The Imperative for Green Transformation in Singapore’s Built Environment

 

Singapore’s commitment to sustainable development is a cornerstone of its national strategy, driven by the pressing realities of climate change and resource scarcity. This commitment is prominently articulated in overarching national frameworks, most notably the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and the Singapore Green Building Masterplan (SGBMP).¹

The SGBMP, in particular, sets forth ambitious targets for the built environment, encapsulated by the “80-80-80 in 2030” goals: to have 80% of buildings by gross floor area (GFA) achieve green certification, ensure 80% of new developments (by GFA) are Super Low Energy (SLE) buildings from 2030 onwards, and achieve an 80% improvement in energy efficiency for best-in-class green buildings by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.¹ Given that buildings account for over 20% of Singapore’s national carbon emissions ⁵, their greening is not merely an environmental aspiration but a critical component of the nation’s climate mitigation strategy.¹

Central to this transformation is the effective integration of renewable energy solutions, with solar energy identified as the most viable and promising option for the island nation.⁸ The SGBMP’s aggressive targets, particularly in a land-scarce urban environment, necessitate innovative approaches to building design where structures themselves become platforms for energy generation. This imperative places significant demands on the architectural and engineering professions, challenging them to rethink conventional design and construction paradigms.

 

The Structural Engineer’s Pivotal Role

 

 

The successful and safe integration of renewable energy systems into building designs is far from a superficial addition; it demands rigorous structural planning, meticulous analysis, and innovative design solutions from the very inception of a project. Structural engineers are, therefore, pivotal figures in this green transformation. Their expertise is crucial in addressing the complex load implications of renewable energy installations, ensuring the compatibility and durability of materials within Singapore’s tropical climate, and navigating the stringent local building codes and safety standards. The transition towards a greener built environment requires structural engineers to move beyond their traditional roles of ensuring stability and safety, to becoming key enablers of energy generation and sustainability. They must consider the entire lifecycle of the building, including the embodied carbon of structural materials and the long-term performance of integrated renewable systems.

 

Scope of this Expert Report

 

 

This expert report provides an in-depth examination of the structural perspectives associated with integrating renewable energy solutions, primarily solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV), into Singaporean building designs. It delves into the intricate interplay between these renewable technologies and the adoption of sustainable construction materials, such as Mass Engineered Timber (MET) and low-carbon concrete, which are gaining traction in Singapore. The analysis will encompass key Singaporean policies, including the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) Green Mark scheme, the SCDF Fire Code, and relevant structural design standards. Furthermore, innovative case studies of pioneering projects in Singapore will be examined to illustrate practical applications, challenges overcome, and lessons learned. The objective is to offer a holistic understanding of the structural requirements, challenges, and opportunities in designing buildings that are not only energy-efficient and environmentally responsible but also structurally sound and resilient for a sustainable future.

1. The Singapore Context: Driving Forces for Renewable Integration

The drive to incorporate renewable energy into Singapore’s building stock is not arbitrary but is propelled by a robust framework of national policies and environmental certification schemes. These initiatives create both the impetus and the guidelines for transforming the built environment into a more sustainable and energy-efficient sector.

• The Singapore Green Plan 2030 & Green Building Masterplan (SGBMP): A National MandateThe Singapore Green Plan 2030 is a whole-of-nation movement charting ambitious sustainability targets.³ A key pillar of this plan is the Singapore Green Building Masterplan (SGBMP), which specifically targets the built environment. The SGBMP’s “80-80-80 in 2030” goals are a clear directive: 80% of buildings by GFA to be green, 80% of new developments by GFA to be Super Low Energy (SLE) buildings from 2030, and an 80% improvement in energy efficiency for best-in-class green buildings by 2030 (compared to 2005 levels).¹ As of the end of 2022, significant progress had been made, with close to 55% of buildings having achieved green certification.¹⁰These masterplans are not mere aspirational documents; they are translated into actionable policies that include mandatory standards for energy performance and incentives to encourage the adoption of green technologies.² For instance, the SGBMP aims to future-proof Singapore’s building stock by raising the minimum energy performance requirements for both new buildings and existing buildings undergoing major retrofitting works.¹ This policy landscape creates a strong demand for buildings that are not only energy-efficient but also capable of generating their own renewable energy. Given Singapore’s limited land area, the building envelope itself – rooftops and facades – becomes prime real estate for renewable energy deployment, particularly solar PV systems.⁸ Consequently, the SGBMP directly necessitates the integration of renewable energy systems into building structures. This, in turn, implies that structural design must evolve beyond its traditional scope to actively enable energy generation, fostering a more integrated design process where structural, architectural, and energy considerations are deeply intertwined from the project’s inception. The broader implication is a fundamental shift in the construction industry towards holistic design and construction practices that prioritize both structural integrity and energy performance.
• BCA Green Mark Scheme: The Backbone of Green Building EvaluationThe Building and Construction Authority (BCA) Green Mark Scheme, launched in 2005, serves as the primary framework for assessing and certifying the environmental performance of buildings in Singapore.² It is an internationally recognized green building rating system specifically tailored for the tropical climate.¹² The scheme has undergone several revisions, with the latest iteration, Green Mark: 2021 (GM:2021), placing a stronger emphasis on a holistic range of sustainability outcomes that extend beyond operational energy efficiency.¹² The second edition of GM:2021 became effective from January/June 2024.¹²
  GM:2021 is structured around several key assessment sections, significantly influencing building design and construction:
  • Energy Efficiency (EE): This remains a foundational and prerequisite section.⁵ The scheme targets substantial energy performance improvements, with Green Mark GoldPLUS and Platinum buildings aiming for 50-60% improvement over 2005 levels.² Super Low Energy (SLE) buildings target an even higher benchmark of at least 60% energy efficiency improvement.²
  • Whole Life Carbon (Cn): This section, a critical addition, focuses on reducing the embodied carbon across a building’s entire life cycle. It promotes sustainable construction methods, the use of low-carbon materials, and strategies for transitioning buildings towards zero carbon emissions.¹² This is particularly significant as embodied carbon constitutes a substantial portion of a building’s total carbon footprint.
  • Health & Wellbeing (Hw): Co-developed with the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Centre for Liveable Cities (CLC), this section evaluates how buildings are designed, constructed, and operated to enhance the mental, physical, and social well-being of occupants.¹³
  • Maintainability (Mt): This assesses the implementation of Design for Maintainability (DfM) principles and the use of smart Facilities Management (FM) technologies to optimize the resource efficiency of downstream maintenance regimes.¹³
  • Resilience (Re): This section addresses the need for buildings to be resilient to the impacts of climate change, such as flooding and heat stress.¹²
  • Intelligence (In): This evaluates the integration of digital technologies, smart building systems, and data management environments to create automated, responsive, and intelligent buildings.¹³

Buildings can achieve various certification levels under GM:2021, including Certified, Gold, GoldPLUS, and Platinum, as well as the more ambitious SLE, Zero Energy, and Positive Energy ratings.¹¹ To support these goals, the government has introduced various incentive schemes. The Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings 2.0 (GMIS-EB 2.0) offers cash incentives for energy-efficient retrofits.² The Green Buildings Innovation Cluster (GBIC) programme funds research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of promising energy-efficient technologies.²The comprehensive nature of the GM:2021 framework, especially its focus on Whole Life Carbon and Resilience, has profound implications for structural design. Structural engineers are now compelled to consider the embodied carbon footprint of their material choices and ensure that buildings can withstand future climate impacts. This necessitates a move towards lighter, more resource-efficient structural systems that can effectively integrate renewable energy technologies without compromising safety or long-term durability. Furthermore, the “Intelligence” and “Maintainability” sections imply a need for structural designs that can seamlessly accommodate sensors, smart systems, and facilitate easier maintenance of integrated technologies. Structural design is thus no longer solely about load-bearing capacity; it must actively contribute to achieving a wide array of Green Mark objectives. This points towards a future where structural engineering becomes increasingly data-driven and performance-based, considering the long-term environmental and operational impacts of design decisions. The interconnectedness of the Green Mark sections means that an optimal structural solution must balance multiple objectives – for example, a low embodied carbon material choice must also be maintainable when integrated with BIPV and resilient to extreme weather.

• Singapore’s Renewable Energy Portfolio: Solar Takes Center StageSingapore’s geographical location near the equator endows it with high average annual solar irradiation, approximately 1580 kWh/m² per year, making solar photovoltaic (PV) technology the most viable and promising renewable energy source for the nation.⁹ The government has set a target to deploy at least 2 gigawatt-peak (GWp) of solar energy by 2030.⁴However, Singapore’s high population density and limited land area present significant challenges for large-scale solar deployment.⁸ This constraint has spurred innovation, turning Singapore into a “living laboratory” for novel solar solutions.⁴³ These include:
  • Extensive rooftop installations on public housing (HDB’s SolarNova programme) and industrial buildings (JTC’s SolarRoof programme).⁸
  • Floating solar farms, such as the notable installation on Tengeh Reservoir.⁴³
  • Vertical solar installations on building facades (Building Integrated Photovoltaics – BIPV) and deployment on other unconventional surfaces like noise barriers.⁸

Despite the potential, solar energy in Singapore faces challenges such as intermittency due to frequent cloud cover and rainfall. This necessitates the deployment of Energy Storage Systems (ESS) and advanced solar forecasting tools to ensure grid stability.⁸ Singapore successfully achieved its 200MWh ESS deployment target ahead of schedule.⁸ While bioenergy also contributes to the renewable mix, other options like wind and hydropower have limited applicability in Singapore.⁹

Green hydrogen is an area of emerging interest for future energy diversification.⁹The concerted push to maximize solar deployment across all available urban surfaces – rooftops, facades, and even water bodies – means that structural systems must become increasingly adaptable, lightweight, and robust. For buildings, this translates into a demand for roofs designed to accommodate PV loads with minimal or no costly retrofitting, and facade systems capable of seamlessly and safely integrating BIPV modules.

The structural design itself is thus a critical enabler for achieving Singapore’s national renewable energy ambitions. This necessitates ongoing research and development into innovative structural systems and BIPV integration technologies that are not only efficient and safe but also cost-effective, thereby ensuring that building structures actively contribute to the nation’s energy ecosystem.

1. Rooftop Solar PV Integration: Structural Engineering Deep Dive

The rooftop remains the most common and often most practical location for deploying solar PV systems in urban environments like Singapore. However, integrating these systems, whether on existing or new buildings, presents a unique set of structural engineering challenges and considerations.

• Assessing Existing Roof Structures for Solar Retrofits:
  Retrofitting solar PV systems onto existing buildings requires a meticulous assessment of the current roof structure’s capacity to safely support the additional loads.
  • Structural Integrity and Load-Bearing Capacity: The BCA mandates that for existing buildings, a professional structural engineer may be required to conduct a thorough inspection of the roof structure and perform calculations to determine its structural loading capacity.⁴⁶ If the existing roof is found to be incapable of withstanding the additional loads imposed by the PV system, structural strengthening plans must be submitted to BCA for approval.⁴⁶ This assessment is comprehensive, involving an analysis of all relevant structural elements, including both new and existing frames, to ascertain their ability to safely support the additional dead and live loads from the solar installation.⁴⁷ The process typically involves reviewing original structural plans. If these are unavailable, a detailed structural site survey is necessary, which includes measuring existing structural members and visually assessing their condition. In some instances, material testing, such as coupon tests for steel elements, may be required to accurately determine material properties and load-carrying capacities.⁴⁷ For buildings older than five years, or those without prior certification of roof integrity, structural approval is generally a prerequisite for solar installation, even in regions not prone to cyclones, a principle that underscores the importance of due diligence.⁴⁸
  • Dead Load Calculations: Solar PV systems introduce additional permanent (dead) loads to the roof structure. Typically, crystalline PV systems, including panels and mounting, can impose a dead load of approximately 15 to 20 kilograms per square meter (kg/m²), which translates to roughly 0.15 to 0.20 kilonewtons per square meter (kN/m²).⁴⁹ More specifically, flush-mounted systems commonly installed on pitched roofs might weigh less than 3 pounds per square foot (psf) (approximately 14.6 kg/m²), while ballasted systems, often used on flat roofs, can be below 5 psf (approximately 24.4 kg/m²) but this can vary significantly based on ballast requirements.⁵⁰ The total dead load calculation must account for the weight of the solar modules themselves (typically 2-3 psf), the racking system, and any ballast material used (which can add up to 2 psf or more).⁵¹ Standard solar panels, including their frames and mounting equipment, generally weigh around 20 kg/m².⁵²While the weight of individual PV panels might seem manageable, the cumulative load distributed over large roof areas can be substantial. This is particularly critical for older structures that were not originally designed to accommodate such additional permanent loads. Engineers must therefore consider not only the current condition of the roof but also potential material degradation over time and the roof’s past loading history. The general figures of 15-20 kg/m² serve as a useful initial estimate, but the final design load will ultimately be dictated by the specific PV panels, racking system, and ballast (if any) selected for the project. This detailed assessment ensures that the added, sustained load will not compromise the structural integrity of the roof over its remaining service life, considering long-term effects like creep in timber or concrete structures. Consequently, retrofitting older or larger roofs often necessitates structural strengthening, which can add to project costs and complexity and must be factored into the overall feasibility study.
  • Wind Load Analysis in Singapore’s Urban and Tropical Context: Wind loads, particularly uplift forces, are a critical design consideration for rooftop PV installations.⁵³ The design must adhere to established standards such as ASCE 7 (American Society of Civil Engineers), which is frequently referenced internationally for wind load calculations ⁵¹, and more pertinently for Singapore, SS EN 1991-1-4 (Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 1-4: General actions – Wind actions), along with its Singapore National Annex.⁵⁵ This local annex provides specific parameters tailored to Singapore’s wind climate. Several factors influence the magnitude of wind loads on rooftop PV systems, including the building’s height, roof slope and geometry, the surrounding terrain category (which differs significantly between open terrain and dense urban environments), the prevailing wind direction, array edge factors (which account for higher pressures at the periphery of the array), and pressure equalization factors specific to the solar panels themselves.⁵⁰ While Singapore’s average wind speed is relatively low at around 2m/s ⁴², structural designs must account for peak gust speeds and the complex, often unpredictable, wind patterns characteristic of dense urban areas. These microclimatic effects, such as urban canyon effects and wind tunnelling between high-rise buildings, can lead to localized wind accelerations and turbulence that may not be fully captured by standard code-based calculations using generalized terrain categories. Floating PV installations on reservoirs also face unique wind load challenges due to their exposure.⁴³ Therefore, for critical or large-scale rooftop PV projects, or for buildings situated in particularly exposed or complex urban topographies, relying solely on simplified code calculations might underestimate the actual wind loads. In such cases, more detailed site-specific wind assessments, potentially involving wind tunnel testing (as conducted for the unique facade of the CapitaGreen building ⁵⁶) or advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis (a tool also mentioned in the BCA Green Mark framework for ventilation studies ³³), may be prudent to ensure an accurate assessment of wind loads. This meticulous approach is vital for preventing panel dislodgement, damage to the mounting system, or even failure of the underlying roof structure, thereby ensuring the long-term safety and performance of the installation. This implies a potential need for structural engineers to possess or collaborate for specialized expertise in urban aerodynamics for complex projects.
  • Methods for Strengthening Existing Roofs: If an existing roof structure is found to lack the capacity to safely support the proposed solar PV system, various strengthening methods can be employed. Common approaches include adding new support beams, reinforcing existing joists or rafters – for example, by “sistering,” which involves attaching new, identical timber or steel members alongside the existing framing elements – or installing additional columns to transfer loads more directly to the foundations.⁵¹ Another technique is load redistribution, where additional structural elements are strategically placed to transfer loads from weaker roof members to stronger ones.⁴⁷
  • The roof diaphragm itself, which provides in-plane stiffness to the roof, can also be strengthened by adding a new layer of plywood or oriented strand board (OSB) sheathing, properly nailed or screwed to the existing structure.⁵¹ When selecting materials for these retrofitting works, particularly in Singapore’s humid and often coastal-proximate environment, durability and corrosion resistance are paramount. This includes specifying stainless steel anchors, galvanized steel beams, or zinc-coated joist hangers to prevent rust and degradation over time.⁵¹The choice of strengthening method for occupied buildings is often heavily influenced by the need to minimize disruption to ongoing activities. Therefore, techniques that can be applied externally or with limited internal access are generally preferred. This practical constraint may drive innovation in retrofit solutions specifically tailored for solar PV installations, favoring less invasive and quicker methods. This suggests a market opportunity for specialized contractors and engineered solutions focused on efficient and minimally disruptive roof strengthening for solar retrofits.
• Designing New Roofs for Optimal Solar Integration:
  The construction of new buildings presents an ideal opportunity to design roofs that are “solar-ready” from their inception, thereby optimizing them for the seamless and cost-effective integration of PV systems.
  • Load Consideration from Inception: It is imperative that the anticipated loads from PV installations, including both dead loads from the panels and mounting systems and live loads such as wind, are factored into the primary structural design of new buildings from the earliest stages.⁴⁶ This proactive approach avoids the need for potentially costly and complex retrofitting later.
  • Roof Design Optimization:
    Several design aspects can be optimized to facilitate efficient solar integration:
    • Unobstructed Roof Space: Maximizing clear, unobstructed roof area is critical for installing the largest possible PV array in a single, contiguous setup. This generally leads to a lower cost per kilowatt-peak (kWp) installed, as manpower and racking costs can be optimized.⁵⁸ Obstructions such as vent pipes, skylights, and HVAC equipment should ideally be located towards the edges of the roof or clustered together to maximize usable solar harvesting areas.⁵⁸
    • Roof Material: Selecting appropriate roof materials can significantly simplify PV installation. Standing seam metal roofs and reinforced concrete roofs are often considered ideal as they can allow for non-penetrative or minimally penetrative mounting systems, reducing the risk of leaks.⁵⁸
    • Roof Angle and Orientation: For Singapore’s equatorial location, the orientation of the roof (e.g., north-south facing) is generally less critical than in higher latitudes.⁴⁶ However, the roof tilt angle is important. A flat roof or a roof with a gentle slope of up to 10 degrees is often optimal for maximizing solar irradiance and facilitating installation. Steeper slopes, generally not exceeding 30 degrees, can also be accommodated, though they may require more complex mounting solutions.⁵⁸
    • Access for Installation and Maintenance: Designing for easy and safe roof access, such as through a vertical access ladder or an open attic balcony leading directly to the roof, can simplify the installation process and reduce future maintenance costs, including potentially obviating the need for scaffolding.⁵⁸

Designing new roofs to be “solar-ready” extends beyond mere load-bearing capacity. It involves a holistic planning approach that considers the roof layout, material selection, and access routes to simplify not only the initial PV installation but also ongoing maintenance and potential future upgrades. This aligns well with the principles of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA), which emphasize ease of assembly and adaptability. A truly “solar-ready” building, with clearly defined zones for PV, pre-considered attachment points, and safe access pathways, can significantly reduce the lifecycle cost and complexity of solar adoption, thereby contributing more effectively to long-term sustainability goals.

• Mounting Systems: Structural Implications:
  The choice of mounting system for rooftop PV arrays has significant structural implications. The primary options are ballasted systems and mechanically attached systems, or a hybrid of the two.
  • Ballasted Systems: These systems rely on the weight of materials like concrete blocks to secure the PV array to the roof, resisting wind uplift and potential seismic forces without requiring penetrations through the roof membrane.⁵⁰ The weight is typically distributed across the roof structure. Ballasted systems are most effective and optimized for large PV arrays on flat or low-slope roofs (generally less than 3 degrees pitch).⁶¹ A key advantage is the avoidance of roof penetrations, which minimizes the risk of leaks and can lead to faster installation times as it relies on simple mechanical assembly without the need for specialized roofing work to seal penetrations.⁶⁰ However, the required ballast weight can be substantial, potentially as high as 8 pounds per square foot (PSF) (approximately 39 kg/m²), depending on environmental loads, site conditions, and safety factors.⁶¹ This added dead load must be carefully evaluated against the roof’s structural capacity.
  • Mechanically Attached Systems: In contrast, mechanically attached systems achieve stability by creating positive connections to the roof deck or underlying structural members (e.g., rafters, purlins) using fasteners like bolts or screws.⁶¹ This approach results in a significantly lighter overall system weight, potentially as low as 1.5 PSF (approximately 7.3 kg/m²).⁶¹ Mechanically attached systems are often more suitable for roofs with limited additional load-bearing capacity, those with steeper slopes (e.g., 3-6 degrees), or roofs clad with standing seam metal, where clamps can attach to the seams without penetration.⁶¹ The primary drawback is the necessity of roof penetrations, which, if not executed and sealed meticulously, can create pathways for water ingress, demanding careful waterproofing detailing.⁶¹
  • Hybrid Systems: In some situations, particularly in areas with very high wind loads or significant seismic risk, a hybrid approach may be adopted, combining the features of ballasted systems with some mechanical attachments to provide enhanced security.⁶¹
    The decision between ballasted and mechanically attached systems involves a critical trade-off. For Singapore, with its high annual rainfall, minimizing roof penetrations is a desirable goal to prevent leaks. However, the substantial added dead load from ballasted systems can be prohibitive for many existing structures or lighter new roof designs. Thus, the optimal solution is highly site-specific and depends on factors such as roof type, the existing structural capacity, wind exposure, and project budget. For many retrofit projects in Singapore, especially on older or more lightweight roof structures, mechanically attached systems may be the more feasible option despite the inherent waterproofing challenges. This underscores the critical need for meticulous detailing, high-quality waterproofing materials specifically designed for solar penetrations in tropical climates, and rigorous inspection protocols during and after installation.
• Waterproofing and Durability in a Tropical Climate:
  Singapore’s tropical climate, characterized by high temperatures, intense rainfall, and persistent humidity, poses significant challenges to the durability of rooftop PV installations and the underlying roof structure. Effective waterproofing is paramount.
  • Penetration Risks: For mechanically attached systems, improperly sealed roof penetrations are a primary vulnerability, often leading to leaks. Water ingress can cause a cascade of problems, including damage to roofing materials, corrosion of structural components, rot in timber elements, mould growth (which poses health risks), and ultimately, a reduction in the building’s structural integrity and service life.⁶²
  • Waterproofing Techniques:
    Meticulous attention to detail is required for sealing penetrations:
    • Roof Flashing: High-quality flashing materials, such as corrosion-resistant metal (e.g., aluminium, stainless steel) or durable rubberized membranes, must be correctly installed around all roof penetrations associated with the PV system, including mounting posts, vents, pipes, and electrical conduits. The flashing must be properly integrated with the primary roofing material and effectively sealed.⁶²
    • Mount Sealants: Solar panel mounting points must be sealed with high-performance sealants specifically designed for solar installations and compatible with the roofing materials. Silicone- or polyurethane-based sealants are commonly recommended for their durability and weather resistance.⁶²
    • Conduit and Junction Box Sealing: Electrical conduits carrying wiring from the solar panels must be sealed using waterproof fittings and gaskets to prevent moisture from damaging the electrical system. Junction boxes, which house electrical connections, also require robust sealing with water-resistant gaskets.⁶²
  • Material Choice and Corrosion:
    All components of the mounting system, including fasteners, brackets, and rails, should be made from corrosion-resistant materials or be adequately treated to withstand Singapore’s humid and potentially saline atmospheric conditions, especially for buildings near the coast. Dissimilar metal corrosion must also be prevented by using compatible materials or appropriate separators.
  • Maintenance: Regular inspection and maintenance of all seals, flashings, and waterproofing elements are crucial to ensure their long-term effectiveness. Any signs of deterioration or damage should be addressed promptly.⁶²Beyond sealing individual penetrations, the overall roof design plays a critical role in water management. Effective drainage, achieved through adequate roof slopes and appropriately sized gutters and downpipes, is essential to prevent water pooling around PV mounts. Furthermore, providing sufficient ventilation space beneath the solar panels (a standoff of at least 10 cm is recommended ⁴⁶) helps to reduce moisture buildup from condensation and can also dissipate heat, which can improve panel efficiency and longevity. This holistic approach to water management, addressing both bulk rainwater and condensation, is vital for ensuring the long-term durability of both the rooftop PV system and the roof structure itself in Singapore’s demanding climate.
• Fire Safety for Rooftop PV (SCDF Compliance):
  Ensuring the fire safety of rooftop PV installations is a critical regulatory and design consideration in Singapore, governed by the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF).
  • Governing Codes and Standards: The SCDF Fire Code, particularly the “Fire Safety Requirements for Solar Photo-Voltaic (PV) Installations on Roof” and the Circular Fire Code 2023, provides specific guidelines for such installations.⁶⁴ These requirements are designed to mitigate fire risks associated with PV systems and ensure safe access for firefighting operations.
  • Access Paths and Setbacks:
    To facilitate firefighter access and operations, specific clearances and pathways are mandated:
    • Access Aisles: Minimum clear width of 1.5 meters must be provided such that no part of any PV array is more than 20 meters from an access aisle.⁶⁶
    • Roof Edge Setbacks: If an access aisle abuts the edge of the roof, its clear width must be at least 2.5 meters, unless a suitable parapet wall or railing is provided to prevent falls.⁶⁶
    • Clearance around Access Points: A clearance of 3 meters must be maintained around roof access hatches and in front of exit doors leading from exit staircases to the roof.⁶⁶
    • Sub-Array Limitations: PV installations are typically divided into sub-arrays, with a maximum size often stipulated, for instance, 40m x 40m, to limit potential fire spread and facilitate access.⁶⁶ While international codes like NFPA 1 (National Fire Protection Association, USA) are not directly applicable in Singapore, their principles often inform best practices. For example, NFPA 1 suggests requirements for access pathways from gutter to ridge and setbacks from the ridge line to allow for roof ventilation by firefighters.⁶⁷ Singapore’s SCDF codes provide the definitive local requirements.
  • Material Fire Ratings: PV modules installed on rooftops must meet a minimum fire resistance rating, typically Class C for both spread of flame and burning brand tests, in accordance with standards like IEC 61730-2.⁶⁴ All associated electrical wiring and switchboards must also comply with relevant Singapore Standards, such as SS CP5 (Code of Practice for Electrical Installations).⁶⁴
  • Structural Fire Safety: In some cases, particularly where PV arrays are installed above non-sprinkler-protected spaces, a 1-hour fire-rated separation between the array and the space below may be required to prevent fire spread into the building.⁶⁵
    The SCDF’s requirements for access paths and setbacks directly influence the available roof area for PV deployment. These spatial constraints can affect the layout of the PV array and, consequently, the design of its structural support system. Engineers must therefore collaborate closely with architects and fire safety engineers from the early design stages to develop PV layouts that not only maximize energy generation potential but also fully comply with all fire safety codes. This integrated approach ensures that the structural system is optimized for the actual, compliant PV arrangement, rather than an idealized maximum-coverage layout, preventing costly redesigns or compromises on safety or energy yield later in the project. This underscores the need for integrated design charrettes involving all key disciplines.
• Table: Structural Considerations for Rooftop PV Mounting Systems in Singapore

 

Mounting Type	Key Structural Loads	Typical Weight Impact (kg/m²)	Roof Compatibility (Slope, Material)	Waterproofing Strategy & Challenges	Key Design Checks	SCDF Fire Code Compliance Notes (Access/Setbacks)
Ballasted	Dead Load (significant), Wind Uplift, Seismic (lateral)	20 – 40+ (highly variable)	Low slope (<3° typically, up to 7° with increased ballast); Concrete roofs ideal.	No penetrations (primary advantage); Relies on roof membrane integrity; Potential for localized pressure points.	Roof capacity for distributed & point loads; Ballast stability (sliding/overturning); Drainage around ballast blocks.	Ensure ballast blocks do not obstruct required access paths/setbacks; Maintain clearance around roof access points.
Mechanically Attached	Dead Load (lower), Wind Uplift (critical), Point Loads at attachments, Seismic	7 – 15	Suitable for various slopes & materials (metal, tile, concrete with penetrations).	Relies on sealing penetrations (flashing, sealants); High risk of leaks if not detailed/installed correctly.	Roof member capacity at attachment points; Pull-out strength of fixings; Penetration detailing; Corrosion resistance.	Ensure racking and panels allow for required access paths and setbacks; Spacing between arrays may be needed.
Hybrid	Combination of Ballasted & Attached loads	Variable (moderate)	Used where ballast alone is insufficient or penetrations are limited.	Combines challenges: ensuring integrity of few penetrations while managing distributed ballast load.	Comprehensive analysis of combined load effects; Optimization of attachment points vs. ballast quantity.	Layout must adhere to all SCDF access and setback requirements, potentially influencing the balance of ballasted vs. attached sections.

Data Sources:.⁴⁶

This table provides a concise comparison of the primary structural implications for different rooftop PV mounting systems, tailored to Singapore’s specific context. It highlights critical factors such as load types, roof compatibility, waterproofing challenges, essential design checks, and SCDF fire safety considerations. This allows engineers, architects, and developers to make more informed decisions at the early stages of a project, understanding the trade-offs involved in selecting a particular mounting system and facilitating a more integrated and compliant design process.

III. Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV): Aesthetics Meets Structural Function

Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) represent a sophisticated approach to renewable energy, where solar PV elements are not merely mounted onto a building but are designed to be an integral part of its envelope. This dual functionality – serving as a building material while simultaneously generating electricity – offers unique aesthetic possibilities but also introduces specific structural engineering challenges.

• Types of BIPV Systems and Their Dual Roles (Energy Generation & Building Envelope):BIPV systems transform passive building surfaces into active energy-generating assets.⁶⁸ They are considered multifunctional construction materials, replacing conventional envelope components.⁷¹ Key types include:
  • Façade Systems: These are increasingly popular for high-rise urban buildings where roof space is limited.
    • Curtain Walls: BIPV modules can be designed to replace standard vision glass or opaque spandrel panels within a curtain wall framework. Structurally, the mullions and transoms of the curtain wall system must be designed to support the weight of the BIPV units, which may be heavier than conventional glazing, and to resist wind loads transferred from the panels. Connection details between the BIPV units and the framing system are critical for both load transfer and weather sealing.⁷¹
    • Rainscreen Cladding: In this application, BIPV panels form the outer, visible layer of a ventilated rainscreen facade. These panels are typically mounted on a secondary sub-structure (e.g., metal rails or brackets) which is then fixed back to the building’s primary structural frame. The sub-structure must be designed to carry the weight of the BIPV panels and transfer wind loads effectively. The ventilation cavity behind the panels is crucial for moisture management and can also help in dissipating heat from the PV modules, potentially improving their efficiency.⁶⁸
    • Spandrel Panels: Opaque BIPV modules can be integrated into the non-vision areas of a facade, such as between floors or in areas concealing structural elements, offering a way to maximize energy generation surface without compromising daylighting.⁷¹
  • Roofing Systems:
    • Solar Tiles/Shingles: These BIPV products are designed to mimic the appearance and function of conventional roofing tiles or shingles, directly forming the weatherproof layer of the roof. Structural considerations include their individual weight, the method of fixing them to the roof battens or decking, and their ability to resist wind uplift forces. The overall roof structure must be capable of supporting the cumulative weight of these solar tiles.⁷¹
    • Skylights: Semi-transparent or opaque BIPV modules can be integrated into skylight assemblies. The structural frame of the skylight must be designed to support the BIPV units and withstand all applicable loads, including wind and potentially snow (though less relevant in Singapore). The connections must ensure water tightness and accommodate electrical wiring.⁷¹
  • Other Applications: BIPV technology can also be incorporated into other building elements such as solar shadings (louvers, awnings) and balcony railings, further expanding the potential for energy generation from the building envelope.⁶⁸

The integration of BIPV fundamentally alters the traditional role of certain building envelope components. A facade or roof is no longer merely a passive weather barrier or an aesthetic feature; it becomes an active, energy-generating system. This paradigm shift requires structural engineers to expand their considerations beyond traditional load resistance. They must now also account for the durability of the integrated power generation components, ensure safe and feasible access for the maintenance of electrical systems embedded within the facade or roof, and analyze the thermal impacts of these energy-generating surfaces on the structural members and the overall building performance. This necessitates a more holistic design approach where structural performance, energy generation, and long-term serviceability are considered in tandem.

• Structural Design Considerations for BIPV Facades:
  Designing structurally sound and durable BIPV facades requires careful attention to several factors:
  • Load Analysis:
    • Dead Loads: The self-weight of the BIPV units, including the PV cells, encapsulation, glass or other substrate, and any integrated framing, must be accurately determined. These loads can be greater than those of conventional glazing or lightweight cladding panels. For instance, Mitrex BIPV panels are specifically engineered and tested for their structural load-bearing capacity, including undergoing tests like MQT 16 to withstand 1.5 times their design load.⁷⁷
    • Wind Loads: Wind loading is a primary design consideration for facades, particularly for tall buildings or those in exposed locations. Calculations must be performed in accordance with relevant standards, such as SS EN 1991-1-4 for Singapore.⁵⁵ BIPV curtain wall systems are often designed to be windproof and meet specific wind speed resistances, for example, up to 42m/s based on standards like EN13830.⁷⁴ For buildings with unique geometries or in complex urban environments, wind tunnel testing or CFD analysis may be necessary to accurately determine wind pressures and suction forces on the BIPV facade, as was done for the distinctive facade of CapitaGreen.⁵⁶
    • Seismic Loads: While Singapore is in a region of low seismicity, seismic considerations may still be relevant for certain building types or heights, influencing connection designs and panel stability.
    • Impact Loads: BIPV facades, especially at lower building levels, should be designed to resist accidental impacts from debris or human activity. Specialized BIPV products, like those from Mitrex, undergo impact resistance testing, such as the large missile impact test (ASTM E1996), to simulate conditions like hurricane debris.⁷⁷
    • Thermal Loads: Temperature variations can induce stresses in BIPV panels and their supporting structures due to differential thermal expansion and contraction of materials. This is particularly important for BIPV as the panels themselves absorb solar radiation and can reach high surface temperatures.
  • Connection Details and Load Transfer:
    The connections between BIPV panels and the building structure are critical. They must securely attach the panels, effectively transfer all applied loads (dead, wind, seismic, thermal) to the primary or secondary structural system (e.g., mullions, transoms, sub-frames), and accommodate any differential movements due to thermal expansion or building sway. The design of these connections must ensure that load paths are clearly defined and that all structural members are adequately sized to resist the transferred forces.
  • Material Compatibility and Durability: Long-term durability in Singapore’s tropical climate is a key concern. This requires careful selection of materials for BIPV panels, framing, fixings, and sealants to ensure compatibility and prevent premature degradation. Corrosion resistance is particularly important for any metallic components, given the high humidity and potential exposure to saline environments near the coast. The adhesives and encapsulants used within the BIPV modules themselves must also maintain their integrity over the design life of the system. Mitrex panels, for example, undergo damp heat testing (85% humidity at 85°C for 1,000 hours) to verify their resistance to moisture-related degradation.⁷⁷
  • Waterproofing and Weathering: A BIPV facade must perform all the functions of a conventional facade, including providing a robust weather barrier. Meticulous detailing of joints between BIPV panels, and at interfaces with other building elements (e.g., windows, corners, parapets), is essential to prevent water ingress. Systems are often tested for water infiltration resistance (e.g., ASTM E331) and air leakage (e.g., ASTM E283) to verify their performance.⁷⁷
  • Maintenance Access:
    The design must incorporate provisions for safe and practical access for cleaning the BIPV surfaces (to maintain energy generation efficiency), as well as for inspection, repair, or replacement of individual BIPV units or associated electrical components.Unlike static cladding systems, BIPV facades are dynamic, energy-generating systems. They absorb solar radiation, which leads to temperature fluctuations on the panel surface and within any air cavity behind ventilated BIPV facades.⁷⁸ These thermal effects can induce stresses and movements that must be accounted for in the structural design of the fixings and the supporting framework. This may involve designing connections that allow for thermal expansion and contraction, selecting materials with compatible thermal properties, and carefully analyzing potential thermal bridging effects. Thus, BIPV facade design demands a more integrated thermo-mechanical structural analysis compared to conventional facade systems.
• Structural Engineering for BIPV Roofing and Skylights:
  When BIPV elements are used in roofing applications, they often form the primary weathering skin of the building, adding another layer of functional requirement.
  • Replacing Conventional Materials: BIPV roofing products, such as solar tiles or shingles, are designed to replace traditional roofing materials like clay tiles or metal sheets. As such, they must directly withstand all environmental loads, including wind, rain, and impact. Their fixing system to the roof substructure (e.g., battens, purlins, or decking) must be robust and durable.
  • Weight Considerations: Similar to conventional rooftop PV systems, the additional weight of BIPV roof elements must be carefully considered in the design of the roof structure.⁷⁶ While some BIPV roofing products aim to be comparable in weight to traditional materials, others, particularly those based on crystalline silicon cells, can be heavier.
  • Water Tightness: This is a paramount concern for any roofing system, and BIPV roofs are no exception. The design of BIPV tiles or shingles must ensure effective water shedding, typically through overlapping joints and integration with appropriate underlays and flashing details at perimeters, penetrations, and junctions.
  • Skylight Integration: BIPV modules integrated into skylights become part of the glazed roofing assembly. The supporting frame, often aluminum, must be designed to carry the weight of the BIPV unit and resist wind and other applicable loads. Connection details must ensure weather tightness and provide pathways for concealed electrical wiring.⁷¹ The spacing and opacity of PV cells within the BIPV skylight can be adjusted to control daylight transmission and heat gain.⁷¹
  • Walkability and Maintenance: Depending on the specific BIPV roofing product and the roof design, consideration must be given to safe access for maintenance (e.g., cleaning, inspection of electrical connections). Some BIPV roofing systems may be designed to withstand occasional foot traffic, while others may require dedicated walkways or access platforms.
    For BIPV roofing systems that serve as the primary weather barrier, ensuring long-term performance and facilitating ease of replacement are critical design objectives. Unlike some facade-mounted BIPV panels that might be more readily accessible, replacing a faulty or damaged BIPV roof tile or shingle can be a more complex and potentially costly operation. Therefore, the structural design of the roof and the BIPV mounting system should ideally promote modularity and allow for the targeted replacement of individual units without necessitating the removal of large sections of the roof or compromising its overall integrity.
  • This points towards the need for durable, corrosion-resistant fixing systems that maintain their integrity over several decades and potentially designing BIPV roof sections for easier disassembly and reassembly. Consequently, life-cycle costing for BIPV roofing must meticulously consider not just the initial installation costs but also the long-term maintenance and replacement scenarios, which can significantly influence the choice of a particular BIPV product and its structural integration methodology.
• Fire Safety for BIPV Systems:Fire safety is a crucial aspect of BIPV system design and installation. BIPV modules, much like conventional PV panels, must meet stringent fire resistance standards. For example, Mitrex BIPV panels are rated Class A under ASTM E84 and pass the NFPA 285 fire propagation test for multi-story buildings.⁷⁷ The SCDF’s Fire Code requirements will be applicable, particularly concerning the flammability of materials used in the building envelope and the potential for fire spread via facades or roofs. Electrical safety, including proper wiring, connections, and overcurrent protection, is also an integral part of the overall fire safety strategy for BIPV systems.
• Table: Structural Design Checklist for BIPV Systems in Singapore

 

BIPV Application	Key Structural Loads to Consider	Primary Load Transfer Mechanism	Critical Connection Details	Waterproofing Strategy	Fire Safety Compliance (SCDF)	Key Material Durability Concerns (Tropical Climate)
Facade-Curtain Wall	Dead load, Wind (pressure & suction), Thermal expansion, Impact	Mullion/Transom system to primary structure	Panel-to-frame fixings, glazing pockets, sealant joints, accommodation for movement.	Integrated into curtain wall glazing seals, pressure-equalized systems.	Material flammability (panel & backing), fire stopping at floor lines, integrity of connections under fire.	UV degradation of sealants/gaskets, corrosion of metal framing/fixings, delamination of PV layers due to heat/humidity cycling.
Facade-Rainscreen	Dead load, Wind (pressure & suction on panels & substructure), Thermal	Sub-frame (rails/brackets) to primary structure	Panel-to-subframe fixings, subframe-to-wall anchors, allowance for ventilation cavity.	Relies on ventilated cavity and weather-resistant outer BIPV panel; careful detailing of open joints or panel overlaps.	Material flammability, cavity barriers to prevent fire spread within facade void, structural stability of substructure in fire.	Corrosion of substructure and fixings, durability of BIPV panel surface against weathering, integrity of open joints if applicable.
Roofing-Tiles/Shingles	Dead load, Wind uplift, Rain/Water load, Foot traffic (maintenance)	Direct fixing to roof battens/decking, or integrated interlocking system	Securement of individual tiles/shingles, overlap details, flashing at penetrations and edges.	Overlapping design of tiles/shingles, underlayment, flashing details critical.	Fire rating of BIPV tiles (e.g., Class C or better), combustibility of underlayment and roof deck, roof access for firefighting.	UV degradation, thermal cycling impact on material integrity and fixings, water tightness of overlaps over time, resistance to biological growth (moss, algae).
Skylights	Dead load, Wind uplift, Snow (less relevant in SG), Impact (hail)	Skylight framing system to roof structure	BIPV glass unit to skylight frame, sealant joints, structural integrity of frame.	Integrated into skylight glazing seals and frame design.	Fire rating of BIPV glazing, structural performance of frame under fire conditions.	Sealant durability, integrity of insulated glass unit (if applicable) containing PV cells, condensation management within frame.

Data Sources:.⁵⁵

This checklist offers a structured approach for engineers and architects when considering BIPV integration. By categorizing key structural considerations by application type, it facilitates early identification of critical design aspects. This promotes a systematic methodology, ensuring that structural safety, durability, and overall performance are comprehensively addressed, which is vital for the successful and widespread adoption of BIPV technology, particularly in Singapore’s challenging tropical climate and dense urban fabric.

1. Synergizing Renewables with Sustainable Structural Materials

The quest for greener buildings in Singapore extends beyond just energy generation; it encompasses the very materials used in construction. The selection of structural materials with lower embodied carbon and enhanced sustainability credentials, such as Mass Engineered Timber (MET) and Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC), can work synergistically with renewable energy systems to achieve truly holistic green building performance.

• Mass Engineered Timber (MET) in Green Buildings:
  Mass Engineered Timber is rapidly gaining recognition in Singapore as a viable and sustainable alternative to conventional structural materials like steel and concrete, aligning well with the nation’s push for productivity and environmental stewardship.
  • Introduction to MET: MET refers to a range of engineered wood products that have been processed to achieve improved structural integrity and predictability compared to traditional sawn lumber. Key types include Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) and Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam).⁷⁹ CLT panels, formed by bonding layers of timber at right angles to each other, are typically used for wall, floor, and roof elements. Glulam, which consists of timber laminations glued together with their grain aligned, is predominantly used for columns, beams, and truss elements.⁸⁰ A significant advantage of MET is its compatibility with Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DfMA) MET components are typically prefabricated off-site in factory-controlled environments to precise dimensions.
  • This allows for rapid and accurate assembly on-site, leading to substantial productivity improvements (e.g., up to 35% time savings reported by BCA, and over 20% achieved at the Woh Hup Technical Hub) ⁸⁰, enhanced quality control, and safer, cleaner construction sites with less noise and waste.⁸⁴ From a sustainability perspective, MET offers compelling benefits. It is typically sourced from sustainably managed forests, often with certifications like FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) or PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification), ensuring responsible harvesting practices.⁸⁶
  • Timber is a renewable resource and acts as a carbon sink, sequestering atmospheric carbon dioxide throughout the building’s lifespan.⁸⁴ Consequently, MET structures generally have a significantly lower embodied carbon footprint compared to equivalent concrete or steel structures. For instance, the 25 King project in Australia, a MET building, achieved a reported 74% reduction in overall carbon emissions over a 60-year life compared to an equivalent conventional reinforced concrete building.⁸⁸
  • Structural Advantages for Renewable Integration:
    The inherent properties of MET offer several structural advantages that can facilitate the integration of renewable energy systems:
    • Lightweight Nature: MET is considerably lighter than steel or concrete.⁸⁴ This reduced self-weight can lead to smaller and more economical foundation systems. For rooftop solar PV installations, a lighter primary roof structure made of MET may possess more reserve capacity to accommodate the additional loads from PV panels and mounting systems, or it may require less robust (and thus less material-intensive) foundations if designed with PV integration in mind from the outset.
    • High Strength-to-Weight Ratio: Despite being lightweight, MET products like Glulam and CLT exhibit excellent strength-to-weight ratios, often comparable to or exceeding that of steel in certain applications.⁸⁹ This allows for efficient structural design, including the creation of large open spans or complex roof geometries that can be optimized for solar exposure.
    • Ease of Machining and Prefabrication: MET components can be precisely machined using Computer Numerical Control (CNC) technology during the prefabrication process.⁷⁹ This allows for the accurate incorporation of features such as channels for electrical conduit routing for PV systems, or pre-drilled holes and recesses for attaching mounting hardware for solar panels or BIPV elements, streamlining on-site installation.
  • Structural Challenges & Solutions in Singapore’s Context:
    Despite its advantages, the use of MET in Singapore’s tropical climate presents specific challenges that require careful structural design and detailing:
    • Fire Safety: Timber is a combustible material, and ensuring fire safety is paramount. MET buildings in Singapore must comply with the SCDF Fire Code ⁹¹, with specific provisions for MET typically found in Section 9.9.5 of the Fire Code 2023 ⁹¹ and guidance from standards like SS 572 (Code of Practice for the Use of Timber in Buildings).⁹³ Common requirements include the installation of automatic sprinkler systems.⁹¹ Fire-protected timber construction systems, often involving the encapsulation of MET elements with fire-resistant plasterboard, are a key strategy.⁹⁴ It’s also recognized that massive timber elements, such as CLT panels of sufficient thickness (e.g., ≥75mm), possess inherent fire resistance due to the formation of a protective charring layer when exposed to fire, which insulates the unburnt timber within.⁸⁴ For taller MET buildings, performance-based fire safety engineering approaches may be required to demonstrate compliance.⁹¹
    • Moisture & Durability in Tropical Climates: Singapore’s consistently high humidity and frequent heavy rainfall create a challenging environment for timber structures.⁹⁵ Effective moisture management is crucial to prevent issues like fungal decay, mould growth, and dimensional instability. Timber moisture content should ideally be maintained within an 11-15% range.⁹⁷Key protection strategies include:
      • Design for Maintainability (DfM): This is a core principle, involving careful detailing to prevent water ingress and facilitate inspection and maintenance.⁹⁹ The selection of appropriate timber service classes (typically Service Class 2 or 3 for Singapore’s conditions, indicating exposure to moisture) is important.⁹¹
      • Protection from Direct Weathering: It is generally recommended to avoid direct, prolonged exposure of MET elements to weather. This can be achieved through protective coatings, sealants, or the use of an outer architectural cladding layer.⁹⁷ For example, the exterior timber elements of NTU’s Gaia building are double-side clad in larch and pre-coated for weather protection.⁹⁷
      • Waterproofing and Drainage: Robust waterproofing details at joints, interfaces, and penetrations, coupled with effective roof and facade drainage systems, are essential to shed water quickly and prevent accumulation.⁹⁹
      • Construction Phase Management: Protecting MET components from moisture during transportation, on-site storage (e.g., using tarps, temporary shelters), and assembly is critical. Just-in-time delivery and rapid erection sequences, as employed for NTU Gaia, help minimize moisture exposure.⁹⁷
    • Pest (Termite) Protection: Termites pose a significant threat to timber structures in tropical regions like Singapore.⁹⁵Preventive measures include:
      • Elevating timber elements from direct ground contact.
      • Installing physical barriers such as termite mesh.
      • Applying chemical treatments to the soil around the building and/or directly to the timber elements.
      • Conducting regular inspections for any signs of termite activity.⁹¹ Ensuring that timber does not remain in prolonged contact with moisture is also crucial, as decaying or damp wood is more susceptible to termite attack.⁹⁵
    • Supply Chain & Expertise: Historically, MET has been predominantly manufactured in Europe ⁷⁹, making supply chain management and logistics important considerations for Singapore projects.⁸⁸ However, regional suppliers and fabricators are emerging, such as Venturer Timberwork ¹⁰³ and Sumitomo Forestry ¹⁰⁶, with some fabrication capabilities in Southeast Asia.¹⁰⁹ A perceived lack of local knowledge and experience in MET construction has been a barrier, highlighting the need for continued professional education, training, and the development of demonstration projects.¹¹¹ Initiatives like the BCA’s MET Guidebook ⁷⁹ and specialized courses aim to build industry capability in this area.
  • BCA Green Mark & MET: MET aligns strongly with several key objectives of the BCA Green Mark scheme. Its compatibility with DfMA supports the productivity and efficiency goals outlined in Singapore’s Construction Industry Transformation Map (ITM).⁷⁹ The lower embodied carbon of MET contributes significantly to achieving credits under the GM:2021 Whole Life Carbon section.¹² The accounting for biogenic carbon (carbon stored in the wood) is an important aspect of this assessment.⁶ Tools like the Singapore Building Carbon Calculator (SBCC), formerly the Building Embodied Carbon Calculator (BECC), are used for these evaluations.⁶
  • Case Studies in Singapore:
    Several pioneering projects in Singapore showcase the successful application of MET:
    • NTU Gaia & The Wave: The Gaia building at Nanyang Technological University, housing the Nanyang Business School, is a landmark achievement as Asia’s largest wooden building, spanning 43,500 sqm and achieving Green Mark Platinum (Zero Energy) certification.¹¹⁷ It features an extensive MET structure (13,000 cubic meters of Glulam and CLT ¹¹⁸) with timber sourced from sustainably managed European forests and prefabricated off-site for efficient “Lego-style” assembly. This DfMA approach reportedly reduced construction time by 35%.¹¹⁹ The building integrates over 1,200 rooftop solar PV panels, generating more than 500 MWh of electricity annually, sufficient to meet its operational energy needs.¹²¹ The design incorporates passive cooling strategies and natural ventilation, enhanced by the thermal properties of timber.¹¹⁹ Careful attention was paid to moisture and pest protection, including the use of sealants, pre-coating of timber elements, and meticulous construction sequencing to minimize moisture exposure.⁹⁷ While some mould issues were reported, these were attributed to condensation and rain exposure on specific surfaces rather than a failure of the MET material itself, underscoring the importance of ongoing maintenance and environmental control in tropical climates.¹²⁰ The Wave, NTU’s sports hall, also utilizes MET, featuring a distinctive 72m wave-like timber roof structure that creates a pillar-less interior and offers superior thermal insulation compared to concrete.¹¹⁷
    • JTC Punggol Digital District (PDD) MET Building: This eight-storey industrial building is recognized as Singapore’s tallest timber industrial building and has achieved Platinum Super-low Energy certification. Its embodied carbon performance is exceptionally low, at 15 kgCO2e/m², which is 98% lower than the BCA benchmark of 1,000 kgCO2e/m² for non-residential buildings. The MET components were fabricated off-site, leading to a 60% reduction in on-site manpower compared to traditional construction methods.¹²³
    • Woh Hup Technical Hub: This project features a four-storey office building constructed with Glulam for columns and beams and CLT for floor slabs. The MET structure was completed in less than six weeks, achieving a productivity improvement of over 20%, with an installation rate of 7.1 m²/man-day, significantly more efficient than conventional concrete construction.⁸³

The successful implementation of MET in these high-profile Singaporean projects, particularly at NTU and JTC PDD, demonstrates that MET is not merely a substitute for conventional materials but a catalyst for achieving exceptionally high levels of building sustainability, including Zero Energy and Super Low Energy performance. The lightweight nature of MET can facilitate innovative architectural forms and potentially allow for larger, less obstructed rooftop areas suitable for maximizing solar PV installations.

Its DfMA compatibility also accelerates construction timelines, a crucial factor in Singapore’s fast-paced economy. This implies that the structural design of MET buildings must be highly integrated with energy performance strategies and architectural vision from the project’s outset. Structural engineers working with MET must therefore collaborate closely with energy consultants and architects to optimize the building form and structure for both efficient energy generation (e.g., maximizing PV capacity) and effective energy conservation (e.g., leveraging the thermal performance of the MET envelope). Looking ahead, MET could play a pivotal role in helping Singapore realize its ambitious “80-80-80 in 2030” SGBMP targets, especially for the construction of new SLE buildings, provided the industry continues to build expertise and effectively address the challenges posed by the tropical climate.

• Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC) for Resilient and Sustainable Structures:
  Concrete is the most widely used construction material globally, but its production, particularly that of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), is a significant contributor to global CO2 emissions, accounting for approximately 8%. Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC) encompasses a range of technologies and material formulations aimed at reducing this carbon footprint.
  • Definition and Types:
    LCC is designed to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with its production compared to conventional OPC concrete. Key approaches include:
    • Use of Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs): This is a widely adopted strategy involving the partial replacement of OPC with industrial by-products or natural pozzolans. Common SCMs include:
      • Fly Ash: A byproduct of coal combustion in power plants.
      • Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS): A byproduct of iron and steel manufacturing.
      • Other SCMs include silica fume (a byproduct of silicon metal production), metakaolin (a calcined clay mineral), and rice husk ash (an agricultural waste product). The use of SCMs can potentially reduce concrete-related emissions by 30-50%.
    • Alternative Binders: These are novel cementitious materials that have a lower intrinsic carbon footprint than OPC. Examples include Calcium Sulfoaluminate (CSA) cements, which are produced at lower calcination temperatures and thus emit less CO2, as well as geopolymer cements and alkali-activated binders that utilize industrial waste streams as precursors.
    • Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) in Concrete: This involves capturing CO2 emissions (either from industrial sources or directly from cement production) and incorporating them into the concrete itself, a process known as carbon mineralization. The CO2 reacts with components in the concrete mix and becomes permanently sequestered as stable carbonates. Pan-United is a notable producer of Carbon Mineralized Concrete (CMC) in Singapore. Researchers at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore have also developed an innovative 3D-printed concrete that incorporates CO2 and steam during the printing process, reportedly increasing strength and achieving 38% carbon capture.
    • Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates (RCA): Incorporating RCA, derived from crushed demolition concrete, into new concrete mixes reduces the demand for virgin aggregates (like granite and sand) and diverts construction waste from landfills. Singapore has standards like SS EN 12620 that permit and guide the use of RCA in concrete.
  • Structural Performance and Durability:
    A primary concern for any LCC formulation is its ability to meet the required structural performance criteria, including compressive strength, durability under service conditions, and workability during placement. Many SCMs, such as fly ash and GGBFS, can enhance the long-term strength and durability of concrete. For instance, GGBFS is known to improve resistance to chloride ingress and sulfate attack, making it beneficial for structures in marine or aggressive environments. However, some LCC formulations, particularly those with high SCM replacement levels, may exhibit slower early strength development compared to conventional OPC concrete, which can impact construction schedules and formwork striking times. Careful mix design and curing are essential to manage these characteristics.
  • Reducing Embodied Carbon: BCA Green Mark & Calculators: The BCA Green Mark 2021 scheme places significant emphasis on reducing embodied carbon through its Whole Life Carbon (Cn) section.¹² Structural systems are a major contributor to a building’s embodied carbon, making the choice of concrete formulation critical. The
    Singapore Building Carbon Calculator (SBCC), which superseded the Building Embodied Carbon Calculator (BECC), is the unified tool mandated for assessing the upfront embodied carbon of building materials, including concrete. The SBCC is customized for Singapore’s local context and aligns with GM:2021 requirements, utilizing data from Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) and Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs).
    Another Singapore-specific metric is the Concrete Usage Index (CUI), defined as the volume of concrete used per square meter of constructed floor area (m³/m²). A lower CUI indicates a more materially efficient structural design. Achieving a good CUI score contributes to the Sustainable Construction (SC) points required for higher-tiered Green Mark projects (GoldPlus and Platinum).
  • Adoption Challenges in Singapore:
    Despite the benefits, the widespread adoption of LCC in Singapore faces several hurdles:
    • Technical and Operational: These include a lack of comprehensive standards and specifications for some newer LCC types, uncertainties regarding their long-term performance in the local tropical climate, and practical issues such as delayed early strength gain or difficulties with pumpability for high-rise construction.
    • Economic: The initial cost of some LCCs can be higher than conventional concrete, particularly for proprietary formulations or those requiring specialized materials or processes. Achieving cost-competitiveness often requires economies of scale, significant investment in R&D, and potentially new plant infrastructure.
    • Awareness and Acceptance: While general awareness of sustainability is increasing, specific knowledge about the performance characteristics, benefits, and proper application of various LCC types may still be limited among some stakeholders in the construction value chain. There can also be a degree of inertia or resistance to moving away from familiar, conventional concrete mixes.¹¹¹
  • Local Initiatives & Case Studies:
    Singapore is seeing proactive efforts from both the public and private sectors to promote LCC:
    • Pan-United Corporation is a prominent local player and a global leader in LCC technologies. The company has an extensive R&D program and offers over 300 concrete solutions, more than half of which are classified as LCC. They are a leading producer of Carbon Mineralized Concrete (PanU CMC+), which utilizes CCU technology, and have deployed this in Singapore, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Pan-United has ambitious targets to offer only LCC by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.
    • Holcim Ltd., a global building materials company, offers its ECOPact range of LCC, which achieves at least a 30% reduction in CO2 emissions through the use of SCMs and advanced admixture technology. They have also introduced innovative biochar-based concrete that can act as a carbon sink.
    • Land Transport Authority (LTA) is mandating the use of LCC for significant infrastructure projects, such as Phase 2 of the Cross Island Line and various footpath renewal contracts, with a target of achieving at least a 20% reduction in carbon emissions compared to conventional concrete. LTA is also exploring other sustainable materials like Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) as an alternative to steel rebar in some applications.
    • Housing & Development Board (HDB), as Singapore’s largest housing developer, drives sustainability through its commitment to achieving BCA Green Mark Gold or GoldPLUS certification for its projects. The Green Mark scheme itself encourages the use of LCC and recycled materials. While the carbon footprint of materials is not currently a direct criterion for HDB tender evaluation, HDB is actively studying the use of alternative building materials to further reduce its carbon footprint under the Cities of Tomorrow R&D programme.
    • JTC Corporation plays a key role in developing industrial infrastructure. Their MET building in Punggol Digital District achieved an extremely low embodied carbon footprint. JTC also commissioned the foundational study that led to the development of the BECC/SBCC, demonstrating its commitment to enabling the industry to measure and manage embodied carbon.⁶

The adoption of LCC is fundamental not only for mitigating the embodied carbon of a building’s structure but also for enhancing the overall energy performance and resilience of buildings that incorporate renewable energy systems. For example, concrete formulations with improved thermal properties could contribute to reducing cooling loads, thereby lessening the demand on building services and complementing the energy generated by PV systems. Furthermore, the enhanced durability offered by some LCCs can ensure the long-term integrity of the structure that supports these renewable energy investments, which often have service lives of 20-25 years or more.⁴⁹ This implies that LCC is not merely an isolated material substitution but a synergistic component in the pursuit of truly low-carbon, high-performance buildings. Structural engineers should therefore consider the holistic impact of LCC selection, evaluating its potential contributions to passive design strategies and its role in ensuring the longevity of the entire building system, including its integrated renewable energy assets. This calls for an integrated design approach where material scientists, structural engineers, architects, and energy consultants collaborate closely to select and design with LCCs that offer a spectrum of benefits.

• Table: Comparative Analysis of Sustainable Structural Materials for Singaporean Buildings

Material Category	Specific Type(s)	Key Structural Properties (Strength/Weight, Stiffness)	Indicative Embodied Carbon Range (vs. OPC Concrete)	Fire Resistance (SCDF Compliance)	Moisture/Pest Resistance (SG Climate) & Treatments	Indicative Cost Impact (vs. Conventional)	Key BCA Green Mark Alignment
Mass Engineered Timber (MET)	CLT, Glulam	High strength-to-weight ratio, good stiffness	Significantly Lower (can be carbon negative with sequestration)	Complies with Fire Code via encapsulation, sprinklers, charring layer design (SS 572, Fire Code 9.9.5)	Vulnerable if untreated; requires DfM, sealants, coatings, termite barriers, moisture management	Potentially higher upfront material cost, offset by faster construction & reduced foundation costs 124	Whole Life Carbon (Cn), DfMA, Productivity, Health & Wellbeing (biophilia)
Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC)	SCM-based (Fly Ash, GGBFS)	Comparable to OPC, can enhance long-term strength & durability	Lower (10-50% reduction depending on SCM type & replacement %)	Similar to OPC concrete	Good resistance; specific SCMs (e.g. GGBFS) can improve durability in harsh environments	Variable; SCMs often cost-neutral or slightly cheaper, but overall mix design can influence cost	Whole Life Carbon (Cn), Sustainable Construction (use of recycled content/by-products)
Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC)	CCUS Concrete (e.g., Carbon Mineralized Concrete)	Strength can be enhanced by mineralization	Lower (CO₂ sequestered); net reduction depends on capture efficiency & base mix	Similar to OPC concrete	Good resistance	Potentially higher due to CO₂ capture/injection technology; aims for cost-parity	Whole Life Carbon (Cn), Innovation
Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC)	Alternative Binders (e.g., Geopolymers, CSA Cement)	Variable; can achieve high strength. CSA offers rapid strength gain.	Significantly Lower (e.g. CSA has lower calcination temp.)	Performance varies; requires specific testing and compliance pathways	Generally good resistance; some may offer enhanced chemical resistance	Can be higher due to specialized materials and production; niche applications currently	Whole Life Carbon (Cn), Innovation
Recycled Concrete Aggregate (RCA) Concrete	Concrete with RCA replacing natural aggregates	Can achieve comparable strength with proper mix design (up to 20% replacement common, higher possible)	Lower (reduces virgin material extraction impact)	Similar to OPC concrete	Similar to OPC concrete	Potentially lower cost due to waste material utilization, but processing RCA adds cost	Whole Life Carbon (Cn), Sustainable Construction (Resource Efficiency, Waste Reduction)

Data Sources: S_R1, S_R3, S_R6, S_R8, S_R16, S_R36, S_R37, S_R43, S_R59, S_R60, S_R105-S_R124, S_R145, S_R148, S_R169-S_R172, S_R176-S_R182, S_R183, S_R185, S_R194-S_R196, S_R208-S_R214, S_R239, S_R248, S_R269, S_R275-S_R281, S_R287, S_R288-S_R294, S_R302-S_R308, S_R318, S_R320, S_R322, S_R337, S_R344, S_R345, S_R347, S_R352, S_R353, S_R358-S_R364, S_R367, S_R371, S_R372, S_R373-S_R379, S_R383, S_R385, S_R386, S_R388-S_R394, S_R396, S_R397, S_R402, S_R403, S_R406, S_R407, S_S34, S_S35, S_S40, S_S41.

This comparative table provides stakeholders with a crucial overview of the primary sustainable structural materials available in Singapore. It highlights the trade-offs and benefits of each option concerning structural properties, embodied carbon, fire and climate resilience, cost implications, and alignment with BCA Green Mark criteria. This information is invaluable for making informed decisions at the early stages of projects that aim for high levels of sustainability and effective renewable energy integration, thereby promoting a more holistic and optimized approach to green building design.

1. Navigating Regulatory Frameworks and Leveraging Incentives

Successfully integrating renewable energy solutions into Singaporean building designs requires a thorough understanding of the prevailing regulatory landscape, particularly the BCA Green Mark scheme and SCDF Fire Code, as well as an awareness of available government incentives that can support innovation and adoption.

• BCA Green Mark 2021: Structural Implications for Renewable Energy Integration
  The BCA Green Mark 2021 scheme is a comprehensive framework that significantly influences structural design choices, especially when renewable energy systems are involved. Its various sections have direct and indirect bearings on how structures are conceived and executed:
  • Energy Efficiency (EE) Section: While this section primarily targets a building’s operational energy consumption, structural design plays a crucial supporting role. Passive design strategies, such as optimizing building orientation for natural daylighting and ventilation, or incorporating self-shading features through structural elements, can reduce energy demand. Furthermore, the structural system must be capable of accommodating high-efficiency active systems (e.g., providing adequate space and support for large, efficient chillers or specialized ventilation equipment). The strong push towards Super Low Energy (SLE), Zero Energy Building (ZEB), and Positive Energy Building (PEB) status ² inherently necessitates maximizing on-site renewable energy generation. This directly impacts the structural design of roofs and facades, which must be capable of hosting significant PV or BIPV arrays.
  • Whole Life Carbon (Cn) Section: This section is a major driver for innovation in structural material selection and design efficiency. Structural systems constitute a significant portion of a building’s embodied carbon. The requirement to use tools like the Singapore Building Carbon Calculator (SBCC) ⁶ to assess and reduce embodied carbon encourages engineers to adopt Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC), Mass Engineered Timber (MET), and design more materially efficient structures (e.g., achieving a lower Concrete Usage Index – CUI). The inclusion of A5 (Construction Phase) emissions in the assessment ¹¹⁴ further incentivizes DfMA solutions like MET, which can minimize on-site construction impacts and waste.
  • Resilience (Re) Section: Buildings must be designed to withstand the anticipated impacts of climate change. From a structural perspective, this includes designing for potentially increased wind loads on facades and roof-mounted renewables, ensuring foundation integrity in areas prone to flooding, and selecting materials that maintain their structural properties under conditions of extreme heat and humidity.⁵ The renewable energy systems themselves, and their attachments to the structure, must also be designed for resilience.
  • Maintainability (Mt) Section: The principles of Design for Maintainability (DfM) – Forecast, Access, Minimise defects, Enable simple maintenance (F.A.M.E.) ¹² – are critical when integrating renewable energy systems. Structures must be designed to provide safe, convenient, and adequate access for the inspection, cleaning, repair, and eventual replacement of PV panels, BIPV units, inverters, and associated cabling and equipment. Life Cycle Costing (LCC) analysis is employed to evaluate design choices with long-term maintenance implications in mind.¹²
  • Intelligence (In) Section: The move towards smart buildings requires infrastructure that is “smart-ready.” This can influence structural design by necessitating pathways for extensive cabling, secure mounting points for sensors and control devices, and dedicated spaces for data infrastructure related to the management and monitoring of renewable energy systems and overall building performance.¹³ The adoption of Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) processes, including the use of Project Information Models (PIM) and Asset Information Models (AIM), is also encouraged under this section ²⁶, facilitating better coordination between structural design and smart system integration.

The GM:2021 framework effectively mandates a holistic approach to structural design, compelling engineers to look beyond mere load-bearing capacity. Structural solutions must now actively contribute to achieving a spectrum of sustainability badges. For instance, a building utilizing MET for its low embodied carbon (contributing to the Cn badge) and supporting a large rooftop PV array (contributing to the EE badge) must also ensure that the MET structure allows for easy panel maintenance (Mt badge), is resilient to increased wind loads due to climate change (Re badge), and can accommodate sensors for performance monitoring (In badge). This necessitates a highly collaborative and iterative design process from the earliest project stages, involving architects, structural engineers, M&E engineers, energy consultants, and FM professionals.

This shift implies an increased demand for structural engineers who possess a robust understanding of whole-building performance, lifecycle impacts, and broad sustainability principles, in addition to their core structural mechanics expertise. The traditional sequential design process is likely to be less effective; a more integrated, concurrent engineering approach is needed to identify synergies and resolve potential conflicts between different Green Mark objectives.

• SCDF Fire Code: Ensuring Safety for Innovative Structures
  Adherence to the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) Fire Code is non-negotiable, and it contains specific provisions relevant to buildings incorporating renewable energy systems and sustainable materials like MET.
  • Timber Structures (MET): The use of MET in construction is governed by standards such as SS 572 (Code of Practice for the Use of Timber in Buildings) and specific clauses within the SCDF Fire Code 2023 (e.g., Section 9.9.5).⁹¹ Key requirements often include the mandatory installation of automatic sprinkler systems, the use of fire-rated encapsulation for timber elements to achieve required fire resistance ratings, and specific considerations for building height.⁹¹ Engineered timber buildings equipped with automatic fire detection or suppression systems are designated buildings under the Fire Safety Act, imposing specific obligations.⁹²
  • Solar PV Installations (Rooftop & BIPV): SCDF publishes specific “Fire Safety Requirements for Solar Photo-Voltaic (PV) Installations on Roof”.⁶⁴ These guidelines address:
    • Access Paths and Setbacks: Mandated clear access paths (e.g., minimum 1.5m wide) and setbacks from roof edges or exit points (e.g., 3m clearance around access hatches) are required to facilitate firefighting operations.⁶⁶ Sub-arrays are typically limited in size (e.g., 40m x 40m).⁶⁶
    • Material Fire Ratings: PV modules must meet minimum fire performance standards, such as Class C for spread of flame and burning brand tests under IEC 61730-2.⁶⁴
    • Structural Fire Safety: For rooftop PV installations over non-sprinkler-protected spaces, a 1-hour fire-rated separation might be required to prevent fire spread.⁶⁵For BIPV systems, particularly those integrated into facades, their material flammability and potential contribution to external fire spread are critical considerations under the Fire Code.

As building designs incorporate more innovative renewable energy solutions and novel sustainable materials (e.g., BIPV facades on complex MET structures), prescriptive clauses within the Fire Code may not comprehensively address all unique scenarios. This situation often necessitates a shift towards performance-based fire safety engineering. This approach allows designers to demonstrate that their innovative solutions achieve a level of safety equivalent to or exceeding that of prescriptive requirements, through detailed engineering analysis, modeling, and sometimes physical testing.

This requires structural engineers to work very closely with Fire Safety Engineers (FSEs), providing them with detailed information on material properties (especially under fire conditions), connection details, and the predicted structural behavior of the system when exposed to fire. This collaborative process is essential for obtaining regulatory approval for innovative green building designs. The increasing adoption of such advanced structures is likely to further drive innovation in fire safety engineering, fostering a regulatory environment that is both rigorous and adaptable to new technologies.

• Leveraging Government Support and Funding:
  The Singapore government offers a suite of incentives and funding schemes to support the adoption of green building technologies and sustainable construction practices. These can be instrumental in de-risking innovation and offsetting the initial costs associated with advanced solutions.
  • Green Buildings Innovation Cluster (GBIC) Programme: This programme, administered by BCA, aims to accelerate the RD&D and deployment of promising energy-efficient technologies for buildings.² An enhanced GBIC 2.0, rolled out in March 2022, intensifies support for “needle-moving technologies with deep energy efficiency,” focusing on areas like alternative cooling technologies, data-driven smart building solutions, and advanced ventilation.² Funding can cover up to 70% of the approved qualifying direct costs for companies and company-affiliated research entities.³⁷
  • Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings 2.0 (GMIS-EB 2.0): This scheme provides cash incentives to building owners to undertake energy efficiency retrofits in existing buildings, particularly those aiming for higher Green Mark ratings such as SLE or Zero Energy.² It is valid from 30 June 2022 until 31 March 2027, or until the available funds are fully committed.
  • SG Eco Fund: A $50 million fund established in 2020 to support community-driven projects that advance environmental sustainability and involve innovation.¹²⁸ While broadly focused, it could potentially support community-based renewable energy initiatives or demonstration projects featuring unique structural designs for sustainability.
  • Built Environment Transformation Gross Floor Area (GFA) Incentive Scheme: A joint initiative by BCA and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), this scheme awards additional GFA to private sector development projects that adopt enhanced standards in productivity (including DfMA), sustainability, and quality.² This can directly incentivize the use of DfMA solutions like MET.
  • Land Intensification Allowance (LIA) for DfMA Facilities: Originally supporting Integrated Construction and Prefabrication Hubs (ICPHs) for precast concrete, this scheme has been expanded to include new multi-storey DfMA facilities producing other DfMA products, such as MET components, effective from 1 January 2026.¹³⁰ This supports the development of the local DfMA ecosystem.

These funding schemes can be strategically leveraged to support not only the renewable energy hardware itself but also the innovative structural engineering, materials, and construction processes required for their optimal and safe integration. For instance, GBIC funding could support R&D into novel BIPV mounting systems or fire-resistant MET connection details. GMIS-EB 2.0 can help offset the costs of complex structural strengthening required for rooftop PV retrofits on older buildings.

Project teams should proactively explore these avenues, framing grant proposals to highlight how structural innovation serves as a key enabler for achieving superior energy performance and broader sustainability outcomes. In this way, government funding acts as a vital catalyst, encouraging the built environment sector to move beyond conventional practices and embrace more advanced and sustainable structural solutions.

• Table: Key Singapore Government Incentives for Renewable Energy in Buildings

Scheme Name	Administering Agency(ies)	Objective/Focus Area	Eligibility Criteria Highlights	Type of Support	Relevance to Structural Integration of Renewables
Green Buildings Innovation Cluster (GBIC) 2.0	BCA	Accelerate RD&D and deployment of energy-efficient building technologies; focus on SLE-enabling tech.	Companies, company-affiliated research entities, IHLs, RIs. Focus on energy-guzzling building typologies. Aligned with SLEB Technology Roadmap. 37	Grant (up to 70% of qualifying direct costs for companies) 37	Funding for R&D of innovative BIPV mounting systems, lightweight structures for PV, fire-resistant MET connections, structural solutions for advanced ventilation/cooling systems.
Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings 2.0 (GMIS-EB 2.0)	BCA	Encourage energy efficiency retrofits in existing buildings to achieve higher Green Mark ratings (SLE, Zero Energy).	Owners of existing private commercial, institutional, light industrial buildings, and residential buildings (under specific conditions). 2	Cash Grant (tiered based on Green Mark rating achieved and tCO2e saved, with caps) 21	Offsetting costs for structural strengthening for rooftop PV, facade modifications for BIPV, structural work for integrating high-efficiency M&E systems.
SG Eco Fund	Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE)	Support community projects advancing environmental sustainability, innovation, and sustained impact.	Individuals, educational institutions, non-profit organisations, for-profit organisations (with community involvement). Projects must show environmental benefit, community action, innovation, and sustained impact. 129	Grant (funding levels vary) 129	Potential support for community-based renewable energy demonstration projects incorporating unique structural designs or sustainable materials (e.g., community building with MET structure and integrated solar).
Built Environment Transformation GFA Incentive Scheme	BCA, URA	Award additional GFA for private sector projects adopting enhanced standards in productivity (DfMA), sustainability, and quality.	Private sector developments. 2	GFA Bonus (up to 3% of Masterplan GFA) 10	Incentivizing DfMA solutions like MET which can be structurally optimized for renewable energy integration (e.g., lighter structures for more PV).
Land Intensification Allowance (LIA) for DfMA Facilities	Economic Development Board (EDB), supported by BCA	Encourage development of multi-storey DfMA facilities to support prefabrication.	New multi-storey DfMA facilities (including MET production) meeting minimum GPR; A&A works for existing qualifying facilities. 130	Tax Allowance (up to 100% of qualifying capital expenditure) 130	Supports development of local MET production capacity, potentially improving supply chain and reducing costs for MET structures designed for renewable integration.

Data Sources:.²

This table serves as a quick-reference guide for stakeholders, outlining key government incentives relevant to integrating renewable energy into Singaporean buildings. By clearly linking these schemes to the structural aspects of such integration, it aims to empower project teams to strategically leverage available support, thereby overcoming financial hurdles and fostering the adoption of more innovative and sustainable structural designs.

1. Case Studies: Pioneering Renewable Integration and Sustainable Structures in Singapore

Singapore’s commitment to green buildings is vividly illustrated by several pioneering projects that showcase innovative approaches to integrating renewable energy systems with advanced structural designs and sustainable materials. These case studies offer valuable lessons and inspiration for the broader industry.

• National University of Singapore (NUS) – A Green Mark Platinum Champion:
  NUS has established itself as a leader in sustainable campus development, with numerous buildings achieving high Green Mark ratings. The university serves as a crucial “living laboratory” for testing and demonstrating advanced green building technologies and innovative structural systems.
  • SDE4 (School of Design and Environment 4): This building is a landmark achievement, being Singapore’s first new-build net-zero energy building and Green Mark Platinum Zero Energy certified.⁴⁰ Its success is rooted in a holistic design philosophy:
    • Renewable Energy System: A key feature is its extensive rooftop solar farm, comprising over 1,200 PV panels that generate over 500 MWh of electricity annually, effectively meeting 100% of the building’s operational energy needs.¹²¹ The LYSAGHT® KLIP-LOK® 406 standing seam roof system was specifically chosen for the solar panel installation, as it allows for clamping the mounting structure to the raised ribs of the roof sheets without requiring any penetrations, thus preserving roof integrity.¹³²
    • Structural Features: The architectural design is deeply integrated with its energy goals. A large over-sailing roof, protruding significantly (52 feet), is supported by distinct columns. This design not only provides extensive shading to the building facades, reducing solar heat gain, but also maximizes the available area for PV panel installation.¹²¹ The building employs a hybrid timber-concrete structure, and its shallow plan and porous layout are designed to promote cross-ventilation and natural daylighting.¹²¹
    • Lessons: SDE4 exemplifies how architectural and structural design can be synergistically combined to maximize passive environmental performance and active solar energy generation within a tropical context. The innovative roof design is a critical structural element that enables its net-zero energy status.
  • Gaia (Nanyang Business School Building): Gaia stands as Asia’s largest wooden building, an impressive 43,500 sqm structure achieving Green Mark Platinum (Zero Energy) certification.¹¹⁷
    • Renewable Energy System: Its rooftop hosts 800 solar PV panels, generating approximately 516,000 kWh of clean energy annually.¹¹⁸
    • Structural Features (MET): Gaia is predominantly constructed using Mass Engineered Timber, specifically Glulam for its frame and Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) for slabs and walls, totaling around 13,000 cubic meters of MET.¹¹⁸ The timber was sourced from sustainably managed forests in Austria, Sweden, and Finland, prefabricated off-site, and assembled on-site using a “Lego-style” DfMA approach. This method significantly reduced construction time by an estimated 35% and minimized on-site disturbances like dust and noise.¹¹⁸
    • Durability in the Tropics: Recognizing the challenges of Singapore’s humid climate, the timber elements were treated with sealants to protect against sunlight, water, and termites. The design also incorporates a sacrificial timber layer on beams for enhanced fire protection. Careful construction sequencing was employed to minimize moisture exposure during assembly.⁹⁷ While some localized mould issues were reported post-occupancy, these were attributed to specific instances of condensation and direct rain exposure on certain surfaces, rather than a systemic failure of the MET material itself, highlighting the critical importance of ongoing maintenance and environmental control within the building.¹²⁰
    • Lessons: Gaia is a testament to the feasibility of large-scale MET construction in a demanding tropical environment. It underscores the benefits of DfMA, the necessity of meticulous moisture management during both construction and operation, and the successful integration of MET with passive design strategies to achieve outstanding energy efficiency.
  • The Wave (NTU Sports Hall): This was NTU’s second building constructed using MET and the first large-scale building of its kind in Southeast Asia.¹¹⁷
    • Structural Features: Its most striking feature is a 72-meter span wave-like roof, constructed using seven massive timber arches. This innovative design creates a large, pillar-less interior space suitable for sports activities. The timber roof is also reported to provide five times better heat insulation than a comparable concrete roof.¹¹⁷
    • Lessons: The Wave demonstrates MET’s versatility and capability for achieving long structural spans and complex architectural forms, while also contributing to the building’s thermal performance.

The pioneering projects at NUS serve as invaluable real-world testbeds for advanced green building technologies and innovative structural systems in Singapore. The successes achieved, as well as the challenges encountered and addressed (such as the mould issue in Gaia), provide crucial data and practical lessons for the wider construction industry. This knowledge helps inform BCA guidelines, shape industry best practices, and direct future research and development efforts, ultimately de-risking and accelerating the adoption of new green building technologies.

• Commercial Buildings Leading the Way:
  Several commercial developments in Singapore have also embraced high sustainability standards, integrating renewable energy and innovative structural solutions.
  • Keppel Bay Tower: This existing 18-storey building was retrofitted to become Singapore’s first Green Mark Platinum (Zero Energy) commercial building.¹³³
    • Renewable Energy System: Its zero-energy status is achieved through a combination of significant energy efficiency retrofits and renewable energy. This includes the installation of onsite PV panels covering over 400m², generating approximately 100,000 kWh per annum, supplemented by the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) from off-site sources.⁴¹
    • Structural Retrofit Aspects: While detailed structural modifications specifically for the PV installation are not extensively covered in the provided information, achieving Zero Energy in an existing high-rise commercial building through deep energy retrofits inherently involves a careful assessment of the existing structure’s capacity to support any new equipment (like more efficient chillers or AHUs) or modifications, including the rooftop PV system. The primary focus of the retrofit was on implementing advanced energy-efficient technologies such as intelligent building controls, smart lighting systems, and high-efficiency air distribution systems.¹³⁴
    • Lessons: Keppel Bay Tower is a landmark project demonstrating that even older commercial buildings can be transformed to achieve the highest levels of energy performance. The structural engineering aspect in such retrofits is crucial for ensuring that the existing building can safely accommodate all new systems and modifications required for the energy transformation.
  • CapitaGreen: This 40-storey office tower, a Green Mark Platinum recipient (2012) ¹³⁸, is renowned for its striking green facade and innovative environmental features.
    • Innovative Design for Energy Reduction: A distinctive “petal-like” structure on its rooftop acts as a wind scoop, designed to capture cooler, cleaner air from above and channel it into the building’s air conditioning system, thereby reducing cooling energy demand.¹³⁸ It features an energy-efficient double-skin façade, with over half its perimeter covered by living green plants, which helps to reduce solar heat gain by up to 26%.¹³⁸
    • Structural Materials: The project utilized “Supercrete,” a Grade 100 ultra-high-strength concrete, for its precast columns, which allowed for smaller column sizes and reduced overall concrete volume.¹³⁹ The construction also involved a hybrid of steel and precast concrete technology.¹³⁹
    • Renewables: While the building’s primary strategy focuses on passive design and energy demand reduction, CapitaLand has trialled innovative renewable solutions like lightweight flexible solar modules at CapitaGreen as part of its Sustainability Xchange programme.¹⁴⁰
    • Lessons: CapitaGreen powerfully illustrates how innovative structural and facade design can significantly minimize a building’s energy demand, which is a crucial prerequisite for making renewable energy contributions more impactful. The complex geometry of its rooftop wind scoop and the double-skin facade required sophisticated wind load analysis and structural engineering.⁵⁶
  • Ocean Financial Centre: Another premium Grade A office tower, Ocean Financial Centre received Green Mark Platinum recertification in 2019 and is undergoing further enhancements with the aim of achieving SLE certification.¹⁴¹
    • Planned Enhancements: These include the implementation of cutting-edge smart building solutions, aesthetic upgrades, and space optimization. Such upgrades, particularly to energy systems, would necessitate structural assessments to ensure compatibility with the existing structure.¹⁴¹
    • Lessons: This project reflects the ongoing trend of existing premium commercial buildings in Singapore being retrofitted to meet progressively higher sustainability standards. Structural engineers play a key role in assessing the feasibility of integrating new, more efficient systems into these established structures.
  • Asia Square Twin Towers: These towers achieved both LEED CS Platinum and Green Mark Platinum certifications, setting an early benchmark for green high-rise buildings in Singapore.¹⁴³
    • Renewable Energy: A significant feature was the installation of photovoltaic cells covering the entire roof area of one of the towers. At the time of its completion, this was reportedly the largest renewable energy generation installation in any commercial office development in Singapore, with the generated electricity used to power mechanical ventilation systems and supplementary lighting.¹⁴³ The development also included a biodiesel generation plant to convert waste cooking oil into fuel for generators.¹⁴³
    • Structural Integration: The roof structure was specifically designed to support this extensive PV array. The building also incorporated energy-saving features like regenerative lifts.¹⁴³
    • Lessons: Asia Square demonstrated early on how large-scale rooftop PV systems could be successfully integrated into major commercial developments, emphasizing the importance of considering such installations in the initial structural design to accommodate the required capacity.

The retrofitting of existing commercial buildings like Keppel Bay Tower and Ocean Financial Centre to achieve higher Green Mark ratings, particularly SLE or Zero Energy status, presents distinct structural challenges. Engineers must often work with aged structures, potentially limited as-built information, and constrained load capacities. Integrating new, often heavier, energy-efficient M&E systems or rooftop PV arrays may require innovative and sometimes complex structural strengthening techniques. However, this challenge also drives opportunity, fostering innovation in lightweight renewable energy solutions, advanced assessment methods for existing structures, and efficient, minimally disruptive structural retrofitting techniques.

• Public Sector and Industrial Initiatives: Driving Scale and Standardization
  The public sector in Singapore, including agencies like JTC Corporation and the Housing & Development Board (HDB), plays a crucial role in driving the adoption of sustainable construction practices and renewable energy integration at scale.
  • JTC Punggol Digital District (PDD) MET Building: As previously mentioned, JTC’s eight-storey MET industrial building in PDD is a flagship project for sustainable industrial development. Its achievement of Platinum Super-low Energy certification and an exceptionally low embodied carbon footprint (98% lower than BCA benchmark) underscores the potential of MET in the industrial sector. The use of DfMA principles in its construction, leading to a 60% reduction in on-site manpower, also aligns with Singapore’s drive for enhanced construction productivity.¹²³ JTC’s commitment is further evidenced by its role in commissioning the study that led to the development of the Building Embodied Carbon Calculator (BECC), now the Singapore Building Carbon Calculator (SBCC) ⁶, a vital tool for the industry.
  • HDB’s SolarNova Programme and Green Mark Commitment: HDB, as the largest housing developer, is a key driver of solar adoption through its SolarNova programme, which aggregates demand for solar PV installations across public housing rooftops.⁸ All new HDB public housing developments are required to achieve at least BCA Green Mark Gold certification, with those in new towns or districts aiming for Green Mark GoldPLUS or higher. The Green Mark scheme encourages the use of sustainable building materials, including low-carbon concrete and recycled materials. While the carbon footprint of building materials is not currently a direct criterion for HDB tender evaluation, HDB is actively researching alternative building materials to further reduce its carbon footprint through initiatives like the Cities of Tomorrow R&D programme.
  • LTA’s Adoption of Low-Carbon Concrete: The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is mandating the use of low-carbon concrete in its major infrastructure projects, such as the Cross Island Line Phase 2 and various footpath renewal contracts. The target is to achieve at least a 20% reduction in carbon emissions compared to conventional concrete for these applications. LTA is also exploring other sustainable materials like Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) as alternatives to traditional steel reinforcement in some contexts.

The proactive stance of public sector agencies like JTC, HDB, and LTA is instrumental in driving the adoption of DfMA principles and sustainable materials like MET and LCC across the wider construction industry. By setting requirements for their own projects and supporting R&D, these agencies help to build industry capacity, create demand, and demonstrate the viability of these innovative solutions at scale. This leadership is critical for mainstreaming sustainable structural practices and renewable energy integration in Singapore.

VII. Future Trends and Outlook in Sustainable Structural Design for Renewable Energy

The integration of renewable energy solutions into Singapore’s building designs is an evolving field, with several key trends poised to shape its future trajectory. Structural engineering will continue to play a critical enabling role in this advancement.

• Advancements in BIPV Technology and Integration:
  Building Integrated Photovoltaics are expected to become more sophisticated, efficient, and aesthetically versatile. Future trends may include:
  • Higher Efficiency and Transparency: Development of BIPV glazing with improved power generation efficiency while maintaining high levels of transparency for vision areas.
  • Novel Materials and Form Factors: Exploration of flexible, lightweight, and even colourful BIPV materials that can be integrated into curved or complex architectural surfaces, moving beyond flat panels. Lightweight flexible solar modules are already being trialled.¹⁴⁰
  • Seamless Structural Integration: Enhanced prefabricated BIPV systems that are designed for even quicker and more robust integration with common facade and roofing structures, potentially incorporating plug-and-play electrical connections. This aligns with DfMA principles for faster and more reliable assembly.
  • Multifunctional BIPV: BIPV systems that offer additional functionalities beyond power generation, such as dynamic shading, enhanced thermal insulation, or even integrated LED displays, will require structural systems that can accommodate these added complexities.
• Next-Generation Mass Engineered Timber (MET) and Hybrid Systems:
  The use of MET is likely to expand, with ongoing research focusing on:
  • Enhanced Durability and Fire Resistance: Development of new treatments and engineered wood composites that offer superior resistance to moisture, pests, and fire, particularly for tropical climates. NTU is researching an invisible coating to make wood fire-resistant.¹⁰³
  • Hybrid Timber-Concrete/Steel Structures: Optimizing the combination of MET with concrete and steel to leverage the best properties of each material. For example, using concrete cores for lateral stability in taller MET buildings or steel for complex connections or long-span elements where timber might be less efficient.¹⁰⁴ Venturer Timberwork is exploring such hybrid typologies.¹⁰⁴
  • Digital Fabrication and Robotics: Increased use of advanced digital fabrication techniques and robotics in the manufacturing and assembly of MET components can lead to greater precision, reduced waste, and faster construction.⁸⁸
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Data-Driven Structural Design for Sustainability:
  AI and data analytics will increasingly influence structural design:
  • Optimisation Algorithms: AI can be used to optimize structural designs for multiple objectives simultaneously, such as minimizing embodied carbon, maximizing material efficiency (reducing CUI), ensuring structural performance under various load conditions (including those from renewables), and facilitating DfMA.
  • Predictive Maintenance for Structures with Integrated Renewables: Sensors embedded within structures or attached to renewable energy systems can provide data for AI-driven predictive maintenance algorithms, identifying potential structural issues or system degradation before they become critical. This is aligned with the BCA Green Mark Intelligence section.²⁶
  • Digital Twins: The creation of detailed digital twins of buildings, incorporating structural information and real-time performance data from integrated renewable systems, will enable more accurate performance analysis, operational optimization, and informed decision-making for future retrofits or upgrades.¹⁴⁵ JTC’s Open Digital Platform for Punggol Digital District is an example of such an initiative.¹⁴⁵
• Circular Economy Principles in Structural Components:
  There will be a growing emphasis on designing structural systems and components with circularity in mind:
  • Design for Disassembly (DfD): Structural connections and systems designed to be easily disassembled at the end of a building’s life, allowing for the reuse or high-value recycling of components like MET beams, steel sections, or even precast LCC elements. This is a challenge for conventional concrete but more feasible with MET and steel.
  • Recycled and Reused Materials: Increased use of RCA in concrete and exploring the potential for reusing salvaged structural timber or steel in new constructions.
  • Standardization and Modularization: Greater standardization of structural component sizes and connection types can facilitate reuse and reduce waste, aligning with DfMA principles.¹⁴⁶
• The Evolving Role of the Structural Engineer in Achieving Net-Zero Emissions: As Singapore progresses towards its long-term net-zero emissions aspiration by 2050 ³, the role of the structural engineer will become even more critical and multifaceted. They will need to:
  • Champion Low-Carbon Materials: Actively advocate for and implement structural solutions using MET, LCC, and other sustainable alternatives.
  • Master Integrated Design: Work seamlessly with architects, M&E engineers, energy consultants, and facade specialists from the earliest project stages to create holistic building solutions where renewable energy integration is inherent, not an afterthought.
  • Embrace Digital Tools: Utilize advanced simulation software, BIM, AI-driven optimization tools, and digital twins to design and verify efficient and resilient structures.
  • Focus on Whole-Life Performance: Consider not just the initial structural design but also the long-term durability, maintainability, adaptability, and end-of-life considerations of the structure and its integrated systems.
  • Innovate for Resilience: Develop structural solutions that can effectively withstand the increasing impacts of climate change, ensuring the safety and longevity of buildings and their renewable energy assets.

The journey towards a truly sustainable built environment in Singapore is ongoing. Structural engineers are at the vanguard of this transformation, tasked with the challenge and opportunity to design the resilient, resource-efficient, and energy-generating buildings of the future. Continuous learning, interdisciplinary collaboration, and a commitment to innovation will be essential for success.

VIII. Conclusion

The integration of renewable energy solutions into Singapore’s building designs is not merely an option but a critical imperative, driven by ambitious national sustainability goals and the urgent need to mitigate climate change. This report has underscored that from a structural perspective, this integration presents both significant challenges and profound opportunities for innovation. The successful deployment of rooftop solar PV systems, the sophisticated incorporation of Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV), and the synergistic use of sustainable structural materials like Mass Engineered Timber (MET) and Low-Carbon Concrete (LCC) all hinge on astute and forward-thinking structural engineering.

Singapore’s policy landscape, spearheaded by the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and the BCA Green Mark 2021 scheme, provides a robust framework that increasingly demands holistic building performance. The emphasis on Whole Life Carbon, Resilience, Maintainability, and Intelligence within GM:2021 compels structural engineers to broaden their focus beyond traditional load-bearing considerations.

Material selection is no longer solely about strength and cost; embodied carbon, durability in a tropical climate, and compatibility with DfMA principles are now paramount. Similarly, structural designs must anticipate and accommodate the physical and operational requirements of integrated renewable energy systems, from the dead and wind loads of rooftop PV arrays to the intricate connection details of BIPV facades and the specific fire safety and durability demands of MET.

The case studies examined, from NUS’s pioneering MET structures like Gaia and SDE4 to the innovative retrofits of commercial towers such as Keppel Bay Tower and CapitaGreen, demonstrate that Singapore is already making significant strides. These projects highlight the tangible benefits of early design integration, the importance of addressing local climatic challenges (particularly moisture and pests for timber), and the productivity gains achievable through DfMA. They also reveal that achieving high levels of sustainability, such as Net Zero Energy, often involves a synergistic combination of passive design, energy-efficient active systems, and maximized on-site renewable energy generation, all underpinned by sound structural engineering.

Key takeaways for structural engineers in Singapore include:

• Embrace Integrated Design: Collaboration with architects, M&E engineers, facade specialists, and fire safety engineers from project inception is crucial for optimizing renewable energy integration and overall building performance.
• Champion Sustainable Materials: Proactively explore and advocate for the use of MET and LCC, understanding their structural properties, environmental benefits, and specific design considerations for the local context.
• Prioritize Durability and Maintainability: Design structures and renewable energy system integrations that are resilient to Singapore’s tropical climate and allow for efficient long-term maintenance and eventual replacement of components.
• Navigate Regulatory Frameworks Proactively: Stay abreast of the evolving BCA Green Mark criteria and SCDF Fire Code requirements, and leverage performance-based design approaches where necessary for innovative solutions.
• Leverage Technology and Innovation: Utilize advanced modelling tools, digital fabrication techniques, and smart building principles to enhance design efficiency, structural performance, and the seamless integration of renewable energy technologies.

The journey towards a low-carbon, resilient built environment requires continuous innovation and a commitment to pushing the boundaries of conventional practice. Structural engineers in Singapore are uniquely positioned to lead this charge, transforming buildings from passive energy consumers into active contributors to a sustainable energy future. By addressing the structural challenges with ingenuity and a holistic perspective, they will be instrumental in realizing Singapore’s vision of a greener and more sustainable urban landscape.

 

Works cited

1. Singapore Green Building Masterplan, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sgbc.sg/sgbmp/
2. Buildings – National Climate Change Secretariat, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.nccs.gov.sg/singapores-climate-action/mitigation-efforts/buildings/
3. Singapore Green Plan 2030, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.greenplan.gov.sg/
4. Our Targets – Singapore Green Plan 2030, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.greenplan.gov.sg/targets/
5. Green Certification | Singapore | Global Sustainable Buildings Guide, accessed June 10, 2025, https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/global-sustainable-buildings/asia-pacific/singapore/topics/green-certification
6. Embodied Carbon Calculator – Singapore Green Building Council, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sgbc.sg/embodied-carbon-calculator/
7. Smart Buildings: Harnessing Technology for Energy and Sustainability Management – Savills Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.savills.com.sg/blog/article/220488/singapore-articles/smart-buildings–harnessing-technology-for-energy-and-sustainability-management.aspx
8. Sunny days ahead for solar adoption in Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.edb.gov.sg/en/business-insights/insights/sunny-days-ahead-for-solar-adoption-in-singapore.html
9. Clean Energy in Singapore: A Path to a Sustainable Future – Sunollo, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sunollo.com/blog/clean-energy-in-singapore
10. Singapore: Transforming the built environment – World Future Energy Summit, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.worldfutureenergysummit.com/en-gb/future-insights-blog/blogs/singapore-transforming-the-built-environment.html
11. The Green Mark Certification Scheme explained – CIM.io, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.cim.io/blog/the-green-mark-certification-scheme-explained
12. Green Mark 2021 | Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg/sustainability/green-mark-certification-scheme/green-mark-2021
13. bca-green-mark-2021-certification-scheme.pdf, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/media-releases/bca-green-mark-2021-certification-scheme.pdf
14. Energy Performance Certificates and Minimum Energy Standards | Singapore | Global Sustainable Buildings Guide | Baker McKenzie Resource Hub, accessed June 10, 2025, https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/global-sustainable-buildings/asia-pacific/singapore/topics/energy-performance-certificates-and-minimum-energy-standards
15. Super low energy buildings in Singapore, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www.jll.com.sg/en/trends-and-insights/research/super-low-energy-buildings-in-singapore
16. sgbc.sg, accessed June 10, 2025, https://digitalacademy.sgbc.sg/course/unpacking-green-mark-2021-sustainability-sections-whole-life-carbon-cn-and-intelligence-in#:~:text=In%20the%20latest%20BCA%20Green,%2C%20Intelligence%2C%20Maintainability%20and%20Resilience.
17. Green Mark 2021 Health and Wellbeing – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/20240101_healthwellbeing_simplified_r2.pdf?sfvrsn=55c29193_0
18. Green Mark 2021 Health and Wellbeing – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/20211027_healthwellbeing_simplified_r1-1.pdf
19. Green Mark 2021 Maintainability – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/20211027_-maintainability-section_writeup.pdf
20. Green Mark 2021 Maintainability Technical Guide For Existing Building | PDF – Scribd, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/565208504/Green-Mark-2021-Maintainability-Technical-Guide-for-Existing-Building
21. How Green Mark 2021 Certification Can Help Manage Your Commercial Property’s Energy Costs – Savills Japan, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.savills.co.jp/blog/article/221720-0/singapore-articles/how-green-mark-2021-certification-can-help-manage-your-commercial-property-s-energy-costs.aspx
22. Green Mark 2021 Technical Guide On Resilience | PDF | Environmental Impact Assessment, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/565208911/Green-Mark-2021-Technical-Guide-on-Resilience
23. 03 GM 2021 Resilience Section (Final) | PDF | Earth Sciences …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/718409848/03-gm-2021-resilience-section-final
24. NATIONAL CLIMATE RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK – Joe Biden for President, accessed June 10, 2025, https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/National-Climate-Resilience-Framework-FINAL.pdf
25. CLIMATE RESILIENCE BUILDING IN CITIES WORLDWIDE – ULI Knowledge Finder, accessed June 10, 2025, https://knowledge.uli.org/-/media/files/research-reports/2020/building-climate-resilience.pdf?rev=0e4d035551b3413f8cb1561a337d284d&hash=8A3ECA7A547F38CC00172F9BAEF5B588
26. Green Mark 2021 Intelligence – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/20240101_intelligence_simplified_r2.pdf?sfvrsn=2d82dc9_0
27. There’s something smart about being green – Blog – Cundall, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.cundall.com/ideas/blog/theres-something-smart-about-being-green
28. Certification Course on Strategies for Smart FM and Maintainability – BCA Academy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.bcaa.edu.sg/what-we-offer/courses/online-courses/Details/certification-course-on-strategies-for-smart-facilities-management-(fm)-and-maintainability
29. Top 10 Leading Green Buildings in Singapore for 2025 – Novatr, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.novatr.com/blog/green-architecture-buildings-singapore
30. Green Mark 2021 – BeeBryte, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.beebryte.com/green-mark-2021/
31. Green Mark Buildings Directory – SLEB Smart Hub, accessed June 10, 2025, https://sleb.sg/Building/GreenMarkBuildingsDirectory
32. BCA Green Mark – Telemax Environmental and Energy Management Limited, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www.telemaxeem.com/index.php/service/6
33. BCA Green Mark – Certification Standard for New Buildings, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/gm_certification_std.pdf
34. BCA Green Mark Certification Standard For Existing Buildings: GM …, accessed June 9, 2025, https://policy.asiapacificenergy.org/node/2595
35. BCA Green Mark Building – Facilities Maintenance Knowledge – WordPress.com, accessed June 9, 2025, https://facilitiesmaintenanceknowledge.wordpress.com/2016/01/20/green-mark-building-requirements/
36. Singapore Green Building Masterplan – GMIS for Existing Buildings 2.0 (GMIS-EB 2.0) – IEA, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.iea.org/policies/18271-singapore-green-building-masterplan-gmis-for-existing-buildings-20-gmis-eb-20
37. Green Buildings Innovation Cluster (GBIC) Programme, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg/buildsg-transformation-fund/green-buildings-innovation-cluster-gbic-programme
38. Urban Solutions and Sustainability – National Research Foundation Singapore, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www.nrf.gov.sg/rie-ecosystem/ecosystem-wide-fis/uss-fi/
39. Green Buildings Innovation Cluster (GBIC) programme – Policies – IEA, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www.iea.org/policies/18278-green-buildings-innovation-cluster-gbic-programme
40. Industry Interest to Mainstream Super Low Energy Buildings picking up pace, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/about-us/news-and-publications/media-releases/2021/09/17/industry-interest-to-mainstream-super-low-energy-buildings-picking-up-pace
41. Keppel Bay Tower certified as Singapore’s first Green Mark Platinum (Zero Energy) commercial building The original target of creating Singapore’s first super low energy highrise existing commercial building has been surpassed – Issuu, accessed June 9, 2025, https://issuu.com/desmond6/docs/tse_feb_21_web/s/11888646
42. Singapore’s Approach To Alternative Energy – National Climate Change Secretariat, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.nccs.gov.sg/singapores-climate-action/singapore-approach-to-alternative-energy/
43. Lessons from Singapore: How to generate solar power in a city without much space, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/04/singapore-solar-floatting-farms-environment-energy-cities/
44. Solar Energy & Corporate PPAs in Singapore – Bird & Bird, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/singapore/solar-energy-corporate-ppas-in-singapore
45. SolarNova Rooftop Solar Program, Singapore Public Private Partnership – World Bank PPP, accessed June 10, 2025, https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/energy-and-power/solarnova-rooftop-solar-program-singapore
46. Green Handbook – Photovoltaic (PV) Systems in Buildings, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/publications/for-industry/pv_guide.pdf
47. The Ultimate Guide to Structural Engineering for Solar Projects, accessed June 10, 2025, https://ecuip.com/guide-to-structural-engineering-for-solar-projects/
48. Building Permit and Structural Assessment Requirements for Solar Panel Installations in Australia – Gamcorp, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.gamcorp.com.au/news/building-permit-and-structural-assessment-requirements-for-solar-panel-installations-in-australia
49. Rooftop Solar-Introduction,benefit and government initiative – Electricalsphere, accessed June 10, 2025, https://electricalsphere.com/rooftop-solar-aboutbenefit-and-government-initiative/
50. Key Structural Considerations for Rooftop Solar on Commercial Buildings – SunPeak, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sunpeakpower.com/blog/structural-considerations-for-rooftop-solar
51. Reinforced Roofs: Structural Retrofits for Solar Panel Installation – GDI Engineering, accessed June 10, 2025, https://gdiengdesign.com/reinforced-roofs-structural-retrofits-solar-panel-installation/
52. Guide to Solar Panel Sizes & Dimensions (June 2025) – GreenMatch, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/solar-energy/solar-panels/sizes
53. ASCE 7-22 Method for Calculating Uplift on PV Modules Notation Lp = Panel chord length., accessed June 10, 2025, https://ocal.csqrcloud.com/community-etrakit/viewAttachment.aspx?Group=PERMIT&ActivityNo=ELE24-0094&key=ECON%3A240201034504492
54. ASCE 7-16 Wind Load Calculations (Solar Panels) | SkyCiv Engineering, accessed June 10, 2025, https://skyciv.com/docs/load-generator/wind/asce-7-wind-load-calculations-solar-panels/
55. Loads – Building Control (Temporary Buildings) Regulations 2018 – Singapore Statutes Online, accessed June 10, 2025, https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL-Supp/S807-2018/Published?DocDate=20181212&ProvIds=Sc2-
56. CapitaGreen – RWDI, accessed June 10, 2025, https://rwdi.com/en_ca/projects/capitagreen/
57. com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://gdiengdesign.com/reinforced-roofs-structural-retrofits-solar-panel-installation/#:~:text=Common%20methods%20include%20adding%20support,and%20impact%20on%20occupied%20spaces.&text=Sistering%20Joists%20or%20Rafters%3A%20Attach,identical%20members%20alongside%20existing%20framing.
58. Complete Guide To Solar Installation When Building A House In Singapore – GetSolar, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.getsolar.ai/en-sg/blog/complete-guide-to-solar-installation-when-building-a-house-in-singapore
59. Preparing for Solar – Singapore – EMA, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ema.gov.sg/consumer-information/solar/preparing-for-solar
60. Ballasted Ground Mount For Solar: Pros & Cons, Alternatives – Nuance Energy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://nuanceenergy.com/solar-blog/ballasted-ground-mount-for-solar-pros-cons-alternatives
61. Choosing the Right Solution Solar on Flat Roofs – Ballasted, Attached & Hybrid, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.altenergymag.com/article/2019/09/choosing-the-right-solution-solar-on-flat-roofs-%E2%80%93-ballasted-attached-hybrid/31779
62. Mitigating Roof Penetration Risks in Solar Installations: Techniques for Installers – Arka360, accessed June 10, 2025, https://arka360.com/ros/roof-penetration-risks-solar-installations
63. Solar Panel Installation: Do Solar Panels Damage Roof? – Anker SOLIX US, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ankersolix.com/blogs/solar/do-solar-panels-damage-roof
64. Solar Panel Fire: Causes, Prevention, and Safety Tips – GetSolar, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.getsolar.ai/en-sg/blog/solar-panel-fire-safety
65. SCDF – Singapore – CORENET X, accessed June 10, 2025, https://corenet.gov.sg/media/2392141/circular-amendments-to-fire-code-2023-%E2%80%93-3rd-batch-of-amendments.pdf
66. Clause 10.2 Solar Photo-Voltaic (PV) Installation – SCDF, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.scdf.gov.sg/fire-safety-services-listing/fire-code-2023/table-of-content/chapter-10-requirements-for-special-installations/clause-10.2-solar-photo-voltaic-pv-installation
67. Residential Solar Panel Requirements – NFPA, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.nfpa.org/news-blogs-and-articles/blogs/2024/02/29/residential-solar-panel-requirements
68. Building-Integrated Photovoltaics; A Technical Guidebook – IEA-PVPS, accessed June 10, 2025, https://iea-pvps.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Building-Integrated-Photovoltaics-Technical-Guidebook.pdf
69. Building-Integrated Photovoltaics: A Technical Guidebook – IEA-PVPS, accessed June 10, 2025, https://iea-pvps.org/key-topics/book-building-integrated-photovoltaics-a-technical-guidebook/
70. Building-integrated Photovoltaics – Natural Resources Canada, accessed June 10, 2025, https://natural-resources.canada.ca/energy-efficiency/building-integrated-photovoltaics
71. Building-Integrated Photovoltaic Designs for Commercial and Institutional Structures – Publications, accessed June 10, 2025, https://docs.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/25272.pdf
72. accessed January 1, 1970, https://iea-pvps.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Building-Integrated-Photovoltaics-Technical-Guidebook.pdf
73. The BIPV system:The Perfect amalgamation of Urban development and Energy generation – Arka360, accessed June 10, 2025, https://arka360.com/ros/bipv-system
74. BIPV Solar Glass Curtain Wall (SF-PVROOM02), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.esolarfirst.com/sfpvroom02-bipv-glass-curtain-wall-product/
75. SF BIPV Glass Curtain Wall – Solar First, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.pvsolarfirst.com/Products_details/BIPV_Glass_Curtain_Wall.html
76. Building-Integrated Photovoltaic Desings for … – Publications, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/25272.pdf
77. The Science of Structural Integrity: How Mitrex Ensures BIPV Safety, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.mitrex.com/blog/the-science-of-structural-integrity-how-mitrex-ensures-bipv-safety
78. A Comprehensive Case Study of a Full-Size BIPV Facade – MDPI, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/5/1293
79. Mass Engineered Timber (MET) Guidebook – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/publications/for-industry/met_guidebook_2018.pdf
80. Mass Engineered Timber | Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg/productivity/design-for-manufacturing-and-assembly-dfma/mass-engineered-timber
81. com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://kallesoemachinery.com/the-green-products-of-the-future/what-is-the-difference-between-clt-and-glulam/#:~:text=These%20materials%2C%20referred%20to%20as,such%20as%20beams%2C%20or%20columns.
82. What Is the Difference Between CLT and Glulam? – Kallesoe Machinery, accessed June 10, 2025, https://kallesoemachinery.com/the-green-products-of-the-future/what-is-the-difference-between-clt-and-glulam/
83. Case Study – Woh Hup Technical Hub | Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg/productivity/design-for-manufacturing-and-assembly-dfma/mass-engineered-timber/mass-engineered-timber-case-study-woh-hup-technical-hub
84. A Guide to Mass Timber Construction: The Future of Sustainable Architecture and The Role of Forestry – Rayonier, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.rayonier.com/stories/a-guide-to-mass-timber-construction-the-future-of-sustainable-architecture-and-the-role-of-forestry/
85. Beyond sustainability: four remarkable benefits of mass timber | www.usa.skanska.com, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.usa.skanska.com/who-we-are/media/constructive-thinking/beyond-sustainability-four-remarkable-benefits-of-mass-timber/
86. Sustainable FSC & PEFC Certified Timbers – Hupkes Wijma, accessed June 10, 2025, https://hupkeswijma.com/en/sustainability/certificats
87. Forest Management Certification | SGS Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sgs.com/en-sg/services/forest-management-certification
88. Expertise | Timber building engineering & MET construction – Aurecon, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.aurecongroup.com/expertise/building-design/timber-building-design
89. How a resurgence in timber could redefine the construction industry – Aurecon, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.aurecongroup.com/insights/mass-engineered-timber-construction-industry
90. Mass timber – the emergence of a modern construction material | Request PDF – ResearchGate, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312056231_Mass_timber_-_the_emergence_of_a_modern_construction_material
91. Mass Engineered Timber (MET) – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/productivity/information-kit-for-met-projects.pdf?sfvrsn=5af04c8d_0
92. fec8390a-4513-48ef-9500-7c1c28bb99d4 1..4, accessed June 10, 2025, https://sso.agc.gov.sg/SL-Supp/S97-2016/Published/20160301170000?DocDate=20160301170000&ViewType=Pdf&_=20230106131804
93. Codes & Standards – Singapore – SCDF, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.scdf.gov.sg/fire-safety-services-listing/fire-code-2023/codes-and-standards
94. Global Membership Council Webinar Series: – Mass Timber Construction, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.iccsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/GMC-Webinar-2022.07-Mass-Timber-Construction.pdf
95. Mass Timber: Challenges and Loss Prevention | Insurance Thought …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.insurancethoughtleadership.com/commercial-lines/mass-timber-challenges-and-loss-prevention
96. Water, Wood, Woes: Why Singapore’s Built Environment Is at Risk – ORIGIN Exterminators, accessed June 10, 2025, https://blog.origin.com.sg/water-wood-woes-why-singapores-built-environment-is-at-risk
97. Case Study: Nanyang Technological University’s Academic Building South, Singapore – News | Stora Enso, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.storaenso.com/en/newsroom/news/2023/4/nanyang-technological-universitys-academic-building-south
98. Mastering moisture in mass timber – Elliott Wood, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.elliottwood.co.uk/latest/mastering-moisture-in-mass-timber
99. Advisory on Good Practices for the Design, Inspection and Maintenance of Mass Engineered Timber (MET) Structures – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/circulars/advisory-on-good-practices-for-the-inspection-and-maintenance-of-mass-engineered-timber-structures01032022.pdf
100. Best Practices for Maintaining Mass Timber Buildings | AirFixture, accessed June 10, 2025, https://airfixture.com/resources/blog/best-practices-for-maintaining-mass-timber-buildings
101. Protecting Your Home from Termite Damage – Pest Control Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.pestcontrolsg.com/articles/protecting-your-home-from-termite-damage.html
102. Termites Control in Singapore – Verminator, accessed June 10, 2025, https://verminator.sg/termites/
103. Venturer Timberwork – Global Timber Contractor, accessed June 10, 2025, https://venturertimberwork.com/
104. Venturer Mass Engineered Timber (MET) and Singapore – YouTube, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51ieZHoR_g8
105. Venturer Timberwork | Do Panama Real Estate & Relocation, accessed June 10, 2025, https://dopanama.com/es_CO/blog/articles-4/venturer-timberwork-185
106. SUMITOMO FORESTRY CO., LTD., accessed June 10, 2025, https://sfc.jp/english/
107. Entering the Carbon Credit Business Through Mangrove Reforestation in Madagascar and Mozambique | Sumitomo Corporation in East Asia, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sumitomocorp.com/en/easia/news/topics/2025/group/20250401_2
108. Asia | Global Construction and Real Estate Business | Our Business | SUMITOMO FORESTRY CO., LTD., accessed June 10, 2025, https://sfc.jp/english/business/overseashousing/asia/
109. Met Mast Structure Fabrication – VIVABLAST | Leading in Industrial Asset Protection Vietnam, accessed June 10, 2025, https://vivablast.com/our-services/fabrication-solutions/met-mast/
110. Precision Metal Bending Solutions in Southeast Asia – Align MFG, accessed June 10, 2025, https://alignmfg.co/processes/fabrication/bending/
111. Full article: Industry perceptions of mass engineered timber (MET) construction: a comparison of South-East Asia with other regions, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17452007.2024.2401561
112. Singapore Building Codes & Guides – ARCHLOGBOOK, accessed June 10, 2025, https://docs.archlogbook.co/singapore-building-codes-and-guides
113. Unpacking Green Mark: 2021 Sustainability Sections: Whole Life Carbon (Cn) and Intelligence (In) – SGBC Digital Academy – Singapore Green Building Council, accessed June 10, 2025, https://digitalacademy.sgbc.sg/course/unpacking-green-mark-2021-sustainability-sections-whole-life-carbon-cn-and-intelligence-in
114. Understanding Green Mark 2021 – Singapore – BCA Academy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.bcaa.edu.sg/what-we-offer/courses/courses-for-professionals-managers-executives/Details/understanding-green-mark-2021
115. Singapore: Green Mark Building Rating System | One Click LCA, accessed June 10, 2025, https://help.oneclicklca.com/en/articles/275726
116. SG Building Carbon Calculator – Singapore Green Building Council, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sgbc.sg/sg-building-carbon-calculator/
117. NTU’s new sports hall is first SEA mega building built using innovative green tech – TODAY, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/ntus-new-sports-hall-first-sea-mega-building-built-using-innovative-green-tech
118. Gaia – Nanyang Technological University, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www3.ntu.edu.sg/CorpComms2/Documents/2023/06_Jun/ST_120623_gaia.pdf
119. Timber wonderland | Alumni | NTU Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ntu.edu.sg/alumni/alumni-stories-news/detail/timber-wonderland
120. Mould issue at Gaia due to condensation and rain, not the timber, say two independent experts – Nanyang Technological University, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ntu.edu.sg/docs/default-source/corporate-ntu/hub-news/mould-issue-at-gaia-due-to-condensation-and-rain-not-the-timber-says-two-independent-experts.pdf?sfvrsn=1ed29e0d_1
121. NUS SDE-4 Case Study – NZEB, accessed June 10, 2025, https://nzeb.in/case-studies/other-regions-case-studies/other-case-studies-list/nus-sde-4-case-study/
122. Developing the Net Zero Energy Design, accessed June 10, 2025, https://transsolar.com/media/pages/publications/papers/plea-2016-developing-the-net-zero-energy-design-for-nus-sde4/2d765d42c2-1549473619/plea2016_paper_net-zero-energy-design-for-sde4.pdf
123. Punggol Digital District clinches Platinum Award for BCA Green …, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.jtc.gov.sg/about-jtc/news-and-stories/press-releases/punggol-digital-district-clinches-platinum-award-for-bca-green-mark-districts
124. Cost Engineering: Mass Timber vs. Concrete & Steel | ASH, accessed June 10, 2025, https://ash.com.au/blog/cost-engineering-mass-timber-vs-concrete-steel/
125. Why Mass Timber Makes Sense – and Saves Dollars | HKS Architects, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.hksinc.com/our-news/articles/why-mass-timber-makes-sense/
126. Certification Course for Green Mark Accredited Professional (GMAP) – BCA Academy, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.bcaa.edu.sg/what-we-offer/courses/Details/certification-course-for-green-mark-accredited-professional-(gmap)
127. Green Mark 2021 RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TECHNICAL GUIDE, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-buildsg/sustainability/20240101_mt_rb_technical_guide_r2.pdf?sfvrsn=af5e014e_0
128. The Eco Innovation of Singapore Sustainable Materials Adoption, accessed June 10, 2025, https://marketresearchsingapore.com/insights/articles/eco-innovation-singapore-sustainable-materials-adoption
129. About SG Eco Fund | Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.mse.gov.sg/take-action/sgecofund/about
130. Singapore’s Land Intensification Allowance scheme for built environment sector expanded to optimise industrial land use – Trade Link Media Pte Ltd, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.tradelinkmedia.biz/publications/7/news/5808
131. Platinum practices: How NUS made its Green Mark | BuildSG Magazine, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg-emag/articles/platinum-practices-how-nus-made-its-green-mark
132. Net-Zero Energy Building @ SDE (NUS SDE4) – Lysaght – Singapore, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.lysaghtasean.com/sg/en/case_studies/net-zero-energy-building-sde-nus-sde4/
133. Building a Greener Future | BuildSG Magazine – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/buildsg-emag/articles/building-a-greener-future
134. Keppel Bay Tower: A Green Building of the Future, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.keppel.com/realestate/Special-Features-Library/Keppel-Bay-Tower-a-green-building-of-the-future
135. Keppel Bay Tower – Sustainable Urban Renewal, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sustainableurbanrenewal.com/our-sur-properties/kbt
136. Retrofitting of Keppel Bay tower resulted in 43% energy savings – YouTube, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpBD6iL6ZJ0
137. KEPPEL BAY TOWER – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 10, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/publications/for-industry/kbt-singapore-first’s-green-mark-platinum-zero-energy-commerical-building.pdf?sfvrsn=6acb3c39_2
138. A TREE OF LIFE – Singapore Green Building Council, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.sgbc.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Awards2016_CapitaGreen.pdf
139. CapitaGreen: The Green Jewel of the Central Business District, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.nparks.gov.sg/-/media/cuge/ebook/citygreen/cg12/cg12_capitagreen.pdf
140. Innovations – Singapore – CapitaLand, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.capitaland.com/en/about-capitaland/sustainability/sustainabilityxchallenge/innovations.html
141. Ocean Financial Centre – Sustainable Urban Renewal, accessed June 9, 2025, https://www.sustainableurbanrenewal.com/our-sur-properties/ofc
142. 2 7 ocean financial centre brings green – Building and Construction Authority (BCA), accessed June 9, 2025, https://www1.bca.gov.sg/docs/default-source/docs-corp-news-and-publications/publications/for-industry/sustainable-construction/sa012009.pdf
143. Case Study – Asia Square, Singapore | The Fifth Estate, accessed June 9, 2025, https://thefifthestate.com.au/articles/case-study-asia-square-singapore/
144. Case Study KNX-LEED: Asia Square Twin Towers, Singapore, accessed June 9, 2025, https://knxforleed.com/en/27-leed-projects-with-knx/leed-platinum/42-case-study-knx-leed-asia-square-twin-towers,-singapore.html
145. JTC’s Open Digital Platform: The technology powering Singapore’s smart district | Unity, accessed June 10, 2025, https://unity.com/resources/jtc-open-digital-platform
146. Integrating Design for Manufacturing and Assembly Principles in Modular Home Construction: A Comprehensive Framework for Enhanced Efficiency and Sustainability – MDPI, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/1/103
147. A preliminary design tool for volumetric buildings – CORE, accessed June 10, 2025, https://core.ac.uk/download/615466812.pdf
148. Implementation Guide – Singapore – EMA, accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.ema.gov.sg/consumer-information/solar/implementation-guide