Kevin Mo's Blog: Solving Global Warming

A Historic Moment: USGBC and China GBC signed MOU

2010-04-02T04:09:03Z

In a hotel not far from the Beijing Olympic Stadium, affectionately named the Bird’s Nest, the CEO of he U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), Mr. Rick Fidrizzi, and the Chairman of China’s Green Building Council (CBGC), Mr. Youwei Wang, signed a Memorandum of Understanding this Tuesday. Officials from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and China’s Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MoHURD) stood by as witnesses to the event along with a group of building industry leaders.

This was a historic moment signifying the beginning of a new era for the two green building powerhouses who will collaborate to promote green building and carbon emissions reductions in the building sector, including support for each other’s green building conferences and joint research and education on a series of issues of mutual interest.

China’s Green Building Council was established just two years ago, but has since quickly became an unstoppable driving force in the green building world, partially due to the very obvious reason of China’s astonishing economic growth and rapid urbanization which make its building market the most attractive in the world, with 42 billion square meters of existing building stock along with two billion square meters of new buildings each year. The associated energy consumption and carbon emissions in the building sector are expected to soar, which makes green building not an option but the only choice.

In its 2010 Green Building Annual Report, released Monday at the Sixth International Building Energy Efficiency and Green Building Symposium in Beijing, CGBC detailed enormous accomplishments achieved by its ten regional chapters and seven special subcommittees in this past year. More regional chapters and special subcommittees are forming. Interestingly, CGBC is the single organizer of this important annual national event on green buildings. The almost imperceptible shift of organization responsibilities away from MoHURD, which hosted the previous five events, underscored the central government’s endorsement of CGBC. More significantly, CGBC has started shouldering power and responsibilities previously held by MoHURD as a green building decision-maker. China’s green building system, the so-called Three-Star System, allowed regional government agencies to certify one- and two-star applications, but the privilege of judging three-star applications, the highest level of evaluation, belonged only to MoHURD’s Green Building Office. Last year, CGBC became the only other certifying agency for three-star applications. Of the 12 latest projects evaluated by China’s green building standard, ten were certified by CGBC and only two by the MoHURD green building office.

Meanwhile, the USGBC website shows that over 200 buildings/projects in China have registered for or already received LEED certification, and this doesn’t include those applying for LEED 2009 version. A USGBC official estimated that the total from China might already exceed 300. Considering China’s robust economy and huge market, it won’t surprise me that China will surpass the U.S. by sending most LEED applications to USGBC in five years. USGBC obviously understands the importance of the interaction with CGBC in Beijing and sent its dream team, including two USGBC founders and three senior officers.

On the second day, the two green building councils held a full-day, close-door meeting to introduce and study both sides’ green building standards and finalize the scope of research work they would jointly carry out in this year.

From Gray to Green: GHG Emissions Reduction Potential in China’s Building Sector

2009-12-09T17:48:56Z

After more than 16-hours of air travel I finally landed at midnight in Hopenhagen, the new eponym given to Copenhagen, where UN Climate Change Conference/COP 15 is now underway; some two hundred national leaders have gathered in the hope of reaching an agreement on climate change. Unfortunately my suitcase didn’t arrive with me and I was concerned about showing up to NRDC’s side event in my red sweater. Luckily, the airline delivered my suitcase to the hotel three hours before our side event. I showed up ready to speak to a large and rapt audience crammed tightly into a room at the Bella Center, where the COP 15 Climate Conference has been taking place since yesterday to the end of next week.

NRDC’s side event took place on the second day of the climate conference Jake Schmidt served as the moderator; Barbara Finamore delivered an opening speech, followed by Mark Levine from LBNL, Lv Xuedu from China Meteorological Administration, and Robert Earley from iCET. I then made a presentation followed by my colleagues Jingjing Qian and Alex Wang.

The topic I discussed was: “From Gray to Green, Make China’s Rapid Urbanization Sustainable” (here is my presentation), to emphasize the importance of the building sector in China’s effort in cutting GHG emissions while maintaining its economic growth. According to a UNEP SBCI report (I serve as a think tank member in SBCI), the building sector has the greatest potential of any sector for reducing GHG emissions, and it is impossible to meet the climate change commitment without addressing building energy performance.

Though there is no official number on building sector’s energy consumption in China, it is generally agreed that the building sector accounts for about 25 percent of China’s total energy use, not including the energy embodied in the building materials. The three industrial-subsectors that are involved with building production - steel, iron and cement - are extremely energy-intensive, consuming roughly additional 25 percent of China’s total energy use. If you examine the building sector in China from a life-cycle perspective, it easily accounts for 40 to 45 percent of total energy use, if not more. To compound the scenario, China’s rapid urbanization is increasing the share of energy use by the building sector every day.

China’s current urbanization ratio is around 45 percent. It only took 20 years for China to reach an urbanization ratio of 40 percent from 20 percent. To put this rate in perspective, it took 120 years for the United Kingdom, 100 years for France, 80 years for Germany and 60 years for the United States to cover the same span. Furthermore, it was estimated that, by 2020, there will be another 300 million people migrating from rural to urban centers; this is a population size equal to that of the entire U.S. If you multiply the size of the migrating population by three (which is the ratio of electricity consumption by a city resident compared with that of a rural one), the increasing electricity consumption for the building sector is astronomical.

In September, in collaboration with the Boston Consulting Group, NRDC released a joint research paper on GHG emissions reduction potential in China’s building sector. If all of China’s commercial and residential buildings, new and existing, could cut energy use by 70 percent and 55 percent, respectively by 2015 (the end year of China’s 12th five year plan), the avoided CO2 emissions would amount to 2 billion metric tons of carbon. This is a very optimistic estimate, but also very encouraging. China’s first green building, the Agenda 21 building owned by China’s Ministry of Science & Technology, proved that it is economically feasible to cut energy use by 72 percent with existing building technologies. The increased initial investment was only 8 percent higher than regular office buildings, and that was when a lot of currently established regular high-performance building products such as low-e windows, were not yet available in China, thereby raising the price tag of the construction cost (in 2004).

The potential for GHG reductions in the building sector is huge, and the challenge is equally daunting. Retrofitting existing buildings invites a series of questions on existing policies, incentives, and financing structures. It is estimated that most of China’s existing buildings are inefficient and will remain so for the next 30 or even 50 years, if no retrofit is conducted.

A fully functional building rating and labeling system is also missing. Though China released a national building labeling draft standard, it still needs a lot of improvement. An integrated and comprehensive incentive system is also necessary to incentivize the private sector to implement energy efficiency measures beyond the minimum requirements set by codes. Initiating one voluntary program on building efficiency after another without appropriate and systematic incentives will not serve the purpose. Again, as I always mention, carrot and club should come together. Enforcement should be strengthened, which means those who violate the building energy codes should be penalized.

We need to be realistic about the challenges ahead and pragmatic in our approach. There is no question that buildings are a critical component in reducing China’s GHG emissions. Fortunately the steps necessary to reducing buildings emissions are not opaque; the strategies are clear, feasible, cost-effective and shovel-ready. What is left is a framework of policies and programs that removes barriers and generates demand.

Citius, Altius, Fortius: China to pursue world’s tallest green building

2009-10-10T04:15:53Z

The 2008 Beijing Olympic Games have become history, but the Olympic spirit of "Citius, Altius, Fortius" appears to have been instilled into China's building industry. The 2009 Green Building and Energy Efficiency International Conference hosted by McGraw-Hill Construction in Shanghai in August showed that more Chinese developers embrace the concept of green buildings, and many would use "green" to justify taller and bigger construction plans. Almost all the development projects presented at the conference were exceptionally jumbo-sized buildings or communities.

Although energy efficiency and GHG emissions reductions are of equal importance in the central government policies, the building industry seldom touches upon the issue of climate change as evidenced in the conference. My presentation, Building Solutions to Climate Change, was the only one focusing on how the building sector can contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation.

[A rendering picture of upcoming Shanghai Center (632 meters), adjacent to China's current two tallest buildings: Shanghai World Financial Center (492 meters) and Jin Mao Tower (421 meters). The famous Oriental Pearl TV Tower (468 meters) is in the background]

One eye-catching presentation previewed China's next tallest building, the 632-meter (2,073 feet) Shanghai Center featuring 30,000 square meters (323,000 square feet) of offices, shops, hotels, and recreational facilities, with a price tag of more than $2 billion U.S. dollars. The skyscraper is already under construction and will eclipse China's current tallest building, the 492-meter (1,624 feet) Shanghai World Financial Center, in 2014. What amazed the audience was that these two highrises and another giant, the 421-meter Jin Mao Tower, are all located in the same district: the Lujiazui Financial and Trade Zone in Shanghai. The three giants are close to one another and are commonly termed "the three big brothers" in China's priciest area, which is sure to become Shanghai's new landmark.

Let's put everything into perspective. The 83.8-meter Shanghai Park Hotel had been the tallest building in Shanghai for half a decade since it was built in 1934. It was rumored--and testified by this WSJ article--that young I.M.Pei was so awed by the height of the hotel at first sight that he quitted Saint John's University in Shanghai and went to the U.S.--first UPenn and then MIT--to study architecture. In 1978, China committed to the open door policy. Just five years later, in 1983, the Shanghai Hotel passed the Park Hotel by a height of 91.5 meter, which officially kicked off a race for the highest. In 1999, Jin Mao Tower became China's tallest building. In 2008, Shanghai World Financial Center grabbed the title.

[The Shanghai Park Hotel was once known as "the tallest building in the Far East"]

Due to its booming economy, China has been known as "an architects' heaven" and has attracted almost every renowned international architectural firm, whose wildest and sexiest dreams can come true here. Interestingly enough, the three big brothers were all designed by American firms: the Shanghai World Financial Center by KPF, the Jin Mao Building by SOM, and the Shanghai Center by Gensler.

The biggest selling point for China's next tallest building is that it aims to be the world's tallest green building (though not the world's tallest building). The developer is probably aware of the controversial issues around this project. Some have criticized that the Financial Zone is already too crowded, and that a 632-meter giant would inevitably put too much strain on the area's already stressed transit systems and infrastructure. Some have argued that Shanghai has fallen over two meters during the past four decades, and that this upcoming giant may expedite the ground-sinking phenomenon.

To remove these "original sins", the developer's presentation revealed the Shanghai Center's objective of pursuing LEED-Gold certification from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) as well as Three-Star certification from China's Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD). Implementation strategies to obtaining the two certifications were also discussed. For such an extraordinary skyscraper, receiving either certification would be quite an accomplishment, and receiving both would be, to many, nearly a mission impossible. But I wouldn't doubt the Shanghai Center's potential to achieve this goal: its green building consulting team consists of Chinese experts who participated in writing the Chinese Green Building Standard, and Gensler itself received a USGBC's Leadership Award in 2005 and is quite knowledgeable about the LEED criteria.

Two claims in the presentation caught my attention: that "skyscrapers are the choice of future city development" and that the project aims to "provide and demonstrate best practices for green skyscrapers." While North American and European countries are not so enthusiastic about skyscrapers any more, Asian countries are still fascinated with them. Currently there is only one 600-plus-meter skyscraper in the world (the Burj Dubai in UAE, 818 meters). But according to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, the world's Tallest 10 in 2020 (including Burj Dubai and Shanghai Center) will all be over 600 meters, and eight will be in Asia and three will be over 1,000 meters. Therefore, Shanghai Center could lose its tallest-green-building crown to others soon after earning it.

According to a Caijing article, the project's environment impact report only briefly discussed air, water, noise and light pollution. The entire report has never been open for public comments, and only the introduction part was posted online for a short period of time. Will the two popular green certifications in China environmentally condone--or should we say legitimate--such an extraordinary development in this special area? A further relevant question: were the two green building standards meant to certify such a super-tall building? Even a scientific law has its domain and constraints. In my previous blog, In Green We Build, I expressed my concern that many developers would use green certification to get green lights from the administration-a potential greenwashing.

Mr. Qingwei Kong, Chairman of the Shanghai Center Construction Development Co. Ltd, provided another perspective: during the economic downturn, the project would "simulate domestic market demand and lessen economic volatility."

Unwavering Determination: Low-Carbon Reconstruction after Earthquake

2009-09-30T10:18:47Z

Ever imagine an airport that serves only one route with only one flight that only operates on Monday, Wednesday and Friday? Welcome to Guangyuan in Sichuan Province, a city with 2200-plus years of history. Situated on a flattened top of a mountain, the Guangyuan Airport only serves one flight between Beijing and Guangyuan on three weekdays per week. You cannot fly to anywhere else from this airport.

(The Guangyuan Airport)

When I first landed at the airport, I was amazed at the simplicity and tininess of the airport. Two hours before, I had just took off from the splendid Beijing Capital Airport. Far beyond my imagination, the Guangyuan Airport was more like a greyhound bus station in comparison. Although I had been told of how underdeveloped Guangyuan is, it still took me some time to realize the reality. With an area of about 16,300 square kilometers and a population of 3.1 million people, Guangyuan's per capita GDP is only one third of China's national average with 80 percent of Guangyuan's population engaged in agriculture. During the earthquake that struck Sichuan on May 12, 2008, nearly 90 percent of the urban and rural structures in Guangyuan were damaged to various degrees, and more than 2.4 million people were affected. For example, in one of Guangyuan's counties, Qingchuan, many buildings were completely flattened and 250,000 people became homeless overnight. While GDP growth rates in Guangyuan reached 13.5 percent in both 2006 and 2007, the 2008 GDP growth rate was reduced sharply to 3.3 percent due to the destruction caused by the earthquake. Guangyuan's direct economic loss from the earthquake amounts to RMB 120 billion (about $17 billion USD).

(A damaged building under repair)

Bumpy and muddy, the road to Guangyuan city was an instant reminder of the catastrophic impact that the earthquake had last year in this area. Facing a massive post-earthquake reconstruction challenge, the city government is aiming to seize the opportunity to transform Guangyuan into a low carbon city. Personally, I believe, it takes just as much unwavering determination for the Guangyuan city government to brave the challenge of reconstructing the city on a green plan as it does for the Obama administration to redirect the American economy during a crisis towards a greener economy.

The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), a national think tank for climate change and sustainable development, was commissioned by a UK grant to conduct a one-year low-carbon reconstruction city planning project in this severely damaged city. The outcome of this project will serve as a roadmap for China's 600-plus small and medium cities on how to mitigate and adapt to climate change while maintaining economic growth, rapid urbanization and industrialization. Viewing this as a very intriguing challenge, I accepted an invitation to serve as an advisor to the team, and flew to Guangyuan for an on-site survey with the CASS team.

On the day I arrived in Guangyuan, world leaders happened to be gathering at the UN to reiterate their hopes to reach a climate agreement in Copenhagen. Chinese President Hu Jintao announced that China would reduce its carbon intensity, though no specific number was provided. No matter what number China eventually sets as the target, it is really up to local governments in places like Guangyuan to implement and fulfill the targets. I cannot say enough about the importance of the CASS' pilot project in Guangyuan. While many would focus their efforts on China's economic centers, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen, CASS chose Guangyuan because it is more representative of China's small and medium sized cities that are going through an early phase of industrialization, experiencing fast city expansion and population explosion, and facing huge environment and energy challenges. How to balance the needs of economic growth and the pressures of GHG emissions reduction is a critical question to be answered in this research.

In its Industrial Park Development Plan for 2009-2015, Guangyuan made it clear that clean energy and low carbon technologies would be the driving force. Since natural gas is abundant in Guangyuan, the government decided to encourage all industries to switch from coal to natural gas, which would significantly reduce GHG emissions. In addition, in rural Longtan County, one of the four counties in Guangyuan, all households have installed biogas plants. This year, all biogas plants alone in Guangyuan will cut carbon dioxide emissions by 6.5 million tons. Guangyuan plans to construct biogas plants for at least 60 percent of all rural households by 2015.

But all of the above measures alone are not enough to put Guangyuan on a low-carbon path.. To expedite post-earthquake economy recovery and industrialization, Guangyuan established an "express lane" for approving industrial reconstruction projects, which simplified application procedures and lifted environmental restrictions. As a result, many high pollutant and energy-intensive industries migrated to Guangyuan from developed areas. With abundant resources and cheap energy, it is likely that Guangyuan could be on an unsustainable path unless a low-carbon development framework is put in place.

(An industrial park supported by Zhejiang Province with energy-intensive textile plants, aluminum manufacturing plants, etc.)

Required by the Chinese central government, Guangyuan needs to cut down its energy intensity by 20 percent from its 2005 level by 2010. However, Guangyuan only managed to cut down its energy intensity by a total of 8.04 percent by the end of 2008, achieving merely 40 percent of the goal in three years. For 2009 and 2010, Guangyuan needs to cut down 6.5 percent each year to meet the goal, which is a very daunting task.

For the construction industry, only structural durability to sustain another earthquake was emphasized in the reconstruction efforts. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in the reconstruction, however, were not given the attention they deserve. Based on the Guangyuan Post-earthquake Urban and Rural Housing Reconstruction Plan, 12 million square meter buildings will be built by 2010. A lock-in inefficiency will be tremendous if we don't move quickly to make appropriate modifications to the plan, which will begin implementation soon.

The CASS project will provide recommendations to revise several of Guangyuan's reconstruction efforts, including: 1) the Post-earthquake Reconstruction Master Plan, 2) Reconstruction Urban Planning, 3) the Urban & rural Housing Reconstruction Plan, 4) the Industrial Development Plan and 5) Policy recommendation for Guangyuan's 12th Five Year Plan.

Three case studies will be conducted, including 1) a low-carbon community, 2) low-carbon buildings, and 3) an assessment and policy design of renewable energy for rural areas.

On the 2nd day of my trip, I gave a half-day workshop to Guangyuan's construction and urban planning officials, researchers and developers. The workshop focused on six areas:

1. Building and climate change
2. How to use local materials for buildings
3. Building energy label
4. Smart growth
5. Low carbon community design
6. Case study on sustainable urban planning

I'll continue to blog my research findings down the road.

A damaged building under repair

Go with wind: China to dramatically boost its wind power capacity, again

2009-07-21T10:36:59Z

China keeps revising its renewable energy target for 2020--so frequently and dramatically that just when you feel you finally managed to track all the target numbers and to put them on paper, the numbers become history. China first announced its 2020 target for renewable energy in 2007, and then revised the numbers in May 2009. With the stimulus package injected into renewable energy investment, China is now reported to be revising the 2020 target plan again, which is even more ambitious (as shown below). It should be noted that China interchangeably uses the terms "alternative energy" and "renewable energy"; its portfolio includes large amounts of hydropower and nuclear power.

.	Installed Capacity by the end of 2008	The 2020 Target set in 2007	The 2020 Target revised in May 2009	Proposed plan to revise the 2020 Target
Wind	12.17 gW	30 gW	100 gW	150 gW
Solar	140 mW	1.8 gW	10 gW+	20 gW
Nuclear	9.1 gW	40 gW	60~75 gW	86 gW
Total power supply	793 gW	1000 gW		1400~1500 gW

In the newly proposed 2020 renewable energy plan, wind power would become dominant, accounting for 10 percent of the total power supply and increasing from an initial 30 gigawatts (gW), which was less than nuclear power (40 gW), to 150 gW. This would be double the nuclear power target of 86 gW. Solar energy capacity would also be significantly increased, from the original 1.8 gW, to 20 gW, 142 times the installed capacity at the end of 2008.

To show it's not just a numbers game with the renewable energy target, a couple of weeks ago, China began construction on its first 10 gW wind power station in Jiuquan, Gansu province. The installed capacity will be increased to 20 gW by 2020 and eventually reach 40 gW, which would almost double the installed capacity of the gigantic Three Gorges Dam-the world's largest hydro-electric power station, with a potential total installed capacity at 22.4 gW. Gansu is now boasting "Three Gorges of Wind Farms," with a total investment predicted to be more than 120 billion yuan ($17.6 billion); the newly estimated total investment in Three Gorges Dam is about 180 billion yuan.

Of the 150 gW target by 2020, 30 gW will come from offshore wind farms. The largest offshore wind power project so far is the Donghai Bridge Wind Farm in Shanghai--the most fascinating wind farm, in my opinion. The Donghai Bridge is about 32.5 kilometers long, the longest in China. Wind turbines are being installed on both sides of the bridge. The total installed power capacity will reach 100 mW.

A Chinese research team has re-evaluated China's potential wind power resources and significantly increased its onshore wind power potential to 700~1,200 gW from the original forecast of 280 gW, which means wind power resources alone can meet the entire country's electricity demands. Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region and Inner Mongolia both boast more than 100 gW of wind energy resources. But there remains one big issue, similar to the one confronted by coal and natural gas industries: all the wind power resource--rich areas are thousands of kilometers away from high electricity demand areas. High voltage power lines are needed. In an effort to build a so-called Strong Smart Grid, China invested more in grids than in power generation last year.

China's total power capacity will be more than 900 gW in 2009, and will soon be close to what the U.S. has now--1,000 gW.

A Tale of Two Countries: Secretary Chu Spoke on Climate Change at Tsinghua University

2009-07-20T10:04:46Z

Two days before Energy Secretary Steven Chu gave a speech at Tsinghua University, the top Chinese science and engineering school where I taught building science 15 years ago, a U.S. Embassy intern sent an email offering seats to the first 100 repliers. A dozen interns in our Beijing office immediately emailed back, trying to grab a seat. Unfortunately, all but one hit the lottery-the tickets went too fast. I could clearly see how disappointed our interns were. Luckily, they all eventually went to listen to Secretary Chu after the university increased the overflow space.

It was not the first time a high-profile U.S. figure had spoken at Tsinghua University-President Clinton and President Bush both did-but it's the first time two Chinese-American secretaries visited China at the same time; Commerce Secretary Gary Locke was also in Beijing at the time. The Chinese student audience showed unusually high excitement. In addition, Secretary Chu is a long-time foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. His fellow Nobel laureate, Dr. C.N. Yang, now a professor at Tsinghua, attended the speech and sat in the first row.

Secretary Chu started his speech by mentioning his close ties to Tsinghua-both of his parents graduated from Tsinghua and then went to MIT. His presentation focused on climate change and urged that the U.S. and China work together to tackle global warming issues. To conclude his speech, he used Martin Luther King's phrase from more than 40 years ago, "We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today."

During Secretary Chu's visit to China, the U.S. DOE and China's National Energy Administration announced plans to develop a joint research center on clean energy, with an initial pledge of $15 million from both countries. Priority research topics include building energy efficiency, carbon capture and storage (CCS) and clean vehicles.

As a researcher having worked on building energy efficiency in both the U.S. and China for more than 15 years, I feel that the building sector for the first time is receiving overdue respect in climate talks. Although the building sector accounts for almost 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. and 30 percent in China, climate experts appear to be far more interested in such sectors as power generation, industry, transportation, agriculture, etc.

Unlike CCS and clean vehicles, developing innovative technologies is not the most urgent aspect of building energy efficiency. Existing energy efficiency technologies, if fully utilized, can increase building energy efficiency to at least 30 percent in the U.S. and 50 percent in China. In the newly signed U.S.-China Building Efficiency MOU, the two countries will learn from each other's experiences with efficient building technologies.

Building policy incentives and regulatory reform are equally important to the both countries. While the American Clean Energy and Security Act is pushing for a national building code, China has already had in place national building standards and green building standards, with help from NRDC and other U.S. organizations. In addition, China also requires that government-owned buildings and large public buildings install real-time energy monitoring systems; it would probably be an uphill climb for the U.S. to require this. However, in China, building code enforcement is still a big concern, and a market-based incentive mechanism is also missing. NRDC and RESNET are helping China to develop a building-labeling system that enforces building codes, and to foster a market-based energy inspector community.

China is enthusiastic about eco-city initiatives, which the U.S. government will support, according to the MOU. But it still will take time before China achieves net-zero energy building, an ambitious goal for the DOE that targets the year 2020 for residential buildings and 2025 for commercial buildings. China still faces regulatory obstacles to get solar energy connected to the grid. By the end of 2008, only 100 mW solar power capacity was attached to the grid. By the DOE's definition, a net-zero energy building should be able to send extra electricity to the grid and get electricity from the grid when on-site generation is insufficient.

China Launches National Green Building Label Campaign

2009-06-25T13:50:19Z

On this surprisingly steamy, 102-degree day in Beijing, more than 400 green building experts from across China gathered in a hotel to launch the 3-star Chinese Green Building Label campaign.

Two years ago, China's Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development ("MOHURD", formerly known as MOC) released an official Chinese Green Building Evaluation Standard. Little progress has been made since then except for the release of several supplementary technical guidelines and the establishment of a management office. Only ten designs have been awarded the Green Building Design Label (GBDL), one of the two labels assigned by the standard. The other label is the Green Building Label (GBL), for buildings that have been occupied for at least one year. No building has obtained a GBL yet. However, in the past two years, more than 100 Chinese buildings have been registered for LEED certification.

The Chinese Green Building System is made up of six components: land efficiency, energy efficiency, water efficiency, resource efficiency, environment quality and operational management. Each component has mandatory items, regular items and premium items. A project receives one point when it satisfies one regular or premium item requirement. The scoring system is more similar to that of NAHB National Green Building Standard than to that of LEED. The star level is decided by the minimum score of each component, not the total scores. For example, the residential evaluation table is as follow:

.	Land	Energy	Water	Resource	Env.	Operations	.
Star level	Regular score	Regular score	Regular score	Regular score	Regular score	Regular score	Total premium score
★	4	2	3	3	2	4	0
★★	5	3	4	4	3	5	3
★★★	6	4	5	5	4	6	5

To scale up the existing program, MOHURD launched this campaign to officially allow provincial green building offices to administer the 1-star and 2-star labels, as the system had been originally designed; its own office would only evaluate applications for the 3-star label, the highest and most prestigious one. The ten designs certified so far include four 3-star, two 2-star and four 1-star labels. Currently, only residential buildings, office buildings and hotels are eligible to apply for the label.

Although regulated by a government agency, the Chinese green building program is a voluntary program that offers no incentives. GBDL is effective for one year and only comes with a certificate, and GBL is good for three years and is awarded with both a certificate and a plaque. The application fee includes a registration fee of 1,000 yuan ($140) and an estimated evaluation fee of 40,000 to 50,000 yuan ($5,700 to $7,100).

Mr. Yiming Chen, Director of the Science and Technology Division under MOHURD, made a concise opening speech to the 400 provincial representatives who will shoulder the evaluation responsibility and are key to the success of the campaign. He admitted that Chinese green building development is still at an early stage, especially in view of the following facts:

Lack of technological integration
The standard needs improvement and expansion to cover more public buildings (e.g., hospitals, shopping malls, and movie theaters, etc.)
Most green buildings are in large cities, and the number of green buildings is still small compared to the large stock of the Chinese buildings.

He emphasized that building energy efficiency was the top priority for green buildings in China. A green building must first and foremost be energy efficient. In the LEED rating system, points lost in the energy section can be recouped from other sections.

Local green building standards must be in line with the national standard, says Mr Chen, if there is a conflict in between, the national standard should always supersede the local one.

The standard was written by a group of national experts from various disciplines who also evaluated the ten certified designs. It remains to be seen whether the provincial capacity can support the scale-up effort.