Life Cycle Analysis of a Game-Based Solution for Domestic Energy Saving

Marta Gangolells, Miquel Casals, Núria Forcada and Marcel Macarulla
Additional contact information
Marta Gangolells: Group of Construction Research and Innovation (GRIC), Department of Project and Construction Engineering, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 08222 Terrassa (Barcelona), Spain
Miquel Casals: Group of Construction Research and Innovation (GRIC), Department of Project and Construction Engineering, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 08222 Terrassa (Barcelona), Spain
Núria Forcada: Group of Construction Research and Innovation (GRIC), Department of Project and Construction Engineering, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 08222 Terrassa (Barcelona), Spain
Marcel Macarulla: Group of Construction Research and Innovation (GRIC), Department of Project and Construction Engineering, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, 08222 Terrassa (Barcelona), Spain

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 17, 1-18

Abstract: ICT-based solutions are seen to be almost totally environmentally friendly, but game-based solutions for energy saving have not been explored yet. This paper describes a comprehensive analysis and an in-depth interpretation of the life cycle environmental impact of a game-based solution for domestic energy saving, developed and validated within the EU-funded Horizon 2020 project EnerGAware—Energy Game for Awareness of energy efficiency in social housing communities. Life cycle impacts were calculated with SimaPRO 8.5.2.0 using the ReCiPe 2016 v1.02 midpoint and endpoint methods and information contained within the Ecoinvent v3.4 database. Although the pre-competitive solution, directly arising from the research project, was found to have a relatively high environmental impact, its future exploitation, which mostly relies on existing infrastructure, was found to be highly competitive from an environmental perspective. The game will help reduce the life cycle impact of domestic energy consumption on damage to human health (3.68%), ecosystem quality (3.87%), and resource availability (4.81%). Most of the environmental impact of the market solution was found in the manufacturing phase (77.96–80.12%). Transport (8.86–7.57%), use (3.86–5.82%), and maintenance (7.24–7.54%) phases were found to contribute little to environmental impact. This research provides a useful reference for decision-making as it contributes to the environmental benchmarking of competing energy-saving strategies.

Keywords: serious game; environmental impacts; life cycle assessment; social housing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/6699/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/6699/ (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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:17:p:6699-:d:400815

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

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