Submit to Sustainability Review for Sustainability Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050). This special issue belongs to the section "Green Building".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2024) | Viewed by 17463

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Monica Lavagna

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Department of Architecture, Built environment and Construction Engineering (ABC), Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy
Interests: sustainability and sustainable buildings; sustainable construction and building materials; construction methods and techniques; life cycle as-sessment; green building rating systems; circular economy
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Dr. Roberto Giordano

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Associate Professor, Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, 10125 Turin, Italy
Interests: whole life carbon assessment; circular economy; embodied impacts; life cycle assessment; green building ratings
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The sustainability of buildings and constructions is closely connected to the study, assessment and management of material and resource flows along the whole life cycle processes. It is necessary to consider the extraction and sourcing, the transport and logistics, the production, the onsite construction, the use and maintenance activities, the deconstruction (or disassembly), the end of life scenarios of products/materials and, eventually, the recycling.

Achieving a sustainable construction involves a twofold approach. On the one hand, it is necessary to measure the environmental impacts of a building - in particular those related to climate change - to verify whether it meets decarbonisation targets. On the other, it is strategically to develop solutions aimed at optimising the resource management, fostering the flows to circularity and to a stronger interaction among technologies (e.g. between IT and production technologies).

Building technology plays a crucial role in the above-described framework due to its attitude to comply with a performance-based approach. Technology is the “means” of interacting with the natural environment.

First, Building technologies are related to: the materials choices (e.g. bio-based materials, recycled materials, high performances-durable materials); the construction techniques (e.g. dry assembly, design for disassembly, modular construction, off-site prefabrication); the production systems (e.g. industrial symbiosis, 3D printing, added manufacturing); etc.

Second, Building “Soft” (non-tangible) technologies are equally important: management models (e.g. circular business/organisational models, circular supply chain, reverse logistics), digital tools (e.g. IoT, AI, shared platform), evaluation methods. In particular, the development of methods to analyse the environmental factors affecting the construction by including indicators to meet goals set up in the latest policies and standards arising from the Paris Climate Agreement is a challenging aspect. In other words - for the construction sector - it means assessing the Whole-Life Carbon and the Circular Economy flows to comply with zero carbon goals by 2050.

Therefore, this Special Issue aims to gather original contributions and review articles focusing on sustainability aspects (environmental, economic and social), highlighting the role of Building Technologies both to meet decarbonisation targets and to optimise the life cycle management of material and process flows.

Possible subjects can be:

decarbonisation related to materials/products/buildings (bio-based materials, renewable resources, etc.);
sustainability indicators/criteria for buildings/products/construction techniques;
whole life cycle assessment/carbon of buildings and constructions;
circular use of resources and life cycle extension of materials/products/buildings (adaptability, reuse/remanufacturing/repurpose, product-as-a-service/building-as-a-service, etc.);
low impact and sustainable production/construction/deconstruction techniques;
circular organisational models/supply chain for buildings and buildings elements/products;
digital enabling technologies to support the life cycle management of materials flows;
technological innovations for sustainability;
sustainable retrofitting and adaptive re-use of existing buildings.

We look forward to receiving your contributions.

Dr. Monica Lavagna
Dr. Roberto Giordano
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sustainability is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

sustainable construction and building materials
decarbonization
life cycle assessment
circular economy
sustainable buildings
building technology

Published Papers (10 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

22 pages, 11205 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Public Housing Stock between Recovery and Sustainability: The Case of Tor Bella Monaca in Rome

by Eliana Cangelli, Michele Conteduca, Elnaz Behnam Kia, Hassan Zaiter and Valerio Fonti

Sustainability 2024, 16(6), 2510; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16062510 - 18 Mar 2024

Viewed by 683

Abstract

The buildings and construction sector is responsible for 37% of energy-related CO₂ emissions and over 34% of energy demand globally. The redevelopment of the existing residential building stock has become a consolidated policy of the European Commission to implement the objectives of economic recovery and energy transition towards climate neutrality by 2050. This paper illustrates the design experimentation conducted by the Sapienza University team on the recovery of the public housing compartment R5 in Tor Bella Monaca, Rome. The research proposes an original methodology that is ideally replicable for regenerating large public housing districts built on the outskirts of major European cities, characterised by significant technological and social degradation and energy deficiency. This paper provides an overview of the interventions and an evaluation of the method and set of tools developed in drafting the Technical and Economic Feasibility Study at both the neighbourhood and building levels. This contribution is addressed to researchers and public and private organisations dealing with the complexity of the social housing recovery topic, emphasising overall sustainability aspects of interventions in terms of typological and energy refurbishment of buildings, re-activation of open spaces and enhancement of landscape components, and envisioning new services through participatory methods that promote social inclusion. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 2884 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Materials and Climate Change: A Set of Indices as the Benchmark for Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment for Tangible Cultural Heritage in Europe

by Francesca Giglio, Patrizia Frontera, Angela Malara and Francesco Armocida

Sustainability 2024, 16(5), 2067; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052067 - 1 Mar 2024

Viewed by 656

Abstract

Among the issues most related to climate change, the built environment is also subjected to short- and long-term risks. Referring to tangible cultural heritage, materials and buildings are subjected to different types of damage that require adaptive risk prevention and containment strategies, currently missing from conventional risk assessments. Thus, there is an increasingly urgent need for scientific and technical knowledge, tools, and solutions aimed at solving critical issues in cultural heritage due to climate change. In this context, the aim of this study is to study the mechanisms of impacts brought about by climate change and the formulation of a possible set of indices as benchmarks to measure climate change’s effect on cultural heritage buildings. The study is structured on a methodology that identifies three sections: the first and second parts systematize and critically interpret data on impact mechanisms and indices for climate vulnerability and risk assessment; the third part, data processing, reports the perspective findings. The main intermediate indices, contributing to a comprehensive damage index, were identified, and a procedural protocol was developed. Finally, through the correlation of indices, a potential case study could be analyzed, and benchmarks made effective. The study reports partial results of one of the “Ecosystems of Innovation” pilot projects funded by the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. The study is still a work in progress and needs advancement and deepening to verify case study indices. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 3335 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Parametric Integrated Design Approach for Life Cycle Zero-Carbon Buildings

by Ehsan Kamel, Francesco Pittau, Laura Mora Dal Verme, Piergiorgio Scatigna and Giuliana Iannaccone

Sustainability 2024, 16(5), 2001; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052001 - 28 Feb 2024

Viewed by 635

Abstract

Implementing net-zero carbon design is a crucial step towards decarbonizing the built environment during the entire life cycle of a building, encompassing both embodied and operational carbon. This paper presents a novel computational approach to designing life cycle zero-carbon buildings (LC-ZCBs), utilizing parametric integrated modeling through the versatile Grasshopper platform. A residential building located at the New York Institute of Technology, optimized to fulfill the LC-ZCB target, serves as a case study for this comprehensive study. Four main influencing design parameters are defined, and three hundred design combinations are evaluated through the assessment of operational carbon (OC) and embodied carbon (EC). By incorporating biobased materials in the design options (BIO) as a replacement for conventional insulation (OPT), the influence of biogenic carbon is addressed by utilizing the GWPbio dynamic method. While both OPT and BIO registered similar OC, with values ranging below 0.7 kg CO₂eq/m²a, the EC is largely different, with negative values ranging between −0.64 and −0.54 kg CO₂eq/m²a only for BIO alternatives, while the OPT ones achieved positive values (2.25–2.45 kg CO₂eq/m²a). Finally, to account for potential climate changes, future climate data, and 2099 weather conditions are considered during the scenario assessments. The results show that OC tends to slightly decrease due to the increasing productivity of PV panels. Thus, the life cycle emissions for all OPT alternatives decrease, moving from 2.4–3.0 kg CO₂eq/m²a to 2.2–2.4, but none of them achieve the LC-ZCB target, while BIO alternatives are able to achieve the target with negative values between −0.15 and −0.60 kg CO₂eq/m²a. There is potential for achieving LC-ZCBs when fast-growing biobased materials are largely used as construction materials, fostering a more environmentally responsible future for the construction industry. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2616 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Life Cycle Assessment of the Construction Process in a Mass Timber Structure

by Mahboobeh Hemmati, Tahar Messadi and Hongmei Gu

Sustainability 2024, 16(1), 262; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010262 - 27 Dec 2023

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1342

Abstract

Today, the application of green materials in the building industry is the norm rather than the exception and reflects an attempt to mitigate the sector’s environmental impacts. Mass timber is growing rapidly in the construction field because of its long span, speed of installation, lightness and toughness, carbon sequestration capabilities, renewability, fire rating, acoustic isolation, and thermal resistance. Mass timber is close to overtaking steel and concrete as the preferred material. The endeavor of this research is to quantitatively assess the ability of this green material to leverage the abatement of carbon emissions. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a leading method for assessing the environmental impacts of the building sector. The recently completed Adohi Hall mass timber building on the University of Arkansas campus was used as a case study in an investigation to quantify greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions throughout the construction phase only. The energy used in building operations is the most dominant source of emissions in the building industry and has galvanized research on increasing the efficiency of building operations, but reduced emissions have made the impacts of embodied carbon (EC) components more noticeable in the building life cycle. While most studies have focused on the manufacturing stage, only a few to date have focused on the construction process. Consequently, few data are available on the environmental impacts associated with the installation of mass timber as a new green material. The present study began with the quantification of the materials and an inventory of the equipment used for construction. Then, this study determined the EC associated with running the equipment for building construction. The GHG emissions resulting from the transportation of materials to the site were also quantified. Based on data collected from the construction site, the results of this study indicate that earthwork ranks first in carbon emissions, followed by mass timber installation and construction. In third place is ready-mix poured concrete and rebar installation, followed by Geopiers. A comparison of these results with those in the existing literature shows that the EC generally associated with the building construction phase has been underestimated to date. Furthermore, only emissions associated with the fuel usage of the main equipment were considered. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2837 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Comparative Cradle-to-Grave Carbon Footprint of a CFRP-Grid Reinforced Concrete Façade Panel

by Jana Gerta Backes, Laura Schmidt, Jan Bielak, Pamela Del Rosario, Marzia Traverso and Martin Claßen

Sustainability 2023, 15(15), 11548; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511548 - 26 Jul 2023

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1442

Abstract

Due to climate change and current efforts to reduce emissions in the construction sector, this study evaluates and discusses the results of a comparative cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), with a main focus on Global Warming Potential for functionally equivalent carbon-reinforced concrete (CRC) and steel-reinforced concrete (SRC) façade panels for the first time. The novelty of this study is the focus on construction waste and, in particular, the worst-case application of non-recycled construction waste. The use of CRC requires a lower concrete thickness than SRC because the carbon fiber reinforcement does not corrode, in contrast to steel reinforcement. Façade panels of the same geometrical dimensions and structural performance were defined as functional units (FU). Assuming an End-of-Life (EoL) scenario of 50% landfill and 50% recycling, the Global Warming Potential (GWP, given in CO₂ equivalent (CO₂e)) of the CRC façade (411–496 kg CO₂e) is shown to perform better than or equal to the SRC façade (492 kg CO₂e). Changing the assumption of CRC to a worst-case scenario, going fully to landfill and not being recycled (single life cycle), turns the GWP results in favor of the SRC façade. Assuming a 50-year service life for the SRC façade panel and relativizing the emissions to the years, the more durable CRC façade performs much better. Finally, depending on the system boundary, the assumed EoL and lifetime, CRC can represent a lower-emission alternative to a functionally equivalent component made of SRC. The most important and “novel” result in this study, which also leads to future research opportunities, is that delicate adjustments (especially concerning EoL scenarios and expected service life) can lead to completely different recommendations for decision-makers. Only by combining the knowledge of LCA experts, structural engineers, and builders optimal decisions can be made regarding sustainable materials and building components. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 934 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A General Framework for Sustainability Assessment of Buildings: A Life-Cycle Thinking Approach

by Duc Binh Tran, Van Tan Tran, Xuan Anh Pham and Van Tuan Nguyen

Sustainability 2023, 15(14), 10770; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410770 - 9 Jul 2023

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2335

Abstract

Construction is a manufacturing industry that consumes substantial amounts of natural resources, human resources, and social capital. Activities that occur during building construction and utilization negatively impact the environment and have direct and indirect impacts on the surrounding community and society. Properly assessing the sustainability of buildings is critical to the pursuit and achievement of sustainable development goals. Also, construction project decision-makers and stakeholders currently lack an effective tool for comparing the relative sustainability of different materials, design approaches, construction methods, and building operation alternatives. Thus, an integrated framework for assessing building sustainability in terms of environmental, economic, and social aspects is developed and proposed in this paper based on life cycle thinking. This framework is applicable to different building types and life-cycle assessment scopes and provides a practical tool for construction investment project stakeholders to reference, implement, and use to guide the decision-making process. This framework may also provide a reference for other researchers in the construction field to develop sustainability assessment models optimized for different types of construction projects. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 2387 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Visualization and Interpretation of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment—Existing Tools and Future Development

by Jana Gerta Backes, Leonie Sophie Steinberg, Alexandra Weniger and Marzia Traverso

Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10658; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310658 - 6 Jul 2023

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2030

Abstract

The aim of this study is the evaluation of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) visualizations, which have been gaining increasing relevance in recent years. Despite this, the final interpretation and visualization of LCSA are not yet sufficiently established. Three of the existing LCSA visualization tools, Life Cycle Sustainability Triangle (LCST), Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard (LCSD), and Sustainability Crowns, are compared and discussed along previously established target criteria. Subsequently, a “new” visualization tool (LCSA-Wheel) is developed based on analysis results and tested within a case study. It became clear that the LCST and Sustainability Crowns are mainly used to help weigh the sustainability dimensions. Nevertheless, the Sustainability Crowns meet most of the defined target criteria and thus serve as a model for the development of a visualization approach. The LCSD maps a wealth of information but is more difficult to understand without a deeper dive into the topic. The proposed LCSA-Wheel adopts a clear structure and provides information needed to understand the visualization. Although further developments are still necessary for general applicability, there is a justified assumption, shown with the help of a case study, that the LCSA-Wheel will gain acceptance in science and practice and thus drive the use of the LCSA. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 4953 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Building Construction: A Case Study in China

by Yahong Dong, Peng Liu and Md. Uzzal Hossain

Sustainability 2023, 15(9), 7655; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097655 - 6 May 2023

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2693

Abstract

Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) has been increasingly implemented in a wide spectrum of products. Considering the vital importance of buildings to human lives, it is surprising that there have been few LCSA case studies of buildings from mainland China, which boasts the largest developing economy in the world. This study aims to implement LCSA in a typical residential building project in China. The three areas of protections (AoPs) are integrated into an overarching LCSA framework by applying the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. It is found that the building project has less impacts of climate change, acidification and human toxicity, but greater impacts of ozone depletion and freshwater eutrophication, as compared to benchmarks of buildings. The sustainability single score is estimated to be 71.5/100, with 40.86% caused by the environmental impact, 29.68% by the economic impact and 29.46% by the social impact. The sustainability results of the studied case are further compared with an existing study in Hong Kong. The results would contribute to the knowledge and understanding of the sustainability performance of buildings in China. The methodology presented in this study can contribute to further improvements in LCSA evaluation, both regionally and globally. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 37276 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Ecological Potential of Building Components in Multi-Storey Residential Construction: A Comparative Case Study between an Existing Concrete and a Timber Building in Austria

by Henriette Fischer, Martin Aichholzer and Azra Korjenic

Sustainability 2023, 15(8), 6349; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086349 - 7 Apr 2023

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2269

Abstract

With the introduction of energy-efficient buildings, the importance of embodied energy in new buildings has become increasingly relevant to minimising the impact of climate change. This study compares two existing four-storey residential buildings: one building has a reinforced concrete (RC) structure and the other has a timber structure. The study’s aim is to find out which building components are responsible for the largest embodied impacts and whether there are differences between the two construction methods. The specificity of the wooden building is the combined use of solid and lightweight timber elements. The methodology consists of a general life cycle assessment (LCA) and a more detailed analysis of the product stage using the eco2soft software. The heating and cooling energy demand was calculated using the WUFI Plus software with recent regional climate data sets. The results show that for both types of construction in multi-storey buildings, it is not only the superstructure that needs to be considered, but also the floor structures, which have a major influence on the embodied impact. The timber building requires less energy to maintain the indoor climate within the set temperatures. As climate change has progressed rapidly in Austria in recent years, it is recommended that the standards for climate models be updated more quickly to allow realistic prediction of thermal comfort at the design stage. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 2029 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Barriers to the Adoption of Reverse Logistics in the Construction Industry: A Combined ISM and MICMAC Approach

by Margarida Pimentel, Amílcar Arantes and Carlos Oliveira Cruz

Sustainability 2022, 14(23), 15786; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315786 - 27 Nov 2022

Cited by 7 | Viewed by 1990

Abstract

With growing environmental concerns, reverse logistics (RL) assumes a significant role in the sustainability of the construction industry to the extent that it can contribute to mitigating some of the negative environmental impacts related to its activity. However, despite the benefits that can be attributed to RL, its implementation level in the construction industry is still very low. This research determines the root barriers to adopting RL in construction (ARLC) using the case of the Portuguese construction market. The methodology involved focus groups and a combined Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) and Matrices d’Impacts cross-multiplication appliqúe a classmate (MICMAC) approach. The root barriers that have been identified by the application of the methodology to the ARLC are: lack of financial incentives to incorporate recycled materials, lack of knowledge about RL, lack of technical support, standard codes and regulations in favor of using recycled materials, lack of information sharing, cooperation and coordination among entities of the supply chain, current buildings have not been designed for deconstruction, and lack of construction and demolition waste (CDW) management and recycling infrastructures and markets for the materials resulting from CDW. The highest hierarchical level includes barrier B10 (lack of financial incentives to incorporate recycled materials into the construction); this barrier influences all the other barriers and, as such, it is considered the key barrier to the ARLC in Portugal. The research has also identified 17 different mitigation measures to tackle these barriers, with different natures: fiscal, regulatory, financial, etc. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Building and Construction Sustainability: Toward a Life Cycle Management of Materials and Processes Flows

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (10 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI