1、2008 ASHRAE 491ABSTRACTThis paper presents a comprehensive, yet easily expand-able, friendly to use building appliance taxonomy. Thesuggested classification is part of the major four year researchproject Carbon Reduction in Buildings, (CaRB), involving aconsortium of 5 U.K. universities, to investig
2、ate the associatedcarbon dioxide emissions from U.K. domestic and non-domes-tic building stock. The classification main aim is to assistunderstanding energy use as it facilitates the production ofequipment inventories, the allocation of energy to end uses,and it supports statistical analysis. The ap
3、pliance taxonomy isbeing used for surveying and modelling in the CaRB project,and can be applied to energy end-use surveying fieldwork andanalysis of all building types.INTRODUCTIONThe research presented in this paper is part of the majorfour year research project carbon reduction in buildings,(CaRB
4、), involving a consortium of 5 U.K. universities, toinvestigate the associated carbon dioxide emissions fromU.K. domestic and non-domestic building stock. The projectbegan in October 2004 and is one of three projects in the 5MCarbon Visions Buildings research programme sponsoredjointly by the Engine
5、ering and Physical Sciences ResearchCouncil (EPSRC) and the Carbon Trust. A key element of theproject is the completion of longitudinal research with theobjective of developing a social-technical model of energyuse in buildings. Once completed the model will enablecarbon dioxide emissions from a wid
6、e variety of buildingtypes to be predicted and controlled more accurately, andthereby allow authorities to introduce appropriate carbonreduction measures more effectively across a community. Inorder to develop the model it is essential for CaRB to gainaccurate data across both domestic and non-domes
7、tic energyend-uses, which includes the increasingly significant electri-cal equipment end-use.In comparison to the 1970s and 1980s there is now a vastarray of electrical products and appliances available fordomestic and non-domestic consumers (Owen 2006). This hasled to a steep increase in the level
8、 of ownership of electricalequipment across the U.K. domestic sector as presented inFigure 1.These trends are reflected in the increased energy demandassociated to electrical appliance use. Furthermore, if the datafrom Figure 1 (DTI 2002) are re-arranged based on the numberof appliances per househol
9、d and compared with annual house-hold electrical use, the following results presented in Figure 2are obtained.The results presented in Figure 2 indicate the possibilitythat many other appliances not covered by DTI classificationsystem are consuming increasing amounts of energy. At pres-ent household
10、 appliances are accounting for approximately16% of all U.K. domestic carbon dioxide emissions in 2005(DCLG 2006), a trend that is widely anticipated to continue.Within the non-domestic sector the rapid proliferation of ITequipment provides a clear illustration of the similar trendthroughout industry
11、 and commerce. These changes in electri-cal equipment ownership and energy consumption have madewhat was once a widely overlooked energy end-use, one ofindisputable significance.The growth in equipment diversity and increased levelsof appliance ownership is also mirrored in other developedcountries.
12、 For example, in an Australian study of moderndomestic buildings, one household had 136 different electri-cal appliances (Energy Efficient Strategies 2006). SimilarlyAppliances Taxonomy Across Both Domestic and Nondomestic Building SectorsLjiljana Marjanovic-Halburd, PhD Michael Coleman Harry Bruhns
13、Alex Summerfield, PhD Andy Wright, PhDLjiljana Marjanovic-Halburd and Andy Wright are senior research fellows and Michael Coleman is a PhD student at the Institute of Energyand Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, UK. Harry Bruhns is a principal research fellow and Alex Summerfield is a
14、researchfellow at the Bartlett, University College London, UK.NY-08-0592008, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (www.ashrae.org). Published in ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 114, Part 1. For personal use only. Additional reproduction, distribution, or transm
15、ission in either print or digital form is not permitted without ASHRAEs prior written permission.492 ASHRAE Transactionsthe New Zealand Household Energy End-Use Project (HEEP)identified on average 33 appliances within the more than 400dwellings surveyed, with a maximum of 82 appliances (Isaacset al.
16、 2006). In the USA Nordman and McWhinney (2006)highlighted an audit of 16 non-domestic commercial build-ings that “found 321 different product types without evenassessing closets, plenums, basements or attics”.This ever increasing array of electrical equipment pres-ents a significant problem for the
17、 surveying, monitoring andmodelling of energy use within both domestic and non-domestic buildings, because any simple categorization of anelectrical appliance will often provide little indication of itsassociated energy consumption. For example the recording ofthe term TV, provides no indication of
18、the size or type of tele-vision (e.g., color CRT, black and white CRT, LCD, Plasma,Projector, CRT with integrated DVD, CRT with integratedVCR, etc.) and subsequently the level of electricity consump-tion associated to the everyday operation of different electri-cal equipment.A comprehensive and well
19、 structured equipment classifi-cation is a central part in understanding energy use as it offersthe prospect of generating equipment inventories, allocatingenergy use and supporting statistical analysis. As a result itwas concluded that electrical appliance taxonomy would be ofgreat value to modelli
20、ng in the CaRB project and to the energyend-use surveying fieldwork of all building types. Thus thecentral aim of this paper is to provide a general purpose clas-sification to organize and summaries equipment that works forboth the domestic and non-domestic stock. Ideally a taxonomywould subdivide e
21、quipment into a number of clear and system-atically grouped categories. This would avoid the over compli-cation of the survey process whilst maintaining the desiredlevel of accuracy. Systematic categorization is also a vitalfactor for the subsequent analysis of survey data. Therefore theFigure 1 Per
22、centage of U.K. households that own household domestic appliances (DTI 2002).Figure 2 U.K. appliance ownership and household electrical energy use.ASHRAE Transactions 493equipment classification needs to fulfil the following keyrequirements below:Comprehensive and Complete. Provides a place for alle
23、nergy using equipment and inherently remains unambiguous(i.e., there is a place for everything, and only one place).Variable Levels of Detail. Be compatible with variouslevels of available information. For instance in fieldwork itmay only be known that everybody has a PC (it might be alaptop, a high
24、 powered workstation or even a 24/7 server). Itmust be possible to record such general information, but alsorecord data with increasing levels of precision where moredetailed information is available.User Friendly. The classification must be “sensible” inthe way that we understand equipment, with fa
25、miliar catego-ries that work in the “real” world.THE REVIEW OF EXISTINGEQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATIONWhen considering the formation of an equipment taxon-omy, suitable for the application to prolonged academicresearch, there are two significant issues that contribute to thefuture use/longevity of the data
26、. Firstly, electrical equipmentis continually being superseded by new models. This turnoverof equipment types and models can result in data quicklybecoming out of date. For example video cassette recordersare now regarded by many manufacturers and retailers asobsolete, in comparison to the new gener
27、ation of DVD record-ers, and are no longer sold in many U.K. retail outlets (Dent2004). However a large majority of equipment does remain inuse despite being considered as obsolete. Secondly, there is atrend towards merging the functions of previously differentappliances into one new one. In respect
28、 to domestic appli-ances, manufacturers of home multimedia equipment widelyanticipate that home entertainment systems and personalcomputers will eventually merge into a single unit. The devel-opment of multifunctional equipment presents a significantproblem for the categorization process. In the nea
29、r termsubjective judgement is necessary to determining which func-tion is the primary function of the appliance, and in the longerterm a new type of appliance might emerge.The literature review attempted to cover all relevantsources of information, from a comprehensive Internet searchto an examinati
30、on of academic reference sources. Somewhatsurprisingly it appears that a comprehensive equipment clas-sification system, suitable for the needs of research projectsinvestigating energy end use, does not currently exist. Never-theless a number of potentially useful websites, organizationsand literatu
31、re sources were identified and are listed below:The Association of Manufacturers of Domestic Appli-ances (AMEDA) http:/www.amdea.org.uk/Index.htmMarket Transformation Programme (MTP) http:/ http:/www.cibse.org and Concise Handbook,CIBSEBritish Standards Institute (BSI) http:/www.bsi- http:/www.energ
32、ylabels.org.uk/index. htmlEnergystar (Europe) http:/www.eu-energystar.org/en/index.htmlEnergystar (USA) http:/www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=home.indexeBay http:/www.ebay.co.uk/Argos http:/www.argos.co.uk/static/Home.htmEuropa (WEEE Directive) http:/europa.eu/Energy Rating Australia http:/www.energy
33、rating.gov.au/index.htmlThe majority of relevant website sources provide equip-ment listings in distinct category types. Unfortunately most ofthese are often very limited in either their detail or the overallrange of equipment listed.Though the use of retail websites, such as eBay and Argos,may at f
34、irst appear to be undemanding for academic research,these types of websites provide a straightforward means tooverview appliance categories and are usually accompaniedby a product photograph (which can be a very useful point ofreference to the uninitiated). Retail websites also provide thepotential
35、to assess prospective market changes, as a result ofretailers needing to rapidly alter their product ranges toconsumer demand in what is currently a highly competitivemarketplace. Finally, they are well proven and tested for theirpurpose.The Market Transformation Programme (MTP) pro-vides another we
36、bsite of particular interest in the U.K. TheMTP is funded by the Department for Environment, Foodand Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and has been established to sup-port “the development and implementation of U.K. Govern-ment policy on sustainable products” (MTP 2006a). The siteprovides a variety of useful da
37、ta concerning both domesticand non-domestic energy consumption from equipment andincludes a variety of appliance listings. However there is notcurrently a comprehensive category list on the MTP website.As a basis the MTP usually defines electrical appliances byEU Energy Label test standards. Unfortu
38、nately this approachonly appears to apply to the larger “white goods,” leavingsmall domestic appliances (SDAs) to be categorized by gen-eral function such as:Table top cooking; kettles, toasters, health grills, steam-ers, chocolate fountains, etc.,Food preparation; blenders, mixers, coffee-makers, e
39、tc.,Beauty aids; foot spas, sun beds, etc.,Hair styling; dryers, curlers, straighteners, etc.In MTP they follow a general categorization system usedwidely throughout domestic energy consumption literature.This consists of grouping appliances into the broad categoriesof wet appliances, cold appliance
40、s, cooking appliances, con-sumer electronics, domestic lighting, domestic heating and494 ASHRAE Transactionshot water, and domestic ICT (information and communicationtechnologies) (MTP 2006b). Potential limitations in the use ofsuch a classification relate to the high level of subjectivitytowards th
41、e categorization process. As such this categoriza-tion approach presents very limited potential to assist theneeds of research projects. This is because it does not providean integrated system that specifically relates to all equipmentenergy consumption levels or to the energy survey process.The app
42、roach applied to SDAs could be viewed as quiteambiguous and highly subjective. For example a coffee-maker could easily be considered as a “table top cooking”appliance. One might imagine that clarity could be improvedby using location to define categories for SDAs, such askitchen “appliances” and “be
43、droom” appliances, etc. How-ever, one can readily imagine appliances being found in unex-pected locations (e.g., freezers in garages, kettles inbedrooms, etc.). Another issue for consideration is that appli-ances found in non-domestic buildings (e.g., cafes, hotels andsalons, etc.) will most probabl
44、y have very different manufac-turing specifications from those in domestic buildings.Clearly the average hair dryer in a salon will have a very dif-ferent energy consumption profile to that of the averagedomestic version. It follows that taking a simple localityapproach to categorization will not fu
45、lfil the need to define theenergy consumption characteristics of a vast range of differ-ent equipment across both the domestic and non-domesticsectors.When reviewing the academic research, most publishedjournal papers provide only very basic and subjective catego-rization lists, which are usually de
46、signed purely to meet thespecific needs of each individual study. For exampleMonsouri et al. (1996) used five categories of domestic appli-ance (1) space- and water-heating appliances; (2) cookingappliances; (3) refrigeration appliances; (4) television setsand video recorders; and (5) wet appliances
47、. Other papers,typified by Yao and Steemers (2005), follow the general,MTP style of classification of brown goods, cold appliances,cooking appliances, wet appliances, miscellaneous appli-ances. Similarly as part of the 1990s domestic equipment andcarbon dioxide emissions (DECADE) project, Fawcett et
48、 al.(2000) include a final version of the DECADE categorizationsystem for household appliances. This list includes thefollowing categories: (1) cold appliances, (2) consumer elec-tronics, (3) cooking appliances (split into minor and major),(4) lighting, (5) miscellaneous appliances, (6) water heatin
49、g,(7) and wet appliances. The system proposed by DECADEuses a relatively structured approach towards consumer elec-tronics but, does not distinguish between appliances charac-teristics, such as equipment sizes and types.The term “miscellaneous” is frequently used throughoutliterature investigating the energy consumption of electricalappliances. However the use of this term implies uncertaintyregarding the particular equipment associated with this cate-gory. In the USA the term miscellaneous end-use h
