This paper compares two residential buildings, one conventional (inefficient uncomfortable) house and the other one low-energy in a residential block in Algerian Saharan climate. Deployed concepts are usually based on a more rational use of energy, a good insulation practice by optimizing thermal performance of opaque and transparent walls and eliminating thermal bridges, a passive heating of living spaces using solar gains, a better compactness and active aspects dedicated to lighting and heating domestic water. In order to achieve comparative tests and emphasise the differences in energy and financial needs, an evaluation tool was developed to demonstrate that applying passive and active house design principles could be an alternative solution for energy-efficient buildings. The results indicate that the studied house is meeting the low-energy house design target of total energy requirement of less than 50 kWh/m 2 year, the total energy saving was 79.13%. In Saharan climate, the air cooling requires more elaborate techniques and is more complicated compared to the heating. For the Algerian state, it has been found that it is more appropriate to subsidize the relative cost of each integration system instead of subsidizing the kilowatt-hour price of electricity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haddam et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: