Sprint 1: Conditions

Uncovering the conditions for change in the building industry

Sprint 1 Conditions diagram

The goal of Sprint 1

Sprint 1 was about determining the conditions for change in the bio-based building industry. The specific goal of this Sprint was to create a design brief for Sprint 2, elaborating what will make up the product and what won’t. 

House design choices

In this Sprint we’ve determined what the three house models are and of what base materials they will consist of. We’ll create a baseline ‘standard house’, a ‘hybrid house’ of CLT and a ‘bio-based house’ of the future. We’ve chosen to use the NL-SfB Building codes instead of Brand Layers, as using the industry standard for component naming will increase usability and BIM modelling integration.

Downsizing the Doughnut

In this Sprint we’ve decided to move away from using the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s). This is because the SDG’s under represent the planetary boundaries, in contrast to the Doughnut of Kate Raworth, which will be the assessment method for the tool. Creating City Portraits is the methodology for downscaling the Doughnut of social and planetary boundaries to the city. The tool provides a holistic snapshot of the city and its impact through four lenses–both social and ecological, local and global–which together provide a new perspective on what it means for a city to thrive. We build further on this idea, whilst instead of downsizing the Doughnut to a city level, we downsize the Doughnut to a project level. 

Building on the Doughnut

Assessment criteria

We’ve chosen to at least assess CO2, nitrogen, biodiversity, well-being, and affordability, as these indicators were valued as most important by the stakeholders. We’ll perform simple meta analyses of hard and soft data points from nationally recognized bodies to use as input for the tool. Stichting Nationale Koolstofmarkt (SNK), ASN Bank and NIBE engaged in the project to help validate our data. 

Stakeholder consultation

To better understand potential users and the decision making process, numerous interviews were performed with a variety of stakeholders. The main insights are summarized in quotes of the different stakeholders.

A lot of bio-based materials are certified in Europe, but in the Netherlands these materials often require extra certification (NEN) which is expensive and time-intensive.

Architect

We need proof that bio-based materials reduce life-cycle costs and building costs, or that they increase our PR, media exposure, or enhance value of the property.

Project Developer

We need to persuade the whole chain of decision makers. A compelling bio-based case study with beautiful visuals can definitely help.

Provincial civil servant

We build with materials we know and trust. Show us how building with bio-based materials can make our lives easier

Contractor

It’s really important to raise awareness and increase the knowledge of civil servants regarding bio-based building. Do this by making comparisons super easy, especially accounting for costs, carbon and nitrogen. 

Municipal civil servant

User journey

Based on the stakeholder consultations we’ve mapped out the user journey of the tool. A user journey is a series of steps which represent a scenario in which a user might interact with the tool we are designing. Our user journey will consist of five stages: the awareness, exploration, information, inspiration and influence stage.

Other conclusions

Economic value of bio-based building

  • Bio-based buildings are usually modular, lighter and easy to use. This means working hours and building costs can be reduced, thus bio-based building can decrease the building- and life cycle costs. And because bio-based materials are lighter, you can build on more valuable or complicated building areas, like subsidence areas, nature reserves and cities.
  • Building with bio-based building materials can reduce long term costs, as it can reduce maintenance. This is especially interesting for housing corporations. Furthermore, at the end of a life cycle of a bio-based house, most of the materials can be reused, while with regular building materials these materials go to waste. This reduces waste-management and disassembly costs, while increasing value for the circular economy.
  • A possible carbon tax and rewarding carbon removal through the voluntary carbon market can create additional economic incentives for implementing bio-based building materials.
  • Bio-based building materials are often lighter, making transport and building more efficient through electrification, thus decreasing nitrogen emissions. This can potentially speed up acquiring building permits.

 

Policy roadblocks

  • The MPG (MilieuPrestatie Gebouwen) is one of the most important indicator for policymakers. We need policy makers to lower the MPG to create incentives for bio-based building.

 

LCA data

  • End of Life assumptions are wrong through for example application of NEN-EN 15804 instead of EN 16449 – on paper we burn everything.
  • Building site emissions are mostly not accounted for in life cycle analyses. Even without these emissions factored in, embodied carbon can outweigh 50 years of operational carbon. Weight matters.

  • There’s a big need for open-source data—available open datasets are scarce.

Previous Sprint

Sprint 0: Ecosystem

Exploring the bio-based building ecosystem

Next Sprint 

Sprint 2: Development

Developing the building material impact tool