The life-cycle assessment of a single-storey retail building in Canada

Abstract This study investigates the breakdown of primary energy use and global warming potential (GWP) in a single-storey retail building located in Toronto, Canada, with a 50 year lifespan. Five different types of buildings are examined to investigate the impact associated with the choice of building materials. Over a 50 year lifespan, the operating energy and operating GWP of the five buildings only differs by 3% and 4% respectively. The total embodied energy and embodied GWP differs by as much as 44% and 35% respectively. The roof alone accounts for around 50% of the total embodied energy and GWP in these buildings, which is far greater than the contribution from any other individual building component. However, operating effects in these buildings account for around 90% of the total effects and far outweigh any differences in embodied effects between the buildings. Therefore, the total energy and total GWP of these buildings only differs at most by 6% and 7% respectively over a 50 year lifespan.

[1]  Raymond J. Cole,et al.  Life-cycle energy use in office buildings , 1996 .

[2]  Oscar Ortiz,et al.  Sustainability based on LCM of residential dwellings: A case study in Catalonia, Spain , 2009 .

[3]  Appu Haapio,et al.  A critical review of building environmental assessment tools , 2008 .

[4]  Leif Gustavsson,et al.  Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building , 2010 .

[5]  Leslie Daryl Danny Harvey,et al.  A Handbook on Low-Energy Buildings and District-Energy Systems : Fundamentals, Techniques and Examples , 2012 .

[6]  A. Horvath,et al.  Life-Cycle Assessment of Office Buildings in Europe and the United States , 2006 .

[7]  Nannan Wang,et al.  Lifecycle assessment for sustainable design options of a commercial building in Shanghai , 2010 .

[8]  John Straube,et al.  Building science for building enclosures , 2005 .

[9]  Ignacio Zabalza Bribián,et al.  Life cycle assessment in buildings: State-of-the-art and simplified LCA methodology as a complement for building certification , 2009 .

[10]  J. Last.  Our common future. , 1987, Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique.

[11]  Catarina Thormark,et al.  The effect of material choice on the total energy need and recycling potential of a building , 2006 .

[12]  Ravi Prakash,et al.  Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: An overview , 2010 .

[13]  Jacquetta Lee,et al.  Critical review of life cycle analysis and assessment techniques and their application to commercial activities , 1995 .

[14]  Anne Grete Hestnes,et al.  Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: A review article , 2007 .

[15]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Building materials selection: greenhouse strategies for built facilities , 2001 .

[16]  T. Malmqvist,et al.  Basic building life cycle calculations to decrease contribution to climate change Case study on an , 2011 .

[17]  Hugo Hens,et al.  Life cycle inventory of buildings: A contribution analysis , 2010 .

[18]  Laure Itard,et al.  Comparing environmental impacts of renovated housing stock with new construction , 2007 .

[19]  Grace Ding,et al.  Life cycle energy assessment of Australian secondary schools , 2007 .

[20]  H. K. Yu,et al.  Environmental impacts of building materials and building services components for commercial buildings in Hong Kong , 2007 .

[21]  S. John,et al.  Environmental Impacts of Multi-Storey Buildings Using Different Construction Materials , 2009 .

[22]  Charles J. Kibert,et al.  Sustainable Construction : Green Building Design and Delivery , 2005 .

[23]  Anna Forsberg,et al.  Tools for environmental assessment of the built environment , 2004 .