• Energy Research
• US close
• DK close
• English close
• ZENODO close

{"references": ["U.S. Energy Information Administration. \"How much energy is\nconsumed in residential and commercial buildings in the United States?\"\nAvailable at: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=86&t=1", "S. Darby, \"The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption.\"\nEnvironmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, 2006. Available\nat: http://www.globalwarmingisreal.com/energyconsump-feedback.pdf.\nVisited: September 2015", "J. S. John, \"Putting energy disaggregation tech to the test,\" November,\n2013. Greentech Media. Available at:\nhttp://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/putting-energydisaggregation-tech-to-the-test.\nVisited: September 2015", "A. Zoha, A. Gluhak, M. A. Imran, S. Rajasegarar, \"Non-intrusive load\nmonitoring approaches for disaggregated energy sensing: a survey,\"\nSensors, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 16838-16866, December 2012.", "G. W. Hart, \"Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring,\" in Proc. of the\nIEEE, vol. 80, pp. 1870-1891, December 1992.", "M. Baranski, J. Voss, \"Non-intrusive appliance load monitoring based\non Optical Sensor,\" IEEE Bologna PowerTech Conference, Bologna,\nItaly, June 2003. Available at:\nhttp://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1304732", "L. Farinaccio, R. Zmeureanu, \"Using a pattern recognition approach to\ndisaggregate the total electricity consumption in a house into the major\nen-uses,\" Elsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 245-259,\nAugust 1999.", "J. M. Abreu, F. C. Pereira, P. Ferr\u00e3o, \"Using pattern recognition to\nidentify habitual behavior in residential electricity consumption,\"\nElsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 49, pp. 479-487, June 2012.", "C. Beckel, L. Sadamori, S. Santini, \"Automatic socio-economic\nclassification of households using electricity consumption data,\" in\nProc. of the 4th international conference on future energy systems, New\nYork, 2013, pp. 75-86.\n[10] H. Zhao, F. Magoul\u00e8s, \"A review on the prediction of building energy\nconsumption,\" Elsevier, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,\nvol. 16, no. 6, pp. 3586-3592, August 2012.\n[11] G. K. F. Tso, K. K. W. Yau, \"Predicting electricity energy consumption:\nA comparison of regression analysis, decision tree and neural networks,\"\nElsevier, Energy, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1761-1768, September 2007.\n[12] F. Farzan, S. A. Vaghefi, K. Mahani, M. A. Jafari, J. Gong, \"Operational\nplanning for multi-building portfolio in an uncertain energy market,\"\nElsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 103, pp. 271-283, September 2015."]} Energy disaggregation has been focused by many energy companies since energy efficiency can be achieved when the breakdown of energy consumption is known. Companies have been investing in technologies to come up with software and/or hardware solutions that can provide this type of information to the consumer. On the other hand, not all people can afford to have these technologies. Therefore, in this paper, we present a methodology for breaking down the aggregate consumption and identifying the highdemanding end-uses profiles. These energy profiles will be used to build the forecast model for optimal control purpose. A facility with high cooling load is used as an illustrative case study to demonstrate the results of proposed methodology. We apply a high level energy disaggregation through a pattern recognition approach in order to extract the consumption profile of its rooftop packaged units (RTUs) and present a forecast model for the energy consumption.

{"references": ["U.S. Energy Information Administration. \"How much energy is\nconsumed in residential and commercial buildings in the United States?\"\nAvailable at: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=86&t=1", "S. Darby, \"The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption.\"\nEnvironmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, 2006. Available\nat: http://www.globalwarmingisreal.com/energyconsump-feedback.pdf.\nVisited: September 2015", "J. S. John, \"Putting energy disaggregation tech to the test,\" November,\n2013. Greentech Media. Available at:\nhttp://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/putting-energydisaggregation-tech-to-the-test.\nVisited: September 2015", "A. Zoha, A. Gluhak, M. A. Imran, S. Rajasegarar, \"Non-intrusive load\nmonitoring approaches for disaggregated energy sensing: a survey,\"\nSensors, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 16838-16866, December 2012.", "G. W. Hart, \"Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring,\" in Proc. of the\nIEEE, vol. 80, pp. 1870-1891, December 1992.", "M. Baranski, J. Voss, \"Non-intrusive appliance load monitoring based\non Optical Sensor,\" IEEE Bologna PowerTech Conference, Bologna,\nItaly, June 2003. Available at:\nhttp://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1304732", "L. Farinaccio, R. Zmeureanu, \"Using a pattern recognition approach to\ndisaggregate the total electricity consumption in a house into the major\nen-uses,\" Elsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 245-259,\nAugust 1999.", "J. M. Abreu, F. C. Pereira, P. Ferr\u00e3o, \"Using pattern recognition to\nidentify habitual behavior in residential electricity consumption,\"\nElsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 49, pp. 479-487, June 2012.", "C. Beckel, L. Sadamori, S. Santini, \"Automatic socio-economic\nclassification of households using electricity consumption data,\" in\nProc. of the 4th international conference on future energy systems, New\nYork, 2013, pp. 75-86.\n[10] H. Zhao, F. Magoul\u00e8s, \"A review on the prediction of building energy\nconsumption,\" Elsevier, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,\nvol. 16, no. 6, pp. 3586-3592, August 2012.\n[11] G. K. F. Tso, K. K. W. Yau, \"Predicting electricity energy consumption:\nA comparison of regression analysis, decision tree and neural networks,\"\nElsevier, Energy, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1761-1768, September 2007.\n[12] F. Farzan, S. A. Vaghefi, K. Mahani, M. A. Jafari, J. Gong, \"Operational\nplanning for multi-building portfolio in an uncertain energy market,\"\nElsevier, Energy and Buildings, vol. 103, pp. 271-283, September 2015."]} Energy disaggregation has been focused by many energy companies since energy efficiency can be achieved when the breakdown of energy consumption is known. Companies have been investing in technologies to come up with software and/or hardware solutions that can provide this type of information to the consumer. On the other hand, not all people can afford to have these technologies. Therefore, in this paper, we present a methodology for breaking down the aggregate consumption and identifying the highdemanding end-uses profiles. These energy profiles will be used to build the forecast model for optimal control purpose. A facility with high cooling load is used as an illustrative case study to demonstrate the results of proposed methodology. We apply a high level energy disaggregation through a pattern recognition approach in order to extract the consumption profile of its rooftop packaged units (RTUs) and present a forecast model for the energy consumption.

The goal of this study is to determine the difference in CO2 emissions between 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, more specifically during lockdown periods during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the beginning of the pandemic, most countries were forced into lockdowns, and a countless number of people had to continue their daily work from home in isolation. Previously, people would go to an office or to school and leave their houses empty for eight hours, without having lights or any electronics on. Because of this, there should be a direct correlation between electricity usage before and during lockdowns, as a private residence should have higher electricity consumption during 2020-2021, when they are at home. Using machine learning, we will investigate to see if COVID-19 affected CO2 emissions as a result of more electricity usage in private residences. A model will be made to predict what the CO2 emissions would be for 2019-2020, based on electricity usage data from 2020-2021. Then, the real CO2 emissions from 2019-2020 will be compared with the model’s predicted values, and the difference will indicate if COVID-19 caused an inconsistency between actual and predicted CO2 emissions. Factors that were taken into account when making a model were independent variables relating to outdoor conditions, the number of people living in the house, and the temperature that the thermostat is set at, making the response variable CO2 emissions.

The goal of this study is to determine the difference in CO2 emissions between 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, more specifically during lockdown periods during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the beginning of the pandemic, most countries were forced into lockdowns, and a countless number of people had to continue their daily work from home in isolation. Previously, people would go to an office or to school and leave their houses empty for eight hours, without having lights or any electronics on. Because of this, there should be a direct correlation between electricity usage before and during lockdowns, as a private residence should have higher electricity consumption during 2020-2021, when they are at home. Using machine learning, we will investigate to see if COVID-19 affected CO2 emissions as a result of more electricity usage in private residences. A model will be made to predict what the CO2 emissions would be for 2019-2020, based on electricity usage data from 2020-2021. Then, the real CO2 emissions from 2019-2020 will be compared with the model’s predicted values, and the difference will indicate if COVID-19 caused an inconsistency between actual and predicted CO2 emissions. Factors that were taken into account when making a model were independent variables relating to outdoor conditions, the number of people living in the house, and the temperature that the thermostat is set at, making the response variable CO2 emissions.

A key topic of the European CL‐Windcon project, and specifically WP1 of the project, is the accurate modelling of wind turbine and wind farm dynamics at a varying range of fidelities. Hence, this document describes the different numerical models employed throughout the project and presents their arrangement and fidelity classification based on the different capabilities, limitations and complexity of their underlying physics. The description of the four categories selected: steady‐state models, control‐oriented dynamical models, medium‐fidelity simulation models, and high‐fidelity simulation models is included and discussed in the document.

A key topic of the European CL‐Windcon project, and specifically WP1 of the project, is the accurate modelling of wind turbine and wind farm dynamics at a varying range of fidelities. Hence, this document describes the different numerical models employed throughout the project and presents their arrangement and fidelity classification based on the different capabilities, limitations and complexity of their underlying physics. The description of the four categories selected: steady‐state models, control‐oriented dynamical models, medium‐fidelity simulation models, and high‐fidelity simulation models is included and discussed in the document.

Newsletter from March 2022 - Have a look on the last news around the UPWARDS project.

Newsletter from March 2022 - Have a look on the last news around the UPWARDS project.