Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회논문집)

Korea Institute of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Green and Traditional Buildings using Life Cycle Assessment

전과정평가(LCA)를 이용한 친환경 인증 건축물과 일반 건축물의 환경영향 비교 사례 연구

  • Hong, Taehoon (Department of Architectural Engineering, Yonsei University) ;
  • Jeong, Kwangbok (Department of Architectural Engineering, Yonsei University) ;
  • Ji, Changyoon (Department of Architectural Engineering, Yonsei University)
  • Received : 2014.01.08
  • Accepted : 2014.03.28
  • Published : 2014.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to understand the environmental impact reduction of green buildings that are certified by Green standard for energy and environmental design(G-SEED). To ensure this end, this study assessed and compared the environmental impacts(global warning, ozone layer depletion, acidification, and eutrophication) of a G-SEED-certified elementary school building(green building) and an uncertified elementary school building(traditional building) using the life cycle assessment methodology. This study considered the environmental impacts from the material manufacturing, material transportation, on-site construction, and operation during 40 years. The comparison of the environmental impact intensity of two buildings showed that the green building generated much more environmental impacts than the traditional building. For example, the global warming potential of the green building was approximately 12.5% higher than of the traditional building since the global warming potential of the green building was 3.751 $t-CO_2eq./m^2$ while that of the traditional building was 3.282 $t-CO_2eq./m^2$. It signifies that the G-SEED doesn't guarantee the reduction of the environmental impacts in terms of four impact categories. Therefore, the G-SEED should be complemented and improved to achieve the environmental impact reduction.

본 연구는 국내에서 시행중인 친환경 건축물 인증제도 (G-SEED)에 따른 환경영향 저감 효과를 파악하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위하여, G-SEED 인증을 받은 초등학교 건축물과 인증을 받지 않은 일반 초등학교 건축물을 대상으로, 전과정평가 방법론을 이용하여 4가지 환경영향범주 (지구온난화, 오존층파괴, 산성화, 부영양화)에 따른 환경영향을 평가하고, 결과를 비교하였다. 건축물에 대한 환경영향평가는 자재생산, 자재운송, 시공, 운영단계를 포함하였으며, 운영기간은 40년으로 설정하였다. 두 건축물의 단위연면적당 환경영향을 비교한 결과, 일반 초등학교 건축물에 비해 친환경 인증 초등학교 건축물의 환경영향이 큰 것으로 나타났다. 예를 들어, 친환경 인증 초등학교 건축물의 지구온난화지수는 3.751 $t-CO_2eq./m^2$ 로 산출된 반면, 일반 초등학교 건축물의 지구온난화지수는 3.282 $t-CO_2eq./m^2$ 로 산출되어, 약 12.5% 크게 나타났다. 이는 G-SEED 인증이 4가지 측면에서의 환경영향의 저감을 보장하지 못한다는 것을 의미한다. 따라서 건축물로부터 발생하는 환경영향의 저감을 달성하기 위해서는 G-SEED에 대한 보완이 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Baek, C., Tae, S., Roh, S., Lee, J., and Shin, S. (2011). "A Study on the Requisite Elements of $LCCO_2$ Evaluation System at Planning Stage of Building," Korean journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 12(3), pp. 31-41. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2011.12.3.31
  2. Bare, J.C., Norris G.A., Pennington D.W., and Mckone T. (2003). "TRACI: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts." J. Ind. Ecol., 6(3), pp. 49-78.
  3. Construction Association of Korea (CAK). (2011). General Information for Construction. Construction Association of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
  4. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2005). Spatial differentiation in Life Cycle impact assessment - The EDIP 2003 methodology. EPA, Danish Ministry of the Environment. p. 43.
  5. Guinee, J.B., Gorree, M., Heijung, R., Huppoes, G., Kleijn, R., Koning, A., Oers, L., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Suh, S., Udo de Haes, H.A., Bruijn, H. Duin R., Huijbregts, M.A.J., (2001). Life cycle assessment: An operational guide to the ISO standards. final report part 2A. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment(VROM) and Centre of Environmental Science-Leiden University (CML). pp. 65-66.
  6. Hauschild, M. and Wenzel H. (1998). Environmental assessment of products: scientific background volume2. 1st ed, Champman & Hall, London.
  7. Heijungs, R., Guinee, J., Huppes G., Lankreijer, R.M., Udo de Haes H.A., Wegener Sleeswijk A., Ansems A.M.M., Eggle, P.G., Duin R., Goede, H.P. (1992). Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of products. Guide and Backgrounds. CML, Leiden University, Leiden.
  8. Hong, T., Ji, C., and Jang, M. (2012a). "An analysis on $CO_2$ emission of structural steel materials by strength using Input-Output LCA." Korean journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 13(4), pp. 131-139. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2012.13.4.132
  9. Hong T, Ji C, Jang M, Park H. (2012b). "Integrated Model for Assessing the Cost and CO2 Emission (IMACC) for Sustainable Structural Design in Ready-Mix Concrete." J. Environ. Manage., 103. pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.034
  10. Hong, T., Ji, C., and Jeong, K. (2012c). "Environmental Impact Assessment of Buildings based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Methodology." Korean journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 13(5), pp. 85-94. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2012.13.5.084
  11. Hong T., Koo C., and Park S. (2012d). "A decision support model for improving a multi-family housing complex based on CO2 emission from gas energy consumption." Build. Environ., 52(6), pp. 142-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.01.001
  12. Hong T., Kim H., and Kwak T. (2012e). "Energy Saving Techniques for Reducing CO2 Emission in Elementary Schools." J. Manage. Eng., 28(1), pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000101
  13. Hong, T., Ji, C., Jang, M., Park, H. (2013). "Assessment Model for Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions during the Construction Phase." scheduled for publication in J. Manage. Eng.
  14. IPCC Working Group (2007). Climate Change 2007, The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge University Press.
  15. ISO 14040 (2006). Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment-Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standardization.
  16. Kim, Y,D., Cha, H.S., Kim, K.R., and Shin, D.W. (2011). "Evaluation Method of Green Construction Technologies Using Integrated LCC and LCA Analysis." Korean journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 12(3), pp. 91-100. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2011.12.3.91
  17. Korea Institute of Construction Technology (KICT). (2004). The Environmental Load Unit Composition and Program Development for LCA of Building - The Construction of Method with LCA for Estimating Environmental Building. Korea Institute of Construction and Transportation Technology Evaluation and Planning, South Korea.
  18. Lee, K.H., Kim, N.G., and Rhee, E.K. (2003). "A Study on the Evaluation Method of Green Remodeling Considering LCA and LCC." Journal of the Korean Solar Energy Society, 23(1), pp. 57-67.
  19. Lee, K.H. and Yang, J.H. (2009). "A Study on the Functional Unit Estimation of Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emission in the Construction Materials." Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea, 25(6), pp. 43-50.
  20. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST), (2010). Statistical Yearbook of Education. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, South Korea.
  21. Pennington DW, Potting J, Finnveden G, Lindeijer E, Jolliet O, Rydberg T (2004). "Life cycle assessment Part 2: Current impact assessment practice." Environment International, 30(5), pp. 721-739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2003.12.009
  22. Tae S., Shin S., Woo J., Roh S. (2011). "The development of apartment house life cycle CO2 simple assessment system using standard apartment houses of South Korea." Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 15(3), pp. 1454-1467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.053
  23. Trusty W. (2006). Integrating LCA into LEED - Working group A Interim Report #1. US Green Building Council, p. 11.
  24. Wang M.Q. (1999). GREET 1.5: Transportation fuel-Cycle model, volume 2: appendixes of data and results. Center for Transportation Research, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.
  25. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) (2006). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion:2006, Chapter 8 in: Daniel, J.S., Velders, G.J.M., and Coauthors, Halocarbon Scenarios, Ozone Depletion Potentials, and Global Warming Potentials, WMO Geneva.