Explore the vast range of titles available.

Building energy modeling (BEM) has become increasingly used in building energy conservation research. Prototype building models are developed to represent the typical urban building characteristics of a specific building type, meteorological conditions, and construction year. This study included four residential buildings and 11 commercial buildings to represent nationwide building types in China. With consideration of five climate zones and different construction years corresponding to national standards, a total of 151 prototype building models were developed. The building envelope properties, occupancy and energy-related behaviors, and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system characteristics were defined according to the corresponding building energy efficiency design standards, HVAC design standards, and through other sources, such as questionnaire surveys, on-site measurements, and literature, which reflect the real situation of existing buildings in China. Based on the developed prototype buildings, a large database of 9225 models in 270 cities was further developed to facilitate users to simulate building energy in different cities. In conclusion, the developed prototype building models can represent realistic building characteristics and construction practices of the most common residential and commercial buildings in China, serving as an important foundation for BEM. The models can be used for analyses related to building energy conservation research on typical individual buildings, including energy-saving technologies, advanced controls, and new policies, and providing a reference for the development of building energy codes and standards.

The ideology of ensuring energy-efficient design and construction of buildings by providing minimum requirements is the core objective of this work. Energy audit was conducted to improve the design of the building with incremental requirements to further enhance the energy efficiency. The Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) has been modified extensively over the years, starting from its initial deployment in the year 2011 to its latest modifications in the year 2019. The energy conservation standards in ECBC apply to building envelope, heating ventilation, air conditioning, lighting, service water heating, and electric power distribution. It should also be ensured that all-electric systems, transformers, energy-efficient motors, and diesel generators must meet the regulated set of mandatory requirements. From among the various software types that have been approved for ECBC design and application, this study has employed Energy Plus software to simulate the design based on the given input and the selected location. The location that has been chosen for this study was Bhubaneshwar, India. All necessary details ranging from latitude, longitude, weather, time zone, elevation, building area, lighting, heating, cooling, and much more have been covered in the simulation. Utilizing ECBC regulated standards for an energy-efficient building design has resulted in an increase in the energy savings by 27.4%, and thus, the building qualifies to be regarded as an ECBC compliant building.

This book provides an introduction to the theory and design of composite structures of steel and concrete. Material applicable to both buildings and bridges is included, with more detailed information relating to structures for buildings. Throughout, the design methods are illustrated by calculations in accordance with the Eurocode for composite structures, EN 1994, Part 1-1, 'General rules and rules for buildings' and Part 1-2, 'Structural fire design', and their cross-references to ENs 1990 to 1993. The methods are stated and explained, so that no reference to Eurocodes is needed. The use of Eurocodes has been required in the UK since 2010 for building and bridge structures that are publicly funded. Their first major revision began in 2015, with the new versions due in the early 2020s. Both authors are involved in the work on Eurocode 4.

Because of its low cost, its ease of use and relative robustness to misuse, its versatility, and its local availability, concrete is by far the most widely used building material in the world today. Intrinsically, concrete has a very low energy and carbon footprint compared to most other materials. However, the volume of Portland cement required for concrete construction makes the cement industry a large emitter of CO 2 . The International Energy Agency recently proposed a global CO 2 reduction plan. This plan has three main elements: long term CO 2 targets, a sectorial approach based on the lowest cost to society, and technology roadmaps that demonstrate the means to achieve the CO 2 reductions. For the cement industry, this plan calls for a reduction in CO 2 emissions from 2 Gt in 2007 to 1.55 Gt in 2050, while over the same period cement production is projected to increase by about 50 %. The authors of the cement industry roadmap point out that the extrapolation of existing technologies (fuel efficiency, alternative fuels and biomass, and clinker substitution) will only take us half the way towards these goals. According to the roadmap, the industry will have to rely on costly and unproven carbon capture and storage technologies for the other half of the required reduction. This will result in significant additional costs for society. Most of the CO 2 footprint of cement is due to the decarbonation of limestone during the clinkering process. Designing new clinkers that require less limestone is one means to significantly reduce the CO 2 footprint of cement and concrete. A new class of clinkers described in this paper can reduce CO 2 emissions by 20 to 30 % when compared to the manufacture of traditional PC Clinker.

Building materials can be exposed to microorganisms (mainly bacteria, fungi and algae) in almost every aqueous medium or damp environment, water being the indispensable condition for life development. The activity of microorganisms can be responsible for mineralogical, chemical and microstructural damage to the material (biodeterioration). Deleterious effects can also concern the aesthetics of a building (proliferation of colored biological stains on façades and roofs) or the quality of indoor air (presence of microorganisms in damp buildings). However, microorganisms can also have positive effects (healing of materials) and their action is explored through the development of bio-based protective systems intended for building materials. In all cases, understanding interactions between building materials and microorganisms is an indispensable step toward the development of more sustainable, better quality, safer structures in many environments. This paper presents two examples where the action of microorganisms has—or is likely to have—strong impact on the durability and safety of concrete structures. The first example concerns the biodeterioration of concrete in agricultural and agro-food environments. The second example is that of the abiotic and biotic reactivity of nitrates in repository of intermediate-level long-lived nuclear wastes. The paper presents the approaches used to explore and understand the phenomenology of bio-geo-chemical interactions in these complex environments. These studies notably comprise the development of test methods and experimental pilots to enable these explorations to be carried out. Current shortcomings in the scientific literature and in the standardization environment are also highlighted.

PurposeWith a contribution of 39% to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, reducing the environmental impacts of buildings plays an undisputed role in achieving climate goals. Therefore, the development of projects with a low carbon footprint is of crucial importance. Although several active and passive solutions as well as design strategies have been developed, identifying critical levers to minimise GHG emissions and the cost of future building projects is still a problem faced every day by designers.MethodsMotivated by this knowledge gap in this study, we conducted a life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) of a residential building situated in Austria. To identify the critical levers for reducing impacts and cost, 37 scenarios with three different advanced energetic standards are created. The scenarios with the various standards are developed through the combination of different construction materials, insulation materials and technical building equipment. In the eco-efficiency assessment (LCA and LCCA), a reference study period of 50 years is assumed. The life cycle of the building scenarios was analysed according to the European standard EN-15978.ResultsResults show that improving the energetic standard does not yield an overall cost savings potential. The additional construction cost (23%) for energy efficiency measures, including thermal insulation and change of technical building equipment, is higher than the reduction potential in operating cost over 50 years. On the other hand, the improvement of energetic standards allows a reduction of the environmental impacts by 25%.ConclusionsTo ensure a cost-optimal environmental improvement of buildings, it is crucial to conduct an eco-efficiency assessment during the design process of energy-efficient buildings. This study shows how improving the energetic standard of buildings can reduce environmental impacts with slightly increased life cycle cost.

PurposeThis research aims to propose a comparative environmental analysis of conventional and prefabricated construction techniques utilizing a building information modelling (BIM) technique.Design/methodology/approachA set of indicators are selected to assess the environmental emissions throughout the construction life cycle, based on BIM platform. An existing project involving ten apartment buildings in Shanghai is selected as a case study.FindingsThe results reveal that prefabricated construction demonstrates environment-friendly performance with some exceptions of acidification and mineral resource consumption. Environmental impacts can also be further reduced by increasing the projected area ratio and percentage of project prefabrication.Originality/valueOverall, the proposed method can be used to identify relevant environmental merits and for decision-making of appropriate construction techniques in building construction projects.

In this study, we critically examine the potential of recycled construction materials, focusing on how these materials can significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy usage in the construction sector. By adopting an integrated approach that combines Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Material Flow Analysis (MFA) within the circular economy framework, we thoroughly examine the lifecycle environmental performance of these materials. Our findings reveal a promising future where incorporating recycled materials in construction can significantly lower GHG emissions and conserve energy. This underscores their crucial role in advancing sustainable construction practices. Moreover, our study emphasizes the need for robust regulatory frameworks and technological innovations to enhance the adoption of environmentally responsible practices. We encourage policymakers, industry stakeholders, and the academic community to collaborate and promote the adoption of a circular economy strategy in the building sector. Our research contributes to the ongoing discussion on sustainable construction, offering evidence-based insights that can inform future policies and initiatives to improve environmental stewardship in the construction industry. This study aligns with the European Union’s objectives of achieving climate-neutral cities by 2030 and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals outlined for completion by 2030. Overall, this paper contributes to the ongoing dialogue on sustainable construction, providing a fact-driven basis for future policy and initiatives to enhance environmental stewardship in the industry.

PurposeLife cycle assessment (LCA) is an internationally accepted method to assess the environmental impacts of buildings. A major methodological challenge remains the modelling of the end-of-life stage of buildings and allocation of benefits and burdens between systems. Various approaches are hence applied in practice to date. This paper compares the two methods widely renowned in Europe—the EC product environmental footprint (PEF) method and the CEN standards: EN 15804+A1 and EN15978—and offers insights about their fitness for achieving circularity goals.MethodsThe EC PEF method and the CEN EN 15804/EN 15978 standards were methodologically analysed with a focus on the end-of-life modelling and allocation approach and were applied to a building case study. The EN 15804+A1 standard explains the guidelines but does not offer a modelling formula. Accordingly, this paper proposes a formula for the CEN standards using identical parameters as in the end-of-life circular footprint formula (CFF) of the EC PEF Guidance v6.3 to increase consistency among LCA studies. The calculation formulas were then applied to a newly constructed office building. A comparative analysis of both the implementation and results are described, and recommendations are formulated.ResultsIn the absence of databases compatible with the two LCA methods and comprising all building products, the Ecoinvent datasets had to be remodelled to enable a comparative modular assessment. This proved to be a laborious process. The EC PEF method and CEN standards showed similar impacts and hotspots for the case study building. The module D in the CEN standards includes a significant share of positive impacts, but due to collective accounting, it does not clearly communicate these benefits. The summation of burdens and benefits in the EC PEF method reduces its transparency, while the allocation and quality factors enable this method to better capture the market realities and drive circular economy goals.ConclusionsThe construction sector and the LCI database developers are encouraged to create the missing LCA databases compatible with the modular and end-of-life allocation modelling requirements of both methods. More prescriptive and meticulous guidelines, with further harmonization between the EC PEF method and the CEN standards and their end-of-life allocation formula, would largely increase comparability and reliability of LCA studies and communications. To improve transparency, it is recommended to report the module D impacts per life cycle stage as per the CEN standards and the burdens and benefits separately for each life cycle stage as per the EC PEF method.