IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i4p1020-d138845.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural Stabilized Earth Panels versus Conventional Façade Systems. Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Galán-Marín

    (Departamento de Construcciones Arquitectónicas 1, Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura, Universidad de Sevilla, Avda. Reina Mercedes, 2, 41012 Seville, Spain)

  • Alejandro Martínez-Rocamora

    (GACS Research Group, Department of Construction Sciences, Faculty of Architecture, Construction and Design, University of Bío-Bío, Av. Collao, 1202 Concepción, Chile)

  • Jaime Solís-Guzmán

    (ArDiTec Research Group, Department of Architectural Constructions II, Higher Technical School of Building Engineering, University of Seville, Av. Reina Mercedes, 4-a, 41012 Seville, Spain)

  • Carlos Rivera-Gómez

    (Departamento de Construcciones Arquitectónicas 1, Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura, Universidad de Sevilla, Avda. Reina Mercedes, 2, 41012 Seville, Spain)

Abstract

More effective construction technologies are needed nowadays in order to reduce construction energy consumption during the life-cycle of buildings. Besides which, it is necessary to consider the economic feasibility and associated costs within the framework of these alternative technologies so as to favouring their practical implementation in the construction sector. In this sense, this paper presents an economic and environmental comparison of a new non-bearing façade construction solution based on the extruded unfired stabilized clay panels as opposed to three traditional solutions with similar physical, thermal, and aesthetic characteristics in terms of the exterior cladding. The proposed panels are a sandwich type configuration with an intermediate insulating material and two exterior pieces manufactured by extrusion with raw earth stabilized with alginate and animal wool fibers. In this paper, details of the constructive technology of the system are provided. From the results obtained, it is possible to conclude that the solution is a valid alternative from the environmental point of view, considerably reducing the Global Warming Potential and the Cumulative Energy Demand. And although the environmental improvement of the system can be considered the primary objective of this investigation, on the other hand, once executed, it will also be a competitive constructive technology from the perspective of the system’s final costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Galán-Marín & Alejandro Martínez-Rocamora & Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Carlos Rivera-Gómez, 2018. "Natural Stabilized Earth Panels versus Conventional Façade Systems. Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1020-:d:138845
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1020/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1020/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Uğur, Latif Onur & Leblebici, Neşe, 2018. "An examination of the LEED green building certification system in terms of construction costs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 1476-1483.
    2. Shukla, Ashish & Tiwari, G.N. & Sodha, M.S., 2009. "Embodied energy analysis of adobe house," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 755-761.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Byung-Ju Jeon & Byung-Soo Kim, 2021. "Development of Material Combination Model Considering Economics and Construction Efficiency for G-SEED Certification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Ghani Albaali & Mohammed Shahateet & Khaled AL-Naif & Saud Altayeb & Abdul Ghafoor Saidi, 2020. "Examining the Economic Impact of Renewable Energy in Green Buildings: A Case Study of Jordan," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(6), pages 31-35.
    3. Ma, Minda & Cai, Wei & Cai, Weiguang, 2018. "Carbon abatement in China's commercial building sector: A bottom-up measurement model based on Kaya-LMDI methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PA), pages 350-368.
    4. Ebru Ergöz Karahan & Özgür Göçer & Kenan Göçer & Didem Boyacıoğlu, 2021. "An Investigation of Occupant Energy-Saving Behavior in Vernacular Houses of Behramkale (Assos)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-23, December.
    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. Anh-Duc Pham & Quang Trung Nguyen & Duc Long Luong & Quynh Chau Truong, 2020. "The Development of a Decision Support Model for Eco-Friendly Material Selection in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Ben-Alon, L. & Loftness, V. & Harries, K.A. & Cochran Hameen, E., 2021. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of natural vs conventional building assemblies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    8. Monica C. M. Parlato & Simona M. C. Porto & Carmen Galán-Marín & Carlos Alberto Rivera-Gómez & Massimo Cuomo & Francesco Nocera, 2023. "Thermal Performance, Microstructure Analysis and Strength Characterisation of Agro-Waste Reinforced Soil Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-20, July.
    9. Cabeza, Luisa F. & Rincón, Lídia & Vilariño, Virginia & Pérez, Gabriel & Castell, Albert, 2014. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 394-416.
    10. Duy Hoang Pham & Joosung Lee & Yonghan Ahn, 2019. "Implementing LEED v4 BD+C Projects in Vietnam: Contributions and Challenges for General Contractor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, October.
    11. Ali Amiri & Juudit Ottelin & Jaana Sorvari, 2019. "Are LEED-Certified Buildings Energy-Efficient in Practice?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, March.
    12. Chandel, S.S. & Sharma, Vandna & Marwah, Bhanu M., 2016. "Review of energy efficient features in vernacular architecture for improving indoor thermal comfort conditions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 459-477.
    13. Giada Giuffrida & Letizia Dipasquale & Riccardo Maria Pulselli & Rosa Caponetto, 2024. "Compared Environmental Lifecycle Performances of Earth-Based Walls to Drive Building Envelope Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Valenzuela, Marian & Ciudad, Gustavo & Cárdenas, Juan Pablo & Medina, Carlos & Salas, Alexis & Oñate, Angelo & Pincheira, Gonzalo & Attia, Shady & Tuninetti, Víctor, 2024. "Towards the development of performance-efficient compressed earth blocks from industrial and agro-industrial by-products," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    15. Wu Deng & Jing Xie & Zhen Peng, 2018. "Material Transitions and Associated Embodied Energy Input of Rural Buildings: Case Study of Qinyong Village in Ningbo China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Ali Amiri & Juudit Ottelin & Jaana Sorvari & Seppo Junnila, 2020. "Economic and Technical Considerations in Pursuing Green Building Certification: A Case Study from Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, January.

    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:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1020-:d:138845. 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.