Economic and environmental life cycle assessment of alternative mass timber walls to evaluate circular economy in building: MCDM method

被引:14
作者
Balasbaneh, Ali Tighnavard [1 ]
Sher, Willy [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Fac Civil & Environm Engn, Parit Raja 86400, Johor, Malaysia
[2] Univ Newcastle UON, Fac Engn & Built Environm, Sch Architecture & Built Environm, Univ Dr, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
关键词
Circular economy; Engineering wood; Life cycle analysis; Cross-laminated timber (CLT); Nail-laminated timber (NLT); Dowel-laminated timber (DLT); CARBON EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE-GAS; ENERGY; WOOD; CONSTRUCTION; SYSTEM; MITIGATION; EFFICIENCY; IMPACTS; LCA;
D O I
10.1007/s10668-022-02707-7
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The construction industry is one of the largest consumers of energy and materials, which leads to it being one of the highest sources of environmental emissions. Quantifying the impact of building materials is critical if strategies for mitigating environmental deterioration are to be developed. The lifecycle assessment (LCA) consequential methodology has been applied to evaluate different methods of constructing residential double-story buildings. The ReCiPe methodology has been used for life cycle inventory. Three different forms of mass timber construction have been considered including cross-laminated timber (CLT), nail-laminated timber (NLT), and dowel-laminated timber (DLT). These have been assessed as load-bearing panels or wood frame construction. We evaluated the global warming potential (GWP), embodied energy, and cost to identify the building type with the lowest impacts. The results revealed that total CO2 emissions for mass timbers for the construction stage are 130 CO2/M-2, 118 CO2/M-2, and 132 CO2/M-2 of the panel for CLT, DLT, and NLT, respectively. The embodied energy emission is 1921 MJ/M-2, 1902 MJ/M-2, and 2130 MJ/M-2 related to the CLT, DLT, and NLT, respectively, for this stage. The results also indicated that the carbon emission of DLT is lowest compared to the other two alternatives in the manufacturing and construction stages. However, when the entire life cycle is considered, NLT is the most favorable material. However, based on the life cycle cost (LCC), DLT has a lower cost. Finally, multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) was used to normalize the results and compare the alternatives. This showed DLT to be the best alternative, followed by CLT and NLT. In conclusion, the selection of building materials needs to prioritize regulations to reduce environmental and economic impacts.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 268
页数:30
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [41] Comprehensive assessment method for building environmental performance: Trade-off between indoor environmental quality and life cycle carbon emissions
    Dong, Zhao
    Luo, Xiaoyu
    Zhao, Kang
    Ge, Jian
    Chan, Isabelle Y. S.
    BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2025, 272
  • [42] Revisiting mass, economic value, quality-based functional units in life cycle assessment of foods towards environmental benchmarking
    O, N. -C.
    Hwang, C. -J.
    Pak, J. -S.
    Jon, Y. -I.
    Ri, I. -K.
    Choe, T. -H.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 21 (03) : 2975 - 2988
  • [43] Retrofitting Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities toward a Greener and Circular Economy by Virtue of Resource Recovery: Techno-Economic Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment
    Tian, Xueyu
    Richardson, Ruth E.
    Tester, Jefferson W.
    Lozano, Jose L.
    You, Fengqi
    ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING, 2020, 8 (36): : 13823 - 13837