a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: The building envelope incorporates signicant amount of construction materials and is a key determinant
Received 12 October 2015 of the embodied energy and environmental impacts in buildings. It is also a mediator between indoor
Received in revised form 17 May 2016 and outdoor environmental conditions and has signicant impacts on operational energy use in many
Accepted 18 May 2016
types of buildings.
Available online 20 May 2016
The present article utilizes a multi-objective optimization algorithm to explore optimum building enve-
lope design with respect to energy use and life cycle contribution to the impacts on the environment in a
Keywords:
low-rise ofce building in Seattle, Washington. Design inputs of interest include insulation material, win-
Life cycle assessment (LCA)
Building envelope
dow type, window frame material, wall thermal resistance, and south and north window-to-wall ratios
Optimization (WWR). The simulation tool eQuest 3.65 is used to assess the operational energy use, while Life Cycle
Genetic algorithm Assessment (LCA) methodology and Athena IE are used to estimate the environmental impacts. Also, a
hybrid articial neural network and genetic algorithm approach is used as the optimization technique.
The environmental impact categories of interest within the LCA include: global warming, acidication,
eutrophication, smog formation, and ozone depletion. The results reveal that the optimum design sce-
nario incorporates berglass-framed triple-glazed window, about 60% south WWR, 10% north WWR, and
R-17 insulation.
2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.05.054
0378-7788/ 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534 525
Acidication
mental life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the effect of change
in mullion materials on curtain walls environmental impacts. Azari
[3] conducts a parametric LCA analysis to examine how the change
of design input values in a limited number of building envelope
Eutrophication congurations would impact the environment.
Dodoo et al. [10] is an example of studies that focus on building
structures. The study uses the consequential-based LCA to compare
three versions of timber structures; i.e., cross-laminated timber,
beam-and-column and modular structures. In an LCA study of an
ofce building, Junnila and Horvath [24] conduct a complete life-
cycle analysis on an ofce building with a service life of 50 years
Energy
tion, climate change, etc. They later extend this study and compare
the impacts of ofce buildings in the US and Europe [25]. In Aus-
Warming
tralian context, Treloar et al. [33] and Treloar et al. [34] study the
Global
and, in another project, measure the embodied energy in several
ofce buildings and study the effect of height and number of oors
Forma-
Smog
shown in Table 1.
Recovery
&
ciated with each design combination. The results are then used
Components, and
Systems
An overview of some LCA literature.
Subject of LCA
Materials
2. Methods
Reference
[24]
[25]
[26]
[28]
[29]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[10]
tion efforts.
526 R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534
shows design inputs along with their values, as examined in this into account [2]. While the developers of the software do not pro-
research. vide access to its inventory database or details about the specic
The reference ow, another element in goal and scope deni- electricity or transportation assumptions, it is expected that hydro-
tion, is about quantication of materials and energy needed per electric power is considered to be the source of Seattles electricity
design combination. Moreover, the system boundary shows what is generation in the softwares inventory database, as suggested by
included in or excluded from the LCA scope. The system boundary in the US Energy Information Administration (2015).
the present study includes all stages of building envelope life-cycle
(from material extraction through manufacturing, to construction, 2.1.3. Impact assessment
operation and maintenance, to demolition and recovery) as well Impact assessment is the LCA activity that tries to classify the
as associated transportation. The environmental impact categories environmental inputs and outputs for each design combination
of interest included global warming, acidication, eutrophication, based on their impacts on the environment. The type of impacts
smog formation, and fossil-fuel energy consumption. we were interested in this research included global warming, acid-
ication, eutrophication, smog formation, and ozone depletion as
2.1.2. Inventory modeling some of the most widely considered impact categories in the liter-
In the next step of LCA methodology, the environmental ows ature. Sometimes, an environmental emission could fall into more
(inputs and outputs) associated with the building envelope life than one impact category because of its multiple effects on the
cycle should be identied and quantied. Given the number of environment.
envelope design inputs and their corresponding values assumed Contribution of each environmental emission (methane, for
in this research, the total number of possible design combinations instance) to each impact category (e.g., global warming) is
of building envelope was too many to be modeled considering the quantied by multiplying its quantity into an impact-specic
limited resources available to us. Optimization techniques was a science-based factor characterization factor that represents
reasonable methodological alternative in order to draw conclu- relative importance of the emission of interest in that category
sions based on limited number of modeling runs. We considered of impacts. In other words, characterization factors convert the
only 91 random design combinations (called, the initial scenarios) quantity of environmental emissions into measures that repre-
for inventory modeling and impact assessment and then used the sent impact categories. The measure for global warming potential
results in the next phase of research, to be explained in section (GWP), as an example, is equivalent kilogram of CO2 . This step of
2.2, in a hybrid genetic algorithm (GA) and articial neural net- impact assessment is called characterization and its outcome is
works (ANN) approach to develop future populations/generations quantied contribution of the LCA subject, FU of building envelope,
of combinations and nd the optimum design combination. to the impact categories of interest; i.e., global warming poten-
We also made sure that diversity was present in the initial pop- tial (GWP), acidication potential (AP), eutrophication potential
ulation of 91 design combinations used for inventory modeling (EP), smog formation potential (SFP), and ozone depletion poten-
and impact assessment. Inventory modeling and impact assess- tial (ODP). Table 4 includes the information about design inputs and
ment were conducted using Athena Impact Estimator which uses environmental outputs per FU for 91 design combinations. The top
the US Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) Tool for Reduction and bottom 5 percent values for environmental outputs in Table 4
and Assessment of Chemicals and other environmental Impacts are highlighted red and green, respectively.
(TRACI) methodology for life cycle impact assessment [2]. While
Athena IE incorporates a large useful inventory database, it is not 2.1.4. Interpretation of results
designed to model the operational energy use associated with The last step in LCA methodology, based on ISO 14040 [21], is
design combinations. To feed it with this piece of data, we relied on interpretation of results through which the results, limitations and
eQuest 3.65 [20], an energy performance modeling and simulation recommendations are presented. We present the results following
tool which can estimate the energy consumed in the building for the second phase of research, optimization efforts.
heating, cooling, lighting, etc. We modeled the building in eQuest
3.65 and simulated its energy use for all design combinations. For 2.2. Optimization
activity-, schedule- and system-related assumptions, we relied on
the softwares built-in default assumptions which represent com- The next step in research was optimization. Several attempts
pliance with the energy code requirements. The energy simulation have been made to classify different optimization techniques. One
results were then used in the LCA tool, Athena IE, along with the popular classication proposed by Cohon and Marks [8] classies
other building design and construction information. Athena IE used the optimization techniques to a priori (such as global criterion
this information to generate the inventory results, i.e. the envi- method, etc.), a posteriori (such as -constraint, etc.) and pro-
ronmental inputs and outputs/emissions, associated with design gressive preference articulation techniques based on the way that
combinations. search and decision-making problems are handled by each method.
It is important to note that the LCAs computational approach The evolutionary algorithm method (such as genetic algorithm,
to inventory modeling introduced by Heijungs and Suh [19] con- etc.) that is used in our research is a different kind of approach
structs the inventory vector based on the processes in the system based on the theory that non-dominated solutions are chosen to
boundaries and the environmental inputs and outputs to those pro- remain in a population as it evolves [6].
cesses. The approach uses the equation below for this purpose: The LCA results for 91 design combinations were entered into
the optimization phase with the objective of identifying the opti-
[g] = [B] [A]1 [f ] (1)
mum values for design inputs. We pursued a two-step optimization
where g is inventory vector, B intervention matrix, A1
inverse algorithm, as explained below.
matrix of technology matrix, and f is nal demand vector.
The Athena Impact Estimator (IE) uses LCA methodology and 2.2.1. Step 1: Modeling by Articial Neural Networks (ANNs)
a regionalized life-cycle inventory database in compliance with ANNs are effective computational frameworks that imitate the
ISO 14040/14044 [2]. The software allows for specication of complex relationships of biological networks to solve intricate non-
cities based on which the inventory data are regionalized, i.e. linear problems, especially where classical mathematical modeling
regional differences with regard to transportation modes and dis- processes fail to succeed [5,16,18]. In the present study, separate
tances, electricity grid, and manufacturing technology are taken ANNs were used to model and optimize operational energy and
528 R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534
Table 4
Impact assessment results. (For interpretation of the references to colour in the text, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534 529
environmental impacts. The process, which is the same for all out- Table 5
Genetic algorithm parameters used in ANN training.
puts, is explained below using Eutrophication Potential (EP), as a
random example. Optimization Parameter Value
To model EP by an ANN, a four-stage methodology was followed. Initial population size 100
In the rst stage, the normalization process was conducted on both Selection operator Killing off the worst 50% of chromosomes
design combination data (input data) and EP data (targets). The Mating operator Tournament selection
data normalization process minimizes the inuence of magnitude Crossover operator Single-point crossover
Mutation rate 20% of new generation
and range of variations of the input variables throughout the ANN
Training and test errorsa 1% and 2% respectively
training process. Generally, a linear transformation is applied to
a
In case of Operational Energy (OE) the training and test errors are set to be 3%
normalize training and test data sets.
and 5%, respectively.
To nd the optimum parameters of an ANN including weights
and biases, the initial data were divided into two subsets, i.e. train-
ing and test data sets. Data division, the second stage of ANN, was generation of chromosomes is produced and sent to the evaluation
conducted through random selection. In this stage, 70% of the nor- unit. This optimization process is repeated till a preset training MSE
malized data were utilized to train the ANN and optimize weights is established. Then, the trained ANN (the ANN lled with the genes
and biases. 30% of the data that was not considered in the training of the best chromosome) is evaluated via presenting test data set
process was used for validation and testing process. and calculating test MSE. Final solution occurs when a test MSE of
The third stage of ANN methodology is denition of ANN archi- less then or equal to a preset test MSE is achieved. Otherwise, the
tecture, including the number of layers and the number of neurons algorithm returns to the third stage and is repeated.
in each layer. A ve-layer ANN was dened with 5-3-4-2-1 neurons The genetic algorithm parameters used in training process of
in hidden and output layers. The number of neurons in the input ANNs are presented in Table 5. Moreover, Fig. 3 illustrates the ow
layer is equal with the number of input variables, i.e. 6 neurons. The chart applied for training and test processes of dened ANNs.
architecture of proposed ANN is illustrated in Fig. 2. Based on the ve-stage computational algorithm and the ow
Logistic sigmoid, hyperbolic tangent sigmoid, and linear transfer chart presented in Fig. 3, a computer code was developed in Pas-
functions are the most commonly used activation functions in the cal programming language (Lazarus 1.2.4 IDE) and compiled into
optimization of ANNs. Here, the hyperbolic tangent sigmoid was 64-bits executable using FPC 2.6.2. A Mersenne Twister-based sub-
utilized as the activation function for the hidden and output layers routine was used to produce the required random numbers for the
to scale outputs of each neuron within the range of 1 to +1. modeling processes [27]. The random number generation subrou-
The last stage in modeling the data by an ANN is to dene tine satises the tests of uniformity and serial correlation with high
and apply an appropriate training algorithm. In other words, ANN resolution. The cycle length of the random number generator was
parameters (including weights and biases) should be adjusted and 219937 -1.
optimized to minimize the generated errors for both training and
test data sets. Indeed, the performance of an ANN is evaluated via 2.2.2. Step 2: Multi-objective Optimization by Genetic Algorithm
the calculation of the mean squared errors (MSEs) for both training (GA)
and test data sets. These values are unique signature of the net- Genetic Algorithms (GAs) are effective stochastic optimization
works performance and dened as the average of the sum of the tools used in different elds of science and technology [17,15]. Each
differences between the targets and the ANN predictions: genetic algorithm process is initiated by randomly generating a
population of predened chromosomes. A chromosome, as a well-
1 N structured string, is made up of tightly connected genes and carries
MSE = y yi,target (2)
N i=1 i the genetic information. Each chromosome as a genotype is related
to a phenotype as its corresponding physical object. Genetic algo-
where N, yi , and yi,target are number of data for training or test pro- rithm, as an evolutionary articial intelligence technique, applies
cesses, the ANN output and target value for the ith experiment, genetic operators, such as mutation and crossover, to the best
respectively. members from the previous generation in order to establish the
In the present study, an evolutionary optimization algorithm new generation. These operators stochastically adjust/control the
was used to train the dened ANNs and precisely adjust and opti- gene(s) values to help the population evolve and produce optimum
mize their weights and biases. A computer code was developed chromosomes. Mutation operator, as an exploration tool, is utilized
capable of handling a predened ANN and stochastically com- to randomly introduce new information from the search space (i.e.,
puting and readjusting its weights and biases applying genetic gene pool) and to move the solution(s) towards the global optimum.
algorithm evolutionary method. For this purpose, the networks On the other hand, crossover operator, as an exploitation tool, com-
unknown/adjustable parameters including 67 weights and 15 bines information from existing chromosomes and conducts the
biases were codied into a chromosome composed of 82 genes. solution(s) towards local optima.
Each gene within the dened chromosome can take a value In the present study, genetic algorithm was applied to determine
between 1 and +1. So, the developed computer code was trained the appropriate design inputs that lead to optimum operational
to scan and explore chromosomes by means of genetic algorithm energy and environmental impacts. To formulate the genetic algo-
and nd the best chromosome results with minimum MSEs for both rithm, the design inputs are codied into a chromosome depicted
training and test data sets. Hence, an initial population of these in Fig. 4.
chromosomes was randomly generated. For each chromosome, e.g. An initial population of the chromosomes is randomly pro-
chromosome number j, the genes were fed into the predened ANN duced. The tness of each generated chromosome is calculated by
structure. Then, the training data set was used to evaluate the per- recalling the trained ANNs of the rst optimization step. Each chro-
formance of the fed ANN. The calculated MSE was considered as the mosome is identied by six tness values (objectives) including one
tness of chromosome number j. This training process is repeated for operational energy and ve for environmental impacts. So, for
for all chromosomes separately. Then, the chromosomes are sorted each chromosome all six trained ANNs were separately recalled
based on the calculated training MSEs. The best tness obviously to calculate the corresponding tness. To do this, the genes of
belongs to a chromosome that results in a minimum MSE. Apply- each chromosome were fed into the input layer of the previously
ing selection, mating, crossover, and mutation operators, the new trained ANNs and the outputs of the ANNs were reported as the
530 R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534
Fig. 3. The ow chart describing the genetic algorithm based training of ANNs.
tness values for that chromosome. Then, the chromosomes were algorithms are much more effective and faster optimization tools.
sorted based on predened target(s). If the optimization target was The main difference between NSGA-II and conventional GA is the
a single-objective optimization that minimized only one of the sorting mechanism. Indeed, the chromosomes in NSGA-II are sorted
environmental outputs, e.g. the Eutrophication Potential (EP), then based on the concept of domination. In general, the chromosome
the chromosomes were totally ordered according to the EP tness x dominates the chromosome y if it is not worse than the chromo-
values calculated using the corresponding ANN for each chromo- some y for all objectives and strictly better than it for at least one
some. On the other hand, in case of a multi-objective optimization objective:
that simultaneously minimizes two or more targets/objectives; e.g.,
operational energy and/or other environmental impacts altogether,
the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) is used i , fi (x) fi (y)
[7]. Unlike classical multi-objective optimization methods, the evo- (3)
lutionary algorithms especially multi-objective versions of genetic j , fj (x) < fj (y)
R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534 531
Table 6
Main controlling parameters of the applied genetic algorithm. 6
Optimization Parameter Value
3
where, fi (x) is the tness value of the chromosome x respect to
objective i. It is clear that i and j are representatives of environ- 2
mental outputs, i.e. OE, GWP, AP, ODP, EP, and SFP.
Having compared all possible pairs of population, the NSGA-II 1
inspects and evaluates the chromosomes based on the number of
non-dominations and assigns a number/rank to each chromosome 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
accordingly. So, the chromosomes are precisely classied and posi-
tioned within a set of fronts. The rst front consists of completely Iteraon (-)
non-dominated set of chromosomes in the current population and
the second front comprise of chromosomes are dominated by the Fig. 6. Iteration-dependent error variations of the ANN model for optimization of
the responding variable; EP in this case.
members in the rst front only and the front goes on. Hence, the
chromosomes in the rst front are given a rank value of 1 and those
in the second are assigned the rank value of 2 and so on. Then,
the chromosomes within each front are sorted according to their from 5.67% to 1.00% within 946 iterations. Relatively large number
crowding distance. The crowding distance is a measure of how close of epochs (iterations) and small errors shows that the developed
a chromosome is to its neighbors. The chromosome located in the ANN model is able to properly predict the behavior of the data.
lesser crowded region, i.e. the region with large average crowding Table 7 lists the statistical details of the ANN model training and
distance, results in better diversity in the population and is more testing for the entire data.
preferred. Number of epochs in Table 7 indicates the number of times that
In the next stage, the selection, mating, crossover, and muta- the genetic algorithm is repeated to learn successfully how to fore-
tion operators were applied on the sorted population to select see the response variable (EP, for instance) through the developed
and reproduce new generation. The adjustable genetic algorithm network. Reasonably low training and test MSE values are indica-
parameters applied in this optimization step are listed in Table 6. tors of how well the models explain the data. Table 7 also reports
Also, the ow chart of this optimization process is shown in Fig. 5. other statistical parameters such as correlation coefcient, coef-
cient of efciency, goodness of t, and coefcient of determination
3. Results for each environmental output. Coefcient of determination, for
instance, shows the proportion of variations in the response vari-
The MSE variations of the best chromosome in training the data ables (EP, for instance) that can be explained by the model.
for single-objective optimization of the data revealed a decline of The performance of the developed ANN model was further
errors as the number of iterations increased. The Fig. 6, which illus- checked through comparison of predicted values of each response
trates the MSE variations in training the EP data, shows a decline variable with actual experimental data. Fig. 7 veries the accu-
532 R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534
Table 7
Statistical details of the ANN model training and testing in single-objective optimization.
Fig. 7. Relationship between the experimental data and the optimized ANN model outputs for OE, GWP, AP, SFP, ODP and EP.
racy of ANN in prediction of all environmental impacts as response that the mass of insulation does not have any effect on the ODP of
variables. scenarios in Table 8.
The single-objective optimization results shown in Table 8 On the other hand, the design scenarios with lowest WWR per-
reveal that the operational energy (OE) consumption is mini- centages result in minimum ODP and EP. In other words, the lowest
mized in a design scenario with about 60% south WWR, about potentials for ozone depletion and eutrophication occur in cases
10% north WWR, and the use of triple-glazed windows, berglass with the lowest mass of glass in building skin.
window frame, R-17 wall insulation, and FG batt and polystyrene The result for multi-objective optimization is included in
insulations. Compared with the optimum scenario for OE, the Table 9. As the table shows, the optimum design scenario that
GWP-optimized design scenario incorporates lesser R-value (R- yields the optimum low environmental impacts is the one that
13), higher north WWR (about 60%; which in turn results in lesser incorporates triple-glazed windows with berglass frame on south
use of insulation in building skin), and using wood vinyl as win- elevation as about 60% WWR and on north elevation as about 10%
dow frame material. Among the optimized scenarios in Table 8, WWR. Interestingly, this optimum design scenario does not con-
only GWP- and SFP-optimized design scenarios entail relatively tain the highest R-value, but R-17. The is in line with diminishing
large WWR percentages in both south and north. This in turn return law based on which increasing R-value above a certain opti-
means lesser use of insulation mass in building skin dened for mum point does not have a major impact on improving the building
these scenarios. Hydrouorocarbon (HFC) blowing agents used in performance.
extruded polystyrene production make signicant contribution to Another observation that needs to be veried with other data
global warming and smog formation and the low GWP and SFP is that the optimum design combination for all environmental
in design scenarios with lesser use of insulation can be associated outputs is the same as design combination that yields the least
with the impact of HFCs. HFCs, however, do not contain chlorine operational energy use. If veried by other data and future stud-
and have essentially zero ozone depletion potential. This means ies, this can imply that architects wishing to lower the life-cycle
R. Azari et al. / Energy and Buildings 126 (2016) 524534 533
Table 8
Results of single-objective optimization. Design inputs and environmental outputs associated with optimum (minimum) scenarios.
Min OE case Min GWP case Min AP case Min ODP case Min EP case Min SFP case
Design Inputs
Insulation Material FG Batt+ Ext. FG Batt+ Ext. FG Batt+ Ext. FG Batt+ Ext. FG Batt+ Ext. FG Batt
Polystyrene Polystyrene Polystyrene Polystyrene Polystyrene
Window Frame Material Fiberglass Wood Vinyl Aluminum Fiberglass Fiberglass Wood Vinyl
Wall R-value hr.ft2 . F/Btu 17 13 11 21 21 11
m2 K/W 2.99 2.28 1.93 3.69 3.69 1.93
South WWR (%) 60 60 59 10 10 60
North WWR (%) 10 60 10 10 10 50
Glazing Type Triple Glazing Triple Glazing Triple Glazing Double Glazing Double Glazing Triple Glazing
Environmental Outputs
OE (MJ) 191.123 192.119 191.884 197.894 197.893 195.434
GWP (kg CO2-eq) 1804.6700 1695.6097 1819.9874 1912.5770 1912.5771 1746.4217
AP (kg SO2-eq) 6.6764 6.6290 6.0070 6.71600 6.7159 6.5406
ODP (kg CFC-11-eq) 9.0704E-07 9.1478E-07 8.9582E-07 8.2400E-07 8.2405E-07 9.5233E-07
EP (kg N-eq) 0.0898 0.0910 0.0869 0.0852 0.0852 0.0920
SFP (kg O3-eq) 18.2865 17.9231 18.3499 20.3440 20.3440 17.6045
[3] R. Azari, Integrated energy and environmental life-cycle assessment of ofce [20] Hirsch, J. (2009). The Quick Energy Simulation Tool (eQuest) [software tool].
building envelopes, Energy Build. 82 (2014) 156162. Available from: http://www.doe2.com/equest/.
[4] R. Azari, Y.W. Kim, Comparative assessment of life cycle impacts of curtain [21] International Organization of Standards, ISO 14040, Environmental
wall mullions, Build. Environ. 48 (2012) 135145. ManagementLife Cycle AssessmentPrinciple and Framework, National
[5] P.J. Braspenning, F. Thuijsman, A.J.M.M. Weijters, Articial Neural Networks: Standard Authority of Ireland, Ireland, 2006.
An Introduction to ANN Theory and Practice, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1995. [22] International Organization of Standards, ISO 14044, Environmental
[6] G. Chiandussi, M. Codegone, S. Ferrero, F.E. Varesio, Comparison of ManagementLife Cycle AssessmentRequirements and Guidelines, National
multi-objective optimization methodologies for engineering applications, Standard Authority of Ireland, Ireland, 2006.
Comput. Math. Appl. 63 (2012) 912942. [23] International Organization of Standards, ISO 16745, Environmental
[7] C.A. Coello, D.A. Van Veldhuizen, G.B. Lamont, Evolutionary Algorithms for Performance of Buildings-Carbon Metric of a Building, Use Stage, National
Solving Multi-Objective Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, Standard Authority of Ireland, Ireland, 2015.
2002. [24] S. Junnila, A. Horvath, Life-cycle environmental effects of an ofce Building, J.
[8] Cohon, D.H. Marks, A review and evaluation of multiobjective programming Infrastruct. Syst. 9 (4) (2003) 157166.
techniques, Water Resour. Res. 11 (1975) 208220. [25] S. Junnila, A. Horvath, A.A. Guggemos, Life-cycle assessment of ofce buildings
[9] K. Deb, Optimization for Engineering DesignAlgorithms and Examples, PHI in Europe and the United States, J. Infrastruct. Syst. 12 (1) (2006) 1017.
Publishing, 2012. [26] L. Kosareo, R. Ries, Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of green
[10] A. Dodoo, L. Gustavsson, R. Sathre, Lifecycle carbon implications of roofs, Build. Environ. 42 (7) (2007) 26062613.
conventional and low-energy multi-storey timber building systems, Energy [27] M. Matsumoto, T. Nishimura, Mersenne twister: a623-dimensionally
Build. 82 (2014) 194210. equidistributed uniform pseudo-random number generator, ACM Trans.
[11] EIA, 2015. Monthly energy review. Energy Information Administration. http:// Model. Comp. Simul. 8 (1) (1998) 330.
www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec2 3.pdf. [28] M. Ottele, K. Perini, A.L.A. Fraaij, E.M. Haas, R. Raiteri, Comparative life cycle
[12] EN 15978, 2011. Sustainability of Construction Works. Assessment of analysis for green facades and living wall systems, Energy Build. 43 (12)
Environmental Performance of BuildingsCalculation Method. European (2011) 34193429.
Committee for Standardization. [29] R.M. Pulselli, E. Simoncini, N. Marchettini, Energy and emergy based
[14] EPA, 2009. Buildings and the Environment: a Statistical Summary. http:// costbenet evaluation of building envelopes relative to geographical
ww2.harford.edu/faculty/eaugusti/Environ%20Health/ location and climate, Build. Environ. 44 (5) (2009) 920928.
green%20building%20stats.pdf. [31] F. Stazi, A. Mastrucci, P. Munafo, Life cycle assessment approach for the
[15] M. Gen, R. Cheng, Genetic Algorithms and Engineering Design, John Wiley and optimization of sustainable building envelopes: an application on solar wall
Sons Inc., 1997. systems, Build. Environ. 58 (2012) 278288.
[16] K. Gurney, An Introduction to Neural Networks, Taylor & Francis, London, UK, [32] D.D. Tingley, A. Hathway, B. Davison, An environmental impact comparison of
2005. external wall insulation types, Build. Environ. 85 (2015) 182189.
[17] R.L. Haupt, S.E. Haupt, Practical Genetic Algorithms, 2nd edition, John Wiley & [33] G. Treloar, R. Fay, B. Ilozor, P. Love, Building materials selection: greenhouse
Sons Inc., 2004. strategies for built facilities, Facilities 19 (3/4) (2001) 139149.
[18] S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, Prentice Hall PTR, [34] G. Treloar, R. Fay, B. Ilozor, P. Love, An analysis of the embodied energy of
Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1998. ofce buildings by height, Facilities 19 (5/6) (2001) 204214.
[19] R. Heijungs, S. Suh, Computational Structure of Life Cycle Assessment, Kluwer [35] Y.G. Yohanis, B. Norton, Life-cycle operational and embodied energy for a
Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 2002. generic single-storey ofce building in the U.K, Energy 27 (2002) 7792.