4.8 Review

Thermal comfort and building energy consumption implications - A review

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 115, Issue -, Pages 164-173

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.10.062

Keywords

Predicted mean vote; Adaptive comfort models; Building energy efficiency; Climate change; Heat and cooling requirements

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50978210]
  2. Innovative Research Team Grant of Shaanxi Province, China

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Buildings account for about 40% of the global energy consumption and contribute over 30% of the CO2 emissions. A large proportion of this energy is used for thermal comfort in buildings. This paper reviews thermal comfort research work and discusses the implications for building energy efficiency. Predicted mean vote works well in air-conditioned spaces but not naturally ventilated buildings, whereas adaptive models tend to have a broader comfort temperature ranges. Higher indoor temperatures in summertime conditions would lead to less prevalence of cooling systems as well as less cooling requirements. Raising summer set point temperature has good energy saving potential, in that it can be applied to both new and existing buildings. Further research and development work conducive to a better understanding of thermal comfort and energy conservation in buildings have been identified and discussed. These include (i) social-economic and cultural studies in general and post-occupancy evaluation of the built environment and the corresponding energy use in particular, and (ii) consideration of future climate scenarios in the analysis of co- and tri-generation schemes for HVAC applications, fuel mix and the associated energy planning/distribution systems in response to the expected changes in heating and cooling requirements due to climate change. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available