Session 1 - Montefiore

More documents

Recommendations

Info

404 HFA yr if the insulation thickness in the exterior walls, the roof and the slab are respectively increased to 160 mm, 240 mm and 120 mm The results of the manual calculations are indicated in Table 4. In Fig. 3, both case studies are represented in terms of Embodied carbon (production of materials) whereas Fig. 4 provides the Operational carbon versus Embodied carbon throughout the lifespan of the building. These results are coherent with an analysis carried out in the University of Liège on houses presenting various types of envelope [8]. It is then possible to affirm that the Use Stage is the most harmful period during the building life-cycle in terms of Operational carbon. In the same line of thoughts, the energy consumption is the major source of impacts. But the lifetime is crucial to draw general conclusions from the case study. With a very long reference time or a relatively high operational energy use, the embodied impacts can seem comparatively small. And if the lifetime or the operational energy decreases (even by a small percentage), the relative yearly impacts (operational to embodied impact) can rise up to more than 50%. Coming to the Embodied carbon, it is possible to reach the legislation requirements with fewer materials emissions for the steel house than for the traditional masonry house at least on the basis of the present assumptions, taking into account the recycling credits for steel. Table 1 Composition of the envelope of the steel frame house. Material Thickness (mm) Database Basement slab (USH ¼ 0.36 W/m 2 Slab on grade 150 BEES K) Expanded polystyrene 80 CRTI Slab (cement mortar) 60 CRTI Plywood sheathing 20 CRTI Plaster slab 13 CRTI External wall (USH ¼ 0.35 W/m 2 Steel siding 0.8 100% WORLDSTEEL K) Rockwool insulation 120 CRTI Steel studs 260 2.7e100% WORLDSTEEL Steel internal supports 20 1e50% WORLDSTEEL Plaster board 13 CRTI Roof (USH ¼ 0.21 W/m 2 Steel roof tiles 0.8 100% WORLDSTEEL K) Steel rafters 60 1e50% WORLDSTEEL Steel purlins 260 2.7e100% WORLDSTEEL Rockwool insulation 200 CRTI Steel internal supports 20 1e50% WORLDSTEEL Plaster board 13 CRTI Floor Plaster slab 13 CRTI Plywood sheathing 20 CRTI Rockwool insulation 40 2.7e100% CRTI Steel beams 260 1e50% WORLDSTEEL Steel internal supports 20 WORLDSTEEL Plaster board 13 CRTI Internal walls Plaster board 13 CRTI Rockwool insulation 40 CRTI Steel internal supports 40 WORLDSTEEL Plaster board 13 CRTI B. Rossi et al. / Building and Environment 51 (2012) 402e407 Fig. 2. 3D model of the reference house. Analysing the share of Embodied energy of each part of the building, it is not possible to make one part responsible for the biggest amount of Embodied energy. The exterior walls, the roof, the ground floor, the intermediate floor have, more or less, the same importance. The ground floor is nevertheless the biggest contributor to the impact mainly because of the reinforced concrete foundation. In the masonry house, the difference in Embodied carbon comes from the roof, intermediate floor and the internal walls. One could claim that the non consideration of the recycling of non-metallic materials leads to overestimated results. For wood, which uptakes CO2, the end-of-life (burning with energy recovery) increases the Global warming potential impact while producing energy. So the manual calculations would yield even more unfavourable results for the masonry house. For concrete blocks and bricks, used material can be broken down into chips, which can be used for landscaping, or broken down further to be used as aggregate for new construction materials. About 75e80% of secondary and recycled aggregates are thought to end up as subbase and fill, including use in road building and airfield pavements. Recycled aggregates can also be used to replace a part of the aggregates in concrete. But, recycled aggregate will typically have higher absorption and lower specific gravity than natural aggregate and will produce concrete with slightly higher drying shrinkage and creep. These differences become greater with increasing amounts of recycled fine aggregates. In Ref. [9], the LCA results show that the impacts of cement and aggregate production phases are slightly larger for recycled aggregates concrete than for natural Table 2 Composition of the envelope of the masonry house. Material Thickness (mm) Database Basement slab (USH ¼ 0.35 W/m 2 Slab on grade 150 BEES K) Expanded polystyrene 80 CRTI Slab (cement mortar) 60 CRTI Plywood sheathing 20 CRTI Plaster slab 13 CRTI External wall (USH ¼ 0.37 W/m 2 Clay brick 100 CRTI K) Expanded polystyrene 80 CRTI Concrete blocks 190 CRTI Plaster 13 CRTI Roof (USH ¼ 0.22 W/m 2 Ceramic roof tiles 18 CRTI K) Plywood sheathing 10 CRTI Rockwool insulation 180 CRTI Timber 230 5% CRTI Timber 19 8% CRTI Plaster board 13 CRTI Floor Slab 80 CRTI Reinforced light concrete slab 90 CRTI Plaster 13 CRTI Internal walls Plaster 13 CRTI Concrete blocks 190 CRTI Plaster 13 CRTI
Table 3 Distribution of the steel weight within the walls. Wall designation % of steel Roof 43 Floor 21 External walls 27 Internal walls 9 aggregates concrete mainly because of transportation. In fact, even if, in an LCA, the original concrete is produced with recycled aggregates, the production of cement is the main contributor to all studied impact categories. It causes approximately 77% of the total energy use and 88% of the total GWP. The main reason for such a situation is a large CO2 emission during the calcinations process in the clinker production and the fossil fuel usage. The contribution of the aggregate and concrete production and demolition is very small. The same conclusions are drawn in [9]. At this stage, it is important to note that the transportation related to the end-of-life is taken into account with a higher distance for metallic materials than for non-metallic materials. Even though, the preliminary conclusion is still the same. 3.2. Comparative analysis in three different locations 3.2.1. Introduction To be able to draw general conclusions, it is necessary to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the results to chosen parameters to truly understand their influence on the final values. Herein, the goal is to compare the LCA results of a building located in three different towns and to assess the influence of climate and energy mix. The following parameters (inputs) are thus not included in the sensitivity analysis seen the fact that they don’t change the conclusion of the comparative analysis, although having (for some of them) a strong influence on the final results: (1) Transportation modes and distances could differ from one town to another but as it is only slightly affecting the results, it is thus not considered in the sensitivity analysis; (2) The energy mix: different energy mixes for electricity production will be considered for the three climates but, in one country, the energy mix will not be modified; (3) The scenario and envelope composition: naturally, if the occupation scenario, demanded temperature or insulation type are modified, the indicators change consequently. Herein those parameters will be kept constant but the interested reader can refer to [10] and [11] for more information; (4) The house configuration, the percentage of windows, the house plan, the envelope composition and orientation are of course of Table 4 Manual calculations e Masonry house versus steel house (kWh/m 2 yr). Masonry Steel Building Electricity (including cooling and double flux ventilation) 20.97 21.97 User Electricity 18.79 18.79 Total electricity demand 39.76 40.75 Space heating 44.85 32.38 Ventilation 12.07 12.07 Hot water 5.57 5.57 Total heating demand 62.50 50.02 Heat recovery (double flux ventilation) 9.05 9.05 Total bought energy for heating 53.44 40.97 Total energy demand 102.26 90.77 Total bought energy 93.20 81.72 Without user electricity 74.42 62.93 B. Rossi et al. / Building and Environment 51 (2012) 402e407 405 Fig. 3. Manual calculations e Share of eachbuilding part in theEmbodied carbon e Masonry house versus steel house. great influence on the final results. They will remain unchanged in the present sensitivity analysis; (5) The presence of local heat/electricity production or energy saving equipment was not investigated in the present paper, although ventilation heat recovery is taken into account because it is becoming a common measure in new built house. Nevertheless, its influence will be briefly discussed; (6) The carbon payback will be indicated on the next graphs and, naturally, a modification of the lifespan (50 years until now) will influence it. The influence of two important parameters was so therefore assessed since they might have an influence on the main conclusion stated before: (1) The database: The quality (precision, completeness, representativeness) of the data used can have a significant impact on the results of an LCA. The existence of uncertainties in input data and modelling is often mentioned as a crucial drawback to a clear interpretation of LCA results. First of all, it can be seen that Equer database (EcoInvent) and the databases used in our manual calculations provide similar results for the masonry house (see the companion paper). The uncertainties in the database yield to tolerable differences as far as these impacts are concerned. Secondly, the steel embodied emissions initially taken as EcoInvent ones in Equer, were replaced by the Worldsteel database (IISI 2002) taking into account the recycling of steel at the end of its life in our manual calculations ([12] and [13]) It was shown that the end-of-life credits have a strong influence on the Embodied carbon/energy of the steel house. (2) The design of the steel house: It was shown that the quantity of steel used per HFA, that was initially evaluated as 64 kg/m 2 , can be increased to approximately 25% of its value, and that, in order to reach the Embodied carbon of the masonry house. Similarly, if the design is modified and the steel quantity increased, the Embodied carbon will increase subsequently in all climates. It is thus concluded that the design of the house presented in this analysis does not affect the final conclusion of the paper. On top of these considerations, the main conclusions are provided in the next paragraph which highlight the influence of the energy mix and climate.
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 173 and 174: Appendix A.9 173
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 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: assumptions, the indicators (Embodi
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 247 and 248: Status of ocean thermal energy conv
Page 253 and 254: Status of Natural Gas Combined Cycl
Page 259 and 260: Status of Integrated coal Gazeifica
Page 265 and 266: Status of Carbon Capture and Storag
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?