How  I  Got  Run  Over  by  the  Carbon  Elephant…  or  Buildings  as  a  Climate  Change  Solu2on  Chris  Magwood  ONBC  2018  

Where  I’m  coming  from…  

A  20-­‐year  pracCce  of  ecological  design  &  construcCon  

Considering  material  &  system  choices  based  on  criteria:  •  Environmental  impacts  

•  Embodied  energy  (and  carbon)  

•  Indoor  environment  quality  •  Energy  Efficiency  •  Waste  •  Material  costs  •  Labour  inputs  •  Skill  level  required  by  homeowner  •  Sourcing  &  availability  •  Durability  &  longevity  •  Building  code  compliance  

Take  a  trip  with  me  

down  the  nerdy  

rabbit  hole  of  

embodied  carbon  

calculaCons…  

How  do  we  find  out  the  greenhouse  gas  emissions  related  to  a  parCcular  material?  

I  started  with  the  ICE  (Inventory  of  Carbon  and  Energy)  database,  generated  at  University  of  Bath  in  England.  It  started  in  2005  and  has  

been  an  invaluable  resource.  But,  the  data  isn’t  verified  or  standardized  (and  is  UK  and  European),  

so  need  bePer  sources…  

Environmental  Product  DeclaraCons…  

A  more  reliable  source  of  ecological  impact  data  

Varying  standards  for  EPDs…  

Two  different  standards,  not  directly  comparable!  

Boundary  condiCons…  

Ensuring  comparisons  cover  the  same  boundaries  for  comparison  

PS.  We  should  do  this!  

An  EPD  for  straw  bales  and  hemp  would  make  these  opVons  that  designers  looking  for  materials  would  actually  see.  I  can’t  think  of  a  bePer  role  for  the  ONBC  at  this  point.  

MD-17001-EN | Carlo F. Christensen | Page 7 of 11

LCA results ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS PER M2

Parameter Unit A1-A3 A4 A5 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 C3 C4 D

GWP [kg CO2-eq.] -50,4 0,555 0,809 38,4 0,00415 0 0 0 0 0,134 0 40,5 -15,2

ODP [kg CFC11-eq.] 3,97E-009 4,52E-013 6,31E-013 0 4,66E-010 0 0 0 0 1,09E-013 0 8,81E-012 -1,62E-011

AP [kg SO2-eq.] 0,42 0,00239 0,00423 0 6,81E-005 0 0 0 0 0,000575 0 0,00413 -0,02

EP [kg PO43--eq.] -0,882 0,000595 -0,00862 0,349 6,78E-005 0 0 0 0 0,000143 0 0,000843 -0,00249

POCP [kg ethene-eq.] 0,00395 -0,00087 2,4E-005 0 1,61E-005 0 0 0 0 -0,00021 0 0,000334 -0,0021

ADPE [kg Sb-eq.] 0,000125 5,02E-008 4,55E-007 -1,51E-005 5,33E-008 0 0 0 0 1,21E-008 0 3,83E-007 -2,88E-006

ADPF [MJ] 327 7,66 3,34 0 0,066 0 0 0 0 1,85 0 7,41 -201

Caption GWP = Global warming potential; ODP = Ozone depletion potential; AP = Acidification potential of soil and water; EP = Eutrophication potential; POCP = Photochemical ozone creation potential; ADPE = Abiotic depletion potential for non fossil resources; ADPF = Abiotic depletion potential for fossil resources

RESOURCE USE PER M2

Parameter Unit A1-A3 A4 A5 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 C3 C4 D

PERE [MJ] 262 - - - - - - - - - - - -

PERM [MJ] 741 - - - - - - - - - - - -

PERT [MJ] 1E003 0,395 9,87 0 0,274 0 0 0 0 0,0954 0 1,31 -59,9

PENRE [MJ] 330 - - - - - - - - - - - -

PENRM [MJ] 6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

PENRT [MJ] 336 7,7 3,45 -0,619 0,07 0 0 0 0 1,86 0 8,81 -208

SM [kg] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RSF [MJ] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NRSF [MJ] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

FW [m3] 0,0953 0,000732 0,00408 0 0,00159 0 0 0 0 0,000176 0 0,0983 -0,0284

Caption

PERE = Use of renewable primary energy excluding renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials; PERM = Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials; PERT = Total use of renewable primary energy resources; PENRE = Use of non renewable primary energy excluding non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials; PENRM = Use of non renewable

primary energy resources used as raw materials; PENRT = Total use of non renewable primary energy resources; SM = Use of secondary material; RSF = Use of renewable secondary fuels; NRSF = Use of non renewable secondary fuels; FW = Use of net fresh water

Owner: Carlo F. Christensen A/SNo.:ECO EPD:

MD-17001-EN00000505

Issued: 25-04-2017Valid to: 25-04-2022

EPDVERIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DECLARATION | ISO 14025 & EN 15804

3 r d P A R T Y V E R I F I E D

BuildingComponent Materials Constructiontype Kgtotal ICE2.0factor OtherECfactor TotalkgCO2e ImprovedperformanceTotalCO2sequestration Notes RedListChemicalsFoundationWalls&Slab 1)Typicalpouredconcrete Concrete 8inchconcretewall,24mPa 39120 0.107 0.127* 4968.2 0 N

Parging Top2feet,1:1:6mix 711 0.174 123.7 0 NRebar 1/2"rebarasperOBC 295.4 1.4 413.6 0 N

5505.5

2)Highslagconcrete Concrete,50%blastfurnaceslag 8inchslagconcrete,24mPa 39120 0.077 3012.2 0 NParging Top2feet,1:1:6mix 711 0.174 123.7 0 NRebar 1/2"rebarasperOBC 295.4 1.4 413.6 0 N

3549.5

3)ICF Concrete 8inchconcrete,24mPa 39120 0.107 0.127* 4968.2 0 NParging Top2feet,1:1:6mix 711 0.174 123.7 0 NRebar 1/2"rebaraspermanufacturerspecs 433 1.4 606.2 0 N

5698.1

4)NexcemICF(formerlyDurisol)Concrete Concretefillfor43212inchblocks@0.013yd3/ft220616 0.107 0.127* 2618.2 0 NParging Top2feet,1:1:6mix 711 0.174 123.7 0 NRebar 1/2inchrebaraspermanufacturerspecs 492 1.4 688.8 0 N

3430.7

5)Rammedearthblocks Rammedearthblocks 8"Watershedblocks 23052.1 0.061 0.0696* 1604.4 0 NParging Top2feet,1:1:6mix 711 0.174 123.7 0 NRebar 1/2"rebarasperOBC 393.9 1.4 551.5 0 N

2279.6

FoundationSlab1)Typicalpouredconcrete Concrete,24mPa 4inchthickslab 23280 0.107 0.127* 2956.6 0 N

2)Highslagconcrete Concrete,50%blastfurnaceslag 4inchthickslab 23280 0.077 1792.6 0 N

3)Earthenfloor 4inchesearthenfloor 10563 10563 0.0052 55 0 N

FoundationInsulation*CodeMinimum

1)Extrudedpolystyrene Exteriorwallinsulation 4inchesXPSfoam(R-20) 243 4.26 35.04kg/m2atR-20 3255.6 0 YSubslabinsulation 2inchesXPSfoam(R-10) 120.3 4.26 17.52kg/m2atR-10 1627.8 0 Y

4883.4 7585.5

2)Expandedpolystyrene Exteriorwallinsulation 4inchesEPSfoam15kg/m3(R-18) 149.6 3.29 47.13kgperm3 391.2 0 YSubslabinsulation 2inchesEPSfoam15kg/m3(R-9) 120.3 3.29 47.13kgperm3 222.5 0 Y

613.7 965.3

3)Highdensitysprayfoam Exteriorwallinsulation ~4inches(R-20) N/A 11.22kg/ft2atR-20 11216.1 0 YSubslabinsulation ~2inches(R-10) N/A 5.63kg/ft2atR-10 2551.5 0 Y

13767.6 20020.4

4)MediumdensitysprayfoamExteriorwallinsulation ~4inches,2lb/ft3(R-20) N/A 9.03kg/ft2atR-20 7937.4 0 YSubslabinsulation ~2inches,2lb/ft3(R-10) N/A 4.53kg/ft2atR-10 4530 0 Y

12467.4 19616.7

5)ICF ICFinsulation 2-5/8inchesEPSperside(R-24) 201 4.26 47.13kgperm3 631.5 0 YICFwebbing Polystyrenewebsat8inches 34.5 4.49 154.9 0 NSubslabinsulation 2inchesEPSfoam15kg/m3(R-9) 120.3 3.29 47.13kgperm3 222.5 0 Y

1008.9 1389.3

Looking  at  modeling  results…  

There  can  be  a  wide  variaVon!  

Build  your  own  adventure…  

Adding  up  the  different  materials  that  you  could  choose  

Involving  the  energy  nerds…  

…to  add  operaVonal  carbon  emissions  to  the  scenario.  

Take  away  points:  •  Embodied  carbon  can  vary  widely,  and  

can  be  negaVve  (or  posiVve…)  •  Fuel  source  makes  a  huge  difference  

And  this  could  just  be  the  beginning…  

…of  an  intenVonal  effort  to  store  carbon  in  the  built  environment.  

Two  key  government  direcVves  drive  the  imperaVve  to  reduce  carbon  emissions  associated  with  buildings:  •  OBC  ObjecVve  OE1.1  •  CCAP:  Buildings  and  Homes  

This  has  been  addressed  via  a  focus  on  the  energy  efficiency  of  buildings,  and  to  a  lesser  degree,  electrificaVon  (via  heat  pumps).    Policy  opVon  to  focus  on  embodied  carbon…  Pilot  projects  in  City  of  Vancouver  and  CaGBC  Zero  Carbon  Building  Standard,  collecVng  embodied  carbon  data.  

It’s  starVng  to  happen!  PublicaVons,  government  policy  acVon,  cross-­‐sector  iniVaVve  from  Carbon  Leadership  Forum…  

…and  the  natural  building  community  has  a  central  role  to  play.