environment design guide · • gen 20 details a case study of the life cycle energy of a dwelling...

B D P E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E MAY 2004 • GEN 58 • SUMMARY © Copyright BDP

E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E

EMBODIED WATER OF CONSTRUCTIONDr Graham Treloar, Michael McCormack, Dr Laurence Palmowski and Professor Roger Fay

SUMMARY OF

ACTIONS TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE OUTCOMESEnvironmental Issues/Principal Impacts• Water requirements of buildings need to be considered in life cycle terms.

• Water saving features need to be considered in terms of their embodied water, to ensure a net water saving within a reasonable period of time.

• Water saving features need to make significant life cycle savings in the context of the building.

Basic StrategiesIn many design situations, boundaries and constraints limit the application of cutting EDGe actions. In these circumstances, designers should at least consider the following:

• Look at key actions and strategies (e.g. passive design, reducing waste, reducing water use, etc)

• Achieve a balance between embodied water and operational water over the anticipated lifetime of buildings

• Consider the water related environmental impacts of demolishing, replacing or refurbishing a building at various stages in its life

• Aim to reduce the overall environmental impacts of buildings, rather than just focussing on embodied or operational water.

Cutting EDGe StrategiesDue to the synergy between embodied water and embodied energy, many of the strategies for minimising embodied water are the same as for embodied energy:

• Use durable materials and components appropriately

• Design generally for long building life, with appropriate detailing, allowing for flexibility

• Reuse materials, use recycled materials and materials with recycled content

• Use materials which are local, if equivalent in performance

• Consider the water payback period of any proposed strategy in financial and environmental terms

• Specify products and equipment that are efficient in their use of water, and that support waste water reuse and grey water recycling, where feasible.

Synergies and ReferencesBDP Environment Design Guide:

• GEN 20 details a case study of the life cycle energy of a dwelling and the activities of the householders.

• GEN 22 details a case study of the life cycle energy of a dwelling.

• GEN 35 details greenhouse implications of building materials.

B D P E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E MAY 2004 • GEN 58 • PAGE 1

The BDP Environment Design Guide is published by The Royal Australian Institute of Architects

© Copyright BDP

EMBODIED WATER OF CONSTRUCTIONDr Graham Treloar, Michael McCormack, Dr Laurence Palmowski and Prof Roger Fay

1.0 INTRODUCTIONWater is a fundamental aspect of all living things. Since 1900, overall water consumption has increased ten times. Consequently many countries are feeling the effects of water shortage and are starting to exceed local limits of supply (www.savewater.com.au, 2003). Forecasts have shown that freshwater supply from increases in the capacity of the expanding built environment to harvest rainfall, will not increase enough to provide for population growth in the future, due to disproportionate demand. Water storages are currently dropping to concerning levels in many areas, while in other areas flooding serves as a poignant reminder of the dynamism of our weather systems.

Apart from Antarctica, Australia is considered the driest continent in the world. Despite this, Australia consumes the largest amount of water per capita (www.savewater.com.au, 2003). Only 13.6% of this is used for the operation of buildings (Foran and Poldy, 2002), with most being used in the agriculture sector. Buildings are now being designed to use less water during operation, for example through water efficient fittings and equipment such as dishwashers. Additionally, grey water recycling systems offer the potential to significantly reduce demand for fresh water.

Similar to the early 1970s with the energy crisis, a demand-side view is required to solve the problem of scarce water supplies, including consideration of indirect requirements (i.e., not just looking at efficiency of supply to the sectors that consume water, but also the drivers of demand for the sectors that consume products from those sectors). To manage demand for electricity, one needs to monitor direct demand but also indirect demand. For example, if an increase in construction is expected three years from now, an increase in manufacturing two years from now is to be expected. A similar approach is required for embodied water. Embodied water comprises the water required directly for construction itself and the water consumed indirectly in the production and delivery of materials and services to construction. Water required directly for construction includes:

“…washing down of concrete trucks and skips, water used on site ablution blocks (this can be considerable in a large project with a big workforce) and water used during the installation and commissioning of piped systems for chilled, condenser and heating hot water. In many instances, these systems are filled and drained a number of times before handover and large piped systems may hold 30 to 50 kL of water…” (Anon., 2004).

However, despite these seemingly large and measurable quantities, water required directly for construction is likely to be insignificant compared to the indirect water required for the manufacture of construction materials

and products (i.e., through materials and other products required to support construction). There is currently a lack of research into embodied water requirements by the construction sector. The relationship between the embodied water and the operational water is also unknown. It is important to balance the life cycle water requirements, so that one aspect is not accidentally increased at the expense of another. The aim of this note is therefore to present an overview of the issue of embodied water in construction, so building designers can appreciate how this issue relates to efforts to save water in the operation of buildings. The relationship between embodied water and embodied energy will also be investigated.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Australian water consumption Australia is the driest populated continent in the world. It is described as having a high spatial and temporal variability in climatic conditions (ABS, 2000). This variability and recurrent drought has a consequent effect on the already vulnerable water supply. However, Australia’s level of water consumption is one of the highest in the world and is increasing at a considerable rate.

Figure 1 shows the percentage of water consumption per year by sectors in Australia. Agriculture has the highest consumption per year, consuming just under 70 per

2% Commercial services1% Public administrations

and services

8%Water, sewageand

draining

6%Electricity

3%Manufa

cturing

3% Mining

69%Agriculture, forestry

and fishing

8%Households

Figure 1. Water consumption by sectors, Australia 1996–97Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Water Account for Australia, 1993-94 to 1996-97

E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E

• GEN 58 • MAY 2004 B D P E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E B D P E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E MAY 2004 • GEN 58 • PAGE 3

cent. Public administration and services consumes only 1 per cent. Household water consumption accounts for 8 per cent of the total water consumption, some of which is for operation and maintenance of buildings, but much is also consumed by clothes washing, bathing, cooking and garden watering. Building construction comes under manufacturing, but indirect requirements for construction could come from this and other sectors, including agriculture (for example, fibres for carpets, and textiles). Raw materials are mined and harvested, manufactured into products, using transportation, energy and other services, then assembled into buildings.

2.2 Construction industry water consumptionOver recent years an increasing number of studies have investigated the impacts of construction on the environment (for example: Vanegas et al, 1996; Bourdeau et al, 1998; and Cole, 1998). Spence and Mulligan (1995) state that the construction industry causes great environmental impact. However published research on embodied water in products of the Australian economy is extremely rare (apart from notably Lenzen and Foran, 2001; and Foran and Poldy, 2002).

According to Foran and Poldy (2002) water consumption for building operations accounts for 13.6 per cent of the total water consumption of Australia. Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show construction water consumption for the year 1996-97 was just 13,491ML of a total of 22,185,731ML nationally, i.e. just 0.061 per cent. This is quite different to the situation with energy, where approximately 20 per cent of the national total is used in building operation but a significant amount of approximately 1 per cent is used in building construction.

2.3 Basis for the researchIt has been shown that water is a critical issue in Australia, and while the construction industry does not use significant amounts directly, indirect requirements are likely to be significant. As has been done for embodied energy in a previous BDP Environment Design Guide (EDG) note (DES 35, Treloar and Fay, 2000), what is now required is a detailed investigation of the implications of the embodied water issue for individual buildings, and building materials. A crucial question relates to the differences between the embodied energy and embodied water requirements at the material, element and building level. If embodied water is quite similar to embodied energy, perhaps a great paradigm shift in design is not required, apart from fine tuning and cross checking. However, if embodied water is very different to embodied energy, at any or all levels of detail, perhaps the information used in designing sustainable buildings needs to be expanded to include this parameter.

3.0 METHODIn this section, embodied energy analysis methods are briefly reviewed. The same method is then adapted to the task of embodied water analysis, and applied to two building case studies: one residential and one commercial. They were selected as the same buildings/case studies as in BDP EDG note DES 35 (Treloar

and Fay, 2000), for convenience of comparison. The relationship to operational water will not be examined in this note, as the choice of materials does not influence water consumption in the same way as it does with operational energy (for example, thermal mass, insulation, surface emissivity and absorptivity characteristics).

3.1 Theoretical overviewBy looking at the theory of embodied energy it is possible to gain an understanding of embodied water. Much like energy, water is consumed by every sector of the economy. The energy embodied in a product involves the energy to extract, transport and refine raw materials and then to manufacture components and assemble the product. Embodied energy involves both direct and indirect energy requirements. These processes are traceable upstream from the finished product to the consideration of raw materials (see BDP Environment Design Guide notes GEN 20, GEN 22 and DES 35).

This is the same for embodied water: only the numbers change. The embodied water of a product is the net amount of water needed to create and deliver a product through all stages of production, containing both direct and indirect requirements for all materials and resources used to manufacture that product. Direct water is the water consumed in the main production of a specific product that is being analysed. The water mixed with cement and aggregate on-site to create concrete is considered a direct requirement. Indirect water is the water used to create and deliver materials and resources that go into the main product. This would include water used to make concrete slurry at a batching plant.

It is important to exclude water that might be drawn off from a supply system but is not actually consumed (e.g., mains or in-stream discharge). This has been done for the presented results, and had the effect of reducing the results by a factor of 10. This means that the in-stream discharges represent approximately 90 per cent of the embodied water! Obviously, if the water is available to downstream industries or ecosystems, it has not really been ‘consumed’. One may argue that water is never consumed: it is evaporated and falls later somewhere else as precipitation. However, an important distinction is made here: that water evaporated or otherwise removed from the system (e.g. mains, stream, reservoir, etc.) is effectively consumed, as we cannot rely on it falling as rain in the same upstream catchment. The same argument can be made for energy analysis: that according to Newton, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In this case, we speak to the availability of the energy. In a litre of petrol, much energy is released (34MJ approximately, Boustead and Hancock, 1979). However, once the fuel is combusted, the energy is altered in state, and is much less available to other users as a number of cubic metres of slightly warm gas hovering a few metres above a highway. We make a similar argument here as to the availability of water reserves. A litre of water in a pipe is much more available to industry than a cloud hovering a few kilometres somewhere above the Pacific Ocean.


3.2 Embodied energy analysis methodsEmbodied energy analysis methods can be used to calculate embodied water; consequently it is important to understand the various techniques. There are a number of methods used to analyse embodied energy, the accuracy and extent of embodied energy analysis undertaken is dependent on the method chosen. Bullard et al (1978) classified these as three separate groups. The first being process analysis, the second input-output analysis and lastly hybrid analysis. These are described below in turn.

Process analysis (see Figure 2) quantifies all of the energy embodied in a product, from the main process down to all of the inputs to each process upstream (Boustead and Hancock, 1979). Process analysis methods are generally most accurate, however according to Lave et al (1995) because of the detail needed for assessment of the main production processes and the intricacy of associated upstream processes they are commonly fragmented in nature (i.e., they are not able to assess all of the supply chain, and strategically or sometimes unstrategically focus on the processes that are considered to be more significant (ISO 14041, 1999). Boustead and Hancock (1979) simplified this problem, stating that at each stage there may be large or small inputs of goods and services that are unable to be measured in detail using the described method. This incompleteness can cause problems when more than one product is compared. The differing degrees of incompleteness can lead the comparison to be void if they are greater than the difference between the products. This method of

embodied energy analysis has been used by Hill (1978), Sinclair (1986), Howard (1991), and Lawson (1996).

Input-output analysis (see Figure 3) uses national statistical information gathered by governments for the purpose of analysing national economic flows between sectors (Miller and Blair, 1985). The system models the flows of 106 sectors of the Australian economy at each stage of the manufacturing process. The primary energy requirement of the product under analysis and the product cost are used in the calculation. Miller and Blair (1985) stated that although input-output analysis represents a comprehensive framework for the supply chain, it is exposed to inherent inaccuracies. Because of the number of assumptions that need to be made when using this method, the results may be unreliable. Despite these limitations, this method of embodied energy analysis has been used by many researchers, including inter alia Proops (1977), Carter et al (1981) Stein et al (1981) and Treloar (1997). It is arguably the most widely used mathematical tool in the world, having the stated environmental applications, as well as financial modelling, etc. When a claim is made about the indirect benefits of a policy (such as a trade agreement) or an event (such as the Commonwealth Games) in terms of GDP or employment, the tool used to determine these multipliers is almost invariably input-output analysis. It therefore, in the eyes of a wide range of scholars and policy makers, has critical value for the purpose of modelling and forecasting, despite the inherent inaccuracy. It is the only comprehensive, economy-wide source of supply chain information that can be used for this type of research.

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

Main process

Energy of transport

Direct energy

Direct energy

Materials Capital equipmentof main process

Direct energy Direct energy

Capital equipmentof other processes

Energy of transport Energy of transport Energy of transport

Aquisition, transfer andstorage of fuels



Upstream

Figure 2. Process analysis framework Source: After IFIAS, 1974.

Main process

Direct energy Direct energy Direct energy Direct energy

Stage 0 Stage 1 ...

Upstream

Stage 2 Stage�

Direct energy Indirect energy

Goods and servicesGoods and servicesGoods and services

Figure 3. Input-output analysis framework


Obviously, methods to minimise the effect of the inherent inaccuracies must be used and assessed. The most common of these is hybrid analysis, where the accuracy of process analysis is combined with the breadth of input-output analysis – using the best of both worlds, and minimising the errors inherent to each method. The hybrid analysis can be based on either the process or input-output analysis framework. In this research, input-output-based hybrid analysis was selected. Where process analysis data was available, it was used. For the embodied energy, this comprised material quantities and energy data covering more than half of the system boundary. However, for the embodied water case studies, process data from industry is not widely available, and has not been used yet. Process data in terms of material quantities was used. Consequently, the reliability of the embodied water results is not as high as the embodied energy results. More detail on these methods can be found in Treloar (1997) and Treloar et al (2001).

4.0 CASES STUDIESThe case studies will be compared in embodied water and energy terms, to demonstrate how designers can use this information in the design of ecologically sustainable buildings. Firstly, a range of typical materials are analysed. For convenience, the same list as used in DES 35 has been used. A comparison of the embodied energy and water values is presented. Then one residential and one commercial building are analysed, again, the same buildings used in DES 35.

4.1 MaterialsTable 1 gives the embodied water values for a range of typical building materials, by mass and area depending on which unit is more commonly used. Copper has the highest value on a mass basis, while carpet has the highest value out of those compared by unit area.

Figure 4 compares the embodied energy values with the embodied water values in Table 1. Note that the embodied energy values do not exactly correspond to the ranges of values given in DES 35, due to methodological changes and new input-output data from the National Accounts and other base data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (as detailed in Lenzen and Foran, 2001). It can be seen that some materials have embodied energy a little higher than the average ratio, while others have higher embodied water. Some have similar values, compared to the average (represented by the diagonal line in Figure 4).

Many of the principles given in DES 35 for embodied energy remain true for embodied water, for example, a material’s source characteristics influence the embodied energy through:

• transport distances (for example, savings from using an efficiently manufactured material may be reduced if materials are transported long distances)

• country of origin (for imported materials, fuel supply structures may differ from those of Australia)

• process type (for example, for the dry and wet processes for cement manufacture, the former is

well known to be 50 per cent more efficient than the latter)

• raw material source and quality (for example, raw material moisture content can vary the energy required to fire bricks, as well as kiln type, process efficiency, climatic variations and brick type, Sinclair, 1986).

Similarly, principles previously suggested for optimising embodied energy in DES 35 also apply to embodied water:

• use materials with high proportions of recycled content – reducing their overall embodied energy

• reuse products – saving large amounts of embodied energy compared to using new products

• reduce construction waste – producing a clear embodied energy saving

• select long life products or design for a long life – adding value to their initial embodied energy

• use financial life cycle costings as a rough guide, where net energy studies are not available.

MaterialEmbodied water

(kL/t) (kL/m²)Aluminium 88

Brick 0.22

Carpet 2.3

Cement 3.5

Clear float glass 4mm 1.2

Concrete 30 MPa 1.9

Copper 590

Fibreglass batts R2.5 0.28

Paint 0.13

Plasterboard 10mm 0.25

Plastic 187

Steel 39

Timber 21

Vinyl flooring 2mm 1.0

Table 1. Embodied water of materials by mass and areaNB, These values are not to be used for decision-making, as they were derived mainly using input-output data and have not been validated with industry data.

However, there are some important caveats on these general statements, which will be explored further in the whole building case studies in the next section. The most fundamental issue is that the comparison in Figure 4 is being made on an inappropriate basis for decision making – units that are convenient for building measurement, but not functional units (i.e., a ton of steel and a ton of timber provide quite different functions in a building). It is necessary to investigate typical buildings to gain an understanding of the impact of embodied water relative to how materials are used in buildings.

4.2 Whole building case studiesIn this section, embodied water analyses of a residential and a commercial building are used to provide contextual


information for building designers in the selection of materials. The buildings selected are the same buildings as analysed in DES 35 (Treloar and Fay, 2000). The embodied energy values for the examples presented here differ from those in previous notes, due to the use of recent, comprehensively derived embodied energy values. They have been updated substantially from DES 35 to include capital (buildings and equipment) purchased in years prior to the input-output survey year, amortised over the life of the facility. This adds 35 per cent to the embodied energy of an entire building. The effect on the embodied water would probably be similar, based on initial investigations, as the following results suggest. The differences between embodied energy and embodied water are only in the detail, not at the ‘big picture’ level.

Residential case studyThe two-storey brick veneer suburban dwelling of 155m² building area was designed for energy efficient operation. All living areas on the ground floor and bedrooms on the first floor face north and are glazed to provide solar gain in winter and shaded to restrict it in summer. For further information about the life cycle energy requirements of this dwelling, refer to GEN 22. For a broader analysis of household energy requirements, refer to GEN 20. For the greenhouse context, refer DES 35.

Material quantities for the building were derived from architectural and engineering drawings and the architect’s specifications. All elements were analysed, including

substructure, walls, roof, finishes, fitments, services and external elements such as paving and pergolas. The quantities were manipulated into a form suitable for embodied water analysis, e.g. window frames were converted into cubic metres of timber and glazing into square metres of 3mm or 6mm glass.

The embodied water for the dwelling was found to be 16.2kL/m². Of this, 0.2kL/m² was water used for the construction process, which is only 1 per cent of the total embodied water. The other 99 per cent is the water embodied in inputs of goods and services to the construction process. Figure 5 shows the embodied water results for the residential building by material and element.

In the material breakdown, the most important is ‘other items’, a catchall category for goods and services not normally measured in a bill of quantities (for example, inputs from the services sector, such as government administration, banking finance or other property services: see Treloar, 1997, and Treloar et al, 2001, for a deeper discussion of these issues). The next largest material was timber products, which was second most important in embodied energy terms for the residential case study in DES 35 (not including the other items).

Clear float glass 4mmVinyl flooring 2mm

Fibreglass batts R2.5

Paint

Plasterboard 10mmBrick

Carpet Concrete 30 MPa

Cement

Timber

Steel

Aluminium

Plastic

Copper

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Embodiedwater

(kL/unit)

Embodied energy(GJ/unit)

Figure 4. Comparison of embodied energy and embodied water for building materials NB, the logarithmic scale tends to compress the correlation, making it appear stronger than it is. The correlation coefficient is 0.82, whereas 0.9 is considered a strong correlation.


0 1 2 3 4

Steel

Concrete

Other metals

Ceramics

Carpet

Glass

Fibreglass batts

Plasterboard

Plastic

Paint

Timber products

Household appliances

Direct water

Other items

Materialgroup

Embodied Water kL/m² of UFA(raw materials through to construction)

0 1 2 3 4

Structure group

Finishes

Substructure

Roof

Windows

Fixtures

Fitments

Services

External

Direct water

Other items

Elementgroup

Embodied Water kL/m² of UFA(from raw materials through to construction)

UFA = unit per floor area

Figure 5. Embodied water by material and element, residential case study

Next largest are concrete, plastic and household appliances. In embodied energy terms, from DES 35, the most important materials were ceramics, timber, concrete and steel (not including the other items).

By element for embodied water, ‘other items’ is again the largest category, followed by the structure group, fitments, substructure and finishes. The most important elements in embodied energy terms, from DES 35, were external walls, substructure, services and external (not including the other items).

Commercial case studyA typical 15-storey Melbourne commercial building, with a reinforced concrete substructure and frame, and a gross floor area (GFA) of 47,000m², was analysed. The cladding is mostly granite veneer with aluminium framed windows. The building comprises offices, with some retail space, and several under and above ground car parking levels. Quantities for the various materials required for the construction of elements of the building were derived from a bill of quantities, comprising approximately 2000 items. All elements of the building were analysed, including substructure, walls, roof, finishes, fitments, services, and external elements such as paving. In some cases, quantities had to be manipulated to allow correlation to the units of the embodied energy

values. Most of the services elements were given in the bill of quantities as ‘prime cost’ items, and construction documents had to be consulted to enable product quantities for these elements to be derived.

The embodied water for the dwelling was found to be 17.5kL/m². Of this, 0.6kL/m² was water used for the construction process, which is 3.3 per cent of the total embodied water, significantly higher than the residential example. Figure 6 shows the embodied water results for the commercial building by material and element. In the material breakdown, the most important is again ‘other items’. The next largest materials were steel, concrete, non-ferrous metals and carpet, as for the embodied energy analysis in DES 35.

By element, ‘other items’ is again the largest category, followed by the structure group, finishes and services. The most important elements in embodied energy terms, from DES 35, were upper floors, services and external walls (not including the other items).

Embodied water kL/m² of GFA(from raw materials through to construction)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

SteelConcrete

Non-ferrousCeramicCarpetGlass

Fibreglass battsPlasterboard

PlasticPaint

TimberDirect waterOther items

MaterialGroup

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Structure group

Finishes

Substructure

Roof

Windows

Fitments

Services

External

Direct energy

Other items

ElementGroup

Embodied Water kL/m² of GFA(from raw materials through to construction)

GFA = gross floor area

Figure 6. Embodied water by material and element, commercial case study

Interestingly, the total embodied water for the residential case study is much higher compared to the commercial case study, relative to the embodied energy results. This appears to be because the additional materials used for resisting lateral loads in the commercial building are not as high in embodied water as other materials typically used in houses (refer Figure 4 – materials below the diagonal line, such as steel and concrete, are relevant evidence for this statement). However, the embodied water per square metre of usable floor area of residential building is still slightly lower than the commercial building.


5.0 CONCLUSIONThis note has introduced the concept of embodied water and has demonstrated its application using case studies and supporting information. The water embodied in the main construction process alone is small, but the water embodied in construction materials is significant. Furthermore, while strategies are currently being developed to reduce embodied energy and associated greenhouse gas emissions for building materials, embodied water could be added to these criteria, to ensure that in the optimisation of energy and greenhouse issues, water consumption is not unnecessarily increased (i.e. by accident). Similarly, as strategies are being developed to save water during building operation (for example, grey water recycling systems), embodied water is an important cross-check, to ensure the net effect of these systems is positive, and that ongoing life-cycle savings are significant.

A major finding of this preliminary work is that the embodied water results are quite similar to the embodied energy results, at the material and building level. Therefore, there appears to be no need for a significant paradigm shift in the field of ecologically sustainable design. Many of the findings of this note thus comply with the findings of previous notes on embodied energy. For example, to save embodied water too, specify materials and products which:

• are local, in preference to those transported over long distances

• have a high recycled content or which have been used previously

• have a long life or are replaced less often

• are low in embodied energy, if they do not increase life cycle energy over the planned building life

• are high in embodied energy, if they result in a net decrease in life cycle energy over the planned building life.

(BDP EDG note DES 35, page 8)

To this, we can add: specify products and equipment that are efficient in their use of water, and that support waste water reuse and grey water recycling, where feasible.

As a nation that is still growing in its infrastructure, the water embodied in materials could remain a significant issue for some time, even if we substantially reduce the amount of water used directly in construction and the water used in the operation of buildings. Evidence supporting this notion is a current trend we have observed in which the energy embodied in buildings is increasing despite individual building material manufacturing industries improving their energy efficiency. The reason for this is mainly because we tend to increase over time the number and quantity of energy intensive materials used to do essentially the same job as before. This feature may be repeated for embodied water. Society will benefit from the application of this research through conservation of precious water resources. Economically, the research will allow designers and the construction and property industry to evaluate scenarios in broad environmental terms, and select options that might be cost neutral or possibly cost positive.

REFERENCES Anonymous, 2004, Reviewer’s comments on the first draft of this note submitted to the BDP Environment Design Guide.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000, Water Account for Australia, 1993-94 to 1996-97, Catalogue No 4610.0

Bourdeau, L, Huovila, P, Lanting, R and Gilham, A, 1998, Sustainable Development and the Future of Construction: A Comparison of Visions from Various Countries, CE3 Report 225, Rotterdam.

Boustead, I and Hancock, GF, 1979, Handbook of Industrial Energy Analysis, Ellis Horwood Limited, Chichester.

Bullard, CW, Penner, PS and Pilati, DA, 1978, Net Energy Analysis: Handbook for Combining Process and Input-Output Analysis, Resources and Energy, 1, 267-313.

Carter, AJ, Peet, NJ and Baines, JT, 1981, Direct and Indirect Energy Requirements of the New Zealand Economy: An Energy Analysis of the 1971- 72 Inter-Industry Survey, Report No P55, New Zealand Energy Research and Development Committee, Auckland, August.

Cole, R, 1998, Emerging Trends in Building Environmental Assessment Methods, Building Research and Information, 26[1], 3-16.

Fay, R and Treloar, GJ, 1998, Life Cycle Energy Analysis: a Measure of the Environmental Impact of Buildings, BDP Environment Design Guide Practice Note GEN 22, RAIA, ACT, November 8.

Foran, B, Poldy, F, 2002, Future Dilemmas: Options to 2050 for Australia’s Population, Technology Resources and Environment, Report to the department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous affairs, by CSRIO Sustainable Ecosystems, Working paper 02/01, available at: www.cse.csiro.au/research/program5/publications/02-01.pdf.

Hill, PK, 1978, Gross Energy Requirements of Building Materials, Proceedings: Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development Conference, Sydney, March, 179-190.

Howard, N, 1991, Energy in Balance, Building Services, 13[5], 36-3 8.

International Federation of Institutes for Advanced Study (IFIAS), 1974, Energy Analysis Workshop on Methodology and Convention, Workshop Report No 6, Stockholm, 25-30 August.

International Standards Organisation (ISO), 1999, Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Goals and Scope Definition and Inventory Analysis, AS/NZS 14041:1999, Standards Australia, Homebush.

Lave, LB, Cobas-Flores, E, Hendrickson, CT, and McMichael, F, 1995, Life-Cycle Assessment: Using Input-Output Analysis to Estimate Economy-Wide Discharges, Environmental Science and Technology, 29[9], 420A-426A.

Lawson, WR, 1996, Building Materials, Energy and the Environment: Towards Ecologically Sustainable Development, RAIA, ACT.

Lenzen, M and Foran, B, 2001, An Input-Output Analysis of Australian Water Usage, Water Policy, 3[4], 321-340.

Miller, RE and Blair, PD, 1985, Input-Output Analysis – Foundations and Extensions, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

• GEN 58 • MAY 2004 B D P E N V I R O N M E N T D E S I G N G U I D E

Proops, JLR, 1977, Input-Output Analysis and Energy Intensities: A Comparison of Some Methodologies, Applications of Mathematical Modeling, 1[3], 181-186.

Sinclair, T, 1986, Energy Management in the Brick and Ceramics Industry, Report No 646, Commonwealth of Australia National Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Program, Department of Resources and Energy, Canberra.

Spence, R and Mulligan, H, 1995, Sustainable Development and Construction Industry, Habitat International, 19[3], 279-92.

Stein, RG, Stein, C, Buckley, M and Green, M, 1981, Handbook of Energy Use for Building Construction, US Department of Energy, Washington, March, 171.

Treloar, GJ, 1997, Extracting Embodied Energy Paths from Input-Output Tables: Towards an Input-Output-Based Hybrid Energy Analysis Method, Economic Systems Research, 9[4], 375-391.

Treloar, GJ and Fay, R, 2000, Building Materials Selection: Greenhouse Strategies, BDP Environment Design Guide note DES 35, RAIA, ACT.

Treloar, GJ and Fay, R, 1998, Embodied energy of living, BDP Environment Design Guide note GEN 20, RAIA, ACT.

Treloar, GJ, Love, PED, Holt, GD, 2001, Using National Input-Output Data for Embodied Energy Analysis of Individual Residential Buildings, Construction management and economics, 19[1], 49-61.

Vanegas, J, DuBose, J and Pearce, A, 1996, Sustainable Technologies for the Building Construction Industry, Proceedings of the Symposium on Design for the Global Environment, Atlanta, GA.

www.savewater.com.au, 2003, last accessed December, 2003.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTThe authors would like to acknowledge assistance given in the preparation of base water data underlying this research. Dr Manfred Lenzen, of the University of Sydney, Department of Physics, prepared the initial input-output model including comprehensive water data for each sector of the economy based on Australian Bureau of Statistics and other data. Without this contribution, the research reported in this paper would not have occurred.

The authors would also like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the Deakin University Central Research Grants scheme, for the project ‘Modelling Direct and Indirect Water Consumption Associated with Construction’, involving the chief investigators: Graham Treloar, Laurence Palmowski and Sambit Datta (the latter is involved in tasks scheduled for 2005, and has therefore not commenced his contribution to the project, which will involve data visualisation and its role in the design process). Financial assistance was also provided by the Built Environment Research Group, Deakin University, in the form of a Summer Vacation Scholarship for the student Michael McCormack, who is a co-author of this article.

BIOGRAPHYDr Graham Treloar is a Senior Lecturer in Building Science at the School of Architecture and Building, Deakin University, Geelong. His research focuses on life cycle assessment, embodied energy analysis and environmental management, and their application to building design and construction. He has authored/co-authored over 50 refereed research papers, has won over one million Australian dollars in related competitive research grants and is a reviewer for several leading international journals. Graham has prepared numerous research reports for, and consulted to, government departments, research organisations and industry peak bodies. He is the Deputy Director of the Built Environment Research Group and the Manager of the Mobile Architecture and Built Environment Laboratory project. E [email protected]

Michael McCormack is an undergraduate research student in the School of Architecture and Building, Deakin University, Geelong. He won a summer vacation scholarship from the Built Environment Research Group to work on the embodied water project with Dr Treloar. This is his first contribution on a refereed publication.E [email protected]

Dr Laurence Palmowski is a Research Academic in the School of Engineering and Technology, Deakin University, Geelong. Her research focuses on environmental systems, specifically wastewater management and organic waste management. She has 20 refereed publications and has jointly secured over one millions dollars in research funding.E [email protected]

Professor Roger Fay is the Head of the School of Architecture at the University of Tasmania, Launceston. His research is concerned primarily with the life cycle energy of buildings. He is a Chief Investigator for the NABERS project, funded by Environment Australia. With colleagues, he undertakes research and consultancy projects for government and industry and has published numerous articles in prestigious international journals and has delivered invited addresses at important professional, government and intellectual forums. He is an Adjunct Professor to the School of Architecture and Building, Deakin University.E [email protected].

The views expressed in this Note are the views of the author(s) only and not necessarily those of the Australian Council of Building Design Professions Ltd (BDP), The Royal Australian Institute of Architects (RAIA) or any other person or entity.

This Note is published by the RAIA for BDP and provides information regarding the subject matter covered only, without the assumption of a duty of care by BDP, the RAIA or any other person or entity.

This Note is not intended to be, nor should be, relied upon as a substitute for specific professional advice.

Copyright in this Note is owned by The Royal Australian Institute of Architects.

environment design guide · • gen 20 details a case study of the life cycle energy of a dwelling...

Documents