SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mühendis ve Makina / 2026 / Cilt: 56 Sayı: 660

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED WITH REINFORCED CONCRETE AND WOOD MATERIAL IN TERMS OF MUGLA PROVINCE

MUĞLA İLİ KOŞULLARINDA BETONARME VE AHŞAP İSKELETLİ BİNALARA AİT YAŞAM DÖNGÜSÜ ANALİZİ

Burak Hozatlı(ÇEVRE VE ŞEHİRCİLİK BAKANLIĞI)
Hüseyin Günerhan(EGE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ, MAKİNE MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, TERMODİNAMİK ANABİLİM DALI)
Pages
52–60
Publication Date
2015-02-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In terms of life-cycle energy consumption of buildings, the use of renewable energy sources caused to save of the amounts of operating energy rate of 85-88% and save of the levels of energy of the life cycle with rate of 27-32%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, life cycle assessment of buildings and life cycle energy calculation methods are initially researched, and calculation results of the reinforced concrete buildings designed with traditional methods and timber-framed buildings made using with ecological materials were compared.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It was observed that, small amounts of materials used in the building construction have a significant influence on the total energy consumption and environmental impacts.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In terms of life-cycle energy consumption of buildings, the use of renewable energy sources caused to save of the amounts of operating energy rate of 85-88% and save of the levels of energy of the life cycle with rate of 27-32%.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Betonarme bina · ahşap iskeletli bina · Reinforced concrete building

Abstract

In this study, life cycle assessment of buildings and life cycle energy calculation methods are initially researched, and calculation results of the reinforced concrete buildings designed with traditional methods and timber-framed buildings made using with ecological materials were compared. As a result of this study, life-cycle stages, energy consumption of elements of them and environmental impacts were examined. It was observed that, small amounts of materials used in the building construction have a significant influence on the total energy consumption and environmental impacts. In terms of life-cycle energy consumption of buildings, the use of renewable energy sources caused to save of the amounts of operating energy rate of 85-88% and save of the levels of energy of the life cycle with rate of 27-32%.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, öncelikli olarak binalarda yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmesi (YDD) ve yaşam döngüsü enerjisi hesaplama yöntemleri araştırılmış ve geleneksel yöntemlerle tasarlanmış betonarme bina ile ekolojik malzemelerin kullanıldığı ahşap iskeletli binaya ait hesaplama sonuçları karşılaştırılmıştır. Bu çalışmanın sonucunda, yaşam döngüsü aşamaları ve unsurlarının enerji tüketimleri incelenmiş ve en az miktarda kullanılan malzemelerin bile, binanın toplam enerji tüketimleri üzerinde kayda değer tesiri olduğu görülmüştür. Yaşam döngüsü enerji tüketimleri açısından yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarının kullanılması ile binaların işletim enerjisi miktarlarında %85-88 oranlarında tasarruf sağlanmışken, yaşam döngüsü enerjilerinde bu oran %27-32 seviyelerinde gerçekleştiği tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hozatlı, B., Günerhan, H. (2015). LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED WITH REINFORCED CONCRETE AND WOOD MATERIAL IN TERMS OF MUGLA PROVINCE. Mühendis ve Makina, Cilt: 56 Sayı: 660, 52–60. https://ajindex.com/articles/1295446

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ramesh, T., Prakash, R., Shukla, K. K. 2010. “Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Buildings: An Overview," Energy and Buildings, vol. 42, p. 1592-1600.
  2. Çamur, C. 2010. “Isı Yalıtım Malzemelerinin Yaşam Döngüsü Değerlendirme Yöntemiyle Çevresel Etkilerinin Değerlendirilmesi,” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  3. Çetiner, İ., Metin, B. 2011. “Enerji Etkin Konut Yenilemelerinde Enerji Tüketimi ve Yaşam Dönemi Maliyetlerinin Değerlendirilmesi: İstanbul Örneği,” X. Ulusal Tesisat Mühendisliği Kongresi, 13-16 Nisan 2011, İzmir.
  4. Cole, R. J., Kernan, P. C. 1996. “Life-Cycle Energy Use in Office Buildings,” Building and Environment, vol. 31, p. 307-317.
  5. Adalberth, K. 1997. “Energy Use During the Life Cycle of Buildings: A Method,” Building and Environment, vol. 32, p. 317-320.
  6. Gerilla, G. P., Teknomo K., Hokao, K. 2007. “An Environmental Assessment of Wood and Steel Reinforced Concrete Housing Construction,” Building and Environment, vol. 42, p. 2778-2784.
  7. Ramesh, T., Prakash, R., Shukla, K. K. 2012. “Life Cycle Energy Analysis of a Residential Building with Different Envelopes and Climates in Indian Context,” Applied Energy, vol. 89, p. 193-202.
  8. Citherlet, S., Defaux, T. 2007. “Energy and Environmental Comparison of Three Variants of a Family House during Its Whole Life Span,” Building and Environment, vol. 42, p. 591-598.
  9. Bribián, I. Z., Capilla, A. V., Uson, A. A. 2011. “Life Cycle Assessment of Building Materials: Comparative Analysis of Energy and Environmental Impacts and Evaluation of the Eco-Efficiency Improvement Potential,” Building and Environment, vol. 46, p. 1133-1140.
  10. EMSD, 2006. Consultancy Study in Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Building Construction: Final Report, Electrical and Mechanical Services Department, Hong Kong.
  11. Taygun, G. T. 2005. “Yapı Ürünlerinin Yaşam Döngüsü Değerlendirmesine Yönelik Bir Model Önerisi,” Doktora Tezi, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  12. Lippiatt, B. C. 1998, “BEES 1.0 Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability Technical Manual and User Guide,” http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build98/PDF/b98062.pdf, son erişim tarihi: 08 Ekim 2014.