Environmental life cycle assessment of a commercial office building in Thailand

Abstract

Background, aim, and scope To minimize the environmental impacts of construction and simultaneously move closer to sustainable development in the society, the life cycle assessment of buildings is essential. This article provides an environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of a typical commercial office building in Thailand. Almost all commercial office buildings in Thailand follow a similar structural, envelope pattern as well as usage patterns. Likewise, almost every office building in Thailand operates on electricity, which is obtained from the national grid which limits variability. Therefore, the results of the single case study building are representative of commercial office buildings in Thailand. Target audiences are architects, building construction managers and environmental policy makers who are interested in the environmental impact of buildings. Materials and methods In this work, a combination of input-output and process analysis was used in assessing the potential environmental impact associated with the system under study according to the ISO14040 methodology. The study covered the whole life cycle including material production, construction, occupation, maintenance, demolition, and disposal. The inventory data was simulated in an LCA model and the environmental impacts for each stage computed. Three environmental impact categories considered relevant to the Thailand context were evaluated, namely, global warming potential, acidification potential, and photo-oxidant formation potential. A 50-year service time was assumed for the building. ResultsThe results obtained showed that steel and concrete are the most significant materials both in terms of quantities used, and also for their associated environmental impacts at the manufacturing stage. They accounted for 24% and 47% of the global warming potential, respectively. In addition, of the total photo-oxidant formation potential, they accounted for approximately 41% and 30%; and, of the total acidification potential, 37% and 42%, respectively. Analysis also revealed that the life cycle environmental impacts of commercial buildings are dominated by the operation stage, which accounted for approximately 52% of the total global warming potential, about 66% of the total acidification potential, and about 71% of the total photo-oxidant formation potential, respectively. The results indicate that the principal contributor to the impact categories during the operation phase were emissions related to fossil fuel combustion, particularly for electricity production. Discussion The life cycle environmental impacts of commercial buildings are dominated by the operation stage, especially electricity consumption. Significant reductions in the environmental impacts of buildings at this stage can be achieved through reducing their operating energy. The results obtained show that increasing the indoor set-point temperature of the building by 2°C, as well as the practice of load shedding, reduces the environmental burdens of buildings at the operation stage. On a n...

Pre-use phase LCA of a multi-story residential building: Can greenhouse gas emissions be used as a more general environmental performance indicator?

“…The other studies have focused mainly on comparing the relative importance of the different life cycle phases (Junnila 2004, Junnila and Horvath 2003, Guggemos and Horvath 2005, Junnila et al 2006, Kofoworola and Gheewala 2008, Passer et al 2012). All of these, except the study of Passer et al, have also looked at office buildings, which clearly leaves a knowledge gap regarding the impacts of different building types.…”

“…Thormark 2000, Kofoworola and Gheewala 2008, Zabalza et al 2009, Robertson et al 2012). This might be justified if only certain material choices are compared, but when utilized to describe the actual impacts caused by a building, such cutoffs can be dangerous, as noted by, for example, Blengini and di Carlo (2010).…”

A Materials Life Cycle Assessment of a Net-Zero Energy Building

“…Studies assuming a 40 to 50 year life span found that the use phase, or operational energy, contributes anywhere from 52% to 82% of the total life cycle energy consumption of a building [18][19][20][21][22]. One study used a 75-year lifetime and another analyzed 73 case studies ranging from 40 to 100 years, resulting in total operational life cycle energy of 94% and 80%-90% respectively, highlighting the influence of a building's life span [23,24].…”

“…Recent research has found that lower energy houses typically have proportionally higher embodied energy compared to traditional houses, and that while environmental sustainability was improved through reduction in energy use, the embodied energy of the materials, particularly those materials comprising the shell of the structure, actually increases slightly in low-energy buildings [1,[19][20][21][22]25]. Some studies have concluded that embodied energy for conventional buildings accounts for 10%-38% of the total energy in a building's life cycle [2,18,23,26].…”

Energy-saving policies and low-energy residential buildings: an LCA case study to support decision makers in Piedmont (Italy)

“…Considering that in some cases EOL phase is excluded because of lack of data on demolition, recovery and recycling of materials (Ortiz et al 2009a;Huberman and Pearlmutter 2008) or modelled with literature data and/ or heavy simplifications (Scheuer et al 2003;Adalberth et al 2001;Chen et al 2001;Citherlet and Defaux 2007;Junnila 2004;Thormark 2002;Peuportier 2001;Kofoworola and Gheewala 2008), special attention was paid to modelling a realistic post use scenario, taking into account the knowledge gathered in a previous study (Blengini 2009). …”