Structural Impact Relationships Between Urban Development Intensity Characteristics and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Korea

Abstract

The goal of this study is to analyze the interrelated direct and indirect impacts of urban development intensity (UDI) characteristics on carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions in Korea. The study also compares the main arguments and analysis results of previous studies on cities that are effective in reducing CO 2 emissions. To do this, factors attributable to the UDI characteristics of Korea were selected, and CO 2 emissions were calculated. Then, the impact of UDI characteristics on CO 2 emissions was analyzed using the partial least squares structural equation model. The main results show that the physical, spatial, and socio-demographic characteristics of UDI have a direct impact on CO 2 emissions, and physical, economic, and city-type characteristics indirectly affect CO 2 emissions. As a result, we reach the following conclusions: (i) dense urban forms reduce CO 2 emissions; (ii) economic characteristics of UDI have impact on total CO 2 emissions, having both negative and positive effects; and (iii) medium and small cities have higher per capita CO 2 emissions than do large cities. communication infrastructure on CO 2 emissions. Land use patterns and density elements represent spatial characteristics, and transportation and communication infrastructure facilities exhibit physical characteristics. Similarly, Guerin et al. [8] found that factors such as age, gender, and education level, which indicate social and economic characteristics, such as income and house ownership, affect energy consumption. Brownstone and Golob [9] found that spatial characteristics, such as residential density, affect vehicle mileage and fuel consumption. Tate et al. [10] and Mendes [11] developed the UDI index based on physical characteristics, such as land coverage and infrastructure, and socio-demographic characteristics, such as census block group.However, as pointed out by Wang et al [7], virtually no studies comprehensively address the UDI characteristics relevant to urban planning. For example, Newman and Kenworthy [6] argued that physical factors, such as transportation-related automobiles and transportation facilities, accelerate CO 2 , but their research fails to include economic factors, such as price or income changes. Similarly, Talbi [12] studied the relationship between CO 2 and economic aspects, such as GDP, fuel consumption, fuel ratio, and energy efficiency, and found that the latter two are important for CO 2 emissions. However, this author did not consider the fact that energy consumption patterns or CO 2 emissions may vary due to other factors, such as age or city type. Schipper et al. [13] and Guerin, Yust and Coopet [8] considered socio-demographic and economic characteristics but limited their study of energy consumption to the residential sector. Similarly, Fragkias et al. [14] examined the relationship between city size and CO 2 emissions based on population, but they did not sufficiently address other characteristics influencing this relationship.Though previous studies do not comprehensively address UDI charac...

Systematic review and comparison of densification effects and planning motivations

“…Besides these negative environmental effects of density, there is strong consensus that residents living in communities with a higher density emit fewer GHG emissions from both cooling and heating (Norman et al 2006;Qin & Han 2013;Son et al 2018) Ottelin et al (2014) report higher overall emissions for metropolitan dwellers in comparison with lower density areas, which is explained by the significantly higher emissions from air travel, a factor ignored by all other studies. This highlights the need to include all transport modes when studying GHG emissions.…”

Emissions characteristics and impact on the Environment for LPG And Gasoline in Spark Ignition Engine

“…LPG is obtained from hydrocarbons produced from refinement fossil fuel and process of natural gas, with the most parts dominated by fuel (C3H8) and alkane series (C4H10) [1]. LPG has an energy content of 46.23 MJ/kg and 26 MJ/l, that is slightly over gasoline that stands at 44.4 MJ/kg and 34.8 MJ/l [2]. The energy content of LPG per unit of measurement is comparatively over gasoline, though per unit volume is lower.…”