| Title | Life cycle assessment of curtain wall facades: A screening study on end-of-life scenarios |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 18180 |
| Authors | Cheong, CY; Brambilla, A; Gasparri, E; Kuru, A; Sangiorgio, A |
| Title | Life cycle assessment of curtain wall facades: A screening study on end-of-life scenarios |
| Year | 2024 |
| Published | |
| Abstract | By 2030, Australia is committed to reducing 43 % of its greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 record, and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Embodied carbon emissions in materials used in Australia's building and construction sector are the next frontier to significantly reduce carbon emissions. Facades are among the highest contributors to embodied carbon emissions in commercial buildings. However, there are limited studies on the life cycle assessment examining the embodied impacts of different types of curtain walls. Further, the majority focus on the upfront carbon, oversimplifying the end-of-life (EoL) possibilities, often assuming demolition as the only scenario. This study explores the life cycle assessment of three facade systems from cradle-tograve analysing the trade-off between the impacts of the service life and end-of-life stages to identify the associated environmental benefits. A total of 27 scenarios based on different facade service lives of 20, 40 and 100 years and different EoL scenarios, including landfill, recycling and reuse are examined. The assessed variables include the global warming potential (GWP), total use of renewable primary energy resources (PERT), total use of non-renewable primary energy resources (PENRT) and net freshwater use (FW). This study highlighted the importance of considering the net benefits beyond the boundary. Compared to recycling, reuse provides more net benefits to GWP, PERT and PENRT. By extending the facade lifespan, the uncertainty of the impact indicators associated with different EoL decreases. Moreover, the life cycle benefits of selecting a facade with higher operational savings increases, given the same EoL scenario. |
| https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.108600 |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
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 | |
| 5020
|
Hartwell, R; Macmillan, S; Overend, M Circular economy of facades: Real-world challenges and opportunities(2021) | |
| 16571
|
De Wolf, C; Hoxha, E; Fivet, C Comparison of environmental assessment methods when reusing building components: A case study(2020) | |
| 18968
|
Mohebbi, G; Hasan, A; Blay-Armah, A; Bahadori-Jahromi, A; Mylona, A; Barthorpe, M Comparative analysis of the whole life carbon of three construction methods of a UK-based supermarket(2023)Building Services Engineering Research & Technology, 44.0, 3 | |
| 5765
|
Kitayama, S; Iuorio, O; Josa, I; Borrion, A; Black, L Determining the carbon footprint reduction of reusing lightweight exterior infill walls: A case study of a school building in the United Kingdom(2024) | |
| 27590
|
Rios, FC; Grau, D; Chong, WK Reusing exterior wall framing systems: A cradle-to-cradle comparative life cycle assessment(2019) | |
| 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) | |
| 21616
|
Temizel-Sekeryan, S; Rios, FC; Geremicca, F; Bilec, MM Circular Design and Embodied Carbon in Living Buildings: The Missing Potential(2023)Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 29.0, 3 | |
| 27738
|
Illankoon, C; Vithanage, SC; Pilanawithana, NM Embodied Carbon in Australian Residential Houses: A Preliminary Study(2023)Buildings, 13.0, 10 | |
| 27202
|
Zhu, H; Liou, SR; Chen, PC; He, XY; Sui, ML Carbon Emissions Reduction of a Circular Architectural Practice: A Study on a Reversible Design Pavilion Using Recycled Materials(2024)Sustainability, 16.0, 5 |