Analysis of embodied carbon emissions for a relocatable modular steel building in South Korea

Hanbyeol Jang; Hyeongjae Jang; Seungjun Roh; Yonghan Ahn

doi:10.22712/susb.20210016

All Issue

2021 Vol.12, Issue 2 Preview Page Next Page

General Article

Analysis of embodied carbon emissions for a relocatable modular steel building in South Korea

30 June 2021. pp. 204-214

PDF XML

Abstract

As the construction industry is emerging as a major factor in global environmental problems, research is ongoing to reduce the environmental impact in the construction process. In order to reduce the environmental impact of the construction process, the application of the modular construction method that can minimize the procedure in construction stage is expanding. Various studies have been conducted to expand the application of modular buildings, and environmental benefits analysis is also under way. However, the research conducted so far has targeted modular timber buildings that applied the structure of early modular buildings. The environmental impact evaluation studies of modular steel buildings, which are mainly used for the advantages of various aspects such as structure, are insufficient. The purpose of this study is to prove the sustainability of the modular steel building by conducting an analysis of the embodied carbon emissions. As a result of the analysis, it was possible to reduce the embodied carbon emission by about 37.75% of the modular steel building compared to the conventional construction method. Through these results, it was demonstrated that the environmental benefits of modular steel buildings reduce carbon emissions quantitatively in the same context as the environmental benefits of modular timber buildings already found in previous studies. These results are expected to be used as a basis to support the overall sustainability of the modular construction method.

Keywords

modular construction

modular steel building

embodied carbon emission

major construction material

modular school building

References

Y. Han, M.J. Skibniewski, and L. Wang, A Market Equilibrium Supply Chain Model for Supporting Self-Manufacturing or Outsourcing Decisions in Prefabricated Construction. Sustainability. 9(11) (2017), doi: 10.3390/su9112069. 10.3390/su9112069

C. Mao, Q. Shen, L. Shen, and L. Tang, Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects. Energy and Buildings. 66 (2013), pp. 165-176. 10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.07.033

Y.S. Lim, B. Xia, M. Skitmore, J. Gray, and A. Bridge, Education for sustainability in construction management curricula. International Journal of Construction Management. 15(4) (2015), pp. 321-331, doi: 10.1080/15623599. 2015.1066569. 10.1080/15623599.2015.1066569

O. Pons and G. Wadel, Environmental impacts of prefabricated school buildings in Catalonia. Habitat International. 35(4) (2011), pp. 553-563, doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.03.005.

S. Tae and S. Shin, Current work and future trends for sustainable buildings in South Korea. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 13(8) (2009), pp. 1910-1921. 10.1016/j.rser.2009.01.017

H. Islam, M. Jollands, and S. Setunge, Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost implication of residential buildings-A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 42 (2015), pp. 129-140. 10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.006

S. Roh, S. Tae, S.J. Suk, and G. Ford, Evaluating the embodied environmental impacts of major building tasks and materials of apartment buildings in Korea. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 73 (2017), pp. 135-144. 10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.081

R. Minunno, T. O'Grady, G.M. Morrison, and R.L. Gruner, Investigating the embodied energy and carbon of buildings: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 143 (2021), p. 110935. 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110935

B. Soust-Verdaguer, C. Llatas, and A. García-Martínez, Simplification in life cycle assessment of single-family houses: A review of recent developments. Building and Environment. 103 (2016), pp. 215-227. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.014

S. Tae, S. Shin, J. Woo, and S. Roh, The development of apartment house life cycle CO2 simple assessment system using standard apartment houses of South Korea. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 15(3) (2011), pp. 1454-1467. 10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.053

Seoul building permit statistics, Seoul Research Data Service [Online], 2019. Available at: http://data.seoul. go.kr/dataList/235/S/2/datasetView.do. [Accessed 05/25/2021].

L. Jaillon and C.S. Poon, The evolution of prefabricated residential building systems in Hong Kong: A review of the public and the private sector. Automation in construction, 18(3) (2009), pp. 239-248. 10.1016/j.autcon.2008.09.002

X. Xu and Y. Zhao, Some Economic Facts of the Prefabricated Housing. Industry Report, Rutgers Business School, Newark, NJ, 2010.

A. Baldwin, C.-S. Poon, L.-Y. Shen, S. Austin, and I. Wong, Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and traditional construction. Renewable energy. 34(9) (2009), pp. 2067-2073. 10.1016/j.renene.2009.02.008

M. Kamali, K. Hewage, and A.S. Milani, Life cycle sustainability performance assessment framework for residential modular buildings: Aggregated sustainability indices. Building and Environment. 138 (2018), pp. 21-41, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.019. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.019

S. Velamati, Feasibility, benefits and challenges of modular construction in high rise development in the United States: a developer's perspective. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2012).

J. Hwang, S. Choi, J. Lee, and Y.-S. Kim, Development of Bill of Service Framework for Modular Housing Cnostruction. Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 15(5) (2014), pp. 138-146. 10.6106/KJCEM.2014.15.5.138

R. Kyrö, T. Jylhä, and A. Peltokorpi, Embodying circularity through usable relocatable modular buildings. Facilities. (2019). 10.1108/F-12-2017-0129

Z. Xu, T. Zayed, and Y. Niu, Comparative analysis of modular construction practices in mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. Journal of Cleaner Production. 245 (2020), p. 118861. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118861

N. Atmaca, Life-cycle assessment of post-disaster temporary housing. Building Research & Information. 45(5) (2017), pp. 524-538. 10.1080/09613218.2015.1127116

X. Cao, X. Li, Y. Zhu, and Z. Zhang, A comparative study of environmental performance between prefabricated and traditional residential buildings in China. Journal of cleaner production. 109 (2015), pp. 131-143. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.120

M. Kamali and K. Hewage, Development of performance criteria for sustainability evaluation of modular versus conventional construction methods. Journal of Cleaner Production. 142 (2017), pp. 3592-3606, doi: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.108. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.108

D. Kim, Preliminary Life Cycle Analysis of Modular and Conventional Housing in Benton Harbor, MI, 2008.

J. Quale, M.J. Eckelman, K.W. Williams, G. Sloditskie, and J.B. Zimmerman, Construction Matters: Comparing Environmental Impacts of Building Modular and Conventional Homes in the United States. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 16(2) (2012), pp. 243-253, doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x. 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x

J. Monahan and J.C. Powell, An embodied carbon and energy analysis of modern methods of construction in housing: A case study using a lifecycle assessment framework. Energy and Buildings. 43(1) (2011), pp. 179-188, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.09.005.

J. Li, B. Rismanchi, and T. Ngo, Feasibility study to estimate the environmental benefits of utilising timber to construct high-rise buildings in Australia. Building and Environment. 147 (2019), pp. 108-120, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.09.052.

I. ISO, ISO-14040 Environmental management-life cycle assessment-principles and framework: International Organization for Standardization. (2006).

T.-H. Hong, C.-Y. Ji, and K.-B. Jeong, Environmental impact assessment of buildings based on life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 13(5) (2012), pp. 84-93. 10.6106/KJCEM.2012.13.5.084

J. Yang and S. Tae, A study on the major construction materials of non-residential buildings from the viewpoint of major environmental impact. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development. 10(2) (2019), pp. 56-64, doi: 10.22712/susb.20190007.

S. Roh, S. Tae, R. Kim, and D. Kim, Environmental impact assessment of polymer cement mortar filling method for structure maintenance. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development. 9(4) (2018), pp. 186-196, doi: 10.22712/susb.20180019.

I.Z. Bribián, A.A. Usón, and S. Scarpellini, Life cycle assessment in buildings: State-of-the-art and simplified LCA methodology as a complement for building certification. Building and Environment. 44(12) (2009), pp. 2510-2520. 10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.05.001

W. Pan, K. Li, and Y. Teng, Rethinking system boundaries of the life cycle carbon emissions of buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 90 (2018), pp. 379-390. 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.057

C. Chau, T. Leung, and W. Ng, A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied Energy. 143 (2015), pp. 395-413. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.023

V. Venkatraj and M. Dixit, Life cycle embodied energy analysis of higher education buildings: A comparison between different LCI methodologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 144 (2021), p. 110957. 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110957

S. Shin, Environmental performance evaluation and design techniques for environment friendly buildings. 2007, Seoul, Korea: Kimoondang Publ., pp. 142-150.

G. Tumminia, F. Guarino, S. Longo, M. Ferraro, M. Cellura, and V. Antonucci, Life cycle energy performances and environmental impacts of a prefabricated building module. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 92 (2018), pp. 272-283. 10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.059

Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KICT), Construction Standard [Online], 2019, Available at: http://www.codil.or.kr/helpdesk/search. Do?bbs Id=BBSMSTR_900000000 202&bbsAttrbCode =BBSA01 [Accessed 05/20/2021].

International Organization for Standardization Standardization, Environmental labels and declarations-Type III environmental declarations-Principles and procedures. ISO 14025, ed: ISO Geneva, 2006.

S.O. Ajayi, L.O. Oyedele, B. Ceranic, M. Gallanagh, and K.O. Kadiri, Life cycle environmental performance of material specification: a BIM-enhanced comparative assessment. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development. 6(1) (2015), pp. 14-24. 10.1080/2093761X.2015.1006708

Information

Publisher :Sustainable Building Research Center (ERC) Innovative Durable Building and Infrastructure Research Center
Publisher(Ko) :건설구조물 내구성혁신 연구센터
Journal Title :International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development
Volume : 12
No :2
Pages :204-214
Received Date : 2021-05-21
Accepted Date : 2021-06-28
DOI :https://doi.org/10.22712/susb.20210016

International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development ISSN:2093-761X(Print) 2093-7628(Online)

All Issue