Managing climate-change-induced overheating in non-residential buildings

¹ KTH Royal Institute of Technology, ABE Division of Sustainable Buildings, 114 28 Stockholm, Sweden
² HTW Berlin, University of Applied Sciences Building Energy Technology, 12459 Berlin, Germany

^* Corresponding author: abadura@kth.se

Abstract

Large and rapid climatic changes can be uncomfortable and sometimes hazardous to humans. Buildings protect people from external climatic conditions, and also mitigate the impacts of external climate extremes through their design and construction, as well as with the help of dedicated building service and other technical systems. Active space conditioning accounts for more than 30 per cent of the overall final energy use in Germany. In the life cycle of a building, the construction phase (planning and construction) is the phase with the shortest duration. However, the quality applied during this phase has a significant impact on the resources required, as well as the overall building performance during the much longer operational phase. Once built, buildings are often unable to adapt to boundary conditions that were not considered in the original building design. Consequently, changing outdoor climate conditions can result in an uncomfortable indoor climate over the lifetime of a building. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of flexible solutions for reducing winter heating loads and to reducing/avoiding summer cooling loads in nonresidential buildings in Germany. Various external shading scenarios for non-residential buildings were analysed using the IDA ICE indoor climate and energy simulation tool. Key simulation parameters included the orientation and location of the building, as well as the envelope structure. We investigated the impacts of solar shading on heat storage in the building mass and indoor climate and how different types of envelopes affect overall energy use. The result shows that the use of an adaptive building envelope allows a higher reduction of the total energy demand by 7 % to 15 % compared to an increase in insulation thickness only.