Carbon footprint and embodied energy consumption assessment of building construction works in Western Australia

Abstract

The Australian Green Infrastructure Council (AGIC) is currently leading a new approach to the delivering and operating of infrastructure through a more careful examination of the carbon footprint of construction activities. Using a life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, this paper presents life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy analysis of the Engineering Pavilion (hereinafter referred to as Building 216), at Curtin University Western Australia. The University utilises a Building Management System (BMS) to reduce its overall operational energy consumption.This LCA analysis employed a 'mining to use' approach, in other words, the analysis takes into account all of the stages up to the utilisation stage. The life cycle GHG emissions and embodied energy of Building 216 were calculated to be 14,229 tonne CO 2 -e and 172 TJ, respectively. This paper identified the 'hotspots', or the stages in production and operation of Building 216 that were the cause of the majority of the GHG emissions. From this, proposals for further improvements in environmental management may be made. The usage stage of the building produces 63% less GHG emissions than the University average, due to the implementation of the BMS. This system has played a significant role in reducing the total embodied energy consumption of the building (i.e., 20% less than the University average).

Development of a Carbon Emissions Analysis Framework Using Building Information Modeling and Life Cycle Assessment for the Construction of Hospital Projects

“…Compared with some studies in other countries [46,77], the percentage of the carbon emissions in the operational stage is between 85.0% and 99.6%, which is similar to the result of carbon emissions in this hospital case (91.31%). Compared with other studies in China, the ratio of villas [4], residences [14,20,21], and office buildings [14,15] in the operational stage are 68.92%, 63.26%~85.16%, and 84.91%~85.43% respectively.…”

Probabilistic Analysis of Major Construction Materials in the Life Cycle Embodied Environmental Cost of Korean Apartment Buildings

“…The major construction materials selected in this study are RMC, rebar, concrete brick, glass, insulation, and gypsum board. Among all construction materials used in an apartment building, these six collectively account for more than 95% of environmental impacts within the six impact categories (GWP, AP, EP, ODP, POCP, and ADP) [43,[48][49][50]. This input quantity database considers the six major construction materials used for the above-ground floors, on the assumption that the total quantities of all materials are used for construction, as specified in the original bill of materials.…”

Building Energy Consumption and Carbon dioxide Emissions: Threat to Climate Change

“…The approaches of system accounting for overall energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions induced by buildings are exemplified in terms of a combination of process and input-output analyses [38]. In addition, carbon dioxide emissions and energy consumption also can be assessed using life cycle assessment which takes into account all stages in production and operation of buildings [39]. Based on the approaches, further improvements in environmental and energy management can be made with a concrete procedure to cover various materials, manpower input, equipment and operational cost.…”