Life Cycle Assessment of Internal Wall Panels: A Case Study of Sumerbank Kayseri Textile Factory Restoration Process

Year 2023, , 345 - 354, 31.07.2023

Elif Özkaya Kırılmaz Buket Metin

https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.1258158

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This study presents a case study that aims to select the ideal internal wall panel option causing less environmental impact for the Sumerbank Kayseri Textile Factory restoration process, which is now used as part of Abdullah Gul University’s main campus. Since the university has an environmental agenda, examining the environmental impacts of the materials used for the ongoing restoration process has the potential to contribute to these goals. For this purpose, the three most used interior wall panels in the Turkish building material industry, gypsum, reinforced gypsum, and cement-based panels, were selected within the scope of the case study. The life cycle assessment (LCA) method was used to compare these options, and analyses were conducted using SimaPro software. The data required for life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) were obtained based on market analyses and also from the EcoInvent Life Cycle Inventory Database. At the end of the study, damage assessment, weighting, and midpoint and endpoint data of the characterization results provided by the ReCiPe method were compared and interpreted. According to the overall results obtained for the described case conditions, reinforced gypsum panel causes the most adverse environmental impacts, followed by cement and gypsum panels, respectively.

Keywords

Ecosystem quality, human health, internal wall panels, life cycle assessment, resource use

Thanks

This article was presented at the ATI2022 “De-Constructing and Re-Using Architecture” Symposium and has been published only as an abstract. It represents a case study conducted as part of the ongoing Master’s Thesis at Abdullah Gul University, Graduate School of Engineering and Science, Department of Architecture. The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the study.

İç Duvar Panellerinin Yaşam Döngüsü Değerlendirmesi: Sümerbank Kayseri Tekstil Fabrikası Restorasyon Süreci Örneği

Abstract

Bu çalışma, günümüzde Abdullah Gül Üniversitesi yerleşkesinin bir parçası olarak kullanılan Sümerbank Kayseri Tekstil Fabrikası restorasyon süreci için çevresel etkiye daha az neden olan ideal iç duvar paneli seçeneğini belirlemeyi amaçlayan bir vaka çalışması sunmaktadır. Üniversitenin tanımlı çevresel hedefleri olduğu için, devam eden restorasyon sürecinde kullanılan malzemelerin çevresel etkilerinin incelenmesi, bu hedeflere katkı sağlama potansiyeline sahiptir. Bu amaçla vaka çalışması kapsamında Türk yapı malzemeleri sektöründe en çok kullanılan üç iç duvar paneli olan alçı, güçlendirilmiş alçı ve çimento esaslı paneller seçilmiştir. Bu seçenekleri karşılaştırmak için yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesi (YDD) yöntemi kullanılmış ve analizler SimaPro yazılımı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Yaşam döngüsü etki değerlendirmesi için gereken veriler, piyasa araştırmasının yanı sıra EcoInvent Yaşam Döngüsü Envanter Veri Tabanından elde edilmiştir. Çalışma sonunda, ReCiPe yöntemi tarafından sağlanan hasar değerlendirmesi, ağırlıklandırma ve orta nokta ve bitiş noktası verilerini açıklayan karakterizasyon sonuçları karşılaştırılarak yorumlanmıştır. Örnek çalışma kapsamında elde edilen genel sonuçlara göre, güçlendirilmiş alçı panel en olumsuz çevresel etkilere sebep olurken, onu sırasıyla çimento paneller ve alçı paneller takip etmektedir.

Keywords

Ekosistem kalitesi, insan sağlığı, iç duvar panelleri, yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesi, kaynak kullanımı

References

• Abdullah Gul University (AGU). (n.d.). Sustainability at AGU. https://sustainability.agu.edu.tr/sdg11
• Acero, A., Rodríguez, C. & Ciroth, A. (2016). Impact assessment methods in life cycle assessment and their impact categories, Greendelta, 13-15.
• Balasbaneh, A.T., Bin Marsano, A.K. & Gohari, A. (2019). Sustainable materials selection based on flood damage assessment for a building using LCA and LCC. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222, 844-855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.005
• Ben-Alon, L., Loftness, V., Harries, K.A., DiPietro G. & Hameen, E.C. (2019). Cradle to site Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of natural vs conventional building materials: A case study on cob earthen material. Building and Environment, 160, 1 -10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.05.028
• British Standards Institution. (2006). BS EN ISO 14040: 2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework, London (ISO 14040).
• Buyle, M., Galle, W., Debacker, W. & Audenaert, A. (2019). Sustainability assessment of circular building alternatives: Consequential LCA and LCC for internal wall assemblies as a case study in a Belgian context. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 141-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.306
• Cascione, V., Roberts, M., Allen, S., Dams, B., Maskell, D., Shea, A., Walker, P. & Emmitt, S. (2022). Integration of life cycle assessments (LCA) in circular bio-based wall panel design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 344, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130938
• Cetiner, I. & Ceylan, N. (2013). Environmental consequences of rehabilitation of residential buildings in Turkey: A case study of Istanbul. Building and Environment, 69, 149-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.07.015
• Cetiner, I. & Levent, Ş. (2022). Production and construction process environmental impact assessment of waterproofing applications. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 37(1), 145- 158. doi: 10.17341/gazimmfd.723798
• Cooper, J. S. & Fava, J. (2006). Life cycle assessment practitioner survey: Summary of results. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10(4), 12 -14.
• Grant, T. & Macdonald, F. (2009). Life cycle assessment as decision support: A systemic critique. In R. Horne, T. Grant, & K. Verghese (Eds.), Life cycle assessment: Principles, practice and prospects (pp. 33-41). CSIRO Publishing.
• Horne, R. E. (2009). Life cycle assessment: Origins, principles and context. In R. Horne, T. Grant, & K. Verghese (Eds.), Life cycle assessment: Principles, practice and prospects (pp. 1-8). CSIRO Publishing.
• Huijbregts, M. A. J., Steinmann, Z. J. N., Elshout, P. M. F., Stam, G., Verones, F., Vieira, M. D. M., Hollander, A., Zijp, M., & Van Zelm, R. (2016). ReCiPe 2016 v1.1, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (Report No. RIVM Report 2016-0104).
• Khasreen, M. M., Banfill, P. F. G., & Menzies, G. F. (2009). Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: A review. Sustainability, 1, 674-701. doi:10.3390/su1030674
• Llantoy, N., Chàfer, M. & Cabeza, L.F. (2020). A comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of different insulation materials for buildings in the continental Mediterranean climate. Energy & Buildings, 225, 1 -12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110323
• Marsh, R. (2016). LCA profiles for building components: Strategies for the early design process. Building Research & Information, 44(4), 358-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2016.1102013
• McAlister, S. & Horne, R. E. (2009). Climate change responses: Carbon offsets, biofuels and the life cycle assessment contribution. In R. Horne, T. Grant, & K. Verghese (Eds.), Life cycle assessment: Principles, practice and prospects (pp. 125-140). CSIRO Publishing.
• Ozdemir, A. (2019). Yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesi ve sürdürülebilirlik ilişkisi bağlamında sosyal yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesinin (S-LCA) yeri [The place of social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) in the context of life cycle assessment and sustainability relationship]. Eskisehir Technical University Journal of Science and Technology B-Theoretical Sciences, 7(2), 166-183. https://doi.org/10.20290/estubtdb.517254
• PRé Sustainability. (2022). SimaPro database manual: Methods library. https://simapro.com/wp- content/uploads/2022/07/DatabaseManualMethods.pdf
• PRé Sustainability. (2021). SimaPro tutorial (Version 9.3) [Computer software]. LCA Software.
• Rebitzer, G., Ekvall, T., Frischknecht, R., Hunkeler, D., Norris, G., Rydberg, T., … Pennington, D. W. (2004). Life cycle assessment Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environment International, 30(5), 701–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005
• Rodrigo-Bravo, A., Cuenca-Romero, L.A., Calderón, V., Rodríguez, A. & Gutiérrez-González, S. (2022). Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) between the standard gypsum ceiling tile and polyurethane gypsum ceiling tile. Energy & Buildings, 259, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.111867