A CASE STUDY OF THE INCREASE OF CARBON DIOXIDE DUE TO THE APPLICATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY REGULATIONS IN SERBIA

In order to demonstrate the environmental impact of the increased flow of thermal insulation materials and facade joinery with improved thermal characteristics, the analysis of the carbon footprint for two scenarios for the needs of the research was done as a consequence of the new regulations on the energy efficiency of the facilities. For each of the analyzed scenarios, a project and an overview of works on the basis of which quantities of construction materials, activities and processes that participate in the construction of the analyzed scenarios were calculated (S1 and S2), were made. The reference object (S1) is designed without thermal insulation layers, the energy class „G“, and the scenario (S2) is designed in the energy class „C“, which according to the new regulations is a condition for the construction of new facilities. The study uses the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), a methodology that is the basis for Carbon Lifecycle Analysis (LCACO2), or calculation of the carbon footprint of the facility. Construction carbon calculator, Environmental Protection Agency UK, is used to calculate the carbon footprint, and for the calculation of operational energy, the URSA Construction Physics 2 program. The study showed that the embodied carbon for the scenario (S1) is 138,40 tonnes CO2 e, with less impact on the environment. The higher values of the embodied carbon have a scenario (S2) of 148,20 tonnes CO2 e. The carbon imprint from the phase of construction, or less impact on the environment, has a scenario (S1). However, after ten years of using the facility, the scenario (S1) due to the larger carbon footprint from the operational phase becomes a scenario with a higher environmental impact, with a total carbon footprint of 186,16 tonnes CO2 e, and the scenario (S2) after ten years of use of the facility has a total carbon footprint of 163,86 tonnes CO2 e. The scenario (S1) and (S2) achieve the same values of the total carbon footprint after 3,05 years of use of the facility and (S2) has since then become a better choice from the aspect of the environment. The research has shown that the embodied carbon is neglected in the calculation of the environmental impact of the facility, as well as the average when the benefits can be expected from the application of measures for energy-efficient buildings. The research also points to the need for low-carbon thermal insulation materials to bridge the gap between the demand for the extinguishing of buildings on the one hand and the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change.