Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Life Cycle Design pp 31–64Cite as

Life Cycle Methodologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 754 Accesses

Part of the book series: PoliTO Springer Series ((PTSS))

Abstract

This chapter introduces two methodologies based on the life cycle concept: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). LCA and LCC are briefly described in order to provide the reader with an overview of the procedures and a complete bibliographic framework.

The first two sub-chapters focus on the origins, standards, studies, references and methods used to calculate the life cycle approach to buildings. Part three combines LCA and LCC in order to define a common framework that can be used to develop the Life Cycle Model described in Chap. 4. It includes an outline of ongoing projects based on the combination of the two methods.

The decision to present these evaluation techniques focusing on the building analysis illustrated early on in the book was inspired by the need to establish the cultural and scientific background for the experimental part of the monograph in Part II.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Life Cycle Thinking defines the principles used to ensure the continuous improvement of environmental performance at every stage of the life cycle of a system: from design (eco-design), to production, business management (EMAS and ISO 14000), disposal, and end of life. The strategies used to assess sustainability are based on the Life Cycle Management principle (LCM) according to which the life cycle and economic, environmental, and societal considerations are integrated into the decision-making processes regarding product development. (UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, LCM Definition Study in Saur et al. 2003)

  2. 2.

    Boustead and Hancock (1979).

  3. 3.

    SETAC is a professional company for environmental sciences and engineering and correlated disciplines interested in the quality of the environment. It has offices in Florida (USA) and Belgium.

  4. 4.

    For example, several tools are used to direct the market towards eco-responsible choices in order to encourage the demand for low environmental impact products and services, including: Integrated Product Policies (IPP), Green Public Procurement (GPP), Ecological labels (Ecolabel, EPD), and integrated waste management.

  5. 5.

    Cfr. Chap. 1.

  6. 6.

    The “midpoint indicators” or “impact indicators” are expressed through the characterisation process, while the “endpoint indicators” express the categories of damage and require a normalisation process.

  7. 7.

    Data regarding characteristics was taken from scientific literature (Giordano 2010; Blengini and Di Carlo 2010; Lavagna 2008), software processing programmes (Sima-Pro), databases (Boustead 4.0, Ecoinvent, I-lca, Buwal), and handbooks.

  8. 8.

    For example, in Sect. 5.2—the “Chavonne warehouse” case study—other environmental indicators were considered because they were deemed important in order to evaluate the effects of biomass combustion (Acidification Potential and Eutrophication Potential).

  9. 9.

    The last Special Report published by the IPCC on Global Warming is dated October 2018 (access 31/10/2018).

  10. 10.

    IEA SHC TASK 40—IEA ECBCS ANNEX 52.

  11. 11.

    Among the existing certification methods, for example MINERGIE-ECO (the Swiss protocol for sustainable building) envisages the inclusion of the embodied energy of building materials and end-of-life processes and disposal in the assessment of the energy consumption of the building.

  12. 12.

    The list is incomplete. Regarding the choice of environmental impact indicators, for buildings refer for example to: the guidelines of the Environmental Declaration Product for product assessment (e.g., Product Category Rules—PCR—for the assessment of the environmental performance of UN CPC 531 Buildings); the characterisation methods of LCIA impacts to calculate the indicators of single impacts, midpoint indicators, or aggregates, endpoint indicators (e.g., CML, ReCiPe, EcoIndicator, etc.); international standards ISO 21929 establishing the building indicators; other specific design references.

  13. 13.

    Sherif, Kolarik “Life Cycle Costing: Concept and Practise” in Omega. The International Journal of Management Science. Reference from the book by Hunkeler D., Lichtenvort K., Rebitzer G., Environmental Life Cycle Costing, SETAC Books, CRC Press, New York, 2008.

  14. 14.

    Blanchard’s articles were published in the book by Hunkeler D., Lichtenvort K., Rebitzer G., Environmental Life Cycle Costing, SETAC Books, CRC Press, New York, 2008. However, the authors maintain that Blanchard and Fabrycky, and the standards, do not elaborate a methodology, but provide guidance about how to calculate and compare costs. They present LCC more in terms of Life Cycle Thinking and stress the importance of the global vision of the system.

  15. 15.

    The life cycle approach had already been introduced into European policies in Decision n. 1600/2002/EC stating that “this requires promoting a green public procurement policy, allowing environmental characteristics to be taken into account and the possible integration of the environmental life cycle” (art. 3.6) and in the Communication from the Commission to the Council and European Parliament “Integrated Product Policy. Building on environmental life-cycle thinking” COM(2003)302.

  16. 16.

    The relationship between sustainability and energy efficiency is assumed by Directive 2010/31/EU with guidelines n. 244/2012 which establish a comparative methodology framework for calculating cost-optimal levels of minimum energy performance requirements for buildings and building elements. Furthermore, standard EN 15459-1—Energy performance of buildings—Economic evaluation procedure for energy systems in buildings—Part 1: Calculation procedures, Module M1-14 provides a calculation method for the economic issues regarding heating systems and other systems.

  17. 17.

    CIB (Conseil Internazionale du Batiment) and RILEM (Réunion Internationale des Laboratoires et Experts des Matériaux, systèmes de construction et ouvrages).

  18. 18.

    For example, in Italy it is possible to use the class division of technological units defined by the UNI 8290 standard.

  19. 19.

    The term indicates the planning of the envisaged life of the building and its components during the design stage. For example, the goal of the service life planning could be to reduce ownership costs and facilitate management and maintenance processes.

    Several terms are also linked to the “useful life” concept:

    predicted service life—predicted life according to technical production specifications

    design life—prediction by the designer

    service life—prediction based on statistical data of already installed elements.

  20. 20.

    DGLS 50/2016, art. 96, 1b.

  21. 21.

    Cfr. Sect. 4.4.

  22. 22.

    Cfr. Art. 6 of Directive 2009/33/EC of 23 April 2009 “Methodology for the calculation of operational lifetime costs” and Table 2 attached to the costs of emissions in road transport for the year 2007: CO2 = 0.03–0.04 €/kg; NOX = 0.0044 €/g; NMHC = 0.001 €/g; particulate matter = 0.087 €/g.

  23. 23.

    The main scope of the first ExternE project has been the airborne pollutants from power plants and the development of the Impact Pathway Analysis (IPA). Then, main goals of the follow-up projects have been on the one hand improving and extending the methodology and incorporating new knowledge, on the other hand extending the field of applications, such as heat production, transport, and industrial activities (http://www.externe.info, access on 15/01/2019).

  24. 24.

    In the construction sector, the calculation method and economic impact indicators can be assumed by ISO 15686-5, EN 16627 and EN 15643-4.

  25. 25.

    Real costs correspond to the current value, while nominal costs are obtained by multiplying real costs by the inflation/deflation rate linked to the percentage of increase/decrease in prices per year, from the initial reference date to the year in which the cost will be sustained.

  26. 26.

    The 3% discount rate was taken from Delegated Regulation (EU) n. 244/2012 for the calculation of the Cost Optimal according to Directive 2010/31/EU.

  27. 27.

    Corporate environmental accounting processes are the identification, measurement, calculation, analytical, preparatory, interpretation, and communication processes used in the management of financial (and non-financial) data to plan, assess and control the environmental aspects of a company. (Van der Veen 2000, pp. 155–175).

  28. 28.

    ISO/FDIS 15686-5 paragraphs 6.2, 6.3, 6.4.

  29. 29.

    Ibidem, paragraphs 6.5.

  30. 30.

    Cfr. Chap. 4 (Life Cycle Design Model—LCDM)

  31. 31.

    There are cases in which the economic investment ends before the decommissioning stage or cases in which the actors involved change, modifying the goals and scope of the investment, and hence the period of analysis.

  32. 32.

    This list is indicative and can be implemented with other specific processes depending on the system boundaries of the project to be assessed. For example, it can include information about the site or design activities, site management, temporary worksite structures, etc.

  33. 33.

    The market price of a product is the result of the difference between revenue and costs (raw materials, labour, capital).

  34. 34.

    The revenue margin (regarding market prices) considers the possible variations of production costs (including fluctuation of the costs of raw materials). If price variations do not exceed the envisaged variation, the market price remains the same.

  35. 35.

    One reason for a slowing down of the dissemination of the standardised global cost assessment amongst companies was, in many cases, shown to be due to non-correspondence to the cost assessment system used by individual companies or organisations.

  36. 36.

    Cfr. Appendix A of Chap. 4.

  37. 37.

    Cfr. Molinari (2002), BEES (2006), ASTM 917; ISO 15686, Manfron (1998), Perret (1995).

  38. 38.

    It is impossible to know the functional duration of certain products on sale since they have only just come onto the market.

  39. 39.

    The information was provided during interviews with operators in the Piedmont Region (Italy).

References

  • Baldo GL, Marino M, Rossi S (2005) Analisi del ciclo di vita LCA. Materiali, prodotti, processi, Edizioni Ambiente, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Blengini G, Di Carlo T (2010) The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy buildings. Energy Build 42:869–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonanomi M, De Flumeri C, Lavagna M (2012) Edifici a consumo energetico zero. Orientamenti normativi, criteri progettuali ed esempi di Zero Energy e Zero Emission Buildings, Maggioli

    Google Scholar 

  • Boustead I, Hancock G (1979) Handbook of industrial energy analysis. The Open University, Milton Keynes, Hellis Horwood Limited, Chichester, West Sussex, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Braume A (2006) Linking life cycle costing and LCA for building and construction—a framework for eco-efficient construction. In: Proceedings, 2nd international conference on quantified eco-efficiency analysis for sustainability, EgmondaanZee, 28–30 June 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis Langdon Management Consulting. Life Cycle Costing (LCC) as a Contribution to Sustainable Construction: A Common Methodology—Final Methodology. 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/construction/studies/life-cycle-costing_en.htm. Accessed 16 Sept 2018

  • Deng S, Wang RZ, Dai YJ (2014) How to evaluate performance of net zero energy building—A literature research. Energy 71:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EMSD, ARUP, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) Tool for Commercial Building Developments in Hong Kong—User Manual (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • EN 15643-4:2012 Sustainability of construction works—assessment of buildings—part 4: framework for the assessment of economic performance

    Google Scholar 

  • EN 16627:2015—Sustainability of construction works—assessment of economic performance of buildings—calculation methods

    Google Scholar 

  • EN 16627:2015 Sustainability assessment of buildings—economic performance of buildings

    Google Scholar 

  • Estevan H, Schaefer B, Adell A (2018) Life cycle costing state of the art report

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission—Joint Research Centre (2010) Institute for environment and sustainability: international reference life cycle data system (ILCD) handbook—general guide for life cycle assessment—detailed guidance. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission Task Group 4: Life Cycle Costs in Construction. Final Report, June 2003

    Google Scholar 

  • Fregonara E (2015) Valutazione sostenibilità progetto. Life Cycle Thinking e indirizzi internazionali. Franco Angeli, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Fregonara E (2017) Methodologies for supporting sustainability in energy and buildings. The contribution of project economic evaluation. Energy Proc 111:2–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano R (2010) I Prodotti per l’edilizia sostenibile.La compatibilità ambientale dei materiali nel processo edilizio, SistemiEditoriali, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • Giordano R, Serra V, Tortalla E, Valentini V, Aghemo C (2015) Embodied energy and operational energy assessment in the framework of nearly zero energy building and building energy rating. Energy Proc 69

    Google Scholar 

  • Glisoni M, Bianco E, De Leonardis D (2010) Progetto APE—Linee guida per l’applicabilità della metodologia Life Cycle Costing agli appalti pubblici ecologici. ARPA Piemonte

    Google Scholar 

  • Gluch P, Baumann H (2004) The life-cycle costing (LCC) approach: a conceptual discussion of its usefulness for environmental decision-making. Build Environ 39:571–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, Van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S,. Udo de Haes HA, De Bruijn JA, Van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ (ed) (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards. Series: Eco-efficiency in industry and science. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond GP, Jones CI (2008) Embodied energy and carbon in construction materials. Proc Inst Civil Eng Energy 161(2):87–98. https://doi.org/10.1680/ener.2008.161.2.87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler D, Rebitzer G, Lichtenvort K (ed) (2008) Environmental life cycle costing. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Huppes G, Ciroth A, Lichtenvort K, Rebitzer G, Schmith W, Seuring S (2008) Modelling for life cycle costing. In: Hunkeler D, Rebitzer G, Lichtenvort K (eds) Environmental life cycle costing. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2014) Energy in buildings and communities programme. In: Annex 57: evaluation of embodied energy and CO2 eq for building construction

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 15686-5:2017 Building and constructed assets—service life planning—life cycle costing

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 21929-1:2011 Sustainability in building construction—sustainability indicators—part 1: framework for the development of indicators and a core set of indicators for buildings

    Google Scholar 

  • Karsten V, Riley M (2009) IEA joint project: towards net zero energy solar buildings (NZEBs), IEA SHC Task 40—ECBCS Annex 52

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2003) Life-cycle based methods for sustainable product development. Int J Life Cycle Ass 11(special issue 1):116–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavagna M (2008) Life cycle assessment in edilizia. Hoepli, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippiatt BC (1998) BEES: balancing environmental and economic performance. Construct Spec 51:4

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippiatt BC, Boyle AS (2001) Using BEES to select cost-effective green products. Int J Life Cycle Ass 6:76–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippiatt BC, Means RS (2014) Evaluating products over their life cycle, green building, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Manfron V (1998) La manutenzione delle costruzioni. In: Manfron V, Siviero E (eds) Manutenzione delle costruzioni. Utet, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Molinari C (2002) La manutenzione come requisito di progetto. Sistemi Editoriali, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • Monticelli C, Thiébat F (2016) Energy and environmental performances assessment/Valutazione delle prestazioni energetico-ambientali. In: Lucarelli MT, Mussinelli E, Trombetta C (ed) Cluster in progress, pp 109–113. Maggioli, Santarcangelo di Romagna (RN)

    Google Scholar 

  • NIST (2000) BEES 2.0: building for environmental and economic sustainabiliry technical manual and user guide. NISTIR 6520. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Gaithersburg, MD, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Settanni E (2005) Life Cycle Costing nella produzione dell’energia elettrica, lineamenti metodologici e applicazione. Ambiente, Risorse, Salute (ARS), n. 101

    Google Scholar 

  • Perret J (1995) Guide de la maintenance des bâtiments. Le Moniteur, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollo R (2015) Progettare l’ambiente urbano. Riflessioni e strumenti. Carocci, Roma

    Google Scholar 

  • Publisher: ICLEI—Local Governments for Sustainability, European Secretariat

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebitzer G, Hunkeler D (2003) Life-Cycle Costing in LCM: ambitions, opportunities and limitations. Discussing a framework. Int J Life Cycle Ass 8:253–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rebitzer G, Nakamura S (2008) Environmental life cycle costing. In: Hunkeler D, Rebitzer G, Lichtenvort K (ed) Environmental life cycle costing. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Saur K, Donato G, Cobas Flores E, Frankl P, Jensen AA, Kituyi E, Lee KM, Swarr T, Tawfic M, Tukker A UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative, draft final report of the LCM definition study, version 3.6, 17 Nov 2003. https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2003%20-%20LCM%20Definition%20Study%20-%20v3.6.pdf. Accessed 02 Nov 2018

  • Settanni E, Notarnicola B, Tassielli G (2012) Life cycle costing (LCC). In Fogel D, Fredericks S, Spellerberg I (eds) The encyclopedia of sustainability, Vol 6: measurements, indicators, and research methods for sustainability, pp. 221–224. Berkshire Publishing, Great Barrington, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Swarr ET, Hunkeler D, Klӧpffer W, Pesones H, Ciroth A, Brent AC, Pagan R (2011) Environmental life cycle costing: a code of practice. SETAC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Reports. http://www.ipcc.ch. Accessed 5 Dec 2018

  • Thormark C (2002) A low energy building in a life cycle—its embodied energy, energy need for operation and recycling potential. Build Environ 37:429–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valdivia S, Ugaya CML, Sonnemann G, Hildenbrand J (2011) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment. Making informed choices on products. UNEP, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Veen M (2000) Environmental management accounting. In: Kolk A (ed) Economics of environmental management, Harlow, UK, Pearson Education Ltd

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss K, Musall E (2012) Net zero energy buildings: international comparison of carbon-neutral lifestyles. Birkhäuser, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf MA, Pant R, Chomkhamsri K, Sala S, Pennington D (2012) International reference life cycle data system (ILCD) handbook—towards more sustainable production and consumption for a resource-efficient Europe. JRC Reference Report, EUR 24982 EN. European Commission—Joint Research Centre. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright LA, Kemp S, Williams I (2011) ‘Carbon footprinting’: towards a universally accepted definition. Carbon Manag 2(1):61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Architettura e Design (DAD), Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy

    Francesca Thiébat

Authors
  1. Francesca Thiébat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesca Thiébat .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Thiébat, F. (2019). Life Cycle Methodologies. In: Life Cycle Design. PoliTO Springer Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11497-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11497-8_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11496-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11497-8

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation