The complicated nature of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) (thermal, visual, acoustic comfort, etc.) dictates a multi-fold approach for desirable IEQ levels to be achieved. The improvement of building shells’ thermal performance, imposed by the constantly revised buildings’ energy performance regulations, does not necessarily guarantee the upgrade of all IEQ-related aspects, such as the construction’s acoustic quality, as most of the commonly used insulation materials are characterized by their low acoustic performance properties. From this perspective the SUstainable PReconstructed Innovative Module (SU.PR.I.M.) research project investigates a new, innovative preconstructed building module with advanced characteristics, which can, among other features, provide a high quality of acoustic performance in the indoor space. The module consists of two reinforced concrete vertical panels, between which the load bearing steel profiles are positioned. In the cavity and at the exterior surface of the panel there is a layer of thermal insulation. For the scope of the analysis, different external finishing surfaces are considered, including cladding with slate and brick, and different cavity insulation materials are examined. The addition of Phase Change Materials (PCM) in different mix proportions in the interior concrete panel is also examined. For the calculation of the sound insulation performance of the building module the INSUL 9.0 software is used. The results were validated through an experimental measurement in the laboratory in order to test the consistency of the values obtained. The results indicate that the examined preconstructed module can cover the sound insulation national regulation’s performance limits, but the implementation of such panels in building constructions should be carefully considered in case of lower frequency noise environments.

The widespread adoption of circularity principles in the building sector fuels the need for robust and comprehensive evaluation systems, which could benefit from the approaches and indicators employed in widely accepted building sustainability assessment (BSA) methods. Simultaneously, the effective consideration of circular economy (CE) principles into BSA methods becomes increasingly urgent. An important step towards achieving these targets is the investigation of whether, and to which degree, the existing BSA methods encompass and express circularity principles; this study focuses on this relatively underexplored theme. Specifically, this study investigates the degree of association between five widely used BSA methods and the circularity strategies included in the 10R Framework. The methods examined are BREEAM, DGNB, LEED, Level(s) and SBTool (versions and criteria for new buildings). The examination was conducted at the lowest self-contained and score-attributing level of each method and was undertaken by five expert groups—each assigned one method. A quantitative scale from 0 to 5 was used to assess the strength of the association. The results are analysed in terms of (i) the criteria/thematic areas within each method receiving high/low scores, and (ii) the circularity strategies deduced to be strongly/weakly represented in and across the BSA methods. Common trends and milder differences across these axes are observed. Generally, the associations appear stronger in thematic areas relevant to, among others, resources and lifecycle performance, and weaker regarding parameters linked to user comfort. The R-strategies Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Rethink emerge as more intensely represented in the examined methods. The study’s results indicate areas for further research and potential methodological enhancement.

The construction sector is a major contributor to environmental degradation, prompting the need for integrating sustainability into its practices. This need has driven the development of sustainability assessment methods across various scales of the built environment. Simultaneously, the recent emphasis on Circular Economy (CE) principles has introduced challenges in translating these principles into measurable outcomes within the construction sector. This study aims to investigate the extent to which circularity principles are embedded within existing sustainability assessment methods for new buildings. The study begins by addressing the interrelationships and distinctions between circularity and sustainability concepts, establishing a foundation for the subsequent analysis. Five internationally recognised sustainability assessment methods for new buildings—BREEAM, DGNB, LEED, Level(s), SBTool—were examined to assess their incorporation of circularity aspects. Each component of these methods was scrutinised for alignment with the 10 circularity strategies outlined in the well-established 10-R framework of waste hierarchy. Expert groups, consisting of CircularB COST Action members, independently evaluated the methods and provided opinions on the direct and indirect associations between the assessed components and the 10-R principles. Disagreements were resolved through group discussions. The analysis revealed varying degrees of integration and explicit reference to circularity principles across the assessed methods. The study also highlighted the subjectivity inherent in identifying correlations and the challenges connected to linking certain circularity-related concepts in the built environment—such as resilience and adaptability—with the 10-R strategies. The findings underscore the need for a more in-depth analysis before making direct comparisons of the integration of circularity principles among different sustainability assessment methods, given their methodological differences. The study also identifies directions for future research.

Circularity in the building sector is tightly connected to the recovery of materials and components for reuse and recycling, and to buildings’ adaptability, facilitated by design for disassembly and deconstruction. To enable these strategies, effective deconstruction considerations must be embedded from the early design stages onwards. Accordingly, multiple circularity frameworks regard design for de-construction as essential, proposing diverse metrics and criteria for its evaluation. This study investigates how deconstruction potential is addressed within Level(s), a common European framework for assessing sustainability and circularity performance, through Indicator 2.4: Design for deconstruction. The adopted methodology is structured in five steps: (i) analysis of Indicator 2.4, including its scope, criteria/metrics, and integration into Macro Objective (MO) 2: Resource efficient and circular material life cycle; (ii) identification and synthesis of key disassembly requirements based on established frameworks; (iii) evaluation of the coverage of these requirements within Level(s); (iv) comparative assessment of methodological characteristics against selected frameworks to determine strengths and weaknesses in the Level(s) approach and highlight opportunities for alignment (v) formulation of improvement directions, including proposals for additions or modifications to different elements of the assessment. The study aims to clarify where the current approach performs well and where refinement is needed. Enhancement opportunities are detected at various levels of the framework, including refining Tier terminology, improving the inclusiveness of technical and process aspects, reconsidering criteria weights, and understanding interactions with other circularity indicators in MO2 to broaden the calculation of overall circularity score based on multiple MO2 indicators.

The estimation of the degradation potential of building materials and components induced by the climatic conditions in a region, is a major step towards climate adapted, durable and resilient structures. The investigation of this potential’s evolution in time supports, in view of the advancing climate change, the design of building elements able to respond to future conditions. Such efforts are very important when wood-based components, the use of which can be highly beneficial regarding circularity and sustainability in the built environment, are concerned. In this study, the decay potential of above ground wooden elements in Greece is examined. Building on the findings of a previous study, which provided such estimates based on daily climatic data over the period 1985–2004 for 33 locations in Greece, this work expands the calculations’ basis with the inclusion of daily climatic data for the period 2005–2022. The studied sites are slightly lower in number but still distributed across Greece. The index proposed by Scheffer is used to provide estimations of the decay potential at these sites. An existing dose-response model is additionally applied for some of them. The calculations are performed based on the available data for larger periods between 1985–2022, and for successive smaller intervals within it. Hence, estimations for the examined potential are produced using a broadened climatic database, and its temporal trend over the last decades is identified.