Case study II: Application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in BIM in early design stages for the selection of the structural system of a residential building in Spain

Depósito de investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ Esta es la versión aceptada del capítulo de libro publicado en : This is an accepted manuscript of a book chapter published in: Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment: Environmental, Social and Economic Aspects. (2024): 09/01/2025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95122-7.00017-4 Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved “This is an Accepted Manuscript of an book chapter published by Elsevier in [Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment] [2024], available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95122-7.00017-4” 17 Case study II: Application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in BIM in early design stages for the selection of the structural system of a residential building in Spain Carmen Llatas Higher Technical School of Architecture, Instituto Universitario de Arquitectura y Ciencias de la Construccio ´n, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain 17.1 Introduction Several reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (IPCC, 2018) and the International Energy Agency (IEA) (IEA, 2019) provide evidence of the catastrophic situation with respect to CO 2 emissions and its short and medium-term consequences. The built environment plays an important role, being responsible for 40% of greenhouse gas emissions (IEA, 2019). The construction sector is also the largest consumer of natural resources; in the European Union (EU), for example, it accounts for about 50% of all extracted material (European Commission, 2022) and is the main waste generator, being responsible for more than 35% of the total waste generation(Eurostat, 2018). To mitigate this situation, society is increasingly demanding cities and buildings that produce lower environmental impacts, provide economic benefits(Mc Graw-Hill construction, 2013), and generate a positive impact on society. To this end, current European sustainability strategies such as the Green Deal (European Commission, 2019)andthe Circular Economy Plan Action (European Commission, 2020) propose radical changes in current construction models, which must be implemented and transferred into practice using more effective and innovative measures to produce profound changes. Therefore, the transition to an environmentally and socioeconomically sustainable model is a global priority area. Furthermore, the objectives of decarbonization of the building sector require the development and implementation of tools to predict impacts. The design phase is crucial to reduce the impact of the building during its life cycle (Meex et al., 2018). Consequently, to assess the environmental impact of building projects, the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the most objective and widely used method (ISO, 2006a, 2006b). However, reducing the environmental impacts of the built environment goes beyond traditional unidimensional Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95122-7.00017-4 ©2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. approaches. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) provides a more comprehensive and holistic approach than the LCA technique by adding economic and social dimensions to the environmental dimension. The method is defined as the sum of the LCA (environmental), economic LCC (Life Cycle Costing), and social S-LCA (social life cycle assessment) (Kloepffer, 2008). However, LCSA implementation in the building sector is still limited (Llatas et al., 2020). Furthermore, the use of the BIM (Building Information Modeling) methodology, mandatory in Public Tenders in many European countries since 2018 (Official Journal of the European Union, 2014), has led to a digital revolution in the construction sector, and the scientific community has highlighted its potential to improve the sustainability of buildings. LCSA complexity in data management can be addressed by tools such as BIM (buildingSMART, 2022), which, in addition to facilitating the management of building life cycle data, allows the integrationofthetripleassessmentduring the building design process. In this vein, this chapter shows the results of applying a BIM-based LCSA method to a real Spanish building to analyze the significance of using different building materials in alternative structural systems. The knowledge provided by the results can help architects and civil engineers in their decision-making process for selecting the most suitable construction alternatives from a sustainability point of view. 17.2 Case study presentation 17.2.1 Case study approach The specific focus of this study is to compare in a BIM model the impact values of the environmental, economic, and social categories associated with the life cycle of alternative structural systems in buildings. The case study applies the method carried out in (Llatas et al., 2022), which is based on the LCSA standardization rules (ISO, 2019). In accordance with the proposed framework, a double-pronged approach is considered: 1. Obtaining the social, economic, and environmental impact of the processes related to alternative structural building systems and elements in a BIM software. 2. Obtaining these impacts automatically and without any knowledge of LCSA in the main decision-making phase (early design) of the project before undertaking the detailed phase. Key features to facilitate the BIM-based LCSA application for the designer during the early phase of the project are as follows: 1. The development of an internal application in the BIM software that allows visualization of impacts in the BIM software itself, without having to use external tools. 2. Real-time visualization of impacts during the design decision-making process to immediately select alternative solutions and revisualize impacts. 382 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment Within the context of this chapter: 1. Abuilding material is a good, product, raw material, and a similar item used to manufacture, produce, construct, mantain, repair, and demolish a building. These materials can be simple materials used in the building itself (e.g., concrete, bricks, and tiles) or auxiliary materials needed during the execution processes for construction, maintenance, and demolition (e.g., formworks, struts, and gypsum pastes). 2. Abuilding element is a key component of a building (e.g., beam, wall, and column), made of some building material. 3. Abuilding system represents a group of building elements that are interrelated and coordinated among themselves through the project (e.g., structure, foundation, and masonry). Fig. 17.1 shows a conceptual diagram of the case study approach. The main key elements of the research are interrelated: the BIM methodology, the designer, the conventional and sustainable building models, the building systems, elements and materials selected, and finally, their social, economic, and environmental impacts due to the decisions made in the design process. 17.2.2 Structural systems selected The objects of study are two alternative structural systems of a multifamily residential building with 30 dwellings, located in Seville, Spain. The selected building is B5 (Building 5) of a group of six buildings called “Hacienda del Rosario” (see Fig. 17.2) promoted by a public social housing company EMVISESA (2022). Figure 17.1 Case study approach: role of the designer in the design of sustainable buildings. This figure shows a conceptual diagram of the case study approach. The main key elements of the study are interrelated: the BIM methodology, the designer, the conventional and sustainable building models, the selected materials and their social, economic, and environmental impacts; and finally, the decisions in the design process. The figure has an error, it is designer instead of user, which will be corrected later. 383Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM In accordance with European guidelines (Official Journal of the European Union, 2014), the project was tendered in digital support for the public works tender, specifically in Autodesk Revit (2022). The GFA (Gross Floor Area) is 4090 square meters, distributed across six floors, as shown Fig. 17.3. To facilitate the analysis, the basement common to all six buildings has not been considered, and a specific slab foundation for B5 was designed. Two structural options were evaluated and modeled in BIM with a Level of Information (LOI) equal to LO 1 and a Level of Development/Detail (LOD) equal to LOD 200 (BIM Forum, 2020). These LOI and LOD are the minimum required to define the project in the early design stage (Llatas et al., 2020) called Basic Project in Spain (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2006): 1. Option 1: A conventional structural system composed of reinforced concrete beams and columns. 2. Option 2: A metal frame system composed of steel beams and steel columns. The case study reflects a real and frequent context, as new building for residential use is the most common type of construction in Andalusia, followed by rehabilitation works (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2022) as shown in Table 17.1. The reinforced concrete structure is also the most common in Andalusia for residential buildings followed by load-bearing walls and metallic frame (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2022) as shown in Table 17.2. Figure 17.2 Selected building, residential building number 5 (B5), Hacienda del Rosario, Seville. This figure shows the selected residential building that is part of a set of six residential buildings called Hacienda del Rosario. 384 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment Figure 17.3 Sketches of the 3D model and the main materials for the structural options. The figure shows the structural volumes of the two options and the materials chosen for each building element in each option analyzed. Table 17.1 Number of buildings according to construction type (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2019). Spain Andalusian New buildings for residential use 24,103 3949 New buildings for nonresidential use 5533 1334 Rehabilitation works 25383 2852 Demolition works 5045 1052 This table shows the number of buildings by type (new construction, rehabilitation, demolition) in Spain and Andalusia. Table 17.2 Features of new residential buildings in Spain (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2019). Number of buildings Spain Andalusia Vertical building structure Reinforced concrete 17697 3497 Metallic 1691 124 Load-bearing walls 3417 205 Mixed and others 1547 205 Horizontal building structure One-way slab 17215 2078 Other 7137 1871 This table shows the types of vertical and horizontal structures used in residential buildings in Spain and Andalusia. 385Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM Therefore, a reinforced concrete structure was designed as the first structural system option (Option 1) (see Fig. 17.4). Although load-bearing wall is the second structural system used in Spain (Table 17.2), this type of vertical structure is generally used in single-family dwellings up to two stories high. As the case study (B5) is six stories high, a metal frame structure was more appropriate to be considered as the second alternative option (Option 2) (see Fig. 17.5). 17.2.3 BIM-LCSA development The methodological aspects of the BIM-based LCSA case study followed the four stages of any LCA (ISO, 2006a, 2006b): (1) goal and scope definition, (2) Figure 17.4 Construction of a reinforced concrete structural system of a building in Spain. This figure shows an example of a building in Spain whose structure is being built in reinforced concrete. Although the case study focuses on the design phase, in which the building has not yet been constructed, it is considered convenient to show the reader what type of structural system is being evaluated as Option 1. 386 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment life cycle inventory analysis (LCI), (3) life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), and (4) interpretation of the results; described below. A Dynamo script (Autodesk Revit, 2021) was carried out to automate the calculations and visualize the impacts in BIM. 17.2.3.1 Goal and scope definition The application of the LCSA was focused on the structural system and on the embodied impacts produced throughout its life cycle. The methodological aspects of this BIM-LCSA case study were based on (Llatas et al., 2022). Figure 17.5 Construction of a steel structural system of a building in Spain. This figure shows an example of a building in Spain whose structure is being built in steel. Although the case study focuses on the design phase, in which the building has not yet been constructed, it is considered convenient to show the reader what type of structural system is being evaluated as Option 2. 387Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM Functional unit To ensure the application in parallel of the three methods, the functional unit, called functional equivalent in EN 15978 (EN, 2011) and EN 15804 (EN, 2012) standards, should be performed by describing the technical utility of the product and the product’s social utility (UNEP/SETAC, 2011). In this vein, the functional equivalent is a “representation of the required and quantified functional and technical requirements for a building or an assembly system,” and it is used as a basis of comparison (EeBGuide Project, 2012). For example, the functional equivalent could be 1 m 2 GFA to compare two different buildings with the same function. However, as the assessment is focused on the complete building system, the functional unit is referred to the object. Therefore, according to the objective of this study, the functional unit is defined as "Complete structural system that meet the same functional requirements in accordance with the Spanish technical regulations in Spain (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2006)". Impact categories evaluated and selected indicators The method aims to evaluate the three dimensions (economic, environmental, and social) in a harmonized manner. However, a major barrier to unifying and homogenizing LCA, LCC, and S-LCA techniques is their differences in areas such as goals and scopes, qualitative/quantitative data, communication, and interpretation of results (Larsen et al., 2022). For example, regarding the impact categories, the number of indicators evaluated in each dimension varies widely in the scientific literature: 1. The environmental dimension has been the most developed of the three and offers a larger number of environmental impact categories (e.g., acidification potential (AP); global warming potential (GWP); eutrophication potential (EP); abiotic depletion potential of materials (ADP-minerals and metals); abiotic depletion potential for fossil fuels (ADP- fossil); photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP); ozone depletion potential (ODP); renewable energy (PE-Re); and nonrenewable energy (PE-NRe)). 2. The economic dimension focuses mainly on the economic cost of the production, construction, maintenance, and end of life of buildings. Economic analysis (LCC) uses a dynamic approach as it uses parameters that can vary over time, such as the discount rate, whereas in environmental analysis (LCA) the weight of impacts remains fully or largely unchanged over time (Hoogmartens et al., 2014). 3. The social dimension is the one that presents the greatest differences with respect to the two previous dimensions. For example, social impacts are usually related to local (geographical) conditions and organizational behavior in the company, while environmental impacts are mainly related to processes that can be similarly implanted in different locations (Backes & Traverso, 2021). Moreover, S-LCA is the LCA technique with the lowest level of maturity in the scientific literature(Petti et al., 2018). Based on the above, three requirements were taken into account in the selection of the impact categories: 1. To balance the number of indicators in each dimension. 2. To select quantitative indicators, mainly in the social dimension, where the use of qualitative or semiquantitative indicators is more frequent. 388 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment Where: S xP 5Cost of the building system “x” during the project stage. A5Estimated built area. S P 5Working hours of the building system “x” estimated by built area. S xC 5Working hours of the building system “x” spent in the construction stage.S aEC 5Working hours spent to buildthe building element “a.” S xU 5Working hours spent in the use of the building system “x” (embodied). S aEM 5Working hours spent on the maintenance of the building element “a.” S aER 5Working hours spent on the repair of the building element “a.” S aERP 5Working hours spent on replacing the building element “a.” S xE 5Working hours spent at the end-of-life stage of the building system “x.” S aED 5Working hours spent in demolishing the building element “a.” S aET 5Working hours spent in transporting the building element “a” to disposal. S aEF 5Working hours spent in the final disposal of the building element “a.” V aE 5Volume of materials used in the building element “a.” i 5Number of building elements used in the product/construction/use or end-of-life stage. 17.2.3.4 Dynamo script development A Dynamo script (Autodesk Revit, 2021) was programmed to visualize the results and automate the calculations following the steps described in (Llatas et al., 2022). A Dynamo script is an Autodesk-supported application that is found natively in the most recent versions of Revit and other software such as Maya. This application enables, by means of visual programming or code the creation of scripts (command file), whose main purpose is to help in automation tasks. Other studies employed Dynamo script to automate the LCA application. For example, Dynamo has been used to automate LCA and LCC analysis in building construction solutions (Carvalho et al., 2021). Some advantages of automating these calculations are: improved workflow, time savings, and its use in any other BIM model. Workflows, referred to as scripts in Dynamo, are composed of "nodes," which include five elements (with some exceptions): (1) Name, (usually a description of what they do), (2) The body of the node, (3) Ports (output and input), (4) Socket icon, and (5) Default value. To create custom nodes, there are different methods, such as C# format or Zero-Touch. In this case, the nodes were created and connected by wiring directly from the Dynamo user interface according to (Dynamo, 2022), considering the aspects detailed below. Thus the Dynamo script connected inputs and outputs with different results in each dimension, taking advantage of the actions that each one of them does to achieve. Fig. 17.8 shows a screenshot with the nodes developed in the Dynamo script and the social (orange), economic (blue), and environmental (green) impacts obtained in any given construction solution as an example. Creation of BIM-Objects The BIM-Objects were created from the building elements (beams, columns, floors) through Dynamo. Table 17.3 shows the BIM-Objects and building elements for each design option. The building elements follow the systematic structure of the BCCA (Andalusian Government, 2021). In addition, BIM-Objects follow the standard classification system used by the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) schema 395Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM developed by buildingSMART (buildingSMART, 2022) and formally registered by ISO 167391( ISO, 2018). This standard allows for storing data of the life cycle of the building elements and facilitates interoperability between different BIM software (e.g., Revit, Allplan, Archicad) without the loss of this information. A coding identifies each BIM-Object. This coding follows the IFC Classes and Types structure. For example, in the case study, the Classes “ifc_Beam” and “ifc_Column” were considered in the structural building system, and the Types “ifc_Beam_concrete” and “ifc_Beam_steel” were identified within the Class ifc_Beam in each alternative option. Creation of new properties to BIM-Objects Dynamo uses Objects to create and assign new LCSA properties to BIM. The IFC, besides structuring the information in Classes and Types, allows for the creation and selection of parameters in the BIM Objects, through the Property Sets (P_Sets). Enrichment of the IFC with new properties has been employed in previous studies with several approaches. For example, to manage bridge structure information (Park et al., 2020), to simulate building energy performance in buildings (Andriamamonjy et al., 2018) and for the inclusion of building services (Theißen et al., 2020). IFC4 scheme has also been enriched to integrate environmental and economic parameters in the evaluation (Santos et al., 2019). In this vein, (Llatas et al., 2022) proposed and carried out the inclusion of the inexistent parameters related to the LCSA modules of information, through dynamically extensible properties (IfcPropertySet). Therefore, one property was created per life cycle information module (A05, B18, C14), per dimension (environmental, economic, social), and per impact indicator (Kg CO2 eq, Euros, Working hours). Figure 17.8 Screenshot of the Dynamo script developed. This figure shows as an example a screenshot of how the nodes were carried out in the Dynamo script, and the visualization of the impacts for any construction system. In green the environmental impacts. In blue the economic impacts. In orange the social impacts. 396 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment Linking new properties to social, environmental, and economic data The new properties were linked to external databases through Dynamo. The data sheets were created in Excel files and follow the structure of the TBL library proposed by (Llatas et al., 2022). The TBL library contains information regarding the social, economic, and environmental impact categories of BIM-Objects. Fig. 17.7 shows an example of how the TBL library is structured and how it compiles information from other databases to store environmental, social, and economic information. Extraction of the quantity of materials required for building elements The type and quantity of materials required to construct a building element are a key factor in the total impact and thereforegather information related to the volume of materials of the building elements. This information was automatically obtained from the existing property IfcVolumeMeasure. Dynamo was used to extract. Quantification of impacts For the quantification of impacts, nodes were carried out in to perform the following concatenated operations through algorithms:the Dynamo script 1. First, the product between the new LCSA properties and building element volumes was done, by using Equations 20.1 to 20.12. 2. Second, the sum of the results obtained in step 1 according to the stages evaluated (A05, B18, C14) and the dimension (social, economic, environmental) was carried out. 3. Third, the sum of the results obtained in step 1 according to building elements (beams, pillars, floors, foundation) and dimensions (social, economic, environmental) was done. Visualization of results Finally, Dynamo outputs were graphs that were programmed to visualize the quantified impacts, comprising both bar charts and pie charts. These results were displayed in real time for each design option, so that once the designer selected the alternative elements, the program quantified the impacts for these new elements also in real time. 17.3 Results and discussion 17.3.1 Impacts of design options The results were obtained from running the Dynamo script (Autodesk Revit, 2021) linked to the BIM Revit model and the TBL database, and subsequently, the visualization of the charts, including the information in magnitude and comparison of the assessed categories, was automatically displayed. Fig. 17.9 shows the total results by dimension (environmental, economic, and social) and design option (concrete and steel). Fig. 17.10 shows the impact of each Life Cycle (LC) module on each dimension and design option. Fig. 17.11 shows the environmental, economic, and social impact of each building element. 397Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM 17.3.2 Usefulness of the BIM-based LCSA application for the designer The Dynamo script (Autodesk Revit, 2021) allowed the designer, non-LCA expert, for obtaining results of social, economic, and environmental impacts of alternative constructive solutions during their life cycle, as shown in Figs. 17.917.11.This evaluation was carried out in the early design stage of the project, with predimensioned structural elements. The designer simply selects the BIM-Objects to be applied to the project, verifies the correctness of the materials used, and the program automatically quantifies the impacts. Therefore the program helps to introduce Figure 17.9 Overall comparison of the two options for the three indicators. This figure is a bar chart showing the impact on each dimension (social, economic, and environmental) of each option (structural system). Figure 17.10 Comparison of the two options for the three indicators and LC modules included. This figure is a pie chart showing the impact of each module on each dimension (environmental, economic, social) and on each design option. 398 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment new social, environmental, and economic information, hitherto unknown, into project decision-making during the early stages of the project, a phase suitable for selecting the materials and construction elements with the least impact. 17.3.3 Comparison of the impact of building systems: concrete versus Steel The case study focused on the structural system, one of the building systems with the highest incidence of environmental impacts, as shown in other studies (Cabeza et al., 2021; Moncaster et al., 2018; Soust-Verdaguer et al., 2022), and therefore a significant building system in achieving a reduction in the embodied impacts (Moncaster et al., 2018). Option 1 (concrete) was identified as the most GWP producer, with more than two times that of Option 2 (steel and concrete) as shown Fig. 17.9. This result is consistent with other LCA studies that compare concrete and steel structures (Llatas et al., 2022; Oladazimi et al., 2020) and identify concrete-based materials as responsible for 83% of the total environmental load of the design (Kamari et al., 2022). Moreover, Fig. 17.10 shows similar trends of the contribution of each LC module in the options analyzed as detected in a previous study (Llatas et al., 2022): the A1A3 modules in the environmental dimension, the A5 (1A1A3) in the economic dimension, and the A5 in the social dimension. Finally, Fig. 17.11 shows the elements with the greatest impact in each dimension, the slabs (floors) in Option 1, and the foundation in Option 2. Figure 17.11 Visualization of the results of GWP in CO 2 eq., cost, and working hours of local employment spent in alternative structural building elements across the selected LC modules. This figure is a bar chart showing the impact of each building element of each design option on each dimension and module. 399Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM 17.3.4 Barriers and limitations Several modules were omitted, for example, the energy in use phase was omitted due to the low incidence of the structure on the operational energy compared with other building systems, such as the building envelope. This approach was also considered in other previous studies, for example in (Kamari et al., 2022). Furthermore, the lack of social, economic, or environmental data in the databases limits the complete modular structure of ISO 21931 (ISO, 2019) application of the BIM-LCSA. For example, the case study failed to obtain the impact of transportation (Module A4), given the lack of knowledge on the origin of the materials in the early phase of the project. In this vein, databases that provide geolocation aspects will be fundamental to contemplate the impact due to the transport of materials. Other simplifications were made, for example, the building elements were predimensioned, so that in the detailed phase of the project, once the structure is calculated, their volumes can change. This change will mainly affect the total impact in absolute value, which will nevertheless be at least more than 60% of the impacts obtained in the detailed phase of the project (Soust-Verdaguer et al., 2022). However, the usefulness of using this type of tool in the decision-making phase, rather than obtaining impacts in absolute terms, would be to obtain relative impacts between alternative solutions in order to compare them. In this sense, the level of uncertainty in relative terms is smaller than in absolute terms since, in both alternative options, 100% of the absolute values have not been obtained. 17.3.5 New challenges and trends New challenges will have to address and evaluate other building systems (e.g., building envelopes), in addition to other categories of social, environmental, and economic impact, and the inclusion of other life cycle phases. For example, the case study considered the disposal of the materials as the end-of-life scenario. Other end-of-life scenarios, such as reuse or recycling, should be considered. The development of local databases that integrate information from the three dimensions and that can be easily managed by designers will provide more reliable data to carry out the evaluation in each context. In addition, the enrichment of the IFC with new parameters and attributes is another challenge to be addressed, as has been previously highlighted (Tam et al., 2022). In this vein, a complete building sustainability assessment is recommended using an enriched IFC schema to calculate the energy demand, such as in (Andriamamonjy et al., 2018), in compliance with current Spanish standards (Spanish Ministry of Development, 2006) and simulation tools (e.g., Cypetherm HE Plus in the case of Spain) (CYPE Ingenieros S.A, 2022). The application of BIM-based LCSA methods to more case studies will obtain benchmarks in different building typologies and construction systems, for which the use of functional units that allow comparison of the results will be essential. Moreover, the harmonization of the three techniques (LCA, LCC, and S-LCA), as well as the consideration of the weights of each dimension, is necessary to 400 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment integrate the three dimensions. The case study, for example, evaluated one indicator per dimension, with a weight of “1” for the three indicators. Another BIM-based LCSA study (Filho et al., 2022) analyzed impact indicators in a low-income building by applying multicriteria techniques, although the study relied on external tools to quantify impacts. Future research should address a larger number of indicators in each dimension and weigh them. In this line, the use of machine learning techniques or multicriteria analysis methods allows to obtain rankings of constructive solutions and to identify the most optimal constructive solutions, according to the criteria and weights considered. Another challenge will be the development of impact quantification tools in the detailed phase of the project. Although this phase is less suitable for substituting construction elements of higher impact for others of lower impact, since most of the decisions have already been made and addressed, it is a suitable phase to quantify the absolute value of the impact with a lower level of uncertainty. Finally, the increasing implementation of the use of BIM in the construction sector will allow further development of tools programmed in BIM software (such as Revit, AllPlan, and Archicad). For example, the case study presented a Dynamo script (Autodesk Revit, 2021) integrated with Revit applied to a structural system. In the case of handling a larger number of building systems and data, other tools such as plug-ins or add-ins programmed in BIM software are more suitable for their greater automation level and therefore speed in data management, calculations, and visualization of impacts. 17.4 Conclusions In the coming years, the construction sector faces major challenges to reduce its impact, such as its complete decarbonization to meet its Net Zero by 2050 scenario. The LCA methodology is one of the most useful for objectively quantifying the social, economic, and environmental impact of a building during its life cycle. The early design phases are key to making decisions that reduce this impact. Although BIM methodology is not yet fully implemented in the construction sector, it is a useful method for storing and managing building life cycle information and therefore integrating LCA. Thus, the increasing implementation of the BIM methodology in the building sector is an opportunity to integrate automated LCA-based tools into the BIM workflow. Therefore, this chapter presented a case study that implemented LCSA, conceived as the sum of the LCA (environmental), economic LCC (Life Cycle Costing), and social S-LCA (social life cycle assessment), in BIM. The social, economic, and environmental impacts of two alternative building systems were automatically obtained in the early design phase by means of a Dynamo script. The results provided evidence that the Dynamo script enabled the application of the LCSA during the design stage and could help designers select low-impact building solutions for projects. 401Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM This type of tool is firmly aligned with sustainable strategies and policies, where impact prevention is presented as the most environmentally friendly option, contributing to the transition towards the decarbonization of the sector. In the EU, for example, the tool could contribute to the ultimate goal of meeting the challenge of the Green Deal and the Circular Economy Action Plan by moving toward a more sustainable digital building model. The proposed Dynamo script can be a basis for developing similar tools in other contexts and other building typologies. Future studies should explore lesser-known impact categories, such as those of the social dimension, harmonization of the three dimensions, the development of local databases that include information on more impact categories and life cycle phases, a higher level of automation to handle a greater amount of information covering all building systems, and the application of Artificial Intelligence techniques to perform multicriteria analysis for decision making and to detect optimized solutions. Funding This publication is part of the following projects: Grant P20_00541 funded by the Junta de Andalucı ´a and by ERDF A way of making Europe, Grant TED2021-129542B-I00, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by the European Union “NextGenerationEU”/ PRTR” and Grant PID2022-137650OB-I00 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. Acknowledgment The author thanks EMVISESA for providing the information on the building case study. References AbouHamad, M., & Abu-Hamd, M. (2019). Framework for construction system selection based on life cycle cost and sustainability assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241, 118397. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118397. Andalusian Government (2021). BCCA. Base de Costes de la Construccio ´n de Andalucı ´a. Clasificacio ´n Sistema ´tica de Precios Ba ´sicos, Auxiliares y Unitarios. Available from: https://www.juntadeandalucia.es/organismos/fomentoinfraestructurasyordenaciondelterritorio/areas/vivienda-rehabilitacion/planes-instrumentos/paginas/vivienda-bcca.html. Andriamamonjy, A., Saelens, D., & Klein, R. (2018). An automated IFC-based workflow for building energy performance simulation with Modelica. Automation in Construction,91, 166181. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.03.019. Autodesk Revit, About Revit Architecture. (2022). Available from: https://www.autodesk.com/. Autodesk Revit. (2021, September 21). Architecture 1, About Revit Architecture. https:// www.udemy.com/course/smcbarcm/. 402 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment Backes, J. G., & Traverso, M. (2021). Application of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in the construction sector: A systematic literature review. Processes,9(7), 1248. Available from https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9071248. BIM Forum (2020). Level Of Development (LOD) Specification Part I & Commentary https://bimforum.org/lod/. buildingSMART (2022). Available from: https://www.buildingsmart.org/. Cabeza, L. F., Boquera, L., Cha `fer, M., & Ve ´rez, D. (2021). Embodied energy and embodied carbon of structural building materials: Worldwide progress and barriers through literature map analysisEmbodied energy and embodied carbon of structural building materials: Worldwide progress and barriers through literature map analysis. Energy and Buildings,231. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110612,https:// www.journals.elsevier.com/energy-and-buildings. Carvalho, J. P., Villaschi, F. S., & Braganc¸a, L. (2021). Assessing life cycle environmental and economic impacts of building construction solutions with BIM. Sustainability,13(16), 8914. Available from https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168914,https://www.scopus.com/record/display. uri?eid 52-s2.0-85112375980&origin 5resultslist&sort 5plf-f&src 5s&st1 5dynamo 1 AND 1LCA&sid 589acb67d0b2ae7e776028892df8e96f6&sot 5b&sdt 5b&sl 529&s 5T- ITLE-ABS-KEY%28dynamo 1AND 1LCA%29&relpos 51&citeCnt 55&searchTerm 5. CYPE Ingenieros S.A (2022). https://info.cype.com/es/software/cypetherm-he-plus/. Dynamo (2022, Spetember 21). https://dynamobim.org/. Ecoinvent Ecoinvent. (2022). Available from: https://ecoinvent.org/. EeBGuide Project (2012). Unpublished content operational guidance for life cycle assessment studies of the energy efficient buildings initiative. https://www.eebguide.eu/. EMVISESA (2022). Unpublished content Empresa Municipal de la Vivienda de Sevilla. https://www.emvisesa.org/. EN (2011). Unpublished content EN 15978:2011 - Sustainability of construction works - Assessment of environmental performance of buildings - Calculation method. https:// www.en-standard.eu/bs-en-15978-2011-sustainability-of-construction-works-assessment- of-environmental-performance-of-buildings-calculation-method/. EN (2012). Unpublished content EN 15804:2012 1A1:2013 - Sustainability of construction works-Environmental product declarations-Core rules for the product category of construction products. https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/a7de5991-2e9f-4e93- b34c-f1d794cbca02/en-15804-2012a1-2013. EN (2015). EN 16627 - Sustainability of construction works - Assessment of economic performance of buildings - Calculation methods. Available from: https://www.en-standard. eu/csn-en-16627-sustainability-of-construction-works-assessment-of-economic-perfor- mance-of-buildings-calculation-methods/. European Commission (2019). Unpublished content The European Green Deal. https://ec. europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_es. European Commission (2020). Unpublished content Circular economy Action Plan. https:// ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_es. European Commission (2022). Unpublished content Buildings and construction. https://ec. europa.eu/growth/industry/sustainability/buildings-and-construction_en. Eurostat (2018, April 15). 2022 Unpublished content Waste statistics. https://ec.europa.eu/ eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title 5Waste_statistics#Total_waste_generation. Filho, M. V. A. P. M., da Costa, B. B. F., Najjar, M., Figueiredo, K. V., de Mendonc¸a, M. B., & Haddad, A. N. (2022). Sustainability assessment of a low-income building: A BIM-LCSA-FAHP-based analysis. Buildings,12(2), 181. Available from https://doi. org/10.3390/buildings12020181. 403Life cycle sustainability assessment in BIM Hoogmartens, R., Van Passel, S., Van Acker, K., & Dubois, M. (2014). Bridging the gap between LCA, LCC and CBA as sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,48,2733. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.05.001. IEA International Energy Agency (2019). Unpublished content Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction 2019 https://www.iea.org/reports/global-status-report-for- buildings-and-construction-2019 IPCC (2018). Global Warming of 1.5 % oCMitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5Cinthe Context of Sustainable Development. Available from: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/mitigation-pathways-compatible-with-1-5c-in-the-context-of-sustainable-4-development/. ISO (2006a, April 15). 2022 Unpublished content ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management. LCA. Principles and Framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html. ISO (2006b, April 15). 2022 Unpublished content ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management. LCA. Requirements and guidelines. https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html#:B:text 5ISO %2014044%3A2006%20specifies%20requirements,and%20critical%20review%20of%20the. ISO (2018). Unpublished content ISO 16739-1:2020 Preview Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) for data sharing in the construction and facility management industries Part 1: Data schema. https://www.iso.org/standard/70303.html. ISO (2019, April 15). 2022 Unpublished content ISO 219312:2019 Sustainability in buildings and civil engineering works-Framework for methods of assessment of the environmental, social and economic performance of construction works-Part 2: Civil engineering. https://www.iso.org/standard/61696.html. Itec, BEDEC. (2021). Available from: https://metabase.itec.cat/vide/ca/bedec. Kamari, A., Kotula, B. M., & Schultz, C. P. L. (2022). A BIM-based LCA tool for sustainable building design during the early design stageA BIM-based LCA tool for sustainable building design during the early design stage. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment. Available from https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-09-2021-0157,http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id 5sasbe. Kloepffer, W. (2008). Life cycle sustainability assessment of products (with Comments by Helias A. Udo de Haes, p. 95). International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,13(2), 8995. Available from https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2008.02.376. Larsen, V. G., Tollin, N., Sattrup, P. A. M. B., & Tine, H. (2022). What are the challenges in assessing circular economy for the built environment? A literature review on integrating LCA, LCC and S-LCA in life cycle sustainability assessment, LCSA. Journal of Building Engineering, 104203. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104203. Llatas, C., Soust-Verdaguer, B., & Passer, A. (2020). Implementing Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment during design stages in Building Information Modelling: From systematic literature review to a methodological approach. Building and Environment,182. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107164,http://www.elsevier. com/inca/publications/store/2/9/6/index.htt. Llatas, C., Soust-Verdaguer, B., Hollberg, A., Palumbo, E., & Quin ˜ones, R. (2022). BIM- based LCSA application in early design stages using IFCBIM-based LCSA application in early design stages using IFC. Automation in Construction,138, 104259. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104259. Mc Graw-Hill construction (2013). World green building trends, 2013. Available from: https://sftool.gov/Content/attachments/World_Green_Building_Trends_SmartMarket_ Report_2013.pdf. Meex, E., Hollberg, A., Knapen, E., Hildebrand, L., & Verbeeck, G. (2018). Requirements for applying LCA-based environmental impact assessment tools in the early stages of building 404 Materials Selection for Sustainability in the Built Environment