Case Study Comparing the Efficiency of Wooden Buildings with Different Energy Standards

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60460709%3A41320%2F19%3A80896" target="_blank" >RIV/60460709:41320/19:80896 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://bioresources.cnr.ncsu.edu/resources/case-study-comparing-the-efficiency-of-wooden-buildings-with-different-energy-standards/" target="_blank" >https://bioresources.cnr.ncsu.edu/resources/case-study-comparing-the-efficiency-of-wooden-buildings-with-different-energy-standards/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.15376/biores.14.2.4236-4253" target="_blank" >10.15376/biores.14.2.4236-4253</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Case Study Comparing the Efficiency of Wooden Buildings with Different Energy Standards

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

This study compares the economic efficiency of wooden buildings from standard to low-energy, near-passive, and zero-energy homes. The comparison was carried out over the entire expected life cycle of the building (100 years), but due to the high uncertainty of the predictions of fuel and energy prices or discount rates and the clarity of the depiction of the subsequent results, a period of 30 years was also chosen. The most common and most suitable media and combinations for heating (gas, electricity, and wood) were selected. When calculating the entire life cycle of a building, it was found that the more stringent the energy standard, the lower the overall life cycle costs, and the share of heating costs also decreases with the highest costs being electricity heating alternatives. Adversely, the lowest costs were for the fictitious zero-energy home (ZEN) alternative with net metering followed, by some distance, by near zeroenergy home alternatives and passive homes. With the chosen period of 30 year

Název v anglickém jazyce

Case Study Comparing the Efficiency of Wooden Buildings with Different Energy Standards

Popis výsledku anglicky

This study compares the economic efficiency of wooden buildings from standard to low-energy, near-passive, and zero-energy homes. The comparison was carried out over the entire expected life cycle of the building (100 years), but due to the high uncertainty of the predictions of fuel and energy prices or discount rates and the clarity of the depiction of the subsequent results, a period of 30 years was also chosen. The most common and most suitable media and combinations for heating (gas, electricity, and wood) were selected. When calculating the entire life cycle of a building, it was found that the more stringent the energy standard, the lower the overall life cycle costs, and the share of heating costs also decreases with the highest costs being electricity heating alternatives. Adversely, the lowest costs were for the fictitious zero-energy home (ZEN) alternative with net metering followed, by some distance, by near zeroenergy home alternatives and passive homes. With the chosen period of 30 year

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

20502 - Paper and wood

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/EF16_019%2F0000803" target="_blank" >EF16_019/0000803: Excelentní Výzkum jako podpora Adaptace lesnictví a dřevařství na globální změnu a 4. průmyslovou revoluci</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

BioResources

ISSN

1930-2126

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

14

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

18

Strana od-do

4236-4253

Kód UT WoS článku

000466449000124

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85071140984