The building sector is a significant contributor to global energy consumption, driving the need for innovative and sustainable energy efficiency solutions. This study investigates the potential of integrating bio-composite phase change materials into building envelopes to improve thermal performance and reduce energy demand. A novel bio-composite phase change material was developed, and its thermal properties, including latent heat capacity and melting temperature, were characterized through laboratory testing. The material was then incorporated into a virtual building model using energy simulation software to evaluate its impact on thermal loads and overall energy consumption. The results demonstrate that the bio-composite phase change material effectively reduces peak heat flux and provides a significant thermal lag, leading to an estimated 15%–20% reduction in annual heating and cooling energy use compared to a conventional envelope. A preliminary life cycle assessment also indicates that the bio-composite offers a more environmentally friendly alternative to synthetic phase change materials. This research highlights the viability of using renewable, bio-based materials as a passive thermal management strategy, paving the way for the development of more sustainable and energy-efficient buildings.Keywords: Bio-based insulation, building envelope, energy efficiency, sustainable construction, adaptive materials

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Asdrubali F, Schiavoni S, D’Alessandro F. Life cycle assessment of building materials: A review. Sustainability. 2017;9(10):1806.
2. Beder S. Biomimicry: A new science or an old metaphor? Ethics Sci Environ Polit. 2005;5(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep005003.
3. Benyus JM. Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature. New York: HarperCollins; 2002.
4. Berger A, Gruber P. Bio-based insulation materials: A review. Energy Build. 2011;43(12):3539–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.005.
5. Cinelli N, Angrisano MA, Focardi SM. Biomimicry for sustainable building design: A review of the existing literature. Sustainability. 2021;13(11):6041. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116041.
6. Elmqvist T, Fragkias M, Goodness J, Güneralp B, Marcotullio PJ, McDonald RI, et al. Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.
7. Heiselberg P, Brohus H, Hesselholt L, Rasmussen R, Andersen R, Liu S. Review of occupant behaviour in buildings: Implications for building energy performance and indoor environmental quality. Energy Build. 2015;107:343–53.
8. Hong J, Cho Y. Hygrothermal performance of bio-based insulation materials for building applications: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;47:408–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.050.
9. Jawaid M, Thuvander F. Hygrothermal evaluation of wood-fiber insulation materials. Constr Build Mater. 2017;136:540–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.065.
10. Palumbo M, Lacasta AM, Giraldo MP, Haurie L, Correal E. Bio-based insulation materials and their hygrothermal performance in a building envelope system (ETICS). Energy and Buildings. 2018 Sep 1;174:147-55.
11. Li D, Yang L, Lam JC. Impact of climate change on energy use in buildings in different climate zones: a review. Energy. 2013;60:103–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.07.061.
12. Mendes N, Branco F, Castro P, Fangueiro R. Mechanical properties of bio-based insulation materials for building applications: A review. Constr Build Mater. 2017;147:862–73.
13. Placido E, Soares N, Freitas VP. Life cycle assessment of bio-based insulation materials: A comparative study. J Clean Prod. 2018;180:338–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.111.
14. Wargocki P, Seppänen O, Andersson J, Boestra A, Clements-Croome DJ, Fitzner K, et al. Indoor climate and productivity in offices–how to integrate productivity in life cycle costs analysis of building services. Indoor Air. 2000;10(4):232–43.
15. Zhang Y, Yang H. A review of biomimicry in building envelopes: Towards sustainable and adaptive architecture. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;74:1220–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/ rser.2017.03.033.

The building sector is a significant contributor to global energy consumption, driving the need for innovative and sustainable energy efficiency solutions. This study investigates the potential of integrating bio-composite phase change materials into building envelopes to improve thermal performance and reduce energy demand. A novel bio-composite phase change material was developed, and its thermal properties, including latent heat capacity and melting temperature, were characterized through laboratory testing. The material was then incorporated into a virtual building model using energy simulation software to evaluate its impact on thermal loads and overall energy consumption. The results demonstrate that the bio-composite phase change material effectively reduces peak heat flux and provides a significant thermal lag, leading to an estimated 15%–20% reduction in annual heating and cooling energy use compared to a conventional envelope. A preliminary life cycle assessment also indicates that the bio-composite offers a more environmentally friendly alternative to synthetic phase change materials. This research highlights the viability of using renewable, bio-based materials as a passive thermal management strategy, paving the way for the development of more sustainable and energy-efficient buildings.Keywords: Bio-based insulation, building envelope, energy efficiency, sustainable construction, adaptive materials

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Asdrubali F, Schiavoni S, D’Alessandro F. Life cycle assessment of building materials: A review. Sustainability. 2017;9(10):1806.
2. Beder S. Biomimicry: A new science or an old metaphor? Ethics Sci Environ Polit. 2005;5(1):3–10. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep005003.
3. Benyus JM. Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature. New York: HarperCollins; 2002.
4. Berger A, Gruber P. Bio-based insulation materials: A review. Energy Build. 2011;43(12):3539–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.09.005.
5. Cinelli N, Angrisano MA, Focardi SM. Biomimicry for sustainable building design: A review of the existing literature. Sustainability. 2021;13(11):6041. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116041.
6. Elmqvist T, Fragkias M, Goodness J, Güneralp B, Marcotullio PJ, McDonald RI, et al. Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.
7. Heiselberg P, Brohus H, Hesselholt L, Rasmussen R, Andersen R, Liu S. Review of occupant behaviour in buildings: Implications for building energy performance and indoor environmental quality. Energy Build. 2015;107:343–53.
8. Hong J, Cho Y. Hygrothermal performance of bio-based insulation materials for building applications: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;47:408–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.050.
9. Jawaid M, Thuvander F. Hygrothermal evaluation of wood-fiber insulation materials. Constr Build Mater. 2017;136:540–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.065.
10. Palumbo M, Lacasta AM, Giraldo MP, Haurie L, Correal E. Bio-based insulation materials and their hygrothermal performance in a building envelope system (ETICS). Energy and Buildings. 2018 Sep 1;174:147-55.
11. Li D, Yang L, Lam JC. Impact of climate change on energy use in buildings in different climate zones: a review. Energy. 2013;60:103–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.07.061.
12. Mendes N, Branco F, Castro P, Fangueiro R. Mechanical properties of bio-based insulation materials for building applications: A review. Constr Build Mater. 2017;147:862–73.
13. Placido E, Soares N, Freitas VP. Life cycle assessment of bio-based insulation materials: A comparative study. J Clean Prod. 2018;180:338–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.111.
14. Wargocki P, Seppänen O, Andersson J, Boestra A, Clements-Croome DJ, Fitzner K, et al. Indoor climate and productivity in offices–how to integrate productivity in life cycle costs analysis of building services. Indoor Air. 2000;10(4):232–43.
15. Zhang Y, Yang H. A review of biomimicry in building envelopes: Towards sustainable and adaptive architecture. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;74:1220–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/ rser.2017.03.033.