Metwally Abu-Hamd

The objective of this paper is to apply the life cycle assessment methodology to assess the environmental impacts of light steel framed buildings fabricated from cold formed steel (CFS) sections. The assessment covers all phases over the life span of the building from material production, construction, use, and the end of building life, in addition to loads and benefits from reuse/recycling after building disposal. The life cycle inventory and environmental impact indicators are estimated using the Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings. The input data related to the building materials used are extracted from a building information model of the building while the operating energy in the use phase is calculated using an energy simulation software. The Athena Impact Estimator calculates the following mid-point environmental measures: global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential, human health potential, ozone depletion potential, smog potential, eutrophication potential, primary and non-renewable energy (PE) consumption, and fossil fuel consumption. The LCA assessment was applied to a case study of a university building. Results of the case study related to GWP and PE were as follows. The building foundations were responsible for 29% of the embodied GWP and 20% of the embodied PE, while the CFS skeleton was responsible for 30% of the embodied GWP and 49% of the embodied PE. The production stage was responsible for 90% of the embodied GWP and embodied PE. When benefits associated with recycling/reuse were included in the analysis according to Module D of EN 15978, the embodied GWP was reduced by 15.4% while the embodied PE was reduced by 6.22%. Compared with conventional construction systems, the CFS framing systems had much lower embodied GWP and PE.

This paper develops a life cycle assessment framework for embodied environmental impacts of building construction systems. The framework is intended to be used early in the design stage to assist decision making in identifying sources of higher embodied impacts and in selecting sustainable design alternatives. The framework covers commonly used building construction systems such as reinforced concrete construction (RCC), hot-rolled steel construction (HRS), and light steel construction (LSC). The system boundary is defined for the framework from cradle-to-grave plus recycling and reuse possibilities. Building Information Modeling (BIM) and life cycle assessment are integrated in the developed framework to evaluate life cycle embodied energy and embodied greenhouse emissions of design options. The life cycle inventory data used to develop the framework were extracted from BIM models for the building material quantities, verified Environmental Product Declarations (EPD) for the material production stage, and the design of construction operations for the construction and end-of-life stages. Application of the developed framework to a case study of a university building revealed the following results. The material production stage had the highest contribution to embodied impacts, reaching about 90%. Compared with the conventional RCC construction system, the HRS construction system had 41% more life cycle embodied energy, while the LSC construction system had 34% less life cycle embodied energy. When each system was credited with the net benefits resulting from possible recycling/reuse beyond building life, the HRS construction system had 10% less life cycle embodied energy, while the LSC construction system had 68% less life cycle embodied energy. Similarly, the HRS construction system had 29% less life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while the LSC construction system had 62% less life cycle GHG emissions. Sustainability assessment results showed that the RCC construction system received zero Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) credit points, the HRS construction system received three LEED credit points, while the LSC construction system received five LEED credit points.