Advertisement

Componentwise-embodied energy analysis of affordable houses in India

  • Deepak BansalEmail author
  • Vijay K. Minocha
  • Arvinder Kaur
Original Paper

Abstract

Building construction industry is one of the prominent sectors of the economy, which is responsible for rapid depletion of natural resources and for increased primary energy uses. Building construction process and production of construction materials consume a significant amount of energy and releases GHGs, which lead to global warming. South Asian countries, including India, are witnessing a major boom in the construction sector, as a result of growing population, increased living standards, and high urbanization. Embodied energy values represent a major share of the total primary energy consumption in the construction sector. This paper represents componentwise analysis of embodied energy for affordable houses in India. Mathematical computations have been done for 22 types of affordable houses having a plinth area of 27–60 m2. The embodied energy values have been calculated for major building components, i.e., foundation, wall, roof, floor, finish/rendering, and terrace/parapet. Results shows that the walls, roofs, and foundations consume about 82–85% of the total embodied energy of the houses. The embodied energy values (EEV) for wall and roof are 39% and 18%, respectively, for single floor/storey houses. These values increased to 50% and 24%, respectively, for a four floor building. In contrast, the EEV values have decreased progressively for foundation and terracing from 25 and 8%, respectively, for single floor house to 11% and 3%, respectively, for four floor building.

Keywords

Construction materials Embodied energy Affordable housing Building components 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors are thankful and acknowledge the support and help provided by Mrs Manju Safaya, Ex Executive Director (Design Wing) HUDCO, New Delhi, India, for permitting to use the housing data of HUDCO, for carrying out this research. Authors are also thankful to Dr Shailesh Kr Agarwal, Executive Director, Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC), New Delhi, India, Dr Achal Mittal, Principal Scientist, Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee, India, and Ms Yashika Bansal, student of B. Design, FDDI, Noida, India, for constant encouragement and help in analysing the data used and critical comments during this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author (Deepak Bansal) states that there is no conflict of interest in carrying out this study.

References

  1. Asif, M., Muneer, T., & Kelley, R. (2007). Life cycle assessment: a case study of a dwelling home in Scotland. Building and Environment, 42, 1391–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bansal, D., Singh, R., & Sawhney, R. L. (2014). Effect of construction materials on embodied energy and cost of buildings—a case study of residential houses in India up to 60 m2 of plinth area. Energy and Buildings, 69, 260–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bribián, I. Z., Capilla, A. V., & ArandaUsón, A. (2011). Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Building and Environment, 46, 1133–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chani, P. S., & Najamuddin, K. S. K. (2003). Comparative Analysis of embodied energy rates for walling elements in India. IE (I) Journal-AR, 84, 47–50.Google Scholar
  5. Chel, A., & Tiwari, G. N. (2009). Thermal performance and embodied energy analysis of a passive house—case study of vault roof mud-house in India. Applied Energy, 86, 1956–1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, T. Y., Burnett, J., & Chau, C. K. (2010). Analysis of embodied energy use in the residential building of Hong Kong. Energy and Buildings, 42, 735–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Das, P.K., A sustainability impact-assessment tool for selected building technologies in rural India—the case of Andhra Pradesh education project, Ph.D. thesis, University of New Castle Upon Tyne (2006).Google Scholar
  8. Debnath, A., Singh, S. V., & Singh, Y. P. (1995). Comparative assessment of energy requirements for different types of residential buildings in India. Energy and Buildings, 23, 141–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Development Alternatives, energy in building materials: final Report (1995), BMTPC, www.bmtpc.org. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  10. Dixit, M. K., & Singh, S. (2018). Embodied energy analysis of higher education buildings using an input-output-based hybrid method. Energy and Buildings, 161, 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dutil, Y., Rousse, D., Quesada, G., & Buildings, S. (2011). An ever evolving target. Sustainability, 3, 443–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goggins, J., Keane, T., & Kelly, A. (2010). The assessment of embodied energy in typical reinforced concrete building structures in Ireland. Energy and Buildings, 42, 735–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hammond, G., & Jones, C. (2011). Inventory of carbon & energy, ver 20. University of Bath. www.bath.ac.uk/mech-engg/sert/embodied. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  14. IPCC, Mitigation Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC [AR4] (2007). [30] www.censusindia.gov.in. Accessed 17 Oct 2018.
  15. Jalaei, F., Zoghi, M., & Khoshand, A. (2019). Life cycle environmental impact assessment to manage and optimize construction waste using Building Information Modeling (BIM). International Journal of Construction Management, 2019, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Khan, J. H., Mustaquim, S. M., & Hassan, T. (2012). A comparative analysis of housing shortage and levels of deprivation in India. European Journal of Social Sciences, 27(2), 193–205. (ISSN 1450-2267).Google Scholar
  17. Khanzadi, M., Kaveh, A., Rastegar-Moghaddam, M., & Pourbagheri, S. M. (2019). Optimization of Building components with sustainability aspects in bim environment. Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering, 63(1), 93–103.Google Scholar
  18. Mithraratne, N., & Vale, B. (2004). Life cycle analysis model for New Zealand houses. Building and Environment, 39, 483–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Norouzalizadeh Ghoochani, R., & Habibi, R. M. (2016). Improving energy consumption in building products using life cycle assessment and energy analysis. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(4), 443–457.Google Scholar
  20. Pacheco-Torres, R., Jadraque, E., Roldán-Fontana, J., & Ordóñez, J. (2014). Analysis of CO2 emissions in the construction phase of single-family detached houses. Sustainable Cities and Society, 12, 63–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Paulsen, J. S., & Sposto, R. M. (2013). A life cycle energy analysis of social housing in Brazil: Case Study for the program “MY HOUSE MY LIFE”. Energy and Buildings, 57, 95–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.11.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. PinkyDevi, L., & Palaniappan, S. (2018). Life cycle energy analysis of a low-cost house in India. International Journal of Construction Education and Research.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2018.1476935.Google Scholar
  23. Ramesh, S. (2012). Appraisal of vernacular building materials and alternative technologies for roofing and terracing options of embodied energy in buildings. Energy Procedia, 14, 1843–1848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ramesh, T., Prakash, R., & Shukla, K. K. (2013). Life cycle energy analysis of a multifamily residential house: A case study in indian context. Open Journal ofEnergy Efficiency, 2, 34–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reddy, B. V. V., & Jagadish, K. S. (2003). Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies. Energy and Buildings, 35, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Report of the Technical Group, 11th Five year plan: 2007–12] on estimation of urban housing shortage in India. (2018). http://mhupa.gov.in/ministry/housing/HOUSINGSHORTAGE-REPT.pdf. Accessed on 5 April 2018.
  27. Sengupta, N., Roy, S., & Guha, H. (2018). Assessing embodied GHG emission reduction potential of cost effective technologies for construction of residential buildings of Economically Weaker Section in India. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 19, 139–156.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-018-0013-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shukla, A., Tiwari, G. N., & Sodha, M. S. (2009). Embodied energy analysis of adobe house. Renewable Energy, 34, 755–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Swamy, S. L. (2013). Embodied energy analysis, architecture—time space & people. The Magazine of the Council of architecture, India, 13(6), 34–42.Google Scholar
  30. Utama, A., & Gheewala, S. H. (2008). Life cycle energy of single landed houses in Indonesia. Energy and Buildings, 40, 1911–1916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GGSIP UniversityNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.JGM (Projects), Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited (HUDCO)New DelhiIndia
  3. 3.Civil EngineeringDelhi Technical UniversityNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations