4.7 Article

Impacts of COVID-19 on residential building energy use and performance

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 205, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108200

关键词

COVID-19 pandemic; Residential buildings; Energy use; Load profiles

资金

  1. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, there were shifts in household electricity usage, particularly during times when occupants would typically be away from home. Low-income and high-income households experienced larger increases in energy consumption, while middle-income households saw smaller changes.
Following the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic and the rise in cases across the United States, the typical daily routines of millions were disrupted as the country attempted to control the spread of the virus. As a result, homes became makeshift offices, classrooms, restaurants, and entertainment centers. With these changes in how residential buildings are used, surveys and grid-level studies have been conducted to understand how energy use has shifted due to the pandemic. However, there are limited efforts that review the impact of energy use at the household level. In this study, high-resolution, disaggregated data is analyzed to measure the shifts in electricity use related to HVAC loads, non-HVAC loads, and whole-home loads in a comparison of 225 housing units over the years of 2018-2020. Key findings from the analyses indicated increased electricity use during periods that occupants would usually be away from home. The most percent increases in non-HVAC residential loads occurred between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m.; HVAC loads increasing in total daily consumption compared to the same average daily temperatures of previous years. Additionally, dividing the data by household income, the lowest income and higher income households experienced the larger increases in consumption, while the middle income groups experience smaller shifts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据