Environmental Impacts of Multi-Storey Buildings Using Different ...
Environmental Impacts of Multi-Storey Buildings Using Different ... Environmental Impacts of Multi-Storey Buildings Using Different ...
The science behind LCA is still developing. Since life cycle costs cannot be unambiguouslyattributed, especially in multi-product process chains (Johns et al. 2008), LCA should only be usedas a decision support framework, rather than a complete decision making tool.1.1.3 MWH CommissionMWH NZ were engaged to prepare a peer review of Greenstar self-assessment of a buildingdesign constructed from four different materials; concrete, steel, timber and timber plus. Thepreliminary work involved comparing the self-assessments (concrete, steel, timber) provided byScion under the base scenario with the GreenStar Office Design V1 building rating tool. Scion alsoprovided two context documents detailing the research approach and the operational energydetails of the base building. The brief was to provide Scion with a peer review as to whether theassumptions they had made and comparisons drawn between GreenStar Office Design V1 andLCA were appropriate for the limited credits selected for the purposes of this study. The creditsselected by Scion for the purposes of this study included; ENE1, ENE2 and MAT 1-12.Results of the peer review were supplied to Scion by MWH to enable their final reporting. The peerreview of the results summarised below details results of the initial GreenStar Office Design V1self-assessments submitted to MWH from Scion under the base scenario and LCA results alsosubmitted by Scion. MWH have reviewed the documentation in conjunction with current industrypractice and their knowledge of the GreenStar system gained whilst helping the New ZealandGreen Building Council to develop the first GreenStar buildings rating tool for New Zealand. MWHalso keep current with GreenStar NZ technical updates by delivering professional developmenttraining for GreenStar professionals on behalf of the New Zealand Green Building Council andwhilst acting as technical advisors to the New Zealand Green Building Council technical advisoryworking group. This peer review has been undertaken using MWH current knowledge in theconstantly evolving field of environmentally sustainable design and our own industry experience indesigning green buildings.1.2 Peer Review of LCA and GreenStar NZ Office V1 ResultsThe aim of this section is to compare the results of the Scion life cycle assessment and theGreenStar NZ Office Design V1 tool self-assessments carried out by Scion, based on the sameassumptions. The relevance of the research approach (basic assumptions) and interpretation ofresults will be discussed in the conclusions.The number of points awarded (for two categories materials (whole category) and energy (ENE1and ENE2)) as well as the weighted total score (based on these categories) for the steel, concrete,timber and timber plus building are shown in Table 1-2-1.Status Draft 16.07.2008Project NumberOur Ref − MWH Scion GreenStar Assessment PeerReviewFINAL.doc
Table 1-2-1: Green Star NZ Office Design V1 results – Base scenarioCreditsWeighted scoreTimber building 5 5Timber plus building 5 5Steel building 5 5Concrete building 6 6The GreenStar NZ Office Design V1 ranking of the buildings based on self-assessments;1. Concrete2. Steel/Timber/Timber plusIn comparison the LCA results have shown the following ranking for primary energy use as well asGWP in the base scenario:1. Timber plus2. Concrete3. Timber4. SteelUnder the base scenario the GreenStar NZ assessments rated the use of concrete most favourablyin construction but did not separate steel, timber and timber plus. Whereas LCA demonstratedclear differences in the desirability of the different materials from an energy use and globalwarming potential perspective, with timber plus having the least sensitive environmental profile.Table 1-2-2: Green Star NZ Offie Design V1 results – Recycling scenarioCreditsWeighted scoreTimber building 8 7Timber plus building 8 7Steel building 10 8Concrete building 8 7The GreenStar NZ Office Design V1 ranking of the buildings based on the results would be;1. Steel2. Concrete/Timber/Timber plusStatus Draft 16.07.2008Project NumberOur Ref − MWH Scion GreenStar Assessment PeerReviewFINAL.doc
- Page 139 and 140: - 139 -S T E E L B U I L D I N Gm m
- Page 141 and 142: - 141 -T I M B E R B U I L D I N Gm
- Page 143 and 144: - 143 -T I M B E R B U I L D I N G
- Page 145 and 146: - 145 -T Exterior Wall Cladding 581
- Page 147 and 148: - 147 -Appendix B. Life times of bu
- Page 149 and 150: - 149 -Appendix D: Transport scenar
- Page 154 and 155: - 151 -Appendix F: Warren and Mahon
- Page 156 and 157: Timber Plus ProjectSummary of the T
- Page 158 and 159: Timber Plus ProjectGreen Star Ratin
- Page 160 and 161: Timber Plus ProjectVolatile Organic
- Page 162 and 163: Timber Plus ProjectThe Forest Stewa
- Page 164 and 165: Timber Plus ProjectStain and Clear
- Page 166 and 167: Timber Plus ProjectINTERIOR WALL CL
- Page 168 and 169: Timber Plus ProjectWINDOW REVEALSMa
- Page 170 and 171: Timber Plus ProjectSOFFIT FRAMINGMa
- Page 172 and 173: Timber Plus ProjectEXTERIOR WALL CL
- Page 174 and 175: Timber Plus ProjectAdditional Oppor
- Page 176 and 177: Appendix AResene Expected Paint Sys
- Page 178 and 179: - 152 -Appendix G: Green Star Asses
- Page 180 and 181: New Zealand Forest Research Institu
- Page 182 and 183: Executive SummaryA common building
- Page 184 and 185: 1 IntroductionA common building des
- Page 186 and 187: Timber pluso The same assumptions a
- Page 188 and 189: Table 1-1-1: Weightings in Green St
- Page 192 and 193: In comparison the LCA results have
- Page 194 and 195: All four buildings in this research
- Page 196 and 197: 1.4 Further WorkThe difficulty in m
Table 1-2-1: Green Star NZ Office Design V1 results – Base scenarioCreditsWeighted scoreTimber building 5 5Timber plus building 5 5Steel building 5 5Concrete building 6 6The GreenStar NZ Office Design V1 ranking <strong>of</strong> the buildings based on self-assessments;1. Concrete2. Steel/Timber/Timber plusIn comparison the LCA results have shown the following ranking for primary energy use as well asGWP in the base scenario:1. Timber plus2. Concrete3. Timber4. SteelUnder the base scenario the GreenStar NZ assessments rated the use <strong>of</strong> concrete most favourablyin construction but did not separate steel, timber and timber plus. Whereas LCA demonstratedclear differences in the desirability <strong>of</strong> the different materials from an energy use and globalwarming potential perspective, with timber plus having the least sensitive environmental pr<strong>of</strong>ile.Table 1-2-2: Green Star NZ Offie Design V1 results – Recycling scenarioCreditsWeighted scoreTimber building 8 7Timber plus building 8 7Steel building 10 8Concrete building 8 7The GreenStar NZ Office Design V1 ranking <strong>of</strong> the buildings based on the results would be;1. Steel2. Concrete/Timber/Timber plusStatus Draft 16.07.2008Project NumberOur Ref − MWH Scion GreenStar Assessment PeerReviewFINAL.doc
Change language