Materials in Germany's domestic building stock: Calculation model and uncertainties

Ortlepp, R; Gruhler, K and Schiller, G (2018) Materials in Germany's domestic building stock: Calculation model and uncertainties. Building Research & Information, 46(2), pp. 164-178. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Building stocks are the dominant consumers of resources within national economies. Correspondingly, there is high demand for improved knowledge of material stocks and flows in the built environment. Material flow analysis is well suited to meet this demand. Although numerous studies have been conducted on this topic over recent years, these frequently lack applicability and transferability due to insufficient documentation or treatment of uncertainties. A new approach is presented here to calculate material stocks and flows for domestic buildings using the example of multi-family housing (MFH) in Germany. The approach is critically examined to determine its validity. The calculation process involves four steps: (1) building types are classified according to building age; (2) highly specific material composition indicators (MCIs) are calculated for the respective building types; (3) the total material stock as well as inflows and outflows are derived from the total floor space of Germany's MFH; and (4) validity tests are performed to quantify uncertainties. The main results are age-based MCIs for MFH, the total material mass as well as quantitative information on parameter- and model-related uncertainties. Conclusions are drawn on the validity of results, the scalability and applicability of the model and its implementation, along with potential model refinements.;Building stocks are the dominant consumers of resources within national economies. Correspondingly, there is high demand for improved knowledge of material stocks and flows in the built environment. Material flow analysis is well suited to meet this demand. Although numerous studies have been conducted on this topic over recent years, these frequently lack applicability and transferability due to insufficient documentation or treatment of uncertainties. A new approach is presented here to calculate material stocks and flows for domestic buildings using the example of multi-family housing (MFH) in Germany. The approach is critically examined to determine its validity. The calculation process involves four steps: (1) building types are classified according to building age; (2) highly specific material composition indicators (MCIs) are calculated for the respective building types; (3) the total material stock as well as inflows and outflows are derived from the total floor space of Germany's MFH; and (4) validity tests are performed to quantify uncertainties. The main results are age-based MCIs for MFH, the total material mass as well as quantitative information on parameter- and model-related uncertainties. Conclusions are drawn on the validity of results, the scalability and applicability of the model and its implementation, along with potential model refinements.;

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: resource efficiency; material flow; bottom-up; building stock; circular economy; urban mining; domestic buildings; material composition; age; Germany; Validity; Uncertainty; Demand analysis; Buildings; Residential buildings; Construction materials; Mathematical models; Housing
Index terms: resource efficiency, construction material, mining, national economy, material composition indicator, built environment, implementation, material composition, residential building, building age, validity, circular economy, material flow analysis, Germany, housing, multi-family housing, mathematical model, building stock, documentation, demand analysis, domestic building
Subjects: environmental science, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, building materials, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, mathematical modelling, infrastructure and transport systems, market analysis, housing and residential development, asset management, geotechnical engineering, sustainable design, Geography, material properties and characteristics, material science and engineering, professional development, management
Topics: Urban Studies, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Construction Technology, Sustainability
Descriptive scope: 3 PCA

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