Search

To fulfil the needs of the future, the Australian building sector seems to contemplate toward sustainable design. A Green Star Environmental Rating System is one of many green-building rating systems that has been employed throughout the world. For this rating system, the “Material” category occupies 14% of credit points, which could be achieved from eight major categories. To help engineers and designers have simple tools to process sustainable projects, this paper develops a computer-aided model to calculate life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for conventional and high-strength concrete to maximize Credit 19B.1: Life-cycle impacts—Concrete in the Green Star Design and As Built in Australia. The model has been built under Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic platforms; thus, it is flexible and appears to be one of the effective ways to provide concrete mixture design using its life-cycle GHG emissions. Options to maximize Credit 19B.1 have also been discussed for normal and high-strength concrete. The model demonstrates the relationship between the utilization of supplementary cementitious material, coarse and fine aggregates used in concrete, a water-to-cement ratio with concrete strength, as well as sustainable points to be achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Buildings could be led to adverse impacts on environment, such as generation of construction and demolition waste, and emission of greenhouse gases (GHG). Therefore, promotion on development of green buildings is in need. With the increasing awareness in sustainable development, various rating tools are promoted to evaluate the performance of green buildings. Nowadays, these tools function as a guideline for green building development. There are various green building rating tools developed worldwide, and various countries follow different rules, incentives and regulations. However, despite of promotion of green building rating tools, environmental issues from buildings are still significant in Australia. This research compared green building rating tools in Australia and other countries or regions around the world. This research found that rating tools in Australia lack of (1) mandatory criteria and (2) regulations and incentives. This paper recommended that governmental incentives should be promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]