Hi all, I have a query working on RICS v2 edition.
The project is in RIBA 3 hence 6% contingency is included in ‘Top up factor’ tab with 2611 m2 in ‘building area’
However in the results section, total GWP per m2 (kg CO2e/m2) do not match the total GWP (kg CO2e) across A1-A5. Please see the attached screenshot above.
Could you help me understand if I am reading it wrong?
Hi Hiranmoy,
For the first set of results at the top, those do not have the WLCA uncertainty factor considered. The WLCA uncertainty factor comprises of contingency, carbon data uncertainty, and quantity data uncertainty factors.
You can find these at the last section of the Most contributing materials portion, on the results page.
The second set of results are different. Firstly, they exclude biogenic carbon. Secondly they are divided by the GIFA, as indicated in the title above them.
If you have added up the first section by your GIFA which is 2611m2, you would get 373.93 kgCO2e/m2. It is likely there was biogenic carbon within the A5.3 section.
If you can email us with your project and design name, we can see if this is the case.
We recently made some changes to the tool and the results, to align with Version 3 of the same guidance.
Thank you for your prompt response. The WLCA uncertainty factor assumed are only the contingency factor.
Yes you are right, When I compared the first set of results and and second set of results, A1-A4 results makes sense but A5.3 results is lower in the second set of results even with the 6% contingency.
I am trying to understand that.
Additionally, Can you help me understand the results below second set of results? (please see the screenshot in the original post, as i can post only one screenshot here)
It is less than the first set of result i.e 373.93 kgCO2e/m2, considering it doesnt have any topup factors.
Yes, will email you the details.
Thank you again for bearing with me.
