Evaluation of the environmental impact of experimental buildings with different constructive systems using Material Flow Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment

Sustainability of building construction systems depends on their material and energy consumption, and the consequent environmental impact. Thus, the evaluation of their sustainability requires a wide analysis that includes these three topics. Material Flow Analysis (MFA) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) used together can offer a full environmental evaluation. For this reason, in this study, five different facade constructive systems are evaluated with MFA and LCA to compare them from an environmental point of view. The constructive systems were monitored in an experimental set-up located in Mediterranean continental climate, registering energy consumptions for summer and winter periods. MFA evaluated their total material requirement and the ecological rucksack. LCA evaluated their impact on the environment. The energy parameter considered the embodied energy of the materials and the energy consumption registered in the experimental set-up. MFA results show the significant quantity of natural resource extraction required for building which leads to a considerable ecological rucksack. On the other hand, LCA results show the importance of the operational phase of the building in the overall building energy consumption, and therefore in the environmental impact.

[1]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Life cycle assessment of the inclusion of phase change materials (PCM) in experimental buildings , 2010 .

[2]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Service life of the dwelling stock in Spain , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[3]  Youyin Jing,et al.  Application of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and extenics theory for building energy conservation assessment , 2009 .

[4]  Michael Ritthoff,et al.  Calculating MIPS : resource productivity of products and services , 2002 .

[5]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of alveolar brick construction system incorporating phase change materials (PCMs) , 2013 .

[6]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits , 2000 .

[7]  Berhane H. Gebreslassie,et al.  Design of environmentally conscious absorption cooling systems via multi-objective optimization and life cycle assessment , 2009 .

[8]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Experimental study of using PCM in brick constructive solutions for passive cooling , 2010 .

[9]  Walter Klöpffer.  Life Cycle Assessment (Lca) , 2014 .

[10]  D. Pennington,et al.  Life Cycle Impact Assessment Workshop Summary Midpoints versus Endpoints: The Sacrifices and Benefits , 2000 .

[11]  Oscar Ortiz,et al.  The environmental impact of the construction phase: An application to composite walls from a life cycle perspective , 2010 .

[12]  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 .

[13]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Evaluation of the environmental impact of experimental cubicles using Life Cycle Assessment: A highlight on the manufacturing phase , 2012 .

[14]  Appu Haapio,et al.  Environmental effect of structural solutions and building materials to a building , 2008 .

[15]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Experimental Study of PCM Inclusion in Different Building Envelopes , 2009 .

[16]  Helmut Rechberger,et al.  Practical handbook of material flow analysis , 2003 .

[17]  Pere Fullana,et al.  Análisis del ciclo de la vida , 1997 .

[18]  H. Haberl,et al.  Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century , 2009 .

[19]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  Relevance of simplifications in LCA of building components , 2009 .