Embodied Energy Coefficient Quantification and Implementation for an Energy-Conservative House in Thailand

Nattaya Sangngamratsakul (), Kuskana Kubaha and Siriluk Chiarakorn
Additional contact information
Nattaya Sangngamratsakul: Energy Management Technology Program, School of Energy, Environment and Materials, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, 126 Pracha Uthit Rd., Bang Mod, Thung Khru, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
Kuskana Kubaha: Energy Management Technology Program, School of Energy, Environment and Materials, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, 126 Pracha Uthit Rd., Bang Mod, Thung Khru, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
Siriluk Chiarakorn: Environmental Technology Program, School of Energy, Environment and Materials, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, 126 Pracha Uthit Rd., Bang Mod, Thung Khru, Bangkok 10140, Thailand

Sustainability, 2024, vol. 16, issue 10, 1-20

Abstract: The increasing rate of population growth and urban expansion has led to a higher demand for fossil fuels, which, in turn, directly generate greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. These emissions contribute to environmental problems such as global warming and climate change. This study aims to present the total life-cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of a single-family detached house designed with an energy conservation approach. Using a cradle-to-grave scope, this study quantifies the embodied energy in six stages of the building’s life cycle, i.e., initial, transportation, construction, operational, recurrent, and demolition. An input–output (IO)-based method was employed to construct a Thailand-specific embodied energy coefficient for 36 key building materials. This coefficient was then used to quantify both the initial embodied energy and the recurrent embodied energy in this study. The case-study house was broken down into 13 building materials. Concrete was the most consumed material, followed by fiber–cement, steel, and timber, in that order. However, the results of the embodied energy distribution for these materials revealed that fiber–cement ranked first, accounting for 29%. Steel was next, at 21%, followed by concrete at 18%, and, finally, aluminum at 12%. The case-study house had an initial embodied energy of 7.99 GJ/m² and a total life-cycle energy consumption of 0.66 GJ/m²/year. This study provides valuable information on LCEA for residential buildings, fostering public understanding of energy conservation in the Thai context. Furthermore, this study’s results can be applied to establish energy conservation guidelines for residential buildings. These guidelines can help reduce energy resource depletion, carbon emissions, and environmental problems, ultimately contributing to Thailand’s goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

Keywords: embodied energy; life-cycle energy analysis; cradle-to-grave; carbon neutrality; Thailand (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4045/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4045/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:10:p:4045-:d:1393012

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().