The Sustainable Office, Andy Van Den Dobbelsteen, 2004

The Sustainable Office
an exploration of the potential for factor 20

environmental improvement of office accommodation
Andy van den Dobbelsteen

The Sustainable Office
an exploration of the potential for factor 20
environmental improvement of office accommodation
Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor

aan de Technische Universiteit Delft,
op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof.dr.ir. J.T. Fokkema,
voorzitter van het College voor Promoties,
in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 9 september 2004 om 15:30 uur
door Andrew Adrianus Joannes Franciscus VAN DEN DOBBELSTEEN
civiel ingenieur
geboren te Tilburg
Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotoren:
Prof.ir. J.J.M. Cauberg
Prof.ir. H. de Jonge
Prof.ir. J. Kristinsson (Em.)
Samenstelling promotiecommissie:
Rector Magnificus voorzitter
Prof.ir. J.J.M. Cauberg Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor
Prof.ir. H. de Jonge Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor
Prof.ir. J. Kristinsson (Em.) Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor
Prof. J. Worthington MA Sheffield University, Groot-Brittannië / Chalmers University, Göteborg, Zweden
Prof.Dr.-Ing. V. Hartkopf Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Verenigde Staten
Prof.ir. N.A. Hendriks Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
Prof.ir. H.A.J. Henket Technische Universiteit Delft
ir. A.C. van der Linden heeft als begeleider in belangrijke mate
aan de totstandkoming van het proefschrift bijgedragen.
ISBN: 90-75221-02-9
Printing: Copie Sjop, Delft, Netherlands - www.copie-sjop.nl
Layout: Andy van den Dobbelsteen

Copyright © 2004 Andy van den Dobbelsteen
All rights reserved by the author. No part of this publication may be used and/or reproduced in any manner without
written permission from the author, except in the context of reviews.
Alle rechten voorbehouden aan de auteur. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden vermenigvuldigd en/of openbaar
gemaakt op welke wijze dan ook, zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van de auteur, behalve in de zin
van een recensie.
Although the mental process of a PhD research may be supported, it needs to be travelled alone.
The most important support you can get is unconditional and inexpert. This book is dedicated
to the four generations of women who have always stood by me and are most important in my life:
Noé & Isha, Sandra, Annemarie, and Dely.
PREFACE
From March 2000 until today I have had the privilege and pleasure to devote myself to studying what I thought
was a necessity for sustainable development of office work. Friends of mine often did not see this privilege and
pleasure of being a monk at a university. They expressed their admiration, but it was the kind of admiration you
have for people cleaning other people's toilets… These friends work in mainly offices, by the way. However, I can
assure them that the PhD phase offered me a life more challenging, varied and purposeful than the office jobs I
know. Alas, also a life with long evenings, nights and weekends dedicated to the higher goal of a doctoral…
As a consultant I noticed that in practice many consultancies and recommendations made for sustainable building
are either based on assumptions, or on declarations by the government, which are based on assumptions. In the
early 1990s, the Dutch government made a headstart for implementing principles of sustainability in the building
industry. Within a few years, almost the entire sector grew used to taking measures for e.g. energy or water
conservation and selection of sustainable building materials. As commercial parties of the building industry always
participated in the definition of government directives, which was an important factor to the success of the broad
implementation of sustainable building, the level of ambition may be called somewhat low. Nevertheless,
developers and architects often complained about the costly measures of which they expected no significant
improvement of environmental performance. These other assumptions had never been quantitatively assessed
either.
Personally, I was also worried that the bits and pieces achieved in practice would be leading our society to
sustainable development in no way. The opportunity to start a PhD research at the old department of my master
graduation therefore came at the right moment, especially because I was free to fill it in according to my own
insights.
This thick piece of work eventually is the end-result of the last four years. As an optimist, I believe it can contribute
to a wiser and more effective approach to sustainable building and thereby to a small improvement of the world,
and I sincerely hope it will.
In a normal situation, the acknowledgements to people supporting a PhD research are included in a preface. I
attempted this as well but ended in the hopeless situation of a list exceeding the other obligatory elements by at
least a factor of 20. Therefore, I decided to mention every person I am grateful to in an extra section at the end of
the dissertation, with the appropriate heading.
For the people deserving more attention from me I hope this book may make the effort of staying away from
normal life understandable. Anyway, my own condition can be described as in the beautiful Roman saying:
"Ad fine mei Latini sum"…
Amsterdam, 27th of July 2004,
Andy
i
19
conclusions
G
the end
F
assessm ent
the organisation
15 16 17 18
office w ork com parison new solutions
m ethodology
concepts & oftelew ork foroffice
sustainability
foroffice
concepts
concepts w ork of office work
14 13 12 E
case study studies of
space use &
ofthe use of the use of
sustainability the space factor
urban space office space
10 11 D
the technology
sustainable studies of
use of the building
resources geom etry factor
C
conditions accounting
09
designing
forlife 08
fora long
lifespan of
buildings
07
forthe
building
lifespan
the time factor
B
assessm ent
04 05 06
case study
m easuring m ethodology
sustainability foroffice
ofoffice the basis
buildings
buildings
03 02 01 A
introduction
introduction general
to building &
to the office introduction the beginning
sustainability
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface i
Table of contents iii
Korte samenvatting v
Abstract vii
Management Summary ix
Volume A - The Beginning

01 General introduction 5
02 Introduction to the office 21
03 Introduction to building & sustainability 41
References for The Beginning 61
Volume B - The Basis

04 Measuring sustainability 69
05 Assessment methodology for office buildings 91
06 Case study of office buildings 107
References for The Basis 131
Volume C - The Time Factor

07 Accounting for the building lifespan in environmental performance 141
08 Conditions for a long lifespan of buildings 171
09 Designing for life 193
References for The Time Factor 207
Volume D - The Technology Factor

10 Sustainable use of resources 215
11 Studies of the building geometry 245
References for The Technology Factor 273
Volume E - The Space Factor

12 Space use & sustainability 281
13 Studies of the use of office space 303
14 Case study of the use of urban space 317
References for The Space Factor 337
Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work

15 Office work concepts & sustainability 345
16 Assessment methodology for office concepts 359
17 Comparison of telework concepts 383
18 New solutions for office work 409
References for The Organisation of Office Work 443
Volume G - The End

19 Conclusions - The factor 20 and other important issues 451
Terminology 473
References for The End 491
Thank you, thank you, thank you 493
iii
iv
KORTE SAMENVATTING
Duurzame ontwikkeling is het doel van een evenwicht tussen economie en het milieu, terwijl een beter verdeelde
welvaart wordt bereikt over de hele wereld. Om dit mogelijk te maken moet de milieubelasting van onze
welvaartsmiddelen met een factor 20 worden verminderd. Deze factor 20 kan ook worden vertaald naar de
kantorenmarkt. Het promotieonderzoek dat in dit proefschrift wordt behandeld was gericht op het vinden van
oplossingen die effectief bijdragen aan een factor 20 milieuverbetering van kantoorhuisvesting.
Twaalf kantoorgebouwen, die zijn ontworpen zonder speciale duurzaamheidsambities, zijn milieutechnisch
beoordeeld voor een bepaling van de huidige milieuprestatie en de aspecten en onderdelen die de belangrijkste
bijdrage leveren aan de milieubelasting. Deze casestudie maakt duidelijk dat recent gebouwde kantoren
nauwelijks duurzamer zijn dan in het referentiejaar 1990 en dat, op basis van een levensduur van 75 jaar, bijna
80% van de milieubelasting wordt veroorzaakt door het verbruik van energie. Verwarming (en koeling), verlichting
en gebruik van apparatuur (vooral computers) zijn verantwoordelijk voor ongeveer 90% van het energieverbruik.
De draagconstructie van een gebouw veroorzaakt bijna 60% van de milieubelasting van bouwmaterialen.
Waterverbruik blijkt onbelangrijk voor de milieuprestatie.
De leeftijd en verwachte gebruiksduur van een gebouw werden tot nu toe niet verrekend in de milieuprestatie. Dit
proefschrift introduceert een methodiek voor het verrekenen van deze tijdsfactoren, waarmee beslissingen over
bijvoorbeeld renovatie en hergebruik van een bestaand gebouw versus sloop en nieuwbouw kunnen worden
ondersteund. Op basis van deze methodiek kan worden geconstateerd dat het gebruik van bouwmaterialen bij
een uiteindelijke gebouwgebruiksduur van 20 jaar - een realistische waarde voor moderne kantoren - net zo
belangrijk wordt als het energiegebruik. Studies laten zien dat er twee gebruiksduurstrategieën zijn die de
milieuprestatie van kantoren effectief verbeteren: het ontwerpen van lang meegaande monumentale gebouwen
met een overgedimensioneerde structuur, of van gebouwen met een demontabele of kortcyclische
draagconstructie. De levensduur van andere onderdelen buiten de draagconstructie spelen geen belangrijke rol in
de milieuprestatie.
Theoretisch gezien kan het gebruik van duurzame energiebronnen tot meer dan factor 20 milieuverbetering van
het energiegebruik leiden. Er zijn vele bekende en beschikbare technieken en oplossingen. De draagconstructie
van een gebouw kan worden verbeterd door optimale overspanningen en combinaties van bouwmaterialen voor
dragende delen te kiezen. Het maximale verschil tussen gunstige en ongunstige maar gebruikelijke oplossingen
voor draagconstructies kan oplopen tot een factor 4,5. De beste gevonden oplossing is een vloer van TT-platen
die de hele gebouwdiepte overspannen en ondersteund worden door houten liggers en kolommen. Dit is tevens
een flexibele oplossing voor kantoren. Verdere verbeteringen zullen mogelijk zijn door nieuwe
materiaaltoepassingen.
Ten gevolge van verschillende effecten wordt de milieuprestatie van een gebouw niet substantieel beïnvloed door
zijn basisvorm. Wanneer verschillende gebouwhoogten worden vergeleken, is er wel een optimaal aantal
bouwlagen te vinden voor een bepaald netto vloeroppervlak vereist voor een kantoororganisatie. In het geval van
grote gebouwen kan het maximale verschil tussen gunstige en ongunstige stapelingen oplopen tot een factor 1,6.
Het ruimtegebruik in kantoren bepaalt de maat en geometrie van het gebouw. Er is substantiële milieuverbetering
van het materiaalgebruik mogelijk door een andere kantoorinrichting dan het cellenkantoor. Casestudies van
Europese herontwikkelingsprojecten rondom knooppunten van openbaar vervoer laten zien dat intensief en
meervoudig ruimtegebruik op de stedelijke schaal tot een significante milieuverbetering kunnen leiden voor
mobiliteit en de behouden groene ruimte buiten de stad. Ten opzichte van gemiddelde monofunctionele stedelijke
plannen bieden stapelen en mengen van functies de betere mogelijkheden voor duurzaamheid.
Vergelijking van telewerkconcepten met traditionele kantoorwerkconcepten tonen aan dat beperkte verbeteringen
kunnen worden bereikt voor medewerkerverkeer en het gebruik van ruimte, materialen en energie. De beste
prestaties zijn mogelijk door ingewikkelde vormen van telewerk die zijn gebaseerd op verspreid werken. In dat
geval werken kantoormedewerkers in principe waar zij voor zaken zijn: bij de klant, in een business center, thuis
of waar dan ook tussen deze plekken. In de nabije toekomst liggen de beste mogelijkheden voor een duurzame
kantoorhuisvesting in een nieuwe organisatie van kantoorwerk. Deze zou gebaseerd moeten zijn op concentratie
v
van algemene, gedeelde kantoorfuncties op knooppunten van openbaar en privévervoer, met thuis- en
wijkkantoren als basiswerkplek voor kantoormedewerkers en virtuele kantoren onderweg. In dit concept
transformeert het traditionele centrale kantoor naar een clubgebouwkantoor, waar alleen de basisfuncties voor het
management, het beheer en ondersteuning van het kantoor worden gehuisvest, en waar medewerkers elkaar
ontmoeten voor hun collectieve identiteit en uitwisseling van ervaringen. Dit veel kleinere centrale kantoor kan in
het hart van de stad worden gesitueerd of bij de al genoemde business knooppunten. De nieuwe organisatie van
kantoorwerk leidt tot een factor 2 milieuverbetering, nog zonder potentiële aanvullende verbeteringen voor de
factoren ruimte, tijd en technologie mee te nemen. Behalve de milieuvoordelen, leidt het nieuwe
kantoorwerkconcept tot een opwaardering en verlevendiging van de stedelijke gebieden en biedt het meer vrijheid
met betrekking tot de combinatie van zakelijke en privéactiviteiten.
Een eindbeoordeling is verricht van de algehele verbeterpotentie van een combinatie van maatregelen, beginnend
met de organisatie van kantoorwerk, gevolgd door oplossingen voor een efficiënt gebruik van ruimte, optimale
gebouwontwerpen en technologieën, en ten slotte gebaseerd op duurzame strategieën voor de factor tijd. Deze
beoordeling geeft aan dat, op basis van een optimale combinatie van maatregelen, een factor 50
milieuverbetering kan worden bereikt. Een minder optimale combinatie maakt nog steeds een factor 10 mogelijk.
De factor 20 lijkt daarom haalbaar voor kantoorhuisvesting. Beslissend voor dit eindresultaat is een integrale
benadering, met name door het betrekken van het gebruik van duurzame energiebronnen, een verstandiger
omgang met levensduuraspecten en een nieuwe organisatie van kantoorwerk. En de mensen moeten het
natuurlijk doen.
vi
ABSTRACT
Sustainable development is the goal of a balance between economy and the environment, whilst establishing a
better spread prosperity across the world. In order to make this possible, the environmental load of our
commodities needs to be reduced by a factor of 20. This factor 20 can also be translated to the office market. The
PhD research presented in this thesis focussed on finding solutions effectively contributing to factor 20
environmental improvement of office accommodation.
In order to determine the current environmental performance and to find the main aspects and building
components causing environmental damage, twelve offices designed without a special focus on sustainability
were environmentally assessed. This case study reveals that recently constructed offices are hardly more
sustainable than in the reference year 1990 and that, on the basis of a lifespan of 75 years, almost 80% of the
environmental load of office buildings is related to energy consumption. Heating (and cooling), lighting and use of
equipment (mainly computers) together constitute approximately 90% of energy consumption. The supporting
structure of a building causes almost 60% of the environmental load of building materials. Consumption of water
proves unimportant to the environmental performance.
The age and expected service life of a building had not yet been accounted for in environmental performance.
This thesis presents a methodology for the account of these factors of time, facilitating decisions about, for
example, renovation and re-use of an existing building versus demolition and construction of a new building. On
the basis of this methodology it can be established that with an eventual service life of the building of around 20
years - a realistic value for modern offices - the use of building materials becomes equally important as energy
consumption. Studies indicate that there are two main service life strategies that effectively improve the
environmental performance of offices: design of long-lasting monumental buildings with an over-sized structure, or
buildings with a demountable or short-cyclic supporting structure. The lifespan of components other than the
supporting structure play no significant role in environmental performance.
Theoretically, the use of sustainable energy resources can lead to more than a factor 20 environmental
improvement of energy consumption. Many technologies and solutions are known and available. The supporting
structure of a building can be improved by choosing optimal structural spans and combinations of building
materials for the structural components. A maximum difference of a factor 4.5 can be found between favourable
and unfavourable, yet common, solutions for supporting structures. Best solution found is a floor of TT slabs
spanning the entire building depth, supported by timber beams and columns. For offices this is a flexible solution
as well. Further enhancements will be possible through the use of new building materials.
As a result of different effects, the basic shape of a building does not substantially influence its environmental
performance. When comparing different building heights, however, an optimal number of stories can be found for
each net floor area required for an office organisation. In the case of large buildings, the maximum difference
between favourable and unfavourable solutions is around a factor of 1.6.
The use of space inside offices defines the size and geometry of the building. Layout principles other than the
cellular office enable substantial environmental improvement of the use of building materials. As case studies of
European redevelopments around nodes of public transport reveal, on the urban scale, intensive and multiple use
of space can lead to significant environmental improvement related to travel and the green area preserved outside
the city. In regards to average mono-functional urban plans, stacking and mixing of functions offer the better
opportunities for sustainability.
Comparison of telework concepts with traditional concepts for office work demonstrate that limited improvement
can be achieved in terms of employee travel and the use of space, building materials and energy. The best
achievements are possible through complex forms of telework based on distributed working. In this case, office
workers basically work where they are for business: with the client, in a business centre, at home, or anywhere in-
between. In the near future, the best opportunities for sustainable office accommodation will be a new sustainable
organisation of office work. This should be based on the concentration of general, shared office functions at nodes
of public and private transport, together with home and district offices as basic workplaces for office employees,
and virtual offices anywhere. In this concept, the traditional central office is transformed into a clubhouse office,
vii
where only the basic functions for management, administration and support of the office are accommodated, and
where employees meet for their corporate identity and exchange of experience. This much smaller central office
can be located in the heart of cities or at the already mentioned business nodes. The new organisation of office
work leads to environmental improvement by a factor of 2, not yet taking into account potential additional
improvements of the space, time and technology factor. Beside the environmental benefits, this new office work
concept leads to revaluation and animation of urban areas, and offers more freedom with regard to the
combination of business and private activities.
A final assessment was done of the overall improvement potential through a combination of measures, starting
with the organisation of office work, followed by solutions for an efficient use of space, optimal building designs
and technologies, and finally based on sustainable strategies for the time factor. This assessment indicates that,
on the basis of an optimal combination of measures, environmental improvement by a factor of 50 is possible. A
less optimal combination still makes factor 10 possible. Therefore, the factor 20 seems feasible for office
accommodation. Decisive to this end-result is an integral strategy, in particular involving the use of sustainable
energy resources, a wiser approach to aspects of the lifespan, and a new organisation of office work. And people
of course will have to do it.
viii
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
The Beginning
The factor 20
The basic objective of this research is to contribute to environmental improvement of office accommodation by a
factor of 20 by the year 2040. This factor 20 is necessary to make sustainable development possible1. As defined
by World Commission on Environment and Development, sustainable development implies the establishment of a
balance between the economy and the environment and the necessity for an enormous catching-up process by
developing countries. The improvement required could be defined as a smaller number, e.g. factor 10 or factor 4.
However, these targets would imply that we begrudge developing countries to catch up completely or that we
even intend to keep them at a low level of prosperity.
For the research presented, the factor 20 was taken as an indication of the magnitude of the improvement
required. It was translated to the smaller scale of the office market, in particular office accommodation.
The intention to achieve factor 20 improvement necessitates an effective approach, aiming at solutions that are
significant (i.e. that relate to a large contribution) and/or have a high improvement potential. Recent assessments
indicate that the environmental performance of buildings with a focus on sustainability have not achieved the
improvement expected. The mainstream office market may be expected to perform even worse than this.
This research
A hypothesis for this research was that sustainable building has been concentrated on ineffective solutions.
Another hypothesis was that larger improvements are expected in other fields than in technology: i.e. the time
factor, the space factor and the organisation of office work. These dimensions form the basis for the demand for
office accommodation in the first place. The objective of this research was to find solutions for office
accommodation that contribute to the factor 20 effectively. The solutions were sought in all the mentioned
directions, preceeded by a case study of office buildings without a special focus on sustainability.
Figure 00.01 depicts the logical order of the approach of this PhD research.
OFFICES & SUSTAINABLE BUILDING

introduction
THE CURRENT PERFORMANCE

basic case study
THE BUILDING LIFESPAN

accounting model and recalculations
BUILDING DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY

typology and case studies
THE USE OF SPACE IN BUILDINGS THE USE OF URBAN SPACE

typology and case studies case studies
OFFICE WORK CONCEPTS

THE OVERALL POTENTIAL

final conclusion
Figure 00.01: A simple way of explaining this PhD research
1
'Factor 20' is deduced from a formula that relates the pressure on the environment to the global population, its average wealth, and the
environmental load as a result of it.
ix
The office
Offices can be categorised into place, space and use typologies. Basically, the office is not just the building, but
rather any place where office work is executed. Office work is the processing of information, i.e. concentrating,
archiving, producing and communicating information. This definition opens doors to new perceptions of
organisation of office work, with information, data- and telecommunication technologies (ICTs) making it possible.
Environmental problems and building

When influences to the environment are divided into interventions, effects and problems, the three main
environmental problems to which all interventions eventually lead are the depletion of resources, the deterioration
of ecosystems and the deterioration of human health.
The Basis
In order to determine environmental performance of office accommodation, its environmental load needs to be
assessed. The methodology of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is the basis for environmental assessment. Different
models and tools have been developed to convert the outcome of LCA into unitary scores that facilitate
comparisons between alternatives. Every model and tool has its specific method, scope, advantages, and
disadvantages. The selection of a tool mainly depends on the object considered and the application of the
outcome.
In order to reduce the deviations and other disadvantages of specific assessment tools, the absolute outcome for
a certain solution can be best compared with that for a well-defined reference solution. This comparison resolves
in environmental indices or environmental improvement factors. The latter was used for this research, expressing
the progress with respect to the reference year 1990.
Reference types
In order to determine the environmental performance of buildings, they need to be compared to reference
buildings. There are different manners of defining these. A reference building may be based on the same design
but with a reference use of materials and building services (the design reference). In this case, the improvement
factor is an indication of the environmental performance in terms of the materials and building services used in the
building. The reference building may also be based on an equal net or gross floor area, however with reference
values for the building design, materials and building services (the NFA or GFA reference). In this case, the
improvement factor expresses the environmental performance of the whole building design. When the reference
building is based on an equal number of users or fulltime equivalent, however with a reference use of space per
employee, and a reference design, materials and building services (the FTE reference), the improvement factor
indicates the integral performance of the building and its use.
Although an improvement factor based on the FTE reference provides the most complete indication, all reference
types have their function when explaining specific details of the environmental load. Moreover, the determination
of an FTE reference is more complex and only temporary, as the number of users of buildings alters constantly.
Although the NFA reference gives a more honest comparative for office buildings, in this research I mainly worked
with GFA references since it was not always possible to determine net floor areas.
Environmental indicator
The key environmental indicator used in this research was environmental costs or eco-costs. These are costs
related to the prevention and abatement of environmental damage, which will be transferred to society eventually.
Environmental costs were chosen because the conversion of these from LCA data is - although complicated -
relatively objective. Besides, an assessment tool functioning on the basis of environmental costs was available for
offices (GreenCalc). I chose to work with annual values for the environmental costs. The main reason for this was
that the environmental costs for energy and water consumption are determined on an annual basis, and for these
parameters the conversion to a long-term future would be very uncertain. For the use of building materials, the
environmental costs are determined for a certain reference lifespan (including the extraction, manufacture,
transport, construction, operation, maintenance, demolition, and re-use of materials). For the research presented,
in order to gain annual values, these environmental costs for building materials were divided by the reference
x
lifespan. This is a defendable simplification, due to the inaccuracies of long-term estimations for consumption of
energy and water.
Study of office buildings

In order to determine the present-day environmental performance of normal office buildings, a study was
conducted of twelve typologically different yet functionally comparable government offices, the majority being
constructed after 1985. This study indicated that the environmental performance of office building designs has
seen only limited improvement. Through comparison with a design reference, it was visible that this limited
improvement has merely been achieved by the autonomous development of energy-efficient building services.
The basic study revealed that 77.5% of the annual environmental load is caused by energy consumption, 19.5%
by the use of building materials, and only 3.0% by water consumption. The three main sources of energy
consumption are heating and cooling, lighting, and equipment (mainly computers), which together constitute
almost 90% of the environmental load of energy consumption, almost equally divided. The environmental load of
building materials is mainly caused by the supporting structure (almost 60%), for which horizontal elements
(floors, beams, and roof) constitute approximately 70%. In terms of environmental effectiveness, these elements
should therefore be looked intpo. If commuter travel were involved in the assessments, as determined by
GreenCalc, this aspect would constitute 6.5% of the annual environmental load. However, there are doubts about
the validity of this figure.
The Time Factor
In general, environmental assessment tools use an implicit time-span for the environmental load of buildings. The
time factor has not yet been included in environmental performance, ignoring differences in age and expected
service life between buildings. In this thesis, a practical methodology is presented for the account of the age and
expected service life of buildings, enabling a better indication of environmental performance and supporting a
more just comparison between alternatives for demolition & new construction versus renovation & re-use of old
buildings.
The lifespan accounting methodology

Associated with economic calculations, for the account of time effects to environmental cost one can use net
present values (NPVs) or annuities. The NPV method capitalises all environmental loads at the beginning of a
lifespan, leading to an integral once-only load. The annuities method spreads all environmental loads over the
lifespan, leading to an integral annual load.
The lifespan accounting methodology proposed in this thesis combines the two methods. For the use of building
materials, the environmental loads occurring throughout the building lifespan (as determined by means of LCA)
are capitalised. This NPV is considered an environmental mortgage that needs to be paid off within a reference
lifespan. For consumption of energy and water, annual values are used. When a building is demolished before the
reference lifespan is reached there is a proportion of the environmental mortgage remaining to be paid off. For a
just assessment, this remaining environmental debt, needs to be accounted for and added to the environmental
mortgage of the new building. When buildings are compared and their eventual service lives are expected to
differ, a different reference lifespan should be taken into account for each alternative, influencing the annual pay-
off for the environmental mortgage. The reference lifespan should be equal to the estimated service life (ESL),
which is based on the aesthetical, functional and technical qualities of a building.
Recalculations
Recalculations of the twelve government offices from the basic study demonstrated the decisive influence of the
actual age and service life expectation on environmental performance, which until now had been ignored. On a
long-term basis, old buildings with a long ESL almost always perform better than a new building, even if it is
constructed more sustainably.
The ESL and the qualities decisive for it

Different qualities influence the ultimate service life of a building. In order to define these basic qualities enabling a
long service life, three main qualities of architecture based on Vitruvius - use value, experience value and future
xi
value - were inter-related and completed with ecological quality. Each of these qualities and their overlaps are
provided by specific solutions. Cultural, social and architectural quality, functionality, and flexibility of buildings are
considered decisive for the ESL. Technical problems will be solved if a building has a special social-cultural-
historic or architectural meaning and if it is functional enough. For the determination of an ESL factor, for each of
these three qualities a factor was determined with respect to a reference lifespan.
The determination of the ESL needs to be studied further; however, the research presented lays a basis for its
determination and involvement in environmental assessments.
Designing for life with multiple lifespans of building components

For the lifespan accounting methodology, office buildings were considered as a homogeneous body with a defined
lifespan. In practice, buildings are constructed of components with different lifespans, and thereby with a different
number of replacements within a reference lifespan. An optimal strategy for the lifespan of building components
can be found when taking into account these multiple lifespans. An eventual service life of the building equal to
the lifespan of its supporting structure provides the best results. Tuning the lifespans of components to the service
life planned for a building leads to the best results: up to a factor 2.8 environmental improvement can be achieved
with respect to current practice. There are two sustainable strategies for offices: construct monumental buildings
with a long-lasting, over-sized structure, or flexible buildings with a demountable or short-lasting, environmentally
benign structure.
The Technology Factor
Energy
In theory, without account of the equipment required, infinite environmental improvement of energy consumption
is possible through the use of sustainable energy resources. Therefore, technically, energy is not an
environmental problem. The application of sustainable energy resources throughout society will be a key issue to
the success of sustainable development, since it affects all aspects of life, including travel. Therefore, the use of
sustainable energy is an absolute necessity. There are many solutions known for sustainable technologies on the
building scale. An example is the breathing window, which will significantly reduce energy consumption for heating
and ventilation, limit the amount of building services and airducts required, and enable a smaller building height or
assure a longer service life. In addition, tackling energy issues on an urban scale rather than the building will
prove most effective.
With a shift to sustainable energy, environmental problems related to biodiversity, ecosystem health and human
health become increasingly more important. A wider approach to sustainability than the sole focus on carbon
dioxide related to fossil energy is therefore necessary.
Building materials
Through the selection of floor structures, a maximum environmental improvement by factor 2 is possible with
respect to massive concrete floors. When considering whole structural designs, involving structural spans, floor
structures, beams, columns, and their respective material alternatives, a factor 2.5 improvement is possible with
respect to the average of all possible combinations, and factor 4.5 with respect to the worst combined solution. Of
all combinations studied, the best combination was based on TT-slabs spanning the complete depth of a building,
supported by timber beams and timber columns, with a long façade bay of 5.4 m. When taking into account that
solutions based on massive concrete floors, which are probably worse than the alternatives studied but were not
included in the assessments, an improvement factor of approximately 4 may be possible when switching from a
common concrete structure cast on site to the TT-slab and timber combination.
Extra improvement potential for the use of building materials is to be found in the application of new building
materials such as carbon fibres or renewable materials. As a structural material, bamboo can lead to
environmental improvement by a factor of 5 to 20, depending on the specific structural function.
Water
Although at present water consumption proves to be of no great influence on the environmental load of office
buildings, its contribution is larger when including the use of cooling water for electricity and manufacturing of
metals. Moreover, water will be a key issue for sustainable development of the entire world. A factor 2
xii
environmental improvement of water consumption is easily possible through water conservation technologies, use
of other water resources such as rainwater, and re-use of purified wastewater.
The building geometry

Due to variable effects, the selection of an efficient building shape has no great influence on the overall
environmental performance: a maximum difference by a factor of 1.1. Starting with a certain net floor area (NFA)
required for an office organisation and a reference floor depth of 12.6 m, the extent of stacking has a comparable
influence: a maximum difference by a factor of 1.3 between the best and worst solution applies to large offices.
When the floor depth is increased to 25.2 m, the integrated improvement factor however increases to 1.5, also
applying to large offices. The optimal number of layers depends on the NFA required; it ranges from 4 layers for
small offices (2,100 m2) to 26 layers for large offices (67,200 m2).
The assessment of the Commerzbank headquarters highrise demonstrates that in the typology studies the
assumptions made for highrises are too optimistic. When studying buildings of more than 20 floors, the
environmental load of the supporting structure and building services increases more rapidly than below that
height. The optimal number of floors found for large offices will therefore be lower, and the eventual improvement
factor will be smaller than defined. A more accurate environmental assessment model for highrises will therefore
be necessary. The Commerzbank study demonstrated that within the boundaries of a building, highrise solutions
(above approximately 25 floors) cannot be justified from an environmental point of view. However, this stands
apart from advantages on the urban scale (reduction of land use) and the cultural and therefore lifetime
importance of highrises.
The Space Factor
There are different relationships between the use of space (floor and land area) for office accommodation and
environmental effects, e.g. energy and water consumption, the building materials required, consumption of fuel for
transport and ecological effects. For these parameters, different qualitative and quantitative indicators are
available. Floor and land use efficiency can differ significantly between projects. Basing the reference building on
the number of users of an office building leads to a more accurate determination of the environmental
performance.
Space use in offices

Great spatial improvement is possible through the shift from a cellular office to another layout. When purely
considering a certain number of users and ignoring possibilities for telework, the best environmental improvement
can be achieved by means of an open-plan layout: factor 1.8 with respect to the cellular office plan. The group
office performs factor 1.6 better, and the combi-office layout factor 1.5. These figures are only referring to the
environmental load of building materials. The consumption of energy depends on the number of users and the
total floor area.
Space use in urban areas

On the urban scale, multiple and/or intensive use of space can lead to remarkable results with respect to an
average European mono-functional density. Based on a study of European redevelopment cases around nodes of
public transport a factor up to 11 for the green area preserved outside the city and up to a factor 7 for the
reduction of transport fuel can be achieved. Due to the significance yet relatively small variation of the
environmental performance of energy consumption and use of building materials, the integrated improvement
potential overall can be a factor 1.5, as achieved by Canary Wharf in London. These figures are based on
average building heights. Individual buildings may show more variable performances for energy and building
materials.
In the case of projects covering larger areas of land and the involvement of a mix of urban functions, a smaller
density can be achieved than in the case of small mono-functional projects. Nevertheless, on the basis of an
average mix of urban functions, three times the density of an average urban district is definitely possible, leading
to a factor 1.5 environmental improvement, disregarding additional enhancements through sustainable design and
especially the combination of technical urban utilities such as energy, water and transport.
xiii
The Organisation of Office Work
Through telework concepts, office employees can work closer to home or to clients, reducing the distance
travelled for work. Furthermore, the space required at the central office may be reduced. Every telework concept
however requires extra space at the telework office, drawing a distinction between office concept comparisons.
Innovative office concepts, including telework, enable personal freedom for office employees but also have
drawbacks related to the management of work and individual characteristics.
Telework concepts comparison

Assessment of different telework concepts demonstrated that most of these concepts lead to a limited
environmental improvement. In general, commuter and business travel is reduced through teleworking. However,
the use of space, building materials and energy depends on the additional space required at the particular
telework office, involving occupational inefficiencies of business centres and satellite offices. Most teleworker
concepts therefore achieve overall between a factor 1.1 and 1.2 environmental improvement. The results vary
with the average number of telework days and the assumptions made. Best performance is achieved through the
4-telework days home worker concept, leading to factor 1.3. In this result, the employee's residence was however
assumed to be already in use by other family members. If this is not the case, the performance will be diminished.
In general, the choice for a teleworker concept and its response to the use of transport and office layout is a
delicate one, and different measures will have a different outcome.
In the assessments, potential improvements through solutions for optimal building designs and heights or
sustainable technological solutions (energy technologies, use of building materials) were not included, and these
can therefore form additional improvements. In combination with the layout solutions for the central office
assessed in Volume E - The Space Factor, improvement factors up to factor 1.5 are possible (for an open-plan
layout) for some telework concepts. Altering the office floor design therefore has a greater improvement potential
than the outplacing of employees at offices that are less efficiently managed. Combination of both measures
however leads to the best outcome.
For the instant office worker concept consisting of office workers who mainly use workplaces not specifically
designed for office work, for more than one telework day, the amount of business travel needed to be increased.
When the hours of business travel are increased, the instant office worker concept leads to the best results: a
factor 1.5 environmental improvement for the 4-telework days, with a variation of 20-hours business travel.
For the telework concepts assessment, common solutions for telework offices were considered. New forms of the
business centre - the transfer office, located at nodes of transport infrastructure, and the district office, in
residential areas - provide extra opportunities for environmental improvement. Concepts based on these telework
offices perform better than the traditional business centre in commercial office areas.
More complicated patterns of office work

The comparisons previously mentioned all applied to one single telework office type. Present-day office work for
dynamic organisations is often more complex than that, involving more than two different offices. To model this
distributed type of working, the flexible and free-range office worker concepts were also assessed. The latter type
represents the free-lancing office worker not bound to an organisation. The assessment of these office worker
types demonstrated a more significant improvement factor, up to 1.6. These results indicate that the disconnection
of employees from their personal workdesks is the main stimulus for environmental improvement of the
organisation of office work.
The findings for theoretic concepts were supported by the assessment of The Vision Web, a real office company
that relies on various workplaces. The reduction of space used for office work and the use of old, renovated
buildings made an environmental improvement of building materials by more than a factor 20 possible. This
however also depends on the attachment of consultants working for one or more clients, involving 'borrowed
space' at a guest office. If all consultants were posted at a client's office, the guest office would need more space,
thus reducing the environmental performance to factor 2.5. The overall environmental improvement of this real
company was severely reduced to factor 1.3 in the best-case scenario, or 1.1 in the worst-case scenario, which is
due to the great distances covered by car transportation. In the case of a dynamic and mobile innovative
organisation as this one studied, employee travel becomes as important or even more important than the energy
consumption at different offices.
xiv
Sustainable organisation of office work
In the near future, office work can largely be conducted away from the central office, reducing the central office to
a clubhouse office, where employees regularly meet to find a shared identity and which expresses the
organisation's image, beliefs and policy. Other office types fitting into this new office work concept are: business
nodes at the nodes of private and public transport, home offices or district offices in the vicinity of residences and
amenities, and instant offices anywhere in-between the other offices.
The business nodes provide space for meetings, presentations and other communication objectives, plus all kinds
of supporting facilities for office work, including, for instance, reproduction facilities, hotels, bars, shops and child
care. The location at easily accessible nodes makes meeting space at the central office redundant and reduces
employee travel.
The district offices can be integrated in other facilities and local amenities in districts, upgrading these areas and
enabling well-facilitated work close to home for employees who for certain reasons cannot work at home.
The assessment of the new office organisation concept indicates an environmental improvement by a factor of 1.6
to 2.1, depending on the choice between a home or district office and the question of being bound to an
organisation or working freelance. This environmental improvement is regardless of potential further
improvements within the offices, such as efficient layout solutions, sustainable energy technologies and optimal
structural designs.
Overall
Combining the results of all partial studies of the technology factor, time factor, space factor and the organisation
of office work and avoiding the doubling of effects, more than a factor 20 environmental improvement should be
possible. This can be achieved by an optimal combination of solutions: a new, sustainable organisation of office
work, multiple and intensive use of space, efficiently shaped and organised buildings with sustainable
technologies and efficiently designed supporting structures, and appropriate lifetime strategies for buildings and
their components. With a less favourable combination, including suboptimal solutions, a factor 10 is still possible.
Decisive to a good result is the use of sustainable energy resources, although this measure alone cannot produce
the desired result. Therefore, there is no cure-all for sustainable offices; best results are achieved through an
integrated approach starting with the office work concept, which defines the demand for space and location of
offices, after which the use of space, building design and technology can be solved in a sustainable way.
There are many considerations to be made about the different typology, case and innovation studies presented in
this thesis and the limited importance of these when compared to human everyday behaviour. This research
however mapped the technical potential of the sustainable improvement of office accommodation. It is up to man
to accomplish it.
xv
xvi
Front page
The Pantheon in Rome, Italy, a magnificent example of an
ingenious, long-lasting building. Together with the light
beaming through the eye, the space inside the dome
enchants visitors.
In his book The Discovery of Heaven, Harry Mulisch used this
building as a metaphor for the beginning and end of life.
The Beginning
19 G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
factor
09 08 07 C
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
introduction
to building &
sustainability
01 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
This chapter forms an introduction of the research that led to this dissertation. The background of sustainable
building and its problems will be looked into, as well as the objectives, boundary conditions, and approach of the
research.
Figure 01.01: A view on the seemingly chaotic façade of Federal Square Museum in Melbourne, Australia
The Sustainable Office - Andy van den Dobbelsteen
Contents
01.01 Background 7
01.01.01 Environmental problems and sustainability 7
01.01.02 Current environmental performance 8
01.01.03 The concept of effectiveness 9
01.02 Hypotheses 11
01.02.01 Causes of the problem 11
01.02.02 Effective sustainable solutions 12
01.03 Research framework 13
01.03.01 Basic definitions 13
01.03.02 Problem and objective 15
01.03.03 Restrictions 15
01.04 Research methodology and thesis outline 16
01.04.01 Approach 16
01.04.02 Outline 17
All REFERENCES for Volume A - The Beginning can be found on pages 61 to 64.
6 01 General introduction - A The Beginning

Andy van den Dobbelsteen - The Sustainable Office
01.01 Background
01.01.01 Environmental problems and sustainability
Problems ahead
A healthy environment is a basic condition for the existence of plants, animals and also human beings. Without
sensible processing of natural resources, irreplaceable materials will deplete, the natural resistance and purifying
capacity of the earth will not be able to handle pollution anymore, and ecosystems will be deteriorated, eventually
victimising human beings themselves. This stands apart from the direct health impact that the use of resources
causes to human beings themselves.
The world population is growing and demanding economic growth and more luxury, whereas the natural
capacities of the planet are limited. In the 1970s, the Club of Rome warned against the dangers of uninhibited
growth [Meadows et al., 1972]. The congregation of scientists stated that large problems would arise if we
continued living the way we have been. This is difficult to imagine, living in a prosperous country, with no lack of
resources and food. The problems, however, are not 'here and now', but 'there and later' [Duijvestein, 2001]. With
respect to climate change and expected resource depletion, 'there' presumably equals developing countries, and
'later' has already started in many places… Many research projects on the state of the Earth [e.g. Meadows et al.,
1992; WHO, 1997; RIVM, 2001a] demonstrate that the natural equilibrium between human intervention and
ecological resilience has been disturbed. The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 was a first attempt to
globally tune policy on environmental issues. In 1996, this was followed by the summit in Kyoto, where most
countries committed themselves to measures against emissions of ozone-deteriorating compounds and
greenhouse gases. Under president George W. Bush the United States, known to be the greatest contributor to
environmental problems, withdrew from the Kyoto protocol.
By the year 2000 surveys indicated that the emission of carbon dioxide had not decreased. Recent publications in
Nature [Liu et al., 2003] and Biological Conservation [McKee et al., 2003] describe the threat to biodiversity of
human population growth, smaller households and the increasing use of space by humans. Especially
deforestation in developing countries with a recognised rich biodiversity forms a serious threat to one-fifth of the
world's plant and animal species [Brook et al., 2003]. Correction seems more necessary than ever.
The concept of sustainability

The World Commission on Environment and Development [Brundtland et al., 1987] proposed a pro-active global
approach to tackle environmental problems. The concept of sustainable development was introduced, relating
environmental protection to a prosperity more equally divided across the world, concisely formulated as: "a
development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs". However, this definition does not clearly express the balance between economy and ecology,
and the diminishment of differences between rich and poor countries. The commission emphasised this in their
report: "a process of change in which exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of
technological developments and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance current and future potential
to meet human needs and aspirations". In western countries, sustainability is therefore often interpreted in its
environmental meaning, forgetting its promise to developing countries. In spite of this, many governments have
taken up the responsibility to put sustainability on the political agenda, translating it into policy and coupling it into
targets.
In a broader sense, sustainable development is sometimes divided into four main aspects: environmental
sustainability, economic sustainability, cultural sustainability, and social sustainability1 [e.g. Bächtold, 1998], in
which sustainability is specifically related to ecological, economical, cultural and social developments. In the
research presented, I mainly focussed on environmental sustainability, directed at improvements to the ecological
side of sustainability, yet also contributing to the other aspects mentioned. Sustainable building refers to
sustainability in regard to building and construction. This is more elaborately discussed in chapter 03.
1 Definitions of these and most other terms (printed italic) are given in the terminology list at the end of this thesis.
A The Beginning - 01 General introduction 7

The factor 20
Commoner [1971] related environmental problems to the world population, its prosperity and the environmental
impact by prosperity. In order to make the objectives of the Brundtland Commission quantifiable, Ehrlich & Ehrlich
[1990] and Speth [1990] re-introduced this relationship, as in formula 01.01a, in which the pressure on the
environment (EP) equals the magnitude of the world population (P) times the average rate of prosperity or wealth
(W) times the environmental impact related to this wealth (E):
EP = P x W x E <01.01a>
1990 was taken as the reference year, indexing all factors 1:
1990 1 = 1 x 1 x 1 <01.01b>
Around 1990, the Brundtland Commission, like many other institutions, considered the pressure on the
environment too high, intending to halve it within 50 years. Another target was a more equally divided wealth,
meaning that - if western countries do not give up their prosperity - the average rate of prosperity will need to
grow immensely. Estimates of the increase required are factor 4 to 8; however, factor 5 was chosen. Meanwhile,
as recent estimates confirm, the world population was expected to double within 50 years. Therefore, with two
factors in formula 01.01 as a global goal, and another considered inevitable, the manageable factor left is E:
2040 ½ = 2 x 5 x 1/20 <01.01c>
As formula 01.01c indicates, the environmental impact by unit of prosperity, or metabolism needs to be reduced
by factor 20, or 95%. Five Dutch ministries [Jansen & Vergragt, 1992] and different departments of the Delft
University of Technology [Heel & Jansen, 1993] made this factor 20 a goal for sustainability. It is a global target
that needs to be complied with in all aspects of life. It therefore also affects the building industry, as well as office
use.
There are not many countries outside the Netherlands that picked this factor 20 as a target for policy on
sustainability. Better known and more widely supported are the factor 4 and factor 10. These less ambitious
factors of improvement however do not ensure the dual objectives of the Brundtland Commission, which I chose
to take as an underlying basis for my research: improving the health of the environment on the one hand and
establishing a better spread of wealth over the world. Of course it is arguable if these two goals are even
separately realistic in an economy-driven world, let alone if they can be simultaneously achieved, but I saw the
factor 20 as the summit to be checked before the findings would perhaps prove that this is unattainable.
Nevertheless, it remains more of an image of the immense improvement needed rather than an exact goal.
01.01.02 Current environmental performance
The environmental load of office buildings

Recent environmental calculations indicate that in the past 10 years Dutch building projects, with sustainability as
an explicit focus, achieved environmental improvement by a maximum factor of 2.5, using a theoretical building
as a reference for the year 1990 [Croes et al., 2001]. These findings were based on the LCA based assessment
tool GreenCalc, of which the specific contents, advantages and disadvantages will be discussed in chapter 04.
If a factor 20 improvement were the goal for 2040 and the environmental performance were to improve along a
linear target line towards that year, the results found by Croes et al. are not sufficient. In this case, by the year
2000 a factor of 4.8 should already have been achieved (see figure 01.02).
Perhaps worse than calculated

In the Netherlands, measured environmental performances [RIVM, 2001b] show that, starting from 1990, hardly
any improvement can be seen. Nationwide, this can be explained by a building explosion, which neutralises
possible improvements in separate buildings. Another cause for disappointing results can be related to user
influences. In office buildings, the technologies and building services are often used wrongly [Gerritse, 2002].

Another cause of further debts to the environmental performance is that assessments are usually calculated with
a constant building lifespan. In many cases, especially in case of the office market, the actual lifespan achieved is
shorter than accounted for. Without official reference, in comparison with the potential lifespan of supporting
structures, experience from the real estate market is that office buildings often turn out functionally and
economically obsolete within a relatively short period after their delivery. Therefore, I expect the actual
performance to be worse than calculated.
environmental
factor
index TARGET
20 2000
15 1500
INBETWEEN TARGETS
10 1000
5 500
START
1 100
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

year
Figure 01.02: The linear target line towards factor 20 environmental improvement by the year 2040
Necessity of a paradigm shift

Illustration projects show that factor 20 environmental improvement is only approachable through technologies
based on sustainable energy resources, multiple re-use of buildings, and innovative technologies [Linden &
Dobbelsteen, 2000]. Nevertheless, even then the goal remains theoretic, and the measures mentioned are largely
dependent on non-technical aspects. Therefore, a broad approach to the accommodation process - not just
technically yet functionally, organisationally, and socially also - might only lead to a factor 20 improvement. A
paradigm shift is therefore necessary to approach sustainability differently, and more effectively than has been
done so far. This requires a further discussion of a core term in this research: effectiveness.
01.01.03 The concept of effectiveness
The five E-s

Effectiveness can be defined in different ways. In dictionaries it is often blurred with 'efficacy' and 'efficiency'. The
meaning is however different. In their 'Soft System', Vidgen et al. [1993] distinguished 'the five E-s', as terms
defining performance of transformations (which are changes caused by a certain intervention):
Efficacy: does the transformation work; will it actually produce the required output?
Efficiency: is the transformation being carried out with the minimum resources (i.e. the amount of output
divided by the amount of resource used)?
Elegance: is the transformation well designed; is it aesthetically pleasing; is it over-complicated; is it over- or
under-engineered?
Effectiveness: is the transformation process performed by the system meeting the longer term aim?
Ethicality: is the transformation acceptable from a value judgement perspective, where value judgements
concern 'good' and 'bad' and are subject to change over time [Vickers, 1965/1984]?
Vidgen et al. commented on efficiency and effectiveness and how it is possible to be efficient without being
effective. Furthermore, they mentioned that the judgements about elegance are undoubtedly (inter)subjective;
however, their inclusion allows professional experience and competence to be drawn upon when assessing
quality. Vidgen et al. consider economic considerations to be an included in the efficiency criterion.

Conditionality within the soft system

Following the work of Vidgen et al., Alho & Barrett [2002] presented a 'Soft Sustainable System' (clarified by
figure 01.03). In this model there is a hierarchy between the terms; a greater circle represents greater
sustainability.
e
z
y
x
w
Figure 01.03: The soft sustainable system for performance of transformations, according to Alho & Barrett [2002]
In the system the letters stand for the five 'E-s':

w = efficacy [Vidgen et al., 1993]
x = efficiency [Vidgen et al., 1993]
y = effectiveness [Forbes et al,, 1998]
z = ethicality [Vickers, 1965/1984]
e = elegance [Vidgen et al., 1993]
According to Alho & Barrett, elegance is the highest state of sustainability. Elegance and ethicality, however, are
strongly cultural and - as Vidgen et al. stated - partly (inter)subjective. Technically - and objectively - the highest
grade within the model is effectiveness. This research therefore focuses on solutions that are effective.
A definition of effectiveness
As previously stated, Vidgen et al. describe effectiveness with the question: is the transformation process
performed by the system meeting the longer-term aim? This, however, excludes effectiveness related to a short-
term aim or an aim in general. Therefore, in this research effectiveness is generally described as "the extent to
which the transformation process performed by a system meets a certain aim".
Effectiveness:
the extent of meeting a certain aim
Accordingly, effectiveness for sustainability can be defined as follows:
Effectiveness for sustainability:

the extent of contributing to sustainable development
For the specific aim of this research a more specified definition of effectiveness is taken as the basis:
'environmental effectiveness' or 'effectiveness for technical sustainability'.
Environmental effectiveness:
the extent of contributing to a factor 20 environmental improvement by the year 2040
In order to make the concept of effectiveness more concrete, the 'effectiveness factor' (fE) can be introduced,
consisting of the contribution factor (fC), i.e. the environmental load of an element or aspect (Ei) divided by the
total environmental load (Etot), and its improvement potential (fP). See formula 01.02 and figure 01.04.
The effectiveness factor: fE = fC x fP = Ei/Etot x fP <01.02>

contribution to environmental load (f C)

30%
environmental load
6
25%
5
20%
20% potential improvement (f P)
4
12,5% 50%
3 12,5%
10%
2 40%
1
100%
A B C D E
building parts
f E = f C x f P = 0,025 = 0,050 = 0,100 = 0,050 = 0,150
Figure 01.04: Explanation of the effectiveness factor: determine the contribution of a certain building part to the total
environmental load, determine the potential for improvement and calculate their product
A question following the definition is how the effectiveness of a system (or solution) can be determined. A
technical aim can effectively be met according to two main requirements:
1. Importance: relatively great or important elements in the system
2. Improvement: elements in the system with a potential for relatively large improvement
The quest for effectiveness should therefore head in two directions: finding out the contribution of all elements in
a system and finding out the improvement potential. Elements that meet both requirements - i.e. which are
important in the system and have great potential for improvement - are most effective:
Effectiveness = Importance x Improvement
01.02 Hypotheses
01.02.01 Causes of the problem
As concluded in section 01.01, present-day environmental performance of offices is probably not sufficient for the
factor 20 improvement required by the year 2040. Before heading into directions of solutions, the reasons for
these debts need to be analysed. In this section, hypotheses are stated about the cause of the arrears of
environmental performance of offices.
Hypothesis: the building industry focuses on ineffective technical solutions

Without any understanding of present-day performance of offices, a strategy for improvement is useless. One of
the up-coming questions is why the progressive office projects still achieve insufficient improvement with respect
to standard ways of building. Therefore, insight into the effectiveness of design solutions is necessary. Based on
this insight one can concentrate on building elements or design solutions that possibly form an important
contribution to the factor 20. Beside that, new technological solutions need to be developed with a greater
effectiveness than common solutions.
Hypothesis: sustainability is focused on too small a scale

At the moment, sustainability is mainly directed to the design of buildings. An approach on the higher urban scale
possibly yields more effect. One can think of the scale advantage - some technical solutions are not viable or

efficient on the building scale but might be in a broader context - and efficiency improvement potential - intensive
use of space and combination of utilities can lead to saving of materials, energy and water etc.
Consideration of environmental problems on an urban or wider scale and with reference to this scale will give a
better indication of the real environmental performance of building in general.
Hypothesis: sustainability needs to be achieved through more than just technology

The American ecological economist Amory Lovins characterises the attitude of the industry toward social
problems by: "Technology is the answer, but what was the question again?" The focus of present sustainable
building projects is also mainly technical: application of environmentally benign materials and reducing energy
and water consumption. Improvement of these technical aspects is important, but other aspects should stay in
focus as well if we aim to achieve environmental improvement by a factor of 20.
01.02.02 Effective sustainable solutions
The three dimensions of sustainability

Basic concept behind the analysis and further elaboration of the Sustainable Office is the multi-dimensional
approach to sustainability. The model in figure 01.05 shows a graphic representation of achieving technical
sustainability by tackling three quantitative, measurable dimensions or factors:
The technology factor: improvement of building design and building technology
The time factor: improvement of the lifespan2 of buildings, their components and materials
The space factor: improvement of the use of space for office work
The idea of this concept is that the technical factor 20 had been sought for in only one direction: design and
technology, whereas it is in fact a function, not necessarily the product, of space use, technology, and the
eventual lifespan. Instead of attempting to achieve factor 20 in the one-dimensional extension of the technology
axis of figure 01.05, I assume it will be more rewarding to find it in the volume of the cube combining technology
with the space and time axes.
Figure 01.05: Sustainability in three dimensions: technology, space and time.
Figure 01.05 is mainly related to 'hard', quantifiable factors. An essential factor defining the use of space, building
technology and lifespan of a building is not visible: the organisation of office work. Along with other 'soft' factors it
is not visible because the environmental impact of it cannot be directly measured, but appears in a more efficient
use of space and accommodation, as well as commuter travel, which consequently define the factors technology
and time. Therefore, the organisation of office work and other factors - e.g. the quality of life (climate, health,
2 A distinction can be made between the technical, economic and functional lifespan, and the service life of a building. These will be
discussed in Volume C - The Time Factor and their definitions can be found in the Terminology List at the end of this dissertation. Up
until chapter 07 I will use the general term 'lifespan'.

safety, well-being, prosperity, prospects, etc.) - form the core of the three axes of figure 01.05, a fourth dimension
difficult to represent graphically, but one which drifts through all dimensions, like a cloud.
On the basis of the three-dimensional concept, including the organisation of office work, new hypotheses can be
stated about effective sustainable solutions for office accommodation.
Hypothesis: Effective solutions for building design and technology will lead to better
performance than achieved to date
If the environmental measures applied in office buildings were not the most effective solutions imaginable, better
performance should be achieved through an optimal design of offices and use of building technologies.
Hypothesis: Prolonging the lifespan of a building contributes to the factor 20

As stated before, the eventual lifespan of a building is expected to be important to the environmental performance
of a building. Therefore, the time factor is an extension (or deepening) of the technology factor, as the technology
factor influences the lifespan of a building. A hypothesis is that prolonging the lifespan of an office building - more
specifically: the actual lifespan that the office will be in use - will reduce the environmental load per unit of time
and thereby contribute effectively to the factor 20.
Hypothesis: Optimal use of space contributes to the factor 20

The space factor is also indirectly connected to the technology factor, for if less space is needed the demand for
building materials and energy will presumably decrease as well. The technology factor in reverse influences the
use of space. An improved use of space is expected to multiply the improvement possible through technological
measures. It can be sought inside the office, by means of efficient layout principles and intensive use of space,
and outside the office, by means of optimal density and optimal height solutions for urban areas.
Hypothesis: New concepts for office work contribute to the factor 20

By means of some innovative office concepts, 20% of space efficiency improvement is possible with respect to
the original spatial requirements. However, there is still no clear image of the environmental impact of telework
concepts and other innovative concepts. A hypothesis is that innovative office concepts can effectively improve
the use of space and time, as well as the use of technology. Therefore, in this research, the term 'sustainable
office concept' is used rather than 'innovative office concept', when referring to office concepts that meet this aim.
The ideas behind the four hypotheses cannot be considered separately and need to be balanced because
solutions in a singular direction might affect another direction negatively. For instance, despite the expected
importance to environmental improvement, simply prolonging the lifespan of a building does not say anything
about the real use of office space. A long-lasting yet empty building is not effective. On the other hand, just
improving the spatial needs of an office organisation does not assure a longer lifespan. In fact, it may well lead to
a shorter one.
01.03 Research framework
01.03.01 Basic definitions
Ecology
The basic science for all focus on the environment is ecology. Ecology is the conjunction of the Greek words
oikos (house) and logia (treatise) and means: "the relation of plants and living creatures to each other and their
environment, or the study of this" [from Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English: Hornby et al.,
1998].
Environment
From an ecological (not social) viewpoint, the meaning of environment is "the natural conditions, e.g. land, air and
water, in which people, animals and plants live" [Hornby et al., 1998]. A common definition is that of ecologist Udo
de Haes (1984): "environment is the physical, non-living surroundings of society, to which it stands in a reciprocal
relationship". Jong et al. [1992] simplified this definition further to "the set of conditions for life".

An environmental aspect is an element of an organisation's activity, product or service that can interact with the
environment [ISO, 1996].
Environmental problems
In line with the 'technical' definition of Jong, one can speak of an environmental problem if conditions for life are
lacking, namely if the existence of plants, animals and human beings is threatened.
There are three environmental problems, threatening the conditions of life:
Depletion of resources
Deterioration of ecosystems
Deterioration of the human health
Every impact on the environment eventually leads to one or more of these problems.
Examples of the three environmental problems are:

Depletion of zinc: Through the extraction of zinc ore the technical and economic exploitation of zinc
deteriorates. The extraction of materials from the earth crust is not necessarily a problem but the depletion is.
Extraction for that matter can also be harmful to the environment, though this has nothing to do with
depletion.
Deterioration of ecosystems by heavy metals like lead, mercury and cadmium: Through emission these are
spread, absorbed by nature, thereby disturbing ecosystems. Emission of heavy metals is not directly harmful
to the environment, nor is the absorption by plants and animals, but it is a problem as soon as this absorption
becomes a matter of destruction of plants and animals.
Deterioration of the human health by radioactivity: If people get cancer through absorption of radiation, this
can be considered a problem.
Sustainability
Deduced from the concept of sustainable development, sustainability can be defined as a condition in which
sustainable development is accomplished: a state of the world in which needs of all people are fulfilled without
restricting the fulfilment of future needs, a state of balanced economy and ecology. More specifically for the
building industry it means a state in which material cycles have been closed, in which water demand and supply
have been balanced and in which only sustainable energy is applied.
Sustainable building or construction

Nowadays sustainable building3 refers to all kinds of building or construction with a traditionally smaller
environmental load. It however often comes down to traditional building with a few adaptations. The original
meaning of sustainable building was broader: a way of building without harmful effects that can be maintained
until the end of time.
Sustainable accommodation
Sustainable accommodation can literally be defined as accommodation that can be 'sustained', endlessly
maintained, without depletion of resources or deterioration of ecosystems and human health. It however does not
imply that the same accommodation needs to be maintained forever. In terms of this research, it means that the
accommodation of the office, wherever and whenever, is a sustainable solution.
Office, office work, office accommodation

According to the dictionary an office is 'a room, or a set of rooms, or a whole building where people perform
clerical, professional and administrative work'. Vos et al. [1999] simplify this definition to 'a place where office
work is performed' and define office work by 'processing of information'. In their definition of office work, Simons
et al. [2002] use the description: 'archiving, concentrating, producing, and communicating of information'. In fact,
the definitions by Simons et al. give a further clarification of the term 'processing', as used by Vos et al. Therefore,
the complete definition of an office can be 'a working environment (or workplace) where people process
information (as part of their job)'. Therefore, the office can refer to a building, the floor plan or a workplace.
3 According to the Dutch ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (1990) the definition reads as follows: "a way of building
aimed at reducing the health and environmental impact of construction, buildings and the built environment".

Telecommuting and telework

There are different definitions of telework:
Telework occurs when information and communications technologies (ICTs) are applied to enable work to be
done at a distance from the place where the work's results are needed, or where the work would
conventionally have been done [European Telework On-line, 2000].
Telework is work that is performed at a distance from an office building, geographically separated from the
other workplaces [Heiden & Pellenbarg, 1990].
Telework is work performed mainly, or for an important part, at a location other than a traditional workplace
of an employer, involving the use of telecommunication, related to the accomplishment of the working task as
well as to communication with the enterprise [MIRTI, 1997].
In terms of this research, telework was defined as regular work (at least one day per week) outside the central
office, in another office. Incidental work at clients' offices for business reasons (e.g. consulting jobs) is not
considered telework. Telecommuting is limited to working at home for at least one day a week; for the rest of the
week, one needs the availability of a workplace somewhere else [Froggatt, 1996].
01.03.02 Problem and objective
Problem definition
The offices with a focus on sustainability only represent a limited part of the office market. 'Mainstream' office
buildings presumably perform even worse than the already insufficient figures presented. The problem definition
of this research was therefore formed by two questions:
Why is there no great improvement in the environmental performance of office accommodation yet?
How can a factor 20 environmental improvement effectively be achieved for office accommodation?
Main objective
Main objective of this research was: finding effective sustainable solutions for office work, or contributing
significantly to factor 20 environmental improvement of office work accommodation in the year 2040.
Main objective:
finding effective sustainable solutions for the accommodation of office work
Research needed
The first direction of study was finding out the environmental performance of present office buildings through
environmental assessment, detecting the elements that contribute most significantly to the environmental load
and stating a design strategy for effective improvement of office buildings. Optimal solutions needed to be found
for the building geometry and aspects that prove to be significant.
In order to involve the time factor in environmental assessments, the lifespan needed to be methodologically
included in the determination of environmental performance, a new area for sustainable building. After this,
different lifespan strategies could be tested to find potential improvement.
Space use of different office building designs needed to be analysed in order to find the most sustainable
solutions. Therefore, different solutions for the same spatial programme, and urban planning concepts for areas
including the office needed to be studied. This had not been done before, thus requiring the development of
assessment methodologies.
Finally, office work concepts, including employee travel, needed to be environmentally assessed and compared.
Again, as this had not been done before, a new assessment methodology needed to be developed. Last but not
least, new ways of doing office work with a promise to sustainability had to be explored.

01.03.03 Restrictions
Accommodation, technology, and travel

The research was directed at the accommodation of office organisations, organisations that publicly or
commercially couple themselves with professional services. The research was however restricted to the physical
elements providing accommodation and enabling office work: building design, building technology and building
services, and the office environment. Although information and telecommunication technologies form a facility for
office work innovation and thereby office accommodation innovation, I did not study the impact of these.
During the research process, this restriction put me to a dilemma, as the environmental advantage of new office
work concepts - besides space use reduction - are often based on the reduction of employee travel. For a
complete assessment of the potential of office concepts, I therefore needed to involve the movements of office
employees, although these form no part of 'office accommodation'.
The actual use and organisation of office work

Although sustainable solutions can go wrong in practice, for the total improvement possible, a good realisation
and use of measures had to be assumed. The key issue is exploration of the environmental improvement
potential of office accommodation, not the obstacles that may eventually prevent good performance. The actual
use of buildings may therefore be a starting-point for analyses and assessments; it however plays no role in the
study and development of new solutions.
In a similar way of reasoning, the organisation of office work is included and excluded. It plays an important role
in this research, as it influences the demand for space and thereby the building design, the occupation rate,
efficiency of use, and the eventual lifespan of the building. However, the organisation of work processes itself is
another area of study and not included in this research. This also applies to functional and financial aspects of
office work and user satisfaction. In other words, office work is only taken into account in terms of the
accommodation concept it defines.
Target groups
For practical application, the research is in principle directed at owners, building managers, project developers,
architects, and building technologists. It is meant to support the decision moments in the accommodation process
that these stakeholders influence, with an emphasis on the organisation concept, location, accommodation
concept, and design of the office.
01.04 Research methodology and thesis outline
01.04.01 Approach
Research questions
There are four main research questions applying to all the directions of the solutions that the research is
focussing on: the technology factor, the time factor, the space factor, and the organisation of office work. For
each of these factors the following questions needed to be answered:
1. What is the relationship of this factor (technology, time, space, organisation of office work) with
sustainability?
2. How can the environmental performance in terms of this relationship be measured, calculated or modelled?
3. What is the environmental performance of current solutions for office accommodation?
4. How can the environmental performance be improved effectively?
As introduced in the section on the concept of effectiveness, the answer to the last question can be found by
determining the importance and improvement potential of certain strategies and solutions for office
accommodation:
Which aspects or elements contribute most to the environmental load?
Which aspects or elements can be significantly improved?
The exploration of effectiveness for sustainability in the four dimensions of technology, time, space, and
organisation logically led to four main volumes of this thesis. In addition to these, an introductory and concluding

volume would have made a total of six volumes. However, an extra volume was required to assess and analyse
the present-day environmental performance of office buildings, providing insight into the main aspects and
elements contributing to the environmental load, and leading to better understanding of opportunities for
improvement. This completed the total of seven thesis volumes.
Hierarchy
The design and technology of the office building is a combined result of the location of the office and the specific
desires and space requirements of the organisation. Office locations and the way organisations work are defined
by the office (real estate) market. This may be simplified to the schemes of figure 01.06, of which the left one is a
traditional idea, and the right one inserts the organisation between the location and building [Peeters, 2002],
implicitly assuming an organisation cannot influence the location.
Figure 01.06: The hierarchy of office accommodation
Figure 01.06 makes clear that the most effective approach to sustainable offices is expected at the top of these
pyramids: in the market, following this on the location level, then the organisation, and finally the building, under
which even technology may be placed. One could speak of 'small sustainability', related to improvements to the
office building, and 'great sustainability', improving the entire office market (or the whole world) [Jonge, 2003].
Structure
A logical way through sustainable solutions for office accommodation would therefore be top-down. However, this
would only be logical if all required data were already known. Since this research started with hardly any
knowledge of the environmental impact of current technical solutions, let alone entire buildings or the location and
market, I needed to start from the bottom and find out environmental-technical details before translating them to a
higher level of abstraction and influence. I contemplated on ultimately treating the separate parts in the reverse
order of the bottom-up exploration, but since assessment results from a lower abstraction level were used for
studies at a higher level, this would have created an intangible structure with forward references. That is why I
wrote the greatest part of this dissertation following the exploration of my research - yet of course better
structured than the actual chaotic process…
At the very end of the dissertation I will however treat the findings top-down, as it works in practice and thus
providing the right order of sustainable decisions.
01.04.02 Outline
Order of volumes and chapters

As explained previously, the thesis was divided into seven main volumes addressed in the following order:
A. The Beginning
B. The Basis
C. The Time Factor
D. The Technology Factor
E. The Space Factor
F. The Organisation of Office Work
G. The End
Every volume contains chapters, leading to the somewhat uncommon number of 19 chapters.
Figure 01.07 presents the volumes and chapters of this dissertation, working bottom-up yet paying more attention
to important levels of the hierarchy. The core of this overview therefore is formed by a triangle in which 'the quest

for effective sustainable solutions for office accommodation' is the common thread. The Time Factor in fact is not
a low level but runs through all levels: technology, space and organisation of office work. It is addressed early in
the thesis in order to enable a better, more complete interpretation of the case study of Volume B - The Basis by
involving the building lifespan in environmental performance. The first two chapters of Volume C - The Time
Factor therefore form no element of the triangle. The last one however discusses sustainable solutions and
strategies.
19
conclusions
Gthe end
F
assessm ent
the organisation
15 16 17 18
m ethodology
sustainability
foroffice
concepts
14 13 12 E
space use &
10 11 D
the technology
use of the building
C
09
designing
forlife 08
fora long
lifespan of
buildings
07
forthe
building
lifespan
the time factor
B
assessm ent
04 05 06
case study
ofoffice the basis
buildings
buildings
03 02 01 A
introduction
to building &
sustainability
Figure 01.07: Overview of this dissertation

Explanation
Uncommon, yet associated with the hierarchy considerations discussed previously, the story starts at the
bottom with this general introduction, chapter 014. Since not all basic knowledge, definitions and facts
required for further reading could be treated in this first chapter, and in order to avoid repeated introductions
of them, I decided to add two extra introductions, one on the office as a concept (02), and one on
sustainability, environmental problems and the relationship with building (03).
Follow the line and you will find the chapters of Volume B - The Basis. In cooperation with and half financed
by the Dutch Government Buildings Agency (DGBA; Rijksgebouwendienst or Rgd in Dutch), I was able to,
together with two colleagues, assess and analyse twelve offices representing the market, providing the
basic information on important environmental aspects and elements for office buildings. Before this case
study could be conducted, an inventory and analysis of methods and tools for environmental assessment
(04) was necessary, and more important, a well-defined assessment methodology specifically directed at
office buildings needed to be developed (05). These two chapters therefore precede the presentation of the
case study (06).
We then arrive at Volume C - The Time Factor. This volume starts with the presentation of the lifespan
accounting methodology (07), by means of which the age and expected lifetime of buildings can be taken
into account with respect to environmental performance. Decisions between demolition or re-use of an old
building can also be supported. I needed to treat this time aspect before The Technology Factor because
the office buildings case study had to be recalculated on the basis of the actual age and estimated lifespan
ahead. A further elaboration on the methodology is presented in chapter 08, discussing the qualities and
values that define the eventual life expectancy of a building. After this, chapter 09 explores different lifetime
strategies for office buildings. It is the first chapter within the triangle representing the chapters exploring
solutions, conditions and boundaries of the Sustainable Office. The triangle also represents the upside down
hierarchic pyramid.
Volume D - The Technology Factor returns to the findings of chapter 06 and explores effective technical
solutions for a sustainable use of resources (10) and the optimal shape and height of office building design
(11).
Consecutively, in Volume E - The Space Factor a step is put towards the parameter that precedes the
eventual size, shape and design of the building: the demand for space. Chapter 12 first brings into focus all
aspects and indicators related to the environmental impact of the use of space. In chapter 13, the use of
space inside offices is analysed, and chapter 14 discusses the assessment of seven urban European cases
based on intensive and/or multiple use of space.
Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work puts another step back in the accommodation process, to the
factor defining space use. Chapter 15 analyses the relationship of office work concepts with sustainability. In
chapter 16, an assessment methodology is explained, on the basis of which different telework concepts
were compared (17). Chapter 18 finally explores existing and future innovative solutions for office work
leading to environmental improvement.
The dissertation concludes with Volume G - The End. Chapter 19 summarises all results and puts them in
the right order, clarifying the overall improvement potential of The Sustainable Office. Not all of the terms
used in this thesis are defined in the text. Therefore, I provided the reader with an extensive terminology list
with definitions and descriptions of all important terms and concepts. It can be found after chapter 19. For
clarification of the used terminology please turn to this terminology appendix.
Relations between chapters and research questions

Figure 01.08 presents an overview of the chapters divided into the main volumes and the four research questions
introduced previously, including a general exploration. When a chapter is repeated once or twice the thickly
bordered cell depicts the main focus.
4 Why, for instance, 04 and not 4? To be honest, I first thought it looked nicer. However, second, it is more practical. In an overview, the
computer places a number 4 after 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 2, and 3. The same counts for all my chapters, pictures,
and files with calculations, tables, and figures. With a book of this size, this would make structuring of files very complicated.

A
the beginning
B
the basis
C
the time factor
D
the technology
factor E
the space factor
F
the organisation
of office work G
the end
0
01
General
exploration
02
1
What is the 03 07 12 15
relationship of
this factor with
sustainability?
08
2
How can the 04 08
environmental
performance
be determined?
05 07 10 11 13 14 16
3
What is the
environmental
06 13 17
performance
of current
solutions? 07 09 10 11 14 18
4
How can the
environmental
09 10 11 13 14 18
performance
be improved
effectively? 19
Figure 01.08: Division of chapters into the four main research questions
Man/woman
In this dissertation, especially Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work, I will be writing about certain office
employee types. Although an office worker can be masculine or feminine, for convenience, I sometimes refer to
this person with 'he', 'him' or 'his'. I am not ignoring emancipation; it is just that most office workers are men and
we are generally more used to talking about office workers in the masculine form. Female readers, please accept
my apologies for this.

02 INTRODUCTION TO THE OFFICE
This chapter describes the context of office accommodation types. The chapter starts with a brief history of office
accommodation, then new developments will be discussed. Offices will be divided between solutions for the
placing of the building, the internal layout design, or the use pattern of its workplaces.
Figure 02.01: Office caves in the building for the insurance company Interpolis in Tilburg, Netherlands
Contents
02.01 A brief history of office accommodation 23

02.01.01 'The clerks' factory' 23
02.01.02 The cellular office 23
02.01.03 The open-plan office 24
02.01.04 The office landscape 25
02.01.05 Centraal Beheer and its followers 26
02.01.06 The combi office 27
02.01.07 Explaining international differences 28
02.02 The office: place, space, and use 29
02.02.01 Office place solutions 30
02.02.02 Office space solutions 34
02.02.03 Office use solutions 37
22 02 Introduction to the office - A The Beginning

02.01 A brief history of office accommodation
The development of the office as a production means can roughly be divided into the following steps:
Late 19th century: 'clerks' factories'
From the 1900s: cellular offices
From the 1920s: open-plan offices
Mainly in the 1960s: the office landscape
A special development from 1972: Centraal Beheer and its followers
From the late 1970s: the combi office
These development steps will be treated in the sections following.
02.01.01 'The clerks' factory'
In the nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution took place. Starting in the United Kingdom, a diversity of
industries was developed. At the beginning, in the factories, the manager had to cope with administration himself
because there was no staff specified for it. As the importance and magnitude of this administrative work grew, it
developed as a new kind of working activity. Initially, the activities of producing (the real factory work), designing,
administrating and managing were interwoven with each other and located together in the same building. When
the administrative activities that could be called office work were separated from the other work, it functioned from
small residential buildings.
In the twentieth century, office functions, as we know them now, were uncoupled from the productive and
industrial processes. This led to the division of buildings in which the different functions were executed. From this
moment on, office buildings developed in their own way. As the first cars were a kind of motorised carriage, the
first real office buildings were more of a 'clerks' factory' than an office as we know it nowadays: large halls or
rooms, with employees sitting orderly at tables in rows, the supervisor having the privilege of a personal room
overlooking the production space. The difference with ordinary factories was that the employees were relatively
neatly dressed and the work being done resembled the office work definition given in chapter 01: processing of
information. The employees were mostly working at large typing machines, producing pieces of paper. These
'white-collar factories' had flexible floor plans and anonymous workrooms with noisy office machines [Bedoire,
1979].
02.01.02 The cellular office
Many of the Anglo-Saxon office buildings that evolved starting from the end of the nineteenth century had a
cellular office plan that significantly differed from European cellular offices (see figure 02.02).
Figure 02.02a & b: Two cellular floor plans: a. the American example of the Foreman State National building in New York,
USA and b. a European example
As a result of regulations lacking in daylight and outside views, the typical floor plans of American examples were
deeper. In European countries, from the 1950s onwards, the clerks' factory developed itself into an office with
A The Beginning - 02 Introduction to the office 23

personal rooms for each employee, with a corridor as a way to, and connector between, the rooms. As typical
examples, the floor plans of figure 02.02 are scale-less and orientation-independent.
The advantages of the floor layout of these cellular offices - also called cell offices or chamber offices - were
recognition, acknowledgement, privacy, and an individually adjustable indoor climate. Not particularly favourable,
however a feature of these offices is expression of status, power control and preference. In cellular offices, the
door of the rooms is regulatory for communication or contemplation, to be decided by the employee himself.
Disadvantages are the relatively inefficient use of space, building materials, cabling and equipment, the few
mutual contacts, and the difficulty of consultation or joint activities at unplanned moments (see figure 02.03).
Figure 02.03 (left): A typical cellular office plan with single corridor
Figure 02.04 (right): A double-corridor cellular office plan
02.01.03 The open-plan office
Already before the development of the cellular office in Europe, in the USA in the 1920s, Frederick Taylor
designed the first open-plan office. This office consisted of an open floor layout with desks placed orthogonally,
facing the supervisor [Leffingwell, 1925]. With the introduction of air-conditioning in the 1930s, and fluorescent
lighting in the 1940s, the floor depth of office buildings was no longer limited by the need for daylight and natural
ventilation [Sundstrom, 1986]. Gradually, an open floor plan with a central core of elevators and special facilities
became the standard for office building in the USA and UK, resulting in floor depths generally ranging from 25 to
70 m (see figure 02.05).
Figure 02.05: The maximum open floor plan (69 m x 69 m) of the Sears Tower in Chicago, USA

It is only since the 1990s that European companies switched over to more open-plan-like floor layouts, however
either with a much more limited floor depth or penetrated by large glass-covered spaces, as a result of daylight
and outside view regulations.
The features of the open-plan office were a rigid and orthogonal arrangement of workplaces, leading to a very
'controlled' and 'clean' working environment with little personal influence. Furthermore, the open-plan office led to
many technological innovations: for instance air-conditioning and raised floors with integrated service trenches. At
a time when typewriters and telephones were the only visible office equipment, the open-plan office already
anticipated information technology.
Open-plan offices are still often applied, especially in Anglo-Saxon countries. In other countries creative
companies, such as architects and graphic designers, often used an open floor plan (see figure 02.06).
Figure 02.06: The open plan office of the graphic designers company EVD in Sydney, Australia [picture: Kasper Wensveen]
02.01.04 The office landscape
At the end of the 1950s, as a specific form of the open-plan office, a German consultancy group, the Quickborner
Team, developed a radical new office concept: the office landscape. The office landscape (called 'Großraum' in
Germany) consisted of large office spaces used by many employees. The seemingly chaotic configuration of
desks and chairs was designed on the basis of analysis of work patterns and ergonomic needs of office
employees, because conventional office buildings no longer met the needs of modern office work [Schnelle,
1993]. The indoor climate needed to be fully air-conditioned. Figure 02.07 gives an example.
Figure 02.07: The office landscape of the German company GEG Versand Kamen

The advantages of this new office type were horizontal, non-hierarchical exchange of information and contacts
between the employees, and an inexpensive and flexible floor plan. The office landscape however had many
drawbacks: the floor develops to a jungle because people create partitions themselves; paper lying scattered
around forms a mess; employees do not have their own territory and lack responsibility; there is no privacy; the
centralised air-conditioning system and noise leads to climatic problems; not everybody can sit near a window
and have a view outside [Kammerer, 1985]. See for instance figure 02.08. These problems are all instances of
ignored basic psychological needs [Vroon, 1990].
Figure 02.08: Instance of an office landscape: the former office of the newspaper Het Parool [picture: Caro Bonink]
02.01.05 Centraal Beheer and its followers
In the 1970s a difference in culture, organisation and employee expectation was acknowledged between
countries, organisations, and even separate office functions. Herman Hertzberger tried to capture cooperation
and individual aspirations in an integrated office design for the insurance company Centraal Beheer in Apeldoorn,
Netherlands. In order to make the employees feel as part of a working community without being lost in the crowd
[Staal, 1987], the office was transformed into a small village. Small office units for only 8-10 people were linked by
raised walkways, atria and common spaces, creating a kasbah-like office layout (see figure 02.09).
Figure 02.09: The floor plan of the Centraal Beheer office in Apeldoorn, Netherlands [picture: Herman Hertzberger]

Another crucial idea was that users had to play an important role in finishing the building. Hertzberger intended to
design a structure that the employees themselves had to make 'their own' by, for example, adding decorations or
bringing furniture from their homes (see figure 02.10)
Figure 02.10: The interior of the Centraal Beheer office [picture: Willem Diepraam]
This innovative concept was followed in several other office designs, however never to the same fundamental
extent as original at Centraal Beheer. As discussed in chapter 06, even Hertzberger's own Ministry of Social
Affairs and Labour (in The Hague, Netherlands) was eventually used differently than the designer had intended.
The concept therefore found a less radical successor in the Scandinavian combi office, which was broadly
adapted.
02.01.06 The combi office
The 1980s brought a flood of office building innovations. Most importantly, the personal computer became a
standard; automation and tele- and data-communication entered the world of office work. The increase of this
electrical equipment required networks and cable routings which therefore greatly altered the infrastructure in
offices and led to an increase in internal heat production and a greater pressure on office space. Moreover,
organisation structures and the profile of the personnel changed. In Sweden, the so-called combi office - or
cocoon-office - evolved from a 'democratisation' of workplaces. It consisted of small private cellular office rooms
with glazed partitions located along the perimeter of the building, grouped around an open central zone with
common facilities such as photocopiers and archives (see figure 02.11).
Figure 02.11: The combi-office layout of the office of the Swedish company Zander & Ingeström

In the private spaces, employees were able to work independently, without hindrance from their colleagues. The
open space was the 'living room', for consultation, relaxation and communication (see figure 02.12). The combi
office offers great transparency toward the inside and outside. An important advantage of this office type is the
possibility of personnel to decide themselves if they want to retreat or stay in the public space in the middle. The
combi office took away a lot of disadvantages of the cellular and the open-plan offices (especially the office
landscape) on the other. A drawback of the combi office is the relatively large use of space, where every
employee has his own private cell, or the lack of a private territory, where an employee does not have his own
workplace.
Figure 02.12: A place for relaxation and conference in the Dynamic Office in Haarlem, Netherlands
The combi office is strongly associated with office innovation. It is a perfect solution combining the advantages of
both cellular and open-plan offices [Kamphuis, 1992; Veldhoen, 1995].
02.01.07 Explaining international differences
In order to explain office differences, in his PhD-research, Juriaan van Meel [2000] compared offices from
different European countries. In the part following, the main differences Meel had found are briefly discussed.
Different capitalisms
The main difference between synchronic application of open-floor plans (as in the UK and USA) and more cell-
based floor plans (as in Northern Europe) is caused by an efficiency- and technology-driven development in the
investor versus user demands driven development.
American and British labour relations are dominated by 'shareholder capitalism'. Shareholders and their profits
are main interests of organisations, reflected by the efficiency of the deep British floors. Developers and
investors, who are often strongly influenced by American practice, dominate the British market. By nature these
parties are more interested in the efficiency and flexibility of buildings rather than end-user desires. Particularly in
London, developers have been able to ignore user interests for a long time because of all-time high market
pressures [Meel, 2000].
On the European continent, 'stakeholder capitalism' prevails. Organisations explicitly regard the well-being of their
employees and society in general as part of their interests [Charkham, 1998; Ferner& Hyman, 1999]. The narrow
Continental-European floors express the interests of employees: they are the product of the employees' desire for
daylight, an outside view and operable windows. In Continental Europe employees have been able to put their
stamp on office design, because their organisations traditionally build their own buildings. As owner-occupiers
they have to be less concerned about issues such as gross-to-net ratios, efficiency, standardisation, flexibility or
marketability than other office developers [Meel, 2000].
Different efficiencies
Table 02.03 gives percentage of workers who were absent more than 5 days due to health problems caused by
their job [EFILWC, 1996]. Remarkably, German and Dutch employees, with their user-based, excellent working
conditions, are absent more often than other European employees.

Table 02.03: Office employees absent more than 5 working days due to their job [EFILWC, 1996]
country proportion
Germany 28%
Netherlands 19%
Italy 12%
United Kingdom 9%
Sweden 9%
Nevertheless, international data of absences cannot be directly compared. The interpretation of 'illness' differs
between countries: for instance, absence due to a conflict about work is accounted for differently. Compared to
other countries, The Netherlands and Germany have a high labour productivity, which is a communicating vessel
with illness absence. Furthermore, the office environment mainly affects short-term absence, limiting the value of
considerations that only involve absences of more than 5 days [Leijten, 2002].
Different rents
Another crucial difference in market conditions is the rent level. These differences can be explained by
differences in labour relations and market conditions. More importantly than regulations is the culture factor. The
way in which culture is expressed, however, depends strongly on market conditions and the extent to which users
are actually involved in workplace design. There are three aspects of culture that have an impact on workplace
design: hierarchy, individualism and the way people interact [Meel, 2000].
Different forms
Form should follow function, yet similar organisations are accommodated in strongly varying buildings in different
countries. Roughly there are three reasons why national context can overrule the impact of functional
requirements [Meel, 2000]:
1. Differences in the interpretation of functional requirements;
2. The relative importance of these requirements;
3. Their translation into design solutions.
Ad 1. Efficiency has a different meaning in London than in Amsterdam, where rents were twice as low around the
year 2000. The same goes for the term flexibility. In the UK it refers to open office spaces in which workplaces
can be easily rearranged. In the Netherlands it refers to cellular offices with moveable partitions.
Ad 2. The importance of the various requirements depends on the powers and interests of the parties involved
(developers, owners, real estate managers, shareholders, employees). In a developer-led market such as the UK,
flexibility is more important than user comfort. In Continental Europe it is the other way around.
Ad 3. Handbooks on office design lead designers into believing that every activity or function requires its own type
of space. Nevertheless, international differences clearly illustrate that similar functions can take place in markedly
different buildings, and vice versa.
02.02 The office: place, space, and use
Vos et al. [1999] divide workplace concepts between the aspects place, space and use. All concepts are called
'office', but place merely refers to the building and its location, space to the floor plan and use to the workplace
(see figure 02.13).
For the following three subsections, I used the taxonomy of the publication 'The Office, the Whole Office and
Nothing but the Office' by Vos et al. for the traditional and innovative office accommodation concepts.

Figure 02.13: Graphical illustration of the office place, space and use concepts,
from The Office, the Whole Office and Nothing but the Office [Vos et al., 1999]
02.02.01 Office place solutions
The office place can be a central office, or it can be a telework office. In this section, each of these offices and
their forms will be discussed.
The central office

The central office is a building where the workplaces of employees from the same unit or department are located
[Vos et al., 1999]. It can be a headquarters or a branch office. Another name for such an office is the base office:
a building that accommodates the most important part of the organisation, and from which the whole office is
managed [EGM-onderzoek, 1994].
Its features are:
Face to face interaction
Corporate identity (see figure 02.14)
Traditional concept of an office

Figure 02.14: Example of a typical central office with corporate identity, even without a company name on it
The telework office

The telework office is a workplace that is physically disconnected from the central office [Vos et al., 1999]. Its
features are:
Availability of information technology
Limited face to face interaction
Limited visual control and management
Necessity of output-based assessment
The telework office can be a satellite office (facilitated by the employer), a business centre (facilitated by a
commercial provider) or a guest office (the office of a client). It can also be a home office or an instant office, i.e.
anywhere where office work can be done. A related concept is the club office, i.e. an office that is used in addition
to telework offices, a meeting place for employees who normally only interact electronically [Laing, 1997].
The satellite office

There are different definitions of the satellite office concept:
An office building near the teleworkers' homes, financed by one organisation, with workplaces and other
facilities for the exclusive use by teleworkers from that organisation [TU Eindhoven, 1995].
An office intended for use by employees from the same or from a different organisation, whose residence is
near to the office; this is not simply a branch office [Becker et al., 1992].
An office that is not the central office and where employees use the existing facilities [Rgd, 1996]; see figure
02.15, for an example of this.
In terms of this research, the satellite office is solely considered as a telework office exploited by the organisation
of the central office. It is therefore a facility for employees provided by their own organisation.
Figure 02.15: Satellite office for the Dutch Government Buildings Agency: Pels Rijckenstraat in Arnhem, Netherlands
The business centre

The business centre is a telework office, facilitated by a commercial provider [Vos et al., 1999]. Another definition
is: a place where serviced rooms can be rented by the hour or day [Duffy et al., 1993]. EGM-onderzoek [1994]

also called it a telework centre: a building with office space that can be rented by several organisations in addition
to the central office and often with an on-line connection with the central office.
The business centre offers office space and support service on either a short-term or an as-needed basis [Sims
et al., 1996]. Its features are:
Availability of high grade IT
Regulation of office space usage
Situated in places with a high concentration of potential clients (see figure 02.16)
Figure 02.16: One of the many business centres of office space provider Regus
Concepts related to the business centre are the neighbourhood or district office and the transfer office. These will
be introduced in chapter 18.
The guest office

The guest office is an office located in the building of a principal or client organisation [Vos et al., 1999]. It is also
referred to as guesting, an arrangement of two or more companies to allow one another's employees to use
offices on location [HQ Business Centres, 2000]. This involves using someone else's facility as a remote work
centre. The other person may be a customer, client or fellow employee [AICPA, 2000].
The guest office's features are:
Close interaction with people you work with
Presence of facilities and resources of the principal or client organisation
The home office

The home office is a workplace located in the residence of an employee [Vos et al., 1999]. It is also referred to as
home based telecommuting, when employees work at home for a limited number of days a week [Sims et al.,
1996]. Employees return to the central office for meetings and other group activities. More generally,
telecommuting can be defined as working at home for at least one day a week; for the rest of the week one needs
the availability of a workplace somewhere else [Froggatt, 1996]. Miller [2000] calls the home office the most
common form of telecommuting, where employees working at home one or more days a week.
The features of the home office are:

Unavailability of office facilities such as reception and reproduction facilities
Integration of work and private life (see figure 02.17)
Necessity of high grade IT for optimal working conditions
The latter is not necessarily true: a simple telephone line will already provide access to the Internet, and thereby
to the central office.

Figure 02.17: As simple as it can be: a home office in the corner of a living room
The instant office

The instant office is a workplace, instantly created by the user in a place that is not primarily designed for office
work [Vos et al., 1999]. Employees are constantly on the move carrying their offices with them. Laptops, modems
and various telecommunications services allow these mobile workers to connect to the central office, customers
or suppliers, from virtually any location. In terms of these sorts of offices, Becker & Joroff [1995] talk about found
alternative workplaces, spaces, not exclusively designed for work: hotel lobbies and rooms, automobiles,
airplanes, airline clubs, restaurants and so forth. I can add also trains (see figure 02.18) and libraries.
The instant office's features are:

Unavailability of office facilities yet availability of non-territorial facilities, depending on the particular location
Necessity of IT for contact with the office
'Footloose' features: freedom of time and place
Figure 02.18 (left): Instant office in the luxury ICE-train from Amsterdam to Frankfurt
Figure 02.19 (right): All a virtual office needs: power and access to a network (which may also be wireless)
Another name for the instant office is virtual office. The virtual office can be defined as a place for office work,
which is done 'footloose and fancy free'. Its opportunities evolved as a result of mobile phones, laptops, internet
and e-mail (see figure 02.19).
A virtual office example often described is the virtual, non-territorial, and open TBWA Chiat/Day [e.g. Becker &
Steele, 1994; Raymond & Cunliffe, 1997; Duffy & Powell, 1997). This concept did not entirely succeed because
employees could not find workstations or one another. As a result, their productivity plummeted [Berger, 1999].

Comparison of the different office place concepts

Table 02.04 is a concluding scheme of the different office place concepts and their characteristics.
Table 02.04: Characteristics of office place concepts
PLACE central office satellite office guest office business centre home office instant office
near potential
location anywhere near residences anywhere at home footloose
clients
no
corporate identity yes yes no no no
(of the client)
management control yes limited limited no no no
limited limited (with other depends on the

face to face interaction yes limited no
(with the client) companies) location
output-based no yes yes yes yes yes
regulation of usage no possibly possibly yes no no
yes yes
IT necessary no yes yes yes
(high grade) (high grade)
facilities available yes yes usually usually no no
02.02.02 Office space solutions
A workplace can be physically disconnected from other workplaces or located in the same place. Examples of
different forms of spatial concepts are:
The cellular office (1-3 workplaces)
The group office (4-12 workplaces)
The open-plan office (13+ workplaces)
These spatial concepts have an influence on the way people interact, the type of climate control, spatial flexibility,
and spatial efficiency.
The cellular office

The cellular office - sometimes called cell office - is an enclosed space designed to accommodate 1-3 workplaces
[Vos et al., 1999]. Another definition is a composition of work and meeting spaces with the emphasis on individual
use. The rooms are separately accessible by corridors, stairs and elevators and are used by 1-3 persons [Dewulf
& Jonge, 1994]. Duffy & Powell [1997] say it accommodates individual, private work with little interaction. In a
cellular office the rooms are situated along the perimeter. Windows provide daylight.
Figure 02.20: A typical corridor in the Tax Office in Terneuzen, Netherlands
Features of the cellular office are:

Acoustic and visual privacy
Appropriate for private work and confidential meetings

Room size as an expression of status and hierarchical structures

Decentralised climate control
Limited spatial flexibility
Limited space use efficiency
The fact that cellular offices perhaps provide light rooms yet also dark corridors is demonstrated by an example of
the Tax Office in Terneuzen, Netherlands (figure 02.20).
The group office

The group office is an enclosed space designed to accommodate 4-12 workplaces [Vos et al., 1999]. Another
definition is: an intermediate between a cellular office and an office landscape, consisting of medium-sized rooms,
each accommodating 4-15 people [Dewulf & Jonge, 1994]. The Dutch Government Buildings Agency [Rgd, 1996]
also calls the group office team office and states it is designed for 4-9 people. More general 'group space' is a
medium-sized room containing 5-15 persons who work together [Duffy, 1976]. Another variant on the group office
is the den office, in which the den spaces are designed for group work and often provide a range of several
simple settings usually arranged in an open-plan office or in group rooms [Duffy & Powell, 1997].
Figure 02.21: Group office in the TNO Building, Delft, Netherlands
A related concept is the project space, which is dedicated to a particular project or team, for the duration of work
[Twijnstra Gudde, 1996; Steelcase, 1996]. Figure 02.21 gives an example.
The features of the group office are:
Little acoustic and visual privacy for 4-12 people
Appropriate for group work
Decentralised climate control
Limited spatial flexibility and use efficiency
The open-plan office

The open-plan office is an enclosed space designed to accommodate 13 or more workplaces [Vos et al., 1999].
Features of the open-plan office are:
Little acoustic and visual privacy
Appropriate for interaction and social control
Few possibilities for individual climate control
Good spatial flexibility
An efficient use of space
A particular type of open-plan office is the office landscape, an arrangement of workplaces in an irregular pattern
and separated from one another by semi-high screens, plants and filing cabinets [Duffy, 1976], for instance, see
figure 02.22. Other definitions of the office landscape are: a large continuous space consisting of at least 10
workplaces [Rgd, 1996] and a large open space in which artificially lighted workplaces are not enclosed by floor-
to-ceiling partitions however separated by interior elements such as plants, cabinets and semi-high partitions
[Dewulf & Jonge, 1994]. This type of space concept is also called the open office - the scattering of desks and
work groups across huge open floor plans [Brand, 1994].

Figure 02.22: Open-plan interior of the Food Inspection Department, Zutphen, Netherlands
The combi office

The combi office is a cellular office situated around an open space that is designed to accommodate common
facilities and group-work [Vos et al., 1999]. Another definition is: small, glass-fronted, individual rooms surrounded
by or immediately adjacent to spaces for teamwork [Duffy & Powell, 1997]. The concept emerged to provide high
levels of personal enclosure at the building perimeter as well as shared spaces for interaction and group work in
the inner space [Laing, 1997]. A different name for this concept is cocon office: small separated workplaces, in
which employees with different functions perform individual tasks, grouped around a common inner space, that
accommodates all other facilities and functions [Dewulf & Jonge, 1994]. This could also be an office based on the
idea of separated workplaces situated around a common central space, which serves as a meeting place, and
provides filing cabinets, faxes, printers, etc. [Rgd, 1996]. See figure 02.23, for example.
Features of the combi office are:
Combination of enclosed and open spaces
Visual and acoustic privacy with individual climate control (in enclosed spaces)
Availability of common facilities (in open space)
Limited efficient floor use
A particular type of the combi office is the monastery office, in which the regular workplaces are situated in the
open space and where private work and personal meetings take place in small rooms around this open space
[Wagenberg & Wilmes, 1995; TU Eindhoven, 1995].
Figure 02.23: The combi-office layout of the office tower of insurance company Interpolis in Tilburg, Netherlands
The free office

In order to provide an extra option for non-structural office space that is not specifically designed for office work,
the free office space typology has been added. This is the space solution for the instant office. Therefore, it is not
a typical floor plan or workplace design, however a workplace in any place. In this respect, 'workplace' is any
place where office work (the processing of information) can be performed. It can be a library, a restaurant table, a
comfortable chair, a train seat, or even a floating mattress in the pool of someone's holiday location. In fact, the
free office space is just the space around the office worker and his appliances.

Features of the free office are:

Open space by definition, possibly in an enclosed room (see figure 02.24)
No visual and acoustic privacy
No climate control
Availability of facilities depending on the environment where work is performed
Very efficient floor use and flexibility
Figure 02.24: Example of free office space: a dining kitchen
Comparison of the different office space concepts

Table 02.04 is a concluding scheme of the different office space concepts.
Table 02.05: Characteristics of office space concepts
SPACE cellular group open-plan combi free
partly
climate control decentralised decentralised centralised centralised
(de)centralised
acoustic and visual limited (for 4-12 yes (in enclosed
yes limited no
privacy people only) spaces)
private work and personal yes (in enclosed
yes no no no
meetings spaces)
interaction and social
no limited yes yes no
control
expression of status yes limited no no no
spatial flexibility limited limited yes yes yes
space use efficiency limited limited yes limited yes
02.02.03 Office use solutions
There are four concepts of using a workplace, presented by table 02.06:

Assigning one workplace to one person (personal workplace)
Assigning one workplace to a group of people (shared workplace)
Assigning a group of workplaces to a group of people (non-territorial workplace)
Assigning a group of workplaces to one person (plural workplace)5
5 Vos et al. did not mention this type of use.

Table 02.06: Different office use concepts
one person a group of people
one workplace personal office shared office
a group of non-territorial
plural office
workplaces office
The personal office

The personal office is a workplace used exclusively by a single employee [Vos et al., 1999]. Another name for it is
'personal space', space allocated to an individual [Steelcase, 1996]. This space is for individuals who continue to
need an office space 'permanently assigned' to them because most of their process-oriented work is performed
on site [Miller, 2000]. There are many examples of personal offices.
Features are:
Personalisation of the workplace
Availability of private territory
Emphasising status and position (see figure 02.25)
People can easily be located
Figure 02.25: Undeniably a personal office, in this case in the monumental Public Works office in The Hague, Netherlands
The shared office

A shared office is a workplace assigned to two or more employees who use the workplace on a rotating basis
[Vos et al., 1999]. The Dutch Government Buildings Agency [Rgd, 1996] speaks of two or more specific users per
workplace, often used by part-time or ambulatory workers. Two or more workers are assigned to the same desk,
workstation, or individual office [Becker et al., 1993].
Features are:
Availability of private territory
Difficult personalisation of the workplace
Possibility of storage of personal items nearby
Requirements for the shared office concept are scheduling and a clean desk policy.
The non-territorial office

The non-territorial office is a number of workplaces assigned to two or more employees [Vos et al., 1999]. Other
definitions are:
An environment where employees do not have their own assigned, individual workstations or offices.
Usually, there are more employees than workstations [Sims et al., 1996]

A space allocation practice in which individuals have no desks, workstations or offices for their own exclusive
use [Becker, 1993]
Another name for it is free address: a setting made up of 'self-service' workstations, allocated on a 'first-come,
first-served' basis [Steelcase, 1996].
Features are:
Unavailability of private territory
Presence of mobile or centrally located cabinets
Appropriate for spontaneous interaction (see figure 02.26)
Appropriate for mobile workgroups or departments.
Requirements are regulation, on the basis of hotelling (employees make reservations for workplaces in advance)
or first-come, first-served (workplaces are assigned upon arrival at the office building), and clean-desking.
A related concept is that of activity-related workplaces. In this concept workplaces are dedicated to specific tasks
(readings, meetings etc.). Employees move from one workplace to another, depending on what sort of work they
perform at any one time [Twijnstra Gudde, 1996; Rgd, 1996].
Figure 02.26: Non-territorial workplaces in the Food Inspection Department, Zutphen, Netherlands
The plural workplace

An office employee possibly needs more than one workplace and would rather not share these with other people.
This plural workplace can either be assigned to someone with a high rank in the hierarchy (e.g. the director) or
someone in a supporting function (the technician, network manager, see figure 02.27), both working at different
places in the building, but needing personal space in each case.
Figure 02.27: One of the two workplaces of a technical manager in the Tax Office in Gorinchem, Netherlands

Comparison of the different office use concepts

Table 12.07 below is a concluding scheme of the different office use concepts.
Table 02.07: Characteristics of office use concepts
USE personal shared non-territorial plural
in mobile or
personal items in the office nearby in the office
central cabinet
personalisation yes limited no yes
private territory yes yes no yes
emphasising status yes yes no yes
locatable yes limited no limited
interaction no limited yes (spontaneous) limited

03 INTRODUCTION TO BUILDING &
SUSTAINABILITY
This chapter elaborates further on sustainability issues and the environmental impact of building in particular. In
order to gain better insight into the context of sustainability, the main environmental problems will be discussed,
as well as the coherence with the building industry. Improvement strategies will be presented, leading to general
solutions for sustainable building.
Figure 03.01: Sand dunes of Huacachina in the coastal area of Peru

Contents
03.01 Environmental problems 43

03.01.01 Depletion of resources 43
03.01.02 Deterioration of ecosystems 48
03.01.03 Deterioration of human health 49
03.01.04 Problems most recognised 50
03.02 Influence of building on environmental problems 52
03.02.01 Building and depletion 52
03.02.02 Building and ecosystem deterioration 54
03.02.03 Building and human health 54
03.03 Improvement strategies for sustainable building 56
03.03.01 A bio-ecological approach: the natural way 56
03.03.02 A logical approach: the three steps strategy 56
03.03.03 Back from the future: backcasting 57
03.03.04 Environmental performance: the factor 20 57
42 03 Introduction to building & sustainability - A The Beginning

03.01 Environmental problems
As introduced in chapter 01, the three main environmental problems are depletion of resources, deterioration of
ecosystems, and deterioration of human health. As in table 03.01, environmental effects can be attributed to the
three main environmental problems:
Table 03.01: Environmental effects and problems

depletion of resources deterioration of ecosystems deterioration of the human health
consumption of resources climate change ozone at living level
consumption of energy ozone layer deterioration summersmog
consumption of water acidification wintersmog
spread of dust noise hindrance
nuclear accidents stench hindrance
nutrification or eutrofication light hindrance
hazardous pollution spread indoor pollution
erosion radiation
landscape deterioration
desiccation
In this section, these three problems will be discussed.
03.01.01 Depletion of resources
Definition
From an environmental point of view, depletion can be seen as the running short of a certain resource6. This may
concern finite a-biotic resources (minerals, such as metals and stony material), however, biotic resources
(organic materials and fossil energy) may also be finite when their extraction exceeds their growth. Organic fossil
resources like mineral oil and natural gas have evolved during millions of years. However, over the last 200 years
they have been consumed at a phenomenal rate (see figure 03.02).
Figure 03.02: Estimated lower and upper limits of oil and gas reserves and consumption lines,
indicating the moment of depletion [Scheer, 1999].
6 According to Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English [Hornby et al., 1998], the verb 'to deplete' means: "to reduce
greatly the quantity, size, power or value of something". The Dutch Van Dale dictionary [Geerts & Heestermans, 1992] describes it as
"to tap a layer (of oil) completely empty", "to consume by repeatedly taking something away" or "to deprive of its strengths". 'Depletion'
is "the process of depleting" or the "condition in which one is at the end of ones strengths".
A The Beginning - 03 Introduction to building & sustainability 43

Depletion can also concern space, oxygen and water. The capacity of the earth to replenish possible losses in a
natural way is essential. As long as growth exceeds consumption, there is no matter of depletion.
Is depletion an environmental problem?

Elements do not alter, unless they transform - according to the formula of Einstein (E=mc2) - into energy.
Therefore, physically seen, depletion is impossible.
Technical or economic depletion, however, is imaginable, meaning a resource is economically not extractable
anymore with the available technology [Jong, 1997]. If, for instance, the extraction of zinc from the earth crust is
not economically viable man cannot manufacture products from primary zinc anymore. When that point is
reached, man needs to switch over to complete recycling of zinc or to other materials that it can substitute for
zinc.
From another perspective, as long as there are no methods to sustainably exploit resources, even economical
depletion can be seen as a problem of sustainability [Duijvestein, 1997] because future generations will not be
able to fulfil some needs that can be fulfilled now.
Cause of depletion
Depletion is caused by the following simultaneous developments:
The world population grows, increasing the demand for resources.
The demand for resources per person increases, mainly because of growth in welfare.
The availability of finite resources decreases.
The growth of renewable resources is insufficient.
The first phenomenon is a problem or fact that designing engineers can hardly solve. The third is also a natural
condition. The fourth emphasises the importance of the exploitation of renewable resources.
The second phenomenon however results from the human need to improve welfare: more personal space, with
more possessions and luxury; nobody wants to reduce their comfort level. Without frustrating this need,
something needs to be done about the personal demand for resources by avoiding waste of resources or the
application of renewable or reuseable products.
The most important resources subject to depletion are: fossil energy, minerals (stony materials and metals),
timber, fresh water, fresh air, space. These will be discussed in the following text.
Fossil energy
Coal, mineral oil and natural gas are forms of fossil energy. The demand for energy has dramatically increased
since the Industrial Revolution and is broadly proportional to population growth (see figure 03.03).
Figure 03.03: The consumption increase of fossil energy resources [UN, 1982-1990; Davis, 1990]
Although new resources are explored and found every year, fossil energy reserves are limited and less
economically extractable when drilling deeper and at more complex locations. Mineral oil is expected to deplete
the soonest, followed by natural gas (see table 03.01), after which people will have to shift to the more polluting

coal if fossil energy is still preferred to sustainable energy (sun, wind, water and geothermal energy). Sustainable
energy resources will be discussed in chapter 10.
Table 03.01: Fossil fuel reserves, production and remaining potential [from: Meadows et al., 1992]
fuel reserves estimated production years to go
(in 1989) (in 1989)
coal 326
1.695.200.000.000 tons 5.200.000.000 tons
brown coal 434
mineral oil 877.400.000.000 barrels 21.400.000.000 barrels 41
natural gas 115.500.000.000.000 m3 1.925.000.000.000 m3 60
Minerals: stony materials and metals

The Earth consists of many varieties of stony material, so in the near future depletion will not be easily reached.
Depletion is therefore only regional, depending on local availability.
Some metals are closer to depletion. Comparing the estimated contents of the earth crust with the minimum
percentage of metals required in ore (see table 03.02), a measure of depletability of metals is obtained.
Table 03.02: Existence of metals and the required ore contents, a measure of depletability [from: Meadows et al., 1992]
metal presence lowest ore content proportion
in the earth crust economically extractable
lead 0.0012% 4% 3300
zinc 0.0094% 3.5% 370
copper 0.0063% 0.35% 56
iron 5.82% 20% 3.4
aluminium 8.3% 18.5% 2.2
As a certain metal ore depreciates (i.e. with the percentage in the ore decreased, see the example in figure
03.04), extraction becomes economically and technically more complicated. This can be considered as depletion.
Figure 03.04: Decrease of the average percentage of copper in copper ore,

extracted in the United States [US Bureau of Mines, 1906-1990]
Taking into consideration the annual rate of production, many metals are expected to deplete in case of
undiminished use in the next 20 to 100 years [Meadows et al., 1992]. In particular, lead, zinc and tin can be
considered to be depleting rapidly.
Timber
Timber can generally be divided into timber from tropical and moderate forests, and into timber from primeval and
productive forests, with some categories in-between. The area of productive tropical forests is still very limited,
leaving three main possible sources: tropical primeval forests and temperate primeval and productive forests.

Extracting timber from primeval forests can be considered depletion, unless forest regeneration is applied.
Certification by the internationally recognised Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) makes clear distinction possible
between sustainable and unsustainable timber. Unsustainable timber means depletion of natural forests. Figure
03.05 demonstrates the development of forest area remaining in case of exponential growth of losses, linear
losses and exponential decrease of losses. When realising that, over the last many years, the decline in forested
area has been constant, depletion of tropical timber found naturally may be expected shortly after 2030.
Figure 03.05: Decrease of the area of tropical forest in case of three scenarios [Meadows et al., 1992]
Fresh water
The greater part of fresh water consumption is for agriculture and direct human needs. On the one hand, the
demand increases with a growing world population whilst on the other hand, more fresh water is contaminated,
making it harder to use it for human purposes. Wealthier countries have fewer problems because they are able to
invest in purification plants, leaving the greater water problem to developing countries.
Figure 03.06: The depletion of fresh water: annual supply, the available basic stream,
the attainable stream and the growing human need [Ambroggi, 1980]

The problem with water is that a great number of people still do not have access to sufficient fresh water and that,
although the available amount of fresh water increases with the attainability of new sources and with new
technologies to create fresh water from contaminated and salt-water, the world population is growing faster than
the fresh water resources can (see figure 03.06). Fresh water, therefore, can be considered to be depleting on a
global scale.
Fresh air
It perhaps seems peculiar to consider fresh air a depletable resource. The world's atmosphere seems vast
enough to provide enough fresh air for eternity. However, as Jón Kristinsson stated [2002], the liveable part of the
atmosphere is like a folium around a football7. Therefore, care is required.
The Earth's atmosphere is a complex natural system of which contents, temperature and density fluctuate. All
beings contribute to the air quality and form an element in the natural purification system of the Earth. However,
man is doing his utmost to disturb this system through emission of polluted exhaust fumes and hazardous
particles. As the efforts of climatologists demonstrate, to understand and predict the behaviour of the atmosphere
and all elements and creatures involved is - understatedly - difficult. Nevertheless, in many areas of the world,
mostly in and near large cities, the air quality and availability of fresh air is constantly under threat. To people,
animals and plants in these areas, the lack of fresh air endangers their health. As long as the carrying capacity of
the Earth suffices, all polluting elements can be purified. We do however not know the limits. Therefore, it seems
wise to avoid unnecessary emission of polluting particles.
Space
Although there is enough space, when considering the orbit, the liveable global space or even the accessible
earth surface, people may regionally experience a depletion of open space as cities grow and the open space
reduces. When we consider the liveable space around the Earth (accessible and with enough oxygen), it is a
limited commodity, however plentiful for the time being. Nevertheless, when we calculate the surface needed for
agriculture (providing for human food need) and accommodation, space is limited. Recent agricultural
modernisations have lowered the pressure on land and are therefore crucial for further population growth [Jong,
1997]. The liveable space is limited for the global population, although the population size itself is a better
parameter.
Indirect consequences
Beside depletion, there can be serious environmental impacts during the extraction process of resources. An
example is the increasing percentage of waste produced when extracting metal due to the decreasing metal
content in ore. Another example is erosion of the original soil occurring after tropical trees are cut down or
incinerated. In this case, the 'consumption' of timber is not directly the problem, but the consequence is. These
examples are not symptoms of depletion but examples of deterioration of ecosystems or deterioration of human
health.
Another depletion-related phenomenon is degeneration of soil at one place and enrichment at another (see figure
03.07). At the extraction site (often a developing country) a resource can be an important nutrient to the
ecosystem. Removing this resource can arouse an ecological problem to the existing flora and fauna, causing a
biotope shift. In rich countries soil can also be degenerated by the extraction of specific resources.
Eventually, waste materials of all extracted resources (with the basic elements of the resources still in them)
spread in the air, water and ground. On the one hand, as in the case of toxicity, they can be a direct threat to
ecosystems and human beings; on the other hand, they can lead to over-abundance of certain particles in the
soil, contributing to the deterioration of ecosystems.
7 The earth's diameter is 12,735 km. By approximation, the liveable part of the atmosphere (no oxygen supply necessary) is 5 km. This
means a ratio of 4 *10-4. The diameter of an official football size 5 is 25 cm. In proportion to this, the atmosphere would be 0.1 mm
thick.

developing country rich country
original contents of the soil

BA FE A BACC B E
KJ G L H LIHL J G
C C
C C
C A D C EA E C H
J L H JL L
I FA B D E A C B B A L LL
H I J
G H
I K H
BA EC A B C A F EC
C
L JG
H L
HK G JI
resources extraction for the building industry
soil degeneration
FE
D E E
E
KJ L L L
JL
J
JL L
II F D E
L LL
J K
E F E L J L
K J
w aste spread
soil enrichment
K
A HC A H A C A C H A
FE E JA B LH C B L C H CLBJ IGC B A C
C C
C
D E E A
C
G B
A I A I HJ
C
A H J
A I
LB C C L L
III F D E
L LL
B I
B C B
H C A H J H HC
G B
B CC
B I
A C
B K
F
H H A A A H A
E E J B L C I A I CH AG C JA B
K
CL C
A A G A H C C C
Figure 03.07: Process of degeneration versus enrichment of soil
03.01.02 Deterioration of ecosystems
Definitions
An ecosystem is "all the plants and living creatures in a particular area considered together with their physical
environment" [Hornby et al., 1998]. Ecosystems are 'deteriorated' when the coherence and interaction between
plant and animal communities and their physical environmental is disturbed. This does not mean that an
ecosystem should be static; it is dynamic by nature and its contents and size fluctuate in time. The issue is the
natural balance: a healthy ecosystem is able to restore the numbers of species, and relations between species,
after a disturbance.
Deterioration of ecosystems can be divided into two parts:

Deterioration of biodiversity (abundance of species)
Number reduced per plant or animal species (species size)
Both influence the balance of an ecological system.
Biodiversity represents the very foundation of human existence. It is the natural biological asset of the Earth. The
diversity of species and genes affects the ability of ecological communities to resist or recover from disturbances
and environmental change, including long-term climatic change. Recent estimates of the number of species vary
between 7 and 20 million, of which only 1.75 million are scientifically described [Watson et al., 1995]. The global
population growth [McKee et al., 2003] and its growing personal use of space [Liu et al., 2003] put a severe
pressure on natural habitats, thereby threatening the biodiversity. Small-scale studies of biodiversity indicate that
up to one-fifth of the original species could vanish within 100 years [Brook et al., 2003]. Global estimates are 7
species per day [McKee et al., 2003]. In some areas, fragile animal and plant families might even be reduced by
90% within the present century.
In the case of a natural disaster the consequences will be more dramatic if nature is less varied. Consciously or
unconsciously, man is dependent on a considerable part of these species. Australian Aboriginals say that every
time an animal species becomes extinct, man comes a step closer to his own extinction [Morgan, 1996]. Jong et
al. [1992] call biodiversity the risk insurance of life, the natural resistance against catastrophes, and therefore
consider it the most important aspect of sustainability. Nevertheless, the size of species is also an important
indicator.

Cause of ecosystem deterioration

Deterioration of ecosystems can take different forms.
Most evident is the direct visible deterioration of tropical forest as a result of wood-cutting and deterioration of the
landscape by extraction of superficially located minerals (like most metal ores, marl, clay and other minerals).
Through this extraction biotopes disappear. Secondary effects like erosion, desiccation and desertification cause
similar effects.
Another form of deterioration is evolving more gradually. It concerns the change of life conditions: climate change,
radiation effects, desiccation or pollution spread. Global climate change is generally considered the most
persisting and devastating environmental problem. Many discussions have taken place about the human
influence on climate change. However, since the International Panel on Climate Change [IPCC, 2001a] published
their findings and expectations (discussed in subsection 03.01.04), the idea that man has a more than marginal
influence is broadly supported, implying that international action will be necessary if we want to mitigate the
effects that are already developing.
The decisive factor for permanent deterioration by climate change is the adaptability or mobility of plants and
animals [Jong, 1997]. Some animals can move into urbanised areas and survive perfectly. There are also plants
that can move by 100 meters in 10 years. Rapid climate change is fatal for these. Whether it is a direct
consequence of global climate change or due to local interventions, local or even regional extinction of species is
particularly accelerated by desiccation.
03.01.03 Deterioration of human health
Definitions
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines the term health as follows [1983]: "a state of complete physical,
mental and social well-being, and not just the absence of disease or infirmity". The association of the condition of
body and mind is therefore acknowledged8.
Health may be considered "the ability to adapt oneself to constant change in the environment". A human being
has natural mechanisms to defend himself against illness. Resistance, for instance, is in the skin, stomach,
intestines and mucous membranes, and also in the form of the immune system ('anti-bodies' neutralising 'anti-
genes'). The excessive reaction of this defence system causes allergies, one of the greatest health problems of
recent times.
Health effects can manifest physically ("through the body") and psychologically ("through the mind"). These are
referred to as physiological functioning ("the mechanism on the body") and psychological functioning ("the
mechanism on the mind").
Based on the health definition of WHO, health problems can be defined as "problems caused by lack of physical,
mental or social well-being". The seriousness of health problems can differ greatly. In decreasing seriousness
these can be divided into [Dongen & Steenbekkers, 1997]:
1. Death
2. Non-recoverable clinical effects
3. Recoverable clinical effects
4. Sub-clinical effects (vague physical trouble)
5. Nuisance reactions and disorder (see frame text)
6. Degeneration of feeling comfortable and aesthetics.
The cause of health deterioration

Different mechanisms can lead to the six categories of health trouble. A direct transfer occurs when somebody is
exposed to a certain agent9. Human transport mechanisms as well as the extraction, transport, fabrication and
use of building materials, energy and water have an important influence.
8 This awareness can be found in the old Roman saying "mens sana in corpore sano" (a healthy mind is in a healthy body).
9 An agent is "a force or a substance that produces an effect or change" [Hornby et al., 1998] or "a particle that causes a chemical effect
or an illness condition" [Geerts & Heesterman, 1992].

The mechanism of indirect transfer is less transparent. Deterioration of ecosystems sometimes leads to
deterioration of human health, though often via a longer route, because man forms the highest level in the food
chain.
When the definition of 'sustainable development' is applied, the deterioration of human health is an important
environmental problem because future generations have to fulfil their needs, good health being the first condition
of life.
03.01.04 Problems most recognised
The following environmental problems are considered most important to the future of mankind and nature:
Global climate change and its expected consequences.
Depletion of (fossil) energy - and its consumption as a possible cause for climate change.
Availability of clean fresh water in large areas of the earth
Deterioration of tropical forests.
Deterioration of the ozone layer used to be a major issue; however, since the world-wide prohibition of CFCs, the
main cause of this problem has been almost completely removed.
Climate change
The greenhouse effect is a natural phenomenon enabling life on earth: it limits the loss of reflected solar heat.
Over the last two centuries an increase in gases that form the basis for the greenhouse effect (carbon-dioxide
and methane) and a rise in the average temperature on earth have been detected. The growing emission of
greenhouse gases by human activities is largely attributable to the use of fossil energy.
Scientific discussion has been going on about the extent to which human beings can be held responsible for this
climate change. A natural fluctuation in the contents of the atmosphere and hence the temperature has already
been proven by Arctic ice samples analysis [Houghton & Woodwell, 1989]. Looking back 160.000 years,
concentrations of CO2 and CH4 have however never been as high as they are presently (see figure 03.08).
Figure 03.08: Greenhouse gases and temperature over the last 160.000 years,
derived from arctic ice samples [Houghton & Woodwell, 1989].

In the year 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC, 2001a] produced a series of four
reports concluding that human activities had a indisputable influence on climate change. The judgement of the
IPCC is generally used as the basis for international environmental policy.
The first IPCC workgroup [2001b] described the expectations for climate change.
In the year 1995 scientists expected a maximum increase by 3.5 degrees in the 21st century. Based on new
insight into the expectations for SO2 and CH4, the temperature on earth is now expected to rise by 0.6 to 5.8
degrees. In North America, North and Central Asia the temperature will rise 40% more than the average. The
margin for the expected temperature increase is rather large, indicating uncertainty. Wigley & Raper [2001]
however calculated the most probable event: the chance that the extra temperature increase is less than
1.7°C is negligible. As a probable upper level Wigley & Raper chose 4,9°C, with 90% certainty that in the first
30 years the increase will be between 0.3 and 1.0°C.
The northern hemisphere and Antarctica will encounter more precipitation. In other places arid and humid
areas will alternate.
Ocean and sea levels will rise 9 to 88 cm, again a great bandwidth indicating uncertainties in the calculations
and including local differences.
There are no indications of increasing extreme weather (heavy storms) trends.
The second report of the IPCC workgroup II [2001c] presented the expected impact of these climate changes to
man and nature:
Glaciers will shrink and permafrost on tundra will defrost.
Ironically, countries that produced most greenhouse gases will suffer least. Therefore, the gap between the
rich and poor parts of the world will increase.
In temperate regions breeding seasons will commence earlier and agricultural seasons will last longer,
leading to greater yields, lower heating costs and less deaths.
In South-Eastern Asia the temperature rise will lead to more precipitation, annihilating water shortages.
For Africa, vast parts of Asia and, to a lesser extent, Southern America, there will be intense heat and
draught. In contrast to this, due to a rising sea level, heavy storms and floods are expected.
As with all expectations and assumptions, we should allow for possible surprises, because certain parameters
might become critical, fundamentally altering the chemical processes in the atmosphere. Alverson & Pedersen
[2001] observed more indications of a non-gradual climate change. Santer et al. [2003] found that the rising top of
the Earth's troposphere is a result of transport and industrial emissions closely associated with the greenhouse
effect and that this rise therefore is a kind of barometer for it.
In spite of the expected dramatic impact of climate change, the IPCC workgroup III [2001d] states that the
increased greenhouse effect can be stopped with existing technology and for reasonably low costs. The
workgroup suggested energy conservation, electric cars, electric fuel cells and storage of CO2 in the ground.
Nevertheless, when considering electric solutions, electricity will need to be sustainably produced. Underground
storage of carbon dioxide can be considered a tail-end solution, applicable to the unavoidable localised
production of CO2, as by electricity plants. Sustainable energy remains a key factor in the fight against humanly
influenced climate change, particularly in regards to transport and building.
Biodiversity
In scientific fields of ecology and nature conservation, biodiversity is generally recognised as an essential
condition for life. As its main long-term problem is related to climate change, as stated on the Rio de Janeiro
Earth Summit in 1992, policy is merely directed towards reduction of energy consumption and use of sustainable
energy. A more direct problem is growth of the population and the resulting claim on land, in particular tropical
forest areas with a rich biodiversity (see further on). Thomas et al. [2004] found that, on the basis of mid-range
climate scenarios, 15% to 37% of all species are committed to extinction.
In the year 1995, the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) presented their Global biodiversity
Assessment [Watson et al., 1995], in which the necessity of conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity was
expounded. As the main solutions for these, Watson et al. suggested:
An equitable sharing of income and assets
Enhanced research, inventory, and monitoring of biodiversity for policy-making and management
Successful maintenance and sustainable use of biodiversity through committed and skilled people.

Deterioration by deforestation
As a direct consequence of deforestation, anywhere in the world, the landscape is affected. Biotopes disappear,
leading to possible deterioration or even vanishing of complete ecosystems. If nature can restore itself in
deforested areas, loss of ecologic quality will only be temporary. However, in many cases deforestation causes
erosion: the disappearance of trees or plants holding the soil together causes the upper, fertile layers to wash
away. This problem applies mainly to tropical forests. Erosion often precedes desertification. Once turned into a
desert, little can be done about an area anymore.
An indirect consequence of deforestation is desiccation (see below). In the ground plants retain fluid and vaporise
water. Through evaporation warmth is drawn from the environment, causing a difference between cool vegetated
areas and warm bare plains or cities. Due to vegetal evaporation it rains more often in forested areas than
elsewhere. When a forest disappears, precipitation reduces, the air becomes warmer, and the soil dehydrates,
leading to less precipitation. This ultimately also leads to desertification, as in the case of eroded forest areas.
This vicious circle can only be broken by timely reforestation.
Freshwater supply
In the Johannesburg Earth Summit of 2000 fresh water was made a key issue for sustainability. As a result of the
combination of climate change and increased demand for water, some areas in the world will run out of fresh
water. Ironically yet logically, these countries often already belong to the poorest. They therefore lack the financial
means to treat seawater for drinking purposes. Nevertheless, even rich countries in temperate areas can sense
the impact of excessive water consumption and climate change.
Water conservation and direct use of precipitation water, anywhere in the world, should therefore be
institutionalised.
Desiccation
All consequences of lowering ground water levels share the name of 'desiccation': lack of water, accelerated
mineralisation, peat soil sagging, changes in the supply of ground water flow and precipitation. Lower ground
water levels have great consequences for nature and the environment. Beside aridity, in coastal areas, a shift in
the salt-water borderline is likely, causing problems for ecosystems and waterworks.
Beside global scale climate change, one of the causes of desiccation is the human extraction of ground water.
Water works and agricultural companies pump water up and thereby lower the ground water level, necessitating
irrigation in drier periods for agriculture. A consequence of the enlargement of urban area means an increase of
macadamised and drained land area, causing accelerated discharge of rainwater to open water as well as
decreased infiltration of rain water into the ground. Extraction of resources (for instance brown and black coal,
and marl), changes resulting from drainage through polder and land reorganisation, regulation of open water
levels, and - as already presented - deforestation, also influence desiccation.
03.02 Influence of building on environmental problems
Sustainable building will need to provide accommodative solutions to tackle the environmental problems that
relate to the building process. The relationship between building and environmental problems will be discussed in
this section.
03.02.01 Building and depletion
Of all material flows in the world 50% is directly or indirectly connected to the building industry [State of the World
1995]. In the Netherlands, the building industry needs more than 120 million tons of resources annually.
Meanwhile, 17 million tons of construction and demolition waste is produced annually [Dorsthorst & Kowalczyk,
2000]. This means that at least 86% (approximately 100 million tons) of the building materials required needs to
be primary, in spite of a low population growth rate. This emphasises the growth of personal demand for
resources.
The building industry is largely responsible for consumption of resources. These will be discussed below.

Fossil energy
The building industry is directly responsible for energy consumption in the manufacturing process of building
materials, and indirectly in the day-to-day use of energy in buildings (electricity, heating, cooling, ventilation,
lighting etc.). It involves natural gas, mineral oil and coal, of which gas is mostly used in buildings. Estimates of
the contribution of building to the consumption of fossil energy are 30% [RIVM, 1988] to 50% [Glass &
Pocklington, 2002].
Depletion of fossil energy resources can be avoided through the design of energy-efficient buildings, the use of
sustainable energy, and the use of building materials with a small content of embodied energy10.
Stony materials
The most significant part of construction and building waste, a measure of the total contribution of materials in
buildings, is stony material [Dorsthorst & Kowalczyk, 2000]. Concrete is the main material, originally consisting of
sand, gravel and marl. The stony materials necessary for building will not deplete quickly, except for marl, which
is increasingly replaced by furnace ashes from the metal industry. Lately, gravel is substituted often by debris
granulate. However, the reason for this is more of an ecological kind: e.g. preventing the deterioration of the river
bed.
Taking the presence of stony materials in the earth crust into account, the use of stony materials by the building
industry will not directly cause a depletion problem. At most, the problem will be deterioration.
Metals
Steel, aluminium, lead, zinc and copper are the main materials for the building industry. Of these materials, zinc
and copper may be considered depleting: the percentage of zinc and copper in ore material is rapidly decreasing,
making extraction economically and technically more complicated.
Generally, broad recycling and re-use of metal products can avoid depletion of metals. Recycling is increasingly
practised because it involves expensive products (lead, copper), because there is a large supply (steel), and
because extraction is more expensive than recycling (aluminium).
Timber
The use of timber by the building industry contributes to the deterioration and disappearance of primeval forests.
This timber mainly comes from tropical primeval, temperate primeval, and temperate productive forests. In
particular, countries such as Japan and the Netherlands use a lot of tropical timber (mostly produced
unsustainably). Nevertheless, the building industry is only responsible for approximately 20% of the loss of
rainforest [Centrum Hout, 1991]; the main part of rainforest degeneration is a consequence of burning down by
poor peasants, seeking new ground for cultivation, as fertility often proves very temporary. This however
demonstrates the necessity of sustainably managed production forests in tropical regions, as an economic
stimulation for the local people.
The only solution against timber depletion everywhere in the world, therefore, is sustainable management of
forests. The FSC certification system mentioned previously is a basis for the assurance of the environmental
quality of timber.
Fresh water
Although water can be used for the extraction and manufacture of building materials (for instance: the production
of steel requires great quantities of water for cooling), the larger part of fresh water consumption is caused by
agriculture and direct human needs. The building industry cannot be held directly responsible for that.
Nevertheless, in the technical design of buildings, a lot can be done about water preservation, e.g. water-efficient
sanitation, use of rain, ground or surface water and reuse of purified wastewater.
Space
When talking of 'space', we usually mean the use of floor or land area. Building can be logically seen as one of
the main causes for use of land and - in the third dimension - space. Nevertheless, with respect to the total space
contents, the occupation is relative.
10 Embodied energy is the energy used during the extraction, manufacture and transport of building materials, and sometimes also the
re-processing of material waste.

The extent to which space, in particular the ground surface, is consumed, largely depends on urban planning.
Condensed building, stacking and combining functions can avoid excessive use of land.
03.02.02 Building and ecosystem deterioration
Climate change
The manufacture of building materials and occupation of buildings contributes to the emission of CO2, NOx, O3,
CH4, and, to a lesser extent: SO2, gases known to influence the greenhouse effect and global climate change.
The building location is another factor, as it also influences travel, and therefore many (emission) effects related
to traffic.
Superficial extraction of resources

Affecting the global scale less but more directly connected to the extraction and fabrication of building materials,
is the deterioration of nature and landscape by the (superficial) extraction of resources. In many places in the
world, superficial extraction of resources has deteriorated the landscape.
The larger the surface of excavation, the greater the deterioration and impact to ecosystems will be. Excavations
will degenerate the soil. Abundance of species develops at edges of biotopes and gradients between different
ecological conditions, where alternation in life conditions exists. Vast monotone planes lead to the survival of
relatively few species. This pleads for small-scale, local extraction of resources.
Heavy metals
A higher rate impact of interventions by the building industry is the longer-term effect of pollution, e.g. the spread
of heavy metals from building products. Heavy metals cannot be broken down by nature. These particles collect
in the ground, in the silt of watercourses and banks. Through movement in the food chain, heavy metals form a
peril for flora and fauna, and ultimately man as well.
Heavy metals can originate from agriculture (manure and pesticides), exhaust gases (lead in gasoline) and from
buildings:
Gutters: copper and zinc (though zinc is actually not a heavy metal)
Façade and roof cladding: copper, lead and zinc
Seals: lead and zinc
Water ducts: copper and (in old buildings) lead
Wood treatment: mainly copper, arsenic and chromium (though chromium is not really a heavy metal)
Paint: lead, zinc, copper, chromium and many more (for colourings)
Corrosion of building products is an important cause for diffused water and ground pollution by copper, lead and
zinc.
In spite of the severe environmental problems described in section 03.01 and the building-related problems
treated previously, we should not forget that man, especially in urban planning, can create biotopes and
ecosystems himself. Building therefore does not necessarily mean the deterioration of ecosystems or loss of
biodiversity.
03.02.03 Building and human health
In general, the health effects from the construction and occupation of buildings are not always obvious; the
medical and building science are separate worlds. Nevertheless, on the basis of the six grades of health
deterioration discussed previously, we can describe the relationship between building and health issues as
follows:
Death: except for accidents in the extraction, fabrication and construction process related to building, there
are not many aspects of buildings that directly lead to deaths. One example, however, is the long-term
effects of carcinogenic particles (asbestos and possibly other fibrous materials) on the human body,
specifically in the lungs.
Incurable clinical effects: under this category one can also include accidents related to the building process.
Incurable clinical effects, such as the impact of long exposure to certain emissions from building materials

and paints, e.g. the influence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) on the nerve system, and the effect of
stony dust to lungs.
Curable clinical effects: these are short-term physical inconveniences, e.g. curable damages to the skin (for
instance by mineral wool, polyurethane, chalk, glue etc.).
Sub-clinical effects (vague physical trouble): these often occur inside buildings, by causes difficult to trace in
the climate system or emissions by apparatus and building materials: nausea, dizziness, dry mouth,
headache etc. resulting from ozone from copiers and printers, or from VOC-emitting new carpets.
Nuisance reactions and disorder: a well known effect here is the nuisance by noise inside and around
buildings or building sites. Odour nuisance is not very common in building construction and occupation.
Degeneration of feeling comfortable and aesthetics: this is the most abstract health effect, most clearly
related to building by the exterior and interior design (architecture), as well as the use of buildings (office
organisation).
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

In the building industry, volatile organic compounds are used to keep certain products (temporarily) liquid or to
enable solution of certain particles in a product. An example of the first is VOCs in paints and glues, and therefore
also in slab materials (formaldehydes). Cleaning products (ammonia) are an example of the second type. Ozone
from printers and copiers is also a VOC.
The health problems arise when harmful VOCs evaporate and are inhaled. The effect depends on the specific
particle and magnitude. The VOC family of aldehydes leads to innumerable symptoms [Dongen & Steenbekkers,
1992; Copius Peereboom, 1994]: dry air, eye irritations, warm facial skin, throat irritations, dry skin, eczema, skin
irritations (in case of contact), headache, memory and concentration effects. Formaldehyde deteriorates the
immune system, can possibly affect pregnancy and diminish tolerance. There are many indications that
formaldehyde is carcinogenic [Bos, 1994].
Allergies
Among the health problems whose causes are difficult to trace are allergies. Nevertheless, as a family, allergies
form the most widely spread disease at the moment. There are many variants to the cause and effect of allergic
inconvenience. In the human body, the production of anti-bodies can result in an exaggerated reaction. This is
called over-sensitivity. If this already existed, then at new exposure to allergens, an allergic reaction will be
possible. The extent to which allergies occur is a question of genetic predisposition and sensitivity (the process of
growing more sensitive to allergens). Recently, the number of allergies has increased rapidly; estimations are that
already 10 to 20% of the population of the developed world is allergic to a certain particle. 10 to 15% of allergy
trouble directly originates from the indoor environment.
Summer smog
Many effects on the human health are not directly related to building. However, buildings or the building industry
in general have an undeniable secondary influence on them. Summer smog is one by-product of the building
industry. The building location also influences transportation, the main source for ozone production in
summertime.
Summer smog consists of nitrous oxide (NOx), VOC and ozone (O3). Of these, ozone is the most harmful.
Summer smog arises as a result of incineration in the industry, electricity plants, traffic and through the
evaporation of solvents from households and industry. Under the influence of a high temperature, sunshine and a
weak wind, NOx en VOC become ozone. The phenomenon was first observed in Los Angeles.
Effects of ozone on human beings are:
Temporary trouble: dry throat, pain in the chest, coughing, constriction, pain during inhalation, headache,
nausea, discomfort and dizziness.
Temporarily functioning disorder in lungs, deterioration of the lung tissue and disruption of automatic lung
clearance.
In case of repeated exposure: continual deterioration of the lungs.
Risk groups for summer smog are people doing heavy labour, especially around noon, CARA patients (people
with a respiratory tract disorder) and physically sensitive people.

Nuisance
Noise, odour and light can be forms of nuisance disorders. Nuisance reactions are strongly dependent on the
person and environment: some people can deal with noise better than others. In cities a higher noise level is
more generally accepted than in the countryside. The extent to which there is nuisance disorders depends on the
number of complaints. One speaks of noise disturbance if more than 10% of the people abiding near the source
(residents and/or workers) experience nuisance. Nuisance plays a role at the extraction, transport and
manufacture of building materials and also at the construction. Plants and animals can also experience nuisance
disorders.
03.03 Improvement strategies for sustainable building
With the described problems in mind, it seems wise to build sustainably. In this section, strategies are presented.
03.03.01 A bio-ecological approach: the natural way
Dating from the period that environmental issues were not yet calculable and sustainable choices had to be
based on personal validation and philosophy, the natural way is one name for the strategy that implies
accommodation solutions as close to nature as possible. This includes the application of organic or limitedly
processed materials, limited mechanical means for climate control and absence of 'high tech' principles. Ways of
building in the natural way can be called building environmentally sound, building environmentally benign,
ecological building, biological building or bio-ecological building, the latter being a combination of ecological
(environmentally benign) and biological (healthy) building. On the one hand, the natural way is founded on
respect for the environment and human health. On the other hand, it can result from a fear of technological
solutions.
03.03.02 A logical approach: the three steps strategy
In the 1980s, for a conscientious approach to environmental goods, the research group Urban Design and
Environment (SOM in Dutch) of the Delft University of Technology developed the three steps strategy. It consists
of:
1. Avoid unnecessary demand for resources
2. Use resources that are unlimited or renewable
3. Use limited resources wisely (cleanly and with a large return)
The last step automatically overflows into the first step: a large functional yield leads to less waste of or a smaller
demand for resources.
As an example, referring to the use of building materials, the three steps strategy can be redefined into:
Avoid unnecessary consumption (waste) of materials:
– Consider the option of not-building: consider adapting the organisation from within to avoid moving
– Re-use or renovate a building instead of constructing a new one
– Design efficiently: do not make elements larger than necessary.
Use renewable or abundantly obtainable resources
– Use organic materials: timber, bamboo, reed etc.
– Use bulk materials from the purification processes (fume gas desulphurisation gypsum, fly ashes,
furnace ashes, copper ashes etc.)
– Use mineral materials and metals that are abundantly available (e.g. sand, clay, pebbles, respectively
aluminium, steel etc.).
Use clean processes for extraction and manufacture, and increase re-use of materials that are depleting or
whose primary manufacture is harmful to the environment
– Use clean manufacture processes
– Close production circuits: re-use waste materials, waste heat and wastewater

– Re-use building elements and components

– Recycle construction and demolition waste for new applications
– Re-use materials with a great initial environmental load, metals in particular
– Avoid circulation of pollution in the air, water or ground.
03.03.03 Back from the future: backcasting
The three steps strategy mainly stimulates improvement of existing solutions. As stated in chapter 01, the
hypothesis is that improving existing solutions, however efficient that may be, will not be effective.
Backcasting (or 'backward prediction' [Kristinsson, 2002]) is a method of taking into account the potentials of the
earth and the human needs in the future. This is followed by the development of effective solutions to these
needs, but preferably not based on usual solutions. Backcasting means the redesign of society, starting from
scratch but focused on an effective fulfilment of needs.
03.03.04 Environmental performance: the factor 20
In chapter 01, the concept of sustainable development [Brundtland et al., 1987] and the formula of Commoner
[1971], Ehrlich & Ehrlich [1990] and Speth [1990] were introduced as the analytic basis for the factor 20
environmental improvement target for 2040.
The natural way, three steps strategy, and back-casting methods offer a basis for a systematic approach to
environmental problems, but it is unknown whether they lead to a factor 20 improvement.
In terms of resources, the next steps can be worked on to achieve the factor 20:
Use 95% of resources less. This seems unattainable for most types of resources.
Use sustainable energy, renewable materials, and amply available water resources. In this case, an infinite
factor improvement is theoretically possible. However, at the moment, sustainable energy is still too
expensive, the natural production of resources cannot keep up with the growing demand, and climate
change makes the availability of water uncertain. A very disciplined maintenance of all natural resources
therefore would be required.
Producing energy, building materials, and water 20 times cleaner. This for instance implies 95% mitigation of
deterioration, 95% waste production reduction, and 95% less emissions (N.B. towards 5% CO2). The slow
progress (or rather regress) in reducing the CO2-emission indicates that this probably is beyond reach.
Use or reuse buildings, building elements, or building materials 20 times longer. Multiple re-use is possible,
however 20 times seems utopian. And building for a 1000 years does not seem very common anymore.
A combination of solutions also leading to a factor of 20. This appears to be the most realistic option.
Effective versus ineffective solutions

Taking the factor 20 as a strategy basis, a focus is necessary on effective measures, as described in chapter 01.
As described above, prolonging the lifespan of buildings and their materials probably has an important influence
on the achievement of the factor 20. Theoretically, doubling the lifespan causes an efficiency improvement by
factor 2. This is a greater impact than saving 20% material, leading to factor 1,25 improvement (see figure 03.10).
As prolonging the lifespan of buildings through restoration and good maintenance is a realistic option and saving
half of the applied materials for the same function is not, a focus on lifespan-prolonging qualities seems logical.

1 100%
environmental load
1.25 80%
2 50%
4 25%
10 10%
20 5%
0%
A B
A: 20% saving of building materials
B: doubling the building lifespan
Figure 03.10: Hypothetical comparison of the reduction of environmental load expressed by any unit
or the factor environmental improvement: material savings versus doubling the building lifespan
Another consequence of the factor 20 target is the release of solutions with marginal improvements. In contrast,
relatively important building elements and potentially great improvements should be the basis for sustainability.
Figure 03.11 illustrates an ineffective measure: small improvement to a relatively unimportant building element.
Figure 03.11: In the Netherlands nowadays almost all PVC products have a reuse warranty (in Dutch: 'hergebruikgarantie').
This means that the purveyor is obliged to reprocess the material after demolition.
Is the factor 20 possible?

In an exploratory design study of a ministry office (see figure 03.12), by the year 2040, a factor 20 improvement
theoretically seems to be an attainable goal [Linden & Dobbelsteen, 2000]. Wide use of sustainable energy can
lead to an improvement factor exceeding 20 for the 'energy' criterion. In contrast, a factor 20 improvement in the
use of building materials seems impossible without innovative technologies.
This demonstrates the importance of reusing buildings, building elements and materials, and it emphasises the
broad application of sustainable energy.

Figure 03.12 a-c: Three designs for a ministry office in 2040

Left to right designs by architects Jón Kristinsson, Mecanoo and Renz Pijnenborgh; the most sustainable design
by Lucien Kroll, who largely maintained the existing building, is not depicted [pictures: Kees van der Linden]
Has an improvement by a factor of 20 been achieved before?

Research on the amount of sulphur and soot particles in the London open air [Lomborg, 2001] proves the
possibility of a factor 20 improvement in the physical world. Since the beginning of the nineteenth century these
particles have decreased by 95%. In terms of surface water pollution, similar results have been achieved since
the introduction of sewage systems. The reduction of space and materials for computers and calculators since
their introduction in the 1960s is another example.
These examples involve products or pollution that man originally introduced himself. However, the building
industry has achieved similar results. Nowadays, building causes a greater environmental load than it used to, as
seen by the exponential growth in the demand for resources, the long distances over which they are transported,
and the elaborate processing of products. Formerly, and as a necessity, buildings were constructed more
sustainably with local, renewable materials, dependent on their availability. Due to the scarcity of resources and
poverty, this automatically occurs in developing countries (figure 03.13).
Figure 03.13: In Amazonia, accommodation is built solely with locally obtainable materials
Necessity of environmental assessment models

Determining the environmental performance is fundamental for insight in the factor improvement. It can be
obtained by comparing a building to a reference for the year 1990. In chapter 04 and 05, environmental
assessment models and an assessment methodology for office buildings will be discussed.


REFERENCES FOR THE BEGINNING

Literature
AICPA; website: http://www.aicpa.org/pubs/tpcpa/sep97/altrnate.htm; 2000

Alho A. & Barrett P.S.; 'Elegance in EIA decision making: a meta-criterion towards sustainable development', in:
Proceedings Building Sustainable Cities - Towards the Measurement and Understanding of Sustainable Urban
Development; University of Salford, UK, 2002
Alverson K.D. & Pedersen Th.; 'Environmental Variability and Climate Change', in: International Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme, Main Serials QC903, I32 no. 6; International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm, Sweden,
2001
Ambroggi R.P.; 'Water', in: Scientific American, Sept., 1980 (103)
Bächtold H.-G.; 'Nachhaltigkeit', in: Schweizische Ingenieur & Architekt, No. 13, 1998 (pp.194-197)
Becker F. & Joroff M.; Reinventing the Workplace - Corporate Real Estate 2000; International Development Research
Foundation (IDRF), USA, 1995
Becker F. & Steele F.; Workplace by design - mapping the high-performance workspace; Jossey-Bass Publishers, San
Francisco, USA, 1994
Becker F., Quinn K., Rappaport A. & Sims W.; New Working Practices - Benchmarking Flexible Scheduling, Staffing,
and Work Location in an International Context; Cornell University International Workplace Studies Program, Ithaca,
USA, 1992
Bedoire F.; 'Open plan offices, landscape offices and celltype office', in: Arkitektur, No. 1, 1979 (16-26)
Berger W.; 'Lost in Space', in: Wired, No. 7.02; website: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.02/, 1999
Bos R.P.; 'Milieu en kankerverwekkende stoffen' (in Dutch), in: Copius Peereboom J.W. (ed.), Basisboek milieu en
gezondheid (pp. 229-232); Boom, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1994
Brand S.; How buildings learn - What happens after they're built; Phoenix Illustrated, London, UK, 1994
Brook B.W., Sodhi N.S. & Ng P.K.L.; 'Catastrophic extinctions follow deforestation in Singapore', in: Nature 424 (420-
423); Nature AOP, published online 24 July, 2003
Brundtland G.H. (ed.) et al. (World Commission on Environment and Development); Our Common Future; Oxford
University Press, Oxford, UK / New York, USA, 1987
Centrum Hout; Onderzoek wijst op toenemend belang Nederlands hout (in Dutch); Centrum Hout, Naarden,
Netherlands, 1991
Charkham J.P.; Keeping Good Company - A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries; Oxford University
Press, Oxford, UK / New York, USA, 1998
Commoner B.; The closing circle: nature, man and technology; Random House, USA, 1971
Copius Peereboom J.W. (ed.); Basisboek milieu en gezondheid (in Dutch); Boom, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1994
Croes H., Dewever M. & Haas M.; One number says it all (poster); Dutch Government Buildings Agency, The Hague,
Netherlands, 2001
Davis G.R.; 'Energy for Planet Earth', in: Scientific American, Sept., 1990 (55-62)
Dewulf G.P.M.R. & Jonge H. de; Toekomst van de kantorenmarkt 1994-2015 (in Dutch); Delft University of
Technology, Netherlands, 1994
Dongen J.E.F. van & Steenbekkers J.H.M.; Gezondheidsproblemen en het binnenmilieu in woningen (in Dutch);
Nederlands Instituut voor Preventieve Gezondheidszorg TNO, Netherlands, 1993
Dorsthorst B. te & Kowalczyk T.; 'State of the art Deconstruction in the Netherlands', in: Kibert Ch. & Chini A. (eds.),
Overview of Deconstruction in Selected Countries, CIB report Publication 252 (pp. 95-143); University of Florida, USA,
2000
Duffy F.; Organisation of the shell - Planning office space; The Architectural Press, London, UK, 1976
Duffy F. & Powell K.; The new office; Conran Octopus, London, UK, 1997
Duffy F., Laing A. & Crisp V.; The responsible workplace - The redesign of work & offices; DEGW, BRE, Butterworth
Architecture and Estates Gazette, London, UK, 1993
Duijvestein K.; Lecture on sustainable building, at: Milieudiscussiedag; Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Architecture, Netherlands, 2001
Duijvestein K.; Ecologisch bouwen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Studiegroep
StadsOntwerp en Milieu, 1997
Ehrlich P. & Ehrlich A.; The population explosion; Hutchinson, London, UK, 1990
EFILWC (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions); Second European Survey on
Working Conditions; Dublin, Ireland, 1996
EGM-onderzoek; Werkplek & organisatie (in Dutch); Rijksgebouwendienst, The Hague, Netherlands, 1994
Ferner A. & Hyman R.; Changing Industrial Relations in Europe; Blackwell, London, UK, 1999
European Telework Online; website: http://www.eto.org.uk/; 2000
A The Beginning - References for The Beginning 61

Forbes D.P.; 'Measuring the Unmeasurable: Empirical Studies of Nonprofit Organization Effectiveness From 1977 to
1997', in: Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 27, 2001 (pp. 183-202)
Froggatt C.C.; 'Werken wanneer en waar men het meest produktief is' (in Dutch), in: Facility Management Magazine,
December 1996
Geerts G. & Heestermans H. et al.; Van Dale Groot woordenboek der Nederlandse taal (twaalfde druk in de nieuwe
spelling) (in Dutch); Van Dale Lexicografie, Utrecht, Netherlands / Antwerp, Belgium, 1992
Gerritse C. (Deerns raadgevende ingenieurs & Werkgroep PARAP); Energiegebruik in EER hersteld -
Kantelpuntonderzoek energiegebruik rijksgebouwen deel 2; de invloed van structuureffecten (in Dutch);
Rijksgebouwendienst, The Hague, Netherlands, 2002
Glass J. & Pocklington D.N.; 'Delivering Sustainability throughout the Building Process: a Study of the UK Cement and
Concrete Sector', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume I (1457-1465);
Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2002
Heel H.P. van & Jansen J.L.A.; Met zoeken en leren duurzaam op weg (Diesrede 1993) (in Dutch); Delft University of
Heiden E.M. van der & Pellenbarg P.H.; Telematica en het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven - Gebruiksmogelijkheden en
ruimtelijke effecten (in Dutch); Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Faculteit der Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen, vakgroep Sociale
en Economische Geografie, 1990
Hornby A.S. & Crowther J., Kavanagh K. & Ashby M. (eds.); Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English
(Fifth edition); Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1998
Houghton R.A. & Woodwell G.M.; 'Global climate change', in: Scientific American, April, 1989 (40)
HQ Business Centers; website: http://hqnet.com/survey.htm, 2000
IPCC; Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report (Summary for Policymakers); IPCC: www.ipcc.ch, 2001a
IPCC Working Group I; Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis (Summary for Policymakers); IPCC: www.ipcc.ch,
2001b
IPCC Working Group II; Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (Summary for Policymakers);
IPCC: www.ipcc.ch, 2001c
IPCC Working Group III; Climate Change 2001: Mitigation (Summary for Policymakers); IPCC: www.ipcc.ch, 2001d
ISO; Environmental management systems - Specification with guidance for use (ISO 14001); ISO, 1996
Jansen J.L.A. & Vergragt Ph.J.; Sustainable Technological Development (accepted proposal 1992); Ministries of
VROM, EZ, O&W and LNV, Leidschendam, Netherlands, 1992
Jong T.M. de; Inleiding Technische Ecologie en Milieuplanning (in Dutch); Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft,
Netherlands, 1997
Jong T.M. de, Leeuwen C.G. van & Vermeulen C.; Technische Ecologie en Milieuplanning (in Dutch); Delft University
of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Delft, Netherlands, 1992
Jonge H. de; 'The Philosophy and Practice of Maintenance and Modernisation', in: Quah L.K., Building Maintenance
and Modernisation Worldwide, Vol. 1 (xvii-xxxi); Longman Singapore Publishers (Pte) Ltd, Singapore, 1990
Kammerer H.; 'From Open Plan to Individual Offices', in: Baumeister, Vol. 82, No. 10, 1985 (17-27)
Kamphuis H.; 'Het cocon-kantoor, kantoorvorm van de toekomst? (in Dutch)', in: Facility Management Magazine, Vol.
5, October, 1992 (24-26)
Kristinsson J.; Vitale architectuur - Integraal ontwerpen (in Dutch); Kristinsson-Reitsema, Deventer, Netherlands, 2002
Laing A.; 'New patterns of work - The design of the office', in: Worthington J., Reinventing the workplace; Architectural
Press, Oxford, UK, 1997
Leffingwell W.H.; Office Management - Principles and Practice; A.W. Shaw, Chicago, USA, 1925
Leijten J.L.; 'Binnenmilieu, productiviteit en ziekteverzuim (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Gezonde Gebouwen (cahier
A3); ISSO/SBR, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Liu J., Daily G.C., Ehrlich P.R. & Luck G.W.; 'Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and
biodiversity', in: Nature 421 (530-533); Nature AOP, published online 12 January, 2003
Lomborg B.; The Skeptical Environmentalist - Measuring the Real State of the World; Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK / New York, USA, 2001
McKee J.K., Sciulli P.W., Fooce C.D. & Waite T.A.; 'Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human
population growth', in: Biological Conservation; published online 8 April, 2003
Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens III W.W.; The limits to growth; Universe Books, New York, USA,
1972
Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L. & Randers J.; Beyond the limits - Global collapse or a sustainable future; Earthscan
Publications Limited, London, UK, 1992
Meel J. van; The European Office - Office design and national context; 010 Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2000
Miller H.; website: http://www.hermanmiller.com/research/reports/; 2000
MIRTI (Models of Industrial Relations in Telework Innovation); MIRTI handbook (second draft); MIRTI, USA, 1997
Morgan M.; Australië op blote voeten (in Dutch); Uitgeverij A.W. Bruna, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1996
Peeters N.Y.; Tijdelijk Duurzaam Huisvesten - Conceptkeuze voor tijdelijke huisvesting (in Dutch); ARKO Uitgeverij,
Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002
62 References for The Beginning - A The Beginning

Raymond S. & Cunliffe R.; Tomorrow's Office - Creating effective and humane interiors; E&FN Spon, London, UK,
1997
Rgd (Rijksgebouwendienst); Kantoorinnovatie - Maatkostuum voor organisaties in beweging (in Dutch); Ministerie van
VROM/Rijksgebouwendienst, The Hague, Netherlands, 1996
RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne); Nationale Milieuverkenning 5, 2000-2030 (in Dutch);
Samson bv, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2001a
RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne); Milieubalans 2000 - Het Nederlands milieu verklaard (in
Dutch); Samson bv, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2001b
RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne); Zorgen voor morgen - Nationale Milieuverkenning 1985-
2011 (in Dutch); Samson Tjeenk Willink, Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands, 1988
Santer B.D. et al.; 'Contributions of anthropogenic and natural forcing to recent tropopause height changes', in: Science
301, 2003 (479-483)
Scheer H.; Solare Weltwirtschaft - Strategie für die ökologische Moderne (in German); Verlag Antje Kunstmann,
München, Germany, 1999
Schnelle E.; 'Entwürfe, Ausbau, Einrichtung, Kosten, Beispiele (Preface) (in German)', in: Gottschalk, Flexibele
Verwaltungsbauten; Verlag Gerd Hatje, Stuttgart, Germany, 1963
Sims W., Joroff M. & Becker F.; Managing the Reinvented Workplace; International Development Research Foundation
(IDRF), USA, 1996
Speth J.G.; 'Can the world be saved?', in: Ecological economics vol. 1 (pp. 289-304); 1990
State of the World, 1995
Staal G.; Between Dictate and Design - The architecture of office buildings; 010 Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands,
1987
Steelcase; Steelcase Strafor methodology: "Workplace Evaluation"; Steelcase, UK, 1996
Sundstrom E.; Workplaces; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK / New York, USA, 1986
Thomas C.D., Cameron A., Green R.E., Bakkenes M., Beaumont L.J., Collingham Y.C., Erasmus B.F.N., Ferreira de
Siquieira M., Grainger A., Hannah L., Hughes L., Huntley B., Jaarsveld A.S. van, Midgley G.F., Miles L., Ortega-Huerta
M.A., Townsend Peterson A., Phillips O.L. & Williams S.E.; 'Extinction risk from climate change', in: Nature, Vol. 427,
No. 6970, 8 January, 2003 (145-148)
TU Eindhoven (Technische Universiteit Eindhoven); 'Een studie naar nieuwe inrichtingsconcepten (in Dutch)', in:
Nieuwe manieren van werken en inrichten van kantoren in Nederland; TU Eindhoven, Netherlands, 1995
Twijnstra Gudde; NEO - New European Offices; Twijnstra Gudde, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 1996
UN (United Nations); Energy Statistics Yearbook 1982-1990; U.N., New York, USA, 1982-1990
US Bureau of Mines; Minerals Yearbook 1906-1990; Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA, 1906-1990
Veldhoen E.; 'Beproefde kantoorconcepten bestaan niet meer - Het coconkantoor, een Scandinavische fictie of een
onomkeerbare ontwikkeling (in Dutch)', in: Facility Management Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 46, 1995 (27-29)
Vickers G. (edited by the Open Systems Group); The Vickers Papers; Harper and Row, London, UK, 1984
Vidgen R., Wood-Harper T. & Wood J.R.G.; 'A Soft Systems Approach to Information Systems Quality', in:
Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, Volume 5, 1993
Vos P.G.J.C., Meel J.J. van & Dijcks A.; The office, the whole office and nothing but the office, version 1.2; Delft
University of Technology, Department of Real Estate and Project Management, Netherlands, 1999
Vroon P.; Psychologische aspecten van ziekmakende gebouwen (in Dutch); Ministerie van VROM, The Hague,
Netherlands, 1990
Wagenberg A. van & Wilmes R.; 'Het beproeven van nieuwe inrichtingsconcepten voor kantoren (in Dutch)', in: Facility
Management Magazine, February, 1995
Watson R.T. (ch.), Heywood V.H. (ed.), Baste I., Dias B., Gámez R., Janetos T., Reid W. & Ruark G.; Global
Biodiversity Assessment - Summary for Policy-Makers; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK / New York, USA,
1995
WHO (World Health Organisation); Health aspects related to indoor air quality (EURO Reports and Studies 21); WHO
Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, 1983
Wigley T.M.L. & Raper S.C.B.; 'Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming', in: Science, No. 293 (pp.
451-455); 2001
Pictures are by the author, unless indicated otherwise.
A The Beginning - References for The Beginning 63

Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Rien Elling, for remarks on the structure and contents of an early Dutch version of chapter 01
Juriaan van Meel, whose PhD-research provided me a lot of useful information and thereby discouraged me to re-
invent some wheels and dig into international office characteristics too deep.
The authors of The Office, the Whole Office and Nothing but the Office, for providing a clear overview of office types
and taxonomy, and Hans de Jonge, initiator and supervisor of this book, for bringing it to my attention.
Amal Chatterjee, for a persistent look at the English in an early version of chapter 03.
Personal publications & co-authorships
Conference proceedings
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Wilde Th.S. de & Arets M.J.P.; 'Sustainability in three dimensions - the importance of
improving the use of space and life span beside technological efficiency', in: Brebbia C.A., Martin-Duque J.F. &
Wadhwa L.C. (eds.); The Sustainable City II - Urban Regenation and Sustainability (305-314); WIT Press,
Southampton, UK, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den, Klaase D. & Timmeren A. van; 'Sustainable urban development - better environmental
performance through efficient space use and an integrated approach to utilities', in: Proceedings International
Conference Building Sustainable Cities, Venezia; University of Salford, UK, 2002
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Linden A.C. van der; 'Finding the most effective sustainable measures', in: Boonstra
C., Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2000 (667-669);
Aeneas, Technical Publishers, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Linden A.C. van der & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Building 2040, factor 20 less environmental load? - Evaluating
the limits of reducing the environmental costs of building material, use of energy, use of water and mobility', in:
Boonstra C., Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2000 (598-
600); Aeneas, Technical Publishers, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Expert journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Verkiezingen januari 2003 - Herkansing voor duurzaamheid?' (in Dutch), in: Nieuwsbrief
Duurzaam Bouwen no. 4, year 5, December 2002 (1); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Kennis, ambitie en durf - de politieke enquête van de Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen' (in
Dutch), in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen no. 2, year 5, May 2002 (2-6); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam,
Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Vakblad Duurzame Energie' (in Dutch), in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen no. 2, year 5, May
2002 (7); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Duurzaam bouwen in 2002: waar gaat dat heen?' (in Dutch), in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam
Bouwen no. 5, year 4, Dec 2001 (1-2); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2001
Linden A.C. van der & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Kantoren in 2040: factor 20 minder? - Milieukostenvergelijking
van bouwmaterialen, energie, water en mobiliteit (in Dutch)', in: BOUW, No. 4, April (58-61); Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie,
Den Haag, Netherlands, 2001
Academic subject material

Dobbelsteen A. van den & Alberts K.; Milieueffecten van bouwmaterialen - Duurzaam omgaan met grondstoffen (in
Dutch); Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 2001
64 References for The Beginning - A The Beginning

Front page
A rock cliff on the Isle of Skye, Scotland.
The Basis
19 G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
factor
09 08 07 C
the time factor
B
assessm ent
04 05 06
case study
ofoffice the basis
buildings
buildings
03 02 01 A
the beginning
04 MEASURING SUSTAINABILITY
In this chapter, the historical development of the measurement of sustainability-related aspects is discussed. The
basis for environmental assessment, the methodology of life cycle analysis (LCA), is explained and discussed.
Furthermore, an overview and introduction is given of assessment software tools for sustainable building.
Figure 04.01: The gentle art of comparing apples with pears, bananas, avocados, tomatos, onions, …
- a market in Cuenca, Ecuador
Contents
04.01 An introduction to environmental assessment 71

04.01.01 For example, assessment development in the Netherlands 71
04.01.02 Assessment considerations 72
04.02 The basis: life cycle analysis (LCA) 74
04.02.01 The methodology of LCA 74
04.02.02 Considerations with regard to LCA 76
04.02.03 An additional model: Eco-Indicator 99 80
04.02.04 An additional model: TWIN2002 80
04.03 Tools and models for sustainable building 81
04.03.01 Categorisation of tools and models 81
04.03.02 Types of tools and models for sustainable building 83
04.04 Design-supporting tools for offices 85
04.04.01 Overview 85
04.04.02 Qualitative tools 87
04.04.03 Quantitative tools 88
04.04.04 Considerations 89
All REFERENCES for Volume B - The Basis can be found on pages 131 to 136.
70 04 Measuring sustainability - B The Basis

04.01 An introduction to environmental assessment
04.01.01 For example, assessment development in the Netherlands
In order to treat the development of environmental assessment, I used the Netherlands as an example. It is
therefore no historical account generally applying to all countries, but clarifies the development of rationalising
sustainability.
Background
At the moment when the concepts of sustainability and sustainable building were introduced, only a small
percentage of architects, mostly driven by idealism, practised what can be referred to as environmentally
conscious design. Having the most knowledge and experience of this new field of sustainable building some
members of this group went into environmental consultancy. They worked, beside specific, project-bound
services, on checklists or preference lists of measures fitting into a more environmentally conscious way of
building. Examples are the DCBA checklist, developed by the consulting company BOOM, and the checklist for
sustainable housing and renovation, developed by the non-governmental organisation SEV. Thus, in the 1990s,
different checklists evolved, which were developed by different consultants, municipalities, developers and
designers, leading to much confusion. Therefore, the Dutch government took the initiative to develop a general
list, applicable to the entire country. This is the National Package Sustainable Building [SBR, 1996], constituted in
accordance with parties from the building industry.
Checklists were sometimes coupled to score systems. The scores were nevertheless still based on reasoning.
This also happened to the national packages, providing a control tool for green financing of sustainable projects.
First calculation attempts

As a result of the presence of different subjective checklists, a need grew for a more quantified approach to
environmental measures.
In the year 1990, the 'environmental measure' was introduced [Schayk et al., 1990], a formula for the
environmental load of materials. The formula turned out so complicated and subject to criticism, that after its
presentation nothing was done with it.
Based on research by Carola van den Broek [1989], in the early 1990s research commenced on the
environmental effects of building materials, resulting in a telephone book size of inventories [Jong, 1991]. In order
to gain scores, the environmental criteria were coupled to weighing factors. Remarkably, after this study, its
supervisor Taeke de Jong believed environmental effects cannot be satisfactorily quantified.
Nevertheless, the consulting company NIBE picked up Jong's research and developed a score system of eight
environmental criteria. Weighing factors were used to convert effects into scores. In the years 1992-1995, these
lists were used in building practice.
The energy performance code and other standards

Previous developments mainly concerned the quantifying of environmental effects of building materials, a new
'sport' in the building industry. More experience had always existed concerning the energy consumption of
buildings. Until 1992, the Dutch Building Regulations had included a demand for the heat resistance of buildings.
This was criticised because the insulation value of a building does not necessarily predict energy consumption;
more parameters are responsible for that. In a nutshell this was the reason for the development of an energy
performance code (EPN), the first code not to demand conditions yet the eventual performance, depending on the
building type. More information about the EPN can be found in Kuipers-van Gaalen [2003].
The concept of performance codes was followed by the development of a water performance code [Bleuzé et al.,
1995] and a building material performance code [Scholten et al., 2000]. Another performance standard that has
been worked on for a long time is the radiation performance code [Schaap et al., 1998], putting limits to the
radiation doses in dwellings. However, none of these have been formalised yet. Work on the building material
performance code has even recently been cancelled.
B The Basis - 04 Measuring sustainability 71

LCA
In 1992, the research centre CML presented a standardised methodology for environmental life cycle analysis,
LCA. It is represented by ISO-codes and has become the international basis for environmental assessments and
additional assessment methods and calculation software. These will be treated more elaborately further on.
The LCA methodology resulted in a standard format for the report of environmental data for manufacturing
industries, called environment-relevant product information (MRPI in Dutch) [Schuurmans & Meijer, 2000].
04.01.02 Assessment considerations
From the cradle to the grave

A lifetime precedes the application of building products at the construction stage. Environmental aspects play a
role in every part of this life cycle, not just at the visible design, construction and occupation stage.
Since many building products used in Western Europe are not found in the region, the effects of the extraction
and primary processing are hardly a cause for concern. However, these stages usually have the most decisive
impact on the environment, especially in terms of the deterioration of fragile ecosystems and health-threatening
processes during the first manufacturing processes. Therefore, it is important to involve the whole life cycle of
materials in the assessment of a building product: from the cradle to the grave.
The life cycle

The following phases of the product cycle pass from the cradle to the grave: exploration - extraction -
transportation to the factory - manufacture to (half-)product - transportation to the construction site - mountage at
the construction site - operation and maintenance - renovation (conjunction with a next resource stream) -
demolition, landfill, incineration or re-use. Table 04.01 gives the most important interventions throughout the
different phases and gives an impression of factors in the assessment of building materials.
Table 04.01: Life cycle of building materials and interventions.

intervention
extraction exploration
excavations and chopping
use of energy and water
production of nuisance, emissions and waste
labour conditions
transportation use of energy
(after extraction, manufacture construction of roads
and demolition) production of nuisance
leaks and accidents (collisions)
processing use of energy and water
(and possibly pre-processing) production of nuisance, emissions and waste
labour conditions
construction and renovation use of energy and water
labour conditions
occupation use of energy and water
production of emissions, radiation and waste
demolition use of energy
labour conditions
land fill or incineration
The difference between intervention, effect and problem

A distinction between real environmental problems and the interventions or events leading to these problems -
with possible effects inbetween - is essential. Interventions and effects do not directly mean deterioration of the
environment; the real environmental problem is in fact the last, fatal effect in the chain.
The chains of intervention, effect and problem are often more complicated than the next three examples, which
are an illustration of fossil energy:
Consumption of fossil energy (intervention) leads to depletion of this energy resource (problem) in case of
lingering growth.

When fossil energy is combusted (intervention) sulphurdioxide is emitted (effect), which deposits (effect) and
is absorbed by plants (effect), through which they perish (problem).
During the same combustion, carbondioxide is emitted (effect). It contributes to the greenhouse effect
(effect), as a result of which the atmosphere and earth heats up (effect). This causes erosion (effect), leading
to disappearance of biotopes and deterioration of bio-diversity (problem). It can also cause sand drifts and
droughts (effect), harmful to human health (problem).
Therefore, the greenhouse effect amplified by man - the greenhouse effect has always naturally existed - is only
an environmental problem when organisms disappear and human health deteriorates as a result of it.
Cause and effect

The examples mentioned illustrate that a chain reaction of events can eventually lead to one or more effects and
possibly to one or more environmental problems (depletion of resources, deterioration of ecosystems, or
deterioration of human health). Eventually, everything revolves around these problems, which, however, can be
very complex and difficult to measure. What can be measured is the emission of materials and the consumption of
resources. If the relation with later occurring effects and problems can be proven, a material may be assessed by
the first intervention.
It seems trivial to make a distinction between intervention, effect and problem. When assessing building materials,
products, or buildings however it is crucial. The environmental impact of materials can be weighed by the effect or
the cause of the eventual problem. Therefore, when considering consequences and causes, double counting is
likely to occur.
Figure 04.02 gives an (incomplete) overview of interventions, effects and environmental problems.
use of water depletion of freshwater

use of materials depletion of materials depletion of
use of fossil fuel depletion of fossil fuel resources
use of space use of land
eco-toxicity
production of waste nutrification
acidification deterioration of
eco-system quality
emissions climate change
ozone layer deterioration
respirative effects
radiation radiative effects
carcinogenious effects deterioration of

human health
production of noise noise nuisance
production of odour odour nuisance
production of light light nuisance
INTERVENTIONS EFFECTS PROBLEMS
Figure 04.02: Coherence between interventions, effects and eventual environmental problems.
Measuring, calculating, reasoning - the extent of exactness

With the assessment of environmental aspects, different grades of exactness can be achieved.
The most exact assessment is based on gauged or measured values. An example is the emission of exhaust
gases, which can be gauged relatively simply.
Characteristics cannot always be measured. In that case, on the basis of accepted calculation methods,
calculated values are the most accurate. Examples are emissions in the indoor environment, which depend
on the design and use of the building. It is not possible to test and measure each source separately, making
calculated values acceptable.

For certain environmental criteria there are no crystallised or accepted calculation methods, let alone
measured values. In that case, only reasoned judgement is possible. An example is the direct deterioration of
ecosystems: for which calculation methods are not yet widely supported.
Data is more exact when the building process has proceeded. Since a building design becomes more detailed
later in the process, it is possible to execute more accurate assessments of its environmental effects after
construction (see figure 04.03).
Figure 04.03: The availability of measured and calculated data during the building process - reasoned data fills in the blanks
The feedback of data does not always occur…
04.02 The basis: life cycle analysis (LCA)
04.02.01 The methodology of LCA
Impacts of plans on the environment are in general assessed through the Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA). Life Cycle Analysis or Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the commonly acknowledged basis for the quantitive
environmental assessment of products. In principle, in an LCA, all environmental effects occurring during the life
cycle of a (building) product are analysed, from the extraction of resources until the end-phase of demolition or
recycling (from the cradle to the grave). The LCA methodology developed by the Centre of Environmental Studies
in Leiden, Netherlands (CML) was presented in 1992 [Heijungs et al., 1992]. It was internationally standardised in
the ISO 14040 series ([ISO, 1997], [ISO, 1998], [ISO, 2000a], [ISO, 2000b]).
In an LCA, three steps are made:

1. The definition of the functional unit and the process tree of a product
2. The inventory of environmental effects
3. Evaluation of the results.
The functional unit and process tree

For the comparison of alternatives to a certain function, a general basis needs to be defined. This basis is called
the functional unit [ISO, 1998]. For a correct comparison, the functional unit is of vital importance: measurements
of the alternatives are defined by its technical and functional requirements (e.g. strength and stiffness) during a
certain time-span, the reference lifespan. Maintenance and replacements of elements of the alternatives are
included in the functional unit. It means that weaker alternatives require more material, and that alternatives with a
shorter lifespan need to be maintained or replaced more often (both leading to a heavier environmental load).
Figure 04.04 graphically describes the specifications for the functional unit in the case of a comparison of different
floor structures [Arets et al., 2003]. The functional unit is 1 m2 of floor area, with a variable bearing load of 2.5 and
5.0 kN/m2 (there are two sets of comparisons), an air sound and contact sound insulation index of 0 dB, and 120
minutes fire resistance. These requirements implied that certain structure alternatives (for instance timber beam
floors) required additional measures.

cross-section A-A' (1 m eterwide)
2 2
variab le lo ad ; 2 ,5 kN /m / 5 kN /m
A
p erm anent lo ad (excl.construction w eight)
co nstructio n w eig ht
A'
structural span
4,8 m - 16,8 m
sound insulation,
in conformance
with the Dutch
standards
floor
fire safety
(120 min.)
Figure 04.04: Schematic image of the specifications for the functional unit
in the case of a comparison of different floor structures [Arets et al., 2003].
The whole life cycle process is mapped for all alternatives. This means that the necessary sources, the extraction
process, the production process, the use phase and end phase are mapped out in a process tree.
Inventory
The second step is making an inventory of the inflow and outflow, also referred to as environmental interventions,
for every phase in the process tree. Examples of inflow from the environment are energy and resources;
examples of outflow to the environment are emissions to the ground, water and air as well as waste material. The
result of the inventory is a summary of interventions in an extensive intervention table.
The environmental interventions are subsequently recalculated to environmental effects, e.g. 'depletion of
resources', 'greenhouse effect', 'deterioration of the ozone-layer', 'human toxicity' and 'eco-toxicity', 'smog
production', 'acidification' and 'nitrification'. Every environmental intervention influences one or more
environmental effects; the distinction therefore is required. The extent to which an environmental intervention
contributes to an environmental effect is defined by characterisation factors. Environmental effects are expressed
in theme-equivalents through aggregation.
The overview of the scores on all environmental effects or theme-equivalents together is called the (characterised)
environmental profile. These environmental effects cannot be compared. For that to occur, the scores per effect
need to be normalised, by relating them to the average impact caused by one national or European citizen. Thus
a normalised environmental profile evolves.
Evaluation
Evaluation of the normalised environmental profile is the last step in an LCA. In onder to make one final score (a
unitary score) possible, environmental effects would have to be weighed against each other by means of weighing
factors. Therefore, the relative importance of each environmental effect would have to be determined (e.g.
greenhouse effect versus aquatic eco-toxicity). This final weighing, however, is not a regular element of an LCA.
04.02.02 Considerations with regard to LCA
Ever since environmental assessments were introduced there have been arguments about the validity of the
models applied. Even though LCA is standardised there are questions and hence discussions on certain issues.
Beside the proof of environmental damage and (un)availability of data (inventories) and indicators, they may be
summarised as follows:
The environmental effects included or excluded in the assessment

Allocation and the inclusion of recycling

The importance of effects and the weighing method
These will be discussed in this section, which is based on the report by Dobbelsteen & Loos [2000]
Environmental effects
In the new LCA method by the CML ('CML-2') the following environmental effects are proposed to to be taken into
account. However, not all are included yet:
Pollutions Depletion
amplification of the greenhouse effect biotic resources
deterioration of the ozone-layer a-biotic resources
human toxicity
eco-toxicity Deterioration
forming of photo-chemic oxidants deterioration of ecosystems and landscapes
acidification number of casualties
nitrification
waste warmth
odour In addition to these, 'radiation', 'light' and 'calamities'
noise are mentioned. These are not yet operational.
For some environmental effects, among which land use and deterioration or transformation of ecosystems results,
characterisation factors only exist to a limited extent. At the moment, these effects can therefore only be
qualitatively assessed in the final evaluation.
Within the LCA-method, 'final waste' and 'energy consumption' are not considered environmental effects. The
effects of landfill and energy consumption are already assessed through emissions and depletion of resources.
Re-usability of products or materials is a question of allocation (see further on in this section).
Different methods are available for the determination of environmental effects. They are permanently subject to
scientific discussion and adapted to new insights over time.
Depletion
There is no standard method included for 'depletion of biotic resources'. Methods for this criterion are under
construction, but only partially operational. For the operative method for 'depletion of abiotic resources' there is no
consensus [Vroonhof et al., 1999]. An important discussion takes place on the question whether the assessment
should be based on supplies or on the energy required for extraction of the resource in the future.
Pollution
In the CML2-method the criterion 'pollutions' has hardly been altered. Only for 'acidification', 'human toxicity' and
'ecotoxicity', new methods are applied. For the other criteria the method of 1992 is taken as the basis, actualised
with the latest characterisation factors. No characterisation factors are used for '(waste) heat' and 'noise'.
Deterioration
The most important adaptation of the new CML-method is to be found under the old header of 'deterioration'. The
new name for landscape deterioration is 'land use', defined by 'space use', biodiversity' and 'life support'. At the
moment, only 'space use' is operational and is expressed as the occupied area times the occupation period
(m².y). In the report 'Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA' [Lindeijer et al., 1998] a
start was made for the implementation of ecologic deterioration aspects into the LCA-method. At present, this
method is still being developed.
For 'radiation', two methods are available; however, a choice has not yet been made between them. No
characterisation factors are applied for 'number of casualties'. 'Light' and 'calamities' are not mentioned any
longer.
The reference lifespan and number of replacements

When an LCA is done for a consumer product, the reference lifespan can be adjusted to the normal life
expectancy. For a building this is much more complicated, as a building consists of many components with
different lifespans that influence one another. If a short reference lifespan is chosen, many components will not be
at the end of their potential lifespan. If a long reference lifespan is chosen, many components (probably all except
the supporting structure) will need to be replaced a certain number of times. This number of replacements
depends on the assumed lifespan of the component, which is subject to uncertainties, and the decision to fully

count the last replacement or to use a proportion of that [Nunen et al., 2003]. Some of these time effects will be
elaborated in Volume C - The Time Factor.
Allocation
An important issue of discussion for the determination of environmental effects of a product is the so-called
allocation of these effects: what is taken into account and what not, and what is allocated to which production
process? Figure 04.05 gives an interpretation of the problem.
processing
? of w aste
processing
end ?
? of w aste
begin end ?
?
recycling to ? begin
new product ?
recycling to ?
new product
whole lifecycle?
Figure 04.05: Graphic image of the problem of allocation: is the end-phase of the first product cycle
attributed to the same first cycle or to the next product cycle?
The allocation of environmental effects is strongly defined by the chosen lifespan, the recycling scenario, the
attribution of recycling and the period during which particles rinse out. For the attribution of recycling there are
many possibilities, about which there is still no consensus.
Allocation methods
There are different methods for the allocation of environmental effects:
The cut-off method: a separation is made between the end-phase of the lifecycle of a primary product and
the reprocessing of waste to a new product, which is attributed to the secondary product.
The coproduction method: attributng the reprocessing of waste to a secondary product depends on the value
of the secondary product with respect to the primary product. In case of a high value of the secondary
product, reprocessing is attributed to the secondary product.
The reprocessing method: the reprocessing of primary product waste to a secondary product is attributed to
the primary product but the rest is not.
The subtraction method (also called the substitution method): in this method the environmental load of a
secondary product is partially subtracted from the environmental load of the primary product.
Furthermore, there is the quality method.
When environmental profiles of different waste scenarios are determined, the choice of the applied allocation
method has a great influence on the LCA results. With the cutting method, the environmental load of the primary
product is the greatest; in case of the subtraction method, the environmental load of the secondary product is the
greatest. The other methods lie somewhere in-between [Kortman et al., 1996]
The cutting method is the easiest and therefore applied most often. The use of secondary resources and materials
(the secondary product system) is preferable from a sustainable point-of-view.
Eventually, the most sustainable decision needs to be made at the moment of choice. For the 'Selection-model for
coastal and bank works' [Loos & Dobbelsteen, 2001], the Dutch Department of Road and Water Engineering
decided to take the begin-phase, including the end-phase of the previous product chain, as well as the end-phase
of a chain into account when choosing a product, even when this implied a methodic error (two end-phases are
accounted for). The thought behind it was: it is important that the chosen solution, with the present knowledge, is
the most sustainable solution for here and now.

Weighing
In an environmental comparison two types of weighing are possible, of which one is included in the LCA method.
This is weighing of different interventions causing the same environmental effect, the aggregation after which the
normalisation takes place, making effects dimensionless.
The second weighing, or end-weighing, concerns the interventions with different environmental effects. When
speaking about weighing of environmental effects in general, only this step is mostly referred to. The final
weighing step is not standardised and has always been an issue in discussions, since it is difficult to say whether
the score for landscape deterioration is more important than the score for waste materials.
There are a number of weighing methods to make these considerations (derived from Soest et al. [1997]):
Delphi or panel method: a group of internal or external experts or representatives of societal groups is asked
to give a weighing factor to each environmental effect or theme-equivalent to their own experience.
Distance-to-target method: the weighing factor of every environmental effect or theme-equivalent depends on
the difference between the present performance and the required level.
Damage function method: weighing factors are based on the relationship between environmental
interventions and the damage they cause to ecosystems and human health.
Environmental cost methods: environmental effects are multiplied by shadowprices or by the costs to prevent
or neutralise the environmental damage (called monetary numbers).
Each weighing method has its advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, in order to get an impression of the
quality of the calculation model, it is important to know which weighing method is used. The panel method is quick
and easy; however, the results are strongly dependent on the composition of the panel. The distance-to-target
method is reasonably objective but depends on the chosen political targets, not always equalling the real
importance to the environment. Environmental cost methods are reasonably objective and enable integrated
weighing and combination with real costs. However, the determination of prevention costs is not simple and can
be executed in different ways.
Environmental costs will be elaborated here.
Environmental costs: shadowprices and prevention costs

In general, environmental costs are the societal costs related to environmental damage and restoration to original
environmental qualities. These costs are not included in the price of products but eventually shifted to society, by
means of taxes and excises. Therefore, environmental costs can be seen as a preliminary form of eco-tax on
products, necessary to compensate for defrayal of environmental damage. Together with the actual costs of a
product, an integral price can be acquired. For the time being, environmental costs are theoretic and only an
indicator of the environmental load, imposed by a product or building.
The Dutch ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Housing draws a distinction between environmental costs
and hidden environmental costs. In their vision, the first are costs made by the industry to prevent environmental
damage or to comply with environmental government regulations. These are accounted for in the real price of
goods. Hidden environmental costs are in fact the environmental discussed in this thesis. They are not yet
included in the prices of goods. For simplification, in this thesis I generally used the term 'environmental costs',
though meaning to exclude the costs that are already accounted for in real prices.
Environmental costs can be determined in two ways.

The shadow-price reflects the price society is willing to pay for the achievement of an environmental goal.
The shadow-price of an emission is determined through the cost of the last necessary measure to attain an
emission target, the so-called marginal cost [Soest et al., 1997].
Prevention costs [IVM, 2000] are costs that are related to the prevention of environmental damage by certain
interventions (e.g. emissions). Prevention costs to sustainability are costs of preventive measures,
necessary to diminish the environmental damage (or emissions) to a sustainable level. They are
(theoretical/hypothetical) costs of measures that still have to be executed [Beetstra et al., 2002]. In most
models environmental costs are in fact theoretical. However, in his Eco-costs/Value-Ratio, Vogtländer [2001]
relates prevention costs of measures to the economic value added to them.

Additional methods
A standard LCA includes quantifiable environmental effects. Some effects (e.g. ‘deterioration of ecosystems') are
ignored until an assessment method has been developed generally accepted. Furthermore, the standard LCA
provides an outcome of different effect scores; a weighing method is not included and an overall judgement of
products is therefore not often possible.
In order to obtain a single score and enable the comparison of products, models additional to the LCA
methodology have been developed specifically for the building industry. The validity of the models is always
subject to discussion, mainly about the applied weighing method.
In the section following, I will discuss the Eco-Indicator 99 and the TWIN2002 models, which are based on the
standard LCA, yet add environmental effects that are normally ignored. Furthermore, the model translates the
differing units for each environmental effect to environmental cost, making the effects compatible and comparable.
The TWIN2002 model was important to the research presented here because the assessments of chapter 06 were
executed with the software tool GreenCalc, for which the assessment of building materials is methodologically
based on TWIN2002, excluding the health assessment of this model.
Software tools specifically designed for the assessment of buildings and building designs will be treated in section
04.03.
04.02.03 An additional model: Eco-Indicator 99
The Eco-Indicator 99 model uses the basic methodology of LCA but adds a weighing step based on the damage
function method [Goedkoop et al., 2000]. Its predecessor, the Eco-Indicator 95 model, was initially based on the
distance-to-target method. Eco-Indicator 99 determines the environmental impact of products to resource
supplies, ecosystems and human health. Therefore, it embodies an assessment tool that recognizes the three
main environmental problems mentioned in chapter 03.
Eco-Indicator 99 divides the inventory of all environmental interventions into three themes: resources, land use,
and emissions. Subsequently, the model determines the damage impact of these. The damage to resources
supplies - in other words, depletion of resources - is expressed in terms of the additional energy required in the
future to extract other resources of the same quality. For the damage to ecosystems the loss of biodiversity is
detremined in a certain area, during a certain period of time. Finally, the damage to human health is expressed in
terms of the lost life years and decrease of the quality of life. Eco-Indicator 99 therefore uses the index of 'DALY',
Disability Adjusted Life Years, which the World Health Organization and World Bank use as well.
On the basis of the panel method, the three scores resulting from the damage assessments are weighed to a final
score, the Eco-Indicator.
04.02.04 An additional model: TWIN2002
The TWIN2002 model is an enhancement of the TWIN model developed by Haas [1997], which has been a basis
for many building products assessments in the Netherlands. The TWIN model contains an assessment method for
the determination of environmental and health effects, and it combines quantitative and qualitative assessment
criteria. The assessment process in the original TWIN model followed the methodology of LCA until the
aggregation phase and then added a weighing step:
1. Definition of the functional unit and process tree
2. Inventory of environmental interventions
3. Aggregation to environmental effect equivalents
4. Weighing to indices
TWIN was based on the first LCA methodology of the CML, whereas the TWIN2002 largely follows the more recent
version of CML-2 [NIBE Research, 2002]. A significant difference between the original TWIN and TWIN2002 model
concerns the weighing phase: TWIN offered a weighing scale for the environmental effects, whereas TWIN2002

does not actually weigh, however adds a multiplication by environmental costs per effect (explained below), to
obtain a final score.
Environmental effects taken into account

Table 04.02 provides an overview of the environmental effects included in the inventory of TWIN2002.
Table 04.02: Environmental effects assessed by the TWIN2002 model,

with their determination method, environmental costs and unit of measurement [NIBE Research, 2002]
Environmental effect Method Environmental costs
unit
Emissions
Global warming CML2-baseline, GWP100 0.091 €/kg CO2 eq.
3
Ozone layer deterioration CML2-baseline, ODP8 5.725 10 €/kg CFC-11 eq.
Human toxicity CML2-baseline, HTP8, global 0.048 €/kg 1,4-DB eq.
Aquatic toxicity CML2-baseline, FAETP8, global 0.048 €/kg 1,4-DB eq.
Terrestrial toxicity CML2-baseline, TAETP8, global 0.048 €/kg 1,4-DB eq.
Photo-chemical oxydant forming CML2-baseline, high NOx POCP 4.402 €/kg C2H4 eq.
Acidification CML2-baseline, average European AP 2.723 €/kg SO2 eq.
Eutrification CML2-baseline, generic EP 54.454 €/kg PO4 eq.
Depletion
Biotic resources TWIN 0.042 €/elm
Abiotic resources TWIN 0.042 €/elm
Energy resources TWIN 0.042 €elm
Land use
2
Land use Eco-indicator 99 0.205 PDF*m /yr
Nuisance
-7 3
Odour CML2-baseline, inverse OTV 0.233 10 m OTV
2
Road transport noise Müller-Wenk 3.219 10 DALY
-6
Manufacturing process noise TWIN 0.149 10 €/elm
Light TWIN 0.024 €/elm
Calamities TWIN 0.024 €/elm
*: elm = environmental load mark
As can be seen, to a great proportion TWIN2002 applies environmental data of materials and products acquired in
accordance with CML-2. The model however also includes other quantitative and estimative methods for
environmental effects that a 'pure' LCA lacks. Land use is assessed by means of the Eco-Indicator 99 model and
for the noise of road transport the scientific method of Müller-Wenk is used. The original TWIN method based on
qualitative assessment and conversion to score classes is used for depletion of resources, two types of nuisances
and calamities.
Environmental costs
The weighing methodology of TWIN2002 is based on the principle of environmental prevention costs introduced in
the previous section. As monetary factors, these hidden environmental costs can be coupled to environmental
effects acquired through LCA, resulting in a final result in (environmental) euros or dollars. The monetary factors
applied in TWIN2002 (see table 04.02) were determined from various references (discussed in [Beetstra et al.,
2002]).

Considerations
When the TWIN model was introduced there were serious objections from the scientific field of life cycle
assessment concerning the principle of a final weighing and the use of qualitative methods for effects additional to
the standard methodology for LCA. In regards to this, TWIN2002 is to be considered an improvement of the original
model, as it more stricktly follows LCA. The principle choice to be made is between either a generally accepted
assessment that leaves out some environmental effects and provides an outcome in the form of a profile, or an
assessment method without wide scientific support that adds quantitatively assessed effects and provides a
unitary outcome.
At this moment the use of unitary scores, obtained by any final weighing, is still subject to scientific discussions.
Nevertheless, the use of environmental costs in TWIN2002 has diminished the objections of a biased weighing
system. As discussed previously, the final expression of environmental load in a unitary score also has important
advantages concerning comparisons between alternatives.
04.03 Tools and models for sustainable building
04.03.01 Categorisation of tools and models
An assessment tool for sustainable building can be characterised according to many features, which will be
discussed in this subsection.
Methodology
The methodology applied by an assessment tool defines the environmental effects taken into account, the type of
appreciation and weighing, and thereby the eventual output. An assessment tool may be quantitative, qualitative,
or mixed. The tool may strictly follow the standard LCA methodology, it may be based on a model that forms an
adaptation of, or addition to the LCA methodology, or it may follow its own methodology.
Environmental themes
Assessment tools can be characterised by the environmental themes or effects that they take into account:
Flora & fauna
Water
Building materials & waste
Energy
Travel
Health
Safety
Integral
The scale
The environmental effects, which are usually included in the methodology, reflect an impact on various scales.
According to RIVM [1988], environmental effects can be divided according to five main scale levels. Table 04.03 is
an adaptation of that model.
In table 04.03, the effects are placed on the highest level they influence. Depletion of resources is caused by local
interceptions but has a global impact. Acidification influences smaller scales (e.g. trees and other plants), but
spreads over continents. Nutrification and the spread of heavy metals reach thousands of kilometres through
rivers, but can also manifest locally.

Table 04.03: Environmental problems and scale levels [adaptation of RIVM, 1988]
scale level global radius environmental effects
mondial whole world material consumption
energy consumption
water consumption
climate change
ozone layer deterioration
continental 1.000 - 10.000 km acidification
dust spread
nuclear accidents
fluvial 100 - 1000 km nutrification and eutrofication
spread of hazardous emissions
regional 10 - 100 km erosion
land use and ecosystem deterioration
desiccation
urban 1m -10 km ozone at living level
summer smog
winter smog
noise nuisance
odour nuisance
light nuisance
indoor air pollution
radiation
For assessment tools, different scale levels are important. The tools available on the market are mainly directed at
the building level. A higher level is the urban plan; a lower level the building product. Table 04.04 is an adaptation
of Jong [1997], who formulated scale steps through multiplication or division by approximately 3.
Table 04.04: Environmental problems and scale levels [adaptation of Jong, 1997]
radius > 30 km 10 km 3 km 1 km 300 m 100 m 30 m 10 m 3m 1m 300 mm 100 mm
component
segment
element
building
section
vicinity
district
region
detail
block
town
city
name >
scale > region urban plan the building building product
Building sector
An assessment tool is directed at a specific sector in the building industry, which may be product development,
housing, offices, other utility buildings, or road and water works. In the case of buildings, the tool may be focussed
on new buildings, renovation projects, or existing buildings.
Building stage and target group

Every potential type of user has specific demands for the assessment tool he uses, partly dependent on the
building stage in which they are involved. Most assessment tools for sustainable building are directed at the
design stage and its particular parties; some are also applicable in other stages. Based on experience, table 04.05
is an overview of the persons involved during the accommodation process, in which the dark-shaded cells
represent regular involvement of the person mentioned. Light-shaded cells represent possible, yet not regular
involvement.
The expertise level required for the intended user is also important. The following categorisation can be used:
Specialist (S): for technical experts, e.g. sustainable building consultants, physicists and building service
consultants, as well as structural and building engineers.
Building-involved (B): for parties actively involved in the design and construction stage, e.g. architects, urban
planners, contractors, developers and project managers.
General (G): parties indirectly involved in the design and construction stage and technical laymen, e.g. the
principal, investor and occupant.
It is possible that technical experts are present among groups of laymen, and laymen among technical expert
companies. The categories are nevertheless indicative. In terms of this research, an investor with broad
knowledge of sustainable building is considered a specialist.

Table 04.06: Accommodation stages and persons involved in the building industry
a b c d
initiative location design construction occupation renovation demolition
principal principal principal principal principal principal principal
project manager project manager project manager project manager project manager
developer developer developer developer developer developer
investor investor investor investor investor investor investor
SB-consultant1 SB-consultant1 SB-consultant1 SB-consultant1 SB-consultant1
urban planner urban planner
architect architect architect architect architect
constructor2 constructor2 constructor2
physicist3 physicist3
contractor contractor contractor contractor
occupant4 occupant4 occupant4 occupant4 occupant4
a: plus definition of requirements; b: plus urban design; c: meant is the building design; d: plus preparation
1: SB = sustainable building; 2: consultant for the bearing structure; 3: consultant for indoor climate and building services; 4: plus building manager
Input required
Some assessment tools may need detailed input, such as from specifications and detail drawings, while
approximate data may be sufficient for others. When characterising assessment tools, the three following
categories can be used:
I. Approximate: the input only requires sketches and an idea of the materials and building services planned.
II. Detailed: for the input, building drawings, and inventories of materials and building services are required.
III. Exact: the input requires exact measures, areas, and quantities of meticulously described products, as well
as technical data of building services.
Data quality
The validity of a software tool is importantly defined by its data, which may originate from different sources:
Scientific publications
The manufacturer of ancilliary industry
Branch organisations
Other sources, e.g. reports and literature
For the validity and reliability of data, the age of the sources is also important. Furthermore, completeness is
important: a part of the calculation will be skipped or estimated if there is lack of data. This relates to the
gradations of exactness, i.e. the distinction between measured, calculated or reasoned values already discussed.
Completeness and reliability define the general term data quality. Methods have been developed to determine
data quality and quantify it.
For most assessment software, it is difficult to trace the origins of basic data. Many tools currently used collect
their data from standardised LCA-databases.
Completion level and status

The introduction moment of an assessment tool does not define the quality of the model because many models
are regularly updated or introduced in a new version. Therefore, it is useful to know the status of the tool:
It is embedded in legislation.
It is being processed into an official standard.
It is available on the market.
It is a beta-version still being developed.
04.03.02 Types of tools and models for sustainable building
In this section, without extensive illustration, many tools and models for sustainable building are briefly discussed.
It is impossible to name all existing models and those still being developed from all countries in the world. Hence,
the list is incomplete and limited to well-known examples from Europe and America.

The tools and models are roughly divided among the following types:
Decision-supporting models
Pure LCA-tools
Assessment models
Design-supportiing tools
Only pure LCA tools and design-supporting tools that are available on the market will be more elaborately
discussed in section 04.04.
Code O m schrijving Invoer D C B A score NP check GF score info
V EN ER G IE
V Algem een
E-1 > energieprestatiecoëfficiënt: vulEPC in 0,90 15,0 60 30 X002/S002/S003
E-2 > EPC = < 1,1 ja 5 o ok S002
E-3 > EPC = < 1,0 ja 10 o ok S003
E-4 > EPC = < 0,9 ja 15
E-5 > EPC = < 0,6 30
Stap 1: Voorkom onnodig energiegebruik
V Beperk transm issieverliezen
E-10 > com pact bouw en: verhouding verliesoppervlak /
(gebruiksoppervlak x hoogte)
E-11 > isolatie bg-vloer: vulRc-w aarde [m 2K/W ] 2,5 0,0 S012/494
E-12 > isolatie bg-vloer: Rc > = 3,0 [m 2K/W ] 1 • X • X S012
E-13 > isolatie bg-vloer: Rc > = 3,5[m 2K/W ] 2 o S494
E-14 > isolatie gevel: vulRc-w aarde [m 2K/W ] in 3,0 1,5 S013/495
E-15 > isolatie gevel: Rc > = 3,0 [m 2K/W ] ja 1 • ok S013
E-16 > isolatie gevel: Rc > = 3,5 [m 2K/W ] 3 o S495
E-17 > isolatie dak: vulRc-w aarde [m 2K/W ] in 3,5 2,5 S014/496
E-18 > isolatie dak: Rc > = 3,0 [m 2K/W ] ja 1 • ok S014
E-19 > isolatie dak: Rc > = 4,0 [m 2K/W ] 4 o S496
E-20 > glas: vulU-w aarde [W /m 2K] glas in 1,6 4,0
E-21 > HR+ -glas: U-w aarde glas = < 1,6 [W /m 2K] ja 4 • ok • ok S016
E-22 > HR+ + -glas: U-w aarde glas = < 1,2 [W /m 2K] 6 S016
E-23 > gedeeltelijke oplegging (nokken e.d.) 0
E-24 > doorgaande isolatie vloer-spouw (m et cellenbeton) 0
E-25 > doorgaande isolatie vloer-spouw (m et cellulair glas) 1
E-26 > spouw m uur als w oningscheidende w and: Rc > = 0,4 0

E-27 > isolatie w oningen onderling: Rc > = 1,0 [m 2K/W ] 3
E-28 > isoleer kruipluik ja 1 1,0 • ok S022
E-29 > (rol)luiken/panelen [m 2] 4 o 10 S017
E-30 > m aak brede vensterbanken boven radiatoren n.v.t. 1 o n.v.t. • n.v.t. S035
E-31 > O verig (vulin) ... ... ... ...
Figure 04.06: An image of the Integral DCBA-checklist (in Dutch), the automised version of the DCBA-method
Decision-supporting models
Decision-supporting models - or in short: decision models - are calculation programs forming a bridge between
static checklists and calculation tools requiring detailed input. They couple sustainable measures from different
checklists with performance scores retrieved from calculation tools, enabling integrated assessment of plans. In
general, they are supporting the stages of urban and building design. In the case of agreements on the
environmental performance, decision models may be used as tools for communication or evaluation. Dutch
examples (translated) are the 'Integrated DCBA-checklist' (see figure 04.06), 'Sustainable Building to Size' (in
Dutch: Dubo op Maat) and the 'Municipal Practice Directive' (in Dutch: Gemeentelijke PraktijkRichtlijn).
Decision-supporting models do not calculate the exact environmental load, however offer a rough indication of the
performance of plans. In this research, these types of models are not discussed any further.
Pure LCA-tools
The term 'pure LCA-tools' refers to tools through which a user can execute life cycle assessments ("Do your own
LCA"). Therefore, they need to know the exact resources or products, processes and transport means. Dutch
examples are SimaPro and IDEMAT.
Assessment models
Models that are additional to the standard LCA-methodology are grouped under the name of assessment models.
In general, they provide an end-weighing method required for one final score. Assessment models sometimes add
environmental aspects that the standard LCA does not take into account due to lacking in quantitative methods.
Dutch examples are the TWIN2002 model and Eco-Indicator 99, which were already discussed.

Design-supporting tools
The most extensive group of tools, which are also the main focus of this chapter, are tools designed mainly to
support the design stage of a building or urban plan. Most of these tools are currently based on the standard LCA-
methodology. In general, however, for the ultimate performance score they use an additional assessment model.
Dutch examples of decision-supporting tools are Eco-Quantum and GreenCalc, examples from the United
Kingdom are BREEAM and Envest and American examples are LEED and BEES.
Since design-supporting tools are important to this research, in terms of assessment and analysis of office
buildings, these will be discussed more elaborately in the following section.
04.04 Design-supporting tools for offices
04.04.01 Overview
At the moment of writing this, many tools have been, and are still being developed to support sustainable building.
Table 04.06 provides an overview of the ones I found information about. Due to the constant development of new
tools and the adaptation of older ones, this overview cannot suffice.
Table 04.06: Overview of design-supporting assessment tools
tool status information

retailer literature
design-supporting tools
EcoScan NL on the market TNO Industry TNO Industry, 2001
Eco-Quantum NL on the market W/E consultants sustainable building Mak et al., 1997
GreenCalc NL on the market dgmr/Sureac Linden et al., 1999
TNO-MEP (Environmental Sciences, Energy

Eco-Install NL being developed Research and Process Innovation)
TNO-MEP, 2000
HENK NL being developed Deerns Raadgevende Ingenieurs ?
BREEAM UK on the market Building Research Establishment BRE, 1998
EcoHomes UK on the market BRE Centre for Sustainable Building BRE, 2001
Envest UK on the market BRE Centre for Sustainable Building Edwards et al., 2000
Ecole des Mines de Paris, Centre

EQUER F on the market d’Energetique
Peuportier, 1997; Kohler et al., 1997
CSTB (Centre Scientifique et Technique du

ESCALE F on the market Bâtiment)
Chatagnon et al., 1998
PAPOOSE F on the market TRIBU Bornarel et al., 1996
TEAM for buildings F on the market ECOBILAN Osset & Cortijo, 1997
Institut für industrielle Bauproduktion (ifib),

ecopro D on the market Universität Karlsruhe
Kohler & Koch, 1996
ifib/Institut für ressourcenschonendes Bauen

LEGOE D on the market (IREB), Bauhaus-Uni Weimar
Kohler et al., 1998
ETH Zürich, Laboratory for Technical

OGIP CH on the market Chemistry
OGIP; website: http://www.ogip.ch
OEkoprofile N on the market Norwegian Building Research Institute Myhre, 1998
BEAT 2000 S ? Swedish Building Institute (SBI) Holleris Petersen et al., 2000
EcoEffect S on the market KTH Centre for Built Environment Glaumann, 1999
SBI's LCA tool DK on the market Danish Building Research Institute Holleris Petersen, 1998
BEE FIN on the market VTT Building Technology -
USA Construction Engineering Research

LEED USA on the market Laboratories
USGBC, 2002
USA Construction Engineering Research

BEES USA on the market Laboratories
Lippiatt, 2000
TM
ATHENA CAN on the market ATHENA
TM
Sustainable Materials Institute Trusty, 2000

In terms of the research presented, it is not necessary (if at all desirable) to discuss all the tools summarised in
table 04.06. Several studies have already been carried out on the inventory and analysis of assessment tools (e.g.
[IEA, 1999] and [SETAC, 2001]).
Table 04.07 summarises the tools with their basic application areas again. Since my research is directed at
offices, tools that are supporting the design of office buildings (the column 'off' beneath 'sector') will be included in
further treatise. Furthermore, in order to be useful to my research, the tools would need to be applied for new
(designs) and existing buildings (the column 'new/exist'), assess entire buildings (the column 'build' beneath
'scale'), take into account at least the use of energy and building materials (the columns 'M' and 'E' beneath 'env
themes'), and be at least useful to the building design, occupation, and renovation stages (the columns '3', '5' and
'6'). This means that the following tools are interesting for further study:
Eco-Quantum
GreenCalc
BREEAM
Envest
LEED
ATHENA and Urban FIS (TIRA) might also be appropriate; however, I could not find enough information on these.
Table 04.07: Basic characteristics of design-supporting assessment tools

1 2 3 4
tool sector status scale env themes stages
off hous prod new exist urb build prod F L W M E T H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
design-supporting tools
EcoScan
Eco-Quantum
GreenCalc
Eco-Install
HENK ? ? ?
BREEAM
EcoHomes
Envest
EQUER
ESCALE
PAPOOSE ?
TEAM for buildings
ecopro
LEGOE
OGIP
OEkoprofile
BEAT 2000
EcoEffect
SBI's LCA tool
BEE
LEED integral
BEES
TM
ATHENA ? ?
1: off = offices and other utility buildings; hous = housing; prod = product development; 2: urb = urban planning; build = building; prod = building products; 3: F = flora & fauna; L = land
use; W = water; M = materials & waste; E = energy; T = travel; H: health & safety; 4: 1 = initiative & definition; 2 = location & urban planning; 3 = building design; 4 = construction; 5 =
occupation; 6 = renovation; 7 = demolition

In the following sections, the five tools selected above will be discussed in more detail. The tools have been
grouped into qualitative tools (BREEAM and LEED) and quantitative tools (Eco-Quantum, GreenCalc, and
Envest).
04.04.02 Qualitative tools
BREEAM
The Centre for Sustainable Construction of the British BRE (Building Research Establishment) developed
BREEAM. In BREEAM, the abbreviation EAM stands for Environmental Assessment Method. One could call it a
collective model, a framework for different methodologies, each assessing another environmental aspect.
BREEAM was once introduced to stimulate sustainable building in the market. It is currently used as an evaluation
or benchmark tool for environmental performance, mainly directed at the level of management. Assessments
using the basis of BREEAM are only allowed to parties certified by the BRE. The tool was applied in the
international Green Building Challenge project.
BREEAM is an instrument for the analysis and improvement of office buildings, from design to management.
BREEAM provides scores on different criteria. The assessment is qualitative. With a weighing set an overall score
can be obtained, as a result of which a project can be certified as a pass, good, very good or excellent.
LEED
The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) developed the LEED (Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design) Green Building Rating System. It may be considered the American equivalent of
BREEAM. As a framework, the programme is meant as stimulance for a broad introduction of sustainable building
(green building) in the market and for the testing of buildings to a measurable scale, through which different
projects can distinguish themselves. LEED is directed at new building projects and renovation, yet existing
buildings and infill projects can also be assessed using this tool.
LEED assesses location development, water saving, energy efficiency, materials choices and indoor climate.
Dependent on the extent to which a building performs on different aspects, a project can earn a normal, bronze,
silver, gold or platinum certificate.
Comparison
On paper, there are no great differences between BREEAM and LEED, as table 04.08 demonstrates. Some
difference can be found with the environmental themes assessed and the building stages at which the tools are
directed. Both tools obtain a great proportion of their required data through enquiries and case visits, for which
licensed consultants are needed. In fact, BREEAM and LEED are models (or toolkits) containing tools rather than
tools themselves.
Table 04.08: Characteristics of BREEAM and LEED

tool sector 1 scale 2 env them es 3 stages 4 exp5 inp6 m ethod rem arks
off hous urb build F L W M E T H 2 3 5 6
BREEAM S II ow n licensed use only
LEED integral S II ow n licensed use only
1 : off= offices and otherutility buildings;hous = housing;prod = productdevelopm ent;2 : urb = urban planning;build = building;prod = building products;3 : F = flora & fauna;
L = land use;W = w ater;M = m aterials & w aste;E = energy;T = travel;H:health & safety;4 : 1 = initiative & definition;2 = location & urban planning;3 = building design;4 =
construction;5 = occupation;6 = renovation;7 = dem olition;5 : expertise required -S = specialist;B = involved in the building process;G = general,laym en;6 : inputdetailedness -
I= approxim ate:sketches and rough ideas;II= detailed:draw ings and inventories;III= exact:exactm easures,areas,and quantities ofm eticulously described products
Since BREEAM and LEED are tools that are only applicable by licensed consulting companies, they were less
appropriate for studies such as the one presented in chapter 06. Moreover, as they combine different methods,
and as results are defined qualitatively, a quantitive comparison and analysis of different buildings would prove
difficult.

04.04.03 Quantitative tools
Eco-Quantum
Eco-Quantum is primarily designed for designing houses. At present, its developers however are working on a
version for offices, which is why I discuss the tool here. Stimulated by two non-governmental organisations and
with repetitive consultancy of parties from the building industry, IVAM Environmental Research and W/E
consultants developed Eco-Quantum.
Eco-Quantum enables the calculation of an overall LCA on the building level. The tool calculates the
environmental impact of the materials applied or planned, resulting in an environmental profile. The tool therefore
contains an extensive and ordered database of materials and their environmental effects.
For the building's energy consumption, an environmental profile can be obtained through the calculation of the
energy performance (in accordance with Dutch energy legislation). Dependent on the chosen sanitary services,
water consumption will also be assessable in the near future. By means of optional weighing, the environmental
profile may be converted to one indicator score.
Except for the optional weighing, Eco-Quantum strictly follows the standard LCA methodology and thereby has
the same advantages and disadvantages as LCA, which was previously discussed in section 04.02.
GreenCalc
GreenCalc was developed by Sureac, a Dutch foundation of companies working in the area of sustainability, and
the Dutch consulting company dgmr. The development was initiated and supported by the Dutch Government
Buildings Agency. Recently, the largest Dutch energy provider Nuon joined Sureac. GreenCalc is primarily
designed for office buildings. An extended version is currently being introduced in the market for use on an urban
scale and for housing.
GreenCalc calculates the environmental cost of building materials, energy, water, and commuter travel. Building
materials are assessed according to the previously discussed TWIN2002 model. However, the health assessment
of this model is ignored. Environmental costs of energy consumption are determined in accordance with the
official energy performance code, of which the results are coupled to monitary factors per m3 gas or kWh
electricity. Basis for the water consumption calculation is the water performance standard developed by the Dutch
consultancy companies opMAAT and BOOM [Bleuzé et al., 1995]. Commuter travel is determined according to a
model based on features of the building site and approachability. The fuel consumption derived for car or public
transport is consequently coupled to environmental costs.
When the user imports the environmental load of a reference building or an environmental budget, GreenCalc
automatically calculates the environmental index (see chapter 05), indicating the progress or arrears with respect
to a reference.
Building materials are assessed on the basis of the TWIN2002 model. Therefore, the considerations related to this
model, as already discussed in subsection 04.02.04, also apply to the materials module of GreenCalc. Remarks
can be made about the use of a 75 years reference lifespan and the way that energy consumption is modelled
from the calculated annual values to this term. GreenCalc presumes a transition of power from traditional energy
resources to more sustainable resources and approximates this gradual shift by multiplying the annual values by
35 years instead of 75. The new version of GreenCalc avoids this methodological flaw by using just annual
values.
An advantage of GreenCalc is the ability to assess more than one theme and express them in the same
environmental costs, making it a relatively complete and practical design-supporting tool.
Envest
The Centre for Sustainable Construction of the British BRE also developed Envest. The assessment tool is
directed at architects and designers. With respect to Eco-Quantum and GreenCalc, Envest is more appropriate for
use in the early design stages, as it offers an assessment of the geometry of a building design. Envest is
complementary to BREEAM, and results can be presented through BREEAM.

Envest facilitates users to assess the life cycle effects of the materials used in a building design (mainly directed
at offices) and to compare different variants. Life cycle data is derived from the database Envprofiles, also
developed by the BRE. Envest also assesses energy consumption during the building occupation. End-scores are
expressed in 'ecopoints'.
Comparison
Table 04.09 summarises characteristics of the three quantitive assessment tools.
Table 04.09: Characteristics of Eco-Quantum, GreenCalc, and Envest

tool sector 1 scale 2 env them es 3 stages 4 exp5 inp6 m ethod rem arks
off hous urb build F L W M E T H 2 3 5 6
Eco-Quantum B II LCA
GreenCalc B II LCA+addition
Envest B II LCA+addition
1 : off= offices and otherutility buildings;hous = housing;prod = productdevelopm ent;2 : urb = urban planning;build = building;prod = building products;3 : F = flora & fauna;
L = land use;W = w ater;M = m aterials & w aste;E = energy;T = travel;H:health & safety;4 : 1 = initiative & definition;2 = location & urban planning;3 = building design;4 =
construction;5 = occupation;6 = renovation;7 = dem olition;5 : expertise required -S = specialist;B = involved in the building process;G = general,laym en;6 : inputdetailedness -
I= approxim ate:sketches and rough ideas;II= detailed:draw ings and inventories;III= exact:exactm easures,areas,and quantities ofm eticulously described products
Each one of the tools is useful to areas of sustainable building. Since they all provide unified end-scores,
comparisons between different buildings and building designs are possible. Nevertheless, in order to enable valid
comparisons, a general methodology for assessments of different buildings is required. This will be discussed in
chapter 05.
At the moment, Eco-Quantum is only applicable to housing projects, and GreenCalc and Envest only to offices. All
tools take the use of building materials and energy consumption into account. Envest and GreenCalc also
consider water consumption, an aspect that will soon be integrated into Eco-quantum as well. The main difference
in the assessed aspects therefore is commuter travel, which is included in GreenCalc and not in the other two.
Further on in this dissertation, I will however demonstrate that the travel estimation model used in GreenCalc
leads to unlikely results.
04.04.04 Considerations
Remarks about the quantification of sustainability

For parties involved in the building industry, the legal obligation to fulfill different environmental performance
standards leads to more paper and calculation work. The shift to quantitative scores inevitably leads to inability to
assess special or innovative solutions. This sometimes demands creativeness, particularly in the case of
innovations that are difficult to fit into standard regulations.
The subjectivity of early checklists disappears when environmental issues are calculated. As assessment tools
are improving, sustainable building is maturing. This is similar to decisions on supporting structures that used to
be taken on the basis of personal experience once but now require calculative assurance.
Nevertheless, one should not fully cling to digits. No calculation method is complete nor has data at its disposal
that is 100% reliable. Besides, as environmental data continuously changes, assessment tools become obsolete.
Therefore, a critical eye remains necessary all the time. In order to diminish the drawbacks of the ever-imperfect
assessment tools, a methodology of working with references is proposed in chapter 05.
A methodological choice
Every model has its drawbacks. If a model strictly follows the standard LCA methodology, parties in the building
industry will in general accept the calculated results. On the basis of LCA, some environmental problems however
will be neglected and thus not taken into account. When a model is an adaptation to the LCA methodology, for
instance, the assessment is more complete through addition of the environmental effects. However, the
assessment method of these effects is scientifically controversial. Basically, this dilemma has already been on the
scientific agenda for over 10 years.

With regard to the methodological approach to environmental assessment, one could speak of two extreme
ideologies supported by separate groups of followers. The first group with a scientific background comprises of
hardliners strictly following the LCA methodology with quantitative and consensive methods and, as a
consequence, accepting incomplete assessments. Over the past 10 years, most people of this group have
learned to accept additional methods to translate LCA outcome into simple scores.
The second group comprises of people believing that LCA has its limitations in regards to sustainability, thus
accepting additional views on issues not involved in the LCA methodology. This group has personal icons who
have been working in the field for a long time, and who have ideas about sustainability that are often
uninterpretable into LCA. They also reflect dogmas originating from a long time ago. Over the past ten years, most
people in this group have shifted towards rules more strictly defined according to the LCA methodology.
The selection of a tool used for environmental decisions is often related to one of the two ideologies. Due to
disputes about the correct ideology, the division between people working on sustainability supports criticism that
sustainability should be no issue at all.
Therefore, in this research, I chose not to strictly cling to one assessment tool or the other, however tried to
develop doming methodologies for the cases I wanted to study. These doming methodologies discussed in
chapters 05, 14, and 16 were an addition to existing assessment tools, yet independent from any of them, using
their strengths and diminishing their specific drawbacks. I strove to avoid a complex choice of just one of the tools
discussed in this chapter.
Incomplete
As already stated, the overview of assessment models and tools for sustainable building could not be fully
completed. In this section, for instance, I did not discuss the interesting development on land use and the
assessment of ecosystem shifts. That topic will however be returned to chapter 12. I could have spent many more
pages on the discussion of every model or tool I know. In terms of the objectives of this research, this was not
necessary. And I wonder whether you, reader, would have appreciated a detailed analysis of these
methodologies. Many studies have already and are still being executed on the inventory and comparison of tools,
often initiated or supported by the European Community. The objective for it is often an integration of the tools
available. I however wonder whether that will ever be achieved. Every country and specific stakeholder prefers his
own model. A forced combination with exotic models often runs aground. I therefore conclude by stating that
every model and tool will prove its value best if the environmental performance of building is improved by the use
of it.

05 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
FOR OFFICE BUILDINGS
An objective comparison of office buildings requires more than just the choice of a certain assessment model.
Buildings can be compared to one another and also to a reference. The latter comparison type enables insight
into the progress or decline with respect to the factor 20. This chapter discusses different environmental
calculation and reference types. A methodology generally applicable for office building assessments and
comparisons is elaborated on. It was used in the case study discussed in chapter 06.
Figure 05.01: Different, yet similar: office buildings in the Arena area of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contents
05.01 Calculation types for office buildings 93

05.01.01 Environmental calculations sec 93
05.01.02 Building comparisons on the basis of absolute scores 93
05.01.03 Building comparisons on the basis of relative scores 94
05.01.04 Protocols 96
05.02 Reference types 97
05.02.01 The design reference 97
05.02.02 The GFA reference 98
05.02.03 The FTE reference 100
05.02.04 The environmental performance demand 101
05.02.05 Remarks 101
05.03 Defining the reference for office buildings 102
05.03.01 Definition of the personal use of space 102
05.03.02 Definition of the building geometry 103
05.03.03 Definition of reference materials, building services and location aspects 105
05.03.04 Image of the theoretic reference building 105
05.04 Conclusion 106
92 05 Assessment methodology for office buildings - B The Basis

05.01 Calculation types for office buildings
Three types of calculations are possible for assessing buildings in regards to environmental aspects:
Environmental calculations sec, of one building
Building comparisons on the basis of absolute scores
Building comparisons on the basis of relative scores or indices
Each of these assessments require their own, more or less elaborately described methodology and protocol. In
this section, the three assessment types are explained and their influence on the required methodology and
protocol will be discussed. I mainly refer to environmental assessments. However, the treated characteristics,
requirements, and outcome are commonly applicable for all kinds of building assessments.
05.01.01 Environmental calculations sec
Meaning and possibilities

With an environmental calculation sec the absolute environmental score can be determined. The results of the
calculation are given in a unit that depends on the used assessment tool: ecopoints, eco-indicators, environmental
load points and environmental costs.
The aim of an environmental calculation sec may be:

Obtaining insight into the contribution of different building elements to the total environmental load of the
building design. Therefore, the assessment tool needs to provide results on separate elements.
Obtaining insight into the contribution of the building to different environmental effects; therefore, the
assessment tool needs to be able to divide the results into different environmental effects or environmental
themes.
Environmental improvement or optimisation of a building design. Therefore, more than one calculation of the
same building design is necessary, adapting one or more elements in the input of every new calculation.
Conditions
The determination of the environmental load of one building allows for inaccuracies in the input and the way the
data is processed. Even if the absolute outcome of the calculation is not correct, as long as there is no
comparison with another building, the previously mentioned aims of the calculation can be met.
An environmental calculation sec does not require a complicated protocol. Main demand for this assessment type
is the correct analysis of the required input data and the correct input of the data into the assessment tool.
The absolute environmental load of a building itself does not define the environmental quality of the building
because that would require a comparison with another building or a reference. If the results from an environmental
calculation sec are later used to compare the building with another design, a methodology and protocol for
building comparisons on the basis of the absolute environmental load will be necessary.
05.01.02 Building comparisons on the basis of absolute scores

With building comparisons on the basis of absolute scores the environmental load of more than one building is
determined, in order to compare these. The outcome of the calculation is absolute again, in a unit depending on
the software used, but through consideration of more than one building results can be made relative or typical
(expressed as differences, percentages, scores per unit etc.).
With these building comparisons the possibilities of an environmental calculation sec remain, for each of the
separate buildings. Besides, building comparisons on the basis of absolute scores offer extra possibilities:
Obtaining insight into the environmental differences and causes between buildings or between buildings and
a reference (see figure 05.01)
B The Basis - 05 Assessment methodology for office buildings 93

Obtaining insight into the absolute environmental load of a set of buildings and their characteristics
Categorisation of buildings in accordance with the environmental load
optim um
environmental performance score

required
levels
official m inim um
environmental themes
Figure 05.01: Hypothetical example in which the environmental score for different themes is compared
with required performance levels. A dark-coloured top part in the column indicates that the building performs worse
than the reference; a light-coloured top part means that the building performs better.
Conditions
In order to compare buildings correctly, comparisons on the basis of absolute scores have to meet the following
requirements:
1. For comparability, the buildings need to have a comparable function and size. The latter will not be necessary
if the results can be converted to the same size or to a reference size (for instance one of the compared
buildings or a theoretical reference). Functional equity is accomplished through formulating and clinging to a
functional unit, a set of requirements that is the same for each one of the compared buildings and thus the
basis for comparison.
2. In the case of a comparison of results for different buildings, the starting conditions should be equal. The
building elements or environmental aspects calculated and neglected and the extent of detail in the input
need to be equal. This means that an input protocol has to be defined.
3. Beside the formulation of a functional unit it is necessary to describe the way in which functionally unequal
buildings need to be compared, i.e. how a conversion needs to be carried out. This can be done in a
functional conversion protocol. In case of functionally equal buildings this conversion protocol is not required;
the definition of a reference will then offer a basis for equity.
05.01.03 Building comparisons on the basis of relative scores

If the environmental load of different buildings is calculated (in accordance with the methodology for building
comparisons on the basis of absolute scores) and related to a reference environmental load or the environmental
load of a reference building (which is slightly different), an index or factor can be determined. When this is carried
out with all buildings, a building comparison on the basis of relative scores is possible.
The determination of an environmental index or improvement factor

The environmental index, originally introduced by the Dutch Government Buildings Agency [Dewever, 1996], is
such an indicator enabling comparisons between buildings for which a comparable reference has been applied.
An environmental index can be obtained by relating the environmental load of a building to the environmental load
of a reference building (see figure 05.02).

environmental load
environmental environmental load 1990 reference x 100
=
index environmental load building design
reference building
Figure 05.02: Determination of the environmental index
A index greater than 100 means an environmental performance better than the reference. When the reference is
coupled to the year 1990 and a target line is set for the factor 20 goal by the year 2040, progress or arrears to the
end goal or in-between targets can be clarified. Factor 20 corresponds to an environmental index 2000 by the
year 2040.
Instead of an environmental index, an environmental improvement factor can be determined by leaving out the
multiplication by 100. For the research presented in this dissertation, I chose to use improvement factors in order
to avoid a mix-up with the indices that already circulate in the Dutch world of sustainable building [e.g. Croes et
al., 2001]. The determination of environmental indices would somewhat differ from the methodology described in
this chapter, making results incompatible, although they give an impression of similarity. The treatment of my
methodology can however also be applied to environmental indices.
Aims
The following aims of an environmental calculation sec and of a comparison on the basis of absolute scores
remain possible in the case of a building comparison on the basis of relative scores such as environmental
improvement factors:
The contribution of different building elements to the total environmental load
The contribution of each separate building to different environmental effects
The cause of environmental differences between buildings
These aims, however, are only attainable as long as the absolute values remain detectable. This shows that
building comparisons purely on the basis of environmental improvement factors provide insufficient background
information about differences and causes of the environmental load of buildings.
Comparisons based on relative scores offer extra opportunities with respect to comparisons based on the
absolute score:
Simple scores, in contrast with different effect scores with many digits
Comparability of aspects of sustainability, of which scores are put in different units
Insight into progress or decline of the environmental performance, with respect to a reference year or target
line towards an end goal
Environmental improvement or optimisation of buildings, with respect to a reference building or the factor 20
Insight into environmental differences between functionally unequal buildings
Categorisation of buildings
Reduction of systematic deviations in environmental assessments.
The last opportunity needs further explanation.

In a comparative study, possible flaws of the assessment method or tool dissolve into the calculation of the
building as well as the reference. With the determination of the environmental improvement factor, results are
divided by one another, leading to a reduction of the systematic deviation. Therefore, the choice for a specific
assessment tool becomes less important. From a scientific point of view, working with relative scores such as the
environmental improvement factor is therefore preferable. However, an essential condition is the clearly defined
reference to which buildings are related and an analysis of the absolute results lying underneath.

Conditions
In order to assess buildings correctly, comparisons based on relative scores must meet the same conditions as
the ones based on absolute scores, with the difference that a functional unit is compulsory and not optional.
As previously mentioned, the most important part of a building comparison based on relative scores is the
definition of the reference, for which different types apply. Section 05.02 will discuss this more elaborately.
05.01.04 Protocols
In order to equally compare buildings, a protocol, providing strict guidelines for a comparison is useful. The
protocol may be written as a step-by-step approach to the comparison. The following example was used by
Martijn Arets for his comparison of floor structures [2001].
A supporting structure comparison protocol

Step 1: Determine the subject of comparison.
Step 2: Check if a useful division in elements can be made. This will be the case if specific demands can be
put for one or more elements.
Step 3: Define performance demands for the whole and per element (depending on the intended use). Start
with applying laws, followed by demands of the principal (and other actors).
Step 4: Review the demands critically:
– Is enough attention paid to functionality? Is there no multi-functional use?
– Do the demands clearly mark out what is taken into consideration and what not? Can the connection
with other elements be determined from the demands as well as the necessity to take this into
account?
– Are the demands non-directive? In other words: are the demands formulated in such a way that they do
not 'push' the results towards a certain desired direction?
– Are the demands not too strict, unnecessarily leaving out appropriate solutions?
Step 5: Formulate the functional unit.
Step 6: Choose which environmental assessment tool will be applied. Based on that, define other
environmental aspects that need to be assessed in another way.
Step 7: Define the alternative solutions and determine their properties.
Step 8: Define the reference with which all alternatives will be compared.
Step 9: Determine the environmental load. Assess the other environmental aspects.
Step 10: Test the sensitivity of the results with respect to the formulated requirements, the selected materials
etc. When the sensitivity figures are reasonably large, it is wise to critically review the requirements or to
choose another assessment tool.
The basis for comparison or functional unit

A functional unit is a kind of protocol or a part of a larger protocol, describing which basic requirements all
assessed buildings need to meet. A functional unit can be defined by more than just functional requirements:
Geographically: the scale of the research field and the place of the compared objects
Chronologically: the period during which the objects were made or the stage over which the objects will be
assessed
Thematically: the subject of comparison and the (environmental) themes or parameters that will be compared
Functionally: the functions of the alternatives considered
Spatially: basic spatial requirements (surfaces, volumes etc.), connected with the basis for functional
comparison
Technically: technical performances (strength, stiffness, fire safety, noise reduction, heat insulation etc.) that
all alternatives should minimally achieve.
The basic unit for comparison also needs to be defined: person, m1, m2, m3, etc. The basis for functional, spatial
and technical comparison may also be defined through the reference with which the alternatives will be compared.

Functional conversion protocol

In case of functionally unequal buildings without an appropriate reference, a recalculation needs to be executed in
order to make them comparable. Therefore, a functional conversion protocol is necessary, in which the conversion
of the environmental load of alternatives is described, so that they can be compared with each other. For instance,
a conversion factor can be derived by dividing the average floor use of one function by that of another function.
Input protocol
An input protocol is necessary to equalise calculated and unconsidered building elements or environmental
parameters, as well as the detail in the input of different buildings. The same elements and environmental aspects
are usually compared and used in the assessment tool. However, in case of particular solutions that cannot be
treated in a standard way the same process needs to be followed for all diverging solutions.
05.02 Reference types
In order to make a meaningless outcome of a calculation interpretable, the environmental load of studied objects
can be compared with that of a reference. If the reference is chosen to represent the year 1990, the evolving
result of comparison will be an indicator for the progress or arrears towards the factor 20.
For the convenience of the reader and myself, in this chapter, the objects of environmental comparisons are
always office buildings. Therefore, the reference can be a theoretic office building, designed for the same number
of people but constructed in accordance with standards from the year 1990.
The exact definition of the reference defines the results, their usefulness and their interpretation. For buildings,
there are four basic reference types:
A. The design reference
B. The GFA reference
C. The FTE reference
D. The environmental performance demand.
These different reference types will be clarified in the following subsections.
05.02.01 The design reference
Definition
In case of a design reference, the design of the reference (shape, floor area, façade, built-in components, amount
of building materials) is equal to the studied building. The design reference is based on a list of reference
solutions for building materials, energy and water services. This reference data is pasted in the assessment model
into the dimensions of the studied building design, as depicted in figure 05.03.
In this figure and those similar following, the term 'environmental index' is substitutable by 'environmental
improvement factor'. An environmental improvement factor based on the design reference is called the
environmental improvement factor for building materials & services.
In the past, environmental indices as determined for the Dutch Government Buildings Agency (DGBA) were
mostly based on the design reference. Later, this index was replaced by an environmental index based on a GFA
reference, comparable to what is presented in section 05.02.02.

Figure 05.03: Schematic illustration of the design reference and the determination of the materials & services index
Use and limitations

Characteristics of the design reference can be found in table 05.01.
Table 05.01: Characteristics of the design reference

The design reference
Number of people not distinctive: equal to studied building
Floor area not distinctive: equal to studied building
Building geometry not distinctive: equal to studied building
Building materials reference solutions
Building services reference solutions
Location aspects depends: equal to studied building or reference solutions
Name of obtained factor improvement factor for building materials & services
An improvement factor for building materials & services, as is implied in the name, only assesses the ecological
quality of the applied building materials and services. The design reference does not support assessments of the
building design or the efficiency of building use because the quantities of the studied building are equal to the
reference.
The approach is quick and easy but in fact means working with a shifting reference, because the design, size,
form, layout and building use change with every studied building. Every new building requires a new reference
definition. Therefore, through the materials and services improvement factor alone, one building is not completely
comparable to the other.
05.02.02 The GFA reference
Definition
This reference type is based on the gross floor area (GFA) of the studied building. In case of non-completed
buildings it may be based on spatial requirements for the net floor area (NFA) in the original brief multiplied by an
average GFA/NFA ratio. An essential difference with the design reference is the design of the theoretic GFA
reference building. The building geometry, façade and built-in components are 'constructed' in accordance with
reference building design features (this will be discussed in section 05.03.02). Consequently, the materials and
building services are taken from a reference list (see figure 05.04).
An index based on a GFA reference may be called the environmental improvement factor for the building design
(based on the GFA). However, being the standard, it is also referred to as the environmental improvement factor
for the building design or even simply environmental improvement factor.

Figure 05.04: Schematic illustration of the GFA reference and the determination of the building design index
Use and limitations

For the indices, as presented by Croes et al. [2001], a reference similar to the GFA reference described here was
applied. The GFA reference has proven particularly useful in the case of design competitions, if different designs
are made for the same building.
The environmental improvement factor, based on the GFA, enables an assessment of the environmental
performance of the building design and the building materials and services applied. In order to get a picture of the
building design efficiency alone, given a certain material and service selection, it should be compared to a
materials & services improvement factor. The result of this division could be called the environmental design
efficiency. Characteristics of the GFA reference can be found in table 05.02.
Table 05.02: Characteristics of the GFA reference

The GFA reference
Floor area not distinctive: equal to studied building
Building geometry reference values, depending on the floor area
Location aspects reference solutions
Name of obtained factor improvement factor for the building design (based on the GFA)
The GFA is a common measure for office buildings, whereas the use area is more often applied to housing. As an
indicator for the space used in an office, user-oriented organisations as such state building managers prefer
discussing the net floor area (NFA) or the (functional) useful area (UA), whereas real estate managers use the
free lettable area in cases of hireable offices. They are all slightly different area measurements that can be used
as the basis for a reference. Founding the environmental reference on the UA or NFA would provide a better
indication of the design efficiency, because the GFA also implies area not specifically necessary for the primary
functions of the office. So, as an extra measure for design efficiency, especially in the case of buildings with a
relatively great floor area not dedicated to primary office functions (conservatories, atria, hanging gardens, etc.), a
building design improvement factor based on the UA, or one of the other types, will prove more appropriate.
Because of its specific assessment, if it is divided by the materials and services improvement factor, the result
could be called the environmental internal design efficiency.
The spatial programme of the GFA reference is equal to the one in the assessed building. Therefore one cannot
see whether the use of the building, the building occupation, is efficient. For that an FTE reference is necessary.

05.02.03 The FTE reference
Definition
In an FTE reference, the number of people (or full time equivalent, FTE) for whom a new building is being
designed or with which an existing building is currently being used forms the basis for comparison. To determine
the total floor area of the reference building, the number of users is multiplied by a reference value for the
personal use of area in the year 1990, and possibly dependent on the type of office function. In the case of an
FTE reference, the reference building is therefore built from scratch, requiring a definition of functions in the
building, their reference floor area and specific facilities. Consequently, the reference building geometry is
'constructed' as was done with the GFA reference, followed by standard materials and building services (see
figure 05.05).
An environmental index obtained by comparison with the FTE reference is called the environmental improvement
factor for the building use.
Figure 05.05: Schematic illustration of the FTE reference and the determination of the building use index
Use and limitations

On the basis of an FTE reference, more aspects of a building can be assessed than with a GFA reference. Its
determination however is more complex. The improvement factor for the building use enables assessment of the
integrated environmental load of a building design, its occupation, and the applied materials and building services,
with respect to a theoretic building. To get an impression of the building use alone, given certain building design
and materials and service, the improvement factor for the building use should be divided by the improvement
factor for the building design. The result of this division can be called the environmental occupation efficiency.
Characteristics of the GFA reference can be found in table 05.03.
Table 05.03: Characteristics of the FTE reference

The FTE reference
Floor area reference value, depending on the number of people
Building geometry reference values, depending on the floor area
Location aspects reference solutions
Name of obtained factor improvement factor for the building use

In practice, different office functions require different floor areas: in general, more space is assigned to higher
functions higher in the hierarchy. An altering reference floor use per employee makes an individual assessment
more accurate but also complicates the determination of the FTE reference, and leads to incomparable buildings
comprising of different functions.
The number of people using the studied building is not always known and may change during the lifetime of the
building. The environmental performance will therefore vary with different personnel data and is only applicable
when related to a certain period (year, month, week or even day).
05.02.04 The environmental performance demand
Definition
Determination of a reference with detailed characteristics relatively takes a lot of effort and requires insight into
functional and technical aspects of buildings. For a quick yet correct comparison of buildings, a reference may
also be determined by the floor area required or the number of people using the building, coupled with a reference
environmental load per m2 GFA (the environmental performance demand), or coupled with a reference
environmental load per person or FTE.
For instance, as possibly derived from assessments, the average environmental cost of offices (expressed in e€,
environmental euros) divided by the number of occupants might on average be e€ 20,000 per FTE. If an office
building for 200 FTE people were to perform the same as this average, it could be allowed a total environmental
load of e€ 4,000,000. The building design can be tested to that amount. In the case of a spatial demand the office
could be allowed an environmental load of e€ 40,000 per m2 GFA, leading to the same total load as the previous
example if every 1.0 FTE employee were alloted 20 m2 GFA of office floor space.
A performance demand as in the examples described can only be determined if many calculations of comparable
building types have already taken place, from which the environmental load per person or per m2 can be derived.
In the case study described in chapter 06, twelve office building were assessed, a relatively limited number of
offices, especially when taking into account that they are all government offices. A general performance demand
per FTE or m2 will require a greater number of assessments.
Use and limitations

The limitations of an environmental performance demand are comparable to those of a GFA or FTE reference,
dependent on which type is chosen. This particular reference depends on the floor area or number of users for
which the building was or is being designed. Changing these starting conditions will change the environmental
load permitted.
05.02.05 Remarks
Differences between the environmental improvement factor types

Table 05.04 clarifies the differences between the environmental reference types discussed and the environmental
improvement factors that can be obtained from them.
It would be quite disturbing to use different factor types when speaking of the environmental improvement factor.
For the assessment of technical aspects and the building design, the improvement factor for the building design is
most important. As determination of other types of floor area than the GFA, the building design improvement
factor will primarily be meant as the factor based on the GFA.

Table 05.04: Origins of different environmental improvement factors

Environmental improvement factor (e.i.f.) Reference type basis or conversion
e.i.f. for building materials & services design reference
e.i.f. for the building design (based on the GFA) GFA reference
- variant: based on the use area UA reference
- variant: based on the net floor area NFA reference
environmental design efficiency = e.i.f. for the building design (GFA) / e.i.f. for building materials & services
environmental internal design efficiency = e.i.f. for the building design (UA) / e.i.f. for building materials & services
e.i.f. for the building use FTE reference
environmental occupation efficiency = i.f. for the building use / i.f. for the building design
Doubts concerning the time factor

The disadvantage of fixing a building shape and layout principle for comparison with a certain office is that for a
certain number of employees a tight building leads to the greatest environmental improvement factor: less building
materials cause less environmental load and a smaller building envelope leads to reduced energy consumption. In
this case, future developments such as growth in the office organisation or a shift to other functions are forgotten,
possibly shortening the eventual lifespan. On the basis of present assessments, buildings shaped to minimum
size requirements perform environmentally well but may have a short life expectancy when taking into account
future changes including requirements for ceiling heights and passageway sizes, which eventually has an
unfavourable impact on sustainability. These considerations about the time factor will however be discussed
further and tested in Volume C of this dissertation.
05.03 Defining the reference for office buildings
In this section, the determination of reference values for an office building commences with the starting-point for
the FTE reference: the reference floor area per employee. Step by step, geometry values for the reference
building will consequently be determined (required for the FTE- and GFA reference), followed by the
determination of reference materials, building services and site aspects (required for all reference types).
05.03.01 Definition of the personal use of space
Starting with the number of personnel using the studied building, a next step is to determine the 1990 reference
floor area per FTE, from which point the entire reference building can be defined.
Floor area
There are several estimations of the floor area used per employee but none explicitly refer to the year 1990. In
1995, real estate company DTZ Zadelhoff calculated an average use per employee in German offices of 28,9 m2.
Hakfoort & Lie [1996] mention 24 m2 GFA per employee in the Netherlands. According to Eldonk et al. [2001] in
the year 1996 the Dutch mean use was 27.9 m2 per employee, a value that dropped to 25.5 m2 by the year 1999
and 23.8 m2 by 2001. If this trend began before 1996, it is assumed in the year 1990 the average floor use must
have been greater than 27.9 m2. However, in the Netherlands starting only around the year 1996 the first space-
saving office innovation projects started [Twijnstra Gudde, 1996; Dutch Government Buildings Agency, 1997].
Therefore, for 1990, the average GFA per employee is estimated around 28 m2, and the total GFA Atot of the
reference building will be according to formula 05.01, p being the number of employees.
Atot = 28*p [m2] <05.01>

05.03.02 Definition of the building geometry
Office concept
The quantity of built-in components required for a certain floor area depends on the chosen office concept, which
is a combination of the organisational use concept and an architectural layout concept (see table 05.05). The
latter, however, is closely related to the use concept.
Table 05.05: Office use and layout concepts [adaptation of Vos et al., 1999]
office use concept office layout concept
personal/territorial office cellular office
shared office group office
non-territorial office open-plan office
combi office
flexible/virtual office
non-territorial use is dividable to organisation-bound, commercial rentable and informal
workplaces, of which the latter incline to virtual workplaces (workplaces outside the office)
By 1998, only 9% of the Dutch offices had an innovative concept [Antwerpen & Hermans, 1998]; most had
territorial workplaces. The largest part of offices had a cell structured layout, of which 40% had 1- or 2-person
rooms, 23% had 3- or 8-person rooms (group offices) and 21% a combination of both. Therefore, it is reasonable
to pick a territorial cell office as a reference for 1990, long before the broad introduction of office innovation.
Building depth and length

As many researchers found out, Dutch cell offices are mainly based on a floor module of 1.80 m x 5.40 m and a
single middle corridor of 1.80 m [Blyth, 1993; Dewulf & de Jonge, 1994; Gerritse & Houten, 1995; Wislocki, 1998].
This implies a common building depth for the 1990 reference building of 12.60 m. Therefore, if the reference
building were to be accomplished in one layer, the total building length would be (formula 05.02):
Ltot = 28*p/12.60 = 2.222*p [m] <05.02>
This total facade length is the real façade length only in the case of small floor areas (buildings of one layer). For a
good reference for the façades, roof and ground floor, a reference length of an office building needs to be
determined.
Based on Dutch building legislation rules for security exits the distance between the entrance of a building and a
smoke compartment should be a maximum of 30 m. To avoid smoke compartments, a reference length of around
60 m may therefore be chosen, or more precisely - with 32 bays of 1.80 m - rounded off to 57.60 m. Hence the
reference GFA per layer of 12.60 x 57.60 = 725.8 m2. Reference offices with a GFA of 725.8 m2 and less have
one building layer, the building length depending on the floor area required, rounded off upwards in order to fit the
bay measure of 1.80 m. For larger buildings, the number of building layers (y) can be determined according to
formula 05.03, rounded off to an integer number.
y=Ltot/57,60=0,0386*p [-] <05.03>
Greater office floor areas require relatively more space per layer for vertical transport; in contrast to this, scale
advantages occur. Nevertheless, only one reference can be applied. Limitation of the façade length is therefore
useful.
Building height
The building depth and length determine the floor area per building layer. When these two parameters have been
defined the building height is residual. In the case of large floor areas, a limited reference building length would
lead to an unrealistic height, necessitating additional structural measures. Therefore, a maximum reference height
needs to be defined.
Based on a concrete structure with a stiff core around the elevators conventional to the Dutch situation, and based
on experience, an estimated maximum height is 24 layers. A free floor height of 2.40 m is common [Boer et al.,
1996], so with a structure and service height of 1.20 m the total reference floor height is 3.60 m. This means a
maximum reference building height of 86.40 m. If y from formula 05.03 exceeds 24, the total amount of building

layers of the reference building is set at 24. In case of a large reference office (20.000 m2 GFA and larger, e.g. a
ministry), this maximum height is quickly attained, after which expansion of the reference floor area can be sought
by an extension of the building length.
Calculation of the measurements for the reference building geometry

Following the definition of different reference measures the shape of the fictitious reference building for a studied
office building can be determined from formulas (see table 05.06).
Table 05.06: Reference list for environmental comparisons

number of fte (p) p
needed area (A) A=28*p
total facade length (Ltot) Ltot=28*p/12,60=2,222*p
A<=725,8 A >725,8
building layers (y) y=Ltot/57,60=0,0386*p
y<=24 y>24
Yref=A/57,60
number of stories (Yref) Yref = 1 Yref=24
round off upwards to integer
building height (Href) Href=3,60*Yref=3,60 Href=3,60*Yref Href=3,60*Yref=86,40
needed area per layer (a) a=A/Yref a=A/Yref
t=L/1,80 t=a/12,60/1,80=a/22,7 t=a/12,60/1,80=a/22,7

number of bays (t)
round off upwards to an integer round off upwards to an integer round off upwards to an integer
building length (Lref) Lref=1,80*t Lref = 1,80*t Lref=1,80*t
gross floor area (Aref) Aref=12,60*Lref Aref=12,60*Yref*Lref Aref=12,60*Yref*Lref =302,4*Lref
This definition of reference design geometries looks complex but can be easily put in a spreadsheet model, as
was done for the case study presented in chapter 06.
Additional design references

For complete data input in an environmental assessment model the following briefly presented additional features
of the reference building were chosen. For a more elaborate explanation, I refer to Dobbelsteen et al.
[2002b] in the reference list of personal publications at the end of this volume.
Having no statistical preference for the orientation of office buildings, the arbitrary choice was made to orient
the long elevations of the office on the west and east. The entrance is at the eastern elevation.
The east and west elevation are given a common external glass area percentage of 30%, including the
window-frame. The short elevations on North and South are blind.
For the case study in chapter 06 a cellar not taken as functional space was originally included in the
reference. However, since the GFA of the studied building - including or excluding a cellar - defines the total
floor area of the reference, a possible cellar will always be transformed into reference space. So, ultimately, a
cellar was left out of the reference building.
The reference office has a flat roof without special facilities.
The cell-structured office floor has a modular layout
Built-in components based on a module of 1.80 m by 5.40 m. Based on databases of the Dutch Government
Buildings Agency (DGBA) an average internal wall area of 90% of the GFA was chosen, of which 10 percent
points are internal doors.
The supporting structure is a column structure with a stiff core of 3.60 m by 3.60 m.

05.03.03 Definition of reference materials, building services and location

aspects
Having the basic measures determined, reference materials and building services can be defined. The selection
of materials, building services and site aspects presented in table 05.07 was based on a study by Haas &
Dobbelsteen [1996], and is adapted at some points.
Table 05.07: Reference list for environmental comparisons

Building materials
foundation, columns, beams, floor structure, roof structure and bearing walls of concrete, cast on site,
Supporting structure
40 mm EPS insulation of ground floor and roof
brick masonry - 50 mm rock wool - lime stone blocks, tropical timber windows with double panes,
Facades
entrance of glass in tropical timber frames, security door of tropical plywood
25% massive lime sand block walls, 75% metal stud walls with 50 mm rock wool, honeycomb doors in
Built-in components
tropical timber frames, concrete stairs
cement decks, bituminous roofing with gravel ballast, gypsum ceiling panels, 90% lino and 10%
Finish
ceramic tile floor covering, 10% ceramic tile wall covering and 90% lime plaster-work with acrylic paint
Terrain 50 mm asphalt pavement
Energy consumption
opening times 8.00-20.00 h, 38 hours working week, 85% presence during opening hours, 1 computer
Building use
per person, no auto power-down,
light walls, heavy facades and closed ceilings, conventional boiler, mechanical extraction of exhaust
Climatising 3 3
air (2.0 m /hm ), no heat recovery, no ventilator control, no cooling
Warm tap water conventional boiler with central heating, distribution by circulation
Lighting conventional TL ceiling fittings, room switches, 40% of functional area has daylight possibilities
Water consumption
Facilities restaurant, showers and greenery watering present, no air moistening

Sanitation toilets with 9 litre reservoirs, standard taps and showers
Substitution no substitution of tap water by rain water
Travel
2
Site town borders, 400-600 people/km , internal work (85% presence)
Public transport railway station at 4 km, frequency 4 times per hour, bus shelter at 500 m, frequency 4 times per hour
motorway at 1 km, through traffic on service road, parking lots at 100 m, 0.6 lots per employee,
Private transport
pedestrian and bike paths separated from road by greenery
These reference conditions and values are independent from the assessment tool used. In principle, a reference
can be determined through each of the assessment tools appropriate for office buildings.
05.03.04 Image of the theoretic reference building
The reference office can be seen as a typical Dutch 'motorway office', located at the border of a town near a
service road, having the disposal of sufficient parking space and distant from public transport. The office design is
traditional, with a concrete supporting structure and brick masonry. It has a cell-structured layout (every employee
has his own desk). The building services and heat insulation are in accordance with 1990 legislation requirements.

05.04 Conclusion
The choice for one of the three references presented in this chapter is decisive for the results and their
interpretation. Nevertheless, all improvement factors retrieved through comparison with the different references
are useful in environmental assessments of buildings, for each one reveals different aspects. The FTE reference
enables the most integral environmental assessment but needs results based on the other references for a more
detailed look at certain aspects such as the efficiency of building use, design efficiency, and the performance of
building materials and services alone.
For the assessment of office buildings discussed in the following chapter, I decided to mainly use the GFA
reference, with the design reference as an indicator for the building technology applied. In chapter 13 of Volume E
- The Space Factor, the FTE reference will be used for an assessment in which the use of space forms the main
issue.
As a follow-up for studies of many cases, with the government office buildings assessment discussed in chapter
06 as a start, the average environmental load per m2 GFA or per FTE can be deduced and applied as a reference
performance demand for the near future. This performance demand per employee would enable an easy fixation
of the environmental load reference for an office organisation, avoiding a detailed definition of the office concept,
building design and technology. The principal and architect could use this for improvement of the environmental
quality of their project; society can see the achieved progress towards sustainability.
The methodology for the definition of a reference building for a building comparison on the basis of relative
scores, which was presented in this chapter, was regularly communicated to people involved in the DGBA case
studies, assessors of buildings, and people involved in the update version of the software tool GreenCalc. In a
version lightly adapted, the GFA reference was chosen as a basis for future environmental assessments, leading
to environmental indices.

06 CASE STUDY OF OFFICE BUILDINGS
In cooperation with the Dutch Government Buildings Agency a study was conducted on the environmental load of
twelve government offices, all of different sizes, styles and ages, however with a comparable function. The
methodology described in chapter 05 was applied to determine environmental improvement factors on the basis of
comparison with a reference. This chapter discusses the results of the case study where findings clarify the most
important environmental aspects and building elements for the improvement of environmental performance.
Figure 06.01: The twelve government office buildings assessed and discussed in this chapter
From left to right and top to bottom: the Food Inspection Department in Zutphen, the Road and Water Engineering
Department in Delft, the Administration of Justice in Haarlem [picture: Hubert-Jan Henket Architecten bna], the Mixed Office
in Arnhem, The Artillery in The Hague, the Exchequer and Audit Office in The Hague [picture: Robert Oerlemans], the
Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment in The Hague, the Tax Office in Gorinchem, the Geometry Department in Delft, the
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment in The Hague, the Johan de Witt House in The Hague, and the Road
and Waterworks Office in Middelburg [picture: De Ruiter Architecten]. Other pictures are by the author.
Contents
06.01 Introduction 109

06.01.01 Background 109
06.01.02 Research approach 109
06.01.03 Buildings assessed 110
06.01.04 Selection of the assessment tool 111
06.02 Instance of an assessment: the Ministry of SAE 113
06.02.01 Environmental calculation 113
06.02.02 Further analysis 115
06.03 Absolute results for all buildings 116
06.03.01 Characteristics 116
06.03.02 Typical environmental cost 116
06.03.03 Cause of the environmental load 118
06.04 Overall improvement factors 121
06.04.01 Performance of the entire building design 121
06.04.02 Performance in the case of the actual energy consumption 122
06.04.03 Influence of the spatial design and technology used 122
06.04.04 Performance related to the year of construction or renovation 123
06.04.05 Involving commuter travel 124
06.05 Conclusions 125
06.05.01 Absolute results 125
06.05.02 Causes 126
06.05.03 Environmental performance with respect to the year 1990 127
06.05.04 Directions for effective solutions 127
06.05.05 Uncertainties and remarks 128
108 06 Case study of office buildings - B The Basis

06.01 Introduction
06.01.01 Background
As discussed in chapter 01, the environmental performance of different buildings designed with a particular focus
on sustainability is probably insufficient with respect to an intermediate target for factor 20 environmental
improvement by the year 2040. The reasons for being behind schedule needed to be explained, and effective
sustainable solutions needed to be found. In the year 2000, the performance of average office buildings with a
comparable function and without sustainable measures was unknown. Offices without a particular focus on
sustainability needed to be analysed to find effective solutions. Sponsored by and in cooperation with the Dutch
Government Buildings Agency (DGBA), in the years 2001 and 2002 a study was conducted of twelve government
offices. The aim for myself was to determine the environmental performance of office buildings without special
attention for sustainability, the main elements contributing to environmental damage and possible improvements.
For the DGBA, the possible measures for improvement of their real estate was most important.
Under the supervision of Selina Roskam, Axel de Boer and Huub Croes of the DGBA and Kees van der Linden of
Delft University, my colleague Martijn Arets and I visited, analysed and assessed the twelve office buildings, then
wrote a report on each one of them [Dobbelsteen et al., 2002d-i; Arets et al., 2002a-f]. I also wrote the main report
[Dobbelsteen et al., 2002a] and two annex reports [Dobbelsteen et al., 2002b-c], of which one discussed the
assessment methodology (as presented in chapter 05) and the other concisely provided an overview of the
results.
In this chapter, the main results of the case study will be presented and discussed. In chapters 06 and 13, the
case study is taken as a starting-point for further elaboration with regard to the factors space and time.
06.01.02 Research approach
The schedule of the case study is graphically presented by figure 06.02.
The case study commenced with meetings with the people involved, about the approach and selection of
buildings. The most important part of the case study was the development of a general assessment methodology
that could be applied to all future assessments of office buildings. The eventual methodology was presented in
chapter 05 and broadly picked up by organisations that assess the environmental performance of (office)
buildings.
We visited the selected office buildings (see section 06.01.03) and interviewed the respective contact persons;
these were mostly technical or facilities managers. In two cases, the buildings were not yet constructed. For
these, we consulted the supervisor at the regional DGBA responsible. For the calculations, drawings and data, the
used (or to be used) materials and building services were necessary. Furthermore, additional information was
obtained on tours through the buildings and discussions with the contact person.
For each of the studied buildings, the determination of measurements and details of the reference building, as well
as the quantitive analysis of the assessment outcome, was automated. This was done in a spreadsheet file
developed beforehand, which simplified the work and formed a basis for future assessments.
B The Basis - 06 Case study of office buildings 109

preparation of the cases preparation of the assessment
formulation of development of the

selection criteria assessment methodology
buildings from the inventory of
DGBA portfolio assessment tools
selection of selection of the

office buildings assessment tool
the actual assessment

data from regional
departments
collection of definition of
necessary data reference buildings
processing of data into the assessment tool
assessment of
other aspects determination of environmental performance
conclusion
analysis and comparison of results
factor 20 target
formulation of solution directions and advices to the DGBA
Figuur 06.02: Schematic representation of the research process
06.01.03 Buildings assessed
In deliberation with participants of the DGBA, the cases were selected from the following criteria:
All buildings needed to mainly have an office work function. The DGBA real estate portfolio consists of many
types of government buildings, e.g. prisons, courts, laboratories, warehouses, police stations, and offices
with or without public counter functions. We only selected buildings mainly used as an office with no or a
limited counter function. Differences between functions were however inevitable: some buildings have a
relatively great proportion of meeting rooms, whereas others mainly consist of personal workplaces.
The buildings needed to have different sizes (floor areas and heights). Government office buildings of the
DGBA range from small tax offices with an approximate gross floor area (GFA) of 1,000 m2 to ministries of
over 50,000 m2.
The buildings needed to be constructed or renovated between 1960 and 2000, preferably well divided over
these decades. In conference with people involved, two buildings under design or construction were also
taken into account in order to involve modern offices: the Geometry Department in Delft and Road and
Waterworks Department in Middelburg. Both were particularly interesting because they were controversial to
some extent and had had a relatively difficult design process.
The buildings were preferably built according to different building styles and technologies.
The DGBA, which owns government real estate spread over the Netherlands, wanted different regional
departments to be represented.
Table 06.01 presents the assessed buildings and their characteristics. Pictures were shown in figure 06.01.

Tabel 06.01: Overview of the assessed buildings

building name city detail constr renov GFA layers
2
'Johan de Witt House' The Hague 1655 1966 1,671 m 4
2
Mixed Office Arnhem also satellite office 1965 1996 6,897 m 7
Tax Office Gorinchem old and new part 1976 1995 1 6,342 m2 3
2
Road & Water Engineering Delft just the C-building 1985 - 3,489 m 11
2
Ministry of SAE The Hague 1990 - 57,812 m2 13
3 2
Ministry of HSPE The Hague 1992 - 92,097 m 17
2
Exchequer & Audit Office The Hague 1997 - 5,177 m 5
'The Artillery' The Hague 1998 - 14,275 m2 5
2
Food Inspection Zutphen just the office part 2000 - 1,312 m 2
2
Administration of Justice Haarlem just the office part 2001 - 7,531 m 4
Geometry Department Delft under construction 2001 - 13,590 m2 7
2
Road and Waterworks Middelburg in design stage 2002 - 11,263 m 5
1: construction of the new part of the office; 2: SAE = Social Affairs & Employment; 3: HSPE = Housing, Spatial Planning & Environment
Starting with the intention to assess twenty buildings, but due to little cooperation from some of the regional
departments, insufficient data, and limited time, eventually only twelve were fully analysed. This smaller number of
course reduced the representative nature of the assessment. Nevertheless, I think that even with the twelve
offices we obtained a diverse cross-section of the DGBA portfolio. Also, the DGBA is only one of the many real
estate portfolio holders, and it is located in the Netherlands, making this study limited to the Dutch situation. As
discussed in chapter 02, there are international differences in offices, even in Western Europe. The findings of the
case study presented in this chapter should therefore be put into perspective for offices in other countries.
06.01.04 Selection of the assessment tool
Selection criteria
In order to determine the environmental performance of offices and all aspects related to them I would have
preferred to apply a tool that is methodologically based on the pure methodology of LCA. However, there are a
few contemplations that made this impossible, if not undesirable. First, there are also methodological or ethical
drawbacks to LCA, considering the incompleteness of effects involved and the impossibility to use the
environmental profile outcome of a pure LCA for a comparison of many buildings. These drawbacks were already
discussed in section 04.02. More important is the unavailability of a pure LCA tool focussing on offices. There are
only two tools for this and they work on the basis of unitary scores: Envest and GreenCalc.
For the case study of office buildings the environmental assessment tool had to meet the following requirements:
The tool needed to be applicable to office buildings.
Existing buildings as well as theoretical buildings needed to be assessable.
The tool needed to take into account the impact of different aspects. At a minimum the use of energy,
materials and water needed to be assessed.
For easy comparison, the output for the different aspects was preferably expressed in the same unit.
My colleagues and I should be able to work quickly with the tool.
On the basis of these criteria, GreenCalc was selected: it is directed at office buildings, does not discriminate input
for real of fictitious buildings, takes into account the use of materials, energy, water and commuter travel and puts
the results in environmental cost. In addition, all people involved had practical or theoretical experience with
GreenCalc, which made it easy to interpret and discuss the results.
As discussed in subsection 04.04.03, scientific objections can be made against the use of a tool that presents its
outcome in a unitary score, such as the materials module of GreenCalc which is based on the TWIN2002 model.
Within the context of this research and its relatively abstract objectives - finding directions of solutions for

sustainable office accommodation - a tool such as GreenCalc was appropriate enough for a systematic approach.
In chapter 05, and further on in this thesis, in chapters 13, 14, and 16, general assessment methodologies are
introduced that are additional to any environmental assessment tool. These methodologies were meant to mitigate
the drawbacks of individual tools. For the case study of this chapter, I needed one tool to put the first step for the
exploration of effective improvements to office accommodation, and GreenCalc was most appropriate for that.
Adaptations
The use of building materials and consumption of energy and water relate directly to the building design and the
applied technology. As assessed by GreenCalc, commuter travel is mainly the result of the building location,
available parking space, and public transport facilities. The building design can therefore not be held responsible
for the environmental costs of commuter travel. Since the determination of the environmental performance of
office buildings and its most important aspects and elements were main objectives of this chapter, I needed to
leave the environmental cost of commuter travel out of the assessment, though GreenCalc calculated it anyway.
Furthermore, GreenCalc's calculation of environmental cost is based on a building lifespan of 75 years. For the
use of building materials, this means that the environmental lifecycle assessment (LCA) involves the phases
before occupation (e.g. excavation, manufacture, transport, and construction), the end-phase of demolition, and
75 years of service, including intermediate maintenance and replacements. For the other aspects, GreenCalc
calculates the annual environmental cost first, based on the annual consumption of energy, water, and transport
fuel. In the end-result the annual values are converted to the lifespan of 75 years. For water consumption, this
simply means a multiplication by 75. For the consumption of energy (and fuel for commuter transport), as already
introduced in subsection 04.04.03, the developers of GreenCalc made the choice to include a future shift to
sustainable energy resources, a result of which the environmental cost would be reduced with respect to
technologies based on fossil fuel. The shift toward 100% sustainable energy resources is approached through a
multiplication of the annual values by 35 years, instead of 75. This is a very controversial approach, in
contradiction to the LCA methodology.
I chose not to work accordingly. The forecast of sustainable energy use in the future is very difficult because,
during the last few decades, oil companies prolonged the predicted use of petrol and gas by means of exploiting
new source fields and more efficient technologies, e.g. drilling techniques, hence postponing the broad application
of sustainable energy. Moreover, the conversion factor of 35 years seems arbitrary. Therefore, I decided to work
with annual environmental costs. This means that I could directly use the annual values GreenCalc calculated for
energy and water.
In order to convert the environmental load of building materials into annual values, I chose to divide the
environmental cost of building materials by 75 years, which implies that the reference lifespan for the buildings
assessed remained 75 years (otherwise the annual values would have been smaller, due to less maintenance and
fewer replacements in the case of a shorter lifespan).
The division of the environmental load of building materials by 75 may also be controversial, as this load appears
at different instants in the process. This will also be discussed in chapter 07 of Volume C - The Time Factor.
However, since maintenance and the number of replacements of every building component were related to the
reference lifespan of 75 years, the approach based on annual values is acceptable. It can be compared to the
determination of annual financial loads (annuities) for all costs that appear during the lifespan of the building.
Technical limitations of the assessment tool

Prior to the presentation of results of the office buildings case study, some limitations of the applied software tool
need to be discussed.
First, the materials database of GreenCalc is large, yet not complete. Some materials for certain applications are
lacking. This is however a general problem with environmental assessment tools: not yet all building materials are
assessed according to LCA-standards, yet, as with other tools, in GreenCalc it is difficult to enter innovative
technologies for façades (double-skin façades) and building services (heatpump systems). It therefore requires
expertise and experience to approximate the influence of these new technologies or of certain divergent material
applications. As a result of this, glass-covered spaces like conservatories and atria are also difficult to model.
GreenCalc however offers possibilities to make adjustments and add corrections.
In terms of energy consumption, GreenCalc calculates the energy required for heating, lighting, and tap water in
detail. The energy required for cooling however is determined relatively coarsely. This is visible when comparing

transparent with more closed building designs. The increase in cooling demand expected in the case of the
transparent design is not visible but the increase in heating demand (as a result of increased heat loss) is.
Furthermore, the impact of individually adjustable climate systems cannot be modelled.
There are more incomplete or uncertain sources of energy consumption that will not be mentioned here. As we
knew these incomplete sources, we could convert divergent situations and and take into account correct data for
materials and energy.
06.02 Instance of an assessment: the Ministry of SAE
For instance, the process of the assessment in the case of one of the buildings, i.e. the Ministry of Social Affairs
and Employment (SAE), is clarified step-by-step. Figure 06.03 gives a helicopter view of the building.
Figure 06.03: The Ministry of Social Affairs & Employment, in The Hague, Netherlands [picture: DGBA]
06.02.01 Environmental calculation
Environmental improvement factors

As discussed in chapter 05, for an objective comparison of results of different buildings, the definition of a
generally applicable reference building is essential. There are three possible references, every one of them for
another objective and leading to different results. In the case study presented, the GFA reference and design
reference were only applied to assess the entire design of the building, and the use of building materials and
services. For an overall indication of the environmental performance of a building, an improvement factor based
on the GFA reference is most appropriate. In order to see the influence of technical details versus the spatial
design, an improvement factor based on the design reference was also determined.
Table 06.02: Results from the SAE Ministry assessment, based on a GFA reference and design reference
environmental cost SAE Ministry GFA reference impr des reference impr
building materials € 464,221 € 501,974 1.08 € 522,150 1.12
energy consumption € 1,603,735 € 1,994,051 1.24 € 1,903,453 1.19
water consumption € 65,806 € 75,733 1.15 € 75,733 1.15
total € 2,133,762 € 2,571,758 € 2,501,336

per employee € 1,185 € 1,429 1.21 € 1,390 1.17
2
per m gfa € 37 € 51 € 49
Environmental calculation
Table 06.02 presents the results of the environmental calculation of the Ministry of SAE and its two references.
A brief explanation of this table:
The first column presents the different aspects. As previously explained, commuter travel was not taken into
account in this building assessment.

The second column gives the annual environmental cost of the Ministry of SAE. As previously explained, the
value for building materials is based on a lifespan of 75 years.
The third gives the annual environmental cost of the GFA reference.
The fourth column shows the environmental improvement factor for the building design, i.e. the inverse
relationship of the environmental cost of the ministry to its reference. An improvement factor of 1.0 means
equal environmental cost; a higher factor is more favourable. As can be seen, the performance of the
ministry building is better than the reference in all aspects assessed.
The next column with environmental cost gives the result for the design reference, which has the same
design as the ministry, however with standard building materials and services.
The last column presents the improvement factor for building materials and services. For building materials,
this factor is somewhat greater than the one based on the GFA reference, indicating that the building design
is somewhat unfavourable for the use of building materials. However, in the case of energy consumption, it
is the other way around. Overall, the difference between the factors indicates that the building design is
efficient because the performance of the use of building materials and services is enhanced. Overall, the
Ministry of SAE (N.B. constructed in the year 1990) performs environmentally better than the 1990-reference
building.
Actual energy consumption

The results for energy consumption presented previously were based on the calculations of GreenCalc. For most
buildings assessed, as part of the governmental energy efficiency policy plan, energy consumption had been
measured in the period 1990-2000. We compared these measured data with the calculated ones of GreenCalc. In
some cases, great differences could be seen. In particular, the use of electricity tended to be greater than
calculated, whereas the actual consumption of natural gas was often a smaller than calculated.
If there were differences, we did another GreenCalc calculation with the corrected energy data. Table 06.03
presents the results for the Ministry of SAE. There is only a difference in the value for energy consumption in the
second column. As can be seen, the actual energy performance of the ministry building is more favourable than
calculated, improving the overall performance.
Tabel 06.03: Results for the Ministry of SAE in the case of actual energy consumption values
environmental cost SAE Ministry GFA reference impr des reference impr
building materials € 464,221 € 501,974 1.08 € 522,150 1.12
energy consumption € 1,350,596 € 1,994,051 1.48 € 1,903,453 1.41
water consumption € 65,806 € 75,733 1.15 € 75,733 1.15
total € 1,880,623 € 2,571,758 € 2,501,336

per employee € 1,045 € 1,429 1.37 € 1,390 1.33
2
per m gfa € 33 € 51 € 49
The differences between calculated and measured values are possibly due to assumption differences of the
assessment tool (i.e. GreenCalc) with reality. When working with measured data of the assessed building, the
energy consumption of the references still needs to be determined through calculation, in which these differences
are still involved. This is an example of the difficulty of choosing between measured or calculated data. In order to
provide a subjective basis of comparison, I decided to mainly work with calculated values, with or without internal
assumption differences of GreenCalc that apply to both the building and its reference.
06.02.02 Further analysis
Division of the total environmental cost

For each building assessed, the environmental cost was divided between the three aspects. Figure 06.04 gives an
instant of the division in the case of the Ministry of SAE.
As can be seen from this example, energy consumption is the greatest cause for the environmental load of the
ministry building. This is an observation generally applying to all buildings.

3: 3.1% 1: 21.8%
1: building materials
2: energy consumption
3: w ater consumption
2: 75.2%
Figure 06.04: Division of the annual environmental cost in the Ministry of SAE case
Division of the environmental cost of energy consumption

An analysis document for the results was made in which, for each aspect, the environmental cost was divided
further between specific elements. A further division of the environmental cost of energy consumption provides
insight into the main causes in this most relevant environmental aspect. Figure 06.05 gives the example of the
Ministry of SAE.
8: 23.0%
1: 32.4% 1: heating
2: tap w ater
7: 1.3% 3: cooling
4: ventilation
6: 1.9%
5: lighting
2: 0.3% 6: humidification
3: 0.0%
7: pumps
4: 7.2%
5: 33.9% 8: equipment
Figure 06.05: Division of the environmental cost of energy consumption in the Ministry of SAE case
Figure 06.05 demonstrates that in the particular case of the Ministry of SAE, the environmental load of energy
consumption is mainly caused as a result of lighting, heating and equipment. In all cases assessed the picture
was comparable. In this case, lighting is the greatest contributor because the building floors are deep, combined
with inappropriately placed partition walls. In many cases monitored, data of the actual energy consumption
indicated that the use of equipment (e.g. computers and elevators) was more important than calculated,
sometimes making it the greatest source of environmental cost.
Division of the environmental cost of building materials

For the environmental cost of building materials, a division was made between the main building elements:
Supporting structure: foundation, floor structures, columns, beams, bearing walls
Structural detailing: facades, stairs, balustrades, floordecks
Built-in components: non-bearing walls, inner doors, inner windows
Finish: roof finish, facade cladding, ceiling finish, floor finish and tiling, wall finish and tiling
Paving.
Figure 06.06 presents the division of environmental cost between these building elements for the SAE Ministry.
4: 12.9% 5: 0.4%
1: 59.3%
3: 11.5% 1: supporting structure
2: structural detailing
3: built-in components
4: finish
2: 15.9% 5: paving
Figure 06.06: Division of the environmental cost of building materials in the Ministry of SAE case

As can be seen, the supporting structure causes approximately 60% of the environmental load of materials. The
Ministry of SAE has a heavy concrete structure; however, in all cases the supporting structure proved to be
responsible for more than 50% of the environmental load of building materials.
06.03 Absolute results for all buildings
06.03.01 Characteristics
On the basis of all twelve assessed buildings, average values were deduced. Table 06.04 presents characteristic
values of the assessed buildings.
Table 06.04: Characteristics of the assessed office buildings and the building and area averages
project year empl layers GFA
typical > constructed renovated total personal per layer
2 2
unit > yr yr p l m m /p m2/l
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1655 1966 35 4 1,671 47.7 418
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1965 1996 225 7 6,897 30.7 985
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1976 1995 270 3 6,342 23.5 2,114
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1985 - 167 11 3,489 20.9 317
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1990 - 1800 13 57,812 32.1 4,447
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 1992 - 3260 17 92,097 28.3 5,417
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1997 - 154 5 5,177 33.6 1,035
'The Artillery', The Hague 1998 - 420 5 14,275 34.0 2,855
Food Inspection, Zutphen 2000 - 80 2 1,312 16.4 656
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 2001 - 364 4 7,531 20.7 1,883
Geometry Department, Delft 2001 - 429 7 13,590 31.7 1,941
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 2002 - 483 5 11,263 23.3 2,253
1964 496
building average 641 6.9 18,455 28.6 2,027
1994
AVERAGE
1989 1992
area average 12.2 28.8 2,668
1993
In the lower rows, two averages are presented: the building average (the values summed and divided by twelve)
and the area average (the values multiplied by their respective GFA, summed and divided by the total GFA of all
buildings), also called weighted averages.
As can be seen, the average year of construction or renovation is 1994 or 1993, depending on the significance of
the average building size. Due to the large ministry buildings, the area averages for the number of building layers
and GFA per layer are greater than the building averages. On average, the personal use of GFA is also greater in
the case of larger buildings.
06.03.02 Typical environmental cost
The annual energy consumption values per person are 237 m3 of natural gas and 1,071 kWh of electricity. Per m2
GFA the values are 7.7 m3 and 35 kWh. The mean production of carbon dioxide is almost 5.2 kton per building
per year. Per employee it is approximately 6 tons of CO2 and per m2 GFA 200 kg of CO2 per year. The annual
water consumption values are 8.9 m3 per person and 0.29 m3 per m2 GFA. Table 06.05 presents average values
for the environmental cost of the buildings and their averages based on the use of every resource.

Table 06.05: Typical environmental costs of the assessed buildings and the building and area averages
project total materials energy water

typical > personal spatial personal spatial personal spatial personal spat
unit > e€/p e€/m2 e€/p e€/m2 e€/p e€/m2 e€/p e€/m2
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 2,314 48.5 362 7.6 1,912 40.0 40 0.8
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1,267 41.3 242 7.9 985 32.1 40 1.3
Tax Office, Gorinchem 983 41.8 202 8.6 738 31.4 43 1.8
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 949 45.4 184 8.8 726 34.7 39 1.9
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1,185 36.9 258 8.0 891 27.7 37 1.1
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 1,213 42.9 239 8.5 937 33.2 37 1.3
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1,178 35.0 195 5.8 949 28.2 33 1.0
'The Artillery', The Hague 1,138 33.5 201 5.9 900 26.5 37 1.1
Food Inspection, Zutphen 802 48.9 150 9.1 614 37.4 38 2.3
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 909 43.9 182 8.8 693 33.5 34 1.6
Geometry Department, Delft 1,832 57.8 290 9.2 1,507 47.6 35 1.1
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 887 38.0 137 5.9 716 30.7 34 1.5
building average 1,221 42.8 220 7.8 964 33.6 37 1.4

AVERAGE
area average 1,190 41.3 232 8.2 922 32.7 37 1.3
An interesting result is the relatively large difference of the environmental cost per employee between the
buildings, up to approximately a factor of 3. The spatial environmental cost does not differ more than a factor of
1.8, which shows that the number of people using a building is an important additional factor to the environmental
performance. This will be elaborately discussed in chapter 13.
The average values for the environmental cost deduced here, overall or per aspect, will contribute to additional
assessments, as will be demonstrated in the case studies of Volume E - The Space Factor and Volume F - The
Organisation of Office Work.
When measured data for energy consumption is used, the environmental cost of energy consumption increases,
as table 06.06 demonstrates. In this table, under 'measured' and 'total', the environmental cost based on
measured data is presented, if applicable1. When the cell background is dark-coloured, the difference between the
calculated and measured data is more than 20%.
Table 06.06: Differences in the environmental costs in the case of calculated and measured energy consumption data.
project energy
calculated / measured > calculated measured difference
unit > e€ e€
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 66,916 63,802 -4.7%

Mixed Office, Arnhem 221,596 196,697 -11.2%
Tax Office, Gorinchem 199,180 170,092 -14.6%
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 121,209 233,724 92.8%
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1,603,735 1,350,596 -15.8%
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 3,054,488 4,925,910 61.3%
'The Artillery', The Hague 378,183 348,168 -7.9%
1 Energy consumption of not all buildings was measured.

As can be seen, in five of the twelve cases, the actual energy consumption is smaller than calculated, yet never
more than 20%. The two cases consuming more energy significantly differ from the calculated values. There
might be a discrepancy between the application range of measured data for electricity and gas: for instance, the
energy system monitored could service more buildings than just the main offices. This is a possible explanation
for the Ministry of HSPE. A clear division between energy destined for the ministry building and energy for other
buildings could however not be made. It is also possible that the HSPE building in fact uses more energy than
calculated, the result of computers, cooling and telecommunication. As the office of the Road and Water
Engineering (RWE) Department assessed forms a complex with other buildings, it is probable that the measured
energy quantity is partly destined for one of the other buildings. In this case, another explanation was not likely, as
the RWE building contains a relatively sober climate system.
As stated previously, it is difficult to determine to which extent the difference in energy consumption is due to
errors in the assessment tool, or in the basic data used for calculation.
06.03.03 Cause of the environmental load
Overall
Figure 06.07 presents the division of the annual environmental load of all assessed office buildings between the
environmental aspects of building materials, energy consumption, and water consumption. The importance of
energy consumption is striking: it causes more than three-quarters of the environmental cost. The use of building
materials contributes approximately 20%. The environmental load by the consumption of water is nearly
negligible: 3%.
3: 3.0%
1: 19.5%
1. building materials
2. energy consumption
3. w ater consumption
2: 77.5%
Figure 06.07: Division of the environmental cost of all assessed buildings
These findings are based on a reference lifespan of 75 years of the building. This boundary condition does not
affect the results for energy and water, which are already based on annual consumption values. However, it
importantly influences the impact of building materials. A shorter lifespan would mean that less maintenance and
replacements of certain building components or materials would have to be taken into account, reducing the
annual environmental load of building materials. However, in case of a shorter lifespan, the total environmental
load of building materials would have to be divided by fewer years, increasing the annual values. The expectation
is therefore an increase of the importance of building materials in case of a shorter lifespan. This will be
elaborated on in Volume C - The Time Factor.
Meanwhile, in general, a reference lifespan of 75 years seems reasonable. The fact that many office buildings are
functionally obsolete before that term does not change the technical possibility to keep a building functional for 75
years. In any case, the consumption of energy by an office building is by far the most important aspect for
sustainability. Therefore, the sources of energy consumption will be analysed next.
If measured data for energy consumption were taken into account, the contribution of energy to the total
environmental cost would increase to 80.9%. However, as previously discussed, two office buildings with
significantly different measured energy data caused this increase.
Energy consumption
Figure 06.08 presents a further division of the environmental cost of energy consumption between the energy
consumption sources. The pie graph demonstrates that there are three main causes for energy demand in
government office buildings: heating, lighting, and equipment (in this order). Although their order varied in specific

cases, these three sources were always the main cause for energy consumption. Variation between the three is a
result of the specific building design: some buildings have deep floors and many partition walls, increasing the
demand for artificial lighting; in other buildings the use of equipment (computers) for the specific organisation was
relatively important. In general, the older offices show a relatively large contribution from heating, and modern
transparent buildings a relatively small contribution of lighting.
8: 23.6% 1: heating
1: 31.3%
2: tap w ater
7: 1.3% 3: cooling
4: ventilation
6: 2.7% 5: lighting
2: 1.0% 6: humidification
3: 2.5% 7: pumps
5: 28.7% 4: 8.9% 8: equipment
Figure 06.08: Division of the environmental cost of energy consumption of all assessed buildings
It needs to be commented that, as part of the accommodation policy, most government offices only have
mechanical extraction of exhaust air and natural supply of fresh air. This reduces the energy consumption of the
ventilation system. Furthermore, as part of the same policy, only a few government offices have air-conditioning or
cooling units, accounting for the relatively small contribution of cooling in the environmental cost. At least, that is
based on the data that was used for input in GreenCalc. As demonstrated previously, the actual energy
consumption based on official accounts often diverged from the calculated results, indicating a more important
influence of some sources demanding electricity, e.g. cooling and equipment.
More numbers of commercial office buildings are expected to be fully air-conditioned as compared to the DGBA
offices when taking into account the mentioned policy of avoiding mechanic cooling. Therefore, they are expected
to show a more important influence on the environmental cost by ventilation and cooling. Helped by the
transparent design, good thermal insulation, and increasing internal heat production of equipment and employees
themselves, cooling is slowly exceeding the energy demand for heating. This will be discussed further in chapter
10.
70% of the environmental load of energy consumption is a result of electricity use; the other 30% comes from
consumption of natural gas or petrol. Put in the primary energy unit, the difference is smaller. This is due to
energy losses at the production of electricity, which is less efficient than the production of gas.
Building materials
Figure 06.09 presents the division of the environmental cost of building materials between the different main
elements of an office building. The supporting structure is responsible for the greatest part (almost 60%) of the
environmental load, followed by finish and structural detailing.
4: 16.7% 5: 1.4%
1: 57.1%
1: supporting structure
3: 9.5%
2: structural detailing
3: built-in components
4: finish
2: 15.3% 5: paving
Figure 06.09: Division of the environmental cost of building materials of all assessed buildings
As the basic life cycle assessment was based on a reference lifespan of 75 years, the environmental load of the
supporting structure (that can last the entire period) will consist of the initial environmental damage (caused by
extraction, manufacture, transport, and construction), and the environmental damage of the end stage of the
material (caused by demolition, recycling and disposal), whereas the environmental load of finish (and to a lesser
extent: structural detailing and built-in components) will be mostly caused by repetitive maintenance and

replacement. Therefore, for the annual environmental load a shorter reference lifespan will imply an approximately
constant contribution by elements subject to maintenance and replacement and increasing environmental cost
(and thus importance) of the supporting structure. This will be discussed in chapter 07 and 09.
Supporting structure (57.1%)

A closer look at the supporting structure reveals that the story floors (26.9%) and beams (22.6%) mainly cause its
environmental load. If the ground floor and flat roof were also included, the entire floor structure would account for
approximately 60%, and with the beams of the foundation included almost 70%. When the office building was
situated in the lower, western part of the Netherlands with its soggy peat underground, (concrete) foundation
poles on average caused 10% of the environmental load from building materials.
Due to the importance of the floor structure to the environmental load, buildings containing floor types with a
reduced amount of concrete (e.g. hollow core slabs, as in The Artillery) and floor structures without beams have
relatively low environmental cost related to the use of building materials. In one of the cases (the Ministry of SAE),
inefficiently shaped beams (i.e. low and broad instead of high and narrow) led to relatively high environmental cost
of beams: for the same load-bearing capacity, more material was necessary than in other cases.
Finish (16.7%)
Except for 5% for the roof finish, by approximation, the environmental cost of the finish materials is equally divided
between floor, façade, wall and ceiling finishes. This is based on average figures, because there would only be a
contribution of façade finish if metal cladding or natural stone were applied. In the case of the Food Inspection
building, the zinc cladding accounted for 50% of the environmental cost of finish. In case of aluminium cladding,
this contribution would be less dramatic.
The use of natural gypsum in ceiling panels is an important cause of environmental cost. The metal hooks and
strips holding the panels were not included in the assessment.
Structural detailing (15.3%)

The environmental load of structural detailing is mainly caused by facades (61.1%) and floordecks (27.7%).
Façades with a great proportion of glass cause a smaller environmental load for the use of building materials than
massive façades (e.g. brick or concrete walls). Heat transmission losses are however greater in case of glass
façades and therefore the environmental cost of energy consumption is higher.
Built-in components (9.5%)

Non-bearing walls are the main cause of the environmental load of built-in components (83.3%). A sober, open
layout with few or transparent partitions therefore reduces the environmental cost. The gypsum slabs, insulation
and steel posts of partition wall systems are unfavourable with respect to massive walls of gypsum or lime blocks,
regardless of possible conveniences in the case of alterations to built-in components.
Paving (1.4%)
The mean contribution of paving to the environmental load of building materials can greatly differ between the
cases: from zero - no paving, parking facilities in the basement - to more than 10% - in case of parking space
outside the office but on the building plot privately owned and made of asphalt.
Building services (?%)

In the calculations, building services were not included. This was done because of the great difficulty to obtain
data on the sections, lengths and materials used for climate control ducts, water and gas piping, and electricity
and telecommunication wires. At the time of writing, no studies were available on the quantity and environmental
load of building services with respect to other building components. However, as metal elements in other
components such as the façade cladding and the supporting structure play an important role in the environmental
load, a significant influence may be expected from the material use by building services. This however needs to
be studied further.
Water consumption
In terms of the environmental cost, consumption of water only plays a small role in office buildings. The use of
water is directly related to the number of people using the building, the type of sanitation, possible substitution of
drinking water by rain, ground or surface water and the presence of a canteen, showers, and plants. The average

water consumption per employee using the assessed buildings is approximately 45 litres per day and mainly
consists of toilet flushing. Knowing that in the Netherlands a person uses approximately 150 litres of drinking
water daily, only one-third of this is 'consumed' in the office.
06.04 Overall improvement factors
Conclusions about the environmental performance of the assessed buildings and their averages cannot be drawn
from absolute and typical values for the environmental cost. In this section, the environmental performance is
therefore expressed by improvement factors, based on the methodology presented in chapter 5.
06.04.01 Performance of the entire building design
Table 06.07 presents the improvement factors determined from the environmental cost of the buildings and their
respective reference.
The left column presents the twelve buildings, in order of decreasing age. The next four columns show overaal
improvement factors and individual improvement factors building materials, energy consumption, and water
consumption. The improvement factors are based on the GFA reference and therefore are an indication for the
environmental performance of the building design and its technology. Favourable improvement factor values (>
1.00) have a light-coloured background, unfavourable values (<1.00) a dark-coloured background.
On average, the buildings cause a smaller environmental load than their reference, however not to such a great
extent. Some good performances are achieved in the use of building materials. Relatively large differences
between the projects can be seen; this is also evident in the energy consumption column. Striking is the
unfavourable energy performance of the recently constructed Geometry Department. The consumption of water
shows no great differences between the cases.
Table 06.07: Environmental improvement factors of the office buildings, based on comparison with a GFA reference
project overall materials energy water
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1.06 1.44 0.99 1.06
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.15 1.22 1.13 1.04
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.17 1.18 1.17 0.98
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.06 1.04 1.06 1.07
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.21 1.08 1.24 1.15
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 0.99 1.09 0.96 1.15
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1.36 1.64 1.30 1.27
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.37 1.54 1.34 1.15
Food Inspection, Zutphen 1.24 1.59 1.17 1.11
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 1.10 1.20 1.06 1.24
Geometry Department, Delft 0.80 1.00 0.76 1.21
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 1.25 1.65 1.18 1.24
building average 1.15 1.31 1.11 1.14

AVERAGE
area average 1.08 1.15 1.06 1.15
The differences between the two average types - the building average is always greater than the area average -
indicate that larger buildings achieve a less favourable performance, especially in the use of building materials.
This is due to heavier supporting structures and relatively larger envelope surface areas.

06.04.02 Performance in the case of the actual energy consumption
Table 06.08 presents overall improvement factors based on calculated and measured energy data to show any
differences. A negative percentage means that the actual energy consumption, and therefore the environmental
load, are smaller than calculated. The performance degradation of two buildings is obvious, whereas other
buildings perform better. As previously discussed, the degradation is mainly caused by a greater use of electricity
than calculated, whereas an improvement of the performance is mostly related to a smaller gas consumption than
calculated.
Table 06.08: Overall improvement factors based on calculated and measured energy data
project overall performance
calculated / measured > calculated measured difference
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1.06 1.10 -3.8%
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.15 1.26 -8.7%
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.17 1.31 -11.0%
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.06 0.62 71.0%
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.21 1.37 -11.9%
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 0.99 0.67 47.3%
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.37 1.46 -6.3%
building average 1.15 1.11 3.0%

AVERAGE
area average 1.08 1.10 -1.6%
The two cases with a relatively large difference between calculated and measured values are not representative
of the other results. Other measured values led to an improvement factor change smaller than 12%.
06.04.03 Influence of the spatial design and technology used
When we want to see the influence of the building design alone on the improvement factors of table 06.07, a
comparison should be made with results based on a design reference. Table 06.09 gives the differences between
the GFA and design reference for the overall performance, the use of building materials, and energy consumption.
Water consumption is equal for both references. A positive value means that the performance calculated on the
basis of GFA reference is greater, indicating that the actual building design is more favourable than the reference
office design.
In the 'overall' column we can see that, except for the lowest four buildings (the most recent designs!), the building
design has in general improved the environmental performance, although the average difference is limited.
Greatest positive flukes are the Exchequer & Audit Office and The Artillery, of which the first is an organically
shaped building leading to a minimum outer façade area and the second a compact ensemble of buildings,
connected by glass-covered open areas. In general, the improvement factor based on the design reference shows
an increase from older to newer buildings, demonstrating that the environmental performance of building
technology (building services and materials) has automatically improved with the years. However, in the cases
most recently built or designed the GFA-based improvement factor is lower than the design-based improvement
factor, indicating that environmental improvement through technology is reduced as a result of the building design.
Modern office design is apparently not incited by sustainability considerations… Greatest negative flukes of the
building design influence are the Food Inspection, a building on poles with a maximum of building envelope, and
the Geometry Department, a fold design with relatively large open atrium spaces.
Not all separate results, differences, and their causes could be explained here. Dobbelsteen et al. [2002a-i] and
Arets et al. [2002a-f] from the personal publications list at the end of this Volume B discuss the case studies in
detail.

Tabel 06.09: Improvement factor differences for the twelve office buildings based on the GFA and design reference
A positive value means that the results based on the GFA reference are more favourable
project overall materials energy
reference type > GFA/des-ref GFA/des-ref GFA/des-ref
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 2.9% 56.7% -5.9%

Mixed Office, Arnhem 5.7% 17.1% 3.3%
Tax Office, Gorinchem 7.7% 4.1% 9.1%
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.5% 12.1% -0.8%
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 2.8% -3.9% 4.8%
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 9.8% 25.7% 6.4%
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 17.3% 58.7% 10.5%
'The Artillery', The Hague 15.6% 35.1% 12.0%
Food Inspection, Zutphen -15.7% 21.9% -24.2%
Administration of Justice, Haarlem -4.8% 33.9% -12.5%
Geometry Department, Delft -21.5% -26.6% -21.0%
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg -2.6% 22.5% -7.8%
building average 1.2% 19.6% -2.8%

AVERAGE
area average 3.9% 12.4% 1.9%
06.04.04 Performance related to the year of construction or renovation
In order to see any progress or demise in the determined environmental performance, the improvement factors
were related to the year of delivery after construction or renovation (renovation when applicable) and set in the
graph of figure 06.10. As seen in figure 06.10, the improvement factors based on the design reference show a
clear increase with the years, whereas the increase of the factors based on the GFA reference is minimal. This
again demonstrates that the building design of the recent cases is relatively unfavourable for the environmental
performance.
1.60
gfa-reference
1.50
design-reference
1.40
gfa-ref average
im provem ent factor
1.30 des-ref average

1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
year of delivery after construction or renovation
Figure 06.10: Improvement factors related to the year of delivery
As figure 06.10 also demonstrates the dots are wider spread in recent years. There is of course less data from
older buildings, which makes the mean results for the years 1960-1985 less accurate. When the account of the

oldest building, the Johan de Witt House, is left out of the relationship, the average line for the factors based on
the design reference is even steeper than in figure 06.10, demonstrating that the environmental progress of recent
buildings is mainly a result of the autonomous development of building technology in terms of energy efficiency.
Figure 06.10 demonstrates that the environmental improvement factors of office buildings - at least in the case of the
Dutch Government Buildings Agency - could have been more favourable, approximately by a factor of 1.2 by the year
2000, if the building design efficiency had stayed equal to previous years. An even more efficient building design
would have further improved the performance by more than a factor of 1.3.
06.04.05 Involving commuter travel
So far, in the discussion of the assessed office buildings I only regarded the environmental aspects that are
directly related to the building and its occupation. In the original calculations with GreenCalc, commuter travel was
also assessed because normally the assessment tool includes this aspect. The reason why I have not yet
discussed the results on this aspect is because my fellow researchers and I had serious doubts about the validity
of determining the extent and environmental cost of commuter travel. These doubts were supported by results
from the office worker concepts assessment discussed further on in chapter 17. More importantly, in contrast to
the aspects materials, energy, and water, the assessment methodology of travel is a complete black box. No
explanation could be found for determining the impact of travel, which is based on the means of transport used,
available infrastructure, distance to public transport and parking space.
In this section, the original results for commuter travel however will be presented shortly, in order to provide a
comparison basis for the more accurate determination of commuter travel in chapter 17.
Overal influence
Figure 06.11 presents the average division of environmental cost when commuter travel is included in the final
results. Commuter travel contributes 6.5% to the total environmental cost. The respective contributions of energy
consumption, building materials, and water consumption are thereby logically reduced by 6.5%.
On average, the individual improvement factor for travel is 1.11, and due to the relative unimportance it has no
influence on the overall improvement factor previously determined (1.08).
3: 2.9% 4: 6.5%
1: 18.2%
1: building materials
2: energy consumption
3: w ater consumption
4: commuter travel
2: 72.4%
Figure 06.11: Division of the environmental cost when commuter travel is included
Transport means for commuter travel

For the governmental departments studied, the transport means used for commuter travel are almost equally divided,
as demonstrated by figure 06.12. GreenCalc calculates that more than 50 percent of commuter distances are
travelled by public transport, and nearly another quarter is man-powered transport, i.e. by foot or bicycle.
4: 19.3% 1: 23.8%
1: foot/bicycle
2: train
3: bus/tram
4: car
3: 31.9% 2: 24.9%
Figure 06.12: Division of transport means of commuter travel

This division clearly influenced the results positively. However, one could ask why the performance is still limited to
the determined factor of 1.11 with this favourable selection of transport means. Since government offices are often
situated at nodes of public transport and use of personal cars is discouraged, the performance of commuter travel for
commercial offices may be expected to be worse than a factor of 1.11.
Main causes for the environmental load in regards to travel

The division of environmental load is not equal to figure 06.13 because man-powered transport has no
environmental load. Material use of the vehicles used is not included; only the consumption of fuel is considered.
Furthermore, the environmental damage caused by petrol and electricity differs, leading to different environmental
cost. In this case study, 64.7% of the environmental load is caused by the 19.3% contingent of personal cars.
Buses and trams cause 23.7%, and trains 11.6%. This means that, according to the basic data used by
GreenCalc, from an environmental point of view, buses and trams are a factor 1.6 times worse than trains, and
cars are 7.2 times worse.
It would be worthwhile to know the results if the vehicles and infrastructure for the specific form of transport were
involved in the assessment. Clearly however, this would immensely complicate the assessment.
As previously explained, there were doubts about the validity of the results calculated for commuter travel, and at
the moment of writing, for an update version of GreenCalc, a new method is developed for the calculation of
commuter travel impact on environmental costs. For these reasons, the results presented in this section will not
be taken into account any further.
06.05 Conclusions
06.05.01 Absolute results
Overall
The average overall annual environmental cost of the twelve assessed government office buildings, in
environmental euros, is e€ 43 per m2 gross floor area (GFA) using a weighted, building-related average (the
spatial cost of every building summed and divided by twelve), and e€ 41 per m2 when using an area-related
average (the total cost of all buildings summed and divided by the total GFA). The difference between the
averages indicates that large buildings on average have lower environmental costs than small buildings. The
average environmental cost lies around e€ 1,200 per employee.
Energy consumption
Energy consumption is responsible for almost 80% of the total annual environmental cost. The building-related
annual environmental cost of energy consumption is e€ 34/m2, and the area-related average one euro less.
Personal values are almost a thousand environmental euro per employee per year. The average annual CO2-
emission is almost 5,200 ton, or 6 ton per employee, or 200 kg/m2.
Building materials
The use of building materials is responsible for almost 20% of the environmental load. The building- and area-
related average annual environmental cost of building materials is around e€ 8/m2. Personal values are around e€
225 per year.
A reference lifespan of 75 years was the basis for the environmental life cycle assessment of building materials.
The impact of a shorter lifespan to the contribution of building materials and with the annual environmental load
will be discussed in Volume C - The Time Factor.
Water consumption
Water consumption only accounts for 3% of the annual environmental load. The annual building-related average
environmental cost of water consumption is e€ 1.4/m2 and the area-related average e€ 1.3/m2. Since water
consumption is mainly related to the number of employees, a better indicator is the personal value of e€ 37 per
employee per year, both building- and area-related. The daily personal consumption of drinking water is almost 45
liters.

Comparison with assessments by others

The Finnish PhD researcher Seppo Junnila compared three office buildings with different architectural designs,
building and energy technologies, and typical materials [Junnila, 2003]. His study consisted of a pure LCA
analysis of the buildings resulting in outcome per environmental effect, not of aggregated results, as presented in
this chapter. Junnila found no great differences in the results and concluded that different present-day designs of
office buildings initially lead to a similar environmental impact. However, he also found that involving maintenance
- which is included in the LCA-data used by GreenCalc - led to differences on average of 50% of the total score.
The most important issues evolving from this study were the use of energy, especially electricity [Junnila &
Horvath, 2003], on average causing 60-70% of the environmental impact. For the impact of components, the
structural frame, in particular reinforced concrete and steel, proved to be most important, this supporting my own
findings. As a component, the impact of HVAC (heating, ventilation, air-conditioning) services, and as building
materials, paints and non-ferrous metals were also significant to some environmental effects. In the study
presented in this chapter, the use of materials for building services was not involved. An additional study should
however be executed to estimate their impact, as determined by an assessment tool with aggregated scores,
such as GreenCalc.
06.05.02 Causes
Energy consumption
The three main sources of energy consumption are heating, lighting and equipment, which approximately cause
90% of the environmental load. In case of fully air-conditioned offices, the proportion of ventilation and cooling
becomes relatively more important. Additional conclusions are:
In case of a well-insulated building, the demand for electricity becomes by far the most important element of
energy consumption.
For the buildings studied, a indoor climate system based on the natural supply of fresh air proved more
favourable than an extensive air-conditioning or an entirely mechanical ventilation system.
Transparent façades save energy for artificial lighting, however increase the heat transmission losses. On
the basis of the conducted assessment, overall, transparent façades turned out to be less favourable than a
closed, well-insulated façade. It needs to be mentioned, however, that the applied assessment tool does not
properly account the behaviour of modern façades, e.g. double-skin technologies. I did not seek the
optimum.
Building materials
The supporting structure (especially floor structures) is accountable for 60% of the environmental load of building
materials. In terms of sustainability, finish and structural detailing are the second and third most important material
elements. The building design and material selections greatly influence the quantity and proportion of certain
building elements in the total environmental load.
It is not possible to mention all conclusions drawn from material selections. The most important are:
An efficient supporting structure positively influences the environmental load. In particular, the floor structure
is important, making floor types with a reduced material use favourable. This will be elaborated on in chapter
10.
The use of a basement has an important influence on the environmental load.
A transparent façade saves environmental cost of building materials but increases those related to energy
consumption. From an environmental point of view, zinc and copper cladding are unfavourable façade
solutions.
A design with an open or transparent floor layout reduces the environmental load of built-in components
(partitions) and lighting.
Partition walls systems with natural gypsum slabs are less favourable than massive partition walls.
If the use of asphalt is avoided, the environmental load of paving will become almost negligible.
Water consumption
Water consumption is dependent on several parameters, all related to the number of employees. The main cause
is toilet flushing.

06.05.03 Environmental performance with respect to the year 1990
Overall
The government offices assessed on average perform 15% environmentally better (improvement factor 1.15) than
their 1990-reference, based on the same GFA but with a reference building design, and reference building
materials and services. This performance is building-related. In case of a floor area-related average, the
improvement factor is 1.08, indicating that the improvement factor of large buildings is smaller than in the case of
small office buildings. The variance in the results is 2.5%, not particularly large.
Although the buildings assessed were constructed without a particular focus on sustainability, an important part of
the improvement factor is achieved through the use of energy-efficient building services and a more sustainable
selection of building materials. Technological progress has obviously automatically led to environmental
improvement.
Between 1985 and 2003, the average improvement factor based on the GFA reference has gradually increased,
yet by less than 10%. Meanwhile, the environmental quality of building materials and services has significantly
improved (by more than 30%). Therefore, the efficiency of the building design has decreased in the same period.
This means that the environmental performance of recent buildings could have been better if their spatial design
had remained equally efficient. Further improvement of modern building design therefore lies in an efficient
building design.
Energy consumption
The building-related average improvement factor for energy consumption is 1.11; the weighted, area-related
average is 1.06, indicating that with respect to their references large buildings are less favourable than small
ones. The variance in the results is a relatively average 2.6%.
Building materials
The building-related average improvement factor for building materials is 1.31; the area-related average is 1.15,
again indicating that large buildings are less favourable with respect to their references. The variance is greater
than e.g. in the case of energy consumption: 6.1%, indicating that the performance based on the use of building
materials is largely dependent on the building design.
Water consumption
The building-related average improvement factor for water consumption is 1.14; the area-related average is 1.15,
showing no significant difference as water consumption is mainly based on the number of employees. The
variance between the offices buildings is particularly small: 0.8%, due to small differences between the applied
sanitation and water resources.
06.05.04 Directions for effective solutions
Energy consumption
The influence of energy consumption on the environmental load emphasises the importance of energy solutions.
The greatest improvement potential probably lies in the use of sustainable energy resources, especially for
heating, lighting, and equipment. For electricity, power from photovoltaic cells, wind turbines, and hydroelectric
powerstations are well-known solutions that need to be combined with an efficient electrical storage system, e.g.
by means of hydrogen. For heating and hot tap water, solar or geothermal energy and waste heat are possible
solutions. Possibilities for sustainable energy will be discussed in chapter 10. Other solutions lie in the smart
location, orientation, and design of office buildings, which will also be discussed in chapter 10.
Building materials
The importance of energy consumption might bring up the conclusion that focussing on other aspects is not
worthwhile. Nevertheless, as discussed in this chapter, a relatively long lifespan was taken as a basis for the
building materials assessment, and a shorter lifespan - corresponding better to present-day life expectancy figures
for office buildings - would have led to a more important contribution by building materials. To which extent the

eventual lifespan of an office building influences the environmental performance will be discussed in the chapters
of Volume C - The Time Factor.
Effective solutions for building materials mainly lie in the supporting structure and building elements that
simultaneously influence the energy consumption (façades and built-in components). However, as also discussed,
the selection of certain building materials can influence the environmental load negatively and their avoidance is
therefore also an effective measure. Chapter 10 involves typology studies for the supporting structure and building
façade.
Water consumption
Although water is an essential source for life, water consumption is not very important as an indicator for
sustainability of office buildings in western countries such as the Netherlands. If the 3% proportion of annual
environmental cost needs to be improved effectively (reduced to an even smaller percentage), a focus on water
preserving toilet flushing will be the best solution. This can be sought in water-efficient sanitation, however also in
the use of other, lower quality water.
Integrated: the building geometry

In the case study presented in this chapter, all buildings were compared to a theoretical reference building with a
standard cell-structured office floor layout. In the case of large office buildings, e.g. the ministry buildings, this
reference building constituted as a relatively shallow, high, slab- or fence-shaped building. As the spatial efficiency
of recently constructed office buildings is less favourable with respect to older buildings, an effective solution for
sustainable building might be a more efficient building geometry, influencing the use of materials and energy.
Knowledge of the environmental impact of different building designs for the same floor area was still lacking when
the case study of this chapter was finished. Therefore, typology studies were conducted on the influence of the
building shape and height. These will be discussed in chapter 11.
The use of space

The case study presented was limited to the assessment of the office building design and building technology.
These however follow the spatial demand of an office organisation. So far, the use of space by an organisation
was taken as a starting condition. The office buildings assessed however have differing characterics for the use of
space per employee, and the relationship of their gross and net floor area is also different. In the chapters of
Volume E - The Space Factor, the impact of different concepts for space use will be discussed.
06.05.05 Uncertainties and remarks
Outcome of another tool

First of all, there are uncertainties as to whether the outcome based on calculations by GreenCalc would have
been different in the case of another assessment tool. This of course is possible, although I expect that the basic
findings would not deviate much. However, I could not test this, for three reasons.
First, the environmental aspects and building elements GreenCalc assesses are difficult to compare to those of
another tool. Even if two different sets of calculations had been done, a conclusion about the most probable
results would be based on different boundary conditions. This stands apart from the methodological differences.
Second, GreenCalc is a relatively practical tool for the assessment of office buildings but it has nevertheless cost
a considerable amount of time to do the calculations. This is due to the time-consuming process of deriving the
input data from drawings, lists and interviews, as well as of the actual input into the tool. A second round of
calculations by means of a different, less-known tool would have extended this research by at least one year.
Third, the objective of this research was not to compare and assess assessment tools but use them to find
effective sustainable solutions. To dig into details that probably have no significant influence on the direction of the
findings - the results by Junnila [2003] support this presumption - would mean that the goal of effectiveness was at
least not complied with in the research itself.
In spite of all of this, it would be worthwhile to study the outcome differences of different tools in another project.
The aspects of uncertainty and incompleteness of different assessment methods and tools demonstrate the
appropriateness of working with relative performance scores. Implicit and explicit assumpions of the assessment
tool influence both the output for the building itself and its reference, reducing the absolute deviation.

Selected buildings and country

As discussed already, the findings apply to the Dutch offices of one real estate portfolio holder, the DGBA, so they
cannot be generally translated to other countries and organisations. A similar case study for other countries and
commercial properties would be interesting and worthwhile.
Energy consumption discrepancies

Some uncertainty remains about the actual energy consumption of two buildings, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial
Planning and Environment (HSPE) and Department of Road and Water Engineering (RWE). Their measured data
significantly diverged from the calculated ones, for which possible reasons are given. For the RWE it is probable
that the measured energy data included the consumption of the adjoining building. For the Ministry of HSPE the
explanation may be less simple. The measured data might include another building, but taking into account the
size of the ministry building, the divergence could never have been the determined 61%. Therefore, it is probable
that the actual energy consumption of the building is greater than calculated and a possible cause might be the
incorrect calculation by GreenCalc, or an incorrect input. The ministry's office spaces are used relatively
intensively, and the building contains conservatories of which the effects were difficult to model. Additional to a
greater use of energy for computers and telecommunication, these features of the building might have caused a
greater demand for cooling.
The time factor

For the calculations presented in this chapter, the buildings were considered as if they were built in 2002. If their
age were taken into account, for older buildings, the environmental load of building materials could have been
partly written-off. This will be more thoroughly elaborated on in chapter 07 of Volume C - The Time Factor.


REFERENCES FOR THE BASIS
Literature
Antwerpen J. van & Hermans W.; Huisvestingsvoorkeuren van kantoren (in Dutch); INBO, Wageningen, Netherlands,
1998
Arets M.; Milieuvergelijkingen van draagconstructies (thesis) (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil
Engineering and Geosciences, Netherlands, 2001
Beetstra F., Haas M., Loos R. van der & Abrahams R.; 'Monetarisering (in Dutch)', in: NIBE Research bv; Basiswerk
Duurzaam & Gezond Bouwen (F2.1/1-33); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2002
Bleuzé P., Ellen R. ter & Gommans L.; WaterPrestatieNormering (in Dutch); opMAAT, Delft / BOOM-Maastricht,
Maastricht, Netherlands, 1995
Blyth A.; 'Working in the Netherlands', in: Architects' Journal, September 1, 1993 (pp. 26-27); 1993
Boer J.R., Diehl P.J. & Koenders H.; Arbo-normenboek (in Dutch); Samsom Bedrijfsinformatie, Alphen a/d Rijn,
Netherlands, 1996
Bornarel A., Akiki E. & Juteau F.; Outil pour une aide à la décision, sur critères de qualité environnementale, à
destination des maîtres d’ouvrage - La méthode PAPOOSE (rapport d’étude); PCA, France, 1996
BRE; BREEAM 98 - For Offices; CRC Ltd, UK, 1998
BRE; website: www.bre.co.uk/sustainable/index.html; 2001
Broek C. van den; Milieueffecten van bouwmaterialen - Monografieën SOM deel 5 (in Dutch); Delft University of
Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Study group SOM, faculteit Bouwkunde, TU Delft, Netherlands, 1989
Chatagnon N., Nibel S. & Achard G.; 'ESCALE, a method of assessing a building’s environmental performance at the
design stage', in: Proceedings of Green Building Challenge ‘98, Vancouver, Canada, 1998
Croes H., Dewever M. & Haas M.; One number says it all (poster); Dutch Government Buildings Agency, The Hague,
Netherlands, 2001
Dewever L.M.; Paasbrief 1996 (in Dutch); Inspectie Milieuhygiëne voor de Rijkshuisvesting, Arnhem, Netherlands,
1996
Dewulf G.P.M.R. & Jonge H. de; Toekomst van de kantorenmarkt 1994-2015 (in Dutch); Delft University of
Edwards S., Bartlett E. & Dickie I.; Whole life costing and life-cycle assessment for sustainable building design; BRE,
Watford, UK, 2000
Eldonk A. van, Venema W., Vos tot Nederveen Cappel C. de; Het Nationale Kantorenmarktonderzoek 2001 -
Resultaten en visies (in Dutch); Twynstra Gudde, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 2001
Gerritse C. & Houten W. van; Programma & het ruimtegebruik per werkplek; Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft,
Netherlands, 1995
Glaumann M.; EcoEffect - Miljövärdering av bebyggelse (in Swedish); KTH Center for Built Environment, Göteborg,
Sweden, 1999
Haas E.M.; TWIN-model - Milieu classificatie-model Bouw (in Dutch); NIBE, Naarden / TUE, Eindhoven, Netherlands,
1997
Haas E.M. & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; Referentielijst 1990; NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 1996
Hakfoort J. & Lie R.; 'Office Space per Work - Evidence from Four European Markets', in: The Journal of Real Estate
Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1996 (pp. 183-196); 1996
Heijungs R., Guinée J., Huppes G., Lankreijer R.M., Udo de Haes H.A., Wegener Sleeswijk A., Ansems A.M., Eggels
P.G., Duin R. van & Goede H.P. de; Environmental life cycle assessment of products - Guide and background; CML,
Leiden, Netherlands, 1992
Holleris Petersen E., Dinesen J. & Krogh H.; Miljødatadblade for bygningsdele (in Danish); Statens
Byggeforskningsinstitut, Hørsholm, Denmark, 2000
Holleris Petersen E.; Database and Inventory Tool for Building Components and Buildings' environmental performance
- SBI-report 275; SBI, Horsholm, Denmark, 1998
IEA; 'Annex 31 - Energy related environmental impact of buildings', in: website: http://www.uni-
weimar.de/SCC/PRO/survey.html; The International Energy Agency, 1999
ISO, Environmental Management; Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework (ISO 14040:1997); ISO/FDIS,
1997
ISO, Environmental Management; Life cycle assessment - Goal and scope definition and inventory analysis (ISO
14041:1998(E)); ISO/FDIS, 1998
ISO, Environmental Management; Life cycle assessment - Life cycle impact assessment (ISO 14042:2000); ISO/FDIS,
2000a
ISO, Environmental Management; Life cycle assessment - Life cycle interpretation (ISO 14043:2000); ISO/FDIS, 2000b
B The Basis - References for The Basis 131

IVM (Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken); Final report on calculation of a national income according to Hueting's
methodology; IVM, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2000
Jong T.M. de; Indicatieve lijst milieu-effecten van bouwmaterialen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Architecture, Delft, Netherlands, 1991
Jong T.M. de; Inleiding Technische Ecologie en Milieuplanning (in Dutch); Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft,
Netherlands, 1997
Junnila S.; 'Identification of environmental impact of office buildings by building element and material groups', in:
Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil
Infrastructures (433-438); RIL/VTT, Finland, 2003
Junnila S. & Horvath A.; 'Environmental Sensitivity Analysis of the Life-cycle of an Office Building', in: Proceedings 2nd
International Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (215-
220); RIL/VTT, Finland, 2003
Kohler N. & Koch M.; Ecopro-manual; ifib, Universität Karlsruhe, Germany, 1996
Kohler N., Hermann M. & Lützkendorf T.; 'CAAD system with integrated quantity surveying & energy calculation LCA',
in: Proceedings Green Building Challenge ’98, Vol. 2, 1998 (68)
Kortman J.G.M. et al. (IVAM, TNO, CML); Inschatting milieu-effecten van de afdankfase van langcyclische producten
(SPA-programma, rapport nr. 96.005) (in Dutch); RIZA, Lelystad, Netherlands, 1996
Kuijpers-van Galen I.; 'Energieprestatienormering - Inleiding (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam Bouwen (1.2
EPN 1-13); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003
Lindeijer E.W., Kampen M. van, Fraanje P.J., Dobben H.F. van, Nabuurs G.J., Schouwenberg E.P.A.G., Prins A.H.,
Dankers N. & Leopold M.F.; Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA; Rijkswaterstaat, Dienst
Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1998
Linden K. van der, Spiekman M., Haas M. & Koster P.; 'GreenCalc - Een calculatie- en communicatiemodel om
milieubelasting van gebouwen meetbaar en vergelijkbaar te maken (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam
Bouwen (B270.10-1-27); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1999
Lippiatt B.; Building for environmental and economical sustainability (BEES 2.0) - Technical Manual and user guide
(Report NISTIR 6220); National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2000
Mak J., Anink D., Knapen M., Kortman J., Ewijk H. van; 'Development of LCA based tools for buildings', in:
Proceedings Second International Conference Buildings and the Environment, Paris, France, 1997
Myhre L.; Sammenslåing av Økoprofil og MRN (in Norwegian); NBI/GRIP, Oslo, Norway, 1998
NIBE Research bv; 'TWIN-model 2002 (in Dutch)', in: NIBE Research bv, Basiswerk Duurzaam & Gezond Bouwen
(F1.4/1-9); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2002
OGIP; website: website: http://www.ogip.ch
Osset Ph. & Cortijo P.; 'TEAM™ for Building', in: Proceedings Building and the Environment, Second International
Conference, Paris, France, 1997
Peuportier B.; EQUER final report 2 - Plan Architecture; Ecole des Mines de Paris, Centre d’Energetique, Paris,
France, 1997
Peuportier B., Kohler N. et al.; European methodology for evaluation of environmental impact of buildings - Life-cycle
assessment (REGENER Project, Summary Report); European Commission Directorate General XII for science,
research and development, Program APAS, 1997
RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne); Zorgen voor morgen - Nationale Milieuverkenning 1985-
2011 (in Dutch); Samson Tjeenk Willink, Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands, 1988
SBR (Stichting Bouwresearch); Nationaal Pakket Duurzaam Bouwen Woningbouw - Nieuwbouw (in Dutch); SBR,
Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1996
Schaap L.E.J.J., Bosmans G., van der Graaf E.R. & Hendriks Ch.F.; De stralingsprestatienorm - Een prestatiemodel
voor ioniserende straling in het woonmilieu (in Dutch); Aeneas, Best, Netherlands, 1998
Schayk L.A. van, Manders-Maanders E.H.C., Slot B.J.M. & Niël E.G.G.M.; De Milieumaat voor de Bouw - Een methode
om milieu-aspecten van bouwprodukten te kwantificeren (in Dutch); TU Eindhoven, Faculteit Bouwkunde, Vakgroep
FAGO, groep Materiaalkunde, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 1990
Scholten N., Groot-van Dam A. de, Kortman J., Huppes G., Ven B. van der, Schuurmans A. & Anink D.; 'Developing an
environmental performance standard for the materialuse in buildings for the Dutch Building Decree', in: Boonstra C.,
Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2000 (234-236); Aeneas,
Best, Netherlands, 2000
Schuurmans A. & Meijer J.; 'The application of environmental product declarations for innovations in the building
sector', in: Boonstra C., Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building
2000 (247-249); Aeneas, Best, Netherlands, 2000
SETAC; LCA in building and construction - A state-of-the-art report of SETAC-EUROPE; Intron, Sittard, Netherlands,
2001
Soest J.P. van, Sas H. & Wit G. de; Appels, peren en milieumaatregelen - Afweging van milieumaatregelen op basis
van kosteneffectiviteit (in Dutch); CE, Delft, Netherlands, 1997
132 References for The Basis - B The Basis

Vogtländer J.G.; The model of Eco-costs/Value Ratio - A new LCA based decision support tool; Delft University of
Technology, DfS, Delft, Netherlands, 2001
TNO Industry; EcoScan website: http://www.ind.tno.nl/product_development/sustainable_concepts/ecoscan/index.html;
2001
Trusty W.B.; 'Introducing an assessment tool classification system', in: ATHENATM Sustainable Materials Institute,
Advanced Building Newsletter, No. 25, July, 2000 (18)
Vos P.G.J.C., Meel J.J. van & Dijcks A.; The office, the whole office and nothing but the office, version 1.2; Delft
University of Technology, Department of Real Estate and Project Management, Netherlands, 1999
Vos P.G.J.C. & Voordt D.J.M. van der; 'Het kantoor van morgen vandaag bezien - Effecten van kantoorinnovatie' (in
Dutch), in: M&O, No. 4; 2001
Vroonhof J., Herder S. & Bergsma G. (CE) ; Milieuwegingsmethoden voor toepassing van baggerspecie (in Dutch);
Rijkswaterstaat, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1999
Wislocki P.; 'New buildings in the Netherlands - Power and ambition', in: World Architecture, No. 69, September 1998
(pp. 72-77); 1998
For the assessment of the twelve government office buildings, additional to direct information from contact
persons, the following literature was studied:
Abrahams, R.; Globale milieukostenberekening gerechtsgebouw De Appelaar te Haarlem - Conceptrapportage versie
1.1 (in Dutch); NIBE, Bussum, Netherlands, 2000
Architectenbureau de Ruiter B.V.; Definitief ontwerp RWS Zeeland (in Dutch); Architectenbureau de Ruiter,
Netherlands, 2001
Architectenbureau ir. K.J. Rosdorff; Bestek (in Dutch); Architectenbureau ir.K.J. Rosdorff, The Hague, Netherlands,
1990
Architectengemeenschap Van den Broek en Bakema; 'Uitbreiding kantoorgebouw te Delft (in Dutch) -
Architectuurdocumentatie', in: Bouw, 7 April, 1989
Architectengemeenschap Van den Broek en Bakema; Bestek uitbreiding gebouw Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde (in
Dutch); Architectengemeenschap Van den Broek en Bakema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1985
Architectengemeenschap Van den Broek en Bakema/Lans G.; Bestektekeningen (in Dutch); Architectengemeenschap
Van den Broek en Bakema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1985
Asch D., Hoek L. van (ed.) et al.; Rijksgebouwendienst Jaarverslag 2000 (in Dutch); Rijksgebouwendienst, The Hague,
Netherlands, 2001
Beheercommissie Johan de Witt-huis; Het Johan de Witt-huis, zijn bewoners, bouwhistorie en interieur (in Dutch);
Beheercommissie JdW-huis, The Hague, Netherlands, 1999
Beheercommissie Johan de Witt-huis; Statustekeningen Johan de Witt-huis (in Dutch); Beheercommissie JdW-huis,
The Hague, Netherlands, 1993
Bruin M. de & Blans I. (eds.); 'Een ontdekkingstocht door het nieuwe gebouw van SZW (in Dutch)', in: Nieuwsbouw, 10
December; Ministerie van SZW, The Hague, Netherlands, 1990
Buro voor Bouwkunde; Tekeningen en omschrijving Rijkskantoorgebouw Pels Rijckenstraat 1, Arnhem (in Dutch) -
Herhuisvesting RIMH; Buro voor Bouwkunde, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1989
Damen Consultants B.V.; Inventarisatieformulier (in Dutch); Rgd Oost, Arnhem, Netherlands, 1997
Duin L. van & Tettero W. (eds.); Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid - Architectonische studies 7 (in
Econergy; EnergieSpiegel Jaarscan 2000 Rijkskantoorgebouw Arnhem (in Dutch); Econergy, Netherlands, 2001
Goedkoop M., Effting S. & Collignon M.; De Eco-indicator 99 - Handleiding voor ontwerpens (in Dutch); Pré
Consultants bv, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 2000
Hubert-Jan Henket architecten bna; Definitief Ontwerp gerechtsgebouw - De Appelaar - Haarlem (in Dutch); Hubert-
Jan Henket architecten bna, Esch, Netherlands, 2000
Inspectrum; Inventarisatieformulier (in Dutch); Rgd Zuid-West, Schiedam, Netherlands, 1994
Inspectrum/Ham P. v.d.; Inventarisatieformulier (in Dutch); Rgd Zuid-West, Schiedam, Netherlands, 1993
Knobbe F.; Behoefteplan 1998 (in Dutch); Rgd Oost, Arnhem, Netherlands, 1998
moBius Consult; Nieuwbouw Rijkswaterstaat te Middelburg - Bouwfysische en Dubo-aspecten Definitief Ontwerp (in
Dutch); moBius, Driebergen-Rijsenburg, Netherlands, 2001
NgV Nijmegen/ Rijndertse H. & Rodenburg M.; Inventarisatieformulier (in Dutch); Rgd Oost, Arnhem, Netherlands,
1999

Novem; Monitor van de voortgang van het Energie Efficiencyprogramma Rijkshuisvesting over de periode t/m 31
december 2000 - Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer (in Dutch); Novem, Utrecht,
Netherlands, 2001
december 2000 - Ministerie van Financiën: Directoraat Generaal der Belastingen (in Dutch); Novem, Utrecht,
Netherlands, 2001
december 2000 - Ministerie van Verkeer & Waterstaat (in Dutch); Novem, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001
Nunen H., Hendriks N.A. & Erkelens P.A.; 'Influence of service life on Life Cycle Assessments', in: Proceedings 2nd
RDMZ (Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg); 'Duurzame monumentenzorg' (in Dutch), in: Info Restauratie en Beheer,
27 November; RDMZ, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001
Rgd Directie Zuid-West/Hulten P. van; Tekening plattegrond vierde verdieping (in Dutch); Rgd Zuid-West, Schiedam,
Netherlands, 1991
Rgd Directie Zuid-West; Revisietekeningen Centraal Belastinggebouw Vroedschapstraat 15 te Gorinchem (in Dutch);
Rgd Zuid-West, Schiedam, Netherlands, 1997
Rijksgebouwendienst; Satellietkantoor - Kantoorinnovatie project Arnhem (in Dutch); Ministerie van VROM, The
Hague, Netherlands, 1998
Rijksgebouwendienst; Rapportage energie-onderzoek rijkskantoorgebouw Arnhem (in Dutch); Rgd, The Hague,
Netherlands, 1998
Rijksgebouwendienst; Tekeningen Pels Rijckenstraat Arnhem - Rijkskantoorverzamelgebouw (in Dutch); Rgd, The
Rijksgebouwendienst; Statustekeningen belastingkantoor Gorinchem (in Dutch); Rgd Zuid-West, Schiedam,
Netherlands, year unknown
Rijksgebouwdienst dir. 's Gravenhage e.o.; Tekeningen Kneuterdijk 6 's Gravenhage (in Dutch); Rgd-DGEO, The
Salomons I. & Eyck A. van; Built with colour - The Netherlands Court of Audit by Aldo and Hannie van Eyck; 010
Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1999
Werkgroep PARAP; Kantelpuntonderzoek energiebesparing rijkshuisvesting (eindrapport) (in Dutch);
Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Dr. Rien Elling, teacher of the course Writing a dissertation, for a detailed look on the first version of chapter 05.
Martijn Arets, student graduated on a topic presented further on in this dissertation, colleague, pleasant room mate and
main partner for the government offices case study
Kees van der Linden, all-round academic manager, daily supervisor for my research and supervisor to the government
offices case study
Wietze van Houten of the DGBA, Willem Meijer of Willem Meijer Consultancy, and Ruud Melis of Deerns raadgevende
ingenieurs, all of the PARAP workgroup studying energy behaviour of DGBA-offices, for giving me the opportunity to
visit offices of the DGBA with them and learn from energy technology, energy behaviour and technical mistakes.
Furthermore, I would like to thank the following persons of the Dutch Government Buildings Agency (DGBA) for
their cooperation (PM: project manager; FM: facilities or technical manager):
Food Inspection Department, Zutphen: Mrs. S. de Koning (DGBA East) and Mr. H. Weber (FM)
Mixed Office, Arnhem: Mrs. S. de Koning (DGBA East)
Department of Justice, Haarlem: Mr. W. Ooms (PM) and Mr. H. van Hilten (DGBA North West)
Tax Office, Gorinchem: Mr. Hensing (DGBA South West)
Road and Water Engineering Department, Delft: Mr. Hensing (DGBA South West)
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg: Mr. B. van Rijnswou (DGBA South West)
Geography Department, Delft: Mr. F. Hofman (PM)
Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, The Hague: Mr. L. Helder (FM)
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment, The Hague: Mr. R. van der Spek (FM)
Johan de Witt House, The Hague: Mr. A. Wringer (FM)

The Artillery, The Hague: Mr. P. Wiersma (FM)

General: Mrs. S. Roskam & Mr. A. de Boer (DGBA Central Management)
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Linden A.C. van der & Klaase D.; 'Sustainability needs more than just smart
technology', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (pp. 1501-1508);
Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2002j
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Linden A.C. van der & Ravesloot C.M.; 'Defining the reference for environmental
performance', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.); Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (pp. 1509-1516);
Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2002k
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Linden A.C. van der, Cauberg J.J.M. & Kristinsson J.; 'Managing sustainable measures
through calculations of the environmental performance', in: Proceedings CIB World Building Congress 2001 -
Performance in Product and Practice; CIB/ BCC/ BIA/ ABCB/ BRANZ, Wellington, New Zealand, 2001
Contributions to books
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Arets, M.; 'Effective sustainable building - Case studies', in: Syllabus PAO-cursus Het
ontwikkelen van duurzame gebouwen, 26 en 27 november 2002; Stichting Postacademisch Onderwijs Civiele Techniek
en Bouwtechniek, Delft, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Reken- en beslismodellen - Een overzicht (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam
Bouwen (1.1 OVZ 1-26); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Reken- en beslismodellen - Een overzicht (in Dutch)', in: Linden A.C. van der (ed.), Het
ontwikkelen van duurzame gebouwen; Stichting Postacademisch Onderwijs Civiele Techniek en Bouwtechniek, Delft,
Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Rekenprogramma's voor duurzaam bouwen' (in Dutch), in: Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam
Bouwen (pp. B270.40-1-30); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Reports
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Effectiever naar duurzaamheid - Hoofdrapport
project Milieubelasting van rijkskantoorgebouwen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil
Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002a
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Beoordelingsmethodiek van kantoren -
Bijlagerapport 1 project Milieubelasting van rijkskantoorgebouwen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002b
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Samengevatte resultaten per deelproject -
Bijlagerapport 2 project Milieubelasting van rijkskantoorgebouwen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002c
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het belastingkantoor
Gorinchem (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of
Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002d
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het C-gebouw van de Dienst
Weg- en Waterbouwkunde (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002e
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het kernministerie van Sociale
Zaken en Werkgelegenheid (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002f
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het nieuwe RWS-hoofdkantoor
Directie Zeeland (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of
Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002g
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het Verkeer & Waterstaat-
kantoor De Artillerie (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section
of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002h
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het verzamelkantoor Pels
Rijckenstraat, Arnhem (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002i

Arets M.J.P., Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Linden A.C. van der; Milieubelasting van het kantoor van de Algemene
Rekenkamer (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of
Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002a
Arets M.J.P., van den Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. & van der Linden A.C.; Milieubelasting van de Keuringsdienst van Waren
te Zutphen (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building
Engineering, Netherlands, 2002b
Arets M.J.P., van den Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. & van der Linden A.C.; Milieubelasting van de nieuwbouw voor de
Meetkundige Dienst (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section
of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002c
Arets M.J.P., van den Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. & van der Linden A.C.; Milieubelasting van het kantoordeel van de Dienst
Rechtspleging - De Appelaar (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002d
Arets M.J.P., van den Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. & van der Linden A.C.; Milieubelasting van het kernministerie van Volks-
huisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil
Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002e
Arets M.J.P., van den Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. & van der Linden A.C.; Milieubelasting van het RWS-kantoor Johan de
Witt-huis (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building
Engineering, Netherlands, 2002f
Loos R.M.M. van der & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; Keuzemodel kust- en oeverwerken - Ontwerpondersteunend
model voor de beoordeling van effecten op LNC-, milieu- en kostenaspecten (leidraad) (in Dutch); Rijkswaterstaat,
Dienst Weg- en Waterbouw, Delft, Netherlands, 2001
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Loos R.M.M. van der; Keuzemodel kust- en oeverwerken - Ontwikkeling van een
ontwerpondersteunend model voor de beoordeling van effecten op LNC-, milieu- en kostenaspecten (eindrapport fase
1 & 2) (in Dutch); Rijkswaterstaat, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 2000
Expert journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Linden K. van der; 'Hoe rekenen andere landen aan duurzaam bouwen?' (in Dutch), in:
Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen no. 4, year 5, December 2002 (pp. 4-5); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam,
Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Referentiegebouwen, voor het bepalen van milieuprestaties', in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam
Bouwen no. 3, year 5, October 2002 (p. 6-7); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Rekenen aan duurzaam bouwen' (in Dutch), in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen no. 3, year 5,
October 2002 (p. 1-2); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Klaase D.; 'Onvoldoende vooruitgang in milieukwaliteit kantoren - The paradigm shift (1)' (in
Dutch), in: Real Estate Magazine no. 19, 2001 (pp. 36-39); Arko Uitgeverij bv, Nieuwegein, 2001
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Werkbare beslismodellen voor actieve bouwpartners - Checklists vormen de basis' (in
Dutch), in: Duurzaam Bouwen No. 3-2000 (pp. 20-22); Aeneas, Best, Netherlands, 2000


Front page
Detail of a centuries old cedar door in the central monastery
area in Arequipa, Peru. Time has eroded the outer surface yet
not the inside, giving the door character.
The Time Factor
19 G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
factor
C
09
designing
forlife 08
fora long
lifespan of
buildings
07
forthe
building
lifespan
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
the beginning
07 ACCOUNTING FOR THE BUILDING LIFESPAN
IN ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
Everybody intuitively understands that the lifespan is important to the eventual environmental performance of a
building. Although this idea may be argued by reason, it could not yet be quantitatively demonstrated. In order to
fully take into account the influence of the building's lifespan, the environmental load needed to be treated as a
function of the lifespan. This chapter introduces model that enables comparisons between buildings with a
different lifespan, and deliberations about renovation or demolition. Beside theoretical examples of its
applications, it is also tested on the office buildings assessed in chapter 06.
Figure 07.01: The clock on the city hall tower in Siena, Italy
Contents
07.01 Theoretical basis 143

07.01.01 Basic definitions 143
07.01.02 The time factor in assessments 144
07.02 The lifespan accounting model 145
07.02.01 Environmental loads and the building cycle 145
07.02.02 Two ways of accounting 146
07.02.03 The debt remaining at the moment of intervention 149
07.02.04 Taking into account specific lifespans 150
07.03 Calculations for example 151
07.03.01 Comparing different building designs 151
07.03.02 Comparing demolition and re-use 153
07.04 Recalculating the twelve offices 155
07.04.01 Age-including recalculations 155
07.04.02 Recalculations on the basis of estimated service lives 157
07.05 Considerations and elaborations 158
07.05.01 Time effects and LCA 159
07.05.02 Distinguishing different building stages 159
07.05.03 Discerning different building components 161
07.05.04 Purely economic comparisons 164
07.05.05 Inclusion of a discount rate 165
07.05.06 Net present value versus annuities 167
07.05.07 Dealing with long lifespans 167
07.05.08 The estimated service life 169
All REFERENCES for Volume C - The Time Factor can be found on pages 207 to 210.
142 07 Accounting for the building lifespan in environmental performance - C The Time Factor
07.01 Theoretical basis
07.01.01 Definitions
Lifetimes and lifespans

The lifetime is the length of a person's life or a thing's existence, whereas the lifespan is the length of time that
something is likely to live, continue or function [both definitions are by Hornby et al., 1998]. 'Lifespan' therefore
reflects the expected lifetime. In this dissertation I mainly consider buildings before they have reached the end of
their existence, so the use of 'lifespan' seems more appropriate than 'lifetime'.
Different lifespan types will be defined below.
The technical lifespan

The technical lifespan is the expected time-span within which the building meets the technical performance criteria
in a given maintenance strategy [Jonge, 1990]1. It is therefore the maximum possible lifetime of a product within
that maintenance strategy. The technical lifespan of the supporting structure mostly defines a building's technical
lifespan. For concrete structures, Keskküla [2003] found that after a gradual decline, a long period of a lower yet
acceptable quality level develops, after which failure occurs (see figure 07.02).
technical quality
time
Figure 07.02: The gradual decline of technical quality often seen with supporting structures [after: Keskküla, 2003]
The economic lifespan

Jonge [1990] defines the economic lifespan as the expected time-span within which the building meets the return-
on-investment criteria According to Soeter [2004] it is the moment after which the net present value of all future
costs become equal or greater than that of all future benefits. It is therefore the time-span after which further use
or maintenance of the product becomes economically irresponsible, apart from considerations about, for example,
the architectural quality or sustainability.
The functional lifespan

The functional lifespan is the period during which the building meets the functional requirements [Peeters, 2002a]
or the expected time-span within which an organisation can operate without changes to the building [Jonge,
1990]. It is the time-span after which an object becomes functionally obsolete.
The environmental lifespan

In addition to these terms, the environmental lifespan can be defined as the time-span after which demolition and
reconstruction becomes environmentally more favourable than renovation and re-use. This lifespan is therefore
similar to the economic lifespan, yet with the environmental load instead of actual costs as a decisive criterion.
1 Jonge used this definition for the technical lifetime, leaving out the word 'expected' in the description. As explained in the first part of
this section, the use of 'lifespan' rather than 'lifetime' is however more appropriate.
The same remark applies to the definitions of the economic lifespan and functional lifespan.
C The Time Factor - 07 Accounting for the building lifespan in environmental performance 143
Buildings
When considering buildings, it is difficult to define an integral technical lifespan. There are many components that
together form the building, and most of them need to be replaced or repaired before the technical lifespan of the
supporting structure, which is the decisive component of the building when considering the time factor. For offices,
the functional lifespan is mostly the shortest, followed by the economic lifespan: when a building loses its
functionality, it will soon reach its economic feasibility as an office. However, that does not exclude economic
possibilities for use as another function.
Nunen et al. [2003] graphically illustrated the general decline in the quality of a product and the performance
levels under which it becomes functionally, economically, or technically obsolete (figure 07.03). The product can
be replaced for economical or functional reasons before it has reached its technical lifespan.
performance
functional lifespan
economical lifespan
technical lifespan
time
Figure 07.03: The decline of the performance of buildings and minimum required levels [after: Nunen et al., 2003]
Actually, the decline of quality for these aspects cannot be represented by one line - they are different for each
one of them - but the graph clarifies the order of obsolescence. It can be translated to whole buildings.
The service life

A term that is also often used in technical areas of lifetime management is the service life of a product. This may
be defined as "the time-span that an object remains in function". It may therefore be considered equal to the
lifetime of an object2. As will be seen further on, with the discussion on the expected or estimated service life, this
term is generally used in an international context but mainly for products or building components rather than the
building as a whole. Nevertheless, in this dissertation I chose to generally use the term 'service life' to express the
eventual time-span that a building remains in use, whether this is defined by the technical, functional or economic
lifespan. In practice, the functional lifespan mostly defines the actual service life of an office building.
07.01.02 The time factor in assessments
Reasoned influence of the lifespan

The findings presented in chapter 06 were based on a building lifespan of 75 years. This boundary condition does
not affect the results for energy and water, which are already based on annual consumption values. For these
aspects, prolonging the lifespan would only mean a multiplication of the annual values, provided that the boundary
conditions for energy and water consumption do not alter.
For building materials, altering the lifespan however influences the environmental impact. A shorter lifespan
implies that less maintenance to, and replacements of, certain building components or materials need to be taken
into account, reducing the annual environmental load of building materials. On the other hand, in the case of a
shorter lifespan, the total environmental load of building materials needs to be divided by fewer years, increasing
the annual values. An increase of the importance of building materials is therefore expected in the case of a
shorter lifespan.
2 As 'service life' has an equal meaning as 'lifetime', the 'expected service life' equals the 'lifespan'.
This is all reasoning; there has been no quantitative proof yet of the influence of the time factor on the
environmental performance.
Assessments based on a fixed time-span

At the moment, environmental assessment tools do not take into account different lifespans. Although standard
LCA procedures (e.g. [ISO, 1998]) prescribe the definition of a reference lifespan for the functional unit or
boundary conditions of an assessment, there are no directives for an approach to decisions before reaching the
reference lifespan, or in the case of a shortened, prolonged, or varying lifespan.
The assessment tool GreenCalc uses a reference lifespan of 75 years for the LCA-database of building materials.
It is however questionable whether an average office building will function for the entire 75 years. Therefore, as
discussed in chapter 06, I chose to work with annual values of the environmental cost resulting from GreenCalc.
Other assessment tools use similar boundary conditions for the reference lifespan. It is sometimes adjustable but
this does not imply comparability of the environmental performance in the case of different lifespans or in the case
of different designs.
Theory, model and tests

The time factor should be better incorporated in environmental assessments. This chapter presents a
mathematical model for the account of the building lifespan in environmental performance. The model enables
comparisons of different building designs in cases of a different lifespan, determination of break-even points for
the lifespan or environmental loads. It also supports decisions between demolition and new construction versus
renovation and re-use of the existing building. In the sections following, the model as well as theoretical and
practical tests will be presented.
07.02 The lifespan accounting model
07.02.01 Environmental loads and the building cycle
Dispersion of loads over the lifespan

The environmental damage related to the construction and operation of a building consists of once-off
environmental loads and annually repeating environmental loads. The environmental cost of building materials
mainly come up at the beginning of a lifecycle of a building, as a result of the pre-construction process of
extraction, manufacture and transport. This load is actually gradual but can best be allocated at once to the
construction stage. Other examples of environmental loads considered once-off on the scale of a lifetime are in-
between refurbishments and renovation and the production of waste at the construction or demolition stage.
Material repairs and maintenance, building-related consumption of energy and water, and energy used by
commuter travel are annually repeating environmental costs. See figure 07.04.
environmental load
energy and w ater consumption

construction
demolition
refurbishment renovation
time
Figure 07.04: Dispersion of once-off and annual environmental loads over the building lifespan
For simplification of the explanation of the lifespan accounting model, refurbishment and renovation will be
ignored, hence figure 07.05 forms the basis for further discussion. The initial (I) and annual (a) and demolition (D)
environmental loads, which can be determined by means of LCA-based assessment tools, are dispersed over the
lifespan of a building (L).
environmental load
construction
demolition
I
D
a
L time
Figure 07.05: Simplification of once-off and annual environmental loads
Table 07.01 summarises once-off environmental loads that occur at the beginning and end of the building
lifespan, and the annually repeating environmental loads that are related to the building occupation. Since LCA
takes annual maintenance, repair and replacement of building materials into account, they can be best shared
under the initial environmental load.
Table 07.01: Once-off and annual environmental loads

initial environmental load (I) annual environmental load (a) demolition load (D)
extraction, manufacture and maintenance, replacements, recycling of building materials
transport of building materials additions of building materials demolition energy
construction energy consumption energy consumption demolition waste
construction waste production water consumption land transformation
land transformation land occupation
(travel energy)
One environmental unit

As treated in chapter 04, the standardised LCA-methodology forms the basis for environmental assessments.
Results are presented in profiles of environmental effects expressed in their respective units. In figure 07.05 and
following figures the 'environmental load' is a hypothetical unitary value (e.g. environmental cost or eco-points). If
it were discerned by different environmental themes (as in LCA), every beam of figure 07.05 would consist of six
beams per stage, complicating the explanation of the model. The model presented can however also be applied to
the discerned outcome of a pure LCA calculation.
07.02.02 Two ways of accounting
The occurrence of environmental loads during the building cycle is similar to that of costs. Methods of life cycle
costing (LCC) from the area of building economics may therefore be applied. There are two possibilities to make
once-off and annually repeating environmental loads comparable: the determination of net present values or of
annuities.
The net present value

The first method described determines the value at the moment of consideration of all environmental loads
appearing during the whole lifespan, the net present value (NPV) (see figure 07.06). In case of financial
assessments, a discount rate for real interest and inflation needs to be accounted for, leading to smaller present
values of costs and benefits occurring after the moment of delivery. In the case of environmental loads the
inclusion of interest and inflation is debatable. This will be discussed further on. For a simple explanation of the
model, I chose to exclude a discount rate in the environmental assessments. For the NPV, the environmental
loads therefore are simply summed.
environmental load
construction
demolition
I
D
a
L time
environmental load
capitalising future environm ental loads
time
Figure 07.06: Determining the net present value of environmental loads occurring during the building lifespan
Following the NPV method, excluding in-between once-off loads (e.g. for refurbishment and renovation) and
without the account of a discount rate, the total environmental load (E) is the sum of the initial (I) and demolition
(D) environmental loads, plus the annual loads (a), times the number of years in the building lifespan (L), as
shown in formula 07.01.
E = I + D + L.a <07.01>
Annuities
Another method is the conversion of environmental loads to annuities, annual values covering all costs and
benefits appearing during the whole lifespan (figure 07.07). Again, for the environmental assessments of this
dissertation, a discount rate for interest and inflation is not taken into account. The process is therefore limited to
summing the environmental loads and dividing them by the lifespan.

environmental load
construction
demolition
I
D
a
L time
environmental load
debiting initial loads

reserving future loads
time
Figure 07.07: Determining annuities of environmental loads occurring during the building lifespan
In the case of this method, the once-off environmental loads need to be equally divided over the lifespan and
summed to the annually repeating loads. The total annual environmental load (e) therefore equals:
e = a + (I + D)/L <07.02>
Clarifying the environmental impact of a long or short lifespan

Formula 07.02 clarifies that if the lifespan of a building is extended (L ↑), the total annual environmental load will
be reduced (e ↓), which is also graphically demonstrated in figure 07.08.
environmental load
time time
Figure 07.08: The difference in environmental load in the case of a long (left) and short (right) lifespan
Using a long-term perspective (much longer than the lifespan of one building), many short lifespans will
continuously lead to greater annual loads and overall be less sustainable than a few long ones. This shows that
working with annuities clarifies the environmental impact of buildings with different lifespans better. For the same
insight, if the NPV method were applied, a long reference lifespan would have to be taken into account involving
multiple lives of the same type of building, encountering the methodological problem of allocation, as discussed in
chapter 04.
The cumulated environmental load

Figure 07.09 [an adaptation of Klunder, 2003] shows a possible representation of the cumulated environmental
load set against the time scale. An environmental comparison and decision between re-use, renovation, and new
construction could in this case be based on this cumulated environmental load. In the case of re-use, the course
of environmental load would continue as a result of the annually repeating loads. The intervention of demolition
and new construction would lead to a stacked increase on top of the load already caused by the original building,
followed by a presumably slower increase as a result of more favourable energy consumption. Renovation would
be placed in-between. A certain moment after the intervention the lines of renovation or new construction would
cross the line of simple re-use, making them more favourable from that moment on.
environmental load
new construction
cumulated
renovation
re-use of old building
time
Figure 07.09: Cumulated environmental load of three alternatives, set against time [adaptation of Klunder, 2003]
This approach directly converts the initial environmental load at the beginning of the lifespan. For new
construction and renovation, the annually repeating environmental load of the old building until the moment of
intervention is also accounted in the cumulated load. This would not be appropriate for a fair comparison of the
alternatives. Therefore, figure 07.11 is more an image of the historically developed environmental load rather than
a basis for comparison of alternatives.
07.02.03 The debt remaining at the moment of intervention
Paying off over a reference lifespan

When we want to integrate sustainability in decisions about demolition or re-use, a combination of the previously
described accounting methods is necessary. The once-off loads converted to present values represent the
environmental capital invested in the building now and in the future. This can be considered an environmental
mortgage imposing an environmental debt on the building. This debt needs to be paid off gradually during a
certain reference lifespan (Lref, see figure 07.10). The annually repeating environmental load (not shown) just re-
appears every year as another form of environmental debt paid off directly.
environmental load
once-only environmental load
Lref time
Figure 07.10: Paying off the environmental mortgage of a building
In figure 07.10, the angle of the pay-off line (ε) is a measure of the velocity with which the environmental debt is
paid off. ε is defined as the environmental pay-off angle. It is calculated as follows:
tan(ε) = (I + D)/Lref <07.03>
If the reference lifespan is longer, the environmental pay-off angle will be smaller, and if it is shorter, the angle will
be greater. In the first case, the initial environmental debt will be paid off more slowly and annual loads will be
smaller. In the second case, pay-off will be quicker and annual loads heavier. For environmental decisions, the
definition of the reference lifespan therefore is important.
Remaining environmental debt

When the reference lifespan is not yet reached, there is a part of the environmental mortgage still remaining to be
paid off, named the remaining environmental debt, Er (see figure 07.11).
environmental load
Er
l Lref
Figure 07.11: The remaining environmental debt at the year l before the reference lifespan Lref
The remaining environmental debt can be calculated as follows:

Er(l) = (I + D) - l.tan(ε) = (I + D)(1 - l/Lref) <07.04>
In formula 07.04, the value (1 - l/Lref) is the age correction factor, which indicates the remaining proportion of the
original environmental debt.
For the environmental assessment of interventions at an instant before the reference lifespan is reached, the
remaining environmental debt should be considered as a measure of the invested environmental capital (or
accepted environmental mortgage) that has not yet been paid off. In the case of demolition this debt would mean
a kind of penalty, an increase of the environmental mortgage taken on a new building. An example of this will be
given later on.
07.02.04 Taking into account specific lifespans
The ESL factor

For the model presented so far, differences in service lives expected for the alternatives were not taken into
account. Two buildings with differing once-off and annually repeating environmental loads may be compared,
leading to a preferable solution. This comparison however would not be just if one of the alternatives is expected
to last longer than the other. There are many aspects that define the eventual service life of a building, which will
be discussed in chapter 08. For the explanation of the lifespan accounting model, the expected service life is
involved through the introduction of an estimated service life factor (ESL factor), an indicator to involve the impact
of conditions that influence the service life of a building. By means of this factor varying lifespans can be taken
into account in environmental assessments.
How does it work?

Based on a reference lifespan, e.g. the 75 years that has been used previously, the ESL factor expresses the
extent to which the building is expected to reach that lifespan or even go beyond it. An ESL factor of 1.0 indicates
that, on the basis of the building's qualitative and technical properties, the eventual service life is expected to be
equal to the reference lifespan. An ESL factor less than 1.0 indicates a shorter expected service life.
For instance, the reference building defined in chapter 05, with its cellular layout and limited floor height, would
probably not reach a long functional lifespan. Rather 25 years - for normal to modern offices - seems the
maximum. In this case, the ESL factor would equal 0.33, tripling the calculated annual environmental load for
building materials. With respect to this new reference, office design focused at a long lifespan would perform
better.
Quantitative consequences
The ESL factor is an additional factor to the eventual environmental load determined according to the model
previously introduced. Formulas 07.01 and 07.02 are therefore adapted as follows:
E = I + D + fESL.Lref.a <07.05>
e = a + (I + D)/fESL.Lref <07.06>
In formula 07.05 and 07.06, 'fESL' is the ESL factor. As can be seen, the ESL factor is connected to the reference
lifespan. The formulas demonstrate the importance of working with annual loads rather than capitalised total
loads: a small ESL factor (short expected service life) will lead to a relatively small total environmental load
(formula 07.05), yet also to a relatively large total annual environmental load (formula 07.06). Formula 07.05 using
a short-term perspective however does however not show this. Rather the total load E is repeated more often and
therefore no guarantee for good environmental performance. In contrast, the total annual environmental load e of
formula 07.06 immediately clarifies the actual environmental performance.
Determination of the ESL factor

Basically, there are three methods to determine the estimated service life or ESL factor of a building:
1. Exact calculation of the ESL (factor) on the basis of quantitative factors
2. Reasoned estimation by an expert or group of experts
3. A combination of these: use of ESL categories based on decisive factors to the service life of a building
As will be discussed in chapter 08, the first method is hardly possible since the service life of a building is defined
by many intangible factors. To a greater or lesser extent, the second method will lead to a biased judgement. The
third method is also based on estimation but in a structural manner. This method therefore seems a good
intermediate for an indication of the ESL.
ESL categories
For the inclusion of the age of buildings in environmental calculations, the Dutch National Agency for Monument
Care [RDMZ, 2001] introduced some rules: a monument of before 1850 is expected to last at least 200 years after
the year 1990, a monument constructed between 1850 and 1940 150 years, a monument of after 1940 100 years,
an existing building 75 years, and a new building also 75 years after its construction. This rough approach fails to
recognise aesthetic and functional qualities (or lack of these) of recent buildings, which will be discussed in
chapter 08. Instead, table 07.02 gives a possible categorisation of ESL factors based on three important criteria
that define the eventual service life of a building. These ESL categories are only exemplar and meant to function
as a basis for the testing of the lifespan accounting model further on. A better definition of the categories needs to
be studied further.
Table 07.02: Exemplar ESL categories and factors used to test the lifespan accounting model on estimated service lives
ESL category architecture flexibility functional problems years to go ESL factor
A national monument 150 2.00
B exceptional yes no 100 1.33
C exceptional yes yes 80 1.07
D exceptional no no 60 0.75
E moderate yes no 60 0.75
F exceptional no yes 40 0.53
G moderate yes yes 40 0.53
H moderate no no 20 0.27
I moderate no yes 10 0.13
As mentioned, these ESL categories serve as a basis. For every separate building, the values could be adjusted
on grounds of particular characteristics of the building.
07.03 Calculations for example
07.03.01 Comparing different building designs
Fixed reference lifespan

Building design 1 from figure 07.12 has a greater once-off environmental load, yet a smaller annually repeating
load than building design 2. The question of under what circumstances which design is more sustainable can be
given if a break-even point for the lifespan is determined. The NPV method is appropriate for this comparison
when the reference lifespan for both alternatives is equal, and a remaining environmental debt does not have to
be taken into account.
Buiilding design 1 Building design 2
E1 = I1+D1+a1.L E2 = I2+D2+a2.L
I1 a1 D1 I2 a2 D2
Figure 07.12: Two comparative building designs with differing environmental loads
Break-even points
For the determination of a break-even point the two total environmental loads are made equal:
E1 = E2 I1 + D1 + L.a1 = I2 + D2 + L.a2 L.(a2 - a1) = (I1 - I2) + (D1 - D2)
L = {(I1 - I2) + (D1 - D2)}/(a2 - a1) = (∆I + ∆D)/∆a = ∆(I + D)/∆a <07.07>
This means that, if the lifespan is long (L > ∆(I + D)/∆a), the environmental load of the second design (E2) will be
greater, and, if the lifespan is short (L < ∆(I + D)/∆a), the environmental load of the first design (E1) will be
greater. This is logical, because, in the case of a long lifespan, the annual load becomes more important.
Accordingly, a break-even annual load can be determined, given a constant lifespan and once-off load:
a2 - a1 = (I1 - I2+ D1 - D2)/L ∆a = ∆(I + D)/L <07.08>
Hence, if the difference in annual load is equal to the difference between the once-off loads divided by the
lifespan, there will be no environmental preference between the designs. Recalling the initial conditions, a2 is
greater than a1. If the difference between them approaches infinity (a2 being much greater than a1) the total
environmental load of design 2, E2, will be greater than the one of design 1. In reverse, if the difference between
a2 and a1 approaches zero the environmental load of design 1 will be greater.
Furthermore, given a constant lifespan and annual load, a break-even once-off load can also be determined:
I1 - I2 + D1 - D2 = L.(a2 - a1) ∆(I + D) = L.∆a <07.09>
If the difference in once-off loads is equal to the difference in annual loads times the lifespan, there is no
environmental preference between the designs. Recalling the initial conditions, the once-off loads of design 1 are
greater than those of design 2. If the difference between them approaches infinity (I1 and D1 being much greater
than I2 and D2) the total environmental load of design 1, E1, will be greater than the one of design 2. In reverse, if
the difference approaches zero the environmental load of design 2 will be greater.
Different lifespans
If the estimated service life of each building were to be included, the comparison would be as seen in figure 07.13.
Building design 1 Building design 2
E1 = I1+D1+a1.fESL1.L E2 = I2+D2+a2.fESL2.L
I1 a1 D1 I2 a2 D2
Figure 07.13: Two comparable building designs with differing environmental loads and a differing ESL factor
This time, since the lifespans are already determined through the ESL factor, the determination of a break-even
lifespan is not the order. As previously stated, a break-even annual load can be determined:
E1 = E2 I1 + D1 + fESL1.L.a1 = I2 + D2 + fESL2.L.a2
a2 = a1.fESL1/fESL2 + ∆(I + D)/L.fESL2 <07.10>
And, correspondingly, a break-even once-off load:
I1 - I2 + D1 - D2 = ∆(I + D) = L.(fESL2.a2 - fESL1.a1) <07.11>
Formulas 07.10 and 07.11 demonstrate that comparisons become somewhat more complex when involving the
future lifespan of a building.
07.03.02 Comparing demolition and re-use
As previously stated, a long lifespan may be important to sustainability. The decision to renovate and reuse a
building or to demolish it and construct a new one however is not simple. An old building may have its initial
environmental mortgage partially paid off, it probably also has a less favourable energy consumption pattern than
a new building. Since energy is the greatest contributor to the environmental load of buildings, under certain
circumstances, demolition and reconstruction will be environmentally preferable. The question is in which cases.
A fixed reference lifespan

In the part following, I will deduce the break-even points in the case where a decision needs to be made about an
existing building: re-use, or demolish and construct a new one. First, a reference lifespan (Lref) needs to be
chosen. When the moment of decision takes place somewhere before that lifespan (L), there is a remaining
environmental debt (Er) for the environmental mortgage that has not yet been paid off. In accordance with formula
07.04 and figure 07.11, it equals: (I + D)(1 - L/Lref).
From moment L on, a new reference lifespan L*ref needs to be taken into account, as the new basis for
comparison. In the case of re-use, the remaining environmental debt needs to be paid off over the new reference
lifespan and the old annual load remains as before. In the case of demolition and new building, the remaining
environmental debt needs to be added to the new environmental mortgage of once-off loads, i.e. the
environmental capital invested for the new building. This sum needs to be paid off over the new reference
lifespan. In this case, the annual load is expected to be smaller than in the case of re-use. Figure 07.14
graphically illustrates the comparison.
environmental load
Er
a old
L Lref L*ref time

environmental load
I new+ Dnew
Er
a new
L L*ref time
Figure 07.14: Graphic comparison of re-use versus demolition and new building
The environmental load of demolition and new construction (Enew) and re-use of the old building (Eold) equal:
Enew = Er + Inew + Dnew + L*ref.anew <07.12a>
Eold = Er + L*ref.aold <07.12b>

Notice that no environmental load for a possible renovation of the old building is included in formula 07.12b.
In order to be more sustainable, the annual environmental load of the newly constructed building must be smaller
than that of the old building (anew < aold). The question is however, which maximum value of the new annual load
(anew) is allowed for a smaller environmental load at the end of the new reference lifespan (Lref).
This can be determined as follows:

Enew < Eold Er + Inew + Dnew + L*ref.anew < Er + L*ref.aold
aold - a new [=∆a] > (Inew + Dnew)/L*ref <07.13>

The difference in annual environmental load after reconstruction should be greater than the once-off
environmental load of the new building divided by the reference lifespan. This outcome provides a clear
environmental performance requirement to the architect, principal or specialist.
The break-even new annual load (anew,be) equals aold - (Inew + Dnew)/L*ref.
As can be seen in formula 07.13, with these comparisons of alternatives for the same old building, the remaining
environmental debt is eliminated. The contemplation concentrates on environmental loads from the moment of
intervention on. The remaining environmental debt only plays a role when a choice needs to be made between
different existing buildings.
Differing lifespans
Interesting results will emerge when differing estimated service lives are taken into account. For instance, for the
old building it is imaginable that, without serious restoration, the service life will not be as long as that of a new
building (L*ref1 = fESL1.L*ref ; fESL1 < 1.0). In contrast, a new building can be optimally directed at a long service life
(L*ref2 = fESL2.L*ref ; fESL2 = 1.0). The environmental mortgage for both alternatives therefore needs to be paid of
within different terms.
Figure 07.15 graphically presents the comparison between re-use and demolition and new construction, taking
into account different services lives after the intervention. The total annual environmental load (e) will point out the
most profitable alternative, and not the total environmental load (E), as previously argued.
environmental load
Er
a old
L Lref L*ref1 (= L*ref.fESL1) time

environmental load
Inew+ Dnew
Er
L*ref2 (= L*ref.fESL2)
a new
L time
Figure 07.15: Graphic comparison of re-use versus demolition and new building, taking into account different ESL factors
The annual load of re-use of the old building (eold) and demolition and new construction (enew) equal:
eold = aold + Er/L*ref1 <07.14a>
enew = anew + (Er + Inew + Dnew)/L*ref2 <07.14b>

In order to be more sustainable, the annual environmental load of the newly constructed building must be smaller
than that of the old building (anew < aold). The maximum value of the new annual load (anew) allowed for a smaller
environmental load at the end of the new reference lifespan (L*ref) and can be determined as follows:
enew < eold anew + (Er + Inew + Dnew)/L*ref2 < aold + Er/L*ref1
aold - a new [=∆a] > (Er + Inew + Dnew)/L*ref2 - Er/L*ref1 <07.15>
For example: if Er = 10, Inew + Dnew = 15, aold = 2, L*ref = 50, fESL1 = 0.5, and fESL2 = 1.0, anew should be at most:
a new = aold - (Er + Inew + Dnew)/L*ref2 + Er/L*ref1
a new = 2 - (15 + 10)/50 + 10/25 = 2 - 0.5 + 0.4 = 1.9 <07.16>
Note that, in the comparison based on a fixed reference lifespan a maximum anew of 1.4 would have been allowed.
In this example the unfavourable service life conditions of the old building allow for the construction of a new
building with only 5% less energy consumption.
In the comparative formula 07.16, the ESL factors were simply made equal to 0.5 and 1.0, without verification.
The complex determination of this factor will however be treated in chapter 08.
07.04 Recalculating the twelve offices
On the basis of the lifespan accounting model introduced in the previous sections, the assessment results of the
twelve government office buildings presented in chapter 06 were recalculated. The objective was to determine the
difference between the inclusion or exclusion of the lifespan in environmental performance. The basic data from
the assessments of chapter 06 therefore are only indicative. This section will discuss the new findings.
The offices were also originally analysed on aspects that influence their eventual lifespan. This qualitative element
of the assessment will be addressed in chapter 08.
07.04.01 Age-including recalculations
Considered as new
Since energy and water consumption are already year-based, the consideration of the building lifespan only
concerns the environmental load for the use of building materials. The original calculations presented in chapter
06 were based on a reference lifespan of 75 years. The improvement factors resulted from comparison of the
(annual) environmental cost of the building with that of the theoretic reference building representing the year 1990.
Therefore, every building was considered at the moment of completion after original construction or renovation.
Thus, both the actual building and its reference were compared as if they were newly built. In fact, nearly all
environmental assessments of buildings are based on this condition.
Years of delivery
When a decision needs to be made about a building at a later instant than the moment of completion, a different
comparison must be drawn, for example based on the model described in the previous sections. For the
conversion of the environmental load of the building at a certain decision moment, the year of completion needs to
be taken into account. Table 07.03 shows the year of delivery after construction or renovation. In the case of
renovation, a certain proportion of the building materials is replaced, renewed, and substituted.
The percentages next to the years are estimations of the extent of preservation or renewal at the moment of
renovation. These form the basis for recalculation of the environmental load of building materials. For example, for
the Mixed Office in Arnhem, 60% of the original building materials of the year 1965 were preserved, whereas 40%
were renewed in 1996. Therefore, for the remaining environmental debt, 60% of the entire environmental cost of
building materials will be recalculated on the basis of the year 1965, and 40% on the basis of the year 1996.
Table 07.03 also presents the original results for the use of building materials and those of recalculations of the
environmental performance. The end-factors represent the environmental performance in terms of the remaining
environmental debt in the year 2004 with respect to that of a theoretical reference building constructed in the
same year. In this table, the column with 'correction' represents the age correction factor expressing the remaining
proportion of environmental cost.
Table 07.03: Original and age-corrected environmental performance of the use of building materials
project year of completion original age-corrected
specific > construction renovation cost factor corr cost factor
unit > yr % yr % e€ e€
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1655 80 1966 20 12,685 1.44 0.10 1,252 14.56
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1965 60 1996 40 54,450 1.22 0.65 35,138 1.88
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1976 50 1995 50 54,498 1.18 0.75 41,055 1.57
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1985 100 - 0 30,647 1.04 0.75 22,883 1.40
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1990 100 - 0 464,221 1.08 0.81 377,567 1.33
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 1992 100 - 0 780,258 1.09 0.84 655,417 1.29
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1997 100 - 0 30,042 1.64 0.91 27,238 1.81
'The Artillery', The Hague 1998 100 - 0 84,325 1.54 0.92 77,579 1.68
Food Inspection, Zutphen 2000 100 - 0 12,003 1.59 0.95 11,363 1.68
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 2001 100 - 0 66,243 1.20 0.96 63,594 1.25
Geometry Department, Delft 2001 100 - 0 124,588 1.00 0.96 119,604 1.05
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 2002 100 - 0 66,167 1.65 0.97 64,403 1.69
Logically, the improvement shift is most striking in the case of the Johan de Witt House monument, which was
only partly renovated in the year 1966. The correction factor 0.10 leads to an eventual improvement factor of
almost 15. This means that if a decision were to be taken between this monument and a new office built according
to the standards of 1990, from an environmental point of view, the Johan de Witt House would be almost 15 times
better. Note however that this only related to the use of building materials (containing the once-off loads I + D
previously explained).
Overall results
When energy and water consumption are included, the overall improvement factors give a total impression of the
'environmental value' of the office buildings in the year 2004. Table 07.04 provides these results.
Table 07.04: Original and age-corrected overall environmental performance of the offices in the year 2004
project original age-corrected
specific > factor factor increase
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1.06 1.24 16%
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.15 1.23 7%
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.17 1.23 5%
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.06 1.11 5%
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.21 1.26 4%
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 0.99 1.02 3%
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1.36 1.38 2%
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.37 1.39 1%
Food Inspection, Zutphen 1.24 1.26 1%
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 1.10 1.11 1%
Geometry Department, Delft 0.80 0.81 1%
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 1.25 1.26 0%
As table 07.04 shows, with respect to the original calculations, the overall improvement factor of the Johan de Witt
House is improved to 1.24 (i.e. plus 16%), which is smaller than the immense improvement of the material
performance. This is of course due to the relative importance of energy consumption.
All other buildings also demonstrate improvement with respect to the original calculations. This is logical because
all buildings were completed before 2004, the year of decision. The older the average age of the building, the
smaller the age correction factor and the smaller the corrected environmental load of building materials. The
relatively recent Exchequer & Audit Office and The Artillery nevertheless still perform best as a result of their
energy-efficient design. Nevertheless, this underscores the nuance of decisions between old and new buildings.
Performance demand
The improvement factors of table 07.05 are an indication of the minimal environmental performance of a new
building if it were to substitute the old one. For instance, by the year 2004, from a sustainable point of view,
another accommodation solution for the departments in the Mixed Office in Arnhem should at least achieve an
environmental improvement factor of 1.23 to justify the substitution.
This performance demand is based on the same GFA. If a new solution offered smaller accommodation to an
equal number of employees, the use of an FTE reference would be preferable.
07.04.02 Recalculations on the basis of estimated service lives
ESL factors
For the twelve office buildings, the environmental load of building materials determined in section 07.04.01 was
divided by ESL factors evolving from the ESL-categories based on table 07.02. The ESL categories were
determined by personal estimation based on local visits and findings from the case study presented in chapter 06
and further on, in chapter 13. The estimated categories are indicative and used only for testing the lifespan
accounting model to determine the environmental performance in the case of differing service lives.
Recalculated environmental performance

Table 07.05 presents the new building materials performance resulting from the ESL-recalculation. Next to the
project column, the first column gives the original values presented in chapter 06. The next column gives the age-
corrected values. The last three columns present the ESL category, ESL factor, and the ultimate age- and ESL-
corrected environmental improvement factor.
Table 07.05: Original, age-corrected, and ESL-corrected environmental performance of the use of building materials
project original age-corrected ESL-corrected
specific > factor factor cat ESL factor
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1.44 14.56 A 2.00 29.11
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.22 1.88 E 0.75 1.41
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.18 1.57 H 0.27 0.42
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.04 1.40 G 0.53 0.74
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.08 1.33 C 1.07 1.42
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 1.09 1.29 D 0.75 0.97
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1.64 1.81 B 1.33 2.40
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.54 1.68 B 1.33 2.23
Food Inspection, Zutphen 1.59 1.68 E 0.75 1.26
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 1.20 1.25 D 0.75 0.94
Geometry Department, Delft 1.00 1.05 B 1.33 1.39
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 1.65 1.69 B 1.33 2.25
The most significant improvement is again visible for the monument, the Johan de Witt House: from a material
point of view, the use of this building is by far the most sustainable. Other important improvements are visible with
the recent examples of exceptional architecture: the Exchequer & Audit Office, The Artillery, Road and
Waterworks, and the Geometry Department. Declines are visible with many other buildings, most clearly seen
here with the Tax Office.
Basically, the last column of table 07.05 presents an integral environmental improvement factor for the use of
building materials, involving the age of the building and the expected service life. A short estimated service life is a
penalty that deteriorates the environmental performance. It sounds logical, and it is. Nevertheless, this has never
been integrated in environmental assessments yet.
Overall results
When energy and water consumption are included, the overall improvement factors give an integral total
impression of the 'environmental value' for the office buildings in the year 2004. Table 07.06 presents these
results, including the differences with respect to the original improvement factors without account of the age and
estimated service life.
Table 07.06: Original, age-corrected, and ESL-corrected overall environmental performance of the offices in the year 2004
project original age-corrected ESL-corrected
specific > factor factor factor difference
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 1.06 1.24 1.25 17%
Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.15 1.23 1.18 3%
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.17 1.23 0.85 -27%
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.06 1.11 0.98 -7%
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.21 1.26 1.27 6%
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 0.99 1.02 0.96 -2%
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1.36 1.38 1.43 6%
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.37 1.39 1.45 6%
Food Inspection, Zutphen 1.24 1.26 1.19 -5%
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 1.10 1.11 1.04 -5%
Geometry Department, Delft 0.80 0.81 0.84 5%
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 1.25 1.26 1.31 4%
As table 07.06 shows, the ESL-corrected overall improvement factor of the Johan de Witt House is comparable to
the age-corrected factor, due to the increasing relative importance of energy consumption. Other smaller risers
are the Ministry of SAE, Exchequer & Audit Office, The Artillery, Road and Waterworks, and Geometry
Department. Especially the second of these, a building without specific sustainability ambitions, performs better
than originally expected. The Mixed Office and Ministry of HSPE are more or less back at the beginning, indicating
that their expected service life equals approximately 75 years after the reconsideration, for the year 2004. The Tax
Office shows a rather dramatic drop in environmental performance.
These findings are sometimes dramatically different than in the original assessment, again demonstrating the
essence of the involvement of the time factor in environmental assessments.
07.05 Considerations and elaborations
The theory, comparison model and tests presented in this paper form a first exploration of the practical
implementation of the time factor in assessments of the environmental performance of buildings. As
demonstrated, the mathematical approach is useful in the case of decision moments in the accommodation
process, for instance, if one needs to weigh re-use of an existing building versus demolition and new construction.
The eventual selection of the best solution will be dependent on various criteria. In practice, the financial
consequences of demolition and reconstruction or renovation are often decisive. The model presented in this
chapter and the examples provided however enable an integrated decision, in which aspects of sustainability are
also represented.
In spite of this all, there are methodological remarks to be made about the model. The model needs to be more
elaborately tested on integrated comparisons of accommodation concepts. Chapter 09 will discuss such a
comparison, based on the model in this chapter. This section will discuss some considerations about the model.
07.05.01 Time effects and LCA
For the determination of the environmental load of building materials, the model presented in this chapter is
implicitly based on the methodology of LCA. This however does not guarantee an errorless calculation of the
environmental load. Klunder & Nunen [2003] discern six time aspects that define the influence environmental load:
1. Design: the current design extrapolated through the life cycle
2. Production technology: new materials or concepts used
3. Re-design: the possibility for re-use
4. Waste treatment technology: advanced techniques in the future
5. Technical service life: replacements based technical aspects
6. Functional service life: replacements based on other aspects
LCA is based on buildings using common products of today. In the future, replacements will probably be done with
advanced products that have a different environmental load than current products. Klunder & Nunen therefore
implicitly notice that LCA always contains errors with respect to the environmental load calculated.
This is a general problem applying to all assessments taking a relatively long reference lifespan as a basis.
However, it cannot be avoided, as the future cannot be predicted. Therefore, it is important to use recent
knowledge of product manufacture and other phases in the lifecycle, as well as the environmental damage related
to these. The essence is to make the best decision now, even though future developments will change the
perceptions of today.
07.05.02 Distinguishing different building stages
The course of the cumulated environmental load

The presentation of the lifespan accounting model in this chapter started with a distinction between different
stages in the lifecycle of buildings:
The initial environmental load of building products, consisting of the extraction of their resources,
manufacture, transport, and construction.
Annually or regularly repeating environmental loads during the operation of the building related to the
consumption of energy and water, and maintenance, repair, and replacement of building components and
materials
Possible once-off environmental loads of refurbishment and renovation
The environmental load related to demolition and recycling.
This distinction was simplified into a division into an annually repeating load of energy and water consumption,
and a once-off load related to the use of building materials (including the initial load and the load of maintenance
and demolition). Considered an environmental mortgage, the environmental load of building materials had to be
paid off over a reference lifespan. This came down to dividing the environmental load by the reference lifespan,
thereby obtaining constant annual values. The environmental load of building materials can however be
distinguished between loads introduced within a relatively short period of time, at the construction and demolition
stage, and loads that reappear every year, such as maintenance. The course of the cumulated environmental load
of building materials therefore is actually as in figure 07.16 [Nunen et al., 2003], in which the difference between
two service lives of the same product are depicted.
(M)
Environmental burden (M)
Demounting Environmental
Me
burden A
Mt
Mu
Mi Environmental
Mounting burden B
(t)
Tu
Service life A
Service life B (= 1,5 * Service life A)

Time (t)
Figure 07.16: The cumulative course of the environmental load of building materials
in the case of two different service lives of the same product [Nunen et al., 2003]
Dividing the environmental load by the lifespan implies a transformation of the actual course of figure 07.16 to a
linear relationship. This methodological simplification is acceptable when the lifespan remains constant. A shorter
or a longer service life however would lead to another proportion of maintenance during the operation period to
the total environmental load. After all, the environmental load of the initial and demolition stage may be assumed
constant for all service lives. Figure 07.17 demonstrates that the simplification of using annual values can lead to
large deviations if the lifespan is varied.
environmental load
25 50 75 100 time
Figure 07.17: The difference between the actual environmental load after a service life of 25, 50, 75, and 100 years, and the
environmental load based on annual values derived from the actual environmental load after a service life of 75 years
If the environmental load of the operation stage of a building were to constitute 20% of the total environmental
load in the 75-year service life case, it would actually constitute 13.3% in the 50-year case, 6.7% in the 25-year
case, and 26.7% in the 100-year case.
With a constant percentage of 80% for the once-off loads, this fractional approach would lead to the following total
percentages with respect to the 75-year environmental load:
25-year service life: 86.7%
75-year service life: 100%
In contrast to these, working on the basis of annual values would have led to 33.3%, 66.7%, 100%, and 133.3%,
implying errors of -61%, -29%, 0%, and +25%. These figures however apply to separate products only.
07.05.03 Distinguishing different building components
Different components, different service lives

So far, the comparison was based on products, with a relatively simple course of the environmental load. In the
case of a whole building the course is less clear. With the exception of the supporting structure, most building
components will be replaced once or more often during the building lifespan. After all, the lifespans of building
components differ:
Normally, the supporting structure will last longest: 100 years or more.
The building envelope, consisting of the façades and roofing, may be altered every 25 years. However, it is
also possible that a (brick) façade and (copper) roof only need maintenance and can outlast the supporting
structure.
The building services usually need to be updated every 15 to 20 years, due to obsolescence and more
efficient technologies available on the market.
The built-in components, meaning partition walls, are often adapted or replaced after 5 to 15 years,
depending on the dynamics of the company and whether they are actually adaptable.
Finish is often related to changes to other components, especially partitions, so finish may be replaced after 5
to 15 years as well.
The scenery can change day by day.
environmental load

construction
demolition
building
I
D
a
L time
maintenance
com ponents
Figure 07.18: Instance of the environmental loads during the lifespan of an entire building (above)
and its separate components (below)
A different dispersion of environmental loads

Because of the actual dispersion of lifespans, the graphic representation of once-off and annually repeating loads
of figure 07.05 is a simplification. Reality will resemble more a sum of the separate schemes as shown in figure
07.18. The scheme at the top previously applied for whole buildings will probably only refer to the supporting
structure of a building, excluding energy and water consumption.
Figure 07.19 shows the actual assessment, taking into account the environmental debt of every specific building
component.
D
environmental load
building
I
Er
a
L time
com ponents
Figure 07.19: Accounting for the lifespan of the entire building (above) and its separate components (below)
Even though figure 07.18 and 17.19 are a simplification - each of the separate elements contains smaller
lifecycles of their respective components - a detailed study of all elements of a building would be impractical.
Moreover, a detailed study would perhaps suggest greater exactness but, due to uncertainties and
incompleteness, that is not true. In the case of indicative comparisons, it seems legitimate to use a coarser
approach based on a simplified model of reality.
In addition, the annually repeating environmental load of energy and water consumption will alter through time, as
a result of the replacement of obsolete services and supply developments. It is complicated to predict these
changes. Moreover, developments in energy and water consumption would merely be important to whole-life
assessments of buildings. As I chose to work with annual environmental loads using up-to-date information, just
assessments can be made at every instant in the lifetime of a building.
Consequence to the course of the cumulated environmental load

With respect to figure 07.16 and 07.17, a distinction between different building components as in figure 07.18
would lead to a disorder of repetitive lines for the cumulative environmental load of all components. Nevertheless,
the heaviest environmental load could still be attributed to the initial and demolition stage, as all components are
constructed and deconstructed at these stages. Therefore, only the stage of operation will show a disorderly line,
on average steeper than in figure 07.17. The exact course of it - as well as the seriousness of the deviations when
working with annual environmental loads - can only be approximated by distinguishing different building
components, their respective lifespans and the number of replacements. Table 07.07 shows the estimated
lifespan of the main building components and the consequence for the number of replacements
Table 07.07: Typical lifespans of the main building components and the number of replacements
in cases of different service lives of the building
building component lifespan replacements

service life of the building
specific > 25 50 75 100
supporting structure 100 years 1 1 1 1
structural detailing 25 years 1 2 3 4
built-in components 10 years 3 5 8 10
finish 10 years 3 5 8 10
paving 50 years 1 1 2 2
The case study of chapter 06 determined the division of the environmental load of the main building components.
By estimating the proportion of the once-off loads of construction, replacement and demolition and that of annual
loads of maintenance and repair, the contribution of the environmental load to these can be deduced. Table 07.08
shows this deduction towards the reference lifespan of 75 years and the typical lifespan of the components, as
presented in table 07.07. A distinction between the initial and demolition loads could not be made, but as these
are assumed constant, they may be summed.
Table 07.08: Deduction the environmental load of the once-off and annual proportion of the environmental load of building
materials, over 75 years and the typical lifespan of the component, based on findings from the case study in chapter 06
building component contribution estimated division between once-off and annual

all stages once-off: construction & demolition annual: maintenance & repair
specific > 75 years typical proportion 75 years typical proportion 75 years typical
supporting structure 57.1% 57.1% 90% 51.4% 51.4% 10% 5.7% 5.7%
structural detailing 15.3% 5.1% 80% 12.2% 4.1% 20% 3.1% 1.0%
built-in components 9.5% 1.2% 60% 5.7% 0.7% 40% 3.8% 0.5%
finish 16.7% 2.1% 50% 8.4% 1.0% 50% 8.4% 1.0%
paving 1.4% 0.7% 90% 1.3% 0.6% 10% 0.1% 0.1%
TOTAL 100.0% 78.9% 21.1%
If the course of the cumulated environmental load were according to figure 07.16 and 07.17, the division between
once-off and annual loads proportion would be approximately 80% versus 20%. A more correct image of reality
will however be obtained when typical values from table 07.08 are coupled to the number of replacements of table
07.07. Table 07.09 presents the deduction of the total environmental load after a service life of 25, 50, 75, and
100 years, based on the most probable course of the cumulative environmental load and based on annual values.
The percentages represent the proportion of the environmental load with respect to the reference, the 75-year
case.
As can be seen, the errors are smaller than calculated for the products alone. When the service life is altered by
less than 25 years (i.e. 33.3% in this case), the error remains smaller than 20%, keeping working with annual
values relatively acceptable. When the difference of service life is more than 33.3%, the error becomes too
significant.
This outcome was based on the estimated proportions of once-off and annual environmental loads, as depicted in
table 07.08. For the most important building components, the contribution of maintenance and repair was
assumed to be smaller than 20%. Junnila and Horvath [2003] found that, through implying the maintenance of
building products in LCA, the environmental impact was on average increased by 50%. This means that they
determined a proportion between once-off and annual environmental loads of 67%/33%. In this case the
deviations of a longer or shorter service life would be significantly smaller than determined previously.
Table 07.09: Deduction the total environmental load after a service of the building of 25, 50, 75, and 100 years: on the basis
of the most probable course of the cumulated environmental load, and based on annual values
building component proportional division of environmental loads

repl once ann repl once ann repl once ann repl once ann
specific > 25 years 50 years 75 years (reference) 100 years
supporting structure 1 51.4% 5.7% 1 51.4% 5.7% 1 51.4% 5.7% 1 51.4% 5.7%
structural detailing 1 4.1% 1.0% 2 8.2% 2.0% 3 12.2% 3.1% 4 16.3% 4.1%
built-in components 3 2.1% 1.4% 5 3.6% 2.4% 8 5.7% 3.8% 10 7.1% 4.8%
finish 3 3.1% 3.1% 5 5.2% 5.2% 8 8.4% 8.4% 10 10.4% 10.4%
paving 1 0.6% 0.1% 1 0.6% 0.1% 2 1.3% 0.1% 2 1.3% 0.1%
once-off versus annual 61.4% 11.4% 69.0% 15.4% 78.9% 21.1% 86.5% 25.1%
TOTAL 72.7% 84.4% 100.0% 111.7%
based on annual values
TOTAL 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% 133.3%
error -54.2% -21.0% 0.0% 19.4%
Because of the sensitivity described, a dividable LCA of building materials and products would be desirable for an
accurate picture. Erlandsson & Borg [2003] therefore already pleaded for a distinction of different building
components in lifecycle assessments, in order to involve different service lives. Based on the tests in this
subsection, for every component it should at least distinguish between once-off and annual environmental loads,
even categorised on the basis of their frequency.
As mentioned previously, working with annual values only affects the accuracy of the assessments when the
service life of the buildings used for calculation deviate from the reference lifespan that forms the basis for
environmental LCA data. When buildings or accommodation solutions are compared on the basis of a constant
reference lifespan, as with the account for the building age, working with annual values is accurate.
As presented in this chapter, the lifespan accounting model includes multiple replacements for building
components with a shorter service life than the chosen reference lifespan, and therefore it takes into account
different service lives. For a more accurate use of the lifespan accounting model, chapter 09 will make a
distinction between the different building components. Chapter 09 will discuss the consequence of the service life
of the building in relation to different lifespans of building components, in order to find strategies for sustainable
building designs.
07.05.04 Purely economic comparisons
The lifespan accounting model was based on methods from the field of building economy. Nevertheless, not all
principles of economic comparisons were followed strictly. Purely economic comparisons meet the following
requirements [Soeter, 2004]:
Account for both costs and benefits
Account for costs and benefits that can be influenced from the moment of comparison
Involving the impact of time and time preference
Analysis of differences instead of absolute values
Pure expression of the net sacrifices that need to be made
Since the methodology presented met the two last requirements, only the first three will be vaguely discussed
here.
Costs and benefits

With the methodology presented in this chapter the first requirement is met in terms of environmental costs. In
economic comparisons it is possible to distinguish the benefits of a building: the produce they yield, the market
value of the property. It is difficult to define environmental benefits of the use of a building: the operational impact
of a building merely means environmental damage in terms of emissions and use of resources rather than
advantageous effects to the environment.
Effects from now on

A purely economic comparison considers effects currently or in the future. The past is ignored, and as already
discussed in chapter 04, the principle implies the selection of the best measure at the moment of contemplation,
regardless of what happened in the past. This may be useful to decisions about different solutions for the same
building; however, in the case of a remaining (environmental) mortgage, this debt needs to be included in the
comparison, which was done in the examples shown previously.
Time preference
As discussed briefly, for the explanation of the lifespan accounting model no discount factor for interest and
inflation was used. In an economic context this would be unimaginable. A discount rate is calculated for reasons
of postponing consumption, the risk during the respective time-span, and the inflation that decreases the value of
money. Translated to environmental issues, the clearing of a forest (for building) would perhaps be preferable in
the long-distance future rather than now. This could have been accounted for by means of a discount rate, leading
to a smaller environmental damage in the future with respect to the same intervention now.
The consequence of involving a discount rate will be discussed in the following subsection.
07.05.05 Inclusion of a discount rate
Including a discount rate or not

When designing the lifespan accounting methodology, a decision needed to be made about inclusion or exclusion
of interest (i) and inflation (f), as in financial deliberations (see formula 07.17).
dreal = (1+i)/(1+f) - 1 <07.17>
For different economies, Tupamäki [2003] discerns the following real discount rates:
Natural economies: 0% (simple payback)
National economies: 3%
State economies: 6%
Business economies: 9%
Tupamäki proposed a real discount rate of 1%. As can be seen, he takes 0% (no interest) for economies based on
natural processes, supporting the exclusion of discount rates in environmental comparisons. I chose to leave
these factors out of the equations because of the ethical discussion about the compatibility of environmental
issues with such discount rates and for simplification of the methodology. It is however possible to include a
discount rate.
The calculation of a discount rate affects two actions in the lifespan accounting methodology: it influences the
capitalisation of future once-off environmental loads and it defines the course of paying off after the moment of
decision. In an example of the first aspect: the capitalised loads of figure 07.06 would be reduced in height if
interest were included. As with financial calculations, this is a demonstration of the possibility that future
environmental costs have a smaller value at present. An example of the second aspect related to a discount rate
is the other appearance of the pay-off line as originally seen in figure 07.10. This line would be curved instead of
linear. When using a discount rate, the definition of a reference lifespan or the use of annual discount values is not
necessary anymore. The process of paying off would be decelerated if interest and inflation were included.
Formula 07.18, in which 'd' is the discount rate for interest and inflation, describes this process.
Er(l) = (I + D).(1-d)l <07.18>
Impact of different discount rates

The height of the discount rate would define the speed by which the remaining environmental debt is paid off.
Formula 07.18 implies a rapid pay-off directly after the year of completion, thendecelerated as time passes. The
remaining environmental debt never reaches 0 but nearly touches the zero line from a certain age on. Figure
07.20 illustrates this course for a high discount rate. The original line of paying off is also shown.
Lref
Figure 07.20: Paying off in accordance with formula 07.17, in case of a high discount rate
Figure 07.20 demonstrates that the environmental debt is quickly reduced in the first years after the building's
construction, posing a relatively small 'penalty' on the demolition of young buildings. This seems an odd condition.
The advantage with respect to the methodology presented previously in this chapter is that even in the case of old
buildings, a small environmental debt remains to be accounted for in demolition. One could however argue that its
size will be negligible with respect to the environmental load of new buildings, annihilating the influence of the old
building anyway.
With a discount rate of 3%, the environmental debt is reduced to 10% of its original size after approximately 75
years, which was the reference lifespan used in the calculation. With a rate of 10% this reduction is reached at
around 22 years. With a discount rate of 1.33% (equal to 1/75), the direction coefficient of paying off at the start
equals the one in case of the methodology with a reference lifespan of 75 years (see figure 07.21). This
demonstrates that early demolition is not favoured in the case of small discount rates.
Lref
Figure 07.21: Paying off in accordance with formula 07.17, in case of a discount rate around 1.3%
Different approach
Another approach would be a 'flat' start of paying off, accelerating with the growing age of the building. The course
would be as in formula 07.19, illustrated by figure 07.22.
Er(l) = (I + D){2 - (1+d) l} <07.19>
environmental load
Lref time
Figure 07.22: Paying off in accordance with formula 07.18, in case of a positive discount rate
For an environmental debt completely paid off after 75 years, the discount rate should be 0.93%. The real
discount rate of 1% that Tupamäki proposed would lead to a reference lifespan of 70 years. The problem with a
formula such as 07.19 is that it leads to negative values after a certain service life. It would therefore require the
exact definition of the reference lifespan after which the remaining environmental debt should be 0.
The illustrative comparisons of this chapter would have become more complex than necessary, blurring the
message of the theory and methodology.
07.05.06 Net present value versus annuities
In the methodology presented, the environmental loads of relatively short-lasting interventions occurring once only
(construction, renovation, demolition) are capitalised at the starting moment of construction or renovation. This
environmental mortgage is consequently paid off over a reference lifespan. The once-off loads are separately
treated from the annually repeating loads of e.g. energy and water consumption, making the methodology
presented not a pure net present value (NPV) method but a hybrid solution, possibly raising questions from an
economical angle. This however was deliberately chosen.
Through the separate treatment of environmental loads, a distinction is possible between the remaining
environmental debt of the building and the annual future loads when a decision needs to be made about
demolition or renovation at an instant in time. In case of a pure NPV comparison, these different loads would have
been integrated. If one were to use a pure NPV method at the time of decision, capitalising all future loads of both
alternatives - apart from the quantity of these loads - a building expected to last less will perform better than a
long-lasting one because a shorter lifespan involves fewer reappearing environmental loads. This would be
methodologically incorrect. A pure NPV method is only useful when the expected service life is equal for both
alternatives. This explains the methodological choice for a distinction between once-off and annually repeating
environmental loads.
In the case of differing expected service lives, the environmental consequence is best demonstrated by
considering the total annual environmental load after the intervention (demolition or reuse). This stands apart from
the choice for NPV or annuities.
07.05.07 Dealing with long lifespans
The reference lifespan

When presenting the lifespan accounting model, people often asked why 75 years was taken as a reference
lifespan. For offices, a more realistic term would be 25 years. For waterworks, 50 years is often taken as a basis
[Loos & Dobbelsteen, 2001]. For residences, the same term, up to 75 years, could be used. The reason for
choosing 75 years is simple: the assessment tool that I used for the determination of the environmental cost,
GreenCalc, is based on a database of product LCAs taking 75 years as a reference time-span. In order to join
with this basic data and avoid complex conversions, I used this number of years. If the years chosen were shorter,
working on the basis of the model presented, the environmental merits of long-lasting buildings would be difficult
to account. Moreover, in my opinion, choosing a reference lifespan is not a question of taking a realistic current
term for the office's lifespan but a term that should technically be attained with regard to the longest-lasting
component of a building, the supporting structure. In that respect, a term of 100 years or longer, appropriate for
sustainability considerations, might also have been defendable.
In the theory presented in this chapter, the remaining environmental debt is 0 (zero) after 75 years and for the rest
of the lifetime considered. This means that, in terms of this theory, there is no preference for buildings of 75 years
old, or 100 years, or older. It is valid to question this.
There are three theoretic solutions to approach to this problem of long lifespans:
Taking a long lifespan as a reference, for instance 200 years
Involving a low discount rate for interest and inflation
Proceed with the remaining environmental debt below the zero line
These will be discussed below.
Taking a long lifespan as a reference

The impact of this is demonstrated by figure 07.23, showing the original reference lifespan, a longer one and a
shorter one.
environmental load
ε1
Lref1 time
environmental load
ε2
Lref2 time
environmental load
ε3
Lref3 time
Figure 07.23: The impact of selecting a longer (L2) or shorter (L3) reference lifespan
The consequence of a long lifespan is the very gradual pay-off of the initial and demolition environmental loads (a
small environmental pay-off angle ε), leading to small differences in the short term. In the case of a shorter
reference lifespan the environmental debt is quickly paid off (a large ε), hence failing to support decisions about
longer terms.
Involving a discount rate

As discussed in the previous subsection, in accordance with formula 07.18, in the longer term paying off the
environmental debt will be slowed, never reaching zero. For sustainability and decisions related to short and long
future terms, the ideal course of paying off would be as shown in figure 07.20, requiring a discount rate between 1
and 3%.
Proceed with the remaining environmental debt below the zero line
This principle is illustrated by figure 07.24. It is also possible on the basis of a discount rate as shown in formula
07.21 and figure 07.22. In that case, a building of more than 75 years would receive a discount (a negative
environmental debt), making re-use of old buildings even more favourable.
In the case of comparisons between demolition and reconstruction versus re-use of old buildings, the question
would arise how to approach a new reference lifespan: if the environmental debt of the old building were to be
further paid off below the zero-line, demolition and reconstruction would hardly be favourable anymore. This is an
odd situation when the annually repeating environmental load of the old building is relatively great. In the case of
very old buildings, the total annual environmental load would even always be negative. This approach is therefore
not desirable.
L
Lref
Er
Figure 07.24: Paying off of environmental debt below the zero-line
Conclusion
After this discussion of different approaches to a very long lifespan, the easiest adaptation to the theory presented
in previous sections would be the use of a longer reference lifespan. However, since most office buildings do not
reach a service life of 75 years, the use of this term seems justifiable for supporting sustainable decisions. The
use of a low discount rate instead of an arbitrarily chosen reference lifespan is also an option. However, the
decisions about demolition or re-use would become more complex and not necessarily be served better.
07.05.08 The estimated service life
This chapter involved a concise introduction of the estimated service life and ESL factor by which the expected
future lifespan can be taken into account in determining the environmental performance of buildings. Its
determination may have seemed easy but this is certainly not the case. The ESL factor could not be determined
exactly yet, and needs further elaboration. The various aspects influencing the eventual service life of a building,
including functional aspects and design solutions, will be discussed in the following chapter.
08 CONDITIONS FOR A LONG LIFESPAN OF
BUILDINGS
In this chapter, the values and qualities required for a long lifespan will be explored. First, a lifetime quality
assessment of the twelve government offices from chapter 06 and 07 will be discussed. On the basis of various
qualities related to Vitruvius, a design is presented for the estimated service life factor (ESL factor), which enables
an account of the expected future service life of a building in an environmental assessment. The determination of
this factor has not yet been completed, yet its theoretical implementation in the lifespan accounting theory was
already presented in chapter 07. Finally, quality conditions for re-use of buildings or at least their supporting
structures will be discussed in this chapter.
Figure 08.01: Houses repetitively adapted at the bank of the river in Girona, Spain
Contents
08.01 Lifetime qualities assessment of the twelve offices 173

08.02 Conditions for a long service life 175
08.02.01 Vitruvius plus sustainability 175
08.02.02 Specific use value 178
08.02.03 User experience value and ecological user experience value 179
08.02.04 Specific experience value and ecological experience value 180
08.02.05 Specific future value 181
08.03 Determination of the ESL factor 185
08.03.01 The Factor Method 185
08.03.02 Qualities defining the ESL of a building 185
08.03.03 Measuring aspects affecting the service life of a building 186
08.04 Reusing buildings, components and materials 187
08.04.01 End-of-life strategies 187
08.04.02 Basic values for re-use 189
08.04.03 Technical conditions for re-use 190
08.04.04 Design for better end-of-life possibilities 191
172 08 Conditions for a long lifespan of buildings - C The Time Factor

08.01 Lifetime qualities assessment of the twelve offices
The assessment results of the twelve government office buildings presented in chapter 06 and recalculated in
chapter 07 were originally qualitatively analysed as well on aspects that influence their eventual service life.
Findings from that assessment will be discussed in this section, after an brief explanation of the method applied.
Method
For the government office buildings introduced in chapter 06, a limited number of aspects with an influence on the
building lifespan were analysed:
For the use quality of the building, functional aspects and experiences of the technical manager and other
occupants of the buildings were collected.
Concerning architecture, this was checked whether the building was a national monument and whether it
fitted well into its environment. We made a judgement about the architectural status and extra-ordinance of
the building.
The building's surroundings were analysed on historic, aesthetic, or economic quality.
Flexibility was considered internally and externally. External flexibility concerned the outward, horizontal and
vertical extendibility of the building. Internal flexibility concerned rearrangeability of the built-in components.
For every building, a scorecard was made in which the different questions were qualitatively answered.
Use quality results

In general, the experience of occupants was more positive when special attention had been paid to a lively
interior, daylight access and additional facilities. In regards to this, the DGBA almost always takes the users' well-
being into account. Another example of this is the individually adjustable indoor climate. There were few
complaints about that. An exception to this was the old part of the Tax Office in Gorinchem, which contains deep
rooms, a balanced ventilation system, and non-operable windows (see figure 08.02).
Figure 08.02: Interior of the old part of the Tax Office in Gorinchem
A positive example of a relatively old building was the Road and Water Engineering department in Delft, which for
instance contains shallow rooms with very good daylight access, individually adjustable sunscreens, and only
mechanical extraction of exhaust air.
In all of the buildings assessed, no potentially harmful materials were found. A single concern of note was the
static chargeability of some artificial tapestries. These lead to inconvenience, however the risk to human health
cannot be proven.
Architecture and surroundings results

Only one building, the Johan de Witt House in The Hague was a monument constructed in the year 1653.
Because of its historical importance it will most likely last many more years yet. Another building, the Artillery is
also expected to have a long life, possibly as a monument, as a result of its classical architecture and harmonious
fit in the inner city of The Hague.
C The Time Factor - 08 Conditions for a long lifespan of buildings 173

The buildings for the Exchequer & Audit Office (design: Aldo van Eijk, see figure 08.03) and Ministry of SAE
(design: Herman Hertzberger) in The Hague, as well as more recent offices for the Geometry Department (design:
Hans van Heeswijk) and Road and Waterworks Department (design: Paul de Ruiter), can be considered
exceptional forms of architecture, with a long potential lifespan, independent from other qualities. It is imaginable
that current problems with the accommodation will be easily managed in the near future.
Figure 08.03: The Exchequer & Audit Office in the Hague [picture: Teo Krijgsman]
As a result of their accommodation policy, the DGBA mainly situates their buildings near railway stations and in
centres of cities. The surroundings of these areas are usually varied, often both economically interesting and
historical, promising to the future of the buildings studied. Exceptions are the Food Inspection Department, located
on an industrial site at the verges of Zutphen, and the Road and Waterworks office in Middelburg. Middelburg is
however a small city and the building site is especially noteworthy, next to a regionally important canal and close
to the railway station.
Flexibility results
Most offices, in particular the ones situated in compact urban circumstances, did not have the opportunity to be
externally adapted through addition of extra layers or extensions on site. Nevertheless, not all offices on relatively
vast plots were likely to be extended in the future, due to the explicit architectural form.
The majority of the offices consisted of a strong cellular grid not easily adaptable. For most cases it was
nevertheless imaginable that an open office plan would be possible. In some cases, e.g. The Artillery in The
Hague and the Road and Waterworks office in Middelburg, internal flexibility was eminent as a result of wide
structural spans and absence of obstacles, combined with a demountable partition system (see figure 08.04).
Figure 08.04: Demountable partitions of The Artillery in The Hague

Some specific conclusions

Use quality importantly defines the lifetime quality of an office building. An individually adjustable indoor
climate is important to the well-being of an occupant. This can however be altered in the case of a renovation
of the building services. Therefore, a building merely needs to be pleasant to its users. Improvement of the
use quality however often bites the principle of spatial efficiency because additional facilities such as coffee
corners and relax spots consume space.
It will be possible to test real lifetime quality after a long service life, as with the Johan de Witt House. For the
other buildings, an exceptional design and sufficient flexibility will ensure a long service life. Some buildings
with spatial inadequacies or obstruction for change, e.g. the Ministry of SAE, the old part of the Tax Office,
and the Road & Water Engineering Department, should be refurbished internally for a more convenient
working environment. A more open layout principle would provide more light, space and flexibility.
As no building will last forever, and due to unforeseeable changes in the future, flexibility is the best feature to
withstand uncontrollable changes. At best, the DGBA-offices were internally but hardly ever externally
adaptable.
Recommendations
The government office buildings case study led to many specific recommendations concerning environmental
performance, spatial use, and lifetime qualities. Here, only some general remarks will be made.
In the case of a new building, with the choice of a building site, a distinction can be made of the aspired
service life. Historical inner cities require robust designs that can last long and fit into the existing
environment. On locations at the outskirts of cities or town, e.g. alongside highways, adaptable and/or
demountable designs will be more appropriate because of the dynamic circumstances.
As previously mentioned, there seems to be a controversy between spatial efficiency and positive user
experience. A sole focus on square meters is therefore not recommended. However, offering abundant
additional space beside workplaces is no solution either. A good balance therefore is necessary, and it can
best be established by offering a variety of spatial functions together with efficient function-related space
assignments. If the workplace equals the pleasant open space, a goal will have been scored. Personal space
with privacy will however always be necessary. These rooms can however measure the size of a booth.
Further on, in Volume E - The Space Factor and Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work, this will be
more elaborately treated.
08.02 Conditions for a long service life
As demonstrated in chapter 07, the eventual lifespan of a building is important to the environmental performance
of accommodation. The longer a building lasts, the smaller the remaining environmental debt of once-off
environmental loads. The eventual lifespan of the building depends on qualities complicated to calculate, e.g.
location, architecture, and adaptability. This section will discuss and attempt to structure the design elements that
define the ultimate lifespan.
Different perceptions are possible regarding qualities of buildings. The division of qualities to be treated in the
following subsections is just one way of looking at this matter. I tried to approach this intangible area in a
structured way.
08.02.01 Vitruvius plus sustainability
Definitions of quality
The term 'quality' refers to a wide range of characteristics. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current
English [Hornby et al., 1998] defines quality in a neutral (it can be positive or negative) or positive way. Neutral
definitions are "the standard of something when compared to other things like it" and "how good or bad something
is". Positive meanings are "a high standard or level", "a usually good characteristic", and "a special or
distinguishing feature". In terms of this research, the term refers to positive features.
The qualities discussed in this section form the basis of the ESL factor. It should contain all future value qualities
expressing the potential of a building to achieve a certain service life.

Vitruvius
In Roman times, Vitruvius distinguished three basic qualities of architecture: firmitas (firmness), utilitas
(usefulness) and venustas (pleasure). I chose to convert these values to future value, use value, and experience
value. Future value refers to lifetime quality: a building needs to last for a long time. Use value refers to
functionality: the building needs to be practical and useful to the user. This user may be the person for whom the
building was originally designed, or it may be any person potentially using the building during its lifetime. In the
case of the latter interpretation, use value would contain all qualities related to a building. Therefore, I chose to
relate use value to a specific user for whom the building was built. Experience value refers to aesthetic quality: a
building needs to be pleasing to look at, artistic, and show good taste [Hornby et al., 1998].
These three values are not independent: use value and experience value importantly define the future value of a
building, yet future value involves more. There are no cases imaginable in which use value and experience value
do not influence future value. They are therefore entirely included in future value. Experience value importantly
defines use value in terms of the user experience of the (internal) building. Both use and experience value are
however defined by more aspects. Figure 08.05 graphically presents these inter-relationships between the terms.
future value
experience value
use value
Figure 08.05: Relationships and dependency of quality values based on Vitruvius
Since Vitruvius' values are all related to future value, they are elements of the time factor. As introduced in
chapter 01, beside the time factor, the two other dimensions technically influencing sustainability are the use of
space and technology.
Vitruvius+
In his time of plenty, Vitruvius did not discern the ecological value of a building, a value that goes beyond the
value for users and passers-by, involving care for the global environment. It refers to the environmental,
ecological, biological quality of building materials, and the use of energy and water. This quality is also an element
of future quality: a part of sustainability related to long-lasting buildings. However, a good ecological quality of
buildings also assures a sustainable future, which involves a broader meaning of Vitruvius' future value. In some
aspects, ecological value is related to user value: for instance, when it concerns the consumption of energy and
cost related to that. When ecological value involves a specific form of architecture, it is also related to experience
value. Furthermore, in the case of the use of biological, healthy building materials, ecological value is related to
both use value and experience value. Therefore, figure 08.06 graphically presents the inter-relationships of the
values of Vitruvius including ecological value: 'Vitruvius+'.
One could relate the different circular areas of figure 08.06 to a specific form of building design:
Ecological value: ecological design
Use value: functional design
Experience value: aesthetic design
The entire circle of future value, including the design forms mentioned previously, and not just ecological design,
could be called sustainable design.

future value
ecological
value
experience
value
use value
Figure 08.06: Relationships and dependency of the quality values of 'Vitruvius+'
Value fields
My idea is that every part of the circle of figure 08.06, belonging to one or more of the basic values, involves
qualities influencing the eventual lifespan of a building. In figure 08.07, I therefore numbered the separate areas.
future value
8
1
ecological
value 4 7
experience
2 3 value
6
use value
5
Figure 08.07: Value fields for the values of 'Vitruvius+'
For every area of figure 08.07, for which I propose certain value terminologies, examples can be given of qualities
and performances that particularly fit in it (and nowhere else):
1. Specific ecological value: ecological quality of resources used
2. Ecological use value: energy and water consumption performance, spatial performance
3. Ecological user experience value or Bio-ecological value: health quality
4. Ecological experience value: ecological educational quality
5. Specific use value: technical quality, functionality, multifunctionality, functional diversity
6. User experience value: spatial quality, internal aesthetic quality
7. Specific experience value: external aesthetic quality, architectural diversity, social-cultural-historical quality
8. Specific future value: adaptability, flexibility
All terminologies will be defined and explained further on in this section3.
I cannot be complete in naming the qualities related to the specific value fields. The qualities mentioned however
provide an indication of the characteristics influencing a specific value of sustainability. In order to design for life,
one should take into account every quality mentioned.
Qualities treated
In the following subsections, I will discuss some of the qualities mentioned previously. The value fields 1 and 2,
related to ecological value, are already extensively treated in other parts of this dissertation. I will therefore not
discuss them here. The other value fields 3 to 8 will be successively discussed in the following subsections. Fields
3 and 6, ecological user experience value and user experience value, and fields 4 and 7, ecological experience
value and specific experience value, will be discussed in groups.
3 As with all terms used in this dissertation, they are in the terminologies appendix at the end of this dissertation.

For each value form discussed, the quality terms will be defined, the influence on the building lifespan explained,
and design measures discussed. The main focus will be on specific future values.
08.02.02 Specific use value
The specific use value of a building, excluding the use value that is also part of ecological value and/or experience
value, involves the technical quality, functionality, multifunctionality, and functional diversity. These will be treated
consecutively below.
Technical quality and functionality

These terms are a basic condition or obviousness of buildings. In terms of a long lifetime, technical quality
includes a good physical condition of vital elements of the building, such as the foundation and supporting
structure. For a long lifespan, the building needs to be in good technical shape.
Functionality4 ("the state of being practical and useful") can be perceived in a short-term or narrow way ("the
building should be practical and useful to the organisation that occupies it at the moment"), or in a long-term or
more sustainable way ("the building should be practical and useful to a number of organisations that will occupy it
in the building's service life"). In the first case, one could speak of a 'tailor-made suit' (see figure 08.08), fancy yet
risky in the case of unexpected growth. In the second case, one could speak of a 'loose-fit confection suit', less
fancy yet enabling a long-lasting use.
Figure 08.08: Organic layout of the Gasunie in Groningen, Netherlands: fit for the present organisation, yet for others?
Functionality in its long-term meaning is related to multifunctionality, which I define as "the state of being able to
fulfil many functions in a lifetime".
Multifunctionality and functional diversity

Multifunctionality is often mistakenly used for functional diversity, which is similar to functional variety, "the state of
offering different functions at the same time". Multifunctionality is therefore a characteristic enabled by the general
quality of a building and its adaptability or flexibility. The first quality is related to the 'loose-fit confection suit'
solution (see figure 08.09), the second one will be treated further on. The importance of multifunctionality to
sustainability therefore seems logical.
4 Alexander et al. [2004] draw a distinction between functionality and usefulness, of which the latter is defined as "the measure of quality
of the user experience when interacting with something" [Nielsen, 1993].

Figure 08.09: The light, open office floors of Chiswick Park in London [picture: Sebastiaan de Wilde]
Multifunctionality may always be related to a building or a part of a building ("The building is multifunctional: it can
be used as an office or shopping centre"), whereas functional diversity always refers to a higher scale than the
object considered: a group of buildings in an urban area may be functionally diverse ("The urban area is diverse: it
contains different functions"). A building in itself can only be diverse when viewed from the smaller functions
accommodated in it ("There is a great diversity of functions accommodated in the building: offices, shops, bars,
and a library"). Old people's homes often offer a range of functions: residences, shops, gathering rooms, a
theatre, restaurant, etc. (see figure 08.10).
Figure 08.10: A shop and gathering room in the old people's home Pelgromhof in Zevenaar, Netherlands
Therefore, functional diversity cannot be a feature of one building. For an urban area, functional homogeneity may
lead to function loss if the specific function disappears. Functional diversity may be important for social safety,
functional and technical efficiency, and a long functional use of an urban area. This will be further discussed in
chapter 12. In terms of separate buildings, the diversity of the urban area limits the risk of function loss of a
building located in it.
08.02.03 User experience value and ecological user experience value
User experience value

The user experience value of a building, meaning the collection of use value and experience value, without the
part that includes ecological value, involves spatial quality and internal aesthetic quality. Both qualities are a form
of aesthetic quality related to the experience of the user of a building. There is no great difference between their
respective meanings. In fact, spatial quality is an element of internal aesthetic quality referring to the user
experience of space itself: e.g. space volumes, spatial proportions, and internal view axes. Aesthetics involve
more aspects than just space: e.g. rhythm, texture, and colour.

Many studies and publications have been published on the topic of aesthetics and spatial quality. They are no
central issue for the research presented in this dissertation. The remark that spatial quality and other internal
aesthetical qualities are a factor to the potential lifespan of a building should be sufficient.
Ecological user experience value

The specific collection of qualities combining ecological, user, and experience value, previously called ecological
user experience value or bio-ecological value involves health quality.
The health quality of a building is influenced by the climate system, the occupants' influence on it and the building
materials used. For human health, the indoor climate is ten times more important than the outdoor climate
[Fanger, 2002]. Regarding these aspects, the potentially negative influence of a bad-functioning climate system,
the lack of individual influence and use of hazardous materials is better known than the positive influence of a
well-designed solution. The latter is commonly considered a basic condition for buildings. For a long lifespan, the
building needs to be healthy or at least not damage the users' health. Asbestos is a clear example of the dramatic
impact of a wrong material selection. On a less lethal level, individual control is crucial for the well-being of
employees [Vroon, 1990]. Open spaces with air-conditioning, artificial lighting, little outside view, and no
possibilities of opening a window are often regarded as harmful. In Continental Europe, work councils have picked
up this issue and made it one of their main criteria in judging office design, whereas it is a less important issue in
the USA and UK [Meel, 2000]. Fanger [2002] defines as the basic indoor air qualities of an office: cool and dry
fresh air, individual control, no polluting sources and adverse health effects, no draft, no noise, and no
compromises. Several sources [e.g. Milton et al., 2000; Leijten, 2002] found that a good indoor air quality
improves labour productivity. An ample overview of all aspects influencing productivity can be found in Clements-
Croome [2004].
08.02.04 Specific experience value and ecological experience value
Specific experience value

The specific experience value of a building, excluding the experience value that is also part of ecological value
and/or use value, involves external aesthetic quality, architectural diversity, and the tripod of social-cultural-
historical quality.
External aesthetic quality refers to the same quality aspects already mentioned in relation to internal aesthetic
quality, however experienced from outside the building. Here I also restrict myself by stating that the external
aesthetic quality influences the potential lifespan. For a long lifespan, a beautiful building - in any sense - is
advantageous.
Analogue to functional diversity, architectural diversity can only refer to a higher scale than the object considered.
In contrast, architectural diversity can only be considered on the urban level: a group of buildings in an urban area
may be architecturally diverse ("The urban area contains different architectural styles"). An architectural style not
recognised by society will eventually be demolished. Urban architectural diversity may therefore be important to a
long future use of an urban area. Therefore, architectural diversity does not refer to the building.
The tripod of social-cultural-historical quality actually consists of three separate qualities, which I grouped together
because they all refer to the social perception of (in these terms) buildings. Social, cultural, and historical quality
may be independent from aesthetic quality, yet evolve as a result of different developments. A socially, culturally
or historically important building will be advantageous for a long lifespan.
Ecological experience value

A particular case of the combination of experience and ecological value refers to the experience of the ecological
quality of a building. One could call this ecological educational quality: people experience and understand the
meaning of the ecological value of a building. An example of this is the use of a green roof and climbing plants,
which may offer habitats to certain animals and improve the outdoor air quality.

08.02.05 Specific future value
When we accept that the functions in a building and the way they are accommodated and organised will always
change we know that flexibility is a decisive factor for a long and useful building lifespan. The specific future value
of a building, excluding the experience value that is also part of ecological value and/or use value, involves
adaptability or flexibility. A clearer distinction between these two terms is however necessary.
Definitions
Adaptability and flexibility are often confused with one another, and the difference between them is cloudy.
Adaptability is the ability to adapt oneself or itself to something [Hornby et al., 1998]. In terms of objects, besides
bending easily, Hornby et al. define flexibility as the ability to be easily changed to suit new conditions. Since
buildings do not adapt themselves, flexibility seems to suit buildings more. Rongen [1994] discerns the two terms
by stating that adaptability is related to changes of the building and flexibility to changes inside the building. He
thereby draws a difference between the building and its interior. It is however arguable whether the interior
belongs to the building or not. The distinction is therefore difficult. Moreover, taking the definition by Hornby et al.
as a basis, flexibility seems to suit both internal and external changes.
Changeability is something different, the tendency to change or the characteristic to change regularly [Hornby et
al., 1998]. This term may therefore rather refer to organisations than buildings.
Taking the above arguments into consideration, I decided to use 'flexibility' for the ability of buildings to be easily
changed.
Time scale of flexibility

Saari & Heikkilä [2003] distinguish three types of flexibility:
Service flexibility: the building's ability to adapt to recurrent quick loadings
Modifiability: the building's capacity to meet the changing needs of its users
Long-term adaptability: the building's adaptability to unknown activities and users
Service flexibility is related to changes within one year, modifiability to changes over 3 to 10 years, and long-term
adaptability to periods longer than 30 years. Taking the definition of the latter as a basis, for office buildings, this
period should be rather 10 years.
Saari & Heikkilä's distinction, although not consequent in its terminology when mixing flexibility, modifiability and
adaptability, is a clear example of the different capacities a building should have for a long service life.
Hierarchy of flexibilities
The need for flexibility emerges from the discrepancy between the dynamic and amorphous character of an
organisation and the rigid, fixed character of a building. Hans de Jonge calls these organisation flexibility and
technical flexibility. Within the framework of this research, the latter will be defined differently.
In the years after 2000, the drive behind flexibility did not originate from idealist principles, yet economic survival.
The decline of the western economy offered an insecure future for mainly young ICT-related companies that had
rapidly grown over the prior years. Uncertainty of orders, return, and income for the near future make a long-term
hiring contract for office space unattractive. Many of these dynamic companies therefore prefer a short-term
contract. One could call this desire financial flexibility.
In reverse, to parties that offer accommodation, these short-term contracts mean uncertain conditions for rent or
lease for the near future. In order to run a smaller risk, real estate should better have functional flexibility, be
multifunctional or subdividable, for use by different or smaller companies if the present tenant or leaser were to
end the contract.
Functional flexibility is enabled through measures of technical flexibility: a building will be useful to different
functions if the technical conditions are suitable for a different use, for instance, a greater floor height, a greater
bearing capacity of the floors, or easily replaceable partitions.
Therefore, dependence can be observed from financial flexibility, via functional flexibility, to technical flexibility. In
reverse, there is conditionality from technical flexibility, via functional flexibility, to financial flexibility.
The types of flexibility, their meaning, measures that support them, and their dependency and conditionality are
summarised in table 08.01 and explained below.

Table 08.01: Types of flexibility at the building level and technical measures
type of flexibility meaning technical measures
financial flexibility
financial independence an organisation is not stuck to - functional flexibility (see below)
financial commitments for - short-term (lease) contracts
long - non-trendy, timeless architecture
functional flexibility
multi-functionality a building may be used by - technical flexibility (see below)
different functions - highest use standards
- over-dimensioned floor structures
sub-dividability a building is dividable for use - technical flexibility (see below)
by more than one - various entrances
organisation
dependence
- various staircases and elevator shafts
conditionality
- various facility groups and shafts

technical flexibility
excess a building is larger than just - spatial over-capacity
for the original organisation - great floor heights
- high and wide passages
extendibility, horizontal a building can grow through - over-sized building plots
adaptation of the facade - openable facades
- dismountable structural elements
- dismountable facades
extendibility, vertical a building can grow through - greater bearing capacity for extra layers
addition of layers - reckon with functional use of cellar floors
re-dividability the fill-in of a building can be - open bearing structure
easily adapted - avoidance of obstacles
- compartimented technical functions
- removable or replaceable partitions
Functional flexibility
Functional flexibility is formed by multifunctionality and subdividability of buildings.
As already discussed, multifunctionality means the ability to be used for different functions. It is facilitated by
means of technical flexibility, building to the highest standards imaginable (offices usable as residences,
residences usable as shops, etc.), and the provision of increased load-bearing capacity of especially floors to
enable a number of functions that involve heavy archives or machinery.
Figure 08.11a & b: The Wholesale trade building in Rotterdam consists of various entrances and subdivided floors
Subdividability is facilitated by means of technical flexibility (again) and the presence of various entrances,
staircases, elevator shafts, and facility groups and shafts. These functional conditions of a building make it

possible that an office floor is used by more than one organisation. An example of such a building is the wholesale
trade building ('Groothandelsgebouw' in Dutch) in Rotterdam (see figure 08.11).
Technical flexibility
As discussed, technical flexibility forms the basis for functional flexibility. Excess, horizontal and vertical
extendibility, and redividability are forms of technical flexibility.
Excess means that the building is larger than just for the original organisation accommodated in it. Excess seems
an odd measure for sustainability when striving for conservation of space and material use. From a long-term
perspective, some excess in building size and particular measurements however will pay off due to a longer
service life. In Amsterdam, the entire seventeenth century inner-city (see figure 08.12) would have lost function if
the buildings had been based on minimal measurements for the much smaller people of that time: using the same
margin as nowadays, the floor height would have been approximately 1.85 m, whereas at present, the average
Dutchman is already that tall. Therefore, it has proven fortunate that the rich merchants back then adapted the
floor height to the desired daylight access rather than their own length, as has been done in the last century…
Excess is facilitated by means of reckoning with over-capacity in the early design stages, great floor heights, high
and wide passages, and large structural spans.
Figure 08.12a & b: The seventeenth century inner-city of Amsterdam
Horizontal extendibility means that a building can grow, or be enlarged through adaptation of the building façade.
It is facilitated by means of over-sized building plots (an urban measure), operable façades, demountable
structural elements and demountable façades.
Vertical extendibility means that a building can be enlarged through addition of building layers on top of or beneath
the building. It is facilitated by means of a greater bearing capacity of the supporting structure, in order to enable
extra layers on top (see figure 08.13), or reckoning with functional use of cellar floors that originally had no or a
different function.
Redividability means that the layout of a building can easily be adapted. It plays on a lower scale than the
subdividability mentioned earlier. Redividability is facilitated by means of an open supporting structure with wide
spans, combined with removable or replaceable partitions and avoidance of permanent, structural obstacles, such
as bearing walls, shafts and columns. Deep floors are economical, easy to subdivide and they contain no
awkward corners that are difficult to let [Banham, 1969]. A solution contributing to the avoidance of obstacles is
the compartmentalisation of technical facilities such as elevators, building services, and sanitation (see figure
08.14).

Figure 08.13 (at left): A timber-framed top layer added to an old-people's home in Loppersum, Netherlands
Figure 08.14 (at right): Compartmentalisation of sanitation, reproduction facilities, and elevators in the DGBA office in
Arnhem, Netherlands
Decisive factors
Almost every building can be adapted to another function. The financial and environmental consequence of a
renovation project however varies with the extent of intervention needed. In general, redivision of partitions and
alteration of the floor layout is relatively simple. Extendibility is more complex, however possible in most cases. In
principle, even the most important element of a building, the supporting structure, may be adapted. A building
however will be relatively useless if its floor height is too small. In this case, the demolition of in-between floors will
be necessary, making the renovation an expensive enterprise and resulting in excessive floor heights.
Adapt the building or the organisation?

The previous solutions for flexibility are focussed on adaptation of the building to the organisation. In case of
accommodative inconvenience, the organisation itself might also be suitable for improvement too. An example of
an unconventional solution for an inevitable-looking fact is the growth of square melons, in Thailand (see figure
08.15). One is inclined to adapt the fridge rather than the food for which it is designed, even when food does not
have a practical shape.
Figure 08.15: In Thailand, melons are grown into a cube shape, so that they fit into a refrigerator more easily [picture: AP].

08.03 Determination of the ESL factor
08.03.01 The Factor Method
ISO 15686 [ISO, 2000; 2001; 2002] offers a service life prediction method for technical components of design
objects based on the Service Life Methodology [Masters and Brandt, 1989; RILEM, 1989], called the Factor
Method (see formula 08.01). It relates the ESL to a reference service life (RSL) multiplied by factors for different
quality aspects:
ESL = RSL x A x B x C x D x E x F x G <08.01>
where:
A = factor for the quality of components
B = factor for the design level
C = factor for the work execution level
D = factor for the indoor environment
E = factor for the outdoor environment
F = factor for usage conditions
G = factor for the maintenance level
The use of formula 08.11 can be exemplified by the following calculation: when the reference service life of a
window frame is 25 years, A = 0.9, B = 1.2, C = 1.0, D = 0.8, E = 1.1, F = 0.9, and D = 0.7, the ESL equals 15
years. Nunen et al. [2003] added two extra factors to the ESL-formula: T, to indicate the liability for replacement
because of a trends, and R, for the possibility to demount a component for re-use.
Formula 08.01 may seem simple. However, the exact determination of every factor and the RSL is complicated
and different for every type of component. Bamforth & Alisa [2003] developed a formula that calculates the
performance of a component at a certain time based on formula 08.01, introducing another two coefficients
specific to materials, components, or systems, further complicating and narrowing the application.
In terms of building, the Factor Method is directed mainly at building components and supports the determining of
their expected technical lifetime. For buildings as a whole, applying the Factor Method would require a
complicated combination of estimated service lives for different components. Moreover, as previously described,
the eventual service life of a building is defined by cultural, social and aesthetic qualities rather than the technical
quality of its components.
08.03.02 Qualities defining the ESL of a building
An ESL factor for an entire building ought to be dependent on all qualities discussed previously in section 08.02,
which may be grouped as follows:
Basic qualities (technical quality, functionality, health quality)
Flexibility (including multifunctionality)
Ecological quality (ecological quality of resources used, energy and water consumption performance, spatial
performance, ecological educational quality)
Architectural quality (spatial quality, aesthetic quality, social-cultural-historical quality)
Neighbourhood quality (functional diversity, architectural diversity)
Complications
At present, it is still far too complicated to include all the parameters involved in this list of qualities.
For new buildings, the basic qualities are not distinctive, as they may be assumed equal in all cases. There
is no point in providing a new building with bad technical, functional, or health properties. A distinction may
only be made between old and new buildings, when the technical quality and functionality of older building
has possibly declined. In that case, technical quality can be measured and visually assessed. Functionality
and health quality can be qualitatively assessed by means of inquiries about user satisfaction.

Flexibility is perhaps most easily assessed, as will be discussed further on.

Ecological quality needs to be excluded from the list because most of the qualities applying to it are already
subject to the estimated service life factor (ESL factor). If ecological quality were included in the ESL factor,
this quality would be counted twice.
Architectural quality is difficult to assess. If commonly accepted assessment methods existed, most of the
qualities mentioned would still only be qualitatively and subjectively determined. Architecture is often only
highly esteemed after many years and therefore difficult to assess at the building's moment of completion.
Moreover, the social, cultural, and historical quality of a building will only develop during the years of use.
Therefore, only an official status of preservation, e.g. being on the Unesco world heritage or national
monument list, may be an ex-ante assurance of a long service life. Nevertheless, all qualities mentioned in
this chapter were not in order of importance, and the impact of architecture on the eventual service life is
often decisive. An attempt of inclusion in the ESL factor should therefore be made.
Functional and architectural diversity may be determined through the number of styles present in a certain
area. Neighbourhood quality actually involves more aspects than the previous two: buildings in a historical,
monumental neighbourhood may not be as easily demolished as buildings in a recent development area. On
the other hand, a historical neighbourhood might also facilitate the demolition of a recently constructed
building, if a new one better fitting the environment is planned. Therefore, little can be said about the
eventual influence of the neighbourhood. More importantly, these features do not judge the building in itself,
yet the situation in which it is put, i.e. the city planner. Therefore, it is better that they are excluded from the
ESL factor.
A conclusion may therefore be that for the ESL factor only aspects of flexibility seem useful, and possibly and
preferably architectural qualities as well.
08.03.03 Measuring aspects affecting the service life of a building
Measuring the extent of flexibility

Flexibility was previously divided into financial, functional and technical flexibility. Since technical flexibility forms a
condition for functional flexibility, and functional flexibility for financial flexibility, characteristics of technical
flexibility mostly suffice. Table 08.02 summarises them and also shows possible indicators to measure them. The
dark-shaded rows give useful quantitative indicators.
The italic-set factors mentioned in table 08.02 result from comparison of the specific characteristic of the building
with a reference building. For instance, the horizontal bearing capacity factor is determined through division of the
reference load-bearing capacity of the floors by the one of the assessed building. Other factors are determined
correspondingly. A factor more than 1.0 indicates greater flexibility.
The account of factors mentioned in table 08.02 in the environmental performance of buildings leads to interesting
environmental paradoxes: a GFA factor greater than 1.0 means that the building is too large with respect to a
reference use of space, indicating a bad performance. It however also means greater flexibility for the building's
future, indicating good performance. This applies to more of the factors of table 07.02. The delicate weighing of
the positive or negative effects of these indicators is decisive to the eventual performance.
Saari & Heikkilä [2003] introduced a much simpler, economic factor expressing the extent of flexibility: the
Flexibility Degree (FlexD), extracting from a flexibility of 100% the costs of renovation divided by the new
construction costs. For instance, when the renovation is estimated at € 350 per m2, whereas new construction will
cost € 1250 per m2, the FlexD equals 1 - 350/1250 = 0,72 or 72%. This degree depends on the function switch
required and of course on the design of renovation or a new building.

Table 08.02: Technical measures of flexibility and possible indicators

type of flexibility technical measures possible indicator
multi-functionality - use standards ?
without technical flexibility - floor structure bearing capacity horizontal bearing capacity factor
sub-dividability - entrances
without technical flexibility - staircases and elevator shafts potential user number factor
- facility groups and shafts
excess - capacity GFA or NFA factor
- floor height
floor height factor
- passages size
extendibility, horizontal - building plot size GSI or OSR
- facades openability
facade structure dismountable or not?
- dismountability
extendibility, vertical - column/foundation bearing capacity vertical bearing capacity factor
- cellar floor usability useful cellar floor present or not?
re-dividability - bearing structure openness
- obstacles obstacle area factor
- compartmentation
- partition removability partitions removable or not?
Measuring architectural quality

As previously discussed, the term architectural quality is a collection concept of various qualities such as spatial
quality, aesthetic quality, and social, cultural, and historical quality. Although it may be altered through time, an
official preservative status is the sole assurance of a long building lifespan, independent from the building's
flexibility or other qualities. In the Netherlands, a building will get awarded the monument status if it is at least 50
years old and represents an important historical, cultural, social, or aesthetic meaning to the direct environment,
urban area, region, or society in general. The Dutch Government Department for Monument Care [Nusselder,
1994] mentions authenticity, rarity, scientific value and beauty as decisive characteristics (see also 08.04.02). This
emphasises the importance and preference of qualities enabling a long lifespan: architectural qualities outshine
more technological qualities such as flexibility.
A first question to be asked is therefore whether the building is on the Unesco world heritage list, whether it is a
national monument, or something similar. For relatively young buildings, the (potential) historical, cultural, and
social meaning of the building to society is a key issue for a later monument status. Furthermore, the architectural
building style and its adequacy in the urban structure are important. To exemplify these last two aspects: an office
building of remarkable architecture will probably have a greater chance for a long service life than a 'middle-of-the-
road' office style found anywhere else. And a building fitting well into the urban environment and style of
surrounding buildings will probably have a longer lifespan than an urban dissonant annoying people, unless the
dissonant is of architectural excellence.
As previously stated, to quantify architectural quality in a simple indicator is most likely impossible. A monument
status is a fact or not. Furthermore, personal expertise on architecture enables an estimation of the eventual
service life.
08.04 Reusing buildings, components and materials
08.04.01 End-of-life strategies
The end-stage of a product: Delft and other ladders

In the Netherlands, 23 million tons of construction and demolition waste (CDW) are produced annually [Hendriks
& Vingerling, 2000], of which 41% concrete, 20% asphalt, and 29% brick. 18 million tons are re-used, however
mostly in low-graded applications: 14 million tons as a sub-base for roads, 1 million tons in embankments, and
only 2 millions ton as a substitute material in concrete [Xing et al., 2002]. Enhanced separation techniques
however should increase the extent of re-use in high-graded applications.

With regards to the above figures we are talking about recycling, which is a tail end solution for the end-phase of a
building. The Ladder of Lansink, as stated in the Dutch parliament, defined preference steps for the end-phase of
a product in general:
1. Prevention
2. Element reuse
3. Material reuse
4. Useful application
5. Incineration with energy recovery
6. Incineration
7. Landfill.
Since 1996, in the Netherlands, it has been prohibited for re-usable building materials to be used for landfill. As a
result of this governmental regulation 90% of the CDW is currently being re-used. Nevertheless, this does not
necessarily mean high-grade re-use: the main part (stony debris) is used for road foundation. For an indication of
the annual amount of CDW produced: it would equal the foundation for a 250 km 6-lane motorway.
This is an argument for higher-grade alternatives for CDW. PhD students of Delft University of Technology
shuffled and added new steps to the Ladder of Lansink, called the Delft Ladder [Hendriks, 2000]:
1. Prevention (maintain and re-use a complete building)
2. Structure re-use or object renovation (the support-infill principle: maintain and re-use the supporting structure;
renovate the built-in components and finish)
3. Element re-use (re-use demountable building elements)
4. Material re-use (material recycling: re-use separated building materials in similar functions)
5. Useful application (material downcycling: use separated building materials in lower-graded functions)
6. Immobilisation with useful application (debris recycling: process building debris for equally graded functions)
7. Immobilisation (debris downcycling: process building debris to lower-graded functions)
8. Incineration with energy recovery (thermic recycling)
9. Incineration
10. Landfill (dump the material in a closed and secured waste storage).
Kibert of the University of Florida added an extra step to the Delft Ladder between steps 7 and 8: composting
[Kibert et al., 2001].
The Delft Ladder can be interpreted flexibly. Useful application is lower than recycling, but it can also be the other
way around, dependent on the required energy-input and the environmental impact.
The Lansink and Delft Ladders also create obligations for the design stage of a building. To enable steps 1 to 3 in
the design stage, one needs to pay attention to the building method, the ability to separate the supporting
structure and infill and to demount individual elements. For step 4 and 5 from the Delft Ladder, a conscientious
selection of building materials is necessary, enabling re-use or recycling at a later stage.
Critically observing the Delft Ladder from a future perspective, Dorsthorst & Kowalczyk [2000] stated that some of
the lower preference steps may be cancelled. Thus, they come up with table 08.03.
Table 08.03: Strategies for old and new construction, based on the Delft Ladder [Dorsthorst & Kowalczyk, 2000].
Options Existing building New building
1. Prevention All underneath mentioned options
2. Re-use of buildings Renovation of the building 'Design for Adaptability'
3. Re-use of components Re-use of components 'Design for Dismantling'
4. Re-use of materials Re-use of materials in their own cycle 'Design for Recycling'
5. Useful application Re-use of materials in another cycle 'Design for Recycling'
6. Immobilisation with useful application Is a process, no option Does not occur anymore
7. Immobilisation with landfill Is a process, no option Does not occur anymore
8. Incineration with energy recovery Is a process, no option Does not occur anymore
9. Incineration with landfill Is a process, no option Does not occur anymore
10. Landfill Only if nothing else is possible Does not occur anymore

In order to facilitate or enable the first three steps of table 08.03, some boundary conditions are necessary. These
will be treated in the following section. As previously discussed, in technical terms, re-use of a building is mainly
dependent on the technical state and flexibility features of the supporting structure. I will therefore mainly focus on
this element of re-use. For re-use of other components and materials and debris I would like to refer to excellent
literature available: for re-use of components: e.g. Schultmann [2003], Peeters [2002b], Hendriks & Dorsthorst
[2001], Kibert et al. [2001], and Dorsthorst & Kowalczyk [2000], for re-use of materials: e.g. Dijk et al. [2002];
Janssen & Hendriks [2002], and Xing et al. [2002]. Hendriks & Janssen [2004] integrate al solutions.
08.04.02 Basic values for re-use
The values mentioned in chapter 08 enabling a long service life for a building are also an incentive for the re-use
of old buildings:
1. Specific ecological value: ecological quality of resources used
2. Ecological use value: energy and water consumption performance, spatial performance
3. Ecological user experience value or Bio-ecological value: health quality
4. Ecological experience value: ecological educational quality
5. Specific use value: technical quality, functionality, multifunctionality, functional diversity
6. User experience value: spatial quality, internal aesthetic quality
7. Specific experience value: external aesthetic quality, architectural diversity, social-cultural-historical quality
8. Specific future value: flexibility
Decisive qualities
Assuming that a building can be entirely stripped and got rid of built-in components and building services that may
form a problem for re-use, values numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 will not prove decisive for re-use.
Of value number 5, functional diversity is either a state of the surroundings or a possibility through re-development
of the building studied. Beside the floor plan and layout of the office, which can be altered relatively easily, the
functionality and multifunctionality of a building are merely a result of the design measurements of the building,
with the supporting structure in particular. Therefore, technical quality of the supporting structure is most
important.
In the case of an existing building to be re-used, value numbers 6 and 7 have already been sufficiently described.
The extent of appreciation depending on these values is decisive for the wish to re-use the building. If the
supporting structure is preserved, different architectural features will only be obtained through a new floor layouts
and possibly removal of floor parts (internal), another façade structure and possibly extensions (external).
As with functionality and multifunctionality, flexibility of value number 8 is largely dependent on properties and
measures of the building and supporting structure in particular.
This brief deduction of qualities decisive for re-use supports three main indicators: appreciation of the building,
technical quality, and properties and measurements.
These indicators are importantly related to the supporting structure. The supporting structure causes 60% of the
environmental load of building materials in cases of a 75-years lifespan. For a start, preservation of this element is
the most effective measure. And as the other elements need to be replaced more frequently than the supporting
structure, from an environmental point of view, their sacrifice is not dramatic.
Appreciation of the building

The Dutch Government Department for Monument Care [RDMZ, 1991] uses the following main criteria to
qualitatively yet structurally assess whether a building can be considered a monument:
Cultural-historical values
Architectural-historical values
Ensemble values
Intactness, recognisability and representativity
Rarity
For each of these criteria, subcriteria are mentioned that form the basis for an inventory list. Although this method
is related to potential monument status buildings, it may also be applied to buildings in general. For instance, this
appreciation method may lead to advices for preservation, reconstruction, or removal of building elements.

Remarkable or not, a building may always be re-used, for instance on grounds of environmental performance, as
demonstrated in chapter 07. The technical quality however limits the possibilities.
08.04.03 Technical conditions for re-use
Technical quality
A good technical condition of the supporting structure is obviously essential for a prolonged use. The state of a
supporting structure can be determined in different destructive and non-destructive manners. A visual assessment
by experts is mostly common. Damages may be repaired, deteriorated qualities restored, and non-repairable
elements replaced. Practically, all technical problems concerning the supporting structure can be solved. A rare
exception to this is the complete deterioration of a timber structure through certain fungi (see figure 08.16). With
our modern concrete buildings however these problems are unlikely. More decisive therefore are the properties
and measurements of the structure.
Figure 08.16a & b: A beam of an old German farm deteriorated by fungi - in this case, the entire building was contaminated
and needed to be fully reconstructed
Serviceability, repairability, and replaceability

Even a well-designed building with well-designed components may encounter unexpected damages or
deterioration through human, climatic and environmental circumstances. In order to avoid complete replacement
of a component, or even the demolition of the building, serviceability of all building components is a first
requirement, to enable maintenance and repairs. Therefore, repairability of components is the next step. Finally,
some (relatively small) elements subject to wear and tear, e.g. the hinges of doors and windows, should always
be easily replaceable. It might even be wise to design buildings in such a way that possible damage happens to
the elements that can be easily replaced.
Properties and measures

Financial, functional, and technical flexibility have already been previously discussed, as well as the resulting
multifunctionality and forms of adaptability. The supporting structure may be the main obstacle, literally, for re-use:
for instance, when the structural spans are so unpractical that the building cannot not be made useful. More
important is the load-bearing capacity. If it is insufficient for its possible future use, it may be upgraded, however
probably not without loss of free height or floor space. The first of these two is probably most important for a
successful re-use of a building: a limited height will directly demonstrate the consequence of the lack of space.
In this chapter, I already illustrated the importance of spatial excess with the seventeenth century inner city of
Amsterdam. Besides expression of status, this was decided because of daylight access: high spaces with high
windows produce better lighting, a valuable amenity at that time. Another advantage originally not intended for
later use was the common floor span from sidewall to sidewall. For storehouses, the sense of this measure seems
obvious. Nowadays however it enables usage by many functions beside storage (see figure 08.17). Deep old
warehouses accommodate new office concepts more easily than today's buildings [Jonge, 1999].

Figure 08.17: Seventeenth century storehouses in Amsterdam, now in use as apartments and studios
In the Netherlands, on average, a male is already 1.85 m tall. This implies that there is a large group of people
taller than 2 m. In 1903, when adult men were on average 1.70-1.75 a general law was enforced with rules for
residences. In it, a minimal measure of floor heights was given: 2.40 m, at that time providing a margin of
approximately 40%. Originally meant as a bottom line, for financial reasons, this height was quickly used as the
standard, until the year 2002, when it was raised to 2.60. Before 2002, the margin had shrunk to an unpleasant
30% but now is back to 40%. The average height of people is still increasing. Sticking to old measures will
therefore be a guarantee for functional obsolescence within 100 years. Therefore, reckoning with an extra margin,
as illustrated by figure 08.18, increases the probability of a long service life of buildings.
Figure 08.18: The Municipal Health Service Office in Tiel, Netherlands, with an exceptional floor and door height. The man
on the right is 1.92 m tall, giving an indication of the door measures.
08.04.04 Design for better end-of-life possibilities
In the traditional ways, the end of life of a building consisted of the unrestricted demolition and landfill or
incineration of demolition waste. Deconstruction is a term for the more wise selective demolition of a building
enabling easy recycling of separate materials. A further step is selective dismantling, enabling re-use of entire
components.
When building components or materials are re-used, the theory explained in chapter 07 requires an adaptation for
determining the environmental performance. In standard LCA databases, a certain extent of recycling is taken into
account for when this is common practice for building material. Dismantling and re-use of entire components are
usually not taken into account. In terms of the lifespan accounting methodology, re-use of components should be
considered similar to re-use of buildings, only on a smaller scale. Recycling is more complicated to account for, as
it requires new energy and material resources and produces new waste. Therefore, for recycling, I chose to rely
on LCAs underneath the assessment, acknowledging that these cannot be completely up-to-date but take all
aspects related to recycling into account better than a reasoned approach.
For the demolition and renovation alternatives, the theoretic comparison of accommodation solutions for the Road
and Water Engineering Department in Delft, as presented in chapter 07, did not account for the re-use of

components. In the case of selective deconstruction (dismantling is not possible because the building is not
designed for this) and re-use, the alternatives would perform better with respect to simple re-use of the old
building.
Based on many case studies, German researcher Frank Schultmann [2003] determined that selective dismantling
leads up to a 50% cost savings for the deployment of human resources, the technological means applied, and the
recycling of materials. In addition, he observed accelerated deconstruction times and re-use or recycling rates of
over 97%. Early building design reckoning with later ability to dismantle leads to higher costs for human
resources, yet to lower costs in the end. The balance between these depends on the chosen scenario.
Schultmann also found that ecologically sound methods for dismantling were not necessarily more expensive.

09 DESIGNING FOR LIFE
In chapters 07 and 08, we have seen that the age and the expected service life of a building matters to
environmental performance, and that we are able to account for their influence through calculations. In this final
chapter of Volume C - The Time Factor, I will explore the improvement potential of unusual office building designs,
based on a more conscientious approach to the age and projected lifespan of the building and its components.
Figure 09.01: Andy Warhol's newspapers: signs of simultaneous temporality and repetition
Contents

09.01.01 Present-day lifetime efficiency 195
09.01.02 A further treatise of the time factor 196
09.02 Comparison of different accommodation solutions 197
09.02.01 Introduction 197
09.02.02 Taking into account a fixed reference lifespan 198
09.02.03 Taking into account different expected service lives 199
09.03 Sustainable service life strategies 200
09.03.01 Re-assessing offices with discerned lifespans 200
09.03.02 Other service life strategies 203
09.03.03 Optimal solutions 204
09.03.04 IFD building 205
194 09 Designing for life - C The Time Factor

09.01 Introduction
09.01.01 Present-day lifetime efficiency
The useful life factor (ULF) and useful lifespan (ULS)

The problem of the modern office's lifespan and the inefficiency of its usage are demonstrated well by means of
the useful life factor (ULF). This indicator was originally nameless and invented by the environmental inspector of
the DGBA, Marcel Dewever, and introduced in Dobbelsteen [1993]. The ULF expresses the use efficiency of a
building during its lifetime. Therefore, the number of years a building has been or is expected to be used,
composed of the day parts it was occupied, is related it to the maximum use possible. The calculation of the ULF
is as follows:
ULF = Le/Lt x De/Dt x OccA <09.01>
In this formula, Le represents the estimated or economic lifespan, Lt is the technical lifespan of vital building
elements (the supporting structure), De is the estimated use hours in a week during Le, Dt is the maximum number
of hours in a week, and OccA is the occupation rate during De related to a certain personal use of space.
The useful lifespan (ULS) is the number of years that a building has been optimally used at the end of its lifetime.
The ULS equals the ULF times Lt, as is demonstrated in formula 09.02:
ULS = ULF x Lt = Le x De/Dt x OccA <09.02>
Present-day performance
When we consider modern offices, due to rapid economical and social changes, they normally do not reach an
age of 25 years without severe interventions. Nevertheless, we can assume that the supporting structure of the
building should easily last 100 years. Furthermore, offices are normally occupied from 8.00 h in the morning to
18.00 h in the evening, which is 10 hours in total. Since some office employees work longer hours, however we
can reckon with 12 hours in total, 5 days a week. In total, there are 168 hours in a week. And finally, during office
use hours, the average occupation rate is not more than 50% (and that is even optimistic) [Twynstra Gudde,
2001]. Therefore, on the basis of an average personal use of space of 24 m2 GFA in the year 2000 (see chapter
05), the ULF equals:
ULF = 25/100 x (5x12)/(7x24) x 0.5 = 0.045 <09.03>
This means that only 4.5% efficiency is achieved of the entire use potential of an office. The ULS equals 0.045
times 100 = 4.5 years, instead of the maximum of 100 years.
Potential
If a building were used 100% efficiently (that is: 100 years, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and with optimal
occupation), improvement by more than a factor 20 would be achieved with respect to the present situation.
However, a ULF of 1.00 or ULS of 100 years is unrealistic. Nevertheless, a better performance than 4.5% or 4.5
years should be possible. For comparison: residences have an estimated ULF of 0.24, hence more than five times
better, based on the same personal average use of space.
Improvement of the ULF of offices is to be found in different directions:
Improvement of the eventual lifespan of an office building
Improvement of the building's use during the week, by means of evening and weekend activities, or through
an different approach to office work
Improvement of the average occupation rate, through space use efficiency and an efficient organisation of
office work.
This chapter will treat the first objective, whereas the chapters of Volume E - The Space Factor and Volume F -
The Organisation of Office Work will discuss the others.
C The Time Factor - 09 Designing for life 195

09.01.02 A further treatise of the time factor
The speed of change

Figure 09.02 is a picture by Brand [1999] that provides insight in time processes and the speed of change. The
higher layers show fast cycles exemplified by fashion, where the people involved demand change. The lower
layers are the areas that cannot change quickly and that provide stability. The time scale of each layer variesy
from day-to-day to centuries or even millions of years. The fast layers innovate, while the lower ones stabilise; the
whole combines learning with continuity. In the past this may have been harmonious, yet now the balance seems
disturbed [Brandon, 2003]. Office buildings have shifted from the inner layer of infrastructure to almost fashionable
design.
Figure 09.02: The order of civilisation: the fast layers innovate, while the slow layers stabilise;
the whole combines learning with continuity [Brand, 1999]
Cycles of transformation
The complex use of the built environment in time is related to cycles of transformation (see figure 09.03) [Kohler,
2003]. It may be possible to change the length of these cycles, yet not easily. Moreover, this approach would
neglect the possibility of mistakes and the potential of learning and improvement within shorter spans. Therefore,
for sustainable building, it seems wiser to adapt to these cycles and provide solutions that fit in them.
European towns
Buildings, Infrastructure
Infrastructure renovation
Building renovation
Human generation
Building use
IT Hardware
IT Software
10 20 50 100 years
Figure 09.03: Cycles of transformation [presented by Brandon, 2003; after Kohler, 2003]
This can be exemplified by building services (for HVAC), which are subject to rapid technological changes
(improvements in most cases). Trying to expand the lifecycle of these services would block the introduction of

enhanced services developed within this lifecycle. A very short lifespan would however lead to unnecessary
consumption of building materials and production of waste. For a sustainable balance, the environmental impact
of energy reduction with respect to the old system should therefore exceed the environmental impact of the
materials used for the new system. This implies a delicate deliberation of effects related to the time factor.
09.02 Comparison of different accommodation solutions
09.02.01 Introduction
Many practical test cases may be used to demonstrate the application value of the model introduced in chapter
07. In this section, the C-building of the Road & Water Engineering Department in Delft (see figure 09.04) will be
used as an example for the comparison of different solutions for office accommodation.
Figure 09.04: The Road & Water Engineering office (C-building) in Delft, Netherlands
The office building for the Road & Water Engineering (RWE) Department in Delft was completed in 1985. As with
many other offices, the functionality of the building will probably be a topic of discussion around its 25th
anniversary, in this case in 2010. By that year, new solutions for accommodation need to be found. There are
different possibilities for the DGBA to tackle this problem:
Demolish the old building and construct a new one. In this case, the entire invested environmental capital of
the old building is removed, requiring a 100% penalty of the remaining environmental debt. The new building
can be traditional or modern without measures for sustainability ('market-conform'), or it can be a sustainable
office to the latest standards.
Renovate the building extensively through stripping: maintain the supporting structure, remove its façades,
inner partitions and building services before giving it a new look and layout. As the supporting structure
defines approximately 60% of the environmental load (see chapter 06), in this case 60% of the old invested
environmental capital will be preserved, or put differently: 60% of the environmental investment for a new
building can be avoided.
Renovate the building services only. In this case, sustainable building services for e.g. heating, cooling,
ventilation, and sanitation can replace older ones. By approximation, only 10% of the originally invested
environmental capital will be removed, and only 10% of the remaining environmental debt needs to be
accounted for.
Table 09.01 summarises the basic conditions of the existing office and the accommodation solutions for the year
2010.

Table 09.01: Basic years for construction and renovation of accommodation for the RWE Department
solution
specific > construction renovation
unit > yr % yr %
RWE building, original 1985 100 - 0

demolition & new building, traditional 2010 100 - 0
demolition & new building, sustainable 2010 100 - 0
extensive renovation 1985 60 2010 40
renovation of building services 1985 90 2010 10
09.02.02 Taking into account a fixed reference lifespan
Reasoned environmental cost

By 2010, as a result of technological developments, energy consumption is expected to be more favourable than
at present, even with traditional buildings. Sustainable buildings may be able to halve the energy consumption of
traditional buildings. This also counts for the extensive renovation solution because in this case the entire building
façade and building services can be replaced. In case of a minor renovation of the building services, some
drawbacks of the old façade will remain, decreasing the improvement potential.
To some extent, the potential described will also apply to water consumption. In this case, the potential of
sustainable solutions however will also be achievable in the building services renovation variant.
For the traditional variant of the demolition and new building solution, the environmental cost of the new building
materials will be comparable to the value of the old ones. For this aspect, not such a great improvement is
expected in the case of a sustainable building. And in the case of extensive renovation only 40% of the renewed
building's materials may be upgraded environmentally. The newly-built value of the services renovation solution
will be comparable to the old and traditional building's value.
Table 09.02 summarises the effects of the solutions described previously.
Table 09.02: New-built values of different accommodation solutions for the RWE Department
solution energy water building materials

old new total
specific > cost factor cost factor cost factor
unit > e€ e€ e€
RWE building, original 121,209 1.06 6,572 1.07 30,647 30,647 1.04
demolition & new building, traditional 100,000 1.29 6,000 1.17 30,000 30,000 1.07
demolition & new building, sustainable 50,000 2.58 3,000 2.34 20,000 20,000 1.60
extensive renovation 50,000 2.58 3,000 2.34 20,000 6,000 26,000 1.23
renovation of building services 80,000 1.61 3,000 2.34 27,000 3,000 30,000 1.07
Table 09.03 demonstrates the recalculation of the environmental cost of the building materials and overall results
of every variant. The overall performance of all four accommodation solutions is formed by the environmental cost
of energy consumption, water consumption, and new building materials, plus the remaining environmental debt of
the old building.

Table 09.03: Recalculated, values including the age of the different solutions at the decision moment 2010
solution building materials overall

specific > corr cost factor cost factor
unit > e€ e€
RWE building, original 0.67 20,431 1.57 148,212 1.13

demolition & new building, traditional 1.68 50,431 0.63 156,431 1.07
demolition & new building, sustainable 2.02 40,431 0.79 93,431 1.80
extensive renovation 0.97 25,231 1.27 78,231 2.15
renovation of building services 0.75 22,531 1.42 105,531 1.59
As can be seen, the demolition alternatives, even if they lead to a sustainable office, deteriorate the environmental
performance of building materials. This is entirely due to the remaining environmental debt of the old building. If
the building had been older, a more substantial part of the environmental mortgage would have been paid off.
Nevertheless, the environmental performance of the demolition alternatives (partly) recovers in the overall results.
This is due to the predominant contribution of energy consumption.
Overall, the extensive renovation leads to the largest improvement: a factor of 2.15. The traditional new building
performs worst. The results at the top for re-use of the existing building should only be used for comparison, as
the starting condition was a non-functional building that needed to be altered. Nevertheless, the figures
demonstrate that simple re-use of the building without any renovation would not lead to a favourable outcome.
09.02.03 Taking into account different expected service lives
ESL categories
One can assume that when the DGBA decides to demolish a building, a very special one should take its place.
Therefore, the first two alternatives will probably be of special architecture. Through extensive renovation, the
entire envelope of the building can be refreshed, yet not the shape. Hence, a 'moderate+' architecture status from
the indicative ESL categories presented in chapter 07 (table 07.02) may be assigned. The fourth solution will lead
to no improvement of the appearance, only to revalue the old quality. And the original building: by 2010, it will be
degraded from ESL category E (moderate architecture, flexibility, no functional problems) to ESL category G
(moderate architecture, flexibility, functional problems). Based on these categories and the values determined
earlier, the age- and ESL-corrected environmental load of building materials can be determined.
Material recalculations
Table 09.04 summarises the ESL categories and factors of the existing office and its accommodation solutions, as
well as the recalculation of the environmental cost of the building materials of every variant. Due to the relatively
favourable expected service life of the new construction variants, their performance for the use of building
materials is improved with respect to that of table 09.03. The other alternatives perform worse.
Table 09.04: ESL categories and factors of accommodation solutions for the RWE Department
and the influence on the environmental performance of building materials
solution building materials

specific > cat ESL cost factor
unit > e€
RWE building, original G 0.53 38,549 0.83

demolition & new building, traditional B 1.33 37,918 0.84
demolition & new building, sustainable B 1.33 30,399 1.05
extensive renovation E+ 0.85 29,684 1.08
renovation of building services E 0.75 30,042 1.07

Integral overall performance

The overall performance of all four accommodation solutions is formed by the environmental cost of energy
consumption, water consumption, and the recalculated environmental load of building materials. Table 09.05
presents the ultimate integral results of the assessment.
Table 09.05: Overall environmental cost and performance of the accommodation solutions for the RWE Department, taking
into account both the age and the estimated service life of the alternatives
solution overall
specific > cost factor
unit > e€
RWE building, original 166,331 1.01

demolition & new building, traditional 143,918 1.17
demolition & new building, sustainable 83,399 2.01
extensive renovation 82,684 2.03
renovation of building services 113,042 1.49
Although improved with respect to the outcome of table 09.03, the traditional demolition alternative still leads to
the worst environmental performance, ignoring the first row representing simple re-use of the old building. The
extensive renovation and the sustainable new construction variant lead to a similar performance. If the original
building had been older, the sustainable demolition alternative would have led to the best results. If the decision
moment were before 2010, the extensive renovation would have been the most favourable. The limited renovation
of building services leads a performance between the traditional and sustainable new building. It is a better
solution than simply reusing the old building.
Needless to say that the comparison will be different with every other building.
Usual decisions
The eventual selection of the best solution will depend on various criteria. In practice, the financial consequences
of demolition and reconstruction or renovation are often decisive. The model presented in this chapter and the
examples of this and the previous sections however enable an integrated decision, in which aspects of
sustainability are also represented.
The exclusion of interest and inflation may be discriminating to the outcome. If a discount rate for these were
included, long-term effects would be weakened, probably improving the results for the new construction variants:
the remaining environmental debt of the old building and the net present value of the new one would have been
smaller.
09.03 Sustainable service life strategies
09.03.01 Re-assessing offices with discerned lifespans
Service life scenarios

Results from the office buildings assessment presented in chapter 06 were used for the recalculations of the
environmental performance in the case of different scenarios for the service life of the building. The following
service lives were taken as a basis: 200, 100, 75, 50, 25, 15, and 10 years.
For simplification, I presumed that after traditional or selective demolition, the waste evolving was dumped,
incinerated, or recycled according to average conditions in LCA. The following lifespans were used for the
recalculations, as discussed in subsection 07.05.03:
Supporting structure: 100 years
Structural detailing, incl. the façades: 25 years
Built-in components: 10 years

Finish: 10 years
Building services: 15 years
Replacements and new environmental costs

The lifespan conditions mentioned previously imply that, for a certain building service life, the separate
components are used once or replaced repetitively. Table 09.06 gives the fraction of each component's
environmental load to be accounted for in the recalculation. As can be seen, the numbers of replacements were
rounded upwards towards an integer digit. Even when the building does not function longer than five years after a
replacement, the entire component still needs to be fully accounted for. This has been discussed already in
subsection 07.05.03.
Table 09.06: Number of replacements of building components in the case of different building service life scenarios
building component service life service life of the building
200 100 75 50 25 15 10
unit > y - - - - - - -
supporting structure 100 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
structural detailing 25 8 4 3 2 1 1 1
built-in components 10 20 10 8 5 3 2 1
finish 10 20 10 8 5 3 2 1
building services 15 14 7 5 4 2 1 1
The use of building materials for building services was originally not included in the assessments.
Table 09.07 presents the average values for the environmental costs, as determined through the case studies.
These environmental costs are based on a total period of 75 years. Therefore, in order to determine the
environmental costs for the specific lifespans chosen for this re-assessment, the environmental costs required
recalculation. For this I made the rough simplification that the original environmental costs could be divided by 75
and multiplied by their individual service life. As discussed in subsection 07.05.02, this means an inaccuracy with
regards to the actual situation. In order to avoid separate life cycle assessments for each building component,
taking into account shorter lifespans than 75 years, this was however the only way to enable a comparison.
Table 09.07: Environmental cost of components: original (over 75 years), and recalculated (over their specific lifespan)
building component environmental costs
original recalculated
unit > e€ e€
supporting structure 14,598,719 19,464,958
structural detailing 3,900,696 1,300,232
built-in components 2,423,318 323,109
finish 4,268,922 569,190
Results of the re-assessment

Figure 09.05 presents the results of the assessment. In this figure, the annual environmental costs can be found.
It is clear that, in terms of the environmental cost, a longer lifespan is more favourable and means a great
improvement with respect to current practice, although the 100 or 200 years variants show no difference. In
general, the components with a long lifespan become relatively more important when the building service life
becomes shorter. This is in particular visible for the supporting structure: starting with a 58% contribution to the
total environmental load in the 200 years case, and its contribution increasing to 89% in the 10 years case.

2,500,000 finish
annual environm ental costs

built-in components
2,000,000 structural detailing
supporting structure
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
200 100 75 50 25 15 10
building service life
Figure 09.05: The environmental load of a building in the case of different building service life scenarios
and based on common lifespans of building components
Taking into account re-use

The results of these recalculations are based on the assumption that all materials become waste after their
individual lifespan, or after the service life of the building. This means that the supporting structure, apt for a 100
years lifespan becomes waste after 10 years, in the 10 years scenario. This may be realistic for a traditional
supporting structure of concrete cast in situ, but not in the case of prefab concrete, steel or timber components.
Including building services

As mentioned, this assessment is without the account of building services. If these were included and their initial
environmental cost was equal to the built-in components (e€ 2,500,000 for 75 years), the improvement factors of
table 09.03 would show an increasing (negative, downward) absolute difference of 0.01 for the 10 years variant,
and 0.15 (5% relative) for the 200 years variant. The involvement of the building services therefore mainly
influences long lifespans. However, it is dangerous to assume the similar services with the same environmental
cost for more than 200 years. If the original environmental cost of building services were twice as great (e€
5,000,000), the absolute (positive) difference would be up to 0.28 (10%). The influence of building services
however is still limited and insignificant for short building service lives.
The shifting importance of energy consumption

One of the presumptions made previously was that a shorter building service life would make the use of building
materials relatively more important with respect to energy consumption. This could be checked on the basis of the
new recalculations. Figure 09.06 shows the contribution of building materials, energy consumption, and water
consumption to the total annual environmental load.
100%
w ater consumption
90%
energy consumption
80%
70% building materials
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
200 100 75 50 25 15 10
building service life
Figure 09.06: Contribution of materials, energy and water to environmental cost in the case of different service life scenarios

The graph clearly demonstrates that for service lives of 15 years and shorter, the environmental load of materials
becomes more important than that of energy and water (of which the annual load is constant). This is even more
so when building services are included.
Based on this exercise, an important conclusion can be drawn that for common functional lifespans of modern
offices, approximately 25 years, building materials are much more important to the environmental load than
previously calculated on the basis of a 75 years reference lifespan. The lesson for effective sustainable design is:
In the case of a long projected building lifespan: focus mainly on sustainable energy solutions
In the case of an expected or projected lifespan of around 20 years: pay attention to both energy
consumption and building materials
In the case of a projected lifespan of less than 20 years: focus on a sustainable use of building materials and
re-use or recycling after demountage or deconstruction
These recommendations are of course additional to the basic conditions for a certain service life, related to the
quality and measurements of office buildings.
09.03.02 Other service life strategies
The outcome presented demonstrates the importance of a long-lasting supporting structure (or a long-lasting re-
use of structural components), but does this also apply to the other building components? I calculated a variant
where the structural detailing also had a service life of 100 years, and the built-in components and finish 50 years
(strategy B). This strategy led to no difference in the long service life scenarios but was more unfavourable to
shorter building service lives (see table 09.08). For versatile and short-cyclic markets, as the one for office real
estate, this therefore proves a bad strategy.
The importance of the supporting structure validates the assumption that as long as the supporting structure is
maintained for a long period, short-cyclic alterations to other building components do not greatly influence the
environmental performance. I tested this by putting the service lives of all other components at 5 years (strategy
C). The results, which do not visibly differ from the first strategy can again be seen in table 09.08. They support
the statement that a long-cyclic supporting structure may be combined with short-cyclic components,.
Finally, a strategy with short-cyclic service lives (10 years) for all components, including the supporting structure
(D) was calculated. In this case, the results for all service life scenarios are comparable.
Table 09.08: Improvement factors of different strategies for different building service lives
strategy service life of the building
200 100 75 50 25 15 10
improvement factor (with respect to A - 25)
A. specific service lives 2.79 2.79 2.31 1.77 1.00 0.62 0.43
B. long-cyclic service lives 2.79 2.79 2.09 1.61 0.80 0.48 0.32
C. short-cyclic service lives, excl. structure 2.79 2.79 2.29 1.77 0.99 0.63 0.45
D. short-cyclic service lives, all 2.79 2.79 2.62 2.79 2.33 2.09 2.79
Acknowledging all limitations of this re-assessment, the best results (in dark-shaded cells) indicate that (1) great
improvements are possible with respect to common practice; (2) when the building service life is long, there is no
difference between the strategy used; (3) a long building service life is always favourable to a shorter one, unless
(4) all components have short-cyclic lifespans. In this case, a shorter building service live also becomes
favourable.

09.03.03 Optimal solutions
On the basis of the current functional service life of 25 years or less, there are two strategies for office
accommodation leading to the following most favourable results:
1. A supporting structure that can last at least 100 years, with a short-cyclic façade, built-in components and
finish, which can easily be replaced in case of another organisation, or even another function. Notice that, in
order to make this building service life of more than 100 years possible, the supporting structure needs to be
over-dimensioned, wider, and higher than usual.
2. Short-cyclic service lives for all building components, including the supporting structure. It will however be
difficult to develop a supporting structure that is not meant to last longer than 10 years, as a result of the
many technical requirements associated with its bearing and stabilising function. Section 09.03.04 however
will discuss an experiment that was not meant to last longer than 20 years.
With regard to the problem of a short lifespan for the supporting structure, a timber structure might perhaps not
last 100 years, but in this case 25 years should be no problem. Such a structure, combined with a façade that can
also last the usual 25 years and short-cyclic built-in components and finish, should achieve the best performance.
Table 09.09 presents the results for this strategy. If the supporting structure and structural detailing were designed
for 15 years, the 15-years scenario would lead to the best results. Thus, in general, the supporting structure
should be adapted to the desired building service life. These findings support the validity of IFD building,
discussed in subsection 09.03.04.
Table 09.09: Outcome of the 25-years strategy

building component service life replacements service life of the building
25 15 10 25 15 10
unit > y - - - e€/y e€/y e€/y
supporting structure 25 1 1 1 194,650 324,416 486,624
structural detailing 25 1 1 1 52,009 86,682 130,023
built-in components 5 5 3 2 32,311 32,311 32,311
finish 5 5 3 2 56,919 56,919 56,919
total 335,889 500,328 705,877
improvement factor 2.79 1.87 1.33
In the outcome of table 09.09, possible environmental advantages of the selected building materials (for instance
the advantageous timber for the structure) are not taken into account. The values are still based on average data
from the government office buildings case study of chapter 06.
The relation to economic lifespans

The strategies assessed previously are regardless of economic consequences. Acknowledging the difference
between the technical and economical lifespan of a building, Erkelens [2003] distinguishes different scenarios and
related them to environmentally sound designs for infrastructure formulated by Durmisevic & Dorsthorst [2002]:
Technical > economical lifespan components should be re-usable and recyclable
Technical = economical lifespan components should be recoverable and recyclable designs
Technical < economical lifespan components should be replaceable and recyclable designs
Erkelens' scenarios and design strategies for infrastructure may be directly translated to building components.
09.03.04 IFD Building
Definition
Industrial, flexible and demountable (IFD) building can support short-cyclic building and reduce the amount of
construction and demolition waste. Hendriks & Vingerling [2000] described the principles of IFD as follows:
Industrial manufacture
No waste on the construction site

Construction becomes assembling

Flexibility of the building during the course of life
Flexibility during the design stage
Demountability and reusability or recyclability of the building.
In the project Flexible Breakthrough [Hendriks et al., 2002], an apartment building was adapted in accordance with
the principles of IFD building. In the project, the load-bearing concrete inner walls of a typical Dutch apartment
building were removed and replaced by a steel frame, enlarging the living space and enabling larger rooms in the
apartment. Interesting results were [Hendriks et al., 2003]:
The removal of the load-bearing walls cost four times less labour than conventional demolition.
The installation of the four story high steel frame took half a day.
The connection of the concrete floor to the steel frame proved to be very simple and cost effective. with A
traditional solution is drilling away a top-layer stretch and replacing it by new concrete. With respect to this,
roughening the hollow core slabs and drilling holes in them for reinforcement concrete resulted in cost
reduction for labour and materials by a factor of 4 (see figure 09.07).
Figure 09.07: Traditional (at right) and more efficient (at left) connection of hollow core slabs
to a steel frame [based on Hendriks et al., 2003]
A specific IFD-project: the XX-office

The XX-project in Delft, Netherlands (figure 09.08), was initiated to study the possibilities and impact of an office
building that was not meant to last, at least no longer than 20 ('XX') years (see figure 09.10). The design contains
components that are either expected to last no longer than 20 years (1), or to be easily dismantled and re-used
(2), or to be at least recycled after 20 years (3). An example of the first principle: the ventilation ducts are made of
cardboard, with steel joints. An example of the second principle: the supporting structure consists of a timber
frame and timber floor elements, which are filled with sand for sound insulation. An example of the third principle
is the glass façades and ground floor of concrete hollow core slabs, which are recycled in the Netherlands.
Figure 09.08: The XX-office in Delft, Netherlands [picture: Rijksgebouwendienst]
An LCA comparison of the supporting structure of the XX-office with alternatives based on a more traditional or
IFD technology and different recycling scenarios [Herwijnen & Blok, 2003] showed that the XX principle performed
best. However, the reference lifespan was taken at 50 years, and the XX-office was only accounted for twice in
that period. When strictly sticking to the principle of 20 years, the entire structure should have been taken into
account 2.5 times or, even more correctly, 3 times. If an extra replacement were taken into account, the
alternative structures with a long lifespan of 50 years would have proven most favourable. Nevertheless, the
comparison of subsection 09.03.03 demonstrated that a strategy such as XX leads to favourable results. Besides,

a timber structure performs relatively well with respect to other alternatives with a short design lifespan. This will
be further explored in chapter 10.
The three L's

Already in 1974, Alex Gordon presented his philosophy of the three L's: long life, loose fit, low energy, pleading for
energy-efficient buildings designed for a long lifespan, however with built-in components appropriate for
adaptations to altered functional demands [Gordon, 1974]. In his time before LCA, Gordon could not quantify and
thereby prove his simply stated concept. However, the importance of energy to the environmental load of office
buildings, as demonstrated in chapter 06, as well as the impact of the building service life to sustainability, as
demonstrated in this chapter and the two preceding it, proves how effective his 3-L's philosophy turns out to be.

REFERENCES FOR THE TIME FACTOR
Literature
Alexander K., Fenker M., Granath J.A., Haugen T. & Vissanen K.; 'Usable workplaces', in: Proceedings of the CIB
World Building Congress 2004, in conjunction with the 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality, Ventilation
and Energy Conservation in Buildings, and the 6th International Conference on Multipurpose High-rise Towers and Tall
Buildings (CD-rom); Institute for Research in Construction, NRC-CNRC, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2004
Bamforth Ph. & Alisa M.; 'Lifetime data and systematics for presenting lifetime data', in: Proceedings 2nd International
Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (607-616); RIL/VTT,
Finland, 2003
Banham R.; The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment; Architectural Press, London, UK, 1969
Brand S.; The Clock of the Long Now: Time and Responsibility - The Idea Behind the World's Slowest Computer; Basic
Books, New York, USA, 1999
Brandon P.S.; 'Time and the sustainable development agenda', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.),
Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (17-
32); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Clements-Croome, 2004 PM
Dijk K. van, Fraaij A., Hendriks Ch.F. & Mulder E.; 'Clay-brick recovery from masonry debris by means of a thermal
process', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1415-1422);
Dorsthorst B. te & Kowalczyk T.; 'State of the art Deconstruction in the Netherlands', in: Kibert Ch. & Chini A. (eds.),
Overview of Deconstruction in Selected Countries, CIB report Publication 252 (95-143); University of Florida, USA,
2000
Durmisevic E. & Dorsthorst B.J.H. te; 'Building's transformation capacity as the indicator of sustainability', in:
Proceedings Open building conference of CIB 104 - Balancing Resources and Quality in Housing; Mexico, 2002
Erkelens P.A.; 'Infrastructure for different life span', in: Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 -
Integrated Life-time Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (181-185); RIL / VTT, Finland, 2003
Erlandsson M. & Borg M.; 'Generic LCA-methodology applicable for buildings, constructions and operation services -
today practice and development needs', in: Building and Environment 38, 2003 (919-938)
Fanger P.O.; 'Human Requirements in Future Air-Conditioned Environments', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S.
(eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume I (29-38); Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2002
Gordon A.; 'The Economics of the 3 L's Concept', in: Chartered Surveyor B & QS Quarterly, RICS, Winter, 1974
Hendriks Ch.F. (ed.); Nationaal congres Bouw- en Sloopafval, kwaliteit in de keten (in Dutch); Nederlands
studiecentrum, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2000
Hendriks N.A. & Vingerling J.J.; 'Industrial, flexible and demountable (IFD) building technology: a key to sustainable
construction', in: Proceedings International Symposium ILCDES 2000 - Integrated Life Cycle Design of Materials and
Structures; RIL / VTT, Finland, 2000
Hendriks Ch.F.& Dorsthorst B.J.H. te; 'Re-use of constructions at different levels: construction, element or material', in:
Proceedings CIB World Building Congress 2001 - Performance in Product and Practice (CD-rom); CIB/ BCC/ BIA/
ABCB/ BRANZ, Wellington, New Zealand, 2001
Hendriks Ch. & Janssen G.; A New Vision on the Building Cycle; Aeneas, technical publishers, Boxtel, Netherlands,
2004
Hendriks N.A., Nunen H. van & Rutten P.G.S.; 'Project Flexible Breakthrough: Methodology and Design', in:
Proceedings 9th International Conference on Durability of Building Materials and Components; Brisbane, Australia,
2002
Hendriks N.A., Nunen H. van & Rutten P.G.S.; 'IFD Technology for the Renovation of Apartment Buildings: Project
Flexible Breakthrough', in: Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Life-time Engineering
of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (193-198); RIL / VTT, Finland, 2003
Hornby A.S. & Crowther J., Kavanagh K. & Ashby M. (eds.); Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English
(Fifth edition); Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1998
14041:1998(E)); ISO/FDIS, 1998
ISO (International Organization for Standardization); Building and constructed assets - Service life planning - Part 1:
General principles (ISO 15686-1); ISO, 2000
Service life prediction procedures (ISO 15686-2); ISO, 2001
C The Time Factor - References for The Time Factor 207

Performance audits and procedures (ISO 15686-3); ISO, 2002
Janssen G.M.T. & Hendriks Ch.F.; 'Sustainable use of recycled materials in building construction', in: Anson M., Ko
J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1399-1406); Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK,
2002
Jonge H. de; Real Estate in the Corporate Setting - Course in Successful Corporate Real Estate Strategies; Delft
University of Technology, Netherlands, 1999
Keskküla T.; 'The assessment of Technical Situation of Buildings in Estonia', in: Lecture at 2nd International
Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (); Kuopio, Finland,
2003
Kibert Ch.J., Chini, A. & Languell J.; 'Deconstruction as an essential component of sustainable construction', in:
Proceedings CIB World Building Congress 2001 - Performance in Product and Practice (CD-rom); CIB/ BCC/ BIA/
ABCB/ BRANZ, Wellington, New Zealand, 2001
Klunder G.; 'Towards ecological life-cycle design: measuring the environmental impact of housing transformations', in:
Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil
Infrastructures (421-426); RIL/VTT, Finland, 2003
Klunder G. & Nunen H. van; 'The factor of time in life cycle assessment of housing', in: Open House International,
March, 2003 (20-27)
Kohler N.; 'Presentation', at: Intelcity Workshop (under the auspices of the University of Salford, UK); Siena, Italy, 2003
Leijten J.L.; 'Binnenmilieu, productiviteit en ziekteverzuim (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Gezonde Gebouwen (cahier
A3); ISSO/SBR, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Masters L.W. & Brandt E. (eds.); 'Systematic methodology for service life prediction of building materials and
components', in: Materials and Structures / Matériaux et Constructions 22, 1989 (385-392)
Milton D.K., Glencross P.M. & Walters M.D.; 'Risk of Sick Leave Associated with Outdoor Air Supply Rate,
Humidification, and Occupant Complaints', in: Indoor Air, Vol. 10, 2000 (212-221)
Nielsen J.; Usability engineering; Academic Press, 1993
Nunen H., Hendriks N.A. & Erkelens P.A.; 'Influence of service life on Life Cycle Assessments', in: Proceedings 2nd
Nusselder E.J.; 'Restaureren of niet (in Dutch)', in: Syllabus Erfgoed in ijzer en staal; Staalbouwkundig genootschap,
Peeters N.Y.; Tijdelijk Duurzaam Huisvesten - Conceptkeuze voor tijdelijke huisvesting (in Dutch); ARKO Uitgeverij,
Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002a
Peeters N.Y.; Tijdelijk Duurzaam Huisvesten - Hoogwaardig hergebruik op componentniveau (in Dutch); ARKO
Uitgeverij, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002b
RDMZ (Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg); 'Duurzame monumentenzorg', in: Info Restauratie en Beheer, 27
November; RDMZ, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001
RDMZ (Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg); Handleiding selectie en registratie jongere bouwkunst (1850-1940) (in
Dutch); RDMZ, Zeist, Netherlands, 1991
RILEM; Systematic Methodology for Service Life Prediction of Building Materials and Components - RILEM Technical
Recommendation 64; RILEM, 1989
Rongen C.T.H. van; Veranderbaarheid en flexibiliteit van gebouwen; Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands,
1994
Saari A. & Heikkilä P.; 'Building flexibility management', in: Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 -
Integrated Life-time Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (199-204); RIL / VTT, Finland, 2003
Schultmann F.; 'A Planning System for the End-of-Life Management of Buildings', in: Proceedings 2nd International
Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (519-524); RIL/VTT,
Finland, 2003
Soeter J.; interview on the 11th of May 2004
Tupamäki O.; 'Total LCC and Sustainable Construction', in: Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 -
Integrated Lifetime Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (103-109); RIL/VTT, Finland, 2003
Twynstra Gudde; Tijdmetingen hogere overheden (in Dutch); Twynstra Gudde, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 2001
Vroon P.; De psychologische basisbehoeften van de mens (in Dutch); Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht, Netherlands, 1990
Xing W., Pietersen H., Hendriks Ch. & Rem P.; 'Improve the quality of construction and demolition waste by separation
techniques', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1439-1446);
208 References for The Time Factor - C The Time Factor

For the time assessment of the twelve government office buildings, the specific literature for the office buildings
case study mentioned in Volume B - The Basis was also studied.
Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Marcel Dewever, retired Environmental Inspector of the DGBA, PhD-researcher himself, for exchanging thoughts with
me on the topic of qualities outside environmental performance at his pleasant home.
Charles F. Hendriks, professor of Material Sciences and Sustainable Building at the Faculty of Civil Engineering &
Geosciences in Delft, for offering me the opportunity to present the matter addressed in this Volume C - The Time
Factor to the Committee for Chain Management in the Building Industry and at the national symposium Re-use in the
building industry, and for making it a chapter in his book A New Vision on the Building Cycle.
Jo Soeter, lecturer on Building Economics at the Faculty of Architecture in Delft, for reading my preliminary chapters of
this volume and giving valuable comments on it.
Furthermore, I would like to thank Martijn Arets, Kees van der Linden, and the persons of the Dutch Government
Buildings Agency (DGBA) mentioned at the end of Volume B - The Basis, who cooperated with us on the office
buildings case study.
Dobbelsteen A. van den, Arets M. & Linden K. van der; 'The factor time in sustainability - Integration of the building
lifespan in environmental performance and decisions between demolition and re-use', in: Proceedings 2nd International
Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Life-time Engineering of Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (457-462); RIL / VTT,
Finland, 2003
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Linden A.C. van der; 'Managing the factor time in sustainability - A model for the
Impact of the building lifespan on environmental performance', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.),
Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003)
(229-236, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den, Wilde S. de & Timmeren, A. van; 'Rethinking sustainable building - Towards effective
solutions for office work and its accommodation', in: Bustamante W.G. & Collados E.B. (eds.), Proceedings 20th
International Conference PLEA2003 - Passive Low Energy Architecture (CD-rom); Santiago de Chile, Chile, 2003
technology', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.); Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (pp. 1501-1508);
Wadhwa L.C. (eds.); The Sustainable City II - Urban Regenation and Sustainability (pp. 305-314); WIT Press,
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Linden A.C. van der; 'Managing the factor time in sustainability - A model for the
Impact of the building lifespan on environmental performance', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Smart
and Sustainable Built Environment; Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK, to be published in 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Het verrekenen van de levensduur in de milieuscore van gebouwen' (in Dutch), in: Basiswerk
Innovatief Renoveren en Herstructureren (PM); Weka Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Het verrekenen van de levensduur in de milieuscore van gebouwen' (in Dutch), in:
Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam Bouwen (PM); Weka Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Voorwaarden voor een lange gebruiksduur van gebouwen' (in Dutch), in: Praktijkhandboek
Duurzaam Bouwen (PM); Weka Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, to be published in 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Reusing buildings', in: Hendriks Ch. & Janssen G., A New Vision on the Building Cycle (147-
192); Aeneas, technical publishers, Boxtel, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Voorwaarden voor een lange gebruiksduur van gebouwen' (in Dutch), in: Basiswerk
Innovatief Renoveren en Herstructureren (2.3.20 1-28); Weka Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004
C The Time Factor - References for The Time Factor 209

Reports
Dobbelsteen A. van den; Duurzame utiliteitsbouw - Utiliteitsbouw in dienst van mens & milieu (in Dutch); Delft
The reports summed at the end of Volume B also contained information on lifespan aspects of the buildings re-
assessed in this part.
Expert journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'De factor tijd - Het meenemen van de levensduur in milieuvergelijkingen (in Dutch)', in:
Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 2, year 7, July (1-3); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Kantoorinnovatie: meer dan een coole inrichting (in Dutch)', in: Real Estate Magazine, No. 35
(PM); Arko Uitgeverij, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Ontwerpen voor de toekomst - Levensduurstrategieën voor gebouwen met een lagere
milieulast (in Dutch)', in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 4, year 7, December (PM); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V.,
Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Klaase D.; 'De broodnodige focus op een lange gebruiksduur van kantoren - The paradigm
shift (2)', in: Real Estate Magazine no. 20, 2002 (pp. 42-46); Arko Uitgeverij bv, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Hsb maakt uitbreiding op het dak mogelijk - De duurzame transformatie van zorgcentrum
Wiemersheerd in Loppersum', in: nijgh Hout in de Bouw #5/01, July/August 2001; Nijgh Periodieken BV, Schiedam,
Netherlands, 2001
210 References for The Time Factor - C The Time Factor

Front page
A dazzling look into the gigantic conservatory of the Gas
Union office in Groningen, Netherlands. It is a great piece of
engineering but also caused trouble, as the indoor air chilled
against the glazing and caused a cold draft in the entrance
hall beneath. In order to avoid the draft, small holes in the
structure were created to function as hot air blowers. This
more importantly worsening the intended energy saving by the
conservatory. Professional mountaineers need to be hired to
clean the glazing, using the conservatory structure for
climbing.
19 G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
use of the building
09 08 07 C
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
the beginning
10 SUSTAINABLE USE OF RESOURCES
The case study of chapter 06 revealed aspects and building elements that are important to sustainability. In order
to achieve the effectiveness described in chapter 01, for these important aspects and building elements, are
explored in this chapter as well as the possibilities for a significant improvement potential in the use of energy,
building materials, and water. The chapter discusses theoretical solutions and the results of typology studies.
Figure 10.01: The power plant reservoir of Lake Hume in Victoria, Australia, where, by the end of 2002,
the water level had dropped 20 m within three years and has continued to decrease since then:
the water used to be at the level of the stones by the trees
Contents

10.02 Sustainable use of energy 218
10.02.02 Reducing the energy demand 219
10.02.03 Sustainable and other non-fossil energy resources 223
10.02.04 Example studies 226
10.03 Building materials 227
10.03.02 Comparison of floor structures 227
10.03.03 Comparison of complete structural designs 231
10.03.04 Example study: bamboo as a new construction material 236
10.03.05 Other opportunities for a sustainable use of building materials 240
10.03.06 Water 243
10.04 Improvement potential for the use of resources 244
All REFERENCES for Volume D - The Technology Factor can be found on pages 273 to 276.
216 10 Sustainable use of resources - D The Technology Factor

10.01 Introduction
All resources
As introduced in chapter 02, there are several resources related to office accommodation and consecutively to
environmental effects and problems. Figure 10.02 gives a graphic interpretation of these resources and their
inflow, outflow, and stationary effects. Sustainable use means a careful approach to these resources, in order to
mitigate their negative effects.
The issue of land use and the use of space in general will be discussed in Volume E - The Space Factor, and
travel will form a part of the office concepts assessed in Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work. This volume
of the dissertation, in particular this chapter, will discuss the use of energy, materials and water in office buildings.
building materials energy & water land air & space travel
in materials energy & water land air & space materials & fuel
out waste emissions & wastewater waste emissions
stat indoor climate indoor & outdoor climate deterioration outdoor climate outdoor climate
Figure 10.02: Different resources for offices, their inflow ('in'), outflow ('out'), and stationary effects ('stat')
With a lifespan of at least 25 years, the most important elements contributing to the environmental load of office
buildings are energy consumed during operation of the building, followed by the use of building materials, mainly
defined by the supporting structure. These results urged further study on the potential to improve the
environmental performance of office building designs and technologies with regard to energy consumption and the
use of building materials.
Energy, materials and water

In this chapter, the potential of a more sustainable use of resources will be discussed. Although energy
consumption is the most important environmental aspect, the main focus of this chapter will be on explorations
concerning the supporting structure. The reason for this is that most sustainable solutions for energy preservation
and application of sustainable energy resources are already known and practised. In principle, factor 20
improvement with respect to the situation of 1990 is definitely possible, as explorative studies found [Linden &
Dobbelsteen, 2000]. The discussion of the aspect energy, in section 10.02, will therefore be restricted to a concise
overview of measures and opportunities.
As mentioned, the supporting structure is by far the most important element of the environmental load of building
materials. Therefore, its improvement potential, which until this publication little had been known about, needed to
be examined. In section 10.03, studies on the supporting structure, which were conducted with graduation
students at Delft University, and their interesting and important results will be presented.
Water consumption turned out relatively unimportant to the environmental load of office buildings. Nevertheless, I
will briefly discuss this aspect in section 10.04, for reasons I will explain there.
D The Technology Factor - 10 Sustainable use of resources 217

10.02 Sustainable use of energy
Figures
As found in the case study in chapter 06, energy consumption is by far the most important element of
sustainability for office buildings. These findings are supported by the fact that 40% of the energy consumption of
the greatest energy consumer in the world, the USA, is caused by operation energy in buildings. 10% is related to
the extraction, manufacture and transport of building materials [EIA, 1995], thus also relating to construction, even
increasing the importance of energy to sustainability. These figures are comparable to the UK, where buildings
consume 50% of all energy [Glass & Pocklington, 2002]. In Finland, the use of energy per square metre of
housing space has decreased between the years 1960 and 2000; the use per capita however has increased. This
is due to the more than doubled use of housing space per person: 14.3 m2 in 1960, and 35.3 m2 in the year 2000
[Punkki & Pääjärvi, 2003]. This development demonstrates the inter-linkage between the use of space and energy
consumption, as Volume E - The Space Factor will discuss.
Most important consumers for offices

As the office buildings case study indicated, the three main sources of energy consumption in an average office
are heating (and cooling), lighting, and equipment (mainly computers), all contributing to approximately 30% of the
environmental load of energy. An effective approach therefore should be directed at these three aspects. As the
development of computers and their energy use is beyond the architect's and building engineer's influence, I
decided not to spend any time and energy on this.
With regard to lighting, sustainable solutions are already well-known, whether you seek them in technological
measures (efficient lighting systems and building management systems) or architecture (orientation, glass
proportions, and sophisticated daylight systems). These solutions however require a delicate balance with heating
and cooling, because they are closely related to lighting. Finding the optimum between the aspects daylight
access, artificial lighting, inner heat production by lighting and daylight, and transmission losses through glass
panels is an interesting and valuable study. Nevertheless, since I think it will not enhance efficient systems
currently already applied by a great factor, I did not include it in this research.
Heating has always played an important role in energy consumption of buildings, but for office buildings it is
becoming relatively less significant with respect to cooling, as the amount of apparatus and electrical power
increases [Werkgroup PARAP, 2002]. This will be explained further on.
The source is decisive

Balaras et al. [2003] found that the average primary energy mix for electricity in Europe is as follows:
Oil: 48%
Coal: 41%
Gas: 9%
Coal/gas: 2%
Note that sustainable energy accounts for less than 1%.
In their sensitivity tests of LCA-comparisons of office buildings, Junnila & Horvath [2003] found that the applied
electricity mix for the LCA of a building proves to be decisive: final results for energy could be plus or minus 50%
with respect to the average, which applies to common, conventional plants. A shift from traditional coal-based
plants to more sustainable solutions as power from biomass, or even solar or wind power can mean going from
nothing to sustainability.
Strategy
The greatest improvement potential therefore is expected from the use of sustainable energy resources.
In terms of energy, stated simply, sustainable means eternally available and clean. Taking the sun as the
fundamental resource, energy resources based on it are not expected to deplete within 4.5 billion years. From a
theoretical point of view, therefore, efficiency will not be an issue anymore if a sustainable resource provides the
global economy with the energy required. However, since sustainable energy technologies are economically not
competitive yet with technologies based on fossil energy and since increasing the demand for energy will
financially put sustainable resources further behind, a first step needs to be a reduction in the demand for energy.

Therefore, despite the potential of sustainable energy, efficiency improvement remains important, although
preferably directed at stages before their use in buildings. Hartkopf calculated [2003] that only 2 to 4% of the initial
primary energy is applied usefully. For every source of energy, every 'lifecycle' phase can be optimised: from
extraction or reception of the resource itself, the conversion, transport, storage, and the end-use, to the final waste
phase. In terms of this research, however, this is not an objective. The focus will be on the eventual application
and potential in office buildings, using the technology behind the supply of energy as a boundary condition.
Outline
In this section, I will discuss first the potential reduction of the energy demand through location and design of the
office building, by which the present application of sustainable energy resources would already become more
effective. I will do this step by step, from location to detail. Furthermore, sustainable energy resources will be
discussed, as well as their potential for office buildings and in the urban situation, with exemplifying studies on
weather- and daytime-adaptable façades and large glass-covered spaces.
Although energy is essential to sustainable building and many things may be said about the topic, I will not
elaborate much on this aspect because, as I mentioned, most technological and design measures for an energy-
efficient and even sustainable approach to building are already known. Highly efficient and even zero-energy
buildings have been constructed already. Therefore, there are many good studies available on this topic.
10.02.02 Reducing the energy demand
This subsection discusses the solutions related to the location of the office building and its spatial design that
reduce the demand for heating, cooling and lighting. The following measures influencing the energy performance
will be discussed:
Location and urban design
The building orientation
Zoning and compartmentalisation
Heating versus cooling
Location and urban design

Before commencing, it should be remarked that office location is predominantly defined by economical market
conditions and powers beyond the sustainability-driven researcher. Knowing this, I will nevertheless consider the
office location in terms of environmental sustainability.
A first step in a sustainable solution for office buildings is made through the selection of its location. Within
Europe, great differences already occur in the use of energy for heating, depending on geographic location,
habits, and applied technologies: apartments in Greece for instance use 109 kWh/m2, in France 111.4 kWh/m2, in
Denmark 144.1 kWh/m2, and in Poland 261.6 kWh/m2 [Balaras et al., 2003]. With regard to their geographic
location, Greece and Poland use relatively too much energy, which is caused by different energy standards than
in France and Denmark.
The Netherlands is a country with a relatively cool and temperate climate. Nevertheless, in Dutch offices, cooling
is slowly exceeding the energy demand for heating, which will be explained later. For places closer to the equator,
this development will be even stronger. The development toward more cooling in office buildings will also be
amplified by global warming and, in some cases, climatic shifts. For instance, with respect to the average global
temperature, according to many climatologists Europe is expected to become relatively warmer, as opposed to for
example Middle-Africa. This was already discussed in chapter 03.
In any case, the growing demand for cooling in offices urges the selection of a location that is cooler rather than
warmer. On a global scale, theoretically, this would interestingly mean the replacement of all office activities to the
temperate northern areas of Europe, North America and Asia, or the southern areas of Africa, South America and
Oceania. The location of offices is of course never decided on the basis of energy considerations. The solution
can however also be influenced per region or country. For instance, high-altitude areas and areas close to the sea
or ocean are more temperate. This is however dependent on the specific situation. On a smaller scale, areas near
open water and in or close to forests are more temperate than non-forested and arid areas.

This last remark forms a bridge to the design of urban areas because not involving woods or water in the decision
for placement of commercial office areas will also make them relatively dry and warm. For instance, Shashua-Bar
& Hoffman [2002] found that trees in courtyards reduce the temperature and thereby the cooling demand. The
urban plan also influences the possibility to receive sun- and daylight in buildings and to use solar energy. For
optimal access of sun- and daylight, the angle of obstruction by other surrounding buildings should not be too
large. A detailed study of the building programme, the orientation to the sun and building heights should provide
the right answers. Some aspects will be discussed below.
Beside the influence on sunshine and daylight, the grid of streets and building blocks influences the wind flow and
thereby the extent of cooling or heating through wind. In particular, in the hot, arid areas in Northern Africa and
Saudi Arabia, urban design and the street pattern is of great influence on the temperature in towns and villages:
streets directed at the hot desert will cause flows of hot air through the city whereas a street direction
perpendicular to it will reduce these flows. If a town or village is surrounded by desert, a closed urban plan will
avoid extensive warming1. A comparable situation exists near the sea or ocean shore: streets perpendicular to the
shore will enable wet, temperate winds to flow through town.
The principles mentioned previously concern cases in which the flow of wind through urban areas is desirable or
undesirable from an energetic point of view. In temperate and cold areas, the exact direction of streets is less
important and plays a different role: for human comfort on the streets, it is preferable to avoid strong wind flows.
This implies that broad, straight roads and high buildings are less desirable. Figure 10.03 gives examples of
commercial office areas in Amsterdam (the Arena area) and London (Chiswick Park). Open water, broad and
straight streets, high individual buildings, and buildings placed inline are an assurance of the nuisance by wind. I
should mention however that Chiswick Park is designed with considerably lower buildings and a park surrounding
and partly integrated in the area, improving the outdoor climate. The Arena area contains hardly any trees.
Figure 10.03: Two examples of open, windy plans for a commercial office area: the Arena area in Amsterdam (a, left),
and Chiswick Park, in London [picture: Sebastiaan de Wilde] (b, right): open water, broad streets, high individual buildings,
and buildings placed inline are an assurance of great wind speeds, making the area less comfortable
Beside sun and wind, the science of urban building physics relates to more aspects (e.g. noise nuisance). In
terms of this dissertation, however, the topic will not be discussed any further.
Orientation of the building

The orientation of an office building is strongly related to the urban grid in which it is located. The sustainable
design parameter of orientation is mostly connected to the use of passive or active solar energy. In general, an
orientation of the long façade from southwest to southeast is most favourable for an optimal reception of solar
heat. In the case of a pure south elevation, in summertime due to the high position of the sun, undesirable solar
heat can easily be obstructed through overhangs and canopies. A west or east elevation would need vertical
awnings, obscuring the space behind them.
With a flat roof, the building's orientation will not be decisive for an optimal use of solar cells and panels.
1
In countries with a warm or hot climate, the use of patios underlines this and the presence of fountains demonstrates the knowledge of
the cooling effect of flowing water.

Figure 10.04 depicts a 'climate compass' that indicates, for the Dutch situation, the best orientations with regards
to direct solar radiation, occurrence, speed and relative humidity of the windflow, and temperature (with respect to
an average situation on the land), related to the time of year [Dobbelsteen, 1993, based on meteorological
sources]. Such a climate compass can be a tool for sustainable planning and building design. For instance, a
southwest elevation should use different materials and detailing than a southeast elevation, due to humidity (rain)
and temperature differences of the winds on these elevations.
Figure 10.04: The climate compass, applying to the Netherlands, indicating the best orientations for direct solar radiation,
occurrence, force and relative humidity of the windflow, and temperature
Zoning and compartmentalisation

The office-building layout can also be adapted to the orientation. As cooling becomes more important than
heating, internal orientation or zoning of buildings needs to change. The sustainable building advice used to be
orientation of permanently occupied spaces on the south, southwest or southeast side of a building, in order to
reduce heating energy. Nowadays, however, rooms permanently occupied may better be situated at the north
elevation of office buildings, whereas infrequently used spaces such as meeting rooms and flexible workplaces
may be situated at the south side of the office floor.
Compartmentalisation is closely related to zoning because it implies the spatial, thermal, and acoustic isolation of
functions with different needs, e.g. temperature, light, fresh air, and humidity. Compartmentalisation avoids
unnecessary energy losses. Tuning the indoor climate of the whole office floor to average properties, and locally
adapting this average, leads to inefficiencies.
Thermal insulation
After the global energy crisis of the year 1973, thermal insulation in buildings importantly altered the use of energy
for heating. However, it also led to an increase of cooling demands, of which figure 10.05 illustrates this principle
[Gerritse, 2004]. This development is further stimulated by transparent building designs (daylight!).

ventilation + solar heat gain

transmission + internal heat
more insulation
production
Winter Summer
heating cooling
m³ gas kWh electra
Figure 10.05: Impact of more thermal insulation on transmission and ventilation losses,
and thereby on heating and cooling demands [Gerritse, 2004]
This development is in particular visible in the average energy demand for heating and cooling for Dutch
government offices throughout the years, demonstrating a decrease of heating energy and an increase of cooling
energy from the years 1975 until 1990 (see figure 10.06). The year 1990 more or less shows an equilibrium
between heating and cooling. Nevertheless, over the last years, the development towards cooling has persisted
because the energy preservation requirements, which are hardly ever directed at cooling performances, have also
been forced up, floor space is more efficiently used, and the use of equipment producing internal heat has
increased. As an extra drawback, a shift from heating to cooling leads to an increased use of primary energy,
because cooling is based on electrical energy, which is subject to greater efficiency losses.
m³ natural gas
x 1000
12
10
2
July
Aug
May
Sep
Nov
Dec
Feb
Jun
Mar
Jan
Apr
Oct
1975 heating- 1990

1975 cooling ..1990
insulation levels 1975 and 1990
Figure 10.06: Development of the use of energy for heating and cooling in Dutch offices between 1975 and 1990:
the amount for heating has decreased, while the amount for cooling has grown [adaptation of Gerritse, 2004]
These developments validate the question whether further insulation requirements, without additional technical
adjustments, will be effective for offices.
Thermal mass
Mass of the building inside the insulation layer stabilises the indoor temperature. A good balance between use
characteristics that influence the indoor climate on the one side and building mass and thermal insulation on the

other side will positively influence the consumption of energy, before any technology is applied. For spaces
permanently occupied, indoor climate stabilisation through thermal mass is useful, whereas spaces irregularly
used are better helped with less mass, facilitating the ability for quick heating up or cooling down. The tendency of
offices to heat up rather than cool down requires local extraction of waste heat. This, and many other arguments
concerning the indoor air quality urge the application of local, personal air facilities, as tested and presented by
Fanger [2002] and Hartkopf et al. [2003].
For offices, the decision between light- or heavy-weight building is delicate and resembles the weighing of
monumental or temporary buildings, as discussed in chapter 09. A long-lasting building, or meant to last long,
possibly accommodating more functions than just office work will probably be better served with a durable,
massive structure. Demountable buildings for short functional spans could better be constructed of light
components. Nowadays, technologies based on heat exchangers and heat pumps enable relatively light buildings
to use thermal mass 'at a distance': the ground beneath or beside the building, groundwater, or open water.
Approach on an urban scale

The approach to sustainable building in general is directed at separate buildings. Tackling energy on an urban
scale, especially when the location is intensively used, can yield scale and efficiency advantages. Many technical
utilities services are more efficient on an urban scale rather than on the building scale.
Functional diversity can also be advantageous to the efficiency of technical utilities, mainly heating and cooling. If
a perimeter building or urban area is used for more functions, e.g. shops, offices and apartments, combined
technical utilities and building services will be more efficiently used 24 hours a day than separate facilities.
Furthermore, coupling energy services enables bringing supply and demand into equilibrium. For instance, as
offices produce more heat than they require, whereas dwellings still need more heating than cooling, an integrated
system reduces the peaks in both demands, thus improving the energy performance. For transitional seasons, the
storage of heat and cold is a necessity for this system.
An aspect that had not yet been studied is the use of materials for building services in buildings and technical
utilities on the urban scale. For sustainable building, these elements were only involved in terms of their energy
consumption. Nevertheless, Brosowsky [2002] found that, on the basis of a 75 years reference lifespan,
approximately 10% of the environmental load of an urban residential district, including the houses and their annual
energy consumption, is caused by the materials used for urban utilities: ducts, pipes, and intermediate stations.
Additional research by Arets [2003] also led to significant amounts of materials for these utilities, which is why
they will be involved in the new version of the environmental assessment tool GreenCalc. The integral
appreciation of building services and other technical utilities, in terms of the materials used and energy
consumption resulting from them, however still needs to be thoroughly assessed.
10.02.03 Sustainable and other non-fossil energy resources
In this subsection, the decisive factor for sustainable use of energy, namely the use of sustainable energy, will be
briefly discussed. As previously explained, many technologies associated with sustainable energy resources are
already known, so I chose to limit this topic to a treatise on the potential of these technologies, including other not-
fossil resources.
Solar energy
In its simple form of heat reception through windows and glass-covered spaces, and absorbed in building mass,
and in a more indirect form of solar collectors, passive solar energy will always be an effective element of
sustainable design. In this text, however, I will mainly discuss the active form of solar energy: solar power.
The annual energy value of solar radiation on the surface of the Netherlands, including its continental plane of the
North Sea, equals the total energy the world economy annually consumes [Jong & Dobbelsteen, 1998].
Converting this amount of solar radiation to usable power however leads to energy loss. Also, it is practically
impossible to cover this entire area with solar panels, but this clearly indicates that there is enough solar energy
for the world because the Netherlands is small and located at an unfavourable latitude for optimal solar gains.

Modern solar cells achieve efficiencies of 15 to 30% and have become - and are still becoming - technically better
and more cost-effective over the years. The reason why solar panels are not yet broadly applied is the relatively
unfavourable price per kWh with respect to fossil energy. The price is a result of the cost of manufacturing,
demand, and - and this is dangerous, yet true - the decisive role of capitalism in general and oil companies in
particular. Almost all patents on solar technologies are owned by companies directly or indirectly associated with
the production of fossil energy. It is logical, though perhaps not ethical, that these companies do not put too much
effort and money into technologies that, at the moment, are still less profitable than fossil resources.
Nevertheless, the thought that these companies have put effort and money into the acquirement of patents for
solar technologies should be comforting: it is an assurance of the wide introduction of solar energy from the
moment when fossil energy depletes or becomes unattainable for some reason. The great drawback of this
strategy however is that the emission of exhaust gases aggravating the greenhouse effect will linger in the mean
time, and that in the end, fossil fuel will almost be depleted and hence usable for functions other than energy (e.g.
the production of plastics and medicines).
The wind
Indirectly, wind is a result of the sun and the gyration of the Earth. It is therefore a more indirect resource than the
sun itself. Jong & Dobbelsteen [1998] calculated that if countless windmills were optimally distributed on the Dutch
land surface, including all reductions due to their distance, the circular rotor shape, and horizontal and vertical
spatial inefficiencies, regardless of the other functions of the country, wind power could cover approximately half
the electricity demand for the Netherlands. As already explained, if optimally planned, solar power could easily
cover the entire demand.
Nevertheless, wind power has already proven itself more cost-effective than solar panels. And recently, small
windmills can be applied on buildings in urban areas, enabling direct use in these buildings. The integration of
wind technologies in office buildings offers promising results [Mertens, 2001].
The shallow and deeper Earth crust

The Earth crust is also a resultant of solar energy, from the outside as well as (historically) from within. With a
delay, and dependent on the depth, the shallow ground follows the average air temperature of the atmosphere. It
is therefore tempers extreme temperature levels, thus cooling in the Summer and warming in the Winter. The use
of this source can be passive (buildings dug into the ground, or via groundwater collection, or water- or air-ducts)
or active (by means of heat exchangers and heatpumps) - see Kristinsson [2002]. The soil may also be used as a
means of heat and cold storage [Kristinsson, 2002].
Waste heat
When waste heat is produced, exploiting it of course contributes to a more efficient and sustainable use of
resources. By definition, waste heat is not a sustainable resource, as it may be a result of any source.
The use of waste heat is an example of the cascade principle. This is a strategy generally applying to all
resources, but will be briefly mentioned here. It implies that a resource is first used in the function of the highest
possible grade, and residual resources of that and following processes in lower-graded functions. In terms of
energy, it means that high-value energy, of a high temperature, be used for high-grade applications and energetic
products resulting from it being applied in lower-graded functions. As an odd example: the combustion of gas
causes a temperature of 1500oC; to use this potential for heating up a building to 20oC may be considered a
wasteful process, whereas the use of waste heat from e.g. cooling towers for this function is smarter and more
sustainable. The terms exergy and exergetic efficiency relate energy efficiency to the stages of the cascade.
In buildings, waste heat can also be re-used and upgrade incoming fresh air. With regard to this the development
of the breathing window [Kristinsson, 2003] is promising. First, this heat recovery system saves the greater part of
energy for heating and ventilation (constituting almost half of the total energy consumption). Second, it makes the
building services for heating and ventilation superfluous, potentially reducing the floor height for offices by 15%
(thus reducing the use of space and materials), or enabling longer use of old buildings with a limited floor height.
Water
In terms of power from river and tidal plants, water can also be an interesting sustainable energy resource. River
water power plants have long been considered producers of sustainable energy (after all, water is abundantly
available). However, in the case of large-scale projects, the construction of these plants often led to a great

deterioration of cultural and natural areas that were required to be flooded. Moreover, these plants also often
influence the eco-systems up- and downstream negatively.
Power from tidal plants is another story. As far as I know, these plants provide coastal areas with less ecological
problems than river plants. There are two main principles for tidal energy extraction: use of great tidal level
differences, and use of energy from waves, either through the height differences of waves or on the basis of piezo
energy. Great tidal differences are very local, whereas waves provide opportunities anywhere in coastal zones.
Kristinsson [2002] designed solutions for energy extraction from waves.
Despite the opportunities of water energy, Jong & Dobbelsteen [1998] calculated that, with respect to the total
demand, their potential yield remains limited.
Biomass
The maximum efficiency of the conversion of solar energy in plants is 1.2% [Jong & Dobbelsteen, 1998]. That is at
least a factor of 10 less effective than modern solar cells. Moreover, the incineration of biomass from plants
cannot be 100% efficient and will further produce CO2 and other emissions. Knowing these figures, recent
incentives to widely construct biomass plants and exploit young forests specifically grown for the plant furnace
must seem rather unsustainable. Nevertheless, in terms of emissions, clean and efficient incineration of plant
residues and organic waste is eventually equal to composting, with the extra advantage that their internal energy
is usefully applied. The incineration of young trees and other plants however is a waste of ecologic capital and
CO2-absorbing capacity. And we should not forget that even burning organic waste is a form of accelerated
consumption of fossil resources: composting organic waste once meant the birth of fossil fuels.
Nuclear power
There is repetitive discussion on the question whether nuclear energy can be considered sustainable or not.
Again, there are figures that should support the outcome of this discussion, even assuming that nuclear energy
can be safely produced and stored. One ton of nuclear fuel produces approximately 80,000 ton of debris [Hartkopf
et al., 2003], which needs to be safely stored. This waste has a half-value time of 150 years. When we think about
150 years ago and remember what has happened since then, even safe storage should be considered unsafe
when it requires at least 150 years of international stability. This hardly makes nuclear power - I should add in its
present form - a sustainable resource. Besides, the world already has the greatest and safest nuclear plant at its
disposal: the sun.
Hydrogen technology
A great problem concerning sustainable energy resources such as the sun and wind is their non-continuous
availability. Therefore, energy storage is an important issue. However, the present storage possibilities based on
chemical technologies such as in batteries have many drawbacks. The technology that could alter this is based on
hydrogen, enabling efficient storage, with smaller conversion losses. Hydrogen is often incorrectly considered a
sustainable energy resource: it is only a possible sustainable energy storage form, from which power is regained
through hydrogen fuel cells. In the previous years, safe storage tanks have been developed for hydrogen, limiting
the risks of this highly reactive element. It nevertheless remains explosive in case of calamities.
Prior to the use of hydrogen, it needs to be produced from water by electrical power. The current problem is that
this process is mostly based on traditional, fossil fuel-based plants. With regard to this usage, in terms of carbon
dioxide production, coal-powered hydrogen would produce 500 g CO2 per driven mile, whilst normal cars using
petrol produce 140 g CO2 per mile [Hartkopf, 2003]. Therefore, from a sustainable point of view, hydrogen
technology should only be coupled to electricity from plants or installations powered by sustainable energy
resources.
There are additional objections to the unrestricted application of hydrogen technologies. Highly reactive volatile
hydrogen may not only react to oxygen, yet also to other particles in the atmosphere, which we cannot yet foresee
yet, leading to potentially hazardous situations. As an analogue example, volatile methane from fossil fuels more
seriously aggravates the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide.

10.02.04 Example studies
The weather- and daytime-adaptable building façade

In order to reduce the environmental load of office buildings caused by energy and building materials, graduation
student Sabine Jansen developed and assessed solutions for a dynamic, weather- and daytime-adaptable office
façade for her master's thesis [Jansen, 2002]. It concerned the possibilities to change the admittance of solar
radiation, to change heat insulation values, and to enable thermal heat storage (both night cooling in Summer and
storage of solar radiation in Winter).
This study was published and presented at a conference [Bokel et al., 2003].
The following steps were taken:

The total environmental load (energy and materials) of a 1990 reference façade and some variants were
determined.
After analysing the thermal behaviour of the façades, theoretically possible solutions for energy preservation
were designed and calculated. Energy consumption after application of these theoretical solutions was
calculated.
For the most promising energy-saving principles, design concepts with common and available materials
were developed and their total environmental costs were determined. The technical feasibility of the
concepts were also taken into account.
The most favourable option was worked out in detailed drawings and assessed in order to determine the
final environmental performance.
The final façade design achieved a heating energy reduction of 66%, leading to a 51% reduction of environmental
cost by energy consumption, including cooling energy. Including the use of materials, the final design achieved an
environmental improvement factor of 1.83 with respect to the 1990 reference façade (see figure 10.07).
For this weather- and daytime-adaptable façade, the transparent surfaces for outside view and daylight access
were separated, while using the closed parts for solar reception on the outside and heat storage in water ducts on
the inside. The U-value of the windows is extremely low and access of daylight can be adjusted.
improvement factor
0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90
1990 reference
1. roller blind
2. HR+ glazing
facade solution
3. cantilever panel
4. sliding window
1+2
3 + lime bricks
1 + lime bricks
1 + waterfilled
1 + 2 + waterfilled
Figure 10.07: Outcome of different adaptable façade solutions [based on Jansen, 2002]
Large glass-covered spaces

Few studies have been done on the integral environmental impact of large glass-covered spaces, such as atria,
conservatories and galleries. The influence of these spaces is difficult to model: it largely depends on the specific
design and use. First, there are additional building materials required for the supporting structure and the glass
panels, producing a negative environmental influence, whereas minor, environmentally benign materials may be

used for the indoor façades. Second, a glass-covered space influences the consumption of energy for heating,
cooling and ventilation. For instance, a non-heated atrium can work as a buffer zone, an extra insulating layer for
the façade and a 'pre-heater' of fresh air. It can however also lead to extensive heating up in the summertime,
requiring additional cooling measures. There is even a more complicated situation when a glass-covered space is
climatised.
For his master's thesis Thomas Metz studied large glass-covered spaces [Metz, 2004]. This study is soon to be
published in a scientific journal. Thomas modelled buildings with different types of atria and conservatories used in
different ways and compared these to a reference building without any glass-covered space. All alternatives
needed to comply with a general functional unit, consisting of several technical and functional requirements. The
impact of the glass-covered spaces on the use of building materials, energy and space, as well as physical
aspects of the indoor climate were studied.
The interesting outcome of the study was that in terms of the environmental performance, there is no strong
preference for a building with or without an atrium or conservatory. The positive and negative effects on the use of
building materials and energy consumption are almost in balance. The conclusion from this study therefore is that
if a large glass-covered space can improve the quality of a building, i.e. for its users, no objection could be made
from a sustainable point of view. Or rather, glass-covered space can be recommended, as they improve the
building quality and thereby possibly prolong the expected service life.
10.03 Building materials
As the case studies presented in chapter 06 demonstrated, the use of building materials on average contributes to
20% of the environmental load of office buildings. This figure is based on a lifespan of 75 years. As calculated in
chapter 09, this contribution increases with a shorter service life. Analysis of the results also indicated that the
supporting structure was responsible for the greater part of the environmental load of building materials: almost
60%. This figure demonstrated that improving the structural design would most probably yield the most substantial
environmental profit. It was therefore a conscientious decision not to study other building material applications
than the supporting structure.
As introduced in chapter 01, effectiveness is a product of importance and improvement potential. The supporting
structure may be important, it may also be an element of a building difficult to be improved in an environmental
sense. Therefore, the next step was to determine the environmental differences and improvement potential of
different structural alternatives. As an integrated or additional element to the PhD-research presented, three
graduation students - Martijn Arets, Ricardo Nunes, and Pablo van der Lugt - executed environmental studies on
the supporting structure, one on floor structure alternatives, one on the combination of materials in basic structural
designs, and one on bamboo as a new construction material for the western world. The approach and results of
these projects will be presented in the following subsections.
10.03.02 Comparison of floor structures
The case study of office buildings in Volume B showed that horizontal elements of the supporting structure
(beams, floor and roof structure) cause about 70% of the environmental load of the supporting structure, hence
within the supporting structure these are very relevant. The floor structure (including roof, ground-floor and story
floors) is an especially important part of the environmental load. In the year 2001, Martijn Arets graduated and
presented his research on the environmental comparison of floor alternatives for different structural spans.
Martijn's master thesis 'Environmental comparison of supporting structures', a basis for this subsection, [Arets,
2001] was followed by many national and international publications [Arets, 2003a; Arets, 2003b; Arets &
Dobbelsteen, 2003; Arets et al., 2003; Arets & Dobbelsteen, 2002a; Arets & Dobbelsteen, 2002b].

Figure 10.08: Pictures of the BubbleDeck floor and cross-sections of the other assessed floor structures [adaptation of Arets,
2001]
Floor alternatives selected

For the assessment, the following floor structure alternatives commonly used in western office buildings were
selected (graphically clarified by figure 10.08):
Prefab concrete: hollow core slabs
Prefab concrete/cast on site: composite floor-plates (reinforced)
Prefab concrete/cast on site: composite floor-plates (pre-stressed)
Prefab concrete: TT-slabs
Steel/concrete combination: Steel plate-concrete floor
Concrete cast on site: BubbleDeckTM floor
Timber: timber beam floor
Concrete entirely cast in situ was not involved in the assessments. This solution is expected to be comparable to
the reinforced composite floor-plates.
BubbleDeck is a trademark. The floor with this name contains plastic hollow balls between the reinforcement grid,
artificially raising the floor height whilst saving on the amount of material. The floor spans from column to column,
without supporting beams.
Assessment methodology
The floor structures were assessed for different structural spans, starting with 4.8 m, with steps of 0.6 m, up to
16.8 m, without intermediate beams. For every structural span the dimensions of the floors were calculated in
accordance with the functional unit. The functional unit consisted of requirements for structural, safety and comfort
aspects: the imposed load, deformation restrictions, required dimensions, fire safety (of the construction), and
thermal and sound insulation. In order to compare floors, the next functional unit was defined.
Variable load: 2.5 kN/m2 (standard for offices) and 5.0 kN/m2 (e.g. to enable flexibility or heavy functions),
excl. dead weight
Deformation restrictions: in accordance with the Dutch standards
Fire safety requirement: 120 minutes
Sound insulation requirements: in accordance with the Dutch standards for dwellings
Thermal insulation was no consideration, given the objective of assessing internal floor structures. The
environmental load of every alternative was related to 1 m2 floor.

The alternatives were designed in such a way that they met all requirements, including finish. As a result, the
timber floor needed to be equipped with plaster slabs to improve its fire safety.
As already explained, there was an important difference between the BubbleDeck floor and the other floor types.
The BubbleDeck floor has a load bearing capacity in two directions. The other floors have a load-bearing capacity
in one direction and beams are necessary to divert the load to the columns, as shown in figure 10.09. This
difference was solved by subtracting the environmental load of beams from the environmental load of the
BubbleDeck floor.
Figure 10.09: Load bearing capacity of floors in one and two directions [Arets, 2001]
For the environmental load, the LCA-database of the assessment tool GreenCalc was applied, containing recent
LCA-data and coupling these to environmental cost. The end-results were therefore expressed by environmental
euros. In addition to this environmental assessment, the real cost of the alternatives was calculated, in order to
determine the integral cost, the sum of environmental and real money.
Environmental cost of floor structures at different spans

120 minutes fireproof safety, Qvar = 2,5 kN/m2
275
1: hollow core slab
250 2: composite floor-plate (reinforced)
3: composite floor-plate (pre-stressed)
4: TT-slab
225
5: steelplate-concrete floor
environmental cost [e€/m2]
2 3 7 6: timber floor
200 7: BubbleDeck floor
175
1
150
5 4
125
6
100
75
4.8 6.0 7.2 8.4 9.6 10.8 12.0 13.2 14.4 15.6 16.8
span [m]
Figure 10.10: The environmental cost of different floor types at different spans [Arets, 2003a]
Outcome of environmental cost

The assessment led to a graph of the environmental cost of every alternative related to the structural span, as
presented in figure 10.10. In this figure, lower environmental costs, or lower lines are more favourable than higher
ones. The lines sometimes show discontinuities, as a result of the changeover to a new floor type supplied by the
industry.
Figure 10.10 shows that, for short spans the timber floor and the hollow core slab, and for larger spans the
concrete TT-slab cause the lowest environmental loads. This means that, from an environmental point of view and
based on the mentioned requirements, these floor types are preferred for these spans. The worst solutions are the
two versions of the composite concrete plates, the pre-stressed variant being more favourable. This relatively bad

performance is caused by the great amount of concrete in the cross-section. Other concrete alternatives save on
material through holes (hollow core slabs), balls (BubbleDeck), a stronger material supporting the concrete
(steelplate-concrete floor), or a more efficiently shaped cross-section (TT-slabs). The timber beam floor is most
favourable for shorter spans because of the lower environmental load of the basic material.
The results and relationships for a greater variable floor load (5 kN/m2; for instance for heavy functions or for
flexibility reasons), are comparable to figure 10.10, with the difference that the timber floor is no alternative
anymore, because it cannot bear the heavier load.
Outcome of integral cost

The real, economic cost of the different floor types plays a stipulating role in the decision-making. The real cost of
all floors was calculated and added to the environmental cost, leading to values for the integral cost. The outcome
is presented by figure 10.11, based on a variable load of 2.5 kN/m2.
The timber beam floor has shifted upwards as a result of the real cost of this floor. Other alternatives show little
change with respect to the environmental cost graph, with the small difference that the hollow core slab is more
profitable than the TT-slab until 7.2 m. Therefore, from a combined environmental and economic point of view, for
short spans, the hollow core slab proves most profitable. For larger spans, the TT-slab is most profitable.
Integral cost of floor structures at different spans

(integral cost = environmental cost + realisation cost)
120 minutes fireproof safety, Qvar = 2,5 kN/m2
1: hollow core slab
375
2: composite floor-plate (reinforced)
3: composite floor-plate (pre-stressed)
350
3 4: TT-slab
325 5: steelplate-concrete floor
7 6: timber floor
2
7: BubbleDeck floor
integral costs [euro's]
300
275
5
1
250
6 4
225
200
175
150
4.8 5.4 6 6.6 7.2 7.8 8.4 9 9.6 10.2 10.8 11.4 12 12.6 13.2 13.8 14.4 15 15.6 16.2 16.8
span [meters]
Figure 10.11: The integral cost of different floor types at different spans [Arets, 2003a]
Conclusions
The outcome provides an indication of the possible environmental improvement factor with respect to standard
solutions. There is a maximum difference of a factor of 2 between two solutions at the same span. With the
knowledge that - in any case in the Netherlands - many offices are constructed with the commonly cheap
composite concrete floor, there is great environmental improvement potential through the use of timber floors for
spans up to 6 m, hollow core slabs up to 6.6 m, and TT-slabs when exceeding 6.6 m.
The following restrictions apply to the findings presented:
The conclusions are only valid for the functional unit mentioned earlier.
The economic and environmental costs are calculated for the Netherlands.
For the environmental and economic costs some assumptions needed to be made; it is therefore more
appropriate to evaluate the difference in costs between the floor types, rather than to solely observe the
absolute values.

Not all possible floor alternatives could be involved in the study. Additional study will therefore provide more
insight in other common (e.g. massive concrete cast in situ) or innovative solutions (e.g. the 'Infra+ floor') for
office floors.
Optimal combinations of building materials

Concrete, steel, and timber are used most commonly for supporting structures. These materials have different
qualities with respect to e.g. tensile strength, compression strength, bending strength, and shear strength. In order
to use as little material as possible it is logical to select a material whose qualities fit the required function: the
right material for the right function. However, in order to reduce the environmental load, a limited environmental
impact is also important. With regard to optimal combinations of materials, the study presented in the following
section gives some more answers.
10.03.03 Comparison of complete structural designs
The study presented in the previous subsection got a follow-up in the graduation project of Ricardo Nunes, from
Portugal. Under the supervision of Martijn Arets and myself, Ricardo compared entire structural designs,
consisting of floors, beams and columns. For each of these components, different material alternatives were taken
into account, and every alternative for one component could be combined with another alternative for another
component. For every combination, the properties of every component were calculated. The research approach
was presented in Arets et al. [2003]. This subsection is based on Ricardo Nunes' preparative work [Nunes, 2003].
Methodology
Basis of the comparison study is an office floor of 64.8 m long and 12.6 m deep, the latter typical for cellular
offices. This basic floor measurement was filled in with nine different structural plans, containing spans of 12.6 m,
or 5.4+7.2 m, or 5.4+1.8+5.4 m over the floor depth, and spans of 5.4 m, or 10.8 m, or 16.2 m over the floor
length. Figure 10.12 depicts them. The floors span between the longer facades.
1 4 7
2 5 8
3 6 9
Figure 10.12: The nine office floor structure plans; structures 3, 6 , and 9 contain a double column row (on both sides of the
corridor, one row is not shown) halfway the floor depth [adaptation of Nunes, 2003]

Basic materials for the structural components were concrete, steel, and timber. Table 10.01 presents the
alternatives per component.
Table 10.01: Structure component alternatives

type floor beams columns
1 hollow core slabs concrete, prefab or cast on site concrete, prefab or cast on site
2 TT-slabs prefab, pre-stressed concrete steel profile
3 timber beam floor steel profile laminated timber
4 BubbleDeck laminated timber -
Again, based on two variable floor loadings (2.5 and 5.0 kN/m2), for every element in the structure, an optimal
solution was found, and their dimensions determined, including the amount of reinforcement in concrete. The
eventual sizes were converted to weights and multiplied by environmental cost. Based on the database of
GreenCalc, the typical environmental costs of table 10.02 were used.
Table 10.02: Typical environmental cost used

basic material weight environmental cost remark
3 3
concrete 2500 kg/m 0.400 e€/kg 1,000 e€/m without reinforcement
steel 7850 kg/m3 3.449 e€/kg 27,075 e€/m3
timber 440 kg/m3 0.952 e€/kg 419 e€/m3
The determination of dimensions started with the simplest floor size applied: 5.4 x 5.4 m. Using the results for the
four floor types from the study presented in the previous subsection, first the dimensions of every beam type were
determined, followed by the dimensioning of the columns (see figure 10.13). Consecutively, the same was done
for other floor sizes.
Figure 10.13: Plan of the functional units: columns (above at right) and beams (below at left) [Nunes, 2003]
Combinations
A great collection of combinations was calculated: 9 structural designs with 4 x 4 x 3 = 48 possible combinations
of components, for two loadings, thus 864 variants in total. This is under the assumption of one floor type for a
whole floor. However, not all material components apply to all structural spans. For instance, the timber beam
floor is only usable for 5.4 m spans, pre-stressed concrete beams were not taken into account for the 5.4 m span,
and the TT floor was only taken into account for the long 12.6 span.

A combination of two floor types, possible for structural designs 2, 4 or 6, in the same structural design was also
calculated. Because of practical drawbacks of such solutions, these combined floors will not be discussed any
further.
It is not worthwhile to present all results. In the following, I will concentrate on the most important findings.
Best results
Table 10.03 presents the best results for the 2.5 kN/m2 loading. These are the combinations achieving an
environmental improvement by a factor of 1.50 and more with respect to the average score of all combinations.
Table 10.03: Best structural combination solutions for a variable loading of 2.5 kN/m2, achieving a factor of at least 1.50
environmental improvement with respect to the average of all combinations
design all results floor beam outer column inner column
cost rank factor material type type type w b type d type d
O1 108,702 16 1.53 hollow core A320 concrete B25/A400 500 300 GL32 230 GL32 260
O1 107,937 15 1.54 hollow core A320 steel IPE 360 GL32 230 GL32 260
O3 104,572 14 1.59 hollow core AB200 timber GL32 550 85 GL32 230 GL32 230
O1 93,671 7 1.78 hollow core A320 timber GL32 750 135 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O1 94,899 10 1.75 hollow core A320 timber GL32 750 135 HE140A HE160A
O1 87,923 4 1.89 hollow core A320 timber GL32 750 135 GL32 230 GL32 260
O1 94,069 9 1.77 TT Tz 2400/330-2 concrete B25/A400 500 300 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O1 95,297 12 1.75 TT Tz 2400/330-2 concrete B25/A400 500 300 HE140A HE160A
O1 88,320 6 1.88 TT Tz 2400/330-2 concrete B25/A400 500 300 GL32 230 GL32 260
O1 93,804 8 1.77 TT Tz 2400/330-2 steel IPE 360 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O1 95,033 11 1.75 TT Tz 2400/330-2 steel IPE 360 HE140A HE160A
O1 88,056 5 1.89 TT Tz 2400/330-2 steel IPE 360 GL32 230 GL32 260
O1 73,424 2 2.27 TT Tz 2400/330-2 timber GL32 700 135 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O1 74,652 3 2.23 TT Tz 2400/330-2 timber GL32 700 135 HE140A HE160A
O1 67,675 1 2.46 TT Tz 2400/330-2 timber GL32 700 135 GL32 230 GL32 260
O3 103,272 13 1.61 timber timber GL32 550 85 GL32 230 GL32 230
O6 108,741 17 1.53 timber timber GL32 850 135 GL32 230 GL32 230
Three basic structural designs perform best: 1, 3 and 6, especially structure 1 (see figure 10.14). Structure 1, with
a depth span of 12.6 and length spans of 5.4 m, leads to the best results with a hollow core floor or a TT-floor.
Structures 3 and 6, supported twice halfway along the floor depth, only perform above the factor 1.50 when timber
beams and columns are involved.
1 3 6
Figure 10.14: Structural designs performing best, from an environmental point of view
The best solution is a combination of TT-slabs spanning 12.6 m, supported by timber beams and timber columns,
an interesting combination leading to almost a factor 2.5 improvement with respect to the average performance! A
close profitable solution is replacing the timber columns by concrete or steel ones. There is a broad collection of
solutions leading to improvement factors between 1.7 and 1.9: hollow core slabs, timber beams, and any column
applied to structure 1, or TT slabs, concrete or steel beams, and any columns, also applied to structure 1.
An important conclusion from table 10.03 is the supremacy of structure 1. This is even more so because this
structure type facilitates excellent inner flexibility. Another important general conclusion is that, from an
environmental point of view, there is no real preference between steel or concrete beams or columns. Selecting
timber beams and columns instead of steel or concrete ones can lead up to a 40% performance improvement.

Nevertheless, as table 10.03 also demonstrates: when TT-slabs or hollow core slabs are selected for structure
type 1, the environmental performance is always good. This is important when a high building needs to be
designed. Here it is not an option for a timber column and beam structure.
Worst results
There are many combinations leading to a performance less than a factor of 1.0 with respect to the average of all
structural combinations. Table 10.04 presents the worst solutions, performing less than the inverse of factor 1.50,
i.e. below factor 0.67. The 'columns' column could have been left out because the results only cause minor
differences to the end-results.
Table 10.04: Worst structural combination solutions for a variable loading of 2.5 kN/m2, achieving less than a factor of 0.67
environmental improvement with respect to the average
cost rank factor material type type type w b type d type d
O7 306,293 168 0.54 hollow core A320 reinf concr B25/A400 1400 600 B25/A400 320 B25/A400 420
O7 302,221 167 0.55 hollow core A320 reinf concr B25/A400 1400 600 HE240A HE300A
O7 291,204 166 0.57 hollow core A320 reinf concr B25/A400 1400 600 GL32 340 GL32 390
O9 281,847 164 0.59 hollow core AB200 reinf concr B25/A400 1000 500 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 250
O9 282,257 165 0.59 hollow core AB201 reinf concr B25/A400 1000 500 HE160A HE200A
O9 275,381 163 0.60 hollow core AB202 reinf concr B25/A400 1000 500 GL32 260 GL32 300
O7 263,473 160 0.63 hollow core A320 steel HE900A B25/A400 250 B25/A400 320
O7 262,326 159 0.63 hollow core A320 steel HE900A HE200A HE300A
O7 255,027 154 0.65 hollow core A320 steel HE900A GL32 300 GL32 340
O9 259,745 157 0.64 hollow core AB200 steel HE600A B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O9 260,717 158 0.64 hollow core AB200 steel HE600A HE140A HE160A
O9 255,593 155 0.65 hollow core AB200 steel HE600A GL32 230 GL32 260
O2 269,998 161 0.62 bubbledeck BD230/BD280 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O2 270,081 162 0.62 bubbledeck BD230/BD280 HE140A HE160A
O2 257,098 156 0.65 bubbledeck BD230/BD280 GL32 230 GL32 260
Table 10.04 demonstrates that structures with a long span at the longer side of the building (7 and 9) perform
worst. In particular, in these variants, the hollow core slabs and reinforced concrete beams perform badly, as a
result of the considerable dimensions of these components, leading to excessive dead weight and requiring
unnecessary bearing capacity. Structure 8, also with long façade spans of 16.2 m, is not visible in table 10.04,
however only performs slightly better than 7 and 9. Structure 2 is a particular case: for the BubbleDeck floor used
in it, this structural design is an unfortunate combination. The three worst structures are depicted in figure 10.15.
7 9 2
Figure 10.15: Structural designs performing worst, from an environmental point of view: structures 7 and 9 always perform
below a factor of 0.67, number 2 only with a BubbleDeck floor
Looking at the materials, the TT-slabs and timber floors do not appear in table 10.04. However, in this case, as a
result of the unfavourably dimensioned beams of structure 9, even the timber floor performs badly. This indicates
that beams become relatively decisive in the case of large spans in the longitudinal direction. In table 10.04, pre-
stressed concrete and timber beams do not appear either. This means that if a long beam span needs to be
made, timber or pre-stressed concrete are the best solutions, with timber first.

Results for a greater variable load

When the variable load is set at 5.0 kN/m2, the number of combinations exceeding factor 1.5 environmental
improvement with respect to the average increases. Table 10.05 presents these best results.
Table 10.05: Best structural combination solutions for a variable loading of 5.0 kN/m2, achieving at least a factor of 1.50
environmental improvement with respect to the average
cost rank factor type specific type specific w b type d type d
O1 119,316 18 1.52 hollow core A320 steel IPE 450 0 0 GL32 230 GL32 300
O3 116,476 15 1.56 hollow core AB200 timber GL32 600 110 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O3 119,183 17 1.52 hollow core AB200 timber GL32 600 110 HE140A HE140A
O1 100,064 7 1.81 hollow core A320 timber GL32 850 135 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 250
O1 100,342 8 1.81 hollow core A320 timber GL32 850 135 HE140A HE200A
O1 90,879 4 1.99 hollow core A320 timber GL32 850 135 GL32 230 GL32 300
O2 116,646 16 1.55 hollow core AB200/VX265 timber GL32 800 135 GL32 230 GL32 260
O6 120,149 19 1.51 hollow core AB200 timber GL32 1050 135 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 200
O1 106,634 11 1.70 TT Tz 2400/430-1 reinf concrete B25/A400 600 300 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 250
O1 106,912 12 1.70 TT Tz 2400/430-1 reinf concrete B25/A400 600 300 HE140A HE200A
O1 97,449 6 1.86 TT Tz 2400/430-1 reinf concrete B25/A400 600 300 GL32 230 GL32 300
O1 105,652 9 1.72 TT Tz 2400/430-1 steel IPE 400 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 250
O1 105,930 10 1.71 TT Tz 2400/430-1 steel IPE 400 0 0 HE140A HE200A
O1 96,467 5 1.88 TT Tz 2400/430-1 steel IPE 400 0 0 GL32 230 GL32 300
O1 82,232 2 2.20 TT Tz 2400/430-1 timber GL32 850 135 B25/A400 200 B25/A400 250
O1 82,510 3 2.20 TT Tz 2400/430-1 timber GL32 850 135 HE140A HE200A
O1 73,047 1 2.48 TT Tz 2400/430-1 timber GL32 850 135 GL32 230 GL32 300
Again, structure number 1 turns out favourable. Best results are again achieved through TT-slabs, timber beams
and timber columns. Structure 3, with hollow core slabs, timber beams and any column type, and structure 6, with
timber beams and timber (or concrete) columns also return. Structure 2 this time joins the list, with hollow core
slabs, timber beams and timber columns.
Not shown here are the worst results in case of the 5-kN load. The list of combinations is also longer than in the
case of 2.5 kN, indicating that for a heavier loading, the appropriateness of structural combinations becomes more
obvious: a structural combination either performs very well, or very badly. Worst combinations for the 5-kN variant
are all structures number 7, 8, and 9 - with a hollow core floor, beams of steel or reinforced concrete, and any
column type - plus again structure 2 with a BubbleDeck floor and any column type.
Overall results
As could already be deduced from table 10.04 and 10.05, there is great variance of environmental load between
the structural combinations. Table 10.06 gives the average, best and worst values of the assessment. The total
floor area is 816 m2, so the average environmental cost is e€ 204 per m2 in the case of a variable load of 2.5
kN/m2, and e€ 220 per m2 in the case of 5.0 kN/m2.
The most important conclusion to be drawn from these figures is that the difference between the best and worst
structural combination, both for the 2.5- and 5.0-kN variants, is more than a factor of 4.5. This factor does not
equal the improvement potential in practice; however, it gives an indication of the impact of an optimal design
solution.
Table 10.06: Average, best and worst performances of the structural alternatives
2.5 kN/m2 5.0 kN/m2
cost rank factor cost rank factor
average 166,337 85 1.11 181,232 66 1.12
best 67,675 1 2.46 73,047 1 2.48
worst 306,293 168 0.54 340,256 132 0.53

For financial reasons, structural solutions as 3, 6, and 9 will not often be applied in the real world because the
cause of their great environmental load lies in inefficient use of structural materials, also transferred into real cost.
Nevertheless, when we take into account that common floor alternatives such as composite concrete plates,
which in the floor structures comparison performed worse than hollow core slabs (not to mention concrete entirely
cast on site), TT-slabs, and the timber beam floor, it is definitely possible that an improvement factor of 4 can be
achieved with respect to common practice.
Considerations
Additional measures to protect steel beams against fire are not included in the environmental load. This may be
realised by an synthetic foam, or plaster board. In the last case it can be seen as finish, belonging to finish of the
interior, thus blurring the comparison. That is why it was not included in the assessment of steel. Timber
measurements are calculated according to construction codes and therefore still fulfill the bearing function and
remain protective in case of fire for the prescribed period.
10.03.04 Example study: bamboo as a new construction material
So far, supporting structures have been studied for the usual materials: concrete, steel, and timber. New types of
building materials might offer opportunities to enhance the environmental performance of buildings in general or
supporting structures in particular. Pablo van der Lugt studied the applicability and environmental and financial
performance of bamboo as a new building material for structures in Western Europe. It is not a really new
application: in Middle America and Southeast Asia, bamboo has already been commonly used for centuries (see
figure 10.16).
Figure 10.16: Bamboo scaffolding in Hong Kong, even at great heights
Pablo is one of the few students whose master thesis [Lugt, 2003] formed the basis of many scientific and expert
publications within a year after graduation [Lugt et al., 2003; Dobbelsteen & Lugt, 2003; Lugt & Dobbelsteen,
2003; Lugt et al. 2004]. Dr. Jules Janssen, internationally acclaimed bamboo expert, also supervised Pablo and
co-authored two of the publications mentioned. This subsection is based on Pablo's work.
Introduction to bamboo
Bamboo, a fast growing renewable material with a simple production process, was expected to be a sustainable
alternative in place of more traditional materials like concrete, steel and timber. However, this had never been
quantitatively proven. In the study presented, an LCA study was conducted for bamboo, in its original form (the
culm) and in an industrial product application (a wall panel). The different environmental effects resulting from
LCA were converted to unified end-results by means of the TWIN2002 model, introduced and discussed in chapter
04.
Research method
The following bamboo products were environmentally assessed:
Air-dried culms of the bamboo species Guadua angustifolia from Costa Rica, based on use (including
transport) in the Netherlands.

Bamboo panels (PlybooTM natural plain-pressed two-layered bamboo panel) produced in Shanghai, China,
based on use in Holland, used as cover for inner walls.
Data for the production processes of these products was retrieved through interviews with experts and literature
studied. In order to compensate for the unreliability of some of the data, the environmental assessment of bamboo
took place following a worst-case scenario. An expert from the Dutch consulting company NIBE Research
processed the data in the TWIN2002-model.
The bamboo culm was assessed in the structural function as a column, transversal and longitudinal beam and rail,
as applied in the walking bridge in the Amsterdam Woods (see figure 10.17), the dimension of each functional
element defined by the original technical requirements, mainly its strength and stiffness. The functional unit was 1
m1 of these functional elements.
Figure 10.17: Bamboo bridge in the Amsterdam Woods [picture: Pablo van der Lugt]
For the bridge, the functional elements of bamboo and their properties were compared to the same functional
elements of building materials most commonly used in these applications: steel, sustainably produced timber
(species: azobé and robinia), and concrete. Concrete was only considered in the functional element 'column'
because it is not commonly used as a line element in bridges. The actual longitudinal steel beam was theoretically
replaced by four bamboo culms.
Assessment results of the culm

The environmental load of the bamboo culm is mainly defined by the sea transport from Costa Rica to the
Netherlands. Therefore, when bamboo is used in the country that produces the bamboo (in this case Costa Rica),
the environmental costs will be considerably lower due to the absence of sea transport.
Figure 10.18 presents the results in micro-points (mPt), equal to 10-3 environmental euro (e€).
120
100 92.9
environm ental cost (10-3 e€)
80
60
40
20
6.5
3.2 1.6
0
processing (saw ing, preservation transport (land) transport (sea)
fertiliser) (borium)
Figure 10.18: Environmental costs of 1 kg bamboo culm per part of the production process

For annual values, the environmental costs of every alternative (bamboo, timber, steel, and concrete) were
divided by the reference lifespan. Figure 10.19 presents the results in indices. For the index, the environmental
costs of the alternative with the lowest environmental impact - in all cases: bamboo - were divided by the
environmental costs of the alternatives compared and multiplied by 100. In the case of a higher index, the
environmental costs are greater and therefore, the performance is worse.
3500
Steel
3000 Azobe
Robinia
2500
Bamboo
Concrete
2000
1500
1000
500
0
transversal beam column rail longitudinal beam
Figure 10.19: Index of the annual environmental cost of the different alternatives for structural components
The graph of figure 10.19 demonstrates that the bamboo culm in all applications, even when used in Western
Europe, is the most sustainable alternative. With respect to alternatives for the transversal beam and column, a
factor 20 environmental improvement is achieved. The difference in environmental performance between the
longitudinal and transversal beam is due to the fact that four bamboo beams instead of one are required for the
longitudinal beam. Note that the timber species assessed are produced sustainably; timber from regular, non-
sustainable forests will have a considerably worse environmental impact.
The good environmental performance of the bamboo culm is a result of the effective shape of its cross-section
and the simple production process. Because of the natural hollow design, bamboo needs less material mass for a
certain function than a rectangular massive section e.g. in the case of timber. The short production process just
consists of sawing, removal of foliage, preservation, and drying. The bamboo culm assessed is dried in the open
air without the use of a drying chamber (which would relatively cost more energy).
Figure 10.20: Bamboo parquet applied in an office building
Environmental assessment of the bamboo panel

Bamboo panels are mainly used as parquet (see figure 10.20), but can also be used in other applications such as
veneer or covering material. In the study presented the panel was compared to wood-based panels. The
functional unit was 1 m2 of non-bearing internal wall covering. Figure 10.21 presents the environmental cost of all
alternatives taken into account.

20
Nuissance
environmental cost (e€)
Land use
15
Components
Emissions
10
Chipboard (100% new wood)

Chipboard (100% waste wood)
OSB (sustainable produce)
MDF (standard produce)

MDF (sustainable produce)
Plastercardboard (natural plaster)
Multiplex - pine (standard produce)

Hardboard (100% waste wood)
Pine (sustainable produce)
Bamboopanel 10 mm theoretical
Bamboopanel 10 mm
Cementbound woodfiberboard
Plaster fiberboard
Multiplex - tropical (standard produce)

Plastercardboard
Figure 10.21: Environmental cost in euro per functional unit (1 m2) of wood-based panels for internal walls including the
bamboo panel
Figure 10.21 indicates that the environmental performance of the bamboo panel is less favourable than most
wood-based panels for non-bearing internal walls. This is due to the lacking shape advantage of the culm and a
more complex production process of the panel. Therefore, the environmental costs of 1 kg of bamboo panel are
considerably higher than those of the culm. In addition to sea transport, the bleaching and preserving process by
means of H2O2 has a substantial share in the environmental load of the product. A theoretical non-bleached
version of the bamboo panel scores significantly better: in that case, only panels with wooden material originating
from sustainably maintained forests or panels made of 100% waste perform environmentally better.
Panels based on metal and synthetic material were not included in the graph. The environmental costs of these
alternatives are on average expected to be higher than those of wood- and bamboo-based panels.
Considerations
Uncertainties are attached to environmental assessments, as by means of LCA. The available data is also
debatable. Moreover, some environmental aspects that could be favourable to bamboo, e.g. the annual
production of biomass of a bamboo plantation (which is three times as high as for the average timber productive
forest), were not included in the assessment.
As an outcome of an analysis of factors of success and failure, practical problems when using the bamboo culm in
Western Europe turned out to be numerous. They have a certain number of main bamboo-related sources: the
shape of the material, the irregularity of the material and the lack of knowledge and building codes. While many of
the failure factors can be avoided in the future, some of them will remain. Bamboo is a natural product and will
therefore always have some extent of irregularity. In Western countries, the bamboo culm should therefore be
used in functions for which the measurement requirements are not entirely precise or fixed, such as in temporary
buildings (e.g. pavilions - see figure 10.22 - and tents) or small civil projects (e.g. bridges). Furthermore, bamboo
culms can play a role as a finish material.

Figure 10.22: The ZERI pavilion constructed of bamboo and wood, at the Expo 2000 in Hanover, Germany
10.03.05 Other opportunities for a sustainable use of building materials
Going back to the beginning, the objective to improve the environmental performance of the supporting structure
is basically achieved in four ways:
1. Finding the optimal structural spans
2. Using the best material combinations
3. Finding new materials for supporting structures
4. Innovating supporting structures
To some extent, the previous subsections explored the first three strategies. I will summarise them here.
Conclusive reflections on the studies presented

First, floor structures were environmentally tested for different floor spans. The assessment focussed on common
floor structures applied in office buildings. Beside possible outcome differences in the case of another assessment
tool, the results of the comparison might vary when other and renewed versions of the floor types are
reconsidered. A broader use of floor types that are called the same name, yet manufactured by different
companies, will probably diminish the discontinuities in the lines of figure 10.10 and 10.11. Nevertheless, the
findings provide a clear relationship and proportional performance of the basic floor types, and they clearly led to
three best options: timber beam floors, hollow core slabs and TT-slabs. The results therefore satisfactorily support
sustainable selecting of a floor type.
Second, the study of entire supporting structures used results of the floor structures study and expanded these to
include beams and columns. Only one floor layer was considered; however, for stacking, it can be multiplied to the
required height. This would only influence the dimensions of the columns, and as demonstrated, these make no
great difference when the floor and beams have already been selected. The study presented explored
combinations of floor, beam, and column types for basic structural designs and found some optimal combinations.
Best results are based on a building deep floor span of TT-slabs, with not too long beams along the long side of
the floor plan, most preferably of laminated timber, and supported by timber columns. This is an unusual
combination that could imply an important environmental improvement for currently applied structures.
An additional study could take into account beam spans shorter than 5.4 m, in order to find the optimum there.
Nevertheless, and fortunately, the most favourable combination offers a very good basis for flexibility: with a span
of 12.6 m or more the floor layout is free, and the beam length of 5.4 m enables a conversion of the office into
apartments. A shorter beam span would require a double bay for one apartment, making such a conversion less
viable.

This study therefore offers a good basis for sustainable design of structures. The assessment should be
expanded to include the involvement of more types of floors and beams - although the best floor alternatives were
already implied - and deeper office floors. However, the findings of the study presented are applicable to most
cellular office types with a floor depth of around 12.6 m.
The bamboo study formed a first exploration of the possibility and environmental consequence of using bamboo in
structures, an element of the third strategy mentioned at the beginning of this subsection. It has only been applied
to a civil bridge structure, but the outcome promises good results for a building structure as well. Nevertheless,
additional building-directed studies are necessary. Furthermore, in its basic form, bamboo will always have
inconveniences that limit its use. Tree trunks can always be processed to usefully shaped products. With bamboo,
this is more difficult, but if done so, the environmental performance will be worse. In spite of these drawbacks, a
bamboo structure for other applications than a temporary exhibition item would be an interesting experiment.
Especially because, as discussed in chapter 08, office buildings with a short functional lifespan are best served
with a flexible long-lasting structure, or a demountable short-lasting structure. Bamboo might be a perfect solution
for the last strategy, but it therefore requires an experiment as with the XX-office in Delft, the Netherlands.
A conclusion may therefore be that the first two studies presented provide a good picture of the environmental
impact and potential of common materials and components for supporting structures. The use of bamboo and
other new structural materials still needs further study. Figure 10.23 gives an example of a very pure application of
tree trunks as columns in the Dutch pavilion of Expo 2000, in Hanover, Germany.
Figure 10.23: In the Dutch pavilion at the Expo 2000 in Hanover oak-tree trunks were used as columns
As an example of a more modernistic innovation for structures: carbon fibres may lead to efficient supporting
structures with fewer disadvantages than the usual solutions. For instance, experimental bridges made of carbon
fibre turned out to be 8 times stronger than steel [Flanagan, 2002]. In addition, the material does not rust, it does
not have to be painted and can be manufactured off-site. It would be very worthwhile to study the potential of
carbon fibre structures for buildings, especially offices. This however could not be executed in the available time
of this PhD-research.
Further improvements of the supporting structure

As clarified, further environmental enhancement might be possible by means of new solutions for structures, for
instance by means of the following measures:
Light & demountable structures

Floors consisting of light, demountable components and materials might lead to higher structural floor sections.
The space within the structures would however be functional. Three-dimensional trusses for floors are one of the
possibilities coming under this solution, simultaneously offering load-bearing capacity and space for ducts and
wiring.
Efficient shapes of structural cross-sections

Every engineer knows that an I-shape profiled steel beam is much more effective (for bending, buckling, etc.) than
a massive cross-section with the same amount of material. In fact, the hollow core slab and TT-slab are evolutions

of the I-shaped beams. A further optimisation of cross-sectional shapes for floors, beams, and columns would
enhance the environmental performance, especially if the principle of pre-stress is applied, not only to concrete
yet also to composite structures of, for instance, timber beams or girders.
Separation of different structural functions within one component

The previous solution would mean a return of historic structural principles that once were the paragon of material
efficiency, placed, as they were, in times when material resources were expensive and labour was cheap. The
industrialisation of the building products industry, together with more expensive human resources and relatively
cheaper materials, led to simplified structures, loosing a lot of the craftsmanship of the early structures. The
computerisation of product design and assembly however will renew the opportunity to most efficiently shape and
produce structures with few expenses. In addition, the separation of the pressure zone and tensile elements of an
office floor (the old concept of under-spanned structures) might lead to interesting, effective solutions (see figure
10.24).
Figure 10.24: An under-spanned timber floor
Optimal combinations of materials with components

So far, structural components were studied that were combined in entire supporting structures. Within a
component, materials can also be combined in order to develop better technical, financial, or environmental
properties. In that case, the best materials for a certain structuring, bearing, stabilising, or preserving function can
be used for that function, whereas other materials can be made responsible for the other functions. In fact,
reinforced concrete is already a combination of materials, each with a certain function: cement for glue, gravel for
pressure strength, steel for reinforcement, tensile strength and bending strength, and sand for filling. In addition,
the mineral mass preserves the reinforcement steel, provides mass for indoor climate stabilisation, and fire
protection. From a functional point of view, pure concrete is not the best option for beams and floors, because of
its relative weight. These components are mostly subject to bending and tension. Steel is best used for tension,
whereas timber (and bamboo) combines pressure, bending, and to a lesser extent tensile qualities. For a beam, a
combination of a timber main body with a steel flange underneath would perhaps be a good combination (see
figure 10.25). Concrete still seems an appropriate solution for the columns and foundation of buildings. The
assessments showed that timber is superior for columns. However, timber columns are only usable to a limited
number of stories (although new developments might change this idea).
Figure 10.25: A timber beam with a steel underflange
New materials with better properties for bearing and stabilising

This was already mentioned at the beginning of this subsection. Beside the potential of anorganic materials, I
need to mention the efforts made to enhance the quality of concrete, for instance with high-strength concretes,
and new supplements in concrete, e.g. iron fibres and plastics, and more natural ingredients, e.g. organic fibres,
clay and adobe, as well as usefully applied residual materials from industries. A point of attention for these
developments however remains the re-usability or at least recyclability of the new materials. In addition, as Kohler
et al. [1999] stated, dumping large amounts of industrial waste in innovative, recycled building materials may be a
considerable long-term risk for its inhabitants. We should therefore remain careful.

Improvement of other building components

This entire section was only directed at improvements to the supporting structure that contributed to 60% of the
environmental load of building materials. As the case study presented in chapter 06 indicated, finish, façades, and
non-bearing inner partition walls also play a role worth improving. As for this research, except for the adaptive
façades study discussed in section 10.02, this has not been the focus. Needless to say these subjects require
additional study.
10.04 Water
The case study of chapter 06 showed a limited importance of water consumption to the environmental load of
office buildings. Reduction of water consumption in offices therefore formed no part of the further elaboration on
effective elements for environmental improvement. In this short section, however, I will make some comments to
put water, and the consumption of it, in regard to sustainable building into better context.
More important than calculated

The findings of chapter 06 are based on the consumption of water for toilets, other sanitation, cleaning facilities,
and the possible canteen in the office. The software tool GreenCalc multiplied the annual consumption by an
environmental price per cubic metre, based on studies by Dobbelsteen et al. [1995] on the costs of recuperation of
damages related to water consumption, applicable to the Dutch situation. These environmental costs are however
only applied to annual consumption of water related to the operation of a building. In the environmental damage of
building materials and energy consumption, as determined through LCA, the consumption of water and its
environmental impact is not involved.
If the environmental costs used for day-to-day consumption were also related to water consumption for
manufacture of building materials and electricity production, the importance of this aspect would most certainly be
increased. Per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity produced in a conventional plant, 2 litres of water is consumed for
cooling purposes [Hartkopf, 2003]. In office buildings themselves, for the same cooling purpose, the building
services for HVAC also consume water. Especially for large and high buildings (see the assessment of the
Commerzbank Headquarters in the following chapter), this cooling-related water consumption can be significant.
For the same purpose, per kg of steel, more than 100 litres of water is used [Broek, 1989]. It is difficult to
determine the average amount of steel used in the twelve offices of chapter 06; however, the average personal
consumption of electricity (1,071 kWh) would imply a water consumption value of more than 2 m3 additional to the
average personal consumption of 8.9 m3. This is a rather significant difference of 22.5%, which would be further
increased by the steel- and HVAC-related consumption of water.
Scarcity
In addition, as described in chapter 02, it should again be said that water is vital to humans, and its importance
exceeds the dry quantitative data of water consumption. And in contrast to energy and other resources, the limited
availability of fresh water in many parts of the world more pressingly urges measures. With enough water at your
disposal from taps, the tendency remains to not want to fully understand the problems many parts of the world are
facing. As a 'western' country, Australia encountered the potential magnitude of the problem: at the moment of
writing, some parts of the country had not had rain for two years. Figure 10.01 already demonstrated an instance
of this. Water restriction and preservation measures are a first step, yet sustainable use of water, in balance with
what is available in the area, will be an inevitable necessity eventually.
Sustainable use of water is easy

It is as this header says. First rule: collect the cleanest water naturally available, which is mostly water from
precipitation, and do not flush it away to open water (as is usual) but filter and purify it to the required quality.
Second rule: use water efficiently, with water preserving sanitation and facilities, and use potable water only for
functions that require potable water; use water with a lower yet sufficient quality for other functions. Third rule:
pollute water as little as possible, and only with particles that can easily be cleansed. Fourth rule: clean
wastewater for re-use in lower grade functions (toilet flushing, plants, and gardens). Fifth rule: water still deficient
should come from collective water utilities; this also applies to areas that have no facilities for local purification
systems. Rainwater however can be collected anywhere.

If man stops polluting ground and open water, the preparation of potable water will be easy and inexpensive.
Water exerts the cycle that everybody experiences most easily.
10.05 Improvement potential for the use of resources
For the maximum environmental improvement factors in regard to the use of sustainable resources, the outcome
of an explorative study presented in Linden & Dobbelsteen [2000] can be used.
Energy and travel

Although the improvement potential for energy and travel found by Linden & Dobbelsteen was greater than a
factor of 20, this figure can be used as a maximum, thereby taking into account the environmental damage as a
result of the use of land and equipment. When discussing the advantages and disadvantages of sustainable
energy technologies, the negative impact of the use of materials for decentralised sustainable energy systems,
e.g. wind turbines and solar panels, is mentioned often. One however should not forget that opposed to the
environmental load of these, there is a heavy environmental burden to be accounted for traditional networks and
plants for electricity. Nevertheless, when taking into account less favourable conditions, an improvement factor of
5 is a realistic estimation based on performances already achieved in experimental projects.
Building materials
A sustainable selection of building materials has not yet led to larger improvements than by a factor of 2. The
study of bamboo was too limited and generally not applicable to office structures. Data from other studies on
sustainable materials was lacking. In their study, Linden & Dobbelsteen found a maximum improvement for
building materials by a factor of 15, but this included a 95% re-use of the old building. One of the studied
alternatives reused only 20% of the old building and achieved a factor of 4.7. Converting this to 0% of re-use, the
maximum potential should be around a factor of 4. This potential factor 4 had also been determined in section
10.03.03 for the building structure. The factor 4 therefore seems the optimum. A more cautious estimation of the
improvement potential for building materials is a factor of 2.
If a potential transition towards sustainable energy resources is assumed in the near future, something can be
said about the improvement potential of building materials as well. After all, a certain proportion of the
environmental load of building materials is related to the use of energy, for example, for extraction processes,
manufacture and transportation. 50% of the environmental load from pollutions may be related to energy
consumption, and 25% from deterioration. The use of energy resources themselves may be fully accounted for.
Hence, based on life cycle data the consumption of energy is responsible for approximately 40% of the total
environmental load of building materials in the 1990 reference office building2. This means that an environmental
improvement of energy resources by a factor of 20 or 5, i.e. a broad or limited use of sustainable energy, implies
an extra improvement of building materials by a factor of: 1/(0.6 + 0.4*0.05) = 1.61, and 1/(0.6 + 0.4*0.2) = 1.47
respectively.
Water
Linden & Dobbelsteen [2000] found a maximum improvement potential by a factor of 9.5 for consumption of water.
A more cautious estimation is a factor of 2, which can be achieved already by available techniques.
2
The exact analysis for the contribution of environmental effects to the total environmental load of building materials in the 1990
reference building, as calculated by the assessment tool GreenCalc, is as follows: material resources 3%, pollutions 39%, waste 24%,
nuisance 4%, deterioration 11%, and energy resources 19%.

11 STUDIES OF THE BUILDING GEOMETRY
The results of chapter 06 urged further study on typologies for the building design and technology applied. The
demand for building materials and energy is primarily defined by the design of the office building, of which the
shape and height form important parameters. In this chapter, typology studies on the building geometry are
presented: the influence of the building shape and the influence of stacking (both given a certain demand for
space) on energy consumption, the use of building materials and other aspects of sustainability. The performance
of an extremely high-rise building will also be discussed.
Figure 11.01: A great diversity of building shapes and heights in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Contents
11.01 Building shapes typology study 247

11.01.02 The use of building materials 248
11.01.03 Energy consumption 249
11.01.04 Integration 249
11.02 Building heights typology study 250
11.02.04 Integration 258
11.03 Assessing a real skyscraper: the Commerzbank 261
11.03.01 Introducing the Commerzbank headquarters building 261
11.03.02 Performance with respect to theoretical reference buildings 267
11.03.03 Comparison with large, lower buildings 269
All REFERENCES for Volume D - The Technology Factor can be found on pages 273 to 276.
246 11 Studies of the building geometry - D The Technology Factor

11.01 Building shapes typology study
In order to determine consequences of different the geometrical building shapes for the use of building materials
and energy, a simple typology study on six different solutions for an equal floor area was conducted. These typical
shapes were called the Cube, the Warehouse, the Caterpillar, the Fence, the Slab, and the Tower (see figure
11.02).
The Cube The Slab The Fence The Tower The Warehouse The Caterpillar
Figure 11.02: The basic building shapes for an equal gross floor area
The basic element had an area of 1 unit. For a realistic situation, with a realistic minimal floor depth, the
measurements of a basic element were taken 12 x 12 m. Floor height was taken 4 m, leading to 3 floors per
vertical element3. Starting-point was a total floor area of 24 units (576 m2). The amount of building materials was
considered proportional to the area of floors, façades and roof. Fill-in was considered proportional to the floor area
and therefore constant in all cases. The Cube was taken as a reference. For every solution an improvement factor
was determined.
the Cube the Fence
total floor area: 24 units total floor area: 24 units

ground area: 4 units ground area: 4 units
story floor area: 20 units story floor area: 20 units
facade area 16 units facade area: 20 units
roof area 4 units roof area: 4 units
total envelope area: 24 units total envelope area: 28 units
material amount: 44 units material amount: 48 units

improvement factor: 1.00 improvement factor: 0.92
the Warehouse the Slab

ground area: 8 units ground area: 2 units
facade area: 12 units facade area: 24 units
roof area: 8 units roof area: 2 units

the Caterpillar the Tower

ground area: 8 units ground area: 1 unit
facade area: 18 units facade area: 32 units
roof area: 8 units roof area: 1 unit

Figure 11.03: Comparison of geometric features of different building typologies with an equal floor area
3
If the floor height were taken smaller, there would be more story floors and the differences between the improvement factors of the
typologies would be smaller, due to the increasing importance of floors, of which the area is equal in all cases.
D The Technology Factor - 11 Studies of the building geometry 247

11.01.02 The use of building materials
Figure 11.03 presents the determined number of spatial units for different building components.
In terms of building materials amounts, the typical Cube and Warehouse, low-rise buildings with a relatively large
ground area, are most favourable. The Tower typology is least favourable. This of course forms a simplified study
of buildings. In terms of the supporting structure and envelope, no difference was made between high and low, or
narrow and deep buildings. No distinction was made between the details of elements and type of materials:
façades, roof, and floors are different and, therefore, have a different impact on the environmental load.
The environmental impact of the building shape typologies can be determined by coupling the material amounts to
environmental data from LCA-based calculation tools as presented in chapter 04. Based on the case study of
chapter 06, table 11.01 presents typical annual environmental costs of the studied building elements of figure
11.03, including their finish.
Table 11.01: Annual environmental load of main building elements, based on the office buildings case study of chapter 06
element environmental cost importance including

foundation, ground floor structure, floor decks, and
ground floor € 1,472.03 /m2 2.674 floor and ceiling finishes
roof € 465.29 /m2 0.845 roof structure, beams and finish
story floor structures, beams, floor decks, stairs and

story floors € 606.54 /m2 1.102 balustrades, and floor and ceiling finishes
facades € 365.57 /m2 0.664 façade structures and cladding
columns, load-bearing and non-bearing walls, internal

vertical elements € 373.75 /m2 GFA 0.679 doors and windows, and wall finish
paving € 20.27 /m2 GFA 0.037 paving
average € 550.57 /m2 1.000
Table 11.01 demonstrates the relative environmental importance of the ground floor (including the foundation),
and the relative unimportance of façades. When this relevance is related to the shape typology study of figure
11.03, a better indication is obtained for the environmental impact of different building shapes. Table 11.02
presents the results.
In terms of building materials, as expected, the reference Cube typology is still the most favourable building
shape. The small difference between the Warehouse, Fence, and Slab, three similarly shaped yet differently
placed typologies, is a result of the contribution of story floors and façades. Due to their inefficient shape, the
Tower and Caterpillar typologies are most unfavourable. As a result of the relatively heavy environmental load of
the ground floor, the improvement factor of the Tower is less unfavourable than if purely based on the amount of
building materials.
Table 11.02: Improvement factors with respect to The Cube for the use of materials by different building shapes,
taking into account the relative importance of the main building elements
shape type ground floor roof story floors facades others total factor
importance > 2.674 0.845 1.102 0.664 0.716 1.000
units relative units relative units relative units relative units relative units relative
the Cube 4 10.7 4 3.4 20 22.0 16 10.6 24 17.2 68 57.4 1.00
the Warehouse 8 21.4 8 6.8 16 17.6 12 8.0 24 17.2 68 61.7 0.93
the Fence 4 10.7 4 3.4 20 22.0 20 13.3 24 17.2 72 62.7 0.92
the Slab 2 5.3 2 1.7 22 24.2 24 15.9 24 17.2 74 63.1 0.91
the Caterpillar 8 21.4 8 6.8 16 17.6 18 12.0 24 17.2 74 69.7 0.82
the Tower 1 2.7 1 0.8 23 25.3 32 21.2 24 17.2 81 71.4 0.80

11.01.03 Energy consumption
Analogue to building materials, the influence of basic building shapes on energy consumption was studied. As a
simplification, the energy required for ventilation, humidification, air-duct pumping, warm tap water, and use of
equipment was assumed proportional to the floor area and therefore equal for all variants. A difference can be
expected in the energy required for heating, cooling, and lighting. As presented in chapter 06, these sources on
average contribute 41.0%, 3.3%, and 37.6% respectively to the environmental load of energy consumption of the
assessed office buildings. This is when energy use by equipment is excluded, which is user dependent only and
therefore I left out. Heating and cooling - which can be summed because they are exchangeable - are largely
dependent on the building envelope, and in the case of well-insulated walls they are equally divided between
transmission and ventilation losses. If all elements of the building envelope have the same heat resistance and
the average outside temperature is assumed equal on all surfaces, the total envelope surface will be the best
measure for heating and cooling differences. Lighting is partly - I assumed 50% - dependent on the building depth.
Since buildings are situated in urban areas consisting of similar building types, I neglected the fact that higher
buildings can profit more from daylight, supposing they are shaded to the same extent as lower building areas. All
other parameters influencing energy consumption are taken to be constant. Under these conditions, table 11.03
presents the factors of environmental improvement, again with respect to the Cube typology.
Table 11.03: Improvement factors with respect to The Cube for the energy consumption of different basic building shapes,
taking into account the relative importance of distinctive energy sources
shape type heating & cooling lighting others total factor
importance > 44.3% 37.6% 18.1% 100%
env resp relative depth resp relative relative relative
the Slab 28 100% 0.52 1 50% 0.28 0.18 0.98 1.02
the Fence 28 100% 0.52 1 50% 0.28 0.18 0.98 1.02
the Cube 24 100% 0.44 2 50% 0.38 0.18 1.00 1.00
the Warehouse 28 100% 0.52 2 50% 0.38 0.18 1.07 0.93
the Tower 34 100% 0.63 1 50% 0.28 0.18 1.09 0.92
the Caterpillar 34 100% 0.63 1 50% 0.28 0.18 1.09 0.92
Table 11.03 demonstrates that, in terms of energy consumption, the differences between the basic shapes are
small. In spite of the expectation that the Cube will be most favourable because of its most compact shape, the
Slab and the Fence come out best, which is due to the relative importance of lighting (the Slab and Fence are
shallower than the Cube). A long shape (lying down or standing up) is least favourable. When no inter-reaction
between separate buildings is assumed, this conclusion is also valid for whole urban areas with the buildings
shaped as these basic typologies.
11.01.04 Integration
When the results of both studies are combined, an integrated assessment for the influence of different shapes on
the entire environmental load becomes possible. Table 11.04 gives the results.
As table 11.04 demonstrates, the differences of improvement factor between the basic shapes are relatively small.
In terms of environmental performance, one could say that the Cube, Slab, and Fence typologies are similar and
the Tower and Caterpillar also, however approximately 10% less favourable, with the Warehouse typology in-
between. The use of land (ground area) is still possible to distinguish between the typologies of which the
environmental impact was not involved in the study presented here. This will however be discussed in the
chapters of Volume E - The Space Factor.

Table 11.04: Integrated improvement factors with respect to The Cube for different basic building shapes
shape type energy materials water total
contribution > 77.5% 19.5% 3.0% 100.0%
factor factor factor factor
the Cube 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
the Slab 1.02 0.91 1.00 1.00
the Fence 1.02 0.92 1.00 1.00
the Warehouse 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.93
the Tower 0.92 0.80 1.00 0.90
the Caterpillar 0.92 0.82 1.00 0.90
Furthermore, this shape typology study was only indicative. A large cubic shape eventually performs differently to
a small one, and a small cubic shape performs differently to a large rectangular shape. It is the combination of
size and extent of stacking that matters. Therefore, the more accurate typology study on building heights was
executed in the following section.
11.02 Building heights typology study
Inspired by a study by Gerritse [1995] relating building costs to the number of building layers, a comparison was
drawn between theoretical building design alternatives for the same net floor area (NFA) however with a different
number of building layers. The following alternatives were compared: variant A with 2 stories, variant B with 4
stories, variant C with 8 stories, variant D with 16 stories, variant E with 32 stories, and variant F with 64 stories.
For every alternative, the floor plan was based on a cellular office layout, with rooms bordering the façades and a
corridor in-between, as was previously done in the methodology of chapter 05. An important factor involved was
the relation of the gross floor area (GFA) with the NFA, expressed in the gross/net ratio retrieved from Gerritse.
This ratio depends on the floor layout efficiency. It is higher - meaning a less efficient floor use - in the case of
high buildings with a relatively small area per floor. In the case of small floor areas it shows greater variance
between the building layer alternatives, as demonstrated by figure 11.04.
GFA / NFA
1.70
1.65
1.60 number of layers = 12
10
1.55 8
1.50 6
4
1.45 3
1.40 2
1.35
1.30
1.25
1.20
1.4 2.8 4.2 5.6 7.0 8.4 9.8 12.6 16.8
NFA x 1000
Figure 11.04: The GFA/NFA ratio related to the number of building layers and NFA [Gerritse, 1995; Gerritse, 2004]
For the 32-stories and 64-stories alternative, extrapolation was applied to the values found by Gerritse. In the
example presented below, the basic NFA was 8,400 m2, just leaving a minimal floor layout with an elevator in the

case of 64 building layers. For simplification, the floor layout and resulting amount of inner partitions were
considered constant to the GFA, although every height alternative requires another floor layout. In order to
compare this study to the building shape study, one should consider building type A and B as Caterpillar types, C
as a Fence type, D between a Fence and Slab type, E between the Slab and Tower type, and F as a real Tower
type.
Table 11.05 shows the results for the use of building materials. The explanation below table 11.05 exactly follows
the process from NFA to the other characteristics. An important difference with table 11.04 is caused by the inner
layout loss.
Table 11.05: Comparison of the use of building materials between six building height concepts for an equal net floor area
characteristics building variant
A B C D E F
unit info
starting conditions
number of building layers 2 4 8 16 32 64 -
1
building height 7.2 14.4 28.8 57.6 115.2 230.4 m
2
NFA (net floor area) 8,400 8,400 8,400 8,400 8,400 8,400 m
2
GFA/NFA ratio 1.325 1.340 1.375 1.400 1.420 1.435 -
geometric characteristics
2 3
GFA (gross floor area) 11,130 11,256 11,550 11,760 11,928 12,054 m
2 4
GA (ground area) 5,565 2,814 1,444 735 373 188 m
3 5
building volume 40,068 40,522 41,580 42,336 42,941 43,394 m
6
short facade depth 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 m
2 7
short facade area 91 181 363 726 1,452 2,903 m
8
long facade length 441.7 223.3 114.6 58.3 29.6 14.9 m
2 9
long facade area 3,180 3,216 3,300 3,360 3,408 3,444 m
2 10
building envelope area 17,671 12,423 10,213 9,642 10,465 13,071 m
2 11
total structure area 23,236 20,865 20,320 20,667 22,020 24,936 m
12
compactness 0.44 0.31 0.25 0.23 0.24 0.30 -
improvement factors
13
land use factor 1.00 1.98 3.85 7.57 14.93 29.55 -
14
material use factor 1.00 1.11 1.14 1.12 1.06 0.93 -
explanation
1: standard layer height: 3.6 m; 2: A-C: Gerritse [1995]; D-E: extrapolation of Gerritse [1995]; 3: = total NFA * GFA/NFA ratio; 4: = GFA per layer; 5: =
GA * building height; 6: starting point: 5.4 - 1.8 - 5.4 corridor type; 7: = short facade depth * building height; 8: = GFA per layer / short facade length; 9:
= long facade length * building height; 10: = 2 * (GA + long facade + short facade area 11: = envelope area + total GFA - GS; 12: = envelope surface /
building volume; 13: = GAA / GAX; 14: = total structure area A / total structure area X.
As can be seen, the improvement factors for land use logically increase with an increasing number of building
layers. The consequence of this however will be treated in chapter 14. The improvement factors for the use of
building materials show an optimum around variant C, with 8 stories.
Taking into account the environmental relevance

The theoretical comparison of table 11.05 only involves the amount of building materials, not their environmental
load. As described in section 11.01.02, the main building elements have different environmental cost per typical
unit. For the determination of environmental improvement factors, the results of table 11.05 were again connected
to the typical environmental cost of table 11.01. In the calculation, the larger volume of columns and foundation in

case of a greater number of building layers is approached as follows: every step higher, the environmental cost of
'foundation' and 'other building elements' increases by factor 1.1 (10% extra). Table 11.06 presents the results.
Table 11.06: Environmental improvement factors for the use of building materials of six building height concepts
building element building variant
A B C D E F
parameter unit
ground floor
absolute area 5,565 2,814 1,444 735 373 188 m2
typical environmental cost 1,472 1,619 1,781 1,959 2,155 2,371 e€/m2
environmental cost 81,919 45,565 25,715 14,401 8,034 4,465 ke€
roof area
absolute area 5,565 2,814 1,444 735 373 188 m2
typical environmental cost 465 465 465 465 465 465 e€/m2
environmental cost 25,893 13,093 6,718 3,420 1,734 876 ke€
story floors
absolute area 5,565 8,442 10,106 11,025 11,555 11,866 m2
façades
absolute area 6,541 6,795 7,326 8,172 9,719 12,694 m2
other building elements
absolute area (GFA) 11,130 11,256 11,550 11,760 11,928 12,054 m2
total
total environmental cost 209.3 183.5 175.6 176.2 184.2 200.2 Me€
improvement factor 1.00 1.14 1.19 1.19 1.14 1.05 -
Put into a chart, the optimum can be seen around 10 stories (figure 11.05), reaching a maximum of a factor of 1.2.
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
num ber of building layers
Figure 11.05: Relationship of environmental improvement factors for building materials with the number of building layers,
for an NFA of 8,400 m2
Other floor areas

The results shown apply to a net floor area of 8,400 m2. The same comparison study was done for an NFA of
2,100 m2 (leaving out variants E and F), 4,200 m2 (leaving out variant F), 16,800 m2, 33,600 m2, and 67,200 m2.
All together, these led to the relationships presented in figure 11.06. The gross/net ratio values applied are again

based on or extrapolated from Gerritse [1995]. Some lines are cut off because a greater number of layers would
lead to such a short 'long façade' that it would not have been realistic.
This graph shows that an office building optimally stacked can lead up to a maximal improvement factor for
building materials of approximately 1.26, depending on the total floor area. The final selection of building materials
will further influence the end-results.
1.40
im provem ent factor 1.30
1.20 67,200 m 2
33,600 m 2
1.10 16,800 m 2
2 4,200 m 2 8,400 m 2
2,100 m
1.00
0.90 12.6 m deep
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 11.06: Relationships of the environmental improvement factor for building materials with the number of building layers,
for different values of the NFA
The findings presented above concern single-corridor cellular offices with a floor depth of 12.6 m. When the office
floor is twice as deep, i.e. 25.2 m, possibly filled in with a 5.4 - 2.4 - 9.6 - 2.4 - 5.4 m layout principle, the results
are according to figure 11.07. There is no significant improvement with respect to the maximum improvement
factor of figure 11.06. The maximum is factor 1.27, in the case of 67,200 m2 NFA around 16 stories.
1.40
1.30
1.20 67,200 m 2
8,400 m 2
4,200 m 2 16,800 m 2
1.10 2,100 m 2 33,600 m 2
1.00
0.90 25.2 m deep
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 11.07: Relationships of the environmental improvement factor for building materials with the number of building layers,
for different values of the NFA, in case of a deeper floor plan
Comparing shallow and deep floor plans

For the environmental improvement factors, in all cases, the environmental cost of an alternative with a specific
number of layers was compared to the 2-layers variant with an equal NFA. This explains the great differences in
the cases with a large floor area: to accommodate the floor area into two building layers is very unfavourable. A
more-layered alternative therefore quickly achieves good performance. Hence the incomparability of the
improvement factors of different NFAs. The improvement factor of the 67,200-m2 variants might be greater than
the one for smaller variants but the environmental load per m2 might still be less favourable.
For the same reason, in order to see the preference between shallow and deep floor alternatives, we should not
look at the differences between the improvement factors but compare their respective environmental load. These
are not visible in figure 11.06 and figure 11.07. Therefore, for every alternative for a certain NFA, table 11.07 gives
improvement factors for the spatial environmental cost with respect to the shallow 2-stories option of every NFA-
variant, enabling comparison between the deep and shallow floor plan. Bordered cells depict the most favourable

solution for the specific floor area; the most unfavourable solutions have a dark-coloured background. Unrealistic
solutions have a grey background.
Table 11.07: Environmental improvement factors of building materials for every alternative per NFA
A B C D E F
2 stories 4 stories 8 stories 16 stories 32 stories 64 stories
2
net floor area depth environmental cost (ke€/m NFA)
12.6 m 1.00 1.12 1.14 1.04
2,100 m2
25.2 m 1.04 1.16
12.6 m 1.00 1.12 1.15 1.14 1.05

4,200 m2
25.2 m 1.05 1.18 1.20
12.6 m 1.00 1.14 1.19 1.19 1.14 1.05

8,400 m2
25.2 m 1.06 1.21 1.26 1.24
12.6 m 1.00 1.15 1.22 1.22 1.16 1.07

16,800 m2
25.2 m 1.06 1.22 1.30 1.29 1.21
12.6 m 1.00 1.15 1.23 1.24 1.21 1.14

33,600 m2
25.2 m 1.06 1.23 1.31 1.32 1.28 1.19
12.6 m 1.00 1.15 1.24 1.26 1.23 1.18

67,200 m2
25.2 m 1.06 1.23 1.33 1.35 1.32 1.24
The table should be approached as follows: an organisation requires a certain floor area and wants to know the
most sustainable building geometry - a deep or shallow floor plan, more or fewer building layers. The table then
provides the information necessary.
Table 11.07 indicates that, in terms of material use, a 2-stories solution is always least favourable. From an
environmental point of view, even in the case of large floor areas, stacking above 16 building layers is not
preferable. Furthermore, a deeper floor plan is more favourable than a shallow one. The maximum difference in
environmental cost between the alternatives for a certain NFA is relatively small: 27%.
For the different building alternatives of table 11.05, the consequences of stacking for the energy consumption
were also estimated and related to environmental cost. Since the GFA of the alternatives is not constant, in
contrast to the building shape typology study presented previously, all sources of energy consumption need to be
related to the building geometry.
The building volume defines the total demand for heating and cooling, ventilation, and humidification. As
presented in chapter 06, ventilation and humidification is responsible for 11.4% of the total environmental cost of
energy consumption. As with the study of 11.01.03, the energy demand for heating and cooling are also assumed
to be proportional to the building envelope area. In all cases, basically, lighting is constant because the building
depth of all alternatives is equal. However, as with the energy required for air-duct pumping and hot tap water, it is
assumed proportionally related to the GFA. As in chapter 06, elevators and computers were shared under one
name of 'equipment', I assumed that the use of elevators constitutes 25% of the total energy consumption by
equipment. Energy consumption of elevators is assumed to increase by 25% with every step of doubling layers.
Use of computers, the remaining 75% of energy use by equipment, is assumed constant in all cases. Table 11.08
presents the results.

Table 11.08: Comparison of the energy consumption of six building height concepts for an equal net floor area
source of energy demand building variant
A B C D E F
parameter unit info
geometry
number of building layers 2 4 8 16 32 64 -
GFA (gross floor area) 11,130 11,256 11,550 11,760 11,928 12,054 m2
floor depth 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.6 m
building volume 40,068 40,522 41,580 42,336 42,941 43,394 m3
building envelope area 17,671 12,423 10,213 9,642 10,465 13,071 m2
heating and cooling
1
proportion 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% 33.8% -
2
volume factor 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.92 -
3
envelope factor 1.00 1.42 1.73 1.83 1.69 1.35 -
4
energy impact 0.34 0.48 0.56 0.59 0.53 0.42 -
ventilation and moistening
1
proportion 11.6% 11.6% 11.6% 11.6% 11.6% 11.6% -
volume factor 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.92 -
5
energy impact 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 -
lighting
1
proportion 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% 28.7% -
6
depth factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
7
energy impact 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 -
elevators
8
proportion 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% -
9
height factor 1.00 0.80 0.64 0.51 0.41 0.33
7
energy impact 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 -
other sources
1
proportion 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% -
10
GFA factor 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.92 -
7
energy impact 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 -
total
11
improvement factor 1.00 1.12 1.20 1.21 1.15 1.03 -
explanation
1: see chapter 05; 2: = volumeA / volumeX; 3: = envelopeA / envelopeX; 4: = proportion x energy demand x envelope factor; 5: = proportion x energy demand;
6: = depthA/depthX; 7: = proportion x energy demand; 8: value for A: taken 25% of energy consumption of equipment (see chapter 05); 9: = increasing 10%
every double number of layers; 10: = GFAA / GFAX; 11: = summed energy impact of all parts
When the improvement factors for energy consumption are set against the number of building layers, figure 11.07
evolves for the 8,400 m2 NFA variant. In comparison with figure 11.04, figure 11.08 shows a comparable
relationship of energy consumption with the building height: up to a factor of 1.22 is possible. This time, the
optimal number of stories is approximately 13.

1.50
1.40

1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 11.08: Relationship of environmental improvement factors for energy with the number of building layers,
for an NFA of 8,400 m2
Other floor areas

As with building materials, the comparison was executed for different NFA values. Figure 11.09 presents the
relationships determined. This graph shows that an optimal height of the office building can lead to a greater
improvement factor, up to 1.37, around 30 building layers in the case of 67,200 m2 NFA.
1.50
1.40
67,200 m 2
1.30
33,600 m 2
1.20
1.10 16,800 m 2
1.00 2,100 m 2
4,200 m 2 8,400 m 2
0.90
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 11.09: Relationships of the environmental improvement factor for energy with the number of building layers,
for different values of the NFA
Again, the calculations were made for the deeper floor plan of 25.2 m. In this case, figure 11.10 presents the
results. With respect to the previous graph, a greater improvement is achieved, especially in the larger office
typologies, up to a factor of 1.61 at 27 building layers. Therefore, due to a reduction of the building envelope, in
the case of large office areas, a deeper floor plan is definitely favourable.
Shallower versus deeper

As explained in the section on building materials, the improvement factors of different NFAs should not be
compared. In contrast with table 11.07 there are no absolute values for the environmental cost of energy
consumption. Table 11.09 therefore uses improvement factors related to the shallow 2-stories option of every
NFA, enabling a comparison between the deep and shallow floor plan. Comparison between the separate floor
areas is still not possible. Bordered cells again give the most favourable solution in each row; the most
unfavourable solutions have a dark-coloured background. Unrealistic solutions have a grey background. Again,
the starting-point is a certain NFA. The table then provides the best solution for that floor area.

1.70
1.60
1.50
67,200 m 2

1.40
1.30
33,600 m 2
8,400 m 2
1.20
4,200 m 2
1.10 2,100 m 2
16,800 m 2
1.00
0.90 25.2 m deep
0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 11.10: Relationships of the environmental improvement factor for energy with the number of building layers,
for different values of the NFA, in case of a deeper floor plan
Table 11.09 shows that a deeper floor plan is more favourable than a shallow one starting from an NFA of 8,400
m2 and with at least 8 building layers. Until approximately 12,000 m2, the optimal building height lays around 8
stories, first with a floor depth of 12.6 m, later with 25.2 m. For larger floor areas, the optimal height shifts towards
approximately 30 stories in the case of 67,200 m2. The environmental difference between a shallow and deep
floor plan is at its greatest in the case of the largest floor area: around a factor of 1.7.
Table 11.09: Environmental improvement factors of energy consumption for every alternative per NFA
A B C D E F
net floor area depth improvement factor
2,100 m2 12.6 m 1.00 1.09 1.10 1.00
25.2 m 0.91 1.01
2
4,200 m 12.6 m 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.12 1.02
25.2 m 0.92 1.06 1.10
8,400 m2 12.6 m 1.00 1.12 1.20 1.21 1.15 1.03

25.2 m 0.93 1.12 1.24 1.20
16,800 m2 12.6 m 1.00 1.13 1.24 1.27 1.23 1.12

25.2 m 0.93 1.15 1.34 1.39 1.24
33,600 m2 12.6 m 1.00 1.13 1.25 1.31 1.31 1.25

25.2 m 0.93 1.16 1.39 1.53 1.48 1.28
67,200 m2 12.6 m 1.00 1.14 1.27 1.34 1.36 1.33

25.2 m 0.93 1.17 1.44 1.63 1.67 1.54

11.02.04 Integration
Shallow floor plan

When the results for building materials and energy consumption are combined, taking into account the relative
importance of these aspects, the chart of figure 11.11 evolves for a floor plan with a depth of 12.6 m. In the case
of greater values for the NFA, the optimum shifts toward more building layers; in the case of smaller floor areas it
shifts toward fewer layers.
1.60
1.50 1.60
1.40 1.50
im prove m ent facto

67,200 m 2 1.40
1.30
1.30
1.20 33,600 m 2
1.20
1.10 16,800 m 2 1.10
1.00 2,100 m 2 4,200 m 2 8,400 m 2 1.00
0.90 32
67 00
12.6 m deep
33 0
20
8
16 0
0
0.80
84
80
la
ye
42 0
0
2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
00
r
21
A
s
NF
0
Figure 11.11: Relation of integrated environmental improvement factors with the number of building layers,
for different sizes of the NFA, in case of a 12.6 m deep floor plan
Deep floor plan

Figure 11.11 demonstrates that every office size has an optimum number of building layers, given a certain floor
plan, in this case a cellular office with a depth of 12.6 m deep. In the case of the deeper floor plan of 25.2 m,
figure 11.12 presents the following lines.
1.60
1.50 1.60
67,200 m 2
1.40 1.50 im prove m ent facto

1.40
1.30
8,400 m 2 16,800 m 2 1.30
1.20 33,600 m 2
4,200 m 2 1.20
1.10 2,100 m 2 1.10
1.00 1.00
0.90 25.2 m deep 32

67 00
33 00
20
8
16
0.80
84 0
8
la
ye
42 0
00
2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
21
0
r
A
s
NF
0
Figure 11.12: Relation of integrated environmental improvement factors with the number of building layers,
for different sizes of the NFA, in case of a deeper floor plan
Comparing the different depths

The results of figure 11.12 are more favourable when the separate results for every NFA-value are related to the
2-stories variant of the 12.6-m depth alternatives. This can be seen in table 11.10, in which the deeper variants of
a certain number of layers are always more favourable than the shallower ones.

Table 11.10: Integrated improvement factors for different numbers of building layers and floor depths
A B C D E F
net floor area depth improvement factor
12.6 m 1.00 1.09 1.11 1.01
2,100 m2
25.2 m 0.94 1.04
12.6 m 1.00 1.10 1.14 1.12 1.02

4,200 m2
25.2 m 0.95 1.08 1.12
12.6 m 1.00 1.12 1.19 1.20 1.14 1.03

8,400 m2
25.2 m 0.95 1.13 1.24 1.20
12.6 m 1.00 1.13 1.22 1.25 1.21 1.11

16,800 m2
25.2 m 0.96 1.16 1.32 1.36 1.23
12.6 m 1.00 1.13 1.24 1.29 1.28 1.22

33,600 m2
25.2 m 0.96 1.17 1.37 1.47 1.43 1.25
12.6 m 1.00 1.14 1.25 1.32 1.33 1.29

67,200 m2
25.2 m 0.96 1.18 1.40 1.56 1.58 1.47
Therefore, in general, if an office organisation is able to organise its activities and workplaces with a deep floor
plan, from an environmental point of view, the best solution will be found through the bordered cells of table 11.10.
If an organisation however prefers a cellular office with a single corridor (12.6 m depth), it will need to find the
highest value in the 12.6 m row of the preferred NFA.
Note that the gaps between the height variants can be wide, and that the optimum will often lay in-between two
calculated values. For instance, the optimum for an NFA 67,200 m2 and a floor depth of 25.2 m lays around 26
stories, whereas table 11.10 might have led us to believe 32 stories.
Other GFA/NFA ratios

For the typology studies of this section, I used values for the GFA/NFA ratio based on Gerritse [1995]. Recent
analyses led to a general so formula deduced for this ratio [Meijer, 2003; presented in Gerritse, 2004], in which n
equals the number of building layers:
GFA/NFA=2*(NFA/n)-0,04 <11.01>
Note that this formula applies to offices with a floor depth of 13.2 m and a maximum number of 12 stories. The
formula does not take into account design inefficiencies in the NFA.
In spite of these restrictions, I recalculated the typologies based on GFAs using Meijer's formula. Figure 11.13
presents the new results for the integral environmental improvement factors. The crosses represent optima of the
original studies. As can be seen, the new maximum values are smaller than the original ones. Significant
differences however only appear in the case of NFAs greater than 16,800 m2. Basically, the relationships remain
similar.

1.60 1.60
1.50 1.50

1.40 1.40
67,200 m 2
1.30 1.30
67,200 m 2
1.20 1.20 8,400 m 2 16,800 m 2
4,200 m 2
33,600 m 2 33,600 m 2
1.10 1.10 2,100 m 2
16,800 m 2
2,100 m 2
1.00 4,200 m 2 1.00
8,400 m 2
0.90 12.6 m deep 0.90 25.2 m deep
0.80 0.80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
num ber of building layers num ber of building layers
Figure 11.13: Relationships of integrated environmental improvement factors with the number of building layers,
for different values of the NFA, based on the formula by Meijer [2003]
Long façades
The study presented is based on theoretical, simple, offices with a cellular plan. In the case of large floor areas
and low extents of stacking the building is relatively long. However, the building may then be considered as a
more realistic folded design, for which the study modelled an average long façade length.
Large glass-covered spaces

The influence of large glass-covered spaces, e.g. conservatories and atria, which are often applied in large
buildings up to 16 stories, were not taken into account. The study presented in this chapter is a study of basic
building shapes, based on a certain number of building layers. If a principal wants to add a glass-covered space, it
can be an extra factor affecting the environmental performance, i.e. improvement factors, determined here. As
discussed in chapter 10, the influence of large glass-covered spaces has a marginally different impact on the
Impact of extreme high-rises

Some uncertainties remain about the impact of increasing numbers of building layers on the amount of building
materials for columns and foundation. As explained, I modelled a 10% increase of environmental cost of the
foundation and vertical building elements, for every step of increasing building layers. This is however a rough
assumption that could not be thoroughly checked. The improvement factors calculated for the use of building
materials are now less favourable for high-rise variants than before I decided to model the 10% increase steps.
Due to the importance of other building elements, the differences however were not significant. The aspect of
stability nevertheless becomes much more important in the case of great heights. Stafford Smith & Coull [1991]
found that the amount of steel for columns increases linearly with height, whereas above 10 layers constructive
steel elements for carrying wind forces increase exponentially. This emphasises that the results presented in this
chapter are not valid for heights above 16 or at least 32 stories.
The façade structure will probably also be different when applied at great altitudes. This was not taken into
account either.
Furthermore, for the higher variants, the improvement factors found for energy consumption are probably
optimistic. For instance, the increased airflow at high altitudes plays a significant role in the heat transmission of
high-rise buildings. In addition, relatively economical systems for natural ventilation are impossible or require
additional measures that increase the energy demand. The influence of building services, including elevators, is
also expected to be more important than assumed.
The remarks made here were checked by means of the assessment of an extreme high-rise building presented in
the following section.

11.03 Assessing a real skyscraper: the Commerzbank
As part of the PhD research presented, graduation student Valentina Colaleo [2002] environmentally assessed
the Commerzbank Headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany (see figure 11.14). With a structural height of 259 m and a
total height of 299 m, the Commerzbank is Europe's tallest building. It is known as an ecological high-rise tower.
This section is based on the study of Colaleo.
Figure 11.14: The Commerzbank Headquarters in the centre of Frankfurt, Germany
11.03.01 Introducing the Commerzbank headquarters building
General description
The Commerzbank Headquarters tower was designed by Sir Norman Foster and constructed in the year 1997. It
was located among the tall buildings that form the skyline of Frankfurt's modern business district, exerting an
important step in the city’s development. For the city of Frankfurt, the Commerzbank tower needed to symbolise
its international and financial importance. However, it also needed to express its awareness of the ecological
crisis.
Table 11.11 presents some general characteristics of the Commerzbank building.
Table 11.11: General characteristics of the Commerzbank Headquarters

characteristics
general
name and location Commerzbank Headquarters, Frankfurt, Germany
architect Sir Norman Foster & Partners
engineers Ove Arup and Partners
building envelope consultants Josef Gartner & Co
completion June 1997
net floor area (NFA) 39,160 m2
gross floor area (GFA) 97,172 m2
plot area 6,339 m2
number of occupants 2,400
Composition of the building

The Commerzbank Headquarters complex was integrated into the existing street pattern. The basement of the
tower is formed by a building block of which the perimeter buildings contain a mix of apartments, shops, a branch
bank and car parking facilities, as well as a new auditorium for the bank (see figure 11.15).

Figure 11.15: The Commerzbank Headquarters building in its urban environment in Frankfurt, Germany
On top of the three cellar floors, the ground floor is at 4.60 m above ground level. It is a four-story high publicly
accessible entrance hall, offering a winter garden, and accommodating restaurants, cafés and space for
performances and exhibitions of works of art. The tower has a rounded triangular plan. It is divided in four-story
high blocks, of which one side hosts a winter garden, and the other two host offices. Plant rooms are located in
some of the cellar floors and on stories 5-6 and 51-62. The 49th story is a conventionally conditioned double-height
area with a conference room, meeting rooms and a kitchen. See figure 11.16.
Figure 11.16: Vertical cross-section of the Commerzbank tower [picture: Foster & Partners]
The gardens and indoor climate system

In order to accommodate the best workplaces for the employees (either physical or psychological) and to
encourage teamwork, the building needed to offer high quality in space and comfort. Foster designed four-story
high landscaped gardens penetrating from the façade through to the central atrium and distributed these evenly
over the height of the building, enabling a clear view of the outside world from every individual office or
workstation (see figure 11.17). The whole architectural, spatial and environmental concept of the building depends
on these gardens. The perimeter offices are ventilated through the double skin, while the inner offices looking onto
one of the gardens are indirectly supplied with fresh air. The gardens act as chimneys in which the air flows from
the floor to the ceiling, introducing new air and ventilating the internal offices. Staircases, elevators, and utilities
are located at the corners along the perimeter, leaving the building's core open as a continuous atrium and shaft
for natural ventilation.

Figure 11.17: a. One of the gardens [picture: Gabriele Röhle] and b. typical floor plan [picture: Foster & Partners]
Lighting and indoor climate are controlled by both a passive system and an electronic building management
system (BMS) acting on the basis of data from solar radiation, air temperature, air pressure, wind speed and
direction received from approximately 1,400 control stations distributed around the building. The passive system,
designed by Josef Gartner & Co., consists of a double-skin façade with Venetian blinds between the two panes.
The electronic system (BMS) controls the temperature, humidity and light level in the offices and, if necessary for
the indoor comfort, it re-equilibrates the conditions. Mechanical ventilation is used when the outdoor temperature
is above 25°C or below 3°C. Natural ventilation, as shown by figure 11.18, turns out to be suitable for maintaining
indoor comfort for about two-thirds of the year, a remarkable performance for a skyscraper.
Figure 11.18: Principle of the façade [picture: Foster & Partners]
Cooling and flushing water

Cooling of the offices is provided through chilled ceilings. They cannot be simultaneously used with natural
ventilation yet combine with mechanical air conditioning. The BMS decides to switch to one mode or the other.
The employees are kept informed of the situation by a simple indicator light: a red light means that the mechanical
ventilation is in operation and the windows are locked shut; a green light means that the system is in the natural
ventilation mode and the employees are free to open their windows.
Dry coolers are installed at the upper levels of the service tower to dissipate excess heat from the absorption
chillers at the lower level of the service tower during the winter months. Cooling water from the water coolers at
the upper levels of the service tower perform the same task during the summer months. Their wastewater is
reused. The absorption chillers are powered by the city's district heating system. In the basement, water storage
and heat exchangers are also sited.
Heating and hot water

Ordinary thermostatically controlled panel radiators below the windows provide heating. When the building is in
the natural ventilation mode, the occupants themselves control the temperature and ventilation of their personal

space by simply opening and closing the windows. Furthermore, heat is recovered from exhaust air and used for
low-grade hot water suitable for the building's domestic functions.
Electricity and elevators

The Commerzbank building uses electricity supplied from three main switch rooms, which take the power directly
from the city's main 10.000 Volt supply. The building has diesel generators for emergency supply, enabling a total
supply of 12.3 MW, about half the building's present demand.
There are sets of elevators in all three corners of the plan. The height of the building is divided into three zones
and each set of lifts serves one zone. Although interchange floors at level 7, 19, and 35 allow for journeys from
one zone to another, every floor is accessible from the main entrance lobby in one trip. The elevators are based
on a standardised frame and guidance system. The extensive use of glass however makes them considerably
heavier than normal elevator cars, for which special heavy-duty cables were installed.
As in most skyscrapers, in the Commerzbank tower elevator traffic also decreases with height and therefore fewer
elevator shafts are required on the upper levels. The space of the redundant shafts is then taken over by other
functions such as plant rooms and lavatories.
Table 11.12 summarises energy-related characteristics.
Table 11.12: Energy characteristics of the Commerzbank Headquarters

characteristics
energy use
orientation of main façades multiple
solar control system motorised vertical blinds
gross floor naturally ventilated approximately 100% + A/C
night-time ventilation supply natural
air conditioning type minimum fresh air, chilled ceiling
artificial lighting during daylight hours approximately 0 % (target) of the NFA
artificial lighting control energy-saving timers and movement detectors
additional measures utilisation of building mass, thermal storage, free night cooling
as part of energy strategy
heating system water radiation, perimeter heating
heat recovery heat recovery in central plant; only 2-3 changes needed due to
chilled ceilings
boiler type heat exchanger
additional measures waste water from cooling towers re-used for toilets
The supporting structure

The extraordinary design of the Commerzbank building required extraordinary measures for the supporting
structure.
The Commerzbank tower is essentially a hollow tube in which most of the vertical loads are distributed along the
perimeter of the building. The structure consists of two major elements: the corner columns (measuring 7.5 by 1.2
m in their final form), in which all the vertical forces are concentrated, and the eight-story high, bridge-like, steel
structures, that span across the gardens between the columns. For a freer façade, without diagonal cross bracing,
a Vierendeel frame solution of horizontal and vertical members was chosen. Large steel frames connecting each
pair of columns across the corners of the plan complete the perforated tube structure. They support the floors and
act with the columns to resist wind loading. The combination of steel and concrete produces a relatively light and
efficient structural form, which is also easier to build. The composite steel and concrete floors were simple and
quick to build, requiring no temporary formwork or propping, and are significantly lighter. Any saving in weight was
beneficial as it allowed the use of more economical foundations.

Figure 11.19: a. Model of the lower supporting structure and b. structural floor plan [pictures: Foster & Partners]
The foundations of the high-rise consist of 12 metre-high cellular boxes with external walls up to 3 metres thick on
a 2.5 to 4.5 metre thick horizontal slab, which is supported by 111 reinforced concrete poles, clustered in three
groups at the corners of the tower (see figure 11.19). The 45-metre long poles have a diameter of 1.8 metres for
the first twenty metres of drilling, reducing to 1.5 metres beyond that. Cavities in the layer of limestone that
supports the foundation poles were injected with liquid concrete.
The special nature of the structural design of the Commerzbank building allowed for a high degree of
standardisation. The Vierendeel frames have a similar job to do; all are therefore identical. Although the six main
corner columns vary in required load-bearing capacity from top to bottom, they remain uniform in both size and
weight, however have an altering amount of steel reinforcement.
The cladding system

The Commerzbank tower is provided with a functionally divers cladding system: the five different types have to
carry out different jobs and therefore employ different technologies. The most sophisticated one is discussed here.
The cladding system used for the external offices' windows consists in a regular grid of structurally independent
composite panels, pre-manufactured and assembled on site. Every panel contained all sub-components including
motors and blinds. This sophisticated cladding system forms an integrated part of the environmental control
system. It contains a fixed spandrel of insulated grey glass and a double window system that has inner double-
glazed, bottom-hinged, inward opening light, and a second outer skin of fixed glass with an externally ventilated
20 cm cavity in-between. Air is scooped into the cavity at still level and exhausted through a slot at the head. The
fixed outer skin therefore acts as a buffer, slowing down the flow of air into the building enabling the window to be
opened without admitting driving rain or causing uncomfortable draughts, even in quite windy conditions (see
figure 11.20). The cavity also accommodates Venetian blinds that not only filter the daylight and reduce glare but
also deflect direct sunlight before it reaches the inner layer of glass, thereby reducing solar heat gain.
The panels used in for the internal offices are a simplified version of the ones used for the exterior office cladding.
They are insulated and have opening windows as well but the second skin and the blinds are omitted. Through
these openings, fresh air naturally flows from the atrium into the offices.

Figure 11.20: Natural ventilation principle [picture: Foster & Partners]
The four-story high garden consists of a glazed curtain wall, set back from the surface of the rest of the tower
façade and sloped outwards (see figure 11.21). This breaks the vertical plane, makes room for an external terrace
at garden level, and interrupts the pattern of reflections on the façade, making the interior more visible and
thereby displaying the green to the outside world.
Full-height, steel 'bowstring' truss mullions support the horizontal aluminium-glazed grid. The mullions are
connected to the building’s heating system so that they act as a radiator preventing uncomfortable downdraughts
and condensation in winter4. At the highest part of the curtain wall, there is a row of horizontally pivoted windows
motorised and operated automatically by the BMS, which provide natural ventilation for the garden space.
Figure 11.21: Fragment of the Commerzbank south elevation, with the Main5 Tower on the background
4
This is comparable to the solution for the conservatory of the Gas Union building depicted on the title page of this Volume D.
5
German pronunciation. The Main is the river that flows through Frankfurt.

Table 11.13 summarises the characteristics of the use of building materials.
Table 11.13: Material use characteristics of the Commerzbank Headquarters

characteristics
building materials
foundations piled raft foundation, bearing walls, and floors in concrete
bearing structure Vierendeel frames, steel and concrete columns

secondary structure composite floor system, concrete glazed roof, perforated
concrete blocks
cladding system double-skin façade with aluminium frames for offices, double-
and single-layered glass windows, metallic louvers units,
hardened glass with a coating film
finishing ceramic, granite and carpet tiles for floors, metallic slabs and
acrylic paint for walls, cement tiles, metallic ceiling panels,
bitumen and insulation for the roof
inner partitions element walls and double-glazed partition walls, inner
windows in aluminium frames
additional measures use of timber only from managed sources, catering waste
treated in a natural organic sewage
11.03.02 Performance with respect to theoretical reference buildings
General characteristics
As introduced in chapter 05, we compared the building to a GFA-reference, based on an equal number of users
and equal gross floor area, and a FTE-reference, based on an equal number of users, yet with a reference floor
area per user. The references had a common cellular office building design and a maximum number of 24 stories.
Table 11.14 gives general characteristics of the Commerzbank building and its references, demonstrating an
inefficient use of space by the Commerzbank tower.
Table 11.14: Characteristics of the Commerzbank and its two theoretical references [based on Colaleo, 2003]
parameter characteristics improvement factor
Commerzbank GFA-reference FTE-reference GFA-ref FTE-ref
unit unit unit
year of construction 1997 "1990" "1990"
number of employees 2,400 p 2,400 p 2,400 p
2 2 2
net floor area (NFA) 39,160 m 58,460 m 40,497 m
1.49 1.03
NFA per employee 16.3 m2 24.4 m2 16.9 m2
2 2 2
gross floor area (GFA) 97,172 m 97,172 m 67,496 m
1.00 0.69
GFA per employee 40.5 m2 40.5 m2 28.1 m2
GFA/NFA ratio 2.481 1.662 1.667 0.67 0.67
2 2 2
ground area (GA) 8,315 m 30,460 m 30,460 m
3.66 3.66
GA per employee 3.5 m2 12.7 m2 12.7 m2
The environmental cost comparison

Table 11.15 presents the outcome of the environmental cost calculation of the Commerzbank building and its
references. The improvement factors suggest that the high-rise design is not as ecological as was intended.

Table 11.15: Environmental comparison of the Commerzbank with two theoretical references [based on Colaleo, 2003]
criterion annual environmental cost improvement factor
unit unit unit
building materials 1,902,380 e€ 694,690 e€ 516,688 e€ 0.37 0.27
energy consumption 3,687,102 e€ 2,931,998 e€ 2,305,623 e€ 0.80 0.63
water consumption 78,292 e€ 100,978 e€ 100,978 e€ 1.29 1.29
total 5,667,773 e€ 3,947,867 e€ 3,143,490 e€
per employee 2,362 e€ 1,645 e€ 1,310 e€ 0.70 0.55
per m2 GFA 58 e€ 41 e€ 47 e€
In particular, the great difference between the environmental costs of building materials is striking. As can be seen
in the columns of the GFA-reference, this is only partly due to the inefficient use of space in the Commerzbank
building. A surplus of building materials and hence environmental cost for the garden spaces is expected.
However, this cannot explain the entire gap. The most probable explanation for this will be the actual use of
building materials for the supporting structure - and perhaps also other building elements - for a skyscraper the
size of the Commerzbank. Appropriate for the assessments presented in chapter 06, the reference buildings are
based on standard office buildings that do not exceed 24 building layers and therefore do not have a structure
with significantly larger dimensions. The reference buildings stow the large office space into a shallow, long
building, a design completely different from the Commerzbank. The theoretical reference buildings therefore are
probably less appropriate for an assessment of high-rises.
We also compared the Commerzbank to a so-called design-reference, with a similar building design, however with
standard building materials and services. The difference was smaller this time, indicating that for the particular
floor area, the shape of the Commerzbank design is less favourable than a standard cellular office previously
used in the other references. The Commerzbank still came out unfavourable. The six main columns, which from a
structural point of view, are unnecessarily constant in size from bottom to top, are a probable cause of this.
Also surprising is the unfavourable environmental cost for energy. One would have expected environmental profit
on this aspect. It again seems that the building shape is responsible for a greater demand for heating, cooling,
and ventilation.
As a result of the re-use of cooling water, the consumption of water is more favourable than the two references.
However, this has no great influence on the end-result.
Calculating with energy values more expectable

As discussed in chapter 06, the energy calculation module of GreenCalc is just a coarse tool for which
complicated or uncommon solutions are hard to calculate. Therefore, energy consumption values predicted by the
Commerzbank engineers of Ove Arup were used for a corrective calculation. In this case, the environmental cost
of energy and overall environmental performance however would be even worse, as table 11.16 presents.
Table 11.16: Environmental comparison in case of predicted energy consumption [based on Colaleo, 2003]
criterion annual environmental cost improvement factor
unit unit unit
building materials 1,902,380 e€ 694,690 e€ 516,688 e€ 0.37 0.27
energy consumption 4,371,245 e€ 2,931,998 e€ 2,305,623 e€ 0.67 0.53
water consumption 78,292 e€ 100,978 e€ 100,978 e€ 1.29 1.29
total 6,351,917 e€ 3,733,957 e€ 2,929,580 e€
per employee 2,647 e€ 1,556 e€ 1,221 e€ 0.59 0.46
per m2 GFA 65 e€ 38 e€ 44 e€
In order to interpret this outcome, table 11.17 compares the separate sources of energy consumption. This table
demonstrates that the differences between the predicted and calculated use of energy for heating and lighting are

not substantial. However, the predicted energy demand for cooling, and to a lesser extent ventilation, is strikingly
greater than calculated. Taking into account the vast floor area reserved for cooling plants, a relatively great use
of energy for cooling was probably expected, however not to such a large degree.
Table 11.17: Energy consumption features predicted and calculated for the Commerzbank
2
energy source annual energy consumption per m GFA
predicted by Ove Arup calculated by GreenCalc explanation
heating 36.0 kWh 31.7 kWh incl. pumps & hot tap water
cooling 115.0 kWh 7.0 kWh incl. pumps
artificial lighting 16.0 kWh 11.9 kWh

mechanical ventilation 18.0 kWh 4.6 kWh incl. moistening
equipment kWh 16.9 kWh computers & elevators
total 185.0 kWh 72.2 kWh

1,702 MJ 664 MJ
The question however is, how accurate the assessment tool used is. The average value for primary energy use of
buildings of the Dutch Government Buildings Agency (DGBA) is 1,544 MJ/m2 GFA [based on Novem, 2001]. This
is within 10% of the Commerzbank value. When I take into account that the spatial use of energy by high-rises is
expected to be less favourable than more compact alternatives, the expected 1,702 MJ seems a reasonable, if not
good performance. To illustrate this: the original energy consumption estimate was 13 million kWh per year, while
actual energy consumption has been approximately 10 million kWh. With both figures, Commerzbank consumes
significantly less energy than traditional commercial skyscrapers.
The conclusion may therefore be drawn that although the environmental load of the Commerzbank Headquarters
building is greater than lower buildings with the same floor area, the building is not necessarily an environmentally
unfavourable high-rise design because a comparison with other high-rise buildings was not executed.
10.00
environm ental cost (e€ per m2 gfa)
1,312 m 2 13,590 m 2
7,531 m 2
9.00 3,489 m 2 92,097 m 2
6,342 m 2 6,897 m 2
8.00
57,812 m 2
1,671 m 2
7.00
14,275 m 2
6.00 11,263 m 2
5,177 m 2
5.00
4.00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 11.22: Environmental load of the use of building materials of real buildings versus building height
11.03.03 Comparison with large, lower buildings
Real building height and the environmental load of building materials

The case study of government office buildings presented in chapter 06 indicates that the annual environmental
load per m2 of building materials on average increases with the number of building layers (see figure 11.22). The
range of results however is relatively large: more than a factor of 1.5. The results are of course also importantly
dependent on the design of the building and façade, the selected building materials, level of technical quality,

etcetera. Furthermore, there is less data from buildings exceeding 10 layers. Therefore, if more high-rise objects
were studied, the average would show a more accurate trend. Nevertheless, it seems logical that the
environmental damage due to building materials increases with a greater height, for instance because of the
heavier supporting structure.
Real building height and the environmental load of energy consumption

The results for energy consumption of real buildings were also put in a chart (figure 11.23). In this case, the
spatial values for the environmental cost are higher, and a slight decrease can be seen with a greater extent of
stacking. The range of results however is even wider than with building materials, demanding more case
assessments than just these 12 offices.
50.00
environm ental cost (e€ per m2 gfa)
13,590 m 2
45.00
40.00 1,671 m 2
1,312 m 2
35.00 7,531 m 2 3,489 m 2
92,097 m 2
6,897 m 2
30.00 6,342 m 2 11,263 m 2

5,177 m 2 57,812 m 2
14,275 m 2
25.00
20.00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 11.23: Environmental load of the energy consumption of real buildings versus building height
Comparison of the Commerzbank with two ministries

Compared to two Dutch ministries, the Commerzbank has a relatively large environmental load (see table 11.18).
The use of land, which is more efficient in the Commerzbank case, was not expressed using environmental costs.
Its bad performance is mainly due to inefficient use of floor space: the Commerzbank has a very high gross/net
ratio because of heavy supporting structures and the hanging gardens. Besides, the supporting structure imposes
a great demand on building materials such as concrete and steel.
Table 11.18: Characteristics and annual environmental cost per m2 GFA of two Dutch ministry buildings and the
Commerzbank Headquarters [based on Colaleo, 2003]
building characteristics environmental cost
users layers GFA/NFA GFA/empl materials energy
unit > p l - m2/p e€/m2.y e€/m2.y
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1800 10 1.83 32.1 8.03 27.74
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 3260 16 1.97 28.3 8.47 33.17
Commerzbank HQ, Frankfurt 2400 62 2.48 40.5 19.58 37.94
In the two studies presented, only separate buildings were assessed. Combining buildings in an integrated urban
plan might yield environmental profits for the materials used. Evaluating the use of building material, the basis of
comparison should not be the environmental performance of a separate building, but of a whole city plan. This
performance should be related to a reference based upon the same number of people using the buildings and
area as a whole.

Remarks
Some advantages of high-rise buildings and densely built urban areas were not included in the environmental
performance of this case. In cases of highly stacked buildings, a great reduction of land use is evident, through
which building in ecologically more important rural areas is avoided. Furthermore, dense urban areas with high-
rise buildings stimulate the use of public transport and thereby improve the environmental performance of travel,
as was demonstrated by Newman & Kenworthy [2001]. These aspects were not involved in the assessments
presented in this chapter.
The time factor was also neglected. As demonstrated in chapter 07, the building lifespan is an important aspect
because the eventual environmental load will depend on it. As chapter 08 indicated, the functional quality,
aesthetic value and cultural meaning of a building are decisive for the eventual lifespan, more than its technical
quality. High-rises such as the Commerzbank therefore are expected to last longer than average office buildings.
Moreover, we should not have the illusion that environmental issues play a role in the ultimate geometry of an
office building. As the title of her study indicated ('Form follows finance'), Carol Willis [1995] found that the height
of high-rises in New York and Chicago constructed before World War II were defined by financial considerations,
within the boundaries of local legislation. Since WWII, the choice between high-rise or low-rise office designs can
be incited by a few factors [Meel, 2000]:
History: open spaces in bombed cities such as Rotterdam, Frankfurt and London offer opportunities for
reconstruction with high-rise buildings.
Scarcity of land: high rent levels facilitate high-rises.
Willingness to express: some cities, e.g. Frankfurt, want to demonstrate that they are an important financial
centre, e.g. by means of high-rise structures.
Powerful market forces created existing high-rise cities such as Hong Kong and Manhattan. In Europe, such
strong forces are either absent or were overruled by the impact of the urban setting [Meel, 2000].


REFERENCES FOR THE TECHNOLOGY FACTOR
Literature
Arets M.J.P.; Milieuvergelijkingen van draagconstructies (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil
Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2001
Arets M.J.P.; Materiaalgebruik van installaties op wijkniveau (in Dutch); NUON TPC, Duiven, Netherlands, 2003
Arets M.J.P.; 'Puntos de referencia de forjados desde el punto de vista medioambiental / Benchmarking floor
constructions from the environmental point of view - Construcción sostenible / Effective sustainable building (in Spanish
/ English)', in: BFT - Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik / Concrete Plant + Precast Technology, Edición española / English
edition, No. 2, 2003b (24-28)
Arets M.J.P.; 'Benchmarking von Deckensystemen aus der Sicht des Umweltschützes / Benchmarking floor
constructions from the environmental point of view - Nachhaltiges Bauen / Effective sustainable building (in German /
English)', in: BFT - Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik / Concrete Plant + Precast Technology, No. 4, 2003a (62-67)
Balaras C.A., Droutsma K., Dascalaki E., Hansen K. & Petersen E.H.; 'Environmental Impact Assessment of
Residential Buildings', in: Proceedings 2nd International Symposium ILCDES 2003 - Integrated Lifetime Engineering of
Buildings and Civil Infrastructures (439-444); RIL/VTT, Finland, 2003
Broek C. van den; Milieueffecten van bouwmaterialen - Monografieën SOM deel 5 (in Dutch); Delft University of
Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Study group SOM, faculteit Bouwkunde, TU Delft, Netherlands, 1989
Brosowsky M.; Milieukostenanalyse van de technische infrastructuur van een stadswijk; Delft University of Technology,
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Section of Building Engineering, Netherlands, 2002
Colaleo V.; Sustainability in numbers for technological building; Politecnico di Torino, Facoltà di Ingegneria, Turin, Italy,
2003
Dobbelska A.; Poseidon, home of the DouchecarrouselTM - Achtergrond, techniek en toepassing van de fameuze
Douchecarrousel (in Dutch); Poseidonpost, January, 2003
Dobbelska A.; De Integrale Douchetheorie - naar aanleiding van de reactie van J. van de Bouw op het stuk 'Poseidon,
home of the DouchecarrouselTM' (in Dutch); Poseidonpost, May 2003
EIA (Energy Information Administration); Energy Consumption in Commercial Buildings in 1995; EIA, US Department
of Energy, USA, 1995
Flanagan R.; 'Creating Competitive Advantage and Profits with Technology in the Construction Sector', in: Anson M.,
Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume I (29-38); Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK,
2002
Gerritse C.; Kosten-kwaliteitsturing in de vroege fasen van het huisvestingsproces (in Dutch); Delft University of
Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Real Estate & Housing, Netherlands, 2004
Gerritse C.; Stapeling (in Dutch); Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1995
Glass J. & Pocklington D.N.; 'Delivering Sustainability throughout the Building Process: a Study of the UK Cement and
Concrete Sector', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume I (1457-1465);
Hartkopf V.; 'Building as Power Plant', in: Keynote lecture at the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and
Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003); Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Hartkopf V., Archer D. & Loftness V.; 'Building as Power Plant - BAPP', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.),
Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (2-
16, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Jansen S.C.; Het ontwikkelen van een weersafhankelijke kantoorgevel (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology,
Faculty of Architecture, Netherlands, 2002
Kohler N.; 'An observer's perspective on the relevance of GBC'98', in: Building Research and Information, No. 27, 4/5,
1999 (309-320)
Kristinsson J.; 'Breathing window - research - Healthy ventilation in buildings', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C.
(eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE
2003); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Kristinsson J.; Vitale architectuur - Integraal ontwerpen (in Dutch); Kristinsson-Reitsema, Deventer, Netherlands, 2002
Lugt P. van der; Bamboe als alternatief bouwmateriaal in West-Europa? (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology,
Faculty of Architecture, Real Estate & Housing Department, Delft, Netherlands, 2003
D The Technology Factor - References for The Technology Factor 273

Meijer W.; De 'foef' formule (in Dutch); Willem Meijer Consultancy, Oss, Netherlands, 2003
Mertens S.; 'The flat plate concentrator', in: Wisse J. & Kleinman K. (eds.), Proceedings 3rd International European and
African Conference on Wind Engineering (415-418); University of Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2001
Metz Th.S.; Milieuanalyse van Grote Glasoverkapte Ruimten (in Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil
Engineering & Geosciences, Netherlands, 2004
Newman P. & Kenworthy J.; 'Sustainable Urban Form: The Big Picture', in: Williams K., Burton E. & Jenks M. (eds.),
Achieving Sustainable Urban Form (109-120); Spon Press, London, UK/New York, USA, 2001
Novem; Monitor van de voortgang van het Energie Efficiencyprogramma Rijkshuisvesting over de periode 1989 tot en
met 2000 (in Dutch); Novem B.V., Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001
Nunes R.; Environmental comparison of building structures; Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, 2003
Punkki J. & Pääjärvi R.; 'Development of Cost-Effective Sustainable Building', in: Proceedings 2nd International
Finland, 2003
Shashua-Bar L. & Hoffman M.E.; 'Quantitative Evaluation of the Effects of Built-up Geometry and Trees on Diurnal Air
Temperature in Canyon-type Courtyards', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building
Technology, Volume II (1493-1500); Elsevier Science, Oxford, UK, 2002
Stafford Smith B. & Coull A.; Tall building structures: analyses and design; John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA, 1991
Werkgroep PARAP & Deerns raadgevende ingenieurs (Gerritse C.); Energiegebruik in EER hersteld -
Willis C.; Form Follows Finance - Skyscrapers and Skylines in New York and Chicago; Princeton Architectural Press,
New York, USA, 1995
For the assessment of the Commerzbank Headquarters, the following literature was studied:
Architectural Monographs No. 20; Foster Associates - Recent work; Academy Editions/Martain's Press, 1992
Davies C. & Lambot I.; Commerzbank Frankfurt - Prototype for an Ecological High-Rise; Watermark/Birkhäuser, 1997
Foster N.; Foster Associates - Buildings and Projects - Vol. 4 - 1982-1989; Birkhäuser Verlag/Watermark, 1990
Master Architect Series II; Norman Foster - Selected and current work of Foster & Partners; Images Publishing, year
unknown
Acknowledgements
Thank you (in alphabetical order):

Ali Laaraj, graduated shortly before I was finished, for inspiring me how to tackle the building shapes study, as you
could not finish your study before I needed to pick up this topic
Kees Gerritse, academic teacher at the department of Real Estate & Housing of the faculty of Architecture, for
discussing the building shape and height studies with me and providing me useful extra information
Martijn Arets, former graduation student and present colleague, for the importance of your study of floor structures to
additional studies by Ricardo and its contribution to chapter 10 and many publications resulting from it
Pablo van der Lugt, graduated real estate and housing student, for the pleasant cooperation on your thesis, its
contribution to chapter 10 and the important publications we made on it
Ricardo Nunes, graduated exchange student from Lisbon, Portugal, for your pleasant presence with Martijn and me in
Delft and for the extensive calculations of many alternatives for complete structural designs and their final
environmental outcome presented in chapter 10
Ruben Abrahams, former colleague and present friend, for cooperating with me and several graduation students like
Pablo, adding value to their study results
Sabine Jansen, graduated specialist of building physics and building technology, recently returned from Barcelona, for
the contribution of your thesis to chapter 10
Thomas Metz, former master student who just graduated before I had to hand in the manuscript of this book, for the
contribution of your thesis to chapter 10 and for a pleasant graduation period for me as a supervisor
Valentina Colaleo, graduated exchange student from Politecnico di Torino, Italy, for the contribution of your thesis to
my research and for the special period my colleagues and I spent with you in Delft
274 References for The Technology Factor - D The Technology Factor

Scientific journals
Lugt P. van der, Dobbelsteen A. van den & Janssen J.; 'An environmental, financial and practical assessment of
bamboo as a building material for bearing structures', in: Construction and Building Materials; Elsevier Science, Oxford,
UK, submitted
Lugt P. van der & Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Bamboo as an alternative building material in Western Europe? - A study
of the sustainability, costs and bottlenecks of the use of bamboo (products) in Western Europe', in: Journal of Bamboo
and Rattan; INBAR, Beijing, China, 2003
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; 'Smart sustainable office design - Effective
technological solutions, based on typology and case studies', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.),
(163-171, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Arets M.J.P., Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Nunes R.J.C.; 'Sustainable bearing structures for (office) buildings at
different structural spans', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003 International
Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (594-601, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK /
Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Arets M.J.P. & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Sustainable bearing structures for (office) buildings', in: Bontempi F.
(ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Structural and Construction Engineering, System-based
Vision for Strategic and Creative Design, Vol. 2 (1661-1666); A.A. Balkema, Lisse, Netherlands, 2003
Lugt P. van der, Dobbelsteen A. van den & Janssen J.; 'Bamboo, a sustainable building material in Western Europe',
in: Proceedings International Bamboo Workshop, Wuhan, China; INBAR, Beijing, China, 2003
Bokel R., Jansen S., Dobbelsteen A. van den & Voorden M. van der; 'The development of an energy-saving office
façade based on adaptation to outside weather conditions in the Netherlands', in: Proceedings International
Conference Building Simulation, Eindhoven; IBPSA, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2003
Arets M.J.P. & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Sustainable bearing structures', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S.
(eds.); Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1449-1456); Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2002b
Arets M.J.P. & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Effective technical solutions for sustainable offices - A focus on building
materials', in: Dyrstadt Pettersen T. (ed.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2002 (CD-rom);
EcoBuild, Oslo, Norway, 2002a
Conference Building Sustainable Cities, Venezia (CD-rom); University of Salford, UK, 2002
the limits of reducing the environmental costs of building material, use of energy, use of water and mobility', in:
Boonstra C., Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2000 (598-
600); Aeneas, Technical Publishers, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Arets M.J.P. & Linden A.C. van der; 'Smart sustainable office design - Effective
technological solutions, based on typology and case studies', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Smart
and Sustainable Built Environment; Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK, to be published in 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Druk werk te doen aan gebouwen voor duurzame technologische ontwikkeling -
Bouwtechniek & Bouwproces (in Dutch)', in: PS Jaarboek 2003; PS, Delft, Netherlands, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Duurzame stedebouw kan veel opleveren maar vereist een innovatieve aanpak - Het
Nieuwegeinse binnenstadsproject als testcase voor duurzame herstructurering (in Dutch)', in: Boone M. (ed.), Dubo
Jaarboek 2000 (130-134); Aeneas, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Reports
Dobbelsteen A. van den, Pötz H. & Bleuzé P.; De integrale waterprijs (in Dutch); opMAAT, Delft, Netherlands, 1995
Dobbelsteen A. van den; Duurzame utiliteitsbouw - Utiliteitsbouw in dienst van mens & milieu (in Dutch); Delft
D The Technology Factor - References for The Technology Factor 275

Expert journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Lugt P. van der; 'Bamboe - Een duurzaam bouwmateriaal voor West-Europa (in Dutch)', in:
Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 3, year 6, July (5-7); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003
Lugt P. van der, Abrahams R. & Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Bamboe: waarom niet hier? - Reuzengras als stam en in
platen (in Dutch)', in: Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 4 (32-34); Aeneas, Boxtel, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Environmental design - Verschillende ontwerpbenaderingen voor een betere toekomst (in
Dutch)', in: U-profiel, October (6-9); U-dispuut, Delft, Netherlands, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Lugt P. van der; 'Bamboe - Een duurzaam bouwmateriaal voor West-Europa (in Dutch)', in:
Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 3, Year 6, July (5-7); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Klaase D.; 'Duurzaamheid vereist een effectieve aanpak van stedebouw - The paradigm
shift (3) (in Dutch)', in: Real Estate Magazine, No. 21 (23-27); Arko Uitgeverij bv, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Innovatieve aanpak duurzaam bouwen in Nieuwegein (in Dutch)', in: NIBE-blad, Year 2, No.
3 (4); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2000

Jong T. de & Dobbelsteen A. van den; Milieueffecten van het energiegebruik (versie 1.0) (in Dutch); Publikatieburo
Bouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1998
276 References for The Technology Factor - D The Technology Factor

Front page
A wheat field in the North of the Netherlands, where space,
which is rare in most other parts of the country, is still
abundant, and relatively cheap. This picture exemplifies that
space use also concerns ecological and cultural aspects, and
its appreciation depends on specific area.
The Space Factor
19 G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
space use &
10 11 D
the technology
factor
09 08 07 C
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
the beginning
12 SPACE USE & SUSTAINABILITY
As discussed in chapter 11, the shape of a building and its number of building layers influence the use of building
materials, energy consumption, and thereby the environmental performance of a building. In this chapter, the
building typology studies of chapter 11 will be extended towards a study of the factor that defines the eventual
features of buildings and urban plans: the use of space. This chapter discusses space use characteristics, the
measurement of spatial efficiency and environmental impact of space use, and solutions for the improvement of
the use of space.
Figure 12.01: Hong Kong Island

Contents

12.02 Quantifying space use 284
12.02.02 Spatial efficiency indicators 284
12.02.03 Spatial improvement factors 286
12.02.04 Functional indicators 286
12.03 Sustainability impact of space use concepts 287
12.03.03 Travel 289
12.03.04 Ecology 291
12.03.05 Water 293
12.03.06 Health 293
12.03.07 Safety 294
12.03.08 Other effects 295
12.03.09 Integrated sustainability assessment of space use concepts 296
12.04 Space use optimisation 296
12.04.01 Introduction: strategies for improvement 296
12.04.02 Principles of intensive and multiple use of space 296
12.04.03 Optimised use of space in practice 299
All REFERENCES for Volume E - The Space Factor can be found on pages 337 to 340.
282 12 Space use & sustainability - E The Space Factor

12.01 Introduction
The increased personal use of space

The growth of the global population leads to an increase of occupied land. As introduced in chapter 01, over the
period 1985-2000, the human use of space increased more than this growth would have justified [Liu et al., 2003].
The excessive growth of demand for space is a reflection of the increased amount of space per person. Luxury
plays a role; yet more important is the increase of wealth, leading to smaller households in equally large houses.
Therefore, in terms of residential accommodation, there has been an increase of built area per capita. As already
cited in chapter 10, the personal use of space for Finnish residences has increased by a factor of 2.3 since 1960
[Punkki & Pääjärvi, 2003]. In the Netherlands, the average number of people in a household has also decreased
while the proportion of one-person households has grown [CBS, 2002a].
Office work naturally also contributes to the use of space and its environmental effects: office accommodation
consumes land, building materials, energy and water. Furthermore, commuter and business travel form an
important part of the impact of transportation. As discussed in chapter 06, in the Netherlands, the personal use of
office space has decreased from approximately 28 m2 gross floor area (GFA) in 1990 to 23.8 m2 in 2001.
Therefore, even with a growing population, office space seems to have diminished. A great shift of economic
activity from agricultural and industrial sectors to the service sector has however taken place, leading to an
increase of real estate for office work. In Western Europe and North America, already an important proportion of
built area consists of office space.
The future task

For the next few decades, the world population and its average standard of living is expected to increase, putting
an even greater pressure on the space still available. This pressure will particularly be concentrated in cities, as
the migration from rural to urban areas is expected to prolong. Therefore, for a more sustainable use of land,
space use needs to be optimised. This optimisation starts with a reduction of the initial demand for space. In order
to avoid sprawl, i.e. consumption of vast rural areas outside the cities, new building sites need to be located within
the city borders, or a more ecological means for urban extension needs to be found. Simultaneously, the negative
effects of travel can be reduced through shorter travelling distances and a shift from individual petrol- or diesel-
driven cars towards more sustainable ways of transport.
The problem of space use can of course not be solved through an improvement of office accommodation alone.
An integrated urban approach to accommodation for different functions should be the solution. Nevertheless, a
smart approach to office space can form an important contribution to a more sustainable society. For instance,
office organisations can reduce the negative effects of space use and travel by means of (from a smaller to a
larger scale):
Reducing the personal use of space by office employees through innovative office concepts
Reducing the use of land by office buildings through stacking of building layers
Reducing the use of land through combinations with other urban functions
Reducing travel distances through directive allocation policies
Reducing the impact of travel through stimulation of public or other sustainable forms of transport
Measuring space
Before any improvement can be determined, space use needs to be quantified. Therefore, in this chapter,
methods and indicators for space use quantification will be discussed. Furthermore, solution principles for an
improved use of space will be presented. In chapter 13, the spatial assessment of the twelve government offices
introduced in chapter 06 will be presented and discussed, as well as an assessment of different layout principles
for offices. This chapter forms the basis for the assessment methodology and urban case study presented in
chapter 14. The urban cases analysed will be related to general characteristics. The sole influence of the
organisation of office work on space use and consequential effects will be treated in Volume F - The Organisation
of Office Work.
E The Space Factor - 12 Space use & sustainability 283

12.02 Quantifying space use
In this section, the assessibility of space use in itself will be discussed. It is important to understand that the use of
space for a certain function may be considered in different numbers or dimensions. First, it can be considered in
two dimensions, accounting for square metres: the two-dimensional use of one layer of floor or ground space.
Second, space use can be considered in three dimensions: a three-dimensional picture of all two-dimensional
layers related to a reference layer, mostly the ground level. Third, space use can be considered in the fourth
dimension, time. In that case, the use of space is considered over a longer period of time: a day, a week, a year or
a lifetime.
The use of space can be quantitatively assessed through a typical (personal, functional, etc.) use of floor area or
land. These can be translated into spatial efficiency indicators. Another method is comparing the studied project to
an existing or theoretical reference project, leading to spatial improvement factors. The spatial efficiency indicators
and improvement factors can be connected to a two- or three-dimensional analysis of cases. For a better
understanding of the space factor in the fourth dimension, the diversity of functions and their use of space can be
translated into functional indicators. All indicators will be discussed in this section.
12.02.02 Spatial efficiency indicators
Several indicators are useful for the quantification of space use. In this section, the following indicators will be
discussed: the GSI, the FSI, FAR, or PR, and the OSR and UPSI.
GSI
The ground space index (GSI) is the relation between the built ground area and the total ground area. The GSI is
a pure two-dimensional approach to space use. It therefore expresses the 'openness' of a plan on the ground
level. Together with the FSI, treated below, the GSI expresses the extent of urban compactness.
FSI, FAR, or PR
The floor space index (FSI) is the relation between the total gross floor area (GFA) and the total ground area on
which it has been established. It therefore has a three-dimensional character and is a measure for building
density. The FSI can be applied for a city as whole, urban quarters or plans and separate building plots. The floor
area ratio (FAR) and plot ratio (PR) are also often used. They however are equal to the FSI.
In table 12.01, the FSI of seven urban plans in Amsterdam involving office buildings is depicted (based on data
from the Spatial Planning Department of Amsterdam [DRO, 2001].
Table 12.01: Examples of the FSI of Amsterdam urban projects [source: DRO, 2001]
project gross floor area plot area plot-FSI net ground area net area FSI
2 2 2
Eastern Dock Island 258.000 m 33.960 m 7,6 95.590 m 2,7
2 2 2
De Branding 18.172 m 3.832 m 4,7 7.870 m 2,3
2 2 2
Western Station Island 80.000 m 18.000 m 4,4 64.980 m 1,2
2 2 2
Entrepot-West 100.220 m 33.824 m 3,0 85.304 m 1,2
2 2 2
Rietlanden 186.640 m 65.223 m 2,9 172.891 m 1,1
2 2 2
Java Island 198.115 m 73.647 m 2,7 167.761 m 1,2
2 2 2
Industrial Area North 11.932 m 6.600 m 1,8 6.600 m 1,8
In table 12.01, a distinction was made between the plot-FSI, which is based on the actual area of the building plot,
and the net area FSI, which also includes the surrounding public space (green, water, and paving) improving the
quality and spatial perception of the building plot. In Amsterdam, the water surface forms a relatively great

proportion of the total urban area. For an island or for land bordering canals and harbours, the surrounding water
increases the quality and perception of space and should therefore be included in the ground area, according to
the Spatial Planning Department of Amsterdam.
OSR and UPSI

FSI and GSI are objective indicators for space use, but they do not directly express the human pressure on the
studied area. In terms of the quality of public space, the amount of open space is important. The open space ratio
(OSR) is the relation between the total GFA and the non-built ground area. In this indicator, private space such as
commercially occupied space (terraces) and private gardens are also considered open space, although this type
of space is not unconditionally publicly accessible. Fellow researcher Sebastiaan de Wilde and I therefore
introduced another indicator: the useful public space index (UPSI), the relation between the accessible public
space and the established GFA. In contrast to the OSR it only includes the open space that can be publicly used.
Relationships between urban typologies and indicator values

An equal density (FSI) can be realised with different urban compactnesses (GSI), leading to totally different urban
qualities. Furthermore, if many people need to share a small area (a low OSR or UPSI), the area will be crowded.
Sometimes this may however be desired for a lively, busy urban area.
Berghauser Pont & Haupt [2002] related the FSI, GSI and OSR/UPSI to urban planning in order to find guidelines
for certain desired urban qualities. Figure 12.02 illustrates the graphic coherence of the spatial indicators and
urban typologies.
higher
building
layers
FSI
economic
OSR/UPSI
centre
urban
suburban
higher
rural
GSI
Figure 12.02: Urban typologies and the quantity of several spatial indicators [adaptation of Berghauser Pont & Haupt, 2002]
FSI = floor space index, GSI = ground space index, OSR = open space ratio, UPSI = useful public space index
An explanation of these indicators is given in the text
Based on Berghauser Pont & Haupt, table 12.02 clarifies of the different urban typologies and their values for the
FSI, GSI and OSR. Note that a high FSI and GSI indicate a great pressure of built mass on the land, whereas a
high OSR means that the pressure on the open space is small.

Table 12.02: Urban typologies and spatial indicators [adaptation of Berghauser Pont & Haupt, 2002]
building typology FSI GSI OSR
height building type open space type building density compactness personal open space
rural
low villa quarter orchard low (< 0,50) low (< 0,10) high (> 1,50)
medium farms farm yard low (< 0,50) low (< 0,10) high (> 1,50)
high solitary tower meadow low (< 0,50) low (< 0,10) high (> 1,50)
suburban
low dwelling strips private gardens low (~ 0,30) low (~ 0,18) high (~ 2,50)
medium open building block public garden medium (~ 0,80) low (~ 0,16) medium (~ 1,10)
high tower flat public landscape park medium (~ 1,40) low (~ 0,11) medium (~ 0,70)
urban
low patio dwellings private patios medium (~ 0,80) high (~ 0,34) medium (~ 0,85)
medium closed building block partly closed public garden medium (~ 1,40) medium (~ 0,24) medium (~ 0,60)
high city tower stamp parks/green beds high (~ 2,00) medium (~ 0,20) low (~ 0,45)
economic centre
low - - - - -
medium mega building block completely closed garden high (~ 1,90) high (~ 0,34) low (~ 0,37)
high mega tower internal/roof garden/park high (> 2,00) high (~ 0,30) low (~ 0,30)
12.02.03 Spatial improvement factors
Another method of assessing the use of space by a project is relating spatial factors or areas to those of a
theoretic reference based on standard properties, thus leading to an improvement factor for the use of space. This
method requires a clearly defined reference generally applicable to all compared cases, which can be complete
urban plans or separate buildings.
As presented in chapter 05, the reference may be a theoretic building with an equal GFA as the studied object;
however, in that case the use of space cannot be assessed. A reference based on an equal number of occupants,
however with a certain standard personal use of space, enables spatial assessment. The reference's footprint
depends on the required building size, height and parking space. For the floor use improvement factor, the GFA of
the reference is divided by the GFA of the studied case. Likewise, the ground use improvement factor is
determined through division of the reference's ground area by the ground area of the studied case.
12.02.04 Functional indicators
For an efficient use of space 24 hours a day, it is important to combine functions that are simultaneously and
sequentially used. As functionally divers areas tend to be occupied all day, a mix of functions plays an important
role in creating a pleasant and socially safe area. Furthermore, combining functions also has spatial efficiency
benefits, which can be related to environmental benefits. In mixed areas, the public urban space, parking space,
and technical utilities can be more efficiently used. When less public space is required it can be more luxuriously
furnished, contributing to the spatial quality of the area, which is an element of sustainability.
Functional indicators can therefore be useful to get an impression of the space use efficiency during a certain
period of time (the fourth dimension). In this section, the office apartment ratio (OAR) and public private ratio
(PPR) are discussed.
OAR
It is complicated to involve all possible urban functions in one indicator. For an idea of space use during the day,
the relation between office space and residential space is a simple yet effective indicator. Offices are mostly
occupied during daytime and residences in the evening and the night. Because of this difference, public urban

space near offices and residences are used in different periods. A mix of offices and residences will therefore lead
to a more efficient use of public space. Sebastiaan de Wilde and I therefore introduced the office apartment ratio
(OAR), the relation between the GFA of offices and the GFA of residences, both private forms of space. The term
'apartment' is also meant to include separate dwellings. An OAR of 100% implies an urban plan solely with offices;
an OAR of 0% means a fully residential plan.
The benefits of function mixing can be illustrated with the potential efficiency in parking facilities. In Western
Europe, office car parks are roughly used between 8.00 h and 18.00 h during five days of the week. This is 30% of
the total week duration. Residential car parks are mainly used from 18.00 h to 8.00 h and during the weekends,
constituting the remaining 70% of the total week. Based on practical experience, one parking lot is approximately
needed per 150 m2 of office space and one parking lot is needed per apartment (approximately 75 m2). If offices
and residences were separated in two urban plans, or if an urban plan consisted of equal proportions of offices
and residences (an OAR of 50%) and their parking facilities were not combined, for every 300 m2 GFA, three
parking lots would be required. Only two parking lots would be required if the parking facilities were combined. In
that case, the offices can use one of every two parking lots, and half the number of apartments can still use the
parking facilities during daytime. This means an efficiency improvement of 33% with respect to separate car
parks. The maximum improvement would be 50%, if 150 m2 of offices were traded for every 75 m2 of apartments
(an OAR of 66.7%). Due to an inevitable overlap at deviating usage, leading to parking space shortage, this
efficiency improvement is however not realistic. In reverse, when a project is dominated by housing developments
(an OAR less than 50%), no extra parking space is required for offices. In that case, the efficiency improvement
would however decrease. The implication of functional diversity to environmental parameters will be discussed
further on, in section 12.03.
PPR
A distinction can also be made between public and private functions. In general, offices and apartments are
privately occupied by their users or owners. Everybody can however use public amenities as shops and theatres.
An area with public functions therefore serves more people than just the ones that live and work within their
borders. They give the area a greater meaning than just a privately used area. Furthermore, public functions have
another use pattern than offices and apartments, at different periods of time. They can therefore further improve
the use efficiency of an area. In order to obtain an indicator for the relation of publicly accessible space and
private space, Sebastiaan de Wilde and I introduced the public private ratio (PPR).
The relations between public and private, and offices and apartments are shown in figure 12.03.
Public Private
Offices
Apartments
Figure 12.03: A simple representation of public and private areas, offices and apartments
12.03 Sustainability impact of space use concepts
Space use has an environmental impact that cannot be expressed by spatial indicators ot improvement factors
alone. This section discusses the particular environmental impact of increased or reduced use of space,
connected to the use of building materials, energy consumption, travel, ecology, water consumption, health, and
safety. For each of these aspects, the following questions will be discussed:
1. How does the use of space influence it?
2. How can another approach to space use improve its environmental performance?
3. Which indicators and assessment methods are available to quantify the influence of space use on it?

The building shape, the building materials used, and the eventual energy consumption influence one another.
Nevertheless, in the following two subsections the impact of plans with a more or less intensive land use on
material and energy use (and their environmental impact) will be separately discussed.
Influence
Space use has a two-directional impact on the use of building materials. First, the compactness of building
volumes determines the amount of building materials required for a plan. Second, stacking of building layers
requires supporting structures with greater dimensions and thus a larger volume of building materials. The
typology studies presented in chapter 11 gave an indication of the influence of the shape and extent of stacking of
separate building volumes. The study of the Commerzbank Headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany (which was also
presented in chapter 11), indicated that a strong increase of environmental cost is expected for extreme high-
rises.
Since there is no inter-exchanging between building materials of buildings, the results found for separate buildings
can be summed in case of an urban plan. Combinations of structural elements can then save an additional
amount of building materials and improve the environmental performance.
Improvements
In terms of building materials, a deeper floor plan will generally be preferable if the number of buildings is equal to
a solution with a shallow floor plan. A maximum difference of a factor 1.4 is possible between the most and least
favourable solution.
The eventual number of building layers is of course also dependent on the specific urban situation and official
height regulations.
Tools
In chapter 11, the relationship between the height and environmental load of building materials was already given
in environmental cost. If the exact amount of building materials is known, the materials can be directly coupled to
environmental life cycle data. Software tools appropriate for this objective were introduced in chapter 04.
Influence
As presented in chapter 11, the optimal number of building layers depends on the required floor area and the floor
depth. The study mentioned concerned individual buildings. In contrast to the use of building materials, in urban
areas, the influence of surrounding buildings on energy consumption is not negligible: when buildings are situated
close to each other they influence one another. On the one hand, heat loss of one building is partly recovered
through heat radiation collection by another building. In summertime, on the other hand, heat is more difficult to
get rid of, demanding more cooling energy.
Steemers [2003] calculated that, with respect to urban sprawl, in a dense urban area, office buildings would use a
double amount of energy because of the increased necessity of artificial lighting and mechanical ventilation. He
however also found that the increase in energy in such a case is significantly less than when switching from a
naturally ventilated to fully air-conditioned offices. In order to enable natural ventilation concepts in buildings,
Steemers pleaded for reducing private car use and clean and using efficient public transport in case of dense city
areas.
Improvements
With regard to energy consumption there are few general rules for the optimal height. A deeper floor plan is only
generally more profitable for a great floor area and in case of more than 8 building layers. The maximum
difference between the most and least favourable solution is a factor of approximately 1.7.

Considering complete urban areas, when a site is intensively used, scale and efficiency advantages can be
yielded. First, technical building services are more viable on an urban rather than on the building scale and they
will be more efficiently used in case of function mixing and an integral approach to utilities. Furthermore, technical
utilities can be combined, leading to less material and better maintainability. Finally, coupling energy services can
bring supply and demand into equilibrium. For instance, as discussed in chapter 10, over the year, modern offices
produce more warmth than they require, whereas residences still need more heating than cooling. In that case,
peaks in energy demand can be avoided through heat and cold storage.
Indicators and tools

Energy consumption can be estimated before occupation and measured afterwards by means of many simulation
models. Coupling basic consumption data of specific energy resources with LCA data provides indicators for
energy, which also involve exhaust gasses.
To determine the efficiency of the utilities applied, as with other building materials, quantities of ducts and
equipment can be assessed through LCA. It needs to be remarked however that few studies have been executed
on the use of materials by utilities.
12.03.03 Travel
Influence
When studying the influence of dense versus spacious urban plans, the impact on travel by occupants,
commuters, and visitors also needs to be taken into account. Given a certain total floor area required for different
functions, spreading these functions and accommodating them in low-rise buildings will probably lead to a greater
total travel distance than in case of an intensively used urban plan in which all functions are combined. In
particular for dense city areas, smart solutions are however required to accomplish optimal access for both public
transport and car traffic, crucial for the success of a project.
Newman & Kenworthy [1987; 2001] found a clear relationship between the density of cities around the world and
the transport fuel consumption per capita (see figure 12.04), indicating that intensively used space contributes to
smaller energy consumption for transportation.
USA
Australia
Europe
East Asia
Figure 12.04: Relationship between the consumption of fuel and urban density [Newman & Kenworthy, 1987]

The results for different regions of the world are interestingly grouped. The upper part of the curve is defined by
North-American cities. Australia shows similar densities yet a more favourable consumption pattern. European
cities are concentrated around the bend of the curve. Finally, cities from Eastern Asia define the lower end of the
curve. In terms of technology, economy, and average prosperity, the Asian cities are perhaps not directly
comparable to the others. Europe, North America and Australia are however comparable, and these show
interesting differences related to density.
Improvements
Optimal use of space might stimulate a mobility shift towards public transport and a reduction of absolute energy
consumption for transport, as Newman & Kenworthy found. Their findings are however related to entire cities. It is
therefore difficult to assess districts of specific urban plans on the basis of the relationship. The curve
nevertheless indicates that an enhancement of the city's density will most likely improve travel patterns, given
certain basic conditions.

Indicators for the environmental impact of space use concepts on mobility are the fuel used for cars or electricity
for railway systems, coupled to LCA data. The comparison basis for employee travel is the distance travelled by
one passenger: passenger.kilometre (p.km). Each parameter describing the performance of a certain transport
means therefore needs to be divided by this personal kilometre: e.g. MJ/p.km, kg CO2/p.km, and e€/p.km. Other
indicators might be the number of people using cars, public transport or man-powered transport.
The Dutch environmental assessment tool GreenCalc contains a module in which employee travel is predicted.
This aspect was involved in the original assessment of government offices, however excluded from chapter 06
because employee travel is entirely based on parameters independent from the building design: the nature of
roads, the number of parking lots and the proximity of public transport. Furthermore, as presented in chapter 15,
the determination of environmental cost of employee travel by means of GreenCalc turned out to be too far from
more accurate calculations.
In the part following, values for the environmental cost of travel will be deduced, clarified by table 12.03.
Division and occupation of the transport means

For the environmental impact of personal car transport, a distinction between petrol, diesel and LPG cars is
important. By means of the Dutch Nature and Environment Foundation [Stichting Natuur en Milieu, 2001], who
studied Dutch transport, the occupation rate and emissions of these three car types were determined. Through the
division of the emissions and their average, the proportion of each car type could be deduced: 10.8% LPG cars,
21.6% diesel cars and 67.7% petrol cars.
I estimated the division of different means of public transport myself. Some sources mention a ratio of 2:1 or 1:1
between trains on the one hand and buses and trams on the other. I reckoned with 60% train transport, equally
divided between long distance (intercity) trains and local trains (including metros), and 40% bus and tram
transport. For the latter I took into account that not every city has a tram network (overall proportion 10%) and that
most buses ride on diesel (overall proportion 20% versus 10% LPG buses).
Typical environmental load

The environmental costs of travel (in environmental euros, e€) reflect the environmental damage that is caused by
the depletion of energy resources, eco-system deterioration through the process of raw energy forms onto
transport fuel or electricity, and deterioration of the human health by emissions. According to Beetstra et al.
[2002], 1 kWh 'costs' e€ 0.095 and 1 m3 natural gas equivalent (nge) e€ 0.395. Environmental costs data of petrol
is lacking. By approximation, the energy value of 1 liter of petrol equals 1 m3 natural gas. Based on extra
processing and more malignant emissions than natural gas, I assumed the environmental performance of petrol is
20% worse than natural gas. Therefore, the environmental cost of petrol is taken at € 0.474 per liter or nge.
1 MJ primary energy corresponds with 1/9.2 = 0.1087 kWh electric or 1/25.17 = 0.02843 m3 natural gas
equivalent. Therefore, 1 MJ electric 'costs' e€ 0.0103, 1 MJ natural gas e€ 0.0112, and 1 MJ petrol e€ 0.0135.
LPG is put equal to natural gas. With the proportions previously determined, the average environmental cost of
public transport is: e€ 0.0111/MJ. Table 12.03 gives all values determined.

Table 12.03: Deduction of reference values for environmental effects of different transport means
In this table, 'prop' stands for proportion and 'e€' for environmental euros
(2)
transport means emissions env load
(1)
type prop CO2 CO NOx VOCs SO2 PM10 energy(3)
unit % g/p.km g/p.km g/p.km g/p.km mg/p.km mg/p.km e€/MJ
personal car
total 100 160.68 2.07 1.23 0.29 15.53 29.72 0.0135
- LPG car 10.8 139.62 0.45 0.65 0.29 0.00 3.99
- diesel car 21.6 154.77 0.28 1.45 0.65 46.98 102.34
- petrol car 67.7 165.72 2.90 1.23 0.36 7.33 9.32
public transport
total 100 33.31 0.02 0.16 0.01 10.68 7.35 0.0111
- diesel bus 20.0 39.64 0.08 0.61 0.06 12.03 34.26 0.0135
- LPG bus 10.0 44.55 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.93 0.0112
- tram* 10.0 35.20 0.00 0.05 0.00 13.75 0.78 0.0103
- intercity train 30.0 22.82 0.00 0.03 0.00 9.25 0.30 0.0103
- local train (electric) 30.0 35.20 0.00 0.05 0.00 13.75 0.78 0.0103
bike or foot
total 100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0000
* occupation of trams is taken equal to buses; emissions are taken equal to local trains; 1: Personal car: deduced from emission data from Stichting Natuur en
Milieu [2001]; public transport: estimation (see explanatory text); 2: Source: Stichting Natuur en Milieu [2001], based on data from rush hour outside cities, for
the year 1998; 3: Deduced from Beetstra et al. [2002] (see explanatory text).
As Newman & Kenworthy used plain MJs in their results, an average division between personal and public
transport needed to be chosen for an average environmental value per MJ. This of course depends on the region
in the world. Taking Western Europe as an example, a 70/30 division seems appropriate, leading to an average
value of e€ 0.0128 per MJ.
12.03.04 Ecology
Influence
Space use in separate buildings only indirectly influences ecological values. The use of floor space defines the
size of the building and therefore the use of urban space. This in its turn defines the claim on areas inside or
outside the city. When these areas have a great ecological value, environmental damage is caused. When these
are ecologically worthless, in terms of sustainability, development of real estate hardly has an influence and can
even improve the ecological value. More accurate indicators are the green, brown or grey area preserved or
deteriorated. These indicators however do not validate the specific ecological impact, they merely refer to the
original function and measure of the occupied land.
Improvements
Intensive and multiple use of urban space avoids the necessity of sprawl and thereby safeguards green areas
outside cities. The environmental impact is therefore avoiding the deterioration of ecosystems (or more precisely:
land conversion or ecosystem shift) outside the city. This must however be related to inner-city ecosystem
deterioration.

The density of an urban area is an indicator that approximates the effect of land use. For good comparison it
however needs to be related to a reference density. Sebastiaan de Wilde and I developed an indicator that is
related to a reference plan with a reference density, the green area preserved (GAP). As the name suggests, it
calculates the land area that was avoided to be built on as a result of an urban plan more intensive than an
average reference plan (see figure 12.05). The GAP was used in the assessment of urban plans of chapter 14.

Figure 12.05: Principle of the GAP-indicator
The GAP does not determine the specific ecological impact of this avoidance of land claims. The ecological
impact of space use concepts is related to the ecosystem shift on the site of development and outside, where
development was avoided. The complexity of assessing ecological aspects lies in the appreciation of different
ecosystems, from rare natural biotopes to inner-city greens. For instance, in case of intensive and multiple use of
urban space, the ecosystem deterioration avoided outside the city should be related to the inner-city ecosystem
shift.
Several assessment models have been developed to tackle this problem, but none has been generally applied.
In order to determine the influence of different types of land use on the global climate, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change [IPCC Working Group I, 2001] uses a model that accounts for carbon production
and absorption of land use. Specifically designed for the objective of climatology, this model does not include
other ecological impacts of land use.
A broader land use appreciation model was presented by Lindeijer et al. [1998], which assesses land use
duration and size and was meant as an additional assessment element to the general LCA-methodology
[ISO, 1998]. This model has however not yet been incorporated in the standard procedure.
Another ecological appreciation model is Ecolemma, developed by Beetstra [1998], which determines the
impact of a shift from one ecosystem type to another on the basis of environmental cost. The calculation
programme NEAT (NIBE Ecology Appreciation Tool) is based on Beetstra. This tool was applied to assess
the urban design impact on ecological values by determining the ecological value before and after
completion of the plan. This led to alternative plans with a better ecological performance [NIBE, 2000; 2001].
In his PhD thesis, Vogtländer [2001] related eco-costs of the use of land to the wealth and rarity of species.
NABERS II is a post-occupancy model that involves a module for assessment of landscape diversity,
checking the presence of growth layers (lawn, shrubs, and trees) and rating these on a performance scale
from 0 (unacceptable practice) to 5 (best practice) [Fay, 2003].
Working in accordance with the methodology of Ecolemma or NEAT is appropriate for exactly defined urban areas
but not directly for plans that theoretically avoided land claims somewhere else. If environmental costs from these
methods or eco-costs from Vogtländer were combined with the GAP-indicator, an ecological assessment and
comparison with other aspects would be possible. Beetstra et al. relate their environmental costs of land use to
the ecosystem present. Vogtländer [2001] uses € 4.00/m2 as a minimum eco-price for land use outside cities.
Beside the advantage of inter-comparability of different environmental aspects, even though they are theoretical,
relating ecological effects to environmental costs enables comparison with real costs. Economic appreciation of
land is therefore closely related to determination of the environmental costs of ground use. Market prices for land
can substitute ecologic values when comparing different concepts of space use but are, of course, no indicator for
environmental issues.

12.03.05 Water
Influence
Basically, for different alternatives for space use in buildings, water consumption per capita will most probably not
significantly differ. Different designs for urban areas, buildings and their floor layout influences the length of
conduit-pipes and therefore might have an effect on possible conduit-pipe losses. Except for the amount of
building materials required for the pipes, in a normal situation, the effect on water consumption will however be
marginal.
Some effect differences of space use alternatives may be expected with rain- and groundwater. Concentration of
building mass leads to less rainwater per capita or per m2 floor area. This will only be of importance if rainwater is
applied as a B-quality tap water. In addition, rainwater run-off per capita or m2 will be smaller, possibly leading to
fewer problems in case of heavy rainfall. A counter effect is a possible problem increase because of the
concentrated run-off (floods) and diminished rainwater infiltration opportunities (desiccation) in a densely built
area. This is however largely dependent on the extent of paving, open ground, and the applied sewage system,
parameters that not directly relate to the use of space.
Improvement
As previously discussed, a great difference in water consumption, rainwater usage and infiltration is not expected
as a result of a different approach to space use.

Water consumption can easily be calculated by means of different methods or measured during occupation. The
eventual effects of space use on rain- and groundwater can only be assessed through elaborate precipitation,
infiltration, and sewage capacity calculations, none of which are appropriate for the conceptual stage of plans.
12.03.06 Health
Influence
On the building scale, the usage of floors influences the personal perception and experience of space and thereby
the psychological health of occupants. As an indirect result of this, in excessive situations, physical health may
also be affected (in a negative or positive way). Technical conditions, not the space concept, mainly define the
influence on physical health.
Buildings and traffic define the impact of urban space use on health. The impact of buildings on outdoor health in
urban areas is expected to be limited to exhaust air emission. The health impact of traffic in urban situations
involves outdoor and indoor air quality, and level of noise, light and odour. Typical exhaust gasses from traffic are
Pb (in case of lead bearing fuels), NO2 and SO2. Furthermore, in specific climatic circumstances, traffic is a main
cause of the conversion of oxygen into ozone (O3), known as summer smog.
Improvements
On the basis of the influence previously described, a first idea might be that intensive use of space, both within
buildings or urban areas, has a negative impact on the health of people using them. Building compactly indeed
requires extra care for indoor climate quality; more so because of the already mentioned pollution from the limited
open space outside.
In general, the outdoor and indoor air quality in densely populated areas is worse than in rural residential or office
areas, when specific industrial and agricultural areas are excluded. Byrne et al. [1998] demonstrated that in some
mega-cities the level of pollutants exceeds health levels (see figure 12.06).
As the cities mentioned in figure 12.06 however show, the level of technological progress and urban transport
mode possibilities also play an important role. This emphasises that intensive use of space will be possible
without deterioration of the air quality if a great proportion of travel is based on electricity-based transport means
such as trains, trams, metros, and electrical cars and buses, or if cars and buses use clean combustion
technologies.

Figure 12.06: Air quality indicators in mega-cities [Byrne et al., 1998]

The health impact of different space concepts can best be measured. Estimative tools need to be used when an
indication before occupation is needed. There are many indoor air quality tools for buildings; however, as
discussed already, these are mainly based on technical parameters. The space usage concept is therefore not
decisive for the end-results. On the urban scale, outdoor air quality can also best be measured. For an indication
beforehand, an estimation of the number of users and their transport means is necessary. For an integral
environmental assessment of the health impact of different spatial concepts, the proportion of transport means
and their typical exhaust gases can be coupled to LCA-data and the volume of air to which it is emitted. At the
moment of writing, I do not know of any similar estimative methods and comparisons of different urban plans for
an equal programme.
12.03.07 Safety
Influence
Safety can be divided between physical safety and social safety [Voordt & Wegen, 1990]. Physical safety
concerns the probability of a person being killed or injured by natural or man-made hazards [Suddle & Waarts,
2003]. Social safety concerns crime incentives and spatial, institutional and social factors of an area [Durmisevic,
2002]. On the floor surface, space usage in itself does not directly affect physical and social safety. In an urban
area, the urban layout, buildings and traffic define the impact of space usage on physical and social safety.
Suddle [2003] described the cross-effects of physical safety in an urban area, as demonstrated in figure 12.07.
The most severe effects are related to falling building elements during construction and occupation, and to
explosions in case of accidents in buildings and traffic.
The concept of space use has a decisive impact on social safety in an urban area. This is related to functional
diversity, influencing use patterns and periods, and density, influencing the number of people using a certain
amount of public space and thereby social control and vigilance among people.

Building
2
3 Infrastructure
1
Vicinity 4
Figure 12.07: Safety influences of buildings and infrastructure in urban areas [Suddle, 2003]
Improvements
Physical safety is best conditioned in open areas where there is a small exchange of contact between sources
and possible victims of accidents. Intensifying urban areas therefore poses an extra risk on the users of that area.
Especially in case of multiple use of urban space, the construction of buildings is a safety concern as different
functions use the same projected area on the ground. Falling building elements and material from construction
works endanger passers-by, which is less evident if construction takes place in a less dense and mono-functional
area. The risk of falling elements is related to the construction stage of buildings and is therefore temporary,
whereas the risk of damage by explosions and social safety remains an important urban quality. Of these, only
social safety concerns day-to-day life. In general, the impact on social safety is however reverse to physical
safety: dense urban areas increase social control and vigilance, especially in mixed areas with differing periods of
use during the day.

Estimating and measuring the impact of different building and urban designs on technical safety is a young and
growing area of study, discussed by e.g. Suddle et al. [2002]. The impact of urban space concepts on physical
safety can be approximated through the spatial indicators (FSI, GSI, and UPSI) and functional indicators (OAR
and PPR) previously introduced. On a quite detailed level, there are general design principles available for social
safety. At the moment of writing, I do not know of estimative methods for the eventual social safety. However, the
spatial and functional indicators are again a measure of density and functional diversity, that for an important part
define social safety, though in a reverse manner to physical safety. Of course, the exact design of an urban area
defines it safe or unsafe. This is however independent from the chosen spatial concept. Therefore, the spatial and
functional indicators form a sufficient measure for physical and social safety.
12.03.08 Other effects
Environmental effects are not the only sustainability impact of an optimised use of space. When projects of space
use optimisation in inner city areas are realised near railway stations and the historic city centre, they are often
located on the city’s prime locations. The rents per square meter will therefore be high and a high return on
investment may be achieved. In the process of space use optimisation, neglected areas will be upgraded,
enabling improvement of the social and cultural character. It can also be a simple requirement for preparing the
city for a new era, which is sustainable urban development in that respect. Furthermore, multiple use of space can
positively influence the eventual life span of an urban area and its buildings, an important dimension of
sustainability.

12.03.09 Integrated sustainability assessment of space use concepts
The tools and indicators presented in this section enable a separate assessment of space use impact on
sustainability. A complete indication of the sustainability of space use concepts can only be determined if the use
of space is related to the quantified impact on different environmental parameters (for instance, how bad is 1
square meter of built land that originally was natural?). It is still difficult to integrate all sustainability aspects into
one indicator score: a serious problem is their incompatibility. Integrated comparison of space use concepts will
only be possible if the calculated environmental effects are put in comparable units, e.g. environmental costs, or if
they are related to space use indicators.
As long as this cannot be established, we have to rely on separate performance scores. However, the impact of
different space concepts will even then not be clarified. Therefore, the best indicators for the environmental
performance of space use will be comparisons with reference projects, which can be real or theoretical. In chapter
14, an assessment methodology based on comparison with reference projects will be introduced, on the basis of
which urban cases were executed.
12.04 Space use optimisation
12.04.01 Introduction: strategies for improvement
Improvement of space can be realised through solutions in two, three, or four dimensions (surface, volume, and
time) and it can refer to one of more functions. Basic strategies for improved use of space are presented in table
12.04. Starting from one function at one layer, which can be a building layer or the ground level, the first possible
strategy is increasing the occupation rate. Sebastiaan de Wilde and I define this intensive use of surface. A next
strategy is stacking of layers, which we define intensive use of land. A strategy in another direction is the
combination of urban functions, which is defined as multiple use of surface. The two strategies can also be
combined through stacking different urban functions. We define this multiple use of land.
Table 12.04: Representation of strategies for improvement of the use of space

stacking
one layer more layers
one function
intensive use of surface intensive use of land

by increasing by adding
functional diversity
the occupation rate more building layers

more functions
multiple use of surface multiple use of land

by combining by stacking
different functions different functions
Space use in the fourth dimension, time, is applicable to each of the four strategies.
12.04.02 Principles of intensive and multiple use of space
Definitions
As presented in the previous section, improvement of space use can be approached through strategies for
intensive and multiple use of surface and land. Intensive use of surface and land are forms of the concept of
intensive use of space. Multiple use of surface and land and are forms of the concept of multiple use of space.

The two concepts seem similar but are defined differently. By character, intensive use of space is subjective
because whether an area is intensively used depends on the reference to which it is compared. The division
between intensive and not intensive is made objective through relating the space use of a plan to a clearly defined
general reference, the direct surroundings, or a comparable project elsewhere. A local reference for space use,
e.g. a space use indicator of the direct surroundings of the studied plan, offers insight into the extent of intensity
with respect to the surroundings but is not generally applicable.
Multiple use of space is a more objectively definable concept: there is a clear difference between a plan with one
function and one with more functions (to which the term 'multiple' refers). Functions however need to be clearly
defined in order to distinguish multiple from singular use. Priemus et al. [2000] defined multiple use of space as a
situation in which "different functions are combined in a certain space in a certain time". Therewith, they
demonstrated the three decisive factors for multiple use: function, space, and time.
Solution principles
The strategies for improvement can be translated to solution principles for urban planning and building design in
two, three or four dimensions. These are graphically presented in figure 12.08.
increase intensive use

occupancy of surface
intensive use mix & stack

stack 3x
of land
multiple, or
mix mixed, use of multiple use
surface of land
intensive use
use longer in time
adapt in multiple use

time in time
Figure 12.08: Principle solutions for an improved use of space
Intensification in two dimensions is achieved through increasing the occupation rate (intensive use of surface),
meaning that more people can use the same area or that an equal number of people use a smaller area. It can be
applied to different scale levels and to separate functions. Additional intensification in three dimensions is possible
through stacking of building layers (intensive use of land). Functions can be mixed in two dimensions (multiple, or
mixed, use of surface) or, stacked, in three dimensions (multiple use of land). For a longer useful life span,
extended use in a certain period of time (intensive use in time) or adaptability to other functions is a necessity
(multiple use in time).
These solution principles can be combined in an urban area, e.g. mixed functions in an urban area (multiple, or
mixed, use of surface), of which the offices are stacked (intensive use of land).
Relationships between the solution principles

The order, dependency, and relationships among solution principles for intensive and multiple use of space can
be graphically represented by figure 12.09. A basic solution principle for both concepts is related to the use of

surface in general, the second dimension. Solution principles for the use of land, the third dimension, are a
specific solution contributing to an intensive or multiple use in the second dimension, i.e. the use of ground
surface. To put it differently: the projected intensive or multiple use of land is always a form of intensive or multiple
use of (ground) surface. Solution principles for the use in time, the fourth dimension, are another specific
contributing to intensive and multiple use in the second and possibly the third dimension.
intensive use of space multiple use of space
intensive use o f surface m ultip le, o r m ixed , use o f surface
2nd dim ension 2nd dim ension
intensive use o f land m ultip le use o f land
3rd dim ension 3rd dim ension
intensive use in tim e m ultip le use in tim e

(extend ed ) (rep etitive)
4th dim ension 4th dim ension
(p ro lo ng ed ) (seq uential)
Figure 12.09: Relationships between solutions for intensive and multiple use of space
As figure 12.09 indicates, intensive use in time and multiple use in time can be part of the two main concepts but
not necessarily. For instance, when opening periods of an office building are prolonged, however with the same
number of users, we cannot define it as 'intensive use'. Only extended opening for more users leads to greater
intensity. Furthermore, over a longer period, sequential use through adaptation of the building to another function
cannot be seen as an example of multiple use of space; only repetitive use by more than one function during the
day or week is. Note that solutions for the time factor can be applied to the day, the week, and so on, throughout
the building's lifetime.
intensive use of space multiple use of space
Figure 12.10: Inter-connectivity and overlap of solutions for intensive and multiple use of space
There are many solutions imaginable that are intensive as well as multiple. An example is the stacking of
functions that would normally be situated next to each other: the same programme is concentrated in a smaller
area, thus intensified, and it concerns more than one function, making it multiple. Nevertheless, not all examples
of multiplicity mean intensiveness and reverse. Figure 12.10 represents this partial overlap and inter-connectivity
of the two space use concepts.
Optimisation of space use can be seen as an integrated approach to both concepts of intensive and multiple use
of space.

12.04.03 Optimised use of space in practice
As previously discussed, multiple and intensive use of space can be applied in four dimensions. Besides, they can
be applied to different scales: at the urban level, at the plot level and within buildings. In table 12.05 different
practical strategies for implementing optimisation of the use of space are explained.
Table 12.05: Practical measures for intensive and multiple use of space, on different scales
scale
city/quarter building plot floor layer
intensive
increase of the building plot increase the office floor

increase of the urban density:
use of surface
occupancy: efficient plot layout, occupancy: efficient floor layout,

horizontal:
avoid sprawl, concentrate

use intensification innovative concepts
functional diversity on the urban functional diversity in the on-demand office concepts:
multiple
scale: mixing leisure, shops, building: mixing office space, hireable, flexible workplaces and
offices, apartments restaurant, bar, small shops related services
intensive
high density building: stacking establishment of the required

building layers, limitation of programme on more layers -
dimension
use of land
vertical:
building plot areas instead of on a larger plot
stacking of urban functions: functional stacking within a

multiple
infrastructure, parking space, building: amenities, (semi-) -

(semi-)public, private space public and private functions
intensive
extension of opening hours of extension of the opening hours extension of floor use, spreading
use in time
shops and public functions of buildings of working hours

time:
urban adaptability: multi- functional adaptability: multi- functional and technical

multiple
functional urban space, different functional space, different use adaptability: innovative office
use during the day during the day concepts, flexible systems
Intensive use of surface

Intensive use of surface means that the floor and ground surface have a high occupation rate. On the building
scale an example is the intensification of office space through innovative work concepts, such as desk-sharing
and flexible, non-personal workplaces (see figure 12.11). Within the urban context, for instance, it means housing
or office areas with a great density (see figure 12.12).
Figure 12.11 (left): Shared desks closely placed in the Food Inspection Department, Zutphen
Figure 12.12 (right): The low-rise high-density residential area of Java Island in Amsterdam [picture: Kees van der Linden]
Intensive use of land

Intensive use of land means that building layers of the same function are placed on top of each other. Examples
of such projects are high-rise buildings (see figure 12.13) or massive building blocks.

Figure 12.13: Stacked residences on KNSM Island in Amsterdam
Intensive use in time

Intensive use in time means that urban or building space is occupied during a longer period of the day, week or
year and thereby used by more people. Examples of this are extended opening hours in a shopping area with
cultural functions (see figure 12.14). The prolonged opening hours ('the 24 hours economy') of a single function,
e.g. offices (see figure 12.15), leads to inefficiencies, as the same number of people uses the building during a
longer period.
Figure 12.14 (left): Night shopping and leisure on Nathan Road in Hong Kong, attracting people that work in daytime
Figure 12.15 (right): Evening use of the Alterra research building in Wageningen, Netherlands [picture: DGBA]
Figure 12.16 (left): The Amsterdam inner-city: residences, offices, theatres, hotels, and other amenities
Figure 12.17 (right): Supermarket and other shops in the railway station of Frankfurt

Multiple use of surface

Multiple, or mixed, use of surface means that different functions are placed beside one another. Examples of such
projects are often found in city centres, where working and living is combined, with a background of public and
semi-public functions (see figure 12.16). By combination of urban functions, infrastructure will be used more
efficiently and occupation will be spread over more hours a day, having functional as well as social advantages.
On the building scale, multiple use of surface involves the combination of infrastructure with amenities such as
shops and leisure spaces, as seen in modern railway stations and airports (see figure 12.17).
Multiple use of land

Multiple use of land means that different functions are placed on top of each other. Urban examples of such
projects are buildings constructed above infrastructure and offices and apartments constructed above shops and
leisure. Figure 12.18 depicts a multi-layer plan for the centre of Nieuwegein, Netherlands, including parking
facilities, a theatre, shops, offices and apartments. Figure 12.19 is a more simple example of the multiple use of
land: an office building spanning over a road in Brisbane, Australia.
Figure 12.18 (left): The Nieuwegein centre plan [picture: Gemeente Nieuwegein]
Figure 12.19 (right): Multiple use of land by a building constructed over a road in Brisbane, Australia
The Dutch pavilion for the international Expo 2000 in Hannover, Germany, provides the simplest and clearest
image of this principle on the building scale (see figure 12.20). A common example is given by a building in
Kuopio, Finland (figure 12.21), where parking deck and offices have been constructed above shops.
Figure 12.20 (left): The Dutch pavilion for the Expo 2000 in Hanover, Germany
Figure 12.21 (right): A multiple-layered building containing shops, parking space and offices, in Kuopio, Finland

Multiple use in time

Multiple use in time means that limited space is used for different functions in time, one after the other. However,
as discussed, only repetitive and cyclic use in time leads to multiple use of space. A short-term example of such
projects is a cinema that is used as conference space during the day. A longer term example is an urban playing
ground or square that is temporarily and repetitively used for a circus or fair.
Definite functional changes to buildings and urban plans are examples of possibly environmentally worthwhile
solutions that are no form of multiple use of space. Figure 12.22 shows a picture of a former grain silo in the
western harbour area of Amsterdam, which is now used as an apartment building.
The solution principle can also be applied to the urban scale. For instance, a former industrial site can be re-used
as residential area. Figure 12.23 gives an example of the Municipal Waterworks terrain in Amsterdam, which is
now used as a residential area.
Figure 12.22 (left): Apartments in the former grain silo in the western harbour areas of Amsterdam
Figure 12.23 (right): Apartments and a building with a public function in the former Municipal Waterworks area of Amsterdam
Practical problems of space use optimisation

In contrast with the advantages of intensive and multiple use of space are problems concerning the complexity
and costs of these projects [Wilde, 2002a]. First, realising intensive and multiple use of space in inner city areas is
expensive. In order to enable construction on a limited building area or above infrastructure, and to minimise the
negative impact of the construction process on its direct surroundings, considerably large investments are
required, compared to traditional projects with sprawl. Inner city construction is a complex logistical process with
environmental demands. Large investments are required to avoid noise nuisance and ensure physical safety of
users and passers-by, both during construction and exploitation. Risk analysis on fire accidents and, when railway
tracks are covered, on derailing trains must be undertaken.
Other possible disadvantages concern social and functional aspects. Deserted islands will arise if space use
optimisation is only realised by mono-functional intensification outside the usual occupation hours, affecting the
social climate. Another problem, primarily related to the covering of infrastructure, is the limited adaptability of
large buildings in their urban surroundings. Therefore, future growth is hindered. Last, but not least, there are
some major complexities in the process of multiple partnerships and a lot of legal barriers concerning
landownership and insurances.

13 STUDIES OF THE USE OF OFFICE SPACE
The government offices assessed in chapter 06 were also spatially analysed, on the basis of their internal and
external use of space. The environmental performance was based on an FTE reference, as described in chapter
05, which is based on the use of personal space standard for the year 1990 and thereby enables assessment of
the entire office building and its usage. This chapter presents and discusses the results of the assessment and,
based on it, provides solutions for improvement of the use of space. Furthermore, different office layout principles
will be environmentally assessed.
Figure 13.01: The twelve government offices of which the spatial characteristics are discussed in this chapter
From left to right and top to bottom: street impression of the Administration of Justice in Haarlem [picture: Hubert-Jan Henket
Architecten bna], the Geometry Department in Delft, aerial view on the Exchequer and Audit Office in The Hague [picture:
KLM aerocarta], north elevation of The Artillery in The Hague, luxurious meeting room in the Johan de Witt House in The
Hague, entrance area of the Road and Water Engineering Department in Delft, tramway through the Ministry of Housing,
Spatial Planning and Environment in The Hague, restaurant and view of the Tax Office in Gorinchem, plan of the Road and
Waterworks Office in Middelburg [picture: De Ruiter Architecten], view from the roof of the Mixed Office in Arnhem, the Food
Inspection Department in Zutphen on poles, and an office room of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment in The
Hague. Other pictures are by the author.
Contents

13.01.01 External and internal use of space 305
13.01.02 The FTE reference 305
13.02 Spatial indicators 305
13.02.01 An overview of all buildings 305
13.02.02 The average office building 308
13.03 Environmental improvement factors 309
13.03.01 The improvement factors and their interpretation 309
13.03.02 The average building 310
13.04 Typology studies of the office layout 310
13.04.01 Spatial performance of office space solutions 310
13.04.02 Environmental performance of office space solutions 311
13.05 Lessons for the efficiency of the use of office space 314
13.05.01 Conclusions from the case studies 314
13.05.02 Conclusions from the layout typology studies 314
13.05.03 Recommendations for improvement 315
13.05.04 Additional research 316
304 13 Studies of the use of office space - E The Space Factor

13.01 Introduction
13.01.01 External and internal use of space
In the assessment of government office buildings presented in chapter 06, the use of space was also taken into
account but not yet discussed. The use of space was analysed in two ways: first, the use of ground area (GA),
related to the gross floor area (GFA) or the number of occupants of the building (external use of space), and
second, the floor use related to the number of employees (internal use of space).
In order to obtain quantitative values, in every case, improvement factors were determined for the use of ground
and floor area. Furthermore, for the external use of space, a floor space index (FSI) was calculated, and for the
internal use of space, an environmental improvement factor was determined, based on an FTE reference.
13.01.02 The FTE reference
In the case study presented in chapter 06, the government office buildings were assessed through comparison
with a theoretic reference building that was based on an equal gross floor area (GFA). The environmental
improvement factors thereby determined expressed the environmental performance of the building design and its
building technology. When the reference building is based on an equal number of users (or FTE - full time
equivalent) and a reference personal use of space, an indication is obtained for both the building design and its
use efficiency. As introduced in chapter 05, this reference building is called the FTE reference.
Its determination is repeated in figure 13.02.
Figure 13.02: Determination of the FTE reference, its environmental load and the environmental index.
An integrated judgement of the sustainability of an office building is possible on the basis of an FTE reference. In
order to get an impression of the use efficiency alone, given a certain design, and certain building materials and
services, the improvement factor based on the FTE reference should be related to the one based on the GFA
reference.
13.02 Spatial indicators
13.02.01 An overview of all buildings
Table 13.01 provides an overview of the spatial characteristics and improvement factors for the use of GFA and
ground area, based on comparison with an FTE reference. A building average and area average are also given.
E The Space Factor - 13 Studies of the use of office space 305

Improvement factors greater than 1.00 have a light-coloured background; factors less than 1.00 have a dark-
coloured background. When the improvement factor is greater than 1.00 the respective building uses less space
than its reference.
Table13.01: Overview of spatial improvement factors and the FSI of the twelve government offices
CHARACTERISTICS IMPROVEMENT FACTORS FSI
project GFA NFA GA floor land
unit > 2 2 2
m /p m /p m /p
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 47.7 35.4 39.8 0.60 0.72 1.20
Mixed Office, Arnhem 30.7 18.4 17.2 0.92 0.85 1.78
Tax Office, Gorinchem 23.5 14.1 14.3 1.22 0.99 1.64
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 20.9 12.5 0.0 1.37 N/A N/A
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 32.1 17.6 6.2 0.88 2.06 5.21
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 28.3 14.3 4.1 0.99 3.75 6.81
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 33.6 20.2 11.8 0.84 1.37 2.84
'The Artillery', The Hague 34.0 20.4 6.8 0.84 1.94 5.00
Food Inspection, Zutphen 16.4 13.2 19.3 1.73 1.11 0.85
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 20.7 14.8 6.1 1.36 2.21 3.41
Geometry Department, Delft 31.7 25.4 23.2 0.91 0.69 1.36
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 23.3 14.0 18.1 1.22 0.72 1.29
building average 28.6 18.4 15.2 1.07 1.49 2.85

AVERAGE
area average 28.8 16.3 8.6 0.98 1.80 3.33
Interpretation
Table 10.01 demonstrates the variation of space use between the buildings. On average, the government offices
have a favourable improvement factor with respect to their references. The difference between the building and
area average indicates the following:
In case of large buildings, the use of GFA is less favourable than in case of small buildings. This can be
seen in the column 'GFA' under 'characteristics' as well as in the column 'floor' under 'improvement factors'.
The average improvement factor for the use of floor area is 1.07.
For the use of NFA, this relationship is reverse. This means that in large buildings a greater proportion of the
GFA is not directly useful to the function of office work. On the one hand, this is a result of a supporting
structure with greater dimensions; on the other hand, and more important, large buildings often have extra
space for the reception of guests, for consultancy and meetings, and they often have large glass-covered
spaces.
Large buildings use the ground surface more efficiently. This is again both visible in the absolute values of
'GA' and the improvement factor for 'land'. The average improvement factor for the use of ground area is
1.49, 49% better than the 1990 reference. This is also due to the fact that most of the assessed buildings are
located in The Hague, where a higher density is common than the other cities. A comparison between
different sites is therefore difficult: a building with the disposal of a vast building plot in a rural area can hardly
be accounted for an inefficient use of land.
The efficient use of ground area in case of large buildings proves more effective to the FSI than the limitedly
less favourable use of GFA. This can be seen in the FSI column. The average FSI of the 12 projects is 2.85.
Note that this value considers a plot-FSI. The FSI is commonly used for entire urban plans or districts, in
which case its value is always lower than building plots intensively used, which is due to the inclusion of
streets and public space.
Spatial differences
For many government offices, e.g. the ministry buildings and The Artillery, the use of extra floor area is to be
found in additional spaces as meeting rooms, a restaurant, coffee corners, and just open space that make the

building more pleasant (see figure 13.03). In that respect, the sole focus on saving space will not be improving the
use quality.
Figure 13.03: The front hall of The Artillery, with informal tables and seats, a coffee corner (left end), and a library (right end)
Nevertheless, some governmental office spaces are rather large in comparison with commercial offices. In the
case of the Food Inspection, the use of floor space is intensified through non-territorial and shared desks (see
figure 13.04 and 13.05).
Figure 13.04 (left): Non-territorial desks in the Food Inspection Department in Zutphen, Netherlands
Figure 13.05 (right): Shared desks in an open-plan setting in the Food Inspection office
The traditional cellular layout of the Road and Water Engineering Department however also achieves an efficient
floor use without specific measures. My personal experience with the building is nevertheless positive as a result
of the pleasant layout well lit by daylight. Figure 13.06 gives an impression of a typical office room.
Figure 13.06: A typical shallow, yet light room for two employees
in the Road and Water Engineering office in Delft, Netherlands

13.02.02 The average office building
When the characteristics of the separate buildings are quantitatively translated into an average building (based on
area averages), the typical government office building is made more visible (table 13.02).
Table 13.02: Comparison of the average office building and its FTE reference
characteristics average FTE reference impr

year of construction or
1994 1990
renovation
employees 641
building layers 7 13
2
gross floor area (m ) 18,455 17,936
2
0.97
per employee (m /p) 28.8 28.0
2
net floor area (m ) 10,442 10,762
2
1.03
2
land area (m ) 5,536 9,958
2
1.80
The GFA is 3% greater than the average for the year 1990. In general, perhaps because of their specific function,
in government offices, more space is commonly used per employee than in commercial offices [Eldonk et al.,
2001], which are also included in the average value of 28 m2. The NFA of government offices is 3% more
favourable than their 1990-reference. This means that a smaller proportion of the GFA is useful for office work.
Land is relatively intensively used: a factor 1.8 better than the reference.
Table 13.03: Environmental cost assessment of offices

project overall performance
reference type > FTE-reference GFA-reference
'Johan de Witt House', The Hague 0.69 1.06

Mixed Office, Arnhem 1.04 1.15
Tax Office, Gorinchem 1.35 1.17
Road & Water Engineering, Delft 1.38 1.06
Ministry of SAE, The Hague 1.06 1.21
Ministry of HSPE, The Hague 0.98 0.99
Exchequer & Audit Office, The Hague 1.14 1.36
'The Artillery', The Hague 1.15 1.37
Food Inspection, Zutphen 1.77 1.24
Administration of Justice, Haarlem 1.34 1.10
Geometry Department, Delft 0.73 0.80
Road and Waterworks, Middelburg 1.46 1.25
building average 1.17 1.15

AVERAGE
area average 1.05 1.08

13.03 Environmental improvement factors
13.03.01 The improvement factors and their interpretation
Table 13.03 presents the improvement factors for the government offices with respect to their GFA and FTE
reference. When the factor based on the FTE reference is greater than the one based on the GFA reference, the
personal use of space in the building is efficient. When it is smaller, the personal use of space is less efficient than
the 1990-reference. The table demonstrates that the inefficient use of space can undo the benefits of a
sustainable building design.
Interpretation
The results show that environmental improvement factors sometimes have a wide spread. The building average
demonstrates that the efficiency of use is on average a little bit more favourable, as a result of a mean personal
use of space smaller than 28 m2. The area average however indicates the less efficient use of GFA by large
buildings.
Some comments can be made about individual results:

The Johan de Witt House is a monument less apt for an efficient use of space. The rooms are exceptionally
spacious and the building contains a luxurious meeting room (see figure 13.07 and 13.08). The building is
therefore often used for official occasions. As demonstrated in chapter 07, the age of the Johan de Witt
House however proves the building's value.
Figure 13.07 (left): An office room in the Johan de Witt House

Figure 13.08 (right): The main meeting room in the Johan de Witt House
Obviously, the Gorinchem tax office is used efficiently, without specific measures. Every employee simply
has less floor area at his disposal. This seems to be normal for administrative tax offices. The similar yet
even stronger effect can be seen with the Road and Water Engineering building.
The relatively good performance of the Ministry of SAE (constructed in 1990) is compensated by an
inefficient use of space. This is due to the cellular layout of the octagonal floors, which were originally meant
as an open floor plan, causing inefficient room plans (see figure 13.09). A similar effect takes place in the
case of the Exchequer & Audit Office and The Artillery. The latter of these has a relatively great proportion of
floor area for meeting rooms and general functions, e.g. a library.
The Food Inspection is the only department working with an innovative office concept of e.g. shared and
non-territorial workplaces. This clearly pays off in a significant improvement of the environmental
performance. Related to the GFA reference, an extra improvement by a factor of 1.77/1.24 = 1.43 is
achieved.
The recently built Administration of Justice and to-be-built Road and Waterworks Office also demonstrate a
relatively intensive use of space as a result of more modern layout principles.
The bad performance of the Geometry Department is partly due to the laboratory that is also incorporated in
the building.

Figure 13.09: Office room with impractical angles, in the SAE Ministry building
The positive impact of innovative office concepts would never be visible if the reference building were based on
the GFA alone.
13.03.02 The average building
Again translated into an average building, the differences of government offices can be visualised more easily.
Table 13.04 presents the environmental cost and improvement factors. It again demonstrates that, taking into
account the average use of floor area, the government offices - 1994 being their average year of completion -
perform only 5% better than a reference office building representing the year 1990. This performance should have
been better with regard to a linear target line towards the factor 20 by the year 2040.
Table 13.04: Environmental cost and improvement factors of the average government office building and its FTE reference
environmental cost average FTE reference impr
building materials € 148,344 € 165,622 1.12
energy consumption € 590,410 € 605,817 1.03
water consumption € 23,425 € 26,952 1.15
total € 762,179 € 798,390

per employee € 1,190 € 1,246 1.05
2
per m GFA € 41 € 45
13.04 Typology studies of the office layout
13.04.01 Spatial performance of office space solutions
The greater part of the buildings assessed in this chapter are cellular offices. Other office space solutions, as
presented in chapter 02, might lead to space use reductions. Veldhoen [1998] compared spatial parameters of the
cellular office to the group office (he called it 'team office'), open-plan office (he used the term 'office landscape'),
combi office (referred to as 'cocoon office'), and the innovative alternatives of the lean office and vital office. The
latter two are basically a spatial and functional adaptation of the combi office. The spatial differences between
these office space solutions are summarised in table 13.05.

Table 13.05: Average floor areas per employee of different office space solutions [based on Veldhoen, 1998]
area measure type office space solution
cellular group open-plan combi lean vital
1
functional useful floor area 17.3 12.2 10.9 12.6 11.4 8.6
2
useful floor area 19.4 13.2 11.8 13.1 11.8 8.9
3
net floor area 27.4 17.6 15.5 18.4 14.8 11.1
4
gross floor area 30.4 19.6 17.2 20.5 16.5 12.4
1: consisting of work spaces, formal and informal communication spaces, and supporting functions; 2 = 1 + layout
inefficiencies; 3 = 2 + horizontal and vertical traffic spaces and space for building services; 4 = 3 + structural space
Note that these different office space solutions are closely related to solutions for the use the office. For instance,
the lean office, the vital office, and to a lesser extent the combi office require some form of shared or non-territorial
space in order to achieve the spatial performance presented by table 13.06.
Improvement factors
When the GFA values from table 13.05 are related to the cellular office, improvement factors can be obtained.
Table 13.06 presents these. Mind that the improvement factors of this table are spatial improvement factors and
not necessarily environmental improvement factors.
Table 13.06: Spatial improvement factors of different office space solutions [based on Veldhoen, 1998]
office space solution
cellular group open-plan combi lean vital
gross floor area 30.4 19.6 17.2 20.5 16.5 12.4
improvement factor 1.00 1.55 1.77 1.48 1.84 2.45
1: consisting of work spaces, formal and informal communication spaces, and supporting functions; 2 = 1 + layout
inefficiencies; 3 = 2 + horizontal and vertical traffic spaces and space for building services; 4 = 3 + structural space
As can be seen, great spatial improvements can be achieved by means of office layouts differing from cellular
offices. However, as mentioned already, the latter three solutions of table 13.06 are to a greater or lesser extent
dependent on completely innovative solutions for the use of the office. Switching to the more efficient space
solutions is therefore not as simple as it seems. Moreover, the choice of one of the space-efficient solutions may
involve negative consequences to the users' labour satisfaction and labour productivity. In the case of an open
office, there is more distraction [Brill et al., 2001] and less satisfaction or experience value [Duquesnoy & Tanis,
2002].
13.05.02 Environmental performance of office space solutions
Basic data from the office buildings case study

When the spatial implications of the different office space solutions are coupled to the environmental data of the
office buildings case study presented in chapter 06 and recalculated in this chapter, the environmental
performance of these concepts can be determined.
The layout chosen for an office building has an influence on different yet not many building elements. The way in
which an office floor is organised mainly affects the quantity and type of built-in components: inner walls, doors
and windows, as well as their finish. Table 13.07 summarises environmental data applying to these elements.
As can be seen, the average GFA per employee of the twelve government offices is 30.8 m2, close to Veldhoen's
30.4 m2, confirming that most government offices have a cellular layout and supporting Veldhoen's findings.
For the integrated built-in components of table 13.07, inner doors, inner windows and finish were allocated to
bearing and non-bearing walls in proportion to their respective areas (as shown in the column 'prop').

Table 13.07: Environmental data for building elements affected by the office layout, based on the office buildings case study
element quantity env cost
related to > GFA employee prop element GFA contr
unit > m2/m2 m2/p % e€/m2.y e€/m2.y %
averages from office buildings case study
GFA 30.8 100%
fill-in and finishing
bearing walls 0.22 6.71 26% 1.60 0.77 4.4%
non-bearing walls 0.62 18.98 74% 1.01 1.37 7.9%
inner doors 0.07 2.27 1.48 0.24 1.4%
inner windows 0.08 2.57 0.18 0.03 0.2%
wall finishing and tiling 1.43 43.86 0.20 0.63 3.6%
integrated fill-in
bearing walls complete 0.26 6.72 1.61 0.77 4.4%
non-bearing walls complete 0.73 19.01 1.02 1.38 7.9%
TOTAL 0.99 25.73 2.63 2.15 12.4%
The values for the integrated built-in components were used for the comparison of different layout principles. As
can be seen, the area of inner walls per GFA is almost 1, meaning that for every square metre of floor, one square
metre of inner wall is used.
In order to provide a pure basis for comparison of office layouts, for all variants the structural and external building
design needed to be taken equal. Therefore, the quantity of bearing walls was also taken equal in all cases,
whereas non-supporting components were supposed to depend on the selected office layout. The environmental
cost per m2 element of load-bearing or non-bearing wall was taken constant for all alternatives. Table 13.07 also
shows the contribution of a specific element to the total environmental cost of building materials.
Environmental performance of the different solutions

Table 13.08 gives an overview of the four basic solutions for office space and their environmental performance.
Important are the bordered cells with a white background because they form the presumptions for the GFA, the
area of bearing walls, and area of non-bearing walls with respect to the reference solution, i.e. the cellular office.
The cellular office was taken equal to the average values of the office buildings case study. For the other variants,
the proportion of bearing walls was always taken at 100%, whereas that of GFA was chosen to approximate the
values of Veldhoen. Non-bearing walls were estimated. The last two columns present the environmental
improvement factors. The first is related to the building element itself, indicating the environmental improvement of
the built-in components. The second improvement factor is related to the material use for the entire building,
assuming that the environmental improvement factors of the other building elements remain 1.0. Both
improvement factors are based on the same number of employees using the office. The fact that an open-plan
office uses less floor area per person and may be smaller than a cellular office therefore is involved in these
factors.
Table 13.08 demonstrates that, for the built-in components, significant environmental improvements can be
achieved through switching from a cellular to especially an open-plan layout. The total improvement factor for
building materials is logically smaller, yet still significant, as a result of the space reduced. A part of the
improvements is established as a result of a smaller quantity of built-in components, another part results from a
smaller personal use of space. I need to remark, however, that the environmental load of the built-in components
and its finish is taken equal for all cases. It is imaginable that a modern open-plan office is equipped with other
types of partitions and furniture than the cellular office, leading to different environmental cost per unit. This was
however not taken into account.

Table 13.08: Environmental parameters for the different office space solutions
element quantity env cost improvement factor
related to > GFA employee prop GFA contr element TOTAL
unit > m2/m2 m2/p % e€/m2.y % - -
cellular office
GFA 30.8 100
bearing walls complete 0.26 6.72 100 0.77 4.4% 1.00
non-bearing walls complete 0.73 19.01 100 1.38 7.9% 1.00
TOTAL 0.99 25.73 2.15 12.4% 1.00 1.00
group office
GFA 20.0 65
TOTAL 0.63 16.23 1.46 8.4% 2.26 1.60
open-plan office
GFA 18.5 60
TOTAL 0.44 11.47 1.12 6.4% 3.21 1.77
combi-office
GFA 21.5 70
TOTAL 0.81 20.98 1.81 10.4% 1.70 1.46
In spite of this, the conclusion can be drawn that an office layout other than cellular leads to significant
environmental improvement, which is clarified by the graph of figure 13.10.
3.50
3.00 fill-in improvement
total improvement
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
cellular office group office open-plan combi-office
office
Figure 13.10: Environmental improvement factors of the use of building materials by different office layout solutions
The impact on energy consumption was not taken into account. Since open-plan layouts save space, they will
also reduce the area-related energy consumption. Intensification may however also lead to increased energy
demand for cooling. I therefore decided to leave energy out of the comparison.

13.05 Lessons for the efficiency of the use of office space
13.05.01 Conclusions from the case studies
In short, the following conclusions can be drawn from the space-based assessment of the twelve government
offices:
The use of FTE references demonstrates that the eventual environmental performance of an office building
is importantly related to the number of people, or their number of FTE. The use of personal space by office
employees defines the total floor area required and the eventual size of the building. A reduction of the
personal use of space, by means of simple intensification and non-territorial or shared workplaces, therefore
leads to less building material, a smaller energy consumption, and thus a smaller environmental load for the
entire office organisation. With respect to the GFA reference, basing the improvement factor on the FTE
reference enhances the assessment of the spatial impact and enables the determination of an integral
environmental performance. The FTE reference is however a momentary image because the number of
employees working in a building can differ day-by-day, making it a less reliable basis for comparison. The
assessments presented in this section should therefore be considered limited to the moment of registration.
Since the average personal use of space does not differ much from the reference value for 1990, the
average performance of the government offices based on the FTE reference is not much better or worse
than the one based on the GFA reference. It is better in the case of a building-based average, and worse in
the case of an area-based average, indicating that in large buildings the personal use of space is less
efficient than in small buildings. This is due to larger supporting structures and additional space for meetings,
food and beverages, as well as open spaces covered with glass.
Since the additional spaces previously mentioned in general improve the functional quality and user
experience, reducing the use of space should not be a dogmatic goal. If some spaces are used inefficiently
and others are hardly ever occupied, the spatial efficiency should be improved. However, if the pressure on
space is already high, additional open spaces will form an important factor for the well-being of occupants
and should therefore be cherished.
The average floor space index (FSI) of the government office plots is 2.85. This value however differs
considerably between the projects. Inner-city buildings logically achieve a higher FSI than buildings in rural
areas. In dense urban areas the intention should be a high FSI, whereas in rural areas one can focus on the
most efficient building shape. The impact of the use of ground area can be best seen by means of
comparison with a reference building. The offices studied on average perform 49% better than their
references.
A consideration should be made about the factor of time. Defining a reference geometry and layout, a 'tight'
building is the best solution for good performance (a great environmental improvement factor): a smaller building
envelope means less consumption of energy and less building materials mean less environmental damage.
However, with this approach future changes (new spatial requirements, different work forms etc.) are ignored,
possibly shortening the eventual functional life span of the building. Therefore, as treated in Volume C - The Time
Factor, the factor of time should be taken into account, in which aspects like flexibility play a role.
13.05.02 Conclusions from the layout typology studies
The typology study presented in section 13.04 demonstrated that avoiding a cellular office layout might result in
great spatial and environmental improvement factors. The open-plan office in particular performs well in terms of
the use of building materials (total improvement factor: 1.77) as a result of the limited personal use of space and
the avoidance of inner partitions. The group office comes second in environmental performance (factor 1.60), and
with an improvement factor of 1.46, the combi office also performs well with respect to the cellular office.
Nevertheless, as already mentioned, functional and practical obstacles for another layout principle were not taken
into account. The performances calculated are therefore a theoretical indication of the improvement potential of
the office layout alone. Theoretical or not, the results are promising. Further improvements may be accomplished
through the selection of the type of partitions and finish, and the reduction of employees requiring a workplace in

the office, as tested by the assessment of office worker concepts, treated in Volume F - The Organisation of
Office Work.
13.05.03 Recommendations for improvement
In this section, based on the case study of the government buildings and related to the use of space,
improvements will be recommended for existing and new buildings.
Options for improvement during occupation

For the benefit of sustainability and the economy, an office building should be efficiently used. Efficient use of
space is only partly solvable through a technical approach. The organisation of office work has the greatest
influence on space use, for it defines the character and arrangement of workplaces, and thereby the efficiency of
the layout.
When an organisation does not naturally fit into a building there are two possible solutions: (1) adapting the
building, or (2) adapting the organisation. The executive management and the employees decide in which
direction the decision will be made.
Easily demountable, movable partitions form a basis for spatial efficiency when the floor layout is not optimal and
the organisation cannot or does not want to change. When additional space is required, more radical solutions are
necessary. In that case, solutions are finding space not yet used (e.g. a cellar or storage rooms) or enlarging the
building, by means of extending the building in one direction or the other, constructing an extra building, or adding
an extra layer to it. Chapter 08 already gave an example of this.
A first step is adapting the floor layout to the building design. For instance, an organic floor plan requires an open-
plan layout or group office layout at the most. Forcing an orthogonal floor arrangement in it will lead to inefficiency.
In the case of under-capacity of workstations, spaces for secondary functions may be conversed to (temporary)
workplaces, enhancing the spatial efficiency. In the beginning, a less strict, not complete assignment of office
space might require additional space. Due to inevitable alterations in the demand for space it will however
eventually lead to more flexibility, efficiency, and thereby better environmental and economic performance. When
a part of the office floor is reserved for non-territorial use, this can be useful to special project-teams, to
employees working flexibly, and for general activities (e.g. meetings) that cannot always be foreseen.
Options for improvement in the case of renovation

First, for improvements in case of renovation or refurbishment, the recommendations for improvement during
occupation also apply. However, in the case of renovation, a decision needs to be made taking into account the
age of the building and its possible status as a monument or aesthetic excellence. For a monument of more than
150 years old, a radical approach to the building structure is not recommended when this only limitedly improves
the functionality of the building. As previously stated: as a result of its age, the environmental mortgage of a
monument has in general already been paid off.
In other cases of renovation, improvement of the use of space after the intervention should be an argument for
sustainability. Trading a possible surplus of e.g. meeting rooms for workplaces or non-territorial space will improve
the use of space, thereby the use of building materials and energy consumption. When, due to this, a part of the
building is at risk of becoming redundant, renting it to third parties might be a solution.
As a first step, another organisation of the office may be contemplated. In the case of a deep office floor, functions
requiring daylight can be located near the façades, whereas technical spaces, reproduction facilities, meeting and
consultancy rooms, and other functions without the need for daylight can be located in the central floor area.
Semi-transparent, demountable partitions and doors will reduce the demand for energy for artificial lighting,
improve the practical adaptability and reduce the environmental load in the case of another internal alteration.
Experiments with office innovation led to a better-lit and more effectively used building [Vos & Voordt, 2001]. This
was also demonstrated by the office innovation experiment of the SAE Ministry (see figure 13.11, and compare it
to figure 13.09). Needs to be remarked, though, that not every office employee fancies great transparency. For

employees, the indoor climate, psychological needs (e.g. privacy), and personal experience remain important
aspects.
An office organisation should not tread in the pitfall that renovation will afterwards establish the ideal situation.
There is no ideal office, at least not for a long while, because every organisation changes. Therefore, in the long
run, it is more effective to focus a renovation project on achieving a building that can be easily adapted. It is
possible through removal of internal obstacles and enabling compartmentalisation and redividability.
Figure 13.11: The experimental office innovation area of the SAE Ministry, the same as in figure 13.09
Options for improvement in the case of new buildings

A substantial proportion of the recommendations previously mentioned also apply to the case of a new building of
which the design can still be influenced.
Furthermore, as a first step, depending on the urban situation and its limitations, a much more efficient use of land
will be achieved through stacking of building layers and different functions, e.g. parking facilities beneath or on top
of the building.
Second, the eventual building should match the office organisation. One strategy is a custom-made suit perfectly
designed for the organisation and its way of working. Another and more safe strategy is a loose-fit suit that allows
for future adaptations from within. Spacious buildings, with an open layout and few obstacles offer more freedom
for different arrangements and future adaptations.
Third, on the building layer, an open-plan office layout for non-territorial workplaces and general facilities,
combined with small personal cells or efficient group offices for more concentrated work lead to an efficient use of
space.
The gross-net ratio can be made more favourable through avoidance of additional spatial functions as open
spaces, places for consultancy, coffee corners, etc. These are however defining the building's character, its
occupants' well-being, and thereby its future value. An optimal ratio should therefore be found.
13.05.04 Additional research
A reference based on the number of actual hours of use would take into account the occupation rate of the office
building and therefore provide a more accurate measure of the efficiency of use. Such a reference would make
better distinction between traditional and innovative office concepts possible. In Volume F - The Organisation of
Office Work, office concepts and their assessibility will be elaborated.

14 CASE STUDY OF THE USE URBAN SPACE
As a synthesis of two PhD researches, together with Sebastiaan de Wilde I analysed and environmentally
assessed six redevelopment cases around transit hubs in the UK, France and the Netherlands. In each of the
cases, space use was intensive and/or multiple. For reference, they were compared to a theoretic urban office
project with an average density and an existing project known for its multiple use of space, Euralille in Lille. In the
assessment land use, energy consumption, use of building materials, and transport fuel consumption were taken
into account. This led to interesting results and relationships between spatial characteristics and environmental
performance. This chapter will discuss the background, assessment methodology, cases, and results. It is based
on two articles we wrote for the Journal of Environmental Management.
Figure 14.01: Four of the seven existing cases involved in the study of this chapter
Clockwise: Euralille in Lille, Canary Wharf in London, La Défense in Paris [pictures: Sebastiaan de Wilde], and the Zuidas in
Amsterdam [DRO, 2001]
Contents
14.01 Background: the development of cities and infrastructure 319

14.02 Assessment methodology for the urban cases 320
14.02.01 Definition of the reference 320
14.02.02 Assessment of the spatial efficiency 322
14.02.03 Assessment of environmental parameters 322
14.02.04 Euralille as an extra reference 323
14.03 The cases studied 325
14.03.01 The London cases 325
14.03.02 The Paris cases 326
14.03.03 The Amsterdam cases 327
14.04 Comparing the projects 329
14.04.01 Overview of basic data 329
14.04.02 Spatial and functional comparison 329
14.04.03 Environmental comparison 332
14.05 Sensitivity tests 333
14.05.01 Functional equity 333
14.05.02 A higher ecological value of land 334
14.05.03 Energy conservation 334
14.05.04 Different fuel prices 334
14.06 Conclusions 334
14.06.01 Findings for the use of space 334
14.06.02 Findings for sustainability 335
14.06.03 Additional enhancements 335
318 14 Case study of the use of urban space - E The Space Factor
14.01 Background: the development of cities and

infrastructure
In this chapter, cases of redevelopment around nodes of public transport are assessed and compared. For an
understanding of the importance of these areas to urban development, the use of space, and thereby the impact
on sustainability, a brief historic view is necessary. Three main phases can be distinguished in the development of
space use in cities and the role that railway stations played in that development: before 1850, between 1850 and
1950, and after 1950.
First phase, before 1850

In the first phase, city walls were constructed around the historic city centre. Growth of the city emerged in two
ways: densification within the city walls and construction of new city walls around the existing city. High densities,
especially in terms of the number of inhabitants per hectare, were very common.
Second phase, between 1850 and 1950

The second phase started in the second half of the nineteenth century after the Industrial Revolution, with the
large-scale construction of railway infrastructure and terminals at the city borders. City walls partly lost their
function and were therefore often demolished. Examples of such terminals are found in all major European cities,
for example Waterloo Station and St Pancras Station in London and Gare du Nord and Gare Montparnasse in
Paris. From that point in time cities grew much faster. Within the city, public transport systems were constructed in
order to link the railway stations and to upgrade inner city transport. The Circle Line metro in London is an
example of these developments. Paris had a similar infrastructure that was mostly used for transport of
commodities [Wagenaar, 1998]. Amsterdam Central Station is a through station that links the east and the west.
Third phase, after 1950

The third phase started with the large-scale construction of infrastructure for car transport. Transport by car grew
extremely fast and new infrastructure for cars was needed. In order to link the transport axes, city-rings for car
traffic enclosed what could be seen as city borders at that time. The Boulevard Périphérique in Paris and the A10
ring road in Amsterdam are examples of this. Due to improved infrastructure and the fact that most commuters
were able to buy a car, cities grew even faster than before by large-scale, low-density and mono-functional urban
sprawl. The three phases can be roughly illustrated with the development of Amsterdam, in figure 14.02.
Figure 14.02: Schematic development of the city of Amsterdam: a. the first phase in which the city was bordered by walls and
water; b. the phase in which the main part of the city was concentrated within ring roads and rail infrastructure; c. the present
situation with recent development areas [image: Sebastiaan de Wilde]
Scarcity of space
The development of infrastructure and the possibility to travel longer distances in the same time has had a huge
influence on the growth of cities. At present, cities have taken up so much of the rural green spaces around them,
that it has become an environmental necessity to save what is left. Greenfield sites are further away from the city
centre and from public transport. As city space is being reconsidered, new development strategies, such as
brownfield development, get much attention. Brownfields are urban areas that have not been developed or that
remain from earlier functions. Although the land tends to be much more expensive, brownfield developments often
E The Space Factor - 14 Case study of the use of urban space 319
fit better into the city infrastructure, public transport facilities and cultural amenities [Wilde, 2002b]. Rural areas
form the new city walls, with the difference that they protect the surroundings from the city instead of the city from
its surroundings, which was the original function of the old city walls. Optimising the use of space already
occupied is important. At present, railway station areas and other nodes of public transport are particularly
selected for redevelopment plans. Therefore, Sebastiaan de Wilde and I chose some of these projects for our
assessment.
The cases studied

For this study, we chose urban plans at two different positions in the urban fabric. The first position is found
around inner city railway stations, at the old city borders, at the verge of development phase one and two. The
examples that will be discussed are the redevelopments of Liverpool Street Station in London and Seine Rive
Gauche in Paris. The second position is on the borders of the second ring, considered the shift from phase two to
three. The examples that will be discussed are Canary Wharf in London, La Défense in Paris, and Zuidas and
Bijlmer Station in Amsterdam. First, the assessment methodology applied will be discussed.
14.02 Assessment methodology for the urban cases
In this research, Sebastiaan de Wilde and I analysed the redevelopment projects in terms of their spatial efficiency
and functional diversity. We used the spatial and environmental indicators introduced in chapter 12. We used
reference projects to determine the environmental performance of these projects.
14.02.01 Definition of the reference
The reference principle

Every urban plan has specific features that make it difficult, if not impossible, to compare it to other urban plans,
especially when speaking in international context. The projects we compared are all located in major cities in
Western Europe with a similar historical development as treated in the first section, making comparison
acceptable. Assessment of different plans is best made possible is by defining a general theoretical reference,
adjusted to the specific plan and its characteristics. Relative performance indicators resulting from comparison of
the actual plan with this reference may be used for a broader consideration of cases. This reference principle has
already been applied to previous assessments of buildings and building elements.
For urban plans, the assessment methodology based on this principle is depicted by figure 14.03. In order to
assess the sustainability impact of intensive and multiple use of space, the theoretical reference for our case
study of urban plans needed to reflect an average urban extension plan. The definition of this average plan could
be best based on the number of users of an urban plan, related to the quantitative spatial, functional and
environmental indicators introduced in chapter 12.
Users, occupants, inhabitants

When determining the total number of people in an urban area, a distinction can be made between users,
occupants or inhabitants. Users of an urban area can be defined as all people that make use of the facilities
(housing space, working space or other facilities) in the area; occupants are people that have a permanent place
in the area (housing or working space); and inhabitants are the people who only live in the area (housing space).
In order to make a correct comparison between the cases, the exact interpretation of people numbers is
important. In order to estimate the personal transport fuel consumption, Newman & Kenworthy [1987; 2001] used
the population of the city as their reference, i.e. inhabitants. Nevertheless, they studied complete cities, and in that
case it is perhaps reasonable to assume that the population living in the city is as great as the number of people
working and recreating in it.
Figure 14.03: Graphical clarification of the assessment methodology based on a theoretical reference
User numbers
We faced the problem that there were no exact accounts available of the number of people using the areas in
London, Paris and Amsterdam. These user numbers therefore needed to be calculated on the basis of the
functional contents of a plan and values for the personal use of space per function. We grossly divided urban
functions in the categories 'offices', 'residences' and 'amenities', of which the latter included shops and public
buildings such as libraries and theatres. The reference year was chosen at 2000. For that year, an average use of
24 m2 GFA per office employee in the Netherlands was already determined in chapter 05. The actual use of office
space differs between the UK, France and Netherlands but for general reference this value may be used since
every case is related to a reference based on the same value. For the personal use of living space, we also used
the same value for each of the three countries: 32 m2 per person, based on data from Statistics Netherlands [CBS,
2002]. Little information was available of space use per person in case of amenities. We estimated the average
occupation of these facilities over the day twice as low as office space: 48 m2 per person.
In order to find the total number of users for each of the cases, we needed to use weighted user numbers, also
taking into account the period that office employees, shoppers and inhabitants are present in the area. The
personal use of space was therefore multiplied by the estimated occupation hours during a week, divided by the
total number of week hours. For office work we calculated with 10 use hours a day (8 working hours plus 2 hours
for travelling and lunch) for 5 days a week, i.e. 50 hours (30% of the total hours in a week). For residential space
we assumed 12 hours a day for 5 days and 20 hours a day 2 days a week, i.e. 100 hours in total (60%). Time
spent in other facilities in the area was related to standard shop opening times: 10 hours a day for 6 days of the
week, i.e. 60 hours (36%). As can be seen, we did not allow for periods spent on holidays, because we assumed
that incoming tourists would balance those figures.
On the basis of the figures just explained, the total number of users of an urban area could be derived from the
total area of offices, residences and amenities: office area/24 + residential area/32 + amenities area/48.
Notice that the number of users deduced accordingly is a duration-related, integral value, in which periods without
occupation are incorporated. The number of users therefore equals the average number over the whole week.
Land use
For the conversion of user numbers to the area of land occupied by the reference plan, an average European
urban density of 50 persons per hectare [Newman & Kenworthy, 1987; Koolhaas et al., 1997; Berghauser Pont et
al., 2002] was used. On the basis of the area of land determined specifically for the reference and the user
number and floor areas equal to the assessed case, most spatial, functional and environmental indicators could
be determined. For the use of building materials and energy consumption of the buildings in a plan, the average
building height of a common urban extension plan needed to be defined. We chose to take 4 building layers as
the reference.
Reference division of functions

The reference described is based on a functional and spatial program equal to that of the case studied: a plan
entirely consisting of offices is compared to a reference with office space only. This is legitimate for the
assessment of separate cases and comparison of functionally equal plans. Using this reference for functionally
diverse cases, dense monofunctional plans, for which the users need to live and shop elsewhere, would be
compared with mixed areas that are less dense yet accommodate all user numbers. For the correct comparison of
functionally diverse plans, all cases therefore need to be converted to the same constitution of functions, as was
done for our sensibility tests. The basis for that comparison was a reference plan with a spatial division of 40%
offices, 40% residences, and 20% amenities, assumed appropriate for urban areas. The cases studied were
enlarged to this division by adding residences and amenities (all cases predominantly contained offices) of which
the area required was based on the average urban values discussed previously.
14.02.02 Assessment of the spatial efficiency
Density
In the case study presented, we determined the efficiency of land use by the floor space index (FSI), which, as
discussed in chapter 12, is a measure for the relationship between the gross floor area (GFA) and the ground
area on which it was established. The ground space index (GSI), the relation between the occupied and
unoccupied ground surface, and the useful public space index (UPSI), the relation between the public open space
and total GFA, could have been used as background indicators to determine spatial characteristics. Due to
insufficient data, we were however not able to analyse these.
Functional diversity
In order to determine the functional diversity and future value of an urban area we determined the office apartment
ratio (OAR), the relation between offices and housing, and the public private ratio (PPR), the relation between
publicly and privately accessible buildings. As discussed in chapter 12, these indicators may also be used as a
measure of physical and social safety.
14.02.03 Assessment of environmental parameters
Chapter 12 made clear that the environmental assessment of urban space use concepts is complicated. A few
quantitative indicators (e.g. materials, energy and water consumption) may be determined, but merely through
estimation. Other parameters (e.g. ecology, water management, transport means, health and safety) need to be
described qualitatively. Because of their relative importance in urban areas, only the quantitative assessment
results for building materials, energy consumption in buildings and fuel consumption for transport will be
presented.
The green area preserved (GAP)

The preservation of green areas around the city as a result of space use optimisation is an essential indicator for
sustainability in general and for the environmental performance of an urban plan in particular. Ecology is however
still complexly translatable into environmental scores. As introduced in chapter 12, the green area preserved
(GAP) is a measure of the avoided development of land outside the plan. For every case presented, we
determined the GAP, through multiplication of the individual use of space of the basic reference project by the
number of users of the specific project and subtraction of the actual ground area of the studied case. This
determination was illustrated by figure 12.05. For comparison with other environmental parameters, the GAP was
multiplied by the minimum eco-costs determined by Vogtländer [2001]: e€ 4.00/m2.
Energy consumption and the use of building materials

In order to include the influence of the average number of building layers in the urban area, we used factors
deduced from the typology studies of the building height presented in chapter 11. Table 14.01 is an abstract of
these findings, for offices with a net floor area (NFA) of 8,400 m2 and a floor depth of 12.6 m.
Table 14.01: Improvement factors for energy consumption and the use of materials for different building heights, based on a
NFA of 8,400 m2 and floor depth of 12.6 m, as determined in chapter 11
height variant energy materials
2
for a NFA of 8,400 m factor factor
A: 2 layers 1.00 1.00
B: 4 layers 1.12 1.14
C: 8 layers 1.20 1.19
D: 16 layers 1.21 1.19
E: 32 layers 1.15 1.14
F: 64 layers 1.03 1.05
In reality, an urban plan will of course contain different buildings with different floor areas and different floor
depths. If we wanted to take into account every individual building, the assessment would however have become
impractical and we would have never been able to involve seven existing projects. The values shown in table
14.01 are therefore indicative. As the complete study of chapter 11 demonstrated, in case of a constant NFA, the
difference between the variants of 12.6 and 25.2 m depth was almost insignificant. In case of a constant floor
depth, the difference in improvement factors between the variants of 4,200, 8,400, and 16,800 m2 NFA generally
remained below 10%, which we found acceptable.
For the environmental load we used the findings of the case studies presented in chapter 06. For the use of
building materials, the average annual environmental cost were taken at e€ 8.21 per m2 GFA, and for energy
consumption at e€ 40.26 per m2 GFA, partially based on calculated values and partially on measured values. The
improvement factors of table 14.01 were used for the ultimate annual environmental load.
Consumption of fuel for transportation

We determined the average consumption of fuel for transportation in accordance with the relationship found by
Newman & Kenworthy [1987], based on the urban density (defined in persons per hectare), and introduced in
chapter 12. The primary energy values resulting from this still need to be converted to environmental indicators,
preferably environmental cost, in order to be comparable to the environmental impact of the use of building
materials and energy consumption. As determined in chapter 12, and taking into account a 70/30 division between
personal car and public transport, the average environmental cost of one MJ is e€ 0.013. This value was used to
compare the impact of travel to the use of building materials and energy consumption of the buildings.
14.02.04 Euralille as an extra reference
Euralille in Lille, France, is widely seen as an example of multiple use of space and dense urban planning. In
order to not just involve a theoretic reference, this project was also taken into account in the assessments. In this
section, the Euralille case will be used to clarify the calculation of the various parameters.
Description of Euralille
Euralille (figure 14.03) lays in the middle of an area of Europe in which between 60 and 70 million people live and
work [Koolhaas, 1993]. The city council made a strategic choice to develop the area around the new railway
infrastructure. The new high-speed train station was situated on the borders of the city in order to accommodate
the construction of both the station and tracks. An underground metro system connects this new station with the
city centre and the existing station, Lille Flandres. The location has good accessibility.
The government (both local and national) played an important role in the development of the area. Beside the
financial support, a lot of effort has been put in publicity and promotion of the area [Coupland, 1997]. This made
the project to a commercial success.
Figure 14.03: Real estate development over the railway tracks of railway station Lille Europe [picture: Sebastiaan de Wilde]
Density and diversity

The total area of the development is approximately 70 hectares. On this site, 273,700 m2 GFA has been
developed [Bertolini & Spit, 1998], containing 117,000 m2 office space, 33,600 m2 residential space, and 123,100
m2 space for amenities.
Based on these figures, the FSI is 0.39. This is a relatively low density, surprisingly lower than average for
European cities, despite Euralille's reputation of an urban plan intensively used. This is due to the large rural area
on which it has been developed and the relative great proportion of undeveloped land within the area.
The OAR of Euralille is 117/(117 + 33.6) = 0.777. The PPR equals 123.1/273.7= 0.450.
Number of users
The number of users was calculated as described previously:
Office occupants (117,000 m2, 24 m2/user, used 30% of the week): 0.3*117,000/24 = 1,463 p
Residential inhabitants (0 m2, 32 m2/user, used 60% of the week): 0.6 * 33,600/32 = 630 p
Other users (123,100 m2, 48 m2/user, used 36% of the week): 0.36 * 123,100/48 = 923 p
The total number of users is therefore 3,016, and the personal density is 3,016/70 = 43.1 p/ha. This is comparable
to the spatial density (expressed by the FSI) and also lower than European averages.
Environmental impact
When calculating the environmental impact, the average annual environmental load of materials and energy was
divided by the improvement factors of table 14.01. In the Euralille case, the average building height was 10 floors,
leading to the following calculations:
Energy: e€ 40.26 x 273,700 / 1.21(10 stories) = e€ 9,106,745
Materials: e€ 8.21 x 273,700 / 1.20 (10 stories) = e€ 1,872,564
The transport fuel consumption depends on the number of users per hectare: 43. Reading the curve of Newman &
Kenworthy, this corresponds with approximately 14,000 MJ per capita. This is multiplied by the number of users:
3,016 x 14,000 = 42,224,000 MJ = 42,224 GJ. This corresponds with 42,224,000 x e€ 0.013 = e€ 548,912.
Data from the other cases was determined accordingly.
Table 14.02 summarises the main spatial, functional and environmental characteristics of the Euralille project.
Table 14.02: Characteristics of the Euralille reference

Euralille
aspect indicator value unit
characteristics number of users 3,016 p
GFA (gross floor area) 273,700 m2
office space 117,000 m2
residential space 33,600 m2
other space 123,100 m2
GA (ground area) 700,000 m2
average number of layers 10
spatial indicators density 43 p/ha
FSI (floor space index) 0.39
functional indicators OAR (office apartment ratio) 77.7 %
PPR (public private ratio) 45.0 %
environmental indicators building materials1 1,873 .103 e€
energy consumption2 9,107 .103 e€
3
transport fuel consumption 42,221 GJ
4
540 .103 e€
2
1: = improvement factor (see table 14.01) x e€ 8.21/m x GFA; 2: = improvement factor (see table
14.01) x e€ 40.26/m2 x GFA; 3: = personal value according to Newman & Kenworthy [1987] x number
of users; 4: = MJ value x e€ 0.0128/MJ (see explanatory text)
14.03 The cases studied
In this section, the six projects assessed will be described. Basic facts and data are based on Wilde [2002a].
14.03.01 The London cases
In London in the 1980s the office market exploded. This ‘Big Bang’ of the office market was a result of the
information technology development. New offices schemes, with buildings that could deal with the transfer of large
amounts of data, were the result of a financial globalisation. At the same time, for a secondary income to the
shortened government money, the newly privatised British Rail covered railway tracks and railway stations with
real estate [Hannay, 1991].
Figure 14.04: The Broadgate/Liverpool Street Station redevelopment scheme [Rosehaugh Stanhope, 1998]
Liverpool Street Station / Broadgate Development

Above and around Liverpool Street Station (figure 14.04) 370,000 m2 of real estate was developed on 11.7
hectares of land. This project, the Broadgate Development, is an example of intensive use of space. Broadgate
predominantly consists of offices, so the mixed-use aspect of the project is limited to offices, railway infrastructure,
and a small amount of amenities.
Canary Wharf
Canary Wharf (figure 14.05) lies in a London harbour area, eight miles east of Tower Bridge. In 1980, the London
Dockland Development Corporation was created to develop this former harbour area, which had become derelict
due to the decline of local industry. In 1982 the first plans were to develop about 1 million square metres, but the
developer was unable to fund the project. In 1987 the Docklands Light Rail opened, making the area more
accessible. In 1991 the first tenants moved to Canary Wharf, and by 1993, 7,000 people were working there. In
1999, the Jubilee Line extension was opened, allowing mass public transport to the area. In total, 1.3 million m2 of
real estate predominantly for offices is realised at Canary Wharf on only 34 hectares of land. By 2001, 82 percent
of the commuters used public transport [Canary Wharf Group, 2002].
At the moment, most of the buildings of the scale model of figure 14.06 have been completed and over 42,000
people work in the area. However, these are peak numbers, not averages over 24 hours. In accordance with the
methodology previously presented, we determined an average presence of 20,014 users.
Figure 14.05: Scale model of the development of Canary Wharf in the GLA building in London [picture: Sebastiaan de Wilde]
14.03.02 The Paris cases
Six large railway terminals border the city centre of Paris. Construction of the high-speed train (in French: train à
grande vitesse, TGV) network forced the city to upgrade existing stations that were to be served by TGV trains.
One of these projects is the development of Seine Rive Gauche. La Défense, a new business district, is situated
outside the borders of the city centre of Paris, just outside the Boulevard Périphérique.
Seine Rive Gauche

Seine Rive Gauche (Seine left bank) is an inner city project stretching from Gare d’Austerlitz to the Boulevard
Périphérique (figure 14.06). One of president Mitterand’s ‘Grand Projets’, the National Library of France, already
opened in 1996 as the first part of the project. Seine Rive Gauche will be under construction until 2005 [Paris Rive
Gauche, 2002]. Approximately 1.7 million m2 of floor area is planned on approximately 130 hectares. In this
project, different functions are mixed. Beside offices, Rive Gauche offers residential complexes, and public and
retail services, indicating close involvement of the government.
Figure 14.06: The redevelopment scheme of Seine Rive Gauche [Editions Quai Rouge]
La Défense
La Défense, a new business district, is situated outside the borders of the city centre of Paris, just outside
Boulevard Périphérique (see figure 14.07). It was created after forty years of cooperation between the state, the
developer and independent planners. La Défense has 2.5 million m2 of office space on 160 hectares of land.
Every year, 100 million people transfer in La Défense, making it the largest European junction for public suburban
transport [Diedrich, 1998]. As in Canary Wharf, housing is only realised in the periphery of this business district
and not within it.
Figure 14.07: Panoramic view of La Défense from the Eiffel Tower [picture: Sebastiaan de Wilde]
14.03.03 The Amsterdam cases
Over the last ten years, Amsterdam has planned some large-scale urban development. The Zuidas (South axis) is
being developed between two southern districts of Amsterdam. In the South-East district of Amsterdam, the area
around Bijlmer Station has been developed.
Zuidas
For the Zuidas development, railway and metro tracks will be covered as well as the A10 ring road (figure 14.08
and 14.09). The area is intended to become a second city centre with all the facilities to make it animated. The
project plan consists of more than 2 million m2 floor area, with an equal share of offices and housing [DRO
Amsterdam, 2001]. The new ground level of the Zuidas will be at the same level as adjoining districts, breaking
the infrastructure barrier. As a result of the mixed use of offices, apartments, and public facilities the use of public
transport will be better spread over the day and the station will be more efficiently used. The Zuidas development
is planned to take up approximately twenty to thirty years.
Figure 14.08 (left): The redevelopment plans for Amsterdam Zuidas [DRO Amsterdam, 2001]
Figure 14.09 (right): Artist impression of the redevelopment plan for Amsterdam Zuidas [DRO Amsterdam]
Bijlmer Station
The Bijlmer redevelopment project commenced in 1996 with the completion of the Amsterdam Arena, the multi-
functional soccer stadium of Ajax. Offices, residential buildings and a large number of facilities were developed
around Amsterdam Bijlmer Station (see figure 14.10 and 14.11). Reconstruction and enlargement of the railway
and metro station is part of this project. On 65 hectares, approximately 800,000 m2 of real estate is developed,
mainly consisting of office space [Gemeente Amsterdam, 1997].
Figure 14.10 (left): Redevelopment scheme of Amsterdam Bijlmer Station [Gemeente Amsterdam, 1997]
Figure 14.11 (right): The area around Bijlmer Station,

with the Amsterdam Arena stadium, shops, a cinema, theatre, offices, and apartments
14.04 Comparing the projects
14.04.01 Overview of basic data
Table 14.03 summarises the spatial, functional, and environmental characteristics of the cases.
Table 14.03: Overview of spatial, functional, and environmental characteristics of the European cases
indicator London Paris Amsterdam
Broadgate Canary Wf Rv Gauche La Défense Zuidas Bijlmer unit
characteristics
number of users 5,325 20,014 21,750 32,825 32,973 9,053 p
GFA (gross floor area) 370 1,350 1,650 2,710 2,252 801 .103 m2
- office space 340 1,262 750 2,500 1,007 401 .103 m2
- residential space 0 38 500 0 982 93 .103 m2
- other space 30 50 400 210 263 307 .103 m2
GA (ground area) 11.7 34.8 130.0 160.0 172.0 65.0 ha
number of layers 10 20 8 20 15 10 -
spatial indicators
density 455 575 167 205 192 139 p/ha
FSI 3.16 3.88 1.27 1.69 1.31 1.23 -
functional indicators
OAR 100.0 97.1 60.0 100.0 50.6 81.2 %
PPR 8.1 3.7 24.2 7.7 11.7 38.4 %
environmental indicators
building materials 2,531 9,391 11,362 18,855 15,537 5,479 .103 euro
building energy 12,311 45,286 55,392 90,921 74,930 26,646 .103 euro
transport fuel 136 384 974 1,260 1,266 463 .103 euro
TOTAL 14,979 55,061 67,728 111,036 91,733 32,588 .103 euro
14.04.02 Spatial and functional comparison
Density
A spatial comparison between the cases can only be drawn by means of spatial and functional indicators. When
observing the results of table 14.03, it is important to know that the average density of European cities is 50
persons per hectare and the average FSI is approximately 0.50. The FSI of the London cases therefore
demonstrate great intensity, and although the FSI-values of the Amsterdam cases and Seine Rive Gauche seem
low, they are already more than twice as intensive as average.
Although the OAR is always greater than 50%, implying that offices are dominant over residences, it greatly differs
between the projects. The London cases and La Défense entirely or predominantly consist of offices. The Zuidas
and Seine Rive Gauche are better mixed. As discussed in chapter 12, in the case of a low OAR, there will be a
substantial upgrade in the use of public space, and the amount of parking space required may be reduced through
double use of parking lots.
Beside a more efficient use of space, some environmental impact may be expected from a mixed use of land. For
instance, utilities for power, heating, cooling, and ventilation of offices and apartments can be combined to save
energy. Utilities for water and sewerage may also be optimised as a result of water consumption spread more
over time.
The projects assessed did not have accounts of an integrated approach to energy and water utilities, making it
reasonable to assume that none of the plans profited from the opportunity to achieve additional environmental
improvements. We could therefore not assess the entire improvement potential of intensive and multiple use of
space on the performance of energy and water. We only know that, by 2002, an environmental and social report
was presented for Canary Wharf [Canary Wharf Group plc, 2002], and that sustainability played a role in the
forming of ideas in the early development of the Zuidas [e.g. Johan Matser Projectontwikkeling et al., 1997].
There is great variation of the Public Private Ratio (PPR) between the projects. In cases of projects with a high
PPR (Euralille, Bijlmer, and Rive Gauche), the achieved FSI was lower than in the case of a low PPR (Canary
Wharf, Broadgate, and La Défense), possibly indicating that private parties demand more space to make a project
feasible for them.
Areas per user

For a comparison of spatial efficiency, spatial values per user are a useful additional parameter. These are
presented in table 14.04. The improvement factors for the GA per user were determined through comparison of
the projects with their specific reference. The GAP per user explicitly expresses the importance of an optimised
use of space to sustainability. The relative GAP reflects the green area preserved with respect to the total land
area of the reference. The references are not shown.
Table 14.04: Spatial comparison of the European cases

spatial indicators London Paris Amsterdam
GA per user 22.0 17.4 59.8 48.7 52.2 71.8 m2/p
GAP per user 178.0 182.6 140.2 151.3 147.8 128.2 m2/p
relative GAP 89% 91% 70% 76% 74% 64%
The ground area (GA) per user shows a potential improvement by more than a factor of 10 with respect to an
average urban plan. All projects achieved a GAP of more than 100 m2 per user. Best results are by the London
cases.
Relationships
For the six cases, figure 14.12 presents the relationship of GA and the total amount of GFA that is realised on it.
The density may differ greatly; however, the mean FSI, presented by the trend line, is approximately 1.38.
3,000
La Défense
higher FSI
2,500
Zuidas
gross floor area (103 m 2)
2,000
linear trend
Seine Rive Gauche
FSI = 1.38
1,500
Canary Wharf
1,000
Bijlmer low er FSI
500 Broadgate
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
ground area (ha)
Figure 14.12: Relationship between the GA and GFA of the cases studied
Figure 14.13 presents the relationship between the GA and the FSI. When the building site becomes larger, a
high FSI is more difficult to achieve due to a larger area required for public space and infrastructure. Variation of
the FSI also becomes smaller when the building site is larger.
5.0
4.5
Canary Wharf
4.0
3.5
Broadgate
floor space index
3.0
2.5
exponential trend
2.0
La Défense
narrow ing
1.5
m argin Zuidas
Bijlmer
1.0 Seine Rive Gauche
0.5
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
ground area (ha)
Figure 14.13: Relationship between the GA and FSI of the cases studied
In figure 14.14, the relationship between the FSI and the OAR is set out. This graph again demonstrates that the
FSI is lower for projects where offices and apartments are better mixed, i.e. with a smaller OAR. People need
more space for living than for working, and residences are usually combined with a certain number of amenities,
increasing the area required.
4.5
4.0
Canary Wharf
3.5
Broadgate
3.0
floor space index
2.5
2.0
exponential trend
La Défense
1.5
Zuidas
Bijlmer
1.0 Seine Rive Gauche
0.5
0.0
100 90 80 70 60 50 40
office apartm ent ratio
Figure 14.14: Relationship between the FSI and the OAR of the cases studied
It is difficult to impose a general FSI on urban projects such as the ones studied. Seine Rive Gauche and Zuidas
demonstrate that when the project covers a larger area, with mixed functions, the FSI can be around 1.4. When a
project is established on a smaller piece of land and mono-functional, as with Broadgate and Canary Wharf, a
considerably higher FSI is possible. As discussed previously, the calculation results for cases with a smaller
building site may however be misleading because a claim on the direct surroundings might be required for
residences and amenities. In the sensitivity tests presented further on, the comparison was executed on the basis
of functionally equal plans.
14.04.03 Environmental comparison
All environmental parameters - the use of land, building materials, building energy, and fuel for transport - were
translated to annual environmental cost. Table 14.05 presents the figures per capita, as well as overall
improvement factors.
Table 14.05: Environmental costs of the six cases

Env indicators London Paris Amsterdam
land use (GAP) -712 -730 -561 -605 -591 -513 euro/p
building materials 475 469 522 574 471 605 euro/p
building energy 2,312 2,263 2,547 2,770 2,273 2,943 euro/p
transport fuel 26 19 45 38 38 51 euro/p
INTEGRATED 2,101 2,021 2,553 2,778 2,191 3,087 euro/p
As can be seen, energy consumption is the most important aspect, followed by building materials. Being of the
same order as building materials, the environmental cost reduction as a result of the GAP can be significant. The
environmental costs of travel are strikingly small. Some sensitivity tests on environmental parameters will be
discussed further on.
Figure 14.17 presents the improvement factors calculated for the individual environmental criteria.
12.00
11.00 land use (GAP)
10.00 building materials
9.00 building energy
8.00 transport fuel
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Broadgate Canary Wf Rv Gauche La Défense Zuidas Bijlmer
Figure 14.17: The environmental improvement factors of the six cases
Figure 14.17 demonstrates that the environmental essence of intensive and multiple use of space can be best
found in the GAP (up to a factor 11.5 environmental improvement) and the reduction of transportation (up to a
factor 7.3). Compared to the environmental cost of materials and energy (see table 14.05) their influence on the
end result is limited. The environmental cost for land use however was based on minimum values found by
Vogtländer [2001].
The improvement factors for the use of building materials and energy consumption show no strong relationship
with the density. We did not analyse the real use of building materials and energy: these parameters were defined
by the average height of the buildings and showed a maximum difference by a factor of 1.2.
14.05 Sensitivity tests
14.05.01 Functional equity
As discussed previously, we also assessed the cases on the basis of functional equity, in terms of space equally
divided between offices, residences and amenities. This means that for all cases, the OAR needed to be 50% and
the PPR 20%, requiring addition of space to plans with a different division of functions, against average urban
densities for each function. Table 14.06 presents the spatial characteristics for the new 'integral' urban plans,
including the factors with respect to the original calculations.
The adjustments are most substantial to the London cases and to a smaller extent La Défense, as a result of their
predominant office function. The functionally diverse Zuidas needed to be least adjusted, as the factors of table
14.06 demonstrate. This also applies to Seine Rive Gauche.
Table 14.06: Spatial characteristics of the cases redefined for functional equity, and differences with the initial situation
indicator London Paris Amsterdam

characteristics
number of users 11,900 44,170 26,250 87,500 35,245 14,032 p
difference factor 2.23 2.21 1.21 2.67 1.07 1.55
3 2
GFA (gross floor area) 850 3,155 1,875 6,250 2,518 1,002 .10 m
GA (ground area) 143 483 220 1,254 217 165 ha
Table 14.07 presents the new spatial indicators and environmental improvement factors.
Table 14.07: Spatial characteristics and indicators for the cases redefined for functional equity
Env indicators London Paris Amsterdam
Broadgate Canary Wf Rv Gauche La Défense Zuidas Bijlmer
spatial indicators
density (p/ha) 83 91 119 70 162 85
floor space index (FSI) 0.59 0.65 0.85 0.50 1.16 0.61
improvement factors
land use (GAP) 1.66 1.83 2.39 1.40 3.24 1.71
building materials 1.05 1.03 1.05 1.03 1.04 1.05
building energy 1.08 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.08 1.08
transport fuel 1.57 1.57 2.20 1.22 3.67 1.57
INTEGRATED 1.22 1.23 1.29 1.16 1.36 1.22
original 1.49 1.51 1.33 1.33 1.41 1.28
For the dense yet relatively mono-functional cases (Canary Wharf, Broadgate and La Défense), the very high
initial densities of table 14.03, both in terms of persons per hectare and FSI, have dropped to levels not much
higher than average urban plans. The environmental performance has also significantly deteriorated by
approximately 20%. It should be remarked, however, that he additional area compensating for lack of multiplicity
was based on average densities. It is imaginable that they would have been solved in comparable densities as the
original plans. This is however not certain, making use of average values defendable. The mixed areas (Zuidas
and Seine Rive Gauche) show only limited decrease of the initial integrated factor as residences and amenities
have already been integrated in the intensive and multiple concept. This proves a successful strategy.
14.05.02 A higher ecological value of land
Sensitivity tests were also executed on the environmental cost of land preserved outside the cities. As discussed,
a minimum annual value of 4 euro per m2 was initially used. If this value were increased, land use (i.e. the GAP)
would become more influential on the end result. As we converted the determined GAP to a discount value in
terms of environmental cost, it is theoretically possible that the integrated environmental cost becomes negative.
This would occur for Canary Wharf and Broadgate if the annual ecological land value would exceed 15 e€/m2. For
the other cases a negative end result would occur with higher prices. Above 28 e€/m2, all cases - last joined by
Bijlmer - would end at a negative environmental cost value. This development would of course plead for a different
methodology, in which the environmental cost of the land occupied would be accounted, instead of the land
preserved.
In the case of an assessment on the basis of functional equity, the boundary value for land use leading to
negative end results would be considerably higher: 21 e€/m2 for Zuidas, up to 53 e€/m2 for La Défense.
14.05.03 Energy conservation
For the initial assessments, no energy conservation was taken into account for any of the cases. The influence of
the building height, as determined in chapter 11, was only accounted for in energy consumption. We recalculated
the environmental impact on the basis of reduced consumption of building energy. This improvement could be
realised through sustainable energy technologies in the buildings or on the urban scale.
As energy demonstrated to be decisive to the end-result, a reduction of its consumption would effectuate
significant overall improvement. Calculating with energy consumption reduced by 50%, which is a realistic value at
present, the integrated results would approximately improve to the same extent, i.e. by a factor of 2, leading to a
best total environmental improvement factor of 3.42 for Canary Wharf, and a worst one of 2.44 for Bijlmer. In case
of functional equity, the impact of energy preservation would be less influential yet still significant: the end results
would on project average improve by almost a factor of 1.9.
14.05.04 Different fuel prices
The ecological price for fuel in the initial assessments was 0.013 e€/MJ, as determined in chapter 12. The
influence of travel on the end-results was primarily very limited. If the environmental cost were increased by a
factor of 2, the end-result would on average alter by 2%, still no great influence. Only an increase by a factor of 5
or more would show a significant difference of 10% or more. In case of functional equity this difference would
even only occur after an increase of the ecological price by more than a factor of 10.
14.06 Conclusions
14.06.01 Findings for the use of space
The spatial indicators determined for the six cases indicated that great densities, in terms of the FSI and number
of people per hectare, are possible for individual cases. However, a general finding is: the larger the area the
lower the potential FSI, which is a result of the public space, infrastructure and amenities required for large areas.
Another finding is that a functionally mixed area in general achieves a lower FSI than a mono-functional one
directed at offices alone. The latter finding is supported by the recalculations on the basis of functional equity,
taking into account areas with an average urban division of offices, residences and amenities. For the cases
consisting predominantly of offices, an addition of space for residences and amenities therefore was taken into
account. Assessment of these redefined urban plans revealed that the potential density improvement is limited to
around three times the value of average urban plans.
14.06.02 Findings for sustainability
Intensive use of urban space, characterised by a high FSI, leads to great reductions of occupied land (and thereby
to preservation of green area outside the city) and fuel for transportation. For the intensive and multiple cases
presented in this chapter, the discount of environmental cost for the area of preserved land is of the same order of
environmental cost for building materials. On weighted average, the use of land was environmentally improved by
a factor of 5; however, considered on the basis of functional equity, this value was reduced to a factor of 2. The
great improvement factors found for transport fuel (up to a factor of 7 better than for average urban plans) hardly
influence the integrated end-results. The consumption of energy by buildings dominates these, and as stacking
potentially leads to improvement by only a factor of 1.2, with respect to the improvement factors for land and fuel,
the overall environmental performance of the cases is eventually limited. Nevertheless, the environmental
performance of all cases was at least 28% better than average urban plans. Canary Wharf and Broadgate
achieved the greatest integrated improvement by a factor of 1.5. The recalculations based on functional equity
demonstrate that the performance of mono-functional areas actually is considerably worse and that concepts of
multiple use of space that are simultaneously intensive - such as Zuidas and Seine Rive Gauche - offer the best
perspective for sustainability.
Testing the sensitivity for the ecological price of land outside the city, a greater than minimum value as used for
the initial assessments significantly alters the end-result for intensive urban plans enabling preservation of green
land outside the city. Assuming that the minimum land price applies to areas that are ecologically not very
important (most agricultural land and meadows), one could apply higher environmental cost to areas with a
greater biodiversity and rarity of species (e.g. natural forests and wetlands). In that case, finding building sites
inside the city and developing them for intensive and multiple uses is even more worthwhile than calculated for
this study.
The sensitivity tests on energy consumption emphasise the importance of energy consumption improvement on
the building scale yet also and rather on the urban scale, in order to profit from scale advantages and make
sustainable technologies viable.
14.06.03 Additional enhancements
For the case studies presented, the use of floor area was chosen indistinctive and taken equal to each specific
reference. In addition to the improvement factors determined, a reduced demand for office space (we assume that
a reduction of residential and space is not probable) would enable accommodation of more people in the urban
area, enhancing the results. These improvements to space efficiency inside buildings may be achieved through
efficient floor layouts and reductions of personal workplace area through innovative office concepts, as discussed
in Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work.
Functional diversity as accomplished through multiple use of space may be more advantageous than calculated.
As explained in chapter 12, an OAR of 0.50 can lead to 33% improved efficiency of parking space. Diversity is
also expected to lead to a long and efficient use of the area, including its technical utilities, which may be
combined to save materials and energy and which will be more efficiently used over time. The cases assessed did
not have accounts of an integrated approach to utilities for e.g. energy and water supply. We only know that
environmental and social issues are monitored and reported for Canary Wharf [Canary Wharf Group, 2002], and
that sustainability only played a role in the forming of ideas in the early development of Zuidas. It is therefore
reasonable to assume that none of the plans profited from the possibility to achieve additional environmental
improvements. This is an opportunity missed. Therefore, the findings presented do not describe the entire
potential of intensive and multiple use of space. Any improvement through a sustainable use of building materials
and energy may be an extra factor for multiplication.
Additional improvement in the dimension of time - longer building lifespans and re-use of buildings and their
components and materials - will also contribute to sustainability.
It should be clear that the integrated assessment and comparison of urban plans is a relatively young area, for
which the presented study formed one of the first explorative steps. Since comparable studies have hardly been
conducted in this field, the methodology applied to the cases is incomplete, contains uncertainties, and depends
partly on assumptions. Future research will enable application of more accurate data for the environmental impact
of urban projects.
The GAP
Without the consideration of land use effects, the improvement potential of an optimised use of space would not
have been in perspective with respect to the other parameters and possible drawbacks such as health issues. For
further methodological development, the appreciation of shifts of land use and their environmental cost should
however be studied any further, processed into official databases (which do not exist yet) and applied location-
specifically.
Travel
The method for the determination of transport fuel consumption is entirely based on one source [Newman &
Kenworthy, 1987], which makes it rather fragile. For a more robust assessment, further study of the influence of a
more or less intensive urban plan to travel behaviour is necessary. Furthermore, it needs to be confirmed whether
the intensity of a single plan leads to an environmentally more profitable travel pattern when the surrounding
areas and the city as a whole have a smaller density. In addition, no distinction has been made for the presence
and quality of public transport and parking facilities, both of which influence the travel behaviour of the users of an
area. Actual data of travel characteristics of the users of different urban plans would provide more information for
an enhanced methodology. Nevertheless, as our study indicates, user travel is not decisive for the environmental
performance of urban areas.
Another problem is the translation into environmental cost of the long-term effects of functional diversity and the
multi-functional potential of an urban plan. Therefore, a model would be required to estimate the time effects of
urban plans. This was already undertaken for separate office buildings (in chapter 07) but not yet for entire urban
plans.
In spite of these restrictions, the findings indicate that substantial environmental benefit can be created by means
of intensive and multiple use of space.
Results of other studies

Not really comparable to our study, Steadman [1998] conducted a study of the impact of four different scenarios
for the increase of built land in an area around the city of Swindon, UK:
A. Swindon as a compact city: containment and increased density of the main city area
B. High density dispersal of built space in the surrounding villages, combined with enhanced public transport
C. Limited peripheral expansion of Swindon
D. The trend: no explicit policy for land use and transport
Steadman used the TRANUS model [Wegener, 1994] to determine the impact of these scenarios to land use,
transport and energy consumption and found that scenarios A, B, and C performed better than the usual trend of
scenario D. Scenario A, the compact city, led to the smallest use of land, fuel and energy. However, he warned
that restrictions to building in peripheral areas or the hinterland of Swindon would lead to a drive of housing out of
town. The largest shift towards public transport was achieved by means of scenario B. The compacter scenarios A
and C only showed limited shifts.
Studies of Lau [2003] revealed that Hong Kong had good scores on many sustainability aspects, demonstrating
that dense urban areas perform well in environmental impact assessments.
REFERENCES FOR THE SPACE FACTOR
Literature
Beetstra F., Haas M., Loos R. van der & Abrahams R.; 'Monetarisering (in Dutch)', in: NIBE Research bv; Basiswerk
Duurzaam & Gezond Bouwen (F2.1/1-33); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2002
Beetstra F.F.; Het ECOLEMMA Model - Ecologische Eenheden Milieu-Monetair gewogen voor Aantasting in de bouw
(Bouwsteen 50) (in Dutch); Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands, 1998
Berghauser Pont M., Haupt P., Vegt J. van der & Kooij E. van der (ed.); FSI-GSI-OSR als instrument voor verdichting
en verdunning - Casestudy Nieuw West (in Dutch); PERMETA architecten / Bureau Parkstad, Amsterdam,
Netherlands, 2002
Berghauser Pont M. & Haupt P.; 'Ruimtegebruik gekwantificeerd (in Dutch)', in: Rooilijn, No. 1, 2002
Bertolini L. & Spit T.; Cities on Rails - The redevelopment of station areas; E & FN Spon, London, UK, 1998
Byrne J., Wang D., Lee H. & Kim J.D.; 'An equity- and sustainability-based policy response to global climate change',
in: Energy Policy 26-4, 1998 (335-343)
Canary Wharf Group plc; 'Environmental and Social Report 2000-2001', on website: www.canarywharf.com; Canary
Wharf Group plc., London, UK, 2002
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek); 2001 - Het jaar in cijfers (in Dutch); CBS, Netherlands, 2002a
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek); website: www.cbs.nl; CBS, Netherlands, 2002b
Coupland A. (ed.); Reclaiming the city - Mixed use development; E & FN Spon, London, UK, 1997
Diedrich L.; 'La Défense: teures Pflaster mit Konzept (in German)', in: Topos, December, 1998 (72-79)
DRO (Dienst Ruimtelijke Ordening) Amsterdam; Visie Amsterdam Zuidas - Stand van zaken maart 2002 (in Dutch);
DRO, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002
Duquesnoy F.F. & Tanis H.; Strategisch huisvestingsbeleid in de zorgverzekeraarsbranche (master thesis, in Dutch);
Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Netherlands, 2002
Durmisevic S.; Perception aspects in underground spaces using intelligent knowledge modelling; DUP Science, Delft,
Netherlands, 2002
Fay R.; 'NABERS: Environmental rating as a reporting strategy', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.),
(280-288 (CD-rom)); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Gemeente Amsterdam; Centrumgebied Amsterdam Zuidoost - Stedenbouwkundig Plan Augustus 1997 (in Dutch);
Gemeente Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1997
Hannay P.; 'Big Bang Broadgate - Die Entstehung eines Burogiganten in London (in German)', in: Baumeister, No. 11,
1991 (19-25)
IPCC Working Group I; Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis (Technical Summary); IPCC: www.ipcc.ch, 2001
14041:1998(E)); ISO/FDIS, 1998
Johan Matser Projectontwikkeling, Multi Vastgoed, Intermezzo, HBG Vastgoed & Fortis; Due South - Wonen aan de
Zuidas (in Dutch); Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1997
Koolhaas R. et al.; S, M, L, XL; Taschen, Köln, Germany, 1997
Koolhaas R.; 'TGV Station Lille (in Dutch)', in: Gall S. et al. (eds.), Stedebouw in beweging (146-156); 010 Publishers,
Lau S.S.Y.; 'Sustainable development in Hong Kong: policy, building design and construction', in: Yang J., Brandon
P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built
Environment (SASBE 2003) (72-81, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane,
Australia, 2003
Lindeijer E.W., Kampen M. van, Fraanje P.J., Dobben H.F. van, Nabuurs G.J., Schouwenberg E.P.A.G., Prins A.H.,
Dankers N. & Leopold M.F.; Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA; Rijkswaterstaat, Dienst
Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1998
Liu J., Daily G.C., Ehrlich P.R. & Luck G.W.; 'Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and biodiversity',
in: Nature 421 (530-533); Nature AOP, published online 12 January, 2003
Newman P.W.G. & Kenworthy J.R.; Gasoline consumption and cities - A comparison of U.S. cities with a global survey
and some implications; Murdoch University, Murdoch, W.A., USA, 1987
Newman P. & Kenworthy J.; 'Sustainable Urban Form: The Big Picture', in: Williams K., Burton E. & Jenks M. (eds.),
Achieving Sustainable Urban Form (109-120); Spon Press, London, UK/New York, USA, 2001
E The Space Factor - References for The Space Factor 337

NIBE; '581 Bedrijventerrein Moerdijkse Hoek - Verantwoorde visie voor zware industrie (in Dutch)', in: NIBE-blad, Year
2, No. 4 (34); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2000
NIBE; '584 Stevenshage, Dordrecht (in Dutch)', in: NIBE-blad, Year 3, No. 5 (2); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2001
Paris Rive Gauche; website: www.parisrivegauche.com; 2002
Priemus H., Nijkamp P. & Dieleman F.; Meervoudig ruimtegebruik - Stimulansen en belemmeringen (in Dutch); Delft
University Press, Delft, Netherlands, 2000
Punkki J. & Pääjärvi R.; 'Development of Cost-Effective Sustainable Building', in: Proceedings 2nd International
Finland, 2003
Rosehaugh Stanhope Developments plc.; Broadgate; Penhurst Press, UK, 1988
Steadman P.; 'Some doubts about the 'compact city': experiments with an urban land use, transport and energy model',
in: Proceedings COST C4 Final Conference, 1998
Steemers K.; 'Energy and the city - Density, buildings and transport', in: Energy and buildings 35 (3-14); Elsevier
Science, London, UK, 2003
Steinema D.; 'Poseidon roeit de Fryske Alvestêde' (in Dutch/Frisian); Poseidonpost, August, 2003
Stichting Natuur en Milieu; Personenverkeer en milieu (in Dutch); Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Utrecht, Netherlands,
2001
Suddle S.I.; 'Multiple use of space using Bayesian Networks - Safety assessment of third parties during construction',
in: Bedford & Gelder van (eds.), Proceedings European Safety and Reliability Conference ESREL 2003, Vol. 2 (1519-
1526); Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, The Netherlands, 2003
Suddle S.I. & Waarts P.H.; 'The Risk of Safety - An integration of psychological and mathematical approaches', in: Risk
Decision and Policy, 3 October, 2003
Suddle S., Wilde Th.S. de & Ale B.J.M.; 'The 3rd dimension of risk contours in multiple use of space', in: ESReDA 23rd
seminar, Decision analysis: methodology and application for safety of transportation and process industries, 2002 (12)
Veldhoen E.; Kantoren bestaan niet meer / versie 2.0 - Een vitale organisatie in een digitale werkomgeving (in Dutch);
Uitgeverij 010, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1998
Vogtländer J.G.; The model of Eco-costs/Value Ratio - A new LCA based decision support tool; Gopher, Groningen,
Netherlands, 2001
Voordt D.J.M. van der & Wegen H.B.R. van; Sociaal veilig ontwerpen - Checklist ten behoeve van het ontwikkelen en
toetsen van (plannen voor) de gebouwde omgeving (in Dutch); Publikatieburo Bouwkunde, Delft, Netherlands, 1990
Vos P.G.J.C. & Voordt D.J.M. van der; 'Tomorrow's offices through today's eyes - Effects of office innovation in the
working environment', in: Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002 (48-65)
Wagenaar M.; Stedebouw en burgerlijke vrijheid - De contrasterende carrières van zes Europese hoofdsteden; Thoth,
Bussum, Netherlands, 1998
Wegener M.; 'Operational urban models: state of the art', in: Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 60, No.
1, Winter, 1994 (17-29)
Wilde Th.S. de; Meervoudig ruimtegebruik en spoorweginfrastructuur - Gebiedsontwikkeling en voorbeeldprojecten (in
Dutch); Holland Railconsult, Utrecht, Netherlands, 2002a
Wilde Th.S. de; 'Multiple land use in railway station areas', in: Brebbia C.A., Martin-Duque J.F. & Wadhwa L.C. (eds.),
The Sustainable City II - Urban Regenation and Sustainability (305-314); WIT Press, Wessex, UK, 2002b
For the spatial assessment of the twelve government office buildings, the specific literature for the office buildings
case study mentioned in Volume B - The Basis was also studied.
Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Sebastiaan de Wilde, PhD-researcher on the topic of multiple use of space around railway stations and partner in crime
on the case studies presented in chapter 14 and on the disentanglement of issues of multiple and intensive use of
space and their impact on sustainability.
Amal Chatterjee, teacher of scientific English at Delft University, for commenting on the English of the article that
formed the basis of chapter 12.
Jo Edwards, architect at PTEA in London, for reading and commenting on the English of the article that formed the
basis for chapter 14.
Maurits Kapenga, academic guest teacher at Universidade Católica de Goiás (UCG) and urban planner of CMK
Arquitetura e Urbanismo in Goîania, Brasil, for commenting on the two articles that founded chapter 12 and 14.
338 References for The Space Factor - E The Space Factor

Furthermore, I would like to thank Martijn Arets, Kees van der Linden, and the persons of the Dutch Government
Buildings Agency (DGBA) mentioned at the end of Volume B - The Basis, who cooperated with us on the office
buildings case study.
Scientific journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Wilde S. de; 'Space use optimisation and sustainability - Environmental assessment of
space use concepts', in: Journal of Environmental Management; Elsevier Science, Oxford, UK, submitted, expected
2004
Wilde S. de & Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Space use optimisation and sustainability - An international comparison of
cases', in: Journal of Environmental Management; Elsevier Science, Oxford, UK, submitted, expected 2004
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Wilde Th.S. de; 'Space use and sustainability - Environmental assessment and
comparison of urban cases of optimised use of space', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of
the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (314-322, CD-rom);
University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
technology', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1501-1508);
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Linden A.C. van der & Ravesloot C.M.; 'Defining the reference for environmental
performance', in: Anson M., Ko J.M. & Lam E.S.S. (eds.), Advances in Building Technology, Volume II (1509-1516);
Wadhwa L.C. (eds.), The Sustainable City II - Urban Regenation and Sustainability (305-314); WIT Press,
Conference Building Sustainable Cities, Venezia; University of Salford, UK, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Arets, M.; 'Effective sustainable building - Case studies', in: Syllabus PAO-cursus Het
ontwikkelen van duurzame gebouwen, 26 en 27 november 2002; Stichting Postacademisch Onderwijs Civiele Techniek
en Bouwtechniek, Delft, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Duurzame stedebouw kan veel opleveren maar vereist een innovatieve aanpak - Het
Nieuwegeinse binnenstadsproject als testcase voor duurzame herstructurering (in Dutch)', in: Boone M. (ed.), Dubo
Jaarboek 2000 (130-134); Aeneas, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Expert journals
Wilde Th.S. de & Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den; 'Sustainability and the use of urban space - Environmental
assessment of intensive and multiple use of space', in: Nova Terra, Year 4, No. 2, June (17-21); Nirov, The Hague,
Netherlands, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Wilde S. de; 'Duurzaam ruimtegebruik (in Dutch)', in: Nieuwsbrief Duurzaam Bouwen, No. 3,
Year 6, July (1-3); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2003
Dobbelsteen A. van den & Klaase D.; 'Duurzaamheid vereist een effectieve aanpak van stedebouw - The paradigm
shift (3) (in Dutch)', in: Real Estate Magazine, No. 21 (23-27); Arko Uitgeverij bv, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2002
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Hsb maakt uitbreiding op het dak mogelijk - De duurzame transformatie van zorgcentrum
Wiemersheerd in Loppersum (in Dutch)', in: nijgh Hout in de Bouw, No. 5, July/August (26-29); Nijgh Periodieken BV,
Schiedam, Netherlands, 2001
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Innovatieve aanpak duurzaam bouwen in Nieuwegein (in Dutch)', in: NIBE-blad, Year 2, No.
3 (4); NIBE, Naarden, Netherlands, 2000
E The Space Factor - References for The Space Factor 339

340 References for The Space Factor - E The Space Factor

Front page
Cell phones waiting to be collected by their users in a central
recharge closet in an innovatively organised office. For
optimal working conditions, non-territorial workplaces require
sophisticated information and communication technologies.
Personal cell phones and laptops more often replace the
solution shown, enabling access anywhere.
The Organisation
of Office Work
19 G
the end
F
assessm ent
the organisation
15 16 17 18
m ethodology
sustainability
foroffice
concepts
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
factor
09 08 07 C
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
the beginning
15 WORK CONCEPTS & SUSTAINABILITY
This chapter describes the context of office work solutions and their influence on sustainability. It is an introduction
to the office worker concept assessments discussed in chapters 17 and 18, and the preceding methodology
presented in chapter 16.
Figure 15.01: The afternoon traffic jam of commuters going home, in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Contents

15.02 The modern office 349
15.02.01 New solutions for office accommodation 349
15.02.02 Office innovation 351
15.03 The troubles and blessings of office innovation 352
15.03.01 Practical examples of innovating organisations 352
15.03.02 Costs and benefits of office innovation 355
15.03.03 Healthy doubts about new office concepts 356
15.04 And the environmental impact? 358
All REFERENCES for Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work can be found on pages 443 to 446.
346 15 Work concepts & sustainability - F The Organisation of Office Work

15.01 Introduction
Office work concepts and their influence

In this and the following chapters of Volume F I will climb another step upwards in the hierarchy of decisions in the
accommodation process. After exploring the impact of the building design and its technology, as well as the use of
space that precedes these, I will now focus on the aspect that defines the use of space: the organisation of office
work. The different ways in which office work can be organised are called office work concepts.
When studying the impact of office work concepts, more elements need to be taken into account beside the
building and its technology. First, as mentioned, the size and even the design of the eventual building is an effect
of the chosen office work concept. The way office work is organised however also influences the daily pattern of
employees and the characteristics of their commuter and business travel. In chapter 02, the different central and
telework office types were already introduced. When an organisation applies telework principles, it uses and
consequently influences the use of space, materials, and energy in telework offices, as well as commuter travel to
and from every office involved. Moreover, it affects the distances and the time used for business travel.
Therefore, the entire potential of new concepts for office work lies in the use of the central and telework offices
and employee travel related to commuting and business purposes. When assessing office work concepts, all of
these needed to be taken into account, complicating the assessment, however providing a better and more
integral indication of the achievable environmental improvement.
Travel and office concepts

In the office buildings case study presented in chapter 06, only physical aspects of the offices were taken into
account. The way the office was organised and how their employees travel to and from work and possibly spend
working time at other places were not included. As already mentioned, commuter travel was originally assessed
by means of the used assessment tool.
In his normal life, the office employee undertakes different forms of travel, divided into commuter travel and
business travel (both related to work), travel for basic needs, to shops, and travel for leisure purposes, including
holidays. This is illustrated graphically by figure 15.02.
Figure 15.02: Travel patterns of ordinary people as office employees, between work, shops and leisure
In the case of a traditional office work concept, these forms of travel are clearly separated: the person either works
and travels to and from the office, or he is shopping, or he is on his way to or from something recreational. The
latter two of these may be combined, but in a traditional sense commuter travel is clearly discernable.
In case of an innovative concept based on telework, these relationships are different and blurred. When working
closer to home, employees are more easily tempted to combine business activities with personal matters, such as
shopping and relaxing. There is no problem with that because it means a more efficient use of time and avoidance
of travel, under the assumption that the employee does what he would do anyway, at another time. This last
assumption however seems to be wrong since sources report increased 'informal' travel as a result of telework:
F The Organisation of Office Work - 15 Work concepts & sustainability 347

"granny is visited unexpectedly" [Dewever, 2003] as the employee is in the neighbourhood anyway. This implies
an unfavourable compensation for the reduction of travel undertaken for business purposes.
When assessing new office concepts based on telework, these side effects should be ignored because they are
not related directly to the function of office work. Moreover, the individual behaviour will be unpredictable and
differ significantly as there will also be employees who at best roam the local area by foot or bike. In the
assessments presented further on I therefore had to restrict mobility to business-related travel.
Boundaries
As a kind of continuation of the offices introduced in chapter 02, in this chapter, the development of modern
offices will be discussed, including the financial and functional reasons for the switch from a traditional way of
working to an innovative concept. However, organisational matters will not be elaborated on. As explained in
chapter 01, as a restriction to the vast explorable and analysable field, this research focused on the 'hard',
measurable factors of office accommodation. It only considers the organisation of office work in terms of the
quantities of space, materials, energy, and fuel for transportation used and saved. The potential of a new way of
working needed to be determined, regardless of everyone's personal implementation of it. Analogue to the
argument posed for travel, the involvement of the intangible aspect of personal behaviour would have complicated
the research seriously. Besides, it is more of a matter of business management, economy, sociology, and
psychology, rather than development, design and engineering of office accommodation.
The assessment approach is therefore - alas - more conceptual than actual. However, as I understand the
essence of work processes behind the accommodation, the results will always be put into a human perspective.
People versus organisations

I needed to clarify this because when discussing the studies presented in this volume with the former
Environmental Inspector of the DGBA, Marcel Dewever, he asked why I had not compared different types of office
workers, fictitious yet realistic persons with a certain work pattern, ranging from the wealthy CEO with a luxurious
and unlimitedly large office and daily business flights, to the man processing tax forms in a room shared with ten
others and travelling to and from the office by bike every day. Marcel was right: these are the people that actually
do it: perform the office work that others model theoretically. So, ethically I agreed with him but had to stick with
office accommodation methodologically and therefore consider complete organisations, grey averages of the
colourful individuals that shape them.
The contemplation on this matter can perhaps be clarified graphically by figure 15.03. A person makes decisions
individually about his mobility from home, to the office yet also to other targets (at left). Within this influence is the
decision about how close to live from the office and how to travel to it. These activities are the responsibility of the
indiviual.
Figure 15.03: Commuter travel: personal decisions by the employee, and organisational decisions by the company
This research revolves around the other responsibility, namely of the office organisation (figure 15.03, at right).
This involves decisions that influence the sustainability of the company itself, for instance about whether to be
located close to clients or (potential) employees. This matter is regardless of the employee's personal completion

of the boundaries defined by the organisation. The company cannot be held responsible for the decision of an
employee to move away from the office and choose a SUV1 for transport.
It is the company's decisions on the office work concept that however embody the environmental improvement
potential. And that is what this research is about.
15.02 The modern office
In chapter 02, a brief history was given of office accommodation, ending with the combi-office, a typology to which
many modern offices still apply. New ways of working meant a different use of space, leading to adaptation and
enhancement of the combi-office layout, designing worksettings rather than workplaces. A few companies
developed layout typologies that separated specific office functions and put them in different spaces instead of on
the same floor, often seizing the opportunity to design these in artistical ways. They will be shown further on.
This section proceeds with recent and possible future developments in office accommodation.
15.02.01 New solutions for office accommodation
Towards innovative office concepts

In terms of office work, the 1990s brought business processes and the physical work environment together. The
focus was on a maximum utilisation of human resources, space and time through an increase of the occupation
rate, while trying to create effective work environments. In the past it may have been possible to ignore user
needs; however, with a shrinking working population in the Western world, firms had to work harder to attract
young talented people. This may require better payment and career opportunities, but also a more humane office
environment [Meel, 2000]. This, together with technological developments, economic considerations,
organisational developments, and external developments led to innovative office concepts or workplace
innovation. Workplace innovation is the process of introducing new elements in the physical working environment
or accommodation, ICT and other facilities, in order to fine-tune them to new ways of working [Voordt, 2003]. In
contrast to traditional personal workplaces without regard of the activities performed in them, innovative concepts
are directed basically at activity-related workplaces (see figure 15.04), which are subject to desksharing and
deskrotating.
autonomy absence
hive cockpit
combi hotel
social interaction
social interaction
(landscape) (cellular)
den
club cloister group
(group)
personal shared
Figure 15.04: Two workplace typology divisions related to innovative office concepts,
left by Duffy & Powell [1997], right by Voordt [2003]
Another effect from the shrinking and thereby expensive labour resources, enabled by various ICT applications, is
the distributed service provision: delegation of certain office activities (e.g. call centres) to countries with low
wages (e.g. India). Under the influence of disappearing time boundaries, collective knowledge spreads over the
world more easily.
1
Sports Utility Vehicle, large and heavy, fuel consumption approximately 1 liter/6 km, opposed to 1/15 by average European middle-
class cars.

The consequence for office accommodation

Merely as a result of the developments described, Juriaan van Meel [2000] observed three trends at the
workplace level:
1. Building more open and transparent layouts
2. The rise of the non-territorial office
3. Workplaces becoming increasingly virtual
The success of open layouts depends largely on cultural and psychological factors [Jonge, 1999]. The success of
the non-territorial office depends on the actual need for it and the gain of it. The last trend is a result of
telecommuting, through which offices can become smaller, merely functioning as meeting places for 'nomadic'
employees. The success of teleworking as the basis for it depends largely on psychological factors.
Telework
Telework is an implicit asset of most innovative office concepts, an element of the efficiency improvement of
organisations through working closer to home, or near the client. Telework concepts may have benefits for the
organisation but also for the employee himself. Becker [1994] summarised the benefits and barriers of working at
locations for flexible work, as well as the implications for facility management (see table 15.01).
Table 15.01: Benefits, barriers and facility management implications of locations for flexible work [Becker, 1994]
benefits barriers
more flexibility and control to the employees decreased communication with employees
traffic/telecommuting considerations decreased working as a team
work in the area that best suits the task decreased productivity in the central office
balance work and home life dissatisfaction due to giving up space
greater personal productivity [might be different] insurance questions for non-office locations
reduced space costs facility management implications
improved communications new information systems
increased employee satisfaction specific security issues
increased possibilities to recruit people best equipment, technology and furniture
Future offices
Through their survey of the Dutch office market, Eldonk et al. [2001] reported that the future office will feature:
More focus on charisma: special architecture on sight, at nodes of infrastructure, with innovative office
concepts, a semi-public place for encountering colleagues and finding company culture, apt to attract and
captivate high-quality personnel (see figure 15.05).
A higher quality level of facilities: accommodation-related services (maintenance, security, ICT), services
related to the organisation (reception, reproduction, meeting rooms), and employee services (sport, child
care, shopping - see again figure 15.05) as secondary labour conditions
Functional, technical, and financial flexibility: with an expected claim on flexible space (50%), on-demand
space (20%), leaving 30% to traditional fixed space.
Balance between efficiency (get more from real estate) and effectiveness (get more from employees):
savings on ICT have a relatively small influence on the overall costs, yet are essential to the functioning of
personnel (forming 60% of the costs).
Following the needs of modern office developments, the European Community financed the research programme
SANE (Sustainable Accommodation for the New Economy), which studied the impact of the new economy on
people, process, place, and technology, in order to identify new ways of accommodating work [Harrison, 2002].
The goal of the project was a unified framework for the design of sustainable workplaces in Europe, based on
location-independent computing and ubiquitous networking, with a focus on sustainable, collaborative workplaces
for knowledge workers.

Figure 15.05: The modern high-quality office worker needs employee services to stay captivated and productive
In his report on SANE, Harrison stated that the 2000s will be characterised as a decade of larger organisational
networks, with attempts to use scarce resources and time more effectively and manage a dispersed workforce.
According to Harrison, new concepts of shared workplaces and shared space are part of the future: in Western
countries, office organisations become more fluent, work can be executed at different locations, and employees
become more flexible in working schedules, sharing work and literal tele-communication (communication at a
distance). Chapter 18 will discuss more on the outcome of the SANE-project.
15.02.02 Office innovation
Objectives for innovation

For office organisations, objectives for innovative concepts are performance improvement (more effective and
efficient use of accommodation, ICT and other facilities), cost reduction, improvement of labour productivity,
satisfaction of employees or attraction and retention of rare personnel, and a positive image [Voordt, 2003]. Some
office consultants promote concepts such as teleworking, desk-sharing and non-territorial offices as something
inevitable rather than futuristic [Regterschot, 1995].
These findings demonstrate that an improvement of environmental performance, is in no way an argument for a
shift from traditional to innovative concepts. This might seem disappointing; however, it actually provides the
opportunity to incorporate sustainability without external influences. That is of course if office innovation proves to
be more sustainable, something found through the assessments presented in chapter 17 and 18.
Penetration of new office concepts in the Netherlands

By 1998 the Netherlands had the greatest proportion of people teleworking in Europe (9.1%) [European
Commission, 1999]. It might therefore be useful to further analyse the Dutch situation. Beside the amount of
people teleworking, a similar proportion of Dutch organisations are working with new office concepts without
telework, such as desksharing (see table 15.02). The Dutch economy still has the greatest proportion of people
working part-time, meaning 4 days a week or less. In order to use human resources, space and other capital
efficiently, this figure logically has urged organisations to avoid unoccupied workplaces.
At the relatively low Dutch rent levels space-saving office innovation hardly saves any costs [Troost, 1998].
Therefore, consultants see office innovation as a tool to increase productivity or to change the culture of an
organisation rather than as a means to save costs [Vollebregt, 1998]. This may explain why relatively expensive
concepts such as the combi-office are popular in the Netherlands. The next question is whether innovative
concepts indeed lead to improved productivity, which will be discussed in the following section.

Table 15.02: Transition of new office concepts in the Netherlands [source: Antwerpen & Hermans, 1998]
stage of transition proportion
working with new concepts 9%
experimenting with new concepts 4%
studying new concepts 3%
thinking about new concepts 15%
not thinking about new concepts 69%
Forerunners and followers

In the Netherlands, the boost in office innovation was incited by a few organisations, halfway the 1990s:
companies of management consultants such as Andersen Consulting and Twijnstra Gudde (nowadays: Twynstra
Gudde - mark the difference…) [1996], the DGBA [Rgd, 1996], and insurance company Interpolis [1997]
presented new ways of working and accommodating office work almost simultaneously with the publication of
Francis Duffy's much acclaimed book The New Office [Duffy & Powell, 1997]. Especially companies for dynamic
markets, such as ICTs, followed the examples of these forerunners. However, the switch was not made as widely
as perhaps was expected.
The following figures show that the innovative cases led to spatial efficiency [Voordt, 2003]:
Interpolis, Tilburg: 23.2 m2 GFA per employee, although this figure might be smaller now (see further on)
Andersen Consulting, Amstelveen: 8.4 m2 GFA per employee, with 85% of employees often working outside
The DGBA Dynamic Office: 20% space reduction [Vos, 1997]
Chamber of Commerce, Rotterdam: 20% space reduction
KPN Telecom, The Hague: 1 workplace per 1.25 employees, i.e. a so-called flexfactor of 80% [Ramnath,
2001]
The Dynamic Office and Interpolis will be briefly discussed in the following section.
15.03 The troubles and blessings of office innovation
15.03.01 Practical examples of innovating organisations
The Dynamic Office of the DGBA

The DGBA was one of the initiators and stimulators of office innovation, experimenting with, for instance, satellite
offices (e.g the one in Arnhem assessed in chapter 06), the 'office hotel' in The Hague, and the innovative
'Dynamic Office' in Haarlem (figure 15.06 and 15.07).
Figure 15.06 (left): View from the Dynamic Office in Haarlem, Netherlands to the railway station next to it
Figure 15.07 (right): Roof terrace of the Dynamic Office

Much to the effort of the director at the time the Dynamic Office was accomplished in spite of the initial resistance
of employees who were fond of their personal desks,. Only a few personal workplaces were assigned to
permanent staff; the building mainly contained shared and non-territorial workplaces (figure 15.08) but also luxury
spaces for relaxing and informal meetings (figure 15.09). Personnel were expected to work at home regularly.
Figure 15.08 (left): A shared desk at the Dynamic Office in Haarlem, Netherlands - notice the personal trolley
Figure 15.09 (right): A luxury room for informal meetings in the same office
As the organisation in the Dynamic Office was monitored by the Delft University of Technology [Vos, 1997-1999],
a lot of information was obtained about the functionality of the concept, as discussed in the following subsection.
Since the delivery in 1997, over time, resistance has grown against the working conditions at the office. This was
related to certain developments and one specific feature of the organisation involved: an increasing number of
people were accommodated in the building, because of which many of the open spaces were used for hot-
desking, while too many people kept coming to the office instead of working at home.
For the Dynamic Office, the present flexfactor of 56% (0.56 workplace per employee) seemed too small. The
extent of office innovation may however be more successful to dynamic organisations.
Interpolis
In 1996 and 1997, the Dutch insurance company Interpolis chose to change its image and organisation radically.
With the construction of a new headquarters in Tilburg (figure 15.10 and 15.11), an innovative concept was
introduced on the basis of non-territorial workplaces, combined with well-organised telework facilities at the homes
of employees with a part-time appointment or who wished for home office facilities.
Figure 15.10 (left): View of the Interpolis headquarters in Tiburg, Netherlands

Figure 15.11 (right): Main hall of Interpolis

The main tower of the office consists of combi-office floors, with a variety of spaces for work and consultancy
(figure 15.12 and 15.13).
Figure 15.12 (left): The stairs with a central and connective function in the office tower of Interpolis
Figure 15.13 (right): Corner for consultation and quick work
The concept may be called a success, since the non-territorial space has been enlarged by a complete
transformation of the first floor to sophisticated meeting rooms and spaces (figure 15.14 and 15.15) and seven
completely different club offices designed by artists (see, for instance, figure 15.16 and 15.17).
Figure 15.14 (top, left): Sophisticated presentation facilities in a meeting room in Interpolis
Figure 15.15 (top, right): Open space for consultation
Figure 15.16 (bottom, left): The Pub Club Office
Figure 15.17 (bottom, right): A flowery place
The implementation process has succeeded well: 90% of the employees do not want to return to the situation
before 1996/1997 [Braaksma, 2003]. An important element of the success lies in the combined transformation of

the old management structure: the company went from a 7-layers to a 4-layers management structure, and the
executives joined in the sole use of non-territorial office space. Interpolis therewith complied with the
recommendation of Dewulf & Vos [1998] that the management board should set an example for their personnel.
The flexfactor of Interpolis is 75%, so there are relatively more workplaces per employee than in the DGBA-case.
At the moment of writing, another approximately 500 people from another office building were to be joined with the
headquarter personnel, intensifying the use of workplaces. Nevertheless, because of the integral approach to
work at the central office and at telework offices, among which the employees' homes, the success is most likely
to be sustained. The flexfactor for the Dynamic Office mentioned previously does not necessarily mean a 'beyond-
limit' value: chapter 18 will discuss a flourishing existing company with a flexfactor below 50%.
15.03.02 Costs and benefits of office innovation
Theo van der Voordt [2003] studied the influence of workplace innovation on labour satisfaction, labour
productivity, and management costs. The text of this subsection is based mainly on his findings.
Labour satisfaction
Voordt found that the impact of workplace innovation on labour satisfaction is ambivalent. Positive effects were
advanced ICT and layout, freedom, and communication; negative effects were lack of privacy, excess of stimuli,
and lack of status, identity, and personalisation.
Well-functioning technology, favourable circumstances for concentration and interaction, and a correct number of
employees per workplace are decisive for a positive experience of office innovation. Furthermore, a positive
reception of innovation is facilitated through a careful implementation process, the commitment of executives, an
enthusiastic triggerer, clear communication lines and decision processes, a good balance between bottom-up and
top-down processes, a comfortable indoor climate with possibilities for individual control, and appropriate
supporting services.
Labour productivity
Measurement of labour productivity is still relatively complicated, and there are not many tools or methods
available. Table 15.03 presents measures that led to significant productivity improvements (10% or more), found
by Kaczmarczyk & Morris [2002]. Voordt [2003] nevertheless found that the effects are also ambivalent,
depending on the specific situation.
Table 15.03: Measures that lead to a productivity improvement by 10% or more [Kaczmarczyk & Morris, 2002]
solution productivity improvement
telework 22%
quality of layout 15%
renovation 25%
ergonomic furniture 21%
green surroundings 15%
better lighting 12%
noise reduction 20%
better indoor climate 10%
individual influence 16%
A conscientious approach to the working environment, improved communication, concentration cells, the home
office, and a professional technological infrastructure were positive effects of workplace innovation. Health also
plays an important role in this: Eley Associates [2001] found that healthy buildings lead to better work
performances, findings that are supported by many other studies [e.g. Mendell et al., 2002; Fanger, 2002; Bell et
al., 2003].
Voordt found that negative effects associated with technology were concentration, acclimatisation, ICT problems,
and time loss for logging onto computer systems and searching of information.

Management costs
The impact of workplace innovation on costs per employee clearly turns out to be favourable. As a result of fewer
workplaces and a smaller use of space, reduced energy consumption, savings on general maintenance, and
internal movement costs, cost savings are great. Sometimes, savings are however fully spent on workplaces.
Negative cost effects are related to the implementation process, refurbishment, ICT, external workplaces, and the
intensive management and maintenance of non-territorial workplaces.
Voordt remarked that there were still measurement problems and that little empiric research had been executed.
The long-term effects are unknown, as is the influence of technological aspects.
15.03.03 Healthy doubts about new office concepts
Just positive?
History shows that the course of office architecture is driven by new office concepts. As Meel noticed [2000], the
development of new office working environments often results in the description of progress and glorification of
benefits: more productive, cost-efficient, more flexible. However, Vos & Voordt [2002] found that the labour
satisfaction and productivity in the case of innovative concepts does not always lead to acclamation. New
concepts are more accepted for their novelty, aesthetics, and prestige rather than for the real reasons (does it
actually do the job?) [Meel, 2000].
As a consequence of the developments that primarily seem liberation from the yoke of the labour parole,
employees need to take more responsibility for their own work, which can turn out positive or negative. Not every
function is apt for this new office work and not every person is able to cope with new labour freedom. Moreover,
the accommodations specifically designed for office innovation do not always satisfy their users. Some employees
working in the modern, open-plan Villa VPRO (of a Dutch broadcasting company) in Hilversum, Netherlands, find
it impossible to concentrate and work in an open building where people are moving around constantly, making
calls and conferring [Zwaap, 1997; Amsberg et al., 1998]. In addition, Pullen [2003] introduced the term 'grey
negligence' for the tendency of people working in innovative environments to spend more time on coffee pauses,
toilets, and cigarettes, as a means to avoid working.
Output and quality control

In the case of telework principles, instead of their presence, the productivity and quality of work by employees
needs to be measured. Since permanent control is not possible, if even desirable, deadlines, sale or turnover
targets, work production quantities, or other output data enables measurement of these indicators when an
employee works outside the office for relatively long periods. However, not every office function can be measured
in output easily. Some functions will remain bound to personal contact and control by superiors.
Psychology
People spend 30% of their time on sleeping, and 20% is spent indoors at home. Of our entire lifetime, we work
eight years in total (see figure 15.18). Western office workers spend approximately 25% of their life at the office.
This seems to give enough reasons for a pleasant working environment.
One of the main problems of the developments described is privacy, or rather the lack of it, at the central office
and in more informal places. Privacy, a personal territory and individual influence on the environment are three of
the five basic psychological needs of people [Vroon, 1990] that are under pressure in new office concepts. In
public spaces, the lack of privacy is often solved by mental seclusion, for instance by means of sunglasses and
headsets for walkmans or radios. Cars have always been a means of escape from working and other
environments. However, since this form of transport is used increasingly for both personal and business purposes,
mobile phones and modern commodities for cars (such as video-conferencing, Internet access, and GIS
positioning systems) draw the personal car into the working environment. An impact of working in these instant
offices designed non-ergonomically may be physiological problems, such as repetitive strain injuries (RSI).

Figure 15.18: Billboard in the Universum Science Center in Bremen, Germany: "we work 8 years of our lifetime"
The counter-movement
The developments described therefore do not lead to greater productivity necessarily. This will only be the case if
telework principles were applied to employees that profited already from an enhanced freedom of work. The
limited advantage to other employees and the organisation as a whole therefore has led to counterstreams that
plead a return to old working standards. A well-known example is the German Judith Mair [2002], who defies what
she calls fashionable playground offices and pleads for fixed working hours without over-time working, clear tasks,
hierarchies and decorum, as well as the re-introduction of uniforms at the office.
The fresh, shining, dynamic employee… or not?

Extreme as it may seem, Mair has a point when applied to office employees who generally work at a central office,
who get nervous when thinking about working at home, who hardly travel for business purposes, who operate less
independently or cannot even operate without direct supervision, and who basically consider office work as a
means to earn money for living and nothing more. In other words, for whom work never becomes an objective of
life. See it the way you want, ideas on new office concepts always come from independent people who work at the
frontier of new developments, who fulfill creative jobs and travel a lot. With all respect and no preferences for
office functions, I have never seen a sparkling vision on office work development from an average tax office
employee.
People like me enjoy working indepently, like working at different locations and traveling. To them, new office
concepts are like a refreshing dive in the sea in a thrilling sunny environment (figure 15.19). However, their work
excites them and perhaps they are blessed to be able to concentrate in turbulent places, at odd times and with
office noise or even booming music on. However, I am afraid that this is not a general characteristic among office
personnel. Most people just want a clear and structured life and a personal workplace that is always there for
them.
Moreover, recent measurements of Dutch office organisations [Eldonk et al., 2001] indicated that five years after
the wide presentation of innovative office concepts approximately 80% of office personnel still work at the central
office. Eldonk et al. expected the proportion of employees that work at home or elsewhere to increase, yet not
significantly. People and organisations hardly change, and when they do, it is done slowly…

Figure 15.19: The Holiday Office: working outside, in a thrilling environment - the best place
15.04 And the environmental impact?
In this chapter, office work concepts have been discussed without their influence on sustainability. The literature
available about office accommodation and office concepts rarely considers environmental themes: most are
directed at functional, financial, or spatial and architectural aspects of office accommodation. Some succeed to
mention that telework solutions might reduce commuter travel and thereby improve the environmental
performance of office work, however always without good reference to research based on environmental
assessments.
The possibilities for environmental improvement of the office building (its shape, height, technical design etc.)
have been explored in previous chapters. This also has been done for the use of space forming the basis for
office design, and the building lifespan defining the eventual performance. Now we need to take a step backward
in the accommodation process. The demand for space is defined by the office concept and accommodation
principle. Therefore, focussing on the building design, it seems worthwhile to determine the environmental impact
of different office work concepts. As already stated, not many researches have been conducted to reveal this.
Therefore, I needed to develop my own assessment methodology and base it on data available from previous
environmental assessments. Fortunately, I could use a lot from the case study presented in chapter 06.
The assessment methodology I developed to assess different office concepts for similar organisations will be
discussed in chapter 16. The actual assessment of traditional and telework-based office concepts will be
presented in chapter 17, and new solutions for the future will be discussed and, if possible, assessed in chapter
18.

16 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FOR OFFICE
CONCEPTS
This chapter is preparative for the environmental assessment and comparison of different office concepts, as
treated in chapter 17 and 18. The methodology, the office types, and the environmental criteria used in the
assessment will be explained and discussed. Step by step, the different reference values required for the
assessment will be determined. The end-result is an overview of typical - personal or spatial - reference values for
the different office types. Assumptions and uncertainties will be discussed as well.
Figure 16.01: An eaglehawk keeping a sharp eye on its environment

Contents
16.01 Scheme of the office concept comparison 361

16.01.01 Office concepts to be assessed 361
16.01.02 Office work variables 362
16.01.03 Assessment criteria 363
16.01.04 Structure of the ethodology 364
16.02 Reference values 364
16.02.01 The use of space 364
16.02.04 Transport means 368
16.03 Reference office buildings 369
16.03.01 Office space concepts selected 369
16.03.02 Typical values for office buildings 370
16.03.03 Occupation-related attribution of floor area 371
16.04 Reference employee travel 375
16.04.01 Business travel 375
16.04.02 Commuter travel per office place 376
16.05 Overview and discussion 378
16.05.01 Overview of determined reference values 378
16.05.02 Discussion on uncertainties 379
360 16 Assessment methodology for office concepts - F The Organisation of Office Work
16.01 Scheme of the assessment of office concepts
16.01.01 Office concepts to be assessed
The total number of office concepts

In chapter 02, the office was introduced as a working environment where people process information. Office work
concepts were divided between solutions for the place of office work, the space in which office work is done, and
the use concept of the workplace.
If all variables were combined, in total, 6 x 5 x 4 = 120 different concepts would be theoretically possible, not even
taking into account combinations of concepts for one organisation. Table 16.01 presents reasonable combinations
of concepts for place, space and use.
Table 16.01: Possible combinations of office place, space, and use concepts
SPACE USE PLACE

central guest satellite business home instant
office office office centre office office
personal ? ? X
cellular
shared ? X
non-territorial ? X X
plural X X X ? X
personal ? ? X X
group
shared ? X X
plural X X X X X
personal ? ? X
open-plan
shared ? X
plural X X X X X
personal ? ? X X
combi
shared ? X X
plural X X X X X
personal X X X X X X
free
shared X X X X X
non-territorial X X X X X
plural X X X X X X
In the central office, guest office, satellite office and business centre all types of space concepts are applicable,
except for free office space (though one could argue about working in a chair not specifically designed for office
work). In the case of the central office, these space concepts can be used in all four ways. The central office is the
only place where a plural workplace (more than one workplace, specifically allocated to one person) is imaginable:
either for someone with a high rank in the hierarchy (director) or for someone in a supporting function (technician,
network manager).
A personal workplace in a guest or satellite office (in fact, the satellite office is a guest office, hosted by the
organisation itself) is imaginable, in the case of a presence of more than four days per week (e.g. full-time
posting). In the case of 2- or 3-days telework, the guest office workplace will be shared among these part-time
employees.
In a business centre one normally hires a personal workplace in a cellular, group (e.g. in case of a project team),
open-plan (e.g. in case of a whole department or a small company, see figure 16.02), or possibly even a combi-
office setting. When large companies hire workplaces for a longer period they are able to apply the concept of
shared or non-territorial workplaces but this is not common.
F The Organisation of Office Work - 16 Assessment methodology for office concepts 361
Figure 16.02: Open-plan office layout in the Teleport Towers business center in Amsterdam
In the home office, workplaces are always personal or shared with partners, housemates or tenants. The home
and instant office are the only concepts that can have free office space, not designed or reserved for office work.
The instant office workplace is always non-territorial.
The scheme of table 16.01 shows reduction of the theoretically possible 120 office concepts to a maximum of 22
concepts. This number can be reduced further to 17 because the combi office usually is a combination of the four
space concepts (personal, shared, non-territorial and possibly plural).
Reduction of variables for the office concept study

A distinction between office space concepts (cellular, group, open-plan, combi, or free office) is not necessary
because the basis is a certain use of space per person. A distinction between office use concepts (personal,
shared, non-territorial, or plural office) would only be useful if space use reduction were required. Thus, just the six
main office place concepts remain, of which the central office may be combined with any of the other telework
concepts.
Therefore in the study presented, the following theoretical office concepts needed to be assessed:
The traditional office worker concept, which is the reference concept
The guest office worker concept
The satellite office worker concept
The business centre worker concept
The home office worker concept
The instant office worker concept.
16.01.02 Office work variables
Traditional versus telework concepts

This chapter forms the basis for a comparison of office concepts. The common element is similar office work by
the same type of organisation, yet organised differently.
In terms of this research, a comparison of office concepts basically is a comparison of traditional with more or less
innovative office work concepts. Traditional office work is done at the central office, from which business travel is
also committed. Since telework is defined as regular work (at least one day per week) outside the central office, in
another office2, innovative concepts always depend on one or more places for telework. The maximum number of
telework weekdays is chosen at 4, leaving a minimum of one day at the central office.
2
For the definition and description of the central office and other office place concepts, I refer to chapter 2 (PM).
Altering the number of teleworkers or days of telework

There are two basic ways to assess the influence of telework concepts on sustainability:
studying a greater or smaller number of employees teleworking for a certain, constant number of days;
studying the same number of employees teleworking a greater or smaller number of days a week.
A third possibility would be the combination of these two; this would however unnecessarily complicate the
assessment and make the comparison turbid. In this research, I chose to keep the number of employees suited
for telework constant and to alter the number of days that they are teleworking. Taking a commercial office
organisation as the basis, I assumed that 80% of the personnel have a commercial or another function
appropriate for telework.
16.01.03 Assessment criteria
In order to assess the environmental impact, the following criteria were studied:
The use of space
The use of building materials
Energy consumption
Employee travel
The importance of these will be explained in this section.
Consumption of water was left out of the comparison, because of its relative small importance to the
environmental load (see chapter 06) and because it is fully dependent on the number of office employees and
therefore constant in any of the compared cases and their references.
Use of space
As discussed in Volume E - The Space Factor, except for land use, the use of office space itself is hardly
translatable into environmental indicators. It however forms the basis for other aspects defining the environmental
performance of office accommodation. The personal floor area required for an office employee determines the
total demand for office space by an organisation, and together with the building design it defines the use of land,
the amount of building materials required, and the expected energy consumption of the building. Thus, before
these can be determined, for the office concept the total demand for space needs to be deduced.
The claim on land area can only be determined by the definition of a certain reference design for the office
building. Since there are many variables in office design, the use of land by office concepts was left out of the
comparison. It may however be approximated through the use of office floor space instead.
Use of building materials

Together with energy consumption, the use of building materials in the office building(s) is most directly relatable
to environmental indicators, by means of LCA data. Therefore, the amount of building materials per office concept
can be related to an average environmental performance per ton, m2, or person. Although the definitive selection
of building materials can have an important impact on the environmental performance (see Volume D - The
Technology Factor), taking into account different material alternatives would make the comparison too
complicated. The study presented in chapters 17 and 18 therefore was based on average values for the
environmental cost of office design. In order to find the full potential improvement, the results of the office concept
comparison however may be multiplied by the potential improvement factors for building materials.
Energy consumption
As found and presented in chapter 06, in the case of a lifespan of 75 years, the consumption of energy constitutes
almost 80% of the total environmental load of the office building. The influence of office concepts on the eventual
energy consumption therefore is significant. The average energy consumption per m2, or per person, can be
related to office space or personnel. Again, as with building materials, energy-efficient design strategies may play
an important role in the end-result but are not taken into account to reduce the number of variations. Again, the
results of the office concept comparison can be improvement factors for energy. For the environmental cost of
energy consumption I used average values.
Employee travel
In general, employee travel can be divided between individual transport by car, individual transport by bicycle or
foot, and public transport (by train, bus and tram).
The following aspects of travel have an environmental impact:
The use of fuel or electricity
Emission of exhaust gasses: CO2, NOx, SO2, lead, and other particles
The use of materials for cars, trains, trams, busses, and bicycles: e.g. steel, aluminium, plastics, and paint
The occupation of parking space and space on the road
Due to unclearly definable boundary conditions (in particular the transport means), and overlap with other
transport and urban functions (in particular space occupation), the assessment was restricted to the determination
of fuel consumption (in the unit of primary energy, MJ), emissions, and the environmental load of these.
16.01.04 Structure of the methodology
In a spreadsheet file most of the determination steps were made fully automatic, leaving a few key parameters
open for input. These starting parameters are:
The total number of employees
Proportional values for the use of space, materials and energy of every office type
Occupation rates of every office type
Proportional values for different forms of transport.
Division of subjects to chapter sections

The steps of the office concept assessment are graphically presented by table 16.02.
The preparatory work was presented in this section of the chapter. Section 16.02 will treat the determination of
typical reference values generally applicable to offices. The determination of typical values that are related to
different office place types will be dealt with in section 16.03 (for the office buildings) and 16.04 (for employee
travel). Not visible in the graph is section 16.05, in which I will discuss the assumptions and uncertainties.
Chapter 17 and 18 will discuss the last steps of the study: the assessment and comparison of more or less
innovative office concepts.
16.02 Reference values
In order to make calculation possible, data needed to be determined for the use of space, materials, energy and
transport fuel.
16.02.01 The use of space
The use of office space depends on the number of employees and the average floor area per employee. For the
personal use of space, two reference years were considered: 1990, reference year for environmental performance
assessments, and 2000, reference year for more modern offices. As determined in chapter 05, in the Netherlands,
in the year 1990 the personal use of GFA was approximately 28 m2. Based on Eldonk et al. [2001], an average
value of 24 m2 GFA per employee had been found for the year 2000.
Table 16.02: Structure of the office concept assessment

preparatory work
scheme of
comparison
selection of
assessment criteria
SPACE USE USE OF MATERIALS ENERGY CONSUMPTION EMPLOYEE TRAVEL
determination of general typical values
sources for basic figures (previous assessments, literature, deductions, estimations and assumptions)
personal spatial use of spatial consumption

performance per personal distance travelled
use of space building materials of energy (MJ/p.km; kg/p.km; e€/p.km)
(m2/p) (tons/m2; e€/m2) (MJ/m2; e€/m2)
determination of office type related typical values

selection of
office place types
personal spatial use of spatial consumption
use of space building materials of energy
(m2/p) (tons/m2; e€/m2) (tons/m2; e€/m2)
selection of
telework variables
occupation-related
attribution of floor area
actual personal
use of space
(m2/p)
starting conditions for

employee travel
personal values for personal values for
business travel commuter travel
(MJ/p; kg/p; e€/p) (MJ/p; kg/p; e€/p)
office concept assessment and comparison

selection of
office work concepts
total office space performance of business performance of
required travel commuter travel
(m2) (MJ; kg; e€) (MJ; kg; e€)
total amount of total consumption of
materials required energy expected
(tons; e€) (tons; e€)
total performance of
employee travel
(MJ; kg; e€)
improvement factor for improvement factor for improvement factor for improvement factor for
the use of space the use of material the use of energy employee travel
integrated performance per office concept and comparison of the concepts
Typical material values

Values for the use of building materials were based on Simons et al. [2002]. For offices in the Netherlands, for the
year 2000 they found values of 46,000,000 m2 GFA and 96.6 megaton (Mton) of building materials. With the
presented average of 24 m2 GFA per employee, the total number of office workers must have been 1.92 million,
which is comparable to the rough 2 million that Simons et al. mention. Therefore, the personal use of building
materials is 50.4 ton/p, and the spatial use is 2.10 ton/m2 GFA.
In order to determine the values for the year 1990, some data from 2000 needed to be converted. Starting-point
was the assumption that the spatial use of building materials had not changed over the years, so that the value for
the year 2000 equaled the one for 1990: 2.10 ton/m2. I assumed that the total number of office workers could be
converted back from the year 2000 by multiplying the number of this year (1.92 million) with the inverse of an
average annual growth of 3%: 1/1.0310 (leading to a quantity of 1.43 million). Furthermore, the total GFA could be
determined through the personal use of space of 28 m2/p. This resulted in a personal use of building materials of
58.8 ton/p for the year 2000.
Typical environmental loads

For the environmental load of building materials, the values for the use of space were linked to data of the
average annual environmental cost of building materials, as determined in chapter 06. Average annual
environmental cost of the studied buildings was e€ 8.21 per m2. This value was used for both the 2000 reference
and the studied telework offices. For the 1990 reference, the average environmental cost of the 1990 reference
building of chapter 05 were used: e€ 10.03 per m2 annually. The ultimate environmental cost of the theoretic
offices served as an indication, based on environmental data of real buildings.
Overview
Table 16.03 presents the annual reference values determined for the use of building materials.
Table 16.03: Deduction of typical reference values for the annual use of building materials by office buildings
In this table, 'e€' stands for environmental euros
parameter material use source or deduction
1990
personal space use 28 m2/p see chapter 04
number of office employees 1,426,180 p 2. = employees '00 / (1.03)10

2
total gross floor area (GFA) 39,933,040 m 3. = employees '90 x personal space
amount of building material 83,859,384 ton 4. = (GFA '90 / GFA '00) x materials '00
2
spatial material use 2.10 ton/m 5. = materials / GFA
personal material use 58.8 ton/p 5. = materials / employees
spatial environmental debit 10.03 e€/m2

2000
personal space use 24 m2/p Eldonk et al., 2001
number of office employees 1,916,667 p 1. = GFA'00 / personal space
total gross floor area (GFA) 46,000,000 m2 Simons et al., 2002
amount of building material 96,600,000 ton Simons et al., 2003

2
spatial material use 2.10 ton/m 5. = materials / GFA
personal material use 50.4 ton/p 5. = materials / employees
spatial environmental debit 8.21 e€/m2
Typical energy values

A part of the energy consumption of an office organisation is directly related to the building, another part depends
upon the personal activities of office employees. In order to fully assess the influence of different office work
concepts, the typical consumption of energy needed to be determined per m2 GFA and per employee. Dividing the
total consumption of energy between these two is complex. I assumed that climate control (heating, cooling,
ventilation, etc.) depends completely upon the building, i.e. the GFA, and the use of equipment (mainly
computers) upon the number of users. As found in chapter 06, the use of equipment defines approximately 50%
of the total use of electricity. Hence, 50% of the electricity use may be assumed employee-related, and 50% of the
electricity use, plus 100% of the gas consumption building-related. This division is only necessary for the office
concepts of the year 2000, because for the reference of the year 1990, employees were just working at the central
office, and spatial values of energy consumption therefore are sufficient.
For consumption of primary energy, the personal use of space was linked to data from the Dutch Government
Buildings Agency (DGBA) [Novem, 2001], representing more than 3 million m2 of office space. Around that year
approximately 110,000 employees were working for the government [Rgd, 2003].
As can be seen in table 16.04, taking measured data of the use of electricity and fuel (mainly natural gas) as the
basis, the typical consumption of energy for the year 1990 was 1,258 MJ per m2, divided between 539 MJ of fuel
and 719 MJ of electricity. Accordingly, for the year 2000, the typical energy consumption turned out to be 1,544
MJ/m2 in total, of which 582 MJ of fuel and 962 MJ of electricity.
Note that energy consumption had increased, in spite of energy preservation policy. It was caused mainly through
an increase of the use of electricity by computers and cooling plants, called autonomous development [Novem,
2001] or structural effects [Gerritse, 2002].
The value of the total consumption of energy for 2000 was split into 1,063 MJ/m2 and 15,701 MJ/p, as can be
seen in table 16.04.
Table 16.04: Deduction of typical reference values for the annual energy consumption of office buildings
In this table, 'nge' stands for natural gas equivalents
parameter fuel consumption electricity use source
1990
total gross floor area (GFA) 3,347,996 m2 3,590,253 m2 Novem, 2001
3
total energy consumption 51,327,888 m nge 72,961,992 m3 nge Novem, 2001
0.26 kWh/m3 nge NEN 5128-1998
280,623,046 kWh
spatial energy consumption 15.33 m3 nge/m2 78.16 kWh/m2
3
typical primary energy values 35.17 MJ/m nge 9.20 MJ/kWh NEN 5128-1998
spatial primary energy 539.2 MJ/m2 719.1 MJ/m2

total spatial energy consumption 1,258.3 MJ/m2
2000
total gross floor area (GFA) 3,347,996 m2 3,590,253 m2 Novem, 2001
employee number 110,000 p Rgd, 2003

3 3
total energy consumption 55,392,814 m nge 97,619,166 m nge Novem, 2001
3
0.26 kWh/m nge NEN 5128-1998
375,458,331 kWh
typical primary energy values 35.17 MJ/m3 nge 9.20 MJ/kWh NEN 5128-1998
total primary energy 1,948,165 GJ 3,454,217 GJ

building-related consumption 100 % 50 % see chapter 05
spatial energy consumption 581.9 MJ/m2 481.1 MJ/m

2
total spatial energy consumption 1,063 MJ/m2

employee-related consumption 0 % 50 % see chapter 05
personal energy consumption 0 MJ/p 15,701 MJ/p

total personal energy consumption 15,701 MJ/p

In order to get an impression of the environmental impact, the floor area was also linked to energy data from the
case study of office buildings in chapter 06. By the year 2000, the average environmental cost for energy
consumption of the studied buildings was e€ 32.68 per m2 annually, based on partly measured (if available), partly
calculated data. As with building materials, the 1990 reference was also based on that study: e€ 34.66 per m2
annually. Both averages are weighted area averages, taking into account the floor area of the buildings studied.
Notice that the ratio of 1990 versus 2000 for consumption of primary energy (factor 1.23) is higher than the ratio
for the environmental cost (factor 1.16). This is possibly due to the fact that some of the government office
buildings were still under construction or finished only recently; therefore, measured energy data were not
available. In these cases, the energy consumption and the environmental cost resulting from this, calculated by
GreenCalc, were taken as a basis. Comparison of these values with the measured ones indicated that the
calculated values on average are slightly more favourable than the measured ones.
Table 16.05 presents the annual environmental load determined for energy consumption in offices.
Table 16.05: Deduction of typical reference values for the annual consumption of energy of office buildings
In this table, 'e€' stands for environmental euros
parameter spatial load personal load source
1990
spatial environmental load 34.66 e€/m2 - e€/p see chapter 05
2000
typical spatial environmental load 40.26 e€/m2 see chapter 05
total environmental load 144.5 Me€

proportion 68.0 % 32.0 % Novem, 2001
divided environmental load 98.33 Me€ 46.21 Me€

typical environmental load 27.39 e€/m2 420.09 e€/p
16.02.04 Transport means
The comparison basis for employee travel is passenger.kilometre (p.km), i.e. the distance travelled by one
passenger. Every parameter describing the performance of a certain transport mode therefore was divided by this
personal distance: e.g. MJ/p.km, kg CO2/p.km, and e€/p.km.
Typical occupation rates

According to Stichting Natuur en Milieu [2001] the average occupation rate of a car is 23%, presumably based on
a maximum occupation of five people per car, and for buses and trains it is 45%, respectively 60%.
Typical speed values

The speed of transport means is important for the total time of travel (in the case of constant travel distances) or
travel distances (in the case of constant time of travel). The average speed of cars on long distances is 80 km/h
and on short distances 30 km/h [CLTM, 1990]. For car transport, the proportion of long versus short travel
distances was assumed to be 2:1, leading to an average speed of 63.33 km/h.
CLTM [1990] found an average speed of trains of 90 km/h; for local trains however a speed of 80 km/h was taken.
The same source found the following velocities: city buses 22.5 km/h, regional buses 45 km/h, and trams 32.5
km/h. I assumed a ratio of 2:1 for city versus regional buses, leading to an average speed of buses of 30 km/h.
For the calculation of the average speed of public transport, the proportions of the previous section were applied,
leading to 63.25 km/h.
The average velocity of pedestrians going to work is 5 km/h; on bike it is 12.5 km/h [CLTM, 1990]. Non-fuel
consuming travel by bike or foot was based on the Dutch situation and considered divided 2:1, leading to an
average speed of 10 km/h.

For the consumption of energy for travel, data were used from RIVM [1997], a recent source with figures for all
types of transport. The average use of energy by personal cars is 1.78 MJ per passenger kilometre. For public
transport the energy values vary: for buses 1.56 MJ/p.km, for trams 0.95 MJ/p.km, for local trains 1.06 MJ/p.km,
and for high-speed 'intercity' trains 0.69 MJ/p.km. With these forms of public transport proportionally divided, the
average energy consumption equals 1.09 MJ/p.km.
Travelling by bike or foot also costs energy. Although this concerns a totally different type of energy (food), one
source [Stichting Natuur & Milieu, 1990] presents a general energetic value for personal non-motorised travel:
0.091 MJ/p.km. It is unknown whether energy losses from the production of food to consumption and combustion
were included in this value.
Typical emissions
Exhaust gases are closely related to the use of fuel or electricity but also depend on the efficiency and quality of
the engine applied. For the emissions of travel, data were used from the thorough research by Stichting Natuur en
Milieu [2001].

As determined in chapter 12, 1 MJ of petrol 'costs' e€ 0.0135, and the average environmental cost of public
transport is e€ 0.0111/MJ. These values were connected to energy values per passenger.kilometre, through
which the personal environmental cost could be determined: e€ 0.0240/p.km for cars, and e€ 0.0120/p.km for
public transport, exactly twice as low.
Overview
Table 16.06 presents an overview for the reference values determined for different means of transport. The
emissions are not presented, but can be found in table 12.05.
Table 16.06: Deduction of reference values for the environmental effects of different means of transport
In this table, 'prop' stands for proportion, 'occ' for occupation rate, 'pers' for personal, and 'e€' for environmental euros
transport means performance env load
type prop(1) occ(2) speed(3) energy(4) energy(5) pers
unit % % km/h MJ/p.km e€/MJ e€/p.km
personal car
total 100 23.0 63.33 1.78 0.0135 0.0240
- LPG car 10.8
- diesel car 21.6
- petrol car 67.7
public transport
total 100 49.5 63.25 1.09 0.0111 0.0120
- diesel bus 20.0 45.0 30.00 1.56 0.0135 0.0147
- LPG bus 10.0 45.0 30.00 1.56 0.0112 0.0122
- tram* 10.0 45.0 32.50 0.95 0.0103 0.0112
- intercity train 30.0 60.0 90.00 0.69 0.0103 0.0112
- local train (electric) 30.0 60.0 80.00 1.06 0.0103 0.0112
bike or foot
total 100 100 10.00 0.09 0.0000 0.0000
* occupation of trams is taken equal to buses; emissions are taken equal to local trains; 1: As deduced in Chapter 12; 2:
Source: Stichting Natuur en Milieu [2001], based on data from rush hour outside cities, for the year 1998; 3: Deduced from
CLTM [1990] (see explanatory text); 4: Source: RIVM [1997]; 5: As deduced in Chapter 12
16.03 Reference office buildings
16.03.01 Office place solutions selected
The environmental impact of office concepts can be divided between consequences of the office place solution
(the accommodation, including the use of space, building materials and energy) and employee travel, i.e.
commuter and business travel (fuel consumption and emissions).
The following office place solutions were taken as a basis:

The central office
The guest office
The business centre
The home office
The instant office.
For each of these office places a typical use of space per employee was deduced, based on the reference use of
space determined previously. Furthermore, every office place solution has a typical use of materials and energy,
related to the typical use of space per employee and the function, facilities and quality of the accommodation.
16.03.02 Typical values for office buildings
For the determination of the following typical values, I assumed that the buildings were comparably designed with
no particular focus on sustainability. The typical values were determined without account for possible spatial
(in)efficiencies.
Typical spatial values

Basis for the typical use of space are the spatial reference values as determined previously: 28 m2 per employee
for the central office in the year 1990 and 24 m2 for all offices in the year 2000. These values were multiplied by
an estimated proportional value (percentage) to acquire the typical use of space per employee. This proportional
value depends on the specific office place type.
An explanation of the proportional values is as follows. The guest office is a central office itself, with the same use
of space per employee. Due to non-permanent allotment of workplaces, the satellite office may provide relatively
small workplaces (75% of the central office). The business centre needs to offer workplaces comparable to the
central office. The home office may be much smaller (50%) with respect to a workplace in the central office. For
the instant office, a small spot for work will be sufficient. This is estimated at 25% of the workspace in the central
office.
Typical material values

Figures for the use of building materials were found already: 2.10 ton/m2 GFA. In order to acquire the typical
building mass per m2 this value was also multiplied by an proportional value (percentage) depending on the office
place type.
An explanation of the proportional values is as follows. The satellite office may be less luxurious than the central
office. The business centre needs to offer first-class workspace and therefore requires high-quality, luxurious
materials. Being a central office to other employees itself, the guest office will be comparable to the central office.
Due to a lacking representive function, the home office may use materials of lower quality. The instant office is
virtual and designed for a different function, and therefore requires no building materials at all.
Basis for the typical use of building materials are the environmental reference values determined previously: e€
10.03 per m2 for the central office in the year 1990, and e€ 8.21 per m2 for all offices in the year 2000. These were
coupled to the same proportional values as used for the typical building mass.

The environmental reference values determined previously formed the basis for the typical annual consumption of
energy: 1,258 MJ and e€ 34.66 per m2 for the central office in the year 1990, and 1,063 MJ/m2 and 15,701 MJ/p,
as well as e€ 27.39/m2 and e€ 420.09/p for all offices in the year 2000. Again, these values were multiplied by a
certain proportional value to acquire the typical consumption of energy per m2. The ultimate energy consumption
of an office depends on the building and the way it is used. The first parameter could be determined through the
typical use of space; the second one was related to the presence of employees.
Data of the building-related consumption of energy are defined mainly during the working hours of employees.
Since personal work periods shift and differ, the total period that an office building is in full function is longer than
the average eight working hours. Therefore, the data used are related to approximately 12 hours (7 to 19 h, or 8
tot 20 h). In contrast, on a normal working day, the home office workplace is only used for eight hours. During
these hours, the home office however will be less energy-efficient because of inferior energy services and
simultaneous use of facilities. The guest and satellite office will be comparable to the central office. The business
centre provides all possible energy services including air-conditioning and therefore is assumed to consume more
energy. The instant office requires no additional energy but already used at the particular spot.
The personal consumption of energy is independent from the office place. It is a constant value connected to the
employee.
Overview
Table 16.07 presents the values introduced previously.
Table 16.07: Typical reference values for annual use of space, building materials, and energy by different office buildings
In this table, 'prop' stands for proportion, 'typ' for typical, 'dur' for duration, and 'e€' for environmental euros
building type space use building materials energy consumption
prop (1)
typ(2)
prop (1)
typical(3) prop (1)
dur (1)
spatial(3) personal(3)
unit % m2/p % ton/m2 e€/m2 % h/day MJ/m2 e€/m2 MJ/p e€/p
1990
central office 100 28.0 100 2.10 10.03 100 12 1,258 34.66 N/A N/A
2000
central office 100 24.0 100 2.10 8.21 100 12 1,063 27.39 15,701 420.09
guest office 100 24.0 100 2.10 8.21 100 12 1,063 27.39 15,701 420.09
satellite office 75 18.0 100 2.10 8.21 100 12 1,063 27.39 15,701 420.09
business centre 100 24.0 110 2.31 9.03 110 12 1,169 30.13 15,701 420.09
home office 50 12.0 80 1.68 6.57 120 8 850 21.91 15,701 420.09
instant office 25 6.0 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 15,701 420.09
1: Assumptions (see explanatory text); 2: Source reference year 1990: see chapter 04; reference year 2000: deduced from Eldonk et al. [2001]; 3: As
previously deduced (see explanatory text).
A basic assumption for the home office is that the residence is used already during daytime. For the home office,
the additional value for the spatial consumption of energy therefore refers to the room specifically used for office
work. If the residence were not in use during daytime, a completely different picture would evolve. In this case, the
residential consumption of energy will increase during working hours as the entire house will be heated. This
means that the entire residence should be accounted for, making the comparison more complicated. The
sensitivity tests in chapter 17 needed to check the influence of this.
16.03.03 Occupation-related attribution of floor area
Introduction of the actual personal use of space

The demand for space outside the central office varies with an altering number of telework days. Therefore, in
another office (whichever that is) extra space needs to be reserved for employees teleworking. This floor area
may be approached in a simple way, i.e. by multiplying the personal use of space of the specific office type by the
number of office employees using it and assuming that the building is not smaller, nor larger than required. This
can be repeated when the number of telework days increases or decreases, leading to a different size of the
telework office every time. This would however overlook the fact that normally the size of a telework office is fixed,
altering to the number of telework days irregularly, and in some cases also dependent on other organisations than
the one assessed.
The determination of the actual personal use of space is complex and subject to assumptions. In this section, I
clarify the chosen occupation-related attribution of floor area.
The central office

The central office is designed to accommodate the total number of employees. The question is whether the size of
the central office would differ when a larger proportion of the employees teleworks for a certain number of days (or
when the same number of employees teleworks a larger number of days). When switching to telework, not
altering the building size does not make any sense for economy and sustainability, save possible favourable
effects on employee travel. Therefore, I chose to adapt the building size to the proportion of personnel
teleworking: when the employees telework 2 days of a 5-day workweek, 60% of the original space is required. In
practice, a smaller office of course is not directly established. Therefore, I assume that the office concept has
been in the process of development already for a certain period, having led to a stable situation. For all telework
concepts, 20% of the personnel is permanently based at the central office.
The following conditions were used for the assessment:

1. No telework (the reference situation): the size ratio is 1.0, i.e. the building size equals 100% of the reference
size, which is the number of employees times the personal use of space (28 m2 for the 1990 reference, 24 m2
for the 2000 reference, as presented previously).
2. One-day telework: the building size equals 20% of the employees times 100% of the reference size, plus 80%
of the employees times 80% of the reference size. Therefore, the size ratio equals: 0.2 x 1.0 + 0.8 x 0.8 =
0.84.
3. Two-days telework: the building size equals 20% of the employees times 100% of the reference size, plus
80% of the employees times 60% of the reference size, leading to the following size ratio: 0.2 x 1.0 + 0.8 x
0.6 = 0.68.
4. Three-days telework: size ratio determined as above: 0.2 + 0.8 x 0.4 = 0.52.
5. Four-days telework: size ratio: 0.2 + 0.8 x 0.2 = 0.36.
As can be seen, in this study, the maximum saving on space is 64%. Possible additional solutions for space use
optimisation, as discussed in Volume E - The Space Factor, were not taken into account.
The guest office

The personal use of space in a guest office was determined at 24 m2. If the guest worker is present only one day
a week, it is probable that the client's facility manager will not provide him with a special workstation but propose
to pick a non-occupied workplace instead. If the office employee is at the guest office for two or three days a
week, a workplace will be necessary. However, he will most likely share it with another guest worker working there
also two or three days. In that case, the demand for office space per person will be half the personal use of space
for a workplace. This obviously will lead to problems if there are more guest workers teleworking 3 days instead of
2 days but I chose to ignore this. Nevertheless, for the full picture, the use of space and other performances by
the 2- or 3-days guest office variant should be mediated. An office worker staying at the guest office four days a
week will need a proper place of his own. In that case, the guest worker uses the full 24 m2.
Telework offices used by more than one organisation

As stated in the introduction part of this section, a simple conversion of personal space requirements to the size of
a telework office would ignore that the size of a telework office occupied by more than one user - commercial or
private - depends on more than just the office organisation assessed. In order to be adaptable to altering
demands for space, a certain part of this office building usually will not be occupied, increasing the actual use of
space per employee. Therefore, it is necessary to calculate with an average occupation rate, which increases
when the employees switch to more days of telework.
In general, for the actual personal use of space, the typical use is multiplied by the inverse of the basic office
occupation rate plus an additional factor depending on the number of telework days. Mathematically:
Aact = Atyp x (1 / (Occ + fprop x (dtele - 1))), <16.01>
in which Aact is the actual personal use of space; Atyp is the typical personal use of space; Occ is the basic
occupation rate of the office; fprop is a proportional factor by which the studied organisation occupies the office; and
dtele is the number of telework days spent in the office.
This actual personal use of space applies to the day(s) that an office employee works at the telework office. This
value should be multiplied by the ratio of the number of telework days and total weekdays. For instance, in the
case of two telework days this would be 2/5 (i.e. 0.4).
The determination of the actual personal use of space per telework office will be clarified below.

The satellite office is considered to be part of the company or organisation studied. This means that a limited
group of employees may use the satellite office: they are all part of the same company but come from different
central offices. I assumed that the greater company consists of three organisations with their own central office,
and that these three organisations equally use the satellite office(s)3. Meanwhile, for reasons of adaptability, the
satellite office will not be completely occupied. I assumed a basic occupation rate of 75%. When compared to
commercial suppliers of office space this is rather high yet defendable, because, being an office of the same
company, the supply for satellite office space can be better matched with the demand. Therefore, every
organisation using the satellite office on average occupies 25% of the office, based on telework on one day per
week. Since the complete office is larger than the occupied 75%, the actual personal use of space is also larger
than the basic 18 m2: 1.00/0.75 x 18 = 1.33 x 18 = 24 m2.
When the organisation studied increases the number of telework days, the demand for space at the satellite office
increases proportionally. Thus, in the case of a 2-days telework basis, the demand by the studied organisation will
be doubled. This means that the satellite office will be fully occupied (75% plus another 25%), leading to a
personal use of space of 18 m2 (see figure 16.03). Concepts based on more than 2 days of telework will require
additional office space near the satellite office, keeping the personal use of space at 18 m2.
100% ('full house')

hired floor area
using 50% 1/1.00 = 100% pers space use
75% (average)
using 25% 1/0.75 = 133% pers space use
basic situation situation of greater

1 day per w eek contribution
Figure 16.03: Determination of the actual personal use of space in the case of a satellite office
The business centre

The business centre is a commercial supplier of office space and therefore has a more variable occupation rate.
Based on an interview with Sipke Feenstra, the general manager of Regus Netherlands, the basic occupation rate
was taken at 60%. Furthermore, I assumed that employees of the studied office organisation occupy 10% of the
total business centre (one sixth of the occupied area). In this basic situation, the actual personal use of space
equals 1.00/0.60 x 24 = 1.67 x 24 = 40 m2. This is a relatively large area, due to the non-occupied space that is
inherent to offices subject to the demand from the market.
100% ('full house')

hired floor area
hiring 40% 1/0.90 = 111% pers space use

30% 1/0.80 = 125% pers space use
60% (average) 20% 1/0.70 = 143% pers space use
basic situation situation of greater

1 day per w eek contribution
Figure 16.04: Determination of the actual personal use of space in the case of a business centre
3
A satellite office can be one of the central offices also, accommodating office workers of another central office. This was however not
my starting-point because, in this case, the satellite office can be considered a guest office, with a comparable attribution of floor area
as described previously.
When the organisation studied increases the number of telework days, the actual personal use of space
decreases. Figure 16.04 graphically shows this process.
The home office

The personal use of space of a home office workplace, determined at 12 m2, is required when someone works at
the home office regularly and relatively often, i.e. three or four days a week. This implies an extra room, or extra
space with respect to a residence without a home office function. There is no distinction between the space
required for three, four or even five days of telework: the workplace will be similar.
A different situation will occur if someone only works at home for one or two days. In this case the dwelling can
hardly be called an office. An extra room will not be necessary: the work may be done at a table or a desk already
present. Therefore, in this case no additional space is required.
The instant office

The instant office is the simplest concept: it is never especially designed or constructed for office work. Therefore,
the actual personal use of space of an instant office worker is 0 m2.
Overview
Table 16.08 presents an overview of the values for the actual personal use of space determined previously. As
explained, the two upper reference office concepts have a fixed personal use of space. The central office below
the references represents the central office in the case telework is applied. As can be seen, 20% of the
employees work at the central office permanently, putting a constant demand on office space, and 80% teleworks.
The demand for space in the central office reduces when the number of telework days increases.
In order to know the total demand for space, the use of space in a telework office, depending on the number of
telework days, should be added to the use of space in the central office. For instance, when 80% of the
employees telework in a business centre for three days a week, the demand for space in the central office is 12.5
m2/p, and in the business centre 18.0 m2/p. In this example, the average demand for space therefore equals 12.5
+ 0.8 x 18.0 = 26.9 m2/p.
Table 16.08: Typical reference values for the actual personal use of space
In this table, 'occ' stands for occupation rate, 'prop' for proportion, and 'typ' for typical.
building type features
(1)
occ prop(1) typ(2)
unit > % % m2/p
reference offices
1990 reference 100 100 28.0
2000 reference 100 100 24.0
building type features actual personal space use explanation(3)
(1) (1) (2)
occ prop typ
telework days > 0 1 2 3 4
ratio > 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 = telework day(s)/ 5 weekdays
central office 80% teleworking

central worker 100 20 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 = typ
teleworker 100 80 24.0 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8 = typ x (1 - ratio)
average 24.0 20.2 16.3 12.5 8.6 = (prop x act)central + (prop x act)tele
telework offices applying for teleworkers only

guest office 100 80 24.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 1 day: no wp needed; 2 / 3 days: wp sharing; 4 days full wp
satellite office 75 80 18.0 0.0 4.8 7.2 10.8 14.4 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,25 x (teledays - 1)))
business centre 60 80 24.0 0.0 8.0 13.7 18.0 21.3 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,1 x (teledays - 1)))
home office 100 80 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 1 / 2 days: no extra space needed; 3 / 4 extra space needed
instant office 100 80 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 in all cases no extra space needed
1: Assumptions (see explanatory text); 2: As previously determined; 3: See explanatory text for better clarification.
Table 16.09 illustrates the personal use of space by the people teleworking. As can be seen, for every teleworker
variant there is an optimal number of telework days.
Table 16.09: Typical reference values for the personal use of space by teleworkers
building type personal space use
telework days> 0 1 2 3 4
guest office
guest office 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.0
central office 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
total 24.0 19.2 26.4 21.6 28.8
satellite office
satellite office 0.0 4.8 7.2 10.8 14.4
central office 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
total 24.0 24.0 21.6 20.4 19.2
business centre
business centre 0.0 8.0 13.7 18.0 21.3
central office 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
total 24.0 27.2 28.1 27.6 26.1
home office
home office 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0
central office 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
total 24.0 19.2 14.4 21.6 16.8
instant office
instant office 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
central office 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
total 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8
16.04 Reference employee travel
Employee travel can be divided between commuter and business travel.

Together with the travel characteristics of employees and their weekly working hours, the location of the office(s)
and the extent of telework define the distance and frequency of both business and commuter travel. If the
influence on both travel types were to be calculated, there would be too many variables. For the methodology
presented, business travel distances therefore were taken constant whereas commuter travel distances were
subject to the chosen office concept and the average number of telework days. I assumed that employee travel
could be reduced through the integration of business and commuter travel.
16.04.01 Business travel
The share of employees travelling for business purposes

Commercial offices were taken as a basis for the methodology. However, even in a commercial organisation not
every employee has a commercial function. 80% of the employees (the potential of teleworkers) were estimated to
participate in business travel. Business travel by foot or bicycle was assumed marginal. The other transport
means were divided as follows: 80% by car, 20% by public transport.
The travel distance

As a starting-point, I assumed that a commercial office employee on average travels 60 minutes a day for
business purposes, regardless of the speed. This is not so important since by approximation the average velocity
of public transport equals that of personal cars. By nature, a busy consultant travels a lot more. On the other
hand, there are employees also who do not travel for business purposes every day. Business travel is assumed
constant and equal to most office worker concepts. However, due to its location closer to public transport, in the
case of the satellite office, employees will use public transport to meet clients relatively more often. And due to the
concentration of potential clients in business centres, business travel may also be done on foot - within the
building.
Starting from the duration of travel, the average personal distance of travel could be determined by taking into
account the average speed. And, taking into account the typical reference values per passenger kilometre
determined previously, personal values could be deduced for the fuel consumption, emissions and the
environmental load. Table 16.10 presents the personal values thus determined for all concepts except the satellite
office and business centre. The personal values for emissions are hidden.
Table 16.10: Daily personal values for business travel for all office types - in this table, 'bizz' stands for the proportion of
employees with a commercial function, 'prop' for proportion, 'dur' for duration, 'pers' for personal, and 'typ' for typical
transport m eans em ployees distance fuel use env load
bizz (1)
prop (1)
total dur (1)
speed (2)
pers typ(2)
pers typ(2) pers
unit > % % % min/p km/h km/p MJ/p.km MJ/p e€/p.km e€/p
personal car 80 64 60 63.33 63.33 1.78 112.73 0.0240 1.52
public transport 80 20 16 60 63.25 63.25 1.09 68.82 0.0123 0.78
bike or foot 0 0 0 10.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.0000 0.00
average 60 63.31 63.31 1.64 103.95 0.0216 1.37
TOTAL 80 100 80
1 : Estim ation (see explanatory text);2 : A s previously deduced (see explanatory text).
It is imaginable that executing business travel from one of the telework offices leads to de-tours or short-cuts in
comparison with business travel from the central office. This all depends on the choice for a telework office closer
to home or closer to clients. Since the determination of this is complex and different in any occasion, I assumed
that the advantages would balance the disadvantages.
16.04.02 Commuter travel per type of office place
Although the average rate of travelling has increased significantly over the last two centuries, there has been no
great change in the average time spent on daily travel. In other words, people spend as much time travelling as
they did in the eighteenth century. However, the total distance they cover nowadays is much greater. Therefore, I
did not take the travel distance to the office as a basis, but the duration of travel. This means that I assumed that
an office employee will accept living further away from the central office if he uses a transport means of greater
velocity.
A general maximum accepted duration of travel to work is 45 minutes. In the case of the reference situation (just
the central office, no telework), I assumed an average duration of travelling one-way of 30 minutes, hence 60
minutes per day in total. If an office employee works at another office - a guest office or one of the telework offices
- these days the travel duration and covered distance will be shorter.
The central office

The central office forms the reference situation to which the basic duration of travel applies. For an average
division of office employees into means of transport, I used Linden et al. [1999], who took 60% of car travellers,
30% of public transport travellers and 10% of pedestrians or cyclists.
Table 16.11 presents the personal values determined for commuter travel.
The guest office

When an office employee spends regular time at a guest office, even if his presence is longer than at normal
business occasions, travelling to the guest office may be considered business travel rather than commuter travel.
Therefore, it already is accounted for as business travel. This means that I did not take into account any travel
duration for commuter travel to the guest office, implying no additional environmental impact.
Table 16.11: Daily personal values for commuter travel to the central office
In this table, 'prop' stands for proportion, 'dur' for duration, 'pers' for personal, and 'typ' for typical.
transport m eans persons distance fuel use env load
prop (1)
dur (1)
speed (2)
pers typ (2)
pers typ(2) pers
unit > % min/p km/h km/p MJ/p.km MJ/p e€/p.km e€/p
personal car 60 60 63.33 63.33 1.780 112.73 0.0240 1.52
public transport 30 60 63.25 63.25 1.088 68.82 0.0123 0.78
bike or foot 10 60 10.00 10.00 0.091 0.91 0.0000 0.00
average 60 57.97 57.97 1.404 88.37 0.0181 1.14
TOTAL 100

Being an office for employees of the organisation itself, the satellite office is located closer to home (what else is
the point of a satellite office?). As a starting-point, I assumed half the travel duration with respect to the central
office (30 minutes a day). Due to the relative proximity of the satellite office to the employee's residence, and
expectably to public transport as well, the office employee will be tempted more easily to use public or non-
motorised transport. I assumed an increase of the use of both public transport and bike or foot by 10% each,
leading to a decrease of the use of a personal car by 20%.
Table 16.12 presents the personal values determined for the satellite office case.
Table 16.12: Daily personal values for commuter travel to the satellite office
prop(1) dur (1) speed(2) pers typ(2) pers typ(2) pers
personal car 40 30 63.33 31.67 1.780 56.36 0.0240 0.76
bike or foot 20 30 10.00 5.00 0.091 0.46 0.0000 0.00
average 30 52.63 26.32 1.165 36.40 0.0145 0.46
TOTAL 100
The business centre

The business centre may be considered a type of satellite office, open to other companies than the one studied.
As a result of the wide-spread availability of business centres, the business centre is expected to be even closer
to the employee's residence than the satellite office. However, in order to fulfil its commercial function, the
business centre is located often at a commercially attractive site: in commercial districts and near carrageways or
motorways. Therefore, I assumed the same proximity to residential areas as for the satellite office. Due to the
commercial location the average transport mode will differ less from the central office case. For the business
centre I assumed an increase of both public transport and transport by bike or foot by 5%, leading to a reduction
of car use by 10%.
Table 16.13 presents the personal values determined for the business centre.
The home office

Obviously, there is no commuter travel to the home office.
The instant office

There are no particular geographic coordinates for an instant office. It appears instantly when an office employee
needs to work on his way to the central office, telework office or a client. Therefore, no additional travel is required
to reach the instant office, implying no environmental impact.
Table 16.13: Daily personal values for commuter travel to the business centre
prop (1)
dur (1)
speed(2)
pers typ(2)
pers typ(2) pers
personal car 50 30 63.33 31.67 1.780 56.36 0.0240 0.76
bike or foot 15 30 10.00 5.00 0.091 0.46 0.0000 0.00
average 30 55.30 27.65 1.284 40.29 0.0163 0.52
TOTAL 100
16.05 Overview and discussion
16.05.01 Overview of determined reference values
Table 16.14 presents the annual environmental characteristics of different office types, as determined in this
chapter. These values form the basis for the assessment and comparison of different office concepts.
Table 16.14: Overview of characteristics of the different office types

In this table, 'env' stands for environmental load, 'prim' for primary energy, and 'e€' for environmental euros.
building type space use materials energy
depending on telework days annual annual
0 1 2 3 4 mass env prim nrg env load
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
unit > m /p m /p m /p m /p m /p ton/m e€/m MJ/m MJ/p e€/m2 e€/p
references
1990 reference 28.0 2.10 10.03 1,258 N/A 34.66 N/A
2000 reference 24.0 2.10 8.21 1,063 15,701 27.39 420.09
central office
- non-teleworkers 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 2.10 8.21 1,063 15,701 27.39 420.09
- teleworkers 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8 2.10 8.21 1,063 15,701 27.39 420.09
telework offices
guest office 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 2.10 8.21 1,063 15,701 27.39 420.09
satellite office 0.0 4.8 7.2 10.8 14.4 2.10 8.21 1,063 15,701 27.39 420.09
business centre 0.0 8.0 13.7 18.0 21.3 2.31 9.03 1,169 15,701 30.13 420.09
home office 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 1.68 6.57 850 15,701 21.91 420.09
instant office 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0 15,701 0.00 420.09
Space use
The number of days per week spent in a telework office defines the personal use of space by teleworkers.
Employees working in the central office permanently cause a constant demand for space. In the eventual
comparison of office concepts, the personal use of space needs to be multiplied by the total number of employees
to whom the value applies. Thus the total GFA is determined.
The use of building materials and energy

Table 16.14 gives spatial values for the use of building materials, the total annual consumption of energy by the
office buildings, as well as their annual environmental costs of these. The total amount of building materials
required for the office organisation and the expected energy consumption are determined by means of the GFA
deduced.
Business and commuter travel

Table 16.15 summarises the environmental characteristics of employee travel for the different office types, as
determined in this chapter. Only three types of emissions are displayed; the others are CO, VOCs and PO10. The
values determined also form the basis for an assessment and comparison of different office concepts.
The values for business and commuter travel are daily personal values. In the eventual assessment, these still
needed to be multiplied by the number of employees to which they apply and the number of days per year that
they are travelling to and from the specific office.
Table 16.15: Overview of characteristics of the different office types

In this table, 'env' stands for environmental load, 'prim' for primary energy, and 'e€' for environmental euros.
building type bizz travel comm travel
fuel CO2 NOx SO2 env fuel CO2 NOx SO2 env
unit > MJ/p kg/p g/p mg/p e€/p MJ/p kg/p g/p mg/p e€/p
references
1990 reference 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 88.4 6.74 49.8 792.8 1.14
2000 reference 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 88.4 6.74 49.8 792.8 1.14
central office
- non-teleworkers 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 88.4 6.74 49.8 792.8 1.14
- teleworkers 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 88.4 6.74 49.8 792.8 1.14
telework offices
guest office 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00
satellite office 95.2 6.95 50.8 860.3 1.22 36.4 2.46 17.6 331.8 0.46
business centre 88.4 6.74 49.8 792.8 1.14 40.3 2.91 21.2 364.1 0.52
home office 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00
instant office 103.9 8.56 64.3 921.9 1.37 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00
16.05.02 Discussion on uncertainties
There are uncertainties connected to the determination of the reference values presented in this chapter. In some
cases, assumptions were necessary and some data was questionable. Although as well founded as possible, the
reference values might be different in practice. Therefore, some sensitivity tests need to be undertaken.
General assumptions
The environmental effects studied by means of the methodology of this chapter are assumed independent from
the office organisation. However, it is imaginable that for larger office organisations per employee a different use
of space, building materials, energy or transport means should be taken into account. Figures that I encountered
however did not make any distinction between the size of organisations or buildings. The actual use of the office
influences the eventual performance, especially in case of innovative office concepts that rely importantly on the
employees' commitment.
Not taken into account are general aspects of quality, for example in terms of offering up-to-date facilities,
optimising the indoor climate (and working process), and enabling a long lifespan through adaptability of the
office. The business centre needs to offer high-quality, state-of-the-art facilties to its clients, leading to good
working conditions and efficiency. In order to react to the demand from the market, the business centre also
needs to be adaptable. These are aspects that could not be integrated in the technical comparison but are
important, as discussed in Volume C - The Time Factor.
The use of space

For the determination of reference values for the use of space, the following assumptions were made:
The personal use of space in the case of each office place type, which were expressed by the proportion to
the central office (guest office: 100%; satellite office: 75%; business centre: 100%; home office: 50%; instant
office: 25%).
The size of the central office. This is related linearly to the number of employees, regardless of the possibility
that, when switching to telework, the office at least temporarily will be 'too large' with respect to the average
24 m2/p. Instead of saving the entire personal use of space in the case of telework, a partial reduction is also
imaginable. However, this would simply lead to a greater environmental load.
The sharing of workplaces in the guest office in the case of 2 or 3 telework days.
The basic occupation rate of the satellite office (75%), and the proportional occupation by the studied
organisation in the case of 1 telework day (25%).
The basic occupation rate of the business centre (60%), and the proportional occupation by the studied
organisation in the case of 1 telework day (10%).

For the determination of reference values for building materials, the following assumptions were made:
The total number of employees in 1990. These were converted back from the year 2000, taking into account
a 3% annual growth (1.43 million). This number defines the total GFA (39.9 million m2) and personal use of
building materials for the reference office concept in 1990. This does however not influence the outcome.
The spatial use of building materials in the year 1990, which was taken equal to the year 2000 (2.10 ton/m2)
and defines the ultimate use of material of the reference office concept in the year 1990. This assumption
however is realistic: office buildings have not altered to such an extent, that the amount of materials per m2
has more than marginally increased or decreased.
The amount of building materials in proportion to the central office (guest office: 100%; satellite office: 90%;
business centre: 110%; home office: 80%; instant office: 0%), defining the ultimate total use of building
materials and their environmental cost.
Energy consumption
For the determination of reference values for energy consumption, the following assumptions were made:
The proportion of energy consumption in proportion to the central office (guest office: 100%; satellite office:
100%; business centre: 110%; home office: 120%), defining the ultimate consumption of energy.
The assumption that the residence is already in use during daytime. It needs to be checked, what happens
when homework forms the primary use of the residence.
The 6% difference of the ratio between 1990 and 2000 for primary energy consumption and environmental cost
could not be fully explained. The influence of office users on energy performance is substantial. However, it was
too complicated to take this into account.
Employee travel
For the determination of reference values for employee travel, the following assumptions were made:
First, the practical, business-like consideration of travel. I assumed only commuter and business travel, and
these can be combined, leading to a shorter total distance of travel. In modern life, people often mix travel
for professional purposes with personal goals - e.g. shopping, leisure, taking children to school - making a
strictly separated assessment cloudy. Therefore, actual travel distances might be longer than expected. Not
taking these personal de-tours into account however is defendable, as they are not directly related to the
office work concept.
Travel distance savings. A conscientious choice for a telework office can avoid distances covered from and
to home (commuter travel) or clients (business travel). In this methodology, I assumed savings only on
commuter travel distances. This means that, in the case of a conscientious employee, more environmental
profit can be achieved than calculated, but also, in the case of a less engaged employee, a greater
environmental load as well.
Commuter behaviour. Basic distances for commuter travel were considered to depend upon the average
duration of travel and the chosen transport means. The basic travel distance can be reduced through
working in a telework office. However, it is imaginable that an office worker with a guest office, satellite
office, or business centre at disposal can move so far away from these that his travel duration again
becomes the maximum accepted distance, as if the telework office becomes a new central office. This would
of course have a negative effect on the total distance of employee travel, making telework offices useless for
environmental purposes.
The proportion of the use of long-distance (intercity) trains, local trains, diesel buses, LPG buses, and trams
(30% / 30% / 20% / 10% / 10%), defining the average speed and environmental performance.
The proportion of city buses versus regional buses (2:1), defining the average speed of buses (30 km/h).
Taking travel durations as the starting-point, a greater or smaller average speed however does not influence
the environmental performance per p.km, which is a constant figure.
The proportion of car use for long versus short distances (2:1), defining the average speed of cars (63.33
km/h) and the distance for commuter and business travel by car. As mentioned, a greater or smaller average
speed does not influence the environmental performance per p.km.
The proportion of travel by bike versus foot (2:1), defining the average speed, and the commuter travel
distance of non-motorised transportation. This does not influence the environmental performance of non-
motorised travel.
The environmental load of petrol, assumed to be 20% worse than that of natural gas. This of course is
important to the eventual performance of car and bus transport. Petrol and diesel will have a heavier
environmental load than natural gas (since raffinage and combustion is less clean). However, it is unknown
whether this is 1% or 100% worse. 20% seems reasonable.
The environmental performance of different means of transport. In terms of emissions, this is improving
constantly, especially with cars. Therefore, data is expected to be out of date relatively soon.
The proportion of employees with a commercial function, appropriate for business travel (80%), applying to
all office concepts. This defines only the proportion of employee travel to the total environmental load.
The average duration of commuter (60 min) and business travel (60 min) applying to all office concepts. This
defines only the proportion of employee travel to the total environmental load.
The duration of commuter travel, in the case of the central office, satellite office, and business centre,
defining the environmental performance.
The proportion of employees using a personal car, public transport, or bike or foot, in the case of the central
office, satellite office, and business centre, defining the environmental performance.
Teleworking whole days. In the methodology, the possibility of teleworking in smaller units than one day (e.g.
half a day, one and a half day, or two and a half day) was not taken into account. In that case, it seems
logical that the employee would travel longer distances, provided he would travel to the central office the
other part of the day. From a sustainable point of view, dayparts of telework are not useful. Therefore, they
were not included.
Velocities. The average speed of cars (80 km/h on long distances, 30 km/h on short distances) was taken
from a rather old source [CLTM, 1990]. Due to more congestion, it is imaginary that the average speed has
decreased. The speed of trains most likely has not altered much.
Sensitivity tests
Based on the assumptions described previously, the following parameters needed to be tested on sensitivity:
The personal use of space for every office place type
The use of building materials in proportion to the central office
Energy consumption in proportion to the central office
The influence of usage of the residence to energy consumption
The method for accounting for the occupation rate of the satellite office and business centre
The proportion of long-distance trains, local trains, diesel buses, LPG buses, and trams in public transport
The average speed of cars
The environmental load of petrol
The duration of commuter travel, in the case of the central office, satellite office, and business centre
The proportion of employees using a personal car, public transport, or bike or foot, in the case of the central
office, satellite office, and business centre
The sensitivity tests will be discussed at the end of the assessment of teleworker concepts in chapter 17.
17 COMPARISON OF TELEWORK CONCEPTS
In this chapter, different office concepts based on forms of telework are assessed in accordance with the
methodology presented in chapter 16. Specific features of the different office worker concepts are clarified. The
results of the impact calculated for the use of space, materials, energy, and transport means (for business and
commuter travel) are discussed and put into focus with a traditional reference concept. The final result is an
indication of the potential improvement by different forms of office work. Furthermore, sensitivity tests reveal
detailed information about the influence of assumptions.
Figure 17.01: Mobile working in efficient spaces in Iquitos, Peru

Contents

17.02 Description of the office concepts 385
17.02.01 The traditional office worker 385
17.02.02 The guest and satellite office worker 386
17.02.03 The business centre worker 387
17.02.04 The home office worker 387
17.02.05 The instant office worker 388
17.03 Process of the assessment 388
17.03.01 The reference concept 389
17.03.02 Instance of the assessment of a telework concept 390
17.04 Outcome 391
17.04.01 Separate results 391
17.04.02 Comparison of typical units 394
17.04.03 Comparison of environmental costs 396
17.05 Sensitivity tests and conclusions 397
17.05.01 Preliminary conclusions 397
17.05.02 Assumptions about buildings 398
17.05.03 Assumptions about the occupation rate 399
17.05.04 Assumptions about employee travel 402
17.05.05 A closer look at the home office concept 404
17.05.06 Taking into account different office layouts 405
384 17 Comparison of telework concepts - F The Organisation of Office Work

17.01 Introduction
Office worker concepts studied

In chapter 16, a general assessment methodology was presented for the environmental assessment of office
concepts. In this chapter, the assessment and comparison of six different theoretical teleworker concepts are
discussed. With the exception of the reference concept, these office concepts are based on a greater or smaller
number of telework days applying to a part of the personnel. For each office worker concept these numbers of
telework days form the variants.
In the study presented, the following theoretical office concepts were assessed:
The traditional office worker concept, which is the reference concept
The guest office worker concept
The satellite office worker concept
The business centre worker concept
The home office worker concept
The instant office worker concept
Reference concepts
The traditional office worker concept is the reference concept, without the use of telework, to which all other
concepts and their variants are compared. In order to see progress with respect to the environmental reference
year 1990, one reference is characterised according to that year, based on the methodology presented in chapter
05. The other reference has average characteristics of the year 2000. This reference concept makes clear to
which extent the other office worker concepts perform better than a traditionally organised modern company.
Criteria
For the assessment, the space, building materials and energy used by buildings, as well as the consumption of
fuel and emission of exhaust gases by both commuter and business travel are taken into account. Beside an
expression of the results by typical indicators for each of these aspects (square metres, tons, megajoules of
primary energy, and grams or kilograms of particular gases), for an integrated assessment, effects are also
translated into environmental costs.
17.02 Description of the office concepts
17.02.01 The traditional office worker
The traditional office worker concept is the reference for comparison. It consists of people working in a central
office with a cellular floor plan and personal workplaces. Beside commuter travel to and from the central office, the
employees travel to clients for business purposes (see figure 17.02).
Central Office
Client
business travel w orkplace commuter travel Home
Figure 17.02: Graphic scheme of the traditional office worker
The traditional office worker travels to work in the central office five days a week, where he works 40 hours per
week in total, 46 weeks per year (I assumed six weeks of holidays, special leave and illness). He travels for
business purposes five days a week, but limited to an average of 1 hour per day, as clarified in chapter 16. For the
comparison, the central office needed to be defined in reference values for the use of space, building materials
and energy. These were already presented in chapter 16.
Figure 17.03 depicts general characteristics of the traditional office worker concept.
F The Organisation of Office Work - 17 Comparison of telework concepts 385

business Central Office commuter

Client travel ref space use/empl travel
5 days/w k ref env load materials 5 days/w k Home
ref energy consumption
w orking
40 h/w k
Figure 17.03: Graphic scheme of the traditional office worker concept
17.02.02 The guest and satellite office worker
The guest office is a central office of a client, where an office worker from the organisation studied spends one to
four days a week. In the guest office worker concept he therefore has two workplaces and travels from home to
both the central and guest office. Furthermore, he conducts business travel from the central office and possibly
from the guest office as well (see figure 17.04). In the case of the satellite office worker concept, the behaviour of
the employee is comparable to that of the guest office worker, replacing the guest office by a satellite office.
Although the data for space, materials, energy and travel, required for the comparison, is different than in the case
of the guest office, the structure of the satellite office worker concept is similar.
Central Office
w orkplace Home
commuter travel
business travel
Client Telework Office
w orkplace
Figure 17.04: Graphic scheme of a teleworker, such as the guest and satellite worker
Translated into values required for the environmental comparison, the teleworker's commuter travel to the central
office is a maximum four days per week (on the basis of one day of telework), and one minimum day per week to
the telework office, i.e. the guest or satellite office. Since a client owns the guest office, commuter travel to the
guest office may be considered business travel, reducing business travel to other clients, provided the duration of
business travel is taken as a constant.
As with other telework concepts, the question is whether the use of a guest office leads to a greater use of space,
building materials, and energy (see figure 17.05). As discussed in chapter 16, this depends on the number of
telework days.
Central Office
w orking ref space use/empl w orking
max 32 h/w k ref env load materials commuter travel Home 0 h/w k
ref energy consumption max 4 days/w k
commuter travel
min 1 day/w k
business travel
?
Client Telework Office
extra space use/empl w orking
extra env load materials min 8 h/w k
extra energy cons
Figure 17.05: General graphic scheme of a telework concept, such as the guest and satellite office worker concepts

17.02.03 The business centre worker
Although the exact figures for the use of space, building materials and energy are different, in structure, the
business centre worker concept is not different from the guest and satellite office worker concept. Therefore,
figure 17.05 also graphically represents this concept, seen from the office organisation studied.
From the business centre's owner's point of view, his concept looks different (see figure 17.06). As a provider of
office facilities, his clients come from everywhere. The exact background of the user is, although important, not
always visible.
Business Centre client travel

ref space use/empl 5 days/w k
ref env load materials
Figure 17.06: Graphic scheme of the district office concept, seen from the business centre itself
In the study presented, I only considered office concepts for the same company or organisation, which is the
demanding party, and to which the business centre may be an element, yet not the centre of the organisation of
office work.
17.02.04 The home office worker
In the case of the home office worker concept, the teleworking office employee has a workplace at his residence,
from which he can travel also for business purposes. Working whole days at the home office will reduce commuter
travel. However, again, the important issue when assessing this office concept is whether the home office uses
less space, materials and energy than a traditional workplace in the central office (see figure 17.07).
?
Central Office commuter travel Home Office
ref space use/empl max 4 days/w k extra space use/empl
ref envwload materials
orking Home extra env load materials
ref energy
max 32consumption
h/w k w orking extra energy consumption
min 8 h/w k
business travel
max 4 days/w k
Client
Figure 17.07: Graphic scheme of the home office worker concept

17.02.05 The instant office worker
The instant office is a virtual replacement of other office place types, directly related to business travel and
possibly commuter travel as well. As an office concept, it can only be applied if the employee is on the road (see
figure 17.08). Therefore, the more an office worker travels, the greater the opportunity to use an instant office.
Using an instant office avoids consumption of instant coffee and the need for a personal workplace in another
office.
The instant office needs to be combined with another office place type, which is the base office, unless the office
worker works freelance, without a central office, travelling from client to client and doing his work on the way. A
completely 'homeless' concept is rather unrealistic: a home office would be the least facility for the employee. In
the study presented, the instant office worker concept was combined only with the central office, as shown in
figure 17.08).
Instant Offices
no extra space use/empl Client
no extra env load materials
no extra energy cons
Central Office commuter travel

ref space use/empl max 4 days/w k w orking
ref env load materials Home 0 h/w k
business travel
- no extra travel Instant Offices
w orking min 8 h/w k Client
Client
Figure 17.08: Graphic scheme of the instant office worker concept
For the office worker concepts discussed previously, a certain number of telework days could be considered
without influencing the frequency of business travel. A 4-days use of the instant office is however not imaginable
when an office employee on average travels only one hour per day for business purposes. For the instant office
the starting-conditions therefore needed to be altered as follows:
1 day in the instant office, 4 days in the central office: 5 hours of business travel per week
2 days in the instant office, 3 days in the central office: 10 hours of business travel per week
3 days in the instant office, 2 days in the central office: 15 hours of business travel per week
4 days in the instant office, 1 day in the central office: 20 hours of business travel per week.
With the exception of the 1-day instant office variant, this different approach makes the instant office not directly
comparable to the other office concepts. In order to enable a proper assessment, the reference situation also
needed to be adapted in terms of business travel.
17.03 Process of the assessment
Based on the methodology discussed in chapter 16, the assessment of telework concepts was automised in a
spreadsheet model. The number of employees was the only variable in the final assessment sheet. In sheets
underlying, certain parameters were variable (see chapter 16). This section illustrates how the results of section
17.04 were obtained.

17.03.01 The reference concept
Table 17.01 presents the environmental features of the traditional office worker concept. As can be seen, the
1990 reference has a larger GFA and, based on this floor area, uses more building materials than the 2000
reference. Energy consumption however is smaller. As discussed in chapter 16, energy consumption of the 1990
reference is only based on a spatial energy use, whereas all concepts of the year 2000 are determined through
combining spatial and personal consumption of energy.
Table 17.01: Environmental features of the traditional office worker concept for the year 1990 and 2000
'no' stands for number, 'prop' for proportion, 'tot' for total, 'pers' for personal, and 'spat' for spatial typical values
concept type employees space materials energy
typical > no prop tot dur pers total spat total spat pers total
unit > p % p d/wk m2/p m2 ton/m2 kton MJ/m2 MJ/p GJ
1990 traditional worker

5 days central office 100 100.0 100 5.0 28.0 2,800 2.10 5.88 1,258 N/A 3,523
TOTAL 2,800 5.88 3,523
5 days central office 100.0 100 5.0 24.0 2,400 2.10 5.04 1,063 15,701 4,121
TOTAL 2,400 5.04 4,121
Table 17.02 presents the values determined for employee travel. There is no difference between the 1990 and
2000 reference. An overview of the separate emissions by business or commuter travel is not given; they are
already summed.
Table 17.02: Travel features of the traditional office worker concept

'bizz trav' stands for business travel, 'comm trav' for commuter travel, 'tot' for total, 'dur' for duration, and 'pers' for personal
concept type employees employee travel
1 1
bizz trav comm trav total
typical > tot dur pers total pers total fuel CO2 CO VOCs NOx SO2 PO10
unit > p d/wk GJ/p GJ GJ/p GJ GJ ton ton ton kg kg kg

5 days central office 100 5.0 23.91 1,913 20.33 2,033 3,945 313 3.75 2.33 532 35.2 58.6
TOTAL 1,913 2,033 3,945 313 3.75 2.33 532 35.2 58.6
5 days central office 100 5.0 23.91 1,913 20.33 2,033 3,945 313 3.75 2.33 532 35.2 58.6
TOTAL 1,913 2,033 3,945 313 3.75 2.33 532 35.2 58.6
1: Basis are the values previously determined, multiplied by 46 weeks of 5 working days a year.
An environmental unit such as the environmental cost can be used to obtain comparable values for all
environmental aspects. The environmental cost was determined using the methodology described in chapter 16.
Table 17.03 presents the values determined.
The relative significant influence of employee travel on the total environmental cost is an interesting outcome.
Commuter travel contributes approximately 17%, provided the consumption of water (not included in this
assessment) does not contribute more than 3.0% in total. The contribution of commuter travel is more substantial
than based on the calculations presented in chapter 06. Based on the assumptions for business travel, employee
travel in total is even responsible for 28% of the environmental load of the office concept. This indicates that the
remarks made in chapter 06 and 15 - namely, that the assessment tool used is probably too optimistic about
commuter travel - were correct. Nevertheless, energy consumption remains the most important aspect.

Table 17.03: Environmental costs of the traditional office worker concept

'bizz trav' stands for business travel, 'comm trav' for commuter travel, 'spat' for spatial, 'pers' for personal,
and 'env' for environmental cost
concept type materials energy employee travel total
1 1
bizz trav comm trav total
typical > spat total spat pers total pers bizz pers comm total env
e€/m2 2
unit > ke€ e€/m e€/p ke€ e€/p ke€ e€/p ke€ ke€ ke€

5 days central office 10.03 28.08 34.66 N/A 97.05 315 25.22 263 26.32 51.55 176.68
TOTAL 28.08 97.05 25.22 26.32 51.55 176.68
5 days central office 8.21 19.70 27.39 420.09 107.74 315 25.22 263 26.32 51.55 178.99
TOTAL 19.70 107.74 25.22 26.32 51.55 178.99
17.03.02 Instance of the assessment of a telework concept
As an example of the assessment of the telework concepts, this section presents some tables of the assessment
of the guest office worker concept, based on 3 days of telework. Table 17.04 presents the determination of
environmental features. In table 17.04, it is visible which part of the personnel causes which demand for space,
building materials, and energy. The 20% in the column 'prop' represent employees who never leave the office
during working hours. The first 80% is the contribution of the teleworkers to the use of space, materials and
energy in the central office. The second 80% shows the contribution of teleworkers to the use of these in the guest
office. The totals (dark rows) can be compared to features of the two reference concepts presented previously.
For employee travel, the values were determined accordingly.
Table 17.04: Environmental features of the 3-days telework variant of the guest office worker concept
'no' stands for number, 'tot' for total, 'pers' for personal, and 'spat' for spatial values
concept type employees space materials energy
typical > tot dur pers total spat total spat pers total
2 2 2 2
unit > p d/wk m /p m ton/m kton MJ/m MJ/p GJ
guest worker
central office 20 5.0 24.0 480 2.10 1.01 1,063 15,701 824
3 days central office 80 2.0 9.6 768 2.10 1.61 1,063 15,701 1,319
guest office 80 3.0 12.0 960 2.10 2.02 1,063 15,701 1,774
TOTAL 2,208 4.64 3,917
Table 17.06 presents the determination of the environmental cost, enabling comparison of all aspects.
Table 17.06: Environmental costs of the 3-days telework variant of the guest office worker concept - 'bizz trav' and 'comm
trav' stand for business and commuter travel, 'spat' for spatial, 'pers' for personal, and 'env' for environmental cost
concept type materials energy employee travel total
bizz trav1 comm trav1 total
typical > spat total spat pers total pers bizz pers comm total env
2 2
unit > e€/m ke€ e€/m e€/p ke€ e€/p ke€ e€/p ke€ ke€ ke€
guest worker
central office 8.21 3.94 27.39 420.09 21.55 0 0.00 263 5.26 5.26 30.75
3 days central office 8.21 6.31 27.39 420.09 34.48 126 10.09 105 8.42 18.51 59.30
guest office 8.21 7.88 27.39 420.09 46.46 189 15.13 0 0.00 15.13 69.47
TOTAL 18.13 102.48 25.22 13.69 38.91 159.52

To clarify the performance of this concept with respect to the reference concepts, the typical values and
environmental cost were converted to improvement factors. Table 17.07 presents these factors, based on
comparison of the environmental cost.
Table 17.07: Improvement factors of the 3-days telework variant of the guest office worker concept,
based on environmental costs - 'env' stands for environmental costs, and 'impr' for improvement factor
office concept m aterials energy travel total
100 employees env impr env impr env impr env impr
unit / ref year > ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990
1990 traditional w orker
5 days 28.1 1.00 97.0 1.00 51.5 1.00 176.7 1.00
2000 traditional w orker
5 days 19.7 1.43 107.7 0.90 51.5 1.00 179.0 0.99
guest w orker 179.0
3 days 18.1 1.55 102.5 0.95 38.9 1.32 159.5 1.11
Evident is the better performance of the use of building materials and employee travel. The performance of energy
consumption is worse. Expressed in environmental costs, energy consumption is less favourable than in
megajoules. This can be explained through the large proportion of electrical energy in the absolute value of
primary energy. The environmental load of 1 MJ of electricity is greater than of 1 MJ of gas. Telework might
reduce the building-related consumption of gas; the use of electricity however remains substantial.
The other office concepts were assessed accordingly. Section 17.04 will discuss the overall comparison.
17.04 Outcome
17.04.01 Separate results
The guest office worker

In the case of the guest office worker concept, for the use of space and building materials, the 1-day telework
variant is most favourable. When considering energy consumption, the 3-days telework variant is most favourable.
It should be reminded that, in terms of space use, the 2-days and 3-days variants are combined, because a 2-day
guest office worker uses half the workplace of a 3-day worker. Therefore, the results for these two variants should
be combined. In this case, in terms of energy consumption, they still form the most efficient solution. As a result of
reduced commuter travel, the use of transport fuel and the production of emissions are smaller as an office
employee teleworks on more days.
Figure 17.09 illustrates the total environmental loads of the concept, in the case of all four telework variants. The
dashed lines represent the two references. Lower means more favourable.
The jumps in the results are due to the assumptions. In the case of one day of telework an extra workplace is not
required, in the case of 2- and 3-telework days workplaces are-shared (making the first relatively less favourable
than the second), and in the case of the 4-day variant, an extra personal workplace needs to be reserved. As a
result of the relative importance of energy consumption and travel, the 3-days variant of the guest office worker
concepts proves most favourable, even if the result is combined with the 2-days variant.

environm ental load of the guest w orker concept

2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
env load per em ployee

1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
days of guest w ork
Figure 17.09: The environmental loads (in e€/p) of the guest office worker concept
The satellite office worker

In the case of the satellite office worker concept, the 4-days telework variant is the most favourable solution for all
criteria. The increasing number of telework days improves the unfavourable starting-condition of the occupation
rate of the satellite office. As a result of reduced commuter travel to the central office and shorter travel distances
to the satellite office, more telework days lead to smaller consumption of primary energy by transport means, and
to less emission of exhaust gases.
Figure 17.10 illustrates the environmental loads of the concept.
environm ental load of the satellite w orker concept

2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
days of satellite w ork
Figure 17.10: The environmental loads (in e€/p) of the satellite office worker concept
The results show a clear relationship between the number of telework days and the reduction of environmental
load. Together with the positive impact of a more favourable occupation rate, the reduction of commuter travel
proves important to the end-result. The results are the best for the 4-days telework variant.
The business centre worker

In the case of the business centre worker concept, for the use of space, the 4-days variant is most favourable
(although differences are small). As with the satellite office, this is due to the improving conditions of the
occupation rate of the business centre. In terms of the use of building materials, the 1-day telework variant is most
favourable, just ahead of the 4-days variant. This is due to the amount of building materials in the business centre
(larger than in the central office), growing in importance when switching to more telework days. In terms of energy
consumption, the 2-days telework variant is the most favourable solution. Beside the starting-conditions of energy

consumption (as treated in chapter 16), this optimum is mainly a reflection of energy consequences of the use of
space and building materials, comparable to a break-even point in economic studies. In the case of more telework
days, the reduction of commuter travel to the central office and shorter travel distances to the business centre
lead to a smaller demand for fuel, and to fewer emissions.
Figure 17.11 illustrates the total environmental loads of the concept.
environm ental load of the business centre concept

2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
days of business centre w ork
Figure 17.11: The environmental loads (in e€/p) of the business centre worker concept
Due to the relatively unfavourable starting-conditions - 60% occupancy as starting-condition, needing to be

luxurious and requiring the highest standards for climate-control - for the 1-, 2- and 3-telework days variants, the
business centre worker concept is less favourable than the reference project. The reduced employee travel and
better occupancy make the 4-days telework variant the most profitable solution in terms of the environmental cost.
However, the results are indifferent with regard to the traditional office worker.
The home office worker

In the case of the home office worker concept, for the use of space, the 2-days variant is most favourable,
because this variant does not require extra space. In terms of the use of building materials, the 2-days and 4-days
telework variants are equally favourable. In terms of energy consumption, the 4-days telework variant is most
favourable.
Figure 17.12 illustrates the total environmental loads.
environm ental load of the hom e w orker concept
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
days of hom e w ork
Figure 17.12: The environmental loads (in e€/p) of the home office worker concept

The home office worker concept performs inconstantly. There is a leap in the results at the 3-days variant. This is
a result of the extra room required for office work. In all cases, with the basic assumptions for these calculations,
the residence turns out to be a good solution for office work. Employee travel is strongly reduced by telework at
the home office.
The instant office worker

As previously clarified, different traditional references needed to be defined for every variant of the instant office
worker concept. Business travel increases with the number of telework days. The instant office worker concept
therefore seems less favourable. However, as the figures for business travel shift for the reference as well, the
instant office worker concept performs relatively well.
The potential improvement of energy consumption is especially notable because all other office concepts could
only lead to limited improvement with respect to the year 1990. The limited improvement potential of employee
travel is also striking. For the other office concepts, the greatest improvements are achieved here. The relatively
unfavourable performance of the instant office worker concept can be explained by the increase of business
travel, increasing the environmental load as well.
Figure 17.13 illustrates the total environmental loads of the concept. As the reference shifts, the columns that
seem constant are actually developing a greater difference to the reference.
Environm ental im pact of instant office w ork
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.13: The environmental loads (in e€/p) of the instant office worker concept
For all environmental aspects, the 4-days telework variant is the most favourable solution.
The instant office worker concept can be seen as a work concept for busy commercial companies, leading to an
important reduction of office space, materials and energy. That is, of course, when the company truly limits the
amount of office space in the central office. Due to the increase of business travel distances, the importance of
travel to the total environmental load grows (up to more than 60%). In the case of a 4-day telework situation, the
use of building materials is hardly an issue anymore. Therefore, it is expected that, in the case of office
organisations with a lot of business travel, a sustainable form of transport will have a more significant positive
effect on the environmental load of the office concept.
17.04.02 Comparison of typical units
Overview
Table 17.08 gives an overview of the final results of all telework concepts, expressed by means of typical units,
improvement factors based on these, and the overall rank for sustainability. For the instant office worker concept,
only the performance of the 1-day variant is presented because of reasons mentioned previously. Further in this
section, the other variants of the instant office worker concept will be discussed.

Table 17.08: Final results, improvement factors, and ranks of the different telework concepts, based on typical units
office concept space materials energy travel
100 employees gfa impr rank mass impr rank fuel impr rank fuel impr rank
unit / ref year > m2 1990 kton 1990 GJ 1990 GJ 1990
5 days 2,800 1.00 19 5.88 1.00 17 3,523 1.00 3 3,945 1.00 18
5 days 2,400 1.17 11 5.04 1.17 11 4,121 0.85 12 3,945 1.00 18
guest worker
1 day 2,016 1.39 3 4.23 1.39 4 3,713 0.95 5 3,620 1.09 13
2 days 2,592 1.08 14 5.44 1.08 13 4,325 0.81 14 3,295 1.20 9
3 days 2,208 1.27 8 4.64 1.27 9 3,917 0.90 10 2,970 1.33 3
4 days 2,784 1.01 18 5.85 1.01 16 4,529 0.78 17 2,644 1.49 1
satellite worker
1 day 2,400 1.17 11 5.04 1.17 12 4,121 0.85 13 3,722 1.06 17
2 days 2,208 1.27 8 4.64 1.27 9 3,917 0.90 10 3,498 1.13 12
3 days 2,112 1.33 7 4.44 1.33 8 3,815 0.92 9 3,274 1.20 8
4 days 2,016 1.39 3 4.23 1.39 3 3,713 0.95 4 3,051 1.29 6
business centre worker
1 day 2,656 1.05 15 5.71 1.03 14 4,461 0.79 15 3,711 1.06 16
2 days 2,729 1.03 17 5.96 0.99 19 4,588 0.77 19 3,477 1.13 11
3 days 2,688 1.04 16 5.95 0.99 18 4,580 0.77 18 3,242 1.22 7
4 days 2,571 1.09 13 5.76 1.02 15 4,484 0.79 16 3,008 1.31 5
home worker
1 day 2,016 1.39 3 4.23 1.39 4 3,713 0.95 5 3,620 1.09 13
2 days 1,632 1.72 1 3.43 1.72 2 3,305 1.07 1 3,295 1.20 9
3 days 2,208 1.27 8 4.23 1.39 4 3,747 0.94 8 2,970 1.33 3
4 days 1,824 1.54 2 3.43 1.72 1 3,339 1.06 2 2,644 1.49 1
instant worker
1 day 2,016 1.39 3 4.23 1.39 4 3,713 0.95 5 3,620 1.09 13
The use of space

With respect to the 1990 traditional office worker concept, all telework concepts demonstrate a reduction of office
space. This not always the case when compared to the 2000 reference. For better performance with respect to
this reference, an improvement by at least a factor of 1.17 is necessary, showing that the business centre worker
concept and some variants of the the guest office worker concept do not lead to improvement.
The largest improvement (factor 1.54) is achieved by the 4-days home office worker concept. The smallest
improvement (factor 1.01) is obtained by the 4-days guest office worker concept.

A similar image of results is visible in terms of the use of building materials: almost all telework variants lead to an
improvement. The differences however are greater as a result of the typical features of the office types.
Largest improvement (factor 1.72) is achieved by the 2- and 4-days home office worker concept; the worst
performance (factor 0.99) is achieved by the 2- and 3-days business centre worker concept.
Energy consumption
Except for the home office worker concept (factor 1.37 in the 4-days variant), with respect to the 1990 reference
there is no significant improvement of energy consumption. However, when the results are compared to the 2000
reference (which has less favourable features than the 1990 version), every telework variant means an
improvement. In that respect, one could note that the altered conditions for energy consumption in the year 2000
generally are obstructing a great improvement factor with respect to the standards of 1990.
The worst performance (factor 0.93) is achieved by the 4-days guest office worker concept.

Employee travel
All telework concepts demonstrate an important reduction of commuter travel and thereby of employee travel in
total. Largest improvement (factor 1.49) is achieved by the 4-day variants of the guest and home office worker
concepts; smallest improvements are achieved by the 1-day variants of the satellite office and business centre
worker concept (factor 1.05).
17.04.03 Comparison of environmental costs
Basic comparison
As previously determined, in most cases, the performance of building materials expressed in environmental cost
is more profitable than when considered in typical units. Beside specific material differences between the office
place types, this is due to better sustainable building standards in the year 2000.
In comparison with the traditional office worker concept of 1990, the office concepts studied do not succeed to
reduce the energy consumed by buildings. This is due to the unfavourable characteristic for energy consumption
in the year 2000, amplified by an unfavourable division between gas consumption and use of electricity, of which
the latter causes more environmental damage.
In all cases, the environmental load of employee travel is smaller than with the two references.
The dominance of energy in the total environmental costs emphasises the importance of sustainable energy
technologies. The substantial contribution of travel to the total environmental cost underscores the importance of
sustainable transport systems and the improvement potential of telework concepts. This is especially the case for
office organisations of which the employees need to travel a lot.
Figure 17.14 graphically illustrates the outcome for all telework concepts, expressed by means of environmental
improvement factors with respect to the 1990 reference.
1.40
1. guest w orker
im provem ent factors
4
1.30
2. satellite w orker
1.20
3. bizz centre w orker
1.10 5 2
1 4. home w orker
1.00
3 5. instant w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
num ber of telew ork days
Figure 17.14: Outcome of the office concept assessment
The instant office, a comparison in the case of more hours of business travel
The instant office worker concept was assessed differently for the 2-, 3-, and 4-days telework variants, because
business travel needed to be increased to make these variants realistic. When business travel is accordingly
increased for the other telework concepts (i.e. 10 hours of business travel for the 2-days variant, 15 hours for the
3-days variant, and 20 hours for the 4-days variant), a comparison is possible involving the 2-, 3-, and 3-days
variant of the instant office worker concept. Figure 17.15 illustrates the outcome of the comparison. Since
business travel is not distinguishing for any of the concepts, the environmental improvement factors are smaller
than in figure 17.17.
Every variant of the instant office worker concept can be compared to the well-performing 4-days variant of the
home office worker concept based on 5 hours of business travel. In this case, the 10-hours business travel variant
of the instant worker performs similarly. When the number of hours of business travel is raised to 15 or 20, the
instant office worker concept (employees working 'on the road' as much as possible, requiring only a small
proportion of the original office space) leads to the lowest environmental cost. The home office worker concept
however is still relatively favourable in comparison with the other office concepts, though differences are much

smaller than in the case of less business travel. In the case of these amounts of business travel hours, employee
travel is responsible for almost 2/3 of the total annual environmental load, and the office buildings become
relatively unimportant.
1.50
5 1. guest w orker
1.40
1.30
4
1.20 3. bizz centre w orker

2
1
1.10 4. home w orker
3
1.00
5. instant w orker
0.90
5h 5h 10 h 15 h 20 h
business travel duration
Figure 17.17: Outcome of the assessment in the case of increasing hours of business travel
17.05 Sensitivity tests and conclusions
Some sensitivity tests were needed for parameters that were assumed. I divided the sensitivity tests between
assumptions about buildings, occupation rates, and employee travel. Apart from these, I took a closer look at the
home office worker concept, and made recalculations taking into account different solutions for the floor layout
(based on findings presented in chapter 13).
17.05.01 Preliminary conclusions
Based on the basic conditions of the assessment methodology in chapter 16, the following concise preliminary
conclusions can be drawn from the assessments presented previously:
Office concepts that significantly reduce the use of space for personal workplaces (the home and instant
office worker concepts) perform well in terms of environmental load.
Office concepts located close to the employees' residential areas in general lead to reduced travel and better
The occupation rate of an office used by more than one organisation is important to the actual use of space
and eventual environmental load.
For the traditional office worker concept, in the case of the 1990-reference, approximately 55% of the
environmental load is caused by energy consumption, 29% by employee travel, and 16% by the use of
building materials. This is based on 5 hours of business travel per employee. In the case of the 2000-
reference, the importance of energy consumption increases to 60%, employee travel still contributes 29%,
and the use of building materials has become less important, causing 11 % of the environmental load. For the
telework concepts, as a result of reduced commuter travel (and in some cases business travel as well) the
importance of travel is diminished, making energy consumption even more dominant. This emphasises the
necessity of the use of sustainable energy resources and energy-efficient technologies in offices.
In the case of more hours of business travel, the contribution of employee travel to the total environmental
load can grow to approximately 60%, putting energy consumption of the building in second place (36%) and
making building materials relatively unimportant. This means that for organisations with a pattern of long
travel distances, the use of sustainable transportation is decisive to the ultimate environmental performance.

In the study presented, beside a difference in consumption of fuel between the telework concepts, emissions
of the transport means did not differ significantly. Offices located near nodes of public transport however have
a slightly more sustainable pattern of emissions.
17.05.02 Assumptions about buildings
The sensitivity tests of this subsection concerned the following assumptions:

The personal use of space for every office place type
The amount of building materials in proportion to the central office
Energy consumption in proportion to the central office
Attribution of energy consumption to the office function of buildings
These parameters did not have to be tested on the central office and the guest office (which is a central office for
a client). And except for the use of space, the instant office has not been subject to assumptions because its
character is space not specifically designed for office work, leading to zero values for building materials and
energy. Therefore, testing of sensitivity was only useful for the satellite office, business centre, and home office,
whose values are given in table 17.11, which is a part of table 16.07. The values assumed are set in bordered
cells.
Table 17.11: Basic values for the satellite office, business centre, and home office, with assumptions in bordered cells
(3)
prop (1)
typ (2)
prop (1)
typical prop (1)
dur (1)
2 2 2 2 2
unit % m /p % ton/m e€/m % h/day MJ/m e€/m MJ/p e€/p
business centre 100 24.0 110 2.31 9.03 110 12 1,169 30.13 15,701 420.09
home office 50 12.0 80 1.68 6.57 120 8 850 21.91 15,701 420.09
A first test concerned equal proportional values for all office types, as shown in table 17.12. It was no use to alter
the values for the duration of energy consumption, because the basic energy data used for separate office
buildings was based on 24-hour measurements, whereas energy consumption of the residence cannot be entirely
related to the office work executed in it.
Table 17.14: Equal values for the satellite office, business centre, and home office
(3)
prop (1)
typ (2)
prop (1)
typical prop (1)
dur (1)
2 2 2 2 2
business centre 100 24.0 100 2.10 8.21 100 12 1,063 27.39 15,701 420.09
home office 100 24.0 100 2.10 8.21 100 8 709 18.26 15,701 420.09
With the values of table 17.12, the final results in particular alter for the 3- and 4-days home worker concept. The
satellite worker concept becomes 3 to 10% less favourable, whereas the business centre worker concept overall
becomes 3% more favourable, as figure 17.16 demonstrates. In this graph, the old lines are dotted.
I should note that, in this calculation, the residential workplace becomes a luxurious room of 24 m2, which is
probably unrealistic. In contrast, it is imaginable that the proportion of energy consumption of the home office is
worse than the 100% and 125% assumed previously. Furthermore, until now the business centre has been
considered a building with less favourable conditions for the use of building materials and energy. One could
argue however that a business centre needs to be adapted to the latest technology and standards, including
aspects of sustainability. For the satellite office, the same assumptions as for the central office seem reasonable.
All together, table 17.13 shows new values for these office types.

1.40
2b. satellite new

1.30 4a
3b. bizz centre new
1.20 4b. home new
2a
1.10 4b 2b 2a. satellite original
3b 3a. bizz centre original

1.00
3a 4a. home original
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.16: Improvement factors for the satellite office, business centre, and home office worker concepts, from the initial
calculations (thin dotted a lines) and recalculations based on equal spatial, material and energetic conditions (thick b lines)
Table 17.13: Adjusted, reasonable values for the satellite office, business centre, and home office
prop (1)
typ (2)
prop (1)
typical(3) prop (1)
dur (1)
unit % m2/p % ton/m2 e€/m2 % h/day MJ/m2 e€/m2 MJ/p e€/p
business centre 100 24.0 80 1.68 6.57 80 12 850 21.91 15,701 420.09
home office 50 12.0 100 2.10 8.21 150 8 1,063 27.39 15,701 420.09
Figure 17.17 presents the newly calculated results. In this version, the business centre worker concept becomes
more favourable (4 to 10% more). For the 3- and 4-days variants, the home worker concept is 3 and 4% less
favourable, as a result of more consumption of energy.
1.40
2b. satellite new
1.30 4a
3b. bizz centre new
4b
1.20 4b. home new
2a
1.10 3b 2a. satellite original
2b
3a. bizz centre original
1.00
3a 4a. home original
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.17: Improvement factors for the satellite office, business centre, and home office worker concepts,
from the initial calculations (thin dotted a lines) and recalculations based on reasonable new conditions (thick c lines)
17.05.03 Assumptions about the occupation rate
Conversion of the occupation rate of the satellite office and business centre
The basic assumptions for the actual use of space, especially the conversion of the occupation rate used for the
satellite office and business centre (see the rows of white cells in table 17.14, a part of table 16.08), are important
aspects to be tested on sensitivity. Especially for the business centre worker concept the initial assumptions
proved unfavourable.

Table 17.16: Initial conversion of the occupation rate for the satellite office and business centre, in bordered cells
(3)
building type features actual personal space use explanation
(1) (1) (2)
occ prop typ

satellite office 75 80 18.0 0.0 4.8 7.2 10.8 14.4 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,25 x (teledays - 1)))
business centre 60 80 24.0 0.0 8.0 13.7 18.0 21.3 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,1 x (teledays - 1)))
When the occupation rate is set at 100% and the original conversion is omitted, table 17.15 presents the new
values.
Table 17.15: New conditions for the satellite office and business centre without occupation rate conversions
(3)
occ(1) prop(1) typ(2)

satellite office 100 80 18.0 0.0 3.6 7.2 10.8 14.4 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100))
business centre 100 80 24.0 0.0 4.8 9.6 14.4 19.2 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100))
Figure 17.18 presents the environmental improvement factors of the final outcome. As can be seen, the
performance of the satellite office worker concept only differs for the 1-telework day variant. The other variants
show no difference because the occupation rate already was 100%. Instead of deterioration, the business centre
now shows a significant improvement, leading to results almost comparable to the satellite worker concept.
Figure 17.18 demonstrates that the assumptions for the occupation rate importantly influence the environmental
performance. Improving the usual occupation rate of 60% therefore is an important measure for sustainability.
1.40
2b. satellite new
1.30
1.20 3b. bizz centre new

2a
1.10 2a. satellite original
3c
1.00 2c
3a 3a. bizz centre original
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.18: Improvement factors for the satellite office and business centre worker concepts,
from the initial calculations (thin dotted a lines) and recalculations without occupation rate conversions (thick b lines)
Considering the office concepts in a narrow context (the office organisation studied and the offices used by it),
figure 17.18 definitely gives the correct picture. In a broader context, e.g. on the national scale of the real estate
market, spatial inefficiencies however lead to extensive use of office and unfavourable environmental loads.
Including better standards for the business centre

When the results of figure 17.18 are combined with better technological standards for the business centre and an
average use of space (24 m2) for the satellite office, figure 17.19 presents the new results. The business centre
worker concept now performs significantly better. The difference between figures 17.18 and 17.19 indicates the
greater importance of space use to the end-result than properties for the use of building materials and energy
consumption.

1.40
2b. satellite new

1.30
1.20 3b. bizz centre new

2a
1.10 3c 2a. satellite original
2c
1.00
3a 3a. bizz centre original
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.19: Improvement factors for the satellite office and business centre worker concepts,
from the initial calculations (thin dotted a lines) and recalculations omitting the occupation rate conversion and involving an
average use of space for the satellite office and better technological standards for the business centre (thick c lines)
With these recalculations, the business centre can measure up to other concepts that perform relatively well. In
this case, the basic condition is however that the spatial inefficiencies due to a low occupation rate are not
accounted for. Furthermore, the business centre should use sustainable materials and modern technologies for
energy consumption. This seems the case with many of the business centres of Regus, of which the Teleport
Towers in Amsterdam, Netherlands is an example (see figure 17.22).
Figure 17.20: The Teleport Towers business centre of office space provider Regus, in Amsterdam, Netherlands
Different assumptions for the guest office

For the original calculations, at the guest office space was assigned to the teleworker according to the following
principles:
1 day of telework: no special workdesk necessary
2 days of telework: shared with employees working 3 days per week
3 days of telework: shared with employees working 2 days per week
4 days of telework: personal workplace
For teleworking employees the use of space in the central office was calculated as follows: the basic personal use
of space, divided by the number of telework days. If this principle were reversely applied to the guest office, a
smoother performance development would be seen, as demonstrated by the thick continuous line in figure 17.21.
Notice that in this case, even in the 4-days variant, the guest worker does not have a personal workplace of 24 m2
at disposal, explaining why the smooth line ends somewhat higher than with the initial calculation.

If a guest worker had a personal workplace at his disposal immediately, even in the 1-telework day variant, the
environmental performance would be considerably worse, as the dashed thick line in figure 17.21 shows.
Logically, only with the 4-days variant the concept reaches the result of the original calculation.
1.20
1b
1.10 1b. guest new

1a
1.00
0 1c
1a. guest original
0.90
0.80 1c. guest personal
0.70
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.21: Improvement factors for the guest worker concept, from the initial calculations (thin dotted line 1a),
from recalculations based on a gradual increase of guest worker space (thick continuous line1b),
and from recalculations based on a personal workplace for every telework variant (thick dashed line1c)
These exercises support two important conclusions. To assign a personal workplace to someone who is present
for less than 4 days a week means environmental deterioration. Furthermore, if a workplace is provided anyway,
desksharing is an essential measure for sustainability.
17.05.04 Assumptions about employee travel
For employee travel, the assumptions concerned:

The proportion of long-distance trains, local trains, diesel buses, LPG buses, and trams in public transport
The average speed of cars
The commuter travel duration, in the case of the central office, satellite office, and business centre
The proportion of employees travelling by personal car, public transport, or bike or foot, in the case of the
central office, satellite office, and business centre
Proportions for public transport

Altering the first parameter, the proportions for public transport, did not have a visible influence on the final results,
even in the case of a 100% use of diesel buses (most unfavourable) or high-speed trains (most favourable),
because the individual environmental differences between the means of public transport are not significant.
Car speed
The average speed of cars was altered in two ways: assuming an optimal motorway infrastructure to the office
(average speed: 100 km/h) and a jammed urban area (average speed: 20 km/h). The most-striking results of
these recalculations can be found in figure 17.22.
The dashed lines depict the results for high speeds, and the continuous lines for low speeds. The office concepts
can be easily distinguished because their basic course remains the same. As can be seen, from an environmental
point of view, high-speed travel towards the office and clients is more favourable. However, the change in
emissions when switching to greater speed was not involved in these calculations. With respect to a basic speed
of e.g. 60 km/h, with higher speeds emissions are probably less favourable. However, this also applies to lower
speeds in traffic jams, when cars need to brake and pull up repetitively. Therefore, both high- and low-speed
results are expected to be less favourable (lower lines) than in figure 17.22.

1.40
1. guest w orker
1.30

1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
4. home w orker
0.80
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.22: Improvement factors for the office concepts, from recalculations based on a high speed (dashed lines) and low
speed of cars (continuous lines); the initial results lie somewhat above those of low speeds

The environmental load of petrol was estimated to be 20% greater than that of natural gas with an equal value of
primary energy. However, a more significant difference is imaginable. I recalculated the concepts on the basis of
an environmental load of petrol twice as unfavourable as gas. In this case, the traditional office worker concept,
which relies more on personal cars rather than public transport, became slightly less favourable, improving the
results of all telework concepts.
The duration of commuter travel

A different pattern of commuter travel was tested on the central office, subsequently studying the changed results
for the telework concepts. The first change was to double the travel distance to the central office (two times 60
minutes per day), the second change was to half the distance (two times 15 minutes per day). Figure 17.23 shows
the most striking results of these recalculations. Dashed lines depict the results for doubled distances, continuous
lines for halved distances. Again, the separate concepts can be distinguished by their basic course. The results
from the initial calculations, which are not depicted in the graph, lie in-between.
Figure 17.23 demonstrates that in the case of a long distance to the central office, the application of an office
concept based on telework is worthwhile from an environmental point of view. In the half-distance situation, the
business centre and satellite office are not any closer than the central office. Therefore, their advantage in terms
of improvements to employee travel is greatly lost.
1.50
1. guest w orker
1.40
1.30 2. satellite w orker
1.20 3. bizz centre w orker

1.00
5. instant w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.23: Improvement factors for the office concepts, from recalculations based on double commuter distances (dashed
lines), and half commuter distances (continuous lines); the initial results lie somewhat above those of half distances
Use of cars versus public transport

Regardless of their functional consequences, two extreme situations were compared: every employee uses only a
personal car, or they use only public transport. This was applied to all office concepts. Figure 17.24 shows the

most-striking results. Dashed lines depict the 100% car situation, and continuous lines the 100% public transport
situation.
1.40
1. guest w orker
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
4. home w orker
0.80
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.24: Improvement factors for the office concepts, in recalculations with use of cars only (dashed lines), and public
transport only (continuous lines)
When people use only cars, the difference between the traditional office concept and the telework concept
becomes greater, to the advantage of the telework concept. Hence the better environmental performance of the
solution of 100% of cars, especially for the home office worker concept. In the situation of 100% of public
transport, in most cases the traditional concept relatively becomes more favourable, yet not much.
17.05.05 A closer look at the home office worker concept
As discussed in chapter 16, a basic assumption for the home office was that the residence is used already during
daytime. This is imaginable when the partner of the office employee or somebody else is at home, working,
housekeeping, or taking care of children. When the residence normally is not used during daytime, the normal
residential consumption of energy increases during working hours. In order to check the influence of this, I
assumed an average 4-member family house of four times the mean floor area of an office employee: 96 m2. I
assumed also that energy consumption is increased by 20%, one-sixth of the normal spatial consumption of
energy for the home office, only applying to the eight hours of work. The results from this new calculation,
inclusing data from the basic calculations, can be seen in figure 17.25.
1.40
1.30
new calculation
(empty house)
1.20
1.10
1.00 original calculation

(full house)
0.90
0.80
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.25: Improvement factors for the home office worker concept, from the initial calculation (the dotted line) and
recalculation taking into account an increase of energy consumption for the whole house (the continuous line)
Figure 17.25 demonstrates that if an office employee starts working at home, whereas this residence previously
was unoccupied, there will be a deterioriation of environmental performance in the case of a 1- or 3-teleworkdays

variant. The 2-days variant shows hardly any improvement, and the 4-days variant stays beneath factor 1.1
improvement. The basic assumption for the home office therefore is significant to the final result.
A room for all variants

If the office employee wants to have a personal room for work at home, or if the office organisation demands this
for reasons of working conditions, there will be an additional floor area of 12 m2 for all variants. On the basis of
this, figure 17.26 presents the two situations discussed previously: a room for working in a house that is already
occupied during working hours (the dashed line) and one in a house that normally would be empty (the continuous
line).
Figure 17.26 emphasises that when an extra room is established for office work in the residence it will be more
sustainable if this room is used as many days as possible (provided the amount of space at the central office is
accordingly reduced).
1.40
1.30
new calculation
1.20 (empty house)
1.10
1.00
0.90 original calculation

(full house)
0.80
0.70
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.26: Improvement factors for the home office worker concept, in the case of an extra room for working for all
telework variants, in an occupied (the dashed line) and empty house (the continuous line)
17.05.06 Taking into account different office layouts
Results with different office layout solutions in the central office

The main assessment and additional sensitivity tests presented previously were based on a reference values for
the personal use of space and environmental cost per m2, which were deduced from the case study of office
buildings treated in chapter 06. As discussed in chapter 13, the greater part of the buildings assessed in this case
study are cellular offices. Therefore, when the average personal use of space is presumed to reduce as a result of
telework, until now, the remaining space at the central office has still been based on a cellular office layout,
though assigned to a smaller number of employees continuously present, implying shared use of workplaces. In
this case it however is more logical to switch to another layout principle, such as introduced in chapter 02 and
assessed in chapter 13.
The telework concepts were recalculated on the basis of a different layout principle in the central and satellite
office. The other telework offices (the guest office, business centre and home office) were still based on the
personal use of space determined according to the methodology in chapter 16.
Results for a group office layout

Figure 17.27 presents the improvement factors calculated for a group office layout in the central and satellite
office.
The differences with the original performances indicate that the improvement factors are amplified. With the
exception of the satellite office worker concept, the improvements however become relatively smaller in cases of
many telework days. This is a result of the telework office (which is no group office) becoming more influential.
The home office worker concept achieves a factor of 1.45 in the case of 2 telework days.
In contrast to the assessment of chapter 13, the use of energy is now included in the overall results.

1.60
1. guest w orker
im provem ent factor 1.50
1.40 4 2. satellite w orker
1.30 5 2
1.20
1 4. home w orker
1.10
3
1.00
5. instant w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.27: Improvement factors for the telework concepts, with a group office layout in the central and satellite office
Results for a open-plan office layout

In a similar way, the results were recalculated in the case of an open-plan layout of the central and satellite office.
Figure 17.28 presents the new results. In accordance with the results presented in chapter 13, the telework
concepts now achieve their best performances, up to an improvement factor of 1.49 in the case of 2 telework days
at the home office.
1.60
1. guest w orker
1.50
1.40 4 2. satellite w orker
1.30 5
2
1.20
1
3
1.00
5. instant w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.28: Improvement factors for the telework concepts, with an open-plan office layout in the central and satellite office
In figure 17.28 it is again visible that, with the exception of the satellite worker concept, the performances
deteriorate after one or two days of telework, which is due to the cellular layout of the other telework offices. The
organisation assessed cannot influence these. For an enhanced overall performance, the other offices should also
have a layout solution more effective than the cellular plan.
Results for a combi office layout

Finally, figure 17.29 presents the results calculated when the central and satellite office of the assessed
organisation have a combi office layout. Since innovative office organisations often apply this layout principle,
figure 17.29 perhaps represents a realistic indication of the improvement potential by telework. The results are
less impressive than with the open-plan office, however still an enhancement of the original results.

1.60
1. guest w orker
1.50

1.40 2. satellite w orker
4
1.30
5 2 3. bizz centre w orker
1.20
1.10 1 4. home w orker
1.00 3
5. instant w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 17.29: Improvement factors for the telework concepts, with a combi office layout in the central and satellite office
The recalculations discussed in this subsection were based on the initial calculations of the telework concepts.
Combinations of the different office layout principles with previous sensitivity tests were not recalculated.
Therefore, the individual performances of the telework concepts would alter according to the relationships found
previously in this section.


18 NEW SOLUTIONS FOR OFFICE WORK
The assessments of the previous chapter concerned common solutions for telework concepts. In this final chapter
of The Organisation of Office Work, new or uncommon solutions for office work with a potential for improvement
will be discussed and - if possible - assessed in a similar way as done before.
Figure 18.01: The future of offices: the only way is up? - Centre Pompidou in Paris, France
Contents

18.02 Telework concepts with new office types 412
18.02.01 The transfer office worker concept 412
18.02.02 The district office worker concept 414
18.02.03 Overview of environmental data 416
18.02.04 Assessment results 416
18.03 Concepts of distributed telework offices 418
18.03.02 The flexible office worker concept 419
18.03.03 The free-range office worker concept 420
18.03.04 Results 421
18.04 An existing innovative company: The Vision Web 421
18.04.02 Results for building materials 424
18.04.03 Results for energy consumption 426
18.04.04 Results for employee travel 427
18.04.05 Overall results 427
18.05 Sustainable future organisation of office work 428
18.05.01 Dematerialisation 429
18.05.02 Assignment of tasks to different workforces 430
18.05.03 Division of office work functions 431
18.05.04 Variety of workplace accommodation 434
18.05.05 The new distribution of office work 435
18.05.06 Benefits of the new office work concept 439
410 18 New solutions for office work - F The Organisation of Office Work
18.01 Introduction
In chapter 17, different office concepts were compared, of which the reference concept had a traditional character,
and five others involved telecommuting employees. All office concepts assessed were based on existing office
place types: the guest office, satellite office, business centre, home office, and instant office. They were all
considered in relatively simply.
In the near and distant future, new office types other than the central office and telework offices are imaginable.
Office work may be conducted at more than one or two different places. And even beyond this, office work may be
organised totally differently than we know now. This chapter explores new developments in the organisation of
office work in the light of sustainability: the objective is improvement of environmental performance.
New office types

Section 18.02 starts with two new office place types additional to the ones assessed in chapter 17 and possibly
implying environmental improvement. Both office types can be placed between the business centre and home
office. The first is a business centre located at nodes of infrastructure: roads, railways, airports, etc. Because of
this, it is called the transfer office. The second is located in the vicinity of residents and is meant as an alternative
to the home office, however in a low-profile business centre mode. This new office is called the district office. In
section 18.02, the transfer and district office worker concepts will be discussed. They were assessed in
accordance with the methodology in chapter 16.
Distributed work patterns

With a range of places apt for office work at one's disposal, the office employee needs not to stick to one telework
office in addition to the central office. In fact, many people currently telecommuting already work at more than one
telework office: the home, guest and instant office are quite common, although many people would not realise that
their seat in the train or plane becomes an instant office as soon as they commence working.
In section 18.03, two office worker concepts will be discussed that are more complex than assessed so far. They
are the flexible office worker concept and the free-range office worker concept. In terms of this research, the
flexible worker is an office employee working at any of the known offices (although the concept will be restricted to
avoid unnecessary complications), and the free-range worker is an independently operating person, either having
his own company, or offering free-lance services to other companies. Both concepts will again be assessed
according to the methodology presented in chapter 16.
A real company
The whole approach to determining the potential environmental improvement of different office concepts has
mainly been theoretical. In the case of the companies briefly mentioned and introduced in chapter 15, the simple
forms of telework however are realistic because their employees can merely be referred to as home office
workers. There are not many companies yet whose employees follow distributed work patterns as previously
described. Nevertheless, with the kind cooperation of one of these few companies in the Netherlands, The Vision
Web in Delft, I was able to analyse and assess such a company in terms of sustainability. In section 18.04, The
Vision Web will be introduced and assessed in comparison to a traditional way of organising the same work.
A whole new way of working

This last chapter of the exploration ends with a new concept for office work in the future. In one way, it is a logical
step after the latest developments described in the previous sections; in another way, it means a scale extension
to the regional, national and international economies for a structured and centrally organised way of working,
whilst keeping open all options for individual freedom of work. Section 18.05 step by step explains the ideas
behind this concept and attempts to estimate its potential for sustainability.
F The Organisation of Office Work - 18 New solutions for office work 411
18.02 Telework concepts with new office types
18.02.01 The transfer office worker concept
Introduction
There is no great difference between the features of the transfer office and the business centre. In principle,
business centres may be situated anywhere, although some general assumptions were taken as basic conditions
for the business centre worker concept. The transfer office is specifically located at the node of transport
infrastructure: roads, railways, and airports. As a result of this, the transfer office will have a more dynamic user
profile than the privileged business centre. Business travellers will be able to quickly check-in at a workstation, call
a meeting, or consultate with clients. The transfer office offers all modern office facilities as well as a back office to
support the client. The combination with other commercial facilities such as bars, restaurants, and shops may be
an opportunity to extend this idea. Since the transfer office is located at the crossroads of traffic, it will be easy to
switch (transfer) from one transport mode to another.
In fact, at many airports office services resembling the transfer office described here are already evolving. In these
places, the amenities enlivening these surroundings are usually already present.
On average, the transfer office will be located somewhat closer to the employees' homes than the business
centre. Furthermore, the junction of public and private transport lines will reduce mobility and stimulate the use of
public transport, which may be called more sustainable. The main idea about this concept is therefore reduction of
the environmental cost of travel. Figure 18.02 graphically presents the concept.
Central Office
w orking ref space use/empl commuter travel w orking
max 32 h/w k ref env load materials max 4 days/w k Home 0 h/w k
?
business travel Transfer Office
max 5 days/w k extra space use/empl w orking
Client extra env load materials min 8 h/w k
extra energy cons
Figure 18.02: Graphic scheme of the transfer office concept
Typical values for the use of space, building materials and energy
As with the business centre, the transfer office needs to offer workplaces equal to or surpassing the central office.
The hasty business traveller cannot be put in a narrow booth the moment he touches down to do some work.
Hence the average personal use of space of 24 m2 per employee chosen for this concept.
In terms of use of building material and energy consumption, the transfer office is placed between the business
centre and district office discussed further on.
The actual use of space

The basic occupation rate of the transfer office is assumed equal to the business centre. Due to its location and its
smaller size than the business centre, the transfer office depends on more numerous, smaller clients. Therefore, I
assumed that employees of the office organisation studied occupy 7.5% of the transfer office (one eighth of the
occupied area). In this basic situation, the actual personal use of space is equal to the business centre: 40 m2.
Due to the 7.5% occupation share, increasing the number of telework days will slowly reduce the actual personal
use of space. Figure 18.03 graphically demonstrates this.
100% ('full house')
hired floor area

hiring 30.0% 1/0.825 = 121% pers space use
22.5% 1/0.750 = 133% pers space use
60% (average) 15.0% 1/0.675 = 154% pers space use
basic situation situation of greater contribution

1 day per w eek w orkers 2 / 3 / 4 day per w eek w orkers
Figure 18.03: Determination of the actual personal use of space in the case of a transfer office
Employee travel
As previously stated, the transfer office will be somewhat closer to home than the business centre. In terms of
proximity to public transport, it will be more similar to the satellite office, rather than to the business centre.
Therefore, in the case of the transfer office, I assumed 20 minutes per day commuter travel in total and a
transport mode division of 40% car, 40% public transport and 20% bike or foot. Table 18.01 presents the personal
values determined for commuter travel. Personal values for emissions are hidden.
Table 18.01: Daily personal values for commuter travel to the transfer office
transport means persons distance fuel use env load
(1) (1) (2) (2)
prop dur speed pers typ pers typ(2) pers
personal car 40 20 63.33 21.11 1.780 37.58 0.0240 0.51
bike or foot 20 20 10.00 3.33 0.091 0.30 0.0000 0.00
average 20 52.63 17.54 1.165 24.27 0.0144 0.30
TOTAL 100
1: Estimation (see explanatory text); 2: As previously deduced (see explanatory text).
As with the business centre and satellite office in the assessments presented in chapter 17, the profile of transport
for business travel may also be assumed divergent from the division of 80% personal car and 20% public
transport generally applied to office concepts. As a result of the favourable conditions, travel will shift towards the
use of public transport. I assumed 10% of travel by bike or foot, expressing the internal movements in the transfer
office and its surroundings and an additional 50/50 division between cars and public transport. Table 18.02
presents the personal values used.
Table 18.02: Daily personal values for business travel for the transfer office
transport means employees distance fuel use env load
(1) (1) (1) (2) (2)
bizz prop total dur speed pers typ pers typ(2) pers
personal car 45 36 60 63.33 63.33 1.78 112.73 0.0240 1.52
bike or foot 10 8 60 10.00 10.00 0.09 0.91 0.0000 0.00
average 60 57.96 57.96 1.30 81.79 0.0162 1.03
TOTAL 80 100 80
18.02.02 The district office worker concept
Introduction
As introduced, the district office is a low-profile business centre located in residential areas. It is a rather informal
office for office employees from various organisations who want to work close to home but have personal or
functional reasons for not doing it there (see figure 18.04). The district office provides open or quiet personal
workplaces, high-speed internet access, reproduction facilities, facsimile, and printing services, basic facilities
generally not found at home. The district office might be best integrated with commercial shopping centres,
enhanced Internet cafés and libraries.
Central Office
w orking ref space use/empl commuter travel w orking
max 32 h/w k ref env load materials max 4 days/w k Home 0 h/w k
?
business travel
District Office extra space use/empl
max 5 days/w k
extra env load materials
Client extra energy cons
w orking
min 8 h/w k
Figure 18.04: Graphic scheme of the district office concept, seen from the client
In Almere, the Netherlands, an experiment is being conducted with a district office, under supervision of the Dutch
research institute TNO4. The project is supported and equipped by several companies for e.g. office furniture, ICT
facilities and reproduction facilities. At the moment of writing, there were no measurement results to report.
Typical values for space, building materials and energy consumption

Due to non-permanent allotment of workplaces, as with the satellite and guest office, the district office can provide
relatively small workplaces, for which I assumed 75% of the personal use of space in the central office, i.e. 18 m2.
In terms of building material use and energy consumption, the district office can be less luxurious than the central
office and therefore will be comparable to the satellite office.
Actual use of space

The district office is situated in residential areas and is therefore dependent on even more numerous, smaller
clients, because no office company will have all their employees living in one district. Actually, for an organisation
averagely sized in a normal city, a reasonable assumption is that in each district there is only one employee living
there.
For the total number of workplaces supplied by the district office, my reverse deduction starting-point was the
service area of an elementary school, having 6 classes of 20 children (120 in total). Assuming that 50% of the
households have children, on average two children per household, of which only one is going to elementary
school, and there are 240 households in total, with 480 adults. 50% of these work at an office, and 25% of them is
willing or allowed to work at home for at least 1 day (20%) per week. This results in 12 district office workers
permanently occupying the district office. If the occupation rate is again 60% (taking into account extra space), the
office employee studied occupies 5% of the district office.
In this basic situation, the actual personal use of space is the same as with the business centre: 40 m2, but again,
due to the 5% occupation share, the actual personal use of space increases even more slowly when raising the
number of telework days. Figure 18.05 graphically demonstrates this result.
4
For British readers: TNO is 'the Dutch BRE'
100% ('full house')
hired floor area

15.0% 1/0.70 = 143% pers space use
60% (average) 10.0% 1/0.65 = 154% pers space use
basic situation situation of greater contribution

1 day per w eek w orkers 2 / 3 / 4 day per w eek w orkers
Figure 18.05: Determination of the actual personal floor space in the case of a district office
Employee travel
Except for the home office, the district office is nearest to home. It is located in the centre of a district, through
which commuter travel will be significantly reduced. I assumed an average commuter travel duration not longer
than 10 minutes per day, and used the reverse division of transport means to the ones used for the central office:
10% car, 30% public transport and 60% bike or foot. Table 18.03 presents the values determined.
Table 18.03: Personal daily values for commuter travel to the district office
transport means persons distance fuel use env load
prop(1) dur(1) speed(2) pers typ(2) pers typ(2) pers
personal car 10 10 63.33 10.56 1.780 18.79 0.0240 0.25
bike or foot 60 10 10.00 1.67 0.091 0.15 0.0000 0.00
average 10 31.31 5.22 0.559 5.41 0.0060 0.06
TOTAL 100
For business travel, the features of the district worker will be similar to the home worker, of whom 80% use
personal cars and 20% public transport (see table 18.04).
Table 18.04: Personal daily values for business travel for all office types
transport means employees distance fuel use env load
(1) (1) (1) (2) (2)
bizz prop total dur speed pers typ pers typ(2) pers
personal car 80 64 60 63.33 63.33 1.78 112.73 0.0240 1.52
bike or foot 0 0 0 10.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.0000 0.00
average 60 63.31 63.31 1.64 103.95 0.0216 1.37
TOTAL 80 100 80
18.02.03 Overview of environmental data
Table 18.05 presents the basic values for the use of space, building materials and energy for both the transfer and
district office, as previously explained.
Table 18.05: Typical annual values for the use of space, building materials, and energy of the transfer and district office
(3)
prop (1)
typ (2)
prop (1)
typical prop (1)
dur (1)
2 2 2 2 2
transfer office 100 24.0 100 2.10 8.21 105 12 1,116 14.38 15,701 420.09
district office 75 18.0 90 1.89 7.39 100 12 1,063 13.69 15,701 420.09
1: Assumptions (see explanatory text); 2: Source reference year 1990: see chapter 04; reference year 2000: deduced from Eldonk et al. [2001]; 3: As
previously deduced (see explanatory text).
As also discussed in chapter 17, the actual use of space by the telecommuting office worker depends on the
number of telework days and the occupation rate at the transfer and district office. Table 18.06 gives the values
determined.
Table 18.06: Typical reference values for the actual personal space use
(3)
occ(1) prop(1) typ(2)
central office 80% teleworking

central worker 100 20 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 = typ
teleworker 100 80 24.0 24.0 19.2 14.4 9.6 4.8 = typ x (1 - ratio)
average 24.0 20.2 16.3 12.5 8.6 = (prop x act)central + (prop x act)tele

transfer office 60 80 24.0 0.0 8.0 14.2 19.2 23.3 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,075 x (teledays - 1)))
district office 60 80 18.0 0.0 6.0 11.1 15.4 19.2 = typ x ratio x (1 / (occ / 100 + 0,05 x (teledays - 1)))
1: Assumptions (see explanatory text); 2: As previously determined; 3: See explanatory text for better clarification.
18.02.04 Assessment results
Typical units
Table 18.07 presents the typical quantities calculated for the use of space, building materials, energy, and travel.
Improvement factors with respect to the traditional office worker concept (positioned in the year 1990), as well as
the rank with regards to the concepts already assessed in chapter 17 are also given.
The ranks of table 18.07 show that there is not a particularly great improvement in the use of space, materials and
energy with respect to the other office concepts. Energy consumption may even be called dramatic in the transfer
office case, similar to the business centre worker concept. A main cause is due to the spatial inefficiency in the
offices through office vacancies. The results for employee travel, especially in the case of 3 or more telework days
however demonstrate where the merits of these concepts lie.
Table 18.07: Results in typical quantities for the transfer and district office worker concepts
office concept space materials energy travel
100 employees gfa impr rank mass impr rank fuel impr rank fuel impr rank
unit / ref year > m2 1990 kton 1990 GJ 1990 GJ 1990
transfer worker
1 day 2,656 1.05 19 5.58 1.05 18 4,427 0.80 19 3,628 1.09 22
2 days 2,770 1.01 24 5.82 1.01 22 4,575 0.77 24 3,310 1.19 15
3 days 2,784 1.01 25 5.85 1.01 23 4,611 0.76 27 2,993 1.32 7
4 days 2,726 1.03 22 5.72 1.03 20 4,566 0.77 23 2,675 1.47 3
district worker
1 day 2,496 1.12 15 5.14 1.14 16 4,223 0.83 16 3,640 1.08 23
2 days 2,518 1.11 16 5.10 1.15 15 4,247 0.83 17 3,335 1.18 16
3 days 2,482 1.13 14 4.95 1.19 12 4,209 0.84 15 3,029 1.30 9
4 days 2,400 1.17 11 4.72 1.25 11 4,121 0.85 12 2,724 1.45 4
Environmental improvement factors

In spite of the moderate absolute results, when translated into environmental cost, the transfer and district office
worker concepts perform better than the 'competitor' they resemble the most, the normal business centre worker
concept, as can be seen in figure 18.05. The home office worker remains most favourable, however only under
the conditions discussed in chapter 17, i.e. when the house is already in use. If this is not the case, the district
worker will be even more favourable in comparison to all other telework variants.
The transfer and district office are both an expression of the business centre concept. The results found here
therefore rather support decisions about the location and features of a business centre, than condemn the normal
concept.
1.40
im provem ent factors
4
1.30
1.20 7 4. home w orker

6
1.10 6. transfer w orker
1.00
3 7. district w orker
0.90
0 1 2 3 4
Figure 18.05: Environmental improvement factors of four related telework concepts:

the business centre worker, the transfer office worker, the district office worker, and the home office worker
The results for the transfer and district office worker imply that if a business centre is located close to transport
nodes or residential areas, its environmental performance will improve. A functionally diverse area combining
infrastructure, residences, and offices would even be more favourable than the highest line of figure 18.05
because this ultimate integrated solution would combine the commuter travel features of the district or home office
with the business travel features of the transfer office. Be reminded that in the home office worker concept
business travel did not perform particularly well, as the office employee would have to rely on his own car or local
public transport. Someone living and working around a transport node with office facilities would certainly have the
best of both worlds.
Figure 18.05 also demonstrates that the performance improves with the number of telework days, and hence an
improving occupation rate. A well-occupied office gives the best results.
The mobile office

Another concept that has not been not studied, is the mobile office, a workplace in a mobile carrier (e.g. car),
specifically designed for optimal use as an office, therefore more sophisticated than the instant office. In this case,
the office moves with the employee. One could argue against this type of office, however, in that the average
equipment of an office employee (laptop and cell phone) already provides sufficient opportunities to work with on-
line connection to the central office or to colleagues. The instant office - an airport lounge, train, metro, café,
restaurant or library - provides the space to use this equipment, and needs not to move with the employee. One of
the drawbacks of this instant office with respect to a mobile office is that an instant office is never designed to
have the best ergonomic comfort for the office employee. There have been studies of repetitive strain injuries
(RSI) with instant workers that confirm this.
18.03 Concepts of distributed telework offices
Freedom in time
In the 1980s, the general expectation was that computers would radically change office design. However, except
for the infrastructure required for modern offices, this has not really happened. In the year 1992, Drucker already
signalled that the world was evolving into a knowledge economy. This development might eventually lead to great
change after all. Already in the 1980s, Toffler [1981] and Naisbett [1984] predicted that it would not be long before
it was unnecessary to build offices because computers would enable people to work anywhere they wanted. As
described in chapter 15, new information and telecommunication technologies have indeed already enabled office
employees to work at a wide range of locations. For instance, by 2001, 74% of the Dutch households had access
to the Internet [CBS, 2002]. The 24-hour city, a 24-hour a day environment significantly stimulated by global
tourism, becomes a reality. Since the world's business and information resources have become continuously
available, by 1999, 17 million people in the UK had shopped at night [Kreitzman, 1999]. The substantial increase
of midnight calls between 1989 and 1999 - figures from British Telecom (BT) - demonstrate that the opportunities
of Kreitzman's 24-hour city were widely seized.
Figure 18.06: A first class mobile working environment
Freedom of place
Provided with mobile phones, portable computers and palmtops, office work can be done in different urban work
settings, leading to a blur of living, working and moving. This may be called distributed working [Harrison, 2002].
For office real estate, space can already be purchased on demand, on an hourly, daily, or monthly basis. A rise
has been visible in the global networks of serviced on-demand offices with sophisticated ICT services. Informal
types of work environments, such as airport lounges, first class trains (see figure 18.06), and Internet cafés
provide flexible office space. When ICT-services in these spaces are combined with sophisticated peripheral
technologies such as video-conferencing, plotters or CD-mixing facilities, and meeting rooms and business
catering are provided, new work environments evolve, called new café offices [Harrison, 2002].
The use of new concepts can be illustrated by the extent of absence at the central office. The Helen Hamlyn
Foundation found that UK business travellers undertake 22 business trips per year and stay away from home for
44 nights per year.
Freedom of life
As a result of the developments in information and telecommunication technologies, office personnel work more
independently and flexibly than before. This increased individual freedom of work enables the employee to
structure their own time schedule, involving social responsibilities to partners, children, friends, and family during
working hours, which was impossible before. The diversity of contacts during working hours has increased
therefore, within and outside the organisation. The free labour conditions described offer better opportunities for
free-lance activities, part-time jobs and shared functions.
Matrix living
The developments described result in what is called matrix living [Harrison, 2002]: a co-existence of individual
lifestyles that include multiple tasks and multiple locations across time. The challenge for the future is to design a
range of physical environments that can effectively incorporate working in diverse ways at any time of the day or
week and ICT applications that will support this type of distributed working.
Importance to sustainability
As with the office concepts previously assessed, new solutions for the office accommodation are important to
sustainability. Effective living and working environments, meeting professional and personal needs, lead to a more
effective use of limited time and resources. This might lead to a shift in office accommodation resulting in
redundancy of traditional office buildings. This is illustrated by developments in London, where from 1997 to 2002
16 million m2 of redundant office space was converted to housing [Harrison, 2002].
A greater variety of workplaces is more likely to meet the requirements for effective living and working than a
traditional office concept or telework concept based on one extra working place. Therefore, in the following
subsection, this concept of distributed working will be tested using the flexible and free-range office worker
concepts, which are relatively complex with respect to the concepts previously assessed.
18.03.02 The flexible office worker concept
The first form of the distributed telework office worker reflects the employee of a busy, dynamic organisation with
various clients spread over the country, region, and world, e.g. an IT or management consulting company. The
employees are with clients, or on their way to them, most of the time, and keeping a personal workplace reserved
for them would be a waste of money and space. As a result of his dynamic work pattern, the flexible office worker
tries to put himself to work at any place that suits him: with the client (the guest office), at a satellite office, at
home or close to home (the home or district office), occasionally at a hired desk in a business centre or transfer
office, and on the way between all of these offices (the instant office). Figure 18.06 illustrates this.
? ?
Guest Office Satellite Office
extra space use/empl extra space use/empl
extra env load materials extra env load materials
extra energy cons extra energy cons
Home or District
?
Central Office Instant Offices Office
w orking
ref space use/empl no extra space use/empl extra space use/empl
0 h/w k
ref env load materials no extra env load materials Home extra env load materials
ref energy consumption no extra energy cons extra energy cons
? ?
Business Centre Transfer Office
w orking
0 h/w k
Figure 18.07: Graphic scheme of the flexible office worker concept
18.03.03 The free-range office worker concept
All previous office worker types were connected to an office organisation with a central office. There are also
people working independently, either with their own company, or working free-lance for other companies. These
people are even more footloose than the flexible office worker: they have no central office and no company-
privileged satellite office. This concept therefore is characterised by fewer variables (see figure 18.08).
?
Guest Office
extra space use/empl
extra env load materials
extra energy cons
Home or District
?
Instant Offices Office
w orking
no extra space use/empl extra space use/empl
0 h/w k
no extra env load materials Home extra env load materials
no extra energy cons extra energy cons
? ?
Business Centre Transfer Office
w orking
0 h/w k
Figure 18.08: Graphic scheme of the freerange office worker concept
As with the flexible worker concept, the free-range office worker concept was limited to a few variables. This
person works two days at his basic office, which may be the home office, district office, transfer office, or business
centre. Furthermore, he spends two working days with clients, at the guest office, and in-between his movements
there is one day of instant office work. The free-range office worker is a full-time teleworker.
18.03.04 Results
For the flexible and free-range worker, a graph such as in figure 18.05 cannot be shown, as they have a fixed
number of telework days. The results therefore are given through the environmental improvement factors of table
18.09.
Table 18.09: Environmental improvement factors of the flexible and free-range office worker concepts
office concept improvement factors
no. of telework days > 0 1 2 3 4 5
1990 traditional worker 1.00
2000 traditional worker 0.99
flexible worker
satellite office 1.35
business centre 1.15
transfer office 1.30
district office 1.40
home office 1.64
free-range worker
business centre 1.06
transfer office 1.34
district office 1.53
home office 1.64
Table 18.09 indicates a greater improvement potential by means of flexible work concepts compared to the
traditional and simple telework concepts. That is, of course, under the condition that - for the flexible office worker
- the central office is actually reduced in space as the employees increase their number of telework days.
Simple telework concepts based on one telework office achieved a maximum improvement factor of 1.31 (the 4-
days home office worker). The flexible office worker and the free-range worker reach a factor of 1.64, when both
are using the home office as a base office. The district office nevertheless also performs well, especially when
taking into account the disadvantage of not being fully occupied.
The conclusion may therefore be drawn that, under certain conditions, the concept of distributed working provides
greater opportunities for environmental improvement than more traditional ways of working. This should be
checked against a real organisation however, which will be done in the following section.
18.04 An existing innovative company: The Vision Web
The Vision Web is the name of a Dutch private holding, consisting of five companies (see figure 18.10), each
offering services in the IT-area. At the moment the assessment was carried out, these five companies had 480
employees combined. They rent four offices, in Delft, Dordrecht, Veldhoven, and Groningen. These will be
discussed further on. The data and descriptions in this section are based on a presentation by, and interview with,
Erik Eversteyn, HR coordinator of Solvision, one of the companies under The Vision Web.
Figure 18.10: The five present companies of The Vision Web
Organisation of the work process

The Vision Web offers space for meetings and presentations (figure 18.11), flexible, non-territorial workdesks
(figure 18.12), and supportive facilities at all locations, such as secretariat, administration, and network
management. Furthermore, every office has equipment for reproduction, as well as coffee corners and cooking
facilities.
Figure 18.11 (left): Meeting room at the central office of The Vision Web in Delft
Figure 18.12 (right): Non-territorial flexible workdesks in Delft
Being a company servicing a young and dynamic economic area, The Vision Web consists of relatively young
employees. This perhaps cleared the path to a non-traditional way of organising their work. Except for the
employees responsible for the supportive functions, such as reception and network support (see figure 18.13 and
18.14), none of the commercial and management staff own a personal workplace. The number of desks for
flexible work is limited. The four offices discussed in the following subsection mainly offer space for meetings and
presentations.
Figure 18.13 (left): One of the only fixed workplaces in the central office in Delft: the entrance counter
Figure 18.14 (right): The network maintenance and support room in the cellar in Delft
The Vision Web offers high-grade ICT facilities at home, a cell phone, a personal e-mail address and ISDN
access to the Internet for all employees. Commercial, consulting and executive personnel have a laptop and
lease-car at their disposal. Commercial, consulting and executive employees are expected to conduct their work
at the client's office, at home, on the road, and in one of the central and satellite offices. As a result of this, the
space used per employee has been significantly reduced.
In order to provide a good basis for communication and consultancy between employees, The Vision Web offers
an intranet, for employees only, so they can access all facilities when working from a distance. Employees are
responsible for their own time management. However, they keep their schedule updated on the intranet, so
everybody knows where their colleagues can be found.
Work patterns
On average, the employees of The Vision Web spend approximately half a day a week at home (the home office),
one day on the road (the instant office), almost three days at the client's office (the guest office), and just over half
a day at any of the four offices (the central or satellite office). This pattern however differs per function but is
greatly influenced by the largest group of employees, the consultants (see table 18.10).
Table 18.10: Division of employee functions and presence patterns

1
function employees workplaces estimated presence during working time
number FTE office home road client
unit > - - - % % % %
executives/management 12 12 30 20 30 20
secretariat 5 4 4 88 12
administration 8 7 8 88 12
commercial 15 13.5 16 16 40 32
consultancy 440 403.5 148 10 10 20 60
TOTAL 480 440 160 13 10 20 57
1: Delft & Veldhoven: 40; Dordrecht: 60; Groningen: 20
As can be seen in table 18.10, only the administration staff regularly stays at the office; the executive, commercial,
and consulting employees spend most of their time outside one of the company's office buildings. Consultants visit
them only 10% of their time, and on average spend three days per week with the client. Commercial employees
spend an estimated 2 days per week on the road. Also for the executives and consultants the time spent in transit
is substantial. The average distance per annum travelled by car demonstrates this: 35,600 km, i.e. approximately
100 km per day. It is unknown to what extent private travel is used to make up this figure.
The accommodation
The Vision Web rents one central and three satellite offices. The central headquarters is situated in Delft, in the
former mayor house (figure 18.15).
Figure 18.15: The former mayor's house in Delft, Netherlands, central office of The Vision Web
This stylish house in a nice location just outside the centre had become derelict in the 1980s and was on the list to
be demolished. The young Vision Web however renovated it to an unusual office, whose main space is a grand-
café (figure 18.16 and 18.17).
Figure 18.16 (left): The grand-café in Delft

Figure 18.17 (right): A small meeting in the grand-café
The three other offices are situated in Groningen (in the North of the Netherlands), Veldhoven (in the South), and
Dordrecht (in the middle). Delft itself lies between Rotterdam and The Hague, in the western, densely populated
area of the Netherlands. All offices are approximately 100 years old, with limited renovations and are relatively
small.
The assessment methodology

The organisation was compared with two theoretical references representing a traditional organisation with the
same function and number of people, however with a building that was constructed in 1990 (the environmental
reference year), or 2000 (the reference year for modern organisation), and with a reference use of space related
to those years. For environmental data, I used data from the assessment of the twelve Dutch government offices,
presented in chapter 06.
In the assessment calculations, the age of the Vision Web offices was involved in accordance with the lifespan
accounting methodology of chapter 07. The environmental capital remaining for the office organisation's buildings,
and the environmental load of renovation, led to an age-correction factor for the original environmental load of
building materials.
18.04.02 Results for building materials
Vision Web only

On the basis of the actual space in all the offices of The Vision Web, the use of building materials and their
environmental load was determined first. Table 18.11 presents the results. The year of construction (the column
with 'const') and renovation ('renov'), together with the extent of renovation ('new'), define the age-correction factor
('corr'). The next column ('total') gives the final environmental load of building materials (in environmental euros),
and the last two columns present improvement factors with respect to the two references.
Compared to the two references, in terms of the use of building materials, environmental improvement by more
than a factor of 20 is achieved. The organisation had already saved office space through the flexible work
concept, but the historic accommodation makes the results even more favourable.
Table 18.11: Comparison of the environmental load of building materials of The Vision Web with two references
office case space building materials
total const orig new renov corr spat total improvement
2 2
unit > m yr % % yr e€/m ke€ 1990-ref 2000-ref
1990 traditional reference 13,440 1990 100 0 0.87 10.03 116.83 1.00 0.81
2000 traditional reference 11,520 2000 100 0 1.00 8.21 94.58 1.24 1.00
The Vision Web

office place building type
Delft central office 657 1878 80 20 1990 0.17 8.21 0.93
Veldhoven satellite office 657 1920 80 20 1998 0.19 8.21 1.05
Dordrecht satellite office 986 1900 80 20 1998 0.19 8.21 1.58
Groningen satellite office 329 1860 80 20 1998 0.19 8.21 0.53
TOTAL Vision Web only 2,628 4.09 28.60 23.15
Involving 'borrowed' offices

The results of table 18.11 are regardless of space specially required for The Vision Web employees in other
offices. As shown in subsection 18.04.02, the employees spend much of their time with clients. For the executives
and commercial employees, the client visits are irregular and related to new contracts and account management.
For these employees, no space will be reserved. For the consultants this however may be different. If a consultant
is posted with a client for the total three days per week, a workplace will have to be at his disposal. In the previous
assessments of theoretical office worker concepts I assumed sharing of workplaces in case of 2 or 3 days at the
guest office. For the Vision Web consultants I also assumed a shared, half workplace of 12 m2. The telework
offices were on average all considered to be constructed in 1975.
Table 18.12: Assessment results for the environmental load of building materials in case of 'borrowed' office space
office case space building materials
total const orig new renov corr spat total improvement
2 2
unit > m yr % % yr e€/m ke€ 1990-ref 2000-ref
The Vision Web

personnel office place
direction central office
guest office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 8.21 0.00
home office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 6.57 0.00
instant office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 0.00 0.00
secretariat central office
home office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 6.57 0.00
commercial central office
guest office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 8.21 0.00
home office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 6.57 0.00
instant office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 0.00 0.00
consultants central office
guest office 5,280 1975 100 0 0.67 8.21 43.35
home office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 6.57 0.00
instant office 0 1975 100 0 0.67 0.00 0.00
TOTAL borrowed space 5,280 43.35
TOTAL integrated 7,908 47.43 2.46 1.99
Table 18.12 shows the work patterns of all employees and the conversion of these to use of space and materials
at one of the other - 'borrowed' - offices. As can be seen, only the guest office in the case of the consultants
affects the figures.
In the lower rows of table 18.12, totals can be found for the borrowed office space and totals including the values
determined in table 18.11. As can be seen, the use of guest office space significantly worsens the environmental
performance. The results of table 18.12 may be seen as a worst-case scenario however, in which all consultants
only work for one client. The truth will be results in-between table 18.11 and 18.12. Nevertheless, with respect to a
traditional organisation, even in the worst-case scenario, The Vision Web performs a factor of 2.46 or 1.99 better
for the use of building materials.
18.04.03 Results for energy consumption
Vision Web only

Table 18.13 presents the environmental load and performance for the use of energy, when only the offices of The
Vision Web are considered, taking into account space-related (HVAC, lighting) and employee-related (equipment)
energy consumption. The Vision Web has no specific policy on energy conservation: the company rents the
offices all-inclusive from a real estate agent who maintains the building services, which is common practice. The
costs of accommodation, including energy and water, comprise only 1.5% of the total annual running costs, even
less than the fixed cost of ICT. Salaries involving additional labour conditions comprise almost 90% of the cost.
Therefore, to put it in perspective, for this kind of company, the accommodation and its energy efficiency forms no
concern whatsoever. As I understood from my visit to the central office in Delft, energy is wasted rather than
saved. The use of old buildings of course deteriorates the energy performance. Nevertheless, reduction of the use
of space in principle reduces the primary demand for energy. Table 18.13 demonstrates that an improvement with
respect to the references is still achieved.
Table 18.13: Assessment results for the environmental load of energy consumption of The Vision Web
office case employees space energy consumption
no prop dur total spat pers total improvement
2 2
unit > p % d/wk m e€/m e€/p ke€ 1990-ref 2000-ref
1990 traditional reference 480 100.0 5.0 13,440 34.66 N/A 465.83 1.00 1.11
2000 traditional reference 480 100.0 5.0 11,520 27.42 420.61 517.81 0.90 1.00
The Vision Web

office place building type
Delft central office 120 25.0 657 30.17 420.61 70.29
Veldhoven satellite office 120 25.0 657 30.17 420.61 70.29
Dordrecht satellite office 180 37.5 986 30.17 420.61 105.44
Groningen satellite office 60 12.5 329 30.17 420.61 35.15
TOTAL Vision Web only 2,628 281.17 1.66 1.84
Involving borrowed offices

The results of table 18.13 again disregarded other offices. These were however taken into account in table 18.14,
where again only the guest office for consultants plays a role. The use of space in this office type leads to an
increase of energy consumption, and the environmental cost as a result of it, yet not as much as seen with
building materials. The reason for this is that the personal energy consumption, which is relatively influential, was
already involved in table 18.14.
In spite of the relatively unfavourable conditions of The Vision Web, even in the worst-case scenario of table
18.14, the overall environmental performance for energy consumption is better than the reference organisation.
This is due mainly to the saving of office space. Further energy saving technologies would improve the
performance, but as already illustrated, these form no real concern for this kind of organisation.
Table 18.14: Assessment results for the environmental load of energy consumption in case of 'borrowed' office space
office case employees space energy consumption
no prop dur total spat pers total improvement
2 2
unit > p % d/wk m e€/m e€/p ke€ 1990-ref 2000-ref
The Vision Web

personnel office place
direction central office 12 2.5 1.50
guest office 1.00 0 27.42 0.00
home office 1.00 0 13.71 0.00
instant office 1.50 0 0.00 0.00
secretariat central office 13 2.7 4.40
home office 0.60 0 13.71 0.00
commercial central office 15 3.1 0.80
guest office 1.60 0 27.42 0.00
home office 0.80 0 13.71 0.00
consultants central office 440 91.7 0.50
guest office 3.00 5,280 27.42 144.79
home office 0.50 0 13.71 0.00
TOTAL borrowed space 5,280 144.79
TOTAL integrated 7,908 425.96 1.09 1.22
18.04.04 Results for employee travel
The distances travelled by Vision Web employees were also used as the basis for the reference organisation.
However, as with the assessments of chapter 17, I assumed an average division of transport means for the
reference organisation (e.g. 75% car, 25% public transport and 5% bike or foot for business and commuter travel
together), whereas The Vision Web only uses lease cars for business and commuter travel. For the Vision Web
travel features I used the average annual distance travelled by car, for all executive, commercial and consulting
personnel, and connected it to environmental parameters of car transport. For the reference organisation I took
the same distance, translated it to travel times per person and divided these over the different transport forms.
Table 18.15 gives the results of the travel assessment. It demonstrates the heavier environmental load of
transportation by car.
Table 18.15: Absolute results and environmental improvement factors for employee travel
office case employee travel
fuel CO2 CO NOx VOCs SO2 PO10 total improvement
unit > PJ ton ton ton kg kg kg ke€ 1990-ref 2000-ref
1990 traditional reference 25.52 2,030 24.43 15.14 3,466 227.5 380.5 333.8 1.00 1.00
2000 traditional reference 25.52 2,030 24.43 15.14 3,466 227.5 380.5 333.8 1.00 1.00
The Vision Web TOTAL 29.59 2,671 34.41 20.45 4,821 258.2 494.1 398.9 0.84 0.84
18.04.05 Overall results
As previously discussed, for The Vision Web an environmental best- and worst-case scenario can be taken into
account. In the best-case scenario, the consultants on average work for more than one client, necessating no
additional working space in a guest office. In the worst-case scenario the consultants are posted at the client's
office for three days per week, requiring a shared workplace. As a result of the immense space reduction at the
Vision Web offices themselves, the choice between these scenarios is significant. Table 18.16 again
demonstrates this. The table provides all improvement factors for the use of space and the environmental load of
building materials, energy consumption, and employee travel, with respect to the 1990 reference organisation.
Table 18.16: Improvement factors for different environmental criteria and the overall results
office concept space materials energy travel TOTAL
gfa impr env impr env impr env impr env impr
unit / ref year > m2 1990 ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990 ke€ 1990
the vision web
480 employees
1990 reference 13,440 1.00 116.8 12.7% 1.00 465.8 50.8% 1.00 333.8 36.4% 1.00 916.4 1.00
2000 reference 11,520 1.17 94.6 10.0% 1.24 517.8 54.7% 0.90 333.8 35.3% 1.00 946.1 0.97
TVW best case 2,628 5.11 4.1 0.6% 28.60 281.2 41.1% 1.66 58.3% 684.2 1.34
398.9 0.84
TVW worst case 7,908 1.70 47.4 5.4% 2.46 426.0 48.8% 1.09 45.7% 872.3 1.05
The Vision Web concept leads to more than a factor 5 space reduction when the consultants work on a versatile
basis. If they do not, the space improvement will only increase by a factor of 1.7. On a versatile working basis, the
environmental performance for the use of building materials exceeds factor 20. In the other case, it will be only
2.46. Energy consumption is a factor of 1.66 better than the reference organisation, unless the consultants stick to
one client: in that case it is factor 1.09. Finally, employee travel is equal to both cases and - as already discussed
- worse than the reference organisation: factor 0.84.
The overall result is mainly influenced by employee travel and energy consumption, as a result of which
respectively a factor 1.34 and 1.05 improvement with respect to the 1990 reference is achieved.
Discussion
The findings of table 18.16 support the financial idea that if an organisation spends much time and money on
travelling to and from clients, the accommodation is of hardly any importance anymore. Travel proves most
important, and although the percentage difference is small, in the case of great distances travelled, the use of cars
deteriorates the end-performance. For this kind of organisation, a sustainable form of travel would yield the best
results. It needs to be recalled that it is uncertain whether private travel was included in the figures presented.
Although energy consumption forms no essential financial element, in terms of sustainability, it still causes 40% to
50% of the environmental load. In the Vision Web case, however, this concerns the real estate agent, for whom
energy preservation measures would be expensive and, in the short-term perspective, raise the rental price,
whereas the tenant has no particular desire for sustainable measures.
The use of building materials does not have a great contribution to the overall results here, but this is also a direct
merit of the use of old and small buildings. If The Vision Web were accommodated in modern offices, which is the
common way, the influence of building materials would be greater, yet still not decisive. This demonstrates that
the initial demand for space is the most important parameter for the reduction of environmental load of building
materials and energy consumption. This is supported by the positive results of the flexible and free-range office
worker concepts.
18.05 Future sustainable organisation of office work
This section will discuss developments influencing the future organisation of office work, as well as a structural
approach to a sustainable solution for office work. As many ideas presented here are personal, you as the reader
will often find the personal 'I'-mode of writing which one normally prefers to avoid. This mode of writing is however
meant to express non-generality and personality of ideas rather than to underline the author.
18.05.01 Dematerialisation
Interpretations of dematerialisation
When office work needs to become less environmentally damaging, one of the radical ways this is achieved is
through absorbing office work in other activities, so that it requires no additional accommodation. This could be
called dematerialisation of office accommodation because no space specifically meant for office work would
remain. The process towards this end-goal could also be called dematerialisation, as well as the intention to
reduce the amount of material used for office work.
Another interpretation of dematerialisation is the digitalisation of all office functions, so that no paper, reports,
books, and archives will be necessary anymore. This last objective will importantly reduce the amount of space
required for storage of information, to the minimum space for an office employee, his desk and the necessary
equipment. This form of dematerialisation may be called dematerialisation of information.
Dematerialisation of information stands apart from dematerialisation of office accommodation: it can still be
combined with traditional office concepts and in this case leads to only limited environmental improvement.
However, it provides the facilities that simplify working in a new, independent manner. In the reverse direction,
therefore, dematerialisation of office accommodation may be separate from dematerialisation of information, but it
is certainly facilitated by it. A combination of both developments will probably achieve the best results for
sustainability.
Dematerialisation of information
As discussed in the introduction section of this chapter, the promising future of working without paper and
personal contact has already been expected for a long time. In the 1990s the use of e-mail and the Internet made
their advance in the world and are at present widely and frequently used. The use of paper has however not
decreased but increased, because many people still print their e-mail messages, which are more numerous than
old paper messages. In addition, people visit websites for information, and this information is also often printed.
Digital newspapers and magazines have also not pushed aside paper versions. A main problem with digital
versions of paperwork is the readability of the pages and manageability of leafing through them.
The impact of this intervening, overlapping period from analogue to digital technology, is that - despite all
expected merits of the digital age - the environmental impact is worse than before. It only used to be through the
use of paper, but now also through the use of computers and consumption of energy.
Nevertheless, although the use of paper will never completely be erased, I personally believe that the shift to
digital technology will procede and eventually become more important than old-fashioned paper. After all, digital
paperwork has many extra advantages based on interactiveness and individualised servicing that will be decisive
when the technical limitations of the readability and 'leafability' have been solved.
There is just one critical issue: the availability of energy, because digital technologies require power, the
unforeseen problems with regard to energy might just bend the developments in the other direction…
Dematerialisation of office accommodation

As introduced, when assuming that office work, or work resembling today's office work, will still be necessary in
the future, accommodation will still be needed. This accommodation can be optimally reduced when the space for
office work is simultaneously used for other functions, in other words: when office work is absorbed in everyday
life.
This office work absorption will not be attainable in one step. Most of the present office tasks are still connected to
and performed at the central office or another building specifically designed for office work. To make them apt for
absorption in other urban functions they need to be physically disconnected from the central or another office.
As The Vision Web case demonstrated, this physical disconnection is already possible. The Vision Web however
still relies on the provision of accommodation by clients. This emphasises the importance of personal contact with
clients and colleagues.
The need for personal contact

Technologies such as video-conferencing, and enhancements based on eye-to-eye contact that facilitate serious
personal consultations and negotiations, e.g. the 'Eye Catcher' developed by the company Exovision (see figure
18.18), enable what I call telecontact, personal contact at a distance, limiting the need for travel and meeting
space.
Eye Catcher Eye Catcher
camera camera
network
LCD LCD
conversation conversation
partner partner
Figure 18.18: technical principle of the Eye Catcher, developed by Exovision
The development of virtual reality technologies suggests that 3-dimensional telecontact will also be within reach.
This would virtually place people at a meeting table, while they are physically separated, and in any place in the
world. Developed with the best technologies that simulate every essential characteristic of a normal conversation
between people, meetings in the same place would be made superfluous. I believe these technologies will be
developed, sooner or later. It does not mean that I believe that real personal contact between clients and
colleagues will not remain important; however, it will reduce the need for business travel and meeting rooms.
Nevertheless, I am conscious that it will mainly influence the higher levels of business: top executives who
normally fly over the world for meetings. As long as travelling is not much effort and office employees are not too
busy or expensive, a swift meeting in a handy place will probably be preferred. I will however return to a more
sustainable solution for that further on.
The focus of this section

I have chosen not to give too much attention to information, data- and telecommunication technologies that will,
amongst other things, facilitate future office work, for the same reasons that I have not included the environmental
impact of ICT to office work. Moreover, to predict future technological developments, with the past 20 years as
evidence, would probably be a good reason for laughs in another 20 years later.
In the following subsections, I will therefore focus on accommodation-related conditions and developments of
future office concepts, from the viewpoint of sustainability potentials. This will include the necessary revision of
spatial planning.
The following solution steps towards a sustainable future organisation of office work will be discussed:
Assigning tasks to different workforces
Dividing office work functions
Varying workplace accommodation
Distributing office work
This last explorative section of the research presented will close with considerations that question accepted
wisdom.
18.05.02 Assignment of tasks to different workforces
A structural approach to the dematerialisation of office work should start with a critical view for which office tasks
can be distributed or solved differently than by means of allocation at the central office. From the viewpoint of an
office organisation itself, there are different solutions for what Edum-Fotwe et al. [2003] call distributed office work,
meaning the distribution of work to different human resources available:
Outsourcing: let people from one organisation do the job, at the office of another organisation. This efficiency
solution of exchanging fixed workforces, which may not always be fully in use, might imply an environmental
improvement of the organisation itself; however, from a broader viewpoint, it means shifting responsibilities
to another organisation, which is uncontrollable.
Free-lancing: hire people for a job on a free-lance basis, executed at their own office. As demonstrated by
the assessment of the free-range office worker concept (a possible pattern for a free-lance worker),
switching from a fixed workspace to a more versatile, non-reserved way of accommodation leads to better
environmental performance. However, the distribution of work tasks to free-lance operators also means a
problem shift to other employees, possibly leading to a greater use of space, energy and materials.
Teleworking: let employees spend time at a telework office instead of the central office. This was tested in
chapter 17 and the first paragraphs of this chapter. Looking at the central office, this solution certainly leads
to spatial, material and energetic efficiency, and environmental improvement. However, in general, the
assessments only indicated limited overall improvement (factor 1.1-1.2) for simple replacement of the
workplace at the central office by a workplace in one telework office. Only a more complex pattern of more
than one telework office, avoiding personal or even shared workplaces, leads to improvement factors
exceeding 1.5.
In the approach of Edum-Fotwe et al., tasks that cannot be distributed to these kinds of human resources
solutions still need to be done at the central office.
As discussed with every solution for office work distribution, it is questionable whether they facilitate
environmental improvement, especially when shifting responsibilities to other organisations. In the research
presented, the focus therefore remained on one organisation and the solutions it can apply to improve the
environmental performance, even if this is not a core task of that organisation.
18.05.03 Division of office work functions
New solutions for office accommodation need to be solutions that still make the basic contents of office work
possible. As defined in chapter 01, the core of office work is processing of information, or more precisely:
concentrating, archiving, producing, and communicating of information. I will now discuss whether these can be
physically disconnected from the central office.
Concentrating and archiving

Concentrating and archiving of information can already be fully digitalised and thereby located anywhere. The
office employee concentrates information himself. The computer collecting digital information however may be
anywhere. Archiving of digital information can be established in relatively small spaces in comparison to the old
days. The hardcopies of information (e.g. books, reports, and magazines) may be treated as in modern libraries:
they may be efficiently stored in compact archive systems, where they can be quickly found and collected after an
order from a computer anywhere in the world. These books, reports and magazines therefore do not necessarily
have to be stored with the office organisation itself; they may be exclusively accessible through a commercial
library that takes over the archiving and distributing task of the office organisation.
Figure 18.19: Personal archive lockers in the Interpolis headquarters in Tilburg
The most practical location for the digital archive of information (the server, mostly) seems the central office (see
figure 18.19). However, it is also imaginable that commercial companies with expertise in security issues, and
closest to the latest developments in data storage and security, will provide services to office organisations, in
addition to other ICT-related services. In the case of small companies with limited digital archives, this will not be
necessary, and development of new efficient hardware systems will reduce storage sizes required. It is imaginable
however that large companies operating internationally might need such professional services, thereby keeping
the central offices clear of storage space. This is of course regardless of short-term personal and local safety
back-ups, which may be done through efficient data-storage systems5.
The conclusion therefore may be that, in the near future, concentrating and archiving of information can be
executed anywhere, physically disconnected from the office employee or even the central office. Concentration of
information is already disconnectable from the central office. If digital information archives remain located at the
central office, this will hardly require any office space in the future.
Producing
Producing information may have many forms: e.g. writing letters and e-mails, writing consultancy and status
reports, and the creative process of designing buildings and urban plans, in digital versions or paperwork. Even
conducting research projects, studying and developing ideas, in non-material, virtual forms are part this office
work function. Each one of them has its optimal organisational form. I will briefly discuss them below.
In general, the writing process of letters, e-mails, and reports is a personal business that can be done at any place
and any time. For these activities, the central office is not a necessity. For printing and multiplication of letters and
reports, good printing and reproduction facilities are practical, however, they can already be found in many places
nowadays: besides copy shops and commercial reproduction companies, airports, supermarkets, and Internet
cafés more regularly offer these facilities. Business centres, as well as the transfer and district offices derived from
the business centre, of course also have them. With a more ad-hoc, touch-down usability of these centres, the
threshold to use them on an incidental basis would be lower. In this case, professional facilities for printing and
reproduction could be best concentrated in or close to business centres.
Concentration, research and individual development of ideas may best be done in quiet environments, although
routine work and web-research may also be done in more noisy spaces. It depends on the ability of the individual
to concentrate and his wishes to do it alone or with other people. In any case, this activity can be disconnected
from the central office, yet demands accommodation facilities to do work that requires concentration.
For me, this was the main problem when working on my PhD-research. Whether it was my own central office,
home office, or instant office anywhere, the main cause of distraction were colleagues, family and friends, not
people I am not acquainted with. A remorseful finding was that I could work best when colleagues and
acquaintances were not around, regardless of the noise, turbulence and restlessness of the environment: people,
sights and sounds that do not ask for attention do not distract. Therefore, I personally believe in the disconnection
of work requiring concentration from any informal environment, in terms of acquainted people present. The one
type of workplace that I missed therefore was the archetypical monk's cell. And I assume that I am not the only
one. The provision of such concentration cells in any kind of business centre or in the corners of libraries, airport
lounges, halls, and cafés would avoid the need of a central office with a combi-office layout involving these cells
(such as in figure 18.20 and 18.21).
The last form of producing information is the most difficult one to be disconnected from colleagues and the central
office: the creative teamwork of design and collective development of ideas. It is the activity that is often forgotten
when organisational visionaries proclaim the blessings of virtual working environments. Although e-mail, Internet,
and videoconferencing - even in innovative, sophisticated forms - may avoid the need for the actual presence of
colleagues in the same place, creative centres as offices for design and advertising function through the inter-
personal ad-hoc exchange of ideas that come up inpredictably. For office organisations that provide a consulting
function, infrequent brainstorming sessions might be organised in a business centre, conference centre, or even
holiday environment. For organisations whose everyday work consists of brainstorming about ideas, this however
would be unpractical, expensive and ineffective. I therefore presume that for these kinds of office organisations, a
central office with a very individual character will endure modern developments.
5
As I am working at this section at home, for instance, at the end of the day I save the work done on a 256 MB memory stick of 1.0 by
2.4, by 8.0 cm, containing every file related to this PhD-research. These storage technologies will be enhanced, and the 256 MB will be
a great laugh within 10 years… This way of backing up however is already much more effective than 10 years ago, when it required
numerous floppy disks or a central server.
Figure 18.20 (at left): Concentration cell in the Dynamic Office in Haarlem
Figure 18.21 (at right): Concentration cell in the office of the Food Inspection Department in Zutphen
Communicating
Many of today's office work revolves around communication, and much has already been mentioned about the
current and possible future developments in ICT enhancing and extending the possibilities of telecommunication.
In many senses, personal contact will not be necessary anymore in the future. It is already visible in the advance
that contacts and intimate relationships through the Internet have taken. Nevertheless, even these eventually
come to the need of personally meeting the person who had only ever been at the other end of the line. In a
similar way, in many respects, office work may be communicated from a distance (literal telecommunication);
personal meetings however offer additional qualities and advantages that will keep them necessary.
The question is however: should meeting facilities be integrated in the central office, or can they be offered in
another way? The answer is yes, they can, and for sustainability it even is: yes, they should. The use of meeting
rooms is namely rather infrequent or frequently limited, to one certain day in the week, month, or year. This does
not concern small rooms for swift ad-hoc consultations between colleagues, it concerns rooms for appointed
meetings. It is a waste of space, materials and energy to include meeting rooms in the corporate, central office
when they serve people from various other organisations who also have these meeting rooms in their own
corporate, central office. In order to reduce the use of space, building materials and energy, and in order to reduce
travel, it will be wiser to concentrate meeting facilities at transit nodes of roads, railways and airports, for use by
different organisations. This will require tuning of agendas for organisations, employees, and spaces, but will
improve the usage of these spaces.
Executive and supportive functions

In the four main contents of office work (concentrating, archiving, producing, and communicating information),
some important activities are forgotten. They are the functions that do not literally mean office work but make it
possible: e.g. the management and coordination of work, administration, issue of equipment, and network, ICT,
and other technical support.
Technically, these functions may also operate on a telecontact basis, and as already discussed, technical support
for the network and data-storage may be assigned to commercial service providers. However, without a central
office as the central core or anchorplace of a company, the world would be swarmed with independently operating
office employees who only through virtual means get into contact with colleagues. A central office will therefore
remain important, although it may be much smaller than at present. It is practical and logical that the
management, administration, issue of equipment, and other support have their basic accommodation in these
offices. It will be the 'club space' of a company, comparable to the building of a sportsclub, rather than a large
factory of workplaces that are irregularly occupied and where employees do not undertake collective activities
because they already see their colleagues every day. This new office clubhouse will be further clarified in the
subsection 18.05.05.
18.05.04 Variety of workplace accommodation
As prepared in the previous subsection, the division of different office tasks leans towards the availability of
different accommodation and location of workplaces. This subsection will briefly discuss the differences in
character and scale of these workplaces, as an interval between the previous and following subsections.
Solutions for all scales and characters

Workplaces can be differently accommodated depending on the character of assignment and the scale required.
The scale may be the workplace itself, the building, or the urban setting. The character of assignment and
accessibility may be private (company-only), privileged (to a certain number of participation companies), and
public (to anyone). Daan Klaase and I designed figure 18.22, which schematically generates different workplace
solutions related to these grades of scale and character.
CHARACTER
private privileged public
workplace
personal hireable virtual

workplace workplace workplace
building
SCALE
private business Internet

castle centre café
urban setting
business shopping
campus
park centre
Figure 18.22: Workplace solutions for different assignment characters and scales
In a similar way, SANE [Harrison, 2002] generated physical and virtual solutions for each of the character
categories private, privileged and public (figure 18.23). All accommodation solutions shown in figure 18.23 may
refer to owned or shared space, and they may be located in one building or location ("the office is the city"), or
dispersed over the city ("the city is the office"). In the latter case, office workplaces may be located in 'drop-in work
centres' in downtown retail and leisure areas, or incorporated in semi-public spaces such as hotels, serviced office
centres, airport lounges, and cafés. In this strategy, the only spaces actually owned by the organisation are
private workplaces including headquarters buildings, training and IT-centres.
Figure 18.23: Virtual and physical workplace solutions for private, priviledged and public space [Harrison, 2002]
As argued in the previous subsection, every character category is necessary but for sustainability a shift is needed
from private use to public sharing and accessibility. Each of these office workplace solutions may be centralised or
decentralised.
Potential of avoidance
On the basis of present-day common office space assignment to certain functions [DTZ Zadelhoff, 1995], table
18.17 presents the potential of saving space at the central office by shifting functions towards privileged and
public accessibility. As can be seen, the central office can be a factor of 6 smaller than usual.
Table 18.17: Potential avoidance of current office space functions when shifting them towards privileged and public
accessibility in centralised or decentralised complexes
functional space GFA proportion centralised decentralised
2
m private privileged public privileged public
primary functions
standard workplaces 10.7 37.0%
X
additional functions
conference and meeting space 0.9 3.1%
X X
X X
canteen, kitchen 1.8 6.2%
supportive functions
lobby, reception, post, delivery 0.6 2.1%
X X
X X
administration 0.5 1.7%
storage, archive, library 3.9 13.5%
X
specific organisational functions

marketing 0.5 1.7%
X
medical officer 0.1 0.3%
X
works council 0.1 0.3%
X
building related space

corridors, lifts, ducts 8.0 27.7%
X X X
X X X
technical services 1.5 5.2%
security and facility areas 0.3 1.0%
TOTAL 28.9 100.0% 4.5 21.6 2.8 21.6 2.8
The distribution of the functions requires high-quality business centres to fill in the gap at the central office. The
subsection following however will unfold the last step of the new sustainable organisation of office work, in which
all office functions are involved.
18.05.05 The new distribution of office work
The concept presented in this subsection is based on personal ideas raised, adapted and presented in the
workshop on 'Dematerialisation of the building sector' organised by TNO-STB, on the 6th of September 2001, and
later further processed and published by Simons et al. [2002]. In this thesis, however, I made adaptations to the
concept as presented by Simons et al. because I think it had some flaws that were not meant initially.
It should be mentioned that, although perhaps differing in details, the ideas presented are shared with many other
people thinking about the future of office work, many of which do not necessarily strive for sustainability but seek
efficiency and effectiveness.
The basic idea

As prepared in subsection 18.05.03, many of today's office work activities can be disconnected from the central
office, leaving a much smaller central office with a totally different character than usual at present. The concept
however starts with the basic unit for office work: the office employee with the basic equipment to work anywhere,
anyplace, facetiously called the mobile unit. From this basic element, the necessary accommodation solutions and
their distributed location (see figure 18.24) will be discussed below. Note that it is not the distribution of
workplaces that makes it more sustainable than the concentration of them but the absorption of office work in
other functions, thus the mix of office work in other urban functions.
the employee the home or instant office the district office the business nodes
the mobile unit: the personal work habitat: facilities in the vicinity: new core business:
- cell phone - place for concentration - extra support - coordination and control
- laptop - personal activities - services - 'club space'
- Internet connection - efficient use of rest time - contacts and inspiration - meetings
Figure 18.24: The four basic elements of the sustainable future organisation of office work
The employee or personal centre

Some of the core activities of office work can be performed on a personal basis, anywhere and anytime,
depending on the employee's preferences and available office space (which may be any place where office work
can be done). The basic equipment is a laptop, cell phone, and access to the Internet, or anything futuristic
replacing this equipment yet enabling similar as well as additional activities. The office place can be home or
anywhere not specifically designed for office work. This last condition is necessary to avoid special space,
materials and energy to be used for office work. The free, unlimited way of working will only be sustainable if it is
absorbed in other functions already present. SANE [Harrison, 2002] uses the term personal centre and mainly
refers to the home office, a secondary work location used for work requiring concentration or routine tasks that do
not require the physical involvement of other people. I also place instant offices under the basic work
environments.
The district office or neighbourhood centre

Sometimes the office employee will need access to a place designed to be used for office work, quiet and close to
home, yet avoiding the possible disadvantages of a workplace in the presence of family. Moreover, for some of
the office work activities, technical and functional facilities additional to the basic equipment are required that are
not to be found at home or in an instant office. These services and facilities can be accommodated in the district
office, the low-profile business centre already presented at the beginning of this chapter. In this respect, for SANE,
Harrison [2002] uses the term project centre, or better: neighbourhood centre, which is also located in suburban
and other residential areas and shared by a number of organisations or even open to the public.
For spatial and functional efficiency, the district office or neighbourhood centre is best integrated in, or situated
close to, other district amenities or services: shopping centres, libraries, copy shops, cafés and bars. In this case,
its individual performance will be better than determined in section 18.02.
The business nodes

Some of the activities need to be done with colleagues, clients, or other people that inspire new ideas nearby. Due
to this, the best place for these conferences, presentations, business and project team meetings is at the verges
of the city, at nodes of infrastructure, in order to be optimally accessible by all transport means from all directions.
The connection of motorways and parking space with public transport and roads for slow personal transport will
lead to an optimal sustainable division between these transport modes, whereas currently office work is served
best by cars only. When meeting only at these business nodes, fast connections for public transport will provide
the easiest way to travel, and work during travel, while still offering accessibility for people with cars from places
without sufficient and fast public transport. Be aware that even personal cars will be much less environmentally
damaging in the future, as a result of sustainable energy resources and storage systems.
Comparable, yet somewhat different, is the interpretation of Harrison [2002], who uses the term corporate centre
for a modern, more expensive business centre in business districts close to the organisation's clients. This centre
shared by a number of organisations offers both individual work settings and long-term project space, and a wide
mix of other client facilities. Therefore, it greatly resembles the already existing new business centres of Regus, as
the Teleport Towers next to the western ringroad of Amsterdam (as shown in figure 18.25 to 18.30).
Figure 18.25 to 18.30: Spaces and services additional to the normal facilities of a business centre, provided by Regus in the
Teleport Towers in Amsterdam (from left to right, from top to bottom): the cyber café, a reading cockpit, the brainstorm room,
the lounge bar, the leisure room, and a relax room with view on the western ringroad
In regards to the location of these business or corporate centres I disagree with Harrison. The ideas for SANE are
based too much on current spatial planning of offices in business districts and hence place corporate centres in
the middle of them. As traditional office buildings may become totally different in the future, when the distribution
of office work activities is realised, the mono-functional and concentrated location of them will not be necessary. A
more sustainable solution, which was demonstrated by the better performance of the transfer office with respect to
the normal business centre, is at the business nodes previously presented.
Furthermore, the spaces and facilities desired at these nodes need not be provided by one business centre
organisation but can be served by a range of companies related to the new office work: amenities for world-wide
meetings and presentations, production and reproduction, relaxing, sporting, dining, drinking, staying overnight,
shopping, travelling, car care, child care, etc. etc. The new business nodes can be a pulsing dynamic centre for
the new economy, combining office work with other work and optimal travel opportunities, embedded between
residential areas and also attracting citizens as a result of the liveliness and amenities provided.
The central office remaining: the clubhouse or operations centre

The new offices previously presented only leave one last office work element unsolved: the central office as a
place of central operations and facilities management, coordination, and issue. Besides, personal contact with
people from the organisation will remain important for identity, commitment, influence, exchange of personal
experiences and problems, and for the team feeling. The central office will therefore remain a home base for
employees, especially if they regularly work elsewhere. This office will be an opportunity to express the desired
image to the world. Furthermore, it will express the organisation's culture, values and beliefs, and need to arouse
the pride of its employees to be part of it, the kind of dedication that sportsclubs encounter from their members. It
can therefore be called the office clubhouse.
Figure 18.31: The future downtown office clubhouse of a large multinational
The size of the office can significantly alter: it needs not to offer workplaces for everyone, just for the essential
departments that are exclusive to the organisation. Furthermore, it needs to offer space for private meetings for
personnel, and for relaxation of employees that return 'home'. I estimate that its size - of course depending on the
number of employees - will be comparable to an average downtown club (figure 18.31). The Vision Web, whose
central office is an old mayor's residence that offers a grand café and meeting rooms as their main facilities,
demonstrated that this assumption is very realistic. If many other office organisations were to follow this example,
a considerable amount of office space and buildings would be reduced. Moreover, since the smaller clubhouses
can be located closer to residential areas and inner cities, employee travel would be significantly reduced.
For SANE, Harrison [2002] calls the remaining office the operations centre, and attributes business functions to it
that are not directly customer services: finance, human resources, information technology and training, housing
representatives of the service partners, and call centre space for administrative and service support to the other
centres, requiring a range of work settings.
Harrison locates the operations centre outside the central business district. As a result of the reduced size, it may
however be located anywhere. In order to express the company's image, it is best located at spots where it can be
seen: in the city centre or - even better - at the same business nodes previously introduced. In the latter case, the
office clubhouse forms the private topping of a collective mix of functions. It needs not necessarily be a loose
building separated from other companies: it can also be integrated in shared corporate buildings that also offer
space for the clubhouses of other office organisations, as well as the facilities of the business node, logically
located at the nodes of transport lines as well. This central location at business nodes of course offers the same
advantages to commuter travel as to business travel.
18.05.06 Benefits of the new sustainable office work concept
Personal benefits
A general improvement for office employees in particular and individuals living in and around cities in general is
the improvement of the quality of life.
As a result of reduced commuting and no need to be present at the central office at certain times, employees will
get more control over their use of time, and they will be able to match work tasks with personal needs.
Furthermore, the location of their different workspaces and meeting places will provide more opportunities for
interaction with other people from other professions.
For other individuals, the concept presented means an enrichment of existing districts and nodes of transport,
providing opportunities for enterprises related to office business yet also secondary urban functions coupled to
them. The area around the city can remain untouched and be improved for leisure and nature functions.
The existing city

A factor of strength of the organisation of office work presented in this section is the possibility to integrate it into
existing cities. The central office as we know it will be functionally and spatially broken down into smaller units and
distributed across the urban area. District offices and home offices offer structural workplaces, instant workplaces
provide ad-hoc workplaces, business nodes offer meeting spaces, workplaces and supportive facilities, and the
clubhouse office will be a much smaller central office than before but imply a greater significance to the
employees.
An advantage that Harrison also recognises is the easier incorporation of the smaller office units into the existing
city fabric, and within old or previously obsolete buildings in downtown areas. This especially applies to the district
office (Harrison used a similar solution called the project centre), which should be integrated into district amenities
for a wide range of potential users.
Financial implications
With regard to economic aspects, office organisations will have less real estate to invest in. Their own offices are
reduced to the clubhouse office, and this may be rented or leased (back) from real estate agents. This implies a
move from fixed cost to more variable cost, as a result of which capital will be freed for investment into other
targets, e.g. research and development, business quality improvements, and better employee services.
Environmental benefits
The main focus of this research was of course the environmental benefits coming from another way of working.
The reduced demand for office space in the concept presented will lead to smaller consumption of energy and
material resources and avoid the need for construction of new buildings. A second benefit is diminished
maintenance. The demand for smaller office space in existing urban areas will avoid demolition and destruction of
environmental capital of old buildings, as explained and tested in chapter 07 and 08. A very important
improvement is the limitation of commuter and business travel, and the shift from personal car transport to public
transport. Not least is the reduction of land use.
On the other hand, the new business nodes will require extensive investment of money and resources for the
multi-functional centres that should evolve at the complex crossings of roads and railways. Furthermore, existing
business districts with sole office functions will lose their function, requiring a redevelopment towards a more
multi-functional area including apartments and amenities. This redevelopment will again require resources.
Nevertheless, the essential advantage is the avoidance of new territories outside the city, whilst improving the
qualities inside.
Improvement potential
Simons et al. [2002] estimated the improvement potential of their presented concept, which basically contains the
same elements as presented in this section. The basis was formed by quantitive data for office accommodation
and commuter travel in the year 2000. For the years 2015 and 2050 these parameters were again calculated on
the basis of unaltered policy, including a growth of office employees as a result of the growing service economy.
For the year 2050, the sustainable variant was also calculated. Table 18.18 gives the results determined by
Simons et al.
Table 18.18: Potential of a distributed office work concept [after Simons et al., 2002]
parameter unit ref unaltered policy sustainable
2000 2015 2050 factor 2050 factor
space km2 200 302 400 0.50 80 2.50
materials Mton 97 112 120 0.81 54 1.80
energy PJ/y 20 30 7.8 2.56 4.7 4.26
travel: cars 109 km/y 10 11.6 25.6 0.39 1.3 7.69
public transport 109 km/y 2.4 2.8 3.4 0.71 1.3 1.85
Table 18.18 only gives absolute values of quantitive parameters which cannot be compared. They are not equal to
environmental loads. Without going into too much detail, some presumptions leading to the values of table 18.18
seemed optimistic to me. Furthermore, Simons et al. included a growing number of office employees, virtually
increasing the improvement factors.
I made an estimated calculation of the environmental improvement potential of the new office concept in
accordance with the methodology of chapter 16. For this calculation, the following office places were used: the
clubhouse office as a (small) central office, the business node as a transfer office, the district and home office as
residential office workplaces, and instant offices in-between these workplaces. The 95% of employees without a
fixed desk on average spend 0.5 day at the central office, 2 days at home or at the district office, 1.5 days at the
transfer office, and 1 day in instant offices. This applies to the so-called club workers. I also assessed free-lance
workers, who spend 0.5 day extra at the transfer office.
The spatial assumptions were equal to the ones of previous assessments, the basic occupation rates of the
transfer and district offices however were taken at 80% instead of 60%, and the division of transport means for
commuter travel were 40% car, 40% public transport and 20% bike or foot, whereas for business travel they were
40%, 50% and 10% respectively. The results are presented in figure 18.33.
2.50
traditional w orker
club w orker, district
2.00
club w orker, home
free-lance w orker, district
1.50
free-lance w orker, home
1.00
0.50
0.00
off ice co
nce pt
Figure 18.33: Outcome of the estimative assessment of the new sustainable organisation of office work
The environmental performance lies between 1.69 and 2.18. Taking into account greater amounts of business
travel, as in chapter 17, the maximum improvement potential can even be factor 2.34. The free-lance workers
score a bit more favourable, due to the lack of a small yet extra building. The club workers and free-lance workers
that operate from home perform somewhat better than those who spend two days at the district office.
It needs to be mentioned that the assumptions made were not optimistic, and the results of figure 18.33 only apply
to the conditions previously mentioned. Furthermore, as with all office worker concepts, the assessment did not
take into account technological or spatial optimisations, as presented in the parts on The Space Factor and The
Technology Factor. Knowing this, the estimated assessment indicates a broad, nationwide realistic potential
improvement of the environmental performance of a factor of 2, by a different organisation of office work alone.
Radical changes
As Harrison commented in his report on SANE, the different work concepts of SANE and the ones presented in
this dissertation assume radical changes in workplace design, hotel management, service provision, IT delivery,
and the supply and demand sides of the building procurement model. The new way of working will therefore not
be achieved within a short period but persevering, step by step, starting with experiments in districts and at nodes
of infrastructure.
The future of central offices and the individual behaviour of office employees cannot be easily influenced by
government intervention. Governments, provinces, municipalities, and districts however are necessary for the
multiple development of district offices and business nodes: these do not evolve by themselves. Future
sustainable office work therefore requires intervention of the public sector. The market will not initiate it.
Facility requirements
The flexible way of working needs to fulfil certain requirements before it has a similar quality to the traditional
office workplace [Edum-Fotwe et al., 2003]: access anytime anyplace, shared information resources, scalability,
and a secure and customised environment.
These were not discussed in this section but intrinsically assumed as a basis. It is clear that facilities management
forms the core of working in the new and sustainable economy.
Critical issues
There are many threats that may obstruct a shift towards the new way of working: they may be related to costs,
risks, local restrictions, company and governmental policies, availability of service providers, management issues,
client perceptions etc. etc. Some of them were already discussed in chapter 15. The balance of costs and benefits
will make it a success or a failure. And as long as environmental issues are not yet implemented in actual costs, I
worry about the outcome.
The critical issue is however: will there be a strong and persistent power that enforces the developments needed?
As discussed, governments should start the developments at transport nodes and lay the basis for enhanced
business centres, supportive facilities, and amenities, while avoiding the evolution of a few large corporate offices
at these nodes. Meanwhile, smaller local incentives for district office facilities in urban district areas also require
government involvement. Finally, companies also need to make the shift to organise their work in another way.
Isolation in the new concept of life

In the new economy, aircraft or train seats offer opportunities to either interact with strangers or retreat into private
space. Hotels become temporary homes (see figure 18.34), with services such as a television, hotel lobby, bar,
restaurant, and gym imitating the home environment or its direct surroundings.
Figure 18.34: A new type of office: the Hotel Office
Accessibility anyplace and anytime is a key-issue for the new organisation of office work. It should be remarked
that this is mostly one-directional: the employee usually wants to reach the office, clients, and colleagues anytime
anyplace. However, people do not always want to be reached themselves. The home becomes the only sanctuary
that can be disconnected from the new economy provided that residences are not yet used as a home office.
However, the only realistic disconnection from the World Wide Web, including the company (figure 18.35), is a
physical disconnection or the off-switch on the computer and mobile phone.
Figure 18.35: Disconnection from the IT-driven new economy is easy…
REFERENCES FOR THE ORGANISATION

OF OFFICE WORK
Literature
Amsberg K., Gaag P. van der, Koolhaas M., Leenders G., Nauta A. & Slager K.; 'Foute gebouwen 2 (in Dutch)', in:
NRC Handelsblad, 15 September, 1998
Antwerpen J. van & Hermans W.; Huisvestingsvoorkeuren van kantoren (in Dutch); INBO, Wageningen, Netherlands,
1998
Becker F.; Telework Centers - Satellite Offices: New Working Practices; Cornell University, International Workplace
Studies Program (IWSP), Ithaca, USA, 1994
Bell J., Mabb J., Garcia-Hansen V., Bergman B. & Morawska L.; 'Occupant health and productivity: an Australian
perspective', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on
Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (687-694, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie
Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Braaksma P.; 'Interpolis: helder werken', presentation at Interpolis, Tilburg, Netherlands, 22 May, 2003
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek); 2001 - Het jaar in cijfers (in Dutch); CBS, Netherlands, 2002
CLTM (Commissie Lange Termijn Milieubeleid); Het milieu - Denkbeelden voor de 21e eeuw (in Dutch); Kerckebosch,
Zeist, Netherlands, 1990
Dewever M.; Interview; Nijmegen, Netherlands, 7 August, 2003
Dewulf G.P.M.R. & Vos P.G.J.C.; 'De (on)mogelijkheden van kantoorinnovatie (in Dutch)', in: Management en
Organisatie, Vol. 52, No. 1, 1998 (7-28)
Drucker P.F.; 'The new society of organizations', in: Harvard Business Review September/October, 1992 (18-32)
Duffy F. & Powell K.; The new office; Conran Octopus, London, UK, 1997
Edum-Fotwe J.T., Thorpe A., Gregory M.J., Deasley P.J., Wootton A.B., North A.W.N. & Cooper R.; 'Distributed design
in aerospace, construction and product design: exploring scenarios for future team working', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S.
& Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built
Environment (SASBE 2003) (677-686, CD-rom); University of Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane,
Australia, 2003
Eley Associates; The Collaborative for High Performance Schools - Best Practices Manual; Eley Associates, San
Francisco, CA, USA, 2001
European Commission; 'Status Report on European Telework 1998', website:
http://www.eto.org.uk/twork/tw98/index.htm, 1999
Harrison A.; 'Accommodating the new economy: the SANE space environment model', website: http://www.degw.co.uk;
DEGW, London, UK, 2002
Interpolis; Je werkplek is waar je bent (in Dutch); Interpolis Facilitair Bedrijf, Tilburg, Netherlands, 1997
Jonge H. de; Real Estate in the Corporate Setting - Course in Successful Corporate Real Estate Strategies; Delft
Kaczmarczyk S. & Morris S.; Balanced Scorecard for Government - The Workplace Dimension; W4 workingpaper,
GSA, Washingtonj, USA, 2002
Kreitzman L.; The 24 Hour Society; Profile Books, London, UK, 1999
Linden K. van der, Spiekman M., Haas M. & Koster P.; 'GreenCalc - Een calculatie- en communicatiemodel om
milieubelasting van gebouwen meetbaar en vergelijkbaar te maken (in Dutch)', in: Praktijkhandboek Duurzaam
Bouwen (B270.10-1-27); WEKA Uitgeverij B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1999
Mair J.; Schluss mit lustig - Warum Leistung und Disziplin mehr bringen als emotionale Intelligenz, Teamgeist und Soft
Skills (in German); Eichborn, Frankfurt, Germany, 2002
Mendell M.J., Fisk W.J., Kreiss K., Levin H., Alexander D., Cain W.S., Girman J.R., Hines C.J., Jensen P.A., Milton
D.K., Rexroat L.P. & Wallingford K.M.; 'Improving the Health of Workers in Indoor Environments: Priority Research
Needs for a National Occupational Research Agenda', in: American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 92, No. 9, Sept.,
2002 (1430-1440)
Naisbett J.; Megatrends; Warner, New York, USA, 1984
F The Organisation of Office Work - References for The Organisation of Office Work 443
Novem; Monitor van de voortgang van het Energie Efficiencyprogramma Rijkshuisvesting over de periode 1989 tot en
met 2000 (in Dutch); Novem B.V., Utrecht, Netherlands, 2001
Pullen W.; Interview; Delft, Netherlands, 1 August, 2003
Ramnath U.; Relevante tevredenheidsfactoren binnen innovatieve werkomgevingen (master thesis, in Dutch); Delft
University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Netherlands, 2001
Rgd (Rijksgebouwendienst); website: http://www.rijksgebouwendienst.nl; 2003
Regterschot J.; 'It is finally going to happen', in: New European Offices; Twijnstra Gudde, Amersfoort, Netherlands,
1995
Rgd (Rijksgebouwendienst); Kantoorinnovatie - Maatkostuum voor organisaties in beweging (in Dutch); Ministerie van
VROM/Rijksgebouwendienst, The Hague, Netherlands, 1996
RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieuhygiëne); Energiegebruik en emissies per vervoerwijze (in Dutch);
RIVM, Bilthoven, Netherlands, 1997
Simons L., Lanting R., Fraanje P. & Roelofs E.; Een andere kijk op kantoorwerk - Dematerialisatie van kantoren door
functiemenging en decentralisatie (in Dutch); TNO, Delft, Netherlands, 2002
Stichting Natuur en Milieu; 'Vervoersgegevens (in Dutch)', in: Natuur en Milieu, March, 1990
Stichting Natuur en Milieu; Personenverkeer en milieu (in Dutch); Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Utrecht, Netherlands,
2001
Toffler A.; The Third Wave; Pan Books, London, UK, 1981
Troost K.; (Werkplek)Kosten van kantoorinnovatie (in Dutch); Stichting voor Beleggings- en Vastgoedkunde,
Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1998
Vollebregt J.; 'Huisvesting als kapstok voor integraal verandermanagement' (in Dutch)', in: Facility Management
Magazine, Vol. 11, No. 61, 1998 (26-29)
Voordt D.J.M. van der; Kosten en baten van werkplekinnovatie (in Dutch) - Een definitie en -programmeringsstudie;
Center for People and Buildings, Delft, Netherlands, 2003
Vos P.G.J.C.; Werkt het beter in het Dynamischkantoor? - Nulmeting, eerste en tweede nameting, eindevaluatie (in
Dutch); Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Real Estate & Housing, Netherlands , 1997-1999
Vos P.G.J.C. & Voordt D.J.M. van der; 'Tomorrow's offices through today's eyes - Effects of office innovation in the
working environment', in: Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002 (48-65)
Vroon P.; De psychologische basisbehoeften van de mens (in Dutch); Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht, Netherlands, 1990
Zwaap R.; 'Villa Hommeles (in Dutch)', in: De Groene Amsterdammer, Vol. 36, 1997
Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Daan Klaase, young, brilliant project manager of MAB, for developing many ideas together with me about the future
office market and new ways of working.
Erik Eversteyn, of The Vision Web / Solvision, who was kind to provide information about his company's concept and
buildings, and show me around in Delft.
Lucas Simons, formerly of TNO-STB, currently of Utz Kapeh, for organising the workshop on Dematerialisation of the
building sector and contemplating with me about sustainable future office work and having the similar ideas about it:
our ideas will hopefully get a follow-up through my PhD…
Sipke Feenstra, general manager of Regus Netherlands, for the opportunity to interview him on Regus, from which I
got useful information for the methodology and assessment of office concepts.
Marcel Dewever, retired Environmental Inspector of the DGBA, PhD-researcher himself, for reading an extended
version of the Brisbane paper and discussing it with me at his pleasant home.
Wim Pullen, manager of the Center for People and Buildings, for reading an extended version of the Brisbane paper
and discussing it with me.
The platform Future Sustainable Workspace (FSW), especially Emma van Sandick of TNO-STB, for offering me the
opportunity to present my research on office concepts, of which this chapter describes the methodological part, and
thereby getting feedback on it.
Theo Magermans, of Samas office settings Benelux and co-member of the FSW-platform, for inviting me to present my
office concept research again to Ursula Tischner and Martijn Verkuijl of the European Sus|pro-net, thereby giving me
more feedback.
Ursula Tischner and Martijn Verkuijl of Econcept and the European Sus|pro-net, for offering me the opportunity to
present my research on a European stage.
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den & Jonge H. de; 'Office work and sustainability - An environmental assessment of
traditional and innovative office concepts', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003
International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (668-676, CD-rom); University of
Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Expert journals
Dobbelsteen A. van den; 'Het duurzame kantoor (in Dutch)', in: Real Estate Magazine, No. 32 (36-39); Arko Uitgeverij,
Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2004
F The Organisation of Office Work - References for The Organisation of Office Work 445
Front page
Sunrise in the ancient city of Tikal, Guatemala. The high-
developed society of this old equivalent of modern megacities
once flourished yet abruptly came to an end in the 9th century
AD. Ever since, the jungle has taken over the city, still
covering many of its treasures beneath the lush green. The
cause of the city’s demise is not completely clear, but it is
most likely due to a combination of food depletion through
ecological exhaustion, wars with other city-states and the lack
of productive human resources.
The End
19
conclusions
G
the end
15 16 17 18 F
the organisation
of office work
14 13 12 E
the space factor
10 11 D
the technology
factor
09 08 07 C
the time factor
04 05 06 B
the basis
03 02 01 A
the beginning
19 CONCLUSIONS: THE FACTOR 20
AND OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
This chapter concludes this long journey of exploration of the environmental improvement potential for office
accommodation. It summarises the findings and conclusions of all previous chapters. This time, parts C to F of
this dissertation will be treated corresponding with the order of the accommodation process. The original
hypotheses will be tested and recommendations made for further research and implementation of results in
sustainability policies. This chapter, and thereby this thesis, ends with a contemplation on sustainability in a
broader sense and on the future of building.
Figure 19.01: Descending the steep stairs of a Maya pyramid in Uxmal, Mexico.
The hill on the background hides the secret of another pyramid and temple forgotten in time
Contents
19.01 Introduction to the conclusion 453

19.02 Main findings and remarks 454
19.02.01 The Basis 454
19.02.02 The Organisation of Office Work 454
19.02.03 The Space Factor 455
19.02.04 The Technology Factor 456
19.02.05 The Time Factor 457
19.02.06 Testing the hypotheses 457
19.03 The potential for environmental improvement 459
19.03.01 Summarising every individual step 459
19.03.02 The integrated potential 461
19.03.03 Alternative scenarios 463
19.03.04 Brief conclusions 465
19.04 Considerations 465
19.04.01 Putting the potential in perspective 465
19.04.02 More approaches 466
19.04.03 More than the building and its technology 466
19.04.04 More than the western world 468
19.05 Recommendations 468
19.05.01 Additional research 468
19.05.02 Policy for sustainability 469
19.06 The future? 469
19.06.01 Future developments from an economic viewpoint 469
19.06.02 Ecology and the future 469
19.06.03 Final remarks 471
The extensive TERMINOLOGY list can be found on pages 473 to 490.
REFERENCES for Volume G - The End can be found on pages 491 to 492.
The appropriately titled THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU is expressed on page 493.
452 19 Conclusions: the factor 20 and other important issues - G The End
19.01 Introduction to the conclusion
The research process

Figure 19.02 is a simple representation of the logical order of the research presented, leaving out supporting
studies of methodologies and secondary introductions. Roughly speaking, this was also the order in which the
research in this thesis was discussed.
OFFICES & SUSTAINABLE BUILDING

introduction
THE CURRENT PERFORMANCE

basic case study
THE BUILDING LIFESPAN

accounting model and recalculations
BUILDING DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY


typology and case studies case studies
OFFICE WORK CONCEPTS

THE OVERALL POTENTIAL

final conclusion
Figure 19.02: A simple way of explaining this PhD research
The reverse order

The order of figure 19.02 is logical when deriving environmental data from scratch. Research is started at the
detailed level of building design (size, materials and building services), then working back to more abstract levels.
However, to achieve the best environmental performance, the findings should be applied in the reverse order,
starting with the organisation of office work and working the way down to the eventual selection of building
products. Figure 19.03 presents these steps hierarchically, from a high organisational level to the lower technical
level. The time factor should be thought about throughout the process. Therefore, the time factor is positioned at
all levels.
THE ORGANISATION OF OFFICE WORK

concepts of distributed office work

optimal floor layouts multiple & intensive use of space
THE TIME FACTOR
designing for life THE BUILDING DESIGN
optimal building shape & height
TECHNICAL OPTIMALISATIONS
energy consumption & supporting structure
Figure 19.03: The order of improvements, based on the hierarchical pyramid
G The End - Terminology 453

As a clarification of figure 19.03, effective reductions in environmental load therefore are achieved in the following
order:
'Designing for life' refers to the high-quality design of buildings, in terms of monumentality or demountability,
as well as the optimal selection of building components for the planned service life of a building (as
discussed in chapter 09)
The organisation of office work: telework and other distribution concepts, defining the space required
Optimal shapes and heights of buildings based on the net floor area required
An optimal office floor layout based on the area required and chosen office concept
An efficient structural design (i.e. the structural spans) and appropriate selection of components
Use of sustainable energy resources and technologies, including a sustainable supporting structure
The findings of this research in association with these steps will be treated in the following section. The individual
and integrated environmental improvement potential found will be discussed in section 19.03.
19.02 Main findings and remarks
For the research presented, the factor 20 was taken as an indication of the magnitude of the environmental
improvement required.
19.02.01 The Basis
The basic study of office buildings

The basic study of twelve typologically different, yet functionally comparable, government offices indicated that the
environmental performance of office building design has had limited improvement since 1985. The only
improvement is achieved because of autonomous measures for energy-efficiency.
Based on a reference lifespan of 75 years, 77.5% of the annual environmental load is caused by energy
consumption, 19.5% by the use of building materials, and only 3.0% by water consumption. The three main
sources of energy consumption are heating and cooling, lighting, and equipment (mainly computers), which
almost equally divided constitute 86% of the environmental load of energy consumption. The environmental load
of building materials is mainly contained in the supporting structure (57%), for which horizontal elements (floors,
beams, and roof) constitute approximately 70%. In terms of environmental effectiveness, therefore, these
elements should be looked into.
19.02.02 The Organisation of Office Work
The effective environmental improvement of office accommodation starts with the organisation of office work. The
choice of a telework concept and its effect on travel and office layout is a delicate one, and different measures will
produce different outcomes.
Telework concepts
Assessment of different telework concepts demonstrated that most lead to a limited environmental improvement.
In general, commuter and business travel are reduced through telecommuting. The use of space, building
materials and energy depends on the additional space needed at the telework office, taking into account
occupational inefficiencies of business centres and satellite offices. Most telework concepts achieve between a
factor of 1.1 to 1.2 overall environmental improvement. The results vary for the average number of telework days
and the assumptions made. Best performance is achieved through the 4-telework days home office worker
concept, leading to a factor 1.3 improvement. In this result, the employee's residence is assumed to be already in
use by other family members. If this is not the case, there is hardly any improvement.
When the hours of business travel are increased, the instant office worker concept - consisting of office workers
who mainly use workplaces not specifically designed for office work - achieves the best results: factor 1.5
environmental improvement for the 4-telework days, 20-hours business travel variant. These results indicate that
disconnecting of employees from their personal workdesks is the main stimulus for environmental improvement of
office work concepts.
New forms of the business centre - the transfer office, at nodes of public and private transport, and the district
office, in residential areas - provide extra opportunities for environmental improvement. Concepts based on these
telework offices perform better than the traditional business centre in commercial office areas.
More complex patterns of office work

The assessment of more complex present-day office work concepts for dynamic organisations demonstrated a
greater improvement factor, up to 1.6. A range of workplaces therefore has a greater improvement potential than
just one telework office, especially when the home or district office forms the base office.
The findings for theoretical concepts were supported through the assessment of an actual office company of
which the office work concept was based on various office places. The reduction of space used for office work and
the use of old, renovated buildings made possible an environmental improvement of building materials by more
than a factor of 20. This however also depends on how much a consultant is bound to one or more clients, this
involving 'borrowed space' at a guest office. If all consultants were posted at a client's office, this guest office
would need more space, thus limiting the environmental performance to a factor of 2.5. The overall environmental
improvement of this actual company was severely reduced to an improvement factor of 1.3 in the best-case
scenario, and 1.1 in the worst-case scenario, due to the great distances of employee travel covered by car. In the
case of a dynamic and mobile innovative organisation, employee travel becomes as important, or even more
important, than the energy consumption at the different office buildings.
Future sustainable organisation of office work

In the near future, office work may largely be conducted away from the central office, reducing the central office to
a clubhouse office, where employees regularly meet and find a shared identity and which expresses the
organisation's image, beliefs and policy. Other offices in this sustainable office work concept are business nodes
at transit hubs for private and public transport, district offices in residential areas, home offices, and instant offices
anywhere on the way to and from the offices.
The assessment of the new office organisation concept indicates an environmental improvement factor between
1.6 and 2.1. This depends on the choice between a home or district office, and the question of being bound to an
organisation or working freelance. This environmental improvement is regardless of further potential spatial and
technical improvements within the offices, such as efficient layout solutions, sustainable energy technologies and
optimal structural designs.
19.02.03 The Space Factor
The use of space in offices

Spatial improvement is possible through the shift from a cellular office to other layout types. When purely
considering a certain number of users and ignoring possibilities for telework, the best environmental improvement
is achievable by means of an open-plan office layout: factor 1.8 with respect to the cellular office plan. The group
office performs better by a factor of 1.6, and the combi-office layout by a factor of 1.5. The figures refer only to the
environmental load of building materials. The consumption of energy depends on the number of users and the
total floor area.
The combination of layout solutions for the central office and simple telework concepts indicated an overall
improvement by up to a factor of 1.5. Altering the office floor design therefore has a greater improvement potential
than the outplacing of employees at offices that are less efficiently managed. Combination of both ideas however
leads to the best outcome.
The use of space in urban areas

On the urban scale, an optimised use of space can lead to remarkable results with respect to an average density
for European mono-functional urban areas: up to a factor 10 for the green area preserved (GAP) outside the city,
up to a factor 7 for reduction of transport fuel. The improvement potential for the use building materials and energy

through stacking of building layers alone is limited. The integrated improvement potential of intensively used urban
areas can be factor 1.5, as achieved by Canary Wharf in London. When developing areas better adjusted to an
average blend of urban functions, a smaller overall improvement is possible than with mono-functional areas. In a
broader perspective, however, the combination of multiple and intensive use of space achieves the best
performance.
This figures found are strongly influenced by the use of energy in buildings. Individual buildings may show more
variable performances for energy and building materials, and thereby positively influence the final potential.
19.02.04 The Technology Factor
The building geometry

Due to variable effects, the shape of the building design does not exert a great influence on the overall
environmental performance: a maximum factor of 1.1 is possible between the most and least favourable basic
shape. Starting with a certain NFA required for an office organisation and a reference floor depth of 12.6 m, the
extent of stacking has a similar influence: a maximum difference of factor 1.3 between the best and worst
solutions, in regards to large offices. When the floor depth is increased to 25.2 m, the integrated improvement
factors increase however to 1.5, again in regards to large offices. The optimal number of stories depends on the
NFA required; it ranges from 4 stories for small offices (2,100 m2) to 26 stories for large offices (67,200 m2).
The assessment of the Commerzbank highrise demonstrates that in the typology studies the assumptions made
for great heights are too optimistic. When studying buildings more than 20 stories high, the environmental load of
the supporting structure and building services increases more rapidly than below that height. The optimal number
of stories found for large offices therefore will actually be lower, and the ultimate improvement factor will be
smaller than determined. In terms of the environmental load of the building, highrises are not a sustainable
solution.
Energy
In theory, without accounting for the equipment required, more than a factor 20 environmental improvement of
energy consumption is possible through the use of sustainable energy resources. Therefore, technically, energy is
not an environmental problem. The application of sustainable energy resources throughout society will be a key
issue for the success of sustainable development, since it affects all processes in life, including the manufacture
of building materials, supply of fresh water, and transportation. Therefore, the use of sustainable energy is an
absolute necessity.
With a shift to sustainable energy, environmental problems related to biodiversity, ecosystem health and human
health become increasingly more important. Therefore, a wider approach to sustainability is necessary than the
sole focus on carbon dioxide related to fossil energy.
Building materials
Through a wise selection of floor structures alone, a maximum environmental improvement of around factor 2 is
possible with respect to massive concrete floors. When considering complete structural designs, involving
structural spans, floor structures, beams, columns, and their respective material alternatives, a factor of 2.5
improvement is possible with respect to the average of all possible combinations, and a factor of 4.5 with respect
to the worst solution assessed. Of all combinations studied, the best combination was based on TT-slabs
spanning the whole depth of a building, supported by timber beams and timber columns, with a long façade bay of
5.4 m. When taking into account that solutions based on massive concrete floors (which are probably worse than
the alternatives studied) were not included in the assessments, an improvement factor of approximately 4 should
be possible when switching from a common insitu concrete structure to the TT-slab and timber combination.
Extra improvement potential for the use of building materials is to be found in the application of new building
materials such as carbon fibres or renewable materials. As a structural material, bamboo can lead to
environmental improvement between a factor of 5 and 20, depending on the specific structural function.
Water
Although, at present, water consumption proves not to be of great influence to the environmental load of office
buildings, this contribution increases when including the use of cooling water for electricity and manufacturing of
metals. Moreover, water will be a key issue for sustainable development throughout the world. A factor of 2
environmental improvement for water consumption is easily possible through water conservation technologies,
use of other water sources such as rainwater, and re-use of purified wastewater.
19.02.05 The Time Factor
Age and service life

Until now, the age and expected service life of buildings have been ignored in the calculation of environmental
performance. For a correct environmental assessment, these need to be taken into account. Chapters 07 and 08
provided a practical methodology for this. As these chapters demonstrated, the influence of age and estimated
service life (ESL) prove decisive for the environmental performance of the building.
Designing for life

The environmental preference between renovation and (partly) re-use of an old building and demolition and
reconstruction of a new one mainly depends on the environmental mortgage of new building materials, the
estimated service life of both alternatives, and the difference in annual energy consumption.
A building lifespan equal to the expected service life of its supporting structure forms the best foundation for good
environmental performance. Tuning service lives of individual components to the service life expected or planned
for a building leads to the best results: up to a factor of 2.79 environmental improvement can be achieved.
19.02.06 Testing the hypotheses
Hypotheses about the cause of environmental arrears
The building industry focuses on ineffective technical solutions

The case study in chapter 06 revealed that, for an effective approach to sustainable building, tackling energy
consumption and finding a sustainable solution for the supporting structure were most important.
Energy conservation has been an issue since the early 1990s, even for normal day-to-day construction and
operation of office buildings. This has led to, for example, new insulation techniques and energy-efficient building
services and computers. The studies in this thesis supported this by finding an increase to the environmental
performance of building technology between 1985 and 2000, whereas the performance of the entire building
design remained constant. In spite of this, from 1990 to 2000, the average energy consumption of government
offices has increased, as studies monitoring the buildings of the DGBA [Novem, 2002] established. This increase
is due to wider use of computers and cooling. Both findings support the idea that further improvements to the
percentages of energy technology figures will inevitably be overtaken by the expected further increase electricity
demands. For the environmental improvement of energy consumption, the most effective solution therefore will be
the use of sustainable energy resources and technologies based on them.
For building materials, the focus has been on even more ineffective measures, such as the adaptation of certain
building details and selection of building materials for insignificant elements. As the studies in chapter 10 clarified,
a positive impact will be seen if structural components are based on wisely chosen measurements and properties,
and if they consist of the most appropriate sustainable materials. Taking into account that in the Netherlands most
office buildings are still designed with in-situ concrete structures (one of the worst solutions from an environmental
perspective), a great potential lies for an improvement through the use of TT-slabs or hollow core slabs spanning
the entire floor depth, supported by timber beams and columns.
Sustainability is focused on too small a scale

This is true to a great extent for the whole building sector: currently, sustainable building has mainly been directed
at individual buildings. Initiatives undertaken for an urban approach have mainly concerned aspects that can only
be tackled on the urban scale, such as social, cultural and ecological issues and open water management. The
opportunity to approach technical utilities for energy and water provision on the urban scale, using economics of
scale and possibilities to tune supply and demand, therefore has rarely been challenged. The urban case studies
of chapter 14 showed that, in spite of the opportunities of mixed and intensively used plans, communal utilities
had not been approached in an integrated and sustainable way.

Sustainability needs to be achieved through more than just technology

All explorative studies of this dissertation proved this hypothesis. A sole focus on technology will never lead to a
factor 20 environmental improvement. The organisation of office work defines the use of space and extent of
employee travel; the use of space on the urban and building scale defines the size of the buildings required; the
shape and height of the building influence the use of building materials and energy; and only then technological
improvements can make a difference. Technological improvements, although important, are the tail end of holistic
solutions for sustainability.
Hypotheses about effective sustainable solutions
Effective solutions for building design and technology will lead to better performance than
achieved so far
This hypothesis is in fact a truth in itself: effective solutions of course lead to better performances than ineffective
ones. This dissertation, however, enabled a distinction between effective and ineffective. The case and typology
studies in chapter 10 showed that optimal solutions for the supporting structure had a potential to improve the
performance of building materials by a factor of 4.5. The typology studies of chapter 11 demonstrated integrated
improvements up to a factor 1.5 solely through an optimal building shape and height for a certain net floor area.
The use of sustainable energy resources possibly even led to a factor 20 improvement for the environmental load
of energy consumption. Integration of these solutions should make an improvement by at least a factor of 5
possible. Recent sustainable offices have not achieved better than a factor of 2.5.
Prolonging the service life of a building contributes to the factor 20

Although chapter 07 demonstrated better environmental performance with an increase in building age, this
hypothesis was proved by the solutions compared in chapter 09. These demonstrated a decrease in
environmental load when the service life of the building was extended. Decisive to these findings was the
repetition of replacement of components for the supporting structure. A short service life for the building only
proved worthwhile, therefore, when the supporting structure's lifespan was not longer than that of the building.
And even then, in the best-case scenario, this would only perform equal to the long service life of the building.
Study of the old Johan de Witt House in chapter 07 and the old Vision Web offices in chapter 18 however already
determined an environmental improvement factor for the use of building materials exceeding a factor of 20.
Optimal use of space contributes to the factor 20

The layout typology studies of chapter 13 and the urban case studies of chapter 14 clarified the relationship of the
use of space with environmental performance, possibly distinguished into different aspects. On the building scale,
an efficient use of space reduces the required building size and the amount of fill-in. Both of these positively
influence the use of building materials and energy consumption. On the urban scale, an intensive and multiple use
of space mainly leads to more preserved green area and reduced energy for transport. The impact of combined
technical utilities in dense urban plans could not be tested, as none of the cases assessed used this opportunity.
New concepts for office work contribute to the factor 20

The telework concepts comparison of chapter 17 revealed variable and only limited environmental progress, up to
a maximum factor 1.3, through the use of telework in one type of telework office. Distributed ways of working led
to better results (up to factor 1.6), and a new office work concept achieved the best performance (up to factor 2.1).
Both of these latter studies were presented in chapter 18. All studies therefore support the hypothesis. However,
the result of an office concept differing from the traditional way is strongly dependent on the specific situation. The
greatest influence to office concepts is the use of space, which in turn defines the eventual building size and
design. The large influence of energy and travel on the end-result, combined with the limited improvement
potential of these aspects, restricts the influence for large improvement factor figures achieved with space and
materials. Therefore, new office concepts in particular will lead to good results if they are based on sustainable
energy technologies for buildings and transportation.
19.03 The potential for environmental improvement
19.03.01 Summarising every individual step
The Organisation of Office Work

Table 19.01 summarises the environmental improvement potential through the organisation of office work
excluding the traditional concepts but involving the telework concepts of chapter 17 and 18, as well as the new
sustainable organisation of office work proposed in chapter 18. Beside maximum improvement factors, the table
also gives average values, based on all concepts calculated.
Table 19.01: Maximum and average improvement factors for The Organisation of Office Work
Solution
land use materials energy water travel OVERALL
unit > m2/p e€/p e€/p e€/p e€/p e€/p e€/p
1
Average basic values 15.2 61 220 964 37 514 1,796
Contribution to total load 3% 12% 54% 2% 29% 100%
2,3,4
Office work organisation av max av max av max av max av max av max
New organisation of office work 1.0 1.0 2.1 2.9 1.6 1.9 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.3 1.8 2.1
Complex telework concepts 1.0 1.0 2.1 4.0 1.3 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.7 1.3 1.7
Simple telework concepts 1.0 1.0 1.5 4.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.1 1.6
1: materials, energy and water based on the study of chapter 06, travel based on study of chapter 17; 2: based on standard floor area usage; 3: based on standard
usage of building materials and energy; 4: including 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-h business travel variants
As can be seen, in terms of the use of space and building materials, as a maximum some telework concepts,
especially the instant office worker concept, based on four telework days, perform better than the new office
organisation. However, the latter always performs better in terms of energy and travel, and therefore also in the
overall scores. Moreover, the new way of working has better average improvement factors, assuring greater
success.
The Space Factor

For the studies executed in Volume E - The Space Factor, table 19.02 gives the maximum and average
environmental improvement potentials based on personal values (per office employee). The overall results for the
cases of the use of urban space are somewhat less favourable than presented in chapter 14 due to the inclusion
of water consumption. The combination of multiple and intensive use of space perhaps does not lead to the
highest densities but offer the best opportunities for environmental improvement of entire cities.
Table 19.02: Maximum and average improvement factors for The Space Factor
Solution
1
3
The Factor Space av max av max av max av max av max av max
5
Optimal use of urban space 5.8 11.5 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 4.3 7.3 1.4 1.5
Non-cellular office layouts 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
1: land use based on Vogtländer [2001], materials, energy and water based on the study of chapter 06, travel based on study of chapter 17; 3: based on standard
usage of building materials and energy; 5: based on the study of chapter 14, averages are project averages
As can also be seen, the improvement factors of non-cellular office layouts determined in chapter 13 may be
positive for the use of building materials, in the overall potential they lead to only limited improvements. However,
it should be mentioned that the improvement of energy consumption through other layout solutions was not taken

into account. The spatial improvements through an open-plan, group, or combi layout will also lead to reductions
of energy consumption connected to the floor area (e.g. heating, cooling, and lighting).

In table 19.03, the potential improvement values resulting from the studies in the field of The Technology Factor
are summarised. The building shape studies contained more archetypical geometric alternatives than the building
heights studies. The latter however are more accurate and realistic, for instance because they included spatial
losses from net to gross floor areas.
The improvement factors for the office structure combination alternatives were converted to improvement factors
of the use of building materials in total (in which the supporting structure on average constituted 57% of the
environmental load).
The improvement factors for sustainable resources are based on the findings discussed in chapter 10.
Table 19.03: Maximum and average improvement factors for The Technology Factor
Solution
1
2
The Factor Technology av max av max av max av max av max av max
6
Optimal building shapes 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
7
Optimal building heights 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3
8
Optimal supporting structures 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
9
Sustainable resources 1.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 20.0 2.0 9.5 5.0 20.0 3.7 9.3
1: based on the study of chapter 06; 2: based on standard floor area usage; 6: factors with respect to the tower typology; 7: including different net floor areas and
12.6- and 25.2 m deep floor plans, excluding 16- and 32-layers variants, factors with respect to the 2-layers, 12.6-m deep variants; 8: including the alternatives
2
compared in chapter 08 only, for 2.5- and 5.0-kN/m loads, factor with respect to the worst solutions; 9: see section 10.05
The Time Factor

Table 19.04 presents the figures for the last part of the exploration into the environmental improvement potential
for office accommodation, The Time Factor. According to the methodology of chapter 07, using buildings older
than 75 years theoretically makes it possible for an improvement by factor 20 or more in regards to building
materials. Re-using a 60 year old building without adaptations however already leads to an improvement of factor
5, making this a reasonable estimation for the average. In table 19.04, the different service life scenarios of
chapter 09 are also presented.
Table 19.04 demonstrates that although significant improvements are possible with regard to the environmental
load of building materials, the overall performance is limited, due to the relative insignificant contribution of
building materials to the total environmental load.
Table 19.04: Maximum and average improvement factors for The Time Factor
Solution
1
2,3
The Factor Time av max av max av max av max av max av max
10
Re-using old buildings 1.0 1.0 5.0 20.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
11
Service life scenarios 1.0 1.0 1.9 2.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
1: based on the study of chapter 06; 2: based on standard floor area usage; 3: based on standard usage of building materials and energy; 10: maximum factors is
theoretical, others are estimated; 11: factors with respect to a 25-years building service life and common component service lives
Comments
The lifespan dependence of environmental load should be considered separate from the other aspects that define
the use of building materials. The annual environmental load of building materials is first calculated by the amount
of materials, which stands in close relation to the building design, including shape and height, and the structural
design. The building and structural design also limit the type of products that may be used. The products selected
have a specific environmental load.
19.03.02 The integrated potential
Order of solutions
Effective reductions in environmental load may be best achieved in the following hierarchical order:
Organisation of office work: telework and other concepts of distributed work
Efficient layout of the office floor, further defining the space required
Optimal shape and height of the building based on the net floor area required
Optimal design of the supporting structure and the appropriate selection of its products and materials
Use of sustainable energy resources and technologies
Selecting building components tuned to the expected or planned service life of a building
A de-tour has been made through the optimal use of space on the urban scale. This is mainly influenced by other
stakeholders.
Overview of improvement potential

Most of the potential environmental improvement factors separately treated in the previous subsection can be
combined in order to determine an overall improvement potential. Table 19.05 clarifies this.
Table 19.05: Overview of all maximum and average improvement factors, including overall potentials
Solution
1
Original contribution to total load 3% 12% 54% 2% 29% 100%
2,3,4
Office work organisation av max av max av max av max av max av max
New organisation of office work 1.0 1.0 2.1 2.9 1.6 1.9 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.3 1.8 2.1
3
The Factor Space av max av max av max av max av max av max
5
Optimal use of urban space 5.8 11.5 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 4.3 7.3 1.4 1.5
Non-cellular office layouts 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
2
The Factor Technology av max av max av max av max av max av max
6
Optimal building shapes 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
7
Optimal building heights 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3
8
Optimal supporting structures 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
9
Sustainable resources 1.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 20.0 2.0 9.5 5.0 20.0 3.7 9.3
2,3
The Factor Time av max av max av max av max av max av max
10
Re-using old buildings 1.0 1.0 5.0 20.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
11
Service life scenarios 1.0 1.0 1.9 2.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1
Total potential av max av max av max av max av max av max
New office organisation 5.8 11.5 22.4 177.4 8.9 61.6 2.0 9.5 15.0 66.0 9.9 53.0

In the lowest rows of table 19.05, the overall maximum and average potential is calculated. For these factors, not
every row is used in these calculations. For instance, only one of the three office organisation strategies can be
selected and the rows or cells with a grey background are left out of the ultimate calculation because there are
more accurate figures from other assessments:
The building shape study had a more accurate sequence in the form of the building heights study.
The advantages of compact urban areas to building materials and energy were mainly based on the building
heights study. To avoid double counting these factors were excluded.
Environmental travel data from the comparison of the urban cases was arguable, as discussed in chapter
14. Besides, the telework concepts studies contained a more accurate determination of fuel use.
The (re-)use of old buildings may imply great environmental improvement but it is not always possible to
anticipate this specific solution. Furthermore, only one of the two Time Factor solution rows may be selected,
and I chose the least optimistic one.
In spite of these reductions, for the use of building materials, energy, and fuel for transport, large maximum
improvement factors result. For building materials this is due to consequential improvements multiplied one after
another. For energy and travel the large improvement potential is mainly based on the use of sustainable energy
resources.
Calculation of total overall potential

The overall end-results seen in the bottom cells are not a result of the multiplication of overall in-between results
above them but of the total end-results per environmental aspect to the left of them. For every aspect, therefore, I
divided the original environmental cost per employee at the top of the table by the product of all applied
improvement factors. The original overall environmental cost was divided by the sum of the new environmental
cost, leading to the overall improvement factors.
This method also clarifies the importance of the environmental aspects before and after all possible
improvements. The initial situation is as follows: land 3%, materials 12%, energy 54%, water 2%, travel 29%. After
all improvements of the maximum potential, the division is: land 17%, materials 2%, energy 47%, water 12%, and
travel 23%. Land and water become more important as other values, are improved.
The attainable factor 20

As table 19.05 shows in the last three rows and last two columns, environmental improvement of office
accommodation by a factor of 20 seems attainable. The maximum improvement factor in the best combination of
strategies even exceeds this by far. This optimal combination is achieved through the new sustainable
organisation of office work, intensifying the use of urban and building space, optimal heights and structural
designs and optimal combinations of building elements selected in balance with the eventual service life of the
building. As the new sustainable organisation of office work is based on centralised office facilities at nodes of
public and private transport and in districts, even this optimal combination seems realistic.
The end-results also demonstrate that without the new organisation of office work, however with other telework
concepts, a significant environmental improvement factor is also possible. However, as the simple and complex
concepts of telework importantly rely on individual office organisations, the actual achievement of around a factor
of 20 seems utopic. In contrast - and paradoxical because it implies an important change of the office real estate
market - the new office work concept is likely to perform better after implementation than the concepts closer to
the traditional organisation of office work.
In the case of less favourable conditions

Next to the maximum figures in the last column, there are averages for environmental improvement factors,
determined from all assessment results (minimum factors were not presented). These average factors present a
more realistic and attainable goal. The difference with the maximum potential is importantly shown through less
favourable figures for sustainable resources. For instance, theoretically and even technically, an environmental
improvement by a factor of 20 is possible through the use of sustainable energy, but the slow implementation of
sustainable technologies, and current developments in the oil market, offer no opportunity of radical changes
before the target year 2040. In spite of this, autarchic energy projects have already been established and many
progressive projects already go beyond a factor of 2 environmental improvement. Therefore, the factor of 5 used
for the average potential seems reasonable.
The use of average values for the same combination of measures still lead to a factor of almost 10 environmental
improvement for the new sustainable office organisation variant. Other telework concepts lead to around a factor
of 7 or 6, indicating that if a wide implementation of sustainable energy lingers, introduction of the new way of
working will be needed for substantial environmental improvement.
19.03.03 Alternative scenarios
The office market stays conservative

Not many companies have yet switched to telework concepts. It is imaginable that this remains the trend in the
near future. I recalculated the environmental improvement potential for an unaltered organisation of office work.
Table 19.06 presents the outcome of that assessment. For the individual environmental aspects, the white
bordered cells give altered values with respect to table 19.05.
Table 19.06: Maximum and average improvement factors, in the case of an unaltered organisation of office work
Solution
Traditional office organisation 5.8 11.5 10.5 60.4 5.7 32.6 2.0 9.5 5.0 20.0 5.6 26.4
With regard to the initial potential, the maximum improvement is halved. This emphasises the importance of the
concepts of distributed office work, in contrast to traditional personal workplaces at the central office.
The fossil fuel era continues

What if the penetration of sustainable energy stabilises and the use of fossil energy resources continues? In that
case the relatively great improvement factors for sustainable energy should be excluded, involving travel and a
part of the improvement potential for building materials and water as well. Table 19.07 shows the new end-results.
The table illustrates the dramatic decline of environmental improvement potential when the use of fossil fuels is
prolonged and the use of sustainable energy resources is hindered.
Table 19.07: Maximum and average improvement factors in the case of no account for sustainable energy
Solution
In combination with the persistence of traditional office concepts, the end-factors would even further reduce to 1.3
(average) and 1.6 (maximum). Improvement factors that many projects without special attention to sustainability
have already achieved. A sustainable approach to office work and energy are therefore essential for better
performances than already possible.
The sustainable energy providers will take care

The opposite scenario is also interesting to check: worldwide, commercial or governmental energy providers will
use sustainable energy resources for electricity and other energy carriers. Therefore, no effort is required from
office organisations, developers, architects and urban designers. Table 19.08 presents the results.
Table 19.08 indicates that a sole focus on sustainable energy resources will not be sufficient to achieve the factor
20: for the sustainable office, additional measures are required. These measures need to lead to improvements of
at least a factor of 3.2. Combination of the new sustainable office organisation with sustainable energy resources
leads to a maximum factor of 12.8. The factor 20 therefore can only be achieved through a combination of
measures; there is no cure-all elixir.

Table 19.08: Maximum and average improvement factors in the case of sustainable energy resources alone
Solution
Traditional office organisation 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.6 5.0 20.0 1.7 1.9 5.0 20.0 3.4 6.2
No influence on the urban plan

Many cities work with master plans for urban development areas. In these plans, the main urban planner or
architect defines building heights, their positions and basic shapes. If an office organisation were to be
accommodated in such an area, unfortunately some options for environmental improvement need to be excluded:
efficient use of land and efficient use of building materials and energy through optimal building shapes and
heights. In table 19.09, the improvement potential is again calculated on the basis of these restrictions.
Table 19.09: Maximum and average improvement factors in the case of no urban influence
Solution
Urban plans defined by individual designers might not match with the new sustainable office organisation that
requires optimal combinations of building volumes, functions and infrastructure. In this case, therefore, the
telework concepts would become the best option.
As can be seen, the overall potential is importantly reduced with respect to the original values.
Wide re-use of buildings, components and materials

If the real estate market for offices were to re-use and renovate old buildings more widely (an opportunity when
central offices become smaller as a result of the new way of working), the favourable improvement factors of the
row with 'Re-using old buildings' from table 19.05 may be used instead of the one below. Long re-use of building
components and materials can also fall under this strategy and be similarly modelled. For this scenario, the
improvement factors for optimal building heights and optimal structural designs cannot be applied: one is
dependent on the building procured. The combination with new ways of working however remains, as
demonstrated by the office company The Vision Web assessed in this thesis.
In this case, the environmental improvement factors for the use of building materials are significantly increased
(more than doubled), as shown by table 19.10. Although two solutions for improvement are excluded from the
calculation, the eventual potential is only marginally decreased, indicating that the re-use of old buildings is
equally effective for sustainability as for the use of optimally designed buildings.
Table 19.10 Maximum and average improvement factors, in the case of wide re-use of buildings, components and materials
Solution
19.03.04 Brief conclusions
From the results combined and presented in the previous subsections, the following conclusions may be drawn:
Factor 20 environmental improvement is possible through an optimal combination of effective measures with
regard to the organisation of office work, the use of space, building technologies and resources, and the
service life of buildings and their components.
There is no cure-all for office sustainability. If we want to attain the factor 20, it will have to come from a
combination of measures for different aspects, and at different scales.
In the case of a less favourable yet complete combination of measures, an environmental improvement
factor by a factor of approximately 10 is still possible.
Essential for an effective improvement is the wide implementation of sustainable energy resources. With a
stagnation of the introduction of sustainable energy technologies, factor 5, let alone factor 20, will never be
attainable. This also counts for sectors other than the building industry.
Also important to the environmental improvement potential is the introduction of office work concepts that are
based on distributed workplaces closer to home, to clients and at nodes of public and private transport. In
this respect, the new sustainable organisation of office work is especially promising.
The wide re-use of old buildings, components and materials is a measure almost equally effective as the
efficient design of an office building and its supporting structure. Re-use of buildings is combinable with a
new sustainable organisation of office work.
For the improvement potential determined in this final chapter, some additional improvements were not
included. For instance, the potential of sustainable innovative materials such as carbon fibre and bamboo
were excluded, as well as advantages of central urban energy and water utilities. The possible
environmental improvement factor is therefore even larger than calculated.
19.04 Considerations
19.04.01 Putting the potential into perspective
Some remarks are necessary to put the determined environmental improvement potential into perspective.
The re-arrangement of physical planning as proposed for the new sustainable organisation of office work will
be costly and may not be sustainable. Throughout history cities have been developed in different manners.
In the 17th centuries cities grew radialy from their medieval centres, then around the year 1900 new centres
evolved at the borders of these existing cities; later the CIAM strived for separation of functions, whereas on
the basis of this thesis there is a strong preference for function mixing in urban areas. Every change to city
planning means a great effort, especially when a conversion of older districts is required. Already for
economic contemplations alone it is questionable whether a transformation as proposed in this thesis would
be viable. It would at least take a lot of time. However, this dissertation is directed at potential improvements
until the year 2040, so there is still time…
This dissertation was mainly focussed on sustainable accommodation for office work. Working in general
and working in offices is just a small part of the total environmental load of western society. The potential
found will be marginal when we take into account that - as a result of globalisation, increased wealth and free
time - people annually travel billions of kilometres by plane or car, for business or leisure. This is just one
example of many elements of modern society that make the reduction of environmental load for buildings
seem ridiculous.
The development of theoretical solutions, strategies and concepts needs to be followed by extensive surveys
on how they are actually executed and used. The energy consumption monitoring of office buildings by the
PARAP workgroup [1997 and 2002] has already taught many lessons about the mistakes made with the
installation, operation, and maintenance of energy equipment.
In general, the solutions sought through the research presented were meant to have a great environmental
improvement potential. The solutions and strategies found might have that potential but are only technically
possible. It is the people who have to execute it. History however has taught us that they hardly ever do.

Analogue to the discrepancy between the wages of executives versus those of the employees on the work
floor, some people in the office or real estate market make so much money, that they can easily afford large
personal rooms. If money is no problem, sustainability will always remain an idealistic goal, mainly supported
by people who are idealistic or who do not have the money. I therefore plead for the gradual inclusion of
environmental costs in the real price of products.
To put the topic of sustainable offices in perspective: the office is just a basic facility for production and turn-
over. Not many real estate agents and office managers worry about the environmental consequences of
their accommodation as primary work processes demand all attention. This is again supportive for the
implementation of environmental costs in product prices.
One could argue that the final results of this research may be ignored, as they are in the basis founded on
assessments by means of only one tool. After all, for the basic case study of office buildings in chapter 06 I used
only one assessment tool, GreenCalc. Later in the thesis, additional methods were tested for the conversion and
account of new elements to environmental assessment that had been ignored until then. In these following studies
I used some data of the first case study as well as basic environmental costs for certain aspects or building
components, not the tool GreenCalc itself. The additional assessment methodologies (chapters 05, 13, 14, and
16) were exactly designed to mitigate the drawbacks of individual tools. As I have worked with relative
performance scores throughout the thesis, the influence of the original tool on the final results is limited. Within the
context of this research and its relatively abstract objectives - finding directions of solutions for sustainable office
accommodation - one tool was appropriate enough to enable the first step and a systematic approach.
Therefore, I believe that the value of this research is not substantially diminished by the initial use of only one tool.
19.04.02 More approaches
The solutions studied and presented in this dissertation are mainly based upon the existing situation of the
organisation of office work and possible improvements to it. A greater leap may be made by independently
approaching human needs associated with office work in the future and consequently finding the most effective
solutions for them within the expected limits of the future (this is called backcasting). The limits are for instance
related to the reduced possibilities for natural resources (also see section 19.06).
19.04.03 More than the building and its technology
The optimal scale

Although solutions were sought in directions other than technology and on other scales than the building, the
approach of the PhD-research presented in this dissertation had a technical character and was mainly directed at
the office building as a form of accommodation. The ultimate environmental improvement for sustainable
development needs to come from more areas than just office work, and should therefore be tackled at a larger
scale than just the building. Looking for an optimum between individual commitment on the one hand and power
and influence for change on the other, Brandon [2003] found the urban scale to be the ideal one for sustainable
development policy and action agendas. And the urban scale might indeed be the right field for experiments with
sustainable offices, considering the concept of distributed workplaces across the city, as presented in chapter 18.
I touched this scale but could not elaborate more than on technical aspects directly related to office work.
The human influence

The technical solutions highlighted in this dissertation represent the potential for environmental improvement. The
human factor is decisive as to whether this potential is going to be applied and whether it is going to be
successful. Sustainability in itself is not an objective for most individuals. For them, the quality of life, consisting of
many aspects such as climate, health, safety, wellbeing, prosperity, challenges, prospects, etc. etc. comes first. If
this quality of life is combined with sustainability, people will automatically embrace the sustainability goal as well.
An important challenge, for offices in particular, therefore lies in the application of measures that simultaneously
contribute to the quality of life and sustainable development. In that respect, the new sustainable organisation of
office work presented in chapter 18 might be promising, as it produces benefits for the environment and
individuals as well. The improvement factors estimated therefore can not simply be considered quantitatively:
more benefits associated with the concept satisfy the human need for quality of life as well.
Figure 19.04: The people that have to do it - intimate consultation in the Interpolis headquarters
The memory of the office

New concepts for the organisation of office work, especially the ones that reduce the amount of space used by a
company, and that dematerialise and distribute office space to public and exclusive yet non-private facilities,
neglect a typical cultural aspect of the office organisation in question. Old office buildings that have been used for
a long time have a memory usually stored in the attic or in a storage space in the building. Design and
construction drawings are instances of this. In the case of new dematerialised offices, this memory is erased, or at
most digitalised. Moreover, services to clients are distributed and impersonalised. This emphasises the cultural
importance of the new clubhouse offices, which have to respond to the need for identity and history.
Institutional measures and values

This dissertation has mainly had a technical approach to sustainable accommodation. As already introduced in
chapter 01, sustainability is however a combination and synthesis of technical, social and cultural aspects. The
'enablers of sustainability' [Bakens, 2003] presented by Plessis [2003] consist of technology, institutional
measures, and values (meaning ethics and morality), in order of increasing abstractness (see table 19.10). All of
these enablers need steps towards an entirely sustainable situation, from benchmarking assessments to a new
organisation of the building industry.
Table 19.10: Enablers of sustainability [Bakens, 2003; Plessis, 2003]

technology institutional values
benchmarking assessment
mitigation of environmental impact
technologies of the future
new organisation of the building industry
My research has mainly been in the technology column of table 19.10, with the last step rather directed at office
organisations than the building industry, and yet not actually changing the office market, however offering
solutions. The findings of research executed by others and myself still need to be institutionalised before a great
proportion of the office market will embrace them. And one step beyond this is formed by the inclusion of this
sustainable thinking in the ethic and moral values of people. This goes to underscore the humble position of my
research. There is still a long way to go.

19.04.04 More than the western world
The research presented was implicitly directed at the improvement of office work in the western world. I mainly
used examples from Western Europe, in particular the Netherlands. This of course limits the usability of the
findings, requiring additional research for other countries.
What about other parts of the world? The results for Western Europe may be expanded towards the rest of
Europe, to North-America, Australia and New Zealand, and even many large Asian and South-American cities.
However, for the developing world, sustainable development has another meaning, let alone sustainable office
accommodation. As the World Resources Institute observed [1998], in countries with rapidly expanding
populations and uncontrolled urbanisation, the objectives of sustainable development will be weighed differently.
In the pyramid of Maslow [1956], environmental problems have a relatively high position (low priority) with respect
to more basic human needs.
Therefore, to countries with more fundamental problems, sustainability is a luxury. This is exactly the reason why
western countries should take the lead for sustainable development, and not shift problems to developing
countries just because these countries rely on older technologies that are generally more polluting. The argument
will even be stronger if the environmental damage caused per citizen were to be taken as the basis. This casts a
shadow, if not shame, over the recent initiatives of many prosperous countries to resign from international
incentives for sustainable development.
19.05 Recommendations
19.05.01 Additional research
People, not organisations

As already discussed in chapter 15, and associated with the previous remarks, an assessment of realistic office
workers could be an eye-opener in comparison to those working according to the pattern studied and assessed.
As explained, I could not include these archetypical office workers in the dissertation. An additional assessment
however would be worthwhile.
Urban influences
Additional research and measures on the urban therefore scale will still be necessary, involving cultural, social
and human factors. More urban plans need to be studied for better reference. For sustainability, especially the
potential of an integrated sustainable urban approach to technical utilities such as the provision of energy and
water should be determined.
Building height cases and typologies

As discussed in chapter 11, a more accurate environmental assessment model for highrises is necessary. This is
in order to calculate the environmental impact of these building designs more accurately, in particular the
influence of height to the supporting structure and building services. Furthermore, the use of land should be better
integrated to environmental performance of buildings in general, including for highrises. This would make a better
deliberation between building in low and high densities possible.
Reference building and supporting structure

For a better indication of the environmental performance of office buildings, a reference should be defined on the
basis of the number of users, a certain personal use of space, a certain floor layout, and a certain structural span
and type. The latter was not implemented: the supporting structure was only based on a certain use of materials,
without calculation of the amount exactly required for a certain span. A more accurate re-assessment of all
buildings therefore should be executed.
The ESL-factor
The determination of the estimated service life (ESL) of buildings needs to be further studied. Nevertheless, the
research presented lays a basis for its determination and involvement in environmental assessments.
With regard to the factor of time in sustainability, the research presented mainly considered the long-term
timescale: the service life, lifespan, and secondary use of a building. There is also a short-term timescale for day-
by-day use of offices. The differences between the use patterns on a short-term timescale might be larger than
expected, due to longer yet more inefficiently used space, and thereby materials and energy. This requires further
study.
19.05.02 Policy for sustainability
The message of this dissertation to politics is probably clear: policy for sustainable building should be directed at
effective solutions. Beside the larger positive impact on sustainable development, the achievement of greater
improvements will stimulate the understanding and motivation for parties in the real estate and building sector as
well as consumers. Putting a lot of effort and money in measures that only marginally improve the environmental
performance demotivate people and lead to the disappearance of sustainability on the public and private agenda
also giving sustainable building a bad name. This is unnecessary.
This dissertation hopefully provides enough mental fuel to incite a new approach to sustainable building.
19.06 The future?
19.06.01 Future developments from an economic viewpoint
In 2001, Eldonk et al., described the following development of conditions for the office market:
Society: individualisation, balance between work and private life, ageing population
Economy: fast developments, globalisation, availability of information, growing influence of shareholders,
flexibility of labour, consumerism
Technology: mobility, ICT (e-business, e-commerce)
These developments are broadly recognised by many organisations involved in office work. A general expectation
is therefore the increasing freedom of office workers (if they are bound to offices at all…) with regard to what they
do, when and where.
These developments described are, although true, typical for people involved with the economic side of office
work. In general, they look at global and local developments with the selective interest of the potential for the
office market and its real estate in particular.
I would like to add a view on other developments that also influence the office market, which either originate from
a different time line and relate to unavoidable physical developments, or form a basic requirement for sustainable
development.
What I cannot foresee is future events resulting from banal political developments. For instance, the election of
the American president may dramatically influence global stability and ecological incentives. From a viewpoint of
sustainability, I would like to focus on ecological, physical, and necessary developments that will influence office
work and its accommodation, hoping that politics will take these into account.
19.06.02 Ecology and the future
One thing that real estate developers never seem to worry about is the basic living condition of the earth and the
ecology that defines it. Ecology might seem to stand a long way from everyday business troubles but I believe it is
going to radically influence future economies. As discussed in chapter 03 and further on, there is growing proof of
a global climate change with unmistakeable regional consequences. The ideas on the human influence on this
phenomenon find different support or resistance. I am however tempted to think that such dramatic changes as
were registered in the last century have not only been the result of natural dynamics, because no major natural

physical development has yet been distinguished that may explain the rapid climate change. Figure 19.05
illustrates this by means of the swift reduction of polar ice around the Northpole: 40% less in 24 years.
Figure 19.05: Polar ice around the Northpole, left in the year 1979, right by the year 2003 [pictures: NASA]
Anyway, there is a natural adaptive system of the earth, which Lovelock [1979] called Gaia, which will not be able
to compensate for the altered circumstances and developments still occurring, within the next 100 years. At the
moment of finishing the manuscript for this dissertation, Thomas et al. [2004] published their findings of research
on the impact of climate change in Nature, indicating that 15 to 37% of all species on the planet is condemned to
extinction by climate change, which is only based on mid-range scenarios. Therefore, I believe that we, human
beings, should take our responsibility and not assume all will eventually turn out fine. We are the only creatures
with the potential to do make such a change.
The future physical state of the earth

There are some cold facts about the ecological, physical state that our children and grandchildren will find the
earth in by the year 2040.
First, even though better technologies may have been developed and deeper layers of the earthcrust may
have been cultivated for extraction of natural oil, gas and coal, the world will still have been robbed of many
of its resource reserves that originate from processes that took millions of years to produce. It will only take a
few hundred years to deplete.
Second, there will be less space and resources per person. Among these resources I put clean air, water,
materials, food, and nature. The space and resources reduced do not necessarily mean a decrease of
prosperity, as most of this in western countries is currently received through non-material services. If the
world would head in a sustainable direction, the decrease of available resources would be particularly felt in
western countries, just in order to provide developing countries with better conditions. If the world would
head in a non-sustainable direction - and I am sorry but expect this - it would mean a further demise of poor,
developing countries. In any case, reduced resources will limit developments that now seem logical: more
prosperity, more mobility, and even globalism. Without the energy resources driving them, these will all
become uncertain. And alternative energy resources such as sun, wind, water, and geothermal energy will
provide us with more local applications, unless a worldwide distribution network based on hydrogen will
enable trade of energy.
Third, the climates will have changed, to advantageous situations in some countries, however
disadvantageous situations in most. Sea levels will have risen, making wet countries even wetter. Deserts
will have shown further desertification. Most countries will be warmer, some of them colder. This means that
the traditional division of the world into countries with appropriate temperate climate conditions for economic
prosperity and other, currently poor countries under harsh circumstances will have changed. This enables
migration of industries and economies in general towards new areas, especially if these offer good working
conditions, including favourable wages, a development that can already be seen today.
Fourth, as a result of the previous development, technologies will have been altered, this also applying to
buildings. A different climate requires adaptations of human beings and the places they live in. For instance,
Northern Europe has mainly been concerned with the energy consumption of heating in the cold seasons.
Since warming is expected regionally, cooling facilities and building designs dealing better with undesired
warming will become more important. Combined with the reduced availability of energy resources, this might
become a second-order problem. More dramatical for many countries will be the availability of drinking
water. This already occurs in countries around the Mediterranean Sea and Australia, where present
problems may be due to temporary draught periods but in the nearby future also be encountered repetitively.
There will always be enough salt water, but the financial possibility to convert this to fresh water will vary
from country to country.
Despite the need for change, I cannot subscribe to the limited approach of carbon dioxide (CO2) being the sole
reason for excessive climate change. For instance, volatile methane (CH4) has had a stronger influence on it than
carbon dioxide. Moreover, many processes of ecosystem deterioration are now ignored whereas these
dramatically change the lives of plants, animals and human beings on a local level. And, as a secondary effect,
the local climate is altered, generally not to the benefit of people living there. Recent examples of this are
mudslides as a result of severe rainfall in combination with fully cleared out forests. As reduction of CO2 is easy
(just use sustainable energy), the processes that directly deteriorate the earth surface ought to be at the top of the
global agenda.
In general, a human attitude or approach is needed in which the processes we start should be controlled as
completely as possible. This implies complete chain management - not only of the main resources, yet also of the
by-products and emissions - and living in balance with our environment. The remaining failures in this approach
will be much smaller and should be manageable by the living planet Gaia.
19.06.03 Final remarks
In the last months before finishing this dissertation I became more aware of the possibility that it would provide me
with another academic title. There are two variants: DSc, Doctor of Science, and the traditional PhD, Doctor of
Philosophy. I am told that both are receptable but that their meaning is slightly different. I like to believe, on the
basis of the literal words, the Doctor of Science was mainly concerned with his field of science, technical and
exact. I recall doctorate students studying the behaviour impact of iron shrapnel in concrete as a clear example of
being suitable to a DSc-title. As a Dutchman, at first, I hardly understood the implication of PhD. I heard the literal
meaning at a later stage (but nevertheless, I did not understand why Doctor of Philosophy had not been
abbreviated as DPh). One could legitimately question what a building engineer should do with a title in philosophy.
It is only in the recent writing of the last chapters that I learned the deeper meaning and honour in acquiring of
such a title. A PhD suggests knowledge and experience of a specific scientific area in relationship with the much
broader context of the world and its problems. My research has always been interconnected with broader
developments than just technical office accommodation. I hope to have taken enough steps towards earning the
honour of the title of PhD.
As discussed in the previous subsection, there are many forecasts possible. The eventual development of our
world depends on many things but mainly on what we decide to do. My approach has always featured striving for
sustainability, although directed at the limited aspect of office accommodation. I will describe some opportunities
for a sustainable world.
First, sustainability is easy. And it starts in our heads. The way we respect our favourite politicians, artists,
musicians, movie stars, sportsmen and -women, gods and saints demonstrates that people are capable of
devotion and unconditional faith. That is good: it can be turned to complete respect for the environment we live in,
in a modern version of the way some so-called primitive people treat the earth. The earth is sacred. It is the only
condition that enables physical life. It is however also vulnerable and needs attentive care-taking. We, human
beings, are the only creatures capable of knowing this and suitable for this care-taker role.
The consciousness of our responsibility is a starting-condition. It does not imply continuous focus on ecological
matters. Nobody really knows why we are here; there is more than just being earth-tenders. Our personal
developments should however be in coherence with the environment that enables it. And even more important,
they should enable to provide our children and grandchildren with this environment, the fundamental meaning of
sustainability.
As an optimistic final, I end with a small technical example of future sustainable possibilities in terms of ecology,
economy and well-spread prosperity.

Sustainable energy, also in other forms of accommodation, transport and industries, has proven to be essential for
a great environmental improvement potential for office accommodation. A worldwide distribution network based on
sustainable energy resources such as the sun, wind, water, geothermal energy, and hydrogen as a medium will
enable trade of sustainable energy. Poor, arid yet sunny countries will prove to have optimal conditions for the
conversion of solar radiation into power, thus enabling local energy-consuming processes, for instance the
production of drinking water from seawater. Furthermore, the use of solar power to produce hydrogen enables
worldwide trade of sustainable energy, hopefully delivering the money where it belongs: in the developing
countries. It is one of the few options for a new economy that is not restricted by traditional patterns from the
western world. It just needs to be incited with money from the western world. This however would prove to be the
best investment since a long time ago.
TERMINOLOGY
Figure 00.02: A stack of books at the Expo 2000 in Hanover, Germany

term description [Hornby et al., 1998 = Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary]
the 24-hour city : an urban environment active 24 hours a day [Kreitzman, 1999]
to accommodate : (within the framework of this research:) 1. to provide space for somebody or something; 2.
{~oneself/something to something} to adjust or adapt oneself/something to something [Hornby et al.,
1998]
accommodation : (within the framework of this research:) 1. one or more rooms, especially for living in; 2. the process
of adapting; adjustment [Hornby et al., 1998]
acidification : a decrease of the pH-value of air, soil and water by SO2, NOx en ammonia [RIVM, 1988]
active solar energy : solar energy that can be made useful by means of conversion technologies such as solar collectors,
solar cells and solar panels
activity-related : workplaces dedicated to specific tasks (readings, meetings, etc.). Employees move from one
workplaces workplace to another, depending on what sort of work they perform [Twijnstra Gudde, 1996; Rgd,
1996]
to adapt : (within the framework of this research:) 1. to make something suitable for a new use, situation, etc.;
2. to become adjusted to new conditions, etc. [Hornby et al., 1998]
adaptability : the state of being adaptable or possible to adapt
adaptable : a. able to adapt oneself/itself to something; b. that can be adapted [Hornby et al., 1998]
to adjust : (within the framework of this research:) 1. {~something/oneself to something} to become or to make
somebody or something suited to new conditions; to adapt oneself or something; 2. to alter
something by a small amount so that it will fit properly or be right for use [Hornby et al., 1998]
aesthetic : 1a. concerned with beauty and the appreciation of beauty; b. appreciating beauty and beautiful
things; 2. pleasing to look at; artistic; showing good taste [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- design : the way of designing things that are pleasing to look at, artistic, or show good taste [based on
Hornby et al., 1998]
-- quality : quality referring to being pleasing to look at, to being artistic, or to showing good taste [based on
Hornby et al., 1998]
aesthetics : the branch of philosophy dealing with the principles of beauty and artistic taste [Hornby et al., 1998]
age correction factor : the factor by which the age of a building is accounted in its environmental performance [this
dissertation]
agent : (within the framework of this research:) a force or a substance that produces an effect or change
[Hornby et al., 1998]
aggregation : (within the framework of LCA:) the expression of environmental effects in theme equivalents
to allocate : to distribute something officially to somebody or something for a special purpose [Hornby et al.,
1998]
allocation : (within the framework of LCA:) the question which environmental effect is attributed to which process
or product
ammonia : a chemical compound of nitrogen and hydrogen (NH3), a colourless gas with a strong smell, used
especially in household cleaning substances and for making explosives
annually repeating : an environmental load of a building reappearing every year [this dissertation] - e.g. consumption of
environmental load energy and water
annuity : a. a fixed sum of money paid to somebody each year, usually for the rest of their life; b. a form of
insurance or investment that provides such a regular annual income [Hornby et al., 1998]; an annual
value covering all costs and benefits appearing during the whole lifespan [this dissertation]
architect : 1. a person who designs buildings and supervises the process of constructing them; 2. a person who
is responsible for planning or creating a particular event or situation [Hornby et al., 1998]
architectural : of or related to architecture [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- diversity : the state of offering different forms of architecture at the same time [this dissertation]
architecture : (within the framework of this research:) 1. the art and science of designing and constructing
buildings; 2. the design or style of a building or buildings [Hornby et al., 1998]
atrium : a glass-covered space between functional spaces
backcasting : a method of taking into account the potentials of the Earth and the human needs in the future,
followed by development of effective solutions for these needs [Jansen & Vergragt, 1992]
balanced ventilation : mechanically regulated supply of fresh air and discharge of exhaust air
-- with heat recovery : balanced ventilation, where heat is recovered from exhaust air and supplied to fresh air
the base office : a building that accommodates the most important part of the organisation and from which the whole
office is managed [EGM-onderzoek, 1994] - equal to the central office
the basic office : an office functioning as a (second) central office for the flexible office worker or the free-range office
worker [this dissertation] - this may be a home office, district office, transfer office, business centre or
satellite office
basic qualities : (within the framework of this research:) the set of technical quality, functionality and health quality of
a building [this dissertation]
BEES : American design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of products
biodiversity : the wealth of species, the insurance of life on Earth [Jong et al., 1992]
474 Terminology - G The End

bio-ecological : the combination of biological building and ecological building

building
biological : of or relating to biology [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- building : building with a great emphasis on the use of materials, and the experience and health of inhabitants
or users [Duijvestein, 1997]
biology : the scientific study of the life and structure of plants and animals [Hornby et al., 1998]
biotechnology : the use of biological processes for industrial and other purposes [Hornby et al., 1998]
BREEAM : British design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of office buildings
brownfield : an urban area that has not been developed or that is remaining from earlier functions [Wilde, 2002]
to build : 1a. to make or construct something by putting parts of material together; b. to construct houses, etc.;
2. to develop something; to establish something [Hornby et al., 1998]
building : 1. a structure with a roof and walls; 2a. the constructing of houses, etc.; b. the art or business of
doing this [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- block : a basic component of something [Hornby et al., 1998] - not necessarily of a building
-- compact : (in an urban sense) concentration of buildings, primarily in order to use space efficiently; (in an
architectural sense) reduction of the area of the building envelope, primarily in order to reduce the
use of materials and energy
-- envelope : the surfaces enveloping a building
-- environmentally : building in such a manner that as fewest as possible environmental problems arise as a result of the
benign / conscious / construction, use and possible demolition of a building [Duijvestein, 1997] - similar to sustainable
sound building
-- site : an area of land on which a house, etc. is being built [Hornby et al., 1998]
building-related : sickness or physical inconveniences that occur with users of buildings, as a result of physical,
symptoms of chemical, biological, psychological or social factors
sickness
the business centre : a place where serviced rooms can be rented by the hour of the day [Duffy et al., 1993]; a telework
office facilitated by a commercial provider [Vos et al., 1999]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at a business
centre at least one day a week [this dissertation]
the business node : a new type of business centre for the new sustainable office concept, located at the verges of the
city at a node of transport infrastructure, offering space for conferences, presentations, business and
project team meetings, as well as hirable office workplaces, supportive facilities for office employees
and amenities [this dissertation]
C / carbon : chemical element, present in all living substances and occurs in its pure form as diamond and
graphite
calculated value : a value determined through calculation of a certain property by a model or tool [this dissertation]
carbon hydrid : chemical compound of carbon and hydrogen (CxHy), of which methane (CH4) is an example
carpooling : joint commuter transport by car by at least two colleagues
carrying capacity : the quantity of a certain property that can be maximally produced or processed
cascade : a waterfall, especially one of several falling in stages down a steep slope with rocks [Hornby et al.,
1998]
the -- principle : the strategy to use a resource for the highest grade function possible, of which the waste is used for
a lower grade function, and so on
CDW : construction and demolition waste
the cell office : cellular office
the cellular office : a composition of work and meeting places with the emphasis on individual use. The rooms are
separately accessible by corridors, stairs and elevators and are used by 1-3 persons [Dewulf &
Jonge, 1997]; an office accommodating individual, private work with little interaction [Duffy & Powell,
1997]; an enclosed space designed to accommodate 1-3 workplaces [Vos et al., 1999]
the central office : a building where the workplaces of employees from the same unit or department are located [Vos et
al., 1999]
CFCs, HCFCs / : chemical compound of chlorine, fluorine and carbon hydrids, any of the group of gases used in e.g.
(hydrogen-)chloro- aerosol containers, an important cause for ozone layer deterioration and the amplified greenhouse
fluorocarbons effect
changeability : having the tendency or characteristic to change often
changeable : tending to change; often changing [Hornby et al., 1998]
characterisation : (within the framework of LCA:) a factor defining the extent to which an environmental intervention
factor contributes to an environmental effect
Cl / chlorine : chemical element, a poisonous gas with a strong smell, used for making water pure and in the
manufacture of other chemicals
clerk's factory : early version of the office building, strongly resembling a factory but used as an office [this
dissertation]

climate compass : an image of an area indicating its climatical and geophysical features [Dobbelsteen, 1993]
the club office : an office that is used in addition to telework offices, a melting place for employees who normally only
interact electronically [Laing, 1997]
club worker : an office employee of the new sustainable office concept, bound to an organisation with an office
clubhouse [this dissertation]
the clubhouse office : the office clubhouse [this dissertation] - somewhat similar to the club office
CO / carbon : chemical compound of carbon and oxygen (CO), a poisonous gas formed when carbon burns
monoxide partially but not completely
CO2 / carbon dioxide : chemical compound of carbon and oxygen, the gas breathed out by people and animals from the
lungs or produced by burning carbon
the cocoon office : small separated workplaces in which employees with different functions perform individual tasks,
grouped around a common inner space that accommodates alle other facilities and functions [Dewulf
& Jonge, 1997]; an office based on the idea of separated workplaces situated around a common
central space, which serves as a meeting place and provides filing cabinets, faxes, printers, etc.
[Rgd, 1996] - equal to the combi-office
the combi-office : small, glass-fronted individual rooms surrounded by or immediately adjacent to spaces for teamwork
[Duffy & Powell, 1997]; a cellular office situated around an open space that is designed to
accommodate common facilities and group work [Vos et al., 1999]
compartment : any of the sections into which a larger area or enclosed space is divided [Hornby et al., 1998]
compartmentalisatio : the division into compartments of functions that require equal indoor climate conditions or the
n separation of functions from other functions for reasons of e.g. noise nuisance - it is also often used
to reduce the length of pipes and ducts
component : any of the parts of which something is made [Hornby et al., 1998]
conservatory : unheated glasshouse, bordering a use space in order to buffer warmth from the sun
to construct : 1. to build something; to put or fit something together; to form something; 2. to draw a line, figure,
etc. in agreement with certain rules [Hornby et al., 1998]
construction : (within the framework of this research:) 1. the action or manner of constructing something; 2. a thing
constructed; a structure or building [Hornby et al., 1998]
the coproduction : (within the framework of LCA:) a method for the allocation of environmental effects, where the
method attribution of the reprocessing of waste to a secondary product depends on the value of the
secondary product with respect to the primary product
the corporate centre : a modern business centre in business districts close to the organisation's clients, offering individual
work settings and long-term project space to a number of organisations, as well as a wide mix of
other client facilities [Harrison, 2002] - similar to the business node yet differently located in the city
grid
cultural : (within the framework of this research:) of or involving the customs, arts, social institutions, etc. of a
particular group or nation [based on Hornby et al., 1998]
-- quality : quality referring to adding value to cultural aspects [this dissertation]
-- sustainability : sustainability related to cultural aspects
the cut-off method : (within the framework of LCA:) a method for the allocation of environmental effects, where a
separation is made between the end phase of the life cycle of a primary product and the
reprocessing of waste to a new product, which is attributed to the secondary product
cycle of : the time-span after which something needs to be renovated, altered or replaced [Kohler, 2003]
transformation
the damage function : weighing method at which the weighing factor of an environmental intervention is based on the
method damage it causes to ecosystems and human health [Goedkoop et al., 2000]
decision(- : an interactive model developed to support decisions
supporting) model
to deconstruct : (within the framework of this research:) to demolish carefully in order to make easy recycling of
separate materials possible
deconstruction : (within the framework of this research:) the process or action of deconstructing
the Delft Ladder : a correction of the Ladder of Lansink, with steps added and the preference order shuffled, as
proposed by PhD students of Delft University of Technology [Hendriks, 2000]
the Delphi method : weighing method at which a group of internal or external experts or representatives of societal
organisations is asked to give a weighing factor to environmental effects or environmental themes
dematerialisation : the state of avoided use of material or the process of finding solutions by which use of material can
be avoided [Simons et al., 2002]
-- of information : dematerialisation referring to the digitalisation of office work through which no paperwork and
archives will be necessary anymore [this dissertation]
-- of office : dematerialisation referring to the absorption of office work in other day-to-day activities through
accommodation which office accommodation has become unnecessary [this dissertation]
to dematerialise : to solve something in such a way that use of material is avoided

to demolish : (within the framework of this research:) a. to pull or knock down a building; b. to destroy a theory,
etc. [Hornby et al., 1998]
demolition : the process of demolishing or becoming demolished
to demount : as the first meaning of 'to dismantle', applying to buildings: to take a building apart so that it is in
building components
demountability : the state of being demountable or possible to demount
demountable : that can be demounted
the den office : an office with den spaces designed for group working and often providing a range of several simple
settings usually arranged in an open-plan office [Duffy & Powell, 1997] - particular type of group
office
dense : (within the framework of this research:) crowded together in great numbers [Hornby et al., 1998]
density : (within the framework of this research:) the quality of being dense [Hornby et al., 1998]
to deplete : to reduce greatly the quantity, size, power or value of something [Hornby et al., 1998]
depletion : the process of becoming depleted; the extraction of biotic or abiotic components from the
environment in such great quantities that these cannot be replaced by the natural cycle [Duijvestein,
1997]
to design : 1a. to decide how something will look, work, etc., especially by making plans, drawings, or models of
it; b. to think of and plan a system, procedure, etc.; 2. to be made, planned or intended for a
particular purpose or use [Hornby et al., 1998]
design : 1a. a drawing or an outline from which something may be made; b. the art of making such drawings,
etc.; 2. the general arrangement or planning of a building, book, machine, etc.; 3. an arrangement of
lines, shapes or figures as decoration; a pattern; 4. a plan or an intention [Hornby et al., 1998]
design reference : reference building with a design equal to the studied building yet with materials and building services
representative for the year 1990 [this dissertation]
design(-supporting) : tool developed to support the design of a product, building or urban plan
tool
deskrotating : the principle of alternately assigning an office workplace to another employee
desksharing : the principle of sharing an office workplace among two or more employees
to deteriorate : to become worse in quality or condition [Hornby et al., 1998]
deterioration : the process of becoming worse in quality or condition; the intervention of man in the environment, by
which the conditions alters in such a way that it is considered worse than original [Duijvestein, 1997]
direct reuse : (within the framework of this research:) use of products in a new building which result from
demolition of another building
discount : an amount of money taken off the usual cost of something [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- rate : a percentage taken for the discount of interest and inflation
dismantlability : the state of being dismantlable or possible to dismantle
dismantlable : that can be dismantled
to dismantle : 1. to take something apart so that it is in pieces; 2. to end an organisation, a system, etc. in a
gradual and planned way [Hornby et al., 1998]
the distance-to-target : weighing method at which the weighing factor of environmental effects or environmental themes
method depends on the difference between the present performance and the required level
distributed : (within the framework of this research:) spread over an area
-- office work : the distribution of office work to different human resources available, such as outsourcing, free-
lancing, and teleworking [Edum-Fotwe et al., 2003] - notice the difference with Harrison [2002]
-- working : work done in different urban work settings, leading to a blur of living, working and moving [Harrison,
2002] - notice the difference with Edum-Fotwe et al. [2003]
distribution : (within the framework of this research:) 1. the giving of something to a number of people; 2. the way
something is shared out or spread over an area [Hornby et al., 1998]
district heating : a collective heating system for periphery buildings, districts or entire villages or cities
the district office : a low-profile business centre located in residential districts, possibly integrated in a shopping centre,
school, or neighbourhood centre [this dissertation]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at a district
office at least one day a week [this dissertation]
diversity : the state of being varied; variety [Hornby et al., 1998]
eco-costs : costs related to measures that have to be taken to make (and recycle) a product in line with earth's
estimated carrying capacity [Vogtländer, 2001]
Eco-costs/Value- : environmental assessment method relating eco-costs of measures to the economic value to these
Ratio (EVR) measures [Vogtländer, 2001]
Eco-Indicator 99 : environmental assessment method additional to the LCA-methodology
ecological : of or relating to ecology
-- building : building in such a manner that as fewest as possible environmental problems arise as a result of the
construction, use and possible demolition of a building [Duijvestein, 1997]

ecological
-- damage : damage to organisms and their environment [Duijvestein, 1997]
-- design : the way of designing things that cause as little as possible environmental damage
-- educational quality : quality referring to teaching something about ecological matter [this dissertation]
-- experience value : the value related to the ecological educational quality of something [this dissertation]
-- sustainability : the state of a natural balance of plants, animals and people [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- use value : the value related to the performance of the consumption of energy, water and space [this
dissertation]
-- user experience : the value related to the health quality of something [this dissertation]
value
-- value : the value related to the environmental quality of something [this dissertation]
ecologically : keeping the natural balance of plants, animals and people [Hornby et al., 1998]
sustainable
ecology : the relation of plants and living creatures to each other and their environment, or the study of this;
the natural relationship (or the study of the relationship) between plants, animals and people, and the
places in which they live [Hornby et al., 1998]; study and research of the influence of man on space
and vice-versa, and of the symbiotic relationships between man and institutions [Geerts &
Heestermans, 1992]
economic : 1. of or relating to trade, industry and the development of wealth; 2. profitable [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- depletion : depletion as a result of the economic limitations for extraction of resources [this dissertation]
-- lifespan : the economic lifetime expected
-- lifetime : the time-span within which the building meets the return-on-investment criteria [Jonge, 1990]; the
time-span after which the net present value of all future costs become equal or greater than that of
all future benefits [Soeter, 2004]
-- sustainability : sustainability related to trade, industry and the development of wealth
economical : 1. providing good service or value in proportion to the amount of money, time, etc. spent; 2. using no
more of something than is necessary [Hornby et al., 1998]
economy : 1. the relationship between production, trade and the supply of money in a particular country or
region; 2. use of available resources in a way that saves money, time, etc. or avoids waste [Hornby
et al., 1998]
Eco-Quantum : Dutch design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of houses
ecosystem : all the plants and living creatures in a particular area considered together with their physical
environment [Hornby et al., 1998]
effectiveness : the extent of meeting a certain aim [this dissertation]; the measure characterised by: is the
transformation process performed by the system meeting the longer aim? [Vidgen et al., 1993]
-- factor : the product of the contribution of an element or aspect to the total environmental load and its
improvement potential [this dissertation]
-- for sustainability : the extent of contributing to sustainable development [this dissertation]
efficacy : the state or quality of producing the desired result [based on Hornby et al., 1998]; the measure
characterised by: does the transformation work; will it actually produce the required output? [Vidgen
et al., 1993]
efficiency : the state or quality of producing a satisfactory result without wasting time or resources [based on
Hornby et al., 1998]; the measure characterised by: is the transformation being carried out with the
minimum resources? [Vidgen et al., 1993]
EIA / environmental : standardised assessment of the environmental impact of something
impact assessment
elegance : the state or quality of fitting the circumstances in a clever and simple way [based on Hornby et al.,
1998]; the measure characterised by: is the transformation well designed; is it aesthetically pleasing;
is it over-complicated; is it over- or under-engineered? [Vidgen et al., 1993]
embodied energy : the energy put into the extraction, manufacture and transport of building materials, and sometimes
also the re-processing of material waste
enablers of : the set of solutions leading to an entirely sustainable situation covering the areas of technology,
sustainability institutional measures and values, and involving different steps of increasing abstrahency [Bakens,
2003]
to enlarge : (within the framework of this research:) to become or make something larger [Hornby et al., 1998]
to envelop : to wrap something or somebody in something; to cover or surround something or somebody
completely [Hornby et al., 1998]
Envest : British design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of office buildings
environment : the conditions, circumstances, etc. affecting a person's life [Hornby et al., 1998] - this also applies to
organisms other than human beings

the environment : the natural conditions (places or situations), e.g. land, air and water, in which people, animals and
plants live [Hornby et al., 1998]; the set of conditions for life [Jong et al., 1992]; the physical, non-
living surroundings of society, to which it stands in a reciprocal relationship [Udo de Haes, 1984]
environmental : of or relating to the environment
-- aspect : an element of an organisation's activity, product or service that can interact with the environment
[ISO, 1996]
-- assessment : assessment of the environmental impact, environmental load or environmental performance [this
dissertation]
-- carrying capacity : the environmental impact by unit of welfare
-- cost method : weighing method at which environmental effects or environmental themes are multiplied by monetary
factors
-- costs : societal costs related to environmental damage and restoration to original environmental qualities -
these are not included in the price of products but eventually shifted to society, by means of taxes
and excises; costs made by the industry to prevent environmental damage or to comply with
environmental government regulations [Ministry of HSPE]
-- debt : the debt related to invested environmental capital, equal to the environmental load of this capital [this
dissertation]
-- design efficiency : (within the framework of this research:) the building design improvement factor (based on the GFA)
divided by the materials & services improvement factor [this dissertation]
-- effectiveness : the extent of contributing to factor 20 environmental improvement by 2040 [this dissertation]
-- improvement : environmental performance indicator, determined by the division of the environmental load of a
factor reference representing the year 1990 by the environmental load of the object studied [this
dissertation]
-- index : environmental performance indicator, determined by the division of the environmental load of a
reference representing the year 1990 by the environmental load of the object studied, multiplied by
100 [Dewever, 1996]
-- internal design : (within the framework of this research:) the building design improvement factor based on the UA
efficiency divided by the materials & services improvement factor [this dissertation]
-- intervention : an intervention influencing the environmentconsisting of in-streams as well as out-streams of the
system
-- lifespan : the environmental lifetime expected [this dissertation]
-- lifetime : the time-span after which demolition and reconstruction becomes environmentally more favourable
than renovation and reuse [this dissertation]
-- measure : measures contributing to an improvement of the environment or the diminishment of negative effects
on the environment [this dissertation]
-- mortgage : the environmental debt related to the building materials used in a building, which are capitalised at
the year of delivery and need to be paid off within a reference lifespan [this dissertation]
-- occupation : (within the framework of this research:) the building use improvement factor divided by the building
efficiency design improvement factor [this dissertation]
-- pay-off angle : the capitalised once-off environmental loads divided by the reference lifespan, a measure of the
velocity with which the environmental mortgage is paid off [this dissertation]
-- performance : the environmental score of an object with respect to a reference
-- -- demand : the environmental performance of a reference for environmental assessment
-- problem : circumstance in which conditions for life are lacking, threatening the existence of plants, animals and
human beings [based on Jong et al., 1992]
-- profile : the overview of all environmental effects in an LCA
-- quality : quality referring to not being harmful to the environment
-- sustainability : sustainability related to the environment
-- theme : a main set of comparable environmental effects
environmentally : helping to keep the world around us in good condition [Hornby et al., 1998]
sound
ESL / estimated : the time-span that an object is estimated to remain in function [ISO, 2000; 2001; 2003]
service life
-- category : estimated service life category, a category for buildings responding to certain characterics
concerning architecture, flexibility and functionality, translated into an ESL-factor [this dissertation]
-- factor : estimated service life factor, a factor for the estimated service life with respect to a reference lifespan
[ISO, 2000; 2001; 2003]
ethicality : the measure characterised by: is the transformation acceptable from a value judgement perspective,
where value judgements concern 'good' and 'bad' and are subject to change over time? [Vickers,
1965; 1984]
excess : (within the framework of this research:) extra or additional to the necessary or permitted amount

exergetic efficiency : the relation of the energy value released by combustion of an energy resource and the energy value
required for the target function
exergy : the principle of relating the energy value of an energy resource to the energy value required for a
target function
experience value : the value related to the aesthetical quality of something [Vitruvius]
to extend : (within the framework of this research:) to make something longer or larger in space or time [Hornby
et al., 1998]
extended use in time : particular type of space use in time referring to extended use hours for a greater number of users,
contributing to greater intensity [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
extendibility : the ability to be extended
extendible : that can be extended
external aesthetic : quality referring to the exterior of a building being pleasing to look at, being artistic, or showing good
quality taste [this dissertation]
external use of : use of space outside the building, related to the area of land [this dissertation]
space
F / fluorine : chemical element, usually occuring as a pale yellow poisonous gas
the factor 20 : the extent of environmental improvement with respect to the year 1990 required to achieve
sustainable development by the year 2040 [Ehrlich & Ehrlich, 1990; Speth, 1990]
the Factor Method : a service life prediction method for technical components of design objects based on the Service Life
Methodology [ISO, 2000; 2001; 2003]
FAR / floor area ratio : an indicator of the urban density:the relation between the total GFA and the total ground area on
which it has been established [MVRDV, 1998] - equal to the FSI
financial flexibility : flexibility with regard to financial bonds to real estate [this dissertation]
FlexD / flexibility : an economic indicator expressing the extent of flexibility, comparing the costs of renovation with
degree those of reconstruction [Saari & Heikkilä, 2003]
flexibility : the state of being easily changed to suit new situations [this dissertation]
flexible : 1a. easily changed to suit new situations; b. willing and able to change to suit different
circumstances; 2. that can bend easily without breaking [Hornby et al., 1998]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees bound to an office
organisation who telework at various offices most days of the week [this dissertation]
floor height factor : the floor height of a reference building divided by that of the building studied [this dissertation]
fossil energy : energy from fossil resources: natural gas, oil, coal and related products
fossil fuel : fuel from fossil resources: natural gas, oil, and related products
found alternative : spaces not exclusively designed for office work [Becker & Joroff, 1995]
workplaces
free address : a setting made up of 'self-service' workstations, allocated on a 'first-come, first-served' basis
[Steelcase, 1996] - equal to the non-territorial office
the free office : a workplace in any place, the space around the office worker and his appliances [this dissertation]
freelance : earning one's living by selling one's services or individual pieces of work to several organisations
-- worker : somebody who works freelance, but also an unbound office employee of the new sustainable office
concept, without the disposal of an office clubhouse [this dissertation]
freelancing : hiring people for a job on a freelance basis, executed at their own office [Edum-Fotwe et al., 2003]
the free-range office : an office work concept based on a great proportion of unbound office workers who telework at
worker concept various, non-organisation-bound offices all weekdays [this dissertation]
from the cradle to : from the exploration and extraction of resources to the end-phase of a product
the grave
FSC / Forest : a widely accepted organisation for accreditation of sustainably managed timber production
Stewardship Council
-- accreditation : the process of acquiring an FSC certificate; the study of the possibilities to acquire an FSC certificate
-- certificate : the official declaration of being produced in accordance with standards of the FSC
FSC-accredited : timber or wood officially declared to be produced in accordance with standards of the FSC
timber or wood
FSI / floor space : an indicator of the urban density: the relation between the total GFA and the total ground area on
index which it has been established
FTE / full time : the extent of hours to which an employee works with respect to a full-time appointment
equivalent
-- reference : reference building with a number of users equal to the building studied but with a reference use of
personal space, a reference design and reference materials and building services [this dissertation]
to function : 1. to work, to operate; 2. to perform the function [Hornby et al., 1998]

function : a property given to create a practical effect [Warell, 2001]; (within the framework of this research:) 1.
a special activity or purpose of a person or thing; 2. a quantity whose value depends on the varying
values of others [Hornby et al., 1998] - meaning 1 also applies to an organisation
functional : 1. practical and useful; having or providing little or no decoration; 2. of or having a function or
functions; 3. working, able to work [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- conversion : description of the exact process in an environmental assessment for the conversion of alternatives
protocol with different functions to comparable equity [this dissertation]
-- design : the way of designing practical or useful things
-- diversity : the state of offering different functions at the same time [this dissertation]
-- flexibility : flexibility with regard to the functionality of buildings [this dissertation]
-- indicator : an indicator expressing the extent of function mixing [this dissertation]
-- lifespan : the functional lifetime expected; the period during which the building meets the functional
requirements [Peeters, 2002]
-- lifetime : the time-span within which an organisation can operate without changes in the building [Jonge,
1990]
-- quality : quality referring to being practical or useful
-- space : space for the primary functions of an organisation
-- unit : the set of conditions and requirements that all alternatives in an assessment need to fulfill, and the
basic unit for comparison [ISO, 1998]
functionality : the state of being practical and useful
future value : the value related to the lifetime quality of something [Vitruvius]
Gaia : the natural system of the Earth that is able to compensate for altered global circumstances and
developments [Lovelock, 1979]
GAP / green area : an indicator of the area outside a city preserved as a result of the density of an urban plan: the
preserved difference between the ground area of an urban plan and the ground area of a reference plan for an
equal number of people yet with an average density [this dissertation]
geothermal energy : 1. energy from heat from the deeper layers of the earth crust; 2. energy extracted from the soil
GFA : gross floor area
-- factor : the GFA of a reference building divided by that of the building studied [this dissertation]
-- reference : reference building with a GFA equal to the building studied but with a reference design and
reference materials and building services [this dissertation]
great sustainability : (within the framework of this research:) sustainability related to improvements to the entire office
market or the whole world [Jonge, 1993]
green financing : a financial reward for the fulfillment of certain requirements of the National Package Sustainable
Building, usually in the form of a green mortgage
green mortgage : a mortgage for which a certain interest discount is awarded
GreenCalc : Dutch design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of office buildings
the greenhouse effect : the effect that in lower layers of the atmosphere CO2, methane, NOx, CFCs and ozone form a
blanket around the Earth, through the global temperature rises and climate change occurs [RIVM,
1988] - not just the cause for climate change but the primary process enabling a stable climate on
Earth
gross/net ratio : the relation between the GFA and NFA of a building [Gerritse, 1995]
the group office : an intermediate between a cellular office and an office landscape, consisting of medium-sized
rooms, each accommodating 4-15 people [Dewulf & Jonge, 1997]; an enclosed space designed to
accommodate 4-12 workplaces [Vos et al., 1999]
group space : a medium-sized room containing 5-15 persons who work together [Duffy, 1976]
GSI / ground space : an indicator of the urban compactness: the relation between the built ground area and the total
index ground area
Guadua angustifolia : a bamboo species
the guest office : an office located in the building of a principal or client organisation [Vos et al., 1999]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at a guest
guesting : an arrangement of two or more companies to allow one another's employees to use offices on
location [HQ Business Centres, 2000]
H / hydrogen : chemical element, a gas that has no colour, taste or smell and is the lightest substance known,
combining with oxygen to form water
health : a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not just the absence of disease or
infirmity [WHO, 1996]
-- quality : quality referring to contributing to a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being [based
on WHO, 1996]
-- trouble : trouble caused by lack of physical, mental or social well-being [based on WHO, 1996]
healthy : in a state of health, or offering the conditions for health [based on WHO, 1996]

heat recovery : the extraction of heat from a source in order to use it for a certain function
heatpump : a device that can extract heat from one medium and transmit it to another medium with great
efficiency, based on the technical principle of a fridge
historical quality : quality referring to offering a historical value to society [this dissertation]
the home office : a workplace located in the residence of an employee [Vos et al., 1999]
the -- worker : an office employee who teleworks at a home office at least one day a week [this dissertation]
the -- -- concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of home office workers [this dissertation]
home work : (within the framework of this research:) the professional work done by a home office worker
home-based : employees working at home on a limited number of days a week [Sims et al., 1996]
telecommuting
horizontal bearing : the load bearing capacity of the floor structure of a reference building divided by that of the building
capacity factor studied [this dissertation]
horizontal : extendibility in a horizontal direction, e.g. area enlargement through moving the external wall of a
extendability building [this dissertation]
hydroelectric : generating electricity from the power of flowing water
-- power station : installation that produces hydroelectric energy
ICT : information and telecommunication technology
IDEMAT : tool for the execution of LCA
IFD : industrial, flexible and demountable
-- building : a way of building based on industrial construction becoming assembling, no production of waste at
the building site, flexibility during the design stage, flexibility of the building during the course of life,
and demountability and reusability or recyclability of the building [Hendriks & Vingerling, 2000]
improvement factor : (within the framework of this dissertation:) performance indicator, determined by the division of the
score of a reference representing the year 1990 by the score of the object studied [this dissertation]
-- for building : environmental improvement factor based on comparison with the design reference [this dissertation]
materials & services
-- for the building : environmental improvement factor based on comparison with the GFA reference [this dissertation]
design
-- for the building : environmental improvement factor based on comparison with the FTE reference [this dissertation]
use
improvement : (within the framework of this dissertation:) the best improvement factor possible under favourable
potential circumstances [this dissertation]
indicator : (within the framework of this research:) a sign of something; a thing that shows the state or health of
something else [Hornby et al., 1998]
indoor climate : the set of factors inside buildings which influence the health and comfort of the user [RIVM, 1988]
inflation : (within the framework of this research:) a rise in prices and wages caused by an increase in the
money supply and demands for goods, and resulting in the fall in the value of money [Hornby et al.,
1998]
infrastructure : the basic structures and facilities necessary for a country or an organisation to function efficiently,
e.g. buildings, transport, water and energy resources, and administrative systems [Hornby et al.,
1998]
inhabitant : a person who lives in an area or building [this dissertation]
innovative office : the new way in which office work is organised, as opposed to traditional office concepts [this
concept dissertation]
input protocol : description of the exact requirements and constraints that the input in a specific environmental
assessment tool should meet [this dissertation]
the instant office : a workplace instantly created by the user in a place that is not primarily designed for office work [Vos
et al., 1999]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at an instant
integral : (within the framework of this research:) having or containing all parts that are necessary to be
complete, whole [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- costs : the sum of actual costs and environmental costs [Arets, 2001]
-- design : designing in such a manner that as many as possible aspects influencing the comfort, energy
consumption and the environment are involved [Kristinsson, 2002]
integrated : with various parts or aspects linked closely together [Hornby et al., 1998]
intense : (within the framework of this research:) concentrated [Hornby et al., 1998]
intensification : the process or action of intensifying
to intensify : to become or make something become stronger or more concentrated [Hornby et al., 1998]
intensity : (within the framework of this research:) the state or quality of being intense [Hornby et al., 1998]

intensive : (within the framework of this research:) concentrating all one's effort on a specific area [Hornby et
al., 1998]
-- use in time : the situation in which the density of an area is increased during a certain time-span as a result of
measures in the fourth dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
-- use of land : the situation in which the density of an area is increased as a result of measures in the third
dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
-- use of space : the situation in which the density of an area is increased during a certain time-span [Dobbelsteen &
Wilde, 2004]
-- use of surface : the situation in which the density of an area is increased as a result of measures in the second
dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
interest : (within the framework of this research:) money charged for borrowing money, or paid to somebody
who invests money [Hornby et al., 1998]
internal aesthetic : quality referring to the interior of a building being pleasing to look at, being artistic, or showing good
quality taste [this dissertation]
internal orientation : zoning
internal use of space : use of space inside the building, related to the floor area [this dissertation]
intervention table : the inventory of all environmental interventions determined through LCA
the Ladder of Lansink : a preferred order for actions in the waste phase of a product, as first stated in Dutch parliament by
Lansink
LCA / life cycle : methodology of inventory and classification of environmental effects of a product, considered from
analysis/assessment cradle to grave
LCC / life cycle : methodology of accounting all costs ocurring during the lifespan of a building
costing
LEED : American design-supportive tool for the environmental assessment of office buildings
life cycle : a series of forms into which a living thing changes as it develops [Hornby et al., 1998]
lifespan : the length of time that something is likely to live, continue or function [Hornby et al., 1998]
lifetime : the length of a person's life or a thing's existence [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- quality : quality referring to having a long expected lifetime [this dissertation]
long-term : the building's adaptability to unknown activities and users [Saari & Heikkilä, 2003]
adaptability
to maintain : (in terms of this research:) 1. to cause something to continue; to keep something in existence at the
same level, standard, etc.; 2. to keep something in good condition or working order by checking or
repairing it regularly [Hornby et al., 1998]
maintenance : (in terms of this research:) the action of maintaining something or the state of being maintained
marginal costs : the cost of the last necessary measure to attain an emission target [Soest et al., 1997]
matrix living : a co-existence of individual lifestyles that include multiple tasks and multiple locations [Harrison,
2002]
measured value : a value determined through measurement of a certain property [this dissertation]
metabolism : (within the framework of this research:) the environmental impact by unit of welfare - equal to the
environmental carrying capacity
methane : specific type of carbon hydrid, chemical compound of carbon and hydrogen (CH4), a gas without
colour or smell that burns easily and is used as fuel - natural gas mainly consists of methane
method : (within the framework of this research:) a way of doing something [Hornby et al., 1998]
methodical : a. done in a careful logical way; b. doing things in a careful logical way [Hornby et al., 1998]
methodological : using a set of methods used in a particular area of activity
methodology : a set of methods used in a particular area of activity [Hornby et al., 1998]
mixed use of surface : multiple use of surface
the mobile office : a workplace in a mobile carrier (e.g. car), specially designed for optimal use as an office [this
dissertation] - more sophisticated than the instant office
the mobile unit : (within the framework of this research:) the office employee with all the basic equipment required to
work anywhere, anyplace [this dissertation]
model : (within the framework of this research:) a simple description of a system, used for explaining,
calculating, etc. something [Hornby et al., 1998]
modifiability : the building's capacity to meet the changing needs of its users [Saari & Heikkilä, 2003]
the monastery office : an office in which the regular workplaces are situated in the open space; private work and personal
meetings take place in small rooms around the open space [Wagenberg & Wilmes, 1995; TU
Eindhoven, 1995] - particular type of combi-office
monetary factor : shadowprices, prevention costs or marginal costs per unit of environmental effect or environmental
theme
to mount : (within the framework of this research:) to put something into place on a support; to fix something
into position for use, display or study [Hornby et al., 1998]

multi-functionality : the state of being able to fulfil many functions in a lifetime [this dissertation]
multiple : having or involving many individuals, items or types [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- use in time : the situation in which a combination of functions is established in an area during a certain time-span
as a result of measures in the fourth dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
-- use of land : the situation in which a combination of functions is established in an area as a result of measures in
the third dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
-- use of space : the situation in which a combination of functions is established in an area during a certain time-span
[Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]; a situation in which different functions are combined in a certain space
in a certain time [Priemus, 2000]
-- use of surface : the situation in which a combination of functions is established in an area as a result of measures in
the second dimension [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
multiplicity : (within the framework of this research:) a large number or great variety of functions
N / nitrogen : chemical element, a gas without colour, taste or smell that occurs in large quantities in the Earth's
atmosphere
National Package : an overview of measures for sustainable building, developed by order of the Dutch government
Sustainable Building [SBR, 1996]
neighbourhood : a. a district; an area near a particular place; b. the people living there [Hornby et al., 1998]
the -- centre : an office located in suburban an other residential areas and shared by a number of organisations or
even open to the public [Harrison, 2002] - equal to the project centre
the -- office : the district office
-- quality : quality related to the functional diversity and architectural diversity of an urban area [this dissertation]
the new café office : an Internet café combining ICT-services with sophisticated peripheral technologies such as video-
conferencing, plotters or CD-mixing facilities, as well as meeting rooms and business catering
[Harrison, 2002]
new office work : office work that has changed in contents and process as a result of office innovation [this
dissertation]
the new sustainable : an innovative office concept based on distributed workplaces by which the environmental
office (work) concept performance of office work significantly improves [this dissertation]
the new sustainable : a new organisation of office work based on distributed workplaces by which the environmental
organisation of performance of office work significantly improves [this dissertation]
office work
NFA : net floor area
-- factor : the NFA of a reference building divided by that of the building studied [this dissertation]
the non-territorial office : a space allocation practice in which individuals have no desks, workstations or offices for their own
exclusive use [Becker, 1993]; an environment where employees do not have their own assigned,
individual workstations or offices. Usually, there are more employees than workplaces [Sims et al.,
1996]; a number of workplaces assigned to two or more employees [Vos et al., 1999]
normalisation : the process of normalising
to normalise : (within the framework of LCA:) to relate an environmental effect to the average impact caused by
one national, European or American citizen
normalised : an environmental profile in which the scores per environmental effect were normalised
environmental
profile
NOx / nitrous oxide : chemical compound of nitrogen and oxide, a gas used especially formerly by dentists to prevent one
feeling pain
NPV / net present : the value at the moment of consideration of costs or benefits appearing at some instant in time,
value possibly involving a discount rate for interest and inflation
oxygen : chemical element, a gas without colour, taste or smell, which is present in the air and necessary for
all forms of life on Earth
ozone : chemical compound of three oxygen atoms, a colourless gas with a strong smell
OAR / office : an indicator of the mixture of offices and residences in an urban area: the relation between the GFA
apartment ratio of offices and the GFA of residences [this dissertation]
obstacle area factor : the projected area of obstacles on the floor of a reference building divided by that of the building
studied [this dissertation]
occupancy : the action or period of occupying a house, land, etc. [Hornby et al., 1998]
occupant : a person that has a permanent working or living place in an area or building [this dissertation]
occupation rate : the percentage of people using a room with respect to the maximum number of people that this room
can accommodate [Zautsen, 2001]

office : a room, or a set of rooms, or a whole building where people perform clerical, professional and
administrative work [Geerts & Heestermans, 1992]; a place where office work is performed [Vos et
al., 1999]
-- (work) concept : the way in which office work is organised [this dissertation]
-- building : a building specifically designed for the performance of office work
the -- clubhouse : a central office for the new sustainable office concept, much smaller than for a traditional office
concept, only accommodating the management, secretariat, issue and other support for employees,
functioning as the clubspace of a company [this dissertation] - somewhat similar to the club office
-- innovation : the process or action of changing traditional office work concepts [this dissertation]
the -- landscape : a large open space in which workplaces artificially lighted are not enclosed by floor-to-ceiling
partitions, however separated by interior elements such as plants, cabinets and semi-high partitions
[Dewulf & Jonge, 1997]; an arrangement of workplaces in an irregular pattern and separated from
one another by semi-high screens, plants and filing cabinets [Duffy, 1976]; a large continuous space
consisting of at least 10 workplaces [Rgd, 1996] - particular type of open-plan office
-- place : the place of an office, regarding the building [Vos et al., 1999]
-- space : space used or meant for office work, regarding the floor plan [Vos et al., 1999]
-- use : the way in which an office is used, regarding the workplace [Vos et al., 1999]
-- work : concentrating, archiving, producing, and communicating information [Simons at al., 2002];
processing information [Vos et al., 1999]
-- -- absorption : the state of office work integrated in other day-to-day activities or the process towards that state [this
dissertation]
once-off : an environmental load appearing just once during the lifespan of a building [this dissertation] - e.g.
environmental load the environmental load of construction and demolition
the open office : the scattering of desks and work groups across huge open floors [Brand, 1994] - equal to the office
landscape
the open-plan office : an enclosed space designed to accommodate 13 or more workplaces [Vos et al., 1999]
the operations centre : an office for business functions that are not direct client facing: finance, human resources,
information technology and training, housing representatives of the service partners, and call centre
space for administrative and service support to the personal centre, project centre and corporate
centre, requiring a range of work settings [Harrison, 2002] - somewhat similar to the office clubhouse
organic building : building in such a manner that it seems as if the building has grown; this form of building is closely
related to anthroposophy and structural engineering [Duijvestein, 1997]
organisation of : the way that office work is organised and accommodated [this dissertation]
office work
to orientate/orient : (within the framework of this research:) to direct or aim a building or urban grid at something [Hornby
et al., 1998]
orientation : (within the framework of this research:) the action of orientating a building or urban grid or the state
of a building or urban grid being orientated [based on Hornby et al., 1998]
OSR / open space : an indicator of the pressure on the open space in an urban area: the relation between the total GFA
ratio and the non-built ground area
outsourcing : hiring people from another organisation for a job done at the their own office [Edum-Fotwe et al.,
2003]
ozone depletion / : depletion of the ozone layer, the disappearance of the higher ozone layers around the Earth as a
ozone layer result of CFCs and bromide and iodide containing gases, because of which harmful UV-radiation can
deterioration pass through to the surface of the earth, endangering the health of plants, animals and human
beings [RIVM, 1988]
-- hole : an area in the ozone layer where the amount of ozone has been greatly reduced, so that harmful
rays from the sun can pass through it [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- layer : a layer of ozone high above the Earth's surface that helps to protect the Earth from the sun's harmful
rays [Hornby et al., 1998]
the panel method : the Delphi method
passive solar energy : energy of the sun that can be made useful in a building without conversion technologies
performance : the quantified level of quality per function [SBR, 1992]
periphery building : a complex of buildings linked together around a courtyard
personal : (within the framework of this research:) of or belonging to a particular person rather than a group or
an organisation [Hornby et al., 1998]
the -- centre : a secondary work location used for individual concentrated working or routine tasks that do not
require the physical involvement of other people [Harrison, 2002] - similar to the home office
the -- office : a workplace exclusively used by a single employee [Vos et al., 1999]
-- space : space allocated to an individual [Steelcase, 1996]
-- solar energy : the form of active solar energy produced by solar cells or solar panels

physical safety : safety concerning the probability of a person being killed or injured by natural or man-made hazards
[Suddle & Waarts, 2003]
the plural workplace : a number of workplaces assigned to one employee [this dissertation]
pollution : the adding of chemical and physical elements to the environment in quantities that are greater than
can be processed by natural cycles, because of which accumulation occurs [RIVM, 1988]
potential user : the potential number of users of a reference building divided by that of the building studied [this
number factor dissertation]
PPR / public private : an indicator of the mixture of public and private space in an urban area: the relation between the
ratio publicly accessible space and private space [this dissertation]
PR / plot ratio : an indicator of the urban density: the relation between the total GFA and the total ground area on
which it has been established - equal to the FSI
prevention costs : costs related to the prevention of environmental damage by certain interventions, which are not
included in real prices of products and eventually paid by society, through taxes [IVM, 2000]
-- to sustainability : costs of preventive measures, necessary to diminish environmental damage (or emissions) to a
sustainable level [Beetstra et al., 2002]
primary function : most important, fundamental function [based on Hornby et al., 1998]
process tree : the graphical scheme of the steps of the life cycle of a product and their relationships
the project centre : an office located in suburban an other residential areas and shared by a number of organisations or
even open to the public [Harrison, 2002] - equal to the neighbourhood centre, similar to the district
office
project space : space dedicated to a particular project or team, for the duration of work [Twijnstra Gudde, 1996;
Steelcase, 1996]
prolonged use in : particular type of space use in time referring to longer use hours for an equal number of users, not
time contributing to greater intensity [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
prosperity : the state of being successful, especially financially [Hornby et al., 1998]
PV / photovoltaic : generating electric energy by sunlight - equal to solar cells
PV cell : a device that converts the energy of sunlight into electricity - equal to solar cells
quality : 1a. the standard of something when compared to other things like it; how good or bad something is;
b. a high standard or level; 2a. a usually good characteristic; b. a special or distinguishing feature
the -- method : (within the framework of LCA:) a method for the allocation of environmental effects
-- of life : the set of conditions that define the perception of somebody's living circumstances, such as safety,
accommodation, food, climate, health, welfare, prosperity, prospects, etc. [this dissertation]
rearrangeability : redividability
reasoned judgement : appreciation of a certain property through rational reason [this dissertation]
to reconstruct : (within the framework of this research:) to construct or build again something that has been
damaged or destroyed [Hornby et al., 1998]
reconstruction : (within the framework of this research:) 1a. the action or process of reconstructing something or
being reconstructed; b. a copy of something that no longer exists [Hornby et al., 1998]
recyclability : the ability to be used again or to be collected so that it can be made into new material [Hornby et al.,
1998]
recyclable : that can be used again or be collected so that it can be made into new material [Hornby et al., 1998]
to recycle : a. to treat things that have already been used so that they can be used again; b. to obtain the
material for new products from things that have been used, by treating them [Hornby et al., 1998]
redividability : the ability of the fill-in of a building to be easily adapted [this dissertation]
reference building : theoretic building serving as a comparison basis for the determination of the environmental
performance [this dissertation]
remaining : the part of the initial environmental mortgage that still needs to be paid-off [this dissertation]
environmental debt
to renovate : to get old buildings back into good condition [Hornby et al., 1998]
renovation : the action or process of renovating or being renovated
to repair : (within the framework of this research:) to mend something that is broken or damaged [Hornby et al.,
1998]
repairability : the ability to be repaired
repairable : that can be repaired
repetitive use in time : particular type of space use in time referring to repeating alternating use by different functions,
contributing to greater multiplicity [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
to replace : (within the framework of this research:) to exchange something for something that is better or newer
replaceability : the ability to be replaced
replaceable : that can be replaced

replacement : 1. the action of replacing something or being replaced; 2. a person or thing that takes the place of
another [Hornby et al., 1998]
the reprocessing : (within the framework of LCA:) a method for the allocation of environmental effects, where the
method reprocessing of primary product waste to a secondary product is attributed to the primary product but
not the rest
reusability : the state of being reusable or possible to reuse
reusable : that can be used again [Hornby et al., 1998]
to reuse : to use something again [Hornby et al., 1998]
S / sulphur : chemical element, a pale yellow substance that burns with a bright flame and a strong smell, used in
medicine and industry
the satellite office : an office intended for use by employees from the same or from a different organisation, whose
residence is near to the office [Becker et al., 1992]; a telework office facilitated by the organisation of
the central office [this dissertation]; an office building near the teleworkers' homes, financed by one
organisation, with workplaces and other facilities for the exclusive use by teleworkers from that
organisation [TU Eindhoven, 1995]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at a satellite
science : a. the study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world and society, especially
through observation and experiment; b. a particular area of this [Hornby et al., 1998]
scientific : a. of, used in or involved in science; b. using methods based on those of science [Hornby et al.,
1998]
selective : careful demolition of a building, enabling reuse of entire building components
dismantling
sequential use in : particular type of space use in time referring to functions replacing one another, not contributing to
time greater multiplicity [Dobbelsteen & Wilde, 2004]
service flexibility : the building's ability to adapt to recurrent quick loads [Saari & Heikkilä, 2003]
service life : the time-span that an object remains in function
the Service Life : a methodology for the prediction of the service life of technical components of design objects
Methodology [Masters & Brandt, 1989; RILEM, 1989]
shadowprice : the cost society is willing to pay for the achievement of en environmental goal [Soest et al., 1997]
shared corporate : an office building offering space for office clubhouses of different organisations and possibly facilities
building of the business node as well [this dissertation]
the shared office : a workplace assigned to two or more employees who use the workplace on a rotating basis [Vos et
al., 1999]
shareholder : office market developments mainly influenced by shareholders and their profits [Meel, 2000]
capitalism
sick building : a building in which building-related symptoms of sickness regularly (daily or weekly) occur to at least
20% of the users [Heijmerink]
-- syndrome : the regular occurance of building-related symptoms of sickness
SimaPro : a tool for the execution of LCA
small sustainability : (within the framework of this research:) sustainability related to improvements to office buildings
[Jonge, 1993]
SO2 / sulphur : chemical compound of sulphur and oxygen, caused by burning sulphur or sulphur-containing
dioxide substances such as natural oil
social : (within the framework of this research:) 1. concerning the organisation of and relations between
people and communities; 2. of or in society; of or concerning rank in society [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- quality : quality referring to offering a value to people and communities [this dissertation]
-- safety : safety concerning crime incentives and spatial, institutional and social factors of an area
[Durmisevic, 2002]
-- sustainability : sustainability related to social aspects
social-cultural- : the combination of social quality, cultural quality and historical quality, qualities related the value of
historical quality something to society [this dissertation]
solar : a. of, concerning or related to the sun; b. using the sun's energy [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- cell : device that converts the energy of sunlight into electricity [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- collector : device that uses the energy of sunlight to heat water
-- energy : energy of the sun
-- panel : a panel of linked-up solar cells
the space factor : (within the framework of this research:) solutions related to the improvement of the use of space for
office work [this dissertation]

spatial : relating to space as a physical dimension [Hornby et al., 1998]

-- efficiency indicator : an indicator of the efficiency by which space is used [this dissertation]
-- improvement : performance indicator, determined by the division of the spatial feature of a reference representing
factor the year 1990 by that of the object studied [this dissertation]
-- quality : quality referring to the positive perception of space inside a building [this dissertation]
specific : 1. detailed and exact; 2. relating to one particular thing, etc.; not general [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- ecological value : the value related to the ecological quality of the resources used for something [this dissertation]
-- experience value : the value related to the external aesthetic quality, architectonic diversity and social-cultural-historical
quality of something [this dissertation]
-- future value : the value related to the adaptability and flexibility of something [this dissertation]
-- use value : the value related to the technical quality, usefulness, multi-functionality and functional diversity of
something [this dissertation]
stakeholder : office market developments mainly influenced by the well-being of employees and society in general
capitalism [Meel, 2000]
structural : of or relating to a structure or structures [Hornby et al., 1998]
to structure : to give a structure to something; to plan or organise something [Hornby et al., 1998]
structure : 1a. the way in which something is organised, built or put together; b. the state of being well planned
or organised; 2. a particular system, pattern, procedure or institution; 3. a thing made of several parts
put together in a particular way [Hornby et al., 1998]
subdividability : the ability to be divided into different parts
the substitution method : the subtraction method
the subtraction method : (within the framework of LCA:) a method for the allocation of environmental effects, where the
environmental load of the secondary product is partially subtracted from the environmental load of
the primary product
supporter-fill-in : a building method with a spacious, redividable and eternal supporting structure and adaptable fill-in
(and façade)
to sustain : (within the framework of this research:) 1. to keep somebody or something alive or in existence; 2. to
experience or suffer something [Hornby et al., 1998]
sustainability : the state of being sustainable or possible to sustain; a condition in which sustainable development is
accomplished: a state of the world in which the needs of all people are fulfilled without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, a state of balanced economy and ecology
[based on Brundtland et al., 1987]
sustainable : that can be kept going or maintained [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- accommodation : accommodation that can be sustained, maintained; a way of building that can be sustained,
maintained [based on Brundtland et al., 1987]
-- building : a way of building by which the environmental impact and health impact as a result of the construction
and built environment are diminished to a minimum [Dutch Ministry of HSPE, 1990]
-- design : a way of designing things that can be sustained, maintained
-- development : a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs [Brundtland et al., 1987]; a process of change in which
exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological developments
and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance the current and future potential to meet
human needs and aspirations [Brundtland et al., 1987]
-- energy resource : an energy resource that cannot be depleted: solar energy, wind energy, hydraulic and hydroelectric
energy, geothermal energy
-- measure : a measure that in general fits within the definition of sustainable development, or sustainable
building in particular
-- office (work) : an office (work) concept leading to a significant improvement of the environmental performance
concept
synergy : the combined effect of two or more things, processes, etc. that exceeds the sum of their individual
effects [Hornby et al., 1998]
system : (within the framework of this research:) 1. a group of things or parts working together as a whole; 2.
a set of ideas, theories, procedures, etc. according to which something is done [Hornby et al., 1998]
- this research mainly relates to meaning no. 3
systematic : (within the framework of this research:) done or acting according to the system or plan [Hornby et al.,
1998]
the team office : an office designed for 4-9 people [Rgd, 1996] - equal to the group office
technical : 1. of or involving applied and industrial sciences; 2. of a particular object, art or craft, or its
techniques; 3. requiring specialised knowledge; using terms in a particular specialised way; 4. that
involves a strict interpretation of the law or of a set of rules [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- depletion : depletion as a result of the technical limitations for extraction of resources [this dissertation]
-- flexibility : flexibility with regard to the physical components of a building [this dissertation]

technical
-- lifespan : the technical lifetime expected
-- lifetime : the time-span within which the building meets the technical performance criteria in a given
maintenance strategy [Jonge, 1990]
-- quality : quality referring to being technically well-functioning [this dissertation]
technique : a. a method of doing or performing something, especially in the arts or sciences; b. skill in this
technology : a. the scientific and use of applied sciences; b. the application of this to practical tasks in industry
the technology factor : (within the framework of this research:) solutions related to the improvement of building design and
building technology [this dissertation]
to telecommute : to work at home for at least one day a week [based on Froggatt, 1996]
telecommuting : work at home for at least one day a week [Froggatt, 1996]
telecontact : personal contact at a distance, performed in such good quality that it greatly resembles close contact
between people [this dissertation]
telework : work done at a distance from the place where the work's results are needed, or where the work
would conventionally have been done, when ICTs are applied [European Telework On-line, 2000];
work that is performed at a distance from an office building, geographically separated from the other
workplaces [Heiden & Pellenbarg, 1990]; regular work outside the central office, performed in
another office at least one day per week [this dissertation]
to telework : to work outside the central office, in another office at least one day per week [this dissertation]
the -- centre : a building with office space that can be rented by several organisations in addition to the central
office and often with an on-line connection with the central office [TU Eindhoven, 1995] - equal to the
business centre
the -- office : a workplace that is physically disconnected from the central office [Vos et al., 1999]
teleworker : a person regularly teleworking
teleworking : putting employees to work at a telework office instead of the central office [Edum-Fotwe et al., 2003]
TGV : train à grande vitesse, French high-speed train
the city is the office : the concept of office space dispersed over the city [Harrison, 2002]
the -- is the city : the concept of all office space solutions accommodated in one office or location [Harrison, 2002]
theme equivalent : (within the framework of LCA:) the unit in which all environmental effects contributing to a certain
environmental theme are expressed
three steps strategy : a strategy for a conscientious approach to environmental goods: 1. avoid unnecessary consumption
or resources, 2. use resources that are unlimited or renewable, 3. use limited resources wisely
[Duijvestein, 1997]
the time factor : (within the framework of this research:) solutions related to the improvement of the lifespan of
buildings, their components and resources [this dissertation]
time-span : a period of time [Hornby et al., 1998]
tradition : (within the framework of this research:) any established method, practice, etc. [Hornby et al., 1998]
traditional : according to or being tradition
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on office employees who work at the central office five days a week
[this dissertation]
the transfer office : a business centre located at a node of infrastructure where people can transfer from one transport
mode to another [this dissertation]
the -- worker concept : an office work concept based on a great proportion of office employees who telework at a transfer
the TWIN model : environmental assessment method adding a weighing method to LCA and involving environmental
effects and health effects ignored by LCA [Haas, 1997]
the TWIN2002 model : environmental assessment method based on the TWIN model, translating environmental effects to
environmental costs [NIBE Research, 2002]
UA : useful area
ULF / useful life : the use efficiency of a building during its lifetime [Dobbelsteen, 1993]
factor
ULS / useful lifespan : the number of years that a building has been optimally used at the end of its lifetime [Dobbelsteen,
1993]
UPSI / useful public : an indicator of the pressure on the public space in an urban area: the relation between the total GFA
space index and the accessible public space [this dissertation]
usability : the measure of quality of the user experience when interacting with something [Nielsen, 1998]
use rate : the percentage of time that a space is actually used [Zautsen, 2001]
use value : the value related to the functional quality of something [Vitruvius]

useful : 1. that can be used for a practical purpose, that helps one to do something, helpful; 2. of use or
value to somebody/something; 3. good, very satisfactory [Hornby et al., 1998]
-- life : see service life and functional lifespan
usefulness : the state of being useful or possible to use
useless : 1. not fulfilling the intended purpose; 2. certain to not achieve the desired result; 3. having no ability
or skill at something; 4. having no purpose, giving no benefit to anyone [Hornby et al., 1998]
user : a person that uses the facilities in an area or building [this dissertation]
-- experience value : the value related to the spatial quality and internal aesthetic quality of something [this dissertation]
vertical bearing : the load bearing capacity of the columns and foundation of a reference building divided by that of the
capacity factor building studied [this dissertation]
vertical extendability : extendibility in a vertical direction, e.g. area enlargement through adding layers to a building [this
dissertation]
video-conferencing : a meeting with people at a distance by means of an ICT device that enables all participants to see
and hear one another
the virtual office : a place for office work that is done 'footloose', free of space and time [this dissertation] - equal to the
instant office
VOCs / volatile : solvents for e.g. glue and paint that can possibly damage health
organic compounds
water-saving toilet : toilet with a smaller reservoir than usual and/or a flush-interruption button
weighing factor : a factor expressing the importance of a certain environmental effect or environmental theme
weighing method : (within the framework of this research:) a method of assigning weighing factors to environmental
effects or environmental themes
welfare : (within the framework of this research:) the good health, happiness, comfort, etc. of a person or
group [Hornby et al., 1998]
well-being : a state of being healthy, happy, etc. [Hornby et al., 1998]
white-collar factory : early version of the office building, with flexible floor plans and anonymous workrooms with noisy
office machines [Bedoire, 1979]
wind turbine : a windmill that generates electric energy from airflows
workplace : the process of introducing new elements in the physical working environment or accommodation,
innovation ICT, and other facilities, in order te fine-tune them to new ways of working [Voordt, 2003]
zoning : (within the framework of this research:) tuning the various features and climate requirements of the
functions in a building to their best location in the layout plan, taking into account the building's
orientation

REFERENCES FOR THE END
Literature
Bakens W.; 'Enablers of sustainability', in: Yang J., Brandon P.S. & Sidwell A.C. (eds.), Proceedings of the CIB2003
International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003) (687-694, CD-rom); University of
Salford, UK / Carnegie Mellon, USA / QUT, Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Brandon P.S.; 'Time and the sustainable development agenda', presentation at the CIB2003 International Conference
on Smart and Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003); Brisbane, Australia, 2003
the limits of reducing the environmental costs of building material, use of energy, use of water and mobility', in: Boonstra
C., Rovers R. & Pauwels S. (eds.), Proceedings International Conference Sustainable Building 2000 (598-600);
Aeneas, Technical Publishers, Best, Netherlands, 2000
Lovelock J.E.; Gaia; Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1979
Maslow A.H.; 'Self-actualizing people - A study of psychological health', in: Moustakas C.E., The self; explorations in
personal growth (1st ed.) (160-194); Harper, New York, USA, 1956
Plessis C. du; 'Enablers of sustainability', in: presentation at the CIB2003 International Conference on Smart and
Sustainable Built Environment (SASBE 2003); Brisbane, Australia, 2003
Thomas C.D., Cameron A., Green R.E., Bakkenes M., Beaumont L.J., Collingham Y.C., Erasmus B.F.N., Ferreira de
Siquieira M., Grainger A., Hannah L., Hughes L., Huntley B., Jaarsveld A.S. van, Midgley G.F., Miles L., Ortega-Huerta
M.A., Townsend Peterson A., Phillips O.L. & Williams S.E.; 'Extinction risk from climate change', in: Nature, Vol. 427,
No. 6970, 8 January, 2003 (145-148)
Vogtländer J.G.; The model of Eco-costs/Value Ratio - A new LCA based decision support tool; Gopher, Groningen,
Netherlands, 2001
Werkgroep PARAP; Kantelpuntonderzoek energiebesparing rijkshuisvesting (eindrapport) (in Dutch);
Werkgroep PARAP & Deerns raadgevende ingenieurs (Gerritse C.); Energiegebruik in EER hersteld -
World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland et al.); Our Common Future; Oxford University
Press, Oxford, UK / New York, USA, 1990
World Resources Institute; 'Tackling the problems of poverty', in: Environment and Health: Tackling Indoor Air Pollution;
website: http://www.wri.org/wri/wr9899/indoor.htm, 1998
All pictures, unless indicated otherwise, are by the author.
G The End - References for The End 491

Acknowledgements
Thank you:
Jo Edwards, for checking the English of this volume and keeping the English propositions connected to this
thesis concise and sharp, in a way only English native speakers can…
Sebastiaan de Wilde, colleague PhD researcher, for a brave support with the Terminology list.
Dobbelsteen A.A.J.F. van den, Cauberg J.J.M., Jonge H. de & Kristinsson J.; 'Sustainable Offices - Effective Solutions
for Office Organisation, Space Use, Lifespan, Design and Technology', in: Proceedings of the CIB World Building
Congress 2004 - Building for the Future (CD-rom); Institute for Research in Construction, NRC-CNRC, Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada, 2004
Dobbelsteen A. van den, Wilde S. de & Timmeren, A. van; 'Rethinking sustainable building - Towards effective solutions
for office work and its accommodation', in: Bustamante W.G. & Collados E.B. (eds.), Proceedings 20th International
Conference PLEA2003 - Passive Low Energy Architecture (CD-rom); Santiago de Chile, Chile, 2003
492 References for The End - G The End

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU

As the list of thank yous became longer and longer, I decided to put them in this extra section at the end. Be sure to realise,
however, that although located at the end, you belong upfront.
So, here I go. Of course I would like to first thank my supervisors for steering me towards this final product. However, I am
even more grateful for sharing their knowledge, experience, creativity, and inspiration with me: Hans Cauberg, Hans de
Jonge, Jón Kristinsson, and especially my daily (well, rather weekly) supervisor Kees van der Linden. Thanks, Daan &
Steven, for supporting me as 'paranimphs', and Joris for taking pictures at the ceremony.
People that were involved or played a role in specific scientific subjects of this dissertation already were acknowledged at the
end of every volume. Nevertheless, I would like to specially thank my close colleagues and real scientific sparring partners
Martijn Arets, my pleasant Limburgian (no, I am not going to write your petname) mate in- and outside the office room, and
my co-PhD-researcher Sebastiaan de Wilde, my pleasant mate in the Friday Amsterdam-Delft 8.11 and much later return
trains, and the time inbetween. Thank you Merie Chenhall, for a thorough check on the English at the very last instant, and
Kelly Greene, for reading the entire stack of paper and correcting the Dunglish. Michiel Hofman and Barbara Dujardin, of
Hofman Dujardin architects, thank you for providing me with a wonderful guest office in Amsterdam, in the very last weeks of
adjustments to the manuscript.
Furthermore, I want to thank the graduation students I had the pleasure to supervise, of whom I want to mention especially
(since working with them was more like cooperating than supervising): Valentina Colaleo, Ricardo Nunes, Pablo van der
Lugt, Sabine Jansen, and Thomas Metz. Their work can be found inside mine.
I do not want to miss the opportunity to express special thanks to people 'behind the scenes', the people not scientifically
involved in research yet making the wheels turn behind it: Anneke Kool (or do you want to use the maiden name Meijer in
this book?), dedicated secretary, always there for everyone and one of these colleagues that make a trip to the office
worthwhile, and my 'new Anneke' at Architecture: Willie Engelen; Gerrit van de Ende, the computer man, always directly
helpful in case of problems, and, in spite of all virus attacks, still alive; and Willem Franken, especially supportive for the
scanning of my countless slides. Also thanks to former close colleagues Lianne, Annelise, Martina, and Matthijs.
Furthermore, of course, my other former colleagues at Civil Engineering of the previous four years, as well as the student
assistents there, Donsje, Waldo and Walter. I hope you will read this book, understand the importance and potential of
sustainable construction, and take up the challenge for sustainable engineering of buildings.
Our relationship has not always been easy and we still need power to keep it working, but thank you my Toshiba Satellite for
being faithful to the end. And also thanks to my biotic help to my late work at the office, the unsurpassed pizza Palma of
Classic Pizza in Delft.
Then and most important, there are the many relatives and friends that make a PhD monk's life liveable.
First of all, my precious Sandra, lovely Noé, and sunshine-in-the-house Isha. I owe you a lot of time and attention and am a
lucky bastard to have the three of you. The close family seem an obvious support, but I never took this for granted and got it
anyway, and in the best way. Therefore, you are a blessing: my parents and grandparents and those of Sandra, plus mutual
brothers and sister, their partners and offspring. Special thanks to our mothers, Annemarie & Hanny, for coming to our aid so
often.
Not least are the many friends that I am pleased to have and who directly or indirectly played a role in this heap of paper. I
thank them all, but want to mention the ones who were associated most directly to this period of my life: the infamous
mannenborrel: Bert, Steven, Peter, Jeroen, and Harry; the infamous Hesperid hunters and toop-kings Joan, Daan, Joris, and
Hans; the equally infamous Poseidon Carrousel 8+ rowing team (NB see the references of Volume D!): Sander, Gerwin,
Marco, Arjen, Roland, Alexander, Robert, Stefan, Lodewijk, Peter, and its lady managers Marian, Hester & Anniek; the
JAHA-boys Richard, Maarten, Jan, Henk, Marcel, Sieto, and Massimo; the infamous Amsterdam soccer team, especially
Martijn, Tom Jan and Lennart; the even more infamous Molto Fracasso: Pieter, Kyril, Harrie, and Steven; my former inmates
from the locally infamous Bagijnhof K: Martijn, Lidewij, Natalie, Renez, Klaartje, Jo, Adrie, Erwin, Ine, Marcel, Regina, Pieter,
Pieter, Annemiek, and the sustainability in person Theo; my former mates of the infamous 89-90 Proteus-board Tessel, Jan,
Jet, Hans, Jos, Leo, and adventurous Bernice; the infamous meal of ex-chairmen, especially Daan, Joris, Ernest, Jeroen,
Jacqueline, Peter, and Jan Jaap; other old-time favourites Dick, Jurgen, Joost, and Frank; the best neighbours you can have,
Huub & Jeroen; my man in Brasil, Maurits; my former colleagues from NIBE, especially Ruben, René, Michiel, Cleo, Mireille,
and Michiel; my former colleagues from opMAAT, especially Hiltrud; and the former and renewed colleagues from the faculty
of Architecture, especially close ones Arjan, Alexia, Evert & Jean, Peter, Leo, Kees, Kees & Kees: I am looking forward to
bust some sustainable energy into the team of Bio-climatic and Smart Sustainable Design; and finally, the former colleagues
that unintentionally inspired me to hold on to the end, Ton, Nelleke & Christoph: I hope you once will finish your valuable
researches. Special light and strength to Nelleke and her family.
To you and all others not mentioned: thank you, and I hope to spend more time with you again!
G The End - Thank You, Thank You, Thank You 493

The Sustainable Office, Andy Van Den Dobbelsteen, 2004

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Sustainable Office, Andy Van Den Dobbelsteen, 2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Sustainable Office

an exploration of the potential for factor 20

Andy van den Dobbelsteen

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor

door Andrew Adrianus Joannes Franciscus VAN DEN DOBBELSTEEN

Layout: Andy van den Dobbelsteen

Amsterdam, 27th of July 2004,

Volume A - The Beginning

Volume B - The Basis

Volume C - The Time Factor

Volume D - The Technology Factor

Volume E - The Space Factor

Volume F - The Organisation of Office Work

Volume G - The End

OFFICES & SUSTAINABLE BUILDING

THE CURRENT PERFORMANCE

THE BUILDING LIFESPAN

BUILDING DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY

THE USE OF SPACE IN BUILDINGS THE USE OF URBAN SPACE

OFFICE WORK CONCEPTS

THE OVERALL POTENTIAL

Figure 00.01: A simple way of explaining this PhD research

Environmental problems and building

Study of office buildings

The Time Factor

The lifespan accounting methodology

The ESL and the qualities decisive for it

Designing for life with multiple lifespans of building components

The Technology Factor

The building geometry

The Space Factor

Space use in offices

Space use in urban areas

Telework concepts comparison

More complicated patterns of office work

6 01 General introduction - A The Beginning

01.01.01 Environmental problems and sustainability

The concept of sustainability

A The Beginning - 01 General introduction 7

1990 was taken as the reference year, indexing all factors 1:

2040 ½ = 2 x 5 x 1/20 <01.01c>

01.01.02 Current environmental performance

The environmental load of office buildings

Perhaps worse than calculated

8 01 General introduction - A The Beginning

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Necessity of a paradigm shift

01.01.03 The concept of effectiveness

The five E-s

A The Beginning - 01 General introduction 9

Conditionality within the soft system

In the system the letters stand for the five 'E-s':

Accordingly, effectiveness for sustainability can be defined as follows:

Effectiveness for sustainability:

The effectiveness factor: fE = fC x fP = Ei/Etot x fP <01.02>

10 01 General introduction - A The Beginning

contribution to environmental load (f C)

Effectiveness = Importance x Improvement

01.02.01 Causes of the problem

Hypothesis: the building industry focuses on ineffective technical solutions

Hypothesis: sustainability is focused on too small a scale

A The Beginning - 01 General introduction 11

Hypothesis: sustainability needs to be achieved through more than just technology