Premium
Using anticipatory life cycle assessment to enable future sustainable construction
Author(s) -
Göswein Verena,
Rodrigues Carla,
Silvestre José D.,
Freire Fausto,
Habert Guillaume,
König Jakob
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of industrial ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.377
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1530-9290
pISSN - 1088-1980
DOI - 10.1111/jiec.12916
Subject(s) - life cycle assessment , context (archaeology) , benchmarking , industrial ecology , futures studies , modular design , environmental impact assessment , stakeholder , product (mathematics) , computer science , sustainable design , sustainable products , built environment , systems engineering , risk analysis (engineering) , architectural engineering , sustainability , engineering , business , production (economics) , civil engineering , ecology , macroeconomics , economics , biology , paleontology , public relations , geometry , mathematics , marketing , artificial intelligence , political science , operating system
The built environment is the largest single emitter of CO 2 and an important consumer of energy. Much research has gone into the improved efficiency of building operation and construction products. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is commonly used to assess existing buildings or building products. Classic LCA, however, is not suited for evaluating the environmental performance of developing technologies. A new approach, anticipatory LCA (a‐LCA), promises various advantages and can be used as a design constraint during the product development stage. It helps overcome four challenges: (i) data availability, (ii) stakeholder inclusion, (iii) risk assessment, and (iv) multi‐criteria problems. This article's contribution to the line of research is twofold: first, it adapts the a‐LCA approach for construction‐specific purposes in theoretical terms for the four challenges. Second, it applies the method to an innovative prefabricated modular envelope system, the CleanTechBlock (CTB), focusing on challenge (i). Thirty‐six CTB designs are tested and compared to conventional walls. Inclusion of technology foresight is achieved through structured scenario analysis. Moreover, challenge (iv) is tackled through the analysis of different environmental impact categories, transport‐related impacts, and thickness of the wall assemblies of the CTB. The case study results show that optimized material choice and product design is needed to reach the lowest environmental impact. Methodological findings highlight the importance of context‐specific solutions and the need for benchmarking new products.