IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p5722-d1106684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life-Cycle Assessment of LEED-CI v4 Projects in Shanghai, China: A Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Svetlana Pushkar

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore green office building certification strategies in Shanghai. The 45 LEED-CI v4 gold-certified office space projects were sorted by energy and atmosphere credit (EAc6, optimize energy performance) into two groups: 15 projects with the lowest EAc6 achievement (Group 1) and 15 projects with the highest EAc6 achievement (Group 2). To reach the gold certification level in Group 1, high achievement in EAc6 is associated with low achievement in two indoor environmental quality credits (EQc2, low-emitting materials, and EQc8, quality views), while in Group 2, low achievement in EAc6 is associated with high achievement in EQc2 and EQ8. For the life-cycle assessment (LCA), the functional unit was designated as follows: production (P) stage: production of building materials needed to ensure the requirements of EQc2 and EQc8 for 1 m 2 of the building area; and operational energy (OE) stage: OE of 1 m 2 of the building area over 50 years of the building’s lifetime. For the OE stage, two fuel source scenarios were used: 71.07% coal + 28.08% natural gas + 0.81% wind power (WP) + 0.04% photovoltaic (PV) (Scenario 1) and 50% WP + 50% PV (Scenario 2). The results of the LCA (P + OE) showed that under Scenario 1, the LEED certification strategy in Group 1 was greener than that in Group 2. When using Scenario 2, no differences were found between the two groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Svetlana Pushkar, 2023. "Life-Cycle Assessment of LEED-CI v4 Projects in Shanghai, China: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5722-:d:1106684
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5722/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5722/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svetlana Pushkar, 2023. "LEED-CI v4 Projects in Terms of Life Cycle Assessment in Manhattan, New York City: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Yannick Lessard & Chirjiv Anand & Pierre Blanchet & Caroline Frenette & Ben Amor, 2018. "LEED v4: Where Are We Now? Critical Assessment through the LCA of an Office Building Using a Low Impact Energy Consumption Mix," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1105-1116, October.
    3. Svetlana Pushkar & Abraham Yezioro, 2022. "External Shading Devices: Should the Energy Standard Be Supplemented with a Production Stage?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zhuyuan Xue & Hongbo Liu & Qinxiao Zhang & Jingxin Wang & Jilin Fan & Xia Zhou, 2019. "The Impact Assessment of Campus Buildings Based on a Life Cycle Assessment–Life Cycle Cost Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Svetlana Pushkar, 2023. "LEED-CI v4 Projects in Terms of Life Cycle Assessment in Manhattan, New York City: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Kikki Lambrecht Ipsen & Massimo Pizzol & Morten Birkved & Ben Amor, 2024. "Environmental performance of eco‐design strategies applied to the building sector," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(3), pages 556-572, 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:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5722-:d:1106684. 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.