Zero Carbon Design and Architecture,

But How Low is Zero?

By Phillip Jones


Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University

The built environment is key to a low carbon future. Many countries are now
planning for a zero carbon built environment, but the question remains “how
low is zero?”

It is widely accepted that human activity is the cause of climate change. This
combined with the prolific use of natural resources and the production of
polluted waste makes human life virtually unsustainable in its current form.
The built environment, its construction and operation, accounts for a major
part of fossil fuel energy use and the associated carbon dioxide emissions. It
also accounts for a large proportion of material resource use and waste
production, and the associated emissions. There are a number of reasons for
this:

* Economic growth, especially in developing countries, is driving new urban

and peri-urban developments and the associated shift in populations.
* As the population increases, people’s aspirations are increasing and they
desire to improve quality of life through better housing.
* Buildings are a major source of investment. Much of the world’s wealth is
bound up in property development and ownership.

These factors have resulted in an unprecedented construction boom, during

which time we have become very efficient at producing “inefficient buildings.”
The recent downturn in the global economy gives us the opportunity to take
note of what can be done to develop a more sustainable design system giving
us economies over the lifetime of the building.

New Design
In Europe zero carbon buildings are the main driver for sustainable design to
mitigate against further climate change. This means, over time the net carbon
dioxide emissions of a building will be zero reducing energy demand and
using renewable energy supplies. The renewable energy system should be
part of the development and not come from existing green energy sources.
But renewable energy is not always there when we want it. To what extent
can we store energy or be more diverse in our use of energy — use it when it
is available — make hay when the sun shines! We may need to re-engage
with the variations of nature.

In the UK all new housing and schools will be zero carbon by 2016. In Wales,
the devolved government aspires for all new buildings to be zero carbon by
2011. This is a big challenge and although there are few truly zero carbon
buildings to date, there are some good examples.

The Welsh School of Architecture in Cardiff University has been researching

sustainable design for three decades. Since the oil crises of the 1970’s we
have engaged in the design evolution starting with low energy design, then
passive design, and now sustainable design. This research has been
implemented through the design of low energy buildings with smart facades,
innovative environmental systems and renewable energy supplies. We have
developed models predicting energy performance at building and urban scale.
It is not the design knowledge or technology that we lack, but the confidence
to apply what we know — to break the mould!

Refitting Existing Structures

Past emphasis has focused on the design of new buildings, but new buildings
only reduce the rate of increase in emissions. It is the existing built
environment where big changes need to be made. We need ways to address
the existing building stock, at an individual building and urban scale, to reduce
energy demand and decarbonise the energy supply. This is important for
buildings and associated infrastructures including water, sewage, mobility,
waste and energy distribution. This is where the global community will garner
the most dramatic reduction in emissions.

Most sustainable buildings are part of affluent society. It is tempting for

designers to focus on “greening affluence”; however it’s important to address
buildings in poorer areas. Here, it is not only about reducing carbon dioxide
emissions, but also about improving quality of life. Even in the UK many
people live in what is termed fuel poverty, where more than 10 percent of
income is spent on energy used in the home. Affordable warmth is high on the
agenda when refurbishing this sector of the existing buildings. For example, in
China’s rural areas several hundred million people live in houses that are
difficult to heat. Farmers in the colder regions spend up to one-third of their
income on coal to heat substandard housing. Improving energy efficiency in
China’s rural housing will improve quality of life and allow the use of
alternative decarbonised energy sources such as biomass. Can we bring a
better quality of life to the poor without a huge carbon penalty?

Embodied Energy

As a building’s operating energy is reduced, the embodied energy, energy

required in construction, becomes increasingly significant. Over the lifetime of
a “low energy” building in Europe, the embodied energy is of a similar size to
its operating energy. In other countries with more temperate climates, the
embodied energy can be even more significant. Reducing construction waste
is the easiest way to reduce embodied energy, but new materials and more
efficient “modern method” construction systems should be considered. Should
our zero carbon building definition include a renewable supply offset for its
embodied energy over its lifetime?

The Future

The green economy is identified as an area where development without

environmental harm can be achieved. Current economic problems may
indicate a shift from the growth of urbanisation and consumerism, to a more
sustainable balance between rural and urban, and a greener form of growth
and wealth creation. As a global community, we must understand the process
of sustainable design, the human activity processes that our buildings form
part of, and ensure the built environment encourages a broad range of
sustainable lifestyles for individuals and organisations.

This future vision for the built environment provides a quality of life that is
cleaner, healthier, more socially supportive and economically vibrant. We
might not know all the solutions today, but we know enough to begin. We
need to think holistically, and share solutions quickly. There is no utopian
blueprint for the future built environment, but we know the choices and from
these choices our sustainable “zero carbon” future will emerge.
World Architects Pledge Zero Carbon by
2050
T he I n ter na ti o na l U ni o n o f Arch i tec ts ha s a do p t ed a mea s ure
t o el i mi na te ca rb o n emi ss i o n s by t he mi dce n tury .
Martin Pedersen





The UIA has announced that its members have adopted the 2050 Imperative, which hopes to phase out
carbon-emitting buildings by the middle of the century. The move could produce more projects like
Ronald Lu and Partners’ Zero-Carbon Building in Hong Kong.

Courtesy Ronald Lu and Partners

Good news came by way of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) last night:
The International Union of Architects (UIA), a group representing about 1.3 million
architects worldwide and 124 member organizations, announced that it had unanimously
adopted the 2050 Imperative, a declaration that supports phasing out all CO2 emissions
by the middle of the century. The initiative was drafted by Architecture 2030 and
introduced last week by the AIA, at the UIA’s World Congress in Durban, South Africa.
While this is merely a pledge, the list of groups supporting it is truly global in scope.
According to Architecture 2030, it includes all of the architecture councils of Europe,
Asia, the Americas, and Africa. What’s especially promising here is the participation of
The Architecture Society of China and The Indian Institute of Architects. These countries
represent more than a third of the world’s population and, given the amount of building
occurring there, will most likely play key roles in mitigating climate change. Having their
architects support the ambitious goals of the 2050 Imperative sends a powerful, positive
message.

The declaration is also particularly well timed for the upcoming UN Climate Change
Summit, which kicks off September 23rd. With the declaration, the world’s architecture
community—virtually all of it—has committed itself to a fossil-fuel free future. Let’s
hope the United Nations and the governments of the world are listening.

Architecture: Architects of a low-energy future

Low- and zero-energy buildings could have a huge impact on energy use and carbon
emissions. We have the technologies, but if they are to mitigate climate change, green-
building design must hit the mass market, says Declan Butler.

Declan Butler

An ultra-low-energy passive house project in Lindås,

SwedenM. WALL

“It felt surreal,” says Karsten Voss, thinking back to January 2008 and the winter meeting of the
50,000-member international heating, cooling and ventilation research association, ASHRAE.
“Here we were sitting talking about zero-energy buildings, one of the biggest topics on the
programme, inside a hotel that had no proper glazing or insulation — while it was −10 °C
outside.”

It was a classic illustration of both the challenge and the promise of green architecture, says
Voss, who should know. An architectural engineer at the University of Wuppertal in Germany, he
also heads assessment of ultra-low-energy building demonstration projects built under the
country's national programme on research for energy-optimized construction (EnOB). Germany
has pioneered such research, thanks to its long-standing interest in the environment, and has
some of the toughest energy-efficiency regulations around.

“We don't think about energy in the design phase.”

Buildings worldwide account for as much as 45% of energy consumption, and a similar share of
greenhouse-gas emissions. That makes buildings the biggest single contributor to anthropogenic
climate change — a worse offender than all the world's cars and trucks put together. But it also
makes the design of energy-efficient buildings a “monumental but essential task” in the effort to
mitigate climate change, according to a research roadmap published last November by the
research committee of the US Green Building Council. Indeed, the latest report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that improvements in the energy
efficiency of buildings could potentially reduce projected global carbon emissions up to 29% by
2020, and up to 40% by 2030. Moreover, the IPCC's estimates are deliberately conservative,
based on a pessimistic view of how rapidly the building industry can reform its practices. If the
reforms could somehow be accelerated, the reductions in fossil-fuel energy needs could be that
much more dramatic.

Such a speed-up is certainly possible — in principle. Voss and his fellow 'green-building
researchers' have already developed and tested many of the necessary tools and strategies, to
the point where they can now build homes, offices and other buildings that use 80–90% less
energy than existing buildings. The most efficient of these structures are almost completely
'passive', meaning they require very little, if any, traditional heating or air-conditioning. Yet the
overall comfort they provide is, if anything, superior to existing buildings. Nor is there
necessarily a cost penalty: these ultra-energy-efficient buildings are often no more expensive to
build than conventional structures, and work out far cheaper if energy bills during their
occupation are taken into account.

In practice, however, getting the construction industry to change its ways is a daunting prospect.
Especially in the developed world, more than a century of cheap energy has divorced the
architecture of buildings from energy considerations, and from their environment. Architects
typically design whatever their client wants, mostly on the basis of cost or aesthetics, and then
pass the design to engineers who have to make the building work and be comfortable — typically
by bolting on energy-intensive air-conditioning, heating, artificial lighting and whatever else it
takes. As a result, most builders and architects today haven't got a clue how to design buildings
with ultra-low carbon emissions.

And even if they did, there is the sheer scale and diversity of the trillion-dollar worldwide building
industry — a vast labyrinth that involves as many different professions and sectors as there are
sorts of wallpaper, plus an almost unlimited number of types of buildings, regulations, norms,
materials and environments. In the face of all that, “the major impediments to increase energy
efficiency in the building sector are institutional barriers and market failures rather than technical
problems,” notes a report on green buildings published last year by the United Nations
Environmental Programme. “Even if high-tech competence exists in most countries, the
institutional and economic conditions have hindered the technical competence to be effectively
applied in day-to-day design, construction and operation of buildings.”
 The world's largest 'passive' office building in Ulm,
Germany.ENERGON

Change is in the air, however. Green buildings, once the preserve of ardent environmentalists,
are going mainstream. Architect Edward Mazria of Architecture 2030, a non-profit organization in
Santa Fe, New Mexico, set a challenge in 2006 — a voluntary commitment to reduce the carbon
consumption of all new and retrofitted buildings by 50% immediately, and to meet further
reduction milestones to become carbon neutral by 2030. These targets can already largely be
met using existing technology, argues Mazria, who has been practising sustainable architecture
for 30 years. And indeed, the challenge has been endorsed by the US Conference of Mayors,
several US cities, the American Institute of Architects and more than 400 other professional
organizations.

Meanwhile, the US Energy Independence and Security Act, which came into force in December
last year, requires all federal buildings to meet stepwise goals almost identical to those of
Architecture 2030's challenge. The act also introduces tougher energy targets for both
commercial and residential buildings. In Europe and elsewhere, similar, or even tougher, targets
are often being made legally binding on many buildings.

There is a “sea change” underway, says Gregor Henze, an architectural engineer at the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln in Omaha. Carbon emissions weren't even on the radar of most
architects five years ago, he says, adding that the number of architect firms, construction
companies and other members of the US Green Building Council is “exploding” — it now has
13,500 member organizations, and 91,000 members, up some ten-fold since 2000.

One driver is growing public concern over spiralling fuel prices and climate change, says Ken
Baker, chief economist of the American Institute of Architects. The institute surveyed house
purchasers' expectations at the end of 2007 and found that, despite the subprime mortgage
crisis, most were willing to pay more for a house that would use less energy and be kinder on
the planet. “Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of energy-efficient options,” says
Baker, “and they are requesting that architects incorporate them into the design and remodelling
of their homes.”

Innovate and renovate

Meanwhile, green-building researchers are working hard to expand those options. The most
obvious and urgent priority is to take energy into account during retrofitting. Although new
construction in Europe and the United States annually amounts to around 1% of the existing
building stock, about twice that many structures are renovated every year. Given the typical life
cycle of buildings, each renovation that uses inadequate insulation or poorly glazed windows is
an opportunity for lowering energy demand that is lost for decades. One demonstration project
carried out at the Jülich Research Centre in Germany shows what can be done with energy-
efficient design strategies. Although the gains are not as impressive as those with new buildings,
the renovations nonetheless cut the test building's total primary energy needs in half, from
1,235 kilowatt hours per square metre per year (kWh/m2/year) to 600 kWh/m2/year.
“Consumers are increasingly aware of energy-efficient options.”

Ultimately, however, the biggest pay-offs will come from new buildings, where ultra-low-energy
use can be designed in from the beginning. This is particularly important for the developing
world, and urban areas, where so much new construction is expected in coming decades. The
goal in such ultra-low-energy design is to make buildings as 'passive' as possible, meaning they
can satisfy most of their occupants' heating, cooling, and lighting needs from the outside
environment — and then maintain the occupants' comfort as the outside cycles from day to
night, summer to winter.

More research is still needed, for example, to develop cheap glazing and insulation materials that
can adapt themselves to changes in lighting and heating loads over the course of a day, or a
season. Research is also vital to adapt existing solutions to different sorts of buildings or
environments.

Nonetheless, many of the technologies are already mature. Almost two decades of research,
mainly in Europe, has resulted in designs for fully passive houses that require primary energy
needs of 15–50 kWh/m2/year — compared with current-generation European houses that
typically require 160–300 kWh/m2/year — and need only supplementary heating or cooling, in
tiny amounts, or just on the coldest and hottest days.

Such efficiency levels make the buildings amenable to being made zero-carbon by meeting their
low energy needs, either from small, local renewable sources, or using grid electricity generated
from renewable sources.

“You can do a lot with existing technology”, says George Jeronimidis, an engineer who heads the
Centre for Biomimetics at the University of Reading, UK, and who is developing next-generation
building materials that adapt their shape, such as vents that open and close in response to
humidity levels. “We are missing a lot of opportunities because we don't think about energy in
the design phase of a building.”

Holistic house-building

This does require a different mindset, says Maria Wall, a green-building researcher at the
University of Lund in Sweden who was involved in building passive terrace houses in Lindås (see
photo, right). “Getting architects and engineers sitting down together from the outset is critical,”
she says. “One has to consider the building as a whole, and in the context of its environment.”
But new software is helping architects and engineers do just that, says Andreas Wagner, a
building scientist who heads the architecture faculty at the University of Karlsruhe in Germany,
and who is also a member of the design and monitoring team within the EnOB programme.

The software provides a “common language” that allows architects and engineers to jointly
quantify the energy implications of design decisions. Using databases and models of average
temperatures, sunlight and solar radiation from different north–south orientations, it allows them
to pick from a supermarket of passive design strategies, techniques and materials to adapt
designs to the local conditions. “We are now moving on from research and prototypes into the
building market,” says Wagner.

That market is most mature for residential homes, which account for three-quarters of the
energy consumption of the building sector. Passive houses currently make up only 2% of new
buildings in Germany. But market research suggests that fraction will climb quickly as the
necessary competences spread, and as consumers begin to take advantage of low-interest loans
and other recent government incentives. Passive houses are also spreading fast in Austria,
Switzerland and other European countries.
 A 1950s building in Frankfurt, Germany before (left)
and after (right) refurbishment. Thermograms (top) show the reduction in heat loss — energy demand
dropped 90%.WWW.PASSIV.DE

Passive-house design uses extreme insulation of the building envelope — including triple-glazed
windows, often filled with an inert gas — in particular, in an effort to eliminate what engineers
call 'thermal bridges'. These are fault lines, typically at the window frames and at the
intersection of floors and walls, where large, unwanted energy transfers occur with the outside.
The result is an airtight 'skin' that prevents energy leakage. Thermograms of buildings then show
impressive gains in 'nega-watts' (see photos, right).

With insulation like that, the building can get its heating from the solar gains through glazing as
well as through waste heat from appliances and even our bodies.

Another key technique for temperature control in passive houses is at first counterintuitive:
simply let fresh air in from the outside. A pump draws fresh air through a grid of pipes buried
several metres underground, where the temperature is relatively constant throughout the year,
10–14 °C in the United Kingdom, for example. When this fresh air arrives at the house, its
temperature has already been modulated — warmed up or cooled down by the ground,
depending on the season. Then, in a second trick for heating, the incoming fresh air is put
through a heat exchanger to recover 80% of the heat from the warmer stale air being expelled
from the building. This system of air-based cooling and ventilation not only saves energy by
recycling heat, but vastly improves air quality.

The Centre for Environmentally Conscious Construction

in Kassel, Germany, leads by example.MEYER ARCHITEKTURPHOTOGRAFIE

Many of these same tricks can be used for office buildings and other large structures. However,
these buildings tend to be more complex than residential houses, with many more interactions
between different interior zones and higher heat loads from staff and machinery. So it is
considerably more difficult to make them completely passive. Then, too, research in this area is
relatively recent, even in Germany.
Still, EnOB recently published results from the construction of 25 prototype passive office and
other large buildings, and found that most kept energy for heating, lighting and cooling below
100 kWh/m2/year. “That's a factor of four smaller than existing equivalent buildings in Germany,
and of six than in the United States,” says Wagner. Three of the buildings reached energy
consumptions of less than 50 kWh/m2/year.

The EnOB study tested multiple concepts, including passive cooling. One such concept is night
ventilation, which is increasingly being deployed in large buildings worldwide. The idea is to open
automatically the skylights during the night, when the air in the building is warmer than the
outside air. A natural breeze will then release the hot air out the top while drawing in cooler
outside air from ventilation grills in the facade.

Cool control

Another concept tested in the study was to circulate water in boreholes drilled up to 100 metres
down, and then pass the water in closed circuits through concrete slabs in the ceilings of the
building. The water was a relatively warm 17 °C. But there was so much of it that the cooling
effect was comparable to that achieved by air-conditioning compressors. “We use the
environment, the ground, as a heat sink,” says Wagner.

Many new German houses now use such slab cooling, or 'thermally activated building systems',
which were pioneered in Switzerland. The buildings require only very small amounts of energy;
all they need is a small pump. A multi-million-euro renovation of the United Nations offices in
Geneva, Switzerland, will use a similar system, drawing water from Lake Geneva.

These systems will work in even the hottest areas of California, Wagner maintains, although a
small amount of conventional air conditioning might have to kick in during the late afternoon to
keep temperatures below what people have become accustomed to. “But it would reduce most of
the current needs for air conditioning.”

One problem is that the range of daytime temperatures achieved by passive cooling and
ventilation are still less predictable than what conventional systems can deliver, in particular in
large buildings; careful modelling and scaling are required to cover the possible extremes. As a
result, risk-averse architects and engineers worried about potentially unhappy clients tend to
stick with the safest option, and sell buildings that use central heating and air conditioning.

“The need is to build more demonstration passive buildings, to show everyone from carpenters
to house purchasers that it is not such a strange thing to build an energy-efficient house,” says
Wall, “and that not only do these buildings work, but they are actually superior to conventional
buildings.”

Fully passive designs can be adapted to hotter climates, although much less research has been
done for those areas. In some cases, it works out cheaper to use a strategy based on renewable
energy. That's the tack being taken by Jeff Christian, head of the Buildings Technology Center at
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, to design cheap, energy-efficient homes for
low-income families.

“The financial incentives we need to drive this are not in place.”

In Tennessee, he has to deal with not only heat, but also with high humidity. Underground
passive ventilation systems bring in too much moisture for such environments. And although
there are possible solutions, such as solar-driven dessication, this is currently too expensive.
 Energy-efficient homes in Lenoir City, Tennessee (left),
and in Oberdorf, Switzerland.A. B. HUNT

Nonetheless, says Christian, low-energy buildings for the mass market are already doable there.
His focus is what he describes as “a little bit of solar, and a lot of energy efficiency” — that is,
using better insulation and using solar panels. His building in Lenoir City, Tennessee (see photo,
right), also maximizes cooling through natural cross-ventilation. The solar panels cost $20,000
upfront, he says, but he cut costs by mass-producing wall panels and other parts of the building.

For all the progress, though, Christian, for one, is convinced that cheap, low-energy houses will
take off in the United States only if the government wields both carrot and stick. “The financial
incentives we need to drive this are not in place,” he says, adding that tougher and compulsory
energy requirements on buildings “is the only way we will get industry to do the research and
development to get there”.

Yes, he says, green buildings can potentially be built as cheaply as their conventional
counterparts, if not more so. But those psychological and institutional barriers are still very real.
If engineers, architects and builders have to struggle with, for example, unfamiliar green-
architecture techniques, they will incur a heavy 'transaction cost' in the form of confusion,
mistakes and delay. And if they have to add renewable energy, they will saddle the project with
higher capital construction costs — which clients in the large rental sector will have little interest
in paying, as it is the tenants who will reap the rewards in the form of lower energy bills.

The mass-production of wall panels and other parts of the building advocated by Christian is also
seen as a promising avenue in Europe. Cost can be reduced further by avoiding one-off designs
and constructing an identical series of buildings. “The passive terrace houses we have here in
Wuppertal are identical to those in [the German cities of] Wiesbaden or Hannover,” says Voss.
“The only difference is the colour.”

Nonetheless, it is still an open question how quickly passive architecture strategies, combined
with renewable energy sources, will become the mainstream of construction. The good news is
that the interest is there. Witness the turnout of 30,000 delegates in Chicago last November at
the “Greenbuild” conference — which was opened by former US president Bill Clinton. On the last
day of the conference, Maria Atkinson, head of sustainability at Lend Lease, a multinational real-
estate company, threw out a challenge that should please Voss. “The hotels of Boston have 12
months to step up to the challenge of ensuring they are green for Greenbuild 2008, because this
year's delegates will be demanding green hotels as part of their commitment to green
buildings.”
Principles of Low Carbon Design for Architects. There are some well-
established, over-arching principles of low carbon design as established by the
RIBA. Below are details of these principles and how the use of renewable energy
products can help architects to achieve them.

1 Understand energy use in the building type

It’s vital that architects understand the breakdown of energy use for the building
type, at least by fuel type and ideally by end-use, i.e. heating, cooling, lighting
etc. This enables the designer to focus on the most important issues and identify
how to minimise carbon dioxide emissions. The pattern of energy use is
important, not just annual totals, particularly when renewable energy
technologies are being considered.

Over the life of the average building 90% of its energy use will be accounted for
by running the building (heating and hot water). Technology exists today to
hugely reduce the amount of energy consumed by buildings, so the onerous on
buildings to reduce their energy use is even more important. The ultimate green
building in this aspect is the Passive House or zero energy houses, because they
consume the absolute minimum amount of energy. Click here to read more
about NuTech Solar passive houses

2 Use the form and fabric of the building to do the work

Architects should use the form and fabric of the building to do as much of the
work of environmental modification as possible, thus minimising the demand on
services such as heating and lighting. Low carbon buildings should exploit useful
solar and internal heat gains (from people, equipment, etc.) to satisfy as much of
the heat demand as possible, but exclude unwanted solar gains when they may
lead to overheating. Two examples of this are listed below

Site Orientation

 A Southerly faced building will benefit maximum passive gain and for maximum shading in
Summer months.
 A compact building form of minimum surface-to-volume ratio is best for reducing heat loss.
However, a rectangular building with one of the longer facades facing south can allow for
increased passive solar heating, day-lighting and natural ventilation. As well as reducing energy
costs, sunny south-facing rooms also have high amenity value.
 Projections such as bay and dormer windows should be kept to a minimum as you will increase
the surface to volume ratio of the building and this in turn will increase heat loss and they are
also difficult to insulate.
 Pitched roofs with one slope orientated to South will allow for the optimum performance of a solar
heating system.

Windows

 Large windows are most efficient on South facing walls for solar gain although you should
provide shading e.g. curtains, blinds in Summer.
 Smaller and less windows can reduce the amount of heat loss through your windows.
 It is also important to consider the number of glazing layers e.g. double, triple. The thermal
performance of windows depends not only on the number of glazing layers, but also on the air
space between the glazing layers
 Windows should ideally have a U Value greater than 1.4w/m2
 If you’re house is south facing then it is unlikely you will need triple glazed south facing windows,
as over a year you’ll gain more heat than lose even if you choose double glazing
 Windows also have a huge bearing on the buildings independence from natural light. 50% of
daylight hours the light outside is 15,000 lux. Inside a building you need around 300 lux so
therefore we leave most of the light outside.
3 Focus on insulation and air tightness

Low carbon designs seek to reduce unwanted heat losses and gains by adopting
appropriate standards of insulation and air tightness. To identify appropriate
standards it is necessary to understand the heating and/or cooling balance of the
building. Generally the design of a dwelling will focus on keeping heat in and
making use of heat gains, while the design of an office will focus on keeping the
building cool, especially in summer.

NuTech Renewables Ltd can assist you with testing the air tightness of the
building through an air tightness test.

4 Use high efficiency building services with low carbon fuels

The architect should satisfy the remaining energy demand with building services
that are as efficient as possible, and that use fuels with low carbon dioxide
emissions factors. Emissions factors are explained in more detail in the Carbon
Literacy Briefing that forms part of the RIBA Climate Change Tools. Architects
should also ensure that heating controls are as responsive as possible, making
use of solar and internal heat gains without over-heating the building.

NuTech Renewables Ltd can offer a wide range of renewable energy technology
solutions with incoporate solar, please contact NuTech for further information.

5 Use renewable energy systems

Low carbon buildings use renewable energy systems to reduce the carbon
dioxide emissions associated with the provision of heat and power within the
building. Examples Include
Solar Thermal
Air to Water Heat Pumps
Underfloor heating
Wood Pellet Boilers

6.Manage energy within the building

Low carbon design is not enough; low carbon operation is also needed.
Architects can enable efficient operation of the building by ensuring that
appropriate metering and energy management systems are in place, and that the
occupants are well-informed about how the building and its services are intended
to be used.
http://www.nutechrenewables.com/principles-of-low-carbon-design-for-architects/

Architecture 2030: How to Build a Better

World
Emily Pollock posted on August 10, 2018 | Comment

FacebookPinterestTwitterFlipboardLinkedInEmailMore

Listen to this story

PlayMute
 This June, Architecture 2030 released its new Zero Code, a building energy
standard for new building construction. (Image courtesy of Architecture
2030.)

Buildings are responsible for almost half of all greenhouse gas emissions,
a sobering fact for those in the construction and architecture industry.
Over 15years ago, one architect broke with the profession to do something
about it.

Edward Mazria closed his architecture practice in 2002 to establish

Architecture 2030, a not-for-profit aimed at reducing carbon emissions
from buildings. Since then, the organization has grown into a force for
good on the national and international stages.

Architecture 2030 has been busy this year, and we sat down with
representatives from the organization to talk about its tools,
initiatives, and goals for the future.

The Zero Code

Architecture 2030’s most recent achievement is releasing the ZERO Code, a
building energy standard for new building construction that includes both
energy efficiency standards and renewable energy sources to create
buildings that release net-zero carbon. Released in June 2018, the ZERO
Code includes potential paths for efficiency compliance, as well as an
energy calculator that makes it easier to crunch the numbers.

A graphic demonstrating the2030 Challenge. (Image courtesy of Architecture

2030.)

According to Architecture 2030, part of the ZERO Code’s strength is that

it builds on existing standards to make it easier for architects to
measure: “The ZERO Code uses the current national building energy code
standard, ASHRAE 90.1 2016, for building energy efficiency and then adds
on-site and/or off-site renewable energy procurement to achieve net-zero
carbon. All the compliance tools developed for meeting current code
standards are applicable to the ZERO Code.”

As a result, Architecture 2030 says that its code is “not difficult at

all” to implement.

The 2030 Challenge

But the organization is still probably most famous for its 2030 Challenge,
which asks architects and everyone else involved in the global building
community to make all new buildings and renovations carbon neutral (using
no fossil fuel-emitting greenhouse gases) by 2030.
Started in 2006, the challenge currently asks that all building projects
be designed to meet a greenhouse gas standard 70 percent below the
regional median. The standard increases to 80 percent in 2020 and 90
percent in 2025, allowing architects to adjust to the change before
becoming fully carbon neutral. Architects can meet these targets by using
sustainable design, producing on-site renewable energy, and buying
renewable energy from off-site sources (for a maximum of 20 percent of the
total energy).

According to Architecture 2030, the challenge is currently being

implemented by eight of the top 10American
architecture/engineering/planning firms, and 13of the top 20 firms. The
American Institute of Architects (AIA) was one of the first organizations
to adopt the challenge, creating the AIA 2030 Commitment for members in
2010. According to the AIA, the potential energy savings from its members’
commitment in 2016 was “approximately 16.7 million metric tons of
greenhouse gas emission.” And, in June 2018, the AIA invited engineers to
join the commitment.

Architecture 2030 has also started to think outside of the box (or, more
precisely, the building) on reducing carbon, creating the 2030 Challenge
for Products to reduce the carbon associated with creating
building materials. “It is equally important that we focus on the embodied
carbon of our building materials, which are responsible for 11 percent of
all global CO2 emissions,” said Architecture 2030.“Therefore, all new
construction materials must begin reducing their carbon footprint
immediately, especially concrete, steel, glass and aluminum.” After all,
the greenest buildings aren’t very helpful if they’re made of decidedly
un-green materials.

The 2030 Challenge is a step in the right direction. But what if builders
and architects aren’t sure what to do in order to meet it?

The 2030 Palette

The2030 Palette is an online platform that lets architects and planners
browse different ways to become carbon neutral. The strategies are
organized at multiple different levels, from the regional level (what kind
of environment are you in?) down to the neighborhood and building level
(is your building residential or commercial?).

Palette strategies at the “Regional” level, showing architects how to design

for the environment in coastal zones. (Image courtesy of Architecture 2030.)

Architecture 2030 calls the palette a “visual encyclopedia” of different

ways to reduce carbon emissions and energy use, not all of which are
technological. “Designing walkable communities, building daylighting,
shading, green roofs, earth sheltering, solar glazing, and climate-
specific building form and orientation are all examples of applicable
strategies and technologies,” according to the organization.

In addition to solution suggestions, the website also has links to other

websites and publications that provide additional information on each
topic.

2030 Districts
For those who want to make a difference on a level beyond just individual
buildings, Architecture 2030 developed its2030 Districts. The program,
which began as the 2030 Challenge for Planning, creates a patchwork of
“districts” across North America where private and public interests are
paired to reduce energy use, water use, and emissions.
Currently, there are 20 “districts,” representing more than 436 million
square feet of commercial building space. The size of each district is
measured in the square footage of buildings owned by those who have signed
onto the district, with Pittsburgh the largest at 81 million square feet.

A map of 2030 District buildings in downtown Pittsburgh. (Image courtesy of

350 Pittsburgh.)

“Each 2030 District has a unique approach to implementing the 2030

Challenge for Planning,” according to Architecture 2030. This year,
Seattle’s District has worked with the city to develop environmental
incentives, Cleveland’s District has run a green building competition, and
Ithaca’s District has moved toward adopting greener building regulation
policies.

Above and beyond the 2030 districts, Architecture 2030 also urges cities
and jurisdictions to take on the Zero Code, saying that it will “create a
stable and predictable market for renewable energy resources.”
The China Accord
All the above initiatives are heavily focused on (North) America. But what
about the rest of the world?

Three years ago, Architecture 2030 cohosted a meeting with the China
Exploration and Design Association – Architecture Branch (CEDAAB) that
brought together 52 planning and architectural firms. The objective?
Signing the China Accord, an agreement that Architecture 2030 calls "a
commitment to plan and design cities, towns, developments, and buildings
in China to low carbon/carbon neutral standards."

Since then, 62 other Chinese and international firms have signed the
accord, and Architecture 2030 and CEDAAB recently hosted the first net-
zero carbon training workshop in Shanghai in support of it. It’s an
important move in a market that’s projected to be responsible for more
than one-third of the new building projects over the next 20 years.

What Next?
The organization doesn’t sugarcoat the difficulty of its task. “Between
now and 2060, it is projected that we will add 230 billion square feet of
building stock, essentially doubling the area of buildings that exist in
the world today,” the organization said.“In just four decades, we will
build and add an area equal to all the buildings on the planet today.
Consequently, all new buildings must be designed to be carbon-neutral as
soon as possible, so we do not add to the emissions problem.”

Architecture 2030sees a lot of promise in what’s already occurring on the

individual level, with architecture firms and planners designing more
environmentally friendly buildings. But, to reduce the impact of climate
change, it believes that change has to happen on a larger scale:“action
must be taken at a local, state, and/or governmental policy level.”

That might prove to be a difficult task, especially now that global

warming is a controversial topic on the national stage. But it’s also an
essential one for architects who don’t want their buildings to end up
underwater.
https://www.engineering.com/BIM/ArticleID/17422/Architecture-2030-How-to-Build-a-Better-
World.aspx

Big three Mayors sign onto C40

Net Zero Carbon Buildings
pledge
August 23, 2018
by Canadian Architect

Categories
 Architects + Architecture

Tags
 C40 Cities
 Net Zero Carbon Buildings

Today, 3 Canadian mayors, alongside 16 mayors from around the world, representing
130 million urban citizens, committed to significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions
from their cities by ensuring that new buildings operate at net zero carbon by 2030. By
signing the Net Zero Carbon Buildings Declaration, the leaders of Montreal, Toronto,
Vancouver, Copenhagen, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, New York City,
Newburyport, Paris, Portland, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Monica, Stockholm,
Sydney, Tokyo, Tshwane & Washington D.C also pledged to ensure all buildings in the
cities, old or new, will meet net-zero carbon standards by 2050.
Vancouver joins Montreal, Toronto, and cities around the world in the 40 Net Zero Carbon Buildings pledge. Photo by Aditya
Chinchure via Unsplash.
Buildings in urban areas are one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions,
and typically account for over half of a total city’s emissions on average. In London, Los
Angeles and Paris, buildings account for well over 70% of the cities’ overall emissions,
creating an enormous opportunity for progress on bringing emissions down. Currently,
half a million people die prematurely each year due to outdoor air pollution caused by
energy used in buildings.Net Zero Buildings use energy ultra-efficiently and meet any
remaining energy needs from renewable sources. Such bold commitments, made
ahead of the Global Climate Action Summit in San Francisco, are essential steps in
delivering on the highest goals of the Paris Agreement and keeping global temperature
rise below 1.5℃.
“We are excited to be signing the C40 Net Zero Carbon Emissions Declaration along
with other major cities around the world. Vancouver’s Zero Emission Building Plan will
not only reduce GHG emissions from new buildings by over 60% but is also driving our
green economy with a 53% increase in green building jobs since 2010,” said Mayor of
Vancouver Gregor Robertson.
“Paris is home to some of the world’s most beautiful and iconic buildings. As mayors of
the world’s great cities we recognize our responsibility to ensure every building, whether
historic or brand new, helps deliver a sustainable future for our citizens,” said Mayor of
Paris and Chair of C40, Anne Hidalgo. “With this commitment cities are getting the job
done, concretely delivering on the Paris Agreement and building better cities for
generations to come. One more time, the future is taking place in cities.”
Delivering on the commitments made today will require a united effort, as city
governments do not have direct control over all the buildings in a city. This commitment
includes a pledge to work together with state and regional governments and the private
sector to drive this transformation, and calls on national governments for equal action.
This pledge from cities is part of the World Green Building Council’s Net Zero Carbon
Building Commitment for Businesses, Cities, States and Regions.
Specifically, cities making this commitment will:

 Establish a roadmap for our commitment to reach net zero carbon buildings.
 Develop a suite of supporting incentives and programmes.
 Report annually on progress towards meeting our targets, and evaluate the feasibility of
reporting on emissions beyond operational carbon (such as refrigerants).

Furthermore, 13 cities, including Copenhagen, Johannesburg, Montreal, Newburyport,

Paris, Portland, San Jose, Santa Monica, Stockholm, Sydney, Toronto, Tshwane and
Vancouver commit to owning, occupying and developing only assets that are net-zero
carbon by 2030. To achieve this, cities will:

 Evaluate the current energy demand and carbon emissions from their municipal
buildings, and identify opportunities for reduction.
 Establish a roadmap for their commitment to reach net zero carbon municipal buildings.
 Report annually on progress towards meeting their targets, and evaluate the feasibility of
including emissions beyond operational carbon (such as refrigerants).

Leading up to the Global Climate Action Summit, C40 urged cities to step up their
climate action and ambition – today’s announcement is one of the city commitments
under that initiative
https://www.canadianarchitect.com/architecture/big-three-mayors-sign-onto-c40-net-zero-carbon-
buildings/1003743969/