A Comparative Review of Existing Data and Methodologies for Calculating Embodied Energy and Carbon of Buildings

In the Climate Change Act of 2008 the UK Government pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. As one step towards this, regulations are being introduced requiring all new buildings to be ‘zero carbon’ by 2019. These are defined as buildings which emit net zero carbon during their operational lifetime. However, in order to meet the 80% target it is necessary to reduce the carbon emitted during the whole life-cycle of buildings, including that emitted during the processes of construction. These elements make up the ‘embodied carbon’ of the building. While there are no regulations yet in place to restrict embodied carbon, a number of different approaches have been made. There are several existing databases of embodied carbon and embodied energy. Most provide data for the material extraction and manufacturing only, the ‘cradle to factory gate’ phase. In addition to the databases, various software tools have been developed to calculate embodied energy and carbon of individual buildings. A third source of data comes from the research literature, in which individual life cycle analyses of buildings are reported. This paper provides a comprehensive review, comparing and assessing data sources, boundaries and methodologies. The paper concludes that the wide variations in these aspects produce incomparable results. It highlights the areas where existing data is reliable, and where new data and more precise methods are needed. This comprehensive review will guide the future development of a consistent and transparent database and software tool to calculate the embodied energy and carbon of buildings.

Technology confidence in early stage development of medical devices

Innovation is a critical factor in ensuring commercial success within the area of medical technology. Biotechnology and Healthcare developments require huge financial and resource investment, in-depth research and clinical trials. Consequently, these developments involve a complex multidisciplinary structure, which is inherently full of risks and uncertainty. In this context, early technology assessment and 'proof of concept' is often sporadic and unstructured. Existing methodologies for managing the feasibility stage of medical device development are predominantly suited to the later phases of development and favour detail in optimisation, validation and regulatory approval. During these early phases, feasibility studies are normally conducted to establish whether technology is potentially viable. However, it is not clear how this technology viability is currently measured. This paper aims to redress this gap through the development of a technology confidence scale, as appropriate explicitly to the feasibility phase of medical device design. These guidelines were developed from analysis of three recent innovation studies within the medical device industry.

A Comparative Review of existing data and methodologies for calculating embodied energy and carbon of buildings

In the Climate Change Act of 2008 the UK Government pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. As one step towards this, regulations are being introduced requiring all new buildings to be ‘zero carbon’ by 2019. These are defined as buildingswhichemitnetzerocarbonduringtheiroperationallifetime.However,inordertomeetthe80%targetitisnecessary to reduce the carbon emitted during the whole life-cycle of buildings, including that emitted during the processes of construction. These elements make up the ‘embodied carbon’ of the building. While there are no regulations yet in place to restrictembodiedcarbon,anumberofdifferentapproacheshavebeenmade.Thereareseveralexistingdatabasesofembodied carbonandembodiedenergy.Mostprovidedataforthematerialextractionandmanufacturingonly,the‘cradletofactorygate’ phase. In addition to the databases, various software tools have been developed to calculate embodied energy and carbon of individual buildings. A third source of data comes from the research literature, in which individual life cycle analyses of buildings are reported. This paper provides a comprehensive review, comparing and assessing data sources, boundaries and methodologies. The paper concludes that the wide variations in these aspects produce incomparable results. It highlights the areas where existing data is reliable, and where new data and more precise methods are needed. This comprehensive review will guide the future development of a consistent and transparent database and software tool to calculate the embodied energy and carbon of buildings.