Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of a Living Building

Gardner, Haley M.; Hasik, Vaclav; Banawi, Abdulaziz; Olinzock, Maureen; Bilec, Melissa M.

doi:10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000436

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Realistic and precise investigations conducted on the buildings themselves yielded the data on their energetic performances, particularly regarding the construction and use phases of their life cycles. The information regarding the end-of-life phase was obtained from actual data and other relevant studies in the literature [22][23][24].…”

Section: Life Cycle Assessment Of Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy audit of 1900s buildings for sustainable renovation

Cardinale

Negro

Selicati

2022

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This project focuses on the dynamic modelling of two buildings: a school and a public building, both located in the Basilicata and Puglia regions. In order to define the passive energy requirement of the building and propose some energy efficiency solutions, an energy diagnosis was conducted in dynamic settings on these structures. The EnergyPlus™ calculation code is the method utilized for energy diagnosis in the dynamic regime. The dynamic technique enables simulation of real-world building circumstances and plant design based on real-world requirements and building management. Both buildings have significant historical significance, therefore improving their energy efficiency must take this into account. In the design of energy efficiency solutions, the enclosure’s properties are critical. It is the primary source of heat loss and sunlight gain, and it has an impact on indoor comfort. It is vital to consider often contradicting features of the building’s casing, such as heating, cooling, and natural and artificial lighting, when designing the building’s casing. For example, large levels of natural light must be allowed without excessive solar gains during the summer while still ensuring an acceptable quantity of solar earnings during the winter to reduce heating loads. As a result, the efficient configuration can’t just look at one element at a time; it has to look at all of them at the same time, taking into account all of the interactions between the many sources of energy usage. Thermo-hygrometric comfort is another factor to consider when it comes to protecting the human condition. The goal of integrated design for a long-term major redevelopment is to establish the best balance between energy efficiency and environmental burdens, not just during the operational period, but throughout the life cycle. During the redesign process, resources such as life cycle analysis (LCA - Life Cycle Assessment) can be used to objectively quantify the possible environmental implications of new materials, systems, and energy flows (from their supply up to future disposal scenarios at the end of life). Furthermore, by comparing several project options, it is possible to identify which, with the same energy efficiency, causes the least environmental damage. Economic and social sustainability analyses can also be combined. Modern building relief techniques (geometric, material, and thermal) were applied in this study for energy diagnosis and LCA analysis to determine the optimal design options for environmental impacts. The thermal power plants that the solution proposes are completely integrated within the buildings in which they will be put and manage to ensure a perfect mix of energy savings, economic savings, and environmental sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Life Cycle Assessment Of Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy audit of 1900s buildings for sustainable renovation

Cardinale

Negro

Selicati

2022

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Environmental life cycle assessment (E-LCA) is a widely used and robust method for estimating the environmental impacts of building products over their life cycle. However, there is limited guidance on how to consider the life cycle of building components when they do not coincide with the life cycle of the building (Aktas & Bilec, 2012b, 2012aBourke & Kyle, 2019;Gardner et al, 2020;Hasik et al, 2019b;2019a). Perhaps as a result, maintenance and replacement processes are often neglected in most studies of embodied carbon reduction in the built environment (Pomponi & Moncaster, 2016).…”

Section: Circular Economy and Product Lifespans In The Built Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perhaps as a result, maintenance and replacement processes are often neglected in most studies of embodied carbon reduction in the built environment (Pomponi & Moncaster, 2016). Meanwhile, in a previous study led by co-author Bilec, material replacements accounted for 62% of the embodied carbon of the Frick Environmental Center, a highly sustainable building in Pittsburgh with estimated lifespan of 100 years (Gardner et al, 2020). This is consistent with the findings of Francart and Malmqvist (2020), who concluded that the relative impact of material replacement was largest in buildings with low energy use or long lifespans.…”

Section: Circular Economy and Product Lifespans In The Built Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Bother? Environmental and social implications of using durable building products

Rios¹,

Berry²,

Isenhour³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The circular economy (CE) has emerged with the promise of conserving resources through approaches such as durability and extended product lifetimes. At the same time, buildings negatively contribute to resource use and waste production, making buildings a key target for CE strategies. However, the question of how durability and lifetimes affect the social and environmental impacts of building products remains largely unexplored. In this study, we applied environmental and social life cycle assessments (E-LCA and S-LCA, respectively) to a common building component, roof covering, to investigate the effects of durability and different lifespans, and the tradeoffs between social and environmental impacts. We tested different lifespan scenarios for three materials with different durability: thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO), zinc-coated steel, and galvanized aluminum sheets. The results suggest that it is critical to consider the tradeoffs of social and environmental benefits: steel had the most promising social performance, followed closely by aluminum, while the least durable material (TPO) had the worst environmental and social performance. However, the environmental impacts resulting from the production of aluminum sheets were significantly lower than the impacts from steel, which made aluminum the preferred choice for this case study. Moreover, product lifespans impacted the results in both E-LCA and S-LCA due to the number of replacements needed over the life of a 100year building. We discuss key limitations of integrating E-LCA and S-LCA approaches, such as data aggregation and spatial issues, lack of standards on how to account for product durability, and concerns surrounding S-LCA results interpretation.

show abstract

“…More mega projects are likely to be built, and thereby the usage of building materials in the mentioned projects will likely result in serious di culties such as shortages of energy, environmental issues, and global warming if no enough care is made to lowering EE and embodied emissions (EC) (Zeng et al 2021). Buildings clearly have remarkable environmental effects, which present opportunities for mitigation and reduction (Gardner et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative LCA of external wall assemblies in context of Iranian market: considering embodied and operational energy through BIM application

Jafari

Khoshand

Sadeghi

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building envelopes have a critical role in the construction sector's sustainability. The main aim of this research is to assess the environmental impacts of typical exterior wall assemblies and present the best option to the Iranian market, taking into account both embodied and operational energy. Autodesk Green Building studio is used to determine the operating loads of each wall. Simapro, a life cycle assessment software, is used to help manage data on environmental impacts. The results show that the most severe damage category for all of the analyzed walls is human health. Also, the environmental impact of the end-of-life stage is insignificant in comparison with the production and use stages. If reducing carbon emissions is a major priority, replacing one square meter of masonry brick wall (the worst option) with Prefabricated extruded polystyrene (XPS) drywall (the best option) could save 1257.85 kgCO2eq. The operational phase of the specified walls has a wide range of environmental impacts. Prefabricated Knauf drywall and prefabricated XPS drywall consume less energy for the operating phase since they use a sufficient quantity of isolations, leading to better total environmental performance. In conclusion, the thermal performance of building materials should be given more attention.

show abstract

Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of a Living Building

Cited by 14 publications

References 27 publications

Energy audit of 1900s buildings for sustainable renovation

Energy audit of 1900s buildings for sustainable renovation

Why Bother? Environmental and social implications of using durable building products

A comparative LCA of external wall assemblies in context of Iranian market: considering embodied and operational energy through BIM application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About