Glazing Beyond Energy Efficiency: An environmental inquiry throughout the life cycle of architectural flat glass

Due to their porosity to solar energy, glazings have played a complex and singular role in the architectural evolution following the first thermal regulations. Taking advantage of the European policies, the glass industry has sustained the development of new products with ever more efficient energy properties.

However, this recent development rests on an assumption considering that the improvement of the energy performances of the envelope leads to a reduction of heating and cooling needs during the use phase which offsets the ecological impacts induced by the transformation of a larger quantity of materials and the manufacture of a more complex technology. Hence, high-performance glazings appear as preconditions to energy efficient buildings even if this hypothesis remains poorly assessed and rests on questionable grounds, such as the prevalence of global warming over the other ecological impacts or the unchanging comfort requirements. Therefore, this research proposes to find answer to the following main question: what are the environmental implications of the energy performance improvement of glazings?

Taking the form of an inquiry throughout the life cycle of architectural flat glass, this research aims at understanding how the European glass industry has complied with environmental regulations and to what extent energy and material flows have been upset. Through case study of energy efficient refurbishment of housings, it intends to assess the environmental footprint of glass products according to the performance they seek to achieve while enlightening the interactions between design, industry, and environmental policy.

This research is funded by: F.R.S.-FNRS Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique, FRIA fellow

Publications
Transparency, From Sand to Cullet. An environmental inquiry throughout the life cycle of glass used in buildings’ envelopes, Poster presentation at doctoral seminar on sustainability research in the built environment (DS²BE), Faculty of architecture, ULB, Brussels, 30 May 2018

Key References
1. Chappells, Heather, and Elizabeth Shove. 2005. ‘Debating the Future of Comfort: Environmental sustainability, energy consumption and the indoor environment’. Building Research & Information 33 (1): 32–40. DOI: 10.1080/0961321042000322762.
2. Crawford, Robert. 2011. Life Cycle Assessment in the Built Environment. London, New York: Spon Press.
3. Lloyd Thomas, Katie, Tilo Amhoff, and Nick Beech, eds. 2016. Industries of Architecture. London, New York: Routledge.
4. Madlener, Reinhard, and Martin Jakob. 2003. ‘Exploring Experience Curves for the Building Envelope: An investigation for Switzerland for 1970-2020’. ETH Zurich. DOI: 10.3929/ethz-a-004518804.
5. Sala, Serenella, Francesca Farioli, and Alessandra Zamagni. 2013. ‘Progress in Sustainability Science: Lessons Learnt from Current Methodologies for Sustainability Assessment: Part 1’. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18 (9): 1653–72. DOI: 10.1007/s11367-012-0508-6.
6. Van de Voorde, Stephanie. 2016. ‘Glass and Glazing in Post-War Belgium (1945-70). The Rise of Double Glazing.’ In Further Studies in the History of Construction: The Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Construction History Society, edited by James Campbell, et al. Cambridge: Construction History Society