ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITY OF WOOD SUBSTITUTION IN COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS USING LIFE-CYCLE ANALYSIS.

Authors

  • Kristina Milaj
  • Arijit Sinha Oregon State University
  • Thomas H Miller Oregon State University
  • John A Tokarczyk Oregon Department of Forestry

Keywords:

Life-cycle analysis, Wood, Commercial Buildings, Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings, Global Warming Potential

Abstract

Wood is the predominant construction material in the US residential sector. In commercial and midrise construction, the use of wood is limited compared with reinforced concrete and steel. Wood, being a natural, renewable material that sequesters carbon, is a natural fit for newer construction with enhanced sustainability goals. The objective of this study is to evaluate and identify the environmental utility (avoided emissions) of using wood in place of steel and concrete in the commercial construction and renovation sectors in Oregon, United States. The study used comparative, cradle-to-grave, life-cycle analysis, with Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings. Six case studies that represent different building functionalities, material systems, and construction techniques were modeled via the user interface input option, and the results were evaluated for global warming potential (GWP) and impacts on energy sources, such as fossil fuel consumption, when structural materials are substituted using wood. Out of the six case studies, one building was completely redesigned as per current codes using wood as the major structural material. Bills of materials for both wood redesigns and the as-built designs were used as input in the software and subsequently analyzed. Results showed that the average reduction in GWP due to wood substitution was about 60% across the six case studies. These findings reinforce the perception of wood as a green building material having potential for commercial construction.

 

 

References

AF&PA (2005a) National design specification (NDS)

for wood construction. ANSI/AF&PA NDS-2005,

Washington, DC.

AF&PA (2005b) Special design provisions for wind and

seismic. ANSI/AF&PA NDS-2005, Washington, DC.

ASCE—American Society of Civil Engineers (2010)

ASCE/SEI 7-10 minimum design loads for buildings and

other structures. ASCE, New York, NY.

ASMI—Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (2014)

Athena impact estimator for buildings V 5.0.0105 software

and database overview. Athena, Toronto, Ontario.

ASMI—Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (2015)

Athena impact estimator for buildings. Version 5.1 Build

Hotfix. Athena, Toronto, Ontario.

Breyer DE, Fridley KJ, Cobeen KE, Pollock DG (2010)

Design of wood structures–ASD/LRFD. McGraw-Hill

Education, New York, NY.

Börjesson P, Gustavsson L (2000) Greenhouse gas balances

in building construction: Wood versus concrete

from life-cycle and forest land-use perspectives. Energy

Policy 28:575-588.

Bowyer JL (2008) The green movement and the forest

products industry. Forest Prod J 58(7/8):6-13.

Buchanan AH (2006) Can timber buildings help reduce

global CO2 emissions? Proc. World Conference on Timber

Engineering, Portland, OR, August 6-10, 2006.

Buchanan AH (2010) Energy and CO2 advantages of

wood for sustainable buildings. Proc. World Conference

on Timber Engineering, Riva-del-Garda, Italy, June 22-

, 2010.

Buyle M, Braet J, Audenaert A (2013) Life cycle assessment

in the construction sector: A review. Renew

Sustain Energy Rev 26:379-388.

Dezeen Daily (2015) Architects embrace “the beginning of

the timber age. http://www.dezeen.com/2015/11/09/

cross-laminated-timber-construction-architecture-timberage/

(15 January 2016).

Dixit MK, Fernández-Solís JL, Lavy S, Culp CH (2010)

Identification of parameters for embodied energy

measurement: A literature review. Energy Build 42(8):

-1247.

DOE—U.S. Department of Energy (2010) Building energy

data book. Washington, DC.

EPA—Environmental Protetion Agency (2017). Sources

of greenhouse gas emissions. https://www.epa.gov/

ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions.

CEN—European Committee for Standardization (2011)

EN 15978: Sustainability of construction works.

Assessment of environmental performance of buildings,

calculation method. Brussel, Belgium.

Gosselin A, Lehoux N, Cimon Y, Blanchet P (2015) Main

motivations and barriers for using wood as a structural

building material: A case study, 11th Congres International

de Genie Industriel—CIGI2015, Quebec,

Canada, August 26-28, 2015.

Gustavsson L, Sathre R (2006) Variability in energy and

carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building

materials. Build Environ 41:940-951.

ICC—International Code Council (2009) International

Building Code (IBC). Country Club Hills, IL.

ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management: Lifecycle

assessment: Principles and framework. International

Organization for Standardization (ISO),

Genève, Switzerland.

Li S, Altan H (2012) Environmental impact balance of

building structures and substitution effect of wood structure

in Taiwan. Int J Environ Protection 2(1):1-7.

Mallo MF, Espinoza O (2015) Awareness, perceptions and

willingness to adopt cross-laminated timber by the architecture community in the United States. J Clean Prod

:198-210.

McKinley DC, Ryan MG, Birdsey RA, Giardina CP,

Harmon ME, Heath LS, Houghton RA, Jackson RB,

Morrison JF, Murray BC, Pataki DE (2011) A synthesis

of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in

the United States. Ecol Appl 21(6):1902-1924.

Nässén J, Hedenus F, Karlsson S, Holmberg J (2012) Concrete

vs. wood in buildings: An energy system approach.

Build Environ 51:361-369.

Robertson AB, Lam FC, Cole RJ (2012) A comparative

cradle-to-gate life-cycle assessment of mid-rise office

building construction alternatives: Laminated timber or

reinforced concrete. Buildings 2(4):245-270.

Robichaud F, Kozak R, Richelieu A (2009) Wood use in

nonresidential construction: A case for communication

with architects. Forest Prod J 59(1/2):57.

Roos A, Woxblom L, McCluskey D (2010) The influence

of architects and structural engineers on timber in

construction: Perceptions and roles. Silva Fennica

(5):871-884.

Ryberg M, Vieira MD, Zgola M, Bare J, Rosenbaum RK

(2014) Updated US and Canadian normalization factors

for TRACI 2.1. Clean Technol Environ Policy

(2):329-339.

Sinha A, Gupta R, Kutnar A (2013) Sustainable development

and green buildings. Drv Ind 64(1):45-53.

(Wood Industry).

Taghavi S, Miranda E (2003) Response assessment of

nonstructural building elements. Pacific Earthquake

Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.

Wallhagen M, Glaumann M, Malmqvist T (2011) Basic

building life cycle calculations to decrease contribution

to climate change: Case study on an office building in

Sweden. Build Environ 46(10):1863-1871.

Downloads

Published

2017-06-23

Issue

Vol. 49 No. 3 (2017)

Section

Research Contributions

License

The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:

1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.

2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.

3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.