IEA EBC Annex 72: Assessing Life Cycle Related Environmental Impacts Caused by Buildings: Guidelines for design decision-makers:Energy in Buildings and Communities Technology Collaboration Programme

The purpose of this report is to provide support to the design decisions-makers during the design process. For each of the defined design step decision the important topics to consider were identified, the key stakeholders are declared and the purpose of LCA at the selected design step is defined. The report covers: The definition of the design steps, the definition of the tasks in each design step and an overview of the relevant milestones for performing LCA; An overview of the systematic building decomposition methods and the appropriate levels at each design step; An overview of the tools that can be used for LCA and a selection process for choosing the right LCA tool. A special emphasize is given to the topic of Building Information Modelling (BIM), how the BIM tools can facilitate the LCA assessment and what information should be implemented in the BIM model; Strategies on how to reduce the design-related uncertainties; An overview of the visualization of the LCA results and which are appropriate in the selected design steps

Exploring the Use of Mould Estimation Software in New Zealand Residential Houses

Regularly being exposed to the types of mould spores that can grow in houses has been shown to lead to adverse health effects such as respiratory diseases, and the exacerbation of asthma. While susceptible groups such as children, the elderly, and atopic persons are more susceptible to these effects, adverse health effects from mould spores have been shown to affect non-topic populations. The 2015 Building Research Association of New Zealand House Condition Survey found that 46% of owner-occupied properties, and 54% of rented properties in a representative sample of the New Zealand housing stock have some form of mould in them. This means that a large portion of the population could be at risk of suffering from the adverse health effects associated with mould growth in houses. Increased air-tightness in new houses could also be at risk of being under-ventilated, potentially exacerbating this mould issue. It is unknown whether the current New Zealand Building Code, at the time of writing, provides sufficient ventilation requirements to prevent new houses from being under-ventilated. It also does not consider existing houses, which is where most of the mould in the HCS was found. This study explored whether data from the House Condition Survey and WuFi-Bio could be used to test mould mitigation strategies in New Zealand residential bathrooms. This was done by modelling a subset of houses from the House Condition Survey in WuFi-Pro, estimating the risk of mould in them with WuFi-Bio, and comparing this to the observations from the House Condition Survey. Parameters in the models were then changed to reflect the impact that strategies would have on the humidity and temperature in the bathrooms. The aim of this was to develop a hierarchy of recommendations that could help home occupiers and designers determine the most appropriate methods they could use to prevent mould from growing in their homes/designs. However, the results did not align with the observations from the House Condition Survey, and testing the validity of the models by exploring the impact of assumptions showed they had no significant impact. The cause of this misalignment could not be determined, however a lack of internal condition time-series data and information about how observed mould from the House Condition Survey were identified of areas of uncertainty and prevented further exploration. The exploration that was conducted revealed the importance of having enough data to understand the conditions that lead to any observed mould if an existing bathroom is being assessed using WuFi-Bio. It was concluded that attempting to assess a large number of houses with little data using WuFi-Bio was impractical. A controlled experimental study aimed at understanding a few houses in-depth would be a more appropriate method to test mould mitigation strategies, and help address the mould issue in New Zealand houses

Exploring the Use of Mould Estimation Software in New Zealand Residential Houses

Regularly being exposed to the types of mould spores that can grow in houses has been shown to lead to adverse health effects such as respiratory diseases, and the exacerbation of asthma. While susceptible groups such as children, the elderly, and atopic persons are more susceptible to these effects, adverse health effects from mould spores have been shown to affect non-topic populations. The 2015 Building Research Association of New Zealand House Condition Survey found that 46% of owner-occupied properties, and 54% of rented properties in a representative sample of the New Zealand housing stock have some form of mould in them. This means that a large portion of the population could be at risk of suffering from the adverse health effects associated with mould growth in houses. Increased air-tightness in new houses could also be at risk of being under-ventilated, potentially exacerbating this mould issue. It is unknown whether the current New Zealand Building Code, at the time of writing, provides sufficient ventilation requirements to prevent new houses from being under-ventilated. It also does not consider existing houses, which is where most of the mould in the HCS was found. This study explored whether data from the House Condition Survey and WuFi-Bio could be used to test mould mitigation strategies in New Zealand residential bathrooms. This was done by modelling a subset of houses from the House Condition Survey in WuFi-Pro, estimating the risk of mould in them with WuFi-Bio, and comparing this to the observations from the House Condition Survey. Parameters in the models were then changed to reflect the impact that strategies would have on the humidity and temperature in the bathrooms. The aim of this was to develop a hierarchy of recommendations that could help home occupiers and designers determine the most appropriate methods they could use to prevent mould from growing in their homes/designs. However, the results did not align with the observations from the House Condition Survey, and testing the validity of the models by exploring the impact of assumptions showed they had no significant impact. The cause of this misalignment could not be determined, however a lack of internal condition time-series data and information about how observed mould from the House Condition Survey were identified of areas of uncertainty and prevented further exploration. The exploration that was conducted revealed the importance of having enough data to understand the conditions that lead to any observed mould if an existing bathroom is being assessed using WuFi-Bio. It was concluded that attempting to assess a large number of houses with little data using WuFi-Bio was impractical. A controlled experimental study aimed at understanding a few houses in-depth would be a more appropriate method to test mould mitigation strategies, and help address the mould issue in New Zealand houses

Carbon footprint assessment of a wood multi-residential building considering biogenic carbon

Wood and other bio-based building materials are often perceived as a good choice from a climate mitigation perspective. This article compares the life cycle assessment of the same multi-residential building from the perspective of 16 countries participating in the international project Annex 72 of the International Energy Agency to determine the effects of different datasets and methods of accounting for biogenic carbon in wood construction. Three assessment methods are herein considered: two recognized in the standards (the so-called 0/0 method and −1/+1 method) and a variation of the latter (−1/+1* method) used in Australia, Canada, France, and New Zealand. The 0/0 method considers neither fixation in the production stage nor releases of biogenic carbon at the end of a wood product's life. In contrast, the −1/+1 method accounts for the fixation of biogenic carbon in the production stage and its release in the end-of-life stage, irrespective of the disposal scenario (recycling, incineration or landfill). The −1/+1 method assumes that landfills offer only a temporary sequestration of carbon. In the −1/+1* variation, landfills and recycling are considered a partly permanent sequestration of biogenic carbon and thus fewer emissions are accounted for in the end-of-life stage. We examine the variability of the calculated life cycle-based greenhouse gas emissions calculated for a case study building by each participating country, within the same assessment method and across the methods. The results vary substantially. The main reasons for deviations are whether or not landfills and recycling are considered a partly permanent sequestration of biogenic carbon and a mismatch in the biogenic carbon balance. Our findings support the need for further research and to develop practical guidelines to harmonize life cycle assessment methods of buildings with bio-based materials.This publication has received funding from the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (grant number SI/501549-01); the European Union’s Interreg 2 Seas 2014–2020 Programme under grant number 2S05-036 CBCI; the French Agency for Ecological Transition (ADEME); in Germany, from Project Management Organisation Jülich (Projekttr¨ ager Jülich: PtJ) and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie: BMWi) (grant number 03ET1550A); the Danish Energy Agency under the Energy Technology Development and Demonstration Programme (grant 64012-0133 and 64020-2119);in Austrian by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) via IEA Research Cooperation via the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) Grant #864142; the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports within and within project Interexcellence No. LTT19022; Natural Resources Canada and Quebec Wood Export Bureau (QWEB)