Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Since buildings have considerable impacts on the environment, it has become necessary to pay more attention to environmental
performance in building design. However, it is a difficult task to find better design alternatives satisfying several conflicting criteria,
especially, economical and environmental performance. This paper presents a multi-objective optimization model that could assist
designers in green building design. Variables in the model include those parameters that are usually determined at the conceptual
design stage and that have critical influence on building performance. Life cycle analysis methodology is employed to evaluate
design alternatives for both economical and environmental criteria. Life cycle environmental impacts are evaluated in terms of
expanded cumulative exergy consumption, which is the sum of exergy consumption due to resource inputs and abatement exergy
required to recover the negative impacts due to waste emissions. A multi-objective genetic algorithm is employed to find optimal
solutions. A case study is presented and the effectiveness of the approach is demonstrated for identifying a number of Pareto optimal
solutions for green building design.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Building design; Green building; Life cycle assessment; Life cycle cost; Multi-objective genetic algorithm
0360-1323/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.11.017
ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525 1513
the correct orientation can reduce energy consumption alternatives. A review of some optimization studies is
by 30–40% with no extra cost [4]. Currently, designers presented below.
heavily rely on previous experience or building energy End-use operating energy consumption is the optimi-
simulation programs to determine appropriate values zation criterion in many studies [9–11]. Heating and
for design parameters. However, the previous experience cooling energy are covered by Al-Homoud [9] and Coley
might lead to incorrect conclusions because they cannot and Schukat [11] while Wetter [10] enlarged the scope
cover every foreseeable circumstance and cannot reflect further to include lighting energy consumption into the
the complicated interactions between various para- optimization model. If the operating energy consump-
meters. Although many sophisticated energy simulation tion is considered as the only optimization criterion, the
programs (e.g., DOE, Energy Plus) are valuable to study proposed building is likely to have excessive amount of
the impacts of design parameters on building perfor- insulation and would not be cost-effective. To overcome
mance, the iterative trial-and-error process of searching this problem, life cycle cost has been used as the
for a better design solution is time-consuming and performance criterion in several studies [12–14].
ineffective because of the inherent difficulty in exploring Since designers rarely consider only one criterion in
a large design space. the decision-making process, multi-objective optimiza-
This paper presents the use of an optimization tion models have been proposed. Radford and Gero [15]
program coupled with an energy simulation program, applied dynamic programming in the multi-criteria
which allows the design space to be explored in the design optimization with the following four perfor-
search for an optimal or near optimal solution(s) for a mance criteria: thermal load, daylight availability,
predefined problem. construction cost and usable area. Hauglustaine and
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Azar [16] optimized the building envelope using genetic
Related studies are reviewed in the next section. It is algorithms. As many as 10 criteria related with code
followed by a presentation of exergetic life cycle compliance, energy consumption, and cost are consid-
assessment to evaluate environmental performance of ered. Wright et al. [17] applied a multi-objective genetic
buildings. The optimization model is presented in the algorithm to building thermal optimization with em-
fourth section, followed by a brief introduction to the phasis on mechanical system design. Operating energy
multi-objective genetic algorithm used to solve the cost and occupant thermal comfort are the two
optimization problem. A case study is finally presented performance criteria used.
to illustrate the application of the multi-objective genetic Although the above efforts in optimization studies are
algorithm in green building design. significant to explore effective ways for better building
design, several limitations may undermine their applica-
tion in practice. They are discussed below.
use depletion indices based on reserves and reserve-to- the environmental impact potentials and the exergy of
use ratios to consider non-energy resources such as waste emissions. Abatement exergy (AbatEx) is em-
mineral ore. For the latter case, normalization coeffi- ployed in this study to evaluate the required exergy to
cients are required to aggregate depletion indices remove or isolate the emissions from the environment.
together since they vary in the order of magnitudes. As indicated by Cornelissen [23], it is feasible to
However, it is not a simple task to set appropriate determine an average AbatEx for each emission based
normalization coefficients, because the difference of on current available technologies.
magnitudes for depletion indices is problem dependent. Thus, by extending the cumulative exergy consumption
Once the whole impact profiles are defined, normal- to include abatement exergy, the expanded cumulative
ization and weighting are performed to get an overall exergy consumption can consider both resource inputs
value for life cycle environmental impacts. The normal- and waste emissions to the environment, across all life
ization is made by comparing the estimated impacts with cycle phases. It can be regarded as a unifying indicator to
a reference situation, for instance, the estimated impact evaluate life cycle environmental impacts. The main
scores evaluated at the world, country, or person level. advantages of using the expanded cumulative exergy
The weighting approaches usually employ weights or consumption for life cycle optimization with respect to
monetary values to aggregate the normalized environ- environmental performance can be summarized as
mental impacts [20]. Although reference situation and
weights influence the results, there is no widely accepted It can combine resource depletion and waste emis-
choice for both of them. The use of exergy can sions together, and therefore, the life cycle environ-
potentially overcome the above two problems of mental impacts can be condensed into one single
resource characterization and weigthing integration objective function. Moreover, it can avoid the
[22,23]. subjectivity of weights setting in the evaluation of
environmental impacts.
3.2. Exergy application in life cycle assessment It can combine fuel and nonfuel materials together to
characterize the resource depletion.
Exergy is ‘‘the maximum theoretical work that can be
extracted from a combined system consisting of the 3.3. Life cycle environmental impact calculation and data
system under study and the environment as the system preparation
passes from a given state to equilibrium with the
environment—that is, passes to the dead state at which The expanded cumulative exergy consumption is
the combined system possesses energy but no exergy’’ calculated as the sum of cumulative exergy consumption
[24]. Unlike energy, exergy is always destroyed because and abatement exergy consumption. For the conveni-
of the irreversible nature of the process. Exergy is an ence of the following descriptions, the life cycle phases
extensive property whose value is fixed by the state of are grouped into pre-operation phase (PP) and opera-
the system once the environment has been specified. tion phase (OP). The pre-operation phase includes
Therefore, the evaluation of exergy depends on both the natural resource extraction, building material produc-
state of a system under study and the conditions of the tion, on-site construction, and transportation associated
reference environment. Most applications of exergy with the above phases.
analysis in the published literatures concentrate on Three methods can be used to calculate the cumula-
thermal system design [24], chemical and metallurgical tive exergy consumption [25]: process analysis; balance
process analysis [25], and energy conversion system equations of cumulative exergy consumption; extension
design [26]. from cumulative energy consumption. The idea under-
Exergy can be incorporated into LCA to address the lying the method of process analysis is to trace and
issues of natural resource depletion characterization and evaluate all the manufacturing processes of a product.
valuation. Cumulative exergy consumption proposed by The method of balance equations of cumulative exergy
Szargut et al. [25] expresses the sum of the exergy of all consumption uses a system of equations expressing the
natural resources consumed in all the steps of a cumulative exergy consumption of final products as a
production process. Unlike cumulative energy consump- sum of the cumulative exergy due to the intermediate
tion, it also takes into account the chemical exergy of the products and the natural resources extracted directly
nonfuel raw materials extracted from the environment. from the environment. The last method, which is selected
Therefore, cumulative exergy consumption can be used to be employed in this study, calculates the cumulative
to measure natural resource depletion. exergy consumption based on cumulative energy con-
Exergy can also be a measure of waste emissions. sumption, which can be obtained conveniently from some
Because exergy can evaluate the degree of disequilibrium available LCA tools such as ATHENA [6].
between a substance and its environment, some rational Cumulative exergy consumption is evaluated as the
and meaningful relationships can be established between sum of the exergy, from both nonenergetic resources
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1516 W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525
(e.g., mineral ore) and energetic resources (fuel), where 0.86 is the transmission efficiency of electricity, 0.30
consumed in all the steps of a production process. and 0.26 are the overall efficiency of the generation and
Nonfuel exergy can be calculated as the product of mass transmission of electricity if oil and nuclear are used [26].
and its chemical exergy. Fuel exergy can be obtained by The on-site annual energy consumption (ON) can be
multiplying the amount of energy consumption with the obtained from an energy simulation program. Embo-
ratio a between the fuels exergy and its energy content. died energy (ENj) and the mass of nonfuel resources
Thus, the cumulative exergy consumption (CExC) can (mk) for a building material or assembly can be obtained
be expressed as from life cycle assessment programs. This study uses
ATHENA [6] because it has the following advantages:
CExC ¼ CExCPP
" #
X X The ATHENA database covers typical materials or
þ CExCOP ¼ ðaj ENj Þ þ ðek mk Þ assemblies for building structure and envelope and
j k
" # contains updated data for North America.
X ONj The components of an assembly defined in ATHENA
þ n aj ; ð1Þ
j
Zj are more construction-oriented than other LCA
programs because overlap, waste and other miscella-
where neous ancillary materials are considered in the
estimation of materials quantity.
CExCPP cumulative exergy consumption (MJ) due to It presents values for the natural resource consump-
the pre-operation phase; tion and waste emission in detail for a given assembly.
CExCOP cumulative exergy consumption (MJ) due to These values are essential to derive cumulative exergy
the operation phase; consumption and other environmental impacts.
ENj embodied energy (MJ) of fuel j consumed in
the pre-operation phase; AbatEx is calculated as the product of mass of waste
ONj annual on-site operating energy (MJ) of fuel j; emissions and its unit abatement exergy. The unit
ek chemical exergy of nonfuel material k (MJ/kg); AbatEx is usually determined according to particular
mk mass of nonfuel material k (kg); processes used to remove or separate waste emissions
n life expectancy of building in years; (e.g., decarbonization of flue gases after combustion). In
aj ratio between exergy and energy content for this paper, the values of unit AbatEx for CO2, SOx, and
fuel j; NOx are taken as 5.86, 57, and 16 MJ/kg, respectively
Zj overall efficiency of production and delivery [23]. Since the values of unit AbatEx for CH4 and N2O
for fuel j. have not been found in the literature, they are derived by
assuming that the AbatEx is proportional to the global
The value of a is taken from [25,27]. For instance, a is warming potential (GWP) index. Hence, they are
equal to 1.07 and 1.04 for oil and natural gas, calculated by multiplying the GWP index (over a 100-
respectively, and 1.0 for both nuclear energy and year period) by the unit AbatEx for CO2. However, they
electricity. In this paper, weighted sum of a according could be easily updated when the actual values become
to the national electricity mix is applied to the total available. The mass of each waste emission generated in
embodied energy for simplification. The national the pre-operation phase is calculated by multiplying the
electricity mix is used, because the related activities such emission per unit area by the applicable envelope area.
as manufacturing processes are not limited to the local The emissions per unit area for different materials
place. The overall efficiency Z is used to convert on-site construction are stored in the program data files, which
operating energy to primary sources, taking into are prepared in advance with the aid of the ATHENA
account the production and transportion losses. Its program. The mass of each waste emission generated in
values are taken from [26] with the following two the operating phase is calculated by multiplying the on-
exceptions. First, generation loss is not considered for site operating energy consumption with an emission
hydro-electricity because it comes from a renewable factor. The emission factor of delivered electricity is
energy source. Second, the overall efficiency value of calculated from the electricity mix and the emission
electricity is calculated from the local electricity mix. coefficients due to electricity generation from different
For example, given the electricity mix in Quebec, fuel types [28].
Canada (96% from hydro, 2% from oil, and 2% from
nuclear), the Z value is calculated as
4. Multi-objective optimization model
1
Z¼
1:0 0:96=0:86 þ 1:07 0:02=0:30 þ 1:0 0:02=0:26 The components of the optimization model are
¼ 0:79; presented in the following order: variables, constraints,
ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525 1517
and objective functions. The model concentrates on the for example, consists of the following sequence of
building envelope system because of its importance in layers from outside to inside: cladding, cavity,
determining both environmental and economical per- insulation, vapor barrier, masonry structure,
formance of buildings. The same methodology could be and finish.
applied later to a large scope covering other building Each layer of wall (wallLayer) defines the actual
systems such as heating, ventilation, and air condition- material selected. For example, the insulation layer in
ing system. a wall type can be 76.2 mm fiberglass batts or
101.6 mm mineral wool batts.
4.1. Variables Roof type (roofType) defines the roof configuration
with a sequence of layers. For example, a compact
Two types of variables are used to define a building conventional roof type is composed of roofing
design alternative: discrete and continuous. Some membrane, insulation, structure, and finish, presented
variables such as window type can only be of discrete in order from outside to inside.
type with a list of available types of windows. Some Each layer of roof (roofLayer) defines the actual
variables can be either continuous or discrete. Orienta- material selected.
tion, for example, may assume any value between 01 and
901, or it may take one from a pre-set list such as 01, 151
or 301. 4.2. Constraints
In this study, buildings are limited to a rectangular
shape with a known total floor area. Fig. 2 illustrates the Two types of constraints are considered in this
definition of some variables. The following variables optimization model. They are box constraints for
have been defined with their corresponding names in continuous variables and selection constraints for
parenthesis: discrete variables. Box constraints give the boundary
values of continuous variables. For example, if winRatio
is set as a continuous variable and the lower and upper
Building orientation (orientation) in degrees with
boundary values are 0.2 and 0.8, respectively, then the
clockwise direction being positive.
corresponding box constraint is 0:2pwinRatiop0:8:
Aspect ratio (aspectRatio) a/b of a building plan,
Selection constraints give a predefined set of alternatives
where a and b are defined as shown in Fig. 2.
for discrete variables. For example, winType can be
Window type (winType) defines the window construc-
limited to one of three available window types: double
tion. An example is a double glazing window with 13
clear glazing, triple clear glazing, and double glazing
mm airspace in between.
with low-emissivity coating.
Window-to-wall ratio (winRatio) for each building fac-
ade.
Wall type (wallType ) defines the wall configuration 4.3. Objective functions
with a sequence of layers. Masonry cavity wall,
Since the purpose of this study is to assist designers in
achieving cost-effective green building design, both life
cycle cost (LCC) and life cycle environmental impact
a (LCEI) are selected as the two objective functions to be
minimized using the optimization model. Let X denotes
a variable vector, the general expressions to calculate
LCC ($) and LCEI (MJ) are
LCCðXÞ ¼ ICðXÞ þ OCðXÞ; (2)
where
Orientation
IC initial construction cost of building envelope
including exterior walls, windows, roof, and
floor ($);
True North
OC life cycle operating cost including both demand
Fig. 2. Definition of orientation and aspect ratio. and energy consumption costs ($);
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1518 W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525
solutions, which are randomly generated for the first low-level variables may coexist in a chromosome.
generation. This characteristic of GA determines it to be High-level genes will determine which low-level genes
a suitable tool for multi-objective optimization pro- are active.
blems because it can locate multiple Pareto optimal Two supporting techniques were adopted to improve
solutions in a single run. Each individual in the the performance of this algorithm based on a series of
population, usually called chromosome, stands for a trial runs. These two techniques are
potential solution in the problem space. The chromo-
some is usually represented as a binary string which can Mating restriction. Two individuals are permitted to
capture both continuous and discrete variables. The mate only if they are similar but not identical
fitness of an individual is related with its objective according to some metrics. Normalized Euclidean
function values and it is used to determine the distance is used in this study to evaluate the
probability of each individual to be selected for similarity between individuals. This means that two
reproduction. One of the commonly used selection different individuals will crossover if the normalized
operators is the binary tournament selection which Euclidean distance between them is less than the
works as follows: two individuals are randomly selected mating radius, which is assigned the same value
from the current generation and the stronger one as the niching radius. Since the mating restriction is
survives to the next generation. Crossover and mutation helpful to maintain local distributation but unfavor-
operations are then applied on the selected individuals able for exploring search space, it is used only starting
to form a new population. The crossover operator with the second third of the total number of
exchanges some genetic materials between two chromo- generations.
somes, while the mutation operator may flip the values Elitist strategy realized by using the external popula-
of some bits at random. The above procedure is tion. After each generation is produced, the non-
repeated until the maximum number of generations is dominated individuals are copied to the external
reached. population, while dominated individuals in the
Many multi-objective GA have been proposed in the external population are removed. This external
literature [33]. All proposed algorithms have two distinct population has a predefined capacity. If it cannot
goals [33]: to discover solutions as close to the true accommodate all the elites, the clustering technique
Pareto optimal solutions as possible; and to find adopted by Zitzler and Thiele [36] is used to remove
solutions as diverse as possible in the obtained Pareto some individuals located in crowded regions. In this
front. The first goal is usually obtained by applying the study, the external population is not used only for
principle of dominance, which means non-dominated storage, since some members are randomly chosen
solutions are assigned large fitness to survive selection and introduced into the original genetic population
and have more chance for reproduction. The second before selection for each generation to accelerate
goal can be achieved by some techniques such as niche convergence.
sharing strategy, which requires that similar individuals
in the population be penalized by a reduction in fitness
in order to get a wide spread and even distribution along
the Pareto optimal front [33]. 6. Case study
The multi-objective GA proposed by Fonseca
and Flemming [34] is employed in this study. This 6.1. Problem formulation
algorithm uses a rank-based fitness assignment
strategy, where the rank of an individual is equal to The design of a single-story office building located in
one plus the number of solutions in the current Montreal, Canada, is employed in this paper as a case
population that dominate it. A linear function [33] is study. The building has a total above-basement floor
used to map ranks to fitness values so that the individual area of 1000 m2 with a 40-year life expectancy. The floor
with the lowest rank has the maximum fitness value type is an open web steel joists (OWSJ) on beam system
and vice versa. Niche sharing carried out in the with concrete topping. The floor to roof height is 3.6 m.
performance space is applied to all individuals located The energy consumption due to lighting is kept constant
at the same rank. The radius parameter required by according to a given schedule. Only heating and cooling
niche sharing is calculated as 2=ðN 1Þ; where N is the energy consumption are considered in this case study.
population size [33]. Heating season is from November to March, and
An improved version of the traditional GA called cooling season from June to August. The indoor design
‘‘structured GA’’, as proposed by Dasgupta and temperatures are 21 1C and 23 1C in the heating and
McGregor [35], is employed here to represent the cooling season, respectively, without night setback or
chromosome as hierarchical genomic structures. setup. Rooftop units (coefficient of performance of 3.0)
This means that dominant and recessive genes for are assumed to be used for cooling, and electric
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1520 W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525
The initial randomly produced individuals are widely The optimal wall type is the steel-frame wall for all the
distributed, while the final population is clustered to solutions located in the Pareto zone A while it is the
the lower left corner. The final population is close to masonry cavity wall for the other two Pareto zones.
the external population. Both of the two observations This indicates that the light wall is more favorable for
indicate that a good convergence has been achieved. economical performance. However, the heavy wall is
The role of optimization is noticeable. Every solution better in terms of environmental performance.
in the initial population is dominated by some For all Pareto solutions, orientation converges to
solutions in the final external population. The zero; window ratio on each fac- ade converges to the
minimum values of the life cycle cost and the life low bound value which is equal to 0.2 in this case
cycle environmental impact are $3.569 105 and study. This indicates that orientation and window
4.612 107 MJ in the initial population, while they ratio will converge to the same optimal point even if
reached $3.352 105 and 3.819 107 MJ in the the two objective functions are optimized separately.
external population after the optimization. Aspect ratio may take different values in the range
between 0.702 and 0.986 for different Pareto solu-
Since it is hard to obtain the actual global Pareto tions. This indicates that the optimal values of aspect
front for most practical problems, the curve drawn from ratio are different for LCC and life cycle environ-
individuals in a well-converged external population can mental impact. For example, only the aspect ratio is
be regarded as the Pareto front with reasonable changed for solutions with ID between 26 and 29
accuracy. It can be seen from Fig. 3 that the Pareto (Table 2). A value close to 1 is favorable for cost
front is composed of three isolated regions which are reduction because square shape has the minimum
indicated as zones A, B, and C in the figure. Solutions in exterior envelope surface. However, a rectangular
Pareto zone A have low cost but large environmental shape with long side towards south is helpful for
impact, solutions in zone C have low environmental energy performance.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1522 W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525
Table 2
Selected Pareto solutions in external population
Pareto Zone ID Orien. Aspect Ratio WinRatio Wall Type Wall Insu. Roof Insu. LCC ($105) LCEI (107 MJ)
More insulation increases the initial cost, however, it where the percent is indicated in the parentheses. It can
can reduce the operating energy consumption. The be seen from this table that
situation of insulation changing with the two
performance criteria can be observed in each Pareto The initial cost has a large portion of LCC. This is
zone and between Pareto zones. In Pareto zone A , for due to several reasons. First, the electricity price is
example, the wall insulation changed from W2-1 low. Second, lighting is not covered in the operating
(152 mm fiberglass) to W2-3 (254 mm fiberglass). The cost because it is regarded as a constant, and therefore
fiberglass is preferred because it has much less it does not affect the optimal solutions. Third, the
embodied environmental impacts than the rockwool, structural components for floor and roof have high
at almost equivalent thermal properties and construc- construction costs.
tion cost. From Pareto zone B to C , the insulation in For the two components of operating cost, demand
roof changed from EPS to XPS which has lower cost is much higher than energy consumption cost.
thermal conductivity and higher density. In addition, For example, in Pareto zone B, demand cost
insulation thickness for most solutions in Pareto zone ($4.68 104) accounts for about 62% of operating
C takes the maximum value available for this cost ($7.53 104), while energy consumption cost
material, that is, 229 mm XPS. ($2.85 104) contributes the remaining 38%. This
indicates that it is important to incorporate demand
cost whenever LCC is optimized.
Some additional information can be obtained if the The pre-operation phase contributes to about 12% of
detailed constituents of each criterion are investigated the life cycle environmental impact, while the building
for different Pareto zones. The median is used to operation phase takes the remaining 88%.
represent all individuals in a Pareto zone. For the three As more insulation is used by design solutions from
selected median individuals, their detailed constituents Pareto zone A to C, the proportion of initial cost and
of each performance criterion are shown in Table 3, embodied environmental impact increased by about
ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525 1523
Table 3
Constituents of performance criteria for representative individuals
IC OC EE OE
Demand Consumption
A 33.70 44.05
25.36 (75%) 8.34 (25%) 4.33 (10%) 39.72 (90%)
5.16 (16%) 3.18 (9%)
B 34.54 40.10
27.01 (78%) 7.53 (22%) 4.51 (11%) 35.58 (89%)
4.68 (14%) 2.85 (8%)
C 36.62 38.54
29.45 (80%) 7.18 (20%) 5.02 (14%) 33.52 (86%)
4.50 (13%) 2.68 (7%)
The case study has shown that the Pareto front [11] Coley DA, Schukat S. Low-energy design: combining computer-
consists of discrete regions with different optimal based optimization and human judgement. Building and Envir-
onment 2002;37(12):1241–7.
solutions. Some variables such as orientation and
[12] Miller BE, Hittle DC. Optimum design of the CSU low energy
window ratio on each fac- ade converge to the same building. In: Kirkpatrick A, William W, editors. Proceedings of
value for all Pareto solutions. However, optimal values the ASME; International Solar Energy Conference. ASME; 1993.
for some variables such as aspect ratio and insulation p. 107–16.
materials vary with different Pareto solutions or Pareto [13] Peippo K, Lund PD, Vartiainen E. Multivariate optimization of
zones. The case study has demonstrated that the utility design trade-offs for solar low energy buildings. Energy and
Building 1999;29(2):189–205.
structure has a large impact on the environmental
[14] Nielsen TR. Optimization of buildings with respect to energy
performance. If the energy source of electricity genera- and indoor environment. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil
tion changes from oil to hydro, the life cycle environ- Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Lgngby, Den-
mental impacts can be reduced by about 65%, and the mark, 2002.
contribution of building operation to the life cycle [15] Radford AD, Gero JS. Design by optimization in architecture,
environmental impacts decreases from 90% to 70%. building and construction. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold;
1987.
The current stage of this study, however, focuses on [16] Hauglustaine JM, Azar S. Interactive tool aiding to optimise the
building envelope only. More parameters can be building envelope during the sketch design. In: Lamberts R,
optimized if the scope is expanded to cover mechanical Negarao COR, Hensen J, editors. Proceedings of the Seventh
systems and passive solar design strategies. In addition, International IBPSA Conference. IBPSA; 2001. p. 387–94.
complex building shape should be considered. Multi- [17] Wright JA, Loosemore HA, Farmani R. Optimization of building
thermal design and control by multi-criterion genetic algorithm.
zone energy simulation program with daylighting
Energy and Buildings 2002;34(9):959–72.
consideration will be employed in the future in order [18] Peuportier B, Polster B. EQUER—a life cycle simulation tool for
to enlarge the application scope of the established buildings. Center for Energy Studies, Paris, French, http://www-
optimization model. cenerg.ensmp.fr/english/logiciel/cycle/html/15log.html.
[19] Yohanis YG, Norton B. Life cycle operational and embodied
energy for a generic single-story office building in the UK. Energy
2002;27(1):77–92.
Acknowledgement
[20] Barnthouse L, Fava J, Humphreys K, Hunt R, Laibson L,
Noesen S, Norris G, Owens J, Todd J, Vigon B, Weitz K, Young
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial J. Life cycle impact assessment: the state-of-the-art. 2nd ed.
support provided by the EJLB Foundation for the Pensacola, FL: SETAC Press; 1998.
‘‘Environmental Impact of Building Materials’’ project. [21] Cole RJ, Kernan PC. Life cycle energy use in office buildings.
Building and Environment 1996;31(4):307–17.
[22] Finnveden G. Methods for describing and characterizing resource
References depletion in the context of life cycle assessment. Technical report,
Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Environmental Research Institute;
[1] Energy efficiency trends in Canada 1990–2001. Ottawa: Natural 1994.
Resources Canada; 2003. [23] Cornelissen RL. Thermodynamics and sustainable develop-
[2] Buildings energy data book. Department of Energy, US; 2003. ment—the use of exergy analysis and the reduction of irreversi-
[3] Woolley T, Kimmins S, Harrison P, Harrison R. Green building bility. Ph.D. Thesis, Laboratory of Thermal Engineering,
handbook—a guide to building products and their impact on the University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands; 1997.
environment. London: E&FN Spon; 1997. [24] Moran MJ. Availability analysis: a guide to efficient energy use.
[4] Cofaigh EO, Fitzgerald E, Alcock R, McNicholl A, Peltonen V, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1982.
Marucco A. A green Vitruvius—principles and practice of [25] Szargut J, Morris DR, Steward FR. Exergy analysis of thermal,
sustainable architecture design. London: James & James (Science chemical, and metallurgical process. New York: Hemisphere
Publishers) Ltd; 1999. Publishing; 1988.
[5] Papamichael K. Application of information technologies in [26] Zhang M. Analysis of energy conversion systems, including
building design decisions. Building Research & Information material and global warming aspects. Ph.D. Thesis, Department
1999;27(1):20–34. of Mechanical Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis,
[6] ATHENA, V 2.0. The ATHENA Sustainable Materials Institute, OR; 1995.
Ottawa, Canada. [27] Wall G. Exergy—a useful concept within resource accounting.
[7] Cole RJ, Larsson N. GBTool User Manual. Green Building Technical report. Göteborg, Sweden: Institute of Theoretical
Challenge; 2002. Physics, Chalmers University of Technology and University of
[8] Shaviv E, Yezioro A, Capeluto IG, Peleg UJ, Kalay YE. Göteborg; 1977.
Simulations and knowledge-based computer-aided architectural [28] Gagnon L, Belanger C, Uchiyama Y. Life cycle assessment of
design (CAAD) systems for passive and low energy architecture. electricity generation options: the status of research in year 2001.
Energy and Buildings 1996;23(3):257–69. Energy Policy 2003;30(14):1267–78.
[9] Al-Homoud MS. Optimum thermal design of office buildings. [29] RS Means. Building construction cost. Kingston, MA; 2002.
International Journal of Energy Research 1997;21(10):941–57. [30] Model national energy code of Canada for buildings. Ottawa,
[10] Wetter M. GenOpt—A generic optimization program. In: Canada: National Research Council; 1997.
Lamberts R, Negarao COR, Hensen J, editors. Proceedings of [31] Pedersen CO, Liesen RJ, Strand RK, Fisher DE, Dong L, Ellis
the Seventh International IBPSA Conference. IBPSA; 2001, PG. A toolkit for building load calculations. Atlanta, GA:
p. 601–8. ASHRAE; 2000.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Wang et al. / Building and Environment 40 (2005) 1512–1525 1525
[32] Goldberg DE. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and [35] Dasgupta D, McGregor DR. sGA : a structured genetic
machine learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1989. algorithm. Technical Report, IKBS-11-93, Department of Com-
[33] Deb K. Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algo- puter Science, University of Strathclyde, UK; 1993.
rithms. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 2001. [36] Zitzler E, Thiele L. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a
[34] Fonseca CM, Flemming PJ. Multiobjective optimization and comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE
multiple constraint handling with evolutionary algorithms-part 1: Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 1999;2(4):257–71.
a unified formulation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and [37] Regulation respecting energy conservation in new buildings.
Cybernetics, Part A 1998;28(1):26–37. Editeur Officiel du Quebec, Canada; 1992.