Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy
The effects of buildings on the environment can be reduced with research-based alternative building designs. This study focuses on reducing the building space to lower the overall size of a building as a strategy to reduce the building’s embodied energy. The aim of this study was to investigate the...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Buildings |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/3/467 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850068535348297728 |
|---|---|
| author | Abdul Rauf Daniel Euroizing Attoye Malik Mansoor Ali Khalfan Muhammad Tariq Shafiq |
| author_facet | Abdul Rauf Daniel Euroizing Attoye Malik Mansoor Ali Khalfan Muhammad Tariq Shafiq |
| author_sort | Abdul Rauf |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The effects of buildings on the environment can be reduced with research-based alternative building designs. This study focuses on reducing the building space to lower the overall size of a building as a strategy to reduce the building’s embodied energy. The aim of this study was to investigate the initial embodied energy (IEE) of a residential building that was systematically reduced in size. Using input–output-based hybrid analysis, the IEE for three architecturally distinct four-bedroom residential prototypes (P1, P2, and P3) was calculated. The IEE for P1 (525 m<sup>2</sup>), P2 (266 m<sup>2</sup>), and P3 (109 m<sup>2</sup>) were 3555, 2008, and 1000 GJ, respectively. This indicates a 72% reduction in embodied energy consumption when the largest prototype (P1) was transitioned to the smallest (P3). When analyzing IEE/m<sup>2</sup> and IEE/m<sup>2</sup>/occupant, it becomes apparent that larger spaces tend to have a lower IEE/m<sup>2</sup>. However, when the occupancy increases, the IEE/m<sup>2</sup>/occupant decreases by 25–33%. Therefore, considering occupant-centered design for residential buildings, the benefits of a large house are not justifiable. These findings can help inform decisions regarding the optimization of residential spaces to minimize environmental impacts. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-6aa6b79cb7f84cf68d4dcb4a2213317c |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2075-5309 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-02-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Buildings |
| spelling | doaj-art-6aa6b79cb7f84cf68d4dcb4a2213317c2025-08-20T02:48:02ZengMDPI AGBuildings2075-53092025-02-0115346710.3390/buildings15030467Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied EnergyAbdul Rauf0Daniel Euroizing Attoye1Malik Mansoor Ali Khalfan2Muhammad Tariq Shafiq3Architectural Engineering Department, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain P.O. Box 15551, United Arab EmiratesDepartment of Architecture, De Montfort University, Dubi P.O. Box 294345, United Arab EmiratesDepartment of Management Science & Engineering, Khalifa University, Abu Dhabi P.O. Box 127788, United Arab EmiratesSchool of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UKThe effects of buildings on the environment can be reduced with research-based alternative building designs. This study focuses on reducing the building space to lower the overall size of a building as a strategy to reduce the building’s embodied energy. The aim of this study was to investigate the initial embodied energy (IEE) of a residential building that was systematically reduced in size. Using input–output-based hybrid analysis, the IEE for three architecturally distinct four-bedroom residential prototypes (P1, P2, and P3) was calculated. The IEE for P1 (525 m<sup>2</sup>), P2 (266 m<sup>2</sup>), and P3 (109 m<sup>2</sup>) were 3555, 2008, and 1000 GJ, respectively. This indicates a 72% reduction in embodied energy consumption when the largest prototype (P1) was transitioned to the smallest (P3). When analyzing IEE/m<sup>2</sup> and IEE/m<sup>2</sup>/occupant, it becomes apparent that larger spaces tend to have a lower IEE/m<sup>2</sup>. However, when the occupancy increases, the IEE/m<sup>2</sup>/occupant decreases by 25–33%. Therefore, considering occupant-centered design for residential buildings, the benefits of a large house are not justifiable. These findings can help inform decisions regarding the optimization of residential spaces to minimize environmental impacts.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/3/467building sizeinitial embodied energyinput–output-based hybrid analysislife cycle assessmentoccupants |
| spellingShingle | Abdul Rauf Daniel Euroizing Attoye Malik Mansoor Ali Khalfan Muhammad Tariq Shafiq Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy Buildings building size initial embodied energy input–output-based hybrid analysis life cycle assessment occupants |
| title | Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy |
| title_full | Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy |
| title_fullStr | Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy |
| title_short | Examining the Impact of House Size on Building Embodied Energy |
| title_sort | examining the impact of house size on building embodied energy |
| topic | building size initial embodied energy input–output-based hybrid analysis life cycle assessment occupants |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/3/467 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT abdulrauf examiningtheimpactofhousesizeonbuildingembodiedenergy AT danieleuroizingattoye examiningtheimpactofhousesizeonbuildingembodiedenergy AT malikmansooralikhalfan examiningtheimpactofhousesizeonbuildingembodiedenergy AT muhammadtariqshafiq examiningtheimpactofhousesizeonbuildingembodiedenergy |