How to define (net) zero greenhouse gas emissions buildings: The results of an international survey as part of IEA EBC annex 72

The concept of (net) zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emission(s) buildings is gaining wide international attention and is considered to be the main pathway for achieving climate neutrality targets in the built environment. However, there is an increasing plethora of differing terms, definitions, and approaches emerging worldwide. To understand the current progress of the ongoing discussion, this study provides an overview of terms, definitions, and key features from a review of 35 building assessment approaches. The investigation identified that 13 voluntary frameworks from 11 countries are particularly characterised by net zero-carbon/GHG emissions performance targets, which are then subject to a more detailed analysis. The review was organised in the context of the project IEA EBC Annex 72 on “Assessing Life Cycle Related Environmental Impacts Caused by Buildings”, which involves researchers from over 25 countries worldwide. In the current dynamic political surroundings and ongoing scientific debate, only an initial overview of this topic can be presented. However, providing typologies and fostering transparency would be instrumental in delivering clarity, limiting misunderstanding, and avoiding potential greenwashing. To this end, this article categorises the most critical methodological options—i.e., system boundaries for both operational and embodied GHG emissions, the type of GHG emission factor for electricity use, the approach to the “time” aspect, and the possibilities of GHG emission compensation—into a comprehensive framework for clarifying or setting (net) zero GHG emission building definitions in a more systematic way. The article concludes that although variations in the existing approaches will continue to exist, certain minimum directions should be considered for the future development of harmonised (net) zero GHG emissions building frameworks. As a minimum, it is recommended to extend the usual scope of the operational energy use balance. At the same time, minimum requirements must also be set for embodied GHG emissions even if they are not considered in the carbon/GHG emissions balance

Capturing sustainable housing characteristics through Electronic Building Files: The Australian Experience

This paper presents an Australian Government pilot project in 2015 to develop and test a web-based Electronic Building Passport to capture energy efficiency and sustainability related information on residential buildings in the design to hand-over phases of their development and construction. The paper will discuss the key findings of this trial, in terms of (i) local government goals and responsibilities; (ii) available metadata compared with Code required data; (iii) technical benefits and limitations of the online data management system; (iv) data and information sharing, pri-vacy and security; and (v) recommendations for future work

Comparison of the greenhouse gas emissions of a high-rise residential building assessed with different national LCA approaches– IEA EBC Annex 72

Introduction: The international research project IEA EBC Annex 72 investigates the life cycle related environmental impacts caused by buildings. The project aims inter alia to harmonise LCA approaches on buildings. Methods: To identify major commonalities and discrepancies among national LCA approaches, reference buildings were defined to present and compare the national approaches. A residential high-rise building located in Tianjin, China, was selected as one of the reference buildings. The main construction elements are reinforced concrete shear walls, beams and floor slabs. The building has an energy reference area of 4566 m2 and an operational heating energy demand of 250 MJ/m2a. An expert team provided information on the quantities of building materials and elements required for the construction, established a BIM model and quantified the operational energy demand. Results: The greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts of the building were quantified using 17 country-specific national assessment methods and LCA databases. Comparisons of the results are shown on the level of building elements as well as the complete life cycle of the building. Conclusions: The results of these assessments show that the main differences lie in the LCA background data used, the scope of the assessment and the reference study period applied. Despite the variability in the greenhouse gas emissions determined with the 17 national methods, the individual results are relevant in the respective national context of the method, data, tool and benchmark used. It is important that environmental benchmarks correspond to the particular LCA approach and database of a country in which the benchmark is applied. Furthermore, the results imply to include building technologies as their contribution to the overall environmental impacts is not negligible. Grant support: The authors thank the IEA for its organizational support and the funding organizations in the participating countries for their financial support