ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS: ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL ANDINTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article provides a comprehensive analytical review of contemporary approaches to energy-efficient residential building design, comparing practices in Ukraine with those established in Western countries. The study examines the regulatory and legal framework that governs the design, construction, and certification of buildings according to energy efficiency criteria, highlighting the evolution of standards and their impact on the construction industry. A detailed comparison is conducted between Ukrainian building codes (DBNs) and state standards (DSTUs) and their European, American, and Canadian counterparts, including the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), ISO 52000 series, ASHRAE 90.1, and the National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (NECB). This comparative analysis reveals significant disparities in methodology, calculation procedures, and minimum energy performance requirements. The research demonstrates that Western standards incorporate more comprehensive approaches to lifecycle assessment, renewable energy integration, and occupant behavior modeling, while Ukrainian regulations are gradually transitioning toward these advanced methodologies. Based on the practical example of the Lofthouse cottage in the Netherlands, the article illustrates a technological model of an energy-efficient building that exemplifies Nearly Zero Energy Building (NZEB) principles. The study explores critical design considerations including optimal building orientation for passive solar gain, advanced structural solutions for foundations that minimize thermal bridging, high-performance wall assemblies with enhanced insulation values, innovative roof systems that integrate renewable energy generation, high-efficiency windows with low U-values, and sophisticated mechanical ventilation systems with heat recovery capabilities. The article systematically identifies the principal differences between Ukrainian and Western design models, focusing on aspects such as energy modeling requirements, thermal performance standards, air tightness specifications, and renewable energy obligations. These differences represent both challenges and opportunities for the Ukrainian construction sector as it seeks to align with European Union energy efficiency directives. Based on this analysis, the research formulates practical recommendations for harmonizing Ukraine's regulatory framework with international best practices and accelerating the implementation of NZEB technologies in Ukrainian residential construction. The recommendations address policy development, professional training, technology transfer mechanisms, and financial incentive structures. The results demonstrate that the adoption of modern energy-efficient technologies and design principles can reduce energy consumption in Ukrainian residential buildings by 40-60% compared to conventional construction methods. Furthermore, economic analysis indicates that despite higher initial capital costs, these investments achieve financial viability with payback periods of 10-12 years, considering current energy prices and available subsidy programs. These findings underscore the significant potential for improving Ukraine's building stock performance while reducing environmental impact and enhancing energy security.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".