ArticlePDF Available

Comparative Study of LEED, BREEAM and GRIHA Rating System

Comparative Study of LEED, BREEAM and
GRIHA Rating System
1 Laxman Jadhav, 2Shivani Lokhande, 3Apurva Bade 4Anant Tupe 5Arun Sankpal
1Graduate Student, 2 Graduate Student, 3 Graduate Student,
4 Graduate Student, 5 Assistant Professor
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Department of Civil Engineering, G. S. Moze Engineering College,
SPPU University, Pune, Maharashtra, India
AbstractNew Construction is developing at a rapid pace. It
has led to the emergence of Green Building Rating System
worldwide. Various rating system of the world has provided
unique guidelines for each category of building viz. Retails,
Schools, Core & Shell, etc.
This paper aims to develop a systematic review of the
development of green rating systems. The specific objectives
1)discover how interest and research in green rating systems
have developed; 2) identify the similarity, difference, strength
and weakness of green rating systems; 3) examine whether
they fully assess the projects in all aspects of sustainability.
Specifically, LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design), BREEAM (Building Research Establishment
Assessment Method), GRIHA (Green Rating Integrated
Habitat Assessment) were analyzed in this paper. The
common aspect of all the rating system is to create a
sustainable architecture in all respect so as to minimize
negative environmental impact upon the environment. The
three most prevailing rating system LEED, BREEAM and
GRIHA has been studied and compared with Maximum
Points and Mandatory Criteria.
Index TermsGreen Building, LEED, BREEAM, GRIHA,
Rating System
Buildings contribute towards major environmental
impacts during their life cycle. Various resources such as
soil, trees, water, and various formats of energy are used by
the buildings. For instance Water, most vital resource, is
consumed continuously during building construction as
well as operation. Similarly several buildings along with
usage of resources generate large amounts of waste, which
can be recycled and can be reused. Thus, the challenge of a
green building is to make optimum usage of resources and
proper waste disposal at an affordable cost [4].
Recognizing the importance of sustainable building
practices, “going green” and “environment sustainability”
has been introduced for many years [8,9]. However,
construction is still a major energy consumer based on
official statistics [8]. This could be due to the passive
attitude of construction practitioners towards adopting
sustainable solutions [7]. Facing the rising energy costs and
growing environmental concerns, the demand for
sustainable building facilities with minimal environmental
impact has been pushed recently [10,11]. Authorities and
organizations initiated the rating systems for green
buildings to minimize/optimize consumption of natural
resources and control pollution. Buildings certified by
those rating systems are considered as consuming less
energy, providing a better living environment and
contributing to the overall reputation of the property [12]. It
is estimated that there are approximately 600 green rating
systems globally [13]. BREEAM (Building Research
Establishment Assessment Method) is known as the first
rating tool to assess building performance based on certain
target values for different criteria [14,15] . Based on the
magnitude of green measures adopted, Points are Awarded
to a building and, after appropriate weighting; a total score
is ascribed to determine the rating of the building. This
helps to convey the range of application of green measures
in building construction. Worldwide various rating systems
have been developed. The first environmental certification
system was created in year 1996 the Building Research
Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method
(BREEAM) in UK. In year 1998 the Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating
system was introduced in US. In year 2007 the Green
Rating Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA) green
building rating system was introduced in INDIA. Although
green building rating certifications have been the focus of
various researchers during the past 20 years, there is still no
systematic review of the detailed criteria and the updated
process of each rating system. A number of papers focused
on the trend and credits in an individual rating tool,
however, a comprehensive comparison of tools has not
been established.
The focal comparison of this research is centered on
LEED, BREEAM, and GRIHA. This study is a
comprehensive assessment of every category and
subcategory associated with each system. This research
recommends unique green building rating system by
comparing all above exiting rating system which covers
each and every aspect required for the assessment and
certification for green building. This unique rating system
is comparatively less complex and provides the necessary
perception about the project with ease. This research will
focus largely on the way in which users are likely to
interpret and implement the system, as opposed to focusing
on requirements of system overall [6].
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
Sustainable Sites
5.45 3.64
Water efficiency
Energy & Atmosphere
13.63 23.63
Materials & Resources
12.73 9.1 Indoor Environmental
Innovation In Design
31.82 Regional Priority
Green building is defined by the Office of the Federal
Environmental Executive as “the practice of: (i) increasing
the efficiency with which buildings and their sites use
energy, water, and materials, and (ii) reducing building
impacts of human health and the environment, through
better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance,
and removal throughout the complete life cycle” [16].A
green building is one whose construction and lifetime of
operation assure the healthiest possible environment while
representing the most efficient and least
Disruptive use of land, water, energy and resources.
The decision to build green should be made before the site
is selected, as many of the green criteria are affected by site
characteristics and some sites are inappropriate for certain
green projects. One of the first steps in the green design
process is to establish firm environmental goals for the
project like energy efficiency, water conservation, onsite
treatment of rain water and storm water, material and
resources management, construction waste management,
and to assign responsibility for meeting these goals to
specific members of the design team. Each goal needs a
champion who will see that objective through to the end.
The benefits of building green include cost saving from
reduced energy, water and waste, lower operation and
maintenance cost, and enhance occupant’s productivity and
health. However, it may include higher initial cost, but
higher ROI and return on assets are key benefits [6].
A green building rating system is an evaluation tool that
measures environmental performance of a building through
its life cycle. It usually comprises of a set of criteria
covering various parameters related to design, construction
and operation of a green building. Each criterion has pre-
assigned points and sets performance benchmarks and
goals that are largely quantifiable. Some of the successful
international rating programmes are listed and explained
below [4].
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
was developed in the US in 1998. This is the most widely
used green Building rating system in the world. The rating
system is based on several environmental and building
related criterions based on which the buildings are rated.
The Indian Green Building Council adapted LEED system
and launched LEED India version on 1st January 2007.
There are more than 650 LEED certified green buildings in
India such as CII-Godrej GBC, ITC Green Centre
Gurugram, Wipro Gurugram etc.
Fig. 1. LEED Evaluation criteria
Credit Points under Different Categories
100 possible points under the five core categories SS, WE, EA, MR & IEQ
6 possible points under ‘Innovation in Design’
4 possible points under ‘Regional Priority’
Total possible points achieved are 110.
Credit Point for Different Levels of Certification
Table 1 LEED Rating Pattern
LEED Certified 40-49
LEED Silver Certified Level 50-59
LEED Gold Certified Level 60-79
LEED Platinum Certified Level
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
Building Research Establishment’s Environmental
Assessment Method (BREEAM) was developed in the
United Kingdom in 1990 and is one of the earliest building
environmental assessment methods. BREEAM covers a
range of building types includingoffices, homes,
industrial units, retail units, and schools. When a building
is assessed, points are awarded for each criterion and the
points are added for a total score. The overall building
performance is awarded a ‘Pass’, ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’ or
‘Excellent’ rating based on the score. BREEAM has
separate criteria/checklist for evaluation of Design and
Procurement and for Management and Operation of
Fig. 2. BREEAM Evaluation criteria
Credit Points under Different Categories
100 possible points under the five core categories M, HW, E, T, W, M & W
An additional 1% can be added to the final score of the relevant category for each ‘innovation credit’ achieved (up to a
maximum of 7%)
Table 2 BREEAM Rating Pattern
Most of the internationally adopted rating systems have
been framed to suit the building industry of that particular
country. The Energy Resource Institute (TERI) New Delhi,
with an objective of sustainable development, took the
responsibility of developing a rating system to measure
building’s environmental performance in the context of
India’s varied climate and building practices and to
encourage the construction of Green Buildings in India.
The rating system will evaluate the performance of the
building for its entire life cycle based on the Green
Building techniques adopted during construction, operation
and maintenance of the building. This rating system
developed by TERI is called as Green Rating for Integrated
Habitat Assessment (GRIHA).
GRIHA is India’s official Green Building rating
program. It is a 5 star rating system purely based on the
environmental performance of the building. GRIHA is
formed by The Energy Resource Institute New Delhi
(TERI) under the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy
(MNRE). The process of rating is limited to new buildings
only. May it be commercial, educational and residential or
any building built to serve any purpose [4].
The certification is based on 34 criterions for which
marks are awarded out of 100 for buildings with more than
2500 sq. meter. Built-up area. The rating pattern according
to the marks scored by the building is as shown in the table.
Health & well being
% Score
Excellent 70
Very Good
Good 45
Pass 30
Unclassified < 30
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
4.8 3.9
Sustainable Site
Health & Well being
6.7 21.2
Building Planning &
Energy End Use
9.6 Energy Renewable
36.5 Recycle, Recharge
Reuse of water
Waste management
Fig. 3. GRIHA Evaluation criteria
Credit Points under Different Categories
100 possible points under the Eight categories
4 possible points under ‘Innovation in Design’
Total possible points achieved are 104.
Table 3 GRIHA Rating Pattern
One star 50-60
Two star 61-70
Three star
Four star 81-90
Five star >91
Site selection/ Brownfield redevelopment/ Reuse of land/
Reclaimed land/ contaminated land/ sustainable construction
Erosion & Sedimentation control/ Topsoil & Fill Removal from
Urban redevelopment/ Reduced site disturbance/ Ecological
value of site & protection of ecological features/ Mitigating
ecological impact/ Enhancing site ecology/ Ecological value of
site/ Greenery provision/ construction site impact/ Long term
impact on biodiversity
Hard Landscaping & Boundary protection/ Environmental
mgmt./ Environmental mgmt. practices/ Landscaping & Planters/
Microclimatic around building/ Health, Safety & Environmental
mgmt./ Environmental purchasing practices
Responsible Construction practices/ Maintainability/
Commissioning clauses/ Commissioning building Tuning/
Environmental mgmt. Practices (CONQUAS)/ Building & Site
Fundamental building system commissioning/ Measurement &
verification/ Energy monitoring/ Energy conditional
requirement/ Electrical sub- metering/ Testing & commissioning
/ Metering & monitoring
Minimum energy performance/ Optimize energy performance/
Energy efficient cold storage/ Energy eff. Lab system/ Energy
eff. Transportation system/ Energy eff. Equipment/ Peak energy
demand Reduction/ Eff. External lighting/ Lighting zoning &
control/ Centralized energy system/ Thermal performance of
building envelope/ Natural ventilated design & A/c system/
Energy eff. Features/ Annual energy use in building/ Ventilation
system in mechanically ventilated building/ Lighting system in
mechanically ventilated building/ Energy eff. Lighting in public
areas/ Energy eff. applications/ Energy mgmt./ A/c units
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
Renewable energy/ Green power/
Energy improvement/ renewable energy system
Water consumption/ Water monitoring/ Water meter/ Water
usage monitoring/ Monitoring & Control
Water use reduction/ Water eff. Landscaping/ Water leak
detection & prevention/ Water eff. Equipment/ Occupant
amenity potable water efficiency/ Landscaping irrigation water
eff./ Heat rejection water consumption/ Fire system water
consumption/ Potable water use in lab/ Water eff. fitting/
Irrigation system & landscaping/ Water consumption of cooling
tower/ Annual water use/ Water eff. Irrigation
Innovative waste water technologies/ Storm water mgmt./ Water
recycling effluent discharge to foul sewers
Building reuse/ Reuse of Façade/ Reuse of structure/ Building
Storage & collection of recyclables/ construction water mgmt./
Resource reuse/ Recycled content/ Construction waste mgmt./
Recycled aggregates/ Recycled content of concrete/ Recycled
content of steel/ Recycled content and Reused products &
materials/ Sustainable timber flooring/Loose
Deconstruction/ Rapidly renewable materials/ Life
cycle impacts/ Sustainable procurement/ Recycling waste
storage/ Sustainable construction/ Sustainable
Products/ Adaptability & Deconstruction/ Sustainable forest
products/ Waste Recycling facilities/ Waste mgmt.
Local or Regional Materials
Minimum IAQ performance/ Construction IAQ mgmt. plan / Air
change effectiveness/ IAQ in wet areas/ Construction IAQ
mgmt./ IAQ in car parking/ IAQ in public transport
Environment tobacco smokes (ETS) control/ CO2 monitoring/
Low-emitting material/ Indoor chemical & pollutant source
control/ CO2 & VOC monitoring & control/ Hazardous
materials/ Volatile Organic Compounds/ Formaldehyde
minimization/ Mould prevention/ Indoor air
pollutants/Biological contaminations/ Integrated pest mgmt./
Indoor source of air pollution
Reduced heat island effect/ Thermal comfort/ Thermal
Insulation/ Thermal performance of building envelope- RETV/
Thermal comfort in centrally A/c premises/ Thermal comfort in
A/c or Naturally ventilated
Ventilation efficiency/ Ventilation rates/ Naturally ventilated
design & A/c system/ Ventilation in A/c premises/ Localized
ventilation/ Ventilation in common areas
Day lighting & views/ Visual comfort/ Day lighting/ Day light
glare control/ High frequency ballasts/ Electric lighting levels/
External views/ Artificial lighting/ Natural lighting/ Interior
lighting in normally occupied areas/ Interior lighting in not
occupied areas
Safety and Security/ Fire Safety/ Security
Acoustic Performance/ Internal noise Level/ Noise Level/ Room
Acoustics/ Noise Isolation/ Background Noise
Alternative transportation/ Public transport accessibility/
Commuting mass transport/ Green transport/ Local transport/
Vehicular access
Alternative transportation/ Cyclist facilities/ Green transport
Alternative transportation/ Travel plan/ Fuel eff. Transport/
Green transport
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
Green building is a building which is environment friendly
as it is using certain principles during its design,
construction and functioning phase which allow it to get
maximum advantages from the environment and cause
minimum damage. There are many factors which have to
be considered while constructing a green building. It is
very necessary to know how effective a particular project is
in term of its environment friendliness. The unique system
suggested would rate the building on various factors so as
to give a fair idea of where it stands in being a green
All the buildings which are being built newly should focus
on adopting green building techniques in its possible way.
Use of renewable sources, recycling wastes and water, cost
effective building techniques should be adopted etc.
willingly by the builders and developers while constructing
a structure.
The existing Green Building Rating systems should also
rate already constructed old buildings. If not, a new rating
pattern for rating of old buildings should be developed. A
new rating system for small scale projects considering the
views and needs of the small cities should be designed
keeping in mind the local scenario. By doing this the
interest of the people as well as developer community
towards adopting green building techniques may see a hike.
[1] Dat Tien Doan , Ali Ghaffarianhoseini , Nicola Naismith ,
Tongrui Zhang , Amirhosein Ghaffarianhoseini , John Tookey
“ A critical comparison of green building rating systems”
[2] Iliyas ikbal sande , Prof. N S. Phadtare (2015) “Comparative
study of LEED and GRIHA rating system” VOL, 3
[3] Rohan V. Nalawade , Dr. S.G. Sonar Comparative Review
criteria utilization by LEED and GRIHA: Green building
Rating systems for New construction in India”
[4] Nadeem A. Sanadi ,Samreen S. Makandar “Limitations of
Green Building Rating Systems A case of LEED and
GRIHA” (2019),VOL .06
[5] Himanshu Agarwal, Hari Kumar Singh, Sanjay Vashishtha
“Comparison between three most prevailing green building
rating systems of India” (2017),VOL. 05
[6] Dr.M.N. Hedaoo, Mr. Sharad Khese “A Comparative Analysis
Of Rating Systems in Green Building” (2016),VOL.3
[7] J.K.-W. Wong, K.-L. Kuan, Implementing ‘BEAM Plus’ for
BIM-based sus
tainability analysis, Automation Constr. 44
(2014) 163e175.
[8] J.K.W. Wong, J. Zhou, Enhancing environmental sustainability
over building life cycles through green BIM: a review,
Automation Constr. 57 (2015) 156e165
[9] J.A. Lorenzen, Going Green: the process of lifestyle change 1,
in: Sociological Forum, Wiley Online Library, 2012, pp.
[10] S. Azhar, W.A. Carlton, D. Olsen, I. Ahmad, Building
Information Modeling for sustainable design and LEED®
rating analysis, Automation Constr. 20 (2011) 217e224.
[11] F. Jalaei, A. Jrade, Integrating Building Information Modeling
(BIM) and LEED system at the conceptual design stage of
sustainable buildings, Sustain. Cities Soc. 18 (2015) 95e107.
[12] F. Jalaei, A. Jrade, Integrating Building Information Modeling
(BIM) and LEED system at the conceptual design stage of
sustainable buildings, Sustain. Cities Soc. 18 (2015) 95e107.
[13] W. Lee, A comprehensive review of metrics of building
environmental assessment schemes, Energy Build. 62 (2013)
[14] L.M. Mitchell, Green Star and NABERS: learning from the
Australian expe rience with green building rating tools, Energy
Efc. (2010) 93.
[15] D.E. Shiers, “Green” developments: environmentally
responsible buildings in the UK commercial property sector,
Prop. Manag. 18 (2000) 352e365.
[16] Robert Cassidy. Office of the Federal Environmental
Executive, “The Federal Commitment to Green Building:
Experiences and Expectations,” 18 September 2003.
Alternative transportation/ Maximum car parking capacity/ Car
park minimization
Pedestrian route/ Green
Proximity to amenities/ Neighborhood amenities/ Amenities
Light pollution reduction/ Reduction of night K=Light pollution/
Light pollution
Ozone protection/ Ozone depletion potential/ Ozone depletion
substances/ Impact of refrigerants/ Refrigerant GWP/
Refrigerant leak detection & recovery/ CFC reduction in HVAC
& R equipment/ Reduction in CO2 emission/ Low & Zero
carbon technology.
No emissions
International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
IJERTV8IS120305 (This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
Published by :
Vol. 8 Issue 12, December-2019
In the search for façade solutions that meet requirements for energy efficiency and office space use comfort, it seems promising to apply a combination of photovoltaic (PV) technology with switchable glazing. It is believed that the merging of these two technologies might benefit the cooperation between regulated solar protection and energy efficiency. This article provides a design outlook on the use of PV-EC, PV-SPD, and PV-LCD technologies in terms of their utility for office buildings in moderate climates. This study concerns thermal, optical-visual, energetic, and technical issues, and a comparative method was applied. Based on current scientific research, the results of the analysis were juxtaposed with the requirements of the office working environment: natural lighting, thermal protection, glare protection, privacy control, energy efficiency, and technical reliability. The juxtaposition of these aspects revealed the advantages and disadvantages of a given solution from an architectural point of view. PV-EC technology in a side-by-side system was found to be the most appropriate solution and the results may be applied to make preliminary design decisions.
Escalating energy costs and the need to improve energy efficiency have increased public awareness of the need to reduce energy consumption over a building's entire lifecycle, and have prompted efforts to integrate green and sustainable building initiatives into the conventional building design, construction and operation processes. Sustainable building rating systems are being increasingly adopted to assess the sustainability performance of building design and construction. Building information modelling (BIM)-based technologies are regarded as a potentially useful vehicle for helping project stakeholders to capture complete design and project information, and to make the best use of the available design data for sustainable design and sustainability rating analysis. While experience from the Leadership in Environmental Energy and Design (LEED) programme in the US has demonstrated the great potential of integrating BIM with building assessments, it is anticipated that BIM can also be effectively integrated with the Hong Kong ‘BEAM Plus’ sustainable building rating system. This study uses a two-stage method (i.e. a Delphi study and a case study) to explore the potential use of BIM in the case of a residential building project seeking BEAM Plus sustainable building certification in Hong Kong. The Delphi study indicated that 26 out of 80 credit points could potentially be achieved with the support of the documentation produced by BIM (i.e. Autodesk Revit). Detailed procedures for conducting and testing a BIM-based BEAM Plus sustainability analysis are described. The proposed BIM–BEAM Plus assessment framework is then verified using two sampled public housing modular flat models. The complexity of the BIM–BEAM Plus application depends on the project size, the extent of the model development detail and the nature of the project.
Buildings are key target of policies that aim at promoting environmentally sustainable development. Amongst policy instruments that address environmental burdens incurred by buildings, labelling and certification schemes are arguably the most cost-effective. Since the first building environmental assessment scheme was launched in the 1990's, similar schemes have emerged in about 30 countries. These are mainly domestic schemes tailored to suit local contexts. Whilst most of these schemes take a voluntary, market driven approach, some have become a part of mandatory building approval requirements, though different certification schemes may co-exist in some regimes. Benchmarking the strengths and characteristics of different schemes has been advocated. In this connection, this paper provides a comprehensive review and comparison of the issues and metrics of five representative assessment schemes, namely, BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, BEAM Plus and the Chinese scheme ESGB. Comparison of these five schemes shows that BREEAM and LEED are the most comprehensive. A two-phase certification method is adopted in LEED, CASBEE and BEAM Plus, which is considered preferable. Statistical analysis also reveals that there is a moderate degree of agreement amongst the five schemes on weights and ranks of weights allocated to five key assessment aspects. Through comparison, the weighting coefficients adopted by ESGB were found the most representative. Strengths and characteristics of the five schemes have been identified for reference of policy makers in developing their domestic schemes.
Within the past ten years, the design, procurement and management of “green” buildings has evolved from something of a “fringe” activity into a new and increasingly popular approach to the provision of commercial property. Many UK Government agencies, and international corporations, now include green buildings as part of their property portfolios and green issues are already influencing many aspects of the property development process. This paper explains some of the background to this more environmentally responsible approach to property, identifies the potential benefits to owners and occupiers and discusses some of the building-related environmental issues which could provide a basis for ongoing research. The paper concludes that the way commercial buildings are conceived, located, designed and managed is changing, often incorporating new technologies, to meet a new set of project-specific and organisational environmental objectives.
Today, there is a high level of demand for sustainable buildings. The most important decisions regarding a building's sustainable features are made during the design and preconstruction stages. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) is the most widely adopted sustainable building rating system in the United States. For projects pursuing LEED® certification, designers have to conduct in-depth sustainability analyses based on a building's form, materials, context, and mechanical–electrical–plumbing (MEP) systems. Since Building Information Modeling (BIM) allows for multi-disciplinary information to be superimposed within one model, it creates an opportunity to conduct these analyses accurately and efficiently as compared to the traditional methods. In this exploratory research, a case study was conducted on Salisbury University's Perdue School of Business building to demonstrate the use of BIM for sustainable design and the LEED® certification process. First, a conceptual framework was developed to establish the relationship between BIM-based sustainability analyses and the LEED® certification process. Next, the framework was validated via this case study. The results of this study indicate that documentation supporting LEED® credits may be directly or indirectly prepared using the results of BIM-based sustainability analyses software. This process could streamline the LEED® certification process and save substantial time and resources which would otherwise be required using traditional methods.
A critical comparison of green building rating systems
  • Ali Dat Tien Doan
  • Nicola Ghaffarianhoseini
  • Tongrui Naismith
  • Amirhosein Zhang
  • John Ghaffarianhoseini
  • Tookey
Dat Tien Doan, Ali Ghaffarianhoseini, Nicola Naismith, Tongrui Zhang, Amirhosein Ghaffarianhoseini, John Tookey " A critical comparison of green building rating systems"
Comparative Review criteria utilization by LEED and GRIHA: Green building Rating systems for New construction in India
  • V Rohan
  • Dr S G Nalawade
  • Sonar
Rohan V. Nalawade, Dr. S.G. Sonar "Comparative Review criteria utilization by LEED and GRIHA: Green building Rating systems for New construction in India"
Limitations of Green Building Rating Systems -A case of LEED and GRIHA
  • A Nadeem
  • Samreen S Sanadi
  • Makandar
Nadeem A. Sanadi,Samreen S. Makandar "Limitations of Green Building Rating Systems -A case of LEED and GRIHA" (2019),VOL.06
Comparison between three most prevailing green building rating systems of India
  • Himanshu Agarwal
  • Hari Kumar Singh
  • Sanjay Vashishtha
Himanshu Agarwal, Hari Kumar Singh, Sanjay Vashishtha "Comparison between three most prevailing green building rating systems of India" (2017),VOL. 05
A Comparative Analysis Of Rating Systems in Green Building
  • M N Dr
  • Mr Hedaoo
  • Sharad Khese
Dr.M.N. Hedaoo, Mr. Sharad Khese "A Comparative Analysis Of Rating Systems in Green Building" (2016),VOL.3