IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i22p8724-d978553.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Low-Carbon Retrofitting Path of Existing Public Buildings: A Comparative Study Based on Green Building Rating Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Ke Liu

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China
    Jiangsu Province Engineering Research Center of Construction Carbon Neutral Technology, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215011, China
    Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Intelligent Building Energy Efficiency, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China
    Yangtze River Delta Institute of Carbon Neutrality for Human Settlement, Suzhou 215009, China)

  • Jianglan Tian

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China
    Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Intelligent Building Energy Efficiency, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China)

  • Jianping Chen

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China
    Jiangsu Province Engineering Research Center of Construction Carbon Neutral Technology, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215011, China
    Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Intelligent Building Energy Efficiency, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, China)

  • Yueming Wen

    (School of Architecture, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China)

Abstract

Existing building carbon emissions contribute to global climate change significantly. Various Green Building Rating Systems (GBRS) have considered low-carbon requirements to regulate the emissions. Low-carbon retrofitting is an important way to reduce existing building CO 2 emissions. However, low-carbon retrofitting of existing public buildings is not sufficient and systematic, and there is a lack of research on low-carbon retrofitting from the perspective of GBRS. The purpose of this study is to propose a carbon emission control framework for existing public buildings based on GBRS analysis and guide the low-carbon retrofitting. This study makes comparisons among the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), Green Mark (GM), and Assessment Standard for Green Retrofitting of Existing Buildings (ASGREB). A low-carbon retrofit pathway for existing public buildings is proposed from the GBRS research for the first time, encompassing six aspects: materials, energy, management, innovation, site, and water, involving 15 measures. Among them, measures on energy and materials are the main considerations, with weights of 18.3% and 17.7%, respectively. Six recommendations for implementation pathways are also given. Furthermore, the necessary measures, the importance of local context and quantification, priorities of materials, and energy scopes are defined.

Suggested Citation

  • Ke Liu & Jianglan Tian & Jianping Chen & Yueming Wen, 2022. "Low-Carbon Retrofitting Path of Existing Public Buildings: A Comparative Study Based on Green Building Rating Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:22:p:8724-:d:978553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/22/8724/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/22/8724/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudio Nägeli & Liane Thuvander & Holger Wallbaum & Rebecca Cachia & Sebastian Stortecky & Ali Hainoun, 2022. "Methodologies for Synthetic Spatial Building Stock Modelling: Data-Availability-Adapted Approaches for the Spatial Analysis of Building Stock Energy Demand," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-18, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:22:p:8724-:d:978553. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.