IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4688-d189278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of the Applied Measures on the Simulated Scenarios for the Sustainable Building Construction through Carbon Footprint Emissions—Case Study of Building Construction in Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Marina Nikolić Topalović

    (University College of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Belgrade 1046, Serbia)

  • Milenko Stanković

    (Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Faculty of Architecture, University of Banja Luka, Vojvode Stepe 77, Banja Luka 78000, Republika Srpska, Bosna i Hercegovina)

  • Goran Ćirović

    (University College of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Belgrade 1046, Serbia)

  • Dragan Pamučar

    (Department of Logistics, Military Academy, University of Defense in Belgrade, Pavla Jurisica Sturma 33, Belgrade 11000, Serbia)

Abstract

Research was conducted to indicate the impact of the increased flow of thermal insulation materials on the environment due to the implementation of the new regulations on energy efficiency of buildings. The regulations on energy efficiency of buildings in Serbia came into force on 30 September 2012 for all new buildings as well as for buildings in the process of rehabilitation and reconstruction. For that purpose, the carbon footprint was analyzed in three scenarios (BS, S1 and S2) for which the quantities of construction materials and processes were calculated. The life cycle analysis (LCA), which is the basis for analyzing the carbon life cycle (LCACO 2 ), was used in this study. Carbon Calculator was used for measuring carbon footprint, and URSA program to calculate the operational energy. This study was done in two phases. In Phase 1, the embodied carbon was measured to evaluate short-term effects of the implementation of the new regulations. Phase 2 included the first 10 years of building exploitation to evaluate the long-term effects of the new regulations. The analysis was done for the period of 10 years, further adjustments to the regulations regarding energy efficiency of the buildings in Serbia are expected in accordance with EU directives. The study shows that, in the short-run, Scenario BS has the lowest embodied carbon. In the long-run, after 3.66 years, Scenario S2 becomes a better option regarding the impact on the environment. The study reveals the necessity to include embodied carbon together with the whole life carbon to estimation the impact of a building on the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Marina Nikolić Topalović & Milenko Stanković & Goran Ćirović & Dragan Pamučar, 2018. "Comparison of the Applied Measures on the Simulated Scenarios for the Sustainable Building Construction through Carbon Footprint Emissions—Case Study of Building Construction in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4688-:d:189278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4688/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4688/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nässén, Jonas & Holmberg, John & Wadeskog, Anders & Nyman, Madeleine, 2007. "Direct and indirect energy use and carbon emissions in the production phase of buildings: An input–output analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1593-1602.
    2. Chang, Yuan & Ries, Robert J. & Wang, Yaowu, 2011. "The quantification of the embodied impacts of construction projects on energy, environment, and society based on I-O LCA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6321-6330, October.
    3. Unknown, 2005. "Forward," 2005 Conference: Slovenia in the EU - Challenges for Agriculture, Food Science and Rural Affairs, November 10-11, 2005, Moravske Toplice, Slovenia 183804, Slovenian Association of Agricultural Economists (DAES).
    4. Ahmad Faiz Abd Rashid & Juferi Idris & Sumiani Yusoff, 2017. "Environmental Impact Analysis on Residential Building in Malaysia Using Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, February.
    5. Srđan Dimić & Dragan Pamučar & Srđan Ljubojević & Boban Đorović, 2016. "Strategic Transport Management Models—The Case Study of an Oil Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-27, September.
    6. Young-Sun Jeong, 2017. "Assessment of Alternative Scenarios for CO 2 Reduction Potential in the Residential Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-16, March.
    7. Diana Carolina Gámez-García & José Manuel Gómez-Soberón & Ramón Corral-Higuera & Héctor Saldaña-Márquez & María Consolación Gómez-Soberón & Susana Paola Arredondo-Rea, 2018. "A Cradle to Handover Life Cycle Assessment of External Walls: Choice of Materials and Prognosis of Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    8. Miguel-Angel Perea-Moreno & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro & Alberto-Jesus Perea-Moreno, 2018. "Sustainable Energy Based on Sunflower Seed Husk Boiler for Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, September.
    9. Zhang, Xiaoling & Shen, Liyin & Zhang, Lei, 2013. "Life cycle assessment of the air emissions during building construction process: A case study in Hong Kong," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 160-169.
    10. Mohamad Monkiz Khasreen & Phillip F. G. Banfill & Gillian F. Menzies, 2009. "Life-Cycle Assessment and the Environmental Impact of Buildings: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-28, September.
    11. Xianzheng Gong & Zuoren Nie & Zhihong Wang & Suping Cui & Feng Gao & Tieyong Zuo, 2012. "Life Cycle Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emission of Residential Building Designs in Beijing," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(4), pages 576-587, August.
    12. Miimu Airaksinen & Pellervo Matilainen, 2010. "Carbon Efficient Building Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-15, March.
    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. Alberto Bezama & Jakob Hildebrandt & Daniela Thrän, 2021. "Integrating Regionalized Socioeconomic Considerations onto Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating Bioeconomy Value Chains: A Case Study on Hybrid Wood–Concrete Ceiling Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. López-Ochoa, Luis M. & Las-Heras-Casas, Jesús & González-Caballín, Juan M. & Carpio, Manuel, 2023. "Towards nearly zero-energy residential buildings in Mediterranean countries: The implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive 2018 in Spain," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).

    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. Diana Carolina Gámez-García & José Manuel Gómez-Soberón & Ramón Corral-Higuera & Héctor Saldaña-Márquez & María Consolación Gómez-Soberón & Susana Paola Arredondo-Rea, 2018. "A Cradle to Handover Life Cycle Assessment of External Walls: Choice of Materials and Prognosis of Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Dixit, Manish K. & Culp, Charles H. & Fernández-Solís, Jose L., 2013. "System boundary for embodied energy in buildings: A conceptual model for definition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 153-164.
    3. Dixit, Manish K., 2017. "Life cycle embodied energy analysis of residential buildings: A review of literature to investigate embodied energy parameters," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 390-413.
    4. Rui Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decomposition and Decoupling Analysis of Life-Cycle Carbon Emission in China’s Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Leslie Ayagapin & Jean Philippe Praene, 2020. "Environmental Overcost of Single Family Houses in Insular Context: A Comparative LCA Study of Reunion Island and France," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    6. Chang, Yuan & Ries, Robert J. & Wang, Yaowu, 2013. "Life-cycle energy of residential buildings in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 656-664.
    7. 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.
    8. Shuangxi Zhou & Zhenzhen Guo & Yang Ding & Jingliang Dong & Jianming Le & Jie Fu, 2021. "Effect of Green Construction on a Building’s Carbon Emission and Its Price at Materialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Ningshuang Zeng & Yan Liu & Chao Mao & Markus König, 2018. "Investigating the Relationship between Construction Supply Chain Integration and Sustainable Use of Material: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Umberto Vitiello & Antonio Salzano & Domenico Asprone & Marco Di Ludovico & Andrea Prota, 2016. "Life-Cycle Assessment of Seismic Retrofit Strategies Applied to Existing Building Structures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Rongrong Li & Rui Jiang, 2017. "Moving Low-Carbon Construction Industry in Jiangsu Province: Evidence from Decomposition and Decoupling Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-14, June.
    12. Ionel-Sorinel Vasilca & Madlena Nen & Oana Chivu & Valentin Radu & Cezar-Petre Simion & Nicolae Marinescu, 2021. "The Management of Environmental Resources in the Construction Sector: An Empirical Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    13. Baoquan Cheng & Jingwei Li & Vivian W. Y. Tam & Ming Yang & Dong Chen, 2020. "A BIM-LCA Approach for Estimating the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Large-Scale Public Buildings: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, January.
    14. Pilar Lopez-Llompart & G. Mathias Kondolf, 2016. "Encroachments in floodways of the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(1), pages 513-542, March.
    15. Hammad Ahmad & Gyan Chhipi-Shrestha & Kasun Hewage & Rehan Sadiq, 2022. "A Comprehensive Review on Construction Applications and Life Cycle Sustainability of Natural Fiber Biocomposites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-34, November.
    16. Cheng, Jianquan & Bertolini, Luca, 2013. "Measuring urban job accessibility with distance decay, competition and diversity," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 100-109.
    17. M. De Donno & M. Pratelli, 2006. "A theory of stochastic integration for bond markets," Papers math/0602532, arXiv.org.
    18. Prilly Oktoviany & Robert Knobloch & Ralf Korn, 2021. "A machine learning-based price state prediction model for agricultural commodities using external factors," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 44(2), pages 1063-1085, December.
    19. Michelle Sheran Sylvester, 2007. "The Career and Family Choices of Women: A Dynamic Analysis of Labor Force Participation, Schooling, Marriage and Fertility Decisions," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(3), pages 367-399, July.
    20. Henrekson, Magnus & Johansson, Dan, 2010. "Firm Growth, Institutions and Structural Transformation," Ratio Working Papers 150, The Ratio Institute.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4688-:d:189278. 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.