IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3865-d779100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprinting of Universities Worldwide Part II: First Quantification of Complete Embodied Impacts of Two Campuses in Germany and Singapore

Author

Listed:
  • Eckard Helmers

    (Department of Environ. Planning and Technology, Umwelt-Campus, University of Applied Sciences Trier, P.O. Box 1380, 55761 Birkenfeld, Germany)

  • Chia Chien Chang

    (Energy Research Institute (ERI@N), Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798, Singapore)

  • Justin Dauwels

    (Faculty EEMCS, TU Delft, Mekelweg 4, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Universities, as innovation drivers in science and technology worldwide, should attempt to become carbon-neutral institutions and should lead this transformation. Many universities have picked up the challenge and quantified their carbon footprints; however, up-to-date quantification is limited to use-phase emissions. So far, data on embodied impacts of university campus infrastructure are missing, which prevents us from evaluating their life cycle costs. In this paper, we quantify the embodied impacts of two university campuses of very different sizes and climate zones: the Umwelt-Campus Birkenfeld (UCB), Germany, and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. We also quantify the effects of switching to full renewable energy supply on the carbon footprint of a university campus based on the example of UCB. The embodied impacts amount to 13.7 (UCB) and 26.2 (NTU) kg CO 2 e/m 2 •y, respectively, equivalent to 59.2% (UCB), and 29.8% (NTU), respectively, of the building lifecycle impacts. As a consequence, embodied impacts can be dominating; thus, they should be quantified and reported. When adding additional use-phase impacts caused by the universities on top of the building lifecycle impacts (e.g., mobility impacts), both institutions happen to exhibit very similar emissions with 124.5–126.3 kg CO 2 e/m 2 •y despite their different sizes, structures, and locations. Embodied impacts comprise 11.0–20.8% of the total impacts at the two universities. In conclusion, efficient reduction in university carbon footprints requires a holistic approach, considering all impacts caused on and by a campus including upstream effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Eckard Helmers & Chia Chien Chang & Justin Dauwels, 2022. "Carbon Footprinting of Universities Worldwide Part II: First Quantification of Complete Embodied Impacts of Two Campuses in Germany and Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3865-:d:779100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3865/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3865/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kylili, Angeliki & Ilic, Milos & Fokaides, Paris A., 2017. "Whole-building Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a passive house of the sub-tropical climatic zone," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 169-177.
    2. 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.
    3. Christina Kiamili & Alexander Hollberg & Guillaume Habert, 2020. "Detailed Assessment of Embodied Carbon of HVAC Systems for a New Office Building Based on BIM," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Francesco Asdrubali & Marta Roncone & Gianluca Grazieschi, 2021. "Embodied Energy and Embodied GWP of Windows: A Critical Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Eckard Helmers & Johannes Dietz & Martin Weiss, 2020. "Sensitivity Analysis in the Life-Cycle Assessment of Electric vs. Combustion Engine Cars under Approximate Real-World Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-31, February.
    6. Wang, Tao & Seo, Seongwon & Liao, Pin-Chao & Fang, Dongping, 2016. "GHG emission reduction performance of state-of-the-art green buildings: Review of two case studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 484-493.
    7. Ana M. Osorio & Luisa F. Úsuga & Rafael E. Vásquez & César Nieto-Londoño & Maria E. Rinaudo & José A. Martínez & Walter Leal Filho, 2022. "Towards Carbon Neutrality in Higher Education Institutions: Case of Two Private Universities in Colombia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    8. Željko Jurić & Davor Ljubas, 2020. "Comparative Assessment of Carbon Footprints of Selected Organizations: The Application of the Enhanced Bilan Carbone Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    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. Lingyu Wang & Xingyun Yan & Mingzhu Fang & Hua Song & Jie Hu, 2023. "A Systematic Design Framework for Zero Carbon Campuses: Investigating the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Fahua Campus Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-31, May.
    2. Denner Deda & Helena Gervásio & Margarida J. Quina, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis and Benchmarking of Life Cycle Assessment of Higher Education Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, February.

    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. 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).
    2. Joana Fernandes & Maria Catarina Santos & Rui Castro, 2021. "Introductory Review of Energy Efficiency in Buildings Retrofits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Francesco Asdrubali & Gianluca Grazieschi & Marta Roncone & Francesca Thiebat & Corrado Carbonaro, 2023. "Sustainability of Building Materials: Embodied Energy and Embodied Carbon of Masonry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Fenner, Andriel Evandro & Kibert, Charles Joseph & Woo, Junghoon & Morque, Shirley & Razkenari, Mohamad & Hakim, Hamed & Lu, Xiaoshu, 2018. "The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1142-1152.
    5. Burek, Jasmina & Nutter, Darin W., 2019. "A life cycle assessment-based multi-objective optimization of the purchased, solar, and wind energy for the grocery, perishables, and general merchandise multi-facility distribution center network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1427-1446.
    6. 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.
    7. Luis M. López-Ochoa & Jesús Las-Heras-Casas & Luis M. López-González & César García-Lozano, 2020. "Energy Renovation of Residential Buildings in Cold Mediterranean Zones Using Optimized Thermal Envelope Insulation Thicknesses: The Case of Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-34, March.
    8. Sungwoo Lee & Sungho Tae & Seungjun Roh & Taehyung Kim, 2015. "Green Template for Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings Based on Building Information Modeling: Focus on Embodied Environmental Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-15, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Justiani Sally & Wibowo Budhi S., 2022. "The Economic and Environmental Benefits of Collaborative Pick-Up in Urban Delivery Systems," LOGI – Scientific Journal on Transport and Logistics, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 245-256, January.
    11. Roux, Charlotte & Schalbart, Patrick & Assoumou, Edi & Peuportier, Bruno, 2016. "Integrating climate change and energy mix scenarios in LCA of buildings and districts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 619-629.
    12. 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.
    13. Antonello Monsù Scolaro & Stefania De Medici, 2021. "Downcycling and Upcycling in Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse of Pre-Existing Buildings: Re-Designing Technological Performances in an Environmental Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    14. Maria Anna Cusenza & Teresa Maria Gulotta & Marina Mistretta & Maurizio Cellura, 2021. "Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of the Thermal Insulation Improvement in Residential Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Sultan Çetin & Catherine De Wolf & Nancy Bocken, 2021. "Circular Digital Built Environment: An Emerging Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    16. Jin-Young Park & Byung-Soo Kim & Dong-Eun Lee, 2021. "Environmental and Cost Impact Assessment of Pavement Materials Using IBEES Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    17. Dzikuć Maciej, 2015. "Environmental management with the use of LCA in the Polish energy system," Management, Sciendo, vol. 19(1), pages 89-97, May.
    18. Arman Hashemi & Heather Cruickshank & Ali Cheshmehzangi, 2015. "Environmental Impacts and Embodied Energy of Construction Methods and Materials in Low-Income Tropical Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-18, June.
    19. Qianqian Zhao & Junzhen Li & Roman Fediuk & Sergey Klyuev & Darya Nemova, 2021. "Benefit Evaluation Model of Prefabricated Buildings in Seasonally Frozen Regions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    20. Chau, C.K. & Xu, J.M. & Leung, T.M. & Ng, W.Y., 2017. "Evaluation of the impacts of end-of-life management strategies for deconstruction of a high-rise concrete framed office building," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(P2), pages 1595-1603.

    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:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3865-:d:779100. 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.