Actions contemplated in Sustainable Energy (and Climate)Action Plans (SEAPs), which municipalities adhering tothe EU initiative called “The Covenant of Mayors” are requiredto prepare, regard many sectors, among which arebuildings. To implement such plans, it is necessary tomake use of methods for predicting energy use in buildings.Technicians involved in this tend to adopt easy-tousesimulation models because of the common mid-levelexpertise of the offices involved. However, such simplifiedmethods could result in a less accurate evaluation of theenergy demand of buildings. In this paper the suitabilityof the quasi-steady state and the dynamic approach, in theframe of these new urban energy planning tools, is assessed.Specifically, a comparison between the two methodsreported in the EN ISO 52016-1 Standard (namely thequasi-steady state monthly method and the dynamichourly method), used here as representative of the twocited classes of models, is drawn. Despite some limitationsof the quasi-steady state model found in the analysis, thepossibility to still use both modelling approaches to implementSEAPs is argued in the paper. Moreover, a tentativeprocedural scheme is proposed, which technicians workingon SEAPs can usefully follow in order to choose themost appropriate modelling approach that can be used dependingon the specific situation to address.
|Titolo della pubblicazione ospite||Proceedings of 4th IBPSA-Italy Conference|
|Numero di pagine||8|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Published - 2020|
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes