2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-981-16-6269-0_41
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Definitions of Positive Energy Districts: A Review of the Status Quo and Challenges

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In recent years, the Positive Energy District (PED) concept has emerged in which a district generates more local renewable energy than energy consumed from the outer-district boundaries while maintaining a net-zero carbon emission balance. Furthermore, the solar potential of heritage buildings can be implemented in virtual PEDs, which open the spatial frontiers of districts to allow off-site renewable generation [36][37][38][39], (Figure 1).…”
Section: Scopementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, the Positive Energy District (PED) concept has emerged in which a district generates more local renewable energy than energy consumed from the outer-district boundaries while maintaining a net-zero carbon emission balance. Furthermore, the solar potential of heritage buildings can be implemented in virtual PEDs, which open the spatial frontiers of districts to allow off-site renewable generation [36][37][38][39], (Figure 1).…”
Section: Scopementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second divergence is the balance metric or key performance indicators (KPI) to be used: energy end use or flexibility KPIs [14], total or non-renewable primary energy [3,13,15] or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [16], or a combination of the above and others [8,14]. In the latest Annex 83 review of the International Energy Agency (IEA) however, most definitions use a primary energy indicator, with notable exceptions [17]. However still, differences in primary energy conversion can cause drastically different balance assessments [18][19][20][21].…”
Section: Of 24mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second divergence is the balance metric or KPI to be used: energy end use or flexibility KPIs [14], total or non-renewable primary energy [3,13,15] or GHG emissions [16], or a combination of the above and others [8,14]. In the latest IEA Annex 83 review however, most definitions use a primary energy indicator, with notable exceptions [17]. However still, differences in primary energy conversion can cause drastically different balance assessments [18][19][20][21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be further obfuscated by the fact that many projects do not readily achieve their positive balance without some form of "offsite subsidies", be it in the form of RES credits or outright including these resources in the PED boundary [3,9], but not necessarily clear rules how this inclusion must be performed. Temporally, most use an annual balancing period of an operation year [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%