Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods and Life Cycle Assessment Processes
2.1. Goal and Scope of LCA
2.2. Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)
2.3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
- Global warming potential (GWP): greenhouse gasses and global warming—fossil + biogenic
- Ozone depletion potential (ODP): damage to ozone in the upper atmosphere
- Acidification potential (AP): acidification of soil or water
- Eutrophication potential (EP): over-fertilisation and excessive biomass growth
- Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP): impact of ozone and other oxidants in lower atmosphere
- Abiotic depletion potential—elements (ADPE): elements, minerals and energy consumed
- Abiotic depletion potential—fossil (ADPF): consumption of fossil resources
GaBi Modelling
2.4. Other Assumptions
- Assumptions regarding the roll forming and storage facility processes are noted in Appendix A.
- The processes not included in the assessment had a negligible effect on the overall environmental impacts of the roof.
- The generic inventory and LCI data in the software was a reasonably accurate representation of the processes and impacts from the production of the local manufactured long run roofing profile with five ribs.
3. Results
3.1. Life Cycle Assessment of Organic Coated Steel Coil
3.2. Life Cycle Assessment of the Long Run Roofing Profile with Five Ribs
3.3. Life Cycle Assessment of the Ancillary Items
3.4. Life Cycle Assessment of the Case Roof including Ancillary Items
4. Discussion and Recommendations
4.1. Importance of Source of Steel Coil for Roofing in LCA
4.2. Consideration of Ancillary Items in LCA
4.3. Recommendation for Improving the Sustainability of Steel Roofing Products
- There was a large part of the environmental impact from the steel roof product’s raw materials and manufacturing processes. The processes were identified as the hotspots of the steel roofing product by having more than 50% environmental impact across all indicators. In addition, when including the ancillary items, the steel roofing production processes also had the biggest environmental impact, accounting for more than 80% of the total impact in most categories. Therefore, this highlights the potential room for improvement in the steel roofing product’s environmental performance by reducing the effects of the product’s manufacturing processes. Optimising the steel roof design can be one of the solutions for reducing the impacts of the manufacturing processes. Reducing the weight of steel used can potentially reduce the amount of raw material and also the amount of energy used during the manufacturing process.
- Although the roll forming process had lower environmental impacts than others, identifying the highest impacts from the components during the process was performed. The machine used in the study to press and cut the steel coil into the final long run roofing profile with five ribs had the largest impact on the environment, which is 69% of the total impacts, in comparison with other activities in the processes. One of the other contributing factors was the direct electricity consumption used by the machine. According to 2019 national electricity supply data [76], most of the electricity supply in New Zealand is primarily from renewable energy sources. However, 17.5% of the energy generated is from burning fossil fuels [76]. Thus, improving renewable energy production, such as using photovoltaic (PV) panels in manufacturing sites, can reduce the effects of fossil fuel consumption during the roll forming process.
- It was found that the recycling of steel products at the EOL stages had a significant positive influence on the environmental impacts for all impact categories. There was a significant recovery of the life cycle impacts after the recycling process, which could reduce the impact values by up to 45% of the total impacts in GWP, POCP, and ADP fossil indicators. Therefore, it highlights the importance of the reuse and recycling processes of the steel roofing product in improving its environmental performance.
- LCA should consider the source of the steel coil used in roofing. When the final guidance for completing a simple LCA is released, it should include data to consider all major brands of steel coil used for roofing. EPDs are available for NZ products, and data for roofing made from an imported coil is presented in the study.
- Roll forming processes to convert steel coil to roofing are negligible and can be ignored. However, the transportation of the coil to the roll forming site should be considered if the steel coil is imported.
- Ancillary items should be considered in LCA; however, a simple increase in emissions from steel roofing is considered suitable for simplified LCA. The data for the factor of increase for each impact category is provided in the study.
5. Conclusions
- It was found that for all impact categories, on average, coated steel coil manufactured globally had less than 70% of the impact of the New Zealand product.
- The roll forming process to convert coated steel coil to steel roofing had an insignificant effect on overall emissions, less than 0.5% of the total impacts for six out of the seven impact categories. On the other hand, transportation of steel coil was responsible for a significant proportion of impacts, accounting for 49% of the eutrophication potential and 6% of the global warming potential for steel coil imported from South Korea.
- Ancillary items accounted for less than 30% of total roof emissions for all impact categories except eutrophication (40%). Gutter and flashings accounted for at least 10% of total emissions for all impact categories, and there were also notable emissions from underlay and timber purlins or fascia boards.
- The overall global warming impact from the steel roof was 12 kg CO2-eq for every 1 m2 of floor area.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix A.1. De-Coiler
- De-coiler model: Haixing HX.
- Output: 1 m of roofing/5 s based on speed of roll forming machine.
- Power usage: 3 kW assumed continuously for operation resulting in an estimated power use of 0.0066 kWh/m2 of roofing.
Appendix A.2. Roll Forming (and Cutting) Machine
- Roll forming model: ** Countries in the Context of Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costs. Structures 2018, 13, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emami, N.; Heinonen, J.; Marteinsson, B.; Säynäjoki, A.; Junnonen, J.-M.; Laine, J.; Junnila, S. A Life Cycle Assessment of Two Residential Buildings Using Two Different LCA Database-Software Combinations: Recognizing Uniformities and Inconsistencies. Buildings 2019, 9, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SimaPro. What is an Input-Output Database for LCA? SimaPro: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2017; Available online: https://simapro.com/2017/what-is-an-input-output-io-database/ (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Säynäjoki, A.; Heinonen, J.; Junnila, S.; Horvath, A. Can life-cycle assessment produce reliable policy guidelines in the building sector? Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 013001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO Standard, No. 14040:2006; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. ISO: Geneva Switzerland, 2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html (accessed on 27 February 2022).
- Rangelov, M.; Dylla, H.; Mukherjee, A.; Sivaneswaran, N. Use of environmental product declarations (EPDs) of pavement materials in the United States of America (U.S.A.) to ensure environmental impact reductions. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 283, 124619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pagnon, F.; Mathern, A.; Ek, K. A Review of Online Sources of Open-Access Life Cycle Assessment Data for the Construction Sector. In IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020; Volume 588, p. 042051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sphera. GaBi ts, Version 9.1.0.53; Computer Software; Sphera: Berlin, Germany, 2020. Available online: https://gabi.sphera.com/software/gabi-universities/gabi-education-free/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- PRé Sustainability. SimaPro, Version 9.1.1; Computer Software; PRé Sustainability: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2020. Available online: https://simapro.com/licences/#/education(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- GreenDelta. OpenLCA, Version 1.11.0; Computer Software; GreenDelta: Berlin, Germany, 2022. Available online: https://www.openlca.org/download/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- BRANZ. LCAQuick, Version 3.4.3; Computer Software; BRANZ: Judgeford, New Zealand, 2020. Available online: https://www.branz.co.nz/environment-zero-carbon-research/framework/lcaquick/(accessed on 25 February 2022).
- WorldSteel Association. Life Cycle Assessment: Environmental Assessment of Roofing Systems; WorldSteel Association: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; p. 47. Available online: https://worldsteel.org/wp-content/uploads/Life-cycle-assessment-Environmental-assessment-of-roofing-systems.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2022).
- Herrmann, I.T.; Moltesen, A. Does it matter which Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tool you choose?—A comparative assessment of SimaPro and GaBi. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 86, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colorsteel. Environmental Product Declaration; EPD Australasia: Nelson, New Zealand, 2018; p. 20. Available online: https://epd-australasia.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/NZS0028-EPD-document-COLORSTEEL.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Colorsteel. Environmental Product Declaration: Addendum—Rollforming Data; Colorsteel: Glenbrook, New Zealand, 2018; p. 8. Available online: https://www.colorsteel.co.nz/assets/Brochures/COLORSTEEL_EDP_Document_Supplement_2019_Nocrops.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Colorcote. Environmental Product Declaration; Colorcote: Auckland, New Zealand, 2019; p. 15. Available online: https://www.colorcote.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Colorcote-EPD-Document.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Bare, J.C.; Hofstetter, P.; Pennington, D.W.; de Haes, H.A.U. Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2000, 5, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sartori, T.; Drogemuller, R.; Omrani, S.; Lamari, F. A schematic framework for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Green Building Rating System (GBRS). J. Build. Eng. 2021, 38, 102180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- New Zealand Steel. The Ironmaking Process|New Zealand Steel. 2015. Available online: https://www.nzsteel.co.nz/.https://www.nzsteel.co.nz/new-zealand-steel/the-story-of-steel/the-science-of-steel/the-ironmaking-process/ (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- Zampori, L.; Saouter, E.; Schau, E.; Cristobal Garcia, J.; Castellani, V.; Sala, S. Guide for Interpreting Life Cycle Assessment Result; EUR 28266 EN; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Love, S. Steel Product Carbon Offset Programme; Thinkstep ANZ: Wellington, New Zealand, 2020; p. 47. Available online: https://www.hera.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/Steel-Sector-Carbon-Offset-Programme-Instructions-v4-28-10-2020.pdf (accessed on 22 May 2022).
- Le, A.B.D.; Whyte, A.; Biswas, W.K. Carbon footprint and embodied energy assessment of roof-covering materials. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2019, 21, 1913–1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry for the Environment. New Zealand’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2019; Ministry for the Environment: Wellington, New Zealand, 2021. Available online: https://environment.govt.nz/assets/Publications/New-Zealands-Greenhouse-Gas-Inventory-1990-2019Volume-1-Chapters-1-15.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2022).
Figure 1. Life cycle assessment framework for the research.Figure 2. Roof level plan of the case study house (all measurements are in millimetres and scaled 1:100).Figure 2. Roof level plan of the case study house (all measurements are in millimetres and scaled 1:100).Figure 3. Overview of the case steel roofing aggregate processes in GaBi Ts software.Figure 4. Overview of the factory production aggregate process.Figure 5. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of organic steel coil production for 1 m2 of roof: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 5. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of organic steel coil production for 1 m2 of roof: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 6. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of a steel roof profile for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 6. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of a steel roof profile for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 7. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of ancillary items for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 7. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of ancillary items for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 8. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of steel roofing including ancillary items for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Figure 8. Outputs from GaBi showing the environmental impacts of steel roofing including ancillary items for 1 m2 of the case study house: (a) GWP; (b) AP; (c) EP; (d) ODP; (e) ADP elements; (f) ADP fossil; (g) POCP.Table 1. Bill of materials for case study house.Item Material in GaBi Qty Unit kg/m2-Floor Steel The long run roofing profile with five ribs—0.55mm Organic steel coil 376 Lin/m 5.800 Ridge/barge flashing Organic steel coil 80 Lin/m 0.590 Eave drip flashing Organic steel coil 18 Lin/m 0.050 125 box gutter Organic steel coil 18 Lin/m 0.100 Internal gutter Organic steel coil 5 Lin/m 0.020 Others Fascia board (ridge/barge/eaves) Pine 95 Lin/m 0.460 Timber purlins/battens Pine 1 − 70 × 45 at 900 crs 1.500 Underlay Polypropylene film 7 50 m2 rolls 0.130 Flashing tape Aluminum foil + rubber 10 Lin/m 0.002 Excluded Roof truss and brackets, fixings, soffit boards, gutter brackets, downpipes, touch-up paint, and gutter pipe flashings n/a Table 2. Comparison of the life cycle impacts of the imported and locally sourced organic coated steels.Table 2. Comparison of the life cycle impacts of the imported and locally sourced organic coated steels.Impact Category Unit 1 m2 of 5-rib Trapezoidal Steel Profile Imported Organic Coated Steel Coils Locally Sourced Organic Coated Steel Coils Global Warming Potential kg CO2-eq 1.49 × 101 2.20 × 101 Ozone Depletion kg CFC11-eq −4.21 × 10−9 4.85 × 10−9 Acidification kg SO2-eq 4.42 × 10−2 1.99 × 10−1 Eutrophication kg PO4-eq 3.81 × 10−3 1.05 × 10−2 Photochemical Ozone Creation kg C2H4-eq 6.93 × 10−3 1.11 × 10−2 Abiotic Depletion—Elements kg SB-eq 8.37 × 10−5 1.79 × 10−4 Abiotic Depletion—Fossil MJ 1.61 × 102 2.84 × 102 Table 3. Overall life cycle impact for the seven impact categories for 1 m2 of case steel roofing.Impact Category Unit Life Cycle Modules Total A1–A3, D A2 1 C3–C4 2 Global Warming Potential kg CO2-eq 9.97 5.17 × 10−1 7.00 × 10−2 1.06 × 101 Ozone Depletion kg CFC11-eq −2.50 × 10−8 Negligible 7.93 × 10−15 −2.5 × 10−8 Acidification kg SO2-eq 3.32 × 10−2 1.22 × 10−2 2.00 × 10−4 4.60 × 10−2 Eutrophication kg PO4-eq 2.85 × 10−3 2.40 × 10−3 2.82 × 10−5 5.28 × 10−3 Photochemical Ozone Creation kg C2H4-eq 4.93 × 10−3 −1.26 × 10−3 1.73 × 10−5 3.69 × 10−3 Abiotic Depletion—Elements kg SB-eq 8.00 × 10−5 Negligible 2.68 × 10−8 8.00 × 10−5 Abiotic Depletion—Fossil MJ 1.09 × 102 Negligible 9.70 × 10−1 1.10 × 102 1 Transport from Busan to NZ factory. These A2 transport emissions are in addition to the A2 transport contained within the Worldsteel data in the A1–A4, D emissions. 2 Waste processing (C3) and disposal (C4) processes data adapted from EPD published by Colorsteel for Maxx 0.55 mm steel roofing product.Table 4. Recommended percentage increase in environmental impacts from roofing only to include ancillary items.Table 4. Recommended percentage increase in environmental impacts from roofing only to include ancillary items.Impact Category Percentage Increase of Roofing Only
ImpactsGlobal Warming Potential 9% Ozone Depletion 14% Acidification 24% Eutrophication 40% Photochemical Ozone Creation 3% Abiotic Depletion—Elements 14% Abiotic Depletion—Fossil 27% Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Roy, K.; Dani, A.A.; Ichhpuni, H.; Fang, Z.; Lim, J.B.P. Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943
Roy K, Dani AA, Ichhpuni H, Fang Z, Lim JBP. Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof. Applied Sciences. 2022; 12(12):5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943
Chicago/Turabian StyleRoy, Krishanu, Aflah Alamsah Dani, Hartej Ichhpuni, Zhiyuan Fang, and James B. P. Lim. 2022. "Improving Sustainability of Steel Roofs: Life Cycle Assessment of a Case Study Roof" Applied Sciences 12, no. 12: 5943. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125943