Exploring the effects of several energy efficiency measures on the embodied/operational energy trade-off: A case study of swedish residential buildings

Abstract The building design process is crucial in efforts to implement energy-efficient practices by adopting Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs). However, design choices based solely on reducing operational energy use can significantly increase a building's embodied energy and Life Cycle Energy (LCE) use, because there is a trade-off between embodied and operational energy. This article presents a case study in which multi-objective optimization was used to explore the effects of various EEMs on the aforementioned trade-off. Optimal solution(s) for six different building shapes (rectangular, H-, U-, l -, T- and cross-shaped) based on two sets of EEMs were investigated and compared. The first set of EEMs consisted of EEMs that can be implemented or modified during the early design phase, such as the building's shape, orientation, Window to Wall Ratio (WWR), and constituent materials. The second set comprised EEMs that can be implemented later in the design phase (i.e. EEMs relating to the constituent materials). The LCE reductions achieved by finding optimal solutions for EEMs in the first set (ranged from 2175.2 to 3803.8 GJ) were significantly (over 5 times) higher than those achieved for the second set (ranged from 418.6 to 625.6 GJ) for all building shapes. Moreover, LCE use for pre-optimization building designs varied significantly with building shape. However, after optimization, the differences in LCE use between the optimal solutions of different building shapes were modest. This means that designers and construction companies can select building shapes based on customer requirements, but also highlights the importance of using multi-objective optimization during early design process to identify optimal combinations of EEMs that minimize LCE use.

[1]  Manish K. Dixit,et al.  Life cycle embodied energy analysis of residential buildings: A review of literature to investigate embodied energy parameters , 2017 .

[2]  Kari Alanne,et al.  A life cycle approach to optimizing carbon footprint and costs of a residential building , 2017 .

[3]  Paul Ruyssevelt,et al.  A comparison of an energy/economic-based against an exergoeconomic-based multi-objective optimisation for low carbon building energy design , 2017 .

[4]  Weizhuo Lu,et al.  An environmental assessment and optimization method for contractors , 2017 .

[5]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  An analysis of the embodied energy of office buildings by height , 2001 .

[6]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Multi-objective Genetic Algorithms: Problem Difficulties and Construction of Test Problems , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[7]  Grace K C Ding,et al.  Sustainable construction--the role of environmental assessment tools. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[8]  Philippe Rigo,et al.  A review on simulation-based optimization methods applied to building performance analysis , 2014 .

[9]  Evangelos Grigoroudis,et al.  A multi-objective decision model for the improvement of energy efficiency in buildings , 2010 .

[10]  John Haymaker,et al.  ThermalOpt: A methodology for automated BIM-based multidisciplinary thermal simulation for use in optimization environments , 2011 .

[11]  Moncef Krarti,et al.  Genetic-algorithm based approach to optimize building envelope design for residential buildings , 2010 .

[12]  Navid Delgarm,et al.  Multi-objective optimization of building energy performance and indoor thermal comfort: A new method using artificial bee colony (ABC) , 2016 .

[13]  Paolo Maria Congedo,et al.  Multi-criteria optimization analysis of external walls according to ITACA protocol for zero energy buildings in the mediterranean climate , 2014 .

[14]  Weimin Wang,et al.  Applying multi-objective genetic algorithms in green building design optimization , 2005 .

[15]  Theodoros Theodosiou,et al.  Embodied energy in residential buildings-towards the nearly zero energy building: A literature review , 2016 .

[16]  Tim Johansson,et al.  An integrated BIM-based framework for minimizing embodied energy during building design , 2016 .

[17]  Sha Liu,et al.  Building information modeling based building design optimization for sustainability , 2015 .

[18]  M. Fesanghary,et al.  Design of low-emission and energy-efficient residential buildings using a multi-objective optimization algorithm , 2012 .

[19]  Olivier Vassart,et al.  A Whole LCA of the Sustainable Aspects of Structural Systems in Tall Buildings , 2016 .

[20]  Aris Tsangrassoulis,et al.  Algorithms for optimization of building design: A review , 2014 .

[21]  Jani Mukkavaara,et al.  An Integrated BIM-based framework for the optimization of the trade-off between embodied and operational energy , 2018 .

[22]  Sarel Lavy,et al.  Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review , 2010 .

[23]  T. M. Leung,et al.  A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings , 2015 .

[24]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Genetic Algorithms and Highly Constrained Problems: The Time-Table Case , 1990, PPSN.

[25]  Ala Hasan,et al.  Applying a multi-objective optimization approach for Design of low-emission cost-effective dwellings , 2011 .

[26]  Somayeh Asadi,et al.  Development of a new methodology to optimize building life cycle cost, environmental impacts, and occupant satisfaction , 2017 .

[27]  Wei Yan,et al.  BPOpt: A framework for BIM-based performance optimization , 2015 .

[28]  Weimin Wang,et al.  Floor shape optimization for green building design , 2006, Adv. Eng. Informatics.