Indoor Air Quality Assessment: Comparison of Ventilation Scenarios for Retrofitting Classrooms in a Hot Climate

energies Article Indoor Air Quality Assessment: Comparison of Ventilation Scenarios for Retrofitting Classrooms in a Hot Climate Carmen María Calama-González * , Ángel Luis León-Rodríguez and Rafael Suárez Instituto Universitario de Arquitectura y Ciencias de la Construcci ó n, Escuela T é cnica Superior de Arquitectura, Universidad de Sevilla, Av. Reina Mercedes 2, 41012 Seville, Spain; [email protected] (Á.L.L.-R.); rsuar[email protected] (R.S.) *Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-954559517 Received: 29 October 2019; Accepted: 2 December 2019; Published: 4 December 2019   Abstract: Current energy efficiency policies in buildings foster the promotion of energy retrofitting of the existing stock. In southern Spain, the most extensive public sector is that of educational buildings, which is especially subject to significant internal loads due to high occupancy. A large fraction of the energy retrofit strategies conducted to date have focused on energy aspects and indoor thermal comfort, repeatedly disregarding indoor air quality criteria. This research assesses indoor air quality in a school located in the Mediterranean area, with the objective of promoting different ventilation scenarios, based on occupancy patterns and carbon dioxide levels monitored on site. Results show that manual ventilation cannot guarantee minimum indoor quality levels following current standards. A constant ventilation based on CO 2 levels allows 15% more thermal comfort hours a year to be reached, compared to CO 2 -based optimized demand-controlled ventilation. Nevertheless, the latter ensures 35% annual energy savings, compared to a constant CO 2 -based ventilation, and 37% more annual energy savings over that of a constant ventilation rate of outdoor air per person. Keywords: school buildings; indoor air quality; CO 2 levels; mechanical ventilation; thermal comfort; energy consumption; Mediterranean climate 1. Introduction Given that the building sector accounts for around 40% of energy consumption [ 1 ] in Europe, increasing energy efficiency in buildings has become a fundamental goal [ 2 ]. As established in Directive 2010/31/EU [ 3 ], it is crucial to reduce the energy needed to adequately cool, heat, and ventilate buildings, fostering alternative solutions that minimize energy demand [ 4 ]. Nevertheless, the slow rate at which existing buildings are being replaced by new constructions [ 5 ] makes it difficult to meet the energy savings proposed in these standards. Thus, the existing building stock must be refurbished in order to provide significant environmental effects [ 6 ]. As a result, current energy policies promote building retrofitting as a main strategic action, as established in Directive 2012/27/EU [ 7 ]. In this regard, Directive 2018/844 [ 8 ] establishes a long-term plan to enhance building retrofitting of the existing stock for its decarbonization, through high-energy efficiency measures, including aspects relating to health and air quality. Equally, the increasing outdoor temperatures due to climate change significantly impact the energy consumption of existing buildings and frequently lead to indoor overheating [ 9 ], which negatively affects thermal comfort and indoor air quality [ 10 ]. These phenomena are more pronounced in the warmer climates of southern Europe [ 11 ], including the Mediterranean area. In addition, the educational building stock is especially sensitive to these issues given the importance of internal occupancy loads in the thermal balance. This sector is the most extensive for public buildings in Energies 2019,12, 4607; doi:10.3390/en12244607 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies Energies 2019,12, 4607 2 of 20 southern Europe [ 12 ]. The Spanish educational building stock was mainly built prior to 1979 [ 13 ], predating the first standard establishing thermal requirements [ 14 ]. This stock consists of 33,667 non-university centers, and just over 7200 of these are located in southern Spain [15]. As established by Stabile et al. [ 16 ], energetically retrofitting existing buildings is key for reducing energy costs in the building sector. For this reason, retrofit strategies in the existing educational stock in Europe have fostered the implementation of consumption-saving solutions, mainly considering thermal and energy-based approaches [ 5 ]. In contrast, indoor air quality (IAQ) is usually relegated to the background, despite its direct relation to health and comfort [17]. In the case of southern Spain, the existing educational buildings do not generally have cooling systems [ 18 ], since the academic year only considers the partial use of these buildings in summer season (classes finish in mid-June and start in mid-September). It is therefore vital to promote alternative retrofit strategies that guarantee adequate IAQ during the periods of use. Among themain IAQindicators, carbon dioxidelevels arequite widespreadwhen assessingindoor spaces, such as educational buildings, where the main polluting source is the human metabolism [ 19 ]. WargockiandWyon[ 20 ]statedthatbothtemperaturesandairqualityinclassroomsareimportantfactors in the learning process, and should be as much a priority as improving teaching methods. Extensive research has shown that spaces with insufficient or inadequate ventilation may lead to occupant discomfort [ 21 ], while having adverse effects on health and cognitive performance [ 22 , 23 ]. Moreover, poor IAQ has serious repercussions on the attendance and learning ability of students [ 24 ], reducing the performance of tasks [ 25 , 26 ], and leading to occupant discomfort. Shendell et al. [ 27 ] reported a statistically significant relation between student absenteeism and carbon dioxide concentrations, stating that a 1000-ppm increase in the difference between indoor and outdoor CO 2 concentration led to an increase of around 10% to 20% in student absenteeism. Branco et al. [ 28 ] analyzed how the exposure to different indoor air pollutants (CO 2 , CO, HCOH, NO 2 , O 3 , total volatile organic compounds, PM 1 , PM 2.5 , PM 10 , and total suspended particles) influence children’s health and comfort. After monitoring 25 nursery and primary schools they concluded that PM 2.5 and CO 2 were the major concerning pollutants. Likewise, Becerra et al. [ 29 ] measured high priority pollutants (such as CO 2 , PM 2.5 , PM 10 , and TVOC, among others) in nine Mediterranean schools. The authors reported that the main indoor air pollutant sources were those related to occupancy and settled dust: CO 2 and PM. Lazovic et al. [ 30 ] assessed PM 10 , PM 2.5 , CO 2 , and NO 2 concentrations in two schools and identified a correlation between PM and CO2concentrations. Several guidelines and standards also consider CO 2 levels to be an adequate air quality indicator in order to modulate the outdoor air flow rate and maintain adequate indoor conditions while limiting energy consumption [31,32]. Natural ventilation is one of the most effective passive strategies for improving efficiency and energy saving [ 33 , 34 ], since it requires no energy to operate. Gil-Baez et al. [ 12 ] assessed the effectiveness of a cross natural ventilation system in a school in southern Spain. They stated that the natural ventilation system allows primary energy savings of up to 33% compared to a mechanical ventilation system. Vivian-Dorizas et al. [ 35 ] analyzed ventilation rates and indoor air pollutants in nine naturally ventilated schools in Athens (Mediterranean climate). The authors concluded that the average ventilation rate in all schools was higher than the minimum value recommended by the standards, with CO2concentrations also above the limit values. In the summer of 2017 in Seville (southern Spain), outdoor temperatures exceeded 30 ◦ C and 40 ◦ C for 67% and 16% of the days, respectively [ 36 ]. Thus, natural ventilation is noticeably dependent on outdoor temperatures [ 19 ]. Additionally, current ventilation standards [ 37 ] require the air to be filtered in order to ensure minimum air quality levels. Hence, natural ventilation based exclusively on opening the windows is usually insufficient to guarantee adequate IAQ conditions in educational buildings, therefore making it necessary to incorporate mechanical ventilation systems. Moreover, the control of the ventilation systems is usually conditioned by users and based mainly on thermal aspects, rather than IAQ [ 38 ] conditions, while the existence of cross-ventilation is also a factor in guaranteeing Energies 2019,12, 4607 3 of 20 the movement of air. Stabile et al. [ 39 ] conducted a study on the effect of natural ventilation on IAQ in several Italian classrooms. They concluded that manual airing based on subjective physical responses could not provide minimum IAQ in the classrooms during severe meteoclimatic conditions. For this reason, mechanical ventilation and heat recovery systems are widely incorporated to achieve adequate IAQ in existing school buildings [ 40 ] and a necessary approach for buildings with a high crowding index [ 16 ]. Schibuola et al. [ 6 ] analyzed a demand-controlled ventilation system to retrofit a university library in Venice, reaching total primary energy consumption savings of up to 33% for a ground-source heat pump. Almeida [ 41 ] explained the benefits of optimized demand-controlled ventilation methods for improving IAQ in classrooms in southern Portugal, comparing a naturally cross-ventilated classroom with a mechanically ventilated one. According to the surveys collected, students prefered the IAQ of the mechanically ventilated classroom. This is because air temperatures were lower and CO 2 concentrations almost never exceeded 1500 ppm, as was the case in 20% of the occupied period with natural ventilation. Stabile et al. [ 39 ] compared the IAQ and energy consumption reported by manual airing (opening windows) and a CO 2 -based demand-controlled ventilation system. Mechanical ventilation results showed a reduction in CO 2 levels and a lower penetration of sub-micron particles. Meanwhile, manual airing showed statistical reductions in CO 2 when longer airing periods were set, also leading to higher sub-micron particle infiltration from outdoors. This paper assessed the IAQ of a monitored school with no HVAC (heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning) system, located in the Mediterranean area. CO2levels monitored for one year were analyzed, considering real use and occupancy patterns. The main objective of this research was quantitative and comparative analysis, through the energy modelling of several ventilation scenarios selected based on the criteria established in current standards. The final aim was to ambiently retrofit the school, evaluating the impact of these scenarios on indoor operative temperatures in the classroom, when free-running conditions (without heating and cooling systems) were considered. The influence of the ventilation scenarios on electricity consumption of the systems (fans) was also assessed. The novelty of this paper is that it assessed whether it is possible to use passive mechanical ventilation systems (no thermal treatment of air) to improve IAQ conditions in Andalusian schools. 2. Methods This paper presents an analysis of indoor ambient variables, combining on-site monitoring techniques and energy simulation modelling. Specifically, IAQ was assessed through the analysis of the carbon dioxide levels recorded in a school classroom in the Mediterranean climate during a whole year, extending previous research conducted as part of the same case study [ 36 ]. CO 2 concentrations were analyzed in three representative periods when the classroom was occupied (winter, summer, and mid-season), and using Matlab R2017, a matrix programming for descriptive statistical analysis [ 42 ]. Moreover, for the purposes of reference, CO2levels were also evaluated during an occupied period. Considering the statistical results obtained, the most unfavorable occupancy pattern of a typical working day was determined, incorporating carbon dioxide levels registered in the classroom during the monitoring process. The aim of this was to evaluate the influence of three ventilation scenarios (explained in Section 2.2) on the indoor temperatures of the classroom during a typical academic year, as well as on the electricity consumption related to the ventilation systems (fans). 2.1. Considerations for the Indoor Air Quality Analysis In the analysis of the case study, maximum values recommended by several standards were taken into account in order to guarantee adequate indoor air conditions. Firstly, the Spanish Standard for Thermal Installations in Buildings (RITE) [ 43 ] recommends maximum values of carbon dioxide levels according to the indoor air quality required in the building. For educational buildings (air quality: IDA 2), it is recommended that indoor CO 2 levels of 500 ppm over outdoor CO 2 concentrations are maintained. Energies 2019,12, 4607 4 of 20 In contrast, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) [ 44 ] recommends not to exceed indoor carbon dioxide levels by over 700 ppm above outdoor concentrations. In addition, this standard states that CO 2 levels should be below 1000 ppm in spaces with working stations with continued exposure to pollutants. Lastly, the European Technical Report CR 1752 [ 45 ] establishes an upper limit depending on the building category, corresponding to the A category, a PPD around 15%, and a ventilation rate of 10 l/(s · person), for sedentary occupants and indoor pollution due to human metabolism. Thus, CO 2 concentrations should be kept below 460 ppm over outdoor levels. 2.2. Considerations for the Air Changes Per Hour Analysis After analyzing indoor air quality analysis, three ventilation scenarios were defined according to the methods established in the Spanish Standard for Thermal Installations in Buildings (RITE) [ 44 ]: (1) Indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp); (2) indirect classification by CO 2 -based constant ventilation (CV); (3) and indirect classification by CO 2 -based optimized demand control (VV). The first two methods are explained in RITE [ 44 ] and are determined through a constant ventilation rate. The first method (CVp) is applied in spaces where people are considered to have a metabolic rate of around 1.2 met and where most of the indoor pollutants are due to the human metabolism. Depending on the building use, indoor air quality is defined and a specific minimum ventilation rate per person is associated to it. In the case of a school classroom, indoor air quality is defined as “IDA 2”, which corresponds to a minimum ventilation rate of 12.5 l/s · person. When the classroom is unoccupied, this method considers no ventilation rate. In addition, the ventilation rate obtained requires constant application when the classroom is occupied, and as a result, it overestimates ventilation necessities. The second method (CV) is also suitable for spaces where pollution is mainly due to human biofluents. In this case, ventilation rates are determined using Equation (1): Q=G/(∆CO2×E), (1) where: Q: Calculated ventilation rate (l/s); G: CO2pollutant loads of the space (l/s·person). For a classroom, this is 19 l/s·person; ∆ CO 2 : Difference between indoor and outdoor CO 2 levels (10 −6 ppm). For IDA 2, a value of 500 ppm over outdoor CO2concentrations was considered; E: Effectiveness of the ventilation system. This parameter was fixed at 0.9 In this study, a third scenario consisting of a variation of the second method (CV) was included in the analysis (VV) in order to optimize the ventilation rate depending on the carbon dioxide levels recorded during a typical working day. Unlike the first two scenarios, VV considers a variable ventilation rate determined from indoor CO 2 recorded during the monitoring of the classroom. For its calculation, Equation (1) was also applied but considering both monitored indoor and outdoor dioxide carbon concentrations. Thus, this variable method allows a better adjustment to a real monitored case study. 2.3. Considerations for the Energy Simulation Analysis: Thermal Comfort and Electrical Consumption Once the geometrical, physical, and constructive characterization of the classroom was obtained [ 46 ], an energy simulation model was constructed to analyze the influence of the ventilation scenarios above on the indoor thermal performance and electricity consumption of the ventilation systems. Neither air heat treatment nor heat recovery systems were considered for the ventilation design. Thermal comfort was assessed considering operative temperatures (both indoor air and Energies 2019,12, 4607 5 of 20 surface temperatures) in the simulation model, which incorporated the calculation procedure of ISO 7726:2002 [47]. For the modelling phase, the energy analysis software Design Builder (v. 4.7.0.027), recognized by the US DOE [ 48 ], was used as an interface to EnergyPlus [ 49 ]. The adjacent spaces of the classroom were also modelled in order to account for their thermal influence. The data from the outdoor variables monitored during the year were incorporated into the weather file used for the energy simulations. Indoor air measurements during an unoccupied period in the monitoring stage were used to validate the energy simulation model following the criteria established in the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Guideline 14-2002 [45]. For the thermal comfort assessment, simulated indoor temperatures were analyzed according to ISO 7730:2005 [ 50 ], considering the classroom occupied in free-running conditions (no cooling or heating system). This standard establishes a method based on the theory formulated by Fanger [ 51 ], determining a reference temperature band according to the seasonal clothing level, air humidity and velocity, activity levels, and a specific predicted percentage of dissatisfied (PPD). Even though several formulations on the adaptive approach (such as CEN EN 15251:2007 [ 32 ], and its revision prEN 16798-1:2015 [ 52 ], or ASHRAE 55:2017 [ 53 ]) have been developed in recent decades, revealing a correlation between indoor and outdoor temperatures, these adaptive models can only be applied with a given outdoor temperature range. Fanger’s method was considered in the case study since it best reproduces the real metabolic rate and thermal resistance values recorded in the classroom [ 36 ]. In addition, as stated in the introduction, the upper limits of the outdoor temperature ranges established in the adaptive standards cited were dramatically exceeded in Seville in 2017. Thus, adaptive models could not be properly implemented in this case study. Hence, in order to determine the thermal comfort band, the following aspects were considered: An average relative humidity of 50%, a metabolic rate of 1.2 met, an interior PPD below 15%, and a thermal resistance of 0.5 clo in summer and 1.2 clo in winter and mid-season. Thus, the thermal comfort bands were 16.1 ◦C to 24.1 ◦C for winter and mid-season and 22.8 ◦C to 26.8 ◦C for summer. When assessing the electricity consumption of ventilation systems, a fan capable of working both at a constant and a variable ventilation rate was introduced into the simulation software. A high-performance,low-consumption, andhelicon-centrifugefanwasselected, meetingtherequirements of the minimum ventilation rates obtained in the calculations (Section 4.3). For each scenario, the operating schedule of the fan was implemented in the energy simulation model, and based on the technical sheets of the product, the corresponding electricity consumption was assigned to each ventilation rate obtained in the calculations [54]. 3. Case Study 3.1. Case Study Description In order to conduct this research, on-site measurements were obtained for a public educational building, Mart í ñez Montañ é s Secondary School, managed by the Andalusian Regional Government. This building is located at latitude 37.37 ◦ N and longitude − 5.97 ◦ W, that is, in southern Spain, in an area with a Mediterranean climate. A south-facing classroom on the second floor of the school was monitored specifically (Figure 1). The 6.95 m × 6.85 m classroom has four windows, which are roughly south facing. The windows, which are 2.40 m high and 1.40 m wide, account for 53% of the façade surface. Table 1shows the constructive and physical properties of the classroom analyzed. The infiltration rate was obtained using a Blower Door test, conducted to characterize the airtightness of the building’s envelope, following the procedure established in ISO 9972:2015 [ 55 ]. The test results showed that the air leakage rate at 50 Pa was V 50 =578 ( ± 0.2%) m 3 /h [ 47 ]. The Persily–Kronvall model was adopted [ 56 ] to convert to infiltration rates expressed in air changes per hour (ACH). Energies 2019,12, 4607 6 of 20 Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20 Figure 1. Floor plan of the monitored classroom with the location of the sensors used and the elements of the proposed ventilation system (explained in Section 4.3). Table 1. Considerations for the energy simulation model. Variable Value Unit Façade: 0.015 m exterior mortar rendering, 0.115 m perforated brick wall, 0.015 m interior mortar rendering, 0.07 m non-ventilated air chamber, 0.06 m partition brick wall and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.32 W/m2·K Partition wall: 0.015 m gypsum plaster, 0.07 m partition brick wall and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.92 W/m2·K Floor/ceiling: 0.02 m artificial stone floor, 0.025 m mortar rendering, 0.30 m ceramic beam filling pieces and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.29 W/m2·K Windows: aluminum frame, 4 mm single glazing, no thermal bridge 5.70 W/m2·K Infiltration rate 0.40 ACH Occupancy rate 0.45 p/m2 Lessons in the school are taught in the morning (from 9:00 to 15:00) for secondary education, and in the evening (from 16:00 to 20:00) for adult education. Although the classroom has a maximum Figure 1. Floor plan of the monitored classroom with the location of the sensors used and the elements of the proposed ventilation system (explained in Section 4.3). Table 1. Considerations for the energy simulation model. Variable Value Unit Façade: 0.015 m exterior mortar rendering, 0.115 m perforated brick wall, 0.015 m interior mortar rendering, 0.07 m non-ventilated air chamber, 0.06 m partition brick wall and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.32 W/m2·K Partition wall: 0.015 m gypsum plaster, 0.07 m partition brick wall and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.92 W/m2·K Floor/ceiling: 0.02 m artificial stone floor, 0.025 m mortar rendering, 0.30 m ceramic beam filling pieces and 0.015 m gypsum plaster 1.29 W/m2·K Windows: aluminum frame, 4 mm single glazing, no thermal bridge 5.70 W/m2·K Infiltration rate 0.40 ACH Occupancy rate 0.45 p/m2 Lessons in the school are taught in the morning (from 9:00 to 15:00) for secondary education, and in the evening (from 16:00 to 20:00) for adult education. Although the classroom has a maximum capacity of 35 students plus a teacher (Figure 2a), the maximum number of occupants during the monitoring process was 21 people (occupancy rate of 0.45 p/m 2 ). The academic year for the school Energies 2019,12, 4607 7 of 20 considers the following no-work periods: Until 8 January; from 23 June to 17 September; and from 20 December. Moreover, the classroom has an external solar protection system (Figure 2b) from its original construction, based on roller blinds made of polyvinyl chloride material (PVC). Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20 capacity of 35 students plus a teacher (Figure 2a), the maximum number of occupants during the monitoring process was 21 people (occupancy rate of 0.45 p/m2). The academic year for the school considers the following no-work periods: Until 8 January; from 23 June to 17 September; and from 20 December. Moreover, the classroom has an external solar protection system (Figure 2b) from its original construction, based on roller blinds made of polyvinyl chloride material (PVC). (a) (b) Figure 2. (a) Monitored classroom; (b) Cross-section of the window: location of outdoor sensors. 3.2. Monitoring System The monitoring system, installed according to EN ISO 7726:2002 [47], consists of the sensors indicated in Table 2, also showing their main technical characteristics. This equipment registers information at 10-min intervals, storing it on data loggers located in the monitoring panel of the classroom. Every 30 min, the monitored data is uploaded to a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) server through a mobile card. The data loggers store information related to several sensors. There is an indoor sensor for carbon dioxide levels in the classroom, as well as two presence sensors, four sensors that measure the aperture of the window, and another four sensors that register information of the shutter aperture levels. It should be noted that the monitoring system only registers the aperture or closure of each window (Y/N): 100% means that all the windows are open. However, no information is provided on the percentage of the aperture of the window or the associated ventilation rate. An outdoor luxmeter and pyranometer were installed on the façade in addition to the indoor sensors. Table 2. Probes in the room monitored. Device Nº Location Unit Range Accuracy CO2 detector 1 On surface: east Wall ppm 0–2000 ±(40 ppm + 4.8 % of reading) Presence detector 2 North walls Y/N 4–15 m - Window opening control 4 Windows Y/N - - Blind level sensor 4 Blinds mm 200–8000 ±25 mm Pyranometer 1 Outdoor W/m2 0–4000 ±2.0% Lux meter 1 Outdoor lux 0–200,000 ±4.0% Information regarding other outdoor ambient variables was also recorded (relative humidity, air temperature, CO2 levels, wind speed and direction) by a local weather station, placed in some test Figure 2. (a) Monitored classroom; (b) Cross-section of the window: location of outdoor sensors. 3.2. Monitoring System The monitoring system, installed according to EN ISO 7726:2002 [ 47 ], consists of the sensors indicated in Table 2, also showing their main technical characteristics. This equipment registers information at 10-min intervals, storing it on data loggers located in the monitoring panel of the classroom. Every 30 min, the monitored data is uploaded to a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) server through a mobile card. Table 2. Probes in the room monitored. Device Nº Location Unit Range Accuracy CO2detector 1 On surface: east Wall ppm 0–2000 ±(40 ppm +4.8 % of reading) Presence detector 2 North walls Y/N 4–15 m - Window opening control 4 Windows Y/N - - Blind level sensor 4 Blinds mm 200–8000 ±25 mm Pyranometer 1 Outdoor W/m20–4000 ±2.0% Lux meter 1 Outdoor lux 0–200,000 ±4.0% The data loggers store information related to several sensors. There is an indoor sensor for carbon dioxide levels in the classroom, as well as two presence sensors, four sensors that measure the aperture of the window, and another four sensors that register information of the shutter aperture levels. It should be noted that the monitoring system only registers the aperture or closure of each window (Y/N): 100% means that all the windows are open. However, no information is provided on the percentage of the aperture of the window or the associated ventilation rate. An outdoor luxmeter and pyranometer were installed on the façade in addition to the indoor sensors. Information regarding other outdoor ambient variables was also recorded (relative humidity, air temperature, CO 2 levels, wind speed and direction) by a local weather station, placed in some Energies 2019,12, 4607 8 of 20 test cells [ 57 ], at a distance of 450 m from the educational building. Table 3shows the technical characteristics of the sensors in the weather station. Table 3. Probes in the weather station. Device Nº Orientation Unit Range Accuracy Thermometer 2 N ◦C−40–80 ±0.15±0.1% Hygrometer 1 - % 0–100 ±3% (0.70%)–±5% (71.10%) CO2detector 1 - ppm 0–2000 ±2.0% Anemometer 1 - m/s 0–50 ±0.5 Vane 1 - ◦0–360 ±2.5 Information registered by all outdoor sensors was included in the weather file used in the energy simulation modelling. Air temperatures monitored inside the classroom during an unoccupied period when the shutters are fully open were used to validate the energy simulation model, as explained in Section 2.3. 3.3. Monitoring Phases The classroom was monitored from May 2017 to April 2018 (12 months), recording data during three representative seasonal periods: Winter, summer, and mid-season. The characteristics of these periods are shown in Table 4. Table 4. Characteristics of periods analyzed. Periods Description Tout (◦C) Hours Analyzed Occupied Hours Winter 1 December to 28 February 1.9–26.2 2160 964 Summer 1 May to 23 June 9.4–46.4 1296 335 Mid-season 1 March to 30 April 5.2–36.5 1464 429 Note: Non-working days have been removed from the winter period. In the statistical analysis of the periods, the following non-working days were erased from the study: From 20 December to 8 January and from 23 June to 17 September. Thus, the analysis conducted is in line with the academic year of the educational building. For reference, a 120-hour unoccupied period (18 to 22 April) was also considered in order to collect indoor CO2values without the influence of users. 4. Analysis of Results Indoor carbon dioxide levels during unoccupied and occupied periods were assessed in order to verify whether IAQ conditions meet the requirements and recommendations of the standards. The ventilation scenarios considered, determined based on the CO 2 concentrations obtained, are then shown. Finally, the influence of each ventilation scenario on indoor temperatures and electricity consumption of the ventilation system was evaluated. 4.1. Carbon Dioxide Levels Analysis: Unoccupied Period Figure 3shows the average carbon dioxide concentrations in the classroom during an unoccupied period and with the windows totally closed. As can be seen, average outdoor CO 2 levels of around 470 ppm were registered, with maximum values of 530 ppm. Inside the classroom, average CO 2 levels of 390 ppm were recorded, with minimum and maximum peaks of 376 and 421 ppm, respectively. Carbon dioxide levels were maintained between 350 and 400 ppm during 70% of the total hours. The rest of the time, values varied between 400 and 450 ppm. Energies 2019,12, 4607 9 of 20 Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 20 the first two days after an occupied period (18 April and 19 April) and are then noticeably reduced (from 20 April to 22 April). Figure 3. Carbon dioxide levels (CO2) recorded inside the classroom during the unoccupied period (18 April to 22 April). Windows were totally closed. 4.2. Carbon Dioxide Levels Analysis: Occupied Periods Figure 4 shows the percentage of hours when the classroom was: (1) Unoccupied, (2) occupied in free-running conditions (without heating and cooling systems), and (3) occupied in thermal comfort (according to ISO 7730:2005) during free-running conditions. In these three cases, the percentages indicated were determined considering 100% of the hours. Figure 5 shows indoor CO2 levels registered in the classroom during the three seasonal periods analyzed and under two hypotheses: (1) Occupied and (2) occupied in thermal comfort (according to ISO 7730:2005). The ranges used to analyze carbon dioxide levels were set considering the following criteria: (1) Values under 500 ppm, which is the lower limit established by the Spanish standard (RITE) [44]; (2) values between 500 and 1000 ppm, which make it possible to identify the hours when the classroom meets the recommendations of the RITE and the RC 1752; (3) maximum values recommended by the ASHRAE, which can be assessed in the range 1000–1500 ppm; and (4) IAQ is considered to be absolutely inadequate when values are over 1500 ppm. In summer, the percentage of occupied hours in comfort, when free-running conditions are considered, corresponds to 100% of the hours occupied in free-running conditions. This is due to the fact that the summer season analyzed is 1 May to 23 June, since these are the working summer months considered in the academic year. However, it is worth highlighting that the classroom is in thermal comfort during less than 5% of the occupied hours in free-running conditions during winter. The results obtained show that most of the time when thermal comfort is met during the winter season, carbon dioxide levels are over 1500 ppm. In mid-season and summer, CO2 levels are usually up to 1000 ppm during comfort hours. Figure 3. Carbon dioxide levels (CO 2 ) recorded inside the classroom during the unoccupied period (18 April to 22 April). Windows were totally closed. The relatively high indoor concentration of CO 2 during this period may be attributed mainly to the closure of the windows and the absence of a mechanical ventilation system in the classroom. Moreover, it should be taken into consideration that the reduction of dioxide carbon levels was progressive. This is easily observed in Figure 3, where CO 2 concentrations are slightly higher during the first two days after an occupied period (18 April and 19 April) and are then noticeably reduced (from 20 April to 22 April). 4.2. Carbon Dioxide Levels Analysis: Occupied Periods Figure 4shows the percentage of hours when the classroom was: (1) Unoccupied, (2) occupied in free-running conditions (without heating and cooling systems), and (3) occupied in thermal comfort (according to ISO 7730:2005) during free-running conditions. In these three cases, the percentages indicated were determined considering 100% of the hours. Figure 5shows indoor CO 2 levels registered in the classroom during the three seasonal periods analyzed and under two hypotheses: (1) Occupied and (2) occupied in thermal comfort (according to ISO 7730:2005). The ranges used to analyze carbon dioxide levels were set considering the following criteria: (1) Values under 500 ppm, which is the lower limit established by the Spanish standard (RITE) [ 44 ]; (2) values between 500 and 1000 ppm, which make it possible to identify the hours when the classroom meets the recommendations of the RITE and the RC 1752; (3) maximum values recommended by the ASHRAE, which can be assessed in the range 1000–1500 ppm; and (4) IAQ is considered to be absolutely inadequate when values are over 1500 ppm. In summer, the percentage of occupied hours in comfort, when free-running conditions are considered, corresponds to 100% of the hours occupied in free-running conditions. This is due to the fact that the summer season analyzed is 1 May to 23 June, since these are the working summer months considered in the academic year. However, it is worth highlighting that the classroom is in thermal comfort during less than 5% of the occupied hours in free-running conditions during winter. The results obtained show that most of the time when thermal comfort is met during the winter season, carbon dioxide levels are over 1500 ppm. In mid-season and summer, CO 2 levels are usually up to 1000 ppm during comfort hours. Energies 2019,12, 4607 16 of 20 Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20 Figure 12. Comparison of annual electricity consumption in the three ventilation scenarios: indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp), indirect classification by CO2-based constant ventilation (CV), and indirect classification by CO2-based optimized demand control (VV). As the results obtained show, the electricity consumption of a ventilation system operating in the classroom at a constant ventilation rate during the whole year, and determined by the indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp), is around 225.6 kWh/year. If a ventilation system calculated using CO2-based constant ventilation (CV) is chosen, the electricity consumption is reduced by 3.8% (217.0 kWh/year). In contrast, the ventilation system determined using CO2-based optimized demand control (VV) allows electricity savings of 34.6%, when compared to the previous option, with a total annual consumption of around 141.9 kWh/year. 5. Conclusions This paper assessed the indoor air quality (IAQ) of an educational building in southern Spain, analyzing the CO2 concentrations monitored in a classroom during a whole year. This research was conducted during three representative periods (winter, summer, and mid-season), comparing the registered values with the upper limits recommended by several national and international standards. In order to obtain CO2 reference values in the classroom in free-running conditions (no internal gains and windows totally closed), an unoccupied 5-day period was also analyzed. Taking into consideration the CO2 levels monitored, three ventilation scenarios were defined in order to compare their influence on the classroom’s indoor temperatures (% of thermal comfort hours) and on the electricity consumption of the ventilation system (kWh/year): 1) Indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp); (2) indirect classification by CO2-based constant ventilation (CV); and (3) indirect classification by CO2-based optimized demand control (VV). The main conclusions reported in this research can be summarized as follows: • During the unoccupied period and with the windows totally closed, the CO2 concentrations monitored in the classroom are below 425 ppm. • When the classroom is occupied, in around 45% of the hours in winter and mid-season, carbon dioxide levels are between 500 and 1000 ppm, concentrations that are registered during 40% of the hours in summer. • However, indoor CO2 levels are significantly high when the classroom is occupied in thermal comfort conditions, even exceeding values of 1500 ppm in more than half of the analyzed hours in winter. • Even though the classroom has natural ventilation mechanisms (windows), the high CO2 values justify the need to promote mechanical ventilation systems, guaranteeing indoor environmental quality in line with the requirements and recommendations of the national and international standards. The ineffectiveness of the natural ventilation mechanisms may be due to the lack of crossed-side ventilation and inadequate operation of these systems by users. Figure 12. Comparison of annual electricity consumption in the three ventilation scenarios: indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp), indirect classification by CO 2 -based constant ventilation (CV), and indirect classification by CO2-based optimized demand control (VV). As the results obtained show, the electricity consumption of a ventilation system operating in the classroom at a constant ventilation rate during the whole year, and determined by the indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp), is around 225.6 kWh/year. If a ventilation system calculated using CO 2 -based constant ventilation (CV) is chosen, the electricity consumption is reduced by 3.8% (217.0 kWh/year). In contrast, the ventilation system determined using CO 2 -based optimized demand control (VV) allows electricity savings of 34.6%, when compared to the previous option, with a total annual consumption of around 141.9 kWh/year. 5. Conclusions This paper assessed the indoor air quality (IAQ) of an educational building in southern Spain, analyzing the CO 2 concentrations monitored in a classroom during a whole year. This research was conducted during three representative periods (winter, summer, and mid-season), comparing the registered values with the upper limits recommended by several national and international standards. In order to obtain CO 2 reference values in the classroom in free-running conditions (no internal gains and windows totally closed), an unoccupied 5-day period was also analyzed. Taking into consideration the CO 2 levels monitored, three ventilation scenarios were defined in order to compare their influence on the classroom’s indoor temperatures (% of thermal comfort hours) and on the electricity consumption of the ventilation system (kWh/year): 1) Indirect classification by the rate of outdoor air per person (CVp); (2) indirect classification by CO 2 -based constant ventilation (CV); and (3) indirect classification by CO2-based optimized demand control (VV). The main conclusions reported in this research can be summarized as follows: • During the unoccupied period and with the windows totally closed, the CO 2 concentrations monitored in the classroom are below 425 ppm. • When the classroom is occupied, in around 45% of the hours in winter and mid-season, carbon dioxide levels are between 500 and 1000 ppm, concentrations that are registered during 40% of the hours in summer. • However, indoor CO 2 levels are significantly high when the classroom is occupied in thermal comfort conditions, even exceeding values of 1500 ppm in more than half of the analyzed hours in winter. • Even though the classroom has natural ventilation mechanisms (windows), the high CO 2 values justify the need to promote mechanical ventilation systems, guaranteeing indoor environmental quality in line with the requirements and recommendations of the national and international standards. The ineffectiveness of the natural ventilation mechanisms may be due to the lack of crossed-side ventilation and inadequate operation of these systems by users. Energies 2019,12, 4607 17 of 20 • If the three ventilation scenarios are compared from a thermal point of view, CO 2 -based constant ventilation reaches approximately 15% more comfort hours per year in free-running conditions compared to CO 2 -based optimized demand ventilation, with more significant differences in winter. Nevertheless, indoor temperatures are quite similar between the ventilation based on outdoor air per person and the CO2-based constant ventilation for all the seasonal periods. • When the associated electricity consumption is taken into account, differences between the three systems are much more noticeable: CO 2 -based optimized demand ventilation allows annual savings of around 35% in comparison with CO 2 -based constant ventilation. Moreover, CO 2 -based optimized demand ventilation consumes 40% less electricity per year than a ventilation based on outdoor air per person. Despite its impact on thermal comfort, in an educational building located in the Mediterranean climate, the use of CO 2 -based optimized demand ventilation leads to very significant savings compared to other constant rate ventilation systems. The results also show that high ventilation rates should be adopted in the case study to enhance IAQ conditions. In this sense, it should be highlighted that the ventilation rates established in the standards considered in this paper provide minimum values. Further research is required on this topic, especially regarding the consideration of how other pollutants may influence IAQ conditions. This paper shows how passive mechanical ventilation systems (without thermally treating air) can be used to retrofit Andalusian schools, improving IAQ conditions with a low electricity consumption. Author Contributions: Á.L.L.-R. and R.S. conceived and designed the experiments; all authors performed the experiments; all authors analyzed the data; all authors have written, reviewed, and approved the final manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by the Spanish government through the research and development project “Energy Rehabilitation of tertiary buildings in Mediterranean climate by optimizing Solar Protection Systems” (ref BIA2014-53949-R). Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Spanish Government. European Regional Development Fund. C.M.C.-G. wishes to acknowledge the financial support provided by the FPU Program of the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (FPU17/01375). Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results. References 1. Eurostat. Statistical Books. In Energy Balance Sheets 2015 Data; Eurostat: Luxembourg, 2017. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/8113778/KS-EN-17-001-EN-N.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2019). 2. Da Graça Carvalho, M. EU energy and climate change strategy. Energy 2012,40, 19–22. [CrossRef] 3. Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010. On the Energy Performance of Buildings. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX% 3A32010L0031 (accessed on 25 June 2019). 4. Attia, S.; Carlucci, S. Impact of different thermal comfort models on zero energy residential buildings in hot climate. Energy Build. 2015,102, 117–128. [CrossRef] 5. Ma, Z.; Cooper, P.; Daly, D.; Ledo, L. Existing building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-the-art. Energy Build. 2012,55, 889–902. [CrossRef] 6. Schibuola, L.; Scarpa, M.; Tambani, C. CO 2 based ventilation control in energy retrofit: An experimental assessment. Energy 2018,143, 606–614. [CrossRef] 7. Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012. On Energy Efficiency. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32012L0027 (accessed on 25 June 2019). 8. Directive Directive 2018/844/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018, Amending Directive 2010/31/EU on the Energy Performance of Buildings and Directive 2012/27/EU on Energy Efficiency. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ES/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018L0844 (accessed on 25 June 2019). Energies 2019,12, 4607 18 of 20 9. Santamouris, M.; Kolokotsa, D. On the impact of urban overheating and extreme climatic conditions on housing, energy, comfort and environmental quality of vulnerable population in Europe. Energy Build. 2015 , 98, 125–133. [CrossRef] 10. Stazi, F.; Tomassoni, E.; Di Perna, C. Super-insulated wooden envelopes in Mediterranean climate: Summer overheating, thermal comfort optimization, environmental impact on an Italian case study. Energy Build. 2017,138, 716–732. [CrossRef] 11. Parry, M.L.; Canziani, O.F.; Palutikof, J.P.; Van der Linden, P.J.; Hanson, C.E. IPCC 2007: Contribution of Working Group II. Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2007. 12. Gil-Baez, M.; Padura, Á .B.; Huelva, M.M. Passive actions in the building envelope to enhance sustainability of schools in a Mediterranean climate. Energy 2019,167, 144–158. [CrossRef] 13. Ministerio de Educaci ó n, Cultura y Deporte. Datos y Cifras. Curso Escolar 2015/2016; Secretar í a General Técnica; Centro de Publicaciones: Madrid, Spain, 2015. 14. Gobierno de España, Presidencia del Gobierno. Real Decreto 2429/1979, de 6 de Julio, por el que se Aprueba la Norma B á sica de Edificaci ó n NBE-CT-79, Sobre Condiciones T é rmicas en los Edificios; Gobierno de España: Madrid, España, 1979. Available online: https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/1979/10/22/pdfs/A24524-24550.pdf (accessed on 2 December 2019). 15. Lizana, J.; Serrano-Jimenez, A.; Ortiz, C.; Becerra, J.A.; Chacartegui, R. Energy assessment method towards low-carbon energy schools. Energy 2018,159, 310–326. [CrossRef] 16. Stabile, L.; Buonanno, G.; Frattolillo, A.; Dell’Isola, M. The effect of the ventilation retrofit in a school on CO2, airborne particles, and energy consumptions. Build. Environ. 2019,156, 1–11. [CrossRef] 17. Krawczyk, D.A. Theoretical and real effect of the school’s thermal modernization—A case study. Energy Build. 2014,81, 30–37. [CrossRef] 18. Junta de Andaluc í a. Programa de Climatizaci ó n Sostenible y Eficiencia Energ é tica de Centros Escolares P ú blicos en Andaluc í a; Junta de Andaluc í a: Sevilla, España, 2017. Available online: https://www.juntadeandalucia.es/ export/drupaljda/planes/18/05/01%20Programa%20climatizaci%C3%B3n%20completo.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2019). 19. De Giuli, V.; Da Pos, O.; De Carli, M. Indoor environmental quality and pupil perception in Italian primary schools. Build. Environ. 2012,56, 335–345. [CrossRef] 20. Wargocki, P.; Wyon, D. Research report on effects of HVAC on student performance. Am. Soc. Heat. Refrig. Air Cond. Eng. ASHRAE J. 2006,48, 23–28. 21. Tham, K.W. Indoor air quality and its effects on humans—A review of challenges and developments in the last 30 years. Energy Build. 2016,130, 637–650. [CrossRef] 22. Mendell, M.J.; Eliseeva, E.A.; Davies, M.M.; Spears, M.; Lobscheid, A.; Fisk, W.J.; Apte, M.G. Association of classroom ventilation with reduced illness absence: A prospective study in California elementary schools. Indoor Air 2013,23, 515–528. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 23. Wargocki, P.; Wyon, D.P. Providing better thermal and air quality conditions in school classrooms would be cost-effective. Build. Environ. 2013,59, 581–589. [CrossRef] 24. Bak ó -Bir ó , Z.; Clements-Croome, D.J.; Kochhar, N.; Awbi, H.B.; Williams, M.J. Ventilation rates in schools and pupils’ performance. Build. Environ. 2012,48, 215–223. [CrossRef] 25. Smedje, G.; Norback, D.; Edling, C. Mental performance by secondary school pupils in relation to the quality of indoor air. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on IAQ and Climate—Indoor Air, Nagoya, Japan, 21–26 July 1996; pp. 413–419. 26. Myhrvold, A.N.; Olsen, E.; Lauridsen, O. Indoor environments in schools—pupils health and performance in regardtoCO 2 concentrations. InProceedingsofthe 7thInternationalConferenceon IAQand Climate—Indoor Air, Nagoya, Japan, 21–26 July 1996; pp. 369–374. 27. Shendell, D.G.; Prill, R.; Fisk, W.J.; Apte, M.G.; Blake, D.; Faulkner, D. Associations between classroom CO 2 concentrations and student attendance in Washington and Idaho. Indoor Air 2004,14, 333–341. [CrossRef] 28. Branco,P.T.B.S.; Alvim-Ferraz,M.C.M.; Martins,F.G.; Sousa,S.I.V.Quantifying indoorairqualitydeterminants in urban and rural nursery and primary schools. Environ. Res. 2019,176, 108534. [CrossRef] 29. Becerra, J.A.; Lizana, J.; Gil, M.; Barrios-Padura, A.; Blondeau, P.; Chacartegui, R. Identification of potential indoor air pollutants in schools. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,242, 118420. [CrossRef] Energies 2019,12, 4607 19 of 20 30. Lazovi´c, I.; Jovaševi´c-Stojanovi´c, M.; Živkovi´c, M.M.; Tasic, V.; Stevanovi´c, Ž.M. PM and CO 2 variability and relationship in different school environments. Chem. Ind. Chem. Eng. Q. 2015,21, 179–187. [CrossRef] 31. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers. 62.1: Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality; ASHRAE: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2013. 32. European Committee for Standardization. CEN 15251:2007. Indoor Environmental Input Parameters for Design and Assessment of Energy Performance of Buildings-Addressing Indoor Air Quality, Thermal Environment, Lighting and Acoustics; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2007. 33. Homod, R.Z.; Sahari, K.S.M.; Almurib, H.A.F. Energy saving by integrated control of natural ventilation and HVAC systems using model guide for comparison. Renew. Energy 2014,71, 639–650. [CrossRef] 34. Van Hooff, T.; Blocken, B.; Timmermans, H.J.P.; Hensen, J.L.M. Analysis of the predicted effect of passive climate adaptation measures on energy demand for cooling and heating in a residential building. Energy 2016,94, 811–820. [CrossRef] 35. Dorizas, P.V.; Assimakopoulos, M.-N.; Helmis, C.; Santamouris, M. An integrated evaluation study of the ventilation rate, the exposure and the indoor air quality in naturally ventilated classrooms in the Mediterranean region during spring. Sci. Total Environ. 2015,502, 557–570. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 36. Calama-Gonz á lez, C.M.; Su á rez, R.; Le ó n-Rodr í guez, Á .L.; Ferrari, S. Assessment of Indoor Environmental Quality for Retrofitting Classrooms with an Egg-Crate Shading Device in a Hot Climate. Sustainability 2019 , 11, 1078. [CrossRef] 37. UNE-EN. 16798-3:2018 Energy Performance of Buildings—Ventilation for Buildings—Part 3: For Non-Residential Buildings—Performance Requirements for Ventilation and Room-Conditioning Systems (Modules M5-1, M5-4); AENOR: Madrid, Spain, 2018. 38. Griffiths, M.; Eftekhari, M. Control of CO 2 in a naturally ventilated classroom. Energy Build. 2008 ,40, 556–560. [CrossRef] 39. Stabile, L.; Dell’Isola, M.; Frattolillo, A.; Massimo, A.; Russi, A. Effect of natural ventilation and manual airing on indoor air quality in naturally ventilated Italian classrooms. Build. Environ. 2016 ,98, 180–189. [CrossRef] 40. Wang, Y.; Zhao, F.-Y.; Kuckelkorn, J.; Liu, D.; Liu, L.-Q.; Pan, X.-C. Cooling energy efficiency and classroom air environment of a school building operated by the heat recovery air conditioning unit. Energy 2014 ,64, 991–1001. [CrossRef] 41. Almeida, R.M.S.F.; de Freitas, V.P. IEQ Assessment of Classrooms with an Optimized Demand Controlled Ventilation System. Energy Procedia 2015,78, 3132–3137. [CrossRef] 42. The Mathworks Inc. MATLAB R2017a Software; The Mathworks Inc.: Natick, MA, USA, 2017. Available online: https://es.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html (accessed on 2 December 2019). 43. RITE. Spanish Standard for Thermal Installations in Buildings (Reglamento de Instalaciones T é rmicas de los Edificios); Ministry of Industry, Energy and Turism, Spanish Government: Madrid, Spain, 2013. 44. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002: Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings; ASHRAE: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2002. 45. CEN European Technical Report CR 1752. Ventilation for Buildings: Design Criteria for the Indoor Environment; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 1998. 46. Calama-Gonz á lez, C.M.; Su á rez, R.; Le ó n-Rodr í guez, Á .L. Thermal and Lighting Consumption Savings in Classrooms Retrofitted with Shading Devices in a Hot Climate. Energies 2018,11, 2790. [CrossRef] 47. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 7726:2002. Ergonomics of the Thermal Environment— Instruments for Measuring Physical Quantities; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2002. 48. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Washington, DC, USA. 2017. Available online: http://www.energy.gov (accessed on 15 December 2018). 49. U.S Department of Energy. EnergyPlus Energy Simulation Software; US Department of Energy: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. Available online: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov (accessed on 15 December 2018). 50. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 7730:2005 (E). Ergonomics of the Thermal Environment—Analytical Determination and Interpretation of Thermal Comfort Using Calculation of the PMV and PPD Indices and Local Thermal Comfort; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. 51. Fanger, P.O. Thermal Comfort: Analysis and Applications in Environmental Engineering; Danish Technical Press: Copenhagen, Denmark, 1970. Energies 2019,12, 4607 20 of 20 52. European Committee for Standardization. CEN/TC 156. prEN 16798-1:2015. Energy Performance of Buildings—Part 1: Indoor Environmental Input Parameters for Design and Assessment of Energy Performance of Buildings Addressing Indoor Air Quality, Thermal Environment, Lighting and Acoustics—Module M1–6; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. 53. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers. ANSI/ASHRAE 55-2017: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy; ASHRAE: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2017. 54. Soler & Palau Ventilation Systems. Mixed Flow Duct Fans with Brushless DC Motors of High Efficiency and Low Consumption. Available online: http://www.solerpalau.co.uk/(accessed on 10 June 2019). 55. International Organization for Standardization. Thermal Performance of Buildings—Determination of Air Permeability of Buildings—Fan Pressurization Method ISO 9972; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. 56. Sherman, M.H. Estimation of infiltration from leakage and climate indicators. Energy Build. 1987 ,10, 81–86. [CrossRef] 57. Calama-Gonz á lez, C.M.; Su á rez, R.; Le ó n-Rodr í guez, Á .L.; Dom í nguez-Amarillo, S. Evaluation of Thermal Comfort Conditions in Retrofitted Facades Using Test Cells and Considering Overheating Scenarios in a Mediterranean Climate. Energies 2018,11, 788. [CrossRef] © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).