Comparative Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance of Reinforced Concrete and Timber Stadiums—A Case Study in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Energy Consumption and Carbon Emissions of Public Buildings
1.2. Development Tendency and Current Situation of Gymnasium in China
1.3. Energy Saving and Carbon Emission Reduction Potential of Timber Buildings
1.4. Study Objective
2. Description of Studied Buildings and Its Environment
2.1. Climate Zones in China
2.2. Details of Simulation Buildings
3. Method and Data
3.1. Framework of the Study
Life Cycle Energy Assessment (LCEA) and Life Cycle Carbon Assessment (LCCA)
3.2. Energy Consumption
3.2.1. Construction Phase
- (1)
- The energy consumed and carbon emitted during the decoration of concrete buildings are ignored.
- (2)
- Based on existing research, the on-site erection energy consumption of RC and CLT buildings is set at 100 MJ/ m2 and 20 MJ/m2, respectively [44].
- (3)
- The boundaries of the materials, including concrete, sand, cement, steel, and brick, start with the extraction of raw materials, whereas the boundary for CLT starts with tree harvesting. The total volume of consumption of building materials for RC and timber stadiums is shown in Table 5. The inventory of data used to calculate the energy consumption of building material production is presented in Table 6.
3.2.2. Operation Phase
- (1)
- According to the building grade classification in China, the life spans of the two stadiums are assumed to be 50 years [50].
- (2)
- The indoor temperature is controlled between 10 °C and 26 °C. In the winter, the temperature of the sports hall is set at 18 °C when occupied. The temperature of the office, lounge and bathroom areas are set at 20 °C. The comfortable temperature in summer is expected to be no more than 26 °C. Cooling is implemented automatically when the temperature exceeds this range. The basic parameters of the thermal conditions are shown in Table 7 [50].
- (3)
- (4)
- Electricity is used for cooling, water heating, lighting, appliances, and ventilation, while raw coal is used for heating. This is the current practice in China and is described in detail later.
3.2.3. End of Life
- (1)
- The energy consumption for demolition of a building is considered to be 90% of the energy consumed during the erection phase as the existing research [51]. The demolition area of RC and CLT buildings is set at 90 MJ/m2 and 18 MJ/m2, respectively.
- (2)
- For the concrete buildings, we assume that all of the concrete and steel materials would go into landfill after demolition. This is also the current practice in Northeast China. Due to the relatively small amount of steel used in the stadium, the ignorance of steel recycling may not have significant effect on the total carbon emissions of the building.
- (3)
- For the CLT buildings, a recycling rate of 60% is assumed, with 40% used for biomass energy.
- (4)
- The energy consumed by transportation is ignored.
3.3. Carbon Emissions and Carbon Uptake
3.3.1. Carbon Emissions
3.3.2. CO2 Uptake of Concrete and Cement during the Operation Stage
- (1)
- Depth of carbonation. The carbonation of concrete starts at the outer surface and moves progressively inwards. The process is controlled by the diffusion of CO2 into the concrete. The depth of carbonation as a function of time can be described by Equation 3 [56,57]. The service life of the concrete is estimated to be 50 years (t):
- (2)
- (3)
- Amount of CO2 absorbed per volume. The amount of CO2 absorbed per volume can be calculated using Equation (5) [57]:
- (4)
- Amount of CO2 uptake. Finally, the total carbon uptake can be obtained by Equation (6).
3.4. Quality of Data
4. Results and Analysis
5. Discussion
5.1. Energy Consumption and Carbon Emissions in Different Climatic Regions
5.2. Stadium Operation Mode
5.3. CO2 Uptake of Concrete and Cement
6. Conclusions
- (1)
- The estimated energy consumption and carbon emissions of CLT buildings are much lower than those of RC buildings in all of the studied cities, which indicates that CLT systems have greater potential than RC systems to reduce carbon emissions and energy consumption.
- (2)
- The energy consumption and carbon emissions of both concrete and CLT buildings are closely related to the climate zones. Buildings in “severely cold” and “cold” regions of China, in which heating is responsible for the majority of energy consumption, consume the most energy and release the most carbon, followed by “hot summer, cold winter” regions, “hot summer, warm winter” regions, and “temperate” regions. Therefore, timber is best suited to regions with considerable space heating in the winter. Although CLT as a sustainable material can be developed nationwide in China, it is better to develop it in severely cold and cold regions first due to limitations on timber production.
- (3)
- Different building operation modes have a great impact on energy consumption and carbon emissions. The reasonable arrangement of operation time is an effective way to reduce the energy consumed by stadiums.
- (4)
- Although the total carbon uptake of concrete and cement is much less than that of timber, the carbonation process and ability to sequester CO2 of cement and concrete should not be neglected.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Owusu, P.A.; Asumadu-Sarkodie, S. A review of renewable energy sources, sustainability issues and climate change mitigation. Cogent. Eng. 2016, 3, 1167990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bureau, P.R. 2019 World Population Data Sheet. Available online: https://www.prb.org/worldpopdata/ (accessed on 19 December 2019).
- Van der Werf, G.R.; Morton, D.C.; DeFries, R.S.; Olivier, J.G.; Kasibhatla, P.S.; Jackson, R.B.; Collatz, G.J.; Randerson, J.T.J.N.G. CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nat. Geosci. 2009, 2, 737–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanif, I. Impact of fossil fuels energy consumption, energy policies, and urban sprawl on carbon emissions in East Asia and the Pacific: A panel investigation. Energy Strateg. Rev. 2018, 21, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-mulali, U.; Tang, C.F.; Ozturk, I. Estimating the Environment Kuznets Curve hypothesis: Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 50, 918–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kivyiro, P.; Arminen, H. Carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and foreign direct investment: Causality analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy 2014, 74, 595–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, J.E. Sir John Houghton: Global Warming: The Complete Briefing, 2nd edition. J. Atmos. Chem. 1998, 30, 409–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Houghton, J. Global Warming: The Complete Briefing; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2004; p. 454. [Google Scholar]
- Melillo, J.M.; Richmond, T.T.C.; Yohe, G.W. Climate Change Impacts in the United States; The Third National Climate Assessment; the U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
- EIA. International Energy Outlook 2019; the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA): Washington, DC, USA, 2019.
- Donat, L.; Schindler, H.; Burck, J. Brown to Green: The G20 Transition Towards a Net-Zero Emissions Economy (2019); Climate Transparency: Berlin, Germany, 2019; p. 65. [Google Scholar]
- China Association of Building Energy Efficiency. Proceedings of the Research Report on Building Energy Consumption in China (2018); Professional Committee on Energy Consumption Statistics: Shanghai, China, 2018. (In Chinese)
- Xi, J. Jinping Xi’s Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Paris Conference on Climate Change. Available online: http://www.xinhuanet.com//world/2015-12/01/c_1117309642.htm (accessed on 6 December 2015).
- Hong, Y.; Xinyue, H.; Qun, R.; Tao, L.; Xinhu, L.; Guoqin, Z.; Shi, L. Effect of urban micro-climatic regulation ability on public building energy usage carbon emission. Energy Build. 2017, 154, 553–559. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Y.; Yan, D.; Guo, S.; Hu, S.; Wei, Q.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; An, J.; Zhang, Y.; Guo, S. China Building Energy Use 2018; Building Energy Research Center of Tsinghua University (BERC) of Tsinghua University: Beijing, China, 2018; p. 85. [Google Scholar]
- The State Council of China. Outline of Building a Strong Sports Country. Available online: http://sports.people.com.cn/n1/2019/0902/c14820-31332239.html (accessed on 15 November 2019). (In Chinese)
- General Administration of Sports of China. The Sixth National Sports Ground Census Data Bulletin. Available online: http://www.sport.gov.cn/n16/n1077/n1467/n3895927/n4119307/7153937.html (accessed on 15 November 2019). (In Chinese)
- General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China; Standardization Administration of China. Requirement of the Service and Management for Public Fitness Activity Center; General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China; Standardization Administration of China: Beijing, China, 2017; Volume GB/T 34280-2017.
- Trianti-Stourna, E.; Spyropoulou, K.; Theofylaktos, C.; Droutsa, K.; Balaras, C.A.; Santamouris, M.; Asimakopoulos, D.N.; Lazaropoulou, G.; Papanikolaou, N. Energy conservation strategies for sports centers: Part A. Sports halls. Energy Build. 1997, 27, 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nishioka, T.; Ohtaka, K.; Hashimoto, N.; Onojima, H. Measurement and evaluation of the indoor thermal environment in a large domed stadium. Energy Build. 2000, 32, 217–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Liang, S. Study on adaptability of large-space “saddle-shaped” shell overall roof greening. Energy Build. 2017, 138, 748–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramage, M.H.; Burridge, H.; Busse-Wicher, M.; Fereday, G.; Reynolds, T.; Shah, D.U.; Wu, G.; Yu, L.; Fleming, P.; Densley-Tingley, D.; et al. The wood from the trees: The use of timber in construction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 68, 333–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, D.; Ding, G. Comparing the performance of brick and timber in residential buildings—The case of Australia. Energy Build. 2018, 159, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowyer, J.; Bratkovich, S.; Fernholz, K. Utilization of Harvested Wood by the North American Forest Products Industry; Dovetail Partners Outlook. 2012. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312137029 (accessed on 15 November 2019).
- Harris, R. 8-Cross laminated timber. In Wood Composites; Ansell, M.P., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2015; Available online: https://sciencedirect.xilesou.top/science/article/pii/B9781782424543000081 (accessed on 15 November 2019). [CrossRef]
- Caniato, M.; Bettarello, F.; Gasparella, A. Energy and Acoustic Performances of Timber in Buildings. In Reference Module in Materials Science and Materials Engineering; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brandner, R.; Flatscher, G.; Ringhofer, A.; Schickhofer, G.; Thiel, A. Cross laminated timber (CLT): Overview and development. Eur. J. Wood Wood Prod. 2016, 74, 331–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breneman, S. Cross-Laminated Timber Structural Floor and Roof Design. Structure Magazine, 14 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.J. Comparison of Environmental Performance of a Five-Storey Building Built with Cross-Laminated Timber and Concrete; Department of Wood Science, University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2012; p. 31. [Google Scholar]
- Hafner, A.; Schäfer, S. Comparative LCA study of different timber and mineral buildings and calculation method for substitution factors on building level. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 167, 630–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tettey, U.Y.A.; Dodoo, A.; Gustavsson, L. Effect of different frame materials on the primary energy use of a multi storey residential building in a life cycle perspective. Energy Build. 2019, 185, 259–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khavari, A.M.; Pei, S.; Tabares-Velasco, P.C. Energy Consumption Analysis of Multistory Cross-Laminated Timber Residential Buildings: A Comparative Study. J. Archit. Eng. 2016, 22, 04016002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiniforush, A.A.; Akbarnezhad, A.; Valipour, H.; Xiao, J. Energy implications of using steel-timber composite (STC) elements in buildings. Energy Build. 2018, 176, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pierobon, F.; Huang, M.; Simonen, K.; Ganguly, I. Environmental benefits of using hybrid CLT structure in midrise non-residential construction: An LCA based comparative case study in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. J. Build. Eng. 2019, 26, 100862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pajchrowski, G.; Noskowiak, A.; Lewandowska, A.; Strykowski, W. Wood as a building material in the light of environmental assessment of full life cycle of four buildings. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 52, 428–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, Y.; Cui, X.; Yin, X.; Chen, Y.; Guo, H. Assessment of Energy Saving Potential by Replacing Conventional Materials by Cross Laminated Timber (CLT)—A Case Study of Office Buildings in China. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Balasbaneh, A.T.; Marsono, A.K.B. Strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from residential sector by proposing new building structures in hot and humid climatic conditions. Build. Environ. 2017, 124, 357–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China (MOHURD). Code for Design of Civil Buildings; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2005; Volume GB50352.
- Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China (MOHURD). Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Public Buildings; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2015; Volume GB50189-2015. [Google Scholar]
- Donlan, J.; Skog, K.; Byrne, K.A. Carbon storage in harvested wood products for Ireland 1961–2009. Biomass Bioenergy 2012, 46, 731–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blengini, G.A.; Carlo, T.D. The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy buildings. Energy Build. 2010, 42, 869–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evangelista, P.P.A.; Kiperstok, A.; Torres, E.A.; Gonçalves, J.P. Environmental performance analysis of residential buildings in Brazil using life cycle assessment (LCA). Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 169, 748–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramesh, T.; Prakash, R.; Shukla, K.K. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: An overview. Energy Build. 2010, 42, 1592–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, H.; Liu, Y.; Meng, Y.; Huang, H.; Sun, C.; Shao, Y. A Comparison of the Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance between Reinforced Concrete and Cross-Laminated Timber Structures in Residential Buildings in the Severe Cold Region of China. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhou, Z.; Song, X. The life cycle assessment of two kinds of concretes. Environ. Eng. 2009, 27, 472–475. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, R.; Wang, H.T.; Zhang, H.; Chen, X. Life cycle assessment of cement technologies in China and recommendations. Acta Sci. Circumstantiae 2010, 30, 2361–2368. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, L.S.; Zhang, L.F. Life Cycle assessment of environmental impacts for the whole steel production process. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2012, 22, 239–244. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Z. Life Cycle Assessment of Rock Wool Board and EPS Board in Materials Science Forum; Trans Tech Publ.: Qingdao, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Quintana, A.; Alba, J.; del Rey, R.; Guillén-Guillamón, I. Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of gypsum plasterboard and a new kind of bio-based epoxy composite containing different natural fibers. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 185, 408–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China (MOHURD); General Administration of Sports of China. Design Code for Sports Building; China Architecture & Building Press: Beijing, China, 2003; Volume JGJ 31-2003.
- Zhang, X. Carbon Emissions Measurement Methods and Comparative Studies on Green Building Structural System; Harbin Institute of Technology: Harbin, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Dhakal, S. Urban energy use and carbon emissions from cities in China and policy implications. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 4208–4219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, R.; Zhu, J.; Hou, P.; Tao, H. Getting Every Ton of Emissions Right: An Analysis of Emission Factors for Purchased Electricity in China; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; p. 16. [Google Scholar]
- Council, C.E. A list of statistics on the national power industry from January 2009 to September 2009. Available online: http://www.nea.gov.cn/2019-12/26/c_138659627.htm (accessed on 10 February 2020). (In Chinese)
- Noussan, M.; Roberto, R.; Nastasi, B. Performance Indicators of Electricity Generation at Country Level—The Case of Italy. Energies 2018, 11, 650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Currie, R.J. Carbonation Depths in Structural-quality Concrete: An Assessment of Evidence from Investigations of Structures and from Other Sources; Building Research Establishment (BRE): Garston, Hertfordshire, UK, 1986; Available online: https://trid.trb.org/view/277736 (accessed on 20 December 2019).
- Pade, C.; Guimaraes, M. The CO2 uptake of concrete in a 100 year perspective. Cem. Concr. Res. 2007, 37, 1348–1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lagerblad, B. Carbon Dioxide Uptake During Concrete Life Cycle: State of the Art; Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute Stockholm: Stockholm, Sweden, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, S. Modern Concrete Technology; Shaanxi Science and Technology Press: Xi’an, China, 1998. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ma, H.; Du, N.; Yu, S.; Lu, W.; Zhang, Z.; Deng, N.; Li, C. Analysis of typical public building energy consumption in northern China. Energy Build. 2017, 136, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, M.P.; Tovey, K. Overcoming barriers to implementation of carbon reduction strategies in large commercial buildings in China. Build. Environ. 2010, 45, 856–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jing, R.; Wang, M.; Zhang, R.; Li, N.; Zhao, Y. A study on energy performance of 30 commercial office buildings in Hong Kong. Energy Build 2017, 144, 117–128. [Google Scholar]
- Garg, A.; Maheshwari, J.; Shukla, P.R.; Rawal, R. Energy appliance transformation in commercial buildings in India under alternate policy scenarios. Energy 2017, 140, 952–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Climate Region | Temperature | Sub-Region | Representative City | U-Value (Local Regulations) | R-Value (Local Regulations) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hottest | Coldest | |||||
Severely Cold | ≤25 °C | ≤–10 °C | I (B) | Harbin | Roof: ≤0.28 | Ground Floor: ≥1.1 |
Wall: ≤0.38 | ||||||
Window: ≤1.3 | ||||||
Cold | 18 °C~28 °C | –10 °C~0 °C | II (B) | Beijing | Roof: ≤0.45 | Ground Floor: ≥0.6 |
Wall: ≤0.5 | ||||||
Window: ≤1.5 | ||||||
Hot Summer, Cold Winter | 25 °C~30 °C | 0 °C~10 °C | III (B) | Shanghai | Roof: ≤0.5 | — |
Wall: ≤0.8 | ||||||
Window: ≤1.8 | ||||||
Hot Summer, Warm Winter | 25 °C~29 °C | −10 °C | IV (B) | Guangzhou | Roof: ≤0.8 | — |
Wall: ≤1.5 | ||||||
Window: ≤2 | ||||||
Temperate | 18 °C~25 °C | 0 °C~13 °C | V (B) | Kunming | Roof: ≤0.8 | — |
Wall: ≤1.5 | ||||||
Window: ≤2 |
Items | Figures | Items | Figures |
---|---|---|---|
Total Floor Area (m2) | 5800.00 | Plane Size of Performance Stage (m) | 18.00 × 12.00 |
External Wall Area (m2) | 2401.02 | Plane Size of Game Hall (m) | 24.00 × 42.00 |
External Opening Area (m2) | 1347.78 | Area Index (m2/per seat) | 1.93 |
Total Volume (m³) | 51420.86 | Sports Hall Area (m2) | 2844.13 |
Total Height (m) | 17.60 | Office Area (m2) | 947.26 |
Number of Layers | 3.00 | Lounge Area (m2) | 1181.95 |
Number of Seats | 3000.00 | Bathroom Area (m2) | 426.46 |
Plane Size (m) | 50.20 × 58.20 | Plant Room Area (m2) | 400.20 |
Cities | External Wall and External Window | Roof | Ground Floor |
---|---|---|---|
Harbin | |||
Beijing | |||
Shanghai | |||
Guangzhou | |||
Kunming |
Cities | External Wall and External Window | Roof | Ground Floor |
---|---|---|---|
Harbin | |||
Beijing | |||
Shanghai | |||
Guangzhou | |||
Kunming |
Materials | RC Buildings | Timber Buildings | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Material Volume (m3) | Material Mass (Tons) | Material Volume (m3) | Material Mass (Tons) | |
Concrete | 3715.08 | 4380.53 | 861.08 | 1463.84 |
Sand | 584.96 | 4787.84 | 420.09 | 672.14 |
Cement | 194.99 | 253.48 | 140.03 | 182.04 |
Steel | 44.85 | 349.85 | 17.33 | 135.20 |
EPS (Harbin) | 752.64 | 18.82 | 752.64 | 18.82 |
EPS (Beijing) | 435.89 | 10.90 | 435.89 | 10.90 |
EPS (Shanghai) | 328.196 | 8.205 | 328.196 | 8.205 |
EPS (Guangzhou) | 96.08 | 2.40 | 96.08 | 2.40 |
EPS (Kunming) | 96.08 | 2.40 | 96.08 | 2.40 |
Plasterboard | 109.92 | 76.94 | 126.50 | 88.55 |
Timber | — | — | 3186.43 | 1593.21 |
Material | Energy Consumption for Material Production | Carbon Emissions during Material Manufacture Process | References | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unit | Value | Unit | Value | ||
Concrete | GJ/t | 0.764 | Kg-CO2/m3 | 352.200 | [45] |
Sand | GJ/t | 0.029 | — | — | [44] |
Cement | GJ/t | 3.186 | Kg-CO2/t | 860.000 | [44,46] |
Steel | GJ/t | 19.520 | — | — | [47] |
EPS Insulation Board | GJ/t | 94.000 | — | — | [44,48] |
Plasterboard | GJ/m3 | 2.400 | Kg-CO2/t | 213.862 | [49] |
Timber | GJ/m3 | 0.545 | — | — | [44] |
Transportation (Train) | MJ/t·km | 0.220 | — | — | |
Transportation (Lorry) | MJ/t·km | 2.300 | — | — |
Room | Occupied | Heating Time | Heating Month | Heating Set Point | Cooling Time | Cooling Month | Cooling Set Point |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sports hall | Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday every week 09:00–17:00 | 24 h | 15 October to 15 April (Harbin) 15 November to 15 March (Beijing, Shanghai) No heating (Guangzhou) 15 December to 15 February (Kunming) | 18 °C; (When occupied) 10 °C | When Occupied and Room Temp > 26 °C | 1 June to 31 August (Harbin) 16 March to 14 November (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou) 16 February to 14 December (Kunming) | 26 26 °C |
Office | 20 °C | 26 °C | |||||
Lounge | 20 °C | 26 °C | |||||
Bathroom | 20 °C | 26 °C | |||||
Plant Room | 10 °C | — | — | — |
Room | Infiltrate Ventilation Set Point and Time | Natural Ventilation Set Point | Natural Ventilation Set Time | Auxiliary |
---|---|---|---|---|
Sports Hall | 0.25 ach 24 h | — | — | 5.56 I/s/person (When Occupied) |
Office | 1 ach | When occupied and Room Temp is between 18 °C and 26 °C | — | |
Lounge | 3 ach | — | ||
Bathroom | — | — | 3 ach (When Occupied) | |
Plant Room | — | — | — |
Fossil Energy Items | Cj | ηj | Studied Cities |
---|---|---|---|
Raw Coal | 20,934 kJ/kg | 26.80 (t-C/TJ) | — |
Electricity | 3600 kJ/kWh | 1.14 (t-CO2 /MWh, Northeast China) | Harbin |
1.13 (t-CO2 /MWh, North China) | Beijing | ||
0.78 (t-CO2 /MWh, East China) | Shanghai | ||
0.67 (t-CO2 /MWh, Southern China) | Guangzhou, Kunming |
Exposure Condition | Compressive Strength | |
---|---|---|
15 Mpa (mm/(year) 0.5) | 23–35 Mpa (mm/(year) 0.5) | |
Exposed | 5.00 | 1.50 |
Indoors | 15.00 | 6.00 |
Exposure Condition | Concrete | Cement | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RC Building | Timber Building | RC Building | Timber Building | ||
Aslabs | Indoors | 15,945.45 | — | — | — |
Aroof | Indoors | 3612.00 | — | 903.00 | 903.00 |
Awalls (External Surface) | Exposed | 2401.02 | — | 600.26 | 600.26 |
Awalls (Internal Surface) | Indoors | 9189.59 | — | 2297.40 | 2297.40 |
Acolumns and beams | Indoors | 4780.02 | — | 1195.01 | 1195.01 |
Aground floor | Indoors | 2817.50 | 2817.50 | — | — |
Cities | Buildings | Energy Consumed (MJ/m2) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Construction | Operation | End of Life | Total | ||
Harbin | RC Building | 2388.80 | 38,997.64 | 90.00 | 41,476.44 |
Timber Building | 1262.47 | 35,611.97 | 18.00 | 36,892.44 | |
Beijing | RC Building | 2260.46 | 30,923.55 | 90.00 | 33,274.01 |
Timber Building | 1134.14 | 28,081.42 | 18.00 | 29,233.56 | |
Shanghai | RC Building | 2216.83 | 25,106.60 | 90.00 | 27,413.43 |
Timber Building | 1090.50 | 24,071.97 | 18.00 | 25,180.47 | |
Guangzhou | RC Building | 2122.78 | 22,388.93 | 90.00 | 24,601.71 |
Timber Building | 996.45 | 22,453.54 | 18.00 | 23,467.99 | |
Kunming | RC Building | 2122.78 | 17,171.96 | 90.00 | 19,384.74 |
Timber Building | 996.45 | 17,474.47 | 18.00 | 18,488.92 |
Cities | Buildings | Energy Consumed During Operation Phase (MJ/m2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heating | Cooling | Lighting | Appliance | Water Heating | Total | ||
Harbin | RC Building | 20,627.87 | 5163.77 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 38,997.64 |
Timber Building | 17,089.68 | 5316.28 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 35,611.97 | |
Beijing | RC Building | 10,584.65 | 7132.90 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 30,923.55 |
Timber Building | 7511.78 | 7363.64 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 28,081.42 | |
Shanghai | RC Building | 4452.49 | 7448.11 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 25,106.60 |
Timber Building | 3332.19 | 7533.78 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 24,071.97 | |
Guangzhou | RC Building | 0.00 | 9182.92 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 22,388.93 |
Timber Building | 0.00 | 9247.53 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 22,453.54 | |
Kunming | RC Building | 410.06 | 3555.90 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 17,171.96 |
Timber Building | 253.06 | 4015.40 | 3258.05 | 7585.71 | 2362.24 | 17,474.47 |
Cities | Buildings | Carbon Emissions (kg/m2) | Carbon Storage and Uptake (kg/m2) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Construction | Operation | End of Life | Timber | Concrete | Cement | ||
Harbin | RC | 1380.38 | 1380.38 | 28.50 | — | 24.34 | 8.37 |
Timber | 7844.13 | 7844.13 | 5.70 | 263.70 | 1.86 | 8.37 | |
Beijing | RC | 482.33 | 482.33 | 28.25 | — | 24.34 | 8.37 |
Timber | 7824.81 | 7824.81 | 5.65 | 263.70 | 1.86 | 8.37 | |
Shanghai | RC | 1333.46 | 1333.46 | 19.50 | — | 24.34 | 8.37 |
Timber | 7424.27 | 7424.27 | 3.90 | 263.70 | 1.86 | 8.37 | |
Guangzhou | RC | 438.54 | 438.54 | 16.75 | — | 24.34 | 8.37 |
Timber | 7194.74 | 7194.74 | 3.35 | 263.70 | 1.86 | 8.37 | |
Kunming | RC | 1104.24 | 1104.24 | 16.75 | — | 24.34 | 8.37 |
Timber | 4912.59 | 4912.59 | 3.35 | 263.70 | 1.86 | 8.37 |
Cities | Buildings | Carbon Emissions During Operation Phase (kg/m2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heating | Cooling | Lighting | Appliance | Water Heating | Total | ||
Harbin | RC Building | 2027.03 | 1635.19 | 1031.72 | 2402.14 | 748.04 | 7844.13 |
Timber Building | 1679.35 | 1683.49 | 1031.72 | 2402.14 | 748.04 | 7544.74 | |
Beijing | RC Building | 1040.12 | 2238.94 | 1022.67 | 2381.07 | 741.48 | 7424.27 |
Timber Building | 738.16 | 2311.36 | 1022.67 | 2381.07 | 741.48 | 7194.74 | |
Shanghai | RC Building | 437.53 | 1613.76 | 705.91 | 1643.57 | 511.82 | 4912.59 |
Timber Building | 327.44 | 1632.32 | 705.91 | 1643.57 | 511.82 | 4821.06 | |
Guangzhou | RC Building | 0.00 | 1709.04 | 606.36 | 1411.79 | 439.64 | 4166.83 |
Timber Building | 0.00 | 1721.07 | 606.36 | 1411.79 | 439.64 | 4178.85 | |
Kunming | RC Building | 40.30 | 661.79 | 606.36 | 1411.79 | 439.64 | 3159.87 |
Timber Building | 24.87 | 747.31 | 606.35 | 1411.79 | 439.64 | 3229.95 |
Cities | Energy Saving Potential | Carbon Reduction Potential | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
LCEA | Operation Phase | LCCA | Operation Phase | |
Harbin | 11.05% | 8.68% | 15.85% | 3.82% |
Beijing | 12.14% | 9.19% | 15.86% | 3.09% |
Shanghai | 8.15% | 4.12% | 18.88% | 1.86% |
Guangzhou | 4.61% | –0.29% | 19.22% | –0.29% |
Kunming | 4.62% | –1.76% | 22.47% | –2.22% |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dong, Y.; Qin, T.; Zhou, S.; Huang, L.; Bo, R.; Guo, H.; Yin, X. Comparative Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance of Reinforced Concrete and Timber Stadiums—A Case Study in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041566
Dong Y, Qin T, Zhou S, Huang L, Bo R, Guo H, Yin X. Comparative Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance of Reinforced Concrete and Timber Stadiums—A Case Study in China. Sustainability. 2020; 12(4):1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041566
Chicago/Turabian StyleDong, Yu, Tongyu Qin, Siyuan Zhou, Lu Huang, Rui Bo, Haibo Guo, and Xunzhi Yin. 2020. "Comparative Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction Performance of Reinforced Concrete and Timber Stadiums—A Case Study in China" Sustainability 12, no. 4: 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041566