Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Building and Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

Relevance of simplications in LCA of building components

Daniel Kellenberger a, *, Hans-Jorg Althaus b
a
Scion (Forest Research), Te Papa Tipu Innovation Park, 49 Sala Street, Private Bag 3020, Rotorua 3010, New Zealand
b berlandstrasse 129, CH-8600 Du
EMPA, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research, U bendorf, Switzerland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper provides a detailed analysis of life cycle assessment (LCA) results of different building
Received 19 February 2008 components (e.g. wooden wall, concrete roof) on different levels of simplication (from a comprehensive
Received in revised form 8 May 2008 LCA including all materials and processes to the fully reduced component including only the main
Accepted 8 June 2008
materials remaining in the component). The main objective is the determination of the relevance of
materials and processes often neglected in simplied LCA of building components which aim at providing
Keywords:
results of similar quality as comprehensive assessments with less effort. The studied simplications are
Building
categorised in transportations of the building materials from the factory gate to the building site, some
Component
OGIP ancillary materials which are not obvious in the component, the building process itself and the associated
LCA cutting waste. The results show that transports and ancillary materials are of relevance while the building
Life cycle assessment process and the cutting waste can be neglected. The heavier the used materials and the longer the transport
Cumulative energy demand distances the bigger is the inuence of transports on the LCA results. The inuence of the ancillary
materials is highest for wooden constructions as a lot of screws nails and other connectors are essential.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Various more or less comprehensive LCA studies1 of total build-

Buildings and their use phase are of high ecological relevance as
can be derived from the total Swiss energy consumption in the year
2003. This total energy use can be broken down in several basic
consumption sectors. Twenty-six percentage of the sum is used in
the Transportation sector, 12% in the Industry, 12% in the commercial
and agricultural sector and 50% in the building sector (Zimmermann
et al. [1]) which considers all building types, also the construction
and the operation of industrial and commercial buildings. The
operation of all these buildings accounts for 30% of the overall Swiss
energy consumption. For the electrical installations like lightning,
cooling and ventilation about 16% and for the construction and
refurbishment of the buildings about 12% of the total consumption is
needed (these data are only published in the German report of
Zimmermann et al. [2]). The construction and operation of buildings
not only cause the consumption of a large amount of energy; they
also induce a high demand for physical resources and a major impact
on the environment. The operation also signicantly inuences the
energy consumption of future generations and the deconstruction
and recycling or disposal of the buildings will take place about 80
100 years after the construction. Thus, the construction sector
can signicantly contribute to a more sustainable development
(Zimmermann et al. [1]).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 64 (0)4 802 4981; fax: 64 (0)4 385 3397.
E-mail address: daniel.kellenberger@scionresearch.com (D. Kellenberger).
ings or parts of it have been performed to nd the signicant
contributors to the environmental prole of buildings and to iden-
tify opportunities for improvement: Scheuer et al. [3] for example
made an LCA of a new university building, Lalive dEpinay [4]
developed the LCA based method EcoCheck and applied it to an
ofce building, Cole [5] has examined the energy consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions associated with the on-site construction
of a selection of alternative wood, steel and concrete structural
assemblies and SIA [6] lists different construction types (compo-
nents) and links them to various environmental indicators (e.g. CO2-
Eq., SO2-Eq.). Some of the studies account for the energy consumed
in the construction process while others dont, some account for the
transportation of the construction crew to the construction site
while others dont, some account only for the obvious materials in
a cross section sketch while others include joints and connectors.
The contribution of the building phase (mainly energy
consumption), the additional materials and works (e.g. joints,
surface treatments, connectors, form-works, etc.), the transportation
from factory or storage place to the building site and the cutting
waste of different typical components are not considered
1
Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies the environmental aspects and potential
impacts throughout a productss life (i.e. cradle to grave) from raw material
acquisition through production, use and disposal. The categories of environmental
impacts generally include indicators for resource use, human health, and ecosystem
quality (ISO/EN14040 (2000)).

0360-1323/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.06.002
 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825
Building
Assumed Life-span: 80 years
Is made up of components
Building Components
Assumed Life-span: 80 years
A building component is made up of layers.
The LCI-data include beside the main
materials the transportation from gate to
building site, the cutting waste, the building
process and some additional works (e.g.
formwork, sealing, etc.)
Layers
Assumed Life-span: <= 80years
Is made up of one or several
material(s) (e.g. untreated wood),
product(s) (e.g. mortar as binder)
and/or a group of products (e.g.
masonry).
LCI includes all In-and Outputs Glass wool Insulation
from cradle to gate
Fig. 1. The setup of the system Building.
consistently in different studies. Our work aims at evaluating the
relevance of these contributions for the LCA results.
2. Life cycle assessment of building components
2.1. Functional unit and system denition/boundaries
Buildings can be described as a system with the following
structure (Fig. 1):
In general building components are the smallest elements of the
whole system Building showing comparable relevant properties
(e.g. static properties, heat and sound transfer insulation, etc.) and
thus allowing for the denition of comparable functions in the
system. A direct comparison of single materials is usually not in
accordance with ISO/EN14040 [7] as the properties of the materials
are varying very much and therefore an unambiguous denition of
their common function might not be possible. The chosen func-
tional unit for this study is therefore 1 m2 of opaque building
component with similar heat transfer rate over 80 years. No other
properties as for example heat capacity, thickness or sound
performance is taken into account. If the results would be used for
comparative assessment of the different components, potential
differences in these properties would need to be addressed.
However, the aim of the study is to evaluate the relevance of
different stages of simplication for the LCA results and no
comparison between the different components is made.
Since no reliable data on the life span of buildings are available,
most studies assume a lifespan of 7580 years (SIA [6], Scheuer
et al. [3]). The life span of the building components in our study is
assumed to be 80 years.
819
e.g. Double wall masonry with
glass wool, double-sided
plastered
Brick Mortar
The production of the building materials which are needed for
the studied components (from SIA [6], compare Section 2.2),
include all upstream products and processes from cradle to gate
(Frischknecht et al. [8], Althaus et al. [9] Kellenberger et al. [10] and
ecoinvent Database v.1.12). The transportation from the factory gate
or distribution centre to the building site is by default included in
the used software (LTE-OGIP). Transportation distances, the means
of transportation and the cutting waste on the construction site
which is either disposed or recycled have been adapted based on
Binz et al. [11] (see Table 2). The construction process itself contains
the use of machines and some additional materials and work as for
example the needed formwork or connection elements to anking
walls. The operation phase includes the replacement of certain
layers. The energy needed to operate the building (space heating,
domestic hot water and electricity) is included to analyse its
contribution to the total results but not for analysing the inuence
of the different simplications. The disposal/recycling of the
materials from these layers and the replacement process are also
included. After 80 years of service life the disposal/recycling of the
components is taken into account too. The system with its
boundary is illustrated in Fig. 2:
2.2. Life Cycle Inventory
The choice of the studied building components (1 m2) is based
on a decision that a comparison of two to three examples within
one category of components (e.g. interior wall, interior wall, roof,
2
http://www.ecoinvent.com.
820 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825
Construction site
Transport of
equipment
Transport of Additional materials
construction
crew Building processes
Temporary
heating
New layers
Heating energy**
Disposal of old layers
after replacement,
during operation
Fig. 2. The system boundary of the all-inclusive building components within LTE-OGIP (*/** products/processes in focus for the comparison).
etc.) is possible. Walls and roofs are the categories of compo-
nents with the biggest variation of examples in SIA [6]. To raise
the potential of interpretation at least one wooden and one
mineral construction have been selected for each category of
components.
Within the choice of examples in SIA [6] the following building
components with similar heat transfer rates (between 0.25 and
0.3 W/m2 K) have been studied (Table 1):
The means of transportation and the transport distances from
factory gate or distribution centre to the construction site for the
different materials used in the building components and the
material losses in construction are derived from the Binz et al. [11]
and represented in Table 2.
The transport distances are estimated based on the number of
manufacturers in Switzerland. The means of transportation are
based on the size and weight of the needed materials. The used
transportation categories are van and lorry with a maximum total
weight of 16 tons. The losses during construction vary between 1
(glass) and 5% (mortar and lime plastering) for concrete and
building stones (brick or calcareous sandstone), 1020% for wooden
products, 3% for insulation materials and 4% for metal parts and are
also derived from Binz et al. [11].
The all-inclusive components are calculated with the original
system boundary of the LTE-OGIP tool. Five parts are distinguished
as follows:
(1) Transportation from factory gate or distribution centre
(depending on the system boundary of the LCI-data) to the
construction site.
(2) Building processes (mainly use of machines in the building
phase).
(3) Cutting waste and its disposal/recycling during the building
phase.
(4) Additional materials and work (mainly connectors, adhesive
tapes, construction of block outs, etc.).
(5) Fully reduced building component (including only the main
materials remaining in the component).
Production
building material
Transport of material from factory *
gate & distribution centre to
construction site
* Construction of
Building Cutting waste *
* component
Operation of
Building
component
Disposal of building
Disposal building
material during
material at end-of-life
construction
2.3. Building structure versus space heating during operation
As the study only takes into account components and not the
whole building a simplied approach was used to give a rough
indication on the effect of material related impact versus overall
impact. The burdens of the all-inclusive building components are
therefore compared to the burdens for replacing the heat energy
losses through the respective components (transmission heat los-
ses) over the whole life span of 80 years. Component properties
other than the heat transfer rate (e.g. heat capacity) were not taken
into account even if they inuence the energy consumption of
a building. Including these properties would demand for assump-
tions about the building as a whole and about the use of the
building, which would inuence the result much more than the
differences in the actual properties themselves. The heat losses
taken into account are therefore calculated based on the U-value of
each component to give an idea on the ratio of building structure
to space heating. Heat is assumed to be generated by a low-NOx
gas heating with a capacity of <100 kW in the basis scenario. The
sensitivity of the results is assessed by assuming an oil heating
scenario.
2.4. Life cycle assessment
The following indicators are used to describe the environmental
impacts and the resource efciency of the different components:
 non-renewable cumulative energy demand (CED) from fossil
and nuclear (Frischknecht et al. [8]);
 renewable cumulative energy demand (CED) from water, wind,
solar and geothermal (Frischknecht et al. [8]);
 renewable CED from biomass (Frischknecht et al. [8]); and
 Eco-indicator 99 H/A total (Goedkoop and Spriensma [12],
Frischknecht et al. [8]).
The non-renewable CED allows statements on the use of ener-
getic resources (protection of non-renewable energetic resources).
 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825 821

Table 1
Description of studied Building components (sketch from SIA [6], data from OGIP).

Building component Materials Thickness [cm] Density [kg/m3] Mass [kg/m2] Life span [years]
2
Inverted horizontal concrete roof insulated with expanded polystyrene slabs (U-value: 0.3 W/m K)
Outside
sand/gravel/pebbles washed 10 2000 200 25
Synthetic bre eece/felt 940 0.14 25
Expanded polystyrene 14 33 4.62 25
Polymeric bitumen waterproof sheeting 1160 8.9 25
Normal concrete 20 2380 476 80
Reinforcing steel 7850 15 80
inside

Wooden structure roof with 2 layers of glass wool, covered with roof tiles (U-value: 0.25 W/m2 K)
Outside
roof tile 1800 75.6 25
Shelves/slates 470 1.8 40
Fibreboard soft 0.6 900 5.4 40
Shelves/slates 470 3.25 40
Glass wool 12 35 4.2 40
Polyethylene foil 1160 0.3 40
Shelves/slates 2 470 9.4 40
Square-shaped timber 470 19.74 80
inside

Calcareous sandstone wall with exterior glass wool insulation and timber cladding (U-value: 0.28 W/m2 K)
Outside weatherboard 2.5 470 11.8 30
Timber strapping 470 10.5 30
Glass wool 12 22 2.6 30
Calcareous sandstone 15 1500 208.3 80
Lime diluted mortar 1700 49.3 80
Lime plastering 0.5 1500 12.6 40
inside

Plastered double masonry wall with intermediate glass wool insulation (U-value: 0.25 W/m2 K)
Outside
conventional exterior rendering 0.7 1800 13 35
Brick 12 1000 120 80
Lime diluted mortar 1700 39.1 80
Steel, low alloyed 7850 0.01 80
Glass wool 8 60 4.8 80
Brick 15 1000 150 80
Lime diluted mortar 1700 45.9 80
Single layer gypsum plaster 0.5 1500 7.5 40
inside

(continued on next page)

822 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825

Table 1 (continued)

Building component Materials Thickness [cm] Density [kg/m3] Mass [kg/m2] Life span [years]

2
Plastered masonry with exterior insulation from expanded polystyrene (U-value: 0.27 W/m K)
Outside
organic exterior rendering 0.25 1500 3.8 25
Steel, low alloyed 7850 0.01 25
Expanded polystyrene 10 20 2 25
Brick 16.7 1000 166.8 80
Lime diluted mortar 1700 54.4 80
Single layer gypsum plaster 2.3 1500 34.6 40
inside

On the basis of this indicator no statements on the environmental
effects of products are possible since the effects of emissions and
the use of non-energetic resources are neglected. Despite this
limitation, this indicator is shown because the grey energy is
widely used as an ecological indicator, especially in the building
sector. There are different ways of calculating the grey energy. In
Switzerland, the denition by Kasser and Poll [13] (sum of non-
renewable CED and CED from hydropower) is the most common.
The Eco-indicator 99 (H/A) is a widely used damage oriented
impact assessment method which models the effects of resource
use and emissions on human health, ecosystem quality and
resource quality. Impacts on these three safeguard objects are
weighted and added to provide a single score indicator (Goedkoop
and Spriensma [12]).
It must be pointed out that a comparison of different compo-
nents is only allowed within one impact category and not between
two different categories (e.g. CED non-renewable and Eco-indicator
99 (H/A) total).
As the aim of the study is to show the relevance of different
stages of simplication for the LCA results within components and
not for comparing the components among each other, the results
are only shown in relative gures.
Based on a prototype of the OGIP software (Kohler and Klingele
[17]) further steps in optimizing the tool were taken by the Swiss
Research Centre for Rationalization in Building and Civil Engi-
neering (CRB) with the support of the Swiss Federal Ofce of Energy
(BFE), the Swiss Federal Ofce for Buildings and Logistics (BBL) and
t.h.e. Software GmbH,4 who developed and maintains the new LTE-
OGIP software.5
OGIP stands for Optimisation of Global demands in terms of
costs, energy and environment within an Integrated Planning
process. OGIP is based on Life Cycle Impact Assessment results
from the ecoinvent database v1.16 which again are based on Life
Cycle Inventory-studies for minerals, metals, wooden and paper
building products and processes, published by Althaus et al. [9],
Althaus and Classen [18], and Hischier et al. [19].
3. Results
The ratio of the impact from the building structure to the impact
of the space heating will be discussed rst, followed by discussions
of the results on the non-renewable cumulative energy demand
and the Eco-indicator 99 (H/A) across all life cycle phases of the
building structure (that means excluding space heating) for each
building component.

2.5. The LCA-based building assessment tool LTE-OGIP 3.1. General remarks

All the calculations for this study are performed with the LCA-
based building assessment tool LTE-OGIP. Other LCA-based building
assessment tools are described in Cole [14,15] and Peuportier and
Putzeys [16].
The basis of LTE-OGIP is the fact that determining the environ-
mental impact of constructions is a complex task. Many individual
components need to be calculated; many data are insufciently
available; many methodological aspects need to be claried and
correctly considered.
Taking on this work during the design process of buildings is
impossible for practitioners unless there are standardised tech-
niques capable of automatically analysing the information which
accumulates during the design process. Therefore, Niklaus Kohler3
in the early 1990s developed a method to calculate energy and
material balances based on a standardised method for estimating
and controlling costs of the building.
3 6
Institute for industrial building production, University of Karlsruhe.
The Indicators renewable CED and CED from biomass show
often a different picture then the CED non-renewable. The inu-
ence of these CED categories (renewable, biomass) on the total CED
is between 0 and 20%. CED from renewable energy (e.g. from water)
is mainly found in the Swiss electricity mix. Therefore a big inu-
ence is visible when the building process is removed. CED from
biomass is mainly due to wooden products (wooden roof and wall
constructions). Thus, for concrete components, the amount of CED
from biomass is halved when removing the formwork, which is
part of the building process. These indicators are not discussed for
each component.
The Indicator Global Warming Potential (CO2-Eq.) is not shown
in the result gures as the relative results are very similar to the
non-renewable CED results. This is not surprising, as most energy
4
http://www.the-software.de/.
5
http://www.the-software.de/BauenUmwelt.html.
http://www.ecoinvent.com.
 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825 823

Table 2
Transport distances, means of transportation and cutting waste for the most important materials from Binz et al. [11].

Building material Specication Transport distance from production Cutting waste Means of transportation (t)
place to construction site

[km] [] []
Concrete With 0% of recycling content 32 0.03 Lorry 16
Brick Production: todays avarage 76 0.02 Lorry 28
Roof tile Production: todays avarage 76 0.02 Lorry 28
Calcareous sandstone With 0% of recycling content 75 0.02 Lorry 28
Lime diluted mortar With 0% of recycling content 48 0.05 Lorry 16
Lime plastering With 0% of recycling content 48 0.05 Lorry 16
Anhydrite With 0% of recycling content 109 0.05 Lorry 16
Glass With 0% of recycling content 188 0.01 Lorry 16
Sawn timer Drying: todays avarage 48 0.10 Lorry 16
Glued laminated timber Production and drying: todays avarage 83 0.20 Lorry 16
Fibreboard soft Production and drying: todays avarage 131 0.20 Lorry 16
Reinforcement steel With todays recycling ratio 131 0.04 Lorry 28
Construction steel With todays recycling ratio 188 0.04 Lorry 28
Rock wool 124 0.03 Lorry 16
Polyethylene PE 131 0.05 Van, <3.5
Bitumen Bitumen waterproof sheeting 131 0.05 Lorry 16
Crushed gravel Gravel sand 30 0.02 Lorry 16
Polystyrene EPS With 0% of recycling content 109 0.03 Lorry 16
Synthetic bre eece 100 0.03 Lorry 16
Glass wool 124 0.03 Lorry 16
Lime plastering 48 0.05 Lorry 16

intense processes for the production of building materials and for component for the building component concrete roof with
space heating are based on non-renewable fossil fuels. external polystyrene insulation (Fig. 3).
Relevant contributions come from the needed additional
materials and the transports of the materials from factory gate to
3.2. Building structure versus operation phase (heating) construction site. The transports (distance times mass) play an
important role because the roof is build of heavy materials
For all the studied building components the non-renewable CED (concrete, steel and pebbles) although the transport distances of
results and the results from Eco-indicator 99 (H/A) are similar for these materials are rather short. Transportation of reinforcing
the operation phase. This is due to the U-values which are very steel is ecologically relevant due to the long distance. The
close together for the all-inclusive building components (between contribution of the additional materials is mainly due to the
0.25 and 0.3 W/m2 K). Thus the total non-renewable CED for the additional concrete which is necessary to get a small gradient on
operation phase varies between 7500 and 9000 MJ/m2 for 80 years. the horizontal roof.
In contrast the results from building structure for the all-inclusive
building components vary between 1200 and 5700 MJ/m2 for 80
years. Based on these facts the ratio of building structure to
operation phase for the all-inclusive building components vary 100%
between 0.6 and 0.9. 90%
The Eco-indicator 99 (H/A) results are in the range of 2733
points for the operation phase of the all-inclusive building 80%
components. In contrast the building structure ranges from 13 to 70%
38 points. This fact leads to a ratio of 0.40.7 for the operation
phase from the total for the all-inclusive building component. 60%
As shown in Section 1 the Swiss ratio of the sum of the cumu- 50%
lative energy demand of the building construction and the refur-
bishment to the overall demand is around 12% (Zimmermann et al. 40%
[2]). The results of the studied building components (including all 30%
stages of reduction) show a ratio of 1040%. This higher ratio is
mainly due to the fact that in general total buildings include a lot of 20%
components which are not relevant for the heat losses (e.g. inside 10%
walls, infrastructure for water supply, sound-insulated oors
between two stories, etc.) 0%
CED (non CED CED EcoIndicator
The sensitivity analysis for the heating system shows no rele- renewable) (renewable) (biomass) 99
vant difference between the gas heating (base scenario) and the oil
Indicators
heating.
(1) transportation (4) additional materials and works

3.3. Horizontal concrete roof with external polystyrene insulation (2) building processes (5) component fully reduced
(3) cutting waste
The fully reduced component indicates a reduction in the
two main indicators non-renewable CED and total Eco-indicator Fig. 3. Relative results for different indicators for the concrete roof with external
99 (H/A) over 80-year time of 2030% from the all-inclusive polystyrene insulation.
824 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825

3.4. Wooden roof with glass wool insulation 100%

90%
The fully reduced component indicates a reduction in the two
main indicators non-renewable CED and Eco-indicator 99 (H/A) 80%
total over 80-year time of 2025% from the all-inclusive compo-
70%
nent for the building component Wooden structure roof with 2
layers of glass wool, covered with roof tiles (Fig. 4). 60%
The materials and processes that are often neglected in
50%
simplied LCA studies show a small and relative steady contribu-
tion to the results (max. 10% each). No group is therefore of special 40%
interest.
30%

3.5. Calcareous sandstone wall with glass wool insulation 20%

10%
The fully reduced component indicates a reduction in the two
main indicators non-renewable CED and total Eco-indicator 99 0%
CED (non CED CED EcoIndicator
(H/A) over 80-year time of 1525% from the all-inclusive compo- renewable) (renewable) (biomass) 99
nent for the building component Calcareous sandstone wall with
Indicators
glass wool exterior insulation and sheeting (Fig. 5).
The biggest contributions to the results of the fully reduced (1) transportation (4) additional materials and works
component have the transports of the materials from factory gate
(2) building processes (5) component fully reduced
to construction site and the additional materials. The transports
(distance times mass) play an important role because the calcar- (3) cutting waste
eous blocks have a rather high weight and also the distance is
rather high (75 km). The sum of the metal connectors used for Fig. 5. Relative results for different indicators for the calcareous sandstone wall with
the construction of the wooden sheeting (nails, screws, staples, exterior glass wool insulation and wooden sheeting.

etc.) is responsible for the reduction from neglecting additional

materials.
3.6. Double masonry wall with intermediate glass wool insulation
The fully reduced component indicates a reduction in the two
main indicators non-renewable CED and total Eco-indicator 99
(H/A) over 80-year time of 1530% from the all-inclusive compo-
nent for the building component Plastered double masonry wall
with intermediate glass wool insulation (Fig. 6).
The biggest impacts of potential simplications have the
transport of the materials from the factory gate to the construction
site and the additional materials. The transports (distance times
mass) play an important role because the calcareous blocks are
rather heavy and also the distance is rather high (75 km). The
emulsion paint used as coat of paint on the inside of the wall and
the sum of the metal parts used within and for the construction are
responsible for the contribution of about 510% from additional
materials.

100%
100%
90%
90%
80%
80%
70%
70%
60%
60%
50%
50%
40%
40%
30%
30%
20% 20%
10% 10%

0% 0%
CED (non CED CED EcoIndicator CED (non CED CED EcoIndicator
renewable) (renewable) (biomass) 99 renewable) (renewable) (biomass) 99
Indicators Indicators
(1) transportation (4) additional materials and works (1) transportation (4) additional materials and works

(2) building processes (5) component fully reduced (2) building processes (5) component fully reduced
(3) cutting waste (3) cutting waste

Fig. 4. Relative results for different indicators for the wooden structure roof with glass Fig. 6. Relative results for different indicators for the double masonry wall with glass
wool insulation. wool insulation in between.
 D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus / Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818825
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
CED (non CED CED EcoIndicator
renewable) (renewable) (biomass) 99
Indicators
(1) transportation (4) additional materials and works
(2) building processes (5) component fully reduced
(3) cutting waste
Fig. 7. Relative results for different indicators for the masonry with expanded
polystyrene insulation.
3.7. Masonry with expanded polystyrene insulation
The fully reduced component indicates a reduction in the two
main indicators non-renewable CED and Eco-indicator 99 (H/A)
total over 80-year time of 2530% from the all-inclusive compo-
nent for the building component Plastered masonry with exterior
insulation from expanded polystyrene (Fig. 7).
Responsible for the main contribution of additional materials,
processes and wastes (about 20%) are the adhesive mortar which is
used to stick the polystyrene slabs on the masonry and the emul-
sion paint as coat of paint on the inside of the wall.
4. Conclusion and perspective
This paper provides a detailed examination of the cumulative
non-renewable energy and the total Eco-indicator 99 (H/A)-points
associated with ve building components described on ve
different levels of detailing (from all-inclusive to fully reduced). The
results from the all-inclusive and fully reduced building component
differ between 15 and 30%. For all studied components the addi-
tional materials play an important role whereas within the mate-
rials some have a bigger impact as others. For two components also
the transports have a quite high impact No further systematic
correlation between the reduced scores and the various neglected
materials and processes is observed. It cant be concluded from the
overall contribution that a simplied approach, neglecting trans-
ports, cutting waste and additional materials leads to a different
rating of various components then a detailed assessment would do.
However, the general conclusion that for a rating of different
components a comprehensive assessment is not necessary cant be
drawn neither because this has only been shown for ve specic
components. Doubts on the admissibility of the simplications are
fostered by the fact, that for each studied building component
different simplications are responsible for the main reduction of
the impact.
Recapitulating it can be stated that for a comparison of different
building components the transportation of the materials from
825
factory gate to the construction site and the needed additional
materials with a high environmental impact should be taken into
account.
The inuence of the building process, exclusive transport of
equipment and construction crew and temporary heating is less
than 8% and that of the cutting waste less than 4% for the total Eco-
indicator 99 (H/A) and the non-renewable CED. The assumption
that this applies to all building components seems reasonable.
Thus, these simplications seem admissible for a comparison of
different building components.
More components should be studied to identify systematic
patterns of impact reduction by neglecting certain materials or
activities. This would provide practical guidance on what additional
materials/work need to be taken into account and what simpli-
cations are acceptable in life cycle assessment of building compo-
nents. It would also allow dening cut-off rules for the additional
materials which need to be taken into account due to high envi-
ronmental impact.
References
[1] Zimmermann M, Althaus HJ, Haas A. Benchmarks for sustainable construc-
tion: a contribution to develop a standard. Energy and Buildings 2005;37:
114757.
[2] Zimmermann M, Althaus HJ, Haas A. Benchmarks fur die Beurteilung von
Umweltvertraglichkeit von Hochbauten Beitrag zur Entwicklung eines
Standards fur nachhaltiges Bauen. EMPA, Dubendorf; 2005.
[3] Scheuer C, Keoleian GA, Reppe P. Life cycle energy and environmental
performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design
implications. Energy and Buildings 2003;35:1049.
[4] Lalive dEpinay AE. Die Umweltvertraglichkeit als eine Determinante des
architektonischen Entwurfs. Zurich; 2000.
[5] Cole RJ. Energy and greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construc-
tion of alternative structural systems. Building and Environment 1998;34:335.
[6] SIA. Hochbaukonstruktionen nach okologischen Gesichtspunkten. Zurich:
Schweizerischer Ingenieur- und Architekten-Verein (SIA); 1995.
[7] ISO/EN14040. Environmental management life cycle assessment principles
and framework (ISO 14040:2000). CEN European Bureau for Standardisation;
2000.
[8] Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus HJ, Doka G, Dones R, Heck T, et al. The
ecoinvent database: overview and methodological framework. International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2005;10:39.
[9] Althaus HJ, Kellenberger D, Doka G, Kunniger T. Manufacturing and disposal of
building materials and inventorying infrastructure in ecoinvent. International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2005;10:3542.
[10] Kellenberger D, Althaus H-J, Jungbluth N, Kunniger T. Life cycle inventories of
building products. Final report ecoinvent 2000 No. 7, EMPA Dubendorf, Swiss
Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dubendorf, CH, www.ecoinvent.ch; 2003.
[11] Binz A, Erb M, Lehmann G. O kologische Nachhaltigkeit im Wohnungsbau; eine
Bewertung von Erneuerungsstrategie. Muttenz: Fachhochschule beider Basel;
2000.
[12] Goedkoop M, Spriensma R. The eco-indicator 99, a damage oriented method
for life cycle impact assessment, Methodology Report. Amersfoort, Pre
Consultants B.V.; 2000.
[13] Kasser U, Poll M. Graue Energie von Baustoffen; Daten zu Baustoffen, Bau-
chemikalien, Verarbeitungs- und Transportprozessen mit Erlauterungen und
Empfehlungen fur die Baupraxis. Zurich: Buro fur Umweltchemie; 1998.
[14] Cole RJ. Emerging trends in building environmental assessment methods.
Building Research and Information 1998;26:316.
[15] Cole RJ. Building environmental assessment methods: redening intentions
and roles. Building Research and Information 2005;35:45567.
[16] Peuportier B, Putzeys K. Inter-comparison and benchmarking of LCA-based
environmental assessment and design tools, http://www.etn-presco.net/
generalinfo/index.html; 2005.
[17] Kohler N, Klingele M. OGIP/DATO, Optimierung von Gesamtenergieverbrauch,
Umweltbelastung und Baukosten, Schlussbericht April 1996. Karlsruhe/
Weimar/Zurich, Institut fur Industrielle Bauproduktion der Universitat Karls-
ruhe (TU), Lehrstuhl Bauklimatik und Bauokologie (ib) an der Hochschule fur
Architektur und Bauwesen (HAB) Weimar, Holliger Bau-, Energie- und
Umweltberatung Bern, Institut fur Energietechnik (ETH) Zurich, Zentralstelle
fur Baurationalisierung (CRB) Zurich und Aarproject AG Bern; 1996.
[18] Althaus H-J, Classen M. Life cycle inventories of metals and methodological
aspects of inventorying material resources in ecoinvent. International Journal
for Life Cycle Assessment 2005;1:439.
[19] Hischier R, Althaus HJ, Werner F. Developments in wood and packaging
materials life cycle inventories in ecoinvent. International Journal for Life Cycle
Assessment 2005;10:508.