- 62 -In the steel recycling scenario, all recoverable structural steel (estimated to be 250 tonnes)was recycled. The amount <strong>of</strong> recycled steel was then assumed to replace virgin steel andcredited to the building. For the Concrete building, the recoverable structural concrete(estimated at 2,180 tonnes) was assumed to be recycled to produce gravel. The production <strong>of</strong>the same amount <strong>of</strong> virgin gravel was then credited to the building.The total mass <strong>of</strong> wooden materials was the same as in the landfilling scenario which includestimber, LVL, plywood, and MDF (see Table 6.3). It was assumed that all these materialswould be burnt in a cogeneration plant with an efficiency <strong>of</strong> 60% (Connell Wagner, 2007; seealso the Bioenergy Knowledge Centre calculator, www.bkc.co.nz/tools). This means that 60%<strong>of</strong> the calorific value <strong>of</strong> the wood (i) is recovered as useful energy (ii) through combustionwith a ratio <strong>of</strong> electricity to heat <strong>of</strong> 1:3 (Connell Wagner, 2007). Thus 60% <strong>of</strong> the totalcalorific value <strong>of</strong> the timber was converted into electricity (iii) and heat (iv). It was assumedthat this amount <strong>of</strong> electricity and heat replaces electricity from the national grid and heatfrom burning natural gas and therefore displaces fossil fuels (0.067 kg CO 2 e per MJ heat fromnatural gas [a universal coefficient] and 0.078 kg CO 2 e per MJ electricity (GaBi 4.3, adjustedfor electricity generation in the NZ grid) and primary energy (1.42 MJ per MJ heat fromnatural gas and 2.25 MJ per MJ electricity (GaBi 4.3)).Table 6.3: Energy recovered from wood combustion and CO 2 displaced from avoiding the use <strong>of</strong>traditional energy sources (natural gas and electricity)Building type Concrete Steel Timber Timber+Material (t)Timber 11.57 10.94 61.28 164.96LVL 343.94 343.94Plywood/MDF 6.09 6.09 56.45 125.07Total wood waste 17.66 17.03 461.67 633.97Retained energy (GJ)(i) Calorific Value 276.91 267.03 7,238.99 9,940.65(ii) at 60% efficiency 166.15 160.22 4,343.39 5,964.39(iii) Metered Electricity 41.54 40.05 1085.85 1491.10(iv) Metered Heat 124.61 120.16 3,257.54 4,473.29CO 2 e displacement (t)Electricity 3.23 3.12 84.45 115.97Natural gas 8.31 8.01 217.17 298.22Total 11.54 11.13 301.62 414.19Primary energy displacement(GJ)Electricity 93.46 90.12 2,443.16 3,354.97Natural gas 176.53 170.23 4,614.85 6,337.16Total 269.99 260.35 7,058.01 9,692.13This displacement can be explained more clearly by tracking the path <strong>of</strong> the carbon, withinthe wooden products, from cradle to grave.
- 63 -Growing timber takes up CO 2 from the atmosphere and stores it as carbon. When the wood isharvested from the forest the carbon continues to be stored within the wood. The wood isthen used in various forms in construction <strong>of</strong> buildings, exists over the full lifetime <strong>of</strong> thebuildings and carbon continues to be stored up to the point <strong>of</strong> deconstruction.When the deconstructed timber is combusted, CO 2 is released back into the atmosphere,which brings the balance back to zero. However, because beneficial energy is recovered at thesame time, the need to use fossil fuels such as natural gas and electricity generated in coal,gas and oil fired power stations has been avoided. Therefore, the CO 2 that was not released,by avoiding the use <strong>of</strong> natural gas and electricity, can be subtracted from the GWP <strong>of</strong> the end<strong>of</strong>-lifephase in which the wood is being combusted.The emission <strong>of</strong> CO 2 equivalents and the use <strong>of</strong> primary energy were then subtracted from thetotal life cycle results <strong>of</strong> each building respectively (Table 6.3), based on the aboveexplanation. The use <strong>of</strong> natural gas for heat and the emissions related to producing electricityby burning <strong>of</strong> fossil fuel have been avoided.6.3.3.4 TransportIt was assumed for all building materials that they would be sourced locally or from theclosest possible supplier. All timber was assumed to be sourced locally (this is a fairassumption for most timber, excepting cedar, used in the TimberPlus building). For somematerials that are available from multiple locations, such as concrete, aluminium, and paint, aNew Zealand average distance was calculated.It was assumed that structural steel would be imported from Australia. However, it would alsobe possible that steel would be imported from Asia.The locations reflect a short distance (Auckland), a medium distance (Wellington) and a longdistance scenario (Christchurch). The long distance scenario was chosen as the base scenario(as Christchurch is the actual location <strong>of</strong> the new Biological Sciences building used as atemplate in this study). Transport distances for the three scenarios are presented in Table 6.4.Table 6.4 Distances travelled, via truck and ship, to deliver materials to building locations inChristchurch, Wellington and AucklandChristchurch (km) Wellington (km) Auckland (km)Material Truck Ship Truck Ship Truck ShipConcrete 124 124 124Steel (NZ) 1,000 92 600 30Steel (Aus) 50 2,500 50 2,500 50 2,500Glass 1,000 92 600 30Timber 427 400 200LVL 427 100 500Plywood/MDF 676 62 400 200Aluminium 400 400 400Plasterboard 20 600 30Paint 400 400 400Glass Insulation 1,000 92 600 30Poly Insulation 1,000 92 600 30Fibre Cement 1,000 92 600 30
- Page 1 and 2:
Environmental Impacts ofMulti-Store
- Page 5 and 6:
ContentsGlossary...................
- Page 7 and 8:
6.3.4.3 Maintenance related embodie
- Page 9 and 10:
- 9 -GlossaryCO 2 stored - refers t
- Page 11 and 12: - 11 -Chapter 7Chapter 8Chapter 9Ch
- Page 13 and 14: - 13 -An alternative end-of-life sc
- Page 15 and 16: - 15 -designers and a shortage of b
- Page 17 and 18: - 17 -• Ministry for the Environm
- Page 19 and 20: - 19 -which it can be fashioned to
- Page 21 and 22: - 21 -For fire safety, the New Zeal
- Page 23 and 24: - 23 -buildings for low seismic are
- Page 25 and 26: - 25 -4 The Buildings4.1 Constructi
- Page 27 and 28: - 27 -the building. The basement le
- Page 29 and 30: - 29 -4.3.2 Common Design Principle
- Page 31 and 32: - 31 -Figure 4.5: South-west façad
- Page 33 and 34: - 33 -the three longitudinal frames
- Page 35 and 36: - 35 -4.3.5.2 Floor and RoofThe str
- Page 37 and 38: - 37 -4.4 Multi-Storey Timber Build
- Page 39 and 40: - 39 -Several different solutions h
- Page 41 and 42: - 41 -5 Operational Energy5.1 Gener
- Page 43 and 44: - 43 -Table 5.1: Simulation inputs
- Page 45 and 46: - 45 -Table 5.3: Areas of office en
- Page 47 and 48: - 47 -Modifying the design to achie
- Page 49 and 50: - 49 -• Standards New Zealand (NZ
- Page 51 and 52: - 51 -6 Life Cycle Assessment6.1 In
- Page 53 and 54: - 53 -6.2.3.3 Impact AssessmentThe
- Page 55 and 56: - 55 -6.3.2.2 System BoundariesThe
- Page 57 and 58: - 57 -For more information see:http
- Page 59 and 60: - 59 -6.3.3 Inventory Analysis6.3.3
- Page 61: - 61 -Table 6.2: Net tonnes CO 2 eq
- Page 65 and 66: - 65 -6.3.4 Impact AssessmentTotal
- Page 67 and 68: - 67 -8000700060005000GWP (t CO2 eq
- Page 69 and 70: - 69 -As explained above, carbon st
- Page 71 and 72: - 71 -Figure 6.10: Total embodied e
- Page 73 and 74: - 73 -Table 6.9: Total GWP of each
- Page 75 and 76: - 75 -8,0007,0006,0005,000GWP (t CO
- Page 77 and 78: - 77 -45000400003500030000GWP (kg C
- Page 79 and 80: - 79 -assumed to be identical for t
- Page 81 and 82: - 81 -6.4.3.2 Green Star Recycling
- Page 83 and 84: - 83 -Table 6.16: Green Star result
- Page 85 and 86: - 85 -The contribution of initial e
- Page 87 and 88: - 87 -results, the reutilisation sc
- Page 89 and 90: - 89 -7.1.1 Platform and Balloon Co
- Page 91 and 92: - 91 -buildings has been analysed a
- Page 93 and 94: - 93 -Figure 7.5: Construction sche
- Page 95 and 96: - 95 -8.2 Source and Availability o
- Page 97 and 98: - 97 -It would be incorrect, howeve
- Page 99 and 100: - 99 -8.5 Additional Opportunities
- Page 101 and 102: - 101 -example, removal of CCA trea
- Page 103 and 104: - 103 -The Waste Minimisation Bill
- Page 105 and 106: - 105 -9 Discussion9.1 The Building
- Page 107 and 108: - 107 -• The buildings tend to be
- Page 109 and 110: - 109 -9.4.3 Data Sets9.4.3.1 Gener
- Page 111 and 112: - 111 -The following assessment wil
- Page 113 and 114:
- 113 -Table 9.1. GWP coefficients
- Page 115 and 116:
- 115 -Figure 9.2 shows that the ne
- Page 117 and 118:
- 117 -placing and retaining materi
- Page 119 and 120:
- 119 -Net CO 2 emissions - that is
- Page 121 and 122:
- 121 -The LVL specified for the st
- Page 123 and 124:
- 123 -10 ConclusionsThe following
- Page 125 and 126:
- 125 -building types, instead subs
- Page 127 and 128:
- 127 -In summary, reutilisation sh
- Page 129 and 130:
- 129 -• What is the ranking of t
- Page 131 and 132:
- 131 -• What is the comparison i
- Page 133 and 134:
- 133 -Connell Wagner (2007): Combu
- Page 135 and 136:
- 135 -Suzuki, Michiya, and Tatsuo
- Page 137 and 138:
- 137 -C O N C R E T E B U I L D I
- 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 190 and 191:
The science behind LCA is still dev
- 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