现有建筑最佳地震/能源集成改造的决策方法

IF 2.2 Q2 CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY
M. Caruso, R. Couto, R. Pinho, R. Monteiro
{"title":"现有建筑最佳地震/能源集成改造的决策方法","authors":"M. Caruso, R. Couto, R. Pinho, R. Monteiro","doi":"10.3389/fbuil.2023.1176515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the ambitious targets of carbon emission reduction set for the very near future, it is now expected that retrofitting operations on existing buildings aim both at reducing their operational energy consumption and at improving their seismic performance. Indeed, it is now well acknowledged that, if a sole energy efficiency upgrade is provided to a given building, in case of an earthquake occurrence, double economic and environmental losses will be experienced due to both the lost investment for energy retrofitting and the repair and retrofitting activities for post-earthquake damage. Moreover, social losses may also be experienced in terms of casualties, injured or homeless due to the seismic and structural deficiencies of the existing structure. To aid thus the process of a coupled seismic/energy renovation of the existing building stock, several multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches have been developed for the identification of optimal retrofitting solutions for buildings. Such procedures typically consider a range of economic, social, technical, and, more recently, environmental aspects that are assumed to be of interest to decision makers (e.g., installation cost, duration of works, architectural impact, need for specialised workers, etc.). The present study demonstrates the application to a case-study school building of two different MCDM approaches, which account for seismic vulnerability and energy efficiency, as well as related environmental impacts of buildings. The main differences between the two procedures are explored in terms of considered decision-making parameters and corresponding weights, rankings of retrofitting options and identification of the optimal retrofitting strategies.","PeriodicalId":37112,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Built Environment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-making approaches for optimal seismic/energy integrated retrofitting of existing buildings\",\"authors\":\"M. Caruso, R. Couto, R. Pinho, R. Monteiro\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fbuil.2023.1176515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given the ambitious targets of carbon emission reduction set for the very near future, it is now expected that retrofitting operations on existing buildings aim both at reducing their operational energy consumption and at improving their seismic performance. Indeed, it is now well acknowledged that, if a sole energy efficiency upgrade is provided to a given building, in case of an earthquake occurrence, double economic and environmental losses will be experienced due to both the lost investment for energy retrofitting and the repair and retrofitting activities for post-earthquake damage. Moreover, social losses may also be experienced in terms of casualties, injured or homeless due to the seismic and structural deficiencies of the existing structure. To aid thus the process of a coupled seismic/energy renovation of the existing building stock, several multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches have been developed for the identification of optimal retrofitting solutions for buildings. Such procedures typically consider a range of economic, social, technical, and, more recently, environmental aspects that are assumed to be of interest to decision makers (e.g., installation cost, duration of works, architectural impact, need for specialised workers, etc.). The present study demonstrates the application to a case-study school building of two different MCDM approaches, which account for seismic vulnerability and energy efficiency, as well as related environmental impacts of buildings. The main differences between the two procedures are explored in terms of considered decision-making parameters and corresponding weights, rankings of retrofitting options and identification of the optimal retrofitting strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Built Environment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Built Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2023.1176515\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2023.1176515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

考虑到在不久的将来设定的雄心勃勃的碳减排目标,现在预计对现有建筑进行改造的目的是减少其运营能耗并提高其抗震性能。事实上,现在人们普遍认识到,如果对某一建筑物进行唯一的能源效率升级,在发生地震的情况下,由于能源改造的投资损失以及震后破坏的维修和改造活动,将经历双重的经济和环境损失。此外,由于现有结构的地震和结构缺陷,也可能造成人员伤亡或无家可归,从而造成社会损失。因此,为了帮助现有建筑存量的耦合地震/能源改造过程,已经开发了几种多标准决策(MCDM)方法来确定建筑物的最佳改造解决方案。这些程序通常考虑一系列经济、社会、技术以及最近的环境因素,这些因素被认为是决策者感兴趣的(例如,安装成本、工程工期、建筑影响、对专业工人的需求等)。本研究展示了两种不同的MCDM方法在学校建筑案例研究中的应用,这两种方法考虑了地震易损性和能源效率,以及建筑物的相关环境影响。从考虑的决策参数和相应的权重、改造方案的排序和最佳改造策略的确定等方面探讨了两种方法之间的主要区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Decision-making approaches for optimal seismic/energy integrated retrofitting of existing buildings
Given the ambitious targets of carbon emission reduction set for the very near future, it is now expected that retrofitting operations on existing buildings aim both at reducing their operational energy consumption and at improving their seismic performance. Indeed, it is now well acknowledged that, if a sole energy efficiency upgrade is provided to a given building, in case of an earthquake occurrence, double economic and environmental losses will be experienced due to both the lost investment for energy retrofitting and the repair and retrofitting activities for post-earthquake damage. Moreover, social losses may also be experienced in terms of casualties, injured or homeless due to the seismic and structural deficiencies of the existing structure. To aid thus the process of a coupled seismic/energy renovation of the existing building stock, several multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches have been developed for the identification of optimal retrofitting solutions for buildings. Such procedures typically consider a range of economic, social, technical, and, more recently, environmental aspects that are assumed to be of interest to decision makers (e.g., installation cost, duration of works, architectural impact, need for specialised workers, etc.). The present study demonstrates the application to a case-study school building of two different MCDM approaches, which account for seismic vulnerability and energy efficiency, as well as related environmental impacts of buildings. The main differences between the two procedures are explored in terms of considered decision-making parameters and corresponding weights, rankings of retrofitting options and identification of the optimal retrofitting strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Built Environment
Frontiers in Built Environment Social Sciences-Urban Studies
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
266
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信