Technology with the Environment in Mind

Intel's First Designed and Built Green Building

INTRODUCTION

R&D Environment Need for "Smart Buildings"

Design Center building is an example of an ever changing construction environment in a leading corporation. The energy consumed by our existing R&D buildings has increased since 2003 from 2MW to 8MW. That's an increase of 400% in less than four years. Such growth requires many fast conversions of office spaces and energy infrastructure, while at the same time keeping the quality high and the cost low. There are no construction rules for this kind of turnaround; our business continuation policy requires creative engineering solutions to provide adequate power and space, within the same building structure, and without or with minimum interruption to the business. Innovative and creative solutions already resulted from our R&D operational challenges (i.e., installing an ice storage reservoir as an Uninterruptible Chilled Water Supply to a Data Center or water-cooled server racks to optimize Data Center space).

Back in 2004, Intel Corporation decided to build a new development center in Israel. At that time, the practical decision makers in the local construction industry were totally unaware of the concept of Green Buildings (although this concept was known to environmental groups and to a few in the academy). The public at large (excluding environmental groups) had as yet not been exposed much to this concept. In light of this fact, the decision to build and formally certify a first Green Building, new to Intel Corporation and new to the local industry, is considered a breakthrough.

The experience gained by the local engineers helped establish the "Site Engineering Management Mission," documented in the project scope: "...New IDC Building will be built smartly, will be flexible to modifications and designed with energy savings in mind..." (Marc Denner, 2004). This mission defined the scope for an efficient energy facility, with modular and low-cost conversions of offices and spaces, suitable as working environments for researchers, and with effective Total Cost of Ownership. Actually, this common strategy affected the project team's mindset, thus broadening their goal: reduce the impact the building has on the environment, decrease the contribution to global warming, and create a healthier place to work. This "Sustainable Development" approach created a new standard for Intel R&D buildings.

Sustainable Development

The concept of environmental management and education for nature conservation has changed dramatically over the last few decades. A romantic approach was dominant in the early 60s, where conservation of the wild areas outside of the cities was considered to be the issue, and the public was encouraged to go out from the urban environment to nature. During the 70s a more aPoCalyptic approach was adopted, mainly due to the large number of environmental catastrophes reported during those years: In 1967, the Torrey Canyon oil tanker went aground off the southwest coast of England, and in 1969 oil spilled from an offshore well in California's Santa Barbara Channel. In 1971, the ruling of a lawsuit in Japan drew international attention to the effects of decades of mercury poisoning on the people of Minamata, and later in 1978, in Love Canal, New York, the discovery of toxic waste buried beneath an entire neighborhood attracted the world's attention.

Figure 1: Photo of Earth from space emphasizing the interrelation between development and ecology impacts
click image for larger view
 

Meanwhile, photos of Earth from outer space emphasized the deleterious consequences of our technological "progress," and showed us how truly small a place the Earth is in the universe (see Figure 1) [1].

The 1980s saw a rise in public concern about the role of business in society following a series of notorious environmental and social incidents, and by the early 1990s, the Brundtland Report (1987) and the Earth Summit (Rio de Janeiro, 1992) had inspired a shift in the understanding of the concept of development. These landmark events pushed the idea of development beyond economic growth and the continued generation of wealth defined narrowly in financial terms, to include the concepts of intra- and inter-generational equity and quality of life [2].

The concept of "Sustainable Development" came into general usage following the publication of the 1987 report of the Brundtland Commission, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). This commission coined what was to become the most often-quoted definition of Sustainable Development: development that "meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" [3].

Sustainable Development does not focus solely on environmental issues. More broadly, Sustainable Development policies encompass three general policy areas: economic, environmental, and social (Figure 2). Only at a point where all three areas merge, is real sustainable action taken [4].

Figure 2: Scheme of Sustainable Development: the confluence of three policy areas
click image for larger view
 

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development, founded in 1995, has formulated the business case for Sustainable Development and argues that "Sustainable Development is good for business and business is good for Sustainable Development" [5].

This concept of Sustainable Development spawned the emergence of the "triple bottom line" concept, which lies at the heart of corporate responsibility and corporate citizenship. Central to this is the need to measure and report on a company's performance with respect to economic prosperity, social justice, and environmental quality.

The roles and responsibilities of business in society, in particular global businesses, are being defined more broadly. Stakeholder demands are increasingly going beyond the obligation to "do no harm" to the responsibility for being "a positive force" in contributing to worldwide social development goals [6].

Green Building and LEED Certification Benefits

The built environment has a profound impact on our natural environment, economy, health, and productivity [7]. In the United States alone, buildings account for

• 65% of electricity consumption
• 36% of energy use
• 30% of greenhouse gas emissions
• 30% of raw materials use
• 30% of waste output (136 million tons annually)
• 12% of potable water consumption

In Israel, buildings account for [8]

• 30% of the total of electricity consumption, 12% of which is for heating, cooling, and lighting
• 30% of the total energy consumption in the commercial sector, largely used for heating, cooling and lighting
• 7.5 million tons of building waste, generated every year
• 30% of the fresh water consumption

Building green, if it is done right, reduces the impact on the global environment, supports community improvement, increases the useful life of building systems and equipment, increases property values, and contributes to user satisfaction and productivity resulting in reduced absenteeism [9]. It also enhances the corporate profile, supports the local economy, and reduces the building life-cycle cost.

In order to promote environmentally-responsible building in Israel, the Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection published guidelines on the subject in 1997 [10]. The guidelines are based on the environmentally-responsible building guidelines prepared for New York City in 1996 by Dr. Miriam Haran and Professor Victor Goldsmith, on behalf of the Center for Applied Studies of the Environment of the City University of New York.

The guidelines deal with all stages of construction including the following:

• Project and program planning, including definition of the project and consideration of non-construction options, site selection, and building for the long term.
• Design processes including integrated design processes and decision-making models for evaluating trade-offs.
• Building energy use including life-cycle cost.
• Indoor environment.
• Material and product selection including life-cycle analysis.
• Water reduction/management use, storm water runoff, use of non-potable water and landscaping.
• Operation and maintenance considerations.
• Construction considerations including health and safety issues.

There is no characteristic look of a green building. While natural and resource-efficient features can be highlighted in a building, they can also be invisible within any architectural design aesthetics [11]. However, meeting the above guidelines, together with complying with a rating system, provides a relative measure of how "green" the building is. By applying a measurable standard and third-party audit, following these guidelines can ensure recognition and validation to the level of commitment. In recent years, there has been a proliferation of labels for building products said to be produced in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.

The term "eco-label" is any label, seal, or logo used to give purchasers, including architects, designers, and builders, an assurance that the environmental characteristics or production methods of the product used improve the performance of the building envelope [12]. Not all Green Buildings' eco-labels are the same, but most will cover these five broad areas: sustainable site planning, safeguarding water, energy efficiency, conservation of material and resources, and indoor air quality. LEED was chosen as the project's rating system.

LEED is a rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and it is the most acceptable one in the U.S. LEED has four levels, each characterized by earned points: "Certified" (minimum 26 points), "Silver" (minimum 33 points), "Gold" (minimum 39 points) and "Platinum" (minimum 52 points). A level qualifies and quantifies a building's environmental and energy characteristics compared to known common standards and to other certified Green Buildings. This process encourages and accelerates global adoption of sustainable green building and development practices through the creation and implementation of universally understood and accepted tools and performance criteria. This instrument is used to evaluate environmental performance from a "whole building" perspective over a building life-cycle, providing a definitive standard for what constitutes a green building. LEED for new construction rating system is designed to guide and distinguish high-performance commercial and institutional projects, including office buildings, high-rise residential buildings, government buildings, recreational facilities, manufacturing plants, and laboratories.

The USGBC has asserted that a LEED-Certified level or LEED-Silver level should not cost more than a conventional building [13]. Studies show that LEED buildings fall within the typical cost range of conventional similar building types. A comprehensive study, done by Gregory H. Katz [14], shows that the green cost premium for LEED Silver Certification level, averaged over 18 office and school projects, is around 2% (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Average green cost premium vs. level of green certification for offices and schools
click image for larger view
 

Davis Langdon [15] updated in 2006 his previous study and showed essentially the same results he published in 2004: there is no significant difference in average costs for green buildings as compared to non-green buildings. Many green buildings' projects end with little or no added cost, and with budgets well within the cost range of non-green buildings with similar programs.

Source: Carnegie-Mellon University Source: National Research Council, 1998

Figure 4: Personnel and operation costs contribution to building life-cycle costs
click image for larger view
 

As important as they are, real costs are not the only costs to be considered. In many cases, opportunity costs hinge on how a building affects employees as they are by far the largest expense for most companies (Figure 4). Steven Morton from HOK [16] wrote that for offices, salaries are 72 times higher than energy costs, and they account for 92% of the life-cycle cost of a building. On average, Americans spend more than 90% of their time indoors, while case studies show that healthy indoor environments can increase employee productivity, due to less absenteeism, and can cause employees to stay in their jobs longer.

Israeli "Green" Construction Market Capabilities

Many revolutionary "green" developments and solutions carry the stamp of an Israeli company and are constantly being invented by Israeli scientists, developed by Israeli companies, and funded by local investors. Nonetheless, when it comes to implementing these high-technology environmental solutions, it seems that Israel lags behind the rest of the world [17]. Construction management and engineering firms still have limited experience with sustainable design and construction. Trade contractors have never used sustainable construction specifications or equipment and material delivery. Local material suppliers are still not aware of the developing green business opportunities in Israel. Only limited available "eco-labeled" construction materials are available to the local market. In many cases, vendors and suppliers do not know if their product carries a "sustainability" label, such as recyclable content data, and they lack the required supportive documentation.

Difficulties have been evaluated and were acknowledged during the project's planning phase. As a result, the team assumed responsibility to share the experience gained in this project and pave the way for the local construction industry.

Back to Top