Studies conducted by major national and international scientific bodies have indisputably concluded that the increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) since the mid-20th century has led to irreversible changes in the climate. Data has shown that the contribution of the building sector accounts for 39% of these emissions. Reducing GHG emissions associated with the construction phase of buildings, or embodied carbon (EC), will prevent GHG emissions from entering the atmosphere earlier, reducing the negative impacts. However, to achieve any meaningful reduction, there is a need for consistency and accuracy in the calculations. The accuracy of these calculations is primarily tied to the accuracy of embodied carbon factors (ECF) used in the calculations, values determining the environmental impact of a product or procedure per unit weight. The emissions of any product can be calculated by performing a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). While the requirements for carrying out an LCA have been standardised in ISO14044, the lack of a definitive national ECF database in the UK means that EC calculations can vary drastically based on the chosen database. An LCA has been carried out on a standard Lidl supermarket design within the A1–A3 boundary. For the calculation, the ECFs were sourced from two different databases, using the GHG conversion factor data published in 2020 by the UK Department of Energy & Climate Change and data published in 2019 by the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE). The latter is currently accepted as the most consistent database for carbon factors in the UK. This study showed that using a more detailed database compared to using a more general database could result in a 35.2% reduction of embodied carbon, while using more detailed data from a single database can reduce it by a further 5.5%. It is necessary to establish the most accurate baseline for embodied carbon so that any carbon reduction attempts can be as effective as possible.

The built environment has been a significant contributor to global carbon emissions. It, therefore, has a vital role to play in the reduction efforts of future climate change. While the design of buildings may determine future energy use for cooling, heating, and lighting during the operational stage of the building, this study aims to observe the effect of the building design on the operational as well as the whole-life carbon emissions. Past studies have focused on either the operational carbon or the embodied carbon of a building. Using a cradle-to-grave assessment of a typical UK supermarket, this study explores the relationship between embodied carbon and operational carbon. Additionally, it examines the effects of the variables between three approved construction methods of the same design on the whole life of carbon. These methods are a steel structural frame and cladding panel external wall, steel frame and poroton walls, precast concrete and glulam frame and precast concrete walls. The findings of this research will contribute to mitigation strategies for the environmental impacts of supermarket building construction whilst providing a framework for future assessment of the whole-life carbon of supermarket buildings. Employing the life cycle assessment methodology, this paper examines the potential of minimising both embodied and operational carbon by observing the whole life carbon. Highlighting the influence of the GHG emission contributing factors in each stage on each other. Additionally, the recommended methodology for the supermarket building types of this case study, could be adapted for other types of buildings. The findings could also augment carbon emission research and guide the development of supermarket buildings to low carbon intensive. Furthermore, collaboration with the industry in carrying out this research aids in adopting the findings as practical and theoretical guides for engineers and designers in reducing the building sector’s harmful environmental impact.

Buildings and the construction sector as a whole are among the chief emitters of carbon, and the structural system of a building contributes substantially to its embodied carbon emissions. Whereas extensive studies exist into carbon missions, a detailed evaluation of real multipart building systems in brick, steel, and timber (glulam) substitutes is lacking. This paper employs whole-life-embedded carbon as a sustainability metric to compare a current UK supermarket building system of steel, brick, and timber. Four construction systems by the supermarket, referred to as CS1, CS2, CS3, and CS4, are used in the investigation. Comparisons are also made between two end-of-life treatment methods (recycle and landfill) along with the benefits that can be realised in future construction projects. The outcome from the comparative assessment reveals that there are minor variations in the embodied carbon of building systems used by the supermarket. CS4, while currently presenting marginal gains (approximately 148,960.68 kgCO₂eq.) compared to CS1, loses its advantages when recycled contents for future construction projects are considered. The result indicates that CS4 generates about 18% less carbon emission reduction potential than CS1, whilst CS3 generates approximately 16% less than CS1. The findings of this article can enhance the knowledge of embodied carbon estimation and reduction capabilities of timber, steel, and brick buildings. Also, the detailed method for quantifying embodied carbon used in this article can be adopted in similar projects around the world.