Data-driven baseline generation for post-retrofit energy saving assessment, a comparison of statistical and machine learning methods

The renovation wave aims to improve energy performance of the existing building stock, encouraging development of methods for predicting post-retrofit energy use and quantifying savings. Therefore, establishing an energy use baseline is crucial for computing changes and savings. Data-driven techniques vary in effectiveness for this purpose. Selecting a suitable data-driven method for post-retrofit energy use modelling requires choosing between several approaches. This study compares two methods of establishing a baseline for post-retrofit evaluation, focusing on predicting heating and electricity energy use. One method utilizes monthly degree-day normalisation and baseline derivation, and the other employs machine learning techniques, including clustering to address seasonal variations and non-linear regression models like random forest and neural network. The comparison was based on CVRMSE, obtained by applying the methods to eight datasets. These individual datasets included metered and simulated data for heating and electricity energy use in two large non-residential buildings. An upper error margin of CVRMSE 25 % for annual energy use, as set in ASHRAE Guidelines, was not reached. The actual uncertainty during validation with simulated data ranged from 4.5 to 10.4 % for heating and electricity models using the degree-day method, and from 1.4 to 7.5 % for machine learning models. When applied to metered data, the degree-day method showed an uncertainty of 8.4–19.3 %, while machine learning models had an uncertainty of 6.11–17.5 %. Additionally, monthly percentage error analysis confirmed a considerably better performance of the machine learning models. This study contributes to the assessment of renovation impact and operational energy savings by offering additional perspectives on selecting energy use modelling methods, which are also applicable in the context of Minimum Energy Performance Standards. • Comparing monthly data-driven methods for energy use baseline generation. • Applicable method to follow Minimum Energy Performance Standards in buildings. • The machine learning method proved to be suitable for monthly energy use prediction. • The degree-day method provided an accurate baseline generation with monthly data. • Seasonal differentiations are addressed in the implemented machine learning method.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Building Engineering
Published
2024-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.111016
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Building Energy and Comfort Optimization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.18

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Data-driven baseline generation for post-retrofit energy saving assessment, a comparison of statistical and machine learning methods

Martin Thalfeldt, Helena Kuivjõgi, Jarek Kurnitski, Eduard Petlenkov et al.
12 citations
Journal of Building Engineering
Building Energy and Comfort Optimization
3.18
article

Data-driven baseline generation for post-retrofit energy saving assessment, a comparison of statistical and machine learning methods

Martin Thalfeldt, Helena Kuivjõgi, Jarek Kurnitski, Eduard Petlenkov, Sofia Vasman
article en
12 citations

Abstract

The renovation wave aims to improve energy performance of the existing building stock, encouraging development of methods for predicting post-retrofit energy use and quantifying savings. Therefore, establishing an energy use baseline is crucial for computing changes and savings. Data-driven techniques vary in effectiveness for this purpose. Selecting a suitable data-driven method for post-retrofit energy use modelling requires choosing between several approaches. This study compares two methods of establishing a baseline for post-retrofit evaluation, focusing on predicting heating and electricity energy use. One method utilizes monthly degree-day normalisation and baseline derivation, and the other employs machine learning techniques, including clustering to address seasonal variations and non-linear regression models like random forest and neural network. The comparison was based on CVRMSE, obtained by applying the methods to eight datasets. These individual datasets included metered and simulated data for heating and electricity energy use in two large non-residential buildings. An upper error margin of CVRMSE 25 % for annual energy use, as set in ASHRAE Guidelines, was not reached. The actual uncertainty during validation with simulated data ranged from 4.5 to 10.4 % for heating and electricity models using the degree-day method, and from 1.4 to 7.5 % for machine learning models. When applied to metered data, the degree-day method showed an uncertainty of 8.4–19.3 %, while machine learning models had an uncertainty of 6.11–17.5 %. Additionally, monthly percentage error analysis confirmed a considerably better performance of the machine learning models. This study contributes to the assessment of renovation impact and operational energy savings by offering additional perspectives on selecting energy use modelling methods, which are also applicable in the context of Minimum Energy Performance Standards. • Comparing monthly data-driven methods for energy use baseline generation. • Applicable method to follow Minimum Energy Performance Standards in buildings. • The machine learning method proved to be suitable for monthly energy use prediction. • The degree-day method provided an accurate baseline generation with monthly data. • Seasonal differentiations are addressed in the implemented machine learning method.

Journal of Building EngineeringVol. 98
European Commission, Eesti Teadusagentuur, Haridus- ja Teadusministeerium, HORIZON EUROPE Reforming and enhancing the European Research and Innovation system
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Building Energy and Comfort Optimization
3.18
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.