The document discusses a student project comparing the costs and benefits of constructing a residential green building versus a conventional home. It outlines the project objectives of comparing construction costs, estimated energy and water savings, and the cost increase of building green. The methodology section describes analyzing case studies and market costs. Results found that a green home costs 12-15% more but saves approximately ₹10,000 annually on energy and 440 liters of water per day. The payback period for green upgrades like LED lights is an estimated 35 years. The conclusion recommends green construction for new homes given the long-term savings and environmental benefits outweigh the initial 12.94% higher cost.
The document discusses a student project comparing the costs and benefits of constructing a residential green building versus a conventional home. It outlines the project objectives of comparing construction costs, estimated energy and water savings, and the cost increase of building green. The methodology section describes analyzing case studies and market costs. Results found that a green home costs 12-15% more but saves approximately ₹10,000 annually on energy and 440 liters of water per day. The payback period for green upgrades like LED lights is an estimated 35 years. The conclusion recommends green construction for new homes given the long-term savings and environmental benefits outweigh the initial 12.94% higher cost.
The document discusses a student project comparing the costs and benefits of constructing a residential green building versus a conventional home. It outlines the project objectives of comparing construction costs, estimated energy and water savings, and the cost increase of building green. The methodology section describes analyzing case studies and market costs. Results found that a green home costs 12-15% more but saves approximately ₹10,000 annually on energy and 440 liters of water per day. The payback period for green upgrades like LED lights is an estimated 35 years. The conclusion recommends green construction for new homes given the long-term savings and environmental benefits outweigh the initial 12.94% higher cost.
The document discusses a student project comparing the costs and benefits of constructing a residential green building versus a conventional home. It outlines the project objectives of comparing construction costs, estimated energy and water savings, and the cost increase of building green. The methodology section describes analyzing case studies and market costs. Results found that a green home costs 12-15% more but saves approximately ₹10,000 annually on energy and 440 liters of water per day. The payback period for green upgrades like LED lights is an estimated 35 years. The conclusion recommends green construction for new homes given the long-term savings and environmental benefits outweigh the initial 12.94% higher cost.
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 12
K.L.
E SOCIETY’S K.L.E INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
PROJECT TITLE Residential Green Building under the guidance of Prof D. R. Kulkarni
Team members : AKSHAYKUMAR S HALLYAL 2KE17CV400 VIJAYKUMAR PB 2KE17CV418 MOHAMMADILIYAS R GUDADUR 2KE17CV407 CONTENTS 1.INTRODUCTION 2.LITERATURE SURVEY 3.OBJECTIVES 4.METHODOLOGY 5.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 6.CONCLUSION INTRODUCTION Green Building or Sustainable Architecture is the practice of creating structures in which the resources are used optimally throughout the stage of development of a building. Economy is the major factor in any type of construction work, especially for residential houses and more specifically when they are situated in the megacity in a Developing country like India. There is a need of concentrating on a Green Home, which is one of the most important and one of the most discussed topics throughout the globe, in the age of global warming and climate change worldwide. In this situation, some smart way is necessary to be found out, to encourage the Green Construction. LITERATURE SURVEY Green building construction techniques –P.D.AHER,DR.S.S.PIMPLIKAR
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY(IJERT) VOL 1
Indian green building council (IGBC)
Green rating for integrated habitat assessment (GRIHA)
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED)INDIA
OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT
To compare the cost of construction of a home as a Green
Home & a Conventional Home. To find out energy and water savings in a Green Home over the Conventional home. To find out cost percentage increase while constructing a Green Home instead of a Conventional Home. To find out the middle way to encourage the Green Construction. METHODOLOGY
Case studies site selection
Quantity Estimation
Decision of changes
Market studies
Cost analysis
Comparison Sl. No. Item Conventional Material Green Material
1 Windows and Openings Aluminium Panelled Plain Insulated Glass (IG Units) Glasses 2 Lighting Fixtures Tube Lights & CFLs Low Watt LED Tube Lights & Bulbs 3 Plumbing Fixtures Conventional Fixtures Special Green Fixtures
4 Flooring Vitrified & Glazed Tiles and PVC Flooring, Glazed
China Mosaic Tiles and China Mosaic
5 Doors Pine Wood Engineering Wood
6 Paints Plastic VOC Plastic Non VOC
7 Bricks Clay Bricks Flyash Bricks 8 Cement OPC PPC 9 Installation of Rain Not Provided Provided Water Harvesting System • The following is the list of the items in which the appropriate changes as per the project criteria are made, in the desire of economic Green Home: – • Windows • Lighting Fixtures • Plumbing Fixtures • Flooring • Doors • Paints • Bricks • Cement • Installation of Rain Water Harvesting System RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS • Energy Savings The savings in the energy will be 70% per year, which is near about ` 10,000 per year. The life of the LED fixtures will be more than 17 years (50000/8/365=17.12). Same way the life of the tubelight is about 5 years (15000/8/365=5.14) and that of the CFL is about 2 years (6000/8/365=2.05).
Water savings Water fixtures use per day per person (6 persons): – Basin : 4 Times a day Sink : 4 Times a day Wash Area : 4 Times a day Shower : 2 Times a day W.C. : 1 Times a day Urinals : 3 Times a day Total Water Saved = 74 liter/ day/ person =74*6=444 liter/day Conclusion • If the Home is Constructed as a Green Home in this project, the total cost increases by ` 4,02,130, in addition to the total construction cost of the Conventional home which is found to be ` 31,07,415. 2) • The percentage increase in total construction cost is 12.94% (say, 12 - 15%). 3) The saving in money, which is about `10,000, will be the clear saving after the payback period of LED fixtures is completed. • Water saving is about 444 (say, 440) liter/day. • Payback period, considering savings only in the electricity bills, is found to be 35 years. • So, on the bases of the above figures, it can be concluded that: – “If the intention is to construct a new Home to live in, it is advisable to go for a GREEN HOME rather than the ordinary conventional home. Because, the percentage increase of 12.94% in the total cost is not a negligible amount when the intention is just to renovate or retrofit an Old Home Thank you
