Matt A. Jungclaus , Nicholas Grant , Martín I. Torres , Jay H. Arehart , Wil V. Srubar III
{"title":"Embodied carbon benchmarks of single-family residential buildings in the United States","authors":"Matt A. Jungclaus , Nicholas Grant , Martín I. Torres , Jay H. Arehart , Wil V. Srubar III","doi":"10.1016/j.scs.2024.105975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The objective of this work was to define and implement a methodology for establishing theoretical, science-based embodied carbon benchmarks for single-family, detached residential buildings based on the United States Department of Energy prototype single-family residential building energy models. The expected differences in materiality across 16 climate zones and 4 foundation types resulted in 64 archetypical single-family residential building models. Probabilistic life cycle assessment was applied to a material quantity takeoff of each building model to approximate each building model's material use intensity (MUI, kg/m<sup>2</sup>) and embodied carbon intensity (ECI, kgCO<sub>2</sub>e/m<sup>2</sup>). The results indicate that average MUIs range from 185 to 346 kg/m<sup>2</sup> and average ECIs ranged from 39 to 121 kgCO<sub>2</sub>e/m<sup>2</sup>. The choice of life cycle assessment (LCA) data had a significant impact on the ECI results. More specifically, ECIs calculated using One Click LCA were approximately 7 % and 44 % higher than those from Tally and Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings (Athena), respectively. When accounting for theoretical maximum biogenic CO<sub>2</sub> storage (not including end-of-life treatment), all net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensities computed using Athena were negative, indicating that the buildings were net-CO<sub>2</sub> storing. When using One Click or Tally, 28 % and 50 % of the building models were net-CO<sub>2</sub> storing, respectively. The results presented herein can be used to establish theoretical, science-based embodied carbon benchmarks for single-family residential buildings in the United States. In addition, the methodology could be adopted by entities seeking to establish building-related embodied carbon emissions reduction targets.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48659,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Cities and Society","volume":"117 ","pages":"Article 105975"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Cities and Society","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210670724007996","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The objective of this work was to define and implement a methodology for establishing theoretical, science-based embodied carbon benchmarks for single-family, detached residential buildings based on the United States Department of Energy prototype single-family residential building energy models. The expected differences in materiality across 16 climate zones and 4 foundation types resulted in 64 archetypical single-family residential building models. Probabilistic life cycle assessment was applied to a material quantity takeoff of each building model to approximate each building model's material use intensity (MUI, kg/m2) and embodied carbon intensity (ECI, kgCO2e/m2). The results indicate that average MUIs range from 185 to 346 kg/m2 and average ECIs ranged from 39 to 121 kgCO2e/m2. The choice of life cycle assessment (LCA) data had a significant impact on the ECI results. More specifically, ECIs calculated using One Click LCA were approximately 7 % and 44 % higher than those from Tally and Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings (Athena), respectively. When accounting for theoretical maximum biogenic CO2 storage (not including end-of-life treatment), all net CO2 emissions intensities computed using Athena were negative, indicating that the buildings were net-CO2 storing. When using One Click or Tally, 28 % and 50 % of the building models were net-CO2 storing, respectively. The results presented herein can be used to establish theoretical, science-based embodied carbon benchmarks for single-family residential buildings in the United States. In addition, the methodology could be adopted by entities seeking to establish building-related embodied carbon emissions reduction targets.
期刊介绍:
Sustainable Cities and Society (SCS) is an international journal that focuses on fundamental and applied research to promote environmentally sustainable and socially resilient cities. The journal welcomes cross-cutting, multi-disciplinary research in various areas, including:
1. Smart cities and resilient environments;
2. Alternative/clean energy sources, energy distribution, distributed energy generation, and energy demand reduction/management;
3. Monitoring and improving air quality in built environment and cities (e.g., healthy built environment and air quality management);
4. Energy efficient, low/zero carbon, and green buildings/communities;
5. Climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban environments;
6. Green infrastructure and BMPs;
7. Environmental Footprint accounting and management;
8. Urban agriculture and forestry;
9. ICT, smart grid and intelligent infrastructure;
10. Urban design/planning, regulations, legislation, certification, economics, and policy;
11. Social aspects, impacts and resiliency of cities;
12. Behavior monitoring, analysis and change within urban communities;
13. Health monitoring and improvement;
14. Nexus issues related to sustainable cities and societies;
15. Smart city governance;
16. Decision Support Systems for trade-off and uncertainty analysis for improved management of cities and society;
17. Big data, machine learning, and artificial intelligence applications and case studies;
18. Critical infrastructure protection, including security, privacy, forensics, and reliability issues of cyber-physical systems.
19. Water footprint reduction and urban water distribution, harvesting, treatment, reuse and management;
20. Waste reduction and recycling;
21. Wastewater collection, treatment and recycling;
22. Smart, clean and healthy transportation systems and infrastructure;