A multi-life cycle assessment of external wall insulation strategies in an Irish domestic retrofit

Sara Carrigan, Patrick Daly and Alberta Congeduti
Additional contact information
Sara Carrigan: School of Architecture Building & Environment, Ireland
Patrick Daly: School of Architecture, Ireland
Alberta Congeduti: School of Architecture Building & Environment, Ireland

Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, 2024, vol. 13, issue 2, 133-156

Abstract: European Union (EU) policy and initiatives are driving both building renovation and the uptake of low-embodied carbon and circular design in the construction sector. The European Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) recast (2021) introduces global warming potential (GWP) methodology, and the future state will likely be embodied carbon targets for which life cycle assessment (LCA) of buildings will be required. External wall insulation (EWI) will have an important role to play in meeting targets. In this context, this paper compares the carbon emission payoff of three alternative EWI strategies that address conventional, low-carbon and circular solutions to EWI respectively, in the retrofit of an existing dwelling. The circular strategy is based on design for disassembly (DfD). Whereas standard LCA is based on a single building life cycle, the literature reviewed shows that the environmental impact assessment of DfD requires a multi-life cycle approach. In the absence of standardised methods for assessment, four multi-cycle LCA methods are selected and applied holistically in a case study investigation. Three allocation methods, 100:0, linear degressive (LD) and enhanced linear degressive (CELD), provide a range of emissions from ‘conservative’ to ‘best case’ over three building life cycles and the fourth method, the Van Gulck method, assesses the benefits of circularity through the concept of ‘multi-cycling’ based on one building life cycle. As each method of assessment will deliver different results, carbon emission payoff is not a fixed value. Findings show that with multiple use, the circular strategy pays off due to avoided production emissions and benefits from end-of-life (EoL) processes that DfD facilitates, that the upfront carbon cost of the circular strategy is minor relative to the carbon emission savings that reuse brings, and that the margin of improvement relative to the alternative strategies increases with each subsequent reuse.

Keywords: EPBD; LCA; multi-cycle LCA; circular economy; circularity; design for disassembly (DfD); embodied carbon; external wall insulation (EWI) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: R3 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://hstalks.com/article/8674/download/ (application/pdf)
https://hstalks.com/article/8674/ (text/html)
Requires a paid subscription for full access.

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:aza:jbsav0:y:2024:v:13:i:2:p:133-156

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation from Henry Stewart Publications
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Henry Stewart Talks ().