Actionable insights with less data: guiding early building design decisions with streamlined probabilistic life cycle assessment

Abstract

Purpose

Two obstacles that impede wider use of life cycle assessment (LCA) are its time- and data-intensiveness and the credibility surrounding its results—challenges that grow with the complexity of the product being analyzed. To guide the critical early-design stages of a complicated product like a building, it is important to be able to rapidly estimate environmental impacts with limited information, quantify the resulting uncertainty, and identify critical parameters where more detail is needed.

Methods

The authors have developed the Building Attribute to Impact Algorithm (BAIA) to demonstrate the use of streamlined (not scope-limiting), probabilistic LCA for guiding the design of a building from early stages of the design process when many aspects of the design are unknown or undecided. Early-design uncertainty is accommodated through under-specification—characterizing the design using the available level of detail—and capturing the resulting variability in predicted impacts through Monte Carlo simulations. Probabilistic triage with sensitivity analyses identifies which uncertain attributes should be specified further to increase the precision of the results. The speed of the analyses allows for sequentially refining key attributes and re-running the analyses until the predicted impacts are precise enough to inform decision-making, such as choosing a preferable design alternative.

Results and discussion

Twelve design variants for a hypothetical single-family residential building are analyzed. As information is sequentially added to each variant, the significance of the difference in performance between each variant pair is calculated to determine when enough information has been added to resolve the designs (identify which design is preferable) with high confidence. At the sixth step in the analysis, all variant pairs whose mean impacts differ by at least 4% are resolvable with 90% confidence, even though only six attributes are specified and dozens of attributes remain under-specified. Furthermore, the comparative results for each variant pair are validated against a set of conventional LCA results, showing that BAIA identifies the correct preferable design among each resolvable pair at this step.

Conclusions

Iterative specification guided by probabilistic triage can help identify promising early-design alternatives even when details are only provided for key attributes. The analysis of hypothetical design variants demonstrates that BAIA is both efficient (arrives at statistically defensible conclusions from design variant comparisons based on few pieces of information) and effective (identifies the same preferable design variants as conventional LCAs).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Abbreviations

AAM:

Attribute to activity model

BAIA:

Building Attribute to Impact Algorithm

BEopt:

Building Energy Optimization, NREL software

BIM:

Building information modeling

BOA:

Bill of activities

CI:

Comparison indicator

CV:

Coefficient of variation

FS:

Fully specified

GWP:

Global warming potential

HVAC:

Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

IE:

Athena Impact Estimator

JMP:

Statistical software from SAS

LCA:

Life cycle assessment

MC:

Monte Carlo

NREL:

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

ESM:

Electronic Supplementary Material

References

  1. Aktas CB, Bilec MM (2012) Impact of lifetime on US residential building LCA results. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(3):337–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0363-x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Al Gharably M, DeCarolis JF, Ranjithan SR (2016) An enhanced linear regression-based building energy model (LRBEM plus ) for early design. J Build Perform Simu 9(2):115–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/19401493.2015.1004108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Asadi S, Amiri SS, Mottahedi M (2014) On the development of multi-linear regression analysis to assess energy consumption in the early stages of building design. Energ Buildings. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.096

  4. Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (2015) Impact Estimator for Buildings v5.1.0102

  5. Basbagill J, Flager F, Lepech M, Fischer M (2013) Application of life-cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced embodied environmental impacts. Build Environ 60:81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.11.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Basbagill JP, Flager FL, Lepech M (2014) A multi-objective feedback approach for evaluating sequential conceptual building design decisions. Automat Constr 45:136–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.04.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ecoinvent Centre - Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories (2007) Ecoinvent database. Duebendorf

  8. European Committee for Standardization (2011) EN 15978:2011 Sustainability of construction works. Assessment of environmental performance of buildings. Calculation method

  9. Gervásio H, Santos P, Martins R, Simões da Silva L (2014) A macro-component approach for the assessment of building sustainability in early stages of design. Build Environ 73:256–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.12.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Graedel TE (1998) Streamlined life-cycle assessment. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  11. Graedel TE, Allenby BR, Comrie PR (1995) Matrix approaches to abridged life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 29:134A

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Granadeiro V, Duarte JP, Correia JR, Leal VMS (2013) Building envelope shape design in early stages of the design process: integrating architectural design systems and energy simulation. Automat Constr 32:196–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gregory JR, Noshadravan A, Olivetti EA, Kirchain RE (2016) A methodology for robust comparative life cycle assessments incorporating uncertainty. Environ Sci Technol 50(12):6397–6405. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b04969

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Heeren N, Mutel CL, Steubing B, Ostermeyer Y, Wallbaum H, Hellweg S (2015) Environmental impact of buildings—what matters? Environ Sci Technol 49(16):9832–9841. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01735

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Heijungs R, Kleijn R (2001) Numerical approaches towards life cycle interpretation five examples. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(3):141–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978732

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hester J, Gregory J, Kirchain R (2017) Sequential early-design guidance for residential single-family buildings using a probabilistic metamodel of energy consumption. Energ Build 134:202–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.10.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hollberg A, Ruth J (2016) LCA in architectural design—a parametric approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(7):943–960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1065-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Huijbregts MA, Gilijamse W, Ragas AM, Reijnders L (2003) Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. Environ Sci Technol 37(11):2600–2608. https://doi.org/10.1021/es020971+

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hunt RG, Boguski TK, Weitz K, Sharma A (1998) Case studies examining LCA streamlining techniques. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(1):36–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hygh JS, DeCarolis JF, Hill DB, Ranjithan SR (2012) Multivariate regression as an energy assessment tool in early building design. Build Environ 57:165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.04.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ikonen T, Tulkki V (2014) The importance of input interactions in the uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of nuclear fuel behavior. Nucl Eng Des 275:229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2014.05.015

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (2016) Standard estimated life expectancy chart for homes. https://www.nachi.org/life-expectancy.htm. 2016

  23. Kellenberger D, Althaus H-J (2009) Relevance of simplifications in LCA of building components. Build Environ 44(4):818–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Konis K, Gamas A, Kensek K (2016) Passive performance and building form: an optimization framework for early-stage design support. Sol Energy 125:161–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.12.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kuo T-C, Smith S, Smith GC, Huang SH (2016) A predictive product attribute driven eco-design process using depth-first search. J Clean Prod 112, Part 4:3201–3210

  26. Malmqvist T, Glaumann M, Scarpellini S, Zabalza I, Aranda A, Llera E, Díaz S (2011) Life cycle assessment in buildings: the ENSLIC simplified method and guidelines. Energy 36(4):1900–1907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.03.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Marsh R (2016) LCA profiles for building components: strategies for the early design process. Build Res Inf 44(4):358–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2016.1102013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mueller KG, Lampérth MU, Kimura F (2004) Parameterised inventories for life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(4):227–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. National Association of Home Builders, Bank of America Home Equity (2007) Study of life expectancy of home components

  30. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2016) BEopt 2.6. https://beopt.nrel.gov/home

  31. Nielsen TR (2005) Simple tool to evaluate energy demand and indoor environment in the early stages of building design. Sol Energy 78(1):73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2004.06.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2013) U.S. life cycle inventory database. http://www.nrel.gov/lci/Accessed Feb 2014

  33. Oh MS, Na S (2017) Building information modelling (BIM) based CO2 emissions assessment in the early design stage. Int J Civ Eng Technol 8:1411–1425

  34. Olinzock MA, Landis AE, Saunders CL, Collinge WO, Jones AK, Schaefer LA, Bilec MM (2015) Life cycle assessment use in the North American building community: summary of findings from a 2011/2012 survey. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(3):318–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0834-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Olivetti E, Patanavanich S, Kirchain R (2013) Exploring the viability of probabilistic under-specification to streamline life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 47(10):5208–5216. https://doi.org/10.1021/es3042934

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Oracle (2014) Crystal Ball Release 11.1.2.4.000 (32-bit). http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/crystalball/overview/index.html

  37. Østergård T, Jensen RL, Maagaard SE (2016) Building simulations supporting decision making in early design—a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 61:187–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Østergård T, Jensen RL, Maagaard SE (2017) Early building design: informed decision-making by exploring multidimensional design space using sensitivity analysis. ENB Energy Buildings 142:8–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.02.059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla KK (2012) Life cycle approach in evaluating energy performance of residential buildings in Indian context. Energ Building 54:259–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Reis L (2013) An exploration of materials taxonomies to support streamlined life cycle assessment. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://worldcat.org. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/85797

  41. Rezaee R, Brown J, Augenbroe G, Kim J (2015) Assessment of uncertainty and confidence in building design exploration. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 29(04):429–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060415000426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Romani Z, Draoui A, Allard F (2015) Metamodeling the heating and cooling energy needs and simultaneous building envelope optimization for low energy building design in Morocco. Energ Building 102:139–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (2006) Life expectancy of building components: surveyors’ experiences of buildings in use: a practical guide. Building Cost Information Service Ltd., London

  44. Samuelson H, Claussnitzer S, Goyal A, Chen Y, Romo-Castillo A (2016) Parametric energy simulation in early design: high-rise residential buildings in urban contexts. Build Environ 101:19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.02.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. SAS Institute Inc. (2013) JMP Pro 11.2.0

  46. Saunders CL, Landis AE, Mecca LP, Jones AK, Schaefer LA, Bilec MM (2013) Analyzing the practice of life cycle assessment: focus on the building sector. J Ind Ecol 17:777–788

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Seo S, Tucker S, Newton P (2007) Automated material selection and environmental assessment in the context of 3D building modelling. J Green Build 2(2):51–61. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.2.2.51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Soust-Verdaguer B, Llatas C, Garcia-Martinez A (2017) Critical review of bim-based LCA method to buildings. Energy and Buildings 136:110–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.12.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Soust-Verdaguer B, Llatas C, García-Martínez A (2016) Simplification in life cycle assessment of single-family houses: a review of recent developments. Build Environ 103:215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Srivastav A, Tewari A, Dong B (2013) Baseline building energy modeling and localized uncertainty quantification using Gaussian mixture models. Energy and Buildings 65:438–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.05.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tecchio P, Gregory J, Ghattas R, Kirchain R (2018) Structured under-specification of life cycle impact assessment data for building assemblies. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12746

  52. Tecchio P, Gregory J, Olivetti E, Ghattas R, Kirchain R (2017) Streamlining the life cycle assessment of buildings by structured under-specification and probabilistic triage. J Ind Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12731

  53. The American Institute of Architects (2012) An architect’s guide to integrating energy modeling in the design process. http://www.aia.org/practicing/AIAB097932

  54. Thinkstep (2013) GaBi Software Professional Database. http://www.gabi-software.com/databases/professional/

  55. U.S. Department of Energy (2014) EnergyPlus:8.1.0 http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/

  56. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010) Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID)

  57. Wang W, Zmeureanu R, Rivard H (2005) Applying multi-objective genetic algorithms in green building design optimization. Build Environ 40(11):1512–1525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.11.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Concrete Sustainability Hub at MIT, with sponsorship provided by the Portland Cement Association and the Ready Mixed Concrete Research & Education Foundation. Thanks also to Paolo Tecchio and Carla Rodrigues for their feedback and assistance in conducting this research.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua Hester.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Holger Wallbaum

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(DOCX 310 kb)

BAIA paper SI.docx: Formulas for assembly area calculations, details on construction and performance of regression model for energy consumption, details on under-specification method and hierarchies, design variants used in case study, sequence of design decisions made in case study, sample breakdown of embodied impacts, and summary of agreement between BAIA and conventional LCA at each step of sequential design.

ESM 2

(XLSX 112 kb)

AAM-E regression coefficients.xlsx: Coefficients for stepwise regression models used in estimating building energy consumption.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hester, J., Miller, T.R., Gregory, J. et al. Actionable insights with less data: guiding early building design decisions with streamlined probabilistic life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23, 1903–1915 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1431-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Buildings
  • Early-design guidance
  • Life cycle assessment
  • Sensitivity analyses
  • Streamlined
  • Uncertainty