TERM PAPER

on

Green Building

Submitted to

(Amity School of Engineering)

Guided By: Submitted By:

Mr. Sumit Bhardwaj Mohammed Ahmed

A12415813001

AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH

GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR

1
!

2
 Declaration by the student

I Mohammad Ahmed, student of B.Tech (CIVIL) hereby declare that the

project titled Green Buildings which is submitted by me to Department
of Amity school of Engineering,Amity University, Uttar Pradesh, Noida, in
partial fulfilment of requirement for the award of the degree of Bachelor of
Technology in CIVIL ,has not been previously formed the basis for the
award of any degree, diploma or other similar title or recognition.The
Author attests that permission has been obtained for the use of any copy
righted material appearing in the Dissertation / Project report other than
brief excerpts requiring only proper acknowledgement in scholarly writing
and all such use is acknowledged.

Noida

!
Date - 15th July 2015 MOHAMMAD AHMED
A12415813001

3
 Certificate by Faculty Guide

This is to certify that Mr Mohammed Ahmed, student of B.Tech. in

Civil has carried out the work presented in the project of the Term
paper entitle Green Buildings" as a part of Second year programme of
Bachelor of Technology from Amity School of Engineering, Amity
University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh under my supervision.

Noida

Mr. Sumit Bhardwaj

Amity University

4
 Acknowledgement

I feel great pleasure in submitting the project work entitled Green

Buildings to the department of Amity School of Engineering,Amity
University,Noida.

I am very obliged to our mentor Dr. Prof. Ajay Rana, without whose
active cooperation , involment, support and guidance, this work would
not have been completed successfully.
He has provided us with the requisite information whenever needed.
This has helped us immensely in carrying out the work well within the
given time limits.

5
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

GREEN BUILDING

1.1)INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF PROJECT

a) Background
b) The Issue of Cost
c) What is a Green Building?
d) LEED as the US Green Building Standard
1.2) IMPORTANT ASSUMPTION
a) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
b) Use of Present Value (PV) and Net Present Value (NPV)
c) Discount Rate
d) Term
e) Inflation
1.3) GREEN BUILDING ECONOMY
a) The Problems of Determining Cost
b) National Green Building Leaders
1.4) ENERGY USE
1.5) EMISSION OF ENERGY
a) Value of Pollution Associated with Energy
b) Estimated Costs Associated with Pollution from Power Generation.
c) The Cost of Carbon: Putting a Price on CO2 Emissions
1.6) WATER CONSERVATION
1.7) WASTE REDUCTION
1.8) PRODUCTIVITY AND HEALTH
1.9) SPOTLIGHTED TECHNOLOGIES AND METHODOLOGIES
a) Commissioning, and Measurement and Verification.
b) Underfloor Air
1.10) INSURANCE BENIFITS OF GREEN BUILDING
1.11)CASE STUDY
a)ITC Green Centre

b) About ITC
c) The ITC Green Centre Project
d) Building Design
e) MATERIALS USED
f) Salient features of Platinum rated ITC Green
g) Highlights of the building
h) GREEN FEATURES OF THE BUILDING
1.12) CONCLUSION

6
 1.1)INTRODUCTION

Green buildings ar healthy, energy-efficient buildings that increase natural light-weight, incorporate
high performance systems, and improve air flow for occupants. inexperienced living roofs and
plenty of of varied decisions may even be supplemental to integrate the building directly into the
surroundings.

Background
Green or sustainable buildings use key resources like energy, water,
materials, and land rather more expeditiously than buildings that square measure
merely engineered to code. They conjointly produce healthy working and living
environments, with additional natural light-weight and cleaner air, and contribute
to improved worker and student's health, comfortness and their productivity.
Property buildings make measure cost-efficient, saving taxpayers money by
reducing maintenance prices and operations.

7
The Issue of Cost

It is typically seen that buildings use an oversized portion of water, wood,

energy, and different resources utilized in the economy. inexperienced building
give a doubtless promising thanks to facilitate address a variety of challenges
facing folks, such as:
The high value of electrical power.
Worsening electrical grid constraints, with associated power quality and
convenience issues.
Pending water shortage and waste disposal problems.
Continued state and federal pressure to chop criteria pollutants.
Growing concern over the price of world warming.
The rising incidence of allergies and bronchial asthma, particularly in kids.
The health and productivity of employees.
The impact of the physical college setting on childrens talents to be told.
Increasing expenses of maintaining and operative state facilities over time.

Benefits embody some parts that ar comparatively simple to quantify, like energy
and water savings, further as those who ar less simply quantified, like the
employment of recycled content materials and improved indoor environmental
quality. before this report, no comprehensive analysis of the particular prices and
monetary advantages of inexperienced buildings had been completed, though
there ar variety of studies that do begin to deal with this important issue.

8
 What is a Green Building?

Green or sustainable buildings area unit sensitive to:

1. Environment.
2. Resource & energy consumption.
3. Impact on individuals (quality and good health of labor environment).
4. Financial impact (cost-effectiveness from a full monetary cost-return
perspective).
5. The world at giant (a broader set of problems, like well water recharge and
heating, that a government is often involved about).

LEED as the US Green Building Standard

The us inexperienced Building Council (USGBC), a national non-profit entity,
developed the Leadership in Energy and Environmental style (LEED)
inexperienced Building Rating System33 to rate new and existing industrial,
institutional, and high-rise residential buildings in step with their environmental
attributes and property options. The LEED system utilizes a listing of thirty four
potential performance based mostly credits value up to sixty nine points,
similarly as seven necessity criteria, divided into six categories:
1. Sustainable Sites
2. Water potency
3. Energy and Atmosphere
4. Materials and Resources
5. Indoor Environmental Quality
6. Innovation & style method

9
 1.2)IMPORTANT ASSUMPTIONS

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

This report uses a life cycle cost accounting (LCC) approach to guage and
integrate the advantages and prices related to property buildings. Life cycle cost
accounting, usually confused with the additional rigorous life cycle assessment
(LCA) analysis, appearance at prices and edges over the lifetime of a selected
product, technology or system. LCA, in distinction, involves accounting for all
upstream and downstream prices of a selected activity, and desegregation them
through the same application of economic discounting. The result if information
is on the market -- could be a current cradle to grave inventory, impact
assessment and interpretation (e.g., a internet gift worth estimate). However, the
art and science of scheming true life cycle impacts and prices of inexperienced
buildings continues to be evolving and is usually not practiced. Currently,
selections on whether or not or to not invest in an exceedingly inexperienced
building ar generally based mostly solely on initial prices and, in some cases, a
reduced worth of down energy and water bills. This report seeks associate degree
approach that pulls on the discipline of LCC practices to spot and clearly
document the advantages and prices of the foremost necessary inexperienced
building attributes, together with some that ar typically not expressly thought of
in building investment selections.

Use of gift worth (PV) and internet gift worth (NPV)

The overarching purpose of this report is to answer the subsequent question: will
it create money and economic sense to make a inexperienced building?
inexperienced buildings might price additional to make than standard buildings,
particularly once incorporating additional advanced technologies and better levels
of LEED, or property. However, they conjointly supply important price savings
over time.

10
This report can look for to calculate {the current|the gift|this} worth of
inexperienced buildings and elements on a gift worth (PV) or internet present
worth (NPV) basis. PV is that the gift worth of a future stream of economic
edges. NPV reflects a stream of current and future edges and prices, associate
degreed ends up in {a worth|a worth|a price} in todays bucks that represents this
value of an investment\'s future money edges minus any initial investment. If
positive, the investment ought to be created (unless an excellent higher
investment exists), otherwise it mustn\'t.69 This report assumes acceptable|an
acceptable} discount rate over associate degree appropriate term to derive
associate degree educated principle for creating property building funding
selections. Typically, money edges for individual components ar calculated on {a
gift|a gift} worth basis then combined within the conclusion with internet prices
to reach a internet present worth estimate.

1.3)GREEN BUILDING ECONOMY

The Problems of Determining Cost

There has been a widespread perception within the real-estate trade that building
inexperienced is considerably dearer than ancient strategies of development. A
half dozen People developers interviewed in 2001 estimated that green buildings
cost 10% to 15% more than conventional buildings. The Sustainable Building
Task Force Blueprint identifies several obstacles to sustainable buildings,
including:

1. Incomplete integration within and between projects.

2. Lack of life cycle costing.

3. Insufficient technical information.

11
The Blueprint notes that because of these barriers, many sustainable building
applications are prematurely labelled as unproven or too costly. Consulting
Specifying Engineer echoed this view in its issue, indicating that: the perception
that green design is more expensive is pervasive among developers and will take
time to overcome and inhibiting green design is the perception that green
costs more and does not have an economically attractive payback.

Many developers keep cost information proprietary. In addition, even if

developers are willing to share their cost data, determining a precise green
premium for a given project is often very difficult for several reasons:

1. The design and construction process for the first green building of a client or
design/architectural firm is often characterized by significant learning curve
costs, and design schedule problems such as late and costly change orders.

2. The relative newness of green technologies and systems can make designers,
architects and clients conservative when using them. They may oversize
green building systems and not fully integrate them into the building, thereby
reducing cost savings and other benefits. Similarly, cost estimators may add
uncertainty factors for new green technologies they are not familiar with, and
these can compound, further inflating cost estimates.

!
12
Fig 4:Natural sunlight through the windows decreases
overall lighting energy expenses for Forest Hills.

Fig5:The Helmus Building offers its tenants nicely appointed workspace with
ample daylight

13
 !
Fig.7:The Sisters chose to refurbish 800 original windows, simultaneously saving
costs and reducing wastes. The windows can now be opened, allowing residents
to
control room temperature and fresh air supply.

14
 1.4) Energy Use

Energy could be a substantial and well known value of building operations which
will be reduced through energy potency and connected measures that area unit a
part of inexperienced building style. Therefore, the worth of lower energy bills in
inexperienced buildings will be important. the typical annual value of energy in
state buildings is around $1.47/ft .On average, inexperienced buildings use half-
hour less energy than typical buildings a discount, for a 100,000 foot state
office block, worth $44,000 p.a., with the 20-year gift price of expected energy
savings value over 1,000,000 greenbacks.
A detailed review of sixty LEED rated buildings, as well as five LEED rated
buildings in folks, clearly demonstrates that inexperienced buildings, when put
next to traditional buildings, are:

1. On average 25-30% additional energy economical

2. Characterized by even lower electricity peak consumption;
3. More seemingly to come up with renewable energy on-site; and

15
4. More seemingly to get grid power generated from renewable energy sources
(green power and/or tradable renewable certificates.

Although the environmental and health prices related to pollution caused by non-
renewable wattage generation and on-the-spot fuel use area unit usually
externalized (not considered) once creating investment selections, the energy
reductions completed through the look and construction of inexperienced
buildings scale back pollution and lower the environmental impact of typical
power generation. This report seeks to quantify a number of the advantages, as
well as {the price|the worth} of peak power reduction and therefore the value of
emissions reductions related to the energy methods integrated into inexperienced
building style.

1.5)EMISSION OF ENERGY

Value of Pollution Associated with Energy

Energy use in folks state buildings and colleges is preponderantly electricity.

Reduction in electricity use means that lower emissions of pollutants (due to
avoided burning of fossil fuels to get electricity) that square measure damaging to
human health, to the environment and to property.

Air pollutants that result from the burning of fossil fuels include:

1. Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) a principal cause of smog.

2. Particulates (including PM10) a principal cause of respiratory illness (with

associated health costs) and an important contributor to smog.

3. Sulphur Dioxide (SO2 or SOx) a principal cause of acid rain. (SOx and SO2
are functionally the same for the purposes of this report.)

16
4. Carbon Dioxide (CO2) the principal greenhouse gas and the principal
product of combustion.

Additional fossil fuel related pollutants include reactive organic compounds

(ROC) and carbon monoxide (CO). These pollutants are not evaluated here
because People power plant emissions represent 0.24% and 0.33%, respectively,
of the statewide emissions totals and their values in other building aspects are
small. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) may have significant value but are
not calculated in this report. A more comprehensive analysis should evaluate the
costs of a fuller set of these additional pollutants, including mercury.

There are at least three ways of valuing the costs of air pollution associated with
burning fossil fuels:

1) The direct costs of pollution effects on property, health and environment can be
calculated and then allocated on a weighted or a site-specific basis.

2) The cost of avoiding or reducing these pollutants can be used as a way to

determine market value of pollutants.

3) The market value of pollutants can be used if there is an established trading

market.

Energy use in People state buildings is over 95% electricity . The generation of
electricity, particularly from fossil fuels, creates a number of harmful emissions.
Average green building use of conventional energy (and the resulting associated
emissions) is on average about 36% lower than conventional buildings. Adding
emissions reductions from green power purchases to overall electricity
consumption reduction provides a total emissions reduction of 36% compared to
conventional buildings.

17
Estimated Costs Associated with Pollution from Power Generation

Air pollution from burning fossil fuels to generate electricity imposes very large
health, environmental and property damage costs. Demonstrated health costs
include increased mortality and increased respiratory ailments. The health,
environmental and property damages associated with pollution from burning
(15)fossil fuels commonly referred to as externalities are only partially
reflected in the price of energy. Estimating the costs of externalities is technically
difficult politically problematic, and overall an inexact science. There have been
dozens of attempts to estimate the external costs of power generation, but these
efforts have not produced consensus.

The Cost of Carbon: Putting a Price on CO2 Emissions

The vast majority of the worlds climate change scientists have concluded that
anthropogenic emissions principally from burning fossil fuels are the root
cause of global warming. The United States is responsible for about 22% of
global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Of this 22%, the US building sector is
responsible for about 35% of US CO2 emissions. CO2 is the dominant global
warming gas, equal to about 9% of global anthropogenic emissions. As a recent
study notes, US buildings alone are responsible for more CO2 emissions than
those of any other country in the world except China.
Global warming is recognized as a potentially very costly issue for People,
implying a significant value for CO2 reductions in this state. Projected changes in
rainfall patterns and snowmelt will likely reduce both available freshwater
supplies and the effectiveness of the states hydropower infrastructure. If People
experiences below average rainfall, it could cut the amount of power that the state
gets from hydroelectricity, currently 20% of total power, by up to half.

18
 1.6)WATER CONSERVATION

People are facing substantial water shortages that are expected to worsen.
Drought years can be particularly difficult to People. Urban water users have
experienced mandatory rationing, small rural communities have seen wells go
dry, agricultural lands have been fallowed, and environmental water supplies
have been reduced. Without additional facilities, all of these conditions will only
deteriorate with Peoples projected population increase.

Thus, water conservation not only saves money for the end user through reduced
utility expenditures, but also saves state water districts the costs of facilities
construction and expansion and prevents potential environmental damage.

Green building water conservation strategies typically fall into four categories:

1. Efficiency of potable water use through better design/technology.

2. Capture of gray water non-faecal waste water from bathroom sinks,

bathtubs, showers, washing machines, etc. and use for irrigation.

3. On-site storm water capture for use or groundwater recharge.

4. Recycled/reclaimed water use.

1.7)WASTE REDUCTION

Waste reduction strategies such as reuse and recycling, as promoted in green

buildings, help to divert some waste from being disposed of in landfills.
Diversion strategies result in savings associated with avoided disposal costs as
well as in reduced societal costs of landfill creation and maintenance. In addition
to diverting waste from landfills, recycling and reuse can catalyze further
economic growth in industries that reprocess diverted waste and use recycled raw
materials.

19
Green building waste reduction strategies can occur at time of construction and
throughout the life of the building.
Construction waste reduction options include:
1. Reuse and minimization of construction and demolition (C&D) debris and
diversion of C&D waste from landfills to recycling facilities.
2. Source reduction, e.g., (1) use of building materials that are more durable and
easier to repair and maintain, (2) design to generate less scrap material
through dimensional planning, (3) increased recycled content, (4) use of
reclaimed building materials, and (5) use of structural materials in a dual role
as finish material (e.g. stained concrete flooring, unfinished ceilings, etc.).
3. Reuse of existing building structure and shell in renovation projects.

Building lifetime waste reduction includes:

1. Development of indoor recycling program and space.
2. Design for deconstruction.
3. Design for flexibility through the use of moveable walls, raised floors,
modular furniture, moveable task lighting and other reusable building
components.

Together, these strategies can have a dramatic impact on reducing landfill

disposal. C&D diversion rates have reached as high as 97% on individual state of
People projects, and are typically at least 50-75% in green buildings. C&D waste
impacts vary greatly depending on the type of building project and whether it is
new construction, renovation, or construction on already developed land.

1.8)PRODUCTIVITY AND HEALTH

This section contains a brief overview of what is known about health, human
comfort and productivity in relation to green building design and operation. The
conclusion contains a reasonable and conservative estimate for the monetary
value of productivity gains in green buildings. Health and productivity issues,

20
often addressed separately, are combined here because both relate directly to
worker well-being and comfort and both can be measured by their impacts on
productivity.

The relationship between worker comfort/productivity and building design/

operation is complicated. There are thousands of studies, reports and articles on
the subject. This report relies in large part on recent meta-studies that have
screened tens or hundreds of other studies and have evaluated and synthesized
their findings

1.9)SPOTLIGHTED TECHNIQUES AND METHODOLOGIES

This section contains a brief review of the impact of three specific green building
features or systems: commissioning, underfloor air distribution systems, and cool
roofs. The energy, environmental and health benefits of these technologies and
practices are included in the relevant sections above. However, one additional
benefit of underfloor air reduced cost of churn is not accounted for elsewhere
in this report, and is calculated below.

Similarly, commissioning benefits include reduced operations and maintenance

(O&M) costs, a benefit not captured above and therefore calculated here.
Commissioning is a process that ensures proper system design and installation,
and reduces costs by eliminating errors. It is an important part of the integrated
design approach and helps ensure that green building systems perform as
expected. Since all LEED buildings include commissioning (it is a prerequisite)
and are likely to include other measures that help address operations and
maintenance issues, the O&M benefits of commissioning can be included in
calculations of the full financial benefits of green buildings.

Commissioning, and Measurement and Verification

Commissioning a methodology to ensure that building systems are installed and
operated as planned is an increasingly common practice. It has been defined as
the process of ensuring that systems are designed, installed, functionally tested

21
and capable of being operated and maintained according to the owners
operational needs.

Commissioning is particularly important for green buildings, because they are

expected to achieve better performance (e.g., low energy use, better air quality)
than conventional buildings. LEED requires Fundamental Building Systems
Commissioning, which currently entails hiring a commissioning expert,
developing a commissioning plan and completing a commissioning report. In
addition, LEED provides credits for additional commissioning and for including a
building performance measurement and verification program. The measurement
protocol referenced in LEED, the International Performance Measurement and
Verification Protocol 268 is also used internationally as a way to demonstrate
CO2 reductions benefits, providing a potentially helpful way to secure financial
value through sale of CO2 reductions associated with green buildings

Commissioning and green buildings share:

a) Use of a systems approach.
b) Use of life cycle perspective.
c) Greater attention to design.

Estimated cost of commissioning as a percentage of construction costs varies with

building size and is typically viewed as a higher percentage for smaller buildings.
However, there is evidence that resulting savings more than pay for the cost of
commissioning for both green and non-green buildings. A recent report found that
costs of commissioning, including travel expenses, range from 2% to 4% for
buildings costing less than $5 million, down to 0.5 % to 1% for buildings costing
over $50 million. The study used nine case studies to illustrate why savings from
commissioning exceeded the cost of commissioning even before the projects
were complete. Commissioning: 271
a. Helped eliminate costly change orders.
b. Reduced requests for cost information.
c. Helped ensure proper system/component selection.
d. Improved performance of building systems.
e. Reduced call backs.
22
Basic commissioning required for LEED costs even less. In six recent LEED
office buildings and schools the average cost of Fundamental Building Systems
Commissioning required for the LEED prerequisite was equal to 0.3 to 0.6 % of
construction costs.
The Portland Energy Conservation study cites cases including a People
commercial property and a People university building in which commissioning
led to identifying substantial design and operating problems, and opportunities for
substantial savings. Commissioning can also provide potentially significant
insurance related benefits.
LEED includes an additional credit for system metering. Detailed analysis of
several hundred million dollars of energy building upgrades demonstrate that
rigorous measurement and verification of energy and water efficiency and system
retrofits tend to:
a. Increase initial savings level.
b. Increase persistence of savings.
c. Reduce variability on energy and water savings.
Underfloor Air
It is estimated that underfloor or raised floor HVAC systems are used in 58% of
new commercial buildings in Japan and half of new commercial buildings in
Europe, but in only 10% of new commercial buildings in North America. Only 2
of 21 green buildings reviewed included underfloor air, the same percentage as
conventional buildings, although there are strong indications that the use of
underfloor air is rising in all US construction, and rising more rapidly in new US
green building construction. Advocates of underfloor air cite a range of benefits
relative to conventional overhead air distribution systems, including:
a. Reduced life cycle building costs.
b. Improved ventilation efficiency and indoor air quality.
c. Reduced energy use.
d. Lower cost of churn.
e. Quieter working spaces resulting in greater occupant
satisfaction.

23
 1.10)INSURANCE BENIFITS OF GREEN
BUILDING

Risk, and associated losses, is costly, with or without formal insurance. With
conventional insurance, customer costs include deductibles, premiums and
possible excess costs if the insured loss level is capped. If commercial insurance
is not used, then the building owner is either formally or informally self-insured.
Formal self-insurance implies that a distinct premium is paid from internal
budgets and accumulated in the form of an earmarked loss reserve. If self-
insurance is informal, then the risks are said to be retained and losses are paid
from general operating budgets, without the creation of an anticipatory loss
reserve.318 Where formal or informal self-insurance is used, risk management is
particularly important, since there is no hedge (upper limit) against loss costs.

1.11)CASE STUDY

ITC Green Centre

Buiding: ITC Green Centre

Location: Gurgaon, India
Floor Area: 1, 70,000 Sq.Ft
Architect: Rajender Kumar & Associates,
New Delhi, India

Significance: Platinum Rated green building

Rated by: USGBC-LEED (US Green Building Council- Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design) through CII IGBC, Hyderabad
Year: 2004
Points Scored: 52/69
Building Energy simulation done by: Visual DOE 2

24
Energy consumption Statistics
Normal building of similar area 35,00,000 kWh/year
ITC Green Centre 20,00,000 kWh/year
Annual Energy Savings Rs. 9 Million
% increase in initial cost - 15%

About ITC

Indias most valuable corporations with a market capitalization of US$ 10 billion.

Ranked by Forbes as one of Worlds Best Big Companies, ITC contributed over Rs.
6600 crore to the exchequer, in 2004-08. ITCs core businesses, products and brands
include
FMCG - Cigarettes, Branded Packaged Foods, Lifestyle Retailing, Greeting,
Gifting and Stationery
Hotels
Paperboards, Specialty Papers and Packaging
Agri Business

The ITC Green Centre Project

The ITC Green Centre houses the headquarters of ITCs Hotels Business and was
declared the worlds largest Platinum rated Green Building when it was certified in
2004.

25
 The project was conceived to be a Green building in sync with ITCs
commitment towards a Greener tomorrow.
Unique character to the building is that it got the Platinum rating at a time when
the rating was not customized to suit Indian condition and priorities.
Since most of their projects were rated Gold, ITC decided to go a step ahead
and try for the platinum rating. It may sound like a short step forward, but it
took the company a lot of time and effort to get all the nuances of a platinum-
rated green building right.
Green Materials
The first hurdle was acquiring green materials like green wood obtained from
sustainable forests and low-volatility organic compounds for construction,
which at that time were not easily available in the country. Here, ITC received
help from USGBC, which helped it source the materials. Numerous energy
sensitivity exercises had to be conducted with ITC design and architecture
consultants and employees, sensitizing them with issues of environment
conservation.

Why Glass?
During the project design it was targeted to cut down the energy consumption
significantly, compared to a conventional building. At ITC Green Centre, energy
consumption has been slashed by as much as 51% through design integration alone. In
fact, in daytime, unlike other office buildings, artificial light is not consumed at all
here. The glazing for the building has been designed to maximize the effect of natural
light, largely eliminating the need for artificial ones.
At the same time, the window glass, while allowing light inside, does not
allow heat. This, not only keeps the office cool from inside during the day, but also
decreases the load on air-conditioners

Architects requirements from glass

According to Ar.Rahul Kumar of Rajender Kumar and Associates who were
the architects of this project, when they started working on the facades they needed a
company which gave them enough options to test out the designs and do the energy

26
modeling analysis. Saint-Gobain with its expertise to address such situations could
work closely with the architect and the client and provided them various options of
modern sustainable glazing.

Challenges of sustainable glazing

It is always an interesting challenge to work out a sustainable glazing design for
tropical climatic conditions. While doing modern office buildings one has to ensure that
the light penetrates deep into the interior spaces and at the same time keep the heat out.

ITC could achieve the twin proposition of lending in abundant natural light yet
cutting down the heat gain in the interiors with advanced high performance
glazing solutions.

Design Intent:
High energy efficiency of the faade with optimum light
transmission
On the Northern side, the glass solution was required to give a higher

light transmission due to the orientation of the building

Frontal elevation showing faade design

27
 Building Design
By giving the Lshape configuration the width of the floor Plate is reduced for the
same amount of floor plate area thereby allowing natural light to penetrate deep into
the interior spaces

The building is a composition of three parts.

Two office wings are held together by a central atrium that as an ensemble
creates a large L-shaped figure focused on an exterior landscaped court.
The L-shape blocking ensures that part of the faade is always shaded.
The L-shape office wings end into hexagonal ends that make a very strong

presence on the approach roads.

The atrium joins the different functions of the building and connects them into
an ensemble encouraging a sense of community and interaction.
The octagonal atrium has side light from the top to provide a glare
free natural lighting in the interior without allowing direct heat gain from
the roof.
Interior roller shades to reduce Heat gain

28
 1. Saint-Gobains Cool-lite Blue Green double glazed with Ekologik
which has very low solar factor (SF) and U-Value with optimal light
transmission
2. The north side with Parsol Green double glazed with Ekologik with
higher light transmission and low solar factor (SF) and U-Value to
maximize daylighting

Clients view on Saint Gobain

Saint-Gobain has looked at this entire job beyond that of a glass vendor. They kept the
end goal & objective in mind; that they are partners in delivering a Platinum Rated
Building
Mr.Alwyn Naronha (VP Projects -ITC)

MATERIALS USED

Carpet
CRI Green Level certified
Recycled content of 60%
Source : Bealuie of America , US

High Reflective Roof Coating

Energy Star certified
Emissivity of 0.94.
Source : Energy Seal Coatings, US

Lighting Fixtures & Lamps

Efficient light fixtures with electronic ballast , source : Philips T5 & CFL

lamps , Source : Osram

Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) Block

29
55% Flyash content

Source: BILT Infrastructure Ltd

Double Glazed Windows

U value 1.9 w/m2 K

Glass by Saint Gobain

Portland Pozzolana cement

26% pozolana

Source :Birla Plus

Ready Mix Concrete (RMC)

Fly ash (3.36%)
Source : Birla RMC

Medium Density Fibreboard (MDF)

85% rapidly renewable materials
(eucalyptus which is grown with in ten years life cycle) 15%
recycled material
Source : Nuwud

Salient features of Platinum rated ITC Green

Centre Sustainable Site

1. Alternative Transportation: Parking, shower & changing facilities

for bicyclists, pool cars with charging facility.

30
 2. Storm Water Management: Rainwater recharge pits to ensure zero
discharge into municipal drainage.
3. Heat Island Effect: 80% underground parking. More than 75% of the terrace
has been insulated and coated with the reflective high albedo roof paint.
4. Light Pollution Reduction: Minimum exterior lighting to limit night sky
pollution.
b) Water Efficiency
1. Water Efficient Landscaping: Native plants, high efficiency irrigation
system and 100% recycled water for irrigation.
2. Innovative Waste Water Technologies: Fluidized Aerobic Bioreactors
(FAB) sewage treatment plant provided.
3. Water Use Reduction: 40% reduction in water usage over base case.
c) Energy & Atmosphere
1. Energy: Exceeds ASHRAE 90.1 base case standards by 51%.
2. Envelope: External wall of 250mm thickness. Autoclaved Aerated Concrete
Blocks, double glazed windows, 75mm-thick extruded polystyrene roof
insulation. Extruded polystyrene (XPS) is a type of insulation material with a
high R-value, good moisture resistance, high structural strength and low
weight. Extruded polystyrene is used extensively as thermal insulation in
industrial, commercial and residential construction
3. HVAC: Chillers of COP 6.1, double skinned AHUs, VFDs, VAVs, Heat

Recovery Wheel.

4. Hot Water: Solar thermal technology.

5. Ozone Depletion: All HVAC equipment are free from CFC / HCFC /

Halons.

d) Materials and Resource

1. Storage and Collection of Recyclables: Separate storage bins provided at
each floor level for different recyclable materials such as paper, cardboard,
glass, plastic and metals.
2. Resource Reuse: More than 10% of the building materials are refurbished
31
 / salvaged from other sites.
3. Recycled Content: Fly ash based cement; Fly ash based AAC Blocks,
acoustic ceiling, glass, ceramic tile, MDF cabinets, etc.
4. Regional Materials: More than 40% of the building materials are from within
500 miles of the project site.
5. Rapidly Renewable Materials: Such as medium density fibre board.
6. Certified Wood: New woods used are certified under the Forest
Stewardship Council, US.
e) Indoor Environmental Quality
1. Environment Tobacco Smoke Control: Designated smoking rooms are
provided at convenient locations with separate exhausts.
2. CO2 Monitoring: Sensors at various locations monitor CO2 levels.
3. Low Emitting Materials: Low VOC levels of adhesives / sealants used for
carpets /composite woods / paints.
4. Daylight and views: Views to external glazing from at least 90% of regularly
occupied areas.
f) Innovation and Design Process
1. Green Education: Educating visitors, construction workers,

employees, consultants on sustainability.

Highlights of the building

1. Use of glass which has 19% recycled content helped ITC to get points in
recycle content.
2. Use of other recycled and recyclable resources, with materials like fly ash
based cement etc. More than 10% of the building materials used are recycled,
refurbished or salvaged from other sites

3. 40% of the total raw materials used were procured within 500 miles of the
project site such as double glazed glass faade and window framing, 250mm
thick auto-claved and aerated concrete block wall
32
 4. Daylight and views: Views to external glazing from at least 90% of regularly
occupied areas
5. Use of solar photo voltaic for emergency lighting
6. Use of green material to reduce heat gain from rooftop / building envelope
with high performance glazing and proper insulation material

7. CFC/HCFC free HVAC equipment is used to combat ozone depletion.

8. Installation of solar hot water system and solar concentrator for kitchen
9. Use of green material to reduce heat gain from rooftop /

side walls. Low cost version of this idea is to paint the rooftop white or

roll outgunny bags in summer

GREEN FEATURES OF THE BUILDING

Fly Ash based cement used

Autoclave Aerated Concrete (AAC) Blocks
Double glazed windows with low-e coating
Rain water harvesting
Water saving techniques
CFC, HCFC & Halon free air- conditioning system
Energy efficient lighting (T5 lamps with electronic ballast, high efficient
luminaires)
Water efficient landscaping
Sewage treatment plant and waste water recycling.
Use of Low VOC, rapidly renewable & certified materials
Eco friendly house keeping chemicals & practices
Carbon dioxide (co2) monitoring indoor chemical & pollutant source

33
 control (Dedicated copy printer room with independent exhaust) indoor
air quality (iaq) system.
Optimized energy performance through efficient designs light pollution
reduction ozone protection ( by using cfc, hcfc & halon free refrigerants)
water use reduction storm water management
Use of recycled materials
CO2 monitoring systems in AHU (operates when internal co2 is 530ppm Or
more than external atmosphere)20 days flush out of entire building air prior
to occupation

1.12)CONCLUSION

THE GREEN BUILDING CONCEPT IS HERE TO STAY.

The Global Industry is moving from building to building approach to Sustainability &
towards greener neighbourhood & cities.The key challenges for the development of
green buildings in India are mostly in the lines of awareness on the benefits of green
buildings, materials and technology. To succeed it is important to increase the
awareness among general public about the benefits of green projects and the resultant
gains to the buyers.Like many countries , Green Funds should be introduced to
facilitate the involvement of industry in the process of providing green materials and to
facilitate green movement in real estate development.
To succeed Partnership between Industry & Government is essential . New useful
legislations & codes like mandatory energy & water usage audits etc are need of day .
Only thru this partnership we will realize the full potential to deliver an
economically ,environmentally & socially sustainable.

34