IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i6p2220-d331814.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Impacts of Building Construction Using Cross-laminated Timber Panel Construction Method: A Case of the Research Building in Kyushu, Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Katsuyuki Nakano

    (College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki 567-8570, Japan)

  • Masahiko Karube

    (Department of Wood Engineering, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, National Research and Development Agency of Forest Research and Management Organization, Tsukuba 305-8687, Japan)

  • Nobuaki Hattori

    (Faculty of Agriculture, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Fuchu 183-8509, Japan)

Abstract

In Japan, there has been an increase in the number of buildings built using cross-laminated timber (CLT) in order to utilize the abundant forest resources in the country. However, no studies have evaluated the environmental impact of the construction of CLT buildings in Japan. This study evaluates the environmental impacts from the start of construction to the completion of a real CLT building in Kumamoto city, Kyushu region, southern Japan. We investigated the input of the materials and energy used in the construction of the building. The environmental impact categories evaluated include climate change, ozone layer depletion, eutrophication, acidification, and photochemical oxidation. We found that the concrete used for the foundations, and the cement-based soil stabilizer used for ground reinforcement accounted for 42% of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The construction site was previously used as a seedbed field, necessitating ground reinforcement. Furthermore, the large foundations were designed in order to raise the low height of the wooden structure from the ground level. Developing and applying methods with lower environmental impacts for ground reinforcement and building foundations is recommended. In addition, we found that by using biomass-derived electricity in CLT manufacturing, the environmental impacts of CLT manufacturing could be reduced, thus reducing the environmental impacts of the entire building. The biogenic carbon fixed in the wooden parts during the building usage accounted for 32% of the total GHG emissions of the building construction. Since this biogenic carbon will be released to the atmosphere at the end-of-life stage of the building, a long-term usage of the CLT buildings and/or reuse of the CLT is recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Katsuyuki Nakano & Masahiko Karube & Nobuaki Hattori, 2020. "Environmental Impacts of Building Construction Using Cross-laminated Timber Panel Construction Method: A Case of the Research Building in Kyushu, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2220-:d:331814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2220/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2220/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ying Liu & Haibo Guo & Cheng Sun & Wen-Shao Chang, 2016. "Assessing Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) as an Alternative Material for Mid-Rise Residential Buildings in Cold Regions in China—A Life-Cycle Assessment Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, October.
    2. Anand, Chirjiv Kaur & Amor, Ben, 2017. "Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 408-416.
    3. Cindy X. Chen & Francesca Pierobon & Indroneil Ganguly, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) Produced in Western Washington: The Role of Logistics and Wood Species Mix," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Kamalakanta Sahoo & Richard Bergman & Sevda Alanya-Rosenbaum & Hongmei Gu & Shaobo Liang, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Forest-Based Products: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-30, August.
    5. Haibo Guo & Ying Liu & Yiping Meng & Haoyu Huang & Cheng Sun & Yu Shao, 2017. "A Comparison of the Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance between Reinforced Concrete and Cross-Laminated Timber Structures in Residential Buildings in the Severe Cold Region of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, August.
    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. Minunno, Roberto & O'Grady, Timothy & Morrison, Gregory M. & Gruner, Richard L., 2021. "Investigating the embodied energy and carbon of buildings: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).

    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. Tetsuya Iwase & Takanobu Sasaki & Shogo Araki & Tomohumi Huzita & Chihiro Kayo, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Small-Scale Bridge Repair Using Cross-Laminated Timber Floor Slabs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Minunno, Roberto & O'Grady, Timothy & Morrison, Gregory M. & Gruner, Richard L., 2021. "Investigating the embodied energy and carbon of buildings: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    3. Kamalakanta Sahoo & Richard Bergman & Sevda Alanya-Rosenbaum & Hongmei Gu & Shaobo Liang, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Forest-Based Products: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-30, August.
    4. Cindy X. Chen & Francesca Pierobon & Susan Jones & Ian Maples & Yingchun Gong & Indroneil Ganguly, 2021. "Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Gabriel Felmer & Rodrigo Morales-Vera & Rodrigo Astroza & Ignacio González & Maureen Puettmann & Mark Wishnie, 2022. "A Lifecycle Assessment of a Low-Energy Mass-Timber Building and Mainstream Concrete Alternative in Central Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Shaobo Liang & Hongmei Gu & Richard Bergman, 2021. "Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment and Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of a High-Rise Mass Timber Building: A Case Study in Pacific Northwestern United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Endrik Arumägi & Targo Kalamees, 2020. "Cost and Energy Reduction of a New nZEB Wooden Building," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Cindy X. Chen & Francesca Pierobon & Indroneil Ganguly, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) Produced in Western Washington: The Role of Logistics and Wood Species Mix," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Yu Dong & Tongyu Qin & Siyuan Zhou & Lu Huang & Rui Bo & Haibo Guo & Xunzhi Yin, 2020. "Comparative Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance of Reinforced Concrete and Timber Stadiums—A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Moncef L. Nehdi & Yannian Zhang & Xiaohan Gao & Lei V. Zhang & Ahmed R. Suleiman, 2021. "Experimental Investigation on Axial Compression of Resilient Nail-Cross-Laminated Timber Panels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Kong, Minjin & Lee, Minhyun & Kang, Hyuna & Hong, Taehoon, 2021. "Development of a framework for evaluating the contents and usability of the building life cycle assessment tool," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Pau Fonseca i Casas & Antoni Fonseca i Casas, 2017. "Using Specification and Description Language for Life Cycle Assesment in Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Alejandro Padilla-Rivera & Ben Amor & Pierre Blanchet, 2018. "Evaluating the Link between Low Carbon Reductions Strategies and Its Performance in the Context of Climate Change: A Carbon Footprint of a Wood-Frame Residential Building in Quebec, Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Kim, Rakhyun & Tae, Sungho & Roh, Seungjun, 2017. "Development of low carbon durability design for green apartment buildings in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 263-272.
    16. Xuyao Zhang & Weimin Zhang & Dayu Xu, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Complex Forestry Enterprise: A Case Study of a Forest–Fiberboard Integrated Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.
    17. Qianmiao Yang & Liyao Kong & Hui Tong & Xiaolin Wang, 2020. "Evaluation Model of Environmental Impacts of Insulation Building Envelopes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, March.
    18. 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).
    19. Yuki Fuchigami & Keisuke Kojiro & Yuzo Furuta, 2020. "Quantification of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Wood-Plastic Recycled Composite (WPRC) and Verification of the Effect of Reducing Emissions through Multiple Recycling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-13, March.
    20. Ashok Kumar & Pardeep Singh & Nishant Raj Kapoor & Chandan Swaroop Meena & Kshitij Jain & Kishor S. Kulkarni & Raffaello Cozzolino, 2021. "Ecological Footprint of Residential Buildings in Composite Climate of India—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-25, October.

    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:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2220-:d:331814. 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.