Investigation of Structural Systems in terms of the Decarbonizing Built Environment: Life Cycle Perspective

Öz

The construction industry is responsible for high energy consumption and environmental emissions. Building a decarbonized built environment requires evaluating the building industry in light of environmental performance criteria. In this respect, this study focuses on the environmental impact of structural elements, which constitute the largest percentage of a building. The study explains the life cycle assessment methodology and defines a life cycle framework for the analysis of structural systems. Life cycle energy and carbon analyses of alternative systems are performed using GaBi LCA software. The findings are evaluated in light of decarbonizing the built environment, and recommendations are presented. The study demonstrates the importance of the environmental impact of alternative systems, highlighting the necessity of incorporating environmental performance into an integrated decision-making mechanism at the early design stage.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Life cycle assessment
• built environment
• decarbonization
• structural systems.

Destekleyen Kurum

This study is produced within the scope of the project titled "Development of a Decision Support Model for Structure Selection in the Context of Earthquake and Environmental Impact (24/ÖAP/06)" supported by the Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, led by Prof. Dr. Ümit ARPACIOĞLU. We would like to thank the MSFAU Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit for their contributions to the study.

Etik Beyan

The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the study.

Strüktür Sistemlerinin Yapılı Çevrenin Karbondan Arındırılması Açısından Araştırılması: Yaşam Döngüsü Perspektifi

Öz

Yapı endüstrisi yüksek enerji tüketimi ve çevresel emisyonlardan sorumludur. Karbondan arındırılmış bir yapı çevre inşa etmek yapı portföyünün performansının kriterlerini değerlendirmesini gerektirir. Bu açıdan bakıldığında, bir aktarımların en büyük yüzdesini taşıyan taşıyıcı sistem elemanlarının odağına odaklanılmaktadır. Çalışmada, yaşam problemleri değerlendirmesi sistematiği açıklanmakta ve yapısal sonuçlar analizi için yaşam dağılımı aralıkları sınıflandırılmaktadır. GaBi LCA yazılımı aracılığıyla alternatif sistemlerin yaşam sorunu enerji ve karbon analizleri gerçekleştirilmektedir. Yapılı çevrenin karbondan arındırılması elde edilen bulgular değerlendirilerek öneriler açıklanmaktadır. Çalışma, alternatif sistemlerin çevre üzerinde oluşturduğu etkinin önemini, gösteri performansının erken tasarım aşamasında bütünleşik bir karar sıcaklıklarına dahil edilememesinin gerekliliğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesi
• yapılı çevre
• dekarbonizasyon
• strüktür sistemleri.

Destekleyen Kurum

This study is produced within the scope of the project titled "Development of a Decision Support Model for Structure Selection in the Context of Earthquake and Environmental Impact (24/ÖAP/06)" supported by the Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, led by Prof. Dr. Ümit ARPACIOĞLU. We would like to thank the MSFAU Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit for their contributions to the study.

Etik Beyan

The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the study.

Kaynakça

1. Agarwal, P. & Shrikhande, M. (2006). Earthquake resistant design of structures. PHI learning private limited, Delhi.
2. Azari, R. & Abbasabadi, N. (2018). Embodied energy of buildings: A review of data, methods, challenges, and research trends. Energy and Buildings, 168, 225–235. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENBUILD.2018.03.003
3. Balasbaneh, A. T. & Ramli, M. Z. (2020). A comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of concrete and steel-prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction structures in Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(34), 43186–43201. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-10141-3/METRICS
4. Bhuiyan, M. M. A., Hammad, A., Bhuiyan, M. M. A., & Hammad, A. (2023). A hybrid multi-criteria decision support system for selecting the most sustainable structural material for a multistory building construction. Sustainability, Vol. 15, 15(4). Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU15043128
5. Cabeza, L. F., Rincón, L., Vilariño, V., Pérez, G. & Castell, A. (2014). Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 29, 394–416. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2013.08.037
6. Calle Müller, C., Pradhananga, P. & ElZomor, M. (2024). Pathways to decarbonization, circular construction, and sustainability in the built environment. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 25(6), 1315–1332. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-09-2023-0400
7. Chau, C. K., Leung, T. M. & Ng, W. Y. (2015). A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied Energy, 143(1), 395–413. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APENERGY.2015.01.023
8. European Committee for Standardization. (2011). Sustainability of construction works—Assessment of environmental performance of buildings—Calculation method, Brussels (Standard No. EN 15978:2011).

9. European Commission (2018). Environmental Benchmarks for Buildings. JRC Technical Report. ISBN 978-92-79-80970-5.
10. Fay, R. & Treloar, G. (2003). Life Cycle Energy Analysis: A measure of the environmental impact of buildings. The Environment Design Guide, 1–7.
11. Gezer, A. & Gül, A. Eds. (2009). Kent Ormancılığı (Kavramsal-Teknik ve Kültürel Boyutu). SDU Orman Fakültesi, Kitap Yayın No: 86, s: 01-246. Isparta. 2009. (ISBN : 978-9944-452-30-4) SDU Basım evi- Isparta.
12. Guerrero, J. A. R., Yang, T. Y. & Swei, O. (2023). Earthquake and deterioration inclusive probabilistic life cycle assessment (EDP-LCA) framework for buildings. Resilient Cities and Structures, 2(3), 30–40. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RCNS.2023.05.003
13. Guggemos, A. A. & Horvath, A. (2005). Comparison of environmental effects of steel- and concrete-framed buildings. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 11(2), 93–101. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2005)11:2(93)
14. Gül, H. E. Gül, S. E. Akten, S. Gül, A. (2024). Determining the Criteria for the Conversion of Existing Education Buildings According to Green Building Standards IV. International Architectural Sciences and Applications Symposium May 30-31, 2024, p.2002-2016, Girne- Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. https://www.iarcsas.org/literature
15. IEA, ANNEX 57. (2016). Evaluation of Embodied Energy and CO2eq for Building Construction (Annex 57). Access Address (01.01.2025): https://www.iea-ebc.org/projects/project?AnnexID=57
16. International Organization for Standardization. (2006). Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines (ISO 14044:2006). Geneva, Switzerland.
17. Kim, S., Moon, J. H., Shin, Y., Kim, G. H. & Seo, D. S. (2013). Life comparative analysis of energy consumption and CO2 emissions of different building structural frame types. The Scientific World Journal, 2013. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/175702
18. Marinova, S., Deetman, S., van der Voet, E. & Daioglou, V. (2020). Global construction materials database and stock analysis of residential buildings between 1970-2050. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119146. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.119146
19. Oladazimi, A., Mansour, S. & Hosseinijou, S. A. (2020). Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Steel and Concrete Construction Frames: A Case Study of Two Residential Buildings in Iran. Buildings, Vol. 10, Page 54, 10(3), 54. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/BUILDINGS10030054
20. Pittau, F., Lumia, G., Heeren, N., Iannaccone, G. & Habert, G. (2019). Retrofit as a carbon sink: The carbon storage potentials of the EU housing stock. Journal of Cleaner Production, 214, 365–376. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.12.304
21. Sharma, A., Saxena, A., Sethi, M., Shree, V. & Varun. (2011). Life cycle assessment of buildings: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(1), 871–875. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2010.09.008
22. Simonen, K., Merrifield, S., Almufti, I., Strobel, K. & Tipler, J. (2015). Integrating environmental impacts as another measure of earthquake performance for tall buildings in high seismic zones. Structures Congress 2015 - Proceedings of the 2015 Structures Congress, 933–944. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479117.080;CTYPE:STRING:BOOK
23. Somer, M. E. (2025). An estimation approach on material intensities and global warming potential of Turkish residential stock. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, Volume 16, Issue 12.
24. Sphera. (n.d.). Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Software. Access Address (01.01.2025): https://sphera.com/product-stewardship/life-cycle-assessment-software-and-data/?nab=1
25. Stek, E., Delong, D., McDonnell, T. & Rodriguez, J. (2011). Life cycle assessment using ATHENA impact estimator for buildings: A case study. Structures Congress 2011 - Proceedings of the 2011 Structures Congress, 483–494. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1061/41171(401)42
26. TUIK. (n.d.). Türkiye 2024-2025 Konut Birimi Sayısı. Access Address (01.01.2025): https://tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files/vizyon2023/ia/insaat_son_surum.pdf.
27. Zuo, J., Pullen, S., Rameezdeen, R., Bennetts, H., Wang, Y., Mao, G., Zhou, Z., Du, H. & Duan, H. (2017). Green building evaluation from a life-cycle perspective in Australia: A critical review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70, 358–368. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2016.11.251