Abstract
Purpose
This paper uses a dynamic life cycle assessment (DLCA) approach and illustrates the potential importance of the method using a simplified case study of an institutional building. Previous life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have consistently found that energy consumption in the use phase of a building is dominant in most environmental impact categories. Due to the long life span of buildings and potential for changes in usage patterns over time, a shift toward DLCA has been suggested.
Methods
We define DLCA as an approach to LCA which explicitly incorporates dynamic process modeling in the context of temporal and spatial variations in the surrounding industrial and environmental systems. A simplified mathematical model is used to incorporate dynamic information from the case study building, temporally explicit sources of life cycle inventory data and temporally explicit life cycle impact assessment characterization factors, where available. The DLCA model was evaluated for the historical and projected future environmental impacts of an existing institutional building, with additional scenario development for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of future impacts.
Results and discussion
Results showed that overall life cycle impacts varied greatly in some categories when compared to static LCA results, generated from the temporal perspective of either the building's initial construction or its recent renovation. From the initial construction perspective, impacts in categories related to criteria air pollutants were reduced by more than 50 % when compared to a static LCA, even though nonrenewable energy use increased by 15 %. Pollution controls were a major reason for these reductions. In the future scenario analysis, the baseline DLCA scenario showed a decrease in all impact categories compared with the static LCA. The outer bounds of the sensitivity analysis varied from slightly higher to strongly lower than the static results, indicating the general robustness of the decline across the scenarios.
Conclusions
These findings support the use of dynamic modeling in life cycle assessment to increase the relevance of results. In some cases, decision making related to building design and operations may be affected by considering the interaction of temporally explicit information in multiple steps of the LCA. The DLCA results suggest that in some cases, changes during a building's lifetime can influence the LCA results to a greater degree than the material and construction phases. Adapting LCA to a more dynamic approach may increase the usefulness of the method in assessing the performance of buildings and other complex systems in the built environment.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ACHD (2011) Air quality annual report for 2010 with 1990–2010 trends, 2011, Allegheny County Health Department, Air Quality Program: Pittsburgh, PA
Aktas CB, Bilec MM (2011) Impact of lifetime on US residential building LCA results. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.1007/s11367-011-0363-x
Bare J et al (2003) TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78
Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Environ Policy 13(5):687–696
DRA (Deeter and Richey Architects) (1965) Drawings for construction of School of Engineering Building, University of Pittsburgh. General State Authority of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Edge (Edge Studio Architects) (2007) Drawings for construction of Benedum Hall: upgrade and deferred maintenance for buildings and systems. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Edge (Edge Studio Architects) (2008) Drawings for construction of Benedum Hall: MSI Addition And Renovations. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Ekvall T, Weidema BP (2004) System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(3):161–171
Field F, Kirchain R, Clark J (2000) Life-cycle assessment and temporal distributions of emissions: developing a fleet-based analysis. J Ind Ecol 4(2):71–91
Frischknecht R, Rebitzer G (2005) The ecoinvent database system: a comprehensive web-based LCA database. J Clean Prod 13(13–14):1337–1343
Heijungs R, Suh S (2002) The computational structure of life cycle assessment. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Hellweg S, Frischknecht R (2004) Evaluation of long-term impacts in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assessment 9(5):339–340
Hellweg S, Hofstetter TB, Hungerbühler K (2003) Discounting and the environment: should current impacts be weighted differently than impacts harming future generations? Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(1):8–18
Hirsch JJaA (2010) The eQUEST Quick Energy Simulation Model, version 3.64
Huijbregts MAJ (1998) Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Part I: a general framework for the analysis of uncertainty and variability in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(5):273–280
Huijbregts MAJ, Norris G, Bretz R, Ciroth A, Maurice B, Von Bahr B, Weidema B, De Beaufort ASH (2001) Framework for modelling data uncertainty in life cycle inventories. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(3):127–132
Humbert S, Manneh R et al (2009) Assessing regional intake fractions in North America. Sci Total Environ 407(17):4812–4820
Junnila S, Horvath A, Guggemos AA (2006) Life-cycle assessment of office buildings in Europe and the United States. J Infrastruct Syst 12(1):10–17
Kendall A, Chang B, Sharpe B (2009) Accounting for time-dependent effects in biofuel life cycle greenhouse gas emissions calculations. Environ Sci Technol 43:7142–7147
Kendall A, Price L (2012) Incorporating time-corrected life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in vehicle regulations. Environ Sci Technol 46(5):2557–2563
Kendall A (2012) Time-adjusted global warming potentials for LCA and carbon footprints. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(18):1042–1049
Kofoworola OF, Gheewala SH (2008) Environmental life cycle assessment of a commercial office building in Thailand. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(6):498–511
Levasseur A, Lesage P, Margni M, Deschěnes L, Samson R (2010) Considering time in LCA: dynamic LCA and its application to global warming impact assessments. Environ Sci Technol 44(8):3169–3174
Levine SH, Gloria TP, Romanoff E (2007) A dynamic model for determining the temporal distribution of environmental burden. J Ind Ecol 11(4):39–49
Mutel CL, Hellweg S (2008) Regionalized life cycle assessment: computational methodology and application to inventory databases. Environ Sci Technol 43(15):5797–5803
Norris GA (2003) Impact characterization in the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts: methods for acidification, eutrophication, and ozone formation. J Ind Ecol 6(3–4):79–101
NREL (2010) U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database. http://www.nrel.gov/lci/. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
Pehnt M (2006) Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies. Renew Energ 31(1):55–71
Reap J, Bras B, Newcomb PJ, Carmichael C (2003) Improving life cycle assessment by including spatial, dynamic and place-based modeling. In, Chicago, IL, 2003. 2003 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, pp 77–83
Reap J, Roman F, Duncan S, Bras B (2008) A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment. Part 2: impact assessment and interpretation. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(5):374–388
Ries R (2003) Uncertainty in environmental assessment for the built environment. In: Molenaar KR, Chinowsky PS (eds) Honolulu, HI., 2003. Construction Research Congress, Winds of Change: Integration and Innovation in Construction, Proceedings of the Congress, pp 411–419
Scheuer C, Keoelian G, Reppe P (2003) Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build 35:1049–1064
Seppälä J, Posch M, Johansson M, Hettelingh JP (2006) Country-dependent characterisation factors for acidification and terrestrial eutrophication based on accumulated exceedance as an impact category indicator. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(6):403–416
Shah VP, Ries RJ (2009) A characterization model with spatial and temporal resolution for life cycle impact assessment of photochemical precursors in the United States. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(4):313–327
Stasinopoulos P, Compston P, Newell B, Jones HM (2011) A system dynamics approach in LCA to account for temporal effects—a consequential energy LCI of car body-in-whites. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(2):199–207
Struijs J, Van Dijk A, Slaper H, Van Wijnen HJ, Velders GJM, Chaplin G, Huijbregts MAJ (2010) Spatial- and time-explicit human damage modeling of ozone depleting substances in life cycle impact assessment. Environ Sci Technol 44(1):204–209
Udo de Haes HA, Heijungs R, Suh S, Huppes G (2004) Three strategies to overcome the limitations of life-cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 8(3):19–32
USDOE (2009) 2009 Buildings Energy Data Book. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/docs/DataBooks/2009_BEDB_Updated.pdf. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
USDOE (2010a) Annual Energy Outlook 2010, Main Reference Case Tables. http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2010).pdf. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
USDOE (2010b) Electric Power Annual 2009—State Data Tables. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/state/. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
USEPA (2009) National air pollutant emission trends, 1900–1998. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/index.html. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
USEPA (2010) Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990–2008. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html. Accessed 10 Jul 201
USEPA (2011a) Regulatory impact analysis of the proposed toxics rule: final Report. http://www.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/RIAs/ToxicsRuleRIA.pdf. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
USEPA (2011b) Technology transfer network: clearinghouse for inventories and emissions factors. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. Accessed 10 Jul 2011
Van Zelm R, Huijbregts MAJ, et al (2007) Time horizon dependent characterization factors for acidification in life-cycle assessment based on forest plant species occurrence in Europe. Environ Sci Technol 41(3):922–927
Weber C, Jaramillo P, Marriott J, Samaras C (2010) Life cycle assessment and grid electricity: what do we know and what can we know? Environ Sci Technol 44:1895–1901
Wu HJ, Yuan ZW, Zhang L, Bi J (2011) Life cycle energy consumption and CO2 emission of an office building in China. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(2):105–118
Young JE, Sachs A (1994) Worldwatch paper #121: the next efficiency revolution: creating a sustainable materials economy. Worldwatch Institute, Washington
Zhai P, Williams ED (2010) Dynamic hybrid life cycle assessment of energy and carbon of multicrystalline silicon photovoltaic systems. Environ Sci Technol 44(20):7950–7955
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under EFRI-SEED Grant #1038139 and the Mascaro Center for Sustainable Innovation at the University of Pittsburgh and by EPA STAR Graduate Fellowship FP917321.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Holger Wallbaum
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(PDF 1656 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Collinge, W.O., Landis, A.E., Jones, A.K. et al. Dynamic life cycle assessment: framework and application to an institutional building. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18, 538–552 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0528-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0528-2