Abstract
To date, in the literature, there has been no study on the comparison of hybrid (timber and concrete) buildings with counterparts made of timber and concrete as the most common construction materials, in terms of the life cycle assessment (LCA) and the carbon footprint. This paper examines the environmental impacts of a five-story hybrid apartment building compared to timber and reinforced concrete counterparts in whole-building life-cycle assessment using the software tool, One Click LCA, for the estimation of environmental impacts from building materials of assemblies, construction, and building end-of-life treatment of 50 years in Finland. Following EN 15978, stages of product and construction (A1–A5), use (B1–B6), end-of-life (C1–C4), and beyond the building life cycle (D) were assessed. The main findings highlighted are as following: (1) for A1–A3, the timber apartment had the smallest carbon footprint (28% less than the hybrid apartment); (2) in A4, the timber apartment had a much smaller carbon footprint (55% less than the hybrid apartment), and the hybrid apartment had a smaller carbon footprint (19%) than the concrete apartment; (3) for B1–B5, the carbon footprint of the timber apartment was larger (>20%); (4) in C1–C4, the carbon footprint of the concrete apartment had the lowest emissions (35,061 kg CO2-e), and the timber apartment had the highest (44,627 kg CO2-e), but in D, timber became the most advantageous material; (5) the share of life-cycle emissions from building services was very significant. Considering the environmental performance of hybrid construction as well as its other advantages over timber, wood-based hybrid solutions can lead to more rational use of wood, encouraging the development of more efficient buildings. In the long run, this will result in a higher proportion of wood in buildings, which will be beneficial for living conditions, the environment, and the society in general.
Highlights
To date, in the literature, there has been no study on the comparison of hybrid buildings with counterparts made of timber and concrete as the most common construction materials, in terms of the life cycle assessment (LCA) and the carbon footprint
This paper examined the environmental impacts of a five-story hybrid apartment building compared to those of timber and a more traditional reinforced concrete counterpart in whole-building LCA using the software tool, One Click LCA, for the estimation of environmental impacts from building materials of assemblies, construction, and building end-of-life treatment of 50 years in Finland
Energy use contributed most to the carbon footprint of every building followed by product stages A1–A3
Summary
In the literature, there has been no study on the comparison of hybrid (timber and concrete) buildings with counterparts made of timber and concrete as the most common construction materials, in terms of the life cycle assessment (LCA) and the carbon footprint. Following EN 15978, stages of product and construction (A1–A5), use (B1–B6), end-of-life (C1–C4), and beyond the building life cycle (D) were assessed. There are currently two main approaches adopted in the construction industry to reduce environmental impacts: (1) appropriate material selection; and (2) the optimization of energy use throughout the building’s service life [9,10,11,12]. GHG emissions from buildings can be significantly affected by the choice of building materials In this regard, according to the calculation made by Hafner [13] on the life-cycle assessment (LCA), depending on the building construction standard, the operation stage accounts for 45% to 80% of the total. While the steel industry accounts for about 9% of the direct emissions from global fossil fuel use [15], concrete production accounts for about 8% of the world’s CO2 emissions [16,17]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
