The technical or biological loop? Economic and environmental performance of circular building components

被引:9
|
作者
Jansen, Bas Wouterszoon [1 ,2 ]
van Stijn, Anne [1 ,2 ]
Eberhardt, Leonora Charlotte Malabi [3 ]
van Bortel, Gerard [1 ]
Gruis, Vincent [1 ]
机构
[1] Delft Univ Technol, Dept Management Built Environm, POB 5043, NL-2600 GA Delft, Netherlands
[2] Amsterdam Inst Adv Metropolitan Solut AMS, Bldg 027W,Kattenburgerstr 5, NL-1018 JA Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Aalborg Univ, Dept Built Environm, AC Meyers Vaenge 15, DK-2450 Copenhagen SV, Denmark
关键词
Circular economy; Building components; Life cycle costing; Life cycle assessment; Circular pathways; Circular design strategies; BUILT ENVIRONMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.spc.2022.10.008
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The construction sector can become more sustainable by applying the Circular Economy concept, which distinguishes two main pathways: substituting materials for biological materials, or optimizing the use or reuse of technical materials. Practitioners sometimes choose one pathway over the other, but knowledge of which of these pathways yields the best circular performance for the building industry is lacking. To determine which pathway is the most circular, the performance of biological, technical, and hybrid variants for a circular kitchen and renovation facade are developed and compared with one another and with the linear 'business-as-usual' (BAU) practice components. The novelmethods of Circular Economy Life Cycle Assessment (CE-LCA) and Circular Economy Life Cycle Costing (CE-LCC), and traditional material flow analysis (MFA) are used. The results show that the biological kitchen and facade consistently perform best in the CE-LCA, but perform second best and worst in the MFA respectively, and consistently perform the worst in the CE-LCC. Technical solutions perform best in the MFA. However, while the technical kitchen performs second best in the CE-LCA and best in the CELCC, the technical facade performs worst in the CE-LCA and third best in the CE-LCC. A purposeful, reversible, hybrid application of biological and technicalmaterials yields themost consistent circular performance overall, performing best in the CE-LCC (saving 17 % compared to BAU), second best in the MFA (saving 23 % compared to BAU), and third best in the CE-LCA (an increase of 21 % compared to the BAU). This study shows that neither a purely biological nor purely technical solution performs best overall, but that a purposeful hybrid solution can mitigate the disadvantages of both pathways. Further research is recommended to assessmore building components and other hybrid variants. (c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Institution of Chemical Engineers. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:476 / 489
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Environmental Design Guidelines for Circular Building Components: The Case of the Circular Building Structure
    Eberhardt, Leonora Charlotte Malabi
    van Stijn, Anne
    Stranddorf, Liv Kristensen
    Birkved, Morten
    Birgisdottir, Harpa
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (10)
  • [2] Modeling Social, Economic, Technical & Environmental Components in an Energy System
    Toba, Ange-Lionel
    Seck, Mamadou
    COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS, 2016, 95 : 400 - 407
  • [3] Economic evaluation for the technical performances of the building shell components: doors and windows
    Tronchin, Lamberto
    Durvilli, Ilaria
    Fabbri, Kristian
    Tarabusi, Valerio
    AMTA '08: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 9TH WSEAS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ACOUSTICS & MUSIC: THEORY & APPLICATIONS: ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FOR ACOUSTICS & MUSIC, 2008, : 127 - 132
  • [4] Evaluation of the Environmental Performance of Residential Building Envelope Components
    Tokbolat, Serik
    Nazipov, Farnush
    Kim, Jong R.
    Karaca, Ferhat
    ENERGIES, 2020, 13 (01)
  • [5] TECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES UTILIZATION OF VALUABLE COMPONENTS FROM LARGE-CAPACITY INDUSTRIAL WASTE
    Kasimov, A. M.
    Udalov, I. V.
    Kononenko, A. V.
    VISNYK OF V N KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY-SERIES GEOLOGY GEOGRAPHY ECOLOGY, 2015, (42): : 124 - 129
  • [6] Technical, Economic and Environmental Assessment of Xylitol Production in a Biorefinery Platform Toward a Circular Economy
    Clauser, Nicolas M.
    Fit, Cintia G.
    Cardozo, Rocio E.
    Rivaldi, Johana A.
    Felissia, Fernando E.
    Area, Maria C.
    Vallejos, Maria E.
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2024, 16 (23)
  • [7] Towards the implementation of circular economy in the water softening industry: A technical, economic and environmental analysis
    Micari, M.
    Moser, M.
    Cipollina, A.
    Tamburini, A.
    Micale, G.
    Bertsch, V
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 255
  • [8] Energy, environmental and economic performance of an external roof for a sustainable building
    Ouhaibi, Salma
    Gounni, Ayoub
    Belouaggadia, Naoual
    Ezzine, Mohammed
    Lbibb, Rachid
    ENERGY SOURCES PART A-RECOVERY UTILIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS, 2024, 46 (01) : 11978 - 11994
  • [9] Technical, Economic, and Environmental Comparison of Closed- Loop Recycling Technologies for Common Plastics
    Uekert, Taylor
    Singh, Avantika
    DesVeaux, Jason S.
    Ghosh, Tapajyoti
    Bhatt, Arpit
    Yadav, Geetanjali
    Afzal, Shaik
    Walzberg, Julien
    Knauer, Katrina M.
    Nicholson, Scott R.
    Beckham, Gregg T.
    Carpenter, Alberta C.
    ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING, 2023, 11 (03) : 965 - 978
  • [10] Optimisation of opaque components of the building envelope. Energy, economic and environmental issues
    Lollini
    Barozzi
    Fasano
    Meroni
    Zinzi
    BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2006, 41 (08) : 1001 - 1013