IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p3096-d166731.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Industrial or Traditional Bamboo Construction? Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Bamboo-Based Buildings

Author

Listed:
  • Edwin Zea Escamilla

    (Centre for Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability, University of Zürich, 8001 Zürich, Switzerland)

  • Guillaume Habert

    (Institute of Construction Management, ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland)

  • Juan Francisco Correal Daza

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universidad de los Andes, 111711 Bogotá, Colombia)

  • Hector F. Archilla

    (Amphibia–BASE & Visiting Research Fellow, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK)

  • Juan Sebastian Echeverry Fernández

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universidad de los Andes, 111711 Bogotá, Colombia)

  • David Trujillo

    (School of Energy, Construction and Environment, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK)

Abstract

The past five decades have witnessed an unprecedented growth in population. This has led to an ever-growing housing demand. It has been proposed that the use of bio-based materials, and specifically bamboo, can help alleviate the housing demand in a sustainable manner. The present paper aims to assess the environmental impact caused by using four different construction materials (bamboo, brick, concrete hollow block, and engineered bamboo) in buildings. A comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) was carried out to measure the environmental impact of the different construction materials in the construction of single and multi-storey buildings. The LCA considered the extraction, production, transport, and use of the construction materials. The IPCC2013 evaluation method from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC2013 was used for the calculations of CO 2 emissions. The assessment was geographically located in Colombia, South America, and estimates the transport distances of the construction materials. The results show that transportation and reinforcing materials significantly contribute to the environmental impact, whereas the engineered bamboo construction system has the lowest environmental impact. The adoption of bamboo-based construction systems has a significant potential to support the regenerative development of regions where they could be used and might lead to long-lasting improvements to economies, environments, and livelihoods.

Suggested Citation

  • Edwin Zea Escamilla & Guillaume Habert & Juan Francisco Correal Daza & Hector F. Archilla & Juan Sebastian Echeverry Fernández & David Trujillo, 2018. "Industrial or Traditional Bamboo Construction? Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Bamboo-Based Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3096-:d:166731
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3096/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3096/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharma, Aashish & Saxena, Abhishek & Sethi, Muneesh & Shree, Venu & Varun, 2011. "Life cycle assessment of buildings: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 871-875, January.
    2. Steinberger, Julia K. & Krausmann, Fridolin & Eisenmenger, Nina, 2010. "Global patterns of materials use: A socioeconomic and geophysical analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1148-1158, March.
    3. Corinna Salzer & Holger Wallbaum & Luis Felipe Lopez & Jean Luc Kouyoumji, 2016. "Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, February.
    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. Chun Hua Julia Liu & Francesco Pomponi & Bernardino D’Amico, 2023. "The Extent to Which Hemp Insulation Materials Can Be Used in Canadian Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-31, October.
    2. Bianca Galmarini & Paolo Costa & Leonardo Chiesi, 2022. "Natural Building Materials and Social Representations in Informal Settlements: How Perceptions of Bamboo Interfere with Sustainable, Affordable, and Quality Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-26, September.
    3. Zhuyuan Xue & Hongbo Liu & Qinxiao Zhang & Jingxin Wang & Jilin Fan & Xia Zhou, 2019. "The Impact Assessment of Campus Buildings Based on a Life Cycle Assessment–Life Cycle Cost Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    4. Eleni Eleftheriou & Luis Felipe Lopez Muñoz & Guillaume Habert & Edwin Zea Escamilla, 2022. "Parametric Approach to Simplified Life Cycle Assessment of Social Housing Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
    5. Brian E. Bautista & Lessandro E. O. Garciano & Luis F. Lopez, 2021. "Comparative Analysis of Shear Strength Parallel to Fiber of Different Local Bamboo Species in the Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.
    6. Yao Lu & Hankun Lin & Siwei Liu & Yiqiang Xiao, 2019. "Nonuniform Woven Solar Shading Screens: Shading, Mechanical, and Daylighting Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Faham Tahmasebinia & Yuanchen Ma & Karl Joshua & Saleh Mohammad Ebrahimzadeh Sepasgozar & Yang Yu & Jike Li & Samad Sepasgozar & Fernando Alonso Marroquin, 2021. "Sustainable Architecture Creating Arches Using a Bamboo Grid Shell Structure: Numerical Analysis and Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-25, March.
    8. Liyin Shen & Junsi Yang & Rong Zhang & Changzhuan Shao & Xiangnan Song, 2019. "The Benefits and Barriers for Promoting Bamboo as a Green Building Material in China—An Integrative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, April.
    9. Dimitra Ioannidou & Guido Sonnemann & Sangwon Suh, 2020. "Do we have enough natural sand for low‐carbon infrastructure?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1004-1015, October.
    10. Rui Ma & Zhihua Chen & Yansheng Du & Lingao Jiao, 2023. "Structural Grading and Characteristic Value of the Moso Bamboo Culm Based on Its Minimum External Diameter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Xingwei Xiang & Qian Wu & Ye Zhang & Bifeng Zhu & Xiaoji Wang & Anping Wan & Tongle Huang & Luoke Hu, 2021. "A Pedagogical Approach to Incorporating the Concept of Sustainability into Design-to-Physical-Construction Teaching in Introductory Architectural Design Courses: A Case Study on a Bamboo Construction ," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-29, July.

    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. Cem Iskender Aydin & Begum Ozkaynak & Beatriz Rodríguez-Labajos & Taylan Yenilmez, 2017. "Network effects in environmental justice struggles: An investigation of conflicts between mining companies and civil society organizations from a network perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Duro, Juan Antonio, 2012. "On the automatic application of inequality indexes in the analysis of the international distribution of environmental indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-7.
    3. G. Gnanachandrasamy & C. Dushiyanthan & T. Jeyavel Rajakumar & Yongzhang Zhou, 2020. "Assessment of hydrogeochemical characteristics of groundwater in the lower Vellar river basin: using Geographical Information System (GIS) and Water Quality Index (WQI)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 759-789, February.
    4. Duro, Juan Antonio, 2013. "International mobility in carbon dioxide emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 208-216.
    5. Teixidó-Figueras, J. & Duro, J.A., 2014. "Spatial Polarization of the Ecological Footprint Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-106.
    6. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    7. Georgiadou, Maria Christina & Hacking, Theophilus & Guthrie, Peter, 2012. "A conceptual framework for future-proofing the energy performance of buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 145-155.
    8. Sierra-Pérez, Jorge & Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Boschmonart-Rives, Jesús & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2018. "Integrated life cycle assessment and thermodynamic simulation of a public building’s envelope renovation: Conventional vs. Passivhaus proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1510-1521.
    9. Zixia Xiang & Yanhong Yin & Yuanwen He, 2018. "A Microeconomic Methodology to Evaluate Energy Efficiency by Consumption Behaviors and Strategies to Improve Energy Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-11, November.
    10. Deng, S. & Wang, R.Z. & Dai, Y.J., 2014. "How to evaluate performance of net zero energy building – A literature research," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-16.
    11. Marco Bianchi & Carlos Tapia & Ikerne del Valle, 2020. "Monitoring domestic material consumption at lower territorial levels: A novel data downscaling method," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1074-1087, October.
    12. Zhang, Shengling & Wang, Yao & Hao, Yu & Liu, Zhiwei, 2021. "Shooting two hawks with one arrow: Could China's emission trading scheme promote green development efficiency and regional carbon equality?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Wendler, Tobias & Töbelmann, Daniel & Günther, Jutta, 2021. "Natural resources and technology - on the mitigating effect of green tech," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242416, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Julia K Steinberger & Fridolin Krausmann & Michael Getzner & Heinz Schandl & Jim West, 2013. "Development and Dematerialization: An International Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-11, October.
    15. Mathieu, Valentin & Roda, Jean-Marc, 2023. "A meta-analysis on wood trade flow modeling concepts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    16. Pothen, Frank & Schymura, Michael, 2014. "Bigger cakes with less ingredients? A comparison of material use of the world economy," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-030, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Wang, Zhiping & Feng, Chao & Chen, Jinyu & Huang, Jianbai, 2017. "The driving forces of material use in China: An index decomposition analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 336-348.
    18. 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.
    19. Tobias Wendler, 2019. "About the Relationship Between Green Technology and Material Usage," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1383-1423, November.
    20. Magee, Christopher L. & Devezas, Tessaleno C., 2017. "A simple extension of dematerialization theory: Incorporation of technical progress and the rebound effect," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 196-205.

    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:9:p:3096-:d:166731. 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.