Energy use and height in office buildings

Godoy-Shimizu, D; Steadman, P; Hamilton, I; Donn, M; Evans, S; Moreno, G and Shayesteh, H (2018) Energy use and height in office buildings. Building Research & Information, 46(8), pp. 845-863. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

The relationship between energy use and height is examined for a sample of 611 office buildings in England and Wales using actual annual metered consumption of electricity and fossil fuels. The buildings are of different ages; they have different construction characteristics and methods of heating and ventilation; and they include both public and commercial offices. When rising from five storeys and below to 21 storeys and above, the mean intensity of electricity and fossil fuel use increases by 137% and 42% respectively, and mean carbon emissions are more than doubled. A multivariate regression model is used to interpret the contributions of building characteristics and other factors to this result. Air-conditioning is important, but a trend of increased energy use with height is also found in naturally ventilated buildings. Newer buildings are not in general more efficient: the intensity of electricity use is greater in offices built in recent decades, without a compensating decrease in fossil fuel use. The evidence suggests it is likely–although not proven – that much of the increase in energy use with height is due to the greater exposure of taller buildings to lower temperatures, stronger winds and more solar gains.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building performance; buildings; CO2 emissions; energy; epidemiology; height; multivariate regression; office design; tall buildings
Index terms: Wales, exposure, consumption, evidence, ventilation, building performance, commercial office, tall building, office design, energy use, fossil fuel, office building, CO2 emissions, carbon emission, regression model, England
Subjects: specialized design, quality assurance, statistical analysis, public and environmental health, Geography, energy systems, air quality, evaluation and assessment methods, construction type, climate science, consumer economics
Topics: Design Practice, Quality Management, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles
Descriptive scope: 3 PCA

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