TY  - JOUR
A1  - Maia‐Silva, Debora
A1  - Kumar, Rohini
A1  - Nateghi, Roshanak
T1  - The Goldilocks Zone in Cooling Demand: What Can We Do Better?
Y1  - 2022-01-18
VL  - 10
IS  - 1
JF  - Earth's Future
DO  - 10.1029/2021EF002476
PB  - 
N2  - The higher frequency and intensity of sustained heat events have increased the demand for cooling energy across the globe. Current estimates of summer‐time energy demand are primarily based on Cooling Degree Days (CDD), representing the number of degrees a day's average temperature exceeds a predetermined comfort zone temperature. Through a comprehensive analysis of the historical energy demand data across the USA, we show that the commonly used CDD estimates fall significantly short (±25%) of capturing regional thermal comfort levels. Moreover, given the increasingly compelling evidence that air temperature alone is not sufficient for characterizing human thermal comfort, we extend the widely used CDD calculation to heat index, which accounts for both air temperature and humidity. Our results indicate significant mis‐estimation of regional thermal comfort when humidity is ignored. Our findings have significant implications for the security, sustainability, and resilience of the grid under climate change.
N2  - Plain Language Summary: Hotter summer days and more frequent and intense heatwaves are causing a sharp rise in demand for air conditioning across the globe. Accurate estimation of demand for space cooling is an integral component of resilient planning, operation, and management of the grid. One widely used metric for characterizing this demand is the Cooling Degree Days (CDD), which is calculated by measuring the difference between the mean daily temperature and a pre‐defined base temperature that represents a “comfort zone.” In this study, we analyze historical data on climate and energy demand and find that the most frequently used base temperature of 65°F in CDD calculations leads to mis‐characterizing comfort zones across different geographic areas in the United States. This can cause significant under‐ or over‐estimations of cooling energy demand. Moreover, we extend the temperature‐based CDD calculations to also account for the role of humidity and demonstrate the cost of ignoring humidity in CDD calculations under present and future climate conditions.
N2  - Key Points: Analysis of electricity demand shows that the widely used Cooling Degree Days (CDD) estimates fall short of capturing regional thermal comfort zones. Estimates of air conditioning penetration and affordability based on traditional calculation of CDD can lead to significant misestimation. Extending CDD calculations to include humidity improves the characterization of climate‐demand nexus under present and future climate.
UR  - http://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gldocs-11858/9916
ER  -