Abstract In a static Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), the global warming potential (GWP) is calculated assuming Green House Gas (GHG) impact to be independent of their emission or uptake timing.This study investigates if this approach is adequate to fully capture the global warming impact (GWI) of building materials. Static LCA (sLCA) was compared to dynamic LCA (dLCA) on two case studies, a conventional wall made of concrete and mineral wool, and a bio-based wall made of wood and straw. The main results are: ●sLCA do not allow to evaluate the real GWI of building materials. This might mislead the comparison of building materials. ●GWP indicator might be estimated at 100- and 500-year-TH to better support mitigation in the building sector; ●The relative metric in kgCO2 equivalent misleads conclusions. Absolute global warming indicators calculated with dLCA might be fairer to compare building materials’ GWI; ●sLCA with at 100 years GWP indicator and a relative metric in kgCO2e, which is the approach currently used in the French building sector, disadvantages bio-based solutions compared to conventional ones; ●dLCA applied to an alternative functional unit — maintaining a housing function during several centuries — demonstrates that temporary carbon storage induced by bio-based materials do not lead to dramatic carbon release for future generations.

中文翻译：

---

温室气体时间动态对建筑材料 GWP 评估的影响：生物基和非生物基墙的案例研究

摘要 在静态生命周期评估 (LCA) 中，假设温室气体 (GHG) 的影响与其排放或吸收时间无关，计算全球变暖潜能值 (GWP)。本研究调查这种方法是否足以完全捕获建筑材料的全球变暖影响 (GWI)。在两个案例研究中，静态 LCA (sLCA) 与动态 LCA (dLCA) 进行了比较，一个是由混凝土和矿棉制成的传统墙，另一个是由木头和稻草制成的生物基墙。主要结果是： ●sLCA 不允许评估建筑材料的真实 GWI。这可能会误导建筑材料的比较。● GWP 指标可能估计为 100 年和 500 年-TH，以更好地支持建筑部门的减缓；●kgCO2 当量的相对度量会误导结论。使用 dLCA 计算的绝对全球变暖指标可能更适合比较建筑材料的 GWI；● sLCA 具有 100 年 GWP 指标和以 kgCO2e 为单位的相对指标，这是法国建筑部门目前使用的方法，与传统解决方案相比，生物基解决方案存在劣势；● dLCA 应用于替代功能单元——在几个世纪内保持住房功能——表明由生物基材料引起的临时碳储存不会导致子孙后代的大量碳释放。