## 3 Results
### Estimating the Carbon Neutrality Capacity of Additional Parks  
Given the limited number of parks analyzed, a 5% extrapolation was conducted to assess the feasibility of attaining carbon neutrality. As data on parks' carbon emissions was scarce, an estimation approach was adopted. This involved estimating 5% of existing parks' carbon emissions and applying this estimation to other parks based on existing data. This approach aids in managing carbon emissions for parks under construction, potentially reducing emissions for new parks. Nonetheless, the estimation method introduces uncertainty, as it relies on park-specific data for accuracy. For parks with waterbodies, Lixin Park's area is 4.7 \(\mathrm{hm^{2}}\) and its 5% carbon emission is 15,836.65 kgCO\({}_{2}\)e, while Maple Garden's area is 3 \(\mathrm{hm^{2}}\) and its 5% carbon emission is 14,941.3 kgCO\({}_{2}\)e. The CN value of each park depends on park size, construction carbon emissions, and other factors. Also, for parks without waterbodies, Litchi Old Tree Park has an area of 0.54 \(\mathrm{hm^{2}}\) and a 5% carbon emission of 3623.4 kgCO\({}_{2}\)e, whereas Dayuan Park has 0.6 \(\mathrm{hm^{2}}\) and 5172.4 kgCO\({}_{2}\)e. To recap, Lixin Park and Maple Garden were selected as reference points for parks featuring water bodies, given their moderate sizes. Conversely, Yongquan Park was deemed unsuitable \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**No.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Park Name**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Landscape Element Proportion (\%)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**NDVI**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**RI**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**CN (\%)**} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-8}  & & **Softscape** & & & & & \\ \hline
4 & Yongquan Park & 19.98 & 36.05 & 43.97 & 0.21 & 3.27 & \(-\)83.64 \\ \hline
5 & Litchi Old Tree Park & 86.12 & - & 13.88 & 0.65 & 3.88 & 21.71 \\ \hline
6 & Dayuan Park & 70.94 & - & 29.06 & 0.54 & 2.97 & \(-\)2.56 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: _Cont._ \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & NDVI & CN & Softscape & Hardscape & RI \\ \hline NDVI & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1} & & \\ \hline CN & 0.965 ** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1} & & \\ \hline Softscape & 0.994 ** & 0.967 ** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1} & & \\ \hline Hardscape & \(-\)0.880 * & \(-\)0.903 * & \(-\)0.912 * & \(1\) & \\ \hline RI & 0.473 & 0.443 & 0.407 & \(-\)0.438 & \(1\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: **. \(p\) < 0.01; *. \(p\) < 0.05.  
\end{table} 
Table 8: Pearson correlation analysis table. due to its substantial carbon emissions linked to its sizable water body. For parks without water bodies, Litichi Old Tree Park and Dayuan Park were employed. The data from Litichi Old Tree Park and Dayuan Park served as representative examples for such parks. This study encompassed the evaluation of LEP in 22 Taichung parks, combining green spaces and water bodies, to ascertain their potential for achieving carbon neutrality. Table 9 shows ten parks with water bodies, ranging from 0.6 to 11.4 \(\text{hm}^{2}\), while Table 10 shows twelve parks without water bodies, ranging from 0.6 to 2.9 \(\text{hm}^{2}\). The obtained data reveal distinct Softscape, Waterbody, and Hardscape ratios among the parks studied. Among the parks with water bodies, Jingxian Park boasts the highest Softscape ratio (82.46%), while Fengle Sculpture Park records the lowest (51.4%). For Waterbody percentages, Fengle Sculpture Park leads (15.15%), while Jingxian Park has the