Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/34047
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Building Services Engineering-
dc.creatorLee, WL-
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-30T06:31:00Z-
dc.date.available2015-03-30T06:31:00Z-
dc.identifier.issn0378-7788-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/34047-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.subjectBEAM Plusen_US
dc.subjectBREEAMen_US
dc.subjectCASBEEen_US
dc.subjectChinese ESGBen_US
dc.subjectEnergy use assessmenten_US
dc.subjectLEEDen_US
dc.titleBenchmarking energy use of building environmental assessment schemesen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage326-
dc.identifier.epage334-
dc.identifier.volume45-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.11.024-
dcterms.abstractBREEAM, LEED, CASBEE, BEAM Plus and Chinese ESGB have been formally launched at different stages in the last twenty years. How well the certified and rated buildings compare with each other is always an interest of building designers and policy-makers. This paper presents a side-by-side comparison of energy use assessments of the five schemes. The comparisons are on the assessment method and criteria, default parameters, trade-offs allowed, performance scales, approved simulation tools, performance indicators and assessment results. Comparison results showed that all the five schemes are based on relative performance. It was also found that despite the variations in default parameters among the five schemes, market positions of certified buildings are comparable. LEED was found to be the most stringent and relatively less flexible in its assessment criteria. Nonetheless, the energy cost budget approach, adopted only by LEED, is able to fulfil emission reduction and cost saving objectives on the condition that a "fuel neutral" approach should be adopted.-
dcterms.bibliographicCitationEnergy and Buildings, 2012, v. 45, p. 326-334-
dcterms.isPartOfEnergy and buildings-
dcterms.issued2012-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000300860200038-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84855224053-
dc.identifier.eissn1872-6178-
dc.identifier.rosgroupidr57279-
dc.description.ros2011-2012 > Academic research: refereed > Publication in refereed journal-
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

59
Last Week
1
Last month
0
Citations as of Sep 6, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

51
Last Week
1
Last month
2
Citations as of Oct 28, 2020

Page view(s)

163
Last Week
3
Last month
Citations as of Oct 26, 2020

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.