IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i18p4843-d414471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Energy Balance of Constructions Based on Wood during Their Use in Connection with CO 2 Emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Jozef Švajlenka

    (Laboratory of Construction Technology and Management, Department of Construction Technology, Economy and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Košice, 042 00 Košice, Slovakia)

  • Mária Kozlovská

    (Department of Construction Technology, Economy and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Košice, 0420 00 Košice, Slovakia)

Abstract

In the construction industry, it is the material production phase and the use phase of buildings’ life cycles that represent the greatest environmental burden. The presented research focused on wood constructions during their use phase. The primary objective of the research was to determine the amount of CO 2 produced during the operation of specific wood constructions in connection with the energy demand for their heating. A correlation analysis of selected parameters revealed a statistically significant correlation between heating medium type and energy demand for heating ( p = −0.5773) and between heating medium type and amount of CO 2 produced ( p = 0.4796). A more detailed analysis showed that, in terms of the average energy demand for heating, the column constructions were the most efficient among the compared construction systems, regardless of the energy standard. Similar findings were obtained for annual CO 2 production in connection with the average energy demand for heating. The only difference was that the panel and log constructions exhibited almost identical parameters, which came as a surprise to some extent. The column constructions turned out to be the most efficient again, regardless of their energy standard. The analysis that focused on the heating medium type revealed statistically significant differences among the heating medium types in energy demand for heating ( p < 0.0001). The constructions that used electricity for heating were the most energy-efficient. When the individual characteristics of the different heating media in relation to CO 2 production were taken into account, the constructions that were heated using biomass were the least polluting. The constructions heated using electricity and gas showed a significantly greater deviation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jozef Švajlenka & Mária Kozlovská, 2020. "Analysis of the Energy Balance of Constructions Based on Wood during Their Use in Connection with CO 2 Emissions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:18:p:4843-:d:414471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/18/4843/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/18/4843/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Wiedmann & Richard Wood & Jan Minx & Manfred Lenzen & Dabo Guan & Rocky Harris, 2010. "A Carbon Footprint Time Series Of The Uk - Results From A Multi-Region Input-Output Model," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 19-42.
    2. Park, Junghoon & Tae, Sungho & Kim, Taehyung, 2012. "Life cycle CO2 assessment of concrete by compressive strength on construction site in Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2940-2946.
    3. Cabeza, Luisa F. & Rincón, Lídia & Vilariño, Virginia & Pérez, Gabriel & Castell, Albert, 2014. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 394-416.
    4. Gustafsson, Mattias & Rönnelid, Mats & Trygg, Louise & Karlsson, Björn, 2016. "CO2 emission evaluation of energy conserving measures in buildings connected to a district heating system – Case study of a multi-dwelling building in Sweden," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 341-350.
    5. Hasanbeigi, Ali & Price, Lynn & Lin, Elina, 2012. "Emerging energy-efficiency and CO2 emission-reduction technologies for cement and concrete production: A technical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 6220-6238.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Junsong Jia & Jing Lei & Chundi Chen & Xu Song & Yexi Zhong, 2021. "Contribution of Renewable Energy Consumption to CO 2 Emission Mitigation: A Comparative Analysis from a Global Geographic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Seunguk Na & Inkwan Paik, 2019. "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Costs with the Alternative Structural System for Slab: A Comparative Analysis of South Korea Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Tae Hyoung Kim & Chang U Chae & Gil Hwan Kim & Hyoung Jae Jang, 2016. "Analysis of CO 2 Emission Characteristics of Concrete Used at Construction Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    3. Ä°rem Åžanal, 2018. "Discussion on the effectiveness of cement replacement for carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reduction in concrete," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(2), pages 366-378, April.
    4. Inkwan Paik & Seunguk Na, 2019. "Comparison of Carbon Dioxide Emissions of the Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Slab and the Voided Slab System During the Construction Phase: A Case Study of a Residential Building in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Roh, Seungjun & Tae, Sungho, 2017. "An integrated assessment system for managing life cycle CO2 emissions of a building," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 265-275.
    6. Wang, JingJing & Wang, YuanFeng & Sun, YiWen & Tingley, Danielle Densley & Zhang, YuRong, 2017. "Life cycle sustainability assessment of fly ash concrete structures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1162-1174.
    7. Inkwan Paik & Seunguk Na & Seongho Yoon, 2018. "Assessment of CO 2 Emissions by Replacing an Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Slab with the Void Slab System in a High-Rise Commercial Residential Complex Building in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Ke Zhang & Xingwei Wang, 2021. "Pollution Haven Hypothesis of Global CO 2 , SO 2 , NO x —Evidence from 43 Economies and 56 Sectors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-27, June.
    9. Liu, Xuewei & Yuan, Zengwei & Xu, Yuan & Jiang, Songyan, 2017. "Greening cement in China: A cost-effective roadmap," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 233-244.
    10. Albert, Osei-Owusu Kwame & Marianne, Thomsen & Jonathan, Lindahl & Nino, Javakhishvili Larsen & Dario, Caro, 2020. "Tracking the carbon emissions of Denmark's five regions from a producer and consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    11. Li, Yilin & Chen, Bin & Li, Chaohui & Li, Zhi & Chen, Guoqian, 2020. "Energy perspective of Sino-US trade imbalance in global supply chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    12. Burek, Jasmina & Nutter, Darin W., 2019. "A life cycle assessment-based multi-objective optimization of the purchased, solar, and wind energy for the grocery, perishables, and general merchandise multi-facility distribution center network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1427-1446.
    13. Kucukvar, Murat & Haider, Muhammad Ali & Onat, Nuri Cihat, 2017. "Exploring the material footprints of national electricity production scenarios until 2050: The case for Turkey and UK," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 251-263.
    14. José M. Rueda-Cantuche & Tamas Revesz & Antonio F. Amores & Agustín Velázquez & Marian Mraz & Emanuele Ferrari & Alfredo J. Mainar-Causapé & Letizia Montinari & Bert Saveyn, 2020. "Improving the European input–output database for global trade analysis," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Sierra-Pérez, Jorge & Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Boschmonart-Rives, Jesús & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2018. "Integrated life cycle assessment and thermodynamic simulation of a public building’s envelope renovation: Conventional vs. Passivhaus proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1510-1521.
    16. Luis M. López-Ochoa & Jesús Las-Heras-Casas & Luis M. López-González & César García-Lozano, 2020. "Energy Renovation of Residential Buildings in Cold Mediterranean Zones Using Optimized Thermal Envelope Insulation Thicknesses: The Case of Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-34, March.
    17. Anne Ventura & Van‐Loc Ta & Tristan Senga Kiessé & Stéphanie Bonnet, 2021. "Design of concrete : Setting a new basis for improving both durability and environmental performance," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(1), pages 233-247, February.
    18. Sungwoo Lee & Sungho Tae & Seungjun Roh & Taehyung Kim, 2015. "Green Template for Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings Based on Building Information Modeling: Focus on Embodied Environmental Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Ouyang, Xiaoling & Lin, Boqiang, 2015. "An analysis of the driving forces of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in China’s industrial sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 838-849.
    20. Patricia González-Vallejo & Radu Muntean & Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Madelyn Marrero, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Dwelling Construction in Romania and Spain. A Comparative Analysis with the OERCO2 Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:18:p:4843-:d:414471. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.