| Title | Comparison of environmental assessment methods when reusing building components: A case study |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 16571 |
| Authors | De Wolf, C; Hoxha, E; Fivet, C |
| Title | Comparison of environmental assessment methods when reusing building components: A case study |
| Year | 2020 |
| Published | |
| Abstract | The building industry is responsible for 35 % of all solid waste in Europe and more than a third of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To address this, applying circular economy principles to the building sector is crucial, for example by reusing building elements from demolition sites rather than extracting and producing new materials. However, most current life-cycle assessment (LCA) tools are not appropriate to evaluate the environmental impact of a building when its components originate from prior buildings and/or will be used in future unknown ones. Still, robust measurement is needed to demonstrate the benefits of reuse towards environmentally sustainable cities. This paper compares existing methodologies to quantify the global warming potential (GWP, expressed in kg(CO)(2e)/unit) of recycled/recyclable and reused/reusable products, selected within widely recognised standards, rating schemes, and academic studies, such as the cut-off method, the end-of-life method, the distributed allocation (PAS-2050) method, the Environmental Footprint method, the Degressive method and the SIA 2032 method. Based on these recognised approaches for assessing the GWP of products, new equations are written and applied to buildings with reused/reusable materials for each of the methods. The Kopfbau Halle 118 building (Winterthur, CH, 2021), which is designed with reclaimed elements from local demolition sites, is chosen as a case study. Discrepancies in LCA methods are highlighted by applying them to three different life cycles corresponding to the first, intermediate, or final use of building components. This paper shows that current quantification methods to assess reuse give wide-ranging results and do not address the full spectrum of the reuse practice, that their boundaries are too limited, and that a number of critical features are currently hardly quantifiable, such as embedded use value, versatility, storage and transformation impacts, user-owner separation, dis/re-mountability, or design complexity. |
| https://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/278413/files/2020%20Sustainable%20Cities%20%26%20Society%20%28Comparison%20of%20environmental%20assessment%20methods%20when%20reusing%20building%20components%2C%20a%20case%20study%29%20.pdf |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
6820
|
Lausselet, C; Urrego, JPF; Resch, E; Brattebo, H Temporal analysis of the material flows and embodied greenhouse gas emissions of a neighborhood building stock(2021)Journal Of Industrial Ecology, 25, 2 | |
| 2676
|
Joensuu, T; Leino, R; Heinonen, J; Saari, A Developing Buildings' Life Cycle Assessment in Circular Economy-Comparing methods for assessing carbon footprint of reusable components(2022) | |
| 28478
|
Pristerà, G; Tonini, D; Tornaghi, ML; Caro, D; Sala, S Taxonomy of design for deconstruction options to enable circular economy in buildings(2024) | |
| 6678
|
Wang, SQ; Wu, QQ; Yu, JP BIM-Based Assessment of the Environmental Effects of Various End-of-Life Scenarios for Buildings(2024)Sustainability, 16, 7 | |
| 20950
|
Krause, K; Hafner, A Relevance of the information content in module D on circular economy of building materials(2019) | |
| 22552
|
Lachat, A; Mantalovas, K; Desbois, T; Yazoghli-Marzouk, O; Colas, AS; Di Mino, G; Feraille, A From Buildings' End of Life to Aggregate Recycling under a Circular Economic Perspective: A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Case Study(2021)Sustainability, 13.0, 17 | |
| 4247
|
Eberhardt, LCM; Ronholt, J; Birkved, M; Birgisdottir, H Circular Economy potential within the building stock - Mapping the embodied greenhouse gas emissions of four Danish examples(2021) | |
| 20595
|
Hossain, MU; Ng, ST Influence of waste materials on buildings' life cycle environmental impacts: Adopting resource recovery principle(2019) | |
| 17362
|
Backes, JG; Del Rosario, P; Petrosa, D; Traverso, M; Hatzfeld, T; Günther, E Building Sector Issues in about 100 Years: End-Of-Life Scenarios of Carbon-Reinforced Concrete Presented in the Context of a Life Cycle Assessment, Focusing the Carbon Footprint(2022)Processes, 10, 9 | |
| 25294
|
Struck, F; Flamme, S Measuring Recyclability-A Key Factor For Resource Efficiency Evaluation(2023) |