Complementing emergy evaluation and life cycle assessment for enlightening the environmental benefits of using engineered timber in the building sector

IF 8 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Science of the Total Environment Pub Date : 2025-03-20 Epub Date: 2025-03-06 DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179030
Fabio Sporchia , Morena Bruno , Elena Neri , Federico M. Pulselli , Nicoletta Patrizi , Simone Bastianoni
{"title":"Complementing emergy evaluation and life cycle assessment for enlightening the environmental benefits of using engineered timber in the building sector","authors":"Fabio Sporchia ,&nbsp;Morena Bruno ,&nbsp;Elena Neri ,&nbsp;Federico M. Pulselli ,&nbsp;Nicoletta Patrizi ,&nbsp;Simone Bastianoni","doi":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Engineered timber can represent a great opportunity to mitigate the large impacts due to the global building sector. However, the most applied environmental assessment methodologies such a life cycle assessment (LCA) might show limited advantages when comparing the impact on climate change of buildings made of traditional materials, such as concrete and steel, and building based on engineered timber. This work proposes emergy evaluation (EME) as a complementary environmental assessment methodology. By expanding the boundaries of the assessment, EME captures input flows and related features, especially in terms of renewability, that are overlooked in LCA. LCA and EME were applied to two identically modeled buildings composed of either only traditional materials or engineered timber as their replacement. EME reveals the higher sustainability level of engineered timber compared to traditional materials in the building sector, capturing larger environmental benefits compared to LCA. Ultimately, the robustness of the results is tested through a comparative sensitivity analysis performed for three geographic scenarios, different energy use scenarios, and different transport distances.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":422,"journal":{"name":"Science of the Total Environment","volume":"970 ","pages":"Article 179030"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science of the Total Environment","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969725006655","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Engineered timber can represent a great opportunity to mitigate the large impacts due to the global building sector. However, the most applied environmental assessment methodologies such a life cycle assessment (LCA) might show limited advantages when comparing the impact on climate change of buildings made of traditional materials, such as concrete and steel, and building based on engineered timber. This work proposes emergy evaluation (EME) as a complementary environmental assessment methodology. By expanding the boundaries of the assessment, EME captures input flows and related features, especially in terms of renewability, that are overlooked in LCA. LCA and EME were applied to two identically modeled buildings composed of either only traditional materials or engineered timber as their replacement. EME reveals the higher sustainability level of engineered timber compared to traditional materials in the building sector, capturing larger environmental benefits compared to LCA. Ultimately, the robustness of the results is tested through a comparative sensitivity analysis performed for three geographic scenarios, different energy use scenarios, and different transport distances.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
补充应急评估和生命周期评估,揭示建筑领域使用工程木材的环境效益
工程木材可以代表一个很好的机会,以减轻由于全球建筑行业的巨大影响。然而,最常用的环境评估方法,如生命周期评估(LCA),在比较传统材料(如混凝土和钢材)建筑和工程木材建筑对气候变化的影响时,可能显示出有限的优势。这项工作提出能值评价(EME)作为一种补充的环境评价方法。通过扩展评估的边界,EME捕获了在LCA中被忽略的输入流和相关特征,特别是在可再生方面。LCA和EME被应用于两个完全相同的模型建筑,它们要么由传统材料组成,要么由工程木材代替。EME显示,与建筑领域的传统材料相比,工程木材具有更高的可持续性水平,与LCA相比,获得了更大的环境效益。最后,通过对三种地理情景、不同能源使用情景和不同运输距离进行比较敏感性分析,测试了结果的稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science of the Total Environment
Science of the Total Environment 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
10.20%
发文量
8726
审稿时长
2.4 months
期刊介绍: The Science of the Total Environment is an international journal dedicated to scientific research on the environment and its interaction with humanity. It covers a wide range of disciplines and seeks to publish innovative, hypothesis-driven, and impactful research that explores the entire environment, including the atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, and anthroposphere. The journal's updated Aims & Scope emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary environmental research with broad impact. Priority is given to studies that advance fundamental understanding and explore the interconnectedness of multiple environmental spheres. Field studies are preferred, while laboratory experiments must demonstrate significant methodological advancements or mechanistic insights with direct relevance to the environment.
期刊最新文献
Wildfire impacts on groundwater recharge in mountain catchments The consequences of the energy transition: Evidence from North America, Europe, and China A Bayesian inversion of TROPOMI methane observations over South Africa: Implications for bottom-up inventories A combined electron and synchrotron micro- and nano-scale exploration of light rare earth element distribution and speciation in bauxite residues of lateritic and karstic origin Persistent organic pollutants in India: Multi-compartment trends, source fingerprinting, and emerging environmental challenges (2000–2025)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1