SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS OF REUSED INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS IN CHINA: AN ASSESSMENT METHOD

被引:9
|
作者
Tian, Wei [1 ]
Zhong, Xingju [1 ]
Zhang, Guangmin [1 ]
Goh, Yang Miang [2 ]
机构
[1] Xian Univ Architecture & Technol, Sch Civil Engn, Xian 710055, Peoples R China
[2] Natl Univ Singapore, Sch Design & Environm, Singapore 117566, Singapore
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
old industrial buildings; reuse; sustainability assessment; extenics; RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS; HONG-KONG; EXTENICS; FRAMEWORK; SYSTEM; AHP;
D O I
10.3846/jcem.2021.14283
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The sustainable development of old industrial buildings is in line with the national construction strategy and has an important impact on current urban renewal. Only by achieving a unified balance among economic, social, and environmental factors can reused industrial buildings be considered sustainable. However, there are no relevant sustainability assessment indicators and methods for reused industrial buildings in China. The purpose of this study was to provide a reasonable and effective method for assessing the sustainability of reused industrial buildings. First, this study analysed the factors influencing reused industrial building sustainability through a project investigation. Second, based on the assessment indicator setting procedure, the sustainability assessment indicator system for reused industrial buildings was optimised. Moreover, a multi-level sustainability assessment model based on extenics was established to identify the correlation functions of indicators with different attributes. Finally, a case was considered to verify this assessment method. The results showed that this assessment method in good agreement with the actual state of the case was validated to be more effective and practical. The assessment method could provide a basis for decision-making to improve sustainability and could be adopted by relevant rating agencies to determine the sustainability level of reused industrial buildings.
引用
收藏
页码:60 / 75
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Sustainability assessment methodology for industrial buildings: three case studies
    Cuadrado, Jesus
    Zubizarreta, Mikel
    Roji, Eduardo
    Larrauri, Marcos
    Alvarez, Izaskun
    [J]. CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, 2016, 33 (02) : 106 - 124
  • [2] Sustainability index for industrial buildings
    Cuadrado, Jesus
    Roji, Eduardo
    Tomas San Jose, Jose
    Pedro Reyes, Juan
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS-STRUCTURES AND BUILDINGS, 2012, 165 (05) : 245 - 253
  • [3] Sustainability Assessment of Buildings
    Bastert, Heinrich
    [J]. MAUERWERK, 2011, 15 (01) : 8 - 12
  • [4] RESEARCH ON ASSESSMENT METHOD OF GREEN BUILDINGS IN CHINA
    Bing, Wei
    Bin, Zhang
    Wen, Luo
    [J]. ES2010: PROCEEDINGS OF ASME 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY, VOL 1, 2010, : 65 - 73
  • [5] Development of a sustainability assessment method for buildings - the OPEN HOUSE case
    Tomsic, Miha
    Zavrl, Marjana Sijanec
    [J]. FACILITIES, 2018, 36 (1-2) : 76 - 102
  • [6] An environmental and economic sustainability assessment method for the retrofitting of residential buildings
    Cetiner, Ikbal
    Edis, Ecem
    [J]. ENERGY AND BUILDINGS, 2014, 74 : 132 - 140
  • [7] Sustainability-Related Decision Making in Industrial Buildings: An AHP Analysis
    Cuadrado, Jesus
    Zubizarreta, Mikel
    Roji, Eduardo
    Garcia, Harkaitz
    Larrauri, Marcos
    [J]. MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING, 2015, 2015
  • [8] Assessment and Certification of the Sustainability of Buildings
    Graubner, Carl-Alexander
    Lutzkendorf, Thomas
    [J]. MAUERWERK, 2008, 12 (02) : 53 - 60
  • [9] Sustainability Assessment of Buildings Indicators
    Rodrigues, Leonardo
    Delgado, Joao M. P. Q.
    Mendes, Adelio
    Lima, Antonio G. B.
    Guimaraes, Ana S.
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (04)
  • [10] Sustainability assessment for recreational buildings
    Raslanas, Saulius
    Kliukas, Romualdas
    Stasiukynas, Andrius
    [J]. CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, 2016, 33 (04) : 286 - 312