A Comparative Techno-Economic Assessment of Active and Passive Building Strategies: Energy Performance, Thermal Comfort, and LCOE Analysis

Engineering notes

Engineering notes will be added by the Power for Solar editorial team.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为光伏效率、钙钛矿太阳能电池、储能技术、太阳能热利用、BIPV、并网技术等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

This study comparatively examines the effects of different active and passive energy strategies on energy performance, carbon emission reduction, economic feasibility, and thermal comfort potential in a university building in Ankara. This study uses a university building with 8760 h of recorded operational electricity consumption data as a real-world reference case and evaluates different retrofit strategies through dynamic building energy simulations. Simulation results were evaluated not only in terms of total energy consumption but also in terms of operational carbon emissions, levelized cost of energy (LCOE/LCOSE), and the potential for improving indoor temperature stability through passive design strategies. The results show that PV system integration provides the highest energy and carbon reduction performance by reducing the net grid electricity consumption by 89.76%. Among passive systems, the Trombe wall scenario provided the highest energy savings and the lowest LCOSE value. PCM application stood out in terms of indoor temperature stability potential, while the green roof system contributed to temperature control, especially during the summer. In addition, an economic sensitivity analysis based on the discount rate was carried out to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed strategies in terms of sustainable building design. The study contributes to the comparative analysis of active and passive retrofit strategies in university buildings by offering an integrated and multi-dimensional evaluation approach supported by real operational data.

Links and sources

• PDF from original source

Comments