Techno-Economic Analysis of Heat Pump and Cogeneration Systems for a High Performance Midrise Apartment in the Canadian Climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increased awareness on the importance and benefit of energy efficiency, building owners and designers are frequently confronted with the challenge of which mechanical system is most suitable to meet the building’s energy target needs. The decision making process is often aided through the use of building simulation tools; however this type of analysis is often considered costly and time consuming in particular when various mechanical systems need to be assessed. With Natural Resources Canada’s priorities on promoting the sustainability and economic development of Canada’s natural resources, this paper presents an analysis conducted on several standard and innovative mechanical systems to aid decision makers in the early building design stages to select a suitable system. The paper further illustrates the benefits of each system type often not known or misunderstood. Using TRNSYS, five system types are evaluated in a typical newly constructed high performance mid-rise apartment in two Canadian regions: Calgary and Montreal. The five systems selected for comparison include (1) a conventional mid-rise apartment heating and cooling system, (2) boiler/cooling tower water source heat pumps, (3) ground source heat pumps, (4) a cogeneration unit sized to meet the heating load of the building and (5) a cogeneration plus electric driven heat pump system. Heat pumps were selected for the benefit in upgrading and utilizing renewable energy sources and cogeneration for the conversion of natural gas to electricity. The analysis includes a 20 year life cycle cost including a sensitivity analysis on forecasted utility rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".