Energy use during the life cycle of buildings: a method

Adalberth, Karin

doi:10.1016/s0360-1323(96)00068-6

Cited by 209 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The waste factor value varies from the type of building materials; references [25] and [33] listed waste factors with related materials. The value of may vary among different countries.…”

Section: Quantitative Model Of Ghg Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects

Mao

Shen

et al. 2013

Energy and Buildings

415

215

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the construction stage will be more relatively significant over time.Different construction methods influence GHG emissions in the construction phase. This study investigates the differences of GHG emissions between prefabrication and conventional construction methods. This study sets a calculation boundary and five emission sources for the semi-prefabricated construction process: embodied emissions of building materials, transportation of building materials, transportation of construction waste and soil, transportation of prefabricated components, operation of equipment, and construction techniques. A quantitative model is then established using a process-based method. A semi-prefabrication project and a conventional construction project in China are employed for preliminary examination of the differences in GHG emissions. Results show that the semi-prefabrication method produces less GHG emissions per square meter compared with the conventional construction, with the former producing 336 kg/m 2 and the latter generating 368 kg/m 2 . The largest proportion of total GHG emissions comes from the embodied emissions of building materials, accounting for approximately 85%. Four elements that positively contribute to reduced emissions are the embodied GHG emissions of building materials, transportation of building materials, resource consumption of equipment and techniques, and transportation of waste and soil, accounting for 86.5%, 18.3%, 10.3%, and 0.2%, respectively, of reduced emissions; one a negative effect on reduced emissions is the transportation of prefabricated components, which offsets 15.3% of the total emissions reduction. Thus, adopting prefabricated construction methods contribute to significant environmental benefits on GHG emissions in this initial study.

show abstract

“…The waste factor value varies from the type of building materials; references [25] and [33] listed waste factors with related materials. The value of may vary among different countries.…”

Section: Quantitative Model Of Ghg Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects

Mao

Shen

et al. 2013

Energy and Buildings

415

215

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[5,6,12,13,[17][18][19][20][21]) have been implemented for cold climate houses and have shown that the operational phase has a preponderant weight in overall energy requirement and GHG emissions. Nonetheless, a few recent studies have pointed out that, for very-low-energy buildings, the nonoperational phase is the most significant [4,5,27].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[12][13][14][15]. For example, Adalberth [13] proposed a methodology to account for LC energy of buildings from cradle to grave and applied it to three Swedish single-family houses prefabricated in a factory [12].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life-cycle assessment of a house with alternative exterior walls: Comparison of three impact assessment methods

Monteiro

Freire

2012

Energy and Buildings

208

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tA life-cycle (LC) model has been implemented for a Portuguese single-family house. The first goal is to characterize the main LC processes (material production and transport, heating, cooling, maintenance) assessing seven alternative exterior walls for the same house to identify environmentally preferable solutions. The second goal is to compare the results of three life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods -CED (cumulative energy demand), for primary energy accounting; CML 2001 (Institute of Environmental Sciences of Leiden University) and EI'99 (Eco-indicator'99), for multiple environmental impacts -to determine the extent to which the results of a life-cycle assessment are influenced by the method applied. The results show that the most significant LC process depends on the operational pattern assumed. Regarding the assessment of the exterior wall alternatives, the results indicate the wood-wall is the preferable solution. Non-renewable CED shows results similar to abiotic depletion (CML 2001) and resources (EI'99) categories, as well as some correlation with climate change/global warming potential (GWP), acidification and eutrophication. However, no correlation was found with the remaining impact categories. Comparing CML 2001 and EI'99 categories, GWP, ozone layer depletion, abiotic depletion, acidification, and eutrophication present robust results that permit a straightforward comparison between the two LCIA methods. Nevertheless, CML results present slightly higher impacts for the use phase, while EI'99 for material production. In addition, the two LCIA methods can present inconsistent results between similar categories (different ranking of alternatives), which ultimately can influence the choice among solutions.

show abstract

“…For instance in the United Kingdom, it has been reported that dwelling and household usage accounts for 50% of all energy consumed and about 8% (350 PJ per year) is used to manufacture and transport building materials. (Adalberth K., 1996in Morel et al, 2001. Waziri et al, (2013) compared energy consumed as well as the amount of carbon emissions between Compressed Earth Bricks (CEB) and other conventional bricks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the use of lateritic soils in the construction/development of sustainable housing in Africa: A geological perspective

Oyelami

Rooy

2016

Journal of African Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights• Appraisal of the previous work in the use of tropical soils in low cost, energy efficient housing development.• It established CEBs as sustainable building materials for a sustainable environment.• Identification of lateritic soils as suitable material in the production of CEBs.• Established the importance of parent rock material (its type and mineralogy) in strength and durability of CEBs.• Discouraging the common practice of firing clay bricks for the sake of sustainable environment. AbstractLateritic soils have been described as highly weathered tropical or sub-tropical residual soils with varying proportions of particle sizes ranging from clay size to gravel, usually coated with sesquioxide rich concretions. It is sometimes referred to as brick earth based on its use. The use of laterite and lateritic soils have been found to promote the realization of decent housing and bridging the housing deficit, especially in Africa.The author has attempted to review available information on the recent trends in building bricks and housing development with the aim of identifying a suitable soil material that will meet the present challenge of sustaining the environment without costing too much and maintaining a high standard of strength, durability and aesthetics. A critical review of laterite and lateritic soils from a geological point of view indicated these soils to be one of the best natural materials used in the production of compressed earth bricks. Lateritic soils are mostly well graded, comprising both cohesive (silt and clay) and cohesionless (sands and gravels) soil fraction, it contains sesquioxides and clay minerals which are very useful in the natural binding process as well as in the presence of most chemical binders.Compressed earth bricks are mainly composed of raw earth materials (soil) with their cohesion due principally to the clay fraction present in both humid and dry states. CEB's promote building in a 'sustainable' way and offers a good prospect to using our resources in an efficient manner while creating dwellings that improve human health, well-being and preserving a better environment, with an affordable and natural alternative.

show abstract

Energy use during the life cycle of buildings: a method

Cited by 209 publications

References 1 publication

Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects

Comparative study of greenhouse gas emissions between off-site prefabrication and conventional construction methods: Two case studies of residential projects

Life-cycle assessment of a house with alternative exterior walls: Comparison of three impact assessment methods

A review of the use of lateritic soils in the construction/development of sustainable housing in Africa: A geological perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About