Construction economics of sustainability

1
Construction economics of sustainability

• Docent, Dr Arto SaariHelsinki University of
  TechnologyLaboratory of Construction Economics
  and Management
• Joint Seminar CEEC AEEBS SCS
• 13th April 2007 Dublin

2
Construction projectsin Finland

• Main concern construction costs
• Good solutions from the viewpoint life cycle
  costs and ecology?
• No has not been clear rules and procedures
• Next will be presented results some studies
  conducted at Helsinki University of Technology

3
FLEXIBUILD
Saari, A., Kruus, M., Hämäläinen, A, Kiiras, J.,
2007. Flexibuild a systematic flexibility
management procedure for building projects,
Facilities, 25 (3/4), 104-114. Saari, A., Kruus,
M., Hämäläinen, A, Kiiras, J., 2006. Flexibuild
A systematic flexibility management procedure for
building projects. CIB W70 Trondheim
international symposium, Changing user demands on
buildings Needs for lifecycle planning and
management, 12-14 June 2006, Tore I. Haugen,
Anita Moum, Jan Bröhner (eds.), Trondheim, pp.
463-472.
4
FLEXIBILE PROGRAMMING

• Buildings are not programmed for a single known
  use but for a selected range of variation for
  users requirements

5
(No Transcript)
6
Greenhouse gases caused by a typical new Finnish
apartment building during 50 years.Source A.
Saari, Environmental impacts of residential
buildings, Rakennustieto Oy, 2000 (Finnish
language), available in web http//www.rts.fi/eko
tieto.hml
7
Energy management in briefing and design phase

• Under Nordic conditions, the most effective way
  of having an impact on the greenhouse gases given
  off by building during its life cycle is to see
  that the energy consumption of building during
  use is reasonable.

8
Project control procedure

• Target setting in project planning phase
• for construction costs
• for energy consumption (in use phase)
• Verifying the designs in design phase
• construction costs
• heating energy consumption (in use phase)
• specific LCC-LCA analyses
• Requirements concerning implementations

9
Case project 1 VVO/ASO/Viikki, Helsinki Jan.
2006
)
)

• Analysis
• Buildings are larger than targeted
• Construction costs exceed
• Heating energy consumption exceed

) Tenants can adjust the ventilation of their
dwellings
10
Case project 1 VVO/ASO/Viikki, Helsinki Jan.
2006
)
)

• Analysis
• Ratio gr-m2/ap-m2 is poor
• The bay depht of the building is low
• Area of balconies is high

) Tenants can adjust the ventilation of their
dwellings
11
Case project 2Physics Department University
of Helsinki

An examle of the energy management in briefing
and design phase of a construction project
12
Case project 2A target consumption
calculationin briefing phase
132
45
Total
13
Case project 2A target vs. designs

• Estimated heating energy consuption
• kWh/gr.fl sqm/yr
• target 132
• esimated from designs 161
• difference 29 (22)

• Estimated energy consumption is higher than the
  target set
• The reason for the exceeding must be analyzed
• Then the proposed designs must be developed

14
Case project 2The results of cost management

• The researcher suggested the following measures
• The architectural designer should reduce the
  windowed area and look for glass-wall solutions
  of lower thermal transmittance.
• The ventilation designer should check the
  dimensioning of the supply air devices and
  downsize them, if necessary.

• Results
• Designs were revised based on submitted
  development proposals.
• Through the development of the design solution,
  the annual heating energy need was reduced from
  the 161 to 127 kWh/gr.fl.sqm.
• Developed designs can be considered acceptable.

15
An example ofeco-economical analysis

• Includes
• description of alternative design solutions
• calculation of life cycle costs
• calculation of environmental impacts
• normalization and weighting of costs and impacts
• ranked alternatives

Source Saari, A. A systematic control procedure
for environmental burdens of building costruction
projects. In Construction Economics and
Organization, 2nd Nordic Conference, Göteborg
24-25 April 2001, pp. 107-115.
16
An example of eco-economical analysis
Comparison of facade lattice material Alternative
1 galvanized steel Alternative 2 aluminium
17
An example of eco-economical analysis

• Time horizon 50 years
• Selected interest rate 4
• Repacement cycles
• steel lattice tree times per 50 years
• aluminium lattice once per 50 years

18
An example of eco-economical analysis
Sensitivity analysis If interest rate is 1 or
less, or if replacement cycle of steel lattice is
four times, then LCC of aluminimum lattice
become lower.
Source Saari, A. A systematic control procedure
for environmental burdens of building costruction
projects. In Construction Economics and
Organization, 2nd Nordic Conference, Göteborg
24-25 April 2001, pp. 107-115.
19
An example of eco-economical analysis

• The factors influencing the value
• weight
• Life-cycle costs 50
• Use of non-renewable materials 5
• Climatic warming (CO2 equiv.) 25
• Acidification (SO2 equiv.) 10
• Oxidants (ethene equiv.) 10
• The above weights serve as
  examples

20
An example of eco-economical analysis
Source Saari, A. A systematic control procedure
for environmental burdens of building costruction
projects. In Construction Economics and
Organization, 2nd Nordic Conference, Göteborg
24-25 April 2001, pp. 107-115.
21
An example of eco-economical analysis
reference level
weights
rating of alternatives
Source Saari, A. A systematic control procedure
for environmental burdens of building costruction
projects. In Construction Economics and
Organization, 2nd Nordic Conference, Göteborg
24-25 April 2001, pp. 107-115.
22
An example ofSocio-economic analysis
The aim of this study was to examine changes in
the overall costs of an office when the
efficiency of space use is increased. The
variable in the examination was a space index,
calculated as the floor area per employee. The
quality of indoor climate was also a variable in
the analysis.
Source Arto Saari, Topi Tissari, Esko Valkama
and Olli Seppänen (2006). The effect of a
redesigned floor plan, occupant density and the
quality of indoor climate on the cost of space,
productivity and sick leave in an office
buildingA case study, Building and Environment,
Volume 41 (12), 1961-1972.
23
Initial plan (1)
Open plan office (3)
Cell office (2)
Saari, Tissari, Valkama, Seppänen 2006
24
An example of socio-economic analysisModels
Seppänen, Fisk, Faulkner 2003
Saari, Tissari, Valkama, Seppänen 2006
25
Arto Saari, Topi Tissari, Esko Valkama and Olli
Seppänen (2006). The effect of a redesigned floor
plan, occupant density and the quality of indoor
climate on the cost of space, productivity and
sick leave in an office buildingA case study,
Building and Environment, Volume 41 (12),
1961-1972.
26
An example of socio-economic analysisResults
The overall cost analysis of a given case
building showed that when space use is boosted
significantly, measures must be taken to
guarantee a sufficient quality of indoor
climate. The study indicates that investment in
the quality of indoor climate is cost effective
when the economic effect of indoor climate to
health and productivity are taken into account in
addition to the costs of investment, operation
and maintenance. Insufficient ventilation without
mechanical cooling may cause a substantial loss
of productivity. The importance of good
ventilation and air-conditioning increases with a
more efficient use of space especially in
conjunction with high value of work.
Source Arto Saari, Topi Tissari, Esko Valkama
and Olli Seppänen (2006). The effect of a
redesigned floor plan, occupant density and the
quality of indoor climate on the cost of space,
productivity and sick leave in an office
buildingA case study, Building and Environment,
Volume 41 (12), 1961-1972.
27
Contact Dr Arto Saari Helsinki University of
Technology Laboratory of Construction
Economics Box 2100 02015 TKK Finland Tel. 358 9
4511 E-mail firstname.surname_at_tkk.fi