Author:
Verhaeghe Charlotte,Amaryllis Audenaert,Verbeke Stijn
Abstract
The rising interest in low energy building has led to an inflation in related terminology: (nearly) zero energy buildings, or (n)ZEBs, passive houses, positive energy buildings and districts, off-grid buildings, energy autarkic buildings, etc. Each of these terms involves (sometimes subtle) differences in interpretations, system boundaries, included energy end uses, etc. This paper maps the differences and overlaps in applications of various cases of residential High Energy Performance Buildings (HEPBs), aiming to contribute in the development of a novel taxonomy to evaluate the extent to which a building can be considered energy or carbon neutral. Three dimensions are suggested for specification in novel taxonomy for HEPBs: (i) the spatial dimension (energy use, locally renewable energy production and sometimes energy storage), (ii) the time dimension (during which period is the building and its systems balanced, e.g. yearly or momentary) and (iii) the end-use dimension (these are the end-uses that are included or excluded for the calculation of the total energy needs of the buildings).
Reference74 articles.
1. Zero Energy Building – A review of definitions and calculation methodologies
2. Build Up, Overview | Zero-Energy Buildings: does the definition influence their design and implementation?, (2019), Available online: https://www.buildup.eu/en/news/overview-zero-energy-buildings-does-definition-influence-their-design-and-implementation.
3. A comprehensive analysis on definitions, development, and policies of nearly zero energy buildings in China
4. Wei X., Shicong Z., APEC 100 Best Practice Analysis of Nearly/Net Zero Energy Building; (2017);
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献