Evaluation of low-impact modular housing using energy optimization and life cycle analysis

Abstract

This paper presents life cycle analysis of the container-based single-family housing and combines energy analysis and optimization, life cycle assessment and life cycle costing. The proposed models include the container code (CC), designed to Canadian national building code as reference model, and an improved container (IC) incorporating passive solar technologies. Utilizing passive design strategies results in approximately 79% reduction in annual operational energy consumption for the improved case. The life cycle assessment considers the total energy use and global warming potential over 60-year lifespan. Three life cycle phases are considered: pre-use, use and operation, and end of life. As a result of envelope upgrade, the IC offers 77% reduction in life cycle energy use and global warming potential (GWP) than the CC. However, the envelope upgrade requiring greater energy intensity through industrial processing of additional building materials led to higher environmental impact, approximately 65,370 kWh of embodied energy and 20 t of CO₂ eq of GWP embodied carbon emissions for the improved container at pre-use phase. In terms of life cycle cost, IC shows less than 10% total cost savings as compared to CC. This study, however, proves that integrating passive solar design techniques in building not only results in reduced energy consumption but rather translates to reduction in life cycle environmental impacts and life cycle cost building systems, which is, in this case, a modular container housing.

Keywords

Container-based units / Envelope design and optimization / Energy performance / Life cycle assessment / Life cycle costing

References

[1] Alemdağ EL, Aydin Ö. A study of shipping containers as a living space in context of sustainability. Artium, 2015, 3: 17-29

[2] Allacker K, Mathieux F, Pennington D, Pant R. The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2017, 22: 1441-1458

[3] Assefa G, Ambler C. To demolish or not to demolish: life cycle consideration of repurposing buildings. Sustain Cities Soc, 2017, 28: 146-153

[4] Athena Sustainable Materials Institute (2016) User manual and transparency document impact estimator for buildings v.5. Ottawa, Ontario

[5] Atmaca A. Life cycle assessment and cost analysis of residential buildings in south east of turkey: part 1—review and methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2016, 21: 831-846

[6] Atmaca A. Life-cycle assessment and cost analysis of residential buildings in South East of Turkey: part 2—a case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2016, 21: 925-942

[7] Atmaca N. Life-cycle assessment of post-disaster temporary housing. Build Res Inf, 2017, 45: 524-538

[8] Aye L, Ngo T, Crawford RH Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy analysis of prefabricated reusable building modules. Energy Build, 2012, 47: 159-168

[9] BC Housing (2014) Modular and prefabricated housing: literature scan of ideas, innovations and considerations to improve affordability, efficiency, and quality. British Columbia

[10] Berbesz A M, Szefer I M. Innovations in shaping the residential and retail buildings. Functional and pro-environmental potential of shipping containers in architecture. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2018, 415: 012052

[11] Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2016) Reducing costs of affordable housing

[12] Chiras D. The solar house: passive heating and cooling, 2002 White River Junction Chelsea Green Publishing

[13] CM and HC (CMHC) (2013) Sustainable housing and communities: industrialized housing—a chapter from the Canadian housing observer, Ottawa, Ontario

[14] Dumas A, Trancossi M, Madonia M, Coppola M. Zero emission temporary habitation: a passive container house acclimatized by geothermal water. J Sol Energy Eng, 2014, 136: 044505

[15] Elrayies GM. Thermal performance assessment of shipping container architecture in hot and humid climates. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol, 2017, 7: 1114

[16] EnergyPlus (2018) EnergyPlus simulation tool

[17] Fuller SK, Petersen SR (1996) Life cycle costing manual: for the federal energy management program. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Prepared for: United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC

[18] Ganiron T, Almarwae M. Prefabricated technology in a modular house. Int J Adv Sci Technol, 2014, 73: 51-74

[19] Giriunas K, Sezen H, Dupaix RB. Evaluation, modeling, and analysis of shipping container building structures. Eng Struct, 2012, 43: 48-57

[20] Hachem-vermette C, Dara C, Kane R (2018) Towards net zero energy modular housing: a case study. In: 35th Annual world of modular: modular and offsite construction (MOC) summit at modular building Institute’s Annual Convention and Tradeshow, Hollywood, Florida, pp 1–8

[21] International Organization for Standardization (2006) Environmental management: life cycle assessment—requirements and regulations. ISO

[22] Islam H, Zhang G, Setunge S, Bhuiyan MA. Life cycle assessment of shipping container home: a sustainable construction. Energy Build, 2016, 128: 673-685

[23] Knaack U, Chung-Klatte S, Hasselbach R. Prefabricated systems: principles of construction, 2012 Berlin Walter de Gruyter

[24] Koffler C, Finkbeiner M. Are we still keeping it “real”? Proposing a revised paradigm for recycling credits in attributional life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2018, 23: 181-190

[25] Koffler C, Florin J. Tackling the downcycling issue: a revised approach to value-corrected substitution in life cycle assessment of aluminum (VCS 2.0). Sustain, 2013, 5: 4546-4560

[26] Kotaji S, Schuurmans A, Edwards S. Life-cycle assessment in building and construction: a state-of-the-art report, 2003 North Carolina Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

[27] Kumar V, Hewage K, Sadiq R. Life cycle assessment of residential buildings. A case study in Canada. Int J Energy Environ Eng, 2015, 9: 1017-1025

[28] Lim GJ Investigating current status of container housing. Appl Mech Mater, 2013, 433: 2282-2285

[29] Marszal AJ, Heiselberg P. Life cycle cost analysis of a multi-storey residential net zero energy building in Denmark. Energy, 2011, 36: 5600-5609

[30] Monahan J, Powell JC. An embodied carbon and energy analysis of modern methods of construction in housing: a case study using a lifecycle assessment framework. Energy Build, 2011, 43: 179-188

[31] National Research Council Canada Alberta building code, division B, part 9 housing and small buildings, 2014 Ottawa NRC

[32] National Research Council Canada National building code of Canada, division B: acceptable solutions, part 9—housing and small buildings, 2015 Ottawa NRC

[33] National Research Council Canada The National energy code of Canada for buildings 2015 (NECB), 2015 Ottawa National Research Council (NRC)

[34] Natural Resources Canada Energy efficiency trends in Canada 1990–2013, 2013 Ottawa NRC

[35] Paleari M, Lavagna M, Campioli A. The assessment of the relevance of building components and life phases for the environmental profile of nearly zero-energy buildings: life cycle assessment of a multifamily building in Italy. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 2016, 21: 1667-1690

[36] PassiveHouse (2017) A developer’s guide to Passive House buildings an industry resource for designing and constructing Passive House (Passivhaus) buildings in Canada. FORT ST JOHN, BC

[37] Peña JA, Schuzer K. Design of reusable emergency relief housing units using general-purpose (GP) shipping containers. Int J Eng Res Innov, 2012, 4: 55-64

[38] Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla KK. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build, 2010, 42: 1592-1600

[39] Reza B, Sadiq R, Hewage K. Emergy-based life cycle assessment (Em-LCA) of multi-unit and single-family residential buildings in Canada. Int J Sustain Built Environ, 2014, 3: 207-224

[40] Sadineni SB, Madala S, Boehm RF. Passive building energy savings: a review of building envelope components. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 2011, 15: 3617-3631

[41] Sartori I, Geier S, Lollini R, et al (2010) Comfort and energy efficiency recommendations for net zero energy buildings. In: The EuroSun-international conference on solar heating, cooling and buildings, Graz, Austria, pp 1–9

[42] Sharon Crowther (2017) Prefab homes may help reduce Alberta’s construction waste. In: Specifications to Globe Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/real-estate/calgary-and-edmonton/prefab-homes-may-help-reduce-albertas-construction-waste/article33690149/. Accessed 18 Feb 2019

[43] Statista (2018) Average number of people per family in Canada in 2016, by province. In: Statistics–statistics portal. https://www.statista.com/statistics/478954/average-family-size-in-canada-by-province. Accessed 5 Sept 2018

[44] Stazi F, Mastrucci A, Munafò P. Life cycle assessment approach for the optimization of sustainable building envelopes: an application on solar wall systems. Build Environ, 2012, 58: 278-288

[45] Stevanović S. Optimization of passive solar design strategies: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 2013, 25: 177-196

[46] Sun Z, Mei H, Ni R. Overview of modular design strategy of the shipping container architecture in cold regions. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci, 2017

[47] Zink T, Geyer R, Startz R. Toward estimating displaced primary production from recycling: a case study of U.S. Aluminum. J Ind Ecol, 2018, 22: 314-326

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada