Life Cycle Case Study

4 July 2014

Peter Tse

BSRIA Principal Design Consultant

2

The built environment experts 2

UEA Enterprise Centre

• Gateway to the University, showcase of sustainability

• Construction cost: £16m

• Teaching and learning facilities with work spaces for local companies

3

The built environment experts 3

Exemplar low carbon building

• 100 Year Design Life

• Passivhaus Certification

• Breeam Outstanding

• Very Low Embodied Energy

• Focus on Local Supply Chains

• High Use of Renewable

Materials

4

The built environment experts 4

Focus on natural local materials

5

Making buildings better

Life Cycle Costing Initial drivers for project:

• Breeam Outstanding

• Part of Reality Checking process in Soft Landings

Making better decisions:

LCC

LCA

6

Making buildings better

What did we review?

• Aligned with Breeam 2011

• Credit 1

– LCC analysis for project at conceptual design (Stage C/D)

• Credit 2

– LCC analysis for selected building components or systems

• Credit 3

– Revisit analyses at detailed design (Stage D/E)

– Vital that recommendations are implemented

7

Making buildings better

What data did we need?

Client team inputted actual figures into the model for:

– Management costs

– Maintenance costs

– Utility costs

Contractor inputted actual figures into the model for:

– Capital costs

8

Making buildings better

60-year LCC breakdown at public sector discount rate

Capital investment

Operation & Maintenance

Inner Pie – Passivhaus

Outer Pie – Part L design

Credit 1

Passivhaus vs Part L design

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

PassivHaus Part Lcompliant

60-year cumulative year-by-year

estimated spend (3% inflation)

9

Making buildings better

Credit 2 – Alternative designs within

PassivHaus scheme

Passivhaus design

Energy for

heating

Roof and PV system

Window frames

External hard land-

scaping

Internal lighting

Floor finish

At least two of the

following areas be

reviewed:

• Envelope

• Services

• Finishes

• External spaces

10

Making buildings better

What did we find? 1. Window frames

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

Aluminium faced All wood

Requires

painting

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

Aluminium faced All wood

11

Making buildings better

What did we find? 2. External hard landscaping

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

Stone + timber Gravel + timber Gravel Stone

12

Making buildings better

What did we find?

3. Internal floor finish

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

Carpet wood lino Hardwood only Carpet only

13

Making buildings better

Other factors?

14

Making buildings better

Credit 3

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

Carpet wood lino Hardwood only Carpet only Polished concrete

15

Making buildings better

Has Life-cycle considerations benefitted the project?

Positive

• Enriched understanding of the project values - learnt about which issues were important to different client representatives

• Helped to ensure ‘realistic’ value engineering

• Client appreciation of life-cycle process

• A very well informed project team

• Making the right decision

Negative

• A lot of information to digest and a lot of scenarios to consider, when do you stop the analysis?

• A multi-headed Client has appeared, who do we listen to?

16

Making buildings better

More than colour: Applying

nanotechnologies for the multifunctional

ceramic pigments development

Produce multi-functional pigments for construction and automotive

applications

Pigment functionalities:

Thermal storage, infra-red reflectance, antibacterial and self

cleaning

17

Making buildings better

Traditional vs Nanopigmy Validate the economic and environmental costs and benefits of each

pigment in relation to traditional solutions

2. Thermal storage + self-cleaning in

concrete render

3. Infra red reflectance + self cleaning in

concrete render

1. Thermal storage +

antibacterial in paint

and polymer board

18

Making buildings better

Applying Life-cycle thinking

• Life cycle costing and life cycle assessment allow the

effects of a material or product innovation to be

considered in advance

• Can indicate where innovations have most impact

• Can help avoid costly mistakes

• Close liaison with supplier/manufacturer is needed to

obtain robust data

19

Making buildings better

Thank you

Peter Tse

peter.tse@bsria.co.uk

Tel: +44 (0) 1344 465651| Mob: +44 (0) 7957 473856