سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات158
تعداد شماره‌ها6,225
تعداد مقالات67,685
تعداد مشاهده مقاله114,996,299
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله89,668,459
یوسفی, فاطمه, قلی پور, یعقوب. (1397). ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران. , 23(1), 81-92. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2018.247936.671899
فاطمه یوسفی; یعقوب قلی پور. "ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران". , 23, 1, 1397, 81-92. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2018.247936.671899
یوسفی, فاطمه, قلی پور, یعقوب. (1397). 'ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران', , 23(1), pp. 81-92. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2018.247936.671899
یوسفی, فاطمه, قلی پور, یعقوب. ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران. , 1397; 23(1): 81-92. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2018.247936.671899

ارزیابی مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان مسکونی واقعی در شهر تهران

نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی
مقاله 7، دوره 23، شماره 1، خرداد 1397، صفحه 81-92    اصل مقاله (2.08 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jfaup.2018.247936.671899
نویسندگان
فاطمه یوسفی* 1؛ یعقوب قلی پور2
1گروه مدیریت ساخت، دانشکده عمران، پردیس فنی، دانشگاه تهران
2گروه پژوهشی بهینه سازی مهندسی، دانشکده عمران، پردیس فنی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
در میان ملاک های موجود برای تشخیص ساختمان های کم انرژی، مصرف انرژی طول عمر ساختمان یکی از جامع ترین معیارها می باشد که می تواند برآورد درستی از کل انرژی مصرفی ساختمان در اختیار مهندسان قرار دهد. با توجه به عدم وجود پیشینه مناسب در خصوص بررسی وضعیت انرژی طول عمر ساختمان ها در ایران، در این مطالعه سعی شده است که مصرف انرژی طول عمر یک ساختمان واقعی با جزییات کامل برآورد گردد تا ضمن ارائه پارامترهای موثر و چالش های موجود در هر بخش، روند محاسبه به عنوان یک الگو قابل استفاده باشد. بدین منظور، یک ساختمان واقعی با اسکلت بتنی و پلان متداول که اخیرا در شهر تهران ساخته شده، به عنوان نمونه انتخاب گردید و ضمن تشریح روند محاسبه مصرف انرژی طول عمر، انرژی مراحل مختلف چرخه حیات آن برآورد شد. دستاوردهای این مطالعه حاکی از آن است که سهم انرژی نهفته اولیه ساختمان معادل 13% از کل انرژی طول عمر آن می باشد و در محدوده متداول ارقام جهانی قرار دارد. همچنین نتایج نشان می دهد که 85% مصرف انرژی طول عمر ساختمان نمونه بتنی مربوط به دوره بهره برداری است که با توجه به طول عمر نسبتا کم ساختمان ها در ایران نسبت به مقادیر جهانی، رقم بالایی محسوب می شود.
کلیدواژه‌ها
انرژی طول عمر؛ ساختمان مسکونی؛ انرژی نهفته؛ اسکلت بتنی؛ ایران
عنوان مقاله [English]
Life cycle assessment of a real residential building in Tehran
نویسندگان [English]
Fatemeh Yousefi1؛ Yaghob Gholipour2
1Department of Construction Engineering and Management, Civil Engineering School, University of Tehran
2Engineering Optimization Research Gr., School of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Among many aspects considered to evaluate the low energy buildings, the Life Cycle Energy Consumption (LCEC) is the most comprehensive factor that can properly direct engineers and architectures to the buildings’ optimum design. The LCEC is introduced as the total energy usage associated with all stages of a building’s life cycle mainly consists of production of its materials, transportation of the materials and components, on-site construction, operation, maintenance, demolition and waste treatment. This study aims to evaluate the LCEC factor of a real building located in Tehran, Iran. Due to the lack of the investigations in this field in Iran, the methodology of estimating the building’s energy consumption is comprehensively introduced in this paper. For this purpose, a real multi-family residential building with common architectural plan and residences is selected and the process of evaluating the building’s energy consumption during various periods of its life cycle is discussed in detail. These periods include the material production, transportation, on-site construction, operation, and maintenance stage. Demolition and disposal stage is excluded from the scope of this study because of the lack of the clear information about the waste treatment process in the country. Beside, the energy usage of this stage is reported to be less than 1% of the buildings’ total LCEC according to the literature. The results of this analysis show that the embodied energy of the considered case is about 15% of its LCEC. This embodied energy that is indeed in the range of the internationally reported values can be divided into three separate parts including: 1) 12% energy usage for the building material production, 2) 1% energy usage for the material transportation and on-site construction, and 3) 2% energy consumption for the building maintenance stage. In this regard, it seems that the energy usage during on-site construction period of the building has the minimum effect on the building’s LCEC (about 0.2%) and consequently may be ignored in the LCEC process. It is also concluded that 85% of the considered building’s LCEC belongs to the operation stage in which the effect of climate change in terms of global warming is considered via a simple method based on the change of the thermal comfort setpoints. Although this operational energy is in the range of the values reported in the common international investigations, it is too high for Iran where the lifespan of the residential buildings is respectively short. If the lifespan of the considered building in this study increase from 35 years to 60 years, the portion of the operational energy can increase up to 91% of the building’s LCEC. Therefore, proper estimation of the building’s lifespan is demanded for most of the energy assessment studies. Accurate estimation of the energy content of the building materials in Iran is also highly necessitated. If the material production industry in Iran consumes averagely 30% more energy respect to the average values of the world’s industry, the building’s operational energy will reduce about 3% and respectively its total embodied energy will increase about the same amount.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Life Cycle, Energy consumption, Residential building, Concrete frame, Embodied energy, Iran
مراجع

حیدری، شاهین (1388)، دمای آسایش حرارتی مردم شهر تهران، نشریه هنرهای زیبا-معماری و شهرسازی، شماره 38، صص 14-5.

فروزان نرجس؛ حاجی پور، خلیل و سلطانی، علی (1395)، بررسی مصرف انرژی نهفته در بافت های مسکونی : نمونه موردی شهر شیراز، فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی نقش جهان، فصل 6، شماره 1، صص 52-42.

قربانی، خلیل (1393)، الگوی فصلی و مکانی تغییر اقلیم دمای هوا در ایران، نشریه پژوهش های حفاظت آب و خاک، جلد 21، شماره 5، صص 270-257.

مرکز آمار ایران (1391- تابستان 1395)، اطلاعات پروانه های ساختمانی صادرشده توسط شهرداری های کشور، تهران، دفتر ریاست، روابط عمومی و همکاری های بین الملل.
Adalbert, K (1997), Energy use during the life cycle of single-unit dwellings:examples, Building and Environment , Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 321-329.
Crowther, P (1999), Design for disassembly to recover embodied energy, in The 16th International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Melbourne–Brisbane–Cairns.
Deng, W; Prasad, D; Osmond P & Li, F (2011), Quantifying life cycle energy and carbon footprints of China's residential small district, Journal of Green Building, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 96-111.
Dixit, M; Fernández-Solís, J; Lavy, S & Culp C (2010), Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42, No. 8, pp. 1238-1247.
Dixit, M; Culp, C & Fernández-Solís, J (2013), System boundary for embodied energy in buildings: A conceptual model for definition, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 21, pp. 153-164.
Dixit, M; Culp, C; Lavy S & Fernández-Solís, J (2014), Recurrent embodied energy and its relationship with service life and life cycle energy: A review paper, Facilities, Vol. 32, No. 3/4, pp.160-181.
Dixit, M (2017), Life cycle embodied energy analysis of residential buildings: A review of literature to investigate embodied energy parameters, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 79, pp. 390-413.
Gao, W; Ariyama, T; Ojima, T & Meier, A (2001), Energy impacts of recycling disassembly material in residential buildings, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 33, pp. 553-562.
Hammond G & Jones, C (2008), Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE), Sustainable Energy Research Team, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.
Heravi, G; Nafisi T & Mousavi, R (2016), Evaluation of energy consumption during production andconstruction of concrete and steel frames of residential buildings, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 130, pp. 244-252.
Junnila, S; Horvath A & Guggemos, A (2006), Life-cycle assessment of office buildings in Europe and the United States, Journal of Infrastructure Systems , Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 10-17, 2006.
Koocheki, A; Nasiri, M; Kamali, G. A; & Shahandeh, H (2006 ), Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Agroclimatic Indicators in Iran, Arid Land Research and Management, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 245-259.
Kotaji , S; Edwards S & Schuurmans, A (2003), Life cycle assessment in building and construction, A state-of-the-Art report, SETAC press, ?????????.
Kua, H & Wong, C (2012), Analysing the life cycle greenhouse gas emission and energy consumption of a multi-storied commercial building in Singapore from an extended system boundry perspective, Energy and buildings,??????????? pp. 6-14.
Lelieveld, J; Hadjinicolaou, P; Kostopoulou, E; Chenoweth, J; Maayar, M. El; Giannakopoulos, C; Hannides, C; Lange, M. A; Tanarhte, M; Tyrlis, E & Xoplaki, E (2012), Climate change and impacts in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East, Climatic Change, Vol 114, pp. 667–687.
Ma, J; Du, G; Zhang, Z; Wang P & Xie, B (2017), Life cycle analysis of energy consumption and CO2 emissions from a typical large offi ce building in Tianjin , China, building and Environment, Vol. 117, pp. 36-48.
Metasd (2008), [Online]. Available: http://metasd.com/2008/08/climate-war-game-is-2050-temperature-locked-in/. [Accessed 22 10 2017].
Mithraratne N & Vale, B (2004), Life cycle analysis model for New Zeland houses, Building and Environment,???????????? pp. 483-492.
Nassen, J; Holmberg, J; Wadeskog A & Nyman, M (2007), Direct and indirect energy use and carbon emissions in the production phase of buildings: An input output analysis, Energy, Vol. 32, No. 9, pp. 1593-1602.
Nassen, J; Hedenus, F; Karlsson S & Holmberg, J (2012), Concrete vs. wood in buildings- an energy system approach, Building and environment, Vol. 51,pp. 361-369.
Peuportier, B (2001), Life cycle assessment applied to the comparative evaluation of single family houses in the French context, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 443-450.
Praseeda, K; Venkatarama Reddy B & Mani, M (2016), Embodied and operational energy of urban residentialbuildings in India, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 110, pp. 211-219.
Pullen, S (2000), Energy used in the construction and operation of houses, Architectural Science Review, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 87-94.
Ramesh, T; Prakash R & Shukla, K. K (2010), Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42, pp. 1592-1600.
Ramesh, T; Prakash R & Shukla, K. K (2013), Life cycle energy analysis of a multifamily residential house: a case study in Indian context, Journal of Energy Efficiency, Vol. 2, pp. 34-41.
Roshan, Gh. R; Ranjbar, F & Orosa, A (2010), Simulation of global warming effect on outdoor thermal comfort conditions, International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 571-580.
Thormark, C (2002), A low energy building in a life cycle—its embodied energy, energy need for operation and recycling potential, Building and Environment, Vol. 37, pp. 429 – 435.
Venkatarama Reddy, B & Jagadish, K (2003), Embodied energy of common and alternative building materials and technologies, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 35 , pp. 129–137.
Vukotic, L; Fenner, R & Symons, K (2010), Assessing embodied energy of building structural elements, in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Engineering Sustainability, Vol. 163, No. 3, pp. 147-158, Thomas Telford Ltd.
Winter, B & Hestnes, A (1999), Solar versus green: The analysis of a Norwegian row house, Solar Energy, Vol. 66, No. 6, pp. 387–393.
Yousefi, F; Gholipour Y & Yan, W (2017), A study of the impact of occupant behaviors on energy performance of building envelopes using occupants’ data, Energy & Buildings, Vol. 148, pp. 182-198.

 

 

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 984
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 2,418


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب