4.7 Article

Investigations on the integration and acceptability of GSHP in the UK dwellings

期刊

BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 82, 期 -, 页码 442-449

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.09.020

关键词

GSHP; Integration; Acceptability; UK dwellings

资金

  1. Orbit Heart of England, Orbit Housing Group Limited

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heating and cooling in residential buildings is becoming significantly important and constitutes large proportion of total energy consumption. In order to create green and sustainable buildings it becomes imperative to use low carbon, efficient and renewable energy technologies to reduce and deliver the heating and cooling demand. Ground source heat pump (GSHP) uses the ground or ground water as heat source-sink. However, integrating the technology at end user and its acceptability significantly affects its performance. Present study examines the integration and acceptability of GSHP in the UK dwellings. Many factors at end user side e.g. awareness, cost, economics, comfort, supplier's quality, etc. are considered in the present research. These factors deemed to be responsible of GSHP penetration into the UK renewable energy sector for dwellings. GSHP from single suppliers are installed in 62 houses spread across Coventry, situated in the West Midlands, UK. During the course of installation and operation data are collected in the form of questionnaire survey to establish factors around integration, user awareness and ability to adopt and training for end user and how it affected the performance of GSHP. Also in the whole process of operation end users perception regarding energy bills, comfort and ease of operation is also taken into account. According to the data analysis occupancy, end users' awareness and understanding of GSHP, additional heating and technical support have been found very significant factors affecting energy saving and performance of installed GSHP. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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