Eco Priority Guide: External Shading Devices
Overview
Shading devices are regularly exposed to sun and weather,
therefore their main eco-priority is life-cycle issues, in
particular durability and maintenance requirements. Depending on
what type (if any) of additional finish is suitable and its
maintenance requirements, the life-cycle costs of external shading
devices can be high.
Aluminium and stainless steel are high durability, low
maintenance materials but are also high in embodied energy and
greenhouse emissions. Careful life-cycle assessment should be
undertaken of alternatives, such as timber or fabric, before
engaging whole façade aluminium or stainless steel.
In the case of aluminium and stainless steel shading devices,
the improved durability may not justify the increased greenhouse
gas emissions generated from the production of these materials.
Other materials, such as unfinished recycled hardwood, represent a
more appropriate choice of external shading device (see for example
the City of Melbourne Council House 2) as this application is
non-essential, accessible and maintainable. See glossary entry for
more information on Appropriate Durability.
Residentially, many shade devices are custom built during
construction and are likely to be made of easily fabricated
materials such as fibre cement (sheet, louvres and lattice),
colorbond, aluminium and timber. If added by the homeowner they are
more likely to be fabric awnings, roller shutters or aluminium
louvres.
Commercially (and in multi-unit developments), external shade
devices have been in decline due to the increased use of smart
glass. This is creating significant problems in the industry as
glass tower occupants are suffering radiant heat stress. This
situation can best be avoided using external sunshades. See
Smart Glazing Selection Eco Priority Guide for further
information (coming soon).
Provided the external sunshade is fitted during base building
construction and is connected to a Building Management System (or
equivalent), relevant Green Star™ credit points may be able to be
achieved.
Eco-Priorities
The following issues relate to both potential positive and
negative issues associated with each product class:
Commercial
|
Priority Order
|
Fabric PTFE coated
Fibre-glass
|
Fabric
Acrylic
fluoro-carbon treated
|
Stainless Steel
|
Fibre Cement, epoxy coated
|
Concrete
precast
|
Alpolic- Alumin on resin core
|
Glass,
coated
|
|
1
|
Durability
|
Durability+
|
Durability+
|
Durability+
|
Durability+
|
Durability
|
Durability+
|
|
2
|
GHG+
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
|
3
|
Resource
|
Resource
|
Toxics
|
Toxics
|
Resources
|
Resource+
|
Resources+
|
|
4
|
Toxics
|
Toxics
|
Resources
|
Resources
|
|
|
Thermal
|
|
Issues of concern?*
|
Minor
|
|
|
Minor Possible Bio-diversity
|
|
|
|
+ Denotes issue has positive outcomes
* Issues that are high-concern and are an eco-design basis for not
using the product.
Residential
|
Priority Order
|
Fabric
Canvas
cotton and polyester
|
Softw'd
W'board incl Ply
|
Fibre Cement
uncompr'd
|
Alumin Awning
powder coated, roller or fixed
|
Alumin
Louvres
powder coated
|
|
1
|
Durability
|
Durability
|
Durability+
|
Durability+
|
Durability+
|
|
2
|
Bio-
diversity
|
Bio-
diversity
|
GHG+
|
GHG
|
GHG
|
|
3
|
Resource (water)
|
Toxics if preserved
|
Resources
|
Toxics
|
Toxics
|
|
4
|
GHG+
|
GHG+
|
Bio-
diversity
|
Resource+
|
Resource+
|
|
Issues of concern?*
|
Yes
Bio-diversity
|
Yes
Bio-diversity
|
Possible
Bio-
diversity
|
|
|
+ Denotes issue has positive outcomes
* Issues that are high-concern and are an eco-design basis for not
using the product.
Making a Decision
Commentary
Designing shading that is both correct and relevant to the
aspect and plane (i.e. orientation and whether shading is vertical
and horizontal), is the most important issue with external shading.
If the design is not correct, the shade will be inefficient at
best, and/or useless at worst. Size and angle of blades needs to be
designed according to solar altitude and azimuth angles at critical
times of the year. If in doubt how this is achieved, consult
fundamental texts (e.g. Phillips 1999), or a passive solar
specialist.
Some recent experiences in one of Australia's iconic new green
development precincts has demonstrated that avoiding the use of
external shading and opting for tinted 'high performance' glass has
lead to major heat discomfort for building occupants. Once the sun
shines on the glass, it heats up, re-radiating the absorbed heat
into the internal spaces and increasing the mean radiant
temperature. While there are a variety of shading options,
from double envelopes to conventional shading, that will combat the
problem, the industry is in the process of learning the hard way
that there is ultimately no substitute for external shading,
particularly in hot climates (although
ecospecifier has had reports of legal actions in
Melbourne about this issue).
For shading devices containing timber, third-party certified
products with chain of custody, e.g. Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC), should be preferenced. The fibre in FC sheet, plywood and
treated boards is now generally softwood sourced from plantations
in various countries. It is generally not sourced from Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC) timber. Hardwood plywood from overseas
should not be used without FSC Chain of Custody certification due
to the high likelihood of it being sourced from Asian or South
American rainforests, or remnant African forests.
Decision-Making Checklist
- Does a thing have to be made or used? If so, does it create a
net benefit?
- Fate: Start with the end in mind. If the product is not
reusable, fully biodegradable or highly recyclable at the end of
life, or facilitating these activities, its not sustainable.
- Energy: What will the product's likely net energy balance be
over its life? Will it save more energy than it uses?
- Durability: Does the product embody an appropriate level of
durability for its accessibility, criticality and maintenance
profile?
- Biodiversity: Is there a chance that the product has had a
negative impact on biodiversity? Erosion of biodiversity is a
one-way street.
- Toxicity: Is the product toxic and or persistent in the
environment at any stage in its life cycle? If so, don't use
it.
- Resources: Does the product use rare resources/ create a net
negative flow of resources (e.g. poor maintainability/ high
maintenance requirements)
- Is the product socially sustainable?
- Does the product, or its use, contribute to delivering synergy
benefits in other building systems?
Source: Adapted from Andrew Walker Morison
Quick Guide
|
Aluminium fixed louvres -
extruded 0.6mm powdercoated, virgin alumin
|
|
For
- Inexpensive
- Durable
- Lightweight
- Recyclable
- Potentially reusable
|
Against
- High embodied energy
- Largely virgin materials
|
Aluminium elliptical louvres -
extruded, powdercoated, virgin alumin
|
|
For
- Durable
- Lightweight
- Recyclable
- Potentially reusable
- Operable
|
Against
- High embodied energy
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Fabric - Fluorocarbon
polymer coated fibreglass
|
|
For
- High durability & tensile strength
- Self cleaning
- Translucent
- Flexible & suitable for tensile structures - minimising
structural support requirements
- Fire resistant
|
Against
- High embodied energy
- Toxic emissions related to fluorocarbons
- Not recyclable or reusable
- Non-biodegradable
- Non renewable, petrochemical base
- Toxic emissions due to embodied energy associated atmospheric
emissions
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Fabric - Acrylic,
fluorocarbon treated
|
|
For
- Medium durability and strength
- Moderately self cleaning
- Flexible
- Inexpensive
|
Against
- Moderate embodied energy
- Toxic emissions related to fluorocarbons
- Not recyclable or reusable
- Non-biodegradable
- Non renewable, petrochemical base
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Stainless Steel
|
|
For
- Highest durability of all materials
- Lowest maintenance
- Highly recyclable and as high value material, likely to be
recycled
|
Against
- Not likely to be reusable without remelting and reforming
- High embodied energy
- Heavy metal, rare and non-renewable content
- Toxic emissions due to embodied energy associated
atmospheric emissions
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Fibre cement - Epoxy or
polyurethane coated, compressed 9-20mm
|
|
For
- Moderate embodied energy overall
- Stable surface
- Plantation based fibre sources
|
Against
- High embodied energy oil based coating/s
- Non FSC certified cellulose
- Not recyclable - not re-useable if adhered to substrate or
fixings
- Likely VOC emissions from coating
- Not easily maintained
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Precast Concrete - 75mm
blade
|
|
For
- Highly durable
- Can be used without additional finish
- High strength and large span minimises need for intermediate
support structure
|
Against
- High embodied energy
- Heavy to support
- Susceptible to concrete cancer if reinforcing not properly
installed
- Largely virgin materials
|
|
Hardwood -
Recycled
|
|
For
- Lowest embodied energy of materials without considering
maintenance requirements
- High durability grade timber selection will minimise
maintenance
- Most sustainable source of timber
- Natural timber aesthetic
|
Against
- Semi-durable without paint but maximum durability requires
painting, therefore high maintenance if coated otherwise will
require replacement within lifespan of building
- Susceptible to insect attack
- Flammable
|
Further Information
For more detailed information on this topic admin@ecospecifier.org.
References
Indoor Environmental Quality with Radiant Based Heating and
Cooling. Accessed 27/03/13, at www.healthyheating.com
Lawson, W.L., (1995), Building Materials Energy and the
Environment, RAIA, Canberra.
Olgay, V., (1965), Design with Climate, Princeton
University Press, New Jersey.
Phillips, R.O., (1999) Sunshine and Shade in Australia,
CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.