SSP - JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol.
19, Issue 1, 2024
DOI: 10.2478/sspjce-2024-0005
Assessment of a residential building in terms of carbon footprint
and circular economy
Jana Budajova1*, Silvia Vilcekova2, Eva Kridlova Burdova2 and Peter Mesaros3
Technical University of Kosice, Vysokoskolska 4, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia
1
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute of Architectural Engineering
2
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute for Sustainable and Circular Construction
3
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Institute of Technology, Economics and Management in Construction
*e-mail: jana.budajova@tuke.sk
Abstract
Built environment contributes significantly to social and economic development, but it is also resource
intensive. It is therefore one of the main producers of emissions and carbon footprint. Choosing building
designs with a long service life is the key to resolving environmental problems. In this paper, the life
cycle of a residential building is evaluated to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions and costs associated
with the construction, use and disposal of the building. Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing
methods were used to evaluate the environmental and financial impact of the residential building. The
system boundaries were defined as "Cradle to Grave" and a lifetime of 60 years. The calculation showed
that the building emitted 843 tons of CO2e, or 19.8 kg CO2e/m2/year, and the life cycle costs were 2 026
€/m2. Considering the phases considered, the energy consumption phase (B6) caused the highest CO 2e
emissions, up to 50.1%.
Keywords: life cycle assessment, residential building, carbon footprint, circular economy, life cycle cost
1 Introduction
The construction sector and its related manufacturing supply chain emit greenhouse gases
(GHG) due to misallocation of resources and misuse of energy. Sustainability has a wider
definition and includes three aspects – environmental protection, social aspect, and economic
security [1].
The circular economy is a model of production and consumption in which products and services
are designed to enable sharing, reuse, repairability and recyclability. Unlike the linear economy,
where resources are overused and unnecessary waste is created, in the circular economy scarce
resources they use effectively, and the value of the products does not end up buried in a landfill.
The circular economy tries to reflect natural processes where no waste is created. Waste is
considered a resource that is returned to circulation, creating a closed cycle of materials,
products, and components [2, 3]. Life cycle assessment (LCA) can support circular economy
1
Budajova J., Vilcekova., Burdova Kridlova E., and Mesaros P.
(CE), which is already written into regulations and is becoming an important tool for
environmental management in the construction industry [2]. It seeks to address issues the
problems of energy consumption and carbon emissions, given the significant environmental
burden created by the construction industry. Therefore, environmental assessments such as
LCA have been developed for buildings [1]. Construction contributes around 35% of the total
municipal waste disposed in landfills [4]. Due to growing concerns about resource use in
building construction, energy consumption during building operation, end-of-life waste
disposal and related environmental impacts. As a consequence of the global development of
building construction, the operation, maintenance/renovation and decommissioning of
buildings would place an even greater burden on the environment. Therefore, due to the
increased emphasis on sustainability, the construction industry is a key target for reducing
environmental impacts worldwide [5]. Carbon footprint has become an important concept
against climate change and sustainability. It involves the calculation of the amount of
greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), which are produced directly or indirectly
by an individual, organization, event, or product. This concept helps us better understand the
ecological impact of our activity and serves as a basis for the development of measures aimed
at reducing emissions and a sustainable lifestyle [6, 7]. Greenhouse gas emission values are
expressed as equivalents. Global warming potential (GWP) is expressed as CO2 equivalent [8].
The assessment of a residential building in terms of carbon footprint and circular economy
involves evaluating the environmental impact of the building's construction, operation, and
eventual disposal, as well as considering how resources can be used more efficiently and
sustainably throughout its lifecycle [9, 10]. The evaluation also includes costs that have been
calculated for the entire cycle. This assessment aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
minimize waste generation, and promote the reuse and recycling of materials to create a more
sustainable and environmentally friendly living space. Can a building be overpriced without
negative environmental impacts? These are the questions we ask in this paper.
2 Materials and methods
The assessment of the life cycle of the residential building from the point of view of
environmental and economic aspects was carried out in accordance with valid international
standards. Based on these standards, the analysis consists of the goal and scope, inventory
analyzes (the process of obtaining and gathering information about all inputs and outputs that
are associated with a product or service during its life cycle), impact analyzes (evaluation and
quantification of the environmental impacts associated with the product or by the service during
their life cycle) and interpretation of the results.
2.1 Goal and Scope
To analyse the impact of the building on the environment for the "Cradle to Cradle" system
boundary, the software OneClickLCA was used, which works in accordance with EN
15987+A2+AC, STN EN ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. In the software, materials were selected,
their transport distances, operating energy, water consumption and quantification of their
emissions. The effects on the environment were determined on the gross floor area of the
building, which was converted to 1m2 for a lifetime of 50 years. Life cycle costs were also
2
SSP - JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol. 19, Issue 1, 2024
quantified using the OneClickLCA software, which worked in accordance with the ISO 15686-
5 standard according to the structure of the EN 16627 standard. The system boundaries of the
life cycle according to the standardized phase marking A1 to D are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1: Life cycle assessment [Author] Figure 2: Life cycle cost [Author]
2.2 Life cycle inventory analysis
The selected residential building is located in Poprad. Poprad is one of the larger cities in
Slovakia. It is in the north of Slovakia, near the High Tatras (figure 3). The gross floor area is
849.38 m2 on four floors, which is a smaller apartment building in Slovakia. The residential
building is part of a complex of four identical residential buildings (figure 4 and 5) and meets
the thermal requirements for category A0 (zero building). The building has a brick load-bearing
system made of clay bricks; the ceilings are made of reinforced concrete slabs 160 mm thick.
The building is insulated with Greywall EPS (expanded polystyrene) insulation. It's important
to consider the energy consumption values of the building, which are 42.4 kWh/m2/a of
electricity and 68.8 kWh/m2. Calculating the carbon footprint of the residential building per
1m2 of gross floor area over a 50-year period can provide valuable insights into its
environmental impact. Analyzing and optimizing these values can help in implementing more
sustainable practices and reducing carbon emissions.
3
Budajova J., Vilcekova., Burdova Kridlova E., and Mesaros P.
Figure 3: Position of residential building [13]
Figure 4: Residential building Figure 5: Residential building [14]
The materials used in the residential building, their amount and cost are shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6: Total sum [Author]
4
SSP - JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol. 19, Issue 1, 2024
2.3 Life cycle impact assessment
In the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) step, all inventory data of the residential building
were evaluated. The LCA approach allowed the assessment of many categories of
environmental impacts. The main environmental impact indicators included in this study were
shown in Figure 7. The residential building was also analyzed in terms of life cycle costs. Life
cycle costing refers to the total cost of owning and maintaining a product or system throughout
its lifetime. Nominal life cycle cost is the total cost including inflation or the time value of
money, while discounted life cycle cost considers the time value of money by discounting future
costs to present value. This helps in comparing costs over time and making informed decisions.
Figure 7: Impact categories [Author]
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Life cycle assessment - Global warming potential
In the GWP-Total category, the largest share of CO2e emissions is operational energy phase B6
of up to 50%, followed by the product phase with 20.9%, where used bricks, mortars, and
screeds 25.5% and 18.1% have the most negative impact on the climate change (figure 8). The
phase with the lowest share of CO2e is the transport with share 1.2%. Consumptions of
electricity and energy are the main contributors of CO2e. In the GWP-Fossil (figure 9) category,
the operational energy phase of B6 has the largest contribution to CO2e emissions at 50.1%,
followed by the product phase at 22.9%, where the largest negative impacts are from used
coatings, paints, and lacquers at 25.2% and bricks at 20.8%. In the GWP-Bio (figure 10)
category, the C3 and C4 phases cause 99.3% of the emissions. In the GWP-LULUC (land use
and land use change) (figure 11) category, the product phase A1-A4 and B4-B5 have the largest
contribution to CO2e emissions up to 49% and 32.9% respectively.
5
Budajova J., Vilcekova., Burdova Kridlova E., and Mesaros P.
Figure 8: GWP-Total [Author]
Figure 9: GWP-Fossil [Author]
Figure 10: GWP-bio [kg CO2e bio] [Author]
6
SSP - JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol. 19, Issue 1, 2024
Figure 11: GWP-LULUC [Author]
The whole building comprehensively generated CO2e emissions in the range of 843 tons of
CO2e. Converted to FU, it causes emissions of 19.8 kg CO2e/m2/year (figure 7). Stages that
contribute the most to a carbon footprint, were the operational energy B6, product A1-A3 and
recovery and renovation B4-B5. The energy consumption phase (B6) was represented by a
50.1% share, followed by the product phase (A1-A3) by a 20.88% share and recovery and
renovation (B4-B5) by a 19.77% share. The least represented were transport (A4) and
installation (A5) with a share of 1.16% and 1.73%, respectively.
3.2 Results of life cycle cost
From the calculation of life cycle costs, it emerged that the building had a nominal value of 1
720 881€. The total life cycle costs in terms of functional unit reached 2 026 EUR/m2 (1 720
881 €/849.5 m2) (see figure 12). Based on the context provided, the estimated distribution of
life cycle costs reached, energy costs 14.7%, construction costs 67.3%, building maintenance
costs 11.6%. These percentages represented the allocation of the life cycle budget to different
cost categories. The EoL phase represents only a small amount of 1% (see figure 13).
600000 475396 475396 502849,69 496292,74
500000
400000
300000 213707,06
€
200000 81855,91 103784,94 44690,51 32635,61
100000 1036,41
0
A0-A5 Pre- B4-B5 B6 Operational B7 Operational C1-C4 EoL
construction and Replacement and energy water
Product, refurbishment
construction
process stage
Life-cycle cost, discounted with inflation LCC, nominal (undiscounted, includes inflation)
Figure 12: Life cycle stages
7
Budajova J., Vilcekova., Burdova Kridlova E., and Mesaros P.
Figure 13: Life cycle cost stages [Author]
3.3 Discussion
Carbon footprint of the residential building is determined using by using LCA. The estimated
useful life was calculated for a period of 50 years. The whole building generates CO2e emissions
in the range of 843 tons, which represents 19.8 kg CO2e/m2/year and 992 kg CO2e/m2. Compared
to the study of residential buildings [11], which evaluates a 5-storey and 13-storey residential
buildings from South-East Turkey, a building rated in Slovakia causes less CO2e emissions.
Emission ranges from 3 956 to 5 809 kg CO2e/m2. In comparison with this study, the energy
consumption phase accounted for the largest greenhouse gas emissions. In this study, a different
insulation material was used for the walls which may have caused higher emissions. The authors
further state that by choosing the appropriate insulation material, a reduction in emissions can
be achieved and this is confirmed in their study. In this study, the total life cycle costs are
reached at USD 7.28 million, which is EUR 6.4 million for a five-story building and USD 1.72
million, which is 1.5 million € for a thirteen-story building over the proposed 50 lifetime.
Among the most expensive (49-52%) materials and structures are concrete foundations,
reinforced concrete slab. For the building investigated in this study, the total life cycle cost is
1.72 million € which is comparable with the mentioned study [11]. The study [12] examined a
ten-storey building in Denmark. It has a total area of 7 000 m2, the external wall is a sandwich
construction with mineral wool, and the building uses an HVAC system with a heat pump and
photovoltaic panels. The total LCC is 15.4 million €, per m2 is 2 203 €/m2.
4 Conclusion
The construction and maintenance of building structures involve energy-intensive processes
throughout their life cycle, starting from the extraction of raw materials, product production,
and even disposal. This highlights the importance of considering the environmental impact and
energy consumption associated with the entire lifecycle of buildings. Energy-intensive
processes consume large amounts of energy resources and produce significant emissions and
waste. Absolutely, the environmental impact of construction includes various stages such as
8
SSP - JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol. 19, Issue 1, 2024
material extraction, transportation, manufacturing, operation, maintenance, and end-of-life
considerations. It's important to consider these factors to minimize the environmental footprint
of construction projects. These phases also have significant economic costs. Assessing the
environmental impact and life cycle costs of a residence as a challenging task and it is necessary
to evaluate all elements and phases of the life cycle. Results of this study point out that
operational energy contributes the most to the carbon footprint (50%) as well as the biggest
costs also go to operational energy. The amount of CO2e emissions is affected not only by the
choice of materials but also by the total gross floor area. Future research will focus on
conducting an in-depth analysis and comparison of the environmental and economic aspects of
different buildings, which can help identify environmentally friendly measures and sustainable
practices. This approach can lead to more informed decision-making in the construction
industry and contribute to the creation of greener and more efficient buildings.
Acknowledgments
This study was financially supported by Grant Agency of Slovak Republic to support project No. VEGA
1/0057/24 and by the Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-22-0576.
References
[1] Mhatre P., Gedam V., Unnikrishnan S. & Verma S. (2021). Circular economy in built
environment–Literature review and theory development Journal of Building Engineering 35
101995.
[2] Joensuu T., Leino R., Heinonen J. & Saari A. (2021). Developing Buildings’ Life Cycle
Assessment in Circular Economy-Comparing methods for assessing carbon footprint of reusable
components Sustainable Cities and Society 103499.
[3] Tunn, V. S., Bocken, N. M., van den Hende, E. A., & Schoormans, J. P. (2019). Business models
for sustainable consumption in the circular economy: An expert study. Journal of cleaner
production, 212, 324-333.
[4] Kamali M., Hewage K. & Sadiq R. (2019). Conventional versus modular construction methods:
A comparative cradle-to-gate LCA for residential buildings Energy and Buildings 204 109479.
[5] Joensuu T., Leino R., Heinonen J. & Saari, A. (2021). Developing Buildings Life Cycle
Assessment in Circular Economy-Comparing methods for assessing carbon footprint of reusable
components Sustainable Cities and Society 103499.
[6] East A. J. (2008). September What is a carbon footprint? An overview of definitions and
methodologies. In Vegetable industry carbon footprint scoping study - Discussion papers and
workshop Horticulture Australia Limited.
[7] Števo S. (2008). Uhlíková stopa bývania v globalizovaných domoch TZB Haustechnik roč. 25
pp16-20.
[8] Amoo L. M. & Fagbenle R. L. (2020). Climate change in developing nations of the world In
Applications of Heat, Mass and Fluid Boundary Layers (Woodhead Publishing) pp 437-71.
[9] Ghisellini, P., Ripa, M., & Ulgiati, S. (2018). Exploring environmental and economic costs and
benefits of a circular economy approach to the construction and demolition sector. A literature
review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 178, 618-643.
9
Budajova J., Vilcekova., Burdova Kridlova E., and Mesaros P.
[10] Chau, C. K., Leung, T. M., & Ng, W. Y. (2015). A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle
energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied energy, 143,
395-413.
[11] Atmaca A. (2016). Life-cycle assessment and cost analysis of residential buildings in South-East
of Turkey: part 2—a case study The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21 pp 925-
942.
[12] Marszal, A. J., & Heiselberg, P. (2011). Life cycle cost analysis of a multi-storey residential Net
Zero Energy Building in Denmark. Energy, 36(9), 5600-5609.
[13] Google Maps, Available online: 12.03.2024
https://www.google.sk/maps/place/LUNA+RESIDENCE+POPRAD+-
+MATEJOVCE/@49.0788993,20.3278781,376m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!1m7!3m6!1s0x473e3b
c5e38c4fb7:0x7af2e9cb4a896bdf!2sLUNA+RESIDENCE+POPRAD+-
+MATEJOVCE!8m2!3d49.0794723!4d20.3194412!16s%2Fg%2F11txjd76ds!3m5!1s0x473e3b
c5e38c4fb7:0x7af2e9cb4a896bdf!8m2!3d49.0794723!4d20.3194412!16s%2Fg%2F11txjd76ds?
entry=ttu
[14] Google Maps, Street View, Available online: 12.03.2024
https://www.google.sk/maps/@49.079063,20.3286721,3a,60y,150.13h,87.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3
m4!1se3SmxDWDIsN0nAhY63-gmw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
10
