Economic and Energy Life Cycle Assessment of aerogel-based thermal renders

Garrido, Rita; Silvestre, José Dinis; Flores‐Colen, Inês

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.194

Cited by 39 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The NPV is estimated taking into consideration the formulas presented in Table 4. Concerning the discount rate, this value was defined based on previous studies [34,35]. Based on previous studies, if a lower value is used, the difference between alternatives decreases, despite the increase of the NPV for all of them.…”

Section: Economic Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…-Higher values-30% and 50%, which simulate future expectable scenarios for dwellings or multi-familiar residential buildings [40]. In fact, both values were used in previous studies [34,41] because telecommuting is each day more frequent, and elderly people also stay at home most of the day, which means that energy needs for residential buildings can be estimated based on the use of heating or cooling equipment for much more than the 10% of daytime prescribed in the national regulation.…”

Section: Wall Type Insulation Materials Designation Thickness (M) U-vamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Retrofitting a Building’s Envelope: Sustainability Performance of ETICS with ICB or EPS

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the environmental, energy, and economic performances of the External Thermal Insulation Composite System (ETICS) using agglomerated insulation cork board (ICB) or expanded polystyrene (EPS) as insulation material applied in the energetic renovation of the building envelope during a 50-year study period. A comparison between ETICS using ICB and EPS, for the same time horizon, is also presented. The environmental balance is based on “Cradle to Cradle” (C2C) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), focusing on the carbon footprint and consumption of nonrenewable primary energy (PE-NRe). The characteristics of these products in terms of thermal insulation, the increased energy performance provided by their installation for retrofit of the buildings’ envelope, and the resulting energy savings are considered in the energy balance. The estimation of the C2C carbon and PE-NRe saved is considered in the final balance between the energy and environmental performances. ETICS with ICB is environmentally advantageous both in terms of carbon footprint and of PE-NRe. In fact, the production stage of ICB is less polluting, while EPS requires lower energy consumption to fulfil the heating and cooling needs of a flat, due to its lower U-Value, and its lower acquisition cost results in a lower C2C cost. Comparing both ETICS’ alternatives with reference solutions, it was found that the latter only perform better in the economic dimension, and only for an energy consumption to fulfil less than 25% of the heating and cooling needs. This paper represents an advance to the current state-of-the-art by including all the life-cycle stages and dimensions of the LCA in the analysis of solutions for energy renovation of building envelopes.

show abstract

Section: Economic Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Wall Type Insulation Materials Designation Thickness (M) U-vamentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrofitting a Building’s Envelope: Sustainability Performance of ETICS with ICB or EPS

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New technical solutions are being developed to address the drawbacks of traditional construction methods. Alternative materials are under scrutiny, for example, insulation cork boards (Silvestre, Pargana, de Brito, Pinheiro, & Durão, ) and thermal mortars with nano‐materials (Garrido, Silvestre, & Flores‐Colen, ). Yet, there are also efforts to rethink traditional materials to improve insulating or structural capacities and environmental impacts, for example, example recycled expanded polystyrene (Dissanayake, Jayasinghe, & Jayasinghe, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using anticipatory life cycle assessment to enable future sustainable construction

Göswein

Rodrigues

Silvestre

et al. 2019

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The built environment is the largest single emitter of CO2 and an important consumer of energy. Much research has gone into the improved efficiency of building operation and construction products. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is commonly used to assess existing buildings or building products. Classic LCA, however, is not suited for evaluating the environmental performance of developing technologies. A new approach, anticipatory LCA (a‐LCA), promises various advantages and can be used as a design constraint during the product development stage. It helps overcome four challenges: (i) data availability, (ii) stakeholder inclusion, (iii) risk assessment, and (iv) multi‐criteria problems. This article's contribution to the line of research is twofold: first, it adapts the a‐LCA approach for construction‐specific purposes in theoretical terms for the four challenges. Second, it applies the method to an innovative prefabricated modular envelope system, the CleanTechBlock (CTB), focusing on challenge (i). Thirty‐six CTB designs are tested and compared to conventional walls. Inclusion of technology foresight is achieved through structured scenario analysis. Moreover, challenge (iv) is tackled through the analysis of different environmental impact categories, transport‐related impacts, and thickness of the wall assemblies of the CTB. The case study results show that optimized material choice and product design is needed to reach the lowest environmental impact. Methodological findings highlight the importance of context‐specific solutions and the need for benchmarking new products.

show abstract

“…The environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) is made from cradle-to-cradle (C2C), being focused on the consumption of non-renewable primary energy and carbon footprint of the TIRM and of its components. The economic assessment C2C is based on market prices (e.g., the cost of manufacture, transportation to site and installation, corresponding to the market acquisition cost) and on the savings that result from using this material in the retrofit of envelopes [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Retrofitting of a Buildings’ Envelope: Assessment of the Environmental, Economic and Energy (3E) Performance of a Cork-Based Thermal Insulating Rendering Mortar

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an environmental, economic and energy (3E) assessment of an energy retrofitting of the external walls of a flat of an average building with the most current characteristics used in Portugal. For this intervention, a cork-based (as recycled lightweight aggregate) TIRM (Thermal Insulating Rendering Mortar) was considered. The declared unit was 1 m2 of an external wall for a 50-year study period and the energy and economic costs and savings, as well as the environmental impacts, were analytically modelled and compared for two main alternatives: the reference wall without any intervention and the energetically rehabilitated solution with the application of TIRM. Walls with improved energy performance (with TIRM) show lower economic and environmental impacts: reductions from 6% to 32% in carbon emissions, non-renewable energy consumption and costs during the use stage, which depends on the thickness and relative place where TIRM layers are applied. A worse energy performance is shown by reference walls (without TIRM) during the use stage (corresponding to energy used for heating and cooling), while the improved walls present economic and environmental impacts due to the application of TIRM (including the production, transport and application into the building) that do not exist in the reference walls. The comparison between reference walls and energy-retrofitted ones revealed that reference wall become be more expensive when more demanding operational energy requirements are analysed over a 50-year period, even if renewable materials are more expensive.

show abstract

Economic and Energy Life Cycle Assessment of aerogel-based thermal renders

Cited by 39 publications

References 22 publications

Retrofitting a Building’s Envelope: Sustainability Performance of ETICS with ICB or EPS

Retrofitting a Building’s Envelope: Sustainability Performance of ETICS with ICB or EPS

Using anticipatory life cycle assessment to enable future sustainable construction

Energy Retrofitting of a Buildings’ Envelope: Assessment of the Environmental, Economic and Energy (3E) Performance of a Cork-Based Thermal Insulating Rendering Mortar

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About