eco-region nw: sustainable construction ccinw, manchester, september 6, 2005 alastair moore
DESCRIPTION
Eco-Region NW: Sustainable Construction CCINW, Manchester, September 6, 2005 Alastair Moore University of Manchester Centre for Urban & Regional Ecology. Order of things. Project overview Ecological footprint Scenario modelling tool Case study: construction Conclusions & Questions. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Eco-Region NW: Sustainable Construction
CCINW, Manchester, September 6, 2005
Alastair Moore
University of Manchester
Centre for Urban & Regional Ecology
Order of things . . .
• Project overview
• Ecological footprint
• Scenario modelling tool
• Case study: construction
• Conclusions & Questions
Eco-Region North West
Energy & water
Goods & services
Renewable resources
Non-renewable resources Resource
depletion
Air, water, waste
Goods & services
OUTPUTSFuture impacts
Land & environmental capacity
INPUTS
Information & capital
PeoplePeople
CITIES & REGIONS as MATERIAL PROCESSORS
OBJECTIVES
Databasing: comprehensive data system on
regional resource and waste flows
Modelling: integrated model to analyse future
trends and scenarios
Benchmarking: reporting system for waste
minimization and resource productivity
Business applications: apply the model /
database system to the construction industry
Policy & public applications: use the database /
modelling system to analyse regional policy
Indicators:
Can be applied to regional economy: or SIC sectors, or products (e.g. house)
• Ecological impacts: ecological footprint (EF)
• Climate change: carbon intensity
• Resource efficiency: resource inputs / resource outputs
• Resource sufficiency: domestic production / domestic consumption
• Resource productivity: GVA in production per unit MFA
• Res.effectiveness: primary inputs / final consumption after waste
Ecological Footprint• Estimate of a population's consumption of food, materials and
energy in terms of the area of biologically productive land or sea required to produce those natural resources
• gha: A global hectare is one hectare of biologically productive space with world-average productivity
• 2002, biosphere had 11.4 billion hectares of biologically productive space (approx one quarter of the planet's surface)
• Includes 2.0 billion hectares of ocean and 9.4 billion hectares of land.
• 1 global hectare is a hectare representing the average capacity of one of these 11.4 billion hectares.
• Global hectares allow the meaningful comparison of the ecological footprints of different countries, regions, LAs, which use different qualities and mixes of cropland, grazing land, and forest
• When all global hectares of bioprucdtive land and sea are divided by the total global population, we end up with our fair earth share - 1.8 gha.
Construction sector:
case study
Drivers?
• UK Gov’t Sustainable Development Strategy • UK SCP• Sustainable Communities• Prescott’s £60K house• Kyoto and UK GHG targets• Aggregate levy• Landfill levy• SEA• SA• Competitiveness• Current NW footprint 6.2 gha/cap vs ‘fair earth
share of 1.8 gha/cap
Overall picture
Scenario modelling framework
• Housing stock, flow model
• Spreadsheet-model linked to REAP and others
• Baselines or exg stock, growth, clearances
• HH energy demand scenarios
• Housing construction (MFA, EF, C02)
Ecological footprint of construction
• 0.63 gha/cap household energy demand (~10% of total EF)
• 0.3-0.6 gha/cap for construction activities
• How to reduce the EF of housing by factor of 4 (i.e. ~0.16 gha/cap for energy demand & 0.08-0.15 for construction)?
To build new. . . . or not to build new?This is the question (sort of)
• ~15-18,000 new houses constructed per year (RSS)• Opportunity for energy efficiency gains & lower EF• Has considerable construction EF to annualize
• ~13,000 additional houses per year, net of clearances• ~3-5,000 homes cleared (demolished) per year
• Reduces EF of poor quality exg stock• Replacement houses have construction EF to annualize• New homes have lower operating EF
• Should no. of new more efficient houses be increased, or should we retrofit existing stock?
• Could retrofit some or all of 3-5,000 homes slated for clearing
Construction phase
How ‘heavy’ is a house, and what is it’s ecological impact?
EA code
123 code
TOTAL Ecological Footprint per
tonne (=direct + indirect) EF
EF
gha/tonne t/house gha
7 7 Other mining and quarrying 0.009 137.56 1.17
34 51 Structural clay products 0.076 19.60 1.48
35 52 Cement, lime and plaster 0.176 15.03 2.65
36 53 Articles of concrete, stone etc 0.028 105.78 2.99
13 31 Wood and wood products 1.523 7.82 11.90
25 42 Paints, varnishes, printing ink etc 0.615 0.69 0.43
30 47 Rubber products 1.305 0.11 0.14
31 48 Plastic products 1.262 2.10 2.65
32 49 Glass and glass products 0.306 0.99 0.30
33 50 Ceramic goods 0.283 0.76 0.21
37 54 Iron and steel 0.727 2.52 1.83
41 57-61 Structural metal products 1.433 2.00 2.86
44 70-72 Electric motors and generators etc 0.537 0.94 0.50
Total 150 + 137 29.1
MFA (standard vs eco) STANDARD gha/tonne
EF-standard (gha) ECO-TYPE gha/tonne
EF-eco-type (gha)
CEMENT 11.523 0.176
2.028 1.163 0.176
0.205
BRICK 6.343 0.076
0.482 0.423 0.076
0.032
LIME 0.079 0.176
0.014 0.226 0.176
0.040
STEEL 0.162 0.727
0.118
PVC WINDOWS 0.348 1.262
0.439
TIMBER - - 3.177 1.523
4.838
INSULATION (rock) 0.399 0.009
0.004
INSULATION (polystyrene) 0.272 1.262
0.343
INSULATION (cellulose) - 0.513 1.523
0.781
CER.TILES 0.401 0.283
0.113 0.401 0.283
0.113
CLAY TILES - 2.789 0.076
0.211
AGGREGATE -
3.541
6.220
House construction EF• Total EF embodied in construction materials required to build typical
house in the NW is 29 gha
• REAP tells us another 13 gha per house is due to the activities of actually assembling all these materials into a house
• Total EF of constructing a dwelling is 0.3 gha/cap/yr (assuming 60 yr lifespan) or 0.6 if 30 years is used (assuming closer comparability with operational costs)
Total EF / cap from construction
2005 2010 2025 2050
60 yr operational life 0.3
30 yr operational life 0.6
Household energy damand:
A series of potential policy options
combined option - no retrofit; add 12K Ecohomes Excellent
existing stock - 1/3 replaced by 2050 2900 2900 2864 2758 2591
new stock at increased rate 16k /yr 16 80 320 720
total stock: exg + new 2900 2944 3078 3311
energy EF in exg m.gha 4.3 4.30 4.30 4.30
energy EF in new: Ecohomes excellent m.gha 0.04 0.15 0.34
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 4.34 4.45 4.64
total EF / cap from HH energy demand 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.64
combined option - 40% house retrofit; add 12K Ecohomes Excellent
2900 2900 2885 2840 2766
new stock at increased rate 12k /yr 12 60 240 540
total stock: exg + new 2900 2945 3080 3306
exg dwelling efficiency:40% house gha per
dw 1.48 1.41 1.19 0.82
energy EF in exg: 40% house m.gha 4.3 4.06 3.37 2.26
energy EF in new: Ecohomes excellent m.gha 0.03 0.11 0.34
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 4.09 3.48 2.60
total EF / cap from HH energy demand 0.63 0.59 0.49 0.36
Results (build & operate)Policy options total EF / cap from HH energy demand
2005 2010 2025 2050
single policy: add 18K annually 0.63 0.65 0.68 0.69
combined option - no retrofit; add 12K Ecohomes Excellent
0.63 0.63 0.63 0.64
combined option - no retrofit; add 12K BedZED 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.61
combined option - 40% house retrofit; add 12K Ecohomes Excellent
0.63 0.59 0.49 0.36
combined option - retrofit to 40% house std ovr 30 yrs; add 9K BedZED
0.63 0.59 0.49 0.34
combined option - 40% house with 30% (31K) replacement; BedZED
0.63 0.57 0.42 0.25
combined option - 40% house with 50% (42K) replacement; BedZED
0.63 0.55 0.38 0.20
Total EF / cap from construction
60 yr operational life 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
30 yr operational life 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Questions• Is the EF the best metric to measure resource
efficiency?• How do we annualize the EF of construction
to ensure comparability between new build and retrofitting?
• Footprint calculations are an underestimate of our global impacts, and they rely on national and regional level data. Does this make the EF measure too simplistic?
• Is the EF’s accuracy sufficient to allow us to act on what the footprint is showing us now?
Conclusions
• Retrofitting may deserve a closer look.• Few key assumptions, but EF, CO2 and
material intensity results are comparable. • Start of a universal indicator of ecological
impact of consumption.• Data is generally standardized and
available yearly; hence updatable• More data will yield better resolution.
Alastair Moore
Research Associate
Centre for Urban & Regional Ecology
University of Manchester
CO2 emissions from construction of typical UK house
EA code
123 code
TOTAL Co2 for different building
materials
tonnes materials per house
Total CO2 per house
T CO2/tonne
7 7 Other mining and quarrying 0.019 137.56 2.58
34 51 Structural clay products 0.188 19.60 3.68
35 52 Cement, lime and plaster 0.671 15.03 10.09
36 53 Articles of concrete, stone etc 0.076 105.78 8.03
13 31 Wood and wood products 0.674 7.82 5.27
25 42 Paints, varnishes, printing ink etc 0.506 0.69 0.35
30 47 Rubber products 1.131 0.11 0.12
31 48 Plastic products 1.285 2.10 2.70
32 49 Glass and glass products 1.739 0.99 1.73
33 50 Ceramic goods 1.950 0.76 1.47
37 54 Iron and steel 4.061 2.52 10.25
41 57-61 Structural metal products 6.805 2.00 13.60
44 70-72 Electric motors and generators etc 1.371 0.94 1.29
Total 61.168
combined option - 40% house with 30% replacement
existing stock - 1/3 replaced by 2050 2900 2900 2772 2420 1931
new stock at increased rate 31k /yr 31 155 620 1395
total stock: exg + new 2900 2927 3040 3326
exg dwelling efficiency gha per
dw 1.48 1.41 1.19 0.82
energy EF in exg gha 4.3 3.90 2.87 1.57
new dwelling efficiency BedZed2 gha per
dw 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
energy EF in new gha/cap 0.02 0.10 0.22
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 3.93 2.97 1.80
total EF / cap from HH energy demand
0.63 0.57 0.42 0.25
combined option - 40% house with 50% replacement
existing stock - 1/2 replaced by 2050
2900 2900 2682 2122 1436
new stock at increased rate 42k /yr 42 210 840 1890
total stock: exg + new 2900 2892 2962 3326
exg dwelling efficiency gha per
dw 1.48 1.41 1.19 0.82
energy EF in exg gha 4.3 3.78 2.52 1.17
new dwelling efficiency BedZed2 gha per
dw 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
energy EF in new gha/cap 0.03 0.13 0.30
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 3.81 2.65 1.47
total EF / cap from HH energy demand
0.63 0.55 0.38 0.20
combined option - retrofit to 40% house std ovr 30 yrs; add 9K BedZED
2900 2900 2900 2900 2900
new stock at increased rate 9k /yr 9 45 180 405
total stock: exg + new 2900 2945 3080 3305
exg dwelling efficiency:40% house gha per dw 1.48 1.41 1.19 0.82
energy EF in exg: 40% house m.gha 4.3 4.09 3.44 2.37
new dwelling efficiency BedZed2 gha per dw 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
energy EF in new gha/cap 0.01 0.03 0.06
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 4.09 3.47 2.43
total EF / cap from HH energy demand 0.63 0.59 0.49 0.34
combined option - no retrofit; add 12K BedZED
2900 2900 2885 2840 2766
new stock at increased rate 12k /yr 12 60 240 540
total stock: exg + new 2900 2945 3080 3306
exg dwelling efficiency:40% house gha per
dw 1.48 1.41 1.19 0.82
energy EF in exg: 40% house m.gha 4.3 4.30 4.30 4.30
new dwelling efficiency BedZed2 gha per
dw 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
energy EF in new gha/cap 0.01 0.04 0.09
total EF from HH energy demand 1000 gha 4.30 4.31 4.34 4.39
total EF / cap from HH energy demand
0.63 0.63 0.62 0.61
SUMMARY OF THE REGION
all figures per capita unless otherwise stated units 2005 2010 2025long range
2050
population 1000s 1000s 6830 6887 7031 7232
households (2004) 1000s 2903 3000 3110 3317
size of household p 2.35 2.30 2.26 2.17
EF 2005 EF 2010 EF 2025long range EF
2050
EF / cap - central projection 6.2 6.55 7.73 10.19
total EF - central projection million.gha 42.35 45.12 54.36 73.69
Household food cons.
Household food cons.Regional
extraction
Regional extraction
Regional production
Regional production
Commercial food cons.
Commercial food cons.
Public food cons.
Public food cons.
Factors: transport &
construction
Factors: transport &
construction
Exported production
Exported production
Production waste / emissions
Exported extraction
Exported extraction
Imported extraction
Imported extraction
Imported production
Imported production
Primary mass
balance
Secondarymass
balance
Demand side mass
balance
Externalities mass balance
Consumer waste /
emissions
Consumer waste /
emissions
Tertiary waste / em
Tertiary waste / em
Secondary waste /
emissions
Secondary waste /
emissions
Primary waste /
emissions
Primary waste /
emissions
Eco-Region NW data framework
National level
Regional level
Sectoral level
Firm level Benchmarking
ASSESS / ENWORKS
2a) Ecological footprint
2b) sectoral footprint
Impacts ActivitiesProduction by sectors
Consumption by factors
Waste & emissions
5a) Sectoral model
(REWARD)
5c) Production
benchmarks
1) Mass balance model
3a) Regional waste
balance
4b) consumption benchmarks
3b) Waste sector
benchmarks
5b) Activity model (Atlas)
4a) Construction benchmarks
upstream downstream
REAP model: Application to Eco-Budget UK
LCA results
0.01 0.1 1 10
CEMENT
BRICK
LIME
STEEL
WINDOWS
TIMBER
INSULATION
CER.TILES
CLAY TILES
AGGREGATE
ECO-TYPE
STANDARD
weighted environmental impact (log scale)
Energy Retrofits to Existing Buildings
– Loft Insulation (100 – 200mm)
– Cavity Wall Insulation– Draught Stripping– Double glazing with low ‘e’
glass– Floor insulation– Gas Central Heating
Controls– Hot Water Tank Insulation– Hot Water Tank Thermostat– Primary Pipework
Insulation– Condensing Boiler– 10% renewables
– Yield 38% CO2 reductions, or
– 5.48 tonnes to 3.62 tonnes CO2/year/dwelling
– 5580 tonnes/yr if applied to approx 3,000 dwellings slated for demolition
– 53% reduction in EF by 2050 assuming 30 year phase-in