EPJ Web of Conferences 54, 02004 (2013)

DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/20135402004


C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences - SIF, 2013

Energy and architecture — An overview

G. Sonetti(∗ )
Architect, MSc. The University of Nottingham, University Park, NG7 2RD, Nottingham, UK

Summary. — This paper aims to provide a short overview on the complex aspects
and growing concern about energy in architecture by gradually zooming into it,
starting from a macro-scale analysis of building contribution in the total EU energy
consumption, related policies, user behaviour’s impacts and vernacular architecture
techniques; then looking at the meso scale of building energy performance during
its use, dynamic simulations of heat transfer and insights from a whole life cycle
analysis of the energy involved during construction and disposal phases; finally, at
the building element micro-scale, describing local heat transfer and human thermal
comfort measurements. Conclusions gather recommendations and further scenarios
where different stakeholders and techniques can play their part for a wiser and more
sustainable energy use, and a better built environment for us and those to come.

1. – Introduction

If a system can be modelled as composed by 3 parameters, and each parameter can

assume “n” number of states, then we know that the total combination of possible con-
figurations is 3n . What happens with buildings is that even if the number of parameters
that can be observed regarding energy issues could be relatively low, the “n” always
prompts very large, and — to make things harder — to weigh key parameters in a hi-

(∗ ) E-mail: [email protected]

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 2 .0, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article available at http://www.epj-conferences.org or http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/20135402004

 EPJ Web of Conferences

erarchy scale and in a common frame valid for every case, is not a trivial matter. In
addition, since achieving thermo-hygrometric comfort deals also with economic, security,
safety and environmental issues, the sustainability challenge for an architecture design
team or a policy maker nowadays becomes even tougher. Choosing a configuration over
another requires a strong simplification effort to translate the multitude of physical in-
teractions into “edible” data. A building is characterized by several thermodynamics
equations (air movement, radiation exchange, noise transmission, moisture flow, electri-
cal power flow, degree of insulation, etc.) each one of which may interact by a non-linear
law with the others, to not mention the repercussion that each singular variation can
have on the total energy consumption, or the transportation and maintenance costs, or
the disposal scenario: “n” variations correspond to incredibly high cascade results.
This paper will cover essential issues at the macro, meso and micro scale of this
complex topic about energy and built environment, stressing the outlines for further
improvements in energy saving techniques and user environmental awareness.

2. – Energy issue at macro scale: the built environment

.
2 1. Quick facts on building energy consumption trends. – We are continuously bom-
barded by frightened data on climate change emergency, CO2 emissions and energy source
depletion, reserves’ scarcity and building contributing to this worsening situation. Statis-
tics exposed afterwards are not the n-th threatening messages and apocalyptic scenarios
running to the usual final audience switching off, but constitute an important preface
to understand the border conditions of the problem and calibrate weights of different
energy issues in built environment.
Energy consumption of buildings in developed countries comprises 20–40% of the
total energy use [1] and is above industry and transport figures in EU and USA. Future
projections indicate that in 2030, buildings will be responsible for 35.6% of primary
energy use in the world and continue to maintain their importance. Causes of this
can be found in the high rate of growth in population, the enhancement of building
services and the very high standard of living, together with the rise in time spent inside
a building. In addition, predictions indicate a massive growth in energy consumption
in EU within the next 15 years, increasing approximately around 50%. According to
building energy consumption trends, Spain energy consumption rate is above the North
American (1.9%) and European data (1.5%) and much above the UK figure. This can
be the result of increased building sector business, wider availability of building services
and in particular large use of HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) systems.
Emerging economies, too, will intensify needs for education, health and other services,
together with the consequential energy consumption [2].
In the residential sector, weather, architectural design, energy systems and economic
level of the occupants are important indicators for energy consumption. By and large,
small flats need less energy as there is less conditioned and transfer area, and also less
occupation, and dwellings in developed countries use more energy than those in emerging
economies due to the installation of new appliances (air conditioners, computers, etc.).

02004-p.2
 LNES2012

In USA, dwellings consume 22% of the total final energy use, compared with 26% in
the EU. The UK figure is 28%, well above the Spanish 15%, and this is mainly due to
a more severe climate and to the predominance of independent houses over blocks in
the house typology. In non-domestic buildings, the type of use and activities make a
huge impact on the quality and quantity of energy services needed. HVAC is the main
end use with a rate close to 50%. Lighting follows with 15% and appliances with 10%.
Building typology is crucial for energy consultancy and housing stock assessment, since
it influences both the distribution and the intensity of energy use at building and district
level. Within the commercial sector, office buildings are, together with retail, those with
the biggest consumption and CO2 emissions.
.
2 2. Building energy policies. – EU last FP7 calls emphasize on energy rating to inform
and stimulate subsequent building renovation activities [3]. About 85% of the European
buildings are older than 20 years; 60% are older than 40 years and 30% are pre-war build-
ings. Most of them are not equipped with advanced building management and control
systems. It is estimated that about 50% of these buildings will be renovated in the next
20 years opening the potential to improve their energy performance [2]. Local adminis-
trations can seriously reduce emissions only by increasing the environmental awareness of
citizens and stakeholders and helping them to take action. The new European Directive
on the energy performance of buildings [4] requires each country to implement policies to
improve the efficiency of buildings, until new buildings have almost zero energy consump-
tion by 2020. Thus, local administrations could accomplish a lot by persuading citizens
to retrofit their houses. The Italian national tax relief policy has led to energy saving
retrofits, but primarily to those that require less financial commitment, such as window
replacement. These retrofits result in lower energy savings compared to those on opaque
building surfaces but are a lot cheaper and so easier to apply. Therefore, to achieve
the European Union targets for 2020, it will be essential encouraging private initiative
together with government intervention, promoting of energy efficiency, new technologies
for energy production, limiting energy consumption and raising social awareness on the
rational use of energy.
.
2 3. Passive design and hybrid approach. – Building energy efficiency can be locally
improved by implementing either active or passive energy efficient strategies. Improve-
ments to heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, electrical lighting,
etc. can be categorized as active strategies, whereas improvements to building envelope
elements can be classified under passive strategies. Recent years have seen a renewed
interest in environmental-friendly passive building energy efficiency strategies, because
they are being envisioned as a viable solution to the problems of energy crisis and envi-
ronmental pollution. Energy savings of 31.4% and peak load savings of 36.8% from the
base case were recorded for high-rise apartments in the hot and humid climate of Hong
Kong just by implementing passive energy efficient strategies [5]. In a different study [6],
the thermal and heat transfer performance of a building envelope in the subtropical cli-
matic conditions of Hong Kong saved as much as 35% and 47% of total and peak cooling
demands, respectively.

02004-p.3
 EPJ Web of Conferences

Advanced and sustainable materials research for building envelope applications has
seen significant progress in recent years, but a proper design inspired by past examples is
a worthwhile endeavour and a scientific guidance as valid as high-tech solutions. Vernac-
ular architectures, recovered for example by Assan Fathy and then other architects, are
those that are built by people, thus influenced by tradition and culture. They survived
up to our era because they have been gleaned through a long period of trial and error and
the ingenuity of local builders who possess specific knowledge about their place on the
planet, so they form a tangible proof of effectiveness of climate-specific passive building
technologies to modern buildings [7]. In a world that is seeing the rapid dissemination
of mass-produced homes and buildings designed by teams of architects and engineers
sometimes thousands of miles away from the building site, there is a threat that ver-
nacular traditions that help define the cultural make-up of a people and a place will be
lost. The challenge to preserve these valuable techniques and cultures will be to package
this knowledge in such a way that vernacular traditions become widely known to modern
designers and builders, including information about not only the energy performance but
also about cost, material availability and cultural traditions [8].
Conclusion of a comparative study [9] aiming to explore the influence of incorporat-
ing ICT and modern techniques in buildings in hot climates through the perspective of
passive and active building performances, shows that dependence of individual active
features to solve one or some climatic design strategies brings energy savings that range
from just 8% up to 40%, according on the combination used. Passive design strategies
that used low-sophistication devices achieved between 20% to 60% energy savings, but
some of these strategies might not be applicable to all cases (for example, depending on
south-facing orientations only). This makes them unreliable for constant savings in all
situations. However, combining active features and correct passive design strategies gives
consistent savings of around 50–55% for most cases when compared to a conventional
situation. Such sensibly planned buildings offer flexibility and convenience that exclu-
sively passive buildings cannot give, such as rapid temporary changes, options to open
individual windows or operate specific blinds. A successful smart building and smart city
cannot be just a collection of smart active features: it needs to be a product of a design
process that incorporates intelligence in all its stages, including the schematic early ones,
evaluating socioeconomic impacts of each choice while taking advantage of technological
innovations and local resources.
.
2 4. RES integration. – Renewable energy source integration within new and existing
buildings is also a significant approach to reduce resource consumption. In the European
Directive 31 definition of the concept of a “zero” or “near zero” energy building (ZEBs or
near ZEBs), the energy use in new constructions must be compensated by the production
of energy from renewable sources. The energy balance will be zero when the energy
demand equals the renewable-energy generation, both on-site supply options available
within the building’s footprint (solar photovoltaics, small and medium wind turbines,
solar thermal, CHP, heat pumps) and off-site site supply (hydro electricity, biomass,
wind and solar farm) [10].

02004-p.4
 LNES2012

Currently, three systems have been receiving wide concern, including solar-based en-
ergy systems, ground source-based energy systems and day-lighting systems. Recently,
Marszal [11] determined the life cycle cost of the on-site and off-site renewable energy
supply systems: from the private economy perspective and with the current technologies’
cost and energy price, in 4 out of 5 on-site RES options investment in energy efficiency
is a more cost-effective decision than investment in renewable-energy technologies. The
off-site RES options have a reverse life cycle cost trend, and for all systems the combi-
nation of less demining energy frame and high renewable-energy generation is the most
cost-optimal path towards net-zero building.
.
2 5. User behaviour in the domestic building. – Evidence from behavioural economics
and psychology outlines the current approach to enabling people, at home and at work,
to reduce their energy consumption and reduce their bills in the process. Behaviourally
based changes that reduce emissions have indeed major advantages. First, the benefits
can be very fast, unlike major infrastructure changes that can take years, or even decades,
and a 1% gain today is worth more than a 1% gain tomorrow. Second, they can be highly
cost-effective. Third, they can provide savings and other benefits directly to citizens. A
detailed survey held by Lopes [12] also suggested acting on user awareness of stand-by
power consumption (that represents the 8–10% of total consumption) and in general on
a closer association between electricity production and its economic burden, since energy
cost is always the main priority even for residents enthusiastic about energy savings.
Studies in the United States, the Netherlands and the UK [13] have estimated that 26–
36% of in-home energy use is due to residents behaviour. To promote energy-conscious
behaviour effectively throughout the population requires a better understanding of the
interface between people and the equipment they use. In general, further attention
should be given to assessing information transfer methods that combine the frequently
updated appliance-specific feedback interface (to increase motivation to save energy)
with feasible energy-saving tips at the points-of-use (to increase knowledge about energy-
saving methods). For example, energy-saving tips might be displayed on a drop-down
menu whilst the user is new to the Energy Consumption Indicators (ECI), and then
hidden by the user once he/she knows about the tips or has modified certain energy use
practises. This feature would play a secondary but potentially important role to that
part of the display that indicates energy consumption.

3. – Energy issue at the meso scale: the building

According to the definition in the EPBD Recast Annex 3, “The energy performance
of a building shall be expressed in a transparent manner and shall include an energy
performance indicator and a numeric indicator of primary energy use, based on primary
energy factors per energy carrier, which may be based on national or regional annual
weighted averages or a specific value for on-site production”. This methodology uses
primary energy as the metric for building energy performance to “indicate the quality of
a building in energy use” [14]. The most commonly used EP indicator for many building

02004-p.5
 EPJ Web of Conferences

types is energy use intensities (EUI), i.e. kWh/m2 . Building energy performance is
mainly determined by six factors: climate, building envelope, building services and energy
systems, building operation and maintenance, occupants’ activities and behaviour and
indoor environmental quality provided, as summarized in IEA Annex 53 project. The
energy performance assessment approaches in the building sector can be classified into
two major categories, namely performance-based and feature-specific approaches [15].
Using the performance-based approach, assessment results are obtained by comparing
the performance indicators (e.g. EUI or CO2 emission) against established benchmarks.
Dynamic simulation programs have been accepted as powerful tools for analyzing
building energy performance, where required inputs should be firstly collected and then
be fed into a so-called simulation engine to describe detailed mathematic models. Typical
inputs may include four groups of parameters, i.e. weather conditions, building descrip-
tion, system description and component description. The weather conditions generally
include the dry and wet bulb temperature of outdoor air, solar radiation intensity, wind
speed, etc. Building description data mainly include location, design and construction
data, thermal zones, internal heat gain, infiltration and usage profiles, etc. For system
description, system types and sizes, control schedules, as well as outdoor air require-
ments are needed. The inputs for component description are mainly addressed HVAC
components, including the equipment types and sizes, performance characteristic, load
assignments and auxiliary equipment. Simplified and steady state methods are gener-
ally acceptable to simulate the performance of systems and equipment for a diagnostic
purpose or at sketch phases of building design.
.
3 1. The building energy budget. – The building energy budget may be written, sym-
bolically, as this equation presented by Taesler [16] (see fig. 1):

(1) QC + QG + QF + Ql − QP − QE − QS ± ΔQ = QN ,

where: QC = heat loss by conduction to the outside air, QG = heat loss by conduction
to the ground, QF = heat loss by mechanical ventilation, Ql = heat loss by air leakage
(infiltration), QP = heat gain from occupants, QE = heat gain from electric appliances,
QS = heat gain from solar irradiation, ΔQ = heat storage in the building structure,
QN = net energy input needed.
Equation (1) applies to all time scales, i.e., for calculating short-term (hourly, daily)
heating/cooling demands, monthly and annual totals or long-term mean values. For
the longer time scales, however, the storage term ΔQ may be neglected. Atmospheric
conditions directly influence the terms QC , QF , Ql and QS on an hourly basis. QE is
partially affected in response to day lighting conditions. QG depends on soil temperature
at different depths. This term, however, is usually quite small and may be ignored or just
roughly estimated. The terms QC and QF are, to a good approximation, proportional
to the indoor-outdoor temperature difference (ΔT ) and may thus be calculated from
heating degree-hours or -days. Ql depends on ΔT in combination with wind speed and
wind direction and QS depends on cloudiness and turbidity in addition to the position

02004-p.6
 LNES2012

Fig. 1. – The building energy budget.

of the Sun in the sky. In order to calculate these terms it is necessary to account for the
location and exposure of the building. Wind is strongly influenced by the local urban
surroundings, and solar irradiation on building surfaces is even more strongly influenced
by site-specific conditions. Temperature may also vary significantly in response to local
and urban conditions. In addition, energy is needed for hot water production (QW ).
One of the designer’s first decisions is to set an energy use goal for the building. This
is a crucial programming level design choice that will effect both the process of how
the building is designed and the final design product. With appropriate computerised
engineering tools, professionals would be able to evaluate various energy saving options
to be translated to “in the pocket” savings for the public and private read acceptability
and feasibility.
.
3 2. LCA for the whole building life cycle energy consumption. – A wide review by
Khasreen [17] estimated that the use phase in conventional buildings represents approx-
imately 80% to 90% of the life-cycle energy use, while 10% to 20% is consumed by the
material extraction and production and less than 1% through end-of-life treatments.
However, by the development of energy-efficient buildings and the use of less-polluting
energy sources, the contribution of the material production and end-of-life phases is
expected to dramatically increase in the future.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a useful methodology for evaluating the environ-
mental and energy loads of processes during their whole life cycle, encompassing the
extraction and processing of raw materials, manufacturing, transportation and distri-
bution, use, reuse, maintenance, recycling and final disposal. Obviously, allocating the
correct amount of energy used, for example, a brick fabrication, transportation, cutting
and positioning on site, and forecast the amount of energy required for its transportation
to recycle plants and its new shaping, is not an easy task [18]. The long life time of a

02004-p.7
 EPJ Web of Conferences

building makes impossible an exact evaluation on a 70 years base; borders conditions

change sensibly after a substitution or a loss or a misuse in a building element, there is
very little standardization in techniques and then each building is unique and is designed
as such. However, sustainability assessment is a combination of different tools, and the
exact content of the assessment is planned on the basis of the project in question. Keeping
in mind that “all models are wrong, and someone is useful”, LCA can be very helpful in
specifying energy impacts in the very early stage of a design process, gaining insight of the
most energy-absorbing steps and understanding, from cradle to grave, how each choice
can affect the whole building performance. LCA apart, systematic and effective methods
for the management of performance characteristics are a prerequisite: information con-
tent from different objects (components, technical systems, buildings, spaces) needs to
be known, in order to develop methods of producing the information. The challenge is to
focus in the correct way, and thus to produce and process valid performance information
for different stakeholders. The development potential of total building performance is
in fitting experimental and calculative methods together in diagnostic methods, and in
defining the criteria of a sustainable built environment metabolism [19].
.
3 3. Heat transfer at the building envelope level . – Coming back to the ultimate reason
why buildings use energy, the final purpose of every building-plant system is to maintain
comfortable living and working conditions in it. The temperature outdoors swings above
and below comfortable temperatures, and the building envelope has to provide a thermal
barrier between them. The amount of energy that flows across this barrier determines
how much energy must be expended in heating or cooling the building to maintain
comfort; therefore the efficiency and the correct use of the interface, including walls, roof,
foundation and openings, plays an important role. The energy contained in a building is
increased, for instance, by sunshine and by the supply of electricity and fuel for heating
and other appliances [20]. Energy flows “in transit” through the control volume of a
building by primary heat transport modes like:

– Conduction (heat flow on a molecular scale. Medium at rest or moving);

– Convection (heat conveyed as internal thermal energy of mass that is displaced by

mean or turbulent motion);

– Radiation (heat transfer by electromagnetic waves such as infrared or visible light).

In buildings, heat is also transported by the following mechanisms, which basically belong
to the convective mode:

– Transfer of latent heat by transport of water or water vapour

– Thermal energy associated with the air replaced in a building by ventilation or by

air leakage (infiltration).

– Thermal energy associated with fresh and used domestic water and combustion air
(including flue gases), and fluids feeding Heat Pumps.

02004-p.8
 LNES2012

The transport of energy in the above list is limited to energy in the form of sensible or
latent heat. A change of sensible heat is characterized by a change of temperature while
a change of latent heat is associated with some mass altering its phase, while transport
of energy in forms other than heat is usually not considered.

4. – Energy issue at the micro scale — the building element

According to the second law of thermodynamics, in a closed system heat transfer is

only possible in the direction from a higher temperature to a lower one. The heat loss
through an envelope should therefore be proportional to the difference Tinside −Toutside , or
to a positive power of it for small differences. For a simple formula, a linear dependence
on temperature difference is sufficient. Accepting further that heat loss grows linearly
with surface area A, one finds

(2) Q̇ = AU (Ti − Te ).

The constant of proportionality, U , is the Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient in W/(m2 K).
Equation (2) suggests three ways to reduce heat loss: 1) reduce the set-point for the
indoor temperature during the heating season; 2) improve the insulation of the envelope
and so the overall heat transfer coefficient U ; 3) reduce the surface area without changing
the enclosed volume.
The cumulated amount of lost heat is the time integral of the instantaneous heat flow,

(3) Q= Q̇dt.

The quantity of heat, Q, is measured in J (Joule). In the construction sector, it is often

converted into kWh (kW-hours). The fuel consumed for heating is roughly proportional
to the difference between Q and the sum of the internal heat gains from Sun, occupants,
lights, equipment, and so forth. Therefore, the time-average of the temperature difference
ΔTbal = Tbalance − Toutside during the heating season is of importance for estimating
heating cost. Here, Tbalance is that outside temperature at which no heating is required to
maintain a prescribed inside temperature at given internal heat gains [21]. For simplified
calculation purpose, the thermal performance of buildings can be compared on the basis
of degree-days (DDh ), which correspond for a geographical site between given dates to a
time integral of ΔTbal in which only positive values of the difference are counted.
.
4 1. Human comfort and HVAC systems. – The human body is essentially a constant-
temperature device. Heat is continuously produced by bodily processes and dissipated in
an automatically regulated manner to maintain the body temperature at its correct level
despite variations in ambient conditions. In terms of physiology, the body is in a state
of thermal equilibrium with its environment when it loses heat at exactly the same rate
as it gains heat. Mathematically, the relationship between the body’s heat production

02004-p.9
 EPJ Web of Conferences

and all its other heat gains and losses is [22]

(4) M = E ± R ± C ± S,

where: M = metabolic rate, E = rate of heat loss by evaporation, respiration, and

elimination, R = radiation rate, C = conduction and convection rate, S = body heat
storage rate.
The body always produces heat, so the metabolic rate (M ) is always positive, varying
with the degree of exertion.
If environmental conditions are such that the combined heat loss from radiation,
conduction, convection, and evaporation is less than the body’s rate of heat production,
the excess heat must be stored in body tissue. But body heat storage (S) is always
small because the body has a limited thermal storage capacity. Therefore, as its interior
becomes warmer, the body reacts to correct the situation by increasing blood flow to the
skin surface and increasing perspiration. As a result, body heat loss is increased, thereby
maintaining the desired body temperature and the balance expressed by eq. (3). The
converse condition — where heat loss is greater than body heat production — causes a
reversal of the above process and, if necessary, shivering. This increased activity raises
the metabolic rate. The comfort of a given individual is affected by many variables
(see table I). Health, age, activity, clothing, gender, food and acclimatization are all
determining factors of the comfort conditions for any particular person. In addition

Table I. – Factors influencing the heat balance equation. Source: John Blankenbaker, “Venti-
lating Systems for Hot Industries,” Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning, Vol. 54, No. 2, February
1982, p. 61. (Reproduced from the original: Industrial Ventilation. American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Committee on Industrial Ventilation, Lansing, Michigan,
1976, p. 3-2.)

Factor Environment Human

Metabolism (M ) Little effect Activity
Weight
Surface area
Age
Sex
Evaporation (E) Wet-bulb temperature Ability to produce sweat
Dry-bulb temperature Clothing
Velocity Surface area
Radiation (R) Temperature difference Surface area
between bodies Clothing
Emissivity of surfaces
Convection (C) Dry-bulb temperature Clothing
Velocity Mean body surface temperature
Surface area

02004-p.10
 LNES2012

to its thermal climate, the air quality of each indoor environment affects the sense of
comfort [23]. A new control strategy for automatic or customizable control of personalized
radiant heating/cooling, maybe by including the human body as sensor in the control
loop, can save a big amount of energy while maintaining thermal comfort of the individual
building occupant.

5. – Conclusions

Relationships between energy and architecture, design, energy needs, disposal scenar-
ios and user behaviour are in truth extremely complex. Buildings must be considered
as holistic, dynamic systems, with many factors influencing different impact categories
and needing complex evaluation tools to take into account complex relationship between
energy, internal comfort and environmental impacts. Issues discussed above are evidence
of a multidisciplinary approach on building design, in order to integrated planning with
contributions from engineer, physics, chemistry and environmental and medical science.
A conscientious choice about environmental, societal and economic impacts in the
design phase will be a cost-less energy saving along the whole life cycle. In the end, an
insistent efficiency program in the building sector would prevent a large portion of the
demand for new power stations and give more time to develop environmentally friendly
energy-supply methods. Not only are constitute opportunities to apply today’s efficiency
knowledge, but advanced technologies — drawing on basic research by scientists and
engineers in solid-state physics, thermodynamics, turbulent flows, and nanotechnology
— could allow us to dramatically reduce today’s building energy demand. To accelerate
those developments, governmental and manufacturing R&D efforts need to be signifi-
cantly expanded, which would have the added gain of boosting educational and business
opportunities for the next generation of leaders in the building-efficiency field.

REFERENCES

[1] EC-European Commission, New EU energy plan – More security, less pollution. Available
at: http://ec.europa.eu/news/energy/070110, 2007.
[2] Pérez-Lombard L., Ortiz J. et al., Energy and Buildings, 43 (2011) 255.
[3] EC-European Commission, Environment – Climate change – Emission Trading System.
Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission/index en.htm, 2009.
[4] Directive 2010/31/UE, “The energy performance of buildings”, Official Journal of the
European Union, 2010.
[5] Shi L. and Chew M. Y. L., Ren. Sust. Energy Rev., 16 (2012) 192.
[6] Sadineni S. B., Madala S. et al., Ren. Sust. Energy Rev., 15 (2011) 3617.
[7] Brown G. Z., in Sun, wind, and light: architectural design strategies (Wiley, NY) 1985.
[8] Zhai Z. and Previtali J. M., Energy and Buildings, 42 (2010) 357.
[9] Ochoa C. E. and Capeluto I. G., Building and Environment, 43 (2008) 1829.
[10] Dall’O’ G., Galante A. et al., Sustainable Cities and Society, 4 (2012) 12.
[11] Marszal A. J. and Heiselberg P. et al., Renewable Energy, 44 (2012) 154.
[12] Lopes L. and Hokoi S. et al., Energy and Buildings, 37 (2005) 698.
[13] Mansouri-Azar I., Newborough M. and Probert D., Applied Energy, 54 (1996) 211.

02004-p.11
 EPJ Web of Conferences

[14] ECBCS, Total Energy Use in Buildings: Analysis and Evaluation Methods, Annex No. 53,
2009, p. 34.
[15] Wang S., Yan C. et al., Energy and Buildings, 55 (2012) 873.
[16] Taesler R., Energy and Buildings, 16 (1991) 599.
[17] Khasreen M. M., Banfill P. F. G. et al., Sustainability, 1 (2009) 674.
[18] Neri P., in Verso la valutazione ambientale degli edifici: life cycle assessment a supporto
della progettazione eco-sostenibile (Alinea, Firenze) 2008.
[19] Giampietro M., Mayumi K. et al., Energy, 34 (2009) 313.
[20] Çengel Y. A., in Heat Transfer: A Practical Approach (McGraw-Hill, NY) 2003.
[21] American Society of Heating, ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC applications (ASHRAE,
Atlanta) 2007.
[22] Fanger P. O., in Thermal comfort: Analysis and applications in environmental
engineering (Danish Technical Press, Copenhagen) (1970).
[23] Blankenbaker J., Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning, 54 (1982) 60.

02004-p.12