Sustainability, Infrastructure and Communities

- Focus on Opportunities - Arpad Horvath

Associate ProfessorDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering

University of California, Berkeleyhorvath@ce.berkeley.edu

February 14, 2007

Outline of Presentation Where is sustainability research today? Sustainability research at UC Berkeley Players, networks, timing, trends Joint opportunities Involvement of industry

The Grand Vision: Sustainable Development

Definition: Meeting the needs of the current generation without sacrificing the ability of the future generations to meet their needs. (Brundtland Commission, 1987)

• Maintain societal progress while improving environmental quality and quality of life

• Environmental goals- reduce non-renewable resource use- manage renewable resource use for sustainability- reduce toxic substance emissions (heavy metals, solvents,)- reduce greenhouse gas and ozone depleting substance emissions

• Educate the stakeholders• Do good by doing well

• profit = revenue - cost

The Triple Bottom Line of Sustainability

Environment Economy

Social issues

Courtesy: B. Boughton, DTSC

Urban Communities of the Third Millennium

SustainableLivable

EngagingTransit oriented

WiredRenewable

ENR, March 12, 2001, Cover Story

Characterizing Sustainability Research

~ 30 years of publications and projects 1st phase: “we have a global problem”

» Mostly descriptive, qualitative» Stated problem, categories of effects (e.g., air emissions), but few numbers

2nd phase: “let’s analyze/blame someone” – low hanging fruit» Industries: automobile, chemical, petroleum, electric power, cement» Advent of industrial ecology, life-cycle assessment (LCA)» Mostly incomplete assessments (e.g., not all life cycle phases, inventory but no

impact assessment)» Initial savings by companies

3rd phase: more specific assessments» Data collection for specific studies» Services and network analysis, not just manufacturing processes and products» Supply-chain informed LCA» Advances in impact assessment

Observations about Sustainability Research

1. Need to incorporate triple bottom line: environment, economy, equity

- need a unified theory and implementation to link them

2. Sustainability solutions are integrated solutions - Need to learn from successful businesses

3. Need to assess a broad range of environmental effects – sustainability is not just about energy!

4. Need international networks for research and projects5. Need quantitative studies 6. Need to analyze services, not just products and

processes

Integrated Facilities Engineering Companies in

the U.S.

Bechtel

Percentage of Waste Recycled in the U.S., Late 1990s

0

20

40

60

80

100%

Lead Asphalt SteelAluminum Cans Concrete Rebars PaperPlastic Bottles Copper

LCA Framework

Raw Materials Acquisition

Manufacturing

Use/Reuse/Maintenance

Recycle/Waste Management

Inputs Outputs

Raw Materials

Energy

System Boundary

Atmospheric Emissions

Waterborne Wastes

Solid Wastes

Coproducts

Other Releases

Source: U.S. EPA

A concept and methodology to evaluate the environmental effects of a product or activity holistically, by analyzing the whole life cycle of a particular product, process, or activity (U.S. EPA, 1993).

LCA Methodology – ISO 14040

LCA – Life-Cycle Assessment (ISO 14040)

Inventory analysis

Direct applications:

* Product development * Product/process improvement * Strategic planning * Policy making * Marketing * Other

Goal and scope

definition

Impact assessment

Interpretation

Plastics

Aluminum

Cobalt

Copper

Stainless Steel

Chromium

Iron

Monitor

Motherboard

Housing

Hard Drive

Cooling Fan

Keyboard

Video Card

Screws

Wires

Computer

Iron Ore Mining

Petrochemicals production

Quartz Mining

Casserite Mining

Copper Ore Mining

Chemical Reduction

Oil Drilling Injection Molding

Rolling and Shot Peening

Extrusion

Silicon

Bauxite Ore Mining or recycled aluminum

collection

Electrolysis

Stage 1: Materials Extraction

Stage 2: Materials Processing

Stage 3: Component Manufacturing

Stage 4: Assembly Stages 5 & 6: Use and Disposal

Purification and polishing

Ore Mining

Wire drawing

Electricity*Coal Mining Coal burning in

power plant

*This flowchart disregards all the forms of energy required for each stage of the supply chain (transportation fuel, electricity, etc)

Separation

Refinement Glass

Figure 1: Life Cycle of a Computer C. Reich-Weiser, UCB

“The 1.7 Kilogram Microchip”

Williams, E. (2002) “The 1.7 Kilogram Microchip: Energy and Material Use in the Production of Semiconductor Devices.” ES&T, 36:5504-5510.

Buildings and the Environment

Buildings integral part of infrastructure systems (or “civil systems”), and the boundaries between these terms are fuzzy

The built environment has a large impact on the natural environment, economy, health, and productivity

Buildings account for 17% of world’s fresh water withdrawals, 25% of world’s wood harvest, and 40% of world’s materials and energy flows

U.S. Buildings and the Environment

The construction industry accounts for ~8% of U.S. GDP» Similar in industrialized countries, even bigger economic share in industrializing

countries» U.S. construction industry larger than the GDP of 212 national economies

(CA’s: 150 economies) 54% of U.S. energy consumption is directly or indirectly related to

buildings and their construction In the U.S., buildings account for

» 65% of electricity consumption» 30% of GHG emissions» 30% of raw material use» 30% of waste output (136 M tons annually)» 12% of potable water consumption

Categories of Natural Resources

Energy Raw materials Land/Habitat Terrestrial Ecosystems Marine Ecosystems Biodiversityetc.

Ecosystems and Biodiversity

Terrestrial and marine ecosystems greatly endangered» Loss of forest, oil spills, overfishing, etc.

Current rate of extinction is several orders of magnitude greater than the natural background» In the U.S.:

– over 500 known species are now extinct– 1,200 species listed as endangered

Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing

Multidisciplinary campus group integrating engineering, policy, public health, and business in green engineering, management, and pollution prevention 

Strategic areas: » Civil infrastructure systems» Electronics industry» Servicizing products

9 faculty from Civil and Environmental Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Haas School of Business, Energy and Resources Group, School of Public Health

10 current Ph.D. students 28 alumnihttp://cgdm.berkeley.edu

Since 1993

Green Engineering and Management Research Network at UC Berkeley

Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing (CGDM) Network for Energy and Environmentally Efficient Economy (N4E) Center for Future Urban Transport, A Volvo Center of Excellence Urban Sustainability Initiative (USI) Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL) Project Production Systems Laboratory (P2SL)

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)

Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI)

Green Engineering & Management: Some Recent Research Projects (1999-2006)

Infrastructure:» Buildings» Pavements» Electricity generation» Water treatment» Used oil» Shredder residue» Freight transportation

Electronics industry:» Computer plastics recycling

Services:» Telework/telecommuting» News delivery using wireless and wired telecommunications» Teleconferencing versus business travel

Green Engineering & Management: Selection of Current Research Projects

Infrastructure:» Passenger transportation modes» Green logistics» Building life cycle and indoor air quality

– Data centers Services:

» Digital media through wired and wireless telecommunications

Urban Sustainability Initiative

Joint effort of UC Berkeley, the U.S. National Academies, and non-governmental organizations (Urban Age, Healthy Communities Network)

Goal: combine cutting edge research and development with innovative capacity building programs and a global information & exchange network to foster the spread of effective urban sustainability practices and technologies in growing cities throughout the developing world.» Facilitate linkages between project partners, local scientific communities, civil society,

the private sector and the official leadership of rapidly growing cities; » Accelerate the application of existing technologies and practices, and the development

and demonstration of new technologies and practices that improve the environment;» Creating an extensive urban sustainability information network to share technologies

and best practices for the benefit of cities around the world. » Create “living laboratories” in cities in Asia, Latin America, and Africa, and to test new

approaches of environmentally sustainable urban development.

Emissions Sources (required and selected optional reporting)

CO2 equivalent (metric tons)

Percentage Contribution

Purchased Electricity 142,000 45.6%Steam (from co-generation and auxiliary boilers) 81,000 25.9%

Air Travel 50,000 16.1%Faculty and Staff Auto Commute 18,000 5.8%

Natural Gas 13,000 4.2%Student Commute 4,000 1.3%

Fugitive Emissions- Refrigeration 2,000 0.6%Solid Waste 2,000 0.6%

Campus Fleet 1,000 0.3%Total Emissions 310,000 100%

UCB Preliminary Inventory 2005

Required and Optional Reporting to California Climate Action Registry

6.4 metric tons/personSource: Fahmida Ahmed, CalCAP

Trends UC Berkeley GHG Emissions Trends

Transportation

Solid WasteNatural gas

Purchased Steam

Purchased Electricity

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020

In T

hous

ands

Year

Car

bon

Dio

xide

Em

issio

ns E

quiv

alen

t (kg

CO

2 e)

Transportation Solid Waste On-campus Stationary Purchased Steam and Chilled water Purchased Electricity

“Carbon Performance” Institution Emissions in

metric tons of CO2 equivalent

Student population

Metric tons of CO2 equivalent

/ student

Year recorded

University of California, Santa Barbara 64,996 29,269 2.2 year 2006Tufts University 20,375 8,500 2.4 year 2003

University of California, San Diego 156,846 25,964 6.0 year 2004 University of California, Berkeley 309,692 33,558 9.2 year 2005

Harvard University 319,303 20,042 15.9 year 2005Oberlin College 50,417 2,857 17.6 year 2000 Yale University 284,663 11,250 25.3 year 2004

Each of these campuses looks at emissions sources comparable to the “required and selected optional reporting” package.

Source: Fahmida Ahmed, CalCAP

http://sustainable-engineering.berkeley.edu/

“Engineering for Sustainability and Environmental Management” Certificate

Program

Players, Networks in the U.S. Universities

» Carnegie Mellon, Michigan, Arizona State, Texas, Washington Research labs (e.g., Lawrence Berkeley National Lab) The leaders are ICT companies LEED as a green scoring system

Exciting Times in the U.S….

The Economist, 4/29/04

AB 32, Global Warming Solutions Act, by 2020, return GHG emissions to 1990 levels (and boost annual GSP by $60B and create 17,000 jobs)

UC Berkeley’s $500M Energy Biosciences Institute (BP-funded)

U.S. considering GHG reduction legislation and industrial action

Greening Building Practices in China Tasks:

» Assess the current construction practices of commercial buildings and high-rise residential buildings in China.

» Recommend environmentally less burdensome building materials and processes.– Short term: Focus on major materials (e.g., concrete, steel,

aluminum, flooring, with special focus on cement) and processes (e.g., construction equipment, temporary materials).

– Later: evaluate the engineering, economic and environmental feasibility of using waste materials and byproducts (such as fly ash, demolition material, waste tires) in construction.

Indoor Air Quality in China Task:

» Assess the effect of the indoor environments on building occupants. – What are the indoor air quality (IAQ) implications of using

common building (e.g., carpet and paint) and maintenance materials (e.g., cleaners)?

– What are the IAQ implications from the introduction of pollution from outdoor air? China has severely polluted urban air and might consider IAQ control by means of filtering supply air in addition to controlling indoor emission sources.

Opportunities to Use Innovations in Practice

Need to get all the stakeholders networking and integrating (clients want intergated, packaged services, want to deal with one company)

Need to get problem focused» problems are global

GHG and other environmental studies of U.S., Chinese, Indian, etc. companies, industries, government entities

ICT industry: Data centers study, construction, operation Biofuels Lean and green

Purposes

DesignCriteria

DesignConcepts

ProcessDesign

ProductDesign

DetailedEngineering

Fabrication& Logistics

Installation

Commissioning

Operations & Maintenance

Alteration &Decommissioning

Project Definition Lean Design Lean Supply Lean Assembly Use

Production ControlWork Structuring

LearningLoops

Connecting Green and Lean: Project Production Systems Laboratory

Develop new project management theory based on understanding of production systems (esp. Toyota Production System)

Reform project management practice

http://p2sl.berkeley.edu

Opportunities in Research and Development

Location: U.S., Europe, China Transformational, interdisciplinary research and

development» Modeling of infrastructure» Sustainability metrics

– E.g., green building scoring system for the EU– LCA model for Finland, Nordic countries, EU

Data centers Computer-based decision-support tools Education

» Joint educational initiatives in, e.g., China

Opportunities for Industrial Involvement

GHG developments in California, U.S., China, India Scientific and management knowledge transfer, consulting

» service industries, and their supply chains have a tremendous opportunity to present a unified product (e.g., Bechtel, Xerox, Kodak)

» ICT industries Biofuels Data centers ICT products/services helping urban communities (e.g.,

telework, mobile work) Green does not have to be synonimous with cheap Green can bring competitive advantages

Industrial Ecology “The (deliberate and rational) concept requires

that an industrial system be viewed not in isolation from its surrounding systems, but in concert with them.

It is a systems view in which one seeks to optimize the total materials cycle from virgin material, to finished material, to component, to product, to obsolete product, to ultimate disposal.

Factors to be optimized include resources, energy, and capital.” – Graedel and Allenby

Future Work Continued adaptation of the latest environmental

science and management methods and results» hybrid LCA

Need to assess indirect as well as direct environmental effects, and reveal the supply chain implications

Takeback, recycling regulations Revisit past research questions, and redo some

analyses Quantify the benefits on society Focus on impact assessment, not just on inventory Embrace analysis of social effects

Future Plans

Campus research center in “Technology and Sustainability.” Formalize “Technology and Sustainability” certificate program. Accelerate research on green and lean project delivery. Develop green modules for engineering courses. Involve more faculty in teaching and research.

Buildings and the Environment

Buildings integral part of infrastructure systems (or “civil systems”), and the boundaries between these terms are fuzzy

The built environment has a large impact on the natural environment, economy, health, and productivity

Buildings account for 17% of world’s fresh water withdrawals, 25% of world’s wood harvest, and 40% of world’s materials and energy flows

U.S. Buildings and the Environment

The construction industry accounts for ~8% of U.S. GDP» Similar in industrialized countries, even bigger economic share in industrializing

countries» U.S. construction industry larger than the GDP of 212 national economies

(CA’s: 150 economies) 54% of U.S. energy consumption is directly or indirectly related to

buildings and their construction In the U.S., buildings account for

» 65% of electricity consumption» 30% of GHG emissions» 30% of raw material use» 30% of waste output (136 M tons annually)» 12% of potable water consumption

Composition of the U.S. GDP (2002)

Economic sector Percent of GDP Cumulative Percent

Services 20.4 20.4

Finance, insurance, real estate

19.4 39.8

Retail trade 8.8 48.6

Wholesale trade 6.9 55.5

Government 12.7 68.2

Communications 2.6 70.8

Transportation 3.2 74.0

Construction 4.1 78.1

Electric, gas, sanitary services

2.6 80.7

Manufacturing 17.0 97.7

Mining 1.5 99.2

Agriculture, forestry, fishing 1.6 ~100U.S

. Dep

artm

ent o

f Com

mer

ce, w

ww

.cen

sus.

gov

The Economist, May 8, 2003

Cities of the Third Millennium

SustainableLivable

EngagingTransit oriented

WiredRenewable

ENR, March 12, 2001, Cover Story

Characteristics of Civil Systems Products and processes Manufacturing and service Long service lifetimes Slower obsolescence (?) compared to industrial products Large, complicated, in the public eye Considered “underfunded”, “in bad shape” (ASCE Report

Card 1998, 2001, 2005) Decisions have significant economic, environmental and

social consequences

Current Issues - General• Visual and physical impacts of infrastructure• Reduction of materials use • End-of-life options: landfilling, reuse, recycling• Environmental discharges (to air, water, land and

underground wells) in all phases of construction• Hazardous and non-hazardous waste generation and

disposal• Environmental efficiency of construction equipment• Energy implications of constructionetc.

Current Issues - Specific• Toxic chemical emissions• Conventional pollutant emissions• Greenhouse gas and ozone-depleting chemicals use

and emissions• Embedded energy in construction materials• Energy consumption by construction machines• Nonrenewable and renewable resource use• Reuse and recycling of construction materials• Solid and nonsolid waste implications• etc.

Existing Solutions

•Rating tools

•EIA

•LCA

How Much Material Do We Use?

• A total of 2.8 billion metric tons of different materials used in the U.S. in 1995 (USGS)

• ~3.5 billion metric tons in 2000• 81% by volume were construction materials, mostly

stone, and sand and gravel

Use of Construction Mineral and Material Commodities in the U.S. [ton]

cementcrushed

stonedimension

stone

coalcombustion

productsiron andsteel slag

constructionsand andgravel

1950 40,891,000 228,000,000 1,890,000 22,600,000 321,000,000

1960 55,526,000 557,000,000 2,250,000 26,100,000 628,000,000

1970 67,476,000 788,000,000 1,830,000 4,630,000 30,600,000 830,000,000

1980 70,173,000 893,000,000 1,830,000 11,300,000 22,900,000 692,000,000

1990 80,964,000 1,110,000,000 3,680,000 19,300,000 22,100,000 831,000,000

2000 110,470,000 1,569,000,000 5,850,000 28,600,000 17,500,000 1,120,000,000

Ewell ME (2001), Mining and quarrying trends. Minerals Yearbook, Vol I–Metals and Minerals. U.S. Geological Survey

Current Design Method

Current building design decisions are made based on: Safety Functionality CostEnvironmental issues are often only addressed qualitatively or simplistically (e.g., using recycled-content flooring or lead-free paint)

Objectives of Horvath’s Research Group

Material and energy resource consumption Environmental impacts of onsite construction

processes Overall life-cycle impacts of construction Decision support tool for the building industry

Our Comprehensive Framework

ConstructionDesign Operation Maintenance End-of-life

Air Emissions Water Emissions Waste Emissions

Water Materials Energy Labor Equipment Finance

Direct Impacts

Indirect Impacts

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

MaterialsProduction

Scope and detail of our analysis

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

Generic Impact Category

Indirect Impacts

Direct Impacts

ExistsMissing

Legend:

(Guggemos, 2003)

(Literature on Buildings)

ConstructionDesign Operation Maintenance End-of-lifeMaterialsProduction

Detail

Scope

Our Research

MaterialsExtraction &

Manufacturing

(EIO-LCA)

Building Use

(EIO-LCA)

BuildingMaintenance

(Process data)

Building End-of-Life

(Process data)

Environmental Emissions

Energy and Resources Consumed

BuildingConstruction

(CEDST)

European – U.S. Office Building Comparison

Located in Southern Finland / Midwest U.S. Typical 4-story / 5-story building; 4,400 m2 area;

17,300 m3 / 16,400 m3 volume Structural frame:

» pre-fabricated concrete elements, sandwich-panels » steel-reinforced concrete beam-column system, shear walls at core

Exterior envelope: brick veneer on concrete / aluminum curtain wall Interior finishes: typical commercial office space Construction materials: 1,190 kg/m2 / 1,290 kg/m2

Maintenance materials: 240 kg/m2 / 70 kg/m2

Heat: 36 kWh/m3/yr (~average) / Natural gas: 17.5 m3/m2/yr Electricity: 70 kWh/m2/yr (30% below average) / 184+56 kWh/m2/yr 54 different building elements consisting of 23 different building materials Service life: 50 years

EU Case Study Results

Energy [GJ] CO2 [Mg] SO2 [kg] NOx [kg] PM10 [kg] Materials (Total) 15,000 1,300 2,300 4,000 2,100 Landscaping (gravel, etc.) 2 0 0 1 0 Concrete 4,200 450 280 1,600 760 Steel reinforcing 1,000 47 64 110 35 Steel, cast iron 3,900 440 530 540 440 Nonferrous metals 1,300 82 340 310 190 Masonry 230 25 82 87 NA Timber 80 0 0 14 3 Plastic, rubber, etc. 390 21 120 120 36 Building boards, paper 890 56 360 350 110 Insulation 1,500 76 310 260 360 Waterproofing 22 1 4 7 1 Glass 850 58 84 410 10 Finishing (flooring, glues, etc.) 320 18 40 89 150 Paints 300 12 82 45 13 Others NA 2 NA 24 NA Construction (Total) 4,800 200 500 1,800 400 Materials in construction 1,300 45 220 310 75 Electricity 1,700 46 87 100 140 Heat 320 22 29 41 66 Machinery 1,200 92 110 1,100 140 Steam NA 4 0 8 0 Transp. of building materials 310 22 5 270 10 Use Phase (Total) 204,000 11,000 9,900 20,000 3,700 Electricity, others (e.g., outlets, HVAC) 74,000 3,300 3,300 6,200 2,000 Electricity, lighting 30,000 1,400 1,400 2,500 830 Heating 100,000 6,200 5,200 11,000 820 Maintenance (Total) 9,500 700 2,300 2,500 1,100 Landscaping (gravel, etc.) 2 0 0 1 0 Concrete 360 32 26 110 25 Steel reinforcing 1 0 0 0 0 Steel, cast iron 1,300 230 290 290 240 Nonferrous metals 930 52 210 110 93 Masonry 240 25 82 87 NA Timber 76 0 0 14 3 Plastic, rubber, etc. 160 8 52 50 14 Building boards, paper 890 56 360 350 110 Insulation 1,000 60 260 190 290 Waterproofing 22 1 4 7 1 Glass 850 58 84 410 10 Finishing (flooring, glues, etc.) 320 18 40 89 150 Paints 3,000 120 820 450 130 Constr.& transportation of materials 350 29 23 338 31 End-of-life (Total) 800 60 50 700 90 Equipment 510 37 45 430 80 Transportation of materials 300 22 4 270 5

TOTAL 234,100 13,260 15,050 29,000 7,390

U.S. Case Study

Results

Energy [GJ] CO2 [Mg] SO2 [kg] NOx [kg] PM10 [kg]Materials (Total) 31,100 2,000 9,300 8,000 2,700Aluminum 79 4 63 25 7Bitumen 69 4 15 19 5Carpet 1,303 80 308 295 136Ceramic tile 1,122 79 130 224 39Concrete 3,084 213 1,308 1,593 309Elevator 502 32 140 118 23Mineral fiber board ceiling tile 942 65 324 257 107Glass 3,432 236 647 1,196 185Gypsum board 892 62 104 148 63Insulation - Extruded polystyrene 90 5 18 18 3Insulation - Fiberglass 3,118 216 631 705 827Paint 99 6 20 25 6Steel - Metal stairs 856 54 239 161 43Steel - studs, doors, frames, grid 2,302 146 642 432 115Steel - Reinforcement bar 3,916 248 1,092 736 196Water heater 12 1 3 3 1HVAC multizone units 1,842 120 579 543 109Switchgear 67 4 21 18 3Emergency generator 50 3 15 13 3Copper - tubing and wire 1,083 76 1,298 303 204Steel - piping, ductwork 6,218 394 1,734 1,168 311Polypropylene - piping 1 0 0 0 0Construction (Total) 5,500 400 800 8,300 700Materials 1,005 64 224 420 166Transportation 253 19 9 114 26Equipment 4,199 293 526 7,787 552Use Phase (Total) 297,600 22,200 82,700 48,500 3,400Lighting 46,567 4,487 25,137 12,862 886Electricity 106,628 10,274 57,560 29,451 2,030Natural gas 144,375 7,401 37 6,167 469Maintenance (Total) 21,600 1,300 5,200 5,000 2,100Bitumen 137 8 30 37 11Carpet 15,637 955 3,693 3,535 1,633Elevator 502 32 140 118 23Mineral fiber board ceiling tile 1,885 129 648 513 214Gypsum board 621 43 73 103 44Paint 989 58 199 249 56Steel - studs, doors, frames, grid 1,620 103 452 304 81Transportation 116 9 4 52 12Equipment 47 3 6 89 6End-of-life (Total) 3,300 200 400 5,800 400Equipment 3,065 212 378 5,717 406Transportation of materials 188 14 7 85 19

TOTAL 359,100 26,100 98,400 75,600 9,300

Comparison of Contribution of Life-cycle Phases

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

PM-10 [Mg]

NOx [Mg]

SO2 [Mg]

CO2 [Gg]

Energy [10*TJ]

Materials

Construction

Use Phase

Maintenance

End-of-Life

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

PM-10 [Mg]

NOx [Mg]

SO2 [Mg]

CO2 [Gg]

Energy [10*TJ]

Materials

Construction

Use Phase

MaintenanceEnd-of-Life

Finland

U.S.

DATA QUALITY ASSESSMENTData Quality*

Table Acquisition

method Independence of data supplier

Representa-tiveness Data Age

Geographical correlation

Technological correlation

Building materials 2 1 2 2 2 2 Construction 3 1 2 2 3 4 Use 2 2 1 1 1 1 Maintenance 2 1 1 2 2 2 End-of-life 2 1 2 1 2 3 *Maximum quality = 1 *Minimum quality = 5

Data Quality* TableAcquisition method

Independence of data supplier

Representa-tiveness Data Age

Geographical correlation

Technological correlation

Building materials 1 1 2 2 2 2

Construction 3 1 2 3 2 3

Use 1 1 2 1 1 1

Maintenance 3 1 2 2 2 3

End-of-life 2 1 2 1 2 2

         

         

Finland

U.S.

U.S. Case Study Results Use phase dominates all categories

except PM10

Materials and maintenance phases each have a proportion of 22% or more in a single emission category

Construction and end-of-life phases have relatively insignificant impacts overall

U.S. Case Study Data Quality

Data Quality* TableAcquisition

methodIndependence of

data supplierRepresenta-

tiveness Data AgeGeographical

correlationTechnological

correlation

Building materials 1 1 2 2 2 2

Construction 3 1 2 3 2 3

Use 1 1 2 1 1 1

Maintenance 3 1 2 2 2 3

End-of-life 2 1 2 1 2 2

*Maximum quality = 1          

*Minimum quality = 5          

U.S. Case Study Results

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

PM-10 [Mg]

NOx [Mg]

SO2 [Mg]

CO2 [Gg]

Energy [10*TJ]

Materials

Construction

Use Phase

Maintenance

End-of-Life

Case Study: Steel v. Concrete Frame Buildings

47,360 ft2, five-story building located in Minnesota 50 year use phase aluminum-framed, glass panel curtain wall built-up roofing interior finishes include painted partition walls,

acoustical drop ceilings, and carpet or ceramic tile flooring

mechanical system provides both heating and cooling

Steel v. Concrete Frame: Construction Phase (Frame Only)

Energy Consumption

Comparison of Construction Phase Energy Impacts

050

100150200250300350

Tem

pora

ryM

ater

ials

Tran

spor

tM

ater

ials

Tran

spor

tE

quip

men

t

Equ

ipm

ent

Use Oth

erIm

pact

s

Ener

gy [1

0*G

J]

Steel FrameConcrete Frame

Steel v. Concrete Frame Building: Whole Building Life-cycle Energy

Consumption

Comparison of Energy Impacts

0

1

2

3

4

5

Materials Construction End-of-Life Mat'ls + Const.+ EOL

Life Cycle Phases

Ener

gy [1

0*TJ

]

Building withSteel Frame

Building withConcrete Frame

Case Study: University of California, Santa Barbara - Bren School of Environmental

Science & Management

Source: Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership

UCSB Bren School Completed April 2002 for $24 million 7,900 m2 administrative and laboratory space Combination steel and concrete frame U.S. Green Building Council LEED Platinum Rating “Green” changes include recycled content materials,

increased HVAC efficiency, building orientation to optimize use of natural lighting and ocean breezes

Bren School Life-cycle Assessment

50-year service life assumed Used 90% construction document cost estimate with quantities

and installed costs » material costs determined using R.S. Means guides

Estimated equipment types and duration of use with R.S. Means guides

Transportation of materials and equipment estimated based on material weight and truck capacity

Building use phase electricity and natural gas based on mechanical engineer’s energy analysis

Maintenance based on typical material replacement ages

Bren School Life-cycle Assessment

MaterialsExtraction &

Manufacturing

AggregateAluminumBitumenCarpet

Ceramic TileConcrete

Cooling TowerCopper

Elec. Equip.Elevator

Emerg. Gen.Insulation

FireproofingGlass

GypsumLab Fixtures

LightsCeiling TileHVAC Unit

PaintPipeSteel

Vinyl TileWood

Building Use

ElectricityNatural Gas

BuildingMaintenance

BitumenCaulkingGypsum

Metal StudsCeiling GridInsulation

Ceiling TileDoorsPaint

CarpetVinyl TileElevator

Wheelchair Lift

Building End-of-Life

Dump TruckLoaderCrane

Environmental Emissions

Energy and Resources Consumed

BuildingConstruction

FormworkWater

OilRollerCrane

Tar KettleTruck

Mixer TruckPump

VibratorAir Compr.

ForkliftBackhoeLoader

Vib. PlateGrinder

Paint SprayerPower Saw

Rebar BenderRebar CutterSteel PunchSteel Torch

Welder

Proportions of Bren School Building LCA

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Energy CO NOX PM10 SO2 CO2

End-of-LifeMaintenanceUse PhaseConstructionMaterials

Bren School Emissions Analysis

Use phase dominates energy, CO2, SO2, and NOX emissions Materials production dominates CO emissions PM emissions are similar in the materials and use phases Overall, construction is a small part of life-cycle environmental

impacts, but as use phase becomes more efficient, the materials and construction phases are expected to increase in significance

The end-of-life phase is also small, but more research, more detailed assessment is needed

Maintenance phase emissions are similar in significance to the construction phase

Bren School Emissions from Major Phases

Energy CO NOX PM10 SO2 CO2

 % of

Phase% of

Phase% of

Phase% of

Phase% of

Phase% of

Phase

Materials PhaseSteel - structure, pipe 29% 35% 21% 21% 25% 28%

Concrete 15% 8% 29% 21% 19% 15%

Steel - sheet products 14% 17% 10% 10% 12% 13%

Construction PhaseEquipment 65% 60% 89% 62% 57% 66%

Building Use PhaseElectricity 72% 64% 94% 94% 99.98% 83%

Maintenance PhaseElevator 31% 47% 31% 23% 38% 33%

Paint 19% 11% 20% 17% 16% 18%

Carpet 15% 7% 14% 25% 15% 15%

End-of-Life PhaseEquipment 73% 56% 92% 78% 90% 71%

Purposes

DesignCriteria

DesignConcepts

ProcessDesign

ProductDesign

DetailedEngineering

Fabrication& Logistics

Installation

Commissioning

Operations & Maintenance

Alteration &Decommissioning

Project Definition Lean Design Lean Supply Lean Assembly Use

Production ControlWork Structuring

LearningLoops

Connecting Green and Lean: Project Production Systems Laboratory

Develop new project management theory based on understanding of production systems (esp. Toyota Production System)

Reform project management practice

http://p2sl.berkeley.edu

Conclusions LCA necessary for better decision-making throughout

the life cycle of a building Control electricity and natural gas use with efficient

design Control materials and maintenance impacts by material

choices LCA should permeate green building scoring systems

(e.g., LEED) We are creating a decision-support tool for total

building LCA (BuiLCA)

Percentage of Waste Recycled in the U.S., Late 1990s

0

20

40

60

80

100%

Lead Asphalt SteelAluminum Cans Concrete Rebars PaperPlastic Bottles Copper

Annual Waste Stream of Different Materials Recycled, Late 1990s

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

120,000,000 Metric Tons

Asphalt Concrete Steel Paper Aluminum Plastics Lead Copper

Asphalt Pavement Milling Machine

Milling Machine

Direct and Indirect Energy Use (electricity plus fuels) by the Major

Sectors of the U.S. Economy

0102030405060708090

Manufacturing Services Utilities Other

Ener

gy U

se p

er $

M (1

012 M

J)direct indirect

120

Rosenblum, J., Horvath, A., and Hendrickson, C. (2000), “Environmental Implications of Service Industries.” Environmental Science & Technology, ACS, 34(22), November 15, pp. 4669-4676.

Direct and Indirect Generation of RCRA Hazardous Wastes by the Major Sectors of the

U.S. Economy

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Manufacturing Services Utilities OtherRCRA

Haz

ardo

us W

aste

s G

ener

ated

(1

06 met

ric

tons

)

direct indirect

Rosenblum, J., Horvath, A., and Hendrickson, C. (2000), “Environmental Implications of Service Industries.” Environmental Science & Technology, ACS, 34(22), November 15, pp. 4669-4676.

Characterizing ICT & Environment Research

One of the first three industries to lead design for environment and pollution prevention research and practice (with automobiles and chemicals)

~12 years of publications 1st phase: “we want to be a clean industry”

» Efforts of a rapidly growing industry to establish environmental credibility» Prominence of ICT industries grew parallel to prominence of environmental management» Early adopter of industrial ecology, design for disassembly, green materials selection, life-cycle

assessment (LCA)– But largely incomplete assessments (e.g., not all life cycle phases, inventory but no impact assessment)

» Mostly energy and toxic emissions related» Initially focused on components, then trying to assess entire systems

2nd phase: more specific assessments, including the supply chain and recyclers» Involving the supply chain, but also the waste management industry/recyclers» Data collection for specific studies» Supply-chain informed LCA

3rd phase: “we bring environmental benefits to society”» Services and network analysis, not just manufacturing processes and products

– Internet, telework» Servicizing products

Critical mass still missing in many areas