How to decarbonise the construction sector, without shifting the problem
- Life cycle assessment (LCA) is the only tool that evaluates the full range of a building’s environmental impacts, going far beyond GHG emissions alone.
- Some ‘green’ solutions can shift the problem: recycled carpets emit toxic substances, showing that decarbonisation and health do not always go hand in hand.
- The circular economy presents the same risks: reused materials may contain banned insecticides, despite a climate-friendly approach.
- Bio-based materials offer genuine co-benefits, such as a low energy footprint, local availability and the regulation of indoor pollutants.
- There is no miracle solution: LCA guides choices by comparing all alternatives, and moderation remains the universal principle of any construction project.
When it comes to the environment, the cure can sometimes prove worse than the disease. One of the best-known examples is diesel. Since it emits fewer greenhouse gases (GHGs), it was long considered a better alternative to petrol – until we became aware of the health and environmental effects of the other gases and particles emitted in large quantities.
The construction sector is not immune to these false solutions, as Valérie Desauziers illustrates: “When analysing the indoor air quality in fitness centres1, we realised that certain recycled rubber mats emit substances that are harmful to health. The initiative is commendable from an environmental perspective, but it must not come at the expense of human health.”
So, how can we ensure we do not replace one problem – GHG emissions – with another? Or shift it geographically or over time? “Life cycle assessment (LCA) is the only method for evaluating the various environmental impacts,” replies Adélaïde Feraille. LCA is a standardised assessment method that takes into account the impacts of a product’s entire life cycle – from manufacture and transport through to use and end-of-life. The impacts considered include not only GHG emissions but also numerous other environmental impacts: water quality, air quality, soil pollution, etc. Since the 1990s, LCA has been used in the construction of new buildings. It has since been extended to neighbourhood-scale projects and renovation schemes2.

“There is no miracle solution that is completely neutral for the environment or health,” points out Adélaïde Feraille. “LCA should be seen as a decision-making tool: it was designed to compare alternative solutions, taking into account all impacts.
Since 2022, the latest environmental regulations to come into force – RE2020 – have, for the first time, incorporated the environmental performance of buildings, based on life cycle analysis. The construction of a new building must therefore meet targets for energy efficiency, reduced carbon footprint and comfort in the event of extreme heat3.
LCA proves particularly useful, for example, when choosing a building’s thermal insulation. Indeed, the thicker the insulation, the greater the insulation performance and the greater the energy savings. However, the manufacture of the insulation itself requires energy: beyond a certain threshold, the thermal benefits no longer offset the energy consumed in producing the insulation. LCA enables this limit to be determined to ensure that the choice of insulation is beneficial from a climate perspective.
Nevertheless, in practice, it is very difficult to incorporate all the impacts of a solution into a life cycle assessment. “Many methodological issues are still under discussion,” points out Adélaïde Feraille. “LCA is a tool developed for the production of goods; adaptations are needed to apply it to the building sector. Assessments face numerous limitations: incomplete databases, difficulties in defining the boundaries of the system being assessed, and so on.”
One of the shortcomings of LCA concerns the health impact of decarbonisation solutions in the building sector. “Emerging materials, developed through an eco-design approach, may emit toxic substances for which we lack data,” explains Valérie Desauziers. These materials, used in our homes or public buildings, can thus pollute indoor air or food matrices. “These may be additives, but also substances not intentionally added that form through chemical reactions during the manufacture or degradation of the eco-designed material,” explains Valérie Desauziers.
A well-managed renovation or construction project can multiply the benefits for the climate, biodiversity and health
Another example: the circular economy. “Since the Anti-Waste and Circular Economy Act (AGEC), it has been mandatory to carry out an assessment and recover materials during demolition work or major renovation projects,” adds Valérie Desauziers. However, whilst this approach is beneficial for the climate, it can have harmful consequences for health. Certain structural elements reused in furniture, for example, may—if they have been treated with insecticides now banned—pose a health risk to residents.”
Conversely, a well-managed renovation or construction project can multiply the benefits for the climate, biodiversity and health. In certain contexts, rammed earth stands out as a very interesting building system: “It is a bio-based material that does not require significant energy expenditure to process or transport when the source is located near the construction site,” explains Valérie Desauziers. “Our ongoing research – not yet published – shows that, thanks to its absorption properties, this material also helps to regulate certain indoor air pollutants.”
The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report4 highlights the potential co-benefits for the environment: reduced acidification and eutrophication near construction sites, improved biodiversity thanks to green roofs and walls, and reduced pollution through reduced corrosion of building materials. A 2020 study5 cited by the IPCC assesses the potential savings in natural resources – fossil fuels, metal ores, metals – under an energy efficiency scenario for European buildings. The result is that for every megawatt-hour (MWh, the unit of energy) of final energy demand saved in the residential sector, 406 kg of natural resources are saved. For non-residential buildings, the figure rises to 706 kg per MWh of reduced energy demand.
Adélaïde Feraille concludes: “There is no silver bullet, and it is necessary to consider the context to make the best choice. However, resource efficiency and optimisation are concepts that apply to all projects, and LCA helps us to implement them.”

