Abstract
Purpose
The building sector is one of the most relevant sectors in terms of environmental impact. Different functional units (FUs) can be used in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies for a variety of purposes. This paper aimed to present different FUs used in the LCA of buildings and evaluate the influence of FU choice and setting in comparative studies.
Methods
As an example, we compared the “cradle to grave” environmental performance of four typical Brazilian residential buildings with different construction typologies, i.e., multi-dwelling and single dwelling, each with high and basic standards. We chose three types of FU for comparison: a dwelling with defined lifetime and occupancy parameters, an area of 1 m2 of dwelling over a year period, and the accommodation of an occupant person of the dwelling over a day.
Results and discussion
The FU choice was found to bias the results considerably. As expected, the largest global warming indicator (GWi) values per dwelling unit and occupant were identified for the high standard dwellings. However, when measured per square meter, lower standard dwellings presented the largest GWi values. This was caused by the greater concentration of people per square meter in smaller area dwellings, resulting in larger water and energy consumption per square meter. The sensitivity analysis of FU variables such as lifetime and occupancy showed the GWi contribution of the infrastructure more relevant compared with the operation in high and basic standard dwellings. The definition of lifetime and occupancy parameters is key to avoid bias and to reduce uncertainty of the results when performing a comparison of dwelling environmental performances.
Conclusions
This paper highlights the need for adequate choice and setting of FU to support intended decision-making in LCA studies of the building sector. The use of at least two FUs presented a broader picture of building performance, helping to guide effective environmental optimization efforts from different approaches and levels of analysis. Information regarding space, time, and service dimensions should be either included in the FU setting or provided in the building LCA study to allow adjustment of the results for subsequent comparison.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
07 February 2022
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01941-x
References
AHS (American Housing Survey) (2017) General Housing Data - All Occupied Units, Year Built. U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs.html Accessed 9 April 2020
Albertí J, Brodhag C, Fullana-i-Palmer P (2019) First steps in life cycle assessments of cities with a sustainability perspective: A proposal for goal, function, functional unit, and reference flow. Sci Total Environ 646:1516–1527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.377
Anand CK, Amor B (2017) Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 67:408–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.058
Asdrubali F, Baldassarri C, Fthenakis V (2013) Life cycle analysis in the construction sector: Guiding the optimization of conventional Italian buildings. Energy Build 64:73–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.04.018
Baccini P, Brunner PH (2012) Methabolism of anthroposphere: analysis, evaluation, design. The MIT Press (second edition), Cambridge
Balaguera A, Carvajal GI, Albertí J, Fullana-i-Palmer P (2018) Life cycle assessment of road construction alternative materials: A literature review. Resour Conserv Recycl 132:37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.01.003
Blengini GA, Di Carlo T (2010) Energy-saving policies and low-energy residential buildings: an LCA case study to support decision makers in Piedmont (Italy). Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:652–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-010-0190-5
Bonamente E, Cotana F (2015) Carbon and Energy Footprints of Prefabricated Industrial Buildings: A Systematic Life Cycle Assessment Analysis. Energies 8:2685–12701. https://doi.org/10.3390/en81112333
Buyle M, Braet J, Audenaert A (2013) Life cycle assessment in the construction sector: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 26:379–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.001
Bueno C (2014) Avaliação de Ciclo de Vida na Construção Civil: Análise de Sensibilidade. [Life Cycle Assessment in Civil Construction: Sensitivity Analysis]. Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo
Bueno C, Hauschild MZ, Rossignolo JA et al (2016) Sensitivity analysis of the use of Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods: a case study on building materials. J Clean Prod 112:2208–2220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.006
Cabeza LF, Rincón L, Vilariño V et al (2014) Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 29:394–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.037
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek) (2019) Voorraad woningen; gemiddeld oppervlak; woningtype, bouwjaarklasse, regio. Statistics Netherlands. https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/82550NED/table?fromstatweb Accessed 14 November 2019
Chau CK, Leung TM, Ng WY (2015) A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings. Appl Energy 143:395–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.023
Cooper JS (2003) Specifying functional units and reference flows for comparable alternatives. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:337–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978507
Cuéllar-Franca RM, Azapagic A (2012) Environmental impacts of the UK residential sector: Life cycle assessment of houses. Build Environ 54:86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.02.005
Daigo I, Iwata K, Oguchi M, Goto Y (2017) Lifetime Distribution of Buildings Decided by Economic Situation at Demolition: D-based Lifetime Distribution. Procedia CIRP 61:146–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.221
EeBGuide (2011) EeBGuide Guidance Document – Part B: Buildings. Energy - Efficient Building (E2B), European Initiative (EI), Brussels
EN - 15978 (2011) Sustainability of construction works - Assessment of environmental performance of buildings - Calculation method. British Standards Institution (BSI), London
Erlandsson M, Levin P (2004) Environmental assessment of rebuilding and possible performance improvements effect on a national scale. Build Environ 39:1453–1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.06.001
Evangelista PPA (2017) Desempenho ambiental na construção civil: parâmetros para aplicação da avaliação do ciclo de vida em edificações residenciais brasileiras. [Environmental performance in civil construction: parameters for life cycle assessment application in Brazilian residential buildings]. Thesis, Federal University of Bahia (UFBA)
Evangelista PPA, Kiperstok A, Torres EA, Gonçalves JP (2018) Environmental performance analysis of residential buildings in Brazil using life cycle assessment (LCA). Constr Build Mater 169:748–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.045
Ferreira A, Pinheiro MD, de Brito J, Mateus R (2018) Combined carbon and energy intensity benchmarks for sustainable retail stores. Energy 165:877–889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.020
Filimonau V, Santa-Rosa MS, Franca LS, Cánovas A, Ribeiro GM, Molnarova J, Piumatti RG (2018) Tourism and accommodation services. ecoinvent Association, Zürich
Hauschild MZ, Kara S, Røpke I (2020) Absolute sustainability: challenges to life cycle engineering. CIRP Ann 69:533–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2020.05.004
Heijungs R, Kleijn R (2001) Numerical approaches towards life cycle interpretation five examples. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6:141–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978732
IBGE (2019) Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios (PNAD) - Características gerais dos domicílios e dos moradores 2018 [National Household Sample Survey - General characteristics of households and residents - 2018]. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv101654_informativo.pdf. Accessed 18 Mar 2020.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York
ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva
ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Requirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva
Kamali M, Hewage K, Sadiq R (2019) Conventional versus modular construction methods: A comparative cradle-to-gate LCA for residential buildings. Energy Build 204:109479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109479
Kim SJ, Kara S, Hauschild M (2017) Functional unit and product functionality - addressing increase in consumption and demand for functionality in sustainability assessment with LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1257–1265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1233-3
Larriva RA, Calleja Rodríguez G, Cejudo López JM et al (2014) A decision-making LCA for energy refurbishment of buildings: Conditions of comfort. Energy Build 70:333–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.11.049
Lasvaux S, Gantner J, Wittstock B et al (2014) Achieving consistency in life cycle assessment practice within the European construction sector: the role of the EeBGuide InfoHub. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1783–1793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0786-2
Lavagna M, Baldassarri C, Campioli A et al (2018) Benchmarks for environmental impact of housing in Europe: Definition of archetypes and LCA of the residential building stock. Build Environ 145:260–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.09.008
Maslesa E, Nielsen SB, Birkved M, Hultén J (2017) Environmental indicators for non-residential buildings: When, what, and how to measure? In: Nielsen SB, Jensen PA, Brinkø R (eds) Research papers for EUROFM’S 16th Research Symposium. Polyteknisk Forlag, Lyngby, pp 8–19
Mateus R, Silva SM, de Almeida MG (2019) Environmental and cost life cycle analysis of the impact of using solar systems in energy renovation of Southern European single-family buildings. Renew Energy 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.04.036
Micolier A, Loubet P, Taillandier F, Sonnemann G (2019) To what extent can agent-based modelling enhance a life cycle assessment? Answers based on a literature review. J Clean Prod 239:118123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118123
MINVU (Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo) (2019) Predios habitacionales por año de construcción - total país según región y comuna al segundo semestre 2018 [Housing properties by year of construction - country total according to region and commune in the second half of 2018]. Government of Chile. https://www.observatoriourbano.cl/estadisticas-habitacionales/ Accessed 14 November 2019
Morales M, Moraga G, Araujo A, Santos C, Kirchheim AP, Passuello A (2017) Impacts of functional unit definition in social housing LCA: a Brazilian case study. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in Latin America – CILCA 2017. Medellín, Colombia
Morales M, Moraga G, Kirchheim AP, Passuello A (2019) Regionalized inventory data in LCA of public housing: A comparison between two conventional typologies in southern Brazil. J Clean Prod 238:117869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117869
Moreno-Ruiz E, Valsasina L, FitzGerald D, Brunner F, Symeonidis A, Bourgault G, Wernet G (2019) Documentation of changes implemented in ecoinvent database v3.6. ecoinvent Association, Zürich
NBR - 15575 (2013) Edificações Habitacionais - Desempenho - Requisitos gerais [Housing Buildings - Performance - General requirements]. Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas (ABNT), Rio de Janeiro
Norman J, MacLean HL, Kennedy CA (2006) Comparing High and Low Residential Density: Life-Cycle Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. J Urban Plan Dev 132:10–21. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2006)132:1(10)
Østergaard N, Thorsted L, Miraglia S et al (2018) Data Driven Quantification of the Temporal Scope of Building LCAs. Procedia CIRP 69:224–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.057
PalaciosMunoz B, Peuportier B, GraciaVilla L, LópezMesa B (2019) Sustainability assessment of refurbishment vs. new constructions by means of LCA and durabilitybased estimations of buildings lifespans: a new approach. Build Environ 160:106203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106203
Paleari M, Lavagna M, Campioli A (2016) The assessment of the relevance of building components and life phases for the environmental profile of nearly zero-energy buildings: life cycle assessment of a multifamily building in Italy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1667–1690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1133-6
Panesar DK, Seto KE, Churchill CJ (2017) Impact of the selection of functional unit on the life cycle assessment of green concrete. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:1969–1986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1284-0
Passer A, Kreiner H, Maydl P (2012) Assessment of the environmental performance of buildings: A critical evaluation of the influence of technical building equipment on residential buildings. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1116–1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0435-6
Rashid AFA, Yusoff S (2015) A review of life cycle assessment method for building industry. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 45:244–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.043
Rossi B, Marique A-F, Reiter S (2012) Life-cycle assessment of residential buildings in three different European locations, case study. Build Environ 51:402–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.11.002
Ros-Dosdá T, Celades I, Vilalta L et al (2019) Environmental comparison of indoor floor coverings. Sci Total Environ 693:133519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.325
Saade MRM, Guest G, Amor B (2020) Comparative whole building LCAs: How far are our expectations from the documented evidence? Build Environ 167:106449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106449
Silvestre JD, Silva A, Brito J (2015) Uncertainty modelling of service life and environmental performance to reduce risk in building design decisions. J Civ Eng Manag 21:308–322. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.890649
Soust-Verdaguer B, Llatas C, García-Martínez A (2016) Simplification in life cycle assessment of single-family houses: A review of recent developments. Build Environ 103:215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.014
Souza HHS, Lima ÂMF, Esquerre KO, Kiperstok A (2017) Life cycle assessment of the environmental influence of wooden and concrete utility poles based on service lifetime. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:2030–2041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1293-z
UN (2020) Household Size & Composition, 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations, New York. https://population.un.org/Household/index.html Accessed 09 April 2020
Acknowledgments
One of the authors (HS) wishes to thank the UNESCO Chair in Life Cycle and Climate Change (ESCI-UPF) for hosting him during the 2017 academic year, when part of this research was carried out, as well as the “Inova Talentos” RHAE Trainee Program (Euvaldo Lodi Institute) for the grant. The authors are responsible for the choice and presentation of information contained in this paper as well as for the opinions expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit this Organization. We thank the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) and the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS), especially the Environmental Technologies Postgraduate Program (PGTA) at UFMS. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions.
Funding
This study was financed in part by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) - Finance Code 001 (grant process number: 88887.466854/2019-00; 88882.453459/2019-01; 1572275) and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). The funding sources had no involvement with the research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by Alexander Passer.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The original online version of this article was revised due to equation formatting and renumbering.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
de Simone Souza, H.H., de Abreu Evangelista, P.P., Medeiros, D.L. et al. Functional unit influence on building life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26, 435–454 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01854-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01854-1