Aye, L; Bamford, N; Charters, B and Robinson, J (2000) Environmentally sustainable development: A life-cycle costing approach for a commercial office building in Melbourne, Australia. Construction Management and Economics, 18(8), pp. 927-934. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
A range of property and construction options is analysed using standard life-cycle costing methodology. The options are to renovate the existing building, buy an alternative building and renovate, and buy a development site and construct a new building. The do-nothing option and a hypothetical option to construct a new building on an ideal site are analysed as benchmarks. The results show that the optimum option is to buy a suitable site and construct a new building and that the least sustainable option, in the case study, is to stay in the existing property and renovate the building. Although staying in the existing building and doing nothing carries the lowest financial cost, energy consumption and greenhouse emissions are significantly worse than for the alternative options.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building accomodation options; energy efficiency; greenhouse gas emissions; life-cycle costing |
| Index terms: | case study, energy efficiency, Australia, energy consumption, option, costing, sustainable development, commercial office, methodology, greenhouse gas emission |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, construction type, energy systems, sustainability and energy, health safety and environment, Geography, research methods, accounting and finance, environmental health, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here