2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The embodied air pollutant emissions and water footprints of buildings in China: a quantification using disaggregated input–output life cycle inventory model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 90 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such benchmark provides a macro-level perspective to examine the reliability of results obtained in present study. Given the emission intensity provided by Chang et al (2015) for the category of urban residential and office buildings, the result obtained from the uncertainty analysis framework in this study was also acceptable and reasonable. Process-based 0.645-0.887* Note: "RC" represents the reinforced concrete frame; "SF" represents the steel-framed structure "FSS"…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such benchmark provides a macro-level perspective to examine the reliability of results obtained in present study. Given the emission intensity provided by Chang et al (2015) for the category of urban residential and office buildings, the result obtained from the uncertainty analysis framework in this study was also acceptable and reasonable. Process-based 0.645-0.887* Note: "RC" represents the reinforced concrete frame; "SF" represents the steel-framed structure "FSS"…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Given the geographic and structural similarities of these buildings, the estimated GHG emission intensity was highly consistent with the findings summarized in Table 8, especially with the building cases analyzed in Shenzhen and Hong Kong. Chang et al (2015) conducted a disaggregated I-O analysis to quantify the GHG emission for different types of buildings at the national average level. Such benchmark provides a macro-level perspective to examine the reliability of results obtained in present study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Buildings, building materials, and systems are also evaluated [35][36][37][38]. Other more recent studies have focused on building renovation [39][40][41], prefabricated buildings [42,43], construction [42,44,45], hybrid building footprint [46], public buildings [47], operational carbon (heating), cooling, hot water, and embedded carbon (material supply, production, transport) [48,49]. The built environment is recognized as a major factor in resource use and environmental impacts.…”
Section: A Brief Litterature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In which the nonresidential buildings refer to plant, education, warehouse, office, commercial, hospital, hotel, and other buildings. The key building material categories are divided into steel, concrete, cement (non-concrete use), wood, brick, sand, gravel, limestone, glass, and ceramic tiles (Chang, 2016).…”
Section: Research Boundarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The primary referred data sources are standards of the consumption of major materials for construction projects (Building Construction Manual, 2003; Zhao et al, 2014), Statistical Yearbook (National Bureau of Statistics of the People's Republic of China. 2001-2017) and published literatures(Chang, 2016;Han and Xiang, 2013;Huang et al, 2013;Huang et al, 2017). The MI for residential buildings and non-residential buildings are shown inFig.2.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%