pjh uitm proceeding

8/3/2019 PjH UiTM Proceeding

1/37


2/37


3/37

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and warmest greetings,

I must congratulate the professional personnel of Putrajaya Holdings and Faculty of Architecture,Planning and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) who lead the role in organising a symposiumon Putrajaya: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development. This symposium embarks on thevitality of giving a kick-start to synergise between academia and industrial players; particularly in the eld

of Built Environment. I am proud that UiTM is able to associate with a renowned corporation; PutrajayaHolding in running this symposium and ultimately to drive the Malaysian Governments initiativesin promoting green technology and sustainable built environment. On behalf of UiTM, I am honoured toconvey our deepest gratitude for entrusting us to collaborate in organising this prestigious symposium.

UiTM is a global, unique, and competitive university providing high-quality education and research. Ithas reached a maturity of an institution of higher learning and leadership beyond the boundaries of theuniversity. With these qualities, I can assure that the collaboration is able to synergise excellently byguaranteeing green transformation inputs in catering to the demand from the industrial personnel. As Izoom into the vitality of the green agenda evolvement in the country, it is perceivable that collaborationbetween university and industry is extremely needed to achieve the government aspiration.

Looking ahead, I envision that demand for green technology in Malaysia will grow tremendously asenvironmental awareness grows. The move towards sustainability in the Malaysian built environmentsector is anticipated to usher in a more challenging future environment for existing players of builtenvironment. This would ensure the sector to remain viable amidst a potentially large supply andembrace advanced and greener technologies in the years ahead. A rigorous approach to establish trustand positioning collaboration positively would enable the industry to reap the full benets of our globalisedand high technology environment.

It has been a profound honour to be part of the team in realising the success of the symposium. We hopethat the essences that we share could inject evolution of green-conscious built environment players thatdrive the aspiration of the government towards a sustainable green development.

Thank you.

Dato Prof.Ir Dr Sahol Hamid Abu Bakar, FASc

Vice Chancellor, UniversitiTeknologi MARA (UiTM)

ii


4/37v

Table of Contents

SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DE-VELOPMENT: GREEN DESIGN, ARCHITECTURE,AND MATERIALSAr. Serina Hijjas

Overview 1

SUSTAINABLE GREEN BUILDING AND

INTEGRATED GREEN PROJECT:Green Design and PlanningDato Dr. Kenneth Yeang

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Four Strands of Eco-infrastructures2.1 The Green Eco-infrastructure2.2 The Grey Eco-infrastructure2.3 The Blue Eco-infrastructure2.4 The Red (or Human) Eco-infrastructure3.0 Seamless & Benign Biointegration4.0 Ecomimesis5.0 Ecodesign as Restoring Impaired Environments6.0 Ecodesign as a Self-monitoring System7.0 Conclusion8.0 References

2

3

4

56

7

GREEN CONSTRUCTION AND INNOVATION:METHOD, TECHNIQUES, AND RESOURCESPoul Erik Kristensen

Overview 8

CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY ANDINVESTMENT ON GREEN DEVELOPMENTProfessor Charles Egbu

1.0 Introduction2.0 Drivers, Challenges and Corporate Sustainability and

Green Developments3.0 Investment in Green Developments4.0 A 12 - Point Strategic Framework for Effective

Consideration and Implementation of CorporateSustainability and Investment on Green Development

4. Conclusions and Recommendations5.0 References

910

1112

1314

GREEN INITIATIVES VENTURE OF INTEGRATEDGREEN DEVELOPMENT PROJECTMariati Bagdad1, Assoc Professor Sr. Dr. MohammadFadhil Mohammad1 and Ungku Nur Sabrina UngkuAbdul Nassir1

1.0 Introduction2.0 The Green Initiatives Development in Malaysia - The

Economical Value and Its Potential3.0 The Green Building Index pilot project- Case study on

Green Energy Ofce3.1 GBI Certication Guarantees Government Incentives3.2 GBI certied of GEO Building- EE and RE Integrated

Value, Economical Value, and Potentials4.0 Energy Efciency and Energy Conservation building-

Case study on Low Energy Ofce4.1 LEO building- EE Economical Value and Potentials5.0 Clean Development Mechanism- Case study on

Malaysian Carbon Credit Trading5.1 Carbon Credit on CDM Energy Business-economical

Value and Potentials6.0 Feed-In tariff- Malaysia Review7.0 The Conceptual Venture of Integrated Green

Development Project7.1 The Building Composition, Projects Economical Value,

and Projects Feasible outcome8.0 Conclusion9.0 Acknowledgements10.0 References

1516

18

19

20

21

22

FACILITY MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTIONIN GREEN BUILDING INITIATIVESMohammad Shahrizal Mohammad Idris

1.0 Introduction2.0 Evolution of FM in Malaysia3.0 Sustainable Facility Management4.0 Relationship between FM and Green Building

5.0 Critical Success Factor6.0 The Author7.0 References

25262730

31

32


5/371

PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable Development


PjH-UiTM Collaboration 2011Novemeber 15, 2011, Putrajaya W.P., Malaysia

SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTUREAND URBAN DEVELOPMENT:

GREEN DESIGN, ARCHITECTUREAND MATERIALS

Overview

A strong emphasis of sustainable by planning and design upon improving the sustainability ofthe built environment. This aspect is crucial to grow the public awareness and the understanding ofthe importance of sustainable development practices; through, green design concept, materialaspects (types, cost, and availability), thus green architecture composition in an urban development

which is expected to enhance the quality of life for today and future generation.

The aim of the paper is to discover fresh and holistic approaches to designing the sustainablebuilt environment addressing building and the entire spatial environment. New ideas along with theregulatory practices, indicators, measurements, and priorities are signicant to be viewed from theindividual buildings to the district and city-scale level.

Ar. Serina HijjasHijjas Kasturi Associates Sdn Bhd,

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia(E-mail: [email protected])


6/372


PUTRAJAYA: Experiential Learning for Sustainable DevelopmentPjH-UiTM Collaboration 2011

Novemeber 15, 2011, Putrajaya W.P., Malaysia

SUSTAINABLE GREEN BUILDINGAND INTEGRATED GREEN PROJECT:

Green Design and PlanningAbstract

KeywordsSustainability, Green, Design, Planning.

1.0 Introduction

We would be mistaken to regard green design as simply just about eco-engineering. These engineeringsystems are indeed an important part of green design (see grey eco- infrastructure below) giving usan acceptable level of comfort that are sustainable, while such technologies continue to rapidly developand advance towards a greener and cleaner engineering solutions for our built environment. Howeverit must be clear that eco-engineering is not exclusively the only considerations in green design.

Neither is green design just about the rating systems (such as LEED, BREEAM, Carbon proling, etc.).These are certainly useful checklists and guidelines but are not comprehensive. They are useful as a partial

tick list of reminders of some of the key items to consider in green design or for comparing buildings andmaster plans using a common standard. They have also been useful in proselytizing green design to awider audience. But by not being comprehensive and ecologically holistic (an aspect crucial in eco-design),many designers having achieved the highest level of rating (such as platinum) would ask what next?Where do we go from here?

We are all only too aware of the numerous pressing global social issues that need to be addressed.

These include issues such as addressing abject poverty, providing clean water, adequate food and

enclosures, proper sanitation, and so forth. But ultimately if we do not have clean environment such as

clean air, clean water, and clean land, all those other pressing global social issues become even more

difcult and costly to resolve. Thus saving our environment has to be the most vital issue that human-

kind must address today, feeding into our fears that this millennium may be our last. For the designer,

the compelling question is: how do we design for a sustainable future? Globally, businesses andindustries face similar concerns of seeking to understand the environmental consequences of their

functions and processes, to envision what these might be if they were sustainable, and to take action to

realize this vision with comprehensive ecologically-benign strategies, with new business models, new

production systems, materials and processes. More than these, our human society has to change to a

sustainable way of life, we need to change how we live, behave, work, make, eat, learn, move about.

Dato Dr. Kenneth YeangTR Hamzah & Yeang Sdn Bhd, Ampang,

Selangor, Malaysia(E-mail: [email protected])


7/373


Clearly, green design has now entered the mainstream of architecture. Ask any architect today aboutgreen design and you will nd the same pitch use of renewable energy systems (such as photovoltaics,wind generators, etc.), compliance to accreditation systems, carbon proling, planning as new urbanism,etc. We need to question whether this is all there is to green design?

The contention here is that achieving effective green design is much more than the above and that greendesign is not as easy as it had been contended. It is complex. Whi le still incomplete, there are anumber of design strategies that can be adopted in combination to arrive as close as we could to the goal

of achieving a state of stasis of our built environment with the natural environment.

2.0 Four Strands of Eco-infrastructures

The rst design strategy is to view green design in terms of weaving of four strands of eco-infrastructures,colour coded here as follows:

The grey (the engineering infrastructure being the eco sustainable clean tech engineering systems

and utilities).

The blue (water management and closing of the water cycle by design with sustainable drainage).

The green (the green eco-infrastructure or natures own utilities which must be linked). The red (our human built systems, spaces, hard capes, society, legislative and regulatory systems).

Green design is the seamless and the benign blending of all these four sets of eco-infrastructures into asystem. This concept provides a platform for green design. Like the factors in DNA (by Crick and Watson)which reduces a complex concept into fours simple sets of instructions, these four sets of eco-infrastructuresand their integration provide the integrative bases for green design and planning - the blending of all thesefour sets of infrastructures into a system.

2.1 The Green Eco-infrastructure

The green eco-infrastructure is vital to every design and master plan. It parallels the usual grey urbaninfrastructure of roads, drainage systems and utilities. This green eco- infrastructure is natures utilities.These is the interconnected network of natural areas and other open green spaces within the biome thatconserves natural ecosystem values and clean air and water. It also enables the area to ourish as a naturalhabitat for a wide range of wildlife besides delivering a wide array of benets to humans and the naturalworld alike, such as providing habitats linked across the landscape that permits fauna (such as birds andanimals) to move freely. This eco-infrastructure is natures functioning infrastructure (equivalent to ourhuman-made engineering infrastructures, designated here as grey, blue and red eco-infrastructures), andin addition to providing cleaner water and enhancing water supplies, it can also result in some, if not all,of the following outcomes: cleaner air; a reduction in heat-island effect in urban areas; a moderation inthe impact of climate change; increased energy efciency; and the protection of source water.

Incorporating an eco-infrastructure is thus vital to any eco-master planning endeavour. Without it, no matterhow clever or advanced are the eco-engineering systems, the design or master plan remains simply awork of engineering, and can in no way be called an ecological master plan nor neither in the case oflarger developments, an eco-city.

These linear-ora and fauna corridors connect existing green spaces and larger green areas within thelocality and to the landscape of the hinterland, and can create new larger habitats in their own right, ormay be in the form of newly linked existing woodland belts or wetlands, or existing landscape features(such as overgrown railway lines, hedges and waterways). Any new green infrastructure must clearlyalso complement and enhance the natural functions of what is already there in the landscape.

In the master planning process, the designer identies existing green corridors, routes and green areas,and possible new routes and linkages for creating new connections in the landscape. It is at this pointthat additional green functional landscape elements or zones can also be integrated, such as linking toexisting waterways that also provide ecological services, such as drainage to attenuate ooding.


8/374


This eco-infrastructure takes precedence over the engineering eco-infrastructure in the master plan.By creating, improving and rehabilitating ecological connectivity of the immediate environment,the eco-infrastructure turns human intervention in the landscape from a negative into a positive. Its en-vironmental benets and values are as a green armature and framework for natural systems andfunctions that are ecologically fundamental to the viability of the localitys plant and animal species andtheir habitats, such as healthy soils, water and air. It reverses the fragmentation of natural habitats (as aconsequence of urban sprawl and transportation routes, etc.) and encourages increases in biodiversityto restore functioning ecosystems while providing the fabric for sustainable living, and safeguarding and

enhancing natural features.

This endeavour by design to connect the landscape must extend to the built form is both horizontallyand a vertically. An obvious demonstration of horizontal connectivity is the provision of ecologicalcorridors and links in regional and local planning that are crucial for making urban patterns more biologicallyviable. Connectivity over impervious surfaces and roads can be achieved by using ecological bridges,under crofts and ramps. Besides improved horizontal connectivity and ecological nexus, vertical connectivitywith buildings is also necessary since most buildings are not single storey but multi-storey. Design mustextend the ecological corridors vertically upwards, with the eco-infrastructure traversing a building from thefoundations and landscape at the ground to create habitats on the walls, terraces and rooftops.

2.2 The Grey Eco-infrastructure

The grey infrastructure is the usual urban engineering infrastructure such as roads, drains, sewerage,water reticulation, telecommunications, and energy and electric power distribution systems. We need notto be prescriptive of any specic engineering system, but require that these systems be clean technologies,of low embodied energy and be carbon neutral inasmuch as possible, and at the same time be integralwith the green infrastructure rather than vice-versa.

2.3 The Blue Eco-infrastructure

Parallel to the ecological infrastructure is the water infrastructure (the blue eco-infrastructure) where thewater cycle should be managed to close the loop, although not always possible in locations with low rainfall.Rainfall needs to be harvested and water use to be recycled. The surface water from rain needs to beretained within the site and to be returned back to the land for the recharging of groundwater andaquifers by means of ltration beds, pervious roadways and built surfaces, retention ponds and bioswales. Water used within the built environment (both grey and black water) need to be reused sustainablyinasmuch as possible.

Site planning must take into consideration the sites natural drainage patterns and provide surface-watermanagement such that rainfall remains within the locality and is not drained away into water bodies whichis then lost. Combined with the green eco-infrastructure, storm water management enables the natural

processes to inltrate, evapotranspire, or the capture and use storm water on or near the site where itfalls while potentially generating other environmental benets.

Waterways should not be culverted or deculverted as engineered waterways, but should be replacedwith the introduction of wetlands and buffer strips of ecologically functional meadows and woodlandhabitats. Sealed surfaces can reduce soil moisture and leave low- lying areas susceptible to oodingfrom excessive run-off. Wetland greenways need to be designed as sustainable drainage systems toprovide ecological services. Green buffers can be used together with linear green spaces to maximizetheir habitat potential.

Eco-design must create sustainable urban drainage systems that can function as wetland habitats.

This is not only to alleviate ooding, but also to create buffer strips for habitat creation. While the widthsof the buffer may be constrained by existing land uses, their integration through linear green spaces canallow for wider corridors. Surface-water management maximises habitat potential. Intermittent waterwaytributaries can be linked up using swales.


9/375


2.4The Red (or Human) Eco-infrastructure

This human eco-infrastructure is our human community, its built enclosures (buildings, houses etc),hard scapes and regulatory systems (laws, regulations, legislation, ethics etc). This is the social andhuman dimension that is often missing in the work of many green designers. It is evidently clear that ourpresent proigate lifestyles, our economies and industries, our mobility, our diet and food production, etc.,need to be changed to be sustainable.

3.0 Seamless & Benign Biointegration

The second design strategy is to regard green design as Biointegration - as the seamless andbenign environmental Biointegration of the synthetic and the articial (the human made) with the naturalenvironment. It is the failure to successfully biointegrate that is the root cause of all our environmentalproblems. In effect if we are able to biointegrate all our business and industrial processes and functions,all our built systems and essentially everything that we do or make in our built environment (which bydenition includes our buildings, facilities, infrastructure, products, refrigerators, toys, etc.) with the naturalenvironment in a seamless and benign way, there will in principle be no environmental problemswhatsoever. Successfully achieving this is of course easier said than done, but herein lies our challenge.

We can draw an analogy here between eco-design and prosthetic design in surgery. A medical prosthetichas to integrate with its organic host being the human body. Failure to integrate successfully results indislocation in one or in both. By analogy, this is what ecodesign should achieve: a total physical, systemicand temporal integration of our human- made built environment and our activities with our organic hostbeing the natural environment within in a benign and positive way. Eco-design is thus design that successfullybiointegrates our articial systems both mechanically and organically, with its host system being the eco-systems in the biosphere.

Our designing for bio-integration can be regarded at three aspects: physically, systemically and temporally.Physical and systemic integration requires a discernment of the ecology of the locality. Any activityarising from our design or our business/industries must physically integrate benignly with the ecosystems.To achieve this, we must rst understand the localitys ecosystem before imposing any human activity orbuilt system upon it. Every site has ecology with a limiting capacity to withstand stresses imposed upon it,which if stressed beyond this capacity, becomes irrevocably damaged. Consequences can range fromminimal localised impact (such as the clearing of a small land area for access), to the total devastation ofthe entire land area (such as the clearing of all trees and vegetation, levelling the topography, diversionof existing waterways, etc).

We need to ascertain the localitys ecosystem structure, energy ow, its species diversity and other ecologicalproperties and processes. Then we must identify which parts of the site (if any) can permit different typesof structures and activities, and which parts are particularly sensitive. Finally, we must consider thelikely impacts of the intended construction and use over time.

This is of course a major undertaking. It needs to be done diurnally over the year and in some instancesover several years. To reduce this lengthy effort, landscape architects developed the sieve-mappingtechnique for landscaping mapping. We must be aware that this method is an abbreviated approach, andgenerally treats the sites ecosystem statically and may ignore the dynamic forces taking place betweenthe layers and within an ecosystem. Between each of these layers are complex interactions.

Another major design issue is the systemic integration of our built forms and its operational systems andinternal processes with the ecosystems in nature. This integration is crucial because if our built systemsand processes do not integrate with the natural systems in nature, then they will remain disparate, articialitems and potentially pollutive and destructive to the ecology of the locality. Their eventual integration

after their manufacture and use can only be through biodegradation. Often, this requires a long-termnatural process of decomposition.


10/376


Temporal integration involves the conservation of both renewable and non-renewable resources toensure that these are sustainable for future generations. This includes designing for low energy builtsystems that are less or are non dependant on the use of non-renewable energy resources.

4.0 Ecomimesis

The third design strategy is to regard green design as ecomimesis as imitating the attribute and properties

of ecosystems their processes, structure, features and functions. This is one of the fundamental premisesfor eco-design. Our built environment must imitate ecosystems in all respects e.g. recycling, using energyfrom the sun through photosynthesis, become systems that head towards increasing energy efciency,achieve a holistic balance of biotic and abiotic constituents, etc.

Nature without humans exists in stasis. Can our businesses and our built environment imitate naturesprocesses, structure, and functions, particularly its ecosystems? For instance, ecosystems have nowaste. Everything is recycled within. Thus by imitating this, our built environment will produce nowaste. All emissions and products are continuously reused, recycled within and eventually reintegratedwith the natural environment, in tandem with efcient uses of energy and material resources.

Ecosystems in a biosphere are denable units containing both biotic and abiotic constituents actingtogether as a whole. From this concept, our businesses/industries and built environment should be designedanalogously to the ecosystems physical content, composition and processes. For instance, besidesregarding our architecture as just art objects or as engineering-serviced enclosures, we should regard itas artefacts that need to be operationally and eventually integrated with nature.As is self-evident, the material composition of our built environment is almost entirely inorganic, whereasecosystems contain a complement of both biotic and abiotic constituents, or of inorganic and organiccomponents, which need to be reversed.

Our myriad of construction, manufacturing and other activities are, in effect, making the biosphere moreand more inorganic, articial and increasingly biologically simplied. To continue without balancing thebiotic content means simply adding to the biospheres articiality, thereby making it increasingly more andmore inorganic and synthetic. This results in the biological simplication of the biosphere and the reductionof its complexity and diversity. We must reverse this trend and balance our built environment with greaterintegral levels of biomass, ameliorating biodiversity and ecological connectivity in the built forms.

Ecodesign also requires the designer to use green materials and assemblies of materials, and componentsthat facilitate reuse, recycling and reintegration for temporal integration with the ecological systems. Weneed to be ecomimetic in our use of materials in the built environment. In ecosystems, all living organismsfeed on continual ows of matter and energy from their environment to stay alive, and all living organismscontinually produce outputs. Here, an ecosystem generates no waste, one species waste being anotherspecies food. Thus matter cycles continually through the web of life. It is this closing of the loop in reuse

and recycling that our human-made environment must imitate.

5.0 Ecodesign as Restoring Impaired Environments

Fourthly, ecodesign can be regarded not only as the creating of new articial living urban ecosystemsor rehabilitating existing built environments and cities, but also as one of restoring existent impairedand devastated ecosystems regionally within the wider landscape to our designed system. Ecodesignmust look beyond the limitations of the project site, and at the larger context of the locality. Where neededwe should improve the ecological linkages between our designed systems and our business processeswith the surrounding landscape and hardscapes, not just horizontally but also vertically.

Achieving these linkages ensures a wider level of species connectivity, interaction, mobility and greatersharing of resources across boundaries. Such real improvements in ecological nexus enhance biodiversityand further increase habitat resilience and species survival. Providing new ecological corridors andlinkages in regional planning is crucial in making urban patterns more biologically viable.


11/377


Crucially we need to apply these concepts to retrot our existent cites and urban developments. We mustbiointegrate the existent inorganic aspects of our built environment and its processes with the landscapeso that they mutually become ecosystemic. We must create human-made ecosystems compatible withthe ecosystems in nature. By doing so, we enhance human-made ecosystems abilities to sustain lifein the biosphere.

6.0 Ecodesign as a Self-monitoring System

The fth strategy for ecodesign is to regard our designed system as a series of interdependent environmentalinteractions, whose constant global and local monitoring (e.g. through GPS and biosensors, etc.) isnecessary to ensure global environmental stasis, enabling an anticipatory approach to and the immediaterepair and restoration of environmental devastations by humans, natural disasters and the inadvertentnegative impacts of our human built environment, activities and industries. These sets of environmentalinteractions need to be monitored for appropriate corrective action to be immediately taken to maintainglobal ecological stability.

7.0 Conclusion

The above are strategies that can be adopted singularly or in composite to approach green design. Greendesign has to goes beyond conventional rating systems such as LEED or BREEAM, etc. While beingindeed useful indexes for providing a common basis for comparing the greenness of building designs,they are however not totally effective design tools. They are not comprehensive enough in approachingthe issues of environmental design at the local, regional and global levels.Generally stated, ecological design is still very much in its infancy. The totally green building or greenecocity does not yet exist. There is still much more theoretical work, technical research and invention,environmental studies and design interpretation that need to be done and tested before we can have atruly green built environment. We all need to continue this great pursuit.

8.0 References

Yeang K. 2009, EcoMasterplanning: Ken Yeang, John Wiley & Sons (UK).

Yeang K. 2009, Eco Skyscrapers, Images Publishing Group (Australia).

Yeang K. 2006, EcoDesign: A Manual for Ecological Design, John Wiley & Sons (UK).

Ken Yeang, DMPN, PhD (Cantab.), AA Dipl., D.Lit. (Hon.), FRSA, APAM, FSIA, RIBA,

ARAIA, Hon. FAIA, Hon. FRIAS, Chairman of Llewelyn Davies Yeang (UK) and

its sister company, T. R. Hamzah & Yeang (Malaysia), Distinguished Plym Professor

University of Illinois, Adjunct Professor at the University of Malaya, University of Hawaii at Manoa,

University of Tongji (Shanghai).


12/378




GREEN CONSTRUCTIONAND INNOVATION: METHOD,

TECHNIQUES AND RESOURCESOverview

The ideal green project and integrated green elements is focusing on energy sustainability. Somehow orrather, this would preserve the public decision to build a green building as well as opt for green features inorder to maximize the green potential, minimize redesign, and assure the overall success and economicviability of the green elements of the building project.

The aim of the paper, nevertheless, is to propose various green choices that the stakeholders could afford

to decide on; which is consequently potential to be integrated to the built environment. Further, theseIntegrated Green Developments must be holistically planned and designed following the Green BuildingStandard practices but with adaptation to the Socio-Economic Conditions.

Poul Erik KristensenIEN Consultants Sdn. Bhd, Bangsar,

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia(E-mail: poul @ ien.com.my)


13/379




CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITYAND INVESTMENT ON

GREEN DEVELOPMENTAbstract

Keywords

Carbon Emission Reduction, Corporate Sustainability, Green Development and Investment

In this second decade of the twenty-rst century, key stakeholders in the marketplace are

demanding that organisations demonstrate their ability to improve corporate processes and day-

by-day operations, be socially responsible, environmentally sustainable and economically

viable. This implies that if organisations want to obtain their stakeholders trust and build a good

reputation in the market place, organisations would need to provide concrete evidence that they

are committed to continual long-term improvement; identifying, monitoring, and reporting all

social, environmental, and economic effects of their operations. Reporting on sustainability-relatedinitiatives and their performances should be seen as an integral part of business operations of

most organisations. The level of implementation of corporate sustainability-related activities and

performance reporting in the annual sustainability-related reports, however, is still in its infancy.

However, some organisations are making reasonable efforts to disclose information about their

sustainability-related activities and performance in their published annual sustainability- related

reports. This includes reporting on employee well-being activities and performance, waste reduction

activities and performance, resources efciency activities and performance, corporate social

responsibility activities and performance. Reporting on carbon emissions reduction activities and

performance still appears the least reported initiative. This paper argues that the practice of

corporate sustainability is not easy, but it is here to stay, and it provides an opportunity

for organisational innovations and competitive advantage. The paper posits a strategic frameworkfor considering effective corporate sustainability and investment on green development.

Corporate sustainability should not be seen as a capital outlay but an investment. It should also

be seen as a long-term investment demanding a holistic approach in its consideration and

implementation. There is ample scope for organisational improvements in strategic and

operational consideration of corporate sustainability as well as in investment in this regard.

Professor Charles EgbuSchool of the Built Environment,

University of Salford, England, UK(E-mail:[email protected])


14/3710


1.0 Introduction

Few would argue that todays business environments in which organisations operate are different fromthose of ten or twenty years ago. These are partly due to the need to meet increased demands andexpectations of stakeholders; protecting degradation of natural resources; working within the connesof a knowledge economy; managing crisis and remediation while defending the organisation; and diminishingsocial and community structures. These are very complex issues, involving numerous processescarried out and inuenced by many stakeholders; and they colour and guide corporate level decisions.

They are also formidable environmental, economic and social issues that have evolved over time andwhich need urgent attention. While these raise real challenges to organisations, they also provide someopportunities. From a business perspective, sustainability could be seen as an opportunity for creatinglongterm shareholder value by seizing opportunities and managing risks related to the economic,environmental, and social impact of doing business. The World Commission on Environment andDevelopment has dened sustainability as economic development that meets the needs of the presentgeneration without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland,1987). However, this macroeconomic denition, arguably, does not provide much guidance on how thisconcept should be put into operation at a corporate level; and managers still question how to implement astrategy to encourage corporate sustainability when there are many competing organisational constraintsand numerous barriers to implement.

There have been many initiatives put in place, at international, national and local levels in many countries withregard to sustainability. These include the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Changetalks in Cancun, Mexico in 2010, where major efforts were made to win progress on internationalagreements necessary for further adoption of sustainability practices. The 17th conference of parties(COP 17) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is planned to be held inDurban, South Africa, between 28th November and 9th December 2011.

Sustainability has signicant implications for all businesses. In particularly, it necessitates a decisionmaking process that balances the impacts associated with environmental, social and economic issues.In order for this to occur, however, the principles of sustainability must be incorporated into existing corporatestrategy and management systems, rather than being seen as just another addon. For it to bemeaningful, sustainability must therefore be viewed as an essential business value that requires fullintegration into core business strategies. Although there is no one best theory, best acclaimed or denitiveapproach as to how organisations can integrate sustainability issues and imperatives into their overallorganisational structure, it is nonetheless important that sustainability issues need to be linked to thecontinual improvement of business performance and in line with the vagaries of organisationalcharacteristics, strategic intent and trajectory and pathways.

2.0 Drivers, Challenges and Corporate Sustainability and Green Developments

Green development has been receiving increased attention for many years now, especially in the last two

decades. Many reasons can be proffered for this, such as the rising oil prices, legislation and regulations,and phenomenon like global warming seen to be affecting us. There is, however, a denitional issue hereas well an issue of scope with regard to green development.

The denition of green is quite wide, and covers such issues as sustainability, environment, energy,and waste minimization to mention but a few. With initiatives like the Kyoto Protocol, ISO 14000 andcarbon credit system the adaptation of the green philosophy is being regulated and incentivised. Arifet al (2009) have argued that the major drivers behind the adoption of green are regulations, cost savingsthrough reduction in energy costs and waste minimization, promotion of corporate green image andcorporate social responsibility. Although the issue of green is in the fore, regulatory bodies, privatecorporations, government agencies and nal consumers view green from different perspectives and use

different sets of variables to choose the path of going green.

To improve sustainability performance, executives have recognised that it is necessary to better understandthe drivers of both costs and revenues and the actions that they can take to affect them. The identicationand measurement of social and environmental strategies are; however, particularly difcult as they are


15/3711


usually linked to longterm time horizons, a high level of uncertainty, and impacts that are often difcultto quantify. Nonetheless, it is important for businesses to understand the reasons why they need to adoptthe sustainability initiatives. Firstly, this understanding could help business leaders to identify theresulting sustainabilityrelated drivers in their industry and organisations. Secondly, this understandingcould act as a muchneeded catalyst for stimulating internal discussions and debate about sustainabilitythreats and opportunities in the market place and in the society. Thirdly, this understanding could assistdecision makers to develop sustainability strategy based on the drivers. Fourthly, this understandingcould expose the mechanisms that foster sustainable organisations, allowing managers and decision

makers to determine the relative efcacy of actions, market and measures.

In this paper, a broader denition of green development is considered, and not limited only to practicesand techniques that are environmentally friendly, energy efcient and minimisation of waste. A thoroughreview of extant literature reveals articles addressing related areas of green developments, includingOfori (1998, 2000), Revell and Blackburn (2007), and Pasquire (1999) that have presented a range of successfactors that can help make construction industry environmentally friendly such as: imposition of stricterregulations, establishment of longer customer-supplier relationship; increased awareness of environmental,social and economic impact; implementation of environmental management system; support and pushfrom top management; implementation of ISO14000 certications; regular audits on green environmentalstandards; customers willingness to pay extra for green construction and engagement by government

bodies during the formulation of the regulations. Arif et al (2009) and Potbhare (2009) have also notedthat there are other writers who have proffered suggestions for waste minimisation, an important aspectof green development. These include Dainty and Brooke (2004), and Sarkis (1998). Suggestions forimproved waste minimisation include standardization of design; stock control to minimize over-ordering;environmental education for the workforce; having recycling and waste disposal companies as part ofthe supply chain; practicing just-in-time delivery approaches; penalties for poor waste management;incentives and tender premiums for waste minimisation; waste auditing; increased use of off-site techniques;use of on-site compactors; suppliers required to provide materials and products in small batch sizes;and reverse logistics. In the same vein, Bartlett and Howard (2000), Tiwari (2001), Sarkis (1998), andUnruh (2008) have highlighted issues and practices associated with addressing energy efciency,especially with respect to the construction and building projects and developments. These are: setting upenergy saving objectives at operational levels; consideration of energy objectives at the strategic planninglevel; value management of energy plans; lifecycle costing accuracy; improved education/awareness ofdesigners about energy efcient materials and techniques; use of cost and environmental assessmenttools; and investigation about energy producing opportunities in construction development projects.

Dealing with corporate sustainability is not easy and not without its challenge. Industry barriers andchallenges to corporate sustainability are worthy of consideration, which reect the special and uniquefeatures of the business activity in which organisations engage. Industry barriers include technicalinformation and knowledge, capital costs, conguration of current operations, competitive pressures andindustry regulations. Industry barriers represent a rst wave of obstacles for organisations to overcome inimproving sustainability performance. Organisations in the chemical, electric utility, construction, steel,mining and pulp and paper industries face the toughest challenges in overhauling operations to promote

sustainability (Post and Altman, 1994). Translating a sustainability strategy into action and driving itthrough a complex organisation is a substantial challenge. Without appropriate organisational structureand management systems, organisations may not reap all the benets associated with sustainabilityperformance. The alignments of strategy, structure, and management systems are essential fororganisations to both coordinate activities and motivate employees toward implementing a sustainabilitystrategy. The organisational structure around sustainability issues is critical to success and entailsorganising a wide range of activities and resources often spread throughout many locations. Organisationsmust consider whether key resources and activities should be centralised or decentralised, and decideupon a level of central control versus business unit autonomy. These decisions must be appropriatelyaligned with organisational culture. It is difcult to achieve maximum sustainability performance unlessmanagement sends a clear message that sustainability performance is critical to the company. If

employee performance is evaluated based solely on short-term prot or revenue contributions, employeesquickly recognize that trade-offs on the social and environmental issues are acceptable and desired changesin corporate culture become more difcult (Epstein and Roy, 2001).


16/3712


3.0 Investment in Green Developments

As discussed previously, green developments and initiatives are now being given increased attentionby nations and corporate institutions, and these take different formats and approaches. Many countriesare also increasingly developing initiatives for a low carbon economy. The need for investment in greendevelopments is important and complex. Green growth, for many, could be seen as an important mechanism forpromoting economic growth while reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, minimising wasteand inefcient use of natural resources, and maintaining biodiversity. It could equally be interpreted to

mean the improvement of health and welfare prospects for communities and strengthening energy securitythrough less dependence on imported fossil fuels. Green growth will, undoubtedly, necessitate a paradigmshift in both public and private investments.

In addition, given the current world-wide nancial challenges and limited public funds, there is needfor appropriate policy frameworks to help leverage private nancing for green developments and initiatives.As an example, in the UK, the current coalition government is creating the UK Green Investment Bank,which will begin operating in April 2012. Most countries have a development bank, but the UK will be therst country to have a national bank dedicated to the green economy. Some of the banks early targetswould be offshore wind, waste and non-domestic energy efciency. It is anticipated that this will givebusinesses the reassurance they are looking for to invest in British renewable energy jobs and industries.

The green investment bank could be used to cut energy waste from homes and in so doing, help to tacklefuel poverty and climate-changing emissions.

It is generally well documented that in many western economies, the recent nancial crisis and turmoil inthe credit markets, mean that many commercial lenders who are active in the renewable energy sectorare now seemingly unwilling to be forth coming or take the lead in major nancings. There is, however, need forcountries, including the Malaysian Government and corporate institutions to increasingly invest and nancegreen services, products and technologies. In Malaysia, for example, there is need for increased andimproved access to nance for businesses providing clean energy and climate resilient technologies. Thereare benets for Malaysia to continuously move to a cleaner energy economy, reduce dependency on fossilfuels and biomass. Similarly, a move towards improved preservation and conservation of land healthand benecial impacts of renewable energy development on wild life and habitats is welcome. In terms ofnancial investment, there is ample role for commercial banks and micronance institutions to increaselending to households and rural small and medium enterprises in Malaysia.

Governments should encourage procurement practices, including public private initiatives where theseare appropriate, in the access and delivery of green investment. These could have wide and positiveramications. They could offer advantages to bidders, supplies and contractors embracing green initiativeswhen developing a green projects; offer best value for money through lower running costs; improvedadoption of green outputs which can help in stimulating and accelerating the take-up and adoption ofgreen services, products and technologies. There is also increased role for private equity, venture capitaland public markets in the nancing of green developments, especially renewable energy programmes.Private equity funds could increasingly participate in the renewable energy market by taking an equity

stake in, or buying out, promising renewable energy project developers or equipment manufacturers.Again, while it is the case that venture capital investors do not generally play a role in nancing theconstruction of renewable energy assets, venture investors could fund promising renewable energytechnologies in the initial stages of the commercialization process. In the same vein, public markets couldincreasingly offer indirect nancing to renewable energy projects by channelling capital to renewableenergy technology manufacturers and project developers. Although investments in research and development(R&D) by organisations in many industrial sectors are low, there is need for organisations to do better ininvesting in corporate sustainability initiatives.

4.0 A 12 - Point Strategic Framework for Effective Consideration and Implementation of Corporate

Sustainability and Investment on Green Development

The importance of sustainability for organisations and the challenges associated with its implementationmeans that organisations would have to give due consideration to this important and growing dimensionof organisational life. There is also an urgent need to develop an appropriate strategic framework which


17/3713


should allow organisations to consider and implement corporate sustainability in a holistic manner. A12-point strategic framework is provided below, which when considered appropriately could be of help toorganisations. These are not documented in any order of importance or sequence to be followed. Theirrelative importance is likely to vary from organisation to organisation and in accordance with the maturitylevel of an organisation.

1. Link corporate sustainability strategy to wider organisational strategy

2. Develop appropriate organisational cultures and climate that are rife for corporate sustainability

3. Conduct a corporate sustainability mapping exercise with risk management at its heart

identifying gaps, strengths and weaknesses

4. Set clear and ambitious corporate sustainability targets and commit to this through

demonstrable actions

5. Institute an organisational performance measurement regime of corporate sustainability

6. Obtain buy-in from organisational staff, draw on customer capital, and fully engage with

stakeholders in the area of corporate sustainability

7. Develop expertise, core and dynamic capabilities; draw on lessons learned on corporate responsibility

initiatives (processes, products, services and technologies) and exploit innovations in this regard.

8. Develop effective communication plans (for internal organisational and external audiences)

around corporate sustainability.

9. Explore and exploit wider initiatives that benet corporate sustainability

10. Invest (nance, time and human capital) in corporate sustainability, including in

research and development (R&D)

11. Corporate sustainability initiative(s) could be done singly, more than one project at a time, serially or

in parallel. But it needs to be carried out within the framework of organisational capability, resources,

within accepted organisational pace and trajectory.

12. Report on corporate sustainability outcomes regularly, comprehensively and fairly; including

reporting on corporate sustainability performance

While a strategic framework is important in addressing corporate strategy, it is equally important thatorganisations are minded about the requisite resources (capabilities and capacities) at their disposalin effecting appropriate strategies. At the same time, there is a need for effective business cases to bemade for corporate sustainability and green development initiatives.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

There is an increased level of attention and importance attached to corporate sustainability and greendevelopments. Corporate sustainability is diverse and complex. It is about a proper balance being createdbetween economic, social and ecological aims. Effectively managing sustainability could lead to the

creation of new ways of working, new products, services, and new market space. Pursuing such anapproach can offer organisations signicant potential benets, including the identication of new and untappedbusiness opportunities, a greater focus on longer-term emerging customer needs, migration into businessareas that, by denition, have greater longevity, and the ability to create a genuine win-win situationfor both business and society. Corporate sustainability, therefore, provides an opportunity for organisationalinnovations. Organisations face real challenges in addressing the complex issues associated withcorporate sustainability. Corporate sustainability should be seen as a long-term investment. A holisticapproach is also needed in addressing corporate sustainability. A strategic framework is called for as partof a holistic approach. This calls, inter alia, for nancial investment and organisational commitment. Astrategy for corporate sustainability needs to be aligned to the wider organisational strategy.


18/3714


5.0 References

Arif, M; Egbu, C. and Alshawi, M (2010) Promoting Green Construction in India through Industry-Academia Collaboration Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice.Volume 136, Issue 3, pp. 128-131 Issue Date: July 2010.

Arif, M; Egbu, C; Halem, A.; Kulonda, D.; and Khalfan, M. (2009). State of Green Construction in India:Drivers and Challenges, Journal of Engineering Design and Technology, 2009, 7(2), 223-234.

Highly Commended Award Winner at the Literati Network Awards for Excellence 2010.

Bruntland, G. (1987). Our common future: The world commission on environment and development,Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Dainty, A.R.J. and Brooke, R.J. (2004), Towards Improved Construction Waste Minimisation: ANeed for Improved Supply Chain Integration? Structural Survey, 22(1), 20-29.

Epstein, M. J. and Roy, M. J. (2001) Sustainability in Action: Identifying and Measuring the KeyPerformance Drivers. Long Range Planning, 34, 585-604.

Ofori, G. (1998), Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework for Attainment comment,Construction Management and Economics, 16, 141-145.

Ofori, G. (2000), Greening the Construction Supply Chain in Singapore, European Journal ofPurchasing and Supply Management, 6, 195-206.

Pasquire, C. (1999), The Implications of Environmental Issues on UK Construct ion Management,Engineering Construction and Architecture Management, 6(3), 276-286.

Post, J. E. and Altman, B. W. (1994) Managing environmental change process: barriers and opportunities.Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(4), 4-14.

Potbhare, V., Syal, M., Arif, Mohammed, Khalfan, M., and Egbu, C., (2009) Emergence of Green BuildingGuidelines in India and their Comparison with Developed Countries, Journal of Engineering Designand Technology, 2009, 7(1), 99-121.Outstanding Paper Award Winner at the Literati Network Awardsfor Excellence 2010.

Revell, A. and Blackburn, R. (2007), The business case for sustainability? An examination of small rmsin the UKs construction and restaurant sectors, Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(6),404-420.

Sarkis, J.(1998), Evaluating Environmentally Conscious Business Pract ices, European Journal ofOperations Research, 107 (2), 159-174.

Syal, M. Hastak, M. Mullens, M. and Sweany, A. (2006), United StatesIndia Collaborative ResearchDirections in Urban Housing and Supporting Infrastructure, Journal of Architecture Engineering,December, 163-167.

Tiwari, P. (2001), Energy Efciency and Building Construction in India, Building and Environment,36, 1127-1135.

Unruh, G.C. (2008), The Biosphere Rules, Harvard Business Review, February, 111-116.

Walton, S.V. Handeld, R.B. and Melnyk, S.A. (1998), The Green Supply Chain: Integrating Suppliers into

Environmental Management Process, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,Spring Issue, 1-10.


19/3715




GREEN INITIATIVES VENTUREOF INTEGRATED GREEN

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTAbstract

KeywordsGreen initiatives, GBI, Renewable energy, Carbon Credit, Sustainable Value

1.0 Introduction

Malaysia today is facing two of the worlds most pressing issues, namely climate change and energysecurity which in due course causes an incretion to worlds carbon emissions (MPM, Warren,2009; Dunphy et al., 2007 ). In facing up to the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) emission challenges,the Government and the Malaysian Construction Professionals are now very committed to contributea sustainable approach; hence becoming the ultimate reasons of Going Green concept become a

Mariati Bagdad1, Assoc Professor Sr. Dr.Mohammad Fadhil Mohammad1 andUngku Nur Sabrina Ungku Abdul Nassir11Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying,

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, MALAYSIA(E-mail: [email protected],[email protected], [email protected])

The Copenhagen Climate Change Summit 2009 (COP15) has seen that Malaysia has pledged

to reduce its emissions intensity of GDP by the year 2020. Therefore, the building sectors are

also motivated to play a part to revolutionize the Malaysian property development. This green

movement attempts to achieve sustainability goal towards a carbon neutral city in the coming

millennia. Alternatively, there are other green initiatives likely to be opted with in reducing carbon

emissions intensity yet promises a huge potential on business prot. Many scholars claimed

that Green Building Index (GBI) offers a rating system tools that is promising positive outcomesto the certied green building and a pay-off to stakeholders. However, in the present Malaysia

market, the development of green building is quite slowness due to the overwhelming debate on

the economical value out of green features. Therefore, this paper shall be the introductory paper

upon the study on green initiatives in Malaysia such as GBI, renewable energy and carbon credit

venture. The objective of this paper is to present the case study analysis on certied green

building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) model in Malaysia thus dene its potential connection to the

carbon credit project. Nevertheless, the aim of this paper is to provide a fundamental base on the

simulation model in optimizing the sustainability value out of integrated green development project

in Malaysia. This paper assesses the literature review and case study analysis on exchange-value

and use-value of green initiatives approach thus attempts to hypothesize the feasibility of integrated

green development project. The simulation model is expected to anticipate the Tenth MalaysiaPlan 2011-2015 aspirations towards the New Economic Model, premised on high income, inclusiveness and

sustainability by building sensible green property along with other integrated green mechanisms.


20/3716


government policy. This is evident when the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology, and Water (2009)comprehend the paces towards this Green vision thus announce the national green policy namely GreenTechnology. Apart from that, the ambitious Green Building Index Scheme (GBI) is introduced in 2009 torevolutionize the Malaysian property development, in spite of its attempts to achieve a carbon neutral cityin the coming millennia (GBI, 2010; MPM, 2009; Khamidi, 2007). As a result, aiming at Green propertydevelopment is a current trend among the building industry players.

However, Malaysian Green Building Confederation (2010) realizes that buildings or built environment,

those contributes signicantly to green house gas emissions (GHGs) must integrate sustainable approachthat consider the synergy among three sets of values namely Triple Bottom Line; including the natural,social, and economic environment. That is to say, the sustainable strategy of green building must enlightenthe developers on good corporate business management principles to grow through a proper managedsustainability and green initiatives, as well as a positive growth to business development (Bertrand, 2010).

According to Bagdad (2011) study, the issues on green building mostly are related to the performance ofgreen building development that is often driven by the criteria and context of the development, limitedsize of the market, and difculties in identifying any change in value aspects (tangible benet) that canbe directly attributed to sustainable and green building (Bertrand, 2010; Warren, 2009).

Meanwhile, the popularity of going green in all aspects of personal and professional life has made other greeninitiatives become an important concept and opportunity to earn extra income (MGBC, 2010). These Greenmovements however have created unprecedented dimensions of comparative advantages. Therefore, thefragmented green initiatives approach of established project in Malaysia is expected to be integrated to forma sustainable venture in corporate business management development. The certied green building, carboncredits, renewable energy, patent inventions and clean technologies present themselves as new world resourcesand potential economic drivers (Begum & Pereira, 2010; Tick & Shing, 2010). The integration of these greeninitiatives could be perceived as a new business-model to consider the environment-friendly building as well asgenerating a side income. It should be designed to reduce greenhouse emissions and combat negative climatechanges, thus the building and construction business players would invest on the green development which willnot only show their compliance to green and environmental efforts, but also making an additional income.

2.0 The Green Initiatives Development in Malaysia - The Economical Value and Its Potential

Malaysia has practically emerged towards sustainable development with a vision on combating the energyinsecurity and climate change issues. This is prolong to the fact that, the current risk exposure indicators(likelihood and magnitude) to energy and climate change trends by its urban city; Kuala Lumpur itselfexposed to medium threat based on its energy insecurity, energy import dependency, physical exposureand city vulnerability towards the climate change (IPCC and UN, 2010).

On the other hand, the building sectors and construction industry are blamed to be responsible for energyand materials consumption besides contributing thirty ve to forty ve percent of CO2 emissions (Khamidi,

2007; Price et al., 2006). Therefore, the remedy actions are set to undertake the issues particularly onthe energy and carbon emission for building category. Among other green initiatives that have beenestablished are series of demonstration projects, development of Energy Efciency and Conservation(EE&C) Guidelines, Energy Management Program, Government Policies, Green Building scheme, aswell as Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project as shown in Table 1.


21/3717


Table 1: Established Green Initiatives by Malaysian Constitution in Relation to

Energy and Building Sectors

No. Green Initiative Establishment Organization Year

1.0 Guideline

1.1Energy Efciency & Conservation Guidelines forMalaysian Industries

MEGTW / KETTHA, MGTC,and UNDP-GEF

2007

1.2 Design Strategies for Energy Efciency in NewBuildings (Non-Domestic) MEGTW / KETTHA,DANIDA, MPWD / JKR 2004

1.3Guidelines for Conducting Energy Audits inCommercial Buildings

MEGTW / KETTHA andMGTC

2004

1.4 Malaysia Industrial Energy Audit GuidelinesMEGTW / KETTHA, MGTC,and UNDP-GEF

2003

1.5MS1525 : 2001-Code of Practice Use of EnergyEfciency and renewable Energy for Non-Residential Buildings

SIRIM2001and2007

1.6 EE in Buildings GuidelinesMinistry of Energy,Telecommunications & Post

1989

2.0 Energy Management Program2.1 Feed-In Tariff Energy Commission 2011

2.2 ASEAN Energy Management Scheme MGTC 2011

2.3 Energy Audit Government buildings MEGTW / KETTHA 2001

3.0 Government Policy

3.1 The National Green Technology Policy MEGTW / KETTHA 2009

3.2

Energy Policy-based on 1974 PetroleumDevelopment Act, 1975 National Petroleum Policy,1980 National Depletion Policy, 1990 ElectricitySupply Act, 1993 Gas Supply Acts, 1994 ElectricityRegulations, 1997 Gas Supply Regulation and the

2001 Energy Commission Act.

MEGTW / KETTHA, EnergyCommission, and MGTC

Varies

4.0 Green Building Scheme

4.1 Green Building Index GBI Sdn Bhd (PAM & ACEM) 2009

5.0National Clean Development MechanismProject

UNFCCC2008-2012

5.155 energy projects were registered with CDM EBand 5 energy projects has issued CERs

PGEO Energy SB, Felda PalmIndustries SB, LDEO EnergySB, SEO Energy SB, andLAFARGE S.A.

2006-2010

Source: MGTC, 2010.

The investments in these greenhouse gas emission reductions projects nevertheless, are signicantin contributing both to economic and environmental well-being of the country. On the other hand, themarket outlook on the environmental sustainability aspect in Malaysia is still new and vulnerable. Thisis due to the nancial dilemma faced by the Malaysian business players to demonstrate their ability toovercome the existing nancial or other barriers such as development cost, fragmented fees, risk, andreturn (MGTC, 2010; Tick and Shing, 2010).Therefore it is a worthwhile to assess the various possibilities tointegrate the established green initiatives project innovatively in order to mitigate the issues and concernspertaining to the cost effectiveness of the project.


22/3718


3.0 The Green Building Index pilot project- Case Study on Green Energy Ofce

The Green Building Index is a green rating tool to guide architects, designers, government bodies, buildingowners, and developers towards constructing environmentally responsible buildings. It was initiated and willbe managed by PAMs newly formed Sustainability Committee. In addition, Green Building Index SdnBhd was incorporated in February 2009, a wholly-owned subsidiary of PAM and the Association ofConsulting Engineers Malaysia (ACEM), to administrate GBI accreditation and training of GBI Facilitatorsand Certiers. The GBI rating tool provides an opportunity for developers and building owners to design

and construct green, sustainable buildings that can provide energy savings, water savings, a healthierindoor environment, better connectivity to public transport and the adoption of recycling and greenery fortheir projects and reduce our impact on the environment. GBI is developed specically for the Malaysian-tropical climate, environmental and developmental context, cultural and social needs.

As a result, the 4000 square meters of Malaysian Green Technology Corporation ofce; The GreenEnergy Ofce (GEO) building serves as a green pilot project that provides a platform for proof of thegreen concept in the subject of sustainable building design. Taking and advantage on the solar potentialin 2005, the jointly funded project of GEO building is intended to encourage the long-term cost reductionof non-emitting green house gas (GHG) technologies by installing the Building Integrated Photovoltaic(BIPV) system, and also achieved the GBI (certied) for Non-Residential Building. GEO building proved

the sustainability achievement through its energy efciency strategy by producing electricity in about1,200 kWp/year but only consume energy about 65kWh/m2/year (without PV contribution) as measuredin Building Energy Index (BEI). As compared to conventional building that would consume energy upto 220 kWph/m2/year, GEO building is likely demonstrate sustainability more than seventy percent interms of energy efciency (MGTC, 2010; IEN, 2010). Thus the GEO building in turn contributes to only23kgCO2/m2/year (MGBC and Chen, 2010) or about 80 percent reduction on CO2 emission intensity perannum as shown in Figure 1.

Table 2: GEO Building Reduces 70 Percent Energy Consumption as

Compared to Conventional Building

Description Energy Index Energy Consumption

A. Conventional building 220 kWh / m2 / year 698,500 kWh / year

B. GEO building 65 kWh / m2/ year 206,375 kWh / year

(Savings= A-B) 155 kWh / m2 / year 492,125 kWh / year

Percentage savings - 70.5%

Source: MGTC, 2010

Figure 1: GEO Building Demonstrates High CO2 Emission Savings

Source: IEN Consultants, 2010.

-60

-70

-80


23/3719


3.1 GBI Certication Guarantees Government Incentives

GBI has become an important initiative that promises a signicant outcome to the certied green buildingmovement in Malaysia (MGBC and Chen, 2010; Tan, 2009). However, the community is still hesitantabout embracing the green concept due to misgivings about the quality standard of this green modelwhether it would benet building and its economies. Therefore, to encourage its implementation, theGBI as supported by the Malaysian government; has subsidized the Malaysian new framework and willguarantee the reimbursement to the investor with government incentives. In lieu to this effort,

the government has granted the organization or building owners who are obtaining the certied greenbuilding with two types of incentives generally on company tax exemption and stamp duty exemption(MGBC and Chen, 2010). The eligibility of GBI for GBI incentives are based on the buildings that havebeen awarded the GBI certicate of any grade is eligible to be considered for GBI incentives. The criteriaare; Energy Efciency (38%), Indoor Environmental Quality, Sustainable site Planning and Management,Material and Resources (9%), Water Efciency, and Innovation (9%)

3.2 GBI certied of GEO building- EE and RE integrated value, economical value, and potentials

It is forecasted that the photo voltaic system as integrated to GEO building could achieve BEI 35kWph/m2/year. Therefore, more energy saving out of EE and RE performance that is expected to contribute

an economical value on the investment of certied green building with building integrated photovoltaicsystem. According to the study that has been simulated by Bagdad (2011), hypothetically, if a 4000sqmcommercial green building adopt the same mechanism and design as GEO building does; more than 80percent operational cost saving of EE and RE performance alone (regardless of water saving) can beachieved from certied green building with BIPV technology which can be translated into about RM233,000 a year. As opposed to the conventional building, it is expected that business operation could recoverthe expenditure on green buildings approximately 5.8 years of operation (rental collection, cost saving onenergy efciency, and tax exemption). The study also hypothesizes that, the commercial green building ishighly potential to an incretion of yearly revenue up to 21% as compared to conventional building.

4.0 Energy Efciency and Energy Conservation building- Case study on Low Energy Ofce

The scrutinize on energy use of a building as explicitly addressed in Ninth Malaysian Plan (9MP) hasled the government to consider Energy Efciency (EE) and energy saving features to the governmentbuildings. Therefore, the Low Energy ofce (LEO) building has completed in 2004 thus becomes the rstgovernment initiatives to undertake the EE assessment on this Ministry of Energy, Green Technology,and Water ofce building. The energy efcient features as adopted by LEO building are including thedaylighting, EE lighting, EE ofce equipment, EE ventilation, controls & Sensors, buildings orientation,insulation, and energy management. LEO building incorporates the EE features through integratedbuilding design process and computer simulation (Begum and Pereira, 2010).

Besides, this 20,000 square meters building has achieved a promising energy saving by consumed

only 114 kWh / m2/ year as measured in building energy index (Tick and Shing, 2010). As comparedto conventional building which consumed about 275 kWh / m2/ year, LEO building saves almost 60 percentof energy conservation through EE features (as shown in Table 3) and shaves-off about 60 percent ofCO2 emission (Figure 1).

Table 3: LEO building Reduces 60 Percent Energy Consumption

Compared to Conventional Building.

Description Energy Index Energy Consumption

A. Conventional building 275 kWh / m2 / year 5, 290, 175 kWh / year

B. LEO building 114 kWh / m2/ year 2, 193, 018 kWh / year

(Savings= A-B) 161 kWh / m2 / year 3, 097, 157 kWh / year

Percentage savings - 60%

Source: MGTC, 2010


24/3720


4.1 LEO building- EE economical Value and Potentials

Taking into account the mission on lowering energy consumption in a building, the LEO building howeverdemonstrates attractive economical value based on its operational cost- saving. Nonetheless, LEO buildingbase cost of RM 50 million only takes up about 5 percent of additional cost on installing EE features whichis equivalent to RM 5.048 million. According to Begum and Pereira (2010), LEO building is estimated toachieve more than50% cost saving which can be translated into approximately RM600, 000 a year. Tick andShing (2010) also has analyzed that the estimated energy consumption on cooling and electrical energy

as shown in Table 4 indicates that, the operational cost saving on energy based on EE features is feasiblyeconomical to a commercial building. This is because, if the LEO building demonstrates a payback periodaround 8.4 years over the investment on EE features, hypothetically, the commercial building may have areturn on investment less than three years (IEN, 2010).

Table 4: LEO Building Yields More than 50 Percent of Operational Cost Saving

on Energy as Compared to Conventional Building.

Description (based on a/c area of 19,200m2) Energy Cost (RM/year)

Cooling Electrical Total

Energy Energy

A. Conventional building 275 kWh / m2 / year 478, 000 620, 000 1, 099, 000

B. LEO building 114 kWh / m2/ year 156, 000 338, 000 493, 000

(Savings= A-B) 161 kWh / m2 / year 322, 000 282, 000 604, 000

Percentage savings 60 % 67.4 % 45.5 % 55.1 %

Source: Tick and Shing, 2010

5.0 Clean Development Mechanism- Case study on Malaysian Carbon Credit trading

Carbon Credit is a new denition term of assigning a value to a reduction or offset of greenhouse gas

emissions as compensation to voluntary effort of the rm towards Malaysian Green mission; additionalityand contributions to sustainable development. A carbon credit is usually equivalent to one tonne of carbondioxide equivalent (CO2-e). MGBC (2010) afrmed that the CDM facilitates Annex 1 countries purchaseor claim CERs from projects implemented in developing countries (non Annex 1 countries) to be used formeeting their emissions reduction targets. Projects that qualify for CDM include the following: end-useenergy efciency, supply-side energy efciency, renewable energy, fuel switching, agriculture, industrialprocesses, solvent and other product use, waste management, and sinks (afforestation and reforestation).

According to Malaysia Energy Center (MEC), the agricultural and natural resources-rich lead to biomassplants projects in Malaysia that has 100 million tonnes of carbon credit, which can be translated into someRM5 billion in revenues. CDM related carbon trading in Malaysia is expected to surge in the next few

years from demands by European Unions to meet target reductions by 2012. According to MGTC(2010), Malaysia has 55 registered CDM EB projects on energy while 5 projects have issued CertiedEmission Rates (CERs). The total CERs has been traded is about 708, 028 tonnes which amounting toapproximately USD 7.1 million (RM 24.1 million)

5.1 Carbon Credit on CDM Energy Business-economical value and Potentials

The investments in this greenhouse gas emission reductions project will signicantly contributingboth to economic and environmental well-being of the country. The mission of carbon credit as studiedby this paper eventually to develop a sustainable green building and renewable energy projects, that toeliminate or reduce carbon dioxide emissions which will reduce our dependence on old diesel, oil, gas or

coal red electric generators. Therefore those Companies and electric utilities in countries have a solutionto buy these emission reduction carbon credits to replace the emissions from their coal burning electricpower plants. The estimated transaction costs in average for the small-scale CDM projects is RM 55,000and for the larger scale projects is RM 120,000 which may make some potential CDM projects lessattractive(CDM, 2010).


25/3721


6.0 Feed-In tariff- Malaysia review

In developing the Renewable Energy sectors, Malaysia have adopts sophisticated system of Feed-in Tariffsand renewable energy targets differentiated by technology. In additions, Malaysias policy includesspecic targets for each technology by year. For example, in 2011 Malaysias quota for solar PV is 29 MWand in 2012 the target is an additional 46 MW. Approximately, one-third of the solar Photo Voltaic (PV)capacity is set aside for projects less than 1 MW in size. The value that has been offered is ranging fromRM1.23 / kWh to RM0.85 / kWh according to energy supply capacity (Table 5) excluding the bonuses.

Malaysia expects to have installed more than 3,000 MW of renewable energy by 2020, of which aboutone-third (1,250 MW) will be from solar PV, and another one-third from biomass (1,065 MW).

Table 5: Renewable Tariffs for Solar PV in Malaysia

Description Years MYR/kWh /kWh CAD/kWh USD/kWh Degression

(4.191) (1.370) (1.369) -8.0%

4 kW 24 kW 72 kW < 1,000 kW 21 1.14 0.272 0.373 0.372 -8.0%

> 1 MW < 10 MW 21 0.95 0.227 0.311 0.310 -8.0%

> 10 MW < 30 MW 21 0.85 0.203 0.278 0.278 -8.0%

Bonus for rooftop 21 0.26 0.062 0.085 0.085 -8.0%

Bonus for BIPV 21 0.25 0.060 0.082 0.082 -8.0%

Bonus for local modules 21 0.03 0.007 0.010 0.010 -8.0%

Bonus for local inverters 21 0.01 0.002 0.003 0.003 -8.0%

Source: MEGTW, 2011

7.0 The Conceptual Venture of Integrated Green Development Project

Based on the case study analysis on the green initiatives development in Malaysia, the researcherhas attempted to work out a potential venture to propose an integrated green development project outof established development as mention earlier. Hypothetically, it is expected that the result could diversifythe possibilities on embarking more than two green projects combined into one sustainable project ordevelopment. The working simulation will be solely on data applicable as mentioned in the case studyand also described in item 3.1 to 3.3. The conceptual model of integrated green development projectventure is shown in Figure 2.

7.1 The Building Composition, Projects Economical Value, and Projects Feasible outcome

According to the case study analysis, building range from 4000sqm to 20,000 sqm is sufcient tocater the crucial integrated elements of green initiatives such as energy efciency and renewableenergy features. The case study also suggested that by adopting certied green building under theGBI scheme, compensable government incentives is guaranteed specically on tax exemption andstamp duty exemption. The energy efcient features on energy that can be adopted are day lighting,EE lighting, EE ofce equipment, EE ventilation, controls & Sensors, buildings orientation, insulation, andenergy management as demonstrated by LEO building. Meanwhile, to harvest the renewable energybenet the building integrated photo voltaic system can be installed as part of the building envelopesthat has been practiced by GEO building. The study estimated that, for a building range 4,000sqm to20,000sqm that comprises of energy efciency and renewable energy features; at least the sum of RM20million to RM 50 million need to be inlayed. The precedent study on LEO and GEO building shows that,approximately 5 percent to 18 percent is invested on the energy efciency while 15 percent more on thesolar photo voltaic system on an average of 766 sqm of the building area (roof top). To embark thebusiness on renewable energy under the feed-in tariff scheme, the cost practically incurred to installation


26/3722


of solar photo voltaic, whereby in this case, 1200 kWhp can be generated on merely RM3 million asdemonstrated by GEO building. In view of the fact that energy efciency and renewable energy shaves-offabout 60 to 80 percent of CO2 emission by conserving the energy, this project is potential to trade its CO2emission saving by means of carbon credit trading. According to MGTC (2011), an amount of US$40,000to US$150,000 of transaction is needed to register a project as a CDM project before tradable the CertiedEmission Rates (CERs).The simulation study (as shown in Figure 2) analyzes the ow and the feasibleoutcome out of these green initiatives venture based on the case study result of LEO building, GEO building,CDM-carbon credit trading, and feed-in tariff scheme. It is expected that more than two business make

up the revenue, an operational cost saving, and tradable CO2 saving become the side income out of thisproject or development.

Figure 2: The Conceptual Model for Green Initiatives Venture of Integrated Green

Development Project

8.0 Conclusion

The simulation study result had shown an innovative business proposal to the developer, building owner,and investor on how to harvest the green initiatives benet. The study nevertheless hypothesize

that, an investment on single green property could resulting more than two business to make up therevenue, an operational cost saving, and tradable CO2 saving become the side income out of thisproject or development. However, the main conclusion is that, since the LEO and GEO building isa non-prot (generation) building therefore, this simulation needs to be validated through a real-basedbusiness proposal that is potential to be an innovative projects proposal to the sustainable industry in

PROPOSED INTEGRATED GREEN DEVELOPEMENT PROJECT

MAIN

REVENUE+INCREMENTALREVENUE+COSTS

AVING+

SIDEINCOME=

SUSTAINABLEBUSINESS

Green Initiatives

Certied GBI ofce

-area: 4,000 sqm up to20,000 sqm

Building designed withEE and RE features

- Passive and activedesign for energyefciency

- Install BIPV

RE outcome procured to

Feed-In Tariff

-Sum energy saleable

CO2 emission procuredinto CDM

-Carbon credit trading

Cost incurred to

registration only

CO2 saving of RE andEE performance

CERs traded and CSRs

achieved

Side Income

Cost incurred to RE

RE from Solar PVproduces 1.2MW

RE from solar PV prot

Incremental revenue

Additional EE and RE

cost

5% to 33 %

Efciency featurestackle the energy use

of the building

50% to 70% operationalcost-saving

Building cost

RM 20-50 million

Commercial Ofcefor rent

Main revenue

Cost and Impact Feasible Outcome

Government Incentives


27/3723


Malaysia. The conceptual model of the Green juxtaposition initiative need to justify that building greencan be a low cost but protable if the business strategy aim on green economy out of green propertyis structured sensibly.

9.0 Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the MGTC and MEGTW ofcer in providing necessary assistant from time to

time for completion of this paper. The authors wish to compliments to the Ministry of Higher EducationMalaysia (MOHE) in providing the fundamental research grant scheme (FRGS) to facilitate the researchprocess described in this paper.

10.0 References

Bagdad, M. (2011). Venturing GBI-NREB into Carbon Credit: a sustainable framework for MalaysianGreen Property and Green Economy, Finland: Conference proceeding of SB11: World Sustain-able Building Conference, 18-22 October 2011, Helsinki, Finland.

Begum, R.A. and Pereira, J.J. (2010). GHG Emissions and Energy Efciency Potential in the BuildingSector of Malaysia, Autralian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 4(10) pp.5012-5017.

Bertrand, L., (2010). How can developers harvest the benefits of green building while reducingthe risks and cost green building accreditation?Malaysia: Presentation paper for a Conference onSustainable Building South East Asia, May 5, Kuala Lumpur.

Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A. and Benn, S. (2007). Organizational Change for Corporate Sustain-abil ity- A Guide for Leaders and Change Agents of the Future, 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

Ellison, L., and Sayce, S. (2007). Assessing sustainability in the existing commercial property stock.Journal of Property Management, Vol.25 No.3, pp.287-304.

IEN Consultants (2010). Low Energy Buildings-GEO and ST Diamond Building. Singapore: Slidepresentation on September 15, SGBC Green Building Conference & World GBC InternationalCongress 2010, Sands.

Lorenz, D., Truck, S., and Lutzkendof, T. (2007). Exploring the relationship between the sustainabilityof construction and market value: theoretical basics and initial empirical results from the residential

property sector. Journal of Property Management, Vol. 25, pp. 119-49.

Malaysia Prime Minister (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015: Prime Minister Malaysia foreword.Malaysia: The Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department Putrajaya. pp. iii-iv.

MGBC and Chen (2010). New Life for old-plugging the leaks in existing building. Malaysia: Presentationpaper on April 26, at the launch of Non-Residential Existing Building (NREB), Kuala Lumpur.

MGTC (2010). Green Energy Ofce and Green TownShip. Malaysia: Slide presentation on October 21,One Day Seminar on Green Technology and Renewable Energy, Selangor, p.p 9-22.

M.F., Khamidi (2007). Development of Building Assessment Tool for evaluation of Purpose BuiltBuilding (PBOs) Life Cycle Management: Benchmarking and assessment for environmental

performance. Malaysia: Presentation paper for a Conference on Sustainable Building SouthEast Asia, 5-7 November 2007, Kuala Lumpur.

Miller, N., Spivey, J. and Florence, A. (2008). Does green pay off. Journal of Real Estate PortfolioManagement, Vol. 14 No. 4, p. 15.

Tan, L.M. (2009). The Development of GBI Malaysia (GBI). Malaysia: Presentation paper on April 23,at the launch of GBI. Kuala Lumpur.


28/3724


Tick, H.O., and Shing, C.C. (2010). Energy efficiency and carbon trading potent

pjh uitm proceeding

Documents