Loading…
Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong
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 m...
Saved in:
Published in: | The international journal of life cycle assessment 2014-07, Vol.19 (7), p.1409-1423 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3 |
container_end_page | 1423 |
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 1409 |
container_title | The international journal of life cycle assessment |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Dong, Ya Hong Ng, S. Thomas |
description | 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 |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11367-014-0743-0 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1800427406</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1800427406</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1KxDAUhYMoOP48gCsDbtxUb36aTpcyqCMKijrrkCapRtqmJu3CnQ_hE_okZqiCuHBzLhe-c7jcg9ABgRMCUJxGQpgoMiA8g4KzDDbQjIi0FTnQTTSDks8zxni5jXZifAGgBMp8htqFb3sVXPeEh2eLW2d677oBq85g2_0sfR-80s824kpFa7Dv8L1duDv7-f6hcBxG84Z9jbVvWxu0Uw2uRteYlBqx6_DSp_jrJHtoq1ZNtPvfcxetLs4fF8vs5vbyanF2k2nOyiGzrNLCakIVE_NKcKhMIZIoS-ZlrivGldFCmLpghpiKlmVlmCBlDblaw2wXHU-56e7X0cZBti5q2zSqs36MkswBOC04iIQe_UFf_Bi6dJ0kOeMFFYKyRJGJ0sHHGGwt--BaFd4kAbkuQE4FyFSAXBcgIXno5In9-r82_Er-x3Q4mWrlpXoKLsrVA00AABECcsG-AFEpkv8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1534726623</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Dong, Ya Hong ; Ng, S. Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Dong, Ya Hong ; Ng, S. Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>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 to interpret the midpoint and endpoint results, in particular, for the assessment of commercial buildings in Hong Kong.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0948-3349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7502</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0743-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>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</subject><ispartof>The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2014-07, Vol.19 (7), p.1409-1423</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dong, Ya Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, S. Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong</title><title>The international journal of life cycle assessment</title><addtitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</addtitle><description>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 to interpret the midpoint and endpoint results, in particular, for the assessment of commercial buildings in Hong Kong.</description><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Building materials</subject><subject>Buildings</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Commercial buildings</subject><subject>Commercial real estate</subject><subject>Construction industry</subject><subject>Construction materials</subject><subject>Damage</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Chemistry</subject><subject>Environmental Economics</subject><subject>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental performance</subject><subject>inventories</subject><subject>Lcia of Impacts on Human Health and Ecosystems</subject><subject>Life cycle analysis</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>life cycle impact assessment</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Product life cycle</subject><subject>Project engineering</subject><subject>Ranking</subject><issn>0948-3349</issn><issn>1614-7502</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1KxDAUhYMoOP48gCsDbtxUb36aTpcyqCMKijrrkCapRtqmJu3CnQ_hE_okZqiCuHBzLhe-c7jcg9ABgRMCUJxGQpgoMiA8g4KzDDbQjIi0FTnQTTSDks8zxni5jXZifAGgBMp8htqFb3sVXPeEh2eLW2d677oBq85g2_0sfR-80s824kpFa7Dv8L1duDv7-f6hcBxG84Z9jbVvWxu0Uw2uRteYlBqx6_DSp_jrJHtoq1ZNtPvfcxetLs4fF8vs5vbyanF2k2nOyiGzrNLCakIVE_NKcKhMIZIoS-ZlrivGldFCmLpghpiKlmVlmCBlDblaw2wXHU-56e7X0cZBti5q2zSqs36MkswBOC04iIQe_UFf_Bi6dJ0kOeMFFYKyRJGJ0sHHGGwt--BaFd4kAbkuQE4FyFSAXBcgIXno5In9-r82_Er-x3Q4mWrlpXoKLsrVA00AABECcsG-AFEpkv8</recordid><startdate>20140701</startdate><enddate>20140701</enddate><creator>Dong, Ya Hong</creator><creator>Ng, S. Thomas</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140701</creationdate><title>Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong</title><author>Dong, Ya Hong ; Ng, S. Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Building materials</topic><topic>Buildings</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Commercial buildings</topic><topic>Commercial real estate</topic><topic>Construction industry</topic><topic>Construction materials</topic><topic>Damage</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Chemistry</topic><topic>Environmental Economics</topic><topic>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental performance</topic><topic>inventories</topic><topic>Lcia of Impacts on Human Health and Ecosystems</topic><topic>Life cycle analysis</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>life cycle impact assessment</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Product life cycle</topic><topic>Project engineering</topic><topic>Ranking</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dong, Ya Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, S. Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dong, Ya Hong</au><au>Ng, S. Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle><stitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</stitle><date>2014-07-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1409</spage><epage>1423</epage><pages>1409-1423</pages><issn>0948-3349</issn><eissn>1614-7502</eissn><abstract>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 to interpret the midpoint and endpoint results, in particular, for the assessment of commercial buildings in Hong Kong.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s11367-014-0743-0</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0948-3349 |
ispartof | The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2014-07, Vol.19 (7), p.1409-1423 |
issn | 0948-3349 1614-7502 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1800427406 |
source | Springer Nature |
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 |
title | Comparing the midpoint and endpoint approaches based on ReCiPe—a study of commercial buildings in Hong Kong |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T07%3A09%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20the%20midpoint%20and%20endpoint%20approaches%20based%20on%20ReCiPe%E2%80%94a%20study%20of%20commercial%20buildings%20in%20Hong%20Kong&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20life%20cycle%20assessment&rft.au=Dong,%20Ya%20Hong&rft.date=2014-07-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1409&rft.epage=1423&rft.pages=1409-1423&rft.issn=0948-3349&rft.eissn=1614-7502&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11367-014-0743-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1800427406%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-e3bc6ec12a368b640bd760bdae1895cb34adc66df73d1db299bd3619f05a40bd3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1534726623&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |