Life cycle carbon emission assessment of a multi-purpose university building: A case study of Sri Lanka

doi:10.15302/J-FEM-2018055

Front. Eng

2018, Vol. 5

Issue (3) : 381-393 https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2018055

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Life cycle carbon emission assessment of a multi-purpose university building: A case study of Sri Lanka

Ramya KUMANAYAKE(

), Hanbin LUO

Department of Construction Management, School of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China

Download: PDF(415 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Buildings are known to significantly affect the global carbon emissions throughout their life cycle. To mitigate carbon emissions, investigation of the current performance of buildings with regard to energy consumption and carbon emissions is necessary. This paper presents a process-based life cycle assessment methodology for assessing carbon emissions of buildings, using a multi-storey reinforced concrete building in a Sri Lankan university as a case study. The entire cradle-to-grave building life cycle was assessed and the life span of the building was assumed as 50 years. The results provide evidence of the significance of operation and material production stages, which contributed to the total carbon emissions by 63.22% and 31.59% respectively. Between them, the main structural materials, concrete and reinforcement steel made up 61.91% of the total carbon emitted at the material production stage. The life cycle carbon emissions of the building were found to be 31.81 kg·m⁻² CO₂ per year, which is comparable with the values obtained in similar studies found in the literature. In minimizing the life cycle carbon emissions, the importance of identifying control measures for both building operation and material production at the early design stage were emphasized. Although the other life cycle stages only contributed to about 5.19% of the life cycle carbon emissions, they should also receive attention when formulating control strategies. Some of the recommended strategies are introducing energy efficiency measures in building design and operation, using renewable energy for building operation and manufacturing of materials, identifying designs that can save mass material quantities, using alternative materials that are locally available in Sri Lanka and implementing material reuse and recycling. This study is one of the first to undertake a life cycle carbon emissions assessment for a building in the Sri Lankan context, with the hope of facilitating environmentally-friendly buildings and promoting sustainable construction practices in the country.

Keywords carbon emission life cycle assessment buildings sustainable construction Sri Lanka

Corresponding Author(s): Ramya KUMANAYAKE

Just Accepted Date: 14 December 2017 Online First Date: 12 January 2018 Issue Date: 14 September 2018

Cite this article:

Ramya KUMANAYAKE,Hanbin LUO. Life cycle carbon emission assessment of a multi-purpose university building: A case study of Sri Lanka[J]. Front. Eng, 2018, 5(3): 381-393.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.15302/J-FEM-2018055
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2018/V5/I3/381

Tab.1 Basic parameters of the case study building

Fig.1 Pictorial view of the case study building

Tab.2 Contribution of major construction materials to total weight and carbon emissions

Fig.2 Comparison of percentage weights and embodied carbon of major building materials

Tab.3 Carbon emissions in material transportation

Tab.4 Carbon emissions in construction

Tab.5 Summary of building life cycle carbon emissions

Fig.3 Carbon emissions from the various building life cycle stages

Tab.6 Comparison of studies on life cycle carbon emissions

1	Abeysundara U G Y, Babel S, Gheewala S H (2009). A matrix in life cycle perspective for selecting sustainable materials for buildings in Sri Lanka. Building and Environment, 44(5): 997–1004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.07.005
2	Abeysundra U G Y, Babel S, Gheewala S (2007). A decision making matrix with life cycle perspective of materials for roofs in Sri Lanka. Materials & Design, 28(9): 2478–2487 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2006.09.011
3	Asif M, Muneer T, Kelley R (2007). Life cycle assessment: A case study of a dwelling home in Scotland. Building and Environment, 42(3): 1391–1394 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.11.023
4	Atmaca A, Atmaca N (2015). Life cycle energy (LCEA) and carbon dioxide emissions (LCCO2A) assessment of two residential buildings in Gaziantep, Turkey. Energy and Building, 102: 417–431 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.06.008
5	Aye L, Ngo T, Crawford R H, Gammampila R, Mendis P (2012). Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy analysis of prefabricated reusable building modules. Energy and Building, 47: 159–168 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.11.049
6	Biswas W K (2014). Carbon footprint and embodied energy assessment of building construction works in Western Australia. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 3(2): 179–186 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2014.11.004
7	Blengini G A (2009). Life cycle of buildings, demolition and recycling potential: A case study in Turin, Italy. Building and Environment, 44(2): 319–330 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.03.007
8	Chau C K, Leung T M, Ng W Y (2015). A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied Energy, 143(1): 395–413 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.023
9	Chau C K, Yik F W H, Hui W K, Liu H C, Yu H K (2007). Environmental impacts of building materials and building services components for commercial buildings in Hong Kong. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(18): 1840–1851 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.10.004
10	Chiraratananon S, Hien V D (2011). Thermal performance and cost effectiveness of massive walls under thai climate. Energy and Building, 43(7): 1655–1662 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.03.010
11	Chiraratananon S, Hien V D, Tummu P (2012). Thermal performance and cost effectiveness of wall insulation under Thai climate. Energy and Building, 45: 82–90 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.10.025
12	Delzendeh E, Wu S, Lee A, Zhou Y (2017). The impact of occupants’ behaviours on building energy analysis: A research review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 80: 1061–1071 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.264
13	Department of Census and Statistics Sri Lanka 2013 (2015). Survey of Construction Industries
14	Dias W P S, Pooliyadda S P (2004). Quality based energy contents and carbon coefficients for building materials: A systems approach. Energy, 29(4): 561–580 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2003.10.001
15	Dimoudi A, Tompa C (2008). Energy and environmental indicators related to construction of office buildings. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53(1–2): 86–95 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.09.008
16	González M J, García Navarro J (2006). Assessment of the decrease of CO2 emissions in the construction field through the selection of materials: Practical case study of three houses of low environmental impact. Building and Environment, 41(7): 902–909 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.04.006
17	Green Building Council Sri Lanka (2015). Green labelling. Sri Lanka website, Accessed September 20, 2017
18	Gustavsson L, Joelsson A, Sathre R (2010). Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy and Building, 42(2): 230–242 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.08.018
19	Hong J, Shen G Q, Feng Y, Lau W S, Mao C (2015). Greenhouse gas emissions during the construction phase of a building: case study in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103: 249–59
20	Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Forth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R K and Reisinger, A (eds.). IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland
21	International Energy Agency (2015). IEA Statistics: CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion
22	International Organization for Standardization (1997). ISO 14040-Environmental management- Life Cycle Assessment- Principles and Framework
23	Jeong Y S, Lee S E, Huh J H (2012). Estimation of CO2 emission of apartment buildings due to major construction materials in the Republic of Korea. Energy and Building, 49: 437–442 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.02.041
24	Kim S, Lee S, Na Y J, Kim J T (2013). Conceptual model for LCC-based LCCO2 analysis of apartment buildings. Energy and Building, 64: 285–291 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.05.016
25	Kofoworola O F, Gheewala S H (2008). Environmental life cycle assessment of a commercial office building in Thailand. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 13(6): 498–511 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0012-1
26	Kofoworola O F, Gheewala S H (2009). Life cycle energy assessment of a typical office building in Thailand. Energy and Building, 41(10): 1076–1083 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.06.002
27	Korea LCI DB Information Network (2017). CFP/EPD website, Accessed May 29, 2017
28	Kua H W, Wong C L (2012). Analysing the life cycle greenhouse gas emission and energy consumption of a multi-storied commercial building in Singapore from an extended system boundary perspective. Energy and Building, 51: 6–14 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.03.027
29	Li D, Cui P, Lu Y (2016). Development of an automated estimator of life-cycle carbon emissions for residential buildings: A case study in Nanjing, China. Habitat International, 57: 154–163 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.07.003
30	Li D Z, Chen H X, Hui E C M, Zhang J B, Li Q M (2013). A methodology for estimating the life-cycle carbon efficiency of a residential building. Building and Environment, 59: 448–455 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.012
31	Luo Z, Yang L, Liu J (2015). Embodied carbon emissions of office building: A case study of China’s 78 office buildings. Building and Environment, 95: 365–371 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.09.018
32	Monahan J, Powell J C (2011). An embodied carbon and energy analysis of modern methods of construction in housing: A case study using a lifecycle assessment framework. Energy and Building, 43(1): 179–188 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.09.005
33	Ortiz-Rodríguez O, Castells F, Sonnemann G (2010). Life cycle assessment of two dwellings: One in Spain, a developed country, and one in Colombia, a country under development. Science of the Total Environment, 408(12): 2435–2443 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.02.021 pmid: 20211484
34	Pacheco-Torres R, Jadraque E, Roldán-Fontana J, Ordóñez J (2014). Analysis of CO2 emissions in the construction phase of single-family detached houses. Sustainable Cities and Society, 12: 63–68 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.01.003
35	Paulsen J S, Sposto R M (2013). A life cycle energy analysis of social housing in Brazil: Case study for the program “MY HOUSE MY LIFE”. Energy and Building, 57: 95–102 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.11.014
36	Pinky Devi L, Palaniappan S (2014). A case study on life cycle energy use of residential building in Southern India. Energy and Building, 80: 247–259 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.05.034
37	Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla K K (2010). Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: An overview. Energy and Building, 42(10): 1592– 1600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.05.007
38	Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla K K (2012). Life cycle approach in evaluating energy performance of residential buildings in Indian context. Energy and Building, 54: 259–265 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.07.016
39	Roh S, Tae S (2016). Building simplified life cycle CO2 emissions assessment tool (B-SCAT) to support low-carbon building design in South Korea. Sustainability, 8(6): 567 https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060567
40	Roh S, Tae S, Shin S (2014a). Development of building materials embodied greenhouse gases assessment criteria and system (BEGAS) in the newly revised Korea Green Building Certification System (G-SEED). Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 35: 410–421 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.034
41	Roh S, Tae S, Shin S, Woo J (2014b). Development of an optimum design program (SUSB-OPTIMUM) for the life cycle CO2 assessment of an apartment house in Korea. Building and Environment, 73: 40–54 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.11.015
42	Roh S, Tae S, Suk S J, Ford G, Shin S (2016). Development of a building life cycle carbon emissions assessment program (BEGAS 2.0) for Korea’s green building index certification system. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53: 954–965 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.048
43	Rossi B, Marique A F, Reiter S (2012). Life-cycle assessment of residential buildings in three different European locations, case study. Building and Environment, 51: 402–407 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.11.002
44	Ruuska A (2013). Role of embodied energy, operational energy and related greenhouse gas emission of buildings in the context of developing tropical countries. In SB13 Singapore-Realising Sustainability in Tropics, 205–11
45	Scheuer C, Keoleian G A, Reppe P (2003). Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: Modeling challenges and design implications. Energy and Building, 35(10): 1049–1064 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(03)00066-5
46	Shukla A, Tiwari G N, Sodha M S (2009). Embodied energy analysis of adobe house. Renewable Energy, 34(3): 755–761 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.04.002
47	Sim J, Sim J, Park C (2016). The air emission assessment of a South Korean apartment building’s life cycle, along with environmental impact. Building and Environment, 95: 104–115 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.09.008
48	Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority (2015). Sri Lanka Energy Balance 2015—An analysis of energy sector performance
50	Tae S, Shin S, Woo J, Roh S (2011). The development of apartment house life cycle CO2 simple assessment system using standard apartment houses of South Korea. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(3): 1454–1467 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.053
51	United Nations Environment Programme (2010). Common Carbon Metric: Protocol for Measuring Energy Use and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building Operations
52	University of Bath UK (2011). Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) Version 2
53	Varun S A, Sharma A, Shree V, Nautiyal H (2012). Life cycle environmental assessment of an educational building in Northern India: A case study. Sustainable Cities and Society, 4(1): 22–28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2012.03.002
54	Venkatarama Reddy B V, Jagadish K S (2003). Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies. Energy and Building, 35(2): 129–137 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(01)00141-4
55	Wen T J, Siong H C, Noor Z Z (2015). Assessment of embodied energy and global warming potential of building construction using life cycle analysis approach: Case studies of residential buildings in Iskandar Malaysia. Energy and Building, 93: 295–302 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.12.002
56	Wu H J, Yuan Z W, Zhang L, Bi J (2012). Life cycle energy consumption and CO2 emission of an office building in China. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17(2): 105–118 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0342-2
57	Zhang X, Wang F (2015). Life-cycle assessment and control measures for carbon emissions of typical buildings in China. Building and Environment, 86: 89–97 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.01.003
58	Zhang Y, Zheng X, Zhang H, Chen G, Wang X (2016). Carbon emission analysis of a residential building in China through life cycle assessment. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 10(1): 150–158 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0684-7

[1]	Yue-Jun ZHANG, Jing-Yue LIU. Overview of research on carbon information disclosure[J]. Front. Eng, 2020, 7(1): 47-62.
[2]	Sarah M. L. HUBBARD, Bryan HUBBARD. A review of sustainability metrics for the construction and operation of airport and roadway infrastructure[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(3): 433-452.
[3]	Zhenhua HUANG, Hongqin FAN, Liyin SHEN. Case-based reasoning for selection of the best practices in low-carbon city development[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(3): 416-432.
[4]	Bingqing ZHANG, Ruochen ZENG, Xiaodong LI. Environmental and human health impact assessment of major interior wall decorative materials[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(3): 406-415.
[5]	Rafaela BORTOLINI, Núria FORCADA. Facility managers’ perceptions on building performance assessment[J]. Front. Eng, 2018, 5(3): 324-333.
[6]	Hakob AVETISYAN, Miroslaw SKIBNIEWSKI, Mohammad MOZAFFARPOUR. Analyzing sustainability of construction equipment in the state of California[J]. Front. Eng, 2017, 4(2): 138-145.
[7]	Ru-jiang Zhao,Wung Hee Moh. Value Management Practices on Major Construction Projects and Green Building[J]. Front. Eng, 2016, 3(2): 147-157.
[8]	Fu-qiang Wang,Jun Liu. The Supply Chain Contract Design under Cap-and-Trade Mechanism with Free Riding[J]. Front. Eng, 2015, 2(3): 277-286.
[9]	Steve Hsueh-Ming Wang,Paula Williams,Jing Shi,Huojun Yang. From Green to Sustainability—Trends in the Assessment Methods of Green Buildings[J]. Front. Eng, 2015, 2(2): 114-121.
[10]	Ai-lian Lin,Yong-ning Niu,Ping-jing Yu. QMS: Its Application and Innovation at a Small Inspection and Appraisal Company[J]. Front. Eng, 2014, 1(4): 390-394.
[11]	Xing Wei,Han-ding Guo. A Comprehensive Evaluation of Policy Effectiveness for Energy Efficiency in Existing Buildings[J]. Front. Eng, 2014, 1(4): 341-347.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed