Gilles Desthieux1,2*
Mattia Manni3
Gabriele Lobaccaro3
Caroline Hachem-Vermette4
Silvia Croce5
Martin Thebault6
Jouri Kanters7- 1High School of Landscape Engineering and Architecture, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (HES-SO), Geneva, Switzerland
- 2University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland, Delémont, Jura, Switzerland
- 3Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
- 4Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada
- 5Eurac Research, Bolzano, Italy
- 6Université Savoie Mont Blanc, Chambéry, Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes, France
- 7Lund University, Lund, Skane County, Sweden
GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT
Editorial on the Research Topic
Solar neighborhood planning: optimize solar energy use in cities through the digitalization of the built environment
The urban environment offers a large solar potential that remains untapped due to administrative (heritage constrains) and social barriers (architectural integration), as well as specific challenges like the limited rooftop’s structural resistance, the competing uses of surfaces, e.g., and inter-building effects (mutual shading, multiple reflections). The premise of this Research Topic is that the neighborhood is the appropriate scale for overcoming these barriers and facilitating the deployment of solar energy in modern cities (Wall, 2024; Manni et al., 2023).
This Research Topic was proposed in the context of the IEA SHC Task 63 “Solar Neighborhood Planning”1, which focuses on the design of neighborhoods with high solar accessibility for on-site energy production and daylighting. Also, this Research Topic is in line with the HELIOS project2, funded by the Research Council of Norway, which aims to develop a digital platform to support to key players in urban energy planning to achieve the solar neighborhood standards, thus boosting the solar energy in the Nordic built environment.
Wall (2024) presents the key points of IEA SHC Task 63, emphasizing the need to secure the “right to light” for everyone. Indeed, guaranteeing the solar access is the preliminary step for boosting solar energy generation and achieving adequate daylighting in a healthy environment (both indoor and outdoor). In addition, climate change and heat wave events highlight the need for “right to shade”, especially in the context of urban heat island. However, there is a lack of specific standards to preserve these rights. Secondly, solar design involves not only active energy production with PV and thermal panels integrated into the building envelope, but also passive strategies that use sunlight to improve indoor and outdoor comfort while reducing energy consumption for heating, cooling, and lighting (Hachem-Vermette et al., 2024). Further Research Topic arise about competing uses of urban surfaces (Croce et al., 2022) as the same surface can have multiple potential usages (e.g., vegetation or solar panels). In this regard, combining two or more solar strategies can be a solution. Additionally, solar neighborhood planning needs to be supported by digital tools and key metrics (Kanters and Thebault, 2022; Kanters et al., 2024) to (i) facilitate stakeholder engagement and citizen participation in the design process (Caballero et al., 2024), (ii) promote social acceptance of solar applications, and (iii) support communities in developing roadmaps for solar energy implementation. Finally, Task 63 explored innovative financing mechanisms and business models for solar neighborhoods to ensure long-term viability and to include and clarify added value (e.g., human health and wellbeing, resilience, energy security, biodiversity) (Wilczynski, 2024).
The Research Topic contains a total of seven papers, three review papers and four original contributions.
The review papers present global approaches and theoretical backgrounds that are central to solar neighborhood planning.
Hachem Vermette et al. review regulatory frameworks in five countries (Canada, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland) related to solar access, passive, active, and general building energy regulations. They identify gaps in existing regulations, standards, and codes, and emphasize the need for future regulations to protect solar access and rights. The study reveals that solar energy legislation is generally scarce, lacks comprehensive planning, and is highly dependent on the national policy system - centralized or federal.
Manni et al. reviewed 112 publications focusing on the model chain for horizontal-to-tilted irradiance conversion at high latitudes. The best-performing decomposition and transposition models were identified, considering multiple time resolutions (1-h, 1-min) and specific configurations such as east-west (E-W) vertical bifacial photovoltaics (VBPV). This aspect is central, since the accuracy of the estimated solar potential influences the solar neighborhood planning.
The main challenge in implementing solar energy in the existing built environment is the growing number of buildings classified as cultural heritage in Europe. Akbarinejad et al. review the economic, geographical, technical, conservative, legislative, and social challenges and barriers of adopting solar energy in high-sensitive neighborhoods in Norway. Potential solutions and strategies are identified to help stakeholders, experts, and authorities in successfully integrating solar energy systems in these areas.
The second group of papers in the special issues showcase innovative concepts and applications at three different scales: regional, urban and neighborhood, group of buildings.
Desthieux and Thebault present the project of the solar cadaster of the Greater Geneva (Switzerland and France). A major outcome was the creation of a public web platform that allows the simulation of PV self-consumption for each building in the region, providing key performance indicators for investment decisions. The project demonstrates that the solar cadaster fosters cohesion among local stakeholders, guiding them towards unified solar energy governance.
Hasan et al. examine the relationship between density metrics and the solar potential of building rooftops and facades in Toronto (Canada). The study identifies key metrics affecting roof solar potential, including building height, density, proximity, and roof complexity. Using simulation models, it highlights which neighborhood profiles are best suited for retrofitting active solar technologies. This research offers a valuable framework for solar neighborhood design, particularly in existing urban areas like Toronto.
The study by Viriyaroj et al. evaluates installation sites for VBPVs in low-rise urban neighborhoods at high latitudes. It highlights that E-W VBPVs align with residential electricity consumption, boosting self-consumption in areas with low solar elevation angles. The research compares VBPVs and monofacial PVs in three residential areas of Helsinki with different densities and shading. Simulations using PVSyst® reveal VBPV systems should be prioritized for unshaded areas.
The study by Ranta et al. highlights the need to explore alternative surfaces for solar PV installations, like carports, and proposes reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of these structures by substituting steel with wood. Simulations performed for Turku (Finland) and Dijon (France) showed that wood-based systems can halve the GHG emissions.
In conclusion, many of the papers show the importance of digital tools for modeling solar access in the built environment. They also highlight that the implementation of solar solutions in the neighborhoods depends on the successful empowerment of stakeholders, especially when facing constraints and barriers. All these contributions cover large parts of the Research Topic Research Topic focusing mostly on active solar strategies. Finally, four papers highlight the growing interest in solar energy at high latitudes as these regions present a unique solar irradiance pattern that can be particularly convenient for VBPV.
Author contributions
GD: Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. MM: Validation, Visualization, Writing–review and editing. GL: Validation, Writing–review and editing. CH-V: Validation, Writing–review and editing. SC: Validation, Writing–review and editing. JK: Validation, Writing–review and editing. MT: Validation, Writing–review and editing.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Footnotes
References
Caballero, N., Balest, J., Giacovelli, G., Akbarinejad, T., Desthieux, G., Formolli, M., et al. (2024). An Integrated Framework for Stakeholder and Citizen Engagement in Solar Neighborhoods. Report from SHC Task 63: Solar Neighborhood Planning and work performed in Subtask B: Economic Strategies and Stakeholder Engagement. Report B3. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2024-0001
Croce, S., Hachem -Vermette, C., Formolli, M., Vettorato, D., and Snow, M. (2022). Surface Uses in solar neighborhoods. Report from SHC Task 63: Solar Neighborhood Planning and work performed in Subtask B: Economic Strategies and Stakeholder Engagement. Report B1. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2022-0002
Hachem -Vermette, C., Singh Grewal, K., Desthieux, G., Hasan, J., and Yadav, S. (2024). Strategies for the design of New and existing high energy performance solar neighborhoods. Report from SHC Task 63: Solar Neighborhood Planning and work performed in Subtask A: Solar planning strategies and concepts. Report A1. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2024-0003
Kanters, J., Thebault, M., Akbarinejad, T., Cederström, C., Czachura, C., Desthieux, G., et al. (2024). Opportunities for improved workflows and Denvelopment needs of solar planning tool. Report from SHC Task 63: Solar Neighborhood Planning and work performed in Subtask C: Solar planning tools. Report C2. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2024-0006
Kanters, J., Thebault, M., Baker, N., Belmonte Monteiro, R., Boccalatte, A., Bouty, K., et al. (2022). Identification of existing tools and workflows for solar neighborhood planning. Report from SHC Task 63: Solar Neighborhood Planning and work performed in Subtask C: Solar Planning Tools. Report C1. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2022-0001
Manni, M., Formolli, M., Boccalatte, A., Croce, S., Desthieux, G., Hachem-Vermette, C., et al. (2023). Ten questions concerning planning and design strategies for solar neighborhoods. Build. Environ. 246, 110946. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110946
Wall, M. (2024). Technology Postion paper of the SHC Task 63: solar neighborhood planning. doi:10.18777/ieashc-task63-2024-0005
Keywords: solar neighborhood, competing uses of surfaces, regulative framework, stakeholder involvement, digital platforms and metrics
Citation: Desthieux G, Manni M, Lobaccaro G, Hachem-Vermette C, Croce S, Thebault M and Kanters J (2024) Editorial: Solar neighborhood planning: optimize solar energy use in cities through the digitalization of the built environment. Front. Built Environ. 10:1487696. doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2024.1487696
Received: 28 August 2024; Accepted: 12 September 2024;
Published: 23 September 2024.
Edited and reviewed by:
Umberto Berardi, Toronto Metropolitan University, CanadaCopyright © 2024 Desthieux, Manni, Lobaccaro, Hachem-Vermette, Croce, Thebault and Kanters. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Gilles Desthieux, Z2lsbGVzLmRlc3RoaWV1eEBoZXNnZS5jaA==