A System to Pre-Evaluate the Suitability of Energy-Saving Technology for Green Buildings
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Evaluation Framework
2.2. Weighting Method
2.2.1. Positive Ideal Solution (PIS) and Negative Ideal Solution (NIS) Determination
2.2.2. Defining Objective Function
2.2.3. Optimizing Algorithm
2.3. Comprehensive Evaluation Value
2.4. Grading Method
2.4.1. Index Baseline Calculation
2.4.2. Grading Points Determination
3. Evaluation Indices for Typical Technologies
3.1. Principles of Evaluation Index Determination
3.2. Technical Performance Evaluation
3.3. Economy Evaluation
3.4. Satisfaction Evaluation
3.5. Evaluation Indices for Typical Green Building Energy-Saving Technologies (GBESTs)
4. Case Study
4.1. Evaluation Indices for Energy Recovery Technology
4.2. Data Collection
4.3. Evaluation Process
4.3.1. Statistics Normalization
4.3.2. Weight Calculation
4.3.3. Comprehensive Evaluation Calculation and Ratings
4.4. Results and Analysis
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Feng, W.; Huang, K.; Levine, M. Evaluation of Energy Savings of the New Chinese Commercial Building Energy Standard. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Washington, DC, USA, 17–22 August 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Y.; Peng, C.; Yan, D. China’s building energy-saving technology roadmap. Constr. Sci. Technol. 2012, 2, 12–19. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Rouleau, J.; Gosselin, L.; Blanchet, P. Understanding energy consumption in high-performance social housing buildings: A case study from Canada. Energy 2018, 145, 677–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, H.; Magoulès, F. A review on the prediction of building energy consumption. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 3586–3592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Yang, L.; He, B.; Zhao, D. Green building in China: Needs great promotion. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2014, 11, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.C.; Ameyaw, E.E.; He, B.; Olanipekun, A.O. Examining issues influencing green building technologies adoption: The United States green building experts’ perspectives. Energy Build. 2017, 144, 320–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Doan, D.T.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Naismith, N.; Zhang, T.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Tookey, J. A critical comparison of green building rating systems. Build. Environ. 2017, 123, 243–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kajikawa, Y.; Inoue, T.; Goh, T.N. Analysis of building environment assessment frameworks and their implications for sustainability indicators. Sustain. Sci. 2011, 6, 233–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, W.L. A comprehensive review of metrics of building environmental assessment schemes. Energy Build. 2013, 62, 403–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamedani, A.Z.; Huber, F. A comparative study of DGNB, LEED and BREEAM certificate systems in urban sustainability. Sustain. City VII 2012, 155, 121–132. [Google Scholar]
- Zhong, K.; Kang, Y. Applicability of air-to-air heat recovery ventilators in China. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2009, 29, 830–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, R.J.; Zou, P.X.W. Stakeholder-associated risks and their interactions in complex green building projects: A social network model. Build. Environ. 2014, 73, 208–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, R.; Kaushik, S.C. Performance evaluation of green roof and shading for thermal protection of buildings. Build. Environ. 2005, 40, 1505–1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayhoub, M.S.; Carter, D.J. The costs and benefits of using daylight guidance to light office buildings. Build. Environ. 2011, 46, 698–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geng, G.; Wang, Z.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, N. Suitability assessment of building energy saving technologies for office buildings in cold areas of China based on an assessment framework. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 103, 650–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Chen, Y. A review on applying ventilated double-skin facade to buildings in hot-summer and cold-winter zone in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 1321–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perpiña Castillo, C.; Batista E Silva, F.; Lavalle, C. An assessment of the regional potential for solar power generation in EU-28. Energy Policy 2016, 88, 86–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Yuan, Y.; Sun, L.; Cao, X. Dynamic Analysis of Exhaust Air Total-heat Recovery of Air Conditioning System in Summer Condition of Chengdu Using TRNSYS Simulation. HV&AC 2016, 46, 128–132. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, P.; Niu, Y.T.; Xie, L.N.; Wang, Z. Green Building Technology of Regional Suitability Evaluation System Research and Case Study. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 357–360, 478–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Si, J.; Marjanovic-Halburd, L.; Nasiri, F.; Bell, S. Assessment of building-integrated green technologies: A review and case study on applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2016, 27, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dangana, Z.; Pan, W.; Goodhew, S. A Decision Making System for Selecting Sustainable Technologies for Retail Buildings. In Proceedings of the 19th CIB World Building Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 5–9 May 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Li, C.; Chen, J.; Yang, J.; Wang, X. Weight Determination Approach for Assessment Index Based on Positive and Negative Ideal Points. Ordnance Ind. Autom. 2015, 34, 22–25. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Kuo, T. A modified TOPSIS with a different ranking index. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 260, 152–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rere, L.M.R.; Fanany, M.I.; Arymurthy, A.M. Simulated Annealing Algorithm for Deep Learning. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 72, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lihua, M.; Xiaoyan, C.; Xiaohui, Y. Evaluation Method of Dissertation Based on Unascertained Rational-AHM. Procedia Eng. 2011, 15, 4751–4756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; Shi, H. Applying Unascertained Theory, Principal Component Analysis and ACO-based Artificial Neural Networks for Real Estate Price Determination. J. Softw. 2011, 6, 3745–3746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, G.L.; Yang, R.G.; Ge-Ning, X.U.; Fan, X.N. Applying ambiguity-theory-based data analysis on small-size samples for mechanical reliability. Chin. J. Constr. Mach. 2010, 8, 444–448. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- VDI-Standard: VDI 3807 Blatt 1. Available online: http://www.vdi.eu/nc/guidelines/vdi_3807_blatt_1-verbrauchskennwerte_fuer_gebaeude_grundlagen_/ (accessed on 9 October 2018).
- Keighley, E.C. Visual requirements and reduced fenestration in office buildings—A study of window shape. Build. Sci. 1973, 8, 311–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Byrd, H.; Rasheed, E. The Productivity Paradox in Green Buildings. Sustainability 2016, 8, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wimmler, C.; Hejazi, G.; Fernandes, E.D.O.; Moreira, C.; Connors, S. Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Renewable Energy Systems on Islands. J. Clean. Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 185–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- China Academy of Building Research, Evaluation standard for application of renewable energy in buildings. In GB/T 50801-2013; China Architecture and Building Press: Beijing, China, 2013. (In Chinese)
- China Academy of Building Research, Air-to-Air Energy Recovery Equipment. In GB/T 21087-2007; China Architecture and Building Press: Beijing, China, 2007. (In Chinese)
- China Academy of Building Research, Design standard for energy efficiency of public buildings. In GB 50189-2015; China Architecture and Building Press: Beijing, China, 2015. (In Chinese)
Case Sample | Evaluation Indices | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
... | ||||
... | ||||
... | ||||
... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
... | ||||
... | ||||
... |
Situations | Demarcation Points | Evaluation Results | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a | b | c | I | II | III | IV | |
1 | M | S | O | Unsuitable | Tolerable | Suitable | |
2 | M | O | S | Unsuitable | Tolerable | Suitable | |
3 | S | M | O | Unsuitable | Tolerable | Suitable |
Types | Technology | Performance Indices | Cost and Benefit Indices | Satisfaction Indices |
---|---|---|---|---|
Passive technologies | Double-skin facade | Heat transfer coefficient/Shading coefficient | Incremental investment payback period (PBP) | Sound insulation/DGP (Daylight Glare Probability) |
Tubular daylighting | System efficiency 1 | Incremental investment PBP | —— | |
Adjustable sun shading | Comprehensive energy consumption ratio | Incremental investment PBP | Light flux ratio/DGP | |
Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) technologies | Energy recovery | Energy recovery efficiency 1 | Incremental investment PBP | —— |
Radiant floor heating | Energy-saving rate | Incremental investment PBP | PMV | |
Independent temperature-humidity control | Energy-saving rate | Incremental investment PBP | —— | |
High efficiency cold and heat source | COP/EER improvement 1 | Incremental investment PBP | —— | |
Renewable energy-related technologies | Solar photovoltaic power generation | Photoelectric conversion efficiency1 | Incremental investment PBP | —— |
Solar hot water heating | Energy collection efficiency1 | Incremental investment PBP 1 | Indoor air temperature 1 | |
Ground source heat pump | EER/COP 1 | Incremental investment PBP 1 | Indoor air Temperature 1 |
Building | Total Area | Stories above the Ground | GBESTs Used in the Buildings |
---|---|---|---|
A | 11,090 | 6 | High-efficiency thermal insulation wall system Exhaust air heat recovery system Ground-source heat pump system Solar hot water system |
B | 10,762 | 3 | Roof greening Tubular daylighting system Exhaust air heat recovery technology |
Type | Exchange Efficiency | |
---|---|---|
Cooling | Heating | |
Enthalpy efficiency | >50% | >55% |
Temperature efficiency | >60% | >65% |
Cases | Building Occupancy | Location | Using Time 1 | Recovery Forms 2 | Recovery Efficiency | Payback Period (Year) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | Office | Shijiazhuang | A | Sensible | 0.78 | 2.8 |
B | Teaching | Tianjin | W | Sensible | 0.62 | 16.96 |
1 | Factory | Benxi | W&S | Sensible | 0.75 | 1 |
2 | Office | Chendu | W&S | Total | 0.648 | 4.5 |
3 | Office | Guangzhou | W&S | Total | 0.65 | 5.5 |
4 | Office | Shenzhen | S | Total | 0.60 | 8 |
5 | Office | Zhujiang | S | Sensible | 0.70 | 5 |
6 | Residence | Guangzhou | S | Total | 0.65 | 3.3 |
Cases | Positive Management | Non-Dimensionalization | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
0.78 | 0.357 | 0.41 | 0.31 | |
0.62 | 0.059 | 0.32 | 0.05 | |
0.75 | 1.000 | 0.39 | 0.86 | |
0.648 | 0.222 | 0.34 | 0.19 | |
0.65 | 0.182 | 0.34 | 0.16 | |
0.6 | 0.125 | 0.31 | 0.11 | |
0.7 | 0.200 | 0.37 | 0.17 | |
0.65 | 0.303 | 0.34 | 0.26 |
Case | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Comprehensive evaluation | 0.35 | 0.16 | 0.67 | 0.25 | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.29 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lu, S.; Fan, M.; Zhao, Y. A System to Pre-Evaluate the Suitability of Energy-Saving Technology for Green Buildings. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103777
Lu S, Fan M, Zhao Y. A System to Pre-Evaluate the Suitability of Energy-Saving Technology for Green Buildings. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103777
Chicago/Turabian StyleLu, Shilei, Minchao Fan, and Yiqun Zhao. 2018. "A System to Pre-Evaluate the Suitability of Energy-Saving Technology for Green Buildings" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3777. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103777