Advertisement

Evaluation of an Environmentally-Benign Renewable Energy System for Buildings

  • Azzam Abu-RayashEmail author
  • Ibrahim Dincer
Conference paper
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

It is very important to have environmentally-friendly solutions based on renewable energy systems for communities. Buildings are large stakeholders in the composition of a community and have substantial energy consumption. In this study, a net zero energy building is considered and modeled using solar PV and geothermal heat pump. The system is assessed for sustainability and energetic and exergetic efficiencies. The solar system considered yields an electricity production capacity of 51.4 kW with exergy efficiency of 15% under atmospheric conditions. The geothermal heat pump has a coefficient of performance of 4.9 and an exergetic coefficient of performance of 2.1. The sustainability index of this system is 0.62 using the hierarchist aggregation method and the weighted geometric mean. Furthermore, the effect of various refrigerants on the thermodynamic performance of the system is investigated.

Keywords

Net zero energy building Sustainability Geothermal heat pump Photovoltaics Solar energy Exergy Efficiency 

Nomenclature

Cp

Power coefficient

\( {\text{Cost}}_{0} \)

Project initial cost, $

ex

Specific exergy, kJ/kg

\( {\dot{\text{E}}\text{x}} \)

Exergy rate, kW

\( {\dot{\text{E}}\text{x}}_{\text{in}} \)

Total exergy input, kW

\( E_{S,Y}^{\text{SW}} \)

Solar radiation flux, kW/m2

h

Specific enthalpy, kJ/kg

\( \dot{N} \)

Net negative cash flow, $

\( \dot{P} \)

Maximum operational hours in a year, hours/year

\( \ddot{P} \)

Net positive cash flow, $

\( \dddot{\text{P}} \)

Total project investment, $

\( {\text{PI}}_{i} \)

Project’s net income in a given year, $

PR

Production rate, tonnes/year

\( {\text{PCF}} \)

Periodic cash flow, $/year

Pop

Population

Powermax

Maximum power output, MW

\( \dot{Q} \)

Heat rate, kW

R

Recoverable reserves, kg

s

Specific entropy, kJ/kgK

\( \dot{S} \)

Entropy rate, kW/K

\( {\dot{\text{S}}\text{S}} \)

System size, kW

T

Temperature, K

t

Time, year

v

Specific volume, m3/kg

W

Weighting factor

\( \dot{W} \)

Work rate, kW

WAM

Weighted arithmetic mean

WGM

Weighted geometric mean

X

Sustainability indicator

Y

Dimensionless indicator value

YP

Yield production, kWh/kWp

Greek Letters

\( \alpha \)

Adjustment factor

\( \eta \)

Energy efficiency

\( \tau \)

Residence time, hr

\( \psi \)

Exergy efficiency

Subscripts

amb

Ambient

Comb

Combustion

Cond

Condense

D

Destruction

ED

Exergy destruction

ER

Energy

EX

Exergy

ENV

Environment

Evap

Evaporator

0

Reference environment

Sust

Sustainability

(T)

Target value

Abbreviations

AP

Acidification potential

AT

Air toxicity

ADP

Abiotic depletion potential

BCR

Benefit–cost ratio

COMM

Commercializability

COP

Coefficient of performance

EI

Educational innovation

EL

Educational level

EP

Eutrophication potential

EES

Engineering Equation Solver

EFI

Environmentally friendliness index

EPA

Environmental protection agency

GHG

Greenhouse gas

GWP

Global warming potential

HH

Human health

HW

Human welfare

IN

Innovation

JC

Job creation

LU

Land use

LCA

Lifecycle assessment

LCOE

Levelized cost of electricity/energy

NPV

Net present value

ODP

Ozone depletion potential

PA

Public awareness

PM

Particulate matter

PV

Photovoltaics

PBT

Payback time

SA

Smog air

SA

Social acceptance

SC

Social cost

TR

Technology readiness

TRAIN

Training

WC

Water consumption

WE

Water ecotoxicity

References

  1. 1.
    Ayoub J (2013) Towards net zero energy solar buildings. CanmetEnergy, Natural Resources Canada, Government of CanadaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Santoyo-Castelazo E, Azapagic A (2014) Sustainability assessment of energy systems: integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. J Clean Prod 80:119–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boza-Kiss B, Moles-Grueso S, Urge-Vorsatz D (2013) Evaluating policy instruments to foster energy efficiency for the sustainable transformation of buildings. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 5(2):163–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yi H, Srinivasan RS, Braham WW, Tilley DR (2017) An ecological understanding of net-zero energy building: evaluation of sustainability based on emergy theory. J Clean Prod 143:654–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Polzin F, Sanders M, Täube F (2017) A diverse and resilient financial system for investments in the energy transition. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 28:24–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Herrero TS, Nicholls L, Strengers Y (2018) Smart home technologies in everyday life: do they address key energy challenges in households? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 31:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alfaris F, Juaidi A, Manzano-Agugliaro F (2017) Intelligent houses’ technologies to optimize the energy performance for the net zero energy house. Energy Build 153:262–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thomas WD, Duffy JJ (2013) Energy performance of net-zero and near net-zero energy houses in New England. Energy Build 67:551–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leckner M, Zmeureanu R (2011) Life cycle cost and energy analysis of a Net Zero Energy House with solar combisystem. Appl Energy 88(1):232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Delisle V (2011) Net-zero energy houses: solar photovoltaic electricity scenario analysis based on current and future costs. ASHRAE Trans 112(2):315–322Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang Z, Xu G, Ren J, Li Z, Zhang B, Ren X (2017) Polygeneration system and sustainability: multi-attribute decision-support framework for comprehensive assessment under uncertainties. J Clean Prod 167:1122–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang Z, Wennersten R, Sun Q (2017) Outline of principles for building scenarios—transition toward more sustainable energy systems. Appl Energy 185(Part 2):1890–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Energy Board (2017) Canada’s adoption of renewable power sources. NEB, pp 1–32. ISSN no. 2371-6804Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ontario Ministry of Energy (2017) Ontario’s long term energy plan 2017. Ministry of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abu-Rayash A, Dincer I (2019) Sustainability assessment of energy systems: a novel integrated model. J Clean Prod 212:1098–1116.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.12.090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hacatoglu K (2014) A systems approach to assessing the sustainability of hybrid community energy systems. Ph.D.’s thesis, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, OshawaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dincer I, Acar C (2017) Smart energy systems for a sustainable future. Appl Energy 194:225–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Caliskan H, Dincer I, Hepbasli A (2011) Exergoeconomic, enviroeconomic and sustainability analyses of a novel air cooler. Energy Build 55:747–756.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.03.024
  19. 19.
    Hacatoglu K, Dincer I, Rosen M (2015) A new model to assess the environmental impact and sustainability of energy systems. J Clean Prod 103:211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) The eco-indicator 99: a damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessmentGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    EPA (2011) National ambient air quality standards. Washington D.C. Available online: http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria
  22. 22.
    Inhaber H (2004) Water use in renewable and conventional electricity production. Energy Sources 26(3):309–322.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00908310490266698
  23. 23.
    Spang ES, Moomaw WR, Gallagher KS, Kirshen PH, Marks DH (2014) The water consumption of energy production: an international comparison. Environmental Research Letters 9(10):105002.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/10/105002
  24. 24.
    Dincer I, Rosen M (2007) Energetic, exergetic, environmental and sustainability aspects of thermal energy storage systems. NATO Science Series Thermal Energy Storage for Sustainable Energy Consumption, pp 23–46Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lazard (2014) Levelized cost of energy analysis, 8th edn. New York City, NYGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dincer I, Acar C (2015) A review on clean energy solutions for better sustainability. Int J Energy Res 39(5):585–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    IRENA and CEM (2014) The socio-economic benefits of large-scale solar and wind: an econValue reportGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McLaughlin J, Smith M (2002) Power of the people: Public awareness and involvement in renewable energy in Scotland. Refocus 3(5):26–29Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyOshawaCanada

Personalised recommendations