Sustainable Materials Selection for Canadian Construction Industry: An Emergy-Based Life-Cycle Analysis (Em-LCA) of Conventional and LEED Suggested Construction Materials
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building industry is a major cause of ecological and environmental problems in the global scale. It accounts for 40% of material and 30% of global energy consumption. Emergy (spelled with an “m”) is the energy of one kind (usually solar energy) that is used, directly or indirectly, to make a product or service. The objective of this paper is to identify sustainable construction materials by assessing the specific emergy of major construction materials used in Canada, including a few rapidly renewable materials suggested by Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). Lifecycle analysis (LCA) of the selected materials was carried out to identify all type of natural, human, and energy resources used in their production process. The specific emergy of each selected material was calculated using the corresponding transformity functions. Results show that rapidly renewable materials suggested by LEED should not be taken blindly without considering the location of construction.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it