Evaluation of life cycle carbon impacts for higher education building redevelopment: a multiple case study approach

UK higher education institutions have strong drivers to reduce operational carbon emissions through building redevelopment. The life cycle carbon impact of buildings − operational and embodied carbon − is a developing area of consideration, particularly in redevelopment. A case study analysis was employed to assess how redevelopment interventions can reduce life cycle carbon impacts. The five case study buildings covered a variety of activities, construction styles, systems and operational characteristics. Each building was monitored over a 12-month period and the data was combined with metered energy use to calibrate life cycle carbon base models following the BS EN 15978:2011 standard. The base models were modified to simulate a range of carbon reduction interventions and also new-build to current UK energy efficiency regulations. The design stage uncertainty was factored in. The best-case refurbishment options showed average life cycle carbon savings of between 20 and 29%, with the most effective intervention varying by building. For new-build, the savings ranged from 32–64%, with the greatest being for conversion from mechanical to natural ventilation. The average contribution of embodied carbon to total life cycle carbon impact for the new-builds varied from 6% for the chemistry building to 23% for the law building.

[1]  English Version,et al.  Sustainability of construction works - Assessment of environmental performance of buildings - Calculation method , 2010 .

[2]  Alice Moncaster,et al.  A comparative review of existing data and methodologies for calculating embodied energy and carbon of buildings , 2012 .

[3]  Akshay Gupta,et al.  Life cycle cost and carbon footprint of energy efficient refurbishments to 20th century UK school buildings , 2014 .

[4]  Edward Allen,et al.  The Architect's studio companion : rules of thumb for preliminary design / Edward Allen and Joseph Iano , 1995 .

[5]  Bryan J.B. Gauld Structures for Architects , 1984 .

[6]  Badea Nicolae,et al.  Life cycle analysis in refurbishment of the buildings as intervention practices in energy saving , 2015 .

[7]  Richard Fenner,et al.  Assessing embodied energy of building structural elements , 2010 .

[8]  P. L. Gaspar,et al.  Embodied energy on refurbishment vs. demolition: A southern Europe case study , 2015 .

[9]  A. Zöld-Zs. Szalay What is missing from the concept of the new European Building Directive , 2007 .

[10]  Pat Guthrie The architect's portable handbook : first step rules of thumb for building design , 1998 .

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

[12]  Gregory A. Keoleian,et al.  Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications , 2003 .

[13]  Anna Laura Pisello,et al.  A Building Energy Efficiency Optimization Method by Evaluating the Effective Thermal Zones Occupancy , 2012 .

[14]  Yimin Zhu,et al.  Applying computer-based simulation to energy auditing: A case study , 2006 .

[15]  Dp Hawkins,et al.  Life cycle carbon impact of higher education building redevelopment , 2016 .

[16]  Michael D. Lepech,et al.  Application of life-cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced embodied environmental impacts , 2013 .

[17]  Kendra Tupper,et al.  Pulling the Levers on Existing Buildings: A Simple Method for Calibrating Hourly Energy Models , 2010 .

[18]  Adolf Acquaye,et al.  Operational vs. embodied emissions in buildings—A review of current trends , 2013 .

[19]  Deuk-Woo Kim,et al.  APPLICATION OF A WHOLE BUILDING SIMULATION TOOL FOR A REAL- LIFE BUILDING , 2011 .