Frequently Asked Questions

The first version of the "LCBI Methodology - New Construction V1.0" is available online at https://www.lowcarbonbuilding.com/methodology/. The ongoing pilot phase will provide relevant feedback, help define the verification process and streamline the methodology.

As of today, the methodology should be applied to the main usage, with secondary usages being included in the calculations as long as they represent 10% of the reference area, secondary usages should be excluded from the both the energy and materials calculations, together with a report explaining the allocation key of shared components between the main usage (be it office, hotel or residential) and the secondary usage. As single-use buildings, evaluating to LCBI opened use for now (offices, hotels, collective housing). Other use has to be excluded for now if reference area is > 10%

BBCA is a non profit organization providing methods to measure & certify life cycle carbon performance of buildings in France. BBCA has initiated the Low Carbon Building Initiative. There are some methodological differences between BBCA and LCBI, but not fundamental ones in terms of the expected performance from submitted buildings. Low carbon leverages and ambitions are expected to similarly help achieve the targets set by LCBI and BBCA, but two different studies must be run because BBCA requires Dynamic LCA (as per RE2020) and LCBI requires Static LCA (as per Levels).

LCBI contributes to the race towards future WLC regulations by rewarding low-carbon buildings through a performance-based rating. The proposed universal reporting framework may also be used to drive portfolio-wide decarbonization strategies across Europe. First, LCBI aligns with EN15978 and 15804 standards. As per the Taxonomy requirement, LCBI is built upon compatibilities with Level(s) to define its methodological principles on embodied/biogenic carbon. For energy, it can be documented with either national calculation methodologies or energy simulations/monitoring as per CRREM. By flagging incompleteness through the stars rating and providing default lump sums, it aims at helping consistent ESG reporting. Finally, the detailed reporting sheet required for each project may simplify the interpretation of life cycle stages impacts within other reporting frameworks such as the GHG Protocol (upfront, operational, in-use/refurbishment, waste…). It's limit values are aligning with CRREM trajectories (for operational carbon) and SBTi upfront embodied carbon trajectory (for embodied carbon)

LCBI follows this principle by requiring minimum efforts on 3 separate indicators whilst allowing for flexibility in the priorisation between embodied, operational and biogenic carbon. However, LCBI leaves to national regulations/initiatives or company ESG strategies the choice to either add them over 50 years (with/without future decarbonization) or tackle them as separate causes to the global warming issue.

For now, the certification only applies to Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Spain. The methodology can be used for any country, however the assessment and performance levels have only been set for these 8 countries for now. Adding more countries to the LCBI methodology is on the LCBI roadmap : feel free to contact us if you want to extend LCBI to your geographical scope.

LCBI ambitions to reconciliate design/operational teams and ESG reporting tasks by providing a universal & flexible rating scheme that follows the design process as more data becomes available, whilst providing a roadmap to decarbonization at project & portfolio levels.

We are regularly in touch with such initiatives and others

Bureau Veritas is our first certifying partner, but it is not limited to them.

The final reporting should be made through the LCBI reporting sheet. For the LCA calculation, any software applying the LCBI methodology calculation can be used. OneClick LCA is a tool that can be used, but is not mandatory One Click LCA is recommanded, not mandatory. The Level(s) GWP tool from One Click LCA work both with EN15804 +A1/+A2 and is quite adapted to perform LCBI assessments. In the next few month (July 2024), One Click LCA will focus on developing a tool that can display the results according to LCBI focusing on the 3 main indicators and the performance levels.

Like RICS in the UK, there are regulations in Europe which all use different scopes, life period, even calculations. LCBI is looking here as priority to be built upon compatibilities with Level(s) (European Commission Framework) same as for the EU taxonomy to allow for investors to report & benchmark more easily their portfolios which can be in different countries.

For the embodied carbon calculation : EN 15978, EN 15804 +A1 and +A2. For operational carbon calculation : EN ISO 52000 or EN 15603, EN 15978.

Level's is a methodological framework for LCA calculcation, which does not give targets or orders of magnitude of low carbon buidlings. Having targets in the LCBI methodology allows to confront LCA calculation to actual numbers, assess if it is low carbon, and potentally shows the needed efforts for carbon reduction.

This methodology is applicable to newly existing building (either in construction, or delivered less than 2 years ago) which are able to precisly calculate the embodied and biogenic carbon from construction, as well as the operational carbon. However, renovation is excluded from the scope.

LCBI is a certification scheme that only focuses on a project's greenhouse gas emissions and sets carbon performance levels. Based on European standards and initiatives, the LCA methodology developed for this certification scheme aims to be the most transparent and comprehensive in terms of reporting.

Energy thresholds are consistent with CRREM - which aligned to SBTi - top down sectorial decarbonization approach budgets, we also made sure that bottom-up energy consumptions (in kWhFE/m²) are capturing energy performant buildings. Embodied wise, top down initiatives are much more rare, very recently on the building SBTi guidance, a pathway tool has been published, defining upfront trajectories only (cf. final visualisation we've made "upfront vs WLCA" showing few residential and offices 2025+ thresholds vs our estimated upfront equivalence targets]

No, there are no bonus for buildings with special foundation needs.

Yes, we are planning to.

Starting July 2024, you will be able to to copy a RE2020 design done in One click LCA into the LCBI tool. At the moment this still requires some manual manipulation (mostly in terms of assessing & displaying the rating scores) but in May, One Click LCA will release a tool specifically for LCBI.

No

IMPS2 without component H. See detailed definition on p.10 of the methodology

At this point, GHG emissions from soil artificialization and land use change on the construction site are not accounted for due to the current lack of consensual methodology and data. This may evolve in further LCBI versions.

To achieve the associated 4th star, macro-lots must be fully modeled (ie quantities detailed and associated to relevant EPDs). No partial modeling will be accepted ; lump sums should be applied as long as the data is not available.

Whilst one may expect differentiations in material intensity across countries (e.g., due to inconsistent building standards, seismic or thermal constraints, etc.), as of now this does not translate in the currently available statistics. Pilot projects may help confirm or correct this observation and adjust targets accordingly.

This is indeed a major issue, but things are progressing at a fast pace and building projects have their role to play in bridging the data gap, in relation with manufacturers, EPD-programs and LCA tools, some of which now including features to adapt generic or specific data in a consistent and standardized way (EN15804). Whilst some building parts are more difficult than others to properly assess (MEPs for instance), some are rather accessible. LCBI requires at least one scope (frame & shell) to be fully assessed, but rewards more complete calculations as sufficient data become available. To avoid miscommunication of partial results, lump sums shall be applied to cover for the missing scopes.

The thresholds are the same between building types. Differences between residential and offices results are not statistically significant enough to introduce objective modulations of the targets, based on the building typology. This may change in the future with more benchmarks and the spread of robust MEP LCA

'The reporting sheet for the LCA and the gives a list of all the elements that should be reported, and makes sure there is no empty line. There is no threshold on quantity for now. The LCA should be as precise as possible and include all finishes for example. Note for Office Buildings : Tenants-related moveable partitions are excluded from calculations. Are retained within the Partitions & Finishes (PF) or Technical & Services (TS) sections any other works that would be required for an open-plan layout to be handed over. If such works are unknown (undetermined tenant works), the embodied carbon impact of a fictional layout based on SED assumptions and other space-planning hypothesis is required.

'The LCA scope includes all modules, from cradle-to-grave, in order to have a calculation as complete and accurate as possible, and reflect the real carbone impact. In the previous EPD regulation (EN15804+A1), only Cradle-to-gate calculation were required. In the new EN15804+A2 regulation, it is now mandatory to report modules from A to C to D. More and more data will therefor be reported on the entire life cycle of the product or material. Uncomplete data from EN15804+A1 EPD will have to be completed, either with the use of a software like OneClick or through LCA practitioner's experience. Please see Part 1.5 from the ANNEXE in the framework for more detail on this subject.

The certification process is based upon two separate submissions at two different stages in the design process. Please refer to the methododology.

The database used for LCBI should be in priority the one of the country where the project is located. OCLCA, for example, integrates the databases for each countries. The LCBI methodology proposes an order of priorisation for the EPD use, according to the context you face.

The lifecycle carbon imbact is reported for 50 years in the LCBI methodology. However final results can easily be calculated per year (dividing by 50) for any amortization needs.

The targets values have been set using different known projects, and a part of an anonymous database from OCLCA. The pilot projects data will also help to adjust the target. As all of these project data are confidential, the sharing of those data is not planned.

The aim of the LCBI methodology aims precisely in normalizing the calculation. For the setting of the targets, assumptions have been made and have been tested and adjusted through the pilot project phase. The data on the different phases A to C helps to see the detailed calculations.

Yes, the calculation takes into account all modules (A1-A5, B1-B5, C1-C4) except for the module D, which is still reported, but separately.

Lifecycle stages should be reported separately as in the LCBI reporting template. In the case where this is not possible due to the values being combined in the EPDs (for example A4 and A5) it is possible to report on the combined values in the template.

For a bio based product, the biogenic storage is indeed taken into account in the A1-A3 phases (carbon reduction by storage), but also in the C phases of the life cycle (release) - in the end, to simplify, the initially stored carbon is released again. With the use of the EN15804+A2 regulation, biogenic carbon is separated from total carbon emissions, and it is this value that needs to be used in the Embodied Carbon calculation part. Embodied carbon calculation and Biognic carbon calculation are independent in the methodology. The calculation of embodied carbon is given in the methodology and is linked to the carbon storage information of the EPD.

The more specific the EPD, the more precise will the LCA be. If no EPDs are available for a product, generic EPD data are allowed. Please see the prioritization order of EPD in part 1.3 of the ANNEX in the methodological framework.

There is no imposed software for the LCA calculation, as long as the calculation methodology is applied. OneClick LCA can be used for the calculation.

Furnitures are not taken into account in the life cycle assessment of the building.

See LCBI guidance: "The reference study period (RSP) is set to 50 years for embodied carbon calculations. There are few discrepancies regarding RSP across Europe, but most methodologies are using 50 years, as is the case of the Level(s) guidance." "Methodologies using 50 years RSP : RE2020 (France), DGNB (Germany), Danish Green Building Council, Climate Declaration (Finland), Level(s) EU framework".]

'The life cycle assessement is done over a 50 year lifespan. If a product or material has a longer lifespan, it will need less replacement and thus will lower the carbon impact of the project. However if a product or material is recyclable, it will be shown through the D module of its EPD - which is reported but not encounted in the building's LCA assessment.

> Both +A1 an +A2 EPD are accepted in the LCA calculation. The data from the EPD are used for the calculation. LCBI indeed allows the use of both +A1 and +A2, however as the Embodied carbon defined by LCBI is the sum of fossil + LULUC GWP, the LCA assessor should make sure that biogenic carboe is not integrated in the result of +A1 EPDs

LCBI allows only the use of EPD made with EN 15804 for Embodied carbon LCA

'It is assumed that LCA are firstly carried out on Frame and Shell scope, where the data is often more accessible, and this calculation calls on low-carbon strategies which are different from the second scope. We therefore wanted to differentiate between these two scopes.

According to our studies, this methodological difference is not significative, this cohabitation between +A1 and +A2 should not be a problem

It is compulsory to fill in the main product impacts stages (A1-A3, A4-A5, B1-B5, C1-C4 and D), which are taken into account when calculating impacts at building scale. On the other hand, there is no a priori obligation for the sub-stages, which may prove useful for identifying certain inconsistencies but are not essential for the calculation itself.

To be aligned with CRREM and ESG annual reporting (GHG protocol, etc.), the impact of the use of refrigerants has to be reported and accounted in the Operational Carbon scope. Leakage rates should be estimated and reported, and associated to the relevant GWP depending on the cooling gas used in the building.

The LCBI certification scheme also allows the project to use a custom District Heating emission factor, as long as it is justified by official national documents or by official statements from district heating management companies. These documents should provide justifications on the emission factor to date. No projected value for future emission factors will be valued in this first version.

LCBI considers the current trends in Europe in terms of grid-related emissions. Rather than relying on prospective arbitrary assumptions to provide a 50 years projection of cumulated operational emissions, LCBI relies on the CRREM emission factors of the year of evaluation (which are documented per country up to 2050) and flexible targets to rate energy performance on a yearly basis.

In order to promote exemplary design and operation of the building and avoid blurring the reporting with other energy procurement strategies, the methodology shall rely on location-based emission factors rather than market-based. These should be sourced from the CRREM Risk Assessment tool, at the year of expected handover if the assessment is carried out construction stage, and at year of certification if monitored consumptions are reported).

The certification scheme proposes to address in-situ renewable energy production with the following methodology: whilst exported energy is not accounted for, self-consumed renewable energy is deducted from the final energy consumption. This in-situ consumption ratio shall be calculated and documented through regulatory methods or a proposed methodology derived from the Dynamic Energy Simulation.

Yes the emission factors are different from the french conventional data given on INIES.

Operational carbon thresholds are set to be coherent with performant energy consumptions and are aligned with CRREM pathways. To achieve such aim, a dedicated target setting methodology was developed, consisting of calculating energy consumption scenarios, and comparing results with GHGe stranding years. See part 1.8 in ANNEX from the methodological framework.

No, LCBI Operational thresholds are already coherently set with CRREM values, they cannot be substituted by other reference values.

Bio-based building materials contain carbon that has been extracted from the atmosphere as CO2 during their growth. This carbon will be re-emitted at the end of life of these materials, mainly in the form of CO2 and/or CH4 depending on the scenario (incineration, landfill, etc.). A “biogenic carbon neutrality” approach is applied to the CO2 stored in these materials coming from sustainable sources (cases where carbon neutrality can be assumed are described in EN 16485 standard). With regards to the entire life cycle of the building, these emissions are neither a burden nor a sink. However, provided their sustainable sourcing can be documented, biobased materials (especially long lasting, structural ones) temporarily store a significant amount of carbon over a period of 50 years (the conventional life cycle of the building) and potentially more. There is therefore a time lag in emissions which is considered beneficial on the “race to urgent decarbonization” for the building sector, whilst they also provide a useful substitute to carbon-intensive materials whose manufacturing processes will take time to fully decarbonise.

The T1 target on Biogenic carbon is not a prerequisite anymore for the Standard level of LCBI. However to reach Performance or Excellence level, the T1 target is needed on biogenic carbon.

Biogenic carbon is accounted only one time on the life cycle assessment. It reflects the stored carbon in a building, which does not change on the life cycle. Indeed, if a bio-based product must be replaced in the 50 year life time, its replacement will result in the same quantity of bio based material stored (end of life scenario of bio-based product result in the release of the stored carbon).

Yes, all building parts components can be accounted in the biogenic carbon part, regardless of the embodied carbon scope/stars.

Biogenic carbon is stored in bio-based products as it grows. Therefore, the carbon storage of a building is taken into account only one time, when the material is incorporated in the building. See question 3.4.

Yes, you can always estimate it in the case of wood products using the mass of the product. You can fin the rule in the methodology (page 20)

Target 1 is set to be accessible to the vast majority of projects. Benchmarks show that with relatively classical components of the finishing works (composite wood raised floor, wooden doors, bio-based insulation, plinths, parquet…) Target 1 can be achieved. Target 2 aims timber or mixed structure buildings that incorporate structural wood (CLT flooring, CLT beam/columns, wooden frame facades…). It shows a real ambition to give importance to bio-based materials on the whole building scope and highlights the potential of “carbon sink” in buildings.

In this case the LCA assessor has to estimate it according to the end of life scenario defined by the EPD. LCA tools like OneClick are doing that very well

All the biobased components of the building are taken into account for Biogenic Carbone Storage