1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Selecting HVAC systems to achieve comfortable and cost-effective residential net-zero energy buildings

      , ,
      Applied Energy
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="P1">HVAC is responsible for the largest share of energy use in residential buildings and plays an important role in broader implementation of net-zero energy building (NZEB). This study investigated the energy, comfort and economic performance of commercially-available HVAC technologies for a residential NZEB. An experimentally-validated model was used to evaluate ventilation, dehumidification, and heat pump options for the NZEB in the mixed-humid climate zone. Ventilation options were compared to mechanical ventilation without recovery; a heat recovery ventilator (HRV) and energy recovery ventilator (ERV) respectively reduced the HVAC energy by 13.5 % and 17.4 % and reduced the building energy by 7.5 % and 9.7 %. There was no significant difference in thermal comfort between the ventilation options. Dehumidification options were compared to an air-source heat pump (ASHP) with a separate dehumidifier; the ASHP with dedicated dehumidification reduced the HVAC energy by 7.3 % and the building energy by 3.9 %. The ASHP-only option (without dedicated dehumidification) reduced the initial investment but provided the worst comfort due to high humidity levels. Finally, ground-source heat pump (GSHP) alternatives were compared to the ASHP; the GSHP with two and three boreholes reduced the HVAC energy by 26.0 % and 29.2 % and the building energy by 13.1 % and 14.7 %. The economics of each HVAC configuration was analyzed using installation cost data and two electricity price structures. The GSHPs with the ERV and dedicated dehumidification provided the highest energy savings and good comfort, but were the most expensive. The ASHP with dedicated dehumidification and the ERV (or HRV) provided reasonable payback periods. </p>

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Applied Energy
          Applied Energy
          Elsevier BV
          03062619
          February 2018
          February 2018
          : 212
          : 577-591
          Article
          10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.046
          5988264
          29887669
          3636c6b3-0b94-455a-ac5d-e105ddef26a8
          © 2018

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article