Lifecycle profit analysis of prefabricated multi-active façades
(2019) In International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation 37(5). p.565-578- Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are financially viable. Design/methodology/approach: A lifecycle profit (LCP) analysis was used to examine financial viability through a ten-step process, which included identifying concepts, assessing costs and prices, calculating the LCP and performing sensitivity analysis. Two existing buildings – one low rise and the other high rise – were used as reference models. Findings: The findings were contradictory. Implementing any of the multi-active façade concepts on the high-rise building would be financially beneficial. The opposite was, however, the case... (More)
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are financially viable. Design/methodology/approach: A lifecycle profit (LCP) analysis was used to examine financial viability through a ten-step process, which included identifying concepts, assessing costs and prices, calculating the LCP and performing sensitivity analysis. Two existing buildings – one low rise and the other high rise – were used as reference models. Findings: The findings were contradictory. Implementing any of the multi-active façade concepts on the high-rise building would be financially beneficial. The opposite was, however, the case for the low-rise building. Two factors causing this contradiction have been identified: the façade material before renovation and the size of the building. Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to two case buildings situated in Sweden; however, similar buildings represent a significant amount of the existing building stock. Part of the purpose of the study is also to investigate the merits of LCP analysis to evaluate energy-efficient retrofitting. The study implicates the benefits and pitfalls of LCP analysis needed to be considered by researchers and practitioners alike. Originality/value: The research findings contribute to the understanding of energy-efficient retrofitting of existing multifamily buildings based on prefabricated multi-active façade concepts.
(Less)
- author
- Sundling, Rikard LU ; Olander, Stefan LU ; Wallentén, Petter LU ; Burke, Stephen LU ; Bernardo, Ricardo LU and Blomsterberg, Åke LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2019
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Energy-efficient retrofitting, Lifecycle profit analysis, Multi-active façades, Prefabrication, Sustainability
- in
- International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation
- volume
- 37
- issue
- 5
- pages
- 565 - 578
- publisher
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85064084503
- ISSN
- 2398-4708
- DOI
- 10.1108/IJBPA-12-2018-0109
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- ee0a0e9b-d06f-4b76-a14c-78d575ba622d
- date added to LUP
- 2019-05-08 12:03:05
- date last changed
- 2022-05-03 20:11:11
@article{ee0a0e9b-d06f-4b76-a14c-78d575ba622d, abstract = {{<p>Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are financially viable. Design/methodology/approach: A lifecycle profit (LCP) analysis was used to examine financial viability through a ten-step process, which included identifying concepts, assessing costs and prices, calculating the LCP and performing sensitivity analysis. Two existing buildings – one low rise and the other high rise – were used as reference models. Findings: The findings were contradictory. Implementing any of the multi-active façade concepts on the high-rise building would be financially beneficial. The opposite was, however, the case for the low-rise building. Two factors causing this contradiction have been identified: the façade material before renovation and the size of the building. Research limitations/implications: The study is limited to two case buildings situated in Sweden; however, similar buildings represent a significant amount of the existing building stock. Part of the purpose of the study is also to investigate the merits of LCP analysis to evaluate energy-efficient retrofitting. The study implicates the benefits and pitfalls of LCP analysis needed to be considered by researchers and practitioners alike. Originality/value: The research findings contribute to the understanding of energy-efficient retrofitting of existing multifamily buildings based on prefabricated multi-active façade concepts.</p>}}, author = {{Sundling, Rikard and Olander, Stefan and Wallentén, Petter and Burke, Stephen and Bernardo, Ricardo and Blomsterberg, Åke}}, issn = {{2398-4708}}, keywords = {{Energy-efficient retrofitting; Lifecycle profit analysis; Multi-active façades; Prefabrication; Sustainability}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{5}}, pages = {{565--578}}, publisher = {{Emerald Group Publishing Limited}}, series = {{International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation}}, title = {{Lifecycle profit analysis of prefabricated multi-active façades}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-12-2018-0109}}, doi = {{10.1108/IJBPA-12-2018-0109}}, volume = {{37}}, year = {{2019}}, }