Reducing embodied carbon during the design process of buildings

Häkkinen, Tarja; Kuittinen, Matti; Ruuska, Antti; Jung, Nusrat

doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2015.06.005

Cited by 93 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This view is echoed and supported by Cuéllar-Franca and Azapagic [67] who reflect on the longevity of decisions taken at the design stage and call for a sustainable home design which considers the impact that design choices exert over the building's life cycle. The centrality of design is also emphasised by Häkkinen and colleagues [110] who recommend a gradual and systematic procession through all different phases and stages of design to accurately assess GHG emissions and achieve low-carbon buildings.…”

Section: Ms2: Better Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodied carbon mitigation and reduction in the built environment – What does the evidence say?

Pomponi

Moncaster

2016

Journal of Environmental Management

237

149

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Of all industrial sectors, the built environment puts the most pressure on the natural environment, and in spite of significant efforts the International Energy Agency suggests that buildings-related emissions are on track to double by 2050. Whilst operational energy efficiency continues to receive significant attention by researchers, a less well-researched area is the assessment of embodied carbon in the built environment in order to understand where the greatest opportunities for its mitigation and reduction lie. This article approaches the body of academic knowledge on strategies to tackle embodied carbon (EC) and uses a systematic review of the available evidence to answer the following research question: how should we mitigate and reduce EC in the built environment? 102 journal articles have been reviewed systematically in the fields of embodied carbon mitigation and reduction, and life cycle assessment. In total, 17 mitigation strategies have been identified from within the existing literature which have been discussed through a meta-analysis on available data. Results reveal that no single mitigation strategy alone seems able to tackle the problem; rather, a pluralistic approach is necessary. The use of materials with lower EC, better design, an increased reuse of ECintensive materials, and stronger policy drivers all emerged as key elements for a quicker transition to a low carbon built environment. The meta-analysis on 77 LCAs also shows an extremely incomplete and short-sighted approach to life cycle studies. Most studies only assess the manufacturing stages, often completely overlooking impacts occurring during the occupancy stage and at the end of life of the building. The LCA research community have the responsibility to address such shortcomings and work towards more complete and meaningful assessments.

show abstract

Section: Ms2: Better Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embodied carbon mitigation and reduction in the built environment – What does the evidence say?

Pomponi

Moncaster

2016

Journal of Environmental Management

237

149

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gustavsson and Sathre (2011) summarized the steps essential in the lifecycle assessment of a building. Häkkinen (2012) and Häkkinen et al (2015) developed reference values for sustainability and performance assessment of buildings. Ruuska et al (2013) compared the environmental impacts of building materials.…”

Section: Focus On the Construction Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon Footprint of Transitional Shelters

Kuittinen

Winter

2015

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extreme weather events, sea level rise, and political disputes linked to climate change are driving masses to leave their homes. Their transitional settlements should be produced in a manner that causes minimum greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to prevent any further acceleration of climate change and the humanitarian crises it causes. This article presents a study of the carbon footprint and primary energy demand of the construction materials of eight different transitional shelters. The lowest carbon footprints were found from shelter models made from bamboo or timber. The highest emissions were caused by shelters that have either a short service life or that are made from metal-intensive structures. The choice of cladding materials was surprisingly important. The findings were further compared to the overall impacts of each construction project, to national per capita GHG emissions, and to construction costs. Some shelter projects had notable total energy consumption even compared to the annual energy use of industrialized countries. The study concludes that construction materials have an important impact on the carbon footprint of shelters. Comparisons should however be made only between similar functional units. Furthermore, benchmark values and more background data are urgently needed in order to give humanitarian nongovernmental organizations tools for lowering the carbon footprint of their construction operations.

show abstract

“…These methods are often agile, flexible, and do not always require a consistent presence of the designer/architect [36,54,55]. There is an advantage if this connection can be established in the very early phase of a project, as the base for sustainable outcome is laid [53]. In the case of a housing project such as Chamazi, where the inhabitants were in a sensible situation of being evicted, the ability to listen to people's emotions and support an empathic environment, where, for instance, fear can be shared, will have a positive influence for the potential of long-term sustainability.…”

Section: Discussion: the Potential Of Inhabitant Engagement To Reach mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The row-house model is more efficient than one family houses, but only two floors does not make the habitation very dense [7]. core structure is concrete, which is not a material with a low carbon footprint; however, the economical form of the buildings saves material, and the concrete can have a new lifecycle in road construction [53]. The materials are durable.…”

Section: Environmental Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using Empathic Design as a Tool for Urban Sustainability in Low-Resource Settings

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Architectural design plays a crucial role in sustainable city development. In fast-growing cities in developing countries, it can be a challenge to reach sustainable results. In this paper, we propose the use of Empathic Design, borrowed from the human-centered design field, as one means to support the work of architects and other stakeholders in these settings. To investigate aspects in which this method could be helpful, we have synthesized two existing sustainability models and applied them to three examples of affordable housing from different low-resource settings. After analysis of the examples, we propose a model with an equal balance between the four different dimensions of sustainability-environmental, economic, social, and cultural-where the aspects that need inhabitant engagement are highlighted. We argue that, to be able to hold the balance between the diverse dimensions of sustainability, the architect needs to understand in-depth the living conditions of people for whom he or she is designing. This calls for a fine-tuned participatory approach when designing in low-resource settings. It may not always be easy to reach this level of participation, but we propose that it can be achieved when the architecture is created through empathic involvement. The use of Empathic Design methods throughout the design process thus supports the endeavor towards sustainable results.

show abstract

Reducing embodied carbon during the design process of buildings

Cited by 93 publications

References 32 publications

Embodied carbon mitigation and reduction in the built environment – What does the evidence say?

Embodied carbon mitigation and reduction in the built environment – What does the evidence say?

Carbon Footprint of Transitional Shelters

Using Empathic Design as a Tool for Urban Sustainability in Low-Resource Settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About