4.7 Article

Benchmarking the performance of building energy management using data envelopment analysis

期刊

APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING
卷 29, 期 16, 页码 3269-3273

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.02.034

关键词

Energy efficiency; Energy management; Data envelopment analysis; Building energy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In traditional methods, benchmarking of building energy performance usually takes into consideration of a wide range of different factors, including floor area, number of occupants, climate condition, energy efficiency of the equipment used, setting of indoor temperature and so on. These different factors are then given different weights to calculate one general indicator. The indicator is general as it measures only the overall energy performance of a building. For obtaining more specific information, such as the energy management effectiveness of a building, this paper proposes an adjustment to the traditional approach by using data envelopment analysis. Factors related to the evaluation of building energy performance are divided into scale factors and management factors; the effect of scale factors is then removed to focus on the performance of management factors that may provide an optional indicator to refine the traditional focus on energy consumption per unit floor area. Samples under evaluation incorporate 47 government office buildings in Taiwan, and floor area and the number of occupants are used as the scale factors for climate-adjusted building energy consumption after regression analysis. According to the evaluation focusing on management performance, five evaluated buildings report minimum energy consumption in different scales and they are rated as 100% for the best management performance. Six buildings receive the rating of 80-99%, 23 buildings fall under 60% and the poorest reads 31%. The average indicator of energy performance of all evaluated buildings reads 65%. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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