Densley Tingley, D (2013) Design for deconstruction: an appraisal. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
This thesis contains an assessment and discussion of the sustainability of design for deconstruction. As a basis for the work, existing literature was reviewed and the gaps in existing knowledge highlighted. Environmental assessment methods were identified as a way to incentivise design for deconstruction. An analysis of LEED demonstrated minimal achievement of reuse credits, likely due to limited availability of reused materials. The supply chain can be developed in the future through the design for deconstruction of all new buildings. Quantifying the environmental benefits of design for deconstruction was underlined as a key strategy to encourage designers to consider the incorporation of design for deconstruction. A methodology was developed to account for designed-in future reuse at the initial design stage. This is based on a PAS2050 methodology (2008) which shares the environmental impact of an element over the number of predicted lives. In the course of this work it has been assumed that the typical building has a fifty year life span, a conservative estimate. Studies in this thesis limit analysis to a hundred year period, giving a possible two lives for the majority of elements. The methodology was used as a basis for the calculation of savings that occur by designing for deconstruction. Initial feasibility studies estimated that a 49% saving in embodied carbon is accomplished by designing for deconstruction. Having demonstrated the potential scope of savings, a tool, Sakura, was developed to enable designers to investigate the savings in embodied energy and carbon for their own schemes. Sakura was used to assess the savings that could be achieved for a range of case studies. Steel and timber frame structures demonstrated the greatest potential savings from design for deconstruction. School projects exhibited the highest savings when the building types were compared.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | environmental assessment; environmental impact; feasibility studies; new build; reuse; timber; designer; sustainability; case studies |
| Index terms: | environmental assessment, appraisal, environmental impact, design stage, methodology, strategy, feasibility study, embodied carbon, embodied energy, estimate, designer, savings, frame structure, new build, case study |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, factor and component analysis, research methods, professional practice, economic analysis, environmental impact, management, construction integration, energy systems, financial and cost management, design stages, profession, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here