The use of proportion varies in life cycle assessment of buildings based on several factors such as the type of building being assessed, the scope of the assessment, the different stages of the building's life cycle, and the methodological frameworks used for conducting the assessment. Here are some examples of how proportion is used in the life cycle assessment of buildings:
1. Building type: The proportion of materials and energy used in the life cycle of residential buildings may differ from that of commercial buildings. For instance, residential buildings may consume more energy for heating and cooling while commercial buildings may use more energy for lighting and running equipment.
2. Scope of assessment: The extent of the assessment can vary from a cradle-to-gate approach, which only considers the environmental impacts arising from the extraction and production of materials, to a cradle-to-grave approach, which takes into account all environmental impacts resulting from the entire life cycle of the building, including demolition and disposal.
3. Life cycle stages: Proportions play a crucial role in identifying the environmental impacts of different life cycle stages, such as construction, operation, maintenance, and end-of-life. For instance, the construction phase of a building requires a higher proportion of materials and energy, while the maintenance phase requires fewer materials but more energy.
4. Methodology: The use of different LCA methodologies can also affect the use of proportion in the assessment. For instance, the input-output approach is based on the proportionality between the inputs and the outputs of an economy, while the process-based approach considers the specific processes and emissions associated with a particular building's life cycle.
In conclusion, the use of proportion in the life cycle assessment of buildings varies depending on several factors such as building type, scope of assessment, life cycle stages, and methodology.
Publication date: