IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p9016-d612967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Conversion Factors of LCIA Methods for Comparison of LCA Results in the Construction Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Yahong Dong

    (Qingdao Research Center for Green Development and Ecological Environment, Qingdao University of Science and Technology, No. 99 Songling Road, Qingdao 266061, China)

  • Md. Uzzal Hossain

    (Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China)

  • Hongyang Li

    (Business School, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100, China
    School of Civil Engineering and Transportation, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China
    State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China)

  • Peng Liu

    (Qingdao Research Center for Green Development and Ecological Environment, Qingdao University of Science and Technology, No. 99 Songling Road, Qingdao 266061, China)

Abstract

The inconsistency caused by different life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods is a long-term challenge for the life cycle assessment (LCA) community. It is necessary to systematically analyze the differences caused by LCIA methods and facilitate the fair comparison of LCA results. This study proposes an effective method of conversion factors (CFs) for converting the results of 8 LCIA methods for 14 impact categories and then demonstrates its application in the construction sector. Correlation analyses of the datasets of construction materials are conducted to develop CFs for the impact categories. A set of conversion cards are devised to present the CFs and the associated correlation information for the LCIA methods. It is revealed that the differences between LCIA methods are largely caused by the characterization methods, rather than due to the metrics. A comparison based only on the same metrics but ignoring the underlying LCIA mechanisms is misleading. High correlations are observed for the impact categories of climate change, acidification, eutrophication, and resource depletion. The developed CFs and conversion cards can greatly help LCA practitioners in the fair comparison of LCA results from different LCIA methods. Case studies are conducted, and verify that by applying the CFs the seemingly incomparable results from different LCIA methods become comparable. The CF method addresses the inconsistency problem of LCIA methods in a practical manner and helps improve the comparability and reliability of LCA studies in the construction sector. Suggestions are provided for the further development of LCIA conversion factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Yahong Dong & Md. Uzzal Hossain & Hongyang Li & Peng Liu, 2021. "Developing Conversion Factors of LCIA Methods for Comparison of LCA Results in the Construction Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9016-:d:612967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9016/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9016/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geng, Shengnan & Wang, Yuan & Zuo, Jian & Zhou, Zhihua & Du, Huibin & Mao, Guozhu, 2017. "Building life cycle assessment research: A review by bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 176-184.
    2. Chris Mutel & Xun Liao & Laure Patouillard & Jane Bare & Peter Fantke & Rolf Frischknecht & Michael Hauschild & Olivier Jolliet & Danielle Maia de Souza & Alexis Laurent & Stephan Pfister & Francesca , 2019. "Overview and recommendations for regionalized life cycle impact assessment," Post-Print hal-02177362, HAL.
    3. Buyle, Matthias & Braet, Johan & Audenaert, Amaryllis, 2013. "Life cycle assessment in the construction sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 379-388.
    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. Igor Catão Martins Vaz & Rodrigo Novais Istchuk & Tânia Mara Sebben Oneda & Enedir Ghisi, 2023. "Sustainable Rainwater Management and Life Cycle Assessment: Challenges and Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Marwa B. Hannouf & Alejandro Padilla‐Rivera & Getachew Assefa & Ian Gates, 2023. "Methodological framework to find links between life cycle sustainability assessment categories and the UN Sustainable Development Goals based on literature," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 707-725, June.
    3. Marina Stramarkou & Christos Boukouvalas & Sokratis E. Koskinakis & Olga Serifi & Vasilis Bekiris & Christos Tsamis & Magdalini Krokida, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment and Preliminary Cost Evaluation of a Smart Packaging System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Bianca Köck & Anton Friedl & Sebastián Serna Loaiza & Walter Wukovits & Bettina Mihalyi-Schneider, 2023. "Automation of Life Cycle Assessment—A Critical Review of Developments in the Field of Life Cycle Inventory Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-40, 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. Patricia González-Vallejo & Radu Muntean & Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Madelyn Marrero, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Dwelling Construction in Romania and Spain. A Comparative Analysis with the OERCO2 Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Cristina Rivero-Camacho & Desirée Alba-Rodríguez & Alejandro Martínez-Rocamora, 2018. "Carbon Footprint Estimation Tool for Residential Buildings for Non-Specialized Users: OERCO2 Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Cui, Li & Chan, Hing Kai & Zhou, Yizhuo & Dai, Jing & Lim, Jia Jia, 2019. "Exploring critical factors of green business failure based on Grey-Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 450-461.
    4. Catherine Houssard & Dominique Maxime & Scott Benoit & Yves Pouliot & Manuele Margni, 2020. "Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Five Greek Yogurt Production Systems: A Perspective beyond the Plant Boundaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    5. Gebara, C.H. & Laurent, A., 2023. "National SDG-7 performance assessment to support achieving sustainable energy for all within planetary limits," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    6. Alencastro, João & Fuertes, Alba & de Wilde, Pieter, 2018. "The relationship between quality defects and the thermal performance of buildings," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 883-894.
    7. Zhang, Yang & Yan, Da & Hu, Shan & Guo, Siyue, 2019. "Modelling of energy consumption and carbon emission from the building construction sector in China, a process-based LCA approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Mastrucci, Alessio & Marvuglia, Antonino & Leopold, Ulrich & Benetto, Enrico, 2017. "Life Cycle Assessment of building stocks from urban to transnational scales: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 316-332.
    9. Timothy Jena & Sakdirat Kaewunruen, 2021. "Life Cycle Sustainability Assessments of an Innovative FRP Composite Footbridge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-20, November.
    10. Diana Carolina Gámez-García & José Manuel Gómez-Soberón & Ramón Corral-Higuera & Héctor Saldaña-Márquez & María Consolación Gómez-Soberón & Susana Paola Arredondo-Rea, 2018. "A Cradle to Handover Life Cycle Assessment of External Walls: Choice of Materials and Prognosis of Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    11. Walzberg, Julien & Dandres, Thomas & Merveille, Nicolas & Cheriet, Mohamed & Samson, Réjean, 2020. "Should we fear the rebound effect in smart homes?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    12. Seungjun Roh & Sungho Tae & Rakhyun Kim, 2018. "Analysis of Embodied Environmental Impacts of Korean Apartment Buildings Considering Major Building Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, May.
    13. Mastrucci, Alessio & Marvuglia, Antonino & Benetto, Enrico & Leopold, Ulrich, 2020. "A spatio-temporal life cycle assessment framework for building renovation scenarios at the urban scale," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    14. Eloise Leonora Gnoatto & Andreza Kalbusch & Elisa Henning, 2019. "Evaluation of the Environmental and Economic Impacts on the Life Cycle of Different Solutions for Toilet Flush Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-12, August.
    15. Jozef Mitterpach & Emília Hroncová & Juraj Ladomerský & Jozef Štefko, 2016. "Quantification of Improvement in Environmental Quality for Old Residential Buildings Using Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Hannah Porter & Abhijit Mukherjee & Rabin Tuladhar & Navdeep Kaur Dhami, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Biocement: An Emerging Sustainable Solution?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Anastasiades, K. & Blom, J. & Buyle, M. & Audenaert, A., 2020. "Translating the circular economy to bridge construction: Lessons learnt from a critical literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    18. Cellura, Maurizio & Guarino, Francesco & Longo, Sonia & Mistretta, Marina, 2017. "Modeling the energy and environmental life cycle of buildings: A co-simulation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 733-742.
    19. Nematchoua, Modeste Kameni & Asadi, Somayeh & Reiter, Sigrid, 2020. "Influence of energy mix on the life cycle of an eco-neighborhood, a case study of 150 countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 81-97.
    20. Pollyanna Fernandes Bianchi & Víctor Yepes & Paulo Cezar Vitorio & Moacir Kripka, 2021. "Study of Alternatives for the Design of Sustainable Low-Income Housing in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, April.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9016-:d:612967. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.