Treloar, G J; Love, P E D; Faniran, O O and Iyer-Raniga, U (2000) A hybrid life cycle assessment method for construction. Construction Management and Economics, 18(1), pp. 5-9. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Life cycle assessments (LCAs) are used to evaluate the environmental impacts attributable to products and processes. For construction projects, LCAs can be used to assess the pollution associated with the manufacture of building materials for the construction process. Despite the reliability of traditional LCA data, many upstream processes are excluded, which adversely affects overall reliability. Input-output analysis is systemically complete, but is subject to inherent errors when applied to the LCA of specific products. Analysis of an input-output LCA model provides a basis for more informed decision making regarding processes which can be ignored during the collection of traditional LCA data. This paper proposes a hybrid LCA method for construction in which national input-output data fill those 'gaps' not accounted for by traditional LCA data. Regardless of the level of detail at which data are collected, LCAs can now be performed at similar overall levels of framework completeness.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; hybrid LCA; input-output analysis; life cycle assessment |
| Index terms: | pollution, building material, input-output analysis, level of detail, life cycle assessment, environmental impact, construction process, decision-making, construction project |
| Subjects: | production management, environmental health, decision analysis, building construction, environmental impact, data analysis and analytics, technical documentation, building materials |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Sustainability, Risk Management, Design Practice, Site Management |
| 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