LIFE CYCLE
ASSESMENT
OF
BUILDINGS
ER. CHANDAN R
INTRODUCTION
Life Cycle Costing (LCC) of Buildings
is a comprehensive method used to
evaluate the total cost of a building
over its entire lifespan, from
planning and construction to
operation, maintenance, and
disposal. This approach helps in
making long-term, cost-effective
decisions and supports sustainable
development goals (SDGs)
Definition of Life
Cycle Costing (LCC)
Life Cycle Costing is the process of
identifying and assessing all costs
associated with the life of a
building, including:
• Initial capital costs
• Operating and maintenance
costs
• Energy costs
• Repair and renovation
• End-of-life or demolition
costs
Components of Life Cycle Costs
Cost Category Description
Land, design, approvals, construction, fixtures,
Initial Costs
furniture
Operation Costs Energy, water, security, cleaning, insurance
Routine upkeep, servicing of HVAC, plumbing,
Maintenance Costs
electrical systems
Replacement of worn-out components like
Repair/Renewal Costs
roofs, flooring, windows
Demolition, site restoration, waste disposal,
End-of-life Costs
recycling
Value recovered at the end of life (can reduce
Residual/Salvage Value
net costs)
LCC Process in Building Projects
• Define objectives: Establish project
scope and alternatives (e.g., different
materials, designs).
• Identify cost parameters: Consider all
relevant costs over a defined time frame
(usually 30–60 years).
• Discounting: Convert future costs into
present value using a discount rate.
• Cost modeling: Use tools like Net
Present Value (NPV), Payback Period,
Internal Rate of Return (IRR).
• Comparison and decision making:
Choose options with optimal total cost
over the lifecycle.
📉 Reduces long-term costs
♻️Promotes sustainability and resource
efficiency
Benefits of LCC
in Buildings 💡 Supports informed decision-making
Optimizes building performance and
durability
🧮 Improves budgeting and investment
planning
Example: Comparing Wall Systems
Initial Annual
Life Total LCC
Wall Type Cost Maintenan
(years) (30 yrs)
(₹/sq.m) ce (₹)
AAC Block ₹1,200 ₹50 40 ₹2,700
Clay Brick ₹1,000 ₹100 30 ₹3,500
Stabilized
₹900 ₹80 25 ₹3,300
Earth Block
From the above, although AAC blocks have higher initial cost, they result in
lower life cycle costs.
Cost Trade-Off Concept
Passive/Low Carbon
Parameter Traditional Design
Design
Often higher due to
Material Use Standard, possibly less
insulation, mass, etc.
Slightly higher (e.g., for
Initial Cost Lower better glazing, shading
devices)
Slightly higher (due to added
Embodied Carbon Moderate
material)
Operational Carbon High (more energy use) Significantly lower
Life Cycle Emissions High overall Lower overall
Lower upfront, higher Higher upfront, lower
Life Cycle Cost
running cost running cost
Steps to Assess Trade-Offs
Step 1: Define the Building and Design Alternatives
• Base Case: Traditional design (code minimum)
• Option A: Passive design (e.g., orientation, thermal mass, shading)
• Option B: Passive + low-carbon materials (e.g., fly ash concrete, bamboo,
cellulose insulation)
Step 2: Quantify Embodied Carbon and Cost Embodied CO₂
Material/Feature Qty Increase (%) Cost Increase (%)
(kgCO₂e)
Additional Insulation
+15% +5% +20 per m²
(e.g., rockwool)
Double glazing vs
+10% +8% +40 per m² window
single
Thermal mass (e.g.,
+20% +12% +60 per m² wall area
Step 3: Estimate Operational Savings (Energy, Emissions, Cost)
Annual CO₂
Annual Energy Use
Design Emissions Energy Cost (₹/m²)
(kWh/m²)
(kgCO₂e/m²)
Traditional 120 96 ₹960
Passive Design 80 64 ₹640
Passive + Low
60 48 ₹480
Carbon
Step 4: LCA and LCC Integration Over 30 Years
(per m²)
Embodied CO₂ Operational
Option Total CO₂ (kg) Total Cost (₹)
(kg) CO₂ (kg)
₹28,800 (energy
Traditional 400 2,880 3,280
only)
Passive Design 500 1,920 2,420 ₹19,200
Passive + Low
600 1,440 2,040 ₹14,400
Carbon
Key Takeaways
• Slightly higher material use upfront (e.g., insulation, thermal mass)
leads to significant savings in operational energy and emissions.
• Integration of passive design features often provides the best trade-
off — low additional cost, high emission reduction.
• Low-carbon materials may raise upfront cost and embodied CO₂ slightly
but drastically reduce life-cycle environmental impact.
Embodied Carbon Emissions in
Buildings
Embodied carbon refers to the total greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)
released during the extraction, manufacture, transport, construction,
maintenance, and disposal of building materials. It is measured in kg CO₂
Major Contributors
equivalent (kgCO₂e).to Embodied Carbon
Material Embodied Carbon (kgCO₂e per unit)
Cement (1 kg) ~0.9–1.0 kgCO₂e
Steel (1 kg) ~1.8–2.5 kgCO₂e
Fired bricks (1 unit) ~0.2–0.4 kgCO₂e
Aluminum (1 kg) ~9–11 kgCO₂e
Timber (1 kg) ~–1.5 (acts as carbon sink in LCA)
Glass (1 kg) ~1.2–1.5 kgCO₂e
Calculation Approach for Embodied
Carbon
Step 1: Quantify Materials Used
Material Quantity Unit
Concrete 100 m³ (e.g., for slabs, beams)
Steel 10,000 kg
Bricks 20,000 number
Step 2: Apply Emission Factors
Material Emission Factor (kgCO₂e/unit) Total Emissions (kgCO₂e)
Concrete 250 kg/m³ 100 × 250 = 25,000
Steel 2.0 kg/kg 10,000 × 2 = 20,000
Bricks 0.3 kg/unit 20,000 × 0.3 = 6,000
Strategies Strategy Examples
to Reduce Use low-carbon
Fly ash cement,
geopolymer concrete,
materials
Embodied recycled steel
Efficient structural Reduce overdesign,
Carbon design optimize spans
Prefabrication/ Minimizes waste, increases
modular design material efficiency
Reduces transport
Local sourcing
emissions
Glulam, CLT, locally
Timber use (carbon
sourced species like Melia
sink)
dubia
Reuse/recycle Reclaimed bricks, steel,
materials aggregates
Embodied Carbon vs Operational
Carbon
When It Key
Type
Occurs Factors
Material
Embodied Before selection,
Carbon occupancy construction
methods
Electricity,
Operationa During
HVAC, water
l Carbon building use
heating
Double Glazing vs Single Glazing window
Double Glazing (Passive
Parameter Single Glazing
Design)
Initial Cost ₹300–400/m² ₹800–1200/m²
1.6–2.8 W/m²K (Better
U-value (Heat Transfer) 5.0–6.0 W/m²K
insulation)
Thermal Comfort Poor (heat loss/gain) Excellent (low heat transfer)
High heat gain/loss → more Reduces heating/cooling load
Energy Efficiency
AC usage by ~20–30%
~50–60 kgCO₂e/m² (more
Embodied Carbon ~25–30 kgCO₂e/m²
material, but longer life)
~5–8 years through energy
Payback Period –
savings
Radiant Cooling vs Conventional Air
Conditioning
Parameter
Conventional AC
Radiant Cooling
(Passive/Low-
(Split/VRF)
Carbon)
Surface-based (cool
Air-based (supply cooled
Cooling Mechanism water circulates in
air)
floor/wall/ceiling)
~0.4–0.6 kW/ton (~30–
Energy Efficiency ~0.8–1.1 kW/ton
40% more efficient)
Localized, drafts Even, radiant comfort,
Thermal Comfort
common no drafts
₹3000–5000 (incl. slab
Initial Cost (₹/m²) ₹1500–2500
piping, chiller)
Operational Cost Higher due to blower, Lower (water is efficient
(₹/year) compression for heat transfer)
Medium (ducts, indoor Slightly higher (more
Embodied Carbon
units) piping + controls)
High (filters,
Low (minimal moving
Maintenance compressors,
parts)
refrigerants)
~30 years with low
Lifespan ~10–12 years
maintenance
Step What to Do Tools/Examples
Suggested 1️⃣
Select two design scenarios:
sustainable vs conventional
E.g., Passive house vs standard
concrete-framed house
Framewor 2️⃣
Estimate material quantities
and select emission factors
Use EPDs or LCA databases
(e.g., ICE database)
k for This 3️⃣
Calculate embodied carbon for
both cases
E.g., kgCO₂e/m² using LCA tools
or Excel
Activity 4️⃣
Estimate operational energy Simulate HVAC, lighting (e.g.,
use and costs EnergyPlus, DesignBuilder)
Calculate total cost and
5️⃣ Use NPV for cost comparison
emissions over 30–60 years
Make a comparative bar graph
6️⃣ Total emissions vs total cost
or table
Conclude with key takeaways: Consider trade-offs and long-
7️⃣
which is better and why term value
THANK YOU
