4.7 Article

Environmental impacts of building materials and building services components for commercial buildings in Hong Kong

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 15, Issue 18, Pages 1840-1851

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.10.004

Keywords

lifecycle analysis; building and building services materials; environmental impacts

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The growing concerns over the environmental impacts of buildings have led to increasing demands for more environmental friendly buildings and building materials. Hitherto, there are not any comprehensive studies that show the overall environmental impact profiles of building materials and building services components for buildings. This paper intends to bridge this gap by reporting overall lifecycle environmental profiles of buildings as well as the ranking orders of environmental impacts of all the building materials and building services materials and components for commercial buildings. Twenty-five commercial buildings in Hong Kong, which include three Grade A office buildings, four Grade B office buildings, one Grade C office buildings, four retail centers and three hotels, have been selected for our study. Based upon these collected samples, no statistical differences were found in the average lifecycle environmental impacts for different building types despite some minor variations were detected. Subsequently, 10 types of building materials and 10 types of building services components have been identified for their significant lifecycle environmental impacts on commercial buildings. Among all, concrete, reinforcement bar, copper power cables, and copper busbars were ranked to be the four most significant materials or components to the total lifecycle environmental impacts. These should form the major targets for improvements in environmental performance of commercial buildings. (C) 2006 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available