4.8 Review

Development of a building life cycle carbon emissions assessment program (BEGAS 2.0) for Korea's green building index certification system

Journal

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
Volume 53, Issue -, Pages 954-965

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.048

Keywords

BEGAS 2.0; Green Building Index Certification System; Green Building Certification System; Life Cycle Carbon Emission

Funding

  1. construction and transportation technology promotion project - Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of the Korean government [1-Technology Innovation-05]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Carbon emission reduction policies demand tighter building Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) qualification standards. However, it is widely believed that it will be difficult to efficiently reduce the carbon emissions of buildings with only a fragmentary revision of the qualification standards. For this reason, the Korean government has developed the Green Building Index Certification System (GBI certification system), which is a certification framework based primarily upon the carbon emissions of a building. There is currently no assessment program tailored to the GBI certification system. The purpose of this study is to develop the Building Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment Program (BEGAS 2.0) to support Korea's GBI certification system. With a theoretical consideration of the GBI certification system, the building LCA qualification standards of other international green building certification systems were analyzed. These analyses enabled development of BEGAS 2.0 that reflects the characteristics of the GBI certification system and the current state of Korea's construction industry. Consequently, an appropriate building life cycle carbon emissions assessment program was developed, which can support Korea's GBI certification system effectively. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available