Products and materials and sustainable commercial buildings

Article Rating:

1 vote

This article discusses the use of sustainable products and materials in commercial buildings.

Summary

The Your Building products and materials article discusses the definition of sustainable products and materials, how they are produced, and where they are used within commercial buildings. The importance of sustainable products and materials is described both in terms of the triple bottom line (TBL) and for different user groups. This is followed by a summary of risks and benefits. The next section identifies the sources of major impact in terms of which products and materials have the greatest negative impacts and why. It also reviews the constraints or barriers to change. The policies, regulations and standards associated with products and materials are reviewed in terms of current status, drivers for change, and likely future directions. Following this, the various ways products and materials are measured, assessed and evaluated for performance is discussed. This includes a review of Australian and some major international assessment and guidance tools and databases. The final sections of the article discuss opportunities, planning, and implementing and operating for improved performance. The article concludes with a summary of check-lists, templates, tools and website links.

Definitions

• What are sustainable products and materials?
• How are sustainable products and materials produced?
  • Production
  • Design
• Where are sustainable products and materials used?

What are sustainable products and materials?

In the built environment, products and materials are used in the construction or assembly of various building components. The terms 'product' and 'material' are often used interchangeably, however, they have different definitions. Sustainable products can be classified as building components that have environmental attributes that make them preferable to alternatives. Sustainable materials are basic components of products and/or buildings that have lower environmental impacts.

Sustainable products may not necessarily be manufactured from sustainable materials. For example, low-e glass is considered a sustainable product because it reduces building heat gain. However, float glass is considered a sustainable material because it is highly recyclable – unlike low-e glass, which is not, or is poorly, recyclable (Kibert, 2005, p.274). Sustainable products and materials are not necessarily sourced from new materials. They also include products that have been re-used or materials that are recycled or from reprocessed sources (see Where are sustainable products and materials used? for further discussion).

The only anecdotal consensus on the definition of sustainable products and materials is that their life cycle environmental characteristics are considered to be better or lower than comparable products. Significant life cycle phases where environmental impacts occur include:

• resource extraction and processing
• product design and manufacture
• transport and packaging
• use
• end of life.
  

Typical characteristics of sustainable products and materials include:

• They source and use resources efficiently during resource extraction.
• They use resources efficiently during processing, design and manufacture.
• They contain materials sourced from renewable resources.
• They use energy and water efficiently.
• They are often more affordable than commonly perceived.
• Using them efficiently can save on costs.
• They provide improved indoor air quality.
• At the end of their life, there is maximum recovery for the production and manufacture of the same or other sustainable products and materials.

An indirect definition for sustainable products and materials used in the built environment is also found within the 14000 series of the International Standards Organization (ISO). These standards include ISO 14020-25 (Environmental Labelling Guidance for Products) and ISO 14040-45 (Life Cycle Principles and Guidance). A further standard, ISO 21930:2007 Sustainability in Building Construction — Environmental Declaration of Building Products, provides the framework for type III environmental product declarations (EPDs) of building products (ISO, 2007). The requirements for type III are found in ISO 14025 (ISO, 2006a). Type III declarations are primarily used to communicate environmental information about products between businesses. They can also be used to communicate environmental information to consumers (see International standards for further discussion).

Commonly used terms for sustainable products and materials include 'green' (from light green to dark green), 'environmentally preferred' or 'eco-preferred', 'environmentally responsible', 'eco-friendly' and 'low (environmental) impact'.

To understand how sustainable products and materials are, it is essential to understand their production processes.

How are sustainable products and materials produced?

Currently, there is no single methodology or approach that describes the sustainable production of products and materials. In part, this is because decision making and impacts are not transparent and are fragmented across industries, sectors and life cycle stages. Within the production stage, impacts arise from two major sources: industrial processes (resource extraction and product manufacture) and product design. Industrial frameworks, such as industrial ecology, and production strategies, such as eco-efficiency and cleaner production, facilitate changes to production practice in an effort to eliminate or reduce downstream impacts. However, manufacturing and resource impacts are largely determined in the early design development stage. 'Design for environment' (DfE) is a design decision-making framework that has been shown to reduce upstream and downstream impacts by up to 80%.

Production

Industrial ecology
This approach provides a systems view of industrial activity, which facilitates economic, cultural and technological evolution by optimising materials, energy and capital while reducing the industrial system's impact on the environment. A systems view is a holistic approach that creates a closed industrial system, analogous to a natural ecosystem, where waste from one industry can be used as input for another (Graedel & Allenby, 2003).

Eco-efficiency
This is a broad term used to describe the guidelines for generating sustainable products and materials. It is not the same as sustainability, as it incorporates environmental and economic, but not social, aspects. Its objective is the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality of life. At the same time, this approach progressively reduces ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout its life cycle to a level at least in line with the earth's estimated carrying capacity (i.e. 'doing more with less'). The Department of Environment and Water Resources has developed eco-efficiency agreements with industry to improve industry's economic and environmental efficiency.

The quoted international standard of eco-efficiency is 'making optimal use of economic and environmental resources which satisfy human needs ... [it is] linked to tools like environmental auditing, environmental management, environmental reporting, environmental accounting and life cycle assessment' (Standards Australia, 2006, p.3). The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has developed seven basic guidelines of eco-efficiency, which can be applied to the life cycle, supply chains and individual products and materials (WBCSD, 2000). These guidelines are:

• reduce material intensity of goods and services
• reduce energy intensity of goods and services
• reduce toxic dispersion
• enhance material recyclability
• maximise sustainable use of material resources
• extend product durability
• increase the service intensity of products.

(See table tiled 'Design responses for each life cycle stage')

Cleaner production
Cleaner production is a part of eco-efficiency and relates to an improved production process that uses less energy, water or other inputs, and generates less waste, particularly environmentally harmful waste (Queensland EPA, 2004).

Design

Design for environment (DfE)
Design for environment examines a product's life cycle (from materials extraction and processing, to manufacture, use, distribution and disposal), in order to identify where and what type of impacts exist. The objective is to find a design option that eliminates, avoids or reduces downstream environmental impacts without compromising product objectives. Four key design strategies include:

• Efficient design: This involves keeping resource input to a minimum, by doing more with less. Benefits of efficient design include resource conservation and cost reductions.
• Safe design: This involves avoiding toxic or hazardous substances in materials or production processes. Benefits of safe design include reduced exposure risk to workers, consumers and the environment.
• Cyclic design: This involves designing materials to continuously cycle through industrial or natural systems. Benefits of cyclic design include waste minimisation and resource conservation.
• Communication design: This involves providing accurate, relevant, informative and verifiable product-related environmental information to all stakeholders. Benefits of communication design include consumer engagement to encourage responsible behaviour (Design Institute of Australia, 2005).
  
  Design responses for each life cycle stage

  Life cycle stage	Design response
  Materials	Design for resource conservation (dematerialisation or light-weighting) Design for low-impact materials (recyclable, third-party certified renewable and/or recycled content) Design for indoor air quality (to aid health and productivity)
  Manufacture	Design for cleaner production
  Use	Design for energy efficiency Design for water conservation Design for minimal consumption Design for low-impact use Design for service and repair Design for durability (adaptability) Universal design (not a DfE criteria but essential to usability) Low VOC design (health and productivity)
  Distribution	Design for efficient distribution (including mode of transport, distance and packaging)
  End of life	Design for re-use Design for remanufacture Design for disassembly Design for recycling Design for safe disposal

  Source: Adapted from Queensland EPA, 2004 – Sustainability roadmap glossary

Embedded in the DfE approach are the principles of extended producer responsibility (EPR) and product stewardship. EPR refers to a 'policy approach under which producers accept significant responsibility – financial and/or physical – for the treatment or disposal of post-consumer products' (OECD, 2001). In product stewardship, brand-owners take much greater responsibility for their products at the products' end of life. This may be facilitated by:

• a purchase contract between the brand owner and consumer to take back the product at the end of its first life
• a lease arrangement that includes maintenance, repair and replacement/upgrade options during use (this occurs where ownership remains in the hands of the brand owner, who provides the product as a service).

Aided by cyclic design, the objective of these pathways is to close the materials loops.

Like industrial ecology and cleaner production, EPR represents a policy shift that is unprecedented within manufacturing and product sales. All these strategies are crucial to developing closed loop materials flow, resource conservation, and pollution control (Lewis & Gertsakis, 2001). Currently, not many manufacturers or suppliers offer all these options, but the introduction of the ISO 14001 environmental management systems (EMS) certification process is increasingly being undertaken by manufacturers, as is product certification.

Where are sustainable products and materials used?

Sustainable products and materials range from stand-alone elements, to those that are integrated to a greater or lesser extent into the building fabric and site. As integration increases, individual performance is sublimated to overall performance. Conversely, components may be chosen because they provide multiple building performance benefits (e.g. raised floor systems, external shading, heat recovery and co-generation systems). However, product and material choices are rarely made in isolation from the overarching building objectives of low environmental impact and optimal performance. Integrated design strategies and computer modelling are the most effective ways to test and compare product and material combinations to optimise performance outcomes.

When in-situ products, materials and assemblies wear out, they are replaced at different rates. Brand (1994) identifies six layers corresponding with the change or churn rate of building components (see left figure). They include the site, structure, skin (or façade), services, space plan (or fit-out) and consumables. The structure has the lowest change rate, followed by the skin. Services and space planning associated with fit-out have a higher rate of change. Consumables (e.g. light bulbs, office supplies, food and furniture) have the highest churn rate.

Different user groups, or combinations of user groups, are responsible for the churn or turnover rate of each building element. Ownership and responsibility for building elements are distributed in varying proportions between the building owner, manager and occupier. However, product and material specification and their assembly is the responsibility of the design, development and construction teams who undertake new building, major refurbishments, or fit-outs. Each of these groups have different life cycle objectives regarding materials and product lifespan, management, maintenance and replacement, and different expectations regarding cost (including tax implications) and end-of-life disposal. For this reason, communication of need and intent is important at the early design stage.

Often under-explored avenues for churn reduction across these building layers and over the length of a building cycle are:

• appropriate management of products, materials and assemblies throughout their life
• design for disassembly at a product's end of life.

Design for disassembly can only be instigated in new construction; however effective management of in-situ products, materials and assemblies is an operational decision and can be implemented throughout the life cycle of the existing building stock. Extending service life, via appropriate use and timely maintenance, avoids the environmental impacts of resource consumption associated with replacement. Product manufacturers, designers and facilities managers are the key groups who can influence this. However, building owners and tenants are key groups who make decisions about the service life of products, equipment or buildings. Developers and owners are also influential through their decisions to retain building elements or to include recycled elements.

In the building and construction sector, a challenge lies in the selection of sustainable products and materials at all phases of design and construction. Completion of product and material selection in a timely manner, and the benefits associated with doing so, are critical to the success of a project.

The importance of sustainable products and materials selection

• Why is it important?
  • Importance for the triple bottom line
  • Importance for the owner
  • Importance for developers, builders, contractors and designers
  • Importance for occupiers
  • Importance for managers
• What are the benefits of using sustainable products and materials?
• What are the risks of using sustainable products and materials?
• What are the barriers to using sustainable products and materials?

Why is it important?

It is estimated that by 2056, global economic activity will have increased fivefold, global population will have increased by over 50%, global energy consumption will have increased nearly threefold, and global manufacturing activity will have increased at least threefold (Matthews et. al., 2000). Australia is a significant contributor of raw materials for building products to the global market, and a direct user of over 27 million tonnes of finished materials. On the basis of projected growth and the need for building upgrade and replacement, all buildings in Australia will, in economic terms, be built twice in the next 50 years (DEH, 2006d). For these reasons, it is important to reduce the environmental impact of products and materials in terms of their production, rate of use and overall building performance, and to optimise their longevity, either in terms of first life or via re-using or reprocessing.

Sustainable materials and products selection is one of the most difficult tasks to undertake in a building project. In part, this is because:

• so many different products and materials need to be evaluated, both individually and as assembled building components
• assessment parameters are not consistent across product categories or different countries of origin
• manufacturing processes lack transparency
• products and materials evaluation has no universally agreed approach.

Materials selection becomes more complex again when extending the selection parameter to include reducing the life cycle environmental footprint of a building. It is well understood that life cycle churn associated with building refurbishment and workplace change is the greatest source of waste and resource loss. Therefore, operational strategies or material qualities that reduce churn and divert materials from landfill are as important as design phase materials selection. These operational strategies include:

• designing for durability
• designing for disassembly, such as for refurbishment, repair and/or reprocessing
• specifying recycled content materials
• optimising maintenance and appropriate use.

Unless all user groups understand how and where they contribute to churn and resource loss, they can not adequately contribute to reducing the environmental impact of their activities.

Importance for the triple bottom line

The use of sustainable products and materials for commercial buildings is important to the triple bottom line (TBL) for a number of reasons. The direct and indirect use of sustainable products and materials reduces the ecological footprint of commercial buildings, the environmental impact of construction, and the associated supply chain activity (through closed loop resource use and low-impact manufacturing processes). The more these pathways are undertaken, the greater the escalation toward environmental and health protection and reduced climate change, pollution, waste and resource depletion. In economic terms, using sustainable products and materials reduces operating costs of manufacture and building operation. Market transformation to green products and materials also stimulates economic activity. Socially, sustainable products and materials support the well-being of building users, and improve the quality and amenity of the built and natural environments.

Importance for the owner

For building owners, the integration of sustainable products and materials into new buildings and major refurbishments is important because:

• it is an example of corporate social responsibility, which can improve corporate image
• it defines brand image and market position, which, in turn, can improve company value, shareholder interest and the ability to attract 'green' finance and lower property insurance premiums
• it generates lower operating costs, which may, or may not, directly benefit the owner
• it is critical to good indoor environment quality, which impacts on health, well-being and productivity (Brown, 2002; Heerwagen, 2000; Leaman & Bordass, 2005)
• it improves and/or lowers the cost of maintenance, especially if low volatile organic compounds (VOC) or VOC-free cleaning products are used (see Snapshot study — Refurbishment).
  

Importance for developers, builders, contractors and designers

For these groups, sustainable product and material selection is important because:

• it generates a stronger relationship and communication with other building stakeholders and with the supply chain who service the industry
• it generates expertise in sustainable materials and products specification, storage, installation and fixing requirements, and use of the integrated design process
• it reduces on-site occupational health and safety hazards (e.g. exposure to risks)
• it embeds sustainable behaviour in a risk adverse industry
• it improves corporate image, market position and branding as a leading edge and innovative company, able to balance and manage risk to create unique solutions.

Importance for occupiers

Sustainable purchasing and specification are part of a suite of actions that can be undertaken by a company to reduce the environmental impacts of business activity. They are also:

• an expression of corporate responsibility and leadership
• a statement about employee and clients/customer value, which aids customer satisfaction and staff retention, and helps to attract new staff
• a way of expanding purchase options to include leasing (i.e. optimising take-back options and reducing disposal obligations and cost).

Importance for managers

For managers, understanding the designed intent of building components:

• aids building tuning and commissioning, and operational performance setting
• builds expertise in building operation, maintenance and repair of sustainable components
• improves building performance via the integrated design process (i.e. the operational experience and needs of facilities managers are better understood and catered for).
  
  

What are the benefits of using sustainable products and materials?

The use of sustainable materials and products supports the health and well-being of biota and abiota. Use of sustainable materials and products also encourages:

• market transformation away from wasteful patterns of consumption and waste generation
• green technology and a green supply chain
• closed loop systems for materials pathways
• standardisation (and use) of environmental assessment tools
• better indoor environment quality (IEQ), which in turn provides better living and working conditions for occupants. This has a direct impact on health and productivity issues (Heerwagen, 2000; Leaman & Bordass, 2005).

Optimal use of sustainable materials and products requires a re-alignment of professional practice across design disciplines and building sector stakeholders towards a shared practice of sustainability. This re-alignment encourages:

• better communication
• more funding for product research and design modelling
• improved building construction, commissioning and user experience
• post-occupancy feedback, to accelerate understanding of building systems, products and materials choices, and design options.

Many sustainability rating tools in Australia and overseas incorporate material selection (e.g. the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA)). For further information on this issue, see Product environmental accreditation systems – an overview of eco-labels.

For the owner, design integration of sustainable products and materials increases building lifespan and therefore increases asset value and return on investment. Cost benefits are generated through accelerated planning approvals, tenant attraction and retention, higher rental returns and reduced operating costs. For the developer, sustainable products and materials can reduce on-site occupational health and safety issues. They can also reduce construction time through accelerated planning approval and the use of prefabricated components, via design for disassembly. For designers, using sustainable products and materials generates expertise in sustainable materials and product specification, while sustainable design and use of the design integration process also reduces design development and time to market. For the occupier, the knowledge that the built environment actively supports health and well-being is a powerful stimulus for productivity, employee satisfaction, and the attraction of like-minded people. This, in itself, is a catalyst for other pro-environmental workplace activities, including green purchasing, recycling, riding to work, and employer-supported community activities. For managers (as for other building professionals), experience in the use of product assessment tools and methodologies, integrated design approaches, sustainable technologies and building monitoring techniques, and new approaches to building tuning and maintenance, increases their knowledge in this area and puts them ahead of mainstream facilities management professionals.

What are the risks of using sustainable products and materials?

New products, materials and assemblies, whether they are sustainable or not, are at risk of not performing to existing standards and specifications or to user expectations. Unforeseen risks may occur (see snapshot study below on 'Unexpected risk and a responsibility'); for example, emissions from different product sources may act synergistically to reduce IEQ, static electricity may be created that interferes with comfort or function, or equipment may have poor service provision or be sourced from faltering start-up companies.

On a building scale, a high level of new product, material or building assembly integration increases the potential for deviation from theoretical and modelled performance, and increases the risk of generating unforeseen operational management problems.

Market globalisation has diversified, rather than focused, quality control, standards compliance and responsiveness to local conditions. Therefore, decisions based on best-cost options may not provide best life cycle benefits. Uncertainties reduce the desire of all players and user groups to expose themselves to risk. This, in turn, reinforces traditional rather than sustainable pathways.

What are the barriers to using sustainable products and materials?

Some of the barriers to the uptake of sustainable building materials and products include:

• the perceived relative cost (as a result of not considering or quantifying the whole-of-life costs)
• the knowledge 'up-step' required to understand and evaluate new products, materials and assemblies, and their building implications and broader TBL value
• the diversity of rating tools and assessment approaches, which makes evaluation more, rather than less, difficult
• inconsistent industry responses, provoked by a voluntary, rather than mandatory, sustainability mandate
• sectoral conservativeness and slow building turnover, which limit the number of 'living' examples that showcase new products
• existing perceptions about acceptable churn rates (particularly by tenants, owners and facility managers)
• the need for new mindset, which requires an openness to revising construction methods, timeframes and processes to accommodate new product workability requirements (see snapshot study below on 'Concrete')

These barriers have real or perceived impacts on the risk and profit of various industry groups, and may therefore influence their decision not to use new sustainable products and materials.

Sources of major impact

• Inefficiency and ineffectiveness - which products and materials have the greatest negative impacts and why?
  • Base building materials
  • Fit-out products and materials
• Which assessment tools should be used?

Although knowledge about environmental impacts is growing, identifying and utilising environmentally preferable building products and materials is problematic, and is still often seen as a 'specialist' activity. While many building products and materials are sourced and manufactured in Australia, we also import a significant proportion. These include polymers for plastics production, metal-based systems, furniture and equipment and, in recent years, lower-value materials, such as stone. The quality of environmental control, assessment and stewardship over such products is often difficult to assess, due to lack of data and, in some cases, poor source governance (e.g. the removal of tropical rainforest timber may cause significant impacts on global biodiversity, and some imported timber is sourced through illegal removal). Therefore, getting good guidance on timber selection is important.

LCA-indicated environmental impacts of building materials range from 2% (of total national energy and greenhouse emissions) to 30%--40% (of the demand on minerals use and solid waste generation) (DEH, 2006d). Specific impact areas are as follows:

• Photochemical oxidant emissions (smog) are dominated by cement production.
• Cumulative energy demand is dominated by steel, softwood, and brick production and construction energy.
• Water use is dominated by steel, concrete and polystyrene production.
• Land use is dominated by softwood and hardwood production.

Some indicators cannot be accurately described, due to limitations of modelling techniques and lack of data, particularly in the areas of water, carcinogens, and land use. As such, conclusions about the impacts on biodiversity cannot be drawn with a high degree of accuracy from current life cycle assessment (LCA).

Embodied energy
Embodied energy refers to the energy used in the production and manufacture of a material or product. In Australia, this energy-use measurement is a good indication of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that may be associated with a product, as much of the energy produced in Australia is from coal-powered greenhouse intensive power stations. Products and materials imported from overseas are likely to have a different embodied energy.

Upstream and downstream impacts
In terms of material and product choices, further opportunities for environmental improvement arise from a range of transformative processes and practices in:

• 'upstream' (manufacturing) industries
• design and construction industries
• 'downstream' industries.

For example, upstream energy and process efficiencies across manufacturing stages could account for improvements of up to 30% in coming years (ABARE, 2006; IEA, 2006). Also, improved tracking of land management practices through chain of custody certification (e.g. through the Forest Stewardship Council) could enable environmental performance improvements for timber against quantifiable metrics.

Downstream, the potential for increased re-use and recycling of building materials is affected to a significant degree by what happens upstream. For example, there is significant potential for economic and environmental benefits arising from the application of design for disassembly (DfD) principles in materials and construction systems and practices. Dutch research indicates that DfD in non-residential buildings may deliver savings of up to 30% on total materials flows, as well as significant economic benefits over the building life (Durmisevic, 2006). It should be noted that such analysis must be undertaken in the context of key design decisions and an understanding of end-of-life considerations, specifically:

• the design life of the structure
• the impacts of maintenance inputs over the design life
• end-of-life options (including design for disassembly, re-usability, recyclability)
• impacts of the selected system on other relevant issues, such as operational energy requirements of the building.

In Australia, expected future trends in the building and construction sector include the following:

• Environmental impacts will grow with materials demand.
• Global warming associated with materials use is projected to grow by 40%.
• Water use is projected to increase by 63%.
• Carcinogens are projected to grow by 50% (note: this figure is qualified by a degree of uncertainty, DEH, 2006d).

Inefficiency and ineffectiveness – which products and materials have the greatest negative impacts and why?

Base building materials

Base building materials include steel, concrete, bricks and aluminium. All are non-renewable resources that generate significant environmental impacts, particularly greenhouse gases (GHG), during extraction and manufacture. For example, a recent Australian study on the impacts of building materials found that generally the global warming impacts are evenly spread across a large number of materials (see left figure). However the study found that, "steel, bricks, concrete and aluminium are the largest contributors because of the energy inputs to the production of these materials (DEH, 2006d, p.39)." In addition, construction energy inputs to building assembly are also a substantial source of greenhouse gases and embodied energy. However, it is operational energy that dominates construction greenhouse and energy impacts by a ratio of 9:1 over all building types (DEH, 2006d). To give further perspective, the life cycle impacts of these base building materials can be offset, if not negated, via the inclusion of design strategies that reduce operational energy demand (i.e. passive design, daylighting and natural ventilation), extend building service life (i.e. design for durability and adaptability), and incorporate full end-of-life materials recycling (i.e. design for deconstruction or disassembly).

In terms of concrete (a combination of cement, aggregates and water), the area of highest impact is General Portland (GP) cement, which is created through an energy intensive process. While it only makes up a small percentage of the concrete, it has the greatest environmental impact in terms of GHG emissions. The impact can be reduced with the replacement of the GP with alternatives such as slag (properly called ground blast furnace slag), fly ash and/or silica fume (Hes & Bates, 2003; Berge, 2000). There are issues with the use of high levels of these replacements in terms of working with the concrete and drying times, depending on the time of year (See snapshot study – Concrete).

Fit-out products and materials

Fit-out products and materials are a substantial source of environmental impact, both in terms of turn-over (or churn) and emissions. These products are characterised by diverse material use (often synthetic or composite materials), multiple material combinations, and a range of fixing methods (mechanical and chemical). Composite materials use materials efficiently, but are difficult to recycle at the end of their life. Treatment of timber can also affect the end of life of the product (i.e. nailing instead of gluing enables easy recycling). In terms of life cycle impact, furniture has a relatively low use-phase impact compared to manufacturing and end of life (left figure). However, manufacturing impacts are significant and diverse when disposal generates a substantial volume of solid waste and potential leachate risk from hazardous substances, particularly metal coatings and finishes. In comparison, the life cycle picture for equipment is focused on the use phase; hence the focus on energy efficiency. However, as much equipment is electronics-based, manufacturing impacts are not insignificant and e-waste is a known problem in terms of waste volume and heavy metal leachate potential. Some furniture and a significant proportion of equipment are made using polymers. These are fully recyclable and retain their engineering properties when repeatedly recycled. However, plastics used in fit-out and furniture are generally poorly recycled because of poor polymer identification, high contamination and separation difficulties (for more information, see NSW Department of Conservation and Environment).

Churn rate within a building is very difficult to control and monitor, as the building owner, tenants and facilities manager all contribute, albeit at different stages and for different reasons. Regular churn represents an inefficient use of materials and also implies a greater throughput of packaging materials, which also have manufacturing and end-of-life impacts.

H4. Toxicity and emissions issues
Two issues are discussed here:

• emissions from products and materials during use (e.g. VOCs)
• toxicity issues associated with emissions from certain materials in manufacture, disposal and/or during fire (accidental or incineration) (e.g. polystyrene and polyvinylchloride (PVC)).

Toxicity
Toxicity, or eco-toxicity, refers to the degree to which a substance is poisonous to biota and abiota. Of the thousands of synthetic substances (xenobiotics) created since World War II, most have not been extensively tested for their health effects (human and non-human), particularly the synergistic effects of chemical combinations that occur incidentally in air, water, soil and biological cells.

Toxic exposure occurs in two major forms:

• high dose exposure (as might occur in an accident or poorly regulated manufacturing environment)
• persistent, low dose exposure (as might occur in persistently polluted environments).

According to the Commonwealth Government, indoor air quality is often significantly worse than outdoor air (Environment Australia, 2001, Chapter 6) (also see What is driving products and materials policy development?). Certain items (e.g. office furniture) and products (some wood panel products) can be significant sources of problematic pollutants. Certain stages in building life cycles can be more emission intensive than others. For example, Brown (2002) found that some workplace indoor air pollutant levels in new buildings were up to 20--200 times higher than ambient levels.

Many synthetic chemicals are persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are environmentally persistent organo-chlorines that don't break down in water and that accumulate through the food chain via fat cells. They are toxic to both humans and wildlife. Although many synthetic POPs have been banned through the 2001 Stockholm Convention, many are perpetuated in other ways (e.g. as products of incomplete combustion, like dioxin, and furan release from organo-chlorines like PVC (Adoela 2004)). Referring to US Vinyl Institute figures, the Vinyl Council of Australia (2003a and 2003b) found that more than half of the annual production of vinyl in Australia is used for construction and furnishing products, and that, of all plastics use in construction, vinyl is the most widely used. Other POP-like substances (i.e. substances that exhibit properties similar to POPs) include brominated flame retardants, particularly polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) and polybrominated biphenyl (PBB), which are found in electronics, furniture foam and fabrics. Since 2006, the use of PBDE, PBB and other hazardous substances, including lead, cadmium, mercury and hexavalent chromium, have been restricted in the manufacture of electronic and electrical equipment in the European Union (see the RoHS directive for further details).

Emissions
Emissions relate to extremely low levels of predominantly volatile organic chemicals (VOCs), which are released into the indoor environment from building materials, fit-out elements, furniture and consumables. Again, the source of such emissions is predominantly synthetic chemicals that evaporate at ambient temperatures. The chemicals are irritating and noxious, and cause photochemical smog. The most commonly cited VOC is formaldehyde, which is found in many paints, caulks, stains and adhesives, as well as fabric finishes and some plastics, foams and cleaning agents. Most products and materials will cease or reduce off-gassing after a period of time. However, indoor emission levels are perpetuated by mechanical ventilation systems with low air exchange rates, and by renewable sources like cleaning chemicals combined with the adsorption factor (i.e. soft furnishings like carpet, foam-covered fabric chairs, and partitions, which harbour resting VOCs as the indoor temperature cools).

Many of the products and materials cited here are ubiquitous in commercial buildings and are subject to high churn. Either directly or indirectly, users of commercial and residential buildings bear some responsibility for the presence of these largely synthetic chemicals. Therefore, all users need to be aware of their contribution to indoor environment quality through their choice of materials. This is a major reason why independent product assessments, comprehensive chemical reviews, manufacturing processes based on DfE principles, and end-of-first-life product stewardship are important decision-making factors. Between them, they support the precautionary principle and help to close the materials loop so as to reduce the perpetuation of persistent and hazardous materials.

Which assessment tools should be used?

The primary criteria for selecting a product and material assessment tool is whether it provides an understanding of how the product or material is made, what resources are used, what happens to the product at the end of its life and, importantly, where the product was made. While many primary building materials are sourced locally, many fit-out products and materials are made in countries that do not have the same level of life cycle environmental or health protection as do so-called first world countries. The underlying TBL question is: are we, as consumers, partly responsible for the environmental decline of supply countries (e.g. China)? Not all assessment or guidance tools look at this issue, which implies that not all tools provide true TBL evaluation. Another criterion, which may not be given a high priority, is whether or not the assessment tool contextualises the value of the product or material into broader design objectives (e.g. the use of photovoltaics as an energy source, as well as shade cover or external cladding; the internal use of (recycled) bricks or in-situ (green) concrete to provide both passive solar and structural qualities).

Policies, regulations and standards

• Products and materials policies
  • What current products and materials policies exist?
  • What is driving products and materials policy development?
  • What impacts will future policies have on developments?
• Products and materials regulations
  • What current products and materials regulations exist?
  • What is driving products and materials regulation development?
  • What impacts will future regulations have on developments?
• Products and materials standards
  • Australian standards
  • International standards
  • Future impacts of ISO standards

Products and materials policies

What current products and materials policies exist?

This section discusses the current products and materials policies from both an international and a national perspective.

An international context
Internationally, government policy relating to the environmental performance of building materials falls into three broad areas:

1. Market-based self-regulatory led approaches with relatively low regulatory intervention, complemented by voluntary programs: the US and Australia fall into this category.
2. Market-based mechanisms with higher levels of regulatory intervention, combined with voluntary programs: the European Union, for example, is developing a regulatory framework (e.g. REACH and RoHS) that may provide a policy blueprint for building products in the future. The EU has a construction products directive (CPD), which states what rules construction products should comply with if they want to get the CE mark (European Commission, 1989). The CPD includes 'essential requirements', such as essential requirement 3, which discusses hygiene, health and the environment (European Commission, 1989, Annex I). The directive is under periodic revision, and it is likely that LCA will become a part of it in the future. The EU is also investing in the development of its own eco-labelling program for building products (the EU flower), while EU members are supporting the development and implementation of reporting instruments specifically for the development of sustainable building products (ISO 21930). It should be noted, however, that the EU is not making qualification to the EU flower or ISO 21930 mandatory, nor are member countries such as the Netherlands making reporting to ISO 21930 a regulatory requirement at this stage. At the member state level, several member states have set and developed approaches concerning the integration of environmental criteria in the conception of buildings. This process has led to questioning construction material producers on the environmental performance of their products. In response, several methods concerning the environmental performance of construction products have been developed; these are often based on life cycle assessment (LCA). In order to stimulate harmonisation, the European Commission (DG Enterprise, Construction Unit) has launched a study aimed at assessing the options for harmonisation.
3. Mandating regulatory compliance using government-supported environmental standards: this is not a widely adopted approach, however, the Dutch Government has agreed to strive for 100% sustainable procurement of its products by 2010. This means that sustainability will be an important and documented parameter in the procurement process. Similarly, the Taiwan Government's procurement policy has a requirement for goods (including building products) to hold the Taiwanese Green Mark eco-label, and a stipulation that purchasers should pay up to 10% more for such products. Green Mark development has been funded by the Taiwan Government (for more information, refer to the US EPA publication on Taiwan's Green Mark Program).

National context: voluntary approaches — government guidelines and tools
The Australian approach to products and materials policy has been to favour a range of voluntary or self-regulatory frameworks, typically through a policy class called 'new environmental policy instruments' (NEPIs). These are seen to be flexible, market-sensitive and generative of performance-based responses, and are often identified as an alternative to a regulatory pathway that may generate the possibility of contravening international agreements (e.g. trade) or creating domestic political conflict (Taplin, 2004).

It has been argued that the down-side to such a policy pathway, as opposed to a binding regulatory one, is that it can generate deceptive behaviour, or greenwash, which serves corporate self-interest over the public good (poor corporate responsibility). It can also provide non-binding or non-transparent regulations that may be either enforced or punished ineffectively. It is also argued by some commentators that voluntary or self-regulatory frameworks can provide 'an inadequate means of tackling complex environmental problems' (van Amstel, Driessen & Glasbergen, 2006, p.2).

An example of a voluntary approach is Commonwealth, state and local government purchasing policies. These can be quite specific in relation to some issues (e.g. requirements for the recycled content of office consumables), while other areas are less well defined (e.g. requirements for building products). For example, the Commonwealth Government procurement policy is contained in the Commonwealth procurement guidelines and best-practice guidance, which in turn refers to the 'environmental purchasing guide and check-lists'. These check-lists address a range of areas including building management services, cleaning services and office equipment. Building products are not addressed directly except under 'recycled products', which says:

'Give consideration to products:

• manufactured using a high percentage of recycled material
• that reduce overall waste and use fewer resources
• with low environmental impact packaging
• from companies that document additional environmental benefits of their products or superior environmental performance of their companies' (DEH, 2006a, p. 2).

However, these suggested considerations are not quantified or benchmarked, and therefore require extensive interpretation at procurement.

Another relevant document, the AGO environmental management strategy, does not address materials, except to say: 'Raise awareness of environmental issues relating to purchasing amongst buyers and users of goods and services' (DEH, 2006c, Environmental management plan 2).

Voluntary guidelines and tools

Level of government	Example	Comment
Federal	ESD design guide for Australian Government buildings	A 'how-to' guide with extensive discussion, tool kits and case studies to inform procurement teams. Includes some discussion on materials selection. It also includes a number of case studies.
	NABERS	A voluntary rating/benchmarking tool allowing building certification based on in-use performance. Building materials are not addressed directly at this stage, however the forthcoming IEQ article relates to materials (also refer to Assessment tools).
	Green office guide	DEW (DEH) office equipment guide
	AGO EMS	Provides broad guidelines, however benchmarks or pass/fail standards are not quantified
	Guide to the use of recycled concrete and masonry material	Provides broad guidelines, however benchmarks or pass/fail standards  are not quantified Guide to use, including specifications, is available from Standards Australia
State	Victorian ESDC guidelines	Number of materials-related criteria, including an embodied energy budget (also refer to Assessment tools). It also includes a number of case studies.
	Victorian Government office accommodation guidelines	Guide for policy and design objectives based on sustainability
	Victorian Government Purchasing Board: environmental purchasing policy	Incorporates environmental purchasing in procurement planning and tender procedures
	Buy green: sustainable procurement	Queensland Government: Environmental impact considerations in the selection of goods and services
	Greengoods	NSW Government: Extensive guidance on developing procurement guidelines
Local	City of Port Phillip sustainable design scorecard and City of Moreland STEPS	Victorian local government: Whole building (commercial) assessment tool including some materials provisions for timber & concrete
	Eco-Buy	Victorian-based local government green purchasing program with a database including building products identified as eco-preferable
	Sustainable choice	NSW local government sustainable purchasing program. Green purchasing database to be launched in 2007.

• NABERS: NABERS is a performance-based rating system that measures an existing building's overall environmental performance during operation, using a set of key impact categories. The system is intended as a voluntary tool that will provide information on the sustainability of existing building stock and promote an improvement in the environmental performance of Australian buildings. NABERS was developed by the Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water Resources in consultation with industry and other stakeholders. In 2005, the Department contracted with the NSW Department of Energy, Utilities and Sustainability (DEUS) to finalise development of the system and introduce it into the Australian marketplace.

• Queensland ecologically sustainable office fit-out guideline: This is a document created by the Queensland Department of Public Works (Building Division) and collaborative partners to provide planners, designers, contractors and end-users of office accommodation with a useful guide to address ESD considerations within the scope of an interior fit-out (Queensland Department of Public Works, 2000). This guideline applies to both fit-out and refurbishment of existing office accommodation and new office buildings. The guideline provides a framework of considerations for reducing environmental impacts, and is quite comprehensive in its scope for addressing construction materials. The guideline contains a self-assessment check-list for users to track their performance, and provides case studies of other projects as a benchmark for the users. There is no formal assessment or certification process for this guide, as it is simply a guide and not a rating tool.

• Victorian environmentally sustainable design and construction — principles and guidelines for capital works projects: This guide, prepared by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, addresses a wide range of sustainability criteria, including building materials, and is intended for use on government capital works projects, including refurbishments. Building materials requirements include an embodied energy 'budget' of 15 GJ per square metre of gross floor area, a building life expectancy of >80 years, and zero CFC and HCFC use. Sign-off is required under the check-list format from design and client teams, including departmental project managers (see Victorian ESDC guidelines for case studies).

Policy drivers for local government
Agenda 21 is a global blueprint for sustainability. It was agreed upon at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 (i.e. the Rio Earth Summit) and provides a framework for implementing sustainable development at the local level. Agenda 21 identifies local authorities as the sphere of governance closest to the people, and calls upon all local authorities to consult with their communities and to develop and implement a local plan for sustainability. This principle contributed to the coining of the term 'think globally, act locally'. Recent survey results from Environs Australia (the Local Government Environment Network) and the International Council for Local Environment Initiatives (ICLEI) support anecdotal evidence that commitment towards LA21 in Australia has increased significantly over the past five years (Australian Local Agenda 21 Index, DEW, 2007b).

State and Commonwealth governments have political leverage and financial resources to initiate sustainability objectives across their jurisdictions. However, local governments, which lie at the very interface of building approvals, have relatively little legislative and financial leverage, are poorly equipped, and are too fragmented to provide a coordinated response. For this reason, few local governments across Australia have embedded sustainable purchasing policies or implanted ESD provisions into their planning scheme. ICLEI has provided some guidance through the development of a Euro-centric sustainable procurement program (see ICLEI Index), which has spawned some local programs, such as Eco-Buy.

What is driving products and materials policy development?

Increasing awareness of the environmental importance of building products, in the context of national and international environmental and health targets, is generating pressure for policy and regulatory development. This is occurring at all levels of government, but also in the areas of private sector corporate governance and policy.

At the international level, policy drivers include the United Nations Agenda 21 initiative. Chapter 7: Promoting sustainable human settlement development suggests that:

'the activities of the construction sector are vital to the achievement of the national socio-economic development goals of providing shelter, infrastructure and employment. However, they can be a major source of environmental damage through depletion of the natural resource base, degradation of fragile eco-zones, chemical pollution and the use of building materials harmful to human health' (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 1993, section 7.67).

The chapter argues that supporting activities should be included to:

'establish and strengthen indigenous building materials industry, based, as much as possible, on inputs of locally available natural resources ... Adopt standards and other regulatory measures which promote the increased use of energy-efficient designs and technologies and sustainable utilization of natural resources in an economically and environmentally appropriate way' (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 1993, section 7.69).

Policy initiatives generally, both in Australia and internationally, have primarily focused on reducing operational energy or greenhouse impacts. However, this approach is being augmented by a growing body of policy and argument to address embodied (building product-related) emissions and impacts (OECD, 2003; Lawson, 1996; Treloar & Fay, 2000).

Even as far back as 2000, the UK policy primer 'Building a better quality of life: a strategy for more sustainable construction' noted that 'climate change poses a major global environmental challenge. A Climate Change Levy on business use of energy is planned for introduction in 2001. This will have particular impacts on manufacturers of materials for use in construction' (DETR, 2000, p.12). The report also stated that 'much international work is now in progress on more sustainable construction, with support from UK construction bodies, through, for example, the OECD, the European Commission and the International Standards Organisation. International pressures are likely to drive future convergence of national policies on sustainable development' (DETR, 2000, p.16).

More recently, the Stern Review indicated that climate change is a primary focus for global action. The review stated that 'three elements of policy are required for an effective global response' for climate change (Stern, 2006, p. viii). These elements are:

• pricing carbon through tax, trading or regulation
• policy to support innovation and the deployment of new low-carbon technologies
• action to remove barriers to energy efficiency (including education on individual responses to climate change). (Stern, 2006, p. viii)

Policy development is also being driven by demand for improved purchasing frameworks from product users, as well as from architects and specifiers to building owners, tenants and building contractors. This demand is driven by emerging data, market perception, and rating tools that transform policy into deliverable requirements, such as Green Star and its US and UK equivalents (LEED and BREEAM respectively).

In Australia, varying levels of government are developing policies and tools, often with different foci. The local government sector is particularly active in developing voluntary guidelines for environmentally preferable building products use — the City of Port Phillip in Victoria, for example, has developed a number of initiatives. A number of statutory bodies have also looked at the issue. VicUrban's Eco-selector makes reporting the environmental performance of materials a requirement for development approvals. Some state government bodies have addressed the area as well, with initiatives including the Ecologically sustainable office fit-out guideline (Queensland Department of Public Works, 2000) and Victoria's Environmentally sustainable design and construction: principles and guidelines for capital works projects (Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2003).

Policy development pressure is also coming from innovation in the private sector, from suppliers marketing products with claims for environmental preferability, and from companies seeking to develop proactive and well-grounded sustainable procurement policies. An important policy driver for product suppliers is increasing disclosure of environmental performance by export markets, such as the European Union (EU).

While there are many drivers for policy development, it should be noted that some barriers do exist. These include:

• the complexity of developing a policy framework that considers:
  • the full life cycle of building products, including use-phase issues, such as operational energy impacts where there are many areas of poor data or where consensus is not present
  • policy compliance across jurisdictions
• concerns from parties who have:
  • extensive capital investment in building product manufacture
  • to bear the risk associated with innovation. For example, it is typically the specifier, supplier or contractor (or all) who share the risk if an innovative building product fails in use. This generates the oft-quoted mantra of 'never be first'.

What impacts will future policies have on developments?

Future products and materials policies are likely to include measures to:

• reduce the overall quantity of materials used
• extend the useful life of products (e.g. extended durability and re-use)
• reduce the intensity of impacts associated with materials manufacture, use and disposal, using a broad range of strategies from reducing energy intensity to biodiversity impacts
• increase market and consumer confidence in claims through declarations, disclosure and/or third-party accreditation.

The implications for future developments are likely to include:

• increased emphasis during design stages on optimising product selection and use for products with environmentally preferable characteristics (e.g. recycled content, third-party verification, reduced embodied greenhouse or water impacts)
• greater reporting regarding environmental characteristics of materials and products, through life cycle assessments or otherwise
• increased requirements for monitoring and accounting for materials at all stages of use, including as-built documentation and end-of-life handling of materials
• additional focus on opportunities to design for disassembly and re-use
• increased costs, or other disincentives, for disposal of materials to landfill.

At present, there can be considerable difficulty identifying, verifying, and sourcing products that have clear environmental benefits. This process usually demands extra work at extra cost. A number of tools and guides, including some of those identified here, have sought to address this. In the short-term, it is likely that this trend will continue; however as the sector matures, consolidation can be expected. It is likely that within a few years the assessment of products, materials and environmental performance will be a standard consideration during the design and construction process, with any marginal cost increases absorbed as part of the cost of doing business.

Products and materials regulations

What current products and materials regulations exist?

In Australia to date, the environmental performance of building products (i.e. the relative environmental performance of different products and materials delivering a service, such as cladding, flooring, windows etc.) has not been regulated either at a Commonwealth or state level.

In the governing Australian regulatory framework, the building code is set up under the Building Act 1975. The Building Code of Australia (BCA) provides a set of measurable construction standards under which building materials are addressed. Standards with regards to building materials have been developed to ensure technical performance, fit for purpose, and quality control. Environmental considerations have not, to date, been addressed by Australian standards.

It should be noted that upstream and downstream components of building product environmental performance, such as raw materials extraction and waste management, have an extensive regulatory framework. This includes emissions during manufacturing and extraction phases to air, land and water through the National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPM). NEPMs are broad framework-setting statutory instruments, similar to environmental protection policies, which outline agreed national objectives for protecting or managing particular aspects of the environment. The National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) is a compulsory reporting framework for emissions for most industrial facilities contained within the NEPM. Regulations addressing waste disposal are relevant to building products (include link to waste section/ list as appropriate). Packaging is an area of regulatory review that is relatively more developed, and which, to a small extent, applies to building products. A Product Stewardship NEPM was initiated in 2005 and is currently under development. It will consist of a generic framework of co-regulated, sector-specific guidelines, principles and targets.

What is driving products and materials regulation development?

Drivers for regulatory development in the building products area are broadly the same as for policy development. The primary difference lies in the role of regulation, which is a matter for interpretation and differs between countries and jurisdictions. In Australia, the role of regulation is generally considered to be to provide minimum standards. What constitute minimum standards for building products sustainability is a debate in its early stages in Australia, as well as in many other countries.

Sustainability agenda
The 2003 Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) CRC study Sustainability and the Building Code of Australia indicated that sustainability is to become a goal of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), alongside existing goals of health, safety and amenity. Energy, water, materials and indoor environment quality are the initial sustainability issues to be given priority (ABCB media release, ABCB, 2004). The energy code has already been amended.

In 2005, the Department of the Environment and Heritage (now the Department of the Environment and Water Resources) commissioned studies to investigate two areas: building materials and water. These reports are due for release in 2007. What future path this work may take remains unclear, but it is probable that, in line with international approaches, research and exploration of the field will continue. In stakeholder consultation briefings conducted as part of this research, the Commonwealth Government stated that it had no plans to regulate building products and materials (DEH, 2006d).

Need for a cohesive national approach to building regulation
The ongoing objective of the 2004 Productivity Commission report Reform of building regulation is to reduce the difference between mandatory technical requirements across jurisdictions, as well as to change the BCA from prescriptive to performance-based requirements. An all-of-government reform approach is encouraged between the Commonwealth, state and territory governments.

The Building Products Innovation Council (BPIC) has stated that a more cohesive national approach to regulation in the building code will reduce inefficiencies in materials supply and construction (in part due to local or regional BCA variations), encourage the pursuit of innovative materials that suit Australian conditions, and reduce cost flow-on to customers. BPIC considers energy efficiency to have an important role in materials selection and argues that outcomes from energy efficiency modelling need to be included in building outcomes (BPIC, 2006).

What impacts will future regulations have on developments?

It is very difficult to judge what potential future regulations in the building products area might address, or the precise impacts on developments. However, the areas that regulation may target are likely to reflect those identified under policy, and are based on the traditional hierarchy of reducing, re-using, and recycling resources.

International innovation in this area to date may provide some guidance. The Netherlands code has mandatory requirements for the use of recycled content levels in some building materials. While this incurred extensive debate, such as that about work-practices (which are now well established), the debate has moved on. Furthermore, some researchers are now calling for investigation into regulating design for disassembly and re-use, due to the large (i.e. 50% or more) environmental savings this may have the potential to generate. This was a recommendation of pioneering work undertaken by Durmisevic (2006).

The UK Code for Sustainable Homes illustrates another model. Under this framework, UK houses will be required to include measures of the carbon intensity of materials production and disposal, as well as building operational performance. The voluntary 2006 code document (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2006) noted that it is a guidance document that "signal(s) the future direction of the Building Regulations" (Dep. for Communities and Local Government, 2006, p. 5) and that "a probable future development regarding the environmental impact of materials is to reward resource efficiency, as well as the use of resources that are more sustainable" (ibid, p. 10). It would appear logical that a similar model will be investigated for non-residential building types: the BRE 'Green Guide', on which the Code's materials section is based, was originally developed for non-residential building types (BRE, 2002).

Whatever the shape and extent of future regulation, it is unlikely to change substantially the fundamental characteristics of building products, in terms of specification and performance. As noted, changes are more likely to be in the efficiency of production, documented stewardship in resource-winning, and the manner in which products and materials are used, tracked, managed, and re-used.

Products and materials standards

Standards are voluntary technical guidance tools for manufactured goods and services. They become mandatory if used in regulations. Moreover, they provide industry-wide standardisation and are sourced from the Australian and New Zealand Standards (AS/NZS) and the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO).

Australian standards

Standards Australia (SA) is considering undertaking a review to include ecologically sustainable development (ESD) criteria in standards development. It has been proposed tha