Life cycle assessment of buildings: A review

Sharma, Aashish; Saxena, Abhishek; Sethi, Muneesh; Shree, Venu; Varun, _

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.008

Cited by 423 publications

(184 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

149

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…She observed that much research concerns tool-making, either various types of modelling (e.g. Brown, Malmqvist, Bai, & Molinari, 2013;Ding, 2008;Morrissey, Meyrick, Sivaraman, Horne, & Berry, 2012;Flores-Colen & de Brito, 2010;Sharma, Saxena, Sethi, & Shree, 2011), or method and/or tool development (e.g. Kirkham, 2005;Wang, Chang, & Nunn, 2010;Love & Bullen, 2009;Kaklauskas, Zavadskas, & Raslanas, 2005;Junghans, 2013;Arja, Sauce, & Souyri, 2009;Brown et al, 2013;Risholt, Time, & Hestnes, 2013;Zhang, Platten, & Shen, 2011).…”

Section: An Overview Of Research: Life Cycle Costing (Lcc) Developmenmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Gluch

Gustafsson

Baumann

et al. 2018

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Real estate-and property owners' rationales behind the adoption of Life Cycle Costing (LCC) respectively how LCC is actually used in renovation projects, is investigated through empirical data from a questionnaire survey sent to managers in Swedish real estate organisations. The study shows a positive attitude towards LCC. It is perceived to as a flexible and multi-functional tool with a familiar monetary format. Nevertheless, the study also reveals simplistic and undeveloped views of how to use LCC. While much research has focused on developing sophisticated LCC tools, the findings indicate that practitioners' interest in these refinements seems limited. The importance of understanding that LCC is used in a context of multiple and partly competing institutional logics of renovation is emphasised. The paper contributes to a more informed research in development of LCC tools as well as better informed LCC use among real estate and property owners.

show abstract

Section: An Overview Of Research: Life Cycle Costing (Lcc) Developmenmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Gluch

Gustafsson

Baumann

et al. 2018

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, several studies have been carried out on the concept of whole building LCA, with each having different techniques and approaches, as well as varied goal and scope [2,6,7,9,25,26]. Some of the studies address the use of BIM for LCA [16,17].…”

Section: Existing Literature On Bim and Lcamentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle environmental performance of material specification: a BIM-enhanced comparative assessment

Ajayi

Oyedele

Ceranic

et al. 2015

International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Ur

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed at evaluating the extent to which different building materials specifications affect building lifecycle environmental performance, using a Building Information Modelling (BIM) enhanced lifecycle assessment (LCA) methodology. A combination of Revit Architecture which is a BIM based design and analysis tool, an energy simulation tool known as Green Building Studio (GBS) and LCA tool known as ATHENA Impact Estimator were used for the assessment. The LCA was carried out on a life case study of a 2100m 2 one-storey school building as well as its variability analysis, by varying materials specifications in terms of whole building materials. The lifecycle performance of the buildings was primarily evaluated in terms of its Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Health Impacts.The findings of the study show that irrespective of materials used, buildings that are based on renewable energy perform better than those based on fossil fuels over its lifecycle. In terms of building materials, both environmental and health preference of buildings congruently range from timber, brick/block, steel, to Insulated Concrete Foams, in a descending order. The study suggests that as buildings become more energy-efficient during operational stages, serious attention needs to be given to their embodied impacts.The study lay out a methodological framework that could be adopted by industry practitioners in evaluating lifecycle environmental impacts of different BIM modelled materials options at building conception stage. This has the tendency of ensuring that most lifecycle environmentally beneficial materials combinations are selected during specification and construction.

show abstract

“…The building LCCO2 emissions represent the total CO2 emissions in all stages from construction, operation, to end-of-life [39,40], as described in Equation (1):…”

Section: Proposal For Simplified Lcco2 Assessment Model For Buildingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building Simplified Life Cycle CO2 Emissions Assessment Tool (B‐SCAT) to Support Low‐Carbon Building Design in South Korea

Roh

Tae

2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Various tools that assess life cycle CO 2 (LCCO 2 ) emissions are currently being developed throughout the international community. However, most building LCCO 2 emissions assessment tools use a bill of quantities (BOQ), which is calculated after starting a building's construction. Thus, it is difficult to assess building LCCO 2 emissions during the early design phase, even though this capability would be highly effective in reducing LCCO 2 emissions. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a Building Simplified LCCO 2 emissions Assessment Tool (B-SCAT) for application in the early design phase of low-carbon buildings in South Korea, in order to facilitate efficient decision-making. To that end, in the construction stage, the BOQ and building drawings were analyzed, and a database of quantities and equations describing the finished area were conducted for each building element. In the operation stage, the "Korea Energy Census Report" and the "Korea Building Energy Efficiency Rating Certification System" were analyzed, and three kinds of models to evaluate CO 2 emissions were proposed. These analyses enabled the development of the B-SCAT. A case study compared the assessment results performed using the B-SCAT against a conventional assessment model based on the actual BOQ of the evaluated building. These values closely approximated the conventional assessment results with error rates of less than 3%.

show abstract

Life cycle assessment of buildings: A review

Cited by 423 publications

References 22 publications

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

From Tool-Making to Tool-Using – And Back: Rationales for Adoption and Use of LCC

Life cycle environmental performance of material specification: a BIM-enhanced comparative assessment

Building Simplified Life Cycle CO2 Emissions Assessment Tool (B‐SCAT) to Support Low‐Carbon Building Design in South Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About