4.4 Article

Evaluation of current material stock and future demolition waste for urban residential buildings in Jakarta and Bandung, Indonesia: embodied energy and CO2 emission analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIAL CYCLES AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 657-675

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10163-015-0460-1

Keywords

Material flow analysis; Embodied energy; Demolition waste; CO2 emissions; Input-output analysis

Funding

  1. JSPS [23760551]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15KK0210, 23760551, 26420582] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

First, this paper evaluates the current building material stock and future demolition waste for urban residential buildings in the cities of Jakarta and Bandung using a material-flow analysis. The actual on-site building measurements were conducted in Jakarta (2012) and Bandung (2011), focusing particularly on unplanned houses, to obtain building material inventory data. A total of 297 houses were investigated in Jakarta, whereas 247 houses were measured in Bandung. Second, this paper analyses the embodied energy and CO2 emissions of building materials through an input-output analysis. The results show that, overall, the total material input intensity for the houses is 2.67 ton/m(2) in Jakarta and 2.54 ton/m(2) in Bandung. Two scenarios with zero and maximum reuse/recycling rates were designed to predict future demolition waste and the embodied energy/CO2 emissions of building materials in Jakarta. Closed-and open-loop material flows were applied. If the maximum reuse/recycling rates are applied to the closed- and open-loop material flows in Jakarta, then it would become possible to not only decrease the final disposal waste (from 123.9 to 2.1 million ton) but also reduce the corresponding embodied energy (from 247.8 to 192.1 PJ) and CO2 emissions (from 24.3 to 19.2 million ton CO2-eq) compared with the zero reuse/recycling scenario from 2012 to 2020.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available