{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016357688113413305, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.202702702702703, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Environmentally sustainable development: a life-cycle costing approach for a commercial office building in Melbourne, Australia

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.