UNIDAD 1

FASE 1 - CONTEXTUALIZACIÓN DE LA EVALUACIÓN DE IMPACTO AMBIENTAL

ALUMNA

CINDY JOHANNA BARRERA JIMENEZ

COD: 1065896140

GRUPO:

358032_15

TUTOR

PABLO ALBERTO QUINTERO

UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL ABIERTA Y A DISTANCIA

ESCUELA DE CIENCIAS AGRICOLAS PECUARIAS Y DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE

PROGRAMA DE INGENIERIA AMBIENTAL

SANTA ROSA – SUR DE BOLIVAR

2019
 Sustainable construction—the role of environmental assessment tools

A sustainable building is a structure (of any kind) that is efficient in the resources that
are used, healthy and productive for its occupants, maximizes the environment over
investment in its life cycle, and through its efficiency, produces a slight footprint in the
planet.

Sustainability is currently a widespread demand throughout society. Real estate

professionals agree that the application of the sustainable model in sustainable buildings
will become the highest priority in the sector over the next 10 years. For this reason,
there are different evaluation systems that determine what needs to be measured to
know if a building meets the concept of sustainable development within a social,
economic and environmental context.

The incorporation of sustainable design elements in a building depends on many

factors, so an approximate monetary estimate of the cost of a sustainable building
cannot be given, but each case and project in particular will have to be studied.

The objective of this analysis is to have an overview and analyze the current method of
evaluation of the environmental building used in terms of its characteristics and
limitations in the evaluation of the sustainability of the building. Some of these evaluation
methods are one-dimensional when the sustainability of multi-faceted construction
needs a multidimensional environment or approach, the building research establishment
developed the system in 1990 in collaboration with private developers in the United
Kingdom, was launched as a credit award to systems for new office buildings. A
certificate of the evaluation result is awarded to the individual building based on a
unique qualification scheme of fair, good, very good or excellent. The environmental
criteria considered in the design of buildings are decisive to reduce the impact of the
different phases of the life cycle of any building: construction, use and demolition.

Since 1990, the BREEAM system has been constantly updated and expanded to include
the evaluation of such buildings as existing offices, supermarkets, new houses and light
industrial buildings (Yates and Baldwin, 1994). Most construction evaluation methods
have to do with a unique criterion such as energy use, interior comfort or air quality to
indicate the overall performance of a building (Cooper, 1999; Kohler, 1999).

Experience has shown that it is not easy to change the building construction system and
manage its operation.To do this, it must break the routine and habits acquired for
decades by the current construction system that has not taken into account the finite
role of natural resources.
The application of the criteria of sustainability, which leads to a rational use of the
natural resources available for construction, will require making some important changes
in the values that it has as its own culture. These sustainability principles lead to a
conservation of natural resources, a maximization in the reuse of resources, a
management of the life cycle, as well as a reduction of global energy and water applied
to the construction of the building and its use during its operation However, the
evaluation process is generally carried out when the design of the project is almost
finished (Crawley and Aho, 1999; Soebarto and Williamson, 2001).

It should be made clear that the recovery work necessary to make a complete building
that meets the environmental criteria can be too extensive, too expensive and slow
(Lowton, 1997; Crawley and Aho, 1999). How to replace an existing ventilation system
by installing more windows to allow natural ventilation and daylight can be expensive but
taking into account the environmental benefits, however slow the process can be
implemented. A project can have several development options and choosing the option
that minimizes harmful effects on the environment plays an important role in achieving
sustainable goals Lowton (1997)

An optimal strategy to minimize the environmental impact is to use solutions that reduce
in a balanced way the effects that the materials they produce on the environment, that
is, on the energy consumption to produce and install them, the waste that they generate
when they are manufactured and Then they are installed on site and the direct and
indirect pollution they produce, such as: Re-use of existing buildings when demolitions
or major reforms are carried out, keep where some or most of the elements indicated
below are reasonable. : Foundation and structure, roof and facade, partitions, raised
floors and suspended ceilings. Send to recover and / or recycle waste generated during
construction such as: wood, asphalt, concrete, brick and block, plasterboard, metals,
paper and cardboard, waterproofing, plastics.

Financial aspects: The environmental evaluation methods of the building focus on the
evaluation of the design against a set of criteria broadly divided into three main
categories: global, local and internal issues. These tools evaluate several main issues
that include the consumption of resources (such as energy, land, water and materials),
environmental load, interior Comfort and longevity. Some evaluation tools such as
BREEAM, BEPAC, LEED and HK-BEAM do not include financial aspects in the
evaluation framework. This may contradict the ultimate principle of a development, as
financial performance is essential for all projects because a project can be
environmentally sound but very expensive to build. Therefore, the main objective of a
development, which is to have an economic return, may not be fulfilled by making the
project less attractive to developers even though it may be environment friendly.
Environmental issues and financial considerations should go hand in hand as part of the
evaluation framework. As in the revised Green Building Challenge (GBC) model, it
includes economic issues in the evaluation framework (Larsson, 1999).

Climatic conditions: the bioclimatic design of the house and the correct solar orientation,
it is important to correctly regulate the climatic and temperature changes, maintaining a
perfect thermal and environmental comfort without additional energy costs, while
maintaining a correct air renewal, respecting the breathing of the building through all its
pores (walls and roof) and avoiding closed pore insulation and plasticizing paints. These
variations include differences in climatic conditions, income level, construction materials
and techniques, construction stocks and appreciation of historical value (Kohler, 1999).
Proper ventilation will prevent problems of accumulation in the home of toxic or
radioactive elements (such as radon gas). Even in the winter months, proper ventilation
of the home is important.

Complexity: Environmental problems are broad and difficult to capture. Consequently,

environmental building evaluation methods tend to be too comprehensive with respect to
incorporating environmental criteria, as well as inclusive of other factors such as
financial and social aspects. For example, the BEPAC comprises 30 criteria and GBTool
comprises 120 criteria (Cole, 1999; Larsson, 1999).

Weighting coefficients: can be modified to adapt to local conditions such as weather or

to reflect prioritized policies (IBEC, 2004). Weighting coefficients may need to be
updated regularly which can be a time-consuming activity. Cole (1998) states that the
main concern is the absence of a theoretical and non-subjective basis agreed to derive
weighting factors.

 We can conclude that Sustainable Construction conceptually aims to rationalize, save,
conserve and improve. Broadly speaking, the requirements that sustainable buildings
must meet include a rational consumption of energy and water throughout their life
cycle, the use of non-harmful materials with the environment and materials of the three
“R”, the minimization of waste during construction and the life cycle, the rational use of
the land and natural integration in the environment or the satisfaction of the present and
future needs of the users / owners (flexible, adaptable and with intrinsic quality).
 Bibliographic references

Construcción sustentable el papel de las herramientas de evaluación ambiental

https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0301479706004270?
token=1E8D71B7FBA89715B977A8D80150C09D00FA77273CE5E10587705C2B56C4
FF098E6672DDE3BB63CC2F9BAA6130BD12E7

La construcción sostenible https://www.cofis.es/pdf/fys/fys13/fys13_30-33.pdf

Abelson, P.W., 1996. Project Appraisal and Valuation of the Environment: General
Principles and Six Case Studies in Developing Countries. MacMillan, New York.

ABRI, 2003. Evaluation Manual for Green Building in Taiwan, Ministry of Interior, third
ed. Architecture and Building Research Institute,Taiwan.

Bentivegna, V., Curwell, S., Deakin, M., Lombardi, P., Mitchell, G., Nijkamp, P., 2002. A
vision and methodology for integrated sustainable urban development: BEQUEST.
Building Research and Information 30 (2), 83–94.

Burke, R., 1999. Project Managemen t Planning and Control Techniques.Wiley,

Chichester.

IBEC, 2004. CASBEE for New Construction.Institute for Building Environment and
Energy Conservation, Japan.

Chambers, N., Simmons, C., Wackernagel, M.,2000. Sharing Nature’s:Ecological

Footprints as an Indicator of Sustainability. Earthscan, London.

Cheng, C.L., 2004. Water environment issues and sustainable strategy in Taiwan. In:
Proceedings of the International Workshop, Tokyo,September.

Clements-Croome, D., 2004. Intelligent Buildings Design, Management and Operation.

Thomas Telford, London.

Cole, R.J., 1994. Assessing the environmental performance of office buildings. In:
Proceedings of CIB Congress, Watford, UK.

Cole, R.J., 1998. Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods.

Building Research and Information 26 (1), 3–16.

Cole, R.J., 1999. Building environmental assessment methods: clarifying intentions.

Building Research and Information 27 (4/5), 230–246.

Cole, R.J., 2005. Building environmental assessment methods: redefining intentions and
roles. Building Research and Information 35 (5),455–467.