Evaluation of circularity
Calculate and evaluate the circularity level or score of a building project: e.g. calculate the material flows, the embodied carbon of materials and building elements, the lifecycle of building elements, etc.
When to take action?
Who can take action?
Advanced expertise needed (to interpret the result in a correct way)
The action steps to take differ largely from one evaluation method to another. Here, we use the Level(s) method as an example.
Make up a bill of quantities, materials, and lifespans.
Calculate the construction & demolition waste and materials.
Assess how your design could extend the service life of the building, by facilitating the continuation of the intended use or through possible future changes in use.
If wished, you can set design targets to compare design options for their relative adaptability.
The needed input can vary largely from one evaluation method to another. Generally, the following input data is needed: detailed information on the connections, the materials and components, and the building site. For the example of Level(s), the outcome of the Scenario planning Action can be useful.
A score or another output that allows to compare different designs on circularity.
Victoria - 51N4E
The Victoria in Brussels (BE) is a renovation project of a 24-story tower. The designers 51N4E aimed to design a flexible building that has the opportunity to integrate various reused building elements. They decided to retain the original vertical concrete structure while making the building's infill adaptable.
SuReal was hired as expert in Life Cycle Assessments and environmental impact assessments. They say in an interview on Circubuild that in the Victoria project Totem and One Click LCA were used to determine the materials with the lowest environmental impact. These calculations also took into account the potential for disassembly and reuse after a period of 60 years. Specifically, the entire specifications documents were screened and adjustments were made to the specifications based on technical, budgetary, practical, and environmental impact.
For example, after looking at various options for the facade, it was concluded that an adaptable facade would cost too much in terms of materials and processing, and a facade system was finally chosen that was less adaptable but kept material consumption to a minimum (source: Reynaers Aluminium).
Copyright :51N4E source