Analysis of the implementation of green building on the Syahdan Campus building based on the Green Building Council Indonesia (GBCI) specifications

Global warming is caused by several factors, one of them being the uncontrolled construction sector that impacts the environment. The concept of green construction and green building is a solution to reduce global warming within the scope of civil engineering buildings. This study determined the criteria and predicate of the results of implementing green buildings according to the Greenship certification by the Green Building Council Indonesia (GBCI) in Binus Syahdan Jakarta. The research method used green building analysis based on the existing greenship building version 1.1. The result is the silver predicate, with the lowest value being Material Resource and Cycle (MRC) and the highest being Energy Efficiency Conservation (EEC). After improvisation, a maximum point was obtained (95) with a platinum predicate. Based on the analysis of the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) calculation for the next 15-20 years, the BINUS Syahdan campus building can save costs of Rp. 7,515,719,282.


Introduction
The global average temperature on the Earth's surface has increased by 0.74% over the last hundred years.About 33% of CO2 emissions, 17% of clean water, 25% of wood products, 30-40% of energy use, and 40-50% use of raw materials for construction and operation contributed by buildings [1].Global warming is the current phenomenal issue and one of the world's challenges, including Indonesia.Several factors cause global warming that hurt the environment.One cause factor is uncontrolled construction.Some examples of these environmental impacts are unfriendly materials, waste of energy, and the reduction of green land.Therefore, the green building concept is a solution to reduce global warming within the scope of Civil Engineering Buildings.Indonesia, part of the international community, has a moral obligation to participate in climate change mitigation efforts.Also, as an archipelagic country, Indonesia is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.The mitigation effort is part of international commitments to achievement targets in the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs).INDCs are the national targets of each country requested by 1324 (2024) 012024 IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1324/1/012024 2 the UNFCC for COP 21, Paris.Indonesia's INDCs have a target to reduce 29% of emissions, 3% higher than the target set in 2009.Several sectors targeted by Indonesia in the INDCs can achieve this through the green building concept, the use of renewable energy, energy efficiency, and waste management.
Green Campus is an international program to realize how to control educational programs on campus in dealing with and solving environmental issues through educational and research programs that innovate and implement sustainable results on campus.Green campus's strategy still refers to the sustainability concept, which consists of environmental, social, and economic.The growth of higher education in Indonesia is very rapid.The fact is one university is born every two days.The number of students in Indonesia reaches 6,924,511 people, more than the population of Singapore.The total fields number of science is 20,516 majors.The largest field of science is engineering, reaching 4,634 majors.
A developed economy demands increased efficiency in energy use.One rising problem in China's universities is how to create a green campus in line with the growth of universities and schools in China.The number of universities increases yearly, but this condition is not balanced with the amount of staff needed.[4] found that a green campus can be achieved starting from toplevel strategy design, such as processing departments at universities to relevant national ministers, as well as some long-term support to achieve the green campus.
The BINUS Syahdan University building is an existing building that was established more than 20 years ago.Identification of the BINUS Syahdan University Building condition is conducted by analyzing the operational components of the building, including the space used, the source of electrical energy and its use, the source of clean water and its use, and the management of the building.According to [5], one of the inhibiting factors for applying the green building concept is the higher initial cost for electrical materials required in implementing the green building concept compared to conventional building concepts.In line with this concept, it is necessary to base the calculation of life cycle costs (Life Cycle Cost) that aims to regulate the process from planning to replacement of building material assets as well as managing long-term life cycle costs rather than short-term savings, and to improve sustainability and minimize life cycle cost, efficiency, and energy conservation throughout the life of the building.Therefore, this research aims to assess and improve the predicate of green building and the savings obtained in the coming years to support Sustainable Development Goals 9 and 11.

Green building application theory and previous research
There are six categories of green ship assessment instruments, including: • Appropriate site development, the purpose of this criterion is to keep the environmental area away from the development process and pay attention to the sustainability of the ecosystem in determining the location of development.• Energy efficiency conservation, this criterion is not only focused on the scope of energy use but also pays attention to the surrounding environment which has an impact on exhaust emissions and other things such as heat pollutants, excessive lighting sources, and noise generated.• Water conservation, the water demand in Indonesia has reached 8,802 x 105 m3.Thus, this criterion applies to a water-saving system starting from the saving program, management, and selection of other water output regulators.• Material resource and cycle, material reuse is seen at the source and cycle to optimize the use of one material to extend the material recycling period with efficiency and conservation to minimize ecological, final waste, and carbon footprint.• Indoor health and comfort, the climate conditioning in the room is quite influential on every building occupant because 90% of the public occupies a room in the building.Poor air composition greatly results in a decrease in the level of environmental atmosphere and conditions for building occupants.
• Building environmental management, in preparing environmentally friendly buildings, it is necessary to pay attention to activities from design, organization, implementation, and control, to plan the operation of the building, an environmentally friendly design is needed, considering the scope of a sustainable building by providing any waste generated by the building using waste disposal.The assessment instrument by Greenship certification is concurrently and confirmed by agreement by each GBCI member, which is every stakeholder related to building construction activities, including the developer sector, architect consultants, structural experts, contractors, plumbing mechanics, central and local governments, and building material providers.The assessment criteria for each category of Greenship Building Built Version 1.1 are in Table 1.Several previous studies/research regarding the application of the green building concept revealed that many buildings have not yet implemented the green building concept, especially campus buildings [6,7,8].According to [9], the average construction cost of a green building-certified residential building is only 1.58% higher than that of a public residential building, indicating that green building certification does not require much extra costs.However, achieving green building certification for residential buildings (gold or diamond) increases the construction cost by about 6.7% to 9.3%.This shows that pursuing high-level green building certification does require higher construction costs.Meanwhile, existing research projects mostly focus on the design phase, leading to a lack of feasibility for green buildings.This analysis shows that the decorative construction cost of the project only comprises 0.27% of the total project cost, which indicates the need for less than 2% [10].
The life cycle cost analysis was conducted by [11] for a green building and showed how the life cycle cost variables were identified and used to develop a life cycle budget for the whole life cycle of a green building that extends for 60 years.Life cycle cost is an economic method for project evaluation in which all costs arise from ownership, operation, maintenance, and disposal.It is calculated without considering environmental or social costs.Life cycle cost (LCC) is used to evaluate and compare several design alternatives based on the total cost, not just the initial investment cost.Operating costs, maintenance, and disposal costs can be more expensive than other costs.[11] also found that reducing energy consumption in green buildings is the most influential factor in reducing its total life cycle cost.

Research method
This research begins with a literature study.The literature study explains the application of the green building concept, the Green Building Council Indonesia (GBCI) parameter standard, the Budget Plan, and previous research.Then, formulating the problem and the objectives of this research.

4
The data collected.Primary data was obtained through field observations and interviews with building management (BM) based on several benchmarks in each Greenship category with research instruments (checklist).Secondary data in this study is data obtained from various sources.In this case, the secondary data obtained comes from building management.The secondary data obtained are as follows: • BINUS University Syahdan Campus building plan.

•
Siteplan for the Syahdan University campus building.

•
Greenship existing building assessment tool version 1.1.After calculating all items, an assessment was made based on land use, efficient energy utilization, water utilization, outdoor air health, and building management with give attention to the environment.Furthermore, the percentage of assessment results on buildings that have been examined according to the category of each aspect of the assessment is then determined based on the predicate by GBCI: Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Bronze.The result of this research provides recommendations and evaluations of the building.The evaluation result will increase the rating or predicate of the building after being assessed if the initial assessment of the building is still relatively ordinary.
The additional financial review and then compare it with existing conditions.After that, calculate the Life Cycle Cost (LCC) for the next 15-20 years by analyzing the initial, operational, and replacement costs.With the application of green building, it is compared whether the financing is saving or losing in terms of costs.

Data and analysis
Table 2 shows a predicate based on total points and percentages according to the standard parameters of greenship existing building v1.1.After observations and interviews, the existing points are obtained in Table 3.The comparison of Greenship's maximum points with actual points is presented in Figure 1.Comparison of green ship points v1.1 The final result of the assessment obtained a total of 65 points with a percentage of 55.55% that was categorized as a predicated building (silver).In Table 3 the most dominant category that meets greenship is the energy efficiency category with 66% of the total standard points achieved.Precisely on benchmark 1 (optimized efficiency building energy performance) where the IKE value on the Syahdan campus building is 143.55 kWh/m2/year and is smaller than the reference standard IKE, which is 250 kWh/m2.year,thus saving 57.42% of the reference standards set, and this category gets 16 points.
While the lowest benchmark in achieving green ship points is in the cycle and material source category with a percentage of 42%, many aspects affect the difficulty of achieving this category including benchmarks 1 (Non-ODS Usage) and 5 (hazardous waste management).In benchmark 1, it found that half of the types of coolers used use the R22 cooling system which is not environmentally friendly because it has an ODP value of 0.05, while in benchmark 5 there is no policy regarding B3 waste treatment such as SOPs, training, and implementation reports.In [8] where the Material Resource & Cycle category is the category with the lowest points, the most major is found in benchmarks 1 (Non-ODS Usage) and 5 (hazardous waste management).
After observing the existing campus, an improvement or design evaluation is conducted based on the parameters of the existing greenship building v1.1.A comparison of Greenship's maximum points with improvement / evaluation points is presented in Figure 2.  The results of the assessment index in each Greenship category before the evaluation and recommendations on the planning of the Syahdan campus building were 65 with a percentage of 55.55% and received a silver rating.The silver rating can be upgraded to platinum through the evaluation and building recommendations.It gets a total of 95 points with a percentage of 81% and a platinum rating by adding several policies and facilities.
Of the six categories that were evaluated, the result is that the water conservation category is the most applicable category on the Syahdan campus with a percentage of 100% supported by the completeness of existing data so that the water conservation category (WAC) can best meet the greenship criteria.The land use category is the most difficult to add designs or improvise 69% because the available land is limited.With this land limitation, it is not possible to expand the vegetation area and expand the paving on the Syahdan campus, so in this it is not difficult to achieve high points.From several recommendations or design evaluations that have been conducted, the cost analysis for several fields is as follows (Table 5-10).Based on the analysis of the life cycle cost (LCC) plan for five years, there are several costs consisting of initial costs, operational and maintenance costs, and replacement costs.

Conclusion
From the assessment process on the analysis of the application of Greenbuilding criteria according to the Greenship certification for built buildings that have been carried out on the BINUS Syahdan campus building design, the following conclusions are obtained: • Based on the results of an assessment of six aspects of the green building criteria that refer to the GBCI Greenship national standard with a rating system for built buildings V1.1, the Syahdan campus building managed to get a total of 65 score points or 55.55% of a maximum of 117 score points.The lowest category is Material Resource and Cycle (MRC) similar to the research of [8], while the highest category is Energy Efficiency Conservation (EEC).• Technical recommendations can be made in increasing the rating/rating of the implementation of Green Building, including meeting building eligibility requirements, meeting prerequisite criteria, and applying several credit and bonus criteria that have been recommended such as adding sub-meters, parking policies, SOPs for pests and diseases, basic waste management, implementing EMS technology support, implementing a water recycling system, changing types of air conditioners and management commitment to be part of greenship.If the building implements all the recommendations,it will get a platinum predicate with a total value of 95 points with a percentage of 81%.• Based on the results of the life cycle cost analysis, the initial and replacement costs for green are largerbut in terms of operating costs are smaller, which is the same case in [7].In

Table 3 .
Formatting sections, subsections and subsubsections.Total percentage of greenship existing building assessment results in v1.1

Table 4 .
Total score from evaluation and recommendation

Table 5 .
Comparison of the overall initial cost

Table 6 .
Comparison of overall operating costs for 5 years

Table 7 .
Comparison of overall operating costs for 20 years

Table 8 .
Comparison of overall replacement costs for 5 years

Table 9 .
Overall replacement cost comparison for 20 years

Table 10 .
Estimated life cycle cost for 5 yearsFrom Table10it can be concluded that from the analysis of the initial, operational, and replacement costs, for 5 years the BINUS Syahdan campus building has/got a cost saving of Rp. 334,405,032.90.This includes a short period of time because the green building concept is not a long concept where the building stands at least 15-20 years in the future.Based on Table11, in the next 15-20 years the BINUS Syahdan campus building can save costs of Rp. 7,515,719,282.00,In addition, the BINUS Syahdan campus building is an environmentally friendly and sustainable building.

Table 11 .
Estimated life cycle cost for 20 years