1. Rethinking
Energy,
Materials,
&
Transporta6on
in
Passive
Houses
Source:
Hausbau-­‐Beratung24.de

2. Embodied
Energy
and
Carbon
Steelmaking
(Source:
Jupiter
Images
Corpora6on)

3. Embodied
Energy
vs.
Carbon
Footprint
Embodied
Energy
=
Sum
of
all
energy
needed
to
produce
any
product,
as
if
that
energy
was
incorporated
or
"embodied"
into
the
product
itself.
Source:
Building
Green
Carbon
Footprint
=
Sum
of
all
greenhouse
gases
emiQed
by
the
full
life
cycle
of
a
product.

4. Life
Cycle
Energy
Assessment
for
Passive
Houses
=
Embodied
Energy
+
Opera6ons
+
Maintenance
Source:
Stephan,
André,
Robert
H.
Crawford,
and
Kristel
De
MyQenaere.
"A
Comprehensive
Assessment
of
the
Life
Cycle
Energy
Demand
of
Passive
Houses."
Applied
Energy112
(2013):
23-­‐34.
Print.

5. But
source
data
may
not
be
appropriate
for
our
context.
DETAILS
Base
case
passive
house:
• Period
of
analysis
=
100
years
• Usable
floor
area
=
3,197
a2
• Structure:
Steel-­‐framed,
concrete
floor
slabs
• Façade
=
Block
walls,
Glued
bricks
–
220
mm
of
polyurethane
insula6on
–
• Triple
glazed,
argon
filled,
wood
windows
• Roof
=
TerracoQa
6les
–
300
mm
of
polyurethane
insula6on
and
100
mm
of
rock
wool
insula6on
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Base
Case
As-­‐Built
Stephan
et
al
Study
uses
Australian
figures
for
Belgian
case

6. Energy
Choices
Not
Fixed
Study:
"The
embodied,
opera6onal
and
transport
energy
requirements
represent
40.0%,
32.8%
and
27.2%
of
the
total,
respec6vely."
Source:
Stephan
et
al
However,
material
and
process
choices
have
a
significant
effect
on
embodied
energy.
Map
of
Material
origina6on
loca6ons:
by
Linnean

7. Carbon
Emissions
Two
Very
similar
office
renova6on
projects
Upper
total
=
86
MJ/sf
Lower
total
=
43
MJ/sf

8. Life
Cycle
Energy
Demand:
Embodied,
Opera6onal,
&
Transport
Embodied:
4,001,000
kWh
145,332
kWh/C2
Graph
Compares
GJ
and
GJ/m2
1
GJ
=
278
kWh
1m²
=
10.8C²
OperaLonal:
3,280,277
kWh
118,885
kWh/C2
Transport:
2,273,333
kWh
98,700
kWh/C2
Total:
10,013,611
kWh
362,918
kWh/C2
100
Year
Analysis
Period

9. Life
Cycle
Energy
Demand
of
Passive
Houses
Compared
with
Varia6ons
Graph
Compares
GJ
of
energy
over
100
years
Standard
house
with
electrical
appliances
now
powered
by
gas
uses
9,292,631
kWh
Passive
house
with
electrical
appliances
now
powered
by
gas
uses
8,660,732
kWh
Standard
house
with
electrical
appliances
now
powered
by
gas
plus
reduced
operaLonal
energy
Passive
house
base
case
uses
10,013,611
kWh
Standard
house
uses
10,070,277
kWh

10. Embodied
vs.
Opera6onal
Energy
This
needs
some
explana6on.
What
are
the
two
bars
and
the
confidence
intervals?
And
a
way
more
descrip6ve
6tle.
EcoCalculator
for
North
East
Belgian
Style
=
7,376
GJ
EcoCalulator
for
NE
US
Style
=
3,600
GJ
OE
=
35
Kbtu/sf/yr

11. Embodied
Energy
By
Material
Timber
use
in
base
case:
• 158.9
a3
-­‐
hardwood
window
frames
• 247.2
a3
-­‐
parquet
flooring;
hollow
core
MDF
doors;
roof;
cupboards
and
closets
• 10.6
a3
-­‐
soawood
(framing)
in
hollow
core
MDF
doors
• 416.7
a3
=
Total

12. Carbon
Emissions
By
Material
Other
poten6al
uses
of
6mber
in
passive
houses:
• Upper
floor
slabs
• Roof
structure
• Columns
and
beams
Source:
Coopera6ve
Research
Centre
for
Greenhouse
Accoun6ng
(Australia)

13. Carbon
Emissions
Key
Conclusions:
§ Metal
has
the
highest
carbon
intensity.
§ The
amount
of
carbon
generally
correlates
with
the
amount
of
material.

14. •
Time
Value
of
Carbon
Savings
Carbon
saved
now
is
worth
more
than
Carbon
later
(area
under
the
line
is
total
carbon
emiQed)
10%
reduc6on
per
year
Start
slow
-­‐
increase
rate
of
reduc6on
Start
fast
-­‐
decrease
rate
of
reduc6on
Time
CarbonReduction WHY
FOCUS
ON
EMBODIED
CARBON?

15. Carbon
&
Chemical
of
Concern
Accoun7ng
§ Typical
Interior
Office
Renova6on
§ Calculated
carbon
emissions
for
materials
and
contractor
commu6ng
§ Assessed
VOC
quan6ty
and
quality
of
materials
§ Evaluated
economic
impact
on
local
and
na6onal
community

16. Toxicity
of
Materials
PVC
piping
(Source:
True
Well
Pipes)

17. Red
Lists
and
Transparency
“Red
lists,”
such
as
the
Living
Building
Challenge’s
are
increasingly
common
but
cau6on
is
advised,
as
new
subs6tutes
for
listed
chemical
may
be
as
bad
or
worse.
LEED
ra6ng
system
rewards
projects
for
using
products
with
low
VOC
emissions,
but
doesn’t
address
chemical
cons6tuents
of
building
products.

19. LEED
Materials
&
Resources
Energy
&
Air
Quality

20. Risks
From
Adhesives
&
Sealants
Source:
Green
Building
Supply
Source:
Building
Green

21. Greener
Adhesive
Choices
Acrylic
Tape
Butyl
Rubber
Tape
Source:
Building
Green
To
minimize
environmental
and
health
impacts:
• Select
low-­‐emiyng
tapes
over
solvent-­‐based,
wet-­‐applied
products.
• Provide
adequate
worker
training
and
protec6on.

22. Risks
From
Insula6on
Spray
Polyurethane
Foam
(SPF)
Extruded
Polystyrene
(XPS)
“The
more
insula6on
the
beQer”
is
common
refrain
in
green
building
industry.
Insula6on
=
strategy
for
net-­‐zero-­‐energy
&
carbon-­‐neutral
performance
But
both
XPS
and
SPF
contribute
to
climate
change
via
embodied
energy
and
blowing-­‐
agent
leakage.
And,
the
brominated
flame
retardant
HBCD
in
XPS
is
persistent,
bioaccumula6ve,
and
toxic
in
animal
studies.

23. Greener
Insula6on
Choices
Mineral
Wool
Cellulose
Source:
Building
Green

24. Wood
• Compared
with
nonrenewable
building
materials,
wood:
– is
produced
largely
from
input
of
sunlight
(through
photosynthesis),
– sequesters
carbon
in
its
produc6on,
– carries
low
embodied
energy,
and
– is
nontoxic,
reusable,
and
biodegradable.

25. Increasing
Demand
for
Materials
with
Low
Emissions
and
VOCs
Improve
IAQ
Increases
11%
from
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Reduce
Energy
Consump6on
Lower
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
Protect
Natural
Resources
Reduce
Water
Consump6on
Improve
Indoor
Air
Quality
2012
2008
Most
Important
Environmental
Reasons
for
Building
Green

26. Chemicals
of
Concern
Present
in
Project
§ Formaldehyde
was
found
in
plywood
–
a
frequently
used
product
§ PVC
was
found
in
some
‘green’
flooring
§ Phthalates
were
found
in
adhesives

27. Chemicals
of
Concern
per
Building
Product
§ Carpet
by
far
the
worst
VOC
emiQer,
mainly
because
of
the
amount
of
product
used.
§ Sheetrock
contains
formaldehyde;
there
is
an
es6mated
22
mg
in
base
case
passive
house.

28. Total
Weight
of
Chemicals
of
Concern
in
the
Project

29. Contractor
Transporta6on
During
Construc6on
New
Bedford:
.90
MT
C02e
for
140
labor
hours
(1
MT/156
hours)
Easton:
3.62
MT
C02e
for
1,274
labor
hours
(1
MT/354
hours)
Woburn:
1.89
MT
C02e
for
1,205
labor
hours
(1
MT/638
hours)
Boston:
.44
MT
C02e
for
1,873
labor
hours
(1
MT/4,257
hours)

30. Contractor
Transporta6on
During
Construc6on

31. Transporta6on
Post-­‐Construc6on
Study
Trans
Energy
per
year
=
93
MBtu

32. Ques6ons
As
we
reduce
opera6onal
energy,
how
can
we
find
similar
reduc6ons
in
other
impacts?
• Reduce
embodied
carbon
materials?
• Lower
toxicity
of
materials?
• Minimize
loca6on
effects?