Is there an alternative to the CRC? -...
115
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected] EMBODIED CARBON 05 MARCH 2015 UCL Energy Institute, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN
Transcript of Is there an alternative to the CRC? -...
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
EMBODIED CARBON05 MARCH 2015
UCL Energy Institute, Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0NN
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
AGENDA
08:00 Breakfast and Networking
08:30 “CBx: An Overview” – Sophie Chisholm, Programme and Technical Manager, CBx
08:40 “1 year on from Embodied carbon week- what’s changed?” – Sean Lockie, Global head of
Sustainability and carbon management at Faithful+Gould
08:50 "Key Factors in designing Low Carbon Buildings "– Christian Dimbleby, Architect & Chartered
Engineer at Architype
09:05 “Embodied carbon and building services”- Mike Medas, Research Engineer at AECOM
09:20 “A contractors perspective on the embodied carbon debate” - David Mason, Senior
Sustainability
Manager, Skanska
09:35 Audience Q&A
09:45 Networking
10:00 Close
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
Email: [email protected]: sophie_chisholm
Sophie Chisholm
Programme & Technical Manager
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
CBx Vision
That every building will perform optimally,
in order to deliver a truly energy efficient
built environment.
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
How we can help you
1. Training
2. Briefings and Events
3. Bespoke Advisory
4. Collaborative Research
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
Join for free to receive our newsletters and attend our
breakfast briefings!
Or become a member to access the full range of
services!
Get Involved
For more information please visit
http://cbxchange.org/membership-partners/
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
1. Website Overhaul
2. Grown membership
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
1. Website Overhaul
2. Grown membership
3. 10 Events
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
1. Website Overhaul
2. Grown membership
3. 10 Events
4. 10 White papers
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
1. Website Overhaul
2. Grown membership
3. 10 Events
4. 10 White papers
5. CBx Training Series
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
6. Knowledge library
7. CBx Data Collection
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
6. Knowledge library
7. CBx Data Collection
8. Benchmarking Exercise
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
9. Bespoke Advisory for EA
10. Links with BBP, EMA,
BE&E, NEF, ZCH
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
9. Bespoke Advisory for EA
10. Links with BBP, EMA,
BE&E, NEF, ZCH
11. FM Leaders Forum
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2014..the story so far
9. Bespoke Advisory for EA
10. Links with BBP, EMA,
BB&E, NEF, ZCH
11. FM Leaders Forum
12. Numerous thought
pieces
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
2015...Looking ahead
1. New programme of events
2. 2 Degrees awards support
3. Benchmarking Clubs
4. Training series
5. Work with Brighton & Hove, Heathrow &
Environment Agency
6. Co-badged guidance with Innovate UK
7. Sponsorship opportunities
8. CBx tool development
9. CBx half day session at Greenbuild EXPO
www.cbxchange.org @CBxchange [email protected]
W: www.cbxchange.orgT: @CBxchange
CBxchangeThe not-for-profit public forum for building energy professionals, at the cutting-
edge of narrowing the performance gap through sharing data, information and
best practice
One year on from Embodied carbon week
what has changed?
Sean Lockie, Faithful+Gould
1. 22 events
2. 900 delegates
3. 300 organisations
4. 15 recommendations.....
Embodied carbon week
Hilites
1. Consistency must improve
2. Calculations focus on the big
issue granularity later
3. Design teams need to be
challenged to come up with
solutions that address E C.
4. Closed loops promoted.
5. Regulation / legislation gap-
industry needs to lead
6. Accuracy
7. Transparency – data / workings /
calculations
8. Business case
9. Don’t over complicate
10.Collaboration research /
practitioners
11.Mitigation planning
A high proportion of a building’s carbon footprint is Embodied
• Part L building regs NO
• BREEAM – Limited influence
• Planning permission – NO Brighton and Westminster ‘consider’.
• Allowable solutions – NO embodied carbon not a consideration.
• Property a laggard compared to Water industry, EA, Rail Highways Agency, Rail.
Lack of drivers – property
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
An agreed European standard that all LCA is based on
Cradle to end of life
BS EN 15978: 2011
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
The RICS methodology aimed at the QS / RICS members.
RICS guidance
Methodology to calculate embodied carbon in a building’s construction life cycle, 2014
• Global guidance note• Life cycle embodied carbon
methodology• Based on BS EN ISO 14040 / 15978• High level• Aimed at the QS
RICS simplifies this approach- BS 15978
The guide contains benchmarks
Embodied carbon benchmarks
Floor area x benchmark
Analysing the results
Uncertainty
Embodied carbon roles for all
Client
Set targets
Team track record
Architect
In addition to passive design, research low carbon materials for building envelope and finishes
Struct Engineer
Research alternative materials for foundation and structural frame
B Services Engineer
balance operational and embodied carbon savings
Project Manager
Establish ways to monitor performance
Contractor
specify work procedures and methods that avoid waste.
local sourcing
avoid half full deliveries
minimise over-ordering
reduce on-site energy consumption
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
The future of data sources.
EPD’s will provide data
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
Expect more environmental data on product information in future ... From EPDs
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable SolutionsWater industry
Environment Agency have been asking supply chain for EC of over a decade
H A embodied carbon calculator
But things are changing.....
1. BS EN 15978
2. RICS method
3. EPDs
4. BIM
5. Learning from
infrastructure
6. Allowable Solutions
White paper Industry leads
Zero Carbon Building Regulations and Allowable Solutions
New regulations are emerging that may put a real value on embodied carbon
reductions
43
Developers may either initiate their own
AS or pay an agreed cost (per tonne CO2
saved) into a fund to pay for off-site
carbon reduction projects in the local
community.
Achieve minimum level of reduction
from on-site and directly connected
sources, achieved through energy
efficiency, on-site LZC technologies and
directly connected LZC heat
The building fabric must be highly energy
efficient in terms of space heating,
cooling, ventilation and lighting.
Required standards range depending on
the type of building
Embodied Carbon Task Force Recommendations 2014
END – reserve slides
A worked example...
Case study 4:M&S, Cheshire Oaks
• Floor Area 20,000m2
• Located near Liverpool
• M+S ‘Plan A’
• A number of sustainability features
• A number of sustainability awards
• Carbon Champion of the Year Award,
CIBSE 2014
• This presentation looks at the embodied carbon
aspects only.
• 60 year cradle to grave assessment.
• Created a baseline then...
• Quantified the reductions in total carbon achieved
against the baseline
The approach
Embodiedcarbon
Operationalcarbon
Scope of the assessment
Scope of the assessment
Foundations &
Structure
Superstructure Fit-out External Areas
Pads Floor Slabs /
Decks
Partitions Car Park
Perimeter Beams Main Building
Frame
Floor and floor
finishes
Yard
Ground Slab Cladding / Walling
Units
Ceilings Roads
Roofing Doors
External Doors Central Plant
Louvring Gas / Electricity
Services
Water Services
Ventilation Services
Drainage
Lifts
Creation of a ‘baseline’ – embodied carbon
• No benchmark existed so a
baseline was created
• Baseline - No Plan A spec
• Traditional retail building
• Specifications listed (right)
Embodiedcarbon
Operationalcarbon
Baseline Agreed design
Foundations Pads and perimeter
beam
As per baseline, with
30% PFA concrete
substitution
Frame Steel frame Steel frames and
glulam joists
Upper Floor
Slab
Concrete Slab Timber Deck
Walls Masonry Hempcrete
Fit Out Plasterboard Walls;
Ceramic Floor Tiles
100% Recycled
Plasterboard; 40%
recycled Ceramic
tiles
Results – embodied carbon: life cycle stages
Embodiescarbon
Operationalcarbon
Total Embodied Carbon over 60 years
11,108 10,728
1,200
752
1,782
1,814
5,200
4,892
710
710
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
20,000t 18,896t
End Of Life
Maintenance
Onsite Activities
Delivery
Raw Materials
Em
bo
die
d C
arb
on
(tC
O2e
)
Things that contributed to reducing the embodied CO2
Shell and Core
•30% PFA substitution in Concrete Foundations, Substructure and Superstructure
•Glulam roof structure (FSC sourced) rather than concrete roof slab
•Hempcrete walls
•Removal of 60mm Screed from Ground Slab
•Timber upper floor deck, rather than reinforced concrete slab
•75% Recycled Aggregates used in External Areas
•80% Recycled content Roof Insulation
•1% Reclaimed steel in Building Frame
Things that contributed to reducing the embodied CO2
Fit Out
•100% Recycled content Fermacell partition walls
•40% Recycled content Strata flooring tiles
•40% Recycled content in Interfaceflor Carpets
It can be very granular
Embodiescarbon
Operationalcarbon
Results – embodied carbon: building zones
Things that contributed to reducing the embodied CO2
Fit Out
•100% Recycled content Fermacell partition walls
•40% Recycled content Strata flooring tiles
•40% Recycled content in Interfaceflor Carpets
Worldwide carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels are rising rapidly
Why do we care about carbon?
• Carbon emissions are expressed as CO2e (i.e. CO2 equivalent)
• Different GHG have different Global Warming Potentials
Global Warming Potential
Key Factors In Designing Low Carbon Buildings –
Case Study: The UEA Enterprise Centre
By Christian Dimbleby of Architype Ltd
Set new standards for embodied carbon
Outstanding
Passivhaus Certification
Use of local bio-renewable materials
1.
2.
3.
4. CO2e life cycle analysis
Sustainability Brief
Set new standards for embodied carbon
Accommodation Brief
Meeting Passivhaus6 kWh/m2.a
South Elevation – lots of glazing
North Elevation – limited glazing
Calculating Embodied Carbon at Early Stage
LifeCYCLE by Franklin + Andrews
Data base system for recording all building components in a
conventional QS measuring way, with additional capital &
lifecycle Carbon added to this – suitable for a fully design
building Carbon calculation only.
RAPIERE by Architype
Rapid modelling tool to asses the impacts of design changes on
Cost, Carbon & Energy, optional analysis can be done in minutes –
suitable for early design stage Carbon calculation through to
detailed design. Create bespoke materials assessments.
Stage AB: Embodied Energy Materials Breakdown
Benchmark Embodied Carbon(Enterprise Centre - 168KgCO2/m2)
Atkins
Masterplanning
Tool - 2010
Office
925KgCO2/m2
Uni Building
845KgCO2/m2
Track Embodied Carbon Throughout Project
Whole Life Impacts
CEN/TC350 Display of modular information for the different
stages of the building assessment
Graphical representation of
Construction Life Cycle, by
Dr Sophie Trachte,
Grey Energy of Building Materials
A1-3
A4-5
B1-7
C1-4
D
How to reduce Embodied Carbon?
EcoMinimalism
“Making the simple complicated is commonplace;
making the complicated simple, that’s creativity.”
Charlie Mingus
“recognise that the simplest way to reduce environmental
impact is to manage with less - ask could we manage
with a smaller building?”
Nick Grant
Manufacturing Energy – Cradle to Gate [A1-3]
Low carbon
concrete:
70% GGBS as
cement
replacement
Optimise and Minimise Materials Impacts
Transportation Carbon [A4]
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Total Transportation Carbon for Timber at UEA [kgCO2e]
Land
Sea
Canadian Timber,
From Montreal via Liverpool
Northern European Timber,
From Oslo via Port of London
Locally sourced Timber
from East Anglia
Grand Fir
Corsican Pine
91% reduction
70% reduction
Working with BRE and the Forestry Commission to
test Local Timber for Brettstapel
Locally Sourced Materials
Embodied Energy - Construction [A5]
Environment Agency Carbon Calculator v3.1.2 can
estimate waste, plant & portcabin emissions
We are tracking actual site emissions
Materials Replacements [B1-B7]
Which material is
better?
The answer depends upon the
durability and replacement
cycle as well as the initial
embodied carbon.
Life Cycle Carbon Analysis of Floor Finishes Date: 01/01/13 Rev: B 7/1/13 By: Gareth Selby
Floor construction
Wool/Polymaide carpet 271.53 489.03
Carpet Tiles – Nylon 700g/m2 219.08 393.67
Carpet Tile – Interface Heuga 726 161.73 289.40
Lino Floor 44.25 73.24
Timber floor -30.10 -28.90
Time Weighted
Total, kgCO2/m2
Non Time weighted
Total, kgCO2/m2
Wool/Polymaide carpet
Carpet Tiles – Nylon 700g/m2
Carpet Tile – Interface Heuga 726
Lino Floor
Timber floor
-200.00 -150.00 -100.00 -50.00 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00
100 Year Lifecycle Carbon Analysis of Floor Finishes
kgCo2/m2 over 100 years
Life Cycle Carbon Analysis of Floor Finishes
End of Life [C1-C4]
Hardest thing to assess as little research in this area:
http://www.greenspec.co.uk/assessing-materials.php
http://www.wrap.org.uk/
http://www.bremap.co.uk/
Carbon Storage [D]
Hemp Insulation
-173,000 kgCO2e
Thatch Cladding
-28,000 kgCO2e
Timber Structure
-1,821,000 kgCO2e
=
=
=
Thetford timber
Other Benefits [D]
Local Bio-Renewable Materials, Thatch & Timber
Other Benefits [D]
Recycling – Iroko Lab benches used as cladding
Calculating Embodied Carbon - RAPIERE
Capital & Lifecycle Cost Model
Based on Sweet Group cost analyses
of recent project data
Embodied Carbon Model
Based on Architypein-house embodied carbon calculator
Energy & Services ModelBased on BDSP Suntool rapid
thermal engine
£ kWh CO2e
• Detailed research and data analysis to
inform Cost, Energy, Carbon &
Lifecycle engines by industry leading
companies
• Models based on industry standards
to provide robust and compliant
results
When changing materials to minimise Embodied Carbon, you have to assess
the financial and energy impacts to fully optimise the building solution.
RAPIERE is the only software which gives you all three sets of information.
www.rapiere.net
Set new standards for embodied carbon
ADAPT researchers check and record all material deliveries to site.
As all Embodied Carbon calculations are always an estimate, in this
instance the University will check the actual embodied carbon of the
building and compare this to the design. This analysis will be fed back
into the RAPIERE software and other design tools to help make more
accurate allowances for items.
Post Completion
Embodied Carbon Check
Embodied carbon and building services
Mike Medas
Research Engineer
AECOM / UoR
86
87
Contents
Why embodied carbon?
Why building services?
Why BIM?
Survey and case study
The way forward
87
8888
89
Why building services?
28.8%
47.0%39.8%
30.3%
36.7%6.5%
16.2%
18.3%
14.9%
13.2%14.7% 25.8%
5.0%
2.6%
12.3%12.0%
14.5%
28.8%
17.0% 13.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Building element CIBSE (2014a) Halcrow Yolles(2011)
CIBSE (2014b)
Percentage of initial
embodied carbon
Research source
Other
Building services
Vertical envelope
Substructure
Superstructure
Building
element
Research Studies of office buildings
90
Why building services?
90
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Lifetime costs
Capital costs
Recurring embodiedcarbon
Initial embodiedcarbon
50
35
60
15
50
65
40
85Buildingservices
Otherbuildingelements
AECOM (2014)
Some challenges
Design
choices
Gaps in tools
Gaps in data sources and calculation methods
Policy Markets Industry attitudesPractice
Gaps in data sources & calculation methods
LCA databases focus on raw materials
EPDs voluntary & costly, too many needed to fill gap
Method needed to predict EC of composite components
??
vs
93
Gaps in LCA-based tools - (Cabeza 2014)
Level 1 product comparison – Simapro, GaBi
Quantitative, accurate, but too complex for lay use,
data on building services is a challenge
Level 2 whole building decision support – Athena, Etool
Quantitative, user friendly, may include building
services, data still a challenge
Level 3 whole building assessment –BREEAM, LEED…
Mixes qualitative & quant. methods, few whole life
carbon metrics, LCA may exclude building services
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other
Whole lifecarbon
Embodiedcarbon
Operationalcarbon
Percentage of overall credit available
Scheme weighting of carbon mitigation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
BREEAM LEED BEAM GS
Other
Embodied carbon-Building servicesexcluded
Embodied carbon-Building servicesincluded
Embodied carbon-Building servicesoptional
Operational carbon
Percentage of overall credit available
Scheme weighting of carbon
mitigation for building services
96
Why BIM?
BIM
design tool
Material and component quantities
Costs
Sustainable choice of building
components and systems
Embodied carbon data
and calculation methods
Operational carbon data and calculation methods
97
Where is BIM heading?
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
9898
Industry survey (72 replies to date)
65% of respondents would find a software tool to predict
embodied carbon of building services ‘useful’
‘The final equipment selection is made by the contractor’
‘Would be interesting, but I think it unlikely to be widely used or
any decisions made on its outcome unless it was a statutory
requirement’
‘It would be beneficial and could guide towards better choice of
components and may push the manufacturing industry towards
considering these issues’
‘Performance of a component is much more important that the
embodied carbon. Therefore I would ignore the results if the
component still had poor performance compared to another
component’
‘Clients would love this. Could influence specifications’
‘Freely available, yes’
999999
Case study of fan-coil units
Horizontal, ducted, water-side fan coil units are widely
used in aircon systems of various types in UK offices
A composite component with 5 main raw materials
Selection typically based on operational performance
and cost, not embodied carbon
Could a parametric method predict embodied carbon of
a generic class of component?
100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Totalcoolingcapacity
(kW)
Mass(kg)
Fan coil unit by available size
Embodiedcarbon
Mass
Total coolingcapacity
100100100
Initial results
Embodied carbon varies with mass and total cooling capacity
101101101101
The way forward
Design
choices
Refine tools
Refine data sources and calculation methods
Influence policy, practice and industry attitudes
102102102102
Embodied Carbon – A Contractors
Perspective
David Mason
Senior Sustainability Manager
Skanska UK
Who are Skanska?
− Global construction company
− 55,000+ employees
− £13bn revenues
− 5,500 in UK
− £1.3bn
− 10-15% growth!
− 4 main business Streams
− Commercial
− Residential
− Infrastructure
− Contracting
Our Journey to Deep Green
− Skanska Colour Palette to measure projects
− Define ultimate ambition – near zero impact
− 6 objectives
− Net zero primary energy
− Near zero carbon construction
− Zero hazardous materials
− Zero unsustainable materials
− Zero waste
− Zero water
Why?
− Fundamental part of a building!
− Increase proportion of impact
− Fundamental to company strategy
− Significant reductions shown
− Innovative design solutions
− Different construction methodology
− Material specification
− Cost reduction
Embodied Carbon – trends
80% operational
and 20%
embodied carbon
Bassängkajen, Malmö
>40% embodied carbon
Väla Gård,
Helsingbor~100%
embodied carbon
Increasing % of impact
Powerhus
Helsingbor~100%
embodied carbon
Embodied Impacts
− Powerhouse
− Refurbishment of
1980s office
− Energy positive
operation
− Offsets embodied
energy of materials
over life time
− Real focus on
materials
2070
Comparisons and benchmarking
City Green Court
construction materials or
components
Entré Lindhagen
materials, material
transport and site activities
Telemark Center
Lifecycle perspective that
includes operational carbon
Concrete frame: 3,076
Floor slabs 2,633
Foundation: 2,564
Columns & beams: 832
Façade: 736
Other components: 503
Construction materials: 7
Operational energy: 33
Operational transport: 5
Benchmarking?
− F Fornebu Senter,
Norway
53% reduction
Brent Civic
Centre
27% reduction
Benchmarking Complexity
− Benefits of pre-fabrication
− 740 Utility cupboards
− Steel frame
− Ply board
− Plasterboard lined
− Copper and HDPE pipe
− 6.7TCO2 per unit – prefabricated
− 9.4TCO2 per unit – built on site
− 27% saving from prefabricating
− 67% saving with material spec changes
111
Communicate Benefit
M25, UK South East Electricity
Substation Alliance
(SEESA), UK
Anglian Water, UK Catthope Viaduct
Replacement, UK
Glasbruket 1, Sweden
The carbon footprint helped
reduce embodied emissions
by 27%.
24,000 tCO2e and ~USD
38m saved by overlaying a
35 mm wearing course,
which avoided the need for
360,000 tons of asphalt.
35,000 tCO2e and ~USD
23m saved by incorporating
2.4 million tons of excavation
materials and demolition
waste.
Project carbon
footprints realized
savings of up to USD
50,000 and 614 tCO2e
on individual projects.
Developed a reusable
packing crate for
aluminum piping,
saved ~USD 100,000
and over 16 tCO2e on
one site alone.
Intranet-based carbon-
modeling tool developed
for Anglian Water.
Embodied carbon savings
of up to 27% or ~2,000
tCO2e.
Overall operational carbon
following an upgrade can
be reduced by 50%, and
savings of ~600
tCO2e/year and
USD 70,000.
The project used over
21,500 tons of
Incinerator Bottom
Aggregate Ash as bulk
fill instead of normal
granular fill material,
saved ~USD 110,000
and 77 tCO2e.
Substituted concrete
drainage pipes with
polyethylene pipes,
decreased lifecycle carbon
emissions by ~40% or 100
tCO2e.
The customer finally opted
for a higher-quality type of
polyethylene pipe which
reduced the initially
achieved financial savings.
112
Lessons Learnt to date
− Increasing data set
− Consistency improving
− Benchmarking
− Unintended consequences!
− Embodied Carbon, Energy or Resource Efficiency?
− Early focus and involvement key to maximising
benefits
Summary
Key areas for improvement
Measurement
Benchmarking
Communication
