Zur Kurzanzeige

Comparative Analysis of Resource and Climate Footprints for Different Heating Systems in Building Information Modeling

dc.date.accessioned2022-11-16T12:59:48Z
dc.date.available2022-11-16T12:59:48Z
dc.date.issued2022-10-31
dc.identifierdoi:10.17170/kobra-202211167127ger
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/14250
dc.description.sponsorshipGefördert durch den Publikationsfonds der Universität Kasselger
dc.language.isoengger
dc.rightsNamensnennung 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectlife cycle assessmentger
dc.subjectbuilding information modelingger
dc.subjectdesign phaseger
dc.subjectresource efficiencyger
dc.subjectenergy efficiencyger
dc.subject.ddc620ger
dc.subject.ddc624ger
dc.titleComparative Analysis of Resource and Climate Footprints for Different Heating Systems in Building Information Modelingger
dc.typeAufsatzger
dcterms.abstractBuildings play an important role to meet Sustainable Development Goals, especially regarding the use of resources and greenhouse gas emissions. They are increasingly designed with energy-efficient solutions regarding their operations, while the related use of natural resources is still insufficiently considered. In this article, a methodology in Building Information Modeling is proposed to measure the resource and climate footprints of buildings’ heating systems. The methodology is applied to a case study building in Germany. The studied heating systems include a gas condensing boiler, ground-source heat pump, ground-source heat pump with a photo-voltaic system and air-source heat pump backed up with a gas boiler. Next to the operational energy, the production and transport of the heating systems were also studied. Results show that heating system operations have the largest impact and that the variant of ground-source heat pump combined with photovoltaics (GSHP + PV) has the lowest impact. In comparison with the gas boiler (GB), savings of 75%, 47%, 80%, and 84% are addressed to climate, material, energy, and land footprints, respectively, while the water footprint of GSHP + PV is 73% higher than that of GB.eng
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessger
dcterms.creatorSameer, Husam
dcterms.creatorBehem, Guillaume
dcterms.creatorMostert, Clemens
dcterms.creatorBringezu, Stefan
dc.relation.doidoi:10.3390/buildings12111824
dc.subject.swdÖkologischer Fußabdruckger
dc.subject.swdEnergieeffizienzger
dc.subject.swdUmweltbilanzger
dc.subject.swdRessourceneffizienzger
dc.subject.swdBuilding Information Modelingger
dc.subject.swdHeizungger
dc.subject.swdDeutschlandger
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionger
dcterms.source.identifiereissn:2075-5309ger
dcterms.source.issueIssue 11ger
dcterms.source.journalBuildingsger
dcterms.source.volumeVolume 12ger
kup.iskupfalseger
dcterms.source.articlenumber1824


Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Thumbnail
Name:
license_rdf
Größe:
908Bytes
Format:
application/rdf+xml
Öffnen
Thumbnail
Name:
buildings_12_01824_v2_1.pdf
Größe:
1.735Mb
Format:
PDF
Öffnen

Das Dokument erscheint in:

Zur Kurzanzeige

Namensnennung 4.0 International
Solange nicht anders angezeigt, wird die Lizenz wie folgt beschrieben: Namensnennung 4.0 International