Advertisement

Analysis and development of conceptual model of low-carbon city with a sustainable approach

  • S. Mollaei
  • M. AmidpourEmail author
  • M. Sharifi
Original Paper

Abstract

Low-carbon cities have been the favorite subject of many societies with the aim of making a sustainable environment for life. The purpose of this study was to develop a conceptualized model of low-carbon city with a sustainable approach by applying life-cycle cost analysis as the methodology with secondary data from Iranian national report to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. This study attempts to examine the factors affecting the production and increase in carbon emission in urban areas and also provides some solutions to solve these problems and create low-carbon urban areas in order to promote environmental quality with a sustainable development approach. Then, some tools and methods are developed to improve the analytical rigor associated with climate action plans. With a focus on non-behavioral items, the cost and effectiveness of more than 30 action items are quantified. Finally, the scenario analysis was used to evaluate the cost and efficiency of various program designs. Results indicate that greenhouse gases mitigation takes remarkable initial investments. This cost differs from $1 to $70 M for each percent of reduction depending on scale and scope of the program. However, long-term cost savings are considerable if the program is properly designed, with the 20-year return period for different climate action plans, exceeding 100%.

Keywords

Climate change Emission mitigation Life-cycle analysis Low-carbon city Sustainable development 

Nomenclature

CTS

Cost per ton of carbon saved ($/tCO2)

LCS

Lifetime carbon saved (tCO2)

NPV

Net present value ($)

eCO2

Embodied CO2 emission (ton)

Mcf

Thousand cubic feet of natural gas

C

Annualized costs ($/year)

r

Discount rate (%)

n

Lifespan (years)

Notes

Acknowledgements

All organizations and specialists which helped to prepare this study with their guidance are thanked.

References

  1. Amado M, Poggi F, Amado AR (2016) Energy efficient city: a model for urban planning. Sustain Cities Soc 26:476–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Calvin K, Clarke L, Krey V, Blanford G, Jiang K, Kainuma M, Kriegler E, Luderer G, Shukla PR (2012) The role of Asia in mitigating climate change: results from the Asia modeling exercise. Energy Econ 34:S251–S260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheshmehzangi A (2016) Feasibility study of Songao’s low carbon town planning, China. Energy Procedia 88:313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. European Commission (2011) Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, cities of tomorrow. Challenges, visions, ways forward. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final.pdf
  5. IPCC (2011) Special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srren/SRREN_FD_SPM_final.pdf
  6. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014 mitigation of climate change (Working Group III contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change). https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_full.pdf
  7. ISO (2003) Task Group 4: life cycle costs in construction. http://onlinebookshop.villareal.fi/docs/LifeCycleCostsinConstruction.pdf
  8. Kainuma M, Shukla PR, Jiang K (2012) Framing and modeling of a low carbon society: an overview. Energy Econ 34:S316–S324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lovaas D (2004) Suburbanization and energy. Energy 5:765–776Google Scholar
  10. Maier S (2016) Smart energy systems for smart city districts: case study Reininghaus district. Energy Sustain Soc 6(1):23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Marique AF, Reiter S (2014) A simplified framework to assess the feasibility of zero-energy at the neighbourhood/community scale. Energy Build 82:114–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Neroutsou TI, Croxford B (2016) Lifecycle costing of low energy housing refurbishment: a case study of a 7 year retrofit in Chester Road, London. Energy Build 128:178–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. O’Toole R (2008) Does rail transit save energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Cato Policy Anal (615). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1263426
  14. Schanes K, Giljum S, Hertwich E (2016) Low carbon lifestyles: a framework to structure consumption strategies and options to reduce carbon footprints. J Clean Prod 139:1033–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shammin MR, Herendeen RA, Hanson MJ, Wilson EJ (2010) A multivariate analysis of the energy intensity of sprawl versus compact living in the US for 2003. Ecol Econ 69(12):2363–2373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Skea J, Nishioka S (2008) Policies and practices for a low-carbon society. Clim Policy 8(sup1):S5–S16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. UNFCCC (2003) Iran’s Initial National Communication to UNFCCC. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/iranc1.pdf
  18. UNFCCC (2010) Iran’s Secound National Communication to UNFCCC. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/iranc2.pdf

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringK. N. Toosi University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations