to regulate" (5) for all three parameters room temperature, ventilation and solar shading. For Q2, there
were also answers at all 5 levels for all three parameters, which expressed a big variation in the occupants'
perceived need to regulate the parameters.
winter with the questions "Do you or others in the household, from time to time, open the windows during
the day/night?". In the summer situation, 84% answered yes during the day and 48% during the night. It was
justified by a desire to get fresh air, e.g. after a shower, or because it was (too) warm. In the winter situation,
57% answered yes during the day and 14% during the night. It was justified by a desire to get fresh air, e.g.
after a shower or cooking. It is noteworthy that it was so relatively common to open windows to get fresh air
even when all of the houses had mechanical ventilation. This practice could be initiated by a wish for
increased comfort or be a practice learned during childhood or a practice relevant in a former home. In any
case, it has consequences for the energy consumption during the heating season.
answered no to the question "Is your heat consumption as low as you expected?". According to the
occupants, it was not because of high indoor temperatures. A review of the comments made about the
energy consumption showed that many occupants were surprised at how high it was and that it was higher
than expected and higher than promised. The big differences and the disappointed expectations may to
some extent be explained by a higher than expected consumption of electricity due to some malfunctioning
heat pumps. Behaviour, e.g. bathing habits of families normally also varies much, e.g. between 3 and 36
showers a week per family [4].
This is due to many factors, but if more knowledge and information were available to users about how a
particular behaviour affects energy consumption and the indoor climate, this might influence user behaviour
in a positive direction. This knowledge could to some extent be contained in the technical installations and
be made available as feedback to occupants through a user interface.
other things because evaluations using identical questionnaires are lacking. However, a comparison with the
settlement "Fremtidens Parcelhuse" (Detached Houses of the Future) [4, 5] is possible since a questionnaire
survey were performed with questions identical to the ones used in this study. "Fremtidens Parcelhuse"
closely matches meets the energy requirements as defined in the existing Danish Building Regulations 2010,
which allows an energy consumption that is approximately 33% higher than in the houses of the present
study.
your home?", more occupants were dissatisfied (44% answered yes) in "Fremtidens Parcelhuse" than in the
present study (26% answered yes).
the five indoor climate parameters and a general assessment of the indoor climate summer and winter of
the present study (complying with BR15) and "Fremtidens Parcelhuse" (complying with BR10). All
assessments, except the assessment of noise, were more positive in the houses of the present study. Around
half (48%/58%) of the occupants specified that they experienced noise from the technical installations
during summer respectively winter, whereas these numbers were 33/35% in "Fremtidens Parcelhuse".
majority (68%) specified that they experienced that it was too warm during summer. In the present study,