ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Climate change has become a considerable concern for humanity during this anthropocentric era. Scientists believe that the rate of global warming and climate change varies directly with the increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide. Urbanization is happening at a higher rate in this era than in any other generation. It was reported that the building sector plays a critical role in the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. Construction of buildings, operation, and utilization of the built environment has led to emissions of a large number of CO2 into the ambient air. Various issues and challenges arise from the building sector in reducing CO2 emissions. The exploitation of non-renewable energy resources, poor building design, and lack of sustainability consideration in urbanization has been holding back CO2 emission mitigation measures in the building sector. Therefore, CO2 emission mitigation plans and schemes are necessary alongside standardized frameworks and guidelines. The strategies to reduce CO2 in the building sector are enforcing standards and policy, conducting impact assessment, adopting low carbon technology, and restricting energy utilization. All stakeholders must play their roles efficiently to reduce CO2 emissions and aid in the fight against climate change.
Content may be subject to copyright.
sustainability
Commentary
Issues, Impacts, and Mitigations of Carbon Dioxide
Emissions in the Building Sector
Khozema Ahmed Ali, Mardiana Idayu Ahmad * and Yusri Yusup *
Environmental Technology Division, School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia,
Penang 11800, Malaysia; khozema@usm.my
*Correspondence: mardianaidayu@usm.my (M.I.A.); yusriy@usm.my (Y.Y.)
Received: 12 August 2020; Accepted: 31 August 2020; Published: 10 September 2020


Abstract:
Climate change has become a considerable concern for humanity during this anthropocentric
era. Scientists believe that the rate of global warming and climate change varies directly with the
increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide. Urbanization is
happening at a higher rate in this era than in any other generation. It was reported that the building
sector plays a critical role in the emission of carbon dioxide (CO
2
) into the atmosphere. Construction of
buildings, operation, and utilization of the built environment has led to emissions of a large number
of CO
2
into the ambient air. Various issues and challenges arise from the building sector in reducing
CO
2
emissions. The exploitation of non-renewable energy resources, poor building design, and lack of
sustainability consideration in urbanization has been holding back CO
2
emission mitigation measures
in the building sector. Therefore, CO
2
emission mitigation plans and schemes are necessary alongside
standardized frameworks and guidelines. The strategies to reduce CO
2
in the building sector are
enforcing standards and policy, conducting impact assessment, adopting low carbon technology,
and restricting energy utilization. All stakeholders must play their roles eciently to reduce CO
2
emissions and aid in the fight against climate change.
Keywords: CO2emissions; building sector; impacts; mitigations
1. Introduction
The increasing average atmospheric temperature has led to global warming, which drives a set of
changes to the Earth’s climate and weather systems. These swift changes are happening as humans
continue to emit heat-trapping greenhouse gases (GHG) to the atmosphere [
1
]. Among these emissions,
carbon dioxide (CO
2
) is the critical anthropogenic greenhouse gas due to its abundance and its ability
to remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years [2].
CO
2
emissions can be from natural and human sources. One of these sources originates from the
urbanization process. Urbanization is a dynamic process that changes rural areas into urban areas
with an increasing number of people and the expansion of the built environment horizontally and
vertically. The built environment is the anthropogenic surroundings that provide infrastructure and
facilities for human activities, and they are the fundamental components of the economy and social
development of a nation. Thus, the acceleration of urbanization played a considerable role in rising
CO2emissions in the building sector.
In general, the building sector ranges from construction to operation, which can be further divided
into residential and non-residential buildings. These include the processes of adding structures to areas
of land and the operation, service, and maintenance of the building. With the building sector facing
a resurgence in growth, a massive direct and indirect impact on the environment has been reported.
It is considered as one of the significantly consuming and waste generating sectors of the economy [
3
].
The environmental impact of this sector can be categorized into ecosystem impacts, natural resource
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427; doi:10.3390/su12187427 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 2 of 11
impacts, and public impacts [
4
]. This sector is also responsible for significant energy consumption and
emission production, such as GHG emissions, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,
and nitrogen oxide [
5
]. As a result of the energy consumption from this sector, the ambient CO
2
level
has increased, which generates enormous proportions of CO
2
emissions [
6
,
7
]. Sources of CO
2
emissions
in this sector can be from the energy utilization required for the manufacturing and transportation of
the building materials to the processing of resources, construction waste disposal, and the demands of
construction equipment [8].
The building sector consumes a substantial portion of non-renewable energy and prompts the
emission of a significant amount of CO
2
[
9
]. Building contributes approximately 39% of the annual
global CO
2
[
10
] (Figure 1). It has been reported that more than a third of the usage of total energy
and CO
2
emissions is a result of the building sector in the developed and developing nations [
11
].
Therefore, CO
2
emission mitigation measures are crucial [
12
]. To promote CO
2
emission mitigation,
planning on conservation of energy, and implementation of strategies to reduce potential emission
mitigation should be prioritized [
13
]. This paper aims to provide an overview of the issues, impacts,
and mitigation strategies in the building sector to reduce and control CO2emissions.
Sustainability2020,12,xFORPEERREVIEW2of12
intoecosystemimpacts,naturalresourceimpacts,andpublicimpacts[4].Thissectorisalso
responsibleforsignificantenergyconsumptionandemissionproduction,suchasGHGemissions,
particulatematter,sulfurdioxide,carbonmonoxide,andnitrogenoxide[5].Asaresultoftheenergy
consumptionfromthissector,theambientCO
2
levelhasincreased,whichgeneratesenormous
proportionsofCO
2
emissions[6,7].SourcesofCO
2
emissionsinthissectorcanbefromtheenergy
utilizationrequiredforthemanufacturingandtransportationofthebuildingmaterialstothe
processingofresources,constructionwastedisposal,andthedemandsofconstructionequipment
[8].
Thebuildingsectorconsumesasubstantialportionofnonrenewableenergyandpromptsthe
emissionofasignificantamountofCO
2
[9].Buildingcontributesapproximately39%oftheannual
globalCO
2
[10](Figure1).Ithasbeenreportedthatmorethanathirdoftheusageoftotalenergyand
CO
2
emissionsisaresultofthebuildingsectorinthedevelopedanddevelopingnations[11].
Therefore,CO
2
emissionmitigationmeasuresarecrucial[12].TopromoteCO
2
emissionmitigation,
planningonconservationofenergy,andimplementationofstrategiestoreducepotentialemission
mitigationshouldbeprioritized[13].Thispaperaimstoprovideanoverviewoftheissues,impacts,
andmitigationstrategiesinthebuildingsectortoreduceandcontrolCO
2
emissions.
Figure1.GlobalCO
2
emissionbysectors.
2.IssuesandChallenges
Thechallengeinsustainablyadvancingthebuildingsectoristheincreasinglylargeoutflowsof
CO
2
duetotheutilizationofnonsustainableenergysourcesintheplanning,construction,and
operationsofbuildings[9].CO
2
isalsoemittedfromthebroadutilizationoflandintheurbanization
process[11].Theenergysourcedfromfossilfuelsisnonsustainable,andyetitaccountsforalarge
percentageoftheenergyusedintheconstructionandoperationprocesses.Sustainableorrenewable
energysourcesonlyaccountfor6%ofthetotalenergyusedinthesector,whilefossilfuelusedin
constructionactivitiesaccountsfor40%ofworldwidegreenhousegasemissions.Although
numerousnovelmethodshavebeenproposedtolessentheCO
2
footprintofbuildings,particularly
inhighdensityurbancommunities,thechallengehasyettobesolvedappreciably[14].
Theutilizationofanonsustainableenergysourcedirectlyaffectstheenvironment,anditis
directlyproportionaltotheamountused.TheconstructionofabuildingemitsCO
2
,bothdirectlyand
indirectly.DirectCO
2
emissionsoriginatefromtheburningofnaturalgas,diesel,lightfueloil,and
otheroilbasedcommodities,whileindirectCO
2
emissionscomefromtheapplicationofelectricity.
Globally,theindirectCO
2
emissionaccountsfor85%ofthetotalCO
2
emitted,whileonly14%isfrom
directemissions.
Figure 1. Global CO2emission by sectors.
2. Issues and Challenges
The challenge in sustainably advancing the building sector is the increasingly large outflows of CO
2
due to the utilization of non-sustainable energy sources in the planning, construction, and operations
of buildings [
9
]. CO
2
is also emitted from the broad utilization of land in the urbanization process [
11
].
The energy sourced from fossil fuels is non-sustainable, and yet it accounts for a large percentage of the
energy used in the construction and operation processes. Sustainable or renewable energy sources only
account for 6% of the total energy used in the sector, while fossil fuel used in construction activities
accounts for 40% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Although numerous novel methods have
been proposed to lessen the CO
2
footprint of buildings, particularly in high-density urban communities,
the challenge has yet to be solved appreciably [14].
The utilization of a non-sustainable energy source directly aects the environment, and it is
directly proportional to the amount used. The construction of a building emits CO
2
, both directly
and indirectly. Direct CO
2
emissions originate from the burning of natural gas, diesel, light fuel oil,
and other oil-based commodities, while indirect CO
2
emissions come from the application of electricity.
Globally, the indirect CO
2
emission accounts for 85% of the total CO
2
emitted, while only 14% is from
direct emissions.
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 3 of 11
The 2030 Climate and Energy Framework states that 27% of energy should be sourced from
sustainable energy sources, while energy eciency or productivity should increase by 27% [
15
].
However, there are challenges in finding sustainable solutions to low productivity and eciency.
One solution is to itemize the processes of construction and operation so that detailed evaluations
can be carried out. Construction includes the assembly of the building material, the development
of the structure and foundation, and the transportation and operation of machinery. The procedure
comprises the maintenance aspect of the building and its infrastructure. The evaluation of the life cycle
requires a detailed inventory of these processes in all phases of the building’s life. The assessment
would highlight strategies that could be made more productive and ecient.
3. Impacts and Consequences
It is well-known that CO
2
emissions contribute to global warming and climate change, which can
significantly cause severe impacts and consequences for humans and the environment. CO
2
emissions
act like a blanket in the air, trapping heat in the atmosphere, and warming up the Earth [
11
]. This layer
prevents the Earth from cooling, and thus raises global temperatures.
Global warming would aect environmental conditions, food and water supplies, weather pattern,
and sea levels. Based on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Global
Climate Summary, it stated that combined land and ocean temperature since 1880 has increased with
an average rate of 0.07
C per decade. The temperature continues rising since 1981, with an average
rate of 0.18 C, which is over twice as massive as previous times.
Figure 2illustrates the impact of CO
2
emissions as a result of rising global temperatures. The release
of CO
2
alters water supplies and changes harvesting seasons. For instance, climate change undermines
coastal and marine regions with rising ocean levels, which triggers a rising demand for food crops.
CO
2
also causes acid rain, which physically damages trees [
16
] and the built environment [
17
,
18
].
These impacts and consequences of CO
2
emissions can be seen now. They extend well beyond the
rising global temperatures, which is aecting ecological systems and communities across the world.
Sustainability2020,12,xFORPEERREVIEW3of12
The2030ClimateandEnergyFrameworkstatesthat27%ofenergyshouldbesourcedfrom
sustainableenergysources,whileenergyefficiencyorproductivityshouldincreaseby27%[15].
However,therearechallengesinfindingsustainablesolutionstolowproductivityandefficiency.
Onesolutionistoitemizetheprocessesofconstructionandoperationsothatdetailedevaluations
canbecarriedout.Constructionincludestheassemblyofthebuildingmaterial,thedevelopmentof
thestructureandfoundation,andthetransportationandoperationofmachinery.Theprocedure
comprisesthemaintenanceaspectofthebuildinganditsinfrastructure.Theevaluationofthelife
cyclerequiresadetailedinventoryoftheseprocessesinallphasesofthebuildingʹslife.The
assessmentwouldhighlightstrategiesthatcouldbemademoreproductiveandefficient.
3.ImpactsandConsequences
ItiswellknownthatCO2emissionscontributetoglobalwarmingandclimatechange,which
cansignificantlycausesevereimpactsandconsequencesforhumansandtheenvironment.CO2
emissionsactlikeablanketintheair,trappingheatintheatmosphere,andwarminguptheEarth
[11].ThislayerpreventstheEarthfromcooling,andthusraisesglobaltemperatures.
Globalwarmingwouldaffectenvironmentalconditions,foodandwatersupplies,weather
pattern,andsealevels.BasedontheNationalOceanicandAtmosphericAdministration(NOAA)
GlobalClimateSummary,itstatedthatcombinedlandandoceantemperaturesince1880has
increasedwithanaveragerateof0.07°Cperdecade.Thetemperaturecontinuesrisingsince1981,
withanaveragerateof0.18°C,whichisovertwiceasmassiveasprevioustimes.
Figure2illustratestheimpactofCO2emissionsasaresultofrisingglobaltemperatures.The
releaseofCO2alterswatersuppliesandchangesharvestingseasons.Forinstance,climatechange
underminescoastalandmarineregionswithrisingoceanlevels,whichtriggersarisingdemandfor
foodcrops.CO2alsocausesacidrain,whichphysicallydamagestrees[16]andthebuiltenvironment
[17,18].TheseimpactsandconsequencesofCO2emissionscanbeseennow.Theyextendwellbeyond
therisingglobaltemperatures,whichisaffectingecologicalsystemsandcommunitiesacrossthe
world.
Figure2.ImpactsandconsequencesofCO2emissionsontheenvironment.
Figure 2. Impacts and consequences of CO2emissions on the environment.
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 4 of 11
4. Strategies and Way Forward
Over the past two decades, governments and policymakers have been urged to take action to
mitigate CO
2
emissions in various sectors [
12
]. This section discusses several strategies to reduce CO
2
emissions in response to concerns on the global warming challenge in the building sector (Figure 3).
These strategies can be applied at various scales towards CO2emissions reduction.
Sustainability2020,12,xFORPEERREVIEW4of12
4.StrategiesandWayForward
Overthepasttwodecades,governmentsandpolicymakershavebeenurgedtotakeactionto
mitigateCO2emissionsinvarioussectors[12].ThissectiondiscussesseveralstrategiestoreduceCO2
emissionsinresponsetoconcernsontheglobalwarmingchallengeinthebuildingsector(Figure3).
ThesestrategiescanbeappliedatvariousscalestowardsCO2emissionsreduction.
Figure3.StrategiesinreducingCO2emissionsinthebuildingsector.
4.1.StandardsandPolicy
Manysustainablebuildingstandards,codes,policies,andguidelinespackageshavebeen
introducedinmanycountriesacrosstheworld,whichaimtoimprovebuildingenergyperformance
andreduceCO2emissions.UndertheParisAgreementcommitmentandtheUnitedNations
SustainableDevelopmentGoals,NationallyDeterminedContribution(NDC)wassetupin2015for
thedecarbonizationofthebuildingsector.Atotalof184countriesparticipatedintheNDC.
Governmentshavetakeninitiativesinthedecarbonizationofthebuildingsectorthroughthe
establishmentofpoliciesandstandards.Table1summarizesexistingstandardsandpolicies
committedbyselectedcountriesunderthisstrategy,thatincorporatethereductionofCO2emissions
intheirgoalsandobjectives.Thesepackagessetminimumrequirementsforenergyperformanceand
efficiencyinbuildingstowardszeroorlowcarbonbuildings.Therearemorethan60countries
worldwidethatinitiatedplanstoimplementtheseeithermandatorilyorvoluntarily[19,20].

Figure 3. Strategies in reducing CO2emissions in the building sector.
4.1. Standards and Policy
Many sustainable building standards, codes, policies, and guidelines packages have been
introduced in many countries across the world, which aim to improve building energy performance
and reduce CO
2
emissions. Under the Paris Agreement commitment and the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals, Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) was set up in 2015 for the
decarbonization of the building sector. A total of 184 countries participated in the NDC. Governments
have taken initiatives in the decarbonization of the building sector through the establishment of policies
and standards. Table 1summarizes existing standards and policies committed by selected countries
under this strategy, that incorporate the reduction of CO
2
emissions in their goals and objectives.
These packages set minimum requirements for energy performance and eciency in buildings towards
zero or low carbon buildings. There are more than 60 countries worldwide that initiated plans to
implement these either mandatorily or voluntarily [19,20].
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 5 of 11
Table 1.
Existing standards associated with the reduction of CO
2
emissions in buildings as part of
prioritizing action on the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), which was set up in 2015 under
the Paris Agreement commitment and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
Country Standards or Policies
China
The Energy Consumption of Buildings standard was introduced by the Ministry of
Housing and Urban-Rural Development in 2016. This standard covers indicators of energy
use for various building types. It aims to limit the amount of building sector energy
consumption of the country and simultaneously limit the total CO2emissions.
Australia
The Australian Federal Government launched the National Carbon Oset Standard for
Buildings in 2017. It was established in collaboration with the Green Building Council
Australia. The main objective of the standard is to provide to measure, reduce, oset,
report, and audit CO2emissions from building operations.
India
A policy was introduced in 2016 as part of the Energy Conservation Act of 2001, which is
aimed at commercial buildings under the Perform, Achieve, and Trade (PAT) program.
It had saved about 9 million tons of oil equivalent (Mtoe) of final energy, thereby reducing
annual CO2emissions by nearly 23 MtCO2. The Energy Conservation Building Code
(ECBC) was updated in 2017 for commercial buildings that recognized improvement
eorts towards decarbonization. In 2018, the first national model building energy code
called the Energy Conservation Building Code for Residential Buildings was introduced
with simple enforcement of thermal comfort and passive system improvement.
European Union
As part of the Clean Energy for all European policy package set in 2016, the European
Commission targets to combat climate change contributed by GHGs, including CO2
emissions, through proposals on energy eciency, energy market, and renewable energy
strategies. An amendment to the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) was
published in 2018 to achieve high-energy eciency and be decarbonized by 2050.
Sweden
In 2016, the Centre for Sustainable Construction was created under a Swedish Government
policy to promote the usage of sustainable materials and energy-ecient renovations,
which could also reduce CO2emissions. In 2019, a certification scheme addressing the
environmental impact of a new building was introduced.
Japan
In 2017, the act on the Improvement of Energy Consumption Performance of Buildings
(Building Energy Eciency Act) was introduced, which includes regulatory measures for
mandatory compliance with energy eciency standards for non-residential buildings.
This act is part of the Japanese government policy on the zero-energy-building
[ZEB]/zero-energy-house [ZEH] system to be achieved by 2030.
Canada
In 2016, tighter energy performance standards for energy-using product categories in
buildings were introduced. New building energy codes have been planned to be
introduced in 2022 as part of the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate
Change to increase energy eciency in existing buildings. In 2019, the Government of
Canada was working to develop a net-zero-energy-ready building code to support the aim
of implementing building energy use labeling.
Germany In 2019, a package of emission mitigation measures by the German government was
formed to meet the requirement of Agenda 2030 in the building sector.
USA
In 2018, the California 2019 Building Energy Eciency Standards was introduced as the
first code in the USA. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
was established in 2018 to increase the overall eciency and sustainability of buildings.
Nigeria
In 2017, the first building energy code was introduced with a partnership between the
German Development Agency (GIZ) and the Nigerian Energy Support Program with the
aim of a set of minimum standards for energy-ecient building construction in Nigeria.
Singapore
In 2016, the Code on Environmental Sustainability Measures for Existing Buildings was
launched in 2016 for existing non-residential buildings within Singapore’s Building
Control Regulations.
Switzerland
In 2018, Switzerland’s new Energy Act came into force, intending to increase energy
eciency in buildings towards decarbonization. Including the use of a CO2tax on
stationary fuels (heating and industry). Under the Act, CO2tax and subsidizing of
geothermal energy have been introduced. A Federal Act on Reduction of CO2Emissions
was revised in 2019 to implement NDC in the building sector.
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 6 of 11
In China, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) has introduced the Emission
Trading Scheme (ETS) to support CO
2
emission mitigation. For the building sector, the Ministry of
Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD) has advised the Green Building Action Plan
to encourage energy-saving systems on municipal buildings, shopping malls, workplaces, etc. [
21
].
In 2008, the “Guidelines to Account for and Report on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals
for Buildings,” were published in Hong Kong, targeted to help to build owners to evaluate their
GHG emission level. Since 2015, the companies, which are listed in the Stock Exchange of Hong
Kong (SEHK), are obligated to reveal the annual environmental and social information according to
the Companies Ordinance. Explicitly, environmental subjects cover emissions, consumptions, and
environmental impacts [
22
]. The Building Energy Eciency Ordinance (BEEO) was legislated in 2012,
involving owners of commercial buildings to conduct an energy audit based on the Energy Audit Code
for their central building services installation every ten years.
In Japan, large building holders were encouraged to implement energy-saving practices and
environmentally friendly designs via the Green Building Program launched by the Tokyo Metropolitan
in 2002 [
21
]. While for oces, commercial, standard and industrial buildings, there was a Tokyo
Cap-and-Trade Program of Japan presented in 2010, targeted to reduce energy consumption. In America,
the concern of CO
2
emission has led to the implementation of policies by the local, state, and federal
governments. One of the programs implemented by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification [
23
]. The LEED certification
oers many advantages in building construction and technologies practices, such as water eciency
and materials and resources [
24
]. Many of the U.S federal government bodies use LEED certification as
the building benchmark. According to USGBC, more than 273 regulatory policies have been enacted by
the city, county, and state level to encourage LEED certification of the commercial building [
25
]. In 2006,
a memorandum of understanding (MOU) was made in the USA that provided a voluntary guideline
for high-performing and sustainable buildings. Based on that, Executive order 13,423 (2007) required
all construction of new federal buildings to comply with the MOU. Fund amounting to $31 billion was
granted to green building and conservation under the Energy Policy Act of 2009. Most of the state and
local green building policies mandate LEED certification for a specific sector. For example, government
buildings in 23 countries, 30 counties, and 170 cities are required to meet the LEED certification
requirement. Sixty cities, including Connecticut, require significant commercial buildings to obtain at
least silver LEED certification. Policies, including incentives and symbolic gestures, are summarized
by Matisoand Noonan [24].
4.2. Adopting Low Carbon Technology
Low carbon technology is one of the technical strategies that can be adopted in buildings to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions. Low carbon technology refers to the technology that has a minimal output
of GHG emissions into the environment, specifically for CO
2
emissions [
26
]. Examples of renewable
and sustainable energy technologies are evaporative cooling, passive ventilation and cooling, solar
photovoltaic, dehumidification, and energy recovery systems. These technologies have been proven
to significantly help to decrease emissions and promote energy savings in buildings. Through low
carbon technology, the development of basic strategy requirements of innovation-driven development
in the building can also be achieved [
27
]. However, the downside of the low carbon technology
implementation is it might increase the operation cost of buildings. Therefore, systematic consideration
should be addressed carefully to ensure the balance between the reduction of CO
2
emissions and
investment of the technology.
4.3. Restriction Strategy
Closing down the operation in particular areas and shutting down associated devices is a
straightforward approach to minimizing the CO
2
emissions and energy utilization in buildings.
The most accessible practice is to keep the doors closed and switching othe lights and electrical
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 7 of 11
appliances of vacant rooms. It is defined as the restriction strategy when this is practiced in public
buildings. Most of the public buildings, such as teaching blocks, libraries, and fitness centers, have been
grouped into several sections according to the usage rate. In these public buildings, restriction strategy
is achievable if unused areas are closed, and users have to gather in certain permitted areas to share
the services. Hence, energy consumption is reduced. A study reported the linkage between building
occupant rate and energy consumption in their study [
28
]. A significant decline in lighting and heating
energy consumption per capita with the increase of occupant rate has been displayed.
Nevertheless, when the occupant rate increases, it might lead to the dissatisfaction of occupants.
In general, high occupant rates usually reduce air quality, ultimately aecting the operational
eectiveness of the occupants. Therefore, the major obstacle of the restriction strategy is energy
conservation refuting the occupants’ satisfaction.
4.4. Impact Assessment of Building Process and Materials
Understanding the entire building process is very important in mitigating CO
2
emissions.
These processes include extraction, manufacturing, transportation, construction, maintenance,
and disposal. Wide ranges of material are utilized in buildings that use energy and release CO
2
through
its life cycle, which is regarded as embodied energy and embodied carbon. As part of mitigation
measures, assessment of embodied carbon of building materials is one of the fundamental approaches
that can have a positive impact on carbon footprint. The selection of appropriate sustainable building
materials can reduce about 30% of embodied CO
2
emissions over a lifespan of the building [
29
,
30
].
Through this assessment, it has been reported that reinforced concrete and clay bricks are the most
carbon-emitting materials leading to approximately 60% to 70% of the total embodied carbon [
31
,
32
].
Detailed inventories on building materials and embodied carbon are presented in Hammond and
Jones [
33
,
34
]. Besides, to reduce CO
2
emissions or meet the emissions targets, sustainable or low
carbon materials can be considered in the manufacturing process. Low carbon cement, timber, straw,
and compressed Earth, which has lower carbon footprints are some excellent alternatives.
Therefore, it is necessary to discover the primary building materials that have an apparent
influence on the environment and include them in the sustainability assessment scope. This discovery
could simplify the evaluation method and attain quick environmental impact assessment. Analysis of
CO
2
emissions, weight, cost, and energy consumption of building materials is shown in Table 2[
35
].
The (kg CO
2
e/m
2
) is a functional unit used for the carbon emission of building material in the embodied
stage. This functional unit provides a benchmark value so that the carbon emission values for buildings
of dierent sizes are consistent and could be compared [
36
]. The calculation for CO
2
emissions was
conducted by the quota method using this formula (Equation (1)):
QCMg =
n
X
i=1
CMri ×mi(1)
where,
QCMg is the CO2emission equivalent released in the building material production process.
CMri
is the carbon emission factor in the production process of the building material without
considering recycling.
miis the amount of building material.
As for energy consumption, the formula (Equation (2)) used to calculate the value is:
QEMe =
n
X
i=1
EMri ×mi(2)
where,
QEMe is the energy consumption for the building material in the production process.
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 8 of 11
EMri
is the energy factor of the building material during the production process without
considering recycling.
Finally, the cost of the building material in the embodied stage is calculated using this formula
(Equation (3)):
QTCMc =
n
X
i=1
UCMri ×mi(3)
where,
QTCMc is the total cost of building material in the embodied stage.
UCMri is the unit cost of a building material without considering recycling.
The carbon emission factors, the energy factors, and the unit cost of the building materials are
reported in the previous studies [
37
40
]. From this study, mortar, commercial concrete, wall materials,
steel and doors, and windows contribute to about 80% of carbon emission. Thus, CO
2
emissions
of buildings should be identified and analyzed from the necessary structural forms. Hence mortar,
commercial concrete, wall materials, and steel should be given more attention when implementing
CO2emission mitigation measures.
Table 2. CO2emissions, weight, cost, and the energy consumption of building materials [35].
Materials CO2Emissions
(kgCO2e/m2)
Weight
(kg/m2)
Cost (RMB/m2;
USD/m2; EUR/m2)
Energy Consumption
(MJ/m2)
Steel 142.23 64.86 279.54; 40.72; 34.20 1415.80
Commercial concrete 123.94 905.3 440.06; 64.10; 53.84 209.37
Wall materials 68.19 334.13 37.88; 5.52; 4.63 260.29
Mortar 58.1 372.76 29.61; 4.31; 3.62 223.69
PVC pipes 33.44 5.89 7.56; 1.10; 0.92 16.96
Polystyrene extrusion board 21.25 1.08 15.06; 2.19; 1.84 15.81
Architectural ceramics 12.12 3.13 3.19; 0.46; 0.39 22.91
Doors and windows 9.54 5.41 70.5; 10.27; 8.63 112.12
Water paints 5.03 0.68 7.76; 1.13; 0.95 19.82
Copper core conductor cables 2.58 0.27 14.07; 2.05; 1.72 12.21
Wood 1.40 5.03 6.61; 0.96; 0.81 5.88
Waterproof roll 0.62 0.51 4.25; 0.62; 0.52 0.02
Stone 0.47 17.12 5.43; 0.79; 0.66 3.63
Total 478.91 1716.16 921.51; 134.23; 112.75 2318.50
In mitigating CO
2
, proposed solutions should also combine sustainable energy sources, such
as solar and wind energy and biofuels, in the operations of buildings through life cycle assessment.
The building sector has great potential to lessen CO
2
emissions during its operational stage by using
less energy at the planning, building, and operation steps by increasing eciency and enhancing
construction standards. The goal of the life cycle assessment is to reduce environmental eects and
costs. With this regard, a global assessment methodology was developed in 2011 called EN 15978:2011,
which provides the calculation steps and analysis rules for the environmental performance assessment
of new and existing buildings [
41
]. This strategy can incorporate all periods of the building’s life cycle.
For example, Hong Kong has analyzed the life cycle of buildings under its jurisdiction. Their focus
is to decrease energy usage by 25% from the 2005 level by 2030 [
14
]. The life cycle assessment can
distinguish the life cycles of the structure from the operation of the building [
15
]. The operation
and embedded carbon footprint of the building is considered in the construction and maintenance
of the building. The construction process includes CO
2
emissions from the creation, development,
maintenance, and substitution of building materials and services of the building [
15
]. The energy used
in maintenance corresponds to the operation carbon footprint for a given fuel blend. Steps used in
limiting the operation carbon footprint can adversely aect the embedded carbon footprint.
On the other hand, aside from new buildings, impact assessment of historical or old buildings
should also be considered, which can be an appropriate solution to reduce CO
2
emissions. As reported
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 9 of 11
in the literature, on average, buildings have an exceptionally long lifespan between 60 to 120 years.
Based on this lifespan, historical or old buildings are still in use, and it is expected that 80%
of existing buildings will continue to be occupied in 2050 [
42
]. Understanding of principles,
materials, methods, risks, and technologies is essential towards decarbonization in these buildings
by analyzing their building materials and elements. A detailed life cycle assessment can be carried
out by taking into account several factors towards CO
2
mitigations such as operational energy
performance, reuse, and sustainable refurbishment, retrofitting solutions, building envelope thermal
performance improvements, heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting systems, and adaptation of
passive measures [43,44].
5. Conclusions
The building sector plays a significant part in the emissions of CO
2
globally. The tremendous
production and release of CO
2
have led to severe consequences and repercussions contributing to
climate change. The adverse eects of the non-sustainable built environment have not only put a
strain on the environment but also have aected humanity. This paper provided an overview of the
issues, impacts, and mitigation strategies in the building sector to reduce and control CO
2
emissions.
The energy sourced from fossil fuels is non-sustainable, and yet it accounts for a large percentage
of the energy used in the construction and operation processes. The strategies to reduce CO
2
in the
building sector are enforcing standards and policy, conducting impact assessment, adopting low carbon
technology, and restricting energy utilization. If we continue with the current approach for the building
sector, it will be too late to rectify the mistakes of our predecessors. The future of sustainable cities and
communities will remain uncertain, and we might fail to achieve global sustainable development goals.
The building sector must be given enough attention and care to reduce the rate of CO
2
emissions.
A comprehensive and thorough analysis is necessary to study the CO
2
emission mitigation measures
in the building sector, and global organizations must come up with a holistic framework to tackle the
issue. For a more sustainable future, it is crucial to implement drastic actions and measures to reduce
CO2emissions to aid the fight in combating climate change.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, M.I.A., K.A.A. and Y.Y.; investigation, K.A.A., and M.I.A.; methodology,
Y.Y. and K.A.A.; project administration, M.I.A., Y.Y., K.A.A.; resources, K.A.A. and Y.Y.; visualization, M.I.A.,
Y.Y. and K.A.A.; writing—original draft, M.I.A., Y.Y. and K.A.A.; writing—review and editing, M.I.A., Y.Y. and
K.A.A.; project administration, Y.Y. and M.I.A.; funding acquisition, M.I.A. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding:
This work was supported by Research University Grant [1001/PTEKIND/8014124] from Universiti
Sains Malaysia.
Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.
References
1.
Alhorr, Y.; Eliskandarani, E.; Elsarrag, E. Approaches to reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the built
environment: Low carbon cities. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 2014,3, 167–178. [CrossRef]
2.
Riat Sb, M.A. Building Energy Consumption and Carbon dioxide Emissions: Threat to Climate Change.
J. Earth Sci. Clim. Chang. 2015,S3. [CrossRef]
3. Bilal, M.; Khan, K.I.A.; Thaheem, M.J.; Nasir, A.R. Current state and barriers to the circular economy in the
building sector: Towards a mitigation framework. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,276, 123250. [CrossRef]
4.
Zolfagharian, S.; Nourbakhsh, M.; Irizarry, J.; Ressang, A.; Gheisari, M. Environmental Impacts Assessment on
Construction Sites. In Construction Research Congress 2012; American Society of Civil Engineers: West Lafayette,
IN, USA, 2012; pp. 1750–1759.
5.
Sandanayake, M.; Zhang, G.; Setunge, S. Estimation of environmental emissions and impacts of building
construction—A decision making tool for contractors. J. Build. Eng. 2019,21, 173–185. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 10 of 11
6.
Adams, S.; Nsiah, C. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions; Does renewable energy matter? Sci. Total Environ.
2019,693, 133288. [CrossRef]
7.
Chang, C.-T.; Yang, C.-H.; Lin, T.-P. Carbon dioxide emissions evaluations and mitigations in the building
and trac sectors in Taichung metropolitan area, Taiwan. J. Clean. Prod. 2019,230, 1241–1255. [CrossRef]
8.
Yan, H.; Shen, Q.; Fan, L.C.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, L. Greenhouse gas emissions in building construction: A case
study of One Peking in Hong Kong. Build. Environ. 2010,45, 949–955. [CrossRef]
9.
Huang, L.; Krigsvoll, G.; Johansen, F.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, X. Carbon emission of global construction sector.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018,81, 1906–1916. [CrossRef]
10.
IEA. World Energy Statistics and Balances (Database). 2019. Available online: www.iea.org/statistics
(accessed on 12 August 2020).
11.
Klufallah, M.M.; Nuruddin, M.F.; Khamidi, M.F.; Jamaludin, N. Assessment of Carbon Emission Reduction
for Buildings Projects in Malaysia-A Comparative Analysis. In E3S Web of Conferences; EDP Sciences: Bangi,
Malaysia, 2014; Volume 3.
12.
Langevin, J.; Harris, C.B.; Reyna, J.L. Assessing the Potential to Reduce U.S. Building CO
2
Emissions 80% by
2050. Joule 2019,3, 2403–2424. [CrossRef]
13.
Ma, M.; Ma, X.; Cai, W.; Cai, W. Carbon-dioxide mitigation in the residential building sector: A household
scale-based assessment. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019,198, 111915. [CrossRef]
14.
Yim, S.; Ng, S.T.; Hossain, U.; Wong, J.M.W. Comprehensive Evaluation of Carbon Emissions for the
Development of High-Rise Residential Building. Buildings 2018,8, 147. [CrossRef]
15.
Pal, S.K.; Takano, A.; Alanne, K.; Siren, K. A life cycle approach to optimizing carbon footprint and costs of a
residential building. Build. Environ. 2017,123, 146–162. [CrossRef]
16.
Paoletti, E.; Manes, F. Eects of elevated carbon dioxide and acidic rain on the growth of holm oak.
In Developments in Environmental Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 375–389.
17.
Cellura, M.; Guarino, F.; Longo, S.; Tumminia, G. Climate change and the building sector: Modelling and
energy implications to an oce building in southern Europe. Energy Sustain. Dev.
2018
,45, 46–65. [CrossRef]
18.
Bravo, A.H.; Soto, A.R.; Sosa, E.R.; S
á
nchez, A.P.; Alarc
ó
n, J.A.L.; Kahl, J.; Ru
í
z, B.J. Eect of acid rain on
building material of the El Tajin archaeological zone in Veracruz, Mexico. Environ. Pollut.
2006
,144, 655–660.
[CrossRef]
19.
Abergel, T.; Dean, B.; Dulac, J. Towards a Zero-Emission, Ecient, and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector:
Global Status Report 2017; UN Environment and International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2017.
20.
UN Environment and International Energy Agency. Towards a zero-emissions, ecient and resilient
buildings and construction sector. In 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction; UN Environment
and International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2019.
21.
Lu, M.; Lai, J. Review on carbon emissions of commercial buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2020
,
119, 109545. [CrossRef]
22.
Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 2020. Available online:
https://www.legco.gov.hk/index.html (accessed on 12 August 2020).
23.
Adekanye, O.G.; Davis, A.; Azevedo, I.L. Federal policy, local policy, and green building certifications in the
U.S. Energy Build. 2020,209, 109700. [CrossRef]
24.
Matiso, D.C.; Noonan, D.S.; Flowers, M.E. Policy Monitor—Green Buildings: Economics and Policies.
Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2016,10, 329–346. [CrossRef]
25.
U.S. Green Building Council. Public Policy Library. Available online: https://public-policies.usgbc.org/
(accessed on 12 August 2020).
26.
Tan, Y.C.; Ismail, M.; Ahmad, M.I. Turbine Ventilator as Low Carbon Technology. In Renewable Energy and
Sustainable Technologies for Building and Environmental Applications; Ahmad, M., Ismail, M., Riat, S., Eds.;
Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016.
27.
IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Solomon, S., Qin, D.,
Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., Miller, H.L., Eds.; Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2007.
28.
Chen, Y.; Liu, H.; Shi, L. Operation strategy of public building: Implications from trade-obetween carbon
emission and occupant satisfaction. J. Clean. Prod. 2018,205, 629–644. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020,12, 7427 11 of 11
29.
Gonz
á
lez, M.J.; Navarro, J.G. Assessment of the decrease of CO
2
emissions in the construction field through
the selection of materials: Practical case study of three houses of low environmental impact. Build. Environ.
2006,41, 902–909. [CrossRef]
30.
Chastas, P.; Theodosiou, T.; Kontoleon, K.J.; Bikas, D. Normalising and assessing carbon emissions in the
building sector: A review on the embodied CO
2
emissions of residential buildings. Build. Environ.
2018
,130,
212–226. [CrossRef]
31.
Kumanayake, R.; Luo, H.; Paulusz, N. Assessment of material related embodied carbon of an oce building
in Sri Lanka. Energy Build. 2018,166, 250–257. [CrossRef]
32.
Robati, M.; Daly, D.; Kokogiannakis, G. A method of uncertainty analysis for whole-life embodied carbon
emissions (CO
2
-e) of building materials of a net-zero energy building in Australia. J. Clean. Prod.
2019
,225,
541–553. [CrossRef]
33. Hammond, G.; Jones, C. Inventory of Carbon and Energy; United Overseas Bank Ltd.: London, UK, 2008.
34.
Hammond, G.; Jones, C. Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE); Lowrie, F., Tse, P., Eds.;
BSRIA: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK, 2011.
35.
Cang, Y.; Yang, L.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, N. Prediction of embodied carbon emissions from residential buildings
with dierent structural forms. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020,54, 101946. [CrossRef]
36.
Luo, Z.; Yang, L.; Liu, J. Carbon Dioxide Emissions of Oce Buildings at Embodied Stage. J. Civ. Archit.
Environ. Eng. 2014, 37–43. [CrossRef]
37.
Luo, Z.; Yang, L.; Liu, J.; Han, B. Research on CO
2
Emission Calculation Method and CO
2
Reduction
Strategies of Building Materials. Build. Sci. 2011,27, 1–8.
38. Xin, C. CO2Emission Assesment of Oce Building Equipment Pipeline; Cheng Kung University: Taiwan, 2008.
39.
Zhixing, L. Study on Calculation Method of Building Life Cycle CO
2
Emission and Emission Reduction Strategies;
Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology: Xi’an, China, 2011.
40.
Jiangsu Provincial Department Of Construction. Proce Table of Architecture and Decoration Engineering in
Jiangsu Province; next and last volume; Jiangsu Provincial Department Of Construction: Jiangsu, China, 2004.
41.
BS. EN15978 Sustainability of Construction Works: Assessment of Environmental Performance of Buildings:
Calculation Method; British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2011.
42.
Loron, M.S.; Ismail, S.; Yunos, M.Y.B.M. Energy Eciency for Reducing Carbon Footprint in Historic
Buildings: Comparing Case in the UK and Malaysia. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2015,9, 82–84.
43.
Sesana, E.; Bertolin, C.; Gagnon, A.S.; Hughes, J. Mitigating Climate Change in the Cultural Built Heritage
Sector. Climate 2019,7, 90. [CrossRef]
44.
Berg, F.; Fuglseth, M. Life cycle assessment and historic buildings: Energy-eciency refurbishment versus
new construction in Norway. J. Archit. Conserv. 2018,24, 152–167. [CrossRef]
©
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/).
... Sustainable building methods aim to reduce the negative consequences of construction on the environment [18,19] by reducing waste, conserving energy, and making efficient use of resources. Among these methods are energyefficient designs, the incorporation of green technology, and the utilisation of renewable and recycled materials [20][21][22]. By decreasing the demand for natural resources, sustainable construction methods help mitigate the negative effects of construction projects on the environment and the battle against climate change [23][24][25][26]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Green building approaches are becoming increasingly popular, which has prompted researchers to focus on recyclables and other types of waste. There needs to be fresh thinking in order to lessen the environmental impact of the building industry, which is a major polluter. This study explores the potential of recycling abandoned Local Area Network (LAN) wires, a significant type of technological trash, as a reinforcing material for sustainable pavement building. The compressive, tensile, and flexural strengths of M40-grade concrete that contains LAN wire trash are also examined in this work. Fuzzy logic, ANN, and GA are examples of soft computing techniques used to optimise the concrete mix design and anticipate its performance. Using 2% LAN wire waste in a two-layer mesh structure after insulation was removed, the maximum compressive strength was 49.42 MPa, which is a 13.5% improvement above standard concrete (43.55 MPa). Additionally, split tensile strength increased by 12.5% to 4.58 MPa and flexural strength by 16% to 5.10 MPa. Soft computing methods including GA, ANN, and Fuzzy Logic were used to improve the concrete mix design. The mix design was improved to a compressive strength of 48.97 MPa after 50 generations by GA. The ANN demonstrated impressive predictive accuracy, with a R² score of 0.986 and an MSE of 0.0012. An example of the long-term usefulness of LAN wire waste in green construction is the use of Fuzzy Logic to the problem of classifying concrete mix quality in relation to performance metrics.
... The significance of this research lies in its potential to contribute to global efforts to reduce the environmental impact of the construction industry [14]. By utilizing a locally abundant material like clay shale, the study not only addresses sustainability issues but also supports the development of region-specific construction practices that are both environmentally friendly and economically viable. ...
... In other words, the rapid increase in urbanization and the growth of the construction sector, it highlights that various strategies and standards should be developed to reduce CO 2 emissions. Therefore, it can be said that the construction sector is one of the sectors that should take an active role in combating environmental problems [11][12][13]. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study investigates the long-run relationship between forest footprint, which shows the amount of forest area needed for pulp, industrial wood, firewood and timber, and forest products as an environmental indicator. Forest footprint, forest product exports, forest product production, forest areas, biomass consumption, and urbanization variables are used in the analyses with annual data for the period 2000–2017 for selected European Union (EU) countries. As a result of the cointegration analyses, there is a long-run relationship between the variables. According to the results of coefficient estimation, it is concluded that forest product exports and urbanization have a decreasing effect on forest ecological footprint, while forest area, forest product production, and biomass consumption have an increasing effect. According to the Method of Moments Quantile Regression (MMQR) estimation results, it is concluded that forest product exports have a decreasing effect on forest footprint in all quantiles in the analysis period. The production of forest products is determined as the variable with the highest negative impact on the forest’s ecological footprint. The effect of urbanization is calculated as positive, but it is the variable with the lowest impact together with forest area. Biomass consumption is found to significantly reduce the forest footprint. In view of the aforementioned findings, it is recommended that efforts be made to promote high-value added, sustainable, and environmentally friendly production processes in forest products exports. This is considered to be a key strategy to reducing the ecological footprint of forests.
... The built environment significantly contributes to anthropogenic climate change due to its intersection with energy, transportation, and buildings, leading to greenhouse gas emissions (Fenner et al., 2018). It has been estimated that the operation of buildings contributes to 28% of annual carbon emissions, while building materials and construction (embodied carbon) contribute to 11% (Ali et al., 2020). Reducing buildings' embodied carbon requires using low-carbon materials, improved designs, tools, and methods, and reusing and recovering materials (Pomponi and Moncaster, 2016). ...
Conference Paper
Society is challenged by the impact of anthropogenic climate change, and the construction industry is a significant contributor to this effect, but it can also become part of the solution. Apart from this, the project-and construction management fields have lagged behind other knowledge fields regarding productivity. Many engineering-related knowledge fields have gained productivity benefits by implementing continuous improvement processes and innovation models. Most construction managers do not benefit from continuous experimentation through applying learning by doing in short successions. Developing a philosophy that would enable the application of continuous improvement in a construction management setup could allow participants to improve construction continuously and project management tools, methods, materials, and designs. This paper uses an integrative literature review to develop a proposed philosophy called Protobuilding. The Protobuilding philosophy is similar to prototyping; however, the objective is not to create a product that can be mass-produced but rather to develop a process of continuous experimentation and learning. The purpose is to create a process that will promote the integration of various design philosophies using systems thinking that may lead to knowledge development and sharing to encourage the development of sustainable buildings with improved functionality while improving construction and project management productivity, thus becoming a beacon of hope for the built environment.
... Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, there has been a marked escalation in climate change and its related effects, primarily driven by increased greenhouse gas emissions from human activities [1]. As these emissions rise, the repercussions of climate change on both human and natural systems become increasingly evident [2]. Significant outcomes of climate change at both global and national scales include the rise in average global temperatures, higher levels of atmospheric CO 2 , and shifts in weather patterns, particularly in precipitation [3,4]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Since the Industrial Revolution, climate change has intensified due to rising greenhouse gas emissions, leading to severe environmental impacts. Given the building sector’s significant contribution to climate change, the circular economy has emerged as a key mitigation strategy. Despite political support and some advancements, significant barriers persist in the building sector’s transition to the circular economy. This article explores the pivotal role of stakeholders as essential agents of change, highlighting the necessity of a concentrated effort on stakeholder engagement in the building sector’s circular economy transition. Using an online questionnaire, this article evaluated the current status of the building sector, as well as stakeholders’ awareness, roles, and perspectives on the transition. The results revealed that while stakeholders are aware of their environmental impacts, knowledge gaps persist, particularly in waste management and circular economy practices. The stakeholders recognize that the transition is happening, but there is a sense of uncertainty about its effectiveness due to substantial barriers. Despite these barriers, there is an increasing commitment toward the practices of the circular economy, underscoring the need for policy development, infrastructure provision, and training programs to support the transition. This article contributes to the literature by providing insights into key stakeholders’ perspectives and offering actionable strategies to enhance engagement for a more effective transition to the circular economy in the building sector.
Article
Purpose While operational carbon (OC) emission reduction strategies have received substantial attention in past literature, very few studies have focused on embodied carbon (EC) emission reduction in the construction industry. Therefore, this study aims at undertaking a scientometric review of strategies to mitigate EC emissions in the construction industry. Design/methodology/approach Scopus search engine was used to search for articles. VOSViewer software was used for scientometric analysis using science mapping approach. Using a total of 151 documents, keywords, authors, papers and their sources were analysed. Furthermore, scientometric analysis was undertaken comprising co-occurrence of keywords, documents source analysis and author co-citation analysis. Findings The significant strategies identified to mitigate EC emissions were: offsite manufacturing/use of prefabricated elements, decarbonisation of energy grid, enhanced policies and regulations by governments, construction sector policies and regulations, guidelines for increased use of low EC materials and reuse and recovery of EC construction materials. Practical implications This study identifies practical strategies that contribute to reduction of EC emissions. Originality/value This study is significant and contributes to the construction industry’s agenda to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
Article
Full-text available
Hava taşımacılığından kaynaklanan CO2 emisyonları konusu önemli çevresel kaygılar yaratmaya devam etmektedir. Havacılık sektörü büyüdükçe karbon ayak izi de büyümekte ve iklim değişikliğine katkıda bulunmaktadır. Bunu ele almak için hükümetler ve politika yapıcılar hava taşımacılığına çevre vergileri uygulamayı düşünmektedir. Bu vergiler, havayolu şirketlerini daha temiz teknolojilere yatırım yaparak ve verimliliği artırarak emisyonları azaltmaya teşvik etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ancak, çevresel sürdürülebilirlik ve ekonomik uygulanabilirlik arasında bir denge bulmak, bu karmaşık ve birbirine bağlı küresel sektörde bir zorluk olmaya devam etmektedir. Bu çalışma, 1995-2021 yılları arasında 25 Avrupa ülkesinde CO2 emisyonları, çevre vergileri, fosil yakıt tüketimi, turizm ve hava taşımacılığı arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Korelasyonu tahmin etmek için Panel Vektör Otoregresyon modeli kullanılmaktadır. Sonuçlar, mevcut çevre vergilerinin CO2 emisyonlarını azaltmak için yeterli olmadığını desteklemektedir. Bulgular ayrıca fosil yakıt tüketimi, turizm ve hava taşımacılığının CO2 emisyonlarında artışa yol açtığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, hava taşımacılığı, turizm, çevre vergileri ve CO2 emisyonları arasında çeşitli nedensellikler bulunmaktadır.
Thesis
Sustainable construction has become one of the influential contributors to the national sustainable development goals achievement in Germany. The federal government of the country has invested an abundant amount to subsidise the sustainable building projects. However, the soaring inflation, the increased price of the alternative building materials and high interest rates has affected the large-scale adoption of sustainable construction. The present research is based on the sustainable construction method in the German construction background and the acknowledgement has been perceived through the mixed method of research methodology. The noted practice to perceive analysis developed concentration through thematic analysis and interview with research papers from authorised scholar works and industry-based experts respectively. The research has found by conducting an interview process that managing the construction practices can improve the image of German construction companies. The research has found that cost of implementation, lack of CE (Circular Economy) knowledge and skill gaps are persistent factor creating challenges for wide-scale adoption of sustainable construction in Germany. Accordingly, green supply chain management practices and circular economy business model transition can help in the achievement of sustainability in the built environment of Germany. Nevertheless, policy changes and re-skilling of employees would be equally important for the industry.
Article
Full-text available
The building sector accounts for one-third of energy-related carbon emissions. For commercial buildings, their energy use has been widely studied but research on their carbon emissions has not been common. To provide a state-of-the-art portrait of carbon emissions of commercial buildings, a study was conducted. Through an extensive review of official datasets, government statistics, authoritative website information and 101 journal articles that are germane to the study, it was found that the global carbon emission has continued to rise although many places have introduced incentive or subsidy schemes for carbon mitigation. Carbon emission has become a major evaluation aspect of the renowned building environmental rating methods such as BREEAM and Green Star, but it remains merely an evaluation criterion under the energy analysis category of both LEED and BEAM Plus. Whereas the first international standard (ISO 16745) on carbon emission calculation and carbon metrics for existing buildings was not referenced in any of the studies reviewed, following this standard to pursue carbon studies in future can enable comparisons of study results on the same basis. Rather than simulation studies, more empirical research using operational data of existing buildings should be carried out in order to obtain real and definite findings. Despite the wide range of efforts made, the growth of carbon emission remains a live issue. How this issue could be resolved should be the focus of future research in this area.
Article
Full-text available
Climate change mitigation targets have put pressure to reduce the carbon footprint of cultural heritage buildings. Commonly adopted measures to decrease the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of historical buildings are targeted at improving their energy efficiency through insulating the building envelope, and upgrading their heating, cooling and lighting systems. However, there are complex issues that arise when mitigating climate change in the cultural built heritage sector. For instance, preserving the authenticity of heritage buildings, maintaining their traditional passive behaviours, and choosing adaptive solutions compatible with the characteristics of heritage materials to avoid an acceleration of decay processes. It is thus important to understand what the enablers, or the barriers, are to reduce the carbon footprint of cultural heritage buildings to meet climate change mitigation targets. This paper investigates how climate change mitigation is considered in the management and preservation of the built heritage through semi-structured interviews with cultural heritage experts from the UK, Italy and Norway. Best-practice approaches for the refurbishment of historical buildings with the aim of decreasing their energy consumption are presented, as perceived by the interviewees, as well as the identification of the enablers and barriers in mitigating climate change in the cultural built heritage sector. The findings emphasise that adapting the cultural built heritage to reduce GHG emissions is challenging, but possible if strong and concerted action involving research and government can be undertaken to overcome the barriers identified in this paper.
Article
Full-text available
The construction of new buildings requires the use of a substantial amount of materials, which have an associated embodied energy for manufacturing, transport, construction and end-of-life disposal. A number of inventories have been developed to collate the typical embodied energy or carbon emissions associated with different building materials and activities, and these can be used to quantify the environmental impacts of different construction methods. However, uncertainty exists in the estimation of embodied CO2-e emissions and other environmental impact results, due to i) inconsistencies in typical embodied carbon emissions values in inventories; ii) errors in estimations of material quantities; iii) assumptions regarding building lifetimes, and iv) errors in estimations of transport distances. This current study quantified the uncertainties associated with the calculation of lifetime CO2-e emissions in a case study net-zero, in terms of operational energy, educational building. This study examined the lifetime impacts of building materials for the building based on a detailed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) that had been previously undertaken for this site. The study considered the 19 building materials which most heavily influenced the total, transport and recurring embodied carbon footprint of the building and a probability distribution was generated to represent the variability for each of the following uncertain parameters: Lifetime, Embodied CO2-e and transport distance over the building’s life. Random sampling was used to generate input variables (1000 samples) based on a probability distribution of each uncertain parameter relative to the building materials. Through the use of a Monte Carlo simulation, the environmental impact for each construction material for a 50-year building lifetime was predicted. Unlike the conventional LCA approach, which provides a single deterministic value, cumulative Monte Carlo distribution curves were used to provide a range of embodied CO2-e emissions for each construction material, and the whole building, through the lifetime of the building. The obtained results revealed a distribution of the total embodied CO2-e of a building which ranged from 2,951 tCO2-e to 5,254 tCO2-e. This variation in the life cycle carbon emissions highlights the importance of considering an uncertainty analysis in the LCA analysis.
Article
The building sector is amongst the major resource consuming and waste generating sectors of the economy. The paradigm of the circular economy has the potential to overcome the problems resulted due to adoption of the linear economic model by the building sector. The circular economy offers a new perspective for industrial ecosystems including materials and products being fed back into the supply chain as resources, thereby resulting in reduced consumption of primary resources and waste generation. The research on circular economy increased rapidly during recent years; however, a research gap exists on the assessment of current state and barriers to the circular economy in the building sector of developing countries. This study has developed and used a circular economy assessment scale for the building sector of developing countries. It is found that the current state of circular economy implementation in the building sector is unsatisfactory. Out of the seven circular economy dimensions used for analysis, the energy dimension showed the best performance and the waste dimension showed the worst performance. Serious steps are required by all the stakeholders of the building sector to improve the adoption of the circular economy. Furthermore, interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and matrice d'Impacts croises-multipication appliqué an classment (MICMAC) techniques are used to identify and classify the key barriers to the circular economy. It is found that a lack of environmental regulations and laws is driving the rest of the barriers to the circular economy. Equally critical is the lack of public awareness and support from public institutions. Finally, a mitigation framework for the building sector of developing countries is proposed, which is an addition to the circular economy existing body of knowledge. The proposed framework could serve as a guideline for decision and policymakers.
Article
Buildings account for about 40% of total U.S. energy consumption and around a third of total energy-related CO2 emissions. Concerns about these emissions have led federal, state, and local governments to pass policies to reduce energy use in buildings. In this paper, we examine whether policies aimed at encouraging green building certifications are associated with an increase in the gross floor area per capita of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certifications. We focus specifically on commercial LEED building retrofits certified under - :existing buildings: operations and maintenance (EB), commercial interiors (CI), and core and shell (CS) rating system categories. Using a panel data approach, we find that metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) with local policies, particularly requirement and density programs, are associated with significant increases in commercial LEED retrofits. Specifically, we find that the switch of an MSA from having no requirement policy to having a requirement policy is associated with an increase of 0.22 LEED sqft/capita [0.02 LEED sqm/capita] (compared to an average of 0.6 LEED sqft/capita [0.06sqm/capita] across all buildings in 2016). We also find that federal policies and improvements to the LEED rating system are associated with increases in LEED certifications. While the impacts of federal policy and LEED rating system updates are difficult to separate, our work suggests that local policy, federal policy, and modifications to the LEED rating system can work in concert to drive green building adoption.
Article
Buildings are responsible for 36% of CO2 emissions in the United States and will thus be integral to climate change mitigation; yet, no studies have comprehensively assessed the potential long-term CO2 emissions reductions from the U.S. buildings sector against national goals in a way that can be regularly updated in the future. We use Scout, a reproducible and granular model of U.S. building energy use, to investigate the potential for the U.S. buildings sector to reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, consistent with the U.S. Mid-Century Strategy. We find that a combination of aggressive efficiency measures, electrification, and high renewable energy penetration can reduce CO2 emissions by 72%–78% relative to 2005 levels, just short of the target. Results are sufficiently disaggregated by technology and end use to inform targeted building energy policy approaches and establish a foundation for continual reassessment of technology development pathways that drive significant long-term emissions reductions.
Article
The study employed panel cointegration techniques to investigate the relationship between renewable energy and carbon dioxide emissions for 28 Sub-Sahara African countries spanning the period 1980-2014. The findings based on the Fully Modified OLS and GMM estimation techniques show that both renewable and nonrenewable energy contribute to carbon dioxide emissions in the countries studied in the long run but only nonrenewable energy has a significant positive effect on carbon dioxide emissions in the short run. The results show that a percentage increase in nonrenewable energy consumption leads to an increase of 1.07% and 1.9% in CO2 emissions in the short and long run respectively. Additionally, economic growth contributes to environmental degradation while urbanization has a negative effect on carbon dioxide emissions. A percentage increase in GDP leads to 1.3% and 1.82% increase in emissions in the short and long run respectively. The results also show that less democratic states are more likely to pollute the environment than more democratic states. Further, there is no statistically significant effect of non-renewable energy in the short-run for more democratic nations.
Article
Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the atmospheric CO 2 level has been continuously increasing because of the overall energy use in urban areas that generates excessively high levels of CO 2 emissions. This study reviewed the relevant literature, then adopted the Taichung metropolitan area as the research target and assessed carbon emissions with respect to buildings, traffic, and carbon sinks. The overall carbon budget of the metropolitan area was mapped following a statistical analysis of the numerical data and urban space information. The results of this study indicated that the annual average urban carbon emissions consist of 67.6% building carbon emissions, 30.5% traffic carbon emissions, and −1.9% carbon sink absorption. In this study, a multiple regression model was used to calculate the floor area of each building. This study also determined that densely populated areas emitted higher levels of carbon than less populated areas. For every square meter of total floor area, 16.51 tCO 2 /m ² ·yr of carbon were emitted from buildings every year. Recommended policies for the city government to implement in the future were organized and used to establish three simulation scenarios of the various implementation stages. The results indicated that adjusting the floor area ratio of buildings is the optimal carbon reduction approach, achieving a reduction of at most 620,363 tons of carbon per year, and multi-scale carbon reduction hotspots were mapped out. In addition, the high-resolution grid was used to present the multi-scale carbon budget results, which helps government agencies to formulate follow-up priority carbon reduction strategies and urban carbon neutral policies.