Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights
Author's personal copy
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This paper presents the results of a detailed LCA study of a low-energy consumption building (thermal
Received 22 January 2013 energy for heating equal to 11 kWh/m2 year) located in Perugia, Italy, according to European ISO 14040
Received in revised form 4 March 2013 and 14044. The building matches the criteria of environmental sustainability and bio-architecture, com-
Accepted 1 May 2013
plying with the “PassivHaus” standard. All life cycle phases were included in the research: acquisition
and production of materials, on-site construction and use/maintenance, demolition and material disposal
Keywords:
(100% landfilling and demolition with waste recycling). A life span of 70 years was considered.
Life Cycle Assessment
The research was therefore focused on cradle-to-grave life, based on data collected by authors, inte-
Passive house
Low-energy building
grated with data from the literature. In particular the study was carried out to analyze: the benefits due
Environmental sustainability to the use of recycled materials, a solar PV (during the utilization years) and the final demolition of the
building. The LCA modeling was performed using the SimaPro software application, connected to the
ecoinvent database. The results show that applying energy saving measures (highly insulated building
envelope and passive-house standard, solar PV, waste recycling and recycled products in pre-production
phase) could significantly decrease the impact of modern dwellings, with the consciousness that new
ways of building do not always provide a positive environmental outcome.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction are ample. Several studies have been conducted on buildings, since
the first Italian energy saving legislation was issued in 1976 (Law
In the last 20 years, the exploitation of non-renewable resources 373/76): they show a 10–20% of energy consumption associated
and the effects of their applications on environment and human with the construction phase, 50–80% during the use and the rest
health were considered central topics in political and scientific with the disposal [1,4–10].
debate worldwide. These kinds of resources have been used in dif- Improving sustainability of buildings is a necessary process
ferent sectors, from energy systems to private/public buildings and to develop a critical consciousness toward the environment and
to production of consumer goods. the use of Earth’s resources. In order to reach this goal, appro-
The construction sector is one of the sectors with more envi- priate tools to investigate their energy as well as environmental
ronmental issues, due to exploitation of non-renewable resources, impacts have to be used. In this framework, the present study aims
land use, energy consumption during all stages of life cycle and at assessing the life cycle of a low energy consumption building
waste demolition and disposal, and long-lasting effects of mistakes, built in central Italy and complying with “PassivHaus” standards.
owing to the long life of buildings [1,2]. Italian energy demand On one hand, efficient energy saving solutions determine bet-
is similar to the EU’s, in terms of net final uses, and is equally ter comfort conditions; on the other no material can be used in
divided into three parts, among the industry, transport and civil building construction without undergoing the processes of pro-
sectors; for the latter, tertiary covers 40% and residential housing duction, processing and transportation: those operations require
the remaining 60%, with a remarkable contribution associated with energy and use resources that can lead to a significant reduc-
heating (68%) [3]. However, margins for reducing consumptions tion of the environmental benefits gained by reducing its energy
consumption.
The study was conducted according to principles of LCA, Life
Cycle Assessment, currently the most appropriate scientific tool to
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 075 5853930; fax: +39 075 5853736.
quantify environmental impacts associated with a process/product,
E-mail addresses: stefania@unipg.it (S. Proietti), psdringola@mach.ing.unipg.it
(P. Sdringola), umberto.desideri@unipg.it (U. Desideri), zepparelli@tre-eng.com
through the inventory of input and output flows of a selected prod-
(F. Zepparelli), info@architettomasciarelli.com (F. Masciarelli), uct/process (energy and raw materials, different types of emissions
frenk.castellani@gmail.com (F. Castellani). and other important environmental factors), the assessment of
0378-7788/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.05.013
Author's personal copy
Table 1
Nomenclature PassivHaus standards [59].
potential impacts and the interpretation of results. The LCA is aimed 3. Life Cycle Assessment
at providing environmental information to support design choices,
through the evaluation of energy consumption, emissions, differ- The “Life Cycle Assessment is a method of evaluation of the
ent materials and building components, technical and construction environmental burdens associated with a product, process, or activ-
solutions, innovative energy systems to decrease the environmen- ity by identifying and quantifying energy and materials used and
tal impact. wastes released into the environment; and to identify and evalu-
ate opportunities to affect environmental improvements” [12]. This
approach determines the shift from a separate study of individual
2. Passive house standard elements of production processes, to an overall view, where all the
processes of transformation, starting from raw material extraction
Passive house refers to a specific construction standard defin- to end-of-life disposal (“cradle to grave”, addressing to the high-
ing a category of buildings with a very low-energy consumptions est degree of environmental sustainability “cradle to cradle” by
and good inner comfort conditions. The term passive means that reuse/recycling), are considered for the achievement of the specific
the external heat gains from solar radiation and the internal ones final function. The application of LCA methodology does not guar-
from occupants, lights, equipment and machineries (internal heat antee a reduction of emissions or energy consumption, but it allows
gains) are sufficient to keep the building at the desired temperature highlighting the weak points of production process and identify-
throughout the heating period. Energy efficiency solutions can be ing possible improvements of technology and management in the
easily integrated in the design of dwellings, because they do not perspective of sustainable development.
differ significantly from the ones used in current buildings in terms Moreover, the personal nature of some choices made in LCA
of esthetics and construction techniques [11]. has to be remarked: models used for inventory or environmental
In passive houses, the energy demand for heating should be impact assessments are limited by assumptions that they implicitly
lower than 15 kWh/m2 year, which is about 85% less than a standard include. A LCA is a scientific model, a simplification of a physical
house built according to Law 10/91 in Italy. This kind of con- system, therefore a complete representation of any effect on the
struction allows reducing up to 90% the energy demand of the environment can not be reached; the accuracy of a LCA depends
typical Central European building stock and over 75% of the aver- on availability, accessibility and quality of relevant information
age energy demand of new buildings that comply with the most [13,14].
advanced European regulations. Large energy savings have also The assessment includes all the activities, processes, by-
been demonstrated in warm climates, where typical buildings also products connected to the system analyzed, including raw material
require active cooling. Passive house standard ensures comfortable processing, production, maintenance, recycling and disposal.
inner conditions both in summer and in winter; these houses make According to the ISO 14040 and 14044 [15,16], an LCA study is
efficient use of the sun, internal heat sources and heat recovery, divided into four main areas:
allowing to supply the residual thermal demand, for example, with
a heat pump [11]. 1. Goal and scope definition: in this phase the investigated product,
The passive house concept was first developed in Sweden, the system boundaries and the data sources are described; the
from collaboration between Bo Adamson of Lund University and functional unit used in the analysis is defined as well.
Dr. Wolfgang Feist. This type of buildings were mainly built in 2. Life Cycle Inventory – LCI: an objective, data-based process
Germany (the first passive house was built in 1991 in Darmstadt- of quantifying energy and raw material requirements, air
Kranichstein by Dr. Feist; the energy demand amounts to an emissions, waterborne effluents, solid waste and other environ-
average of 10 kWh/m2 year and has remained stable for 15 years), mental releases incurred throughout the life cycle of a product,
Netherlands and Northern European Countries, while the first process or activity.
application of this concept in Italy started few years ago. The term 3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment – LCIA: a technical, quantitative
“passive” emphasizes that in the building: interventions of active and/or qualitative process to characterize and assess the effects
plants, powered by fossil fuels or electricity (e.g. traditional boilers of the environmental loadings identified in the inventory com-
or air conditioning units), are minimized; exploitation of solar radi- ponent.
ation and internal heat gains are maximized, as well as the recovery 4. Life Cycle Improvement: a systematic assessment of the needs
from exhaust air by means of high efficiency heat exchangers. and opportunities to reduce environmental burdens associated
Author's personal copy
Fig. 3. Composition of building envelope, in terms of weight. Fig. 4. Composition of building plants, in terms of weight.
Table 4
Comparison between estimated and measured energy consumption/PV production, utilization phase.
Table 6
End-of-life stages.
Table 7
End-of-life consumptions.
Table 8
General LCA results.
Table 9
LCA results with recycled materials in the pre-utilization phase.
Indicator Unit/m2 year Pre-utilization Utilization End-of-life Total life cycle Variation in
pre-utilization [%]
extraction, production, transportation, building process, occupa- Guidance, Publications Office of the European Union, 2010, available at:
tion/use, selective and controlled de-construction, waste handling http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu (accessed 28.12.2012).
[14] E.G. Hertwich, Life cycle approaches to sustainable consumption: a crit-
and treatment. The incidence of the various phases over the entire ical review, Environmental Science & Technology 39 (2005) 4673–4684,
life cycle in terms of environmental impacts was calculated by the http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es0497375.
LCA. The sum of contributions of the PV system in the end-of-life [15] UNI EN ISO 14040, Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment –
Principles and Framework, 2006.
phase causes a reduction of GER higher than 80%, and of GWP100 [16] UNI EN ISO 14044, Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment –
higher than 70%; in particular the choice of a recycling/reusing sce- Requirements and Guidelines, 2006.
nario after a virtuous selective deconstruction reduces the impacts [17] C. Scheuer, G.A. Keoleia, P. Reppe, Life cycle energy and environ-
mental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges
from 5 to 20%, while electricity production from renewable sources
and design implications, Energy and Buildings 35 (2003) 1049–1064,
may cause a further decrease in the range of 50–65%. Excluding http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(03)00066-5.
PV energy production, the utilization phase with winter heating [18] D. Kellenberger, H. Althaus, Relevance of simplifications in LCA of
building components, Building and Environment 44 (2009) 818–825,
and “other uses” (electrical appliances, cooling, lighting, wash-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.06.002.
ing, cooking, hot sanitary water) reaches 20–25% of the overall [19] G.A. Blengini, T. Di Carlo, The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and
impact (unlike traditional building where the percentage is equal materials in the LCA of low energy buildings, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010)
to 80–90%), maintenance phase 10–18%, building envelope 45–52%, 869–880, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.12.009.
[20] L. Gustavsson, A. Joelsson, R. Sathre, Life cycle primary energy use and car-
plants 3–9%, transportation 4–5%, construction process 2–5%. bon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building, Energy and
Focusing on the building envelope in pre-utilization phase, con- Buildings 42 (2010) 230–242, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.08.018.
crete basements are responsible of the main impact, reaching 27% [21] I. Blom, L. Itard, A. Meijer, Environmental impact of dwellings in use: mainte-
nance of façade components, Building and Environment 45 (2010) 2526–2538,
of GER, while the insulating materials contributes for 9% of total http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.05.015.
amount (the wood wool contributes with 15 ton). With reference [22] M.Z. Hauschild, Assessing environmental impacts in a life-cycle per-
to GWP100, the relative impact of concrete basements exceeds spective, Environmental Science & Technology 39 (2005) 81–88,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es053190s.
70%, while the subsystems made of timber and wood fiber reduce [23] T. Ramesha, R. Prakasha, K.K. Shukla, Life cycle energy analysis of
their relative contributions as 78% of their energy load is cov- buildings: an overview, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 1592–1600,
ered by renewable sources. A detailed analysis of the utilization http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.05.007.
[24] O.F. Kofoworola, S.H. Gheewala, Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a com-
phase shows that heating and ventilation contribute to 21% of
mercial office building in Thailand, International Journal of Life Cycle Assess-
GER and 25% of GWP100, while the maintenance phase reaches ment 13 (2008) 498–511, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0012-1.
16% and 12%, respectively. The choice of a selective and controlled [25] F. Castellani, Environmental Sustainability Evaluation of a PassivHaus in tem-
perate climate through life cycle assessment (LCA), University of Perugia, Italy,
de-construction allows to recycle and reuse efficiently the 95% of
2010 (MSc thesis).
materials; this causes a reduction of impacts if compared with 100% [26] Sustainability EvaluatioN of Solar Energy systems (SENSE), LCA Analysis, 2008,
landfilling option: 90% of GER and 87% of GWP100. available at: http://www.sense-eu.net/ (accessed 28.12.2012).
[27] Sustainability EvaluatioN of Solar Energy systems (SENSE), Recycling of
Production Waste, 2002, available at: http://www.sense-eu.net/ (accessed
28.12.2012).
References [28] V. Fthenakis, W. Wang, H. Chul Kim, Life Cycle Inventory analysis of the pro-
duction of metals used in photovoltaics, Renewable and Sustainable Energy
[1] O. Ortiz-Rodríguez, F. Castells, G. Sonnemann, Sustainability in the con- Reviews 13 (2009) 493–517, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.11.012.
struction industry: a review of recent developments based on LCA, [29] M. Asif, T. Muneer, R. Kelley, Life Cycle Assessment: a case study of a
Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 28–39, http://dx.doi.org/ dwelling home in Scotland, Building and Environment 42 (2007) 1391–1394,
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.11.012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.11.023.
[2] A. Mahdavi, E.M. Doppelbauer, A performance comparison of passive [30] N. Huberman, D. Pearlmutter, A life-cycle energy analysis of building
and low-energy buildings, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 1314–1319, materials in the Negev desert, Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 837–848,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.02.025. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.06.002.
[3] Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Eco- [31] T.Y. Chen, J. Burnett, C.K. Chau, Analysis of embodied energy use in
nomic Development (ENEA), Energy and Environmental Report 2007–2008, the residential building of Hong Kong, Energy 26 (2001) 323–340,
ENEA, Rome, Italy, 2009, available at: http://www.enea.it/ (accessed http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-5442(01)00006-8.
28.12.2012). [32] B.L.P. Peuportier, Life Cycle Assessment applied to the comparative evaluation
[4] O. Ortiz-Rodríguez, F. Castells, G. Sonnemann, Life Cycle Assessment of two of single family houses in the French context, Energy and Buildings 33 (2001)
dwellings: one in Spain, a developed country, and one in Colombia, a country 443–450, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(00)00101-8.
under development, Science of the Total Environment 408 (2010) 2435–2443, [33] A. Utama, S.H. Gheewala, Indonesian residential high rise buildings: a
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.02.021. life cycle energy assessment, Energy and Buildings 41 (2009) 1263–1268,
[5] K. Adalberth, Energy use during the life cycle of single unit http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.07.025.
dwellings: examples, Building and Environment 32 (1997) 321–329, [34] I.Z. Bribián, A.A. Usón, S. Scarpellini, Life Cycle Assessment in build-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(96)00069-8. ings: state-of-the-art and simplified LCA methodology as a complement
[6] S. Kotaji, A. Schuurmans, S. Edwards, Life Cycle Assessment in Building and for building certification, Building and Environment 44 (2009) 2510–2520,
Construction: A State of the Art Report, Society of Environmental Toxicology http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.05.001.
and Chemistry (SETAC), 2003. [35] G.A. Blengini, T. Di Carlo, A. Fiorenza, K. Zavaglia, Evaluation of Environmental
[7] L. Gustavsson, A. Joelsson, Life cycle primary energy analysis of residen- Sustainability of a Low-Energy Building Through LCA Methodology – Research
tial buildings, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 210–220, http://dx.doi.org/ Report, Polytechnic of Turin, 2007, available at: http://www.studioroatta.it/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.08.017. (accessed 28.12.2012).
[8] A. Utama, S.H. Gheewala, Life cycle energy of single landed houses in [36] Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Eco-
Indonesia, Energy and Buildings 40 (2008) 1911–1916, http://dx.doi.org/ nomic Development (ENEA), Energy and Environmental Report 2008, ENEA,
10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.04.017. Rome, Italy, 2009, available at: http://www.enea.it (accessed 28.12.2012).
[9] I. Sartori, A.G. Hestnes, Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low- [37] D. Kolokotsa, D. Rovas, E. Kosmatopoulos, K. Kalaitzakis, A roadmap towards
energy buildings: a review article, Energy and Buildings 39 (2007) 249–257, intelligent net zero positive energy buildings, Solar Energy 85 (2011)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.07.001. 3067–3084, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2010.09.001.
[10] S. Thiers, B. Peuportier, Thermal and environmental assessment of a passive [38] C.J. Engelsen, J. Mehus, C. Pade, D.H. Sæther, Carbon Dioxide Uptake in Demol-
building equipped with an earth-to-air heat exchanger in France, Solar Energy ished and Crushed Concrete, Norwegian Building Research Institute, 2005,
82 (2008) 820–831, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2008.02.014. available at: http://www.sintef.no/ (accessed 28.12.2012).
[11] European Program SAVE Intelligent Energy, Passive-On Project for Promot- [39] I. Bekir Topcu, S. Sengel, Properties of concretes produced with waste
ing Passive Houses and the PassivHaus Standard in Warm Climates, 1st concrete aggregate, Cement and Concrete Research 34 (2004) 1307–1312,
January 2005–30th September 2007, available at: http://www.passive-on.org http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2003.12.019.
(accessed 28.12.2012). [40] N. Dantata, A. Touran, J. Wang, An analysis of cost and duration for decon-
[12] Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Guidelines for struction and demolition of residential buildings in Massachusetts, Resources,
Life Cycle Assessment: A “Code of Practice”, 1993. Conservation and Recycling 44 (2005) 1–15, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
[13] European Commission, Joint Research Centre JRC, Institute for Environ- j.resconrec.2004.09.001.
ment and Sustainability IES, International Reference Life Cycle Data System [41] G. Rodriguez, F. Alegre, G. Martinez, The contribution of environmental
(ILCD), Handbook – General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment – Detailed management systems to the management of construction and demolition
Author's personal copy
waste: the case of the autonomous community of Madrid (Spain), environmental impacts of residential buildings in the European
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 50 (2007) 334–349, http://dx.doi.org/ Union: potential and costs, Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 976–984,
10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.06.008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.01.009.
[42] N. Kartam, N. Al-Mutairi, I. Al-Ghusain, J. Al-Humoud, Environmental manage- [53] H. Arslan, Re-design, re-use and recycle of temporary houses, Build-
ment of construction and demolition waste in Kuwait, Waste Management 24 ing and Environment 42 (2007) 400–406, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
(2004) 1049–1059, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2004.06.003. j.buildenv.2005.07.032.
[43] C.J. Kibert, A.R. Chini, J. Languell, Implementing deconstruction in the United [54] M. Lavagna, Life Cycle Assessment in Construction Sector: Design and
States, in: C.J. Kibert, A.R. Chini (Eds.), Overview of Deconstruction in Selected Build in a Perspective of Environmental Sustainability, Hoepli, Milan, Italy,
Countries, International Council for Research and Innovation in Building Con- 2008.
struction (CIB), Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 2000, pp. 181–239, available at: [55] C. Koroneos, G. Kottas, Energy consumption modeling analysis and envi-
http://www.iip.kit.edu/ (accessed 28.12.2012). ronmental impact assessment of model house in Thessaloniki – Greece,
[44] C. Thormark, Conservation of energy and natural resources by recycling Building and Environment 42 (2007) 122–138, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
building waste, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 33 (2001) 113–130, j.buildenv.2005.08.009.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-3449(01)00078-7. [56] B. Polster, B. Peuportier, I.B. Sommereux, P.D. Pedregal, C. Gobin, E.
[45] G.A. Blengini, Life cycle of buildings, demolition and recycling potential: a Durand, Evaluation of the environmental quality of buildings towards a
case study in Turin, Italy, Building and Environment 44 (2009) 319–330, more environmentally conscious design, Solar Energy 57 (1996) 219–230,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.03.007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(96)00071-0.
[46] C. Thormark, The effect of material choice on the total energy need and recycling [57] G. Verbeeck, H. Hens, Life Cycle Inventory of buildings: a con-
potential of a building, Building and Environment 41 (2006) 1019–1026, tribution analysis, Building and Environment 45 (2010) 964–967,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.04.026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.10.003.
[47] A. Dodoo, L. Gustavsson, R. Sathre, Carbon implications of end-of-life manage- [58] A. Dodoo, L. Gustavsson, R. Sathre, Life cycle primary energy implica-
ment of building materials, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 53 (2009) tion of retrofitting a wood-framed apartment building to passive house
276–286, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.12.007. standard, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 54 (2010) 1152–1160,
[48] B. Upton, R. Miner, M. Spinney, L.S. Heath, The greenhouse gas and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.03.010.
energy impacts of using wood instead of alternatives in residential con- [59] A. Carotti, D. Madé, Passive House in Italy – Theory and Project of a “Passive
struction in the United States, Biomass and Bioenergy 32 (2008) 1–10, House” with Traditional Technology, Rockwool, Milan, Italy, 2006.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.07.001. [60] O.F. Kofoworola, S.H. Gheewala, Life cycle energy assessment of a typi-
[49] M. Kumar Dixit, J.L. Fernández-Solís, S. Lavy, C.H. Culp, Identification of parame- cal office building in Thailand, Energy and Buildings 41 (2009) 1076–1083,
ters for embodied energy measurement: a literature review, Energy and Build- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.06.002.
ings 42 (2010) 1238–1247, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.02.016. [61] S. Citherlet, T. Defaux, Energy and environmental comparison of three variants
[50] P. Hernandez, P. Kenny, From net energy to zero energy buildings: defining life of a family house during its whole life span, Building and Environment 42 (2007)
cycle zero energy buildings (LC-ZEB), Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 815–821, 591–598, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.09.025.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.12.001. [62] M. Hauschild, J. Jeswiet, L. Alting, From Life Cycle Assessment to sustainable
[51] D.S. Parker, Very low energy homes in the United States: perspectives on production: status and perspectives, CIRP Annals: Manufacturing Technology
performance from measured data, Energy and Buildings 41 (2009) 512–520, 54 (2005) 1–21, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60017-1.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.11.017. [63] C. Thormark, A low energy building in a life cycle – its embodied energy, energy
[52] F. Nemry, A. Uihlein, C.M. Colodel, C. Wetzel, A. Braune, B. Wittstock, I. need for operation and recycling potential, Building and Environment 37 (2002)
Hasan, J. Kreißig, N. Gallon, S. Niemeier, Y. Frech, Options to reduce the 429–435, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(01)00033-6.