Carbon Reduction Measures-Based LCA of Prefabricated Temporary Housing with Renewable Energy Systems
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
Temporary housing plays an important role in providing secure, hygienic, private, and comfortable shelter in the aftermath of disaster (such as flood, fire, earthquake, etc.). Additionally, temporary housing can also be used as a sustainable form of on-site residences for construction workers. While most of the building components used in temporary housing can be manufactured in a plant, prefabrication technology improves the production efficiency of temporary housing; furthermore, integrated renewable energy systems, for example, solar photovoltaic (PV) system, offer benefits for temporary housing operations. In order to assess the environmental impacts of prefabricated temporary housing equipped with renewable energy systems, this study first divides the life cycle of temporary housing into six stages, and then establishes a life cycle assessment (LCA) model for each stage. Furthermore, with the aim of reducing the environmental impacts, life cycle carbon reduction measures are proposed for each stage of temporary housing. The proposed methodology is demonstrated using a case study in China. Based on the proposed carbon reduction measures, the LCA of a prefabricated temporary housing case study building equipped with renewable energy systems indicates a carbon emissions intensity of 35.7 kg/m2·per year, as well as a reduction in material embodied emissions of 18%, assembly emissions of 17.5%, and operational emissions of 91.5%. This research proposes a carbon reduction-driven LCA of temporary housing and contributes to promoting sustainable development of prefabricated temporary housing equipped with renewable energy systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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