Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China

In the energy-saving retrofit of existing buildings, investors are particularly concerned about the energy-saving performance of exterior windows and the payback period of additional costs. This study evaluates representative cities in four different climate zones in China to simulate the energy con...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Buildings (Basel) 2024-12, Vol.14 (12), p.3904
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Sai, Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed, Yang, Jingjing, Guo, Zongkang, Zeng, Kejun, Chen, Yixing
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 12
container_start_page 3904
container_title Buildings (Basel)
container_volume 14
creator Liu, Sai
Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed
Yang, Jingjing
Guo, Zongkang
Zeng, Kejun
Chen, Yixing
description In the energy-saving retrofit of existing buildings, investors are particularly concerned about the energy-saving performance of exterior windows and the payback period of additional costs. This study evaluates representative cities in four different climate zones in China to simulate the energy consumption of large office buildings after replacing different glass windows and conducting energy-saving and economic feasibility assessments. The research method includes the following steps: First, a baseline model of large office buildings in four cities was established using AutoBPS and OpenStudio. Then, the baseline and retrofit models of replacing glass windows were simulated using the EnergyPlus V9.3.0 to obtain multiple hourly energy consumption results. The commercial electricity and gas prices in the four cities were adjusted to calculate the total cost within 20 years after replacing different types of windows. Using the discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), and profitability index (PI) as evaluation indicators, a feasibility analysis was conducted in the four regions to evaluate the economic feasibility of replacing building windows. The simulation results show that considering economic feasibility and meeting energy-saving standards, it is more economical to choose windows with moderate U-value and SHGC value in the four regions than to choose windows with the smallest U-value and SHGC value, and that both energy savings and economic benefits are closely related to building age, with older buildings (especially those in Changsha and Shenzhen) showing greater benefits. Furthermore, the optimal window types in the four cities determined in this study can recover the investment cost within the window life, with Harbin (SC), Beijing (C), Changsha (HC), and Shenzhen (HW) with the payback period of 6.60, 15.66, 10.16, and 11.42 years, respectively. The research model established in this study provides a useful evaluation path for selecting windows for the energy-saving retrofit of large office buildings in cities in different climate zones and provides data support for the decision making of energy-saving retrofit investors.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/buildings14123904
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3149559105</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A821761043</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ca023037ecc54b769ef062f428de6a54</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A821761043</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-d1764-2a62900beebafbfe1713facc8c1c83075821dabaf8b3fdc80a22aabfb7790b1b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkFtLLDEMxwdRUNQP4FvhPK_2OpfHPatHFxYEUQRfhrRN1i7jVNtZjn57i6tg8pDwT_jlUlVngp8r1fELuw2DD-M6Cy1kEfRedSR5Y2ZG8W7_V35Ynea84cVaI6XRR5W_wylFChObjzB85JBZJHb1PmEKMbHHMPr4PzMq-QrSGtktUXDI_v6MZGFkl4EIE44TWwzhBSZkT3HEL9LiOYxwUh0QDBlPv-Nx9fDv6n5xM1vdXi8X89XMi6bWMwm17Di3iBbIEopGKALnWidcq8oNrRQeSq21irxrOUgJYMk2TcetsOq4Wu64PsKmf01ll_TRRwj9lxDTuoc0BTdg74BLxVWDzhltm7pD4rUkLVuPNRhdWH92rNcU37aYp34Tt6n8KPdK6M6YTnBTus53XWso0DBSnBK44h5fgitPoFD0eVm8qQXXSn0CW1WEJg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3149559105</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><creator>Liu, Sai ; Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed ; Yang, Jingjing ; Guo, Zongkang ; Zeng, Kejun ; Chen, Yixing</creator><creatorcontrib>Liu, Sai ; Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed ; Yang, Jingjing ; Guo, Zongkang ; Zeng, Kejun ; Chen, Yixing</creatorcontrib><description>In the energy-saving retrofit of existing buildings, investors are particularly concerned about the energy-saving performance of exterior windows and the payback period of additional costs. This study evaluates representative cities in four different climate zones in China to simulate the energy consumption of large office buildings after replacing different glass windows and conducting energy-saving and economic feasibility assessments. The research method includes the following steps: First, a baseline model of large office buildings in four cities was established using AutoBPS and OpenStudio. Then, the baseline and retrofit models of replacing glass windows were simulated using the EnergyPlus V9.3.0 to obtain multiple hourly energy consumption results. The commercial electricity and gas prices in the four cities were adjusted to calculate the total cost within 20 years after replacing different types of windows. Using the discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), and profitability index (PI) as evaluation indicators, a feasibility analysis was conducted in the four regions to evaluate the economic feasibility of replacing building windows. The simulation results show that considering economic feasibility and meeting energy-saving standards, it is more economical to choose windows with moderate U-value and SHGC value in the four regions than to choose windows with the smallest U-value and SHGC value, and that both energy savings and economic benefits are closely related to building age, with older buildings (especially those in Changsha and Shenzhen) showing greater benefits. Furthermore, the optimal window types in the four cities determined in this study can recover the investment cost within the window life, with Harbin (SC), Beijing (C), Changsha (HC), and Shenzhen (HW) with the payback period of 6.60, 15.66, 10.16, and 11.42 years, respectively. The research model established in this study provides a useful evaluation path for selecting windows for the energy-saving retrofit of large office buildings in cities in different climate zones and provides data support for the decision making of energy-saving retrofit investors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2075-5309</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2075-5309</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/buildings14123904</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Architecture and energy conservation ; building energy simulation ; Buildings ; Carbon ; China ; Cities ; Climate change ; Cold ; Cost benefit analysis ; Cost control ; Decision making ; economic analysis ; Economics ; Emission standards ; Emissions ; Energy conservation ; Energy consumption ; Energy costs ; Energy efficiency ; EnergyPlus ; Exterior weather conditions ; Feasibility studies ; Green buildings ; HVAC ; Insulation ; Natural gas ; Office buildings ; Payback periods ; Performance evaluation ; Protection and preservation ; Public buildings ; Retrofitting ; Simulation ; Software ; windows</subject><ispartof>Buildings (Basel), 2024-12, Vol.14 (12), p.3904</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,864,2102,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Liu, Sai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jingjing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Zongkang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Kejun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yixing</creatorcontrib><title>Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China</title><title>Buildings (Basel)</title><description>In the energy-saving retrofit of existing buildings, investors are particularly concerned about the energy-saving performance of exterior windows and the payback period of additional costs. This study evaluates representative cities in four different climate zones in China to simulate the energy consumption of large office buildings after replacing different glass windows and conducting energy-saving and economic feasibility assessments. The research method includes the following steps: First, a baseline model of large office buildings in four cities was established using AutoBPS and OpenStudio. Then, the baseline and retrofit models of replacing glass windows were simulated using the EnergyPlus V9.3.0 to obtain multiple hourly energy consumption results. The commercial electricity and gas prices in the four cities were adjusted to calculate the total cost within 20 years after replacing different types of windows. Using the discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), and profitability index (PI) as evaluation indicators, a feasibility analysis was conducted in the four regions to evaluate the economic feasibility of replacing building windows. The simulation results show that considering economic feasibility and meeting energy-saving standards, it is more economical to choose windows with moderate U-value and SHGC value in the four regions than to choose windows with the smallest U-value and SHGC value, and that both energy savings and economic benefits are closely related to building age, with older buildings (especially those in Changsha and Shenzhen) showing greater benefits. Furthermore, the optimal window types in the four cities determined in this study can recover the investment cost within the window life, with Harbin (SC), Beijing (C), Changsha (HC), and Shenzhen (HW) with the payback period of 6.60, 15.66, 10.16, and 11.42 years, respectively. The research model established in this study provides a useful evaluation path for selecting windows for the energy-saving retrofit of large office buildings in cities in different climate zones and provides data support for the decision making of energy-saving retrofit investors.</description><subject>Architecture and energy conservation</subject><subject>building energy simulation</subject><subject>Buildings</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>China</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Cold</subject><subject>Cost benefit analysis</subject><subject>Cost control</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>economic analysis</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Emission standards</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Energy conservation</subject><subject>Energy consumption</subject><subject>Energy costs</subject><subject>Energy efficiency</subject><subject>EnergyPlus</subject><subject>Exterior weather conditions</subject><subject>Feasibility studies</subject><subject>Green buildings</subject><subject>HVAC</subject><subject>Insulation</subject><subject>Natural gas</subject><subject>Office buildings</subject><subject>Payback periods</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Protection and preservation</subject><subject>Public buildings</subject><subject>Retrofitting</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>windows</subject><issn>2075-5309</issn><issn>2075-5309</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkFtLLDEMxwdRUNQP4FvhPK_2OpfHPatHFxYEUQRfhrRN1i7jVNtZjn57i6tg8pDwT_jlUlVngp8r1fELuw2DD-M6Cy1kEfRedSR5Y2ZG8W7_V35Ynea84cVaI6XRR5W_wylFChObjzB85JBZJHb1PmEKMbHHMPr4PzMq-QrSGtktUXDI_v6MZGFkl4EIE44TWwzhBSZkT3HEL9LiOYxwUh0QDBlPv-Nx9fDv6n5xM1vdXi8X89XMi6bWMwm17Di3iBbIEopGKALnWidcq8oNrRQeSq21irxrOUgJYMk2TcetsOq4Wu64PsKmf01ll_TRRwj9lxDTuoc0BTdg74BLxVWDzhltm7pD4rUkLVuPNRhdWH92rNcU37aYp34Tt6n8KPdK6M6YTnBTus53XWso0DBSnBK44h5fgitPoFD0eVm8qQXXSn0CW1WEJg</recordid><startdate>20241201</startdate><enddate>20241201</enddate><creator>Liu, Sai</creator><creator>Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed</creator><creator>Yang, Jingjing</creator><creator>Guo, Zongkang</creator><creator>Zeng, Kejun</creator><creator>Chen, Yixing</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241201</creationdate><title>Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China</title><author>Liu, Sai ; Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed ; Yang, Jingjing ; Guo, Zongkang ; Zeng, Kejun ; Chen, Yixing</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d1764-2a62900beebafbfe1713facc8c1c83075821dabaf8b3fdc80a22aabfb7790b1b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Architecture and energy conservation</topic><topic>building energy simulation</topic><topic>Buildings</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>China</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Cold</topic><topic>Cost benefit analysis</topic><topic>Cost control</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>economic analysis</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Emission standards</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Energy conservation</topic><topic>Energy consumption</topic><topic>Energy costs</topic><topic>Energy efficiency</topic><topic>EnergyPlus</topic><topic>Exterior weather conditions</topic><topic>Feasibility studies</topic><topic>Green buildings</topic><topic>HVAC</topic><topic>Insulation</topic><topic>Natural gas</topic><topic>Office buildings</topic><topic>Payback periods</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Protection and preservation</topic><topic>Public buildings</topic><topic>Retrofitting</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>windows</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Liu, Sai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jingjing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Zongkang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Kejun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yixing</creatorcontrib><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Buildings (Basel)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Liu, Sai</au><au>Ghazali, Farid E. Mohamed</au><au>Yang, Jingjing</au><au>Guo, Zongkang</au><au>Zeng, Kejun</au><au>Chen, Yixing</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China</atitle><jtitle>Buildings (Basel)</jtitle><date>2024-12-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>3904</spage><pages>3904-</pages><issn>2075-5309</issn><eissn>2075-5309</eissn><abstract>In the energy-saving retrofit of existing buildings, investors are particularly concerned about the energy-saving performance of exterior windows and the payback period of additional costs. This study evaluates representative cities in four different climate zones in China to simulate the energy consumption of large office buildings after replacing different glass windows and conducting energy-saving and economic feasibility assessments. The research method includes the following steps: First, a baseline model of large office buildings in four cities was established using AutoBPS and OpenStudio. Then, the baseline and retrofit models of replacing glass windows were simulated using the EnergyPlus V9.3.0 to obtain multiple hourly energy consumption results. The commercial electricity and gas prices in the four cities were adjusted to calculate the total cost within 20 years after replacing different types of windows. Using the discounted payback period (DPP), net present value (NPV), and profitability index (PI) as evaluation indicators, a feasibility analysis was conducted in the four regions to evaluate the economic feasibility of replacing building windows. The simulation results show that considering economic feasibility and meeting energy-saving standards, it is more economical to choose windows with moderate U-value and SHGC value in the four regions than to choose windows with the smallest U-value and SHGC value, and that both energy savings and economic benefits are closely related to building age, with older buildings (especially those in Changsha and Shenzhen) showing greater benefits. Furthermore, the optimal window types in the four cities determined in this study can recover the investment cost within the window life, with Harbin (SC), Beijing (C), Changsha (HC), and Shenzhen (HW) with the payback period of 6.60, 15.66, 10.16, and 11.42 years, respectively. The research model established in this study provides a useful evaluation path for selecting windows for the energy-saving retrofit of large office buildings in cities in different climate zones and provides data support for the decision making of energy-saving retrofit investors.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/buildings14123904</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2075-5309
ispartof Buildings (Basel), 2024-12, Vol.14 (12), p.3904
issn 2075-5309
2075-5309
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3149559105
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
subjects Architecture and energy conservation
building energy simulation
Buildings
Carbon
China
Cities
Climate change
Cold
Cost benefit analysis
Cost control
Decision making
economic analysis
Economics
Emission standards
Emissions
Energy conservation
Energy consumption
Energy costs
Energy efficiency
EnergyPlus
Exterior weather conditions
Feasibility studies
Green buildings
HVAC
Insulation
Natural gas
Office buildings
Payback periods
Performance evaluation
Protection and preservation
Public buildings
Retrofitting
Simulation
Software
windows
title Retrofit Analysis of Exterior Windows for Large Office Buildings in Different Climate Zones of China
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T08%3A19%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Retrofit%20Analysis%20of%20Exterior%20Windows%20for%20Large%20Office%20Buildings%20in%20Different%20Climate%20Zones%20of%20China&rft.jtitle=Buildings%20(Basel)&rft.au=Liu,%20Sai&rft.date=2024-12-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=3904&rft.pages=3904-&rft.issn=2075-5309&rft.eissn=2075-5309&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/buildings14123904&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA821761043%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3149559105&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A821761043&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_ca023037ecc54b769ef062f428de6a54&rfr_iscdi=true