Life cycle environmental impacts of residential buildings of concrete and steel structures, case study: Isfahan city

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
M. Taheriyoun 1
M. Hodaei 2
P. Asadi 3
A. Fallahi Zarandi 3
1 Isfahan University of technology
2 Sharif University of Technology
3 Isfahan University of Technology
Abstract
Considering the goals of sustainable development and increasing environmental pollution, attention to the environmental effects of each product has increased more than ever. In the meantime, the building industry plays a major role in environmental pollution, as a major part of the urban waste comes from the industry. The most important factor affecting the amount and nature of environmental impacts is the type of building system. Life cycle analysis is a method used to assess environmental impacts along with all stages of the life of a product from cradle to grave. It is a method for designing sustainable structures, identifying environmental impacts of materials throughout the life cycle, providing financial and environmental details for choosing between different options by the relevant user, and the ability to select different indicators for assessing the life cycle of the application. In this research, a framework for evaluating the environmental life cycle of buildings is described. Due to the fact that in most buildings in Iran there are steel or concrete frames, the environmental impacts of two types of steel and concrete buildings in Isfahan have been estimated and compared. The analysis of the life-cycle analysis is carried out in four stages of the production and processing of materials, materials, construction, operation and end-of-life. Environmental impacts are categorized in the form of potential warming groups, acidification potential, water nutrition, reduction of fossil fuel resources, air pollutants, human health, photochemical smoke formation potential, ozone depletion and toxic emissions. . The analysis of effects is performed during the steps of classification, determination of the coefficient of influence and normalization and weighing. This analysis is performed in steps of classification, determination of the coefficient of influence and normalization and weighting. In the stage of classification of resources or contaminants that are similar in terms of environmental effects, Commitment and the determination of a single index for the effects defined in the groups through the process of determining the coefficient of influence of each work belonging to a group, normalization (converted to a comparable and comparable scale), and ultimately weighing the effect based on the importance of the type of effect is obtained. Weighing in these methods is performed as a triangle of weighting Showed that the highest pollution was related to the production of materials and in particular the manufacture of steel. The percentage of the raw materials used was generally more than 95%. Steel structures have been contaminated with most of the environmental impacts, including global warming, suspended particles, acidification, nutrition, and smog emissions. The impact of concrete building on greenhouse gas and particulate emissions is much higher and contributes significantly to the production of steel in the production of cancerous and toxic substances. It also showed that due to the increased importance of the release of carcinogens and toxic substances in The whole effect is more and more severe on human health and environmental degradation, and the greater role of steel in the release of these contaminations, the environmental contamination of the steel structure for the release of toxic carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as chromium multiplicity, is much greater than the concrete structure.

Keywords

Subjects

Schwartz, Y., R. Raslan and D. Mumovic, 2016. Implementing multi objective genetic algorithm for life cycle carbon footprint and life cycle cost minimisation: A building refurbishment case study. Energy, 97: 58–68
[2] Hossain, K. and B. Gencturk, 2014. Life-Cycle Environmental Impact Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Buildings Subjected to Natural Hazards. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 22(4): A4014001
[3] Hossain, K.A., 2013. Structural Optimization and Life-cycle Sustainability Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Seismic Regions. University of Houston
[4] Liu, M. (Max) and B. Mi, 2017. Life cycle cost analysis of energy-efficient buildings subjected to earthquakes. Energy and Buildings, 154: 581–589
[5] Lippiatt, B.C., 2000. BEES 2.0 Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability: Technical Manual and User Guide
[6] Guggemos, A. and A. Horvath, 2005. Comparison of Environmental Effects of Steel and Concrete-Framed Buildings. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 11(2): 93
[7] Scheuer, C., G.A. Keoleian and P. Reppe, 2003. Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy and Buildings, 35(10): 1049–1064
[8] Noori, M., R. Ghattas, J. Gregory, R. Miller, E. Olivetti and S. Greene, 2016. Life Cycle Assessment for Residential Buildings: A Literature Review and Gap Analysis Rev. 1
[9] Chou, J.-S. and K.-C. Yeh, 2015. Life cycle carbon dioxide emissions simulation and environmental cost analysis for building construction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 101: 137–147
[10] Hee, W.J., M.A. Alghoul, B. Bakhtyar, O. Elayeb, M.A. Shameri, M.S. Alrubaih and K. Sopian, 2015. The role of window glazing on daylighting and energy saving in buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 42: 323–343
[11] Morrissey, J. and R.E. Horne, 2011. Life cycle cost implications of energy efficiency measures in new residential buildings. Energy and Buildings, 43(4): 915–924
[12] Evangelista, P.P.A., A. Kiperstok, E.A. Torres and J.P. Gonçalves, 2018. Environmental performance analysis of residential buildings in Brazil using life cycle assessment (LCA). Construction and Building Materials, 169: 748–761
[13] Tokbolat, S., F. Nazipov, J.R. Kim and F. Karaca, 2019. Evaluation of the environmental performance of residential building envelope components. Energies, 13(1):
[14] Bahramian, M. and K. Yetilmezsoy, 2020. Life cycle assessment of the building industry: An overview of two decades of research (1995–2018). Energy and Buildings, 219:
[15] Khezri, M.A. and H. Kamalan, 2021. Life Cycle Assessment of Residential Buildings Construction (Case Study: Tehran). Environmental Energy and Economic Research, 5(1): s05
[16] Goedkoop, M., M. Oele, J. Leijting, T. Ponsioen and E. Meijer, Introduction to LCA with SimaPro, 2016
[17] Wernet, G., C. Bauer, B. Steubing, J. Reinhard, E. Moreno-Ruiz and B. Weidema, 2016. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21(9): 1218–1230
[18] Municipality of isfahan, 1393. Statistics of Isfahan City, Department of Housing and Building
[19] Mark Goedkoop, Michiel Oele, Marisa Vieira, Jorrit Leijting, Tommie Ponsioen, E.M., 2016. SimaPro Tutorial
[20] Bare, J., 2011. TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 13(5): 687–696
[21] Aymard, V. and V. Botta-Genoulaz, 2017. Normalisation in life-cycle assessment: consequences of new European factors on decision-making. Supply Chain Forum, 18(2): 76–83
[22] Muhl, M., M. Berger and M. Finkbeiner, 2021. Distance-to-target weighting in LCA—Amatterofperspective. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 26: 114–126
[23] Andreas, R., S. Serenella and N. Jungbluth, 2020. Normalization and weighting: the open challenge in LCA. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 25(9): 1859–1865
[24] Xue, Z., H. Liu, Q. Zhang, J. Wang, J. Fan and X. Zhou, 2020. The impact assessment of campus buildings based on a life cycle assessment-life cycle cost integrated model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(1): 1–24
Modares Civil Engineering journal
Volume 21, Issue 5
November and December 2021
Pages 1-14