| 1. |
- Dodoo, Ambrose, 1979-, et al.
(författare)
-
Climate impacts of wood vs. non-wood buildings
- 2016
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This report documents the findings of a project commissioned by the SwedishAssociation of Local Authorities and Regions on energy and climateimplications of building structural-frame materials from a life cycle perspective.The report is compiled by researchers within the Sustainable Built EnvironmentGroup (SBER) at Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden, and it addresses theterms of reference of the project agreement, including review of existingliterature and reports on energy and climate implications of wood-frame andnon-wood-frame building systems.The report’s primarily focus is: the effect of material choice on different lifecycle stages of a building; the significance of building frame material in relationto the total primary energy use and climate impact of a building; keymethodological issues linked to life cycle analysis of buildings; and theimportance of system perspective in analysis of a building’s climate impacts.
|
|
| 2. |
- Dodoo, Ambrose, 1979-, et al.
(författare)
-
Modeling Carbon Footprint of Wood-Based Products and Buildings
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Carbon Footprint Handbook. - London : CRC Press. - 9781482262223 - 9780429160493 ; , s. 143-162
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and thereby mitigate global climate change are receiving increasing attention in many countries today. There is growing recognition that the current trends in energy supply and demand are not consistent with the goals of sustainable development. Of the global primary energy supply of 549 EJ in 2011, fossil fuels constituted 82%, and biofuels, nuclear, and hydro accounted for about 10, 5, and 2%, respectively (IEA 2013a). Fossil-fuel combustion is the major anthropogenic source of GHG emissions (IPCC 2013). A less significant share of anthropogenic CO2 emission is also connected to non-energy related activities including land-use practices and industrial process reactions. Fossil-fuel combustion and industrial process reactions accounted for 78% of the global total GHG emission increase between 1970 and 2010 (IPCC 2014). Figure 7.1 shows a breakdown of the global total primary energy supply (TPES) and associated CO2 emission by fuel type in 2011 (IEA 2013b). Major studies suggest that fossil fuels are very likely to account for a significant share of future primary energy use, even if effective measures are implemented to promote resource efficiency and sustainable energy systems in the global community (IPCC 2000a,b; IEA 2011). There is growing interest in strategies to reduce fossil-fuel use, thereby creating a resource-efficient built environment with low-carbon footprint.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gustavsson, Leif, 1954-, et al.
(författare)
-
Climate change effects of forestry and substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Renewable & sustainable energy reviews. - : Elsevier. - 1364-0321 .- 1879-0690. ; 67:January, s. 612-624
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We estimate the climate effects of directing forest management in Sweden towards increased carbon storage in forests with more land set-aside for protection, or towards increased forest production for the substitution of carbon-intensive materials and fossil fuels, relative to a reference case of current forest management. We develop various scenarios of forest management and biomass use to estimate the carbon balances of the forest systems, including ecological and technological components, and their impacts on the climate in terms of radiative forcing. The scenario with increased set-aside area and the current level of forest residue harvest resulted in lower cumulative carbon emissions compared to the reference case for the first 90 years, but then showed higher emissions as reduced forest harvest led to higher carbon emissions from energy and material systems. For the reference case of current forest management, increased harvest of forest residues gave increased climate benefits. The most climatically beneficial alternative, expressed as reduced cumulative radiative forcing, in both the short and long terms is a strategy aimed at high forest production, high residue recovery rate, and high efficiency utilization of harvested biomass. Active forest management with high harvest levels and efficient forest product utilization will provide more climate benefit, compared to reducing harvest and storing more carbon in the forest.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
