Architecture and Planning ETDs

Publication Date



An analysis of lifestyles and energy consumption methods is presented. Three approaches to energy conservative housing are discussed: structural, design, and lifestyle. Of the three approaches, this thesis addresses lifestyle only. Among the major lifestyle factors having impact upon residential energy utilization are family factors, household management, attitudes, knowledge, and socioeconomic status. Change and coincident factors also affect energy use. The gross energy consumption method is described and examples of actual studies are given. The method is evaluated and the type of data derived is discussed. Methods which normalize energy consumption (i.e., divide by square footage) are analysis of relationships and descriptive analysis. Each of these methods is described and evaluated. Actual examples are discussed. Adjusted energy consumption methods eliminate all of the physical housing factors so that the effects of lifestyle upon energy use may be examined separately. Four such methods are considered: (1) comparative analysis: lifestyle change; (2) comparative analysis: variance; (3) controlling for physical differences; and (4) actual minus calculated energy consumption. Descriptions, actual examples, and evaluations are given in each case. Methods employing adjusted energy consumption yield the most detailed and specific data regarding the relationship between lifestyles and residential energy consumption.



Document Type


Degree Name


Level of Degree


Department Name

School of Architecture and Planning

First Committee Member (Chair)

William John Siembieda

Second Committee Member

Robert Douglas Busch

Third Committee Member

Job S. Ebenezer

Included in

Architecture Commons