Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods and Life Cycle Assessment Processes
2.1. Goal and Scope of LCA
2.2. Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)
2.3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
- Global warming potential (GWP): greenhouse gasses and global warming—fossil + biogenic
- Ozone depletion potential (ODP): damage to ozone in the upper atmosphere
- Acidification potential (AP): acidification of soil or water
- Eutrophication potential (EP): over-fertilisation and excessive biomass growth
- Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP): impact of ozone and other oxidants in lower atmosphere
- Abiotic depletion potential—elements (ADPE): elements, minerals and energy consumed
- Abiotic depletion potential—fossil (ADPF): consumption of fossil resources
GaBi Modelling
2.4. Other Assumptions
- Assumptions regarding the roll forming and storage facility processes are noted in Appendix A.
- The processes not included in the assessment had a negligible effect on the overall environmental impacts of the roof.
- The generic inventory and LCI data in the software was a reasonably accurate representation of the processes and impacts from the production of the local manufactured long run roofing profile with five ribs.
3. Results
3.1. Life Cycle Assessment of Organic Coated Steel Coil
3.2. Life Cycle Assessment of the Long Run Roofing Profile with Five Ribs
3.3. Life Cycle Assessment of the Ancillary Items
3.4. Life Cycle Assessment of the Case Roof including Ancillary Items
4. Discussion and Recommendations
4.1. Importance of Source of Steel Coil for Roofing in LCA
4.2. Consideration of Ancillary Items in LCA
4.3. Recommendation for Improving the Sustainability of Steel Roofing Products
- There was a large part of the environmental impact from the steel roof product’s raw materials and manufacturing processes. The processes were identified as the hotspots of the steel roofing product by having more than 50% environmental impact across all indicators. In addition, when including the ancillary items, the steel roofing production processes also had the biggest environmental impact, accounting for more than 80% of the total impact in most categories. Therefore, this highlights the potential room for improvement in the steel roofing product’s environmental performance by reducing the effects of the product’s manufacturing processes. Optimising the steel roof design can be one of the solutions for reducing the impacts of the manufacturing processes. Reducing the weight of steel used can potentially reduce the amount of raw material and also the amount of energy used during the manufacturing process.
- Although the roll forming process had lower environmental impacts than others, identifying the highest impacts from the components during the process was performed. The machine used in the study to press and cut the steel coil into the final long run roofing profile with five ribs had the largest impact on the environment, which is 69% of the total impacts, in comparison with other activities in the processes. One of the other contributing factors was the direct electricity consumption used by the machine. According to 2019 national electricity supply data [76], most of the electricity supply in New Zealand is primarily from renewable energy sources. However, 17.5% of the energy generated is from burning fossil fuels [76]. Thus, improving renewable energy production, such as using photovoltaic (PV) panels in manufacturing sites, can reduce the effects of fossil fuel consumption during the roll forming process.
- It was found that the recycling of steel products at the EOL stages had a significant positive influence on the environmental impacts for all impact categories. There was a significant recovery of the life cycle impacts after the recycling process, which could reduce the impact values by up to 45% of the total impacts in GWP, POCP, and ADP fossil indicators. Therefore, it highlights the importance of the reuse and recycling processes of the steel roofing product in improving its environmental performance.
- LCA should consider the source of the steel coil used in roofing. When the final guidance for completing a simple LCA is released, it should include data to consider all major brands of steel coil used for roofing. EPDs are available for NZ products, and data for roofing made from an imported coil is presented in the study.
- Roll forming processes to convert steel coil to roofing are negligible and can be ignored. However, the transportation of the coil to the roll forming site should be considered if the steel coil is imported.
- Ancillary items should be considered in LCA; however, a simple increase in emissions from steel roofing is considered suitable for simplified LCA. The data for the factor of increase for each impact category is provided in the study.
5. Conclusions
- It was found that for all impact categories, on average, coated steel coil manufactured globally had less than 70% of the impact of the New Zealand product.
- The roll forming process to convert coated steel coil to steel roofing had an insignificant effect on overall emissions, less than 0.5% of the total impacts for six out of the seven impact categories. On the other hand, transportation of steel coil was responsible for a significant proportion of impacts, accounting for 49% of the eutrophication potential and 6% of the global warming potential for steel coil imported from South Korea.
- Ancillary items accounted for less than 30% of total roof emissions for all impact categories except eutrophication (40%). Gutter and flashings accounted for at least 10% of total emissions for all impact categories, and there were also notable emissions from underlay and timber purlins or fascia boards.
- The overall global warming impact from the steel roof was 12 kg CO2-eq for every 1 m2 of floor area.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix A.1. De-Coiler
- De-coiler model: Haixing HX.
- Output: 1 m of roofing/5 s based on speed of roll forming machine.
- Power usage: 3 kW assumed continuously for operation resulting in an estimated power use of 0.0066 kWh/m2 of roofing.
Appendix A.2. Roll Forming (and Cutting) Machine
- Roll forming model: Xianfa XF42.
- Machine output: Based on a YouTube video of the operating machine, an output of approximately 1 m of roofing per 5 s was determined.
- Power usage: 7.5 kW assumed to be used continuously during the machine’s operation resulting in an estimated power use of 0.016 kWh/m2 of roofing.
Appendix A.3. Forklift
- Length of steel in one coil: 500 m.
- Gas use by forklift: 2.75 kg/h.
- Handling time per coil prior to profiling in factory: 10 min → 0.012 kg/m2-roofing.
- Handling time per coil in storage: 10 min → 0.012 kg/m2-roofing.
Appendix A.4. Other Power Usage
References
- Rockström, J.; Steffen, W.; Noone, K.; Persson, Å.; Chapin, F.S., III; Lambin, E.; Lenton, T.M.; Scheffer, M.; Folke, C.; Schellnhuber, H.J.; et al. Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14, 32. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268316 (accessed on 25 February 2022). [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment. Building for Climate Change: Transforming the Building and Construction Sector to Reduce Emissions and Improve Climate Resilience; MBIE: Wellington, New Zealand, 2020; p. 10. Available online: https://www.mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/11522-building-for-climate-change (accessed on 25 February 2022).
- UNEP. Buildings and Climate Change: Summary for Decision Makers; United Nations Environment Programme: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment. Whole-of-Life Embodied Carbon Emissions Reduction Framework; MBIE: Wellington, New Zealand, 2020; p. 24. Available online: https://www.mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/11794-whole-of-life-embodied-carbon-emissions-reduction-framework (accessed on 25 February 2022).
- NZGBC. Climate Change and Building Pollution. 2020. Available online: https://www.nzgbc.org.nz/climate-change-and-building-pollution (accessed on 24 February 2022).
- Gibbons, O.P.; Orr, J.J. How to Calculate Embodied Carbon; The Institution of Structural Engineers: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, O.; Carman, N. An Introduction to Embodied Carbon Associated with Building Design in Aotearoa—New Zealand [Paper Presentation]. SESOC 2-21: A New Beginning, Hamilton, New Zealand; 5–6 July 2021. Available online: https://2021conf.sesoc.org.nz/PDFs/S3A%20P3%20-%20Mitchell_Carman.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2022).
- Hu, M.; Esram, N.W. The Status of Embodied Carbon in Building Practice and Research in the United States: A Systematic Investigation. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, W.-J.; Kim, R.; Roh, S.; Ban, H. Identifying the Major Construction Wastes in the Building Construction Phase Based on Life Cycle Assessments. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamage, G.; Vickers, J.; Fisher, B.; Nebel, B. Under Construction: Hidden Emissions and Untapped Potential of Buildings for New Zealand’s 2050 Zero Carbon Goal; Thinkstep ANZ: Pukerua Bay, New Zealand, 2019; p. 55. Available online: https://www.thinkstep-anz.com/resrc/reports/hidden-emissions-and-untapped-potential-of-buildings-for-new-zealands-2050-zero-carbon-goal/ (accessed on 26 February 2022).
- McElroy, S. Notice Seeking Clearance for IKO to Acquire All of the Shares of Ross Roof Group Limited; IKO: Wellington, New Zealand, 2021. Available online: https://comcom.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/255918/IKO-Industries-Ltd-clearance-application-27-May.pdf (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Chen, B.; Roy, K.; Fang, Z.; Uzzaman, A.; Chi, Y.; Lim, J. Web crippling capacity of fastened cold-formed steel channels with edge-stiffened web holes, un-stiffened web holes and plain webs under two-flange loading. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021, 163, 107666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ananthi, G.B.G.; Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Lim, J.B.P. Testing, simulation and design of back-to-back built-up cold-formed steel unequal angle sections under axial compression. Steel Compos. Struct. 2019, 33, 595–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Lau, H.H.; Lim, J.B.P. Finite element modelling of back-to-back built-up cold-formed stainless-steel lipped channels under axial compression. Steel Compos. Struct. 2019, 33, 37–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathieson, C.; Roy, K.; Clifton, G.; Ahmadi, A.; Lim, J. Failure mechanism and bearing capacity of cold-formed steel trusses with HRC connectors. Eng. Struct. 2019, 201, 109741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Xie, Z.; Ingham, J.; Lim, J. Effect of the web hole size on the axial capacity of back-to-back aluminium alloy channel section columns. Eng. Struct. 2022, 260, 114238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Fang, Z.; Uzzaman, A.; Lim, J.B.P. Axial Capacity of Back-to-Back Built-Up Aluminum Alloy Channel Section Columns. J. Struct. Eng. 2022, 148, 04021265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Lau, H.H.; Ting, T.C.H.; Chen, B.; Lim, J.B. Flexural behaviour of back-to-back built-up cold-formed steel channel beams: Experiments and finite element modelling. Structures 2020, 29, 235–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowe, D.; Roy, K.; Das, R.; Clifton, G.C.; Lim, J.B. Full scale experiments on splitting behaviour of concrete slabs in steel concrete composite beams with shear stud connection. Structures 2019, 23, 126–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Wang, W.; Zhang, R.; Zhao, P.; Cheng, J. A calculation model and time-history analysis of semi-rigid steel frame-cfs inflled wall structures. Prog. Steel Build. Struct. 2021, 23, 115–124. [Google Scholar]
- Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Fang, Z.; Uzzaman, A.; Chen, X.; Lim, J.B. Local and distortional buckling behaviour of back-to-back built-up aluminium alloy channel section columns. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021, 163, 107713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.; Roy, K.; Uzzaman, A.; Lim, J.B. Moment capacity of cold-formed channel beams with edge-stiffened web holes, un-stiffened web holes and plain webs. Thin-Walled Struct. 2020, 157, 107070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Ma, Q.; Uzzaman, A.; Lim, J.B. Application of deep learning method in web crippling strength prediction of cold-formed stainless steel channel sections under end-two-flange loading. Structures 2021, 33, 2903–2942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Lau, H.H.; Fang, Z.; Ahmed, A.M.M.; Lim, J.B.P. Axial capacity of back-to-back built-up cold-formed stainless steel unlipped channels-Numerical investigation and parametric study. Steel Compos. Struct. 2021, 40, 761–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Mares, J.; Sham, C.-W.; Chen, B.; Lim, J.B. Deep learning-based axial capacity prediction for cold-formed steel channel sections using Deep Belief Network. Structures 2021, 33, 2792–2802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dar, M.A.; Subramanian, N.; Rather, A.I.; Dar, A.R.; Lim, J.B.P.; Anbarasu, M.; Roy, K. Effect of angle stiffeners on the flexural strength and stiffness of cold-formed steel beams. Steel Compos. Struct. 2019, 33, 225–243. [Google Scholar]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Xie, Z.; Lim, J.B. Local and distortional buckling behaviour of aluminium alloy back-to-back channels with web holes under axial compression. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 47, 103837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.; Roy, K.; Fang, Z.; Uzzaman, A.; Raftery, G.; Lim, J.B. Moment capacity of back-to-back cold-formed steel channels with edge-stiffened holes, un-stiffened holes, and plain webs. Eng. Struct. 2021, 235, 112042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, Y.; Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Fang, Z.; Uzzaman, A.; Ananthi, G.B.G.; Lim, J.B.P. Effect of web hole spacing on axial capacity of back-to-back cold-formed steel channels with edge-stiffened holes. Steel Compos. Struct. 2021, 40, 287–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Lau, H.H.; Fang, Z.; Masood, R.; Ting, T.C.H.; Lim, J.B.; Lee, V.C.C. Effects of corrosion on the strength of self-drilling screw connections in cold-formed steel structures-experiments and finite element modeling. Structures 2022, 36, 1080–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roy, K.; Ting, T.; Lau, H.H.; Lim, J. Experimental Investigation into the Behaviour of Back-to-Back Gapped Built-Up Cold-Formed Steel Channel Sections under Compression. In Proceedings of the International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures 2018—Recent Research and Developments in Cold-Formed Steel Design and Construction, St. Louis, MO, USA, 7–8 November 2018; pp. 283–297. [Google Scholar]
- Roy, K.; Lau, H.H.; Lim, J.B. Numerical investigations on the axial capacity of back-to-back gapped built-up cold-formed stainless steel channels. Adv. Struct. Eng. 2019, 22, 2289–2310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Lakshmanan, D.; Pranomrum, P.; Li, F.; Lau, H.H.; Lim, J.B. Structural behaviour of back-to-back cold-formed steel channel sections with web openings under axial compression at elevated temperatures. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 54, 104512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Xu, J.; Dai, Y.; Paul, B.; Lim, J.B. A novel machine learning method to investigate the web crippling behaviour of perforated roll-formed aluminium alloy unlipped channels under interior-two flange loading. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 51, 104261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, Y.; Roy, K.; Fang, Z.; Chen, B.; Raftery, G.M.; Lim, J.B. A novel machine learning model to predict the moment capacity of cold-formed steel channel beams with edge-stiffened and un-stiffened web holes. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 53, 104592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Chen, B.; Sham, C.-W.; Hajirasouliha, I.; Lim, J.B. Deep learning-based procedure for structural design of cold-formed steel channel sections with edge-stiffened and un-stiffened holes under axial compression. Thin-Walled Struct. 2021, 166, 108076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Chi, Y.; Chen, B.; Lim, J.B. Finite element analysis and proposed design rules for cold-formed stainless steel channels with web holes under end-one-flange loading. Structures 2021, 34, 2876–2899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Liang, H.; Poologanathan, K.; Ghosh, K.; Mohamed, A.M.; Lim, J.B.P. Numerical Simulation and Design Recommendations for Web Crippling Strength of Cold-Formed Steel Channels with Web Holes under Interior-One-Flange Loading at Elevated Temperatures. Buildings 2021, 11, 666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Z.; Roy, K.; Uzzaman, A.; Lim, J.B. Numerical simulation and proposed design rules of cold-formed stainless steel channels with web holes under interior-one-flange loading. Eng. Struct. 2021, 252, 113566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dani, A.A.; Roy, K.; Masood, R.; Fang, Z.; Lim, J.B.P. A Comparative Study on the Life Cycle Assessment of New Zealand Residential Buildings. Buildings 2022, 12, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, H.; Roy, K.; Fang, Z.; Lim, J.B.P. A Critical Review on Optimization of Cold-Formed Steel Members for Better Structural and Thermal Performances. Buildings 2022, 12, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffmann, C.; van Hoey, M.; Zeumer, B. Decarbonization Challenge for Steel; McKinsey & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Metals%20and%20Mining/Our%20Insights/Decarbonization%20challenge%20for%20steel/Decarbonization-challenge-for-steel.pdf (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Swalec, C.; Shearer, C. Pedal to the Metal 2021: No Time to Delay Decarbonizing the Global Steel Sector; Global Energy Monitor: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2021; p. 36. Available online: https://globalenergymonitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pedal-to-the-Metal.pdf (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Bhatnagar, S. Five Actions to Improve the Sustainability of Steel. 2021. Available online: https://www.ey.com/en_jo/mining-metals/five-actions-to-improve-the-sustainability-of-steel (accessed on 28 February 2022).
- International Energy Agency. Net Zero by 2050—A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2021; p. 224. Available online: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/deebef5d-0c34-4539-9d0c-10b13d840027/NetZeroby2050-ARoadmapfortheGlobalEnergySector_CORR.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2022).
- Grande, E.; Imbimbo, M.; Tomei, V. Structural Optimization of Grid Shells: Design Parameters and Combined Strategies. J. Arch. Eng. 2018, 24, 04017027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grande, E.; Imbimbo, M.; Tomei, V. Optimization Strategies for Grid Shells: The Role of Joints. J. Arch. Eng. 2020, 26, 04019028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rombouts, J.; Lombaert, G.; de Laet, L.; Schevenels, M. A novel shape optimization approach for strained gridshells: Design and construction of a simply supported gridshell. Eng. Struct. 2019, 192, 166–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, J.N.; Adriaenssens, S.; Coelho, R.F.; Bouillard, P. Coupled form-finding and grid optimization approach for single layer grid shells. Eng. Struct. 2013, 52, 230–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ortiz-Rodríguez, O.; Castells, F.; Sonnemann, G. Life cycle assessment of two dwellings: One in Spain, a developed country, and one in Colombia, a country under development. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408, 2435–2443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rebitzer, G.; Ekvall, T.; Frischknecht, R.; Hunkeler, D.; Norris, G.; Rydberg, T.; Schmidt, W.-P.; Suh, S.; Weidema, B.P.; Pennington, D.W. Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environ. Int. 2004, 30, 701–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olsen, S.I.; Christensen, F.M.; Hauschild, H.; Pedersen, F.; Larsen, H.F.; Torslov, J. Life cycle impact assessment and risk assessment of chemicals in a methodological comparison. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2001, 21, 385–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vilches, A.; Martinez, A.; Montanes, B. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of building refurbishment: A literature review. Energy Build. 2017, 135, 286–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnston, R.P.; McGrath, T.; Nanukuttan, S.; Lim, J.B.; Soutsos, M.; Chiang, M.C.; Masood, R.; Rahman, M.A. Sustainability of Cold-formed Steel Portal Frames in Developing Countries in the Context of Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costs. Structures 2018, 13, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emami, N.; Heinonen, J.; Marteinsson, B.; Säynäjoki, A.; Junnonen, J.-M.; Laine, J.; Junnila, S. A Life Cycle Assessment of Two Residential Buildings Using Two Different LCA Database-Software Combinations: Recognizing Uniformities and Inconsistencies. Buildings 2019, 9, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SimaPro. What is an Input-Output Database for LCA? SimaPro: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2017; Available online: https://simapro.com/2017/what-is-an-input-output-io-database/ (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Säynäjoki, A.; Heinonen, J.; Junnila, S.; Horvath, A. Can life-cycle assessment produce reliable policy guidelines in the building sector? Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 013001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO Standard, No. 14040:2006; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. ISO: Geneva Switzerland, 2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Rangelov, M.; Dylla, H.; Mukherjee, A.; Sivaneswaran, N. Use of environmental product declarations (EPDs) of pavement materials in the United States of America (U.S.A.) to ensure environmental impact reductions. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 283, 124619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pagnon, F.; Mathern, A.; Ek, K. A Review of Online Sources of Open-Access Life Cycle Assessment Data for the Construction Sector. In IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020; Volume 588, p. 042051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sphera. GaBi ts, Version 9.1.0.53; Computer Software; Sphera: Berlin, Germany, 2020. Available online: https://gabi.sphera.com/software/gabi-universities/gabi-education-free/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- PRé Sustainability. SimaPro, Version 9.1.1; Computer Software; PRé Sustainability: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2020. Available online: https://simapro.com/licences/#/education(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- GreenDelta. OpenLCA, Version 1.11.0; Computer Software; GreenDelta: Berlin, Germany, 2022. Available online: https://www.openlca.org/download/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- BRANZ. LCAQuick, Version 3.4.3; Computer Software; BRANZ: Judgeford, New Zealand, 2020. Available online: https://www.branz.co.nz/environment-zero-carbon-research/framework/lcaquick/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- WorldSteel Association. Life Cycle Assessment: Environmental Assessment of Roofing Systems; WorldSteel Association: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; p. 47. Available online: https://worldsteel.org/wp-content/uploads/Life-cycle-assessment-Environmental-assessment-of-roofing-systems.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2022).
- Herrmann, I.T.; Moltesen, A. Does it matter which Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tool you choose?—A comparative assessment of SimaPro and GaBi. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 86, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colorsteel. Environmental Product Declaration; EPD Australasia: Nelson, New Zealand, 2018; p. 20. Available online: https://epd-australasia.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/NZS0028-EPD-document-COLORSTEEL.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Colorsteel. Environmental Product Declaration: Addendum—Rollforming Data; Colorsteel: Glenbrook, New Zealand, 2018; p. 8. Available online: https://www.colorsteel.co.nz/assets/Brochures/COLORSTEEL_EDP_Document_Supplement_2019_Nocrops.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Colorcote. Environmental Product Declaration; Colorcote: Auckland, New Zealand, 2019; p. 15. Available online: https://www.colorcote.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Colorcote-EPD-Document.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Bare, J.C.; Hofstetter, P.; Pennington, D.W.; de Haes, H.A.U. Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2000, 5, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sartori, T.; Drogemuller, R.; Omrani, S.; Lamari, F. A schematic framework for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Green Building Rating System (GBRS). J. Build. Eng. 2021, 38, 102180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- New Zealand Steel. The Ironmaking Process|New Zealand Steel. 2015. Available online: https://www.nzsteel.co.nz/.https://www.nzsteel.co.nz/new-zealand-steel/the-story-of-steel/the-science-of-steel/the-ironmaking-process/ (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- Zampori, L.; Saouter, E.; Schau, E.; Cristobal Garcia, J.; Castellani, V.; Sala, S. Guide for Interpreting Life Cycle Assessment Result; EUR 28266 EN; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Love, S. Steel Product Carbon Offset Programme; Thinkstep ANZ: Wellington, New Zealand, 2020; p. 47. Available online: https://www.hera.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/Steel-Sector-Carbon-Offset-Programme-Instructions-v4-28-10-2020.pdf (accessed on 22 May 2022).
- Le, A.B.D.; Whyte, A.; Biswas, W.K. Carbon footprint and embodied energy assessment of roof-covering materials. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2019, 21, 1913–1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry for the Environment. New Zealand’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2019; Ministry for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2021. Available online: https://environment.govt.nz/assets/Publications/New-Zealands-Greenhouse-Gas-Inventory-1990-2019Volume-1-Chapters-1-15.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2022).
Item | Material in GaBi | Qty | Unit | kg/m2-Floor | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Steel | The long run roofing profile with five ribs—0.55mm | Organic steel coil | 376 | Lin/m | 5.800 |
Ridge/barge flashing | Organic steel coil | 80 | Lin/m | 0.590 | |
Eave drip flashing | Organic steel coil | 18 | Lin/m | 0.050 | |
125 box gutter | Organic steel coil | 18 | Lin/m | 0.100 | |
Internal gutter | Organic steel coil | 5 | Lin/m | 0.020 | |
Others | Fascia board (ridge/barge/eaves) | Pine | 95 | Lin/m | 0.460 |
Timber purlins/battens | Pine | 1 − 70 × 45 | at 900 crs | 1.500 | |
Underlay | Polypropylene film | 7 | 50 m2 rolls | 0.130 | |
Flashing tape | Aluminum foil + rubber | 10 | Lin/m | 0.002 | |
Excluded | Roof truss and brackets, fixings, soffit boards, gutter brackets, downpipes, touch-up paint, and gutter pipe flashings | n/a |
Impact Category | Unit | 1 m2 of 5-rib Trapezoidal Steel Profile | |
---|---|---|---|
Imported Organic Coated Steel Coils | Locally Sourced Organic Coated Steel Coils | ||
Global Warming Potential | kg CO2-eq | 1.49 × 101 | 2.20 × 101 |
Ozone Depletion | kg CFC11-eq | −4.21 × 10−9 | 4.85 × 10−9 |
Acidification | kg SO2-eq | 4.42 × 10−2 | 1.99 × 10−1 |
Eutrophication | kg PO4-eq | 3.81 × 10−3 | 1.05 × 10−2 |
Photochemical Ozone Creation | kg C2H4-eq | 6.93 × 10−3 | 1.11 × 10−2 |
Abiotic Depletion—Elements | kg SB-eq | 8.37 × 10−5 | 1.79 × 10−4 |
Abiotic Depletion—Fossil | MJ | 1.61 × 102 | 2.84 × 102 |
Impact Category | Unit | Life Cycle Modules | Total | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1–A3, D | A2 1 | C3–C4 2 | |||
Global Warming Potential | kg CO2-eq | 9.97 | 5.17 × 10−1 | 7.00 × 10−2 | 1.06 × 101 |
Ozone Depletion | kg CFC11-eq | −2.50 × 10−8 | Negligible | 7.93 × 10−15 | −2.5 × 10−8 |
Acidification | kg SO2-eq | 3.32 × 10−2 | 1.22 × 10−2 | 2.00 × 10−4 | 4.60 × 10−2 |
Eutrophication | kg PO4-eq | 2.85 × 10−3 | 2.40 × 10−3 | 2.82 × 10−5 | 5.28 × 10−3 |
Photochemical Ozone Creation | kg C2H4-eq | 4.93 × 10−3 | −1.26 × 10−3 | 1.73 × 10−5 | 3.69 × 10−3 |
Abiotic Depletion—Elements | kg SB-eq | 8.00 × 10−5 | Negligible | 2.68 × 10−8 | 8.00 × 10−5 |
Abiotic Depletion—Fossil | MJ | 1.09 × 102 | Negligible | 9.70 × 10−1 | 1.10 × 102 |
Impact Category | Percentage Increase of Roofing Only Impacts |
---|---|
Global Warming Potential | 9% |
Ozone Depletion | 14% |
Acidification | 24% |
Eutrophication | 40% |
Photochemical Ozone Creation | 3% |
Abiotic Depletion—Elements | 14% |
Abiotic Depletion—Fossil | 27% |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Roy, K.; Dani, A.A.; Ichhpuni, H.; Fang, Z.; Lim, J.B.P. Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943
Roy K, Dani AA, Ichhpuni H, Fang Z, Lim JBP. Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof. Applied Sciences. 2022; 12(12):5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943
Chicago/Turabian StyleRoy, Krishanu, Aflah Alamsah Dani, Hartej Ichhpuni, Zhiyuan Fang, and James B. P. Lim. 2022. "Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof" Applied Sciences 12, no. 12: 5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943