Green Building and Green Retrofitting in the Context of Sustainability: Green Retrofitting of Public Buildings

Year 2025, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 950 - 969, 25.05.2025

Mehmet Polat

https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.1516265

Abstract

Excessive use of natural resources, especially energy resources, and the release of large amounts of harmful gases into nature are among the main causes of the environmental problems we face. The areas where natural resources are used intensively are undoubtedly cities. Ever-growing cities are being built in an unsustainable manner in order to meet the building demand. This situation further deepens the already severe environmental crisis. Indeed, conventional buildings seriously damage the environment throughout their life cycle (planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and demolition). For this reason, green buildings, known as environmentally friendly buildings, are increasingly being promoted. However, when evaluated in terms of both public buildings and other buildings, the excess of existing building stock makes green retrofitting a better option than green building for now. In this context, the study was carried out by addressing the most emphasized topics (such as benefits, costs, certificates, and materials) of the research accessed from the ScienceDirect, Springer, and Taylor & Francis databases with the keywords green building and green retrofitting in relation to public buildings. The study focuses on the challenges facing the transformation of the building stock, especially public buildings, through environmentally friendly green retrofitting practices and strategies to combat these challenges. The study also briefly discusses the widely known green building certificates and the recently introduced YeS-TR green building certificates in Turkey. On the other hand, green building costs and green building materials, which affect the decisions in green building and green retrofitting, are discussed in the study due to their importance. As a result, the renovation of buildings, especially public buildings, with green retrofitting projects provides many benefits and also pays back the initial investment in a short time. For this reason, green retrofitting projects should be emphasized, especially in public buildings that consume a lot of energy and produce a lot of harmful emissions. It is also proposed to establish an administratively and financially autonomous central green empowerment administration and to organize it in the provinces.

Keywords

Sustainability, Green Building, Green Building, Green Retrofit, Green Certification, Public Buildings, Cost

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışmanın tüm hazırlanma süreçlerinde etik kurallara uyulduğunu beyan ederim. Aksi bir durumun tespiti halinde Fiscaoeconomia Dergisinin hiçbir sorumluluğu olmayıp, tüm sorumluluk çalışmanın yazarı olarak tarafıma aittir.

Sürdürülebilirlik Bağlamında Yeşil Bina ve Yeşil Güçlendirme: Kamu Binalarında Yeşil Güçlendirme

Abstract

Enerji kaynakları başta olmak üzere doğal kaynakların aşırı kullanımı ve doğaya yüksek miktarda zararlı gazın salınması karşılaştığımız çevre sorunlarının temel sebepleri arasındadır. Doğal kaynakların yoğun bir şekilde kullanıldığı alanlar ise hiç şüphesiz şehirlerdir. Sürekli büyüyen şehirler ise yapı talebini karşılamak için sürdürülebilirlikten uzak bir şekilde yapılaşmaktadır. Bu durum ise zaten ağır bir şekilde yaşanan çevre krizini daha da derinleştirmektedir. Nitekim geleneksel binalar yaşam döngüsü boyunca (planlama, tasarım, inşaat, işletim, bakım, yenileme ve yıkım) çevreye ciddi şekilde zarar vermektedir. Bu nedenle çevre dostu yapılar olarak bilinen yeşil binalar giderek daha fazla teşvik edilmektedir. Ancak gerek kamu binaları bakımından gerek diğer binalar bakımından değerlendirme yapıldığında mevcut bina stokunun fazla olması yeşil güçlendirmeyi şimdilik yeşil binadan daha iyi bir seçenek olarak karşımıza çıkarmaktadır. Bu bağlamda çalışma ScienceDirect, Springer ve Taylor&Francis veri tabanlarından yeşil bina ve yeşil güçlendirme anahtar kelimeleriyle ulaşılan araştırmaların en fazla üzerinde durdukları konuların (fayda, maliyet, sertifika, malzeme gibi) kamu binaları ile ilişkili bir şekilde ele alınmasıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma başta kamu binaları olmak üzere bina stokunun çevre dostu yeşil güçlendirme uygulamalarıyla dönüştürülmesinin önündeki zorluklara ve bu zorluklarla mücadele stratejilerine odaklanmaktadır. Ayrıca çalışmada yaygın olarak bilinen yeşil bina sertifikaları ve Türkiye’de henüz yeni uygulamaya konulan YeS-TR yeşil bina sertifikalarına da kısaca yer verilmektedir. Öte yandan yeşil bina ve yeşil güçlendirmede kararları en çok etkileyen yeşil bina maliyetleri ve yeşil yapı malzemeleri önemine binaen çalışmada ele alınmaktadır. Sonuçta başta kamu binaları olmak üzere binaların yeşil güçlendirme projeleriyle yenilenmesi birçok fayda sağlamakta aynı zamanda kısa sürede ilk yatırımı geri ödemektedir. Bu nedenle öncelikle çok fazla enerji tüketen ve buna bağlı olarak çok fazla zararlı emisyon üreten kamu binaları başta olmak üzere yeşil güçlendirme projelerine ağırlık verilmelidir. Ayrıca idari ve mali bakımdan özerk merkezi bir yeşil güçlendirme idaresi kurularak taşrada da teşkilatlanması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Sürdürülebilirlik, Yeşil Bina, Yeşil Güçlendirme, Yeşil Sertifika, Kamu Binaları, Maliyet

References

• Alam, M., Zou, P. X. W., Stewart, R. A., Bertone, E., Sahin, O., Buntine, C. &Marshall, C. (2019). Government championed strategies to overcome the barriers to public building energy efficiency retrofit projects. Sustainable Cities and Society, 44, 56-69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.09.022
• Allen, J. G., MacNaughton, P., Laurent, J. G. C., Flanigan, S. S., Eitland, E. S. & Spengler, J. D. (2015). Green buildings and health. Current Environmental Health Reports, 2(3), 250-258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-015-0063-y
• Amoah, C. & Smith, J. (2024). Barriers to the green retrofitting of existing residential buildings. Journal of Facilities Management, 22(2), 194-209. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-12-2021-0155
• Ardente, F., Beccali, M., Cellura, M. & Mistretta, M. (2011). Energy and environmental benefits in public buildings as a result of retrofit actions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(1), 460-470. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.022
• Awadh, O. (2017). Sustainability and green building rating systems: LEED, BREEAM, GSAS and Estidama critical analysis. Journal of Building Engineering, 11, 25-29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.03.010
• Balaban, O. & Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2017). Sustainable buildings for healthier cities: Assessing the co-benefits of green buildings in Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, S68-S78. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.086
• Bartlett, E. & Howard, N. (2000). Informing the decision makers on the cost and value of green building. Building Research & Information, 28(5-6), 315-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/096132100418474
• Bertone, E., Stewart, R. A., Sahin, O., Alam, M., Zou, P. X. W., Buntine, C. & Marshall, C. (2018). Guidelines, barriers and strategies for energy and water retrofits of public buildings. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1064-1078. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.065
• BREEAM. (2024). Türkiye'de BREEAM Sertifikalı Yapı Sayısı. Retrieved 11.07.2024 from https://tools.breeam.com/projects/explore/map.jsp
• Bungau, C. C., Bungau, C., Toadere, M. T., Prada-Hanga, I. F., Bungau, T., Popescu, D. E. & Prada, M. F. (2023). Solutions for an ecological and healthy retrofitting of buildings on the campus of the University of Oradea, Romania, built starting from 1911 to 1913. Sustainability, 15(8), 6541. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6541
• Cassidy, R. (2003). White paper on sustainability (Building Design and Construction, Issue. https://archive.epa.gov/greenbu3/greenbuilding/web/pdf/bdcwhitepaperr2.pdf
• Chegut, A., Eichholtz, P. & Kok, N. (2014). Supply, demand and the value of green buildings. Urban Studies, 51(1), 22-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098013484526
• Chegut, A., Eichholtz, P. & Kok, N. (2019). The price of innovation: An analysis of the marginal cost of green buildings. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 98, 102248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2019.07.003
• Cidell, J. & Beata, A. (2009). Spatial variation among green building certification categories: Does place matter? Landscape and Urban Planning, 91(3), 142-151. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.001
• Yeşil Sertifika Bina Değerlendirme Kılavuzu. (2022). 12.06.2022. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=39565&MevzuatTur=7&MevzuatTertip=5
• Darko, A. & Chan, A. P. C. (2016). Critical analysis of green building research trend in construction journals. Habitat International, 57, 53-63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.07.001
• De Luca, P., Carbone, I. & Nagy, J. B. (2017). Green building materials: A review of state of the art studies of innovative materials. Journal of Green Building, 12(4), 141-161. https://doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.12.4.141
• Debrah, C., Chan, A. P. C. & Darko, A. (2022). Artificial intelligence in green building. Automation in Construction, 137, 104192. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104192
• Ding, Z., Fan, Z., Tam, V. W. Y., Bian, Y., Li, S., Illankoon, I. M. C. S. & Moon, S. (2018). Green building evaluation system implementation. Building and Environment, 133, 32-40. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.012
• Doan, D. T., Ghaffarianhoseini, A., Naismith, N., Zhang, T., Ghaffarianhoseini, A. & Tookey, J. (2017). A critical comparison of green building rating systems. Building and Environment, 123, 243-260. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.07.007
• Dwaikat, L. N. & Ali, K. N. (2016). Green buildings cost premium: A review of empirical evidence. Energy and Buildings, 110, 396-403. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.11.021
• Dwaikat, L. N. & Ali, K. N. (2018). The economic benefits of a green building – Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Building Engineering, 18, 448-453. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.04.017
• Ergin, A. & Tekce, I. (2020). Enhancing sustainability benefits through green retrofitting of healthcare buildings. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 960(3), 032066. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/960/3/032066
• ERKE. (2024). Türkiye'de yeşil bina sertifası sahibi bazı kamu binaları. Retrieved 11.07.2024 from https://erketasarim.com/projelerimiz/
• Espinoza, O., Buehlmann, U. & Smith, B. (2012). Forest certification and green building standards: overview and use in the U.S. hardwood industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 33, 30-41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.05.004
• Eze, C. E., Ugulu, R. A., Egwunatum, S. I. & Awodele, I. A. (2020). Green building materials products and service market in the construction ındustry. Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 11, 89 - 101.
• Fan, Y. & Xia, X. (2018). Energy-efficiency building retrofit planning for green building compliance. Building and Environment, 136, 312-321. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.03.044
• Gall, E., Darling, E., Siegel, J. A., Morrison, G. C. & Corsi, R. L. (2013). Evaluation of three common green building materials for ozone removal, and primary and secondary emissions of aldehydes. Atmospheric Environment, 77, 910-918. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.06.014
• Giama, E. & Papadopoulos, A. M. (2016). Construction Materials and Green Building Certification. Key Engineering Materials, 666, 89-96. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.666.89
• Hoang, C. P., Kinney, K. A. & Corsi, R. L. (2009). Ozone removal by green building materials. Building and Environment, 44(8), 1627-1633. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.10.007
• Huo, X., Hao, T. & Jiao, L. (2023). Critical risk factors of public building green retrofit projects- an empirical study in Chongqing, China. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2023.2278886
• Jagarajan, R., Abdullah Mohd Asmoni, M. N., Mohammed, A. H., Jaafar, M. N., Lee Yim Mei, J. & Baba, M. (2017). Green retrofitting – A review of current status, implementations and challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, 1360-1368. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.091
• Kats, G. (2003). Green building costs and financial benefits. Massachusetts technology collaborative Boston, MA.
• Kats, G. (2006). Greening America's schools: Costs and benefits. A Capital E Report. https://usd116.org/files/facilitiesreport/rptgreening.pdf
• Khoshnava, S. M., Rostami, R., Mohamad Zin, R., Štreimikienė, D., Mardani, A. & Ismail, M. (2020). The role of green building materials in reducing environmental and human health ımpacts. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 17(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072589
• Lee, J., McCuskey Shepley, M. & Choi, J. (2019). Exploring the effects of a building retrofit to improve energy performance and sustainability: A case study of Korean public buildings. Journal of Building Engineering, 25, 100822. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100822
• Li, H., Chen, B. & Feng, G. (2017). Investigation and analysis on present situation of existing building green retrofitting in public ınstitution. Procedia Engineering, 205, 3340-3345. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.366
• Liang, X., Shen, G. Q. & Guo, L. (2015). Improving management of green retrofits from a stakeholder perspective: A case study in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(11), 13823-13842. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/12/11/13823
• Liu, G., Li, X., Tan, Y. & Zhang, G. (2020). Building green retrofit in China: Policies, barriers and recommendations. Energy Policy, 139, 111356. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111356
• Mattoni, B., Guattari, C., Evangelisti, L., Bisegna, F., Gori, P. & Asdrubali, F. (2018). Critical review and methodological approach to evaluate the differences among international green building rating tools. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 950-960. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.105
• Mokal, A. B., Shaikh, A. I., Raundal, S. S., Prajapati, S. & Phatak, U. J. (2015). Green building materials – A way towards sustainable construction.
• Newsham, G. R., Veitch, J. A. & Hu, Y. (2018). Effect of green building certification on organizational productivity metrics. Building Research & Information, 46(7), 755-766. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2017.1358032
• Nguyen, B. K. & Altan, H. (2011). Comparative Review of five sustainable rating systems. Procedia Engineering, 21, 376-386. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2029
• Nikyema, G. A. & Blouin, V. Y. (2020). Barriers to the adoption of green building materials and technologies in developing countries: The case of Burkina Faso. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 410(1), 012079. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/410/1/012079
• Nykamp, H. (2017). A transition to green buildings in Norway. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 24, 83-93. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.10.006
• Olanrewaju, O. I., Enegbuma, W. I., Donn, M. & Chileshe, N. (2022). Building information modelling and green building certification systems: A systematic literature review and gap spotting. Sustainable Cities and Society, 81, 103865. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103865
• Pavón, R. M., Alberti, M. G., Álvarez, A. A. A. & del Rosario Chiyón Carrasco, I. (2021). Use of BIM-FM to transform large conventional public buildings into efficient and smart sustainable buildings. Energies, 14(11), 3127. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/11/3127
• Pearlmutter, D., Theochari, D., Nehls, T., Pinho, P., Piro, P., Korolova, A., Papaefthimiou, S., Mateo, M. C. G., Calheiros, C., Zluwa, I., Pitha, U., Schosseler, P., Florentin, Y., Ouannou, S., Gal, E., Aicher, A., Arnold, K., Igondová, E. & Pucher, B. (2019). Enhancing the circular economy with nature-based solutions in the built urban environment: Green building materials, systems and sites. Blue-Green Systems, 2(1), 46-72. https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2019.928
• Qian, Q. K., Chan, E. H. W. & Khalid, A. G. (2015). Challenges in delivering green building projects: Unearthing the transaction costs (TCs). Sustainability, 7(4), 3615-3636. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/4/3615
• Rehm, M. & Ade, R. (2013). Construction costs comparison between ‘green’ and conventional office buildings. Building Research & Information, 41(2), 198-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2013.769145
• Sánchez Cordero, A., Gómez Melgar, S. & Andújar Márquez, J. M. (2020). Green building rating systems and the new framework level(s): A critical review of sustainability certification within Europe. Energies, 13(1), 66. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/1/66
• Sandanayake, M., Gunasekara, C., Law, D., Zhang, G., Setunge, S. & Wanijuru, D. (2020). Sustainable criterion selection framework for green building materials – An optimisation based study of fly-ash Geopolymer concrete. Sustainable Materials and Technologies, 25, e00178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2020.e00178
• Sartori, I. & Hestnes, A. G. (2007). Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: A review article. Energy and Buildings, 39(3), 249-257. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.07.001
• Sharma, N. K. (2020). Sustainable building material for green building construction, conservation and refurbishing. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol, 29(10S), 5343-5350.
• Shehata, N., Mohamed, O. A., Sayed, E. T., Abdelkareem, M. A. & Olabi, A. G. (2022). Geopolymer concrete as green building materials: Recent applications, sustainable development and circular economy potentials. Science of The Total Environment, 836, 155577. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155577
• Si, J., Marjanovic-Halburd, L., Nasiri, F. & Bell, S. (2016). Assessment of building-integrated green technologies: A review and case study on applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27, 106-115. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.013
• Taemthong, W. & Chaisaard, N. (2019). An analysis of green building costs using a minimum cost concept. Journal of Green Building, 14(1), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.14.1.53
• Tan, Y., Liu, G., Zhang, Y., Shuai, C. & Shen, G. Q. (2018). Green retrofit of aged residential buildings in Hong Kong: A preliminary study. Building and Environment, 143, 89-98. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.06.058
• Tatari, O. & Kucukvar, M. (2011). Cost premium prediction of certified green buildings: A neural network approach. Building and Environment, 46(5), 1081-1086. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.11.009
• Theaker, I. G. & Cole, R. J. (2001). The role of local governments in fostering ‘green’ buildings: a case study. Building Research & Information, 29(5), 394-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210110064295
• Uğur, L. O. & Leblebici, N. (2018). An examination of the LEED green building certification system in terms of construction costs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 1476-1483. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.210
• United Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement. Retrieved 18.06.2024 from https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf
• USGBC. (2024). Türkiye'de LEED Sertifikalı Yeşil Yapı Sayısı. Retrieved 11.07.2024 from https://www.usgbc.org/projects?Country=%5B%22Turkey%22%5D
• Zhang, Y., Wang, H., Gao, W., Wang, F., Zhou, N., Kammen, D. M. & Ying, X. (2019). A survey of the status and challenges of green building development in various countries. Sustainability, 11(19), 5385. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/19/5385
• Zuo, J. & Zhao, Z.-Y. (2014). Green building research–current status and future agenda: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 271-281. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021