The Building Market Briefs reports profile a single country building sector condensed into 50 pages. The content addresses the opportunities, the interests of stakeholders, costs and benefits of action to mitigate emissions — the primary driver of climate change. Also, the content is amplified with recommendations from local experts. As the methodologically is aligned, comparison between different European markets is easily made.

Comparisons of buildings in similar climates built in accordance with different regional construction practices and building rating systems can provide useful insights in sustainable design practices. The objectives of this study were: (1) to perform energy related life cycle assessments of a typical LEED-H (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Homes) single-family home in New Jersey (US), and a typical Minergie-P single-family home in Chur, Switzerland; and (2) to assess the effect of rating systems and construction practices on the buildings’ environmental impacts. Inventory data was obtained from the Ecoinvent 2.2 database with a replacement of the Western European electricity mix with the US or New Jersey electricity mix for the New Jersey home. The Swiss building performed better regarding non-renewable energy consumption, Global Warming Potential and Acidification Potential mainly due to the geothermal heat pump and the Swiss electricity mix while there was less of a difference regarding Ozone Layer Depletion Potential and Eutrophication Potential. The influence of electricity sources exceeded the effects of longer building life time or the removal of the Swiss basement. Regional building practices, local codes and environmental policies should take the electricity mix into account because it is so important.