Level(s) methodology in building projects - Shane Donatello
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•301 views
Presentación utilizada por Shane Donatello, Scientific Research Officer, de la Comisión Europea, en el ITeC Time: Jornada de difusión del sistema europeo de indicadores de sostenibilidad Level(s) del 23 de febrero de 2022. Patrocinado por EcoIntelligentGrowth y Construcía. El objetivo de la jornada fue dar a conocer el sistema europeo de indicadores para evaluar y medir la sostenibilidad de los edificios que propone Level(s) y explicar claramente su uso y metodología. Más info: https://itec.es/servicios/productos-sostenibles/levels
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Level(s) methodology in building projects - Shane Donatello
Similar to Level(s) methodology in building projects - Shane Donatello (20)
More from ITeC Instituto Tecnología Construcción
More from ITeC Instituto Tecnología Construcción (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Level(s) methodology in building projects - Shane Donatello
- 1. Presentation at the ITeC webinar, 23 Feb. 2022 Shane Donatello, JRC Level(s) methodology in building projects
- 2. 1. A brief explanation of how ENV and JRC work together on Level(s). 2. A brief description of the Level(s) framework. 3. Some comments on JRC guidance documents. 4. Some specific points about indicator 1.2 on life cycle carbon. Contents
- 3. Level(s) online: ENV and JRC roles DG ENV is driving force behind Level(s) policy and provides a lot of entry level learning material on its website as well as a new eLearning programme and calculator for recording building performance. DG JRC has led the technical research and stakeholder consultation behind the development of the Level(s) framework and provides a series of more detailed technical guidance documents for people who are ready to apply Level(s). Let’s meet Level(s) Reading materials (factsheets, general publications, newsletters) eLearning and tools for reporting Start using Level(s) Community and helpdesk
- 4. The Level(s) framework: macro-objectives MO1 MO6 MO5 MO4 MO3 MO2 • 6 macro-objectives. • MO1, MO2 and MO3 deal with environmental considerations. • MO4 and MO5 deal with social considerations. • MO6 deals with economic considerations.
- 5. The Level(s) framework: indicators MO1 MO6 MO5 MO4 MO3 MO2 1.1 6.2 4.3 2.1 1.2 2.2 4.1 3.1 4.2 5.2 5.1 4.4 2.4 2.3 5.3 6.1 • 16 indicators. • 1-4 indicators per macro- objective.
- 6. The Level(s) framework: levels L1 L2 L3 MO1 MO6 MO5 MO4 MO3 MO2 1.1 6.2 4.3 2.1 1.2 2.2 4.1 3.1 4.2 5.2 5.1 4.4 2.4 2.3 5.3 6.1 Each indicator has 3 levels • Level 1 is the “entry level”, for design concepts. • Level 2 requires detailed calculations/estimations based on designs. • Level 3 requires real life measurement.
- 7. The Level(s) framework: indicator status quo L1 L2 L3 1.1 6.2 4.3 2.1 1.2 2.2 4.1 3.1 4.2 5.2 5.1 4.4 2.4 2.3 5.3 6.1 MO1 MO6 MO5 MO4 MO3 MO2 • 10 indicators have been defined for all 3 levels. • Especially indicators 4.3 (lighting quality), 4.4 (acoustics), 5.2 (extreme weather resilience) and 5.3 (sustainable drainage) need further development. • JRC guidance available for ALL indicators.
- 8. The Level(s) framework: The 3 levels Time Reality Level 1 Concept design Level 2 Detailed design Level 3 Actual performance of building Performance gap
- 9. The Level(s) framework: The indicators Macro Objectives Indicators 1. Greenhouse gas emissions throughout building life cycle 1.1 Use stage energy performance (kWh/m2/yr) 1.2 Life cycle Global Warming Potential (CO2 eq./m2/yr) 2. Resource efficient and circular material life cycles 2.1 Bill of quantities, materials and lifespan 2.2 Construction and Demolition waste 2.3 Design for adaptability and renovation 2.4 Design for deconstruction 3. Efficient use of water resources 3.1 Use stage water consumption (m3/occupant/yr) 4. Healthy and comfortable spaces 4.1 Indoor air quality 4.2 Time out of thermal comfort range 4.3 Lighting 4.4 Acoustics 5. Adaption and resilience to climate change 5.1 Life cycle tools: scenarios for projected future climatic conditions 5.2 Increased risk of extreme weather 5.3 Sustainable drainage 6. Optimised life cycle cost and value 6.1 Life cycle costs (€/m²/yr) 6.2 Value creation and risk factors
- 10. • All documents available on JRC website*. • Some translated versions have been prepared too (incl. ES). • 2 general documents (UM1 and UM2). • 16 standalone, indicator specific documents (UM3 x.x). • Auxiliary files (e.g. LCA tool guidance and water calculator). https://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/product-bureau//product-groups/412/documents 26 + 27 pages Document lengths range from 10 to 40 pages The Level(s) framework: JRC guidance docs *
- 11. • Generally follows EN 15978. • LCA software and databases need to be EN 15978 compliant. • But specifies a minimum scope for embodied carbon (see table 4 in the user manual for indicator 1.2). • Also specifies default service lives for different building elements and technical systems (see table 4 again). • Further discussion is foreseen about floor area definitions, the quality of generic data that is acceptable, the scope of materials included (e.g. onsite energy systems) and other issues such as further alignment with PEF and differences in national LCA methods. • Links to the EU Taxonomy and Energy Performance of Buildings Directive. Indicator 1.2: Life cycle GWP: general points
- 12. • The design team and client basically need to discuss the following issues, as a minimum, if they want to identify the main opportunities to optimise life cycle global warming potential. • Whenever such a concept is taken into account, some further explanation of how this has been done is required in the right hand column. • That is all that is required to “report” at level 1! Indicator 1.2 Life cycle GWP – Level 1
- 13. • To estimate life cycle global warming potential, it is necessary to also know the quantities and embodied carbon of materials used, their expected service lives and maintenance needs and the expected operational consumption of energy (and water) by occupants. Indicator 1.2 Life cycle GWP – Level 2 • The JRC user manual sets out 13 basic steps to be followed. • The reporting format is as shown to the right. • If the reference study period is not 50 years, this should be clearly stated.
- 14. Indicator 1.2 Life cycle GWP – Levels 2 & 3 Level 3 Level 2 iterations
- 15. Thank you © European Union 2021 Unless otherwise noted the reuse of this presentation is authorised under the CC BY 4.0 license. For any use or reproduction of elements that are not owned by the EU, permission may need to be sought directly from the respective right holders. Help us revise EU GPP criteria for buildings: first webinars on 21st and 22nd March: register here. Contact us at: JRC-B5-LEVELS@ec.europa.eu ; Shane.DONATELLO@ec.europa.eu
Editor's Notes
- This presentation covers four main areas, first a brief explanation of how DG environment and the Joint Research Centre work together on Level(s). Then a brief description of the level(s) framework, some details about the JRC guidance documents and some more detail on one of the most important indicators, indicator 1.2 on life cycle carbon.
- Before beginning to speak about Level(s) methodology, which is specified in the JRC user manuals, it is worth explaining briefly how the online content from DG ENV and DG JRC complement each other. The DG ENV website is the main site for Level(s). It is here that readers can find a lot of helpful entry level material, can undertake an eLearning course, connect to the Level(s) community and see an online tool for logging project results. When the time comes to start using Level(s), it is necessary to move to the JRC website, where there are a total of 18 user manuals (2 horizontal and 16 that are specific to each of the 16 indicators). These manuals provide more technical content, step-by-step instructions, reference to relevant EN standards and standard reporting templates.
- One way to look at the Level(s) framework is to consider it as a hexagonal “cake”, split into 6 different flavoured parts. Some (like macro-objectives 1, 2 and 3) have a more environmental flavour, others (like macro-objectives 4 and 5) have a more social flavour, while macro-objective 6 has a strong economic flavour.
- Continuing with the hexagonal “cake” analogy, some of the parts have been broken into smaller pieces, as can be seen in the diagram here.
- In terms of time, we can consider each new building project as starting out from the centre of the “cake” and travelling outwards along the lines of those indicators (or flavours) that the team are interested in. The journey to Level 1 is relatively quick and does not require major effort or investment, consisting mainly of discussions at the conceptual design stage that follow a minimum recommended level 1 checklist of points defined in the JRC guidance manuals. Depending on the outcome of those discussions, the team will decide if it is worthwhile to continue to Level 2, which would require much more effort in order to carry out design calculations and estimations. Here the JRC guidance offers a series of step-by-step instructions and refers to any relevant EN or ISO standards that should be followed. A standard Level(s) reporting format is also defined for level 2 estimations. After the building project is completed, the project team and client can also measure the final performance of the building and compare it to the design estimations. Again, the JRC guidance manuals here specify step by step instructions, any relevant EN or ISO standards and a standard reporting format. This is the comprehensive and progressive Level(s) journey. However, it is worth noting that Level(s) can also be applied to the assessment of existing buildings (i.e. level 3 only) or to already finalised designs (i.e. level 2 only).
- This slide is to show that the Level(s) guidance documents available on the JRC website are complete at level 1 but are not totally complete at levels 2 and 3. White parts indicate no guidance available. This means that there is no detailed guidance for levels 2 and 3 for indicators 4.3 (on lighting), 4.4 (on acoustics), 5.2 (on extreme weather resilience) or 5.3 (on sustainable drainage). These should be completed in future revisions of the Level(s) framework. It can be argued that level 3 for indicator 5.1 and levels 2 and 3 for indicator 6.2 will never be relevant, due to their nature.
- This slide, shows how the three levels should relate in terms of time (on the x-axis) and proximity to reality (on the y-axis). You can see how we begin with the conceptual design, which is not well defined and not close to reality. As time progresses and we step to level 2, the building design becomes more detailed and the estimated performance more realistic. Finally, when the building is finally built, the actual performance can be measured, which is the true reality of the situation. Any discrepancies between level 2 and 3 are generally referred to as the “performance gap”.
- For ease of reference in a single slide, the full titles of the indicators are provided here, ordered horizontally with each row corresponding to one of the six macro-objectives. The indicators in green are those whose are still missing some guidance at levels 2 and 3.
- As mentioned earlier, a total of 18 guidance documents (or user manuals) have been prepared by the JRC and made publically available on their website. The two horizontal user manuals (an introduction to Level(s) and how to set up Level(s) in a building project) have been translated into all of the official languages of the EU. The remaining 16, indicator-specific user manuals have been translated into DE, ES, FR, IT and PL. It is worth noting that a number of indicators have bespoke excel calculation files as well, for example indicator 2.2 on construction and demolition waste, indicator 2.4 on design for deconstruction and indicator 3.1 on efficient use of water.
- For the sake of time, we will only focus on some of the key parts of one of the most important Level(s) indicators, 1.2, life cycle global warming potential. The Level(s) approach to life cycle carbon analysis is in line with EN 15978, but goes into more detail by specifying a minimum scope for embodied carbon and providing default service lives for building elements and coatings. The Level(s) methodology will have to keep up to date with any future agreements about floor area definitions, generic data rules and other issues. It is especially important to get this indicator right due to its direct relevance to high level EU policy and legislation.
- Level 1 reporting for indicator 1.2 simply involves discussing at least the 6 points listing in the table on this slide. If any of these points are taken into account for the concept design, then a brief explanation of how this was done and in what way.
- Reporting at Level 2 requires the collection of the typical data needed for any LCA or carbon footprint (e.g. material quantities, service life assumptions, occupational energy and water consumption and end of life assumptions). Results need to be reported separately by module (A, B, C and D) and by fossil, biogenic and land use Global Warming Potential.
- In this last slide, I just want to highlight how any LCA study is at best an approximation of reality. Even at level 3, it must be understood that future changes in occupant behaviour, occupancy rates, grid energy factors and so can all heavily influence real LCA results. The best designs will always try to account for occupant preferences and needs, both today and in the future.
- Thank you for your attention and, before I finish, I would just like to make you all aware of the revision of EU GPP criteria for buildings, where new criteria proposals are strongly linked to Level(s). If you would like to register for the free webinar, click the link on this slide.