In the last decades, various building information modeling–life cycle assessment (BIM-LCA) integration approaches have been developed to assess the environmental impact of the built asset. However, there is a lack of consensus on the optimal BIM-LCA integration approach that provides the most accurate and efficient assessment outcomes. To compare and determine their accuracy and efficiency, this study aimed to investigate four typical BIM-LCA integration solutions, namely, conventional, parametric modeling, plug-in and industry foundation classes (IFC)-based integration.
The four integration approaches were developed and applied using the same building project. A quantitative technique for evaluating the accuracy and efficiency of BIM-LCA integration solutions was used. Four indicators for assessing the performance of BIM-LCA integration were (1) validity of LCA results, (2) accuracy of bill-of-quantity (BOQ) extraction, (3) time for developing life cycle inventories (i.e. developing time) and (4) time for calculating LCA results (i.e. calculation time).
The results show that the plug-in-based approach outperforms others in developing and calculation time, while the conventional one could derive the most accuracy in BOQ extraction and result validity. The parametric modeling approach outperforms the IFC-based method regarding BOQ extraction, developing time and calculation time. Despite this, the IFC-based approach produces LCA outcomes with approximately 1% error, proving its validity.
This paper forms one of the first studies that employ a quantitative and objective method to determine the performance of four typical BIM-LCA integration solutions and reveal the trade-offs between the accuracy and efficiency of the integration approaches. The findings provide practical references for LCA practitioners to select appropriate BIM-LCA integration approaches for evaluating the environmental impact of the built asset during the design phase.
