An Investigation into GHG and non-GHG Impacts of Double Skin Facades in Office Refurbishments

被引:17
作者
Pomponi, Francesco [1 ]
Piroozfar, Poorang A. E. [2 ,3 ]
Farr, Eric R. P.
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Trumpington St, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, England
[2] Univ Brighton, BEACON Res Ctr, Brighton, E Sussex, England
[3] Univ Brighton, Sch Environm & Technol, Brighton, E Sussex, England
关键词
building energy use; demand-side technology; double skin facade; environmental impact assessment; life cycle assessment (LCA); low-carbon refurbishment; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; EMBODIED ENERGY MEASUREMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE; CARBON FOOTPRINT; ASSESSMENT LCA; BUILDINGS; CONSTRUCTION; OPTIMIZATION; PARAMETERS; EFFICIENCY;
D O I
10.1111/jiec.12368
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The building sector is a major contributor to energy consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and depletion of natural resources. In developed countries, existing buildings represent the majority of the stock, their low-carbon refurbishment hence being one of the most sensible ways to mitigate GHG emissions and reduce environmental impacts of the construction sector. This article has investigated and established the GHG and non-GHG life cycle impacts of several double skin facade (DSF) configurations for office refurbishments by means of a parametric comparative life cycle assessment against up-to-standard single skin facade (SSF) refurbishment solutions. Two different methods were used to assess both GHG emissions and other environmental impacts. Results show that if, on the one hand, most of the DSF configurations assessed actually reduce GHG emissions compared to SSFs over their life cyclethus supporting a wider adoption of DSFs for low-carbon refurbishmentson the other hand, there exist non-negligible ecological and environmental impacts that the DSF generates, specifically in terms of some materials of the structure and their final disposal. Research attention is thus needed regarding the environmental impacts of the materials used for DSFs and not only in minimizing the energy consumption of the operational phase.
引用
收藏
页码:234 / 248
页数:15
相关论文
共 87 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2012, CIBSE GUID F EN EFF
[2]  
[Anonymous], BUILD FUT TOD TRANSF
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2006, 14044 ISO
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2013, WORKING GROUP 1 CONT
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2013, INT J SUST BUILD TEC, DOI DOI 10.1080/2093761X.2012.759890
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Ecoinvent Report 1(v3)
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2011, PAS 20502011 SPECIFI
[8]   Energy and environmental benefits in public buildings as a result of retrofit actions [J].
Ardente, Fulvio ;
Beccali, Marco ;
Cellura, Maurizio ;
Mistretta, Marina .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2011, 15 (01) :460-470
[9]   Life cycle assessment of electricity production from renewable energies: Review and results harmonization [J].
Asdrubali, Francesco ;
Baldinelli, Giorgio ;
D'Alessandro, Francesco ;
Scrucca, Flavio .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2015, 42 :1113-1122
[10]   Life cycle analysis in refurbishment of the buildings as intervention practices in energy saving [J].
Badea, Nicolae ;
George-Vlad, Badea .
ENERGY AND BUILDINGS, 2015, 86 :74-85