Author: Admin
Track2Training for students. Learn more on https://track2training.com
What is Building Performance and Simulation
When used appropriately, building performance simulation has the potential to reduce the environmental impact of the built environment, to improve indoor quality and productivity, as well as to facilitate future innovation and technological progress in construction. Since publication of the first edition of Building Performance Simulation for Design and Operation, the discussion has shifted from a focus on software features to a new agenda, which centres on the effectiveness of building performance simulation in building life cycle processes.
A new round of simulation tools puts the power of building-performance analysis—long the domain of engineers and energy consultants—into the hands of architects.
Predicting a building’s post-occupancy performance early in the design process gives teams the greatest opportunities to optimize a project and understand which decisions will have a significant impact on carbon footprint. Generally speaking, tools that provide real-time feedback and order-of-magnitude comparisons are best suited for the conceptual and schematic design phases, given the rate of design changes. In later phases of the design process, accuracy takes precedence over immediacy as a building becomes more defined.
In the past, designers seeking performance-analysis software had to sacrifice accuracy for ease of use. High-end simulation engines, such as DOE-2.2 and EnergyPlus, required a lot of detailed information and time to compute—two things that are in short supply in the early design phases. Recognizing these constraints, several software companies have developed tools and plug-ins that integrate almost seamlessly into existing BIM software and facilitate early-and-often checks on building performance. Below are five such products to consider for your next project.
Vabi Software provides a suite of apps for calculating and visualizing a project’s environmental, financial, and programmatic performance. The Thermal Comfort Optimizer calculates ideal heating and cooling set points for each room in a building, while the Daylight Ratio Evaluator calculates the amount of daylight a space is receiving and highlights rooms that do not meet requirements. The Energy Assessor, which is forthcoming, estimates the project’s monthly and yearly energy use and costs.
Results from all of the developer’s apps are summarized on a single interface, Vabi’s building performance dashboard, which tallies an overall score based on each criteria for a project. While Vabi Apps do not provide as much detail as some of the other products listed here, their affordability and ease of use are a plus.
Green Building Studio (GBS) is available as a standalone cloud-based service or as part of Revit’s add-on Energy Analysis tools. Using the DOE-2.2 analysis engine, this service provides a very detailed analysis and, as a cloud service, runs quickly on Autodesk’s servers.
Ordinarily, the DOE-2.2 engine requires a thorough description of a building’s envelope and mechanical systems. However, GBS makes assumptions for many of these parameters using ASHRAE standards, allowing architects to focus on the design areas that have the most significance on the building’s overall energy footprint without getting bogged down in technical details. In addition to calculating energy consumption, electricity use, and annual carbon emissions, GBS also estimates the building’s Energy Star score, points for glazing factor and water credits for the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating system, and solar energy potential.
One downside to the cloud-based approach is that the analysis is provided in a report format rather than interactively in the model itself. However, the GBS report viewer does allow for side-by-side comparisons of simulation results.
What is Energy Conservation Building Code ECBC
What is Energy Conservation Building Code ECBC
What is Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC)
The Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) set minimum energy performance standards for commercial buildings. Under section 14 (p) of the Energy Conservation Act, 2001, Central Government has powers to prescribe ECBC for non-residential buildings, having connected load of 100 KW and above or a contract demand of 120 KVA and above or recommended built-up area of 1000 sqm and above. or building complex for efficient use of energy and its conservation. The state governments have the flexibility to modify ECBC to suit local or regional needs. Energy performance standards for the following building systems will be included in the ECBC:
- Building Envelope
- Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning
- Lighting
- Service Water Heating
- Electric Power and Distribution
The salient features of the ECBC for the Composite Climate Zone are as under:
1. Building Envelope:
| Heat/Moisture Losses | Walls | Roof | Window |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minimize Conduction Losses | Use insulation with low U-value | Use insulation with low U-value | Use material with low U-factor |
| Minimize Convection Losses & Moisture Penetration | Reduce air leakage & use vapor barrier | Reduce air leakage & use vapor Barrier | Use prefabricated windows and seal the joints between windows and walls. |
| Climate Zone | Hospitals, Hotels, Call Centres, (24-hours) | Other Building types (Daytime) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum U-factor of the overall assembly (W/sq.m-0 C) | Minimum R-value of insulation alone (W/sq.m-0 C) | Maximum U-factor of the overall assembly (W/sq.m-0 C) | Minimum R-value of insulation alone (W/sq.m-0 C) | |
| Composite | U-0.261 | R-3.5 | U-0.409 | R-2.1 |
| Climate Zone | Hospitals, Hotels, Call Centres, (24-hours) | Other Building types (Daytime) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum U-factor of the overall assembly (W/sq.m-0 C) | Minimum R-value of insulation alone (W/sq.m-0 C) | Maximum U-factor of the overall assembly (W/sq.m-0 C) | Minimum R-value of insulation alone (W/sq.m-0 C) | |
| Composite | U-0.440 | R-2.10 | U-0.440 | R-2.10 |
| Climate | Maximum U-factor | Maximum SHGC WWR < 40% | Maximum SHGC 40% < WWR <60% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Composite | 3.3 | ||
| Composite | 3.3 | ||
| Minimum Visible Light Transmittance | |||
| Window –Wall-Ratio | |||
| <30% | |||
| 31%-40% | |||
| 41%-50% | |||
| 51%-60% |
| Clear Glass | Tinted Glass | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frame Type | Glazing Type | U- Factor(W/m2-0C) | SHGC | VLT | U-Factor | SHGC | VLT |
| All frame types | Single Glazing | 7.1 | 0.82 | 0.76 | 7.1 | 0.70 | 0.58 |
| Wood, vinyl, of fiberglass frame | Double Glazing | 3.3 | 0.59 | 0.64 | 3.4 | 0.42 | 0.39 |
| Metel and other frame type | Double Glazing | 5.1 | 0.68 | 0.66 | 5.1 | 0.50 | 0.40 |
| Daytime Occupancy | 24- Hour Occupancy | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U – Factor | SHGC | U – Factor | SHGC | |
| Mass Walls | 6.01 | – | 13.85 | – |
| Curtain Walls, Other | 15.72 | – | 20.48 | – |
| Roofs | 11.93 | – | 24.67 | – |
| North Windows | -1.75 | 40.65 | -4.56 | 58.15 |
| Non-North Windows | -1.25 | 54.51 | 0.68 | 86.57 |
| Skylights | -96.35 | 311.71 | -294.66 | 918.77 |
| Thermal Requirements | Physical Manifestation |
|---|---|
| Reduce Heat Gain in Summer and Reduce Heat Loss in Winter | |
| Decrease exposed surface area | Orientation and shape of building. Use of trees as wind barriers |
| Increase thermal resistance | Roof insulation and wall insulation |
| Increase thermal capacity (Time lag) | Thicker walls |
| Increase buffer spaces | Air locks/Balconies |
| Decrease air exchange rate | Weather stripping |
| Increase shading | Walls, glass surfaces protected by overhangs, fins and trees |
| Increase surface reflectivity | Pale color, glazed china mosaic tiles, etc. |
| Reduce solar heat gain | Use glazing with lower SHGC and provide shading for windows. Minimize glazing in East and West |
| Promote Heat Loss in Summer/Monsoon | |
| Increase air exchange rate ( Ventilation) | Courtyards/wind towers/ arrangement of openings |
| Increase humidity levels in dry summer | Trees and water ponds for evaporative cooling |
| Decrease humidity in monsoon | Dehumidifiers/ desiccant cooling |
Source:- Nayak and Prajapati (2206), Handbook on Energy Conscious Buildings.
2. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC):
| Equipment Class | Minimum COP | Minimum IPLV | Test Standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Air Cooled Chiller <530KW (<150 tons) | 2.90 | 3.16 | ARI 550/590-1998 |
| Air Cooled Chiller>=530KW(>=150 tons) | 3.05 | 3.32 | ARI 550/590-1998 |
| Centrifugal Water Cooled Chiller <530KW(<150 tons) | 5.80 | 6.09 | ARI 550/590-1998 |
| Centrifugal Water Cooled Chiller >=530KW and =150 tons and <300 tons) | 5.80 | 6.17 | |
| Centrifugal Water Cooled Chiller >=1050KW(>=300 tons) | 6.30 | 6.61 | ARI 550/590-1998 |
| Reciprocating Compressor, Water Cooled Chiller all sizes | 4.20 | 5.05 | |
| Rotary Screw and Scroll Compressor, Water Cooled Chiller <530KW(<150 tons) | 4.70 | 5.49 | ARI550/590-1998 |
| Rotary Screw and Scroll Compressor, Water Cooled Chiller>=530 and =150 and <300 tons) | 5.40 | 6.17 | |
| R Rotary Screw and Scroll Compressor, Water Cooled Chiller>=1050KW(>=300 tons) | 5.75 | 6.43 | ARI 550/590-1998 |
ii) Unitary Air
| Equipment Class | Minimum COP | Minimum IPLV | Test Standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unitary Air Cooled Air Conditioner >=19 and =5.4 and <11 tons) | 3.08 | ARI 210/240 | |
| Unitary Air Cooled Air Conditioner >=40 to =11 to <20 tons) | 3.08 | ARI 340/360 | |
| Unitary Air Cooled Air Conditioner >=70KW(>=20 tons) | 2.93 | 2.99 | ARI 340/360 |
| Unitary Water Cooled Air Conditioner<19KW(<5.4 tons) | 4.10 | ARI 210/240 | |
| Unitary Water Cooled Air Conditioner>=19 and =5.4 and <11 tons) | 4.10 | +++ | ARI 210/240 |
| Unitary Water Cooled Air Conditioner>==11 tons) | 3.22 | 3.02 | ARI 210/240 |
3. Lighting:
| Building Area Type | LPD (W/sq.m) | Building Area Type | LPD (W/sq.m) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Automotive facility | 9.7 | Multifamily | 7.5 |
| Convention Center | 12.9 | Museum | 11.8 |
| Court House | 12.9 | Office | 10.8 |
| Dining: Bar Lounge/Leisure | 14.0 | Parking Garage | 3.2 |
| Dinging: Cafeteria/Fast Food | 15.1 | Performing Arts Theater | 17.2 |
| Space Function | LPD (W/sq.m) | Space Function | LPD (W/sq.m) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lobby | 14.0 | Hospital | |
| For Hotel | 11.8 | Emergency | 29.1 |
| For Performing Arts Theater | 35.5 | Recovery | 8.6 |
| For Motion Picture Theater | 11.8 | Nurse Station | 10.8 |
| Exterior Lighting Applications | Power Limits |
|---|---|
| Building entrance (with canopy) | 13 W/m2 (1.3 W / ft2) of canopied are |
| Building entrance (without canopy) | 90 W/lin m (30 W/lin f) of door width |
| Building exit | 60 W/lin m (20 W/lin f) of door width |
| Building facades | 2 W/m2 (0.2 W/ ft2) of vertical facade area |
| Space Function LPD (W/m2) | Space Function LPD (W/m2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Office-enclosed | 11.8 | For Reading Area | 12.9 |
| Office- open plan | 11.8 | Hospital | |
| Conference/Meeting/Multipurpose | 14.0 | For Emergency | 29.1 |
| Classroom/Lecture Training | 15.1 | For Recovery | 8.6 |
| Lobby | 14.0 | For Nurse Station | 10.8 |
| For Hotel | 11.8 | For Exam Treatment | 16.1 |
| For Performing Arts Theater | 35.5 | For Pharmacy | 12.9 |
| For Motion Picture Theater | 11.8 | For patient Room | 7.5 |
| Audience/Seating Area* | 9.7 | For Operating Room | 23.7 |
| For Gymnasium | 4.3 | For Nursery | 6.5 |
| For Convention Center | 7.5 | For Medical | 23.7 |
| Audience/Seating Area* | 9.7 | For Operating Room | 15.1 |
| Atrium –first three floors | 6.5 | For Low Bay (<8m celling) | 12.9 |
| Atrium-each additional floor | 2.2 | For High Bay (>8m ceiling) | 18.3 |
| Lounge/Recreation* | 12.9 | For Detailed Manufacturing | 22.6 |
| For Hospital | 8.6 | For Equipment Room | 12.9 |
| Dining Area* | 9.7 | For Control Room | 5.4 |
| For Hotel | 14.0 | Hotel/Motel Guest Rooms | 11.8 |
| For Motel | 12.9 | Dormitory- Living Quarters | 11.8 |
| For Bar Lounge/Leisure Dining | 15.1 | Museum | |
| For Family Dining | 22.6 | For General Exhibition | 10.8 |
| Food Preparation | 12.9 | For Restoration | 18.3 |
| Laboratory | 15.1 | Bank office- Banking Activity Area | 16.1 |
| Restrooms | 9.7 | Retail | |
| Dressing/Locker/Fitting Room | 6.5 | For Sales Area | 18.3 |
| Corridor/Transition* | 5.4 | For Mall Concourse | 18.3 |
| For Hospital | 10.8 | Sports Arena | |
| For Manufacturing Facility | 5.4 | For Ring Sports Area | 29.1 |
| Stairs-active | 6.5 | For Court Sports Area | 24.8 |
| Active Storage* | 8.6 | For Indoor Field Area | 15.1 |
| For Hospital | 9.7 | Warehouse | |
| Inactive Storage* | 3.2 | For Fine Material Storage | 15.1 |
| For Museum | 8.6 | For Medium /Bulky Material Storage | 9.7 |
| Electrical /Mechanical Facility | 16.1 | Parking Garage- Garage Area | 2.2 |
| Workshop | 20.5 | Transportation | |
| Convention Center- Exhibit Space | 14.0 | For Airport- Concourse | 6.5 |
| Library | For Air/Train/Bus- Baggage Area | 10.8 | |
| For Card File & Cataloging | 11.8 | For Ticket Counter Terminal | 16.1 |
| For Stacks | 18.3 |
4. Service Water Heating:
Mandatory Requirements
a) Solar water heater or heat recovery for at least 20% of the design capacity
Minimum efficiency for service water heating equipment
Piping insulation
What is Green Building
What is Green Building
Green building refers to both a structure and the application of processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building’s life-cycle: from planning to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and demolition.
What is Green Building
What is Green Building
What is green building? A green’ building is a building that, in its design, construction or operation, reduces or eliminates negative impacts, and can create positive impacts, on our climate and natural environment. Green buildings preserve precious natural resources and improve our quality of life. There are a number of features which can make a building green’. These include: Efficient use of energy, water and other resources Use of renewable energy, such as solar energy Pollution and waste reduction measures, and the enabling of re use and recycling Good indoor environmental air quality Use of materials that are non toxic, ethical and sustainable Consideration of the environment in design, construction and operation Consideration of the quality of life of occupants in design, construction and operation A design that enables adaptation to a changing environment Any building can be a green building, whether it’s a home, an office, a school, a hospital, a community centre, or any other type of structure, provided it includes features listed above. However, it is worth noting that not all green buildings are and need to be the same.
Different countries and regions have a variety of characteristics such as distinctive climatic conditions, unique cultures and traditions, diverse building types and ages, or wide ranging environmental, economic and social priorities all of which shape their approach to green building. Green buildings could become one of the main factors to preserve our rapidly decaying environment. There is no easy way to define a green building, but a green building is essentially a structure that amplifies the positives and mitigates the negatives throughout the entire life cycle of the building Kriss, 2014 . There are many definitions for a green building, but all of them include the planning, designing, constructing, and operating of the building while taking into huge considerations of the energy use, water use, indoor air environment, materials used and the effect it has on the site the green building is being built on. The first green buildings dates back to as far as the 1970’s, when solar panels went from experiments to reality. Green buildings were not as popular as they are today due to their extremely high pricing. With technology rapidly growing, solar panels are becoming cheaper and cheaper, making the transition to creating green buildings more affordable. This is the primary reason for the increased growth of green buildings today. A modern company that is paving the way to the growth of green buildings named LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, focuses primarily on new and effective ideas for environmentally friendly buildings projects.
With more than 60,000 commercial projects worldwide and 1. 7 million square feet being certified every day, LEED is one of the leading groups for promoting green buildings. Buildings require air, water, energy and space for its occupants. These are provided by systems in place like the ventilation system, the water supply system and the electricity supply system. The materials which are used in the construction of the building also produce environmental impact like carbon footprint, pollution through wastes and slurry, and the consumption of water and power. Buildings are one of the major sources of pollution that cause air pollution and are responsible for climate change. The objective of green building concept is to develop buildings which use the natural resources to the minimal at the time of construction as well as operation. Green buildings emphasize on the resource usage efficiency and also press upon the three R’s Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. The technique of green building maximizes the use of efficient construction materials and practices boosts the use of natural sources and sinks in the building’s surroundings minimizes the energy usage to run itself uses highly proficient equipment for the indoor area uses highly proficient methods for water and waste management. The indoor equipment includes lighting, air conditioning and all other needed equipment. Green Building is a team effort and the designing and construction include consultants from architecture and landscaping, air conditioning, plumbing, energy and electrical areas. These consultants have to assess the impact of the each and every design on the environment, keeping in mind the cost involved. The final design needs to be feasible and should minimize the negative impacts that the building would have on the environment. Implementation of the green building concept can lead to a reduction of carbon emission by thirty five percent, water usage by forty percent, solid waste reduction by seventy percent and reduction in energy consumption by fifty percent. Green Building concept also emphasizes on the fact that an area with high biodiversity should be avoided as a site for the construction of a building. To ensure minimum negative impact on the environment by the construction and operation of a building, the factors which are to be kept in mind are to preserve the external environment to the building location to improve the internal area for the residents of the building and also preserve the areas which are not close to the building. Saving Energy Energy saving through green building concept occurs in two ways.
First is reduction in the amount of energy that is consumed in lighting, air conditioning and other building operations. Second is the usage of energy sources which do not produce any greenhouse gases and are renewable in nature. Green Buildings emphasize more on natural lighting and concepts of temperature control and efficient design to further reduce the carbon footprint as well as reduce cost of operation. Saving water Green Buildings use various methods to reduce water usage, treat and reuse waste water and filter water from sourced from precipitation. The target is to be able to achieve zero water table negative impact from the green building. Reducing Waste Waste reduction is one of the most important issues that are to be dealt with. In the US alone, the waste from construction and demolition of buildings accounts for sixty percent of the total non industrial waste. Green Building concept emphasizes on improving the design of the product, re using and recycling materials. It results in tremendous waste reduction and also helps to reduce the environmental impact of the building. Improving Health and Productivity Hygiene and proper conditions inside the building also help in boosting human productivity. Hence various businesses concentrate on this aspect. Green Building concept provides for cleanliness and sound working conditions for employees and other inhabitants. Green Building concept in USA: Green building markets in the United States of America USA , account for five to ten percent of the total building market. The largest organisation for green building in USA is the US Green Building Council USGBC . It has over twelve thousand member organizations and is around a financial worth of over twelve billion dollars. Some of the rating systems that have been developed for green building concept are: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LEED , Green Globes, Building Owners and Managers Association BOMA , National Association of Home Builders NAHB , International Codes Council and American National Standards Institute.
In USA, the existing buildings are accounting for forty percent of total energy consumption, twelve percent of total water usage, sixty eight percent of electricity usage, thirty eight percent of carbon dioxide emission and sixty percent of non industrial waste generation. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LEED Rating System: LEED rating system was developed in USA by the US Green Building Council in the year 1998. It provides a set of standards for environmentally sustainable construction of building using a market based rating system. This rating system is being followed in the US and many other countries for the evaluation of sustainable building. LEED can be defined for new constructions, existing buildings, commercial buildings and schools. Buildings which have been recognized to be eligible for LEED are offices, retail establishments, institutional buildings and service establishments. LEED rating system provides a variety of benefits and cost savings. The benefits include reducing the operating costs, reducing resource utilizations in terms of water and electricity, reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. The other cost savings includes the tax rebates and zone allowances
What is Solar Architecture
What is Solar Architecture
What is Solar Achitecture
Solar architecture is an architectural approach that takes in account the Sun to harness clean and renewable solar power. It is related to the fields of optics, thermics, electronics and materials science. Both active and passive solar housing skills are involved in solar architecture. The use of flexible thin-film photovoltaic modules provides fluid integration with steel roofing profiles, enhancing the building’s design. Orienting a building to the Sun, selecting materials with favorable thermal mass or light dispersing properties, and designing spaces that naturally circulate air also constitute solar architecture. Initial development of solar architecture has been limited by the rigidity and weight of standard solar power panels. The continued development of photovoltaic (PV) thin film solar has provided a lightweight yet robust vehicle to harness solar energy to reduce a building’s impact on the environment.
In the past, we’ve seen solar panels as a necessary evil. They used to be clunky, awkward objects placed haphazardly around a building. Solar panels have evolved in their design and so to has their presence in the world of architecture and design. The major development in solar panels is that they no longer need to be perfectly flat. This has opened up a world of opportunities in their use in more abstract architectural projects. They have their limits, however. It’s hard for solar panels to soak up as much sunlight on an angle.
Architects have managed to take solar panels leaps and bounds. Panels have been incorporated into roofing without simply being placed in rows along a roof. Clients who choose to focus on solar energy can work with architects to designate flat, unused spaces throughout a property to place solar panels without drawing too much attention. More creatively, solar panels have been incorporated into awnings. They have also been incorporated into the landscaping of properties, dividing gardens and filling in empty spaces in the surrounding environment.
The effectiveness of solar architecture is largely determined by the creativity of the architect and the flexibility of the client. A clever architect will be able to incorporate solar panels into the design of a building without making them look bulky and awkward. The more a client is willing to be flexible with the amount of solar energy generated, the more subtly the panels can be incorporated into the design.Solar panels have been widely available for purchase since the 1980s but have yet to be widely adopted in residential housing.
Some barriers to the widespread adoption of solar panels include worries about the cost of the panels, the impact on jobs, and their appearance.
“Economics is the biggest barrier, and aesthetics are the second,” Gardzelewski says. He says these two things stand in the way of solar becoming the standard for architecture design, rather than a risky and costly add-on.
The economic aspect of solar panels is multifaceted. First, there’s cost and risk perception, and then there’s the larger impact on the economy, such as the creation of green-collar jobs. Some people think that their home’s resale value is at risk when they install solar. One appraiser Gardzelewski spoke to said: “I won’t give a house with solar panels any more value in an appraisal. The appraisal will be the same with or without them.” Because the appraisal industry itself is ambivalent about assigning value to solar panels, many homeowners fear that installing them could actually decrease the value of their home—despite potential savings for buyers on future energy bills.
The initial cost of installing solar panels is notoriously exorbitant. Gardzelewski insists that the actual price of the panels has decreased tremendously, so there is no reason that solar-panel installation costs should remain so high. “Solar-panel installers will give you a quote to put solar panels on your home, and they will tell you it costs a lot more than it should cost or what it needs to cost,” he says. “The panels themselves have come down to where they’re just a fraction of the overall expense.”
One reason solar installation remains such a high-ticket item is that builders haven’t wholeheartedly adopted it. “Once solar integrates into the home-building industry, the price of labor will go down because the contractor is going to manage that pretty tightly,” Gardzelewski says. “If you manage the cost and the labor of solar-panel installation, there’s no room for the price to get jacked way up.”
In coal-industry-driven states, there is also some fear that the rise of solar energy will hurt the economy and take away jobs. But Gardzelewski disagrees. He believes that the long-standing blue-collar jobs of the coal industry could become the long-standing green-collar jobs of the solar industry.
BERG’s 5-Strategy Taxonomy for Solar Architecture
1. Legibility
This refers to revealing and celebrating the building systems to see how they work. This is an industrial look with the “guts” of the building exposed. In this paradigm, seeing the inner workings, wiring, structure, and connection of the solar panels fits in with the overall industrial design.
An energy-systems plan (including a radiant-floor heating system, insulation, seasonal shade structures, a ground-source heat pump, and design-integrated solar) for the Fox House in Pavilion, WY. Courtesy of UW-BERG.
An energy-systems plan (including a radiant-floor heating system, insulation, seasonal shade structures, a ground-source heat pump, and design-integrated solar) for the Fox House in Pavilion, WY. Courtesy of UW-BERG.2. Material Planes
Gerrit Rietveld’s Schroder House and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion are two examples of buildings focused on planar composition. In the case of the Barcelona Pavilion, Mies used planar composition to celebrate the richness of materials such as glass, marble, onyx, and travertine. With this strategy, the material aspect of a solar panel is celebrated, too. “We really love looking at the crystals and the wiring and all the intricacies of a solar panel,” Gardzelewski says.
3. Form Follows
From the principle “form follows function,” this concept means designing a building that adapts its shape to the path of the sun. This strategy is obvious when a design is altered to provide optimal orientation for a large number of solar panels, often with a stretched-out or swooping form on the south roof. “A solar panel is a huge module of 3 1/2 feet by 5 1/2 feet, and this can seriously influence the size of your roof,” Gardzelewski says. Designing a roof to fit this module can make the actual solar installation not only easier and more effective but also much better looking.
4. Shading Through Solar Architecture
Solar panels can provide shade for the building itself or the adjacent outdoor space; this method is a good solution for a difficult existing roof. “If you build an exterior structure and you can pull out an enclosed porch—a space that you’re not trying to fit onto the existing roof—you can use it to shade a small space outside,” he says. “You can add solar panels to this new area, and it won’t have to blend into the rest of the roof, because it is a completely separate thing.”
A 3D model of the Fox House in Pavillion, WY. Courtesy of UW-BERG.
A 3D model of the Fox House in Pavillion, WY. Courtesy of UW-BERG.5. Disguised Solar-Panel Design
In this approach, the solar panels are hidden through either compositional strategy or design innovation. This strategy is best used in conjunction with “form follows,” as architecture designed around the size and shape of a solar panel is best suited to disguise the panel (like these solar rooftops from Tesla). “If you can fit them perfectly onto your roof, then you can float or frame the solar panels so you don’t see all of the infrastructure under it—you just see the reflective glass,” Gardzelewski says.
Getting the economic equation for solar panels to work for average middle- and working-class families may take some time. But incorporating BERG’s architectural taxonomy, which integrates solar panels in the design phase, is something architects can do now. Even if a client isn’t going to install solar right away, the taxonomy can help home and building owners incorporate solar panels more aesthetically down the road. And by considering solar as an early constraint that influences building design, architects may be able to usher in an era when solar is finally ubiquitous.
Solar architecture
The term solar architecture refers to an approach to building design that is sensitive to Nature and takes advantage of climatic conditions to achieve human comfort rather than depending on artificial energy that is both costly and environmentally damaging. Unlike the conventional design approach that treats climate as the enemy which has to be kept out of the built environment, solar architecture endeavours to build as part of the environment using climatic factors to our advantage and utilising the energy of Nature itself to attain required comfort levels. Nature’s energies can be utilised in two ways – passiveand active and consequently solar architecture is classified as passive solar and active solar architecture.
Passive solar architecture
It relies upon the design or architecture of the building itself to ensure climate control by way of natural thermal conduction, convection and radiation. The rudiments of solar passive design were developed and used through the centuries by many civilisations across the globe; in fact, many of these early civilisations built dwellings that were better suited to their climatic surroundings than those built today in most developed and developing countries. This has been largely due to the advent of cheap fossil fuels that allowed for artificial temperature and light control at the cost of natural light and cooling. A substantial share of world energy resources is therefore being spent in heating, cooling and lighting of such buildings. The use of solar passive measures such as natural cross ventilation, sufficient day-lighting, proper insulation, use of adequate shading devices coupled with auxiliary energy systems that are renewable and environment friendly can considerably bring down the costs as well as the energy needs of the building.
Passive solar systems
The term passive solar refers to systems that absorb, store and distribute the sun’s energy without relying on mechanical devices like pumps and fans, which require additional energy. Passive solar design reduces the energy requirements of the building by meeting either part or all of its daily cooling, heating and lighting needs through the use of solar energy.
Passive heating
Heating the building through the use of solar energy involves the absorption and storage of incoming solar radiation, which is then used to meet the heating requirements of the space. Incoming solar radiation is typically stored in thermal mass such as concrete, brick, rock, water or a material that changes phase according to temperature. Incoming sunlight is regulated by the use of overhangs, awnings and shades while insulating materials can help to reduce heat loss during the night or in the cold season. Vents and dampers are typically used to distribute warm or cool air from the system to the areas where it is needed. The three most common solar passive systems are direct gain, indirect gain and isolated gain. A direct gain system allows sunlight to windows into on occupied space where it is absorbed by the floor and walls. In the indirect gain system, a medium of heat storage such as wall, in one part of the building absorbs and stores heat, which is then transferred to the rest of the building by conduction, convection or radiation. In an isolated gain system, solar energy is absorbed in a separate area such as greenhouse or solarium, and distributed to the living space by ducts. The incorporation of insulation in passive systems can be effective in conserving additional energy.
Passive cooling
Passive solar technology can also be used for cooling purposes. These systems function by either shielding buildings from direct heat gain or by transferring excess heat outside. Carefully designed elements such as overhangs, awnings and eaves shade from high angle summer sun while allowing winter sun to enter the building. Excess heat transfer can be achieved through ventilation or conduction, where heat is lost to the floor and walls. A radiant heat barrier, such as aluminium foil, installed under a roof is able to block upto 95% of radiant heat transfer through the roof.
Water evaporation is also an effective method of cooling buildings, since water absorbs a large quantity of heat as it evaporates. Fountains, sprays and ponds provide substantial cooling to the surrounding areas. The use of sprinkler systems to continually wet the roof during the hot season can reduce the cooling requirements by 25%. Trees can induce cooling by transpiration, reducing the surrounding temperature by 4 to 14 degrees F.
Active cooling systems of solar cooling such as evaporative cooling through roof spray and roof pond and desiccant cooling systems have been developed alongwith experimental stratergies like earth-cooling tubes and earth-sheltered buildings. Desiccant cooling systems are designed to dehumidify and cool air. These are particularly suited to hot humid climates where air-conditioning accounts for a major portion of the energy costs. Desiccant materials such as silica gels and certain salt compounds naturally absorb moisture from humid air and release the moisture when heated, a feature that makes them re-useable. In a solar desiccant system, the sun provides the energy to recharge the desiccants. Once the air has been dehumidified, it can be chilled by evaporative cooling or other methods to provide relatively cool, dry air. This can greatly reduce cooling requirements
Evaporative cooling
Evaporation occurs whenever the vapour pressure of water is lesser than the water vapour in the surrounding atmosphere. The phase change of water from liquid to the vapour state is accompanied by the release of a large quantity of sensible heat from the air that lowers the temperature of air while its moisture content increases. The provision of shading and the supply of cool, dry air will enhance the process of evaporative cooling. Evaporative cooling techniques can be broadly classified as passive and hybrid.
Passive direct systems include the use of vegetation for evapotranspiration, as well as the use of fountains, pools and ponds where the evaporation of water results in lower temperature in the room. An important technique known as ‘Volume cooler’ is used in traditional architecture. The system is based on the use of a tower where water contained in a jar or spray is precipitated. External air introduced into the tower is cooled by evaporation and then transferred into the building. A contemporary version of this technique uses a wet cellulose pad installed at the top of a downdraft tower, which cools the incoming air.
Passive indirect evaporative cooling techniques include roof spray and roof pond systems.
Roof spray
The exterior surface of the roof is kept wet using sprayers. The sensible heat of the roof surface is converted into latent heat of vaporisation as the water evaporates. This cools the roof surface and a temperature gradient is created between the inside and outside surfaces causing cooling of the building. A reduction in cooling load of about 25% has been observed. A threshold condition for the system is that the temperature of the roof should be greater than that of air.
There are, however, a number of problems associated with this system, not least of which is the adequate availability of water. Also it might not be cost effective, as a result of high maintenance costs and also problems due to inadequate water proofing of the roof.
Roof pond
The roof pond consists of a shaded water pond over an non-insulated concrete roof. Evaporation of water to the dry atmosphere occurs during day and nighttime. The temperature within the space falls as the ceiling acts as a radiant cooling panel for the space, without increasing indoor humidity levels. The limitation of this technique is that it is confined only to single storey structure with flat, concrete roof and also the capital cost is quite high.
Earth cooling tubes
These are long pipes buried underground with one end connected to the house and the other end to the outside. Hot exterior air is drawn through these pipes where tit gives up some of its heat to the soil, which is at a much lower temperature at a depth of 3m to 4m below the surface. This cool air is then introduced into the house.
Special problems associated with these systems are possible condensation of water within the pipes or evaporation of accumulated water and control of the system. The lack of detailed data about the performance of such systems hinders the large-scale use of such systems.
Earth-sheltered buildings
During the summer, soil temperatures at certain depths are considerably lower than ambient air temperature, thus providing an important source for dissipation of a building’s excess heat. Conduction or convection can achieve heat dissipation to the ground. Earth sheltering achieves cooling by conduction where part of the building envelope is in direct contact with the soil. Totally underground buildings offer many additional advantages including protection from noise, dust, radiation and storms, limited air infiltration and potentially safety from fires. They provide benefits under both cooling and heating conditions, however the potential for large scale application of the technology are limited; high cost and poor day-lighting conditions being frequent problems.
On the other hand, building in partial contact with earth offer interesting cooling possibilities. Sod roofs can considerably reduce heat gain from the roof. Earth berming can considerably reduce solar heat gain and also increase heat loss to the surrounding soil, resulting in increase in comfort.
Active solar architecture
It involves the use of solar collectors and other renewable energy systems like biomass to support the solar passive features as they allow a greater degree of control over the internal climate and make the whole system more precise. Active solar systems use solar panels for heat collection and electrically driven pumps or fans to transport the heat or cold to the required spaces. Electronic devices are used to regulate the collection, storage and distribution of heat within the system. Hybrid systems using a balanced combination of active and passive features provide the best performance.
Active solar systems
Active heating
In active systems, solar collectors are used to convert sun’s energy into useful heat for hot water, space heating or industrial processes. Flat-plate collectors are typically used for this purpose. These most often use light-absorbing plates made of dark coloured material such as metal, rubber or plastic that are covered with glass. The plates transfer the heat to a fluid, usually air or water flowing below them and the fluid is used for immediate heating or stored for later use. There are two basic types of liquid based active systems- open loop and closed loop. An open loop system circulates potable water itself, through the collector. In closed loop systems, the circulating fluid is kept separate from the system used for potable water supply. This system is mainly used to prevent the freezing of water within the collector system. However, there is no need to go in for such a system in India, as freezing of water is not a possibility. Also closed loop systems are less efficient as the heat exchanger used in the system causes a loss of upto 10 degrees in the temperature of water, at the same time, one has to reckon with the extra cost of the heat exchanger as well as the circulating pumps. Compared to these, thermosiphon systems are more convenient and simple.
In Thermosiphon systems, the water circulates from the collector to the storage tank by natural convection and gravity. As long as the absorber keeps collecting heat, water keeps being heated in the collector and rises into the storage tank, placed slightly above (at least 50 cm). The cold water in the tank runs into the collector to replace the water discharged into the tank. The circulation stops when there is no incident radiation. Thermosyphon systems are simple, relatively inexpensive and require little maintenance and can be used for domestic applications.
Solar ponds have been developed ,which harness the sun’s energy that can be used for various purposes including production of electricity.
Other devices such as solar cookers, water distillation systems, solar dryers, etc. have been developed which can be used to reduce energy requirements in domestic households and in industrial applications.
Active cooling
Absorption cooling systems transfer a heated liquid from the solar collector to run a generator or a boiler activating the refrigeration loop which cools a storage reservoir from which cool air is drawn into the space. Rankine steam turbine can also be powered by solar energy to run a compressed air-conditioner or water cooler.
Solar refrigeration is independent of electric supply and without any moving parts, for example, Zeolite refrigerator.
What is Climate Responsive Architecture
What is Climate Responsive Architecture
The climate responsive design refers to the architecture that reflects the particular region-specific weather conditions of the peculiar area. It uses data of weather patterns and factors like sun, wind, rainfall, and humidity. The building structure is built according to the same.
In a given region, Climate is the predominant weather. Just as flora and fauna adapt to their surroundings and create sustaining ecosystems, architects should design buildings that respond to the climate and are living rather than consuming. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges faced by human society in the 21st century. To tackle climate change, carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced by changing the way buildings are designed, constructed, managed, and used. The climate-responsive architecture aims to design the optimized building according to specific characteristics of that particular site, to minimize extreme energy use and have a reduced impact on the natural environment.
Climate-responsive architecture functions in lockstep with the local climate(temperature, historical weather patterns, etc.), the direction of the sun (sun path and solar position), site-specific environmental conditions (such as wind, rainfall, humidity), seasonality and also taking into account the natural shade provided by the surrounding area and topography to design pleasant buildings which ensure physiological comfort of users, energy-efficient buildings with reduced reliance on artificial energy.
With an approach from a genuinely sustainable perspective to create buildings that respond directly to their unique place, the process begins with climate data rather than architectural sketches. By addressing the questions such as “Determining the sun’s position in the sky at a given time and season?”, “How much rain falls on the site each season?” and “What effect will the wind have on the building keeping in mind the occupant’s comfort?” The building should be adaptive to changing environmental conditions to meet its functional requirement and to provide comfort. Some steps to achieve climate responsive design involve:
Site analysis
To understand the specific site, it’s important to understand the ramifications of the building through site analysis. The Layout of the Building is designed through an integrative design process to achieve the most optimal location for the building.
Sun direction
The building should be placed considering the cardinal directions. The goal is to maximize the amount of sun that heats space in the winter as well as decreasing the amount of sun in the summer to reduce the less reliance on mechanical energy for cooling and heating.
Window Considerations
Buildings with façades facing the south should use a window area appropriate to their orientation, and glazing should use a double or triple-panelled Low-E-coated glass. In the hottest months, it minimizes the amount of heat transmitted into space while keeping heat inside during the cooler winter months.
Minimize the Building Footprint
To minimize building footprint, architects should design the buildings to be multi-functional. The building will have fewer excavation costs and more wall areas that can benefit from the sun’s warming effects along with an increase in natural daylighting.
Design for Natural Ventilation
A building can be cooled by designing for stack ventilation to draw cooler air from low building openings to protect from warm air rises while carrying heat away through openings at the top of the space. The rate at which the air moves is a function of the vertical distance between the inlets and outlets, their size, and the temperature difference over the room height.
Relax the Occupants Comfort Standards
With climate responsive design, the amount of energy used to cool and heat the building is reduced by dependence on using natural systems, the sun, and the wind. This is possible only if the occupants are open to adding or removing clothing layers according to the seasons, increasing the amount of energy saved.
Building for Geographic Area
When designing the envelope of the building, factors such as insulation, vapor barriers, and air barriers will vary radically depending on whether the project is in the cold, snowy north, the hot and humid south or the arid desert.
Modelling and Analysis
Architects and designers can utilize tools such as lighting models, energy modeling, computational fluid dynamics, daylighting studies, to understand how the design best integrates with the local climate and micro-climate specific to the site.
Find Energy-Efficient Appliances and Systems
Developing climate-responsive homes involves minimizing environmental degradation. Installing sustainable systems and appliances in a building can reduce atmospheric and surface-level pollution. Smart devices may significantly increase the energy efficiency of a house, reducing its ecological effects.
Smart thermostats connect to a building’s HVAC system. They access local weather readings through a Wi-Fi connection, adjusting indoor temperatures for efficiency. They also use motion detection sensors, turning systems off in vacant homes.
Smart lights have similar functions, decreasing artificial light energy usage. Designers can connect a structure’s autonomous systems to renewable energy sources, further decreasing ecological impacts.
Consult an Energy Professional
Sustainable architects can additionally improve the energy efficiency and low impact of construction projects by consulting a power professional. During an energy consultation, certified workers evaluate a whole property, determining its electricity usage. The power professional interprets their findings, helping builders understand how to improve the sustainability of a home.
They evaluate the building’s design, environment, and residential habits when determining its efficiency. When using the feedback, construction professionals can significantly minimize ecological degradation on-site.
Perform Multiple Iterations
If at first, you don’t succeed, try again! It will take the design team multiple passes of just these basic layouts in your pre-design or schematic design phase to hone in the lowest energy use possible, optimized for your specific site. However, it’s better to spend more time in the early phases of design to model the project, which is far less costly than making changes in the field or later on in the design process. Keep at the trials, and eventually, your building will be responding directly to the climate specific to the project site.
Multiple Iterations
The design practice of Climate-Responsive architecture involves more time in the early phases of design to model the project along with multiple iterations in the design process.
What is Vulnerability Analysis for Environment
Vulnerability assessments are used to ascertain the susceptibility of a natural or human system to sustaining damage (or benefiting) from climate change. Vulnerability is a function of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Vulnerability assessments differ from impact assessments in that they more fully consider adaptive management or policy responses that may lessen negative impacts (or enhance positive impacts) of climate change. Where vulnerability assessments are used to guide management or conservation actions, they are often most informative when they are “place-based” and designed to address a particular resource or system of interest. However, in the climate change literature, there are multiple definitions of vulnerability and there is no single universal assessment framework. The assessments included below focus on various exposure units, are applied at different spatial scales, and are relevant to different locations
Planning adaptation at the local level requires an understanding of the current and projected climate hazards as well as an understanding of the vulnerable sectors of the city. These two factors are combined in a risk and vulnerability assessment. There are a multitude of methods that can be applied to conduct risk and vulnerability assessments in urban areas. Knowledge about the different types of methods and their outputs is important for the selection of the most efficient and effective method to be applied in accordance with the capacities of the local authorities.
Climate change risks in a city or town should be characterised from the point of view of several aspects: the climate threat (projected climatic conditions); context of the geographic location (e.g. coastal area, mountain region, etc.); and affected sectors and systems (e.g. human health, infrastructure, transport, ports, energy, water, social well-being, etc.) including the impacts on the most vulnerable groups (e.g. the elderly, he homeless, those at risk of poverty, etc.).
Signatory cities to develop their Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (RVA). Under the Covenant of Mayors reporting framework, the Risk and Vulnerability Assessment incorporates data on climate hazards, vulnerable sectors, adaptive capacity and vulnerable population groups. In terms of climate hazards, signatory cities are requested to define the probability and impact of the most relevant hazards, their expected change in intensity and frequency, as well as timescales. This is done via a defined indication of the level of confidence. For each identified climate hazard, the vulnerable sectors and their vulnerability level is defined. Further, an assessment of the adaptive capacity at the sectoral level is defined, using positive adaptive capacity categories, such as access to services, governmental and institutional capacity, physical and environmental capacity, knowledge and innovation. It is also possible to assign indicators for the identified vulnerable sectors and adaptive capacity.
Risk assessments focus primarily on the projected changes in climatic conditions, inventory of potentially impacted assets, the likelihood of the impact happening and the resulting consequences. Vulnerability assessments emphasise exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity of systems, assets and populations. Integrated risk and vulnerability assessments address both the vulnerability to and the impacts of climatic hazards.
The methods designed for risk and vulnerability assessments can be divided into top-down methods, which are usually based on quantitative data (e.g. census data, downscaled climate models) and use mapping; and bottom-up methods that often employ local knowledge to identify risks and are generally qualitative in nature.
Indicator-based vulnerability assessments use sets of pre-defined indicators that can be both quantitative and qualitative and can be assessed both through modelling or stakeholder consultation.
A quick risk screening method, which is based on existing knowledge, can be employed first-hand to have a clearer understanding of the needs for an in-depth assessment.
Regardless of the method applied, the assessment should, at minimum, take the following elements into consideration:Trends of various climate variables (e.g. average and extreme temperature, number of days with extreme heat, intensive rainfall events, snow cover), ideally based on a range of different climate scenarios;
Expected (direct and indirect) impacts (threats and opportunities) by identifying the most relevant hazards as well as the areas of the city that are at most risk given an overlay of the spatial distribution of the total population, vulnerable populations, economic activities and economic values;
Timescale, such as short, medium (e.g. 2050s) or long-term (e.g. end of century);
An indication on the level of confidence (e.g. high, medium, low) for such impacts, with a view of facilitating the decision-making process given the degree of uncertainty attached to the results.
Climate Change Vulnerability is defined by the IPCC as the susceptibility of a species, system or resource to the negative effects of climate change and other stressors, and includes three components: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity:Exposure is the amount and rate of change that a species or system experiences from the direct (e.g., temperature, precipitation changes) or indirect (e.g., habitat shifts due to changing vegetation composition) impacts of climate change;
Sensitivity refers to characteristics of a species or system that are dependent on specific environmental conditions, and the degree to which it will likely be affected by climate change (e.g., temperature or hydrological requirements); and
Adaptive capacity is the ability of a species to cope and persist under changing conditions through local or regional acclimation, dispersal or migration, adaptation (e.g., behavioral shifts), and/or evolution.
What are Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments?
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments (CCVAs) are emerging tools that can be used as an initial step in the adaptation planning process. A CCVA focuses on species, habitats, or systems of interest, and helps identify the greatest risks to them from climate change impacts. A CCVA identifies factors that contribute to vulnerability, which can include both the direct and indirect effects of climate change, as well as non-climate stressors (e.g., land use change, habitat fragmentation, pollution, and invasive species?).
The process of completing a CCVA includes the synthesis of existing information about the target species or system, confidence levels in those data, and identification of knowledge gaps. A CCVA combines this background information with climate projections to identify the specific elements of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity that contribute to the overall vulnerability of the species or system.
Figure adapted from Glick et al. 2011
There is no standard method or framework to conduct a CCVA, and a variety of methods are being implemented at government, institutional, and organizational levels. Because of this, interpretation of CCVA results should carefully consider whether and how each of the three components of vulnerability (exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity) were evaluated, if non-climate stressors were included in the assessment, how uncertainty is presented, the geographic location covered by the assessment, and whether the entire life cycle of a target species was evaluated, particularly for those that are migratory. Generally, the approach chosen should be based on the goals of practitioners, confidence in existing data and information, and the resources available (e.g., financial, personnel).
Some of the most common frameworks applied regionally are:NatureServe Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI) – A quantitative assessment based on the traits of fish, wildlife, and habitats that might make them more vulnerable to climate change. The CCVI is suitable for assessing large numbers of species and comparing results across taxa. It is based in Microsoft Excel, relatively easy to use, and includes factors related to direct and indirect exposure, species-specific sensitivity, and documented or modeled responses to climate change.
Climate Change Response Framework (CCRF) – A collaborative, cross-boundary approach among scientists, managers, and landowners designed to assess the vulnerability of forested habitats. The assessment incorporates downscaled climate projections into tree species distribution models to determine future habitat suitability. Experts conduct a literature review to summarize the effects of climate change, as well as non-climate stressors, and consider all three components of vulnerability to come to a consensus on a vulnerability ranking and level of confidence.
Northeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (NEAFWA) Habitat Vulnerability Model – An approach created to consistently evaluate the vulnerability of all non-tidal habitats across thirteen Northeastern US states. This method is based on an expert-panel approach, and is made up of 4 sections, or modules, based in Microsoft Excel. The modules score vulnerability based on climate sensitivity factors (adaptive capacity is also partially addressed) and non-climate stressors to produce vulnerability rankings and confidence scores. Experts use these scores to construct descriptive paragraphs explaining the results for each species or habitat evaluated. These narratives help to ensure transparency, evaluate consistency, and clarify underlying assumptions. The National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and several states have used this model successfully to assess habitat vulnerability.
Expert opinion workshops and surveys – These are often qualitative (or mixed qualitative/quantitative), and have been used by a number of states including a report on habitat vulnerability in Massachusetts. These assessments are usually developed independently, and are typically not based on a standardized framework. This allows greater flexibility for the institution conducting the CCVA; however, it is more difficult to make direct comparisons across assessment results since the specific factors evaluated may vary.
Outputs from the CCVAs outlined above compare the relative vulnerability among species or systems and identify major factors contributing to the vulnerability, confidence in the factors assessed, and remaining knowledge gaps. This information can inform adaptation strategies and actions by identifying the areas where additional monitoring and research is needed, and helping to prioritize management and policy decisions.
How are CCVAs presented in the Massachusetts Wildlife Climate Action Tool?
The CCVAs presented in this tool are drawn from assessments completed throughout the Northeast United States, as well as the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic regions. The NatureServe Climate Change Vulnerability Index was the most common method of assessing species vulnerability, though other methods were also included (see descriptions above). The Massachusetts Climate Action Tool presents a summary of CCVA results for individual species and forest habitats; in cases where more than one CCVA result is offered, studies come from various locations and may have used different assessment methodologies. Users should consult the original source for a complete understanding of how vulnerability was assessed and detailed results.
We present multiple Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA) results because not all species were assessed specifically in Massachusetts. For example, an assessment may have included Massachusetts, but been regional in scope. Because species’ ranges and life histories extend beyond state boundaries, assessments conducted in other areas may provide a more comprehensive understanding of their vulnerability. We suggest starting with CCVAs that include Massachusetts (e.g., North Atlantic LCC, North Atlantic coast), and then comparing results from nearby states. We also suggest considering the life history and migration patterns of species to determine what factors might be most influential as the species moves in or out of Massachusetts. In some cases, CCVA rankings may vary for the same species because of unique factors within a given area, or because different methodologies were used in different studies. It is important to read the expert opinions supporting ranking to understand why a ranking differs from one state to another.
In the Massachusetts Climate Action Tool, the following information is presented for each species assessed:
Ranking: The vulnerability ranking categories refer to the predicted extent that the assessed species will be impacted by climate change. Because the ranking category names and definitions vary across reports, similar rankings have been grouped and are presented in a standardized format. See Table 1 (next page) to compare these with the original ranking categories and definitions used by the CCVAs cited in this tool.
Confidence: This category describes how confident the authors are in the vulnerability ranking assigned to each species in the assessment. Confidence scores refer to the amount and quality of the available background information on that species, and do not necessarily include the uncertainty associated with the projected climate data used for rankings.
Emission Scenarios: Emissions scenarios describe future releases of greenhouse gases, aerosols, and other pollutants into the atmosphere, and are based on expected changes in human populations and technology. See climate change page for more information on emission scenarios and climate models.
Time Period: Vulnerability for each species is considered for a specific time period. Many vulnerability assessments consider the current and future impacts that a species may experience through the years 2050, 2080, or 2100.
Location: This field refers to the geographic region considered in the vulnerability assessment. CCVAs can be conducted on local, regional, state, and national levels.
Simplified vulnerability ranking categories as presented in the Massachusetts Wildlife Climate Action Tool, cross-referenced with the original vulnerability ranking categories and definitions used in the assessment reports cited in this tool.
Additional Resources on CCVAs
Climate Registry for the Assessment of Vulnerability (CRAVe): The Climate Registry for the Assessment of Vulnerability (CRAVe) is a searchable, public registry on CCVAs. The purpose of CRAVe is to make information about ongoing and completed vulnerability assessments readily accessible. CRAVe is hosted in two locations: 1) USGS National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center and 2) the EcoAdapt Climate Adaptation Knowledge Exchange. The assessments in CRAVe include studies on species and ecosystems, built environments and infrastructure, cultural resources, and socioeconomic systems. Users can access CRAVe to conduct searches across all vulnerability assessments to find the information necessary for decision making.
Vulnerability Assessment Trainings: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Conservation Training Center (NCTC) offers training courses to guide conservation and resource management practitioners in the theory, design, interpretation, and implementation of CCVAs. Participants also gain a perspective of how CCVAs fit into the broader context of adaptation planning. Courses follow the guidelines established in Scanning the Conservation Horizon – A Guide to Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment.
References
Adaptation Subcommittee to the Governor’s Steering Committee on Climate Change. 2010. The impacts of climate change on Connecticut agriculture, infrastructure, natural resources, and public health.
Brandt, L., et al. 2014. Central Hardwoods ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Central Hardwoods Climate Change Response Framework project. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-124. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
Butler, P., et al. 2015. Central Appalachians forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Central Appalachians Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-146. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
Byers, E., and S. Norris. 2011. Climate change vulnerability assessment of species of concern in West Virginia. West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Elkins, West Virginia.
Cullen, E., E. Yerger, S. Stoleson, and T. Nuttle. 2013. Climate change impacts on Pennsylvania forest songbirds against the backdrop of gas development and historical deer browsing. Pennsylvania Department of Conversation and Natural Resources, Wild Resource Conservation Program (WRCP-010376), Harrisburg, PA.
Dawson, T. P., S. T. Jackson, J. I. House, I. C. Prentice, G. M. Mace. 2011. Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. Science 332: 664-664.
Furedi, M., B. Leppo, M. Kowalski, T. Davis, and B. Eichelberger. 2011. Identifying species in Pennsylvania potentially vulnerable to climate change. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Pittsburgh, PA.
Galbraith H., DesRochers DW, Brown S, Reed JM (2014) Predicting vulnerabilities of North American shorebirds to climate change. PLoS ONE 9(9): e108899.
Glick P., B. A. Stein, and N. Edelson, editors. 2011. Scanning the conservation horizon: a guide to climate change vulnerability assessment. National Wildlife Federation, Washington, DC.
Handler, S., et al. 2014. Michigan forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-129. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
Handler, S., et al. 2014. Minnesota forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-133. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
Hoving, C.L., Y.M. Lee, P.J. Badra, and B.J. Klatt. 2013. Changing climate, changing wildlife: a vulnerability assessment of 400 Species of Greatest Conservation Need and game species in Michigan. Wildlife Division Report No. 3564. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. E. Hanson (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Field, C. B., V. R. Barros, D. J. Dokken, K. J. Mach, M. D. Mastrandrea, T. E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K. L. Ebi, Y. O. Estrada, R. C. Genova, B. Girma, E. S. Kissel, A. N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P. R. Mastrandrea, and L. L. White (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Janowiak, M., et al. In preparation. New England forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the New England Climate Change Response Framework. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station.
Janowiak, M.K., et al. 2014. Forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis for northern Wisconsin and western Upper Michigan: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-136. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA.
Manomet Center for Conservation Science (Manomet) and Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MA DFW). 2010. Climate change and Massachusetts fish and wildlife: Volume 2 habitat and species vulnerability. Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA.
Manomet Center for Conservation Science (Manomet) and National Wildlife Federation (NWF). 2013. The vulnerabilities of fish and wildlife habitats in the Northeast to climate change. Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Plymouth, MA.
Schlesinger, M.D., J.D. Corser, K.A. Perkins, and E.L. White. 2011. Vulnerability of at-risk species to climate change in New York. New York Natural Heritage Program, Albany, NY.
Small-Lorenz, S., L. A. Culp, T. B. Ryder, T. C. Will, and P. P. Marra. 2013. A blind spot in climate change vulnerability assessments. Nature Climate Change 3:91–93.
Sneddon, L. A., and G. Hammerson. 2014. Climate change vulnerability assessments of selected species in the North Atlantic LCC Region. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
Tetratech, Inc. 2013. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources climate change adaptation framework. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Waterbury, VT.
Whitman, A., A. Cutko, P. DeMaynadier, S. Walker, B. Vickery, S. Stockwell, and R. Houston. 2013. Climate change and biodiversity in Maine: vulnerability of habitats and priority species. Report SEI-2013-03. Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences (in collaboration with Maine Beginning with Habitat Climate Change Working Group), Brunswick, ME.
Young, B. E., E. Byers, K. Gravuer, K. Hall, G. Hammerson, A. Redder, J. Cordeiro, and K. Szabo. 2011. Guidelines for using the NatureServe Climate Change Vulnerability Index, version 2.1. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
Eduindex 
You must be logged in to post a comment.