MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016940755 · doi:10.1080/09613210010001150

Curbing the growth in UK commercial energy consumption

2001· article· en· W2016940755 on OpenAlexaff
J. Ivan Scrase

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Research & Information · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Conservation Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy consumptionEfficient energy useLegislationBusinessConsumption (sociology)Investment (military)ProductivityNatural resource economicsEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic growthEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of growth in UK commercial energy consumption since the early 1970s has been approximately three times greater than in the domestic sector. Consumption is projected to continue growing faster than in all other sectors except transport. Increasing floor space has been accompanied by rising energy intensity in many commercial buildings. In the office sector, demand for air conditioning has grown rapidly, and this is associated with a dramatic increase in CO2 emissions. Significant cost-effective CO2 savings have been identified in the sector, using readily available technologies. The Climate Change Levy, and questions of comfort, health and productivity among workers, are pushing energy issues up the agenda for many businesses. However positive action is impeded by barriers in the commercial property sector, such as conflicts of interest between landlords and tenants, poor information and professional conservatism. These barriers act to limit energy efficiency investment, to the detriment of building occupants and wider society for generations to come. These problems will limit the efficacy of existing initiatives that aim to curb commercial sector energy use. The Association for the Conservation of Energy considers that new legislation is needed. This would require freeholders to improve the energy efficiency of their new and existing buildings, in consultation with occupiers and/or unions. Further research is needed on options for sharing the costs and benefits with occupiers and/or energy service companies. Depuis le début des années 1970, le taux de croissance de la consommation énergétique commerciale au Royaume-Uni a étéprès de trois fois supérieure àcelui de la consommation du secteur domestique. Il devrait continuer à crôitre plus vite que dans tous les autres secteurs, à l'exception des transports. L'augmentation de la surface utile par personne s'est accompagnée d'un accroissement de l'intensité énergétique dans de nombreux bâtiments commerciaux. Dans le secteur des immeubles de bureaux, la demande en climatisation s'est accélérée et s'est donc traduite par une augmentation spectaculaire des émissions de CO2. Les technologies existantes permettent de lutter avec efficacité et à moindre coût contre ces émissions. Le problème des changements climatiques, ainsi que les questions de confort, d'hygiène et de productivité chez les travailleurs, mettent en avant les questions d'énergie dans de nombreuses entreprises. Or, des actions positives sont confrontées à des obstacles dans le secteur de la propriété commerciale; c'est le cas des conflits d'intérêts entre propriétaires et locataires, de la médiocrité de l'information et du conservatisme professionnel. Ces obstacles gênent les investissements axés sur une amélioration du rendement énergétique, au détriment des occupants des bâtiments et d'une plus grande sociétépour les générations àvenir. Ils iront àl'encontre des initiatives existantes dont l'objectif est de freiner la consommation de l'énergie dans le secteur commercial. L'Association pour la Conservation de l'Énergie estime que cette nouvelle législation est nécessaire. Il faudrait pour cela que les propriétaires fonciers améliorent l'efficacité énergétique de leurs bâtiments, anciens et nouveaux, en concertation avec les occupants et/ou leurs syndicats. Il faut conduire d'autres recherches sur les options concernant le partage des coûts et des bénéfices avec les occupants et (ou) avec les entreprises de services énergétiques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Research & InformationSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207