Comparison of GHG emissions from circular and conventional building components

Andersen, C E; Kanafani, K; Zimmermann, R K; Rasmussen, F N and Birgisdóttir, H (2020) Comparison of GHG emissions from circular and conventional building components. Buildings & Cities, 1(1), pp. 379-392. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

The concept of circular economy has been introduced as a strategy to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from buildings and mitigate climate change. Although many innovative circular solutions exist, the business model is challenged by a lack of environmental data on the circular solutions, and thus the potential benefits are not verifiable. The study assesses the embodied GHG emissions of five circular building elements/components. Circular solutions are compared with conventional solutions to ascertain whether the business model has the potential to reduce GHG emissions. The GHG emissions are quantified using life-cycle assessment (LCA) for five circular-economy and three conventional building elements/components. The environmental data show that circular building components have the potential to reduce GHG emissions. However, there is a risk of increasing the GHG emissions when compared with conventional solutions, emphasising the need for standardised environmental data. Lastly, the study identifies logistic, economic, technological and regulatory barriers that prevent complete implementation of circular economy. Practice relevance Standardised environmental data on building elements/components are needed to support decision-making at local and national levels. Uncertainties about waste from manufacture and transport in the production stage can affect the environmental potential to such an extent that the benefits from introducing circular economy are lost. One central barrier is identified that prevents complete implementation of the circular economy in buildings; the industry is not geared to support a steady supply of some circular building elements/components. In general, it is clear that the implementation of circular economy requires the identification of environmental, logistical, economic, technological and regulatory concerns. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: buildings; carbon metrics; circular economy; components; embodied carbon; life-cycle assessment; reuse
Index terms: embodied carbon, circular economy, strategy, business model, decision-making, climate change, commons, greenhouse gas, building component, implementation
Subjects: architectural elements, management, sustainable design, decision analysis, business, environmental impact, climate science, contractual arrangements, property law
Topics: Legal Issues, Design Practice, Procurement, Sustainability, Risk Management, Business Strategy
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