TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic feasibility of green office building
T2 - combining life cycle cost analysis and cost–benefit evaluation
AU - Miraj, Perdana
AU - Berawi, Mohammed Ali
AU - Utami, Siti Rahma
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Construction practitioners have adopted the green building (GB) concept to restore environmental damage caused by the built environment over the last decade. However, there is inconclusive debate regarding GB savings’ potential to recover the cost of construction, maintenance, and renewals. This paper evaluates the feasibility of green-certified office buildings in Indonesia by comparing the life cycle cost and presents the cost–benefit ratio. Data were obtained from primary data and combined with reliable secondary sources for analysis. The result shows that GB requires an additional cost of 9.22% but offers energy and water savings over the building’s life cycle accounted for 58.65%. Research has shown that GB adoption reduces the cost per square metre by 41.74% over the traditional one. The cost–benefit ratio of energy, water, and carbon emissions was 2.35 and thus, justified the increased costs of investment, maintenance, and renewals of GB. This research’s findings can assist policymakers, practitioners, developers, and other interested parties in the construction sector in bringing forward regulatory changes, collaboration initiatives, capital investment, or other decision-making support.
AB - Construction practitioners have adopted the green building (GB) concept to restore environmental damage caused by the built environment over the last decade. However, there is inconclusive debate regarding GB savings’ potential to recover the cost of construction, maintenance, and renewals. This paper evaluates the feasibility of green-certified office buildings in Indonesia by comparing the life cycle cost and presents the cost–benefit ratio. Data were obtained from primary data and combined with reliable secondary sources for analysis. The result shows that GB requires an additional cost of 9.22% but offers energy and water savings over the building’s life cycle accounted for 58.65%. Research has shown that GB adoption reduces the cost per square metre by 41.74% over the traditional one. The cost–benefit ratio of energy, water, and carbon emissions was 2.35 and thus, justified the increased costs of investment, maintenance, and renewals of GB. This research’s findings can assist policymakers, practitioners, developers, and other interested parties in the construction sector in bringing forward regulatory changes, collaboration initiatives, capital investment, or other decision-making support.
KW - Construction
KW - cost–benefit analysis
KW - green building
KW - life cycle cost
KW - sustainability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102686048&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/09613218.2021.1896354
DO - 10.1080/09613218.2021.1896354
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85102686048
SN - 0961-3218
VL - 49
SP - 624
EP - 638
JO - Building Research and Information
JF - Building Research and Information
IS - 6
ER -