BTE9003M

ADVANCED CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY AND

INNOVATION

ASSESSMENT 2
INNOVATIONS IN TECHNOLOGY AND THE
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PROCESS: LIFE CYCLE
ASSESSMENT (LCA)

STUDENT ID:
MODULE CODE:
MODULE LEADER:
DATE OF SUBMISSION:

1
 Executive summary

This analysis evaluates the potential of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and carbon foot printing in
the building industry to enhance the life performance of buildings. LCA provides a
comprehensive approach to analysing the environmental impacts of buildings throughout their
entire life cycle, while carbon foot printing focuses specifically on quantifying greenhouse gas
emissions. These methodologies enable stakeholders to make informed decisions that reduce the
environmental impact of buildings and contribute to a more sustainable built environment.
The analysis highlights the benefits of LCA and carbon foot printing in key areas such as design
optimization, operational efficiency, and end-of-life considerations. LCA supports decision-
making during the design stage by identifying opportunities for reducing emissions and resource
consumption. It also helps optimize operational performance by evaluating energy consumption,
water usage, and emissions. Additionally, LCA supports waste reduction and circularity in the
end-of-life stage by analysing the impacts of demolition and material disposal.
Challenges faced in implementing LCA and carbon foot printing include data availability and
quality, complexity and time intensiveness, and lack of standardization and harmonization.
Overcoming these challenges requires collaborative efforts, data collection improvement, and the
development of standardized methodologies and tools.
The analysis emphasizes the importance of continuous research and knowledge-sharing among
stakeholders to further enhance the effectiveness of LCA and carbon foot printing. By leveraging
these methodologies and addressing challenges, stakeholders can contribute to a more
sustainable future by reducing carbon footprints, optimizing resource use, and promoting
environmentally responsible practices in the building industry.

2
 Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................3

EVALUATION OF POTENTIALS OF LCA AND CARBON FOOTPRINT IN THE CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRY TO ENHANCE TO LIFE EXPANSION OF BUILDINGS....................................................3

OVERVIEW OF LCA...................................................................................................................................3
OVERVIEW OF CARBON FOOTPRINT...........................................................................................................4

IDENTIFYING IMPACTS OF LCA AND CARBON FOOTPRINTS IN THE CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRY.................................................................................................................................................5

Design Optimization...........................................................................................................................5
Operational Efficiency........................................................................................................................5
End-of-Life Considerations................................................................................................................6
Regulatory Compliance and Market Demand.....................................................................................6

ANALYSING METHODOLOGIES OF IMPLEMENTING LCA IN THE CONSTRUCTION

INDUSTRY.................................................................................................................................................7

Methodologies for LCA in the Building Industry................................................................................7

LCA Standards and Guidelines...........................................................................................................7
Availability and Quality of LCA Data.................................................................................................8

IDENTIFYING THE CHALLENGES FACED BY BUILDING INDUSTRY IN IMPLEMENTING LCA

..................................................................................................................................................................... 9

IDENTIFYING OTHER TOOLS AND PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING THE CARBON

FOOTPRINT OF A BUILDING...............................................................................................................10

OPERATIONAL CARBON FOOTPRINTING...................................................................................................10

Embodied Carbon Footprinting........................................................................................................11
Carbon Accounting Tools.................................................................................................................11

CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................................................12

DISCUSSION...........................................................................................................................................12

REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................14

3
4
Introduction

The construction industry is increasingly recognizing the need to measure and reduce the
environmental impact of buildings throughout their entire life cycle. Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA) and carbon footprinting have emerged as valuable tools for evaluating and improving the
sustainability performance of buildings. This essay examines the potential of LCA and carbon
footprinting in the building industry to enhance the live performance of buildings, focusing on
key aspects such as design optimization, operational efficiency, and end-of-life considerations.

Evaluation of potentials of LCA and Carbon footprint in the construction

industry to enhance to life expansion of buildings

Overview of LCA

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) examines the environmental implications of products, processes,
and systems from raw material extraction to end-of-life disposal. LCA has become popular in the
building sector for assessing and improving building sustainability. This review covers LCA
subtopics and contemporary literature (2019–2023) that advances building industry LCA
knowledge.

5
 Figure: General Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) process
(Source: McKinsey, 2022)
LCAs begin with goal and scope definition. The study's purpose, system boundaries, functional
unit, and life cycle stages are identified. Reliable and comparable results require precise aim and
scope specification. Coimbra et al. (2019) stressed the necessity of clear aim and scope
specification to ensure LCA study reliability and usefulness. Inventory analysis quantifies inputs
(materials, energy) and outputs (emissions, waste) for each building’s life cycle stage. Material
compositions, energy usage, transportation, and waste management are needed for data
collection. Data availability and modelling have improved inventory analysis. Röck et al. (2020)
used databases and life cycle inventory tools to improve LCA inventories. After inventory
analysis, analyze the environmental implications of the inputs and outputs. Impact assessment
methods convert inventory data into environmental indicators including greenhouse gas
emissions, energy use, water usage, and land occupation.

Figure: Framework representing LCA format used in building industry

(Source: Khouj et al., 2022)
Recent impact assessment methods have addressed social integration and ecosystem service
assessment. Lehmann et al. (2021) suggested a hybrid social-ecological LCA framework to
address environmental and social issues in buildings. Interpretation and Communication: LCA
analysis and conclusions are drawn from impact assessment data. Hotspots, alternative scenarios,
and trade-offs between life cycle stages or building components are included. Decision-making

6
and sustainable actions depend on LCA communication. Eco-labels, EPDs, and sustainability
certificates help stakeholders understand LCA results. Kościesza et al. (2022) examined how
interactive visualization tools might improve LCA results understanding and communication.
LCA can improve building sustainability. LCA supports building industry decision-making
through well-defined purpose and scope, rigorous inventory analysis, comprehensive impact
assessment, and effective interpretation and sharing of results. Data, modeling advances, and
social and ecological factors improve LCA research' credibility and application. LCA empowers
building industry stakeholders to reduce buildings' environmental effect and create a more
sustainable built environment.

Overview of Carbon footprint

Carbon footprint measures human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, including building

development and operation. The building industry must reduce carbon footprints to mitigate
climate change. This review covers carbon footprint, measuring methods, emission sources,
benchmarking, and mitigation measures in the building industry.

Figure: Carbon foot print implementation ration in global building industry

(Source: Global Data, 2022)
Standardised measurement methods are needed to quantify building carbon footprints reliably.
ISO 14044, which provides life cycle assessment (LCA) principles and requirements for many
industries, including the building industry, is the most extensively used carbon footprint
assessment framework. LCA quantifies emissions throughout a building's life cycle, including

7
extraction, production, construction, operation, and disposal. LCA systematically measures
carbon footprints, enabling comparison and benchmarking (ISO, 2019). Buildings emit direct
and indirect carbon. On-site fossil fuel combustion for heating, cooling, and electricity
generation produces Scope 1 emissions. Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions come from grid-supplied
power and construction material embodied carbon. Scope 3 emissions include transportation,
waste management, and building water usage (IPCC, 2019). Building carbon footprints requires
identifying and quantifying these emission sources. Benchmarking: Comparing building carbon
footprints helps find best practices, set goals, and improve. The Global Reporting Initiative
(GRI), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), and the Carbon Disclosure
Project (CDP) help benchmarking by standardizing reporting formats and performance
indicators. These programs promote building industry transparency, accountability, and
improvement (GRI, 2021). Building carbon footprint reduction requires appropriate mitigating
techniques. Improved insulation, HVAC systems, and energy management systems lower
operating emissions. Solar panels and geothermal systems reduce carbon footprints further. Low-
carbon concrete and recycled materials reduce embodied carbon. Optimizing building design,
lifecycle considerations, and behaviour modification methods can reduce carbon footprints
(Cabeza et al., 2021).

Identifying impacts of LCA and Carbon footprints in the construction

industry

Building sustainability requires understanding and addressing buildings' carbon footprints. LCA
measures emissions throughout a building's life cycle. Identifying emission sources, measuring
performance, and implementing effective mitigation techniques help the industry reduce carbon
footprints and meet global climate change targets. Building a low-carbon, resilient built
environment requires a holistic strategy and sustainable practices from the building industry.

8
 Design Optimization

Operational Efficiency

End-of-Life
Considerations

Regulatory Compliance
and Market Demand

Regulatory Compliance
and Market Demand

Figure: Smart art to represent the potentiality of LCA in case of building industry project
(Source: Self)

Design Optimization

LCA provides valuable insights during the design stage of a building, enabling architects and
engineers to make informed decisions that minimize the environmental impact. By quantifying
the embodied carbon and energy of construction materials and systems, LCA helps identify
opportunities for reducing emissions and resource consumption. For example, a study by Guo et
al. (2020) found that incorporating LCA in the design process can significantly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.

9
 Figure: Design optimisation process in various sectors
(Source: Al-Obaidy et al., 2021)

Operational Efficiency

LCA also allows for the assessment of a building's operational stage, which accounts for a
significant portion of its life cycle impacts. By evaluating energy consumption, water usage, and
emissions associated with heating, cooling, and electrical systems, LCA can identify areas for
improvement. This information can inform decisions regarding energy-efficient technologies,
renewable energy integration, and smart building management systems. Research by Pardo-
Martínez et al. (2021) demonstrated the effectiveness of LCA in optimizing energy performance
during the operational stage of buildings.

10
End-of-Life Considerations

Another critical aspect of LCA is its ability to assess the end-of-life stage of a building. By
analyzing the impacts of demolition, waste generation, and material disposal, LCA supports
waste reduction, recycling, and circularity strategies. For instance, through careful
deconstruction and salvage practices, materials can be repurposed, reducing the need for new
resources. A study by Yin et al. (2019) highlighted the potential of LCA in promoting circular
economy principles in building design and construction.

Figure: End Of Life (EOL) consideration framework

(Source: Helen et al., 2022)

11
Regulatory Compliance and Market Demand

LCA and carbon footprinting can assist the building industry in meeting regulatory requirements
and addressing market demands for sustainable buildings. Many countries have implemented
policies and standards that incentivize or mandate the use of LCA and carbon footprinting. For
instance, the European Union's Construction Products Regulation requires Environmental
Product Declarations (EPDs) based on LCA for construction products. Furthermore,
certifications such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and BREEAM
(Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) encourage the use of
LCA in building assessment and rating systems, promoting sustainable practices in the industry.

Figure: Regulatory compilances for LCA

(Source: BBC, 2022)
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and carbon footprinting offer significant potential for enhancing
the live performance of buildings. By integrating LCA into the design process, buildings can be
optimized to minimize embodied carbon and energy. During the operational stage, LCA enables
the identification of energy-efficient strategies and technologies. Additionally, LCA supports

12
waste reduction and circularity in the end-of-life stage. Compliance with regulations and market
demand for sustainable buildings further drive the adoption of LCA and carbon footprinting in
the industry. Embracing these methodologies allows the construction industry to make informed
decisions that prioritize sustainability, reduce carbon footprints, and contribute to a more
environmentally responsible built environment.

Analysing methodologies of implementing LCA in the construction industry

Performing a comprehensive and reliable Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) requires the use of
appropriate methodologies and adherence to recognized standards. This review examines various
methodologies and standards, as well as the availability of LCA data, relevant to conducting
LCA in the building industry. The selected literature (2019-2023) provides insights into recent
advancements and approaches in LCA methodology and standardization efforts.

Methodologies for LCA in the Building Industry

a. Process-Based LCA: This methodology involves a detailed assessment of individual

processes and components within a building's life cycle. It considers material production,
construction, use, and end-of-life stages. Studies, such as the work by Mutel et al. (2020),
have focused on refining process-based LCA models and improving the accuracy of data
inputs.
b. Input-Output LCA: This methodology uses economic input-output tables to analyze the
flow of materials and energy throughout the economy. It provides a macro-level
assessment of a building's life cycle impacts. Input-output LCA has been used to evaluate
the indirect environmental consequences of construction activities, as demonstrated in
research by Pomponi et al. (2021).
c. Hybrid LCA: Hybrid LCA combines aspects of both process-based and input-output
LCA methodologies. It seeks to leverage the strengths of each approach to provide a
more comprehensive and accurate assessment. Hybrid LCA studies, such as the work by
Passarini et al. (2020), have explored the integration of environmental and economic
indicators in the building industry.

13
LCA Standards and Guidelines

ISO 14040 and ISO 14044

These International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards provide general principles
and guidelines for conducting LCA. ISO 14040 outlines the framework and requirements, while
ISO 14044 specifies the detailed LCA methodology. Compliance with these standards ensures
consistency and transparency in LCA studies.
EN 15978
This European standard focuses specifically on the environmental assessment of buildings. It
provides guidelines for performing LCA, including requirements for data collection, system
boundaries, and impact categories. EN 15978 aligns with the principles of sustainability and
provides a common framework for LCA in the European building industry.
Other Certification Systems
Various building certification systems, such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design) and BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method),
incorporate LCA as part of their assessment criteria. These systems establish their own specific
guidelines and requirements for conducting LCA within their certification schemes.

Availability and Quality of LCA Data

a. Databases: Several databases offer LCA data on construction materials, products, and
systems. For example, the Ecoinvent database provides comprehensive life cycle
inventory data, while the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) database focuses
specifically on building materials. These databases contribute to the availability and
reliability of LCA data for the building industry.
b. Data Gaps and Uncertainties: Despite the availability of databases, data gaps and
uncertainties remain a challenge in LCA. Researchers, such as Štreimikienė et al. (2022),
have emphasized the need for accurate and up-to-date data on materials, processes, and
energy consumption to enhance the reliability of LCA results.

The use of appropriate methodologies and adherence to recognized standards are essential for
conducting robust LCA in the building industry. Process-based, input-output, and hybrid LCA
methodologies offer different perspectives and insights into a building's life cycle impacts. ISO

14
standards and guidelines, along with certification systems like LEED and BREEAM, provide
frameworks for consistent and transparent LCA studies.

Identifying the challenges faced by building industry in implementing LCA

The building sector struggles to apply Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which can improve
building sustainability. This review discusses construction industry LCA problems. Recent
literature (2019–2023) sheds light on issues and possible solutions.

Challanges
data Validity
Complexity and
time intensiveness
Lack of
Standardisation

Figure: Smart art representing challenges in implementing LCA in a building project

(Source: Self)
Data validity
Lack of Comprehensive and Up-to-Date Data: LCA requires accurate and trustworthy data on
materials, energy usage, transportation, and waste management. Data coverage, especially for
developing materials and technologies, is still difficult. Del Borghi et al. (2021) recommended
better data gathering and creating industry databases.
Data Uncertainty and Variability: LCA data quality and uncertainty affect findings reliability and
comparability. LCA uncertainties originate from data sources, regional contexts, and system

15
boundaries. Sensitivity analysis and uncertainty propagation improve LCA study robustness
(Boussabaine et al., 2020).

Complexity and Time-Intensiveness

Buildings are complex systems with interrelated components and various life cycle stages. LCA
is complicated by the built environment's many variables and interactions. Accurate system
boundaries, indirect and cumulative impacts, and dynamic aspects like occupant behaviour
increase complexity. Glaumann et al. (2019) examined simpler modelling and modularization to
manage complexity.
Time and Resources: A comprehensive LCA takes time, knowledge, and resources. Data
collection, modelling, impact assessment, and interpretation are resource-intensive. These
constraints may challenge smaller organizations or initiatives with limited resources. Horvath et
al. (2021) provide integrated assessment tools and simplified LCA approaches to address these
issues.

Lack of standardisation
LCA studies in the building industry use different approaches, system limits, and effect
assessment indicators. Variability limits comparison and conclusions. Harmonization and
meaningful comparisons are promoted by standardized LCA methods like ISO 21930 for
environmental product declarations (EPDs) (Berge et al., 2020).
Integration with Other Assessment methodologies: The building sector uses several sustainability
assessment methodologies and certifications that may overlap or supplement LCA. Data
integration, compatibility, and duplication are issues when integrating LCA with BIM, LEED,
and BREEAM. Meireles et al. (2021) found that LCA and other evaluation tools must be
interoperable.

Data availability and quality, complexity and time-intensiveness, and lack of standardization and
harmonization are barriers to establishing industry LCA implementation. Stakeholders—
researchers, practitioners, and policymakers—must collaborate to overcome these problems.
LCA in the building industry can be maximized by improving data collecting and database

16
development, simplifying modelling approaches, standardizing methodologies, and improving
the interface with other assessment tools.

Identifying other tools and procedures for conducting the carbon footprint of
a building

In addition to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), the carbon footprinting of buildings provides
valuable insights into the environmental impact of buildings, focusing specifically on greenhouse
gas emissions. This review explores existing tools and procedures for conducting carbon
footprinting of buildings, excluding the LCA approach. The selected literature (2019-2023)
sheds light on recent advancements and approaches in carbon footprinting methodologies.

Operational Carbon Footprinting

a. Energy Performance Assessment Tools: Various energy performance assessment tools,

such as Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) and energy modeling software, enable
the estimation of operational carbon emissions of buildings. These tools utilize energy
consumption data, energy efficiency metrics, and emission factors to calculate carbon
footprints. Research by Pacheco-Torgal et al. (2019) highlighted the significance of
energy modeling tools in assessing and optimizing the operational carbon footprint of
buildings.
b. Building Energy Management Systems (BEMS): BEMS integrate energy monitoring,
control, and optimization technologies to enhance energy efficiency and reduce carbon
emissions. By collecting real-time energy data and enabling automated control, BEMS
can identify energy-saving opportunities and provide insights into carbon footprint
reduction. Studies by Duarte et al. (2021) have emphasized the role of BEMS in
improving operational performance and carbon management of buildings.

Embodied Carbon Footprinting

 Life Cycle Inventory Databases: Similar to LCA, the carbon footprinting of buildings can
utilize life cycle inventory databases that provide data on the embodied carbon emissions

17
 associated with construction materials and components. These databases, such as the
Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) database, offer comprehensive information on
material production, transportation, and processing emissions. Researchers, such as Yang
et al. (2022), have utilized these databases to estimate and mitigate the embodied carbon
footprint of buildings.
 Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs): EPDs provide standardized information on
the environmental impacts of construction products, including carbon emissions. By
using EPDs, practitioners can assess the embodied carbon footprint of materials and
make informed choices during the design and construction stages. The use of EPDs
promotes transparency and facilitates carbon footprint calculations for specific building
elements. Studies, such as the work by Luo et al. (2020), have explored the integration of
EPDs in carbon footprinting methodologies.

Carbon Accounting Tools

 Carbon Accounting Protocols: Various organizations and initiatives have developed

protocols and guidelines for carbon accounting in the building industry. Examples
include the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) and the World Resources Institute
(WRI) guidelines. These protocols provide standardized methodologies for quantifying
and reporting carbon emissions, ensuring consistency and comparability across different
projects and organizations.
 Online Carbon Calculators: Online carbon calculators provide user-friendly interfaces
that allow building owners, designers, and managers to estimate the carbon footprint of
buildings. These calculators typically consider operational energy use, embodied carbon,
and other relevant parameters. They can be valuable tools for raising awareness and
initiating discussions on carbon reduction strategies. Research by Fonseca et al. (2021)
highlighted the potential of online calculators in engaging stakeholders and promoting
carbon footprint awareness.

Conclusion

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and carbon footprinting play vital roles in the building industry's
efforts to enhance buildings' sustainability and environmental performance. LCA provides a

18
comprehensive framework for assessing the environmental impacts across the entire life cycle of
a building, including embodied carbon, operational energy use, and end-of-life considerations.
Carbon footprinting, on the other hand, focuses specifically on quantifying greenhouse gas
emissions associated with a building's operational and embodied carbon. By employing LCA and
carbon footprinting, the building industry can identify areas of improvement, optimize design
decisions, enhance operational efficiency, and promote circularity and waste reduction. These
methodologies enable stakeholders to make informed choices regarding materials, technologies,
and strategies that reduce the environmental impact of buildings and contribute to a more
sustainable built environment. However, several challenges and considerations must be
addressed to effectively implement LCA and carbon footprinting in the building industry. These
include data availability and quality, complexity and time intensiveness, lack of standardization
and harmonization, and integration with other assessment tools and certifications. Efforts to
improve data collection, enhance modelling techniques, standardize methodologies, and ensure
interoperability with existing frameworks are crucial for overcoming these challenges.

Discussion

The building industry's increasing focus on LCA and carbon footprinting reflects the growing
recognition of the importance of environmental sustainability in the built environment.
Governments, regulatory bodies, and certification systems have also played significant roles in
promoting the adoption of LCA and carbon footprinting by incorporating them into policies,
standards, and rating systems. Furthermore, advancements in technology, such as the
development of comprehensive databases, energy modelling software, and online calculators,
have facilitated the implementation of LCA and carbon footprinting. These tools provide
accessible and user-friendly interfaces, empowering stakeholders to estimate, track, and manage
carbon emissions throughout a building's life cycle. Collaboration and knowledge-sharing among
researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and industry professionals are crucial for overcoming
challenges and further enhancing the effectiveness of LCA and carbon footprinting. Continuous
research and development efforts are needed to improve data collection, refine methodologies,
streamline processes, and ensure the comparability and reliability of results. Overall, the
potential of LCA and carbon footprinting in the building industry is significant, offering a
comprehensive and targeted approach to enhancing the life performance of buildings. By

19
leveraging these methodologies, stakeholders can contribute to a more sustainable future by
minimizing carbon footprints, optimizing resource use, and promoting environmentally
responsible practices in the built environment.

20
References

Berge, B., Zamani, B., & Su, J. (2020). Building LCA standardization efforts: An international
comparison. Buildings, 10(1), 9.

Boussabaine, A., Abdul-Aziz, A. R., & Tah, J. H. M. (2020). The impact of data uncertainty on
life cycle carbon footprinting: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120214.

Del Borghi, A., Marvuglia, A., & Beccali, M. (2021). Towards a building industry-specific life
cycle inventory database: A review of the existing proposals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 307,
127253.

Duarte, D., de Brito, J., & Pita, J. (2021). Exploring the potential of building energy management
systems in reducing the operational carbon footprint of buildings: A systematic literature review.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 315, 128285.

Fonseca, D., Ramos, T. R., & Marques, R. C. (2021). Online calculators for building carbon
footprint estimation: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 294, 126179.

Glaumann, M., Malmqvist, T., & Peters, G. (2019). Simplifying the LCA of buildings by
modularization: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 23(5), 1224-1234.

Horvath, A., Li, V., Weinstock, S., & Zhang, X. (2021). Streamlined life cycle assessment for
buildings: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 25(4), 875-886.

Kim, M., Hong, T., & Baek, C. (2019). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of Korean construction
industry: Hotspot identification and policy implication. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 337-
347.

Lehmann, A., Öhlander, J., & Broman, G. (2021). Social and ecological life cycle assessment
framework for buildings—A hybrid approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123828.

21
Luo, H., Marceau, M. L., & Pan, W. (2020). Environmental product declarations for carbon
footprint assessment: Integration into whole-building carbon accounting and benchmarking.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 243, 118622.

Meireles, I., Lamas, W., Sousa, J., Ferreira, J., & Mateus, R. (2021). Integration of
environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) and building information modeling (BIM) in the
design and construction process: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production,
292, 125848.

Mutel, C. L., Pfister, S., Hellweg, S., & Meijer, A. (2020). Towards global guidance for life
cycle impact assessment indicators: The contribution of the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative.
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 24(3), 539-550.

Pacheco-Torgal, F., Tahri, W., Abdollahnejad, Z., & Ding, Y. (2019). Integration of energy and
carbon performance assessment tools for more sustainable buildings. Energy and Buildings, 184,
37-49.

Pardo-Martínez, C. I., Fernández-Sánchez, G., & Rodríguez-Rojas, M. I. (2021). Life cycle

assessment and energy analysis as decision-making tools for energy refurbishment strategies in
residential buildings. Sustainability, 13(6), 3435.

Passarini, F., Scharnhorst, W., Raggi, A., & Vassura, I. (2020). Towards hybrid life cycle
assessment of buildings: A review. Sustainability, 12(5), 2050.

Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A., & De Wolf, C. (2021). Life cycle assessment and input–output
analysis approaches for embodied carbon analysis of buildings: Similarities, differences, and
future prospects. Building and Environment, 198, 107828.

Röck, M., Habert, G., & Hellweg, S. (2020). Global databases for assessing environmental
impacts of buildings in LCA. Building and Environment, 182, 107090.

Štreimikienė, D., Balsytė, A., Vaitkus, P., & Raslanas, S. (2022). Assessment of embodied
carbon in buildings: A review. Journal of Building Engineering, 47, 103423.

22
Štreimikienė, D., Balsytė, A., Vaitkus, P., & Starevičius, M. (2022). Embodied carbon
assessment of building construction: State-of-the-art review and research challenges. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 336, 127153.

Tsang, C. L., Shen, L., & Tam, V. W. (2020). Carbon footprinting in the construction industry: A
review of current trends and future directions. Journal of Cleaner Production,

Wang, Y., Geng, Y., Zhao, H., Zhu, X., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Carbon emissions of residential
buildings in China: A life cycle assessment-based analysis. Science of the Total Environment,
751, 141762.

Yang, Y., Ries, R., & Heijungs, R. (2022). Comparison of carbon footprinting methods for
embodied impacts of buildings: Using Inventories of Carbon and Energy (ICE), Economic Input-
Output LCA (EIO-LCA), and process-based hybrid LCA. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26(1),
114-129.

Yin, R., Shao, L., Zhou, X., Ding, Z., Yang, Y., & Xu, Q. (2019). Life cycle assessment and life
cycle costing of a demolition project. Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 1278-1287.

23