• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Energy Conversion & Management >Economic assessment of Operational Energy reduction options in a house using Marginal Benefit and Marginal Cost: A case in Bangi, Malaysia
【24h】

Economic assessment of Operational Energy reduction options in a house using Marginal Benefit and Marginal Cost: A case in Bangi, Malaysia

机译：使用边际收益和边际成本对房屋中的运营节能方案进行经济评估：以马来西亚班吉为例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Energy Efficient (EE) appliances such as Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) bulbs and Renewable Energy (RE), namely solar Photovoltaic (PV) can help to reduce Operational Energy (OE) in a house. In addition, a house should also incorporate Passive Architecture (PA) design strategies which in the hot and humid tropical climate, mean avoiding direct heat gain, encouraging natural cross ventilation and optimising the abundant daylight. Nevertheless, reducing OE must also mean economic gain to households to encourage their participation. Common economic gauges such as Return on Investment, Payback Period, Cost Benefit Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost are not suitable to validate OE options in households. These economic gauges approach economic assessment as an end-result on the cost side of the product and may result for good intention to be shelved, primarily because EE equipment and RE have high capital cost compared with the alternatives. On the other hand, reducing OE in houses is actually a continual progression from the status quo and there is always a marginal gain in doing so. The challenge is to know how much is the marginal benefit against the marginal cost of investing in EE and RE. In Economics, the ratio of Marginal Cost (MC) and Marginal Benefits (MB) measure additional benefits of every additional costs of investment at a specific level of production and consumption; and Economists suggests that effective gain and loss should be compared to the status quo, I.e., Relative Position (RP). The Economics theories of MC, MB and RP are being adapted to measure the progression of reducing OE. The living/dining area in two types of houses: with and without PA design strategies are simulated to use conventional incandescent light bulbs and CFL as well as solar PV in lieu of the mains electricity supply. The power requirement for artificial lighting in every case is translated into monetary value and the ratio of MB against MC for each case shows the gain or loss in investment to reduce OE in a 30-year period. The result suggests that the value of MB/MC is high when both houses use CFL, I.e., approximately (Ringgit Malaysia) RM2.5 gain for every RM1 cost. It is also found that investment in solar PV benefits the most in the PA case that uses superior CFL bulbs, I.e., approximately RM2 gain for every RM1 cost. Despite the high capital cost of EE equipment and RE, MB/ MC approach seems to make economic sense for household to invest in reducing OE at certain stages.
机译：节能（EE）电器，例如紧凑型荧光灯（CFL）灯泡和可再生能源（RE），即太阳能光伏（PV）可以帮助减少房屋中的运营能源（OE）。此外，房屋还应采用被动式建筑（PA）设计策略，在炎热潮湿的热带气候中，这意味着避免直接吸热，鼓励自然的交叉通风并优化充足的日光。但是，减少OE也必须对家庭带来经济利益，以鼓励他们参与。诸如投资回报率，投资回收期，成本效益分析，生命周期评估和生命周期成本之类的常见经济指标不适合验证家庭中的OE选项。这些经济指标将经济评估作为产品成本方面的最终结果，并可能被很好地搁置，这主要是因为EE设备和RE与替代产品相比具有较高的资本成本。另一方面，减少房屋的OE实际上是从现状开始的持续发展，这样做总是有一定的收获。面临的挑战是要知道边际收益相对于投资于EE和RE的边际成本有多少。在经济学中，边际成本（MC）和边际收益（MB）的比值用于衡量特定生产和消费水平下每增加一笔投资成本所产生的额外收益；经济学家建议，应将有效损益与现状（即相对位置）进行比较。 MC，MB和RP的经济学理论正在调整以衡量减少OE的进程。两种类型的房屋中的起居/用餐区：模拟有无PA的设计策略，以使用传统的白炽灯泡和CFL以及太阳能PV代替市电。每种情况下对人造照明的功率需求都转换为货币价值，每种情况下MB与MC的比率显示了在30年内减少OE的投资收益或损失。结果表明，当两所房屋都使用CFL时，MB / MC的价值很高，即，每RM1成本大约可获得（Ringgit Malaysia）RM2.5收益。我们还发现，在使用优质CFL灯泡的PA案例中，对太阳能PV的投资受益最大，即，每花费1令吉，大约可获得2令吉收益。尽管EE设备和RE的资本成本很高，但是MB / MC方法似乎对于家庭在某些阶段进行投资以减少OE具有经济意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号