International conference on construction engineering and project management (국제학술발표논문집)

  • 2024.07a
  • /
  • Pages.41-48
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 2508-9048(eISSN)
Korea Institute of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Measuring and reducing the embodied carbon in high-rise buildings through innovative modular construction

  • Xiaohan WU (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) ;
  • Yue TENG (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) ;
  • Geoffrey Qiping SHEN (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) ;
  • Jingke HONG (School of Management Science and Real Estate, Chongqing University) ;
  • Zongjun ZHANG (China State Construction Hailong Technology Company Limited) ;
  • Qiong WANG (China State Construction Hailong Technology Company Limited)
  • Published : 2024.07.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The construction industry is a significant contributor to carbon emissions, with its life cycle emissions posing significant environmental challenges. Despite its increasing importance, embodied carbon (EC) generated from the construction process is often ignored. Modular construction (MC), characterized by a combination of off-site manufacturing and on-site assembly, has been recognized for its potential to contribute to environmental benefits. However, there is still a lack of systematic explanation of urban high-rise MC. This study aims to identify whether and to what extent high-rise MC can achieve EC reductions and lay the foundation for effective carbon reductuons in the construction industry. To achieve this, the study develops a multi-level EC measurement framework for assessing EC during the construction process, using a real case to quantify the EC and determine carbon reduction performance. The innovation is a more comprehensive understanding of the boundaries of EC, as MC includes the amount of superstructure work and decoration integration. The results show that although the MC will increase EC from the transportation stage due to heavier modules, it achieves a net reduction in total EC by reducing on-site machinery energy consumption and waste rates. In conclusion, this study contributes to a better understanding of the EC emissions associated with high-rise MC, offering a valuable measurement framework for global regions evaluating the EC impacts of high-rise MC in similar contexts.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The work presented in this paper was supported by the General Research Fund of the Hong Kong Research Grants Council (Project No.: 15220923), Young Scientists Fund of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (72301232), Shenzhen Municipal Science and Technology Innovation Commission Key Basic Research Fund (Project No.: JCYJ20220818102211024), Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (No. 2023A1515012558), Hong Kong Polytechnic University Carbon Neutrality Fund (No. P0043733), and CSCI-2021-Z-10-07. Also acknowledged is support from China State Hailong Technology Company Limited for access to the case building for study.

References

  1. Al-Hussein, M., Manrique, J. D. & Mah, D. 2009. North Ridge CO2 analysis report: comparison between modular and on-site construction. University of Alberta: Edmontom, AB, Canada.
  2. Aye, L., Ngo, T., Crawford, R. H., Gammampila, R. & Mendis, P. 2012. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy analysis of prefabricated reusable building modules. Energy and buildings, 47, 159-168.
  3. Bribian, I. Z., Capilla, A. V. & Uson, A. A. 2011. Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Building and environment, 46, 1133-1140.
  4. Bureau, E. 2017. Hong Kong's climate action plan 2030+. Environment Bureau Hong Kong.
  5. Chapa, J. 2019. Bringing embodied carbon upfront. Built Environment Economist: Australia and New Zealand, 38-41.
  6. Chau, C. K., Leung, T. & Ng, W. 2015. A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied energy, 143, 395-413.
  7. Cole, R. J. 1999. Building environmental assessment methods: clarifying intentions. Building Research & Information, 27, 230-246.
  8. Gerilla, G. P., Teknomo, K. & Hokao, K. 2007. An environmental assessment of wood and steel reinforced concrete housing construction. Building and Environment, 42, 2778-2784.
  9. Gustavsson, L., Joelsson, A. & Sathre, R. 2010. Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy and buildings, 42, 230-242.
  10. Kamali, M. & Hewage, K. 2016. Life cycle performance of modular buildings: A critical review. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 62, 1171-1183.
  11. Kawecki, L. R. 2010. Environmental performance of modular fabrication: calculating the carbon footprint of energy used in the construction of a modular home, Arizona State University.
  12. Mao, C., Shen, Q., Shen, L. & Tang, L. 2013. Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects. Energy and Buildings, 66, 165-176.
  13. Monahan, J. & Powell, J. C. 2011. An embodied carbon and energy analysis of modern methods of construction in housing: A case study using a lifecycle assessment framework. Energy and buildings, 43, 179-188.
  14. Omar, W. M. S. W., Doh, J.-H., Panuwatwanich, K. & Miller, D. 2014. Assessment of the embodied carbon in precast concrete wall panels using a hybrid life cycle assessment approach in Malaysia. Sustainable Cities and Society, 10, 101-111.
  15. Pervez, H., Ali, Y. & Petrillo, A. 2021. A quantitative assessment of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from conventional and modular construction: A case of developing country. Journal of Cleaner Production, 294, 126210.
  16. Pörtner, H. O., Roberts, D. C., Adams, H., Adler, C., Aldunce, P., Ali, E., Begum, R. A., Betts, R., Kerr, R. B. & Biesbroek, R. 2022. Climate change 2022: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. IPCC.
  17. Quale, J., Eckelman, M. J., Williams, K. W., Sloditskie, G. & Zimmerman, J. B. 2012. Construction matters: Comparing environmental impacts of building modular and conventional homes in the United States. Journal of industrial ecology, 16, 243-253.
  18. Tavares, V., Lacerda, N. & Freire, F. 2019. Embodied energy and greenhouse gas emissions analysis of a prefabricated modular house: The "Moby" case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 1044-1053.
  19. Teng, Y. 2020. Systematic embodied carbon assessment and reduction of prefabricated buildings in Hong Kong. HKU Theses Online (HKUTO).
  20. Teng, Y., Li, K., Pan, W. & Ng, T. 2018. Reducing building life cycle carbon emissions through prefabrication: Evidence from and gaps in empirical studies. Building and Environment, 132, 125-136.
  21. Teng, Y. & Pan, W. 2019. Systematic embodied carbon assessment and reduction of prefabricated high-rise public residential buildings in Hong Kong. Journal of Cleaner Production, 238, 117791.
  22. Wen, T. J., Siong, H. C. & Noor, Z. 2015. Assessment of embodied energy and global warming potential of building construction using life cycle analysis approach: Case studies of residential buildings in Iskandar Malaysia. Energy and Buildings, 93, 295-302.