deconstruction + reuse = nø · pdf filedeconstruction + reuse = nø waste ......

Deconstruction + Reuse = NØ Waste

Jose Mendoza Milara, MArch María López de Asiaín, DA Gabriel Gomez Azpeitia, DA[Proyecto áSILO] [Colima University] [Colima University][email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

ABSTR ACT HEADING

How much does it cost to rehabilitate and extend, with optimal conditions of habitability, a non-used building versus starting a new one from scratch?

One of the main challenges we are facing nowadays in order to fight against climate change is the efficient use of resources in all areas of society. From the scopes of architecture and building sciences, the efficiency in the management of resources will be key for improving our capacity of adaptation towards the requirements of sustainable development and climate change. This issue is directly linked to the topic of rehabilitation versus building from scratch (starting with a new floor plan).

The research developed for the thesis "Life cycles of materials. Building from scratch versus rehabilitation and extension of the traditional dwelling from Extremadura" presents values that go far beyond the estimations made for the initial hypothesis; the impacts on the quality of the natural environment of a renewed-extended existing dwelling is 63,42% lower than the impacts generated by building a new one. Specifically in economical terms, the costs of a renewal/extension of an existing dwelling are 36,90% lower than the costs of a new building.

Having these data values, a quite important question is still in the air: Which will be the steps required to be able to acknowledge society about this issue?

We have completed an empirical demonstration in the case study of the dwelling in C/ Colón 36, in Castuera (Spain), where we present the process to obtain satisfactory results using the following methodology:

DECONSTRUCTION + REUSE = NØWASTE

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, the habitation requirements for dwellings leave out any possibility of renewing traditional housing. Everyone wants to live in a new house, and never think about renewing an old dwelling using popular architectural technics. Although this type of dwelling was already designed with integrated passive architecture, their owners are just either waiting for its collapse or to be demolished in order to build new ones.

Throughout history, in different regions of the world, many cultures have reutilized materials from other constructions to build new dwellings, great buildings, monuments... But after the industrial revolution it is only considered to build using new materials.

We believe it's time to change this paradigm. Some architects have thought of this idea, as we have now the technology for analyzing materials and creating virtual designs before building. That way we are able to calculate if it's feasible or not, and how these materials can be reutilized in order to obtain more efficient buildings. I´ve been working and researching on processes of reutilization and on this type of architecture since 2004. We have worked with passive design, materials reuse, simulation software, Life Cycle Analysis, situated technology and local knowledge, obtaining the best design answers for the needs of its inhabitants. These technics are: DECONSTRUCTION + REUSE = NØ WASTE.

INTENT AND OBJECTIVES OF APPLIED RESEARCH

Our intention is to answer the following question: ¿How much does it costs to renew and extend, in optimal conditions of habitation, a non used building versus a new construction? When we ask "How

30th INTERNATIONAL PLEA CONFERENCE 16-18 December 2014, CEPT University, Ahmedabad

1

much does it costs" it refers to economical value but also to environmental impact.GENERAL OBJETIVE: To determine, through comparison, how much it costs to rehabilitate and

to extend, in ideal conditions of habitability, a building in disuse versus a new building: environment impact and economic value.

SPECIFIC OBJETIVE, working on interventions with real projects:1. Acquiring knowledge about construction system in dwellings from Extremadura (Spain).2. Acquiring knowledge about construction systems in new dwellings. 3. Assess the materials and construction systems to be efficiently reutilized in dwellings renewal.

METHODOLOGY AND TOOLS

The methodology is based on the following processes: search of bibliography, search of data bases (demography, climate, materials, construction details and local technology), analyzing traditional construction systems in Extremadura and in projects of new dwellings built from scratch.

The tools used for obtaining these results are:1. SIMAPRO (ECO-INDICATOR 99); valuation of damages in several areas of impacts:

1. Human health: expected years of life adjusted to disabilities, used on the World Bank and in the World Health Organization. (W.H.O.).

2. Ecosystem Quality: (m2·yr·PDF) square meters of surface of vegetal mass that will endanger some species that may potentially disappear

3. Resources: Megajoules needed to obtain low quality minerals and fossil fuels in the future.2. ARCHISUN: acquiring and comparing values of energetic consumption in dwellings after built.3. Price basis of Extremadura: overview for comparing the costs in € between the following case:

1. Unused dwellings after renewal and extension.2. New dwellings built from scratch.

OUTCOMES AND COMPARATIVE

In this research, we have compared two cases to be able to know the impact and economical cost in each construction unit, but also the energetic costs after finishing the construction process. The analyzed buildings had similar dimensions, but for a better comprehension and comparison, in the impact analysis we have work with built square meters. This way we managed to work with exactly the same measurement on each construction unit, as normally each material is measured in different units (concrete: m3; steel: Kg; brickwork: m2; etc... ).

First, we have evaluated the damages created in the quality of the natural ecosystem. Each building has similar installations (bathroom, kitchen, living room, sleeping rooms, etc... ), therefore, we are analyzing only six construction units (soil movement, foundations, structure, brickworks, finishes and roofing), because these units have the largest differences when analyzing the impact. More information can be found in "Ciclo de Vida Material. Construcción de nueva planta versus rehabilitación y ampliación en la Vivienda Popular Extremeña". This work has been developed in "La Serena", which is a region in the south east of Extremadura (Spain). We show the general comparison of these two types of constructions. On a second phase, we have analyzed the energetic expenses after the construction process was finished, this way we can value how efficient is each type when they´ll be used. The data is showed per year, in a 50-year life cycle. Finally, we present one of the most important issues for our society, the economical value, answering the main question for this research.

Comparative of Ecosystem Quality impact

The comparative analysis of the case studies (new dwelling versus renewal-extension of a dwelling) is presented by categories and areas. With the obtained results, we can understand that renewing and extending a dwelling has less impact than building from scratch. A first graph shows the impact in several areas (human health, quality of the natural ecosystem and resources).


2

In all areas, the damage by square meter in renewed and extended dwelling will be 60% lower than in a new construction. In terms of quality of the natural ecosystem, it's 2,7 times lower than in the worst case scenario. For human health is 3,45 times lower, and for resources it's 3,13 times lower than what is produced by square meter compared to a new dwelling built from scratch.

In the graphic of comparison by categories, we can find the specific impact in kg.eq.CO2 emitted by each square meter and we can see the originating causes. This graph shows three categories that are more relevant than the rest (from lower to higher): climate change, inorganic breathing particles and fossil fuels..

This research has the exact value for each construction unit, for more information please consult on the book. Now, for a better comprehension, we show the uncertainty graph of Monte Carlo. This way we will know which are the originating causes for the emission of kg.eq.CO2 on each category for new dwelling or for a renewed-extended dwelling. In the analysis, the values from the renewed-extended dwelling (green) are subtracted to the values of the new dwelling (red).

Figure 2: Impact comparison by categories between new dwelling and renewed-extended dwelling

Figure 1: Impact comparison by areas between new dwelling and renewed-extended dwelling


3

In the comparison, there are construction units with a proportional relationship lower than 9,35 times. It's the case of brickwork and roofing. The reason for this is that in these units, most of the materials are reused form other constructions or from the renewed dwelling itself (bricks, roof tiles, sand, clay, wood or sticks). In the case of the external finished, the relation is 2-3 times, because even if we reutilize sand and clay we need lime to make the mortar (in some cases, we will need cement and steel too). Lime has a lower impact, but this material (and it happens the same with cement) requires transformation process to be able to use it for construction. Finally, our goal for this research study in the comparison between new versus renewed-extended and this last aspect (extension) is the reason why there is a bigger impact in this unit, as shown in Table 1.

The average value of the total comparison shows that each square meter of newly built surface has a level of emissions of 2,73 times versus surface of a renewed-extended dwelling. Also, with an approximate calculation, we can obtain a comparative value of new versus renewed; if the dwelling is not extended, we need don't need to make new foundations. In this case, the square meter of renewed dwelling has 4,79Kg.eq.CO2 less of emissions. If we subtract in the structure of the building a part of the concrete, steels and pre-fabricated elements, the renewed dwelling will have an impact 75% lower. This way, the emissions of Kg.eq.CO2 generated by the structure would be 1,82. In other construction units we should also subtract some elements, but these data values are enough to demonstrate how much lower the impact would be. Still, discounting these values, renewing a dwelling would generate 6,08Kg.eq.CO2 versus 45,26Kg.eq.CO2/m2 of the new construction. Therefore, we can see how the impact of the renewal would be much lower; precisely 7,24 times lower.

Table 1: Uncertainty comparative newly built dwelling and a renewed-extended dwelling (Kg.eq.CO2)New house Renewed-extended dwelling

Foundation 7,060 4,790Structure 14,640 7,060Masonry 9,650 0,770Roof 6,480 0,700Cladding-finishes 7,430 2,790

TOTAL SUM 45,260 16,110

All built work package 45,58 16,67

Figure 3: Uncertainty analysis. Impact on the quality of the natural ecosystem for each m2 built of new dwelling versus m2 of renewed-extended dwelling.


4

Comparative energy consumption after construction.

The ARCHISUN analysis will give us the energetic expense for each construction, and it shows that the renewed-extended dwelling has a better behaviour. Normally, people think that an architecture renewal performs worse than a new dwelling, but as we see in the following table, it can be seen how this popular concept is wrong, it all depends on a good design before constructing or renewing. Considering that both projects were thought of as efficient designs, we can observe more favorable values when we renovate re-using local materials versus building with conventional materials (concrete from a factory, steel from who knows where, wood form another continent, etc... ).

Comparative economic cost.

In the current society, this is perhaps the most important comparison for the citizens. We are talking about money, most of the time or maybe always, it's the only issue apparently. Again, as in the previous cases, the table shows that the dwelling built from scratch is more expensive than the renewed dwelling. Therefore, the good values are not only related to the impact in the quality of the natural ecosystem or the energetic expense after the construction process, it also happens in economical terms.

The most important differences are in the three first units (de-construction and previous works, soild movements and foundations). This happens because in the renewed-extended dwelling included a new basement, therefore these construction units are more expensive. In the rest of cases, reusing

Table 2: Comparison of energetic consumption once the construction works are finished

GENERAL DATA NEW HOUSE RENEWED-EXTENDED DWELLING

Volume: 893.00 m3 840,96 m3

Peoples: 4 4Building use:: permanent housing permanent housing Median temperature sensation winter: 10.89 ºC 11,63 ºCMedian temperature sensation spring: 22.41 ºC 22,93 ºC Median temperature sensation summer: 31.10 ºC 31,58 ºC Median temperature sensation autumn: 24.14 ºC 24,44 ºC Natural light 7.55 lux 9,87 luxAcoustic insulation 26.31 dBA 25,61 dBaHeating: 10.61 kWh/m3 year 4,98 kWh/m3 yearRefrigeration: 4.50 kWh/m3 year 3,60 kWh/m3 yearLighting: 4.13 kWh/m3 year 4.12 kWh/m3 yearHot water: 2.28 kWh/m3 year 2,36 kWh/m3 yearKitchen: 2.01 kWh/m3 year 2,14 kWh/m3 yearOthers: 1.29 kWh/m3 year 1,30 kWh/m3 year

Table 3: Costs comparison between each type of construction. These prices include the costs of labour, materials and required machinery for each construction unit. http://basepreciosconstruccion.gobex.es/

SUMMURY CONSTRUCTION UNITS NEW HOUSE RENEWED-EXTENDED DWELLING

P001- Deconstruction and previous work - € 5.988,59 € P002- Earth movement 979,03 € 5.864,77 € P003- Foundation 8.330,88 € 23.646,07 € P004- Sanitation installation 2.166,87 € 2.215,43 € P005- Structure 28.486,30 € 5.460,42 € P006- Masonry 17.487,20 € 7.793,80 €P007- Cladding-finishes 22.374,43 € 2.244,72 € P008- Roof 21.884,84 € 2.623,68 € P009- Paint 4.670,55 € 2.298,96 € P010- Electricity installation 5.042,32 € 6.679,42 € P011- Plumbing installation 7.095,49 € 8.392,19 € P012- Doors and windows 20.436,12 € 11.269,85 € P013- Locksmith installation 224,75 € 2.773,86 € P014- Security and health 1.256,52 € 1.238,76 €

BUDGET EXECUTION MATERIAL 140.435,30 € 88.490,52 €


5

materials is cheaper and the most important issue to obtain reduced prices is in the construction. These budget estimations do not include yet the costs of quality control and taxes (porportional for both cases).

INFERENCES AND CONCLUSION

With all the data obtained we can see that the renewed-extended dwelling is cheaper than the newly build dwelling. It is important to understand that we need a well designed process of de-construction and re-utilization of materials to be able to obtain these good results. In a renewal process we first need to know if the existing building is in a ruin condition; this will be a main requirement for the proposal. A building will be considered to be in a ruinous condition when it presents large structural damages or when in needs a partial reconstruction of over 50% of the building. If the existing building is in a ruinous condition, it will be better to completely de-construct it and to re-use the obtained materials in a new construction, either on the same location or in other location, but not too far, in order to reduce the impact in the quality of the natural ecosystem.

The values previously shown give us the knowledge to be able to answer our questions regarding impact on the quality of the ecosystem and the economical costs of building a new dwelling or renewing-extending an existing dwelling:

1. Impact in the quality of the natural ecosystem in a new dwelling is 2,73 times larger than in a renewed-extended dwelling. It is important not to forget that, if we just renew, the impact of a new house will be 7,26 times bigger for each square meter built. The Kg.eq.CO2 emissions are proportional; each square meter of new dwelling will have 45,58 versus 16,67 in a renewed-extended dwelling. This means the Ecosystem Quality impact is 63,42% less.

2. The economic cost of a new house (140.435,30€) versus a renewed-extended dwelling (88.490,52€) is 36.9% cheaper. Any person would want to renew a dwelling if they knew that the costs are lower than purchasing a new house.

EMPIRICAL DEMOSTRATION, APPLIED RESEARCH, PRACTICE WORK.

We decided to work at the neighbourhood called "El Cerrillo" (Castuera, Spain). It's the oldest and most traditional area of this village. We investigated private and public spaces, types of dwellings, age,

Figure 4: Used and non-used dwellings in the neighbourhood of "El Cerrillo" (Castuera, Spain)


6

materials and the most important of all, the quality and the potential of each dwelling. We found 407 dwellings, 222 with permanent use, 112 non-used and 73 dwelling in rental regime or temporal use.

Many dwellings are in good conditions and a renewal process would be feasible. That is why, in the following step, we went to dwelling built upon traditional and popular technics from Extremadura, where we can work and obtain empirical results about DECONSTRUCTION + REUSE = NØ WASTE.

We worked at the dwelling located at C/Colón 36 (Castuera, Spain). The goal is to un-build the roof (tiles, soil, sticks, wood desks, nails and wooden beams) and adobe walls; as shown in next figure.

Before deciding for the reutilization, we test the materials (trength and durability). We will be able to reutilize 65% of the roof tiles for the same function, and the rest for different functions than the original one (filling up walls, or noise isolation in the fundations). The adobe can be used to increase the walls in the perimeter. Soil as a fill up material in walls, to join the adobe with the facade mortar. The sticks were used as formwork, creating the dome to improve the weight distribution in the structural part of the 2nd floor and carry the loads to the walls of the first floor.

Figure 5: Deconstruction process. www.architectureindevelopment.org/project.php?id=354

Figure 6: Reutilization processes. www.architectureindevelopment.org/project.php?id=354


7

Wood beams to make windows and door lintels and support wood pieces as shown the Figure 6. The clapboard and nails were used to build alveolar slab wood, where we use new wood boards (OSB) and glulam wood beams. The insulation is solved with natural sheep wool, using local materials.

Thus, we obtained our goal, this is one of the many works that we have done, after research “Ciclo de Vida Material”, we have done in Proyecto áSILO; with the hope that these results can be useful in other parts of the world.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In the research “El Cerrillo”: Paulina Aguilar, José Hidalgo, Uriel Manjares and Tania González.In the research “Colón 36”: Jorge Bermejo Pascual, Sergio Ceballos de la Torre, Jana Coro

Romero, Aldo Cusumano Cañadas, Jaime Díez Honrado, Dololes Domingo Garzarán, Ana Enguita, Alejandro Gallego, Angel Gallego Aragonés, Francisco Fernández García Cuevas, María G. Javaloyes, Sebastián Baltasar Gragera Pérez, Patricia Jiménez López, Joaquín Mendoza Sánchez, Gabriel Merino, Antonia Milara Sánchez, Avelino Muñoz, Lucía Perey Sanchís, David Romero Cabanillas, Francisco José Sánchez Sánchez, Juan Sánchez Serrano, Saloa Tamayo López, Jesús Vigara,

In the translation: Shylar Abshire and Jéssica Alcántara River, Manuel Torres Rodríguez

NOMENCLATURE

kg = kilogrameq = equivalentCO2= carbon dioxidem2 = square meterm3 = cubic meter% = percentageºC = Celsius degreekWh = kilo Watts hour

REFERENCES

Mendoza Milara, José. 2010. Ciclo de Vida Material. Construcción de nueva planta versus rehabilitación y ampliación en la Vivienda Popular Extremeña. Edit: Académica Española

Alberto González Rodríguez. 2005. Extremadura Popular Casas y Pueblos. Edit. Departamento de publicaciones de la Diputación Provincial de Badajoz

Manuel Viola Nevado. 2007. Manual de Técnicas y Materiales Tradicionales de la Construcción en Extremadura. Edit. Alba Planta en EQUAL

Juan Saumell Lladó. 2008. Habitaciones con historia. La casa de llano en la Baja Extremadura Edit. Departamento de Publicaciones de la Diputación de Badajoz.

González, Eduardo. 1990. Evaluación de Sistemas Pasivos de Enfriamiento y su Aplicación en el Diseño de Viviendas. 1ª Parte. Informe Final de investigación, CONDES. F. de Arquitectura. LUZ.

Bjørn Berger. 2009. The ecology of building materials. ISBN-10: 1856175375.Serra Florensa, R. y Coch Roura, E. 1995. Arquitectura y Energía Natural. ISBN: 84-7653-505-8.

Figure 7: left photo: inside the dwelling. Right photo: main facade; Colón 36, Castuera (Spain)


8

deconstruction + reuse = nø · pdf filedeconstruction + reuse = nø waste ......

Documents