A comparative Life Cycle Assessment of vulnerable dwellings along Davao River Basin using Athena Impact Estimator for Building

Authors: Nurvin Zary E. Bustillo
Journal: University of Mindanao Journal of Engineering Technologies and Innovations | Vol. 1, No. 1, December 2023
DOI:
0 downloads | 0 views

Abstract

Every year, more and more buildings are built, but many have problems because they are exposed to harsh weather and are used. Some of these problems are cracks, dead holes, and a high level of air infiltration, all of which affect how much energy is used. This study aims to compare the embodied energy (EE) using life cycle analysis (LCA) of a row house model and a walk-up apartment model of housing in the riverine area of the Davao River. Assessment of the tool's life cycle is the research approach used for this investigation (LCA). A life cycle perspective can be helpful in several situations, including but not limited to better appreciating the potential benefits of the repurposing project and its impacts on the environment and providing information for future building stock management. Results have shown that row housing produces more building materials than walk-up buildings, with almost 50% less consumed. The row housing model also has a higher environmental impact when it comes to the assembly areas: foundation, roofing, and flooring materials. Meanwhile, walk-up dwellings contribute more wall components, columns, and beams. The findings of the life cycle assessments revealed that, in general, row housing units were impacted more during the production stage (A1 to A3), with 86% of the total. Throughout the same period, walk-up residences had a higher contribution during the construction phase (A4 and A5) with 11% and beyond the building life (D) with an average of 6%. Both models tie in with 2% for the use category (B2, B4, and B6) and 11% for the end-of-life category (C1 to C4). Row housing units have a greater impact on the surrounding environment than walk-up apartment units, assuming that the same measurement criteria are objectively applied to both models. According to the findings of the study, implementing in-situ vertical development in sensitive areas is preferable because it involves less material consumption and has a smaller negative impact on the surrounding environment.

Keywords

Life Cycle Analysis, Sustainability, Climate Change, Vulnerable Housing, River Basin