It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
While the reduction of operational greenhouse gas emissions is prioritized for the existing building stock, embodied emissions dominate the environmental impact of newly constructed buildings that fulfil zero emission standards. One option to reduce embodied emissions is the use of biogenic materials in construction. However, this usually requires an increase in investment costs. This contribution explores the costs of avoided and temporarily saved greenhouse gas emissions in buildings if non-renewable materials are substituted with biogenic materials. To investigate this question, we use life cycle assessment and life cycle costing, aligning the economic and ecological perspectives. We consider material options of different building parts, exterior walls, and slabs. We use the construction element with the lowest cost as a baseline and determine emission savings of different material choices and related costs. This reveals how changing material choices, e.g., from a concrete core to a wooden core, can cause high prevention costs of more than ten times the current values for emissions certificates, if a short time horizon is considered. In a life-cycle perspective, prevention costs can be even higher, depending on the carbon accounting method used. However, replacing cheaper, short lasting, higher-emitting materials with more expensive, long-lasting materials, with lower emissions, is a win-win option if the whole life cycle is considered. We conclude that construction based on reinforced concrete and other non-renewable materials bears a great risk of carbon lock-in if carbon taxes and emissions trading remain the main legislation to prevent greenhouse gas emissions. The study shows that there are currently only very limited economic incentives to avoid and temporarily store embodied greenhouse gas emissions by using biogenic materials instead of non-renewable materials in buildings, and that new policies need to be developed to unlock this potential.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) , Trondheim, Norway
2 University of Twente , Twente, Netherlands