|

Past development of environmental performance
assessment
(1) Stage 1
The oldest form of environmental assessment of buildings in Japan is the
performance assessment of building environments, mainly indoor environments,
which is basically aimed at improving living amenities or enhancing convenience
for occupants. This can be thought of as Stage 1 in the evolution of the
environmental assessment of buildings. At this stage, since the local
environment surrounding the building concerned and the global environment
were generally considered as open systems, environmental assessments paid
no attention to the fact that buildings simply discharged their environmental
loadings into their surroundings. In this sense, the philosophy behind
environmental assessments was very clear, but opposite to today’s
approach.
(2) Stage 2
The growth of public concern over air pollution problems or the effects
of wind on pedestrians etc. in urban areas such as Tokyo in the 1960s
led to the establishment of environmental impact assessments. This was
the time when the concept of environmental loadings was initiated and
incorporated into building environmental assessments, and this is thought
of as Stage 2. Here, only the negative effects that buildings have on
their surrounding environments, such as urban air pollution, wind damage,
and daylight obstruction etc., are considered as environmental impacts,
i.e. environmental loads. In Stage 1, the environment usually suggests
a private space or property, whereas in Stage 2 it is a public (or non-private)
space.
(3) Stage 3
Stage 3 in the evolution of the environmental assessment of buildings
began after the increase in the consciousness of global environmental
problems in the 1990's. A number of specific methods have already been
proposed, based on extensive research experience, including BREEAM, LEEDTM
and GB Tool. In recent years, building environmental performance assessment
methods such as these have spread rapidly in society, particularly in
developed countries, and they have also come to be used for "Design
for Environment" and building environmental labeling (rating). The
main issue in assessment at this stage is the negative impacts; in other
words, the environmental loadings that the buildings have on the environment.
That is to say, it considers Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), evaluating the
environmental loads of a building throughout its life. In addition, building
performance was also included as an object in some assessments, as in
Stage 1. Notably, none of the above assessment tools clearly distinguish
between these two basic assessment objects (in Stage 1 and Stage 2). Also,
the scope (or boundary) of the assessment objects is not clearly stated.
In this sense, the concept of environmental assessment in Stage 3 lacks
the clear underlying philosophy found in Stage 1 and Stage 2, while the
framework of assessment has expanded in Stage 3. The assessment framework,
relative to the first and second stages, but conversely, the framework
of assumptions on which the environmental performance evaluation is based
has become unclear.
New Stage in the Environmental Assessment
of Buildings
Development of CASBEE started from perception that the above situation
required a reconstruction of the current environmental performance assessment
framework into a new system clearly based on the perspective of sustainability.
Stage 3 in environmental assessment began when it was recognized that
the capacities of local environments, and the world as a whole, were reaching
a limit. As a result, the concept of closed ecosystems became essential
for determining environmental capacities when conducting environmental
assessments. Therefore a hypothetical enclosed space bounded by the borders
of the building site, as shown in Figure3, is proposed here in making
environmental assessments of buildings. The environmental loadings can
thus be defined as "the negative environmental impact that extends
outside to the public environment beyond the hypothetical enclosed space."
The improvement of environmental performance within the hypothetical enclosed
space is defined as "the improvement in living amenities for building
users." Dealing with both factors, the stage 4 environmental assessment
clearly defines these two factors, and distinguishes one from the other
as defined by BEE in Equation 1 of the following section. This makes the
philosophy of assessment at stage 4 much clearer, and it has been used
to form the framework for CASBEE, and it is the basis of the CASBEE framework.

Figure.3 Hypothetical enclosed space divided by the site
boundary
From Eco-efficiency to Building Environmental
Efficiency (BEE)
The concept of Eco-efficiency has been introduced for CASBEE to enable
the integrated assessment of two factors, inside and outside the building
site. Eco-Efficiency is normally defined as "Value of products and
services per unit environmental load." Efficiency is commonly defined
in terms of input and output quantities, so a new model can be proposed
for an expanded definition of Eco-Efficiency, as "(beneficial output)/
(input + non-beneficial output)." As figure 4 shows, this new model
of environmental efficiency can be extended to define Building Environmental
Efficiency (BEE), which CASBEE uses as its assessment indicator.

Figure.4 Development from the Eco-efficiency concept to
BEE
Copyright (C) 2005 JSBC Japan Sustainable Building
Consortium , All Rights Reserved
|