Comparative Study of GRIHA, LEED, BREEAM Rating Systems For Green Building

ISSN (Online) 2581-9429
IJARSCT
International Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology (IJARSCT)
Volume 2, Issue 1, February 2022

Impact Factor: 6.252
Comparative Study of GRIHA, LEED, BREEAM

Rating Systems for Green Building
Pratibha Patil1, Alka Avasthi2, Vijeta Kundlikar3, Sampat Nanaware4, Prasad Joshi5
Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering1,3,4,5
Head of Department, Department of Civil Engineering2
Pimpri Chichwad Polytechnic, Akurdi, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Abstract: The negative impacts of the industries such climate change, global warming, ozone depletion
and inefficient resource consumption have received a great concern and awareness among the public,
politicians and academicians and this need demand of Green or sustainable design approach in all
industries and sectors. Thus, a lot of efforts have been applied either in terms of theories or practices in
order to reduce the adverse impacts of the industries. Green building rating tool, is a voluntary
environmental rating system which evaluates the environmental design and construction of buildings, amid
growing concern about urban environmental degradation. In this study, three primary rating systems
prevailing in India are selected and analysed with the aim of providing insights into the current situations;
highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, successes, and failures; and making recommendations for future
improvements. The common aspect of all the rating system is to create a sustainable architecture in all
respect so as to minimize negative environmental impact upon the environment. Certain analysis and data
have been represented in this paper with the help of case study to highlight ambiguities and shortcomings
in the weighting, scoring, and rating, which is mentioned in discussions. The three most prevailing rating
system in India GRIHA, BREEAM and has been studied and compared with each other on the criteria
upon which that are based.
Keywords: Green Building, Rating System, sustainable development, Criteria
I. INTRODUCTION
The rating system evaluate the performance of building from planning, designing, constructing, and operations. Green
building evaluation tool measures environment performance of building through its lifecycle. Globally, green building
rating systems are largely voluntary in nature have been instrumental in raising awareness and popularizing green
building design. These green rating systems aim to quantify the environmental, economic and socio-economic benefits
of green building design with an emphasis on sustainable site planning, optimized energy performance, efficient
materials, and construction practices, water, and waste management strategies; and indoor environmental quality. India
has a varying range of geographic features from north to south and from east to west. Climatic conditions also vary in
these regions thus it is felt prudent to consider climatic condition of the region in a green building rating system. In this
study different green building rating systems have been compared and classified broadly. These systems are subsequently
compared on certain important issues such as life cycle assessment, renewability, forest certification, locally produced
materials, health and safety of construction worker, project management, and climatic conditions. Subsequently, the
results are discussed briefly and conclusions presented.
1.1 An Overview of Green Building Rating Systems

A.1 GRIHA (GREEN RATING FOR INTEGRATED HABITAT ASSESSMENT)
The green rating for integrated habitat assessment (GRIHA) is India’s national framework for the assessment of
environmental impacts of built environments with an individual version applying to new buildings and one for existing
buildings (both starting at 2,500 sqm built-up area). For both versions, the net impact of buildings on quantitative and
qualitative parameters is totalled and compared against a rating table, resulting in a sustainability certification. Thereby,
Copyright to IJARSCT DOI: 10.48175/IJARSCT-2508 75

www.ijarsct.co.in
IJARSCT

the tool aims to support the reduction of detrimental impacts of buildings. Depending on the total point score, buildings
receive a sustainability rating of one to five stars.
The GRIHA rates the buildings from
 50-60 one star,
 61-70 two stars,
 71-80 three stars,
 81-90 four stars,
 Above 90 % five stars.
The system has been developed to help ‘design and evaluate’ new buildings (buildings that are still at the inception
stages). A building is assessed based on its predicted performance over its entire life cycle – inception through operation.
The stages of the life cycle that have been identified for evaluation are:
 Pre-construction stage: (intra- and inter-site issues like proximity to public transport, type of soil, kind of land,
where the property is located, the flora and fauna on the land before construction activity starts, the natural
landscape and land features).
 Building planning and construction stages: (issues of resource conservation and reduction in resource demand,
resource utilization efficiency, resource recovery and reuse, and provisions for occupant health and well-being).
The prime resources that are considered in this section are land, water, energy, air, and green cover.
 Building operation and maintenance stage: (issues of operation and maintenance of building systems and
processes, monitoring and recording of energy consumption, and occupant health and well-being, and also issues
that affect the global and local environment).
Table 1: Weight credit criteria in GRIHA
B. BREEAM (Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method)

The BREEAM was first launched in 1990 and was the first green building performance assessment method. This
method was developed in the UK. The BREEAM-2011 NC assesses the performance of the building. This rating system
is divided in the following areas: innovation where the percentage values represent the weights given to the respective
parameter in the rating system.
85% outstanding,
70% excellent,
55% very good
45% good
30% pass

www.ijarsct.co.in
IJARSCT

The assessment methods and tools are all designed to help construction professionals understand and mitigate the
environmental impacts of the developments they design and build. As BREEAM is predominately a design-stage
assessment, it is important to incorporate details into the design as early as possible. By doing this, it will be easier to
obtain a higher rating and a more cost-effective result. The methods and tools cover different scales of construction
activity. The BREEAM development is useful at the master planning stage for large development sites like new
settlements and communities.
Table 2: Weight credit criteria in BREEAM
C. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)

The LEED rating system has been developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) in 2000. The LEED India
green building rating system was developed by IGBC (Indian Green Building Council) in October 2006. LEED India
encompasses rating systems for:
 Existing Buildings (EB)
 New Construction (NC)
 Core and Shell (C&S)
 Green Homes
These represent the measurable indicators for global and local concerns in the Indian scenario. Based on the points
achieved, the building may be eligible for LEED-certified, Silver, Gold or Platinum Rating. Many buildings in India
register for a LEED Green Building Rating. Some of the major structures that register for a LEED rating are IT Parks,
Offices, Banks, Airports, Convention centres, Educational institutions, Hotels, and Residential complexes. LEED-INDIA
is, therefore, one of the chief councils to give a green rating to a structure, whether an apartment, independent home or
office. This system awards rating of buildings as certified, silver, gold, and platinum. It uses simple checklist format to
rate building performance. The rating system contains one element, indoor air quality (IAQ) management during
construction that explicitly addresses construction worker safety and health. The intent of this element is to protect the
construction workers and building occupants from potential air quality problems during the construction or renovation
process. On successful implementation of an IAQ management plan, the project receives one LEED-NC credit, which is
almost negligible and thus underscores the minimal consideration that the rating system gives to construction worker
safety and health. It should be noted, however, that other elements within the rating system which are aimed to improve
the safety and health of the end-user, such as the use of low-emitting materials, may benefit the safety and health of
construction workers as well.

www.ijarsct.co.in
IJARSCT

Table 3: Weight credit criteria in LEED
1.2 Comparison of different green building rating system

Table No.4 shows the comparison between different green building rating system. The symbol  indicates presence
or consideration of the issue in question in the given rating system. The symbol X indicates absence. For example, life
cycle assessment is present/considered in the four rating systems: BREEAM, LEED and GRIHA, while this is not
considered in Green Star and GBAS rating systems. The results are discussed in the following section.
Criteria BREEAM Weight LEED Weight GRIHA Weight
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)   

Life Cycle cost  7% X  1%
Renewability  4%  8%  14%
Certification of materials used  0.5%  1% X
Locally Produced Materials  3%  2%  1%
Health and safety of construction
X X  2%
worker
Project Management  12%  2%  4%
Climatic condition X  4% X
Table 4: Camparision of rating criteria based on Weight credit
II. DISCUSSION
Life cycle stages considered in BREEAM are: design stage (DS) - leading to an interim BREEAM certified rating, and
post-construction stage (PCS) – leading to a final BREEAM certified rating. Further, in BREEAM there are two
approaches to the assessment at the post-construction stage: a post-construction review of an interim design-stage
assessment and a post construction assessment. Renewability is considered in all the rating systems and in the LEED, 1
point is allotted if 5% of the total value of building materials comes from rapidly renewable sources, defined as 10-year
rotation or less. In the BREEAM, 4 credits for construction waste management and 1 credit for recycled aggregate is
allotted. In green star, 5 points for recycling waste storage, recycled content and reuse of materials is allotted. In GRIHA,
5 points is reserved for re-newable energy utilization (partly mandatory), 3 points for re-newable energy based hot- water
system, 2 points. For waste water treatment, 5 points for water recycle and reuse (including rain-water) and 6 points for
utilization of fly-ash in building structure. In the BREEAM it is mandatory to carry out programme for the endorsement
of forest certification (pefc)- tier level 3. In the LEED, 1 point is reserved if 50% or more of the wood-based materials
and products are fsc certified. In green star, 2 points are given if forest stewardship council (fsc) certified timber is used.
The BREEAM reserves 1 credit for materials which are transported from nearby area. In green star, no credit is allotted
for this. In the LEED, one gets 1 point if a minimum 10% of total building materials were extracted, processed and
manufactured within a 500-mile radius; a second point for 20% minimum of total building materials. In the GRIHA, 2
points are allotted for minimum 40% usage of flyash (by volume of materials used), for 100% load bearing and no-load

www.ijarsct.co.in
IJARSCT

bearing walls. Health and safety of worker is equally important as of occupant which is not considered in the BREEAM,
LEED and green star. But in the GRIHA, 2 points are allotted for at least, minimum level of sanitation/safety facilities
for construction workers (mandatory criteria).the BREEAM rating system assigns 12% weightage for project
management aspect whereas 18 points are given in green star and 6% weightage is given in the GRIHA.
III. CONCLUSION
Green building is not a simple fusion of green design, techniques, and materials. It is a holistic solution to achieve the
concept of sustainable development in the project life cycle including project planning, designing, constructing, operating
and demolishing. In this paper different rating systems that are used in developing countries like India, China and
developed countries like the USA, UK, Germany are compared and it is observed that life cycle assessment is not included
in the Green Star and GBAS but in the BREEAM, it has been considered and 10 points are allotted for life cycle
assessment of green building. In the context of developing countries, economy is more important so it is necessary to
consider life cycle cost of green building which is not taken into account in the GRIHA, the GBAS, and the LEED. All
rating system however considers renewability. As timber is the most important material in building construction and
cutting of wood is harmful to environment, points should be given to wood that comes from a sustainable source and is
certified through any credible program. Forest certification is not considered in the GRIHA and the GBAS. The authors
believe that, similar to end-user safety and health, construction workers safety and health must be considered in green
building. Project management is important to achieve economy and reduce construction waste on site. In the BREEAM,
Green Star, Green Globe, and the GRIHA, project management aspect is considered. In India, topography and climate
changes from north to south and from east to west. For such varied conditions, a rating system should also consider
topographical and climatic factor.
REFERENCES
[1]. Alyami S. H. and Rezgui Y. (2012). “Sustainable Building Assessment Tool Development Approach”
Sustainable Cities and Society 5, 52–62.
[2]. Eco-Housing, (2009). “Eco-housing Assessment Criteria Version 2.” Published by International Institute for
Energy Conservation, Powai, Mumbai, India.
[3]. Greenomics, - Cost Efficiency of Green Buildings in India, (2008) Jones Lang LaSalle Meghraj.
[4]. GRIHA Manual Volume 1, (2010). Published by The Energy and Resources Institute Press, New Delhi, India.
[5]. IGBC Green New Buildings, (2014). “IGBC Green New Buildings Rating System Version 3.” Published by CII
Hyderabad, India.
[6]. Kevern, J. T. (2011). “Green Building and Sustainable Infrastructure: Sustainability Education for Civil
Engineers.” J. Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice,137, 107-112.
[7]. Kibert, C.J. (2013). “Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and delivery.” Third edition. Published
by John Wiley and Sons Inc, Hoboken, New Jersey
[8]. Kohler, N. (1999). The relevance of Green Building Challenge: an observer’s perspective. Building Research
and Information 27 (4/5), 309–320.
[9]. Mateus, R. and Braganca, L. (2011). “Sustainability Assessment and Rating of Buildings: Developing the
Methodology SB Tool PT-H” Building and Environment 46, 1962-1971.
[10]. McGraw-Hill Construction, (2006). Green building smart market report: Design and construction intelligence,
New York.
[11]. U.S. Green Building Council. (2003). “Building momentum: National trends and prospects for high
performance green buildings.” Rep. Prepared for the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, D.C.
[12]. Zimmerman, A., and Kibert, C. J. (2007). “Informing LEED’s next generation with The Natural Step.” Building
Research & Information, 35(6), 681–689.

www.ijarsct.co.in

Comparative Study of GRIHA, LEED, BREEAM Rating Systems For Green Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparative Study of GRIHA, LEED, BREEAM Rating Systems For Green Building

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparative Study of GRIHA, LEED, BREEAM Rating Systems For Green Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISSN (Online) 2581-9429

Volume 2, Issue 1, February 2022