IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2018i1p42-d192307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cradle-to-Site Carbon Emissions Assessment of Prefabricated Rebar Cages for High-Rise Buildings in China

Author

Listed:
  • Boya Jiang

    (School of Architecture, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, China)

  • Hongxian Li

    (School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20001, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia)

  • Ling Dong

    (School of Architecture, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, China)

  • Yu Wang

    (School of Architecture Engineering, Nanjing Institute of Technology, Nanjing 211167, China)

  • Yiqi Tao

    (Department of Architecture, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China)

Abstract

Construction industrialization is growing rapidly and has received significant attention worldwide in recent years. The industrialization of construction results in several benefits, including the promotion of sustainable construction and the development and application of prefabrication techniques. The Prefabricated Rebar Cage (PRC) is an emerging solution applied to high-rise buildings as a replacement of the In-situ Reinforcing Bar (ISRB) construction method. This paper investigates the cradle-to-site carbon emissions of PRC, and compares the results with those of conventional in-situ rebar construction methods for high-rise buildings. The cradle-to-site cycle is divided into three stages, namely, material preparation, transportation, and on-site construction. For the material preparation stage, it is found that CO 2 emissions are increased by 3% when using PRC due to the operation of machinery during the prefabrication process. In the transportation stage, CO 2 emissions are found to increase by 3.3 times for PRC, as there is more transportation required for PRCs than for conventional construction methods. During the on-site construction stage, the PRC method demonstrates its advantages by reducing CO 2 emissions by 44.7%, which is attributed to decreased hoisting frequency and lower mechanical utilization for fewer joining activities. Overall, CO 2 emissions can be reduced by 1.24% by adopting the PRC method for high-rise buildings, and it is therefore recommended to adopt PRCs for this purpose. This research studies carbon emissions of PRC and contributes to promoting the sustainable development of prefabricated building techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Boya Jiang & Hongxian Li & Ling Dong & Yu Wang & Yiqi Tao, 2018. "Cradle-to-Site Carbon Emissions Assessment of Prefabricated Rebar Cages for High-Rise Buildings in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2018:i:1:p:42-:d:192307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/42/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/42/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vicent Penadés-Plà & José V. Martí & Tatiana García-Segura & Víctor Yepes, 2017. "Life-Cycle Assessment: A Comparison between Two Optimal Post-Tensioned Concrete Box-Girder Road Bridges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Varun & Bhat, I.K. & Prakash, Ravi, 2009. "LCA of renewable energy for electricity generation systems--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1067-1073, June.
    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. López-Guerrero, Rafael E. & Vera, Sergio & Carpio, Manuel, 2022. "A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the sustainability of industrialised building systems: A bibliographic review and analysis of case studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    2. Sehee Han & Seunguk Na & Nam-Gi Lim, 2020. "Evaluation of Road Transport Pollutant Emissions from Transporting Building Materials to the Construction Site by Replacing Old Vehicles," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Ling Dong & Yu Wang & Hong Xian Li & Boya Jiang & Mohamed Al-Hussein, 2018. "Carbon Reduction Measures-Based LCA of Prefabricated Temporary Housing with Renewable Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Carnevale, E. & Lombardi, L. & Zanchi, L., 2014. "Life Cycle Assessment of solar energy systems: Comparison of photovoltaic and water thermal heater at domestic scale," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 434-446.
    4. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    5. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Dzikuć Maciej, 2015. "Environmental management with the use of LCA in the Polish energy system," Management, Sciendo, vol. 19(1), pages 89-97, May.
    7. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    8. Yihsuan Wu & Jian Hua, 2022. "Investigating a Retrofit Thermal Power Plant from a Sustainable Environment Perspective—A Fuel Lifecycle Assessment Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-26, April.
    9. Sokka, L. & Sinkko, T. & Holma, A. & Manninen, K. & Pasanen, K. & Rantala, M. & Leskinen, P., 2016. "Environmental impacts of the national renewable energy targets – A case study from Finland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1599-1610.
    10. Emanuele Bonamente & Lara Pelliccia & Maria Cleofe Merico & Sara Rinaldi & Alessandro Petrozzi, 2015. "The Multifunctional Environmental Energy Tower: Carbon Footprint and Land Use Analysis of an Integrated Renewable Energy Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Xue-Ting Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions from Electric Output in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, May.
    12. Irfan, Muhammad & Iqbal, Jamshed & Iqbal, Adeel & Iqbal, Zahid & Riaz, Raja Ali & Mehmood, Adeel, 2017. "Opportunities and challenges in control of smart grids – Pakistani perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 652-674.
    13. Andrea J. Boero & Kevin Kardux & Marina Kovaleva & Daniel A. Salas & Jacco Mooijer & Syed Mashruk & Michael Townsend & Kevin Rouwenhorst & Agustin Valera-Medina & Angel D. Ramirez, 2021. "Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Ammonia-Based Electricity," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Gao, Cheng-kang & Na, Hong-ming & Song, Kai-hui & Dyer, Noel & Tian, Fan & Xu, Qing-jiang & Xing, Yu-hong, 2019. "Environmental impact analysis of power generation from biomass and wind farms in different locations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 307-317.
    15. Song, Cuihong & Gardner, Kevin H. & Klein, Sharon J.W. & Souza, Simone Pereira & Mo, Weiwei, 2018. "Cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas emissions from dams in the United States of America," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 945-956.
    16. Wang, Changbo & Chang, Yuan & Zhang, Lixiao & Chen, Yongsheng & Pang, Mingyue, 2018. "Quantifying uncertainties in greenhouse gas accounting of biomass power generation in China: System boundary and parameters," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 121-127.
    17. Karunathilake, Hirushie & Hewage, Kasun & Mérida, Walter & Sadiq, Rehan, 2019. "Renewable energy selection for net-zero energy communities: Life cycle based decision making under uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 558-573.
    18. Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    19. Karunathilake, Hirushie & Hewage, Kasun & Prabatha, Tharindu & Ruparathna, Rajeev & Sadiq, Rehan, 2020. "Project deployment strategies for community renewable energy: A dynamic multi-period planning approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 237-258.
    20. Leidong Yuan & Cheng Xu, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Low-Rank Coal Utilization for Power Generation and Energy Transportation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, June.

    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:11:y:2018:i:1:p:42-:d:192307. 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.