Sodagar, B; Rai, D; Jones, B; Wihan, J and Fieldson, R (2011) The carbon-reduction potential of straw-bale housing. Building Research & Information, 39(1), pp. 51-65. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The role of straw bale as a construction material for reducing the whole-life impacts of housing is examined. The embodied and operational CO 2 emissions in a recently completed UK social housing project are compared using alternative domestic external wall constructions and the effects on the resulting CO2 emissions. It is estimated that over 15 tonnes of CO2 may be stored in biotic materials of each of the semi-detached houses, of which around 6 tonnes are sequestered by straw and the remaining by wood and wood products. This suggests the carbon lock-up potential of renewable construction materials is capable of reducing the case study house's whole-life CO2 emissions of the house over its 60-year design life by 61% when compared with the case without sequestration. The practical implications of construction, detailing, maintenance, cost and self-build potentials of straw-bale construction are also considered. The potential for load-bearing straw-bale walls is examined through the whole-life performance of straw-bale construction with alternative conventional external walling systems.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | CO2 emissions; cost; embodied energy; operational energy; sequestered CO2; social housing; straw bale |
| Index terms: | self-build, embodied energy, wood, case study, social housing, sequestration, construction material, CO2 emissions, housing |
| Subjects: | energy systems, air quality, housing and residential development, building materials, climate science, data collection methods, traditional and composite building materials, construction integration, construction type |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Urban Studies, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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