Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings
Domestic solar hot water systems (SHWS), which are used to reduce domestic energy use, represent one of the most widely known technologies of solar thermal applications. Taking into account the sizing of these systems during its design phase, it is also important to consider the effects on the envir...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cleaner production 2015-02, Vol.88, p.29-42 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 42 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 29 |
container_title | Journal of cleaner production |
container_volume | 88 |
creator | Zambrana-Vasquez, David Aranda-Usón, Alfonso Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio Jañez, Alberto Llera-Sastresa, Eva Hernandez, Patxi Arrizabalaga, Eneko |
description | Domestic solar hot water systems (SHWS), which are used to reduce domestic energy use, represent one of the most widely known technologies of solar thermal applications. Taking into account the sizing of these systems during its design phase, it is also important to consider the effects on the environment of their use from a life cycle perspective. An evaluation method based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is used in this paper to analyse the environmental implications of SHWS considering the production, use, maintenance and end-of-life stages. As a case study, 32 different types of SWHS to meet the hot water demand (HWD) of 2 dwellings and 2 hotels, located in the region of Aragón in Spain, are studied. The aim of the case study is to compare the environmental performance of SHWS and to select the best environmentally friendly solution while considering their energy pay-back time (EPBT).
From an environmental point of view, comparing the results obtained in all cases studies, e.g., in terms of kg CO2 eq, the use of biomass as fuel for the auxiliary system in each SHWS considered provides the greatest environmental benefit in comparison with the other fuels, usually followed by the use of natural gas. However, in terms of the EPBT, because biomass is the fuel with lowest environmental impact and associated embodied energy, the avoided embodied energy due to the solar contribution in SHWS is the lowest in the biomass case, thereby resulting in a higher value of the EPBT.
•A comprehensive methodology based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is developed.•Environmental impacts for 32 types of solar water heating systems (SWHS) are calculated.•Use of biomass as auxiliary heating has the lowest life cycle environmental impact.•Using SWHS to replace biomass the worst results in terms of avoided emissions and energy payback. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.035 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1669880398</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959652614006234</els_id><sourcerecordid>1660389456</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-1914016cab5c54e300b05d5afba232a0d2a98c6c5f7418d27485461c8480fb093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkcFq3DAURUVJoZO0n1DQMhu7T7YkS92EEJI2EMimXQtZem412Fai50mYv6_NZJ-uxIN7Llwdxr4KqAUI_W1f78OITyXXDQhZg66hVR_YTpjOVqIz-oztwCpbadXoT-ycaA8gOujkjk2380sqeZ5wXvzIPRESbQfPA495QlpS4JRHX_jfvPBXv2DhdKQFJ_rOPQ-ekNNyiEeeZl6QUlzptHXNcUNw5P0hjTHNf-gz-zj4kfDL23vBft_d_rr5WT08_ri_uX6oghR6qYQVch0WfK-CktgC9KCi8kPvm7bxEBtvTdBBDZ0UJjadNEpqEYw0MPRg2wt2eepdP-X5sG5wU6KA4-hnzAdyQmtrDLTW_E8UWmOl0mtUnaKhZKKCg3sqafLl6AS4zYTbuzcTbjPhQLvVxMpdnThcJ78kLI5CwjlgTAXD4mJO7zT8AwSUlbA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1660389456</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Zambrana-Vasquez, David ; Aranda-Usón, Alfonso ; Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio ; Jañez, Alberto ; Llera-Sastresa, Eva ; Hernandez, Patxi ; Arrizabalaga, Eneko</creator><creatorcontrib>Zambrana-Vasquez, David ; Aranda-Usón, Alfonso ; Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio ; Jañez, Alberto ; Llera-Sastresa, Eva ; Hernandez, Patxi ; Arrizabalaga, Eneko</creatorcontrib><description>Domestic solar hot water systems (SHWS), which are used to reduce domestic energy use, represent one of the most widely known technologies of solar thermal applications. Taking into account the sizing of these systems during its design phase, it is also important to consider the effects on the environment of their use from a life cycle perspective. An evaluation method based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is used in this paper to analyse the environmental implications of SHWS considering the production, use, maintenance and end-of-life stages. As a case study, 32 different types of SWHS to meet the hot water demand (HWD) of 2 dwellings and 2 hotels, located in the region of Aragón in Spain, are studied. The aim of the case study is to compare the environmental performance of SHWS and to select the best environmentally friendly solution while considering their energy pay-back time (EPBT).
From an environmental point of view, comparing the results obtained in all cases studies, e.g., in terms of kg CO2 eq, the use of biomass as fuel for the auxiliary system in each SHWS considered provides the greatest environmental benefit in comparison with the other fuels, usually followed by the use of natural gas. However, in terms of the EPBT, because biomass is the fuel with lowest environmental impact and associated embodied energy, the avoided embodied energy due to the solar contribution in SHWS is the lowest in the biomass case, thereby resulting in a higher value of the EPBT.
•A comprehensive methodology based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is developed.•Environmental impacts for 32 types of solar water heating systems (SWHS) are calculated.•Use of biomass as auxiliary heating has the lowest life cycle environmental impact.•Using SWHS to replace biomass the worst results in terms of avoided emissions and energy payback.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-6526</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1786</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.035</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biomass ; Biomass energy production ; Building energy systems ; Domestic ; Domestic energy ; Domestic solar hot water systems ; Eco-efficiency ; Energy savings ; Environmental impact assessment ; Fuels ; Hot water heating ; Life Cycle Assessment ; Natural gas ; Solar heating</subject><ispartof>Journal of cleaner production, 2015-02, Vol.88, p.29-42</ispartof><rights>2014 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-1914016cab5c54e300b05d5afba232a0d2a98c6c5f7418d27485461c8480fb093</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-1914016cab5c54e300b05d5afba232a0d2a98c6c5f7418d27485461c8480fb093</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7245-1722</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652614006234$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zambrana-Vasquez, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aranda-Usón, Alfonso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jañez, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Llera-Sastresa, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernandez, Patxi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arrizabalaga, Eneko</creatorcontrib><title>Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings</title><title>Journal of cleaner production</title><description>Domestic solar hot water systems (SHWS), which are used to reduce domestic energy use, represent one of the most widely known technologies of solar thermal applications. Taking into account the sizing of these systems during its design phase, it is also important to consider the effects on the environment of their use from a life cycle perspective. An evaluation method based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is used in this paper to analyse the environmental implications of SHWS considering the production, use, maintenance and end-of-life stages. As a case study, 32 different types of SWHS to meet the hot water demand (HWD) of 2 dwellings and 2 hotels, located in the region of Aragón in Spain, are studied. The aim of the case study is to compare the environmental performance of SHWS and to select the best environmentally friendly solution while considering their energy pay-back time (EPBT).
From an environmental point of view, comparing the results obtained in all cases studies, e.g., in terms of kg CO2 eq, the use of biomass as fuel for the auxiliary system in each SHWS considered provides the greatest environmental benefit in comparison with the other fuels, usually followed by the use of natural gas. However, in terms of the EPBT, because biomass is the fuel with lowest environmental impact and associated embodied energy, the avoided embodied energy due to the solar contribution in SHWS is the lowest in the biomass case, thereby resulting in a higher value of the EPBT.
•A comprehensive methodology based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is developed.•Environmental impacts for 32 types of solar water heating systems (SWHS) are calculated.•Use of biomass as auxiliary heating has the lowest life cycle environmental impact.•Using SWHS to replace biomass the worst results in terms of avoided emissions and energy payback.</description><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Biomass energy production</subject><subject>Building energy systems</subject><subject>Domestic</subject><subject>Domestic energy</subject><subject>Domestic solar hot water systems</subject><subject>Eco-efficiency</subject><subject>Energy savings</subject><subject>Environmental impact assessment</subject><subject>Fuels</subject><subject>Hot water heating</subject><subject>Life Cycle Assessment</subject><subject>Natural gas</subject><subject>Solar heating</subject><issn>0959-6526</issn><issn>1879-1786</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkcFq3DAURUVJoZO0n1DQMhu7T7YkS92EEJI2EMimXQtZem412Fai50mYv6_NZJ-uxIN7Llwdxr4KqAUI_W1f78OITyXXDQhZg66hVR_YTpjOVqIz-oztwCpbadXoT-ycaA8gOujkjk2380sqeZ5wXvzIPRESbQfPA495QlpS4JRHX_jfvPBXv2DhdKQFJ_rOPQ-ekNNyiEeeZl6QUlzptHXNcUNw5P0hjTHNf-gz-zj4kfDL23vBft_d_rr5WT08_ri_uX6oghR6qYQVch0WfK-CktgC9KCi8kPvm7bxEBtvTdBBDZ0UJjadNEpqEYw0MPRg2wt2eepdP-X5sG5wU6KA4-hnzAdyQmtrDLTW_E8UWmOl0mtUnaKhZKKCg3sqafLl6AS4zYTbuzcTbjPhQLvVxMpdnThcJ78kLI5CwjlgTAXD4mJO7zT8AwSUlbA</recordid><startdate>20150201</startdate><enddate>20150201</enddate><creator>Zambrana-Vasquez, David</creator><creator>Aranda-Usón, Alfonso</creator><creator>Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio</creator><creator>Jañez, Alberto</creator><creator>Llera-Sastresa, Eva</creator><creator>Hernandez, Patxi</creator><creator>Arrizabalaga, Eneko</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KR7</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7245-1722</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20150201</creationdate><title>Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings</title><author>Zambrana-Vasquez, David ; Aranda-Usón, Alfonso ; Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio ; Jañez, Alberto ; Llera-Sastresa, Eva ; Hernandez, Patxi ; Arrizabalaga, Eneko</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-1914016cab5c54e300b05d5afba232a0d2a98c6c5f7418d27485461c8480fb093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Biomass energy production</topic><topic>Building energy systems</topic><topic>Domestic</topic><topic>Domestic energy</topic><topic>Domestic solar hot water systems</topic><topic>Eco-efficiency</topic><topic>Energy savings</topic><topic>Environmental impact assessment</topic><topic>Fuels</topic><topic>Hot water heating</topic><topic>Life Cycle Assessment</topic><topic>Natural gas</topic><topic>Solar heating</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zambrana-Vasquez, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aranda-Usón, Alfonso</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jañez, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Llera-Sastresa, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernandez, Patxi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arrizabalaga, Eneko</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zambrana-Vasquez, David</au><au>Aranda-Usón, Alfonso</au><au>Zabalza-Bribián, Ignacio</au><au>Jañez, Alberto</au><au>Llera-Sastresa, Eva</au><au>Hernandez, Patxi</au><au>Arrizabalaga, Eneko</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle><date>2015-02-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>88</volume><spage>29</spage><epage>42</epage><pages>29-42</pages><issn>0959-6526</issn><eissn>1879-1786</eissn><abstract>Domestic solar hot water systems (SHWS), which are used to reduce domestic energy use, represent one of the most widely known technologies of solar thermal applications. Taking into account the sizing of these systems during its design phase, it is also important to consider the effects on the environment of their use from a life cycle perspective. An evaluation method based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is used in this paper to analyse the environmental implications of SHWS considering the production, use, maintenance and end-of-life stages. As a case study, 32 different types of SWHS to meet the hot water demand (HWD) of 2 dwellings and 2 hotels, located in the region of Aragón in Spain, are studied. The aim of the case study is to compare the environmental performance of SHWS and to select the best environmentally friendly solution while considering their energy pay-back time (EPBT).
From an environmental point of view, comparing the results obtained in all cases studies, e.g., in terms of kg CO2 eq, the use of biomass as fuel for the auxiliary system in each SHWS considered provides the greatest environmental benefit in comparison with the other fuels, usually followed by the use of natural gas. However, in terms of the EPBT, because biomass is the fuel with lowest environmental impact and associated embodied energy, the avoided embodied energy due to the solar contribution in SHWS is the lowest in the biomass case, thereby resulting in a higher value of the EPBT.
•A comprehensive methodology based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is developed.•Environmental impacts for 32 types of solar water heating systems (SWHS) are calculated.•Use of biomass as auxiliary heating has the lowest life cycle environmental impact.•Using SWHS to replace biomass the worst results in terms of avoided emissions and energy payback.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.035</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7245-1722</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0959-6526 |
ispartof | Journal of cleaner production, 2015-02, Vol.88, p.29-42 |
issn | 0959-6526 1879-1786 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1669880398 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Biomass Biomass energy production Building energy systems Domestic Domestic energy Domestic solar hot water systems Eco-efficiency Energy savings Environmental impact assessment Fuels Hot water heating Life Cycle Assessment Natural gas Solar heating |
title | Environmental assessment of domestic solar hot water systems: a case study in residential and hotel buildings |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T04%3A26%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Environmental%20assessment%20of%20domestic%20solar%20hot%20water%20systems:%20a%20case%20study%20in%20residential%20and%20hotel%20buildings&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cleaner%20production&rft.au=Zambrana-Vasquez,%20David&rft.date=2015-02-01&rft.volume=88&rft.spage=29&rft.epage=42&rft.pages=29-42&rft.issn=0959-6526&rft.eissn=1879-1786&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.06.035&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1660389456%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1660389456&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0959652614006234&rfr_iscdi=true |