Submit to Sustainability Review for Sustainability Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings

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 December 2022) | Viewed by 24034

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Ms. Eva Prelovšek Niemelä

E-Mail Website
Assistant Guest Editor

InnoRenew Centre of Excellence (CoE), 6310 Izola-Isola, Slovenia
Interests: sustainability assessment of buildings; wooden construction; bio-based materials for construction of buildings

Dr. Erwin M. Schau

E-Mail Website
Chief Guest Editor

InnoRenew Centre of Excellence (CoE), 6310 Izola-Isola, Slovenia
Interests: life cycle thinkingș life cycle assessment; bio-based materials; wooden construction
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Sustainable development, climate change and other environmental problems are of high concern, as manifested in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Buildings are highly relevant in this regard as, most of the time, people are inside buildings and a large share of total energy use is connected to buildings’ life cycle.

Wisely used, life cycle thinking can prevent burden shifting between life cycle stages and environmental, social and economic impacts in the different stages of a building’s long cradle-to-grave/cradle-to-cradle life.

Up to now, the focus has rightly been on the use phase as buildings are long-lived products. Hence, the use phase, with its energy use, is often the dominating stage in a building or building elements impact assessment (Baldassarri et al. 2017, Lavagna et al. 2018). However, when buildings are built to near or nearly zero, zero and plus building standards, where energy in the use phase becomes respectively small, around zero or even negative (i.e. buildings that produce surplus energy), the environmental impact of the use phase might not be so dominating anymore (Paleari et al. 2016, Schau et al., forthcoming).

The goal of this Special Issue is to explore how state-of-the-art research and practice in life cycle thinking of the built environment is developing, along with improvements in building construction. Research related to the new construction and renovation of existing buildings, that takes into account a holistic, life cycle approach and several SDGs, is of interest. New construction, whole buildings and building elements, fossil fuel free and zero waste construction, are among the topics for this Special Issue. Case studies, comments, reviews and method papers, not only limited to LCA, but also social LCA and life costing, eventually integrated, or not, into a life cycle sustainability assessment (Finkbeiner, et al. 2010), are welcome.

Literature:

Baldassarri, C., Allacker, K., Reale, F., Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2017). Consumer Footprint: Basket of Products indicator on Housing. EUR 28765 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg: https://doi.org/10.2760/05316

Finkbeiner, M., Schau, E. M., Lehmann, A., & Traverso, M. (2010). Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability, 2(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su2103309

Lavagna, M., Baldassarri, C., Campioli, A., Giorgi, S., Valle, A. D., Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2018). Benchmarks for environmental impact of housing in Europe: Definition of archetypes and LCA of the residential building stock. Building and Environment, 145(August), 260–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.09.008

Paleari, M., Lavagna, M., & Campioli, A. (2016). The assessment of the relevance of building components and life phases for the environmental profile of nearly zero-energy buildings: life cycle assessment of a multifamily building in Italy. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21(12), 1667–1690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1133-6

Schau EM, Prelovšek Niemelä E, Niemelä AJ, Alencar Gavric TA and Šušteršič I (forthcoming) Life cycle assessment benchmark for wooden buildings in Europe in Kłos Z, Kałkowska J, Kasprzak J (eds): Towards Sustainable Future. Current Challenges and Prospects in the Life Cycle Management - LCM 2019. Dordrecht: Springer

Dr. Erwin M. Schau
Ms. Eva Prelovšek Niemelä
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

life cycle thinking (LCT)
buildings
building elements
construction
renovation
life cycle assessment (LCA)
social LCA (S-LCA)
life cycle costing (LCC)
sustainability assessment

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

Jump to: Review

24 pages, 2625 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Modelling the Slovenian Wood Industry’s Response to the Greenhouse Gas Paris Agreement and the EU “Fit for 55” Green Transition Plan

by Erwin M. Schau, Igor Gavrić, Iztok Šušteršič, Eva Prelovšek Niemelä, Balázs Dávid, Jaka Gašper Pečnik, David B. DeVallance and Črtomir Tavzes

Sustainability 2023, 15(10), 8376; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108376 - 22 May 2023

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1709

Abstract

Almost 200 nations, including the European Union, have signed the Paris Agreement that aims to limit the temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To meet this target, a significant decrease in GHG emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050 is necessary. To determine the role of wood products in achieving a 55% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030 compared with 1990 levels, we investigated Slovenia’s potential, which has close to 60% forested areas. Therefore, the country could use wood-based products to achieve the agreed-upon climate goals. Nevertheless, uncertainties remain regarding the extent to which increased tree harvesting, local manufacturing, and the utilization of wood products can aid in substituting fossil-derived materials and reducing GHG emissions. A new model was constructed to increase the understanding of the wood products’ (throughout the forest-based industrial ecosystem, incl. construction) potential contribution to reaching the stated emissions targets. Using this linear programming (LP) mathematical optimisation model and carbon footprint calculations based on life cycle assessment methods, a wood flow distribution, the financial investment needed to process these quantities, and the GHG emissions produced and/or saved were calculated. The findings stipulated that Slovenia has the potential to achieve 55 % less GHG emissions by 2030 by expanding logging to at least 3 million m³ and converting the timber to a larger amount of long service-life wooden items made (and utilised) within the country. Such products accumulate carbon for a long time and decrease the need for materials that cause higher GHG emissions. Concomitantly, a better appreciation of the substitution effects in official carbon accounting would be needed. Moreover, to materialize the potential decrease in emissions would require Slovenia’s construction sector to replace fossil- and mineral-based materials with lignocellulosic products, and to increase the capacity to utilize lower-quality wood in high added value applications, which would require significant investment. This paper offers a comprehensive analysis of diverse optimisation outcomes obtained from the investigation into climate action through the use of wood products in Slovenia. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2422 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Life Cycle Assessment of Advanced Building Components towards NZEBs

by Despoina Antypa, Foteini Petrakli, Anastasia Gkika, Pamela Voigt, Alexander Kahnt, Robert Böhm, Jan Suchorzewski, Andreia Araújo, Susana Sousa and Elias P. Koumoulos

Sustainability 2022, 14(23), 16218; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142316218 - 5 Dec 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1847

Abstract

The building sector accounts for 40% of the total energy consumed in Europe at annual basis, together with the relevant Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. In order to mitigate these impacts, the concept and establishment of the Nearly Zero Energy Buildings (NZEBs) is under continuous and intensive research. In fact, as the energy used for buildings’ operation becomes more efficient, impacts resulting from the buildings’ embodied energy become of more importance. Therefore, the selection of building materials and components is of high significance, as these affect the energy performance and potential environmental impacts of the building envelopes. The objective of this study is to perform a preliminary Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on advanced multifunctional building components, aiming to achieve lower embodied emissions in NZEBs. The advanced components analyzed are composite panels for facade elements of building envelopes, providing thermal efficiency. The design of sustainable building envelope systems is expected to upgrade the overall environmental performance of buildings, including the NZEBs. The findings of this study constitute unambiguous evidence on the need for further research on this topic, as substantial lack of data concerning embodied impacts is presented in literature, adding to the growing discussion on NZEBs at a whole life cycle perspective across Europe. This research has shown that the electricity required from the manufacturing phase of the examined building components is the main contributor to climate change impact and the other environmental categories assessed. Sensitivity analysis that has been performed indicated that the climate change impact is highly depended on the electricity grid energy mix across Europe. Taking into account the current green energy transition by the increase of the renewable energy sources in electricity production, as well as the future upgrade of the manufacturing processes, it is expected that this climate change impact will be mitigated. Finally, the comparison between the CLC thermal insulator and other foam concretes in literature showed that the materials of the building components examined do not present any diversions in terms of environmental impact. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

28 pages, 4008 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

A Temporal Perspective in Eco² Building Design

by Patricia Schneider-Marin and Werner Lang

Sustainability 2022, 14(10), 6025; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106025 - 16 May 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1767

Abstract

The architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) sector has great potential and responsibility for reducing its considerable resource consumption and high share of global emissions. However, economic factors are often cited as barriers to more environmentally friendly solutions in building design. Hence, environmental and economic life cycle assessment (LCA and LCC) are of utmost importance in building design. They serve as the base methodologies for what we call the “Eco²” framework. In this context, monetary valuation of multiple environmental impacts allows to integrate the results as a basis for design decisions. A case study representative of small-scale office buildings in Germany illustrates the Eco² framework and shows the influence of temporal parameters (discount rates and price changes), as well as of differing monetary valuation, on the ranking of design options. Varying the temporal parameters affects the ranking of different solutions for the structure and finishes of the case study building but not for its mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) systems and operation. However, the ratio of environmental life cycle cost (eLCC) to financial life cycle cost (fLCC) is significantly higher for MEP systems and operation than for the structure and finishes. This investigation shows that it is possible to achieve simultaneous emission and cost savings, whereas temporal factors can decisively influence decision making in design processes. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

27 pages, 2882 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

Integrating Environmental and Economic Perspectives in Building Design

by Patricia Schneider-Marin, Anne Winkelkotte and Werner Lang

Sustainability 2022, 14(8), 4637; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084637 - 13 Apr 2022

Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2922

Abstract

With increasing environmental damage and decreasing resource availability, sustainability assessment in the building sector is gaining momentum. A literature review shows that the related methods for environmental and economic performance, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC), show great potential for answering a multitude of questions related to building performance. Prevalent topics are the implications of LCA and LCC for retrofit solutions and the trade-offs between environmental and economic considerations in building design. A detailed review of 30 case studies shows the range of differing result integration methods and sheds light on the use of monetary valuation of environmental indicators for an integrated assessment. While a quasi-dynamic approach, accounting for the changing value of money over time, is common in LCC, such an approach is largely absent from LCA. The analysis of common metrics shows that the studies employ strongly differing system boundaries and input parameters. Moreover, a clear description of the methodological framework is missing in most studies. Therefore, this research develops an “Eco²” framework, integrating LCA and LCC for application in building design. Potential further developments for Eco² building assessment are related to extending the system boundaries by including mechanical systems and end-of-life phases, data collection and structuring, and streamlining the approach for continuous application to all stages of building design processes. Additionally, the influence on design decisions of employing temporal parameters in both LCA and LCC and of choosing particular result integration methods should be investigated further. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1314 KiB

Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

Implementing Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Predict Environmental Impacts: Case of Construction Products

by Anish Koyamparambath, Naeem Adibi, Carolina Szablewski, Sierra A. Adibi and Guido Sonnemann

Sustainability 2022, 14(6), 3699; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063699 - 21 Mar 2022

Cited by 13 | Viewed by 6604

Abstract

Nowadays, product designers, manufacturers, and consumers consider the environmental impacts of products, processes, and services in their decision-making process. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a tool that assesses the environmental impacts over a product’s life cycle. Conducting a life cycle assessment (LCA) requires meticulous data sourcing and collection and is often time-consuming for both practitioner and verifier. However, predicting the environmental impacts of products and services can help stakeholders and decision-makers identify the hotspots. Our work proposes using Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques to predict the environmental performance of a product or service to assist LCA practitioners and verifiers. This approach uses data from environmental product declarations of construction products. The data is processed utilizing natural language processing (NLP) which is then trained to random forest algorithm, an ensemble tree-based machine learning method. Finally, we trained the model with information on the product and their environmental impacts using seven impact category values and verified the results using a testing dataset (20% of EPD data). Our results demonstrate that the model was able to predict the values of impact categories: global warming potential, abiotic depletion potential for fossil resources, acidification potential, and photochemical ozone creation potential with an accuracy (measured using R² metrics, a measure to score the correlation of predicted values to real value) of 81%, 77%, 68%, and 70%, respectively. Our method demonstrates the capability to predict environmental performance with a defined variability by learning from the results of the previous LCA studies. The model’s performance also depends on the amount of data available for training. However, this approach does not replace a detailed LCA but is rather a quick prediction and assistance to LCA practitioners and verifiers in realizing an LCA. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

22 pages, 710 KiB

Open AccessReview

Implementation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in the Procurement Process of Buildings: A Systematic Literature Review

by Marco Scherz, Antonija Ana Wieser, Alexander Passer and Helmuth Kreiner

Sustainability 2022, 14(24), 16967; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416967 - 18 Dec 2022

Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2968

Abstract

The construction industry adds a high share to global CO₂ emissions and, thus, to the global climate crisis. Future buildings need to be planned, constructed, operated, and deconstructed in a lifecycle-oriented manner so that the building stock represents a capital asset for future generations. The greatest leverages for reducing a building’s CO₂ emissions lie in the early project phase and subsequently in the tendering and awarding process, which makes early Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) indispensable. In this study, we set a sociological research framework consisting of (i) choosing a research topic, (ii) conducting a literature review, (iii) measuring variables and gathering data, (iv) analyzing data, and (v) drawing a conclusion. Since there are countless studies that apply LCA in the construction sector for environmental assessment, emission reduction, or decision support, we posed the question of whether LCA was also applied in the public building tendering and awarding process. Furthermore, we focused on identifying obstacles to LCA implementation in this early project phase. Therefore, we applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and conducted a Systematic Literature Review (SLR). The results show that numerous articles focused on sustainable tendering or green public procurement in the construction industry; however, the LCA method is scarcely used in the procurement processes (19 articles in the final sample). Based on our findings, the main obstacles to LCA implementation in the procurement process are highlighted in the study. In the future, the mandatory integration of LCA into the procurement process will be crucial to reduce the CO₂ emissions generated by the construction industry and thus contribute to the EU climate target plan to ensure carbon neutrality by 2050. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

30 pages, 6990 KiB

Open AccessReview

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Earth Construction: A Systematic Literature Review Considering Five Construction Techniques

by Deborah Arduin, Lucas Rosse Caldas, Rayane de Lima Moura Paiva and Fernando Rocha

Sustainability 2022, 14(20), 13228; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013228 - 14 Oct 2022

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3887

Abstract

In the past decade, there has been an increase in the environmental performance assessment in earth construction through the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. A Systematic Literature Review verified LCA methodology trends of five earth construction techniques from 2016 to April 2022, resulting in 27 studies. The results have been analyzed through qualitative thematic analysis, considering LCA methodology. Considering embodied carbon (GWP) and embodied energy, transportation and binder content were the main factors that influenced environmental performance. Hence, earth-based constructions exhibit better results in different impact categories than conventional materials. Environmental guidelines and technical features that were presented in the LCA studies are discussed for Adobe, Cob, Rammed Earth (RE), Compressed Earth Block (CEB), and Light Straw Clay (LSC). This study presents environmental benchmarks at the unit, wall, and building scales aiming to encourage LCA methodology applied to earth construction techniques and fostering the discussion of earth construction sustainability. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Life Cycle Thinking and Sustainability Assessment of Buildings)

► Show Figures