Quantifying embodied carbon reductions through mixed reality integration in prefabrication: A Monte Carlo-enhanced life cycle approach

Sandagomika, H; Bazli, M and Arashpour, M (2026) Quantifying embodied carbon reductions through mixed reality integration in prefabrication: A Monte Carlo-enhanced life cycle approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 152(5): 04026051, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The construction industry produces a large amount of carbon emissions, with a significant portion attributed to embodied carbon (EC). Prefabrication has the potential to reduce EC through streamlined workflows and controlled production environments. However, inefficiencies such as rework, material waste, excessive labor input, and quality issues can offset these benefits, necessitating a flexible digital technology approach. This study proposes the integration of mixed reality (MR) into prefabrication workflows to mitigate these issues and reduce EC emissions. A hybrid input-output (I-O) life cycle assessment (LCA) model combined with Monte Carlo (MC) simulation was employed to evaluate EC emission under uncertainty. Four prefabrication scenarios representing increasing levels of MR integration, ranging from conventional methods to high-level digitalization, were analyzed across several life cycle stages. Results emphasize that EC emissions were reduced by 8.5%, 14.9%, and 21.2% in the Lower, Medium, and Higher MR scenarios, respectively, due to significant reductions in rework, rejections, labor hours, and energy use. MC simulation confirmed the robustness of the results, showing decreased variability and tighter confidence intervals with higher levels of MR integration. While the experimental context focuses on precast panel production, the proposed approach is generalizable to broader prefabrication systems with appropriate adaptations to the MR model. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by introducing a novel integration of MR with hybrid I-O LCA for EC accounting in prefabrication and by demonstrating how MC simulation enhances the reliability of environmental impact assessments under uncertainty. The proposed hybrid I-O LCA approach offers a replicable and data-driven method for sustainable decision-making in construction engineering and management.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: embodied carbon emission; hybrid input-output analysis; mixed reality; prefabrication; uncertainty analysis
Index terms: uncertainty analysis, carbon emission, adaptation, life cycle, environmental impact assessment, quality issue, confidence interval, construction engineering, variability, energy use, prefabrication, construction industry, input-output analysis, digitalization, embodied carbon, rework, life cycle assessment, integration, decision-making, body of knowledge, accounting, digital technology, workflow
Subjects: industry analysis, statistical analysis, organizational analysis, decision analysis, management, engineering methods, data analysis and analytics, energy systems, computing systems, value management, environmental hazards, quality assurance, building construction, knowledge management, economic analysis, digital technology, operations management, environmental impact, climate science, user focus
Topics: Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Sustainability, Risk Management, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

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