Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Embodied carbon impacts of residential development siteworks: new assessment framework Cover

Embodied carbon impacts of residential development siteworks: new assessment framework

Open Access
|Apr 2026

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Summary of the parameters used in the literature, which includes embodied carbon (EC) within the life-cycle scope and elements of siteworks within the physical scope.

REFERENCEFUNCTIONAL UNIT/PHYSICAL SCOPEBUILDINGS/TYPOLOGIESLANDSCAPING/EXTERNAL AREAS INCLUDEDSERVICE INFRASTRUCTURES INCLUDEDLIFE-CYCLE STAGESMETHODLIFE SPAN (years)
Du et al. (2015)High-rise urban area and low-rise suburban areaPrototypical constructions of typologiesRoadways and parking onlyNoCradle to graveHybrid LCA50
Butters et al. (2024)Two neighbourhood case studiesModelled typologiesYesNoCradle to graveHybrid LCA50
Hack et al. (2025)Synthetic urban modelsModelled typologiesRoadways onlyModelled estimatesCradle to graveProcess LCA50
Kayaçetin & Tanyer (2020)Three neighbourhood-scale case studiesThree residential case studiesYesNoCradle to graveHybrid LCA50
Nichols & Kockelman (2014)Five neighbourhood-scale case studiesModelled typologiesYesYes, estimated based on existing researchCradle to graveHybrid LCAPer annum
Pomponi et al. (2021)1 km2 synthetic urban modelsModelled typologiesYesNoCradle to graveProcess LCA60
Rankin & Saxe (2024)Existing neighbourhoodsExisting buildings and infrastructureNot definedEstimated using geographical information system (GIS) toolsCradle to gate (A1–A3)Process LCA60 (baseline case)
Troy et al. (2003)Six neighbourhood-scale case studiesModelled typologies based on ageRoadways onlyFoul drainage and water supply onlyCradle to graveInput–output LCA60
Sigurðardóttir et al. (2023)Neighbourhood-scale case studyApartments and ancillary buildingsYesNoCradle to gateProcess LCANot stated
Sjökvist et al. (2025)Neighbourhood-scale case studyArchetype buildingsYesYes, proprietary tool usedA1–A5, B4, C3–C4Process LCANot stated
Stephan et al. (2013)Suburban neighbourhoodModelled typologiesEstimatedModelled estimatesCradle to graveInput–output LCA100
Smith & Gill (2022)Neighbourhood-scale synthetic modelsFive archetypes of residential constructionYesModelled underground servicesCradle to graveProcess LCA40
Trigaux et al. (2014)Four abstracted neighbourhood modelsModelled typologiesModelled based on archetypesNoCradle to graveProcess LCA60

[i] Note: LCA = life-cycle assessment.

Figure 1

Case study project site plan with the three residential typologies.

Figure 2

Physical scope of life-cycle assessment (LCA) organised by levels of urban morphology.

Figure 3

Comparison between scopes of different methodologies.

Figure 4

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) scope for low-rise houses (left) and apartment building (right) defined by categories of urban morphology.

Source: Adapted from the multilevel diagram of Kropf (2014).

Table 2

Parameters of the four highest impact materials for each typology for stages A1–A3.

DWELLING TYPOLOGYMATERIAL (t)A1–A3 GWP (kg CO2e/kg)CARBON FACTOR SOURCEEC PER DWELLING (kg CO2e)EC/m2 (kg CO2e/m2)
House
Concrete in-situ 28/35 Mpa37.320.13ICE Database4,70440
Concrete blocks: medium density29.920.10ICE Database2,98525
Insulation: mineral wool2.031.31ICE Database2,66323
Concrete roof tiles5.780.27Circular ecology1,54313
Duplex
Concrete in-situ 28/35 Mpa34.200.13ICE Database8,62142
Brick11.940.21Cambridge Architectural Research (CAR)5,08825
Lightweight concrete blocks8.680.26ICE Database4,86123
Insulation: mineral wool1.651.31ICE Database4,33221
Apartment
Precast concrete slabs42.810.22ICE Database9,366101
Concrete in-situ 28/35 Mpa30.450.13ICE Database3,79141
Stainless steel0.814.41National average Environmental Product Declaration (EPD)3,55838
Cement mortar (1:3 mix)16.600.18ICE Database3,04133

[i] Note: EC = embodied carbon; GWP = global warming potential; ICE = Inventory of Carbon and Energy; Mpa = megapascal.

Figure 5

Embodied carbon (EC) of each typology by building element per m2: stages A1–A5.

Table 3

Stages A1–A5: combined results including landscaping plus infrastructure.

DWELLING TYPOLOGYTOTAL EC PER DWELLING, STAGES A1–A5 (kg CO2e)GROSS INTERNAL FLOOR AREA (GIFA) (m2)EC/m2 FLOOR AREA, STAGES A1–A5 (kg CO2e/m2)EC PER DWELLING, INCLUDING LANDSCAPING AND INFRASTRUCTURE (kg CO2e)EC/m2 INCLUDING LANDSCAPING AND INFRASTRUCTURE (kg CO2e/m2)PERCENTAGE EC FOR LANDSCAPING AND INFRASTRUCTURE (%)
House37,239118.031649,54642032%
Duplex40,941103.539649,19947519%
Apartment40,66297.743745,90849412%

[i] Note: EC = embodied carbon.

Figure 6

Difference between foul water services layout for 26 low-rise dwellings (left) and 22 unit apartment building (right).

Figure 7

Stages A1–A5 kg CO2e of infrastructures per dwelling typology by service utility (above) and A1–A5 kg CO2e of landscaping per dwelling typology (below) by landscape element.

Figure 8

Stages A1–A5 t CO2e by public infrastructure service utility (above) and material (below).

Figure 9

Stages A1–A5 t CO2e per dwelling by urban morphology and dwelling typology.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.668 | Journal eISSN: 2632-6655
Language: English
Submitted on: Jul 8, 2025
|
Accepted on: Mar 10, 2026
|
Published on: Apr 1, 2026
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2026 Philip Comerford, Oliver Kinnane, Richard O’Hegarty, Philip Crowe, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.