In this article, the authors estimated the saving potentials in the embodied energy and CO2 emissions, which could be achieved through a replacement of the most energy-intensive elements in a large building. The results showed that 75% of the embodied energy came from only a small group of the building components, that reductions from 14% to 29% in embodied energy values were possible with simple replacements and that between 1770 and 4160 tonnes of CO2 could be avoided to be emitted to the atmosphere, with budget increases lower than 8%.
AdalberthK (1997) Energy use during the life cycle of single-unit dwellings: examples. Building and Environment32(4): 321–329.
2.
AdalberthK (2000) Energy use and environmental impact of new residential buildings. PhD Thesis, Lund University, Lund.
3.
AdalberthKAlmgrenAHolleris PetersenE (2001) Energy use in four multi-family houses during their life cycle. International Journal of Low Energy and Sustainable Buildings2: 1–21.
BörjessonPGustavssonL (2000) Greenhouse gas balances in building construction: wood versus concrete from life-cycle and forest land-use perspectives. Energy Policy28(9): 575–588.
6.
BuchananAHHoneyBG (1992) Environmental impacts of the New Zealand building industry. Research report, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, June.
7.
BuchananAHHoneyBG (1994) Energy and carbon dioxide implications of building construction. Energy and Buildings20(3): 205–217.
8.
ColeRJKernanPC (1996) Life-cycle energy use in office buildings. Building and Environment31(4): 307–317.
9.
ColeRJRousseauD (1992) Environmental auditing for building construction: energy and air pollution indices for building materials. Building and Environment27(1): 23–30.
DebnathASinghSVSinghYP (1995) Comparative assessment of energy requirements for different types of residential buildings in India. Energy and Buildings23(2): 141–146.
12.
GagliaAGBalarasCAMirasgedisS. (2007) Empirical assessment of the Hellenic non-residential building stock, energy consumption, emissions and potential energy savings. Energy Conversion and Management48(4): 1160–1175.
13.
GonzálezMJNavarroJG (2006) Assessment of the decrease of CO2 emissions in the construction field through the selection of materials: practical case study of three houses of low environmental impact. Building and Environment41(7): 902–909.
14.
GoverseTHekkertMPGroenewegenP. (2001) Wood innovation in the residential construction sector: opportunities and constraints. Resources Conservation and Recycling34(1): 53–74.
15.
HannonBSteinRGSegalBZ. (1978) Energy and labor in the construction sector. Science202: 837–847.
16.
HarrisDJ (1999) A quantitative approach to the assessment of the environmental impact of building materials. Building and Environment34(6): 751–758.
17.
HaseltineBA (1975) Comparison of energy requirements for building materials and structures. The Structural Engineer53(9): 357–365.
18.
HubermanNPearlmutterD (2008) A life-cycle energy analysis of building materials in the Negev desert. Energy and Buildings40(5): 837–848.
19.
Institute of Construction Technology of Catalonia (ITeC). BEDEC database. Available at www.itec.es/ (accessed December 2013).
20.
LiSAltanH (2012) Environmental impact balance of building structures and substitution effect of wood structure in Taiwan. International Journal of Environmental Protection2(1): 1–7.
21.
MithraratneNValeB (2004) Life cycle analysis model for New Zealand houses. Building and Environment39(4): 483–492.
22.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the US (Mauna Loa Observatory). Trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Available at: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/#mlo (accessed 13 February 2014).
23.
NikoofardSIsmet UgursalVBeausoleil-MorrisonI (2012) Effect of window modifications on household energy requirement for heating and cooling in Canada. In: Proceedings of eSim 2012: IBPSA-Canada eSim Conference - the Canadian conference on building simulation, Halifax, NS, Canada, 1–4 May, pp. 324–337. Available at: http://esim.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2012-eSim-Halifax-Proceedings.pdf.
24.
OrrHWangJFetschD. (2012) Technical note: airtightness of older generation energy efficient houses in Saskatoon. Journal of Building Physics36(3): 294–307.
25.
Pérez-LombardLOrtizJPoutC (2008) A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy and Buildings40(3): 394–398.
26.
PonsOWadelG (2011) Environmental impacts of prefabricated school buildings in Catalonia. Habitat International35(4): 553–563.
27.
RameshTPrakashRShuklaKK (2010) Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy and Buildings42(10): 1592–1600.
28.
RodeC (2012) Global building physics. Journal of Building Physics36(4): 337–352.
29.
Rosselló-BatleBMoiàACladeraA. (2010) Energy use, CO2 emissions and waste throughout the life cycle of a sample of hotels in the Balearic Islands. Energy and Buildings42(4): 547–558.
30.
SartoriIHestnesAG (2007) Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article. Energy and Buildings39(3): 249–257.
31.
ScheuerCKeoleianGAReppeP (2003) Life cycle energy and environmental performance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy and Buildings35(10): 1049–1064.
32.
SternN (2006) Stern Review Report on the Economics of Climate Change. Report, HM Treasury, GOV, UK.
33.
SuzukiMOkaT (1998) Estimation of life cycle energy consumption and CO2 emission of office buildings in Japan. Energy and Buildings28(1): 33–41.
34.
SuzukiMOkaTOkadaK (1995) The estimation of energy consumption and CO2 emission due to housing construction in Japan. Energy and Buildings22(2): 165–169.
35.
ThormarkC (2006) The effect of material choice on the total energy need and recycling potential of a building. Building and the Environment41(8): 1019–1026.
36.
Ürge-VorsatzDHarveyLDDMirasgedisS. (2007) Mitigating CO2 emissions from energy use in the world's buildings. Building Research and Information35(4): 379–398.
37.
Venkatarama ReddyBJagadishKS (2003) Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies. Energy and Buildings35(2): 129–137.
38.
ZabalzaIAranda UsónAScarpelliniS (2009) Life cycle assessment in buildings: State-of-the-art and simplified LCA methodology as a complement for building certification. Building and Environment44(12): 2510–2520.
