BREEAM use at the University of Bristol

1. BREEAM use at the University of Bristol

2. Overview • Background • Our Approach • Progress to date • Lessons learnt

3. Who is this guy? • Worked in energy and env management for 25 years. • Degree in env science. Not an engineer. • Been in HE sector for 15 years. • Bristol set up – all env stuff under my control, energy, waste, transport staff, engage with construction, procurement, food, curriculum, students.

4. Background • Significant building programmes • Written Energy Conservation Design Guides – 1990’s (@ Bath and Bristol) • Time consuming, constant updating, doing the design teams job!?, I’m not an engineer/architect always on the back foot. • Not integrated into the building process. • Mid 2000’s looked at BREEAM, no real competition, LEED not here.

5. Background • Director of Estates - “prove benefit of BREEAM”. • Paid for a BREEAM review of a project. • Also - full energy survey of a newly built science building. • BREEAM review, just assessed not used for design - Result ‘good’, less than 50% score - building a below average building!? • Survey £100k’s worth of savings

6. Bristol’s approach • Iterated over three years. • BREEAM on all projects over £1million. • At least ‘Excellent’ on new builds, ‘Very Good’ on refurb’s • EPC ‘B’, cost to get EPC A. • Forms part of design brief. • Deliverable for design team and contractors. • Start at stage 0.

7. Bristol’s Approach • Employ 3rd party assessors as ‘advocates’. • They sit with the design teams, attend many of the design team meetings, run separate workshops for the design team. • Report to HoS on a regular basis, flag issues, they are independent. • Each BREEAM criteria is targeted. • Design teams need good reasons for not including a criteria.

8. Bristol’s Approach • On top of this – early meeting with sustainability team to ensure their needs are met and local systems work. • BREEAM consultants part of process through design, tender and construction. • Work with the contractor – most projects Design and Build. Try not to novate across, though does happen.

9. Outcomes • Projects – 8 Refurb’s, 5 New Builds • Achieved – 8 Excellent, 5 Very Good • Iterated the approach • Capital Projects just do this now, its like CDM, not negotiable. • CP also understand its about building sustainably, not BREEAM point scoring. • Sustainability part of consultants framework.

10. Example – Richmond Building • Richmond Building – Refurb - Excellent • “B” energy label, difficult on a listed building. • A combined heat and power unit (CHP) used to generate low carbon heat and electricity for use on site. • A green roof on the new swimming pool changing block extension.

11. Richmond Building • All primary materials achieve a Green Guide A+ rating (i.e. highly sustainable) and are supplied by responsibly certified suppliers (e.g. ISO14001, FSC timber). • Most areas naturally ventilated, rare in a building with a footprint depth of more than 30m (usually buildings of 15m).

12. Richmond Building • Low energy/water fittings and toilets, water leak detection, • energy efficient equipment, variable speed pumps and drives, heat recovery, • large areas of cycle storage, • energy and water metering, real time data interfaces for educational learning.

13. Lessons learnt • Try it, iterate. • Be flexible – aim for everything, but consider cost. Not excellent at any cost. • We added a 5% uplift for BREEAM, now we just do it – who cost H&S these days! • You need someone looking out for sustainability – HoS/Advocates • Selection of design consultants

14. Next steps • Soft landings • SKA • Really small projects • More consultant engagement