Can we learn from heritage buildings to achieve nearly zero energy building and thermal comfort? A case study in a hot climate

Author(s):  
Mamdooh Alwetaishi
Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 5357
Author(s):  
Shady Attia ◽  
Camille Gobin

Overheating in residential building is a challenging problem that causes thermal discomfort, productivity reduction, and health problems. This paper aims to assess the climate change impact on thermal comfort in a Belgian reference case. The case study represents a nearly zero energy building that operates without active cooling during summer. The study quantifies the impact of climate change on overheating risks using three representative concentration pathway (RCP) trajectories for greenhouse gas concentration adopted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Building performance analysis is carried out using a multizone dynamic simulation program EnergyPlus. The results show that bioclimatic and thermal adaptation strategies, including adaptive thermal comfort models, cannot suppress the effect of global warming. By 2050, zero energy buildings will be vulnerable to overheating.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 4563
Author(s):  
Nuno Baía Baía Saraiva ◽  
Luisa Dias Dias Pereira ◽  
Adélio Rodrigues Gaspar ◽  
José Joaquim da Costa

The adaptation of spaces to different usage typologies can be complex in heritage buildings. Facilities were initially planned for a specific type of use that, when changed, require additional measures to ensure a suitable indoor environment. Passive strategies—e.g., free cooling—are commonly used as an alternative without requiring equipment installation. However, its implementation often leads to unsatisfactory conditions. Therefore, it is important to clarify the main barriers to achieving thermal comfort in readapted historic buildings. The present work investigates the thermal comfort conditions reported by workers in office spaces of a historic building in the University of Coimbra. A monitoring campaign was carried out between May and September 2020 to assess indoor conditions’ quality. Due to the current pandemic of COVID-19, offices were not occupied at full capacity. A one-day evaluation of thermal comfort was made using a climate analyzer and six occupants were surveyed on 19 August 2020. The main results highlighted discomfort due to overheating of spaces. The causes were related to the combination of inadequate implementation of the free cooling actions and the building use. Furthermore, it was recommended the installation of HVAC systems in case of full capacity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 166 ◽  
pp. 271-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arianna Brambilla ◽  
Graziano Salvalai ◽  
Marco Imperadori ◽  
Marta Maria Sesana

Author(s):  
R Stasi ◽  
S Paterno ◽  
A Stragapede ◽  
S Liuzzi ◽  
P Stefanizzi

KIEAE Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-60
Author(s):  
Mi-Yeon Kim ◽  
Hyung-Geun Kim ◽  
Goopyo Hong

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-43
Author(s):  
Daniel Wubah ◽  
Chris Steuer ◽  
Guilbert Brown ◽  
Karen Rice

Purpose This study aims to provide an example of how higher education institutions (HEIs) can use a successful campus infrastructure project to fund a student- and faculty-led, community-success platform that advances the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Design/methodology/approach The authors applied conceptual models for systems thinking and creating virtuous cycles to analyze Millersville University’s work to establish a community-impact, micro-grant fund using cost savings and utility rebates associated with a new campus zero-energy building. The analysis provides a case study that other HEIs can implement to create university and community virtuous cycles that advance the SDGs. Findings The case study suggests that as HEIs face increasing financial challenges, opportunities exist to capitalize on philanthropic giving and other funding sources to support community prosperity and increase university vitality through a shared responsibility paradigm centered on the SDGs. Practical implications This case study identifies specific funding sources that HEIs can use to fund campus and community sustainability projects using the SDG framework, mechanisms for establishing shared purpose around that impact and a conceptual model for thinking about opportunities to leverage philanthropic giving to create a virtuous cycle that increases university vitality through community impact. Social implications Constructing a campus zero energy building funded in part through philanthropic giving provided a unique opportunity to explore how a project’s success can be leveraged to create additional community successes. This case study offers an example for how to convert one success into a platform that funds projects that have direct community impact in one or more of the SDG goal areas. Originality/value This paper aims at bridging the gap between theoretical frameworks for community sustainable development and descriptive-only case studies by using a case study to demonstrate a conceptual model or framework for advancing community sustainability (Karatzoglou, 2013). The case study provides a unique model for using utility rebates associated with an infrastructure project that was funded through philanthropic giving to establish a fund for projects that support the community. Utility rebates associated with campus energy efficiency projects are often otherwise overlooked, used to fund additional energy efficiency projects or simply returned to a university’s operating budget. For some HEIs, this model may connect the work of facilities staff to student success in ways that have not previously been explored. For others, this alternative use of utility rebates may offer an opportunity to increase the investment value of utility rebate dollars by creating virtuous cycles within their communities that contribute to university vitality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document