Transcript Project Control

Sustainability, Infrastructure and
Communities
- Focus on Opportunities Arpad Horvath
Associate Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Berkeley
[email protected]
February 14, 2007
Outline of Presentation





Where is sustainability research today?
Sustainability research at UC Berkeley
Players, networks, timing, trends
Joint opportunities
Involvement of industry
The Grand Vision:
Sustainable Development

•
•
Definition: Meeting the needs of the current generation without
sacrificing the ability of the future generations to meet their
needs. (Brundtland Commission, 1987)
Maintain societal progress while improving environmental quality
and quality of life
Environmental goals
-
•
•
reduce non-renewable resource use
manage renewable resource use for sustainability
reduce toxic substance emissions (heavy metals, solvents,)
reduce greenhouse gas and ozone depleting substance emissions
Educate the stakeholders
Do good by doing well
• profit = revenue - cost
The Triple Bottom Line of
Sustainability
Environment
Economy
Social issues
Courtesy: B. Boughton, DTSC
Urban Communities of the Third
Millennium
Sustainable
Livable
Engaging
Transit oriented
Wired
Renewable
ENR, March 12, 2001, Cover Story
Characterizing Sustainability Research


~ 30 years of publications and projects
1st phase: “we have a global problem”
» Mostly descriptive, qualitative
» Stated problem, categories of effects (e.g., air emissions), but few numbers

2nd phase: “let’s analyze/blame someone” – low hanging fruit
» Industries: automobile, chemical, petroleum, electric power, cement
» Advent of industrial ecology, life-cycle assessment (LCA)
» Mostly incomplete assessments (e.g., not all life cycle phases, inventory but no
impact assessment)
» Initial savings by companies

3rd phase: more specific assessments
»
»
»
»
Data collection for specific studies
Services and network analysis, not just manufacturing processes and products
Supply-chain informed LCA
Advances in impact assessment
Observations about Sustainability
Research
1. Need to incorporate triple bottom line: environment,
economy, equity
- need a unified theory and implementation to link
them
2. Sustainability solutions are integrated solutions - Need to
learn from successful businesses
3. Need to assess a broad range of environmental effects –
sustainability is not just about energy!
4. Need international networks for research and projects
5. Need quantitative studies
6. Need to analyze services, not just products and
processes
Integrated Facilities Engineering
Companies in the U.S.
Bechtel
Percentage of Waste Recycled in
the U.S., Late 1990s
100
80
60
40
20
0
Lead
Aluminum Cans
Plastic Bottles
Asphalt
Concrete Rebars
Copper
Steel
Paper
LCA Framework
Outputs
Inputs
Atmospheric Emissions
Raw Materials Acquisition
Waterborne Wastes
Raw Materials
Manufacturing
Solid Wastes
Use/Reuse/Maintenance
Energy
Coproducts
Recycle/Waste Management
Other Releases
System Boundary
Source: U.S. EPA
A concept and methodology to evaluate the environmental effects of a product or activity
holistically, by analyzing the whole life cycle of a particular product, process, or activity
(U.S. EPA, 1993).
LCA Methodology – ISO 14040
LCA – Life-Cycle Assessment
(ISO 14040)
Goal and
scope
definition
Inventory
analysis
Impact
assessment
Direct applications:
Interpretation
* Product development
* Product/process improvement
* Strategic planning
* Policy making
* Marketing
* Other
Stage 1: Materials
Extraction
Stage 2: Materials
Processing
Stage 3: Component
Manufacturing
Coal Mining
Coal burning in
power plant
Keyboard
Stainless Steel
Chemical
Reduction
Oil Drilling
Bauxite Ore Mining or
recycled aluminum
collection
Stages 5 & 6: Use
and Disposal
Electricity*
Chromium
Ore Mining
Iron Ore Mining
Stage 4: Assembly
Extrusion
Iron
Petrochemicals
production
Electrolysis
Plastics
Injection Molding
Aluminum
Rolling and Shot Peening
Monitor
Housing
Hard Drive
Copper Ore Mining
Copper
Wire drawing
Cooling Fan
Computer
Screws
Video Card
Casserite Mining
Separation
Cobalt
Wires
Motherboard
Silicon
Quartz Mining
Refinement
Purification and polishing
Glass
*This flowchart disregards all the forms of energy required for each stage of the supply chain (transportation fuel, electricity, etc)
Figure 1: Life Cycle of a Computer
C. Reich-Weiser, UCB
“The 1.7 Kilogram Microchip”
Williams, E. (2002) “The 1.7
Kilogram Microchip: Energy and
Material Use in the Production
of Semiconductor Devices.”
ES&T, 36:5504-5510.
Buildings and the Environment



Buildings integral part of infrastructure systems (or “civil
systems”), and the boundaries between these terms are
fuzzy
The built environment has a large impact on the natural
environment, economy, health, and productivity
Buildings account for 17% of world’s fresh water
withdrawals, 25% of world’s wood harvest, and 40% of
world’s materials and energy flows
U.S. Buildings and the Environment

The construction industry accounts for ~8% of U.S. GDP
» Similar in industrialized countries, even bigger economic share in industrializing
countries
» U.S. construction industry larger than the GDP of 212 national economies
(CA’s: 150 economies)


54% of U.S. energy consumption is directly or indirectly related to
buildings and their construction
In the U.S., buildings account for
»
»
»
»
»
65% of electricity consumption
30% of GHG emissions
30% of raw material use
30% of waste output (136 M tons annually)
12% of potable water consumption
Categories of Natural Resources
Energy
 Raw materials
 Land/Habitat
 Terrestrial Ecosystems
 Marine Ecosystems
 Biodiversity
etc.

Ecosystems and Biodiversity

Terrestrial and marine ecosystems greatly
endangered
» Loss of forest, oil spills, overfishing, etc.

Current rate of extinction is several orders of
magnitude greater than the natural background
» In the U.S.:
– over 500 known species are now extinct
– 1,200 species listed as endangered
Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing



Since 1993

http://cgdm.berkeley.edu

Multidisciplinary campus group integrating engineering,
policy, public health, and business in green
engineering, management, and pollution prevention
Strategic areas:
» Civil infrastructure systems
» Electronics industry
» Servicizing products
9 faculty from Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Mechanical Engineering, Haas School of Business,
Energy and Resources Group, School of Public Health
10 current Ph.D. students
28 alumni
Green Engineering and Management
Research Network at UC Berkeley

Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing (CGDM)

Network for Energy and Environmentally Efficient Economy (N4E)

Center for Future Urban Transport, A Volvo Center of Excellence

Urban Sustainability Initiative (USI)

Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL)

Project Production Systems Laboratory (P2SL)

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)

Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI)
Green Engineering & Management:
Some Recent Research Projects (1999-2006)



Infrastructure:
» Buildings
» Pavements
» Electricity generation
» Water treatment
» Used oil
» Shredder residue
» Freight transportation
Electronics industry:
» Computer plastics recycling
Services:
» Telework/telecommuting
» News delivery using wireless and wired telecommunications
» Teleconferencing versus business travel
Green Engineering & Management:
Selection of Current Research Projects

Infrastructure:
» Passenger transportation modes
» Green logistics
» Building life cycle and indoor air quality
– Data centers

Services:
» Digital media through wired and wireless telecommunications
Urban Sustainability Initiative

Joint effort of UC Berkeley, the U.S. National Academies, and non-governmental
organizations (Urban Age, Healthy Communities Network)

Goal: combine cutting edge research and development with innovative capacity
building programs and a global information & exchange network to foster the
spread of effective urban sustainability practices and technologies in growing cities
throughout the developing world.
» Facilitate linkages between project partners, local scientific communities, civil society,
the private sector and the official leadership of rapidly growing cities;
» Accelerate the application of existing technologies and practices, and the development
and demonstration of new technologies and practices that improve the environment;
» Creating an extensive urban sustainability information network to share technologies
and best practices for the benefit of cities around the world.
» Create “living laboratories” in cities in Asia, Latin America, and Africa, and to test new
approaches of environmentally sustainable urban development.
UCB Preliminary Inventory 2005
Required and Optional Reporting to California Climate Action Registry
Emissions Sources (required and selected
optional reporting)
Purchased Electricity
Steam (from co-generation and auxiliary boilers)
Air Travel
Faculty and Staff Auto Commute
Natural Gas
Student Commute
Fugitive Emissions- Refrigeration
Solid Waste
Campus Fleet
Total Emissions
Source: Fahmida Ahmed, CalCAP
CO2 equivalent
(metric tons)
142,000
81,000
50,000
18,000
13,000
4,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
310,000
Percentage
Contribution
45.6%
25.9%
16.1%
5.8%
4.2%
1.3%
0.6%
0.6%
0.3%
100%
6.4 metric tons/person
UC Berkeley GHG Emissions Trends
Transportation
Solid Waste
Trends
On-campus Stationary
Purchased Steam and Chilled w ater
Purchased Electricity
Purchased Electricity
200,000
In Thousands
Carbon Dioxide Emissions Equivalent (kg CO2 e )
300,000
Purchased Steam
100,000
Natural gas
Solid Waste
Transportation
0
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
Year
2008
2011
2014
2017
2020
“Carbon Performance”
Institution
Emissions in
metric tons of
CO2 equivalent
Student
population
Metric tons of
CO2 equivalent
/student
Year
recorded
University of California, Santa Barbara
Tufts University
University of California, San Diego
University of California, Berkeley
Harvard University
Oberlin College
Yale University
64,996
20,375
156,846
309,692
319,303
50,417
284,663
29,269
8,500
25,964
33,558
20,042
2,857
11,250
2.2
2.4
6.0
9.2
15.9
17.6
25.3
year 2006
year 2003
year 2004
year 2005
year 2005
year 2000
year 2004
Each of these campuses looks at emissions sources comparable to the “required
and selected optional reporting” package.
Source: Fahmida Ahmed, CalCAP
“Engineering for Sustainability and
Environmental Management” Certificate Program
http://sustainable-engineering.berkeley.edu/
Players, Networks in the U.S.

Universities
» Carnegie Mellon, Michigan, Arizona State, Texas, Washington



Research labs (e.g., Lawrence Berkeley National Lab)
The leaders are ICT companies
LEED as a green scoring system
Exciting Times in the U.S….

AB 32, Global Warming Solutions
Act, by 2020, return GHG
emissions to 1990 levels (and
boost annual GSP by $60B and
create 17,000 jobs)

UC Berkeley’s $500M Energy
Biosciences Institute (BP-funded)

U.S. considering GHG reduction
legislation and industrial action
The Economist, 4/29/04
Greening Building Practices in China

Tasks:
» Assess the current construction practices of commercial
buildings and high-rise residential buildings in China.
» Recommend environmentally less burdensome building
materials and processes.
– Short term: Focus on major materials (e.g., concrete, steel,
aluminum, flooring, with special focus on cement) and
processes (e.g., construction equipment, temporary materials).
– Later: evaluate the engineering, economic and environmental
feasibility of using waste materials and byproducts (such as fly
ash, demolition material, waste tires) in construction.
Indoor Air Quality in China

Task:
» Assess the effect of the indoor environments on building
occupants.
– What are the indoor air quality (IAQ) implications of using
common building (e.g., carpet and paint) and maintenance
materials (e.g., cleaners)?
– What are the IAQ implications from the introduction of pollution
from outdoor air? China has severely polluted urban air and
might consider IAQ control by means of filtering supply air in
addition to controlling indoor emission sources.
Opportunities to Use Innovations in
Practice


Need to get all the stakeholders networking and
integrating (clients want intergated, packaged services,
want to deal with one company)
Need to get problem focused
» problems are global




GHG and other environmental studies of U.S., Chinese,
Indian, etc. companies, industries, government entities
ICT industry: Data centers study, construction, operation
Biofuels
Lean and green
Connecting Green and Lean:
Project Production Systems Laboratory
Develop new project management theory based on understanding
of production systems (esp. Toyota Production System)
 Reform project management practice

Purposes
Design
Concepts
Design
Criteria
Project Definition
Product
Design
Process
Design
Lean Design
Fabrication
& Logistics
Detailed
Engineering
Lean Supply
Production Control
Work Structuring
http://p2sl.berkeley.edu
Learning
Loops
Commissioning
Installation
Lean Assembly
Alteration &
Decommissioning
Operations &
Maintenance
Use
Opportunities in Research and
Development


Location: U.S., Europe, China
Transformational, interdisciplinary research and
development
» Modeling of infrastructure
» Sustainability metrics
– E.g., green building scoring system for the EU
– LCA model for Finland, Nordic countries, EU



Data centers
Computer-based decision-support tools
Education
» Joint educational initiatives in, e.g., China
Opportunities for Industrial
Involvement

GHG developments in California, U.S., China, India

Scientific and management knowledge transfer, consulting
» service industries, and their supply chains have a tremendous
opportunity to present a unified product (e.g., Bechtel, Xerox, Kodak)
» ICT industries

Biofuels

Data centers

ICT products/services helping urban communities (e.g.,
telework, mobile work)

Green does not have to be synonimous with cheap

Green can bring competitive advantages
Industrial Ecology
“The (deliberate and rational) concept requires
that an industrial system be viewed not in isolation
from its surrounding systems, but in concert with
them.
 It is a systems view in which one seeks to
optimize the total materials cycle from virgin
material, to finished material, to component, to
product, to obsolete product, to ultimate disposal.
 Factors to be optimized include resources,
energy, and capital.” – Graedel and Allenby

Future Work

Continued adaptation of the latest environmental
science and management methods and results
» hybrid LCA






Need to assess indirect as well as direct environmental
effects, and reveal the supply chain implications
Takeback, recycling regulations
Revisit past research questions, and redo some
analyses
Quantify the benefits on society
Focus on impact assessment, not just on inventory
Embrace analysis of social effects
Future Plans

Campus research center in “Technology and Sustainability.”

Formalize “Technology and Sustainability” certificate program.

Accelerate research on green and lean project delivery.

Develop green modules for engineering courses.

Involve more faculty in teaching and research.
Buildings and the Environment



Buildings integral part of infrastructure systems (or “civil
systems”), and the boundaries between these terms are
fuzzy
The built environment has a large impact on the natural
environment, economy, health, and productivity
Buildings account for 17% of world’s fresh water
withdrawals, 25% of world’s wood harvest, and 40% of
world’s materials and energy flows
U.S. Buildings and the Environment

The construction industry accounts for ~8% of U.S. GDP
» Similar in industrialized countries, even bigger economic share in industrializing
countries
» U.S. construction industry larger than the GDP of 212 national economies
(CA’s: 150 economies)


54% of U.S. energy consumption is directly or indirectly related to
buildings and their construction
In the U.S., buildings account for
»
»
»
»
»
65% of electricity consumption
30% of GHG emissions
30% of raw material use
30% of waste output (136 M tons annually)
12% of potable water consumption
Composition of the U.S. GDP (2002)
U.S. Department of Commerce, www.census.gov
Economic sector
Percent of GDP
Cumulative Percent
Services
20.4
20.4
Finance, insurance, real
estate
Retail trade
19.4
39.8
8.8
48.6
6.9
55.5
12.7
68.2
Communications
2.6
70.8
Transportation
3.2
74.0
Construction
4.1
78.1
Electric, gas, sanitary
services
Manufacturing
2.6
80.7
17.0
97.7
Mining
1.5
99.2
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
1.6
~100
Wholesale trade
Government
The Economist, May 8, 2003
Cities of the Third Millennium
Sustainable
Livable
Engaging
Transit oriented
Wired
Renewable
ENR, March 12, 2001, Cover Story
Characteristics of Civil Systems

Products and processes

Manufacturing and service

Long service lifetimes

Slower obsolescence (?) compared to industrial products

Large, complicated, in the public eye

Considered “underfunded”, “in bad shape” (ASCE Report
Card 1998, 2001, 2005)

Decisions have significant economic, environmental and
social consequences
Current Issues - General
Visual and physical impacts of infrastructure
• Reduction of materials use
• End-of-life options: landfilling, reuse, recycling
• Environmental discharges (to air, water, land and
underground wells) in all phases of construction
• Hazardous and non-hazardous waste generation and
disposal
• Environmental efficiency of construction equipment
• Energy implications of construction
etc.
•
Current Issues - Specific
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Toxic chemical emissions
Conventional pollutant emissions
Greenhouse gas and ozone-depleting chemicals use
and emissions
Embedded energy in construction materials
Energy consumption by construction machines
Nonrenewable and renewable resource use
Reuse and recycling of construction materials
Solid and nonsolid waste implications
etc.
Existing Solutions
•Rating tools
•EIA
•LCA
How Much Material Do We Use?
•
•
•
A total of 2.8 billion metric tons of different materials
used in the U.S. in 1995 (USGS)
~3.5 billion metric tons in 2000
81% by volume were construction materials, mostly
stone, and sand and gravel
Use of Construction Mineral and Material
Commodities in the U.S. [ton]
dimension
stone
coal
combustion
products
iron and
steel slag
construction
sand and
gravel
cement
crushed
stone
1950
40,891,000
228,000,000
1,890,000
22,600,000
321,000,000
1960
55,526,000
557,000,000
2,250,000
26,100,000
628,000,000
1970
67,476,000
788,000,000
1,830,000
4,630,000 30,600,000
830,000,000
1980
70,173,000
893,000,000
1,830,000
11,300,000 22,900,000
692,000,000
1990
80,964,000 1,110,000,000
3,680,000
19,300,000 22,100,000
831,000,000
2000 110,470,000 1,569,000,000
5,850,000
28,600,000 17,500,000
1,120,000,000
Ewell ME (2001), Mining and quarrying trends. Minerals Yearbook, Vol I–Metals and Minerals. U.S. Geological Survey
Current Design Method
Current building design decisions are made
based on:
 Safety
 Functionality
 Cost
Environmental issues are often only addressed
qualitatively or simplistically (e.g., using
recycled-content flooring or lead-free paint)
Objectives of Horvath’s Research Group
Material and energy resource consumption
 Environmental impacts of onsite construction
processes
 Overall life-cycle impacts of construction
 Decision support tool for the building industry

Our Comprehensive Framework
Water
Design
Materials
Materials
Production
Air Emissions
Generic Impact
Category
Energy
Labor
Construction
Operation
Water Emissions
Generic Impact
Category
Equipment
Maintenance
Waste Emissions
Generic Impact
Category
Finance
End-of-life
Direct Impacts
Generic Impact
Category
Indirect Impacts
Scope and detail of our analysis
Detail
Scope
(Guggemos, 2003)
Design
Materials
Production
Construction
Operation
Maintenance
End-of-life
(Literature on Buildings)
Direct Impacts
Generic Impact
Legend: Exists Category
Missing
Generic Impact
Category
Generic Impact
Category
Generic Impact
Category
Indirect Impacts
Our Research
Environmental Emissions
Materials
Extraction &
Manufacturing
Building
Construction
Building Use
(EIO-LCA)
(CEDST)
(EIO-LCA)
Building
Maintenance
Building Endof-Life
(Process data) (Process data)
Energy and Resources Consumed
European – U.S. Office Building Comparison











Located in Southern Finland / Midwest U.S.
Typical 4-story / 5-story building; 4,400 m2 area;
17,300 m3 / 16,400 m3 volume
Structural frame:
» pre-fabricated concrete elements, sandwich-panels
» steel-reinforced concrete beam-column system, shear walls at core
Exterior envelope: brick veneer on concrete / aluminum curtain wall
Interior finishes: typical commercial office space
Construction materials: 1,190 kg/m2 / 1,290 kg/m2
Maintenance materials: 240 kg/m2 / 70 kg/m2
Heat: 36 kWh/m3/yr (~average) / Natural gas: 17.5 m3/m2/yr
Electricity: 70 kWh/m2/yr (30% below average) / 184+56 kWh/m2/yr
54 different building elements consisting of 23 different building materials
Service life: 50 years
EU Case Study
Results
Materials (Total)
Landscaping (gravel, etc.)
Concrete
Steel reinforcing
Steel, cast iron
Nonferrous metals
Masonry
Timber
Plastic, rubber, etc.
Building boards, paper
Insulation
Waterproofing
Glass
Finishing (flooring, glues, etc.)
Paints
Others
Construction (Total)
Materials in construction
Electricity
Heat
Machinery
Steam
Transp. of building materials
Use Phase (Total)
Electricity, others (e.g., outlets, HVAC)
Electricity, lighting
Heating
Maintenance (Total)
Landscaping (gravel, etc.)
Concrete
Steel reinforcing
Steel, cast iron
Nonferrous metals
Masonry
Timber
Plastic, rubber, etc.
Building boards, paper
Insulation
Waterproofing
Glass
Finishing (flooring, glues, etc.)
Paints
Constr.& transportation of materials
End-of-life (Total)
Equipment
Transportation of materials
TOTAL
Energy [GJ] CO2 [Mg]
SO2 [kg] NOx [kg] PM10 [kg]
15,000
1,300
2,300
4,000
2,100
2
0
0
1
0
4,200
450
280
1,600
760
1,000
47
64
110
35
3,900
440
530
540
440
1,300
82
340
310
190
230
25
82
87
NA
80
0
0
14
3
390
21
120
120
36
890
56
360
350
110
1,500
76
310
260
360
22
1
4
7
1
850
58
84
410
10
320
18
40
89
150
300
12
82
45
13
NA
2
NA
24
NA
4,800
200
500
1,800
400
1,300
45
220
310
75
1,700
46
87
100
140
320
22
29
41
66
1,200
92
110
1,100
140
NA
4
0
8
0
310
22
5
270
10
204,000
11,000
9,900
20,000
3,700
74,000
3,300
3,300
6,200
2,000
30,000
1,400
1,400
2,500
830
100,000
6,200
5,200
11,000
820
9,500
700
2,300
2,500
1,100
2
0
0
1
0
360
32
26
110
25
1
0
0
0
0
1,300
230
290
290
240
930
52
210
110
93
240
25
82
87
NA
76
0
0
14
3
160
8
52
50
14
890
56
360
350
110
1,000
60
260
190
290
22
1
4
7
1
850
58
84
410
10
320
18
40
89
150
3,000
120
820
450
130
350
29
23
338
31
800
60
50
700
90
510
37
45
430
80
300
22
4
270
5
234,100
13,260
15,050
29,000
7,390
U.S. Case Study
Results
Materials (Total)
Aluminum
Bitumen
Carpet
Ceramic tile
Concrete
Elevator
Mineral fiber board ceiling tile
Glass
Gypsum board
Insulation - Extruded polystyrene
Insulation - Fiberglass
Paint
Steel - Metal stairs
Steel - studs, doors, frames, grid
Steel - Reinforcement bar
Water heater
HVAC multizone units
Switchgear
Emergency generator
Copper - tubing and wire
Steel - piping, ductwork
Polypropylene - piping
Construction (Total)
Materials
Transportation
Equipment
Use Phase (Total)
Lighting
Electricity
Natural gas
Maintenance (Total)
Bitumen
Carpet
Elevator
Mineral fiber board ceiling tile
Gypsum board
Paint
Steel - studs, doors, frames, grid
Transportation
Equipment
End-of-life (Total)
Equipment
Transportation of materials
TOTAL
Energy [GJ] CO2 [Mg] SO2 [kg] NOx [kg] PM10 [kg]
31,100
2,000
9,300
8,000
2,700
79
4
63
25
7
69
4
15
19
5
1,303
80
308
295
136
1,122
79
130
224
39
3,084
213
1,308
1,593
309
502
32
140
118
23
942
65
324
257
107
3,432
236
647
1,196
185
892
62
104
148
63
90
5
18
18
3
3,118
216
631
705
827
99
6
20
25
6
856
54
239
161
43
2,302
146
642
432
115
3,916
248
1,092
736
196
12
1
3
3
1
1,842
120
579
543
109
67
4
21
18
3
50
3
15
13
3
1,083
76
1,298
303
204
6,218
394
1,734
1,168
311
1
0
0
0
0
5,500
400
800
8,300
700
1,005
64
224
420
166
253
19
9
114
26
4,199
293
526
7,787
552
297,600
22,200
82,700
48,500
3,400
46,567
4,487
25,137
12,862
886
106,628
10,274
57,560
29,451
2,030
144,375
7,401
37
6,167
469
21,600
1,300
5,200
5,000
2,100
137
8
30
37
11
15,637
955
3,693
3,535
1,633
502
32
140
118
23
1,885
129
648
513
214
621
43
73
103
44
989
58
199
249
56
1,620
103
452
304
81
116
9
4
52
12
47
3
6
89
6
3,300
200
400
5,800
400
3,065
212
378
5,717
406
188
14
7
85
19
359,100
26,100
98,400
75,600
9,300
Comparison of Contribution of Life-cycle Phases
Energy [10*TJ]
CO2 [Gg]
Materials
Cons truction
Finland
Us e Phas e
SO2 [Mg]
Maintenance
End-of-Life
NOx [Mg]
PM-10 [Mg]
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Energy [10*TJ]
CO2 [Gg]
Materials
U.S.
Construction
SO2 [Mg]
Use Phase
Maintenance
End-of-Life
NOx [Mg]
PM-10 [Mg]
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
DATA QUALITY ASSESSMENT
Finland
Data Quality*
Table
Acquisition Independence Representamethod
of data supplier
tiveness
Building materials
2
1
2
Construction
3
1
2
Use
2
2
1
Maintenance
2
1
1
End-of-life
2
1
2
*Maximum quality = 1
*Minimum quality = 5
Data Age
2
2
1
2
1
Geographical Technological
correlation
correlation
2
2
3
4
1
1
2
2
2
3
U.S.
Acquisition method
Independence of
data supplier
Representativeness
Data Age
Geographical
correlation
Technological
correlation
Building materials
1
1
2
2
2
2
Construction
3
1
2
3
2
3
Use
1
1
2
1
1
1
Maintenance
3
1
2
2
2
3
End-of-life
2
1
2
1
2
2
Data Quality* Table
U.S. Case Study Results
Use phase dominates all categories
except PM10
 Materials and maintenance phases each
have a proportion of 22% or more in a
single emission category
 Construction and end-of-life phases
have relatively insignificant impacts
overall

U.S. Case Study Data Quality
Data Quality* Table
Acquisition
method
Independence of
data supplier
Representativeness
Data Age
Geographical
correlation
Technological
correlation
Building materials
1
1
2
2
2
2
Construction
3
1
2
3
2
3
Use
1
1
2
1
1
1
Maintenance
3
1
2
2
2
3
End-of-life
2
1
2
1
2
2
*Maximum quality = 1
*Minimum quality = 5
U.S. Case Study Results
Energy [10*TJ]
CO2 [Gg]
Materials
Construction
SO2 [Mg]
Use Phase
Maintenance
End-of-Life
NOx [Mg]
PM-10 [Mg]
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Case Study:
Steel v. Concrete Frame Buildings







47,360 ft2, five-story building
located in Minnesota
50 year use phase
aluminum-framed, glass panel curtain wall
built-up roofing
interior finishes include painted partition walls,
acoustical drop ceilings, and carpet or ceramic tile
flooring
mechanical system provides both heating and cooling
Steel v. Concrete Frame: Construction Phase
(Frame Only) Energy Consumption
Comparison of Construction Phase Energy Impacts
300
250
200
Steel Frame
150
Concrete Frame
100
50
Other
Impacts
Equipment
Use
Transport
Equipment
Transport
Materials
0
Temporary
Materials
Energy [10*GJ]
350
Steel v. Concrete Frame Building: Whole
Building Life-cycle Energy Consumption
Comparison of Energy Impacts
Energy [10*TJ]
5
4
3
Building with
Steel Frame
2
1
Building with
Concrete Frame
0
Materials
Construction
End-of-Life
Life Cycle Phases
Mat'ls + Const.
+ EOL
Case Study: University of California, Santa Barbara Bren School of Environmental Science & Management
Source: Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership
UCSB Bren School

Completed April 2002 for $24 million

7,900 m2 administrative and laboratory space

Combination steel and concrete frame

U.S. Green Building Council LEED Platinum Rating

“Green” changes include recycled content materials,
increased HVAC efficiency, building orientation to
optimize use of natural lighting and ocean breezes
Bren School Life-cycle Assessment

50-year service life assumed

Used 90% construction document cost estimate with quantities
and installed costs
» material costs determined using R.S. Means guides

Estimated equipment types and duration of use with R.S. Means
guides

Transportation of materials and equipment estimated based on
material weight and truck capacity

Building use phase electricity and natural gas based on
mechanical engineer’s energy analysis

Maintenance based on typical material replacement ages
Bren School Life-cycle Assessment
Environmental Emissions
Materials
Extraction &
Manufacturing
Building
Construction
Building Use
Building
Maintenance
Building End-ofLife
Aggregate
Aluminum
Bitumen
Carpet
Ceramic Tile
Concrete
Cooling Tower
Copper
Elec. Equip.
Elevator
Emerg. Gen.
Insulation
Fireproofing
Glass
Gypsum
Lab Fixtures
Lights
Ceiling Tile
HVAC Unit
Paint
Pipe
Steel
Vinyl Tile
Wood
Formwork
Water
Oil
Roller
Crane
Tar Kettle
Truck
Mixer Truck
Pump
Vibrator
Air Compr.
Forklift
Backhoe
Loader
Vib. Plate
Grinder
Paint Sprayer
Power Saw
Rebar Bender
Rebar Cutter
Steel Punch
Steel Torch
Welder
Electricity
Natural Gas
Bitumen
Caulking
Gypsum
Metal Studs
Ceiling Grid
Insulation
Ceiling Tile
Doors
Paint
Carpet
Vinyl Tile
Elevator
Wheelchair Lift
Dump Truck
Loader
Crane
Energy and Resources Consumed
Proportions of Bren School Building LCA
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
End-of-Life
Maintenance
Use Phase
Construction
Materials
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Energy
CO
NOX
PM10
SO2
CO2
Bren School Emissions Analysis

Use phase dominates energy, CO2, SO2, and NOX emissions

Materials production dominates CO emissions

PM emissions are similar in the materials and use phases

Overall, construction is a small part of life-cycle environmental
impacts, but as use phase becomes more efficient, the
materials and construction phases are expected to increase in
significance

The end-of-life phase is also small, but more research, more
detailed assessment is needed

Maintenance phase emissions are similar in significance to the
construction phase
Bren School Emissions from Major Phases
Energy
CO
NOX
PM10
SO2
CO2
% of
Phase
% of
Phase
% of
Phase
% of
Phase
% of
Phase
% of
Phase
Materials Phase
Steel - structure, pipe
29%
35%
21%
21%
25%
28%
Concrete
15%
8%
29%
21%
19%
15%
Steel - sheet products
14%
17%
10%
10%
12%
13%
65%
60%
89%
62%
57%
66%
72%
64%
94%
94%
99.98%
83%
Elevator
31%
47%
31%
23%
38%
33%
Paint
19%
11%
20%
17%
16%
18%
Carpet
15%
7%
14%
25%
15%
15%
73%
56%
92%
78%
90%
71%
Construction Phase
Equipment
Building Use Phase
Electricity
Maintenance Phase
End-of-Life Phase
Equipment
Connecting Green and Lean:
Project Production Systems Laboratory
Develop new project management theory based on understanding
of production systems (esp. Toyota Production System)
 Reform project management practice

Purposes
Design
Concepts
Design
Criteria
Project Definition
Product
Design
Process
Design
Lean Design
Fabrication
& Logistics
Detailed
Engineering
Lean Supply
Production Control
Work Structuring
http://p2sl.berkeley.edu
Learning
Loops
Commissioning
Installation
Lean Assembly
Alteration &
Decommissioning
Operations &
Maintenance
Use
Conclusions





LCA necessary for better decision-making throughout
the life cycle of a building
Control electricity and natural gas use with efficient
design
Control materials and maintenance impacts by material
choices
LCA should permeate green building scoring systems
(e.g., LEED)
We are creating a decision-support tool for total
building LCA (BuiLCA)
Percentage of Waste Recycled in
the U.S., Late 1990s
100
80
60
40
20
0
Lead
Aluminum Cans
Plastic Bottles
Asphalt
Concrete Rebars
Copper
Steel
Paper
Annual Waste Stream of Different
Materials Recycled, Late 1990s
120,000,000 Metric
Tons
100,000,000
80,000,000
60,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
0
Asphalt
Concrete
Steel
Paper
Aluminum
Plastics
Lead
Copper
Asphalt Pavement Milling Machine
Milling Machine
Direct and Indirect Energy Use (electricity plus
fuels) by the Major Sectors of the U.S. Economy
direct
indirect
Energy Use per $M (1012 MJ)
120
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Manufacturing
Services
Utilities
Other
Rosenblum, J., Horvath, A., and Hendrickson, C. (2000), “Environmental Implications of Service Industries.”
Environmental Science & Technology, ACS, 34(22), November 15, pp. 4669-4676.
Direct and Indirect Generation of RCRA Hazardous
Wastes by the Major Sectors of the U.S. Economy
RCRA Hazardous Wastes Generated
(106 m etric tons)
direct
indirect
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
M anufacturing
Services
Utilities
Other
Rosenblum, J., Horvath, A., and Hendrickson, C. (2000), “Environmental Implications of Service Industries.”
Environmental Science & Technology, ACS, 34(22), November 15, pp. 4669-4676.
Characterizing ICT & Environment Research



One of the first three industries to lead design for environment and pollution prevention
research and practice (with automobiles and chemicals)
~12 years of publications
1st phase: “we want to be a clean industry”
» Efforts of a rapidly growing industry to establish environmental credibility
» Prominence of ICT industries grew parallel to prominence of environmental management
» Early adopter of industrial ecology, design for disassembly, green materials selection, life-cycle
assessment (LCA)
– But largely incomplete assessments (e.g., not all life cycle phases, inventory but no impact assessment)
» Mostly energy and toxic emissions related
» Initially focused on components, then trying to assess entire systems

2nd phase: more specific assessments, including the supply chain and recyclers
» Involving the supply chain, but also the waste management industry/recyclers
» Data collection for specific studies
» Supply-chain informed LCA

3rd phase: “we bring environmental benefits to society”
» Services and network analysis, not just manufacturing processes and products
– Internet, telework
» Servicizing products

Critical mass still missing in many areas