Life cycle carbon emissions and comparative evaluation of selected open source UK embodied carbon counting tools

Journal article


Ekundayo, D., Babatunde, S.O., Ekundayo, A., Perera, S. and Udeaja, C. (2019). Life cycle carbon emissions and comparative evaluation of selected open source UK embodied carbon counting tools. Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Buildings. 19 (2), pp. 220-242. https://doi.org//10.5130/AJCEB.v19i2.6692
AuthorsEkundayo, D., Babatunde, S.O., Ekundayo, A., Perera, S. and Udeaja, C.
Abstract

Life cycle carbon emissions (LCO2), made up of operational and embodied carbon, have become a major metric of building environmental performance and energy efficiency. Whilst there are now standard methods for operational carbon assessment due to its significance in LCO2, there is still less emphasis on embodied carbon counting. However, the relative contribution of embodied carbon is on the rise as buildings become increasingly energy efficient. Following the rule that only something which is measurable is manageable, it is essential that we are able to accurately count embodied carbon. This study therefore reviews the concept of LCO2 in buildings and further investigates the open source UK tools for embodied carbon counting. A comparative evaluation case study, which validates an earlier review, showed that there is no logic and consistency in the carbon figures produced by embodied carbon counting tools. This is mainly due to different system boundaries, varying underlying assumptions and methodological differences in calculation. The findings suggest that an industry-agreed data structure and common methodology is needed for embodied carbon counting. Generally, the study provides insights into the use and capabilities of the identified open source UK embodied carbon counting tools, and is relevant to the on-going debate about carbon regulation.

Keywordscarbon counting tools, embodied carbon, life cycle carbon emissions, operational carbon, system boundaries, UK
Year2019
JournalAustralian Journal of Construction Economics and Buildings
Journal citation19 (2), pp. 220-242
PublisherUTS ePress
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org//10.5130/AJCEB.v19i2.6692
Publication dates
Print21 Nov 2019
Publication process dates
Accepted2019
Deposited12 Oct 2020
Publisher's version
License
File Access Level
Open
Permalink -

https://openresearch.lsbu.ac.uk/item/8qx42

Download files


Publisher's version
Carbon Paper.pdf
License: CC BY 4.0
File access level: Open

  • 3
    total views
  • 4
    total downloads
  • 3
    views this month
  • 4
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

Barriers to BIM implementation and ways forward to improve its adoption in the Nigerian AEC firms
Babatunde, SO, Udeaja, C and Adekunle, AO (2020). Barriers to BIM implementation and ways forward to improve its adoption in the Nigerian AEC firms. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbpa-05-2019-0047
Urban Heritage Conservation and Rapid Urbanization: Insights from Surat, India
Udeaja, C., Trillo, C., Awuah, K., Makore, B., Patel, D., Mansuri, L. and Jha, K. (2020). Urban Heritage Conservation and Rapid Urbanization: Insights from Surat, India. Sustainability. 12 (6), pp. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062172
Sustainable development in a construction related curriculum- quantity surveying students’ perspective
Tan A., Udeaja, C., Babatunde, S.O. and Ekundayo, D. (2017). Sustainable development in a construction related curriculum- quantity surveying students’ perspective. International Journal of Strategic Property Management. 21 (1), pp. 101-113. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2016.1246387
BIM adoption within Australian Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs): an innovation diffusion model
Hosseini, M.R., Banihashemi, S., Chileshe, N., Namzadi, M.O., Udeaja, C., Rameezdeen, R. and McCuen, T. (2016). BIM adoption within Australian Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs): an innovation diffusion model. Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Buildings. 16 (3), pp. 71-86. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v16i3.5159