[Q67-Q89] Free EDGE-Expert Exam Files Downloaded Instantly UPDATED [2026]

Variable Refrigerant Volume (VRV) or Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) systems are evaluated in EDGE for their energy efficiency in HVAC applications. The EDGE User Guide explains their application: “VRV/VRF systems are best suited for multizone spaces, as they can simultaneously heat and cool different zones by varying the refrigerant flow, making them ideal for buildings with diverse thermal loads, such as hotels, offices, or hospitals with multiple rooms” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures).
Option C, multizone space, aligns with this description, as VRV/VRF systems excel in managing varied temperature needs across multiple zones. Option A (single zone space) and Option B (single zone office space) are incorrect, as VRV/VRF systems are less efficient for single zones: “For single zone spaces, simpler systems like split units are more appropriate, as VRV/VRF systems are designed for multizone control” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics). Option D (meeting space) is too specific and typically a single zone, not leveraging VRV/VRF’s multizone capability: “Meeting spaces are often single zones, where VRV/VRF systems may be oversized” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.2:
EnergyEfficiency Measures). Thus, VRV/VRF systems are best used for multizone spaces (Option C).
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics.

According to the CBCI EDGE framework, the pathway to becoming an EDGE Auditor is structured to ensure technical competence and familiarity with the EDGE methodology before assuming third-party verification responsibilities. An architect with more than three years of professional experience satisfies the general professional experience requirement; however, this alone is not sufficient to directly become an EDGE Auditor.
The curriculum clarifies that the candidate must first qualify and be recognized as an EDGE Expert. This step ensures that the individual has demonstrated proficiency in using the EDGE software, understands baseline and improved case calculations, and is fully familiar with energy, water, and materials measures within the EDGE Standard. The EDGE Expert credential confirms competence in project modeling and documentation preparation.
Once recognized as an EDGE Expert, the individual can then apply to an accredited EDGE Certification Body or Certifier to become an EDGE Auditor. Auditors operate under Certification Bodies and are responsible for independent design and site audits. They do not apply directly to IFC for this role, nor do they bypass the EDGE Expert stage. Therefore, the correct application process is to first become an EDGE Expert and then apply to a Certifier.

In the CBCI EDGE curriculum, a project can be certified for a defined scope when the owner is pursuing certification for only the area under their control, such as a tenant space, a single owned floor, or a partial building section. In this case, the “project” for EDGE purposes is the single-floor office area owned by Excellence Lawyers, not the entire high-rise. Therefore, the EDGE model must reflect the geometry and specifications of the certified scope only.
That means the envelope inputs should correspond to the office floor’s relevant boundaries: external façade walls (if any), glazing areas, and the resulting Window-to-Wall Ratio for that office scope. Internal partitions that adjoin other conditioned spaces are not treated the same as external envelope elements, because they do not drive the same heat transfer to the outdoors. The same principle applies to wall materials and lengths: they must represent the office area being certified, using the actual constructions that apply to that scope.
Modeling the whole building would incorrectly attribute systems and envelope characteristics outside the owner’s control and could distort the calculated savings and audit evidence. Hence, the correct approach is to model the office floor only.

The Coefficient of Performance (COP) is used in EDGE to calculate the electrical power input required for a given thermal output of a chiller. The EDGE Methodology Report defines COP as: “COP is the ratio of thermal output to electrical input, expressed as COP = Thermal Output / Electrical Input. To find the electrical input (power rating), rearrange the formula: Electrical Input = Thermal Output / COP” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics). Given the COP of the water-cooled chiller as 6 and the cooling thermal load (thermal output) as 3516 W, the power rating is calculated as follows: Electrical Input = 3516 W / 6 = 586 W. Option A, 586 W, matches this calculation. Option B (3510 W) is incorrect, as it is slightly less than the thermal output, implying an unrealistic COP near 1. Option C (3522 W) is slightly above the thermal output, also incorrect. Option D (21096 W) is the result of multiplying the thermal output by the COP (3516 × 6), which is the inverse of the correct calculation. The EDGE User Guide confirms: “For a chiller with a COP of 6, the electrical input is one-sixth of the thermal output, ensuring energy efficiency is accurately assessed” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures). Thus, the power rating is
586 W (Option A).
Reference:EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics; EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures.

According to the CBCI EDGE curriculum, the EDGE software calculates and reports building energy performance based on delivered energy consumption. Delivered energy refers to the actual energy supplied to the building from external sources such as electricity from the grid, natural gas, district cooling, or other fuels.
The software estimates annual energy use for both the baseline case and the improved case and expresses savings as a percentage reduction in delivered energy.
EDGE does not primarily report results in terms of primary energy, which would include upstream energy losses associated with extraction, generation, and transmission. While primary energy is a common metric in some building assessment systems, EDGE focuses on delivered energy because it is directly measurable, easier to verify, and more applicable across diverse markets globally.
Electrical energy alone is also not the sole output, since buildings may use multiple energy carriers such as gas or district systems. Renewable energy is considered within the improved case when on-site systems such as solar photovoltaics are included, but it is not itself the energy consumption result; rather, it offsets delivered energy demand. Therefore, the correct answer is delivered energy.

Utility cost savings in EDGE are calculated based on reductions in resource consumption sourced from the supply grid, as these are the costs directly borne by the building owner. The EDGE User Guide explains:
“Utility cost savings in EDGE are calculated based on the reduction in energy and water consumption from the supply grid, using local tariffs for electricity and water to convert resource savings into financial savings” (EDGE User Guide, Section 2.4: Interpreting EDGE Results). Option D, energy and water consumption from the supply grid, aligns with this definition, focusing on grid-supplied resources. Option A (electricity and water consumption) is partially correct but lacks specificity about the source: “Electricity and water must be grid-supplied to be included in utility cost savings; onsite generation is excluded” (EDGE Methodology Report Version2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations). Option B (generator fuel and water consumption) is incorrect, as generator fuel is not part of utility cost savings: “Generator fuel costs are not included in utility savings, as EDGE focuses on grid-supplied utilities” (EDGE User Guide, Section 2.4: Interpreting EDGE Results). Option C (building energy and water consumption) is too broad, including onsite sources: “Building consumption includes all sources, but utility savings are grid-specific” (EDGE Methodology Report Version
2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations). Thus, energy and water from the supply grid (Option D) is the correct basis for utility cost savings.
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 2.4: Interpreting EDGE Results; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations.

In the CBCI EDGE curriculum, the Share Subproject function is treated as a project administration permission, because it controls who can access a project or part of a project and what they are allowed to do inside the EDGE platform. Sharing affects project confidentiality, accountability for inputs, and control of documentation, so it is restricted to the user role that holds administrative authority over the project workspace.
The Owner role is the primary controlling role in an EDGE project. The Owner can manage access, invite or remove team members, and assign appropriate permissions for collaboration. This is consistent with how EDGE separates responsibilities: the client side controls project data entry, collaboration, and submissions, while verification roles remain independent.
Auditors and Certifiers are part of the independent third-party assessment pathway. Their access is typically granted for review and verification purposes, not for administering who the project is shared with. A Reviewer role, where used, is also generally a read-only or limited-access role and does not have authority to share or manage subprojects.
Therefor

In the CBCI EDGE curriculum, glazing performance is characterized using properties that directly influence solar heat gains through windows, because this is a major driver of cooling energy demand in many climates.
The EDGE software uses Solar Heat Gain Coefficient, which represents the fraction of incident solar radiation that enters the building as heat through the glazing system. A lower SHGC reduces solar heat entering the indoor space, lowering cooling loads and improving the project’s energy savings in the improved case.
Shading Coefficient is an older metric that is sometimes referenced in market literature, but EDGE standardizes the glazing solar performance input using SHGC for consistency across regions and products.
Solar Heat Loss Coefficient is not a standard glazing metric used in EDGE; heat loss through glazing is addressed using thermal transmittance measures such as U-value rather than an SHLC parameter. Solar Reflectivity may be relevant for certain roof or surface materials, but it is not the primary glazing property used in EDGE to quantify solar heat admitted indoors. Therefore, the correct glass property used in EDGE among the options provided is SHGC.

Lamp efficiency in EDGE is a key factor in reducing energy consumption for lighting, a critical green building design strategy. The EDGE User Guide defines lamp efficiency: “In EDGE, a moreefficient lamp is one that provides higher lumens per watt, meaning it produces more light output (lumens) for the same electrical input (watts). This metric, known as luminous efficacy, is used to evaluate lighting efficiency measures like EEM22 – Efficient Lighting for Internal Areas” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.4: Lighting Efficiency Measures). Option A, more lumens/watt, directly aligns with this definition, as it indicates greater efficiency in converting electricity to light. Option B (lower watts/m²) refers to lighting power density, which is a design metric, not a lamp characteristic: “Watts/m² is a measure of lighting power density for a space, not the efficiency of an individual lamp” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.4: Lighting Calculations). Option C (longer life) relates to durability, not efficiency: “Lamp life affects maintenance costs but is not a direct measure of energy efficiency in EDGE” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.4: Lighting Efficiency Measures). Option D (lower wattage) alone does not indicate efficiency, as a lamp with lower wattage but poor light output would be less efficient: “Lower wattage must be paired with adequate lumens to improve efficiency” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.4: Lighting Calculations). Thus, more lumens/watt (Option A) describes a more efficient lamp.
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 4.4: Lighting Efficiency Measures; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.4: Lighting Calculations.

Within the CBCI EDGE curriculum, greywater is defined as relatively low-contamination wastewater generated from bathing and handwashing activities, typically coming from fixtures such as showers, wash basins, and bathtubs. This type of wastewater is considered suitable for recovery and reuse in certain non- potable applications, depending on local codes and the treatment approach, because it does not contain toilet waste.
A water closet WC produces blackwater, not greywater. Blackwater contains fecal matter and urine and therefore has a much higher pathogen load and organic content. Because of this, it requires more stringent treatment processes and different health and safety controls compared with greywater systems. In EDGE water measures, greywater reuse calculations and strategies are based on sources like showers and hand basins, while toilet discharge is excluded from greywater source assumptions.
Therefore, among the listed fixtures, the one that does not produce greywater in EDGE is the water closet WC, making option D the correct answer.

In the CBCI EDGE framework, an EDGE Expert supports the project team in achieving certification by guiding design decisions, modeling the project in the EDGE software, and helping prepare and organize documentation for submission. This commonly includes facilitating the client’s application process, explaining how the EDGE Standard works, and providing basic guidance on using the EDGE App or interpreting EDGE results. EDGE Experts also assist design teams in selecting appropriate energy, water, and materials strategies to meet the minimum savings thresholds and align the improved case inputs with the intended specifications.
However, EDGE Experts are not permitted to act as third-party verifiers or issue certifications. Auditing and certification issuance are independent functions performed by an EDGE Auditor under an accredited Certification Body. This separation is essential to maintain impartiality and avoid conflicts of interest: the party who advises and models the project cannot be the same party who verifies compliance and awards certification. Therefore, providing EDGE audit services and issuing preliminary or final EDGE certificates is not within an EDGE Expert’s scope of work, making option C the correct answer.

The timeline for conducting a site audit as part of the EDGE certification process is critical to ensure that the project’s implementation aligns with the design-stage claims. The EDGE Certification Protocol specifies the timeframe for post-construction audits: “A site audit for EDGE certification must take place within 12 months of the project’s practical completion date to verify that the green building measures have been implemented as claimed in the self-assessment. This ensures that the audit reflects the building’s as-built condition while the project details are still current” (EDGE Certification Protocol, Section 3.4: Post-Construction Requirements).
Option A, 12 months, directly matches this requirement. Option B (18 months), Option C (24 months), and Option D (36 months) exceed the specified timeframe, which could lead to discrepancies due to changes in the building’s condition or operation: “Conducting the site audit beyond 12 months may result in inaccuracies, as building systems or occupancy patterns may change, affecting the verification of measures” (EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols, Section 4.4: Site Audit Procedures). The EDGE User Guide also supports this timeline: “To maintain the integrity of the certification process, the site audit should be scheduled within 12 months of practical completion, allowing the Auditor to assess the building in its initial operational state” (EDGE User Guide, Section 6.3: Post-Construction Certification). The 12-month limit ensures that the audit is timely and relevant, making Option A the correct answer. Additionally, the EDGE Certification Protocol notes: “Extensions beyond 12 months may be granted only in exceptional circumstances, subject toapproval by the Certification Provider, but this is not the standard requirement” (EDGE Certification Protocol, Section
3.4: Post-Construction Requirements). Since the question asks for the standard timeframe, 12 months (Option A) applies.
Reference:EDGE Certification Protocol, Section 3.4: Post-Construction Requirements; EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols, Section 4.4: Site Audit Procedures; EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 6.3: Post- Construction Certification.

Maintaining EDGE Auditor status involves specific requirements to ensure ongoing competence. The EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols outline these requirements: “To maintain their status, EDGE Auditors must perform at least one project site audit every two years, attend refresher training as required by IFC, and stay updated by studying the EDGE user guides and protocols as they are revised” (EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols, Section 5.1: Maintaining Auditor Status). Option A (performing at least one project site audit every two years) is explicitly required to demonstrate active engagement. Option B (studying the EDGE user guides as updated) is also necessary to stay current with program changes. Option D (attending refresher training) is mandated to ensure continued education. However, Option C (retaking the auditor exam) is not a requirement for maintaining status: “Once certified, EDGE Auditors are not required to retake the exam to maintain their status, though they may need to retake it if their certification lapses or if significant program changes occur” (EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols, Section 5.2: Recertification Conditions). Since the question focuses on maintaining status, not recertification after lapse, retaking the exam is not a standard requirement. Thus, retaking the auditor exam (Option C) does not contribute to maintaining Auditor status.
Reference:EDGE Expert and Auditor Protocols, Section 5.1: Maintaining Auditor Status, Section 5.2:
Recertification Conditions.

Utility cost savings in EDGE are calculated based on reductions in resource consumption sourced from the supply grid, as these are the costs directly borne by the building owner. The EDGE User Guide explains:
“Utility cost savings in EDGE are calculated based on the reduction in energy and water consumption from the supply grid, using local tariffs for electricity and water to convert resource savings into financial savings” (EDGE User Guide, Section 2.4: Interpreting EDGE Results). Option D, energy and water consumption from the supply grid, aligns with this definition, focusing on grid-supplied resources. Option A (electricity and water consumption) is partially correct but lacks specificity about the source: “Electricity and water must be grid-supplied to be included in utility cost savings; onsite generation is excluded” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations). Option B (generator fuel and water consumption) is incorrect, as generator fuel is not part of utility cost savings: “Generator fuel costs are not included in utility savings, as EDGE focuses on grid-supplied utilities” (EDGE User Guide, Section 2.4:
Interpreting EDGE Results). Option C (building energy and water consumption) is too broad, including onsite sources: “Building consumption includes all sources, but utility savings are grid-specific” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations). Thus, energy and water from the supply grid (Option D) is the correct basis for utility cost savings.
Reference: EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 2.4: Interpreting EDGE Results; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.4: Cost Savings Calculations.

Water consumption in hotels varies significantly based on usage patterns, with guest-related activities often dominating the water use breakdown. The EDGE User Guide provides detailed insights into water use in hotels: “In a typical 3-star business hotel, the largest contributor to water consumption is showers in guest rooms, accounting for approximately 40-50% of total water use due to frequent guest showers, especially in urban hotels with high occupancy. Laundry, toilets, and faucets also contribute, but to a lesser extent, with laundry at 15-20%, toilets at 10-15%, and faucets at 5-10%” (EDGE User Guide, Section 5.2: Water Efficiency Measures). Option A, showers in guest rooms, aligns with this breakdown as the element likely to consume the most water. Option B (laundry) is significant but lower than showers: “Laundry in 3-star hotels consumes less water than showers, as laundry is typically centralized and less frequent than daily guest showers” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.2: Water Savings Calculations). Option C (toilets in lobby area) is a minor contributor, as lobby toilets serve fewer users compared to guest rooms:
“Toilets in public areas like the lobby have lower usage compared to guest room facilities, contributing only a small fraction of total water use in hotels” (EDGE User Guide, Section 5.2: Water Efficiency Measures).
Option D (faucets in guest rooms) also uses less water than showers: “Faucets in guest rooms, used for handwashing or brushing teeth, have lower flow rates and usage frequency compared to showers, which often run for 5-10 minutes per use” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.2: Water Savings Calculations). The EDGE User Guide further elaborates: “In business hotels, showers dominate water use due to high occupancy and guest behavior, making measures like low-flow shower heads particularly effective for water savings” (EDGE User Guide, Section 5.2: Water Efficiency Measures). The EDGE Methodology Report adds: “For a 3-star hotel with 100 rooms and 70% occupancy, showers can account for 45 liters per guest per day, compared to 15 liters for laundry, 10 liters for toilets, and 5 liters for faucets, based on standard usage assumptions” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.2: Water Savings Calculations).
Thus, showers in guest rooms (Option A) are likely to consume the most water in this context.
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 5.2: Water Efficiency Measures; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 4.2: Water Savings Calculations.

In the CBCI EDGE curriculum, lighting efficiency is a critical strategy for reducing internal loads and lowering overall building energy consumption. Lighting efficacy is measured in lumens per watt, indicating how much visible light is produced for each unit of electrical power consumed. Among the listed options, light emitting diodes, or LEDs, provide the highest efficacy.
Typical performance ranges show that T8 and T5 fluorescent lamps are more efficient than older lighting technologies but generally deliver lower lumens per watt compared to modern LED systems. Compact fluorescent lamps are also more efficient than incandescent lighting but still fall short of the efficacy achieved by LEDs. Contemporary LED fixtures can exceed 100 lumens per watt and in many cases reach significantly higher values depending on product quality and design.
The EDGE software rewards high-efficiency lighting systems because reducing lighting power density directly lowers cooling loads in air-conditioned spaces and decreases total delivered energy consumption.
LEDs also offer additional advantages such as longer lifespan and lower maintenance requirements, further supporting sustainable building design objectives. Therefore, among the listed options, LEDs have the highest efficacy and are the correct answer.

Efficiency in fans and pumps is a critical aspect of green building design in EDGE, particularly for reducing energy consumption in HVAC systems. The EDGE User Guide provides detailed guidance on efficiency measures for mechanical systems: “Variable speed drives (VSDs) deliver the highest efficiency in fans and pumps by adjusting the motor speed to match the actual demand, significantly reducing energy consumption compared to fixed-speed systems. VSDs can achieve energy savings of up to 30-50% in HVAC applications by avoiding the constant operation at full speed typical of single or constant speed drives” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures). Option D, variable speed drive, aligns with this description as the most efficient option. Option A (two speed drive) offers some efficiency by allowing two operating speeds, but it is less flexible than VSDs: “Two speed drives provide limited efficiency gains, as they cannot continuously adjust to varying loads, unlike variable speed drives” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics). Option B (single speed drive) and Option C (constant speed drive) are essentially the same in this context, operating at a fixed speed regardless of demand, leading to energy waste: “Single speed or constant speed drives run at a fixed rate, resulting in higher energy consumption compared to variable speed drives, which modulate speed based on need” (EDGE User Guide, Section 4.2:
Energy Efficiency Measures). The EDGE Methodology Report further elaborates: “Variable speed drives are the most efficient option for fans and pumps in EDGE, as they minimize energy use by matching output to demand, unlike two speed or constant speed drives, which operate inefficiently under partial loads” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics). This makes variable speed drives (Option D) the clear choice for delivering the highest efficiency in fans and pumps.
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 4.2: Energy Efficiency Measures; EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 5.1: Energy Efficiency Metrics.

The EDGE software uses a Base Case to establish a benchmark for resource consumption, tailored to local conditions. The EDGE Methodology Report explains how the Base Case is constructed: “The Base Case for external wall materials in hotels is determined using data from market surveys of typical building practices in the project’s country, supplemented by national building performance codes where available. This ensures the baseline reflects local construction norms and regulatory standards” (EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 3.1: Base Case Determination). Option A matches this description by referencing typical building practices and national codes. Option B incorrectly refers to global practices and international codes, which EDGE does not use, as the software prioritizes local context. Option C, focusing on corporate specifications, is not part of the Base Case methodology, as the Base Case is standardized, not project-specific. Option D, involving local suppliers or accreditation, is irrelevant to how EDGE determines the Base Case, which relies on broader market data rather than supplier-specificinformation.
Reference:EDGE Methodology Report Version 2.0, Section 3.1: Base Case Determination; EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 2.3: Using the EDGE App.

In hot climates, reducing heat gain through building envelopes is a key strategy for energy efficiency, as emphasized in EDGE’s green building design principles. The EDGE User Guide discusses solar reflectivity (measured by the Solar Reflectance Index, SRI) for walls and roofs, stating: “Higher SRI values indicate greater reflectivity, which reduces heat absorption and lowers cooling energy demand in hot climates. For walls in hot climates, an SRI of 0.7 or higher is recommended to maximize energy savings” (EDGE User Guide, Section 3.5: Passive Design Strategies). The options provided are 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.7. Since 0.7 is the highest SRI value among the choices, it reflects the most solar radiation, thereby reducing the cooling load andimproving energy efficiency in a hot climate, as per EDGE’s guidance. Options A, B, and C have lower SRI values and would result in greater heat absorption, increasing energy use for cooling.
Reference:EDGE User Guide Version 2.1, Section 3.5: Passive Design Strategies.

According to the CBCI EDGE protocols and auditor requirements, EDGE Auditors are obligated to retain complete and accurate project records for a minimum of five years after certification. This requirement ensures traceability, transparency, and accountability within the certification system.
The retained records typically include design audit reports, site audit reports, supporting documentation reviewed during certification, correspondence related to compliance decisions, and any corrective actions undertaken during the review process. Maintaining these records is essential in case of quality assurance reviews, disputes, appeals, or spot checks conducted by the certification body or IFC oversight mechanisms.
The five-year retention period reflects international best practices in third-party verification systems, where documentation must remain accessible for potential audits or investigations. Shorter retention periods such as one, two, or three years would not provide sufficient time for post-certification reviews or compliance checks.
This requirement also reinforces professional ethics and due diligence standards expected from EDGE Auditors, ensuring that the credibility and integrity of the EDGE certification system are maintained over time. Therefore, the correct answer is at least five years.

In the EDGE water assessment, rainwater harvesting contributes to savings only when the collected rainwater is used to directly reduce the building’s demand for potable or municipal water. The curriculum explains that qualifying water savings must come from substituting potable water in recognized end uses such as toilet flushing, irrigation, and cooling tower make-up water where applicable. When rainwater is used as make-up water for cooling towers, it displaces treated potable water that would otherwise be required for heat rejection systems, and this reduction is captured in the EDGE software water calculations.
By contrast, options such as groundwater recharge or simply redirecting rainwater to drains or nearby water bodies do not reduce the building’s potable water consumption. These actions may be beneficial for stormwater management, flood control, or environmental protection, but they do not represent a direct offset of the building’s indoor or process water demand in the way EDGE quantifies water savings for certification.
Therefore, the valid use that qualifies for EDGE water savings in this question is using collected rainwater for cooling towers.

According to the CBCI EDGE curriculum, the foundational definition of an EDGE Certified green building is one that achieves a minimum of 20 percent savings in energy, 20 percent savings in water, and 20 percent reduction in embodied carbon in materials when compared to a local baseline or benchmark defined within the EDGE software. This local benchmark reflects standard building practices, climatic conditions, and typical construction methods for the specific country where the project is located.
The 20-20-20 threshold represents the minimum performance requirement for achieving EDGE Certified status. Higher performance levels, such as EDGE Advanced, require at least 40 percent energy savings but still maintain the 20 percent thresholds for water and materials. Therefore, option B reflects the requirement for EDGE Advanced, not the base definition of a green building under EDGE.
Option C is incorrect because EDGE comparisons are always made against a locally defined baseline, not buildings in other countries. Option D is incorrect because EDGE evaluates embodied carbon in materials, not waste reduction as a core certification metric. Therefore, the correct definition aligns with option A.e, the user type that has access to the Share Subproject function is the Owner.