, and
relying on scarce amounts of natural light and fresh air.
As a strong component of the sustainability initiative in buildings, energy use is
rightfully taking its place as a leading metric in evaluating a building’s performance. A
number of Green building rating systems and codes are coming up which is intended to
provide an objective comparison of energy use between buildings.
Different parts of the world have different standards set according to the conditions
prevailing there. Ex- LEED in United States, GRIHA in India, MINERGIE in Switzerland
etc.

However, the architects, planners, developers and all those involved in the
construction business now face the dilemma of which rating system or code, or any
independent technique to use for the design and construction of a sustainable building.
For the purpose of finding a generalized solution to this universal dilemma, a
comparative analysis of the prevailing green building rating systems and codes in India
has been done. Parameters for comparison have been derived by narrowing down the
most popular rating criterions used all over the world. The study has been done especially
for the corporate sector landmark buildings in the mega-cities.

The study reveals that, both IGBC LEED and GRIHA building energy rating
systems have their own set of evaluation strategies, that, independently are
comprehensive and well-drawn. Adopting one rating system over the other cannot be
generalized as either can perform better in a ‘case – specific’ scenario.

IGBC LEED can be a more suitable for the proposed ‘Center of Excellence for
Sustainable Development’ as it gives more weightage to Indoor Environmental Quality and
has more scope for innovation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This dissertation report is a culmination of my learning experience that has enriched me in
the last four years. I take this opportunity to thank all those who helped me at all points
during the journey.

First of all, I would like to thank our Head of the Department, Dr. Manjari Chakroborty for
her valuable comment at all stages. I would like to thank our dissertation guide Prof.
Parama Mitra for prodding us throughout the semester to come up with a good and original
work.

I would also like to extend my thanks to Dr.N.R.Mandal, who gave me his invaluable
advice throughout the process and helped me channelize my analysis in the right direction.

A word of thanks to all the faculty members who shaped me in their different ways over the
last four years.

I would like to thanks all my friends and family members who helped me in their own
different ways, without which this dissertation would have been incomplete.

Thank you all!

Mitul KumariBARC 1005/07

Abstract

Acknowledgements

CONTENTS

Chapter 1
1.0Introduction
1.1 Aim of StudyObjectives, Scope and Limitation1.3Growing
importance of energy modeling1.4Reason why energy rating systems
are becoming popular
Chapter 2
2.0Methodology
2.1Description2.2Flowchart
Chapter 3
3.0Building energy rating systems
3.1Different parameters taken up by energy rating systems3.2Examples
of some of these systems across countries
3.3Examples of systems used in India

Chapter 4
4.0Guidelines prescribed by commonly used rating
systems4.1Salient points covered by systems across the world4.1.1
(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), LEED4.1.2(BRE

Environmental Assessment Method), BREEAM4.1.3(Comprehensive

Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency),
CASBEE4.1.4DGNB4.2Salient points covered by systems in
India4.2.1IGBC LEED4.2.2GRIHA4.2.3(Energy conservation building
codes), ECBC
Chapter 5
5.0Literature study and building stimulation 5.1Literature study5.1.1 CII,
Hyderabad5.1.2 RETREAT, Gurgaon5.2Rating a stimulated corporate

building campus, independently, using the IGBC LEED and GRIHA

rating system
Chapter 6
6.0Comparative analysis of IGBC LEED, GRIHA, ECBC, vernacular
practices
Chapter 7
7.0Conclusion and future scope
List of tables

List of illustrations

List of symbols and abbreviations