MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6998935644

Boiler Retrofits and Decarbonization in Existing Buildings: HVAC Designer Interviews

2022· article· en· W6998935644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHVACBoiler (water heating)ElectrificationWork (physics)Natural gasWater heatingHeating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we investigate methods to reduce carbon emissions from existing large commercial buildings with central natural gas-fired boilers used for space heating. This research explores opportunities to reduce natural gas use through improved building operations and through building decarbonization. We conducted one-hour interviews with 17 mechanical HVAC designers, together having over 350 years of industry experience, professional tenures at engineering consulting firms and design/build firms, and project work in California, New York, Texas, Alaska, the United Kingdom, and Canada. We asked a mix of quantitative and qualitative questions, covering four topic areas: General Background, Peak Heating Load and Boiler Selection, Boiler Controls, and Existing Building Decarbonization. The interviews yielded insight into industry practices, including determining peak heating load, equipment redundancy, boiler staging controls, Heating Hot Water temperature resets, challenges of building electrification, and design considerations for building decarbonization. From the interview results, we developed five key findings: (1) New boilers are oversized, (2) Actual building load distributions are not available, (3) Heating Hot Water temperatures are too high, (4) Boiler end-of-life is not the best electrification opportunity, (5) Reduce building emissions even if all-electric is infeasible. There are many challenges to reducing carbon emissions from existing buildings, but we conclude there are also many opportunities to make immediate positive change.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207