Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong

• Published in: The international journal of life cycle assessment 2014-07, Vol.19 (7), p.1409-1423
• Main Authors: Dong, Ya Hong, Ng, S. Thomas
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Assessments; Building materials; Buildings; Case studies; Categories; Commercial buildings; Commercial real estate; Construction industry; Construction materials; Damage; Earth and Environmental Science; Environment; Environmental Chemistry; Environmental Economics; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology; Environmental impact; Environmental performance; inventories; Lcia of Impacts on Human Health and Ecosystems; Life cycle analysis; Life cycle assessment; life cycle impact assessment; Life cycles; Mathematical models; Product life cycle; Project engineering; Ranking
• ISSN: 0948-3349; 1614-7502
• DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0743-0

PURPOSE: Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been increasingly implemented in analyzing the environmental performance of buildings and construction projects. To assess the life cycle environmental performance, decision-makers may adopt the two life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) approaches, namely the midpoint and endpoint models. Any imprudent usage of the two approaches may affect the assessment results and thus lead to misleading findings. ReCiPe, a well-known work, includes a package of LCIA methods to provide assessments on both midpoint and endpoint levels. This study compares different potential LCIA results using the midpoint and endpoint approaches of ReCiPe based on the assessment of a commercial building in Hong Kong. METHODS: This paper examines 23 materials accounting for over 99 % of the environmental impacts of all the materials consumed in commercial buildings in Hong Kong. The midpoint and endpoint results are compared at the normalization level. A commercial building in Hong Kong is further studied to provide insights as a real case study. The ranking of impact categories and the contributions from various construction materials are examined for the commercial building. Influence due to the weighting factors is discussed. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Normalization results of individual impact categories of the midpoint and endpoint approaches are consistent for the selected construction materials. The difference in the two approaches can be detected when several impact categories are considered. The ranking of materials is slightly different under the two approaches. The ranking of impact categories demonstrates completely different features. In the case study of a commercial building in Hong Kong, the contributions from subprocesses are different at the midpoint and endpoint. The weighting factors can determine not only the contributions of the damage categories to the total environment, but also the value of a single score. CONCLUSIONS: In this research, the midpoint and endpoint approaches are compared using ReCiPe. Information is whittled down from the inventories to a single score. Midpoint results are comprehensive while endpoint results are concise. The endpoint approach which provides additional information of damage should be used as a supplementary to the midpoint model. When endpoint results are asked for, a LCIA method like ReCiPe that provides both the midpoint and endpoint analysis is recommended. This study can assist LCA designers