No abstract

No abstract

To achieve zero-energy building target, both China and the US have planned pathway by formulating guidelines and standards. China has published National China technical standard for nearly zero energy building (CTS-NZEB), which defines detailed principles of zero-energy building. The US LEED zero energy evaluation system has been released based on LEED rating system. Defined target and scope have been introduced in this evaluation system; however, there are no technical and detailed approaches in the rating system. To support future projects achieving the LEED Zero Energy certification in China, accessible applications have been analyzed in perspectives of technology and economy in this article. The comparison and analysis results show that the strategies and technical index of CTS-NZEB can be adopted comprehensively in LEED Zero Energy rating system for Chinese buildings except for renewable energy resources because air source or ground source heat pump system, which are extensively used in China but not acceptable in LEED Zero Energy rating system. High-performance strategies, including low U-value envelope, exterior shading devices, high air tightness envelope, high-efficiency heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning system, and low thermal bridge impact, can be applied to pursue LEED Zero Energy rating system. The incremental costs of NZEBs in China are also supported by government through market and financial policies. This would make significant impacts on Chinese buildings to achieve the LEED Zero Energy target.

Considering the comprehensive effect of building carbon emissions, cost savings is of great significance in nearly-zero-energy buildings (NZEBs). Previous research mostly focused on studying the impact of technical measures in pilot projects. The characteristics of different cities or climate zones have only been considered in a few studies, and the selection of cities is often limited. At times, only one city is considered in each climate zone. Therefore, this study selected 15 cities to better cover climate zone characteristics according to the variation in weather and solar radiation conditions. A pilot NZEB project was chosen as the research subject, in which the energy consumption was monitored and compared across different categories using simulated values by EnergyPlus software. Various NZEB technologies were considered, such as the high-performance building envelope, the fresh air heat recovery unit (FAHRU), demand-controlled ventilation (DCV), a high-efficiency HVAC and lighting system, daylighting, and photovoltaic (PV). The simulated carbon emission intensities in severe cold, cold, and hot summer and cold winter (HSCW) climate zones were 21.97 kgCO2/m2, 19.60 kgCO2/m2, and 15.40 kgCO2/m2, respectively. The combined use of various NZEB technologies resulted in incremental costs of 998.86 CNY/m2, 870.61 CNY/m2, and 656.58 CNY/m2. The results indicated that the HSCW region had the best carbon emission reduction potential and cost-effectiveness when adopting NZEB strategies. Although the incremental cost of passive strategies produced by the envelope system is higher than active strategies produced by the HVAC system and lighting system, the effect of reducing the building’s heating load is a primary and urgent concern. The findings may provide a reference for similar buildings in different climate zones worldwide.