FEASIBILITY OF LOW-RISE NET-ZERO ENERGY HOUSES FOR TORONTO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Net-zero energy homes are highly energy efficient homes that produce as much energy as it consumes annually. Using concepts of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, it is possible for homeowners to lower their energy requirements and costs. A base home was redesigned to become a Net-Zero energy home. This base home’s energy consumption was found to be 3860 m3 of natural gas and 10750 kWh of electricity annually. Using the program HOT2000, the details of the home were modified into an upgraded home. Implementing a ground source heat pump, solar DHW system, additional insulation, high performance windows, high efficiency HRV, energy efficient appliances, and CFL bulbs reduced the annual energy consumption. The upgrades decreased the energy usage to only 6960 kWh/year of electricity with no usage of natural gas. The increase in efficiency allowed for implementation of a PV system that could produce enough energy for the upgraded home. With the implementation of the PV system, the Net-Zero energy home is complete. RETScreen, an economic analysis program, was used to analyze the payback period of the ground source heat pump alone to be 3.4 years and the PV system alone to be 22.1 years. An estimation of the payback period for the upgrades of the entire home, all systems included, was found to be 31 years. And in Ontario with the standard offer of $0.42/kWh buyback of energy generated by PV cells it is much more feasible in Ontario. The payback reduces to 19 years, which is a 40 % reduction in the payback period. If more offers like this were created the idea of a NZE home is much more feasible and will bring us closer to the idea of NZE.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".