1. Concrete Sustainability Hub @MIT Urban Living Laboratory & CSH 27 Oct 2010

2. Outline Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Year 1 LCA Work – Year 2 CSH & ULL: Contributions and Questions Urban Living Laboratory & CSH 27 Oct 2010

3. A Brief History MAY 2009: First contacts OCT 2009: Opening of the CSHub@MIT DEC 2009: Start of two projects  Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): “The Edge of Concrete”  Concrete Sciences (CSP): “The Genesis of Concrete” JUL 2010: H. Jennings joins as Executive Director AUG 31, 2010: 1 ST CSHub INDUSTRY DAY Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions

4. Projects & Goals Sustainable and Holistic Development of the Cement and Concrete Industry. Develop information useful to policy and code Introduce transformational strategies for new technologies Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) Goal: Develop a complete understanding of CO2e of concrete in: - Pavement - Buildings SHORT-TERM BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY Concrete Sciences (CSP) Goal: Develop a first principle understanding of Cement and cement based systems. - More with Less - Higher Performances MEDIUM-TERM BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions

5. Organization Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions CSHub@ MIT: Executive Offices –Hamlin Jennings, Executive Director –Donna Hudson, Program Officer CSHub: Board –Brian McCarthy (PCA) –Julie Garbini (NRMCA) –Franz-Josef Ulm (MIT) –John Ochsendorf (MIT) CSHub Industry Advisory Council –Industry Executives –Led by: Craddock/Batten CSHub Industry Advisory Committees –Currently 8 IACs; 4 LCA, 4 CSP –Industry driven. MIT Departments Involved: Architecture, Mechanical Eng, Civil Eng, Materials Science, Engineering Systems PI (et. al.): Concrete Science PI (et. al.): Life Cycle Analysis

6. Motivations for LCA Work Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions 1) Growing demand for quantifying performance of the built environment 2) Increasing recognition that green design includes the construction phase and the operating phase of buildings 3) Advantages of concrete construction in lowering the emissions in the operating phase 2030 Challenge calls for carbon reductions of: 60% in 2010 (of average carbon emissions for building type) 70% in 2015 80% in 2020 90% in 2025 Carbon-neutral in 2030

7. Goals for LCA Work Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Identify advantages over full life cycle Identify areas for improvement Build foundations for future studies

8. Pavement: Model Scenarios Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions High volume road: Route 101 in Oxnard, CA 65 mph highway 3 lanes each direction + 4 shoulders Daily traffic: 139,000 (Of which trucks: 6,672) Moderate volume road: Route 67 in Ramona, CA 35 mph urban road 2 lanes in each direction + 4 shoulders Daily traffic: 23,400 (Of which trucks: 1,357) Low volume road: Route 178 in Sequoia National Forest 35 mph rural road 1 lane in each direction Daily traffic: 5,200 (Of which trucks: 468) Concrete versus asphalt roads for the following:

9. Pavement: Results Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Roadway lighting, lane closures, etc.

10. Pavement: Summary Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Concrete production emissions are higher than asphalt, but concrete use phase emissions are lower  High traffic volume concrete highways can have up to 90% lower emissions for the entire life cycle compared to asphalt highways because of the greater fuel efficiency of vehicles driving on concrete pavements. But no two pavements are alike  The total carbon footprint of a pavement can vary by two orders of magnitude depending on the traffic volume, rehabilitation schedule, and many other assumptions. Pavement roughness and deflection are still inaccurate  No one has accurately quantified their interactive effects, the effect of each pavement layer, nor the effect of temperature.

11. Buildings: Model Scenarios Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Climate Bldg Type Analysis Phoenix Chicago Pre-use phase Use phase End of life Extraction Heating Disposal ManufacturingCooling Recycling TransportationLighting Reuse ConcreteFans Transportation SteelPlug loads InsulationMaintenance GlassEnergy Mix Energy Model (E+) LCA (GABI) Commercial Single-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Reinforced Concrete Frame vs. Structural Steel Frame Insulated Concrete Form (ICF) vs. Wood Frame

12. Buildings: Results - Commercial Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Total HVAC: - 5% Chicago - 6% Phoenix CHICAGOPHOENIX

13. Buildings: Results - Commercial Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Chicago - 2.5% Phoenix - 2.7%

14. Buildings: Summary - Commercial Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Thermal mass provides energy savings over time Better estimation needed of concrete recycling rates and end-of-life emissions Even greater advantages are possible for concrete buildings

15. Buildings: Results – Residential Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Results based on average quality wood construction, insulated to meet code vs. typical ICF quality construction Primary research performed to determine air-tightness of ICF construction MIT sponsored tests on 15 ICF houses around the country Chicago - 34% Phoenix - 6.3%

16. Buildings: Summary - Residential Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions ICF homes deliver substantial energy savings over the lifetime of residential buildings Blower door testing reveled that ICF homes offer tight construction with improved energy performance Significant further improvements can be made to the life cycle performance of ICF homes

17. Year 2: Moving Ahead Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Year 1 = Benchmarking, Investigating claims Year 2 = Innovation, Original research Since Industry Day:  Complete studies (including sensitivity) and write reports on Yr 1 work  Integrate new team members  Create and finalize plans for Year 2

18. Pavement: Moving Ahead Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Refine our fuel consumption models to better account for pavement-vehicle interactions and to instill greater confidence in fuel savings due to pavement design. Continue peer review process to have an expert critical review of our LCA study. Policy Analysis - Analyze scenarios that quantify the carbon emissions associated with proposed renewal and improved upkeep of the national highway system.  Combine with life cycle economic costing to understand the economic impact of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

19. Buildings: Moving Ahead Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Refine and expand LCA Next Generation Concrete Buildings  Passive strategies Night cooling Passive solar heating  Active strategies Integration w/Controls Radiant systems Low-lift cooling  “Predictive Pre-Cooling Control for Low Lift Radiant Cooling using Building Thermal Mass” by N. Gayeski, 2010  Envelope systems

20. Discussion Timeline & Structure LCA Work – Yr 1LCA Work- Yr 2Questions & Contributions Project Timeline & Goals Involvement of other Departments/Team Members Level and type of involvement of CSHub  Multiple options for degree of involvement