ARCOM

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 42 results ...

Afroz, R (2020) Developing a low-carbon architecture pedagogy in Bangladesh. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 637–49.

Andersen, C E, Kanafani, K, Zimmermann, R K, Rasmussen, F N and Birgisdóttir, H (2020) Comparison of GHG emissions from circular and conventional building components. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 379–92.

Anderson, J and Moncaster, A (2020) Embodied carbon of concrete in buildings, Part 1: analysis of published EPD. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 198–217.

Axon, S and Morrissey, J (2020) Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 393–411.

Baborska-Narozny, M, Szulgowska-Zgrzywa, M, Mokrzecka, M, Chmielewska, A, Fidorow-Kaprawy, N, Stefanowicz, E, Piechurski, K and Laska, M (2020) Climate justice: air quality and transitions from solid fuel heating. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 120–40.

Balouktsi, M (2020) Carbon metrics for cities: production and consumption implications for policies. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 233–59.

Bordass, B (2020) Metrics for energy performance in operation: the fallacy of single indicators. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 260–76.

Clarke, L, Sahin-Dikmen, M and Winch, C (2020) Transforming vocational education and training for nearly zero-energy building. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 650–61.

Crawley, J, McKenna, E, Gori, V and Oreszczyn, T (2020) Creating Domestic Building Thermal Performance Ratings Using Smart Meter Data. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 1–13.

Fawcett, T and Topouzi, M (2020) Residential retrofit in the climate emergency: the role of metrics. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 475–90.

Francart, N, Höjer, M, Mjörnell, K, Orahim, A S, von Platten, J and Malmqvist, T (2020) Sharing indoor space: stakeholders’ perspectives and energy metrics. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 70–85.

Frischknecht, R, Alig, M, Nathani, C, Hellmüller, P and Stolz, P (2020) Carbon footprints and reduction requirements: the Swiss real estate sector. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 325–36.

Grant, E J (2020) Mainstreaming environmental education for architects: the need for basic literacies. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 538–49.

Green, E, Lannon, S, Patterson, J, Variale, F and Iorwerth, H (2020) Decarbonising the Welsh housing stock: from practice to policy. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 277–92.

Green, S D and Sergeeva, N (2020) The contested privileging of zero carbon: plausibility, persuasiveness and professionalism. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 491–503.

Habert, G, Röck, M, Steininger, K, Lupísek, A, Birgisdottir, H, Desing, H, Chandrakumar, C, Pittau, F, Passer, A, Rovers, R, Slavkovic, K, Hollberg, A, Hoxha, E, Jusselme, T, Nault, E, Allacker, K and Lützkendorf, T (2020) Carbon budgets for buildings: harmonising temporal, spatial and sectoral dimensions. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 429–52.

Hamstead, Z, Coseo, P, AlKhaled, S, Boamah, E F, Hondula, D M, Middel, A and Rajkovich, N (2020) Thermally resilient communities: creating a socio-technical collaborative response to extreme temperatures. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 218–32.

Hoxha, E, Passer, A, Saade, M R M, Trigaux, D, Shuttleworth, A, Pittau, F, Allacker, K and Habert, G (2020) Biogenic carbon in buildings: a critical overview of LCA methods. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 504–24.

• Type: Journal Article
• Keywords: bio-based materials; biogenic carbon; buildings; dynamic life-cycle assessment (LCA); environmental product declaration (EPD); life-cycle assessment (LCA); product environmental footprint (PEF);
• ISBN/ISSN: 2632-6655
• URL: https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.46
• Abstract:
  The increasing pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from buildings has motivated specialists to develop low-carbon products incorporating bio-based materials. The impact of these materials is often evaluated through life-cycle assessment (LCA), but there is no clear consensus on how to model the biogenic carbon released or absorbed during their life-cycle. This study investigates and compares existing methods used for biogenic carbon assessment. The most common approaches were identified through an extensive literature review. The possible discrepancies between the results obtained when adopting different methods are made evident through an LCA study of a timber building. Results identified that land-use and land-use-change (LULUC) impacts and carbon-storage credits are not included in most existing methods. In addition, when limiting the system boundary to certain life-cycle stages, methods using the –1/+1 criterion can lead to net negative results for the global warming (GW) score, failing to provide accurate data to inform decision-making. Deviation between the results obtained from different methods was 16% at the building scale and between 35% and 200% at the component scale. Of all the methods studied, the dynamic approach of evaluating biogenic carbon uptake is the most robust and transparent. This critical review identified key methodological differences between the most commonly used methods and recommended standards for biogenic carbon accounting in buildings. This indicates a lack of consensus and guidance for conducting LCAs of bio-based construction products and buildings using bio-based materials. A case study applying four different LCA approaches on a timber building identified the inability to compare results and create proper benchmarks. Moreover, different methods lead designers to pursue different strategies to reduce a building’s carbon footprint. Regulators, the construction industry and the construction products industry are directly affected by this lack of comparability. This research highlights the flaws and benefits of commonly used methods. A clear and grounded recommendation is for practitioners to adopt dynamic biogenic carbon accounting for future assessments of bio-based materials and buildings.

Killip, G (2020) A reform agenda for UK construction education and practice. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 525–37.

Klinsky, S and Mavrogianni, A (2020) Climate justice and the built environment. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 412–28.

Kuittinen, M and Häkkinen, T (2020) Reduced carbon footprints of buildings: new Finnish standards and assessments. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 182–97.

Lützkendorf, T (2020) The role of carbon metrics in supporting built-environment professionals. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 676–86.

Lützkendorf, T and Frischknecht, R (2020) (Net-) zero-emission buildings: a typology of terms and definitions. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 662–75.

Mayer, M (2020) Material recovery certification for construction workers. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 550–64.

Parkin, A, Herrera, M and Coley, D A (2020) Net-zero buildings: when carbon and energy metrics diverge. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 86–99.

Passe, U (2020) A design workflow for integrating performance into architectural education. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 565–78.

Passe, U, Dorneich, M, Krejci, C, Koupaei, D M, Marmur, B, Shenk, L, Stonewall, J, Thompson, J and Zhou, Y (2020) An urban modelling framework for climate resilience in low-resource neighbourhoods. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 453–74.

Patrick, M, Grewal, G, Chelagat, W and Shannon, G (2020) Planetary health justice: feminist approaches to building in rural Kenya. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 308–24.

Roca-Puigròs, M, Billy, R G, Gerber, A, Wäger, P and Müller, D B (2020) Pathways toward a carbon-neutral Swiss residential building stock. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 579–93.

Salter, J, Lu, Y, Kim, J C, Kellett, R, Girling, C, Inomata, F and Krahn, A (2020) Iterative ‘what-if’ neighborhood simulation: energy and emissions impacts. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 293–307.

Schünemann, C, Olfert, A, Schiela, D, Gruhler, K and Ortlepp, R (2020) Mitigation and adaptation in multifamily housing: overheating and climate justice. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 36–55.

Schiller, G, Gruhler, K and Xie, X (2020) Assessing the efficiency of indoor and outdoor access-related infrastructure. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 56–69.

Schmidt, M, Crawford, R H and Warren-Myers, G (2020) Integrating life-cycle GHG emissions into a building’s economic evaluation. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 361–78.

Schoenefeldt, H (2020) Delivery of occupant satisfaction in the House of Commons, 1950–2019. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 141–63.

Simpson, K, Janda, K B and Owen, A (2020) Preparing ‘middle actors’ to deliver zero-carbon building transitions. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 610–24.

Srivastava, M (2020) Cooperative learning in design studios: a pedagogy for net-positive performance. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 594–609.

Steadman, P, Evans, S, Liddiard, R, Godoy-Shimizu, D, Ruyssevelt, P and Humphrey, D (2020) Building stock energy modelling in the UK: the 3DStock method and the London Building Stock Model. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 100–19.

Steininger, K W, Meyer, L, Nabernegg, S and Kirchengast, G (2020) Sectoral carbon budgets as an evaluation framework for the built environment. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 337–60.

Stevenson, F and Kwok, A (2020) Mainstreaming zero carbon: lessons for built-environment education and training. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 687–96.

Tanguy, A, Breton, C, Blanchet, P and Amor, B (2020) Characterising the development trends driving sustainable neighborhoods. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 164–81.

Waldman, B, Huang, M and Simonen, K (2020) Embodied carbon in construction materials: a framework for quantifying data quality in EPDs. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 625–36.

Willand, N, Moore, T, Horne, R and Robertson, S (2020) Retrofit Poverty: Socioeconomic Spatial Disparities in Retrofit Subsidies Uptake. Buildings and Cities, 1(01), 14–35.