hig.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 34 of 34
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    Department of Industrial Ecology, School of Industrial Engineering and Management, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering. Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Stockholm.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Stockholm.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Quality versus impact: Comparing the environmental efficiency of building properties using the EcoEffect tool2010In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 45, no 5, p. 1095-1103Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There are tools that are developed for the assessment of the environmental impact of buildings (e.g. ATHENA). Other tools dealing with the indoor and outdoor environmental quality of building properties (referred to as real estates in other literature) are also available (e.g. GBTool). A platform where both the aspects of quality and impact are presented in an integrated fashion are few. The aim of this contribution is to present how the performance of different building properties can be assessed and compared using the concept of environmental efficiency in a Swedish assessment tool called EcoEffect. It presents the quality dimension in the form of users' satisfaction covering indoor and outdoor performance features against the weighted environmental impact covering global and local impacts. The indoor and outdoor values are collected using questionnaires combined with inspection and some measurements. Life cycle methodology is behind the calculation of the weighted external environmental impact. A case study is presented to show the application of EcoEffect using a comparative assessment of Lindas and a Reference property. The results show that Lindas block is better in internal environment quality than the Reference property. It performs slightly worse than the Reference property in the external environmental impact due to emissions and waste from energy and material use. The approach of integrated presentation of quality and impact as in EcoEffect provides with the opportunity of uncovering issues problem shifting and sub-optimisation. This avoids undesirable situations where the indoor quality is improved through measures that result in higher external environmental impact. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

  • 2.
    Assefa, Getachew
    et al.
    School of Chemical Sciences and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Industrial Ecology, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Department of Infrastructure, Royal Institute of Technology, Built Environment Analysis, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Kindembe, Beatric
    White Arkitekter, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Hult, Marie
    Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Landscape Architecture, Uppsala, Sweden.
    Myhr, Ulla
    Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Landscape Architecture, Uppsala, Sweden.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Environmental assessment of building properties - where natural and social sciences meet: the case of EcoEffect2007In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 42, no 3, p. 1458-1464Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The EcoEffect method of assessing external and internal impacts of building properties is briefly described. The external impacts of manufacturing and transport of the building materials, the generation of power and heat consumed during the operation phase are assessed using life-cycle methodology. Emissions and waste; natural resource depletion and toxic substances in building materials are accounted for. Here methodologies from natural sciences are employed. The internal impacts involve the assessment of the risk for discomfort and ill-being due to features and properties of both the indoor environment and outdoor environment within the boundary of the building properties. This risk is calculated based on data and information from questionnaires; measurements and inspection where methodologies mainly from social sciences are used. Life-cycle costs covering investment and utilities costs as well as maintenance costs summed up over the lifetime of the building are also calculated.

    The result presentation offers extensive layers of diagrams and data tables ranging from an aggregated diagram of environmental efficiency to quantitative indicators of different aspects and factors. Environmental efficiency provides a relative measure of the internal quality of a building property in relation to its external impact vis-à-vis its performance relative to other building properties.

  • 3.
    Carlsson, Per-Olof
    et al.
    Ramböll Sverige AB, Gävle; ACC Glasrådgivare, Stockholm.
    Wintzell, Helene
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; Helene Wintzell AB.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, KTH, Stockholm.
    Ohring, Ilari
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, KTH, Stockholm.
    Svenfelt, Åsa
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, KTH, Stockholm.
    Finnveden, Göran
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, KTH, Stockholm.
    Erlandsson, Malin
    IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet, Stockholm.
    Lindholm, Torbjörn
    Installationsteknik, Chalmers, Göteborg.
    Andersson, Johnny
    Ramböll Sverige AB, Gävle.
    Malmström, Tor-Göran
    Installationsteknik, KTH, Stockholm.
    Testfasen i miljöklassningsprojekten: Delrapport september 20072007Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Denna rapport är en redovisning av resultat och underlag i testfasen imiljöklassningsprojekten.

    I januari 2005 inleddes tre forskningsprojekt med målet att föreslå ettsystem för miljöklassning av byggnader. Forskningsprojekten har engemensam projektgrupp där 27 företag ingår. Syftet med projekten är attta fram förslag till indikatorer och kriterier för klassning inom områdenaenergi, innemiljö och farliga ämnen. Projekten avslutas hösten 2007.

    Under perioden december 2006 – mars 2007 genomfördes ett test avflera alternativa förslag till indikatorer. Testet utfördes i nära samverkanmed 16 företag från projektgruppen och ytterligare 10 bostadsrättföreningaroch 6 småhusägare. Sammanlagt ingick 46 byggnader av olika typ(flerbostadshus, kontor, sjukhus, småhus etc.).

    Testet utfördes genom att företag, föreningar och småhusägare samladein nödvändiga data för klassning av ett antal preliminära indikatorer. Defick också svara på frågor om prioritering av aspekter, indikatorer ochvilka resurser som krävdes.

    Insamlingen av mätdata kompletterades sedan med intervjuer för att fåin ytterligare information och synpunkter.

    Denna rapport innehåller resultat i form av:

    • Indata från dem som testat.
    • Försök till klassning av respektive byggnad.
    • Synpunkter på genomförandet av testningen.
    • Synpunkter på klassningssystemet.

    Dessutom ingick en studie av kopplingen mellan energideklarationer ochmiljöklassning. Några av byggnaderna energideklarerades och dessa datajämfördes med vad som behövs för miljöklassning.

    Rapporten innehåller samtliga dokument från testningen och kommeratt vara ett viktigt underlag i det fortsatta arbetet. Under hösten 2007kommer ett förslag till klassningssystem att presenteras.

  • 4.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Environmental assessment of buildings and building materials2010In: Sustainable Construction: A life Cycle Approach in Engineering. International Training School, Malta 2010 / [ed] Braganca L et al, Malta: Faculty for the Built Environment, University of Malta , 2010, p. 99-150Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 5.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Sustainability – different assessment methods give different answers2006In: Action for Sustainability: Sweden builds for the future / [ed] Gabrielle Waldén, GW Information, Stockholm: Formas , 2006, p. 19-23Chapter in book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    A bulding specially designed to be sustainable, Holmen, in the new development area Hammarby Sjöstad in Stockholm, has been studied with three different environmental assesment methods. The ideas of the client and the City of Stockholm are compared with the assessment result.

  • 6.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH.
    Borg, Ruben Paul
    University of Malta.
    Basic LCA Application: Residential Building Case study - Gronskar, Sweden2008In: Sustainability of Constructions: Integrated Approach to Life-time Structural Engineering COST Action C25 Proceedings of Seminar: Dresden 6, 7 October 2008 / [ed] Braganca et al, Cost Action C25: Addprint AG, Possendorf , 2008, p. 5:18-5:29Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this study is to provide a basic introduction to the application of life cycle thinking in building design. This is achieved through the development of a basic MS Excel tool, and applying it to a specific case study. The application of the tool to a new building is intended to illustrate its practical application and its potential as a basis for the choice of energy system and building technology with low environmental impact. The building, Gronskar, referred to in the case study was built by Skanska in Sweden, and is based on the “Moderna hus” concept, with the underlying principle of designing and constructing new efficient residential buildings. The tool is also intended to offer the necessary flexibility in view of the specific circumstances of different countries and available data.  Furthermore the platform chosen allows for potential further development by users.

  • 7.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Assefa, Getachew
    KTH.
    Kindembe, Beatrice
    KTH.
    Norrman Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Miljövärdering av bebyggelse: extern miljöpåverkan, beskrivning av olika miljöpåverkanskategorier2009Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Den här skriften utgör till största delen en översiktlig beskrivning av de miljöproblem som den moderna människans livsföring bidrar till att skapa i sin omgivning och hur samhället arbetar för att motverka dessa. Syftet är att ge en allmän förståelse för dessa miljöproblem och vad de orsakas av samt peka på vilka förändringar som krävs för att undvika eller eliminera dem. Varje kapitel är disponerat på samma sätt med problembeskrivning, mekanismer, den historiska utvecklingen, problemets omfattning, påverkan på människor samt underlag för EcoEffect-beräkningar. Denna allmänna bild har varit nödvändig att ta fram för att utveckla EcoEffect-metoden, som används för att analysera miljöpåverkan från byggande och användning av byggnader. Miljöproblemen som beskrivs är emellertid inte unika för byggsektorn utan gäller i olika grad också alla andra verksamheter i samhället. Därför bör beskrivningarna i rapporten även kunna vara av intresse för andra som vill tillägna sig en grundläggande förståelse för dagens stora miljöproblem. Rapporten utgör samtidigt en redovisning av det beräkningsunderlag som används för att göra miljöbedömningar i EcoEffect. Dessa uppgifter sammanfattas i slutet av varje kapitel och behöver således inte läsas av personer som inte är intresserade av EcoEffect metoden. Dataredovisningen är disponerad efter beräkningarna i EcoEffect som därför sammanfattas här.

  • 8.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Kahraman, Ilker
    Yasar University, Turkey.
    Basic life time conserations in design of buildings and constructions2009In: Sustainability of Constructions: Integrated Approach to Life-time structural Egineering. Proceedings of Workshop, Yimisoara, 23-24 October 2009 / [ed] Braganca L et al, Cost , 2009, p. 333-353Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 9.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Miljövärdering av bebyggelse - EcoEffect metoden: bakgrund och sammanfattande beskrivning2007Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Under beteckningen ”Miljövärdering av bebyggelse” utvecklas metoder att karaktärisera eller ”mäta” miljöanpassningen och den ekologiska uthålligheten hos bebyggelse. EcoEffect-metoden är en sådan metod som utvecklats vid KTH och Högskolan i Gävle med stöd av Formas, SBUF och en rad företag och organisationer inom byggsektorn.

    Syftet med EcoEffect-metoden är att:

    • kvantitativt beskriva miljö- och hälsopåverkan från fastigheter och bebyggelse

    • ge underlag för jämförelser och beslut som kan leda till minskad miljöpåverkan

    Metoden vänder sig i första hand till beslutsfattare som planlägger, beställer, projekterar och förvaltar bebyggelse. Ett datorverktyg har utvecklats inom pro-jektet som tillsammans med s.k. arbetsblad utgör redskap för att praktiskt an-vända sig av EcoEffect-metoden.

    EcoEffect-metoden tar ett helhetsgrepp om miljöfrågorna genom att parallellt behandla områdena: Energianvändning, Materialanvändning, Innemiljö, Ute-miljö samt Livscykelkostnader. Inom varje område görs miljövärderingen för ett antal olika påverkanskategorier, t.ex. klimatpåverkan, försurning, övergöd-ning, buller, allergipåverkan etc. Strävan har varit att så långt som möjligt kvantifiera fastigheters/byggnaders bidrag till olika miljöproblem.

    En annan ambition har varit att EcoEffect-resultaten skall vara lättbegripliga och att underliggande förutsättningar och ställningstaganden ska vara lätta att få fram. Metoden är idag utvecklad för flerbostadshus, kontor och skolor.

    Den här rapporten beskriver huvuddragen i metoden, hur man kan tillämpa den och använda datorprogrammet. Det finns ytterligare fem mer detaljerade rapporter samt en bilagsdel med tabeller, enkäter mm.

  • 10.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH.
    Miljövärdering av bebyggelse: metodbeskrivning EcoEffect-metoden2009Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Environmental assessment in EcoEffect covers internal and external impact. Assessment of internal impact aims at giving a measure of the risk that people who stay in a building or on an estate will be subjected to nuisance caused by the surrounding environment. Assessment of external impact aims at giving a measure of the contribution to negative impact on health and comfort anywhere caused by the use of a real estate, building or building product. Environmental loads are calculated as equivalents contributing to different environmental effects. Aggregated measures are presented as %, which shows the environmental load of the product per user divided by the corresponding load per capita in the country. Environmental loads may also be shown per product or per m2 floor area. At both external and internal assessment is impact of health and comfort the basis for the evaluation: Also problems occurring in the natural environment, as lack of biologic diversity, are interpreted as problems for man. The size of the negative impact is measured as decreased quality of life with respect to certain components used in social medicine. They are: Mobility, Self-care, Daily activities, Pain, Depression and Cognition. Every kind of negative impact taken into account is classified with reference to these components and a disability weight based on the mean value is calculated for each of them. A “damage value” is then calculated for each impact, which equals the disability weight multiplied by the disability time. This concept may be called a further development of the DALY system (Disability Adjusted Life Years). A damage value, which shows the relative significance of any impact, can be calculated in this way. They are used as weights when different kinds of impacts are aggregated. This report describes the calculation of environmental loads, disability weights and damage values for both internal and external impacts in EcoEffect. Also the basis for the development work is reviewed. The method is new and can be applied systematically on all kinds of environmental impacts causing physical or psychological nuisance.

  • 11.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Miljövärdering av bebyggelse: metodbeskrivning för EcoEffect2005Report (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Svenfelt, Åsa
    Carlson, Per-Olof
    Erlandsson, Martin
    Andersson, Johnny
    Winzell, Helene
    Finnveden, Göran
    Lindholm, Torbjörn
    Malmström, Tor-Göran
    Miljöklassning av byggnader: Slutrapport april 20082008Report (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    Den här rapporten presenterar en metod för att miljöklassa byggnader med avseende på energi, innemiljö och kemiska ämnen. Rapporten presenterar också några särskilda miljökrav för byggnader med eget VA-system.

    Det övergripande syftet med ett nationellt miljöklassningssystem är att bidra till en hållbar bygg- och fastighetssektor. Arbetet ska resultera i en praktiskt tillämpbar metod för miljöklassning av byggnader som är väl förankrad i byggsektorn och hos myndigheterna. En allmänt accepterad miljöklassning av yggnader kan bli ett starkt incitament för byggherrar, fastighetsägare, fastighetsförvaltare och bebyggelsens användare att påskynda en utveckling mot en miljöanpassad och hälsoinriktad byggsektor.

    En av de viktigaste utgångspunkterna för arbetet med att ta fram ett miljöklassningssystem har varit Bygga-bo-dialogens1 mål att alla nya hus och 30 procent av det befintliga byggnadsbeståndet ska vara miljöklassade senast år 2009. Denna ambition har medfört att enkelhet har varit ett viktigt mål för miljöklassningsarbetet. Balansen mellan trovärdighet och

    enkelhet har varit viktigt för arbetet.

  • 13.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, School of Architecture and the Built Environment,, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Studies, Environmental Strategies Research - fms.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Selecting environmental assessment tool for buildings2011In: Proceedings of 6th World Sustainable Building Conference, SB11 Helsinki, October 18-22, 2011, Helsinki, 2011, Vol. 1, p. Abstract 162-163Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 14.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Sundqvist, Åsa
    Finnveden, Göran
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Development of an Environmental Classification System for Buildings through a New Kind of Dialogue between Stakeholders and Researchers.2006In: Environment, health and sustainable development: IAPS 19 Conference Proceedings on CD-Rom / [ed] Mustafa K. Tolba, Aleya Abdel-Hadi, Salah Soliman, 2006Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    Aims and Objectives: The objective of this research project is to develop a system for environmental classifications of buildings, taking into account the building sector's requirements and expectations as well as international and national research findings. The classification system will deal with both new and existing buildings and will encompass indoor environment, efficient use of energy, efficient resource management and hazardous substances. The aim of this paper is to present, discuss and draw conclusions from the first research phase of the project.Context: The building sector is responsible for about 40% of all of energy and material use in Sweden and hence needs to become more sustainable. Major stakeholders in the Swedish building and property sector, including the Swedish government, municipalities and companies, have for the first time started a coordinated work to achieve a more sustainable building sector. This effort, called the dialogue project, embrace a number of commitments for each participant. One of these is to promote that all new buildings and 30% of the existing ones should be classified with respect to health and environmental impact before 2010. A general and broadly accepted system for classification of environmental performance is expected to have a large impact on management, retrofit and new designs. In accordance with this aim two research & development projects were initiated.Method: The classification system is developed by researchers in collaboration with a group of companies and municipalities who support the work practically and financially. They participate in seminars and interviews and they will test modules of the classification system along the development process. The first phase of the project has included a number of inventories: inventory of current bills, legislation and policy targets relating to environmental impact in the building sector; Interviews with key informants representing authorities and stakeholders ; inventory of national and international tools for environmental assessment of buildingsConclusions: The result will focus on conclusions from the inventories seen from three different points of views - demands from the society, demands from the sector and scientific demands. To which extent they are in harmony or contradictory will be examined. Finally some key features and elements of the anticipated classification system will be extracted and presented.

  • 15.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Svenfelt, Åsa
    KTH Miljöstrategisk Analys.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH Miljöstrategisk Analys.
    Finnveden, Göran
    KTH Miljöstrategisk Analys.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Development of an environmental rating tool for buildings through a new kind of dialogue between stakeholders and researchers2009In: ArchNet - I J A R, ISSN 1938-7806, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 116-130Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 16.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Study of international policies, Sweden: National initiatives for reducing the environmental impact of the building sector2006Report (Other academic)
  • 17.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Survey of sustainable approaches in Sweden2008In: Sustainability of Constructions: Integrated Approch to Life-time Structural Egineering / [ed] Braganca L et al, Possendorf: Addprint AG , 2008, p. 2:78-2:95Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 18. Glaumann, Mauritz
    et al.
    Westerberg, Ulla
    Närklimat kring stora hus2018In: Hus mot himlen – hållbar hybris? / [ed] Olshammar, G., Olsson, K. & Siesjö, B., Malmö: Bokförlaget Arena , 2018, p. 200-221Chapter in book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 19.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    et al.
    oyal Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies, Environmental Strategies Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Environmental efficiency in residential buildings - A simplified communication approach2009In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 44, no 5, p. 937-947Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    For all actors involved with planning, developing and managing buildings, the environmental impact relating to energy use and the quality of the indoor environment are both aspects of major concern. It is crucial that a reduction in the environmental impact of a building is not achieved through compromising the indoor environment. This paper presents a method to assess user satisfaction related to the indoor environment and the environmental impact related to the energy use of the building, i.e. the environmental efficiency of the building. This environmental efficiency comprises two indices that are calculated separately but displayed in the same diagram to facilitate communication of complex information. This approach forms part of the Swedish life cycle based environmental assessment tool for buildings, EcoEffect. The present paper presents and exemplifies the environmental efficiency of buildings using data from 26 Swedish multi-family residential buildings and proposes a number of reference values. The concept can be used as an overarching objective for environmental management of a property firm's building stock or for evaluating targets set in the planning process for a new building. It can also be used for environmental rating of buildings, which would probably increase the communication value further. The aggregated indices are rough but proportionately straightforward to calculate and easily communicated. In addition, they address the environmental impacts of buildings in a much more comprehensive way than the current practice.

  • 20. Malmqvist, Tove
    et al.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Selecting problem-related environmental indicators for housing management2006In: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, Vol. 34, no 4, p. 321-333Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The performance of environmental management systems is difficult to evaluate due to insufficient methods for measuring their environmental impacts. A procedure is proposed that contains more environmentally relevant indicators for assessing environmental impacts. In addition, theoretical and practical criteria are suggested for evaluating the relevance of different indicators. This scheme was applied to the housing-management sector with the aim of finding more problem-related indicators. Data from three existing Swedish housing estates were collected and indicators calculated for three environmental aspects: energy use, household waste treatment and embedded toxic substances/materials. The results show that problem-related environmental indicators can be used in the housing sector to measure energy consumption and, to a certain extent, household waste treatment. Finding indicators for embedded toxic substances was found to be more problematic, but an example for further discussion is presented.

  • 21. Malmqvist, Tove
    et al.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    To evaluate user satisfaction and environmental impact simultanously in buildings.2006In: Environmental health and Sustainable Development: IAPS 19 Conference Proceedings on CD-Rom / [ed] Mostafa K. Tolba, Aleya Abdel-Hadi, Salah Soliman, 2006Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this paper is to present a way to measure and display the user satisfaction related to the indoor environment of a building and the environmental impact related to the energy use of the building in the same diagram, the building's environmental efficiency. Further, the aim is to evaluate the power of this concept as an overarching goal for environmental management of buildings by presenting and analysing the environmental efficiency for a number of existing buildings. The environmental impact of energy use and the quality of the indoor environment are two of the most important environmental issues related to buildings. To some extent they are related since for example less energy use for heating, which normally means less environmental impact, may cause inconvenience for the users. For a real estate manager it is thus crucial that a reduced environmental impact of a building is not achieved at the cost of an inferior indoor environment. Instead, these two issues need to be handled simultaneously which raises demands on evaluation methods. Such methods have been developed in a comprehensive Swedish research project on environmental assessment of buildings, called EcoEffect. Data on energy use and user perceptions related to the indoor environment was collected for a number of multifamily houses in Sweden. User perceptions were captured by a comprehensive questionnaire. LCA methodology was used to calculate the environmental impact for the energy use. In order to plot the environmental efficiency in a diagram, an aggregated index needs to be calculated for the user satisfaction and environmental impact respectively. Through the comprehensive questionnaire data along with construction data of the buildings, the validity of these indexes could be evaluated.In the paper, the environmental efficiency for all examined buildings is shown in the same diagram. This aggregated picture will describe the environmental performance of a stock of Swedish buildings. It can be concluded that the aggregated indexes that are necessary for the calculation of the environmental efficiency of a building are rough but nevertheless of a kind that is easily communicated and probably well suited for comparisons between buildings. However, more background information is necessary when working with improvement measures in the environmental management.The simple concept of environmental efficiency can be used to measure and analyse the quality of the indoor environment and external environmental impact simultaneously. It may be used as an overarching environmental objective in real estate management and for comparisons between similar buildings.

  • 22.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    et al.
    Royal Inst Technol KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering. Royal Inst Technol KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Svenfelt, Åsa
    Royal Inst Technol KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Carlson, Per-Olof
    ACC Glasradgivare AB, Nacka, Sweden.
    Erlandsson, Martin
    IVL Swedish Environm Res Inst, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Andersson, Johnny
    Ramboll Consultants, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Winzell, Helene
    Helene Wintzell AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Finnveden, Göran
    Royal Inst Technol KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Lindholm, Torbjörn
    Chalmers, Environm & Energy Dept, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    Malmström, Tor-Göran
    Royal Inst Technol KTH, Dept Bldg Technol, Stockholm, Sweden.
    A Swedish environmental rating tool for buildings2011In: Energy, ISSN 0360-5442, E-ISSN 1873-6785, Vol. 36, no 4, p. 1893-1899Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In 2003, a joint effort between the Swedish government, a number of companies in the building and construction sectors, some municipalities, insurance companies and banks set a target that by 2009, all new buildings and 30% of existing Swedish buildings should be rated using a voluntary environmental rating tool. In a major research programme finished in 2008, a tool was developed to be used in this context. The tool covers three assessment areas: Energy, Indoor environment and Material & Chemicals. These areas are split into 11 aspects with one or a few indicators. Rating criteria are specified for each indicator, stipulating requirements for a rating Gold, Silver, Bronze and Rated. Indicator results can then be aggregated to aspect, area and a single raring for building level for enhanced result communication. The tool builds on previous experiences regarding environmental building rating tools and therefore includes some special characteristics which aim to tackle some of the criticism directed towards the first generation of such tools. At the time of writing, the first buildings have received official ratings and an independent stakeholder group is promoting broader implementation of the tool. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

  • 23.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    et al.
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, School of Architecture and the Built Environment,, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Studies, Environmental Strategies Research - fms.
    Keski-Seppälä, Lars
    Sollentuna municipality.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Integrating municipal climate targets with planning strategies at building level in a life cycle perspective2011In: Proceedings of 6th World Sustainable Building Conference, SB11 Helsinki, October 18-22, 2011, Helsinki, 2011, Vol. 1, p. Abstract 158-159Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 24.
    Norrman Eriksson, Ola
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Assefa, Getachew
    Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Chemical Engineering and Technology, Industrial Ecology, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Life cycle impact assessment - damage based weighting method for environmental impact assessment2005In: Action for Sustainability: Proceedings of the 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference in Tokyo: SB05 Tokyo, 2005Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper describes the conceptual framework for a damage value-oriented weighting method for endpoint problems. It is developed with the aim to be transparent, and with a minimum of subjective features. Calculations of external environmental impacts are based on data for material- and energy flows, emission factors, and characterisation of emissions into contribution to environmental impact categories. These environmental impact values are then weighted by using damage values (total number of DALY (Disability Adjusted Life Years)) for each type of problem. Estimations of the number of persons possibly affected by a problem caused by emissions have been made and multiplied by the severity for each affected person. The category weight is the sum of all damage values in an impact category. This approach has several advantages: (1) A clear distinction between the characterization step and valuation step of the LCA, (2) A knowledge driven method where an improvement in quality and reliability of information and data used can be easily introduced to the framework. The method also suffers from some disadvantages: (1) As in other weighting methods, forecasts about the future in terms of scenarios do always mean an uncertainty and (2) Local and regional environmental problems are extrapolated to global effects, which means that uncertainties are introduced.

  • 25.
    Olsson, Stefan
    et al.
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    An approach towards sustainable renovation: a tool for decision support in early project stages2016In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 106, p. 20-32Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through energy reduction in buildings is a high priority for policy-makers in the European Union and elsewhere. However, although long-term sustainability targets exist on the societal level, it is not obvious how these targets may trickle down to individual sectors and further down to specific organizations or buildings. The aim of this paper is to illustrate an approach for evaluating renovation measures in order to identify appropriate target levels in early project stages and what is needed to achieve a number of proposed sustainability targets. The evaluation approach is supported by a tool that can be seen as an aid to making rough estimations of the environmental impacts. Sustainability target levels in a Swedish context are presented for three issues: operational energy use, GHG emissions due to total energy use for building operation, and embodied GHG emissions due to production of materials. The approach to support well-grounded retrofit decisions is shown with a case study. The tool developed, in combination with a suggested step-by-step evaluation approach, provides an effective way to evaluate various potential improvements, and their consequences, in early project stages. However, other tools with similar functionality may be used. Results from the case illustration imply that it is possible to achieve the proposed sustainability targets for operational energy use by implementing nine measures. However, the targets for GHG emissions for operational energy use and embodied GHG emissions were not achieved because of an energy supply with too high a share of non-renewable fuels.

  • 26.
    Olsson, Stefan
    et al.
    KTH.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    KTH.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Managing Sustainability Aspects in Renovation Processes: Interview Study and Outline of a Process Model2015In: Sustainability, ISSN 2071-1050, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 7, no 6, p. 6336-6352Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In many European countries, there are building stocks in need of extensive renovation. This constitutes an important opportunity to perform energy-saving measures and improve indoor environmental quality aiming at a more sustainable built environment. In this paper, we report results from an interview study with the aim of obtaining an in-depth understanding of renovation processes and how sustainability aspects are handled by various Swedish property owners. Examples of important barriers revealed in the interviews are insufficient inspection of existing buildings, absence of both overarching and detailed sustainability targets and guidelines, and lack of knowledge about sustainability aspects. Based on the interview study, conclusions are drawn for the further development of a process model which aims at systematize integration and effectively address energy, environmental, and indoor environmental quality aspects throughout a renovation process; we refer to this as sustainable renovation. Some key starting points for the process model are to suggest routines, provide checklists and tools, and offer guidance for formulating sustainability targets. However, the interviews show that in order to reach a more sustainable built environment, there is a need for government subsidies, other incentives or new business models that value environmental aspects higher.

  • 27.
    Rossi, Barbara
    et al.
    MS2F, ArGEnCo Department, University of Liège, Belgium .
    Marique, Anne-Francoise
    LEMA, ArGEnCo Department, University of Liège, Belgium .
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Reiter, Sigrid
    LEMA, ArGEnCo Department, University of Liège, Belgium .
    Life-cycle assessment of residential buildings in three different European locations, basic tool2012In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 51, p. 395-401Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The paper deals with the development of a tool used for the life cycle assessment of residential buildings located in three different European towns: Brussels (Belgium), Coimbra (Portugal) and Lulea (Sweden). The basic tool focuses on the structure and the materials of the buildings and permits the evaluation of the Embodied energy, Embodied carbon and yearly energy consumption. For that purpose, a different set of original data is taken into account for each location, in which the monthly temperatures, energy mix, heating and cooling systems are defined. The energy consumption, being for heating space or water, for cooling or for lighting is transformed into CO2 emissions to deduce the Operational carbon as well. The influence of the energy mix can therefore be assessed in the basic tool. As a matter of fact, the heating and cooling systems habitually used in the three countries are also of great importance. The District Heating system, is, for instance, incorporated in the basic tool. The presence of solar water heater or photovoltaic panels is also strongly influencing the operational carbon. After a short literature review on building LCA and the description of the basic tool, the software Pleiades + Comfie combined with Equer is used to achieve the complete LCA for one building using two different load bearing frames. The results of the calculations for Brussels climate are verified against these software results. The dependence of the results to parameters such as climate, energy mix and habits is then discussed in the companion paper.

  • 28.
    Sundkvist, Åsa
    et al.
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, Institutionen för Samhällsplanering och miljö, KTH, Stockholm.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Bergman, Sara
    Kemi & Miljö, Stockholm.
    Finnveden, Göran
    Miljöstrategisk analys – fms, Institutionen för Samhällsplanering och miljö, KTH, Stockholm.
    Stenbeck, Sten
    Kemi & Miljö, Stockholm.
    Wintzell, Helene
    Kemi & Miljö, Stockholm.
    Miljöklassning av byggnader: Inventering av metoder och intressenters behov2006Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Denna rapport innehåller resultatet av projektets inledningsfas, kapitel 2 är en genomgång av politiska och andra mål för hållbar utveckling inom området byggnader med syfte att sätta miljöklassningssystemet i ett sammanhang, kapitel 3 är en redovisning av hur inledningsfasen genomförts, kapitel 4 innehåller resultatet av intervjuer med företag inom bygg och fastighetsbranschen om deras inställning till ett miljöklassningsystem samt intervjuer med aktörer som potentiellt kan skapa incitament för att företag och fastighetsägare ska ansluta sig till miljöklassningssystemet, kapitel 5 behandlar översiktligt genomgången av befintliga metoder för miljöbedömning av byggnader, kapitel 6 redovisar utgångspunkter för det fortsatta arbetet med ett miljöklassningsystem, kapitel 7 innehåller diskussion och slutsatser. Befintliga metoder för miljöbedömning av byggnader redovisas som informationsblad i bilaga 7 (svenska) och bilaga 10 (utländska).

  • 29.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Design consequences of differences in building assessment tools: a case study2011In: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218, E-ISSN 1466-4321, Vol. 39, no 1, p. 16-33Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Environmental assessment tools for buildings are emerging rapidly in many countries. Do different assessment tools influence the design process and also guide ‘green’ building projects in different directions? Three assessment tools, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New Construction (LEED-NC), Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and EcoEffect, were tested in a case study project in Sweden: a new multi-storey residential building called Grönskär. The content and results of the three assessment tools were compared in general, while issues in the three core common categories of Energy, Indoor Environment and Materials & Waste were compared in more detail. The assessment results for the case study building varied with the three tools, and the design strategies and tactics to improve the overall rating of the building project differed for each tool. This confirms that the tools can influence sustainable building in different directions and illustrates insufficient consensus between assessment tools in terms of issues, criteria and weighting. The divergent results highlight the need for an appropriate structure of assessment tools that are both environmentally relevant and practically useful.

  • 30.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering. KTH, MIljöstrategisk Analys - fms.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, School of Architecture and the Built Environment,, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Studies, Environmental Strategies Research - fms.
    Eriksson, Ola
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Westerberg, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Building engineering.
    Framework for Detailed Comparison of Building Environmental Assessment Tools2013In: Buildings, ISSN 2075-5309, E-ISSN 2075-5309, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 39-60Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Understanding how Building Environmental Assessments Tools (BEATs) measure and define “environmental” building is of great interest to many stakeholders, but it is difficult to understand how BEATs relate to each other, as well as to make detailed and systematic tool comparisons. A framework for comparing BEATs is presented in the following which facilitates an understanding and comparison of similarities and differences in terms of structure, content, aggregation, and scope. The framework was tested by comparing three distinctly different assessment tools; LEED-NC v3, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH), and EcoEffect. Illustrations of the hierarchical structure of the tools gave a clear overview of their structural differences. When using the framework, the analysis showed that all three tools treat issues related to the main assessment categories: Energy and Pollution, Indoor Environment, and Materials and Waste. However, the environmental issues addressed, and the parameters defining the object of study, differ and, subsequently, so do rating, results, categories, issues, input data, aggregation methodology, and weighting. This means that BEATs measure “environmental” building differently and push “environmental” design in different directions. Therefore, tool comparisons are important, and the framework can be used to make these comparisons in a more detailed and systematic way.

  • 31.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental engineering.
    Malmqvist, Tove
    Royal Institute of Technology, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, Department of Urban Studies, School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Stockholm.
    Basic building life cycle calculations to decrease contribution to climate change: Case study on an office building in Sweden  2011In: Building and Environment, ISSN 0360-1323, E-ISSN 1873-684X, Vol. 46, no 10, p. 1863-1871Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study examined whether simplified life cycle-based calculations of climate change contributions can provide better decision support for building design. Contributions to climate change from a newly built office building in Gävle, Sweden, were studied from a life cycle perspective as a basis for improvements. A basic climate and energy calculation tool for buildings developed in the European project ENSLIC was used. The study also examined the relative impacts from building material production and building operation, as well as the relative importance of the impact contributions from these two life cycle stages at various conditions.

    The ENSLIC tool calculates operational energy use and contributions to climate change of a number of optional improvement measures. Twelve relevant improvement measures were tested. The most important measures proved to be changing to CO2 free electricity, changing construction slabs from concrete to wood, using windows with better U-values, insulating the building better and installing low-energy lighting and white goods. Introduction of these measures was estimated to reduce the total contribution to climate change by nearly 50% compared with the original building and the operational energy use by nearly 20% (from 100 to 81 kWh/m2 yr). Almost every building is unique and situated in a specific context. Making simple analyses of different construction options showed to be useful and gave some unexpected results which were difficult to foresee from a general design experience. This process acts as an introduction to life cycle thinking and highlights the consequence of different material choices.

  • 32.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Westerberg, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Les outils de mesure de la durabilité des bâtiments: comparaison transnationale2008In: Annales de la Recherche Urbaine, ISSN 0180-930X, no 105, p. 94-103Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [fr]

    Les outils d'évaluation environnementale des bâtiments se développent rapidement dans de nombreux pays. Tous prétendent mesurer la qualité environnementale ou la durabilité des bâtiments, et donnent un maximum de points à ce qui est durable d'une manière ou d'une autre. Mais pour l'instant il n'y a pas de consensus sur le sens des mots « vert » ou « durables » en termes de critères et d'indicateurs. Que cherchent à mesurer les indicateurs existant? Trois outils d'évaluation ont été retenus, l'américain LEED-NC, le britannique Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) et le suédois EcoEffect. Ils ont trois champs d'évaluation principale en commun : l'énergie, l'environnement intérieur, les matériaux et les déchets. En revanche les contenus sont différents. Ces outils ont été comparés quant à leur but, leur contenu, et leur manière d'agréger les items. Ils ont été testés sur un immeuble neuf de plusieurs étages. Les résultats de leur application à cet immeuble divergent, ce qui pose la question de la définition d'outils d'évaluation réellement pertinents.

  • 33.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering.
    Westerberg, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering.
    Understanding differences between the environmental assessment tools: LEED, Code for Sustainable homes and EcoEffectManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
  • 34.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Glaumann, Mauritz
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    Westerberg, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Department of Technology and Built Environment, Ämnesavdelningen för byggnadskvalitet.
    What is a "green" building according to different assessment tools?2008In: Proceedings of the 2008 World Sustainable Building Conference. Vol. 2, 2008, p. 2618-2625Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Environmental assessment tools for buildings are rapidly developing in many countries. All of them claim that they measure “greenness” or “sustainability” of buildings, i.e. if maximum scores are awarded a building is sustainable in some respect. But so far there is no consensus on the interpretation of “green” or “sustainable” in terms of criteria and indicators.

    This article explores if different tools point in different directions regarding “green” building design. It also investigates characteristics of assessment tools and consequences of different approaches.

    Three distinctly different assessment tools, LEED-NC, Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) and EcoEffect have been selected. They have three core assessment areas in common, namely Energy, Indoor Environment and Materials & Waste. The content however is different.

    The tools have been compared with respect to aim, content and aggregation. They have been tested on a new multi storey residential building. Assessments within the core areas were compared. Measures to improve the overall judgement were explored. The diverging result raises the question how to design environmentally relevant and practically useful assessment tools for buildings.

1 - 34 of 34
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf