The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

, Volume 21, Issue 12, pp 1667–1690 | Cite as

The assessment of the relevance of building components and life phases for the environmental profile of nearly zero-energy buildings: life cycle assessment of a multifamily building in Italy

BUILDING COMPONENTS AND BUILDINGS
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Purpose

Since the construction sector is a considerable energy consumer and greenhouse gas (GHG) producer, the EU rules strive to build nearly zero-energy buildings, by reducing the operative energy and yearning for on-site energy production. This article underlines the necessity to go beyond the energy evaluations and move towards the environmental assessment in a life cycle perspective, by comparing the impacts due to building materials and energy production devices.

Methods

We compared the operational energy impacts and those of technologies and materials carrying out a life cycle assessment (LCA; ISO 14040, ISO 14044, EN 15643–2, EN 15978) on a nearly zero-energy building (ZEB), a residential complex with 61 apartments in four buildings, situated near Milan (Italy). We consider all life cycle phases, including production, transport, building site activities, use and maintenance; the materials inventory was filled out collecting data from invoices paid, building site reports, construction drawings and product data sheets. To make the assessment results comparable, we set a functional unit of 1 m2 of net floor area in 1 year (1 m2y), upon a lifespan of 100 years. The environmental data were acquired from Ecoinvent 2.2.

Results and discussion

The results highlight the important role of the pre-use and maintenance phases in building life so that in a nearly ZEB, the environmental impacts linked to the use are no longer the major proportion: the pre-use phase accounts for 56 %, while the operative energy is only 31 % of the total. For this reason, if the environmental assessment of the case study was shrunk to the operational consumption, only one third of the impacts would be considered. The consumption of non-renewable resources after 100 years are 193,950 GJ (133.5 kWh/m2y); the GHG emissions are 15,300 t (37.8 kg of CO2 eq/m2y). In the pre-use phase, structures have the major impacts (50 %) and the load of system components is unexpectedly high (12 %) due to the ambition of on-site energy production.

Conclusions

Paying attention to the operative energy consumption seems to address to only one third of the environmental impacts of buildings: the adoption of LCA as a tool to guide the design choices could help to identify the solution which ensures the lowest overall impact on the whole life, balancing the options of reducing the energy requirements, the on-site production from renewable sources and the limitation of the impacts due to building components (simpler and more durable).

Keywords

Energy and environmental efficiency of residential buildings LCI data collection for buildings Life cycle assessment Production, construction and maintenance impacts of buildings System-related impacts Zero-energy buildings (ZEBs) 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Data access concerning the case study on which the assessment has been conducted was granted by the developer, Trivella S.p.A. in Cinisello Balsamo, Milano. The authors would like to sincerely thank the general manager for his cooperation and helpfulness.

References

  1. Adalberth K, Almgren A, Petersen EH (2001) Life cycle assessment of four multi-family buildings. Int J Low Energy Sustain Build 2:1–21Google Scholar
  2. Arena AP, De Rosa C (2003) Life cycle assessment of energy and environmental implications of the implementation of conservation technologies in school buildings in Mendoza—Argentina. Build Environ 38:359–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asif M, Muneer T, Kelley R (2007) Life cycle assessment: a case study of a dwelling home in Scotland. Build Environ 42:1391–1394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Association MINERGIE® (2011) Manuel pour le calcul de l’énergie grise des batiments MINERGIE-A®, MINERGIE-ECO®, MINERGIE-P-ECO® et MINERGIE-A-ECO®. Bern, Switzerland. http://www.minergie.ch/
  5. Associazione MINERGIE® (2014) Regolamento d’uso del marchio di qualità MINERGIE®. Bern, Switzerland. http://www.minergie.ch/
  6. Berggren B, Hall M, Wall M (2013) LCE analysis of buildings—taking the step towards net zero energy buildings. Energy Build 62:381–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blengini GA (2009) Life cycle of buildings, demolition and recycling potential: a case study in Turin, Italy. Build Environ 44:319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blengini GA, Di Carlo T (2010) The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy buildings. Energy Build 42:869–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blom I, Itard L, Meijer A (2011) Environmental impact of building-related and user-related energy consumption in dwellings. Build Environ 46:1657–1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BLP (2005) BLP durability assessment. Building LifePlans Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen TY, Burnett J, Chau CK (2001) Analysis of embodied energy use in the residential building of Hong Kong. Energy 26:323–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Citherlet S, Defaux T (2007) Energy and environmental comparison of three variants of a family house during its whole life span. Build Environ 42:591–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cuéllar-Franca RM, Azapagic A (2012) Environmental impacts of the UK residential sector: life cycle assessment of houses. Build Environ 54:86–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Directive 2002/91/EC (2002) European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002. On the energy performance of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  15. Directive 2010/31/EU (2010) European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010. On the energy performance of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  16. Ecoinvent 2.2 database. http://www.ecoinvent.org/database/
  17. EN 15643–1:2010 (2010) Sustainability of construction works—sustainability assessment of buildings—part 1: general frameworkGoogle Scholar
  18. EN 15643–2:2011 (2011) Sustainability of construction works—assessment of buildings—part 2: framework for the assessment of environmental performanceGoogle Scholar
  19. EN 15643–3:2012 (2012a). Sustainability of construction works—assessment of buildings—part 3: framework for the assessment of social performanceGoogle Scholar
  20. EN 15643–4:2012 (2012b) Sustainability of construction works—assessment of buildings—part 4: framework for the assessment of economic performanceGoogle Scholar
  21. EN 15978:2011 (2011) Sustainability of construction works—assessment of environmental performance of buildings—calculation methodGoogle Scholar
  22. Erlandsson M, Levin P (2005) Environmental assessment of rebuilding and possible performance improvements effect on a national scale. Build Environ 40:1459–1471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. European Commission (2009) The 2020 climate and energy packageGoogle Scholar
  24. Ferrante A, Cascella MT (2011) Zero energy balance and zero on-site CO2 emission housing development in the Mediterranean climate. Energy Build 43:2002–2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gerilla GP, Teknomo K, Hokao K (2007) An environmental assessment of wood and steel reinforced concrete housing construction. Build Environ 42:2778–2784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gustavsson L, Joelsson A (2010) Life cycle primary energy analysis of residential buildings. Energy Build 42:2010–2020Google Scholar
  27. Gustavsson L, Joelsson A, Sathre R (2010) Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy Build 42:230–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hernandez P, Kenny P (2010) From net energy to zero energy buildings: defining life cycle zero energy buildings (LC-ZEB). Energy Build 42:815–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huberman N, Pearlmutter D (2008) A life-cycle energy analysis of building materials in the Negev desert. Energy Build 40:837–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. IBO (2015) Österreichisches Institut für Baubiologie und Bauökologie. http://www.ibo.at/en/index.htm
  31. IEA - International Energy Agency (2008) Energy efficiency requirements in building codes, energy efficiency policies for new buildings. OECD/IEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  32. IEA - International Energy Agency (2013) Transition to Sustainable Buildings. Strategies and opportunities to 2050Google Scholar
  33. IEA - International Energy Agency (2015) IEA EBC Annex 57 objectives. http://www.annex57.org/
  34. ISO 14040:2006 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and frameworkGoogle Scholar
  35. ISO 14044:2006 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelinesGoogle Scholar
  36. Iyer-Raniga U, Chew Wong JP (2012) Evaluation of whole life cycle assessment for heritage buildings in Australia. Build Environ 47:138–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Junnila S (2004) Life cycle assessment of environmentally significant aspects of an office building. Nordic J Surv Real Estate Res, Special Series, Vol. 2Google Scholar
  38. Kellenberger D, Althaus HJ (2009) Relevance of simplifications in LCA of buildings components. Build Environ 44:818–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Khasreen MM, Banfill PFG, Menzies GF (2009) Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: a review. Sustainability 1:674–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kofoworola OF, Gheewala SH (2009) Life cycle energy assessment of a typical office building in Thailand. Energy Build 41:1076–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lapillonne B, Sebi C, Pollier K, Mairet N (2012) Energy efficiency trends in buildings in the EU. Odyssee Mure Project, FranceGoogle Scholar
  42. Leckner M, Zmeureanu R (2011) Life cycle cost and energy analysis of a net zero energy house with solar combisystem. Appl Energy 88:232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lund H, Marszal A, Heiselberg P (2011) Zero energy buildings and mismatch compensation factors. Energy Build 43:1646–1654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marszal AJ, Heiselberg P, Bourrelle JS, Musall E, Voss K, Sartori I et al (2011) Zero energy building—a review of definitions and calculation methodologies. Energy Build 43:971–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marszal AJ, Heiselberg P, Jensen RL, Norgaard J (2012) On-site or off-site renewable energy supply options? Life cycle cost analysis of a net zero energy building in Denmark. Renew Energy 44:154–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matasci C (2006) Life cycle assessment of 21 buildings: analysis of the different life phases and highlighting of the main causes of their impact on the environment. Thesis of Master en sciences naturalles de l’environnement, Université de Genève and ETH of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  47. Mithraratne N, Vale B (2004) Life cycle analysis model for New Zealand houses. Build Environ 39:483–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. MV, HEV (Associazione Svizzera Inquilini, Associazione Svizzera Proprietari Immobiliari) (2005) Tabella della durata di vitaGoogle Scholar
  49. Optis M, Wild P (2010) Inadequate documentation in published life cycle energy reports on buildings. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:644–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ortiz O, Bonnet C, Bruno JC, Castells F (2009) Sustainability based on LCM of residential dwellings: a case study in Catalonia, Spain. Build Environ 44:584–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ortiz O, Castells F, Sonnemann G (2010) Operational energy in the life cycle of residential dwellings: the experience of Spain and Colombia. Appl Energy 87:673–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Passive House Institute (2013) Certified Passive House. Certification criteria for Residential Passive House buildingsGoogle Scholar
  53. Peuportier BLP (2001) Life cycle assessment applied to the comparative evaluation of single family houses in the French context. Energy Build 33:443–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Peuportier B, Thiers S, Guiavarch A (2013) Eco-design of buildings using thermal simulation and life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 39:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pons O, Wadel G (2011) Environmental impacts of prefabricated school buildings in Catalonia. Habitat Int 35:553–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Radhi H, Sharples S (2013) Global warming implications of façade parameters: a life cycle assessment of residential buildings in Bahrain. Environ Impact Assess Rev 38:99–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sartori I, Hestnes AG (2007) Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article. Energy Build 39:249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sartori I, Napolitano A, Voss K (2012) Net zero energy buildings: a consistent definition framework. Energy Build 48:220–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Scheuer C, Keoleian GA, Reppe P (2003) Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build 35:1049–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sodagar B, Rai D, Jones B, Wihan J, Fieldson R (2011) The carbon reduction potential of straw-bale housing. Build Res Inf 39:51–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Srinivasan RS, Braham WW, Campbell DE, Curcija CD (2012) Re(De)fining net zero energy: renewable energy balance in environmental building design. Build Environ 47:300–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tae S, Shin S, Woo J, Roh S (2011) The development of apartment house life cycle CO2 simple assessment system using standard apartment houses of South Korea. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15:1454–1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thormark C (2002) A low energy building in a life cycle—its embodied energy, energy need for operation and recycling potential. Build Environ 37:429–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Torcellini P, Pless S (2010) Net-zero energy buildings: a classification system based on renewable energy supply options. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, GoldenGoogle Scholar
  66. Torcellini P, Pless S, Deru M, Crawley D (2006) Zero energy buildings: a critical look at the definition. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, GoldenGoogle Scholar
  67. United Nations (1997) Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. KyotoGoogle Scholar
  68. Verbeeck G, Hens H (2010) Life cycle inventory of buildings: a contribution analysis. Build Environ 45:964–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wang L, Gwilliam J, Jones P (2009) Case study of zero energy house design in UK. Energy Build 41:1215–1222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yang L, Zmeureanu R, Rivard H (2008) Comparison of environmental impacts of two residential heating systems. Build Environ 43:1072–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yu D, Tan H, Ruan Y (2011) A future bamboo-structure residential building prototype in China: life cycle assessment of energy use and carbon emission. Energy Build 43:2638–2646CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Paleari
    • 1
  • Monica Lavagna
    • 1
  • Andrea Campioli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations