




To enable the construction industry to measure the sustainability of dwellings, BREEAM has developed two environmental assessment schemes: EcoHomes and the Code for Sustainable Homes (usually shortened to “Code”, or sometimes “CSH” or “CfSH”). Assessment against these schemes is carried out by independent, licensed assessors.
Both schemes take account of a broad range of issues, from bicycles to bathtubs and from recycling to renewable energy. In fact cycle storage, internal water use, low and zero carbon (LCZ) energy sources and recycling facilities are just four aspects of over 30 issues that are examined in detail. Each issue has its own scoring method. A housing development, or a single house or flat, can be assessed against each issue in turn, and a number of credits awarded.
Carbon footprint is in effect assessed for the whole life cycle of the dwelling, from construction, through everyday use, to demolition and disposal. It takes account of the energy embodied in materials, as well as the energy used in construction. However, the major factor is the average energy used during its occupation as a home.
Energy issues account for just one quarter of those examined. Diverse matters such as security and sound-proofing are also covered. Comparing the environmental impact of light fittings and lavatory cisterns is like comparing chalk and cheese, but the BRE has achieved it by consultation with experts from a broad range of disciplines. Different weightings are applied to the issues, so that the value of a credit depends on the issue. Credit value is expressed in points or a percentage, which amount to the same thing as there are 100 points available.
By adding up the credit values for all the issues we get a percentage score to evaluate the sustainability of the dwelling or development. To facilitate the setting of targets, the Code has performance bands from Level 1 to Level 6 (top), while EcoHomes has descriptive ratings from “Pass” to “Excellent”.
Both schemes are applicable to houses and flats to be used as single dwellings. Shared facilities (e.g. common rooms) cannot always be assessed, and neither scheme is capable of assessing management facilities (e.g. warden’s offices). Sometimes therefore a lower score will result. If there are to be significant shared or management facilities then Multi-Residential would be a better scheme to use.