Choudhary, K; Sangwa, N R and Sangwan, K S (2025) Comparative life cycle assessment of flooring options for sustainable buildings. Construction Innovation, 25(4), pp. 1108-1126. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to quantify and compare the environmental impacts of Marble-stone and Kota-stone flooring options widely used for buildings in India. The study discusses the possibility of carbon sequestration through Bamboo cultivation in India. Design/methodology/approach: The study has followed a standard life cycle assessment (LCA) framework based on ISO 14040 guidelines. Three distinct phases have been compared on midpoint and endpoint assessment categories – raw material, polishing and disposal. Primary data has been collected from the construction site in India, and secondary data has been collected from the Ecoinvent 3.0 database. Previous studies have been referred to discuss and calculate the area of bamboo cultivation required to sequestrate the generated carbon from the flooring. Findings: The study has found that endpoint category damage to resources, and midpoint categories of climate change, metal depletion and agricultural land use are highly impacted in building floorings. The study has also found that the Marble-stone floor generates higher environmental impacts than the Kota-stone floor in most of the midpoint and endpoint impact categories. This difference is significant in the raw material phase due to the different compositions of stones. The study also found that Bamboo has excellent potential to act as a carbon sink and mitigate the generated carbon. Research limitations/implications: This study excludes human labour, cutting and distribution of floor tiles made of Marble-stone and Kota-stone. The researcher can use the study to evaluate, compare and benchmark the various building flooring options from the environmental perspective. The study aids to the body of knowledge available on the various building flooring options by presenting the LCA or the environmental impacts generated by two flooring options. It is expected that the architects and builders can use these results to develop carbon-neutral buildings. This study provides a methodology for governments, constructors, builders and individuals to evaluate, compare and benchmark the various construction materials from the environmental perspective by computing the environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of the materials. Originality/value: This study compares two widely used building flooring options using the LCA methodology and evaluates the potential of bamboo cultivation near the buildings for carbon sinks. The study is unique because it shows the environmental impacts of two flooring options and the carbon sequestration method to mitigate/absorb the generated environmental impacts in or around the building itself through bamboo cultivation. This study may set the foundation for carbon-neutral buildings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building flooring; carbon sequestration; green buildings; life cycle assessment; net-zero emission |
| Index terms: | climate change, body of knowledge, green building, environmental impact, computing, methodology, sustainable building, builder, construction site, life cycle assessment, agricultural land, sequestration, ISO, metal, option, India, architect, construction material, depletion, secondary data, marble, database, life cycle, bamboo |
| Subjects: | climate science, practitioner, environmental impact, knowledge management, environmental resource management, urban design, sustainable construction, Geography, research methods, computing systems, value management, data collection methods, profession, work location, building materials, standards development, traditional and composite building materials, design practice, decision analysis, data management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Construction Materials, Information Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice |
| 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