Editorial [to] Themed issue on sustainability in energy and buildings, part 1

This themed issue includes the selected papers from the proceedings of the seventh International Conference on Sustainability and Energy in Buildings 2015 (SEB15), which was successfully held in the vibrant city of Lisbon, Portugal and was organised by the Universidade Nova de Lisbon (New University of Lisbon) in partnership with KES International. Annually, the conference brings together researchers and government and industry professionals to discuss the future of energy in buildings, neighbourhoods and cities from a theoretical, practical, implementation and simulation perspective

Implications of using systematic decomposition structures to organize building LCA information: A comparative analysis of national standards and guidelines- IEA EBC ANNEX 72

The application of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) technique to a building requires the collection and organization of a large amount of data over its life cycle. The systematic decomposition method can be used to classify building components, elements and materials, overcome specific difficulties that are encountered when attempting to complete the life cycle inventory and increase the reliability and transparency of results. In this paper, which was developed in the context of the research project IEA EBC Annex 72, we demonstrate the implications of taking such approach and describe the results of a comparison among different national standards/guidelines that are used to conduct LCA for building decomposition. Methods: We initially identified the main characteristics of the standards/guidelines used by Annex participant countries. The "be2226" reference office building was used as a reference to apply the different national standards/guidelines related to building decomposition. It served as a basis of comparison, allowing us to identify the implications of using different systems/standards in the LCA practice, in terms of how these differences affect the LCI structures, LCA databases and the methods used to communicate results. We also analyzed the implications of integrating these standards/guidelines into Building Information Modelling (BIM) to support LCA. Results: Twelve national classification systems/standards/guidelines for the building decomposition were compared. Differences were identified among the levels of decomposition and grouping principles, as well as the consequences of these differences that were related to the LCI organization. In addition, differences were observed among the LCA databases and the structures of the results. Conclusions: The findings of this study summarize and provide an overview of the most relevant aspects of using a standardized building decomposition structure to conduct LCA. Recommendations are formulated on the basis of these findings

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.IEA -International Energy Agency(undefined

Comparison of the environmental assessment of an identical office building with national methods

The IEA EBC Annex 72 focuses on the assessment of the primary energy demand, greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts of buildings during production, construction, use (including repair and replacement) and end of life (dismantling), i.e. during the entire life cycle of buildings. In one of its activities, reference buildings (size, materialisation, operational energy demand, etc.) were defined on which the existing national assessment methods are applied using national (if available) databases and (national/regional) approaches. The ?be2226? office building in Lustenau, Austria was selected as one of the reference buildings. TU Graz established a BIM model and quantified the amount of building elements as well as construction materials required and the operational energy demand. The building assessment was carried out using the same material and energy demand but applying the LCA approach used in the different countries represented by the participating Annex experts. The results of these assessments are compared in view of identifying major discrepancies. Preliminary findings show that the greenhouse gas emissions per kg of building material differ up to a factor of two and more. Major differences in the building assessments are observed in the transports to the construction site (imports) and the construction activities as well as in the greenhouse gas emissions of the operational energy demand (electricity). The experts document their practical difficulties and how they overcame them. The results of this activity are used to better target harmonisation efforts.IEA -International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement(Slovenia

Indoor performance and sustainability

Perfection (Performance Indicators for Health, Comfort and Safety of the Indoor Environment, 2009-11) is a European Coordination Action under EC's 7th Framework Programme. It aims to help enabling the application of new building design and technologies that improve the impact of the indoor built environment on health and comfort, feeling of safety and positive stimulation integrated within a sustainable built environment. Perfection project consists of the following components · the inventory of current standards, regulations, technologies, and ongoing and recent research activities and policies related to the optimal indoor environment · an analysis of current indicators for health and comfort, safety and accessibility, positive stimulation, adaptability and usability positioned within a generic framework to assess their impacts to sustainability · experiences from pilot cases exploiting the key indoor performance indicators in different building types. This paper presents the findings from applicable design technologies and potential Key Indoor Performance Indicators (KIPIs) representing health and comfort, accessibility safety and positive stimulation, usability and adaptability in relation with their impacts to sustainable buildings

Environmental impact comparison of a ventilated and a non-ventilated building-integrated photovoltaic rooftop design in the Netherlands: Electricity output, energy payback time, and land claim

Building Integrated PV (BIPV) is considered as a key development for successful deployment of PV in the built environment. However, the effect of PV integration on environmental impact is not fully understood. In this study a single indicator for environmental impact assessment of BIPV is investigated in the Netherlands. A BIPV rooftop with 24 multi-crystalline 60-cell modules has been designed with and without backside ventilation, and the environmental impact of these configurations has been assessed in the current situation and three future scenarios. The results are expressed in terms of electricity output difference (ΔEout), Energy PayBack Time (EPBT), and the single indicator Land Claim (LC); the calculated claim in land-time on the carrying capacity to realize the BIPV rooftop. The EPBT calculations are based on two different datasets, SimaPro and the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE), and the LC calculations are based on two different models, SimaPro and MAXergy. Calculations indicate that the ventilated BIPV rooftop design generates 2.6% more electricity than the non-ventilated BIPV rooftop design on a yearly basis. Calculations indicate that the EPBT of the ventilated BIPV rooftop design (3.56 and 4.59 years, based on SimaPro and ICE, respectively) is 9 and 6% longer than the EPBT of the non-ventilated BIPV rooftop design (3.25 and 4.32 years, based on SimaPro and ICE, respectively). Calculations indicate that the LC of a m2 ventilated BIPV rooftop design (24.4 and 19.4 m2 a, based on SimaPro and MAXergy, respectively) is 18 and 10% higher than the LC of a m2 non-ventilated BIPV rooftop design (20.0 and 17.4 m2 a, based on SimaPro and MAXergy, respectively). In the optimal future scenario EPBT might decrease to 2.06 years and LC might decrease to 10.6 m2 a. This study indicates that the non-ventilated BIPV design shows a lower environmental impact in spite of a lower electric performance and that environmental impact can significantly be reduced in future scenarios. © 201