Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China
As the population continues to grow in China’s urban settings, the building sector contributes to increasing levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concrete and steel are the two most common construction materials used in China and account for 60% of the carbon emissions among all building compon...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sustainability 2022-01, Vol.14 (1), p.144 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 144 |
container_title | Sustainability |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Chen, Cindy X Pierobon, Francesca Jones, Susan Maples, Ian Gong, Yingchun Ganguly, Indroneil |
description | As the population continues to grow in China’s urban settings, the building sector contributes to increasing levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concrete and steel are the two most common construction materials used in China and account for 60% of the carbon emissions among all building components. Mass timber is recognized as an alternative building material to concrete and steel, characterized by better environmental performance and unique structural features. Nonetheless, research associated with mass timber buildings is still lacking in China. Quantifying the emission mitigation potentials of using mass timber in new buildings can help accelerate associated policy development and provide valuable references for developing more sustainable constructions in China. This study used a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach to compare the environmental impacts of a baseline concrete building and a functionally equivalent timber building that uses cross-laminated timber as the primary material. A cradle-to-gate LCA model was developed based on onsite interviews and surveys collected in China, existing publications, and geography-specific life cycle inventory data. The results show that the timber building achieved a 25% reduction in global warming potential compared to its concrete counterpart. The environmental performance of timber buildings can be further improved through local sourcing, enhanced logistics, and manufacturing optimizations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/su14010144 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2618264996</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A815705712</galeid><sourcerecordid>A815705712</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-42ed7abfb51d2a216f09dcb335bc9661549977d1fbc7f847de8a0b963d73196e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkU1LxDAQhosoKOrFXxDwpLBr0rTJ1tta_IIVwY9zSZPJmqVN10wq7r83soI6c5hheN53GCbLThidcl7RCxxZQRllRbGTHeRUsgmjJd390-9nx4grmoJzVjFxkK3qoV-roKL7ALJwFki90R2QOSIg9uAjGSx5UIjkxfUtBKK8IfXgdYAI5AnQmQQ51ZGr0XXG-SVekjmpFQJ5jqPZEOdJ_ea8Osr2rOoQjn_qYfZ6c_1S300Wj7f39Xwx0QWt4qTIwUjV2rZkJlc5E5ZWRrecl62uhGBlUVVSGmZbLe2skAZmiraV4EammwTww-x067sOw_sIGJvVMAafVja5YLNcJAORqOmWWqoOGuftEIPSKQ30Tg8erEvz-YyVkpaS5Ulw9k-QmAifcalGxOb--ek_e75ldRgQA9hmHVyvwqZhtPn-VfP7K_4FYSSEOg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2618264996</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China</title><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Chen, Cindy X ; Pierobon, Francesca ; Jones, Susan ; Maples, Ian ; Gong, Yingchun ; Ganguly, Indroneil</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Cindy X ; Pierobon, Francesca ; Jones, Susan ; Maples, Ian ; Gong, Yingchun ; Ganguly, Indroneil</creatorcontrib><description>As the population continues to grow in China’s urban settings, the building sector contributes to increasing levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concrete and steel are the two most common construction materials used in China and account for 60% of the carbon emissions among all building components. Mass timber is recognized as an alternative building material to concrete and steel, characterized by better environmental performance and unique structural features. Nonetheless, research associated with mass timber buildings is still lacking in China. Quantifying the emission mitigation potentials of using mass timber in new buildings can help accelerate associated policy development and provide valuable references for developing more sustainable constructions in China. This study used a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach to compare the environmental impacts of a baseline concrete building and a functionally equivalent timber building that uses cross-laminated timber as the primary material. A cradle-to-gate LCA model was developed based on onsite interviews and surveys collected in China, existing publications, and geography-specific life cycle inventory data. The results show that the timber building achieved a 25% reduction in global warming potential compared to its concrete counterpart. The environmental performance of timber buildings can be further improved through local sourcing, enhanced logistics, and manufacturing optimizations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su14010144</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Building components ; Building construction ; Buildings ; Carbon footprint ; Case studies ; Climate change ; Comparative analysis ; Concrete ; Concrete construction ; Construction industry ; Construction materials ; Design and construction ; Dwellings ; Emissions ; Energy consumption ; Environmental aspects ; Floor coverings ; Flooring ; Geography ; Global warming ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; Housing ; Logistics ; Manufacturing ; Mitigation ; Residential areas ; Residential buildings ; Timber ; Timber (structural) ; Urban areas ; Urban environments ; Urbanization ; Wood laminates ; Wood products</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2022-01, Vol.14 (1), p.144</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2021 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-42ed7abfb51d2a216f09dcb335bc9661549977d1fbc7f847de8a0b963d73196e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-42ed7abfb51d2a216f09dcb335bc9661549977d1fbc7f847de8a0b963d73196e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6731-8510</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Cindy X</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierobon, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maples, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gong, Yingchun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganguly, Indroneil</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>As the population continues to grow in China’s urban settings, the building sector contributes to increasing levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concrete and steel are the two most common construction materials used in China and account for 60% of the carbon emissions among all building components. Mass timber is recognized as an alternative building material to concrete and steel, characterized by better environmental performance and unique structural features. Nonetheless, research associated with mass timber buildings is still lacking in China. Quantifying the emission mitigation potentials of using mass timber in new buildings can help accelerate associated policy development and provide valuable references for developing more sustainable constructions in China. This study used a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach to compare the environmental impacts of a baseline concrete building and a functionally equivalent timber building that uses cross-laminated timber as the primary material. A cradle-to-gate LCA model was developed based on onsite interviews and surveys collected in China, existing publications, and geography-specific life cycle inventory data. The results show that the timber building achieved a 25% reduction in global warming potential compared to its concrete counterpart. The environmental performance of timber buildings can be further improved through local sourcing, enhanced logistics, and manufacturing optimizations.</description><subject>Building components</subject><subject>Building construction</subject><subject>Buildings</subject><subject>Carbon footprint</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Concrete</subject><subject>Concrete construction</subject><subject>Construction industry</subject><subject>Construction materials</subject><subject>Design and construction</subject><subject>Dwellings</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Energy consumption</subject><subject>Environmental aspects</subject><subject>Floor coverings</subject><subject>Flooring</subject><subject>Geography</subject><subject>Global warming</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Logistics</subject><subject>Manufacturing</subject><subject>Mitigation</subject><subject>Residential areas</subject><subject>Residential buildings</subject><subject>Timber</subject><subject>Timber (structural)</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban environments</subject><subject>Urbanization</subject><subject>Wood laminates</subject><subject>Wood products</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkU1LxDAQhosoKOrFXxDwpLBr0rTJ1tta_IIVwY9zSZPJmqVN10wq7r83soI6c5hheN53GCbLThidcl7RCxxZQRllRbGTHeRUsgmjJd390-9nx4grmoJzVjFxkK3qoV-roKL7ALJwFki90R2QOSIg9uAjGSx5UIjkxfUtBKK8IfXgdYAI5AnQmQQ51ZGr0XXG-SVekjmpFQJ5jqPZEOdJ_ea8Osr2rOoQjn_qYfZ6c_1S300Wj7f39Xwx0QWt4qTIwUjV2rZkJlc5E5ZWRrecl62uhGBlUVVSGmZbLe2skAZmiraV4EammwTww-x067sOw_sIGJvVMAafVja5YLNcJAORqOmWWqoOGuftEIPSKQ30Tg8erEvz-YyVkpaS5Ulw9k-QmAifcalGxOb--ek_e75ldRgQA9hmHVyvwqZhtPn-VfP7K_4FYSSEOg</recordid><startdate>20220101</startdate><enddate>20220101</enddate><creator>Chen, Cindy X</creator><creator>Pierobon, Francesca</creator><creator>Jones, Susan</creator><creator>Maples, Ian</creator><creator>Gong, Yingchun</creator><creator>Ganguly, Indroneil</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6731-8510</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220101</creationdate><title>Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China</title><author>Chen, Cindy X ; Pierobon, Francesca ; Jones, Susan ; Maples, Ian ; Gong, Yingchun ; Ganguly, Indroneil</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-42ed7abfb51d2a216f09dcb335bc9661549977d1fbc7f847de8a0b963d73196e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Building components</topic><topic>Building construction</topic><topic>Buildings</topic><topic>Carbon footprint</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Concrete</topic><topic>Concrete construction</topic><topic>Construction industry</topic><topic>Construction materials</topic><topic>Design and construction</topic><topic>Dwellings</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Energy consumption</topic><topic>Environmental aspects</topic><topic>Floor coverings</topic><topic>Flooring</topic><topic>Geography</topic><topic>Global warming</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Logistics</topic><topic>Manufacturing</topic><topic>Mitigation</topic><topic>Residential areas</topic><topic>Residential buildings</topic><topic>Timber</topic><topic>Timber (structural)</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban environments</topic><topic>Urbanization</topic><topic>Wood laminates</topic><topic>Wood products</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Cindy X</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierobon, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maples, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gong, Yingchun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganguly, Indroneil</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Cindy X</au><au>Pierobon, Francesca</au><au>Jones, Susan</au><au>Maples, Ian</au><au>Gong, Yingchun</au><au>Ganguly, Indroneil</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2022-01-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>144</spage><pages>144-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>As the population continues to grow in China’s urban settings, the building sector contributes to increasing levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Concrete and steel are the two most common construction materials used in China and account for 60% of the carbon emissions among all building components. Mass timber is recognized as an alternative building material to concrete and steel, characterized by better environmental performance and unique structural features. Nonetheless, research associated with mass timber buildings is still lacking in China. Quantifying the emission mitigation potentials of using mass timber in new buildings can help accelerate associated policy development and provide valuable references for developing more sustainable constructions in China. This study used a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach to compare the environmental impacts of a baseline concrete building and a functionally equivalent timber building that uses cross-laminated timber as the primary material. A cradle-to-gate LCA model was developed based on onsite interviews and surveys collected in China, existing publications, and geography-specific life cycle inventory data. The results show that the timber building achieved a 25% reduction in global warming potential compared to its concrete counterpart. The environmental performance of timber buildings can be further improved through local sourcing, enhanced logistics, and manufacturing optimizations.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su14010144</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6731-8510</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2071-1050 |
ispartof | Sustainability, 2022-01, Vol.14 (1), p.144 |
issn | 2071-1050 2071-1050 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2618264996 |
source | MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Building components Building construction Buildings Carbon footprint Case studies Climate change Comparative analysis Concrete Concrete construction Construction industry Construction materials Design and construction Dwellings Emissions Energy consumption Environmental aspects Floor coverings Flooring Geography Global warming Greenhouse effect Greenhouse gases Housing Logistics Manufacturing Mitigation Residential areas Residential buildings Timber Timber (structural) Urban areas Urban environments Urbanization Wood laminates Wood products |
title | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mass Timber and Concrete Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T15%3A26%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Life%20Cycle%20Assessment%20of%20Mass%20Timber%20and%20Concrete%20Residential%20Buildings:%20A%20Case%20Study%20in%20China&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Chen,%20Cindy%20X&rft.date=2022-01-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=144&rft.pages=144-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su14010144&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA815705712%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2618264996&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A815705712&rfr_iscdi=true |