Towards urban LCA: examining densification alternatives for a residential neighbourhood

Abstract

This paper explores the environmental impacts of retaining or replacing buildings by extending the consequential replacement framework (CRF) for life-cycle assessment (LCA) from individual buildings towards the urban scale. It addresses a gap in previous studies by examining the broader consequences of building-level retention or replacement decisions in the built environment, namely greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from associated infrastructure construction. The case study, which is located in Finland, investigates alternative ways to densify a growing city, some of which can be achieved within the urban structure, while others require greenfield construction elsewhere in the city. The results reveal that refurbishing and extending already existing buildings is worthwhile in terms of GHG emissions, even if some of the additional floor area targeted in densification were to be built on a greenfield site. After 50 years, the accumulated GHG emissions of scenarios that develop existing buildings are 0.2–12% less than those from replacement scenarios, depending on whether the targeted densification is minor or major and the amount of infrastructure construction involved. This is primarily due to the 11–35% smaller upfront embodied GHG emissions of refurbishment compared with new construction—which 50 years do not offset.