Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Analysing methodological choices in calculations of embodied energy and GHG emissions from buildings
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Environmental Strategies Research (fms).ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2949-422X
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Energy and Buildings, ISSN 0378-7788, E-ISSN 1872-6178, Vol. 158, p. 1487-1498Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The importance of embodied energy and embodied greenhouse gas emissions (EEG) from buildings is gaining increased interest within building sector initiatives and on a regulatory level. In spite of recent harmonisation efforts, reported results of EEG from building case studies display large variations in numerical results due to variations in the chosen indicators, data sources and both temporal and physical boundaries. The aim of this paper is to add value to existing EEG research knowledge by systematically explaining and analysing the methodological implications of the quantitative results obtained, thus providing a framework for reinterpretation and more effective comparison. The collection of over 80 international case studies developed within the International Energy Agency's EBC Annex 57 research programme is used as the quantitative foundation to present a comprehensive analysis of the multiple interacting methodological parameters. The analysis of methodological parameters is structured by the stepwise methodological choices made in the building EEG assessment practice. Each of six assessment process steps involves one or more methodological choices relevant to the EEG results, and the combination potentials between these many parameters signifies a multitude of ways in which the outcome of EEG studies are affected.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Ltd , 2018. Vol. 158, p. 1487-1498
Keywords [en]
Embodied energy, Embodied GHG emissions, EN15978 standard, Life cycle assessment, Methodological choices, Sustainable building, Buildings, Gas emissions, Intelligent buildings, Life cycle, GHG emission, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Greenhouse gases
National Category
Construction Management
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-227101DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.013ISI: 000428010300045Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85034968199OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-227101DiVA, id: diva2:1205962
Note

QC 20180515

Available from: 2018-05-15 Created: 2018-05-15 Last updated: 2018-05-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Malmqvist, Tove

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Malmqvist, Tove
By organisation
Environmental Strategies Research (fms)
In the same journal
Energy and Buildings
Construction Management

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 32 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf