Regulations and robust low-carbon buildings

Tuohy, P (2009) Regulations and robust low-carbon buildings. Building Research & Information, 37(4), pp. 433-445. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Building regulations and associated calculation methods have been rapidly evolving, driven in Europe by the European Union Energy Performance of Buildings Directive. As an example, the current UK regulations are explored in relation to buildings that are naturally ventilated, mechanically ventilated, or mechanically ventilated and cooled. The UK regulatory energy and carbon calculation methods are investigated using a standard office design with typical, best practice, and advanced building fabric and systems applied. The criteria and calculations for demonstrating avoidance of excessive temperatures in buildings that have no mechanical cooling are also explored. Observations are made on how the regulations may influence future adoption of mechanical cooling. Current regulatory methods can be subjective and limited in scope. For example, they do not include adaptive comfort criteria or uncertainties in parameters such as occupant behaviour, climate, internal gains from equipment, etc. A design methodology is proposed that addresses these issues and provides a capability parameter to quantify robustness. This capability parameter allows comparison of design options and provides an indication to building users of the limitations to a buildings use beyond which mitigating action would have to be taken for performance to be maintained.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: air-conditioning; building codes; building design; building regulations; cooling; governance; natural ventilation; overheating; simulation; thermal comfort
Index terms: adaptive comfort, office design, building code, occupant behaviour, option, best practice, methodology, natural ventilation, regulation, thermal comfort, overheating, European Union, energy performance of buildings directive, low-carbon building, building design, building regulation, Europe, governance
Subjects: architectural design, health behaviours and lifestyles, business, human factors, regulatory law, political science, environmental engineering, thermal systems, specialized design, decision analysis, environmental law, design practice, physical geography and landforms, research methods
Topics: Legal Issues, Design Practice, Risk Management, Governance, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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