GRIHA

Advantages and
Shortcomings
By:
Devvrat Chowdhary
2010barc009

AIM
The basic aim of the presentation is to
identify various issues related to GRIHA
certification in India

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

The seminar work will involve a brief listing
of the different rating systems followed for
rating green buildings, but only GRIHA India
rating system will be discussed in detail.

METHODOLOGY
Establishing
Scope and aim

Establishing the
concept of
green building

Discussion and
comparison of
different Rating
systems

GRIHA
evaluation
study with the
help of Case
study

GRIHA plus
points

GRIHA
shortcomings

Conclusion and
Suggestions

What is a green building

The

green building is a building that has

high-efficiency in the use and
consumption of natural resources
Green building practices can substantially
reduce negative environmental impacts.
Green building reduces operating costs,
enhances building marketability, and helps in
increasing workers productivity and health
benefits.

Source: Paper presented on Green buildings" by Debajit Pal it from TERI, June 2004

What is a green building

In the Indian context, a building is 'green' when
It is designed using an integrated approach (as
mentioned in NBC, Part 0)
It provides its users with an optimal level of
comfort catering to local needs (as per NBC-Part 8)
It uses minimum resources, sourced locally (as per
various IS codes and other local materials)
It consumes minimum energy and water (as per
ECBC and NBC)
It generates optimum waste, processed locally (as
per CPCB, and MoEF norms)

Green building rating system

Green building rating systems are

designed to assess and evaluate the
performance of buildings from planning,
designing, constructing, and operations.

Green building rating system

The various rating systems discussed below provide a strategy to rate a building on some
pre formulated energy efficiency parameters. They provide a way to measure the extent
to which a building is environment friendly, sustainable and energy efficient in itself.
These are:
1. TERI-GRIHA
This rating system is developed by TERI- the Energy and Research Institute.
The assessment is based on Energy and Environmental performance of buildings.
The certification is given in the form of stars (1 to 5) depending upon the points secured
by buildings.
2. LEED - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
This rating system was developed by the U.S Green building council in 1993.
It evaluates and rates buildings on the basis of their energy and environmental
performance,
The rating is given in the form of certification, silver, gold and platinum depending upon
the points secured by buildings.
3. BREEAM - Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment
Method
This rating system was developed by the United Kingdom in 1990.
It evaluates and rates buildings on the basis of building environment.
The rating is given in the form of pass, good, very good and excellent depending upon
the points seemed by buildings.

Green Rating for Integrated

Habitat Assessment

GRIHA
GRIHA has been conceived by the Energy and
Resources Institute (TERI) and jointly developed
by Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE)
as the national rating system for buildings.
GRIHA attempts to quantify aspects such as
energy consumption, waste generation,
renewable energy adoption, etc. so as to manage,
control and optimise the same to the best
possible extent.

GRIHA evaluation process

Set of 34 criteria
focusing on:
Site Planning
Building Design
Energy Efficiency
Water and waste
management
Sustainable Building
Materials
Occupant Health and
comfort

100 (+4 innovation points)

point system with
differential weightage on
various criteria

Points
scored
5060
61-70
71-80
81-90
91-100

Rating
One star
Two star
Three
star
Four star
Five star

GRIHA evaluation process

Registration

Final submission
of documents

Final evaluation
by panel of
experts

Submission of
documentation

Preliminary
rating with
comments sent
to project team

Approval of
rating by
advisory
committee

Preliminary
evaluation by
TERI Technical
team

Evaluation by
panel of experts

Award of rating

CASE STUDY: CENTRE FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND
ENGINEERING, IIT KANPUR

Architects : Kanvinde Rai and Chowdhury , ND

Consultants:
Structure : Planning and design bureau , ND
Electrical : Kanwar Krishen Associates
Plumbing : Deolalikar consultants , New
Delhi
HVAC: Gupta Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Landscape : Yogesh Kapoor , New Delhi
Energy Efficiency : The energy and resources
institute (TERI)
Project Management: Institute works
department,

Contractors:
Gupta Enterprise, New Delhi
Kailash Electric , Kanpur
Hilltop refrigeration , New Delhi
Vishnu saran and Co. , Kanpur
TATA BP Solar, New Delhi
BHEL , Lucknow
Built Up Area: 4240 m2 (45640 ft2)
Project Cost : 11.5 Crore
Laboratories - 10 no's Faculty Rooms - 18 nos.
Meeting Rooms - 4 nos. Library ,
Seminar Hall - 100 cap. Class Rooms - 60 cap. &
40 cap.
Exhibition Area Amphitheatre integrated with
Water Body
Shaded Indoor Landscaped Court

Salient Features
1.

Sustainable

site

planning

has

been

integrated

to

maintain

favourable

microclimate. The architectural design has been optimized as per climate and
sun path analysis.
2.

Passive strategies such as an earth air tunnel have been incorporated in the
HVAC design to reduce the cooling load.

3.

The Centre has attempted to conserve and utilize resources efficiently; and
recycle, reuse, and recharge the systems at every stage of design and
construction.

4.

Conceptual Site Plan showing the orientation of the building to admit

maximum daylight from three sides and simultaneously making use of
naturally low-lying area as a water body and providing ambient temperature

5.

The Centre conceptualized as a 'building in the garden' is sited adjoining the

horticulture nursery to the east. The development co-exists with nature, is
sustainable and environment friendly.

6.

The EPI (Energy Performance Index) of the building is predicted to be 45.43

kWh/m2/annum, which is 41.3% less than the TERI GRIHA benchmark. In
comparison to a conventional building, 59% energy savings are predicted in

GRIHA advantages
Focus on non-air conditioned buildings:
GRIHAs criteria provide more credit to climate responsive
architecture and design to minimize energy use compared to
LEED criteria.
Mandatory minimum requirement for solar energy:
GRIHA requires, as a mandatory criterion, 1 per cent of the total
energy needs for the development to be sourced from solar
power.
Quality of ground water:
In India is not guaranteed as in other countries such as the U.S.
GRIHA mandates the treatment of ground water for drinking and
irrigation to the norms as prescribed by ISI.
Noise pollution:
LEED does not evaluate acoustical comfort. GRIHA requires
adherence to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and NBC
guidelines for acceptable outdoor and indoor noise levels.

GRIHA advantages
The

MNRE granted incentives to various

stakeholders under its Energy-efficient
solar/green buildings' scheme to GRIHANRS projects under the 11th five year
plan period.
Extensive hand holding during site visits
of registered projects

BEFORE

AFTER

What may go wrong?

No Proper Pre-Certification
The pre-certification is only a pledge and there
is no legal provision for requiring the project
proponents to achieve the level of rating
promised in the pre-certification application.
DEVELOPERS INTEREST
The developers often do not have convincing
evidence about energy, water savings etc. And
the occupier is also not sure whether they are
paying for a green image or for actual savings
coming from green measures.

What may go wrong?

Empty Promises
There is no legally backed means of verifying
whether the rated buildings are delivering on
their intended goals.
Increment building cost and Payback
period
Most of the developers and builders have their
apprehensions for constructing green buildings
because they believe that green buildings are
expensive, make no economic sense and they
would not be able to recover their cost.

What may go wrong?

Proving Green Credentials
All certified buildings are expected to respect the
local by-laws and to be located on appropriate sites.
Therefore, green rating systems should be made
accountable for awarding green rating to
inappropriately sited projects.
For example the Commonwealth (CWG) village is
constructed on Yamuna flood plain and concerns
were raised by several environmentalists about its
siting. A year after the storm over the games (which
left the village flooded in September 2010) has
settled, the project was awarded a TERI GRIHA 2 Star
Rating.

CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS

Establish

regulatory framework to mandate

performance monitoring, reporting and disclosure of
resource use buildings especially for rated and green rules
compliant buildings
Mandate transparent sharing of information on green
features, costs and pay-back, and performance data of the
rated buildings. This information should be made available
in the public domain in standardized uniform format.
Fiscal measures should be linked with post construction
performance monitoring.
Rating agencies should initiate public awareness
campaign based on the validated performance
information.
Strengthen technical preparedness for bridging the gap
between modeled and actual performance of
buildings.