Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review

Dixit, Manish; Fernández-Solís, José L.; Lavy, Sarel; Culp, C.

doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.02.016

Cited by 585 publications

(375 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

350

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The LCA results between the extremes differed between 15 and 30 % (Kellenberger and Althaus 2009). Other important works related to the residential buildings and the role of particular life cycle stages in the environmental assessment of buildings with special focus on energyrelated aspects are those of Dixit et al (2010), Ortiz et al (2009), Optis andWild ( 2010), Dylewski and Adamczyk ( 2012), Passer et al (2012) and Rossi et al (2012).…”

Section: Lca Of Buildings-simplificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Between full LCA and energy certification methodology—a comparison of six methodological variants of buildings environmental assessment

Lewandowska

Noskowiak

Pajchrowski

et al. 2014

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Construction, as a sector of the economy, is a significant source of negative environmental impacts. The development of sustainable construction and associated initiatives are meant to reduce that impact. Buildings, for many reasons, are the complex objects of life cycle assessment (LCA) studies, which in this case can be particularly time-, data-and costconsuming. Therefore, an attempt was made to explore the possibility of finding a methodological compromise between a full LCA and the compulsory energy certification. Six methodological variants, so called compromise solutions (CS) were identified and assessed. This article presents the results of the research project financed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (N N309 078138) and coordinated by the Wood Technology Institute in Poznan. Methods The proposed CS were hybrids utilising, to various degrees, the environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) and energy certification. Life cycle impact assessments were carried out using IMPACT 2002+. Results and discussion The achieved results showed that the simplifications included in the energy certification lead to a significant drop in environmental impacts (by 77.9 % on average) in relation to the impact calculated for the full LCA. The results closest to the full LCA were achieved by the compromise solution no. 4 (CS4), where simplification included the exclusion from the life cycle of: transport processes, construction site, demolition, final disposal of waste, and the majority of elements associated with the use of the building. CS4 analysed all inventory inputs which were assessed with regard to the entire environmental profile. The following truncation levels were achieved for CS4-10.7 % (conventional masonry building), 9.9 % (passive masonry building), 8.3 % (conventional wooden building) and 7.4 % (passive wooden building), indicating that 90 % of the impact calculated for the full LCA was retained. Conclusions CS4 seems to be a rational compromise between the simplicity of the methodology and the environmental significance. With the exception of the energy usage for heating, hot water and ventilation, CS4 also proposes including, in the analysis, the production of building material and additional elements associated with the use stage, e.g. energy usage for home appliances and lighting, land occupation, water use and wastewater treatment. However, if we were to find a rational minimum, which is close to the energy certification, then a good improvement of this methodology would be to include energy usage for home appliances and lighting as well as introducing conversion indicators, based not only on the depletion of energy resources, but also factoring in global warming and respiratory effects/inorganic compounds. Moreover, it seems that the LCA methodology and, specifically, characterisation factors, are refined to such a degree and scientifically proved that it would be possible to use the knowledge with regard to LCA to establish such indicators for energy certification.

show abstract

Section: Lca Of Buildings-simplificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Between full LCA and energy certification methodology—a comparison of six methodological variants of buildings environmental assessment

Lewandowska

Noskowiak

Pajchrowski

et al. 2014

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many scholars noticed variations in EC measurements due to several factors (Dixit et al 2010, Clark 2013. Therefore, despite the tedious process involved in carbon estimating many other factors need to be considered when preparing an EC estimate.…”

Section: Factors To Be Considered In Embodied Carbon Estimatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on architecture and structure integrated design of temporary venues aimed at low carbon construction

Victoria¹,

Perera

Zhou

et al. 2015

Sustainable Buildings and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Material's coefficients reveal the volume of materials needed per unit area/volume of a construction work. MUA analysis can extract the all of materials needed in a construction of building components and its measurement unit such as kg, m 2 or m 3 .…”

Section: Development Of Materials Unit Analysis (Mua) and Unit Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The calculation is usually done in the phase of preliminary design and design development. The EE value is a useful tool to give an insight about the buildings environmental impact [3]. This paper develops an EE calculation model and how to implement it in housing development in Indonesia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodied Energy Calculation in Mitigating Environmental Impact of Low-Cost Housing Construction

Wahyuni

Triyadi

2017

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Reduction of the negative impacts of building construction, or mitigation, should be done in the early phase of a project. Particular method that can be used to reduce the negative impact is Embodied Energy (EE) calculation. This research develops a method to calculate the total EE of materials used in building construction by using the Material Selection Analysis (MSA) based on Indonesia's Construction Work Unit Price Analysis (WUPA). MSA breaks down the types, its unit, and total volume of materials within an object. Using the EE data from Inventory Carbon and Energy (ICE) Bath, in the UK, this research calculate the embodied energy in three small house types in Indonesia: Type 21 M2, Type 36 M2, and Type 45 M2. The result reveals a negative correlation between building's area and EE value. Nonetheless, the EE value is positively related to the volume of material used. Proposed strategies to decrease the value of EE in low cost housing construction manly; a) design approach in improving the efficiency of material usage, b) materials substitution to material with lower value of EE, especially on material on large volume of usage, c) socialization of EE value to stakeholders as consideration in determining the choice of materials used, thus, environmental mitigation is expected to be an important aspect in determining the design decisions and the choice of materials used.

show abstract

Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review

Cited by 585 publications

References 31 publications

Between full LCA and energy certification methodology—a comparison of six methodological variants of buildings environmental assessment

Between full LCA and energy certification methodology—a comparison of six methodological variants of buildings environmental assessment

Research on architecture and structure integrated design of temporary venues aimed at low carbon construction

Embodied Energy Calculation in Mitigating Environmental Impact of Low-Cost Housing Construction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About