Green Mark for New

Non Residential
Buildings (V 4.1) &
LEED Version 4.
By Benjamin Towell, BCA, Green Mark Department

Introduction:
The BCA Green Mark criteria has established itself as the main rating tool for the SE-Asian
market with a wide range of international projects in Malaysia, China, Thailand, Vietnam and
Laos. In addition to the South East Asian Market, Green Mark has been recognised as applicable
in the tropical belt in Africa with projects certified in Tanzania and interest in the neighbouring
countries. Green Mark has established itself thus as the leading rating system in the tropical and
sub tropical region.

Green Mark is unique in being the first rating system to tailor itself to the urbanised tropics and
have a unique position as a government administered tool, a position that has been replicated in
the UAE.

There are many other rating systems which follow similar principles. Each system will reflect
the industry needs in its country of origin and the performance levels achievable above local
building regulations. The established rating systems can be adopted overseas with relative
success provided they address the context in which they are being applied in which may differ
from the country of origin. An example is BREEAM, the first Green Building rating tool which
originated in the UK. BREEAM was designed for the UK market and thus when adopted overseas
the majority of its international projects are in Europe due to the similarities in market needs
and climate. Similarly Green Star, which was set up in Australia has also has been adapted and
extended to South Africa and New Zealand.

LEED, the USA centric tool has been the first tool to be marketed heavily as a rating tool
applicable to all countries and regions. LEED has been very successful in its market positioning
thus gains interest from MNCs to take up as a part of their global policies for sustainability.
Consultants, developers and contractors with experience with one of any of the established
rating systems, (such as BREEAM, Green Star, Green Mark, CASBEE, HQE, DGNB, or LEED to
name a few) would be able to cope with certification requirements of each of the other systems.

Green Rating Tools (An Overview):

Green Building Rating Tools in simple terms consist of a set of environmental criteria that a
building is scored against. The level of rating will depend on how well the building
demonstrates its compliance or the level of performance of the building compared with baseline
or minimum standards outlined by the rating tools criteria. These criteria will encourage
building design teams to exceed code level requirements for their building, as well as cover
industry best practice that may not be captured in building codes.

Most rating tools will cover building energy efficiency, water efficiency, construction materials
and general issues which are aimed at reducing negative impacts of construction on the
environment.

Different rating systems will differ in their approach of assessing, or scoring a building against
their set criteria of assessment, although the documentation required is often very similar in
nature. Some use auditing techniques to identify if a building has demonstrated compliance
against the criteria, where the auditor and project team have no contact and the documents are
sent to the auditors directly. Others will have a face to face approach where the assessors work
with the project team providing various levels of input and advice. The different methods of
assessment have their own advantages and disadvantages, however what is important is the
quality assurance of the rating tool processes and its certification standards.

A small number of rating systems have gone through ISO 9001 or equivalent ISO certification to
demonstrate that the rating tool processes meet globally recognised high standards of quality
assurance in their design and implementation. The BCA Green Mark Scheme is one of the few
systems that has achieved ISO certification.

The Green Mark Approach:

The BCA Green Mark scheme was launched in 2005 as an environmental rating system for
buildings tailor made for the urban tropics. BCA continuously benchmarks Green Mark against
other established rating tools (including LEED), to ensure that our system maintains itself as a
leading and robust rating tool.

Where Green Mark differs greatly from any other rating system in the world is that it is used as
a centre piece for holistic policy masterplans and building regulations. Due to this fact, the
assessment rigor, criteria rigor and level of onsite checking for compliance to committed
building performance is very high. Our approach to the rating system has transformed our
industry so that Architects, Engineers, Facilities Management, Contractors and Consultants to be
well versed in sustainable design, more integrated in the design approach, provide detailed
documentation and perform simulations and maintain building performance through
sustainable building operations.
The Green Mark Certification (Voluntary _ Awards)

BCA Green Mark projects are assessed in a number of stages by officers within the Building and
Construction Authority itself. These officers are well trained in M&E systems, building physics
and services, C&S, Architecture, Planning and facilities management. Furthermore the team
assessing the projects are also involved in the development of the Green Mark Criteria itself,
thus are able to advise the consultant team on high authority of the intent of each credit and
how the team can demonstrate their compliance to it.

New Building Projects are assessed in 3 or 4 stages depending on the level of award the project
is aiming for. The first stage is known as a pre-assessment. Here the 2 assessors will host an
informal meeting with the project team to discuss the project, the scoring methodology, provide
advice and clarifications on the criteria and sustainable design when called upon.

The second stage is known as the final assessment, this is the detailed documentation review
to ensure compliance with the criteria determining the building performance. The detailed
review includes looking through equipment selections, calculations, building performance,
assumptions, heat loads and equipment sizing, structural drawings, contract documents and
specifications. This formal assessment spans over 2 days with a number of shorter follow up
sessions. For projects that target Gold Plus of Platinum, energy modelling is often required. This
is assessed either by BCAs in house team of experts, or by external assessors. The energy
modelling takes reference from Appendix G of ASHRAE 90.1. For various projects detailed CFD
simulations are also required and assessed.

The 3rd stage relates to the onsite post completion verification of the building design, featured
and measured performance. This includes a detailed review of the purchase orders, delivery
orders and onsite visual inspections and measurements conducted by BCA officers. For Gold
Plus and Platinum projects there is a 4th stage. This is where the building consumption
measured over 12 months will be compared with a calibrated energy model to demonstrate the
buildings compliance with the demonstrated energy saving requirements vs. the baseline as
defined by BCA.

The BCA Green Mark version 4.1 refers to recent Singapore standards that reference the latest
British Standards, American Standards and European standards, and are thus stringent in their
nature. Furthermore BCA Green Mark also references the latest versions of ASHRAE, thus can be
seen to set high global standards for practitioners to achieve.

Building Regulations and Green Mark (Mandatory)

Green Mark is used within Building regulations in Singapore, this covers mandatory compliance
for all new buildings and buildings with major A&A that have a gross floor area of 2000m2 or
above. The process differs from the awards scheme. For meeting legislative requirements the
qualified person (Architect & M&E) shall submit a declaration and self-score showing that they
meet the minimum score and pre-requisite requirements of Green Mark. This self-score is
checked by the BCA legislation team as a part of the Building Plan submission and once deemed
correct, provided all the other requirements from other departments are also deemed
satisfactory, permission to build is granted. An inspection of the environmental performance is a
part of the inspection to be granted the occupation permit.
In Singapore due to the built environments high demand of M&E equipment, especially the
large cooling systems. BCA has introduced mandatory regulatory requirements to ensure
compliance to high efficiency standards over the life cycle of the building. BCA includes
legislative provisions to ensure minimum sustainability standards for all new buildings as
discussed above, in addition this approach has been extended to those larger existing buildings
which are undergoing a cooling system retrofit. Here, like new developments, the qualified
person shall declare that they meet the required standards in Green Mark for Existing Buildings
criteria. This is then checked upon retrofit completion. It is with this experience with legislative
requirements and enforcement procedures; a lot of research has to be conducted to form the
individual criteria and rigorous quality assurance for the assessment and training for the
assessors who must maintain their independence from the project.

A final element of legislation affecting buildings is the mandatory energy audit of the chilled
water plants for new buildings and existing buildings that have undergone their retrofit or have
been certified under Green Mark for Existing buildings (version 3). Here 1 year after the
temporary occupancy permit for new developments, the building owner will have to measure
and submit the efficiency of the chilled water plant (within a +/-5% uncertainty) which must
meet the stated minimum requirements in terms of kW/RT. For Gold Plus and Platinum
buildings certified under Green Mark for New Non-Residential buildings version 4.0 and 4.1
need to demonstrate 0.65kW/RT or better.

How LEED Compares in its Processes

LEED has 2 stages of assessment for a new project, this comprises of a preliminary review
where technical advice is provided on the credits that have been submitted but would need
extra work or evidence to be submitted in order to achieve them. The final review provides the
score and level of award. Unlike Green Mark there is no face to face contact with the LEED
assessment body, reducing the potentially beneficial inputs into the sustainable design from the
assessor and also the ability to have frequent dialogues regarding the certification. Furthermore
the rating is purely based upon the design documentation submitted and not the building
performance in operation. LEED also like Green Mark has a rating tool designed for Existing
Buildings called LEED Building Operations and Maintenance version 4.

Established Rating System Criteria Comparison:

In a comparison of BCA Green Mark for Buildings categories and weight- age we can see that the
main focus remains energy efficiency. This is due to the context of Singapore and the policy
direction. The comparison made is through using green mark headings where possible and then
grouping related criteria from the other schemes under these headings to give a gauge of
relative comparison.

It is notable that Green Mark has the highest weighting on Energy related criteria (See the chart
below), similarly HQE (France) has the highest focus on Indoor environmental quality and
health and DGNB has the greatest number of criteria focusing on social and economic factors of
sustainability. However, differences in local regulation and standards must be given due
consideration in any comparison
 70%

60%

50%

40%

30% Green Mark v4.1

LEED v4 (draft)
20%
BREEAM 2011
Green Star V3
10%
HQE
0% DGNB

LEED NC Version 4 compared with Green Mark NRB Version 4.1:

Green Mark like LEED focuses on energy efficiency not total building consumption and carbon
in as much detail as the European and Australian systems do. This allows the assessment team
to focus on the building performance rather than on normalisation factors for consumption
metrics and carbon metrics.

In Singapore issues such as land use are not required to be a key focus due to the nature of the
countrys planning system and strict zoning thus these considerations are not placed within the
criteria. In LEED, which is based upon the USA which has a more laissez faire town (urban)
planning system nationally, thus these credits are seen as essential in building upon their
minimum regulatory standards in this aspect.

Upon a criteria to criteria comparison (more detail is provided in Appendix A) we can see that
both Green Mark and LEED cover the key aspects of green buildings, although these criteria
have been arranged in a different manner. For example the use of Low GWP, zero ODP
refrigerants and installing leak detection in Green Mark is considered under Environmental
Protection, Under LEED this is part of their Energy section. For Green Mark the use of day
lighting, lighting levels form a part of the energy section, in LEED this falls under their Indoor
Environmental Quality section.

A number of the LEED credits which stand out on their own are often included under broader
headings in Green Mark, for example the credits that have grouped under the environment &
ecology section in LEED, including green transport heading seem more numerous than Green
Mark. However all of the credits excluding parking footprint (which is not applicable in the
Singapore context) has been included in the Green Mark criteria under the sub headings of the
broader criteria heading.

Life cycle is also treated a little differently, although both address the issues of green products.

Rating Tool Life Cycle related Criteria & Processes

LEED (v4 draft) Building Life cycle impact reduction
Simplified EPDs & Green Products
Commissioning
Links with LEED for Operation &
Maintenance
Green Mark v 4.1 Pre-requisite for permanent M&V
Pre-requisite for Sustainable
construction and sustainable materials
Associated performance based
verification for operational efficiency
(stage 1&2)
Strong links with Green Mark for
Existing Buildings for continuous
performance and Green Mark occupant
centric schemes.

For Energy metrics, Green Mark is detailed and focuses on the elements that can improve the
energy performance of a building explicitly and comprehensively, this includes the
requirements for dynamic energy simulations for higher awards. This comprehensive and
explicit performance based approach, complete with our assessment methodology is especially
valuable in international markets where design literacy and energy performance knowledge
differs greatly

It is not just the criteria that need to be considered, it is the assessment process itself. The Green
Mark assessor provides a face to face service to understand the project, relate to the constraints,
opportunities and to clarify the criteria and compliance to this. In addition the assessor will be
able to provide a third party vet through of the desired building performance and thus give the
owner the confidence that the design or retrofit plans will deliver what is expected or to inform
the owner where improvements can be made, where things could be optimised and in a cost
effective manner.. This advice is based upon real world data that has been collected from the
projects the have fallen under Green Mark certification and measured data from buildings in
operation. As such with a face to face assessment that take place over key stages in the building
design cycle and operational cycle Green Mark process is a value adding process, not just a
certification label.
 70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%
Green Mark v4.1
LEED v4 (draft)
10%

0%

Points Distribution

For a breakdown of the like for like criteria see Appendix A.

As such the performance of LEED and Green Mark certified buildings are largely comparable, as
is the documentation quality required, with Green Mark potentially being a little more rigorous
in terms of assessment practices. With this, any consultant, contractor of facility manager with a
good level of experience with Green Mark would be more than capable to deliver a LEED, or
other rating tool certified project.

Appendix A (below) gives a grouped comparison between Green Mark and LEED
 Appendix A Criteria Comparison
Criteria Green Mark NRB 4.1 Credits LEED NC V4 (draft) Credits
Energy Based

Thermal performance of Fundamental commissioning & Verification

Building Envelope 12 (requisite) 0
Air-Conditioning system 30 Minimum energy performance (requisite) 0
Passive Design (Envelope
(pro rate) design) 35 Building level energy metering (requisite) 0

(pro rate) Passive Design (Ventilation) 20 Enhanced commissioning 6

Daylighting 6 Optimise energy performance 18
Artificial lighting 12 Advanced energy metering 1

Ventilation in Carparks 4 Demand response 2

Ventilation in common areas 5 renewable energy production 3
Lifts and Escalators 2 Green Power and Carbon offset 2
Energy Efficient practices 12
Renewable energy 20
Weight 61% 29%
Water Based
Water efficient fittings 10 rainwater management 3
Water usage and Leak
detection 2 outdoor water use reduction + requisite 2
Irrigation systems and
landscaping 3 water metering + requisite 1
Water consumption of Cooling
Towers 2 indoor water use reduction + requisite 6
cooling tower water use 2
Weight 9% 13%

Environment & Ecology (inc transport)

Sustainable construction 10 Sensitive land protection 1

Greenery provision High priority site 3

Environmental management
practice 8 surrounding density and diverse uses 5

Green Transport 7 Access to quality transit 5

Refrigerants 4 Bicycle facilities 1
Stormwater management 2 Reduced parking footprint 1

3 Green vehicles 1
Construction activity pollution prevention
(requisite) 0
site assessment 1
 site development - protect / restore habitat 2
open space 1
Heat island reduction 2
light pollution reduction 1
Storage and collection of recyclables
(requisite) 0
Construction demolition and waste mgmt
planning (requisite) 0
Building lifecycle impact reduction 5
Construction and demolition waste 2
Fundamental refrigerant management
(requisite) 0
enhanced refrigerant management 1
Weight 18% 29%
IEQ &
Health
Thermal comfort 1 Minimum IAQ performance (requisite) 0
Environmental tobacco smoke control
Noise Level 1 (requisite) 0
Indoor air pollutants 2 Enhanced IAQ strategies 2
Indoor air management 2 Low emitting interiors 3
High frequency ballasts 2 construction IAQ management plan 1
IAQ assessment 2
Thermal comfort 1
Interior lighting 2
daylighting 3
Quality views 1
Acoustic performance 1
Weight 4% 14%
Materials
Sustainable products 8 Environmental product declarations 2

Sourcing raw materials 2

material ingredients 2
Weight 4% 5%
Socio -
Economic

Weight 0% 0%
Other
Leed for Neighbourhood Development
Other Green features 7 Location 16
Innovation 5
LEED AP 1
Regional priority 4
Integrative process 1
Weight 4% 10%

LEED v4 Categories Points LEED Rating Score Range

Location and Transportation 16 Certified 40 50
Sustainable Sites 10 Silver 50 60
Water Efficiency 11 Gold 60 80
Energy & Atmosphere 33 Platinum 80 110
Materials & Resources 13
IEQ 16
Innovation 6
Regional Priority 4
Integrative process 1
Total 110