Retrofit versus new-build house using life-cycle assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the findings of research on the environmental performance of two case-study houses, a retrofit and new build. The retrofit was completed to a Passivhaus standard while the new build was completed to current Irish building regulations. Environmental performance of the retrofit and new build was measured using life-cycle assessments, examining the assembly, operational and end-of-life stage over life spans of 50 and 80 years. Using primary information, life-cycle assessment software and life-cycle assessment databases the environmental impacts of each stage were modelled. The operational stage of both case studies was found to be the source of the most significant environmental damage, followed by the assembly and the end-of-life stage respectively. The relative importance of the assembly and end-of-life stage decreased as the life span increased. It was found that the retrofit house studied outperformed the new build in the assembly and operational stage, whereas the new build performed better in the end-of-life stage; however, this is highly sensitive, depending on the standards to which both are completed. Operational energy savings pre- and post-retrofit were significant, indicating the future potential for adoption of high-quality retrofitting practices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".