Which is the greenest wall system: brick, stucco, or EIFS?
comments (4) November 17th, 2009 in BlogsBASF Wall Systems recently announced the results of an Eco-Efficiency Analysis comparing brick, stucco and Senergy® Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS). The analysis was designed to determine the balance of environmental burden and life cycle costs associated with the construction, use and disposal of exterior wall claddings in the United States. Though the study was geared towards commercial buildings, the findings still prove interesting.
THE TEST:
- The ecological impact of processes involved in the extraction, conversion, maintenance and disposal of each component used in the three wall claddings.
- The performance of each cladding was evaluated in six key environmental categories:
- Energy consumption
- Emissions
- Toxicity potential
- Occupational illness and accidents
- Resource consumption
- Land use
- A Lifecycle Cost Analysis (LCA) of the three claddings, creating a comprehensive assessment of both cost and ecological impact.
THE FINDINGS:
Brick: The lifecycle cost of Senergy EIFS and stucco were much lower than brick, and brick was more expensive in all three phases: production, use and disposal. It also provides the least eco-efficient wall cladding due to its higher cost and larger ecological footprint.
Stucco: Like brick, stucco is more material intensive than EIFS. It also a greater environmental impact than EIFS (though less than brick).
EIFS: The smallest ecological footprint in every category of environmental impact.
posted in: Blogs, green building, siding, walls, stonework, stucco, brick, eifs
-
How to Paint Fiber-Cement Siding
Painter Jim Lacey shares some tips for caulking and painting fiber-cement siding. read more
All How-To Topics


















Comments (4)
Do you have the full report on the cost and impact of stucco, because if so it would be a great help if i could look over it. Thanks.
Posted: 5:46 am on December 4th
We did consider HBCD in our Eco-Efficiency Analysis - all three wall systems in our study use HBCD in their rigid insulation materials.
The wall systems we compared were equally insulated, so differences in energy consumption during building use would not be a factor. We used insulation schedules provided by the New Buildings Institute’s Advanced Buildings Core Performance Guide for metal-framed buildings in Climate Zones 1-6.
The Guide requires R-5 continuous exterior insulation plus R-13 cavity insulation, or wall systems that provide a maximum heat transfer coefficient of U-0.077. For EIFS, this U-factor is achieved with 3” of EPS.
For brick and stucco walls, we used 1” of XPS to provide R-5 continuous insulation plus R-13 fiberglass batt cavity insulation, per Guide requirements.
Both EPS and XPS use HBCD as a flame-retardant. The amount of HBCD was similar in all three wall systems, and was not a major factor in study results.
We appreciate your interest in our recently completed study and will be glad to answer any further questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Richard Martens
Market Manager – Nonresidential Construction
BASF Construction Chemicals, LLC – Wall Systems
richard.martens@basf.com
Posted: 3:54 pm on November 30th
Posted: 10:32 am on November 20th
Posted: 8:11 pm on November 19th
You must be logged in to post comments. Log in.