Search

• Important variabilities exist in material intensities of single-family dwellings within and between locations. • The choice of functional unit changes the perception of which location has more efficient building material use. • House size is a strong predictor of overall material use. • Foundations and exterior walls consume the most materials in houses but in different ratios across geographical locations. This study examines variability in material use in single-family dwellings within and between three different locations (Toronto, Perth, and Luzon). It investigates how the use of different functional units changes the perception of what buildings are more materially efficient and which location has the more materially efficient home building norms. Material intensities for 80 single- family dwellings in the three locations form the foundational data for the paper. Important variabilities exist in the material intensities of the single-family dwellings and change with the functional unit selected (e.g., 7–23% for 1 m2 functional unit). Toronto single-family dwellings appear to be one of the least material intensive when presented per 1 m2 floor area but become the most material intensive when presented per 1 building and 1 bedroom with the opposite for Luzon. Housing size is the most effective explainer of overall material use with foundations and walls consuming the most materials but in different ratios across the three locations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Battery-electric trucks (BET) are an alternative to diesel trucks and have the potential for lower life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and total lifetime costs (TCO). This study compares a Class 6 medium-duty BET with a Class 6 medium-duty diesel truck. Vehicle fuel consumption is simulated for Toronto driving conditions, based on different drive cycles, operating temperatures and payloads. The base case results show the BET has lower life cycle GHG emissions and higher lifetime TCO than the diesel truck, but this does not hold across all conditions. GHG emissions of the BET are higher than those of the diesel truck under 100% payload in driving conditions with infrequent stops, while the results are less sensitive to operating temperature. The lifetime cost of the BET can be lower than that of the diesel truck in situations that have driving with frequent stops/starts and with low payloads and low battery and charging station costs. These variables also affect estimated GHG abatement costs, which are highly relevant as carbon pricing is being introduced in the province. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]