IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v16y2012i2p243-253.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Construction Matters: Comparing Environmental Impacts of Building Modular and Conventional Homes in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • John Quale
  • Matthew J. Eckelman
  • Kyle W. Williams
  • Greg Sloditskie
  • Julie B. Zimmerman

Abstract

Modular construction practices are used in many countries as an alternative to conventional on‐site construction for residential homes. While modular home construction has certain advantages in terms of material and time efficiency, it requires a different infrastructure than conventional home construction, and the overall environmental trade‐offs between the two methods have been unclear. This study uses life cycle assessment to quantify the environmental impacts of constructing a typical residential home using the two methods, based on data from several modular construction companies and conventional homebuilders. The study includes impacts from material production and transport, off‐site and on‐site energy use, worker transport, and waste management. For all categories considered, the average impacts of building the home are less for modular construction than for conventional construction, although these averages obscure significant variation among the individual projects and companies.

Suggested Citation

  • John Quale & Matthew J. Eckelman & Kyle W. Williams & Greg Sloditskie & Julie B. Zimmerman, 2012. "Construction Matters: Comparing Environmental Impacts of Building Modular and Conventional Homes in the United States," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(2), pages 243-253, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:16:y:2012:i:2:p:243-253
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00424.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. J. Treloar & P. E. D. Love & O. O. Faniran & U. Iyer-Raniga, 2000. "A hybrid life cycle assessment method for construction," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 5-9.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alejandro Enfedaque & Marcos G. Alberti & Jaime C. Gálvez & Marino Rivera & José M. Simón-Talero, 2018. "Can Polyolefin Fibre Reinforced Concrete Improve the Sustainability of a Flyover Bridge?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Pero, Margherita & Stößlein, Martin & Cigolini, Roberto, 2015. "Linking product modularity to supply chain integration in the construction and shipbuilding industries," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 602-615.
    3. Zezhou Wu & Lirong Luo & Heng Li & Ying Wang & Guoqiang Bi & Maxwell Fordjour Antwi-Afari, 2021. "An Analysis on Promoting Prefabrication Implementation in Construction Industry towards Sustainability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Yu, Sisi & Liu, Yanfeng & Wang, Dengjia & Bahaj, AbuBakr S. & Wu, Yue & Liu, Jiaping, 2021. "Review of thermal and environmental performance of prefabricated buildings: Implications to emission reductions in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    5. López-Guerrero, Rafael E. & Vera, Sergio & Carpio, Manuel, 2022. "A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the sustainability of industrialised building systems: A bibliographic review and analysis of case studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    6. Joaquin Humberto Aquino Rocha & Andréia Arenari de Siqueira & Marco Antonio Barbosa de Oliveira & Lucas da Silva Castro & Lucas Rosse Caldas & Nathalie Barbosa Reis Monteiro & Romildo Dias Toledo Filh, 2022. "Circular Bioeconomy in the Amazon Rainforest: Evaluation of Açaí Seed Ash as a Regional Solution for Partial Cement Replacement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Nicole Anderson & Gayan Wedawatta & Ishara Rathnayake & Niluka Domingo & Zahirah Azizi, 2022. "Embodied Energy Consumption in the Residential Sector: A Case Study of Affordable Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Dilek Arslan & Steve Sharples & Haniyeh Mohammadpourkarbasi & Raheela Khan-Fitzgerald, 2023. "Carbon Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment, and Prefabrication: A Case Study of a High-Rise Residential Built-to-Rent Development in the UK," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Carless, Travis S. & Griffin, W. Michael & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2016. "The environmental competitiveness of small modular reactors: A life cycle study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 84-99.
    10. Ravijanya Chippagiri & Ana Bras & Deepak Sharma & Rahul V. Ralegaonkar, 2022. "Technological and Sustainable Perception on the Advancements of Prefabrication in Construction Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Fred Edmond Boafo & Jin-Hee Kim & Jun-Tae Kim, 2016. "Performance of Modular Prefabricated Architecture: Case Study-Based Review and Future Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-16, June.
    12. Oriol Pons & Albert De la Fuente & Antonio Aguado, 2016. "The Use of MIVES as a Sustainability Assessment MCDM Method for Architecture and Civil Engineering Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-15, May.
    13. Kamali, Mohammad & Hewage, Kasun, 2016. "Life cycle performance of modular buildings: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1171-1183.
    14. Joosung Lee & Jaejun Kim, 2017. "BIM-Based 4D Simulation to Improve Module Manufacturing Productivity for Sustainable Building Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-23, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher & Foran, Barney, 2004. "Energy requirements of Sydney households," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 375-399, July.
    2. Riikka Kyrö & Jukka Heinonen & Antti Säynäjoki & Seppo Junnila, 2012. "Assessing the Potential of Climate Change Mitigation Actions in Three Different City Types in Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(7), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Ristimäki, Miro & Säynäjoki, Antti & Heinonen, Jukka & Junnila, Seppo, 2013. "Combining life cycle costing and life cycle assessment for an analysis of a new residential district energy system design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 168-179.
    4. Chen, Xiuzhi & Liu, Chang & van Oel, Pieter & Mergia Mekonnen, Mesfin & Thorp, Kelly R. & Yin, Tuo & Wang, Jinyan & Muhammad, Tahir & Li, Yunkai, 2022. "Water and carbon risks within hydropower development on national scale," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    5. Dixit, Manish K., 2017. "Life cycle embodied energy analysis of residential buildings: A review of literature to investigate embodied energy parameters," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 390-413.
    6. Wood, Richard & Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher & Lundie, Sven, 2006. "A comparative study of some environmental impacts of conventional and organic farming in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 324-348, September.
    7. Eleftheriadis, Stathis & Mumovic, Dejan & Greening, Paul, 2017. "Life cycle energy efficiency in building structures: A review of current developments and future outlooks based on BIM capabilities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 811-825.
    8. Lenzen, M. & Treloar, G., 2002. "Embodied energy in buildings: wood versus concrete--reply to Borjesson and Gustavsson," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 249-255, February.
    9. Tolga Kaya, 2017. "Unraveling the Energy use Network of Construction Sector in Turkey using Structural Path Analysis," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(1), pages 31-43.
    10. Seo, Seongwon & Kim, Junbeum & Yum, Kwok-Keung & McGregor, James, 2015. "Embodied carbon of building products during their supply chains: Case study of aluminium window in Australia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PA), pages 160-166.
    11. Zuo, Jian & Pullen, Stephen & Rameezdeen, Raufdeen & Bennetts, Helen & Wang, Yuan & Mao, Guozhu & Zhou, Zhihua & Du, Huibin & Duan, Huabo, 2017. "Green building evaluation from a life-cycle perspective in Australia: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 358-368.
    12. Izabela Piasecka & Patrycja Bałdowska-Witos & Katarzyna Piotrowska & Andrzej Tomporowski, 2020. "Eco-Energetical Life Cycle Assessment of Materials and Components of Photovoltaic Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Li, Xin & Feng, Kuishuang & Siu, Yim Ling & Hubacek, Klaus, 2012. "Energy-water nexus of wind power in China: The balancing act between CO2 emissions and water consumption," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 440-448.
    14. Sehee Han & Seunguk Na & Nam-Gi Lim, 2020. "Evaluation of Road Transport Pollutant Emissions from Transporting Building Materials to the Construction Site by Replacing Old Vehicles," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-15, December.
    15. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:16:y:2012:i:2:p:243-253. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.