scholarly journals The Influence of Construction Materials  on Life-Cycle Energy Use and Carbon  Dioxide Emissions of Medium Size  Commercial Buildings

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicolas Perez Fernandez

<p>This thesis studies the influence of construction materials on the life-cycle energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of medium sized low energy consumption commercial buildings. When describing buildings by materials, there is a tendency to label them according to the main structural material used. However, the vast majority of commercial buildings use a large number of materials. Hence it is not clear which materials or combinations of materials can achieve the best performance, in terms of lifecycle energy use and CO2 emissions. The buildings analysed here were based on an actual six-storey 4250m2 (gross floor area) building, with a mixed-mode ventilation system, currently under construction at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch. While the actual building is being constructed in concrete, the author has designed two further versions in which the structures and finishes are predominantly steel or timber. Despite having different structural materials, large quantities of finishes materials are common to all three buildings; large glazed curtain walls and sun louvers, stairs balustrade and most of the offices internal finishes. A fourth building was also produced in which all possible common finishes' of the timber building were replaced by timber components. This building is labelled as Timber-plus and was included to assess the difference of the three initial 'common finishes' buildings against a building that might be expected to have a low or even negative total embodied CO2 emission in structure and finishes. In order to highlight the influence of materials, each building was designed to have a similar indoor climate with roughly the same amount of operational energy for heating and cooling over its full life. Both energy use and CO2 emissions have been assessed over three main stages in the life (and potential environmental impact) of a building: initial production of the building materials (initial embodied energy and initial embodied CO2 emissions); operation of the building (mainly in terms of its energy use); and the refurbishment and maintenance of the building materials over the building's effective life (recurrent embodied energy and CO2 emissions). Calculation of embodied energy and embodied CO2 emissions are based on materials' estimates undertaken by a Quantity Surveyor. DesignBuilder software was used to estimate whole life-cycle energy used and CO2 emitted in the operation of the buildings over a period of 60 years. Two different methods for embodied energy and embodied CO2 calculation were applied to the four buildings. The first method was by multiplying the volume of each material in the schedule calculated by the Quantity Surveyor by the New Zealand specific coefficients of embodied energy and embodied CO2 produced by Andrew Alcorn (2003). The second method was analysing the same schedule of materials with GaBi professional LCA software. Materials' inventories in GaBi are average German industry data collected by PE Europe between 1996 and 2004 (Alcorn, 2003; Nebel & Love, 2008). The energy results of the thesis show that when using the Alcorn coefficients, the total embodied energy (initial plus recurrent embodied energy) averaged 23% and operating energy consumption averaged 77% of the total life-cycle energy consumption for the four buildings. Using the GaBi coefficients, total embodied energy averaged 19% and operating energy consumption averaged 81% of the total life-cycle energy consumption of the four buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the difference between the highest (steel building) and lowest (timber-plus building) life-cycle energy consumption represents a 22% increment of the highest over the lowest. Using the GaBi coefficients, the difference between the lowest (timber-plus building) and the highest (timber building) life-cycle energy consumption represents a 15% increment of the highest over the lowest. The CO2 results shows that when using the Alcorn coefficients, the total embodied CO2 emissions averaged 7% and operating CO2 emissions averaged 93%. Using the GaBi coefficients, total embodied CO2 emissions averaged 16% and operating CO2 emissions averaged 84% of the life-cycle CO2 emissions of the four buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the difference between the highest (steel building) and lowest (timber-plus building) life-cycle CO2 emissions represents a 27% increment of the highest over the lower. Using the GaBi coefficients, the difference between the highest (timber building) and the lowest (timber-plus building) lifecycle CO2 emissions represents a 9% increment of the highest over the lowest. While for the case of embodied energy the Alcorn results averaged 32% higher than the GaBi, in the case of embodied CO2 the Alcorn results averaged 62% lower than the GaBi. Major differences in the results produced when using the two different sets of embodied energy and CO2 coefficients are due mainly to their different approaches to the CO2 sequestration in timber materials. While the Alcorn coefficients account for the CO2 sequestration of timber materials, the GaBi coefficients do not. This is particularly noteworthy as the CO2 sequestration of timber has been neglected in previous research. It was established that embodied energy can significantly influence the life-cycle energy consumption and CO2 emissions of contemporary low energy buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the steel building embodied the equivalent of 27 years of operating energy consumption and 12 years of operating CO2 emissions. At the other end of the spectrum the timber-plus building embodied the equivalent of 11 years of operating energy consumption and has stored the equivalent of 3.6 years of operating CO2 emissions. Using the GaBi coefficients, the steel building embodied the equivalent of 19 years of operating energy consumption and 14 years of operating CO2 emissions, while the timber-plus building embodied the equivalent of 8 years of operating energy consumption and 8 years of operating CO2 emissions. These findings are of significance, for example, in the assessment and weighting of the embodied energy and embodied CO2 components of building sustainable rating tools.</p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Nicolas Perez Fernandez

<p>This thesis studies the influence of construction materials on the life-cycle energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of medium sized low energy consumption commercial buildings. When describing buildings by materials, there is a tendency to label them according to the main structural material used. However, the vast majority of commercial buildings use a large number of materials. Hence it is not clear which materials or combinations of materials can achieve the best performance, in terms of lifecycle energy use and CO2 emissions. The buildings analysed here were based on an actual six-storey 4250m2 (gross floor area) building, with a mixed-mode ventilation system, currently under construction at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch. While the actual building is being constructed in concrete, the author has designed two further versions in which the structures and finishes are predominantly steel or timber. Despite having different structural materials, large quantities of finishes materials are common to all three buildings; large glazed curtain walls and sun louvers, stairs balustrade and most of the offices internal finishes. A fourth building was also produced in which all possible common finishes' of the timber building were replaced by timber components. This building is labelled as Timber-plus and was included to assess the difference of the three initial 'common finishes' buildings against a building that might be expected to have a low or even negative total embodied CO2 emission in structure and finishes. In order to highlight the influence of materials, each building was designed to have a similar indoor climate with roughly the same amount of operational energy for heating and cooling over its full life. Both energy use and CO2 emissions have been assessed over three main stages in the life (and potential environmental impact) of a building: initial production of the building materials (initial embodied energy and initial embodied CO2 emissions); operation of the building (mainly in terms of its energy use); and the refurbishment and maintenance of the building materials over the building's effective life (recurrent embodied energy and CO2 emissions). Calculation of embodied energy and embodied CO2 emissions are based on materials' estimates undertaken by a Quantity Surveyor. DesignBuilder software was used to estimate whole life-cycle energy used and CO2 emitted in the operation of the buildings over a period of 60 years. Two different methods for embodied energy and embodied CO2 calculation were applied to the four buildings. The first method was by multiplying the volume of each material in the schedule calculated by the Quantity Surveyor by the New Zealand specific coefficients of embodied energy and embodied CO2 produced by Andrew Alcorn (2003). The second method was analysing the same schedule of materials with GaBi professional LCA software. Materials' inventories in GaBi are average German industry data collected by PE Europe between 1996 and 2004 (Alcorn, 2003; Nebel & Love, 2008). The energy results of the thesis show that when using the Alcorn coefficients, the total embodied energy (initial plus recurrent embodied energy) averaged 23% and operating energy consumption averaged 77% of the total life-cycle energy consumption for the four buildings. Using the GaBi coefficients, total embodied energy averaged 19% and operating energy consumption averaged 81% of the total life-cycle energy consumption of the four buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the difference between the highest (steel building) and lowest (timber-plus building) life-cycle energy consumption represents a 22% increment of the highest over the lowest. Using the GaBi coefficients, the difference between the lowest (timber-plus building) and the highest (timber building) life-cycle energy consumption represents a 15% increment of the highest over the lowest. The CO2 results shows that when using the Alcorn coefficients, the total embodied CO2 emissions averaged 7% and operating CO2 emissions averaged 93%. Using the GaBi coefficients, total embodied CO2 emissions averaged 16% and operating CO2 emissions averaged 84% of the life-cycle CO2 emissions of the four buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the difference between the highest (steel building) and lowest (timber-plus building) life-cycle CO2 emissions represents a 27% increment of the highest over the lower. Using the GaBi coefficients, the difference between the highest (timber building) and the lowest (timber-plus building) lifecycle CO2 emissions represents a 9% increment of the highest over the lowest. While for the case of embodied energy the Alcorn results averaged 32% higher than the GaBi, in the case of embodied CO2 the Alcorn results averaged 62% lower than the GaBi. Major differences in the results produced when using the two different sets of embodied energy and CO2 coefficients are due mainly to their different approaches to the CO2 sequestration in timber materials. While the Alcorn coefficients account for the CO2 sequestration of timber materials, the GaBi coefficients do not. This is particularly noteworthy as the CO2 sequestration of timber has been neglected in previous research. It was established that embodied energy can significantly influence the life-cycle energy consumption and CO2 emissions of contemporary low energy buildings. Using the Alcorn coefficients, the steel building embodied the equivalent of 27 years of operating energy consumption and 12 years of operating CO2 emissions. At the other end of the spectrum the timber-plus building embodied the equivalent of 11 years of operating energy consumption and has stored the equivalent of 3.6 years of operating CO2 emissions. Using the GaBi coefficients, the steel building embodied the equivalent of 19 years of operating energy consumption and 14 years of operating CO2 emissions, while the timber-plus building embodied the equivalent of 8 years of operating energy consumption and 8 years of operating CO2 emissions. These findings are of significance, for example, in the assessment and weighting of the embodied energy and embodied CO2 components of building sustainable rating tools.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Omrany ◽  
Veronica Soebarto ◽  
Ehsan Sharifi ◽  
Ali Soltani

Residential buildings are responsible for a considerable portion of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Correspondingly, many attempts have been made across the world to minimize energy consumption in this sector via regulations and building codes. The focus of these regulations has mainly been on reducing operational energy use, whereas the impacts of buildings’ embodied energy are frequently excluded. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in analyzing the energy performance of buildings via a life cycle energy assessment (LCEA) approach. The increasing amount of research has however caused the issue of a variation in results presented by LCEA studies, in which apparently similar case studies exhibited different results. This paper aims to identify the main sources of variation in LCEA studies by critically analyzing 26 studies representing 86 cases in 12 countries. The findings indicate that the current trend of LCEA application in residential buildings suffers from significant inaccuracy accruing from incomplete definitions of the system boundary, in tandem with the lack of consensus on measurements of operational and embodied energies. The findings call for a comprehensive framework through which system boundary definition for calculations of embodied and operational energies can be standardized.


2013 ◽  
Vol 689 ◽  
pp. 54-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Usep Surahman ◽  
Tetsu Kubota

This study aims to develop a simplified life cycle assessment model for residential buildings in Indonesia, which can be used under relatively poor data availability conditions. In order to obtain material inventory data and household energy consumption profiles for constructing the above model, a survey was conducted in Bandung in 2011. This paper analyzes life cycle energy and CO2 emissions employing an input-output analysis-based method within unplanned houses (n=250), which are classified into three categories, namely simple, medium and luxurious houses. The results showed that the average embodied energy of simple, medium and luxurious houses was 36.3, 130.0 and 367.7 GJ respectively. The cement consumed the largest energy and emitted the most CO2 emissions among all materials. The annual average operational energy of simple, medium and luxurious houses varied widely at 11.6, 17.4 and 32.1 GJ/year respectively. The energy consumption for cooking accounted for the largest percentage of operational energy. The profiles of life cycle CO2 emissions were similar with those of life cycle energy. The factors affecting embodied, operational and life cycle energy were also studied.


2019 ◽  
Vol 887 ◽  
pp. 335-343
Author(s):  
Nazanin Moazzen ◽  
Mustafa Erkan Karaguler ◽  
Touraj Ashrafian

Energy efficiency has become a crucial part of human life, which has an adverse impact on the social and economic development of any country. In Turkey, it is a critical issue especially in the construction sector due to increase in the dependency on the fuel demands. The energy consumption, which is used during the life cycle of a building, is a huge amount affected by the energy demand for material and building construction, HVAC and lighting systems, maintenance, equipment, and demolition. In general, the Life Cycle Energy (LCE) needs of the building can be summarised as the operational and embodied energy together with the energy use for demolition and recycling processes.Besides, schools alone are responsible for about 15% of the total energy consumption of the commercial building sector. To reduce the energy use and CO2 emission, the operational and embodied energy of the buildings must be minimised. Overall, it seems that choosing proper architectural measures for the envelope and using low emitting material can be a logical step for reducing operational and embodied energy consumptions.This paper is concentrated on the operating and embodied energy consumptions resulting from the application of different architectural measures through the building envelope. It proposes an educational building with low CO2 emission and proper energy performance in Turkey. To illustrate the method of the approach, this contribution illustrates a case study, which was performed on a representative schoold building in Istanbul, Turkey. Energy used for HVAC and lighting in the operating phase and the energy used for the manufacture of the materials are the most significant parts of embodied energy in the LCE analyses. This case study building’s primary energy consumption was calculated with the help of dynamic simulation tools, EnergyPlus and DesignBuilder. Then, different architectural energy efficiency measures were applied to the envelope of the case study building. Then, the influence of proposed actions on LCE consumption and Life Cycle CO2 (LCCO2) emissions were assessed according to the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Simões Branco Júnior ◽  
Júlia Santiago de Matos Monteiro Lira ◽  
Rosa Maria Sposto

RESUMO:  A procura por maior otimização do processo produtivo de edificações, relacionada a simplificação e redução de prazos de execução e diminuição da geração de desperdícios, tem intensificado a utilização de sistemas construtivos industrializados no Brasil. De forma recorrente se verifica a disponibilização de sistemas de vedação em drywall nos lançamentos habitacionais recentes. Por exigência da NBR 15575 (ABNT, 2013) faz-se necessário avaliar o desempenho dos sistemas construtivos, tanto convencional como industrializado, considerando, entre outros, requisitos de sustentabilidade sob aspectos de durabilidade, manutenibilidade e adequação ambiental. Dessa forma, os sistemas construtivos industrializados em drywall devem atender aos requisitos e critérios estabelecidos naquela norma. Nesse contexto, o presente trabalho teve como objetivo avaliar o consumo de energia e emissão de CO2 de um sistema de vedação vertical em drywall, tipologia 140/90. A metodologia se baseou na quantificação de energia incorporada e emissões de CO2, por meio da avaliação de ciclo de vida energético - ACVE e de emissões de CO2 - ACVCO2, respectivamente, nas etapas de fabricação, transporte e manutenção do sistema analisado. Este trabalho procura contribuir com a maior conscientização do uso de sistemas construtivos racionalizados e, principalmente, mais sustentáveis ambientalmente.ABSTRACT: The search for greater optimization of buildings process production, related to simplification and reduction of lead times and reducing of waste, has intensified the use of industrialized constructive systems in Brazil. Repeatedly it is seem the availability of sealing system in drywall in recent housing releases. By requirement of NBR 15575 (ABNT, 2013) it is necessary to evaluate the performance of constructive systems, both conventional as industrialized, considering, among others, sustainability requirements under aspects of durability, maintainability and environmental suitability. Thus, the industrialized systems as drywall must comply with the requirements and criteria set out in that standard. In this context, the present study aimed to evaluate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of a vertical sealing system in drywall, type 140/90. The methodology was based on quantification of embodied energy and CO2 emissions, through the energy life cycle assessment-LCEA and CO2 emissions-LCCO2A, respectively, considering the steps of manufacturing, transportation and maintenance of the system. This paper seeks to contribute to increase awareness of the use of rationalized constructive systems and, especially, more environmentally sustainable.


Buildings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Hossein Omrany ◽  
Veronica Soebarto ◽  
Jian Zuo ◽  
Ruidong Chang

This paper aims to propose a comprehensive framework for a clear description of system boundary conditions in life cycle energy assessment (LCEA) analysis in order to promote the incorporation of embodied energy impacts into building energy-efficiency regulations (BEERs). The proposed framework was developed based on an extensive review of 66 studies representing 243 case studies in over 15 countries. The framework consists of six distinctive dimensions, i.e., temporal, physical, methodological, hypothetical, spatial, and functional. These dimensions encapsulate 15 components collectively. The proposed framework possesses two key characteristics; first, its application facilitates defining the conditions of a system boundary within a transparent context. This consequently leads to increasing reliability of obtained LCEA results for decision-making purposes since any particular conditions (e.g., truncation or assumption) considered in establishing the boundaries of a system under study can be revealed. Second, the use of a framework can also provide a meaningful basis for cross comparing cases within a global context. This characteristic can further result in identifying best practices for the design of buildings with low life cycle energy use performance. Furthermore, this paper applies the proposed framework to analyse the LCEA performance of a case study in Adelaide, Australia. Thereafter, the framework is utilised to cross compare the achieved LCEA results with a case study retrieved from literature in order to demonstrate the framework’s capacity for cross comparison. The results indicate the capability of the framework for maintaining transparency in establishing a system boundary in an LCEA analysis, as well as a standardised basis for cross comparing cases. This study also offers recommendations for policy makers in the building sector to incorporate embodied energy into BEERs.


Buildings ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia MIRABELLA ◽  
Martin RÖCK ◽  
Marcella Ruschi Mendes SAADE ◽  
Carolin SPIRINCKX ◽  
Marc BOSMANS ◽  
...  

Globally, the building sector is responsible for more than 40% of energy use and it contributes approximately 30% of the global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. This high contribution stimulates research and policies to reduce the operational energy use and related GHG emissions of buildings. However, the environmental impacts of buildings can extend wide beyond the operational phase, and the portion of impacts related to the embodied energy of the building becomes relatively more important in low energy buildings. Therefore, the goal of the research is gaining insights into the environmental impacts of various building strategies for energy efficiency requirements compared to the life cycle environmental impacts of the whole building. The goal is to detect and investigate existing trade-offs in current approaches and solutions proposed by the research community. A literature review is driven by six fundamental and specific research questions (RQs), and performed based on two main tasks: (i) selection of literature studies, and (ii) critical analysis of the selected studies in line with the RQs. A final sample of 59 papers and 178 case studies has been collected, and key criteria are systematically analysed in a matrix. The study reveals that the high heterogeneity of the case studies makes it difficult to compare these in a straightforward way, but it allows to provide an overview of current methodological challenges and research gaps. Furthermore, the most complete studies provide valuable insights in the environmental benefits of the identified energy performance strategies over the building life cycle, but also shows the risk of burden shifting if only operational energy use is focused on, or when a limited number of environmental impact categories are assessed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 112 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Vourdoubas

European buildings account for large amounts of energy consumption and CO2 emissions and current EU policies target in decreasing their energy consumption and subsequent CO2 emissions. Realization of a small, grid-connected, residential building with zero CO2 emissions due to energy use in Crete, Greece shows that this can be easily achieved. Required heat and electricity in the building were generated with the use of locally available renewable energies including solar energy and solid biomass. Annual energy consumption and on-site energy generation were balanced over a year as well as the annual electricity exchange between the building and the grid. Technologies used for heat and power generation included solar-thermal, solar-PV and solid-biomass burning which are reliable, mature and cost-effective. Annual energy consumption in the 65 m2 building was 180 KWh/m2 and its annual CO2 emissions were 84.67 kgCO2/m2. The total capital cost of the required renewable energy systems was estimated at approximately 10.77% of its total construction cost, and the required capital investments in renewable energy systems, in order to achieve the goal of a residential building with zero CO2 emissions due to energy use, were 1.65 € per kgCO2, saved annually. The results of this study prove that the creation of zero CO2 emissions buildings is technically feasible, economically attractive and environmentally friendly. Therefore they could be used to create future policies promoting the creation of this type of building additionally to the existing policies promoting near-zero energy buildings.


2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 1795-1810
Author(s):  
James Bambara ◽  
Andreas K. Athienitis

Abstract. The energy consumption of a building is significantly impacted by its envelope design, particularly for greenhouses where coverings typically provide high heat and daylight transmission. Energy and life cycle cost (LCC) analysis were used to identify the most cost-effective cladding design for a greenhouse located in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (45.4° N) that employs supplemental lighting. The base case envelope design uses single glazing, whereas the two alternative designs consist of replacing the glass with twin-wall polycarbonate and adding foil-faced rigid insulation (permanent or movable) on the interior surface of the glass. All the alternative envelope designs increased electricity consumption for lighting and decreased heating energy use except when permanent or movable insulation was applied to the north wall and in the case of permanent insulation on the north wall plus polycarbonate on the east wall. This demonstrates how the use of reflective opaque insulation on the north wall can be beneficial for redirecting light onto the crops to achieve simultaneous reductions in electricity and heating energy costs. A maximum reduction in LCC of 5.5% (net savings of approximately $130,000) was achieved when permanent insulation was applied to the north and east walls plus polycarbonate on the west wall. This alternative envelope design increased electricity consumption for horticultural lighting by 4.3%, reduced heating energy use by 15.6%, and caused greenhouse gas emissions related to energy consumption to decrease by 14.7%. This analysis demonstrates how energy and economic analysis can be employed to determine the most suitable envelope design based on local climate and economic conditions. Keywords: Artificial lighting, Consistent daily light integral, Energy modeling, Envelope design, Greenhouse, Life cycle cost analysis, Light emitting diode, Local agriculture.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document