Building Information Modeling in Assessing Buildings Carbon Footprint: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Peter Tang and Version 1 by Łukasz Kamil Mazur.

The analysis of the carbon footprint of buildings is a key tool for assessing the impact of different buildings on climate change. Several frameworks and methodologies are available to calculate the footprint of buildings, including standards and norms, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and dedicated software tools. The use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) programme for these calculations is both scientifically justified and very practical.

  • carbon footprint of buildings
  • single-family houses
  • timber construction
  • Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
  • Building Information Modeling (BIM)
  • greenhouse gas (GHG)

1. Introduction

Today, with increasing environmental awareness and the global need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, sustainable buildings are becoming a priority for the construction industry [1]. For this reason, it is possible to calculate the carbon footprint of buildings, which is an important tool for assessing the impact of their design and construction on climate change [2,3][2][3].
This scientific publication is focused on the study of the carbon footprint of single-family houses. The carbon footprint includes the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ozone, and other GHGs emitted during the entire life cycle of a building, from its design and construction phase through operation to the end of its life. The measure of a carbon footprint is one kilogram of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). Different GHGs contribute to global warming in different ways, and the carbon dioxide equivalent allows emissions of different gases to be compared on a common scale. This allows us to compare different building solutions, whole structures, and technologies to choose those with the lowest CO2e emissions. Buildings are estimated to be responsible for up to 40% of global CO2e emissions [4,5][4][5]. The aim of this research is to understand the impact of the different stages of a building’s life cycle and the impact of the building’s structural elements on its carbon footprint and to compare masonry and timber-frame construction in terms of their impact on GHG emissions. In the context of building design and construction, the study of a building’s carbon footprint becomes very important as emissions are still at high levels and the construction sector is not on a path to decarbonisation by 2050 [6]. Firstly, reducing GHG emissions is necessary to mitigate climate change and protect the natural environment [7]. As the construction sector is one of the main sources of these emissions, it is particularly important to adopt an environmentally friendly and sustainable approach to the design and construction of residential buildings [8]. Secondly, a carbon footprint study provides an opportunity to compare different design solutions in terms of their impact on GHG emissions [9]. In the case of residential buildings, the comparison between masonry and timber-frame construction is particularly important, as differences in building materials and manufacturing processes can lead to significant differences in the carbon footprint. Finally, there is an economic dimension to analysing the carbon footprint of the design and construction of residential buildings [10,11][10][11]. A growing number of investors and developers are recognising that buildings with a low carbon footprint can be a source of long-term financial savings through reduced operating costs and energy consumption [12].
The construction of a sustainable future requires meticulous attention to the materials and practises utilised in the building sector, where both masonry and wood constructions have been widely adopted but are controversial due to their respective impacts on the environment [13,14,15][13][14][15]. This research emerges from a need to comprehend and contrast the carbon footprints of buildings constructed from these materials, located within the context of a holistic Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) integrated with Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology. A detailed exploration of existing studies reveals a diverse landscape of research in the domain of sustainable building materials [16,17,18][16][17][18]. For example, Kylili and Fokaides [19] assert that sustainable development of the built environment will arise from a greater use of alternative, recycled, natural, and unconventional construction and insulation materials, the use of prefabricated building elements, and the integration of LCA with BIM. Meanwhile, numerous contemporary studies highlight the possibilities of using BIM to reduce the overall environmental impact of a building, especially emphasising its practicality in the early design phases [20,21,22][20][21][22]. However, there still exists a gap in merging these domains, particularly in delivering a comprehensive comparative analysis between timber and masonry constructions through a unified LCA approach integrated with BIM. Wood as a building material can play a key role in transitioning to a more sustainable and less emission-intensive economic sector [23]. Responsible forestry, grounded in principles of sustainable development that allow for the perpetual renewal of forest resources, is paramount [24]. Inappropriate timber harvesting practices harm biodiversity and contribute to deforestation [25].

2. Building Carbon Footprint Assessment

Several frameworks and methodologies have been developed to calculate the carbon footprint of buildings. The most popular methods include (i) standards, (ii) LCA, and (iii) a dedicated computer software tool.
Assessments are based on ISO 14040 [26] and ISO 14044 [27] standards, which are the key standards for LCA and are commonly used to measure the carbon footprint of buildings and building materials [28]. The LCA method is a comprehensive research method that considers all stages of a building’s life cycle, from raw material sourcing to production, construction, usage, and destruction [29,30][29][30]. The basic elements of LCA are (1) the identification and quantitative assessment of the environmental impacts, i.e., the materials and energy consumed and the emissions and waste released into the environment; (2) the assessment of the potential consequences of these impacts; and (3) the evaluation of the options available to reduce the impacts. The LCA method is widely used in the study of the carbon footprint of buildings due to its holistic approach and the consideration of many aspects of the building (Table 1) [31,32,33][31][32][33].
Table 1.
Overview of the available LCA programme.

Software

Description

OpenLCA 2.0.3

OpenLCA is an advanced open source software for LCA and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of products and services. It has the advantage of being accessible and versatile, making it widely used in research and industrial practice [34].

SimaPro + Report Maker

SimaPro is a professional tool that provides a comprehensive assessment of the environmental footprint of products and processes. Report Maker is a tool that integrates with SimaPro and allows the creation of advanced reports and visualisations of LCA results [35].

Tally (2023.09.13.01)

Tally is a specialised software used for analysis in the construction sector. It is used mainly in the United States [36].

Umberto LCA+

Umberto LCA+ can calculate carbon footprints, perform LCA analysis, create EPD declarations, and use the integrated ecoinvent database [37,38][37][38].

One-Click LCA Product Carbon & EPD Generator

One-Click LCA is an expert package that can be split into an LCA and a Carbon Footprint + EPD module. However, the functionality of this software is limited the calculation of carbon footprint. It is integrated with an EPD generator based on the EN15804 standard [39].
The range of tools available, including OpenLCA, SimaPro + Report Maker, Tally (GaBi), Umberto LCA+, and OneClickLCA Product Carbon & EPD Generator, provides users with different options to choose from based on both project requirements and user preferences. Although this variety ostensibly facilitates a thorough analysis of the carbon footprint of buildings, which is a crucial element given the current sustainability and environmental challenges, it is imperative to dive deeper into the efficacy and limitations of each tool to validate its results and applicability. A nuanced evaluation that acknowledges both the advantages and disadvantages of these tools is essential to ensure accuracy and reliability in their application. Although several market offerings allow analysis to be performed in a professional and competent manner, there is a notable limitation in their functionality for building designers. It is therefore imperative to critically analyse the need for an advanced tool that enables assessment at the design and decision stage, possibly integrating BIM, whilst ensuring the accuracy and validity of its results.

3. BIM in Assessing the Carbon Footprint of Buildings

The carbon footprint and LCA of buildings in the design process could be examined using BIM technology, which is both scientifically justified [40,41][40][41] and very practical [42,43][42][43]. BIM offers a comprehensive solution by integrating building information into a central model, creating a ‘digital twin’ of the building that is under design [44,45][44][45]. In the area of carbon footprint assessment, BIM programme facilitates the handling of data on building materials used in project designs. These data play a crucial role in the accurate calculation of carbon emissions. It takes into account the manufacture, transport, and installation of building materials [46,47][46][47]. By using BIM programme to design building elements with appropriate materials, it is possible to precisely monitor the influence of individual building design components on the entire carbon footprint of the building.
As a result of increased attention in the field, there are now an increased number of tools available on the market for computing a structure’s carbon footprint. The most accurate and efficient tools are those that are developed based on a high-precision 3D model of the structure, established using BIM technology [48,49][48][49]. Integration of these tools enables users to import data from the BIM model, including building geometry, material information, and energy consumption. This feature allows for a comprehensive carbon footprint analysis [50,51,52][50][51][52]. Using BIM programme, it becomes possible to consider all pertinent factors that impact GHG emissions throughout the life of a building. In addition, BIM programme also offers energy simulation tools to account for energy consumption in the building [53,54][53][54]. Simulations provide data on the GHG emissions related to heating, lighting, cooling, and ventilation, facilitating the evaluation of a building’s carbon footprint with respect to its operation. An essential benefit of BIM programme is its ability to enable teamwork with different design and construction crews on a project. In this way, objective information on materials, energy consumption, and GHG emissions can be collected and updated in real time. Through ongoing data analysis, it is possible to identify the areas that have the greatest impact on carbon footprint, allowing a strategic reduction plan to be developed [55,56][55][56].
The use of BIM programme to calculate the carbon footprint of buildings is not only scientifically reliable but also pragmatic. It offers sophisticated tools for data collection, analysis, and visualisation, facilitating a deeper understanding of the impact of individual elements on carbon footprint. This enables informed design and construction decisions to minimise GHG emissions (Table 2).
Table 2.
Overview of the available software in BIM technology.

Software

Description

One-Click LCA

This is a common assessment tool used to measure the environmental sustainability of construction projects. One-Click LCA can be added to Autodesk Revit, ArchiCAD, and SketchUp as an additional feature. It enables users to perform sustainability assessments during the design process, considering factors such as building materials, energy usage, and emissions.

Tally (2023.09.13.01)

This is an add-on to Autodesk Revit that allows you to explore the environmental impact of buildings as you design them. It allows the assessment of various aspects of sustainability, including carbon footprint, energy consumption, water consumption, materials, and waste.

Cerclos

This is a cloud-based LCA tool that integrates with BIM programme such as Revit and ArchiCAD. It allows detailed LCA analyses to be carried out, taking into account various aspects of the building, such as building materials, energy consumption, waste management, and GHG emissions.

EC3 (Embodied Carbon in Construction Calculator)

This is an LCA tool developed by the Carbon Leadership Forum. It can be added on to BIM programme such as Revit, Rhino, and Grasshopper. It makes it easy to measure the carbon footprint of building materials, which can help designers choose sustainable materials and make informed decisions about construction.

References

  1. Mazur, Ł.; Bać, A.; Vaverková, M.D.; Winkler, J.; Nowysz, A.; Koda, E. Evaluation of the Quality of the Housing Environment Using Multi-Criteria Analysis That Includes Energy Efficiency: A Review. Energies 2022, 15, 7750.
  2. Shen, F.; Simayi, Z.; Yang, S.; Mamitimin, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y. A Bibliometric Review of Household Carbon Footprint during 2000–2022. Sustainability 2023, 15, 6138.
  3. Yan, X.; Cui, S.; Xu, L.; Lin, J.; Ali, G. Carbon Footprints of Urban Residential Buildings: A Household Survey-Based Approach. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1131.
  4. Isaksson, R.; Rosvall, M.; Espuny, M.; Nunhes, T.V.; De Oliveira, O.J. How Is Building Sustainability Understood?—A Study of Research Papers and Sustainability Reports. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12430.
  5. Architecture 2030 Why the Building Sector? 2022. Available online: https://architecture2030.org/ (accessed on 10 September 2023).
  6. United Nations Environment Programme. 2022 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero-Emission, Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector; United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2022.
  7. United Nations Environment Programme. Buildings and Climate Change: A Summary for Decision-Makers; UNEP DTIE, Sustainable Consumption and Production Branch: Paris, France, 2011; ISBN 978-92-807-3064-7.
  8. Atmaca, A.; Atmaca, N. Carbon Footprint Assessment of Residential Buildings, a Review and a Case Study in Turkey. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 340, 130691.
  9. Sizirici, B.; Fseha, Y.; Cho, C.-S.; Yildiz, I.; Byon, Y.-J. A Review of Carbon Footprint Reduction in Construction Industry, from Design to Operation. Materials 2021, 14, 6094.
  10. Onat, N.C.; Kucukvar, M. Carbon Footprint of Construction Industry: A Global Review and Supply Chain Analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 124, 109783.
  11. Ahmetoğlu, S.; Tanik, A. Management of Carbon Footprint and Determination of GHG Emission Sources in Construction Sector. Int. J. Environ. Geoinform. 2020, 7, 191–204.
  12. Starzyk, A.; Donderewicz, M.; Rybak-Niedziółka, K.; Marchwiński, J.; Grochulska-Salak, M.; Łacek, P.; Mazur, Ł.; Voronkova, I.; Vietrova, P. The Evolution of Multi-Family Housing Development Standards in the Climate Crisis: A Comparative Analysis of Selected Issues. Buildings 2023, 13, 1985.
  13. Kuda, D.; Petříčková, M. Modular Timber Gridshells. J. Sustain. Archit. Civ. Eng. 2021, 28, 72–79.
  14. Mitterpach, J.; Štefko, J. An Environmental Impact of a Wooden and Brick House by the LCA Method. Key Eng. Mater. 2016, 688, 204–209.
  15. Hrdlicka, T.; Cupal, M.; Komosna, M. Wood vs. Brick: Impact on Investment Costs of Houses. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 49, 104088.
  16. Ansah, M.K.; Chen, X.; Yang, H.; Lu, L.; Lam, P.T.I. Developing an Automated BIM-Based Life Cycle Assessment Approach for Modularly Designed High-Rise Buildings. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2021, 90, 106618.
  17. Díaz, J.; Antön, L.Á. Sustainable Construction Approach through Integration of LCA and BIM Tools. In Proceedings of the Computing in Civil and Building Engineering 2014, American Society of Civil Engineers, Orlando, FL, USA, 17 June 2014; pp. 283–290.
  18. Cheng, B.; Li, J.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Yang, M.; Chen, D. A BIM-LCA Approach for Estimating the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Large-Scale Public Buildings: A Case Study. Sustainability 2020, 12, 685.
  19. Kylili, A.; Fokaides, P.A. Policy Trends for the Sustainability Assessment of Construction Materials: A Review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 35, 280–288.
  20. Liu, Z.; Li, P.; Wang, F.; Osmani, M.; Demian, P. Building Information Modeling (BIM) Driven Carbon Emission Reduction Research: A 14-Year Bibliometric Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12820.
  21. Olawumi, T.O.; Chan, D.W.M. An Empirical Survey of the Perceived Benefits of Executing BIM and Sustainability Practices in the Built Environment. Constr. Innov. 2019, 19, 321–342.
  22. Gan, V.J.L.; Deng, M.; Tse, K.T.; Chan, C.M.; Lo, I.M.C.; Cheng, J.C.P. Holistic BIM Framework for Sustainable Low Carbon Design of High-Rise Buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 195, 1091–1104.
  23. Leszczyszyn, E.; Heräjärvi, H.; Verkasalo, E.; Garcia-Jaca, J.; Araya-Letelier, G.; Lanvin, J.-D.; Bidzińska, G.; Augustyniak-Wysocka, D.; Kies, U.; Calvillo, A.; et al. The Future of Wood Construction: Opportunities and Barriers Based on Surveys in Europe and Chile. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4358.
  24. Freer-Smith, P.; Carnus, J.-M. The Sustainable Management and Protection of Forests: Analysis of the Current Position Globally. AMBIO A J. Hum. Environ. 2008, 37, 254–262.
  25. Baker, S.C.; Spies, T.A.; Wardlaw, T.J.; Balmer, J.; Franklin, J.F.; Jordan, G.J. The Harvested Side of Edges: Effect of Retained Forests on the Re-Establishment of Biodiversity in Adjacent Harvested Areas. For. Ecol. Manag. 2013, 302, 107–121.
  26. ISO 14040:2006; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framewor. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
  27. ISO 14044:2006; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
  28. Pacheco-Torres, R.; Jadraque, E.; Roldán-Fontana, J.; Ordóñez, J. Analysis of CO2 Emissions in the Construction Phase of Single-Family Detached Houses. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2014, 12, 63–68.
  29. Vilches, A.; Garcia-Martinez, A.; Sanchez-Montañes, B. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Building Refurbishment: A Literature Review. Energy Build. 2017, 135, 286–301.
  30. Banias, G.F.; Karkanias, C.; Batsioula, M.; Melas, L.D.; Malamakis, A.E.; Geroliolios, D.; Skoutida, S.; Spiliotis, X. Environmental Assessment of Alternative Strategies for the Management of Construction and Demolition Waste: A Life Cycle Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9674.
  31. Rodríguez, L.; Martínez, L.; Panameño, R.; París, O.; Muros, A.; Rodríguez, R.; Javier, R.; González, C. LCA of the NZEB El Salvador Building, a Model to Estimate the Carbon Footprint in a Tropical Country. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 408, 137137.
  32. Säynäjoki, A.; Heinonen, J.; Junnila, S. Carbon Footprint Assessment of a Residential Development Project. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Dev. 2011, 2, 116–123.
  33. Tulevech, S.M.; Hage, D.J.; Jorgensen, S.K.; Guensler, C.L.; Himmler, R.; Gheewala, S.H. Life Cycle Assessment: A Multi-Scenario Case Study of a Low-Energy Industrial Building in Thailand. Energy Build. 2018, 168, 191–200.
  34. Ciroth, A. ICT for Environment in Life Cycle Applications OpenLCA—A New Open Source Software for Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess 2007, 12, 209–210.
  35. Silva, D.A.L.; Nunes, A.O.; da Silva Moris, V.A.; Piekarski, C.M. How Important Is the LCA Software Tool You Choose? Comparative Results from GaBi, OpenLCA, SimaPro and Umberto. In Proceedings of the Conference: VII Conferencia Internacional de Análisis de Ciclo de Vida en Latinoamérica, Medellin, Colombia, 10–15 June 2017.
  36. Hemmati, M.; Messadi, T.; Gu, H. Life Cycle Assessment of Cross-Laminated Timber Transportation from Three Origin Points. Sustainability 2021, 14, 336.
  37. Luz, L.M.D.; Francisco, A.C.D.; Piekarski, C.M.; Salvador, R. Integrating Life Cycle Assessment in the Product Development Process: A Methodological Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 193, 28–42.
  38. Olagunju, B.D.; Olanrewaju, O.A. Comparison of Life Cycle Assessment Tools in Cement Production. S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng. 2020, 31, 70–83.
  39. Grossi, F.; Ge, H.; Zmeureanu, R.; Baba, F. Feasibility of Planting Trees around Buildings as a Nature-Based Solution of Carbon Sequestration—An LCA Approach Using Two Case Studies. Buildings 2022, 13, 41.
  40. Pezeshki, Z.; Ivari, S.A.S. Applications of BIM: A Brief Review and Future Outline. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2018, 25, 273–312.
  41. Azhar, S. Building Information Modeling (BIM): Trends, Benefits, Risks, and Challenges for the AEC Industry. Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 2011, 11, 241–252.
  42. Bahar, Y.; Pere, C.; Landrieu, J.; Nicolle, C. A Thermal Simulation Tool for Building and Its Interoperability through the Building Information Modeling (BIM) Platform. Buildings 2013, 3, 380–398.
  43. Smith, P. BIM & the 5D Project Cost Manager. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 119, 475–484.
  44. Antón, L.Á.; Díaz, J. Integration of Life Cycle Assessment in a BIM Environment. Procedia Eng. 2014, 85, 26–32.
  45. Doan, D.T.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Naismith, N.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Zhang, T.; Tookey, J. Examining Green Star Certification Uptake and Its Relationship with Building Information Modelling (BIM) Adoption in New Zealand. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 250, 109508.
  46. Potrč Obrecht, T.; Röck, M.; Hoxha, E.; Passer, A. BIM and LCA Integration: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5534.
  47. Soust-Verdaguer, B.; Llatas, C.; García-Martínez, A. Critical Review of Bim-Based LCA Method to Buildings. Energy Build. 2017, 136, 110–120.
  48. Röck, M.; Hollberg, A.; Habert, G.; Passer, A. LCA and BIM: Visualization of Environmental Potentials in Building Construction at Early Design Stages. Build. Environ. 2018, 140, 153–161.
  49. Carvalho, J.P.; Alecrim, I.; Bragança, L.; Mateus, R. Integrating BIM-Based LCA and Building Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7468.
  50. Bueno, C.; Fabricio, M.M. Comparative Analysis between a Complete LCA Study and Results from a BIM-LCA Plug-In. Autom. Constr. 2018, 90, 188–200.
  51. Antón, L.Á.; Díaz, J. Integration of Lca And Bim For Sustainable Construction. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2014, 8, 1378–1382.
  52. Santos, R.; Costa, A.A.; Silvestre, J.D.; Pyl, L. Integration of LCA and LCC Analysis within a BIM-Based Environment. Autom. Constr. 2019, 103, 127–149.
  53. Kim, J.B.; Jeong, W.; Clayton, M.J.; Haberl, J.S.; Yan, W. Developing a Physical BIM Library for Building Thermal Energy Simulation. Autom. Constr. 2015, 50, 16–28.
  54. Kamel, E.; Memari, A.M. Review of BIM’s Application in Energy Simulation: Tools, Issues, and Solutions. Autom. Constr. 2019, 97, 164–180.
  55. Wei, H.; Zheng, S.; Zhao, L.; Huang, R. BIM-Based Method Calculation of Auxiliary Materials Required in Housing Construction. Autom. Constr. 2017, 78, 62–82.
  56. Kim, K.P. BIM-Enabled Sustainable Housing Refurbishment—LCA Case Study. In Sustainable Construction Technologies; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 349–394. ISBN 978-0-12-811749-1.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback