Life Cycle Environmental and Cost Analysis of Building Insulated with Hemp Fibre Compared to Alternative Conventional Insulations – a Swedish Case Study

Q2 Engineering
Mathilda Hult, Sara Karlsmo
{"title":"Life Cycle Environmental and Cost Analysis of Building Insulated with Hemp Fibre Compared to Alternative Conventional Insulations – a Swedish Case Study","authors":"Mathilda Hult, Sara Karlsmo","doi":"10.5755/j01.sace.30.1.30357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a comparative life cycle analysis (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) assessments of hemp fibre and conventional alternative insulations for the climate shell of a building. The conventional alternative insulations compared to the hemp fibre are cellulose and glass wool. The object of the analysis is a one-story single-family house, in Växjö, Sweden, and the lifetime of the house is set to 50 years. The LCA focuses on the Global Warming Potential (GWP) impact and the LCC during the lifetime of the different insulations for the building are calculated using the net present value method. The results show that the net GWP-impact for hemp fibre insulation is about 10 % lower and the cost is about 20 % higher than the conventional glass wool alternative. Furthermore, the analysis shows that cellulose insulation has slightly lower GWP-impact and nearly the same cost as the glass wool alternative. Sensitivity analyses regarding five different issues were performed and these show that: for cellulose coming from recycled paper, it contributed to less fossil emissions than non-recycled paper. If the data source for glass wool insulation is changed from environmental product declarations (EPD) to generic data, the greenhouse gas emissions increased. By replacing district heating system with geothermal heating system, fossil GWP-impacts also increased while the LCC analysis shows that operating costs is reduced. If the fuel is changed from diesel to electricity, fossil emissions are reduced over the life cycle of the building. If only part A1 – A5 is reported, as required for the Swedish climate declaration, the results point to the outcomes that glass wool insulation gives the least fossil GWP-impact while the hemp fibre gives the least net GWP-impact.","PeriodicalId":36795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.30.1.30357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This study presents a comparative life cycle analysis (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) assessments of hemp fibre and conventional alternative insulations for the climate shell of a building. The conventional alternative insulations compared to the hemp fibre are cellulose and glass wool. The object of the analysis is a one-story single-family house, in Växjö, Sweden, and the lifetime of the house is set to 50 years. The LCA focuses on the Global Warming Potential (GWP) impact and the LCC during the lifetime of the different insulations for the building are calculated using the net present value method. The results show that the net GWP-impact for hemp fibre insulation is about 10 % lower and the cost is about 20 % higher than the conventional glass wool alternative. Furthermore, the analysis shows that cellulose insulation has slightly lower GWP-impact and nearly the same cost as the glass wool alternative. Sensitivity analyses regarding five different issues were performed and these show that: for cellulose coming from recycled paper, it contributed to less fossil emissions than non-recycled paper. If the data source for glass wool insulation is changed from environmental product declarations (EPD) to generic data, the greenhouse gas emissions increased. By replacing district heating system with geothermal heating system, fossil GWP-impacts also increased while the LCC analysis shows that operating costs is reduced. If the fuel is changed from diesel to electricity, fossil emissions are reduced over the life cycle of the building. If only part A1 – A5 is reported, as required for the Swedish climate declaration, the results point to the outcomes that glass wool insulation gives the least fossil GWP-impact while the hemp fibre gives the least net GWP-impact.
与传统替代绝缘材料相比,大麻纤维绝缘建筑的生命周期环境和成本分析——瑞典案例研究
本研究对建筑气候外壳的大麻纤维和传统替代隔热材料进行了比较生命周期分析(LCA)和生命周期成本(LCC)评估。与大麻纤维相比,传统的替代绝缘材料是纤维素和玻璃棉。分析对象是瑞典Växjö的一栋单层独栋房屋,该房屋的使用寿命为50年。生命周期评价侧重于全球变暖潜能值(GWP)的影响,并使用净现值法计算建筑物不同隔热层使用寿命期间的生命周期评价。结果表明,大麻纤维绝缘的净GWP影响比传统的玻璃棉替代品低约10%,成本高约20%。此外,分析表明,纤维素绝缘的GWP影响略低,成本与玻璃棉替代品几乎相同。对五个不同问题进行了敏感性分析,结果表明:对于来自再生纸的纤维素,它比非再生纸减少了化石排放。如果玻璃棉隔热材料的数据来源从环境产品申报(EPD)改为通用数据,温室气体排放量就会增加。通过用地热供暖系统取代区域供暖系统,化石全球升温潜能值的影响也增加了,而LCC分析表明运营成本降低了。如果燃料从柴油改为电力,那么在建筑的整个生命周期内,化石排放就会减少。如果按照瑞典气候宣言的要求,只报告了A1–A5部分,则结果表明,玻璃棉隔热材料对化石全球升温潜能值的影响最小,而大麻纤维对全球变暖潜能值的净影响最小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信