Letter | Published:

Energy consumption in buildings and female thermal demand

Nature Climate Change volume 5, pages 10541056 (2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

Energy consumption of residential buildings and offices adds up to about 30% of total carbon dioxide emissions; and occupant behaviour contributes to 80% of the variation in energy consumption1. Indoor climate regulations are based on an empirical thermal comfort model that was developed in the 1960s (ref. 2). Standard values for one of its primary variables—metabolic rate—are based on an average male, and may overestimate female metabolic rate by up to 35% (ref. 3). This may cause buildings to be intrinsically non-energy-efficient in providing comfort to females. Therefore, we make a case to use actual metabolic rates. Moreover, with a biophysical analysis we illustrate the effect of miscalculating metabolic rate on female thermal demand. The approach is fundamentally different from current empirical thermal comfort models and builds up predictions from the physical and physiological constraints, rather than statistical association to thermal comfort. It provides a substantiation of the thermal comfort standard on the population level and adds flexibility to predict thermal demand of subpopulations and individuals. Ultimately, an accurate representation of thermal demand of all occupants leads to actual energy consumption predictions and real energy savings of buildings that are designed and operated by the buildings services community.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    IEA Energy Conservation in Buildings and Community Systems Programme ECBCS Annual Report 2011 (ECBCS, 2011)

  2. 2.

    ASHRAE Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy ASHRAE standard 55-2010 (ASHRAE, 2010)

  3. 3.

    , , , & Metabolic equivalent: One size does not fit all. J. Appl. Physiol. 99, 1112–1119 (2005).

  4. 4.

    , & Energy consumption and the unexplained winter warming over northern Asia and North America. Nature Clim. Change 3, 466–470 (2013).

  5. 5.

    et al. Integrated analysis of climate change, land-use, energy and water strategies. Nature Clim. Change 3, 621–626 (2013).

  6. 6.

    & Comparison between male and female subjective estimates of thermal effects and sensations. Appl. Ergon. 12, 29–33 (1981).

  7. 7.

    Gender differences in thermal comfort and use of thermostats in everyday thermal environments. Build. Environ. 42, 1594–1603 (2007).

  8. 8.

    , & Use of mean skin temperature in evaluation of individual thermal comfort for a person in a sleeping posture under steady thermal environment. Indoor Built Environ. 24, 489–499 (2015).

  9. 9.

    Thermal Comfort (McGraw-Hill, 1970).

  10. 10.

    , & Personal factors in thermal comfort assessment: Clothing properties and metabolic heat production. Energy Build. 34, 581–591 (2002).

  11. 11.

    Human Thermal Environments 2nd edn (Taylor & Francis, 2003).

  12. 12.

    et al. 2011 compendium of physical activities: A second update of codes and MET values. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 43, 1575–1581 (2011).

  13. 13.

    , & A Comprehensive Data Base for Estimating Clothing Insulation (ASHRAE, 1985).

  14. 14.

    Thermoregulation and aging. Am. J. Physiol. 292, R99–R102 (2007).

  15. 15.

    Forty years of Fanger’s model of thermal comfort: Comfort for all? Indoor Air 18, 182–201 (2008).

  16. 16.

    , & Cold-induced adaptive thermogenesis in lean and obese. Obesity 18, 1092–1099 (2010).

  17. 17.

    Rational temperature indices of man’s thermal environment and their use with a 2-node model of his temperature regulation. Fed. Proc. 32, 1572–1582 (1973).

  18. 18.

    , , , & Evaluation of thermal comfort using combined multi-node thermoregulation (65MN) and radiation models and computational fluid dynamic (CFD). Energy Build. 34, 637–646 (2002).

  19. 19.

    , & Computer prediction of human thermoregulatory and temperature responses to a wide range of environmental conditions. Int. J. Biometeorol. 45, 143–159 (2001).

  20. 20.

    Thermoreception and Temperature Regulation (Academic Press, 1981).

  21. 21.

    Glossary of terms for thermal physiology. Jpn. J. Physiol. 51, 245–280 (2001).

  22. 22.

    , , & Beyond the classic thermoneutral zone: Including thermal comfort. Temperature 1, 142–149 (2014).

  23. 23.

    , & Comfort and thermal sensations and associated physiological responses at various ambient temperatures. Environ. Res. 1, 1–20 (1967).

  24. 24.

    , , & Evaluation of calculation methods of mean skin temperature for use in thermal comfort study. Build. Environ. 46, 478–488 (2011).

  25. 25.

    & Adaptive thermal comfort and sustainable thermal standards for buildings. Energy Build. 34, 563–572 (2002).

  26. 26.

    & The Harris Benedict equation reevaluated: Resting energy requirements and the body cell mass. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 40, 168–182 (1984).

  27. 27.

    Simplified calculation of body-surface area. N. Engl. J. Med. 317, 1098 (1987).

  28. 28.

    & The validity of ISO-PMV for predicting comfort votes in every-day thermal environments. Energy Build. 34, 667–684 (2002).

  29. 29.

    , , & Adaptation to cold in arctic and tropical mammals and birds in relation to body temperature, insulation, and basal metabolic rate. Biol. Bull. 99, 259–271 (1950).

  30. 30.

    & Man in a Cold Environment (Edward Arnold, 1955).

  31. 31.

    & Impaired defense of core temperature in aged humans during mild cold stress. Am. J. Physiol. 292, R103–R108 (2007).

  32. 32.

    , & Superficial shell insulation in resting and exercising men in cold water. J. Appl. Physiol. 52, 1557–1564 (1982).

  33. 33.

    , , , & Influence of thermophysiology on thermal behavior: The essentials of categorization. Physiol. Behav. 128, 180–187 (2014).

  34. 34.

    New methods for calculating metabolic rate with special reference to protein metabolism. J. Physiol. 109, 1–9 (1949).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to C. Jacquot and L. Schellen for performing measurements, and A. Frijns for fruitful discussions. This study was supported by grants from AgentschapNL (INTEWON: EOSLT10033) and TKI Energo and TKI Solar Energy (TRECO: TEGB | 13023).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Biology, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism of Maastricht University Medical Center+, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands

    • Boris Kingma
    •  & Wouter van Marken Lichtenbelt

Authors

  1. Search for Boris Kingma in:

  2. Search for Wouter van Marken Lichtenbelt in:

Contributions

B.K. contributed to experimental work, project planning, data analysis, biophysical modelling, and manuscript writing. W.v.M.L. contributed to project planning, data analysis, manuscript writing and project funding.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Boris Kingma.

Supplementary information

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2741

Further reading