Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMoazzen, N.
dc.contributor.authorKaragüler, M. E.
dc.contributor.authorAshrafian Bonab, Touraj
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-19T12:59:57Z
dc.date.available2023-04-19T12:59:57Z
dc.date.issued2021-12-15
dc.identifier.issn0378-7788en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10679/8133
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778821007714
dc.description.abstractThere has been an increasing interest in studying energy efficiency in buildings in the recent years, as they account for a significant portion of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. While most of the studies focus on the buildings' operational phase, a substantial part of buildings' energy consumption is disguised as embodied energy. It is impossible to have a zero energy building, as it is necessary to use materials to build the building, and those materials need to produce and transport energy. Life cycle analysis is the utmost efficient method to assess how a building affects the environment. Notably, the impact of buildings on the environment across their lifespans are determined by some factors, which comprise materials, design, construction, use and demolition. The study aims to present the implementation of a life cycle approach and occupant thermal comfort during the school building's energy efficiency design. The study's principal objective focuses on the energy use and environmental impact linked to various alternatives of building envelopes in different climates. Within this context, a reference building located in three different climatic regions of Turkey is investigated. Two ranges of efficiency comprise the focal points of the study. Cost-optimal and nearly zero energy levels are defined for each city. In the hot climate, the cost-optimal scenario cannot improve the comfort conditions, whereas the nZEB scenario improves slightly in such a context. In temperate and cold climates, both strategies can improve comfort conditions. The share of embodied energy and carbon in the nZEB level can reach higher than 80 percent, whereas it is lower than 15 percent in the cost-optimal level.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipIstanbul Technical University
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.ispartofEnergy and Buildings
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.titleComprehensive parameters for the definition of nearly zero energy and cost optimal levels considering the life cycle energy and thermal comfort of school buildingsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.peerreviewedyesen_US
dc.publicationstatusPublisheden_US
dc.contributor.departmentÖzyeğin University
dc.contributor.authorID(ORCID 0000-0001-9243-7071 & YÖK ID 257137) Ashrafıan, Touraj
dc.contributor.ozuauthorAshrafian Bonab, Touraj
dc.identifier.volume253en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000706208400012
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111487en_US
dc.subject.keywordsCost-optimalen_US
dc.subject.keywordsLife cycle energy consumptionen_US
dc.subject.keywordsNearly zero energyen_US
dc.subject.keywordsSchool buildingsen_US
dc.subject.keywordsThermal comforten_US
dc.identifier.scopusSCOPUS:2-s2.0-85116679460
dc.relation.publicationcategoryArticle - International Refereed Journal - Institutional Academic Staff


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Share this page