ワーズワースビル機械設備の体化炭素評価

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a replicable methodology for mechanical embodied carbon assessment and insights into key drivers.

🏢実務担当者:Useful for building designers and sustainability teams to identify high-impact components and prioritize low-carbon alternatives.

🏛政策担当者:Informs policies on embodied carbon regulation and the need for standardized MEP LCA data.

This study evaluates the embodied carbon of the mechanical systems in the Wordsworth Building at the University of British Columbia. The analysis supports UBC’s broader Whole-Building Life Cycle Assessment practices and contributes a transparent methodology for future mechanical system assessments. The work focuses on life cycle modules A1 to A3, A4, B4 and C2 to C4 in accordance with EN 15978 and applies methods recommended in the Embodied Carbon in UBC previous study and the UBC Wordsworth Design Development LCA Report. The modelling was completed using One Click LCA under the limitations of a student license. Major mechanical equipment was quantified based on available design stage documentation, including IFBP drawings and selected shop drawing information. Where project specific product information was not available, representative datasets were selected using a tiered data approach, prioritizing manufacturer information where available and applying standard reference assumptions where necessary. The approach aligns with UBC’s established WBLCA practices and is consistent with methods used in prior UBC embodied carbon work and the Wordsworth Design Development LCA Report. The analysis shows that the total embodied carbon of the mechanical system is approximately 915 t CO₂e, corresponding to 49.6 kg CO₂e/m² of gross floor area and approximately 10.7% of the building’s total embodied carbon over a 60-year reference study period. While this proportion is at the lower end of commonly reported ranges for building services, it is consistent with both the concrete residential building typology and the presence of a district energy system. At the equipment level, embodied carbon is highly concentrated among a limited number of components. Heat pumps, large fans, fluid coolers, make-up air units, and circulation pumps account for the majority of equipment-related impacts, driven by high steel, aluminum, and copper content. Lighter terminal devices contribute comparatively little, even when present in large quantities, indicating that material intensity and replacement frequency, rather than component count, are the primary drivers of mechanical embodied carbon. Across all modelled life cycle stages, replacement impacts in module B4 dominate total mechanical embodied carbon and account for more than half of the system total. This reflects the shorter service lives of HVAC equipment relative to the building reference period and highlights the importance of whole life thinking for mechanical decarbonization. Initial production impacts in A1 to A3 remain significant for large metal intensive equipment, while transport in A4 and end of life stages in C2 to C4 contribute a comparatively minor share under typical assumptions. Overall uncertainty is estimated at ±15–30%, consistent with published guidance for MEP life-cycle assessment. This uncertainty does not alter the qualitative conclusions: mechanical embodied carbon is consistently driven by replacement cycles and concentrated in a small number of heavy, metal-intensive components. Overall, the study demonstrates that a practical and replicable methodology can be applied even with partial documentation and student level LCA tools. The approach provides a foundation for expanding embodied carbon assessment of mechanical systems across UBC. Future assessments would benefit from stronger integration of standard MEP documentation into LCA workflows, broader access to product specific EPDs, and the development of a campus wide mechanical embodied carbon dataset to improve consistency, transparency, and decision relevance across UBC capital projects. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

• openalex https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0454903first seen 2026-08-29 04:44:52