Ashrae Green Guide

Complete Guidance on
ASHRAE GreenGuide
ASHRAE GreenGuide
Green Building from
Planning to Operation Design, Construction, and Operation
of Sustainable Buildings
For green-building and sustainable-design professionals, ASHRAE
GreenGuide is a valuable reference for both experienced practitioners Fifth Edition
as well as those new to the field and industry. Reviewed and written by
experts with real-world experience in the industry, this guide provides
information on design that can be the key to successful projects. Primarily
for HVAC&R designers, ASHRAE GreenGuide is also a useful reference for
architects, owners, building managers, operators, contractors, and others
in the building industry who want to understand high-performance design
from an integrated building systems perspective.
GreenTips found throughout this edition highlight techniques, processes,
measures, or special systems in a concise, understandable format. Building-
Type GreenTips, now included in their own chapter, provide insight and
advice on sustainable design and operation practices for key facility types
with specific needs, such as data centers. Guidance is provided in dual
units—Inch-Pound (I-P) and International System (SI)—so that the content is
easily applicable worldwide. Each chapter also includes a valuable list of
references and additional resources. This edition includes:
• Four entirely new chapters on
▪▪ Green building for existing buildings
▪▪ Green design for residential structures
▪▪ Emerging trends in the green building industry
▪▪ Building-type GreenTips
• Completely rewritten chapter on smart building systems
• GreenTips and Digging Deeper sidebars for detailed, practical
examples
• Enhanced and updated discussion
Fifth Edition
978-1-939200-80-8 (hardcover)
978-1-939200-81-5 (PDF)
1791 Tullie Circle

Atlanta, GA 30329-2305 ● Comprehensive guidance on sustainable buildings
404.636.8400 (worldwide) 9 781939 200808 ● Major revisions to all chapters
www.ashrae.org Product code: 90326 1/18 ● GreenTips with detailed insights for design and operation
Green Guide Cover - 5th Ed_2017.indd 1 12/5/2017 11:26:54 AM

ASHRAE GreenGuide
Design, Construction,
and Operation
This publication was developed under the auspices of ASHRAE Technical Committee
(TC) 2.8, Building Environmental Impacts and Sustainability. TC 2.8 is concerned with the
impacts of buildings on the local, regional, and global environment; means for identify-
ing and reducing these impacts; and enhancing ASHRAE member awareness of the
impacts.
Tom Lawrence, PhD, PE, LEED AP, is the chair of the editorial revision committee
and coeditor of ASHRAE GreenGuide, Fifth Edition. He is a senior public service
associate with the University of Georgia and has more than 35 years of experi-
ence in engineering and related technical fields. He is a past chair of ASHRAE
Technical Committee (TC) 2.8 and is a member of the committee that wrote
and maintains ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design
of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Law-
rence is an ASHRAE Fellow and Director at Large for 2016-2019. As an ASHRAE
Distinguished Lecturer, he gives seminars and workshops on high-performance
building design at venues around the world.
Abdel K. Darwich, PE, CEng, LEED AP, HFDP, is a coeditor of ASHRAE Green
Guide, Fifth Edition. He is an associate principal with Guttmann and Blaevoet
Consulting Engineers in their Sacramento, CA, office. Darwich has more than 20
years of experience in the design of mechanical systems for health care, com-
mercial, industrial, higher education, and mixed-use projects, with emphasis on
low/zero-energy design and indoor air quality. He is a member of ASHRAE TC 2.8
and Standing Standard Project Committee 62.1, an ASHRAE-certified Healthcare
Facility Design Professional, and a recipient of two ASHRAE Technology Awards
(2013 and 2016) and an ASHRAE Distinguished Service Award (2017).
Janice K. Means, PE, LEED AP, FESD is the third coeditor of ASHRAE GreenGuide,
Fifth Edition. She is an associate professor in the College of Architecture and
Design at Lawrence Technological University in Southfield, MI. Means has more
than 30 years of experience in the industry. She is a trained presenter for ANSI/
ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-2001 and -2004; a voting member of the ASHRAE Student
Activities Committee, Guideline Project Committee (GPC) 34, and TC 6.7; a for-
mer voting member of TC 2.8; Region V Student Activities Regional Vice Chair
and a contributing author to Chapter 36 of the 2008 ASHRAE Handbook—HVAC
Systems and Equipment and the new ASHRAE Guideline 34P, Energy Efficiency
for Historic Buildings.
ASHRAE STAFF
SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS
Mark S. Owen, Editor/Group Manager of Handbook and Special Publications
Cindy Sheffield Michaels, Managing Editor
James Madison Walker, Managing Editor of Standards
Lauren Ramsdell, Assistant Editor
Mary Bolton, Editorial Assistant
Michshell Phillips, Editorial Coordinator
PUBLISHING SERVICES
David Soltis, Group Manager of Publishing Services and Electronic Communications
Jayne Jackson, Publication Traffic Administrator
PUBLISHER
W. Stephen Comstock
Updates and errata for this publication will be posted on the

ASHRAE website at www.ashrae.org/publicationupdates.
ASHRAE GreenGuide
Design, Construction,
and Operation
Fifth Edition
Atlanta
ISBN 978-1-939200-80-8 (hardback)
ISBN 978-1-939200-81-5 (PDF)
2018 ASHRAE
1791 Tullie Circle, NE
Atlanta, GA 30329
www.ashrae.org
All rights reserved.

First edition published 2003. Second edition published 2006.
Third edition published 2010. Fourth edition published 2013.
Fifth edition published 2018.
Printed in the United States of America
Cover design by Megan Joyce. Cover image by Costas A. Balaras.

ASHRAE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,
owned by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc.
ASHRAE has compiled this publication with care, but ASHRAE has not investi-
gated, and ASHRAE expressly disclaims any duty to investigate, any product,
service, process, procedure, design, or the like that may be described herein. The
appearance of any technical data or editorial material in this publication does
not constitute endorsement, warranty, or guaranty by ASHRAE of any product,
service, process, procedure, design, or the like. ASHRAE does not warrant that
the information in the publication is free of errors, and ASHRAE does not neces-
sarily agree with any statement or opinion in this publication. The entire risk of the
use of any information in this publication is assumed by the user.
No part of this book may be reproduced without permission in writing from ASHRAE,
except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages or reproduce illustrations in
a review with appropriate credit, nor may any part of this book be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any way or by any means—electronic,
photocopying, recording, or other—without permission in writing from ASHRAE.
Requests for permission should be submitted at www.ashrae.org/permissions.
____________________________________________
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: ASHRAE (Firm)

Title: ASHRAE greenguide : design, construction, and operation of sustainable
buildings.
Other titles: ASHRAE green guide
Description: Fifth edition. | Atlanta, GA : ASHRAE, [2018] | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017039504| ISBN 9781939200808 (hardback) | ISBN
9781939200815 (PDF)
Subjects: LCSH: Sustainable buildings--Design and construction. | Sustainable
buildings--United States--Design and construction. | Sustainable
architecture. | Buildings--Environmental engineering. | Sustainable
construction.
Classification: LCC TH880 .A83 2018 | DDC 720/.47--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/
2017039504
Tomorrow’s Child
Without a name, an unseen face,

And knowing not the time or place,
Tomorrow’s Child, though yet unborn,
I saw you first last Tuesday morn.
A wise friend introduced us two,
And through his shining point of view
I saw a day, which you would see,
A day for you, and not for me.
Knowing you has changed my thinking,
Never having had an inkling
That perhaps the things I do
Might someday threaten you.
Tomorrow’s Child, my daughter-son,
I’m afraid I’ve just begun
To think of you and of your good,
Though always having known I should.
Begin I will to weigh the cost
Of what I squander, what is lost,
If ever I forget that you
Will someday come to live here too.
by Glenn Thomas, ©1996
Reprinted from
Mid-Course Correction:
Toward a
Sustainable Enterprise:
The Interface Model
by Ray Anderson.
Chelsea Green
Publishing Company, 1999
CONTENTS
Foreword xv
Preface xvii
Who Should Use ASHRAE GreenGuide xviii
How to Use ASHRAE GreenGuide xviii
Historical Background on ASHRAE GreenGuide xix
Acknowledgments xxi
Section 1: Basics
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background 3
Introduction 3
Relationship to Sustainability 5
Commitment to Green/Sustainable
High-Performance Projects 5
What Drives Green Projects 6
The Impact of Carbon Considerations 6
Sustainability in Architecture 9
References and Resources 16
Chapter 2: Green Rating Systems, Standards,
and Other Guidance 19
Green-Building Rating Systems—Introduction 19
The LEED Rating System 21
Other Guidelines, Resources, and Certification Programs 22
Building Energy Quotient (Building EQ) 24
European Programs 26
Implementation Through Green Building
vii
Standards and Codes 27
ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1 and
the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) 27
IEQ 30
Residential Buildings 32
Other Building Codes 32
Section 2: The Design Process

Chapter 3: Project Strategies and Early Design 41
Ingredients of a Successful Green Project Endeavor 41
The Owner's Role 42
Incentives for Green Design 43
The Design Process—Early Stages 47
The Design Team 50
The Engineer's Role 54
Concept Development 58
Expressing and Testing Concepts 59
Building Information Modeling (BIM)/
Building Energy Modeling (BEM) 62
Chapter 4: Commissioning 73
The Evolution of the Commissioning Concept 74
Commissioning Phases and Process 75
Commissioning Documents 76
Project Phases 78
Decisions to Make During the Commissioning Process 86
Chapter 5: Architectural Design and Planning Impacts 91
Overview 91
Concise History of the Design of Buildings 91
Design Process for Sustainable Architecture 92
Intentions in Architecture and Building System Development 98
Chapter 6: Conceptual Engineering Design—
Load Determination 101
The Role of Energy Modeling During Conceptual Design 103
viii
Determining the Load Drivers with Parametric Simulations 104
Energy Impacts of Architectural Features 105
Thermal/Mass Transfer of Envelope 106
Engineering Internal Load-Determining Factors 107
Chapter 7: Sustainable Sites 123
Location of the Building Project 123
Urban Heat Island Effect 124
Exterior Lighting 126
Stormwater Management 127
Chapter 8: Indoor Environmental Quality 139
Introduction 139
Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) 140
Thermal Comfort and Control 160
Light and Illumination 162
Acoustics 164
Chapter 9: Energy Conversion and Distribution Systems 169
Energy Exchange 169
Energy Delivery Methods 172
Hydronics 175
Air 179
Energy Conversion/Generation Equipment 180
Energy Conversion/Generation Plant Design 182
District Energy Systems 186
Distributed Electricity Generation 188
Chapter 10: Energy Sources 253
Renewable and Nonrenewable Energy Sources 253
Water-Energy Nexus 254
Solar 255
Wind 265
Hydro 266
Biomass 267
Chapter 11: Lighting Systems 287
Overview 287
ix
Electric Lighting 287
Daylight Harvesting 294
Light Conveyors (Tubular Daylighting Devices) 298
Lighting Controls 298
Cost Considerations 302
Chapter 12: Water Efficiency 307
The Energy-Water Balance 308
Cooling Tower Systems 310
Domestic Water Heating 315
Plumbing 315
Water Recovery and Reuse 316
Chapter 13: Smart Building Systems 339
Integrated Building Automation Systems 340
Detailing the Design of a Control System 341
Automated Fault Detection and Diagnosis 344
Smart Hardware 346
Control Systems and Building Occupants 347
Control Systems and Energy and Water Efficiency 348
Control Systems and Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) 351
Control Systems Commissioning 352
Interaction of a Smart Building with the Smart Grid 354
Chapter 14: Completing Design and
Documentation for Construction 357
Drawings/Documentation Stage 357
Specifying Materials/Equipment 357
Cost Estimating and Budget Reconciliation 358
Bidding 358
Managing Risk 359
Project Delivery Methods and Contractor Selection 360
Chapter 15: Construction 367
Site Planning and Development 367
The Engineer's Role in Construction Quality 367
Construction Practices and Methods 368
Commissioning During Construction 369
x
Moving into Occupancy and Operation 370
Chapter 16: Operation, Maintenance,
and Performance Evaluation 373
Energy Modeling 374
On Construction 375
Building Performance Labeling 375
Filling the Gap: Measurement and Verification 376
Occupant Surveys 377
On Operation and Maintenance 378
Personnel Management 379
Section 3: Postdesign—Construction and Beyond

Chapter 17: Residential Applications 387
Energy Use: Residential Building Sector 388
Standards 389
Performance 393
Architecture and Design 396
Future Trends 403
Chapter 18: Building-Type GreenTips 417
Introduction 417
Building-Type GreenTips 417
#18-1: Performing Arts Spaces 418
#18-2: Health Care Facilities 421
#18-3: Laboratory Facilities 429
#18-4: Student Residence Halls 432
#18-5: Athletic and Recreation Facilities 435
#18-6: Commercial Office Buildings 437
#18-7: K-12 School Buildings 440
#18-8: Data Centers 442
Chapter 19: Existing Buildings 449
Introduction 449
Energy Performance of Existing Buildings 449
Building Audits 450
Improving Building Sustainability and IEQ 453
xi
Delivery Mechanisms for Upgrades to Existing Buildings 459
Chapter 20: Emerging Trends and Epilogue 463
Introduction 463
Distributed (District) Energy Systems 464
Smart Buildings and the Internet of Things 465
Virtual and Augmented Reality 465
Resiliency 466
Building Labeling and Reporting 467
New Construction Techniques 467
Terms, Definitions, and Acronyms 493
Index 495
GREENTIPS
#6-1: Night Precooling 109
#6-2: Night-Sky Cooling 114
#6-3: Plug Loads 118
#7-1: Rain Gardens 132
#7-2: Green-Roof Systems 136
#9-1: Variable-Flow/Variable-Speed Pumping System 195
#9-2: Variable-Refrigerant-Flow (VRF) Systems 199
#9-3: Displacement Ventilation 204
#9-4: Dedicated Outdoor Air Systems (DOAS) 207
#9-5: Ventilation Demand Control Using CO2 210
#9-6: Hybrid Ventilation 213
#9-7: Combined Heating and Power (CHP) Systems 217
#9-8: Low-NOx Burners 222
#9-9: Combustion Air Preheating 224
#9-10: Combination Space/Water Heaters 226
#9-11: Ground-Source Heat Pumps (GSHPs) 229
#9-12: Thermal Energy Storage (TES) for Cooling 233
#9-13: Double-Effect Absorption Chillers 239
#9-14: Gas Engine-Driven Chillers 242
#9-15: Desiccant Cooling and Dehumidification 244
#9-16: Indirect Evaporative Cooling 247
xii
#9-17: Condensing Boilers 250
#10-1: Passive Solar Thermal Energy Systems 271
#10-2: Active Solar Thermal Energy Systems 274
#10-3: Solar Energy System—PV 278
#10-4: Solar Protection 282
#11-1: Light Conveyors (Tubular Daylighting Devices) 304
#12-1: Point-of-Use Domestic Hot-Water Heaters 322
#12-2: Air-Handling Unit (AHU)
Condensate Capture and Reuse 325
#12-3: Rainwater Harvesting 332
#12-4: Graywater Systems 336
#17-1: Mechanical Balanced
Energy Recovery Ventilation (ERV) 413
DIGGING DEEPER SIDEBARS

International Perspective: Regulations and Commentary 10
Some Definitions and Views of Sustainability
from Other Sources 12
CalGreen Code:
America's First Statewide Green-Building Code 33
One Design Firm's Ten Steps to a Net Zero Energy Building 66
Justifications for Green Design 67
National Renewable Energy Laboratory's
Nine-Step Process for Low-Energy Building Design 70
One Firm's Commissioning Checklist 88
Example Calculation to Compute a Baseline
Predicted Water Consumption for a Building 318
How Much Water Will Collect at Design Conditions? 329
One Design Firm’s Materials Specification Checklist 364
Construction Factors to Consider in a Green Design 371
NIST Net Zero Energy Residential Test Facility:
Net Zero Energy and Beyond 405
xiii
FOREWORD
originally written by the late William Coad
edited by Tom Lawrence for the fifth edition
ASHRAE is the preeminent technical society representing engineers prac-

ticing in the fields of heating, refrigeration, and air conditioning—the technology
that uses approximately one-third of the global nonrenewable energy consumed
annually.
ASHRAE membership has actively pursued more effective means of utiliz-
ing precious nonrenewable energy resources for many decades, from the stand-
points of source availability, efficiency of utilization, and technology of
substituting with renewable sources. One significant publication in ASHRAE
Transactions is a paper authored in 1951 by G.W. Gleason, Dean of Engineering
at Oregon State University, titled “Energy—Choose it Wisely Today for Safety
Tomorrow” (Gleason 1951). The flip side of the energy coin is the environment
and, again, ASHRAE has historically dealt with the impact that the practice of
the HVAC&R sciences have had upon both the indoor and the global environ-
ment.
However, the engineering community, to a great extent, serves the needs and
desires of accepted economic norms and the consuming public, a large majority
of whom have not embraced an energy/environmental ethic. As a result, much of
the technology in energy effectiveness and environmental sensitivity that
ASHRAE members have developed over this past century has had limited impact
on society.
In 1975, when ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard 90-75, Energy Con-
servation in New Building Design (ASHRAE 1975), that standard served as our
initial outreach effort to develop an awareness of the energy ethic and to extend
our capabilities throughout society as a whole. Since that time, updated revisions
of Standard 90 have moved the science ahead. In 1993, the chapter on energy
resources was added to the 1993 ASHRAE Handbook—Fundamentals. In 2002,
ASHRAE entered into a partnering agreement with U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC), and it is intended that this and future editions of this design guide will
continue to assist ASHRAE in its efforts at promoting sustainable design, as well
xv
as the many other organizations that have advocated for high-performance building
design.
The consuming public and other representative groups of building profession-
als continue to become more and more aware of the societal need to provide build-
ings that are more energy resource effective and environmentally compatible. The
topics involved with “green building” or “high-performance green buildings” are
much more than just energy as well. These include water efficiency, indoor envi-
ronmental quality, and the materials used in building construction, for example.
ASHRAE has been working toward being recognized as one of the preeminent
authorities on green buildings in the industry, for example by taking the lead in the
creation of ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design
of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. In
addition, newer emerging technologies, such as the smart grid or smart buildings,
are coming forth. This publication, authored and edited by ASHRAE volunteers, is
intended to complement the efforts in all these topical areas and to help the mem-
bership keep up to date.
xvi
PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION
by Tom Lawrence
This new edition of ASHRAE GreenGuide represents another significant up-

date and revision to what has become one of ASHRAE’s primary contributions
toward sustainable design of the built environment.
The new fifth edition is being released as we close in on the fifteenth anniver-
sary of the release of the first edition in January 2004. A lot has changed in the
industry in general, and in green design practices in particular, during those years.
Many of the concepts that seemed “out there” in the time period that the first edi-
tion was published are now considered mainstream and, in some cases, are now
actually required by code. We have tried to incorporate these trends in making revi-
sions to this fifth edition as well as take a look into the crystal ball and anticipate
future trends. It has been ASHRAE’s plan to update and maintain this book on a
regular basis because of this rapidly evolving field and to support ASHRAE’s com-
mitted goal of global leadership in sustainability and technical education. This also
follows the example set by ASHRAE’s rebranding in 2012.
Since the release of the fourth edition of the GreenGuide, a number of devel-
opments have occurred in the green building arena. ASHRAE has continued to
refine and modify ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1, with a new
release of that standard published in late 2014 and another in process for late 2017.
A recent agreement between ASHRAE and the International Code Council (ICC)
will result in the merging of Standard 189.1 and the International Green Construc-
tion Code (IgCC) beginning with the 2018 code cycle. ASHRAE is responsible for
the technical content and ICC is responsible for the administrative provisions. This
will hopefully result in further adoption and use of this code, and other organiza-
tions and jurisdictions are using these as the basis for their own codes and design
standards. Thus, the industry is witnessing the continued evolution of green build-
ing programs from strictly voluntary to being both more mainstream within the
industry as well as mandatory in jurisdictions that have adopted these standards for
their building codes.
This fifth edition features four entirely new chapters, as well as updated infor-
mation and GreenTips. The specific Building-Type GreenTips have been located in
xvii
a new standalone Chapter 18. The new Chapter 19 covers green building design as it
relates to existing buildings, and the new Chapter 17 discusses differing aspects of
green design for residential structures. Finally, Chapter 20, Emerging Trends and Epi-
logue, briefly covers new topics that are becoming key to the industry. Chapter 13,
Smart Building Systems, including information on building automation systems, has
also been extensively revised and expanded in scope.
No one person, or even a small committee of people, can be expected to have the
breadth and depth of expertise to create a book that covers the wide range of issues
governing the design, construction, and operation of green buildings. Thus, many
people with various backgrounds were recruited to help review and edit the existing
chapters and to write the new chapters. One of the goals for the editorial committee
for this revision was to bring in a large number of additional outside reviewers. We
truly appreciate those that contributed their time and talents in reviewing, editing, and
writing. Finally, the current edition could not have been possible without all the hard
work and dedication put into it by others who created the previous editions. This book
truly represents the collaborative nature of the work done by dedicated volunteers
within ASHRAE. All work performed—by the authors, editors, developing subcom-
mittees, other reviewers, and technical committee participants—was strictly volun-
tary.
WHO SHOULD USE ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

The original stated purpose for the ASHRAE GreenGuide was created primarily
for HVAC&R designers, but time has shown that it is also a useful reference for
architects, owners, building managers, operators, contractors, students, and others in
the building industry who want to understand the technical issues regarding high-
performance design from an integrated building systems perspective. Considerable
emphasis is placed on teamwork and close coordination between parties.
The GreenGuide was originally intended for use by younger engineers or archi-
tects, or more experienced professionals about to enter into their first green design
projects. However, a survey of those who purchased one of the earlier editions of this
publication revealed that it was primarily being used by more experienced individu-
als. The survey also indicted a higher percentage of the readership from countries out-
side of North America, perhaps reflecting the growing internationalization of
ASHRAE. These trends have been taken into account with the revision process for
later editions.
HOW TO USE ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

This book is intended to be used more as a reference than as something one
would read in sequence from beginning to end. The table of contents is the best place
for any reader to get an overall view of what is covered in this publication. Through-
out the GreenGuide, numerous techniques, processes, measures, or special systems
are described succinctly in a modified outline or bullet form. These are called
xviii
ASHRAE GREENGUIDExix
ASHRAE GreenTips. Each GreenTip concludes with a listing of other sources that
may be referenced for greater detail. (Lists of GreenTips and Digging Deeper side-
bars can be found in the table of contents.)
All readers should take the time to review Chapter 1, Introduction and Back-
ground, which provides some essential definitions and meanings of key terms. Chap-
ter 2 describes green rating systems and the relevant standards and paths to
compliance as they relate to the work of the mechanical engineers. The project initial
phases are covered, with Chapter 3 providing an overview of project strategies and
the early stages of the design process and Chapter 4 covering the commissioning pro-
cess.
The bulk of this book covers the design process, starting with the architectural
design and planning impacts in Chapter 5. These chapters are essential reading for all
who are interested in how the green design process works. Other topics in this section
include conceptual engineering design, sustainable sites, indoor environmental qual-
ity, energy conversion systems, energy and water resources, lighting, water effi-
ciency, smart building systems, and the process for completing design and
documentation.
The final chapters finish the book with discussions on construction and opera-
tions and maintenance. This final section also includes the chapters on residential
buildings, GreenTips for specific building types and existing buildings, and ends with
the emerging trends chapter. In prior editions of this book, these tips were contained
at the end of the chapter on the architectural design process; however, it is felt that
these are important enough to justify as a separate chapter and not get lost in the
back pages of one particular chapter.
At the end of the guide is a comprehensive References and Resources section,
which compiles all the sources mentioned throughout the guide, and an index for
rapid location of a particular subject of interest.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ON ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

The idea for the publication of this guide was initiated by 1999–2000 ASHRAE
President Jim Wolf and carried forward by then President-Elect (and subsequently
President) William J. Coad. Members of that first subcommittee were David L.
Grumman, Fellow ASHRAE, chair and editor; Jordan L. Heiman, Fellow ASHRAE;
and Sheila Hayter, chair of TC 1.10 (a precursor to the TC 2.8 of today).
The GreenGuide subcommittee responsible for the second and third editions
consisted of John Swift and Tom Lawrence, along with the people noted in the
Acknowledgments section. Work on the fourth and fifth editions was overseen by a
subcommittee of TC 2.8 led by Tom Lawrence.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following individuals served as coeditors on this edition of ASHRAE

GreenGuide, provided written materials and editorial content, and formed the
Senior Editorial Group of the ASHRAE TC 2.8 GreenGuide subcommittee for
the fifth edition:
Thomas Lawrence Abdel K Darwich

University of Georgia Guttmann and Blaevoet Consulting
Athens, GA Engineers, Sacramento, CA
Janice K. Means Dunstan Macauley
Lawrence Technological University WSP
Southfield, MI Arlington, VA
In addition, the following individuals contributed new written materials on

various topics for the fifth edition of ASHRAE GreenGuide. All or portions of
these contributions were incorporated, with minor editing.
Constantinos A. Balaras Ashish Rakheja

Kevin Brown Max Sherman
Kevin Cross Annie Smith
Philip Fairey Stanton Stafford
Dave Grumman Mitchell Swann
Paul Haydock Ted Tiffany
Mark MacCracken Paul Torcellini
Farhan Mehboob Fatih Turan
Jason Morosko Tania Ullah
Lisa Ng
xxi
ASHRAE extends its appreciation to the International Code Council (ICC)
staff, Misty Guard and Mike Pfeiffer, and Solar Rating & Certification Corporation
(ICC-SRCC) staff, Eileen Prado, and Shawn Martin, for their high-level review and
comments that served to further enhance this publication. ICC, ICC-SRCC and
their membership shall not be responsible for any errors, omissions, or damages
arising out of information contained in this publication.
The committee is deeply thankful for all the individuals who helped with or
contributed to the first four editions of the GreenGuide. The fifth edition would not
be where it is without their help. However, because of space constraints, their
names cannot be listed in the fifth edition.
xxii
Section 1:
Basics
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
There continues to be a growing awareness about the impact of the built envi-
ronment on the natural environment. The use of sustainable engineering concepts
has evolved quite rapidly in recent years and is now well recognized in
HVAC&R and related engineering professions. This in turn is being encouraged
by increased client demand for more sustainable buildings, commonly called
green buildings.
Interest in sustainable or green buildings (the distinction between the two is
discussed below) has been particularly evident in the concern about energy and
water resource consumption, but also includes broader concerns such as indoor
environmental air quality, material use, and “smart” development and planning.
Many countries in the world now have green-building rating systems (voluntary)
and/or codes (mandatory) in some form or other. Organizations devoted to green
buildings now exist in most countries. Even as the concept of green design is
reaching mainstream acceptance, these organizations continue to promote these
concepts, exhort the industry and society to action, strive to motivate industry
practitioners and building owners, warn of consequences from ignoring these
concepts, and instruct how to achieve green design.
ASHRAE identified a need for guidance on green building concepts specifi-
cally directed toward practicing professionals involved on a day-to-day basis in
the mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP) building system design process.
However, readers may find that this guide may also serve other needs—for
example, as the basis for a university course in sustainable building design.
From a survey conducted in 2011, a wider range of people now use the
ASHRAE GreenGuide, including students and other professionals in related
disciplines. The topics covered in this guide are global and thus there has been
an effort to keep this guide applicable internationally.
Green is one of those words that can have many meanings, depending on the
circumstances. One of these is the greenery of nature in the flora around us. This
3
4 Chapter 1: Introduction and Background
symbolic reference to nature is the meaning this term relates to in this publication.
The difference between a green and sustainable design is the degree to which the
design helps to minimize the building impact on the environment while simultane-
ously providing a healthy, comfortable indoor environment. When the term green is
used, is commonly is thought of as focusing on the energy and resources involved,
while sustainable is broader in scope and considers the three Ps: people, profit and
planet. However, some may not recognize a difference between the two terms and
use them interchangeably; this is also the general approach taken in this book. This
guide is not intended to cover the full breadth of sustainability, as this would
require and extensive series of volumes, but it is a good overview of the main topics
and issues involved. For additional key characteristics and detailed discussion of
sustainability in buildings and the built environment, refer to the “Sustainability”
chapter in the ASHRAE Handbook—Fundamentals (ASHRAE 2017a).
It is important to note that the definition of green buildings places an emphasis
on integrated design of mechanical, electrical, architectural, and other systems.
Specifically, a green/sustainable building design is one that achieves high perfor-
mance, over the full life cycle, in the following areas:
• Minimizing natural resource consumption through more efficient utilization of

nonrenewable energy and other natural resources, land, water, and construction
materials, including utilization of renewable energy resources to strive to achieve
net zero energy consumption.
• Minimizing emissions that negatively impact our global atmosphere and ulti-
mately the indoor environment, especially those related to indoor air quality
(IAQ), greenhouse gases, global warming, particulates, or acid rain.
• Minimizing discharge of solid waste and liquid effluents, including demolition
and occupant waste, sewer, and stormwater, and the associated infrastructure
required to accommodate removal.
• Minimizing negative impacts on the building site.
• Optimizing the quality of the indoor environment, including air quality, thermal
regime, illumination, acoustics/noise, and visual aspects to provide comfortable
human physiological and psychological perceptions.
• Optimizing the integration of the new building project within the overall built
and urban environment. A truly green/sustainable building should not be thought
of or considered in a vacuum, but rather in how it integrates within the overall
societal context.
Ultimately, even if a project does not have overtly stated green/sustainable goals,
the overall approaches, processes, and concepts presented in this guide provide a
design philosophy useful for any project. Using the principles of this guide, an
owner or a team member can document the objectives and criteria to include in a
project, forming the foundation for a collaborative integrated project delivery
ASHRAE GREENGUIDE  5
approach. This can lower design, construction, and operation costs, resulting in a
lower total cost for the life of the project.
RELATIONSHIP TO SUSTAINABILITY
The related term sustainable design is very commonly used, almost to the point
of losing any consistent meaning. While there have been some rather varied and
complex definitions put forth (see the Digging Deeper sidebar titled “Some Defini-
tions and Views of Sustainability from Other Sources”), a simple one is adapted in
this guide: sustainability is providing for the needs of the present without detracting
from the ability to fulfill the needs of the future.
The preceding discussion suggests that the concepts of green design and sustain-
able design have no absolutes—that is, they cannot be defined in black-and-white
terms. These terms are more useful when thought of as a mindset: a goal to be
sought and a process to follow. This guide is a means of (1) encouraging designers
of the built environment to employ strategies for developing a green/sustainable
design, and (2) setting forth some practical techniques to help practitioners achieve
the goal of green design, thus making a significant contribution to sustainability.
Another method for assessing sustainability is through the concept of the triple
bottom line (Savitz and Weber 2006). This concept advances the idea that monetary
cost is not the only way to value project design options. The triple bottom line con-
cept advocates for the criteria to include economic, social, and environmental
impacts of building design and operations decisions.
COMMITMENT TO GREEN/SUSTAINABLE
HIGH-PERFORMANCE PROJECTS
Green projects require more than a project team with good intentions; they
require commitment from the owner and the rest of the project team, early docu-
mentation of sustainable/green goals recorded by the Owner’s Project Requirement
(OPR), and the designer’s documented basis of design. The most successful proj-
ects incorporating green design are ones with dedicated, proactive owners who are
willing to examine (or give the design team the freedom to examine) the entire
spectrum of ownership—from design to construction to long-term operation of
their facilities. These owners understand that green buildings require more plan-
ning, better execution, and better operational procedures, requiring a firm commit-
ment to changing how building projects are designed, constructed, operated, and
maintained to achieve a lower total cost of ownership and lower long-term environ-
mental impacts.
Implementing green/sustainable practices could indeed raise the initial design
soft costs associated with a project, particularly compared to a code minimum
building design. First cost is an important issue and often is a stumbling block in
moving building design from the code minimum (“good or adequate design”) to
one that is more truly sustainable. Implementing the commissioning process early
in the predesign phase of a project adds an initial budget line item but can often
actually reduce overall total design/construction costs and the ultimate cost of own-
ership.
In addition, significant savings and improved productivity of the building occu-
pants can be realized for the life of the building, lowering the total cost of owner-
ship and/or providing better value for tenants. To achieve lifelong benefits also
requires operating procedures for monitoring performance, making adjustments
(continuing commissioning) when needed, and appropriate maintenance.
WHAT DRIVES GREEN PROJECTS
Green-building advocates can cite plenty of reasons why buildings should be

designed utilizing integrated green concepts. The fact that these reasons exist does
not make it happen in routine building projects, nor does the existence of design-
ers—or design firms—with green design experience. The main driver of green-
building design is the motivation of the owner—the one who initiates the creation
of a project, the one who pays for it (or who carries the burden of its financing), and
the one who has (or has identified) the need to be met by the project in question. If
the owner does not believe that green design is needed, thinks it is unimportant, or
thinks it is of secondary importance to other needs, then it will not happen. In addi-
tion, recent trends in the industry are moving toward green-building practices being
made mandatory, either through local adoption of new codes and standards or
through an organizational policy. These trends are discussed in more detail in
Chapter 2.
THE IMPACT OF CARBON CONSIDERATIONS

The attention paid to concerns about greenhouse gas emissions has certainly
increased in much of the world. During the first decade of the twenty-first century,
two organizations issued challenges to the industry to design and implement build-
ings that had a significantly lower energy consumption compared to current typical
designs. The Architecture 2030 Challenge (see the “References and Resources”
section at the end of the chapter for more information) is one of these. Architecture
2030 was initiated by Edward Mazria in 2002, setting a goal of net zero energy and
net zero carbon buildings by the year 2030. This goal is to be realized by achieving
substantially better building energy performance on a sliding scale from 2010
through 2030. The near-term focus of the challenge was adopted by the American
Institute of Architects (AIA). The Architecture 2010 Imperative achieved a goal of
constructing new buildings that show a 50% improvement in energy efficiency
compared to those built using the 1999 version of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard
90.1, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
(ASHRAE 1999). In Europe, there is an ongoing parallel effort to meet an ambi-

tious goal of nearly zero energy buildings after 2020, according to the Energy Per-
formance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) (European Commission 2010).
There is bad news and good news when we look at how buildings are involved
with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. First, the bad news: buildings (commercial
and residential) are responsible for approximately 30% of the GHG emissions in
the United States and most developed countries, and the trend is also holding up in
key developing nations. The good news is that buildings have also been identified
as the economic sector with the best potential for cost-effective mitigation of GHG
emissions, as highlighted in Figure 1-1. In this figure, the carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions by sector and total non-CO2 GHG emissions across sectors are shown in
the baseline scenario at top while the bottom portion of Figure 1-1 shows the net
result from mitigation scenarios that reach an average of about 450 ppm (in a range
of 430 to 480 ppm) CO2 equivalent (CO2-eq) emissions (likely to limit warming to
3.6°F [2°C] above preindustrial levels) with CO2 capture and storage (CCS, left)
and without CCS (right). The difference between the baseline and mitigation sce-
narios in this figure represent the net emissions decrease possible for each sector,
and the buildings sector represents one of the highest potential options. Therefore,
the buildings industry can and should take responsibility for reducing GHG emis-
sions, primarily through a reduction in energy consumption for new construction, in
refurbishing existing buildings, and planning for the operation and maintenance to
maintain the high level of efficiency.
The Conference of the Parties meeting in Paris in late 2015 (COP21) was recog-
nized as a breakthrough event where the first significant changes to a global
approach to address climate concerns were made in nearly 25 years. More impor-
tantly for the buildings industry, the important role of buildings in addressing this
problem was recognized at this conference and a new organization, the Global Alli-
ance for Buildings and Construction, was created. This alliance has a four-step stra-
tegic approach to: (1) reduce the energy demand of buildings (in particular, existing
buildings), (2) decarbonize the energy and power supply for buildings, and (3)
reduce the embodied greenhouse gases in materials and equipment through life
cycle analysis, and increase resiliency by adaptations against climate change and
associated other risks.
ASHRAE took the lead in meeting these challenges in several ways. To address
the Architecture 2010 Imperative, significant effort was put into modifying Stan-
dard 90.1 (ASHRAE 1999) to drastically improve energy efficiency. The 2010 ver-
sion of Standard 90.1, in essence, met the AIA challenge for 2010 by introducing
requirement changes that were developed and introduced during that decade. Sub-
sequent versions of Standard 90.1 continue to increase the minimum energy effi-
ciency requirements. Although the specific requirements may differ in some cases,
ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design of High-
Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings (ASHRAE
Source: IPCC (2014)
Figure 1-1 Cross-sectoral mitigation strategies.

2017b) and the International Green Construction Code (IgCC) have energy effi-
ciency levels that exceed the minimum code values in Standard 90.1.
Another way this is being accomplished is through the production of the
ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide (AEDG) series. The series covers pre-
scriptive measures that result in significant energy efficiency improvements, with
the first series dealing with measures that should achieve 30% and 50% savings
over Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 1999) with even more strenuous improvements in
the planning process. Additional details on these guides can be found in Chapter 2.
The HVAC&R engineer can provide a significant benefit to society (as well as to
the building project’s owners) via CO2 emissions reduction associated with lower
energy consumption. All new building projects that wish to comply with green
principles should at least estimate the CO2 equivalent emissions footprint of the
building (of which a large part is produced through energy consumption). Using
publicized emissions factors, these calculations are not complicated and can pro-
vide insight. For existing buildings, the goal is to compute the reduction in emis-
sions associated with proposed energy conservation measures. In both cases, the
GHG emissions factor used should be based on source energy and not on energy
consumed on site alone. A good initial reference source for emissions factors is a
2007 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) report (Deru and Torcellini
2007). The emissions factors for site electricity consumption in the United States
have been updated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reflect
recent trends away from coal-based electricity production to more natural gas and
other renewable energy systems such as solar and wind. Along the same lines, the
European Commission is reviewing the methodology for the calculation of a pri-
mary energy factor in the context of revising the Energy Efficiency Directive
(EED) and preparing the upcoming legislative proposals on the 2030 Climate and
Energy Framework. Currently, a default coefficient of 2.5 may be used for convert-
ing kilowatt-hour electricity (EED 2006/32/EC), although EU Member States may
apply a different coefficient provided they can justify it. The ongoing efforts under-
line the need to regularly revise the conversion factor for electricity and that the
methodology adequately reflects the strong efforts of the European power sector to
decrease the carbon footprint and increase the share of renewables in the power
generation mix. European informative default values for various energy carriers are
available in ISO 52000-1, Energy Performance of Buildings—Overarching EPB
Assessment
SUSTAINABILITY IN ARCHITECTURE
The emergence of green-building engineering is best understood in the context
of the movement in architecture toward sustainable buildings and communities.
Detailed reviews of this movement appear elsewhere and fall outside the scope of
this document. A brief review of the history and background of the green design
movement is provided, followed by a discussion of its applicability. Several leading
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE:
REGULATIONS AND COMMENTARY
Society has recognized that previous industrial and developmental actions
caused long-term damage to our environment, resulting in loss of food sources
and plant and animal species, and changes to the Earth’s climate. As a result of
learning from past mistakes and studying the environment, the international
community identified certain actions that threaten the ecosystem’s biodiversity,
and, consequently, it developed several governmental regulations designed to
protect our environment. Thus, in this sense, the green design initiative began
with the implementation of building regulations. An example is the regulated
phaseout of fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and partially haloge-
nated refrigerant hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs).
In Europe, the main regulatory instrument for tackling the energy consumption
of buildings is the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) recast
(European Commission 2010), which took effect in 2012 and replaced the
original EPBD Directive (European Commission 2002). All EU member
Digging Deeper
states introduced national laws, regulations, and administrative provisions

for setting minimum requirements on the energy performance of new and
existing buildings that are subject to major renovations and for energy per-
formance certification of buildings. Additional requirements include regular
inspection of boilers and air conditioning systems in buildings, an assess-
ment of the existing facilities, and provision of advice on possible improve-
ments and alternative solutions. Moreover, the EPBD recast strengthens the
energy performance requirements and clarifies and streamlines some of the
original EPBD provisions to reduce the large differences between EU mem-
ber states’ practices. In particular, it requires that EU member states lay
down the requirements so that new buildings are nearly zero energy by 2020
(2018 for public buildings) and the application of cost-optimal levels for set-
ting minimum energy performance requirements for both the building’s
thermal envelope and technical systems.
Energy performance certificates (EPC) are issued when buildings are
constructed, sold, or rented out. The EPC documents the energy perfor-
mance of the building and is expressed as a numeric indicator or a letter
grade that allows benchmarking of primary energy consumption. The certif-
icate also includes recommendations for cost-effective improvement of the
energy performance, and is valid for up to ten years. National efforts and
examples of EPCs are detailed in the works by Arcipowska et al. (2014) and
Maldonado (2016).
The Concerted Action EPBD launched by the European Commission
provides updated information on the implementation status in the vari-
ous European countries (www.epbd-ca.org).
Buildings are at center stage of the ambitious European efforts and energy
strategies for secure, competitive, and sustainable energy toward 2020, 2030,
and 2050 (https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-strategy).
It is not just in developed countries that green-building design and energy
efficiency concerns are taking hold. The later part of the past decade has seen an
explosion of adopting building energy efficiency standards and green-building
design programs. For example, India was the first expansion of the Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design® (LEED®) Green Building Rating Sys-
tem programs outside of the United States, with the establishment of the India
Digging Deeper
Green Building Council in 2003. India also created a nationwide energy effi-
ciency standard, the Energy Conservation Building Code, in 2008. This code
was based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 but modified for the local cli-
mates and situations. Similarly, ASHRAE’s Standard 90.2 was used as the basis
for energy efficiency in residential construction in Kuwait (knowns as Kuwait
90.2), as modified for Kuwait’s local climate and construction practices.
Energy efficiency standards throughout the world generally adopt two
approaches. One is to have a set of mandatory requirements and then offer a pre-
scriptive or a performance-based path for compliance (examples include the
approaches taken for energy codes in the U.S., Canada, India, and Australia).
Another approach is to have a set of mandatory items, then build on this with a
point system for other features, with a minimum number of points required.
This approach is the one taken by Japan and South Korea, for example.
As documented by the existing and emerging, green-building programs
around the world (Mills et al. 2012), it is evident that the green-building
movement is not just a fad, but truly is transforming the marketplace
worldwide.
methodologies for performing and evaluating green-building design efforts are

reviewed.
Prior to the industrial revolution, building efforts were often directed throughout
design and construction by a single architect—the so-called master builder model.
The master builder alone bore full responsibility for the design and construction of
the building, including any engineering required. This model lent itself to a build-
ing designed as one system, with the means of providing heat, light, water, and
other building services often closely integrated into the architectural elements. Sus-
tainability, semantically if not conceptually, predates these eras, and some modern
unsustainable practices had yet to arise. Sustainability in itself was not the goal of
yesteryear’s master builders. Yet some of the resulting structures appear to have
achieved an admirable combination of great longevity and sustainability in con-
struction, operation, and maintenance. It is interesting to compare the ecological
SOME DEFINITIONS AND VIEWS

OF SUSTAINABILITY FROM OTHER SOURCES
• “The best chance we have of addressing the combined challenges of
energy supply and demand, climate change and energy security is to
accelerate the introduction of new technologies for energy supply and use
and deploy them on a very large scale.” —Thomas Friedman, Hot, Flat
and Crowded (Friedman 2008)
• “Humanity must rediscover its ancient ability to recognize and live within
the cycles of the natural world.” —The Natural Step for Business (Nat-
trass and Altomare 1999)
Digging Deeper
• Development is sustainable “if it meets the needs of the present without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
—Our Common Future (Brundtland Report) (WCED 1987)
• To be sustainable, “a society needs to meet three conditions: Its rates of
use of renewable resources should not exceed their rates of regeneration;
its rates of use of nonrenewable resources should not exceed the rate at
which sustainable renewable substitutes are developed; and its rates of
pollution emissions should not exceed the assimilative capacity of the
environment.” —Herman Daly (Nattrass and Altomare 1999)
• “Sustainability is a state or process that can be maintained indefinitely.
The principles of sustainability integrate three closely intertwined ele-
ments—the environment, the economy, and the social system – into a sys-
tem that can be maintained in a healthy state indefinitely.” —Energy
Management Handbook, eighth edition (Doty and Turner 2012)
• “In this disorganized, fast-paced world, we have reached a critical point.
Now is the time to rethink the way we work, to balance our most import-
ant assets.” —Paola Antonelli, Curator, Department of Architecture and
Design, New York City Museum of Modern Art (Antonelli 2008)
footprint (a concept discussed later in this book) of Roman structures from two mil-
lennia ago heated by radiant floors to a twentieth century structure of comparable
size, site, and use.
In the nineteenth century, as ever more complicated technologies and the scien-
tific method developed, the discipline of engineering building systems and design
emerged separate from architecture. This change was not arbitrary or willful, but
rather was due to the increasing complexity of design tools and construction tech-
nologies and a burgeoning range of available materials and techniques. This com-
plexity continued to grow throughout the twentieth century and continues today.
With the architect transformed from master builder to lead design consultant, most
HVAC&R engineering practices performed work predominantly as a subcontract to
the architect, whose firm, in turn, was retained by the client. Hand-in-hand with
these trends emerged the twentieth century doctrine of buildings over nature, an
approach still widely demanded by clients and supplied by architectural and engi-
neering firms.
Under this approach (buildings are designed under the architect, who is prime
consultant, following the buildings over nature paradigm) the architect conceives
the shell and interior design concepts first. Only then does the architect turn to
structural engineers, then HVAC&R engineers, then electrical engineers, etc. (Not
coincidentally, this hierarchy and sequence of engineering involvement mirrors the
relative expense of the subsystems being designed.)
With notable exceptions, this sequence has reinforced the trend toward buildings
over nature: relying on the brute force of sizable HVAC systems that are resource-
intensive—and energy-intensive to operate—to build and maintain conditions
acceptable for human occupancy. In this approach to the design process, many
opportunities to integrate architectural elements with engineered systems are
missed—often because it’s too late. Even with an integrated design team to bridge
back over the gaps in the traditional design process, a sustainable building with
optimally engineered subsystems will not result if not done by professionals with
appropriate knowledge and insight.
When Green Design is Applicable

Perhaps the obvious answer is “When is green design not applicable?” How-
ever, practicalities do exist in the design process, funding, and expectations of
stakeholders in the process that may, in some people's opinion, preclude con-
sideration of green design. This book is intended to help overcome these
impediments.
One leading trend in architecture, especially in the design of smaller buildings, is
to invite nature in as an alternative to walling it off with a shell and then providing
sufficiently powerful mechanical/electrical systems to perpetuate this isolation.
This situation presents a significant opportunity for engineers today. Architects and
clients who take this approach require fresh and complementary engineering
approaches, not tradition-bound engineering that incorporates extra capacity to
overcome the natural forces a design team may have invited into a building. Natural
ventilation and hybrid mechanical/natural ventilation, radiant heating, radiant cool-
ing, and solar-assisted air conditioning are just a few examples of the tools with
which today’s engineers are increasingly required to acquire fluency. Some of these
“new” techniques have been well known for centuries and used around the world.
In the green-building era, they can be enhanced with new capabilities allowed by
technology advancements, better understanding of the physical processes involved,
and for modern buildings.
Fortunately, there is a great deal of information available about green-building
design, including this GreenGuide. Further, tools for understanding and defending engi-
neering decisions in such projects are available, for example, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
55, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy (ASHRAE 2017a),

includes an adaptive design method that is more applicable to buildings that interact
more freely with the outdoor environment. ASHRAE Standard 55 also accommodates
an increasing variety of design solutions intended both to provide comfort and to
respect the imperative for sustainable buildings.
Another more widely demanded approach to green HVAC engineering pres-
ents a significant opportunity for engineers. This approach applies to projects
ranging from flagship green-building projects to more conventional ones where
the client has only a limited appetite for green design. The demand for environ-
mentally conscious engineering is evidenced by the expansion of engineering
groups, either within or outside architectural practices, that have built a reputa-
tion for a green approach to building design. In addition, many younger engi-
neers and architects just entering the profession are more committed to the
concept of sustainable design than their more established predecessors.
Green HVAC engineering can be provided, for its own sake, independent of any
client or architect demand. Ideally, the end result is an energy-efficient system that
is more robust and provides for better thermal control and indoor environment than
the cookie-cutter conventional design. The appetite for environmentally conscious
engineering must be carefully gaged, and opportunities to educate the design team
carefully seized. In this way, engineers can bring greater value to their projects and
distinguish themselves from competing individuals and firms.
Embodied Energy and Life-Cycle Assessment

Building materials used in the construction and operation of buildings have
energy embodied in them due to the manufacturing, transportation, and installation
processes of converting raw materials to final products. The material selection pro-
cess should consider the environmental impact of demolition and disposal after the
service life of the products. Another new type of building life-cycle assessment
(beyond life cycle costing) focuses on the environmental impact of products and
processes. This is termed life-cycle environmental assessment or simply life-cycle
assessment (LCA). This is a cradle-to-grave approach that evaluates all stages of a
product’s life to determine its cumulative environmental impact. In the case of a
building, the structure is a product itself, but it also is comprised of a large number
of other individual products (e.g., materials, equipment). Thus, the combined
impact of the entire building as a system should be quantified. Different issues and
priorities should be considered. For example, the selection of building materials
with a lower embodied energy may be desirable for the construction phase, but it
may be more environmentally conscious to consider a more energy-intensive one if
it results in higher operational energy savings during the building’s life cycle or the
product’s lifetime, whichever comes first. Similarly, during building refurbishment
and the evaluation of different energy conservation measures, one should also con-
sider the embodied energy in the new building materials (e.g., adding thermal insu-
lation) or the replacement of building elements or systems (e.g., replacing windows

or boilers), by comparing them against the resulting operational energy savings.
Several international efforts are underway to develop a standard approach, along
with professional and easy-to-use tools to overcome cumbersome calculations and
facilitate performing an LCA in routine, day-to-day projects. This is critical to
ensure that these issues are addressed during the early stages of the decision-
making process, when most critical decisions are made, for new building design or
refurbishment. For large projects, use of building information modeling (BIM) can
support LCA by reducing the time to reenter data (e.g. material quantities) and
facilitate calculations, once ontology and semantic issues for the exchange of data
and relevant information are properly handled.
A detailed description of the LCA approach has been developed by the EPA,
and more detail can be found on their website on LCA, included in the Online
Resources section at the end of this chapter. LCA databases and tools are used to
calculate and compare the embodied energy of common building materials and
products. Designers should give preference to resource-efficient materials and
reduce waste by recycling and reusing whenever possible.
The building design team has a variety of options to consider in conducting an
LCA analysis. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14000 series
of standards on environmental management serves as a method to govern the devel-
opment of these tools. LCA tools are available from private commercial as well as
governmental or public domain sources. The Building for Environmental and Eco-
nomic Sustainability (BEES) tool was developed by the National Institute for Stan-
dards and Technology in the United States, with support from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. The Tools for the Reduction and Assessment of
Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) from the EPA focuses on
chemical releases and raw materials usage in products. In Canada, the Athena life-
cycle inventory database contains detailed, high-quality and regional construction
data and complies with ISO 14040/14044 standards (Athena 2014). Some commer-
cial firms also offer LCA tools.
The European Commission has long recognized that LCA provides the best frame-
work for assessing the potential environmental impacts of products and underlined
the need for more consistent data and consensus LCA methodologies. A European
platform from the European Commission Joint Research Centre is available to facili-
tate the availability of quality-assured life-cycle data. The European reference Life
Cycle Database (ELCD) is composed of life-cycle inventory data from front-running
European business associations and other sources for key materials, energy carriers,
transport, and waste management. Data sets can be used free of charge and also dis-
tributed to third parties.
In summary, tremendous growth has occurred in the development of green build-
ing programs and practices over the past couple of decades. This GreenGuide pro-
vides insight into the making the design and operation of buildings more sustainable.
REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
Published
AIA. 1996. Environmental Resource Guide. Edited by Joseph Demkin. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Antonelli, P. 2008. Design and the Elastic Mind. New York: The Museum of
Modern Art.
ASHRAE. 1999. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-1999, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2016. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016, Energy Standard
for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2017a. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2017, Thermal Environmental
Conditions for Human Occupancy. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2017b. ASHRAE Handbook—Fundamentals. Chapter 35. Atlanta:
ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2017c. ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1-2017,
Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except
Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
Athena. 2014. User manual and transparency document: Impact estimator for
buildings v. 5. Ottawa: Athena Sustainable Materials Institute.
https://calculatelca.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/IE4B_v5_User
_Guide_September_2014.pdf
Deru, M., and P. Torcellini. 2007. Source Energy and Emissions Factors for
Energy Use in Buildings. Technical Report NREL/TP_550-38617, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.
Doty, S., and W.C. Turner. 2012. Energy management handbook, 8th edition.
Lilburn, GA: Fairmont Press.
European Commission. 2002. Energy Performance of Buildings, Directive 2002/
91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Official Journal of the
European Communities, Brussels.
European Commission. 2010. Energy Performance of Buildings, Directive 2010/
31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. Official Journal of the
European Communities, Brussels.
Friedman, T. 2008. Hot, flat, and crowded. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Grondzik, W.T. 2001. The (mechanical) engineer’s role in sustainable design:
Indoor environmental quality issues in sustainable design. HTML presentation
available at www.nettally.com/gzik/ieq/ieq-sust_files/frame.htm.
IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working
Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds). pp. 151.
Geneva: IPCC.
ISO. 2017 (under development). ISO 52000-1. Energy Performance of Buildings—
Overarching EPB Assessment. Part 1: General Framework and Procedures.
Geneva
Nattrass, B., and M. Altomare. 1999. The natural step for business. Vancouver:
New Society Publishers.
Savitz, A.W., and K. Weber. 2006. The Triple Bottom Line. San Francisco: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
WCED. 1987. Our common future. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
William McDonough Architects. 1992. The Hannover Principles: Design for
Sustainability. Charlottesville, VA: William McDonough & Partners.
www.mcdonough.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Hannover-Principles
-1992.pdf
Online
The American Institute of Architects

www.aia.org.
Architecture 2030 Challenge
www.architecture2030.org.
Advanced Energy Design Guides
www.ashrae.org/aedg.
Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES)
www.nist.gov/el/economics/BEESSoftware.cfm.
BuildingGreen
www.greenbuildingadvisor.com.
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
(BREEAM®) rating program
www.breeam.org.
European Commission, Concerted Action Energy Performance of Buildings Directive
www.epbd-ca.org.
European Commission Joint Research Centre. European Life Cycle Database.
http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ELCD3/
European Commission Joint Research Centre. European Platform on Life Cycle
Assessment.
http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/.
Green Globes
www.greenglobes.com.
GreenSpec® Product Guide
https://www.buildinggreen.com/product-guidance.
International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment.
www.iisbe.org/.
International Living Building Institute, The Living Building Challenge
https://living-future.org/lbc/.
International Organization for Standardization family of 14000 standards,

www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/management-standards/iso14000.htm.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories, Environmental Energy Technologies
Division
http://eetd.lbl.gov/.
Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide
www.sustainabledesignguide.umn.edu.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Buildings Research
www.nrel.gov/buildings/.
Natural Resources Canada, Evaluation of the Built Environment Portfolio.
/www.nrcan.gc.ca/evaluation/reports/2014/16317
The Natural Step
www.thenaturalstep.org.
New Buildings Institute
www.newbuildings.org/.
Rocky Mountain Institute
www.rmi.org.
Tools for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental
Impacts (TRACI)
https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/tool-reduction-and-assessment-chemicals
-and-other-environmental-impacts-traci.
U.S. Green Building Council, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design,
Green Building Certification System
www.usgbc.org/leed.
The Whole Building Design Guide
www.wbdg.org.
CHAPTER TWO
GREEN RATING SYSTEMS, STANDARDS,

AND OTHER GUIDANCE
Rapid growth in interest in green buildings over the past two decades has
occurred with corresponding growth in the number, depth, and breadth of green-
building resources available.
There are three general types of programs or resources that exist to encourage
green-building design. The first type is composed of green-building rating sys-
tems (sometimes referred to as green building label programs), such as the LEED
program. Second are general guidelines or resources, such as this guide, that have
been created and published to encourage and assist designers in achieving green-
building design. Third is the more recent trend of green-building practices incor-
porated as part of design standards and the code enforcement process. This chap-
ter provides a brief summary of each type and cites several specific examples.
GREEN-BUILDING RATING SYSTEMS—INTRODUCTION

Various rating systems, developed by organizations around the world, strive
to indicate how well a building meets prescribed requirements and to determine
whether a building design is green and to what level. They all provide useful
tools to identify and prioritize key environmental issues. These tools incorpo-
rate a coordinated method for accomplishing, validating, and benchmarking
sustainably designed projects. As with any generalized method, each has its
own limitations and may not apply directly to every project’s regional, politi-
cal, and owner design-intent-specific requirements.
There are a wide variety of labeling and certification programs available to
measure the environmental impact and performance of existing buildings.
These programs can be divided into two general categories: those narrowly
focused on energy (and in some cases, water) use, and those more broadly
focused on those and other sustainability categories, such as indoor environ-
mental quality (IEQ). Key programs in the first category include the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager,
ASHRAE’s Building EQ, and country-specific energy performance certifica-
tion established in Europe. Key programs in the second category include U.S.
19
20 Chapter 2: Green Rating Systems, Standards, and Other Guidance
Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design®

(LEED®) rating system and the Building Research Establishment (BRE) Global
Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM®).
While this guide does not endorse or recommend use of any one particular
green-building rating system or program, it does encourage their use when the
application will produce an exceptional green design and encourages the building
operators to maintain and operate the building in a manner that provides its occu-
pants a continuing healthy and energy-efficient living/work space.
It could easily be said that the green-building movement really started in earnest
with the initial establishment of the BREEAM rating system in 1990. BREEAM is a
creation of the Building Research Establishment (BRE) in the UK. This is a volun-
tary, consensus-based, market-oriented assessment program. With one mandatory
and two optional assessment areas, BREEAM encourages and benchmarks sustain-
ably designed office buildings. The mandatory assessment area is the potential envi-
ronmental impact of the building; the two optional areas are design process and
operation/maintenance. Several other countries and regions have developed or are
developing related spinoffs inspired by BREEAM, and BREEAM has been adopted
in other countries. Although initially focused on specific building types, it is been
adapted to include a wider range of different types of buildings. Similar to what has
happened with other green rating systems, BREEAM has been adapted to various
type of programs (called schemes), such as BREEAM for new construction, domes-
tic refurbishment, communities, in-use (existing buildings), and for homes (Eco-
Homes).
The rating method primarily used in the United States is the LEED program, cre-
ated by U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). USGBC started offering this sys-
tem in the 1990s and it is intended to be a voluntary, consensus-based, market-
driven green-building certification system. It evaluates environmental performance
from a “whole-building” perspective over a building’s life cycle, providing a
numerical standard for what constitutes a green building. USGBC’s goal has been
to raise awareness of the benefits of building green, and it has transformed the mar-
ketplace. Additional discussion on LEED can be found in the following section.
Another rating method that was originally developed in Canada and is being
used in the United States is the Green Globes program. Green Globes is an online
auditing tool that includes many of the same concepts as LEED. While both aim to
help a building owner or designer develop a sustainable design, Green Globes is
primarily a self-assessment tool (although third-party assessment is an option) and
also provides recommendations for the project team to follow for improving the
sustainability of the design. In the United Kingdom, Green Globes is known as the
Global Environmental Method program.
Other green-building rating programs exist in countries throughout the world, for
example, Australia’s Green Star and National Australian Built Environment Rating
System (NABERS), Japan’s Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environ-
ment Efficiency (CASBEE), Hong Kong’s Building Environmental Assessment

Method (BEAM), and the Estidama program in the United Arab Emirates.
The procedures used by those organizations and governments providing
building rating systems vary. Many building rating programs use static building
labels—that is, the building’s energy (or other green attributes) is evaluated
once, the label is applied, and the providing organization does no reassessment
to determine if the building continues to actually meet the original specifica-
tions. The application of dynamic labeling is preferred. A few of the building
rating programs actually do include a reassessment (e.g., every two years), and
buildings not continuing to perform lose their building label (Means and Wal-
ters 2010).
THE LEED RATING SYSTEM

Since its development and introduction in the late 1990s, the LEED program has
become a major factor in the advancement of green buildings in the United States
and elsewhere, as well as an influence on how all buildings are thought of in the
design and construction process. LEED has been applied to numerous projects over
a range of project certification levels, and its use has grown rapidly over the past
several years. The LEED rating system started out with a basic program for new
construction, but because a large majority of buildings already exist, a LEED for
existing buildings was released in 2004 and has been revised several times since.
LEED rating systems have also been developed for a variety of specific building
types. These include building core and shell and commercial interiors for project
developers and tenants (respectively), as well as schools, retail, hospitality, data
centers, warehouses and health care, and homes. Growing in importance is the role
of LEED for Existing Buildings Operations and Maintenance (EBOM). The LEED
program and registered building projects have already been, or are being, estab-
lished in other countries including India, Australia, Canada, and China, and new
project registrations in countries outside the United States make up about 40% of
the total, according to recent trends. Many other countries have developed their
own green building rating systems following the basic criteria in LEED or other rat-
ing systems.
LEED is a voluntary program that uses a point-based rating system for a given
building project. USGBC has been continuously working to update and modify the
LEED program since its initial release. Over the years the revisions have, among
other things, reworked the point ratings to provide a more effective focus to drive
positive environmental and health benefits. Part of the revisions were based on
using the Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environ-
mental Impacts (TRACI) developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).
Another change to the LEED program since its initial release was the inclusion
of regional priority credits. These are used to put additional emphasis on design
Image courtesy of Brendan Owens, U.S. Green Building Council.
Figure 2-1 Credit point distribution for LEED for new construction, v4.
features that are particularly important in relation to the local climate and region
where the project is to be located. For example, in areas with known stormwater
problems, the Sustainable Sites Credit 6.1 for Stormwater Design—Quantity Con-
trol may be included in this priority list. A full list of the Regional Priority credits
can be found on the USGBC website (see the References and Resources section at
the end of the chapter).
The fourth version of the LEED program is now known as LEED v4, and was
finalized in 2013. Achieving 40 points will earn LEED Certified status, and the
higher levels of silver, gold, and platinum can be achieved with 50, 60, and 80
points, respectively. The percentage distribution of these credits is illustrated in
Figure 2-1. “Energy and Atmosphere” is the category with the highest number of
points available, and this is in the direct purview of the HVAC&R engineer.
Further discussion on how LEED may evolve to more closely align with other
green-building codes is given in the section on ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Stan-
dard 189.1 and the International Green Construction Code.
OTHER GUIDELINES, RESOURCES, AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS

Beside the rating systems discussed above, there are other types of programs that
are available to measure the environmental impact and performance of buildings
(existing or new construction). Some of these are more broadly focused on the
broad range of sustainability categories and IEQ. Other key programs that narrowly
focus on energy (and in some cases, water) use include the EPA Portfolio Manager,
ASHRAE’s Building EQ, and mandatory country-specific energy performance cer-
tification in the European Union. Key programs that are more broadly focused on
energy and water use, along with other sustainability categories and IEQ, include
the LEED and the BREEAM rating systems, discussed earlier in this chapter.
This section outlines just some of those additional resources that the green build-
ing designer can access. ASHRAE has publications that can help the inexperienced
and experienced industry professional alike. These include the following:
• ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 202, Commissioning Process for Buildings and Sys-

tems (ASHRAE 2013).
• Advanced Energy Design Guide series. (The 30% Guides were developed initially
and were intended to offer a 30% savings compared to ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Stan-
dard 90.1-1999, while the more recent guides are designed for 50% and more sav-
ings compared to the 2004 version of Standard 90.1. These design guides are
available for free download courtesy of a collaboration between ASHRAE and the
U.S. EPA.
• Indoor Air Quality Guide: Best Practices for Design, Construction and Commis-
sioning (ASHRAE 2009a).
• The ASHRAE Guide for Buildings in Hot and Humid Climates, 2nd edition
(ASHRAE 2009b).
• Cold-Climate Buildings Design Guide (ASHRAE 2015).
• ASHRAE also developed user’s manuals for many of its most widely used stan-
dards, such as Standards 62.1, 62.2, 90.1 and 189.1.
• High Performing Buildings magazine. This publication was created by ASHRAE
to provide real-world, case study examples for reference.
Many of these are also discussed elsewhere in this guide but are mentioned here
as a reminder.
The Advanced Energy Design Guide series is a series of books that provide a set of
prescriptive technical approaches to achieve significant energy savings. The docu-
ments are focused on specific building types, typically smaller building projects that
may not have resources available for much engineering study and analysis of energy
saving technologies (e.g., small retail stores). Recommendations are provided based
on the climate zone the project is located in. The initial series of guides was targeted
toward achieving 30% energy savings compared to Standard 90.1-1999, and the
intent is to repeat the series with increasing efficiency levels leading to net zero
designs. The more recent 50% Guides are designed for 50% savings compared to the
2004 version of Standard 90.1. Additional guides with a higher efficiency target are
in the planning process, and funding considerations will determine how far they go
(e.g., a net zero target by 2020 for the AEDG series is one consideration).
These energy guides were produced in collaboration with the American Institute
of Architects (AIA), the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES),
and USGBC, with assistance provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
These guides are available for free from the ASHRAE website and have been
widely distributed since their release.
The Indoor Air Quality Guide was released in January of 2010 and was devel-
oped in conjunction with AIA, the Building Owners and Managers Association
(BOMA), the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association
(SMACNA), the U.S. EPA and USGBC. A summary of the guidance offered is
available for free download from the ASHRAE website, while the detailed docu-
ment is available for purchase.
BUILDING ENERGY QUOTIENT (Building EQ)

ASHRAE unveiled a building energy labeling program known as the Building
Energy Quotient (Building EQ) program in 2009. The program provides a method
to rate a building’s energy performance both “As Designed” (Asset Rating) and
“As Operated” (Operational Rating).
ASHRAE’s Building EQ assessment is designed to be performed by either an
ASHRAE-certified Building Energy Assessment Professional (BEAP) or by a
licensed Professional Engineer. This assessment includes both utility bill analysis
and an ASHRAE Level 1 Energy Audit, which is described in the next section of
this chapter. ASHRAE produces an energy rating ranging from “A+” to “F”, with a
“C” representing median energy performance in comparison to the building’s peers
(Figure 2-2). The building owner also receives a report with recommendations for
how to reduce energy and water use while maintaining acceptable IEQ. Note that
ASHRAE offers a related “as designed” Building EQ rating, so that owners can
compare the actual performance of their building to its potential performance (Fig-
ure 2-3).
ASHRAE’s Building EQ program provides the general public, building owners
and tenants, potential owners and tenants, and building operations and maintenance
staff with information on the potential and actual energy use of buildings. This
information is useful for the following reasons:
• Building owners and operators can see how their building compares to peer
buildings to establish a measure of their potential for energy performance
improvement.
• Building owners can use the information provided to differentiate their building
from others to secure potential buyers or tenants.
• Potential buyers or tenants can gain insight into the value and potential long-term
cost of a building.
• Operation and maintenance staff can use the results to inform their decisions
regarding maintenance activities, influence building owners and managers to
Figure 2-2 Sample Building EQ plaque.
Figure 2-3 Sample Building EQ dashboard.

pursue equipment upgrades, and demonstrate the return on investment for energy
efficiency projects.
Beyond the benefit received by individual building owners and managers, the
increased availability of building data (specifically the relationship between the
design and operation of buildings) will be a valuable research tool for the building
community.
The EPA Portfolio Manager is an online tool that uses utility bills and basic
building information to develop building energy performance reports, water perfor-
mance reports, and greenhouse gas emissions reports. It is intended for use by
building owners and managers. The tool assigns a normalized ENERGY STAR
score of 1 to 100 to each building, with a score of 50 indicating median energy per-
formance compared to its peers. Buildings receiving a score of 75 or above are eli-
gible for ENERGY STAR certification, which must be obtained by a Professional
Engineer or a Registered Architect. This tool also makes high-level recommenda-
tions on how to reduce water and energy use.
EUROPEAN PROGRAMS
In 2002, the European Parliament approved the Energy Performance of Build-
ings Directive (EPBD), which required member nations to develop methodologies
for the calculation of the energy performance of buildings, to establish minimum
energy performance requirements for both new buildings and existing “large”
buildings subject to “major” renovation, and to develop energy performance certifi-
cation programs. An energy performance certificate (EPC) must be issued when
any building (commercial or residential) is constructed, sold, or rented to a new
tenant. The EPC documents the building's energy performance, expressed as letter
score from A to G, based on primary energy consumption, carbon dioxide emis-
sions, or energy cost per unit floor area to facilitate comparisons between similar
buildings. The EPC also includes cost-effective recommendations for improving
the building’s energy performance, which specify the initial cost, estimated annual
energy and carbon dioxide emissions savings, and the simple payback period.
New buildings should meet minimum energy performance requirements (i.e.,
energy class B), as should existing buildings or building units that undergo major
renovation where technically and economically feasible. Most national schemes
have implemented an asset rating system based on calculated energy use for new
and small existing nonpublic buildings; some have chosen an operational rating
system based on billed energy for large and complex nonresidential buildings. The
majority of the national schemes require a certified energy inspector to perform a
building energy audit to collect all relevant data, which are then used to perform the
calculations for issuing a certificate. Implementation and oversight of the certifica-
tion process is typically the responsibility of the national government. Additional
information concerning European EPCs is provided in Arcipowska et al. (2014).
Finally, BRE Global developed and maintains the BREEAM “in-use” standard.
This program encompasses nine sustainability and IEQ categories: energy, water,
materials, pollution, land use and ecology, health and well-being, waste, transport,
and management. Points may be obtained in each category and are then converted
to a weighted score ranging between 0% and 100%. Assessments range upward
from “Acceptable” (one star) to “Outstanding” (six stars). Organizations either self-
assess or obtain formal certification. Obtaining formal certification requires engag-
ing the services of an assessor licensed by BRE Global.
IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH
GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS AND CODES
Since the middle part of the past decade, there has been a movement to make green-
building practices a more mandatory part of the normal building code process. Several
cities in the United States now require LEED certification for building projects above
a certain size or classification (such as a government building). In addition, ASHRAE
has initiated a process to create a series of new standards for high-performance green
buildings, releasing in early 2010 the initial version of Standard 189.1, Standard for
the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings. This Standard is under continuous maintenance and has had several subse-
quent new releases, most recently (as of this writing) in 2017 (ASHRAE 2017).
ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES STANDARD 189.1 AND

THE INTERNATIONAL GREEN CONSTRUCTION CODE (IgCC)
In 2006, ASHRAE (in conjunction with USGBC and IES) began a process to
create a standard that would address a growing need within the industry for a code-
language document for green buildings suitable for adoption as part of building
codes. ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1-2009, Standard for the
Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Build-
ings (ASHRAE 2009) was developed during a more than three-year process with
extensive public review and was initially published in early 2010. This standard is
in a continuous maintenance process, and an updated version was released in 2017.
The standard differs from LEED or other products in that it is not a rating sys-
tem, nor is it a design guideline per se. The purpose of Standard 189.1 is to provide
minimum requirements for the siting, design, construction, and plans for operation
of high-performance green buildings, while attempting to balance environmental
responsibility, resource efficiency, occupant comfort and well-being, and commu-
nity sensitivity. One key point of this is that Standard 189.1 is not targeted for any
building project, but rather specifically for high-performance building projects.
This document is intended to help fill a perceived gap in the evolving building
codes in this area, as localities begin to adopt green-building designs as a require-
ment.
Image courtesy of Tom Lawrence and ASHRAE
Figure 2-4 Relation of Standard 189.1 to other ASHRAE Standards.
While many of the topics and criteria may overlap or seem similar to LEED for
new construction, Standard 189.1 differs in that it establishes mandatory, minimal
requirements across all topical areas. Besides the obvious intent of providing a
vehicle for adoption into building codes, this standard may also be used by devel-
opers, corporations, universities, or governmental agencies to set requirements for
their own building projects.
Standard 189.1 is not intended to do away with other ASHRAE standards.
Rather, it builds upon key ASHRAE standards and adopts these with modifications
when considered necessary to develop a document that deals with high-perfor-
mance green buildings, as illustrated in Figure 2-4.
This standard includes mandatory criteria in all topical areas (for example, water
or energy) and provides for two compliance paths. The prescriptive path includes
simple compliance criteria; simple in the sense that they are more like a checklist of
technologies or system requirements. The performance path is more complicated in
that it requires more analysis to verify that compliance is indeed achieved.
A brief overview of some key criteria in Standard 189.1 that the typical
ASHRAE member or design professional should be aware of is given below. This
is just a brief overview and is not intended to be an all-inclusive summary.
Sustainable Sites
In addition to a cool-roof requirement for cooling-dominated climates (Climate
Zones 0–3), the standard also has provisions for building walls to be shaded or to
have a minimum solar reflective index value for opaque wall materials in all but the
coldest climate zones.
Water Use Efficiency

Standard 189.1 puts limits on the number of cycles of water through a cooling
tower. It also requires condensate collection on air-handling units above 5.5 tons
(19 kW) of cooling capacity in more humid regions (areas with a design wet-bulb
temperature greater than 72°F [22°C]).
Standard 189.1 is also unique in that it requires the installation of meters with
data storage and retrieval capability on systems and areas above a given threshold
in water usage. Similar provisions are included in the energy section for energy use
and IEQ section for monitoring of outdoor airflow.
Energy Efficiency
While the LEED program, through Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1, provides
for a sliding scale of points awarded for energy efficiency improvements above
Standard 90.1, Standard 189.1 began with the intended goal of providing manda-
tory measures that would result in buildings using 30% less energy than what is
designed according to the existing Standard 90.1 at that time, including process
loads.
During the development of Standard 189.1, many concepts and requirements
were considered for improvements. At the same time, addenda to Standard 90.1
were developed that increased the overall efficiency levels of Standard 90.1. The
net result is that the difference in overall average energy utilization index (EUI) for
buildings designed according to Standard 189.1 and Standard 90.1-2016 is not that
great. It has been ASHRAE’s intent to have the energy efficiency levels for Stan-
dard 189.1 improve at a faster rate than those for Standard 90.1, with an ultimate
goal of having Standard 189.1 reach nearly net zero or cost-effective net zero status
by the year 2020 (although the definition of an optimum nearly net zero value has
yet to be established).
One of the key considerations when developing the energy requirements for
Standard 189.1 was whether to include on-site renewable energy and, if so, to what
extent. Many renewable energy systems are not yet fully cost competitive with con-
ventional energy sources, depending on the local energy costs and particularly
when excluding incentive programs that may go away at any time. Therefore, the
standard only includes the provisions for being “renewable ready” with provisions
for allowing ease of future installation of renewable energy systems as a mandatory
requirement. Exceptions are included for areas with low solar incidence or local
shading. In the prescriptive path, on-site renewable energy is included, but a project
can still comply with this standard using other methods that would have equivalent
benefits or the engineers and designers may elect to go with the performance com-
pliance path.
Energy metering is required for key systems (e.g., HVAC) above certain thresh-
olds, because even when a building is initially designed to be energy efficient, it
can quickly slip into having less than stellar energy efficiency if not continuously
monitored and well maintained.
Standard 189.1 makes numerous modifications to the requirements in
Standard 90.1 regarding HVAC systems. The following is a summary of key
points:
• The threshold for occupancy levels requiring demand-controlled ventilation is

lowered.
• The minimum size requirement for economizers is reduced. Other specific
exception and requirement changes are included, but a description is beyond the
scope of this guide.
• Fan power limits (per volume of air moved) are lowered.
• The requirements for energy recovery from exhaust air are expanded and the
minimum effectiveness of the energy recovery device is set at 60%.
• Levels of duct insulation are increased.
• Unoccupied hotel/motel guest room controls are included.
Depending on the project approach, additional requirements for equipment effi-

ciency beyond Standard 90.1 may also be incorporated. In addition, requirements
are set for automated peak demand reduction of the building.
The performance path for showing compliance with the energy section of
ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1 includes demonstrating equiva-
lent performance in terms of both energy cost and CO2 equivalent emissions,
compared to if the building project had been designed strictly to the criteria in
the prescriptive path.
IEQ
Several aspects of indoor environmental quality are relevant to HVAC design:
tobacco smoke control, outdoor air monitoring, filtration /air cleaning, and determina-
tion of outdoor airflow rate.
The minimum ventilation design for outdoor airflow is to be according to
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1 (ASHRAE 2016b) using the Ventilation Rate
Procedure. Outdoor air monitoring is to be done using permanently mounted,
direct outdoor airflow measurement devices. In contrast to LEED, CO2 moni-
toring in densely occupied zones is not included as part of Standard 189.1.
Tobacco smoke control is achieved by simply banning smoking within the build-
ing and near entrances, outdoor air intakes, or operable windows.
Materials and Resources

A number of requirements included in this section parallel those included with
the LEED program for new construction. Items of particular note include a con-
struction waste management provision to divert a minimum of 50% of nonhazard-
ous waste and demolition debris from being sent to a landfill, a ban on CFC-
containing equipment, and for fire suppression systems to contain no ozone-deplet-
ing substances.
Construction and Plans for Operation

Standard 189.1 includes provisions for not only how a building should be con-
structed, but also for planning for how it should be operated once occupied. Since
the standard is written and intended for adoption into building codes, only items
that would be expected to be developed and in place at the time a certificate of
occupancy is issued could reasonably be considered for inclusion in this standard.
The approach taken within Standard 189.1 is to set requirements for the develop-
ment of plans for operation in critical areas.
This standard includes requirements for building acceptance testing and/or
commissioning, erosion control, IAQ, moisture control, and idling of construc-
tion vehicles to be implemented during construction. Commissioning is to be
done according to requirements that in essence parallel those in ASHRAE
guidelines. IAQ requirements during construction and before occupancy are
similar to those in the LEED program but not identical and when different are
generally more stringent.
Plans for operation are required in key areas that would be needed to help ensure
the building performs as would be expected for a high-performance green building.
These include criteria in setting up long-term monitoring and verification of water
and energy use, as well as IAQ through provisions such as outdoor air monitoring.
Maintenance and service life plans are required as well, and these involve equip-
ment and systems relevant to the HVAC&R or MEP engineer.
International Green Construction Code (IgCC)

Soon after the initial release of Standard 189.1, ASHRAE and the International
Code Council (ICC) reached an agreement whereby the standard would be included
as an appendix to the International Green Construction Code (IgCC). The IgCC
was first released in March 2012 and initially specified Standard 189.1 as a compli-
ance option. By that it was meant that the project team had a choice for compliance:
they can comply with the IgCC or with Standard 189.1.
After several years of a dual set of standards, ASHRAE and ICC agreed that the
two standards should be merged. Starting with the 2018 code cycle, ASHRAE will
be the subject matter expert for technical content while ICC will ensure that the
resulting standard/code will be responsible for the administrative provisions in the
2018 IgCC. The 2018 version of the IgCC will reflect this merger. This “IgCC
powered by 189.1” will hopefully lead to more widespread adoption of green build-
ing codes.
USGBC is also expected to review the measures in the IgCC in 2018 by compar-
ing these to the LEED requirements, hopefully leading to closer alignment of
LEED to the IgCC.
RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
The situations surrounding the residential building market vary widely around
the world based on local situations. The joint ICC/ASHRAE 700 National Green
Building Standard was released in 2015 (ICC 2015), and since then ASHRAE has
expanded its emphasis with respect to the residential market. A local jurisdiction
may elect to include compliance with ICC 700 as part of their adoption of the IgCC.
The 2018 version of the IgCC will be “deemed to comply” for residential construc-
tion.
OTHER BUILDING CODES

In 2010, California became the first state in the Untied States to adopt a green
building code (known as CALGreen). See the accompanying Digging Deeper side-
bar for more information on CALGreen.
A compilation showing where in the United States states and jurisdictions
have surpassed minimum energy code requirements and an outline of several
green rating systems is available online by the Building Codes Assistance Proj-
ect (http://bcapcodes.org). Major cities across the Untied States that have taken
exceptional steps towards increasing the energy efficiency of their buildings
include Chicago, New York, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. An overview
of international building energy efficiency policies (e.g., codes, incentives, and
labels for all types of buildings including mandatory, model code, and voluntary
programs) is maintained by the IEA in a publicly available database
(www.iea.org/beep/).
Other Resources
Further information regarding these resources can be found in the References
and Resources section at the end of the chapter. Other guides and methods include
the following:
CALGREEN CODE: AMERICA’S FIRST STATEWIDE

GREEN-BUILDING CODE
In 2010, the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) was
developed to promote the design of efficient and environmentally responsible
residential and nonresidential buildings in California. The CALGreen code is
part of the overall California Building Standards Code and is the first statewide
green code established in the United States. It was developed, in part, in an
effort to meet the provisions of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, which requires a cap on
greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, with mandatory reporting. The 2010 CAL-
Green Code became effective January 1, 2011 and a modified 2016 version took
effect in January 2017.
To reduce the overall environmental impact of new buildings constructed in
California, and to meet their maximum environmental efficiency targets, the
CALGreen Code adopts many green-building practices as mandatory building
code requirements. The CALGreen Code includes requirements (divisions) for
planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation,
Digging Deeper
material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. The
code also requires building commissioning to verify and ensure that all building
systems operate as designed to meet their maximum energy efficiency targets.
Some similarities to LEED programs include standards for stormwater pollu-
tion prevention, light pollution reduction, indoor and site water savings, con-
struction waste management, energy performance, outdoor air delivery, carbon
monoxide monitoring, and materials selection. In some cases, CALGreen has
stricter targets than LEED, in others, LEED is stricter, and in many others, the
requirements are identical. There are several CALGreen requirements not found
in LEED, such as installing water meters on buildings with area greater than
50,000 ft2 (4600 m2), providing weather-resistant exterior walls and foundation
envelopes, defining the type of fireplace that can be installed, and employing
acoustical control (interior and exterior).
In addition to the mandatory statewide CALGreen requirements, a city or
county may adopt local ordinances to require more restrictive standards that go
above and beyond the mandatory measures. These packages of voluntary mea-
sures, called Tier 1 and Tier 2, include a set of provisions from each code divi-
sion. These provisions are additional measures that are stricter than the
mandatory codes. For instance, building energy performance must exceed the
California Energy Code (Title 24) by 15% and 30% for Tier 1 and Tier 2,
respectively. Additionally, Tier 1 includes one additional elective from the
water efficiency division, whereas Tier 2 includes 3. Some of the cities that have
adopted Tier 1 include Burlingame, Napa, and Santa Rosa. As of the writing of
this edition, only Palo Alto has adopted Tier 2.
• The Whole Building Design Guide

• The Living Building Challenge V2.0 (An updated version 2.1 of this program
was released in May 2012)
• Green Building Advisor
• California Collaborative for High Performance Schools
• Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide
• New York High Performance Building Guidelines (Released in 1999 by the non-
profit Design Trust for Public Space, but still has relevant information for today)
Work referred to by architects includes:
• The Hannover Principles (William McDonough Architects 1992)
• GreenSpec® Product Guide
• Information from The Natural Step (a nonprofit organization)
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO 14000 family of standards)
• Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES). (This software
tool to analyze the impact of a building uses a life-cycle assessment approach as
specified in ISO 14040. An online version was released in 2010.)
• Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental
Impacts (TRACI)
REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
Published
AIA. 1996. Environmental Resource Guide. Edited by Joseph Demkin. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Arcipowska A., Anagnostopoulos F., Mariottini F., Kunkel S. 2014. Energy per-
formance certificates across the EU. Brussels: Buildings Performance Institute
Europe. http://bpie.eu/publication/energy-performance-certificates-across-the
-eu/
ASHRAE. 2009a. Indoor Air Quality Guide: Best Practices for Design, Construc-
tion and Commissioning. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2009b. The ASHRAE Guide for Buildings in Hot and Humid Climates.
Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2012. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2-2012, Method of Testing General
Ventilation Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size.
Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2013. ASHRAE/IES 202-2013. Commissioning Process for Buildings
and Systems. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2015. Cold-Climate Buildings Design Guide. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2016a. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2016, Thermal Environmental
Conditions for Human Occupancy. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2016c. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2016, Ventilation for Acceptable

Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2016b. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. 2017. ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1-2017, Standard for
the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings. Atlanta: ASHRAE.
Deru, M., and P. Torcellini. 2007. Source Energy and Emissions Factors for
Energy Use in Buildings. Technical Report NREL/TP_550-38617, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.
ICC. 2015. ICC/ASHRAE National Green Building Standard. eISBN-13: 978-0-
86718-751-9.
Jarnagin, R.E., R.M. Colker, D. Nail and H. Davies. 2009. ASHRAE Building EQ.
ASHRAE Journal 51(12):18–21.
McDonough, W. 1992. The Hannover principles: Design for sustainability. Presen-
tation, Earth Summit, Brazil.
Means, J.K. and F.H. Walters. 2010. Do High Performance-Labeled Buildings
Really Perform at the Promised Levels? CLIMA 2010 REHVA World Con-
gress 10, Antalya, Turkey. ISBN 978-0975-6907-14-6: Proceedings CD-ROM.
Taylor, S.T. 2005. LEED and Standard 62.1. ASHRAE Journal Sustainability Sup-
plement, September.
USGBC. 2009. LEED 2009 Green Building Design and Construction Reference
Guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Green Building Council.
William McDonough Architects. 1992. The Hannover Principles: Design for
Sustainability. Charlottesville, VA: William McDonough & Partners.
www.mcdonough.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Hannover-Principles
-1992.pdf
Online
The American Institute of Architects
www.aia.org.
ASHRAE Building Energy Quotient
www.buildingenergyquotient.org/.
ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guides
www.ashrae.org/standards-research--technology/advanced-energy-design-guides.
BuildingGreen
Building Codes Assistance Project
http://bcapcodes.org
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
(BREEAM®) rating program
www.breeam.org.
Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development, Smart Communities Network

www.smartcommunities.ncat.org.
Collaborative for High Performance Schools
www.chps.net.
European Commission—Nearly Zero Energy Buildings
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/buildings/nearly-zero
-energy-buildings.
Estidama (United Arab Emirates)
https://www.upc.gov.ae/en/estidama/estidama-program.
Green Building Advisor
Green Globes
www.greenglobes.com.
GreenSpec® Product Guide
https://www.buildinggreen.com/product-guidance.
Green Star (Australia)
www.gbca.org.au/green-star/.
International Code Council (ICC).
https://www.iccsafe.org/
International Energy Agency, Building Energy Efficiency Policies Database
http://www.iea.org/beep/.
International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment.
www.iisbe.org/.
International Living Building Institute, The Living Building Challenge
http://living-future.org/lbc.
International Organization for Standardization family of 14000 standards,
https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch.
International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol
www.evo-world.org.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories, Environmental Energy Technologies
Division
http://eetd.lbl.gov.
Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide
www.sustainabledesignguide.umn.edu.
National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS)
https://nabers.gov.au/public/webpages/home.aspx.
National Institute for Standard and Technology, Building for Environmental and
Economic Sustainability (BEES)
www.nist.gov/el/economics/BEESSoftware.cfm.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Buildings Research

www.nrel.gov/buildings.
Natural Resources Canada, Evaluation of the Built Environment Portfolio.
/www.nrcan.gc.ca/evaluation/reports/2014/16317
The Natural Step
www.naturalstep.org.
New Buildings Institute
www.newbuildings.org.
Rocky Mountain Institute
www.rmi.org.
Tools for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental
Impacts (TRACI)
https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/tool-reduction-and-assessment-chemicals
-and-other-environmental-impacts-traci.
U.S. Green Building Council, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design,
Green Building Certification System
www.usgbc.org/leed.
U.S. Green Building Council, Regional Priority Credit Listing
www.usgbc.org/rpc.
The Whole Building Design Guide
www.wbdg.org.
Section 2:
The Design Process
CHAPTER THREE
PROJECT STRATEGIES AND EARLY DESIGN
INGREDIENTS OF A SUCCESSFUL GREEN PROJECT ENDEAVOR

The following ingredients are essential in delivering a successful green design:
• Commitment from the entire project team, starting with the owner.
• Establishing Owner’s Project Requirements (OPR), including green design
goals, early in the design process.
• Integration of team ideas.
• Effective execution throughout the project’s phases—from predesign through
the end of its useful service life.
Establishing Green Design Goals Early

Establishing goals early in the project planning stages is a key to developing a
successful green design and minimizing costs. It is easy to say that goals need to
be established, but many designers and owners struggle with what green design is
and what green/sustainable goals should be established. The following are typical
questions to ask:
• What does it cost to design and construct a green project?

• Where do you get the best return for the investment?
• How far should the team go to accomplish a green design?
Today there are many guides a team can use with ideas on which green/sus-
tainable principles should be considered. Chapter 2 of this guide presents several
rating systems and references on environmental performance improvement. The
essence of these documents is to provide guidance on how to reduce the impact
the building will have on the environment. While the approaches and goals con-
tained in each differ, all suggest common principles that designers may find help-
ful to apply to their projects.
41

Ashrae Green Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ashrae Green Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ashrae Green Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complete Guidance on

1791 Tullie Circle

Green Guide Cover - 5th Ed_2017.indd 1 12/5/2017 11:26:54 AM

Updates and errata for this publication will be posted on the

All rights reserved.

Cover design by Megan Joyce. Cover image by Costas A. Balaras.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: ASHRAE (Firm)

Without a name, an unseen face,

by Glenn Thomas, ©1996

Section 2: The Design Process

Section 3: Postdesign—Construction and Beyond

DIGGING DEEPER SIDEBARS

ASHRAE is the preeminent technical society representing engineers prac-

This new edition of ASHRAE GreenGuide represents another significant up-

WHO SHOULD USE ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

HOW TO USE ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ON ASHRAE GREENGUIDE

The following individuals served as coeditors on this edition of ASHRAE

Thomas Lawrence Abdel K Darwich

In addition, the following individuals contributed new written materials on

Constantinos A. Balaras Ashish Rakheja

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

• Minimizing natural resource consumption through more efficient utilization of

Green-building advocates can cite plenty of reasons why buildings should be

THE IMPACT OF CARBON CONSIDERATIONS

(ASHRAE 1999). In Europe, there is an ongoing parallel effort to meet an ambi-

Source: IPCC (2014)

Figure 1-1 Cross-sectoral mitigation strategies.

states introduced national laws, regulations, and administrative provisions

methodologies for performing and evaluating green-building design efforts are

SOME DEFINITIONS AND VIEWS

• Development is sustainable “if it meets the needs of the present without

When Green Design is Applicable

55, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy (ASHRAE 2017a),

Embodied Energy and Life-Cycle Assessment

lation) or the replacement of building elements or systems (e.g., replacing windows

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES

The American Institute of Architects

International Organization for Standardization family of 14000 standards,

GREEN RATING SYSTEMS, STANDARDS,

GREEN-BUILDING RATING SYSTEMS—INTRODUCTION

Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design®

ment Efficiency (CASBEE), Hong Kong’s Building Environmental Assessment

THE LEED RATING SYSTEM

Image courtesy of Brendan Owens, U.S. Green Building Council.

OTHER GUIDELINES, RESOURCES, AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS

• ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 202, Commissioning Process for Buildings and Sys-

BUILDING ENERGY QUOTIENT (Building EQ)

Figure 2-2 Sample Building EQ plaque.

Figure 2-3 Sample Building EQ dashboard.

ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES STANDARD 189.1 AND

Image courtesy of Tom Lawrence and ASHRAE

Figure 2-4 Relation of Standard 189.1 to other ASHRAE Standards.

Water Use Efficiency

• The threshold for occupancy levels requiring demand-controlled ventilation is

Depending on the project approach, additional requirements for equipment effi-

Materials and Resources

Construction and Plans for Operation

International Green Construction Code (IgCC)