Sustainable Structural Design. Master s Thesis

Sustainable Structural Design Master s Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joseph M. Danatzko Graduate Program in Civil Engineering The Ohio State University 2010 Thesis Committee Dr. Halil Sezen, Advisor Dr. Shive K. Chaturvedi

Copyright by Joseph Michael Danatzko 2010

Abstract Efficient energy use during construction and operation of buildings and sustainable building design are important issues in both modern society and the engineering community. Innovative methods are needed to address the environmental impact, energy use and other sustainability issues faced during planning and design of buildings. This study investigates sustainable design methodologies, the relationships between structural system and the 2009 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, the impact that project size and type can have on project sustainability, sustainable properties associated with construction materials (such as steel, cast-in-place concrete and prestressed/precast concrete) and computer programs aimed at determining the properties of sustainable structural design alternatives. This study investigates some sustainable structural design methodologies including minimizing material use, minimizing material production energy, minimizing embodied energy, life-cycle analysis/inventory/assessment and maximizing building reuse and presents their positive and negative sustainable qualities. This study discusses and reviews the categories of the 2009 LEED rating system in which points could be awarded to a project for sustainability of its structural frame. This study presents the role that project size and structural systemtype play on aspects of sustainable design including the design and analysis phase, land use, investments in sustainable technologies, use of timber as a primary load bearing material and other sustainable issues. This study reviews the structurally applicable sustainable properties associated with structural steel, cast-in-place and prestessed/precast concrete. Finally, this study provides a review of life-cycle analysis computer programs focusing on three (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0, SimaPRO v7.1 and Athena Impact Estimator v4.0) aimed at assessing the sustainability of design alternatives. This study determined that no single current sustainable design ii

methodology can address all project sustainability issues at this time. Also, the LEED 2009 rating system does not reward projects for sustainable design of their structural systems in the same manner it does other aspects of design. It was determined that construction type and project size can have significant impact on sustainable opportunities for a project and that no single construction material is the most sustainable compared to others for all design types at this time. Finally, existing sustainability analysis software does not meet the current needs of its users in assessing design alternative sustainable properties and provides users with basic structural system comparisons, as exemplified by parametric studies using the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0. iii

Dedication I would like to dedicate this work to my grandfathers for their inspiration and the lessons they taught me: Joseph G. Inglese Michael Danatzko iv

Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following people for their help and guidance in life, civil engineering, career pursuits and opportunities, education and on this study: Dr. Halil Sezen, P.E. Dr. Shive K. Chaturvedi Dr. Hojat Adeli Dr. Caroline Merry Dr. Steven J. Kurtz, P.E. John C. Inglese A.I.A., P.E., LEED AP John Warren Nicholas R. Fisco Muhammad S. Lodhi Cindy Crawford Patrice Allen Diane Rano v

Vita 2003...Saint Peter s Preparatory School 2003...Engineering Intern/Drafting Assistant/ Drafter, Inglese Architecture and Engineering (East Rutherford, NJ) 2005...Civil Engineering Intern, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Allentown, PA) 2006...Civil Engineering Intern, Perini Corporation Civil Division (Newark, NJ) 2006 to 2007...Independent Study Lafayette College Steel Bridge Design Team, Lafayette College (Easton, PA) 2006 to 2007...Design Engineering Intern, Bohler Engineering (Warren, NJ) 2007...B.S. Civil Engineering (Minor: English), Lafayette College (Easton, PA) vi

2007 to 2008...Structural Engineer, Inglese Architecture and Engineering (East Rutherford, NJ) 2007 to 2008...Structural Engineer I, Washington Group International (Currently URS Washington Division) (Princeton, NJ) 2008...Consulting Structural Engineer, CDI Corporation (Contracted by URS Washington Division) (Princeton, NJ) 2008 to 2009...Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University 2008 to 2009...National Student Steel Bridge Team Graduate Advisor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University 2009 to 2010...French Fellowship Recipient, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University Field of Study Major Field: Civil Engineering Specialization: Structural Engineering vii

Table of Contents Abstract... ii Dedication... iv Acknowledgements...v Vita... vi List of Tables...xv List of Figures... xvi Chapter 1: Introduction...1 1.1 Introduction... 1 1.2 Objectives... 2 1.3 Organization and Scope... 3 Chapter 2: Literature Review...5 2.1 Sustainable Structural Design Methodologies... 5 2.1.1 Sustainable Structural Design of Tall Structures... 5 2.2 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System... 6 2.3 Sustainability and Construction Type... 6 2.4 Sustainability and Construction Materials... 7 2.5 Review of Life-Cycle Analysis Computer Programs... 7 Chapter 3: Sustainable Structural Design Methodologies...8 3.1 Introduction... 8 3.2 Methodology 1: Minimizing Material Use... 9 viii

3.2.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 1... 9 3.2.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 1... 10 3.3 Methodology 2: Minimizing Material Production Energy... 11 3.3.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 2... 11 3.3.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 2... 12 3.4 Methodology 3: Minimizing Embodied Energy... 12 3.4.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 3... 13 3.4.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 3... 13 3.5 Methodology 4: Life-Cycle Analysis/Inventory/Assessment... 14 3.5.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 4... 14 3.5.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 4... 15 3.6 Methodology 5: Maximizing Structural System Reuse... 16 3.6.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 5... 17 3.6.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 5... 17 3.7 Conclusions... 18 Chapter 4: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Rating System...20 4.1 Introduction... 20 4.2 LEED Rating System Relative to Structural Design... 21 4.2.1 MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse-Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and Roof... 22 4.2.1.1 Benefits of MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse... 22 4.2.1.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse... 23 4.2.2 MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse... 24 ix

4.2.2.1 Benefits of MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse... 24 4.2.2.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse... 25 4.2.3 MR Credit 4: Recycled Content... 25 4.2.3.1 Benefits of MR Credit 4: Recycled Content... 26 4.2.3.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 4: Recycled Content... 26 4.2.4 MR Credit 5: Regional Materials... 27 4.2.4.1 Benefits of MR Credit 5: Regional Materials... 28 4.2.4.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 5: Regional Materials... 29 4.2.5 MR Credit 7: Certified Wood... 29 4.2.5.1 Benefits of MR Credit 7: Certified Wood... 30 4.2.5.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 7: Certified Wood... 30 Chapter 5: Sustainability and Construction Type...32 5.1 Introduction... 32 5.2 Construction Type... 32 5.3 Wood Construction... 32 5.3.1 Design and Analysis Phase... 33 5.3.2 Investments in Sustainable Technologies... 33 5.3.3 Use of Wood as Primary Load Bearing Material... 33 5.3.4 Other Wood Sustainability Issues... 34 5.4 Steel and Concrete Construction... 35 5.4.1 Design and Analysis Phase... 35 5.4.2 Land Use... 36 x

5.4.3 Investments in Sustainable Technologies... 36 5.4.4 Building Materials... 37 5.4.5 Other Steel and Concrete Construction Sustainability Issues... 38 5.5 The Built Environment... 39 5.6 Conclusions... 40 Chapter 6: Sustainability of Construction Materials...42 6.1 Introduction... 42 6.2 Structural Steel... 42 6.2.1 LEED 2009 and Structural Steel... 42 6.2.2 Structural Steel Section Production... 45 6.2.3 Recycled Materials Content and Structural Steel... 45 6.2.4 Other Sustainable Issues of Structural Steel... 46 6.3 Cast-in-Place Concrete... 47 6.3.1 LEED 2009 and Cast-in-Place Concrete... 47 6.3.2 Cast-in-Place Concrete Member Production... 49 6.3.3 Recycled Materials Content and Cast-in-Place Concrete... 50 6.3.4 Other Sustainable Issues of Cast-in-Place Concrete... 51 6.4 Prestressed/Precast Concrete... 51 6.4.1 LEED 2009 Sustainable Qualities and Prestressed/Precast Concrete... 52 6.4.2 Prestressed/Precast Concrete Member Production... 53 6.4.3 Recycled Materials Content and Prestressed/Precast Concrete... 54 6.4.4 Other Sustainable Qualities of Prestressed/Precast Concrete... 54 xi

6.5 Conclusions... 55 6.5.1 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Steel... 55 6.5.2 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Cast-in-Place Concrete... 55 6.5.3 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Prestressed/Precast Concrete... 56 Chapter 7: Review of Life Cycle Analysis Computer Programs...58 7.1 Introduction... 58 7.2 Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0... 59 7.2.1 BEES v4.0 Program Outputs... 61 7.2.2 BEES v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Advantages... 64 7.2.3 BEES v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages... 65 7.3 SimaPRO v7.1... 66 7.3.1 SimaPRO v7.1 Program Outputs... 67 7.3.2 SimaPRO v7.1 Sustainable Measurement Advantages... 68 7.3.3 SimaPRO v7.1 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages... 69 7.4 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0... 70 7.4.1 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Program Outputs... 71 7.4.2 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Advantages... 73 7.4.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages... 74 7.5 Conclusions and Program Highlights... 75 7.5.1 BEES v4.0 Program Conclusions... 75 7.5.2 SimaPRO v7.1 Program Conclusions... 76 7.5.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Program Conclusions... 76 xii

7.5.4 General Life Cycle Analysis Computer Program Conclusions... 77 Chapter 8: Modeling and Analysis with the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0...78 8.1 Introduction... 78 8.2 Modeling Parameters... 79 8.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Parametric Studies... 85 8.3.1 Study 1: Column Energy Consumption... 85 8.3.1.1 Study 1: Input Values... 85 8.3.2 Study 1: Analysis... 86 8.3.3 Study 1: Conclusions... 90 8.4 Study 2: Beam Energy Consumption... 90 8.4.1 Study 2: Input Values... 90 8.4.2 Study 2: Analysis... 91 8.4.3 Study 2: Conclusions... 95 8.5 Study 3: Concrete Suspended Slab Span Energy Consumption... 95 8.5.1 Study 3: Input Values... 95 8.5.2 Study 3: Analysis... 96 8.5.3 Study 3: Conclusions... 98 8.6 Study 4: Concrete Strength Energy Consumption... 99 8.6.1 Study 4: Input Values... 99 8.6.2 Study 4: Analysis... 99 8.6.3 Study 4: Conclusions... 101 8.7 Study 5: Concrete Fly-Ash Percentage Effect on Energy Consumption... 102 xiii

8.7.1 Study 5: Input Values... 102 8.7.2 Study 5: Analysis... 103 8.7.3 Study 5: Conclusions... 107 8.8 Concluding Remarks... 107 Chapter 9: Conclusions, Limitations and Recommendations...108 9.1 Summary and Concluding Remarks... 108 9.2 Conclusions... 110 9.3 Limitations... 111 9.4 Recommendations... 111 References...113 Appendix A1: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 1...116 Appendix A2: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 2...144 Appendix A3: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 3...168 Appendix A4: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 4...174 Appendix A5: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 5...180 xiv

List of Tables Table 3.1. Positive and negative sustainable attributes of sustainable structural design methodologies...19 Table 5.1. Sustainable design aspect qualities by construction type...41 Table 6.1. Structurally applicable sustainable properties of steel, cast-in-place concrete and prestressed/precast concrete as construction materials...57 Table 8.1. List of highlighted input labels and references...82 Table 8.2. Values employed for inputs in study 1...86 Table 8.3. Total energy consumption values for study 1 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations...87 Table 8.4. Values employed for inputs in study 2...91 Table 8.5. Total energy consumption values for study 2 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations...92 Table 8.6. Values employed for inputs in study 3...96 Table 8.7. Total energy consumption values for study 3 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations...97 Table 8.8. Values employed for inputs in study 3...99 Table 8.9. Total energy consumption values for study 4 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations...100 Table 8.10. Values employed for inputs in study 3...102 Table 8.11. Total energy consumption values for study 3 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations...104 xv

List of Figures Figure 7.1. Screenshot of initial program screen for BEES v4.0...60 Figure 7.2. Screenshot of ratio weighting option offered by BEES v4.0...60 Figure 7.3. Economic performance graphical output for stucco, aluminum siding and trespa meteon comparison...62 Figure 7.4. Environmental performance graphical output for stucco, aluminum siding and trespa meteon comparison...63 Figure 7.5. Overall Performance Graphical Output for Stucco, Aluminum Siding and Trespa Meteon comparison...64 Figure 7.6. SimaPRO v7.1 product tree for 1.0 kilogram of cattle feed...67 Figure 7.7. SimaPRO v7.1 Graphical Output for One (1) Kilogram of Cattle Feed...68 Figure 7.8. Athena impact estimator v4.0 bill of materials report generic example...71 Figure 7.9. Athena Impact Estimator v 4.0 tabular output-generic example...72 Figure 7.10. Athena Impact Estimator v 4.0 graphical output-generic example...73 Figure 8.1. Illustration of structure employed as generic model for Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 energy consumption assessment...79 Figure 8.2. Screenshot of initial input interface for a New project in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0...80 Figure 8.3. Screenshot of interface for Concrete Suspended Slab in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0...81 Figure 8.4. Screenshot of interface for Mixed Columns and Beam in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0...82 Figure 8.5. Screenshot of project assembly tree with project heading highlighted...83 Figure 8.6. Screenshot of Reports interface window with highlighted areas...84 Figure 8.7. Column height vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf...88 xvi

Figure 8.8. Column height vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf...88 Figure 8.10. Live load vs. total energy consumption for columns...89 Figure 8.11. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf...93 Figure 8.12. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf...93 Figure 8.13. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 100 psf...94 Figure 8.14. Live load vs. total energy consumption for beams...94 Figure 8.15. Concrete suspended slab span length vs. total energy consumption...97 Figure 8.16. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab at span lengths of 15, 20, 25, 28 and 30-ft...98 Figure 8.17. Concrete suspended slab concrete strength vs. total energy consumption..100 Figure 8.18. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab at concrete strengths of 3000, 4000 and 9000 psi...101 Figure 8.19. Gross floor area vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf...105 Figure 8.20. Gross floor area vs.total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf...105 Figure 8.21. Gross floor area vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 100 psf...106 Figure 8.22. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab fly-ash percentages...106 xvii

Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction In the modern engineering and architectural culture, sustainable design and energy efficiency have become paramount in design and application for architects, engineers and users as civic requirements and financial limitations mount. In all areas of civil engineering, engineers are encouraged to ensure that projects have the maximum lifespan for their intended use and employ the least amount of natural recourses (e.g., raw materials and energy required for their production) while still meeting client, economic, societal demands and code requirements. Two fields of civil engineering that are constantly assessing their ability to achieve sustainable goals are the engineering design and construction industries. The goal of these industries is to achieve lasting, environmentally sound solutions to the problems faced in the modern culture and look to achieve this in their design of new and rehabilitative projects. Achieving this goal requires the construction and design engineering communities to assess all the aspects and processes involved in a project. These aspects are can be varying and influenced by local conditions and the economy. They include but are not limited to; the required material production energies, design alternative maintenance requirements, material durability, recycled materials contents, project adherence to and applicability within sustainable rating systems such as LEED, structural system design methodologies, relation of sustainability to construction type, sustainability and construction materials and life cycle analysis modeling computer programs. Research into each of these areas contributes to determining methods for achieving high overall project sustainability. Various aspects of sustainable design and construction research have been and are currently being investigated. Research into the qualification and development of the sustainable properties of construction materials has been carried out in an attempt to 1

provide structural designers, planners and constructors with methods for optimizing the environmental impact of structural design. Research into the effect that structural form, system and magnitude have on building design relative to a structure s overall sustainable qualities has also been conducted to address the means and methods pertinent to all design phases (planning, design and implementation). Along with this research, rating systems such as the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system must be assessed in various ways for their applicability to sustainable structural design. LEED is currently employed in the United States to grade various construction types on a credit weighted points system based on the environmental impacts each has across 13 categories typically associated with building design. While the LEED ranking system rewards construction projects (with little mention of structural system design) that meet its requirements, the engineering community looks to go further and better define the sustainable properties of all aspects of a project. This is illustrated by the construction materials production industry s effort to determine their economic and environmental impact more fully and achieve more sustainable designs. The aspects of a project s form, structural system and magnitude directly relate the issues facing both structural engineers and architects in attempts to achieve more sustainable structural designs. This study aims to present research on these aspects of sustainable structural design and illustrates the effect these issues have on structural systems. While structural design and sustainable structures hold many other key elements (such as material choice, life-cycle analysis, construction types and methodologies, etc.), this study focuses on the sustainability achievable in structural design and the nature of how it can directly relate to sustainability in the built environment. 1.2 Objectives The main objectives of this study are to: Present the roles of structure and structural design can play in project sustainability. Present the concept of sustainable structural design. 2

Present and discuss five sustainable structural design methodologies. Present and review the 2009 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building document s applicability for structural system design. Present and review the role project size and material type play in structural and sustainable design. Present and discuss the role sustainability plays in three major construction materials (steel, cast-in-place reinforced concrete and prestressed/precast concrete). Describe and review the concept of life cycle analysis and its implication on structural design. Present and investigate the effectiveness of life cycle analysis computer programs aimed at assessing design alternative s sustainable qualities. Perform parametric studies use a LCA package program (the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0) to investigate the effects of columns, beams, slabs, concrete strength and fly-ash percentage on energy consumption and sustainable structural design. Present conclusions drawn from this study, limitations involved in this research and recommendations for future research. 1.3 Organization and Scope This thesis investigates sustainable structural design and provides background information and review of all concepts addressed. Chapter 3 presents the role structure and structural design play in overall project sustainability and the concept of sustainable structural design. This chapter also discusses five potential design methodologies to achieve sustainable structural designs. Chapter 4 presents and reviews the 2009 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building document s applicability within project structural system design. Chapter 5 presents and investigates the role construction type plays in structural and sustainable design. Chapter 6 presents and reviews the role sustainability plays in three commonly used construction materials (steel, cast-in-place reinforced concrete and prestressed/precast concrete). Chapter 7 presents and reviews the concept of life cycle analysis and life cycle analysis computer 3

programs aimed at assessing design alternatives sustainable qualities. Chapter 8 presents parametric studies conducted using the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 to assess issues of energy consumption in structural systems. This chapter addresses this by assessing the sustainability of columns, beams, slabs, concrete strength and fly-ash percentages via the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 program output. Chapter 9 presents the conclusions drawn from this study, limitations involved in this research and recommendations for future research. 4

Chapter 2: Literature Review 2.1 Sustainable Structural Design Methodologies Sustainable design has been at the forefront of research in both the engineering and architecture communities for several years. Spurred by civic, monetary and political motivations, analysis of the effect that structures and construction has on the world around it has been conducted. Various researchers from numerous fields have worked to present the multifaceted world of sustainable construction and design and the methodologies, mindsets and practices associated with it. In the current building system design processes, structural engineers play a limited role in the overall sustainability of a design (Kestner 2007). While the contribution of sustainability to the built environment typically influences the architectural form of a structure, the performance and cost of a project drive the engineer s work and bottom line. While the building and construction community look to improve sustainable development through attention to integrated design and form, cost and structural performance must remain at the forefront of development (Jackson 2008 and Beheiry et. al 2006). Notwithstanding the merit of research into the sustainable properties of materials and the energy saving methodologies to overall sustainable design, previous research has illustrated that sustainable structural design relies on the proper implementation of structural form and systems. Also as suggested by previous research, the future of the built environment needs to account for more varied aspects of structure and construction (Smith 2007 and Horvath et al. 1998). 2.1.1 Sustainable Structural Design of Tall Structures In a discussion on sustainable structural design, building size and magnitude play an integral part. As noted by Smith (2007), tall buildings can be considered sustainable structures in their very existence as they optimize the use of limited land resources. 5

Coupled with this are the increased loads, energy use, calculation time, etc. that are also associated with tall structures. For this reason, tall structures provide a platform to address how incorporating structural design and form with architectural desires and environmental constraints are keys to sustainable designs The design, construction, architecture and form of tall buildings each contribute to a structure s sustainable design. Each provide an illustration of the effects on sustainability that structural design can have outside of material choice and energy conservation. Sustainable structural design relies on designing structures that in their inherent nature within the built environment serve to enhance and provide to the existing infrastructure system. Tall buildings provide opportunities for sustainable structural design, as exemplified above, and through their place and use within both the general public s everyday life and engineering community. 2.2 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System (LEED) is a tool employed by project designers to illustrate the effectiveness that their design choices can have on project sustainability. Developed by the United State Green Building Council (USGBC), the LEED 2009 rating system awards credits to a project for meeting outlined prerequisites and goals that are summed for a total point score under which a project s sustainable rating (silver, gold or platinum) is awarded. Design professionals petition the USGBC for the rating through an application process that requires detailed documentation of energy conservation efforts undertaken during the projects construction and operation. The USGBC publishes guidelines against which application for sustainable ratings are measured. The guidelines have been prepared for numerous construction types. This document provides and outline for the manner in which application for sustainable rating must be completed as well as guidelines and suggestions for meeting individual credit acquirements and goals. 2.3 Sustainability and Construction Type In structural design, the type of construction being undertaken by a project directly relates to its ability to achieve its sustainability goals. As the magnitude of a project and/or structure increase, its operating and embodied energy also increase. Due 6

to this, review of the effect that construction type (wood construction and steel and concrete construction) can have on the sustainable properties of a project is crucial to understand the role structural systems play in sustainability (Kestner 2007 and Szekely 1996). 2.4 Sustainability and Construction Materials Construction materials play a integral part in assessing the sustainability of any design alternative. Structural steel, cast-in-place reinforced concrete and prestressed/precast concrete each have unique qualities that contribute to the sustainability of a project. Good sustainable properties are associated with structural components that have low energy costs, high durability, low maintenance requirements and contain high-proportions of recycles materials (Naik 2008). The construction materials discussed each have their own positive and negative sustainable properties that have been reviewed from industry and research agency data. 2.5 Review of Life-Cycle Analysis Computer Programs This study looked to review the implementation of sustainable design concepts and methodologies in current life cycle analysis (LCA) computer programs. In an effort to assess the economic and environmental impact that design alternatives can have on a project, sustainability-modeling programs have been written. These programs attempt to assess the sustainability of design alternatives for comparison in an effort to determine the most sustainable option. Programs of specific interest in assessing structural design sustainability are the Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0, SimaPRO v7.1 and Athena Impact Estimator v4.0. These programs address the problem of sustainability measurement in various ways. 7

Chapter 3: Sustainable Structural Design Methodologies 3.1 Introduction A project s structural form, system and magnitude directly relate to the issues that its engineers and architects face when determining the most sustainable structural design alternative. This chapter presents research on numerous aspects and methodologies of sustainable design and illustrates their effect on structural systems. Structural engineers have various methods to design a structural element or system. From material choice to lateral force-resisting system, a structural system and its layout become a combination of the architectural form and engineering properties (two aspects that can often be at odds with one another.) This chapter assumes the goal of sustainable structural design to be the production of a structural system that meets the needs of the owner and user while minimizing the environmental impact and conserving resources where possible. From low/high-rise buildings to short/long-span bridges and any structure in between, minimizing project impact on natural resources and the environment is a goal of engineers, architects and builders alike. This chapter discusses some design methodologies for achieving this goal including: Methodology 1.) Methodology 2.) Methodology 3.) Methodology 4.) Methodology 5.) Minimizing Material Use Minimizing Material Production Energy Minimizing Embodied Energy Life-Cycle Analysis/Inventory/Assessment Maximizing Structural System Reuse Each design methodology has both positive and negative sustainable qualities. While each methodology has the same end goal, this goal is reached via different routes that can compete with one another and can have adverse effects either individually or combined on a successful sustainable structural design. It should be noted that these design methodologies, and the discussion herein, look to address issues concerning 8

structural, and not non-structural, members and construction materials. It is not the intention of this study to address the effect that non-structural members or materials can have on overall project sustainability. Therefore, for example, glass as a non-structural building material is not discussed in this research. 3.2 Methodology 1: Minimizing Material Use As presented by Moon (2008), total structural material minimization can be one goal of sustainable structural design. Engineers can achieve this in two ways. As suggested by Shi at al. (2009), combinations of various material types to form more efficient structural members and systems is one method by which the structural engineer can use the minimal amount of natural resources. Similarly, optimization of a structural model employing a single material type can be another method that reduces the amount of material employed in a design. Likewise, a project architect s methods for minimizing material use are two-fold. An architect can generate a building layout that produces the greatest amount of unusable space from the project site while allowing for all the functionality required by the structure s use. Contrary to this, an architect can minimize building material by making the layout itself as efficient as possible for intended structural use, but without producing the maximum amount of usable space (Trabbuco 2008). While in many cases the proposed building layout achieves the maximum usable space, the second method looks to employ layouts that maximize use-productivity while the first attempts to maximize usable space. Minimizing material use is one sustainable design methodology that can be achieved separately by architects and engineers. This design methodology achieves the goal of sustainable design producing structures that can perform as required while being as structurally efficient as possible. 3.2.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 1 Research into this topic has included evaluation of similar building systems with varying heights to determine and quantify the increase in the amount of material associated with each layout. Also, research on lateral force resisting systems has been conducted to determine their impact of the total material use (Moon 2008, Shi et al. 9

2009). A structure employing the minimal material can achieve the goal of a sustainable design as it has the least impact on the natural environment through lower raw material use. Also, this methodology can affect the structural engineering community to develop more efficient and innovative design processes using the least amount of materials. As a result, engineers may need to evaluate and improve the current conventional design concepts and practices to determine the most efficient manner to achieve designs with the minimum amount of materials. 3.2.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 1 While the end goal of least impact on natural resources is achieved, the analysis and design time associated with these methods can be computationally high. The additional computation time required is due to the complexity involved in solving structural optimization problems or systems with multiple material types interacting. The increased complexity may require that more construction drawings with greater detail must be provided to contractors following the design phase. In short, more calculations and greater complexity take the engineer more time to complete and require more drawings. In addition, a structural design optimization to the use the minimum amount of materials may not be the most sustainable design as construction issues or needs require additional resources. A project s approvals process becomes longer as the number of drawings and details increase. This process may also lead to disputes between architect, engineer and owner as minimal changes by one may require complete redesign by the other. Although new tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM) can reduce the amount of time and effort needed to modify a design, simple revisions to a complicated design still require time. Following the design process, the construction duration of the structure also increases as well as the time required for scheduling and labor due to increased design complexity. Along with this, there may be increased need for design construction clarifications, such as requests for information (RFIs), as complexity of the design increases. All of these possible negative aspects are likely to adversely affect the total project cost. 10

3.3 Methodology 2: Minimizing Material Production Energy Apart from the design of the structural system itself, a methodology for structural sustainability involves reducing the amount of energy and natural resources required for the production of construction materials. For all construction materials (cast-in-place reinforced concrete, prestressed concrete, steel, wood, masonry, etc.) there exists a production energy cost. This cost can vary from year to year, and by location, and can be the result of the world market and environmental regulation requirements. Sustainability enters the material production process mainly during the evaluation of the energy costs required in the gathering, refining, and mixing (etc.) of raw materials. Along with this, sustainability in this methodology relies on the reduction of overall energy costs that can be made to produce materials with the same, or similarly structurally useful, material properties as current production methods. This methodology calls for engineers to designate the use of or specify structural elements that employ production-energy efficient materials in their designs. It also calls on the respective industries to best quantify their energy uses and work to improve current energy costs and production methods. Along with this, industries should seek the development of new technologies and processes for material generation. Another critical aspect of this methodology calls for the reduction and monitoring of material generation by-products and emissions (Naik 2008). 3.3.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 2 Researchers and industry experts have been working in recent years to quantify both the positive and negative effects of construction materials from a sustainable viewpoint. By providing and compiling data on the energy expenditures associated with construction material production, energy values can be tied to sustainable material properties. In achieving a sustainable structural design, this methodology can be advantageous in its attempt to conserve natural recourses and reduce by-products and emissions. Also, studying and providing material production energies to design professionals may lead to innovations in design as the relation between material strength and the energy required for its construction can be determined. In short, as the industry and engineers more fully define construction material properties, the sustainability of 11

structural systems will increase. 3.3.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 2 While the correlation between increased sustainability and minimization of material production energy may seem evident, this is not the case. As the materials themselves may increase structural system sustainable properties, this does not mean that the structural system itself will achieve its most sustainable configuration. Inherently, when the selection of one construction material for use in a structure is made (whether it includes the most sustainable properties or not), the structural system s ability to be sustainable becomes limited. For example, with the selection of special moment resisting reinforced concrete frames as a lateral force resisting system in a structure, the possibility of a more sustainable configuration coming from a design that could include masonry shear walls or steel moment frames is negated. While this can be combated with designs that include combination of different construction materials, use of other materials than the most sustainable construction material would thus decrease the structural system sustainability from a raw materials conservation viewpoint (Shi et al. 2009). Additionally, while the manufacturing industry works to achieve sustainable products, this methodology does not address the input of building industry to sustainable structural design (Deane 2008.) Thus, it falls solely to the manufacturing industry and the engineer to produce greater structural sustainability. 3.4 Methodology 3: Minimizing Embodied Energy As suggested by Trabucco (2008), the design of an efficient service core is probably the most challenging aspect of a tall building project. While his focus is on tall buildings in this statement, the methodology he is referring to can be extended to all structures. The embodied energy associated with a structure is a result of its intended use, initial design and life span. These aspects relate the energy associated with construction to the energy associated with the operation and maintenance over the structure s life. The concept behind minimizing embodied energy is an effort made on both architect and engineer s parts to assess the energy cost of construction versus the 12

operational energy expenditure. Structural layouts that follow this methodology require both engineer and architect to generate designs that focus on reducing the energy use within and around the building. Also associated with this is the design of a structure from a service core standpoint with the goal of balancing building use with façade design (Trabucco 2008). This methodology offers opportunities for sustainable designs to be generated as the focus becomes more on the effective use of the natural environment (regional thermal qualities, geothermal wells, waste recycling systems, wind turbines, solar panels, etc.) to reduce the energy associated with a structures operation. This methodology also addresses the idea of maximizing a structure s thermal mass qualities, harnessing energy use in structural motion and adaptable structural systems (Moon 2008). The methodology also looks to achieve the goal of a sustainable structural system by possible inclusion of adjacent structures in the design or dividing the design of a single structure to multiple smaller structures to allow for a more efficient setup (Shi et al. 2009.) 3.4.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 3 This methodology focuses on achieving sustainable structural design through attention to both the service core and the structure s façade. The minimization of embodied energy requirement is achieved through analysis of both the service core and façade to determine the competing qualities each can have on overall structural sustainability. Ideally, this methodology will result in a structure that attunes the form both structurally and architecturally finding a balance between both to reduce the structures energy envelope. In doing so, the structural system will increase project sustainability through allowing for a consideration of various sustainable properties (including but not limited to: thermal properties, natural light, utilization of solar panels/wind turbines.) 3.4.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 3 The minimizing embodied energy methodology typically neglects maximizing the efficiency of the structural system. Analyzing the structure from a total operating energy envelope viewpoint, the methodology limits its users to define the design by the manner in which it can most effectively utilize the ambient energy available to it. In doing this, a 13

design may not efficiently use its structural materials, which in turn can decrease its overall sustainability. Also, in areas with a lesser-built environment than dense cities, facades that utilize available ambient qualities may reduce the architectural appeal or functionality of a structure relative to the existing infrastructure (Wood 2007). This methodology is also directly tied to location and regional limitations due to the effectiveness of certain technologies (geothermal wells, waste-recycling systems, wind turbines, solar panels, etc.). 3.5 Methodology 4: Life-Cycle Analysis/Inventory/Assessment A common tool employed by design professionals to assess and quantify the sustainability of a project is the Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA). Similarly employed are the Life-Cycle Inventory (LCI) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCAs) analysis methods. These tools are often employed to justify or qualify the net-cost to benefit ratio or economic impact of a design decision. Designers and engineers have worked to employ these models (outlined by ASTM standards E 964-06, E1057-06, E 1074-06, E 1121-07, E1185-07 and E2204-05) to determine the sustainable properties of various aspects of the structural system. These standards define the methods to identify and evaluate multifaceted aspects of a decision involving various measures. Both designers and owners see the LCA/LCI/LCAs as tools to generate the most sustainable design by evaluating its monetary value and constructability requirements. By assessing a structural design through a multifaceted view, the increased number of measures employed along each step increase the accuracy of the evaluation and allow for the most sustainable design to be achieved (Horvath 1998). This is achieved by including and balancing a greater number of aspects of the design (e.g., not solely minimizing material amounts) and will produce a more sustainable design. This methodology has been employed in various projects (Laefer et al. 2008) both related and unrelated to sustainable design and reviewed for case studies to assess its accuracy. Thus, it has merit as a design tool/methodology for sustainable structural design. 3.5.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 4 The most notable advantage of LCA/LCI/LCAs, when employed for structural 14

sustainability purposes, is that they provide designers and owners with a clear outlook and picture of what their structure can achieve during its lifetime. This means that projects with low initial construction costs can assess their estimated energy use over building life considering both environmental and economic impacts. Also, buildings with high initial construction costs can determine viability of sustainable technologies relative to their payback periods. Along with this, LCA/LCI/LCAs models call for greater inclusion by all representative parties on a project, allowing for varied input and cross-discipline interaction. This interaction and input can only help to further the design and lead to greater overall sustainability through more effective designs, decreased design time, increased construction speed and less energy use and maintenance requirements during the lifetime of the structure. Also, through widespread use within industries, this methodologies/models can help to increase efficiencies throughout the built environment and provide a greater knowledge bank for future design as development continues (Horvath 1998). 3.5.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 4 Notwithstanding the positives aspects discussed above, the most lauded negatives to LCA/LCI/LCAs are accuracy with which they can be implemented and completed. Inherent in all of the ASTM standards applicable to LCA/LCI/LCAs is the inclusion of both risk and uncertainty in the analyses. This uncertainty is driven by poorly or obscurely defined factors. This has led to many analysis methods that have produced controversial results (Horvath 1998). While the goal of this methodology is to inform designers so as to generate more sustainable designs, much of this information may not be accurate enough or unknown at the time of initial design to achieve the goal of sustainability. Varying costs, shifting deadlines, durability of materials, long term maintenance requirements and factors not related to the structural system can lead to LCA/LCI/LCAs results that misinform the designers and thus lead to designs that are not the most structurally sustainable. It should also be noted that while increasing the accuracy of the LCA/LCI/LCAs model might be a solution to inaccurate or misleading reports, this 15

increased accuracy does not guarantee a more effective description of overall sustainable structural system properties. This means that even an accurate model may not efficiently contribute to describing design alternative sustainable properties and thus serve useless to project designers. The LCA/LCI/LCAs methodology is a prominent method for assessing many aspects of a project. However, the uncertainty can be very high in its application to the structural system and its sustainability. Also, as with the Methodology 1, minimal design changes can have adverse effects on the structural sustainability and the methodology s accuracy and may require entirely new models. 3.6 Methodology 5: Maximizing Structural System Reuse The concept behind maximizing structural reuse is to generate layouts and designs that produce the least amount of solid waste at end-of-life or allow for the greatest amount of whole or partial system and/or structural component reuse. This two-pronged methodology is similar in idea to the concept of minimizing material use but differs in the type of design it produces. As opposed to the most material efficient design, the objective of this methodology is to achieve layouts that allow for various structural uses, longer structural life spans and to address the possibility of structural element reuse during the planning and initial design stage. Coupled with this initial concept of this methodology is the idea that solid waste management is a key to, and opportunity for, enhanced sustainable design (Laefer 2008.) This concept of solid waste management can extend to waste during all phases of design, construction and demolition, and involves an assessment of all materials included in each part/phase. However, the main goal of the structural reuse methodology is for architects and engineers to achieve greater sustainability through the design of structures by investigating multiple uses of the same structural. This methodology has grown out of observations on the cost associated with demolition and the waste it produces compared with the financial incentive or prolonging building life. Also, this methodology focuses more on the end-of-life of a structure and calls on the engineer to assess material types and structural elements considering their possible reuse in the initial structural system design. This methodology aims to combat 16

the rapid technological developments and higher standard of living in the twenty-first century and the negative that this increased expansion can have on the infrastructure as suggested by Laefer (2008). This methodology also suggests that standardization of connections and structural elements that allow for more versatile structural systems will produce higher levels of sustainability within those systems. 3.6.1 Positive Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 5 As pointed out by Laefer (2008), total or partial building reuse is a solution that contributes to both direct financial gain and environmental sustainability. The methodology of maximizing building reuse is clearly captured by this statement. In relation to sustainability, building reuse and initial design for multiple intended uses is a key factor as its outcome is reduced waste and need for less raw materials. The possible reuse of a structure may have financial incentives as the owner has the ability to reoccupy the building for a new use, which in turn extends the service life of the structure. Also, this design methodology calls for initial architectural design that attempts to involve a structure s adaptation to its surrounding environment and reduces the amount of renovations required for future structural reuse. This methodology could also lead to innovation in both the architectural and engineering communities by employing similar design layouts that allow for relocation of partial structural systems between project sites or possible structural element reuse. Each of these aspects can increase the sustainability of a structure and are possible advantages of this methodology. 3.6.2 Negative Sustainable Attributes of Methodology 5 Multiuse structures often inherently produce sustainable structural designs, as they are versatile and efficient in their use of available space. Incorporating various functions for a design can result in less functionality for the primary structural use. While this may seem a small price for increased sustainability, generating a multiuse structure may not necessarily produce the most sustainable structural design for the original intended use. In short, the design may not be as efficient as it could have been if a single use structure had been maintained. Also, while structural element reuse from one structure to another can lead to fewer raw material requirements for future construction, close inspection of and accurate 17

qualification of structural members must be completed before reuse. The advantage of reusing a structural element over the cost of qualifying a subsequently unsafe member may result in higher initial project costs and reduce the sustainability of the second structure (Laefer 2008). 3.7 Conclusions Each methodology presented herein looks to achieve the same goal, the most sustainable structural design, through different means and measures. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the positive and negative sustainable attributes that each methodology present. 18

Methodologies Positive Sustainable Qualities Negative Sustainable Qualities Longer design and analysis time Least impact on natural Greater structural system environment complexity Methodology 1: Minimizing Material Use Methodology 2: Minimizing Material Production Energy Methodology 3: Minimizing Embodied Energy Methodology 4: Life-Cycle Analysis / Inventory / Assessment Methodology 5: Maximizing Structural System Reuse Lower raw material requirements May lead to innovative designs and practices Research currently being conducted Conservation of natural resources By-product reduction May lead to innovative designs that assess strength and sustainability properties simultaneously Consideration of both sustainable form and function Focus on operating energy use Attention to "service core" during design Considers sustainability over project life Greater inclusion of representative project parties Encourages cross-discipline interaction Widespread use can lead to quicker innovation Financial incentives Extended service life Design relative to surrounding built environment May lead to innovation in standardized designs More drawing and details required Longer approvals process Construction complexity Higher total project cost May not be "most" sustainable design Limitations to sustainability from material choice Currently lacking input from building industry Can result in less efficient structural system Design limited to most effective use of ambient energy Surrounding built environment can limit methodology Highly sensitive to location/region Model accuracy Risk and uncertainty included in analyses Other sustainable issues can detract from most sustainable structural design Adverse effects from minimal design changes Possibility for decreased primaryuse functionality Structural element reuse inspection required Table 3.1. Positive and negative sustainable attributes of sustainable structural design methodologies 19

Chapter 4: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Rating System 4.1 Introduction Dwindling natural resources, environmental changes, financial limitations and the global community have produced a climate in which modern civic growth requires the attention, commitment to and promotion of environmentally sound design and construction practices by the public and private sector. In response to this, the United States created the Green Building Council (USGBC) in 1993, which serves as an organization aimed at assessing and quantifying the environmental impact of new, existing and rehabilitative projects. The USGBC has developed several rating systems for these projects while also working to address different project development and delivery processes. These rating systems and processes provide users with outline for various development and construction types (e.g., schools, neighborhood development, retail, etc.) and are referred to as the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) for those project types and are continually updated. To address both new and rehabilitative construction, the USGBC developed the LEED Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations (USGBC 2008). This document serves as an outline for engineers, architects, developers and contractors of the means and methods by which sustainable designs can be achieved in the planning, construction and operational phases of building projects within the LEED Rating System s guidelines (with 2009 being the most current edition.) The code describes that the LEED Rating System is composed of five distinct design areas each requiring various prerequisites and including 49 separate categories in which up to 100 points can be achieved by construction applying for accreditation. The 2009 LEED document provides design professionals with the intent, requirements/options and potential technologies and strategies for each prerequisite and category. The use of and adherence to the requirements outlined in the document during the design process is at 20

the discretion of the architect and/or engineer and often due to requests made by either party or the owner. 4.2 LEED Rating System Relative to Structural Design The 2009 LEED Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations provides its user with the opportunity to achieve up to 100 rating points. Each of these points is attainable under different sections of the code and relate to various aspects of the design process and choices. Many of the rating points available to a new or rehabilitative construction project are directly related to the project magnitude, location and whether it is to be new or rehabilitative construction. Due to this, the structural system of a project can greatly affect its sustainability. While the code offers various ways in which a sustainable design can be achieved under the 2009 LEED Rating System, it is limiting in how structural frame system can increase a project s sustainability. As a result, the structural engineer (while a part of the planning phase of the project) has little room within the current code to suggest and affect a project s LEED rating. However, most of these limitations are directly related to the size of the project and the complexity of the structural system required as governing load cases can directly affect structural system material choice. Nonetheless, these limitations can restrain a project from achieving the most sustainable design possible and provide structural engineers and designs with little room to affect whole building sustainability. Upon reviewing the 2009 LEED Rating System for application within the structural frame design in new construction, five categories offer possible opportunities for the structural engineer to contribute to the sustainability of the project. These five categories are all located within the Materials & Resources design area of the document and include; MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse-Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and Roof, MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse, MR Credit 4: Recycled Content, MR Credit 5: Regional Materials, and MR Credit 7: Certified Wood. While the 2009 LEED Rating System offers numerous instances where rating points can be obtained in other areas of a project, the above categories offer the opportunity for structural system choices to directly affect the LEED rating a project can obtain. This chapter provides a review of these categories and illustrates their effect on 21

sustainable structural design through discussion of both their positive and negative aspects. 4.2.1 MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse-Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and Roof The 2009 LEED rating system awards up to 3 points under MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse. These points are awarded based upon the total percentage of building reuse as documented during planning and construction. The intention of this credit according to the 2009 LEED document is, to extend the lifecycle of existing building stock, conserve resources, retain cultural resources, reduce waste and reduce environmental impacts of new buildings as they relate to materials manufacturing and transport. The document outlines that 1 point can only be obtained with a minimum of 55% building reuse increasing to 2 and 3 points at 75% and 95%, respectively. The 2009 LEED rating system suggests the reuse of existing building elements as well as the removal of elements that impede increased sustainable building operation. 4.2.1.1 Benefits of MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse The building reuse credit offers the opportunity for both financial and sustainable gains for a project. Its intention is to encourage the reuse of significant portions of an existing structural system that can be incorporated into new construction, employed for an alternative building use from that of the original design intention or updated to comply with more current building codes for existing use. Each of these applications offer structural engineers the opportunity to affect the sustainable qualities of a project in positive ways with regard to the LEED rating system. Through the incorporation of existing structural elements into new construction, the LEED rating system provides a structural engineer with the opportunity to present applicable design alternatives to other project parties. While this opportunity may require more in depth structural analysis and the detailed assessment of the existing structural frame, by offering these credits the USGBC encourages innovative design approaches that allow a structural engineer to provide direct input to sustainable properties of a project. If the project calls for maintaining the existing frame while expanding a structure to include new construction, the structural engineer can present structural system design alternatives that employ the existing structural frame. Using engineering 22

practice and knowledge, any new structural elements can be designed to function as efficiently as possible with the existing frame. Similarly, if a project called for a structure to provide an alternative use from the original design, structural engineers are offered the opportunity to affect the project s sustainable rating by suggesting design alternatives that maintain as much of the existing structural system as possible. Through the addition of new structural elements to the existing frame, upgrading of specific connections or other required structural system additions, the project can maintain its existing frame but achieve the goal of an alternative use. Also, this credit encourages new construction and design that focuses on layouts that can allow for alternative future uses. Again, the structural engineering community is offered an opportunity to affect project sustainability, as defined by LEED. Finally, if a project calls for the continued use of a structure with qualification for existing design codes or increased loads, structural engineers can affect project sustainability by suggesting design alternatives and analysis approaches that look to alter the existing system as little as possible. Efficient connection design and innovative member strengthening methods are just two of the proposals that the structural engineer can make. All of these suggestions are examples of how, within the 2009 LEED rating system parameters, structural design can affect a project s sustainability rating. 4.2.1.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 1.1: Building Reuse While the above examples describe how structural load carrying system choice in a project can affect the overall sustainability, this LEED credit has limited applicability. As noted by the credit name, this credit can only be obtained by projects that look to employ an existing system and not new construction. This credit is also limiting by the manner in which building reuse is suggested and measured. By requiring that at least 55% of the existing structure be maintained, design alternatives are limited to those which incorporate more than half the existing structure and LEED 2009 does not reward what may be more sustainable designs that do not reach this benchmark. Also, this credit rewards the reuse of existing building frames that may result in overall designs that might produce less sustainable layouts than their new counterparts. However, the most glaring omission in this credit is that there is no relation of alternative new/existing design to 23

actual sustainable properties such as production and/or operational energy. Each of these shortcomings illustrate that this credit, while allowing for relation of the structural system to sustainability, may not serve to create the most sustainable design but may increase the sustainability of a project as defined by LEED. 4.2.2 MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse The 2009 LEED rating system awards up to 2 points under MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse. These points are awarded based on the percentage of Reused Materials as documented during planning and construction. The intention of this credit according to the 2009 LEED document is, to reuse building materials and products to reduce demand for virgin materials and reduce waste, thereby lessening impacts associated with the extraction and processing of virgin resources. The code outline that 1 point can be obtained with a minimum of 5% reused materials increasing to 2 points at 10% with no further reward in increased percentages. The document suggests that materials should be salvaged where possible and that potential reused material suppliers be researched as well. 4.2.2.1 Benefits of MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse The material reuse credit is aimed directly towards reducing the amount of raw materials for construction elements required by a project. By reward material reuse from an existing structure, LEED 2009 encourages investigation by the project team into designs that look to reuse as many of the existing construction elements as possible. Also, this credit supports plans for reuse of existing structural elements between two projects. Hence, a project team can investigate if other surrounding projects have resources that might serve in their design and incorporate them into project planning and development. This credit allows for the structural engineer to have a direct effect on project sustainable qualities by suggesting and developing designs that achieve layout allowing for easier reuse of sections. Also, by investigating existing systems for their lateral and vertical force resisting capabilities, the structural engineer can affect project sustainability through the reuse of existing systems or through creative designs that incorporate existing sections with new ones. This credit reward can provide a stepping-stone for structural 24

engineers to affect sustainable design through innovative designs and structural systems that may not have been considered in preliminary design. 4.2.2.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse The greatest pitfall that this credit has is the requalification of existing structural members. While a member s reuse may be preferable to a new design, care must be taken to ensure that the condition of the member is such that its material properties have not been drastically altered from its initial use. If a project plans to reuse a member, it must first meet the criteria for reuse within the new structural frame according to the current applicable building code. However, if after testing or evaluation of the member it is shown to no longer have the necessary material properties, the resources required for that requalification must be absorbed by the project financially and can affect how sustainable the project can now be. It may occur that a design calling for reuse of several structural members from an existing frame may no longer retain the required material properties resulting in a redesign of the new structural frame. Also, the existing members that are not sufficient will require replacement with new members resulting in what might be a lower overall sustainable rating. Along with this, the relatively small number of points awarded by the 2009 LEED rating system for this credit in relation to the total possible points a project can achieve may not warrant the detailed design that may be required. Also, these same points can be achieved by reuse of existing architectural fixtures and other mechanical systems. By not providing a greater reward to structural systems that reuse elements, pursuit of this credit by the project team does not mean that the most sustainable structural design will be achieved. 4.2.3 MR Credit 4: Recycled Content The 2009 LEED rating system awards up to 2 points under MR Credit 4: Recycled Content. These points are awarded based on the percentage of Recycled Content included in building materials as documented during planning and construction. The intention of this credit according to the 2009 LEED code is, to increase demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, thereby reducing impacts resulting from extraction and processing of virgin materials. The code outlines that 1 25

point can be obtained with a minimum of 10% recycled content increasing to 2 points at 20% with no further reward in increased percentages. The document suggests that project should establish recycled content materials goals and consider a range of materials attributes with selecting products and materials. 4.2.3.1 Benefits of MR Credit 4: Recycled Content Encouraging the use of construction materials with increased recycled contents is an effective way to reduce the volume of raw materials employed in material production. This credit fosters sustainability by rewarding the selection of construction materials with recycled content and provides an avenue for project teams and structural engineers to directly affect a building s LEED Sustainability rating through structural frame choice. It can also be noted, as further described in Chapter 6 of this document, that high-rise structural frame construction materials such as steel and concrete employ recycled content and research into each materials sustainable qualities is conducted and fostered by their respective industries. Another benefit of this credit is potential use of byproducts, such as fly ash and slag in concrete as a replacement for cement. Research has shown positive results indicating that concrete strength can increase through the use of these admixtures. Also, fly ash and slag are usually readily available industrial byproducts. This availability also illustrates their applicable sustainable qualities as they reuse existing byproducts for new material production. These admixtures are one example of research being conducted and any admixtures employed in concrete production look to relate both production costs and sustainability. Researchers look to achieve this by defining the material properties of cement and concrete mixes relative to their sustainable properties for their effective use as construction materials. Relating the sustainable qualities of these materials to their material properties can serve to better inform project teams and structural engineers to more effectively develop and suggest structural frame designs that achieve this credit. This may also lead to the design of structural systems that achieve low production energy and raw material consumption relative to alternate designs. 4.2.3.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 4: Recycled Content From the perspective of a project s structural frame, this credit may not go far 26

enough to encourage the most effective and encompassing sustainable design. These two credits can be achieved by a design through the selection of concrete design mixtures or steel that provides the required recycled material content. By making the only requirement for this credit be that the materials include recycled content, this does encourage research into alternative layouts or designs by the project team. Simply, as long as the material has the required material content, the points can be obtained regardless of whether or not an alternative material design would have resulted in a structural system that would have greater sustainable impact. As outlined in greater detail in chapter 6, as the recycled content of materials increase, the required production energy of those materials can also increase and produce high concentration of byproducts. From this, it can be observed that the production energies and byproducts associated with high-recycled content materials can yield a negative effect on the total production/construction energies required for a project. Therefore, the selection of one material over another, and the subsequent reward by the LEED 2009 rating system, may not increase the overall sustainability of a project in relation to total energy expenditures and byproduct generation for production and construction. Current research into the material properties of high-recycled content cements has illustrated that while strength can be increased through their use, ductility and durability may decrease at high contents. Research also indicates that this material may have limited application. While the decision for high-recycled material content concrete would need to be made on a project-by-project basis, the research indicates that it may best serve a structural system not to employ this material. 4.2.4 MR Credit 5: Regional Materials The 2009 LEED rating system awards up to 2 points under MR Credit 5: Regional Materials. These points are awarded based on the percentage of Regional Materials included in building materials as documented during planning and construction. The intention of this credit according to the 2009 LEED document is, to increase demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the use of indigenous resources and reducing the environmental 27

impacts resulting from transportation. The document outlines that 1 point can be obtained with a minimum of 10% of the total project materials cost being regional materials and increasing to 2 points at 20% with no further reward in increased percentages. LEED 2009 suggests that a project should establish locally sourced materials goals and consider a range of materials attributes with selecting products and materials. 4.2.4.1 Benefits of MR Credit 5: Regional Materials The Regional Materials credit encourages a project to consider use of building materials and suppliers within a 500 miles radius of the project site. This credit can have several positive effects on the sustainability of a project. First, encouraging the use materials located within the radius can help to minimize the both transportation costs and environmental impact. Most notably, if the shipping route that a building material must take to a site can be minimized, the environmental impact of that material can be mitigated. As a result, a project can increase its sustainable environmental effects while contributing to the project s financial bottom line. Second, the use of regional materials can have positive effects on the regional economy and encourage growth both economically and technologically. By rewarding projects that aim to maximize regional materials use, LEED can affect an increase in material production in that area. If a project employs regional materials, it can work with local producers to ensure that any other attainable LEED credits can be achieved through their use. Thus, a project can encourage a local producer to investigate technologies that reduce their byproduct emissions or utilize designs including higher recycled materials contents or any other applicable LEED credit. This can serve to make the producer more attractive as a supplier for future projects, leading to increases in both current and future projects sustainability. Finally, regional materials can also contribute to sustainability by allowing and encouraging a project to be similar in form and design to the surrounding built environment. This can encourage designs that both architecturally and structurally mimic similar projects already in use. This LEED credit can therefore encourage a project to pursue designs that can incorporate the intended use with those of the surrounding built 28

environment and thus contribute to that environment in a more sustainable fashion. 4.2.4.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 5: Regional Materials Inherent in the selection of any design or building material is the limitation that specific design or material choice comes with. These limitations can have an effect on the overall sustainability of a structure. For example, if a project were to select cast-inplace concrete as its primary structural frame building material, that project s design could thus be limited by whatever layouts or configurations that building materials would allow. This limitation could mean that an alternative design that chose steel for its primary structural frame may have more (or less) sustainable qualities for the selected design. While this can be said about all projects, the use of regional materials and the reward that LEED gives for it can be limiting to decisions made for design and may not result in the most sustainable overall project. If a project were to pursue this credit for its structural frame and select an applicable building material that was within the 500 mile radius and obtain this LEED credit, this does not mean that the lowest possible material production byproducts would be generated by that choice. If an alternative material were selected from a producer outside that radius did not award this credit, it is possible that lower production energies and environmental impact could be achieved. Therefore, the choice by a project to pursue this credit may have negative effects on the overall project sustainability contrary to the positives that it might gain for its LEED rating. From the perspective of a project structural system and its relation to all the other building materials included nn a project, this credit can be obtained without its consideration. If the selected materials for a project s interior or exterior construction were regional materials, this LEED credit may still be obtained with no consideration of regional material use for structural load carrying system. This would seem to be at odds with this credit s intention as the necessary percentages for the credit points could be achieved without consideration of a structural frame and could limit the effect that a structural engineer can have on project sustainability. 4.2.5 MR Credit 7: Certified Wood The 2009 LEED rating system awards 1 point under MR Credit 7: Certified 29

Wood. This point is awarded based on meeting the requirement that 50% (based on cost) of a project s wood based materials are certified according to the Forest Stewardship Council s criteria for wood components. The intention of this credit according to the 2009 LEED document is, to encourage environmentally responsible forest management. LEED suggests that project should establish a project goal for certified wood use and ensure proper installation and that all materials are quantified. 4.2.5.1 Benefits of MR Credit 7: Certified Wood Through this credit, LEED is encouraging project designers to pursue and ensure the use of specific wood products, that are renewable compared to other building materials due to their natural growth, in design. By employing of certified wood in design, designers can look to increase overall project sustainability and decrease the effect on the use of raw materials associated with other building materials. This credit also has the byproduct of promoting certified wood production and encouraging expansion in that field. As projects seek to obtain this credit, supply of sufficient material must be made available and can encourage the increased production in a region as building demand increases. Thus, this credit can help to bolster local and/or regional economies and encourage innovation and expansion in the area of certified wood production. 4.2.5.2 Disadvantages of MR Credit 7: Certified Wood In consideration of a project s structural system, this credit may play little role in increasing its sustainability as the economical use of wood as a primary structural system material decrease with increase project height and the subsequent increase in design loads. Also, the use of wood as a structural load carrying system can be limited by its durability and service life. From the perspective of a structural engineer and a project structural system material choice, this credit does little for large projects. While projects with generally lower structural loads can achieve the use of wood as a primary structural system element, the increase in height of a structure and loads can limit the ability of wood to be utilized in an economical manner. Due to this, building materials such as steel and concrete are typically chosen for structural system for their ability meet required 30

structural performance at these higher loads. Therefore, this credit may have little effect on projects that must meet structural design requirements for medium to high-rise and long-span structures. Similar to other LEED credits, the certified wood credit requirements can be met through the use of building materials other than the primary structural system. If a project that did not employ wood as the primary structural system element was to designate that all partitions must be constructed of certified wood, this credit may still be obtained. While this may be viewed as a positive for the project and its LEED rating, this does not mean nor encourages that the overall project is the most sustainable choice or layout possible. Structural engineers are limited in being able to meet the requirements of this credit for two reasons. First, the use of wood as a primary structural element may not be available as an economical choice or from a durability, maintenance and service life. And second, this credit can be achieved elsewhere devoid of the structural engineer s input. 31

Chapter 5: Sustainability and Construction Type 5.1 Introduction type can greatly affect the sustainability of structural systems. As discussed in Chapter 4, the 2009 LEED rating system can limit the ability of a project to achieve the most sustainable design possible while still reaching a high LEED rating. Also introduced was the concept that project size (the total height of structure) can affect the overall sustainability through the increased design and analysis period that larger structures can require. However, overall project sustainability may not be directly related to project size and/or height. As a project s size increases, structural system complexity can also increase due to factors including, but not limited to, design loads increase. Due to this, larger projects often encounter limitations in the form of structural system material strength requirements. As a result, primary load bearing systems in these projects require materials with higher strength properties (such as steel, cast-in-place concrete and prestressed/precast concrete). This limitation can have significant effects on the design and performance of a structure. 5.2 Construction Type This chapter classifies the sustainability of projects under two construction types: wood construction (allowing for the use of wood as the primary load carrying material) and steel and concrete construction (employing steel and/or concrete as the primary load carrying materials). For this discussion, these references will be employed throughout. Both construction types offer opportunities to achieve a sustainable design and have qualities that illustrate the structural system s role in a sustainable design. 5.3 Wood Construction As defined earlier, wood construction allows wood to be used as the primary 32

load bearing material. This type of construction has various effects on the design of a project and its ability to achieve and implement sustainable measures. In this section, some of the aspects affecting project sustainability and the structural system design are discussed. 5.3.1 Design and Analysis Phase Inherent in any project involving new and/or rehabilitative construction is the design and analysis phase. This phase includes, but is not limited to, design and analysis of the proposed structure. Design and analysis for any new construction can have varied lengths for completion and is closely related to building layout and architectural design. In wood construction, values for design loads are often lower than their steel and concrete construction counterparts. This is mostly due to the intended use and smaller size of the structure. As a result of this, the amount of time required for the design and analysis phase to be completed on wood projects is usually shorter than steel and concrete construction projects. With a shorter design and analysis phase, more energy, effort and project budget can be allotted to research into sustainable technologies and systems that can be employed during the projects construction and operational phases. 5.3.2 Investments in Sustainable Technologies As mentioned in the previous section, wood construction has the advantage of a shorter design and analysis phase. Similarly, wood construction can also have a shorter period between initial planning and building operation, namely, a shorter construction phase. This means that the time between initial owner investment and revenue generation is shorter than its steel and concrete companion. Thus, the shorter construction phase that wood construction has a shorter payback period and can result in a sustainable technology providing a more economical investment. This shorter payback period also has the advantage of providing engineers and architects with a financial incentive that can be attached to a proposed sustainable design. By being able to link financial and sustainable properties in a design, the designers of low-rise construction projects can have a greater effect on project sustainability. 5.3.3 Use of Wood as Primary Load Bearing Material Another sustainability benefit of wood construction is in its use of wood as a 33

primary load bearing material. A project that employs wood frame construction has the sustainable advantage of using a rapidly renewable building material. Typical steel and concrete construction materials, such as steel and concrete, require more raw materials than wood. Also, the production energies required for steel and concrete construction materials are greater than those for wood. Along with this, current sustainability rating systmes (such as LEED), provide an incentive for the use of wood as a building material. From these three aspects, wood can be viewed as a more sustainable alternative to other construction materials. 5.3.4 Other Wood Sustainability Issues Contrary to the positive sustainable qualities of wood as a building material is the lack of attention that a wood construction projects structural system can receive. Through the selection of wood as the primary building material, a wood construction project can meet design code requirements. However, the selected wood design may not be the most sustainable alternative for the project. If an alternate design involving steel or concrete as the primary frame was to be selected it may result in a longer project service life and greater durability. These are just two of several sustainable advantages that and alternate design may provide. This illustrates the fact that while wood construction often achieves high sustainable ratings and provide opportunities to the project team to suggest sustainable technologies, the final product may not be the most sustainable alternative. Along with this, another sustainability issue that can be unique to wood construction is energy use. In any construction project, the service core (the operational and maintenance energy required for the project) and its function must be taken into account. Inherently, the service core of a project is dependent on the project s size. For example, the amount of energy and power required for a wood construction residential structure compared to a steel and concrete construction residence (assuming the same project site) can be very different. This difference drives the design of interior layouts in both high- and wood construction and the manner with which operational and maintenance efficiency issues are addressed. With a smaller service core relative to a steel and concrete alternative, a wood construction project can be afforded the 34

opportunity to achieve a lower total embodied energy. The relationship between embodied energy and service core in the wood project alternative can allow engineers and architects to employ technologies that may work only for smaller scale projects. Thus, a wood construction project may be able to achieve greater energy efficiency than a steel and concrete alternative, assuming both are on the same site and with the same intended use, due to the difference in building size and service core energy use requirements. This can also be related to project structural system design as the use of wood as a construction material can afford a project with advantageous thermal qualities and opportunities that may not be achievable in a steel and concrete construction project. 5.4 Steel and Concrete Construction As defined earlier, steel and concrete construction employs steel and/or concrete as the primary load bearing material. This type of construction has various effects on the design of a project and its ability to achieve and implement sustainable measures. In this section, some of the aspects affecting project sustainability and the structural system design will be discussed. 5.4.1 Design and Analysis Phase Similar to wood construction, the design and analysis phase can play a major part in a steel and concrete construction project. As steel and concrete construction projects often have higher design load values, they must rely on stronger materials such as steel and concrete. Also, analysis of a steel and concrete construction alternative often produces governing loads that vary between members throughout the structural system. For example, while the overall design of a steel and concrete project can determine that it is controlled by its seismic response loads, this does not mean that the design of certain elements are not controlled by other loading scenarios. The increased number of design controlling load combinations on elements can require greater engineering effort and a longer period required for design relative to a wood construction alternative. This can have both positive and negative effects on project sustainability. With more complex structural systems comes the opportunity for design innovation that may achieve higher overall project sustainability. However, this 35

increased effort required for design may draw project funds away from other sustainable efforts resulting in a lower overall sustainable rating. From this, it becomes clear that complexity of a project s structural system can lead to difficulties in its ability to achieve a higher sustainable rating. 5.4.2 Land Use Inherent in a steel and concrete construction project is a sustainable quality that cannot be achieved in wood construction. With stronger structural materials, steel and concrete construction projects can be built taller than a wood alternative. Thus the design of any steel and concrete construction makes efficient use of project site (especially in areas where land is expensive, i.e., downtown of major cities) that cannot be achieved by a wood construction alternative. By increasing the overall height of a project, the useable space increases. Efficient use of allowable project space is a sustainable quality that looks to meet and/or exceed the requirements of the current project. By doing this, the overall sustainability of the project can be higher as it can serve or house more occupants. For example, construction of a five-story hospital instead of a two-story one would make more efficient use of the limited resource of space. 5.4.3 Investments in Sustainable Technologies Opposing the positive sustainable qualities of steel and concrete construction can be the financial limitations it imposes on sustainable technologies. With more complex building designs and larger structures, additional monetary limitations can occur. Due to this, investments into sustainable technologies can prove to be financially unsound as their payback period can be much longer than in wood construction. Combating this is the idea that economy of scale can take over and that numerous efficient technologies can result in greater overall system efficiency. Each of these points illustrates that sustainable technologies can affect steel and concrete construction projects sustainability in significant ways. However, sustainable technologies in steel and concrete construction can also limit overall project sustainability. One limitation can be due to project budget constraints that limit what technologies might be implemented. A second limitation 36

comes from involving numerous technologies (such as roof gardens or reflective façade surfaces) that may interact negatively. If a project cannot install more sustainable systems due to cost restrictions, it can result in an overall less sustainable structure than its wood construction counterpart. Likewise, investing in numerous technologies can result in a system not interacting efficiently or leading to higher future maintenance costs. Both of these reasons illustrate that sustainable technologies play a different role in steel and concrete construction. 5.4.4 Building Materials Steel and concrete construction projects are those that employ steel and/or concrete as the primary construction material. This means that either steel, cast-in-place concrete or precast/prestressed concrete sections serve as primary load carrying members. Each of these building materials have unique qualities that can help a project to achieve a high sustainable rating and will be discussed in a later chapter. However, some general observations can be made about the role that these building materials play in a project s overall sustainability relative to their wood alternatives. The above materials have advantageous strength qualities that lead to their selection as construction materials. From a sustainability perspective, each of these material choices makes efficient use of space as their design intention is to resist the required load with as little cross-sectional area required. This can allow for greater usable space. These materials are also well established within the construction industry for use. This has led to both past and current research into the sustainable properties of these materials and methods by which they can be employed in a project layout and interact with project facades in sustainably advantageous ways. Similarly, in an effort to increase sustainable properties, research into and the implementation of new production methods and technologies have been included to increase material use by their respective industries and reduce required production energies and byproducts. Along with this, research into the use of industrial byproducts (fly-ash, slag, etc.) and recycled materials contents on the strength properties of these materials have also and are currently being conducted. 37

While the ability of steel, cast-in-place concrete or precast/prestressed concrete to achieve higher sustainable properties as construction materials through the means listed above varies, it can be concluded that their use in high-rise construction can have advantageous sustainable impact on a project. However, other limitations and issues can affect this. 5.4.5 Other Steel and Concrete Construction Sustainability Issues Another sustainable advantage that steel and concrete construction projects can achieve is the ability of larger projects to include multi-use or future-use functions into their layouts and to reuse structural elements or partial structural systems. In the design of these systems, designers look to achieve various goals. In a multi-use project, design layouts that foster, promote and provide the means by which a project can successfully achieved multiple uses are presented. For example, a structure that provides an underground parking area, street level business layouts and residences above looks to capitalize on the ability to provide shopping, covered car parking and housing in one location. The above example can increase a project s sustainability as the inclusion of these essentials would require less environmental impact than housing that was further from shopping areas requiring residents to transport both themselves and their purchases. By reducing the need for these additional trips, a project can increase its sustainability. Similarly, a future-use project looks to provide designs and layout that allow for various occupancies. For example, if in the initial project design, care is taken to ensure that the provided layout achieves both the original intention of an office layout as well as allowing for minimal to no remodeling requirements for conversion to a residence, building service life can be extended. This can increase project sustainability and marketability as the additional future use can provide a longer revenue stream to recoup sustainable investments as well as mitigate or remove demolition costs for future construction. Both of these designs types also provide sustainable advantages through the efficient use of sections (by extending their service life) and by reducing raw materials requirements for future use. Also afforded to steel and concrete construction design is 38

the opportunity for section or partial structural system reuse. Steel and concrete construction projects require materials with greater strength properties than wood and thus employ more raw materials for their production. Structural elements made of these materials (steel and concrete) involved in steel and concrete construction can come at a premium cost due to world markets. Due to this, investigation into the reuse of either single structural elements or partial structural systems can be a viable alternative in modern construction projects. This is a sustainable quality that can only be achieved in steel and concrete construction and thus plays a role in overall project sustainability and initial project planning and design phases. 5.5 The Built Environment The surrounding built environment is an issue in steel and concrete construction projects looking to maximize building height. Local municipalities can impede a project from achieving the most sustainable design by imposing restrictions on heights, distance from roads, façade design, etc. While a project can apply for a variance, there is no guarantee that it will be approved. For example, if a project s surrounding architecture were limited to heights of 40 feet, a new structure that might serve its occupants more efficiently with a design height of 60 feet cannot be pursued, possibly affecting overall structural sustainability. Similarly, if a project looks to decrease its operating energy through the use of glass in an area where codes limit buildings to only masonry facades, overall project sustainability can be negatively affected. Both of these examples illustrate that factors other than construction type can affect a project. As displayed above, a steel or concrete structure can provide a more sustainable alternative in areas where land-use is paramount by allowing for greater structural height. Combating this sustainable property is the surrounding built environment and the effect that that it can have on design. In areas with predominantly steel and concrete construction with greater height, other building design effects, for example unique wind loading due to a tunneling effect, must be taken into account leading to additional design and analysis time. In areas with predominantly wood construction with lower heights, proposed steel and construction steel and concrete construction projects that are higher may be able to take advantage of thermal energy but, 39

in the process, may impede the ability of surrounding projects to do the same. Each of these areas can affect total building sustainability and point to the role that the surrounding built environment can play in a project s design. 5.6 Conclusions This chapter displays that both construction type and structural design play a role in various aspects of a project. Table 5.1 provides an outline of the advantages offered by steel and concrete and wood construction types as defined in this chapter. 40

Design Aspect Wood construction Steel and Concrete Construction Design and Analysis Phase Less design complexity Shorter period required for design Shorter period between design and construction Lower total project energy requirements Availability of additional investment into sustainable technologies More experience within industry Greater design complexity Longer period required for design Longer construction period Greater total project energy requirements Less funds for investment in sustainable technologies Less experience within industry Land Use Less efficient land use Use of land more efficiently Investments in Sustainable Technologies Use of Wood as a Primary Load Bearing Material Shorter payback period for sustainable investments Greater economical incentive for designers and owners Great ability for efficient interaction between multiple sustainable technologies Wood is a renewable resource Advantage in structural system cost LEED incentives for use of wood May not be most sustainable design alternative Building life issues Longer payback period for sustainable investments Possibility for "economies of scale" in sustainable technology use More issues in efficient interaction between multiple sustainable technologies Use of wood not an option Require less sustainable construction materials No explicit LEED incentives Greater ability to meet multi- or future-use needs Less project life issues Other Sustainable Issues Lower operating energy use requirements Ability to use small scale technologies to advantage Possible advantageous thermal qualities relative to other construction materials Longer revenue stream possibilities Greater material reuse after demolition possibility Section or partial structural system reuse Table 5.1. Sustainable design aspect qualities by construction type 41

Chapter 6: Sustainability of Construction Materials 6.1 Introduction The materials selected by a project can greatly affect overall project sustainability. The primary construction materials discussed in this chapter are steel, cast-in-place concrete and prestressed/precast concrete. These materials have various individual sustainable qualities and their use in a structural load carrying system can have unique effects of project sustainability. Presented herein is a review of each of these primary construction materials for their individual sustainable qualities, byproducts associated with their production, production energies required for member fabrication/construction and issues surrounding their use and application as sustainable materials along with a summary of positive and negative sustainable aspects of each. Along with this, issues included in the construction methods and limitations imposed by each are presented. 6.2 Structural Steel The use of structural steel as a primary structural system material has been widely employed in various construction projects in United States and around the world. This is due to the advantageous material properties that steel possesses and its ability to be employed in varying design layouts. Research has been conducted to investigate its applicability as a sustainable building material, the energy, methods and byproducts associated with its production and the effect of recycled materials contents. The design and construction of steel has been and continues to be outlined by the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC 13 th Ed.). This section discusses sustainable properties of steel and provides examples. 6.2.1 LEED 2009 and Structural Steel While many of the sustainable properties of steel are associated with the technological advances made in industry and in its production methods, qualities other 42

production energy requirements can contribute to the sustainability of steel relative to cast-in-place and prestressed/precast concrete sections. Steel sections have the ability to be reused as construction materials as one project reaches its end-of-life. This ability for section reuse means that it is also possible for the reuse of partial structural systems between projects. These qualities can contribute to a higher LEED sustainability rating, possible advantageous financial outcomes for a project and a lower environmental impact. As described in Chapter 4, the 2009 LEED sustainable rating system rewards projects that reuse existing sections or existing structural systems under MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse. This credits aims to encourage the reuse of these structural sections or partial systems between projects for two reasons. First is the goal of reducing transportation costs for construction materials to a project site. Second is the goal of reducing the depletion of natural resources. Both of these goals can be achieved through the use and reuse of steel as a construction material and can contribute to overall project sustainability. Along with the 2009 LEED rating system credits rewarded for the reuse of sections that steel can offer a project, reuse of sections can offer significant financial gains. Be reducing transportation and new sections costs, additional funds can be employed to pursue other sustainable technologies and increase total project sustainability. Likewise, the additional saving can make the choice of steel as the primary structural system material more attractive to project owners, which can have a positive effect within the construction industry. It should be noted that construction costs for steel can vary between regions with varying labor costs. However, the section reusability may be able to offset this aspect for a given design and encourage steel use outside of typically non-steel-use regions. Similarly, partial structural system reuse can have the positive financial aspect of prolonging building service life and reducing construction costs. For example, if and existing steel frame consisting of six floors were to be partially demolished preserving the lower three floors for an alternate use, a project could greatly decrease their construction and labor costs as well as possibly contribute to new construction from the 43

out-of-service elements of the original project. Also, partial structural system reuse can be achieved through the use of steel as a building material through addition or removal of members to existing frames. This can be illustrated in two ways. First, if a project were to convert a braced steel frame to a moment resisting frame, façade improvements, such as additional storefront window space, may now be possible allowing for a new structural system use. Also, if a project explored a design alternative that called for the construction of a new frame that would be connected to an existing frame, minimal changes may be required to the existing frame that would only be possible in steel construction. Both of these examples can contribute to the overall sustainability of a project as well as provide financial incentive by reducing the required amount of new materials and construction costs relative to new construction. As referenced earlier, the reuse of steel sections between local projects and the reuse of partial structural systems can provide environmental advantages to a project. Two key aspects of new steel section production are the energies required and the emissions that occur during production. New steel generation can be an intensive process requiring various types of thermal and electrical energy. Associated with this energy are any byproducts involved in its generation, most specifically green-house-gasses (GHGs). With various inputs involved in energy generation for mining of raw materials, conversion of existing materials into usable materials for new sections and transportation of materials to production facilities, quantifying the total energy and byproducts associated with production can be difficult. In addition, the mixing of necessary materials and the resulting chemical reaction to achieve useable grade steel also has its own GHGs emissions. These points illustrate that reuse of sections and partial systems within structures can contribute greatly to reducing the environmental impact of steel as a construction material. Reuse of steel between projects requires qualification of existing steel sections for further use. While the 2009 LEED document rewards the reuse of sections or partial systems, analysis and testing must be conducted on sections to ensure that there has been no degradation or compromise of their strength and deformation properties. For example, if the section or part of the section buckled or yielded, it may not be reusable. Also, the 44

same section or system, while possibly designed following earlier building standards or codes, must be ensured to perform as required by the current code. For this reason, a project must take into account that while section reuse may be an option, investment may be made into requalification of these sections and system. The additional cost associated with this testing and analysis can hurt a project financially and use of new steel materials may be advantageous from both financial and sustainable points of view. Therefore, a project may decrease its overall sustainability if it were to investigate the reuse of sections or a system to find that new materials were required. Also, a project that investigated reuse options unsuccessfully would invest time, financial assets and energy into section testing and analysis that could result in an increase in overall project environmental impact. 6.2.2 Structural Steel Section Production Production energy requirements for steel can be difficult to fully quantify as numerous variables and units of measure exist across the inputs required for new section production. According to data published by the United States Department of Energy (USDOE 2009) an estimated 16.3 MBtu/ton were employed in the production of steel. This publication references data provided to the USDOE from industry and includes only values associated with electricity, natural gas and coal use relative to the various steel production methods. The data provided by industry for this publication does not address the environmental impact from power generation nor the impact of the chemical reactions associated with the production of steel. Illustrated by the non-inclusion of other energy requirements, such as those involved in raw material mining, environmental data provided from industry doe not provide a full definition of the energies and emissions in steel section production. This lack of a full definition can limit the use of steel as a construction material as its advantageous for section reuse over new section production cannot be fully described. In essence, the sustainable advantages that steel can provide to construction are directly tied to its ability to be easily reused as well as the financial and environmental cost associated with its production. 6.2.3 Recycled Materials Content and Structural Steel 45

As outlined in Chapter 4, the 2009 LEED rating system rewards project that incorporate building materials containing recycled materials into their construction. Steel provides a project with this option as the percentages of recycled materials included in new steel production have been increasing over recent decades. Research by both industry and academia has displayed that recycled materials content has little effect on strength properties associated with steel sections as well. Also, recycled content has no significant effect on steel section durability (Horvath 1998). This recycled material content is an advantage to both projects and producers as it can minimize the need for additional raw materials for section production. As indicated by the United States Department of Energy publications, recycled materials content can increase required production energies relative to the various steel production methods (USDOE 2009, Eruchan 2002). As noted above though, there exists a lack of fully defined energies required for recycled materials contents including all energy and environmental costs associated with section or material recycling. This limits the ability to fully define the effects recycled materials contents can have on material sustainability. 6.2.4 Other Sustainable Issues of Structural Steel The use of steel as structural load carrying system choice can provide a project with advantages that may not be possible with other materials. Its strength and ductility properties have made it a preferred material choice for many current and past projects. It also offers other possible sustainable advantages such as streamlined construction schedules and lower construction waste production. For example, unlike other construction material types, steel construction does not require formwork, which can reduce the overall waste produced and energy required for construction. Also, with planning, construction speed of a project can increase, as steel structural elements do not require any time between placement and function in steel construction. In essence, in a steel construction project, as members are placed they can carry load. This means that a project does not have to wait a period of time for sections to reach their required strength properties. It should also be noted that each of these advantages might have positive financial benefits that would encourage owners and project managers to pursue steel construction and contribute to available funds for other sustainable technologies. 46

Each of the positive sustainable qualities provided above may depend on accurate predictions of production energy requirements and byproducts. To achieve a clear understanding of the use of steel as a construction material relative to others, care must be taken by a project team and industry to assess the impact the steel has. While sustainable advantages can be achieved through its use, these advantages rely on accurate life-cycleanalysis (LCA) and life-cycle-cost modeling (LCC). Included in these models should be accurate forecasts of production energy requirements, byproduct emissions and operational and maintenance costs. 6.3 Cast-in-Place Concrete Cast-in-place concrete construction has been employed for a wide range of construction projects. As a construction material, it offers the opportunity for projects to achieve complex designs and provides engineers with and opportunity for variations within structural layouts that other construction materials may not. Regional financial restrictions and labor costs have driven the use of cast-in-place concrete construction throughout the United States and the world. Cast-in-place concrete construction and the concrete production industry are both highly skilled and developed professions with vast project experience and knowledge. The design and construction of cast-in-place concrete has been and continues to be governed by the American Concrete Institute with input from the Portland Cement Institute. This section addresses the LEED 2009 sustainable qualities, production, recycled materials content and other sustainable issues associated with cast-in-place concrete construction. Where applicable, examples for these topics will be provided as well as an outline of the positive and negative sustainable properties that cast-in-place concrete can provide to a project if selected as the primary building material. 6.3.1 LEED 2009 and Cast-in-Place Concrete The LEED 2009 credit applicability to the aforementioned construction materials often overlaps between points that can be obtained. While this is most often applicable to MR Credit 4: Recycled Content, MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse becomes more difficult in cast-in-place concrete construction. The intention of the LEED credit as applied to a project s structural system, as provided in Chapter 4, is to encourage the reuse of existing 47

structural elements or systems. For cast-in-place concrete construction, this task can be very complex. The removal and testing of an element may be possible with cast-in-place elements provided care is taken during deconstruction. For example, the removal of a cast-in-place concrete beam would require that beam-column joints be severed between all adjacent beams and the supporting columns. This would mean that any reinforcing steel placed through a connection would require either cutting or demolition that would leave the connection reinforcing intact. If the reinforcing bars were cut, the existing section would require further design for permanent connections in a frame, which could lead to either more waste or construction difficulty. If the joint reinforcement were maintained, a project would be required to ensure that sufficient strength was developed between the connection of existing member and new construction. This would again require further design and possible construction issue. Therefore, reuse of cast-in-place concrete members, as described here, is very unlikely and difficult. As illustrated in the above example, although difficult, it may be possible to reuse cast-in-place concrete components. However, to assess the sustainability of this construction, a project must consider the construction energy required and design time necessary for the member s reuse as well as any other sustainable issues related to it. Also, similar to the reuse of steel sections, design professionals would need to address the strength and other material properties of the existing member. It is possible that a member may be tested and determined to no longer be functional for reuse in a new structural system. This shows that reuse of a cast-in-place concrete component between two projects may require greater financial assets, construction, demolition and preparation time and analysis relative to entirely new construction. Unlike MR Credit 3: Materials Reuse, MR Credit 4: Recycled Content can benefit the overall sustainability of a cast-in-place concrete project as well as its LEED 2009 ranking. Concrete construction, in general, has similar qualities to that of steel construction in that new member production can be achieved including recycled materials. Also, similar to steel, concrete section offers the opportunity for a project at its end-of-life (demolition phase) to reuse materials from demolished structure to be employed as recycled content for new elements. This means that a project could increase 48

its overall sustainability by employing members that include recycled materials contents as well as planning for the reuse of their demolished sections as raw materials for new construction. While pursuing this opportunity in new construction is possible, the only reward currently provided to projects in the LEED 2009 rating system is for their use of recycled materials. With concrete reuse may be viewed as a materials reuse issues and fall under MR Credit 3 of the LEED 2009 rating system, the current document intention does not encourage this. Other recycled materials content effects will be discussed in a later section. 6.3.2 Cast-in-Place Concrete Member Production The sustainable properties associated with the production of a cast-in-place concrete member are centered on the production of the concrete, and specifically cement. Reinforcing steel may also be an important factor contributing to sustainability of the member. Also, construction methods associated with concrete placement can contribute to its sustainable properties and are discussed in a later section. Driving the sustainability of cast-in-place concrete sections are the energy intensive aspects of cement and concrete production including raw material gathering and byproduct emissions that are associated with both. While three of the four raw materials in concrete (water, sand and gravel) are abundant and renewable resources, the fourth (cement) is the single most critical material affecting the byproduct emissions, environmental impact and sustainable properties of concrete. The mining and gathering of raw materials for the production of cement requires various forms of energy. In addition to this initial energy, additional energy is required to generate usable cement mixes from these raw materials. Illustrating the energy and raw material requirements of cement production, it has been shown an average of 1.6 tons of raw materials are required to produce 1.0 ton of cement (Naik 2008). This high amount of input energy and raw materials are combined with byproduct outputs that include CO 2, NO x and other green house gasses. Along with this, additional energy input is required for mixing of cement and other raw materials for concrete production also producing CO 2. Upon review of the production requirements of concrete elements, it becomes clear that its production requires various energy inputs during its various stages of 49

production. Consequently, production energy associated with concrete members can vary and are related to their production facilities and raw material availability. The measures of these focus on cement or concrete production facilities themselves and do not include the various other energy requirements associated with concrete production (e.g. raw material mining, transportation and carbon emissions associated with it, etc.). Due to this, an accurate and normalized required energy value for concrete production per volume is difficult to obtain. The concrete industry tries to reduce the energy and environmental impact of concrete and cement production through the use of pozzolanic and recycled industrial materials. Materials, including but not limited to, silica fume, slag and fly ash are often used to replace cement in concrete design mixes in an effort to increase the sustainable and material properties of concrete. The addition of these pozzolanic materials can reduce the total amount of raw materials required for cement production and typically increase the strength of concrete. However, in both cement and concrete, these materials can affect the required production energies and may lead to higher energy input requirements. 6.3.3 Recycled Materials Content and Cast-in-Place Concrete Concrete construction can provide several opportunities for recycled materials content. Similar to steel, the concrete industry and research institutions have investigated the use of industrial byproducts, such as fly-ash and slag, in construction and production (Pentalla 1997). Along with these industrial byproducts, research has been conducted into the use of demolished concrete sections as aggregates and raw materials for new production (Petalla 1997). This research has displayed various material properties such as the possibility to make gains in the mix design strength and construction functionality. However, this same research has indicated that at higher recycled material concentrations, concrete mixes can have increased brittleness (Pentalla 1997). As mentioned earlier, an increase in the recycled materials content of a concrete mix can yield and increase in the required production energy. While this increase can play a role is analyzing design alternatives, the use of recycled materials can increase the overall sustainability of a project. 50

6.3.4 Other Sustainable Issues of Cast-in-Place Concrete Cast-in-place concrete construction can offer projects unique opportunities in terms of scheduling. While cast-in-place concrete construction requires time after placement for initial member strength to be achieved, streamlining of construction schedules can be achieved. With proper planning, a project may be able to increase its construction speed and decrease financial costs. While a streamlined construction schedule can aid a project, the time required between concrete placement and hardening of cast-in-place concrete elements can be limiting. Unlike its steel and prestressed/precast counterparts, cast-in-place concrete sections do not possess the ability to be loaded upon initial placement. This limitation can have impact throughout all phases of a project. By limiting the load that can be placed on a section during construction, the design and analysis phase may not be able to pursue designs that employed these members in temporary use. For example, a project that employs a partially completed portion of the structural frame as a support for loads associated with temporary storage on an upper floor may not be able to carry that load until the cast-in-place section met the required strength. The volume of construction wastes generated also affect the sustainability of construction. The required formwork and associated materials necessary for a cast-inplace concrete frame must also be taken into account during whole project sustainability assessment. While a project may be able to achieve high sustainable ratings through the intelligent use of thermal energy in its design, these ratings may not offset the wastes produced during construction. 6.4 Prestressed/Precast Concrete Prestressed/precast concrete construction offers projects unique sustainability opportunities in both design and construction. Among these is the ability to achieve better material quality control not available in cast-in-place concrete construction due to greater control during the casting process. This allows for project designers to consider layouts not possible with other construction materials. As with the other construction materials discussed in this chapter, research has been conducted by both industry and academia into the sustainable qualities that prestressed/precast concrete possesses as well 51

as investigations into newer production methods and materials (Deane 2008 and Laefer 2008). As an alternative to cast-in-place and steel construction, prestressed/precast concrete construction can allow a project to increase its overall sustainability in terms of both environmental and financial aspects. The design of a prestressed/precast concrete structure is typically governed by the American Concrete Institute (ACI) and Precast Concrete Institute with additional information provided by the Portland Cement Institute. This section addresses the LEED 2009 sustainable qualities, production, recycled materials content and other sustainable issues associated with prestressed/precast concrete construction. Where applicable, examples for these topics are provided as well as an outline of the positive and negative sustainable properties that prestressed/precast concrete can provide to a project if selected as the primary building material. 6.4.1 LEED 2009 Sustainable Qualities and Prestressed/Precast Concrete Prestressed/precast concrete construction offers projects the opportunity to address two of the sections of the LEED 2009 rating system. These two sections are MR Credit 3: Section Reuse and MR. Credit 4: Recycled Materials Content. Prestressed/precast concrete construction provides a project with the opportunity to investigate the reuse of existing members from a previous project under MR Credit 3. Similar to steel construction, precast/prestressed concrete construction allows for the possibility of existing section removal during demolition of one project and reuse in a new project. This is achieved in similar manner to that of steel construction as members can require little modification before reuse. However, a similar issue as that which occurs in cast-in-place concrete construction can hinder this because care must be taken to ensure that an existing section possesses adequate strength properties through testing. Also, analysis must be conducted on the existing component for its applicability within a new structural design. These issues also rely heavily on the initial use of the prestressed/precast member. For example, a project must initially allow for removal of a component from the structural system with impact or demolition that could affect that member (a factor for systems that employ spandrel beams with a poured concrete deck) in its reuse. Similarly, for projects that do allow for the above, the existing member must be of both usable geometry and strength for the new project. While these hurdles may be 52

difficult for a project to overcome, it is possible for prestressed/precast concrete construction to achieve the goal intended by MR Credit 3: Section Reuse in the LEED 2009 rating system. Also, similar to the discussion on cast-in-place concrete sections, prestressed/precast concrete construction allows for the use of recycled materials in concrete mix design. The materials involved in prestressed/precast concrete construction can also be employed as recycled materials after demolition. Prestressed/precast concrete construction also offers the additional ability to employ higher recycled materials contents as both concrete design mixtures and the curing process can be controlled in way not possible in cast-in-place concrete construction. This allows designers to achieve strengths and material properties not possible in cast-in-place construction while still meeting and intentions of MR Credit 4: Materials Reuse with the possibility of even higher recycled materials contents. 6.4.2 Prestressed/Precast Concrete Member Production The production energies and raw material required for prestressed/precast concrete are very similar to cast-in-place concrete with the addition of a key element. While production of cement and concrete for both cast-in-place and prestressed/precast construction is similar, additional energy can be required for prestressed/precast members that require specific curing methods. To increase the curing speed and strength gain time for prestressed/precast concrete section, producers can employ steam curing and other methods. The addition of these methods increases the energy required during production and can affect the total required production energy and materials. For accurate sustainability calculations, the issues discussed above affecting the material production of cement and concrete are needed to be included with the additional curing energies. The increased control over section production involved in prestressed/precast construction can provide a project with the ability to increase section durability and stiffness. As a result, prestressed/precast concrete construction attempts to include measures that can decrease the maintenance costs associated with project operation. However, both of these measures can affect sustainability in negative ways. While maintenance costs are attempted to be driven down, practice has displayed 53

that project maintenance costs associated with operation can often be higher for prestressed/precast construction (Naik 2008). Along with this, the addition of durability and strength increase materials and admixtures can adversely affect section brittleness, which can account for the additional maintenance costs mentioned previously. However, prestressed/precast concrete construction offers the opportunity for reinforcement placement and control. Similarly, prestressed/precast concrete construction has, in general, much better quality control that traditional reinforced concrete. All of these issues affect project sustainability and production sustainability by the increase energy and materials costs associated with section production as well as maintenance. The increased energy involved in improving concrete strength properties can thus adversely affect whole project sustainability. Again, as with cast-in-place concrete, the measures required for determination of production energy requirements can be difficult to fully quantify and have significant effects on production design alternative selection. 6.4.3 Recycled Materials Content and Prestressed/Precast Concrete Similar to cast-in-place concrete and steel construction, prestressed/precast concrete construction allows for the use of recycled materials in its design. These recycled materials often include fly-ash, silica fume, slag or recycled aggregate as with cast-in-place concrete mix design. However, due to the control possible in production of prestressed/precast members, percentages for recycled materials contents can be increased due to different potentially better curing methods than cast-in-place concrete members. The recycled materials content included in members vary relative to application in a project. Prestressed/precast concrete sections can also offer an end-oflife recycling option, just as cast-in-place construction, of the reuse of demolished sections as aggregate or fill. 6.4.4 Other Sustainable Qualities of Prestressed/Precast Concrete As with steel construction, prestressed/precast construction provides a project with the ability for members to be loaded immediately upon placement. This advantage can allow for streamlined construction schedules similar to those possible with steel construction. Additionally, prestressed/precast construction allows for more complex designs that involve structural system members playing several roles in a project s 54

systems. For example, available to prestressed/precast construction can be the option for piping, HVAC or other systems to be included in section design. This inclusion allows for these additional systems (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, etc.) to be put into place while structural construction is proceeding. This means that a project can complete multiple systems during the same time and drive construction time and costs down. In essence, prestressed/precast concrete sections do not limit additional systems designs as strictly as steel construction can, and does not require on-site curing time as with cast-in-place concrete. All of these reasons can add to a project s overall sustainability. Similar to transportation of structural steel members and materials for cast-inplace concrete construction, transportation of elements to project sites can create limitations. Whereas a project and designer may call for a larger component/member, site access limitations can reduce the overall project sustainability by requiring that member to be a single element. This can mean that while the opportunity to be sustainable is provided in prestressed/precast construction, limitations can also exist. 6.5 Conclusions Below are the conclusions that have been drawn from this study relative to each of the material types discussed. Table 6.1 provides a summary of these conclusions. 6.5.1 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Steel Many issues surround the use of steel as a construction material and its relationship to sustainability. However, it can be seen that steel construction offers the positive attributes to project sustainability of individual or frame section reuse, recycled materials content possibility, durability, opportunity for streamlined construction schedules and a short period between placement and ability to resist load. The negative sustainable attributes associated with structural steel of byproduct emission from production (most specifically carbon dioxide), operational and maintenance requirements including fire and corrosion protection, required testing for section or system reuse and significant (and not fully defined) production energy requirements. 6.5.2 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Cast-in-Place Concrete As illustrated, numerous issues surround the use of cast-in-place concrete as a construction material and its relationship to sustainability. However, it can be seen that 55

cast-in-place construction offers the positive attributes to project sustainability of abundant raw materials, possibility of recycled materials contents, ability to be recycled for future construction and unique construction and scheduling opportunities relative to the other materials discussed herein. The negative sustainable attributes associated with cast-in-place concrete of byproduct emissions including several GHGs, significant energy requirements for cement production, additional energy requirements for concrete production, higher energy requirements for incorporation of pozzolanic or recycled materials, materials placement limitations and wastes generated during construction. 6.5.3 Sustainable Qualities and Issues for Prestressed/Precast Concrete Prestressed/precast concrete has many issues surrounding its use as a construction material and its relationship to sustainability. However, it can be seen that prestressed/precast construction offers the positive attributes to project sustainability of abundant raw materials, possibility of recycled materials contents, ability to be recycled for future construction, possibility for streamlined and multi-system construction, short period between placement and service and the possibly for more durable and complex design configurations. Combating these are the negative attributes of byproduct emissions including several GHGs, significant energy requirements for cement production, additional energy requirements for concrete production, higher energy requirements for incorporation of pozzolanic or recycled materials, limitations imposed by site access and relatively high maintenance costs. 56

Material Benefits Shortcomings Ability for frame and section reuse CO 2 emissions Recycled materials content Operational and maintenance possibility requirements Durability Possibility for streamlined Required testing for construction schedules requalification Short period from placement to Significant energy requirements service for production Abundant raw materials Byproduct emissions (Various Structural Steel C.I.P. Reinforced Concrete Prestressed Precast Concrete Ability for use as a recycled material Recycled materials content possibility Unique construction/scheduling properties Abundant raw materials Possibility of recycled materials content Ability to be employed as a recycled material Possibility for streamlined/multisystem construction Short period from placement to service Possibility for high durability and complex designs GHGS) Significant energy requirements for raw material (cement) production and recycled materials contents Construction constraints/material placement limitations Construction Wastes Byproduct emissions (Various GHGS) Significant energy requirements for raw material (cement) production and recycled materials contents Construction constraints/material placement limitations Relatively high maintenance costs. Table 6.1. Structurally applicable sustainable properties of steel, cast-in-place concrete and prestressed/precast concrete as construction materials 57

Chapter 7: Review of Life Cycle Analysis Computer Programs 7.1 Introduction Successful sustainable design of any structure relies on the ability of designers to provide input to a client on design alternatives. Accurate design alternative prediction requires various measures of energy and environmental impact analysis involving a range of issues. The issues include but are not limited to the production energies associated with construction materials as well as an analysis of the environmental impact materials can have over their lifetime. While the producers of façade and non-structural building construction materials present designers and engineers with the sustainable properties of their products, all construction materials involved must be accounted for. This means that a project must account for the sustainable impact that all materials included in construction have during all planning and construction phases. Accurate prediction of energy and environmental measures are what contribute to the total life-cycle analysis (LCA) of a project. The sustainability of individual materials contributes to total project sustainability and accurate prediction of sustainable qualities are required during design alternative analysis. To achieve more accurate predictions and allow for direct side-by-side comparison of designs sustainable properties, the energy requirements for production/use, environmental impact, and end-of-life options must be better determined. The construction materials industries and research institutions actively must actively pursue these material sustainable properties in an effort to achieve increased accuracy. Private companies and government entities have created tools, in the form of lifecycle analysis computer programs, to assist designers in these predictions. These lifecycle analysis programs vary in capability and address different issues, such as focusing solely on energy use, environmental impact or other LEED rating point applicable sustainable properties (e.g., air quality, use of natural light, waste management, etc.), 58

associated with project planning and construction. These programs make calculations based on data from a variety of industries and attempt to unify the results between alternative designs. In this study, three programs (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0, SimaPRO v7.1 and Athena Impact Estimator v4.0) have been evaluated for their applicability to the life-cycle analysis of buildings alternatives. These programs employ databases created from information provided by various sectors of the construction materials production and construction industries and rely on the reported energy values, environmental impacts, and other sustainable properties of construction materials and construction processes. Both positive and negative aspects relating to measurement of sustainable qualities of design alternative of these programs use will be presented. Also, figures displaying program input requirements and output values where relevant. 7.2 Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0 The Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) computer program is a life-cycle analysis tool that performs side-by-side comparison of a single construction material type involved in project design at a time. The program interface allows its user to set weighting ratios for various aspects of both environmental and economic impact resulting from a product s use and compare it to another product in the same major group element. Figures 7.1 and 7.2 show the initial program screen and the option for applying rating ratios: 59

Figure 7.1. Screenshot of initial program screen for BEES v4.0 Figure 7.2. Screenshot of ratio weighting option offered by BEES v4.0 60

An example of the program s materials comparison options would include comparison of two concrete beams, made with 100% Portland cement mix and 15% flyash cement mix concrete respectively, from either the same or different locations (input as distance from manufacturing plant to project site). As described earlier, construction discount rates for each of these beams can be weighted for user economic and environmental importance and compared against their performance in both categories. The ratios calculated for the environmental impact and economic performance of a product over its life cycle are generated from a database contained within the program of applicable product properties and uses. The values in these databases are provided by the program for user review and contain the associated raw material inputs, byproducts of production, wastes due to installation and maintenance, type of energy employed in production and land use associated with life-cycle stage of a construction material. The program s creators, the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology, periodically update the values in these tables BEES v4.0 employs these databases to provide the user with both tabular and graphic representations of the products being compared. 7.2.1 BEES v4.0 Program Outputs Outputs from the BEES v4.0 program provide users with comparisons of single construction material type on both economic and environmental scales. The program inputs require users to provide distance to project site from supplier, indicating that the tables employed in generating these outputs consider transportation costs and environmental impacts. Using the weighting option provided, a user can indicate which byproduct emissions or energy use issues are most important for comparison as well as designate the importance of economic or environmental data to a project s design. Each of these inputs are applied the material selections made by a user from the provided program database. The program then assesses each of the materials selected and provides the user with both graphical and tabular outputs as well as an overall performance combining economic and environmental outputs relative to user weighting. Provided below are examples of program graphical output of both economic, environmental and overall performance for an unweighted material comparison of the three façade materials 61

stucco, aluminum siding and trespa meteon with the same distance to project site values. The economic performance output provides the user with both the first and future costs as well as the sum. As displayed in Figure 7.3, the future cost values can be both positive and negative and are related to a materials ability to provide a project with a financially advantageous use. The vertical axis of Figure 7.3 is the present value costs associated with the previously discussed example while the horizontal axis is the three design alternatives. It should also be noted that values provided from these outputs are at present value costs. Figure 7.3. Economic performance graphical output for stucco, aluminum siding and trespa meteon comparison The environmental performance output, Figure 7.4, provides the user with measures of several environmental factors including the following; acidification, critical air pollutants, ecological toxicity, eutrophication, fossil fuel depletion, global warming, habitat alteration, human health, indoor air quality, ozone depletion, smog and water 62

intake. The measures in this output are gathered from industry data that are provided to the program in the aforementioned performance tables. Figure 7.4. Environmental performance graphical output for stucco, aluminum siding and trespa meteon comparison The program assess the tabular data as well as the user input weights and distance from producer data. These values are converted within the program to percentages of performance that are then converted to a points system. Each of the above mentioned categories contribute to this point system and the program provides the user with and overall (with user defined weights where applicable) environmental score for the materials being compared. The vertical axis of Figure 7.4 is the scores associated with the previously discussed example while the horizontal axis is the three design alternatives. As illustrated by Figures 7.3 and 7.4 from the provided example, stucco has a relatively low economic cost with a high environmental performance (lower scores in environmental performance as desired). The BEES v4.0 computer program also provides the user with and overall performance output, displayed in Figure 7.5. 63

Figure 7.5. Overall Performance Graphical Output for Stucco, Aluminum Siding and Trespa Meteon comparison This output combines the economic and environmental performance outputs considering any weighting ratios that are defined by the user. In the above example, the program default weighting ratios (a 50%/50% consideration for both economic and environmental performance) were employed. As displayed in the vertical axis of Figure 7.5, the score values associated with both economic and environmental performance are combined and presented in a similar manner to Figures 7.3 and 7.4.. The program notes that lower values are desired in the overall performance measurement. Figure 7.5 displays that, in the example provided above, aluminum siding is the project s best overall choice, unlike what was identified in the economic or environmental performance graphs separately (i.e. Figure 7.3 and 7.4). 7.2.2 BEES v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Advantages The BEES v4.0 computer program offers users the ability to compare construction materials of the same category side-by-side. side. As illustrated in the example above, the 64

BEES v4.0 program provides users with insight into a specific building material choice and its relevance to their project s design. The program also allows users to weight the importance of these outputs to their overall project goals. These options can have positive impacts on total project sustainability by allowing its users to consider the economic and environmental impact of material choice. By comparing different façade material options (as done in the provided example), a project can determine the effect that a product with a lower environmental impact located further from the project site can have over other alternatives. This insight allows a project to determine which material can best serve their sustainability goals most effectively. The program output provides its users with both tabular and graphical representations of material comparisons. The combination of the environmental and economic performances of a material for the overall performance provides a project with the ability to consider multiple weighted alternatives. The BEES v4.0 program also allows for several iterations to be run on the same material type allowing for consideration of several product suppliers of the same material (although each investigation requires that a new model be constructed for the same material from different locations). Similarly, a user can run several iterations considering building materials in different categories for comparison. While these comparisons across categories cannot be on the same model, the BEES v4.0 program can provide output on each individually for visual evaluation. Again, this provides more insight into material sustainability allowing for a project to better assess design alternatives. 7.2.3 BEES v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages The BEES v4.0 computer program outputs are computed from internal tables. These tables are generated from industry data as well as other research. While updates to these tables are made periodically, the BEES v4.0 program does not allow user to change table values. Also, the data from which these values are obtained are also not provided to users. Due to this, the results offered from the program analysis may not serve a particular project, as the values provided from the program may not meet actual values of a producer or material being considered. Therefore, the program may provide its user with an incorrect solution for their design alternative considerations. 65

Along with this, the program can only provide a user with comparisons of one building material type at a time. While multiple alternatives within the building type can be compared, alternative interactions cannot without running several models. For example, a user might want to compare façade alternatives considering multiple window alternatives. Each analysis would need to be run separately and cannot be combined. This means that output would only provide a project insight about one material on its own and not data on consideration of alternative materials that may be possible from multiple suppliers. This can be a major hindrance to total project sustainability as building materials may be selected that do not produce the most sustainable design. Included in these limitations is the lack of ability to define material quantities within the program. While comparisons are made between material types, the BEES v4.0 program cannot consider the effect that larger or smaller quantities of one material relative to another in a design alternative can have. It can thus be concluded that the BEES v4.0 program cannot consider if economy of scale or construction advantages were available between different design alternatives. These negatives can outweigh the positive program aspects if accurate, and indepth comparison is required for a project. It can also limit the ability of project designers to effectively contribute to project sustainability and effect a project s overall sustainable qualities. 7.3 SimaPRO v7.1 The SimaPRO v7.1 computer program is a life cycle analysis tool employed in the general calculation of a product s environmental and economic impact. SimaPRO v7.1 bases its calculations off of databases that include inputs from various sectors of the production industry including, but not limited to, raw materials and energy requirements for production. The program offers its user the ability to create and change the values in its databases to better suit a designer s needs. The SimaPRO v7.1 computer program also allows the user to select datum input for a life cycle and environmental impact analysis for a user-defined product generated from a program-defined list of raw materials. However, detailed investigation into all aspects of production must be conducted prior to the combination of raw materials for a new, non-program defined product. Figure 7.6 is 66

an example of a program-defined product, 1.0 kilogram of cattle feed, and the raw materials product tree provided by the SimaPRO v7.1 program. Figure 7.6. SimaPRO v7.1 product tree for 1.0 kilogram of cattle feed With both the database and user-defined products, the program can produce side- by-side comparison of the raw material inputs involved in alternative product designs. SimaPRO v7.1 also offers its users the ability to select various types of analysis methods from different regions of the world. Most notable to this study, the program allows for the use of the BEES analysis method (Section 7.2) and the Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) produced by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Using these analysis tools, the program is able to generate both tables and figures that display the distribution of energy, environmental impact and life-cycle cost associated with a product s production following the guidelines explained by the applicable ASTM standards for life cycle analysis calculation (ASTM E917-05, ASTM E2204-05). 7.3.1 SimaPRO v7.1 Program Outputs 67

SimaPRO v7.1 provides users with both tabular and graphical outputs of total environmental outputs for a product. Several raw material input measures are considered in the program analysis. These input measures are combined to determine the contribution that each can have on several program defined environmental factors including, but not limited to; global warming, acidification, human health-cancer, human health-non-cancer, human health criteria-air air pollutants, eutrophication, smog, natural resource depletion and ozone depletion. The applicable raw material impact measures for a product are considered and employed by the program to illustrate the effect that each has on the environment. Figure 7.7 illustrates a graphical output from the SimaPRO v7.1 program for the example of 1.0 kilogram of cattle feed mentioned in Section 7.3. Figure 7.7. SimaPRO v7.1 Graphical Output for One (1) Kilogram of Cattle Feed 7.3.2 SimaPRO v7.1 Sustainable Measurement Advantages Many of the features included in the SimaPRO v7.1 program package can be advantageous to a user in considering design alternatives. The program provides users 68

with numerous defined products that have been compiled and are based off of industry data. This can allow a user and project to assess the sustainability of a product without product production investigation. Along with this, the SimaPRO v7.1 program allows its users to define their own products from the provided list of input raw materials. Thus, a project can tailor a product to its specific use and consider its sustainability from that. Similarly, the program also allows a user to access and change database values. This may require more detailed investigation into a product, but can allow a project to determine the sustainability of an option in a more effective manner. The SimaPRO v7.1 output provides its user with side-by-side comparison of products based on environmental measures considering their raw materials. This allows design professionals to assess the sustainability of several design alternatives while considering each alternative s raw material inputs effect and availability. The program also allows for this to be done under multiple comparison measures (the BEES comparison and TRACI) allowing for a product analysis on two scales providing designers with more data. The program can provide its user with multiple outputs for various important project aspects. Most specifically the environmental, energy and economic values associated with products. This is all done through a program-defined life cycle cost analysis. 7.3.3 SimaPRO v7.1 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages The immediate and effective use of the SimaPRO v7.1 program is to provide a user with a life cycle cost (LCC) or life cycle analysis (LCA) for product alternatives. While this can serve comparison of products, the SimaPRO v7.1 program is not tailored for comparison of building or structural materials. The SimaPRO v7.1 program aims to compare products, not designs. Its ability for editing and creation of user-defined products can achieve the goals of a design alternative analysis, but detailed investigations are required for these product definitions as well as for accurate design alternative comparison. Due to this, significant time and energy may be required for this program s output to be of value to a project assessing its overall sustainability. Contributing to lack of value in program output are the limitations imposed by the 69

program-defined raw materials. Any user-defined products must be possible from configurations of program-defined materials and thus can limit the types of products that can be defined. As the program does not allow for definition of any product, it can greatly limit the effectiveness that its outputs can have on design alternative comparison. This relates directly to the limitations imposed by the program from its database. As with the BEES v4.0 program, SimaPRO v7.1 can only produce results relative to its database. If there exist errors in the manner in which data was collected or a product being considered is produced/consists of materials outside the program-defined database, the outputs may not be relevant to a project s intended comparisons. Similar to the BEES v4.0 program, SimaPRO v7.1 also cannot consider quantities in its calculations. As discussed in Section 7.2.3, this means that alternative designs could not accurately reflect advantages that one product can provide over another used in a project. Each of these limitations contribute to the overall effectiveness of the SimaPRO v7.1 computer program in comparing alternative design options for a project and affect the effectiveness that program outputs can have for project material choice. 7.4 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program is a building system environmental effect calculation tool designed to help engineers and designers determine the summary measures and/or absolute environmental effect of a design alternative by either life-cycle stage or assembly group embodied effects. The program allows users to create alternative building systems, based on both provided product details user-defined products, that are compared against total (as well as by life-cycle stage) environmental impact. The databases included in the program are generated from industry values considering various energy use aspects including, but not limited to; electricity, hydropower, coal, diesel, feedstock, gasoline, heavy fuel oil, natural gas and nuclear. A designer would generate a model based on a simple building layout (e.g., number of bays, length of bays, etc.) for each applicable level of the building. Interior and façade details can also be specified. The program employs the user-input design data to generate total quantities of raw materials, which are displayed by a Bill of Materials report (an 70

example is provided in Figure 7.8). Figure 7.8. Athena impact estimator v4.0 bill of materials report generic example The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 then applies program-defined constants to display, in either table or graph form, the total environmental impact relative to a design over the building product s life cycle stages. These stages are program-defined and consist of manufacturing, construction, maintenance, end-of-life and operating energy. Along with these individual stages, the program provides an overall energy use assessment for each energy type combining the values of each life cycle stage. The Athena Impact Estimator produces these tables and graphs for each project but allows for multiple projects to be analyzed side-by-side on separate graphs. 7.4.1 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Program Outputs The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 provides the user with both tabular and graphical representations resentations of energy use involved in a building design alternative for the entire project life cycle. The program allows for the selection of various project locations within North America, that alter the database employed by the program in calculating 71

project energy values. This is due to varying energy use by region North America and is encapsulated in the program-defined databases. The program interface and input requirements are most effectively employed for projects considering building design alternatives not project design alternatives. Provided in Figures 7.9 and 7.10 are equivalent tabular and graphical representations of output data from a generic building design alternative and illustrate the type of outputs (ex. electricity, coal, natural gas, etc.) associated with a building. Figure 7.9. Athena Impact Estimator v 4.0 tabular output-generic example 72

Figure 7.10. Athena Impact Estimator v 4.0 graphical output-generic example The energies presented in the program outputs are determined from a database. As a user provides project details, the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 calculates a bill of materials report for each input. The program then totals the materials included in the project s building design model and determines energy use along project life cycles from database entries. Both the tabular and graphical representations include the various units of measure associated with each energy type. The two areas under which energy use are calculated for each life cycle stage are materials and transportation. These values are directly related to the user-defined material choices and geometry and the program- defined databases. Multiple outputs can be generated for design alternatives and displayed on separate tables and graphs at the same time. However, these tables and graphs cannot be displayed on one graph or table at the same time. Values from tables can be exported to Microsoft Excel for further analysis. 7.4.2 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Advantages The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 offers many advantages for sustainable project 73

design. One of the most predominant advantages offered by the program is the ability to consider multiple design alternatives. This allows a project to present energy and environmental impact analysis for various layouts or designs and compare them simultaneously. The designers then can compare design alternatives and make more informed decisions. Similar to this, the program can provide users with analysis results from multiple viewpoints such as by life cycle stage or embodied energy. This means that designers can consider the impact of their material choices relative to project life cycles as well to total project energy requirements. Designers can thus make conclusions based on this data relative to aspects (construction issues, maintenance issues, etc.) important to their project. This also means that alternative design choices can display what areas of the project life cycle will require greater energy expenditures and allow a project to plan for this in their final design decisions. The databases included in the program are from industry data and other outside research efforts. It can be assumed that this data was gathered from various regions within North America and thus can provide a user with accurate input relevant to their project site. These database and regional considerations can be important to project design alternative choices as their accuracy can influence the decision of designers. The Athena Estimator v4.0 has the ability to include material quantities in its calculations. Inclusion of these quantities increases the accuracy with which design alternatives can be compared. This accuracy can aid users and project designers to determine what design alternatives meet, exceed or fall short of their sustainability goals. Another positive sustainable quality of the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 is that its databases and user interface consist of both interior and exterior structural elements. This does not mean that the program can analyze a structure for its effectiveness to resist loads. Rather, it means that the program can consider elements of a projects design rather than simple architectural or structural aspects separately. The program can also assess a building design alternative over its life. This allows designers to consider aspects surrounding material/design choice including end-of-life options. 7.4.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Sustainable Measurement Disadvantages 74

One of the key issues in program use and output, as with the previously discussed programs, are the reliability of the program defined databases. While the program employs industry and research data, the applicability of this data to a specific project may be incorrect. It is difficult to verify the data because it is not clear to the user every input comes from. This means that a user may assess design alternatives that display energy values that are not accurate relative to their material choices and product availability within the project site s region. This can limit the ability of both the program and designers to accurately predict the energy expenditures associated with alternative project designs. The Athena Impact Estimator program shows that energy requirements increase as material quantity increase. However, the program does not provide the user with individual section or member sizes, just an increase in energy relative to span length. Parametric studies employing the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 are provided in Chapter 8. These studies display program use and output more accurately, and depict that the increases in energy are general comparison of design alternative. The final negative sustainable quality associated with the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 is that its use for design alternatives can require extensive input and data. Geometry, layout and initial design are required to achieve an accurate design alternative comparison from the program. This means that both design time and energy must be employed to first determine the various design alternatives as well as enter their required data for program analysis. While this may not be difficult on relatively small projects, as size and complexity increase, design time will increase. This can harm overall project sustainability, as program results may not be accurate. This can lead to modeling that detracts from design alternative decisions choices rather than adds to their effectiveness. 7.5 Conclusions and Program Highlights Review and analysis of the three computer programs presented (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0, SimaPRO v7.1 and Athena Impact Estimator v4.0) led to the following program specific and general conclusions. 7.5.1 BEES v4.0 Program Conclusions The BEES v4.0 program allows for the side-by-side comparison of building 75

materials and can integrate location from supplier to site. Simultaneous economic and environmental analyses can be conducted including weighting ratios relative to their importance within a project decisions making process. The program also relies heavily on a product materials database. One shortcoming of the BEES v4.0 program is that it compares only materials and not project design alternatives directly. As a result only general product conclusions can be drawn. In addition, there is uncertainty about the products database and what information is employed to generate it. Thus, program outputs may not accurately reflect desired project design alternatives. Finally, the program does not allow for material quantity comparison. 7.5.2 SimaPRO v7.1 Program Conclusions The SimaPRO v7.1 program offers a user an extensive database of predefined materials as well as the ability to edit these materials to generate new product as required for design alternatives. It also provides a user with side-by-side product comparison as well as visual raw material inputs to the project under analysis. The program also allows the user to perform environmental, energy and life cycle analyses using various analysis methods including the BEES and TRACI methods. SimaPRO v7.1 falls short as it only allows for comparison of product alternatives and not design alternatives. As a result, limited raw material inputs can hinder the ability of a user to clearly define new products leading to limitations in the results and their effectiveness in project design alternative decision-making. Similar to the BEES v4.0 program, the program database can limit comparison effectiveness as well as its inability to consider material quantities. 7.5.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Program Conclusions The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 program includes environmental and energy analysis measures. The program also allows for alternative design comparison by life cycle stage or embodied energy effect. The values for which are determined from an industry-generated database that includes both interior and exterior building components. It can provide insight into energy expenditures and environmental impact at each step along building life. Unlike the other programs discussed, the Athena Impact Estimator 76

considers material quantities in its analyses. The Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 falls short on its effectiveness as a sustainable design alternative comparison tool because of the trends it applies to its output data. Energy requirements are shown to increase relative to material quantity increase and measurements do not indicate changes in section size (this is depicted in more depth in the studies contained in Chapter 8). Also, the program has difficulty in accurately comparing varying structural design layouts and focuses on general architectural and quantity comparisons. Similar to the previous programs discussed, it also relies heavily on an industry-defined database that may not always be accurate. 7.5.4 General Life Cycle Analysis Computer Program Conclusions In general, the three life cycle analysis programs reviewed rely heavily on databases for analysis. These databases can distort outputs in a manner not helpful to design alternative decision-making. The reviewed programs also lack the ability to fully define a project s building envelope and/or structural system. This limits how a project can compare design alternatives. Care must also be taken in program use to address aspects of project sustainability in effective and meaningful ways. Each of the programs reviewed only provide general comparisons for design alternatives. This limits the accuracy with which conclusions about design alternative can be made. Also, none of the programs reviewed relate material strength, durability and other properties with their program-defined sustainable properties. This limits the type of comparisons that can be made as well as the effectiveness of any research based on these programs use. The programs reviewed are not effective for structural system or whole project modeling on their own. Use of multiple programs may lead to more effective design results, but this is unclear as their shortcomings are often overlapping and may not provide all the necessary solutions for accurate design alternative comparisons at this point in time. 77

Chapter 8: Modeling and Analysis with the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 8.1 Introduction This chapter presents sustainability analysis of beams, columns and concrete slabs using the Athena Impact Software v4.0. It was concluded from the review of available computer programs that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 would best serve in parametric studies to assess the relationship between structural members and energy consumption. This modeling was conducted to evaluate the energy consumption values associated with the following structural elements and properties: Wide Flange (WF), Concrete and Glulam columns energy consumption relative to column height Wide Flange, Concrete and Glulam columns energy consumption relative to live load Wide Flange, Concrete and Glulam beams energy consumption relative to span length Wide Flange, Concrete and Glulam beams energy consumption relative to live load Concrete Suspended Slabs energy consumption relative to span length Concrete Suspended Slabs energy consumption relative to live load Concrete Suspended Slabs energy consumption relative to concrete strength The concrete strength of Concrete Suspended Slabs energy consumption relative to live load The fly-ash percentage of Concrete Suspend Slabs energy consumption relative to gross floor area The fly-ash percentage of Concrete Suspend Slabs energy consumption relative to live load This modeling assesses the output energy values associated with varying widths and lengths of the columns, beams and slabs displayed in Figure 8.1. 78

Figure 8.1. Illustration of structure employed as generic model for Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 energy consumption assessment For each of the studies, the values for height, span, live load, concrete strength and concrete fly-ash percentage were varied individually holding other values constant to determine the effect that each had on energy consumption as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0. The manner in which each value was varied is presented in the next section 8.2 Modeling Parameters Figure 8.2 displays the initial input screen when starting a new project in the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. 79

Figure 8.2.. Screenshot of initial input interface for a New project in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 In all modeling, the Location dropdown window was set to USA. Also, the Building Type was maintained as Commercial. Displayed on Figure 8.2 are two highlighted inputs. These inputs are Gross Floor Area and Building Life Expectancy. All studies were conducted in Imperial units. The Number and Description input fields were left blank. Figure 8.3 displays the input screen obtained after completing the initial input screen parameter inputs and clicking the Edit dropdown tab in the program interface and selecting Add Assembly, Floor and Concrete Suspended Slab. 80

Figure 8.3.. Screenshot of interface for Concrete Suspended Slab in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Displayed on Figure 8.3 are five highlighted inputs: Floor Width, Span, Concrete Flyash %, Concrete and Live Load. Figure 8.4 displays the input screen obtained by clicking on the Edit dropdown tab in the program interface and selecting Add Assembly and Mixed Columns and Beams. 81

Figure 8.4. Screenshot of interface for Mixed Columns and Beam in Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 In all modeling, the Number of Columns and Number of Beams were set to 4. Displayed on the figure are six highlighted inputs: Bay Size, Supported Span, Floor to Floor Height, Live Load, Column Type and Beam Type. Table 8.1 provides a list of all highlighted inputs for reference. Highlighted Input Label Input 1 Input 2 Input 3 Input 4 Input 5 Input 6 Input 7 Input 8 Input 9 Input 10 Input 11 Input 12 Input 13 Reference to Figure Name Reference Figure 14 Gross Floor Area Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy Figure 15 Floor Width Figure 15 Figure 15 Span Concrete Flyash % Figure 15 Concrete Figure 15 Live Load Figure 16 Bay Size Figure 16 Supported Span Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height Figure 16 Live Load Figure 16 Column Type Figure 16 Beam Type Table 8.1. List of highlighted input labels and references 82

For each study, individual models were built. After model construction, the project heading, displayed in Figure 8.5, was highlighted. Figure 8.5. Screenshot of project assembly tree with project heading highlighted With the project heading highlighted, the Reports tab was selected. Figure 8.6 displays the interface window associated with the Reports tab and highlights the four areas of importance. 83

Figure 8.6. Screenshot of Reports interface window with highlighted areas Figure 8.6 displays the Report Format as Table, the Format as Absolute Value, the Type as By Life Cycle Stages and that the Absolute Values box for Energy is checked. These same selections were made for all models. Once these e selections were made, the Show Reports button was pressed. Pressing this button produced the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output table of Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages for each model. This table includes the life cycle stages; Manufacturing, Construction, Maintenance, End Of Life, Operating Energy and Total. The measured energies provided in these tables include; Electricity (kwh), Hydro (MJ), Coal (MJ), Diesel (MJ), Feedstock (MJ), Gasoline (MJ), Heavy Fuel Oil (MJ), LPG (MJ), Natural Gas (MJ), Nuclear (MJ) and Wood (MJ). It should be noted that not all measured energy outputs, as listed in the previous sentence, are included in all model output tables. The measured values are dependent on the materials being assessed. However, measured energy outputs are generally included in all the models employed in this study with the exception of Wood 84

(MJ), which varies with the selection of Glulam for Inputs 12 and 13. The values from these tables were exported from the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 to Microsoft Excel. From there, all units were converted to MJ (the conversion unit of 1 kwh = 3.6 MJ was employed in converting the Electricity output) and summed for a total energy consumption value for each model. These total energy consumption values were then compared via the parameters varied in each study. All exported tables are provided in Appendix A. 8.3 Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 Parametric Studies This section provides the information relevant to the parametric studies that were conducted. 8.3.1 Study 1: Column Energy Consumption The intention of this study was to assess the required energy consumption per length of three column types (Wide Flange, Concrete and Glulam) as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. In this study, all values associated with the slab and beams lengths and widths (as illustrated in Figure 8.1) were held constant while the floor-to-floor height, column type and live load were varied. 8.3.1.1 Study 1: Input Values Table 8.2 displays all input labels included in this study along with their constant or varied value, a reference to their name and a reference to their applicable figure. Table 8.2 also displays the values for the parameters that were varied as applicable. 85

Input Reference to Name Reference Value Unit Label Figure Input 1 Figure 14 Gross Floor Area 400 ft 2 Input 2 Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy 50 Years Input 3 Figure 15 Floor Width 20 ft Input 4 Figure 15 Span 20 ft Input 5 Figure 15 Concrete Flyash % average % Input 6 Figure 15 Concrete 4000 psi Input 7 Figure 15 Live Load 45 psf Input 8 Figure 16 Bay Size 20 ft Input 9 Figure 16 Supported Span 20 ft Input 10 Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height Varied (10-15) ft Input 11 Figure 16 Live Load Varied (45, 75, 100) psf Input 12 Figure 16 Column Type Varied (WF, Concrete, Glulam) -- Input 13 Figure 16 Beam Type WF -- Table 8.2. Values employed for inputs in study 1 8.3.2 Study 1: Analysis The values provided in Table 8.2 were employed to generate models for each of the varied parameters. The Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages output tables for each model from the Athena Impact Estimator were generated and are provided in Appendix A1. Table 8.3 provides the total energy consumption values as tabulated from the values provided in Appendix A1 for each varied Column Type and Live Load by the applicable Floor to Floor Height. Table 8.3 was employed to generate Figures 8.7 through 8.10. 86

Live 45 psf Live 75 psf Live 100 psf Column Type Column Height (ft) WF Energy (MJ) Column Type Column Height (ft) WF Energy (MJ) Column Type Column Height (ft) WF Energy (MJ) 10 95966.2 10 116149.5 10 152774.1 11 97002.9 11 117186.2 11 154433.6 12 98039.6 12 118222.9 12 156093.1 13 99076.3 13 119259.6 13 157752.7 14 100113.1 14 120296.3 14 159412.2 15 101149.8 15 121333.1 15 161071.8 Column Type Column Height (ft) Concrete Energy (MJ) Column Type Column Height (ft) Concrete Energy (MJ) Column Type Column Height (ft) Concrete Energy (MJ) 10 135071.1 10 157405.2 10 189196.3 11 140018.2 11 162567.4 11 194498.0 12 144965.3 12 167729.6 12 199799.8 13 149912.4 13 172891.8 13 205101.6 14 154859.7 14 178054.0 14 210403.3 15 159806.9 15 183216.5 15 215705.1 Column Type Glulam Column Type Glulam Column Type Glulam Column Height (ft) Energy (MJ) Column Height (ft) Energy (MJ) Column Height (ft) Energy (MJ) 10 87824.2 10 107844.7 10 140016.5 11 88028.1 11 108048.6 11 140379.5 12 88232.0 12 108252.5 12 140742.5 13 88435.9 13 108456.4 13 141105.4 14 88639.8 14 108660.3 14 141468.4 15 88843.7 15 108864.2 15 141831.4 Table 8.3. Total energy consumption values for study 1 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations 87

195.0 y = 5162.3x + 105783 R² = 1 185.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 175.0 165.0 155.0 145.0 135.0 125.0 115.0 y = 1036.7x + 105782 R² = 1 y = 203.91x + 105806 R² = 1 105.0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Column Height (ft.) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.7. Column height vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf 165.0 y = 4947.2x + 85599 R² = 1 155.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 145.0 135.0 125.0 115.0 105.0 y = 1036.7x + 85599 R² = 1 95.0 y = 203.91x + 85785 R² = 1 85.0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Column Height (ft.) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.8. Column height vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf 88

225.0 y = 5301.8x + 136179 R² = 1 215.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 205.0 195.0 185.0 175.0 165.0 y = 1659.5x + 136179 R² = 1 155.0 145.0 y = 362.97x + 136387 R² = 1 135.0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Column Height (ft.) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.9. Column height vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 100 psf 220.0 200.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Live Load (psf) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.10. Live load vs. total energy consumption for columns 89

Figures 8.7 through 8.9 display the relationship between Column Height and Total Energy Consumption that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output tables provide for the three column types investigated (WF, Concrete and Glulam) at the live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf). Figure 8.10 displays the relationship between Live Load and Total Energy Consumption for the three column types investigated. Along with this, trendlines have been calculated in Microsoft Excel to determine the bestfit linear equation where applicable. 8.3.3 Study 1: Conclusions The following conclusions have been drawn from the graphs generated in this study: Energy consumption is highest with concrete as the column type devoid of column height Energy consumption increases linearly as volume of material of a column increases Steel columns are approximately 3-5 times more energy conservative than Concrete columns depending on live load Glulam columns are approximately 14-25 times more energy conservative than Concrete columns depending on live load Glulam columns are approximately 4.5-5.5 times more energy conservative than steel columns depending on live load Energy consumption increases as live load on columns increases Energy consumption is highest with Concrete as the column type devoid of live load choice 8.4 Study 2: Beam Energy Consumption The intention of this study was to assess the required energy consumption per length of a beam as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. In this study, the values associated with the columns height, slab length, beam length and slab width (as illustrated in Figure 8.1) were held constant, while the values for beam span, beam type and live load were varied. 8.4.1 Study 2: Input Values 90

Table 8 displays all input labels included in this study along with their constant or varied value, a reference to their name and a reference to their applicable figure. Table 8 also displays which parameters were varied as applicable. Input Reference Name Reference Value Unit Label to Figure Input 1 Figure 14 Gross Floor Area 400 ft 2 Input 2 Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy 50 Years Input 3 Figure 15 Floor Width 20 ft Input 4 Figure 15 Span 20 ft Input 5 Figure 15 Concrete Flyash % average % Input 6 Figure 15 Concrete 4000 psi Input 7 Figure 15 Live Load 45 psf Input 8 Figure 16 Bay Size Varied (15, 20, 25, 30) ft Input 9 Figure 16 Supported Span 20 ft Input 10 Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height 12 ft Input 11 Figure 16 Live Load Varied (45, 75, 100) psf Input 12 Figure 16 Column Type WF -- Input 13 Figure 16 Beam Type Varied (WF, Concrete, Glulam) -- Table 8.4. Values employed for inputs in study 2 8.4.2 Study 2: Analysis The values provided in Table 8.4 were employed to generate models for each of the varied parameters. The Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages output tables for each model from the Athena Impact Estimator are provided in Appendix A2. Table 8.5 provides the total energy consumption values as tabulated from the values provided in Appendix A2 for each varied Beam Type and Live Load by the applicable Bay Size. This table was employed to generate the graphs in Figures 8.11 through 8.14. 91

Live Load 45 psf Live Load 75 psf Live Load 100 psf Beam Beam Beam WF WF Type Type Type WF Beam Beam Beam Energy Energy Energy Length Length Length (MJ) (MJ) (MJ) (ft) (ft) (ft) 15 85541.5 15 100678.8 15 130950.0 20 98039.6 20 118222.9 20 156093.1 25 174317.0 25 203038.0 25 263157.8 30 199571.2 30 234036.2 30 304685.4 40 381310.9 40 419694.5 40 530049.6 Beam Beam Type Concrete Concrete Type Type Beam Concrete Beam Beam Beam Energy Energy Energy Length Length Length (MJ) (MJ) (MJ) (ft) (ft) (ft) 15 71600.5 15 81220.9 15 90877.4 20 82802.2 20 95996.6 20 106813.5 25 94003.9 25 110772.0 25 122750.0 30 105205.6 30 125547.7 30 138686.2 40 127608.9 40 155098.8 40 170558.8 Beam Beam Beam Glulam Glulam Type Type Type Glulam Beam Beam Beam Energy Energy Energy Length Length Length (MJ) (MJ) (MJ) (ft) (ft) (ft) 15 64090.7 15 65869.5 15 84006.3 20 69520.6 20 71892.3 20 93632.4 25 91968.9 25 94011.2 25 127028.1 30 100802.4 30 103253.2 30 141408.1 40 148239.7 40 148310.2 40 209857.4 Table 8.5. Total energy consumption values for study 2 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations 92

140.0 120.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Live Load (psf) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.11. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 420.0 400.0 380.0 360.0 340.0 320.0 300.0 280.0 260.0 240.0 220.0 200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 Beam Length (ft.) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.12. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf 93

Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 540.0 520.0 500.0 480.0 460.0 440.0 420.0 400.0 380.0 360.0 340.0 320.0 300.0 280.0 260.0 240.0 220.0 200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 Beam Length (ft.) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.13. Beam length vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 100 psf 140.0 120.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Live Load (psf) WF Concrete Glulam Figure 8.14. Live load vs. total energy consumption for beams 94

Figures 8.11 through 8.13 display the relationship between Beam Length and Total Energy Consumption that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output tables provide for the three beam types investigated (WF, Concrete and Glulam) at the live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf). Figure 8.14 displays the relationship between Live Load and Total Energy Consumption for the three beam types investigated. 8.4.3 Study 2: Conclusions The following conclusions have been drawn from the graphs generated in this study: Energy consumption is highest with Wide Flange as the beam type devoid of beam length Energy consumption increase as volume of material of a beam increases Energy consumption for Wide Flange beams increase at a greater rate as span length increases as compared to Concrete and Glulam beams At beams lengths of 20 30 ft, energy consumption is similar for Concrete and Glulam beams with live loads of 45 psf and 100 psf Energy consumption increases as live load on beams increases Energy consumption is highest with Wide Flange as the beam type devoid of live load choice Energy consumption for Wide Flange beams increase at a greater rate as live load increases as compared to Concrete and Glulam beams 8.5 Study 3: Concrete Suspended Slab Span Energy Consumption The intention of this study was to assess the required energy consumption associated with span length of a slab as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. In this study, the values associated with the columns height, slab width, beam length and beam width (as illustrated in Figure 8.1) were held constant, while the values for slab length and live load were varied. 8.5.1 Study 3: Input Values Table 8.6 displays all input labels included in this study along with their constant or varied value, a reference to their name and a reference to their applicable figure. Table 8.6 also displays which parameters were varied as applicable. 95

Input Reference Name Reference Value Unit Label to Figure Input 1 Figure 14 Gross Floor Area 400 ft 2 Input 2 Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy 50 Years Input 3 Figure 15 Floor Width 20 ft Input 4 Figure 15 Span Varied (15, 20, 25, 28, 30) ft Input 5 Figure 15 Concrete Flyash % Average % Input 6 Figure 15 Concrete 4000 psi Input 7 Figure 15 Live Load Varied (45, 75, 100) psf Input 8 Figure 16 Bay Size 20 ft Input 9 Figure 16 Supported Span 20 ft Input 10 Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height 12 ft Input 11 Figure 16 Live Load 45 psf Input 12 Figure 16 Column Type WF -- Input 13 Figure 16 Beam Type WF -- Table 8.6. Values employed for inputs in study 3 8.5.2 Study 3: Analysis The values provided in Table 8.6 were employed to generate models for each of the varied parameters. The Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages output tables for each model from the Athena Impact Estimator are provided in Appendix A3. Table 8.7 provides the total energy consumption values as tabulated from the values provided in Appendix A3 for each varied Span and Live Load by the applicable Bay Size. This table was employed to generate the graphs in Figures 8.15 and 8.16. 96

Live Live Live 45 psf 75 psf Load Load Load 100 psf Span Span Span Energy Energy Energy Length Length Length (MJ) (MJ) (MJ) (ft) (ft) (ft) 15 84803.8 15 84560.0 15 87448.7 20 98039.6 20 98099.2 20 104681.8 25 117948.8 25 118010.4 25 126864.3 28 134041.7 28 133836.9 28 142674.7 30 146801.3 30 146267.8 30 154297.0 Table 8.7. Total energy consumption values for study 3 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations 160.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 Span Length (ft.) 45 PSF 75 PSF 100 PSF Figure 8.15. Concrete suspended slab span length vs. total energy consumption 97

160.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Live Load (psf) 15 ft. Span 20 ft. Span 25 ft. Span 28 ft. Span 30 ft. Span Figure 8.16. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab at span lengths of 15, 20, 25, 28 and 30-ft Figures 8.15 displays the relationship between Concrete Suspended Slab span length and Total Energy Consumption that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output tables provide for the three live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf). Figure 8.16 displays the relationship between Live Load and Total Energy Consumption at each the three live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf) for five span lengths (15-ft., 20-ft., 25-ft., 28-ft. and 30-ft.) investigated. 8.5.3 Study 3: Conclusions The following conclusions have been drawn from the graphs generated in this study: Energy consumption is highest at a live load of 100 psf devoid of slab span length Energy consumption increase as volume of material of a slab increases Energy consumption for live loads of 45 and 75 psf are nearly identical for 98

increased span Energy consumption increases as slab span length increases Energy consumption increases as live load on slab increases 8.6 Study 4: Concrete Strength Energy Consumption The intention of this study was to assess the required energy consumption associated with the concrete strength of a slab as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. In this study, the values associated with the columns height, slab length, slab width, beam length and beam width (as illustrated in Figure 8.1) were held constant, while the values for concrete strength and live load were varied. 8.6.1 Study 4: Input Values Table 8.8 displays all input labels included in this study along with their constant or varied value, a reference to their name and a reference to their applicable figure Table 8.8 also displays which parameters were varied as applicable. Input Reference Name Reference Value Unit Label to Figure Input 1 Figure 14 Gross Floor Area 400 ft 2 Input 2 Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy 50 Years Input 3 Figure 15 Floor Width 20 ft Input 4 Figure 15 Span 15 ft Input 5 Figure 15 Concrete Flyash % Average % Input 6 Figure 15 Concrete Varied (3000, 4000, 9000) psi Input 7 Figure 15 Live Load Varied (45, 75, 100) psf Input 8 Figure 16 Bay Size 20 ft Input 9 Figure 16 Supported Span 20 ft Input 10 Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height 12 ft Input 11 Figure 16 Live Load 45 psf Input 12 Figure 16 Column Type WF -- Input 13 Figure 16 Beam Type WF -- Table 8.8. Values employed for inputs in study 3 8.6.2 Study 4: Analysis The values provided in Table 8.8 were employed to generate models for each of the varied parameters. The Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages output tables for each model from the Athena Impact Estimator are provided in Appendix A4. 99

Table 8.9 provides the total energy consumption values as tabulated from the values provided in Appendix A4 for each varied Span and Live Load by the applicable Bay Size. This table was employed to generate the graphs in Figures 8.17 and 8.18. Live Live Live 45 psf 75 psf Load Load Load 100 psf Concrete Concrete Concrete Energy Energy Energy Strength Strength Strength (MJ) (MJ) (MJ) (psi) (psi) (psi) 3000 78535.6 3000 78480.2 3000 80470.5 4000 84803.8 4000 84560.0 4000 87448.7 9000 86093.4 9000 85810.7 9000 88884.3 Table 8.9. Total energy consumption values for study 4 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations 90.0 87.5 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 85.0 82.5 80.0 77.5 75.0 2500 3500 4500 5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 Concrete Strength (psi) 45 PSF 75 PSF 100 PSF Figure 8.17. Concrete suspended slab concrete strength vs. total energy consumption 100

90.0 87.5 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 85.0 82.5 80.0 77.5 75.0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Live Load (psf) 3000 psi 4000 psi 9000 psi Figure 8.18. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab at concrete strengths of 3000, 4000 and 9000 psi Figures 8.17 displays the relationship between Concrete Suspended Slab concrete strength and Total Energy Consumption that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output tables provide for the three live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf). Figure 8.18 displays the relationship between Live Load and Total Energy Consumption for each the three live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf) at the three concrete strengths (3000 psi, 4000 psi and 9000 psi) investigated. 8.6.3 Study 4: Conclusions The following conclusions have been drawn from the graphs generated in this study: Energy consumption increase as concrete strength increases Energy consumption increases are similar for live loads of 45 and 75 psf Energy consumption increases as slab material increases 101

Energy consumption for 100 psf live load is the most energy intensive devoid of concrete strength Energy consumption is lower at lower live loads The range between energy consumption relative to concrete strength decreases with higher concrete strength. 8.7 Study 5: Concrete Fly-Ash Percentage Effect on Energy Consumption The intention of this study was to assess the required energy consumption for a slab area relative to concrete fly-ash percentage as predicted by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 computer program. In this study, the values associated with the column height, beam width and slab width (as illustrated in Figure 8.1) were held constant. The values for the slab length and beam length were varied to achieve the same floor area for the slab and between the beams. This floor area was also set equal in the initial project parameters interface (see Figure 8.2). The concrete fly-ash percentage was also varied. It should be noted that this is the only study in which beam and slab lengths were varied to match gross floor area. 8.7.1 Study 5: Input Values Table 8.10 displays the input labels that were held constant in this study as well as their value. Table 8.10 also displays which parameters were varied as applicable. Input Reference to Figure Reference Value Unit Label Input 1 Figure 14 Gross Floor Area Varied (300, 400, 500, 600) ft 2 Input 2 Figure 14 Building Life Expectancy 50 Years Input 3 Figure 15 Floor Width 20 ft Input 4 Figure 15 Span Varied (15, 20, 25, 30) ft Input 5 Figure 15 Concrete Flyash % Varied (average, 25%, 35%) % Input 6 Figure 15 Concrete 4000 psi Input 7 Figure 15 Live Load Varied (45, 75, 100) psf Input 8 Figure 16 Bay Size Varied (15, 20, 25, 30) ft Input 9 Figure 16 Supported Span 20 ft Input 10 Figure 16 Floor to Floor Height 12 ft Input 11 Figure 16 Live Load 45 psf Input 12 Figure 16 Column Type WF -- Input 13 Figure 16 Beam Type WF -- Table 8.10. Values employed for inputs in study 3 102

8.7.2 Study 5: Analysis The values provided in Table 8.10 were employed to generate models for each of the varied parameters. The Energy Consumption Absolute Value By Life Cycle Stages output tables for each model from the Athena Impact Estimator are provided in Appendix A5. Table 8.11 provides the total energy consumption values as tabulated from the values provided in Appendix A5 for each varied Concrete Flyash % and Live Load by the applicable Gross Floor Area. This table was employed to generate the graphs in Figures 8.19 through 8.22. 103

Live Load 45 psf Live Load 75 psf Live Load 100 psf Flyash % Average Flyash % Average Flyash % Average Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) 300 72305.7 300 72061.8 300 74950.6 400 98039.6 400 98099.2 400 104681.8 500 194226.2 500 194287.8 500 203141.7 600 248332.9 600 247799.4 600 255828.6 Flyash % 25% Flyash % 25% Flyash % 25% Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) 300 70970.5 300 70766.8 300 73464.1 400 95840.5 400 95942.0 400 102100.2 500 190762.6 500 190895.3 500 199204.5 600 243090.0 600 242703.5 600 250299.2 Flyash % 35% Flyash % 35% Flyash % 35% Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) Floor Area (ft 2 ) Energy (MJ) 300 69635.3 300 69471.7 300 71977.7 400 93641.2 400 93784.8 400 99518.5 500 187299.0 500 187502.7 500 195267.3 600 237847.0 600 237607.5 600 244769.8 Table 8.11. Total energy consumption values for study 3 as provided by the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 for the applicable input variations 104

Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 250.0 240.0 230.0 220.0 210.0 200.0 190.0 180.0 170.0 160.0 150.0 140.0 130.0 120.0 110.0 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 Gross Floor Area (ft 2 ) 25% 35% Figure 8.19. Gross floor area vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 45 psf Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 260.0 250.0 240.0 230.0 220.0 210.0 200.0 190.0 180.0 170.0 160.0 150.0 140.0 130.0 120.0 110.0 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 Gross Floor Area (ft 2 ) 25% 35% Figure 8.20. Gross floor area vs.total energy consumption at a live load of 75 psf 105

Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 250.0 240.0 230.0 220.0 210.0 200.0 190.0 180.0 170.0 160.0 150.0 140.0 130.0 120.0 110.0 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 Gross Floor Area (ft 2 ) 25% 35% Figure 8.21. Gross floor area vs. total energy consumption at a live load of 100 psf 75.0 74.0 Energy Consumption (MJ x 10 3 ) 73.0 72.0 71.0 70.0 69.0 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 Live Load (psf) 25% 35% Figure 8.22. Live load vs. total energy consumption for concrete suspended slab fly-ash percentages 106

Figures 8.19 through 8.21 display the relationship between gross floor area and total energy consumption that the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 output tables provide for the three concrete fly-ash percentages investigated (average, 25%, 35%) at the live loads investigated (45 psf, 75 psf, and 100 psf) for a Concrete Suspended Slab. Figure 8.22 displays the relationship between live load and total energy consumption for a Concrete Suspended Slab. 8.7.3 Study 5: Conclusions The following conclusions have been drawn from the graphs generated in this study: Energy consumption decreases as fly-ash percentage increases devoid of live load amount The energy consumption decrease relative to fly-ash percentage is greater at larger floor areas Energy consumption decreases for all fly-ash percentages as when live load is increased Energy consumption for 100 psf live load is the most energy intensive devoid of fly-ash percentage 8.8 Concluding Remarks All studies conducted in this chapter employed output data from The Athena Impact Estimator. Microsoft excel was employed for data manipulation. No other computer program was employed in this analysis. Due to this, all finding and conclusions made in these studies are subject to any inherent limitations included in The Athena Impact Estimator. Conclusions about beams, columns, slabs, spans, concrete strengths, live loads, fly-ash percentages lengths and heights all refer to The Athena Impact Estimator inputs and any and all definitions associated with them. 107

Chapter 9: Conclusions, Limitations and Recommendations 9.1 Summary and Concluding Remarks Sustainability, as defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development of the United Nations (1987), is achieved by meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs. In response to this, the engineering community has been working to develop accurate methods for determining and comparing the sustainability of design alternatives. This study investigated the issues involved in achieving sustainable designs for projects structural systems and assessed some of the measurement methods currently in use. Five potential sustainable structural design methodologies are presented: Minimizing Material Use, Minimizing Material Production Energy, Minimizing Embodied Energy, Life-Cycle Analysis/Inventory/Assessment and Maximizing Structural Reuse. Each design methodology reviewed in Chapter 3 defines sustainability in structural design in a unique way and looks to employ that unique definition in assessing and achieving the most sustainable design. However, use of any single design methodology can limit project sustainability, as outline in Table 3.1. Review of these five potential solutions for the problem of achieving a sustainable structural design, and their positive and negative sustainable qualities, displays that no one methodology can guarantee the most sustainable design. It is suggested that the use of two or more design methodologies is more advantageous to sustainable design as the positive qualities of one methodology can offset the negative qualities of another. The categories of the 2009 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system are reviewed to see which points could be awarded to a project to improve sustainability of its structural frame. Chapter 4 describes the aspects of design related to its structural system for which a project can receive up to 10 rating points. These points account for ten percent of the total possible points that can be awarded in 108

the LEED rating system. Illustrated by the low percentage of points that can be earned by a structural system in LEED is the lack of weight that this rating systems give to this aspect of design. It can be inferred from this that were more importance to be placed on the sustainable design of structural frames in the LEED rating system, more efficient designs and thus overall higher project sustainability would result. Thus, the LEED rating system has little effect on structural system sustainability and can negatively affect overall project sustainability. Also, demolition, maintenance and durability requirements are not considered in LEED. The role that project size and structural system-type play on aspects of sustainable design are presented. Design and analysis phase, land use, investments in sustainable technologies, use of wood as a primary load bearing material are some of the critical issues discussed in Chapter 5. Reviews of the effect that project size and structural system-type can have on these aspects of design displays that they are closely tied to overall project sustainability. During initial project design, attention to the impact that increased project size has on structural system material requirements as well as overall project sustainable is important. Designers and owners should consider the implications that selection of one design alternative over another can have relative to its ability to achieve a successful sustainable design. Structurally applicable sustainable properties associated with structural steel, castin-place and prestessed/precast concrete are reviewed. Each material presents unique sustainable qualities that can be advantageous to sustainable design. However, each material also presents unique construction requirements, by-product emissions and impact of project operation and maintenance. It was concluded that no single construction material discussed in Chapter 6 guarantees that the most sustainable design will be achieved. Use of different materials for a structural system can contribute to overall project sustainability but the combination can prove to be less sustainable. It is suggested that designers consider multiple design alternatives paying close attention to project location and material availability. A review of life-cycle analysis computer programs (e.g. Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) v4.0, SimaPRO v7.1 and Athena 109

Impact Estimator v4.0) was conducted to assess the sustainability of design alternatives. This review displays that the reviewed life-cycle analysis programs do not provide users with definite conclusions about design alternative sustainability. Potential inaccuracy included in internal program tables, limiting raw material input choices and analysis methods that do not accurately changes in design alternatives all contribute to this. It can thus be concluded that current design alternative comparison programs do not meet the basic needs of engineers in determining structural sustainability. Structural system sustainability has many issues that can be affected by all aspects of project design. Accurate prediction of the sustainability of design alternatives relies heavily on accuracy of the data provided by industry. Thus the current analysis tools and methodologies may be inaccurate. To increase overall project and structural system sustainability, consideration to the role that structural systems play and the impact that they can on overall project sustainable properties must be given. More accurate and encompassing industry data is required to assess design alternative s sustainability. Current sustainable rating systems should also include the role that a project s structural system plays in sustainability as well as how raw material requirements and material production energies contribute to the overall sustainable properties of a project. Parametric studies using the Athena Impact Estimator v4.0 can be employed to investigate relationships between energy consumption and structural systems. Energy consumption of structural members varies depending on their material type and length. The energy consumption associated with columns, beams, slabs, concrete strength and fly-ash percentage are unique in their response to changes in live load and system geometry. The program s internal analysis tools limit any conclusions drawn from use of the Athena Impact Estimator. 9.2 Conclusions This study has concluded the following: No single current sustainable design methodology can address all project sustainability issues at this time. The LEED 2009 rating system does not reward projects for sustainable design of their structural systems in the same manner it does other aspects of design. 110

Construction type and project size can have significant impact on sustainable opportunities for a project. No single construction material is the most sustainable compared to others for all design types at this time. Existing sustainability analysis software does not meet the current needs of its users in assessing design alternative sustainable properties. Use of the Athena Impact Estimator can provide insights into the relationship between energy consumption and structural system member types but is limited by the internal program analysis methods and definitions. 9.3 Limitations This study has been limited by the following: Lack of previous research involving the application of each of the aforementioned design methodologies simultaneously. Lack and difficultly of the development of equations and methods for completing each of the proposed methodologies within a structural design. Lack of research providing quantitative values on the effect that project size and 3 Inaccurate or limiting data on total production inputs and energy requirements for construction materials. The limited number and accuracy of tools and computer programs to assess sustainable design alternative. 9.4 Recommendations The following suggestions were outside the scope of this thesis and suggested as recommendations for future research: The analysis of various structures of different size and material choice to determine the overall production energies inputs and values associated with each. Investigation of use of each of the design methodologies suggested for comparative structures separately as well as in combination. Careful review of the LEED rating system s importance and impact on sustainable designs from a structural perspective be conducted including investigation into what LEED ratings can be achieved following the any (or any 111

combination of the mentioned design methodologies. The development of a more accurate sustainable design alternative assessment computer program or other tools that can be used by engineers. 112

References ASTM International. ASTM E 917-05: Standard Practice for Measuring Life Cycle of Building and Building Systems. Book of ASTM Standards, 2005. ASTM International. ASTM E 1057-06: Internal Rate of Return and Adjusted Internal Rate of Return for Investments. Book of ASTM Standards, 2006. ASTM International. ASTM E 1074-06: Net Benefits and Net Savings for Investments. Book of ASTM Standards, 2006. ASTM International. ASTM E 1121-07: Measuring Payback. Book of ASTM Standards, 2007. ASTM International. ASTM E 1185-07: Economic Methods for Evaluating Investments. Book of ASTM Standards, 2007. ASTM International. ASTM E 2204-05: Standard Guide for Summarizing the Economic Impacts of Building-Related. Book of ASTM Standards, 2005. Beheiry, S. M. A., Chong, W. K., and Haas, C. T. Examining the Business Impact of Owner Commitment to Sustainability. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132, No. 4, 2006, pp. 384-392. Deane, M. The Builder s Role in Delivering Sustainable Tall Buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2008, pp. 869-880. Elnimeri, M. and Gupta, P. Sustainable Structure of Tall Buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2008, pp. 881-894. Fruehan, R.J., Fortinti, O., Paxton, H.W. and Brindle, R. Theoretical Minimum Energies to Produce Steel for Selected Conditions. U.S. Department of Energy. 2002. Horvath, A. and Hendrickson, C. Steel versus Steel-Reinforced Concrete Bridges: Environmental Assessment. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1998, pp. 111-117. Kestner, D. M. Sustainable Design. Structure Magazine, 2007, pp. 7 Laefer, D. and Manke, J. Building Reuse Assessment for Sustainable Urban Reconstruction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 134, No. 3, 2008, pp. 217-227 113

Moon, K. Material-Saving Design Strategies for Tall Building Structures. Proceedings: Tall & Green: Typology for a Sustainable Urban Future: CTBUH 8th World Congress, Dubai, March 3-5 2008. Moon, K. S. Sustainable Structural Engineering Strategies for Tall Buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2008, pp. 895-914. Naik, T. Sustainability of Concrete Construction. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, Vol. 13, No. 2, 2008, pp. 98-103. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability Technical Manual and User Guide, 2007. Penttala, V. Concrete and Sustainable Development. ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 94, No. 5, 1997, pp. 409-416. Price, L., Sinton, J., Worrell, E., Phylipsen, D., Xiulian, H. and Ji, L. Energy Use and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Steel Production in China. Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, 2001, pp. 1-20. Shi, J. and Han, T. Conceiving Methods and Innovative Approaches for Tall Building Structure Systems. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 2009, Early View. Szekely, J. Steelmaking and Industrial Ecology-Is Steel a Green Material. ISIJ International, V. 36, No. 1, 1996, pp. 121-132. Trabucco, D. An Analysis of the Relationship between Service Cores and the Embodied/Running Energy of Tall Buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2008, pp. 941-952. The United States Department of Energy. Building Energy Software Tools Directory, Building Technologies Program, <http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/subjects.cfm/pagename=s ubjects/pagename_menu=materials_components/pagename_submenu=hvac_syste ms>, September 2009. The United State Department of Energy. Energy Use in Manufacturing. Energy Information Administration, October 2009. The United State Green Building Council, <http://www.usgbc.org>, March 2009. The United States Green Building Council, LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations. 2008. 114

VanGeem, M. Designer s Notebook: Sustainable Design. Ascent Magazine, 2006, pp. 1-19. Wood, A. Sustainability: A New High-Rise Vernacular? The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2007, pp. 401-410. Worrell, E., Price, L. and Martin, N. Energy Efficiency and Carbon Dioxide Emissions Reduction Opportunities in the US Iron and Steel Sector. Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, 1999. 115

Appendix A1: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 1 116

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3132.956 0 3132.956 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3163.6309 0 3163.631 1246.3433 0.025372704 1246.369 11.892894 0.04939676 11.94229 0 0 0 0.0010035 0.009626731 0.01063 0 0 1258.2372 0.084396196 1258.322 30697.27 0.370246848 30697.64 173.62918 0.720813776 174.35 0 0 0 0.0146427 0.14047643 0.155119 0 0 30870.914 1.231537053 30872.15 2653.112 2269.000938 4922.113 1803.5399 4322.904572 6126.444 0 0 0 2.2137356 842.4730865 844.6868 0 0 4458.8656 7434.378597 11893.24 36820.504 0 36820.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36820.504 0 36820.5 2.3559435 0 2.355943 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.3559435 0 2.355943 3143.4503 1.223020457 3144.673 0.5588362 2.381033076 2.939869 0 0 0 0.0481869 0.464029735 0.512217 0 0 3144.0574 4.068083267 3148.125 46.918098 0.055386942 46.97349 0.1932435 0.107829875 0.301073 0 0 0 0.0021822 0.02101452 0.023197 0 0 47.113524 0.184231338 47.29776 34929.72 2.261319537 34931.98 79.25682 4.402441982 83.65926 0 0 0 0.0891194 0.857973795 0.947093 0 0 35009.066 7.521735315 35016.59 4579.3841 0.097740833 4579.482 43.697386 0.190053745 43.88744 0 0 0 0.0036911 0.037038792 0.04073 0 0 4623.0852 0.32483337 4623.41 Total 117 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3249.6622 0 3249.662 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3280.337 0 3280.337 1292.6668 0.026237045 1292.693 11.892894 0.050584254 11.94348 0 0 0 0.0010403 0.009938899 0.010979 0 0 1304.5607 0.086760199 1304.648 31746.581 0.382859596 31746.96 173.62918 0.738142078 174.3673 0 0 0 0.0151801 0.145031688 0.160212 0 0 31920.226 1.266033361 31921.49 2756.5842 2346.318117 5102.902 1803.5399 4426.826832 6230.367 0 0 0 2.294977 869.7921347 872.0871 0 0 4562.419 7642.937084 12205.36 38299.757 0 38299.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38299.757 0 38299.76 2.4181235 0 2.418123 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4181235 0 2.418123 3236.1653 1.264683604 3237.43 0.5588362 2.438272909 2.997109 0 0 0 0.0499553 0.479076922 0.529032 0 0 3236.7741 4.182033435 3240.956 48.576252 0.057273742 48.63353 0.1932435 0.110422096 0.303666 0 0 0 0.0022623 0.021695963 0.023958 0 0 48.771757 0.1893918 48.96115 36304.654 2.338353153 36306.99 79.25682 4.508276314 83.7651 0 0 0 0.09239 0.885795488 0.978185 0 0 36384.003 7.732424956 36391.74 4749.5886 0.101069778 4749.69 43.697386 0.194622621 43.89201 0 0 0 0.0038265 0.038239856 0.042066 0 0 4793.2899 0.333932255 4793.624 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3366.3688 0 3366.369 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3397.0436 0 3397.044 1338.9905 0.027101387 1339.018 11.892894 0.051771751 11.94467 0 0 0 0.0010771 0.010251067 0.011328 0 0 1350.8845 0.089124205 1350.974 32795.895 0.395472356 32796.29 173.62918 0.75547042 174.3846 0 0 0 0.0157175 0.149586949 0.165304 0 0 32969.54 1.300529725 32970.84 2860.0566 2423.635372 5283.692 1803.5399 4530.749329 6334.289 0 0 0 2.3762187 897.1112024 899.4874 0 0 4665.9727 7851.495903 12517.47 39779.018 0 39779.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39779.018 0 39779.02 2.4803044 0 2.480304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.4803044 0 2.480304 3328.8805 1.306346791 3330.187 0.5588362 2.495512874 3.054349 0 0 0 0.0517237 0.494124121 0.545848 0 0 3329.491 4.295983786 3333.787 50.23441 0.059160543 50.29357 0.1932435 0.113014323 0.306258 0 0 0 0.0023424 0.022377405 0.02472 0 0 50.429996 0.194552271 50.62455 37679.593 2.415386844 37682.01 79.25682 4.614110888 83.87093 0 0 0 0.0956605 0.913617201 1.009278 0 0 37758.946 7.943114933 37766.89 4919.7939 0.104398726 4919.898 43.697386 0.199191507 43.89658 0 0 0 0.003962 0.039440922 0.043403 0 0 4963.4952 0.343031155 4963.838 118 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3483.0749 0 3483.075 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3513.7498 0 3513.75 1385.314 0.027965728 1385.342 11.892894 0.052959245 11.94585 0 0 0 0.0011139 0.010563235 0.011677 0 0 1397.208 0.091488208 1397.3 33845.206 0.408085104 33845.61 173.62918 0.772798722 174.402 0 0 0 0.0162548 0.154142207 0.170397 0 0 34018.852 1.335026033 34020.19 2963.5287 2500.952552 5464.481 1803.5399 4634.671588 6438.211 0 0 0 2.4574601 924.4302506 926.8877 0 0 4769.5261 8060.05439 12829.58 41258.271 0 41258.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41258.271 0 41258.27 2.5424844 0 2.542484 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5424844 0 2.542484 3421.5954 1.348009938 3422.943 0.5588362 2.552752707 3.111589 0 0 0 0.0534921 0.509171309 0.562663 0 0 3422.2077 4.409933954 3426.618 51.892563 0.061047342 51.95361 0.1932435 0.115606544 0.30885 0 0 0 0.0024225 0.023058847 0.025481 0 0 52.088229 0.199712734 52.28794 39054.527 2.49242046 39057.02 79.25682 4.71994522 83.97676 0 0 0 0.0989311 0.941438894 1.04037 0 0 39133.882 8.153804574 39142.04 5089.9984 0.107727671 5090.106 43.697386 0.203760383 43.90115 0 0 0 0.0040974 0.040641986 0.044739 0 0 5133.6999 0.35213004 5134.052

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3599.7878 0 3599.788 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3630.4626 0 3630.463 1431.6401 0.02883009 1431.669 11.892894 0.054146787 11.94704 0 0 0 0.0011508 0.010875407 0.012026 0 0 1443.5342 0.093852284 1443.628 34894.556 0.420698153 34894.98 173.62918 0.79012773 174.4193 0 0 0 0.0167922 0.158697519 0.17549 0 0 35068.202 1.369523403 35069.57 3067.0065 2578.271584 5645.278 1803.5399 4738.598085 6542.138 0 0 0 2.5387048 951.7496237 954.2883 0 0 4873.0851 8268.619293 13141.7 42737.628 0 42737.63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42737.628 0 42737.63 2.6046692 0 2.604669 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6046692 0 2.604669 3514.3117 1.389674079 3515.701 0.5588362 2.609994874 3.168831 0 0 0 0.0552605 0.524218675 0.579479 0 0 3514.9258 4.523887629 3519.45 53.550786 0.062934187 53.61372 0.1932435 0.118198871 0.311442 0 0 0 0.0025026 0.023740298 0.026243 0 0 53.746532 0.204873355 53.95141 40429.543 2.569455914 40432.11 79.25682 4.825783868 84.0826 0 0 0 0.1022018 0.969260918 1.071463 0 0 40508.902 8.364500699 40517.27 5260.2126 0.111056695 5260.324 43.697386 0.208329445 43.90572 0 0 0 0.0042329 0.041843065 0.046076 0 0 5303.9142 0.361229205 5304.275 119 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 45, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3716.4944 0 3716.494 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3747.1693 0 3747.169 1477.9638 0.029694432 1477.994 11.892894 0.055334284 11.94823 0 0 0 0.0011876 0.011187575 0.012375 0 0 1489.8579 0.096216291 1489.954 35943.87 0.433310913 35944.3 173.62918 0.807456072 174.4366 0 0 0 0.0173296 0.163252781 0.180582 0 0 36117.517 1.404019766 36118.92 3170.479 2655.588839 5826.068 1803.5399 4842.520582 6646.06 0 0 0 2.6199464 979.0686914 981.6886 0 0 4976.6388 8477.178113 13453.82 44216.889 0 44216.89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44216.889 0 44216.89 2.6668501 0 2.66685 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6668501 0 2.66685 3607.0269 1.431337266 3608.458 0.5588362 2.667234839 3.226071 0 0 0 0.057029 0.539265874 0.596295 0 0 3607.6427 4.637837979 3612.281 55.208945 0.064820988 55.27377 0.1932435 0.120791098 0.314035 0 0 0 0.0025827 0.02442174 0.027004 0 0 55.404771 0.210033826 55.6148 41804.483 2.646489605 41807.13 79.25682 4.931618442 84.18844 0 0 0 0.1054724 0.99708263 1.102555 0 0 41883.845 8.575190677 41892.42 5430.4178 0.114385643 5430.532 43.697386 0.212898332 43.91028 0 0 0 0.0043684 0.043044131 0.047412 0 0 5474.1196 0.370328105 5474.49 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2224.1233 0 2224.123 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2254.7981 0 2254.798 884.35706 0.017307395 884.3744 11.892894 0.042614927 11.93551 0 0 0 0.0006799 0.006565729 0.007246 0 0 896.25063 0.066488051 896.3171 21683.271 0.252555197 21683.52 173.62918 0.62185103 174.251 0 0 0 0.009922 0.095809283 0.105731 0 0 21856.91 0.97021551 21857.88 1808.0219 1547.947708 3355.97 1803.5399 3729.399677 5532.94 0 0 0 1.5000382 574.5927792 576.0928 0 0 3613.0618 5851.940164 9465.002 25857.162 0 25857.16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25857.162 0 25857.16 2.0651586 0 2.065159 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0651586 0 2.065159 2302.9167 0.834254699 2303.751 0.5588362 2.054133705 2.61297 0 0 0 0.0326517 0.316482674 0.349134 0 0 2303.5082 3.204871077 2306.713 32.89917 0.037780903 32.93695 0.1932435 0.093025579 0.286269 0 0 0 0.0014787 0.014332555 0.015811 0 0 33.093892 0.145139036 33.23903 24052.042 1.542506047 24053.58 79.25682 3.798017151 83.05484 0 0 0 0.0603877 0.585164744 0.645552 0 0 24131.359 5.925687941 24137.28 3249.3531 0.066684208 3249.42 43.697386 0.16396068 43.86135 0 0 0 0.0025011 0.025261605 0.027763 0 0 3293.053 0.255906493 3293.309 120 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2249.948 0 2249.948 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2280.6228 0 2280.623 894.48266 0.017365211 894.5 11.892894 0.043124251 11.93602 0 0 0 0.0006844 0.006571798 0.007256 0 0 906.37624 0.06706126 906.4433 21831.193 0.253398867 21831.45 173.62918 0.629283258 174.2585 0 0 0 0.0099873 0.095897841 0.105885 0 0 22004.832 0.978579966 22005.81 1826.9866 1553.160098 3380.147 1803.5399 3773.972647 5577.513 0 0 0 1.5099108 575.1238883 576.6338 0 0 3632.0364 5902.256633 9534.293 26240.11 0 26240.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26240.11 0 26240.11 2.0982613 0 2.098261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0982613 0 2.098261 2311.5786 0.837041556 2312.416 0.5588362 2.078684262 2.63752 0 0 0 0.0328666 0.316775206 0.349642 0 0 2312.1703 3.232501024 2315.403 33.15545 0.037907111 33.19336 0.1932435 0.0941374 0.287381 0 0 0 0.0014884 0.014345803 0.015834 0 0 33.350181 0.146390314 33.49657 24339.23 1.547658843 24340.78 79.25682 3.843410222 83.10023 0 0 0 0.0607852 0.585705625 0.646491 0 0 24418.548 5.976774689 24424.52 3286.5572 0.066907513 3286.624 43.697386 0.165920303 43.86331 0 0 0 0.0025175 0.025284955 0.027802 0 0 3330.2571 0.25811277 3330.515

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2275.7732 0 2275.773 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2306.4481 0 2306.448 904.60846 0.017423028 904.6259 11.892894 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.0006889 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 916.50205 0.067634473 916.5697 21979.118 0.254242548 21979.37 173.62918 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.0100526 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 22152.757 0.986944477 22153.74 1845.9517 1558.372563 3404.324 1803.5399 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.5197836 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3651.0113 5952.573435 9603.585 26623.066 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.066 0 26623.07 2.1313649 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1313649 0 2.131365 2320.2407 0.839828454 2321.081 0.5588362 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.0330815 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2320.8327 3.260131152 2324.093 33.411735 0.038033321 33.44977 0.1932435 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.0014982 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 33.606476 0.1476416 33.75412 24626.425 1.552811713 24627.98 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.0611826 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 24705.743 6.027861773 24711.77 3323.7621 0.067130821 3323.829 43.697386 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3367.462 0.260319062 3367.722 121 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2301.5979 0 2301.598 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2332.2728 0 2332.273 914.73406 0.017480843 914.7515 11.892894 0.044142902 11.93704 0 0 0 0.0006934 0.006583936 0.007277 0 0 926.62765 0.068207682 926.6959 22127.039 0.255086218 22127.29 173.62918 0.644147753 174.2733 0 0 0 0.0101179 0.096074962 0.106193 0 0 22300.679 0.995308933 22301.67 1864.9164 1563.584953 3428.501 1803.5399 3863.118824 5666.659 0 0 0 1.5296562 576.186126 577.7158 0 0 3669.9859 6002.889903 9672.876 27006.014 0 27006.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27006.014 0 27006.01 2.1644675 0 2.164468 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1644675 0 2.164468 2328.9026 0.842615311 2329.745 0.5588362 2.127785507 2.686622 0 0 0 0.0332964 0.317360281 0.350657 0 0 2329.4948 3.287761099 2332.783 33.668014 0.03815953 33.70617 0.1932435 0.096361049 0.289605 0 0 0 0.0015079 0.014372299 0.01588 0 0 33.862766 0.148892878 34.01166 24913.613 1.557964509 24915.17 79.25682 3.934196606 83.19102 0 0 0 0.0615801 0.586787406 0.648367 0 0 24992.932 6.078948521 24999.01 3360.9661 0.067354126 3361.034 43.697386 0.169839557 43.86723 0 0 0 0.0025505 0.025331656 0.027882 0 0 3404.6661 0.262525339 3404.929 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2327.4231 0 2327.423 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2358.098 0 2358.098 924.85987 0.01753866 924.8774 11.892894 0.044652229 11.93755 0 0 0 0.0006978 0.006590005 0.007288 0 0 936.75346 0.068780895 936.8222 22274.964 0.2559299 22275.22 173.62918 0.65158002 174.2808 0 0 0 0.0101832 0.096163524 0.106347 0 0 22448.604 1.003673444 22449.61 1883.8814 1568.797418 3452.679 1803.5399 3907.692032 5711.232 0 0 0 1.539529 576.7172546 578.2568 0 0 3688.9608 6053.206705 9742.168 27388.969 0 27388.97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27388.969 0 27388.97 2.1975711 0 2.197571 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1975711 0 2.197571 2337.5648 0.845402209 2338.41 0.5588362 2.152336195 2.711172 0 0 0 0.0335113 0.317652824 0.351164 0 0 2338.1571 3.315391227 2341.473 33.924299 0.03828574 33.96259 0.1932435 0.097472876 0.290716 0 0 0 0.0015176 0.014385547 0.015903 0 0 34.119061 0.150144164 34.2692 25200.808 1.56311738 25202.37 79.25682 3.979589919 83.23641 0 0 0 0.0619775 0.587328307 0.649306 0 0 25280.127 6.130035606 25286.26 3398.171 0.067577434 3398.239 43.697386 0.17179919 43.86919 0 0 0 0.0025669 0.025355006 0.027922 0 0 3441.8709 0.264731631 3442.136 122 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 45, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2353.2484 0 2353.248 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2383.9232 0 2383.923 934.98567 0.017596477 935.0033 11.892894 0.045161556 11.93806 0 0 0 0.0007023 0.006596074 0.007298 0 0 946.87927 0.069354108 946.9486 22422.889 0.256773581 22423.15 173.62918 0.659012287 174.2882 0 0 0 0.0102485 0.096252086 0.106501 0 0 22596.528 1.012037955 22597.54 1902.8465 1574.009883 3476.856 1803.5399 3952.26524 5755.805 0 0 0 1.5494018 577.2483832 578.7978 0 0 3707.9357 6103.523506 9811.459 27771.925 0 27771.92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27771.925 0 27771.92 2.2306747 0 2.230675 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2306747 0 2.230675 2346.2269 0.848189106 2347.075 0.5588362 2.176886883 2.735723 0 0 0 0.0337262 0.317945366 0.351672 0 0 2346.8195 3.343021356 2350.163 34.180585 0.03841195 34.219 0.1932435 0.098584704 0.291828 0 0 0 0.0015274 0.014398796 0.015926 0 0 34.375355 0.15139545 34.52675 25488.003 1.568270251 25489.57 79.25682 4.024983232 83.2818 0 0 0 0.062375 0.587869208 0.650244 0 0 25567.322 6.18112269 25573.5 3435.3758 0.067800743 3435.444 43.697386 0.173758823 43.87115 0 0 0 0.0025834 0.025378357 0.027962 0 0 3479.0758 0.266937922 3479.343

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2013.4017 0 2013.402 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2057.1849 0 2057.185 839.56057 0.017234256 839.5778 16.975103 0.038859 17.01396 0 0 0 0.0006718 0.006525975 0.007198 0 0 856.53635 0.062619231 856.599 20394.884 0.251487929 20395.14 247.82639 0.567043307 248.3934 0 0 0 0.0098032 0.095229179 0.105032 0 0 20642.72 0.913760415 20643.63 1723.9529 1540.292325 3264.245 1810.0643 3458.567078 5268.631 0 0 0 1.4820779 571.1137468 572.5958 0 0 3535.4992 5569.97315 9105.472 22367.616 0 22367.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22367.616 0 22367.62 268.18147 0 268.1815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268.18147 0 268.1815 2226.2344 0.830729238 2227.065 0.7976445 1.873089714 2.670734 0 0 0 0.0322607 0.314566441 0.346827 0 0 2227.0643 3.018385393 2230.083 34.84218 0.037621245 34.8798 0.2758225 0.084826638 0.360649 0 0 0 0.001461 0.014245774 0.015707 0 0 35.119463 0.136693657 35.25616 21658.393 1.5359876 21659.93 113.12576 3.463273518 116.589 0 0 0 0.0596647 0.5816217 0.641286 0 0 21771.578 5.580882818 21777.16 2927.1666 0.066395239 2927.233 62.370657 0.149517821 62.52017 0 0 0 0.0024711 0.025108652 0.02758 0 0 2989.5398 0.241021711 2989.781 144.51067 0 144.5107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144.51067 0 144.5107 123 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2018.1542 0 2018.154 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2061.9374 0 2061.937 845.20653 0.017284758 845.2238 16.975103 0.038992731 17.0141 0 0 0 0.0006755 0.006528069 0.007204 0 0 862.1823 0.062805558 862.2451 20413.967 0.252224872 20414.22 247.82639 0.568994762 248.3954 0 0 0 0.0098566 0.095259727 0.105116 0 0 20661.803 0.916479361 20662.72 1734.5107 1544.739177 3279.25 1810.0643 3476.056788 5286.121 0 0 0 1.4901545 571.2969526 572.7871 0 0 3546.0651 5592.092918 9138.158 22401.609 0 22401.61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22401.609 0 22401.61 294.8262 0 294.8262 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 294.8262 0 294.8262 2227.2281 0.833163549 2228.061 0.7976445 1.879535872 2.67718 0 0 0 0.0324365 0.31466735 0.347104 0 0 2228.0582 3.027366771 2231.086 35.29276 0.037731488 35.33049 0.2758225 0.085118565 0.360941 0 0 0 0.001469 0.014250344 0.015719 0 0 35.570052 0.137100397 35.70715 21706.216 1.540488551 21707.76 113.12576 3.475192225 116.6009 0 0 0 0.0599898 0.581808277 0.641798 0 0 21819.402 5.597489053 21825 2932.1521 0.066589647 2932.219 62.370657 0.150033158 62.52069 0 0 0 0.0024846 0.025116706 0.027601 0 0 2994.5252 0.24173951 2994.767 158.96173 0 158.9617 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158.96173 0 158.9617

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2022.9073 0 2022.907 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2066.6905 0 2066.69 850.85268 0.017335261 850.87 16.975103 0.039126465 17.01423 0 0 0 0.0006791 0.006530162 0.007209 0 0 867.82846 0.062991889 867.8915 20433.053 0.252961827 20433.31 247.82639 0.570946257 248.3973 0 0 0 0.00991 0.095290278 0.1052 0 0 20680.889 0.919198362 20681.81 1745.0688 1549.186104 3294.255 1810.0643 3493.546736 5303.611 0 0 0 1.4982313 571.480178 572.9784 0 0 3556.6313 5614.213018 9170.844 22435.61 0 22435.61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22435.61 0 22435.61 321.47094 0 321.4709 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 321.47094 0 321.4709 2228.222 0.835597901 2229.058 0.7976445 1.885982161 2.683627 0 0 0 0.0326123 0.314768269 0.347381 0 0 2229.0523 3.036348331 2232.089 35.743347 0.037841732 35.78119 0.2758225 0.085410498 0.361233 0 0 0 0.0014769 0.014254915 0.015732 0 0 36.020646 0.137507145 36.15815 21754.046 1.544989577 21755.59 113.12576 3.487111175 116.6129 0 0 0 0.060315 0.581994873 0.64231 0 0 21867.232 5.614095625 21872.85 2937.1383 0.066784058 2937.205 62.370657 0.150548504 62.52121 0 0 0 0.0024981 0.025124761 0.027623 0 0 2999.5114 0.242457324 2999.754 173.4128 0 173.4128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 173.4128 0 173.4128 124 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2027.6598 0 2027.66 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2071.443 0 2071.443 856.49863 0.017385763 856.516 16.975103 0.039260197 17.01436 0 0 0 0.0006828 0.006532256 0.007215 0 0 873.47442 0.063178216 873.5376 20452.136 0.253698769 20452.39 247.82639 0.572897713 248.3993 0 0 0 0.0099635 0.095320827 0.105284 0 0 20699.973 0.921917309 20700.89 1755.6266 1553.632955 3309.26 1810.0643 3511.036446 5321.101 0 0 0 1.5063079 571.6633838 573.1697 0 0 3567.1972 5636.332785 9203.53 22469.603 0 22469.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22469.603 0 22469.6 348.11567 0 348.1157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 348.11567 0 348.1157 2229.2157 0.838032212 2230.054 0.7976445 1.892428319 2.690073 0 0 0 0.0327881 0.314869178 0.347657 0 0 2230.0461 3.045329709 2233.091 36.193927 0.037951975 36.23188 0.2758225 0.085702425 0.361525 0 0 0 0.0014849 0.014259484 0.015744 0 0 36.471235 0.137913885 36.60915 21801.87 1.549490529 21803.42 113.12576 3.499029882 116.6248 0 0 0 0.0606401 0.58218145 0.642822 0 0 21915.056 5.630701861 21920.69 2942.1237 0.066978466 2942.191 62.370657 0.151063841 62.52172 0 0 0 0.0025115 0.025132816 0.027644 0 0 3004.4969 0.243175123 3004.74 187.86387 0 187.8639 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 187.86387 0 187.8639

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2032.4129 0 2032.413 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2076.1961 0 2076.196 862.14479 0.017436266 862.1622 16.975103 0.039393931 17.0145 0 0 0 0.0006864 0.00653435 0.007221 0 0 879.12058 0.063364547 879.1839 20471.222 0.254435724 20471.48 247.82639 0.574849208 248.4012 0 0 0 0.0100169 0.095351378 0.105368 0 0 20719.059 0.92463631 20719.98 1766.1847 1558.079882 3324.265 1810.0643 3528.526394 5338.591 0 0 0 1.5143846 571.8466091 573.361 0 0 3577.7634 5658.452885 9236.216 22503.604 0 22503.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22503.604 0 22503.6 374.7604 0 374.7604 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 374.7604 0 374.7604 2230.2096 0.840466563 2231.05 0.7976445 1.898874608 2.696519 0 0 0 0.0329639 0.314970098 0.347934 0 0 2231.0402 3.054311269 2234.095 36.644513 0.038062219 36.68258 0.2758225 0.085994359 0.361817 0 0 0 0.0014928 0.014264055 0.015757 0 0 36.921829 0.138320633 37.06015 21849.699 1.553991554 21851.25 113.12576 3.510948832 116.6367 0 0 0 0.0609653 0.582368046 0.643333 0 0 21962.886 5.647308433 21968.53 2947.1099 0.067172878 2947.177 62.370657 0.151579188 62.52224 0 0 0 0.002525 0.025140871 0.027666 0 0 3009.4831 0.243892937 3009.727 202.31493 0 202.3149 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 202.31493 0 202.3149 125 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 45, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2037.166 0 2037.166 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2080.9492 0 2080.949 867.79094 0.017486769 867.8084 16.975103 0.039527666 17.01463 0 0 0 0.0006901 0.006536443 0.007227 0 0 884.76674 0.063550877 884.8303 20490.308 0.255172679 20490.56 247.82639 0.576800703 248.4032 0 0 0 0.0100703 0.09538193 0.105452 0 0 20738.145 0.927355312 20739.07 1776.7429 1562.526809 3339.27 1810.0643 3546.016342 5356.081 0 0 0 1.5224614 572.0298345 573.5523 0 0 3588.3296 5680.572985 9268.903 22537.605 0 22537.61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22537.605 0 22537.61 401.40514 0 401.4051 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 401.40514 0 401.4051 2231.2035 0.842900915 2232.046 0.7976445 1.905320897 2.702965 0 0 0 0.0331398 0.315071017 0.348211 0 0 2232.0343 3.06329283 2235.098 37.095099 0.038172464 37.13327 0.2758225 0.086286292 0.362109 0 0 0 0.0015008 0.014268625 0.015769 0 0 37.372423 0.138727381 37.51115 21897.529 1.55849258 21899.09 113.12576 3.522867782 116.6486 0 0 0 0.0612904 0.582554643 0.643845 0 0 22010.716 5.663915005 22016.38 2952.0961 0.067367289 2952.163 62.370657 0.152094534 62.52275 0 0 0 0.0025385 0.025148927 0.027687 0 0 3014.4693 0.24461075 3014.714 216.766 0 216.766 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 216.766 0 216.766

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3687.2219 0 3687.222 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3716.446 0 3716.446 1463.8786 0.026845953 1463.905 11.330417 0.059821432 11.39024 0 0 0 0.0011061 0.009865414 0.010972 0 0 1475.2101 0.0965328 1475.307 34013.701 0.391744983 34014.09 165.41735 0.872934021 166.2903 0 0 0 0.0161406 0.143959374 0.1601 0 0 34179.134 1.408638378 34180.54 3067.7601 2401.588336 5469.348 1802.8178 5235.208592 7038.026 0 0 0 2.440183 863.3611966 865.8014 0 0 4873.018 8500.158124 13373.18 44951.254 0 44951.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44951.254 0 44951.25 3.0282873 0 3.028287 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.0282873 0 3.028287 3347.9598 1.294034319 3349.254 0.5324059 2.883525326 3.415931 0 0 0 0.053116 0.475534796 0.528651 0 0 3348.5454 4.653094441 3353.198 52.607902 0.058602948 52.6665 0.184104 0.130586248 0.31469 0 0 0 0.0024055 0.02153555 0.023941 0 0 52.794411 0.210724746 53.00514 41131.572 2.392621541 41133.97 75.508351 5.331531544 80.83988 0 0 0 0.0982356 0.879246227 0.977482 0 0 41207.179 8.603399312 41215.78 5378.6652 0.103427247 5378.769 41.630709 0.23016261 41.86087 0 0 0 0.0040686 0.037957124 0.042026 0 0 5420.3 0.371546981 5420.672 126 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3809.026 0 3809.026 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3838.25 0 3838.25 1512.2223 0.027744945 1512.25 11.330417 0.061058794 11.39148 0 0 0 0.0011445 0.010189624 0.011334 0 0 1523.5538 0.098993363 1523.653 35106.377 0.404863368 35106.78 165.41735 0.890990015 166.3083 0 0 0 0.0167005 0.14869034 0.165391 0 0 35271.811 1.444543723 35273.26 3175.7376 2482.006142 5657.744 1802.8178 5343.495006 7146.313 0 0 0 2.524829 891.7340084 894.2588 0 0 4981.0802 8717.235156 13698.32 46497.272 0 46497.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46497.272 0 46497.27 3.0931886 0 3.093189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.0931886 0 3.093189 3444.2447 1.337367714 3445.582 0.5324059 2.943168913 3.475575 0 0 0 0.0549585 0.491162391 0.546121 0 0 3444.8321 4.771699018 3449.604 54.335583 0.060565388 54.39615 0.184104 0.133287328 0.317391 0 0 0 0.0024889 0.022243277 0.024732 0 0 54.522176 0.216095993 54.73827 42567.002 2.472743383 42569.47 75.508351 5.441810328 80.95016 0 0 0 0.1016432 0.908141072 1.009784 0 0 42642.612 8.822694782 42651.43 5556.2924 0.106889647 5556.399 41.630709 0.234923353 41.86563 0 0 0 0.0042098 0.039204517 0.043414 0 0 5597.9273 0.381017517 5598.308 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3930.8305 0 3930.831 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3960.0546 0 3960.055 1560.5661 0.028643938 1560.595 11.330417 0.062296159 11.39271 0 0 0 0.0011828 0.010513833 0.011697 0 0 1571.8977 0.10145393 1571.999 36199.055 0.417981764 36199.47 165.41735 0.909046049 166.3264 0 0 0 0.0172603 0.153421309 0.170682 0 0 36364.49 1.480449122 36365.97 3283.7155 2562.424023 5846.14 1802.8178 5451.781658 7254.599 0 0 0 2.6094751 920.1068396 922.7163 0 0 5089.1428 8934.312521 14023.46 48043.298 0 48043.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48043.298 0 48043.3 3.1580909 0 3.158091 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.1580909 0 3.158091 3540.5299 1.380701149 3541.911 0.5324059 3.002812631 3.535219 0 0 0 0.056801 0.506789997 0.563591 0 0 3541.1191 4.890303777 3546.009 56.06327 0.06252783 56.1258 0.184104 0.135988413 0.320092 0 0 0 0.0025724 0.022951005 0.025523 0 0 56.249946 0.221467248 56.47141 44002.438 2.5528653 44004.99 75.508351 5.552089353 81.06044 0 0 0 0.1050509 0.937035936 1.042087 0 0 44078.051 9.041990589 44087.09 5733.9203 0.110352051 5734.031 41.630709 0.239684107 41.87039 0 0 0 0.0043509 0.04045191 0.044803 0 0 5775.5554 0.390488067 5775.946 127 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4052.6346 0 4052.635 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4081.8587 0 4081.859 1608.9098 0.02954293 1608.939 11.330417 0.063533521 11.39395 0 0 0 0.0012212 0.010838042 0.012059 0 0 1620.2415 0.103914493 1620.345 37291.731 0.431100149 37292.16 165.41735 0.927102043 166.3444 0 0 0 0.0178202 0.158152275 0.175973 0 0 37457.166 1.516354467 37458.68 3391.6931 2642.841829 6034.535 1802.8178 5560.068073 7362.886 0 0 0 2.6941211 948.4796514 951.1738 0 0 5197.2049 9151.389553 14348.59 49589.316 0 49589.32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49589.316 0 49589.32 3.2229922 0 3.222992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2229922 0 3.222992 3636.8148 1.424034544 3638.239 0.5324059 3.062456218 3.594862 0 0 0 0.0586435 0.522417592 0.581061 0 0 3637.4058 5.008908354 3642.415 57.790951 0.06449027 57.85544 0.184104 0.138689493 0.322793 0 0 0 0.0026558 0.023658732 0.026315 0 0 57.977711 0.226838495 58.20455 45437.868 2.632987142 45440.5 75.508351 5.662368137 81.17072 0 0 0 0.1084585 0.965930781 1.074389 0 0 45513.484 9.26128606 45522.75 5911.5475 0.113814451 5911.661 41.630709 0.24444485 41.87515 0 0 0 0.004492 0.041699303 0.046191 0 0 5953.1827 0.399958603 5953.583

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4174.4392 0 4174.439 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4203.6633 0 4203.663 1657.2537 0.030441922 1657.284 11.330417 0.064770886 11.39519 0 0 0 0.0012596 0.011162251 0.012422 0 0 1668.5854 0.10637506 1668.692 38384.41 0.444218546 38384.85 165.41735 0.945158077 166.3625 0 0 0 0.0183801 0.162883244 0.181263 0 0 38549.846 1.552259866 38551.4 3499.671 2723.25971 6222.931 1802.8178 5668.354725 7471.172 0 0 0 2.7787672 976.8524826 979.6312 0 0 5305.2675 9368.466918 14673.73 51135.342 0 51135.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51135.342 0 51135.34 3.2878945 0 3.287894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2878945 0 3.287894 3733.0999 1.467367979 3734.567 0.5324059 3.122099936 3.654506 0 0 0 0.060486 0.538045198 0.598531 0 0 3733.6928 5.127513113 3738.82 59.518637 0.066452711 59.58509 0.184104 0.141390579 0.325495 0 0 0 0.0027392 0.02436646 0.027106 0 0 59.705481 0.23220975 59.93769 46873.304 2.713109059 46876.02 75.508351 5.772647163 81.281 0 0 0 0.1118661 0.994825645 1.106692 0 0 46948.924 9.480581867 46958.4 6089.1754 0.117276854 6089.293 41.630709 0.249205603 41.87991 0 0 0 0.0046332 0.042946696 0.04758 0 0 6130.8108 0.409429154 6131.22 128 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 75, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 4296.25 0 4296.25 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4325.4741 0 4325.474 1705.6 0.031340935 1705.631 11.330417 0.066008296 11.39643 0 0 0 0.0012979 0.011486464 0.012784 0 0 1716.9317 0.108835695 1717.041 39477.124 0.457337232 39477.58 165.41735 0.963214777 166.3806 0 0 0 0.01894 0.167614263 0.186554 0 0 39642.56 1.588166273 39644.15 3607.6542 2803.679369 6411.334 1802.8178 5776.645377 7579.463 0 0 0 2.8634164 1005.225619 1008.089 0 0 5413.3354 9585.550366 14998.89 52681.464 0 52681.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52681.464 0 52681.46 3.3528006 0 3.352801 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.3528006 0 3.352801 3829.3862 1.510702368 3830.897 0.5324059 3.181745857 3.714152 0 0 0 0.0623286 0.553672972 0.616002 0 0 3829.9809 5.246121197 3835.227 61.246389 0.068415196 61.3148 0.184104 0.144091765 0.328196 0 0 0 0.0028227 0.025074195 0.027897 0 0 61.433315 0.237581156 61.6709 48308.816 2.793232739 48311.61 75.508351 5.882930261 81.39128 0 0 0 0.1152739 1.023720821 1.138995 0 0 48384.44 9.699883821 48394.14 6266.8123 0.120739334 6266.933 41.630709 0.253966533 41.88468 0 0 0 0.0047743 0.044194103 0.048968 0 0 6308.4478 0.41889997 6308.867 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2727.4159 0 2727.416 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2756.64 0 2756.64 1081.6929 0.018434155 1081.711 11.330417 0.052540963 11.38296 0 0 0 0.0007672 0.006684005 0.007451 0 0 1093.0241 0.077659124 1093.102 24566.09 0.268997254 24566.36 165.41735 0.766695023 166.184 0 0 0 0.0111946 0.097535202 0.10873 0 0 24731.518 1.133227479 24732.65 2177.6209 1649.53062 3827.152 1802.8178 4598.066146 6400.884 0 0 0 1.6924434 584.943559 586.636 0 0 3982.1311 6832.540324 10814.67 33320.358 0 33320.36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33320.358 0 33320.36 2.7102931 0 2.710293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7102931 0 2.710293 2471.7276 0.888567038 2472.616 0.5324059 2.532590622 3.064997 0 0 0 0.0368398 0.322183829 0.359024 0 0 2472.2968 3.743341489 2476.04 37.893757 0.040240546 37.934 0.184104 0.114693463 0.298797 0 0 0 0.0016684 0.014590743 0.016259 0 0 38.079529 0.169524753 38.24905 29649.007 1.642927552 29650.65 75.508351 4.682666272 80.19102 0 0 0 0.0681335 0.595705968 0.663839 0 0 29724.584 6.921299791 29731.5 3974.4163 0.071036142 3974.487 41.630709 0.202151048 41.83286 0 0 0 0.0028219 0.02571667 0.028539 0 0 4016.0498 0.298903861 4016.349 129 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2753.2406 0 2753.241 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2782.4647 0 2782.465 1091.8185 0.018491971 1091.837 11.330417 0.053050288 11.38347 0 0 0 0.0007716 0.006690074 0.007462 0 0 1103.1497 0.078232333 1103.228 24714.012 0.269840924 24714.28 165.41735 0.77412725 166.1915 0 0 0 0.01126 0.097623761 0.108884 0 0 24879.44 1.141591935 24880.58 2196.5856 1654.74301 3851.329 1802.8178 4642.639115 6445.457 0 0 0 1.7023161 585.4746681 587.177 0 0 4001.1057 6882.856793 10883.96 33703.306 0 33703.31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33703.306 0 33703.31 2.7433958 0 2.743396 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7433958 0 2.743396 2480.3895 0.891353895 2481.281 0.5324059 2.557141179 3.089547 0 0 0 0.0370547 0.322476361 0.359531 0 0 2480.959 3.770971435 2484.73 38.150037 0.040366755 38.1904 0.184104 0.115805285 0.299909 0 0 0 0.0016781 0.014603991 0.016282 0 0 38.335819 0.17077603 38.50659 29936.195 1.648080348 29937.84 75.508351 4.728059343 80.23641 0 0 0 0.0685309 0.596246849 0.664778 0 0 30011.772 6.972386539 30018.74 4011.6204 0.071259447 4011.692 41.630709 0.20411067 41.83482 0 0 0 0.0028383 0.02574002 0.028578 0 0 4053.2539 0.301110138 4053.555

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2779.0659 0 2779.066 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2808.2899 0 2808.29 1101.9443 0.018549788 1101.963 11.330417 0.053559615 11.38398 0 0 0 0.0007761 0.006696143 0.007472 0 0 1113.2755 0.078805545 1113.354 24861.936 0.270684606 24862.21 165.41735 0.781559518 166.1989 0 0 0 0.0113253 0.097712323 0.109038 0 0 25027.365 1.149956446 25028.52 2215.5507 1659.955475 3875.506 1802.8178 4687.212323 6490.03 0 0 0 1.7121889 586.0057967 587.718 0 0 4020.0806 6933.173594 10953.25 34086.262 0 34086.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34086.262 0 34086.26 2.7764994 0 2.776499 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7764994 0 2.776499 2489.0516 0.894140793 2489.946 0.5324059 2.581691867 3.114098 0 0 0 0.0372696 0.322768904 0.360038 0 0 2489.6213 3.798601564 2493.42 38.406322 0.040492965 38.44681 0.184104 0.116917112 0.301021 0 0 0 0.0016878 0.014617239 0.016305 0 0 38.592114 0.172027316 38.76414 30223.39 1.653233218 30225.04 75.508351 4.773452656 80.2818 0 0 0 0.0689284 0.59678775 0.665716 0 0 30298.968 7.023473624 30305.99 4048.8252 0.071482756 4048.897 41.630709 0.206070303 41.83678 0 0 0 0.0028548 0.025763371 0.028618 0 0 4090.4588 0.30331643 4090.762 130 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2804.8906 0 2804.891 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2834.1146 0 2834.115 1112.0699 0.018607604 1112.089 11.330417 0.054068939 11.38449 0 0 0 0.0007806 0.006702212 0.007483 0 0 1123.4011 0.079378755 1123.48 25009.858 0.271528275 25010.13 165.41735 0.788991745 166.2063 0 0 0 0.0113906 0.097800881 0.109191 0 0 25175.287 1.158320902 25176.45 2234.5153 1665.167865 3899.683 1802.8178 4731.785293 6534.603 0 0 0 1.7220615 586.5369058 588.259 0 0 4039.0552 6983.490063 11022.55 34469.21 0 34469.21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34469.21 0 34469.21 2.8096021 0 2.809602 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8096021 0 2.809602 2497.7136 0.89692765 2498.61 0.5324059 2.606242424 3.138648 0 0 0 0.0374845 0.323061436 0.360546 0 0 2498.2834 3.82623151 2502.11 38.662602 0.040619173 38.70322 0.184104 0.118028933 0.302133 0 0 0 0.0016976 0.014630487 0.016328 0 0 38.848403 0.173278594 39.02168 30510.579 1.658386014 30512.24 75.508351 4.818845726 80.3272 0 0 0 0.0693258 0.597328631 0.666654 0 0 30586.156 7.074560371 30593.23 4086.0293 0.071706061 4086.101 41.630709 0.208029925 41.83874 0 0 0 0.0028713 0.025786721 0.028658 0 0 4127.6629 0.305522707 4127.968 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2830.7158 0 2830.716 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2859.9399 0 2859.94 1122.1957 0.018665421 1122.214 11.330417 0.054578266 11.385 0 0 0 0.0007851 0.006708281 0.007493 0 0 1133.5269 0.079951967 1133.607 25157.783 0.272371957 25158.06 165.41735 0.796424013 166.2138 0 0 0 0.0114559 0.097889443 0.109345 0 0 25323.212 1.166685413 25324.38 2253.4804 1670.38033 3923.861 1802.8178 4776.3585 6579.176 0 0 0 1.7319343 587.0680344 588.8 0 0 4058.0301 7033.806865 11091.84 34852.165 0 34852.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34852.165 0 34852.17 2.8427057 0 2.842706 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8427057 0 2.842706 2506.3757 0.899714548 2507.275 0.5324059 2.630793112 3.163199 0 0 0 0.0376994 0.323353978 0.361053 0 0 2506.9458 3.853861639 2510.8 38.918887 0.040745384 38.95963 0.184104 0.119140761 0.303245 0 0 0 0.0017073 0.014643736 0.016351 0 0 39.104698 0.17452988 39.27923 30797.773 1.663538885 30799.44 75.508351 4.864239039 80.37259 0 0 0 0.0697233 0.597869532 0.667593 0 0 30873.351 7.125647456 30880.48 4123.2341 0.071929369 4123.306 41.630709 0.209989558 41.8407 0 0 0 0.0028877 0.025810072 0.028698 0 0 4164.8677 0.307728999 4165.175 131 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 75, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2856.541 0 2856.541 29.224076 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2885.7651 0 2885.765 1132.3215 0.018723237 1132.34 11.330417 0.055087593 11.3855 0 0 0 0.0007895 0.00671435 0.007504 0 0 1143.6527 0.08052518 1143.733 25305.708 0.273215639 25305.98 165.41735 0.80385628 166.2212 0 0 0 0.0115212 0.097978005 0.109499 0 0 25471.137 1.175049924 25472.31 2272.4455 1675.592795 3948.038 1802.8178 4820.931708 6623.749 0 0 0 1.7418071 587.5991629 589.341 0 0 4077.005 7084.123666 11161.13 35235.121 0 35235.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35235.121 0 35235.12 2.8758093 0 2.875809 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.8758093 0 2.875809 2515.0378 0.902501446 2515.94 0.5324059 2.6553438 3.18775 0 0 0 0.0379143 0.323646521 0.361561 0 0 2515.6082 3.881491767 2519.49 39.175172 0.040871594 39.21604 0.184104 0.120252588 0.304357 0 0 0 0.001717 0.014656984 0.016374 0 0 39.360993 0.175781166 39.53677 31084.968 1.668691755 31086.64 75.508351 4.909632353 80.41798 0 0 0 0.0701207 0.598410432 0.668531 0 0 31160.547 7.17673454 31167.72 4160.439 0.072152677 4160.511 41.630709 0.21194919 41.84266 0 0 0 0.0029042 0.025833422 0.028738 0 0 4202.0726 0.30993529 4202.382

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2516.6943 0 2516.694 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2547.5482 0 2547.548 1036.8964 0.018361016 1036.915 11.962307 0.048785036 12.01109 0 0 0 0.000759 0.006644251 0.007403 0 0 1048.8595 0.073790303 1048.933 23277.703 0.267929986 23277.97 174.64257 0.7118873 175.3545 0 0 0 0.0110759 0.096955098 0.108031 0 0 23452.356 1.076772384 23453.43 2093.5519 1641.875237 3735.427 1803.629 4327.233547 6130.863 0 0 0 1.6744832 581.4645265 583.139 0 0 3898.8553 6550.57331 10449.43 29830.812 0 29830.81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29830.812 0 29830.81 268.8266 0 268.8266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268.8266 0 268.8266 2395.0453 0.885041577 2395.93 0.5620978 2.351546631 2.913644 0 0 0 0.0364488 0.320267596 0.356716 0 0 2395.6439 3.556855804 2399.201 39.836767 0.040080889 39.87685 0.1943713 0.106494522 0.300866 0 0 0 0.0016507 0.014503963 0.016155 0 0 40.032789 0.161079373 40.19387 27255.358 1.636409105 27256.99 79.719404 4.347922638 84.06733 0 0 0 0.0674104 0.592162924 0.659573 0 0 27335.145 6.576494668 27341.72 3652.2298 0.070747173 3652.301 43.952427 0.187708189 44.14014 0 0 0 0.0027919 0.025563717 0.028356 0 0 3696.185 0.284019079 3696.469 144.51067 0 144.5107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144.51067 0 144.5107 132 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2521.4469 0 2521.447 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2552.3008 0 2552.301 1042.5424 0.018411518 1042.561 11.962307 0.048918768 12.01123 0 0 0 0.0007627 0.006646345 0.007409 0 0 1054.5054 0.073976631 1054.579 23296.786 0.268666929 23297.05 174.64257 0.713838755 175.3564 0 0 0 0.0111293 0.096985646 0.108115 0 0 23471.44 1.07949133 23472.52 2104.1096 1646.322089 3750.432 1803.629 4344.723257 6148.352 0 0 0 1.6825598 581.6477324 583.3303 0 0 3909.4212 6572.693078 10482.11 29864.805 0 29864.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29864.805 0 29864.8 295.47134 0 295.4713 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 295.47134 0 295.4713 2396.039 0.887475888 2396.926 0.5620978 2.357992789 2.920091 0 0 0 0.0366246 0.320368505 0.356993 0 0 2396.6377 3.565837182 2400.204 40.287348 0.040191131 40.32754 0.1943713 0.106786449 0.301158 0 0 0 0.0016586 0.014508532 0.016167 0 0 40.483378 0.161486113 40.64486 27303.181 1.640910056 27304.82 79.719404 4.359841346 84.07925 0 0 0 0.0677356 0.592349501 0.660085 0 0 27382.969 6.593100903 27389.56 3657.2152 0.070941581 3657.286 43.952427 0.188223525 44.14065 0 0 0 0.0028054 0.025571772 0.028377 0 0 3701.1705 0.284736878 3701.455 158.96173 0 158.9617 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158.96173 0 158.9617

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2526.1999 0 2526.2 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2557.0538 0 2557.054 1048.1885 0.018462021 1048.207 11.962307 0.049052502 12.01136 0 0 0 0.0007663 0.006648438 0.007415 0 0 1060.1516 0.074162961 1060.226 23315.872 0.269403884 23316.14 174.64257 0.71579025 175.3584 0 0 0 0.0111827 0.097016198 0.108199 0 0 23490.526 1.082210331 23491.61 2114.6678 1650.769015 3765.437 1803.629 4362.213204 6165.842 0 0 0 1.6906366 581.8309577 583.5216 0 0 3919.9874 6594.813178 10514.8 29898.806 0 29898.81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29898.806 0 29898.81 322.11607 0 322.1161 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 322.11607 0 322.1161 2397.0329 0.88991024 2397.923 0.5620978 2.364439078 2.926537 0 0 0 0.0368005 0.320469424 0.35727 0 0 2397.6318 3.574818743 2401.207 40.737934 0.040301376 40.77824 0.1943713 0.107078383 0.30145 0 0 0 0.0016666 0.014513103 0.01618 0 0 40.933972 0.161892861 41.09586 27351.011 1.645411082 27352.66 79.719404 4.371760296 84.09116 0 0 0 0.0680607 0.592536098 0.660597 0 0 27430.799 6.609707475 27437.41 3662.2014 0.071135993 3662.273 43.952427 0.188738872 44.14117 0 0 0 0.0028189 0.025579827 0.028399 0 0 3706.1567 0.285454692 3706.442 173.4128 0 173.4128 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 173.4128 0 173.4128 133 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2530.9525 0 2530.952 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2561.8064 0 2561.806 1053.8345 0.018512523 1053.853 11.962307 0.049186234 12.01149 0 0 0 0.00077 0.006650532 0.007421 0 0 1065.7975 0.074349288 1065.872 23334.955 0.270140827 23335.23 174.64257 0.717741705 175.3603 0 0 0 0.0112361 0.097046746 0.108283 0 0 23509.609 1.084929278 23510.69 2125.2256 1655.215867 3780.441 1803.629 4379.702914 6183.332 0 0 0 1.6987132 582.0141636 583.7129 0 0 3930.5533 6616.932945 10547.49 29932.799 0 29932.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29932.799 0 29932.8 348.7608 0 348.7608 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 348.7608 0 348.7608 2398.0266 0.892344551 2398.919 0.5620978 2.370885236 2.932983 0 0 0 0.0369763 0.320570333 0.357547 0 0 2398.6257 3.583800121 2402.209 41.188514 0.040411618 41.22893 0.1943713 0.10737031 0.301742 0 0 0 0.0016745 0.014517673 0.016192 0 0 41.38456 0.162299601 41.54686 27398.835 1.649912034 27400.48 79.719404 4.383679003 84.10308 0 0 0 0.0683859 0.592722674 0.661109 0 0 27478.623 6.626313711 27485.25 3667.1868 0.071330401 3667.258 43.952427 0.189254208 44.14168 0 0 0 0.0028323 0.025587881 0.02842 0 0 3711.1421 0.286172491 3711.428 187.86387 0 187.8639 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 187.86387 0 187.8639

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2535.7056 0 2535.706 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2566.5594 0 2566.559 1059.4806 0.018563026 1059.499 11.962307 0.049319968 12.01163 0 0 0 0.0007737 0.006652625 0.007426 0 0 1071.4437 0.074535619 1071.518 23354.041 0.270877782 23354.31 174.64257 0.7196932 175.3623 0 0 0 0.0112895 0.097077298 0.108367 0 0 23528.695 1.087648279 23529.78 2135.7837 1659.662794 3795.447 1803.629 4397.192862 6200.822 0 0 0 1.7067899 582.1973889 583.9042 0 0 3941.1195 6639.053045 10580.17 29966.8 0 29966.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29966.8 0 29966.8 375.40554 0 375.4055 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 375.40554 0 375.4055 2399.0205 0.894778903 2399.915 0.5620978 2.377331525 2.939429 0 0 0 0.0371521 0.320671253 0.357823 0 0 2399.6198 3.592781681 2403.213 41.6391 0.040521863 41.67962 0.1943713 0.107662243 0.302034 0 0 0 0.0016825 0.014522243 0.016205 0 0 41.835154 0.162706349 41.99786 27446.665 1.654413059 27448.32 79.719404 4.395597953 84.115 0 0 0 0.068711 0.592909271 0.66162 0 0 27526.453 6.642920283 27533.1 3672.173 0.071524812 3672.245 43.952427 0.189769555 44.1422 0 0 0 0.0028458 0.025595937 0.028442 0 0 3716.1283 0.286890305 3716.415 202.31493 0 202.3149 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 202.31493 0 202.3149 134 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 75, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2540.4586 0 2540.459 30.853884 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2571.3125 0 2571.313 1065.1268 0.018613529 1065.145 11.962307 0.049453702 12.01176 0 0 0 0.0007773 0.006654719 0.007432 0 0 1077.0899 0.07472195 1077.165 23373.127 0.271614737 23373.4 174.64257 0.721644695 175.3642 0 0 0 0.011343 0.097107849 0.108451 0 0 23547.781 1.090367281 23548.87 2146.3419 1664.109721 3810.452 1803.629 4414.68281 6218.312 0 0 0 1.7148667 582.3806142 584.0955 0 0 3951.6857 6661.173145 10612.86 30000.801 0 30000.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30000.801 0 30000.8 402.05027 0 402.0503 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 402.05027 0 402.0503 2400.0144 0.897213254 2400.912 0.5620978 2.383777814 2.945876 0 0 0 0.0373279 0.320772172 0.3581 0 0 2400.6138 3.601763241 2404.216 42.089687 0.040632107 42.13032 0.1943713 0.107954176 0.302326 0 0 0 0.0016905 0.014526813 0.016217 0 0 42.285748 0.163113097 42.44886 27494.495 1.658914085 27496.15 79.719404 4.407516902 84.12692 0 0 0 0.0690362 0.593095867 0.662132 0 0 27574.283 6.659526855 27580.94 3677.1592 0.071719224 3677.231 43.952427 0.190284902 44.14271 0 0 0 0.0028593 0.025603992 0.028463 0 0 3721.1145 0.287608118 3721.402 216.766 0 216.766 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 216.766 0 216.766

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4474.4198 0 4474.42 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4511.3164 0 4511.316 1772.7422 0.028813761 1772.771 14.305129 0.075048906 14.38018 0 0 0 0.0012475 0.010154385 0.011402 0 0 1787.0486 0.114017052 1787.163 38668.571 0.420459875 38668.99 208.84637 1.095138327 209.9415 0 0 0 0.0182039 0.14817613 0.16638 0 0 38877.435 1.663774332 38879.1 3650.0225 2578.777169 6228.8 1806.6366 6567.824645 8374.461 0 0 0 2.7521295 888.6501625 891.4023 0 0 5459.4113 10035.25198 15494.66 56513.67 0 56513.67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56513.67 0 56513.67 4.0219946 0 4.021995 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0219946 0 4.021995 3636.7716 1.388886984 3638.16 0.6721849 3.617523232 4.289708 0 0 0 0.0599062 0.489463825 0.54937 0 0 3637.5036 5.495874041 3643 60.60641 0.062898542 60.66931 0.232439 0.16382682 0.396266 0 0 0 0.002713 0.022166354 0.024879 0 0 60.841562 0.248891716 61.09045 49900.712 2.568000606 49903.28 95.332477 6.68866649 102.0211 0 0 0 0.1107938 0.905000486 1.015794 0 0 49996.155 10.16166758 50006.32 6513.5104 0.111024937 6513.621 52.560526 0.288750225 52.84928 0 0 0 0.0045887 0.039068938 0.043658 0 0 6566.0755 0.438844099 6566.514 135 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4599.4969 0 4599.497 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4636.3936 0 4636.394 1822.3904 0.029740626 1822.42 14.305129 0.076321027 14.38145 0 0 0 0.0012869 0.010489762 0.011777 0 0 1836.6968 0.116551414 1836.813 39794.581 0.433985 39795.02 208.84637 1.11370153 209.9601 0 0 0 0.0187794 0.153070051 0.171849 0 0 40003.446 1.700756581 40005.15 3760.8213 2661.686056 6422.507 1806.6366 6679.152924 8485.79 0 0 0 2.8391275 918.0002581 920.8394 0 0 5570.297 10258.83924 15829.14 58097.151 0 58097.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58097.151 0 58097.15 4.0895561 0 4.089556 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0895561 0 4.089556 3736.6316 1.433563947 3738.065 0.6721849 3.678842261 4.351027 0 0 0 0.0617999 0.505629703 0.56743 0 0 3737.3656 5.618035911 3742.984 62.385223 0.064921828 62.45014 0.232439 0.166603776 0.399043 0 0 0 0.0027987 0.022898459 0.025697 0 0 62.62046 0.254424062 62.87488 51374.036 2.650606655 51376.69 95.332477 6.802043105 102.1345 0 0 0 0.1142961 0.934890596 1.049187 0 0 51469.483 10.38754036 51479.87 6695.9306 0.114594728 6696.045 52.560526 0.293644702 52.85417 0 0 0 0.0047338 0.040359296 0.045093 0 0 6748.4958 0.448598726 6748.944

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4724.5746 0 4724.575 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4761.4712 0 4761.471 1872.0388 0.030667492 1872.069 14.305129 0.07759315 14.38272 0 0 0 0.0013264 0.010825138 0.012152 0 0 1886.3452 0.11908578 1886.464 40920.594 0.447510137 40921.04 208.84637 1.132264774 209.9786 0 0 0 0.0193548 0.157963975 0.177319 0 0 41129.46 1.737738886 41131.2 3871.6204 2744.595018 6616.215 1806.6366 6790.48144 8597.118 0 0 0 2.9261257 947.3503732 950.2765 0 0 5681.1831 10482.42683 16163.61 59680.639 0 59680.64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59680.639 0 59680.64 4.1571185 0 4.157119 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.1571185 0 4.157119 3836.4919 1.478240949 3837.97 0.6721849 3.740161422 4.412346 0 0 0 0.0636936 0.521795591 0.585489 0 0 3837.2278 5.740197963 3842.968 64.164041 0.066945116 64.23099 0.232439 0.169380737 0.40182 0 0 0 0.0028845 0.023630563 0.026515 0 0 64.399364 0.259956417 64.65932 52847.368 2.733212779 52850.1 95.332477 6.915419962 102.2479 0 0 0 0.1177984 0.964780725 1.082579 0 0 52942.818 10.61341347 52953.43 6878.3515 0.118164523 6878.47 52.560526 0.298539189 52.85906 0 0 0 0.0048789 0.041649655 0.046529 0 0 6930.9169 0.458353368 6931.375 136 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 4849.6522 0 4849.652 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4886.5489 0 4886.549 1921.6871 0.031594359 1921.719 14.305129 0.078865273 14.38399 0 0 0 0.0013658 0.011160515 0.012526 0 0 1935.9936 0.121620147 1936.115 42046.608 0.461035274 42047.07 208.84637 1.150828017 209.9972 0 0 0 0.0199303 0.1628579 0.182788 0 0 42255.474 1.77472119 42257.25 3982.4195 2827.50398 6809.923 1806.6366 6901.809957 8708.447 0 0 0 3.0131239 976.7004883 979.7136 0 0 5792.0693 10706.01443 16498.08 61264.128 0 61264.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61264.128 0 61264.13 4.2246809 0 4.224681 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.2246809 0 4.224681 3936.3522 1.522917952 3937.875 0.6721849 3.801480583 4.473665 0 0 0 0.0655873 0.53796148 0.603549 0 0 3937.09 5.862360015 3942.952 65.942859 0.068968404 66.01183 0.232439 0.172157699 0.404597 0 0 0 0.0029703 0.024362668 0.027333 0 0 66.178268 0.265488771 66.44376 54320.699 2.815818902 54323.51 95.332477 7.028796819 102.3613 0 0 0 0.1213007 0.994670854 1.115972 0 0 54416.153 10.83928658 54426.99 7060.7725 0.121734318 7060.894 52.560526 0.303433677 52.86396 0 0 0 0.0050239 0.042940014 0.047964 0 0 7113.338 0.468108009 7113.806 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4974.7299 0 4974.73 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5011.6265 0 5011.627 1971.3355 0.032521225 1971.368 14.305129 0.080137397 14.38527 0 0 0 0.0014052 0.011495891 0.012901 0 0 1985.642 0.124154513 1985.766 43172.621 0.474560411 43173.1 208.84637 1.16939126 210.0158 0 0 0 0.0205057 0.167751824 0.188258 0 0 43381.488 1.811703494 43383.3 4093.2186 2910.412943 7003.632 1806.6366 7013.138473 8819.775 0 0 0 3.100122 1006.050603 1009.151 0 0 5902.9554 10929.60202 16832.56 62847.617 0 62847.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62847.617 0 62847.62 4.2922433 0 4.292243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.2922433 0 4.292243 4036.2125 1.567594954 4037.78 0.6721849 3.862799744 4.534985 0 0 0 0.067481 0.554127369 0.621608 0 0 4036.9522 5.984522066 4042.937 67.721677 0.070991692 67.79267 0.232439 0.17493466 0.407374 0 0 0 0.003056 0.025094773 0.028151 0 0 67.957172 0.271021125 68.22819 55794.03 2.898425025 55796.93 95.332477 7.142173677 102.4747 0 0 0 0.1248031 1.024560984 1.149364 0 0 55889.488 11.06515969 55900.55 7243.1935 0.125304114 7243.319 52.560526 0.308328164 52.86885 0 0 0 0.005169 0.044230373 0.049399 0 0 7295.7591 0.477862651 7296.237 137 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = Concrete, PSF = 100, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 5099.807 0 5099.807 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5136.7037 0 5136.704 2020.9837 0.03344809 2021.017 14.305129 0.081409517 14.38654 0 0 0 0.0014447 0.011831267 0.013276 0 0 2035.2902 0.126688875 2035.417 44298.631 0.488085536 44299.12 208.84637 1.187954463 210.0343 0 0 0 0.0210812 0.172645745 0.193727 0 0 44507.498 1.848685743 44509.35 4204.0174 2993.32183 7197.339 1806.6366 7124.466752 8931.103 0 0 0 3.1871201 1035.400699 1038.588 0 0 6013.8411 11153.18928 17167.03 64431.098 0 64431.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64431.098 0 64431.1 4.3598048 0 4.359805 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.3598048 0 4.359805 4136.0726 1.612271916 4137.685 0.6721849 3.924118773 4.596304 0 0 0 0.0693747 0.570293247 0.639668 0 0 4136.8141 6.106683936 4142.921 69.50049 0.073014978 69.5735 0.232439 0.177711616 0.410151 0 0 0 0.0031418 0.025826877 0.028969 0 0 69.736071 0.276553471 70.01262 57267.355 2.981031074 57270.34 95.332477 7.255550292 102.588 0 0 0 0.1283054 1.054451094 1.182756 0 0 57362.816 11.29103246 57374.11 7425.6137 0.128873905 7425.743 52.560526 0.313222641 52.87375 0 0 0 0.005314 0.045520731 0.050835 0 0 7478.1795 0.487617277 7478.667

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3637.0487 0 3637.049 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3673.9453 0 3673.945 1438.3505 0.020470621 1438.371 14.305129 0.070480918 14.37561 0 0 0 0.0009248 0.006897773 0.007823 0 0 1452.6565 0.097849312 1452.754 29776.391 0.298714028 29776.69 208.84637 1.028480752 209.8749 0 0 0 0.0134948 0.100654566 0.114149 0 0 29985.251 1.427849345 29986.68 2845.6206 1833.127863 4678.748 1806.6366 6168.062116 7974.699 0 0 0 2.0401897 603.6511821 605.6914 0 0 4654.2974 8604.841161 13259.14 46809.066 0 46809.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46809.066 0 46809.07 3.8762857 0 3.876286 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8762857 0 3.876286 2776.8303 0.986729176 2777.817 0.6721849 3.397336136 4.069521 0 0 0 0.0444093 0.332487889 0.376897 0 0 2777.5469 4.7165532 2782.263 46.920792 0.044686016 46.96548 0.232439 0.153855204 0.386294 0 0 0 0.0020112 0.015057383 0.017069 0 0 47.155242 0.213598603 47.36884 39764.758 1.82442571 39766.58 95.332477 6.281548703 101.614 0 0 0 0.0821329 0.614757793 0.696891 0 0 39860.172 8.720732207 39868.89 5284.8689 0.07890167 5284.948 52.560526 0.27117492 52.8317 0 0 0 0.0034017 0.026539139 0.029941 0 0 5337.4329 0.37661573 5337.809 138 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3678.3887 0 3678.389 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3715.2853 0 3715.285 1454.5595 0.020563172 1454.58 14.305129 0.07129624 14.37643 0 0 0 0.000932 0.006907488 0.007839 0 0 1468.8655 0.0987669 1468.964 30013.184 0.300064568 30013.48 208.84637 1.040378197 209.8868 0 0 0 0.0135993 0.10079633 0.114396 0 0 30222.044 1.441239096 30223.48 2875.9792 1841.471819 4717.451 1806.6366 6239.414142 8046.051 0 0 0 2.0559937 604.5013796 606.5574 0 0 4684.6718 8685.38734 13370.06 47422.086 0 47422.09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47422.086 0 47422.09 3.9292763 0 3.929276 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9292763 0 3.929276 2790.6962 0.991190357 2791.687 0.6721849 3.436636456 4.108821 0 0 0 0.0447533 0.332956173 0.377709 0 0 2791.4132 4.760782986 2796.174 47.331043 0.04488805 47.37593 0.232439 0.155634998 0.388074 0 0 0 0.0020267 0.01507859 0.017105 0 0 47.565509 0.215601638 47.78111 40224.487 1.83267427 40226.32 95.332477 6.354213539 101.6867 0 0 0 0.0827691 0.615623634 0.698393 0 0 40319.903 8.802511443 40328.71 5344.425 0.079259135 5344.504 52.560526 0.274311867 52.83484 0 0 0 0.003428 0.026576518 0.030005 0 0 5396.9889 0.38014752 5397.369

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3719.7293 0 3719.729 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3756.6259 0 3756.626 1470.7687 0.020655724 1470.789 14.305129 0.072111565 14.37724 0 0 0 0.0009391 0.006917203 0.007856 0 0 1485.0748 0.099684492 1485.174 30249.979 0.30141512 30250.28 208.84637 1.052275683 209.8987 0 0 0 0.0137039 0.100938098 0.114642 0 0 30458.839 1.454628901 30460.29 2906.3381 1849.815851 4756.154 1806.6366 6310.766405 8117.403 0 0 0 2.0717979 605.3515967 607.4234 0 0 4715.0465 8765.933853 13480.98 48035.115 0 48035.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48035.115 0 48035.11 3.9822678 0 3.982268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9822678 0 3.982268 2804.5624 0.995651579 2805.558 0.6721849 3.475936907 4.148122 0 0 0 0.0450973 0.333424468 0.378522 0 0 2805.2797 4.805012954 2810.085 47.741299 0.045090085 47.78639 0.232439 0.157414798 0.389854 0 0 0 0.0020423 0.015099798 0.017142 0 0 47.975781 0.217604681 48.19339 40684.223 1.840922903 40686.06 95.332477 6.426878618 101.7594 0 0 0 0.0834053 0.616489494 0.699895 0 0 40779.639 8.884291015 40788.52 5403.9818 0.079616604 5404.061 52.560526 0.277448824 52.83797 0 0 0 0.0034544 0.026613897 0.030068 0 0 5456.5458 0.383679324 5456.929 139 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3761.0698 0 3761.07 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3797.9664 0 3797.966 1486.9779 0.020748276 1486.999 14.305129 0.07292689 14.37806 0 0 0 0.0009463 0.006926918 0.007873 0 0 1501.284 0.100602084 1501.385 30486.774 0.302765673 30487.08 208.84637 1.064173168 209.9105 0 0 0 0.0138084 0.101079866 0.114888 0 0 30695.634 1.468018707 30697.1 2936.697 1858.159883 4794.857 1806.6366 6382.118669 8188.755 0 0 0 2.0876021 606.2018137 608.2894 0 0 4745.4213 8846.480365 13591.9 48648.143 0 48648.14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48648.143 0 48648.14 4.0352594 0 4.035259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0352594 0 4.035259 2818.4286 1.000112801 2819.429 0.6721849 3.515237358 4.187422 0 0 0 0.0454413 0.333892763 0.379334 0 0 2819.1462 4.849242922 2823.995 48.151556 0.04529212 48.19685 0.232439 0.159194598 0.391634 0 0 0 0.0020579 0.015121006 0.017179 0 0 48.386053 0.219607724 48.60566 41143.959 1.849171537 41145.81 95.332477 6.499543697 101.832 0 0 0 0.0840416 0.617355354 0.701397 0 0 41239.376 8.966070588 41248.34 5463.5386 0.079974072 5463.619 52.560526 0.28058578 52.84111 0 0 0 0.0034807 0.026651276 0.030132 0 0 5516.1026 0.387211129 5516.49

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3802.4104 0 3802.41 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3839.307 0 3839.307 1503.1871 0.020840829 1503.208 14.305129 0.073742214 14.37887 0 0 0 0.0009534 0.006936633 0.00789 0 0 1517.4932 0.101519676 1517.595 30723.57 0.304116225 30723.87 208.84637 1.076070654 209.9224 0 0 0 0.013913 0.101221633 0.115135 0 0 30932.43 1.481408512 30933.91 2967.056 1866.503914 4833.56 1806.6366 6453.470932 8260.108 0 0 0 2.1034063 607.0520308 609.1554 0 0 4775.796 8927.026877 13702.82 49261.171 0 49261.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49261.171 0 49261.17 4.0882509 0 4.088251 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0882509 0 4.088251 2832.2947 1.004574022 2833.299 0.6721849 3.554537809 4.226723 0 0 0 0.0457853 0.334361058 0.380146 0 0 2833.0127 4.893472889 2837.906 48.561812 0.045494156 48.60731 0.232439 0.160974398 0.393413 0 0 0 0.0020735 0.015142213 0.017216 0 0 48.796324 0.221610768 49.01794 41603.695 1.857420171 41605.55 95.332477 6.572208775 101.9047 0 0 0 0.0846778 0.618221215 0.702899 0 0 41699.112 9.04785016 41708.16 5523.0954 0.080331541 5523.176 52.560526 0.283722737 52.84425 0 0 0 0.0035071 0.026688655 0.030196 0 0 5575.6595 0.390742933 5576.05 140 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Column Type = WF, PSF = 100, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3843.7504 0 3843.75 36.896628 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3880.647 0 3880.647 1519.3961 0.02093338 1519.417 14.305129 0.074557536 14.37969 0 0 0 0.0009606 0.006946348 0.007907 0 0 1533.7022 0.102437264 1533.805 30960.362 0.305466766 30960.67 208.84637 1.0879681 209.9343 0 0 0 0.0140175 0.101363398 0.115381 0 0 31169.222 1.494798263 31170.72 2997.4145 1874.847871 4872.262 1806.6366 6524.822958 8331.46 0 0 0 2.1192104 607.9022283 610.0214 0 0 4806.1703 9007.573057 13813.74 49874.192 0 49874.19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49874.192 0 49874.19 4.1412415 0 4.141242 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.1412415 0 4.141242 2846.1607 1.009035204 2847.17 0.6721849 3.593838129 4.266023 0 0 0 0.0461293 0.334829343 0.380959 0 0 2846.879 4.937702675 2851.817 48.972063 0.045696189 49.01776 0.232439 0.162754192 0.395193 0 0 0 0.0020891 0.015163421 0.017252 0 0 49.206591 0.223613802 49.4302 42063.424 1.86566873 42065.29 95.332477 6.644873611 101.9774 0 0 0 0.085314 0.619087055 0.704401 0 0 42158.842 9.129629396 42167.97 5582.6515 0.080689006 5582.732 52.560526 0.286859684 52.84739 0 0 0 0.0035335 0.026726034 0.030259 0 0 5635.2156 0.394274723 5635.61

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 10 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3307.9721 0 3307.972 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3359.551 0 3359.551 1379.7604 0.020478847 1379.781 19.997585 0.064796185 20.06238 0 0 0 0.0009208 0.006837814 0.007759 0 0 1399.7589 0.092112847 1399.851 27739.858 0.298834075 27740.16 291.95283 0.945527253 292.8984 0 0 0 0.013436 0.099779636 0.113216 0 0 28031.825 1.344140965 28033.17 2735.5991 1831.895299 4567.494 1813.9445 5778.324472 7592.269 0 0 0 2.0313036 598.404006 600.4353 0 0 4551.5748 8208.623777 12760.2 41250.597 0 41250.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41250.597 0 41250.6 499.52914 0 499.5291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 499.52914 0 499.5291 2654.7868 0.987125723 2655.774 0.9396681 3.123319419 4.062988 0 0 0 0.0442158 0.329597772 0.373814 0 0 2655.7707 4.440042914 2660.211 51.165566 0.044703974 51.21027 0.3249337 0.141445806 0.46638 0 0 0 0.0020024 0.014926498 0.016929 0 0 51.492502 0.201076279 51.69358 36006.26 1.825158912 36008.09 133.26823 5.774901943 139.0431 0 0 0 0.0817751 0.609414074 0.691189 0 0 36139.61 8.209474929 36147.82 4776.1177 0.078921228 4776.197 73.47599 0.24931793 73.72531 0 0 0 0.0033869 0.02630845 0.029695 0 0 4849.5971 0.354547608 4849.952 269.11425 0 269.1143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 269.11425 0 269.1143 141 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 11 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3316.4044 0 3316.404 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3367.9834 0 3367.983 1390.1104 0.020572221 1390.131 19.997585 0.065043034 20.06263 0 0 0 0.0009275 0.006841534 0.007769 0 0 1410.1089 0.092456789 1410.201 27772.997 0.30019662 27773.3 291.95283 0.949129349 292.902 0 0 0 0.0135347 0.099833908 0.113369 0 0 28064.964 1.349159878 28066.31 2754.9555 1840.115999 4595.071 1813.9445 5810.702733 7624.647 0 0 0 2.0462191 598.729486 600.7757 0 0 4570.9461 8249.548218 12820.49 41307.771 0 41307.77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41307.771 0 41307.77 549.14742 0 549.1474 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 549.14742 0 549.1474 2656.4484 0.99162656 2657.44 0.9396681 3.135218067 4.074886 0 0 0 0.0445405 0.329777045 0.374318 0 0 2657.4326 4.456621672 2661.889 52.000294 0.044907804 52.0452 0.3249337 0.141984661 0.466918 0 0 0 0.0020171 0.014934617 0.016952 0 0 52.327245 0.201827082 52.52907 36090.14 1.833480791 36091.97 133.26823 5.796902103 139.0651 0 0 0 0.0823756 0.609745543 0.692121 0 0 36223.491 8.240128437 36231.73 4784.7986 0.079280648 4784.878 73.47599 0.250269178 73.72626 0 0 0 0.0034117 0.02632276 0.029735 0 0 4858.278 0.355872586 4858.634 296.02568 0 296.0257 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 296.02568 0 296.0257

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 12 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3324.8373 0 3324.837 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3376.4163 0 3376.416 1400.4606 0.020665596 1400.481 19.997585 0.065289885 20.06287 0 0 0 0.0009343 0.006845253 0.00778 0 0 1420.4591 0.092800734 1420.552 27806.139 0.301559178 27806.44 291.95283 0.952731485 292.9056 0 0 0 0.0136334 0.099888183 0.113522 0 0 28098.106 1.354178845 28099.46 2774.3122 1848.336774 4622.649 1813.9445 5843.081232 7657.026 0 0 0 2.0611346 599.0549855 601.1161 0 0 4590.3178 8290.472992 12880.79 41364.952 0 41364.95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41364.952 0 41364.95 598.7657 0 598.7657 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 598.7657 0 598.7657 2658.1103 0.996127436 2659.106 0.9396681 3.147116847 4.086785 0 0 0 0.0448652 0.329956328 0.374821 0 0 2659.0948 4.473200611 2663.568 52.835028 0.045111635 52.88014 0.3249337 0.142523521 0.467457 0 0 0 0.0020318 0.014942736 0.016975 0 0 53.161993 0.202577892 53.36457 36174.026 1.841802745 36175.87 133.26823 5.818902506 139.0871 0 0 0 0.0829761 0.610077031 0.693053 0 0 36307.377 8.270782282 36315.65 4793.4803 0.079640073 4793.56 73.47599 0.251220436 73.72721 0 0 0 0.0034366 0.02633707 0.029774 0 0 4866.9598 0.357197579 4867.317 322.9371 0 322.9371 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 322.9371 0 322.9371 Total 142 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 13 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3333.2702 0 3333.27 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3384.8492 0 3384.849 1410.8108 0.020758971 1410.832 19.997585 0.065536736 20.06312 0 0 0 0.000941 0.006848972 0.00779 0 0 1430.8093 0.09314468 1430.902 27839.281 0.302921735 27839.58 291.95283 0.956333621 292.9092 0 0 0 0.013732 0.099942457 0.113674 0 0 28131.248 1.359197813 28132.61 2793.669 1856.55755 4650.227 1813.9445 5875.459732 7689.404 0 0 0 2.0760502 599.3804849 601.4565 0 0 4609.6895 8331.397766 12941.09 41422.133 0 41422.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41422.133 0 41422.13 648.38397 0 648.384 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 648.38397 0 648.384 2659.7721 1.000628312 2660.773 0.9396681 3.159015626 4.098684 0 0 0 0.0451898 0.330135611 0.375325 0 0 2660.7569 4.48977955 2665.247 53.669762 0.045315466 53.71508 0.3249337 0.143062381 0.467996 0 0 0 0.0020465 0.014950856 0.016997 0 0 53.996742 0.203328703 54.20007 36257.912 1.850124699 36259.76 133.26823 5.840902909 139.1091 0 0 0 0.0835765 0.61040852 0.693985 0 0 36391.264 8.301436127 36399.57 4802.162 0.079999497 4802.242 73.47599 0.252171693 73.72816 0 0 0 0.0034615 0.026351381 0.029813 0 0 4875.6415 0.358522571 4876 349.84853 0 349.8485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 349.84853 0 349.8485

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 14 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3341.7031 0 3341.703 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3393.2821 0 3393.282 1421.1609 0.020852346 1421.182 19.997585 0.065783588 20.06337 0 0 0 0.0009478 0.006852692 0.0078 0 0 1441.1595 0.093488625 1441.253 27872.423 0.304284292 27872.73 291.95283 0.959935756 292.9128 0 0 0 0.0138307 0.099996732 0.113827 0 0 28164.39 1.36421678 28165.75 2813.0258 1864.778325 4677.804 1813.9445 5907.838231 7721.783 0 0 0 2.0909658 599.7059843 601.797 0 0 4629.0612 8372.32254 13001.38 41479.315 0 41479.31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41479.315 0 41479.31 698.00225 0 698.0023 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 698.00225 0 698.0023 2661.4339 1.005129189 2662.439 0.9396681 3.170914406 4.110583 0 0 0 0.0455145 0.330314895 0.375829 0 0 2662.4191 4.506358489 2666.925 54.504495 0.045519298 54.55001 0.3249337 0.143601241 0.468535 0 0 0 0.0020612 0.014958975 0.01702 0 0 54.83149 0.204079514 55.03557 36341.798 1.858446652 36343.66 133.26823 5.862903311 139.1311 0 0 0 0.084177 0.610740008 0.694917 0 0 36475.151 8.332089972 36483.48 4810.8437 0.080358921 4810.924 73.47599 0.253122951 73.72911 0 0 0 0.0034864 0.026365691 0.029852 0 0 4884.3232 0.359847563 4884.683 376.75995 0 376.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 376.75995 0 376.76 143 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Column Type = Glulam, PSF = 100, Column Height = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3350.1355 0 3350.135 51.578942 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3401.7144 0 3401.714 1431.5109 0.02094572 1431.532 19.997585 0.066030436 20.06362 0 0 0 0.0009546 0.006856411 0.007811 0 0 1451.5095 0.093832567 1451.603 27905.562 0.305646837 27905.87 291.95283 0.963537852 292.9164 0 0 0 0.0139293 0.100051003 0.11398 0 0 28197.529 1.369235693 28198.9 2832.3822 1872.999025 4705.381 1813.9445 5940.216492 7754.161 0 0 0 2.1058813 600.0314643 602.1373 0 0 4648.4325 8413.246982 13061.68 41536.488 0 41536.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41536.488 0 41536.49 747.62053 0 747.6205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 747.62053 0 747.6205 2663.0955 1.009630025 2664.105 0.9396681 3.182813054 4.122481 0 0 0 0.0458392 0.330494167 0.376333 0 0 2664.081 4.522937246 2668.604 55.339224 0.045723127 55.38495 0.3249337 0.144140095 0.469074 0 0 0 0.0020759 0.014967094 0.017043 0 0 55.666233 0.204830316 55.87106 36425.678 1.866768532 36427.54 133.26823 5.884903472 139.1531 0 0 0 0.0847774 0.611071476 0.695849 0 0 36559.031 8.36274348 36567.39 4819.5247 0.080718342 4819.605 73.47599 0.254074199 73.73006 0 0 0 0.0035112 0.026380001 0.029891 0 0 4893.0042 0.361172541 4893.365 403.67138 0 403.6714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 403.67138 0 403.6714

Appendix A2: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 2 144

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1967.145 0 1967.145 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990.15113 0 1990.15113 783.5985 0.016732078 783.6153 8.919671 0.037546751 8.957217 0 0 0 0.000635414 0.006505338 0.007141 0 0 792.5188396 0.060784167 792.5796237 20211.32 0.244159979 20211.56 130.2219 0.54789455 130.7698 0 0 0 0.009272173 0.094928038 0.1042 0 0 20341.55169 0.886982568 20342.43868 1619.307 1496.080071 3115.387 1799.723 3285.86375 5085.587 0 0 0 1.401797175 569.3077302 570.7095 0 0 3420.43154 5351.251551 8771.683092 22046.5 0 22046.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22046.49831 0 22046.49831 1.735757 0 1.735757 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.735756626 0 1.735756626 2216.723 0.806523137 2217.529 0.419127 1.809836452 2.228964 0 0 0 0.030513228 0.313571697 0.344085 0 0 2217.172456 2.929931286 2220.102387 30.34896 0.036525023 30.38549 0.144933 0.081962086 0.226895 0 0 0 0.001381854 0.014200725 0.015583 0 0 30.49527722 0.132687835 30.62796506 21194.26 1.491231417 21195.76 59.44261 3.346320577 62.78894 0 0 0 0.056432801 0.579782455 0.636215 0 0 21253.76305 5.417334448 21259.18039 2879.14 0.064462135 2879.205 32.77304 0.144460906 32.9175 0 0 0 0.002337277 0.025029251 0.027367 0 0 2911.915517 0.233952292 2912.149469 145 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2275.773 0 2275.773 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2306.448063 0 2306.448063 904.6085 0.017423028 904.6259 11.89289 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.000688896 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 916.502047 0.067634473 916.5696815 21979.12 0.254242548 21979.37 173.6292 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.010052593 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 22152.75681 0.986944477 22153.74375 1845.952 1558.372563 3404.324 1803.54 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.519783592 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3651.011313 5952.573435 9603.584748 26623.07 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.0659 0 26623.0659 2.131365 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.131364863 0 2.131364863 2320.241 0.839828454 2321.081 0.558836 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.033081464 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2320.832657 3.260131152 2324.092788 33.41173 0.038033321 33.44977 0.193243 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.001498162 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 33.60647629 0.1476416 33.75411789 24626.43 1.552811713 24627.98 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.061182635 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 24705.74304 6.027861773 24711.7709 3323.762 0.067130821 3323.829 43.69739 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534001 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3367.461983 0.260319062 3367.722302

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 4173.188 0 4173.188 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4211.531895 0 4211.531895 1648.565 0.021670918 1648.587 14.86612 0.081054772 14.94717 0 0 0 0.001017695 0.007023767 0.008041 0 0 1663.432427 0.109749458 1663.542177 32847.36 0.316229164 32847.67 217.0365 1.182777907 218.2192 0 0 0 0.014850536 0.102493125 0.117344 0 0 33064.40651 1.601500197 33066.00801 3239.341 1941.340512 5180.682 1807.357 7093.421619 8900.778 0 0 0 2.245152163 614.6774945 616.9226 0 0 5048.94316 9649.439626 14698.38279 54759.34 0 54759.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54759.34112 0 54759.34112 4.563524 0 4.563524 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.563524342 0 4.563524342 2956.658 1.044586172 2957.703 0.698545 3.907019278 4.605564 0 0 0 0.048870722 0.338561124 0.387432 0 0 2957.405894 5.290166573 2962.69606 52.24135 0.047306186 52.28865 0.241554 0.176937231 0.418492 0 0 0 0.002213211 0.015332422 0.017546 0 0 52.4851144 0.239575839 52.72469024 45727 1.931401154 45728.94 99.07102 7.223933958 106.295 0 0 0 0.090384134 0.62598698 0.716371 0 0 45826.16574 9.781322092 45835.94706 6057.253 0.083537631 6057.336 54.62173 0.311857761 54.93359 0 0 0 0.00374344 0.027023904 0.030767 0 0 6111.878204 0.422419296 6112.300623 Total 146 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4799.579 0 4799.579 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4845.59123 0 4845.59123 1894.167 0.023073267 1894.19 17.83934 0.093408572 17.93275 0 0 0 0.001126241 0.007170972 0.008297 0 0 1912.007039 0.123652811 1912.130691 36435.27 0.336692707 36435.61 260.4438 1.363048609 261.8068 0 0 0 0.016434473 0.104641179 0.121076 0 0 36695.72932 1.804382495 36697.5337 3699.339 2067.769109 5767.108 1811.174 8174.551126 9985.725 0 0 0 2.48461693 627.5599228 630.0445 0 0 5512.997038 10869.88016 16382.8772 64047.92 0 64047.92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64047.92473 0 64047.92473 5.366449 0 5.366449 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.366449267 0 5.366449267 3166.758 1.112182511 3167.87 0.838254 4.502499717 5.340754 0 0 0 0.054083204 0.345656697 0.39974 0 0 3167.650387 5.960338925 3173.610726 58.45754 0.050367423 58.5079 0.289865 0.203904761 0.49377 0 0 0 0.002449269 0.015653759 0.018103 0 0 58.74985113 0.269925943 59.01977707 52692.9 2.056384282 52694.96 118.8852 8.324955238 127.2102 0 0 0 0.100024379 0.639106432 0.739131 0 0 52811.89013 11.02044595 52822.91058 6959.656 0.088953985 6959.745 65.54608 0.359388931 65.90547 0 0 0 0.00414271 0.027590272 0.031733 0 0 7025.205858 0.475933188 7025.681791

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 9321.427 0 9321.427 61.3497 0 61.3497 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9382.776232 0 9382.776232 3667.136 0.033196679 3667.169 23.78579 0.18258934 23.96838 0 0 0 0.001909822 0.008233624 0.010143 0 0 3690.923897 0.224019642 3691.147917 62336.04 0.484416854 62336.52 347.2584 2.664403716 349.9228 0 0 0 0.027868748 0.120147752 0.148016 0 0 62683.32603 3.268968322 62686.595 7020.012 2980.443765 10000.46 1818.808 15979.11054 17797.92 0 0 0 4.21328773 720.5568079 724.7701 0 0 8843.032557 19680.11112 28523.14368 131101.2 0 131101.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 131101.2261 0 131101.2261 11.16268 0 11.16268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.16267927 0 11.16267927 4683.445 1.600153321 4685.045 1.117672 8.80120995 9.918882 0 0 0 0.091711562 0.396878891 0.48859 0 0 4684.653992 10.79824216 4695.452234 103.3316 0.072466162 103.404 0.386487 0.398580506 0.785067 0 0 0 0.004153347 0.017973459 0.022127 0 0 103.7221929 0.489020127 104.211213 102979 2.958624245 102982 158.5136 16.27311127 174.7868 0 0 0 0.169616283 0.733814372 0.903431 0 0 103137.6865 19.96554989 103157.652 13474.01 0.12805407 13474.13 87.39477 0.702511413 88.09728 0 0 0 0.007024997 0.03167882 0.038704 0 0 13561.40846 0.862244303 13562.27071 Total 147 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1513.012 0 1513.012 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1536.018259 0 1536.018259 617.8265 0.027937848 617.8544 8.919671 0.030662517 8.950333 0 0 0 0.000842594 0.012414636 0.013257 0 0 626.7469793 0.071015002 626.8179943 26637.28 0.407678275 26637.69 130.2219 0.447437542 130.6693 0 0 0 0.012295409 0.181158451 0.193454 0 0 26767.51554 1.036274269 26768.55182 1431.82 2494.06379 3925.884 1799.723 2683.397379 4483.12 0 0 0 1.85885982 1086.453578 1088.312 0 0 3233.402243 6263.914748 9497.316991 7971.195 0 7971.195 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7971.194883 0 7971.194883 0.512197 0 0.512197 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.512197446 0 0.512197446 3671.659 1.346666077 3673.005 0.419127 1.478001147 1.897128 0 0 0 0.040462211 0.598412903 0.638875 0 0 3672.118243 3.423080127 3675.541324 36.64876 0.060986483 36.70975 0.144933 0.066934257 0.211867 0 0 0 0.001832415 0.027100333 0.028933 0 0 36.7955266 0.155021072 36.95054767 15125.05 2.489935709 15127.54 59.44261 2.732769387 62.17538 0 0 0 0.074832984 1.106443298 1.181276 0 0 15184.57143 6.329148393 15190.90058 2270.046 0.107585108 2270.153 32.77304 0.117973856 32.89101 0 0 0 0.003099358 0.047765239 0.050865 0 0 2302.821742 0.273324203 2303.095066

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1747.919 0 1747.919 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1778.594009 0 1778.594009 714.6026 0.033124711 714.6358 11.89289 0.035363316 11.92826 0 0 0 0.000993486 0.014760702 0.015754 0 0 726.4965367 0.083248729 726.5797854 31394.33 0.483366674 31394.82 173.6292 0.516033142 174.1452 0 0 0 0.014497274 0.21539302 0.22989 0 0 31567.97863 1.214792836 31569.19343 1665.546 2956.996627 4622.542 1803.54 3094.782734 4898.323 0 0 0 2.191744959 1291.767047 1293.959 0 0 3471.277134 7343.546408 10814.82354 8709.825 0 8709.825 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8709.824598 0 8709.824598 0.542304 0 0.542304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5423038 0 0.5423038 4351.102 1.596684303 4352.699 0.558836 1.704590035 2.263426 0 0 0 0.047708195 0.711498479 0.759207 0 0 4351.708372 4.012772817 4355.721144 43.08997 0.072309062 43.16228 0.193243 0.07719579 0.270439 0 0 0 0.002160564 0.032221641 0.034382 0 0 43.28537643 0.181726493 43.46710292 17422.72 2.952210151 17425.67 79.25682 3.151723849 82.40854 0 0 0 0.088234096 1.31553434 1.403768 0 0 17502.06031 7.419468339 17509.47978 2625.625 0.127557759 2625.752 43.69739 0.136060151 43.83345 0 0 0 0.003654391 0.056791714 0.060446 0 0 2669.325715 0.320409624 2669.646125 148 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1982.826 0 1982.826 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021.169759 0 2021.169759 811.3788 0.038311573 811.4171 14.86612 0.040064115 14.90618 0 0 0 0.001144378 0.017106768 0.018251 0 0 826.2460941 0.095482456 826.3415766 36151.39 0.559055073 36151.95 217.0365 0.584628741 217.6211 0 0 0 0.016699139 0.249627589 0.266327 0 0 36368.44172 1.393311404 36369.83504 1899.271 3419.929464 5319.2 1807.357 3506.16809 5313.525 0 0 0 2.524630098 1497.080515 1499.605 0 0 3709.152026 8423.178069 12132.33009 9448.454 0 9448.454 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9448.454314 0 9448.454314 0.57241 0 0.57241 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.572410153 0 0.572410153 5030.545 1.846702529 5032.392 0.698545 1.931178922 2.629724 0 0 0 0.05495418 0.824584055 0.879538 0 0 5031.2985 4.602465506 5035.900965 49.53118 0.08363164 49.61481 0.241554 0.087457324 0.329012 0 0 0 0.002488713 0.037342948 0.039832 0 0 49.77522625 0.208431913 49.98365816 19720.38 3.414484593 19723.79 99.07102 3.570678311 102.6417 0 0 0 0.101635207 1.524625382 1.626261 0 0 19819.54919 8.509788286 19828.05898 2981.204 0.147530409 2981.351 54.62173 0.154146446 54.77588 0 0 0 0.004209425 0.06581819 0.070028 0 0 3035.829688 0.367495045 3036.197183

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2217.733 0 2217.733 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2263.745509 0 2263.745509 908.155 0.043498435 908.1985 17.83934 0.044764913 17.88411 0 0 0 0.00129527 0.019452834 0.020748 0 0 925.9956515 0.107716182 926.1033677 40908.44 0.634743472 40909.08 260.4438 0.653224341 261.097 0 0 0 0.018901005 0.283862158 0.302763 0 0 41168.90482 1.571829971 41170.47665 2132.996 3882.862301 6015.858 1811.174 3917.553445 5728.727 0 0 0 2.857515237 1702.393983 1705.251 0 0 3947.026917 9502.80973 13449.83665 10187.08 0 10187.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10187.08403 0 10187.08403 0.602517 0 0.602517 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.602516507 0 0.602516507 5709.988 2.096720755 5712.085 0.838254 2.15776781 2.996022 0 0 0 0.062200164 0.937669631 0.99987 0 0 5710.888628 5.192158196 5716.080786 55.97239 0.094954219 56.06735 0.289865 0.097718858 0.387584 0 0 0 0.002816863 0.042464256 0.045281 0 0 56.26507608 0.235137333 56.50021341 22018.04 3.876759035 22021.91 118.8852 3.989632773 122.8749 0 0 0 0.115036319 1.733716424 1.848753 0 0 22137.03807 9.600108232 22146.63818 3336.783 0.167503059 3336.95 65.54608 0.172232741 65.71831 0 0 0 0.004764459 0.074844666 0.079609 0 0 3402.333661 0.414580466 3402.748242 149 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2687.547 0 2687.547 61.3497 0 61.3497 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2748.897008 0 2748.897008 1101.707 0.053872159 1101.761 23.78579 0.05416651 23.83995 0 0 0 0.001597054 0.024144967 0.025742 0 0 1125.494766 0.132183636 1125.62695 50422.55 0.78612027 50423.34 347.2584 0.79041554 348.0488 0 0 0 0.023304735 0.352331296 0.375636 0 0 50769.831 1.928867106 50771.75986 2600.446 4808.727975 7409.174 1818.808 4740.324156 6559.132 0 0 0 3.523285515 2113.020919 2116.544 0 0 4422.776699 11662.07305 16084.84975 11664.34 0 11664.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11664.34346 0 11664.34346 0.662729 0 0.662729 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.662729213 0 0.662729213 7068.875 2.596757207 7071.471 1.117672 2.610945585 3.728618 0 0 0 0.076692132 1.163840783 1.240533 0 0 7070.068884 6.371543576 7076.440427 68.85482 0.117599376 68.97242 0.386487 0.118241926 0.504729 0 0 0 0.003473161 0.052706872 0.05618 0 0 69.24477573 0.288548173 69.5333239 26613.36 4.801307919 26618.16 158.5136 4.827541697 163.3412 0 0 0 0.141838543 2.151898508 2.293737 0 0 26772.01583 11.78074812 26783.79658 4047.941 0.20744836 4048.148 87.39477 0.208405331 87.60318 0 0 0 0.005874527 0.092897617 0.098772 0 0 4135.341608 0.508751308 4135.850359

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1373.458 0 1373.458 32.83738 0 32.83738 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1406.295306 0 1406.295306 936.4785 0.019560025 936.498 12.73133 0.033166279 12.76449 0 0 0 0.000833755 0.006435917 0.00727 0 0 949.2106218 0.059162222 949.269784 15979.51 0.285426326 15979.79 185.8698 0.483973263 186.3538 0 0 0 0.012166432 0.093915022 0.106081 0 0 16165.38892 0.863314612 16166.25224 1911.251 1739.966898 3651.218 1804.616 3492.591807 5297.208 0 0 0 1.839360636 563.2324154 565.0718 0 0 3717.706314 5795.79112 9513.497434 10424.59 0 10424.59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10424.5914 0 10424.5914 2717.649 0 2717.649 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2717.649219 0 2717.649219 1982.797 0.942836481 1983.739 0.598233 1.598688012 2.196921 0 0 0 0.040037768 0.310225445 0.350263 0 0 1983.43487 2.851749938 1986.28662 65.52087 0.042698247 65.56357 0.206867 0.072399807 0.279267 0 0 0 0.001813193 0.014049184 0.015862 0 0 65.72954797 0.129147238 65.85869521 13760.01 1.743269741 13761.76 84.84432 2.955914938 87.80023 0 0 0 0.074047996 0.57359536 0.647643 0 0 13844.93286 5.272780038 13850.20564 1833.758 0.075317257 1833.834 46.77799 0.127689141 46.90568 0 0 0 0.003066846 0.024762154 0.027829 0 0 1880.539506 0.227768552 1880.767275 1473.695 0 1473.695 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1473.694984 0 1473.694984 150 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1488.1 0 1488.1 43.78318 0 43.78318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1531.883057 0 1531.883057 1109.982 0.021200242 1110.004 16.9751 0.03772642 17.01283 0 0 0 0.000953368 0.006486975 0.00744 0 0 1126.958451 0.065413636 1127.023865 16359.11 0.309360899 16359.42 247.8264 0.550516329 248.3769 0 0 0 0.013911864 0.094660076 0.108572 0 0 16606.95117 0.954537304 16607.90571 2237.528 1884.17721 4121.705 1810.064 4088.361046 5898.425 0 0 0 2.103240775 567.7006924 569.8039 0 0 4049.695714 6540.238949 10589.93466 11111.22 0 11111.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11111.21798 0 11111.21798 3623.341 0 3623.341 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3623.340627 0 3623.340627 2006.412 1.021898524 2007.434 0.797644 1.81849685 2.616141 0 0 0 0.045781705 0.312686549 0.358468 0 0 2007.255322 3.153081923 2010.408404 80.34824 0.046278731 80.39452 0.275822 0.082354293 0.358177 0 0 0 0.002073319 0.01416064 0.016234 0 0 80.6261352 0.142793664 80.76892887 14773.04 1.88945253 14774.93 113.1258 3.362333342 116.4881 0 0 0 0.084671142 0.578145849 0.662817 0 0 14886.25213 5.829931721 14892.08206 1935.556 0.081629668 1935.638 62.37066 0.145261613 62.51592 0 0 0 0.003506825 0.024958599 0.028465 0 0 1997.930402 0.25184988 1998.182252 1964.927 0 1964.927 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1964.926646 0 1964.926646

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 1964.353 0 1964.353 54.72897 0 54.72897 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019.082412 0 2019.082412 1812.965 0.027810379 1812.992 21.21888 0.056676707 21.27556 0 0 0 0.001439121 0.006698865 0.008138 0 0 1834.184978 0.091185951 1834.276164 17974.75 0.405818198 17975.15 309.783 0.827045157 310.61 0 0 0 0.021000122 0.097752047 0.118752 0 0 18284.55246 1.330615402 18285.88308 3562.728 2465.214181 6027.942 1815.512 6536.632612 8352.145 0 0 0 3.174866673 586.2440343 589.4189 0 0 5381.414795 9588.090827 14969.50562 14568.4 0 14568.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14568.39934 0 14568.39934 7260.433 0 7260.433 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7260.432954 0 7260.432954 2131.947 1.340521762 2133.287 0.997056 2.731942597 3.728998 0 0 0 0.069108022 0.322900124 0.392008 0 0 2133.012739 4.395364482 2137.408103 140.0571 0.060708226 140.1178 0.344778 0.123721526 0.4685 0 0 0 0.003129699 0.014623182 0.017753 0 0 140.4050017 0.199052934 140.6040546 18970.86 2.478575098 18973.34 141.4072 5.051260712 146.4585 0 0 0 0.127812084 0.597030371 0.724842 0 0 19112.39918 8.126866181 19120.52605 2367.294 0.107072006 2367.401 77.96332 0.218282595 78.1816 0 0 0 0.005293593 0.025773845 0.031067 0 0 2445.262907 0.351128446 2445.614036 3937.555 0 3937.555 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3937.554524 0 3937.554524 Total 151 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2151.318 0 2151.318 65.67477 0 65.67477 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2216.992605 0 2216.992605 2092.364 0.030444579 2092.395 25.46265 0.064114881 25.52677 0 0 0 0.001631962 0.00678209 0.008414 0 0 2117.828595 0.10134155 2117.929936 18601.56 0.444257318 18602 371.7396 0.935585447 372.6752 0 0 0 0.023814121 0.098966485 0.122781 0 0 18973.32322 1.47880925 18974.80203 4088.79 2696.78984 6785.579 1820.96 7502.902744 9323.863 0 0 0 3.600296055 593.5273289 597.1276 0 0 5913.350244 10793.21991 16706.57016 15809.14 0 15809.14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15809.14222 0 15809.14222 8712.405 0 8712.405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8712.404546 0 8712.404546 2175.946 1.467496053 2177.413 1.196467 3.090479051 4.286946 0 0 0 0.078368438 0.326911724 0.40528 0 0 2177.220818 4.884886828 2182.105705 163.8608 0.066458512 163.9272 0.413734 0.139958572 0.553692 0 0 0 0.003549076 0.014804855 0.018354 0 0 164.278046 0.22122194 164.499268 20620.85 2.713345859 20623.56 169.6886 5.714181343 175.4028 0 0 0 0.144938792 0.604447671 0.749386 0 0 20790.685 9.031974874 20799.71698 2535.08 0.117210404 2535.198 93.55598 0.246944787 93.80293 0 0 0 0.00600293 0.02609405 0.032097 0 0 2628.6423 0.390249241 2629.03255 4725.065 0 4725.065 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4725.065429 0 4725.065429

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 45 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3150.969 0 3150.969 87.56636 0 87.56636 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3238.535544 0 3238.535544 3552.319 0.044140629 3552.363 33.95021 0.103896806 34.0541 0 0 0 0.002641778 0.007226654 0.009868 0 0 3586.271373 0.155264088 3586.426637 22026.65 0.644114578 22027.29 495.6528 1.516096381 497.1689 0 0 0 0.038549691 0.105453712 0.144003 0 0 22522.33721 2.265664671 22524.60287 6843.865 3900.561555 10744.43 1831.857 12618.38936 14450.25 0 0 0 5.828067456 632.4328895 638.261 0 0 8681.549699 17151.3838 25832.9335 23595.69 0 23595.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23595.68604 0 23595.68604 16236.74 0 16236.74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16236.73882 0 16236.73882 2463.48 2.127675924 2465.608 1.595289 5.008055776 6.603345 0 0 0 0.126860829 0.348340701 0.475202 0 0 2465.201987 7.484072401 2472.686059 287.5345 0.096356086 287.6309 0.551645 0.226799901 0.778445 0 0 0 0.005745154 0.01577531 0.02152 0 0 288.0918963 0.338931297 288.4308276 29422.78 3.933993994 29426.71 226.2515 9.259709716 235.5112 0 0 0 0.234623221 0.644069057 0.878692 0 0 29649.26528 13.83777277 29663.10305 3449.043 0.169929098 3449.213 124.7413 0.400232787 125.1415 0 0 0 0.00971739 0.027804509 0.037522 0 0 3573.794075 0.597966394 3574.392041 8805.93 0 8805.93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8805.930482 0 8805.930482 152 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2344.61 0 2344.61 21.91806 0 21.91806 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2366.528348 0 2366.528348 931.5988 0.017577138 931.6163 8.497813 0.044991196 8.542804 0 0 0 0.000700824 0.006594044 0.007295 0 0 940.0972835 0.069162379 940.1664459 22373.41 0.256491385 22373.67 124.063 0.65652634 124.7195 0 0 0 0.010226659 0.096222463 0.106449 0 0 22497.48393 1.009240189 22498.49317 1896.503 1572.26641 3468.769 1799.181 3937.356376 5736.538 0 0 0 1.546099527 577.0707289 578.6168 0 0 3697.230435 6086.693515 9783.92395 27643.83 0 27643.83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27643.83303 0 27643.83303 2.219602 0 2.219602 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.219602145 0 2.219602145 2343.33 0.84725694 2344.177 0.399304 2.16867516 2.56798 0 0 0 0.033654289 0.317847515 0.351502 0 0 2343.762551 3.333779616 2347.09633 34.09486 0.038369735 34.13323 0.138078 0.098212819 0.236291 0 0 0 0.001524104 0.014394364 0.015918 0 0 34.23446375 0.150976919 34.38544066 25391.94 1.56654671 25393.51 56.63126 4.009800059 60.64106 0 0 0 0.062242047 0.587688285 0.64993 0 0 25448.63486 6.164035055 25454.7989 3422.931 0.06772605 3422.999 31.22303 0.173103364 31.39613 0 0 0 0.002577879 0.025370547 0.027948 0 0 3454.157068 0.266199961 3454.423268

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2779.066 0 2779.066 29.22408 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2808.289935 0 2808.289935 1101.944 0.018549788 1101.963 11.33042 0.053559615 11.38398 0 0 0 0.00077611 0.006696143 0.007472 0 0 1113.275494 0.078805545 1113.3543 24861.94 0.270684606 24862.21 165.4173 0.781559518 166.1989 0 0 0 0.011325255 0.097712323 0.109038 0 0 25027.3651 1.149956446 25028.51505 2215.551 1659.955475 3875.506 1802.818 4687.212323 6490.03 0 0 0 1.712188862 586.0057967 587.718 0 0 4020.080607 6933.173594 10953.2542 34086.26 0 34086.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34086.26163 0 34086.26163 2.776499 0 2.776499 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.776499377 0 2.776499377 2489.052 0.894140793 2489.946 0.532406 2.581691867 3.114098 0 0 0 0.037269592 0.322768904 0.360038 0 0 2489.621322 3.798601564 2493.419924 38.40632 0.040492965 38.44681 0.184104 0.116917112 0.301021 0 0 0 0.00168783 0.014617239 0.016305 0 0 38.59211371 0.172027316 38.76414103 30223.39 1.653233218 30225.04 75.50835 4.773452656 80.2818 0 0 0 0.068928383 0.59678775 0.665716 0 0 30298.96752 7.023473624 30305.99099 4048.825 0.071482756 4048.897 41.63071 0.206070303 41.83678 0 0 0 0.002854807 0.025763371 0.028618 0 0 4090.458759 0.30331643 4090.762076 153 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 4889.288 0 4889.288 36.53009 0 36.53009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4925.818282 0 4925.818282 1929.341 0.023274106 1929.364 14.16302 0.095177835 14.2582 0 0 0 0.001141786 0.007192054 0.008334 0 0 1943.504795 0.125643995 1943.630439 36949.12 0.339623416 36949.46 206.7717 1.388866278 208.1605 0 0 0 0.016661318 0.104948815 0.12161 0 0 37155.90455 1.833438509 37157.73799 3765.218 2085.875722 5851.093 1806.454 8329.386293 10135.84 0 0 0 2.518912144 629.4048941 631.9238 0 0 5574.190807 11044.66691 16618.85772 65378.2 0 65378.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65378.19957 0 65378.19957 5.481441 0 5.481441 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.481441054 0 5.481441054 3196.848 1.121863396 3197.97 0.665507 4.587782112 5.253289 0 0 0 0.054829716 0.346672898 0.401503 0 0 3197.568031 6.056318405 3203.624349 59.3478 0.050805841 59.3986 0.23013 0.207766946 0.437897 0 0 0 0.002483077 0.01569978 0.018183 0 0 59.58040825 0.274272567 59.85468082 53690.53 2.07428388 53692.61 94.38544 8.482639228 102.8681 0 0 0 0.101405017 0.640985349 0.74239 0 0 53785.02093 11.19790846 53796.21883 7088.894 0.089729694 7088.984 52.03839 0.366196161 52.40458 0 0 0 0.004199891 0.027671385 0.031871 0 0 7140.936859 0.483597239 7141.420456 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 5658.895 0 5658.895 43.83611 0 43.83611 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5702.731546 0 5702.731546 2231.096 0.024997086 2231.121 16.99563 0.11035618 17.10598 0 0 0 0.00127515 0.007372915 0.008648 0 0 2248.092567 0.142726181 2248.235293 41357.36 0.364765699 41357.73 248.126 1.610353691 249.7364 0 0 0 0.018607403 0.107587995 0.126195 0 0 41605.50778 2.082707385 41607.59049 4330.388 2241.210685 6571.599 1810.091 9657.702954 11467.79 0 0 0 2.813127628 645.2327333 648.0459 0 0 6143.291755 12544.14637 18687.43813 76790.51 0 76790.51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76790.50521 0 76790.50521 6.467945 0 6.467945 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.467945029 0 6.467945029 3454.984 1.204914818 3456.189 0.798609 5.319411935 6.118021 0 0 0 0.061233969 0.355390788 0.416625 0 0 3455.843828 6.87971754 3462.723545 66.98524 0.054566992 67.03981 0.276156 0.240900275 0.517056 0 0 0 0.002773107 0.016094587 0.018868 0 0 67.26417051 0.311561854 67.57573237 62249.1 2.227842885 62251.33 113.2625 9.835395676 123.0979 0 0 0 0.113249387 0.657104406 0.770354 0 0 62362.47911 12.72034297 62375.19946 8197.621 0.096384432 8197.717 62.44606 0.424594756 62.87066 0 0 0 0.00469045 0.028367246 0.033058 0 0 8260.07142 0.549346433 8260.620766 Total 154 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 10278.62 0 10278.62 58.44815 0 58.44815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10337.06339 0 10337.06339 4042.44 0.035339611 4042.475 22.66083 0.201467204 22.8623 0 0 0 0.002075691 0.008458567 0.010534 0 0 4065.102891 0.245265382 4065.348157 67818.74 0.515687232 67819.25 330.8347 2.939875719 333.7746 0 0 0 0.030289165 0.123430197 0.153719 0 0 68149.60288 3.578993148 68153.18188 7722.935 3173.639545 10896.57 1817.363 17631.1866 19448.55 0 0 0 4.579214297 740.2424709 744.8217 0 0 9544.877284 21545.06862 31089.9459 145295.1 0 145295.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 145295.1284 0 145295.1284 12.38963 0 12.38963 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.38963037 0 12.38963037 5004.498 1.703447415 5006.202 1.064812 9.711164743 10.77598 0 0 0 0.099676767 0.407721651 0.507398 0 0 5005.662651 11.82233381 5017.484985 112.8305 0.077144043 112.9077 0.368208 0.43978964 0.807998 0 0 0 0.004514068 0.018464496 0.022979 0 0 113.2032461 0.535398178 113.7386442 113623.6 3.1496112 113626.8 151.0167 17.95558398 168.9723 0 0 0 0.184347559 0.753862233 0.93821 0 0 113774.8102 21.85905741 113796.6692 14852.97 0.136330811 14853.11 83.26142 0.775143884 84.03656 0 0 0 0.007635123 0.032544288 0.040179 0 0 14936.23932 0.944018983 14937.18334 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1740.416 0 1740.416 21.91806 0 21.91806 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1762.333803 0 1762.333803 708.0674 0.029606796 708.097 8.497813 0.032969493 8.530782 0 0 0 0.000914172 0.013013259 0.013927 0 0 716.5661467 0.075589548 716.6417362 28666.38 0.432032106 28666.81 124.063 0.48110169 124.5441 0 0 0 0.013339895 0.189893755 0.203234 0 0 28790.45834 1.10302755 28791.56136 1633.691 2643.363361 4277.054 1799.181 2885.289881 4684.471 0 0 0 2.016768671 1138.841429 1140.858 0 0 3434.88918 6667.494671 10102.38385 10869.1 0 10869.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10869.10239 0 10869.10239 0.630315 0 0.630315 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.630315396 0 0.630315396 3848.586 1.427113034 3850.013 0.399304 1.589202474 1.988507 0 0 0 0.043899448 0.627267855 0.671167 0 0 3849.029285 3.643583364 3852.672869 39.86136 0.064629686 39.92599 0.138078 0.071970232 0.210048 0 0 0 0.001988077 0.028407087 0.030395 0 0 40.00142754 0.165007005 40.16643454 17806.79 2.638679155 17809.43 56.63126 2.938376523 59.56964 0 0 0 0.081189994 1.159795035 1.240985 0 0 17863.50028 6.736850712 17870.23714 2601.614 0.114012807 2601.728 31.22303 0.126849931 31.34988 0 0 0 0.003362646 0.050068437 0.053431 0 0 2632.840608 0.290931175 2633.131539 155 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2060.531 0 2060.531 29.22408 0 29.22408 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2089.755541 0 2089.755541 838.559 0.035323528 838.5943 11.33042 0.03847081 11.36889 0 0 0 0.001089762 0.015535989 0.016626 0 0 849.8905074 0.089330326 849.9798377 34110.37 0.515452536 34110.88 165.4173 0.561378711 165.9787 0 0 0 0.015902167 0.226706261 0.242608 0 0 34275.7998 1.303537508 34277.10334 1942.363 3153.726419 5096.089 1802.818 3366.73171 5169.549 0 0 0 2.404141289 1359.615447 1362.02 0 0 3747.584711 7880.073576 11627.65829 12755.76 0 12755.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12755.76441 0 12755.76441 0.707215 0 0.707215 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.707215245 0 0.707215245 4580.628 1.702672147 4582.331 0.532406 1.854378098 2.386784 0 0 0 0.052331473 0.748869021 0.8012 0 0 4581.213085 4.305919266 4585.519004 47.42023 0.077108935 47.49734 0.184104 0.083979244 0.268083 0 0 0 0.002369939 0.033914041 0.036284 0 0 47.60670823 0.195002219 47.80171045 21122.33 3.14817775 21125.48 75.50835 3.428676431 78.93703 0 0 0 0.096784633 1.384631087 1.481416 0 0 21197.93727 7.961485269 21205.89875 3081.072 0.136026274 3081.208 41.63071 0.148016214 41.77872 0 0 0 0.004008529 0.059774626 0.063783 0 0 3122.707143 0.343817114 3123.05096

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2380.641 0 2380.641 36.53009 0 36.53009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2417.171076 0 2417.171076 969.0481 0.04104024 969.0892 14.16302 0.04397208 14.20699 0 0 0 0.001265351 0.018058715 0.019324 0 0 983.2124334 0.103071036 983.3155044 39554.32 0.598872678 39554.91 206.7717 0.641655065 207.4133 0 0 0 0.018464419 0.263518717 0.281983 0 0 39761.1057 1.50404646 39762.60975 2251.029 3664.087698 5915.117 1806.454 3848.169539 5654.624 0 0 0 2.791510861 1580.38916 1583.181 0 0 4060.274921 9092.646398 13152.92132 14642.33 0 14642.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14642.33065 0 14642.33065 0.784111 0 0.784111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.78411119 0 0.78411119 5312.669 1.978230306 5314.648 0.665507 2.11955152 2.785059 0 0 0 0.060763432 0.870470018 0.931233 0 0 5313.395749 4.968251844 5318.364001 54.97904 0.08958814 55.06863 0.23013 0.095988156 0.326118 0 0 0 0.002751797 0.039420987 0.042173 0 0 55.2119245 0.224997283 55.43692178 24437.8 3.657674582 24441.46 94.38544 3.918972267 98.30441 0 0 0 0.11237915 1.609466828 1.721846 0 0 24532.2976 9.186113677 24541.48372 3560.522 0.158039664 3560.68 52.03839 0.169182322 52.20757 0 0 0 0.004654407 0.069480801 0.074135 0 0 3612.564732 0.396702787 3612.961435 156 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2700.757 0 2700.757 43.83611 0 43.83611 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2744.592814 0 2744.592814 1099.54 0.046756971 1099.586 16.99563 0.049473397 17.0451 0 0 0 0.001440941 0.020581445 0.022022 0 0 1116.536794 0.116811814 1116.653606 44998.3 0.682293108 44998.98 248.126 0.721932086 248.8479 0 0 0 0.021026692 0.300331223 0.321358 0 0 45246.44717 1.704556418 45248.15173 2559.701 4174.450756 6734.152 1810.091 4329.611367 6139.702 0 0 0 3.178883479 1801.163179 1804.342 0 0 4372.970453 10305.2253 14678.19576 16528.99 0 16528.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16528.99267 0 16528.99267 0.861011 0 0.861011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.86101104 0 0.86101104 6044.712 2.253789419 6046.966 0.798609 2.384727144 3.183336 0 0 0 0.069195457 0.992071184 1.061267 0 0 6045.579549 5.630587746 6051.210136 62.53792 0.102067389 62.63998 0.276156 0.107997168 0.384153 0 0 0 0.003133659 0.04492794 0.048062 0 0 62.81720519 0.254992497 63.07219769 27753.34 4.167173178 27757.51 113.2625 4.409272176 117.6718 0 0 0 0.12797379 1.83430288 1.962277 0 0 27866.73459 10.41074823 27877.14534 4039.98 0.180053131 4040.16 62.44606 0.190348605 62.63641 0 0 0 0.00530029 0.07918699 0.084487 0 0 4102.431267 0.449588726 4102.880856

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3340.982 0 3340.982 58.44815 0 58.44815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3399.430087 0 3399.430087 1360.52 0.058190415 1360.579 22.66083 0.060475984 22.72131 0 0 0 0.001792121 0.025626902 0.027419 0 0 1383.183081 0.144293302 1383.327374 55886.23 0.84913368 55887.08 330.8347 0.882485462 331.7172 0 0 0 0.026151216 0.373956185 0.400107 0 0 56217.09454 2.105575327 56219.20011 3177.039 5195.175093 8372.214 1817.363 5292.491025 7109.855 0 0 0 3.953625669 2242.710911 2246.665 0 0 4998.356195 12730.37703 17728.73322 20302.22 0 20302.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20302.22093 0 20302.22093 1.014807 0 1.014807 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.014806834 0 1.014806834 7508.795 2.80490669 7511.6 1.064812 2.915076189 3.979888 0 0 0 0.086059441 1.235273346 1.321333 0 0 7509.946012 6.955256226 7516.901269 77.6556 0.127025844 77.78262 0.368208 0.132015092 0.500223 0 0 0 0.003897379 0.05594184 0.059839 0 0 78.02770215 0.314982775 78.34268492 34384.36 5.186168605 34389.54 151.0167 5.389867921 156.4066 0 0 0 0.159162946 2.283974672 2.443138 0 0 34535.53191 12.8600112 34548.39192 4998.887 0.224079988 4999.111 83.26142 0.232680995 83.4941 0 0 0 0.006592052 0.098599355 0.105191 0 0 5082.155392 0.555360338 5082.710752 Total 157 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1411.404 0 1411.404 23.14041 0 23.14041 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1434.544091 0 1434.544091 985.9426 0.020011753 985.9627 8.971731 0.034678447 9.006409 0 0 0 0.000868356 0.00645272 0.007321 0 0 994.9152436 0.06114292 994.9763865 16122.45 0.292018088 16122.74 130.9819 0.506039317 131.488 0 0 0 0.012671342 0.094160206 0.106832 0 0 16253.44675 0.892217611 16254.33897 2005.713 1779.622454 3785.336 1799.79 3677.834323 5477.624 0 0 0 1.915694561 564.7028473 566.6185 0 0 3807.418797 6022.159625 9829.578422 10922.46 0 10922.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10922.45528 0 10922.45528 2961.32 0 2961.32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2961.319959 0 2961.319959 2002.887 0.964610764 2003.851 0.421573 1.671577853 2.093151 0 0 0 0.041699346 0.311035351 0.352735 0 0 2003.35009 2.947223968 2006.297314 69.58383 0.04368434 69.62752 0.145778 0.07570077 0.221479 0 0 0 0.001888441 0.014085862 0.015974 0 0 69.73149784 0.133470972 69.86496881 14090.59 1.783529582 14092.38 59.78955 3.090685557 62.88024 0 0 0 0.077121007 0.575092846 0.652214 0 0 14150.45923 5.449307985 14155.90854 1871.409 0.077057113 1871.487 32.96432 0.133514558 33.09783 0 0 0 0.003194121 0.0248268 0.028021 0 0 1904.377002 0.235398471 1904.6124 1605.827 0 1605.827 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1605.826842 0 1605.826842

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1538.694 0 1538.694 30.85388 0 30.85388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1569.548238 0 1569.548238 1175.935 0.021802546 1175.956 11.96231 0.039742649 12.00205 0 0 0 0.000999503 0.006509378 0.007509 0 0 1187.898 0.068054573 1187.966054 16549.71 0.318149917 16550.02 174.6426 0.579937813 175.2225 0 0 0 0.014585078 0.094986989 0.109572 0 0 16724.36239 0.993074719 16725.35546 2363.478 1937.051303 4300.53 1803.629 4335.351542 6138.981 0 0 0 2.205019444 569.6612734 571.8663 0 0 4169.312484 6842.064118 11011.3766 11775.04 0 11775.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11775.04243 0 11775.04243 3948.235 0 3948.235 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3948.234947 0 3948.234947 2033.199 1.05093091 2034.25 0.562098 1.915683566 2.477781 0 0 0 0.047997144 0.313766426 0.361764 0 0 2033.809209 3.280380903 2037.08959 85.76552 0.047593521 85.81312 0.194371 0.08675559 0.281127 0 0 0 0.00217365 0.014209544 0.016383 0 0 85.96206978 0.148558655 86.11062843 15213.81 1.943132336 15215.76 79.7194 3.542027983 83.26143 0 0 0 0.088768493 0.580142503 0.668911 0 0 15293.62173 6.065302822 15299.68704 1985.758 0.083949477 1985.842 43.95243 0.153028855 44.10546 0 0 0 0.003676525 0.025044795 0.028721 0 0 2029.713925 0.262023127 2029.975948 2141.102 0 2141.102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2141.102456 0 2141.102456 158 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2005.581 0 2005.581 38.56736 0 38.56736 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2044.147888 0 2044.147888 1857.854 0.028199836 1857.882 14.95288 0.05832274 15.01121 0 0 0 0.001471168 0.006717012 0.008188 0 0 1872.808469 0.093239588 1872.901709 18149.28 0.411501279 18149.69 218.3032 0.851064621 219.1543 0 0 0 0.021467762 0.098016851 0.119485 0 0 18367.60603 1.360582751 18368.96662 3650.317 2499.321635 6149.639 1807.468 6724.608433 8532.077 0 0 0 3.245565946 587.8321299 591.0777 0 0 5461.031263 9811.762197 15272.79346 15410.07 0 15410.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15410.06709 0 15410.06709 7462.815 0 7462.815 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7462.814751 0 7462.814751 2167.416 1.35929444 2168.775 0.702622 2.811285057 3.513907 0 0 0 0.070646949 0.323774838 0.394422 0 0 2168.188904 4.494354335 2172.683258 143.5324 0.061558384 143.594 0.242964 0.127314709 0.370279 0 0 0 0.003199393 0.014662795 0.017862 0 0 143.7786113 0.203535888 143.9821472 19324.77 2.513285084 19327.29 99.64925 5.197961983 104.8472 0 0 0 0.130658257 0.598647686 0.729306 0 0 19424.55438 8.309894753 19432.86427 2412.599 0.108573852 2412.707 54.94053 0.224621809 55.16516 0 0 0 0.005411473 0.025843665 0.031255 0 0 2467.544698 0.359039326 2467.903738 4047.255 0 4047.255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4047.254801 0 4047.254801 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2200.79 0 2200.79 46.28083 0 46.28083 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2247.071095 0 2247.071095 2146.232 0.030911927 2146.263 17.94346 0.066090118 18.00955 0 0 0 0.001670418 0.006803866 0.008474 0 0 2164.176752 0.103805912 2164.280558 18811 0.451077014 18811.45 261.9638 0.964408756 262.9283 0 0 0 0.024375288 0.099284249 0.12366 0 0 19072.98704 1.514770019 19074.50181 4193.897 2737.718775 6931.616 1811.307 7728.473444 9539.781 0 0 0 3.685135121 595.4330406 599.1182 0 0 6008.88993 11061.62526 17070.51519 16819.14 0 16819.14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16819.13996 0 16819.13996 8955.263 0 8955.263 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8955.262703 0 8955.262703 2218.509 1.49002326 2219.999 0.843147 3.185689847 4.028837 0 0 0 0.080215148 0.32796138 0.408177 0 0 2219.43206 5.003674487 2224.435734 168.0312 0.067478702 168.0987 0.291557 0.144270385 0.435827 0 0 0 0.003632708 0.014852391 0.018485 0 0 168.3263767 0.226601478 168.5529782 21045.54 2.754997832 21048.3 119.5791 5.890222579 125.4693 0 0 0 0.148354198 0.606388446 0.754743 0 0 21165.27057 9.251608857 21174.52218 2589.446 0.119012619 2589.565 65.92864 0.254551832 66.18319 0 0 0 0.006144386 0.026177834 0.032322 0 0 2655.380333 0.399742284 2655.780075 4856.706 0 4856.706 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4856.705761 0 4856.705761 159 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 75 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3147.466 0 3147.466 61.70777 0 61.70777 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3209.17368 0 3209.17368 3519.053 0.043770397 3519.097 23.92461 0.103767253 24.02838 0 0 0 0.002620602 0.007224751 0.009845 0 0 3542.980307 0.154762401 3543.135069 22075.78 0.63871203 22076.42 349.2851 1.51420591 350.7993 0 0 0 0.038240693 0.105425945 0.143667 0 0 22425.1051 2.258343885 22427.36344 6786.38 3867.795838 10654.18 1818.986 12558.21549 14377.2 0 0 0 5.781352022 632.2663644 638.0477 0 0 8611.146953 17058.27769 25669.42464 24524.76 0 24524.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24524.76419 0 24524.76419 16012.07 0 16012.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16012.0691 0 16012.0691 2505.851 2.10982992 2507.961 1.124196 5.001811065 6.126007 0 0 0 0.125843963 0.34824898 0.474093 0 0 2507.101292 7.459889966 2514.561182 284.1153 0.095547894 284.2108 0.388743 0.226517097 0.61526 0 0 0 0.005699103 0.015771156 0.02147 0 0 284.5097404 0.337836146 284.8475766 29375.22 3.900997394 29379.13 159.4388 9.248163477 168.687 0 0 0 0.232742576 0.643899468 0.876642 0 0 29534.896 13.79306034 29548.68906 3459.824 0.168509062 3459.992 87.90485 0.399727542 88.30458 0 0 0 0.009639499 0.027797187 0.037437 0 0 3547.738482 0.596033792 3548.334515 8683.965 0 8683.965 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8683.96453 0 8683.96453 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 3096.654 0 3096.654 27.67247 0 27.67247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3124.326549 0 3124.326549 1226.467 0.019260797 1226.487 10.72885 0.059823154 10.78867 0 0 0 0.000831144 0.006770778 0.007602 0 0 1237.197032 0.085854728 1237.282887 26681.06 0.28105989 26681.34 156.6348 0.872959138 157.5077 0 0 0 0.012128332 0.098801414 0.11093 0 0 26837.70251 1.252820442 26838.95533 2448.775 1724.056429 4172.832 1802.045 5235.359225 7037.405 0 0 0 1.833600632 592.537354 594.371 0 0 4252.654451 7551.953008 11804.60746 38795.69 0 38795.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38795.69473 0 38795.69473 3.183593 0 3.183593 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.183592736 0 3.183592736 2595.575 0.928413022 2596.503 0.504139 2.883608294 3.387747 0 0 0 0.039912389 0.326366451 0.366279 0 0 2596.118909 4.138387767 2600.257297 41.55801 0.042045052 41.60006 0.174329 0.130590005 0.304919 0 0 0 0.001807515 0.014780162 0.016588 0 0 41.73414797 0.187415218 41.92156319 33755.19 1.716601301 33756.91 71.49936 5.331684949 76.83104 0 0 0 0.073816113 0.603439482 0.677256 0 0 33826.76574 7.651725731 33834.41746 4506.355 0.074228918 4506.429 39.42039 0.230169232 39.65056 0 0 0 0.003057242 0.026050527 0.029108 0 0 4545.778695 0.330448677 4546.109143 160 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 3719.729 0 3719.729 36.89663 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3756.625897 0 3756.625897 1470.769 0.020655724 1470.789 14.30513 0.072111565 14.37724 0 0 0 0.000939116 0.006917203 0.007856 0 0 1485.074755 0.099684492 1485.17444 30249.98 0.30141512 30250.28 208.8464 1.052275683 209.8987 0 0 0 0.013703886 0.100938098 0.114642 0 0 30458.83908 1.454628901 30460.29371 2906.338 1849.815851 4756.154 1806.637 6310.766405 8117.403 0 0 0 2.071797933 605.3515967 607.4234 0 0 4715.046527 8765.933853 13480.98038 48035.11 0 48035.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48035.11465 0 48035.11465 3.982268 0 3.982268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.982267848 0 3.982267848 2804.562 0.995651579 2805.558 0.672185 3.475936907 4.148122 0 0 0 0.045097282 0.333424468 0.378522 0 0 2805.279673 4.805012954 2810.084686 47.7413 0.045090085 47.78639 0.232439 0.157414798 0.389854 0 0 0 0.002042323 0.015099798 0.017142 0 0 47.97578058 0.217604681 48.19338526 40684.22 1.840922903 40686.06 95.33248 6.426878618 101.7594 0 0 0 0.083405333 0.616489494 0.699895 0 0 40779.63907 8.884291015 40788.52336 5403.982 0.079616604 5404.061 52.56053 0.277448824 52.83797 0 0 0 0.003454399 0.026613897 0.030068 0 0 5456.54579 0.383679324 5456.929469

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 6383.528 0 6383.528 46.12079 0 46.12079 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6429.649083 0 6429.649083 2515.217 0.026619378 2515.243 17.88141 0.124647534 18.00606 0 0 0 0.00140072 0.007543206 0.008944 0 0 2533.099524 0.158810118 2533.258335 45508 0.388438717 45508.39 261.058 1.818897824 262.8769 0 0 0 0.020439763 0.110072947 0.130513 0 0 45769.07896 2.317409487 45771.39637 4862.531 2387.468176 7249.999 1811.228 10908.39546 12719.62 0 0 0 3.090149728 660.135622 663.2258 0 0 6676.848754 13955.99926 20632.84801 87535.9 0 87535.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87535.89748 0 87535.89748 7.3968 0 7.3968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.396799538 0 7.396799538 3698.035 1.283112876 3699.318 0.840231 6.008286781 6.848518 0 0 0 0.06726397 0.363599221 0.430863 0 0 3698.942766 7.654998877 3706.597765 74.17637 0.058108348 74.23448 0.290549 0.272097359 0.562646 0 0 0 0.003046188 0.016466322 0.019513 0 0 74.46996481 0.346672029 74.81663684 70307.53 2.3724282 70309.9 119.1656 11.10909976 130.2747 0 0 0 0.124401594 0.672281494 0.796683 0 0 70426.81598 14.15380945 70440.96979 9241.555 0.102650279 9241.658 65.70066 0.479580655 66.18024 0 0 0 0.005152341 0.029022442 0.034175 0 0 9307.261011 0.611253376 9307.872264 161 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 7414.753 0 7414.753 55.34494 0 55.34494 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7470.098222 0 7470.098222 2919.549 0.028928061 2919.578 21.45769 0.144985556 21.60268 0 0 0 0.001579418 0.007785548 0.009365 0 0 2941.008627 0.181699165 2941.190326 51414.77 0.422127785 51415.19 313.2696 2.115676933 315.3852 0 0 0 0.023047394 0.113609281 0.136657 0 0 51728.06497 2.651413999 51730.71639 5619.823 2595.607192 8215.43 1815.819 12688.25568 14504.07 0 0 0 3.484379849 681.3439245 684.8283 0 0 7439.126552 15965.2068 23404.33335 102827.7 0 102827.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102827.6645 0 102827.6645 8.718652 0 8.718652 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.718652405 0 8.718652405 4043.922 1.394396523 4045.316 1.008277 6.988624421 7.996902 0 0 0 0.075845264 0.375280642 0.451126 0 0 4045.005681 8.758301586 4053.763982 84.41006 0.063148052 84.47321 0.348659 0.316493922 0.665152 0 0 0 0.003434809 0.016995339 0.02043 0 0 84.76215759 0.396637313 85.15879491 81775.47 2.578187543 81778.05 142.9987 12.92170775 155.9204 0 0 0 0.140272299 0.693880009 0.834152 0 0 81918.6059 16.1937753 81934.79967 10727.18 0.111567206 10727.29 78.84079 0.557831076 79.39862 0 0 0 0.005809658 0.029954851 0.035765 0 0 10806.02497 0.699353133 10806.72432 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = WF, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 13022.22 0 13022.22 73.79326 0 73.79326 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13096.01395 0 13096.01395 5118.179 0.041481934 5118.221 28.61026 0.255577132 28.86584 0 0 0 0.002551124 0.009103326 0.011654 0 0 5146.792092 0.306162392 5147.098254 83533.88 0.605318024 83534.49 417.6927 3.729465597 421.4222 0 0 0 0.037226847 0.132838723 0.170066 0 0 83951.61409 4.467622343 83956.08171 9737.734 3727.39974 13465.13 1825.001 22366.55905 24191.56 0 0 0 5.628075543 796.6678035 802.2959 0 0 11568.36341 26890.62659 38458.99001 185979.3 0 185979.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 185979.34 0 185979.34 15.90646 0 15.90646 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15.90646011 0 15.90646011 5924.739 1.999520949 5926.739 1.34437 12.31938295 13.66375 0 0 0 0.122507561 0.438800426 0.561308 0 0 5926.206024 14.75770433 5940.963728 140.0576 0.090552328 140.1481 0.464878 0.557908051 1.022786 0 0 0 0.005548008 0.01987196 0.02542 0 0 140.5280056 0.668332339 141.1963379 144134.4 3.697040204 144138.1 190.665 22.77808286 213.443 0 0 0 0.226572053 0.811325738 1.037898 0 0 144325.3064 27.28644881 144352.5929 18805.52 0.160054567 18805.68 105.1211 0.983331516 106.1044 0 0 0 0.009383934 0.035024992 0.044409 0 0 18910.64637 1.178411075 18911.82478 Total 162 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1970.211 0 1970.211 27.67247 0 27.67247 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997.883392 0 1997.883392 799.1287 0.031097291 799.1598 10.72885 0.037600577 10.76645 0 0 0 0.000977505 0.013540254 0.014518 0 0 809.8585321 0.082238122 809.9407702 30687.04 0.453781904 30687.49 156.6348 0.548679986 157.1835 0 0 0 0.01426408 0.197583838 0.211848 0 0 30843.68689 1.200045729 30844.88694 1815.964 2776.771657 4592.735 1802.045 3290.574212 5092.62 0 0 0 2.156489915 1184.960828 1187.117 0 0 3620.165485 7252.306697 10872.47218 13715.88 0 13715.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13715.88354 0 13715.88354 0.858874 0 0.858874 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.858873687 0 0.858873687 4047.342 1.498958205 4048.84 0.504139 1.812430949 2.31657 0 0 0 0.046940791 0.652670177 0.699611 0 0 4047.892603 3.964059332 4051.856663 42.98766 0.067883339 43.05555 0.174329 0.082079583 0.256409 0 0 0 0.002125811 0.029557483 0.031683 0 0 43.16411957 0.179520404 43.34363997 20290.88 2.771518215 20293.65 71.49936 3.351117706 74.85048 0 0 0 0.086814817 1.206762987 1.293578 0 0 20362.46247 7.329398909 20369.79187 2936.197 0.119756449 2936.316 39.42039 0.144667998 39.56506 0 0 0 0.003595609 0.052096047 0.055692 0 0 2975.62067 0.316520494 2975.937191

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2316.307 0 2316.307 36.89663 0 36.89663 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2353.203755 0 2353.203755 940.0315 0.037103309 940.0686 14.30513 0.043431463 14.34856 0 0 0 0.001163465 0.016180575 0.017344 0 0 954.3377718 0.096715347 954.4344871 36438.62 0.54142369 36439.16 208.8464 0.633766192 209.4801 0 0 0 0.01697766 0.236112274 0.25309 0 0 36647.48449 1.411302156 36648.89579 2148.416 3312.982994 5461.399 1806.637 3800.85795 5607.495 0 0 0 2.566737783 1416.02571 1418.592 0 0 3957.619426 8529.866654 12487.48608 15869.41 0 15869.41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15869.41399 0 15869.41399 0.946651 0 0.946651 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.946651023 0 0.946651023 4813.741 1.788461541 4815.53 0.672185 2.093492545 2.765677 0 0 0 0.055870747 0.779939496 0.83581 0 0 4814.469409 4.661893583 4819.131302 51.00249 0.08099408 51.08349 0.232439 0.094808023 0.327247 0 0 0 0.002530222 0.03532113 0.037851 0 0 51.23746331 0.211123233 51.44858655 23899.35 3.306799164 23902.65 95.33248 3.870790189 99.20327 0 0 0 0.103330356 1.442079245 1.54541 0 0 23994.78299 8.619668598 24003.40266 3453.908 0.142883949 3454.051 52.56053 0.167102298 52.72763 0 0 0 0.004279633 0.062254667 0.066534 0 0 3506.473058 0.372240914 3506.845299 163 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2662.41 0 2662.41 46.12079 0 46.12079 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2708.530321 0 2708.530321 1080.937 0.043109347 1080.98 17.88141 0.049262394 17.93067 0 0 0 0.001349425 0.0188209 0.02017 0 0 1098.819446 0.11119264 1098.930639 42190.24 0.629065766 42190.87 261.058 0.718853065 261.7768 0 0 0 0.019691261 0.27464076 0.294332 0 0 42451.31766 1.62255959 42452.94022 2480.874 3849.196109 6330.07 1811.228 4311.145687 6122.373 0 0 0 2.976988696 1647.090898 1650.068 0 0 4295.07869 9807.432694 14102.51138 18023.04 0 18023.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18023.04022 0 18023.04022 1.034432 0 1.034432 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.034432264 0 1.034432264 5580.142 2.077965831 5582.22 0.840231 2.374556344 3.214787 0 0 0 0.064800769 0.907208983 0.97201 0 0 5581.047349 5.359731159 5586.407081 59.01739 0.094104864 59.11149 0.290549 0.107536563 0.398085 0 0 0 0.002934636 0.041084785 0.044019 0 0 59.31087148 0.242726212 59.55359769 27507.89 3.842081876 27511.74 119.1656 4.390466745 123.5561 0 0 0 0.119846018 1.677395814 1.797242 0 0 27627.18017 9.909944434 27637.09011 3971.629 0.166011526 3971.795 65.70066 0.189536773 65.89019 0 0 0 0.004963662 0.072413301 0.077377 0 0 4037.334391 0.4279616 4037.762353

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 3008.506 0 3008.506 55.34494 0 55.34494 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3063.850685 0 3063.850685 1221.839 0.049115364 1221.889 21.45769 0.05509328 21.51279 0 0 0 0.001535385 0.021461221 0.022997 0 0 1243.298686 0.125669865 1243.424356 47941.82 0.716707552 47942.54 313.2696 0.803939271 314.0735 0 0 0 0.022404841 0.313169195 0.335574 0 0 48255.11525 1.833816017 48256.94907 2813.326 4385.407446 7198.734 1815.819 4821.429425 6637.248 0 0 0 3.387236564 1878.15578 1881.543 0 0 4632.532631 11084.99265 15717.52528 20176.57 0 20176.57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20176.57067 0 20176.57067 1.12221 0 1.12221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1222096 0 1.1222096 6346.542 2.367469168 6348.91 1.008277 2.65561794 3.663895 0 0 0 0.073730725 1.034478302 1.108209 0 0 6347.624155 6.05756541 6353.68172 67.03222 0.107215605 67.13943 0.348659 0.120265003 0.468924 0 0 0 0.003339048 0.046848432 0.050187 0 0 67.38421523 0.27432904 67.65854427 31116.37 4.377362824 31120.74 142.9987 4.910139227 147.9089 0 0 0 0.136361557 1.912712072 2.049074 0 0 31259.50069 11.20021412 31270.70091 4489.34 0.189139027 4489.529 78.84079 0.211971072 79.05276 0 0 0 0.005647686 0.082571921 0.08822 0 0 4568.186779 0.48368202 4568.670461 164 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Concrete, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 3700.704 0 3700.704 73.79326 0 73.79326 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3774.497614 0 3774.497614 1503.647 0.061127419 1503.709 28.61026 0.066755098 28.67701 0 0 0 0.001907305 0.026741867 0.028649 0 0 1532.2596 0.154624384 1532.414224 59445.03 0.891991414 59445.92 417.6927 0.974112349 418.6669 0 0 0 0.027832022 0.390226116 0.418058 0 0 59862.74602 2.256329879 59865.00235 3478.237 5457.831897 8936.069 1825.001 5842.0009 7667.002 0 0 0 4.207735345 2340.28585 2344.494 0 0 5307.445836 13640.11865 18947.56448 24483.73 0 24483.73 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24483.72734 0 24483.72734 1.297768 0 1.297768 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.297768177 0 1.297768177 7879.343 2.946476794 7882.289 1.34437 3.217743335 4.562113 0 0 0 0.091590702 1.289017109 1.380608 0 0 7880.778901 7.453237238 7888.232138 83.06194 0.133437131 83.19538 0.464878 0.145721983 0.6106 0 0 0 0.004147874 0.058375734 0.062524 0 0 83.53096715 0.337534848 83.86850199 38333.38 5.447926485 38338.83 190.665 5.949488265 196.6144 0 0 0 0.169392758 2.383344898 2.552738 0 0 38524.21839 13.78075965 38537.99915 5524.772 0.235394104 5525.008 105.1211 0.256839847 105.3779 0 0 0 0.00701574 0.102889175 0.109905 0 0 5629.900501 0.595123126 5630.495624 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 15 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1821.464 0 1821.464 38.68421 0 38.68421 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1860.148517 0 1860.148517 1407.268 0.023738875 1407.292 14.99819 0.047655 15.04584 0 0 0 0.001142525 0.006596328 0.007739 0 0 1422.267802 0.077990203 1422.345792 17909.66 0.346405479 17910.01 218.9646 0.695397439 219.66 0 0 0 0.016672106 0.096255786 0.112928 0 0 18128.64242 1.138058704 18129.78048 2798.2 2108.187165 4906.388 1807.526 5212.115093 7019.641 0 0 0 2.520543084 577.2705733 579.7911 0 0 4608.247359 7897.572831 12505.82019 15040.45 0 15040.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15040.4482 0 15040.4482 4797.188 0 4797.188 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4797.187599 0 4797.187599 2113.891 1.144266291 2115.036 0.704751 2.297076369 3.001827 0 0 0 0.054865217 0.317957589 0.372823 0 0 2114.650907 3.759300249 2118.410208 101.3948 0.051820402 101.4467 0.2437 0.104027731 0.347728 0 0 0 0.002484684 0.014399349 0.016884 0 0 101.6410337 0.170247482 101.8112812 18096.36 2.115705999 18098.48 99.95117 4.247209155 104.1984 0 0 0 0.101470675 0.587891807 0.689362 0 0 18196.41293 6.95080696 18203.36373 2333.73 0.091406719 2333.821 55.10699 0.183497216 55.29049 0 0 0 0.004202611 0.025379333 0.029582 0 0 2388.840957 0.300283268 2389.141241 2601.439 0 2601.439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2601.438661 0 2601.438661 165 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 20 Wood MJ Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2025.726 0 2025.726 51.57894 0 51.57894 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2077.304614 0 2077.304614 1714.289 0.026637067 1714.316 19.99758 0.055780694 20.05337 0 0 0 0.001354317 0.006687273 0.008042 0 0 1734.288009 0.089105035 1734.377114 18590.61 0.38869685 18591 291.9528 0.813970243 292.7668 0 0 0 0.019762645 0.097582894 0.117346 0 0 18882.58482 1.300249986 18883.88507 3375.942 2362.984414 5738.927 1813.944 6270.439458 8084.384 0 0 0 2.987780756 585.2295803 588.2174 0 0 5192.874717 9218.653452 14411.52817 16335.76 0 16335.76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16335.76186 0 16335.76186 6395.974 0 6395.974 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6395.973692 0 6395.973692 2159.23 1.283965551 2160.514 0.939668 2.688752797 3.628421 0 0 0 0.065035682 0.322341368 0.387377 0 0 2160.234695 4.295059716 2164.529754 127.5887 0.058146964 127.6469 0.324934 0.121765588 0.446699 0 0 0 0.002945275 0.014597878 0.017543 0 0 127.9165837 0.194510429 128.1110941 19900.05 2.374004758 19902.42 133.2682 4.971404369 138.2396 0 0 0 0.120280479 0.595997252 0.716278 0 0 20033.43621 7.941406379 20041.37762 2516.158 0.102560846 2516.261 73.47599 0.214809072 73.6908 0 0 0 0.004981656 0.025729245 0.030711 0 0 2589.638956 0.343099163 2589.982055 3468.585 0 3468.585 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3468.584881 0 3468.584881

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2737.535 0 2737.535 64.47368 0 64.47368 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2802.00848 0 2802.00848 2769.945 0.036573573 2769.982 24.99698 0.084102071 25.08108 0 0 0 0.002083442 0.007004026 0.009087 0 0 2794.944373 0.12767967 2795.072053 20994.53 0.53369361 20995.07 364.941 1.227245101 366.1683 0 0 0 0.030402277 0.102205048 0.132607 0 0 21359.50519 1.863143759 21361.36833 5365.046 3236.451465 8601.497 1820.363 9937.100279 11757.46 0 0 0 4.596314943 612.9498183 617.5461 0 0 7190.004641 13786.50156 20976.5062 21333.74 0 21333.74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21333.7373 0 21333.7373 11867.05 0 11867.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11867.04534 0 11867.04534 2339.183 1.7629271 2340.946 1.174585 4.053905806 5.228491 0 0 0 0.100049 0.337609529 0.437659 0 0 2340.45738 6.154442434 2346.611823 217.3577 0.079837701 217.4375 0.406167 0.183589295 0.589756 0 0 0 0.004530925 0.015289327 0.01982 0 0 217.7683599 0.278716323 218.0470762 26177.07 3.259586925 26180.33 166.5853 7.495521743 174.0808 0 0 0 0.185035987 0.624227516 0.809264 0 0 26343.84328 11.37933618 26355.22262 3158.961 0.140805452 3159.102 91.84499 0.323940667 92.16893 0 0 0 0.007663635 0.026947948 0.034612 0 0 3250.813803 0.491694067 3251.305498 6435.917 0 6435.917 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6435.917144 0 6435.917144 166 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 3043.306 0 3043.306 77.36841 0 77.36841 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3120.674252 0 3120.674252 3226.693 0.040879428 3226.734 29.99638 0.096266907 30.09264 0 0 0 0.002398701 0.007140133 0.009539 0 0 3256.691859 0.144286468 3256.836146 22020.08 0.596526061 22020.68 437.9292 1.404758387 439.334 0 0 0 0.035002635 0.104191166 0.139194 0 0 22458.04387 2.105475613 22460.14935 6225.06 3614.982689 9840.043 1826.781 11517.09236 13343.87 0 0 0 5.291812009 624.861076 630.1529 0 0 8057.132626 15756.93613 23814.06875 23369.59 0 23369.59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23369.58865 0 23369.58865 14240.29 0 14240.29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14240.28855 0 14240.28855 2411.444 1.970478826 2413.415 1.409502 4.640277784 6.04978 0 0 0 0.115188038 0.344170187 0.459358 0 0 2412.969182 6.954926797 2419.924109 256.2665 0.089237099 256.3558 0.487401 0.210144333 0.697545 0 0 0 0.005216528 0.01558644 0.020803 0 0 256.7591564 0.314967871 257.0741243 28875.43 3.643342382 28879.07 199.9023 8.579701824 208.482 0 0 0 0.213034936 0.636357929 0.849393 0 0 29075.54431 12.85940214 29088.40371 3433.465 0.157377676 3433.622 110.214 0.370816489 110.5848 0 0 0 0.008823268 0.027471619 0.036295 0 0 3543.687347 0.555665784 3544.243013 7723.101 0 7723.101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7723.100573 0 7723.100573 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Wood MJ Beam Type = Glulam, Live Load = 100 PSF, Beam Length = 40 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4467.28 0 4467.28 206.7637 0 206.7637 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4674.043313 0 4674.043313 5330.475 0.06066516 5330.536 80.164 0.15292663 80.31693 0 0 0 0.003852267 0.007773697 0.011626 0 0 5410.642798 0.221365487 5410.864163 26846.62 0.885245977 26847.51 1170.347 2.231555722 1172.578 0 0 0 0.056213544 0.113436341 0.16965 0 0 28017.02774 3.230238039 28020.25798 10190.57 5354.181233 15544.75 1891.185 18840.15195 20731.34 0 0 0 8.498546019 680.3067578 688.8053 0 0 12090.25167 24874.63994 36964.89161 33641.8 0 33641.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33641.80299 0 33641.80299 25128.4 0 25128.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25128.39937 0 25128.39937 2783.857 2.92419488 2786.782 3.766833 7.371401747 11.13823 0 0 0 0.184989724 0.374709376 0.559699 0 0 2787.809299 10.670306 2798.479605 434.9946 0.13242805 435.127 1.302557 0.333828789 1.636385 0 0 0 0.008377641 0.016969468 0.025347 0 0 436.3055184 0.483226307 436.7887447 41427.83 5.406728048 41433.24 534.2302 13.62944892 547.8597 0 0 0 0.342129918 0.692823759 1.034954 0 0 41962.40408 19.72900073 41982.13308 4723.395 0.233532381 4723.628 294.542 0.589143334 295.1312 0 0 0 0.014169994 0.029909253 0.044079 0 0 5017.951143 0.852584968 5018.803728 13628.43 0 13628.43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13628.42738 0 13628.42738 Total 167

Appendix A3: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 3 168

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Span Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2007.825 0 2007.825 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2038.500302 0 2038.500302 794.7256 0.011998437 794.7376 11.89289 0.038600774 11.9315 0 0 0 0.00052771 0.0041472 0.004675 0 0 806.6189914 0.054746411 806.6737378 16930.9 0.175085144 16931.08 173.6292 0.563275191 174.1925 0 0 0 0.007700513 0.060517307 0.068218 0 0 17104.54139 0.798877641 17105.34027 1582.93 1074.17174 2657.102 1059.145 3378.105384 4437.25 0 0 0 1.16418849 362.9377737 364.102 0 0 2643.239529 4815.214898 7458.454427 25460.28 0 25460.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25460.28207 0 25460.28207 2.08397 0 2.08397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.083970099 0 2.083970099 1615.774 0.57835121 1616.352 0.558836 1.860642658 2.419479 0 0 0 0.025341147 0.199904212 0.225245 0 0 1616.358074 2.638898081 1618.996972 26.50804 0.026191798 26.53423 0.193243 0.084262947 0.277506 0 0 0 0.001147626 0.009053065 0.010201 0 0 26.70243321 0.11950781 26.82194102 21938.47 1.069349973 21939.54 79.25682 3.440259371 82.69708 0 0 0 0.046867277 0.369615486 0.416483 0 0 22017.77368 4.879224829 22022.6529 2920.026 0.046242592 2920.072 43.69739 0.148516251 43.8459 0 0 0 0.001941102 0.015956328 0.017897 0 0 2963.724867 0.21071517 2963.935583 169 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Span Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2275.773 0 2275.773 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2306.448063 0 2306.448063 904.6085 0.017423028 904.6259 11.89289 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.000688896 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 916.502047 0.067634473 916.5696815 21979.12 0.254242548 21979.37 173.6292 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.010052593 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 22152.75681 0.986944477 22153.74375 1845.952 1558.372563 3404.324 1803.54 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.519783592 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3651.011313 5952.573435 9603.584748 26623.07 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.0659 0 26623.0659 2.131365 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.131364863 0 2.131364863 2320.241 0.839828454 2321.081 0.558836 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.033081464 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2320.832657 3.260131152 2324.092788 33.41173 0.038033321 33.44977 0.193243 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.001498162 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 33.60647629 0.1476416 33.75411789 24626.43 1.552811713 24627.98 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.061182635 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 24705.74304 6.027861773 24711.7709 3323.762 0.067130821 3323.829 43.69739 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534001 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3367.461983 0.260319062 3367.722302

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Span Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2684.629 0 2684.629 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2715.303937 0 2715.303937 1071.983 0.025415011 1072.009 11.89289 0.051122085 11.94402 0 0 0 0.000928506 0.010144436 0.011073 0 0 1083.877199 0.086681532 1083.96388 29462.85 0.370864195 29463.23 173.6292 0.745990288 174.3752 0 0 0 0.013549071 0.148030951 0.16158 0 0 29636.49717 1.264885434 29637.76205 2245.215 2271.77173 4516.987 2746.153 4473.894557 7220.047 0 0 0 2.048392598 887.7794833 889.8279 0 0 4993.415864 7633.44577 12626.86163 28583.1 0 28583.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28583.10238 0 28583.10238 2.211255 0 2.211255 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.211255436 0 2.211255436 3354.253 1.225059711 3355.478 0.558836 2.464197565 3.023034 0 0 0 0.044587813 0.488984259 0.533572 0 0 3354.856715 4.178241535 3359.034957 43.68868 0.055479294 43.74416 0.193243 0.111596146 0.30484 0 0 0 0.002019251 0.022144636 0.024164 0 0 43.88394215 0.189220076 44.07316222 28766.85 2.265090044 28769.12 79.25682 4.556210042 83.81303 0 0 0 0.082463093 0.904113787 0.986577 0 0 28846.19025 7.725413873 28853.91566 3938.738 0.097905308 3938.836 43.69739 0.196691923 43.89408 0 0 0 0.003415374 0.039030659 0.042446 0 0 3982.439198 0.33362789 3982.772826 170 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Span Length = 28 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3018.582 0 3018.582 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3049.25665 0 3049.25665 1208.509 0.031761664 1208.541 11.89289 0.057117417 11.95001 0 0 0 0.001120194 0.012967206 0.014087 0 0 1220.402761 0.101846287 1220.504608 35436.33 0.463476644 35436.79 173.6292 0.833476138 174.4627 0 0 0 0.016346235 0.189221743 0.205568 0 0 35609.97278 1.486174524 35611.45895 2570.014 2838.322602 5408.337 3406.865 4998.569573 8405.435 0 0 0 2.471276916 1134.8112 1137.282 0 0 5979.350232 8971.703375 14951.05361 30302.04 0 30302.04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30302.03769 0 30302.03769 2.281319 0 2.281319 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.281318789 0 2.281318789 4172.846 1.530982423 4174.377 0.558836 2.753185801 3.312022 0 0 0 0.053792829 0.625048027 0.678841 0 0 4173.458153 4.909216251 4178.36737 51.91949 0.06933362 51.98882 0.193243 0.12468356 0.317927 0 0 0 0.002436119 0.028306558 0.030743 0 0 52.11516651 0.222323737 52.33749024 32173.47 2.83072981 32176.3 79.25682 5.090538589 84.34736 0 0 0 0.099487344 1.155690654 1.255178 0 0 32252.82475 9.076959053 32261.90171 4440.366 0.122344247 4440.488 43.69739 0.219758926 43.91715 0 0 0 0.004120467 0.049891251 0.054012 0 0 4484.067568 0.391994424 4484.459562

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Span Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3284.888 0 3284.888 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3315.562455 0 3315.562455 1317.296 0.036741508 1317.332 11.89289 0.061843958 11.95474 0 0 0 0.001271247 0.01517767 0.016449 0 0 1329.189687 0.113763136 1329.30345 40137.39 0.536144166 40137.92 173.6292 0.902447383 174.5316 0 0 0 0.018550461 0.221477552 0.240028 0 0 40311.03498 1.660069101 40312.69505 2828.43 3282.871317 6111.301 3886.983 5412.207768 9299.191 0 0 0 2.804518955 1328.257543 1331.062 0 0 6718.217595 10023.33663 16741.55422 31725.66 0 31725.66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31725.65523 0 31725.65523 2.339345 0 2.339345 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.339345066 0 2.339345066 4813.973 1.771021917 4815.744 0.558836 2.981015541 3.539852 0 0 0 0.061046582 0.731597252 0.792644 0 0 4814.59299 5.48363471 4820.076624 58.4098 0.080204291 58.49001 0.193243 0.135001288 0.328245 0 0 0 0.00276462 0.033131854 0.035896 0 0 58.60580954 0.248337433 58.85414698 34901.11 3.274553945 34904.38 79.25682 5.51178734 84.76861 0 0 0 0.112902823 1.352696226 1.465599 0 0 34980.47794 10.13903751 34990.61698 4840.075 0.141520074 4840.217 43.69739 0.237944266 43.93533 0 0 0 0.004676096 0.058395996 0.063072 0 0 4883.777426 0.437860335 4884.215286 Total 171 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Span Length = 15 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2003.581 0 2003.581 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2034.256201 0 2034.256201 792.8413 0.01177258 792.8531 11.89289 0.038427398 11.93132 0 0 0 0.000522047 0.004038883 0.004561 0 0 804.7347533 0.054238862 804.7889922 16743.41 0.171789363 16743.58 173.6292 0.560745237 174.1899 0 0 0 0.00761788 0.058936711 0.066555 0 0 16917.04878 0.791471311 16917.84025 1577.746 1054.027334 2631.774 1059.145 3362.932606 4422.078 0 0 0 1.151695787 353.458533 354.6102 0 0 2638.042883 4770.418473 7408.461356 25532.99 0 25532.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25532.986 0 25532.986 2.086933 0 2.086933 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.086933492 0 2.086933492 1584.545 0.5674644 1585.112 0.558836 1.852285572 2.411122 0 0 0 0.025069216 0.194683097 0.219752 0 0 1585.128537 2.614433069 1587.74297 26.27251 0.025698767 26.29821 0.193243 0.08388448 0.277128 0 0 0 0.001135311 0.008816616 0.009952 0 0 26.46688511 0.118399863 26.58528497 21914.99 1.049220664 21916.04 79.25682 3.424807428 82.68163 0 0 0 0.046364353 0.359961836 0.406326 0 0 21994.29425 4.833989928 21999.12824 2913.102 0.045372949 2913.148 43.69739 0.147849189 43.84524 0 0 0 0.001920272 0.015539579 0.01746 0 0 2956.801783 0.208761717 2957.010544

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Span Length = 20 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2279.007 0 2279.007 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2309.682145 0 2309.682145 905.6498 0.01721114 905.667 11.89289 0.043508684 11.9364 0 0 0 0.000684678 0.006468823 0.007154 0 0 917.5433564 0.067188647 917.610545 21826.91 0.251150621 21827.16 173.6292 0.634893028 174.2641 0 0 0 0.009991041 0.094395199 0.104386 0 0 22000.55155 0.980438847 22001.53199 1847.108 1539.490505 3386.599 1803.54 3807.61587 5611.156 0 0 0 1.510477945 566.1121587 567.6226 0 0 3652.15872 5913.218534 9565.377254 26817.71 0 26817.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26817.70935 0 26817.70935 2.139298 0 2.139298 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.139298479 0 2.139298479 2288.961 0.829615022 2289.791 0.558836 2.097214772 2.656051 0 0 0 0.032878906 0.311811593 0.34469 0 0 2289.553203 3.238641387 2292.791844 33.24495 0.037570786 33.28252 0.193243 0.094976592 0.28822 0 0 0 0.001488989 0.014121016 0.01561 0 0 33.43968422 0.146668393 33.58635261 24696.72 1.533927456 24698.25 79.25682 3.877672449 83.13449 0 0 0 0.060808013 0.576528088 0.637336 0 0 24776.03603 5.988127993 24782.02415 3327.588 0.066315026 3327.655 43.69739 0.167399405 43.86479 0 0 0 0.002518485 0.02488876 0.027407 0 0 3371.288136 0.258603191 3371.546739 172 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Span Length = 25 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2689.146 0 2689.146 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2719.821242 0 2719.821242 1073.371 0.025053628 1073.396 11.89289 0.050903848 11.9438 0 0 0 0.000921161 0.009959485 0.010881 0 0 1085.264465 0.08591696 1085.350382 29199.98 0.365590777 29200.35 173.6292 0.742805691 174.372 0 0 0 0.013441882 0.14533208 0.158774 0 0 29373.62599 1.253728548 29374.87972 2246.354 2239.56529 4485.92 2746.153 4454.795714 7200.948 0 0 0 2.032187294 871.593665 873.6259 0 0 4994.539357 7565.954669 12560.49403 28897.58 0 28897.58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28897.57798 0 28897.57798 2.224073 0 2.224073 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.224073379 0 2.224073379 3301.179 1.207640257 3302.387 0.558836 2.453678023 3.012514 0 0 0 0.044235069 0.480069196 0.524304 0 0 3301.782462 4.141387476 3305.92385 43.39673 0.054690419 43.45142 0.193243 0.111119747 0.304363 0 0 0 0.002003276 0.0217409 0.023744 0 0 43.59197219 0.187551066 43.77952326 28873.96 2.232882118 28876.2 79.25682 4.536759798 83.79358 0 0 0 0.081810709 0.887630165 0.969441 0 0 28953.302 7.657272081 28960.95928 3943.836 0.096513926 3943.932 43.69739 0.195852255 43.89324 0 0 0 0.003388354 0.03831906 0.041707 0 0 3987.536562 0.33068524 3987.867248

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Span Length = 28 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 3018.244 0 3018.244 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3048.918849 0 3048.918849 1207.78 0.031180195 1207.811 11.89289 0.056726469 11.94962 0 0 0 0.001107221 0.012677446 0.013785 0 0 1219.673859 0.10058411 1219.774443 34988.39 0.454991656 34988.85 173.6292 0.827771295 174.4569 0 0 0 0.016156932 0.184993467 0.20115 0 0 35162.03755 1.467756418 35163.50531 2565.502 2786.484836 5351.987 3406.865 4964.356173 8371.221 0 0 0 2.442657386 1109.453149 1111.896 0 0 5974.809368 8860.294157 14835.10353 30674.75 0 30674.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30674.75306 0 30674.75306 2.296511 0 2.296511 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.29651057 0 2.29651057 4089.538 1.502954329 4091.041 0.558836 2.73434124 3.293177 0 0 0 0.053169862 0.611080946 0.664251 0 0 4090.149885 4.848376515 4094.998262 51.39261 0.068064311 51.46068 0.193243 0.123830146 0.317074 0 0 0 0.002407907 0.02767403 0.030082 0 0 51.58826421 0.219568488 51.8078327 32248.5 2.778906901 32251.28 79.25682 5.055695694 84.31252 0 0 0 0.098335194 1.129866039 1.228201 0 0 32327.85212 8.964468634 32336.81659 4437.688 0.120105437 4437.808 43.69739 0.218254756 43.91564 0 0 0 0.004072749 0.0487764 0.052849 0 0 4481.38967 0.387136592 4481.776807 173 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Span Length = 30 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 3278.116 0 3278.116 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3308.790626 0 3308.790626 1313.838 0.035942331 1313.874 11.89289 0.06127363 11.95417 0 0 0 0.001252461 0.014785913 0.016038 0 0 1325.732399 0.112001874 1325.844401 39501.03 0.524482322 39501.56 173.6292 0.894124966 174.5233 0 0 0 0.018276321 0.215760905 0.234037 0 0 39674.67984 1.634368192 39676.31421 2816.965 3211.610718 6028.576 3886.983 5362.296104 9249.28 0 0 0 2.76307352 1293.973343 1296.736 0 0 6706.711935 9867.880165 16574.5921 32127.39 0 32127.39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32127.3947 0 32127.3947 2.35572 0 2.35572 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.355719862 0 2.355719862 4701.207 1.73249985 4702.939 0.558836 2.953524459 3.512361 0 0 0 0.06014443 0.712713696 0.772858 0 0 4701.825512 5.398738005 4707.22425 57.6383 0.078459742 57.71676 0.193243 0.133756299 0.327 0 0 0 0.002723765 0.032276674 0.035 0 0 57.83426312 0.244492715 58.07875583 34923.53 3.20332807 34926.73 79.25682 5.460957348 84.71778 0 0 0 0.111234335 1.317781231 1.429016 0 0 35002.89496 9.982066648 35012.87702 4827.373 0.138442982 4827.511 43.69739 0.235749931 43.93314 0 0 0 0.004606992 0.056888713 0.061496 0 0 4871.074815 0.431081626 4871.505897 Total

Appendix A4: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 4 174

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Concrete Strength = 3000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 1860.759 0 1860.759 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1891.434245 0 1891.434245 733.9285 0.009042409 733.9375 11.89289 0.038600774 11.9315 0 0 0 0.00052771 0.0041472 0.004675 0 0 745.8218787 0.051790382 745.8736691 13249.91 0.131949799 13250.05 173.6292 0.563275191 174.1925 0 0 0 0.007700513 0.060517307 0.068218 0 0 13423.55125 0.755742297 13424.30699 1429.687 808.3422168 2238.029 1059.145 3378.105384 4437.25 0 0 0 1.16418849 362.9377737 364.102 0 0 2489.995726 4549.385375 7039.381101 25460.28 0 25460.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25460.28207 0 25460.28207 2.08397 0 2.08397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.083970099 0 2.083970099 1527.547 0.435864085 1527.982 0.558836 1.860642658 2.419479 0 0 0 0.025341147 0.199904212 0.225245 0 0 1528.130723 2.496410956 1530.627134 22.10184 0.019738982 22.12158 0.193243 0.084262947 0.277506 0 0 0 0.001147626 0.009053065 0.010201 0 0 22.29623278 0.113054994 22.40928778 20677.01 0.805896554 20677.82 79.25682 3.440259371 82.69708 0 0 0 0.046867277 0.369615486 0.416483 0 0 20756.31656 4.615771411 20760.93233 2696.642 0.034856413 2696.677 43.69739 0.148516251 43.8459 0 0 0 0.001941102 0.015956328 0.017897 0 0 2740.341046 0.199328992 2740.540375 Total 175 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Concrete Strength = 4000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2007.825 0 2007.825 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2038.500302 0 2038.500302 794.7256 0.011998437 794.7376 11.89289 0.038600774 11.9315 0 0 0 0.00052771 0.0041472 0.004675 0 0 806.6189914 0.054746411 806.6737378 16930.9 0.175085144 16931.08 173.6292 0.563275191 174.1925 0 0 0 0.007700513 0.060517307 0.068218 0 0 17104.54139 0.798877641 17105.34027 1582.93 1074.17174 2657.102 1059.145 3378.105384 4437.25 0 0 0 1.16418849 362.9377737 364.102 0 0 2643.239529 4815.214898 7458.454427 25460.28 0 25460.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25460.28207 0 25460.28207 2.08397 0 2.08397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.083970099 0 2.083970099 1615.774 0.57835121 1616.352 0.558836 1.860642658 2.419479 0 0 0 0.025341147 0.199904212 0.225245 0 0 1616.358074 2.638898081 1618.996972 26.50804 0.026191798 26.53423 0.193243 0.084262947 0.277506 0 0 0 0.001147626 0.009053065 0.010201 0 0 26.70243321 0.11950781 26.82194102 21938.47 1.069349973 21939.54 79.25682 3.440259371 82.69708 0 0 0 0.046867277 0.369615486 0.416483 0 0 22017.77368 4.879224829 22022.6529 2920.026 0.046242592 2920.072 43.69739 0.148516251 43.8459 0 0 0 0.001941102 0.015956328 0.017897 0 0 2963.724867 0.21071517 2963.935583 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 45 PSF, Concrete Strength = 9000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2039.34 0 2039.34 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2070.014687 0 2070.014687 807.7536 0.012019764 807.7656 11.89289 0.038600774 11.9315 0 0 0 0.00052771 0.0041472 0.004675 0 0 819.647025 0.054767737 819.7017928 17719.68 0.175396344 17719.85 173.6292 0.563275191 174.1925 0 0 0 0.007700513 0.060517307 0.068218 0 0 17893.3156 0.799188842 17894.11479 1615.768 1077.567176 2693.335 1059.145 3378.105384 4437.25 0 0 0 1.16418849 362.9377737 364.102 0 0 2676.077317 4818.610334 7494.687651 25460.28 0 25460.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25460.28207 0 25460.28207 2.08397 0 2.08397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.083970099 0 2.083970099 1634.68 0.579379184 1635.26 0.558836 1.860642658 2.419479 0 0 0 0.025341147 0.199904212 0.225245 0 0 1635.264316 2.639926055 1637.904242 27.45222 0.026238352 27.47846 0.193243 0.084262947 0.277506 0 0 0 0.001147626 0.009053065 0.010201 0 0 27.64661019 0.119554364 27.76616456 22208.78 1.071250659 22209.85 79.25682 3.440259371 82.69708 0 0 0 0.046867277 0.369615486 0.416483 0 0 22288.08507 4.881125516 22292.9662 2967.894 0.046327404 2967.94 43.69739 0.148516251 43.8459 0 0 0 0.001941102 0.015956328 0.017897 0 0 3011.593126 0.210799982 3011.803926 Total 176 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Concrete Strength = 3000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1860.937 0 1860.937 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1891.611482 0 1891.611482 733.872 0.00890542 733.8809 11.89289 0.038427398 11.93132 0 0 0 0.000522047 0.004038883 0.004561 0 0 745.7654217 0.051371702 745.8167934 13173.09 0.129950823 13173.22 173.6292 0.560745237 174.1899 0 0 0 0.00761788 0.058936711 0.066555 0 0 13346.72252 0.749632771 13347.47215 1429.109 796.1896071 2225.299 1059.145 3362.932606 4422.078 0 0 0 1.151695787 353.458533 354.6102 0 0 2489.406144 4512.580746 7001.98689 25532.99 0 25532.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25532.986 0 25532.986 2.086933 0 2.086933 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.086933492 0 2.086933492 1498.97 0.429260953 1499.399 0.558836 1.852285572 2.411122 0 0 0 0.025069216 0.194683097 0.219752 0 0 1499.553619 2.476229622 1502.029849 21.99877 0.019439946 22.01821 0.193243 0.08388448 0.277128 0 0 0 0.001135311 0.008816616 0.009952 0 0 22.193151 0.112141042 22.30529204 20691.46 0.793687608 20692.25 79.25682 3.424807428 82.68163 0 0 0 0.046364353 0.359961836 0.406326 0 0 20770.7611 4.578456872 20775.33956 2696.434 0.03432908 2696.469 43.69739 0.147849189 43.84524 0 0 0 0.001920272 0.015539579 0.01746 0 0 2740.133687 0.197717848 2740.331405

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Concrete Strength = 4000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2003.581 0 2003.581 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2034.256201 0 2034.256201 792.8413 0.01177258 792.8531 11.89289 0.038427398 11.93132 0 0 0 0.000522047 0.004038883 0.004561 0 0 804.7347533 0.054238862 804.7889922 16743.41 0.171789363 16743.58 173.6292 0.560745237 174.1899 0 0 0 0.00761788 0.058936711 0.066555 0 0 16917.04878 0.791471311 16917.84025 1577.746 1054.027334 2631.774 1059.145 3362.932606 4422.078 0 0 0 1.151695787 353.458533 354.6102 0 0 2638.042883 4770.418473 7408.461356 25532.99 0 25532.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25532.986 0 25532.986 2.086933 0 2.086933 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.086933492 0 2.086933492 1584.545 0.5674644 1585.112 0.558836 1.852285572 2.411122 0 0 0 0.025069216 0.194683097 0.219752 0 0 1585.128537 2.614433069 1587.74297 26.27251 0.025698767 26.29821 0.193243 0.08388448 0.277128 0 0 0 0.001135311 0.008816616 0.009952 0 0 26.46688511 0.118399863 26.58528497 21914.99 1.049220664 21916.04 79.25682 3.424807428 82.68163 0 0 0 0.046364353 0.359961836 0.406326 0 0 21994.29425 4.833989928 21999.12824 2913.102 0.045372949 2913.148 43.69739 0.147849189 43.84524 0 0 0 0.001920272 0.015539579 0.01746 0 0 2956.801783 0.208761717 2957.010544 Total 177 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 75 PSF, Concrete Strength = 9000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2034.148 0 2034.148 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2064.823149 0 2064.823149 805.4777 0.011793265 805.4895 11.89289 0.038427398 11.93132 0 0 0 0.000522047 0.004038883 0.004561 0 0 817.3711171 0.054259547 817.4253767 17508.47 0.172091207 17508.64 173.6292 0.560745237 174.1899 0 0 0 0.00761788 0.058936711 0.066555 0 0 17682.10958 0.791773155 17682.90136 1609.597 1057.32069 2666.917 1059.145 3362.932606 4422.078 0 0 0 1.151695787 353.458533 354.6102 0 0 2669.893449 4773.71183 7443.605278 25532.99 0 25532.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25532.986 0 25532.986 2.086933 0 2.086933 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.086933492 0 2.086933492 1602.882 0.56846147 1603.451 0.558836 1.852285572 2.411122 0 0 0 0.025069216 0.194683097 0.219752 0 0 1603.466389 2.615430138 1606.081819 27.1883 0.025743921 27.21404 0.193243 0.08388448 0.277128 0 0 0 0.001135311 0.008816616 0.009952 0 0 27.38267672 0.118445017 27.50112173 22177.18 1.051064209 22178.23 79.25682 3.424807428 82.68163 0 0 0 0.046364353 0.359961836 0.406326 0 0 22256.47911 4.835833473 22261.31494 2959.532 0.045455211 2959.577 43.69739 0.147849189 43.84524 0 0 0 0.001920272 0.015539579 0.01746 0 0 3003.230949 0.208843979 3003.439793

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 100 PSF, Concrete Strength = 3000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1902.182 0 1902.182 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1932.85645 0 1932.85645 750.6644 0.009692795 750.6741 11.89289 0.039564078 11.93246 0 0 0 0.000558412 0.004578956 0.005137 0 0 762.5578134 0.053835829 762.6116492 13780.75 0.141440459 13780.89 173.6292 0.577332038 174.2065 0 0 0 0.008148525 0.066817629 0.074966 0 0 13954.38618 0.785590126 13955.17177 1467.954 866.1938296 2334.148 1059.145 3462.407894 4521.553 0 0 0 1.231920472 400.7224168 401.9543 0 0 2528.33131 4729.32414 7257.65545 25836.45 0 25836.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25836.44585 0 25836.44585 2.099302 0 2.099302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.099302436 0 2.099302436 1642.91 0.467214173 1643.377 0.558836 1.907076037 2.465912 0 0 0 0.026815484 0.220715795 0.247531 0 0 1643.495777 2.595006004 1646.090783 22.92731 0.021158734 22.94847 0.193243 0.086365776 0.279609 0 0 0 0.001214395 0.009995559 0.01121 0 0 23.12177071 0.117520069 23.23929078 21142.78 0.863861706 21143.64 79.25682 3.526112968 82.78293 0 0 0 0.049593995 0.408095331 0.457689 0 0 21222.08621 4.798070005 21226.88428 2758.134 0.037360505 2758.171 43.69739 0.152222557 43.84961 0 0 0 0.002054034 0.017617505 0.019672 0 0 2801.832989 0.207200567 2802.040189 178 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 100 PSF, Concrete Strength = 4000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2065.904 0 2065.904 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2096.579327 0 2096.579327 818.3474 0.012983626 818.3604 11.89289 0.039564078 11.93246 0 0 0 0.000558412 0.004578956 0.005137 0 0 830.2408563 0.05712666 830.2979829 17878.65 0.189461348 17878.84 173.6292 0.577332038 174.2065 0 0 0 0.008148525 0.066817629 0.074966 0 0 18052.28825 0.833611015 18053.12186 1638.555 1162.13142 2800.686 1059.145 3462.407894 4521.553 0 0 0 1.231920472 400.7224168 401.9543 0 0 2698.93163 5025.261731 7724.193361 25836.45 0 25836.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25836.44585 0 25836.44585 2.099302 0 2.099302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.099302436 0 2.099302436 1741.13 0.625839506 1741.756 0.558836 1.907076037 2.465912 0 0 0 0.026815484 0.220715795 0.247531 0 0 1741.71583 2.753631337 1744.469462 27.83256 0.028342401 27.86091 0.193243 0.086365776 0.279609 0 0 0 0.001214395 0.009995559 0.01121 0 0 28.02702097 0.124703737 28.15172471 22547.11 1.157154072 22548.27 79.25682 3.526112968 82.78293 0 0 0 0.049593995 0.408095331 0.457689 0 0 22626.41698 5.091362371 22631.50834 3006.818 0.050036291 3006.868 43.69739 0.152222557 43.84961 0 0 0 0.002054034 0.017617505 0.019672 0 0 3050.517442 0.219876353 3050.737319

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Floor Type = Concrete Suspended Slab, Live Load = 100 PSF, Concrete Strength = 9000 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2100.988 0 2100.988 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2131.663057 0 2131.663057 832.851 0.013007368 832.864 11.89289 0.039564078 11.93246 0 0 0 0.000558412 0.004578956 0.005137 0 0 844.7444556 0.057150402 844.801606 18756.76 0.189807795 18756.95 173.6292 0.577332038 174.2065 0 0 0 0.008148525 0.066817629 0.074966 0 0 18930.39966 0.833957462 18931.23362 1675.112 1165.911426 2841.023 1059.145 3462.407894 4521.553 0 0 0 1.231920472 400.7224168 401.9543 0 0 2735.488652 5029.041737 7764.530389 25836.45 0 25836.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25836.44585 0 25836.44585 2.099302 0 2.099302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.099302436 0 2.099302436 1762.178 0.626983909 1762.805 0.558836 1.907076037 2.465912 0 0 0 0.026815484 0.220715795 0.247531 0 0 1762.763408 2.754775741 1765.518184 28.88368 0.028394228 28.91207 0.193243 0.086365776 0.279609 0 0 0 0.001214395 0.009995559 0.01121 0 0 29.0781362 0.124755563 29.20289177 22848.04 1.159270032 22849.2 79.25682 3.526112968 82.78293 0 0 0 0.049593995 0.408095331 0.457689 0 0 22927.34406 5.093478331 22932.43754 3060.108 0.050130709 3060.158 43.69739 0.152222557 43.84961 0 0 0 0.002054034 0.017617505 0.019672 0 0 3103.807299 0.219970771 3104.02727 Total 179

Appendix A5: Athena Impact Estimator Output Tables for Study 5 180

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1699.197 0 1699.197 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1722.203369 0 1722.203369 673.7156 0.011307487 673.7269 8.919671 0.032513947 8.952185 0 0 0 0.000474228 0.004074671 0.004549 0 0 682.6357839 0.047896106 682.68368 15163.11 0.165002575 15163.27 130.2219 0.474454216 130.6963 0 0 0 0.006920093 0.059458942 0.066379 0 0 15293.33628 0.698915732 15294.03519 1356.286 1011.879248 2368.165 1055.328 2845.42328 3900.751 0 0 0 1.046202073 356.590487 357.6367 0 0 2412.659756 4213.893015 6626.552771 20883.71 0 20883.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20883.71448 0 20883.71448 1.688362 0 1.688362 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.688361862 0 1.688361862 1512.256 0.545045894 1512.801 0.419127 1.56724416 1.986371 0 0 0 0.022772911 0.19640816 0.219181 0 0 1512.697873 2.308698214 1515.006571 23.44527 0.0246835 23.46995 0.144933 0.070975806 0.215908 0 0 0 0.001031318 0.008894739 0.009926 0 0 23.59123415 0.104554045 23.69578819 18506.31 1.007769676 18507.32 59.44261 2.897776413 62.34039 0 0 0 0.042117443 0.363151415 0.405269 0 0 18565.79369 4.268697504 18570.06239 2475.404 0.043573906 2475.447 32.77304 0.125097221 32.89814 0 0 0 0.001744378 0.015677273 0.017422 0 0 2508.178401 0.184348401 2508.36275 181 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2275.773 0 2275.773 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2306.448063 0 2306.448063 904.6085 0.017423028 904.6259 11.89289 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.000688896 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 916.502047 0.067634473 916.5696815 21979.12 0.254242548 21979.37 173.6292 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.010052593 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 22152.75681 0.986944477 22153.74375 1845.952 1558.372563 3404.324 1803.54 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.519783592 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3651.011313 5952.573435 9603.584748 26623.07 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.0659 0 26623.0659 2.131365 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.131364863 0 2.131364863 2320.241 0.839828454 2321.081 0.558836 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.033081464 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2320.832657 3.260131152 2324.092788 33.41173 0.038033321 33.44977 0.193243 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.001498162 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 33.60647629 0.1476416 33.75411789 24626.43 1.552811713 24627.98 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.061182635 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 24705.74304 6.027861773 24711.7709 3323.762 0.067130821 3323.829 43.69739 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534001 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3367.461983 0.260319062 3367.722302

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4582.044 0 4582.044 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4620.387769 0 4620.387769 1815.94 0.029662901 1815.97 14.86612 0.08854328 14.95466 0 0 0 0.001257305 0.010590336 0.011848 0 0 1830.807579 0.128796517 1830.936375 40331.09 0.432850811 40331.52 217.0365 1.29205267 218.3285 0 0 0 0.018347014 0.154537673 0.172885 0 0 40548.14687 1.879441153 40550.02631 3638.604 2654.739678 6293.344 2749.97 7748.770322 10498.74 0 0 0 2.773761168 926.8019609 929.5757 0 0 6391.34771 11330.31196 17721.65967 56719.38 0 56719.38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56719.37759 0 56719.37759 4.643415 0 4.643415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.643414914 0 4.643414914 3990.671 1.42981743 3992.101 0.698545 4.267981892 4.966527 0 0 0 0.060377071 0.510477634 0.570855 0 0 3991.429952 6.208276956 3997.638228 62.51829 0.064752159 62.58304 0.241554 0.19328415 0.434838 0 0 0 0.0027343 0.023118007 0.025852 0 0 62.76258025 0.281154316 63.04373457 49867.43 2.643679485 49870.07 99.07102 7.891340465 106.9624 0 0 0 0.111664593 0.943854241 1.055519 0 0 49966.61295 11.47887419 49978.09182 6672.229 0.114312118 6672.343 54.62173 0.340669749 54.9624 0 0 0 0.004624812 0.040746257 0.045371 0 0 6726.855419 0.495728125 6727.351147 182 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 5808.693 0 5808.693 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5854.705623 0 5854.705623 2306.854 0.042391748 2306.896 17.83934 0.111618952 17.95096 0 0 0 0.001708592 0.015770774 0.017479 0 0 2324.694678 0.169781474 2324.86446 54593.54 0.618594324 54594.16 260.4438 1.628780466 262.0725 0 0 0 0.024932341 0.230132328 0.255065 0 0 54854.00749 2.477507119 54856.485 4681.817 3792.267863 8474.084 3894.617 9768.213039 13662.83 0 0 0 3.769352293 1380.162448 1383.932 0 0 8580.203321 14940.64335 23520.84667 69150.51 0 69150.51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69150.51405 0 69150.51405 5.574429 0 5.574429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.57442947 0 5.57442947 5660.49 2.043375974 5662.534 0.838254 5.380280308 6.218535 0 0 0 0.082048322 0.760186201 0.842235 0 0 5661.410719 8.183842483 5669.594562 83.4556 0.092538392 83.54814 0.289865 0.243656822 0.533522 0 0 0 0.003715727 0.034426562 0.038142 0 0 83.74918438 0.370621776 84.11980615 62967.59 3.778126514 62971.37 118.8852 9.947939044 128.8332 0 0 0 0.151744568 1.405556134 1.557301 0 0 63086.62503 15.13162169 63101.75666 8475.969 0.163343238 8476.132 65.54608 0.429453262 65.97553 0 0 0 0.006284805 0.060677962 0.066963 0 0 8541.5213 0.653474461 8542.174775 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 1666.283 0 1666.283 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1689.289152 0 1689.289152 660.1089 0.011417656 660.1203 8.919671 0.032513947 8.952185 0 0 0 0.000474228 0.004074671 0.004549 0 0 669.0290244 0.048006275 669.0770307 14339.27 0.166610196 14339.44 130.2219 0.474454216 130.6963 0 0 0 0.006920093 0.059458942 0.066379 0 0 14469.4989 0.700523354 14470.19943 1321.988 1019.9235 2341.912 1055.328 2845.42328 3900.751 0 0 0 1.046202073 356.590487 357.6367 0 0 2378.362608 4221.937267 6600.299875 20883.71 0 20883.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20883.71448 0 20883.71448 1.688362 0 1.688362 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.688361862 0 1.688361862 1492.51 0.550356282 1493.06 0.419127 1.56724416 1.986371 0 0 0 0.022772911 0.19640816 0.219181 0 0 1492.951501 2.314008602 1495.265509 22.45912 0.024923992 22.48405 0.144933 0.070975806 0.215908 0 0 0 0.001031318 0.008894739 0.009926 0 0 22.60508562 0.104794536 22.70988015 18223.98 1.017588386 18225 59.44261 2.897776413 62.34039 0 0 0 0.042117443 0.363151415 0.405269 0 0 18283.46802 4.278516214 18287.74654 2425.409 0.043994899 2425.453 32.77304 0.125097221 32.89814 0 0 0 0.001744378 0.015677273 0.017422 0 0 2458.183759 0.184769394 2458.368528 183 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 2221.562 0 2221.562 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2252.236574 0 2252.236574 882.1974 0.017604482 882.215 11.89289 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.000688896 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 894.0909815 0.067815927 894.1587974 20622.21 0.256890388 20622.47 173.6292 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.010052593 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 20795.85229 0.989592317 20796.84188 1789.462 1571.621879 3361.084 1803.54 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.519783592 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3594.522063 5965.822751 9560.344814 26623.07 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.0659 0 26623.0659 2.131365 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.131364863 0 2.131364863 2287.717 0.848574948 2288.566 0.558836 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.033081464 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2288.309318 3.268877647 2291.578196 31.78749 0.038429424 31.82592 0.193243 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.001498162 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 31.98223656 0.148037703 32.13027426 24161.42 1.568983657 24162.99 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.061182635 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 24240.73746 6.044033718 24246.7815 3241.418 0.067824219 3241.486 43.69739 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534001 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3285.118115 0.26101246 3285.379127

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4496.665 0 4496.665 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4535.00883 0 4535.00883 1780.644 0.029948678 1780.674 14.86612 0.08854328 14.95466 0 0 0 0.001257305 0.010590336 0.011848 0 0 1795.511868 0.129082294 1795.64095 38194.07 0.437020955 38194.51 217.0365 1.29205267 218.3285 0 0 0 0.018347014 0.154537673 0.172885 0 0 38411.12626 1.883611298 38413.00987 3549.638 2675.606336 6225.244 2749.97 7748.770322 10498.74 0 0 0 2.773761168 926.8019609 929.5757 0 0 6302.381472 11351.17862 17653.56009 56719.38 0 56719.38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56719.37759 0 56719.37759 4.643415 0 4.643415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.643414914 0 4.643414914 3939.449 1.443592488 3940.893 0.698545 4.267981892 4.966527 0 0 0 0.060377071 0.510477634 0.570855 0 0 3940.208186 6.222052015 3946.430238 59.96024 0.06537599 60.02561 0.241554 0.19328415 0.434838 0 0 0 0.0027343 0.023118007 0.025852 0 0 60.20452717 0.281778147 60.48630532 49135.08 2.669149057 49137.75 99.07102 7.891340465 106.9624 0 0 0 0.111664593 0.943854241 1.055519 0 0 49234.2648 11.50434376 49245.76915 6542.544 0.115404167 6542.659 54.62173 0.340669749 54.9624 0 0 0 0.004624812 0.040746257 0.045371 0 0 6597.170137 0.496820173 6597.666957 184 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 5679.452 0 5679.452 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5725.464706 0 5725.464706 2253.425 0.042824337 2253.468 17.83934 0.111618952 17.95096 0 0 0 0.001708592 0.015770774 0.017479 0 0 2271.266397 0.170214063 2271.436611 51358.66 0.62490681 51359.29 260.4438 1.628780466 262.0725 0 0 0 0.024932341 0.230132328 0.255065 0 0 51619.12888 2.483819604 51621.6127 4547.145 3823.854412 8371 3894.617 9768.213039 13662.83 0 0 0 3.769352293 1380.162448 1383.932 0 0 8445.53219 14972.2299 23417.76209 69150.51 0 69150.51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69150.51405 0 69150.51405 5.574429 0 5.574429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.57442947 0 5.57442947 5582.954 2.064227735 5585.019 0.838254 5.380280308 6.218535 0 0 0 0.082048322 0.760186201 0.842235 0 0 5583.874643 8.204694243 5592.079337 79.58339 0.093482706 79.67688 0.289865 0.243656822 0.533522 0 0 0 0.003715727 0.034426562 0.038142 0 0 79.87697502 0.37156609 80.24854111 61859.01 3.816680646 61862.83 118.8852 9.947939044 128.8332 0 0 0 0.151744568 1.405556134 1.557301 0 0 61978.04548 15.17017582 61993.21566 8279.66 0.164996308 8279.825 65.54608 0.429453262 65.97553 0 0 0 0.006284805 0.060677962 0.066963 0 0 8345.212411 0.655127531 8345.867538 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 1633.367 0 1633.367 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1656.373097 0 1656.373097 646.5014 0.011527834 646.513 8.919671 0.032513947 8.952185 0 0 0 0.000474228 0.004074671 0.004549 0 0 655.4215682 0.048116452 655.4696847 13515.42 0.168217939 13515.59 130.2219 0.474454216 130.6963 0 0 0 0.006920093 0.059458942 0.066379 0 0 13645.65136 0.702131097 13646.35349 1287.69 1027.968476 2315.659 1055.328 2845.42328 3900.751 0 0 0 1.046202073 356.590487 357.6367 0 0 2344.06457 4229.982243 6574.046813 20883.71 0 20883.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20883.71448 0 20883.71448 1.688362 0 1.688362 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.688361862 0 1.688361862 1472.763 0.555667069 1473.319 0.419127 1.56724416 1.986371 0 0 0 0.022772911 0.19640816 0.219181 0 0 1473.205313 2.31931939 1475.524633 21.47297 0.025164501 21.49813 0.144933 0.070975806 0.215908 0 0 0 0.001031318 0.008894739 0.009926 0 0 21.61893169 0.105035046 21.72396673 17941.65 1.027407835 17942.68 59.44261 2.897776413 62.34039 0 0 0 0.042117443 0.363151415 0.405269 0 0 18001.13965 4.288335663 18005.42799 2375.412 0.044415924 2375.456 32.77304 0.125097221 32.89814 0 0 0 0.001744378 0.015677273 0.017422 0 0 2408.186556 0.185190418 2408.371746 Total 185 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy 2167.347 0 2167.347 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2198.022059 0 2198.022059 859.7852 0.01778595 859.803 11.89289 0.043633578 11.93653 0 0 0 0.000688896 0.006577867 0.007267 0 0 871.6787683 0.067997395 871.7467657 19265.29 0.259538427 19265.55 173.6292 0.636715525 174.2659 0 0 0 0.010052593 0.095986403 0.106039 0 0 19438.93102 0.992240356 19439.92326 1732.972 1584.872388 3317.844 1803.54 3818.545855 5622.086 0 0 0 1.519783592 575.6550169 577.1748 0 0 3538.031347 5979.073259 9517.104607 26623.07 0 26623.07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26623.0659 0 26623.0659 2.131365 0 2.131365 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.131364863 0 2.131364863 2255.194 0.857322101 2256.052 0.558836 2.10323495 2.662071 0 0 0 0.033081464 0.317067749 0.350149 0 0 2255.786285 3.2776248 2259.063909 30.16325 0.038825556 30.20207 0.193243 0.095249228 0.288493 0 0 0 0.001498162 0.014359051 0.015857 0 0 30.35798793 0.148433835 30.50642177 23696.41 1.585156819 23697.99 79.25682 3.888803535 83.14562 0 0 0 0.061182635 0.586246525 0.647429 0 0 23775.72743 6.060206879 23781.78764 3159.07 0.068517669 3159.139 43.69739 0.167879935 43.86527 0 0 0 0.002534001 0.025308306 0.027842 0 0 3202.77003 0.26170591 3203.031735 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 4411.282 0 4411.282 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4449.625124 0 4449.625124 1745.347 0.030234476 1745.377 14.86612 0.08854328 14.95466 0 0 0 0.001257305 0.010590336 0.011848 0 0 1760.21435 0.129368092 1760.343718 36057.02 0.441191414 36057.47 217.0365 1.29205267 218.3285 0 0 0 0.018347014 0.154537673 0.172885 0 0 36274.07927 1.887781756 36275.96705 3460.67 2696.474871 6157.144 2749.97 7748.770322 10498.74 0 0 0 2.773761168 926.8019609 929.5757 0 0 6213.412924 11372.04715 17585.46008 56719.38 0 56719.38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56719.37759 0 56719.37759 4.643415 0 4.643415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.643414914 0 4.643414914 3888.228 1.457368584 3889.685 0.698545 4.267981892 4.966527 0 0 0 0.060377071 0.510477634 0.570855 0 0 3888.986901 6.23582811 3895.222729 57.40217 0.065999869 57.46817 0.241554 0.19328415 0.434838 0 0 0 0.0027343 0.023118007 0.025852 0 0 57.64646008 0.282402025 57.92886211 48402.73 2.694620547 48405.42 99.07102 7.891340465 106.9624 0 0 0 0.111664593 0.943854241 1.055519 0 0 48501.90965 11.52981525 48513.43947 6412.852 0.116496298 6412.968 54.62173 0.340669749 54.9624 0 0 0 0.004624812 0.040746257 0.045371 0 0 6467.478215 0.497912304 6467.976127 186 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 45, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total 5550.204 0 5550.204 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5596.216572 0 5596.216572 2199.994 0.043256959 2200.038 17.83934 0.111618952 17.95096 0 0 0 0.001708592 0.015770774 0.017479 0 0 2217.835379 0.170646685 2218.006026 48123.74 0.63121977 48124.37 260.4438 1.628780466 262.0725 0 0 0 0.024932341 0.230132328 0.255065 0 0 48384.21033 2.490132565 48386.70046 4412.471 3855.443802 8267.915 3894.617 9768.213039 13662.83 0 0 0 3.769352293 1380.162448 1383.932 0 0 8310.857563 15003.81929 23314.67685 69150.51 0 69150.51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69150.51405 0 69150.51405 5.574429 0 5.574429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.57442947 0 5.57442947 5505.419 2.085081065 5507.504 0.838254 5.380280308 6.218535 0 0 0 0.082048322 0.760186201 0.842235 0 0 5506.339293 8.225547573 5514.56484 75.71116 0.094427091 75.80559 0.289865 0.243656822 0.533522 0 0 0 0.003715727 0.034426562 0.038142 0 0 76.00474445 0.372510475 76.37725493 60750.42 3.855237681 60754.27 118.8852 9.947939044 128.8332 0 0 0 0.151744568 1.405556134 1.557301 0 0 60869.45532 15.20873286 60884.66406 8083.341 0.166649503 8083.508 65.54608 0.429453262 65.97553 0 0 0 0.006284805 0.060677962 0.066963 0 0 8148.893468 0.656780726 8149.550249

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1694.953 0 1694.953 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1717.959269 0 1717.959269 671.8314 0.01108163 671.8425 8.919671 0.032340572 8.952011 0 0 0 0.000468565 0.003966354 0.004435 0 0 680.7515458 0.047388556 680.7989344 14975.61 0.161706794 14975.78 130.2219 0.471924262 130.6938 0 0 0 0.00683746 0.057878346 0.064716 0 0 15105.84367 0.691509402 15106.53518 1351.101 991.7348416 2342.836 1055.328 2830.250502 3885.579 0 0 0 1.03370937 347.1112462 348.145 0 0 2407.46311 4169.09659 6576.5597 20956.42 0 20956.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20956.41841 0 20956.41841 1.691325 0 1.691325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.691325255 0 1.691325255 1481.027 0.534159084 1481.561 0.419127 1.558887074 1.978014 0 0 0 0.02250098 0.191187045 0.213688 0 0 1481.468336 2.284233202 1483.752569 23.20973 0.024190469 23.23392 0.144933 0.070597338 0.21553 0 0 0 0.001019003 0.00865829 0.009677 0 0 23.35568605 0.103446097 23.45913214 18482.83 0.987640367 18483.82 59.44261 2.88232447 62.32494 0 0 0 0.041614519 0.353497765 0.395112 0 0 18542.31427 4.223462602 18546.53773 2468.481 0.042704264 2468.523 32.77304 0.12443016 32.89747 0 0 0 0.001723548 0.015260525 0.016984 0 0 2501.255316 0.182394948 2501.437711 187 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2279.007 0 2279.007 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2309.682145 0 2309.682145 905.6498 0.01721114 905.667 11.89289 0.043508684 11.9364 0 0 0 0.000684678 0.006468823 0.007154 0 0 917.5433564 0.067188647 917.610545 21826.91 0.251150621 21827.16 173.6292 0.634893028 174.2641 0 0 0 0.009991041 0.094395199 0.104386 0 0 22000.55155 0.980438847 22001.53199 1847.108 1539.490505 3386.599 1803.54 3807.61587 5611.156 0 0 0 1.510477945 566.1121587 567.6226 0 0 3652.15872 5913.218534 9565.377254 26817.71 0 26817.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26817.70935 0 26817.70935 2.139298 0 2.139298 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.139298479 0 2.139298479 2288.961 0.829615022 2289.791 0.558836 2.097214772 2.656051 0 0 0 0.032878906 0.311811593 0.34469 0 0 2289.553203 3.238641387 2292.791844 33.24495 0.037570786 33.28252 0.193243 0.094976592 0.28822 0 0 0 0.001488989 0.014121016 0.01561 0 0 33.43968422 0.146668393 33.58635261 24696.72 1.533927456 24698.25 79.25682 3.877672449 83.13449 0 0 0 0.060808013 0.576528088 0.637336 0 0 24776.03603 5.988127993 24782.02415 3327.588 0.066315026 3327.655 43.69739 0.167399405 43.86479 0 0 0 0.002518485 0.02488876 0.027407 0 0 3371.288136 0.258603191 3371.546739

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4586.562 0 4586.562 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4624.905074 0 4624.905074 1817.327 0.029301518 1817.357 14.86612 0.088325042 14.95444 0 0 0 0.00124996 0.010405385 0.011655 0 0 1832.194845 0.128031945 1832.322877 40068.22 0.427577393 40068.65 217.0365 1.288868073 218.3253 0 0 0 0.018239824 0.151838802 0.170079 0 0 40285.27569 1.868284268 40287.14398 3639.744 2622.533239 6262.277 2749.97 7729.671479 10479.64 0 0 0 2.757555864 910.6161426 913.3737 0 0 6392.471204 11262.82086 17655.29206 57033.85 0 57033.85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57033.85319 0 57033.85319 4.656233 0 4.656233 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.656232857 0 4.656232857 3937.597 1.412397976 3939.01 0.698545 4.25746235 4.956008 0 0 0 0.060024326 0.501562571 0.561587 0 0 3938.355699 6.171422897 3944.527122 62.22634 0.063963284 62.2903 0.241554 0.192807751 0.434362 0 0 0 0.002718325 0.02271427 0.025433 0 0 62.4706103 0.279485305 62.7500956 49974.54 2.611471559 49977.15 99.07102 7.871890221 106.9429 0 0 0 0.111012208 0.927370619 1.038383 0 0 50073.7247 11.4107324 50085.13543 6677.326 0.112920736 6677.439 54.62173 0.339830081 54.96156 0 0 0 0.004597792 0.040034658 0.044632 0 0 6731.952783 0.492785475 6732.445569 188 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 5801.922 0 5801.922 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5847.933794 0 5847.933794 2303.396 0.041592571 2303.438 17.83934 0.111048623 17.95039 0 0 0 0.001689806 0.015379017 0.017069 0 0 2321.237391 0.168020212 2321.405411 53957.18 0.60693248 53957.79 260.4438 1.620458049 262.0642 0 0 0 0.024658201 0.224415681 0.249074 0 0 54217.65235 2.45180621 54220.10415 4670.352 3721.007264 8391.36 3894.617 9718.301376 13612.92 0 0 0 3.727906858 1345.878249 1349.606 0 0 8568.697661 14785.18689 23353.88455 69552.25 0 69552.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69552.25352 0 69552.25352 5.590804 0 5.590804 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.590804265 0 5.590804265 5547.724 2.004853907 5549.729 0.838254 5.352789226 6.191043 0 0 0 0.08114617 0.741302645 0.822449 0 0 5548.643242 8.098945778 5556.742188 82.6841 0.090793843 82.77489 0.289865 0.242411833 0.532277 0 0 0 0.003674872 0.033571382 0.037246 0 0 82.97763795 0.366777058 83.34441501 62990.01 3.706900639 62993.71 118.8852 9.897109052 128.7823 0 0 0 0.150076079 1.370641138 1.520717 0 0 63109.04205 14.97465083 63124.0167 8463.266 0.160266146 8463.427 65.54608 0.427258927 65.97334 0 0 0 0.006215701 0.059170679 0.065386 0 0 8528.81869 0.646695752 8529.465386

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1663.028 0 1663.028 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1686.034571 0 1686.034571 658.6337 0.011188487 658.6449 8.919671 0.032340572 8.952011 0 0 0 0.000468565 0.003966354 0.004435 0 0 667.5538547 0.047495413 667.6013502 14176.55 0.163266085 14176.71 130.2219 0.471924262 130.6938 0 0 0 0.00683746 0.057878346 0.064716 0 0 14306.77382 0.693068693 14307.46689 1317.835 999.5372543 2317.373 1055.328 2830.250502 3885.579 0 0 0 1.03370937 347.1112462 348.145 0 0 2374.197059 4176.899002 6551.096061 20956.42 0 20956.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20956.41841 0 20956.41841 1.691325 0 1.691325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.691325255 0 1.691325255 1461.874 0.539309822 1462.413 0.419127 1.558887074 1.978014 0 0 0 0.02250098 0.191187045 0.213688 0 0 1462.315611 2.28938394 1464.604995 22.25323 0.02442373 22.27766 0.144933 0.070597338 0.21553 0 0 0 0.001019003 0.00865829 0.009677 0 0 22.39918471 0.103679359 22.50286407 18208.99 0.997163891 18209.99 59.44261 2.88232447 62.32494 0 0 0 0.041614519 0.353497765 0.395112 0 0 18268.47633 4.232986127 18272.70932 2419.989 0.0431126 2420.032 32.77304 0.12443016 32.89747 0 0 0 0.001723548 0.015260525 0.016984 0 0 2452.763694 0.182803284 2452.946497 189 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2225.831 0 2225.831 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2256.506278 0 2256.506278 883.6668 0.017389128 883.6842 11.89289 0.043508684 11.9364 0 0 0 0.000684678 0.006468823 0.007154 0 0 895.5604177 0.067366635 895.6277843 20495.93 0.253747878 20496.18 173.6292 0.634893028 174.2641 0 0 0 0.009991041 0.094395199 0.104386 0 0 20669.56849 0.983036104 20670.55152 1791.698 1552.486714 3344.185 1803.54 3807.61587 5611.156 0 0 0 1.510477945 566.1121587 567.6226 0 0 3596.748606 5926.214744 9522.963349 26817.71 0 26817.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26817.70935 0 26817.70935 2.139298 0 2.139298 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.139298479 0 2.139298479 2257.059 0.838194429 2257.898 0.558836 2.097214772 2.656051 0 0 0 0.032878906 0.311811593 0.34469 0 0 2257.651169 3.247220794 2260.89839 31.65174 0.037959321 31.6897 0.193243 0.094976592 0.28822 0 0 0 0.001488989 0.014121016 0.01561 0 0 31.84647294 0.147056928 31.99352987 24240.6 1.549790461 24242.15 79.25682 3.877672449 83.13449 0 0 0 0.060808013 0.576528088 0.637336 0 0 24319.91362 6.003990998 24325.91761 3246.817 0.066995177 3246.884 43.69739 0.167399405 43.86479 0 0 0 0.002518485 0.02488876 0.027407 0 0 3290.517313 0.259283343 3290.776596

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4502.934 0 4502.934 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4541.277584 0 4541.277584 1782.756 0.029581432 1782.785 14.86612 0.088325042 14.95444 0 0 0 0.00124996 0.010405385 0.011655 0 0 1797.623184 0.128311859 1797.751496 37975.04 0.431661992 37975.47 217.0365 1.288868073 218.3253 0 0 0 0.018239824 0.151838802 0.170079 0 0 38192.09355 1.872368867 38193.96592 3552.603 2642.971841 6195.575 2749.97 7729.671479 10479.64 0 0 0 2.757555864 910.6161426 913.3737 0 0 6305.330004 11283.25946 17588.58947 57033.85 0 57033.85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57033.85319 0 57033.85319 4.656233 0 4.656233 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.656232857 0 4.656232857 3887.426 1.425890455 3888.852 0.698545 4.25746235 4.956008 0 0 0 0.060024326 0.501562571 0.561587 0 0 3888.184688 6.184915376 3894.369603 59.72076 0.064574318 59.78533 0.241554 0.192807751 0.434362 0 0 0 0.002718325 0.02271427 0.025433 0 0 59.96503268 0.28009634 60.24512902 49257.22 2.636418653 49259.85 99.07102 7.871890221 106.9429 0 0 0 0.111012208 0.927370619 1.038383 0 0 49356.39982 11.43567949 49367.8355 6550.302 0.113990382 6550.416 54.62173 0.339830081 54.96156 0 0 0 0.004597792 0.040034658 0.044632 0 0 6604.927843 0.493855121 6605.421698 190 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 5676.305 0 5676.305 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5722.316834 0 5722.316834 2251.466 0.042013031 2251.508 17.83934 0.111048623 17.95039 0 0 0 0.001689806 0.015379017 0.017069 0 0 2269.307255 0.168440671 2269.475696 50813.01 0.613067962 50813.63 260.4438 1.620458049 262.0642 0 0 0 0.024658201 0.224415681 0.249074 0 0 51073.48078 2.457941691 51075.93872 4539.458 3751.708115 8291.166 3894.617 9718.301376 13612.92 0 0 0 3.727906858 1345.878249 1349.606 0 0 8437.802753 14815.88774 23253.69049 69552.25 0 69552.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69552.25352 0 69552.25352 5.590804 0 5.590804 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.590804265 0 5.590804265 5472.362 2.025120977 5474.387 0.838254 5.352789226 6.191043 0 0 0 0.08114617 0.741302645 0.822449 0 0 5473.281302 8.119212848 5481.400515 78.92047 0.091711678 79.01218 0.289865 0.242411833 0.532277 0 0 0 0.003674872 0.033571382 0.037246 0 0 79.2140066 0.367694893 79.58170149 61912.51 3.744373701 61916.26 118.8852 9.897109052 128.7823 0 0 0 0.150076079 1.370641138 1.520717 0 0 62031.54743 15.01212389 62046.55955 8272.462 0.161872863 8272.624 65.54608 0.427258927 65.97334 0 0 0 0.006215701 0.059170679 0.065386 0 0 8338.014365 0.648302469 8338.662667

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1631.102 0 1631.102 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1654.108092 0 1654.108092 645.4353 0.011295352 645.4466 8.919671 0.032340572 8.952011 0 0 0 0.000468565 0.003966354 0.004435 0 0 654.3554879 0.047602278 654.4030901 13377.47 0.164825493 13377.63 130.2219 0.471924262 130.6938 0 0 0 0.00683746 0.057878346 0.064716 0 0 13507.69411 0.694628101 13508.38874 1284.568 1007.340369 2291.909 1055.328 2830.250502 3885.579 0 0 0 1.03370937 347.1112462 348.145 0 0 2340.930143 4184.702117 6525.632261 20956.42 0 20956.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20956.41841 0 20956.41841 1.691325 0 1.691325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.691325255 0 1.691325255 1442.721 0.544460948 1443.266 0.419127 1.558887074 1.978014 0 0 0 0.02250098 0.191187045 0.213688 0 0 1443.163066 2.294535066 1445.457601 21.29673 0.02465701 21.32138 0.144933 0.070597338 0.21553 0 0 0 0.001019003 0.00865829 0.009677 0 0 21.44267813 0.103912638 21.54659077 17935.15 1.006688133 17936.16 59.44261 2.88232447 62.32494 0 0 0 0.041614519 0.353497765 0.395112 0 0 17994.63577 4.242510368 17998.87828 2371.495 0.043520967 2371.538 32.77304 0.12443016 32.89747 0 0 0 0.001723548 0.015260525 0.016984 0 0 2404.269588 0.183211651 2404.452799 191 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2172.653 0 2172.653 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2203.327443 0 2203.327443 861.6828 0.017567129 861.7003 11.89289 0.043508684 11.9364 0 0 0 0.000684678 0.006468823 0.007154 0 0 873.5763533 0.067544636 873.6438979 19164.93 0.25634533 19165.19 173.6292 0.634893028 174.2641 0 0 0 0.009991041 0.094395199 0.104386 0 0 19338.56898 0.985633557 19339.55462 1736.287 1565.484094 3301.771 1803.54 3807.61587 5611.156 0 0 0 1.510477945 566.1121587 567.6226 0 0 3541.337052 5939.212123 9480.549175 26817.71 0 26817.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26817.70935 0 26817.70935 2.139298 0 2.139298 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.139298479 0 2.139298479 2225.158 0.846774481 2226.004 0.558836 2.097214772 2.656051 0 0 0 0.032878906 0.311811593 0.34469 0 0 2225.749435 3.255800847 2229.005236 30.05852 0.038347886 30.09687 0.193243 0.094976592 0.28822 0 0 0 0.001488989 0.014121016 0.01561 0 0 30.25325293 0.147445493 30.40069843 23784.47 1.565654661 23786.03 79.25682 3.877672449 83.13449 0 0 0 0.060808013 0.576528088 0.637336 0 0 23863.78685 6.019855198 23869.80671 3166.042 0.06767538 3166.11 43.69739 0.167399405 43.86479 0 0 0 0.002518485 0.02488876 0.027407 0 0 3209.742354 0.259963546 3210.002317 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4419.302 0 4419.302 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4457.645424 0 4457.645424 1748.182 0.029861368 1748.212 14.86612 0.088325042 14.95444 0 0 0 0.00124996 0.010405385 0.011655 0 0 1763.049754 0.128591795 1763.178346 35881.83 0.435746898 35882.27 217.0365 1.288868073 218.3253 0 0 0 0.018239824 0.151838802 0.170079 0 0 36098.88557 1.876453773 36100.76203 3465.459 2663.412283 6128.872 2749.97 7729.671479 10479.64 0 0 0 2.757555864 910.6161426 913.3737 0 0 6218.186541 11303.6999 17521.88645 57033.85 0 57033.85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57033.85319 0 57033.85319 4.656233 0 4.656233 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.656232857 0 4.656232857 3837.256 1.43938395 3838.695 0.698545 4.25746235 4.956008 0 0 0 0.060024326 0.501562571 0.561587 0 0 3838.014147 6.198408871 3844.212556 57.21517 0.065185398 57.28035 0.241554 0.192807751 0.434362 0 0 0 0.002718325 0.02271427 0.025433 0 0 57.45944133 0.28070742 57.74014875 48539.89 2.661367626 48542.55 99.07102 7.871890221 106.9429 0 0 0 0.111012208 0.927370619 1.038383 0 0 48639.06808 11.46062847 48650.52871 6423.27 0.11506011 6423.385 54.62173 0.339830081 54.96156 0 0 0 0.004597792 0.040034658 0.044632 0 0 6477.896399 0.494924848 6478.391324 192 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 75, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 5550.681 0 5550.681 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5596.69286 0 5596.69286 2199.533 0.042433522 2199.576 17.83934 0.111048623 17.95039 0 0 0 0.001689806 0.015379017 0.017069 0 0 2217.374461 0.168861162 2217.543322 47668.8 0.619203905 47669.42 260.4438 1.620458049 262.0642 0 0 0 0.024658201 0.224415681 0.249074 0 0 47929.27039 2.464077634 47931.73446 4408.559 3782.411729 8190.971 3894.617 9718.301376 13612.92 0 0 0 3.727906858 1345.878249 1349.606 0 0 8306.904445 14846.59135 23153.4958 69552.25 0 69552.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69552.25352 0 69552.25352 5.590804 0 5.590804 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.590804265 0 5.590804265 5397.001 2.045389574 5399.046 0.838254 5.352789226 6.191043 0 0 0 0.08114617 0.741302645 0.822449 0 0 5397.920068 8.139481444 5406.05955 75.15681 0.092629582 75.24944 0.289865 0.242411833 0.532277 0 0 0 0.003674872 0.033571382 0.037246 0 0 75.45035463 0.368612797 75.81896742 60835.01 3.781849584 60838.79 118.8852 9.897109052 128.7823 0 0 0 0.150076079 1.370641138 1.520717 0 0 60954.04249 15.04959977 60969.09209 8081.648 0.163479702 8081.811 65.54608 0.427258927 65.97334 0 0 0 0.006215701 0.059170679 0.065386 0 0 8147.200269 0.649909308 8147.850179

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1757.276 0 1757.276 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1780.282395 0 1780.282395 697.3375 0.012292676 697.3498 8.919671 0.033477251 8.953148 0 0 0 0.00050493 0.004506427 0.005011 0 0 706.2576488 0.050276355 706.3079251 16110.85 0.179378779 16111.03 130.2219 0.488511063 130.7104 0 0 0 0.007368105 0.065759264 0.073127 0 0 16241.08313 0.733649106 16241.81678 1411.91 1099.838928 2511.749 1055.328 2929.72579 3985.054 0 0 0 1.113934055 394.37513 395.4891 0 0 2468.351857 4423.939848 6892.291705 21259.88 0 21259.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21259.87826 0 21259.87826 1.703694 0 1.703694 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.703694199 0 1.703694199 1637.612 0.592534189 1638.205 0.419127 1.613677539 2.032805 0 0 0 0.024247248 0.217219743 0.241467 0 0 1638.055629 2.423431471 1640.479061 24.76979 0.026834103 24.79663 0.144933 0.073078635 0.218011 0 0 0 0.001098087 0.009837233 0.010935 0 0 24.91582191 0.109749971 25.02557188 19114.95 1.095573776 19116.05 59.44261 2.98363001 62.42624 0 0 0 0.044844161 0.40163126 0.446475 0 0 19174.43699 4.480835046 19178.91783 2562.196 0.047367606 2562.243 32.77304 0.128803527 32.90184 0 0 0 0.001857311 0.017338451 0.019196 0 0 2594.970976 0.193509584 2595.164486 193 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2421.516 0 2421.516 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2452.191209 0 2452.191209 963.901 0.019910905 963.9209 11.89289 0.046061362 11.93896 0 0 0 0.000766287 0.007669121 0.008435 0 0 975.7946874 0.073641388 975.8683288 24369.41 0.290546479 24369.7 173.6292 0.672142543 174.3013 0 0 0 0.011181907 0.111910333 0.123092 0 0 24543.05322 1.074599355 24544.12782 1985.649 1780.493233 3766.142 1803.54 4031.010741 5834.551 0 0 0 1.690517062 671.1548971 672.8454 0 0 3790.879355 6482.65887 10273.53822 27556.82 0 27556.82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27556.81801 0 27556.81801 2.169424 0 2.169424 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.169424354 0 2.169424354 2637.054 0.959749664 2638.013 0.558836 2.220259491 2.779096 0 0 0 0.036797857 0.369668579 0.406466 0 0 2637.649373 3.549677734 2641.19905 36.74959 0.043464195 36.79306 0.193243 0.100548919 0.293792 0 0 0 0.001666467 0.016741186 0.018408 0 0 36.94450191 0.1607543 37.10525621 26151.61 1.774541591 26153.38 79.25682 4.105177577 83.362 0 0 0 0.068055931 0.683503513 0.751559 0 0 26230.93308 6.563222681 26237.4963 3541.618 0.076710964 3541.694 43.69739 0.177220819 43.87461 0 0 0 0.002818672 0.029506897 0.032326 0 0 3585.317804 0.28343868 3585.601242

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4779.356 0 4779.356 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4817.699666 0 4817.699666 1895.972 0.032797497 1896.005 14.86612 0.09167376 14.95779 0 0 0 0.001356889 0.011951175 0.013308 0 0 1910.839943 0.136422432 1910.976366 43387.66 0.478591859 43388.14 217.0365 1.337733668 218.3742 0 0 0 0.019800175 0.174395482 0.194196 0 0 43604.71947 1.99072101 43606.71019 3826.032 2934.6311 6760.663 2749.97 8022.730954 10772.7 0 0 0 2.993454746 1045.894323 1048.888 0 0 6578.994892 12003.25638 18582.25127 58135.62 0 58135.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58135.61937 0 58135.61937 4.701141 0 4.701141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.701140558 0 4.701140558 4386.081 1.580911865 4387.662 0.698545 4.418877966 5.117423 0 0 0 0.065159189 0.576073079 0.641232 0 0 4386.84476 6.57586291 4393.420623 66.82657 0.071594775 66.89816 0.241554 0.200117782 0.441672 0 0 0 0.002950868 0.026088629 0.029039 0 0 67.0710725 0.297801185 67.36887368 51964.15 2.923047501 51967.07 99.07102 8.170341717 107.2414 0 0 0 0.120508899 1.06513779 1.185647 0 0 52063.3403 12.15852701 52075.49883 6966.287 0.126382705 6966.414 54.62173 0.352714254 54.97445 0 0 0 0.004991117 0.045982077 0.050973 0 0 7020.914223 0.525079036 7021.439302 194 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = Average, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 5979.324 0 5979.324 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6025.336142 0 6025.336142 2375.394 0.0444512 2375.439 17.83934 0.113890216 17.95323 0 0 0 0.001780237 0.016622662 0.018403 0 0 2393.235605 0.174964078 2393.410569 56736.32 0.64864653 56736.97 260.4438 1.66192351 262.1057 0 0 0 0.025977809 0.242563351 0.268541 0 0 56996.79312 2.55313339 56999.34626 4839.161 3976.251551 8815.413 3894.617 9966.980348 13861.6 0 0 0 3.927409477 1454.714471 1458.642 0 0 8737.705867 15397.94637 24135.65224 70799.33 0 70799.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70799.33175 0 70799.33175 5.641635 0 5.641635 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.641634847 0 5.641634847 5909.019 2.14264613 5911.162 0.838254 5.489760295 6.328015 0 0 0 0.085488788 0.801249062 0.886738 0 0 5909.943188 8.433655486 5918.376843 86.59402 0.097034041 86.69105 0.289865 0.248614843 0.53848 0 0 0 0.003871536 0.036286176 0.040158 0 0 86.88775227 0.381935061 87.26968733 64869.65 3.961673356 64873.62 118.8852 10.15036349 129.0356 0 0 0 0.158107549 1.481479843 1.639587 0 0 64988.69829 15.59351668 65004.2918 8727.805 0.171274029 8727.977 65.54608 0.43819194 65.98427 0 0 0 0.00654834 0.063955594 0.070504 0 0 8793.35801 0.673421563 8794.031432

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1720.634 0 1720.634 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1743.640286 0 1743.640286 682.1896 0.012415323 682.202 8.919671 0.033477251 8.953148 0 0 0 0.00050493 0.004506427 0.005011 0 0 691.1097767 0.050399001 691.1601757 15193.71 0.181168481 15193.89 130.2219 0.488511063 130.7104 0 0 0 0.007368105 0.065759264 0.073127 0 0 15323.93727 0.735438808 15324.67271 1373.728 1108.794279 2482.523 1055.328 2929.72579 3985.054 0 0 0 1.113934055 394.37513 395.4891 0 0 2430.170186 4432.895199 6863.065385 21259.88 0 21259.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21259.87826 0 21259.87826 1.703694 0 1.703694 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.703694199 0 1.703694199 1615.629 0.598446036 1616.228 0.419127 1.613677539 2.032805 0 0 0 0.024247248 0.217219743 0.241467 0 0 1616.072767 2.429343317 1618.50211 23.67195 0.027101833 23.69905 0.144933 0.073078635 0.218011 0 0 0 0.001098087 0.009837233 0.010935 0 0 23.8179814 0.110017701 23.9279991 18800.65 1.106504561 18801.75 59.44261 2.98363001 62.42624 0 0 0 0.044844161 0.40163126 0.446475 0 0 18860.13489 4.491765831 18864.62666 2506.539 0.04783628 2506.587 32.77304 0.128803527 32.90184 0 0 0 0.001857311 0.017338451 0.019196 0 0 2539.3139 0.193978259 2539.507878 195 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2357.877 0 2357.877 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2388.552034 0 2388.552034 937.5925 0.020123915 937.6127 11.89289 0.046061362 11.93896 0 0 0 0.000766287 0.007669121 0.008435 0 0 949.48621 0.073854398 949.5600644 22776.53 0.293654793 22776.83 173.6292 0.672142543 174.3013 0 0 0 0.011181907 0.111910333 0.123092 0 0 22950.17529 1.077707669 22951.253 1919.336 1796.04668 3715.383 1803.54 4031.010741 5834.551 0 0 0 1.690517062 671.1548971 672.8454 0 0 3724.566303 6498.212318 10222.77862 27556.82 0 27556.82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27556.81801 0 27556.81801 2.169424 0 2.169424 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.169424354 0 2.169424354 2598.874 0.970017224 2599.844 0.558836 2.220259491 2.779096 0 0 0 0.036797857 0.369668579 0.406466 0 0 2599.47004 3.559945294 2603.029986 34.84289 0.043929182 34.88682 0.193243 0.100548919 0.293792 0 0 0 0.001666467 0.016741186 0.018408 0 0 35.03779764 0.161219287 35.19901693 25605.74 1.793525929 25607.53 79.25682 4.105177577 83.362 0 0 0 0.068055931 0.683503513 0.751559 0 0 25685.06039 6.582207018 25691.64259 3444.954 0.077524948 3445.031 43.69739 0.177220819 43.87461 0 0 0 0.002818672 0.029506897 0.032326 0 0 3488.653868 0.284252663 3488.93812

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 25%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4682.302 0 4682.302 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4720.645822 0 4720.645822 1855.85 0.033122351 1855.883 14.86612 0.09167376 14.95779 0 0 0 0.001356889 0.011951175 0.013308 0 0 1870.71782 0.136747286 1870.854567 40958.42 0.483332239 40958.91 217.0365 1.337733668 218.3742 0 0 0 0.019800175 0.174395482 0.194196 0 0 41175.47795 1.995461389 41177.47342 3724.9 2958.35111 6683.251 2749.97 8022.730954 10772.7 0 0 0 2.993454746 1045.894323 1048.888 0 0 6477.863214 12026.97639 18504.8396 58135.62 0 58135.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58135.61937 0 58135.61937 4.701141 0 4.701141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.701140558 0 4.701140558 4327.855 1.596570555 4329.452 0.698545 4.418877966 5.117423 0 0 0 0.065159189 0.576073079 0.641232 0 0 4328.618818 6.591521601 4335.210339 63.91872 0.07230391 63.99102 0.241554 0.200117782 0.441672 0 0 0 0.002950868 0.026088629 0.029039 0 0 64.1632256 0.298510321 64.46173592 51131.66 2.951999839 51134.61 99.07102 8.170341717 107.2414 0 0 0 0.120508899 1.06513779 1.185647 0 0 51230.84926 12.18747935 51243.03674 6818.869 0.127624083 6818.996 54.62173 0.352714254 54.97445 0 0 0 0.004991117 0.045982077 0.050973 0 0 6873.495491 0.526320414 6874.021811 196 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 300 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 1683.99 0 1683.99 23.00614 0 23.00614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1706.996132 0 1706.996132 667.041 0.012537979 667.0535 8.919671 0.033477251 8.953148 0 0 0 0.00050493 0.004506427 0.005011 0 0 675.961129 0.050521657 676.0116506 14276.55 0.182958318 14276.73 130.2219 0.488511063 130.7104 0 0 0 0.007368105 0.065759264 0.073127 0 0 14406.78009 0.737228645 14407.51731 1335.546 1117.750435 2453.296 1055.328 2929.72579 3985.054 0 0 0 1.113934055 394.37513 395.4891 0 0 2391.987524 4441.851355 6833.838879 21259.88 0 21259.88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21259.87826 0 21259.87826 1.703694 0 1.703694 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.703694199 0 1.703694199 1593.647 0.604358328 1594.251 0.419127 1.613677539 2.032805 0 0 0 0.024247248 0.217219743 0.241467 0 0 1594.09011 2.435255609 1596.525366 22.5741 0.027369583 22.60147 0.144933 0.073078635 0.218011 0 0 0 0.001098087 0.009837233 0.010935 0 0 22.72013487 0.110285451 22.83042032 18486.34 1.117436169 18487.46 59.44261 2.98363001 62.42624 0 0 0 0.044844161 0.40163126 0.446475 0 0 18545.82978 4.502697439 18550.33248 2450.879 0.048304991 2450.927 32.77304 0.128803527 32.90184 0 0 0 0.001857311 0.017338451 0.019196 0 0 2483.653973 0.194446969 2483.84842 Total

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 400 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 2294.234 0 2294.234 30.67485 0 30.67485 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2324.909306 0 2324.909306 911.2827 0.020336942 911.3031 11.89289 0.046061362 11.93896 0 0 0 0.000766287 0.007669121 0.008435 0 0 923.1763854 0.074067424 923.2504529 21183.64 0.296763341 21183.93 173.6292 0.672142543 174.3013 0 0 0 0.011181907 0.111910333 0.123092 0 0 21357.27769 1.080816217 21358.3585 1853.021 1811.601528 3664.623 1803.54 4031.010741 5834.551 0 0 0 1.690517062 671.1548971 672.8454 0 0 3658.25153 6513.767166 10172.0187 27556.82 0 27556.82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27556.81801 0 27556.81801 2.169424 0 2.169424 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.169424354 0 2.169424354 2560.695 0.980285557 2561.676 0.558836 2.220259491 2.779096 0 0 0 0.036797857 0.369668579 0.406466 0 0 2561.291066 3.570213626 2564.861279 32.93617 0.044394204 32.98057 0.193243 0.100548919 0.293792 0 0 0 0.001666467 0.016741186 0.018408 0 0 33.13108294 0.161684309 33.29276724 25059.86 1.812511695 25061.67 79.25682 4.105177577 83.362 0 0 0 0.068055931 0.683503513 0.751559 0 0 25139.18247 6.601192785 25145.78366 3348.285 0.078338993 3348.363 43.69739 0.177220819 43.87461 0 0 0 0.002818672 0.029506897 0.032326 0 0 3391.984982 0.285066709 3392.270049 Total 197 Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 500 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 4585.243 0 4585.243 38.34356 0 38.34356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4623.58656 0 4623.58656 1815.726 0.03344723 1815.76 14.86612 0.09167376 14.95779 0 0 0 0.001356889 0.011951175 0.013308 0 0 1830.593641 0.137072165 1830.730714 38529.15 0.488072975 38529.64 217.0365 1.337733668 218.3742 0 0 0 0.019800175 0.174395482 0.194196 0 0 38746.20644 2.000202125 38748.20665 3623.766 2982.073255 6605.839 2749.97 8022.730954 10772.7 0 0 0 2.993454746 1045.894323 1048.888 0 0 6376.728911 12050.69853 18427.42744 58135.62 0 58135.62 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58135.61937 0 58135.61937 4.701141 0 4.701141 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.701140558 0 4.701140558 4269.63 1.612230424 4271.242 0.698545 4.418877966 5.117423 0 0 0 0.065159189 0.576073079 0.641232 0 0 4270.393421 6.60718147 4277.000602 61.01086 0.073013099 61.08387 0.241554 0.200117782 0.441672 0 0 0 0.002950868 0.026088629 0.029039 0 0 61.25536278 0.299219509 61.55458229 50299.16 2.980954356 50302.14 99.07102 8.170341717 107.2414 0 0 0 0.120508899 1.06513779 1.185647 0 0 50398.35025 12.21643386 50410.56669 6671.442 0.128865554 6671.571 54.62173 0.352714254 54.97445 0 0 0 0.004991117 0.045982077 0.050973 0 0 6726.069209 0.527561885 6726.596771

Energy Consumption Absolute Value Table By Life Cycle Stages Concrete Flyash % = 35%, PSF = 100, Gross Floor Area = 600 Manufacturing Construction Maintenance End - Of - Life Operating Energy Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Material Transport-ation Total Annual Total Material Transport-ation Total 5706.713 0 5706.713 46.01227 0 46.01227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5752.724999 0 5752.724999 2262.697 0.04536368 2262.742 17.83934 0.113890216 17.95323 0 0 0 0.001780237 0.016622662 0.018403 0 0 2280.538237 0.175876559 2280.714114 49913.06 0.661961745 49913.72 260.4438 1.66192351 262.1057 0 0 0 0.025977809 0.242563351 0.268541 0 0 50173.53005 2.566448605 50176.0965 4555.1 4042.878995 8597.979 3894.617 9966.980348 13861.6 0 0 0 3.927409477 1454.714471 1458.642 0 0 8453.644881 15464.57381 23918.21869 70799.33 0 70799.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70799.33175 0 70799.33175 5.641635 0 5.641635 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.641634847 0 5.641634847 5745.476 2.186629704 5747.663 0.838254 5.489760295 6.328015 0 0 0 0.085488788 0.801249062 0.886738 0 0 5746.399708 8.477639061 5754.877347 78.42647 0.099025926 78.5255 0.289865 0.248614843 0.53848 0 0 0 0.003871536 0.036286176 0.040158 0 0 78.72020859 0.383926946 79.10413553 62531.35 4.042997355 62535.4 118.8852 10.15036349 129.0356 0 0 0 0.158107549 1.481479843 1.639587 0 0 62650.39744 15.67484068 62666.07228 8313.727 0.174760926 8313.902 65.54608 0.43819194 65.98427 0 0 0 0.00654834 0.063955594 0.070504 0 0 8379.279652 0.67690846 8379.95656 198