DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Sustainable framework for buildings in cold regions of China considering life cycle cost and environmental impact as well as thermal comfort

Abstract

In recent decades, environmental problems have enforced designers to estimate the level of environmental emission of building design and reduce their environmental impact. On the premise of ensuring indoor comfort, the cost-effectiveness of solutions for reducing the building’s greenhouse gas has become a critical issue. Based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), this paper establishes a building performance trade-off framework for indoor thermal comfort, economics, and environmental implication. This framework consists of four parts: the establishment of the optimization model; sensitivity analysis; obtain of Pareto frontier solutions, and decision-making analysis. Optimization variables involve envelope type and some envelope physical parameters. The “design variables-building performances” database is obtained by using building simulation software combined with the Latin hypercube sampling algorithm. Sensitivity analysis is used to extract the key factors affecting building performance. The designer can prioritize these key factors and it can reduce the uncertainty of building performance. A multi-objective optimization method coupling Gradient Boosted Decision Tree (GBDT) and non-dominated sorting genetic (NSGA-II) algorithm is proposed to seek the trade-off between three performances (obtain Pareto frontier solutions). The Pareto solution provides a more comprehensive reference for the preferences of different stakeholders, and the set of alternative solutions is further shrunk. Finally,more » take a specific residential building in China’s cold climate zone as a showcase of the trade-off framework. According to the obtained Pareto frontier solution, the solution set is shrunk to a certain range, and the distribution ranges of Life Cycle Costs, the greenhouse gas emissions, and the annual thermal discomfort hour ratio are 122.3–137.1 USD/m2, 15.6–44.8 kg CO2/m2, and 19.1–25.2%, respectively. The trade-off framework adopts the order of objective Pareto optimal and then subjective preference selection, narrowing the scope of alternatives for designers and saving time-cost of decision-making.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC); National Key Research and Development Program of China
OSTI Identifier:
1712834
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1808510
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC02-05CH11231; 2016YFC0700100
Resource Type:
Published Article
Journal Name:
Energy Reports
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: Energy Reports Journal Volume: 6 Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 2352-4847
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION; life cycle assessment; life cycle cost; greenhouse gas emissions; thermal comfort; sustainable building

Citation Formats

Wang, Ran, Lu, Shilei, Feng, Wei, Zhai, Xue, and Li, Xinhua. Sustainable framework for buildings in cold regions of China considering life cycle cost and environmental impact as well as thermal comfort. United States: N. p., 2020. Web. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2020.10.023.
Wang, Ran, Lu, Shilei, Feng, Wei, Zhai, Xue, & Li, Xinhua. Sustainable framework for buildings in cold regions of China considering life cycle cost and environmental impact as well as thermal comfort. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.10.023
Wang, Ran, Lu, Shilei, Feng, Wei, Zhai, Xue, and Li, Xinhua. Sun . "Sustainable framework for buildings in cold regions of China considering life cycle cost and environmental impact as well as thermal comfort". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.10.023.
@article{osti_1712834,
title = {Sustainable framework for buildings in cold regions of China considering life cycle cost and environmental impact as well as thermal comfort},
author = {Wang, Ran and Lu, Shilei and Feng, Wei and Zhai, Xue and Li, Xinhua},
abstractNote = {In recent decades, environmental problems have enforced designers to estimate the level of environmental emission of building design and reduce their environmental impact. On the premise of ensuring indoor comfort, the cost-effectiveness of solutions for reducing the building’s greenhouse gas has become a critical issue. Based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), this paper establishes a building performance trade-off framework for indoor thermal comfort, economics, and environmental implication. This framework consists of four parts: the establishment of the optimization model; sensitivity analysis; obtain of Pareto frontier solutions, and decision-making analysis. Optimization variables involve envelope type and some envelope physical parameters. The “design variables-building performances” database is obtained by using building simulation software combined with the Latin hypercube sampling algorithm. Sensitivity analysis is used to extract the key factors affecting building performance. The designer can prioritize these key factors and it can reduce the uncertainty of building performance. A multi-objective optimization method coupling Gradient Boosted Decision Tree (GBDT) and non-dominated sorting genetic (NSGA-II) algorithm is proposed to seek the trade-off between three performances (obtain Pareto frontier solutions). The Pareto solution provides a more comprehensive reference for the preferences of different stakeholders, and the set of alternative solutions is further shrunk. Finally, take a specific residential building in China’s cold climate zone as a showcase of the trade-off framework. According to the obtained Pareto frontier solution, the solution set is shrunk to a certain range, and the distribution ranges of Life Cycle Costs, the greenhouse gas emissions, and the annual thermal discomfort hour ratio are 122.3–137.1 USD/m2, 15.6–44.8 kg CO2/m2, and 19.1–25.2%, respectively. The trade-off framework adopts the order of objective Pareto optimal and then subjective preference selection, narrowing the scope of alternatives for designers and saving time-cost of decision-making.},
doi = {10.1016/j.egyr.2020.10.023},
journal = {Energy Reports},
number = C,
volume = 6,
place = {United States},
year = {Sun Nov 01 00:00:00 EDT 2020},
month = {Sun Nov 01 00:00:00 EDT 2020}
}