Treloar, G J (2000) Streamlined life cycle assessment of domestic structural wall members. Journal of Construction Research, 1(1), pp. 69-76. ISSN 1609-9451
Abstract
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methods, while accepted as the only valid method of evaluating the environmental impacts of buildings, are generally too cumbersome for use by building designers. Therefore, streamlined LCA methods have been developed, which involve either reducing the system boundary of the analysis, reducing the breadth of environmental parameters considered, or using less reliable statistical data. However, currently available streamlined LCA data tends to be inappropriately applied, leaving gaps in the systems boundary. The development of more accurate and complete streamlined LCA data and methods is therefore required, and the author describes some recent developments. Timber wall studs and steel wall studs are compared to recycled steel wall studs, using a new hybrid LCA method based on input-output data. Compared to previous results, steel can have lower greenhouse gas emissions than timber in certain circumstances. Furthermore, the use of input-output data as the basis for the LCA means that reliable data from industry can be incorporated within a comprehensive systems boundary.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | embodied energy; life cycle assessment; streamlined LCA; building materials |
| Index terms: | greenhouse gas emission, environmental impact, embodied energy, building material, designer, life cycle assessment |
| Subjects: | energy systems, environmental health, building materials, environmental impact, profession |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Sustainability, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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