Next Article in Journal
Design of Islamic Parametric Elevation for Interior, Enclosed Corridors to Optimize Daylighting and Solar Radiation Exposure in a Desert Climate: A Case Study of the University of Sharjah, UAE
Next Article in Special Issue
Contemporary and Novel Hold-Down Solutions for Mass Timber Shear Walls
Previous Article in Journal
Parametric Optimization and Decision Support Model Framework for Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment of Flexible Industrial Building Structures Integrating Production Planning
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Identification, Development, and Evaluation of BIM-ARDM: A BIM-Based AR Defect Management System for Construction Inspections
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Buildings
Volume 12
Issue 2
10.3390/buildings12020163
buildings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Challenges and Future Development Paths of Low Carbon Building Design: A Review

by
Chang Xi
1 and
Shi-Jie Cao
1,2,*
1
School of Architecture, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
2
Global Centre for Clean Air Research, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2022, 12(2), 163; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020163
Submission received: 27 December 2021 / Revised: 27 January 2022 / Accepted: 30 January 2022 / Published: 2 February 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Buildings: 10th Anniversary)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Excessive carbon emissions are causing the problems of global warming and the greenhouse effect, which urgently need to be controlled worldwide. It is crucial to reduce the carbon emissions of the construction industry as it is one of the main sources. Carbon is generated at all phases of the building life cycle, including in material production, building design, and building operation and maintenance. Notably, building design has various extents of influence on carbon emissions at each phase, for which a low carbon method urgently needs to be explored. This paper aims to summarize the current status of building design through literature review considering standard systems, carbon emission calculations, and building design optimization. The challenges of building design are as follows: lack of (1) a comprehensive standard system considering different factors, (2) lack of a carbon emission calculation method for the design phase, and a (3) no real-time optimization model aiming at carbon reduction. The path of “standard−calculation−prediction−optimization” (SCPO) for future building design is proposed to address these challenges. It takes standard system as the framework, the carbon calculation method as the foundation, the prediction model as the theory, and the low carbon building as the objective. This paper can provide theoretical guidance for low carbon building design.

1. Introduction

Increased fossil fuel combustion and the exploitation of finite resources are causing excessive carbon emissions, further resulting in global warming and the greenhouse effect [1,2]. If the atmospheric CO2 doubles, the global average temperature will rise by about 3 °C [2]. It is predicted that the increase in global temperature could reach at least 1.5 °C or more by 2030–2052 due to carbon emissions [3]. Countries around the world urgently need to control carbon emissions. In 2015, the Paris Agreement was negotiated. Almost all countries and regions have pronounced low carbon emission policies [4,5]. The European Union has set a goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 [4]. China is the largest carbon emitter in the world, with carbon emissions already reaching 10.251 billion tons in 2020 [6]. In response, the president of China first committed at the 75th UN General Assembly to achieve the goal of carbon peaking by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060 [7]. Reducing carbon emissions has become an urgent issue worldwide.
The report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated that industry, buildings, and transportation are the main sources of carbon emissions. Reducing building carbon emissions, which account for almost 40% of the total carbon emissions globally, is the key to achieving carbon peaking and neutrality [8]. The global building stock is on the rise annually. Taking Norway as an example, the building stock is predicted to increase to 448 million m2 in 2050, which is about 20 % compared to 2020 [9]. China has about 2 billion m2 of new construction annually, which accounts for almost 50% of the world’s total [10]. It is expected that 800 million m2 of new urban residential buildings will be built in per year by 2030 [11]. Thus, it is undoubtedly a major challenge to reduce carbon emissions in the building sector in order to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality.
Strategies have been developed in several countries and regions in order to achieve the goal of zero carbon, largely by reducing the carbon emissions from buildings [12]. The main principles are as follows: (1) making full use of renewable energy to reduce the embedded carbon emissions from the production of building materials, to building construction, to the completion phase; (2) using renewable energy and advanced energy-saving technologies to reduce the carbon emissions in the operation phase; and (3) the remaining carbon can be neutralized by means of carbon sinks or compensated carbon, in order to finally achieve the goal of low carbon building [12]. To this end, the carbon emission process of the life cycle of the building should be fully comprehended. As can been seen in Figure 1, there are seven phases in the whole life cycle, including building material production, building transportation, building design, building construction, building operation and maintenance [13], building renewal, and building demolition. Embedded carbon is generated in the phases of building material production, transportation, construction, and demolition [14], while the carbon generated in the phases of operation and maintenance is operational carbon [15,16]. The carbon emissions from building construction and operation can be up to 40% of the global total emissions [17]. Of the phases of the building life cycle, taking office buildings as an example, building operation and maintenance generates about 66% of the operational carbon, with about 27% of embedded carbon generated in the material production, transportation, and construction, and at least 7% of carbon emissions generated in the other phases [18]. This phenomenon means that each phase of the building life cycle has a diverse impact on carbon emissions.
It is important to note that building design affects carbon emissions in all phases of the building life cycle to variable extents [19]. Figure 1 clearly depicts that the building design phase can determine the form of the building envelope, material selection, etc., which directly affects the carbon emits in the phases of building material production and building transportation, etc. [20]. The design of air conditioning and ventilation systems in the building operation and maintenance, and building renewal phases are based on the finalized building morphology [21]. More seriously, if the building performance is optimized by active technology or retrofitting, such as adding insulation facilities or retrofitting the original operation system [22,23], the embedded carbon emission of the building could be increased [24]. Thus, low carbon building design is crucial to reduce carbon emissions throughout the building life cycle.
At present, scholars from all over the world have fully recognized and conducted in-depth research about the impact of building design on carbon emissions [25], such as building design models and tools [26], optimization of the building design factors [27], and passive and active coupling design [28]. There are many challenges for low carbon building design in the actual application because of the complex building environment. This paper aims to summarize the current status of low carbon building design through literature analysis, and to discuss the challenges and possible developments for the future. Section 2 is the methodology of this work. Section 3 is the current status and challenges regarding research on low carbon building design. Section 4 is possible future work of low carbon building design. Section 5 is the main conclusion. This paper aims to have a guiding effect on low carbon building design.

2. Methodology

Literature research is the main method used in this work. Firstly, the keywords of “low carbon, carbon emission, building design, embodied carbon, operation carbon, and energy saving” were searched in academic databases (i.e., ScienceDirect and Web of Science). Secondly, more relevant literature was uncovered by further searching the cited reference of the review articles. Finally, screening the literature was done according to the following three main criteria: (a) The selected publications should cover one or more of the issues related to building design, such as building form, building performance, building energy use, and building optimization. (b) The selected journals focus on the scopes of buildings, cities, building design, built environment, built engineering, etc. (c) The selected publications should be limited to the last ten years, with a focus on the relevant results from the last three to five years.
After literature screening, the traditional building design was introduced, as follows: the current status and future challenges of the possible low carbon building design path were analyzed, mainly including low carbon standards, carbon emission calculation methods, and building optimization design. The proposed low carbon building design path was summarized as well as the implementation methods of traditional building design.

3. The Status and Challenges of Low Carbon Building Design

3.1. The Traditional Building Design Process

Figure 2 illustrates the traditional process of building design, namely conceptual design, preliminary design, development design, and detailed design [29]. Conceptual design is a design concept jointly negotiated by the architect and the project client [21], which can confirm the building type, volume, functions, and main structural systems. The preliminary design details the content of the conceptual design, such as the layout of the building group, building envelope, structural system, acoustical environment, luminous environment, and air conditioning system. Development design, as a phase to supplement the preliminary design content, mainly covers detailed drawings of the building envelope, detailed layouts of the building, selection of building materials, detailed layouts of the air conditioning and ventilation system [30], detailed electrical systems, and fire safety. Detailed design is the last phase, in which the development phase design is optimized in detail using simulation software [29].
It is necessary to carry out a low carbon design system in the mentioned design process, aimed at low building carbon emissions.
(1)
Low carbon design standards are needed to provide constraints in the conceptual design phase, such as renewable energy utilization [31,32,33] and local meteorological conditions [34,35]. The local climate type, dominant wind direction and speed, solar radiation, and other meteorological conditions should be taken into account, as well as local renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass energy.
(2)
In the preliminary and development design phases, carbon emission calculation methods are needed to compare the carbon emissions of different design alternatives. Building carbon emissions are needed to calculate, in real-time, when the design of building morphology (i.e., the block-scale building height, layout, density, green space ratio, building area, and volume and orientation of an individual building [36,37,38,39]) and building envelope (i.e., roof, external wall, internal wall, window-to-wall ratio, and shading [40,41,42]) should be changed.
(3)
It is necessary for active regulation of low carbon optimization design in the detailed design phase, such as for air conditioning systems [43], lighting systems [44], etc.
Thus, the standard system, carbon emission calculation, and optimal design should be integrated into the building design process, considering the five carbon reduction methods of building morphology design, building envelope design, renewable energy utilization, combination with local meteorological conditions, and active management design (shown in Figure 2) [26]. The status and challenges of the standard system, carbon calculation, and optimal design are discussed as follows.

3.2. The Status of Low Carbon Building Design

As shown in Figure 3, this paper describes the status of low carbon building design from three aspects, namely (1) the standard system of low carbon building design, (2) the calculation methods of carbon emissions, and (3) the optimal building design.
(1) The standard system of low carbon building design: Developed countries in North Europe and North America established related policies at an early stage, and have built numerous low-carbon buildings. Europe formulated the European Energy Technology Strategic Plan in 2008 [45]. The United States developed the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) [46]. These countries have been leading in the field of green and low carbon buildings, and are further exploring new technologies and new routes for “zero energy and zero carbon” buildings. Green buildings with a low energy consumption and high comfort are emerging gradually.
China’s Ministry of Housing and Urban−Rural Development released the national standard “General Specification for Building Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Utilization” to make the calculation of building carbon emissions aiming at “carbon peaking and carbon neutral” a mandatory demand [47]. “The announcement on the issuance of the implementation plan for the in-depth development of green low-carbon leading action for public institutions to promote carbon peaking” states that the promotion of ultra-low energy buildings and low-carbon buildings should be accelerated and green buildings should be developed. Solar photovoltaic photothermic systems should be vigorously promoted. Photoelectric high-efficiency photovoltaic power generation facilities should be installed, making full use of the suitable site space, such as on building roofs and facades [48].
Several provinces and cities in China have put forward relevant development plans for low-carbon building design successively. In Shanghai, it is suggested that assembled buildings should be developed as ultra-low energy buildings, which advocate for the use of exterior wall insulation, high-performance exterior windows, and related technological innovation [49]. Sichuan Province encourages the establishment of a building energy-saving system in accordance with the local climate, humanities, and natural resources [50,51], while Yunnan Province mentions similar suggestion [52]. The Chongqing government has a standard and management system for ultra-low energy consumption buildings, further providing technical support for projects in the design and construction phases [53].
Currently, there are timely development requirements for low carbon building design in all regions. The building design is a complex issue influenced by climate, humanities, economy, culture, and other factors [54,55]. The standard system of low-carbon building design should be improved.
(2) The calculation methods of carbon emissions: Embedded carbon emissions and operational carbon emissions are generated in the life cycle of a building. In the “Standard for building carbon emission calculation” (GB/T 51366-2019) [56], the operational carbon emission calculation is determined based on the amount of different types of energy consumption and the carbon emission factors. Simulation software, such as Energy Plus, eQuest, and TRNSYS [26,40], are used as tools to calculate energy consumption. For the embedded carbon emission, life cycle assessment (LCA) is an internationally and nationally acknowledged method [24,57,58,59]. Based on LCA, the input−output analysis (IO-LCA) method is widely used around the world [60,61,62]. It can calculate industry-wide carbon emissions by using economic input and output data, without the ability to perform specific calculations and analyses during the detailed building processes. The process analysis method [63] can overcome the limitations of IO-LCA by means of carbon emission factors for each phase, which can calculate the carbon emissions from the material production, transportation, construction, operation, disassembly, and recycling of buildings [58,59]. Specifically, the detailed process inventory for each phase is necessary for the process analysis method.
Carbon emission factors are an essential part of the calculation of embedded and operational carbon. IPCC provides a basic database of carbon emission factors. The database cannot be entirely suitable for all buildings, owing to the complex and diverse building types [64]. To be specific, more building forms and composites are gradually being proposed to meet the growing needs of high-rise buildings, resulting in carbon emission factors needing to be updated [18]. Moreover, the sources of carbon emission factors are not uniform, including the basic databases, literature, and standards [65,66]. This is an urgent issue that needs to be solved for the establishment of a standardized and comprehensive carbon emission factor database for low carbon building design.
A detailed building inventory is also crucial for the calculation, without carbon emission factors. As the building inventory information can be commonly obtained from engineering drawings, less detailed information is available on the conceptual and preliminary design phases of building design [67]. Therefore, the carbon emission calculation method should also consider the life cycle process with less inventory information [68].
(3) The optimal building design: There are three types of the optimization of low carbon building design. The first one is to investigate the impact of different factors in building design on carbon emission or energy saving (univariate optimization). Compared with active means, passive design can effectively reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions. Studies have been carried out on passive design factors for energy saving or low carbon emissions, including green roofs [69,70], window-to-wall ratios [71], and building orientation [72], which can provide sufficient theoretical support for low carbon and low energy consumption building design. However, strong interactions are exited between different design factors, causing limitations in practical applications for the univariate optimization.
The second is the multi-objective optimization of building design factors. Construction cost and energy consumption are the commonly used objective functions [73,74]. Low energy consumption and low carbon building design can be achieved by finding the optimal objective [17,27,75]. However, this refers more to the carbon emissions of operational energy consumption [28], which are not enough to indicate the actual carbon emission reduction [76]. Life cycle carbon emissions should be considered in low carbon building design [77]. Many scholars have conducted research on the life cycle carbon emission calculation model of buildings, which is also the research content of the third type.
Generally, in the research of the carbon emission model of buildings, the carbon emission database for life-cycle should first be established [78]. Secondly, the model can be constructed by machine learning and regression fitting, etc. [79,80,81,82]. The current database construction mainly includes research statistics and energy consumption simulation [26,29,57,83]. Research statistics require continuous statistical data over several years or months, for which it takes more time to build a database of carbon emissions. The existing building design optimization is time-consuming and investment heavy. It is necessary to explore a fast and convenient optimization method for low carbon building design.

3.3. The Challenges of Low Carbon Building Design

As shown in Figure 3, based on the analysis of the status of the standard system, the calculation method, and the optimal low carbon building design, several challenges in the development of low carbon building design are present.
The first challenge is the lack of a global perspective design standard system. China’s building stock is relatively high, with various climate characteristics [84], population densities, economic levels, and human characteristics [54]. There is an urgent need for low-carbon buildings to consider multiple factors and develop novel design approaches for different characteristics [85], which consider the spatial form of buildings and being low carbon as the common optimization objectives.
The second challenge is the lack of carbon emission calculation methods applicable to the design phase. The existing calculation methods of embedded and operational carbon require a comprehensive database of carbon emission factors and detailed process inventories [56]. The current database of carbon emission factors needs to be improved in order to be applicable to more building types [18]. The information in the detailed process inventory is assumed, which may differ from the actual construction and operation process information, further affecting the accuracy of the calculation of building carbon emissions [68,86]. Hence, in order to reduce the difference between the design and operating phase, exploring a calculation method applicable to the design phase remains a great challenge.
The third challenge is the lack of real-time optimization methods in the design phase aiming at low carbon emissions. Low carbon building design should take into account the building morphology, for example circulation space, open space and aesthetics, floor area, floor layout, floor height, building volume, building orientation, and fenestration, as well as windows, doors, shading and exterior walls, etc. [74]. Each factor affects the carbon emission directly or indirectly [87]. Moreover, there is the problem of the design process being the time-consuming and this needs to be optimized [81]. Low carbon building design needs to use convenient and fast optimization methods, i.e., drawing−prediction−design, which can provide accurate guidance for building design.

4. Possible Future Work

As shown in Figure 4, the design standard system of “spatial regulation” and “performance regulation” for low carbon green buildings that can adapt to various climatic characteristics will be established in future work. The standard system of building design can provide the low carbon constraints for the conceptual design phase, as well as low carbon concepts for climate and renewable energy adaptation. Specifically, this includes building morphology design, envelope design, low carbon material selection, balancing control between light and heat, passive−active coupling design, indoor humidity independent control, etc.
Then, based on the low carbon building design standard system, the carbon emission calculation methods applicable to the design phase will be explored in future work. Real-time and rapid calculation of building carbon emissions, important for evaluating design alternatives, will be used for different design alternatives during the preliminary design and development design phases. A comprehensive database of carbon emission factors will be built to meet the needs of different climatic conditions, building types, and building heights, etc. In addition, the carbon emission calculation in the design phase will meet the demand of incomplete content of inventory information in future research. Based on the carbon emission factor and the process inventory database, a convenient and fast carbon emission calculation method should be formed to facilitate the rapid assessment of carbon emissions in the design phase.
In the final step, building design in the future will be optimized through the design model. The design parameters will be accurately quantified to minimize the building carbon emissions. Firstly, different climate zones and building types are used as the first boundary conditions. Site area, floor/area ratio, and building height limits should be used as the second boundary conditions. The building orientation and window-to-wall ratio should be used as the third boundary conditions. The influence of each building design factor on carbon emission should be constructed, further contributing a comprehensive database of design factors. Secondly, a low-carbon design prediction model will be constructed through big data analysis and machine learning methods based on the above boundary conditions. Finally, building design drawing software, including Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Building Information Modeling (BIM), will be coupled with the low carbon design prediction model, forming a design pattern so that buildings can be optimized immediately after drawing.

5. Conclusions

This paper reviews the current status of the building standards system, carbon emission calculation methods, and building design optimization in the traditional building design process. The main challenges are as follows: (1) the lack of a comprehensive standard system for different climate zones, space, and performance requirements in the building design phase; (2) the existing carbon emission calculation methods lack a comprehensive database of carbon emission factors, which are not applicable to the design phase without a detailed process inventory; and (3) not being able to optimize building design factors based on real-time carbon emissions during the drawing process in the design phase.
Possible future work in building design should examine dealing with the above-mentioned challenges. A standard design system integrating spatial building information and low carbon performance needs to be formed, which is a constraint framework for the traditional conceptual design phase. A convenient carbon calculation method based on a comprehensive carbon emission factor database and a process inventory factor database should be explored, which is significant for the preliminary and development design phase. The prediction model will be proposed for detailed design using machine learning methods. Specifically, the spatial-low carbon standard system, carbon calculation method, prediction model of building design, and the optimal design of low carbon will be the framework, the foundation, the theory, and the objective, respectively. The system of “standard−calculation−prediction−optimization (SCPO)” will provide precise guidance for future building design.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, investigation, and writing—original draft preparation, C.X.; resources, funding acquisition, and writing—review and editing, S.-J.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 52178069).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Martins, T.; Barreto, A.C.; Souza, F.M.S.; Souza, A.M. Fossil fuels consumption and carbon dioxide emissions in G7 countries: Empirical evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 291, 118093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Denning, A.S. Combustion to concentration to warming: What do climate targets mean for emissions? climate change and the global carbon cycle. Encycl. Anthr. 2018, 1, 443–452. [Google Scholar]
  3. Smith, D.M.; Scaife, A.A.; Hawkins, E.; Bilbao, R.; Boer, G.J.; Caian, M.; Caron, L.P.; Danabasoglu, G.; Delworth, T.; Doblas-Reyes, F.J.; et al. Predicted chance that global warming will temporarily exceed 1.5 °C. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2018, 45, 11895–11903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. EC. Committing to Climate-Neutrality by 2050: Commission Proposes European Climate Law and Consults on the European Climate Pact. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_335 (accessed on 4 March 2020).
  5. Jan, G.; Thomas, B.; Ashok, J.; Jan, S.; Felix, W.; Martin, S. Overview of Member States Information on NZEBs. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/Updated%20progress%20report%20NZEB.pdf (accessed on 8 October 2014).
  6. CABEE. China Building Energy Consumption Annual Report 2020; Building Energy Efficiency, International Energy Charter; CABEE: Brussels, Belgium, 2021; Volume 49, pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  7. CHINADAILY. Statement by H.E. Xi Jinping President of the People’s Republic of China At the General Debate of the 75th Session of The United Nations General Assembly. Available online: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202009/24/WS5f6c08aca31024ad0ba7b776.html (accessed on 22 September 2020).
  8. UNEP. Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction. 2019. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-status-report-for-buildings-and-construction-2019 (accessed on 20 December 2019).
  9. Nina, H.S.; Jan, S.N.; Helge, B.; Inger, A.; Arild, G. Large potentials for energy saving and greenhouse gas emission reductions from large-scale deployment of zero emission building technologies in a national building stock. Energ Policy 2021, 152, 112114. [Google Scholar]
  10. NBS. China Statistical Yearbook; National Bureau of Statistics of People’s Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  11. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2007: China and India Insights; Sourceoecd Energy; IEA/OECD: Paris, France, 2007; Volume 3, pp. 1–672. [Google Scholar]
  12. Council, U.G.B. Net Zero Carbon Buildings: A framework Definition; UK Green Building Council: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  13. Zhang, S.; Xiang, X.; Ma, Z.; Ma, M.; Zou, C. Carbon neutral roadmap of commercialbuilding operations by mid-century: Lessons from China. Buildings 2021, 11, 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ibn-Mohammed, T.; Greenough, R.; Taylor, S.; Ozawa-Meida, L.; Acquaye, A. Operational vs. embodied emissions in buildings-A review of current trends. Energy Build. 2013, 66, 232–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Li, L. Integrating climate change impact in new building design process: A review of building life cycle carbon emission assessment methodologies. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2021, 5, 100286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Grynning, S.; Gradeci, K.; Gaarder, J.E.; Time, B.; Lohne, J.; Kvande, T. Climate adaptation in maintenance operation and management of buildings. Buildings 2020, 10, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Xue, Q.W.; Wang, Z.J.; Chen, Q.Y. Multi-objective optimization of building design for life cycle cost and CO2 emissions: A case study of a low-energy residential building in a severe cold climate. Build. Simul.-China 2022, 15, 83–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gan, V.J.L.; Cheng, J.C.P.; Lo, I.M.C.; Chan, C.M. Developing a CO2-e accounting method for quantification and analysis of embodied carbon in high-rise buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 825–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Basbagill, J.; Flager, F.; Lepech, M.; Fischer, M. Application of life-cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced embodied environmental impacts. Build. Environ. 2013, 60, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gustavsson, L.; Joelsson, A.; Sathre, R. Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy Build. 2010, 42, 230–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Braganca, L.; Vieira, S.M.; Andrade, J.B. Early stage design decisions: The way to achieve sustainable buildings at lower costs. Sci. World J. 2014, 365364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Leinartas, H.A.; Stephens, B. Optimizing whole house deep energy retrofit packages: A case study of existing Chicago-area homes. Buildings 2015, 5, 323–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Far, C.; Far, H. Improving energy efficiency of existing residential buildings using effective thermal retrofit of building envelope. Indoor Built Environ. 2019, 28, 744–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Su, X.; Tian, S.C.; Shao, X.L.; Zhao, X. Embodied and operational energy and carbon emissions of passive building in HSCW zone in China: A case study. Energy Build. 2020, 222, 110090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cao, S.J.; Leng, J.; Qi, D.; Kumar, P.; Chen, T. Sustainable underground spaces: Design, environmental control and energy conservation. Energy Build. 2022, 257, 111779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Alwisy, A.; BuHamdan, S.; Gul, M. Evidence-based ranking of green building design factors according to leading energy modelling tools. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 47, 101491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zemero, B.R.; Tastes, M.E.D.; Bezerra, U.H.; Batista, V.D.; Carvalho, C.C.M.M. Methodology for preliminary design of buildings using multi-objective optimization based on performance simulation. J. Sol. Energy Eng.-Trans. ASME 2019, 141, 040801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Xia, B.; Li, X. Analysis and comparison on the potential of low-carbon architectural design strategies. Sustain. Comput.-Inform. Syst. 2019, 21, 204–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gao, H.; Koch, C.; Wu, Y.P. Building information modelling based building energy modelling: A review. Appl. Energy 2019, 238, 320–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cao, S.J.; Feng, Z.; Wang, J.; Ren, C.; Zhu, H.C.; Chen, G.; Mei, J. Ergonomics-oriented operation, maintenance and control of indoor air environment for public buildings. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2022, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ascione, F.; Bianco, N.; De Masi, R.F.; De Stasio, C.; Mauro, G.M.; Vanoli, G.P. Multi-objective optimization of the renewable energy mix for a building. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 101, 612–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Srinivasan, R.S.; Campbell, D.E.; Wang, W. Renewable substitutability index: Maximizing renewable resource use in buildings. Buildings 2015, 5, 581–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Matic, D.; Calzada, J.R.; Todorovic, M.S. Renewable energy sources-integrated refurbishment approach for low-rise residential prefabricated building in Belgrade, Serbia. Indoor Built Environ. 2016, 25, 1016–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, Q.; Holmberg, S. A methodology to assess energy-demand savings and cost effectiveness of retrofitting in existing Swedish residential buildings. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2015, 14, 254–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Qi, J.; Wei, C.Y. Performance evaluation of climate-adaptive natural ventilation design: A case study of semi-open public cultural building. Indoor Built Environ. 2021, 30, 1714–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Richman, R.; Simpson, R. Towards quantifying energy saving strategies in big-box retail stores: A case study in Ontario (Canada). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2016, 20, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chen, X.; Yang, H.X.; Zhang, W.L. Simulation-based approach to optimize passively designed buildings: A case study on a typical architectural form in hot and humid climates. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 1712–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kerdan, I.G.; Galvez, D.M.; Raslan, R.; Ruyssevelt, P. Modelling the energy and exergy utilisation of the Mexican non-domestic sector: A study by climatic regions. Energy Policy 2015, 77, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Xi, C.; Ren, C.; Wang, J.Q.; Feng, Z.B.; Cao, S.J. Impacts of urban-scale building height diversity on urban climates: A case study of Nanjing, China. Energy Build. 2021, 251, 111350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ali-Toudert, F.; Weidhaus, J. Numerical assessment and optimization of a low-energy residential building for Mediterranean and Saharan climates using a pilot project in Algeria. Renew. Energy 2017, 101, 327–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aksamija, A. Regenerative design and adaptive reuse of existing commercial buildings for net-zero energy use. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2016, 27, 185–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Echenagucia, T.M.; Capozzoli, A.; Cascone, Y.; Sassone, M. The early design stage of a building envelope: Multi-objective search through heating, cooling and lighting energy performance analysis. Appl. Energy 2015, 154, 577–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wang, J.Q.; Yu, C.W.; Cao, S.J. Technology pathway of efficient and climate-friendly cooling in buildings: Towards carbon neutrality. Indoor Built Environ. 2021, 30, 1307–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Setiawan, A.F.; Huang, T.L.; Tzeng, C.T.; Lai, C.M. The effects of envelope design alternatives on the energy consumption of residential houses in Indonesia. Energies 2015, 8, 2788–2802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Eikeland, P.O.; Skjærseth, J.B. The politics of low-carbon innovation: Implementing the European Union’s strategic energy technology plan. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2021, 76, 102043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hu, M. 2019 energy benchmarking data for LEED-certified buildings in Washington, D.C.: Simulation and reality. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 42, 102475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. MOHURD. Announcement on the Release of National Standards of General Specification for Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy Utilization in Buildings. Available online: http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/gongkai/fdzdgknr/zfhcxjsbwj/202110/20211013_762460.html (accessed on 8 September 2021).
  48. FORESTRY. The Announcement on the Issuance of the Implementation Plan for the In-Depth Development of Green Low-Carbon Leading Action for Public Institutions to Promote Carbon Peaking. Available online: http://www.forestry.gov.cn/zlszz/4262/20211123/110547204815318.html (accessed on 19 November 2021).
  49. ZJWSH. The 14th Five-Year Plan for Green Buildings in Shanghai. Available online: http://zjw.sh.gov.cn/ghjh/20211109/a3b03c1ee247418ebce706bd0b08da10.html (accessed on 9 November 2021).
  50. SCJST. “Fourteen Five” Construction Industry Development Plan of Sichuan Province. Available online: http://jst.sc.gov.cn/scjst/ghxx/2021/9/26/0f6d7763bd2b4f66b2cfeb568dfb66e1.shtml (accessed on 26 September 2021).
  51. CDZJ. The Notice on the Issuance of the “14th Five-Year Plan for the Development of the Construction Industry in Chengdu” by Chengdu Housing and Urban-Rural Development Bureau. Available online: http://cdzj.chengdu.gov.cn/cdzj/c131968/2021-11/15/content_8516cf63f9cf4195b6894ae4444e59a2.shtml (accessed on 15 November 2021).
  52. ZFCXJSTYN. Announcement on the Issuance of the “Fourteenth Five-Year Plan for the Development of Green Assembly Building Industry in Yunnan Province”. Available online: https://zfcxjst.yn.gov.cn/zhengfuwenjian8655/284647.html (accessed on 22 November 2021).
  53. ZFCXJWCQ. Announcement on the Issuance of the “Green Finance in Chongqing to Support the Green Development of the Construction Industry Pilot Program”. Available online: http://zfcxjw.cq.gov.cn/zwxx_166/gsgg/202111/t20211112_9968747.html (accessed on 12 November 2021).
  54. Wang, J.G.; Cao, S.J.; Yu, C.W. Development trend and challenges of sustainable urban design in the digital age. Indoor Built Environ. 2021, 30, 3–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Meng, M.R.; Cao, S.J.; Kumar, P.; Tang, X.; Feng, Z. Spatial distribution characteristics of PM2.5 concentration around residential buildings in urban traffic-intensive areas: From the perspectives of health and safety. Saf. Sci. 2021, 141, 105318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Standard for building carbon emission calculation. GB/T 51366-2019; MOHURD: Beijing, China, 2019.
  57. Mao, X.K.; Wang, L.X.; Li, J.W.; Quan, X.L.; Wu, T.Y. Comparison of regression models for estimation of carbon emissions during building’s lifecycle using designing factors: A case study of residential buildings in Tianjin, China. Energy Build. 2019, 204, 109519. [Google Scholar]
  58. Dodoo, A.; Gustavsson, L.; Sathre, R. Lifecycle carbon implications of conventional and low-energy multi-storey timber building systems. Energy Build. 2014, 82, 194–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hong, J.K.; Shen, G.Q.; Feng, Y.; Lau, W.S.T.; Mao, C. Greenhouse gas emissions during the construction phase of a building: A case study in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 103, 249–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Huang, Y.A.; Weber, C.L.; Matthews, H.S. Categorization of scope 3 emissions for streamlined enterprise carbon footprinting. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 8509–8515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Guan, J.; Zhang, Z.H.; Chu, C.L. Quantification of building embodied energy in China using an input-output-based hybrid LCA model. Energy Build. 2016, 110, 443–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Han, M.Y.; Chen, G.Q.; Shao, L.; Li, J.S.; Alsaedi, A.; Ahmad, B.; Guo, S.; Jiang, M.M.; Ji, X. Embodied energy consumption of building construction engineering: Case study in E-town, Beijing. Energy Build. 2013, 64, 62–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, Y.L.; Han, M.Y.; Liu, S.Y.; Chen, G.Q. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by buildings: A multi-scale perspective. Build. Environ. 2019, 151, 240–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gan, V.J.L.; Chan, C.M.; Tse, K.T.; Lo, I.M.C.; Cheng, J.C.P. A comparative analysis of embodied carbon in high-rise buildings regarding different design parameters. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 161, 663–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Marinova, S.; Deetman, S.; van der Voet, E.; Daioglou, V. Global construction materials database and stock analysis of residential buildings between 1970–2050. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 247, 119146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gan, V.J.L.; Cheng, J.C.P.; Lo, I.M.C. A comprehensive approach to mitigation of embodied carbon in reinforced concrete buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 582–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kumanayake, R.; Luo, H.B.; Paulusz, N. Assessment of material related embodied carbon of an office building in Sri Lanka. Energy Build. 2018, 166, 250–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Rock, M.; Hollberg, A.; Habert, G.; Passer, A. LCA and BIM: Visualization of environmental potentials in building construction at early design stages. Build. Environ. 2018, 140, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Mahmoud, S.; Ismaeel, W.S.E. Developing sustainable design guidelines for roof design in a hot arid climate. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2019, 62, 507–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rakotondramiarana, H.T.; Ranaivoarisoa, T.F.; Morau, D. Dynamic simulation of the green roofs impact on building energy performance, case study of Antananarivo, Madagascar. Buildings 2015, 5, 497–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Feehan, A.; Nagpal, H.; Marvuglia, A.; Gallagher, J. Adopting an integrated building energy simulation and life cycle assessment framework for the optimisation of facades and fenestration in building envelopes. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 43, 103138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Yu, Z.; Zhang, W.L.; Fang, T.Y. Impact of building orientation and window-wall ratio on the office building energy consumption. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 409-410, 606–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Lartigue, B.; Lasternas, B.; Loftness, V. Multi-objective optimization of building envelope for energy consumption and daylight. Indoor Built Environ. 2014, 23, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhu, J.J.; Chew, D.A.S.; Lv, S.; Wu, W.W. Optimization method for building envelope design to minimize carbon emissions of building operational energy consumption using orthogonal experimental design (OED). Habitat Int. 2013, 37, 148–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Longo, S.; Montana, F.; Sanseverino, E.R. A review on optimization and cost-optimal methodologies in low-energy buildings design and environmental considerations. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 45, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Fenner, A.E.; Kibert, C.J.; Li, J.X.; Razkenari, M.A.; Hakim, H.; Lu, X.S.; Kouhirostami, M.; Sam, M. Embodied, operation, and commuting emissions: A case study comparing the carbon hotspots of an educational building. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 122081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. O’Neill, R.; Window, A.; Kenway, S.; Dargusch, P. Integrated operational and life-cycle modelling of energy, carbon and cost for building facades. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 286, 125370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Legorburu, G.; Smith, A.D. Incorporating observed data into early design energy models for life cycle cost and carbon emissions analysis of campus buildings. Energy Build. 2020, 224, 110279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Cao, S.J.; Ren, C. Ventilation control strategy using low-dimensional linear ventilation models and artificial neural network. Build. Environ. 2018, 144, 316–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zhu, H.C.; Yu, C.W.; Cao, S.J. Ventilation online monitoring and control system from the perspectives of technology application. Indoor Built Environ. 2020, 29, 587–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Nguyen, A.T.; Reiter, S.; Rigo, P. A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis. Appl. Energy 2014, 113, 1043–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Wang, J.Q.; Hou, J.; Chen, J.P.; Fu, Q.M.; Huang, G.S. Data mining approach for improving the optimal control of HVAC systems: An event-driven strategy. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 39, 102246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Westermann, P.; Evins, R. Surrogate modelling for sustainable building design—A review. Energy Build. 2019, 198, 170–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Yang, F.; Chou, J.M.; Dong, W.J.; Sun, M.Y.; Zhao, W.X. Adaption to climate change risk in eastern China: Carbon emission characteristics and analysis of reduction path. Phys. Chem. Earth 2020, 115, 102829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Han, X.J.; Yu, J.L.; Xia, Y.; Wang, J.J. Spatiotemporal characteristics of carbon emissions in energy-enriched areas and the evolution of regional types. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 7224–7237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Cang, Y.J.; Luo, Z.X.; Yang, L.; Han, B. A new method for calculating the embodied carbon emissions from buildings in schematic design: Taking “building element” as basic unit. Build. Environ. 2020, 185, 107306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Pal, S.K.; Takano, A.; Alanne, K.; Siren, K. A life cycle approach to optimizing carbon footprint and costs of a residential building. Build. Environ. 2017, 123, 146–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Buildings 12 00163 g001 550
Figure 1. Seven phases of the building life cycle.
Figure 1. Seven phases of the building life cycle.
Buildings 12 00163 g001
Buildings 12 00163 g002 550
Figure 2. The process of building design and methods of carbon reduction.
Figure 2. The process of building design and methods of carbon reduction.
Buildings 12 00163 g002
Buildings 12 00163 g003 550
Figure 3. The statues and challenges of low carbon building design.
Figure 3. The statues and challenges of low carbon building design.
Buildings 12 00163 g003
Buildings 12 00163 g004 550
Figure 4. Possible future work for low carbon building design.
Figure 4. Possible future work for low carbon building design.
Buildings 12 00163 g004
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xi, C.; Cao, S.-J. Challenges and Future Development Paths of Low Carbon Building Design: A Review. Buildings 2022, 12, 163. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020163

AMA Style

Xi C, Cao S-J. Challenges and Future Development Paths of Low Carbon Building Design: A Review. Buildings. 2022; 12(2):163. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020163

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xi, Chang, and Shi-Jie Cao. 2022. "Challenges and Future Development Paths of Low Carbon Building Design: A Review" Buildings 12, no. 2: 163. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020163

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop