METRICS FOR BUILDINGS OR BUILDING OF METRICS: A COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT OF THE TRADITIONAL VS. THE RENEWABLE IN MEDICAL OFFICES

摘要

As renewable technologies become a focus in the design process in both architectural education and practice, measuring the environmental impacts of such technologies is gaining attention in education and practice. This paper conducts a Life Cycle Assessment LCA study to model two medical office buildings over a service life of 60 years and its implications on the environment from cradle to grave. It also quantifies and compares the total impacts these 2 buildings have throughout this life span. Both buildings located in Michigan where steel construction is the dominant method of construction for commercial type. Building 1 is a 3-story building with conventional HVAC system. Building 2 is a 1-story LEED certified building that uses a geothermal HVAC system and has more sustainable materials used. The study calculates the environmental footprint of each building per unit area to identify which case has lesser environmental impact (to air, water, and land). The study highlights the importance of setting metrics to measure buildings' sustainability through their environmental burden. This will allow architects to choose more sustainable materials and renewable energy systems based on actual performance. The analysis also provides an assessment to which building component (structure, walls, floors, roofs) contribute the most to the total impacts for each case. The outcome also highlights some areas where LEED rating system may fall short regarding the best materials alternatives to be used and in which component of the building. This contributes to reduced impacts through selecting more sustainable alternatives based on its damage to the environment regardless of the certification.