1
Life Cycle Assessment American Center, Rangoon, Myanmar Researchers: Will Uebelacker and Cole Poland Professor: Corey Griffin Advisor: Ben Deines YGH Project Team: Steve Neiger & Lona Rerick Introduction This LCA looks at the cradle to grave operations of a building, quantifying the environmental impacts of the materials, production process, transportation, operating use, deconstruction, and disposal. There are several environmental categories that can be identified for evaluating global impacts including global warming, ozone depletion, eutrophication, acidification, smog formation, particulates, and fossil fuels. According to the International Organization for Standardization, there are four phases for performing LCA of a building: goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory (LCI), impact assessment and analysis of results. The goal and scope defines the intent of the LCA (cradle to gate, cradle to grave) and the limitations. The LCI is a data collection process that quantifies the materials being used and their energy inputs and outputs. The impact assessment looks at the LCI damage it may have on the environment. Methods This LCA was conducted in Tally, in accordance with LEED and the life cycle assessments they reward points for. All of the data set comes from Tally. Materials were selected by YGH and input to Tally within Revit. The base LCA study was conducted on the American Center base Revit model provided by YGH. The building is two stories and 2400 m2. It has an information center, library, offices and conference room. The building is designed to teach children in Myanmar about the United States. The LCA data collected from this data was compared to the same building using a mixture of metal stud and concrete with wall assembly types constructed of only wood and only concrete. The environmental impact categories calculated in the life cycle assessment of the American Center were global warming potential and primary energy demand. The research focused on these two LCA categories in particular and focused further on the wall assemblies and how they impacted both primary energy demand and global warming potential. Global warming potential is the measurement of gas emissions that are causing an increased greenhouse effect. Primary energy demand is a measurement of the total energy drawn from the earth. It is energy demand from non-renewable resources and renewable resources. Results Tally breaks all of the materials into percentages of the total buildings GWP and PED, therefore the data will be in the form of overall percentages and how they differed from wall assembly to wall assembly. The base numbers were calculated, with the GWP for building 1 being 501.2 kgCO2eq/ m2 and the PED output at 5,778 MJ/m2. An all wood framed wall construction method would drop the buildings GWP to 388.8 kgCO2eq/m2 and the PED output to 4,197 MJ/m2. In comparison, an all concrete wall structure would cause the building to have a GWP of 444.8 kgCO2eq/m2 and a PED of 4,448 MJ/m2. Modeling Challenges There were limitations to the data calculated and LCA has been a retroactive tool in most cases. The information found can act as general guidelines on what materials have a greater impact on the environment around them, but are in need of greater specificity. Tally produces the necessary baseline information to make informed decisions on material selection and their affects on the earth, but is limited in the amount of detail. The materials selected for each wall, floor, ceiling and other systems were generalized. The building is currently in the design development stage and did not have the material detail necessary for pinpointing exact materials within specific wall types that are leading to higher GWP and PED. Conclusions As architects we need to design buildings with greater knowledge of the global warming potential, primary energy demand, as well as other environmental impact categories that were not calculated such as acidification potential and nonrenewable energy. A major step in reducing the impact of buildings from cradle to grave is to run life cycle assessments early in the design phase to help inform material selection. Source materials locally to limit the travel impact, reduce the amount of materials that require extensive amounts of energy to produce such as steel, or insure that the materials have a high-recycled content. A major step in reducing the impact of buildings from cradle to grave is to run life cycle assessments early in the design phase to help inform material selection. YOST GRUBE HALL ARCHITECTURE Global Warming Potential Results Per Revit Category Wood Stud Concrete Existing (Metal Stud) *Ceilings, Curtain Panels, Curtain Wall Mullions, Doors, Stairs, Windows 36% Walls 17% Other* 25% Floors 22% Roof 18% Walls 28% Roof 32% Floors 22% Other* 28% Walls 24% Roof 28% Floors 20% Other* Primary Energy Demand 48% Walls 15% Floors 23% Other* 14% Roof Wood Stud Concrete Existing (Metal Stud) *Ceilings, Curtain Panels, Curtain Wall Mullions, Doors, Stairs, Windows Results Per Revit Category 28% Walls 20% Roof 21% Floors 31% Other* 32% Walls 19% Roof 21% Floors 28% Other* Global Warming Potential Results per Life Cycle Stage Existing (Metal Stud) 25% 75% Legend Life Cycle Stages Manufacturing Maintenance and Replacement Wood Stud 18% 82% Concrete 15% 85% Primary Energy Demand Results per Life Cycle Stage Wood Stud Concrete Legend Life Cycle Stages Manufacturing Maintenance and Replacement Existing (Metal Stud) 33% 67% 27% 73% 24% 76% 933,083 Kg CO2 eq. 1,067,528 Kg CO2 eq. 1,202,973 Kg CO2 eq. 1.007E+007 MJ 1.068E+007 MJ 1.387E+007 MJ 1.526E+007 MJ 1,042,742 Kg CO2 eq. 1,172,827Kg CO2 eq. 1,323,661 Kg CO2 eq. 1.154E+007 MJ 1.186E+007 MJ 0% 50% 100% 2,916,686 kg Mass 7,481 kgSO2eq Acidification Potential 337.4 kgNeq Eutrophication Potential 1,202,973 kgCO2eq Global Warming Potential 0.009209 CFC-11eq Ozone Depletion Potential 116,090 O3eq Smog Formation Potential 1.387E+007 MJ Primary Energy Demand 1.280E+007 MJ Non-renewable Energy 1,061,118 MJ Renewable Energy Legend 03 - Concrete None Steel, reinforcing rod Structural concrete, 3000 psi, generic Structural concrete, 5000 psi, generic 04 - Masonry Mortar type S Stone slab, granite 05 - Metals Cold formed structural steel Stainless steel sheet, Chromium 18/8 Steel, woven wire mesh 06 - Wood/Plastics/Composites Domestic softwood, US 07 - Thermal and Moisture Protection Polyethelene sheet vapor barrier (HDPE) Polyurethane foam rigid board 08 - Openings and Glazing Aluminum, extruded Door frame, metal, galvanized, no door Door hinge Glazing, monolithic sheet, generic Hollow door, interior, steel, galvanized Overhead door closer, aluminum Spandrel, aluminum, insulated (1" core) Spandrel, glass, insulated (1" core) Window frame, steel, galvanized, fixed 09 - Finishes Acoustic ceiling tile, fiberglass Ceramic tile, glazed Metal ceiling tile, aluminum None Paint, interior acrylic latex Slate tile, generic Suspended grid Thinset mortar Wall board, gypsum, natural Wall covering, textile 8% 24% 16% 28% 5% 1% 1% 3% 4% 1% 3% 1% Global Warming Potential 9% 13% 8% 35% 7% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 4% 6% 2% 4% 1% Primary Energy Demand Results per CSI Division, itemized by Material Existing (Metal Stud) 0% 50% 100% 0% 50% 100% 0% 50% 100% Mass 2,916,686 kg 7,481 kgS02eq 337.4 kgNeq 1,202,973 kgC02eq 0.00921 CFC-11eq 116,090 03eq 1.387E+007 MJ 1.280E+007 MJ 1,061,118 MJ 2,478,882 kg 4,381 kgS02eq 224.3 kgNeq 933,083 kgC02eq 0.00881 CFC-11eq 59,898 03eq 1.007E+007 MJ 9,151,322 MJ 920,923 MJ 3,074,042 kg 5,060 kgS02eq 243.7 kgNeq 1,067,528 kgC02eq 0.00987 CFC-11eq 68,954 03eq 1.068E+007 MJ 9,911,801 MJ 763,367 MJ Acidification Eutrophication Global Warming Ozone Depletion Smog Formation Primary Energy Non-renewable Renewable Energy Mass Acidification Eutrophication Global Warming Ozone Depletion Smog Formation Primary Energy Non-renewable Renewable Energy Mass Acidification Eutrophication Global Warming Ozone Depletion Smog Formation Primary Energy Non-renewable Renewable Energy Wood Stud Concrete Revit Categories Ceilings Curtain Panels Curtain Wall Mullions Doors Floors Roofs Stairs and Railings Walls

Life Cycle Assessment American Center, Rangoon, …web.pdx.edu/~cgriffin/research/poster/YGH_LCA_tally.pdfThe LCA data collected from this data was compared to the same building using

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Life Cycle Assessment American Center, Rangoon, …web.pdx.edu/~cgriffin/research/poster/YGH_LCA_tally.pdfThe LCA data collected from this data was compared to the same building using

Life Cycle Assessment American Center, Rangoon, MyanmarResearchers: Will Uebelacker and Cole Poland Professor: Corey Griffin Advisor: Ben Deines YGH Project Team: Steve Neiger & Lona Rerick

Introduction

This LCA looks at the cradle to grave operations of a building, quantifying the environmental impacts of the materials, production process, transportation, operating use, deconstruction, and disposal. There are several environmental categories that can be identified for evaluating global impacts including global warming, ozone depletion, eutrophication, acidification, smog formation, particulates, and fossil fuels. According to the International Organization for Standardization, there are four phases for performing LCA of a building: goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory (LCI), impact assessment and analysis of results. The goal and scope defines the intent of the LCA (cradle to gate, cradle to grave) and the limitations. The LCI is a data collection process that quantifies the materials being used and their energy inputs and outputs. The impact assessment looks at the LCI damage it may have on the environment.

Methods

This LCA was conducted in Tally, in accordance with LEED and the life cycle assessments they reward points for. All of the data set comes from Tally. Materials were selected by YGH and input to Tally within Revit. The base LCA study was conducted on the American Center base Revit model provided by YGH. The building is two stories and 2400 m2. It has an information center, library, offices and conference room. The building is designed to teach children in Myanmar about the United States. The LCA data collected from this data was compared to the same building using a mixture of metal stud and concrete with wall assembly types constructed of only wood and only concrete. The environmental impact categories calculated in the life cycle assessment of the American Center were global warming potential and primary energy demand. The research focused on these two LCA categories in particular and focused further on the wall assemblies and how they impacted both

primary energy demand and global warming potential. Global warming potential is the measurement of gas emissions that are causing an increased greenhouse effect. Primary energy demand is a measurement of the total energy drawn from the earth. It is energy demand from non-renewable resources and renewable resources.

Results

Tally breaks all of the materials into percentages of the total buildings GWP and PED, therefore the data will be in the form of overall percentages and how they differed from wall assembly to wall assembly. The base numbers were calculated, with the GWP for building 1 being 501.2 kgCO2eq/m2 and the PED output at 5,778 MJ/m2. An all wood framed wall construction method would drop the buildings GWP to 388.8 kgCO2eq/m2 and the PED output to 4,197 MJ/m2. In comparison, an all concrete wall structure would cause the building to have a GWP of 444.8 kgCO2eq/m2 and a PED of 4,448 MJ/m2.

Modeling Challenges

There were limitations to the data calculated and LCA has been a retroactive tool in most cases. The information found can act as general guidelines on what materials have a greater impact on the environment around them, but are in need of greater specificity. Tally produces the necessary baseline information to make informed decisions on material selection and their affects on the earth, but is limited in the amount of detail. The materials selected for each wall, floor, ceiling and other systems were generalized. The building is currently in the design development stage and did not

have the material detail necessary for pinpointing exact materials within specific wall types that are leading to higher GWP and PED.

Conclusions

As architects we need to design buildings with greater knowledge of the global warming potential, primary energy demand, as well as other environmental impact categories that were not calculated such as acidification potential and nonrenewable energy. A major step in reducing the impact of buildings from cradle to grave is to run life cycle assessments early in the design phase to help inform material selection. Source materials locally to limit the travel impact, reduce the amount of materials that require extensive amounts of energy to produce such as steel, or insure that the materials have a high-recycled content.

A major step in reducing the impact of buildings from cradle to grave is to run life cycle assessments early in the design phase to help inform material selection.

YO S T G RU B E H A L L ARCHITECTURE

Global Warming PotentialResults Per Revit Category

Wood Stud ConcreteExisting (Metal Stud)*Ceilings, Curtain Panels, Curtain Wall Mullions, Doors, Stairs, Windows

36% Walls

17% Other*

25% Floors

22% Roof

18% Walls

28% Roof32% Floors

22% Other* 28% Walls

24% Roof

28% Floors

20% Other*

Primary Energy Demand

48% Walls

15% Floors

23% Other*

14% Roof

Wood Stud ConcreteExisting (Metal Stud)*Ceilings, Curtain Panels, Curtain Wall Mullions, Doors, Stairs, Windows

Results Per Revit Category

28% Walls

20% Roof 21% Floors

31% Other* 32% Walls

19% Roof21% Floors

28% Other*

Global Warming PotentialResults per Life Cycle Stage

Existing (Metal Stud)

25%

75%

LegendLife Cycle Stages

Manufacturing

Maintenance and Replacement

Wood Stud

18%

82%

Concrete

15%

85%

Primary Energy DemandResults per Life Cycle Stage

Wood Stud Concrete

LegendLife Cycle Stages

Manufacturing

Maintenance and Replacement

Existing (Metal Stud)

33%

67%

27%

73%

24%

76%

933,083 Kg CO2 eq. 1,067,528 Kg CO2 eq.1,202,973 Kg CO2 eq.

1.007E+007 MJ 1.068E+007 MJ1.387E+007 MJ

1.526E+007 MJ

1,042,742 Kg CO2 eq. 1,172,827Kg CO2 eq.1,323,661 Kg CO2 eq.

1.154E+007 MJ 1.186E+007 MJ

Existing (Metal Stud)

0%

50%

100%

2,916,686kg

Mass

7,481kgSO2eq

AcidificationPotential

337.4kgNeq

EutrophicationPotential

1,202,973kgCO2eq

Global WarmingPotential

0.009209CFC-11eq

Ozone DepletionPotential

116,090O3eq

Smog FormationPotential

1.387E+007MJ

Primary EnergyDemand

1.280E+007MJ

Non-renewableEnergy

1,061,118MJ

RenewableEnergy

Legend03 - Concrete

NoneSteel, reinforcing rodStructural concrete, 3000 psi, genericStructural concrete, 5000 psi, generic

04 - MasonryMortar type SStone slab, granite

05 - MetalsCold formed structural steelStainless steel sheet, Chromium 18/8Steel, woven wire mesh

06 - Wood/Plastics/CompositesDomestic softwood, US

07 - Thermal and Moisture ProtectionPolyethelene sheet vapor barrier (HDPE)Polyurethane foam rigid board

08 - Openings and GlazingAluminum, extrudedDoor frame, metal, galvanized, no doorDoor hingeGlazing, monolithic sheet, genericHollow door, interior, steel, galvanizedOverhead door closer, aluminumSpandrel, aluminum, insulated (1" core)Spandrel, glass, insulated (1" core)Window frame, steel, galvanized, fixed

09 - FinishesAcoustic ceiling tile, fiberglassCeramic tile, glazedMetal ceiling tile, aluminumNonePaint, interior acrylic latexSlate tile, genericSuspended grid Thinset mortarWall board, gypsum, naturalWall covering, textile

8%

24%

16%28%

5%

1%1%

3%

4%1% 3% 1%

Global Warming Potential

9%

13%

8%

35%

7%

1%1%1%2%1%

1%

4%

6%

2%4% 1%

Primary Energy Demand

Results per CSI Division, itemized by Material Existing (Metal Stud)

0%

50%

100%

0%

50%

100%

0%

50%

100%

Mass

2,916

,686 k

g 7,4

81 kg

S02eq

337.4

kgNeq

1,202

,973 k

gC02

eq

0.009

21 CFC

-11eq

116,0

90 03

eq

1.387

E+007 M

J

1.280

E+007 M

J

1,061

,118 M

J2,4

78,88

2 kg

4,381

kgS02

eq

224.3

kgNeq

933,0

83 kg

C02eq

0.008

81 CFC

-11eq

59,89

8 03e

q 1.0

07E+00

7 MJ

9,151

,322 M

J92

0,923

MJ

3,074

,042 k

g 5,0

60 kg

S02eq

243.7

kgNeq

1,067

,528 k

gC02

eq

0.009

87 CFC

-11eq

68,95

4 03e

q 1.0

68E+00

7 MJ

9,911

,801 M

J76

3,367

MJ

Acidific

ation

Eutrop

hicatio

n

Global W

arming

Ozone

Depleti

on

Smog Fo

rmatio

n

Primary

Energy

Non-re

newab

le

Renew

able E

nergy Mass

Acidific

ation

Eutrop

hicatio

n

Global W

arming

Ozone

Depleti

on

Smog Fo

rmatio

n

Primary

Energy

Non-re

newab

le

Renew

able E

nergy Mass

Acidific

ation

Eutrop

hicatio

n

Global W

arming

Ozone

Depleti

on

Smog Fo

rmatio

n

Primary

Energy

Non-re

newab

le

Renew

able E

nergy

Wood Stud Concrete

Revit CategoriesCeilingsCurtain Panels

Curtain Wall MullionsDoors

FloorsRoofs

Stairs and RailingsWalls