Life-Cycle Carbon Analysis Shows Where Zero-Carbon Buildings Emit Most

A comprehensive framework has been developed to quantify carbon emissions from building material production, transportation, construction, operation, and demolition. From this, researchers investigated the life-cycle carbon emissions of zero-carbon buildings and compared the economic feasibility of different carbon-reduction strategies. The results, published in Buildings, suggest that building operation and material production account for most life-cycle carbon emissions.

Multi-story building with large windows and greenery outside.
Study: Life-Cycle Carbon Emission Calculation and Economic Analysis of Zero-Carbon Buildings: A Case Study in China. Image Credit: JohnathanShots/Shutterstock

Quantifying Carbon Emissions Across the Building Life Cycle

Buildings contribute a significant share of global greenhouse gas emissions, making decarbonization a major priority for the construction sector. Although energy-efficient designs have reduced operational energy demand, achieving truly zero-carbon buildings requires addressing emissions throughout the building life cycle.

Life-cycle assessment (LCA) provides a systematic framework for quantifying emissions at each stage and identifying the greatest opportunities for carbon reduction.

No time now? Download a PDF and finish later.

Previous studies have primarily focused on quantifying life-cycle carbon emissions rather than assessing the economic viability of different decarbonization strategies. Few studies have compared the long-term costs of on-site renewable energy with green electricity purchases, making it difficult to identify the most cost-effective path to carbon-neutral buildings.

Researchers developed a life-cycle carbon accounting framework based on international ISO standards and Chinese building assessment guidelines. They applied the framework to the Jinan Zero-Carbon Operation Center to quantify emissions across every stage of its life cycle.

Combining Life-Cycle Assessment with Economic Evaluation

The framework covered five stages: material production, material transportation, construction, operation, and demolition.

The case study examined the Jinan Zero-Carbon Operation Center, a 72,431 m2 office building designed to meet multiple sustainability standards. It includes China's Zero-Carbon Building Standard, LEED, WELL, and China's Green Building Standard.

The researchers collected material quantities from engineering drawings and determined transportation distances from supplier locations. They estimated construction emissions from machinery fuel and electricity consumption.

The energy simulation software predicted the building's operational energy demand over its 50-year service life. They also quantified carbon reductions from on-site photovoltaic electricity generation and landscape vegetation.

The researchers evaluated two options: expanding on-site photovoltaic capacity and purchasing green electricity certificates to compare the carbon-neutrality strategies. They used the equivalent annual cost (EAC) method to compare the long-term investment, maintenance, and operating costs of both approaches over the building's lifetime.

Operational Energy and Building Materials Dominate Life-Cycle Emissions

The life-cycle assessment estimated total carbon emissions of 149,974.04 tCO2e over the building's 50-year service life. Building operation was the largest contributor, accounting for 75.5% of total emissions.

Material production emerged as the second-largest emission source at 24.19% of total emissions. Concrete, structural steel, and mortar generated more than 94% of embodied carbon emissions, with concrete contributing the largest share due to its high consumption.

Transportation, construction, and demolition together contributed less than one percent. Within this small share, steel, concrete, and glass dominated transportation emissions owing to their large volumes and long transport distances.

These findings show that reducing operational energy use and embodied carbon should remain the primary focus of zero-carbon building design.

Electricity consumption, such as plug loads, lighting, and cooling systems, dominated operational emissions. The building's photovoltaic systems reduced operational emissions by 29,810 tCO2e, while landscape vegetation sequestered an additional 2989.5 tCO2e.

Despite these measures, operational emissions remained above 113,000 tCO2e, indicating that additional carbon reduction strategies are needed to achieve full carbon neutrality.

The economic analysis identified expanding on-site photovoltaic capacity as the more cost-effective carbon offset strategy. Although photovoltaic systems require a higher upfront investment, they deliver lower long-term costs than purchasing green electricity certificates.

The equivalent annual cost of achieving operational-stage carbon neutrality was $206,589.58 with additional photovoltaics, compared with $316,223.13 using green electricity. Similar cost advantages were observed for full life-cycle carbon neutrality, demonstrating the long-term investment in renewable energy infrastructure.

Implications for Zero-Carbon Building Design and Policy

This study presents a practical framework for evaluating the environmental and economic performance of zero-carbon buildings. By combining life-cycle carbon assessment with long-term economic analysis, it identifies operational energy use and embodied carbon as the primary targets for emission reduction.

The findings also highlight the importance of adopting a whole-life-cycle approach rather than focusing solely on building operation.

The results provide valuable guidance for designers, developers, and policymakers. Improving building energy efficiency, integrating renewable energy systems, and selecting low-carbon construction materials can deliver the greatest reductions in life-cycle emissions.

The economic analysis further shows that expanding on-site photovoltaic generation offers a more cost-effective route to carbon neutrality than purchasing green electricity over the long term.

The authors acknowledge several limitations, including emissions estimates from demolition-stage data based on published assumptions, as measured data remains limited. In addition, the economic analysis did not account for future changes in electricity prices, photovoltaic costs, or carbon markets.

Future studies could incorporate dynamic economic models, measured demolition data, and integrated strategies that combine low-carbon materials, renewable energy systems, and carbon sequestration.

Overall, the study demonstrates that achieving zero-carbon buildings requires an integrated life-cycle strategy that combines carbon accounting, renewable energy, and economic planning.

Journal Reference

Jiang, Y., Wei, C., et al. (2026). Life-Cycle Carbon Emission Calculation and Economic Analysis of Zero-Carbon Buildings: A Case Study in China. Buildings. 16(12). https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/16/12/2395.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.

Akshatha Chandrashekar

Written by

Akshatha Chandrashekar

Dr. Akshatha Chandrashekar is a scientific writer and materials science researcher based in Bengaluru, India. She completed her PhD in Chemistry in 2025 at Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences, and has a BSc from Mount Carmel College and an MSc in Analytical Chemistry. Akshatha’s doctoral research focused on multifunctional, thermally conductive silicone–carbon hybrid nanocomposites for advanced electronic applications. Her expertise spans nanocomposites, polymers, wastewater management, and thermal management systems. As a Junior and Senior Research Fellow on a DRDO-funded project, she helped develop elastomeric composites for wearable cooling garments, improving material performance and supporting successful technology transfer for defense applications. Akshatha has authored peer-reviewed journal articles, contributed to book chapters, and presented at national and international conferences. Her achievements include the Best Poster Award at APA Nanoforum 2022, the Best Student Paper Award at the 13th National Women Science Congress in 2021, and the Best Dissertation Award for her Master’s research. She was also a finalist in the “Spin Your Science” contest at the India Science Festival 2024, with her work archived in the Lunar Codex Project.

Citations

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

  • APA

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. (2026, June 26). Life-Cycle Carbon Analysis Shows Where Zero-Carbon Buildings Emit Most. AZoBuild. Retrieved on June 26, 2026 from https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24103.

  • MLA

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. "Life-Cycle Carbon Analysis Shows Where Zero-Carbon Buildings Emit Most". AZoBuild. 26 June 2026. <https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24103>.

  • Chicago

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. "Life-Cycle Carbon Analysis Shows Where Zero-Carbon Buildings Emit Most". AZoBuild. https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24103. (accessed June 26, 2026).

  • Harvard

    Chandrashekar, Akshatha. 2026. Life-Cycle Carbon Analysis Shows Where Zero-Carbon Buildings Emit Most. AZoBuild, viewed 26 June 2026, https://www.azobuild.com/news.aspx?newsID=24103.

Tell Us What You Think

Do you have a review, update or anything you would like to add to this news story?

Leave your feedback
Your comment type
Submit

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.