Passive Architectural Design Index: A benchmark for passive building techniques by sriraj

18comments

Share conversation:

Maryette Haggerty Perrault Jul 7, 2014 04:03 Member 1 \| Share via:	First things first - Very well written proposal on a great topic for the Buildings Contest sriraj. I appreciate your attention to detail particularly with the sources. I'll definitely continue reading through both the proposal and the sources but I'll share some initial thoughts now. You are absolutely right - while constructing buildings with efficient mechanical systems is great and required in many environments, this standard design process often entirely bypasses options for passive design which (depending on building type and geographic location) could mitigate or eliminate energy consumption associate with mechanical HVAC and lighting. I guess my question is why has this been the case and how can it be overcome? Is it because contractors are beholden to equipment manufacturers? Because mechanical HVAC is the "easy" way to go? Because the design process is disjointed (i.e. architectural separate from mechanical/landscape/etc.)? Because building codes encourage mechanical HVAC over passive technologies? Air conditioning is a relatively new tool in the grand scheme of things and we humans survived without it for millennia by being smart about where we chose to settle and how we built shelters - maybe its time to learn from history. In my mind, design guidelines and energy benchmarking occupy two separate spaces in the lifecycle of a building. Design guidelines/codes/requirements obviously come into play prior to a building being constructed, while the energy benchmarking tracks energy usage in any given building once it is in operation. Perhaps delineating a bit more clearly along these two distinct lines in your proposal will strengthen the overall context. I understand that your are in particular focusing on India and other tropical weather zones as you have mentioned, which is perfect for the proposal. But don't limit the ultimate goal to just these areas - (different) passive design techniques can be adapted for any given climate! I like the very realistic approach you set forth in your Methodology section, and I think this could be further solidified with buy-in from example agencies/institutes/organizations. Could you potentially get more specific on who will be enacting these ideas? Sorry if my thoughts are a bit unorganized, but I'm genuinely excited about your proposal and encourage you to continue promoting this idea. I look forward to learning more about this topic!
Sriraj Gokarakonda Jul 10, 2014 11:28 Member 2 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor hi Maryette, Thanks for your insightful comment. Your first question is exactly what I set out to find through my proposed research. There are certainly many factors involved, as you mentioned, ranging from “manufacturing” associated GDP growth to one’s individual comfort. I am not implying that HVAC is something that we should or could completely do away with. Like Air conditioning, we humans survived millennia by being smart, nevertheless the ‘smartness’ that we now lent to our indispensible gadgets. My arguments is absolutely not on the lines of to be or not to be, rather I am attempting to search for the fine line between the two. What I am trying to propose is not just design guidelines or codes, but also a reverse benchmark that precisely differentiates ‘sufficiency’ from ‘efficiency’. The exact nature of the benchmark is something that needs to be worked upon. Unlike energy benchmark typically expressed as a measure of specific energy consumption, e.g., kWh/m2, I am trying to propose a reverse benchmark (or may be a group of combined indicators) that define, a truly passive/seasonal/hybrid/closed building. To put it loosely, ‘PADI’ could be an indicator pointing out that in a certain climate or under certain weather conditions, a certain type of building with certain functions or internal loads could well be designed to operate freely without the use of air conditioning and still be able to provide thermal comfort to the inmates. This is in no way benchmark that restricts the architects the freedom to design. Rather this is to remind them the basics of design that the now tend to forget completely and let the ball roll to the domain of other professionals very comfortably. Architects should relieve themselves from this agony of designing highly insulated airtight boxes aka refrigerators posing as buildings in the name of energy efficiency. This is very important to understand because, unlike western approach to energy efficiency, which often sees people living in the building as ‘users’, the social approach to building design in India is very different. The way people interact with a building and immediate outdoors is also very different which the concept of a highly insulated closed air-conditioned building cannot address. This is where a hybrid or zoned approach becomes necessary. This turns out to be much more complex as we start discussing more social, economic and technical aspects, as the construction sector in India is still very loosely organized at the bottom level. The idea is to conduct the research in a particular climate zone in India, which then could be used as a blue print that could be replicated anywhere else, not only in the tropics and sub tropics, but also in the temperate and cold climates. As of now I proposed this to be an individual research and I am in the look out for other research organizations to collaborate with. I suppose, government ministries related to energy and power, housing and urban development, etc. and promoters of green building rating systems, should be the ones enacting this concept. For example, in a similar way the Energy Conservation Building Code of India is being promoted with the partnership of governmental, non-governmental, bi-and-multi national partnerships. In principle this ‘sufficiency’ Vs ‘efficiency’ approach should not necessarily be seen as a need Vs greed approach, rather sufficiency should be aiming to be eliminating flaws at the bottom level to start with, which then could be supplemented with efficiency.
Robert Dedomenico Jul 10, 2014 11:21 Member 3 \| Share via:	Siraj, I really like the focus on "sufficiency". I like this proposal a lot, because it is reasonable, feasible, and actionaable. It just makes sense. Well done! Sincerely, Robert
Climate Colab Aug 6, 2014 12:28 Member 4 \| Share via:	Judges' Comments: I agree with the authors of this proposal that a strong integration of passive measures into the design of new buildings located in hot climates can play a critical role in enhancing their sustainability. With the expected growth in both population and buildings in Southeast Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, this could have a major impact on future building energy consumption. Moreover, passive architecture research and design to date has focused to a large extent on space heating-dominated climates, i.e., per the PassivHaus Institut in Germany. The passive building concepts implemented in heating-dominated climates are not fully appropriate (technically, and considering cost) for wholesale adoption in space cooling-dominated climates, and require modification to be optimized for space-cooling dominated climates. The Passive House Institute U.S. has begun working toward this goal, but more efforts are needed, particularly focused on solutions that can work in the context of developing nations. A PADI could be adopted by code bodies and/or voluntary programs. I would recommend that authors use a strong (i.e., not too 'adaptive') definition of indoor comfort when evaluating the need for air conditioning. Thermal comfort has a real impact on productivity and quality of life, and I believe that a fully passive design will not be able to reliable bring thermal comfort in many hot climates, particularly hot and humid climates. Finally, I think that the proposed project terminates too early. It does include field testing to evaluate existing building (~case studies), but thereafter appears to rely on simulations only to identify and select the most effective design solutions and systems. Many energy-saving technologies look good until they are deployed in the field, where people use the technology and construction does not always occur as designed. Think about sick building syndrome, hygrothermal/moisture problems in walls, mechanical ventilation systems in tight (including passive) houses that don't work properly, etc. Before scaling up any solution and having it adopted by the building development chain, people will need to be shown that the solution works effectively. Buildings are expected to last decades! I strongly encourage the proposers to include a significant field testing and evaluation component to evaluate and, ideally, demonstrate the real-world viability of the design solutions developed.
Climate Colab Sep 3, 2014 12:26 Member 5 \| Share via:	Congratulations -- this proposal has been selected as a Finalist! Comments from Judges: - The Judges saw the overall concept of developing a tool to evaluate the "passive potential" of buildings to be a strong one. This being said, there are likely more lower hanging fruit in India than passive architectural design. - The proposal is very thorough overall, however some key elements were lacking; details on emissions reductions, e.g. - The Judges believe that the real value of this tool comes from creating a practical tool that practitioners can use instead of research and publications. (As described, the project is framed more as a research project instead of as a very practical tool development effort.) You may not want to have just a university operating alone perform this project. - The project is ambitious, i.e., how to evaluate a substantial range of passive design and control techniques in different building types, and will also require much more integration with practitioners throughout the building development chain (i.e., real-estate firms, architects, MEPs, building operators, etc.). Thusly, the Judges believed that the proposers have significantly underestimated the budget, resources, and time required to make it happen. Best of luck in the voting period!
Hemant Wagh Sep 6, 2014 04:07 Member 6 \| Share via:	Would it be possible to include into your client communications a request to 'save the seeds of fruits eaten by their units (work/family) throughout the year and spread/help spread those seeds onto unused land in the vicinity.' This would help increase the green cover, density and in long run provide fruits free of cost to everyone. Impact of trees around the house/buildings on the temperatures inside buildings could be another additional dimension to consider. Along with marine a land based BCCS program would be beneficial. A proposal outlining such an approach is available. Following is a link to such a proposal. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300103/planId/1310401 This would bolster the efforts directed at finding workable solution to climate change..
Venkatesh R Sep 7, 2014 08:40 Member 7 \| Share via:	Good Idea SriRaj, this is a thought, to reduce CO2 in env, not sure how much it works https://crowdsourcing.itu.int/post/40111 but it seems it is feasible with advanced nano composites when i discussed with some science journalist, i am not a research student,probably if this idea gets integrated to a feasible form with some research at least with help of some students, it can reduce the temperature and Co2 as well. All the best for your idea! Thanks Venkat
Venkatesh R Sep 7, 2014 08:25 Member 8 \| Share via:	probably the budget required to consider the above suggestion should be less, and if it is given as an opportunity to students who has knowledge in nano composites and botany it would be better, we can create future innovators as well, this idea will create more job opportunities, reduces pollution, Co2,and alternate energy, the future of algae-bio-diesel in other words create a overlapping forest in the existing world. Please ref https://crowdsourcing.itu.int/post/40111 for the details.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 9, 2014 03:29 Member 9 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor hi Hemant, that is a good idea. I will try to spread a word around. hi Ventkatesh, I am not a specialist in the area of nano technologies, however, you idea too sounds interesting. Thanks for your support...
Psi Energy Sep 15, 2014 02:54 Member 10 \| Share via:	You lost me when you clubbed BEE and GRIHA. Firstly, BEE Developed a CODE and GRIHA is a RATING SYSTEM. I hope you know the difference. Secondly, We've worked on the GRIHA benchmark for naturally ventilated buildings and have perhaps the largest number of nat-vent buildings registered and consequently rated in the world (in a cooling dominated climate). Thirdly, We focus on the adaptive thermal comfort bands of the NBC and prove "sufficiency" via un-met/discomfort hours and not just via EPI / EUI. So GRIHA states that the number of hours beyond the adaptive comfort band must be <10% per annum in a nat-vent building (Criterion 14). And that a building must have daylight in >75% of its occupied zones; enough to match the Daylight Factors in the NBC (criterion 13). Fourthly, GRIHA was developed predominantly by architects and thus the focus was always on passive design techniques and NOT active systems alone, both for visual and thermal comfort. Fifthly, Until the WHOLE country doesn't unite to impact our Outdoor Air Quality (Like what the European commission is doing), absolutely naturally ventilated buildings will be absolutely impossible in Urban areas. Measurements by a students of MNIT, Jaipur just yesterday showed IAQ CO2 levels at 4000 ppm in a reputed hotel conference room. And we all know IAQ is eventually a function of OAQ. Additionally, the work on redefining "thermal comfort" in the Indian context is being carried out by Indraganti, Dr. Mathur (MNIT), etc. so we can also put things into perspective as regards our adaptation to our own climate, which would also go a long way in promoting passive design strategies. But, like most people in India, we tend not to read or understand the systems prevailing, but jump to invalidate what exists as if it was a bunch of bunkum created by people (at TERI!) who didn't have anything better to do. And Lastly, you go ahead and name the system PADI. which is the same as the world famous "Professional Association of Diving Instructors". Best of luck. I hope this succeeds.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 15, 2014 06:29 Member 11 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor dear Shorey, Thank you very much for your insightful comments. I am in search of some very critical comments that provide a right direction for my intended research and words of wisdom coming from you are indeed very valuable. At the outset please let me confess that if some rational argument is missing from the piece published here at Climate Colab, it is because of the space limitations, and I have tried to make few more arguments about the subject in a blog article. There is absolutely no prejudice whatsoever, but a quest for framing meaningful question for my research. Having been very interested in passive architecture right from the under graduate level, I tried to orient myself to be working in this area at every possible opportunity. I cannot claim to be all knowledgeable in the field but am not also as ignorant. I have worked in partnership with both GRIHA and BEE on few projects and my current project (www.bigee.net) also has TERI (ADARSH) as an international partner. I understand the difference between BEE and GRIHA, and when I mentioned both of them together I was only pointing out to the energy related criteria of GRIHA system. GRIHA system has rightly addressed the subtleties and made distinctions for air-conditioned and naturally ventilated buildings with appropriate benchmarks. I have had the opportunity to work on GRIHA (and LEED) projects and carried out simulations myself to design and prove the comfort and daylight criteria you mentioned. Definitely, GRIHA system is more indigenous and it rightly focuses of passive systems. However, it is largely voluntary in nature (albeit being made mandatory through policy interventions). The other question pertains to the discretion between air-conditioned and un-conditioned buildings. GRIHA has benchmarks for both conditioned and unconditioned buildings, but the fine distinction between a building’s functional potential as a conditioned or unconditioned one still appears missing. When we talk of naturally ventilated buildings, the first and foremost culprit is of course the deteriorating outdoor air quality. Nevertheless, there are certainly ‘other’ factors that also influence how far a naturally ventilated building can satisfactorily function or even get designed for (like you pointed out in your blog article “Roti, kapda, and the other makaan bygones“). It is also important to study how feasible are the novel and hybrid technologies, lest absolute natural ventilation fail. And, if super airtight, highly insulated buildings (like passivhaus) in certain cases become inevitable, it is important to know how to do them right for Indian conditions. My research question or argument is not what one should do or should not, but what is possible, what are the hindrances and what are the likely impacts? Thermal comfort is unarguably THE criterion in any attempt to benchmark unconditioned buildings. I have read papers by Dr. Indraganti, Prof. Mathur, Prof. Radhakrishnan, Dr. M.K. Singh etc. and made contact with few of them requesting to provide future directions to my intended research. I have been trying to get in touch and urge few other researchers and pioneers working in the field like Mr. Rawal and Mr. Tanmay to read my research proposal and provide some right directions. Few of them already suggested that I should shed the “rating” part of it and perhaps focus more on the performance evluation. I have been trying to read most of the papers published in reputed journals and conference proceeding like PLEA, Energy and Buildings, IBPSA etc. in the past five to ten years to build up my literature survey. My idea is not to reinvent the wheel. For example, I am not trying to carryout primary research in the field of thermal comfort, but I could only rely on the existing literature, or partly add to the existing based on my own research. I am still in the process of framing the right research question, and the whole purpose of giving it a catchy name is to get noticed and draw critique so that it can be improved upon. The proposal is still abstract or may contain partly flawed arguments, but it can only be improved from there on. As I mentioned, in the blog article motioned above and in my research proposal, despite considerable research that is available, designing something as simple as an effective cross ventilation or stack ventilation system for a suitable building leaves a typical architect grappling to rely on out-dated or very simplified formulae and count on stars to make it work. It is necessary that typical architects should be able to relate to and design for effective passive/hybrid strategies in a language known to them and for the very typical building typologies that they often design. Along with the rating systems, benchmarks and codes, they also need some tools to begin with. For example, something as simple as the climate consultant tool, CLEAR (website) etc. with more technical details that aid the design process in the conceptual stages. Once again thank you very much for sharing your opinion and insight. I would be very much obliged to get in touch with you and sincerely wish you could spare few more thoughts so my intended research effectively addresses key gaps in the field. Through my study I hope, to contribute in coherence with the on-going body of research, standards and codes and the idea is not at all to “reinvent the wheel” or to turn a blind eye to what already exists.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 15, 2014 06:19 Member 12 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor here is the blog article that I was referring to...http://pawber.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/28/
Osero Shadrack Tengeya Sep 17, 2014 03:59 Fellow 13 \| Share via:	Hi sriraj and your friends, kindly consider voting for my proposal shown on this link. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300206/planId/1002 Thanks.
Anne-marie Soulsby Sep 23, 2014 04:17 Member 14 \| Share via:	Hi sriraj, Please consider voting for my proposal, https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300801/planId/1309001 Good luck with your entry! Asante/Thank-you @conserveaction
Victor Blanco Oct 4, 2014 11:05 Member 15 \| Share via:	Congratulations!!! Please check the "Discusion Section" in the "Community" label... Proposal of activity during the Conference Session of 2014 Winners... https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/discussion#discussion%3DpageType%3ATHREAD%2CthreadId%3A1337218
Ajith (aj) Rao Oct 7, 2014 04:42 Judge 16 \| Share via:	Congratulations, Sriraj! You had a creative idea and a well-written proposal, and your win is well deserved. Good luck for the grand prize! Regardless, I hope you will be able to take this proposal to the next level. Regards, Ajith
Sriraj Gokarakonda Oct 10, 2014 09:58 Member 17 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor That is a nice idea Victor. Shall join you on the discussion page.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Oct 10, 2014 09:14 Member 18 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor dear Mr. Ajith Rao, thank you very much. Climate CoLab has certainly provided the thrust for writing down some random thoughts into a well structured proposal and I too sincerely hope this proposal takes off into meaningful action.

Maryette Haggerty Perrault Jul 7, 2014 04:03 Member 1 \| Share via:	First things first - Very well written proposal on a great topic for the Buildings Contest sriraj. I appreciate your attention to detail particularly with the sources. I'll definitely continue reading through both the proposal and the sources but I'll share some initial thoughts now. You are absolutely right - while constructing buildings with efficient mechanical systems is great and required in many environments, this standard design process often entirely bypasses options for passive design which (depending on building type and geographic location) could mitigate or eliminate energy consumption associate with mechanical HVAC and lighting. I guess my question is why has this been the case and how can it be overcome? Is it because contractors are beholden to equipment manufacturers? Because mechanical HVAC is the "easy" way to go? Because the design process is disjointed (i.e. architectural separate from mechanical/landscape/etc.)? Because building codes encourage mechanical HVAC over passive technologies? Air conditioning is a relatively new tool in the grand scheme of things and we humans survived without it for millennia by being smart about where we chose to settle and how we built shelters - maybe its time to learn from history. In my mind, design guidelines and energy benchmarking occupy two separate spaces in the lifecycle of a building. Design guidelines/codes/requirements obviously come into play prior to a building being constructed, while the energy benchmarking tracks energy usage in any given building once it is in operation. Perhaps delineating a bit more clearly along these two distinct lines in your proposal will strengthen the overall context. I understand that your are in particular focusing on India and other tropical weather zones as you have mentioned, which is perfect for the proposal. But don't limit the ultimate goal to just these areas - (different) passive design techniques can be adapted for any given climate! I like the very realistic approach you set forth in your Methodology section, and I think this could be further solidified with buy-in from example agencies/institutes/organizations. Could you potentially get more specific on who will be enacting these ideas? Sorry if my thoughts are a bit unorganized, but I'm genuinely excited about your proposal and encourage you to continue promoting this idea. I look forward to learning more about this topic!
Sriraj Gokarakonda Jul 10, 2014 11:28 Member 2 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor hi Maryette, Thanks for your insightful comment. Your first question is exactly what I set out to find through my proposed research. There are certainly many factors involved, as you mentioned, ranging from “manufacturing” associated GDP growth to one’s individual comfort. I am not implying that HVAC is something that we should or could completely do away with. Like Air conditioning, we humans survived millennia by being smart, nevertheless the ‘smartness’ that we now lent to our indispensible gadgets. My arguments is absolutely not on the lines of to be or not to be, rather I am attempting to search for the fine line between the two. What I am trying to propose is not just design guidelines or codes, but also a reverse benchmark that precisely differentiates ‘sufficiency’ from ‘efficiency’. The exact nature of the benchmark is something that needs to be worked upon. Unlike energy benchmark typically expressed as a measure of specific energy consumption, e.g., kWh/m2, I am trying to propose a reverse benchmark (or may be a group of combined indicators) that define, a truly passive/seasonal/hybrid/closed building. To put it loosely, ‘PADI’ could be an indicator pointing out that in a certain climate or under certain weather conditions, a certain type of building with certain functions or internal loads could well be designed to operate freely without the use of air conditioning and still be able to provide thermal comfort to the inmates. This is in no way benchmark that restricts the architects the freedom to design. Rather this is to remind them the basics of design that the now tend to forget completely and let the ball roll to the domain of other professionals very comfortably. Architects should relieve themselves from this agony of designing highly insulated airtight boxes aka refrigerators posing as buildings in the name of energy efficiency. This is very important to understand because, unlike western approach to energy efficiency, which often sees people living in the building as ‘users’, the social approach to building design in India is very different. The way people interact with a building and immediate outdoors is also very different which the concept of a highly insulated closed air-conditioned building cannot address. This is where a hybrid or zoned approach becomes necessary. This turns out to be much more complex as we start discussing more social, economic and technical aspects, as the construction sector in India is still very loosely organized at the bottom level. The idea is to conduct the research in a particular climate zone in India, which then could be used as a blue print that could be replicated anywhere else, not only in the tropics and sub tropics, but also in the temperate and cold climates. As of now I proposed this to be an individual research and I am in the look out for other research organizations to collaborate with. I suppose, government ministries related to energy and power, housing and urban development, etc. and promoters of green building rating systems, should be the ones enacting this concept. For example, in a similar way the Energy Conservation Building Code of India is being promoted with the partnership of governmental, non-governmental, bi-and-multi national partnerships. In principle this ‘sufficiency’ Vs ‘efficiency’ approach should not necessarily be seen as a need Vs greed approach, rather sufficiency should be aiming to be eliminating flaws at the bottom level to start with, which then could be supplemented with efficiency.
Robert Dedomenico Jul 10, 2014 11:21 Member 3 \| Share via:	Siraj, I really like the focus on "sufficiency". I like this proposal a lot, because it is reasonable, feasible, and actionaable. It just makes sense. Well done! Sincerely, Robert
Climate Colab Aug 6, 2014 12:28 Member 4 \| Share via:	Judges' Comments: I agree with the authors of this proposal that a strong integration of passive measures into the design of new buildings located in hot climates can play a critical role in enhancing their sustainability. With the expected growth in both population and buildings in Southeast Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, this could have a major impact on future building energy consumption. Moreover, passive architecture research and design to date has focused to a large extent on space heating-dominated climates, i.e., per the PassivHaus Institut in Germany. The passive building concepts implemented in heating-dominated climates are not fully appropriate (technically, and considering cost) for wholesale adoption in space cooling-dominated climates, and require modification to be optimized for space-cooling dominated climates. The Passive House Institute U.S. has begun working toward this goal, but more efforts are needed, particularly focused on solutions that can work in the context of developing nations. A PADI could be adopted by code bodies and/or voluntary programs. I would recommend that authors use a strong (i.e., not too 'adaptive') definition of indoor comfort when evaluating the need for air conditioning. Thermal comfort has a real impact on productivity and quality of life, and I believe that a fully passive design will not be able to reliable bring thermal comfort in many hot climates, particularly hot and humid climates. Finally, I think that the proposed project terminates too early. It does include field testing to evaluate existing building (~case studies), but thereafter appears to rely on simulations only to identify and select the most effective design solutions and systems. Many energy-saving technologies look good until they are deployed in the field, where people use the technology and construction does not always occur as designed. Think about sick building syndrome, hygrothermal/moisture problems in walls, mechanical ventilation systems in tight (including passive) houses that don't work properly, etc. Before scaling up any solution and having it adopted by the building development chain, people will need to be shown that the solution works effectively. Buildings are expected to last decades! I strongly encourage the proposers to include a significant field testing and evaluation component to evaluate and, ideally, demonstrate the real-world viability of the design solutions developed.
Climate Colab Sep 3, 2014 12:26 Member 5 \| Share via:	Congratulations -- this proposal has been selected as a Finalist! Comments from Judges: - The Judges saw the overall concept of developing a tool to evaluate the "passive potential" of buildings to be a strong one. This being said, there are likely more lower hanging fruit in India than passive architectural design. - The proposal is very thorough overall, however some key elements were lacking; details on emissions reductions, e.g. - The Judges believe that the real value of this tool comes from creating a practical tool that practitioners can use instead of research and publications. (As described, the project is framed more as a research project instead of as a very practical tool development effort.) You may not want to have just a university operating alone perform this project. - The project is ambitious, i.e., how to evaluate a substantial range of passive design and control techniques in different building types, and will also require much more integration with practitioners throughout the building development chain (i.e., real-estate firms, architects, MEPs, building operators, etc.). Thusly, the Judges believed that the proposers have significantly underestimated the budget, resources, and time required to make it happen. Best of luck in the voting period!
Hemant Wagh Sep 6, 2014 04:07 Member 6 \| Share via:	Would it be possible to include into your client communications a request to 'save the seeds of fruits eaten by their units (work/family) throughout the year and spread/help spread those seeds onto unused land in the vicinity.' This would help increase the green cover, density and in long run provide fruits free of cost to everyone. Impact of trees around the house/buildings on the temperatures inside buildings could be another additional dimension to consider. Along with marine a land based BCCS program would be beneficial. A proposal outlining such an approach is available. Following is a link to such a proposal. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300103/planId/1310401 This would bolster the efforts directed at finding workable solution to climate change..
Venkatesh R Sep 7, 2014 08:40 Member 7 \| Share via:	Good Idea SriRaj, this is a thought, to reduce CO2 in env, not sure how much it works https://crowdsourcing.itu.int/post/40111 but it seems it is feasible with advanced nano composites when i discussed with some science journalist, i am not a research student,probably if this idea gets integrated to a feasible form with some research at least with help of some students, it can reduce the temperature and Co2 as well. All the best for your idea! Thanks Venkat
Venkatesh R Sep 7, 2014 08:25 Member 8 \| Share via:	probably the budget required to consider the above suggestion should be less, and if it is given as an opportunity to students who has knowledge in nano composites and botany it would be better, we can create future innovators as well, this idea will create more job opportunities, reduces pollution, Co2,and alternate energy, the future of algae-bio-diesel in other words create a overlapping forest in the existing world. Please ref https://crowdsourcing.itu.int/post/40111 for the details.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 9, 2014 03:29 Member 9 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor hi Hemant, that is a good idea. I will try to spread a word around. hi Ventkatesh, I am not a specialist in the area of nano technologies, however, you idea too sounds interesting. Thanks for your support...
Psi Energy Sep 15, 2014 02:54 Member 10 \| Share via:	You lost me when you clubbed BEE and GRIHA. Firstly, BEE Developed a CODE and GRIHA is a RATING SYSTEM. I hope you know the difference. Secondly, We've worked on the GRIHA benchmark for naturally ventilated buildings and have perhaps the largest number of nat-vent buildings registered and consequently rated in the world (in a cooling dominated climate). Thirdly, We focus on the adaptive thermal comfort bands of the NBC and prove "sufficiency" via un-met/discomfort hours and not just via EPI / EUI. So GRIHA states that the number of hours beyond the adaptive comfort band must be <10% per annum in a nat-vent building (Criterion 14). And that a building must have daylight in >75% of its occupied zones; enough to match the Daylight Factors in the NBC (criterion 13). Fourthly, GRIHA was developed predominantly by architects and thus the focus was always on passive design techniques and NOT active systems alone, both for visual and thermal comfort. Fifthly, Until the WHOLE country doesn't unite to impact our Outdoor Air Quality (Like what the European commission is doing), absolutely naturally ventilated buildings will be absolutely impossible in Urban areas. Measurements by a students of MNIT, Jaipur just yesterday showed IAQ CO2 levels at 4000 ppm in a reputed hotel conference room. And we all know IAQ is eventually a function of OAQ. Additionally, the work on redefining "thermal comfort" in the Indian context is being carried out by Indraganti, Dr. Mathur (MNIT), etc. so we can also put things into perspective as regards our adaptation to our own climate, which would also go a long way in promoting passive design strategies. But, like most people in India, we tend not to read or understand the systems prevailing, but jump to invalidate what exists as if it was a bunch of bunkum created by people (at TERI!) who didn't have anything better to do. And Lastly, you go ahead and name the system PADI. which is the same as the world famous "Professional Association of Diving Instructors". Best of luck. I hope this succeeds.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 15, 2014 06:29 Member 11 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor dear Shorey, Thank you very much for your insightful comments. I am in search of some very critical comments that provide a right direction for my intended research and words of wisdom coming from you are indeed very valuable. At the outset please let me confess that if some rational argument is missing from the piece published here at Climate Colab, it is because of the space limitations, and I have tried to make few more arguments about the subject in a blog article. There is absolutely no prejudice whatsoever, but a quest for framing meaningful question for my research. Having been very interested in passive architecture right from the under graduate level, I tried to orient myself to be working in this area at every possible opportunity. I cannot claim to be all knowledgeable in the field but am not also as ignorant. I have worked in partnership with both GRIHA and BEE on few projects and my current project (www.bigee.net) also has TERI (ADARSH) as an international partner. I understand the difference between BEE and GRIHA, and when I mentioned both of them together I was only pointing out to the energy related criteria of GRIHA system. GRIHA system has rightly addressed the subtleties and made distinctions for air-conditioned and naturally ventilated buildings with appropriate benchmarks. I have had the opportunity to work on GRIHA (and LEED) projects and carried out simulations myself to design and prove the comfort and daylight criteria you mentioned. Definitely, GRIHA system is more indigenous and it rightly focuses of passive systems. However, it is largely voluntary in nature (albeit being made mandatory through policy interventions). The other question pertains to the discretion between air-conditioned and un-conditioned buildings. GRIHA has benchmarks for both conditioned and unconditioned buildings, but the fine distinction between a building’s functional potential as a conditioned or unconditioned one still appears missing. When we talk of naturally ventilated buildings, the first and foremost culprit is of course the deteriorating outdoor air quality. Nevertheless, there are certainly ‘other’ factors that also influence how far a naturally ventilated building can satisfactorily function or even get designed for (like you pointed out in your blog article “Roti, kapda, and the other makaan bygones“). It is also important to study how feasible are the novel and hybrid technologies, lest absolute natural ventilation fail. And, if super airtight, highly insulated buildings (like passivhaus) in certain cases become inevitable, it is important to know how to do them right for Indian conditions. My research question or argument is not what one should do or should not, but what is possible, what are the hindrances and what are the likely impacts? Thermal comfort is unarguably THE criterion in any attempt to benchmark unconditioned buildings. I have read papers by Dr. Indraganti, Prof. Mathur, Prof. Radhakrishnan, Dr. M.K. Singh etc. and made contact with few of them requesting to provide future directions to my intended research. I have been trying to get in touch and urge few other researchers and pioneers working in the field like Mr. Rawal and Mr. Tanmay to read my research proposal and provide some right directions. Few of them already suggested that I should shed the “rating” part of it and perhaps focus more on the performance evluation. I have been trying to read most of the papers published in reputed journals and conference proceeding like PLEA, Energy and Buildings, IBPSA etc. in the past five to ten years to build up my literature survey. My idea is not to reinvent the wheel. For example, I am not trying to carryout primary research in the field of thermal comfort, but I could only rely on the existing literature, or partly add to the existing based on my own research. I am still in the process of framing the right research question, and the whole purpose of giving it a catchy name is to get noticed and draw critique so that it can be improved upon. The proposal is still abstract or may contain partly flawed arguments, but it can only be improved from there on. As I mentioned, in the blog article motioned above and in my research proposal, despite considerable research that is available, designing something as simple as an effective cross ventilation or stack ventilation system for a suitable building leaves a typical architect grappling to rely on out-dated or very simplified formulae and count on stars to make it work. It is necessary that typical architects should be able to relate to and design for effective passive/hybrid strategies in a language known to them and for the very typical building typologies that they often design. Along with the rating systems, benchmarks and codes, they also need some tools to begin with. For example, something as simple as the climate consultant tool, CLEAR (website) etc. with more technical details that aid the design process in the conceptual stages. Once again thank you very much for sharing your opinion and insight. I would be very much obliged to get in touch with you and sincerely wish you could spare few more thoughts so my intended research effectively addresses key gaps in the field. Through my study I hope, to contribute in coherence with the on-going body of research, standards and codes and the idea is not at all to “reinvent the wheel” or to turn a blind eye to what already exists.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Sep 15, 2014 06:19 Member 12 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor here is the blog article that I was referring to...http://pawber.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/28/
Osero Shadrack Tengeya Sep 17, 2014 03:59 Fellow 13 \| Share via:	Hi sriraj and your friends, kindly consider voting for my proposal shown on this link. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300206/planId/1002 Thanks.
Anne-marie Soulsby Sep 23, 2014 04:17 Member 14 \| Share via:	Hi sriraj, Please consider voting for my proposal, https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300801/planId/1309001 Good luck with your entry! Asante/Thank-you @conserveaction
Victor Blanco Oct 4, 2014 11:05 Member 15 \| Share via:	Congratulations!!! Please check the "Discusion Section" in the "Community" label... Proposal of activity during the Conference Session of 2014 Winners... https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/discussion#discussion%3DpageType%3ATHREAD%2CthreadId%3A1337218
Ajith (aj) Rao Oct 7, 2014 04:42 Judge 16 \| Share via:	Congratulations, Sriraj! You had a creative idea and a well-written proposal, and your win is well deserved. Good luck for the grand prize! Regardless, I hope you will be able to take this proposal to the next level. Regards, Ajith
Sriraj Gokarakonda Oct 10, 2014 09:58 Member 17 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor That is a nice idea Victor. Shall join you on the discussion page.
Sriraj Gokarakonda Oct 10, 2014 09:14 Member 18 \| Share via:	Proposal contributor dear Mr. Ajith Rao, thank you very much. Climate CoLab has certainly provided the thrust for writing down some random thoughts into a well structured proposal and I too sincerely hope this proposal takes off into meaningful action.