“Alternative” materials in the green building and construction sector

The construction, use and demolition of buildings carry enormous environmental burdens. As one step to reduce a building’s environmental impact, green building design guidelines and certification programs, such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, Cradle to Cradle and the Whole Building Design Guide, promote the specification of alternative, non-traditional building materials. Alternative materials carry a variety of potential benefits: reducing the amount of energy and other resources needed to create building materials; creating healthier indoor and outdoor environments; diverting or reducing waste from landfills; reducing the use of scarce, critical or economically volatile materials; and spurring innovation in the building industry. However, a lack of clarity surrounds alternative materials and creates a barrier to their usage. The purpose of this paper is to review definitions of alternative materials in various design guidelines in order to provide context to their specification and usage.,Through a survey of green building programs and guidelines, existing literature on alternative materials, and life-cycle assessment using multiple inventory databases, this study tackles the following questions: what constitutes an alternative building material; what are the current barriers to their specification; how are they specified in the most common design guidelines; and do alternative building materials present a “greener” alternative?,These results show that while often alternative materials do in fact show promise for reducing environmental impacts of the built environment, by how much can be a challenging question to quantify and depends on a variety of factors. While many green building guides and certification systems provide recommendations for use of alternative materials, the sheer diversity and uncertainty of these systems coupled with the complexity in understanding their impacts still present a significant barrier to their specification. Much work remains in a variety of disciplines to tackle these barriers. A clear emphasis should be on better understanding their environmental impacts, particularly with respect to the context within the built environment that their specification will provide energy, resource and emission savings. Other key areas of significant work include reducing costs, removing regulatory and code barriers, and educating designers, consumers, and end-users.,Alternative materials are defined and specified in a diversity of contexts leaving the design and construction communities hesitant to promote their use; other work has found this to be a key barrier to their widespread usage. By compiling definitions, barriers and design guidelines instructions while also exploring analytically the benefits of specific cases, this work provides a foundation for better understanding where new, more sustainable materials can be successfully specified.

[1]  J. Burnett,et al.  Analysis of embodied energy use in the residential building of Hong Kong , 2001 .

[2]  Douglas Crawford-Brown,et al.  Improving the Link Between the LEED Green Building Label and a Building's Energy-Related Environmental Metrics , 2008 .

[3]  Peter Walker,et al.  Building houses with local materials: means to drastically reduce the environmental impact of construction , 2001 .

[4]  F. Asdrubali,et al.  A review of unconventional sustainable building insulation materials , 2015 .

[5]  Patrick Beullens,et al.  Reverse logistics in effective recovery of products from waste materials , 2004 .

[6]  T. Sellers Wood adhesive innovations and applications in North America , 2001 .

[7]  C. Macdougall,et al.  THERMAL PERFORMANCE OF GREEN ROOF PANELS IN SUB-ZERO TEMPERATURES , 2010 .

[8]  B. Solberg,et al.  Environmental and economic impacts of substitution between wood products and alternative materials: a review of micro-level analyses from Norway and Sweden , 2005 .

[9]  Steffen Lehmann,et al.  Sustainable Construction for Urban Infill Development Using Engineered Massive Wood Panel Systems , 2012 .

[10]  Ignacio Zabalza Bribián,et al.  Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential , 2011 .

[11]  W. L. Lee,et al.  Benchmarking energy use of building environmental assessment schemes , 2012 .

[12]  Melissa M. Bilec,et al.  Life cycle assessment evaluation of green product labeling systems for residential construction , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[13]  Mikesch Muecke,et al.  Biobased Products and the LEED® Rating System , 2010 .

[14]  Graeme Auld,et al.  Certification Schemes and the Impacts on Forests and Forestry , 2008 .

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

[16]  Fernando Pelisser,et al.  Lightweight concrete production with low Portland cement consumption , 2012 .

[17]  Steffen Lehmann,et al.  Low carbon construction systems using prefabricated engineered solid wood panels for urban infill to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions , 2013 .

[18]  Paul Micklethwaite,et al.  Specifying recycled: understanding UK architects’ and designers’ practices and experience , 2004 .

[19]  R. Espach When is Sustainable Forestry Sustainable? The Forest Stewardship Council in Argentina and Brazil , 2006, Global Environmental Politics.

[20]  M. Lobovikov,et al.  Bamboo in climate change and rural livelihoods , 2012, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[21]  Alfred E. Thal,et al.  To LEED or Not to LEED: Analysis of Cost Premiums Associated With Sustainable Facility Design , 2012 .

[22]  G. Keoleian,et al.  Not all primary aluminum is created equal: life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2005. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  A. Horvath CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT , 2004 .

[24]  Don Mills,et al.  Biology and Building—The Living Learning Center at Washington University's Tyson Research Center: A Journey on the Path to the Living Building Challenge , 2009 .

[25]  Oscar Ortiz,et al.  Sustainability in the construction industry: A review of recent developments based on LCA , 2009 .

[26]  L. Gustavsson,et al.  Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building materials , 2006 .

[27]  B. Solberg,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions, life-cycle inventory and cost-efficiency of using laminated wood instead of steel construction. , 2002 .

[28]  Xianlai Zeng,et al.  Minimizing the increasing solid waste through zero waste strategy , 2015 .

[29]  Douglas John Harris,et al.  A quantitative approach to the assessment of the environmental impact of building materials , 1999 .

[30]  Jane C. Bare,et al.  TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0 , 2011 .

[31]  Ottar Michelsen,et al.  Product category rules and environmental product declarations as tools to promote sustainable products: experiences from a case study of furniture production , 2009 .

[32]  W. L. Lee,et al.  A comprehensive review of metrics of building environmental assessment schemes , 2013 .

[33]  Gillian Frances Menzies,et al.  Life-Cycle Assessment and the Environmental Impact of Buildings: A Review , 2009 .