Sami Kashkooli, A M (2013) A critical building lifecycle assessment framework for building designers and decision makers. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
In the past few decades, world-wide interest in environmental preservation has involved researchers in a great challenge to find new approaches to manage the environmental impact of human activities. This challenge has been significantly highlighted in the construction sector. Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) has developed a variety of methodologies and tools to quantify and manage rates of consumption and emissions during the process of a building’s construction, service-life, and disposal. However, the building sector is not yet satisfied with the results of these methods and tools, due to the low level of sensitivity, lack of user-friendliness and precision. The principal goal of this research is to determine the level of confidence in prospective building lifecycle assessment (BLCA) methodologies and tools in the UK and their applicability to design and decision making. In addition, it investigates the differentiation of the results according to climatic and geographical variation. Therefore, it introduces a new prospective semi-quantitative framework to calculate some key factors such as total energy (including embodied energy and operational energy) during the building’s lifecycle, as well as the embodied carbon, and total environmental impact. The capability of this framework was tested through 132 modelling scenarios of a real case study (‘The Arts Tower' of Sheffield, United Kingdom). In the study, a quantitative measurement approach was developed (an Excel-based spreadsheet) with a great flexibility in micro-detail modelling. This spreadsheet benefits from validated updatable databases and various-unlimited modelling programmes (such as Envest 2 and Ecotect 2011, in this research) to reach a more realistic decision in design. The results of this measurement approach were compared based on different modelling scenarios. The differences are based on the variety of building material scenarios through the case study building in Sheffield. The main outcome of this research is a framework of semi-quantitative prospective BLCA developed to achieve more precise results applicable to design and decision-making. The determination of the sensitivity and capability of this framework was conducted through both quantitative (132 modelling scenarios) and qualitative (surveys including questionnaires and interviews) approaches.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Altan, H |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; decision making; differentiation; environmental impact; interview; measurement; UK |
| Index terms: | modelling, human activity, embodied energy, building material, lifecycle, database, designer, spreadsheet, case study, low level, consumption, differentiation, construction sector, variation, methodology, decision-making, environmental impact, questionnaire, United Kingdom, survey, programme, embodied carbon, interview |
| Subjects: | research methods, Geography, analytical methods, organization, environmental impact, consumer economics, data management, project controls, decision analysis, sociology, measurement and scaling, industry analysis, contractual condition, building materials, data science, energy systems, project delivery, data collection methods, profession |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Time Control, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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