Post Disaster Shelter Energy Efficiency Review - 1 January 2014

Post Disaster Shelter and Energy Efficiency

A Review of Information and Issues
Adele Billups
1
, Margaret Ledyard-Marks
2
and C. Kelly
3



Contents
I. Abstract 2
II. Introduction 2
III. Life Cycle Analysis 4
A. Introduction 4
B. What is Life Cycle Assessment? 4
C. What are the benefits? 5
D. LCA Sources 5
E. Limitations 6
F. Current Application for Humanitarian Operations 7
G. Conclusion 8
IV. Energy Efficient Methods and Materials in Post-Disaster Shelter 8
A. Introduction 8
B. Applications of Energy Efficiency to Post-Disaster Shelter 8
C. Operational Challenges 10
D. Conclusions 11
V. Recommendations 11
VI. References 13


This report can be quoted with attribution to the authors.



1
School of International Service, American University
2
Formerly, School of International Service, American University
3
ProAct Network, to whom correspondence should be sent at disasterkelly@yahoo.com.
Post Disaster Shelter Energy Efficiency Review - 2 January 2014

I.Abstract
Applying an energy efficient approach to building design and construction can reduce the
long-term cost of a building as well as negative environmental impacts by reducing the
quantity of energy used in building construction and operation. This report provides a
review of how energy efficiency can be used in post disaster shelter focusing in Life Cycle
Analysis and current and prospective introduction of energy efficient approaches into post
disaster shelter. These review is intended to identify directions for further work on
improving the energy efficiency of post disaster shelter to reduce shelter costs and
negative environmental consequences. Based on the review work and consultations with
members of the Environment Community of Practice, Global Shelter Cluster and through
two meetings with shelter professionals, the report makes recommendations in the areas
of:
Developing operational guidance on energy efficiency post disaster.
Documenting case studies on what has worked in terms of energy efficient
approaches.
Creating an Energy Efficiency Focus Group.
Promoting cost-benefit analyses of energy efficiency for post disaster shelter.
Using energy audits to assess where efficiencies in energy use can be achieved.
Conducting feasibility studies of possible energy efficient shelter options in
different disaster-prone areas.
Standardizing the Life Cycle Analysis process so it can be used for post disaster
shelter.
Harmonizing standards so that they can be more applicable to the post disaster
context.
Engaging the construction sector in how their expertise can be used to improve
energy efficiency in shelter after disaster.

II. Introduction
This paper provides a review of how the concepts and practices of energy efficiency can
be applied when providing housing after a disaster. The paper contains two studies on
different aspects of energy efficiency and how they relate to post disaster shelter. A final
section provides a set of recommendations on how to improve the integration of energy
efficiency into post disaster shelter.

Providing minimally adequate shelter is a top priority following most disasters. Shelter after
a disaster changes with time, moving from basic protection from the elements, to one or
more physical structures that meet or exceed the basic human right to shelter. This
progressive development of post disaster shelter needs to include access to safe water,
appropriate sanitation, safe living conditions and area livelihoods if the disaster-affected
are to return to a normal life.

All these requirements require resources. Providing these resources requires energy, in
making, transforming or transporting physical resources, in the construction process and
in how well a finished building uses energy.

Where excessive energy is used in any of these areas, there is an increase in cost and a
risk of negative environmental impacts arising from the provision of post disaster shelter.
In many cases, these costs and impacts fall directly on the disaster survivor, hampering
recovery and contributing to disasters in the future.
Post Disaster Shelter Energy Efficiency Review - 3 January 2014

Ideal practices in providing shelter after disaster include:
All shelter-related resources are obtained from near where they are used to reduce
the energy needed for transportation.
All structures are designed to resources in an energy efficient way to reduce the
energy needed to construct the shelter and develop ancillary sites and services.
All structures to be designed in such a way that the energy needed for heating or
cooling is minimize, if not eliminated.

There are significant challenges to meeting these ideals and building energy efficient
shelter after a disaster. Local resources may be limited or come from severely degraded
locations. Social and political pressure pushes rebuilding to happen as quickly as possible,
providing little time for education and the introduction of new materials, designs and
methods to improve energy efficiency.

Improving energy efficiency can cost more initially, raising the question of who pays these
costs, particularly where there is limited household or external funding to meet a variety of
post-disaster needs. Rebuilding shelter after a disaster can continue for decades and
make improving energy efficiency a long-term process, but one where basic approaches
need to be implemented very early in the rebuilding process to be successful.

Further, there may be resistance to new energy efficient methods and materials by
disaster survivors because they are new, and most disaster survivors want to return to the
familiarity of life before the disaster. Overcoming this resistance (sometimes quite
reasonable) requires energy efficient shelter options be clearly defined and packaged
(best before a disaster) in ways which encourages survivors to adopt new methods and
approaches.

Preparing for post disaster shelter also needs to address why higher initial costs are
justified and how subsidies or other mechanisms can be used to address the cost factor.
Cost is also a critical issue when asking for external funding to cover part or the whole cost
of energy efficient post disaster shelter. Solid information on the benefits of the energy
efficiency need to available immediately after a disaster.

As first step in developing a coherent and effective approach to incorporating energy
efficiency into post disaster shelter the Environment Community of Practice of the Global
Shelter Cluster
1
initiated a review to identify current best practice and guidance on energy
efficient construction, including the production, sourcing, transport, stockpiling and use of
construction materials and methods.

This report is intended to review the field of energy efficiency and identify what can be
done in terms of policy and practice to incorporate energy efficiency into post disaster
shelter. The review specifically included the normal construction sector to consider the full
breadth of knowledge and options for energy efficient post disaster reconstruction.

The review is build around two studies, one considering Life Cycle Analysis and the
second considering Energy Efficient Methods and Materials in Post-Disaster Shelter. The
studies summarized here include an introduction, a discussion of the study topic and
conclusions and intended to provide an overview rather than an extensive treatment of

1
See https://www.sheltercluster.org/Global/WorkingGroups/Enviroment/Pages/default.aspx.
Post Disaster Shelter Energy Efficiency Review - 4 January 2014
each topic. The results of the two studies are expanded on in a set of recommendations at
the end of the paper.

The review was undertaken under the auspices of the World Wildlife Fund US (WWF US)
and implemented by C. Kelly, ProAct Network and Adele Billups and Margaret
Ledyard-Marks, at the time interns with WWF US and students in the Global
Environmental Politics Program, American University School of International Service. The
results of the studies were presented at Shelter Center meetings in the Spring and Fall of
2013
2
, and discussed with Environment Community of Practice members during the
research and drafting stages.

III. Life Cycle Analysis
A. Introduction
Post disaster humanitarian shelter programs can contribute to the reduction of the global
energy footprint by assessing and reducing the level of energy used during the shelter
building process.
3
Studies have shown that the embodied energy
4
, from the creation of
construction materials up to the construction of buildings, can account for up to 15 years of
the operational energy of one building (Dixit, Fernandez-Solis, Lavy, & Culp, 2010). This
highlights the usefulness of using energy embodied as a tool to identify ways in which
overall energy use can be reduced.

The intent of energy efficient-focused standards such as Leadership in Energy and Design
(LEED)
7
and the UKs BRE
8
Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM)
9
is to
decrease the overall embodied energy of the building and therefore decrease the
buildings environmental impact throughout its life-cycle. In fact, low energy intensive
building materials as well as reuse- and recycling rubble are or have been used in
reconstruction strategies in the Philippines (Salzer, 2011), Haiti (Abrahms, 2013),

and Sri
Lanka,
10
respectively.
B. What is Life Cycle Assessment?
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is the process of quantifying the energy associated with a
product or project from cradle-to-grave based on values of embodied energy. Embodied
energy is usually expressed in megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg) where 0.948 kBtu or kWh
is equal to one (1) megajoule (Cannon Design, 2012).

Dixon (2010), describes the concept of cradle-to-grave as eight stages of embodied
energy throughout the lifespan of a product. These stages are:


2
See http://hubasia.org/meeting/material/energy-efficiency-post-disaster-shelter and
http://hubasia.org/post-disaster-shelter-and-energy-efficiency.
3
This document uses shelter and building interchangeably, recognizing that the concept of shelter
extends beyond a simple building.
4
Defined as is all the energy required to extract, manufacture and transport a building's materials
as well as that required to assemble and 'finish' a structure. From
http://tenshadesofgreen.org/shade4.html.
7
See http://www.usgbc.org/leed.
8
Formally known as Building Research Establishment.
9
See http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=1766.
10
Information based on interviews with field agents that participated in post-Tsunami reconstruction
in Sri Lanka.
Post Disaster Shelter Energy Efficiency Review - 5 January 2014
1. Extraction of materials from which something is made,
2. Processing of those materials,
3. Manufacturing,
4. Transportation to factory site and to construction site,
5. Actual construction
6. Operation/maintenance of building while in service,
7. Demolition and
8. Disposal or reuse and recycle of components
C. What are the benefits?
Since embodied energy accounts for a significant portion of the total energy of a building,
attention has started to shift toward the direct and indirect energy it takes to construct
buildings and the energy stored in its components (Gonzalez, Chase, and Horowitz,
2012). A case study in the Philippines has shown potential use of LCA as a guide for
criteria in determining alternative building technologies for low income housing in
underdeveloped areas (Salzer, 2011).

Congruently, Finbeiner, et al (2006), discuss how LCA has the potential to shift
environmental burden between life cycle stages by identifying and avoiding the most
energy intensive processes of construction. Moreover, LCA can be used to analyze
attributes of human health, resources, potential trade-offs (Finbeiner, et al, 2006) and the
monetization of environmental externalities (National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
2009).

LCA can also be used to inform environmental regulations, standards for designing
buildings, and retrofitting existing ones to improve overall energy-efficiency (ISO, 2012).
Materials and methods used would be based on materials compiled in a life cycle
inventory (LCI) database (Duque, Gutowski, and Garetti, 2010). Additionally, there is
potential for cost savings in areas such as heating and insulation of housing (Harvey,
2010) in underdeveloped areas where the rebound effect of increased demands for
energy dependent appliances would be non-applicable.
D. LCA Sources
There are many LCA databases, the most prominent examples are the:

Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) (Hammond and Jones, 2006),
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) database (National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, 2009) and,
Comit Europen de Normalisation (CEN/TC 350) database.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
11
has collected 650 international
standards for monitoring environmental effects on economic activity (International
Standards Organization, 2012). Over 100 environmental experts and over 200
international organizations have contributed to the building of the ISO database and
standards (International Standards Organization, 2009).


11
ISO, is a network of the national standards institutes of 163 countries spanning all global regions.
It serves as a bridge between the public and private sector to include developing economies to
international industrial corporations (International Organization of Standardization, 2012).
DRAFT FOR REVIEW - Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 6 October 2013
Similar to the variety of databases, there are many tools and models used to calculate
embodied energy for building design and materials. For instance, there is the economic
input-output life cycle analysis (EIO/LCA), a LCA derivative which can be used to calculate
economy-wide environmental burdens. The EIO/LCA can serve as a cheap, quick and
flexible tool compared to LCA, which deals with more comprehensive datasets
(Hendrickson et al, 1998).

LCA is already being internationally advertised. Butterfly, developed by Building Life
Plans (BLP) (Building Life Plans, 2013a) is a new software tool designed to assess the
feasibility of a project or its performance based on current environmental industry
standards (in the UK). This software allows a user to assess designs imported from
computer aided design software using BLPs lifecycle costing tool and their database of
40,000 materials and components compiled over 25 years. BLP claims that this software
enables users to assess embodied and operational carbon as well as compare the capital
cost versus lifetime durability, thus giving users the ability to identify strengths and
weaknesses of a design before devoting significant financial investment (Building Life
Plans, 2013b).
E. Limitations
There is a common acknowledgment that currently no method to calculate embodied
energy accurately and consistently exists (International Standards Organization, 2012 and
Dixon, 2010). Studies cite a lack of clarity of what embodied energy is and what should be
included in the calculations.

Some definitions are more comprehensive. For example Dixit et al (2010), states
embodied energy comprises the energy consumed during the extraction and processing
of raw materials, transportation of the original raw materials, manufacturing of building
materials and components and energy used for various processes during the construction
and demolition of the building. In comparison, Duque, Gutowski, and Garetti (2010),
provide a more technical definition, embodied energy is the energy that must be
committed to create 1 kg of usable material measured in MJ/kg. Hammond and Jones
(2006) highlight the difficulties in determining the individual values that would go into
calculating embodied energy from cradle to grave to include feedstock energy which is
the energy that is used as material rather than fuel (Hammond and Jones, 2006).

Both definitions represent different perspectives and goals that influence what is included
to measure embodied energy. Furthermore, Hammond and Jones (2006) assert that It is
rare that a single value could be universally agreed upon by researchers (within this field of
work).

Additional limitations compiled by various studies include:

Incomplete databases: due to incomplete datasets, LCA practitioners must
develop their own data (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2009) to modify
existing data bases (sometimes inappropriately) (Duque, Gutowski, and Garetti,
2010) to their local conditions (Salzer, 2011).
Data sources: data used in calculations can sometimes be outdated (Dixit et al,
2010), or generated from small datasets from individual studies that should not be
applied to larger studies (Gonzalez, Chase, and Horowitz, 2012, Hagelaar and
van de Vorst, 2002).
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 7 January 2014
Geographic location: could impact the inputs that go into calculating embodied
energy. Standards, consumption patterns and production patterns vary from
country to country (Dixit, et al, 2010). A global viewpoint does not necessarily
reflect the energy footprint of a small village in an underdeveloped country (Salzer,
2011).
Ambiguity over system boundaries: how to construct and assign boundaries, i.e.
cradle to grave, cradle to gate, direct and indirect energy, feed stock (Dixit, et al,
2010), etc., as well as a lack of a standardized way of performing the embodied
energy calculation, i.e. what values should be included or excluded based on
context.
Comprehension: LCA is complicated and methodologies are difficult to
comprehend even by those considered experts in the field. Such concerns are
amplified when having to identify criteria for choosing ideal products for
construction or operation purposes (United Nations Development Program,, 2008)
especially in post-disaster situations which are already constrained by the urgency
of time bound responses (Abrahms, 2013).
Awareness: In the case of the humanitarian sector, there is little awareness of the
option of using LCA to identify and select supplies and materials needed for
post-disaster construction (Abrahms, 2013).
Ad-hoc assumptions: discrepancies and generalizations are not explained
explicitly or consistently across studies which lead to an issue of transparency
(Duque, Gutowski, and Garetti, 2010, Dixit, et al, 2010, Hagelaar and van de
Vorst, 2002).
Cost-benefit: LCA can cost time and money and often involve the hiring of an
outside form to conduct the LCA (Duque, Gutowski, and Garetti, 2010).
Additionally, materials identified as low-energy may not always equate to lowest
initial price (United Nations Development Program, 2008). Harvey (2010) points
out the realities of waiting for the long-term pay back of reducing energy
consumption that may require greater upfront investment compared to a cheaper
investment into less efficient equipment. This extra investment may offset some
or all of the energy cost savings especially in underdeveloped environments
(Harvey, 2010).

Strides have been made to improve harmonization of ISO standards by consolidating
procedures and methods of LCA. However, methodologies are still plagued by vagueness
concerning system boundaries, methods of allocation, and calculating embodied energy
(Dixit, et al, 2010).
F. Current Application for Humanitarian Operations
A budding awareness of LCA has been percolating within the humanitarian assistance
community. In 2010, the American Red Cross and the World Wild Life Fund created the
Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit (GRRT) (Poston, 2010). Module 5 of the
GRRT, recommended the use of embodied energy as a viable means of measuring
environmental impact (Good, 2010). Likewise, Prinz and Nussbaumer (2012) have
recommended LCA as a viable tool that can aid NGOs and relief organizations in
determining suitable materials and technologies for affected regions.

There have been other efforts to incorporate LCA into the humanitarian assistance, but not
directly focused on disaster response or reconstruction. One example is United Nations
Development Program environmental procurement process in collaboration with the
International Organization for Standardization (United Nations Development Program,
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 8 January 2014
2008). This initiative focuses on the use of energy efficient materials and environmentally
approved office supplies.

A more targeted approach toward mainstreaming the use of LCA is ISOs collaboration
with United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and Society of Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative. Their mission is to develop a new
international standard, ISO 14072, Standard for LCA of Organizations. By the end of 2013,
The Life Cycle Initiative intends to have the first draft of best practices on how to apply LCA
when organizations are constructing supply chains. Additionally, under ISO 14072,
attempts will be made to build databases in congruence with global practices of LCA in
developing regions to include, data reflective of local ecosystems.

It is important to note, that this initiative is still in its nascent stages. For instance, ISO
standard 14072, is tentatively scheduled to be finalized 2015, while road testing is to
follow in 2016 with final publication of results in 2017 (United Nations Environment
Program and Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2013). The ultimate
goal of the Life Cycle Initiative is to diffuse gained scientific knowledge globally with the
hopes of mainstreaming LCA in the decision making process of product development and
marketing. Given the global economic environment, donor fatigue, reputation of poor
financial and environmental stewardship, it would behoove the Humanitarian response
community to consider the exploring ways in which new LCA tools may assist in reducing
cost and environmental impact during disaster response and recovery (United Nations
Environment Program and Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 2013).
G. Conclusion
There is great potential to reduce energy consumption through employing energy-efficient
techniques and technology. However contextual realities of construction in
underdeveloped societies demand that any attempts to incorporate life cycle analysis
have to be economic and easily adaptable to unpredictable situations such as
post-disaster reconstruction.

These realities highlight a need to first address the gaps in data quality and availability,
and a standardized application of LCA in order to facilitate easy application across a
diverse range of contexts. Perhaps then, practitioners could begin to identify where the
LCA tool would be most beneficial given its strengths.

IV. Energy Efficient Methods and Materials in Post-Disaster Shelter
A. Introduction
Energy efficient methods and materials have been used for post disaster recovery. For
example, the U.S. Department of Energy created a program for rebuilding devastated
communities to LEED standards. Its pilot cases were Greensberg, Kansas, devastated by
an F5 tornado, and New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina.

However, these types of programs involve large, reliable funding source and personnel
skilled in energy efficient construction techniques, making it an ideal program for
developed countries. Whether these same approaches can be used following a disaster in
a less wealth country needs exploration. This issue is the focus of this section of the
review.
B. Applications of Energy Efficiency to Post-Disaster Shelter
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 9 January 2014
Generally, energy efficiency is not a primary consideration in post-disaster situations.
Decisions to use energy efficient (EE) materials or methods are generally made at the
local level and are the product of an individuals or specific groups effort. This was the
case in post-tsunami shelter reconstruction programs in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, where
efforts were made to use sustainably harvested wood in structures.
12
Some examples of
EE exist in Haiti, although efforts such as the construction of a LEED-certified orphanage
were often the result of isolated publicity actions and not part of a coordinated approach
(Abrahms, 2013).

Partnerships among organizations involved in relief and recovery can lead to the sort of
innovative approaches needed to implement EE techniques. An excellent example is
UKAids Department for International Developments (DIFD) shelter program in Pakistan
after the 2010 floods.

DFID partnered with the local office of the International Organization of Migration
(IOM)and local organizations Heritage Foundation and HANDS to use many of the EE
solutions listed below to construct shelters with lower energy requirements, at a lower cost
per unit, than originally budgeted. (Murray, 2012) This meant they were able to
construction more than 50,000 shelters, much closer to actual demand, at 50% or more
below the original estimated cost per house (Murray, 2012).

The Hilti Foundation and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology have been sponsoring
research on locally constructed energy efficient building materials. Presentations at the
Shelter Center meetings in November 2011 and October 2013 provide information on
these efforts.
13


There are several low/no cost techniques to achieve energy efficient shelter currently
being used, including:

Constructing earthen walls with a lime base in lieu of concrete, as was done in
DFIDs Pakistan program. These walls are flood resistant, cheaper than concrete,
and have a much lower carbon footprint (Murray, 2012).

Increasing the thermal mass (i.e. wall thickness) and lengthening roof overhangs
for a consistent indoor temperature, no matter the season, a technique also used in
DFIDs Pakistan program (Murray, 2012).

Using more energy-efficient brick kilns and substituting corn husk and other
materials as fuel for coal and wood to reduce the carbon footprint, particularly in
Peru, Ecuador, Zimbabwe, and Sudan (Practical Action, 2007).


12
Information based on interviews with field agents that participated in post-tsunami
reconstruction in Sri Lanka and earthquake recovery in Pakistan. Interview notes are
available on request.
13
See
http://sheltercentre.org/sites/default/files/25_-_life_cycle_assessment_of_alternative_building_mat
erials_-_eth_zurich_-_c_salzer.pdf and
http://sheltercentre.org/sustainability-assessment-8-transitional-shelters.
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 10 January 2014
Using well-fitting doors and gabled roofs (where appropriate) for greater thermal
efficiency in earthquake reconstruction sites in Turkey and Pakistan (Ali, 2007).

Insulating walls with agricultural waste (straw, grass, wood shavings) as an
effective, inexpensive alternative to manufactured materials, a practice Zehra Ali
analyzed in her study (Ali, 2007).

All these techniques are context-sensitive. What works in one region or even in one
community may not work in another. Obviously this is true when talking about warm and
cold climates, but also applies to cultural expectation as to the use and nature of shelter,
and to where the shelter is located.

UNDP Tajikistan is in the process of assembling a catalogue of energy efficient methods
and materials (e.g., stoves, window types) for use in provisional and permanent shelter
construction and repairs following disasters. Quickly having the know-how to define and
integrate energy efficiency into post-disaster shelter is important in a country where up
temperatures can drop below freezing during at least four months of the year and heating
is expensive and can lead to indoor health hazards and over-extraction of scarce
vegetation.

The International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent is currently working on a
tool on energy consumption and energy demand and supply.
14
A set of tools developed
by BRE under the Quantifying Sustainability in the Aftermath of Natural Disasters
(QSAND) Project are currently in review.
C. Operational Challenges
Interviews indicated that disaster-relief has a saving babies mentality, with developing a
long-term strategy for energy efficient transitional shelter is not a priority.
15
Part of this is a
function of the high turnover of staff in disaster-relief locations and their level of
training/knowledge on energy efficient and eco-conscious shelter construction (Himli,
2013, Kennedy 2013). Additionally, most disaster-relief donor money comes with time
and/or quantity constraints, so practitioners are not always able to research or incorporate
energy efficient methods (Himli, 2013).

As there is no standardized measurement on embodied energy for certain types of
structures, or how energy efficient construction techniques can be used, practitioners must
rely limited knowledge. For example, the person ordering materials may not know that
using Forest Stewardship Council timber helps prevent unsustainable deforestation.

Another obstacle to energy efficiency in post-disaster shelter is the largely uncoordinated
efforts of NGOs in a disaster-relief situation, combined with the use of untrained
volunteers. A weak government in the affected country means less regulation and reduces
enforcement of energy efficiency and other regulations where they exist.

As energy efficient materials are not often produced locally, choosing appropriate
materials may necessitate more costly importation, working against the buy locally

14
Comment from a representative of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent,
March 2013.
15
Interviews were conducted by telephone and email with five emergency shelter practitioners in
March and April 2013. Notes from these interviews are available upon request.
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 11 January 2014
concept, and raising issues as to whether the energy needed for transport off-sets the
energy reductions gained from using the more energy efficient material (Kennedy, 2013).
In addition, if building materials are not available locally, or are relatively expensive, they
will likely not be used when repairs are needed, or when building expansion takes place
(Kennedy, 2013).
D. Conclusions
A better understanding of the tradeoffs of including EE methods and materials into
post-disaster shelter construction will provide a better idea of what can realistically be
implemented in the field. BREEAM, LEED, and similar tools are a great source of ideas for
energy efficient materials and methods.

But the actual certifications are time-consuming and expensive to implement. Some of the
criteria may not be appropriate for all cultural contexts. For instance, siting a building along
an east/west axis to take advantage of the southern exposure for passive heating and
cooling may not fit with an organic community structure (or work in the Southern
Hemisphere).

The issue of funding is also critical. Is it financially feasible to implement BREEM or LEED,
or related tools (and LCA) under the financial constraints facing humanitarian assistance?

Case studies, such as the DFID experience in Pakistan, may be the best way to find
practical ways to implement EE in post-disaster shelter. These case studies should focus
on:
Materials and logistics, which meet the objective of reducing energy needs and
costs, and,
Standardized construction approaches, methodologies and construction materials
by region which incorporate energy efficiency at reasonable cost.

Developing good case experiences necessitates a practical network of individuals who are
involved in post disaster shelter and have attempted innovation to reduce energy needs,
and promote overall environmental sustainability.

The case studies themselves, personal experience and the result of structured and
semi-formal research into energy efficient and sustainable post-disaster shelter can lead
to the development of a set of cheat sheets that can expand the accumulative knowledge
and guide others involved in providing post-disaster shelter.

V. Recommendations

This section provides summary recommendations based on the findings of the review
studies as well as inputs from Community of Practice member and the two presentations.
These recommendations frame entry points for near term action to improve the energy
efficiency of post disaster shelter and more detailed and extensive work on how energy
efficiency can be systematically incorporated into post disaster shelter.

Operational Guidance: The sense of the review is that information on energy efficiency for
shelter operations is out there, but not always accessible. There is a need for
simple and clear documented guidance on incorporate energy efficiency into post
disaster shelter and other types of construction. A guide being developed in
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 12 January 2014
Tajikistan on energy-related technologies for use after disasters is an example of
how local information can be collected to support energy efficiency post disaster.
16

Similar documentation, best communicated in short cheat sheets, should be
developed for common construction materials, shelter methods and approaches to
energy efficiency.

Case Studies: The review identified a number of cases where energy efficiency has been
incorporated into post disaster shelter. There are likely more examples, both
historical and current, which should be documented.
17


Energy Efficiency Focus Group: Recognizing that there is expertise on incorporating
energy efficiency into post disaster assistance, a focus group should be
established for the formal and informal sharing this knowledge, and to provide a
focus for those who need access to this information and experience in the future.
18


Cost-Benefit Analyses: The use of cost-benefit analysis to define overall energy cost of
shelter methods and materials should be developed, and applied to standard
shelter options as part of disaster preparedness. Rigorous, but simple to use,
cost-benefit analysis of shelter materials and methods is an essential tool in
defining how best to improve energy efficiency while meeting project funding
limitations (or justifying additional funding when significant savings on energy costs
can be documented).
Energy Audits: Humanitarian organizations should routinely conduct energy audits of
operations to identify where savings can occur, and document lessons for future
operations. These audits will aid organizations to reducing costs, allowing more
funds to go to helping disaster survivors.

Feasibility Studies: Given the wide range of environments and social contexts in which
reconstruction can occur, feasibility studies specific to post-disaster conditions and
requirements, including data collection of the embodied energy of local materials,
should be conducted.

Standardize LCA: Before LCA can be a viable tool of analysis in the post disaster context,
databases, methodologies of embodied energy calculation, and methods of
allocation energy use, must be harmonized to improve transparency, clarity and
ease of use.

Harmonize Standards: The Interagency Standing Committee should establish a
mechanism (e.g., working group) to enable humanitarian actors to develop
standard specifications for shelter materials which incorporate energy efficiency
and which identify the trade-offs in terms of different shelter methods and material
options in different climates and recovery contexts.


16
Further information available via email to firdavs.faizulloev@undp.org, Disaster Risk
Management Program, UNDP Tajikistan.
17
A similar effort has been underway for some years with regards to post disaster shelter projects in
general.See http://www.sheltercasestudies.org/.
18
This group can be established under the Global Shelter Cluster Environment Community of
Practice.
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 13 January 2014
Construction Sector Engagement: There should be a greater engagement of the global
construction sector in defining the how and what for the integration of energy
efficiency into post disaster shelter, and overall post disaster construction, possibly
through the World Economic Forum or similar organization. In reality, post disaster
construction is a small effort when compared to the global construction sector, and
can clearly learn from the day-to-day experiences of the sector.

VI. References
Abrahms, D. D. (2013), Barriers to Environmental Sustainability in Post-Disaster Settings:
A Case Study of Transitional Shelter Implementation in Haiti. Disasters
(forthcoming).
Himli, Mohamed (2013), Interview.
Building Life Plans (2013a), About Us. Retrieved from BLP:
http://www.blpinsurance.com/.
Building Life Plans (2013b), Butterfly. Retrieved from http://blpinsurance.com/butterfly.
Cannon Design. (2012), Material Life: Embodied Energy of Building Materials. Cannon
Design.
Dixit, M., Fernandez-Solis, J., Lavy, S., and Culp, C. (2010), Protocol for Embodied
Energy Measurement Parameters. Energy and Buildings, 42(8), 1238- 1247.
Dixon, Willmott (2010). Embodied Energy: Briefing Notes 14. WD Re-Thinking Ltd.
Duque, C., Gutowski, T., and Garetti, M. (2010), A Tool to Estimate Materials and
Manufacturing Energy for a Product,
http://web.mit.edu/ebm/www/Publications/9_Paper.pdf.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2002), Retrieved May 2013,
from FAO News Room:
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/news/2002/7833-en.html
Finbeiner, M., Inaba, A., Tan, R., Christiansen, K., and Kluppel, H. (2006), The New
International Standards for Life Cycle Assessment ISO 14040 and ISO 14044.
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11(2), 80-85.
Gonzalez, A., Chase, A., & Horowitz, N. (2012), What We Know and Don't Know about
Embodied Energy and Greenhouse Gases for Electronics, Appliances and Light
Bulbs. ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. ACEEE.org.
Good, J. (2010), Materials and the Supply Chain. In W. W. Fund, & A. R. Cross, A Toolkit
Guide Green Recovery and Reconstruction: Training Toolkit for Humanitarian Aid.
San Francisco: Creative Commons.
Hagelaar, G. J., & van de Vorst, J. G. (2002), Environemental Supply Chain Management:
Using Life Cycle Assessment to Structure Supply Chains. International Food and
Agribusiness Management Review, 4, 399-314.
Hammond, G., & Jones, C. (2006), The Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) Version 1.5a
Beta. UK: University of Bath.
Harvey, D. L. (2010), Energy Efficiency and the Demand for Energy Services. Washington
DC: Earthscan.
Hendrickson, C., Horvath, A., Joshi, S., & Lave, L. (1998), Economic Input-Output Models
for Environmental Life-Cycle Assesment. Environmental Science and Technology,
32(7), 1.
International Organization of Standardization. (2012), Rio+20: Forging Action from
Agreement. Retrieved April 16, 2013, from International Organization for
Standardization:
http://www.iso.org/iso/rio_20_forging_action_with_agreement.pdf.
International Standards Organization (2009), Environmental Management: The ISO
14000 Family of International Standards.
Disaster Shelter/Energy Efficiency Scoping - 14 January 2014
Kennedy, James (2013), Interview.
Murray, Magnus W ( 2013), Interviews.
Nattional Renewable Energy Labratory (2009), U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database
Roadmap. Department of Energy.
Poston, L. (2010), The American Red Cross and World Wildlife Fund Launch Green
Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit for Disaster Recovery. Retrieved from WWF:
http://worldwildlife.org/press-releases/the-american-red-cross-and-world-wildlife-f
und-launch-green-recovery-and-reconstruction-toolkit-for-disaster-recovery
Prinz, G., and Nussbaumer, A. (2012), On Fast Transition between Shelters and Housing
after Natural Disasters in Developing. Lausanne: Ecole Polytechnique Fdrale de
Lausanne . Retrieved from
http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/176132/files/On%20Fast%20Transition%20betw
een%20Shelters%20and%20Housing%20after%20Natural%20Disasters%20in%
20Developing.pdf.
Salzer, C. E. (2011), Alternative Building Technologies. The Shelter Meeting 11b. Geneva.
Sem, G. (2007), Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change in Small Island
Developing States. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
United Nations Development Program (2008), Environmental Procurement Practice
Guide. Retrieved April 2013, from UNDP: http://www.undp.org/procurement.
United Nations Environment Program and Society of Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry, (2013), Life Cycle Initiative. Retrieved from www.lifecycleinitiative.org.