مروری بر مبانی و مفاهیم ارزیابی چرخه عمر ساختمان ها و روش های تحلیل آن
محورهای موضوعی : دو فصل‌نامه فضای زیستامیرحسین جانزاده 1 , ساسان مرادی 2 * , مریم ارمغان 3
1 - پژوهشگر دکتری، گروه معماری، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.
2 - استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.
3 - استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد قزوین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.
کلید واژه: ارزیابی چرخه عمر ساختمان ها, محیط زیست, دی اکسید کربن, ساختمان, انرژی نهان, انرژی بهره برداری,
چکیده مقاله :
ارزیابی چرخه عمر (LCA) ساختمان‌ها به‌عنوان ابزاری موثر برای کاهش انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای و اثرات زیست‌محیطی، اهمیت بسیاری در مقابله با بحران‌های آب‌وهوایی دارد. با وجود آگاهی رو به رشد نسبت به رزیابی چرخه عمر ساختمان ها، اما دانش اجرایی در این حوزه همچنان محدود است، که این امر بهره‌گیری کامل از پتانسیل‌های این روش برای کربن‌زدایی در صنعت ساخت‌وساز را دشوار کرده است. این پژوهش با بررسی روش‌ها و اصول ارزیابی چرخه عمر و تحلیل سوابق مرتبط، به شناسایی و ارائه راهکارهایی برای کاهش اثرات زیست‌محیطی و انتشارات مرتبط با ساختمان‌ها در چهارچوب ارزیابی چرخه عمر در بخش های مختلف می‌پردازد. تمرکز اصلی تحقیق بر کاهش انتشار دی‌اکسید کربن در مراحل تولید، ساخت و بهره‌برداری ساختمان‌ها است و این سوال مطرح می‌شود که چگونه استفاده از LCA می‌تواند به کاهش اثرات مخرب زیست‌محیطی در محیط ساخته‌شده کمک کند. در این پژوهش، روش تحقیق به‌صورت توصیفی-تحلیلی بوده و با ارائه اصول، چارچوب‌ها و دستورالعمل‌های بین‌المللی مرتبط، به تحلیل جامع اثرات زیست‌محیطی ساختمان‌ها در کل چرخه عمر آن‌ها می‌پردازد. نتایج این پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که ارزیابی توامان انرژی نهان و بهره‌برداری در تحلیل چرخه عمر ساختمان‌ها، می‌تواند رویکردی کارآمد و عملی برای ارزیابی میزان تاثیرات زیست محیطی ساختمان ها ارائه کند. در این راستا، استفاده از روش‌های تحلیل ترکیبی مبتنی بر ورودی-خروجی نیز به‌عنوان ابزاری مکمل، امکان دستیابی به ارزیابی جامع‌تر و دقیق‌تر اثرات زیست‌محیطی را فراهم می‌آورد. علاوه بر این، پژوهش به بررسی محدودیت‌ها و چالش‌های اجرایی LCA پرداخته و پیشنهادهایی برای بهبود کاربرد آن در صنعت ساختمان ارائه می‌دهد. این پیشنهادها شامل یکپارچه‌سازی LCA با ابزارهای مدل‌سازی اطلاعات ساختمان (BIM)، آموزش تخصصی برای متخصصان حوزه، و تدوین استانداردهای ملی هماهنگ با شرایط اقلیمی و محیطی است. این تحقیق بر اهمیت رویکردها و کاربردهای عملی LCA در کاهش اثرات زیست محیطی ساختمان ها و دستیابی به توسعه پایدار تأکید دارد.
Building Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) serves as an effective tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and minimizing environmental impacts, making it critical in addressing climate crises. Despite growing awareness of LCA’s significance, the practical knowledge necessary for its implementation remains limited, posing challenges to fully leveraging its potential for decarbonizing the construction industry. This study explores the principles and methodologies of LCA while analyzing relevant literature to identify solutions for mitigating environmental impacts and emissions associated with buildings across various stages of their lifecycle. The research emphasizes reducing carbon dioxide emissions during production, construction, and operational phases, raising the question of how LCA can contribute to minimizing environmental degradation in the built environment. Using a descriptive-analytical methodology, the study examines fundamental principles, international frameworks, and guidelines to conduct a comprehensive analysis of environmental impacts throughout a building’s life cycle. The findings highlight the importance of accounting for both embodied and operational energy in LCA as an efficient and practical approach to assessing a building’s environmental footprint. Moreover, the study underscores the value of integrated input-output-based analytical methods as complementary tools for achieving more comprehensive and precise environmental assessments.
The concept of embodied energy, encompassing the total energy consumed during the extraction, processing, transportation, and assembly of building materials, is a critical component in LCA. This study reveals that neglecting embodied energy often leads to an incomplete understanding of a building’s environmental impact. Operational energy, which pertains to the energy used for heating, cooling, lighting, and other activities during a building’s operational phase, also plays a significant role. By integrating these two aspects, the research demonstrates how LCA can provide a holistic perspective on environmental performance. Furthermore, this study examines advanced analytical methods, including hybrid approaches that combine process-based and input-output-based LCA techniques. These hybrid methods offer a more nuanced understanding of environmental impacts by addressing the limitations of traditional LCA approaches. For instance, process-based LCA often provides detailed insights at the expense of broader system boundaries, while input-output-based LCA covers extensive boundaries but may lack specificity. By combining these methods, the study highlights the potential for achieving greater accuracy and reliability in environmental assessments. In addressing the practical challenges of implementing LCA in the construction industry, the research identifies key barriers such as the lack of standardized methodologies, limited expertise among practitioners, and inadequate integration with existing design and construction workflows. To overcome these challenges, the study proposes several actionable recommendations. One such recommendation is the integration of LCA with Building Information Modeling (BIM) tools. The research also emphasizes the importance of specialized training programs to equip architects, engineers, and other stakeholders with the necessary skills to effectively apply LCA principles.
Additionally, the study advocates for the development of national standards and guidelines tailored to specific climatic and environmental conditions. These standards would ensure consistency in LCA practices while addressing regional variations in resource availability, energy mix, and construction techniques. By aligning LCA methodologies with local contexts, the study argues, policymakers and industry leaders can enhance the relevance and applicability of LCA in promoting sustainable construction practices. The research also explores the potential for LCA to drive innovation in the construction industry. By identifying hotspots of environmental impact, LCA can inform the development of new materials, technologies, and design strategies that prioritize sustainability. By incorporating these innovations into LCA frameworks, the construction industry can accelerate its transition toward a more sustainable future. Collaboration among architects, engineers, policymakers, researchers, and industry professionals is essential for addressing the multifaceted challenges associated with LCA implementation. The research calls for the establishment of interdisciplinary working groups and forums to facilitate knowledge exchange and foster a shared commitment to sustainability goals.
In conclusion, this study highlights the transformative potential of LCA as a tool for reducing the environmental impacts of buildings and achieving sustainable development. By addressing both embodied and operational energy, integrating advanced analytical methods, and overcoming practical barriers, LCA can provide a robust framework for evaluating and improving the environmental performance of buildings. The study’s recommendations including specialized training programs, and the development of context-specific standards offer a roadmap for enhancing LCA’s applicability in the construction industry. Ultimately, the research underscores the critical role of LCA in promoting sustainability and resilience in the built environment.
• هاشمى, فاطمه و حیدرى, شاهین. (1391). بهینه سازى مصرف انرژى در ساختمان هاى مسکونى اقلیم سرد(نمونة موردى: شهر اردبیل). صفه22(1), 75-86..
• وزارت راه و شهرسازی، (1399)، مبحث 19 مقررات ملی ساختمان، دقتر مقررات ملی و کنترل ساختمان.
• یوسفی، فاطمه ؛ قلی پور، یعقوب (1397). ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران، هنرهای زیبا - معماری و شهرسازی بهار 1397، دوره بیست و سوم - شماره .1
• Alshamrani, Othman Subhi. (2021). “Life Cycle Assessment for Modular Roof Systems of Large-Span Building.” In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering. ICCCBE 2020. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, 98 vols., edited by E. Toledo Santos and S. Scheer. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-51295-8_91.
• Alshamrani, Othman., Alshibani, Adel., & Mohammed, Awsan. (2022). Operational Energy and Carbon Cost Assessment Model for Family Houses in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 14(3), 1278
• Asif, Mohammad., Currie, John, and Tariq. Muneer. 2007. “Comparison of Aluminium and Stainless Steel Built-in-storage Solar Water Heater.” Building Services Engineering Research and Technology 28 (4): 337–346. doi:10.1177/ 0143624407082390.
• Atkinson-Palombo, Carol. 2010. New Housing Construction in Phoenix: Evidence of “New Suburbanism, Cities 27 (2): 77–86. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.10.001.
• Anand, Chirjiv Kaur., & Amor, Ben. (2017). Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 67, 408-416.
• Arrigoni, Alessandro, Daman K. Panesar, Mel Duhamel, Tamar Opher, Shoshanna Saxe, I. Daniel Posen, and Heather L. MacLean. (2020). Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials: cut-off vs. substitution. Journal of Cleaner Production, 263, 121465.
• Azari, Rahman, and Narjes Abbasabadi. (2018). Embodied energy of buildings: A review of data, methods, challenges, and research trends. Energy and Buildings, 168, 225-235.
• Ben-Alon, Lola, Vivian Loftness, Kent A. Harries, Gwen DiPietro, and Erica Cochran Hameen. (2019). Cradle to site Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of natural vs conventional building materials: A case study on cob earthen material. Building and Environment, 160, 106150.
• Bribián, Ignacio Zabalza, Antonio Valero Capilla, and Alfonso Aranda Usón. (2011). Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Building and environment, 46(5), 1133-1140.
• Brophy, Vivienne, and J. Owen Lewis. (2012). A green vitruvius: principles and practice of sustainable architectural design. Routledge.
• Christoforou, Elias, Angeliki Kylili, Paris A. Fokaides, and Ioannis Ioannou. "Cradle to site Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of adobe bricks." Journal of Cleaner Production 112 (2016): 443-452.
• Crawford, Robert. (2011). Life cycle assessment in the built environment. Routledge.
• Curran, Mary Ann. 2013. “Life Cycle Assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability,” Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 273-277.
• Curran, Mary Ann. 2013. “Life Cycle Assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability,” Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 273-277.
• Ding, Grace KC. (2004). The development of a multi-criteria approach for the measurement of sustainable performance for built projects and facilities (Doctoral dissertation).
• Dixit, Manish Kumar, José L. Fernández-Solís, Sarel Lavy, and Charles H. Culp. (2010). Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review. Energy and buildings, 42(8), 1238-1247
• Dodman, David. .2017. (2016). Environment and urbanization. International Encyclopedia of Geography: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology, 1-9.
• Du, Qiang, Tana Bao, Yi Li, Youdan Huang, and Long Shao. (2019). Impact of prefabrication technology on the cradle-to-site CO 2 emissions of residential buildings. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 21, 1499-1514.
• Fenner, Andriel Evandro, Charles Joseph Kibert, Junghoon Woo, Shirley Morque, Mohamad Razkenari, Hamed Hakim, and Xiaoshu Lu. (2018).. The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 94, 1142-1152.
• Georges, Laurent, Matthias Haase, Aoife Houlihan Wiberg, Torhildur Kristjansdottir, and Birgit Risholt. (2015). Life cycle emissions analysis of two nZEB concepts. Building Research & Information, 43(1), 82-93.
• Giesekam, Jannik, John Barrett, and Peter Taylor. (2016, August). “Scenario analysis of embodied greenhouse gas emissions in UK construction.”. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Engineering Sustainability (Vol. 171, No. 4, pp. 178-190). Thomas Telford Ltd.
• Guo, Zhanggen, An Tu, Chen Chen, and Dawn E. Lehman. (2018). Mechanical properties, durability, and life-cycle assessment of concrete building blocks incorporating recycled concrete aggregates. Journal of Cleaner Production, 199, 136-149.
• Häkkinen, Tarja, Matti Kuittinen, Antti Ruuska, and Nusrat Jung. (2015). Reducing embodied carbon during the design process of buildings. Journal of Building Engineering, 4, 1-13.
• Hamida, Amneh, Abdulsalam Alsudairi, Khalid Alshaibani, and Othman Alshamrani.(2020). “Environmental Impacts Cost Assessment Model of Residential Building Using an Artificial Neural Network.” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management ahead-of-print (ahead–of–print). doi:10.1108/ECAM-06- 2020-0450.
• Han, Baolong, Rusong Wang, Liang Yao, Hongxiao Liu, and Zhonghang Wang. (2015). Life cycle assessment of ceramic façade material and its comparative analysis with three other common façade materials. Journal of Cleaner Production, 99, 86-93.
• International Enegy Agency, https://www.iea.org/countries/Iran, Achieve, 5/8/2023
• IPCC. (2022), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, 4/1/2023 from: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3. Accessed 18 June 2023.
• ISO, I. (2006). ISO 14040. Environmental management–Life cycle assessment–Principles and framework (ISO 14040: 2006).
• Jun, Hanjong, Namgi Lim, and Mikyoung Kim. (2015). BIM-based carbon dioxide emission quantity assessment method in Korea. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 14(3), 569-576.
• Junnila, Seppo, and Arpad Horvath. (2003). Life-cycle environmental effects of an office building. Journal of Infrastructure systems, 9(4), 157-166.
• Jusselme, Thomas, Emmanuel Rey, and Marilyne Andersen. (2018). An integrative approach for embodied energy: Towards an LCA-based data-driven design method. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 88, 123-132.
• Kjær, Louise Laumann, Aris Pagoropoulos, Michael Hauschild, Morten Birkved, Jannick H. Schmidt, and Tim C. McAloone. (2015). From LCC to LCA using a hybrid input output model–a maritime case study. Procedia CIRP, 29, 474-479.
• Lavagna, Monica, Catia Baldassarri, Andrea Campioli, Serena Giorgi, Anna Dalla Valle, Valentina Castellani, and Serenella Sala. (2018). Benchmarks for environmental impact of housing in Europe: Definition of archetypes and LCA of the residential building stock. Building and Environment, 145, 260-275.
• McManus, Marcelle C., and Caroline M. Taylor, (2015). The changing nature of life cycle assessment. Biomass and bioenergy, 82, 13-26.
• Meex, Elke, Alexander Hollberg, Elke Knapen, Linda Hildebrand, and Griet Verbeeck. (2018). Requirements for applying LCA-based environmental impact assessment tools in the early stages of building design. Building and Environment, 133, 228-236.
• Nwodo, Martin N., and Chimay J. Anumba. (2019). A review of life cycle assessment of buildings using a systematic approach. Building and Environment, 162, 106290.
• Ortiz, Oscar, Francesc Castells, and Guido Sonnemann. (2009). Sustainability in the construction industry: A review of recent developments based on LCA. Construction and building materials, 23(1), 28-39.
• One Click LCA. (2021), Life Cycle Assesment for Building, why it matters and how to it use. One Click LCA Board.
• Pacheco-Torgal, F., and Said Jalali. (2011). Nanotechnology: Advantages and drawbacks in the field of construction and building materials. Construction and building materials, 25(2), 582-590..
• Pomponi, Francesco, and Alice Moncaster. (2016). Embodied carbon mitigation and reduction in the built environment–What does the evidence say. Journal of environmental management, 181, 687-700.
• Prateep Na Talang, Rutjaya, Massimo Pizzol, and Sanya Sirivithayapakorn. (2017). Comparative life cycle assessment of fired brick production in Thailand. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22, 1875-1891.
• Potrč, Tajda, Katja Malovrh Rebec, Friderik Knez, Roman Kunič, and Andraž Legat. (2016). Environmental footprint of external thermal insulation composite systems with different insulation types. Energy Procedia, 96, 312-322.
• Pushkar, S., R. Becker, and A. Katz. (2005). “A Methodology for Design of Environmentally Optimal Buildings by Variable Grouping.” Building and Environment 40 (8): 1126–1139. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.09.004.
• Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), 2024, 2 July from: RICS, Whole life carbon assessment for the built environment, London. http://www.rics.org/Global/Whole_life_carbon_assessment_for_the_BE_PG_ guidance_2017.pdf, 2017.
• Roberts, Matthew, Stephen Allen, and David Coley. (2020). Life cycle assessment in the building design process–A systematic literature review. Building and Environment, 185, 107274.
• Saunders, Christi L., Amy E. Landis, Laurel P. Mecca, Alex K. Jones, Laura A. Schaefer, and Melissa M. Bilec. (2013). Analyzing the practice of life cycle assessment: focus on the building sector. Journal of industrial ecology, 17(5), 777-788.
• Schlanbusch, Reidun Dahl, Selamawit Mamo Fufa, Tarja Häkkinen, Sirje Vares, Harpa Birgisdottir, and Peter Ylmén. (2016). “Experiences with LCA in the Nordic building industry – challenges, needs and solutions,” Energy Procedia, 96, 82-93.
• Schlueter, Arno, and Frank Thesseling. (2009). Building information model based energy/exergy performance assessment in early design stages. Automation in construction, 18(2), 153-163.
• Schmidt, Anders C., Allan A. Jensen, Anders U. Clausen, Ole Kamstrup, and Dennis Postlethwaite. (2004). A comparative life cycle assessment of building insulation products made of stone wool, paper wool and flax: part 1: background, goal and scope, life cycle inventory, impact assessment and interpretation. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 9, 53-66.
• Sherif, Yosef S., and William J. Kolarik. (1981). Life cycle costing: concept and practice. Omega, 9(3), 287-296.
• Sierra-Pérez, Jorge, Jesús Boschmonart-Rives, and Xavier Gabarrell. (2016). Environmental assessment of façade-building systems and thermal insulation materials for different climatic conditions. Journal of cleaner production, 113, 102-113.
• Sturgis, Simon. (2019). Targeting Zero: Whole Life and Embodied Carbon Strategies for Design Professionals. Riba publishing.
• Teh, Soo Huey, Thomas Wiedmann, Judith Schinabeck, Hazel Rowley, and Stephen Moore. (2015). Integrated carbon metrics and assessment for the built environment. Procedia CIRP, 29, 480-485..
• Treasury, H. M. (2013). Planning for economic infrastructure. National Audit Office.
• UKGBC. 2017. Embodied Carbon, Developing a client brief, London. https://www. ukgbc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/UK-GBC-EC-Developing-Client-Brief. Pdf. Accessed 15 April 2022.
• Venkatarama Reddy, B. V., & Latha, M. S. (2014). Influence of soil grading on the characteristics of cement stabilised soil compacts. Materials and Structures, 47, 1633-1645.
• Vilches, Alberto, Antonio Garcia-Martinez, and Benito Sanchez-Montanes. (2017). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of building refurbishment: A literature review. Energy and Buildings, 135, 286-
• Wolf, Christian, Daniel Klein, Gabriele Weber‐Blaschke, and Klaus Richter. (2016). Systematic review and meta‐analysis of life cycle assessments for wood energy services. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20(4), 743-763.
• Yılmaz, Emrah, Hakan Arslan, and Alper Bideci. (2019). Environmental performance analysis of insulated composite facade panels using life cycle assessment (LCA). Construction and Building Materials, 202, 806-813.
• Zeng, Ruochen, and Abdol Chini. (2017). A review of research on embodied energy of buildings using bibliometric analysis. Energy and Buildings, 155, 172-184.
• Zhang, X. (2018). Research on the Quantitative Analysis of Building Carbon Emissions and Assessment Methods for Low-carbon Buildings and Structures. Harbi n Institute of Technology. M. Ph. thesis.