Reasons for the Slow Uptake of Embodied Carbon Estimation in the Sri Lankan Building Sector
Global carbon reduction is not merely a responsibility of environmentally advanced developed countries, but also a responsibility of developing countries regardless of their less impact on global carbon emissions. In recognition of that, Sri Lanka as a developing country has initiated promoting green building construction as one reduction strategy. However, notwithstanding the increasing attention on Embodied Carbon (EC) reduction in the global building sector, they still mostly focus on Operational Carbon (OC) reduction (through improving operational energy). An adequate attention has not yet been given on EC estimation and reduction. Therefore, this study aims to identify the reasons for the slow uptake of EC estimation in the Sri Lankan building sector. To achieve this aim, 16 numbers of global barriers to estimate EC were identified through existing literature. They were then subjected to a pilot survey to identify the significant reasons for the slow uptake of EC estimation in the Sri Lankan building sector. A questionnaire with a three-point Likert scale was used to this end. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics. The findings revealed that 11 out of 16 challenges/ barriers are highly relevant as reasons for the slow uptake in estimating EC in buildings in Sri Lanka while the other five challenges/ barriers remain as moderately relevant reasons. Further, the findings revealed that there are no low relevant reasons. Eventually, the paper concluded that all the known reasons are significant to the Sri Lankan building sector and it is necessary to address them in order to upturn the attention on EC reduction.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1315784Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 598
 United Nations Environment Programme. Sustainable building and climate initiative: promoting policies and practices for sustainability. June 2010. (Online). Available from: https://business.un.org/en/assets/9500be08-37e8-4367-842d-2801f01c6586.pdf (Accessed 25 July 2017).
 UN-Habitat, Green Buildings - Interventions for Social Housing, 2015. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
 Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, Methodology to calculate embodied carbon of materials, 2012. 1st ed, Coventry: RICS.
 J. Heinonen, A. Säynäjoki, and S. Junnila. A longitudinal study on the carbon emissions of a new residential development, Sustainability, 2011, 3, pp.1170-1189.
 R. Crawford, Life Cycle Assessment in the Built Environment, 2011. Oxford: Routledge.
 T. Ibn-Mohammed et al. Operational vs. embodied emissions in buildings-A review of current trends, Energy and Buildings. 2013. 66 (2013), pp. 232–245.
 M. K. Dixit, et al., Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: a literature review. Energy and Buildings, 2010. 42 (2010), pp.1238–1247.
 C. De Wolf, F. Pomponi, and A. Moncaster. Measuring embodied carbon dioxide equivalent of buildings: A review and critique of current industry practice. Energy and Buildings, 2017. 140 (2017), pp. 68–80.
 Green Building Council Sri Lanka (GBCSL), Green SL® rating system for built environment, 2015. GBCSL (online) Available from: http://srilankagbc.org/Rating%20System%20for%20Built%20Environment.html (Accessed 13 May 2017).
 S.P. Pooliyadda. Energy content and carbon emission audit of building materials, MPhil Thesis (unpublished), 2000. Sri Lanka: Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratwua.
 F. Pomponi, and A. M. Moncaster. Embodied carbon in the built environment: management, mitigation, and reduction – what does the evidence say? Journal of Environmental Management. 2016. 181(2016). pp.687-700.
 WRAP. Information sheet for construction clients and designers: Cutting embodied carbon in construction projects. 2011. WRAP (online) available from: www.wrap.org.uk/.../FINAL%20PRO095-009%20Embodied%20Carbon%20Annex.pdf (Accessed 13 May 2017).
 I. Sartori, and A.G. Hestnes. Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article, Energy Building. 2007. 39 (2007) pp. 249–257.
 T. Ramesh, R. Prakash, and K. K. Shukla. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview, Energy and Buildings, (2010). 42 (10), 1592–1600.
 M. Victoria, S. Perera and A. Davies. A pragmatic approach for embodied carbon estimating in buildings. In proceedings of SBE16 Torino, Torino, Italy, 2016.
 Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. Athena eco calculator. n.d (online). Available from: http://www.athenasmi.org/our-software-data/ecocalculator/ (Accessed 28 May 2017).
 National Institute of Standards and Technology. Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES), n.d. (online) Available from: https://www.nist.gov/services-resources/software/bees (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 Environment Agency. Environment agency carbon calculator, 2012 (online) Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/571707/LIT_7067.pdf. (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 International Institute for Sustainability Analysis and Strategy. Global Emissions Model for integrated Systems (GEMIS). 1989. Available from: http://iinas.org/gemis.html. (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 Centre Energy Efficiency of Systems, EQUER. n.d. (online) Available from:http://www.dep.minesparistech.fr/Valorisation/Ressources/EQUER/ (Accessed on 20 May 2017).
 SimaPro, SimaPro LCA software. n.d. (online) Available from: www.simapro.co.uk. (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 G. P. Hammond, C. I. Jones, Embodied carbon. The inventory of carbon and energy (ICE), 2011. eds. Fiona Lowrie and Peter Tse, BSRIA.
 Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, Athena Life Cycle Inventory Product Databases. n.d.. (online) Available from: http://www.athenasmi.org/our-software-data/lca-databases/ (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 A. Andrew, Embodied Energy and CO Coefficients for New Zealand Building Materials. 2001. Centre for Building Performance Research, Victoria University of Wellington.
 Franklin and Andrews Limited, UK building black book: The cost and carbon guide. 2011 ed. Croydon: Franklin and Andrews Limited.
 European Commission, European Life Cycle Database (ELCD). 2006. (online) Available from: http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ELCD3/ (Accessed 20th May 2017).
 EcoInvent Association, EcoInvent 3.3. 2016. (online) Available from: http://www.ecoinvent.org/database/ecoinvent-33/ecoinvent-33.html. (Accessed 20 May 2017).
 Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, ÖKOBAUDAT (German National Database). 2013. (online) Available from: http://www.nachhaltigesbauen.de/baustoff-und-gebaeudedaten/oekobaudat.html (Accessed 20th May 2017).
 Australian Life Cycle Assessment Society, AusLCI. n.d. (online) Available from http://auslci.com.au/index.php/Home (Accessed on 20 May 2017).
 A. M. Moncaster & J.Y. Song. A comparative review of existing data and methodologies for calculating embodied energy and carbon of buildings, International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development.2012, 3(1), 26-36.
 G. Ding. The development of a multi-criteria approach for the measurement of sustainable performance for built projects and facilities, 2004Ph.D. thesis, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
 Zhang et al. (2016).
 A. M. Moncaster and K.E. Symons A method and tool for ‘cradle to grave’ embodied carbon and energy impacts of UK buildings in compliance with the new TC350standards, Energy and Buildings. 2013. 66 (2013), pp. 514–523.
 M. Sansom and R. J. Pope. A comparative embodied carbon assessment of commercial buildings, The Structural Engineer. 2012. (online). Available from: https://www.istructe.org/getattachment/7eb7ebd4-d56c-4bc6-b4e3-932ad44e3a0a/EmbodCarbon.pdf (Accessed 15 June 2017).
 Sheng et al. Study and estimation of embodied carbon based on input output analysis. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research. 2016.75. pp. 529-533.
 J. Nässén et al. Direct and indirect energy use and carbon emissions in the production phase of buildings: An input–output analysis. Energy 2007. 32, pp. 1593–1602.
 R. H. Crawford, and G. J. Treloar. Validation of the use of Australian input output data for building embodied energy simulation, In proceedings of Building Simulation 2003, Eindhoven, August 2003, pp. 11-14.
 R. H. Crawford. Validation of the Use of Input-Output Data for Embodied Energy Analysis of the Australian Construction Industry, Journal of Construction Research. 2004.
 E. Gavotsis. And A. Moncaster, Improved embodied energy and carbon accounting: recommendations for industry and policy, Athens Journal of Technological Engineering. 2015. 2 (1). pp. 9–23.
 M. Fouché and R. Crawford, The Australian construction industry’s approach to embodied carbon assessment: a scoping study, in proceedings of Living and Learning: Research for a Better Built Environment: 49thInternational Conference of the Architectural Science Association, University of Melbourne, 2015, pp. 578–587.
 UK Green Building Council, Embodied Carbon Week – Seeing the whole picture, Key findings from Embodied Carbon Week 2014. UKGBC.
 C. K. Anand. and B. Amor. Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: a critical review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017. 67 (2017). pp. 408–416.
 J. Giesekam, J. R. Barrett, P. Taylor, Construction sector views on low carbon building materials, Building Research and Information. 2016. 44 (4). pp.423–444.
 R. Giordano et al. Embodied energy and operational energy assessment in the framework of nearly zero energy building and building energy rating, Energy Proceedia. 2015. 78 (2015). pp. 3204–3209.
 M. K. Dixit et al. Need for an embodied energy measurement protocol for buildings: a review paper, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2012.16 (6). pp.3730–3743.
 P. J. Davies, S. Emmitt. And S.K. Firth, Challenges for capturing and assessing initial embodied energy: a contractor’s perspective, Construction Management and Economics. 2014. 32 (3). pp.290–308.
 T. L¨utzkendorf et al. Net-zero buildings: incorporating embodied impacts, Building Research and Information. 2015. 43 (1). pp.62–81.
 S.T. Ng, J. Wong. And M. Skitmore. Challenges facing carbon dioxide labelling of construction materials, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering Sustainability. 166 (ES1) (2013)20–31.
 T. Malmqvist et al. Life cycle assessment in buildings: The ENSLIC simplified method and guidelines. Energy, 2011. 36(4).
 M. Saunders. P. Lewis and A. Thornhill. Research Methods for business students. 7th edition. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd, 2016.
 A. Bryman, Social Research Methods.5th edition. Oxford: Oxford university press, 2016.