2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.02.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calculation method and tool for assessing energy consumption in the building stock

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 83 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Tronchin et al [19] applied a selection of calculation models, among which a quasi-steady-state calculation method, and compared the results with the real energy consumption; they found out that the standardized energy performance is about 35% higher than the real energy consumption. In a bottom-up energy model of the building stock using archetypes, Tuominen et al [20] discovered a gap of about 32% between the modeled estimate and the official statistics for the detached houses. Sunikka-Blank et al [21] plotted the calculated energy performance against the measured energy consumption of 3400 houses in Germany; their analysis revealed that, when the predicted energy performance is around 300 kWh·m −2 , the real energy consumption is 40% lower, while a predicted energy performance of 150 kWh·m −2 corresponds to 17% lower real consumption.…”
Section: Methodologies For the Energy Performance Assessment Of Buildmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tronchin et al [19] applied a selection of calculation models, among which a quasi-steady-state calculation method, and compared the results with the real energy consumption; they found out that the standardized energy performance is about 35% higher than the real energy consumption. In a bottom-up energy model of the building stock using archetypes, Tuominen et al [20] discovered a gap of about 32% between the modeled estimate and the official statistics for the detached houses. Sunikka-Blank et al [21] plotted the calculated energy performance against the measured energy consumption of 3400 houses in Germany; their analysis revealed that, when the predicted energy performance is around 300 kWh·m −2 , the real energy consumption is 40% lower, while a predicted energy performance of 150 kWh·m −2 corresponds to 17% lower real consumption.…”
Section: Methodologies For the Energy Performance Assessment Of Buildmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to their classification the archetypes technique, a bottom-up approach, consists of modelling representative buildings and extrapolating their results to the urban scale. This has been used in recent studies for energy analysis [7,8]. In addition, the new EU Directive 2003/98/CE [9] has contributed to developing a framework for the re-use of public sector information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This listing of benefits also shows that there are many different reasons why consumers may want to reduce energy consumption and cost savings and price risk reduction are but one of many. In this paper we concentrate on price risk reduction as other benefits have been extensively studied elsewhere in the literature (see e.g., [14,16] because of the lack of proper methodologies to do so. Price risk reduction can be seen as one more area where a value to consumers can be recognized but not yet quantified, as is exemplified by Figure 1.…”
Section: Rationale For Price Risk Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This listing of benefits also shows that there are many different reasons why consumers may want to reduce energy consumption and cost savings and price risk reduction are but one of many. In this paper we concentrate on price risk reduction as other benefits have been extensively studied elsewhere in the literature (see e.g., [14,16]). …”
Section: Rationale For Price Risk Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%