ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to determine the life-cycle environmental impacts associated with energy-retrofit strategies on an urban scale. A prototype campus model that includes deep retrofit clusters, moderate retrofit clusters, and baseline retrofit clusters is used as a case study. The retrofit strategies included major changes to the building envelope with additional insulation, replacement of exterior windows and doors, shading, primary mechanical system replacement, and lighting system replacement. The study aims to (1) compare the three levels of energy retrofit against the existing condition to determine potential reductions in environmental impact, (2) identify the life-cycle hotspots of the energy-retrofit strategies and possible mitigation methods, (3) calculate the payback time for each energy-retrofit level, and (4) demonstrate an example of how life-cycle assessment (LCA) could be used as a quantitative assessment method for energy retrofits done on a large scale. The life-cycle environmental impact is calculated for five categories. The results indicate that energy retrofits overall have a positive effect in terms of reducing life-cycle environmental impacts in all environmental categories except ozone-depletion potential. The deep energy retrofit has a much shorter payback time for its environmental-impact reduction than the other energy-retrofit levels.

中文翻译：

---

校园规模能源改造策略的生命周期环境评估

摘要 本研究的目的是确定与城市规模的能源改造策略相关的生命周期环境影响。包括深度改造集群、中等改造集群和基线改造集群的原型校园模型用作案例研究。改造策略包括对建筑围护结构进行重大改变，增加隔热层，更换外窗和门，遮阳，更换主要机械系统和更换照明系统。该研究旨在 (1) 将能源改造的三个级别与现有条件进行比较，以确定对环境影响的潜在减少，(2) 确定能源改造策略和可能的缓解方法的生命周期热点，(3) 计算每个能源改造级别的投资回收时间，(4) 举例说明如何将生命周期评估 (LCA) 用作大规模能源改造的定量评估方法。计算了五个类别的生命周期环境影响。结果表明，能源改造总体上在减少除臭氧消耗潜力之外的所有环境类别的生命周期环境影响方面具有积极作用。与其他能源改造级别相比，深度能源改造在减少环境影响方面的投资回收期要短得多。结果表明，能源改造总体上在减少除臭氧消耗潜力之外的所有环境类别的生命周期环境影响方面具有积极作用。与其他能源改造级别相比，深度能源改造在减少环境影响方面的投资回收期要短得多。结果表明，能源改造总体上在减少除臭氧消耗潜力之外的所有环境类别的生命周期环境影响方面具有积极作用。与其他能源改造级别相比，深度能源改造在减少环境影响方面的投资回收期要短得多。