Thermo-Hygral and Environmental Evaluation of Chosen Parts of an Ultra-Low-Energy Family Houses

Abstract:

The goal of this paper is to assess two ultra-low-energy family houses from thermo-physical aspects and environmental perspectives. Thermo – physical evaluation, done in two-dimensional PC software Area, has shown results that consent with the newest standards for designing critical details in two ultra-low-energy family houses. Both cases show correctness in design in regards to thermo-physical properties. Both critical spots – corners are well insulated with surface temperatures over 17°C, which indicates low risk of mold occurring. Most of the embodied energy is in roof construction with value of 3084 MJ in house A and 1943 MJ in house B. In terms of indicator of global warming potential, most emissions were calculated in bearing walls of house B (593 kgCO_2eq/m²). From the acidification potential, the most emissions were determined in the roof construction B (1.02283 kgSO_2eq/m²). It can be stated that financial expenses on groundwork and preparing polystyrene casing for a reinforced concrete slab is significantly higher (family house A) than for foundation insulated from the exterior side with extruded polystyrene (family house B).

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 887)
• Pages: 393-400
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.887.393
• Online since: January 2019
• Authors: Peter Turcsanyi*, Anna Sedláková, Eva Kridlova-Burdova, Silvia Vilčeková
• Keywords: CO₂ Emissions, Embodied Energy, Foundation Detail, LCA, SO₂ Emissions, Surface Temperature

References

[1] H. Nykamp, A transition to green buildings in Norway, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. October 2016.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2016.10.006

[2] M.K. Dixit, Life cycle embodied energy analysis of residential buildings: A review of literature to investigate embodied energy parameters, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 79 (2017) 390-413.

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.051

[3] A. Oviir, Life cycle assessment (LCA) in the framework of the next generation Estonian building standard Building certification as a strategy for enhancing sustainability, Energy Procedia 96 (2016) 351-362.

DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.159

[4] R. Kim, T. Sungho, S. Roh, Development of low carbon durability design for green apartment buildings in South Korea. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 77 (2017) 263-272.

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.120

[5] C. Ingrao, F. Scrucca. C. Tricase, F. Asdrubali, A comparative Life Cycle Assessment of external wall-compositions for cleaner construction solutions in buildings, J. Clean Prod.124 (2016) 283-298.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.112

[6] E. Kridlova Burdova, S. Vilcekova, J. Vojtus, A. Sedlakova, Comparison of Material Compositions of Roofs in term of Environmental and Energy Performance, Chem. Eng. Trans. 51 (2015) 1-6.

DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.617

[7] Sedláková A., Vilčekován S., Krídlová Burdová E. 2015. Analysis of material solutions for design of construction details of foundation, wall and floor for energy and environmental impacts, Clean. Technol. Envir. 17(5): 1323-1332.

DOI: 10.1007/s10098-015-0956-3

[8] Sedláková A., Vilčeková S., Krídlová Burdová, E. 2014, Evaluation of structures design concept of lower structure from embodied energy and emissions, Chem. Eng. Trans. 39: 139-144.

[9] Vilčeková S., Sedláková A., Krídlová Burdová E., Vojtuš J. 2015, Comparison of Environmental and Energy Performance of Exterior Walls, Energy Procedia 78: 231-236.

[10] Information on http://kcad.cz/cz/stavebni-fyzika/tepelna-technika/area. Last checked on August 28, (2017).