Zero Energy vs Zero Emissions

On the surface, it may seem that Net Zero Energy is the most responsible approach to building construction, but we may be missing the point…
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released its findings in September 2015, “A Common Definition for Zero Energy Buildings,” which states that a Zero Energy Building is “an energy-efficient building where, on a source energy basis, the actual annual delivered energy is less than or equal to the on-site renewable exported energy.” The report has no measurement criteria for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and in the report, it states that it “… does not tell the whole story of impacts from resource consumption and emissions associated with the energy use.” There is no further mention of GHG emissions, so in a Net-Zero building, combustion heating, a source of GHG emissions, may be employed.
The real culprit, according to most scientists of which I’m aware, is the GHG emissions, and it’s the reason that the world is collectively crying for emissions reductions. Though reducing energy consumption is important, reduction of GHG emissions is the key factor. The city of Vancouver, Canada, recently announced its intent to bypass energy efficiency standards and get straight to the heart of the matter by adopting the first Zero-Emissions Building plan in North America[ren]

Tästä olen vuosia puhunut kirjoitukissani, esitelmissäni ja lausunnoissani; kuten meneillään olevassa rakennusten energiamääräysten uudistamisessa. Turhaan. Kuitenkin Englannissa määräykset perustuvat GHG-päästöihin

Ei kommentteja:

Lähetä kommentti

Kirjoita tähän mielipiteesi.