Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Pittsburgh , 153 Benedum Hall, 3700 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261, United States.
Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine , 227 East 30 South Street, New York, New York 10016, United States.
Environ Sci Technol. 2017 Feb 7;51(3):1110-1119. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b03879. Epub 2017 Jan 17.
Aging water infrastructure and increased water scarcity have resulted in higher interest in water reuse and decentralization. Rating systems for high-performance buildings implicitly promote the use of building-scale, decentralized water supply and treatment technologies. It is important to recognize the potential benefits and trade-offs of decentralized and centralized water systems in the context of high-performance buildings. For this reason and to fill a gap in the current literature, we completed a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the decentralized water system of a high-performance, net-zero energy, net-zero water building (NZB) that received multiple green building certifications and compared the results with two modeled buildings (conventional and water efficient) using centralized water systems. We investigated the NZB's impacts over varying lifetimes, conducted a break-even analysis, and included Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis. The results show that, although the NZB performs better in most categories than the conventional building, the water efficient building generally outperforms the NZB. The lifetime of the NZB, septic tank aeration, and use of solar energy have been found to be important factors in the NZB's impacts. While these findings are specific to the case study building, location, and treatment technologies, the framework for comparison of water and wastewater impacts of various buildings can be applied during building design to aid decision making. As we design and operate high-performance buildings, the potential trade-offs of advanced decentralized water treatment systems should be considered.
老化的水基础设施和日益严重的水资源短缺导致人们对水再利用和分散化的兴趣增加。高性能建筑的评级系统隐含地促进了建筑规模的、分散的供水和处理技术的使用。在高性能建筑的背景下,认识到分散式和集中式水系统的潜在好处和权衡是很重要的。出于这个原因,并为了填补当前文献中的一个空白,我们对一个获得多项绿色建筑认证的高性能、零能耗、零耗水建筑(NZB)的分散式水系统进行了生命周期评估(LCA),并将结果与两个使用集中式水系统的建模建筑(常规建筑和节水建筑)进行了比较。我们研究了 NZB 在不同寿命周期内的影响,进行了盈亏平衡分析,并包括了蒙特卡罗不确定性分析。结果表明,尽管 NZB 在大多数类别中的表现优于常规建筑,但节水建筑通常优于 NZB。NZB 的寿命、化粪池曝气和太阳能的使用已被发现是 NZB 影响的重要因素。虽然这些发现是针对案例研究建筑、位置和处理技术的,但比较各种建筑的水和废水影响的框架可以在建筑设计阶段应用,以帮助决策。在我们设计和运营高性能建筑时,应该考虑先进的分散式水处理系统的潜在权衡。