Abstract
Purpose
EN 15804 and EN 15978 are the established standards to calculate the environmental impact of building products and buildings. Despite the importance of circular building, many life cycle assessment (LCA) studies based on EN 15804/15978 are not set up to evaluate circularity. This paper aims to research how an LCA study should be developed that can determine the environmental impact of a circular versus a linear building element within the methodological framework of EN 15804/15978.
Methods
First, it is clarified how the methodological framework of EN 15804/15978 considers different circular principles. There is a particular focus on the concept of multi-cycling and module D. Second, and as the main objective of this paper, it is analyzed which scenarios throughout the lifespan of a building element should be modeled. The focus lies on combining characteristic transformation and end-of-life scenarios into characteristic life cycle scenarios and examining if this provides sufficient insight into the possible environmental impact. This is illustrated by an LCA study of a linear and circular facade system. When representing the results of the LCA study, it is analyzed how the inclusion of module D changes the results.
Results and discussion
To account for the concept of ‘multi-cycling,’ the authors propose to consider multiple use cycles (i.e., transformations) within one life cycle instead of considering several life cycles. This is done through module B5 Refurbishments. Module D is important to stimulate recycling and reuse at the end of life. However, the concept of module D must be handled with the necessary care to provide correct information. Characteristic life cycle scenarios are determined for a more robust understanding of the possible environmental impact of a building element by modeling only a limited amount of scenarios. For the facade systems, the considered transformation scenarios are more determining for their environmental impact than the choice of end-of-life scenario, especially when module D is not considered.
Conclusions
By setting up an LCA study that can evaluate the important circular principles and consider characteristic life cycle scenarios, detailed insight into the environmental impact of circular versus linear building elements can be obtained. The proposed approach leads to more robust LCA studies of circular versus linear building elements.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Allacker K, Mathieux F, Manfredi S et al (2014) Allocation solutions for secondary material production and end of life recovery: proposals for product policy initiatives. Resour Conserv Recycl 88:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.03.016
Allacker K, Mathieux F, Pennington D, Pant R (2017) The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1441–1458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1244-0
Buyle M, Galle W, Debacker W, Audenaert A (2019) Sustainability assessment of circular building alternatives: consequential LCA and LCC for internal wall assemblies as a case study in a Belgian context. J Clean Prod 218:141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.306
CEN (2011) EN 15978 Sustainability assessment of construction works – assessment of environmental performance of buildings – calculation method
CEN (2019) EN 15804:2012+A2 sustainability of construction works - environmental product declaration - core rules for the product category of construction product
De Wolf C, Hoxha E, Fivet C (2020) Comparison of environmental assessment methods when reusing building components: a case study. Sustain Cities Soc 61:102322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102322
Delem L, Wastiels L (2019) The practical use of module D in a building case study: assumptions, limitations and methodological issues. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 323:012048. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/323/1/012048
Di Maria A, Eyckmans J, Van Acker K (2018) Downcycling versus recycling of construction and demolition waste: combining LCA and LCC to support sustainable policy making. J Waste Manag 75:3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.01.028
Douguet E, Delem L, Wastiels L (2022) Evaluating ‘reuse’ in the current LCA framework–Impact of reuse and reusability in different life cycle stages. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci 1078:012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1078/1/012015
Eberhardt L, Birgisdóttir H, Birkved M (2019a) Comparing life cycle assessment modelling of linear vs. circular building components. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 225:012039. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/225/1/012039
Eberhardt L, Birgisdóttir H, Birkved M (2019b) Life cycle assessment of a Danish office building designed for disassembly. Build Res Inf 47(6):666–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2018.1517458
Eberhardt L, van Stijn A, Rasmussen F et al (2020a) Development of a life cycle assessment allocation approach for circular economy in the built environment. Sustainability 12(22):9579. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229579
Eberhardt L, van Stijn A, Rasmussen F et al (2020b) Towards circular life cycle assessment for the built environment: a comparison of allocation approaches. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 588(3):032026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/588/3/032026
European Commission (2019) Levels report: taking action on the TOTAL impact of the construction sector. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Fawcett W (2011) Investing in flexibility: the lifecycle options synthesis. Cambridge University
FCRBE (2022) The environmental impact of reuse in the construction sector. https://opalis.eu/sites/default/files/2022-02/FCRBE-booklet-01-environmental_impact-EN.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2021
Galle W (2016) Scenario based life cycle costing, an enhanced method for evaluating the financial feasibility of transformable building. Dissertation, VUB
Hossain MDU, Poon CS (2018) Comparative LCA of wood waste management strategies generated from building construction activities. J Clean Prod 177:387–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.233
Lei H, Li L, Yang W et al (2021) An analytical review on application of life cycle assessment in circular economy for built environment. J Build Eng 44:103374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103374
Mirzaie S, Thuring M, Allacker K (2020) End-of-life modelling of buildings to support more informed decisions towards achieving circular economy targets. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25(11):2122–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01807-8
NBN (2017) Sustainability of construction works - environmental product declarations - core rules for the product category of construction products - national supplement to NBN EN 15804+A1:2014. NBN/DTD B 08–001:2017
Paduart A, De Temmerman N, Trigaux D et al (2013) Casestudy ontwerp van gebouwen in functie van aanpasbaarheid: Mahatma Gandhiwijk Mechelen. OVAM https://www.ovam.be/sites/default/files/FILE1375792665548ovor130806GANDHI_Eindrapport_OPLEVERING.pdf. Accessed 15 Jan 2022
PAS 2050 (2008) Guide to PAS 2050, How to assess the carbon footprint of goods and services. British Standards Institution, Carbon Trust and DEFRA document. http://www.bsigroup.com/Standards-and-Publications/Howwe-can-help-you/ProfessionalStandards-Service/PAS-2050. Accessed 12 Dec 2021
Rajagopalan N, Brancart S, De Regel S et al (2021) Multi-criteria decision analysis using life cycle assessment and life cycle costing in circular building design: a case study for wall partitioning systems in the circular retrofit lab. Sustainability 13(9):5124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095124
Rasmussen F, Birkved M, Birgisdóttir H (2019) Upcycling and design for disassembly – LCA of buildings employing circular design strategies. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 225:012040. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/225/1/012040
Sandin G, Peters G, Svanström M (2014) Life cycle assessment of construction materials: the influence of assumptions in end-of-life modelling. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(4):723–731. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0686-x
Tingley D, Davison B (2012) Developing an LCA methodology to account for the environmental benefits of design for deconstruction. Build Environ 57:387–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.06.005
van Stijn A, Eberhardt L, Wouterszoon Jansen B, Meijer A (2021) A circular economy life cycle assessment (CE-LCA) model for building components. Resour Conserv Recycl 174:105683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105683
Vandenbroucke M, Galle W, De Temmerman N et al (2015) Using life cycle assessment to inform decision-making for sustainable buildings. Buildings 5(2):536–559. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings5020536
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the three regional authorities of Belgium responsible for the development of the TOTEM tool for providing the necessary documentation to convert Ecoinvent processes to the Belgian context (“Masterexcel version 17/08/2021” and “Harmonisation_changes_EI36_210629”).
Funding
Lisa Van Gulck, a doctoral research fellow of the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO), acknowledges the support of the FWO [grant number: 1S00221N].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Holger Wallbaum.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Van Gulck, L., Wastiels, L. & Steeman, M. How to evaluate circularity through an LCA study based on the standards EN 15804 and EN 15978. Int J Life Cycle Assess 27, 1249–1266 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02099-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02099-w