Research on energy conservation measures and advanced control strategies is becoming increasingly present to improve building energy performance and may reach the stage of field testing in existing buildings. Therefore, it becomes critical to properly assess the benefits following on-site implementation. Different approaches have been conducted in the past to predict building energy performance and evaluate energy savings. However, it remains not clear how the calculation methods and their underlying assumptions eventually influence the savings estimates. This paper aims to compare the energy savings obtained following the implementation of data-driven measures in an existing building and estimated using three different approaches that are commonly found in the literature. The intricacies of these baseline model-free and baseline model-based methods were investigated, and various aspects were explored such as weather normalization, baseline modelling time-step (monthly, daily, hourly, sub-hourly), input sets (including weather, time-index variables, room air temperatures, heating system conditions), and techniques (linear, multi-linear, gaussian process regression). Results show that savings estimates can significantly vary from one performance evaluation method to another, and from one model to another, highlighting the importance of properly selecting both the evaluation method and the baseline model. Baseline model-based approaches were found more appropriate than the other methods, and daily linear regressions against outdoor air temperature and hourly gaussian process regression using weather and time-index variables were found suitable for building performance evaluation.
Read full abstract