214
A. Campioli et al.
without considering the impacts related to other aspects (energy consumption, acidification, human toxicity, and soil consumption). For example, the wood supply chain
is critical with respect to land use and acidification issues.
Hence, the actions promoted by public administrations should reconcile the need
for a simplified approach (also for checking the results obtained by the project) with
a complete environmental approach, which requires a systemic capability to control
environmental impacts in their complexity.
References
Breton, C., Blanchet, P., Amor, B., Beauregard, R., & Chang, W. S. (2018). Assessing the climate change impacts of biogenic carbon in buildings: A critical review of two main dynamic
approaches. Sustainability, 10(6), 2020.
CNT. (2010). The value of green infrastructure. A guide to recognizing its economic, environmental
and social benefits. Center for Neighborhood Technology.
De Wolf, C., Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A. (2017). Measuring embodied carbon dioxide equivalent of
buildings: A review and critique of current industry practice. Energy and Building, 140, 68–80.
Dodoo, A., Gustavsson, L., & Sathre, R. (2014). Lifecycle carbon implications of conventional and
low-energy multi-storey timber building systems. Energy and Building, 82, 194–210.
EC-JRC. (2012). The international reference Life cycle data system (ILCD) handbook. Towards
more sustainable production and consumption for a resource efficient Europe. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Luxembourg
EN 15804:2012 Sustainability of construction works. Environmental product declarations. Core
rules for the product category of construction products.
EN 15978:2011 Sustainability of construction works. Assessment of environmental performance
of buildings. Calculation method.
Fouquet, M., Levasseur, A., Margni, M., Lebert, A., Lasvaux, S., Souyri, B., et al. (2015). Methodological challenges and developments in LCA of low energy buildings: Application to biogenic
carbon and global warming assessment. Building and Environment, 90, 51–59.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Mitigation. In B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave,
L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press
Lavagna, M., Baldassarri, C., Campioli, A., Giorgi, S., Dalla Valle, A., Castellani, V., et al. (2018).
Benchmarks for environmental impact of housing in Europe: Definition of archetypes and LCA
of the residential building stock. Building and Environment, 145, 260–275.
Lehmann, U., Khouryb, J., & Patel, M. K. (2017). Actual energy performance of student housing:
Case study, benchmarking and performance gap analysis. Energy Procedia, 122, 163–168.
McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., Peper, P. J., Maco, S. E., Gardner, S. L., Cozad, S. K., et al. (2006).
Midwest community tree guide. Benefits, costs, and strategic planting. Create space Independent
Publishing.
Rockström, J., Gaffney, O., Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., & Schellnhuber, H. J.
(2017). A roadmap for rapid decarbonisation. Science, 355, 1269–2127.
Skullestad, J. L., Bohne, R. A., & Lohne, J. (2016). High-rise timber buildings as a climate change
mitigation measure: A comparative LCA of structural system alternatives. Energy Procedia, 96,
112–123.
Van Dronkelaar, C., Dowson, M., Burman, E., Spataru, C., & Mumovic, D. (2016). A review of
the energy performance gap and its underlying causes in non-domestic buildings. Frontiers in
Mechanical Engineering, 1, 1–14.
A. Campioli et al.
without considering the impacts related to other aspects (energy consumption, acidification, human toxicity, and soil consumption). For example, the wood supply chain
is critical with respect to land use and acidification issues.
Hence, the actions promoted by public administrations should reconcile the need
for a simplified approach (also for checking the results obtained by the project) with
a complete environmental approach, which requires a systemic capability to control
environmental impacts in their complexity.
References
Breton, C., Blanchet, P., Amor, B., Beauregard, R., & Chang, W. S. (2018). Assessing the climate change impacts of biogenic carbon in buildings: A critical review of two main dynamic
approaches. Sustainability, 10(6), 2020.
CNT. (2010). The value of green infrastructure. A guide to recognizing its economic, environmental
and social benefits. Center for Neighborhood Technology.
De Wolf, C., Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A. (2017). Measuring embodied carbon dioxide equivalent of
buildings: A review and critique of current industry practice. Energy and Building, 140, 68–80.
Dodoo, A., Gustavsson, L., & Sathre, R. (2014). Lifecycle carbon implications of conventional and
low-energy multi-storey timber building systems. Energy and Building, 82, 194–210.
EC-JRC. (2012). The international reference Life cycle data system (ILCD) handbook. Towards
more sustainable production and consumption for a resource efficient Europe. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Luxembourg
EN 15804:2012 Sustainability of construction works. Environmental product declarations. Core
rules for the product category of construction products.
EN 15978:2011 Sustainability of construction works. Assessment of environmental performance
of buildings. Calculation method.
Fouquet, M., Levasseur, A., Margni, M., Lebert, A., Lasvaux, S., Souyri, B., et al. (2015). Methodological challenges and developments in LCA of low energy buildings: Application to biogenic
carbon and global warming assessment. Building and Environment, 90, 51–59.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Mitigation. In B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave,
L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press
Lavagna, M., Baldassarri, C., Campioli, A., Giorgi, S., Dalla Valle, A., Castellani, V., et al. (2018).
Benchmarks for environmental impact of housing in Europe: Definition of archetypes and LCA
of the residential building stock. Building and Environment, 145, 260–275.
Lehmann, U., Khouryb, J., & Patel, M. K. (2017). Actual energy performance of student housing:
Case study, benchmarking and performance gap analysis. Energy Procedia, 122, 163–168.
McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., Peper, P. J., Maco, S. E., Gardner, S. L., Cozad, S. K., et al. (2006).
Midwest community tree guide. Benefits, costs, and strategic planting. Create space Independent
Publishing.
Rockström, J., Gaffney, O., Rogelj, J., Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., & Schellnhuber, H. J.
(2017). A roadmap for rapid decarbonisation. Science, 355, 1269–2127.
Skullestad, J. L., Bohne, R. A., & Lohne, J. (2016). High-rise timber buildings as a climate change
mitigation measure: A comparative LCA of structural system alternatives. Energy Procedia, 96,
112–123.
Van Dronkelaar, C., Dowson, M., Burman, E., Spataru, C., & Mumovic, D. (2016). A review of
the energy performance gap and its underlying causes in non-domestic buildings. Frontiers in
Mechanical Engineering, 1, 1–14.