Next Article in Journal
Four Perspectives of Sustainability Applied to the Local Food Strategy of Ghent (Belgium): Need for a Cycle of Democratic Participation?
Next Article in Special Issue
The Effect of Land Use on Availability of Japanese Freshwater Resources and Its Significance for Water Footprinting
Previous Article in Journal
Assessing the Blue and Green Water Footprint of Lucerne for Milk Production in South Africa
Previous Article in Special Issue
Describing Long-Term Electricity Demand Scenarios in the Telecommunications Industry: A Case Study of Japan
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2016, 8(1), 54;

Life Cycle Assessment of Flat Roof Technologies for Office Buildings in Israel

Department of Civil Engineering, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel
Academic Editors: Yasuhiro Fukushima, Yasushi Kondo, Shinsuke Murakami, Masaharu Motoshita and Matthias Finkbeiner
Received: 27 October 2015 / Revised: 10 December 2015 / Accepted: 5 January 2016 / Published: 8 January 2016
Full-Text   |   PDF [644 KB, uploaded 8 January 2016]   |  


The goal of the current study was to evaluate the environmental damage from three flat roof technologies typically used in Israel: (i) concrete, (ii) ribbed slab with concrete blocks, and (iii) ribbed slab with autoclaved aerated blocks. The roofs were evaluated using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology. The Production and Construction (P and C), Operational Energy (OE), and Maintenance to Demolition (MtoD) stages were considered. The roofs were modeled based on an office building module located in the four climate zones of Israel, and the hierarchical ReCiPe2008 Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) method was applied. The percent difference of one, which is the default methodological option of ReCiPe2008, and an ANOVA of the six methodological options of ReCiPe2008 were used. The results revealed that (i) in a hot climate, the best roof technology can be selected by considering only the OE stage, whereas in a mild climate, both the OE and P and C stages must be considered; (ii) in a hot climate, the best roof technology is a concrete roof, but in a mild climate, the best options are ribbed slab roofs with concrete blocks and autoclaved aerated blocks; and (iii) the conjugation of ReCiPe2008 with a two-stage nested ANOVA is the appropriate approach to evaluate the differences in environmental damage in order to compare flat roof technologies. View Full-Text
Keywords: flat roof; LCA; ReCiPe2008; two-stage nested mixed ANOVA flat roof; LCA; ReCiPe2008; two-stage nested mixed ANOVA

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Pushkar, S. Life Cycle Assessment of Flat Roof Technologies for Office Buildings in Israel. Sustainability 2016, 8, 54.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top