This research presents a comparative case study examining the embodied carbon of two single-storey residential buildings: an eco-designed home in Australia, and a typical Economically Weaker Section (EWS) type house in India. While the Australian house is intentionally designed for sustainability using low-carbon materials and construction techniques, the Indian EWS house is based on conventional construction methods and the environmental performance is not specifically considered in the design and construction. However, preliminary analysis suggests that the smaller scale and material simplicity of the EWS house may result in a significantly lower embodied carbon footprint.
This study challenges prevailing assumptions about what constitutes a “sustainable” home, particularly in high-income contexts where sustainability is often equated with expensive technologies and large footprints. Embodied carbon is determined using the Bill of Quantities and the embodied carbon factors compiled from national databases. The scope is limited to A1-A3 from a Life Cycle Carbon Assessment perspective. In addition to the base case scenario, sensitivity analysis is done to compare the results using different embodied carbon databases to explore how data selection influences the outcome across different geographic contexts.
By comparing these two different houses, this research highlights the complex relationship across sustainability, affordability, and lifestyle expectations. It raises critical questions about whether high-cost, high-performance homes in developed countries truly deliver lower environmental impacts compared to modest, utilitarian dwellings in emerging economies.
The findings are expected to be helpful for policy, design, and education by advocating for more nuanced, context-sensitive approaches to sustainable housing. This research contributes to the broader discourse on embodied carbon in residential construction and underscores the importance of comparative global studies in shaping equitable and effective climate strategies.