Session 1 - Montefiore

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings – a review Sigrid Reiter, ArcelorMittal International Network in Steel Construction, Sustainability Workshop and Third Plenary Meeting, Bruxelles, Belgique (07/07/2010) The building’s performance is influenced by it’s surroundings (climate, orientation, proximity of infrastructures,…). Part of the environmental impacts generated by the building are locally specific: e.g. neighbourhood impacts (e.g. microclimatic conditions, wind pattern, solar access, …), indoor environment (e.g. indoor air quality, thermal comfort,…), impact on local ecology (e.g. connected green spaces, ecologically senstive areas, …) and urban infrastructure (e.g. carrying capacity of transportation system, water supply). Thus, the system boundaries for buildings LCA are not clear. Each LCA study on a building has to specify the chosen boundaries. Local impacts can not be measured with traditional LCA methods and are therefore usually not considered. For example, Peuportier consider in the environmental assessment of a building only its influence on the outside environment. The aspects related to the inside comfort are supposed to be addressed by other existing tools. Therefore, the calculation of the inside air quality, illumination and noise level as well as the thermal comfort analysis are not dealt with in this research. They are, however, implicitly taken into account in the definition of the “functional unit” (Peuportier 2001). Note that the LCA tool BEES (Lippiatt 2000; NIST 2001) includes indoor air quality in the impact assessment as an impact category based on the total of the VOCs emitted by products, but it is stated that there is little scientific consensus about the relative contribution of different emissions to indoor air performance (Erlandsson & Borg 2003). In REGENER and in SAFE projects the transportation of buildings occupants are assumed to be part of the building service and to contribute to the overall building impact (Peuportier & Kohler 1997; Marique & Reiter 2010). A common allocation issue and discussion point for LCA on the building level is the allocation for recycling. Recycling products reduces in general environmental impacts, particularly the use of resources and waste creation. There are two different building materials recycling types. Steel is an example for a material, which after recycling can be reused for the same application. This is called closed loop recycling. On the other hand, recycled concrete can less easily be reused for the same application but the recycling process of concrete produces granules which can be used in road construction, avoiding the use of other resources like gravel. The corresponding recycling process is called down-cycling or open loop recycling. It concerns materials which were degraded during their use or recycling process, or composite components if the materials cannot be separated. Reusing a building material is handled like closed loop recycling. We define as reuse a process during which a material is not transformed between two cycles, whereas it is transformed temporarily into another state during the recycling process (e.g. melted). The selection of the building materials that can more effectively be recycled at the end-of-life could lower the full life cycle impacts. The more energy needed for operation decreases, the more important it is to pay attention to both energy for material production and to the aspects of the recycling potential (Huberman & Pearlmutter, 2008 ; Blengini 2009). Note that it may be assumed that mixing materials, like concrete with polystyrene or wood for instance, will make the future waste management difficult (Peuportier 2001). The choice of construction techniques can also significantly lower environmental burdens of the building shell. The sensitivity of results to methods and data demands extreme caution when using LCA to compare the impact of alternative materials on the environment (IISI 2002). Most LCA tools provide a database with generic inventory data and some with building-oriented data. These data have to be checked for their quality and relevance. Taking into account the high degree of variability of inventory data in many cases, developers should calculate value intervals or conduct any other uncertainty or sensitivity analysis in a way that is readily understood (IEA 2005). Comparisons of LCA studies on the same building (IEA 2005) show that uncertainty related to a LCA inventory can be significant and must be considered when performing comparative LCAs. It is thus important to undertake sensitivity and Page 9
Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings – a review Sigrid Reiter, ArcelorMittal International Network in Steel Construction, Sustainability Workshop and Third Plenary Meeting, Bruxelles, Belgique (07/07/2010) uncertainty analysis for improving decisions and comparability of the LCA results. Finally, although the general LCA methodology is well defined, its application in the building industry still suffers from a lack of sector-specific standardization. This implies that making a full LCA of a building is not a straightforward process like for many other consumer products. But the interest of LCA at the building level is obviously that decisions based on isolated LCA for materials or components might lead to unexpected secondary effects when the materials or components are applied in buildings without taking into account their impact on the performance of the building as a whole (Verbeeck &Hens 2010). Moreover, case studies of IEA Annex 31 (2005) showed that LCA tools affect descision-making. The case studies all demonstrated that the application of life-cycle assessment tools resulted in significant environmental improvements. Using an assessment process during the design phase created a positive impact on the built environment and in most instances on the users. 3. LCIA tools for buildings Several LCIA tools have been developed to help building designers incorporate LCA into building design (Bribian & al. 2009). They can be used to guide general building planning, select building materials and components or evaluate a complete building. They vary in their areas of application, geographic relevance and data quality. The amount of LCIA expertise and time required to employ these different tools varies also widely. There are three main types of LCIA tools : • Detailed LCA modeling tools (material level) Detailed LCA tools are focusing on materials, components and processes. These tools are mainly used in selecting materials, while also allowing material producers to optimize production processes. The software GaBi (an engineering oriented tool), developed at the IKP University of Stuttgart in cooperation with PE Product Engineering GmbH, is an interesting example of this type of complex tools. Other examples : Simapro (an industrial design oriented tool), TEAM (a French software which has been applied to many European projects including building and waste management), Boustead (a UK LCA tool that is building and construction focused although it can be used for other purposes), BEES (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability, a USA based software which allows the balancing of environmental and economic performance of building products; NIST 2001), … • Design LCA tools (building component level) Design tools use LCA as a basis but are simplified to single indicator points or to an aggregation of impacts to building component levels. These tools include pre-set material data. The aim of these tools is to facilitate easy use by designers and architects. The software Equer, developed at the “Ecole des Mines de Paris”, is an example of this type of LCA tool dealing both with the materials environmental impact and building operational impact. LCAid combines LCA results form materials with the operational modeling capabilities of EcoTect. EcoQuantum, developed in the Netherlands, uses SimPro LCA capabilities and has building components defined but it has limited operational energy and water capabilities. Other examples are : Athena (ATHENA 2001), Envest (BRE 2002), LISA, Becost, BEAT 2000, Greencalc, Ecoeffect, … Page 10
Page 1 and 2:
Session 1 - Supervisors : Pierre De
Page 3 and 4:
Session 3 - Supervisors : Damien Er
Page 5 and 6:
Session 5 - Supervisors : Nathalie
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Session 11 - Supervisors : Damien E
Page 13 and 14:
Session 13 - Supervisors : Nathalie
Page 15 and 16:
Session 15 - Supervisors : Sigrid R
Page 17 and 18:
Appendix A : Sigrid Reiter Appendix
Page 20 and 21:
EEA Report No 10/2006 Urban sprawl
Page 22 and 23:
Contents Contents Acknowledgements
Page 24 and 25:
Urban sprawl — a European challen
Page 26 and 27:
from city centres, while retaining
Page 28 and 29:
growth as mentioned in Chapter 1. R
Page 30 and 31:
The extent of urban sprawl in Europ
Page 32 and 33:
esidential density, sprawl is equal
Page 34 and 35:
The extent of urban sprawl in Europ
Page 36 and 37:
3 The drivers of urban sprawl 3.1 C
Page 38 and 39:
The drivers of urban sprawl Figure
Page 40 and 41:
also clearly demonstrate city spraw
Page 42 and 43:
Box 4 Portugal and Spain: threats t
Page 44 and 45:
Box 5 (cont.) Map Development scena
Page 46 and 47:
Box 6 (cont.) The drivers of urban
Page 48 and 49:
emote locations and requiring trans
Page 50 and 51:
4.1.2 Natural and protected areas T
Page 52 and 53:
Box 7 (cont.) The impacts of urban
Page 54 and 55:
the societal cost of asthma has bee
Page 56 and 57:
Box 8 Effects of residential areas
Page 58 and 59:
5.2 The European spatial developmen
Page 60 and 61:
European regional forces generating
Page 62 and 63:
Box 9 (cont.) Responses to urban sp
Page 64 and 65:
urban development plan and focused
Page 66 and 67:
Box 10 (cont.) Responses to urban s
Page 68 and 69:
Annex: Data and methodological appr
Page 70 and 71:
C Assessing urban sprawl at the Eur
Page 72 and 73:
References and further reading Ambi
Page 74 and 75:
European Commission, 1990. Green Pa
Page 76 and 77:
European Environment Agency Urban s
Page 78 and 79:
Appendix A.2 78
Page 80 and 81:
Section 2 presents a brief review o
Page 82 and 83:
intervention in these specific type
Page 84 and 85:
electricity as trains in Belgium ar
Page 86 and 87:
The majority of those districts are
Page 88 and 89:
which were calculated with the same
Page 90 and 91:
The last type of sensitivity analys
Page 92 and 93:
(INSEE) in France, the Office for N
Page 94 and 95:
Kints C. La rénovation énergétiq
Page 96 and 97:
A Method to Evaluate the Energy Con
Page 98 and 99:
application in many other suburban
Page 100 and 101:
Our classification of buildings cur
Page 102 and 103:
to work and the mode of transportat
Page 104 and 105:
energy consumption of a neighborhoo
Page 106 and 107:
transportation represents 11.8% to
Page 108 and 109:
most important. Insulating only the
Page 110 and 111:
savings highlighted in the first an
Page 112 and 113:
measurements because of high variat
Page 114 and 115:
Hilderson, W., E. Mlecnik and J. Cr
Page 116 and 117:
FIGURE CAPTIONS AND TABLE TITLES Fi
Page 118 and 119:
PLEA2012 - 28th Conference, Opportu
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND SOLAR AVAIL
Page 128 and 129:
year are 34.9 °C and -9,1°C. The
Page 130 and 131:
The new built density of the neighb
Page 132 and 133:
Appendix A.6 132
Page 134 and 135:
uilding” approach. A large amount
Page 136 and 137:
C. Comparison of our classification
Page 138:
In fact, as cavity walls became wid
Page 141 and 142:
METHODS, TOOLS, AND SOFTWARE Keywor
Page 143 and 144:
approaches. These methodologies hav
Page 145 and 146:
travel through the urban area of Li
Page 147 and 148: METHODS, TOOLS, AND SOFTWARE Figure
Page 149 and 150: as well as the ability to test fore
Page 151 and 152: Appendix A.8 151
Page 153 and 154: consumption is rarely taken into ac
Page 155 and 156: interdependences between urban stru
Page 157 and 158: These data were also used by Boussa
Page 159 and 160: and energy consumption in the resid
Page 161 and 162: Mean modal share (train) 14,0% 12,7
Page 163 and 164: Figure 4: Annual transport energy c
Page 165 and 166: 23,0%, even if the annual energy co
Page 167 and 168: or commercial purposes. “Type-pro
Page 169 and 170: Beevers SD and Carslaw DC (2005) Th
Page 171 and 172: Lavadinho S and Lensel B (2010) Imp
Page 175 and 176: NOTICE The submitted manuscript has
Page 177 and 178: Using ZEB design goals takes us out
Page 179 and 180: Boulder, Colorado has a solar acces
Page 181 and 182: (Mermoud 1996) to calculate the exp
Page 183 and 184: energy is used. TDVs have been deve
Page 185 and 186: Net Zero Energy Emissions Building
Page 187 and 188: combined with selecting a favorable
Page 191 and 192: Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings
Page 197: Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings
Page 207 and 208: PRe, SimaPro., 2000. Life Cycle Ass
Page 211 and 212: 396 buildings [17,26]. This review
Page 213 and 214: 398 2.2. Embodied energy and carbon
Page 215 and 216: 400 using photovoltaic panels will
Page 219 and 220: assumptions, the indicators (Embodi
Page 221 and 222: Table 3 Distribution of the steel w
Page 223 and 224: the three case studies exhibit a st
Page 225 and 226: PLEA 2011 - 27 th Conference on Pas
Page 231 and 232: Appendix B : Pierre Dewallef Append
Page 233 and 234: When writing your presentation, you
Page 235 and 236: Status of Solar Tower Power Plant t
Page 237 and 238: Appendix B.3 237
Page 241 and 242: Status of biomass combustion power
Page 243 and 244: Appendix B.5 243
Page 247 and 248: Status of ocean thermal energy conv
Page 249 and 250:
Appendix B.7 249
Page 251 and 252:
When writing your presentation, you
Page 253 and 254:
Status of Natural Gas Combined Cycl
Page 255 and 256:
Appendix B.9 255
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Status of Integrated coal Gazeifica
Page 261 and 262:
Appendix B.11 261
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Status of Carbon Capture and Storag
Page 267 and 268:
Appendix B.13 267
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Status of Carbon Capture and Storag
show all

Session 1 - Montefiore

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?