Within the realms of self-assessments and claiming to be green, one wonders if the public deems this acceptable or better yet, credible. What are the aspects that are frequently over looked and is there a feeling within the market that the South African Green Star Rating is forgetting certain elements, or is a system that is not easy to obtain. In short: How can the Green Star Rating system be improved in terms of the categories referred to above, and how ethical is it to self-assess?
Besides having phenomenal architectural aesthetics and importance, which many building may have (with many thanks to the highly regarded architects in South Africa), buildings and projects, specially within the HVAC & R sector have been called green rated, despite having had an official rating from the GBCSA. “The GBCSA does not endorse any self-assessed rating achieved by the use of Green Star SA,” states the organisation.
In the very deepest efforts to become serious about becoming environmentally friendly, the Green Star Rating was innovatively developed after being based on world wide standards, and especially on that of the Australian Green Building ratings. In taking every aspect that could possibly lead to obtaining the most suitable and sustainable practice within the architectural practices in South Africa, The Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA) has based ratings in categories of management (Man), Indoor Environment Quality (IEQ), Energy (Ene), Transport (Tra), Water (Wat), Materials (Mat), Land Use & Ecology (Eco), and Emissions (Emi). Added to this the GBCSA has made provisions for Innovation (Inn) within the Green Star Rating System where new unseen areas of going green could be considered when thought has been plunged into the development of an environmentally friendly building.
Write comment (1 Comment)