5.4. Limitations and further work
The work presented here is based on simulations of one residential passive house with hydronic heating and heat pump, located in a Northern European climate. The results are therefore limited in their validity, and cannot be directly translated to other cases. They can, however, be used to show some general differences between the technologies and to highlight questions for further analysis. The zero energy balance calculation used here does not include the full life cycle of the building, but is only focuses on energy use during operation. Furthermore, we have used the term ‘nZEB’ here to mean a zero energy building. Future work will also focus on zero emission buildings, and will include analyses of the energy and emissions embodied in the building during the construction phase, as well as replacements and deconstruction Some aspects in the comparison of the solar technologies are left out of the analysis. The zero energy balance is here calculated on an annual basis. A more detailed analysis should take the monthly, daily or even hourly load match into account, which may change the fractions of delivered and exported energy. Such an analysis could also include measures to increase self-consumption of energy. Another important factor is of course cost, which is likewise not considered here. The cost of PV modules has plummeted during the last few years and the market is expanding, while PV/T is still an emerging technology and the market is relatively small. Exchanging PV modules for PV/T modules also means that a hydronic system is necessary, which may increase the system complexity. Architectural integration is not covered in this paper, but there are clearly benefits of the uniform appearance that can be achieved with PV/T compared to separate installations of PV and PV/T.
5.4 ข้อจำกัดและการThe work presented here is based on simulations of one residential passive house with hydronic heating and heat pump, located in a Northern European climate. The results are therefore limited in their validity, and cannot be directly translated to other cases. They can, however, be used to show some general differences between the technologies and to highlight questions for further analysis. The zero energy balance calculation used here does not include the full life cycle of the building, but is only focuses on energy use during operation. Furthermore, we have used the term ‘nZEB’ here to mean a zero energy building. Future work will also focus on zero emission buildings, and will include analyses of the energy and emissions embodied in the building during the construction phase, as well as replacements and deconstruction Some aspects in the comparison of the solar technologies are left out of the analysis. The zero energy balance is here calculated on an annual basis. A more detailed analysis should take the monthly, daily or even hourly load match into account, which may change the fractions of delivered and exported energy. Such an analysis could also include measures to increase self-consumption of energy. Another important factor is of course cost, which is likewise not considered here. The cost of PV modules has plummeted during the last few years and the market is expanding, while PV/T is still an emerging technology and the market is relatively small. Exchanging PV modules for PV/T modules also means that a hydronic system is necessary, which may increase the system complexity. Architectural integration is not covered in this paper, but there are clearly benefits of the uniform appearance that can be achieved with PV/T compared to separate installations of PV and PV/T.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
