Show simple item record

contributor authorSchwartz, Emily K.
contributor authorKrarti, Moncef
date accessioned2023-08-16T18:36:18Z
date available2023-08-16T18:36:18Z
date copyright4/28/2023 12:00:00 AM
date issued2023
identifier issn2642-6641
identifier otherjesbc_4_2_021001.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4292202
description abstractIn this paper, a life cycle cost-based optimization analysis is carried out to compare the energy and cost performance of diverse sustainable designs of a residential building. These designs include code optimal, net zero energy building, and passive house. It is found that in the case where natural gas is employed, a total energy savings of 77% is optimal. The cost-optimal design for electrification achieves 100.12% of energy savings relative to the baseline design but results in a slightly high life cycle cost than that of the gas-cost optimal design. In addition, the results indicate that due to the additional capital costs for the required energy-efficient measures, the passive house case is less economically optimal than the Net Zero Energy Building design options. Overall, the most cost-optimal designs are found to be for natural gas-heated homes with marginally better energy performance than the applicable current energy efficiency code with 10-kW solar panels.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleComparative Analysis Optimal Designs for Passive, Electrified, and Net Zero Energy Residential Buildings
typeJournal Paper
journal volume4
journal issue2
journal titleASME Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Buildings and Cities
identifier doi10.1115/1.4062325
journal fristpage21001-1
journal lastpage21001-14
page14
treeASME Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Buildings and Cities:;2023:;volume( 004 ):;issue: 002
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record