The first available label standardizing a zero-balanced type of building is the Swiss Standard Minergie-A. The standard prescribes an annual net zero primary energy balance for heating, domestic hot water and ventilat...The first available label standardizing a zero-balanced type of building is the Swiss Standard Minergie-A. The standard prescribes an annual net zero primary energy balance for heating, domestic hot water and ventilation. Electricity consumption for appliances and lighting is excluded. Additionally, Minergie-A is the first standard worldwide which includes a requirement in regard to embodied energy. Based on an analysis of 39 Minergie-A buildings, this paper shows that a wide range of different energy concepts and embodied energy strategies are possible in the scope of the label. The basis of all Minergie-A buildings is a well-insulated building envelope. However, the step from the Swiss Standard Minergie-A to a Net ZEB （net zero energy building） standard which includes electricity consumption for appliances and lighting is not a very big one. Increasing the size of the photovoltaic system is sufficient in most cases. Anyway, some of the Minergie-A buildings evaluated are also Net ZEBs. In this paper, it is also shown that the net zero balance during the operational phase of Net ZEBs clearly outweighs the increased embodied energy for additional materials in a life cycle energy analysis.展开更多
Residential buildings are one of the major contributors to climate change due to their significant impacts on global energy consumption.Hence,most countries have introduced regulations to minimize energy use in reside...Residential buildings are one of the major contributors to climate change due to their significant impacts on global energy consumption.Hence,most countries have introduced regulations to minimize energy use in residential buildings.To date,the focus of these regulations has mainly been on operational energy while excluding embodied energy.In recent years,extensive studies have highlighted the necessity of minimizing both embodied energy and operational energy by applying the life-cycle energy assessment(LCEA)approach.However,the absence of a standardized framework and calculation methodology for the analysis of embodied energy has reportedly led to variations in the LCEA results.Retrospective research endeavoured to explore the causes of variations,with a limited focus on calculating embodied impacts.Despite the undertaken attempts,there is still a need to investigate the key parameters causing variations in LCEA results by examining methodological approaches of the current studies toward quantifications of embodied and operational energies.This paper aims to address three primary questions:‘what is the current trend of methodological approach for applying LCEA in residential buildings?’;‘what are the key parameters causing variations in LCEA results?’;and‘how can the continued variations in the application of LCEA in residential buildings be overcome?’.To this end,40 LCEA studies representing 157 cases of residential buildings across 16 countries have been critically reviewed.The findings reveal four principal categories of parameters that potentially contribute to the varying results of LCEAs:system boundary definition,calculation methods,geographical context,and interpretation of results.This paper also proposes a conceptual framework to minimize variations in LCEA studies by standardizing the process of conducting LCEAs.展开更多
文摘The first available label standardizing a zero-balanced type of building is the Swiss Standard Minergie-A. The standard prescribes an annual net zero primary energy balance for heating, domestic hot water and ventilation. Electricity consumption for appliances and lighting is excluded. Additionally, Minergie-A is the first standard worldwide which includes a requirement in regard to embodied energy. Based on an analysis of 39 Minergie-A buildings, this paper shows that a wide range of different energy concepts and embodied energy strategies are possible in the scope of the label. The basis of all Minergie-A buildings is a well-insulated building envelope. However, the step from the Swiss Standard Minergie-A to a Net ZEB （net zero energy building） standard which includes electricity consumption for appliances and lighting is not a very big one. Increasing the size of the photovoltaic system is sufficient in most cases. Anyway, some of the Minergie-A buildings evaluated are also Net ZEBs. In this paper, it is also shown that the net zero balance during the operational phase of Net ZEBs clearly outweighs the increased embodied energy for additional materials in a life cycle energy analysis.
文摘Residential buildings are one of the major contributors to climate change due to their significant impacts on global energy consumption.Hence,most countries have introduced regulations to minimize energy use in residential buildings.To date,the focus of these regulations has mainly been on operational energy while excluding embodied energy.In recent years,extensive studies have highlighted the necessity of minimizing both embodied energy and operational energy by applying the life-cycle energy assessment(LCEA)approach.However,the absence of a standardized framework and calculation methodology for the analysis of embodied energy has reportedly led to variations in the LCEA results.Retrospective research endeavoured to explore the causes of variations,with a limited focus on calculating embodied impacts.Despite the undertaken attempts,there is still a need to investigate the key parameters causing variations in LCEA results by examining methodological approaches of the current studies toward quantifications of embodied and operational energies.This paper aims to address three primary questions:‘what is the current trend of methodological approach for applying LCEA in residential buildings?’;‘what are the key parameters causing variations in LCEA results?’;and‘how can the continued variations in the application of LCEA in residential buildings be overcome?’.To this end,40 LCEA studies representing 157 cases of residential buildings across 16 countries have been critically reviewed.The findings reveal four principal categories of parameters that potentially contribute to the varying results of LCEAs:system boundary definition,calculation methods,geographical context,and interpretation of results.This paper also proposes a conceptual framework to minimize variations in LCEA studies by standardizing the process of conducting LCEAs.
