All Issue

2020 Vol.11, Issue 3 Preview Page

General Article

Green building strategies for LEED-certified laboratory buildings: comparison between gold and platinum levels
Jinho Kim1*
1Associate Professor, Division of Architecture and Urban Design, Incheon National University, Incheon, South Korea, Institute of Urban Science, Incheon National University
* Corresponding Author
29 September 2020. pp. 153-173
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Laboratory facilities at higher education institutions are increasingly utilizing green building strategies to decrease their environmental footprint. The U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system has been developed and widely applied over the past two decades. During this time, comparative studies of LEED strategies have not been rare, but case studies of specific building types are still called for. This paper presents eight case studies of LEED Gold- and Platinum-certified laboratory facilities (four each) in order to examine and compare the integrated design strategies that achieved LEED credits of five LEED categories: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiencies, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality. The following conclusions were drawn. First, the Optimize Energy Performance credit (from the Energy and Atmosphere category) played a critical role in higher ratings, through integrating innovative architectural designs to maximize energy efficiency and requiring the client’s commitment to and investment in renewable energy and green power. Second, higher scores were obtained by active engagement in stormwater design, innovative wastewater technologies, and daylight and views. Lastly, university-level commitment and master planning efforts are critical to introduce an integrated design approach from the early project stage. These findings will provide meaningful references and guidelines for university administrators, architects, engineering consultants, and related stakeholders.

Keywords
green buildings
LEED
laboratories
integrated design
case study
References
1
UNEP, United Nations Environmental Program for Sustainable Buildings and Construction, 2018. available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/resource-efficiency/what-we-do/one-planet-network
2
S. Kubba, Handbook of green building design and construction: LEED, BREEAM and Green Globes. 2017, Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
10.1016/B978-0-12-810433-0.00003-4
3
D. Sartor, M.A. Piette, W. Tschudi, and S. Fok, Strategies for energy benchmarking in cleanrooms and laboratory-type facilities, 2000 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings (2000), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California.
4
G. Bell, D. Sartor, and W. Mills, The Berkeley hood: Development and commercialization of an innovative high-performance laboratory fume hood, Progress and Research Status: 1995-September 2003, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report LBNL-48982 (rev.), September 2003, available at: http://ateam.lbl.gov/ hightech/fumehood/doc/LBNL-48983_FY03.pdf
5
M. Crosbie, Architecture for science. 2004, Victoria, Australia: The Images Publishing Group.
6
E. Mills, G. Bell, D. Sartor, A. Chen, D. Avery, M. Siminovitch, S. Greenberg, G. Marton, A. de Almeida, and L. Eng Lock, Energy efficiency in California laboratory-type facilities, Application Team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's Center for Building Science (1996), available at: http://eetd.lbl.gov/mills/emills/pubs/ PDF/LabEnergy.pdf
10.2172/409878
7
G. Sharp, "Laboratory energy use with demand-based control", in E. Dittrich, (Ed.), The sustainable laboratory handbook. 2015, Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH, pp. 351-362.
10.1002/9783527337095.ch28PMC4322187
8
B. Brewer, A. Harris, and W. Thomann, Evaluation of energy performance changes related to hood sash best management practices, paper presented at Laboratories for the 21st Century Conference, Colorado (2003), available at: www.epa.gov/labs21century/
9
J. Woolliams, M. Lloyd, and J. Spengler, The case for sustainable laboratories: first steps at Harvard University. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 6(4) (2005), pp. 363-382.
10.1108/14676370510623856
10
L. Matthiessen and P. Morris, Costing green: A comprehensive cost database and budgeting methodology, Davis Langdon, (2004), available at: https://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/Costing%20Green_A%20Comprehensive%20Cost%20Database%20and%20Budgeting%20Methodology.pdf
11
P. Morris, and L. Matthiessen, Costing green revisited: Reexamining the feasibility and cost impact of sustainable design in the light of increased market adoption, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, CTBUH Research Paper (2007), available at: https://global.ctbuh.org/resources/papers/download/1242-cost-of- green-revisited-reexamining-the-feasability-and-cost-impact-of-sustainable-design-in-the-light-of-increased-market-adoption.pdf
12
L. Lesniewski, M. Matthiessen, P. Morris, and S. Tepfer, The power of zero: Optimizing value for next generation green. 2013, Kansas City, MO: BNIM.
13
G. Kats, L. Alevantis, A. Berman, E. Mills, J. Perlman, The costs and financial benefits of green buildings: A report to California's sustainable building taskforce. 2003, Sacramento, CA: California Sustainable Building Task Force.
14
A. Amiri, J. Ottelin, and J. Sorvari, Are LEED-certified buildings energy-efficient in practice? Sustainability, 11(6) (2019), pp. 1672.
10.3390/su11061672
15
K. Sullivan and H. Oates, H., Analysis of Arizona's LEED for New Construction population's credits. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138 (2012), pp. 1386-1393.
10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000525
16
P. Wu et al., A comprehensive analysis of the credits obtained by LEED 2009 certified green buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68(Part 1) (2017), pp. 370-379.
10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.007
17
P. Wu et al., Regional variations of credits obtained by LEED 2009 Certified green buildings-A country level analysis. Sustainability, 10 (2018).
10.3390/su10010020
18
U. Berardi, Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: Rating system and rated buildings. Sustainable Development, 20(6) (2012).
10.1002/sd.532
19
J. Todd, C. Pyke, and R. Tufts, Implications of trends in LEED usage: rating system design and market transformation. Building Research & Information, 41(4) (2013), pp. 384-400.
10.1080/09613218.2013.775565
20
L. Silva and J. Ruwanpura, Review of the LEED points obtained by Canadian building projects. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 15(2) (2009), pp. 38-54.
10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(2009)15:2(38)
21
S. Pushkar and O. Verbitsky, Silver and Gold LEED commercial interiors: Certified projects. Journal of Green Building, 14(3) (2019), pp. 95-113.
10.3992/1943-4618.14.3.95
22
Y. Ahn, and A. Pearce, Green luxury: A case study of two green hotels. Journal of Green Building, 8(1) (2017), pp. 90-120.
10.3992/jgb.8.1.90
23
J. Kim et al., Green Building Strategies for LEED certified Recreational Facilities. Journal of Green Building, 12(2) (2017), pp. 149-166.
10.3992/1943-4618.12.2.149
24
S. Kubba. Green construction project management and cost oversight, 2010, Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
10.1016/B978-1-85617-676-7.00014-2
25
Richärd+Bauer Architecture, Northern Arizona University Science and Health Building, (2017), available at: https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/northern-arizona-university-science-and-health-building_o (accessed 4 July 2020)
26
S. Tepfer, Realizing next generation green: Project delivery and cost management strategies for high-performance buildings. 2013, The American Institute of Architects.
27
M. Boubekri, Daylighting design: Planning strategies and best practice solutions. 2014, Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.
10.1515/9783038214786PMC4031400
28
D. Watch, Building type basics for research laboratories. 2008, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
29
L. Herrig, H. Holdridge, B. Amos, and D. Thomson, Georgia Tech Engineered Biosystems Building, (2018), available at: https://www.hpbmagazine.org/georgia-tech-engineered-biosystems-building/ (accessed 4 July 2020)
30
C. Carry, Georgia Tech Krone Engineered Biosystems Building, (2018), available at: https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/georgia-tech-krone-engineered-biosystems-building_o (accessed 4 July 2020)
31
KlingStubbins, Sustainable design of research laboratories: Planning, design, and operation. 2010, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
32
P. Dockx, "Lab ventilation and energy consumption", in E. Dittrich, (Ed.), The Sustainable Laboratory Handbook. 2015, Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH, pp. 363-378.
10.1002/9783527337095.ch29
33
Mendler, S., Odell, W., and Lazarus, M.A., The HOK guidebook to sustainable design, 2005, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Information
  • Publisher :Sustainable Building Research Center (ERC) Innovative Durable Building and Infrastructure Research Center
  • Publisher(Ko) :건설구조물 내구성혁신 연구센터
  • Journal Title :International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development
  • Volume : 11
  • No :3
  • Pages :153-173
  • Received Date : 2020-07-20
  • Accepted Date : 2020-09-22
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.22712/susb.20200012
Journal Informaiton International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development
Online Submission
  • scopus
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close