Content uploaded by Chitrarekha Kabre
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Chitrarekha Kabre on Feb 15, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Contents Contents
Synergistic Design of Sustainable
Built Environments
Synergistic Design of Sustainable
Built Environments
Chitrarekha Kabre
First edition published 2020
by CRC Press
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300, Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
and by CRC Press
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis G roup, LLC
Reasonable effor ts have been made to publish reliable data and informat ion, but the author and publisher cannot assume respon-
sibility for the va lidity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors a nd publishers have attempted to trace the
copyright holders of all material reproduced i n this publication and apologize to copyr ight holders if permission to publish in this
form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been ack nowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify
in any future reprint.
Except as per mitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any
form by any electronic, mechanical, or ot her means, now known or herea fter invented, including photocopying, microlming, and
recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.
For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, access www.copyright.com or contact the Copyr ight
Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. For works that are not available on CCC
please contact mpkbookspermissions@tandf.co.uk
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be tradema rks or registered trademark s, and are used only for identication
and explanation without intent to infr inge.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Kabre, Chitrarekha, author.
Title: Synergistic design of sustainable built environments / Chitrarekha
Kabre.
Description: First ed ition. | Boca Raton : CRC Press, 2021. | Includes
bibliographical references a nd index.
Identiers: LCCN 2020026401 (print) | LCCN 2020026402 (ebook) | ISBN
9780367564834 (hbk) | ISBN 9781003102960 (ebk)
Subjects: LCSH: Susta inable buildings. | Build ings--Energy conser vation. |
Buildings- -Environmental engineering. | Sustainable architecture --Case
studies.
Classication: LCC TH880 .K334 2021 (print) | LCC TH880 (ebook) | DDC
72 0/. 47- -dc 23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020026401
LC ebook record avai lable at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020026402
ISBN: 978-0 -367-56483-4 ( hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-10296-0 (ebk)
Typeset in Times
by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India
Visit the eResources: https://www.routledge.com/9780367564834
Cover: A sculpture of daylight above the reconstructed Reichstag (German Pa rliament), Berlin; design by Pritzker prize laureate
architect Sir Norma n Foster, 1999. Photo credit Tapan Kumar Ghoshal
Contents
Preface...............................................................................................................................................ix
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................. xi
About the Author ........................................................................................................................... xiii
List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................xv
Chapter 1 Introduct ion.................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background........................................................................................................1
1.2 Built Environment .............................................................................................2
1.3 Climate-Responsive Architecture .....................................................................2
1.4 Sustainable Development and Sustainability ....................................................7
1.5 Technological (High-Performance) Design Paradigm ......................................9
1.5.1 Technical Approach.............................................................................. 9
1.5.2 Regulatory Approach ......................................................................... 10
1.5.3 Rating System Approach.................................................................... 12
1.6 Biocentric (Ecological) Design Paradigm ....................................................... 12
1.6.1 Ecological Theories............................................................................ 14
1.6.2 Life Cycle Assessment ....................................................................... 16
1.6.3 Systems Approach.............................................................................. 20
1.7 Synergistic Design........................................................................................... 21
References .................................................................................................................. 23
Chapter 2 Climate and Thermal Comfort................................................................................... 27
2.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................27
2.2 Earth and Its Atmosphere................................................................................ 27
2.3 Solar Radiation ................................................................................................ 30
2.4 Global Climate ................................................................................................34
2.5 Climate and Its Classication ......................................................................... 36
2.6 Elements of Climates....................................................................................... 42
2.6.1 Temperature and Humidity ................................................................ 43
2.6.2 Cloud and Sunshine............................................................................ 44
2.6.3 Irradiation........................................................................................... 46
2.6.4 Wind ................................................................................................... 47
2.6.5 Precipitation ....................................................................................... 47
2.7 Solar Geometry ............................................................................................... 47
2.8 Thermal Comfort............................................................................................. 52
2.8.1 Thermal Balance of Human Body ..................................................... 52
2.8.2 Parameters of Thermal Comfort ........................................................ 53
2.8.3 Thermoregulation ............................................................................... 55
2.8.4 Thermal Neutrality............................................................................. 55
2.9 Environmental Indices and Comfort Zone...................................................... 57
2.10 Cooling and Heating Degree-Days ................................................................. 58
References .................................................................................................................. 60
v
vi Contents
Chapter 3 Thermal Environment Design Strategies ................................................................... 63
3.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................63
3.2 Passive Design Strategies ................................................................................63
3.2.1 Bioclimatic Analysis ..........................................................................64
3.2.2 Passive Solar Heating ........................................................................68
3.2.3 Passive Thermal Mass........................................................................ 71
3.2.4 Comfort Ventilation............................................................................72
3.2.5 Evaporative Cooling ........................................................................... 74
3.3 Hybrid (Low Energy) Design Strategies ......................................................... 76
3.3.1 Earth-Sheltered Design .....................................................................77
3.3.2 Solar Chimney.................................................................................... 78
3.3.3 Night Flush Cooling ........................................................................... 79
3.3.4 Passive Downdraft Cooling................................................................ 80
3.3.5 Passive Radiant Cooling..................................................................... 81
3.4 Thermal Behavior of the Built Environment ..................................................83
3.4.1 Thermo-Physical Properties...............................................................84
3.4.2 Sol-Sir Temperature (Tsa).................................................................... 86
3.4.3 Space Heating Requirements ............................................................. 91
3.4.4 Space Cooling Requirements .............................................................93
3.4.5 Dynamic Models ................................................................................96
3.5 Energy-Efcient Active Design Strategies .................................................... 100
3.5.1 Space Heating Systems ....................................................................100
3.5.2 Mechanical Ventilation .................................................................... 107
3.5.3 Air Conditioning ............................................................................. 109
3.5.4 Radiant Heating and Cooling with DOAS....................................... 115
3.6 Solar Control Design .................................................................................... 117
3.6.1 High-Performance Glasses............................................................... 119
3.6.2 External Shading Devices ................................................................ 120
References ................................................................................................................ 128
Chapter 4 Luminous Environment Design Strategies ............................................................. 131
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 131
4.2 Fundamentals of Light................................................................................... 132
4.2.1 Physics of Light ............................................................................... 132
4.2.1.1 Attributes of Light ............................................................ 132
4.2.1.2 Color of Light .................................................................. 133
4.2.1.3 Color of Surfaces ............................................................. 133
4.2.1.4 Transmission of Light ...................................................... 137
4.2.2 Vision .............................................................................................. 139
4.2.2.1 The Eye and Brain ........................................................... 14 0
4.2.2.2 Threshold Visual Performance ......................................... 141
4.2.2.3 Lighting Requirements ..................................................... 142
4.2.2.4 Glare ................................................................................. 143
4.2.3 Daylight Availability ........................................................................ 143
4.2.3.1 Sky Conditions.................................................................. 14 4
4.3 Daylighting Design Strategies ....................................................................... 146
4.3.1 Side Lighting .................................................................................... 146
4.3.2 Top Lighting ..................................................................................... 149
4.3.3 Light-Guiding System ...................................................................... 150
vii Contents
4.3.3.1 Light Shelf ........................................................................ 150
4.3.3.2 Light-Guiding Shades....................................................... 152
4.3.3.3 Prismatic Panel ................................................................. 152
4.3.3.4 Light-Guiding Glass ......................................................... 153
4.3.3.5 Laser-Cut Panel ................................................................ 154
4.3.3.6 Anidolic Ceiling ............................................................... 154
4.3.3.7 Anidolic Zenithal Openings ............................................. 156
4.3.3.8 Anidolic Solar Blinds ...................................................... 156
4.3.3.9 Zenithal Light-Guiding Glass with Holographic
Optical Elements .............................................................. 157
4.3.4 Light Transmission System .............................................................. 157
4.4 Daylight Prediction Methods......................................................................... 161
4.4.1 IESNA Lumen Method ................................................................... 162
4.4.2 Daylight Factor Method.................................................................... 163
4.4.3 Computer Modeling ........................................................................ 164
4.4.4 Climate-Based Daylight Modeling (CBDM) ................................... 165
4.4.5 Physical Modeling............................................................................ 168
4.5 Electric Lighting as a Supplement to Daylighting......................................... 16 9
4.5.1 Electric Lighting Control ................................................................. 16 9
References ................................................................................................................ 170
Chapter 5 Renewable Energy ................................................................................................... 173
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 173
5.2 Energy............................................................................................................ 174
5.2.1 Forms of Energy............................................................................... 174
5.2.2 Sources of Energy ........................................................................... 176
5.2.3 Cogeneration or Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems........... 17 7
5.2.4 Plug Load ........................................................................................ 17 8
5.3 Solar Energy .................................................................................................. 178
5.3.1 Solar Thermal Systems .................................................................... 179
5.3.2 Photovoltaic Systems........................................................................ 183
5.4 Wind Energy.................................................................................................. 190
5.4.1 Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine (HAWT) ........................................ 191
5.4.2 Vertical Axis Wind Turbine (VAWT).............................................. 195
5.5 Other Renewables.......................................................................................... 196
5.5.1 Biomass ............................................................................................ 196
5.5.2 Geothermal Energy ..........................................................................200
5.5.3 Hydrogen and Fuel Cell.................................................................... 203
5.5.4 Hydropower ...................................................................................... 208
5.6 Energy Storage and Smart Grid .................................................................... 211
5.6.1 Electrochemical Storage................................................................... 213
5.6.2 Mechanical Storage .......................................................................... 213
5.6.3 Chemical Storage ............................................................................. 213
5.6.4 Phase Change Materials ................................................................... 214
5.6.5 Smart Grid........................................................................................ 215
References ................................................................................................................ 218
Chapter 6 Design Case Studies ................................................................................................. 219
6.1 Introduction: Background and Driving Forces.............................................. 219
viii Contents
6.2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Daniel K. Inouye
Regional Center, Honolulu, Hawaii (Zone 1A Very Hot Humid,
COTE 2017) .................................................................................................. 220
6.2.1 Design Intentions.............................................................................. 220
6.2.2 Climate and Site ............................................................................... 221
6.2.3 Daylight and Thermal Design ..........................................................224
6.2.4 Energy Systems ................................................................................ 228
6.2.5 Sustainable Thinking .......................................................................229
6.3 Stanford University Central Energy Facility, Stanford (Zone 3C Warm
Marine, COTE 2017) ..................................................................................... 231
6.3.1 Design Intentions.............................................................................. 231
6.3.2 Climate and Site ............................................................................... 232
6.3.3 Daylight and Thermal Design ..........................................................239
6.3.4 Energy Systems ................................................................................ 241
6.3.5 Sustainable Thinking .......................................................................244
6.4 Edith Green–Wendell Wyatt (EGWW) Federal Building, Portland
(Zone 4C Mixed Marine, COTE 2016)......................................................... 246
6.4.1 Design Intentions..............................................................................246
6.4.2 Climate and Site ...............................................................................248
6.4.3 Daylight and Thermal Design ..........................................................249
6.4.4 Energy Systems ................................................................................ 252
6.4.5 Sustainable Thinking ....................................................................... 255
6.5 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado (Zone 5B
Cool Dry, COTE 2011) ................................................................................. 258
6.5.1 Design Intentions.............................................................................. 258
6.5.2 Climate and Site ...............................................................................259
6.5.3 Daylight and Thermal Design ..........................................................265
6.5.4 Energy Systems ................................................................................ 268
6.5.5 Sustainable Thinking ....................................................................... 272
6.6 University of Wyoming – Visual Arts Facility, Laramie, Wyoming
(Zone 6B – Cold Dry, COTE 2016)............................................................... 272
6.6.1 Design Intentions.............................................................................. 272
6.6.2 Climate and Site ............................................................................... 275
6.6.3 Daylight and Thermal Design ..........................................................280
6.6.4 Energy Systems ................................................................................ 281
6.6.5 Sustainable Thinking .......................................................................283
References ................................................................................................................ 286
Chapter 7 Climate Data and Sun-Path Diagrams .....................................................................289
7.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................289
References ................................................................................................................ 392
Index .............................................................................................................................................. 393
Preface
Nature never breaks her own laws.
Leonardo da Vinci
Over the past half-century, a discourse emphasizing that the environmental health of our earth is
profoundly affected by the design of our built environment has emphatically shaped high-perfor-
mance (green) building practices and associated building regulations (standards and codes), build-
ing environmental assessment methods and sustainability assessment systems. The trajectory of
environmentally responsive design as applicable to the built environment delineates the transition
from technological (high-performance) design paradigm to biocentric (ecological) design paradigm.
It is professing a sustainability framework in synergy with nature or ecosystem not only to preserve
the environment but also to revitalize and regenerate to have net positive environmental benets for
the living world. This implies a living or whole-systems approach, a more expansive notion of the
built environment, one where dynamic relationships exist between a greater number of built and
unbuilt elements and where a balance, sustainable relationship between these elements is explored
and harnessed. The systems approach in the present context is a much-needed call for building
professionals to redene architecture and adopt principles of regenerative design and examine how
it does (or does not) relate to their everyday practice. Mies van der Rohe said that ‘less is more’; in
the present context a better way of putting it may be, as Alexandro Tombazis says, ‘less is beautiful.’
This book explores the theories, principles, and practices of the regenerative design and aims to
delineate a novel systems approach, ‘synergistic design of sustainable built environment’ that fos-
ters transition to both a biocentric (ecological) design paradigm and design excellence. The specic
objectives of the book are as follows:
• To articulate parameters of the thermal and luminous environment: climate, sun, occupant
comfort, and well-being
• To explain the qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis to make design decisions
• To elucidate the spectrum of thermal environment and luminous environment design
strategies
• To explore potentials of renewable energy systems and their integration with the built
environment
• To illustrate design case studies for each of the major climate zones
• To present the climatic data and sun-path diagrams in a readily usable format
The manuscript is organized into seven distinct chapters, starting with the introduction of the sub-
ject; the second chapter, ‘Climate and Comfort,’ classies climate and denes the elements of cli-
mate, parameters of thermal comfort, and solar geometry. The third chapter, ‘Thermal Environment
Design Strategies,’ illustrates and explains passive, hybrid (low-energy), and active design strategies
of heating, cooling, and ventilation. The fourth chapter, ‘Luminous Environment Design Strategies,’
describes the fundamentals of daylighting and explains architectural and state-of-the-art techno-
logical daylighting design strategies and its integration with electric lighting. The palette of thermal
and visual environment design strategies, along with the quantitative and qualitative information
included in Chapters 3 and 4, enables designers to generate design solutions in response to climate,
occupant comfort, and program during the early phases of the design, when built form can evolve
in synergy with natural forces of the sun, wind, sky, water, and earth. The designer can optimize
design solutions to ensure the required indoor conditions with little or no use of energy, other than
from ambient or renewable sources. The fth chapter explores potentials of renewable energy from
the sun, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydro, hydrogen, and fuel cells and its integration in the built
ix
x Preface
environment. Since carbon neutral buildings can be fully powered by renewable resources, a future
of regenerative buildings is not only necessary but also elegantly achievable. The issue of energy
storage, smart metering, and smart grid are also covered in Chapter 5. The sixth chapter showcases
AIA COTE-awarded contemporary design case studies in each of the ve major climatic zones of
the United States. Each exemplar design study includes an overview of the design intentions, cli-
mate and site responses, thermal strategies, energy systems, sustainability thinking, and a design
prole as a snapshot of the project. These building precedent studies are used to illustrate how
designers have approached issues related to the sustainable built environment that is ecologically
appropriate and meaningful for varied climates, programs, and occupants. The lessons of these
precedents should be interpreted for the possibilities they suggest rather than their particular solu-
tions. Chapter 7 presents the climatic data and sun-path diagrams for 50 capital cities, representing
each of the states in the United States. Temperature, humidity, sunshine hours, solar radiation,
rainfall, and precipitation data are given both numerically and in graphic form; the latter for a
quick, visual appreciation, the former for a more detailed analysis. Some single-gure indices are
included: an indication of temperature variability; outdoor design conditions recommended as a
basis for calculating the required heating or cooling capacity. Wind roses show the direction and
frequency of winds, while average speeds are given in numerical form.
This book addresses the quintessential part of the much larger picture of the sustainable built
environment; it is just one way of understanding how complex layers of issues need to be integrated
into a comprehensive whole that is appropriate for the place, program, and users and promises a
regenerative future. Through synergistic design, a vibrant relationship can be established – con-
nections can be made – that weaves together people and built and unbuilt environments into an
ecological whole. As a result, the framework of ‘synergistic design’ should be viewed as something
that is inherently broad and comprehensive in scope, dynamic, adaptable, and capable of change
and growth.
This book is a practical tool or handbook for architects, building professionals, researchers, and
students that will provide them with a theoretical understanding of the physical phenomena to be
dealt with and methodology of implementing the synergistic design of sustainable (regenerative)
built environment. This book explains and demonstrates how the design wisdom of passive solar
architecture can be integrated with the best of modern technological advancement to create sustain-
able and regenerative yet beautifully designed humane architecture. This book is also an important
reference for those architects who are concerned about the aesthetic aspects of sustainability.
Acknowledgments
This book grew out of my past 30 years of academic and professional experiences from four con-
tinents: Asia, Australia, Europe, and the USA. These experiences include my research and teach-
ing at leading institutions: School of Planning & Architecture, New Delhi; the Indian Institute of
Technology, Kharagpur; Manipal University; the University of Queensland, Australia; North Dakota
State University, Fargo; and currently the DCR University of Science & Technology, Murthal. I col-
laborated with THOWL, Detmold, Germany, under the aegis of CREED (Clime Related Energy
Efcient Design); Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; University of Liege, Belgium; TU
Delft, Netherlands; ETH Zurich, Switzerland; Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea and University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA for research and development.
I am grateful to all the esteemed organizations and individuals who helped me to collate the
information for climate, design case studies, and other topics.
I would like to acknowledge CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, for appreciating the value and need
for this book within the architectural profession and for making it a reality.
My father late Mr. Ram Gopal Kabre has been a constant source of motivation to excel in life.
My mentor mechanical engineer Mr. Tapan Kumar Ghoshal stood by me during every struggle and
all successes. I wish to dedicate this book to the lotus feet of Maa Vajreshwari and my saviour Shri
Nityanand Saraswati Maharaj.
xi
About the Author
Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre earned her doctorate in architecture from the University of
Queensland, Australia, in 2008 (recipient of the Australian Development Cooperation Scholarship).
In 1989 she received her master’s in building engineering and management (recipient of gold medal)
from the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi (an institute of National Importance).
In 1985 she received her bachelor’s in architecture from the Maulana Azad National Institute of
Technology, Bhopal. Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre has 30 years of academic and professional expe-
rience in the eld of computer-aided architectural design, project management, and sustainable
architecture. She has developed courses on sustainable architecture at undergraduate, postgradu-
ate, and doctoral levels. She introduced M.Tech. (construction and real estate management), an
innovative program awarded by the University Grants Commission, Government of India. Prof.
Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre has been the pioneer of sustainable architecture education and research at
the eminent institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, Manipal University,
and presently Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science and Technology, Murthal (Sonepat).
As Fulbright visiting professor, North Dakota State University, Fargo (2012), Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha
Kabre contributed in pedagogy of sustainable architecture. She is an active member of the Society
of Building Science Educators (SBSE) and recipient of Jeffrey Cook Memorial Scholarship in 2019.
She has authored more than 36 research papers in international conferences and journals (Building
& Environment and Architectural Science Review) and has served as a reviewer for the journals
Building & Environment (Elsevier Science) and Indoor & Built Environment (Sage Publications).
Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre is t he author of the book Susta inable Building Design: Application Using
Climatic Data in India, published by Springer, Germany, and the chief editor of the book Energy
Efcient Design of Buildings and Cities, published by DCR University of Science & Technology,
Murthal, and Hochschule Ostwestfalen-Lippe (HSOWL), Detmold, Germany. She has an extensive
citation index in Google Scholar. She is a life member of the International Association of Passive
and Low Energy Architecture (PLEA) and an International Associate of American Institute of
Architects. She is also LEED® Green Associate of US GBC. Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre is a
certied professional as well as an evaluator (architect and construction management) of Green
Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA), a national green rating of India. She is the
master trainer for the Energy Conservation Building Code administered by the Bureau of Energy
Efciency, Ministry of Power, Government of India. Prof. Dr. Chitrarekha Kabre’s biography is
published in Marquis Who’s Who in the World, the United States, as one of the leading achievers.
xiii
List of Abbreviations
∆ change or change in
A/C Air conditioning
AC Alternating Current
ADC Active Downdraft Cooling
AEO Annual Energy Output
AH Absolute Humidity
AHU Air Handling Unit
AIA American Institute of Architects
ALT Altitude
AT/ FP Anti Terrorism/Force Protection
ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ANSI American National Standards Institute
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers
AZI Azimuth
BIM Building Information Modelling
BIPV Building Integrated Photovoltaics
BRE Building Research Establishment
BREEAM® Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
BS British Standards
Btu British thermal unit
C Centigrade (temperature scale)
CASBEE Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efciency
C AV Constant Air Volume
CDD Cooling Degree Days
CFC chlorouorocarbon
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
CIE Commission Internationale de l’Eclaiage (International Commission on
Illumination)
CLEAR Center for Living Environments and Regeneration
CO2 Carbon diox ide
CoP Coefcient of Performance
COTE Committee on the Environment
DBT Dry Bulb Temperature
DC Direct Current
DGNB German Sustainable Building Council
DOAS Dedicated Oudoor Air System
DOE Department of Energy
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EUI Energy Use Intensity
F Fahrenheit (temperature scale)
FDFA Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
FSC Forest Stewardship Council
ft2 squa re feet
GHG Green House Gas
HSA Horizontal Shadow Angle
HDC Hybrid Downdraft Cooling
xv
xvi
HDD Heating Degree Days
HDH Heating Degree Hours
H VAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IAQ Indoor Air Quality
ICC International Code Council
IDP Integrate Design Process
IEA International Energy Agency
IEQ Indoor Environmental Quality
IESNA Illuminating Engineering Society of North America
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
I-P system inch-pound; English system of units
ISO International Organization for Standardization
J Joule
K Kelvin or absolute (temperature scale)
kWh kilowatt-hour
LAT Latitude
LBC Living Building Challenge
LCA Life Cycle Assessment
LCC Life Cycle Cost
LCI Life Cycle Inventory
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LID Low Impact Development
low-E low emissivity
LPD Lighting Power Density
lx Lux
m2 square meter
MEP Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing
MRT Mean Radiant Temperature
N Newton
N AV FA C Naval Facilities Engineering Command
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OPEC Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
OSHPD Ofce of Statewide Health Planning and Development
PPA Power Purchase Agreement
PDEC Passive Downdraft Evaporative Cooling
PHIUS Passive House Institute the US
PV Photovolta ic
RH Relative Humidity
RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SET Standard Effective Temperature
SHGC Solar Heat Gain Coefcient
SI System International (d’unités) International System (of Units)
SPeAR Sustainable Project Assessment Routine
SPV Solar Photovoltaic
SWH Solar Water Heater
TRNSYS The Transient Energy System Simulation Tool
UIA Union Internationale des Architects
UNCED UN Conference on Environment and Development
List of Abbreviations
xvii List of Abbreviations
UNEP UN Environment Program
USGBC United States Green Building Council
VAV Variable Air Volume
VCP Visual Comfort Probability
VLT Visual Light Transmission/Transmittance
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
VSA Vertical Shadow Angle
VRF Variable Refrigerant Flow
VRV Variable Refrigerant Volume
WBT Wet Bulb Temperature
WMO World Meteorological Organization
WWR Window to Wall Ratio
ZNE Zero Net Energy
1
Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments Introduction
1Introduction
1.1 BACKGROUND
The new millennium is now almost two decades old. That which began with great festive optimism
was soon followed by the events of September 11, 2001; the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster
of March 11, 2011; a spate of natural disasters; and the more recent unprecedented catastrophe of
humanity, COVID-19, which has led to profound environmental, economic, social, and cultural
effects on a global scale that are now being more and more dominated by an interconnected set of
existential questions with far-reaching consequences for the future existence of mankind.
The global climate strike led by 16-year-old Greta Thunberg and millions of school children
from Sydney to Manila, Dhaka to London, and New York echoed the inconvenient truth that the
fate of the planet is at stake (The Guardian, September 21, 2019). The Decade of Action for the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) launched by the United Nations in early 2020 under the ral-
lying cry ‘For People, For Planet’ urged the world to address the challenges of climate and nature,
gender, and inequality.
As a result of this recent discussion, the issue of ecological balance and climate change has risen
to prominence worldwide. Among the many problems humanity will have to address in the 21st
century, three that ought to be accorded utmost priority, because of an increasing world population
that should total 10 billion people by the end of the rst century of the new millennium, are the
following:
• Securing healthy and sufcient nutrition
• Providing access to clean drinking water
• Assuring disease control and adequate health care
The buildings and construction sector is a key player in the ght against climate change: it accounted
for 36% of global nal energy use and 39% of energy‐related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in 2017
(IEA 2018). In the United States, the construction sectors accounted for $840 billion, or 4.1% of the
gross domestic product (GDP), more than many industries, including information, arts and entertain-
ment, utilities, agriculture, and mining (BEA 2019). By 2060, the world is projected to add 230 bil-
lion m2 (2.5 trillion ft2) of buildings or an area equal to the entire current global building stock (UN
Environment and International Energy Agency 2017). This is the equivalent of adding an entire New
York City to the planet every 34 days for the next 40 years. This trend points to the questions concern-
ing the securing of a stable and sustainable built environment that is of great importance.
It is no longer just a question of following a particular architectural style or design philosophy;
building professionals are urged to transform the global built environment from being a major
contributor of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to being environmentally sustainable and regenera-
tive. Our best chance is to ensure that the architecture, planning, and development community, the
primary agents shaping the built environment through design and construction, has access to the
knowledge and tools necessary for the transition to a sustainable and regenerative world. The syn-
ergistic design of the sustainable built environment is a much-needed call for building professionals
to redene architecture to help this transition to an environmentally sustainable and regenerative
built environment.
This chapter discusses the need for a sustainable built environment and the transition from the
technological (high-performance) design paradigm to a biocentric (ecological) design paradigm.
This chapter emphasizes the importance of the synergistic design of a sustainable built environ-
ment, an innovative systems framework, as the premise of the book.
1
2 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
The next section denes the built environment. The third section presents the climate-responsive
architecture of yesteryears. The fourth section discusses sustainable development and sustainabil-
ity and its relevance to sustainable architecture. Further, the fth section presents a technological
(high-performance) design paradigm, delineating the technical approach, regulatory approach, and
rating system approach. The sixth section explains the biocentric design paradigm including eco-
logical theories and life cycle assessment. Finally, the chapter delineates an innovative systems
framework for the synergistic design of a sustainable built environment.
1.2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT
As the natural environment with varying climate is not suitable to the lifestyle of man, man is
always trying for suitable transformation in the natural surroundings. This transformed environ-
ment is known as ‘Alan-made’ or ‘built environment.’
The built environment generally refers to the ‘manmade surroundings that provide the setting for
human activity, ranging from the large-scale civic surroundings to the personal places’ (Moffatt and
Kohler 2008). The built environment includes both urban and rural forms.
The built environment intends to provide a comfortable environment for humans to reside and
work in and also delivers economic, social, and cultural benets. The built environment also, how-
ever, has wide-ranging negative environmental aspects and impacts, including air quality, water and
energy consumption, transport accessibility, materials use, and management of waste (Table 1.1).
1.3 CLIMATE-RESPONSIVE ARCHITECTURE
Even before the rst built shelters, humans utilized climate elements to improve thermal comfort.
About 2500 years ago, Aeschylus, the Greek playwright, in his play Prometheus (the mythological re
stealer) observed that ignorant primitives and barbarians ‘lacked knowledge of houses built of bricks
and turned to face the winter sun, dwelling beneath the ground like swarming ants in sunless caves.’
The evolution of the built environment, with responses to multiple and complex requirements,
started by providing the shelter needed for protection from attack by human enemies and wild
animals, as well as protection from hostile and unfavorable aspects of the physical environment.
At later stages, durability, status, fashion, and improved environmental quality were the motors of
development (Rapoport 1969). According to this sequence, the protection from climate was one
of the initial factors that have remained a constant preoccupation and priority in the long process
of the development of the built environment and the history of architecture (Oliver 1987). From
the early huddle of buildings at Catalhöyük in Anatolia, 7000 BC, the indigenous building design
TABLE 1.1
Impacts of the Built Environment
Aspects of Built
Environment Consumption Environmental Effects Ultimate Effects
Siting Energy Waste Harm to human health
Design Water Air pollution Environment degradation
Construction Materials Water pollution Loss of resources
Operation Natural resources Indoor pollution
Maintenance Heat islands
Renovation Stormwater runoff
Deconstruction Noise
Source: https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/html/about.html
3 Introduction
demonstrated ingenuity for climate amelioration through a basic understanding of the thermal and
structural behavior of natural materials. Native American traditional buildings and villages have
also utilized passive solar principles for more than 2000 years. In Southern California, the Indians
of the Yokut Tule Lodge (Figure 1.1) not only protected their huts but in a generous, direct manner
provided for pleasant living and shaded communal areas.
From Aristotle to Montesquieu, many scholars believed that climate had pronounced effects on
human physiology and temperament. In book III, Chapter VIII, of Xenophon’s Memorabilia of the
Greek philosopher Socrates (470–399 BC), written a few decades after Aeschylus, and during the
Greek wood fuel shortage, Socrates’ Megaron house (Figure 1.2) exemplies the essential, timeless
principles of sun-tempered architecture:
Now in houses with a south aspect, the sun’s rays penetrate the porticos in winter, but in the summer, the
path of the sun is right over our heads and above the roof, so that there is shade. If then this is the best
arrangement, we should build the south side loftier to get the winter sun and the north side lower to keep
out the winter winds. To put it shortly, the house in which the owner can nd a pleasant retreat at all
seasons and can store his belongings safely is presumably at once the pleasantest and the most beautiful.
However, the rst written documents to explain the functioning of the house in relation to cli-
mate impacts are those of the Greeks and Romans. The Roman architect Marcus Vitruvius Pollio
(Morgan 1960) wrote 2000 years ago:
If our designs for private houses are to be correct, we must at the outset take note of the countries and
climates in which they are built. One style of the house seems appropriate to build in Egypt, another
in Spain, a different kind in Pontus, one still different in Rome, and so on with lands and countries of
other characteristics. This is because one part the earth is directly under the sun’s course, another is
far away from it, while another lies midway between these two … it is obvious that designs for houses
ought similarly to conform to the nature of the country and diversities of climate.
FIGURE 1.1 Yokut Tule Lodge, Southern California. Source: https://missionscalifornia.com/sites/default/
les/2019-11/16-Tule_lodges_0f_Yokuts.jpg “Yo'-kuts Tule Lodges” from Contributions to North American
Ethnology, Volume III. Washington: Government Printing Ofce, 1877. California Historical Society, North
Baker Research Library Collection, FN-32152.
4 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
FIGURE 1.2 Socrates’ Megaron House (470-399 BC). Source: https://ednovak99.wordpress.com/2016/12/
13/passive-solar-design-overview/ Credits: linework by Ar Shiva Bagga and Ar Kapil Grover
Thus, indigenously built habitats across the globe had been an expression of the locally available
materials and construction techniques, the culture of the communities, and a function of the climate
context (Figure 1.3).
As a consequence of the Industrial Revolution, the instinctive attention to how humankind inter-
acts with the natural environment underwent a brusque inversion and led to the advent of moder-
nity, bringing cultural, territorial, and technological transformations (Frampton 1985). The tone of
the international style was set by a few internationally recognized master architects. Most of their
5 Introduction
FIGURE 1.3 Four primary climate types a nd indigenously built response. Credits: linework by Vaibhav Ahuja
solutions involve highly transparent glass-steel design that essentially requires the massive inclusion
of active building systems, such as air conditioning, to provide the minimal comfort conditions for
the building occupants. Figure 1.4 shows the skyline of Chicago, Illinois.
In the post-war years, climate-responsive design of buildings became a concern and realization
was evident that since there is no international climate, architecture also cannot be international. In
the 1950s and 1960s, modern architects Le Corbusier and Louis I. Kahn designed several buildings
driven by a sound response to the climate (Ali and Yannas 1999). One of the physical hallmarks
of modern architecture of the tropics was the sun-screen, usually called the brise-soleil, located on
the facades that faced the sun to prevent its rays penetrating the building’s interior in the summer
(Figure 1.5).
6 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
FIGURE 1.4 Skyline of Chicago. Photo credit: Ms. Cindy Urness, NDSU, Fargo
FIGURE 1.5 Mill Owners’ Association Building, Ahmedabad, Le Corbusier 1954.©Tapan Kumar Ghoshal
Introduction 7
Walter Gropius (1955), considering regional expression, writes:
true regional character cannot be found through a sentimental or imitative approach by incorporat-
ing either old emblems or the newest local fashions which disappear as fast as they appear. But if you
take … the basic difference imposed on architectural design by the climatic condition … diversity of
expression can result … if the architect will use the utterly contrasting indoor-outdoor relations … as
focus for design conception.
The term ‘bioclimatic design’ has been coined by Victor Olgyay in 1953 in his research paper
‘Bioclimatic Approach to Architecture’ and later expanded in his inuential book Design with
Climate with the subtitle Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism (1963). The term
is dened as the architecture that responds to its climatic environment and achieves comfort for
the occupants through appropriate design decisions. Olgyay synthesized elements of climatology,
human physiology, and building physics, with strong advocacy of architectural regionalism in terms
of designing in sympathy with the environment. In many ways, he can be considered an important
progenitor of what is now called ‘sustainable architecture.’
The rst climate and architecture conference was held in February 1979 at the behest of federal
sponsors, where more than 50 architects, engineers, home builders, and climatologists convened in
Washington. Most importantly, the climate and architecture conferees agreed that designers under-
stand the two fundamentals of climate-conscious architecture. Design that responds to climate – and
the research that supports such work – can’t be approached as ‘solar,’ ‘geothermal,’ or ‘underground
construction’ but as solutions that consider all elements of climate in a holistic approach to energy-
conservative design for human comfort (Green 1979).
1.4 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
A broad spectrum of concepts and notions of sustainable development or sustainability evolved
in different regions/forums, and it is axiomatic that there is no common denition of sustainable
development or sustainability. The modern environmental movement is believed to have begun in
the United States in 1962, inspired by Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring, the publication of which
caused a paradigm shift in understanding the environmental impact of pesticide use (IISD 2012).
Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos (1972) presented the state of affairs in their book Only One Earth.
Environmental degradation was the main concern at the Stockholm UNEP Conference in 1972
(Dodds etal. 2012). The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries’ (OPEC) oil embargo
and price increases of the 1970s brought the realization of the nite nature of our fossil fuel supplies
and spurred signicant research and activity to improve energy efciency and nd renewable energy
sources. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) established the
International Energy Agency (IEA) in 1974 to help countries co-ordinate a collective response to
major disruptions in the supply of oil. In 1987, the United Nations established the World Commission
on Environment and Development (WCED), which was later known as the Brundtland Commission
after its Chair Gro Harlem Brundtland, the Norwegian prime minister. The commission’s report,
known as the Brundtland Report (WCED 1987), dened ‘sustainable development’ as ‘development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs.’ It has two intrinsic requirements. First, it entails inter- and intra-generational equity
within the constituent domains of sustainability – environmental, social, cultural, and economic, the
notion of the ‘triple bottom line’ (Figure 1.6). Second, sustainability and any reference to sustainable
development require thinking long term and assuming responsibility for the future.
The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, an international treaty, was
signed in 1987 to phase out organouorides, which are affecting the ozone layer and admitting more
ultraviolet irradiation, causing the greenhouse effect.
8 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
FIGURE 1.6 Triple bottom-line approach to sustainability.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its rst assessment report in 1990,
rmly established that the climate is changing due to anthropogenic inuences caused by the emis-
sion of greenhouse gases by human activities (Houghton etal. 1990).
The Agenda 21 (UNSD 1992) prescribed key points for the sustainable construction industry as
the utilization of indigenous and local materials and technologies; labor-intensive construction and
maintenance technologies; energy-efcient designs and technologies and sustainable utilization of
natural resources (i.e., recycling of materials and waste prevention); development of knowledge on
the environmental impacts of buildings; and self-help housing for the urban and rural poor.
The energy crisis of the 1970s and the environmental concerns of the 1980s laid the foundation
for the contemporary green (sustainable) building movement. The term ‘sustainability’ was not
formally dened then in the context of the built environment, but it echoed in various forums. Sir
Alexander John Gordon (1917–1999), then president of the Royal Institute of British Architects,
espoused his ideas at the RIBA Conference in 1972 and dened ‘good architecture’ as buildings that
exhibit ‘long life, loose t and low energy,’ nicknamed as 3L Principle and which are measurable
(Gordon 1972). The philosophical basis of this was that it would be ecologically benecial to erect
buildings that last, which are designed in a way to remain adaptable for changed uses and which
use little energy in their operation. In 1973, the American Institute of Architects (AIA) established
an energy task force and in 1975 a committee on energy conservation. In 1989, the AIA Committee
on the Environment (COTE) was formed. The Environmental Resource Guide was published by
AIA, funded by EPA (1992). The rst local green building program was introduced in Austin,
Texas (1992).The AIA National Convention in 1993 was themed ‘Sustainability – Architecture at
the Crossroads.’ Susan Maxman, FAIA, then president of AIA echoed in her address
We have the knowledge, we have the riches, we have the power. What is called for is a profound shift in
the way we regard this planet and everything on it. Exploitation must be replaced by stewardship. And
for stewardship to extend its healing hand, we must act responsibly. (AIA 2007)
At the Chicago Congress, more than 3,000 AIA members joined Maxman and the Union
Internationale des Architects (UIA) in signing the Declaration of Interdependence for a Sustainable
Future, a document placing ‘environmental and social sustainability at the core of our practices
Introduction 9
and professional responsibilities’ (AIA 2007). Its scope and breadth suggested that: ‘sustainable
design integrates considerations of resource and energy efciency, healthy buildings and materi-
als, ecologically and socially sensitive land-use, and an aesthetic sensitivity that inspires, afrms,
and ennobles.’ Many national bodies and institutions of architecture adopted this declaration and
developed environmental policies, building energy codes and standards, and green rating systems.
‘Greening of the White House’ initiative was launched by the Clinton administration in 1993.
The historic United Nations Summit held in September 2015 in Paris adopted the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development – the 17 SDGs will universally apply to all over the next 15 years. One
of the goals is to make sustainable cities and communities.
The landmark agreement reached at the COP21 UN Forum on Climate Change Conference in
December 2015 in Paris insinuates an end to the fossil fuel era. It commits nearly 200 countries –
including the United States, China, India, and EU Nations – to keep the global average temperature
increase to ‘well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to drive efforts to limit the temperature
increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.’ To meet this target, the world must reach zero fossil
fuel and CO2 emissions in the built environment by about 2050 and zero total global GHG emissions
between 2060 and 2080 (Hare etal. 2014, 2030 Challenge).
Sustainable development is favored by the government and the private sector, while the term
‘sustainability’ has been increasingly used by academics, environmentalists, and nongovernmen-
tal organizations (Robinson 2004). Generally, the distinction is drawn between ‘anthropocentric-’
and ‘biocentric’-framed sustainability models (Robinson 2004, Cole 2005). Sustainable develop-
ment maintains an anthropocentric view and represents the diametrically opposing imperatives of
technological advancement and growth, on the one hand, and ecological (and perhaps social and
economic) sustainability, on the other. Sustainability, by contrast, promotes a biocentric view that
places the human presence within a larger natural context and focuses on constraints and funda-
mental value and behavioral change.
1.5 TECHNOLOGICAL (HIGH-PERFORMANCE) DESIGN PARADIGM
The terms ‘green,’ ‘sustainable,’ and ‘high performance,’ when used to describe buildings, have
different shades of meaning to some. For this book, however, they are used interchangeably. This
use is consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s denition of green building as
the practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally responsible and
resource-efcient throughout a building’s life-cycle, from siting to design, construction, operation,
maintenance, renovation, and deconstruction. This practice expands and complements the classical
building design concerns of economy, utility, durability, and comfort. A green building is also known
as a sustainable or high-performance building.
The ASHRAE Green Guide (2006) denes green design as ‘one that is aware of and respects nature
and the natural order of things; it is a design that minimizes the negative human impacts on the
natural surroundings, materials, resources, and processes that prevail in nature.’
Within the anthropocentric view to sustainability, the value of a building is still generally dened
in terms of human benet ‘most often measured in relatively short-term nancial returns and human
health’ (Mang and Reed 2015). The technological (high-performance) design paradigm has taken
three approaches: technical, regulatory, and rating system.
1.5.1 Technical approach
Globally the use of a different list of indicators in different approaches makes sustainability assess-
ment subjective and causes a kaleidoscope of problems in comparing results from different methods.
A research and technical approach to this problem is the development of international standards to
10 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
regulate these rating systems for the wider green building market (ISO 2008). The ISO TC 59
‘Building Construction’ and its subcommittee (SC) 17 ‘Sustainability in Building Construction’ is
responsible for the following standards (Ta ble 1.2):
i) ISO/CD 21929-1:2011 Sustainability in Building Construction – Sustainability Indicators –
Part 1: Framework for the Development of Indicators for Buildings and Core Indicators,
(cancels and replaces the ISO/TS 21929-1:2006)
ii) ISO 21930:2007 Sustainability in Building Construction – Environmental Declaration of
Building Products
iii) ISO/TS 21931-1:2006 Sustainability in Building Construction – Part 1: Framework for
Methods of Assessment for Environmental Performance of Construction Works – Part 1:
Buildings, published, stage: 90.92 (2006-06-30)
iv) ISO 15392:2008 Sustainability in Building Construction – General Principles
According to ISO 15392 (2008), construction sustainability includes ‘considering sustainable devel-
opment in terms of its three primary aspects (economic, environmental and social), while meeting
the requirements for technical and functional performance.’ ISO/CD 21929-1 denes a framework
for the improvement of buildings’ sustainability indicators to assist the minimum functionality and
performance of buildings with minimum environmental impact while improving economic and
social aspects at the local and global levels (ISO 2011). Individual buildings are believed to impact
seven core protection areas of sustainable development: cultural heritage, economic capital, eco-
nomic prosperity, ecosystem, natural resources, health and well-being, and social equity. The pur-
pose is to protect the areas of sustainability development and the scope is the building’s life cycle.
ISO/CD 21929-1 denes a list of core indicators to assess, diagnose, compare, and monitor sustain-
able performance-utilizing indicators. The indicators are presented in three levels: the location-
specic level, the site-specic level, and the building-specic level (Figure 1.7).
1.5.2 regulaTory approach
A regulatory approach, in the form of the building standards and codes, provides a minimum
amenity, safety, health, and sustainability standard in the design and construction phases of new
TABLE 1.2
Suite of Related International Standards for Sustainability in Buildings and
Civil Engineering Works
Social Economic
Environmental Aspects Aspects Aspects
Methodological basics ISO 15392: General principles
ISO/TR 21932: Terminology
ISO 21929-1: Sustainability indicators-Part 1: Framework for the
development of indicators and a core set of indictors for buildings
Buildings ISO 21931-1: Framework for methods of
assessment of the environmental performance of
construction works - Part I: Buildings
Building products ISO 21930: Environmental declaration of building
products
Source: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:21929:-1:ed-1:v1:en
11 Introduction
FIGURE 1.7 Building level core indicators ISO. Linework by Ar Shubham Satija
buildings. The regulatory approach involves federal, state, and local jurisdictions concerning man-
datory building regulations and requirements. The purpose is to prescribe minimum acceptable
performance standards in a limited number of criteria, and the scope is to design and construct
the building. Federal involvement with the high-performance building can be highlighted by key
milestones.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (US Govt. 2005) denes goals and standards for reducing energy
use in existing and new federal buildings. The Act requires the application of sustainable design
principles to new and replacement federal buildings. It sets an energy consumption target for new
federal buildings of 30% below existing standards. The Act establishes an ENERGY STAR® label-
ing program. ENERGY STAR is a voluntary program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) to identify and promote energy-efcient products and
buildings to reduce energy consumption, improve energy security, and reduce pollution through
voluntary labeling of, or other forms of communication about, products and buildings that meet
the highest energy conservation standards. Buildings can receive a 1-100 ENERGY STAR score;
this score compares the building’s energy performance to similar buildings nationwide. A score of
50 represents median energy performance, while a score of 75 means the building performs better
than 75% of all similar buildings nationwide and may be eligible for ENERGY STAR certication.
ENERGY STAR labeling and scoring are meant for both existing buildings and new buildings. On
average, ENERGY STAR–certied buildings use 35% less energy and generate 35% fewer green-
house gas emissions than their peers.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (US Govt. 2007) denes attributes of high-
performance buildings, which include reduction of energy, water, material, and fossil fuel use;
improved indoor environmental quality for occupants; improved worker productivity; and lower
life cycle costs when compared to baselines for building performance. EISA 2007 requires federal
agencies to use a green building certication system for new construction and major renovations
of buildings. It sets general water-conservation guidelines and stormwater runoff requirements
for property development. The Act requires new buildings and major renovations to reach zero-
net energy use by 2030. Building standards developed by non-prot organizations over the years
12 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
have been adopted by state and local governments into their building codes to aid in the design
and energy-efcient operation of high-performance or green buildings. Typically, building stan-
dards establish minimum requirements developed through consensus processes, for example, the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the
International Code Council (ICC):
i) ASHRAE Energy Standard 90.1-2010 for buildings except low-rise residential
ii) ASHRAE Standard 189.1-2017 for the design of high-performance, green buildings except
low-rise residential, now integrated with
iii) Other American National Standards Institute (ANSI)–accredited standards
Another development is to prefer performance-based code compliance options over prescriptive meth-
ods so that higher energy and green building standards can be achieved through innovative means.
1.5.3 raTing SySTem approach
A rating system approach is represented by the green building certication systems that differ from
building standards in that they typically take a ‘whole building’ approach. Sustainable building rating
systems are dened as methodologies that examine the performance or expected performance of a
‘whole building’ and translate that examination into an overall assessment that allows for comparison
against other buildings (Fowler and Rauch 2006). Sustainable building rating systems are designed
to foster and recognize different aspects of sustainable practices during the design, construction, and
operation of a building and to incorporate the best practices in reducing the adverse impacts of the
building on the environment. There are more than 600 different rating systems in use or being devel-
oped worldwide (BRE 2008). Tabl e 1.3 summarizes some of these rating systems according to regions.
Cole (2013) distinguishes building environmental assessment methods from sustainability assess-
ment systems. The eld of building environmental assessment has developed remarkably since the
introduction of BREEAM; the majority of extant building environmental assessment methods
assess environmental performance improvement relative to business as usual practice (or regulatory
minimum standards), either implicitly or explicitly, while sustainability assessment systems have
been introduced that expand on the range of performance issues to explicitly include social and
economic criteria and thus attempt to assess ‘sustainability.’
A comparison of well-established building environmental assessment methods BREEAM,
LEED, CASBEE, and GREEN STAR is presented in Tabl e 1.4. A comparison of the salient fea-
tures of four established sustainability assessment systems – LBC, SBTool, SPeAR, and DGNB – is
presented in Tabl e 1.5. Each of these rating systems differs in structure, terminologies, and perfor-
mance assessment methods.
A building’s energy performance has the maximum weightage in sustainability rating systems
because of its high environmental impacts, but it is the least achieved one in sustainability assess-
ments (Berardi 2012). The building sector represents a great potential to reduce energy consumption
in both new and existing buildings by an estimated 30–50% (UNEP 2009).
1.6 BIOCENTRIC (ECOLOGICAL) DESIGN PARADIGM
In contrast to the anthropocentric view, from a biocentric perspective within an ecological world-
view, ‘value’ is added to an ecological system, ‘increasing its systemic capability to generate, sus-
tain and evolve increasingly higher orders of vitality and viability for the life of a particular place’
(Mang and Reed 2015). Sustainability may also be positioned as having as a prerequisite the main-
tenance of the functional integrity of the ecosphere so that it can remain resilient to human-induced
stresses and remain biologically productive (Rees 1991). The ecological theories and life cycle
assessment methods are discussed in this context.
13 Introduction
TABLE 1.3
Building Environmental Assessment Methods and Sustainability Assessment Systems
Region Country Name Owner/Management
Global Green buildings World Green Building Council http://worldgbc.
org/
Global Sustainable buildings and climate United Nations Environmental Programme
initiative https://energies2050.org/sustainable-buildings-
and-climate-initiative-unep-sbci/?lang=en
Europe Europe CRISP http://cic.vtt./eco/crisp/
Czech Republic SBTool CZ Technical and Test Institute for Construction
Prague and Building Research Institute –
certication company ltd. http://sbtool.cz/
France Haute Qualite Environnementale Association pour la Haute Qualité
(HQE) Method Environnementale http://hqegbc.org/accueil/
France Certivéa www.certivea.fr/
France ESCALE http://cstb.fr/
Finland PromisE VTT (Technical Research Centre of Finland)
http://vtt./
Germany DGNB System German Sustainable Building Council http://dgnb.
de/en
Italy LEED Green Building Council Italia www.gbcitalia.org/
Italy Protocollo ITACA iiSBE Italy http://itaca.org/
Norway Envir. Programming of Urban SINTEF (Skandinavias storste uavhengige
Development forskningsorganisasjon) http://lidera.info/
Portugal LiderA (Leadership for the Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon
Environment in Sustainable Building) http://lidera.info
Portugal SBTool PT iiSBE Portugal http://iisbeportugal.org/
Poland LEED Polish Green Building Council http://plgbc.org
Romania LEED Romania Green Building Council http://rogbc.
org/en
Spain VERDE Green Building Council espan̄a http://gbce.es/
Sweden EcoEffect Royal Institute of Technology http://ecoeffect.se
Swiss Minergie Minergie Switzerland http://minergie.ch/
The Netherlands BREEAM-NL Dutch Green Building Council http://dgbc.nl/
UK BREEAM (Building Research Building Research Establishment http://breeam.
Establishment Environmental org
Assessment Method)
Europe LEnSE (Label for Environmental, Belgian Building Research Institute and others
Social & Economic building) https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/78620/re
porting/en
North United States LEED® (Leadership in Energy and United States Green Building Council http://
America Environmental Design) usgbc.org/
Green Globes Green Building Initiative http://greenglobes.com/
Canada LEED-Canada Canada Green Building Council http://cagbc.org
Green Globes ECD Canada http://greenglobes.com/
Mexico SICES Green Building Council Mexico https://
sicesmexico.mx/
Asia China Chinese Green Building Evaluation Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
Label (GBEL) three star Construction http://cngb.org.cn/
Hong Kong BEAMPlus HK-BEAM HK-BEAM Society http://beamsociety.org.hk/
CEPAS (Comprehensive HK Building Department
Environmental Performance
Assessment Scheme)
(Continued)
14 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
TABLE 1.3 (CONTINUED)
Building Environmental Assessment Methods and Sustainability Assessment Systems
Region Country Name Owner/Management
India GRIHA (Green Rating for Integrated GRIHA Council http://grihaindia.org/
Habitat Assessment)
IGBC Green rating Indian Green Building Council https://igbc.in/
igbc/
Japan CASBEE (Comprehensive Assessment Japan Sustainable Building Consort. http://ibec.
System for Building Environmental or.jp/CASBEE/
Efciency)
Korea G-SEED (Green Standard for Energy Korea Research Institute of Eco-Environmental
and Environmental Design) Architecture http://kriea.re.kr/home_eng/
Singapore Green Mark Singapore Building & Construction Authority
(BCA) http://bca.gov.sg/GreenMark/
Taiwan EEWH (Ecology, Energy, Waste and ABRI (Architecture & Building Research
Healthy) Institute) http://abri.gov.tw/en
UAE LEED Emirates http://emiratesgbc.org/
ESTIDAMA-Pearl Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council https://dp
m.gov.ae/en/Urban-Planning/Pearl-Rating-Syste
m-Process
Vietnam LOTUS Vietnam Green Building Council https://vgbc.vn/
en/lotus-en/rating-systems/
Southern Australia Green Star Australian Green Building Council http://new.
Hemisphere gbca.org.au/green-star/
NABERS (National Australian https://nabers.gov.au/
Building Environmental Rating
Scheme)
Argentina LEED http://argentinagbc.org.ar/
Brazil LEED-Brazil GBC Brazil http://gbcbrasil.org.br/
HQE Fundaão Vanzolini
New Zealand Green Star NZ New Zealand Green Building Council http://
nzgbc.org.nz/main/
South Africa Green Star SA South African Green Building Council http://
gbcsa.org.za/
SBAT (Sustainable Building CSIR (Council for Scientic and Industrial
Assessment Tool) Research)https://csir.co.za/
Generic GBTool/SBTool iiSBE (International Initiative for a Sustainable
Built Environment) https://iisbe.org/
SPeAR (Sustainable Project Ove Arup Ltd. https://arup.com/projects/spear
Assessment Routine)
Living Building Challenge International Living Future Institute https://
living-future.org › lbc
1.6.1 ecological TheorieS
Disparate disciplines have contributed to the discourse on ecological processes and the underlying
principles of ecology. As bioregionalist Doug Aberley explains in Futures by Design, ‘Ecology
itself was formally created by Ernest Haeckel (1834–1919), for whom the belief that humans and
nature were inextricably linked became the centrepiece of a unied philosophy, science, arts,
theology, and politics.’ The environmentalists and designers have scrutinized congurations and
drawn prescriptive lessons from such scrutiny. Patrick Geddes, Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo
15 Introduction
TABLE 1.4
Salient Features of Building Environmental Assessment Methods: BREEAM, LEED, CASBEE,
and GREEN STAR
Comparison
items BREEAM (2016)
Location, year UK, 1990
Developed by: BRE (non-prot third
party)
Sustainable Management, health
categories and wellbeing,
energy, transport,
materials, water,
waste, land use, and
ecology, pollution,
and innovation
Assessed building Residence, retail,
industrial unit, ofce,
court, school, health
care, prison,
multifunction
building, unusual
building
Flexibility Flexible in the UK and
relatively overseas
Approach to Additive pre-weighted
scoring criteria credits approach
Ratings Unclassied <30
Pass ≥30
Good ≥45
Very good ≥55
Excellent ≥70
Outstanding ≥85
Source: adapted from Parvesh Kumar (2018)
LEED (2018) CASBEE (2014) Green Star (2020)
US, 1998 Japan, 2001 Australia (2003)
USGBC (non-prot Japan Sustainable Building GBCA (Green
third party) Consortium (JSBC), Building Council of
Institute for Building Australia)
Environment & Energy
Conservation (IBEC)
Sustainable site, Building environmental Management, indoor
indoor quality: indoor environment environment quality,
environmental quality of service, outdoor energy, transport,
quality, water environment on site; water, materials, land
efciency, and environmental load: energy, use and ecology,
resources, resources & materials, emissions, innovation
innovation, and offsite environment
regional priorities
Residence, school, Residence (multi-unit), Design and as-built:
retail, commercial retail, industrial temporary schools, ofces,
building, construction, multifunction universities,
multifunction building industrial facilities,
building, healthcare public buildings,
retail centers, and
hospitals
Flexible in the USA Flexibility in Japan, and Flexible in Australia
and relatively relative low exibility and relatively
overseas overseas overseas
Additive simple Special Additive pre-weighted
approach (1 for 1) credits approach
Certied 40–49 points BEE = 3.0 (excellent) 4 star = 45–59
Silver 50–59 points BEE = ~1.5–3.0 (v. good) 5 star = 60–74
Gold 60–79 points BEE = ~1.0–1.5 (good) 6 star = 75–100
Platinum 80+ points BEE = ~0.5–1.0 (fairy poor)
BEE = less than 0.5 (poor)
Emerson, Eugene and Howard Odum, James Lovelock, and many others down to the next-gener-
ation Frank Lloyd Wright, Rudolf Steiner, Buckminster Fuller, Malcolm Wells, Paolo Soleri, Ian
McHarg, John Tillman Lyle, Wes Jackson, Amory and Hunter Lovins, John Todd and Nancy Jack
Todd, Christopher Alexander, David Orr, Sim van der Ryn, and William McDonough have been
the proponents of ecological design thinking (Guzowski 1999). Tabl e 1.6 provides a summary and
comparison of the development and design concepts and how to relate to each other.
John Tillman Lyle (1994), in his book Regenerative Design for Sustainability, discussed the
dichotomy of design as degenerative and regenerative. The concept of regenerative design and
development added a new dimension – a new intention to the broader theoretical context of sus-
tainable design. A regenerative system provides for continuous replacement, through its functional
processes, of the energy and materials used in its operation. Table 1.7 presents comparison of regen-
erative design support systems.
16 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
TABLE 1.5
Salient Features of Sustainability Assessment: LBC, SBTool, SPeAR, and DGNB
SBTool
Larsoon (2016)
Location, year Canada, 1998
Developed by: iiSBE (international
non-prot collaboration)
Sustainable Site Selection, Project
Categories Planning, and
Development, Energy and
Resource, Environmental
Loadings, Indoor
Environmental Quality,
Service Quality, Economic
and Social aspects,
Cultural and Perceptual
Aspects
Assessed Almost any building
building
Flexibility High exibility around the
world
Approach to Additive improved weighted
scoring criteria scoring approach
Ratings -1 = unsatised
0 = minimum acceptable
performance
5 = best practice
1 to 4 = intermediate
performance levels
2 = normal default
Source: Parvesh Kumar (2018)
Arup’s Sustainable
Project Assessment
Routine (SPeAR)
UK, 2000
ARUP
Environment &
Natural Resources
(60 indicators)
Economic (26
indicators)
Societal (34
indicators)
Almost any building
High exibility
around the world
Special (SPeAR
diagram)
Score
Living Building Challenge
LBC (2010)
US, 2006
International Living
Building Future (non-prot
third party)
Place, Water, Energy, Health
and Happiness, Materials,
Equity, and Beauty
Renovation, landscape or
infrastructure (non-
conditioned development)
almost any building
High exibility around the
world
Actual recorded
performance
Living certication (seven
petals)
Petal certication (three
petals; one of which must
be the Water, Energy, or
Materials)
Net-zero energy certication
DGNB Certificate
Program
Germany, 2009
German Sustainable
Building Council
(DGNB)
Environment
Economic
Socio-Cultural &
Functional
Technical
Process
Site
Almost any building
High exibility
around the world
Special (Performance
Index)
Platinum (~80%)
Gold (~65%)
Silver (~50%)
Bronze (~35% for
existing building)
1.6.2 life cycle aSSeSSmenT
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a technique for assessing the potential environmental loadings and
impacts of buildings (Hobday 2001). LCA technique can be applied in the decision-making process
concerning the design of a new building as well as the renovation of the old building stock. LCA
systems measure the impact of the building on the environment by assessing the emission of one or
more chemical substances related to the building construction and operation. LCA can have one or
more evaluation parameters.
Many diverse methodologies have been developed for carrying out LCA of materials and prod-
ucts, which has resulted in difculties in evaluating and comparing the environmental perfor-
mance of materials and products. In response to these problems, the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) has developed consensus-based international standards for conducting and
reporting life cycle analysis.
ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management-LCA – Principles and framework
ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management-LCA – Requirements and guidelines
17
TABLE 1.6
Comparison of Ecological Theories/Concepts
William McDonough Brinda Vale & Benyus (1997):
Malcolm Wells (1982): Nancy Jack Todd and (2002): Cradle-to- John Tillman Lyle: Robert Vale (1991): Laws of Nature or Sim Van der Ryn
Ian McHarg (1969): Wilderness-Based John Todd (1984): Living Cradle Design Regenerative Design Principles of green Principles of (1996): Ecological
Design with Nature Checklist Machines Philosophy Strategies architecture Biomimicry Principles
1. Negentropy 1. Creates pure air 1. Self-sustaining 1. Believes in 1. Letting nature do the 1. Conserving 1. Nature runs on 10. Solutions grow
2. Apperception 2. Creates pure water 2. Based on the living repaying the earth work energy sunlight from place
3. Symbiosis 3. Stores rainwater relationship between in return for what 2. Considering nature as 2. Working with 2. Nature uses only 11. Ecological
4. Fitness and 4. Produces its own our biotic and abiotic it has given us both model and climate the energy it accounting
tting food environment 2. Suggests to protect context 3. Minimizing new needs 12. Design with
5. The presence of 5. Creates rich soil 3. Based on ecosystem and enrich eco 3. Aggregating, not resources 3. Nature ts form nature.
health or 6. Uses solar energy technologies systems and isolating 4. Respect for to function 13. Everyone is a
pathology 7. Stores solar energy 4. Treat sewage and nature's biological 4. Seeking optimum users 4. Nature recycles designer
8. Creates silence purify water with metabolism levels for multiple 5. Respect for site everything 14. Making nature
9. Consumes its own plants, animals, and 3. Categorizes all the functions 6. Holism 5. Nature rewards visible
wastes microorganisms material into 5. Matching technology cooperation
10. Maintains itself 5. Maintain ecological ‘technical’ and to needs 6. Nature banks on
11. Matches nature's balance in nature ‘biological’ 6. Using information to diversity
pace 4. Suggests the use of replace power 7. Nature demands
12. Provides wildlife organic and 7. Providing multiple local expertise
habitat technical nutrients pathways 8. Nature curbs
13. Provides human 5. Suggests removing 8. Seeking common excesses from
habitat dangerous solutions to disparate within
14. Moderates climate technical materials problems 9. Nature taps the
and weather from current life 9. Managing storage as a power of limits
15. .... and is beautiful cycle key to 'sustainability’
10. Shaping form to guide
ow
11. Shaping form to
manifest process
12. Prioritizing for
sustainability
Source: Adapted from Guzowski (1999)
Introduction
18 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
TABLE 1.7
Comparison of Regenerative Design Support Tools
REGEN Eco-Balance
(Svec et al 2012) (Fisk 2009) Perkins + Wills (2015) LENSES (Plaut 2012)
Developer BNIM Plinky Fisk and Gail Perkins + Wills CLEAR
Vittori
Types of Architectural rm Non-prot Architectural rm Non-prot
Developer organization organization
Background Practice + USGBC The Center for Practice + University of Institute for Built
Maximum Potential British Columbia Environment at
Building Systems Colorado State
University
What? A data-rich, web-based A design and Issues and process-based A process and a
tool planning tool frameworks metrics tool
Audience Professionals and Professionals and Practitioners of Professionals,
community members businesses Perkins+Wills business,
government, students
and non-prot teams
Mission To guide dialogue and To provide principles To offer constructive To cultivate, empower,
help professionals to for balancing life direction to design teams and equip change
engage with support systems and to generate dialogue makers to create a
regenerative approaches across life cycle for regenerative regenerative future
phases approaches
Goal Transforming practice Supplying our needs Expanding design for A thriving living
towards regenerative in a regenerative positive synergies environment
approaches manner
Structure Linking specic Series of graphics Challenging questions Overlaid three lenses
strategies to the whole
Main Robust and resilient Air, water, food, Foundation, sandbox and Foundation lens, ows
categories natural systems, high energy and toolbox lens and vitality lens
performing constructed materials
systems, prosperous
economic systems and
whole social systems
Source: Akturk (2016)
There are four phases in an LCA study:
i) the goal and scope denition phase
ii) the life cycle inventory analysis (LCI) phase
iii) the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) phase
iv) the life cycle interpretation phase
The scope, including the system boundary and level of detail, of an LCA depends on the subject and
the intended use of the study. The depth and the breadth of LCA can differ considerably depending
on the goal of a particular LCA.
The life cycle inventory (LCI) analysis involves a collection of the input/output data necessary to
meet the goals of the dened study.
19 Introduction
The purpose of LCIA is to provide additional information to help assess a product system’s LCI
results to better understand its environmental signicance.
In the life cycle interpretation the results of an LCI or an LCIA, or both, are summarized and
discussed as a basis for conclusions, recommendations, and decision-making in accordance with the
goal and scope denition.
For buildings, the LCA covers resource extraction and production of materials, through the con-
struction and operation of the building to its disposal (Rashid 2015). The cradle-to-cradle assess-
ment takes this further with recycling and reuse built into the assessment.
There are several examples when at the rst instance an unt existing building was planned for
demolition and construction from scratch, but considerations of the environmental and social conse-
quences changed the decision to renovate the existing building. A truly comprehensive, sustainable
approach that includes economic, social, and cultural factors invariably has to give preferences to
the preservation and adaptive reuse of existing structures. Renaissance Hall, a century-old building,
was decided to be demolished but was renovated and reconstructed to the standard of LEED gold
certication for adaptive reuse for the Department of Architecture and Landscape Architecture,
North Dakota State University, Fargo (Figure 1.8).
On the other hand, new building stock should be designed and constructed considering the life
cycle approach. The German engineer Prof. Werner Sobek suggests that future buildings should be
characterized as follows:
• Zero energy: in total, they will not require energy for their annual operation.
• Zero emissions: they will not emit any harmful substances.
• Zero waste: all materials will be completely recyclable.
This ‘triple-zero concept’ is epitomized in his design for the Energy Plus experimental house in
Berlin (Figure 1.9). According to Sobek, the ecologically conscious building can be extremely
attractive and exciting, especially because it asks the designer to face new challenges.
FIGURE 1.8 Renaissance Hall, North Dakota State University, Fargo.© C. Kabre
20 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
FIGURE 1.9 Energy plus house, Berlin. © C. Kabre
1.6.3 SySTemS approach
The well-known trajectory of an environmentally responsive design, developed over the last few
decades, generally distinguishes technological (high-performance) and biocentric (ecological)
design paradigms (Figure 1.10). While aiming for neutral or reduced environmental impacts in
terms of energy, carbon, waste, or water are worthwhile targets, it is important that the built environ-
ment should aim for revitalization and regeneration to have net positive environmental benets for
FIGURE 1.10 Environmentally responsive trajectory. Source: adapted from Reed (2006)
Introduction 21
the living world. This implies that the built environment needs to produce more than it consumes,
as well as remedy pollution and damage. It is a clear departure from the centuries-old outlook that
the best-built environment can be ‘neutral’ in relation to the living world. It is increasingly appar-
ent that society is entering a transition period between these technological (high performance) and
biocentric (ecological) design paradigms. Thus a sustainability framework in synergy with nature
or the ecosystem is necessary not only to preserve the environment but also to revitalize and regen-
erate the fragile and degraded environment. This implies a living or whole-systems approach to
development which looks at the human and non-human ecology of the built environment. In taking
a whole-systems approach, a more expansive notion of the built environment is required, one where
dynamic relationships exist between a greater number of built and unbuilt elements and where a
balanced, sustainable relationship between these elements is explored (Moffatt and Kohler 2008).
1.7 SYNERGISTIC DESIGN
Robinson (2004) suggests ‘if sustainability is to mean anything, it must act as an integrating con-
cept’ and will require new concepts and tools ‘that are integrative and synthetic, not disciplinary
and analytic; and that actively creates synergy, not just summation.’
Synergistic design, therefore, can be visualized as an integrated systems approach to a sustain-
able built environment; conceptually it is illustrated in Figure 1.11. The social goal (design goal)
of a built environment can be dened in terms of the design objective as comfort (thermal and
luminous). This objective must be satised to achieve the design goal. The performance variables,
such as temperature, humidity, solar radiation, and illumination levels, must acquire values within
certain ranges that will satisfy the objective. These ranges may be stated in specic terms as con-
straints or general directional terms as a target; for example, achieving the illumination level of 300
lux can be a target. The design variables, such as length, width, height, and location of the window,
materials properties of glazing, must be assigned some values to collectively describe a design
(system). More generally, performance variables are related to the required functions and design
variables to the form or structure of the design.
The crux of the design process lies in the correct mapping between the design and performance
variables to achieve the objective or goal. A performance variable is often inuenced by more than
one design variable. The converse is also true: one design variable is likely to inuence more than
one performance variable; for instance, a window may inuence not only the daylight admitted
inside but also the solar heat gain and the light distribution. The performance and decision variables
thus interact in complex ways, and the relationships between them are not always obvious.
The design process usually follows a basic generate-and-test approach (Mitchell 1990, pp. 179–
81). In this process to nd a solution requires applying decision rules to generate feasible solutions
and then evaluating performance to determine whether feasible solutions are acceptable solutions.
The basic structure of this model is illustrated in Figure 1.12 .
In a completely manual design process, all the generation and testing are performed by the archi-
tect, or the tasks are divided among members of the design team. In a partially automated design
process, the computer can either generate or test. For example, a computer can be used to generate
alternative shading devices by mechanically applying the rules of solar geometry, with a human
critic inspecting and testing the machine’s proposals or a human designer generating alternatives
which are then tested by computer programs. In a fully automated design process, the computer both
generates and tests.
Given a problem, the efciency with which a solution can be found will depend on the formula-
tion of effective generation and test mechanisms. Generation requires decision rules to assure that
only feasible alternatives are produced and to determine what alternative to try next. In addition to
testing, optimization is necessary to evaluate and sort out the acceptable solutions by drawing infer-
ences, to tradeoff conicting performances, and to prescribe the best solution. A sustainable built
environment is likely to be assessed by the way in which various systems (decisions) fulll multiple
22 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
FIGURE 1.11 A conceptual framework of synergistic design of the sustainable built environment. Source:
adapted from Coyne etal. (1990)
FIGURE 1.12 A basic generate-and-test process of design.
performances, and, indeed, it is typically only possible to achieve high environmental performance
within demanding cost and time constraints through a creative synergy of systems (Figure 1.13).
While the design of the thermal and luminous environment is at the heart of a much larger sus-
tainable built environment picture, it represents an intriguing point of intersection between exter-
nal and internal environmental forces that are ultimately shaped by and given meaning through
23 Introduction
FIGURE 1.13 Goals for action toward sustainable building: test of sustainability can be achieved with a
combination of various assessment methods. Source: arch plus, issue 184, October, Niklaus Kohler
architectural form. It should be the designer’s aim to ensure the required indoor conditions with
little or no use of energy, other than from ambient or renewable sources. As a result, a synergistic
approach to a thermal and luminous environment embodies not only environmental but also rich
aesthetic and innovation opportunities. Therefore the designer’s task is to
1. Analyze the given climate conditions
2. Establish the limits of desirable or acceptable thermal comfort
3. Generate alternative design solutions for the thermal environment from the palette of pas-
sive, hybrid (low-energy), and active design strategies
4. Generate alternative design solutions for the luminous environment from the palette of
passive and advanced daylighting strategies
5. Optimize energy requirements for the thermal and luminous environment
6. Consider the integration of renewable energy with the built environment
It is hoped that the synergy of passive, hybrid (low-energy), and active design strategies with renew-
able energy will lead to a greater realization of a comfortable thermal and luminous environment
and will perhaps even make the built environments sustainable (regenerative in future).
REFERENCES
AIA (2007) AIA Committee on the environment. American Institute of Architects. http://www.aia.org/practi
cing/groups/kc/AIAS077347. Accessed 15 August 2016.
Akturk A (2016) Regenerative Design and Development for a Sustainable Future: Denitions and Tool
Evaluation. MS Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
24 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
Ali ZF, Yannas S (1999) Masters in the tropics: Environmental features of the buildings of Le Corbusier and
Louis I. Kahn in Bangladesh and India. In: Szokolay SV (ed) Proceedings of the Sixteenth International
PLEA (Passive and Low Energy Architecture) Conference, Brisbane, Australia, 22–24 September 1999,
vol 1, pp 41–46.
ASHRAE (2006) Green Guide: the Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings. American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating & Air-conditioning Engineers Inc., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Amsterdam.
BEA (2019) Gross domestic product by industry accounts. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. https://www.
bea.gov/system/les/2019-07/gdpind119.xlsx. Accessed 15 October 2019.
Benyus JM (1997) Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. Harper Collins, New York.
Berardi U (2012) Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: Rating systems and related buildings.
Sustainable Development, 20(6), pp 411–424.
BRE (2008) A Discussion Document Comparing International Environmental Assessment Methods for
Buildings. BRE, Glasgow.
Cole RJ (2005) Building environmental assessment methods: redening intentions and roles. Building
Research and Information, 33: 455–467.
Cole RJ (2013) Rating Systems for Sustainability, in Loftness, V and Haase, D (eds), Sustainable Built
Environments, Springer Science + Business Media, New York, pp. 464–477.
Coyne RD, Rosenman MA, Radford AD, Balachandran M, Gero JS (1990) Knowledge-Based Design Systems.
Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
Dean AO (2002) Rural studio: Samuel Mockbee and an architecture of decency. Princeton Architectural
Press, p 2. https://issuu.com/papress/docs/9781568982922/7. Accessed 11 January 2020.
Dodds F, Strauss M, Strong MF (2012) Only One Earth: The Long Road via Rio to Sustainable Development.
Routledge, London.
Farmer J (1999) Green Shift. Architectural Press, Oxford.
Fisk P (2009) The Eco-Balance Approach to Transect-based Planning: Efforts Taken at Verano, a New
Community and University in San Antonio, Texas. Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems,
Austin, Texas. [Online] URL: http://www.cmpbs.org/sites/default/les/mp12_ecobalance_transect.pdf
Fowler KM, Rauch EM (2006) Sustainable Building Rating Systems-Summary. Pacic Northwest National
Laboratory, US Department of Energy, USA, Richland, WA, report no. 15858. Available at https://
s3.amazonaws.com/legacy.usgbc.org/usgbc/docs/Archive/General/Docs1915.pdf, accessed on 20 July
2020.
Frampton K (1985) Modern Architecture: A Critical History. Thames and Hudson Ltd., London.
GBCI (2016) Certication programmes. http://www.gbci.org/certication. Accessed 12 August 2016.
Gordon A (1972) Designing for survival: The President introduces his long life/loose t/low energy study.
Royal Institute of British Architects Journal, 79(9), pp 374–376.
Green KE (1979) Green climate and architecture. In: Environmental Data and Information Service, US Dept
of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, vol. 10 (5), pp 6–10. Available at
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Nm7zAAAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.R A7-PA6, accessed on
5 August 2020.
Gropius W (1955) Scope of Total Architecture. Harper and Brothers, New York.
Guzowski M (1999) Daylighting for Sustainable Design. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York.
Hare B, Schaeffer M, Lindberg M, Höhne N, Fekete H, Jeffery L, Gütschow J, Sferra F, Rocha M (2014)
Below 2°C or 1.5°C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and Non-Annex I countries. Climate
Action Tracker Policy Brief. climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/brieng_papers/CAT_Bonn_
policy_update_jun2014-nal_revised.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2016.
Hastings R, Wall M (2007) Sustainable Solar Housing, Vol. 1 Strategies and Solutions. Earthscan, London.
Hobday R (ed.) (2001) Energy-Related Environmental Impact of Buildings. Technical Synthesis Report
Annex 31, International Energy Agency. Available at https://www.iea-ebc.org/Data/publications/EBC_
Annex_31_tsr.pdf. Accessed on 14 October 2019.
Houghton JT, Jenkins GJ, Ephraums JJ (eds) (1990) Climate change. The IPCC scientic assessment. ht tps://
www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2016.
IEA (2018) World energy statistics and balances. International Energy Agency, Paris. https://webstore.iea
.org/download/direct/2263?leName=World_Energy_Balances_2018_Overview.pdf. Accessed 23
September 2019
IISD (2012) Sust ainable development timeline. Internat ional Institute of Sustain able Development. https://www.
iisd.org/pdf/2012/sd_timeline_2012.pdf. Accessed 12 August 2016.
25 Introduction
ISO (2007) Sustainability in Building Construction – Environmental Declaration of Building Products.
International Organization for Standardization, ISO/CD 21930, Geneva.
ISO (2008) Sustainability in Building Construction – General Principles. International Organization for
Standardization, ISO Standard 15392, Geneva.
ISO (2010) Sus tainability in B uilding Constru ction – Framework for Methods of A ssessment for Environmen tal
Performance of Constr uction Works – Part 1: Buildings. International Organization for Standardization,
ISO/CD 21931–1, Geneva.
ISO (2011) Sustainability in Building Construction: Sustainability Indicators—Part 1: Framework for the
Development of Indicators and a Core Set of Indicators for Buildings. International Organization for
Standardization, ISO/CD 21929–1, Geneva.
Lyle JT (1994) Regenerative Design for Sustainability. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Mang P, Reed W (2000) Designing from place: A regenerative framework and methodology. Journal of
Building Research and Information, 40(1), pp 23–38.
Mang P, Reed W (2015) The nature of positive. Journal of Building Research and Information, 43(1), pp 7–10.
McDonough W, Braungart M (2002) Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. North Point
Press, New York.
McHarg I (1969) Design with Nature. Natural History Press/Falcon Press, Philadelphia, PA.
MGI (2012) Urban world: Cities and the rise of the consuming class. McKinsey Global Institute. www.
mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Global%20Themes/Urbanization/Urban%20world%20Cities%20
and%20the%20rise%20of%20the%20consuming%20class/MGI_Urban_world_Rise_of_the_consum-
ing_class_Full_report.ashx. Accessed 13 August 2016.
Mitchell WJ (1990) The Logic of Architecture: Design, Computation, and Cognition. The MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Moffatt S, Kohler N (2008) Conceptualizing the built environment as a social-ecological system. Journal of
Building Research and Information, 36(3), pp 248–268.
Ofce of the Federal Environmental Executive (2008) The Federal Commitment to Green Building:
Experiences and Expectations, United States. Ofce of the Federal Environmental Executive. Available
at https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/pdf/fedcomm_greenbuild.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020
Olgyay V (1953) Bioclimatic Approach to Architecture. In the BRAB Conference Report No 5. National
Research Council, Washington, DC.
Olgyay V (1963) Design with Climate, Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism. Princeton
University Press: Princeton, NJ.
Oliver P (1987) Dwellings: The House across the World. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Parvesh Kumar (2018) Biocenosis: Rethinking Future of Sustainable Built Environment. M. Tech. disserta-
tion, DCR University of Science and Technology, Murthal (Sonepat), India.
Perkins +Will (2015) Issues & Process-Based Frameworks for Regenerative Design, cross reference in Akturk
A (2 016 ).
Plaut JM, Dunbar B, Wackerman A, Hodgin S (2012) Regenerative design: the LENSES framework for build-
ings and communities. Journal of Building Research and Information, 40 (1):112–122.
Rapoport A (1969) House Form and Culture. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ.
Rashid AFA, Yusoff S (2015) A review of life cycle assessment method for building industry. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 45, pp 244–248.
Reed B (2006) The trajectory of environmental design. http://www.integrativedesign.net/images/Trajectory
_EnvironmentallyResponsibleDesign.pdf. Accessed 31 October 2012.
Rees WE (1991) Conserving natural capital: the key to sustainable landscapes. International Journal of
Canadian Studies, 4 (Fall): 7–27.
Roaf S, Fuentes M, Thomas S (2001) Ecohouse: A Design Guide. Architectural Press, Oxford.
Robinson J (2004) Squaring a circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological
Economics, 48(4), pp 369–384.
Rudofsky B (1964) Architecture Without Architects. Academy Editions, London.
Sassi P (2016) Built environment sustainability and quality of life (BESQoL) assessment methodology.
In: Filho WL, Brandli L (eds) Engaging Stakeholders in Education for Sustainable Development at
University Level. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 21–32.
Svec P, Berkebile B, Todd JA (2012) REGEN: Toward a tool for regenerative thinking. Journal of Building
Research and Information, 40(1): 81–94.
Todd N, Todd J (1984) Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design. Sierra Club
Books, San Francisco, CA.
26 Synergistic Design of Sustainable Built Environments
UN Environment and International Energy Agency (2017) Towards a zero-emission, efcient, and resilient
buildings and construction sector. Global Status Report (2017). Available at https://www.worldgbc.org/
sites /default/ les /UNE P%20188 _GABC_en%20%28web%29.pdf. Accessed 27 September 2019.
UNEP (2009) Buildings and climate change: Summary for decision makers. Sustainable Buildings & Climate
Initiative. United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.unep.org/sbci/pdfs/SBCI-BCCSu
mmary.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2016.
UNSD (1992) Agenda 21, United Nations for Sustainable Development, United Nations Conference on
Environmental & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.
org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf. Accessed 24 August 2016.
US Government (2005) Energy Policy Act of 2005. Washington. Available at htt ps://www.govinfo.gov/content/
pkg/BILLS-109hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-109hr6enr.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020.
US Government (2007) Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Washington. Available at https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020.
Vale B, Vale R (1991) Green Architecture, Design for a Sustainable Future. Thames and Hudson, London.
Van der Ryn S, Cowan S (1996) Ecological Design. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Vitruvius MP (1960) The Ten Books on Architecture, (Morgan MH, translator). Dover Publications, Inc., New
York, p 170.
Ward B, Dubos R (1972) Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet. Penguin,
Harmondsworth.
WCED (1987) Our common fut ure. World Comm ission on Environment and Development, Oxford GB. Oxford
University Press. conspect.nl/pdf/Our_Common_Future-Brundtland_Report_1987.pdf. Accessed 30
Aug ust 2 012.
Wells M (1982) A Regeneration-Based Checklist for Design and Construction, Gentle Architecture. McGraw-
Hill, New York.
27 References
REFERENCES
AIA (2007) AIA Committee on the environment. American Institute of Architects. http://www.aia.org/prac-
ticing/groups/kc/AIAS077347. Accessed 15 August 2016.
Akturk A (2016) Regenerative Design and Development for a Sustainable Future: Denitions and Tool
Evaluation. MS Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Ali ZF, Yannas S (1999) Masters in the tropics: Environmental features of the buildings of Le Corbusier and
Louis I. Kahn in Bangladesh and India. In: Szokolay SV (ed) Proceedings of the Sixteenth International
PLEA (Passive and Low Energy Architecture) Conference, Brisbane, Australia, 22–24 September 1999,
vol 1, pp 41–46.
ASHRAE (2006) Green Guide: the Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings. American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating & Air-conditioning Engineers Inc., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Amsterdam.
BEA (2019) Gross domestic product by industry accounts. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. https://www.
bea.gov/system/les/2019-07/gdpind119.xlsx. Accessed 15 October 2019.
Benyus JM (1997) Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. Harper Collins, New York.
Berardi U (2012) Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: Rating systems and related buildings.
Sustainable Development, 20(6), pp 411–424.
BRE (2008) A Discussion Document Comparing International Environmental Assessment Methods for
Buildings. BRE, Glasgow.
Cole RJ (2005) Building environmental assessment methods: redening intentions and roles. Building
Research and Information, 33: 455–467.
Cole RJ (2013) Rating Systems for Sustainability, in Loftness, V and Haase, D (eds), Sustainable Built
Environments, Springer Science + Business Media, New York, pp. 464–477.
Coyne RD, Rosenman MA, Radford AD, Balachandran M, Gero JS (1990) Knowledge-Based Design Systems.
Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
Dean AO (2002) Rural studio: Samuel Mockbee and an architecture of decency. Princeton Architectural
Press, p 2. https://issuu.com/papress/docs/9781568982922/7. Accessed 11 January 2020.
Dodds F, Strauss M, Strong MF (2012) Only One Earth: The Long Road via Rio to Sustainable Development.
Routledge, London.
Farmer J (1999) Green Shift. Architectural Press, Oxford.
Fisk P (2009) The Eco-Balance Approach to Transect-based Planning: Efforts Taken at Verano, a New
Community and University in San Antonio, Texas. Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems,
Austin, Texas. [Online] URL: http://www.cmpbs.org/sites/default/les/mp12_ecobalance_transect.pdf
Fowler KM, Rauch EM (2006) Sustainable Building Rating Systems-Summary. Pacic Northwest National
Laboratory, US Department of Energy, USA, Richland, WA, report no. 15858. Available at https://
s3.amazonaws.com/legacy.usgbc.org/usgbc/docs/Archive/General/Docs1915.pdf, accessed on 20 July
2020.
Frampton K (1985) Modern Architecture: A Critical History. Thames and Hudson Ltd., London.
GBCI (2016) Certication programmes. http://www.gbci.org/certication. Accessed 12 August 2016.
Gordon A (1972) Designing for survival: The President introduces his long life/loose t/low energy study.
Royal Institute of British Architects Journal, 79(9), pp 374–376.
Green KE (1979) Green climate and architecture. In: Environmental Data and Information Service, US Dept
of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, vol. 10 (5), pp 6–10. Available at
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Nm7zAAAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.RA7-PA6, accessed on
5 August 2020.
Gropius W (1955) Scope of Total Architecture. Harper and Brothers, New York.
Guzowski M (1999) Daylighting for Sustainable Design. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York.
Hare B, Schaeffer M, Lindberg M, Höhne N, Fekete H, Jeffery L, Gütschow J, Sferra F, Rocha M (2014) Below
2°C or 1.5°C depends on rapid action from both Annex I and Non-Annex I countries. Climate Action
Tracker Policy Brief. climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/brieng_papers/CAT_Bonn_policy_
update_ jun2014-nal_revised.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2016.
Hastings R, Wall M (2007) Sustainable Solar Housing, Vol. 1 Strategies and Solutions. Earthscan, London.
Hobday R (ed.) (2001) Energy-Related Environmental Impact of Buildings. Technical Synthesis Report
Annex 31, International Energy Agency. Available at https://www.iea-ebc.org/Data/publications/EBC_
Annex_31_tsr.pdf. Accessed on 14 October 2019.
Houghton JT, Jenkins GJ, Ephraums JJ (eds) (1990) Climate change. The IPCC scientic assessment. https://
www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2016.
28 References
IEA (2018) World energy statistics and balances. International Energy Agency, Paris. https://webstore.iea.
org/download/direct/2263?leName=World_Energy_Balances_2018_Overview.pdf. Accessed 23
September 2019
IISD (2012) Sust ainable development timeline. Internat ional Institute of Sustai nable Development. https://www.
iisd.org/pdf/2012/sd_timeline_2012.pdf. Accessed 12 August 2016.
ISO (2007) Sustainability in Building Construction – Environmental Declaration of Building Products.
International Organization for Standardization, ISO/CD 21930, Geneva.
ISO (2008) Sustainability in Building Construction – General Principles. International Organization for
Standardization, ISO Standard 15392, Geneva.
ISO (2010) Sus tainability in B uilding Constru ction – Framework for Methods of A ssessment for Environme ntal
Performance of Constr uction Works – Part 1: Buildings. International Organization for Standardization,
ISO/CD 21931–1, Geneva.
ISO (2011) Sustainability in Building Construction: Sustainability Indicators—Part 1: Framework for the
Development of Indicators and a Core Set of Indicators for Buildings. International Organization for
Standardization, ISO/CD 21929–1, Geneva.
Lyle JT (1994) Regenerative Design for Sustainability. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Mang P, Reed W (2000) Designing from place: A regenerative framework and methodology. Journal of
Building Research and Information, 40(1), pp 23–38.
Mang P, Reed W (2015) The nature of positive. Journal of Building Research and Information, 43(1), pp 7–10.
McDonough W, Braungart M (2002) Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. North Point
Press, New York.
McHarg I (1969) Design with Nature. Natural History Press/Falcon Press, Philadelphia, PA.
MGI (2012) Urban world: Cities and the rise of the consuming class. McKinsey Global Institute. www.
mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Global%20Themes/Urbanization/Urban%20world%20Cities%20
and%20the%20rise%20of%20the%20consuming%20class/MGI_Urban_world_Rise_of_the_consum-
ing_class_Full_report.ashx. Accessed 13 August 2016.
Mitchell WJ (1990) The Logic of Architecture: Design, Computation, and Cognition. The MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Moffatt S, Kohler N (2008) Conceptualizing the built environment as a social-ecological system. Journal of
Building Research and Information, 36(3), pp 248–268.
Ofce of the Federal Environmental Executive (2008) The Federal Commitment to Green Building:
Experiences and Expectations, United States. Ofce of the Federal Environmental Executive. Available
at https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/pdf/fedcomm_greenbuild.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020
Olgyay V (1953) Bioclimatic Approach to Architecture. In the BRAB Conference Report No 5. National
Research Council, Washington, DC.
Olgyay V (1963) Design with Climate, Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism. Princeton
University Press: Princeton, NJ.
Oliver P (1987) Dwellings: The House across the World. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Parvesh Kumar (2018) Biocenosis: Rethinking Future of Sustainable Built Environment. M. Tech. disserta-
tion, DCR University of Science and Technology, Murthal (Sonepat), India.
Perkins +Will (2015) Issues & Process-Based Frameworks for Regenerative Design, cross reference in Akturk
A (2 016 ).
Plaut JM, Dunbar B, Wackerman A, Hodgin S (2012) Regenerative design: the LENSES framework for build-
ings and communities. Journal of Building Research and Information, 40 (1):112–122.
Rapoport A (1969) House Form and Culture. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ.
Rashid AFA, Yusoff S (2015) A review of life cycle assessment method for building industry. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 45, pp 244–248.
Reed B (2006) The trajectory of environmental design. http://www.integrativedesign.net/images/Trajectory_
EnvironmentallyResponsibleDesign.pdf. Accessed 31 October 2012.
Rees WE (1991) Conserving natural capital: the key to sustainable landscapes. International Journal of
Canadian Studies, 4 (Fall): 7–27.
Roaf S, Fuentes M, Thomas S (2001) Ecohouse: A Design Guide. Architectural Press, Oxford.
Robinson J (2004) Squaring a circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological
Economics, 48(4), pp 369–384.
Rudofsky B (1964) Architecture Without Architects. Academy Editions, London.
Sassi P (2016) Built environment sustainability and quality of life (BESQoL) assessment methodology.
In: Filho WL, Brandli L (eds) Engaging Stakeholders in Education for Sustainable Development at
University Level. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 21–32.
29 References
Svec P, Berkebile B, Todd JA (2012) REGEN: Toward a tool for regenerative thinking. Journal of Building
Research and Information, 40(1): 81–94.
Todd N, Todd J (1984) Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design. Sierra Club
Books, San Francisco, CA.
UN Environment and International Energy Agency (2017) Towards a zero-emission, efcient, and resilient
buildings and construction sector. Global Status Report (2017). Available at https://www.worldgbc.org/
sites/default/les/UNEP%20188_GABC_en%20%28web%29.pdf. Accessed 27 September 2019.
UNEP (2009) Buildings and climate change: Summary for decision makers. Sustainable Buildings &
Climate Initiative. United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.unep.org/sbci/pdfs/SBCI-
BCCSummary.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2016.
UNSD (1992) Agenda 21, United Nations for Sustainable Development, United Nations Conference on
Environmental & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June. https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf. Accessed 24 August 2016.
US Government (2005) Energy Policy Act of 2005. Washington. Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/
pkg/BILLS-109hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-109hr6enr.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020.
US Government (2007) Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Washington. Available at https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf. Accessed on 20 July 2020.
Vale B, Vale R (1991) Green Architecture, Design for a Sustainable Future. Thames and Hudson, London.
Van der Ryn S, Cowan S (1996) Ecological Design. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Vitruvius MP (1960) The Ten Books on Architecture, (Morgan MH, translator). Dover Publications, Inc., New
York, p 170.
Ward B, Dubos R (1972) Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet. Penguin,
Harmondsworth.
WCED (1987) O ur common future. World Commission on Environment and D evelopment, Oxford GB. Oxford
University Press. conspect.nl/pdf/Our_Common_Future-Brundtland_Report_1987.pdf. Accessed 30
Aug us t 2 012.
Wells M (1982) A Regeneration-Based Checklist for Design and Construction, Gentle Architecture. McGraw-
Hill, New York.
ASHRAE (2009) Handbook of Fundamentals. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air
Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, Chapter 9.
ASHRAE (2013) Climatic Data for Building Design Standards Standard 169–2013. American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta.
ASHRAE (2017) Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
55-2017, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta.
Auliciems A (1981) Towards a psycho-physiological model of thermal perception. International Journal of
Biometeorology, vol. 25(2): 109–22.
Auliciems A (1982) Psycho-physiological criteria for global thermal zones of building design. International
Journal of Biometeorology, vol. 26(Supplement): 69–86.
Auliciems A, Szokolay SV (2007) Thermal Comfort. PLEA Note 3. Passive and Low Energy Architecture
International, Design Tools and Techniques in association with University of Queensland Dept of
Architecture. http://plea-arch.org/wp-content/uploads/PLEA-NOTE-3-THERMAL-COMFORT.pdf.
Accessed 26 November 2012.
Aydinli S (1981) Uber die Berechnung der zur Verfugung stehenden Solarenergie und des Tageslichtes. Verei n
Deutscher Ingenieure. (VDI-Verlag GmbH Dusseldorf), vol. 6(79): 10.
Briggs RS, Lucas RG, Taylor ZT (2003) Climate classication for building energy codes and standards: Part
1-development process. ASHRAE Transactions, Atlanta, vol. 1:4610–4611.
CIBSE (1999) Environmental Design: CIBSE Guide A. The Chartered Institution of Building Services
Engineers, London.
Cooper PI (1969) The absorption of solar radiation in solar stills. Solar Energy, vol. 12: 3.
de Dear R, Brager G, Cooper D (1997) Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference.
Final Report ASHRAE RP-884, Macquarie Research Ltd. Macquarie University, Sydney. http://aws.
mq.edu.au/rp-884/ashrae_rp884_home.html. Accessed 02 June 2015.
de Dear RJ, Brager GS (2002) Thermal comfort in naturally ventilated buildings: Revisions to ASHRAE
Standard 55. Energy and Buildings, vol. 34(6): 549–561.
Diston DJ (2009) Computational Modeling and Simulation of Aircraft and the Environment. John Wiley &
Sons Ltd, Chichester, England.
DOE (n.d.) E nergyPlus Weather Data. Department of Energy, US Government, https://energyplus.net/weather.
30 References
Dogniaux R (1975) Variations geographiques et climatiques des expositions energetiques solaries sur des
surfaces receptrices horizontales et verticals. Institut Royal Meteorologique de Belgique, Misc. Ser. B,
vol. 38: 7.
Fanger PO (1967) Calculation of thermal comfort: Introduction of a basic comfort equation. ASHRAE
Transactions, vol. 73(2): III.4.1.
Hawas M, Muneer T (1983) Correlation between global radiation and sunshine data for India. Solar Energy,
vol. 30(3): 289.
Houghten FC, Yaglaglou CP (1923a) ASHVE Research Report No. 673 Determination of the comfort zone.
ASHVE Transactions, vol. 29: 361–79.
Houghten FC, Yaglaglou CP (1923b) Determining the lines of equal comfort. Journal of ASHVE, vol. 29: 165.
Humphreys M (1978) Outdoor temperatures and comfort indoors. Building Research and Practice, 6(2):
92 –105
Humphreys M, Nicol JF (1998) Understanding the adaptive approach to thermal comfort. ASHRAE Technical
Data Bulletin, vol. 14(1): 1–14.
IESNA (2013) The IESNA Lighting Handbook: Reference and Application. Illuminating Engineering Society
of North America, National Bureau of Standards (1991) The International System of Units (SI), 6th edi-
tion, NBS Special Publication 330, National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.
Iqbal M (1983) An Introduction to Solar Radiation. Academic Press, Toronto.
Kabre C (1999) WINSHADE: A computer design tool for solar control. Building and Environment, vol. 34(3):
263–274.
Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F (2006) World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classica-
tion updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, vol. 15(3): 259–263.
Lim BP, Rao KR, Tharmaratnam K, Mattar AM (1979) Environmental Factors in the Design of Building
Fenestration. Applied Science Publishers Ltd., London.
List RJ (200 0) Smithsonian Meteorologica l Ta bles, 6th revised edition. Smithson ian Miscellane ous Collections,
vol. 114, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Available at https://repository.si.edu/bit-
stream/handle/10088/23746/1951%20%20smc%20%20vol%20114.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Liviana JE, Rohles FH, Bullock OD (1988) Humidity, comfort, and contact lenses. ASHR AE Transactions,
vol. 94(1): 3–11.
Lof GOG, Dufe JA, Smith CO (1966) World distribution of solar radiation. Engineering Experiment Station
Report 21, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Muneer T (2004) Solar Radiation and Daylight Models. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, Amsterdam.
NOAA (2017) Climate Normal. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US Government.
Available at https://ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/land-based-station-data/land-based-datasets/climate-
normals.
NOAA, NASA, and USAF (1976) U.S . Standard Atm osphere. National O ceanic & Atmosph eric Administrat ion
(NOA A). National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA) and United States Air Force (USAF).
Available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19770009539.
Olgyay V (1963) Design with Climate, Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Page JK, Thompson JL, Simmie J (1984) Algorithms for Building Climatology Applications. A Meteorological
Data Base System for Architectural and Building Engineering Designers, Handbook. Department of
Building Science, University of Shefeld, Shefeld, England.
Phillips RO (1948) Sunshine and Shade in Australia. TS 23, also Bulletin 8, 1963.
Szokolay SV (1992) Architecture and Climate Change. RAIA, Red Hill, Canberra
Szokolay SV (2008) Introduction to Architectural Science: The Basis of Sustainable Design. Architectural
Press/Elsevier Science, Oxford.
Vernon HM (1932) The measurement of radiant heat in relation to human comfort. Journal of Industrial
Hygiene, vol. 14: 95–111.
Warner CD (1897) Editoria l. Hartford coura nt of Connecticut. 27 Aug. http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/04/23/
everybody-talks-about-the-weather. Accessed 27 November 2016.
WMO (2010) World Meteorological Organization Standard Normal. United Nations Statistics Division.
Available at http://data.un.org/Explorer.aspx.
WMO (2020) World Weather Information Service. World Meteorological Organization. Available at http://
worldweather.wmo.int/en/home.html.
Arens E, McNall P, Gonzalez R, Berglund L, Zeren L (1980) A new bioclimatic chart for Passive Solar Design.
Proceedings of the 5th National Passive Solar Conference, American Section of the International Solar
Energy Society., Amherst, MA.
31 References
ASHRAE (1972) ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook (SI). American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, New York.
ASHRAE (1997) Fundamentals Handbook SI Edition. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air
Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta.
ASHRAE (2009) Handbook of Fundamentals. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air
Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta.
ASHRAE (2010) ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.I-2010, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers,
Inc., Atlanta.
ASHRAE (2016) ASHRAE Handbook – HVAC systems and equipment (SI). American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta.
Bahadori MN (1985) An improved design of wind towers for natural ventilation and passive cooling. Solar
Energy, 35(2), 119–129.
Bansal N, Mathur R, Bhandari M (1993) Solar chimney for enhanced stack ventilation. Building and
Environment, 28(3), 373–377.
Bliss, RJV (1961) Atmospheric radiation near the surface of the ground. Solar Energy 5(3), 103 –120.
Carmody J, Haglund K (2006) External Shading Devices in Commercial Buildings, the Impact on Energy
Use, Peak Demand and Glare Control. Regents of the University of Minnesota.
CIBSE (1999) Environmental Design: CIBSE Guide A. The Chartered Institution of Building Services
Engineers, London.
Cook J (1989) Passive Cooling. Solar Heat Technologies/MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cristofalo S, Orioli S, Silvestrini G (1989) Thermal behavior of ‘Scirocco rooms’ in ancient Sicilian villas.
Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 4(4), 471–473.
Cunningham WA, Thompson TL (1986) Passive cooling with natural draft cooling towers in combination
with solar chimneys. Proceedings of the Passive Low Energy Architecture (PLEA), Pecs, Hungary, 1–5
September, pp 23–34.
Davies MG (2004) Building Heat Transfer. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.
Ford B (2012) Downdraught cooling: An overview of current research and practice. Architectural Science
Review, 55(4), 237–240.
Givoni B (1969) Man, Climate and Architecture. Elsevier Publishing Company, London.
Givoni B (1991) Performance and applicability of passive and low-energy cooling systems. Energy and
Buildings, 17(3), 17 7–19 9.
Givoni B (1994) Passive and Low Energy Cooling of Buildings. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Givoni B (1998) Climate Considerations in Building and Urban Design. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
Hay H (1978) A passive heating and cooling system from concept to commercialization. Proceedings of
Annual Meeting of American Section of the International Solar Energy Society, Atlanta, Georgia,
28–31 August, pp. 262–272.
Heiselberg, PK (ed.) (2002) Principles of hybrid ventilation. International Energy Agency Annex 35 Final
report. Department of Building Technology and Structural Engineering, Aalborg University, Denmark.
ISO (2007) Building Components and Building Elements-Thermal Resistance and Thermal Transmittance
Calculation Method: 6946. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
Koenigsberger OH, Ingersoll TG, Mayhem A, Szokolay SV (1974) Manual of Tropical Housing and Building:
Part I. Climatic Design. Longman, London.
Lechner N (2001) Heating, Cooling, Lighting Design Methods for Architects. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., New
Yo rk .
Loudon AG (1968) Summertime Temperatures in Buildings. Building Research Station, Garston, England.
Mackey CO, Wright LT (1943) Summer comfort factors as inuenced by the thermal properties of building
materials. ASHVE Transactions Heating, Piping & AC Section, 49, 148–174.
Milbank NO and Harrington-Lynn J (1974) Thermal Response and the Admittance Procedure, Building
Research Station, Garston, England.
Milne MB, Givoni B (1979) Architectural design based on climate. In: Watson D (ed.), Energy Conservation
Through Building Design. McGraw-Hill, Inc, New York, 96–113.
Muneer T (2004) Solar Radiation and Daylight Models. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, Amsterdam.
Olgyay V (1963) Design with Climate - Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Olgyay V, Olgyay A (1957) Solar Control and Shading Devices. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Pescod D (1976) Energy Savings and Performance Limitations with Evaporative Cooling in Australia. Techn.
Report no. 5. CSIRO, Div. Mech. Eng., Highett, Vic., Australia.
32 References
Rao KR, Ballantyne ER (1970) Some Investigation on the Sol-Air Temperature Concept. Division of Building
Research Technical Paper, no. 27. CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia.
Szokolay SV (2008) Introduction to Architectural Science: The Basis of Sustainable Design. Architectural
Press, Elsevier, Oxford.
Watson D (1997) Bioclimatic design. In: Watson, D, Crosbie, MJ, Callender, JH (eds), Time-Savers Standards
for Architectural Design Data. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 23–34.
Watson D, Labs K (1983) Climatic Design: Energy-Efcient Building Principles and Practices. McGraw-
Hill, New York.
Wooldrige MJ, Chapman HL, Pescod D (1976) Indirect evaporative cooling system. ASHRAE Transaction,
82 (1), 146 –155.
Yellott JI (1982) Passive and hybrid cooling research. In: Boer KW, Dufe JA (eds), Advances in Solar Energy,
vol. 1. American Solar Energy Society Inc., New York, pp 241–263.
Zhao D, Aili A, Zhai Y, Xu S, Tan G, Yin X, Yang R (2019) Radiative sky cooling: Fundamental principles,
materials, and applications. Applied Physics Reviews, 6(2), 1–40.
Ander GD (2016) Daylighting. Whole Building Design Guide. National Institute of Building Sciences,
Washington, DC, https://www.wbdg.org/resources/daylighting.
Aschehoug O, Christoffersen J, Jakobiak R, Johnsen K, Lee E, Ruck N, Selkowitz S (eds) (2000) Daylight
in Buildings, a Sourcebook on Daylighting Systems and Components. A Report on IEA SHC Task 21/
ECBCS. Annex 29. International Energy Agency.
ASHRAE (2010) Energy Standard for Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES
Standard 90.1. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta.
CIBSE (2002) Code for Lighting. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, Oxford.
CIE (2003) S 0003 CIE Spatial Distribution of Daylight – CIE Standard General Sky, CIe S 011/E. Commission
Internationale De L’Eclairage, Vienna.
Edmonds IR, Greenup PJ (2002) Daylighting in the tropics. Solar Energy, 73(2), pp 111–121.
Guzowski M (1999) Daylighting for Sustainable Design. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York.
Hansen VG, Edmonds T (2003) Natural illumination of deep-plan ofce buildings: Light pipe strategies. In:
ISES Solar World Congress, 14–19 June 2003, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Hopkinson RG (1963) Architectural Physics - Lighting. Her Majesty’s Stationery Ofce, London.
Howard TC (1986) Variable area light reecting assembly. United States, https://www.osti.gov/servlets/
purl/866085.
IEA (2001) Application guide for daylight responsive lighting control. IEA SHC Task 21. International Energy
Agency, https://www.iea-shc.org/Data/Sites/1/publications/8-8-1%20Application%20Guide.pdf.
IESNA (2013) The IESNA Lighting Handbook: Reference and Application, Illuminating Engineering Society of
North America, National Bureau of Standards (1991) The International System of Units (SI), 6th edition,
NBS Special Publication 330. National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.
ISO (2004) Spatial Distribution of Daylight – CIE Standard General Sky. ISO 15496. International Organization
for Standardization, Geneva.
Iversen A, Roy N, Hvass M, JØrgensen M, Christoffersen M, Jonsen K (2013) Daylight Calculation in Practice:
An Investigation of the Ability of Nine Daylight Simulation Programs to Calculate the Daylight Factor
in Five Typical Rooms. Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut (Danish Building Research Institute), Aalborg
University, Copenhagen, SBi 2013:26, .
Larson GW, Shakespeare R (1998) Rendering with Radiance: The Art and Science of Lighting Visualization.
Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Windows and Daylighting Group (1985) Superlite 1.0 Program Description
Summary, DA 205. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA.
Lim BP, Rao KR, Tharmaratnam K, Mattar AM (1979) Environmental Factors in the Design of Building
Fenestration. Applied Science Publishers, London.
Linhart F, Wittkopf SK, Scartezzini JL (2010) Performance of anidolic daylighting systems in tropical climates
– Parametric studies for identication of main inuencing factors. Solar Energy, 84(7), pp 1085–1094.
Longmore J, Petherbridge P (1961) Munsell value/surface reectance relationships. Letters to the editor.
Journal of the Optical Society of America, 51(3), pp 370–371.
Majoros A (1998) Daylighting. Passive and Low Energy Architecture International, Design Tools and
Techniques, PLEA Note 4. http://www.plea-arch.org/wp-content/uploads/PLEA-Note-4-Daylighting-
lowre.pdf.
Mardaljevic J (2015) Climate-based daylight modelling and its discontents. CIBSE Technical Symposium,
16–17 April, London.
33 References
Moon P, Spencer DE (1942) Illumination from a nonuniform sky. Illumination. Engineering, 37(12),
pp 707–726.
Nair MG, Ramamurthy K, Ganesan AR (2014) Classication of indoor daylight enhancements systems.
Lighting Research and Technology, 46(3), pp 245–267.
NBS (1991) The International System of Units (SI). National Bureau of Standards, 6th edition, NBS Special
Publication 330. Gaithersburg, MD.
Obradovic B, Matusiak B (2019) Daylight transport systems for buildings at high latitudes. Journal of
Daylighting, 6(2), pp 60–79.
Ruck N, Aschehoug O, Aydinli S, Christoffersen J, Edmonds I, Jakobiak R, Kischkoweit-Lopin M, Klinger M,
Lee E, Courret G (2000) Daylight in Buildings-A Sourcebook on Daylighting Systems and Components.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA.
Song J, Luo G, Li L, Tong K, Yang Y, Zhao J (2018) Application of heliostat in interior sunlight illumination
for large buildings. Renewable Energy, 121, pp 19–27.
Szokolay SV (2008) Introduction to Architectural Science: The Basis of Sustainable Design. Architectural
Press/Elsevier Science, Oxford.
Whang AJW, Yang TH, Deng ZH, Chen YY, Tseng WC, Chou CH (2019) A review of daylighting system: For
prototype systems performance and development. Energies, 12(2863), pp 1–34.
Aa, AvD, Heiselberg CP, and Perino M (2011) Designing with Responsive Building Components. IEA-ECBCS,
Annex 44 Integrating Environmentally Responsive Elements in Buildings, Aalborg University, Denmark.
Deloitte (2015) Energy Storage: Tracking the Technologies that Will Transform the Power Sector. Available
at https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/energy-resources/us-er-electric-stor-
age-paper.pdf, accessed on 14 April 2020.
Diesendorf M (2014) Sustainable Energy Solutions for Climate Change. Routledge, Abingdon, England.
DOE (2016) Comparison of Fuel Cell Technologies. U.S. Department of Energy. Available at https://www.
energy.gov/sites/prod/les/2016/06/f32/fcto_fuel_cells_comparison_chart_apr2016.pdf, accessed on 10
April 2020.
Energy Independence and Security Act (2007) Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-
110publ140/pdf/PLAW-110publ140.pdf, accessed on 10 April 2020.
Energy Policy Act (2005) Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-109hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-
109hr6enr.pdf, accessed on 10 April 2020.
Hootman T (2013) Net Zero Energy Design, A Guide for Commercial Architecture. John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
Hoboken, NJ.
https://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/1961-1990/redbook/atlas/colorpdfs/208.PDF
https://cleanet.org/index.html
https://www.energy.gov/eere/
Janda K (2011) Buildings Don’t Use Energy: People Do. Architectural Science Review, vol. 54 (1), pp 15–22.
Klaus D (2003) Advanced Building Systems: A Technical Guide for Architects and Engineers. English transla-
tion by Elizabeth Schwaiger, Birkhäuser Architecture, Basel, Switzerland.
Klaus D, Hammann RE (2008) Energy Design for Tomorrow. Edition Axel Menges, Munich.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy Basics. Ofce of Energy Efciency and Renewable
Energy, US Department of Energy, https://www.nrel.gov/research/learning.html, accessed on 12 April
2020.
Ofce of Energy Efciency and Renewable Energy. Distributed Energy Technologies for Federal projects. US
Department of Energy. Available at https://www.energy.gov/eere/femp/distributed-energy-technologies-
federal-projects, accessed on 15 April 2020
Sengupta M, Xie Y, Lopez A, Habte A, Maclaurin G, Shelby J (2018) The National Solar Radiation Data Base
(NSRDB). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 89 (June), pp 51–60.
Stuckley, CR, Schuck, SM, Sims, REH, etal. (2004) Biomass Energy Production in Australia: Status, Costs
and Opportunities for Major Technologies. A report for the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program, RIRDC
Publication no 04/031, Rural Industries Research & Development Corporation, Canberra.
Szokolay SV (2008) Introduction to Architectural Science, the Basis of Sustainable Design. Architectural
Press/Elsevier Science, Oxford.
World Energy Council (2019) Energy Storage Monitor, Latest Trends in Energy Storage. https://www.worlden-
ergy.org/assets/downloads/ESM_Final_Report_05-Nov-2019.pdf, accessed on 14 April 2020.
AIA (2011) The National Renewable Energy Laboratory Research Support Facility. The American Institute of
Architects, the Committee on the Environment (COTE), http://www.aiatopten.org/node/103, accessed
on 18 January 2020.
34 References
AIA (2016a) The Edith Green – Wendell Wyatt Federal Building. The American Institute of Architects, the
Committee on the Environment (COTE), https://www.aiatopten.org/node/494, accessed on 19 January
2020.
AIA (2016b) The University of Wyoming-Visual Arts Facility. The American Institute of Architects, the
Committee on the Environment (COTE), https://www.aiatopten.org/node/425, accessed on 19 January
2020.
AIA (2017a) The NOAA Daniel K. Inouye Regional Center. The American Institute of Architects, the
Committee on the Environment (COTE), https://www.aia.org/showcases/76911-noaa-daniel-k-inouye-
regional-center, accessed on 19 January 2020.
AIA (2017b) The Stanford Central Energy Facility. The American Institute of Architects, the Committee on
the Environment (COTE), https://www.aia.org/showcases/76996-stanford-university-central-energy-
facility, accessed on 19 January 2020.
Amelar S (2015) From Sea to Shining Sea: NOAA Inouye Regional Center. Architectural Record, 1 August,
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/7358-noaa-inouye-regional-center, accessed on 4 January
2020.
Bennett H (2015) Something Old, New, Borrowed and Green. Hawaii Business, 1 July.
Foreman C, Lowen C (2015) Optimizing a Landmark: Edith Green-Wendell Wyatt Federal Building. High
Performing Buildings, ASHRAE, Summer, pp. 49–58. http://www.hpbmagazine.org/Case-Studies/
Edith-Green-Wendell-Wyatt-Federal-Building-Portland-OR/, accessed on 2 November 2019.
Hootman T, Okada D, Pless S, Sheppy M, Torcellini P (2012) Net Zero Blueprint: National Renewable Energy
Laboratory Res ear ch Support Faci lity. High Perform ing Buildi ngs, pp. 20 –33. http://www.hpbmagazine.org/
attachments/article/12170/12F-Department-of-Energys-National-Renewable-Energy-Laboratory-
Research-Support-Facility-Golden-CO.pdf, accessed on 18 January 2020.
https://www.uwyo.edu/sustainability/leed_buildings/
https://www.hok.com/projects/view/national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration-noaa-daniel-k-inouye-
regional-center/, accessed January 4, 2020.
https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/stanford-universitys-central-energy-facility_o
https://worldarchitecture.org/articles/cgnzh/aia_honor_awards_2017_recognize_excellence_in_architec-
ture_interior_and_regional_urban_design.html
https://www.architonic.com/en/project/zgf-a rchitects-llp-stanford-university-central-energy-facility/5103246
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/11538-stanford-university-central-energy-facility
https://architectureprize.com/winners/winner.php?id=2533
https://issuu.com/constructionbusinessmedia/docs/1705_nzb
https://www.zgf.com/project/stanford-university-central-energy-facility/
https://idesignawards.com/winners/zoom.php?eid=9-10659-16
Knittel T (2014) How Reverse Engineering Can Spur Design Innovation. Fast Co. Exist, 9 January, accessed
on 4 January 2020.
Manahane S (2013) NOAA IRC Dedication at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickham. US Navy News, Hawaii, 19
December, accessed on 4 January 2020.
The Rafu Shimpo, Los Angeles Japanese Daily News (2013) NOAA Dedicates Inouye Regional Center in
Honolulu. 17 December. Available at http://www.rafu.com/2013/12/noaa-dedicates-inouye-regional-
center-in-honolulu/, accessed on 4 January 2020.
Woolford P, See T (2018) Adaptive Reuse for Hawaii Hangars, NOAA Daniel K. Inouye Regional Center,
High Performing Buildings, pp. 6–16. http://www.hpbmagazine-digital.org/hpbmagazine/winter_2018/
MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1257380, accessed on 4 January 2020.
ASHRAE (2009) ASHRAE Climatic Design Conditions 2009/2013/2017, available at http://ashrae-meteo.
info/places.php?continent=North%20America.
DOE (n.d.) All Regions - North and Central America WMO Region 4 - USA, Department of Energy, US Government,
available at https://energyplus.net/weather-region/north_and_central_america_wmo_region_4/USA%20
%20.
DOE (n.d.) EnergyPlus Weather Data, Department of Energy, US Government, available at https://energyplus.
net/weather.
Kabre C (1999) WINSHADE: A Computer Design Tool for Solar Control. Building and Environment, 34(3):
263–274.
NOAA (2017) Climate Normals, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US Government, available
at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/land-based-station-data/land-based-datasets/climate-normals.
35 References
Wikimedia Commons Contributors (2017) File: US Map - States and Capitals.png. October 12, Wikimedia
Commons, the Free Media Repository, retrieved 16:56, April 16, 2020 from https://commons.wikimedia.
org/w/index.php?title=File:US_map_-_states_and_capitals.png&oldid=262675659.
Wilcox S and Marion W (2008) User’s Manual for TMY3 Data Sets, NREL/TP-581-43156, April, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.
WMO (2010) World Meteorological Organization Standard Normal, United Nations Statistics Division, avail-
able at http://data.un.org/Explorer.aspx.
WMO (2020) World Weather Information Service, World Meteorological Organization, available at http://
worldweather.wmo.int/en/home.html.
