"Available online 17 November 2022"Assessing singular elements that constitute the air barrier of a building envelope is quite unfeasible in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The study of these solutions through this particular scope is often overlooked. Two major aspects contribute to it: the complexity of the relationships between elements and the reduced embodied impact of these materials in the overall construction or retrofitting works. This work uses LCA and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) to study the viability of applying two envelope air barrier solutions in dwellings with excessive air change rates and equipped with different heating systems. The application of air barrier solutions resulted in average energy consumption savings in urban terrain, almost half of those in rural terrain during the heating season. Environmental performance and life cycle costs revealed mechanically (MECH) fastened air barriers to outperform fluid (FLUID) applied ones. The median annualized cost of adopting a FLUID solution was almost four times that of a MECH solution. Dwellings equipped with electric radiators ranked first in the shortest average Energy Payback Period (EPP) and the highest average Reference Service Life (RSL) savings. With the current analysis, the adoption of MECH solutions is recommended, independently of the heating system the dwelling is equipped with.This work was financially supported by: Base Funding -
UIDB/04708/2020 and Programmatic Funding - UIDP/04708/2020
of the CONSTRUCT - Instituto de I&D em Estruturas e Construções
- funded by national funds through the FCT/MCTES (PIDDAC). The
author would like to acknowledge the support of FCT - Fundação
para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, the funding of the Doctoral Grant
PD/BD/135162/2017, through the Doctoral Programme EcoCoRe.
This work is supported by the European Social Fund (ESF), through
the North Portugal Regional Operational Programme (Norte 2020)
[Funding Reference: NORTE-06-3559-FSE-000176]
