Embodied energy and embodied carbon of structural building materials: Worldwide progress and barriers through literature map analysis
Climate change mitigation is a recurrent consciousness topic among society and policymakers. Actions are being adopted to face this crucial environmental challenge, with a rising concern with a big impact on the building sector. Construction materials have a high carbon footprint as well as an energ...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat de Lleida (UdL) |
| Repositorio: | Repositori Obert UdL |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositori.udl.cat:10459.1/70168 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110612 http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/70168 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Climate change mitigation Embodied energy Embodied carbon Range of values Structural building materials Literature map Bibliometric analysis |
| Sumario: | Climate change mitigation is a recurrent consciousness topic among society and policymakers. Actions are being adopted to face this crucial environmental challenge, with a rising concern with a big impact on the building sector. Construction materials have a high carbon footprint as well as an energy- intensive activity. To measure the environmental damage and effects, life cycle assessment (LCA) is the methodology most widespread. However, the LCA methodology itself and the assumptions done to carry it out leads to a generalized burden to compare the case studies outcomes. LCA method and for instance geographical location are incompatibilities also revealed in embodied energy and embodied carbon assessments. Urgent actions are needed to clarify the confusions arisen in the research, considering a detailed study on the embodied energy and embodied carbon values. From a material level point of view, this paper aims to illustrate the chronological overview of embodied energy and embodied carbon through keywords analysis. Moreover, to support and corroborate the analysis, an organized summary of the literature data is presented, reporting the range of embodied energy and embodied carbon values up to now. This systematic analysis evidences the lack of standardization and disagreement regarding the assessment of coefficients, database source, and boundary system used in the methodology assessment. |
|---|