BREEAM and LEED: Design,

Productivity and Ecology

Dr Brian Edwards

Emeritus Professor of Architecture ECA Edinburgh

UniversityAuthor of Green Buildings Pay

Rough Guide to Sustainability

Sustainable Architecture: European Directives and Building Design

Presentation based on 2 key

Brian Edwards publications• Books which explore

the impact of

environmental

assessment systems

on how we design,

engineer, construct

and manage buildings

• Books which explain

the professional

responsibilities

The need to assess the sustainability

of a building project

• Growing awareness of the

environmental impacts of

buildings

• Poor design may damage the

environment for 50-100 years

• Need to set benchmarks for

sustainable design

• Hence growth of BREEAM and

LEED

• Client need to demonstrate

green standard of project

Aims of environmental assessment

schemes

• Set criteria against

which to assess a

building

• Provide a score or

rating

• Offers commercial

value to client (‘green

credentials’)

• Allows comparison with

similar building types

Key elements of an assessment

system (BREEAM, LEED)

• Identify the environmental criteria to be used in the

assessment system for that building type (i.e energy,

materials, waste etc.)

• Make a decision on how the criteria will be scored (i.e. %,

credits, points per criterion met etc.)

• Choose how individual scores are combined to give a final

rating (i.e. descriptive, stars, medals).

• Different building types pose different problems of

assessment, and different countries have different

environmental priorities

• Design assessment and certification on completion

• Weighting and points regularly reviewed by national Green

Building Councils

BREEAM (Building Research Establishment

Environmental Assessment Method)

• World’s first

environmental rating

system for buildings

• BREEAM for offices

released in 1990

• Other BREEAMS

introduced since

(housing, schools, retail

etc)

• BREEAM most widely

used tool in the world

(LEED is taking over)

• Over 560,000 buildings

certified

BREEAM aims to raise standards

beyond Regulation minimum values

Re

gu

lato

ry m

inim

um

High Quality Sector

Exemplars

BREEAM

Environmental performance

UK

Build

ing S

tock

Offices

Homes

Industrial

Versions

of

BREEAM

in 2010

Industrial

Healthcare

Courts

Jails

Schools

Prisons

Retail

Courts

• Waste

BREEAM Section Credits Available

as %

Management 8

Health + Well-Being 14

Energy 21

Transport 10

Water 6

Materials 12

Waste 7

Land Use + Ecology 10

Pollution 12

BREEAM Offices (2008 version):

Credits available for each section

Score

(%)

BREEAM

Rating

< 30% UNCLASSIFIED

30% PASS

45% GOOD

55% VERY GOOD

70% EXCELLENT

85% OUTSTANDING

BREEAM rating scores

BREEAM

Section

Credits

Achieved

A

Credits

Available

B

% of Credits

Achieved

C=100(A / B)

Section

Weighting

D

Section

Score

C x D

Management 7 10 70% 0.12 8.40%

Health +

Well-Being

11 14 79% 0.15 11.79%

Energy 10 21 48% 0.19 9.05%

Transport 5 10 50% 0.08 4.00%

Water 4 6 67% 0.06 4.00%

Materials 6 12 50% 0.125 6.25%

Waste 3 7 43% 0.075 3.21%

Land Use +

Ecology

4 10 40% 0.10 4.00%

Pollution 5 12 42% 0.10 4.17%

Total Score

Innovation Credits Achieved

FINAL BREEAM Score

BREEAM RATING

54.87%

1%

55.87%

VERY

GOOD

Example of BREEAM 2008 Office calculation

Presentation of BREEAM Certificate

Other environmental

assessment schemes

• BREEAM - United Kingdom

• LEED - USA

• MINERGIE - Switzerland

• DGNB - Germany

• ECO-QUANTUM - Netherlands

• CASBEE - Japan

• GREEN STAR - Australia

Most of these systems are modelled on the original BREEAM approach of

specifying environmental categories, awarding scores and then bringing the

scores together in to one rating

Leadership in Energy and

Environmental Design (LEED)

• LEED released in 1998 and based

on BREEAM

• Run by the US Green Building

Council (USGBC)

• Structured originally in to six

categories that gave up to 69 points

in total. Now 10 categories

• LEED Version 4 now 8 categories

with up to 110 points

• Environmental rather than energy

focus (maximum energy 20%)

• 70% in USA as against BREEAM

80% in UK

Location and

transportation

16New Category

Sustainable Sites 8 (10)

Water Efficiency 3 (11)

Energy and Atmosphere 6 (33) Five times increase

Materials and Resources 7 (13)

Indoor Environmental

Quality 8 (16) Double points

Regional priority 4 New category

Innovation and Design

Process 2 (5)

Total number of project points possible 110 was 69 under

LEED Version 1

LEED credit and points categories

with update LEAD version 4 (2016)

BREEAM and LEED compared

for Offices in 2010

Whole-building approach encourages and

guides a collaborative, integrated design and

construction process

Optimizes environmental and economic

factors but not energy

Four levels of LEED- certification: 2016

version in red

Platinum Level (80-120) 52+ points (69

possible)

Gold Level (60-79) 39 - 51 points

Silver Level (50-59) 33 - 38 points

Certified Level (40-49) 26 - 32 points

Technical Overview of LEED

Conclusions: Certification

schemes• Growth in environmental awareness and building

certification has changed how we design and construct

buildings. It’s the points scored that matter

• The key drivers are client demand for green image and

user expectation for healthy workplace

• BREEAM, LEED provide image, marketing and financial

benefits

• BREEAM and LEED are environmental not energy

assessment schemes (unlike Passivhaus)

• Globalisation of assessment schemes can undermine

national identity

• Architects and engineers need to understand

assessment schemes (can be certified assessors)

Example Barclaycard HQ

BREEAM Excellent

Conclusions: Design

• Health and wellbeing of users is key factor in how

buildings are now designed

• Energy efficiency is not the only or main driver

• Nature (inside and out) and natural materials play a key

role

• Eco-modernism is new mantra (not energy modernism)

• Buildings are part of wider drive to green our cities,

hence urban design matters too.

• BREEAM and LEED do not on their own produce great

architecture

• Dual certificaiton is future (BREEAM and Passivhaus)

• Key areas of change: facades, atria, roofs

Example: PlantationPlace, London (Arup

associates) BREEAM Excellent

facade atrium

Federal office San Francisco

LEED Gold

General South facade

Conclusions: Technology

• New smart technologies are emerging

under impact of BREEAM, LEED

• Ecology and technology are being

combined in interesting new ways

• Roofs, atria and facades are going through

big technological changes

• Cradle to Cradle approach is impacting on

material and system choices

Example NASA sustainability

base (LEED Platinum)

Example: Green Lighthouse,

University of Copenhagen

Conclusions: Business

• BREEAM, LEED are changing how clients view buildings

• Green building certification offer clear marketing benefits

• Green buildings are seen as healthy and productive

• Productivity in green offices is 4% higher than uncertified

buildings

• LEED was adopted by Obama in his Executive Order

13514 (Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy

and economic performance)

• Global clients require BREEAM or LEED certification

• Fee for BREEAM and LEED certification can eat into

design fees

Example: Genzyme HQ, Boston

LEED Platinum

Ramboll HQ, Copenhagen

Conclusions: Future thoughts

• National environmental certification reinforces cultural

identity and

• Global certification undermines national identity and

climatic design

• Split between environmental certification (BREEAM) and

energy certification (Passivhaus and Energy Star) is not

good for design or ecological integration

• In EU different certification schemes undermines free

movement of professional services. There should be an

EU scheme

• Buildings in use do not perform as designed or as

certified. Need to review certification periodically and

remove if needed

China: east meets west

How do Green Buildings Pay?

• When the extra environmental, energy and

ecological costs are offset by:

1.Gains in productivity within the building

2.Enhanced image and marketability of the

building and hence asset value gains over time

3.Reduced exposure to rising energy costs

4.Reduced exposure to rising environmental

regulation

5.Benefits to user health and wellbeing