Effect of Different Climates On a Shipping Container Passive House in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Passive House buildings with an annual energy demand of less than 15 kWh/m2a (i.e. kWh/m2 per annum) can help Canada and other countries achieve thermal comfort with minimum energy use and carbon footprint through meticulous design and selection of highly efficient building envelope elements and appliances. Shipping container based passive houses can reduce the cost of passive house construction and also promote recycling. In this paper, a passive house built using shipping containers, originally designed for Victoria, BC, Canada, is analyzed using Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) software in different climactic zones of Canada. The locations under consideration are: Halifax (Cool–Temperate), Toronto (Cold–Temperate), Edmonton (Cold), and Yellowknife (Arctic–Climate). This paper critically examines the energy demand changes in various climate zones and make necessary modifications to the design to achieve passive house energy performance requirements in selected climates. Results show that with modified designs shipping container passive houses can meet passive house requirements, except in the Arctic–Climate of Yellowknife.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".