Roulet, C A; Johner, N; Foradini, F; Bluyssen, P; Cox, C; De Oliveira Fernandes, E; Müller, B and Aizlewood, C (2006) Perceived health and comfort in relation to energy use and building characteristics. Building Research & Information, 34(5), pp. 467-474. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Within the European research project Health Optimisation Protocol for Energy-efficient Building (HOPE), 96 apartment buildings and 64 office buildings (of which approximately 75% have been designed to be energy-efficient) were investigated. The building characteristics were assessed according to a checklist during a walk-through survey. Occupant questionnaires were used to determine satisfaction about comfort (thermal visual, acoustical and indoor air quality (IAQ)) and their health (Sick Building Syndrome and allergies). Building-averaged collected data are compared, looking for correlations between building characteristics on one hand, and perceived comfort and health on the other hand. Strong correlations are found between perceived IAQ, thermal, acoustic and lighting comfort, confirming results from other studies. Significant correlations between the perceived comfort and building related symptoms were also found, comfortable and healthier buildings being well distinct from uncomfortable ones. Differences of perceived comfort or health between low- and high-energy buildings show that it is possible to design buildings that are healthy, comfortable and energy efficient.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building assessment; comfort; energy efficiency; indoor environment; occupant perception; satisfaction |
| Index terms: | sick building syndrome, energy-efficient building, energy use, questionnaire, comfort, indoor air quality, indoor environment, office building, occupant perception, survey, apartment building, satisfaction, energy efficiency, building assessment |
| Subjects: | sustainable design, environmental health, occupational health and safety management, asset management, health behaviours and lifestyles, data collection methods, construction type, energy systems, environmental science, project delivery, sustainability and energy |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Sustainability, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here