Life Cycle Assessment of Dynamic Water Flow Glazing Envelopes: A Case Study with Real Test Facilities

Belen Moreno Santamaria, Fernando del Ama Gonzalo, Matthew Griffin, Benito Lauret Aguirregabiria and Juan A. Hernandez Ramos
Additional contact information
Belen Moreno Santamaria: Department of Construction and Architectural Technology, Technical School of Architecture of Madrid, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Av. Juan de Herrera 4, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Fernando del Ama Gonzalo: Keene State College, 229 Main St, Keene, NH 03435, USA
Matthew Griffin: Keene State College, 229 Main St, Keene, NH 03435, USA
Benito Lauret Aguirregabiria: Department of Construction and Architectural Technology, Technical School of Architecture of Madrid, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Av. Juan de Herrera 4, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Juan A. Hernandez Ramos: Escuela Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Aeronautical and Space Engineering, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Plaza Cardenal Cisneros 3, 28040 Madrid, Spain

Energies, 2021, vol. 14, issue 8, 1-17

Abstract: High initial costs hinder innovative technologies for building envelopes. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) should consider energy savings to show relevant economic benefits and potential to reduce energy consumption and CO 2 emissions. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and Life Cycle Energy (LCE) should focus on investment, operation, maintenance, dismantling, disposal, and/or recycling for the building. This study compares the LCC and LCE analysis of Water Flow Glazing (WFG) envelopes with traditional double and triple glazing facades. The assessment considers initial, operational, and disposal costs and energy consumption as well as different energy systems for heating and cooling. Real prototypes have been built in two different locations to record real-world data of yearly operational energy. WFG systems consistently showed a higher initial investment than traditional glazing. The final Life Cycle Cost analysis demonstrates that WFG systems are better over the operation phase only when it is compared with a traditional double-glazing. However, a Life Cycle Energy assessment over 50 years concluded that energy savings between 36% and 66% and CO 2 emissions reduction between 30% and 70% could be achieved.

Keywords: water flow glazing; dynamic building envelope; life cycle assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/8/2195/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/8/2195/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:8:p:2195-:d:536150

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().