1 / 27

Use of nature

Current Trends and Stakeholder Expectations Eco-Efficiency –  Delinking use of nature from quality of life. Q uality of life. 10. Faktor 4/8/10. 8. Economic growth. 4. Use of nature. Material requirements for satisfying human needs & wants.

grant
Télécharger la présentation

Use of nature

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Current Trends and Stakeholder Expectations Eco-Efficiency –  Delinking use of nature from quality of life Qualityof life 10 Faktor 4/8/10 8 Economicgrowth 4 Use of nature

  2. Material requirements for satisfying human needs & wants material intensityper capita per year76 tonnes = hidden material “backpack” visible material load 100 % erosion earth displacement unconverted materials mineral raw materials fossile fuels biological raw materials others 11 community 6 leisure 13 education 5 health 9 clothing 6 food 20 residence 29 tonnesper capita 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 source: Wuppertal Institute

  3. Energiekennwerte im zeitlichen Verlauf Quelle: http://www.passivhaus-institut.de/

  4. Ein Paradigmenwechsel steht noch aus! Quelle: Deutsche Energie-Agentur GmbH (dena)

  5. What is the mipsHAUS-Institute?Short presentation • Since 2003 independent research institute and consultancy • Main issues: „Sustainability and resource efficiency in the building sector - more than only energy efficiency“ • Services: • Planning accompanied services • Practice oriented services • Life cycle wide assessments

  6. Who? – The mipsHAUS-team An interdisciplinary team of planers, architects, building engineers and environmental scientist

  7. REB project Ecological and Economical assessment of two façade concepts - Glass versus plastic -

  8. Goals of the project • Planning accompanied ecological consulting • Life cycle wide assesment of the facade concepts: • Profile construction glass • PMMA-Stegplatten • PC-Stegplatten • GFK-Stegplatten • Assessment of different insulation concepts

  9. TMR: ein Leitindikator nach dem MIPS-Konzept Material-Input pro Service-Einheit (MIPS): • abiotische Rohstoffe • biotische Rohstoffe • Wasser • Luft • Boden • Leitindikator TMR = Summe aus: • abiotischen Rohstoffen • biotischen Rohstoffen • Erosion

  10. Chosen Indicators • Total Material Requirement (TMR) • Cummulated Energy demand (KEA) • Global Warming Potential (GWP) ifff.boku.ac.at/ images/Emissionen.JPG www.gesteinsgarten.de/ erdgas.htm aida.astroinfo.org/ sciesielski/blitz.jpg

  11. Emissions Relevance of the indicators 29% of the german ecological rucksack are related to the building sector Material Ca. 75 % of the total amount of waste are related to the building sector 47% of the use energy is used for the heating of a building Energy 45% of the CO2-Emissions are related to the building sector

  12. Software Gabi 4.0 (life cycle wide assessment)

  13. Outer wall facade

  14. Umweltwirkungspotenziale der Profilbauglas-Variante

  15. Umweltwirkungspotenziale der Polycarbonat-Stegplatten-Variante

  16. Umweltwirkungspotenziale derPolymethylmethacrylat-Stegplatten-Variante

  17. Umweltwirkungspotenziale derGFK-Stegplatten-Variante a (mit UP-Harz) *GWP-Daten für UP-Harz lagen nicht in ausreichender Qualität vor

  18. Umweltwirkungspotenziale derGFK-Stegplatten-Variante b (mit Epoxid-Harz)

  19. Ecological comparison of weather protection facade concepts

  20. Heating system comparison

  21. Gasoline-heating system over the whole use phase

  22. Ecological comparison of the facades per m2 and year

  23. Summary • Ecological minimization in the planning phase through the substitution of aluminum bands • PC-Stegplatten are in the ecological comparison the best choice; even more in the ecological-economic assessment (about 20% cheaper) • Heating standard is under the regulation for new buildings • Maintenance costs are lower than with other concepts (compact heating Insulation system has to be cleaned every 5 years) • Insulation materials: Celluloses has the lowest ecological rucksack This success could only be achieved because of the planning accompanied teamwork with the planers and architects!

  24. Lost potentials! The Landesvertretung of the Land North Rhine Westphalia in Berlin

  25. Our vision 2010: The existing energy efficiency regulation (EnEV) in Germany has been transferred to a resource efficiency regulation (ReEV). Small apartment houses Large apartment houses kg per m2 and year Detached houses Double houses Older than 1900 4.500 kg 3.900 kg 1900 - 1945 4.400 kg 3.800 kg 3.400 kg 3.100 kg Factor 10 1945 - 1960 4.700 kg 3.700 kg 3.300 kg 3.000 kg 1960 - 1980 4.800 kg 4.300 kg 3.800 kg 3.300 kg 1980 - 1998 4.000 kg 4.000 kg 3.500 kg 3.000 kg 1998 - … 4.500 kg 3.900 kg 3.500 kg 3.000 kg

  26. Next steps • Simplification of calculation rules (Materials, Components, Buildings) • Integrating MIPS in a voluntary building standard (e.g. LEED) • Good practice show rooms • Support the creation of a “market” for resource efficient materials/buildings • Frontrunner initiatives from official institutions • National Rehabilitation programs • Influence the education system • …

More Related