Reduced carbon footprints of buildings: new Finnish standards and assessments

Abstract

The Nordic countries are working towards regional carbon neutrality ahead of the European Union's goals. Finland is aiming at carbon neutrality by 2035, and developing a set of policies, including legislation for low-carbon construction. The new approach includes normative carbon limits for different building types before 2025. Finland's Ministry of the Environment has developed an assessment method and will develop a generic emission database. The database will cover all main types of products and materials, sources of energy, modes of transportation as well as other main processes such as site operations and waste management. Furthermore, the criteria for green public procurement have been developed from the viewpoint of reducing the climate impacts of buildings: incorporating global warming potential and climate benefits. However, there are several open questions regarding both the assessment method and the database. These questions are outlined and discussed. The consideration of the foreseen decarbonisation of energy, the relation of the generic data to specific data and the requirements for generating valid generic data are key issues of discussion. The Finnish assessment method is also compared with the methodological development in other Nordic countries and to the proposed Level(s) framework of the European Commission. Policy relevance The carbon limits for buildings will introduce the construction sector to life-cycle approach and assessment. The scope of optimisation will widen from operational emissions to buildings' full lifecycle. This brings changes to building design, as the carbon footprint limit becomes an additional performance requirement for a building permission. For product manufacturers, this may lead to increased market demand of environmental product declarations and their availability in digital format. From the client side, the introduction of limits opens a possibility for setting quantitative targets that go beyond the legal minimum. Furthermore, the proposed concept of carbon handprint (for positive carbon impacts) may become an award criterion in public procurement. The ongoing normative development in the Nordic countries has timely relevance for the development of the Level(s) framework, a common assessment scheme for the European Union. Fora for discussion and co-development are therefore also required at the European level.

Learnings from Developing a Context-Specific LCA Tool for Buildings—The Case of LCAbyg 4

“…European standardisation of building LCA [25] is leaving a considerable definition gap between theory and practice [26,27]. This means that specific national adjustments of the LCA method [14,15,[28][29][30] are needed to close definition gaps, strengthen the use of LCA in the industry, and create momentum for meeting climate mitigation targets. Adjustments include the definitions of system boundaries, scenarios, emission factors, service life of materials, data quality and reporting format.…”

Wooden Extra Stories in Concrete Block of Flats in Finland as an Ecologically Sensitive Engineering Solution

“…This old stock, especially residential buildings built in the 1960s and 1980s (Figure 1), requires major renovations to approach a sustainable and carbon-neutral built environment [12,13]. The renewal of building codes in Finland in recent years has contributed to accelerating the above transformation by aiming to make new construction methods increasingly more ecologically sound, sustainable, and at the same time more energy-efficient [14,15].…”

Wooden Facade Renovation and Additional Floor Construction for Suburban Development in Finland

“…It is worth noting here of the total annual construction expenditures in Finland, approximately 47% is spent on infrastructure projects, 21% on new buildings, and 32% on renovations [17], in which low energy efficiency, lack of balcony, lack of elevator, and unpleasant appearance are among the critical issues identified for Finnish suburban apartments [18]. On the other hand, in practice, apartment renovation is a slow and expensive process that requires a lot of capital and government subsidies [19].…”