Potential carbon emission reductions in australian construction systems through bioclimatic principles

Accepted Manuscript Title: Potential carbon emission reductions in australian construction systems through bioclimatic principles Author: Sattar Sattary David Thorpe PII: DOI: Reference:

S2210-6707(16)30037-3 http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.scs.2016.03.006 SCS 387

To appear in: Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

10-8-2015 9-3-2016 10-3-2016

Please cite this article as: Sattary, Sattar., & Thorpe, David., Potential carbon emission reductions in australian construction systems through bioclimatic principles.Sustainable Cities and Society http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.03.006 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

POTENTIAL CARBON EMISSION REDUCTIONS IN AUSTRALIAN CONSTRUCTION SYSTEMS THROUGH BIOCLIMATIC PRINCIPLES Sattar Sattary* [email protected], David Thorpe [email protected] Faculty of Engineering, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, Brisbane 4300, Australia *

Corresponding author.

1

ABSTRACT The building sector responsible for 40 per cent of energy use (UNEP SBCI 2010); by 2030, a total of 60 Mt of carbon-reduction opportunities can be found in the Australian building sector (McKinsey 2008). Reduction in the carbon emissions from Australian buildings is thus a priority for the Federal government. In Australia the government recently announced plan to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent by 2030 (Politics 2015). This study concerns energy use in building construction and the degree of carbon emissions reduction that can be achieved through use of bioclimatic principles. Criteria of the model proposed in this research have been developed through analyzing bioclimatic principles to measure the potential construction carbon emissions that can be reduced in pre-construction and construction (cradle to site) stages during the lifecycle stages of a building. The developed model examines six case studies from Australia and the UK. The outcomes of this research clearly shows that by use of bioclimatic principles up to 65 per cent reduction in construction carbon emissions can be achieved for a whole building systems (floor, wall and roof), while current best construction practice (i.e. a graded by Green Star) at the highest level achieve less than 32 per cent reduction. However the future of the green construction industry lies on taking into account the bioclimatic principlessuch as replacing conventional building materials with more energy efficient materials (i.e. replacing Portland cement with geopolymer based cement); reusing the recycled construction materials; reducing transportation and other similar initiatives. Geopolymer

Keywords: Construction Carbon Emission; Sustainable Construction Processes; Emission Reduction; Embodied Energy; Construction Materials; Australian Construction Systems; BIM

2

INTRODUCTION Climate change and global warming are recognized as major concerns of sustainable development. Based on a UN report, the building sector is responsible for 40 per cent of energy use (UNEP SBCI 2010), and produces 25 per cent of solid waste. The building sector also generates more than one third of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and is the largest emission source in most countries of the world. The UN believes we need to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50 per cent within the next forty years (UNEP SBCI 2009). The Australian building sector is reported to be one of the largest contributors to Australian greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (building sector is responsible for 40 per cent of energy use (IPCC 2007)); it is estimated a total of 60 Mt of carbon-reduction opportunities can be found in the Australian building sector by 2030 (McKinsey 2008), and thus has the largest potential for significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as compared to other major emitting sectors. Reduction in the carbon emissions from Australian buildings is consequently a priority both for the federal government and also for the Green Building Council of (Green building Council of Australia 2008). The Australian government has thus announced plans to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent by 2030 (Politics 2015). This study concerns the degree of carbon emissions reduction due to building construction that can be achieved through use of bioclimatic principles. It is proposed that the use of bioclimatic principles can reduce construction carbon emissions (energy consumption) by five to six times (Treloar 1998). The UK government has already undertaken steps towards reducing the GHG emissions of buildings by commissioning studies from four leading university groups with interests in reducing embodied energy and carbon emission in the UK building sector (Allwood, Cullen et al. 2012, UK Indemand 2014). It is hoped to eventually achieve 80 per cent reduction in construction carbon emissions in the UK by 2050. As the Australian building sector represents the greatest contributor to Australian greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, reducing construction emissions in this sector is of great importance to the Australian government and building designers. Thus, the future of the green construction industry lies on taking into account bioclimatic principles- such as replacing conventional building materials with more energy efficient materials (e.g. replacing Portland cement with geopolymer based cement); reusing recycled construction materials; reducing transportation and other similar initiatives.

3

CARBON EMISSIONS (EMBODIED ENERGY) OF BUILDING Construction, renovation and maintenance of buildings are significant economic activities contributing to between 10 and 40 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of many counties. The environmental footprint of the building sector includes 40 per cent of energy use, 30 per cent of raw materials use, and 25 per cent of solid waste. The building sector is also responsible for more than one third of global GHG emissions, and in most countries is the largest emissions source. Furthermore, significant energy is used in transporting occupants, goods and services to and from the building (UNEP SBCI 2010). An IPCC report concluded that the building sector has the largest potential for reducing GHG emissions (IPCC 2007). The energy consumption in both new and existing buildings can be cut by an estimated 30-50 per cent without significantly increasing investment costs (Nuttall 2015). Australia generates about 1.5 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions; and on a per capita basis is one of the world's largest polluters (Carbon Neutral 2014). In fact, the energy used by buildings in Australia contributes approximately 20 per cent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions (Australian Government 2014), and the Australian building sector is reported to have one of the largest impacts on such emissions (Hyde 2012). Energy reduction in the Australian building sector is thus a priority both for the federal government and also the city councils of Australia (Green Building Council of Australia 2010, City of Melbourne 2014). This Australian study identifies methods that can assist in this goal, and could also be used as a pilot for other countries, thus increasing the potential to reduce GHGs beyond just the Australian context.

BIOCLIMATIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES The twin Olgyay brothers from Hungary defined bioclimatic principles as the principles that bring together the disciplines of human physiology, climatology and building physics (Olgyay and Olgyay 1963). Victor Olgyay (1910–1970) is best known today as the author of “Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism” (1963) – a book often referenced in the environmental building design field. As leaders in research in bioclimatic architecture from the early 1950s to the late 1960s, the Olgyay brothers can be considered the fathers of contemporary environmental building design (Leather and Wesley 2014). Pereira (2012) believes that building design should be inspired by nature, and aim to minimize environmental impact (Pereira 2012). This goal can be achieved through use of bioclimatic principles which can be used to identify criteria to measure potential reduction in carbon emissions generated by building construction. There

4

are two main aims in bioclimatic construction – first, to ensure that the constructed building is able to function satisfactorily within current and future climatic conditions; and, second, that the environmental impact of existing buildings is reduced through reduction in their energy use and GHG emissions. Use of these principles has been integrated into building design in the context of regionalism in architecture, and in recent years has been seen as a cornerstone for achieving more sustainable buildings (Hyde and Yeang 2009). Research has found that appropriate bioclimatic design can reduce energy consumption in a building as compared with conventional building design (Jong and Rigdon 1998). The following is a summary of the bioclimatic principles that have been used in the model proposed in this paper. They focus on reduction and smarter use of sustainable materials to minimize carbon equivalent emissions.

 Minimize energy consumption in mining, processing, equipment, pre-assembly and assembly in manufacturing. Criteria measured are reduced energy in mining, processing, and construction materials.

 Minimize transportation at all stages of the building process. Criteria measured are reduced energy as a result of preassembling; and materials transportation.

 Minimize use of resources, achieving waste reduction by facilitating reuse and recycling. Criteria measured are reduced energy by recycling and reusing of building materials and building elements.

 Maximize use of renewable energy. Criteria measured are replaced and saved energy in mining and construction (preassembling, professional worker transportation, site process, materials transportation). There are numerous parameters for measuring the GHG emission reduction through using bioclimatic principles but the measurable indicators that have been considered in this study are detailed for various conditions in the (Table 1).

POTENTIAL FOR CONSTRUCTION EMISSION REDUCTION The scale of emission reduction in building construction is significant. The building sector and transportation have the largest potential for delivering long-term, significant and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (UNEP SBCI 2009). The Indemand research center believes that the construction emissions of commercial buildings in the United Kingdom can be cut by 80 per cent by 2050, the target set by the 2008 Climate Change Act (UK Indemand 2014). A report by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development notes that an investment of US$150 billion annually would cut the carbon footprint of buildings

5

by 40 per cent (WBCSD 2014). With proven and commercially available technologies, the energy consumption in both new and existing buildings can be cut by an estimated 30 to 80 per cent during the building life-span.

RESEARCH RATIONALE 1. The building sector has significant potential for delivering long-term, significant and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. This potential is common to developed and developing countries (UNEP SBCI 2009). The goal is to reduce the total quantity of greenhouse gases getting into the atmosphere as quickly as possible, so reducing carbon emission (embodied energy) of building materials has an important role. 2. Until recently, it was generally considered that the carbon emission from building construction was small relative to that from operations over the building’s lifetime. Accordingly, reducing the energy and carbon footprint of the building sector has focused mostly on reducing operating energy by improving the energy efficiency of the building envelope. However, carbon emission from construction processes can be equivalent to as much as 37 years of operational carbon (Ecospecifier 2015), (Canadian Architects 2015). 3. There are some recent successful achievements in this field of reduced emissions including the London Olympic Buildings in 2012 (RTCC 2012 ); reconstruction following Hurricane Sandy in the USA (Inhabitat, 2014); and the LEED attention and certification for reusing construction materials in the USA (LEED 2014). In these cases, considerable and substantial reduction in carbon emission was achieved through use of bioclimatic principles during building construction processes. Additionally, the UK government has funded a core team of sixteen postdoctoral researchers within the four universities of the UK Indemand centre. They are examining all aspects of implementing material efficiency in the UK and have also recently announced that the construction embodied emissions of buildings in the UK can be cut by 80 per cent within the next three decades (UK Indemand 2014). 4. Construction waste constitutes about 40 per cent of the total solid waste in the USA (Green Vally 2013); and Australians produce more than one-and-a-half tonnes of waste per person per year, with 40 per cent of Australia's waste resulting from construction and demolition activities (Hawkesbury City Council 2014). Reuse and recycling of construction materials is now a generally accepted practice (LEED, BREEAM, and Green Star), legislated for, and being used is environmental assessment processes. They grant considerable credits for using, reusing, recycling, upcycling, waste management, and using regional materials. (Cascione, Williams et al. 2010).

6

METHODOLOGY The Australian building sector has the largest potential for reducing GHG emissions (UNEP SBCI 2010), and is recognized as one of the main targets for sustainable construction and development. Key areas in reducing these carbon emissions are in material production, implementation and transportation. This research aims to identify the potential construction carbon emissions that can be reduced in the preconstruction and construction lifecycle stages of a building. There are established techniques (appendix 1) to reduce embodied energy and generated carbon emissions during construction of buildings. Use of these principles has been integrated into building design in the context of regionalism in architecture, and in recent years has been seen as a cornerstone for achieving more sustainable buildings (Hyde and Yeang 2009). The criteria of the model that has been developed through analyzing the bioclimatic principles to measure the potential carbon emission that have been selected with the aim of reducing GHG emissions in the preconstruction and construction (cradle to site) of lifecycle stages of building. The developed model focuses on three main areas that can measure potential carbon reduction: firstly, carbon emission from energy consumed in extraction and production of building materials and elements; secondly, in implementation; and finally in transportation. The study focuses on pre-construction (stage one- extraction and material production, stages two- pre assembling); and during construction (stage three) of the lifecycle stages, the calculation of the study has been undertaken based on the developed model. However, the next stage of the study is planned to include two other stages as well (operation and demolition) that are planned to be done through the BIM which will include whole lifecycle stages of the building. At this stage, the research model and the calculations have been applied only to the major building elements (floor, wall and roof) of the current Australian construction systems which have been identified by Lawson (Lawson 1996).

RESEACH OBJECTIVES Considering bioclimatic principles (e.g. reusing recycled materials; replacing Portland cement with geopolymer based cement, reducing transportation of materials and resources), the following measurable criteria have been applied to the construction systems in the six case studies from Australia and UK:

7

 Reusing recycled aggregates in materials production instead of extracting new aggregate from mining: this includes replacing concrete with 100 per cent recycled aggregate (Uche 2008); and brick with 67 per cent recycled aggregate (Brick Development Association 2014), (Tyrell and Goode 2014).  Using steel from recycled content instead of steel from raw mining: this includes use of steel mesh, edge beams, and steel sheets, aiming towards100 per cent replacement from recycled content (Greenspec 2015), (SteelConstruction.info 2014).  Reusing the recycled construction materials and elements: this includes reusing, post-consumer recycled timber or certified timber by Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) (Design Coalition, 2013) use of insulation from recycled materials (Greenspec 2015); use of concrete tiles from recycled roof tiles (LEED 2014); and reuse of structural elements (Karven 2012).  Replacing Portland cement with geopolymer based concrete: this includes 100% replacement of recycled Portland cement with cement substitute (Nath and Sarker 2014), (McLellan, Williams et al. 2011).  Use types of transportation that generate less carbon emissions, namely use of ship and rail instead of trucks (Learning Legacy 2012).  Reducing transportation by reusing, reusing recycled aggregate, localizing and similar approaches. All the methods and techniques above to reduce construction carbon emissions are known and available, but are not being consistently and properly used and applied in existing construction practices. This research proposes that if these practices were adopted, this would result in substantial reduction of construction carbon emissions. These reductions can be achieved through consideration of bioclimatic principles using the identified criteria in table 1; by legislation granting credits for use of environmental assessment tools (LEED, BREEAM, Green Star) to enable reuse in structural elements; by expanding and creating a “warehouse of parts” and “reuse markets”; and by expanding deconstruction techniques, machinery and facilities (Bales 2008), (SteelConstruction.info 2014). MODEL In this research, the embodied energy of building materials (MJ/kg) is the basis for calculation at the first stage, and then where needed these amounts are converted to tCO2 or kgCO2. Embodied energy units are MJ/kg which represents the mega joules of energy needed to make a kilogram of product; and tCO2 or kgCO2 which represent the tonnes or kilograms of carbon dioxide created by the energy needed to make a kilogram of product. Converting embodied energy (MJ/kg) to carbon emissions (kgCO2) is not straightforward because different

8

types of energy (oil, wind, solar, nuclear and so on) emit different amounts of carbon dioxide. Thus the actual amount of carbon dioxide emitted when a product is made will depend on the type of energy used in the manufacturing process. The Australian Government gives a global average of 0.098 tonnes CO2 = 1 GJ. This is the same as 1 MJ = 0.098 kgCO2 = 98 gCO2 or 1 kgCO2 = 10.204 MJ which is used in this study (CSIRO 2014). By using well-known and established environmentally-friendly projects such as in the case studies, a model has been developed to calculate and measure the potential carbon emissions from the embodied energy of building materials. In determining the measurement criteria, the model takes into account the reduced and saved energy in construction processes to calculate potential carbon emission reduction. The model can thus assist in measurement of possible reduction in carbon emissions during both the pre-construction and construction stages. The model developed can apply to any case study with any classification in any location in Australia, it can applies just to the construction systems of main elements of the case study, location and construction materials suppliers’ location relevant to the location of the case study.

CASE STUDIES FOR THE RESEARCH The model developed reviews six case studies from Australia and the United Kingdom (Table 2) case studies and their construction systems represent the general construction systems used in Australia as identified by Lawson (Lawson 1996). These can include any project from any classification (residential, public, and commercial). For example, the first three case studies are taken from a paper written by Dr. Bill Lawson – all detail and information for these are provided, together with embodied energy and implemented embodied energy (Lawson 1996).The fourth and sixth case studies focus on buildings recently completed on the Springfield campus of the University of Southern Queensland (USQ) – all drawings and detailed information were accessible. The Olympic Velodrome Building from the London Olympics in 2012 is the focus of the fifth case study – these Olympics achieved high sustainability levels from a range of different environmental tools (e.g. CEEQUAL, ISCA, and BREEAM). In case study 5 the bioclimatic principles were implemented and detailed information data are achievable (Rodway 2010), (ICE 2012), (RTCC 2012) (Table 2). More detail about these case studies is provided in Appendix 2.

OUTCOMES OF THE RESEARCH

9

The research model developed has been applied to the basic building elements (floor, wall and roof) of the six case studies, and outcomes are presented in four groups – for the floors, walls, roofs, and whole construction systems. The individual results for floors, walls and roofs are presented in Appendix 3; only the final outcomes for the whole construction system of each case study are presented in the body of this paper. The final outcomes from this study are two summary tables (Tables 3 and 4), and two bar graphs (Figures 1 and 2). The numbers were obtained by collating the data in the tables 29 -34 in Appendix 2.

Sources: The data for the ‘Implementation’, ‘Green tools’ and ‘Research Model’ columns are obtained from Tables 1, 3 and 5 in Appendix 3 – with this data being expressed in numerical forms (as compared to the Standard/Basic carbon emissions data calculated from Tables 1, 3 and 5 in Appendix 3). Standard/Basic: Based on bioclimatic conditions identified in Table 1, embodied energies of the building materials and Australian construction systems (floors, Walls and roofs) have been calculated based on Lawson’s book “Building materials, energy and the environment: Towards ecologically sustainable development”(Lawson 1996). They are converted to carbon emissions based on Australian government’s global average of 1 MJ = 0.098 kgCO2 (CSIRO 2014). Implemented: Based on bioclimatic conditions identified in Table 1, the implemented embodied energies of case studied 1, 2 and 3 are calculated based on Lawson’s study data; the implemented embodied energies for case study 5 are calculated based on achieved data from (News Steel Construction 2010), (WMW 2014), (INGENIA 2012), (ICE 2012), (Standard 2015), (UK Indemand 2014). They are converted to carbon emissions based on the Australian government’s global average of 1 MJ = 0.098 kgCO2 (CSIRO 2014). For more detail see Appendix 3. Green Tool: Based on bioclimatic conditions identified in Table 1, the potential construction carbon emission reductions through credits from green tools were calculated the using green tools technical manual (Green building Council of Australia, 2008). Research Model: Based on bioclimatic conditions identified in table 1; the construction carbon emission reductions were calculated and compared with Standard/Basic construction carbon emissions.

The outcomes achieved from applying the research model indicate that carbon emissions (embodied energy) can be considerably reduced in the different construction systems of the case studies. The data indicates that carbon emissions from the whole construction systems (floor, wall and roof) of the six case studies have approximate potential reduction figures of between 50 and 65 per cent if bioclimatic principles are followed; and between 17 and 32 per cent through use of green tools (Table 4), the highest potential figure being for the London Olympic Velodrome building. Sources: Data of ‘potential construction carbon emission reductions’ through ‘Implementation’, ‘Green tool ‘and from the ‘Research Model’ are obtained from Table 3.

Up to 65 per cent reduction of construction carbon emissions can be achieved (Table 4).

10

As judged from analysing the data presented in Tables 3 and 4, and Figures 1 and 2, three observations can be made. First, when compared with the potential Standard/basic carbon emissions, there are generally considerable reductions in carbon emission that can be achieved as Implemented through standard building practice (except for the Display Project Home as implemented in practice at – 22.6 per cent; and no data is available for cases studies 4 (Multi Sports Building) and 6; ( Multi Sports Building,). Highest reduction was achieved in construction of the 2012 Olympics Velodrome building at 65.8 per cent (case study 5) – this presumably reflects the focus on minimisation of excess material usage in construction of the Velodrome. Interestingly, the Friendly Beaches Lodge (case study 1) also shows a significant carbon reduction of 56.7 per cent over what might have been expected. Second, applying Green tools to the construction process again shows significant reductions across all buildings considered in the case studies, with the highest at 31.9 per cent, again for the Olympic Velodrome (case study 5). Finally applying the research model (using bioclimatic principles), the potential carbon emission reduction for the Friendly Beaches Lodge (case study 1) as Implemented (constructed) is higher than the research model (56.7 per cent compared to 49.8 per cent). Additionally, the figures for the Olympic Velodrome (case study 5) are about equal for the Implemented and Research model (65.8 per cent and 64.9 per cent). In general, however, the research model clearly shows the greatest potential for reduction in construction carbon emissions across the six case studies as compared to standard construction carbon emissions – the lowest being 48.3 per cent for the ACF Green Home (case study 2), and the highest for the Olympic Velodrome at 64.9 per cent. In fact, reductions in construction carbon emission could be approximately doubled as compared with the green tools current best practice.

DISCUSSION BARRIERS, RISKS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH Consideration of bioclimatic principles in the construction industry must be of high priority in order to reduce construction carbon emissions due to the building construction process. Research needs to be funded and commenced towards how these principles can best be implemented – as has been done in the UK (Allwood, Cullen et al. 2012, UK Indemand 2014) and Germany (Federation of Engineering Organization 2011). Criteria could be established that grant credits for use of environmental assessment tools. ASTM has also recommended that the construction industry should use standard geopolymer based cements (Van, San et al. 2015).

11

Reusing and recycling materials also needs to be facilitated and mandated through legislation. There needs to be creation and expansion of a “warehouse of parts”, “reuse markets”, and construction guidelines; and also expansion of deconstruction techniques, machinery and facilities (Bales 2008); (SteelConstruction.info 2014). Appropriate legislation could mandate replacing Portland cement with geopolymer based cement; improve reuse of recycled construction materials; and reduce transportation and construction impacts. The proposed research model has been applied in this study only to the main elements of the building (floors, walls and roofs); and the model additionally takes into consideration the location of the construction suppliers relative to the location of each case study (for assessment of the impact of materials transportation). In the next stage through use of Building Information Modelling (BIM), all building elements (such as stairs, windows, etc.) will be included. It will then be possible for the research model to be applied to any case study with any classification in any location in Australia. The “Process Energy Requirement” (PER) method for calculating embodied energy is the basis for this study, and was also used for calculation of the embodied energy of Australian construction systems. Another type of calculation for embodied energy uses the “Input–Output” method – this is based on the sum of all energy inputs into a product system through all stages of the life cycle (Lawson 2006). Calculation using the Input–Output method energy requirement method produces figures for embodied energy that are two to three times higher than those figures from using the PER method. Such discrepancies could be solved through use of BIM software. Typical embodied energy units are measured using MJ/kg (megajoules of energy needed to make a kilogram of product), and these have to be converted to equivalent kilogram carbon emissions. However, as noted earlier, such conversion is not straightforward because different types of energy (oil, wind, solar, etc.) emit different amounts of carbon dioxide – thus the actual amount of carbon dioxide emitted when a product is made will depend on the type of energy used in the manufacturing process. To facilitate this conversion, the Australian Government equation (1 MJ = 0.098 kgCO2) has been used to convert embodied energy to equivalent carbon emissions. One outcome from this study is to propose geopolymer based cement (GC) as a replacement for Portland Cement (PC) for structural and nonstructural building purposes. If used as a replacement, geopolymer based cement produces a range of reduction in carbon emissions (75 to 90 per cent). This is because geopolymer cement can be slag-based, rock-based or fly-ash-based. GCs made from fly ash or granulated blast furnace slag

12

requires less sodium silicate solution in order to be activated. They therefore have a lower environmental impact than geopolymer based concrete made from metakaolin rock (i.e. rock-based GC). However, the type of geopolymer based cement that might be used to replace Portland cement in building construction depends on the particular type available in the area concerned (Habert , Espinose de Lacaillerie et al. 2011). The major barriers to geopolymer adoption and the lack of standard specifications, track record and exclusion from current standards was the scope study (in 2013) for Ash Development Association of Australia (Wilson and Tagaza

2006). This will in turn affect the outcomes where the Geopolymer based cement is used.

CONCLUSION Our world is changing, and our construction industry needs to adapt to these changes. The Australian building sector has the largest potential for significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions – which could be achieved by simple application of bioclimatic principles. The UK government has funded the UK-Indemand plan to achieve 80 per cent reduction in construction carbon emissions by 2050 – which is considered an achievable target providing future design and construction of buildings take into account bioclimatic principles (Allwood, Cullen et al. 2012). Further action could involve creation of an ‘Australian-Indemand’ or similar scheme by commissioning leading research groups to investigate the problem of reducing embodied energy and carbon emissions in the Australian building sector. This would enable the government to achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and thus to reduce the impact of the building sector on the Australian environment. In summary, application of the model proposed in this research clearly demonstrates that use of bioclimatic principles during the building process can reduce carbon emissions by up to 65 per cent when considered against the standard carbon emissions of Australian construction systems. This compares to a maximum reduction of only 32 per cent when green tools are used, less than half the emission reduction achieved by the research model. There is a risk that number of archived credits could be low in green tools. This is because green tools do not assess the range of criteria inherent in bioclimatic principles and the research model. Currently, consideration of bioclimatic principles is not mandatory in Australian building design and construction. However, if carbon emissions within the Australian construction industry are to be reduced,

13

consideration of bioclimatic principles through use of a model such as proposed in this research will become an expected and mandated process.

14

REFERENCES Allwood, J. M., J. M. Cullen, M. A. Carruth, D. R. Cooper, M. McBrien, R. L. Milford, M. C. Moynihan and A. C. Patel (2012) Sustainable materials: with both eyes open. University of Cambridge UIT Cambridge, p. 51-61 Ash Development Association of Australia (2013). Use of fly ash to achieve enhanced sustainability in construction. What is sustainable development. Ash Development Association of Australia, www.adaa.asn.au pdf, 2013: p. 4 Australian Government (2012). Construction and demolition waste guide, recycling and reusing across the the supply chain, Australian Government, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Poplulation and Communities. www.environment.gov.au V. 2601: p. 5,8 Australian Government (2014). Australian national Greenhouse accounts, . Quarterly Update of Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory. N. G. G. Inventory. Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Australian Government. http://www.climatechange.gov.au 2011: p. 3,6,7 Bales, E. (2008). "Deconstruction and design for disassembly." New Jersey Institute of Technology May 2008(May): p. 2,3.4 Benn, S., D. Dunphy and A. Griffiths (2014) Organizational change for corporate sustainability, Routledge, p. 22, 126, 315 Boral (2013). Boral roofing. Roof Tile Range. Boral. Catalog, Boral. February: p. 2, 3 ,4 BREEAM, Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (2014). "BREEAM International, New Construction Technical Manual" www.breeam.org SD5075- 1.0:2013(09/04/2014): p. 1-29 Brick Development Association. (2014) "Think Brick " Sustainability Retrieved 9th July, 2014 from www.brick.org.uk Brick Industry Associations (2009) Recycled content in green building rating systems- Certification and Credit. Technical note on brick construction. Web page, Brick Industry Associations, pdf, www.gobrick.com , 703-620-0010: p. 7, 13,14 Canadian Architects. (2015) "Measures of Sustainability "Life-Cycle Energy Use in Office Buildings"." Retrieved 25 Augest 2010, from http://www.canadianarchitect.com Carbon Neutral (2014) "Australia's Greenhouse Gas Emissions." Retrieved 01th August 2014, from http://www.carbonneutral.com.au Cascione, A., R. C. Williams, S. Gillen, R. Bentson and D. Haugen (2010). Utilization of Post Consumer Recycled Asphalt Shingles and Fractionated Recycled Asphalt Pavement in Hot Mix Asphalt. Green Streets and Highways 2010 © ASCE 2011 ( American Society of Civil Engineers )Conference. G. S. a. H. 2010. US, ASCE: p. 349-359 CBA Concrete Block Association (2013). Aggregate Concrete Block, Aggregate Block Sustainability, Concrete Block Association, Aggregate Block Sustainability, Concrete Block Association, p. 2, 3, 4 CCAA, Cement, Concrete, Aggregates and Australia (2015) Use of Recycled Aggregates in Construction. Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia website, Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia, May 2008 Report: p. 21 Chisholm, D. (2011). "Best Practice Guide for the Use of Recycled Aggregates in New Concrete." Paper of Cement & Concrete Association of New Zealand: p. 31, 32, 33, 34 City of Melbourne (2014) "City of Melbourne unveils cutting edge green building initiative" http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au

Retrieved 17 September, 2014, from

CSIRO. (2014) "Embodied Energy" Embodied Energy Retrieved 20Th October, 2014, from http://www.cmmt.csiro.au Dowling, J. B. (2010) "The recycled content of steel products" The British Constructional Steelwork Association Limited Sustainability Manager(Registered in England No 2457906 ), P. 1,2 Ecospecifier. (2015). "Knowledg Base , Materials Impacts in Construction." Retrieved 26 August 2015, from www.ecospecifier.com.au EDG, Environmental Design Guide (2014) Design Notes. Published November 1998, reviewed November 200. L. C. E. Analysis. GEN22 was originally published in November 1998: p. 2,3 Federation of Engineering Organization (2011) "Rising global trend of reusibility " Rising global trend of reusability Posted by tapac333 on June 9, 2011, Retrieved 2014 , 20th June, from http://tapac333.wordpress.com , p. 1, 2, 3 Geopolymer House (2011) "Scientists from Mexico’s Cinvestav Develop ‘Green’ Cement" Open source project to develop geopolymer cast stone construction, Retrieved 2014, http://geopolymerhouses.wordpress.com, 2014

15

Gonz, lez and B. Fonteboa (2015). "Recycled aggregates concrete: aggregate and mix properties " World Wide Science , Strength of concrete incorporating aggregates recycled from demolition waste 2015,12th June: P. 1, 2 Green building Council of Australia (2008). Technical manual green star office design & office as built : version 3. Sydney, Green building Council of Australia, P. 235- 294, 261, 3 Green Building Council of Australia (2010) "Federal election an opportunity to move green building from voluntary to vital" Green Building Council of Australia Retrieved 21 July, 2010, from http://www.gbca.org.au Green Building Council of Australia (2012) "Bond University Mirvac School of Sustainable Development." Materials & Design. Retrieved 21 March, 2012, from http://www.gbca.org.au Green Vally (2013) "Recycling Program" Recycling Program Retrieved 29 April 2013, from http://greenvalleybuildersinc.com Greenspec. (2015) "Embodied energy" Retrieved 2015, 01 March, from http://www.greenspec.co.uk Habert , G,. Espinose de Lacaillerie and N. Roussel (2011). "An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete production: reviewing current research trends." Journal of Cleaner Production 19(2011): p. 1229-1238 Hawkesbury City Council. (2014) "Living http://sustainability.hawkesbury.nsw.gov.au

Sustainably

in

the

Hawkesbury"

Retrieved

June

20th,

2014,

from

Hyde, R. (2012) Bioclimatic Housing, Innovative design for warm climates, London, Earthscan,p. 16, 367, 318,320, 423 Hyde, R. and K. Yeang (2009) "Exploring synergies with innovative green technologies for advanced renovation using a bioclimatic approach" Architectural Science Review 53(2): p. 229, 230 ICE, Institution of Civil Engineers (2012) "Olympic waste and recycling." As part of London's commitment to a sustainable 2012 Olympics, civil engineers have worked hard to ensure minimum waste. Retrieved 20th October, 2014, from http://www.ice.org.uk INGENIA, The Olympic Velodrome (2012) The olumpic Velodrome Sustainability report. Sustainability. Website, INGENIA, Issue 51, June 2012: p. 28 Inhabitat (2014) "Hurricane Sandy-Salvaged Wood Being Used to Rebuild the Rockaway Boardwalk." Retrieved February 25, 2014, from http://inhabitat.com IPCC, Intergovernomental Panel on Climate Change (2007), Residential and commercial buildings, Intergovernomental Panel on Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation, Contribution of Working Group, : p. 389 Jong, J. K. and B. Rigdon (1998). Sustainable Architecture Module, December 1998 PhD, The University of Michigan, P. 14,15

Qualities, Use, and Examples of Sustainable Building Materials,

Kang, G. S. and A. Kren (2007) "Structural engineering strategies towards sustainable design" SEAONC Sustainable Design Committee, http://www. seaonc. Org , pdf: 20, p. 27 Karven, J. (2012) "Top Olympic Venues of 2012." About Home, Top Olympic Venues of 2012,: p.1, 2 Lawson, B. (1996). Building materials, energy and the environment: Towards ecologically sustainable development. Red Hill, ACT, Red Hill, ACT, p. 6,12, 91, 93, 123-135 Lawson, B. (2006) "Embodied Energy of Building Materials." Actions Towards Sustainable Outcomes August 2006. Learning Legacy. (2012). "Sustainability " Olympic and Paralympic Games, Sustainability has been part of the DNA Retrieved March 3 2014, from http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk Leather, b. D. and R. Wesley (2014) "Performance and style in the work of Olgyay and Olgyay" arq: Architectural Research Quarterly 18(02): p. 167-176 LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (2014) Raising the Energy-efficient Roof with Concrete Tile: Beyond Traditional Curb Appeal. LEED Points for Concrete Tile. C. Education. Website, Magraw Hill Construction 2014, P. 6/12, 7/12, 8/12 LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (2016 ) "Green Building 101: Sustainable materials and resources" Green Building 101 Retrieved 26th February, 2016, from http://www.usgbc.org LEED, US Green Building Council (2005). LEED for new construction & major renovations version 2.2, US Green Building Council, LEED 2009, p. 6,7 , 49-54

16

Low carbon living, C. (2015). http://www.lowcarbonlivingcrc.com.au/ Masonry (2016) "Green Building" http://www.masonrymagazine.com

"Low

Carbon

The

Voice

Living,

of

the

Leading

Masonry

the

Way."Retrieved

Industry

Retrieved

29TH

23th

May,

2015,

from

Feruary,

2016,

from

McKinsey, C. A. (2008). An Australian Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction. Overview of abatement measures by sector. McKinsey & Company Australia, Embargoed, February 2008: p. 13 McLellan, B., R. Williams, J. Lay, A. Van Riessen and G. Corder (2011) "Costs and carbon emissions for geopolymer pastes in comparison to ordinary portland cement" Journal of Cleaner Production 19(9): p. 1080-1090. Nath, P. and P. K. Sarker (2014). "Effect of GGBFS on setting, workability and early strength properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete cured in ambient condition" Construction and Building Materials 66(0): p. 163-171, , 163, 164, 170 News Steel Construction (2010). Celebrating exceence in Steel Buildings in Europe. Call for entries for the 20011 Structural Steel Design Awards. December 2010: p. 18, 29 Nuttall, N. (2015) Buildings Can Play a Key Role in Combating Climate Change, 2007 Report. News Centre e. f. development. UNEP, UN. UNEP SBCI: p. 1.2 Obla, K., H. Kim and C. Lobo (2010). "Reusing ceramic wastes in concrete" Construction and Building Materials 24(5): 832-838, P.831, 825, 826 Olgyay, V. and A. Olgyay (1963) Design with climate: bioclimatic approach to architectural regionalism, From the personal collection of Ilona Olgyay, Victor’s widow, Princeton, University Press, 190 p. 167 PCA, Portland Cement Australia (2014) "Recycled Aggregates" Sustainability http://www.cement.org

,Recycled Aggregate Characteristics, 2015, from

Pereira, Fernando (2012). Special issue on renewable energy for sustainable development and the built environment Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 0956-6163, 328, p. 109 Federal Politics (2015) "Abbott government announces plan to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent by 2030" Political News Retrieved 14th October, 2015, from http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics Poon, C., S. Kou and L. Lam (2002). "Use of recycled aggregates in molded concrete bricks and blocks" Construction and Building Materials 16(5): p. 281-289 Rodway, S. (2010) "London's Olympic lessons, The first green Summer Games." Teaching Geography Journal 35(3): p. 106-107 RTCC, Responding to Climate Change (2012 ) "A story of sustainable architecture " The Olympic Stadium Retrieved 23 August 2013, from http://www.rtcc.org. Standard (2015) Olympic stadium unwrapped Details of the 80,000-capacity Olympic stadium have been produced by Games chiefs. . M. B. a. R. Olcayto. london standard, Standard: p. 1 SteelConstruction.info (2014) "Recycling http://www.steelconstruction.info

"

Steel

construction

and

recycling

Retrieved

February

20,

2015,

from

Treloar, G. (1998) A Comprehensive Embodied Energy Analysis Framework. A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, A thesis submitted in total fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Deakin University, , p. 273, p. 1, 2, 3 Tyrell, M. E. and A. H. Goode (2014). Tyrell, M. E. and Goode, Alan H., “Waste Glass as a Flux for Brick Clays," U. S. Dept. of the Interior Report of Investigations 7701, 1972. Brick Energy Article. U. S. D. o. t. I. R. o. Investigations. Website. 7701,: p. 15,17. Uche, O. (2008) "Influence of Recycled Concrete Aggregate (RCA) on Compressive Strength of Plain Concrete" Pan, Continental J. Engineering Sciences 8(2): p. 30-36 UK Indemand (2014) Reducing Material Demand in Construction, UK Indemand (2014) Reducing MaterialDemand in Construction Cutting embodied emissions by 80%, Report, UK Indemand, A. Prospectus, UK Indemand, p. 2, 3, 4 UK Indemand (2015) "An Introduction to Material Efficiency." UK Indemand - Industrial Energy and Material Demand Reduction Retrieved 18th May, 2015, from http://www.ukindemand.ac.uk UNEP SBCI , Sustainable Buildings and Climate Initiative (2010). Common carbon metric for measuring energy use & reporting greenhouse gas emissions from building operations. for Measuring Energy Use & Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Building Operations. C. S. C. P. Arab Hoballah, UNEP DTIE. SBCI Members 19, Report Contributors and Reviewers, UNEP, Sustainable buildings &Climate initiative. Members 19: p.2, 5-9

17

UNEP SBCI, Sustainable Buildings & Climate Initiative (2009) Buildings and climate change, Summary for Decision-Makers, D. Sylvie Lemmet, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch, Sustainable United Nations, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch. UNEP DTIE, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch: p.6, 3 US Green Building Council (2010) "LEED 2009 for new construction and major renovations.", Technical Manual, USGBC Member Approved November 2008, P. 5,6, 50-54 US Green Building Council (2011). Certification LEED. Certification LEED, Technical Manual, usgbc website, http://www.usgbc.org/leed, US Green Building council. MAT. 1-5: p. 1-3 Van, D. J., N. R. San, I. Ismail, S. Bernal, D. Brice and J. Provis (2015) "Microstructure and durability of alkali-activated materials as key parameters for standardization." Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials 4(2): 116-128 , p. 116 Vivian, V. and S. Eric (2010) "Reducing Embodied Energy in Masonry Construction, Understanding Embodied Energy in Masonry" Structural Sustainability Journal, May(2010): P. 8 WBCSD, The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2014) "Business solutions for a sustainable world " Business Perspective on policy options - Buildings Retrieved 24th June, 2014, from http://wbcsd.org Wilson, J. and E. Tagaza (2006) "Green buildings in Australia: drivers and barriers" Australian Journal of Structural Engineering 7(1): p. 57 WMW, Waste Management World (2014) London Olympics waste report, Municipal Slid Waste, Waste Management World, http://www.waste-management-world.com, Six part: p. 1

18

Figure Captions 300

Construction carbon emissions of the six case studies 263.5

250

200 184.5

179.5

178.4 159.1

150.5

147.1

150

131.9

128.9 121.6

100

92.5

90

83

82.2 75.9

70.4 56.7

50 32.7

38

Figure 1: Construction carbon emissions from the six case studies based on data in Table 3 (Standard/Basic construction carbon emissions compared with Implemented; Green tool (Green Star) and from application of the 0 Research Model). 0 1. Friendly Beaches Lodge

2. ACF Green Home

Standard /Basic

3. Display Project Home

Implemented

4. Civil Engineering Laboratory, USQ

5. The Olympics Velodrome Building

Green tool

6

Research

19

Figure 2: Potential Reductions (%) in construction emissions based on data in Tables 4 – for Implemented, Green Tool, and from application of this Research Model as compared with Standard/Basic emissions

20

Tables Table 1: Bioclimatic conditions – from current; from best practice with green tools (Green Star, LEED and BREEAM); from this research model; and from research and lab Bioclimatic conditions, Parameters Concrete from recycled aggregates

Current conditions, Implemented

Conditions with Green tools

Conditions in this research

Conditions by research and lab.

In Australia, there are a number of manufactured and recycled aggregates readily available in certain localities. 1

Green tools: maximum 10-20% of aggregate for structural purpose; 40% for nonstructural; ; no restriction in 16 MPa 2, 18, 36

Fully RA for non-structural purpose; 80 % RA for structural purpose; 6

ADAA, ASA, UNSW, Standards Australia; 4, fully RA for non-structural; 75-80 % RA for structural;13,11

Concrete block from recycled aggregate

24% recycled content of an aggregate concrete block; 8

Green tools, maximum40% RA for nonstructural, BRE Standard BES 6001 ; 23,11, 36

Aggregate for concrete block fully from recycled aggregate;13

UK, USA, AUS; 11, fully RA for concrete block;13

Brick from recycled aggregates

the current level of recycled material content in brick is 11% ; 14

Green Star11, 20, 30%; 16, ISO grants 10 points for 10% Recycled aggregate;14,16,36

Reuse the recycled aggregate for brick, 67%; 19

US; UK; AUS, Reuse fully the recycled aggregate for brick; 11, 17

Steel from average recycled content

Primary typically 10-15% of scrap steel, BREEAM, LEED, Green Star, Mat-6; Secondary fully scrap based production maximum 60, 65, 97.5% post-consumer 25 recycled content;23,16,38

Reuse recycled and postconsumer structural and nonstructural steel

Scaffolding, formwork, sheet piles, etc., London Olympic Stadium,32, 34

Reduce material use in steel structural design 10-20%

Some of the current green projects have Green tools, Mat-6, grade reduced materials reduced materials use in design 10-20%23 in design,10-20%, one point 23,21,10,7,29

Green tools, 60,75,95% recycled content, joinery, structural frame designed to be disassembled;3,5,23,24

Steel from fully post-consumer recycled contents

Steel from 65-97.5% post-consumer recycled contents;22, 39

Use 40% recycled and postconsumer steel elements

Steel products are re-usable, steel piles, hollow sections; gauge, purlins, rails32.34

Reduced materials use in structural design 10-20%

Reduced materials use in structural design 10-20%, 32

Green Star 95% of all timber products reused, post-consumer; FSC certified timber; up to 3 points 22, 23, 32,24

60% of all timber products re-used, post-consumer recycled timber; FSC certified timber

AUS; fully timber products re-used, post-consumer , recycled; FSC certified timber

-

Green tools; from recycled content, waste, no natural aggregate up to3.5 points;20,21,23,36

50% Roof tile from recycled aggregate;21

US; UK; AUS,50% Roof tile from recycled aggregate RA;21

-

Green tools; MR4 20% recycled thermal ½ point, , 80% recycled content advised;12.7,27

Thermal insulation from fully recycled waste; 25

US; UK; Thermal insulation fully from recycled waste; 25

Portland cement replaced with Geopolymer based cement

-

Green tools: maximum 60% Insitu concrete; 40% for precast and 30% for stressed concrete; 30% 1 point and 40% 2 points23,26,7

Geopolymer based cement, fully Geopolymer based cement fully replace replaced with Portland cement, with Portland cement, arranged for nonarranged for non-structural, structural structural and structural;13, 28

Reduce transportation by reusing and recycled materials

-

Green tools credit the reusing and recycling up to 40% of materials, not directly credited; obtained from30km radius of the site2,15,35,37

Reusing has been considered in material production and building elements as well (appendix two)

Transportation reduction by increasing reusing and recycling is considered in current study in UK;32

15% of brick are transported to the distributor’s yard or jobsite by rail and 85% by truck;19, 30

LEED, Regional Materials, up to 2 points;14tools advise localizing, using water and rail instead of road;2,15

Localizing has been considered for detail see appendix two

Transport the construction materials in UK has already examined in London Olympics; 30

For three best practices in Lawson’s study; Between -23 % to 57 %

For the best practices, six star projects, 2,23,

Reuse the recycled timber and post-consumer FSC timber Roof tile from recycled tile Thermal insulation from recycled content

Transportation by water or rail not truck, Reduce transportation by localizing Carbon emissions to reduce in Australian construction systems

Currently--% timber products re-used, post-consumer; FSC certified timber

27, 21

Between 17 to 32 %

In the construction practices, examined the six case studies Between 50 to 65 %

UK Government has funded UKIndemand Center32 Proposes 80 %

Sources: 1-(CCAA, Cement et al. 2015),(Gonz and Fonteboa 2015) 2- (Green building Council of Australia 2008); 3- (Masonry 2016); 4-(Low carbon living 2015), (Ash Development Association of Australia 2013); 5- (Green Building Council of Australia 2012); 6-Chapter Six; 7- (US Green Building Council 2010); 8.(CBA Concrete Block Association 2013), 10- (LEED 2016 ); 11- (Poon, Kou et al. 2002), (CBA Concrete Block Association 2013); 13- (Uche 2008, PCA 2014); 14-(Brick Industry Associations 2009); 15-(LEED 2014); 16- (Kang and Kren 2007); 17-(Vivian and Eric 2010); 18- (Obla, Kim et al. 2010); 19-(Brick Development Association 2014, Tyrell and Goode 2014); 20-(Boral 2013); 21- (LEED 2014); 22-(SteelConstruction.info 2014); 23-(Green building Council of Australia 2008); 24- (LEED 2005); 25-(SteelConstruction.info 2014),(Greenspec 2015); 26 -(Ash Development Association of Australia 2013); 27-(US Green Building Council 2011); 28-(Geopolymer House 2011), (Nath and Sarker 2014); 30-(Learning Legacy 2012),(Benn, Dunphy et al. 2014); 32-(UK Indemand 2014),(UK Indemand 2015) (Allwood, Cullen et al. 2012); 34-(Inhabitat 2014), (SteelConstruction.info 2014), (Learning Legacy 2012); 35- (Australian Government 2012); 36- (Chisholm 2011); 37- (BREEAM 2014); 38- (DOWLING 2010); 39- (Kang and Kren 2007)

21

Table 2: Information and construction systems (floors, walls and roofs) of the six case studies used in research Detail specifications of the six research case studies

Construction Systems Floors Walls

Roofs

1. Friendly Beaches Lodge, 1991; accommodation for guests completing a guided three day bushwalk Architect: Latona Masterman Freycinet Peninsula, Tasmania, Australia

Timber frame floor

Single skin timber walls

Timber frame, steel sheet roof

2. ACF Green Home, 1992; This display home was constructed for VDPH in accordance with environmental guidelines prepared for the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) Architect: Taylor Oppenheim Architects Roxburgh Park, Victoria, Australia 3. Display Project Home, 1994; The Canberra Display Project House was sponsored by ERDC to demonstrate the application of energy saving design measures. Architect: Jen-Vue Homes Ginninderra, Australian Capital Territory 4. Civil Engineering Laboratory, USQ, 2013; It is a one level building was sponsored by the Southern Queensland University which has been designed in 350 m2 to be used as laboratory. Nairn Construction; Architect: Wilson Architects, Springfield Central, 4300, Brisbane, Australia 5. The Olympic Velodrome Building, London 2012; The design brief for the Velodrome asked for a lightweight construction. All parties in the construction supply chain co-operated to deliver the project to minimise excess material usage. Principal architects: Jonathan Watts, George Oates, Hopkins, Olympic Park London 6. The Multi Sports Building, USQ, 2013 It is a two story building was sponsored by the Southern Queensland University which has been designed in 302 m2 to be used as a multi sports building. Nairn Construction; Architect: Reid Designers Springfield Central, 4300, Brisbane, Australia

110 mm Concrete Timberslab on ground framed brick floor; Timberveneer walls framed upper floor

Timber frame, concrete tile roof

Source: (tripe 2014)

Source: (EDG 2014)

Source: (Lawson 1996)

Source: The author

Source: [Olympic of London, 2012 #584]

Source: The author

110 mm Concrete TimberTimber slab floor framed brick frame, steel veneer walls sheet roof

200 mm Concrete Cored slab on ground Concrete floor block walls

Steel frame, steel sheet roof (commercial)

Concrete slab floor Concrete upper floor

Cored Concrete block walls; Steel frame timber wall

Steel frame, fabric roof

Concrete slab floor Concrete upper floor

Cored Concrete block walls

Steel frame, steel sheet roof (commercial)

22

Table 3: Comparison of construction carbon emissions of the six case studies (Standard/Basic carbon emissions compared with Implemented, column, Green tool (Green Star), and from application of this Research Model)

KgCo2/m2eq.

Implemented Carbon emissions KgCo2/m2eq.

1. Friendly Beaches Lodge

75.9

32.7

56.7

38

2. ACF Green Home

159.1

147.1

131.9

82.2

3. Display Project Home

150.5

184.5

121.6

70.4

4. Civil Engineering Laboratory

178.4

-

128.9

83

5. The Velodrome Building

263.5

90

179.5

92.5

6. The Multi Sports Building

226.1

-

157.8

98.5

Case studies of the Research

Standard/Basic Carbon emissions

Green tool Carbon emissions KgCo2/m2eq.

Research Model Carbon emissions KgCo2/m2eq.

23

Table 4: Potential Reductions (%) in construction carbon emissions based on data in Table 3 – for Implemented, Green Tool, and from application of this Research Model as compared with Standard/Basic construction carbon emissions Implemented

Green tool

Research Model

Reduction

Reduction

Reduction

1. Friendly Beaches Lodge

56.7 %

25.2 %

49.8 %

2. ACF Green Home

7.5 %

17 %

48.3 %

- 22.6 %

19.2 %

53.2 %

-

30 %

53.4 %

5. The Velodrome Building

65.8 %

31.9 %

64.9 %

6. The Multi Sports Building

-

30.2 %

56.4 %

Case studies

3. Display Project Home 4. Civil Engineering Laboratory

24