Decision-making case study for retrofit of high-rise concrete buildings based on life cycle assessment scenarios

Transcription

1 Decision-making case study for retrofit of high-rise concrete buildings based on life cycle assessment scenarios Sára Erzsébet Horváth Dr Zsuzsa Szalay PhD Budapest University of Technology and Economics MŰEGYETEM 1782

2 Sustainability?

3 The reinforced concreteprecast large-panel construction method spread after the II. World War based on the Soviet technology flats/year altogether flats (app. 13.5% of the people) high energy consumption: app kwh/m 2 year

4 Case study: Budapest, XI. Etele str built: 1968 (renovated: 2007) basement + ground floor + 9 stories 360 apartements (altogether m2) thermal insulated sandwich panels district heating

5 Goal of the study To evaluate the environmental impacts of a typical high-rise panel residential building; To optimize the design for the refurbishment; To provide a decision support tool.

6 Life Cycle Assessment Functional unit: high-rise prefabricated reinforced concrete panel apartment building with altogether m 2 heated area in Budapest (Hungary) to provide housing for 100 years. Excel-based tool, Ecoinvent v2.0 inventory database District heating mix Energy consumption: according to the 7/2006 TNM decree (energy demand for lighting was neglected) based on EPBD

7 Life time of a large-panel building Life time: years The retrofit prolong the remaining life time: Additional thermal insulation on the external walls: decrease the expansion of the external concrete layer of the sandwich panels improve the weather-proofness of the facade hide the panel joints the further corrosion of welded steel elements is prevented (or slowed down) the thermal bridge effect is reduced, with the risk of fabric damages

8 Scenarios for refurbishment No overall renovation: Retrofit: retrofit 1 (thermal insulation): kwh/m 2 year (G) kwh/m 2 year (D) retrofit 2 (increased thermalins.): 92.0 kwh/m 2 year (C) retrofit 3 (+upgrading the heatingsystem and installing HRV): 65.4 kwh/m 2 year (A) retrofit 4 (+solar collectors): 38.9 kwh/m 2 year (A+) Demolition and erection of a new building: newbuilding 1: newbuilding 2: 49.4 kwh/m 2 year (A) 20.0 kwh/m 2 year (A++)

9 Normalization ( retrofit 1 scenario)

10 Global Warming Potential

11 Global Warming Potential

12 Global Warming Potential

13 Global Warming Potential

14 Ozone Depletion Potential

15 Acidification potential

16 Eutrophization

17 Cumulative Energy Demand, non renewable

18 Conclusions The comprehensive retrofit has the lowest environmental impact until about 60 years Even longer term: futureregulations about the energy performance? energy mix? building materials? The analysed time period depends on the decision makers investors vs. sustainability? (local) governments? political decisions?

19 Thank you for your attention! Sára Erzsébet Horváth Budapest University of Technology and Economics This work is connected to the scientific program of the " Development of quality-oriented and harmonized R+D+I strategy and functional model at BME" project. This project is supported by the New Hungary Development Plan (Project ID: TÁMOP-4.2.1/B-09/1/KMR ).