# Adaptation of the SBTool for Sustainability Assessment of High School Buildings in Portugal--SAHSBT
## 4 Results and Discussion  
Methodologies for sustainability assessment use different indicators for the evaluation and certification of buildings, according to the environmental, social, cultural, technological, and economic characteristics of the countries in which they are applied. Because this research is based on the SBTool\({}^{\text{PT}}\)-STP for Office Buildings, the parallel between the indicators used by the SBTool\({}^{\text{PT}}\)-STP for Office Buildings and LEED BD + C Schools, SBTool for Schools, and BREEAM Education is evident. Office buildings and school buildings are both service buildings, and for this reason, they have several indicators in common.  
The parallels between the indicators used by SAHSB\({}^{\text{PT}}\), SBTool\({}^{\text{PT}}\)-STP for Office Buildings, LEED BD + C for Schools, SBTool for K12 Schools, BREEAM Education, and the methodology proposed in this work--the SAHSB\({}^{\text{PT}}\) methodology--can be seen in Table 2.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dimension** & **Category** & **ID** & **SAHSB\({}^{\text{PT}}\)** & **SBTool\({}^{\text{PT}}\)** & **LEED** & **SBTool** & **BREEAM** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Environment} & C1. Climate change outdoor & 11 & Life cycle environmental impacts & X & X & X & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & air quality & I2 & Heat island effects & X & X & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C2. Biodiversity/land use & I3 & Land use efficiency & X & & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I4 & Certificated materials & X & X & & & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & & I5 & Energy consumption & X & X & X & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & C3. Energy & I6 & Renewable energy & X & X & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I7 & Commissioning & X & X & X & & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & C4. Materials, solid residues and resources management & I9 & Environmental management plan & X & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I10 & Flexibility and adaptability & X & X & & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & C5. Water & I11 & Water consumption & X & X & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C5. Water & I12 & Water treatment and recycling & X & X & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I13 & Collection and reuse of Rainwater & X & X & X & & X \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Social} & C6. User health and comfort & I14 & Indoor air quality & X & X & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I15 & Thermal comfort & X & X & & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C6. User health and comfort & I16 & Visual comfort & X & X & & X \\ \cline{2-8}  & I17 & Acoustic comfort & X & X & & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & I18 & Ergomatic comfort & & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C7. Accessability & I19 & Mobility plan & X & X & & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C8. Security/safety & I20 & Occupants security and safety & X & & & X & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C9. Education/Sust. awareness & I21 & Sustainability awareness & X & & & \\ \cline{2-8}  & C10. Sust. of area & I22 & Accessibility public transport & X & & & X \\ \hline Economic & C11. Life cycle cost & I23 & Life cycle costs & X & & & X \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: List of indicators used by Sustainability Assessment of High School Buildings in Portugal (SAHSB\({}^{\text{PT}}\)), SBTool\({}^{\text{PT}}\)-STP for Office Buildings, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) BD + C Schools, Sustainable Building Tool (SBTool) for K–12 Schools, and Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) Education.  
After the study and analysis of the indicators and categories used in other sustainability assessment methodologies specific to school buildings, some conclusions were drawn regarding the indicators and categories that would be better suited to the methodology proposed in this work, as demonstrated in Table 2.  
The SAHSB\({}^{\text{PT}}\) evaluation guide reduces errors in the evaluation process, allowing the evaluator to quantify the performance of the building at the level of each indicator, category, or dimension, resulting in the overall performance of the building (sustainability level--NS).