Back in 2011 regulations were put in place that officially launched South Africa into the world of green buildings. Of course there had been those who had pioneered a path years before but it’s since then that South Africa has chosen to walk in step with the much of the world on the green buildings front. In fact between the 16th-18 of October this year will see Cape Town play host to the “Green Leaders for the World GBC Congress” at the 6th annual Green Building Convention.
Internationally much of the hype has died down and a vast body of people in the industry are knuckling down and getting on with the business of building better quality buildings. Many of those previously sceptical players in the building industry have realised that Green construction isn’t all that different from the conventional kind. Both need to be vigilantly organized and both need skilled labour to be brought to the table. The difference is that conventional construction doesn’t take the welfare of the environment into account nearly as much as green construction does. A building with certain green guidelines will even see construction of mechanisms whose sole purpose is to greatly reduce the overall impact the building has on the environment. Conventional construction often doesn’t have any such additional mechanisms.
Current technology facilitates buildings getting a significant allotment of their energy from clean/renewable sources. Green guidelines have the wherewithal to demand that a building receive a given portion of its energy from solar or wind power sources. The infrastructure for such energy delivery would have to be put in place during the early stages of construction.
Inevitably the issue of construction costs of green buildings surface regularly, but these have come down significantly, making green buildings more affordable. Dr. Prem C. Jain, Chairman – Indian Green Building Council says that in India the construction costs of a green building which is about 3-5 per cent higher for Platinum rated green building than a conventional building, the incremental cost gets paid back within 3-4 years with substantial reduction in operational costs.
The conventionally held view is that the initial or capital cost of energy efficient and green buildings is higher than that of other buildings. However, it is well established in studies done in the US, UK, Australia and India that when considering the total costs over the life of a building, including capital and operational costs, energy efficient and green buildings are typically more economical than conventional buildings. Specifically, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has noted that the energy consumption in both new and existing buildings can be cut by an estimated 30 to 50 per cent without significantly increasing investment costs with proven and commercially available technologies. The IPCC further notes that this potential for greenhouse gas emission reductions from buildings is common to developed and developing countries.
Some construction that follows international green guidelines merely involves using the most efficient equipment possible. Take central air conditioning for example; previously used units weren’t nearly as efficient as many of the units currently available. Certainly, a building could still be fitted with a less than efficient unit. Green guidelines, though, would most likely stipulate that the building be equipped with an efficient Energy Star compliant unit. Measures would have to be taken to ensure no leakage of heat from the building. A unit working overtime to keep a building at a desired temperature would defeat the whole purpose of getting an efficient unit in the first place. The best way to make sure heat doesn’t easily escape from, or enter into the system, is to make sure the building is sealed and the ducts don’t leak, which is best accounted for during construction- which is the whole point.
Coming back to South African standards: in 2011 government in South Africa put forward the National Building Regulations, SANS 10400 which includes requirements for energy usage in buildings. Now mandated, SANS 10400 is mandatory on all new buildings and major renovations requiring building plan approval.
Energy regulations such as SANS 10400 are important components in energy efficiency of buildings, and energy use equal to or less than that of SANS 10400 is also a minimum requirement for a Green Star SA rating. Extra points are then awarded in the rating system for exceeding the minimum requirements of SANS 10400X. However, Green Star SA goes beyond the requirements of only energy efficiency, addressing other environmental and human health impacts of buildings.
Furthermore, in its current form, SANS 10400X can only be applied in the design of new buildings and major renovations, and does not specify requirements for the operation or “in-use” phase of buildings – whereas Green Star SA rating tools are being developed for the operation or “in-use” phase of buildings. (Source: CIDB)
According to the Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA), an independent body, the country has seen a massive increase in the Green Star SA rating of buildings. Based on the Green Building Council of Australia’s Green Star rating system, it is the official green certification measure for buildings in South Africa, authorised by GBCSA. The first few examples of Green Star rated building in South Africa were; the Nedbank phase-two head office in Sandton; Xenprop’s Ridgeside project in Umhlanga, The Villa Mall, in Pretoria and more recently Standard Bank’s Rosebank Office. Many more have followed.
A building development can receive either a 4-star rating signalling that it has employed “best practice”; a 5-star rating which recognises “South African Excellence”, or the coveted 6-star rating indicating that the project is a world leader.
Green guidelines are about trying to save energy and resources, with the ultimate goal of saving the environment. Towards that end, every little bit helps. The sample guidelines above are some of many new initiatives in the construction industry, many more come on to the table as this process rolls out. Time will tell how many were constructive and what failed to make an impact in drive for sustainability and the reduction of the carbon footprint.