Application of Compromise Programming to a semi-detached housing development in order to balance economic and environmental criteria

This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Journal of the Operational Research Society. The definitive publisher-authenticated version: Ruá Aguilar, MJ.; Guadalajara Olmeda, MN. (2012). Application of Compromise Programming to a semi-detached housing development in order to balance economic and environmental criteria. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 64(3):459-468, is available online at: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jors/journal/v64/n3/full/jors201276a.html.European Energy Performance of Buildings Directives DE promote energy efficiency in buildings. Under these Directives, the European Union States must apply minimum requirements regarding the energy performance of buildings and ensure the certification of their energy performance. The Directives set only the basic principles and requirements, leaving a significant amount of room for the Member States to establish their specific mechanisms, numeric requirements and ways to implement them, taking into account local conditions. With respect to the Spanish case, the search for buildings that are more energy efficient results in a conflict between users¿ economic objectives and society's environmental objectives. In this paper, Compromise Programming is applied to help in the decision-making process. An appropriate distribution of types of dwellings, according to their energy performance and to the climatic zone considered in Spain, will be suggested. Results provide a compromise solution between both objectives.Ruá Aguilar, MJ.; Guadalajara Olmeda, MN. (2012). Application of Compromise Programming to a semi-detached housing development in order to balance economic and environmental criteria. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 64(3):459-468. doi:10.1057/jors.2012.76S459468643Andaloro, A. P. F., Salomone, R., Ioppolo, G., & Andaloro, L. (2010). Energy certification of buildings: A comparative analysis of progress towards implementation in European countries. Energy Policy, 38(10), 5840-5866. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.039André, F. J., Cardenete, M. A., & Romero, C. (2008). Using compromise programming for macroeconomic policy making in a general equilibrium framework: theory and application to the Spanish economy. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(7), 875-883. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602415Baja, S., Chapman, D. M., & Dragovich, D. (2006). Spatial based compromise programming for multiple criteria decision making in land use planning. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 12(3), 171-184. doi:10.1007/s10666-006-9059-1Ballestero, E., & Romero, C. (1991). A theorem connecting utility function optimization and compromise programming. Operations Research Letters, 10(7), 421-427. doi:10.1016/0167-6377(91)90045-qBallestero, E., & Romero, C. (1993). Weighting in compromise programming: A theorem on shadow prices. Operations Research Letters, 13(5), 325-329. doi:10.1016/0167-6377(93)90055-lDavies, H., & Wyatt, D. (2004). Appropriate use of the ISO 15686-1 factor method for durability and service life prediction. Building Research & Information, 32(6), 552-553. doi:10.1080/0961321042000291938Diakaki, C., Grigoroudis, E., Kabelis, N., Kolokotsa, D., Kalaitzakis, K., & Stavrakakis, G. (2010). A multi-objective decision model for the improvement of energy efficiency in buildings. Energy, 35(12), 5483-5496. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.05.012Dı́az-Balteiro, L., & Romero, C. (2003). Forest management optimisation models when carbon captured is considered: a goal programming approach. Forest Ecology and Management, 174(1-3), 447-457. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(02)00075-0Diaz-Balteiro, L., & Rodriguez, L. C. E. (2006). Optimal rotations on Eucalyptus plantations including carbon sequestration—A comparison of results in Brazil and Spain. Forest Ecology and Management, 229(1-3), 247-258. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2006.04.005Fattahi, P., & Fayyaz, S. (2009). A Compromise Programming Model to Integrated Urban Water Management. Water Resources Management, 24(6), 1211-1227. doi:10.1007/s11269-009-9492-4Hamdy, M., Hasan, A., & Siren, K. (2011). Applying a multi-objective optimization approach for Design of low-emission cost-effective dwellings. Building and Environment, 46(1), 109-123. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.07.006Johnstone, I. M. (2001). Energy and mass flows of housing: a model and example. Building and Environment, 36(1), 27-41. doi:10.1016/s0360-1323(99)00065-7Johnstone, I. M. (2001). Energy and mass flows of housing: estimating mortality. Building and Environment, 36(1), 43-51. doi:10.1016/s0360-1323(99)00066-9Linares, P., & Romero, C. (2000). A multiple criteria decision making approach for electricity planning in Spain: economic versus environmental objectives. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51(6), 736-743. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600944Rey, F. J., Velasco, E., & Varela, F. (2007). Building Energy Analysis (BEA): A methodology to assess building energy labelling. Energy and Buildings, 39(6), 709-716. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.07.009Rudbeck, C. (2002). Service life of building envelope components: making it operational in economical assessment. Construction and Building Materials, 16(2), 83-89. doi:10.1016/s0950-0618(02)00003-xSan-José, J. T., Losada, R., Cuadrado, J., & Garrucho, I. (2007). Approach to the quantification of the sustainable value in industrial buildings. Building and Environment, 42(11), 3916-3923. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.013Yu, P. L. (1973). A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems. Management Science, 19(8), 936-946. doi:10.1287/mnsc.19.8.936Zelany, M. (1974). A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Computers & Operations Research, 1(3-4), 479-496. doi:10.1016/0305-0548(74)90064-

Climate impacts of energy technologies depend on emissions timing

Energy technologies emit greenhouse gases with differing radiative efficiencies and atmospheric lifetimes. Standard practice for evaluating technologies, which uses the global warming potential (GWP) to compare the integrated radiative forcing of emitted gases over a fixed time horizon, does not acknowledge the importance of a changing background climate relative to climate change mitigation targets. Here we demonstrate that the GWP misvalues the impact of CH[subscript 4]-emitting technologies as mid-century approaches, and we propose a new class of metrics to evaluate technologies based on their time of use. The instantaneous climate impact (ICI) compares gases in an expected radiative forcing stabilization year, and the cumulative climate impact (CCI) compares their time-integrated radiative forcing up to a stabilization year. Using these dynamic metrics, we quantify the climate impacts of technologies and show that high-CH[subscript 4]-emitting energy sources become less advantageous over time. The impact of natural gas for transportation, with CH[subscript 4] leakage, exceeds that of gasoline within 1–2 decades for a commonly cited 3 W m[superscript −2] stabilization target. The impact of algae biodiesel overtakes that of corn ethanol within 2–3 decades, where algae co-products are used to produce biogas and corn co-products are used for animal feed. The proposed metrics capture the changing importance of CH[subscript 4] emissions as a climate threshold is approached, thereby addressing a major shortcoming of the GWP for technology evaluation.New England University Transportation Center (DOT Grant DTRT07-G-0001

Estimating a threshold price for CO2 emissions of buildings to improve their energy performance level. Case study of a new Spanish home

Energy consumption in homes produces CO2. In many countries, building regulations are being set to enable energy efficiency performance levels to be issued. In Spain, there is a regulated procedure to certify the energy performance of buildings according to their CO2 emissions. Consequently, some software tools have been design to simulate buildings and to obtain their energy consumption and CO2 emissions. In this paper the investment, maintenance and energy consumption costs are calculated for different energy performance levels and for various climatic zones, in a single-family home. According to the results, more energy efficient buildings imply higher construction and maintenance costs, which are not compensated by lower energy costs. Therefore, under current conditions, economic criteria do not support the improvement of the energy efficiency of a dwelling. Among the possible measures to promote energy efficiency, a price on CO2 emissions is to be suggested, including the social cost in the analysis. For this purpose, the cost-optimal methodology is used. In different scenarios for the discount rate y energy prices, various prices for CO2 are obtained, depending on the climatic zone and energy performance level.Ruá Aguilar, MJ.; Guadalajara Olmeda, MN. (2015). Estimating a threshold price for CO2 emissions of buildings to improve their energy performance level. Case study of a new Spanish home. Energy Efficiency. 8(2):183-203. doi:10.1007/s12053-014-9286-2S18320382AICIA. (2009). Escala de calificación energética. Edificios de nueva construcción. Madrid: Instituto para la Diversificación y Ahorro de la Energía, Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio.Al-Homoud, M. S. (2005). Performance characteristics and practical applications of common building thermal insulation materials. Building and Environment, 40(3), 353–360.Amecke, H. (2012). The impact of energy performances certificates: a survey of German home owners. Energy Policy, 46, 4–14.Andaloro, A., Salomone, R., Ioppolo, G., & Andaloro, L. (2010). Energy certification of buildings: a comparative analysis of progress towards implementation in European countries. Energy Policy, 38(10), 5840–5866.Annunziata, E., Frey, M., & Rizzi, F. (2013). Towards nearly zero-energy buildings: the state-of-art of national regulations in Europe. Energy, 57, 125–133. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2012.11.049 .Audenaert, A., De Boeck, L., & Roelants, K. (2010). Economic analysis of the profitability of energy-saving architectural measures for the achievement of the EPBD-standard. Energy, 35(7), 2965–2971.Bertrán, A. (2009). Las mediciones en las obras adaptadas al CTE (4th ed.). Granada: Editorial Jorge Loring S.I.Brathal, D., & Langemo, M. (2004). Facilities management: a guide for total workplace design and management. Grand Forks: Knight Printing.Brown, D. W. (1996). Facility maintenance: the manager’s practical guide and handbook. New York: AMACOM American Management Association. New York, NY 10019.Concerted Action EPBD (2008). Implementation of the energy performance of buildings directive. Country reports 2008. Brussels: Directorate General for Energy and Transport, European Commission (available at www.epbd.ca.eu and www.buildup.eu ).Concerted Action EPBD (2011). Implementing the energy performance of buildings directive. Country reports 2011. Brussels: European Union (available at www.epbd.ca.eu and www.buildup.eu ).Davies, H., & Wyatt, D. (2004). Appropriate use or method for durability and service life prediction. Building Research and Information, 32(6), 552–553.Dresner, S., & Ekins, P. (2006). Economic instruments to improve UK home energy efficiency without negative social impacts. Fiscal Studies, 27(1), 47–74.Drury, C. (2008). Management and cost accounting, 7th ed. London.Eurostat European Comission, Instituto de Diversificación y Ahorro de Energía (IDAE), Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo (2011). Proyecto SECH-SPAHOUSEC. Análisis del consumo energético del sector residencial en España. Informe Final. Madrid.Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI (Germany) (2012). Financing the energy efficient transformation of the building sector in the EU. Lessons from the ODYSSEE-MURE project.Garrido, N., Almecija, J. C., Folch, C., Martínez, I. (2011). Certificación energética de edificios. Grupo de Estudios de Energía para la Sostenibilidad (CEES). Cátedra Unesco Sostenibilidad, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. (Available at: upcommons.upc.edu/e-prints/bitstream/2117/11820/1/GAS Natural_090406.pdf).Gómez, J. M., & Esteban, M. A. (2010). Sostenibilidad en la edificación. Comparación de dos tipologías constructivas. Rendimiento de los recursos. Ingeniería de Edificación Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. (Available at: upcommons.upc.edu/pfc/bitstream/2099.1/…/1/PFG_Completo.pdf).Gram-Hanssen, K., Bartiaux, F., Michael Jensen, O., & Cantaert, M. (2007). Do homeowners use energy labels? A comparison between Denmark and Belgium. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2879–2888.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1991a). Manual de uso y conservación de la vivienda. COAAT Principado de Asturias. Simancas Ediciones S.A. Valladolid.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991b). Manteniment de l’edifici. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991c). Manteniment instal.lacions. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991d). Manteniment urbanització. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1994). L’actualitat i el cost del manteniment en edificis d’habitatge. Guia pràctic (1st ed.). Barcelona: Gama S.L. Servicios editoriales.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1996). Ús i manteniment de l’habitatge. Quadern de l’usuari (1st ed.). Zaragoza: Gràfiques Cometa.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1997). La vivienda: Manual de uso y mantenimient, COAAT de Cantabria. 1ª ed.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1999). La vivienda: Manual de uso y mantenimiento, COAAT Principado de Asturias. 2ª ed. Simancas Edicionas S.A. Valladolid.Instituto de Diversificación y Ahorro de Energía (IDAE), Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio (MITYC) (2010). Guía Técnica: Condiciones climáticas exteriores de proyecto, (available at: http://www.minetur.gob.es/energia/desarrollo/eficienciaenergetica/rite/reconocidos/reconocidos/condicionesclimaticas.pdf ).Instituto Eduardo Torroja de Ciencias de la Construcción (IETCC) (2010). Catálogo de Elementos Constructivos del Código Técnico, versión CAT-EC-v06.3-MARZO10. Madrid.Jáber-López, J. T., Valencia-Salazar, I., Peñalvo-López, E., Álvarez-Bel, C., Rivera-López, R., Merino-Hernández, E. (2011). Are energy certification tools for buildings effective? A Spanish case study, Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Youth Conference on Energetics. Leiria, July 7–9.Johnstone, I. M. (2001a). Energy and mass flows of housing: a model and example. Building and Environment, 36, 27–41.Johnstone, I. M. (2001b). Energy and mass flows of housing: estimating mortality. Building and Environment, 36, 43–51.Kaiser, H. H. (2001). The facilities audit. A process for improving facilities conditions. Arlington: Kirby Lithographic. APPA. The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers.Kjaerbye, V. H. (2008). Does energy label on residential housing cause energy savings? AKF, Danish Institute of Governmental Research.La Roche, P. (2010). Calculating green house emissions for houses: analysis of the performance of several carbon counting tools in different climates. Informes de la Construcción, 62(517), 61–80.Larsen, B. M., & Nebakken, R. (1997). Norwegian emissions of CO2 1987–1994. Environmental and Resource Economics, 9, 275–290.Laustsen, J. (2008). Energy efficiency requirements in building codes, energy efficiency policies for new buildings. Paris: International Energy Agency information paper.Linares, P., & Labandeira, X. (2010). Energy efficiency: economics and policy. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24(3), 573–592.Liska, R. W. (2000). Means facilities maintenance standards. Kingston: R.S. Means Company, Inc. Construction Publishers & Consultants.Majcen, D., Itard, H., & Visscher, H. (2013). Theoretical vs. actual energy consumption of labelled dwellings in the Netherlands: discrepancies and policy implications. Energy Policy, 54, 125–136.Mercader, M. P., Olivares, M., & Ramírez de Arellano, A. (2012). Modelo de cuantificación del consumo energético en edificación. Informes de la Construcción, 62(308), 567–582.Ministry of Development of Spain. Directorate for Architecture, Housing and Planning. Report on cost optimal calculations and comparison with the current and future energy performance requirements of buildings in Spain. Version 1.1, 7th June 2013.Pérez-Lombard, L., Ortiz, J., & González, R. (2009). A review of benmarching, rating and labelling concepts within the framework of building energy certification schemes. Energy and Buildings, 41(3), 272–278.Piper, J. E. (1995). Handbook of facility management: tools and techniques, formulas and tables. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Inc.Popescu, D., Bienert, S., Schützenhofer, C., & Boazu, R. (2012). Impact of energy efficiency measures on the economic value of buildings. Applied Energy, 89(1), 454–463.Ramírez de Arellano, A. (2004). Presupuestación de obras. 3ª ed. Universidad de Sevilla. Secretariado de Publicaciones. Colección Manuales Universitarios, 37.Rodríguez-González, A. B., Vinagre-Díaz, J. J., Caañamo, A. J., & Wilby, M. R. (2011). Energy and buildings, 43(4), 980–987.Ruá, M. J., & Guadalajara, N. (2013). Application of compromise programming to a semi-detached housing development in order to balance economic and environmental criteria. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64, 459–468.Ruá, M. J., & Guadalajara, N. (2014). Using the building energy rating software for mathematically modelling operation costs in a simulated home. International Journal of Computer Mathematics. doi: 10.1080/00207160.2014.892588 .Ruá, M. J., & López-Mesa, B. (2012). Certificación energética de edificios en España y sus implicaciones económicas. Informes de la Construcción, 64(527), 307–318.Rudbeck, C. (2002). Service life of building envelope components: making it operational in economical assessment. Construction and Building Materials, 16(2), 83–89.Ruiz, M. C., & Romero, E. (2011). Energy saving in the conventional design of a Spanish house using thermal simulation. Energy and Building, 43(11), 3226–3235.Sanstad, A. H., Blumstein, C., & Stoff, S. E. (1995). How high are option values in energy-efficiency investments? Energy Policy, 23(9), 739–743.Sumner, J., Bird, L., Smith, H. (2009). Carbon taxes: a review of experience and policy design consideration. Technical Report NREL/TP-6A2-47312. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. US Department of Energy.Tuominen, P., Forsström, J., & Honkatukia, J. (2013). Economic effects of energy efficiency improvements in the Finnish building stock. Energy Policy, 52, 181–189.Ucar, A., & Balo, F. (2009). Effect of fuel type on the optimum thickness of selected insulation materials for the four different climatic regions of Turkey. Applied Energy, 86(5), 730–736.Universidad Politécnica De Madrid. Departamento de Construcción y Vías Rurales (2009). Evaluación de los costes constructivos y consumos energéticos derivados de la calificación energética de viviendas. Precost&E. Fase1.Uzsilaityte, L., & Martinaitis, V. (2010). Search for optimal solution of public building renovation in terms of life cycle. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 18(2), 102–110.Verbruggen, A. (2012). Financial appraisal of efficiency investments: why the good may be the worst enemy of the best. Energy Efficiency, 5, 571–582

Whole Genome Sequences of Three Treponema pallidum ssp. pertenue Strains: Yaws and Syphilis Treponemes Differ in Less than 0.2% of the Genome Sequence

Spirochete Treponema pallidum ssp. pertenue (TPE) is the causative agent of yaws while strains of Treponema pallidum ssp. pallidum (TPA) cause syphilis. Both yaws and syphilis are distinguished on the basis of epidemiological characteristics and clinical symptoms. Neither treponeme can reproduce outside the host organism, which precludes the use of standard molecular biology techniques used to study cultivable pathogens. In this study, we determined high quality whole genome sequences of TPE strains and compared them to known genetic information for T. pallidum ssp. pallidum strains. The genome structure was identical in all three TPE strains and also between TPA and TPE strains. The TPE genome length ranged between 1,139,330 bp and 1,139,744 bp. The overall sequence identity between TPA and TPE genomes was 99.8%, indicating that the two pathogens are extremely closely related. A set of 34 TPE genes (3.5%) encoded proteins containing six or more amino acid replacements or other major sequence changes. These genes more often belonged to the group of genes with predicted virulence and unknown functions suggesting their involvement in infection differences between yaws and syphilis