Circularity and Carbon Performance of Prefabricated Biobased Modular Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Cases and Life Cycle Assessment Methods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15377/2409-9821.2026.13.7Keywords:
Modular Systems, Biobased Materials, Sustainable Building, Environmental Design, Life Cycle Assessment, Design for Disassembly, Circularity Performance, Architectural Technology.Abstract
The construction sector faces escalating pressure to reduce embodied greenhouse gas emissions while transitioning from linear material use toward circular, regenerative systems. Biobased modular wall assemblies designed for disassembly and reuse are increasingly promoted as a pathway to address both challenges; however, robust empirical comparisons with conventional construction remain limited, particularly when assessed across different life cycle assessment (LCA) methods and circularity assumptions.
This paper presents a comparative, multi tool, and multi cycle LCA of prefabricated biobased modular wall systems developed within two EU research and demonstration projects (Drive 0 and Circ Reno), benchmarked against conventional external wall insulation systems in retrofit contexts and masonry cavity wall construction in new build scenarios. Environmental performance was assessed using ICE database screening, Ubakus elemental LCA, and OneClick LCA whole building modelling, applying harmonised functional units but varying system boundaries and datasets in order to explicitly examine methodological sensitivity. Both single life (100:0) and multi cycle allocation scenarios (Linear Degressive and Circular Economy Linear Degressive) were explored to evaluate how design for disassembly and reuse potential are represented within current LCA frameworks.
Results show that, under single life cycle assessment, modular systems may exhibit higher mass and embodied impacts than lightweight bonded solutions, particularly where additional framing, fixings, and protective layers are required. However, increasing levels of biobased material integration substantially reduces embodied carbon intensity, and results are highly sensitive to database choice, system boundaries, and biogenic carbon accounting conventions.
Downloads
References
[1] UNEP. Global status report for buildings and construction. 2024. https://doi.org/10.59117/20.500.11822/45095
[2] European Commission. European Green Deal: commission proposes to boost renovation and decarbonisation of buildings. 2021.
[3] O'Hegarty R, Kinnane O. Whole life carbon quantification of the built environment: case study Ireland. Build Environ. 2022; 226: 109730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109730
[4] Röck M, Saade MRM, Balouktsi M, Rasmussen FN, Birgisdottir H, Frischknecht R, et al. Embodied GHG emissions of buildings-the hidden challenge. Appl Energy. 2020; 258: 114107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114107
[5] IPCC. Mitigation of climate change: working group III contribution to the sixth assessment report. 2022.
[6] Pomponi F, Moncaster A. Circular economy for the built environment: a research framework. J Clean Prod. 2017; 143: 710-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.055
[7] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy: economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. 2014.
[8] Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NMP, Hultink EJ. The circular economy-a new sustainability paradigm? J Clean Prod. 2017; 143: 757-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
[9] Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy in construction: regenerative built environments. 2022.
[10] Churkina G, Organschi A, Reyer CPO, Ruff A, Vinke K, Liu Z, et al. Buildings as a global carbon sink. Nat Sustain. 2020; 3(4): 269-76. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4
[11] Pittau F, Krause F, Lumia G, Habert G. Fast-growing bio-based materials as an opportunity for storing carbon in exterior walls. Build Environ. 2018; 129: 117-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.12.006
[12] Zaborowska M, Bernat K. The development of recycling methods for bio-based materials-a review. Waste Manag Res. 2023; 41(1): 68-80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X221105432
[13] Wang S, Huang X, Yin C, Richel A. A critical review on the key issues and optimization of agricultural residue transportation. Biomass Bioenergy. 2021; 146: 105979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.105979
[14] Guest G, Cherubini F, Strømman AH. Global warming potential of carbon dioxide emissions from biomass stored in the anthroposphere and used for bioenergy at end of life. J Ind Ecol. 2013; 17(1): 20-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00507.x
[15] Levasseur A, Lesage P, Margni M, Deschênes L, Samson R. Considering time in LCA: dynamic LCA and its application to global warming impact assessments. Environ Sci Technol. 2010; 44(8): 3169-74. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9030003
[16] Lawson M, Goodier C. Design in modular construction. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1201/b16607
[17] Durmisevic E. Circular economy in construction: design strategies for reversible buildings. 2019.
[18] Eberhardt LCM, Birgisdottir H, Birkved M. Potential of circular economy in sustainable buildings. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. 2019; 471(9): 092051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/471/9/092051
[19] Aye L, Ngo T, Crawford RH, Gammampila R, Mendis P. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy analysis of prefabricated reusable building modules. Energy Build. 2012; 47: 159-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.11.049
[20] Drive 0. Drive 0 [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://www.drive0.eu/
[21] Circ Reno. Circular Reno-Interreg NW Europe. 2023. Available from: https://circularreno.nweurope.eu/
[22] European Environment Agency. Buildings and construction: in-depth topic. 2026.
[23] International Energy Agency. Building retrofits critical to Europe's low carbon pathway. 2015.
[24] European Commission. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the energy performance of buildings (recast) (COM/2021/802 final) [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; 2021 [cited 2026 Apr 29]. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0802
[25] Grazieschi G, Asdrubali F, Thomas G. Embodied energy and carbon of building insulating materials: a critical review. Clean Environ Syst. 2021; 2: 100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100032
[26] Cabeza LF, Rincón L, Vilariño V, Pérez G, Castell A. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2014; 29: 394-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.037
[27] Carrigan S, Daly P, Congeduti A. A multi-life cycle assessment of external wall insulation strategies in an Irish domestic retrofit. J Build Surv Apprais Valuation. 2024; 13(2): 133. https://doi.org/10.69554/EGLU5674
[28] Dsilva J, Zarmukhambetova S, Locke J. Assessment of building materials in the construction sector: a case study using life cycle assessment approach to achieve the circular economy. Heliyon. 2023; 9(10): e20404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20404
[29] Falsafi A, Togiani A, Colley A, Varis J, Horttanainen M. Life cycle assessment in circular design process: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod. 2025; 521: 146188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146188
[30] Khasreen MM, Banfill PFG, Menzies GF. Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: a review. Sustainability. 2009; 1(3): 674-701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1030674
[31] Lasvaux S, Habert G, Peuportier B, Chevalier J. Comparison of generic and product-specific life cycle assessment databases. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2015; 20(11): 1473-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0938-z
[32] Hoxha E, Passer A, Saade MRM, Trigaux D, Shuttleworth A, Pittau F, et al. Biogenic carbon in buildings: a critical overview of LCA methods. Build Cities. 2020; 1(1): 504-24. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.46
[33] Lei H, Li L, Yang W, Bian Y, Li CQ. An analytical review on application of life cycle assessment in circular economy for built environment. J Build Eng. 2021; 44: 103374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103374
[34] Eberhardt LCM, van Stijn A, Rasmussen FN, Birkved M, Birgisdottir H. Development of a life cycle assessment allocation approach. Sustainability. 2020; 12(22): 9579. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229579
[35] Allacker K, Mathieux F, Manfredi S, Pelletier N, De Camillis C, Ardente F, et al. Allocation solutions for secondary material production. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2014; 88: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.03.016
[36] Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Seppälä J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecol Econ. 2018; 143: 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041
[37] Saidani M, Yannou B, Leroy Y, Cluzel F, Kendall A. A taxonomy of circular economy indicators. J Clean Prod. 2019; 207: 542-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.014
[38] Andersen SC, Birgisdottir H, Birkved M. Life cycle assessments of circular economy in the built environment. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11): 6887. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116887
[39] Allacker K, Mathieux F, Pennington D, Pant R. The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2017; 22(9): 1441-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1244-0
[40] Van Gulck L. How to evaluate circularity through an LCA study. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2022; 27(9): 1249-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02099-w
[41] Asdrubali F, D'Alessandro F, Schiavoni S. A review of unconventional sustainable building insulation materials. Sustain Mater Technol. 2015; 4: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2015.05.002
[42] CEN European Committee for Standardization. EN 15804:2012+A2:2019. 2019.
[43] Hoxha E, Passer A, Saade MRM, Trigaux D, Shuttleworth A, Pittau F, et al. Biogenic carbon in buildings. Build Cities. 2020; 1(1): 504-24. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.46
[44] Palumbo M. Contribution to the development of new bio-based thermal insulation materials. 2015.
[45] Bottino-Leone D, Larcher M, Herrera-Avellanosa D, Haas F, Troi A. Evaluation of natural-based insulation systems. Energy. 2019; 181: 521-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.139
[46] Luebkeman C, Felder D. Rethinking design: shearing layers. 2016.
[47] Daly P. A critical review of circularity-design for disassembly. E-Prime. 2023; 5: 100252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prime.2023.100252
[48] Vanova R, Vlcko M, Stefko J. Life cycle impact assessment of straw bale buildings. Materials. 2021; 14(11): 3064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14113064
[49] Häfliger IF, John V, Passer A, Lasvaux S, Hoxha E, Saade MRM, et al. Buildings environmental impacts' sensitivity. J Clean Prod. 2017; 156: 805-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.052
[50] Moncaster AM, Symons KE. Cradle-to-grave embodied carbon impacts. Energy Build. 2013; 66: 514-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.07.046
[51] Vilches A, Garcia-Martinez A, Sanchez-Montañes B. LCA of building refurbishment. Energy Build. 2017; 135: 286-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.11.042
[52] Vertua C, Procaccini G, Pugliese I, Rosana G, Monticelli C, Zanelli A. Comparative LCA of façade retrofit strategies. 2025.
[53] Morganti L, Vandi L, Astudillo Larraz J, García-Jaca J, Navarro Muedra A, Pracucci A. Embodied carbon assessment of façade modules. Sustainability. 2024; 16(3): 1190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031190
[54] ISO. ISO 14040: environmental management-life cycle assessment. 2006.
[55] De Wolf C, Hoxha E, Fivet C. Environmental assessment of reused building components. Sustain Cities Soc. 2020; 61: 102322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102322
[56] Robati M, Daly D, Kokogiannakis G. Uncertainty analysis for embodied carbon. 2019.
[57] Su S, Li X, Zhu Y, Lin B. Dynamic LCA framework. Energy Build. 2017; 149: 310-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.05.042
[58] Daly P. Developing a modular circular wall over-clad system. J Sustain Constr Mater Technol. 2025; 10(3): 360-92. https://doi.org/10.29187/2458-973X.1192
[59] Kavanagh I. An investigation of the environmental-circularity impacts of modern methods of construction (off-site) versus conventional (on-site) Irish external wall construction methods through simultaneous circularity and environmental performance assessment (LCA). Technological University Dublin; 2025.
[60] O’Leary A. Performance-Based Evaluation of Bio-Based Building Materials Derived from Irish Agricultural Crops for High-Performance Building Envelopes [Dissertation]. TU Dublin; 2026.
Downloads
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Patrick Daly
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All the published articles are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC 4.0) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
