Energy Efficient Rammed Earth Construction Thesis

THE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF KENYA
ENERGY EFFICIENT RAMMED EARTH CONSTRUCTION; The future of ancient Technology in Kenya
KIPNGENO GIDEON SITIENEI

EAAQ/04354/2013S. B. ARCH 2020/2021
SUPERVISOR: ARCH. MICHAEL ONYOYO.
RAMMED EARTH ARCHITECTURE
ENERGY EFFICIENT RAMMED EARTH CONSTRUCTION;

The future of Ancient Technology in Kenya.
By;
KIPNGENO GIDEON
EAAQ/04354/2013S
A Thesis Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Architecture.
The Technical University of Kenya
Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Technology
School of Architecture and Spatial Planning
Department of Architecture and Building Science
©2020
ENERGY EFFICIENT RAMMED EARTH CONSTRUCTION
DECLARATION
This thesis is my original work and to the best of my knowledge has not been presented for an award of a degree in any other institution.
This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the examination requirements for the award of the Bachelor of Architecture degree, Depart-
ment of Architecture and Environmental Design, Technical University of Kenya.
Signature…………………………….…...............................................Date………………………………..................................
Kipngeno Gideon Sitienei (EAAQ/04354/2013s)
Author
Signature ………………………….…………………………………. Date………………………………………………………...
Arch. Michael Onyoyo
Supervisor
Signature ………………………….…………………………………… Date………………………………...............................
Ag. Chairman,
Department of Architecture & Environmental Design,
School of Architecture and the Built Environment,
The Technical University of Kenya.
Dr Arch. Joseph Kedogo
i|Page
DEDICATION
I am dedicating this thesis to my immediate and extended family, who have meant and continue to mean so much to me. A spe-
cial feeling of gratitude goes to my late grandmother, Rodah Chelule who taught me the value of hard work, integrity and faith in
God. She was a friend, an inspiration, a guardian and her teachings shaped my Academic, personal and professional life.
ii | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
To God Almighty, for Grace and provisions this far
To my family, both immediate and extended, for their support and encouragement
To my supervisor, Arch. Michael Onyoyo, I am heartily grateful for unwavering support, guidance, insight, encouragement and ample time
throughout the course of this study. To Arch. Gladys Muthoni, for her invaluable critiques, input and direction to facilitate this study. I also
thank the final year studio team for their critiques, insight and input to foster this research.
To Architect Susan K. Araka, the senior Superintending Architect, Ministry of transport, Infrastructure, Housing, Urban Development and
Public Works, for her valuable input on Rammed Earth construction in Kenya. To Dr Eng. Charles Kabubo, the chairperson Sustainable Ma-
terials Research and Technology Centre (SMARTEC), JKUAT, and Eng. Karugo, for their valuable input on Rammed Earth construc-
tion at Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology (Hall 7 and SMARTEC building).
To Structural Reinforced Rammed Earth wall (SIREWALL), who have sponsored my Rammed Earth Technical Course.
To all the lecturers in the Department of Architecture and Environmental Design, for their guidance, critiques and encouragement in all my
years that have enabled me to reach this final phase. Thank you for your invaluable guidance and advice throughout my study in the school
of Architecture.
To all my classmates, class EAAQ/2013s, thank you for being your support and encouragement and colleagues to learn with and from.
iii | P a g e
ABSTRACT
Climate change is one of the main challenges facing modern civilizations. Building materials, construction and building operations
contributes to more than 39% of the Global Green House Gas emissions (UNEP, 2009). According to 2050 projections by architecture 2030,
Embodied energy will make up more than 51 per cent of the Total Global Green House Gas Emissions in the Building Sector (Architecture
2030, 2019). This has been attributed to the increased operational energy efficiency of fixtures and fittings used throughout the buildings
lifetime. This has led to the emerging focus of energy efficiency on the embodied energy (EE) of the buildings which is locked in place as the
building is built and operated and can’t be reduced. This study adopted an exploratory research methodology and adopted a case study and
Life-Cycle Analysis methodology research approaches to understand the various Rammed earth building techniques. The case studies were
Hall 7 and SMARTEC building at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology, in Kenya. The cases were selected because of the
documented Rammed Earth construction and conventional stone and mortar undertaken by the SMARTEC department. The precedent stud-
ies were, The Inside Out School in Ghana, a representation of modern low-technology Rammed earth construction and The Pediatric Surgery
Centre in Uganda, a representation of High Technology Rammed earth construction. The parameters under study were the material selection
properties (Context, Construction, Properties and Experiences) and the Life Cycle Analysis (Goal and scope definition, Life Cycle Inventory
and Interpretation and Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Interpretation.) The data collected was presented and modelled in Revit 2020 stu-
dent’s version, and analyzed using One _Click LCA to calculate the embodied energy. The findings showed that the use of natural building
materials, e.g. earth and stone, results in lower embodied energy as compared to manufactured building materials. However, the use of fin-
ishes, e.g. coatings and pastes increases the initial and recurring EE of the building while the use of concrete had high initial EE but lower
recurring EE. This illustrates the importance of Whole Building Life Cycle Analysis in informing stakeholders in Architecture, engineering
and construction on decisions regarding the choice of building materials since some have lower initial EE but high recurring EE resulting in
cumulatively high embodied energy and vice versa.
iv | P a g e
The mother Art is Architecture. Without an architecture of our own, we have no soul of our own civilization
Frank Lloyd Wright.
v|Page
1.10. Research Methodology .................................................. 11

Table of Contents 1.11. Organization of The Study ........................................... 12
DECLARATION............................................................................. i
1.11.1. Chapter One ........................................................... 12
DEDICATION ............................................................................... ii
1.11.2. Chapter Two .......................................................... 12
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................iii
1.11.3. Chapter Three ........................................................ 12
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................iv
1.11.4. Chapter Four .......................................................... 12
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................ ix
1.11.5. Chapter Five ........................................................... 13
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................... xv
2.0. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................... 15
1. CHAPTER ONE......................................................................... 1
2.0. Introduction. ................................................................... 15
1.0. Introduction ...................................................................... 1
2.1. EARTH ARCHITECTURE ............................................ 15
1.1. Background....................................................................... 4
2.2. EARTH CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES ............... 17
1.2. Problem Statement........................................................... 6
2.2.1. Earth Cut out .............................................................. 18
1.3. Research Questions.......................................................... 7
2.2.2. Earth Dug Out ............................................................ 18
1.4. Research Objectives ......................................................... 7
2.2.3. Filled In (Earth Bag construction)............................ 18
1.5. Relevance/Justification. ................................................... 7
2.2.4. Covered Earth Construction .................................... 18
1.6. Scope of The Study .......................................................... 8
2.2.5. Rammed Earth ........................................................... 19
1.7. Limitations of the Study ................................................. 9
2.2.6. Compressed Earth Blocks (CEB).............................. 20
1.8. Assumptions ..................................................................... 9
2.2.7. Extruded Earth ........................................................... 20
1.9. Definition of Operational Terms.................................. 10
2.2.8. Adobe .......................................................................... 20
vi | P a g e
2.2.9. Stacked Earth (COB) ................................................. 21 2.5.1. Labour-Intensive. ....................................................... 37

2.2.10. Poured Earth .......................................................... 21 2.5.2. Standardization. ......................................................... 37
2.2.11. Shaped Earth .......................................................... 21 2.5.3. Construction Time ..................................................... 37
2.2.12. Wattle and Daub ................................................... 22 2.5.4. Durability .................................................................... 37
2.3. RAMMED EARTH TECHNOLOGY ........................... 22 2.6. Energy Efficiency ........................................................... 38
2.3.1. Rammed Earth Construction before the 20th 2.6.1. Assessing Energy Efficiency..................................... 39
Century ..................................................................................... 24 2.6.2. Why Energy Efficiency? ............................................ 40
2.3.2. Rammed Earth in the 20 Century.......................... 26
th
2.7. Embodied & Operational Energy ................................ 40
2.3.3. Modern Rammed Earth (RE) ................................... 27 2.7.1. Assessing Embodied Energy .................................... 41
2.4. ADVANTAGES OF RAMMED EARTH .................... 35 2.7.2. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Architecture ....... 43
2.4.1. Thermal Mass ............................................................. 35 2.8. Material Selection Considerations ............................... 48
2.4.2. Structural Aspects ..................................................... 35 2.8.1. Material Properties .................................................... 49
2.4.3. Sustainability.............................................................. 35 2.8.2. Experience................................................................... 50
2.4.4. Minimal Maintenance. .............................................. 35 2.8.3. Manufacturing Process ............................................. 51
2.4.5. Insects, Rodents, Termite proof ............................... 36 2.8.4. Context ........................................................................ 51
2.4.6. Fire Resistant. ............................................................. 36 2.9. Theoretical Framework ................................................. 51
2.4.7. Noise Reduction ........................................................ 36 3.0. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................ 54
2.4.8. Aesthetics .................................................................... 36 3.0. Introduction .................................................................... 54
2.4.9. Cradle to cradle.......................................................... 37 3.1. Research Design ............................................................. 54
2.5. DISADVANTAGES ....................................................... 37 3.2. Research Approach ........................................................ 54
vi | P a g e
3.2.1. Case Study .................................................................. 55 4.1.2. Construction ............................................................... 68

3.2.2. Life Cycle Assessment Methodology ..................... 55 4.1.3. Material Properties .................................................... 70
3.3. Sampling Design ............................................................ 57 4.1.4. Experiences ................................................................. 71
3.3.1. Justification for the choice of Case studies............. 58 4.1.5. Life Cycle Assessment............................................... 72
3.3.2. The Functional Unit .................................................. 59 4.2. PRECEDENT STUDY 01. LOW-IMPACT RAMMED
3.4. Data Collection ............................................................... 60 EARTH CONSTRUCTION; THE INSIDE-OUT SCHOOL IN
GHANA. ....................................................................................... 82
3.4.1. Primary Sources ......................................................... 60
4.2.1. Context ........................................................................ 83
3.4.2. Secondary Sources ..................................................... 61
4.2.2. Construction ............................................................... 85
3.5. Data Analysis ................................................................. 61
4.2.3. Material Properties .................................................... 86
a. Goal and scope definition ............................................. 62
4.2.4. Experiences ................................................................. 88
b. Life cycle Inventory and analysis ................................ 62
4.2.5. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT..................................... 89
c. Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Data
interpretation. .......................................................................... 63 4.3. PRECEDENT STUDY 02: High-Tech Rammed Earth
Construction; Pediatric Surgery Center in Uganda ................ 98
3.6. Data Presentation. .......................................................... 63
4.3.1. CONTEXT ................................................................... 99
a. Charts and Graphs ......................................................... 63
4.3.2. Construction ............................................................. 100
b. Photos and Drawings .................................................... 63
4.3.3. Material Properties .................................................. 102
4.0. DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ................... 65
4.3.4. Experiences ............................................................... 104
4.0. Introduction .................................................................... 65
4.3.5. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT ................................... 105
4.1. CASE STUDY 1; CONVENTIONAL RAMMED
EARTH CONSTRUCTION IN KENYA. .................................. 66 4.4. Conventional Stone and Mortar Construction......... 114
4.1.1. Context ........................................................................ 66 4.4.1. Context ...................................................................... 114

vii | P a g e
4.4.2. Construction ............................................................. 115 5.2.3. Comparative analysis of the Environmental

4.4.3. Material Properties .................................................. 116 Impacts (Embodied Carbon) ................................................ 143
4.4.4. Experiences ............................................................... 116 5.3. Limitations of the Study .............................................. 144
4.4.5. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT .................................. 117 5.4. The implication of the Findings ................................. 145
4.5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ..................................... 126 5.5. Recommendations........................................................ 146
5.0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......... 129 5.6. Areas for further research ........................................... 147
5.0. Introduction .................................................................. 129 References ....................................................................................... 148
5.1. Summary of Findings .................................................. 132 6.0. APPENDICES ................................................................... 157
5.1.1. Context ...................................................................... 132 6.1. CHECKLIST ........................................................................ 158
5.1.2. Construction. ............................................................ 134 6.2. INTERVIEWS ...................................................................... 159
5.1.3. Properties .................................................................. 136 6.3. SCHOLARSHIP TO STUDY RAMMED EARTH

TECHNICAL COURSE............................................................. 161
5.1.4. Experiences ............................................................... 137
6.4. LCA STUDENT’S ACCOUNT .......................................... 162
5.2. Energy Efficiency-Embodied Energy ........................ 139
5.2.1. Life Cycle Stages ...................................................... 139
5.2.2. Building Elements ................................................... 142
viii | P a g e
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-11 Showing Emergency Hospital in Uganda (Walsh,

Figure 1-1 showing global warming (Thomas R. Karl, 2003)...... 1 2018)..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 1-1 showing Global CO2 Emissions by Sector Figure 1-12 showing the Construction of Rammed Earth Walls
(Architecture 2030, 2019) .................................................................. 2 in the Emergency Hospital (Walsh, 2018) ...................................... 8
Figure 1-2 Showing total carbon emissions projections for Figure 1-13 showing Total Emissions in 2018 = 6,677 Million
embodied and operational energy from 2020-2050 (Architecture Metric Tons of CO2 equivalent. Percentages may not add up to
2030, 2019) .......................................................................................... 2 100% due to independent rounding (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 2018). ................................... 10
Figure 1-3 showing the energy consumption building products
(Architecture 2030, 2019) .................................................................. 2 Figure 1-14 showing the research methodology ......................... 11
Figure 1-4 Showing Green Building Principles............................. 3 Figure 1-15 showing the Village in The North, Morocco
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) .................................................... 15
Figure 1-5 Showing Floods in Garissa (UNICEF, 2010) ............... 4
Figure 2-1 Showing the earth construction of the world
Figure 1-6 showing Global and Local policy shifts (KAM 2020) 4
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019). ................................................... 16
Figure 1-7 Showing ALHAMBRA IN SPAIN (Encyclopaedia Figure 2-2 Showing the composition of the soil (Auroville Earth
Britannica, 2019) ................................................................................ 5 Institute, 2019). ................................................................................. 16
Figure 1-8 showing GRAND MOSQUE OF DJENNE (Desert
Figure 2-3 Showing Earth Construction techniques ................... 17
Espace, 2019) ...................................................................................... 5
Figure 2-4 Showing earth cut out (Auroville Earth Institute,
Figure 1-9 showing Vernacular Kamba Village ( Bomas of 2019)................................................................................................... 17
Kenya, 2019) ....................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-5 showing a house dug into the Swiss Alps (Morollo,
Figure 1-10 showing the Modern Rammed Earth Wall (Costa,
2017)................................................................................................... 18
Rocha, & Velosa, 2016) ..................................................................... 6
ix | P a g e
Figure 2-6 showing earthbag Junoot, Oman (Cal-Earth Institute, Figure 2-16 showing the Rammed Earth wall in the Great
2019) .................................................................................................. 18 Wall of China (Narloch H. A., 2019). ........................................... 23
Figure 2-7 showing Green Roofs (Modern Covered Earth) of Figure 2-17 Showing the evolution of Rammed Earth ............... 23
Nanyang Technological University's School of Art, Design and
Figure 2-18 shows a prototype of Earthquake resistant building
Media (Paul, 2015) ........................................................................... 19
in Guatemala 1978 (Minke, 2006) .................................................. 24
Figure 2-8 showings Rammed Earth Wall (Chang Recavarren,
Figure 2-19 showing rammed earth foundations (Mukerji,
2013) .................................................................................................. 19
1993)................................................................................................... 25
Figure 2-9 showing National Research Centre in Bamako, Mali
Figure 2-20 Showing the Various shapes of Hand Rammers
(Golebiowski, 2009) ......................................................................... 26
Figure 2-10 showing extruded earth block (Auroville Earth
Figure 2-21 Showing the masonry foundation (Ellington, 1924)
Institute, 2019).................................................................................. 20
............................................................................................................ 26
Figure 2-11 showing Shibam in Southern Yemen (Auroville
Figure 2-22 Showing Reinforcements at the corners (Ellington,
Earth Institute, 2019) ....................................................................... 21
1924)................................................................................................... 27
Figure 2-12 showing shaped earth granaries in Nigeria
Figure 2-23 showing Telenor ‘345’ head office complex near
Islamabad, Pakistan (SIREWALL, 2019) ...................................... 27
Figure 2-13 Showing Maasai manyatta with wattle and daub
Figure 2-24 showing the complete Ricola Herb Centre
walls (Amaro, 2018) ........................................................................ 22
(Archdaily, 2015) ............................................................................. 31
Figure 2-14 showing Saint Siméon de Bressieux in France-
Figure 2-25 showing the pre-fabricated panels to build the
Longest building in Europe (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) .. 22
Ricola Herb Centre in Switzerland (Archdaily, 2015). ............... 31
Figure 2-15 showing Dauphiné in France - Château, 19th
Figure 2-26 Showing the jar Test (Ellington, 1924) ..................... 32
century (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) ..................................... 23
x|Page
Figure 2-27 showing adjustable wooden formwork. (Rowland, Figure 2-39 showing the Layout of the system boundary (ISO
2020) .................................................................................................. 33 14040, 2006)....................................................................................... 45
Figure 2-28 showing steel formwork (Rowland, 2020) .............. 33 Figure 2-40 showing the goal and scope (Ecochain, 2020)......... 46
Figure 2-29 showing parts of the formwork (Narloch P. W., Figure 2-41 showing the chain of Events of the LCA method
2020) .................................................................................................. 34 (Thinkstep, 2020) ............................................................................. 47
Figure 2-30 showing the ramming process (Narloch P. W., 2020) Figure 3-1 showing the Functional Unit....................................... 55
............................................................................................................ 34
Figure 3-2 Showing Inside Out School in Ghana by Andrea
Figure 2-31 showing re-touching (Rowland, 2020) .................... 35 Tabocchini & Francesca Vittorini (Vittorini, 2017)...................... 58
Figure 2-32 Showing the Telenor Head office, Islamabad Figure 3-3showing Emergency Hospital in Uganda by Renzo
(SIREWALL, 2019) .......................................................................... 36 Piano (EMERGENCY, 2020)........................................................... 58
Figure 2-33 illustrating cradle-to-cradle (One-Click LCA, 2020) Figure 3-4 Showing the functional unit, a representation of the
............................................................................................................ 37 whole building. ................................................................................ 59
Figure 2-34 showing energy efficiency......................................... 38 Figure 3-5 showing One-click LCA (One-Click LCA, 2020) ...... 62
Figure 2-35 Showing the Building Scale of Energy Efficiency Figure 3-6 Showing the scope of the Life Cycle Stages under
(IRURAH, 2007) ............................................................................... 39 study. ................................................................................................. 62
Figure 2-36 showing Passive solar House design (iklimnet, Figure 3-7 Showing the expected Performance metric Carbon
2012). ................................................................................................. 41 Heroes Benchmark (Pasanen P1, 2019)......................................... 63
Figure 2-37 Showing the Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment Figure 4-1 Showing location (CIA, 2020)...................................... 66
Stages ................................................................................................ 44
Figure 4-2 Showing access of the SMARTEC department
Figure 2-38 showing the LCA Framework (ISO 14040, 2006) ... 45 building (Google Maps, 2020)........................................................ 66
xi | P a g e
Figure 4-3 showing the prevailing construction technique....... 67 Figure 4-15 showing Global warming impacts by classification
in KgCO2e ........................................................................................ 77
Figure 4-4 Showing the SMART EC building floor Plans ......... 67
Figure 4-16 showing Global warming potential by resource
Figure 4-5 showing Rammed Earth walls (SMARTEC, 2010)... 68
types in Kg ........................................................................................ 78
Figure 4-6 showing mixing, steel formwork and Ramming
Figure 4-17 Showing a model of the building elements -
(SMARTEC, 2010)............................................................................ 68
classifications. .................................................................................. 79
Figure 4-7 showing load test carried out on the SMART EC
Figure 4-18 Showing global warming by Classifications in
building during construction (SMARTEC, 2010) ....................... 69
KgCO2e ............................................................................................. 79
Figure 4-8 showing washed away paint ...................................... 69
Figure 4-19 Embodied carbon by structure - A1-A3................... 80
Figure 4-9 showing SMARTEC building ..................................... 70
Figure 4-20 showing Embodied carbon benchmark ................... 80
Figure 4-10 Showing Conventional Rammed Earth
Figure 4-21 showing the Environmental Impacts Chart ............ 81
Construction Strip model. .............................................................. 72
Figure 4-22 showing location of Ghana in the global map ........ 82
Figure 4-11 Showing Embodied energy of Life Cycle Stages in
MJ ...................................................................................................... 74 Figure 4-23Showing the Inside out School (Baldwin, 2017) ...... 82
Figure 4-12 showing the building components- classifications. Figure 4-24 showing the floor plan (Vittorini, 2017) .................. 83
............................................................................................................ 75
Figure 4-25 Showing the Inside-Out School (Vittorini, 2017).... 83
Figure 4-13 Showing Embodied Energy (Primary) of building
Figure 4-26 Showing the staggered walls (Vittorini, 2017) ........ 84
components in MJ ........................................................................... 75
Figure 4-27 showing the use of the different locally available
Figure 4-14 showing Primary Energy of Building Materials
materials (Vittorini, 2017) ............................................................... 84
used (Resource Types) in MJ ......................................................... 76
Figure 4-28 Showing the transformation of a standard
classroom (Vittorini, 2017). ............................................................ 84
xii | P a g e
Figure 4-29 showing the soil mix (Vittorini, 2017) ..................... 85 Figure 4-41 showing Global warming – Building materials in
KgCO2e ............................................................................................. 95
Figure 4-30 Showing Random Rubble foundation (Vittorini,
2017) .................................................................................................. 85 Figure 4-42 showing the Global warming Potential of the
building elements in KgCO2e........................................................ 96
Figure 4-31 showing the formwork used and the Ramming
process. (Vittorini, 2017) ................................................................. 86 Figure 4-43 showing global warming potential- building
elements in KgCO2e........................................................................ 96
Figure 4-32 Showing Finished Rammed Earth Walls (Vittorini,
2017) .................................................................................................. 86 Figure 4-44 showing Results by life-cycle stage .......................... 97
Figure 4-33 showing the visual properties of the school Figure 4-45 Showing the site plan (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020) . 98
(Vittorini, 2017). ............................................................................... 87
Figure 4-46 showing the Pediatric Surgery Centre
Figure 4-34 showing a pupil working out of the classroom (EMERGENCY, 2020)...................................................................... 98
(Vittorini, 2017) ................................................................................ 88
Figure 4-47 showing the Pediatric Surgery Centre (Google
Figure 4-35 Showing the modelled section understudy ............ 89 Maps, 2020) ....................................................................................... 99
Figure 4-36 Showing total use of primary energy of the Life Figure 4-48showing the Rammed earth Walls (EMERGENCY,
stage in MJ ........................................................................................ 91 2020)................................................................................................... 99
Figure 4-37 showing a model of the building components ....... 92 Figure 4-49 showing the main access, constructed site and the
Park (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020) .................................................... 99
Figure 4-38 showing the Primary Energy – Classifications in MJ
............................................................................................................ 92 Figure 4-50 Showing the load-bearing Rammed Earth walls
(EMERGENCY, 2020).................................................................... 100
Figure 4-39 chart showing the primary energy of the resource
types in MJ ....................................................................................... 93 Figure 4-51 Showing Excavations and setting out of the
Foundations (EMERGENCY, 2020) ............................................ 100
Figure 4-40 showing the Global warming Impacts by Life-Cycle
Stages in KgCO2e ............................................................................ 94
xiii | P a g e
Figure 4-52 showing Reinforced Concrete foundations Figure 4-64 showing model of the classification ....................... 109
(EMERGENCY, 2020) ................................................................... 101
Figure 4-65 showing total primary energy ex. raw materials-
Figure 4-53 showing the wooden formwork used classifications in Megajoules (MJ) ............................................... 109
(EMERGENCY, 2020). .................................................................. 101
Figure 4-66 showing global warming Potential- Life cycle stages
Figure 4-54 Showing interior and exterior finishes in KgCO2e ...................................................................................... 110
(EMERGENCY, 2020) ................................................................... 101
Figure 4-67 Showing global warming -building materials
Figure 4-55 Showing foundation to floor detail ........................ 102 classification in KgCO2e ............................................................... 111
Figure 4-56 Showing floor to floor detail ................................... 102 Figure 4-68 showing Global warming potential model of
various building elements ............................................................ 112
Figure 4-57 showing the Rammed earth walls (EMERGENCY,
2020) ................................................................................................ 103 Figure 4-69 showing global warming potential- building
elements in KgCO2e...................................................................... 112
Figure 4-58 Showing the design team (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ,
2020) ................................................................................................ 104 Figure 4-70 Showing Rammed Earth Walls of Hall 7
(SMARTEC, 2010) .......................................................................... 114
Figure 4-59 showing the Ugandan president with the design
team (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020) ................................................. 104 Figure 4-71 Showing Hall 7 at JKUAT........................................ 114
Figure 4-60 showing the building section (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, Figure 4-72 Showing exterior finishes ........................................ 115
2020) ................................................................................................ 104
Figure 4-73 showing the components under the study............ 117
Figure 4-61 showing the model of the functional unit under the
Figure 4-74 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw
study................................................................................................ 105
materials - Life-cycle stages in Megajoules ................................ 119
Figure 4-62 showing total use of primary energy ex.raw
Figure 4-75 Showing Total use of Primary energy-ex of raw
materials -life Cycle Stages in MJ ................................................ 107
materials in Megajoules- Building materials (Resource types)
Figure 4-63 ...................................................................................... 108 .......................................................................................................... 120
xiv | P a g e
Figure 4-76 showing models of the building elements Figure 5-1 showing Galili Village, Garsen, Tana River County,
classifications ................................................................................. 121 Kenya (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020). ................................................. 132
Figure 4-77 Table 4 28 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. Figure 5-2 showing the only motorized means of accessing
raw materials – Classifications in Megajoules (MJ).................. 121 Galili Village (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020) ...................................... 132
Figure 4-78 Showing Global warming - Life-cycle stages in Figure 5-3 showing the summary of findings by Life Cycle
KgCO2e........................................................................................... 122 Stages............................................................................................... 141
Figure 4-79 ...................................................................................... 123 Figure 5-4 Showing pupils taught under a tree in Kenya
(UNESCO) ...................................................................................... 145
Figure 4-80 showing the model of the building elements by
classification ................................................................................... 124
Figure 4-81 showing the global warming impacts-building LIST OF TABLES

elements in KgCO2e ..................................................................... 124 Table 2-1 showing Earth Building Techniques............................ 17
Figure 4-82 showing Results by life-cycle stage........................ 125 Table 2-2 showing Difference Between Stabilized Rammed
Earth (SRE) and Rammed Earth (RE) ........................................... 30
Figure 4-83 Showing carbon hero’s benchmark of Low-Tech
Rammed Earth Construction. ...................................................... 126 Table 2-3 Showing Whole Building Life Cycle Stages ............... 44
Figure 4-84 Showing the carbon hero’s benchmark of Table 4-1 Showing the parameters understudy .......................... 65
Conventional Rammed Earth Construction. ............................. 126
Table 4-2 showing materials used for construction. ................... 68
Figure 4-85 showing carbon Hero’s Benchmark of High-Tech
Table 4-3 Showing Data Sources ................................................... 73
Rammed Earth Construction ....................................................... 126
Table 4-4 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw
Figure 4-86 showing Hero’s Benchmark of Conventional Stone
materials - Life-cycle stages ........................................................... 74
and mortar construction ............................................................... 126
Figure 4-87 showing the Carbon Hero's Benchmark results ... 127
xv | P a g e
Table 4-5 showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw Table 4-17 showing global warming potential- building
materials – Classifications .............................................................. 75 elements in KgCO2e........................................................................ 96
Table 4-6 showing primary Energy by Resource types ............. 76 Table 4-18 Showing data Inventory ............................................ 102
Table 4-7 Showing Global warming Life Cycle stages data table Table 4-19 showing data sources ................................................. 106
............................................................................................................ 77
Table 4-8 Showing global warming by Resource Types ............ 78 materials - Life-cycle stages ......................................................... 107
Table 4-9 showing Global warming - Classifications ................. 79 Table 4-21 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw
materials - Resource types in Megajoules (MJ) ......................... 108
Table 4-10 showing the material Inventory (Baldwin, 2017) .... 87
Table 4-11showing the data Inventory used to estimate the
materials - Classifications ............................................................. 109
embodied energy. ............................................................................ 90
Table 4-23 Showing Global warming impacts- Life-cycle stages.
Table 4-12 Showing Global warming Life Cycle stages data
.......................................................................................................... 110
table ................................................................................................... 91
Table 4-24 Showing Global warming - Resource types ........... 111
Table 4-13 Showing the primary energy of the model by
Classifications in MJ........................................................................ 92 Table 4-25 Showing Global warming - Classifications............. 112
Table 4-14 showing Primary energy of the model by resource Table 4-26 Showing data sources ................................................ 118
types in MJ ....................................................................................... 93
Table 4-27 showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw
Table 4-15 Global warming - Life-cycle stages in KgCO2e ....... 94 materials - Life-cycle stages ......................................................... 119
Table 4-16 showing Global warming – Building materials in Table 4-28 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw
KgCO2e............................................................................................. 95 materials - Resource types............................................................ 120
xvi | P a g e
Table 4-29 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw Table 5-2 showing the construction ............................................ 135
materials – Classifications in Megajoules (MJ) ......................... 121
Table 5-3 .......................................................................................... 136
Table 5-4 showing the user Experience ...................................... 138
.......................................................................................................... 122
Table 5-5 .......................................................................................... 140
Table 4-31 Global warming impacts-building materials in
KgCO2e........................................................................................... 123 Table 5-6 showing the building elements .................................. 142
Table 4-32 Showing Global warming impacts according to Table 5-7 showing the Embodied Carbon .................................. 144
Resource Types. ............................................................................. 124
Table 6-1 showing parameter Inventory checklist .................... 158
Table 5-1 showing the context of the various precedent and case
Table 6-2 Showing the Questionnaire used to administer
studies. ............................................................................................ 133
interviews. ...................................................................................... 159
xvii | P a g e
1. CHAPTER ONE
1.0. Introduction
Climate change is a change in the pattern of weather, and related changes in oceans,
A B land surfaces and ice sheets, occurring over time scales of decades or longer. Weather is the
state of the atmosphere—its temperature, humidity, wind, rainfall and so on—over hours to
E weeks. (Australian Academy of Science, 2015). The main source of global climate change is
global warming resulting from human-induced changes in atmospheric composition, which
result from emissions of Green House Gases(GHGs) associated with energy use. (Thomas R.
D
C Karl, 2003) as illustrated in Figure 1-1
According to The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN-

Figure 1-1 showing global warming (Thomas
R. Karl, 2003) FCCC), we should stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations "at a level that would prevent dan-
gerous anthropogenic (human-induced) interference with the climate system," and that "such a
A. Some sunlight is bounced back into
space level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally
B. Some heat is naturally kept in by gases to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened, and to enable economic de-
in the air as water vapour
velopment to proceed sustainably” (UNFCCC, 2015). The embodied carbon emissions of build-
C. Extra heat is kept in the Air by green-
house gases produced from human ac- ing products and construction represent a significant portion global emission: concrete, iron,
tivity. and steel alone produce ~9% of annual global GHG emissions; embodied carbon emissions
D. Less Heat can be released into space
from the building sector produce 11% of annual global GHG emissions (Architecture 2030,
E. Some heat is released into space.
2019) as shown in Figure 1-1. Broadly speaking, energy is consumed in the following activities
namely;
1|Page
a. ‘embedded’ or ‘embodied’ energy; Extraction of raw materials, Transport to Pro-
cessing plants; Manufacture of the materials; transport from production plants to
building sites ‘grey’ energy; construction of the building (‘induced’ energy.
b. Operation of the building (‘operational’ energy); Demolition of the building; Haul
away waste materials; Landfill or recycle. This has been as illustrated in Figure 1-3.
Figure 1-1 showing Global CO2 Emissions by

Sector (Architecture 2030, 2019)
Figure 1-3 showing the energy consumption building products (Architecture 2030, 2019)
49 51 According to architecture 2030, Embodied carbon will be responsible for almost half of
total new construction emissions between now and 2050 as illustrated in Figure 1-2
(Architecture 2030, 2019). This energy is locked in place as soon as the building is built and
OPERATIONAL ENERGY
can’t be reduced over time as compared to operation carbon. Embodied carbon is therefore
EMBODIED ENERGY
critical in reducing the carbon emissions in the construction sector. In the architecture, engi-
Figure 1-2 Showing total carbon emissions pro-
jections for embodied and operational energy neering and construction (AEC) industry, key stakeholders haven’t been left behind. Some of
from 2020-2050 (Architecture 2030, 2019) the proposed strategies to make our buildings and infrastructure more ecologically sustaina-
ble, thus reducing the greenhouse gases (GHGs) include;
2|Page
a. The Green Building
b. Passive House
ENERGY EFFICIENCY c. Net Zero Buildings.
‘Green’ building is a building that, in its design, construction or operation, reduces or
eliminates negative impacts, and can create positive impacts, on our climate and natural envi-
MATERIALS
GREEN BUILDING PRINCIPLES
SELECTION ronment (WorldGBC, 2017). Green building material is one that can be recycled, is readily
available, durable, non-toxic with no Volatile Organic compounds (VOCs) and low mainte-
WATER EFFICIENCY nance and operational cost. To achieve a green building, all the principles illustrated in figure
4 should be addressed in design, construction, operation and demolition.
INNOVATION & Passive House is a building standard that is truly energy-efficient, comfortable and af-
DESIGN PROCESS fordable at the same time (Passive House Institute, 2015). This standard aims at reducing the
heating and cooling requirements of a building by using the free heat. Net Zero Energy is a
INDOOR AIR QUALITY concept defined by the use of energy conservation, energy efficiency, and on-site renewable
generation to account for 100% of a targeted building’s or community’s energy usage
SUSTAINABLE SITE (WorldGBC, 2017). Net-zero energy concepts advocate for the reduction of energy-related
DEVELOPMENT emissions, minimizing the embodied energy of materials, use of renewable energy to meet all
the building needs and the elimination of energy-related costs. This study will focus on the re-
Figure 1-4 Showing Green Building Principles duction of the embodied energy of the building materials and the designs that will minimize
the energy required to operate a rammed earth building.
3|Page
1.1. Background
The adverse effects of climate change have brought the world into a state of Climate
Emergency. Climate emergency is “a situation in which urgent action is required to reduce or
halt climate change and avoid potentially irreversible environmental damage resulting from it”
(Oxford University Press, 2019). Kenya is one of the countries with minimal contribution to
greenhouse gases (A-ID, 2019). However, the adverse effects of climate change on the Kenyan
Landscape has been experienced characterized by prolonged droughts, intense flooding(as
shown in Figure 1-5) and the disappearance of the glaciers around Mount Kenya due to in-
creasing temperatures, leading to the drying up of river streams. Such changes have already
led to harvest losses and food shortages, landslides, soil degradation, loss of biodiversity and
increased prevalence of Pests for humans, plants and animals (UNICEF, 2010).
Figure 1-5 Showing Floods in Garissa (UNICEF, In the recent past, policies have shifted towards the construction and development of
2010)
the country and in line with the United Nations Sustainable development goals as shown in
Figure 1-6. For Instance, the Vision 2030 which aims to transform Kenya into a newly industri-
alizing, “middle-income country providing a high-quality life to all its citizens by the year
2030” (Ministry of Finance, Kenya, 2015). The Vision has been in implemented in medium
plans, the current plan being the third medium plan known as the Big 4 Agenda launched by
the current government. The four pillars in the big 4 agenda are food security, affordable hous-
Figure 1-6 showing Global and Local policy shifts
ing, manufacturing and affordable healthcare for all. The focus on Affordable housing has
(KAM 2020)
prompted this study to promote our low-carbon vernacular architecture.
4|Page
For thousands of years, our ancestors have built with the earth in a diversity of con-
struction methods, resulting in the rich heritage of social cooperation and community building
that is inherent in these technologies (Keefe, 2005). Examples of such great architectures in-
clude the Alhambra in Spain (see Figure 1-7), and the Grand Mosque of Djenne (see Figure
1-8). Today earth remains an important building material. Nearly 30 % of the world’s popula-
tion lives in buildings made of earth (Keefe, 2005). Earth has proven to be one of the world’s
best building materials because it is historically the longest used by man, nature’s product, uni-
Figure 1-7 Showing ALHAMBRA IN SPAIN versally available, a high thermal mass, a natural barrier to cold winds and forces of nature (In-
(Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2019)
cluding tornadoes, earthquakes, and hurricanes), insects and rodents, not rationed, not monop-
olized by anyone, a superior building material, fireproof, and soundproof (Makinde, 2012).
In Kenya, various earth building techniques have been part of our vernacular architec-
ture. These techniques are; adobe, wattle and daub, cob, clay and straw, compressed earth
blocks and Rammed Earth. The most common technique is wattle and daub construction tech-
nique as illustrated in Figure 1-9 showing the Kamba village at the Bomas of Kenya. This study
intends to study Rammed earth building technique, one of earth building techniques that can
be used to achieve the complexities of modern living. It has been described as a material and a
technique in which a wet mixture of mud, sand and gravel is poured in formwork and is com-
pacted layer by layer (Costa, Rocha, & Velosa, 2016). Because of the layered approach, rammed
Figure 1-8 showing GRAND MOSQUE OF earth constructions are characterized by a horizontally striped pattern.
DJENNE (Desert Espace, 2019) By using different coloured soils this effect can deliberately be emphasized as
5|Page
illustrated in Figure 1.0–9. The resulting material is durable, has high-performance thermal
mass, biophilic beauty and fine acoustics (SIREWALL, 2019).
1.2. Problem Statement

Climate change is the fundamental design problem of our time (Cramer, 2017). The
Building sector is one of the major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. According to the
Fifteenth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 15) 2009, “the building sector has the
most potential for delivering significant and cost-effective GHG emission reductions” and
“Countries will not meet emission reduction targets without supporting energy efficiency
gains in the building sector” (UNEP, 2009). Major steps have been taken to reduce the opera-
Figure 1-9 showing Vernacular Kamba Village
( Bomas of Kenya, 2019) tional energy of buildings hence focus should also be on reducing the embodied energy of
building materials.
Kenya is one of the fastest-growing countries in Africa. This rapid growth has resulted
in a housing deficit estimated at 250,000 annually. Policies in the construction industry, for in-
stance, the Housing and Urbanization sectors of the Vision 2030, has led to increased construc-
tion aimed at improving infrastructure while reducing the housing deficit in the country. The
use of conventional building techniques that is dependent on industrially manufactured mate-
rials will increase the material embodied energy resulting in carbon emissions and increased
Figure 1-10 showing the Modern Rammed energy used in the construction sector. This growth should therefore adopt climate and en-
Earth Wall (Costa, Rocha, & Velosa, 2016) ergy-conscious techniques that will adapt and mitigate climate change by reducing energy-re-
lated emissions. This can be achieved by creating awareness and exploring earth, a vernacular
6|Page
Building material that can be used to achieve housing needs while protecting the environment.
1.3. Research Questions

i. What are the existing Rammed Earth building techniques in Kenya and other parts of
the world?
ii. What is the embodied Energy of Rammed Earth building technologies as compared to
conventional stone and mortar construction in Kenya?
1.4. Research Objectives

i. To understand the various Rammed Earth building techniques that exist in Kenya and
other parts of the world.
ii. To understand the use, application and Embodied Energy of various Rammed Earth
building techniques as compared to the conventional construction techniques in Kenya.
1.5. Relevance/Justification.
Climate change is one of the greatest problems facing modern civilization. Its adverse
effects on various parts of the world are growing each day with increasing fatalities and eco-
nomic costs. For instance, some economic cost are gradual changes such as increased cooling
costs for buildings, while others are more dramatic, related to the higher frequency of extreme
weather events, such as Superstorm Sandy or the heatwave of 2003 in Europe, which killed
tens of thousands of people (Bice, 2020).
The focus has been on the operational energy of buildings, which has left the embodied
energy overlooked. Going into the future, embodied energy of building materials will be
7|Page
key in reducing Green House Gas emissions. This can be achieved by studying one of earth
building techniques- Rammed Earth, to provide an alternative building technique to achieve
the convenience of modern living, aesthetics of earth architecture and energy efficiency (low-
Embodied energy). This technology uses earth, a low impact, a naturally existing building ma-
terial that has been neglected due to the onset of mainstream manufactured building materials.
More than 30 per cent of Kenyans live in dilapidated earthen structures attributed to poverty
and lack of information on the possibilities of building with earth. This study will therefore
serve to dissipate information regarding energy efficient Rammed Earth construction in our
Kenyan context to achieve contemporary buildings meeting modern needs. An example is the
Figure 1-11 Showing Emergency Hospital in
Uganda (Walsh, 2018). Emergency Hospital in Uganda by Renzo Piano built with Rammed Earth Walls as shown in
Figure 1-11
1.6. Scope of The Study

a. Area of Study
The study is centred on Rammed earth construction technique and no other earth con-
struction techniques namely; Adobe, Wattle and daub, cob, Clay & Straw and Compressed
Earth Blocks. The study has been allocated three months resulting in limited time to study and
analyze all the available information on Rammed Earth construction.

Figure 1-12 showing the Construction of
b. Geographical scope
Rammed Earth Walls in the Emergency Hospi-
tal (Walsh, 2018) The study will be based in Kenya, in Kajiado County shown in figure 14. It is one semi-
arid lands (ASALs) in Kenya with vast unoccupied land and low rainfall resulting in water
8|Page
shortages during some months in the year. This offers an opportunity to explore the vast natu-
ral resource while developing water barns to solve the prevailing community challenges.
c. Methodological Approach
The study will rely mainly on the Literature-based Review to conduct conceptual Embodied
Energy calculations.
1.7. Limitations of the Study

The study will be conducted within three months with limited student’s budget. Some
of the limitations are;
a. Financial constraints
b. Limited time
c. Lack of adequate and relevant local case studies and literature.
d. Lack of local Environmental Product Declaration databases to inform local em-
bodied Energy Calculations.
e. A limited number of Rammed Earth professionals in the Architecture, engi-
neering and construction sector.
1.8. Assumptions
Is Rammed Earth Construction a more sustainable alternative to stone and mortar wall
construction techniques in Kenya?
9|Page
1.9. Definition of Operational Terms

Soil-Soil is the result of the transformation of the underlying rock under the influence of a
range of physical, chemical and biological processes related to biological and climatic condi-
tions and animal and plant life (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019).
Rammed Earth (RE)- Rammed earth walls are built by compacting soil between temporary
formworks.
Green House Gas Emissions (GHGs)- any gas that has the property of absorbing infrared ra-
diation (net heat energy) emitted from Earth’s surface and reradiating it back to Earth’s sur-
face, thus contributing to the greenhouse effect (Mann, 2019). The main greenhouse gases are;
Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide and Fluorinated Gases as shown in Figure 1-13.
Embodied Energy (EE)- Embodied energy is the total energy required for the extraction, pro-
cessing, manufacturing, and delivery of buildings (European Commission, 2020).
Cradle-to-Gate- Also Known as Initial Embodied Energy is the energy involved in the extrac-
tion of raw materials, transportation to a processing/manufacturing plant, manufacturing pro-

Figure 1-13 showing Total Emissions in 2018 = 6,677 cess and the transportation to the dispatch warehousing where they will be transported to site.
Million Metric Tons of CO2 equivalent. Percentages
may not add up to 100% due to independent rounding Recurring Embodied Energy-This is the energy involved in the maintenance and renovations
(United States Environmental Protection Agency,
2018).
throughout the building’s lifetime.
End-of-life- represents embodied energy involved in the demolition and re-use of the building
materials after its life has ended.
10 | P a g e
1.10. Research Methodology

There is a huge gap that has been left in the development of Rammed earth building
Research Methodology
technology that resulted from the introduction of mainstream manufactured building materi-
als. This study will therefore adopt mixed-method research. This is a methodology for con-
ducting research that involves collecting, analyzing and integrating quantitative (e.g., experi-
Qualitative Quantitative
ments, surveys) and qualitative (e.g., focus groups, interviews) research. (Foodrisc 2016). This
study will focus on the sequential explanatory design as illustrated in Figure 1-14
Literature Material The qualitative research will be a precursor to quantitative research by giving actiona-
Review Thickness
ble information to be tested and evaluated. It will involve a literature review, precedent stud-
ies, case studies (where applicable), interviews (of proposed users of the technology, national
Precedent Weight
Study Calculation and county governments reception of the technology and key stakeholders in the construction
industry). The information collected will be analyzed and a proposed action plan formulated.
Embodied The quantitative method will study specific areas raised in qualitative research. It will
Book Study Energy
Calculation involve the tabulation and calculation of various Embodied Energy value of various building
materials making up each wall. The results will give a comparative review of the effects of Em-
Figure 1-14 showing the research methodology bodied energy on the choice of building materials.
Source: Author
11 | P a g e
1.11. Organization of The Study

1.11.1. Chapter One
This chapter introduced climate change, a current global emergency with adverse effects affect-
ing all nations and Rammed earth as a proposed building technique to address the challenges.
This will give the reader a background knowledge into the global problem (climate change),
the local problem (poverty in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands in Kenya) and why the Rammed
earth is the proposed solution. It also describes the research questions and objectives of this
study, detailing the proposed research methodology and the scope of the study.
1.11.2. Chapter Two

This chapter will detail the theoretical/ conceptual framework of the study and a general
review of literature on Rammed Earth construction technique in the global and the local con-
text. This chapter will also review precedent studies of successful Rammed Earth construction
in modern construction.
1.11.3. Chapter Three

This chapter will entail the Research design, a sample design, research tools, data collection
methods and data analysis.
1.11.4. Chapter Four

In this chapter, the primary data will be analyzed and presented as per objective
themes and units of analysis, the hypotheses will be proofed and the results of the study will
be discussed tying up the findings and theoretical positions reviewed in the literature review.
12 | P a g e
1.11.5. Chapter Five

This chapter will be the contain the conclusions of the study, a summary of the findings, limita-
tions of the study, Implications of the findings, recommendations and Identification of further
areas for research
13 | P a g e
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
“If therefore, kings of such immense power did not disdain structures with mud-brick walls, kings for whom it was possible,
thanks to tribute money and booty of war, to have buildings in rubble work or squared stone masonry or even marble, I do not
think it necessary to look down on buildings made of [mud brick], so long as they are roofed correctly (Vitruvius: 30 – 20BC,
translated by Rowland and Howe 1999:41)”
Vitruvius
14 | P a g e
2.0. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0. Introduction.
“Any rigorous attempt to design with em- According to Benjamin Johnson, “Any rigorous attempt to design with embodied en-
bodied energy demands that architecture is ergy demands that architecture is simultaneously an art and a science” (Benjamin, 2017). A
simultaneously an art and a science” good understanding of the Rammed Earth building technique will inform a decision on the
(Benjamin, 2017). choice of and design using the building technique. The analysis of the environmental impacts
is the quantifiable and scientific analysis of the environmental impacts of using the material.
This chapter will therefore analyze earth architecture, and specifically Rammed earth building
technique and the embodied energy of the material.
2.1. EARTH ARCHITECTURE

Earth structure is a structure that uses the earth as a building material. Earth is one of
the oldest building materials known to man and has been used in the most ancient civilization
that still exists today. For example, sections of the great wall of China and the village in the
North in Morocco as shown in Figure 2-1. This was a result of the easy availability, strength
and durability, climate-responsive properties and easy handling. The resulting earth structures
were sustainable and in harmony with nature. On the onset of industrial building materials,
earth was disregarded as the mainstream building materials. Some of the reasons for this disre-
Figure 1-15 showing the Village in The North, gard are; Industry-led building market disadvantaged earth that couldn’t be standardized,
Morocco (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) Loss of operational competence that has led to ignorance of the possibilities of earth architec-
ture and Lack of specialized training on earth architecture; academically and professionally.
15 | P a g e
Today, 40% of the human population resides in earthen houses; in developing coun-
tries, this figure is more than one half (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) as shown in Figure 2-1.
According to the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural organization, Earthen ar-
chitecture is one of the most original and powerful expressions of our ability to create a built
environment with readily available resources (UNESCO, 2019). According to Vitruvius: If
therefore, kings of such immense power did not disdain structures with mud-brick walls,
kings for whom it was possible, thanks to tribute money and booty of war, to have buildings in
Figure 2-1 Showing the earth construction of rubble work or squared stone masonry or even marble, I do not think it necessary to look
the world (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019). down on buildings made of [mud brick], so long as they are roofed correctly (Vitruvius: 30 –
20BC, translated by Rowland and Howe 1999:41).
Soils are composed of solid components, water and air. It is a mixture of clay, silt (very
fine sand), sand, and occasionally larger aggregates such as gravel or stones. When it is used as
“Earthen architecture is one of the
most original and powerful expres- a building material, it is often given different names depending on the building technique in-
sions of our ability to create a built volved. For instance; When compacted within a formwork, it is called” rammed earth”.
environment with readily available
(Minke, 2006).
resources” (UNESCO, 2019) 0.45- 0.002-
4.75-19mm <0.002mm
4.75mm 0.45mm
Figure 2-2 Showing the composition of the soil (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019).
16 | P a g e
Soils are characterized by 4 fundamental properties: Granularity or texture, Compressi-

DRY/SOL
ID bility, Plasticity and Cohesion. Granular or texture is a percentage by weight of the different
grain sizes. Compressibility is the ability of a soil to be compressed to the maximum and is re-
lated to the energy of compaction. Plasticity defines its ability to be moulded. Cohesion defines
LIQUID
SOIL
HUMID
the capacity of soil grains to remain together and is strongly linked with the plasticity.
MIX
2.2. EARTH CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES

Communities all over the world have used soil to build. The type of soil available and
the nature of their activities have determined the type of building techniques they have
PLASTIC
adopted. They type of building technique is determined by the nature of the soil mix used and
how it is applied. In this study, I will classify the soil in four categories namely; dry/solid, Plas-
Figure 2-3 Showing Earth Construction techniques
tic, Humid and Liquid. Twelve building techniques have been used all around the world as
shown in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 showing Earth Building Techniques

SOIL STATE BUILDING TECHNIQUE
DRY/ SOLID 1. Earth Cut 2. Earth Dug Out 3. Filled-In/Earth Bag
Out
HUMID 4. Covered 5. Rammed Earth 6. Compressed Earth
Earth Blocks (CEB)
PLASTIC 7. Extruded 8. Adobe 9. Stacked Earth/ Cob
Earth
Figure 2-4 Showing earth cut out (Auroville
LIQUID 10. Poured Earth 11. Wattle and 12. Formed/ Shaped Earth
Earth Institute, 2019)
Daub
17 | P a g e
2.2.1. Earth Cut out

This is used when soil is cohesive and contains concretions of carbonates. Soil is cut in
the shape of blocks and used like brick or stones as shown in Figure 2-4. The resulting embod-
ied energy is similar to conventional natural hand-cut building stones.
2.2.2. Earth Dug Out

This is a construction method in which earth is dug out to create shelters. Horizontal
dug outs create caves on the hillside accessible by staircase or galleries. Vertical dugs, created
on plains or plateaus, create courtyards with rooms along its edge. This technique uses the
thermal properties of the earth to create hospitable indoor environments reducing the opera-
Figure 2-5 showing a house dug into the Swiss
Alps (Morollo, 2017) tional energy of buildings. The embodied energy of the resulting building is determined by the
materials used during construction as illustrated in Figure 2-5
2.2.3. Filled In (Earth Bag construction)

It is also called sandbag or super-adobe construction. Its construction begins by dig-
ging a trench and laying a foundation. Rows of woven bags with humid soil are stacked to-
gether using barbed wire (see Figure 2-6). The embodied energy of earthbags used in construc-
tion will increase the embodied energy of this construction technique.
2.2.4. Covered Earth Construction

The soil has been traditionally used to cover roofs in different parts of the world. For
Example, In Scandinavia, the earth to cover roofs were taken with grass, to hold the soil and
Figure 2-6 showing earthbag Junoot, Oman give cohesion to it through their roots (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019). In arid
(Cal-Earth Institute, 2019)
18 | P a g e
climates, either very hot or very cold, it regulates the inside temperature, due to heavy thermal
mass. Green roofs are today a modern development of the technique of covered earth. Green
roofs, also known as vegetated roof covers or eco-roofs are multi-beneficial structural compo-
nents that help to mitigate the effects of urbanization on water quality by filtering, absorbing
or detaining rainfall. The type of waterproofing materials used will determine the resulting
embodied energy of this technique when used. This has been illustrated in Figure 2-7
2.2.5. Rammed Earth

Figure 2-7 showing Green Roofs (Modern Cov- Rammed earth happens to be both a material - structural, monolithic, finished; and
ered Earth) of Nanyang Technological Univer- also, a process of building - a method, technology, or technique. It merges these two, often dis-
sity's School of Art, Design and Media (Paul,
tinct, aspects of building construction. Rammed earth walls are built by compacting soil be-
2015)
tween temporary formworks. The formwork usually consists of two parallel surfaces separated
and interconnected by spacers. The mixture of the soil is compacted into layers of approxi-
mately 15 cm by the use of a rammer. The average thickness of the wall is 50 cm. As each form
is filled, another form is placed above it, and the process is carried on until achieving the de-
sired wall height. Forms can be removed directly as soon as the form above is begun as shown
in Figure 2-8
This study will focus on this building technique, stating its evolution from traditional
rammed Earth to modern Rammed Earth and how it can be used to solve the global challenge
Figure 2-8 showings Rammed Earth Wall of climate change by addressing energy efficiency.
(Chang Recavarren, 2013)
19 | P a g e
2.2.6. Compressed Earth Blocks (CEB)

This is a development from traditional Rammed Earth construction technique and has
been used for modern buildings for example the National Research Centre in Bamako, Mali
(See Figure 2-9). The soil, raw or stabilized, is slightly moistened, poured into a steel press
(with or without stabilizer) and then compressed either with a manual or motorized press.
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019). The number of stabilizers used in the production of the blocks
and the use of mortar for wall construction greatly increases the embodied energy of this tech-
nique.
Figure 2-9 showing National Research Centre in Bam- 2.2.7. Extruded Earth
ako, Mali (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) This is a technique in which Stabilized earth, at a plastic state, is as well extruded
through a machine which gives the desired shape as shown in Figure 2-10. The blocks are often
hollow and are cut to the desired length. The soil used has a high sand content ratio which is
abrasive which damages the machine at a faster rate. Stabilization and machines used to ex-
trude the soil increase the embodied energy of this building technique hence not recom-
mended.
2.2.8. Adobe
This is the sun-dried clay brick and is one of the oldest building techniques used by mankind.
The oldest identified adobes were produced around 9,000 BC at Dja’ De El Mughara in Syria.
Adobes are made of thick malleable mud, often added with straw. After being cast they are left
Figure 2-10 showing extruded earth block
to dry under the sun.
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019)
20 | P a g e
2.2.9. Stacked Earth (COB)

This is a construction technique that uses plastic soil mix made up of clay, sand and
straw. Composition of the mixture is made and stacked in layers. Each layer has to be dried up
before the next layer is added. This technique has been used widely in Europe, Africa, Saudi
Arabia and India. One of the notable structures built with cob and adobe is the old historic cap-
ital of Southern Yemen that has been named “The Manhattan of the Desert” as shown in Fig-
ure 2-11
2.2.10. Poured Earth

Figure 2-11 showing Shibam in Southern Yemen This is a technique that stabilized soil with high sandy ratio, in a liquid state, is poured
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019)
like into formworks. This technique is a new development and is very seldom used because of
the high-water content of the soil will induce a lot of shrinkages resulting in a lot of cracks.
2.2.11. Shaped Earth

This is a building technique that uses plastic earth to shape buildings, as a potter
would do. It requires no formwork and uses minimal and simple tools with minimally skilled
labour. This results in architecture that is fluid with a great variety. Over the years and the mi-
rage of modern development, this knowledge and skill have been lost. However, some areas of
Africa are still using this technique to build for instance the Mousgoum hut in morocco and
Granaries in Nigeria (See Figure 2-12)
Figure 2-12 showing shaped earth granaries in

Nigeria (Auroville Earth Institute, 2019)
21 | P a g e
2.2.12. Wattle and Daub

This is a technique in which a load-bearing structure generally made of wood (e.g.
Shrub or bamboo) called wattle, is closed with infill soil called daub. This technique is used
widely in Kenya to build the traditional huts and other vernacular earth structures as shown in
Figure 2-13
2.3. RAMMED EARTH TECHNOLOGY

Rammed earth, also known as taipa[1] in Portuguese, tapial or Tapia in Spanish, pisé
Figure 2-13 Showing Maasai manyatta with (de Terre) in French, and hāngtǔ (夯土) in Chinese, is a technique for constructing walls by
wattle and daub walls (Amaro, 2018)
compacting soil mix between formwork boards which are later removed (Jaquin, 2008). This
construction technique appears to have developed in China and the Mediterranean before
spreading to other parts of the world attributed to migration (Jaquin, 2008). Some of the rea-
sons for its use and re-use are;
a) It’s a quick technique for the building of fortifications
b) Cheap method of building homes
c) Sustainable construction using what’s available on site.
This has led to the use of Rammed Earth building technique to build various monu-
Figure 2-14 showing Saint Siméon de Bres- ments and as a vernacular architecture in several civilizations around the world, for example,
sieux in France- Longest building in Europe
(Auroville Earth Institute, 2019) the Yang Shao and Longshan cultures in China, dating to 5000 BCE. The monumental architec-
ture is better documented, unlike the vernacular architecture. This study will rely on
22 | P a g e
documents from the monumental Rammed Earth construction because of the readily available
data. This study will also focus on the difference in the building techniques used over time to
illustrate the evolution of technology. Archaeological evidence can date entire cities con-
structed of the earth back over 10,000 years. All of the great civilizations of the Middle East
were constructed with mud brick and rammed earth – Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Sumeri
(Terra Firma, 2013).
Rammed earth has been used to build a wide variety of buildings serving various pur-
Figure 2-15 showing Dauphiné in France - poses e.g. Religious institutions, learning institutions, residential and commercial buildings.
Château, 19th century (Auroville Earth Some of the notable historical examples of Rammed earth include; Sections of the great wall of
Institute, 2019)
China, Saint Siméon de Bressieux in France which was the Longest building in Europe in the
19th Century as shown in Figure 2-14 and Dauphiné in Château- France, built in the 19th cen-
tury see Figure 2-15. Most of these buildings still exist today and have stood the test of time in-
dicating the longevity of Rammed Earth Buildings. The life of a building is one of the key fac-
tors affecting the building’s embodied energy. This technology has evolved over the years in-
fluenced by the technological advancements over the years. I will analyze three different
Rammed earth building technologies of the various periods, i.e. before the 20th Century, 20th
Century until 1980 and 1970 to date as illustrated in Figure 2-17:

Figure 2-16 showing the Rammed Earth
wall in the Great Wall of China (Narloch Before the 20th 20th Century
1970 to date
Century Until 1970
H. A., 2019).
Figure 2-17 Showing the evolution of Rammed Earth
23 | P a g e
2.3.1. Rammed Earth Construction before the 20th Century

There is a lot of missing information on the tools, construction materials and the meth-
ods of construction of the earliest forms of Rammed Earth construction. This phase of Rammed
earth will rely on the documented information e.g. in the book the ‘’Rural Economy, containing
a Treatise on Pisé Building” by S.W. Johnson assisted by British architect Henry
Holland.
a. Tools Used
The basic tools needed for the pise construction are The Rammer, the mould/formwork. The
Figure 2-18 shows a prototype of Earthquake formwork is made up of traverse timber holding the shuttering in a place called putlogs. The
resistant building in Guatemala 1978 (Minke,
putlogs were placed three feet interval along the wall. After the drying period, the putlog holes
2006)
are filled with earth or lime-based mortar. The other tools that were used are spades, trowels,
buckets, a watering pot, rake, hatchet, hammer, plumb rule, a square, and a saw. The rammers
weighted between 3.6kilograms and 6 kilograms with a handle measuring at least four feet
long. They were made of heavy wood like oak, ash, beech, or walnut.
b. Labour and Wall Thickness
The wall thickness was between 250mm and 600mm depending on the function of the wall and
the building’s headroom. The headroom was a maximum of 8 times the wall thickness. A mini-
mum of three men was needed, one to transport the soil, and the rest to mix and Ram. Horse-
drawn carts and hand carts were used to transport the soil mix to the construction site.
24 | P a g e
c. Soil Mix
The soil to be used for construction was made up of 25% clay and 75% sand and gravel and a
maximum of 10% moisture content. Organic matter was eliminated as they decompose with
time leaving voids that weaken the Rammed earth walls. The soil mix was tested by compact-
ing a sample n a small bucket and dumped. A good soil mix was required to retain the shape
of the bucket after dumping.
d. Construction
The foundations were made up of Rammed earth rising to 600mmm above the ground level to
protect the walls from water splashing on the walls as shown in Figure 2-19. The soil mix was
prepared and tested to achieve the best mix to be used for construction. Wooden formwork is
then built and 100mm of the soil mix is poured into the formwork. The soil is then rammed to-
gether using wooden hand rammers to a height of approximately 50mm. Each Horizontal sec-
tion was made at an angle of 60 degrees to make it easier to join to another level. Timber was
used to frame doors and windows and was added during construction. The roofing structure
was then added directly on the load-bearing Rammed earth walls using wooden lintels. Bam-
boo was also used to provide the necessary reinforcements.
e. Finishes
The exterior walls were finished using a pebble dash finish, which was a slurry made up of
Figure 2-19 showing rammed earth foundations sand, lime, and gravel roughcast. It can also be finished by traditional stucco or indented using
(Mukerji, 1993).
a hatchet to create a key for the render, resulting in low embodied energy.
25 | P a g e
The interior was mostly finished with plaster or lime wash (Johnson, 1806) and painted.
2.3.2. Rammed Earth in the 20th Century

This phase of Rammed Earth construction begun after the world wars that led to the
great depressions and shortage of materials. The housing shortages in various parts of the
world saw the adoption of the cheap Rammed Earth construction to meet the deficit. The major
proponents of this phase were Karl Ellington.
a. Tools
This saw the introduction of hand tampers of different shapes to achieve a more consistent
Rammed Earth wall as shown in Figure 2-20. All the other tools that were used before were still
Figure 2-20 Showing the Various shapes of Hand used.

Rammers (Golebiowski, 2009) b. Labour and wall thickness
Rammed Earth
Wall The labour required and the same as discussed in the earlier form of Rammed earth construc-
tion.
Reinforcements c. Soil Mix.
The soil used for construction was equal proportions of finer sand, gravel and clay. The mois-
Concrete topping
ture content was to be at most ten per cent.
Foundation d. Construction
Stone foundation was used to a height of 600mm and a concrete topping was added on top of
the masonry wall. A damp-proof membrane was also added to prevent the rising of the damp
Figure 2-21 Showing the masonry foundation
to he Rammed earth walls as shown in Figure 2-21. Industrial reinforcements were introduced
(Ellington, 1924)
26 | P a g e
e.g. the barbed wire, chains, cables, or iron waste and is used most frequently near the corners
where stresses are the highest (Ellington, 1924) as shown in Figure 2-22.
Finishes
2.3.3. Modern Rammed Earth (RE)

Figure 2-22 Showing Reinforcements at the cor- This is Rammed Earth construction in the late 20th Century and the 21st Century. Mech-
ners (Ellington, 1924)
anization and modernization of Rammed earth construction were witnessed. This has also seen
the adoption of Rammed earth construction in some parts of the world for example in Aus-
tralia and New Mexico to guide the construction and building process. This has led to the con-
struction of very sophisticated buildings that meet modern the needs of modern living while
staying true to the material. An example is Telenor ‘345’ head office complex near Islamabad,
Pakistan shown in Figure 2-23. Modern Rammed Earth construction has also seen the adop-
tion of pre-cast rammed earth construction. This has resulted in controlled high-quality
Rammed earth panels and reduces the work-load on site. However, transportation to the pro-
cessing plant and transportation to site results in an increase in the building’s embodied en-
ergy.
a. Tools
Figure 2-23 showing Telenor ‘345’ head office complex
near Islamabad, Pakistan (SIREWALL, 2019) The construction has seen the use of pneumatic rammers and steel formwork that can
be used for both concrete and Rammed earth construction. Customized formworks can also be
used to achieve unique designs and shapes e.g. circular walls. The re-use of building materials
27 | P a g e
reduces the embodied energy of the construction process while reducing the amount of labour
required for construction.
b. Labour and wall thickness
The use of modern ramming and testing equipment has led to thinner walls ranging
between 250mm and 500mm wide. The use of fuel-based pneumatic rammers reduces the
amount of manual labour required and the construction process is faster. However, this in-
creases the embodied energy resulting from site operations hence increasing the environmental
impacts.
c. Soil Mix
i. Non-Stabilized Rammed Earth

This is a building technique that uses clay as the main stabilizer and no added pro-
cessed stabilizers. This results in very thick walls with thickness ranging from 450mm to
600mm. However, the resulting walls have very low embodied energy and have excellent reg-
ulation of humidity. This technique uses bamboo to provide additional reinforcements which
can be grown locally. The use of composite formworks ensures that the resulting walls are
smooth and can easily achieve the various desired shapes.
ii. Stabilized Rammed Earth (SRE).

Stabilization is a Techniques to enhance the natural durability and strength of a soil.
The main objective of soil stabilization is to enhance soil resistance to the erosive effects of the
local weather conditions, including variations in temperature, humidity and rainwater. The
28 | P a g e
use and adoption of the right stabilization method can improve the compressive strength of
soil by as much as 400 to 500% and increase its resistance to erosion and mechanical damage
(E.A.Adam, 2001). Traditionally, natural stabilizers such as animal dung, anthill materials, bird
droppings, plant extracts and animal blood, have been used. These waste materials generally
consist of nitrogenous organic compounds which help bind together soil grains. They also
have no embodied energy since they are waste materials of nature’s processes.
Modern Stabilized Rammed Earth uses manufactured stabilizers e.g. Portland cement,
lime, bitumen, gypsum, alkalis, sodium chloride, calcium chloride, aluminium compounds, sil-
icates, resins, ammonium compounds, polymers, and agricultural and industrial wastes. The
most widely used stabilizers in developing countries, are Portland cement and lime because
they are inexpensive and readily available.
a. Cement stabilization
Ordinary Portland cement hydrates when water is added, the reaction produces a cementitious
gel that is independent of the soil. This gel is made up of calcium silicate hydrates, calcium alu-
minate hydrates and hydrated lime. Findings have shown that there is a relationship between
linear shrinkage and cement content need for stabilization (E.A.Adam, 2001). Cement has a
high embodied energy and isn’t recommended for clay soils.
b. Lime stabilization
Lime is a suitable stabilizer for clay soils and is more widely available than Portland cement. It
has lower embodied energy as compared to Portland cement and has a wider application.
29 | P a g e
Table 2-2 showing Difference Between Stabilized Rammed Earth (SRE) and Rammed Earth (RE)
Stabilized Rammed Earth (SRE) Rammed Earth (RE)

Requires 4%- 12% cement or lime Requires no use any stabilizer
Needs no exterior protection Needs protection by cladding systems or regular
coats of limewash or render.
Normally builds walls 200-300mm thick Builds walls 500mm-700mm thick.
Does not need larger foundations Needs larger foundations to support larger walls
High strength is achieved quickly, 70% of Slow drying means it can take up to 2 months to
full strength within 7 days achieve near full strength
Can incorporate steel reinforcements, lintels Poor results with reinforcements resulting in
allowing for large openings on walls small openings.
30 | P a g e
iii. Pre-Fabricated Rammed Earth Panels

Modern Rammed earth can be pre-fabricated in situ or workshops using stabilized soil.
The pre-fabricated walls are normally in large moulds, then lifted by cranes and set on beds of
lime mortar. The workshops are normally set up close to the soil excavation sites and the con-
struction site. This is to reduce the embodied energy of the produced panels while ensuring
that the quality of the panels is guaranteed. A good example is the Ricola Herb Centre, Laufen,
Switzerland shown on figures 31 and figure 32 (Archdaily, 2015).
Figure 2-25 showing the pre-fabricated panels to build the Ricola Herb Centre in Switzerland
Figure 2-24 showing the complete Ricola Herb
(Archdaily, 2015).
Centre (Archdaily, 2015)
31 | P a g e
c. CONSTRUCTION
1. Soil Testing
Soil characteristics and climatic conditions of an area must be evaluated before the
Rammed earth building process is begun. Before any major action takes place, soil samples
from trial holes must always be taken to check the adequacy of the soil and to be able to esti-
mate available amounts (E.A.Adam, 2001). Laboratory analysis of the raw material is always
necessary for large-scale Rammed Earth construction. For small-scale production, however, it
is not essential to employ sophisticated tests to establish the suitability of the soil. Simple field
tests can be performed to get an indication of the composition of the soil sample. Such tests are
discussed briefly below.
i. The jar test “Particle size test”
The purpose of this test is to get the preliminary proportions of the ratio between
coarse and fine soils. Two-thirds of a bottle is filled by soil taken from the site, and water was
added to fill the bottle as shown in Figure 2-26. The bottle is shaken till all the soil particles are
suspended then it is left to settle for a few hours. As the water cleared, you can see the for-
mation of different soil layers separated by clearly visible lines. The sand layer normally settles
at the bottom as its particles are heavier, then layers of silt and clay stay on top.
ii. The drop Test
A handful of un-sieved soil is taken, moisten and made into a ball. It is then held in hand and
Figure 2-26 Showing the jar Test (Ellington,
left to dry for a few minutes before dropping it. If the ball is broken into a few lumps.
1924)
32 | P a g e
2. Formwork
Modern construction uses precast modular formwork that is either static or moveable.
Moveable means each formwork assembly is filled, disassembled and then set up again. Typi-
cally, a building will be built horizontally, with the first course being completed before the sec-
ond is begun. The materials used should however be strong and light to prevent deformation
and ease movement respectively. Timber is the most used material as shown in Figure 2-27 at-
Figure 2-27 showing adjustable wooden form- tributed to its strength, flexibility and elasticity. When steel formwork is used, they have to be
work. (Rowland, 2020) reinforced at various intervals to withstand ramming pressure as illustrated in Figure 2-28
Static formwork comes from the concrete industry. This is a type of formwork where
separate elements are built up to form one large section. This allows a more controlled finish of
the final Rammed earth walls, unlike the moveable formwork. These two types can be com-
bined to form a hybrid system that borrows the strengths of each type and enhances rammed
earth construction. Some of the formwork elements as are (see Figure 2-29 );
Shutters- Two sides of the formwork
• End-stops-The boards which close off both sides of the formwork
• Ties and Bolts- These can either be direct through bolts, cantilever bolts, thread ties or ties
with wedges.
• Props or stays-the (fixed or moveable) vertical posts used to brace the form.
Figure 2-28 showing steel formwork (Rowland,

2020)
33 | P a g e
• Spacers- These are used to set the width of the walls
• Wedges- for adjusting the formwork.
3. Ramming
The mixed moist soil is poured in the formwork to create a uniform level of almost
200mm. This layer is then compressed using pneumatic compressors to achieve a thickness of
100mm. The process is repeated over and over until the required height is attained as illus-
trated in Figure 2-30.
Figure 2-29 showing parts of the formwork (Narloch P.

W., 2020)
Figure 2-30 showing the ramming process (Narloch P. W., 2020)
4. Finishes
When smooth formwork is used, the resulting walls are fair-faced and do not need
plastering. Whenever deformities are resulting from the formwork, retouching is done by hand
as shown in Figure 2-31.

34 | P a g e
2.4. ADVANTAGES OF RAMMED EARTH

2.4.1. Thermal Mass
Thermal mass is the ability of a material to absorb and store heat energy (Reardon,
2013). Rammed Earth walls have high thermal mass and low embodied energy. For instance, a
300mm Rammed earth wall will take 8-9 hours for the heat to transfer through the wall to the
other side (Garg, 2015). This will reduce the operational energy by minimizing the heating and
cooling needs during the night and day respectively.
2.4.2. Structural Aspects

Rammed Earth is strong in compression which results in large load-bearing capacity
and thus can be used for multi-storey load-bearing construction. This reduces the need for steel
Figure 2-31 showing re-touching (Rowland, 2020) reinforcement hence reducing the building’s cumulative embodied energy.
2.4.3. Sustainability
Rammed earth uses locally available sub-soil, which is readily available and non-toxic.
The construction is labour-intensive hence creating employment, using readily available sur-
plus material while conserving the environment. Its high thermal properties lower the cost of
heating and cooling ensuring that the running cost is low. The construction cost is comparable
to conventional construction cost.
2.4.4. Minimal Maintenance.

Rammed Earth walls features are stand-alone and do not need finishing with plaster-
board or render and have low-maintenance and do not need any attention for 10-20 years
(Garg, 2015) resulting in minimal embodied energy resulting from the maintenance of the
35 | P a g e
building and other surface finishes.
2.4.5. Insects, Rodents, Termite proof

Rammed earth walls have no cavities for pests to live in and to use as a path to the roof
components. It’s not an organic material that can be invested by pests hence requires no pesti-
cides or fungicides to preserve it.
2.4.6. Fire Resistant.

Earth is an incombustible material. According to the Commonwealth Scientific and In-
dustrial Research Organization (CSIRO) tests earth block wall achieved a 4-hour fire-resistance
Figure 2-32 Showing the Telenor Head office, Islama-
bad (SIREWALL, 2019) rating.
2.4.7. Noise Reduction

Rammed Earth walls have good sound insulation attributed to their high density and
thickness. According to CSIRO tests, 250mm Rammed earth walls have a transmission rating
“The opportunity of biophilic de-
of 50 decibels. This makes these walls good for sound insulation thus eliminating embodied
sign is to connect to the particular
ecology of the place, to its culture, energy resulting from soundproofing materials.
history and beauty and to create a
2.4.8. Aesthetics
building that will regenerate life. Rammed earth walls have biophilic beauty that blends with the environment and com-
“Amanda Sturgeon, FAIA
plements other natural building materials and promotes biophilic architecture. “The oppor-
tunity of biophilic design is to connect to the particular ecology of the place, to its culture, his-
tory and beauty and to create a building that will regenerate life.” Amanda Sturgeon, FAIA.
This beauty is achieved on completion of the rammed earth process, eliminating the embodied
energy resulting from the cladding of facades and surfaces.

36 | P a g e
2.4.9. Cradle to cradle

Upon completion of the building’s life cycle, the earth can still be re-used to be the
rammed earth walls which will reduce the initial embodied energy of the new-built as shown
in Figure 2-33.
2.5. DISADVANTAGES
2.5.1. Labour-Intensive.
The processes involved in Rammed Earth technology, i.e. soil excavations, mixing,
building formwork, ramming and removing formwork are labour-intensive which makes its
labour cost quite high. The use of pneumatic tampers reduces the labour required and speeds
up the rate of construction.
2.5.2. Standardization.
The composition of the earth is not homogenous from one place to another resulting in
varying soil mix used for construction.
2.5.3. Construction Time

Building using Rammed earth building technology takes a little longer as compared to other
conventional building materials which might increase the cost of construction. This can how-
Figure 2-33 illustrating cradle-to-cradle (One-Click
LCA, 2020) ever be resolved by using modular units using Rammed earth.
2.5.4. Durability
The outdoor surfaces of non-stabilized rammed earth walls are not water-resistant and faces
wear and tear over a short period especially when exposed to the elements of nature. This can
however be resolved by using small ratios of stabilizers e.g. cement or lime.
37 | P a g e
“Buildings offer the greatest poten- 2.6. Energy Efficiency

tial for achieving significant Green Energy efficiency is using less energy to perform the same task (EESI, 2020) Buildings use
House Gas emission reductions, at
about 40% of global energy, 25% of global water, 40% of global resources, and they emit ap-
least cost, in developed and devel-
oping countries” proximately a third of Green House Gas Emissions (UNEP, 2009). Yet, buildings also offer the
greatest potential for achieving significant GHG emission reductions, at least cost, in devel-
(Dean Cooper, UNEP, 2012).
oped and developing countries (Dean Cooper, UNEP, 2012). Energy efficiency in buildings can
be defined in conventional and emerging terms (IRURAH, 2007). The conventional interpre-
tation of energy Efficient buildings is the operational energy focused on Building Systems and
E.E, air-
conditioning is made up of Operational Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy technologies. Operational
Energy efficiency contributes to energy conservation and can be expressed as savings-margin
from XKWh/m2 to YKWh/m2 where X>Y and X is the reference standard practice. This can be
Day- ENERGY Passive achieved by adopting the following energy efficiency strategies; Passive design, daylighting,
lighting EFFICIENCY design
energy-efficient air-conditioning systems, energy-saving appliances. Renewable Energy Tech-
nologies involves the integration of the following strategies; Daylighting optimization, Solar
water heating, Wind energy integration, Solar electricity (PV-systems).

Energy saving
appliances Emerging interpretations of energy-efficient buildings focus on indirect energy im-
plications. These are; Embodied energy and Settlement and city-scale to access by users. Em-
bodied energy is the Indirect Energy through production and distribution of materials and
components (IRURAH, 2007). The latter focuses on Urban land-form, land-use implications
Figure 2-34 showing energy efficiency
and the linkage to transport and commuting.
38 | P a g e
2.6.1. Assessing Energy Efficiency

Energy efficiency can be assessed at different levels, from economy-wide and sectoral
BUILDING SCALE energy intensity level to individual units of activity, such as buildings (Erbach, 2015). In the
(Commercial, Residential, Institutional)
Building Sector, the scope of the energy efficiency can be defined as the Urban-system which
equitably support/facilitate the minimal/zero-carbon lifestyle-goals of its organizational and

Operational human residents (IRURAH, 2007) and it focuses on three scales namely; industrial scale, urban
Embodied Energy Energy
scale and the building scale. The scope of this study will focus on the building scale, and spe-
cifically the embodied energy of Rammed earth as building technology and as a building mate-
Energy
rial as illustrated in table 2.
Efficiency
Long-life And Soil, the main material used for rammed earth construction has a long-life, it can be re-
Reuse
used, and it’s a low impact material. Energy use in buildings depend on;
Renewable
Energy a. the purpose of the building;
Reused Materials
And Components b. the envelope design and materials;
c. the heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting systems;

Low-impact d. how long the building is used for each day;
Materials
e. the density of occupancy;
High-impact But f. the topography of the site; and

Recyclable
g. external factors such as the weather and the behaviour of the occupiers, e.g., in
Materials
turning off unwanted lights.
Figure 2-35 Showing the Building Scale of En-
ergy Efficiency (IRURAH, 2007)
39 | P a g e
2.6.2. Why Energy Efficiency?

a) Financial savings – buildings that operate more efficiently have reduced energy de-
mand. That means lower operating costs resulting in a sustainable energy source.
b) Reduced carbon footprint – by generating less energy, the buildings emit fewer green-
house gases. That means improved environmental performance.
c) Environmental legislation – organisations operating in energy-efficient buildings will
find it easier to comply with the tightening of environmental regulations. That means
improved productivity.
The single most important factor in d) Sustainable credentials – environmentally-responsible organisations gain a reputation
reducing the impact of embodied
for ethical operation. That means enhanced profitability.
energy is to design long life, dura-
ble and adaptable buildings e) Increased security - reducing energy demand helps protect the country’s energy secu-
(Minke, 2006). rity. That means more resources for future generations.
2.7. Embodied & Operational Energy

Embodied energy is the energy consumed by all of the processes associated with the
production of a building, from the mining and processing of natural resources to manufactur-
ing, transport and product delivery, renovation and maintenance (Geoff Milne, 2013). Building
materials have varying embodied energy, thus the choice of the building materials is critical
towards the reduction of the building’s embodied energy. The single most important factor in
reducing the impact of embodied energy is to design long life, durable and adaptable build-
ings (Minke, 2006).
40 | P a g e
Operational energy is the energy used to run the building over its lifetime. Unlike em-
bodied energy which is built into the building materials, operational energy is occupant de-
pendent and can be reduced through various energy-efficient means. Embodied energy can be
equivalent to many years of operational energy. Research by CSIRO has found that the average
house contains about 1,000GJ of energy embodied in the materials used in its construction
which is equivalent to about 15 years of normal operational energy use (Geoff Milne, 2013).
Embodied energy content varies greatly with different construction types. In many
cases, a higher embodied energy level can be justified if it contributes to lower operating en-
ergy. For example, large amounts of thermal mass, high in embodied energy, can significantly
reduce heating and cooling needs in well designed and insulated passive solar houses (see Fig-
ure 2-36). As the energy efficiency of houses and appliances increases, embodied energy will
Figure 2-36 showing Passive solar House design become increasingly important (Geoff Milne, 2013). This study will focus on one of the low im-
(iklimnet, 2012).
pact building technique (Rammed Earth) and the embodied energy of various Rammed Earth
building Techniques as compared to the conventional stone and mortar construction.
2.7.1. Assessing Embodied Energy

Embodied energy is measured as the quantity of non-renewable energy per unit of
building material, component or system expressed in megajoules (MJ) or gigajoules (GJ) per
unit weight (kg or tone) or area (m2) (BRANZ, 2019). The energy is however hidden which
makes the process of calculating embodied energy complex depending on the boundaries set
in the assessment process.
41 | P a g e
Some of the complex boundaries will be whether to include:
a. the energy used to transport the materials and workers to the building site
b. just the materials for the construction of the building shell or all materials used
to complete the building such as bathroom and kitchen fittings, driveways and
outdoor paving
c. the upstream energy input in making the materials (such as factory/office light-
ing, the energy used in making and maintaining the machines that make the
materials)
d. the embodied energy of urban infrastructure (roads, drains, water and energy
supply).
Some of the measures used are Gross energy requirement (GER) and Process energy
requirement (PER). Gross energy requirement (GER) is a measure of the true embodied energy
of a material, which is impractical to measure in practice (Geoff Milne, 2013). On the other
hand, Process energy requirement (PER) is a measure of the energy directly related to the man-
ufacture of the material (Geoff Milne, 2013). It includes the energy used to transport building
materials to the factory and not the energy used to transport the final product to the building
site. In general, PER accounts for 50–80% of GER (Geoff Milne, 2013). Even within this nar-
rower definition, arriving at a single figure for the material is impractical as it depends on
(Geoff Milne, 2013):
a. the efficiency of the individual manufacturing process
42 | P a g e
b. the fuels used in the manufacture of the materials
c. the distances materials are transported
d. the amount of recycled product used.
Each of these factors varies according to the product, process, manufacturer, application and
how the embodied energy has been assessed (Geoff Milne, 2013). For example, it may be
possible to construct a concrete slab with lower embodied energy than a timber floor if best
practice is followed.
LCA provides a method by which
architects and engineers can ex- The resulting estimates of embodied energy can vary by a factor of ten. This led to the
amine design decision through a formation of the ISO 14000 series by the International Standards Organization (ISO) to serves
process that quantifies the embod- as the guiding standard for life cycle assessments, defining the scopes and creating a uniform
ied impacts while validating
methodology. An LCA examines the entire life-cycle of a product, from raw material extraction
“green” design decisions
to end-of-life. This approach commonly referred to as cradle-to-grave allows for the examina-
(Shreve, 2018).
tion of the environmental impacts through each life cycle stage. LCA is an environmental Eval-
uation tool and not a triple bottom line sustainability tool.
2.7.2. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Architecture

In the past, design relied mostly on knowledge-based decisions to inform the design of
the buildings. On the onset of Building Information Modeling (BIM) and other modelling tech-
nologies, architects can make decisions based on quantifiable data. LCA provides a method by
which architects and engineers can examine design decision through a process that quantifies
the embodied impacts while validating “green” design decisions (Shreve, 2018).
43 | P a g e
The most common form of LCA in architecture is a “whole-building LCA” where an
entire building is examined over all stages of a building’s life cycle. Another form utilized by
building material manufacturers examines an individual product or material, the results of

PRODUCT these analyses are published in documents called environmental product declarations (EPDs).
In a whole building LCA, the material and energy flow between the building and nature are
examined including resources consumed, waste, and emissions to the air, water, and land are
considered (Shreve, 2018). The main differences between the two forms are the scale and scope
CONSTRUCTION
of the study and the process involved in the study. The stages in the whole life LCA is as
shown in Figure 2-37 and Table 2-3.
Table 2-3 Showing Whole Building Life Cycle Stages
USE Product Construction Use End-of-Life
A1 Raw Materials Supply A4 Transport B1 Use C1 Demolition
A2 Transport A5 Construction B2 Maintenance C2 Transport
A3 Manufacturing B3 Repair C3 Waste Pro-

END-OF LIFE cessing
B4 Replacement C4 Disposal
Figure 2-37 Showing the Whole Building Life Cycle
B5 Refurbishment
Assessment Stages
B6 Operational Energy
Use
B7 Operation Water Use
44 | P a g e
The collection of data in the use and end-of-life phases are impractical and time-con-
suming. Some other challenges affecting the adoption of Whole Building life Cycle Assessment
are;
a. The complexity of buildings. This is brought about by the amalgamation of sev-
eral building materials that have to be assessed individually.
b. The lifespan of Buildings. Buildings are designed to have a long lifespan which
makes it impractical to collect end of life data which influence decisions.
Figure 2-38 showing the LCA Framework (ISO The most commonly reported incomes to include global warming potential (carbon
14040, 2006)
footprint), acidification (acid rain), eutrophication (algal bloom), photochemical oxidant crea-
tion (smog formation potential) and ozone depletion and embodied energy also known as pri-
mary energy demand (Shreve, 2018). This study will focus on the Embody Energy or Primary
Energy Demand and the corresponding Global Warming Potential. The study will be based on
the International Standards Organization (ISO) ISO 14040 and ISO 14000 framework to esti-
mate the embodied Energy of the Rammed Earth building technologies. The framework is di-
vided into four stages namely (see Figure 2-38);
a. Goal and scope definition
b. Life-Cycle Inventory
c. Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Figure 2-39 showing the Layout of the system
boundary (ISO 14040, 2006) d. Interpretation
45 | P a g e
Some of the applications of the findings are Product analysis and improvements, stra-
tegic planning, formulation of public opinion and marketing (ISO 14040, 2006). This study will
focus on all stages from cradle to grave excluding the operational/Use phase of the building.
Material Life Cycle (production, use and disposal phases) entails both upstream and down-
stream process associated with the production of a material. They include; Environmental im-
pacts which refer to all relevant extractions from the environment (e.g. ores and crude oil), as
well as emissions into the same (e.g. wastes and carbon dioxide) (Thinkstep, 2020).
2.7.2.1. Goal and Scope

This is the first phase of life cycle analysis and its three main functions as illustrated in
Figure 2-40. These functions are;

a) The definition of the functional unit to be studied.
b) The material life cycle and the impacts we will want to analyse,
Figure 2-40 showing the goal and scope (Ecochain,

c) The definition of the limitations of the analysis as illustrated in Figure 2-40.
2020).
2.7.2.2. Life Cycle Inventory.

The Life Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI) looks at the environmental inputs and out-
puts of a product or service (Ecochain, 2020). This is essentially the data collection phase of
Life Cycle analysis. According to ISO 14040 (ISO 14040, 2006) inventory analysis involves data
46 | P a g e
collection and calculation procedures to quantify relevant inputs and outputs of a product sys-
Flow chart
tem. These inputs and outputs may include the use of resources and releases to air, water, and
land associated with the system. Interpretations may be drawn from these data, depending on
Questionaire the goals and scope of the LCA. These data also constitute the input to the LCA. The process of
conducting an inventory analysis is iterative. As data are collected and more is learned about
the system, new data requirements or limitations may be identified that require a change in the
Data collection data collection procedures so that the goals of the study will still be met. Sometimes, issues
may be identified that require revisions to the goal or scope of the study.
Modelling 2.7.2.3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment.

This is the third Phase of Life Cycle analysis and it involves the evaluation of how sig-
nificant the impacts are based on Life Cycle Inventory flows from the Life Cycle Inventory
Evaluation and
phase. The tasks undertaken in this phase are;
Interpretation
a. Selection of indicators and models
This involves the definition of what you want to measure your impacts is based on
Critical Review (optional)
the outlines goal and scope. For instance, when several emissions contribute to the same
impact category, equivalents are used to measure the environmental impacts, often seen as
Figure 2-41 showing the chain of Events of the
LCA method (Thinkstep, 2020) a lowercase e, for example, CO2-e for CO2-equivalent (Ecochain, 2020). For example, cli-
mate change or global warming potential (GWP) is measured in CO2-equivalents. This
doesn’t mean that only CO2 is contributing to global warming, because, for example, also
methane and nitrous oxide play a role there.

47 | P a g e
b. Classification
This step involves the sorting of Life Cycle Assessment Inventory and assigning it
to defined impact categories. The impact categories are; Human toxicity, Global Warming
Potential, Ecotoxicity, Acidification and Eutrophication.
c. Impact Measurement
This is the last step in the impact assessment and it involves calculating all the equiva-
lents and summing them up in overall impact category totals.
2.7.2.4. Interpretation.
This is the final phase of Life Cycle analysis and can be integrated into the Life Cycle
Inventory (LCI) and the Life Cycle Impact Assessment Phases (LCIA). According to (ISO
14040, 2006), Life Cycle interpretation should include;
a) Identifying the major issues in the LCI and LCIA phases
b) Conclusions, limitations and recommendations
c) Analysing the completeness of the study itself and how it was done (consist-
ently and sensitively)
2.8. Material Selection Considerations

This study will focus on Rammed Earth technology and the resulting embodied energy
of various Rammed Earth Building techniques used locally and globally. Designer’s intentions
are one of the factors that will determine the biases towards a particular material (WASTIELS,
2008).
48 | P a g e
Other parameters that directly influence the choice of a technology/material are (WASTIELS,
2008);
a) Material Properties
b) Experience
c) Manufacturing Process
d) Context
Material properties are defined as
the tangible aspects, or actual
measurable properties, of the chosen 2.8.1. Material Properties
material and the production tech- According to (WASTIELS, 2008), Material properties are defined as the tangible as-
nique
pects, or actual measurable properties, of the chosen material and the production technique.
(WASTIELS, 2008). The chosen technique in this study is the Rammed Earth building technique. The material as-
pects can further be classified into physical aspects and sensorial aspects.
a. Physical Aspects
These refer to aspects that concern engineering. They are organized according to their
structural, mechanical, thermal, optical and physical nature. These properties include; stiffness,
strength, porosity, density and thermal absorption coefficient. The engineering solutions ap-
plied during construction to achieve the stipulated Physical aspects will affect the resulting
Embodied Energy.
49 | P a g e
b. Sensorial Aspects
This Refer to qualities that are experienced through our senses. They are organized ac-
cording to the different senses into visual (colour, gloss, texture), tactile (roughness, warmth),
and auditory aspects (dampness, pitch) and the olfactory aspects e.g. the smell of the material.
The sense of taste has been left out since it has no architectural significance.
2.8.2. Experience
According to (WASTIELS, 2008), experiences are defined as the perception of the (ma-
Experiences are defined as the per- terial) environment by an individual, and can thus be referred to as the ‘intangible characteris-
ception of the (material) environ-
tics’ of a material/ technology. Experiences vary from person to person and they are influenced
ment by an individual, and can
thus be referred to as the ‘intangi- by mood, preference and Culture (WASTIELS, 2008). Experiences can further be categorized as
ble characteristics’ of a material/ perceptions, associations and emotions. The perceptive aspects describe a meaning that is at-
technology. Experiences vary from
tached to the materials in the form of material characteristics (tough, warm, rough) or human
person to person and they are influ-
enced by mood, preference and Cul- characteristics (friendly, formal, strict). Associative meanings are fed by the associations' peo-
ture ple make with aspects, objects or situations they know (hospital-like, cheap-looking, Swiss
(WASTIELS, 2008). cabin material). Emotive aspects are personal emotional reactions of the user to the material
(beautiful, repulsive, pleasant). These are subjective and difficult to address for all the users
hence impacts the uptake of technology. This results in low uptake of better eco-friendly tech-
nologies in preference to other high Embodied energy materials with positive user/designer
experience.
50 | P a g e
2.8.3. Manufacturing Process

Manufacturing processes are defined as the aspects that relate to the production pro-
cess (poured, pre-fabricated, hand-formed), assembly (dry connection, columns and beams,
seamless) and finishing technique (polished, varnished, coloured) (WASTIELS, 2008). They
have a great impact on the resulting Embodied energy of the material and its Life Cycle.
2.8.4. Context
A context is a group of considerations concerning the existing context of the design
project: culturally, physically as well as in terms of use (WASTIELS, 2008). These are all the as-
pects that are either defined in the design program or are existing.
2.9. Theoretical Framework

From the Literature Review, three different rammed Earth building processes are resulting in
different variations of Rammed Earth technologies. These are;
i. Conventional Rammed Earth Construction, a case study of Jomo Kenyatta University
SMART EC prototype building.
ii. Low-tech impact Rammed Earth Construction- a precedent study of Inside Out School
in Ghana
iii. High-tech Rammed Earth Construction - a precedent study of Emergency Hospital in
Uganda
iv. Conventional Stone and mortar construction, a case study of Jomo Kenyatta University
of Science and Technology Hall 7
51 | P a g e
Some of the parameters of the Technology understudy will be categorized into 4 main catego-
ries namely; Rammed Earth Properties, Experience, Context, Manufacturing Process. One of
the tools used to measure the Embodied Energy of buildings is through Life Cycle Assessment
(LCA). LCA modelling in architecture is a complex and time-consuming process. Due to the
limitations of this study stated in chapter one, Some of the Assumptions made in Embodied
Energy Calculations are;
a) The level of detail of Embodied Energy Calculation is conceptual which relies mostly
on pre-determined cradle-to-gate data and estimated transport and maintenance Em-
bodied Energies. This is due to the limited resources and time for the study.
b) The Functional Unit of analysis will be a two-storey model measuring 8m long by 6m
wide and headroom of 3m. This will facilitate the estimation of the weights of materials
used that will aid in the calculation of the embodied energy. The simulations are based
on 1200mm wall strips cut out from the unit of analysis. Every wall-strip is split up into
some or all of the following components (sub-systems): a foundation, a plinth-wall, the
main-wall, slabs and a ring-beams.
c) The study parameters will be categorized into production, construction and End of life.
Production will include cradle to gate EE documented by EPDs, Construction phase
entails EE involve in transportation to site, the construction phase will entail the EE
used in the renovation and maintenance.
52 | P a g e
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
53 | P a g e
3.0. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0. Introduction
Research is a scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific
topic (Kothari, 2004). The research methodology is a science of studying how research is done
scientifically (Kothari, 2004). It is made up of research methods and the logic behind the re-
search methods selected to be used for the study. This chapter describes the research design
that will be used to study the embodied energy of Rammed earth technologies and conven-
tional Stone and mortar construction, data collection methods, analysis and the modes of
presentation of the findings.
3.1. Research Design

As outlined in chapter one, the objectives of this study are;
a. To understand the various Rammed Earth building techniques that exist in
Kenya and other parts of the world.
b. To understand the use, application and Embodied Energy of Rammed Earth as
compared to the conventional Rammed Earth construction.
To achieve these objectives, an exploratory research design will be adopted. An explor-
atory study is a study that emphasizes the discovery of ideas and insights (Kothari, 2004).
3.2. Research Approach

This study will adopt the case study research approach and Life Cycle Assessment
methodology as outlined in ISO 14000 and ISO 14040.
54 | P a g e
3.2.1. Case Study

A Case study is an empirical inquiry which focuses on a contemporary phenomenon
within its real-life context & boundaries between phenomenon and its context are not evident
(Yin, 1994). This approach was selected to identify and understand the various Rammed earth
building technologies qualitatively. This will be achieved through qualitative parameters out-
lined in chapter two of this study, i.e. The Context, Construction process, material Properties
and the Experiences.
3.2.2. Life Cycle Assessment Methodology

This methodology is as outlined in the International Standards Organization (ISO)
14000 and ISO 14040 framework. This framework is comprised of the Goal and scope defini-
tion, the Life Cycle Inventory and Analysis, Life Cycle Impact assessment and the Interpreta-
tion of the data. This will be made up of quantitative data that will inform the calculation of
Embodied Energy of each case under study.

Figure 3-1 showing the Functional Unit
a. Goal and Scope
Source: Author The functional unit set for this study is a one-meter wide strip of the building represents a
Software: Revit 2020 Student Version section of the foundation, Plinth wall, Ground floor slab and the exterior wall as shown in Fig-
ure 3-1. The objective of this study is to determine the embodied energy of various Rammed
Earth building techniques and how it performs compared to stone and mortar. The scope will
be limited to the Cradle to gate embodied energy, transportation to site, maintenance and reno-
vation and the end of Life. The estimated Lifespan used in this study is 60 years.
55 | P a g e
The database used is the global database provided by the One Click LCA interface to estimate
the embodied energy of the materials used. Some of the assumptions made are;
a. The level of detail of Embodied Energy Calculation is conceptual as it will rely
on global estimated Environmental Product Declaration that may not be a rep-
resentation of the construction at the various locations in my case Studies and
precedent studies.
b. The Functional Unit of analysis is a representation of the whole building and
only wall finishes will be included in the calculation of the embodied energy.
c. The site activities and the building’s structural system will not be included in
the calculations of the embodied energy.
b. Life-Cycle Inventory
The data obtained in the field and from precedent studies will be analyzed and the func-
tional unit will be modelled in Revit 2020 student version. The embodied energy resulting
from the model will be calculated using One Click LCA add in the student version. Carbon He-
roes Benchmark will be used to rate the performance of various building elements and their
contribution to Embodied energy as outlined in the literature review.
56 | P a g e
c. Life Cycle Environmental Impact Assessments.

The Environmental Impacts of the three-building technologies will be classified accord-
ing to the Life-cycle stages, classifications (Building elements) and the resource types (Build-
ing, materials). The impacts include; Global warming, Acidification, Eutrophication and im-
pacts on the ozone layer, however, this study will focus on impacts on Global warming.
d. Interpretation
The interpretation of the results will happen during the assessment. The interpretation
will identify the base of the significant issues on LCI and LCIA stages, evaluate how the vari-
ous building techniques perform and identifying the best leverages to reduce the impacts of
the various building techniques.
3.3. Sampling Design

According to Kothari (Kothari, 2004), a sample design refers to the technique or proce-
dure the researcher would adopt in selecting items for the sample. A sample is a small part or
quantity intended to show what the whole is like. The most prevalent earth building technique
in Kenya is wattle and daub as stated in the Literature review resulting in little or no infor-
mation on Rammed earth building technique in Kenya. The search for more information has
also been hampered by the limited time available for the study (three months), lack of infor-
mation on professionals in the Architecture, engineering and construction specializing in
Rammed earth and limited student’s budget. These challenges have resulted in the adoption of
non-probability or purposive sampling design to achieve the objectives of the study.
57 | P a g e
Non-probability sampling is that sampling procedure which does not afford any basis for esti-
mating the probability that each item in the population has of being included in the sample
(Kothari, 2004). The only information on latest Rammed earth construction in Kenya was at the
Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology (JKUAT) undertaken by the Sustainable
Materials and Technology Centre (SMARTEC) department, hence the selection of Hall 7 and
SMARTEC department building as local case studies. To understand the other Rammed earth
Figure 3-2 Showing Inside Out School in building Techniques identified in the Literature review, The inside-Out school in Ghana (see
Ghana by Andrea Tabocchini & Francesca Vit- Figure 3-2) and the Pediatric Emergency Hospital in Uganda (see Figure 3-3) were adopted.
torini (Vittorini, 2017)
3.3.1. Justification for the choice of Case studies
The three Rammed Earth building techniques identified in the literature review are:
a. Conventional Rammed earth construction in Kenya (SMARTEC Building,
JKUAT)
b. Low-tech Rammed earth construction (Inside-Out School, Ghana)
c. High-tech Rammed earth construction (Pediatric Emergency Hospital, Uganda)
d. Conventional Stone and mortar (Hall 7, department of architecture building,
JKUAT)
a. Local Case Studies

Hall 7 and SMART EC prototype buildings are located at the Jomo Kenyatta University
Figure 3-3showing Emergency Hospital in of Agriculture and Technology. Hall 7 was selected because it was built with both Rammed
Uganda by Renzo Piano (EMERGENCY,
earth building technique and the conventional Stone and mortar while the SMARTEC
2020).
58 | P a g e
prototype building walls were built using Rammed earth building technique. These cases were
selected to represent the state of Rammed earth construction in Kenya because of;
i. Accessibility of the site. Jomo Kenyatta University is located at approximately
40km from the Technical University of Kenya
ii. Availability of the relevant information provided by the Sustainable Materials
Research and Technology Centre.
b. Precedent Studies
The precedent studies were selected due to lack of information on low cost rammed
earth construction and high cos rammed earth construction. The Inside-Out school was se-
lected because it represents a simple solution to problems experienced in some parts of Kenya.
For example, in Baringo where pupils are learning in dilapidated classrooms and or under
trees. Pediatric Surgery Center was selected because it represents the complex construction us-
ing Rammed earth building technology to solve modern problems and to give modern spaces.
This solution can be applied in the provision of essential amenities in the remote areas of
Kenya.
Figure 3-4 Showing the functional unit, a repre-
sentation of the whole building. 3.3.2. The Functional Unit
Due to limited time available to model the buildings in each building technique under-
Source: Author
study, a uniform unit of analysis is taken from each building measuring 1m wide & 1m high
Software: Revit 2020 student Version.
for walls and 1m wide and 1m width for the ground floor slab as a representation of the entire
building as shown in Figure 3-4
59 | P a g e
3.4. Data Collection

To achieve the first objective set out in chapter one, this study will adopt both primary
and secondary data collection methods. Primary sources will be used for the local case studies
while secondary sources will be used for the precedent studies and life cycle analysis method-
ology. To satisfy the second objective, this study will rely mainly on secondary data sources
from One Click LCA and Environmental Product declaration database.
3.4.1. Primary Sources

a. Observation
To document the Building materials used and the level of detail, the relationship be-
tween various building materials and any other relevant building details that will better the
understanding of Rammed Earth building technology in Kenya.
b. Field Measurements and data

Field measurements will take into account inputs from the various consultants in-
volved in the construction. This is because the buildings in all the case studies have already
been constructed. The relevant measurements and data to be identified are; wall thickness,
type of foundation, the size and composition of the ground floor slab.
c. Interviews and Questionnaires

This will be done to get information regarding the materials used in the building,
the source of the materials, the manufacturers of the processed materials, the nature of la-
bour used, date of completion and the designer and the user experience of the spaces.
Some of the questions asked are outlined in appendix 02
60 | P a g e
3.4.2. Secondary Sources

a. Journals, periodicals and websites
This is to give information regarding the precedent studies understudy, Environmental
Product Declarations for Embodied energy calculation and Environmental Impacts Assess-
ment.
b. Life Cycle Assessment Software-One Click LCA

The functional unit of each building technique will be modelled in Revit 2020 student
version based on the information gathered in each case study and precedent study. The model
will give information to estimate the embodied energy of the building technique and the
Global warming environment impacts using One-click LCA plugin.
3.5. Data Analysis

To satisfy the first objective of understanding the various rammed earth building tech-
niques and compare them with conventional stone and mortar, data will be analyzed using
material selection properties outlined in the Literature Review. These are:
a. Context
b. Material Properties
c. Construction
d. Experience
61 | P a g e
To satisfy the second objective of understanding the use, application and Embodied En-
ergy of Rammed Earth as compared to the conventional Rammed Earth construction, this
study will analyze the data using the life Cycle Analysis methodology as outlined in ISO
14040. This methodology is comprised of the Goal and scope, life cycle Inventory and analysis
and Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Data interpretation.
a. Goal and scope definition

The main goal of this study is to identify the embodied energy of Rammed earth build-
ing techniques as compared to the conventional stone and mortar construction. The scope will
be delimited to the following Life Cycle Stages as outlined in the literature review; Initial Em-
bodied Energy (A1-A5), Recurring Embodied Energy(B2-B5) and End of Life (C1-C4) as shown
in Figure 3-6. The study will be conceptual, due to reliance on global databases that are not a
reflection of the situation as it is on the sites of the various construction techniques under
study.
Figure 3-5 showing One-click LCA (One-Click LCA,

Initial Embodied Recuring Embodied
End Of Life(C1-C4)
Energy (A1-A5) Energy(B2-B5)
2020)
Figure 3-6 Showing the scope of the Life Cycle Stages under study.
b. Life cycle Inventory and analysis

The data will be modelled in Revit 2020 student version and analyzed using One Click
LCA Revit’s plugin student’s version as shown in Figure 3-5. The embodied energy will be
classified according to the life stages, building materials used and the building components.
62 | P a g e
c. Life Cycle Impact Assessment and Data interpretation.

The data will be used to assess the impacts of the building technique on Global warm-
ing, the major contributor to Climate change. Other impacts that will be illustrated are eu-
trophication, Acidification, Ozone depletion potential and formation of ozone of lower atmos-
phere. One-Click LCA building benchmark will be used to analyze the building’s performance
for comparative analysis of all the case studies and precedent studies. This has been illustrated
in Figure 3-7.
3.6. Data Presentation.

a. Charts and Graphs
Life Cycle assessment data will be modelled in Revit and analyzed using One Click
LCA plugin and presented in form of graphs and charts.
Figure 3-7 Showing the expected Performance metric b. Photos and Drawings
Carbon Heroes Benchmark (Pasanen P1, 2019) This will be used to present information about Rammed Earth building technology to
elaborate on the descriptions in the case studies.
63 | P a g e
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
64 | P a g e
4.0. DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0. Introduction
Having outlined the methods and techniques of the fieldwork in chapter three, this
chapter entails the presentation of the data collected, its analysis and findings. Data analysis
is defined as a process of cleaning, transforming, and modelling data to discover useful in-
formation for decision-making (Guru99, 2020). The chapter will present the collected data,
model the data in Revit 2020 Student’s version and analyze the embodied energy of the build-
ing techniques using One-Click LCA taking into account the material selection parameters and
LCA methodology as in the Literature Review. The parameters are;
Table 4-1 Showing the parameters understudy
PARAMETER CATEGORIES Sub Categories

Context Physical Location & Access
Climate & Neighborhood
Culture Ethics and Style
Use The function of space and Application of the build-
ing technique
Material Proper- Physical Strength, Size, materials
ties Sensorial Visual/ Auditory/ Tactile/ Olfactory
Construction Building Technique Finishes

Experience User and Designer
65 | P a g e
4.1. CASE STUDY 1; CONVENTIONAL RAMMED EARTH CON-

STRUCTION IN KENYA.
Building: SMART EC Department Building
Location: Jomo Kenya University of Agriculture and Technology
Year Completed: 2009
Construction Technology: Rammed Earth
Designers: SMARTEC department, JKUAT

Figure 4-1 Showing location (CIA, 2020)
4.1.1. Context
a. Physical
SMRTEC department building is a prototype Rammed Earth building built by the Sustain-
able Materials and Technology Department at the Jomo Kenya University of Agriculture and
Technology. The university is located in Kiambu County in Kenya as illustrated in Error! Ref-
erence source not found.Figure 4-1. It is accessed Via Thika Super Highways, a distance of ap-
proximately 35km from Nairobi City Centre. At the University, the building is located along
the Innovation street next to Engineering workshops as shown in Error! Reference source not
Figure 4-2 Showing access of the SMARTEC depart- found.. The building has a total floor area of approximately 125 meters square as shown in Fig-
ment building (Google Maps, 2020)
ure 4-4
66 | P a g e
Figure 4-4 Showing the SMART EC building floor Plans
Source. Author
b. Ethics and Style

Figure 4-3 showing the prevailing construction tech- Traditionally, wattle and daub earth building technique is the most common earth build-
nique
ing technique used as shown in Figure 2-13. Industrialization and Urbanization have seen the
Source: Author replacement of the building technique with modern techniques that use modern building ma-
terials. Stone and mortar are the predominant building material used on-site for other build-
ings, which had a major influence on the choice of finishes used in the building.
c. Use/Application
The building is currently used to host offices of the department chaired by Dr Kabubu who
was interviewed at the course of the field study. Exterior load-bearing walls and the interior
67 | P a g e
partitioning walls are made of stabilized Rammed Earth. There were no reinforcements used to
in the construction and steel concrete formwork were used during Ramming.
4.1.2. Construction
a. Soil selection
The soil used for construction was made up of 40% loam soil sourced from site and 60%
laterite sourced from nearby quarries located approximately 5km from the site. According to
Eng. Karugo, who took part in the construction of the prototype, there was no additional stabi-
lizer used to reduce the cost of construction. This resulted in a reduced amount of manufac-
tured building materials hence reducing the resulting embodied energy of the construction.
Figure 4-5 showing Rammed Earth walls
(SMARTEC, 2010) The building is a prototype designed and built by Sustainable Materials Research and
Technology (SMART EC) department at Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology.
These materials were transported to site using trucks.

Table 4-2 showing materials used for construction.
Material Source Distance to Site (Km)
Laterite Site 5
Loam Quarry 5
Cement Simba Cement 30
b. Construction Process
The consultants involved were a team from the Sustainable materials Research and Technology
Figure 4-6 showing mixing, steel formwork and
(SMART EC) department of the University (JKUAT). The construction was done close to the
Ramming (SMARTEC, 2010)
68 | P a g e
Civil engineering lab whereby the various soil compositions were tested and the most appro-
priate mix used for construction and undertaken by various engineers and technicians. Ac-
cording to Dr Kabubu, the construction was undertaken by engineers because there was no
willing architect to advise on the construction. This can be attributed to a lack of relevant
knowledge which discouraged the adoption of the building technology.
Their main objective of the construction team was to develop a building similar to the pre-
dominant conventional stone and mortar in the institution using earth with limited depart-
ment resources. To achieve this, the wall thickness of the load-bearing walls was 225mm and a
Figure 4-7 showing load test carried out on the floor to ceiling height of 2400mm. The strength of the load-bearing capacity of the walls was
SMART EC building during construction
(SMARTEC, 2010) tested by loading bags of sand on the first-floor slab as shown in Figure 4-7. The walls had no
reinforcements which greatly reduced the related embodied energy.
Concrete Steel formwork was used during construction. This re-use of formwork reduced
the embodied energy needed for the construction of the walls. The formwork is currently in
use to construct other forms of construction in the university. Hand Rammers were used as il-
lustrated in Figure 4-6 showing mixing, steel formwork and Ramming
c. Finishing
According to Dr Kabubu, the chairperson of the SMART EC department, their main objective
Figure 4-8 showing washed away paint was to build a prototype building that looked similar to the conventional stone and mortar
Source: Author buildings in the country. The siding was done on the exterior façade of the Rammed earth
walls and painted with a grey finish to mimic the natural stone wall while the interior was
69 | P a g e
plastered and painted with two coats of paint. Some of the reasons put forward for this by Eng.
Karugo for the choice of the finishes are;
i. The exterior walls were painted to reduce the impact of rainfall on the walls. However,
the lower sections of the wall illustrated in have deteriorated over time. This requires
renovations and repainting which results in higher recurring Embodied Energy at-
tributed to renovations and maintenance.
ii. The construction team wanted a building prototype that was similar in appearance to
the conventional stone and mortar construction achieved using readily available build-
ing materials. This made it a challenge to get feedback from the users of the space since
the final building can’t be differentiated from other conventional building techniques.
The plaster and paint also resulted in hampered advantages of the Rammed Earth tech-
nology outlined in chapter two of this study and increased embodied energy of the
building.
4.1.3. Material Properties

a. Physical properties
Reinforced Concrete strip foundation was used and 225mm reinforced concrete plinth wall
Figure 4-9 showing SMARTEC building for the sub-structure. 150mm concrete ground floor slab was used and Rammed earth exterior
and partitioning walls. The walls were adversely affected by high rainfall prompting the use of
Source: Author
exterior wall finishes.
70 | P a g e
b. Sensorial Properties
The choice of the finishes has no distinct sensorial properties. For Instance, the building has
been plastered and painted resulting in a building that is difficult to visually differentiate from
other buildings built with other building techniques and the olfactory properties hampered.
According to Eng. Karugo, Rammed Earth walls have a better sound insulation property as
compared to conventional stone and mortar. Due to the limited time available for the study
and the limited number of Rammed earth buildings available, the sound properties could not
be measured hence an opportunity for further studies.
4.1.4. Experiences
a. User Experience
The Conventional Rammed Earth building finishes mimic the conventional brick and mor-
tar which makes it very difficult to differentiate from the conventional building materials.
However, the users noted that the walls had better sound insulation. The user feedback was
hampered by their inability to differentiate among the various building technologies used on
site. Their main perception of Rammed Earth construction is its association with the poor and
underprivileged in society. This has adversely affected the uptake of the material as one of the
mainstream building materials in Kenya.
b. Designer Experience
The buildings understudy was designed and build as a prototype for Rammed Earth construc-
tion by the sustainable Materials Research and Technology Centre. The team was mainly com-
prised of structural engineers involved in the testing of the structural properties of the
71 | P a g e
materials. There were no architects involved in the design and construction because all archi-
tects consulted advised against using Rammed Earth. This was attributed to the lack of requi-
site knowledge and accompanied building regulations and guidelines in the Kenyan context.
This gap never elicited confidence in the architects to recommend the material for use at-
tributed to fears of failure of the contemporary new materials.
4.1.5. Life Cycle Assessment

a. Goal and Scope
The main goal is to analyze the embodied energy of Conventional Rammed Earth construc-
tion in Kenya. The findings of this Life cycle assessment are conceptual and will only be used
for academic purposes. The building strip under study is as illustrated in Figure 4-10 and the
assumptions made informed by questionnaires are;
a. The type of foundation used is a Reinforced Concrete strip foundation located one
meter below ground level
b. Natural Stone Plinth wall was used
c. 100mm Reinforced Concrete Floor was used with a dump proof membrane and
Figure 4-10 Showing Conventional Rammed Earth 50mm concrete blinding

Construction Strip model.
d. 225mm Rammed Earth wall with 15mm plaster and paint on both the interior and
Source: Author
the exterior.
Software: Revit 2020 student version The system boundaries under the study are as outlined in the methodology.
72 | P a g e
Table 4-3 Showing Data Sources
RESOURCE NAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS EPD Program Country EPD DATA-
BASE
Clay soil, wet bulk density 1760 kg/m3 One Click LCA Germany Eco invent
Low-carbon ready-mix concrete Lavkarbonklasse A - B30 M60 EPD Norge Norway Gabi
Paint, quick-drying, water-based 15 m2/l BRE United Eco invent
primer undercoat Kingdom
Screed mortar, Screed mortar, baubook Austria Eco Invent

cement screed cement screed
Ready-mix concrete, excluding C20/25 (B20 M90) D22 Synk 180 EPD Norge Norway Eco Invent
rebar
Reinforcement steel (rebar), ge- 90% recycled content One Click LCA LOCAL Eco Invent
neric
Soil, wet bulk density 1250 kg/m3 One Click LCA Europe Eco Invent
Synthetic membrane for water- ép. 2mm INIES France Eco Invent
proofing of underground walls
and foundations, French average
73 | P a g e
b. Data Inventory and Analysis

The data obtained were classified according to Life cycle stages, extraction of materials and the
Resource types.
d. Life Cycle Stages
The data obtained is as outlined in Table 4-4 and illustrated in Figure 4-11. Recurring
embodied energy contributed the most of the embodied energy in the simulation attributed to
the maintenance and replacement of some building materials used. This can be reduced by us-
ing materials with a longer lifespan to minimize the need to repair and renovate the building
throughout its lifetime.
Table 4-4 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Life-cycle stages
Item Value (MJ)
A1-A3 Materials 1 315,38
A4 Transportation 216,92
B1-B5 Maintenance and replacement 3 197,94
C1-C4 End of life 88,98

Figure 4-11 Showing Embodied energy of Life Cycle
Stages in MJ
The materials used contributed to a relatively high proportion of the initial embodied
energy. The impacts of the materials throughout the building’s lifetime should therefore be an-
alyzed to propose materials with minimal recurring embodied energy as it has a huge impact
on the energy efficiency of the building throughout its lifetime.

74 | P a g e
e. Classification by building components
This has tabulated in Table 4-5 and illus-
trated in figure 4-10. The external walls and
facades contributed the most embodied en-
ergy in the simulation.

7.8%
The materials making up the exter- 9.5% %
nal walls and facades contributed the most
embodied energy attributed to the need to
maintain and renovate. Materials with
longer life-span should therefore be 82.7%
adopted to minimize the recurring embod-
ied energy
Figure 4-13 Showing Embodied Energy (Primary) of
building components in MJ
Table 4-5 showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials – Classifications
Figure 4-12 showing the building components- classifi- Item Value (MJ)
cations.
External walls and façade 4 173,39
Source: Author
Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 380,1
Software: Revit 2020 student version.
Floor slabs, ceilings, roofing decks, beams and roof 265,72
75 | P a g e
f. Classification by Resource Types in Megajoules (MJ)
This has been tabulated in Table 4-6 and illustrated in Figure 4-14. Coating and pastes
contributed the most embodied energy attributed to high initial embodied energy and high re-
curring embodied energy. Manufacturers should therefore work on reducing the Initial em-
bodied energy and lengthening the lifespan of the coatings and pastes to reduce the recurring
embodied energy. Research on low embodied energy concrete should also be done to reduce
its embodied energy. Wherever possible, plaster should be avoided to reduce the related em-
bodied energy in the building. Masses (soil) contributed the least embodied energy indicating
an opportunity in the use of Earth for modern building constructions.
Table 4-6 showing primary Energy by Resource types
Item Value (MJ)
Coatings & pastes 3 855,61
Concrete 904,26
Gypsum, plaster & cement 38,29
Masses 21,05

The focus of the Life cycle Impact assessment is on the impacts on Global warming, the
Figure 4-14 showing Primary Energy of Building Ma- main contributor to Climate change which was identified as one of the major challenges of
terials used (Resource Types) in MJ
modern civilizations. The impacts are classified according to Life Cycle Stages, Classifications
and Resource Types.
76 | P a g e
i. Life Cycle Stages
Global warming impacts have been tabulated in Table 4-7 and illustrated in Figure 4-15.
Materials and Maintenance & replacement has resulted in the most embodied carbon resulting
in high global warming impacts. Materials with a longer lifespan and require minimal renova-
tions and maintenance should therefore be adopted.
Table 4-7 Showing Global warming Life Cycle stages data table
Item Value (KgCO2e)
A1-A3 Materials 151,51
B1-B5 Maintenance and replacement 164,21

The initial Global warming potential of the buildings is also a very important factor but
should not be considered in isolation as the impacts from maintenance and renovations may be
Figure 4-15 showing Global warming impacts by significant. Materials selected should therefore contribute to the reduction of the environmen-
classification in KgCO2e
tal impacts throughout the building’s life cycle.
If possible, locally produced building materials should be used to reduce the related trans-
portation embodied energy. However, the overall impacts of using the building materials
should be considered in deciding the most suitable materials since the best-suited materials
might be located far but the overall environmental impacts throughout the building’s life cycle.
77 | P a g e
i. Classification by Resource types
Coating and pastes contributed the most impact to global warming while masses (soil) contrib-
uted the least embodied carbon.

Table 4-8 Showing global warming by Resource Types
Item Value (KgCO2e)
Coatings & pastes 179,64
Concrete 120,77
Masses 0,95
The coatings and paste contributed the most environmental impacts attributed to the
production of the coatings and pastes and the renovation and maintenance processes. A study
should be focused on coatings and pastes that have low environmental impacts to conserve the
environment. Concrete also contributed to the most significant environmental impacts. Eco-
friendly concrete should therefore be produced by the manufacturers and declare genuine en-
vironmental product declarations of their products.
The use of masses(soil) had the least environmental impacts indicating the huge potential of
using earth as the most suitable building material to solve the modern environmental chal-
Figure 4-16 showing Global warming potential
lenges in the modern world. Therefore, Rammed Earth construction is a relevant remedy to
by resource types in Kg
solve environmental challenges.
78 | P a g e
ii. Global warming by classifications
External walls and façade contributed the
most significant global warming potential. This
can be attributed to the use of coatings and
pastes that require frequent renovations and

16%
maintenance throughout the building’s life-cy-
cle. The results were tabulated in Table 4-9 and

19.2%
illustrated in Figure 4-17 and Figure 4-15. The
64.8%
use of concrete for both the slab, plinth all and
the foundation had the least environmental im-
pacts which could further be reduced by adopting Figure 4-18 Showing global warming by Classifica-
tions in KgCO2e
eco-friendly concrete.
Figure 4-17 Showing a model of the building elements -

classifications. Table 4-9 showing Global warming - Classifications
Source: Author Item Value (KgCO2e)
Software: Revit 2020 student’s version External walls and facade 215,25
79 | P a g e
d. Benchmark results
The analysis was based on carbon heroes benchmark and the results are categorized according
to the structure (see Figure 4-19), according to Life Cycle Stage and overall building’s bench-
mark score as shown in Figure 4-20.
The Horizontal structure (Ground floor slab) had the least environmental impacts
while the foundation & substructure and the vertical structures & Facades had the most signifi-
Figure 4-19 Embodied carbon by structure - A1- cant environmental impacts. This can be attributed to the significant environmental impacts of
A3 the building materials used and the recurring embodied energy attributed to the maintenance,
renovations and replacement throughout the building’s life cycle. Materials with longer life-
span should therefore be adopted to reduce the need for the replacement throughout the build-
ing’s life cycle. Consideration should also be at the end of Life phase of the life cycle stages to
reduce the initial embodied energy in the New building’s Life Cycle.
Figure 4-20 showing Embodied carbon benchmark
80 | P a g e
The chart in Figure 4-21 shows the environmental impacts of the building’s Life Cycle Stages as modelled. The Maintenance and
Replacement stage contributes the most significant environmental impacts attributed to the recurring embodied energy of the building.
Figure 4-21 showing the Environmental Impacts Chart
81 | P a g e
4.2. PRECEDENT STUDY 01. LOW-IMPACT RAMMED EARTH

CONSTRUCTION; THE INSIDE-OUT SCHOOL IN GHANA.
Figure 4-22 showing location of Ghana in the global

map
Figure 4-23Showing the Inside out School (Baldwin, 2017)
Location: Yeboahkrom, Ghana Area: 600 sq. m
Architects: Andrea Tabocchini & Francesca Vittorini
Year Completed: 2017
Wall Building Technology: Low-Impact Rammed Earth construction
Construction Time: 60days
Cost: 13,000 Us Dollars
82 | P a g e
4.2.1. Context
a. Background
Figure 4-25 Showing the Inside-Out School (Vittorini, 2017).
Inside-Out is a school prototype built in Yeboahkrom, a rural village in Ghana where
Figure 4-24 showing the floor plan (Vittorini, 2017) the wind had destroyed the only school in the area. The project was designed by a team of vol-
unteers from all over the world led by architects Andrea Tabocchini & Francesca Vittorini. The
project resulted after the lead architects won an international competition by Nka Foundation
entitled 4th Earth Architecture Competition. The competition required to design and actualize
the school in the rural village in Ghana.
83 | P a g e
b. Ethics and Style

The design was inspired by the patterns and textures of the typical kente clothes, rigid oil
palms and the vegetable gardens layout of the local community (Vittorini, 2017). This resulted
in the transformation of the standard classroom into an engaging sequence of multi-functional
spaces with different levels of openness as illustrated in Figure 4-28.
Figure 4-26 Showing the staggered walls

(Vittorini, 2017)
Figure 4-28 Showing the transformation of a standard classroom (Vittorini, 2017).
The village is located in a remote rural area with no electricity, running water and poor
access roads. These site limitation and limited construction budgets available resulted in the
use of earth as the main wall building material. The building technique used is stabilized
Rammed Earth with a wall thickness of 600mm. The building technique borrows a lot from the
local vernacular architecture that uses locally available building materials e.g. earth, timber
Figure 4-27 showing the use of the different lo-
cally available materials (Vittorini, 2017) and thatch to build as shown in Figure 4-27
84 | P a g e
c. Use/Application
The building materials (earth and wood) used were locally sourced and build by hand. Stabi-
lized soil mix was used to build the rammed earth walls which formed the exterior walls of the
building and the main load-bearing system. Lightweight Timber measuring
100mm x 100mm was used to elevate the roof creating zenithal light into the building, and gen-
erates natural ventilation of the spaces (Vittorini, 2017).
4.2.2. Construction
a. Material selection and Source
Figure 4-29 showing the soil mix (Vittorini,
58000kg of soil was sourced close to the site and transported to the site by hand. 3km of timber
2017)
was also planned by two hand planers within a 2km radius from the site. The soil mix-use was
made of 98 per cent natural soil mix with 2 per cent cement added as a stabilizer as shown in
Figure 4-29.
Random Rubble foundation footing was used to support the rammed earth walls as shown in
Figure 4-30. The excavation was done by hand and the excavated soil formed part provided the
materials for the wall construction. Locally made wooden formwork was used and hand ram-
mers weight approximately 7kgs were used to ram the earth walls. The formwork was re-used
which reduced the embodied energy due to site operations.
Figure 4-30 Showing Random Rubble foundation

(Vittorini, 2017)
85 | P a g e
Figure 4-31 showing the formwork used and the Ramming process. (Vittorini, 2017)
Figure 4-32 Showing Finished Rammed Earth
Walls (Vittorini, 2017)
c. Finishing
Both the interior and the exterior of the Rammed earth walls were left in their resulting finish
after the removal of the formwork as illustrated in Figure 4-32. This resulted brought the
blurred boundary between the interior and the exterior hence the name inside-out school.

a. Physical Properties
The materials used for construction were Natural stones and mortar (Random Rubble
foundation), Stabilized soil (for the Rammed Earth walls) and Concrete (for floors). Un-rein-
forced 4% Stabilized Rammed Earth was used to build the load-bearing Rammed Earth walls
of the Inside-Out school.
86 | P a g e
Table 4-10 showing the material Inventory (Baldwin, 2017)
Category Materials Thickness(m) Volume(m3)
Foundation and Substructure Random Rubble Foundation 0.45 0.45
Vertical Structures and Fa- Load Bearing Rammed 0.45 0.45
cade Earth wall.
Horizontal structures Concrete Slab 0.15 0.15
Concrete strips 0.05 0.05
i. Visual
Figure 4-33 showing the visual properties of the school (Vittorini, 2017).
The alternating concrete and rammed earth finish visually break down the high walls to suit
the pupils leaning at different levels as indicated in Figure 4-33.
87 | P a g e
ii. Tactile
The thick walls give a sense of toughness and the brown natural colour radiates a sense of
warmth.
iii. Auditory
The thick walls have good sound insulation and reduce the inter-classroom noises pro-
moting a very conducive learning environment.
iv. Olfactory
The building has no odours due to the use of natural building materials
4.2.4. Experiences
The Rammed Earth walls were left with no additional finishes on both the interior and
the exterior facades. This brought about a sense of playfulness and a more interactive learning
environment for the learners by visually extending the exterior into the interior. The horizontal
layers of the Rammed earth and the timber louvres breaks results in an environment that suits
the various ages of the pupil using the space as shown in Figure 4-34.
Figure 4-34 showing a pupil working out of the The design team led by Architects Andrea Tabocchini & Francesca Vittorini learned a
classroom (Vittorini, 2017)
lot about rammed earth on-site during construction by testing the various compositions to
suite the construction. The team of volunteers and local builders also facilitated and gave their
inputs during construction facilitation the success of the project.
88 | P a g e
4.2.5. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

a. Goal and Scope
The main goal was to analyze the embodied energy of low-cost Rammed Earth construc-
tion in Kenya. The building strip under study is as illustrated in Figure 4-35 and the assump-
tions made informed by questionnaires are;
a. The type of foundation used was 450mm Random Rubble foundation located one
b. 100mm Reinforced Concrete Floor was used with a dump proof membrane and
50mm concrete blinding
c. 450mm 3% Stabilized Rammed Earth wall with 50mm concrete layer after every
500mm.
d. 50mm concrete strip located at a height of 500mm runs horizontally on the wall.
e. The database used and assumptions made are as shown in Table 4-11.
Figure 4-35 Showing the modelled section understudy
Source: Author
Software: Revit 2020 student version.
89 | P a g e
Table 4-11showing the data Inventory used to estimate the embodied energy.
RESOURCE NAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ENVIRONMENT DATA Country EPD DA-
SOURCE TABASE
Hollow core concrete slabs, generic C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 40% recycled binders One Click LCA Global Eco invent
in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72 lbs./ft3), incl. re-
inforcement
Lightweight plaster 0.7-1.3 kg/l EPD KEIM AquaROYAL-Mineral- Germany Gabi
putz KEIMFARBEN GmbH
Natural stone kerbs 170x270 mm EPD Tiles and Slabs from natural Europe Gabi
stone EURO-ROC
PVC-P synthetic waterproofing 1.75 kg/m2 FDES France Eco in-

membrane vent
Precast concrete wall elements C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 20% recycled binders One Click LCA Local Eco Invent
(solid, uninsulated), generic in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72 lbs./ft3), incl. re-
inforcement
Ready-mix concrete C 25/30 Oekobau.dat 2017-I, EPD Beton
der Druckfestigkeitsklasse C 25/30
InformationsZentrum Beton
GmbH
Screed mortar, cement screed - - Austria Eco Invent
90 | P a g e
b. Life Cycle Inventory and Analysis

The data were categorized according to the Life Cycle stages, Classifications (Building compo-
nents) and Resource types (building materials used).
i. Life Cycle Stages
Materials used contributed the most significant embodied energy as indicated in Table 4-12
and illustrated in Figure 4-36. This can be attributed to the use of concrete strip on the walls
and mortar in the foundations. The end of life stage had the least embodied energy attributed
to the possibility of using the earth which was the main walling material.
Table 4-12 Showing Global warming Life Cycle stages data table
Item Value (MJ)
A1-A3 Materials 430

A4 Transportation 96
B1-B5 Maintenance and replacement 120
C1-C4 End of life 22

Figure 4-36 Showing total use of primary energy of the
Life stage in MJ
91 | P a g e
ii. Primary Energy by Classification in MJ
Floor slabs and horizontal elements contrib-
uted to the most significant embodied energy at-
tributed to the use of concrete floors and hori-
zontal concrete strips on the walls. This can be

5.9%
reduced by adopting eco-friendly concrete to be 7.2%
24.2%
used for construction. The use of soil as the main
wall building material resulted in the least signif- 24.3%

icant embodied energy of the external walls and
51.5%
86.9%
façade as indicated in Figure 4-37 and illustrated
in figure 4-32. The use of random rubble founda-
tions had a significantly low embodied energy. Figure 4-38 showing the Primary Energy – Classifica-
tions in MJ
Table 4-13 Showing the primary energy of the model by Classifications in MJ
Item Value (MJ)

Figure 4-37 showing a model of the building compo-
nents Floor slabs, ceilings, roofing decks, beams and roof 570
Source: Author Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 47
Software: Revit 2020 Student’s version External walls and facade 39
92 | P a g e
iii. Classification by resource types in MJ
Cement contributed the most significant embodied energy while masses (soil) contrib-
uted the least primary embodied energy. The use of cement for the foundation mortar and
contributed to the most embodied energy while the use of dump proof membrane contrib-
uted significantly on the related embodied energy as shown in Table 4-14 and illustrated in
Figure 4-39. Eco-friendly water-proofing products should therefore be developed to re-
duce the related embodied energy.
Table 4-14 showing Primary energy of the model by resource types in MJ
Item Value (MJ)
Gypsum, plaster & cement 230
Plastics, membranes & roofing 180
Concrete 160
Masses 86
Concrete used for the slab and the horizontal concrete strips resulted in significant em-
bodied energy which can be reduced by adopting eco-friendly concrete or avoiding its use
Figure 4-39 chart showing the primary energy of the
resource types in MJ wherever possible.
93 | P a g e

The environmental impacts of the model are as shown in the following classifications; Life
cycle stages, building classifications and building materials (Resource types). The main focus
will be on Global warming potential.
i. Classification by Life Cycle stages
The materials used contributed to the most significant Global warming potential in the
model attributed to the use of cement, concrete and waterproofing while the end of life con-
tributed the least. This can further be reduced by adopting eco-friendly materials with lower
environmental impacts as tabulated in Table 4-15 and illustrated in Figure 4-40.
Table 4-15 Global warming - Life-cycle stages in KgCO2e
Item Value (KgCO2e)
A1-A3 Materials 48
A4 Transportation 4.2
C1-C4 Renovations 7.6
C1-C4 End of life 5.3
The high initial environmental impacts were however reduced throughout the building’s
life cycle thus reducing the overall building’s embodied energy. This illustrates the gives and
Figure 4-40 showing the Global warming Impacts by takes to be considered in the design stage that will cumulatively result in significantly less
Life-Cycle Stages in KgCO2e
overall environmental impacts.
94 | P a g e
ii. Classification by Building materials (Classifications) in KgCO2e
Concrete contributed to the most significant Global warming impacts. This was at-
tributed to the use of concrete strips on the walls and concrete floors. Eco-friendly concrete
should be adopted to minimize the environmental impacts of concrete in buildings. The
use of the Damp Proof Membrane on the floors contributed significant embodied energy
as indicated in Table 4-16 and illustrated in Figure 4-41. Eco-friendly waterproofing with
low environmental impacts should be adopted for buildings.
Table 4-16 showing Global warming – Building materials in KgCO2e
Item Value (KgCO2e)
Concrete 25
Gypsum, plaster and cement 16
Masses 4.2
Gypsum, plaster and cement contributed less embodied energy attributed to the
use of cement for mortar in the random Rubble foundations and stabilization in the
Rammed earth walls. Wherever possible, binders with less environmental impacts should
be adopted. The masses/soil contributed the least environmental impacts indicating the
significance of using natural materials in reducing the environmental impacts the building
sector have on the environment hence the significance of Rammed Earth construction.
Figure 4-41 showing Global warming – Building mate-
rials in KgCO2e
95 | P a g e
iii. Classification by resource types-building elements in Kg CO2e
The floors and horizontal wall strips contrib-
uted the most significant global warming potential due
to the use of concrete as indicated in Table 4-17 and 2.6%

3.9%
Figure 4-40 as illustrated in the model shown in Figure
4-42. Eco-friendly concrete should be adopted to mini-

mize the environmental impacts concrete has on the en-
vironment. The use of mortar in the random Rubble

93.6%
foundation contributed to significant environmental
impacts indicating the need to adopt eco-friendly bind-
ers for construction. The external walls and façade Figure 4-43 showing global warming potential-
building elements in KgCO2e
made up of the main earth had the least environmental
impacts indicating the significance of using Rammed earth in reducing environmental impacts.
Table 4-17 showing global warming potential- building elements in KgCO2e
Item Value (KgCO2e)

Figure 4-42 showing the Global warming Potential of
the building elements in KgCO2e Floor slabs, ceilings, roofing decks, beams and roof 47,65
Source: Author Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 19,52
Software: Revit 2020 student version External walls and facade 5,94
96 | P a g e
The chart shown in Figure 4-44 shows the other environmental impacts classified by Life Cycle stages in KgCO2e. The A1-A3
material stage contributed the most significant environmental impacts while the C1-C4 end of life stage will contribute the least envi-
ronmental impacts.
Figure 4-44 showing Results by life-cycle stage
97 | P a g e
4.3. PRECEDENT STUDY 02: High-Tech Rammed Earth Con-

struction; Pediatric Surgery Center in Uganda
Figure 4-46 showing the Pediatric Surgery Centre (EMERGENCY, 2020)
LOCATION: Entebbe, Uganda
CLIENT: Emergency NGO
ARCHITECT: Renzo Piano Building Workshop & Studio TAMassociation
LOCAL ARCHITECTS: Studio FH Architects
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: ‘Pise’ Technique (Rammed Earth)

Figure 4-45 Showing the site plan (ÁLVARO
MUÑOZ, 2020) AREA: 9,000 SQ M
COMPLETED: 2020
98 | P a g e
4.3.1. CONTEXT
a. Background
Figure 4-49 showing the main access, constructed site and the Park (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020)
The hospital is located in Wakiso district, 35 km from Kampala city located on the shores of
Figure 4-47 showing the Pediatric Surgery Centre
(Google Maps, 2020) Lake Victoria. The project’s client was a global Non-governmental organization called Emer-
gency in partnership with the government of Uganda. The government supported the project
in Kind by providing 120,000 sq. meters piece of land while the NGO was responsible for fund-
ing and executing the project. The design Architect was architect Renzo piano and the local ar-
chitect was Studio FH Architects.
b. Ethics and Style

According to Renzo Piano, the challenge of the new project was to combine the practical
requirements of a pediatric surgery hospital in Uganda with the desire to create a model piece
Figure 4-48showing the Rammed earth Walls of architecture: rational, tangible, modern, beautiful, but firmly linked to tradition (ÁLVARO
(EMERGENCY, 2020)
MUÑOZ, 2020).
99 | P a g e
This led to the development of a project that is symbolic, representing the culture of the local
community in Wakiso district while promoting the Health Care. Another factor under consid-
eration was the project cost, which was limited due to the low financial capacity of the commu-
nity and the low level of skill. This led to the selection of earth, a cheap natural, non-toxic and
environmentally material that has been widely used by the community to build. The building
technique adopted was Rammed Earth technology, which is one of the earth building tech-
niques used by the local community (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020)

Figure 4-50 Showing the load-bearing Rammed
Earth walls (EMERGENCY, 2020) c. Use and Application
Rammed Earth building technique was used to erect exterior load-bearing walls. The walls
were newly built measuring approximately 450mm. This provides a high thermal mass and
helps to maintain constant temperature and humidity in the indoor hospital environment.
4.3.2. Construction
a. Material Selection and source
The main building material was soil, sourced locally mainly from excavations on site. The con-
struction technique used was the Rammed Earth building technique or ‘pise’ technology. The
construction used a mix of red soil, sand, gravel, a little water and an innovative chemical
binder developed by Mapei Research and Development Laboratories in Milan, Italy (MAPEI,
2020).
Figure 4-51 Showing Excavations and setting
out of the Foundations (EMERGENCY, 2020)
100 | P a g e
Foundation pits were excavated while conserving existing vegetation as shown in Figure 4-52
The soil mix used was in the ratio of 5% binder (Cement):10% water: 85% soil. This study will
assume the embodied energy of cement was used since I could not find the exact binder that
was used for the construction. Wooden formwork was used and highly efficient pneumatic
rammers were used.
c. Finishing
Figure 4-52 showing Reinforced Concrete foun- The Exterior facades were left with Rammed Earth finishes while the interiors were plastered
dations (EMERGENCY, 2020)
and painted with different colour themes as shown below.
Figure 4-54 Showing interior and exterior finishes (EMERGENCY, 2020)
Figure 4-53 showing the wooden formwork

used (EMERGENCY, 2020).
101 | P a g e

a. Physical Properties
The materials used for the construction were Stabilized soil (for the Rammed Earth walls),
Reinforced Concrete (for floors and the sub-structure) and wall Finishes (Plaster and paint).
Reinforced Stabilized Rammed Earth was used to build the load-bearing Rammed Earth walls
of the building.
Figure 4-55 Showing foundation to floor detail Table 4-18 Showing data Inventory
Source: Author Category Materials Thickness(m) Volume(m3)
Foundation and Substructure Strip Foundation 1.35 1.35
RC Plinth Wall 0.45 0.45
Vertical Structures and Fa- Load Bearing Rammed Earth 0.6 0.6
cade wall.
Horizontal structures Concrete Slab 0.15 0.15
Timber beams 0.1 0.1

Figure 4-56 Showing floor to floor detail
Source: Author
102 | P a g e
i. Visual
Figure 4-57 showing the Rammed earth walls (EMERGENCY, 2020)
ii. Tactile
When the walls are touched, they have a rough texture depending on the surfaces of the form-
work that was used for the construction.
iii. Auditory
The thick Rammed earth walls minimize sound transfer from one room to another thereby re-
sulting in a relatively calm hospital environment. This is critical considering that it’s a pediatric
hospital that experiences loud cries of children under medication.
iv. Olfactory
Rammed Earth walls are odourless, however, due to interior plaster and paint to achieve the
desired finish, the odours are attributed to the interior finishes.
103 | P a g e
4.3.4. Experiences
a. Design Team
The design team led by Renzo Piano was fascinated by the idea of giving back dignity to
the ancient Rammed Earth building technology as shown in Figure 4-58. Earth has been asso-
ciated with African vernacular architecture, and it is readily available in Uganda.
The technique also required only a few skilled labours to manage the unskilled workforce
readily available. This ensured that the labour cost was low and that the community was in-
volved in the construction hence resulting in a sense of ownership of the project.

Figure 4-58 Showing the design team
(ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020)
Figure 4-60 showing the building section (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ, 2020)
b. The Users
Earth has been associated with a past of poverty hence resulting in the need to be forgotten by
the community. This is what prompted the design team to try and explore Rammed earth as a
dignified building material by building the community facility that will treat children from all
Figure 4-59 showing the Ugandan president over Uganda and thus promoting the advantages of the earth as a building material.
with the design team (ÁLVARO MUÑOZ,
2020)
104 | P a g e

a. Goal and Scope
a. The type of foundation used was 450mm Random Rubble foundation located one
c. 450mm 3% Stabilized Rammed Earth wall with 50mm concrete layer after every
500mm.
d. The database used and assumptions made are as shown in Table 2-1
The system boundaries under the study are as outlined in the methodology.
Figure 4-61 showing the model of the functional unit

under the study
Source: Author
Software: Revit 2020 student version
105 | P a g e
Table 4-19 showing data sources
RESOURCE NAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ENVIRONMENT DATA SOURCE Country EPD DA-
TABASE
Hollow core concrete slabs, ge- C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 40% recycled One Click LCA Global Eco invent
neric binders in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72
lbs./ft3), incl. reinforcement
Lightweight plaster 0.7-1.3 kg/l EPD KEIM AquaROYAL-Mineral- Germany Gabi
putz KEIMFARBEN GmbH
stone EURO-ROC
PVC-P synthetic waterproofing 1.75 kg/m2 FDES France Eco in-

membrane vent
Precast concrete wall elements C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 20% recycled One Click LCA Local Eco Invent
(solid, uninsulated), generic binders in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72
Ready-mix concrete C 25/30 Oekobau.dat 2017-I, EPD Beton der
Druckfestigkeitsklasse C 25/30 Infor-
mationsZentrum Beton GmbH
106 | P a g e
v. Life Cycle Inventory and Analysis

The data obtained was calculated simulated using One-click LCA interface to calculate the
building’s embodied energy and their resulting environmental impacts.
a. Classifications by Life Cycle Stages in MJ
The materials contributed the most significant embodied energy as indicated in Table 4-20.
This can be attributed to the use of cement, a manufactured building material with significant
initial embodied energy (cradle to gate). The Maintenance and replacement stage also had sig-
nificant embodied energy attribute to the frequency and need to repaint the building through-
out its lifetime. Building materials that require minimal repair and maintenance should there-
fore be adopted to minimize the recurring embodied energy. Transportation phase had signifi-
cant embodied energy attributed to some binders transported to site from Milan.
Table 4-20 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Life-cycle stages
Item Value (MJ)
A1-A3 Materials 1 066,02

Figure 4-62 showing total use of primary energy
ex.raw materials -life Cycle Stages in MJ C1-C4 End of life 105,5
The End of life stage had the least amount of embodied energy attributed to the quan-
tity of re-usable materials after the demolition of the building which will reduce the initial em-
bodied energy in the new building using the re-used materials.

107 | P a g e
b. Classification by building materials in Megajoules
In this model, concrete contributed the most significant initial embodied energy while
masses (soil) contributed the least embodied energy. Further studies should therefore go into
the production of eco-friendly concrete to reduce the environmental impacts of concrete in
buildings. Using plaster and paint on the interior finishes resulted in significant embodied en-
ergy which offers an opportunity to manufacture eco-friendly finishes. This has been tabulated
in Table 4-21 and illustrated in Figure 4-63.
Table 4-21 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Resource types in Megajoules (MJ)
Item Value (MJ)
Concrete 979,19
Plastics, membranes & roofing 233,5
Masses 31,58
The use of no finishes on the exterior resulted in reduced the embodied energy from
coatings and pastes hence the most suitable option whenever possible. Plastics and membranes
Figure 4-63 illustrate the use of the Dump proof membranes waterproofing of the ground floor. Alterna-
tive eco-friendly waterproofing should be adopted for all building waterproofing needs. The
use of Masses/ soil resulted in the least embodied energy hence it’s the best alternative.
108 | P a g e
c. Classifications by building components-classifications in Megajoules (MJ)
Concrete floors contributed the most signifi-
cant embodied energy attributed to the use of
concrete and Dump proof membrane (DPM). Ex-
ternal walls and facades contributed to the signif-
icant embodied energy attributed to the use of 19.1%

plaster and paint as the interior finishes. 44.7%
This can be reduced by adopting eco-friendly
DPM and indoor wall finishes that have a longer 36.2%
lifespan and with low embodied energy. This
has been shown in Table 4-22 and illustrated in

Figure 4-65 showing total primary energy ex. raw ma-
Figure 4-60. This has been illustrated in Figure terials- classifications in Megajoules (MJ)
4-64.
Table 4-22 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Classifications
Item Value (MJ)

Figure 4-64 showing model of the classification
Author: Source
Software: Revit 2020 student’s version
External walls and façade 380,1
109 | P a g e
vi. Life Cycle Impacts Assessment.

The various materials used have varying impacts on the Green House gas emissions. This
is measured in KgCO2e and has been classified according to Life-Cycle stages, building materi-
als and building elements.
i. Life Cycle Stages in KgCO2e
Building materials contributed the most significant global warming potential as shown in
Table 4-13 and illustrated in Figure 4-66. This can be attributed to the use of concrete, damp
proof membrane and plaster and paint indoor all finishes. The recurring maintenance and ren-
ovations of the interior walls resulted in significant embodied energy. Eco-friendly concrete,
water-proofing and indoor finishes should be adopted that have a longer lifespan to minimize
the environmental impacts.
Item Value (KgCO2e)
A1-A3 Materials 153,02

Figure 4-66 showing global warming Potential- Life
cycle stages in KgCO2e A4 Transportation 14,55
110 | P a g e
ii. Building materials Classifications
Concrete contributed the most significant global warming impacts as shown in Table 4-24
and Figure 4-67. This can be attributed to the use of concrete floors and foundations illustrat-
ing the need for eco-friendly concrete to be used for construction. Gypsum, plaster and cement
used for indoor finishes were followed closely by coating and pastes contributing significantly
high environmental impacts. This was however reduced by having no exterior finishes in the
building signifying the importance of avoiding the finishes whenever possible and a need to
develop eco-friendly long-lasting building finishes.

Table 4-24 Showing Global warming - Resource types
Item Value (KgCO2e)
Concrete 142,7
Plastics, membranes & roofing 16,27
Masses 1,1
Figure 4-67 Showing global warming -building materi- The masses/ soil contributed to the least significant environmental impacts and can be
als classification in KgCO2e
attributed to the use of Rammed Earth technology for walls. The use of Rammed earth should
therefore be used as one of the ways of mitigating climate change.
111 | P a g e
iii. Classification by building elements
The floor slabs contributed the most
significant global warming potential as
shown in Table 4-25 and figure 68 and il-
lustrated in Figure 4-68. This can be at-
tributed to the use of concrete floors and

29%
Dump Proof membrane waterproofing. 39.4%
The use of concrete on foundations and
plaster and paint on interior finishes re- 31.6%
sulted in significant environmental im-
pacts which can be mitigated by adopting

Figure 4-69 showing global warming potential- building ele-
eco-friendly concrete, waterproofing and ments in KgCO2e
indoor finishes.
Table 4-25 Showing Global warming - Classifications
Item Value (KgCO2e)

Figure 4-68 showing Global warming potential model
of various building elements Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 69,48
Source: Author External walls and façade 63,82
112 | P a g e
113 | P a g e
4.4. Conventional Stone and Mortar Construction
Figure 4-71 Showing Hall 7 at JKUAT
Source: Author
4.4.1. Context
a. Background
Hall 7 is the department of Architecture building at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Agri-
culture and Technology (JKUAT) in Juja, Kenya. I chose this building because Rammed earth
was used to construct sections of the ground floor Exterior walls while natural stone and mor-
Figure 4-70 Showing Rammed Earth Walls of
tar were used for the other floors. According to Eng. Karugo who was involved in the con-
Hall 7 (SMARTEC, 2010)
struction, they could not use rammed earth walls for the other floors mainly because the struc-
tural frame was not designed to handle the weight of Rammed Earth.
114 | P a g e
b. Ethics and Style

The lack of building regulations and guidelines that determine the design specifications of
Rammed Earth structures led to the abandonment of Rammed Earth and the adoption of the
conventional widely used stone and mortar construction. The construction style adopted is the
frame structural style whereby the structural concrete system acts as a load-bearing system
while the stone and mortar acted as infill material.
c. Use/Application
The building is used as studio spaces for architectural students at the University. Rammed
earth walls on sections of the ground floor were used as exterior and interior partitioning ele-
ments. For the preceding floors, stone and mortar were used.
4.4.2. Construction
a. Construction Process
The construction involved the use of a concrete frame structural system and natural stones for
most of the exterior and interior walls. Less than 5 per cent of all the walls were constructed
using Rammed earth construction.
b. Finishing
Figure 4-72 Showing exterior finishes
The building was plastered and painted on the interior and some sections of the exterior as
shown in Figure 4-72

Source: Author
115 | P a g e

The materials used for the construction were natural stone machine cut (for the Rammed
Earth walls), Reinforced Concrete (for floors and the sub-structure) and wall Finishes (Plaster
and paint). Reinforced concrete beams and columns were also used.
Category Materials Thickness(m) Volume(m3)
Foundation and Substructure Strip Foundation 1.35 1.35
Stone Plinth wall 0.20 0.45
Vertical Structures and Facade Natural Stone 0.6 0.6
Reinforced Concrete
Columns
Horizontal structures Reinforced Concrete 0.15 0.15
Slab
4.4.4. Experiences
Stone is one of the most used building materials in Kenya (Nduire, 2019). This has been at-
tributed to its availability and a more accepted building technique and the well-documented
building technique in the Kenyan building code. This has facilitated its use in various types of
construction and preferred by professionals in the construction industry due to existing build-
ing guidelines and generally accepted by the users.
116 | P a g e

a. Goal and Scope definition.
a. The type of foundation used was 225mm strip located one meter below ground
level
c. 225mm Stone and mortar masonry wall
d. The database used and assumptions made are as shown in Table 4-26
Figure 4-73 showing the components under the study
Source: Author
117 | P a g e
Table 4-26 Showing data sources
RESOURCE NAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ENVIRONMENT DATA SOURCE Country EPD DA-
TABASE
Hollow core concrete slabs, C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 40% recycled One Click LCA Global Eco invent
generic binders in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72
Lightweight plaster 0.7-1.3 kg/l EPD KEIM AquaROYAL-Mineralputz Germany Gabi
KEIMFARBEN GmbH
stone EURO-ROC
PVC-P synthetic waterproof- 1.75 kg/m2 FDES France Eco in-

ing membrane vent
Precast concrete wall ele- C30/37 (4400/5400 PSI), 20% recycled One Click LCA Local Eco Invent
ments (solid, uninsulated), binders in cement (300 kg/m3 / 18.72
generic lbs./ft3), incl. reinforcement
Ready-mix concrete C 25/30 Oekobau.dat 2017-I, EPD Beton der
Druckfestigkeitsklasse C 25/30 Infor-
mationsZentrum Beton GmbH
118 | P a g e
a. LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS

The data obtained was modelled in Revit and analyzed using One Click LCA. This has
been classified according to the Life cycle stages, building materials (Resource types) and
building elements (classifications).
i. Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Life-cycle stages in Megajoules
Maintenance and replacement contributed the most significant recurring embodied energy
as illustrated in Table 4-27 and Figure 4-74. This has been attributed to the need and frequency
of renovations and maintenance of the building throughout its lifetime. Eco-friendly Finishes
with longer life-span should therefore be adopted to minimize embodied energy and mitigate
climate change.
Table 4-27 showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Life-cycle stages
Item Value (MJ)
A1-A3 Materials 2700
Figure 4-74 Showing Total use of primary en- B1-B5 Maintenance and replacement 3,700
ergy ex. raw materials - Life-cycle stages in
Megajoules
The initial embodied energy of building materials contributed to significantly high em-
bodied energy as indicated above attribute to the use of manufactured building materials. Ma-
terials with lower embodied energy should be adopted considering the building’s life cycle.
119 | P a g e
ii. Classification by building materials
Coatings and pastes contributed the most significant initial embodied energy as
tabulated in Table 4-28 and illustrated in Figure 4-75. This has been contributed by the use
of paint as finishes on both the interior and the exterior. The use of these finishes should be
avoided whenever possible to minimize embodied energy and the adoption of eco-
friendly long-lasting finishes to minimize the recurring embodied energy.
Table 4-28 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials - Resource types
Item Value (MJ)
Concrete 930
Masses 39
The use of cement for mortar and plaster resulted in significant embodied energy.
This can be reduced by adopting grout less stone masonry walls and using eco-friendly s
cement since the masses/natural stone have low embodied energy. Eco-friendly concrete
Figure 4-75 Showing Total use of Primary en-
ergy-ex of raw materials in Megajoules- Building and waterproofing to be adopted to reduce the related embodied energy.
materials (Resource types)
120 | P a g e
iii. Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials – Building elements (Classifica-
tions) in Megajoules
The external walls and façade contributed
the most significant embodied energy as tabu-
lated in Table 4-29 and illustrated in Figure 4- 5.5%

69. This can be attributed to the use of mortar
on the stone masonry walls and plaster and 10.9%
paint finishes. Using gout-less joints and eco-
friendly finishes with a longer life span will re-

83.6%
duce the embodied energy.
Figure 4-77 Table 4 28 Showing Total use of primary energy

ex. raw materials – Classifications in Megajoules (MJ)
Table 4-29 Showing Total use of primary energy ex. raw materials – Classifications in Megajoules (MJ)
Item Value (MJ)

Figure 4-76 showing models of the building elements
classifications External walls and facade 5600
Source: Author Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 730
Software: Revit 2020 student’s version. Floor slabs, ceilings, roofing decks, beams and roof 380
121 | P a g e
b. Impacts of the materials on Global warming

The environmental impacts the model has on the environment was also evaluated. The fo-
cus was on Global warming potential. The impacts have been classified according to the Life
cycle stages, building materials and building elements.
i. Classification by building Life Cycle Stages in KgCO2e
The building materials phase and the maintenance and replacement phases contributed the
most significant environmental impacts as tabulated in Table 4-30 and illustrated in Figure
4-78. This can be reduced by adopting eco-friendly materials with lower environmental im-
pacts and long life-span to minimize recurring environmental impacts.
Sourcing materials locally reduced environmental impacts in the transportation phase and
the use of natural stones reduced the environmental impacts in the end-of life phase.
Item Value (kg CO2e)
A1-A3 Materials 300

B1-B5 Maintenance and replacement 130

Figure 4-78 Showing Global warming - Life-cycle
stages in KgCO2e
122 | P a g e
ii. Global warming – Building Materials (Classifications)
Concrete and Coatings and pastes contributed the most significant Global warming im-
pacts while the dump proof membrane contributed the least as indicated in Table 4-31 and
Figure 4-79. They can be reduced by using eco-friendly concrete, coatings and pastes with a
longer life span to reduce the initial environmental impacts and the recurring environmental
impacts.
Table 4-31 Global warming impacts-building materials in KgCO2e
Coatings & pastes 140
Concrete 139.6
Masses 30
Using grout less joints in the natural stone masonry walls will reduce the environmental
Figure 4-79 impacts of the masses/ natural stone
123 | P a g e
iii. Classification by building elements in KgCO2e
The use of mortar, plaster and paints on the walls
contributed to the most significant embodied energy as
tabulated in Table 4-32 and illustrated in Figure 4-79.
This can be reduced by adopting grout less joints in the

11.6%
natural stone masonry walls and avoiding plaster and
paint finishes whenever possible. However, eco- 18.1%
friendly coatings and pastes with longer life span can

70.3%
be adopted to reduce the environmental impacts.
Figure 4-81 showing the global warming im-

pacts-building elements in KgCO2e
Table 4-32 Showing Global warming impacts according to Resource Types.
External walls and facade 320
Foundation, sub-surface, basement and retaining walls 77

Figure 4-80 showing the model of the building elements
by classification Floor slabs, ceilings, roofing decks, beams and roof 28
Source: Author
Software: Revit 2020 student’s version.
124 | P a g e
The chart shown in Figure 4-82 shows all the environmental impacts of the various Life cycle stages. A1-A3 Material stage contrib-
uted the most significant embodied energy
Figure 4-82 showing Results by life-cycle stage
125 | P a g e
4.5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

The benchmark used is the CH Q1 Global-educational as shown in the figures below showing the Hero’s benchmark of all the
models of the building techniques under study.
Figure 4-84 Showing the carbon hero’s benchmark of Conventional Rammed Earth Construction. Figure 4-83 Showing carbon hero’s benchmark of Low-Tech
Rammed Earth Construction.
Figure 4-86 showing Hero’s Benchmark of Conventional Stone and mortar construction Figure 4-85 showing carbon Hero’s Benchmark of High-Tech
Rammed Earth Construction
126 | P a g e
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
The conventional stone and mortar construction had the most significant environmen-
tal impacts as indicated in Figure 4-87. This was attributed to the use of cement mortar and
coatings and pastes wall finishes. This can be reduced by adopting grout less mortar and
EMBODIED avoiding coatings and pastes whenever possible. Eco-friendly cement and coatings and paste
CARBON(KGCO 2M 2) with longer life span will reduce the initial and recurring environmental impacts of these mate-
Conventional RE rials in the building.
Low-Tech RE
Dump poof membrane used in all the models under study had significant environmen-
High-Tech RE
tal impacts. Studies into low carbon and eco-friendly waterproofing should be done to reduce
Conventional Masonry (SE)
the environmental impacts of these materials.
500
400 426
300 In all these cases, the use of natural building materials, soil for Rammed earth construc-
200 222 220
100 75 tion and natural stone for Conventional stone and mortar, had significantly less environmental
0
impacts in all the life cycle stages. This is an opportunity that professionals in Architecture, en-
gineering and construction should adopt to minimize environmental impacts of the building
materials.
Figure 4-87 showing the Carbon Hero's Benchmark re- The use of locally available materials and skill in the construction of the Low-tech
sults
Rammed Earth construction in Ghana had significantly less environmental impacts. This is an
opportunity to solve some of the challenges in remote areas of the Kenya using locally availa-
ble materials while achieving complex construction.
127 | P a g e
CHAPTER 05
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
“Any rigorous attempt to design with embodied energy demands that architecture be simultaneously an art and a science”
(Benjamin, 2017)
128 | P a g e
5.0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0. Introduction
This study evaluated the various earth building techniques based on the four states of
the soil mix used for construction, i.e. Dry/solid mix, Humid soil mix, Plastic soil mix and Liquid
soil mix. This study focused on Rammed earth building techniques, one of the earth’s building
techniques that use the humid soil mix. The various Rammed earth building techniques identi-
fied were compared to the conventional stone and mortar construction, which is the most com-
mon construction technique in Kenya.
The precedent and case studies analysed are;
• Conventional Rammed Earth construction in Kenya-This study focused on
Sustainable Materials Research and Technology Centre (SMARTEC) depart-

ment building at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology
(JKUAT). The centre offered some information on Rammed earth construction in
the recent past. This was a representation of the Rammed earth construction in
Kenya, the challenges faced and how they have been resolved in the building.
• Low-tech Rammed earth Construction- This study focused on Inside Out School
in Ghana. The construction was undertaken in a remote village with a limited
budget, limited resources and constructed by a few skilled (volunteering archi-
tects) and differently skilled members of the community (Skilled in wattle and
daub earth architecture). This precedent study is a reflection of the situation in
129 | P a g e
rural Kenya, where communities are skilled with vernacular wattle and daub ar-
chitecture and lack the basic amenities. The future of earth architecture in remote
rural Kenya is therefore in low-tech Rammed Earth construction.
• High-tech Rammed earth construction- This study focused on the pediatric sur-
gery Centre in Uganda. The main construction challenge was to build a model
architecture that met the technical requirements of a hospital while maintaining
a link with vernacular earth architecture.
• Conventional Stone and Mortar construction. This study focused on the depart-
ment of Architecture building at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and
Technology, Hall 7. This building was selected because the SMARTEC centre
constructed sections of the ground floor with Rammed earth while the other sec-
tions were constructed using stone and mortar.
Life Cycle Assessment was used to analyses the Embodied Energy of the various tech-
niques using One-Click LCA, a Revit 2020 student’s version add-in, as outlined by ISO 14040
standards. This involves Goal and scope definition, Life Cycle Inventory and Analysis (LCIA),
Impacts on Global warming and comparative analysis of the environmental impacts of each
technique. These were further categorized according to Life cycle stages, (i.e. Cradle to gate,
transport, Maintenance and end of life), building materials used and the Building elements to
understand the impacts of using various materials. Some of the challenges encountered during
the fieldwork and the analysis of the data were;
130 | P a g e
a. Inadequate data on Rammed earth construction in Kenya. This hampered access
to Rammed Earth construction in Kenya attributed to undocumented Rammed
earth buildings, privacy concerns in the case of Rammed earth homes and a lim-
ited number of experts on Rammed earth construction in Kenya. This became
apparent after having engagements with Arch. Susan K Araka, the Senior Super-
intending architect, ministry of transport, infrastructure, housing, urban de-
velopment and public works

b. Financial constraints. The limited budget restricted travels to Uganda and Ghana
to take accurate measurements of the walls. This necessitated the reliance on as-
sumptions based on generally accepted standards to determine the wall thick-
ness used to analyze the precedent studies.
c. Life Cycle Assessment Software acquisition. The application for the student ver-
sion of modelling software e.g. One Click LCA used in this study took time due
to the stringent verification process.
d. Lack of local Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) database to inform the
estimated calculation of the Embodied energy in all the local case studies and
Precedent studies. This resulted in the use of Global EPD database provided by
One Click LCA to carry out the study. This hampered the accuracy of the data
used and may not reflect the true figures of the embodied energies of the materi-
als used.
131 | P a g e
e. Time constraints. The available time for this study was only three months which
resulted in the conceptual Embodied Energy calculations and the resulting envi-
ronmental Impacts.
f. Lack of Rammed earth building regulations. There are no provisions in the Ken-
yan building code as at now for Rammed Earth construction in Kenya. This has
hampered and restricted Rammed earth construction limiting it to private con-
structions (Do It Yourself) limiting the available information and quality build.
Figure 5-1 showing Galili Village, Garsen, Tana

River County, Kenya (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020). 5.1. Summary of Findings
To better understand the identified Rammed earth building techniques, the findings
were classified according to material selection properties, (i.e. context, construction, properties
and Experiences).
5.1.1. Context
The context had major impacts on the choice of the building techniques as shown in Ta-
ble 5-1 below. The prevailing factor in all the cases is the African vernacular architecture that
predominantly used the earth as a building material. The challenges outlined by the Inside-Out
school design and construction is a representation of marginalized areas in rural Kenya e.g. in
Galili Village in Garsen, Tana River county featured by citizen tv in the pandemic gains report
Figure 5-2 showing the only motorized means of ac-
cessing Galili Village (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020) as shown in Figure 5-2 (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020). The only motorized transport to site is a 2-
hour ride using a motorbike as shown in Figure 5-2 (Kenya Citizen Tv, 2020).
132 | P a g e
Table 5-1 showing the context of the various precedent and case studies.
Building Technique Study Context
Low-tech Rammed Inside-Out Remote Rural Village in Ghana
Earth construction school African vernacular architectural style.
Experiences High Rainfall
High-tech Rammed Pediatric Hospi- Semi-Urban village at the outskirts of Kampala
Earth construction tal Uganda Experiences High Rainfall
Conventional SMARTEC Urban context, moderate rainfall
Rammed Earth building Institutional Building, at JKUAT Kenya
Conventional stone Hall 7 Urban Context, moderate rainfall
and mortar Institutional Building, at JKUAT Kenya
The complexities of a modern hospital in the design and construction of the Pediatric
Hospital in Uganda by Renzo Piano resulted in High tech Rammed earth construction. This
precedent study is a representation of how Rammed earth can be used to achieve the complex
needs of modern architecture that doesn’t compromise on the required standards while being
linked to vernacular architecture. The future of Rammed earth construction in Kenya is there-
fore in trying to solve architectural challenges of the modern world while enhancing our vernac-
ular architecture.
133 | P a g e
The case studies undertaken is a representation of Rammed earth construction in Kenya.
The prevailing challenge in the context is the association of earth architecture with poverty. This
has limited the exploration and utilization of rammed earth architecture and has been left as an
exclusive material of the low-income earners in various parts of the country.
5.1.2. Construction.
The type of foundation used, type of slab used, construction method, formwork and re-
inforcements were analysed as indicated in Table 5-2.
The Inside-Out school indicated the fusion of the underlying vernacular architecture by
the local community and the theoretical knowledge by the design team to solve the construction
challenge. The construction used was simple, used locally available resources, tools and equip-
ment that were easily learnt by the local labour resulting in the successful execution of the pro-
ject. The construction of the pediatric hospital on the other hand adopted a highly skilled multi-
disciplinary global and local design and construction team that ensured that the building met
the required space needs. The highly mechanized construction delimits the possibilities of
Rammed earth construction in Kenya.
The local case studies indicated a huge gap in the available technical skills required to
build a good Rammed earth building. This gap led to less confidence in the construction using
rammed earth, whereby architects and structural engineers shied away from recommending
rammed earth building technology. To address this gap, I reached out to Structural Reinforced
Rammed Earth wall (SIREWALL), one of the leading Rammed earth contractors in the world.
134 | P a g e
They offered a technical scholarship to attend one of their paid workshops in the united states,
which I intend to attend post-covid 19.

Table 5-2 showing the construction
Building Technique Construction
Low-tech Rammed Earth Random-rubble foundation and Concrete Slab
construction- Inside-Out Hand-rammed load-bearing walls
school Formwork: Wooden fair-faced formwork.
Reinforcements: Horizontal concrete layers
High-tech Rammed Earth Reinforced Concrete Foundation and slab
construction- Pediatric Hos- Pneumatic-Rammed load-bearing walls.
pital Uganda Formwork- Steel Formwork
Reinforcements: Steel reinforcements
Conventional Rammed Reinforced concrete foundation and slab
Earth- SMARTEC building 225mm Hand-rammed load-bearing walls
Formwork: Re-used Steel formwork
Conventional stone and Reinforced concrete foundation and slab
mortar- Hall 7 Reinforced concrete frame structural system
Walls: 98% stone and mortar and 2% Rammed earth walls
135 | P a g e
5.1.3. Properties
The physical and sensorial properties of the resulting walls in each building technique
was analysed. The physical properties influenced the performance of the building material over
time in meeting the design and technical needs while the sensorial properties vary from person
to person based on their interpretation of the resulting wall.

Table 5-3
Building Technique Properties
Low-tech Rammed Earth con- 600mm thick load-bearing walls. The Exterior and Inte-
struction- Inside-Out school rior Finish: No additional finishes on the fair-faced
Rammed earth walls.
High-tech Rammed Earth con- 450mm load-bearing Rammed earth walls. The Interior
struction- Pediatric Hospital finishes were Plastered and painted to meet the technical
Uganda requirements of the hospital while the Exterior Finishes-
Exposed Rammed earth walls.
Conventional Rammed Earth- 225mm load-bearing Rammed earth walls. Both the Inte-
SMARTEC building rior and Exterior Finishes were Plastered and painted.
Conventional stone and mortar- 200mm walls. The Interior Finishes were Plastered and
Hall 7 painted while the Exterior Finishes were plastered,
keyed and painted.
136 | P a g e
5.1.4. Experiences
The designer experience is the most crucial in the post-construction decisions that will
influence the choice and adoption of a particular material. In the precedent studies, the archi-
tects took deliberate action to build with Rammed earth. In the conventional Rammed Earth
construction, the SMARTEC department made up of main engineers, tried the construction of
Rammed earth in the construction of the SMARTEC department building. Their reach was how-
ever restricted by lack of architects who could inform and design using Rammed earth hamper-
ing further constructions. This also led to the over-designing of buildings to mitigate failures re-
sulting in additional cost and embodied energy that could have otherwise been avoided. Archi-
tects should therefore be informed about Rammed earth construction so that they can inform of-
fer various material options to their clients and developers.
The anticipated experiences of the users are considered in the design stage and it is the
primary role of the architect to shape the final user experience. For instance, in the precedent
study, Pediatric surgery Hospital in Uganda, architect Renzo Piano deliberately build with
Rammed earth to promote the vernacular architecture in Uganda. However, in the local case
study, the SMARTEC department plastered and painted the rammed earth walls resulting in a
building that is similar to conventional stone and mortar. The fear of the resulting sensorial
properties denied the appreciation of true Rammed earth walls as seen in the Inside Out school
and The Pediatric Hospital. These decisions influenced the final user experience upon the com-
pletion of the building. Some of these properties are as indicated in
137 | P a g e
Table 5-4 showing the user Experience
Building Technique Experience
Low-tech Rammed Earth The design team involved the community in the construction of
construction- Inside-Out the school resulting in the fusion of knowledge of the vernacular
school architecture and the rammed construction.
The pupils appreciated the truth to material which gave a feeling
of the outdoor being indoors hence the name In-side Out
High-tech Rammed Earth The design team consulted advance research labs in Milan who
construction- Pediatric advised on the binders used for the construction. This resulted in
Hospital Uganda a perfect fusion of vernacular architecture and the modern needs
The users appreciated the warm welcoming Rammed earth walls
that were exposed.
Conventional Rammed The Finishes of the building were made to mimic a conventional
Earth- SMARTEC build- stone and mortar to promote its acceptability. This hampered the
ing assessment of the user experience. This was influenced by the as-
sociation of rammed earth with poverty.
Conventional stone and The Rammed sections of the building were plastered and painted
mortar- Hall 7 to mimic the stone and mortar. The users of the space couldn’t
differentiate between them.
138 | P a g e
5.2. Energy Efficiency-Embodied Energy

In the past, design relied mostly on knowledge-based decisions to inform the design of
the buildings. On the onset of Building Information Modeling (BIM) and other modelling tech-
nologies, architects can make decisions based on quantifiable data. LCA provides a method by
which architects and engineers can examine design decision through a process that quantifies
the embodied impacts while validating “green” design decisions (Shreve, 2018). The analysis
was based on a building one-metre strip and based on One-click LCA’s database. The results
were further classified according to;
a) the life cycle stages to understand the embodied energy contribution of each
stage
b) Building elements-to understand the building elements with the most embodied
energy
5.2.1. Life Cycle Stages

The study also identified that the choice of the Life Cycle Analysis of all Life Cycle
stages should be analysed to inform the choice of building materials to be adopted. Some build-
ing materials have high initial embodied energy but the least recurring and end of life embodied
energy. This will result in low cumulative embodied energy throughout the building’s life and
provides an opportunity to reduce the initial embodied energy in the new building cycle using
the recycled as compared to using virgin building materials.
139 | P a g e
Some materials have low initial Embodied energy (cradle to gate) but high recurring em-
bodied energy and high end of life energy resulting in an increased cumulative embodied en-
ergy. Architects and the design team should therefore make informed decisions that will mini-
mize the cumulative embodied energy of the building throughout its Life Cycle.
In all the techniques under study, the end of Life stage had the least embodied energy
attribute to the possibility of re-using the building materials after its demolition as shown in Ta-
ble 5-5. The recurring embodied energy in the conventional rammed earth construction and the
conventional brick and mortar has been attributed to the use of plaster and paint wall finishes.
Paint contributed the most embodied energy attributed to the number of repainting required
throughout the building’s lifetime. The choice of finishes that requires minimal maintenance
throughout the building’s lifetime should then be adopted to reduce the recurring embodied en-
ergy.
Table 5-5
LIFE CYCLE EMBODIED ENERGY
STAGES Conventional Low-tech RE High-tech RE Conventional
RE stone and Mortar
(Materials) 1315.38 500.98 1066.02 1913.11
Transport 216.92 162 243.54 224.42
Maintenance 3197.94 328.61 573.88 3840.92
End-of Life 88.98 24.37 105.50 111
140 | P a g e
Summary of Findings by Life Stages

4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Materials Transport Maintenance End-of Life
Conventional RE Low-Tech RE High-Tech RE Conventional SE
Figure 5-3 showing the summary of findings by Life Cycle Stages
The end of life-stage across the building techniques had the least embodied energy at-
tributed to the use of natural building materials e.g. earth and natural stone. The design team
should therefore consider using materials that can be re-used and or repurposed at the end of
the building’s life. The initial embodied energy (cradle to gate) is the least in the low-tech
rammed earth construction attributed to the minimal manufactured building materials used.
141 | P a g e
5.2.2. Building Elements

The materials used for the various building elements had an impact on the resulting embod-
ied energy of the elements. i.e. the external walls, Foundation and the ground floor slab. The ex-
ternal walls had the most embodied energy while the floor slab had the least embodied energy
in all the building techniques under study as shown in Table 5-6.
Table 5-6 showing the building elements
BUILDING EMBODIED ENERGY
ELEMENTS Conventional RE Low-Cost RE High-cost RE Conventional
stone and Mortar
External Walls 4173.39 408.37 888.09 4797.09
Foundation 380.10 248.41 720.76 912.26
Floor Slab 265.72 136.90 380.10 380.10
The use of plaster and paint on the external walls as used in the conventional Rammed
earth construction (SMARTEC) and the Conventional Stone and Mortar resulted in the most
Embodied energy. This was attributed to the initial and recurring embodied energy of the fin-
ishes used. Energy-efficient finishes should therefore be adopted to reduce the total embodied
energy of the building. The floor slab had the least embodied energy in all the building tech-
niques under the study. The walling materials should therefore be considered keenly to mini-
mize the building’s embodied energy.
142 | P a g e
Summary of Findings by Building elements

6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
External walls Foundation Floor Slab
Conventional RE Low-Tech RE High-Tech RE Conventional S&M
5.2.3. Comparative analysis of the Environmental Impacts

(Embodied Carbon)
The results of this analysis indicated that conventional stone and mortar construction
has the most embodied carbon. This was attributed to the use of mortar, plaster and paint as fin-
ishes. This could be addressed by using grout fewer joints and eliminating the use of plaster and
paint. This will reduce the initial embodied energy and minimizes the recurring energy and end
of life embodied energy thus resulting in an energy-efficient building.
143 | P a g e
Table 5-7 showing the Embodied Carbon
BUILDING TECHNIQUE Embodied Carbon KgCO2e/M2
Conventional Rammed Earth Construction 222
EMBODIED Low-tech Rammed Earth Construction 75

CARBON(KgCO2M2) High-tech Rammed Earth Construction 220
450
400 426 Conventional Stone & Mortar Construction 426
350
300 Low-tech Rammed earth construction had the least cumulative embodied carbon at-
250
200 222 220 tributed to the minimal use of manufactured building materials and minimal recurring and end
150
100 of life embodied energy. The use of plaster and paint finishes in the High-tech Rammed earth
50 75
0 construction and conventional rammed earth construction resulted in medium embodied en-
ergy. This could be reduced further by using finishes that require less maintenance and renova-
tions that will achieve the required space standards while minimizing embodied energy.
Conventional RE
Low-Tech RE
5.3. Limitations of the Study
The study relied mainly on Eco-design’s database that is made up of European and
High-Tech RE
American Embodied Energy coefficients that might not apply to the immediate contexts of the
Conventional Masonry (SE)
cases under study. This resulted in inconclusive findings that are speculative and just indicates
the resulting embodied energy based on the available data.
144 | P a g e
Another main challenge encountered is the lack of information on local Rammed Earth
construction projects in Kenya. This restricted the study to the partially documented Rammed
earth buildings in Kenya which could otherwise be difficult to identify because of the outdoor
and indoor finishes.
This study was also influenced by the lack of local Rammed Earth construction profes-
sionals who would give more insight into their experiences. This resulted in reliance on theoreti-
cal and conceptual values based on hearsays and findings in my literature review to tabulate the
data used to calculate the estimated embodied energy of the various building techniques.
5.4. The implication of the Findings

The findings also indicate the important role of Building Information Modelling in aid-
ing architects, engineers and construction professionals in making informed decisions that will
cumulatively reduce the embodied energy of building materials. These decisions help in deter-
mining the type and choice of building materials that will influence the buildings embodied en-
Figure 5-4 Showing pupils taught under a tree in ergy throughout its whole life-cycle. However, the design team must be well vast with all build-
Kenya (UNESCO)
ing techniques and materials to advise clients on the most suitable material and building tech-
nique. Despite the challenges brought about by lack of Rammed earth regulations in the Kenyan
building code, Rammed Earth construction has a huge potential in transforming the local ver-
nacular architecture in Kenya especially in marginalized areas lacking basic infrastructure and
amenities e.g. children studying under a tree in Tana River as shown in Figure 5-4. Low tech
rammed earth construction can be adopted as outlined in the Inside-Out School construction.
145 | P a g e
The main challenge facing Rammed earth construction in Kenya and Africa is lack of in-
formation on the why and how Rammed Earth can be adopted in the various construction scales
in the country. This knowledge gap led to the seeking of a scholarship with the Structural Insu-
lated Rammed Earth (SIREWALL) was fortunate to be awarded the scholarship to learn in one
of their annual workshops carried out in the United States of America. I hope to attend the ses-
sions once this pandemic has subsided. This will be a step in bridging the knowledge gap and
hope to be in a position to design and build Rammed earth buildings in Kenya and Africa.
5.5. Recommendations
Key stakeholders in the Architecture, engineering and construction sectors must work
together to bridge the knowledge gap in Rammed earth construction so that we can provide an
alternative building solution that could solve some of the building challenges in Kenya.
Emphasize should also be on key stakeholders in the manufacturing industry to indicate
the Environmental product declarations (EPDs) of their products to facilitate the accurate pre-
diction of the resulting embodied and operation energies of the proposed construction. The Na-
tional Construction Authority should also develop a database of all the Environmental Product
Declarations to act as a one-stop platform to find all relevant information aiding in informed de-
cision making.
146 | P a g e
5.6. Areas for further research

While this study looked at the Embodied Energy of Rammed Earth construction tech-
niques as compared with the conventional stone and mortar construction, areas of further re-
search identified are;
a) Eco-friendly reinforcements and binders that can be used with Rammed earth
construction
b) Non-stabilized Rammed Earth protective coatings and pastes to reduce adverse
effects by elements of weather on the building
c) The role of BIM in informing architects, engineers and construction professionals
on the reduction of Embodied energy of buildings
d) Eco-friendly and long lasting coats and paints for indoor and outdoor wall fin-
ishes, and alternative low-carbon façade enhancement methods with minimal
maintenance.
e) The construction of Rammed earth walls with high embodied energy materials
to reduce the resulting Whole building embodied energy.
147 | P a g e
al., J. D. (2018). Energy Education, University of Calgary. Retrieved

References from Energy Education - Building envelope:
https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Building_envel
Bomas of Kenya. (2019). Kenya in a Miniature; Preserving Kenyas
diverse cultures. Retrieved from Bomas of Kenya: ope#cite_note-1. [Accessed: December 17, 2019].
https://www.bomasofkenya.co.ke/ ÁLVARO MUÑOZ. (2020). Emergency Children's Surgery Center,
in progress, by RPBW. Retrieved from Metalocus:
CIA WORLD FACTBOOK. (2019, February 08). Kenya Economy
https://www.metalocus.es/en/news/emergency-
2019. Retrieved from TheOdora.com:
childrens-surgery-center-progress-rpbw
https://theodora.com/wfbcurrent/kenya/kenya_econom
y.html Amaro, F. (2018). The challenge of current architecture to
approach the rural context. Archdaily.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2011). Building for
the future. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Archdaily. (2015, May 28). Ricola Kräuterzentrum / Herzog & de
Programme. Meuron . Retrieved from ArchDaily:
https://www.archdaily.com/634724/ricola-
acciona. (2019). Discover What Climate Change is and Ho it affects
krauterzentrum-herzog-and-de-
You. Madrid: acciona.
meuron?ad_medium=gallery
Africa vernacular architecture. (2020). Kenya. Retrieved from
Architecture 2030. (2019). NEW BUILDINGS: EMBODIED
Africa vernacular architecture database:
CARBON. Retrieved from Architecture 2030:
http://www.africavernaculararchitecture.com/kenya/
https://architecture2030.org/new-buildings-embodied/
A-ID. (2019, February 10). Energy and Environment. Retrieved
Auroville Earth Institute. (2019). A millenia old tradition.
from Agenda for international Development:
Retrieved from Auroville Earth Institute.:
http://www.a-id.org/2019/02/10/whats-the-role-for-
http://www.earth-
developing-countries-in-enabling-sustainable-
auroville.com/world_techniques_introduction_en.php
transitions/
148 | P a g e
Australian Academy of Science. (2015). The science of climate BRANZ. (2019, July 18). Embodied Energy. Retrieved from Level;
change: Questions and answers. Canberra: Australian The Authority on Sustainable Building:
Academy of Science. http://www.level.org.nz/material-use/embodied-energy/
Bahrami, S. (2008). Energy efficient buildings in warm climates of Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Report of the World Commission on
the Middle East. Lund, Sweden: IIIEE, Lund University. Environment andDevelopment: Our Common Future. Oslo:
UNEP.
Baldwin, E. (2017, November 1). Inside Out School by Andrea
Tabocchini & Francesca Vittorini. Retrieved from Build abroad. (2019). Realizing the Full Potential of Earthbag
Archdaily: Construction. Retrieved from Build abroad:
https://www.archdaily.com/882665/insideout-school- https://buildabroad.org/2017/02/03/earthbag-
andrea-tabocchini-and-francesca- construction/
vittorini?ad_source=search&ad_medium=search_result_
Cal-Earth Institute. (2019). SuperAdobe Worldwide. Retrieved
projects
from Cal-Earth Institute:
Benjamin, D. N. (2017). Embodied Energy and Design: Making https://www.calearth.org/alumni-projects2
Architecture between Metrics and Narratives. New York,
Chang Recavarren, G. (2013, August). Rammed Earth:
NY: Columbia University GSAPP.
Construction Lessons from Experience . Retrieved from
Bice, D. T. (2020). Earth in the future. Retrieved from The ASCE Library:
Pennsylvania State University: https://www.e- https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29SC.194
education.psu.edu/earth103/node/717 3-5576.0000152
BMU. (2020). Federal Ministry of Environment, nature conservation CIA. (2020). Kenya. Retrieved from Central Intelligence Agency:
and Nuclear Safety. Retrieved from Energy Efficiency: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
https://www.bmu.de/en/topics/climate-energy/energy- factbook/geos/ke.html
efficiency/what-does-energy-efficiency-mean/#c10244
149 | P a g e
Climate-Data org. (2019). Kampala Climate . Retrieved from E.A.Adam, D. (2001). Compressed Stabilised Earth Block
Climate-Data org: https://en.climate- Manufacture in Sudan. Paris: UNESCO.
data.org/africa/uganda/central-region/kampala-5578/
Earth Advantage. (2017). Better Buildings Now. Portland,
Costa, C. S., Rocha, F., & Velosa, A. L. (2016). Sustainability in Oregon: Earth Advantage.
earthen heritage conservation. In C. S. Costa, F. Rocha,
Eco Earth Builds. (2015). The Beauty Of Cob. Retrieved from Eco
& A. L. Velosa, Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials
Earth Builds: https://www.ecoearthbuilds.com/the-
in Construction Practice (pp. 92-100). London: Geological
beauty-of-cob
Society of London.
Ecochain. (2020). Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) – Complete
Cramer, N. (2017, October 04). The Climate Is Changing. So Must
Beginner's Guide. Retrieved from Eco chain:
Architecture. Retrieved from ARCHITECT:
https://ecochain.com/knowledge/life-cycle-assessment-
https://www.architectmagazine.com/design/editorial/th
lca-guide/
e-climate-is-changing-so-must-architecture_o
EESI. (2020). Energy Efficiency. Retrieved from Environmental
Craven, J. (2018, November 20). What is Rammed Earth
and Energy Study Institute:
Construction? Retrieved from ThoughtCo.:
https://www.eesi.org/topics/energy-
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-rammed-earth-
efficiency/description
construction-177948
Ellington, K. (1924). Modern Pisé Building: House-Building with
Dean Cooper, UNEP. (2012). ENERGY EFFICIENCY FOR
Compressed or Rammed Earth.
BUILDINGS. Paris : UNEP.
EMERGENCY. (2020). Entebbe Centre of Excellence in Paediatric
Dudovskiy, J. (2019). Case Studies. Retrieved from Research
Surgery. Retrieved from Emergency :
Methodology: https://research-
https://en.emergency.it/projects/uganda-entebbe-
methodology.net/research-methods/qualitative-
paediatric-surgery-centre/
research/case-studies/
Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2019). Alhambra, fortress, Granada,
Spain. Retrieved from Encyclopaedia Britannica:
150 | P a g e
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Alhambra-fortress- cardwell/building-green-how-about-a-rammed-earth-
Granada-Spain home
Erbach, G. (2015). Understanding energy efficiency. London: Global Energy. (2015). National Energy Grid Kenya. Nairobi:
European Parliamentary Research Service. Global Energy.
European Commission. (2020). Embodied energy. Retrieved from Golebiowski, J. (2009). Rammed Earth Architecture's Journey to the
European Commission: High Hills of the Santee AND ITS ROLE AS AN EARLY
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/eu-buildings-factsheets- CONCRETE. outh Caroliner: Clemson University.
topics-tree/embodied-energy
Guillaud, H. (1989). Traité de construction en terre. Marseille :
Fenner, A. E. (2017). Sustainable Manufacturing: Design and CRATerre .
Construction Strategies for Manufactured Construction. .
Guru99. (2020). What is Data Analysis? Types, Process, Methods,
Garg, A. (2015, February 3). Rammed Earth Construction; a Techniques . Retrieved from Guru99:
comprehensive Study. Retrieved from Issuu: https://www.guru99.com/what-is-data-analysis.html
https://issuu.com/akashgarg.iit/docs/rammed_earth_con
Habitat for Humanity. (2019). Housing Poverty In Kenya.
struction/24
Retrieved from Habitat for Humanity:
Geoff Milne. (2013). Embodied energy. Retrieved from Your https://www.habitatforhumanity.org.uk/country/kenya/
Home; Australia's Guide to Environmentally
Hagentoft, C. (2001). An Introduction to Building Physics. Lund,
sustainable Homes:
Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
https://www.yourhome.gov.au/materials/embodied-
energy iklimnet. (2012). PASSIVE SOLAR HEATING. Retrieved from
iklimnet:
Gilham, A. (2017, November 3). Building Green? How about a
http://www.iklimnet.com/save/passive_solar_heating.ht
Rammed Earth Home? . Retrieved from Bebee Producer:
ml
https://www.bebee.com/producer/@claire-
151 | P a g e
IPCC. (2015). Climate Change 2014 Mitigation of Climate Change. Keefe, L. (2005). Earth Building Methods & Materials, Repair &
Cambridge, United Kingdom & New York, NY,USA: Conservation. London: Taylor & Francis.
Cambridge University Press.
KenInvest. (2019). Real Estate and Construction . Retrieved from
IPCCC. (2007). IPCCC 2007b. KenInvest: http://www.invest.go.ke/real-estate-and-
construction/
IRURAH, D. D. (2007). ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDINGS.
STELLENBOSCH: UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH. Kenya Citizen Tv. (2020, October 18). | PANDEMIC GAINS |
Locals in Galili Village in Garsen started teaching after
ISO 14040. (2006). Environmental management - Life cycle
schools closed. Retrieved from Youtube Kenya:
assessment - Principles and framework. Geneve :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TULIyh38MWI&ab
International Organization for Standardization .
_channel=KenyaCitizenTV
ISO 14040. (2006). ISO 14040:2006(en). Retrieved from ISO:
Kerboua Marine, B. L. (2018). Reality Studio Exhibition 2018.
https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:14040:ed-2:v1:en
Retrieved from CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF
Izreal. (2018). How to Wattle & Daub. Retrieved from Izreal.Eu- TECHNOLOGY:
Its really you: http://izreal.eu/2014/07/29/how-to-wattle- https://www.chalmers.se/en/departments/ace/news/Pag
daub/ es/Reality-Studio-Exhibition-2018.aspx
Jaquin, P. (2008). A chronological description of the spatial Knox Council. (2019). limate Emergency. Retrieved from
development of. International Journal of Architectural Change.org: https://www.change.org/p/knox-council-
Heritage:, 3-5. declare-a-climate-emergency
JEC Group. (2016, November 22). Earth-sheltered homes made of Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology; methods &
composite materials. Retrieved from Greenmagichomes: Techniques. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd.,
http://www.jeccomposites.com/knowledge/international Publishers.
-composites-news/earth-sheltered-homes-made-
KOTO HOUSING KENYA. (2018). KOTO TECHNOLOGY
composite-materials
PRODUCT PROFILE. NAIROBI: KOTO HOUSING
152 | P a g e
KENYA. Retrieved from KOTO HOUSING KENYA: Morollo, M. K. (2017, August 15). A Home That Tunnels Through
https://www.kotohousingkenya.co.ke/pages/about.html the Swiss Alps. Retrieved from dwell:
https://www.dwell.com/article/8-subterranean-homes-
Makinde, O. O. (2012). Ecological and Sustainability Issues In
that-are-out-of-this-world-c64819ed
Earth Construction. Journal of Environmental Science,
Toxicology and Food Technology , 20-28. Mukerji, R. S. (1993). Appropriate Building Materials. St.Gallen:
SKAT.
Mann, M. E. (2019, 19 March). Greenhouse gas. Retrieved from
Britannica: NABOUCH, R. E. (2017). Mechanical behavior of rammed earth
https://www.britannica.com/science/greenhouse-gas under pushover test. Savoy: University of Savoie Mont
Blanc.
MAPEI. (2020). Mapei with Renzo Piano and Emergency in Uganda.
Retrieved from Mapei: Narloch, H. A. (2019). Designing the Composition of Cement
https://www.mapei.com/it/en/realta- Stabilized Rammed Earth Using Artificial Neural Networks.
mapei/detail/mapei-with-renzo-piano-and-emergency- Retrieved from IMDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-
in-uganda 1944/12/9/1396/htm
Merriam-webster. (2020). pisé. Retrieved from Merriam- Narloch, P. W. (2020). Assessing Cement Stabilized Rammed Earth
webster: https://www.merriam- Durability in A Humid Continental Climate. Retrieved
webster.com/dictionary/pise from MDPI: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/10/2/26
Ministry of Finance, Kenya. (2015). Vision 2030. Retrieved from National Environment Management Authority, (NEMA,
E-Pomise Kenya: http://e- Kenya). (2015). KenyaSecond National Communication to
promis.treasury.go.ke/portal/development- theUnited Nations Framework Convention On Climate
strategy/vision-2030/ ChangeExecutive Summary. Nairobi: National
Environment Management Authority, (NEMA, Kenya).
Minke, G. (2006). Building with Rammed Earth;Design and
Technology of a Sustainable Architecture. Basel · Berlin · National IAS Academy. (2019). Climate Change Warning.
Boston: Birkhäuser – Publishers for Architecture. Retrieved from National IAS Academy:
153 | P a g e
https://nationalias.com/research/climate-change- Rael, R. (2008). Earth Architecture. New York: Princeton

warning/ Architectural Press.
Nduire, J. (2019, September 25). Popular Materials in Kenya. Reardon, C. (2013). Passive Design. Retrieved from Australian
Retrieved from Construction Kenya: Government. Your Home. Austarlia's guide to
https://www.constructionkenya.com/1599/building- Environmentally Sustainable homes.:
materials-kenya/ https://www.yourhome.gov.au/passive-design/thermal-
mass
Oxford University Press. (2019). Word of the Year 2019. Retrieved
from Oxford Languages: Report, A. M. (July-August 1990). ACI Materials Journal. State-
https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/2019/ of-the-art Report on Soil Cement, 395-417.
Pasanen P1, C. R. (2019). Carbon Heroes Benchmark Program – Roselieb, M. (2015). Earth Building: Adobe Bricks. Retrieved from
whole building embodied carbon profiling. Chiangmai Life Architects: https://www.bamboo-earth-
SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE architecture-construction.com/in-the-news/earth-
2019 (SBE19 Graz) (p. 9). Helsinki, Finland: IOP Conf. building-adobe-bricks/
Series: Earth and Environmental Science 323 (2019)
Rowland. (2020). Formwork. Retrieved from Rammed Earth
012028.
Consulting:
Passive House Institute. (2015). About Passive House - What is http://rammedearthconsulting.com/rammed-earth-
a Passive House? The independent institute for outstanding formwork.htm
energy efficiency in buildings, 5.
Shreve, T. (2018). Designing for Embodied Energy: An Examination
Paul, R. (2015, 06 04). Nanyang Technical University Singapore, of BIM integrated LCA using Residential Architecture in
Green Roof. Retrieved from Inhabitat: Rochester, NY. Rochester, NY: Rochester Institute of
https://inhabitat.com/amazing-green-roof-art-school-in- Technology.
singapore/nanyang-technical-university-singapore12/
154 | P a g e
SIREWALL. (2019). Art and Science of Modern Rammed Earth. UNEP. (2018). 2018 Global Status Report-Towards a zero-emission,
Retrieved from Structured Insulated Rammed Earth: efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector.
https://sirewall.com/ NAIROBI: United Nations Environment Programme.
SIREWALL. (2020). Narbo Via History Museum, France. Retrieved UNESCO. (2019). World Heritage Earthen Architecture Programme
from SIREWALL: https://sirewall.com/ (WHEAP). Retrieved from United Nation Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization:
SMARTEC. (2010). About SMARTEC . Retrieved from Jomo
https://whc.unesco.org/en/earthen-architecture/
Kenyatta University of Science and Technology:
http://jkuat.ac.ke/departments/smartec/home/ UNFCCC. (2015). Report of the Conference of the Parties on its
twenty-first session. Paris: UN Environment.
Terra Firma. (2013). History. Retrieved from Rammed Earth
Homes: UNICEF. (2010). Climate Change In Kenya: Focus on children.
https://www.earthhomes.co.nz/Rammed+Earth+Homes/ London: UNICEF KENYA and UNICEF UK.
History.html
UNID. (2015). Module 18; Energy efficiency in buildings. Seoul:
Thinkstep. (2020). Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Retrieved from UNID.
Thinkstep: https://www.thinkstep.com/life-cycle-
United Nations. (1992). United Nations Conference on
assessment
Environment & Development., (p. 351). Rio de Janerio,
Thomas R. Karl, K. E. (2003). Modern Global Climate Change. Brazil.
Retrieved from American Association for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2018).
Advancement of Science. :
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Retrieved from United States
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/302/5651/1719.ab
Environmental Protection Agency:
stract
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-
UNEP. (2009). Buildings and Climate Change. Fifteenth session of greenhouse-gases
the Conference of the Parties (COP 15) (p. 62). Rio De
Vittorini, A. T. (2017). InsideOut | Prototype of Sustainable Earth
Milan: United Nations Environment Programme,.
School in Ghana. Retrieved from The Plan:
155 | P a g e
https://www.theplan.it/eng/award-2017-
education/insideout-prototype-of-sustainable-earth-
school-in-ghana-1
Walsh, N. P. (2018). Renzo Piano Designs Emergency Hospital

in Uganda with Rammed Earth Walls . Archdaily.
WASTIELS, L. a. (2008). Material Considerations in

Architectural Design: A Study of the Aspects Identified
by Architects for Selecting Materials . Undisciplined!
Proceedings of the Design Research Society Conference 2008.
(p. 14). Sheffield, UK.: Sheffield Hallam University.
WorldGBC. (2017, May 31). From Thousands to Billions -

Coordinated Action towards 100% Net Zero Carbon
Buildings By 2050. Retrieved from World Green Building
Council: https://www.worldgbc.org/news-
media/thousands-billions-coordinated-action-towards-
100-net-zero-carbon-buildings-2050
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research. Design methods. Sage:

Thousands Oaks.
156 | P a g e
6.0. APPENDICES
157 | P a g e
6.1. CHECKLIST
Table 6-1 showing parameter Inventory checklist
PARAMETER BUILDING MATERIAL
CONTEXT LOCATION AND ACCESS
CULTURE
CONSTRUCTION BUILDING TECHNIQUE/TECHNOLOGY
FINISHES
MATERIAL PROPERTIES PHYSICAL
SENSORIAL
EXPERIENCES USERS
DESIGNERS
158 | P a g e
6.2. INTERVIEWS
Table 6-2 Showing the Questionnaire used to administer interviews.
PARAMETERS QUESTIONS
DESIGN Who were the architects
Construction details (Type of foundation, wall thickness, headroom, room sizes, fenestrations
details, roofing)
The type of structural systems used
Why was Rammed earth used
CONSTRUCTION What was the soil mix and where was the soil sourced (distance from site and means of
transport)
What type of stabilizers was used if any and at what ratio?
Ramming techniques were used.
What finishes were used if there any
What other materials have been used and where were they sourced
How long did the construction last
159 | P a g e
RENOVATIONS & How often is it maintained

MAINTENANCE
What is the impact of high Rainfall on the Rammed earth walls
What are the cost implications of this technique throughout the building’s lifetime?
Are the walls cleaned and how often?
END-OF-LIFE Can building materials be re-used
Can the building materials be recycled?
How much material is wasted?
EXPERIENCE How do the users perceive the indoor environment quality from a scale of 1-5 where 1 is very
uncomfortable and 5 is very comfortable
What was the role and experience of the design team in building with Rammed earth?
160 | P a g e
6.3. SCHOLARSHIP TO STUDY RAMMED EARTH TECHNICAL COURSE.
161 | P a g e
6.4. LCA STUDENT’S ACCOUNT
162 | P a g e

Energy Efficient Rammed Earth Construction Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Efficient Rammed Earth Construction Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Efficient Rammed Earth Construction Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF KENYA

KIPNGENO GIDEON SITIENEI

ENERGY EFFICIENT RAMMED EARTH CONSTRUCTION;

The Technical University of Kenya

Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Technology

School of Architecture and Spatial Planning

Department of Architecture and Building Science

ment of Architecture and Environmental Design, Technical University of Kenya.

Kipngeno Gideon Sitienei (EAAQ/04354/2013s)

Signature ………………………….…………………………………. Date………………………………………………………...

Arch. Michael Onyoyo

Signature ………………………….…………………………………… Date………………………………...............................

Department of Architecture & Environmental Design,

School of Architecture and the Built Environment,

The Technical University of Kenya.

Dr Arch. Joseph Kedogo

cumulatively high embodied energy and vice versa.

Frank Lloyd Wright.

1.10. Research Methodology .................................................. 11

2.2.9. Stacked Earth (COB) ................................................. 21 2.5.1. Labour-Intensive. ....................................................... 37

3.2.1. Case Study .................................................................. 55 4.1.2. Construction ............................................................... 68

4.1.1. Context ........................................................................ 66 4.4.1. Context ...................................................................... 114

4.4.2. Construction ............................................................. 115 5.2.3. Comparative analysis of the Environmental

4.5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ..................................... 126 5.5. Recommendations........................................................ 146

5.0. Introduction .................................................................. 129 References ....................................................................................... 148

5.1. Summary of Findings .................................................. 132 6.0. APPENDICES ................................................................... 157

5.1.1. Context ...................................................................... 132 6.1. CHECKLIST ........................................................................ 158

5.1.2. Construction. ............................................................ 134 6.2. INTERVIEWS ...................................................................... 159

5.1.3. Properties .................................................................. 136 6.3. SCHOLARSHIP TO STUDY RAMMED EARTH

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-11 Showing Emergency Hospital in Uganda (Walsh,

Figure 4-81 showing the global warming impacts-building LIST OF TABLES

global warming resulting from human-induced changes in atmospheric composition, which

According to The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN-

a. ‘embedded’ or ‘embodied’ energy; Extraction of raw materials, Transport to Pro-

cessing plants; Manufacture of the materials; transport from production plants to

building sites ‘grey’ energy; construction of the building (‘induced’ energy.

b. Operation of the building (‘operational’ energy); Demolition of the building; Haul

Figure 1-1 showing Global CO2 Emissions by

ble, thus reducing the greenhouse gases (GHGs) include;

a. The Green Building

ENERGY EFFICIENCY c. Net Zero Buildings.

‘Green’ building is a building that, in its design, construction or operation, reduces or

4 should be addressed in design, construction, operation and demolition.

generation to account for 100% of a targeted building’s or community’s energy usage

the energy required to operate a rammed earth building.

Emergency. Climate emergency is “a situation in which urgent action is required to reduce or

Landscape has been experienced characterized by prolonged droughts, intense flooding(as

1.2. Problem Statement

use of conventional building techniques that is dependent on industrially manufactured mate-

1.3. Research Questions

conventional stone and mortar construction in Kenya?

1.4. Research Objectives

other parts of the world.

building techniques as compared to the conventional construction techniques in Kenya.

tens of thousands of people (Bice, 2020).

building techniques- Rammed Earth, to provide an alternative building technique to achieve

1.6. Scope of The Study

analyze all the available information on Rammed Earth construction.

1.7. Limitations of the Study