Next Article in Journal
User-Centered Evaluation of the ARTH-Aid ExoGlove: Perspectives of Patients and Therapists in Rheumatoid Arthritis Rehabilitation
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Investigation and Design Optimization of Centrifugal Water Pump with Splitter Blades Using Response Surface Method
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Modeling and Simulation of Non-Isolated DC–DC Converters for Optimizing Photovoltaic Systems Applied in Positive Energy Districts
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Designs
Volume 9
Issue 2
10.3390/designs9020041
designs-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Review of Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Technologies Utilizing Renewable Energy Resources

by
Mohammad Almesbah
and
Julian Wang
*
Department of Architectural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Designs 2025, 9(2), 41; https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9020041
Submission received: 10 January 2025 / Revised: 20 March 2025 / Accepted: 26 March 2025 / Published: 31 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Design and Applications of Positive Energy Districts)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Dynamic building envelopes integrated with renewable energy sources, termed Dynamic and Renewable Source Building Envelopes (DREBE), provide an innovative approach to optimizing building envelope designs. Yet, these systems are not mature enough and not widely adopted in the industry and few literature resources are employed to understand them. These systems dynamically respond and adapt to various environmental, energy, and occupancy demands for higher energy efficiency and comfort levels compared to traditional building envelopes while simultaneously producing energy. Their potential in climate change mitigation and fostering sustainable urban development warrants great attention from industry and urban planners. Especially in positive energy districts, which aim to reach net-positive energy goals through utilizing smart energy efficient building systems on the district level. This paper reviews innovative systems like dynamic photovoltaic shading devices and phase change materials and evaluates their performance by answering two research questions, what are the current DBE trends and are they feasible in achieving net-positive energy consumption? The analysis conducted reveals the dominance of solar-based dynamic renewable energy systems and a great need for alternatives. The study suggests that alternatives like wind as a renewable energy source should be studied with dynamic systems. Moreover, the study highlights current research gaps including insufficient data on long-term application and economic costs associated with such systems. To address this gap, the study suggests exploring in depth some of these systems and then branching into various combinations of dynamic envelope systems with multiple renewable or adaptive components to further enhance the overall building performance. By synthesizing the current body of literature, this paper gives insights into advancing the application of the dynamic building envelope systems and highlights their crucial role in the future of sustainable urban environments.

1. Introduction

The future of building envelopes lies in utilizing renewable energy sources. Non-renewable sources are no longer sustainable due to their limited resources and rapid consumption in the last few decades [1]. Buildings are significant contributors to energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [2] accounting for 30% of global energy consumption and 26% of energy-related emissions in 2024 [3]. Inefficient building envelope designs can also contribute to higher energy consumption due to higher energy and heat transfer [4]. Traditional building envelope systems mainly utilize static layers that do not respond to environmental changes throughout the year. Outdated inefficient designs may not work in modern times considering the increase in energy consumption and high density of urban environments, which contribute to significant climate change effects [5]. Therefore, solutions to reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions in buildings are crucial for a sustainable future.
Positive Energy Districts (PEDs) have been introduced recently as a novel concept in response to the increasing challenges caused by climate change. PEDs consist of interconnected buildings that share an energy exchange system, enhancing the energy efficiency of the connected buildings [6]. In addition, they incorporate smart building systems to improve the building efficiency of the whole PED community. PEDs also utilize Renewable Energy Sources (RES) for generating electricity to provide surplus energy to reach net-positive energy consumption. The incorporation of RES into the building envelope can provide energy production potential while also utilizing large amounts of façade surface areas, especially in dense urban areas.
The building envelope is the exterior protective layer of the building that acts as an environmental barrier between the outdoor and indoor environments. In recent years, the focus of the envelope has shifted towards harnessing the environmental elements rather than deterring them as a barrier [7]. Dynamic building envelopes (DBE) are systems that use some sort of dynamic component that can respond to external factors such as environmental, energy, or occupational changes [8]. These systems can adapt and change their geometric or physical properties to enhance the building energy or thermal performances by harnessing the environment. Some examples of these systems are dynamic shading devices that shade the building façade based on the time of day and seasonal factors to enhance the daylight and thermal performance of the building [9].
The objective of this review paper is to synthesize findings from recent studies and infer the trends of research related to DBE utilizing RES, and discuss the resulting meta-analysis of the studied systems. Two main questions are answered in this review: (1) What are the current trends of DBE integrated with RES; (2) how feasible are they in achieving net-positive energy?
The use of Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) that is applied to the building envelope is a widely researched topic that can bring benefits by incorporating it into PED design by utilizing roof and vertical surfaces to reach net-zero potential [10] and allow other systems to provide the necessary surplus to reach positive energy consumption. The use of BIPV has been well established and significant research has been conducted that proved the effectiveness of these systems in decarbonization by integrating with the building energy system through RES utilization [11]. Building-integrated photovoltaic-thermal (BIPV/T) systems are hybrid systems consisting of PV and thermal energy collectors that can provide heating to the building while simultaneously generating electricity [12]. The authors in ref. [13] did a systematic review of BIPV/T building systems and highlighted the key parameters that affect its integration for achieving near-zero energy potential, such as PV tilt angle.
Shading devices are one solution for PED integration with BIPV technology. Furthermore, it has been proven that shading systems have greater energy efficiency and savings when made dynamic compared to traditional building envelope systems, especially in south-facing façades in the northern hemisphere [14]. For example, the researchers in ref. [15] reported in their paper multiple types of kinetic shading devices and reported that dynamic shading can provide energy savings of up to 30% of the energy in commercial buildings. Researchers in ref. [16] introduced a parametric model to simulate the two-motion effect of rotation and folding of dynamic façades on energy and daylight performances in high-rise offices and reported a decrease in energy consumption of up to 21%, while researchers in ref. [17] developed a method to analyze dynamic envelopes by using parametric models to assess their energy performances. Another paper investigated the improvements of dynamic building envelopes on energy performance compared to static façades [18].
Another solution for reducing building energy heating and cooling demands is to incorporate Phase-Change Material (PCM) into the building envelope. PCM offers significant energy savings when implemented in the building envelope [19]. PCM is a widely researched technology that has been studied and tested to increase the thermal efficiency of building envelopes for decades and has been increasing in use since then [20]. With the incorporation of PCM in walls, energy savings of up to 30% and comfortable thermal levels can be achieved through a thermal battery-like process that reduces thermal fluctuations between day and night cycles [20]. PCM can be used in different locations on the building envelope in windows and walls or installed alongside other dynamic envelope systems to enhance the building’s thermal efficiency. The authors in refs. [21,22,23] investigated building envelope systems integrated with PCM in terms of its heat storage and release property and thermal energy storage efficiencies. Another review considered the climate conditions regarding the thermal performance of buildings incorporating PCM [24].
To achieve a net-positive energy building, buildings can make use of DBE systems utilizing RES termed Dynamic and Renewable Energy Building Envelopes (DREBE). Envelope components like BIPV, PCM, and dynamic shading devices are efficient solutions to make energy-efficient buildings through the building envelope. However, these individual solutions are not always enough to reduce building energy consumption to net-zero levels. DREBEs can provide enough energy savings for energy generation to cover the rest of the building’s demands to achieve net-positive energy. DREBEs combine systems such as BIPV with dynamic shading devices and PCM to improve the building energy and thermal efficiencies while producing energy.
The current body of research regarding the combination of dynamic systems and RES integrated into the building envelope is scarce. The effect of DBE systems on achieving net-positive energy buildings is not well researched. To understand what makes a DBE reach sustainable goals and achieve net-zero/positive energy goals, we need to review different DBE system configurations and assess their performance. Then, we must synthesize their result findings with things such as building typology, location, and system characteristics and configurations. A wide range of topics were discussed regarding the integration of active/dynamic/adaptive building envelopes and many terminologies are used to define the building components [25,26,27]. However, articles summarizing dynamic building envelopes with renewable energy sources are limited, with very few review papers written on them in the past 11 years.
Current literature reviews do not answer the question of how to achieve net-zero or net-positive goals using dynamic, adaptive façades utilizing renewable energy sources. This paper bridges this research gap by compiling articles regarding DBE systems and providing a meta-analysis of the reviewed papers based on their study methodology, system types, and building typology, so one can be informed about the current trends or gaps that are inferred from the analysis.
This review paper conducts a systematic review on the topic of renewable energy sources incorporated in DBE systems and analyzes the trends of such systems in recent years and synthesizes their configuration with building typology information to highlight what makes such systems achieve higher energy savings and reach net-positive potential. Using systematic search and analysis methods to investigate the recent trends in dynamic envelope systems, classifying each technology by type, and highlighting their performance metrics. The meta-analysis will highlight the primary factors, such as building typology, climate, seasonal testing conditions, and system configurations that contribute to reaching net-positive potential. The contribution of this systematic review will offer insights for future researchers, field specialists, and policymakers on the sustainability of these systems and it will offer a summary of the system objective results for understanding the potential of integrating DBE system designs. Compiling the details of dynamic envelope systems and their energy-saving results will also help highlight current research gaps and future research pathways that can be undertaken by future researchers.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 details the review methodology on how the literature body was searched and collected. Section 3 provides an overview of the reviewed systems and conducts a detailed meta-analysis of the papers focusing on the combination of DBE systems and technologies integrated with RES. Section 4 discusses the results and suggests what future research can focus on. Finally, Section 5 concludes the findings from this paper.

2. Review Methodology

This section provides a systematic approach to gathering research articles focusing on DBE systems that incorporate RES using precise inclusion and exclusion criteria and established key terms. The literature search was conducted using the search databases of Web of Science, Engineering Village Compendex, and Google Scholar. Web of Science and Engineering Village Compendex were used as the search medium to find relevant literature on the Dynamic + Renewable topic using a comprehensive search of terms and keywords, while Google Scholar was used to find articles through manual search or through article references.
The criterion of search included a combination of terms and keywords. Terms such as dynamic building envelope, energy generation, adaptive façade, net positive energy buildings, active building envelope façade, renewable energy source, and phase change material PCM were used to narrow down the body of literature to the relevant topic. In addition, the keywords included provide further specifics for the search, these keywords include: BIPV, PCM, piezoelectric, positive energy, thermoelectric materials, renewable energy source, adaptive building, and positive energy district. The search query is (dynamic building envelope) AND (energy generation) OR (adaptive façade) AND (net positive energy buildings) AND (renewable energy source) AND (phase change material PCM) followed by the keywords that were used set to INCLUDE or set to OR operators.
The inclusion criteria include any paper with a DBE system that utilizes some sort of energy generation through renewable energy sources. Articles mentioning climate-responsive building elements studies are included. Studies with a focus on achieving energy savings and energy efficiency through individual components of the system or the combination of dynamic + renewable are included in the literature review. The range of literature searches includes peer-reviewed journal articles published within the past 11 years from 2013–2024.
The exclusion criteria for paper screening are based on whether the studies address dynamic envelopes only with no renewable energy generation present like those with dynamic shading elements. Excluded are articles that study both dynamic envelopes and renewable energy generation as separate non-integrated case studies, and papers presenting a static envelope system and no renewable energy generation. Articles purely focusing on theoretical models or hypothetical materials were excluded.
Figure 1 shows the methodology flowchart used in this review. The reasons for excluding some articles at the end of the screening process is because after accessing and reading the full article it was found that some articles include multiple case studies that are studied separately, and some do not include energy generation or dynamic components.
A challenge in searching the literature is the many different terminologies and keywords used to define the same building envelope system or component. To address this, refs. [25,26] papers’ terminology review was used to obtain a general idea of the different naming conventions used for the many building envelope terminologies.
For the purposes of this review, a dynamic envelope is defined as a system where the components act to adapt, respond, or change to sustain an environment at efficient energy and comfort thermal levels. Systems such as adaptive PV panels dynamically adjust to sustain the maximum energy generation possible while also reducing building loads through increased or reduced solar heat gains into the building’s glazed façade. A PCM system in this case transitions the phase of the material from solid to liquid and vice versa when absorbing or releasing heat to prolong the heat transfer and reduce thermal fluctuations. After collecting a total of 21 papers, the systems were categorized into two primary types: Kinetic dynamic envelopes and Passive dynamic envelopes. Kinetic dynamic envelopes are characterized by moveable components such as adjustable or motorized PV modules like those used in shading devices. Passive dynamic envelopes include systems incorporating PCM. A meta-analysis of the reviewed papers will outline their system’s configuration and objective in terms of what type of envelope component is being studied (e.g., wall, glazed façade, double-skin façade (DSF), windows, etc.), what type of RES is utilized, location and climate characteristics, does the paper mention net-zero or net-positive goals, and how the study is conducted as well as the objective results.

3. Results

3.1. Overview of Dynamic Building Envelopes

For ease of identifying the systems, the dynamic envelope systems studied were classified into two categories: Kinetic Dynamic envelope systems and Passive Dynamic envelope systems. Kinetic dynamic envelope systems include technologies such as dynamic PV shading devices, movable components with solar tracking, and piezoelectric systems. In contrast, Passive dynamic systems include PCM, thermoelectric materials, and rooftop PV units with PCM in walls or paired with PV systems. Dynamic envelope systems in this study can be broadly categorized into paired systems or unpaired. Paired systems are usually located in the same location or are one combined component. Unpaired systems are usually located elsewhere and are not one combined component. Both of those system types share the characteristic of being linked and affecting the building system jointly.
The structure of this section is as follows: First, the configurations of the studied systems and their objectives are detailed. Second, the methods of study employed to achieve the objectives are presented. Third, the system performances and the objective results are summarized. This review paper analyzed a total of 21 papers and conducted a meta-analysis, which is detailed in this section. Table 1 summarizes the reviewed papers in terms of which dynamic envelope component was used and what renewable energy sources are present. The main points detailed in this review are the type of envelope component, renewable energy source, study methodology, building typology, season, and climate. The types of envelope components include dynamic PV and PCM, and renewable energy sources include solar energy harvesting PV, thermoelectric generators, and piezoelectric generators. The methodology of the studies includes experimental, simulation, or both, and building typology includes commercial or residential buildings. Finally, included are the season and climate of which the study investigates. The results of the envelope systems studied are reported in the subsequent sections focusing on their energy, thermal, and visual performance metrics.

3.2. Renewable Energy Sources

Three renewable energy sources are utilized in the reviewed papers: solar energy through PV generators, waste heat harvesting through thermoelectric generation, and wind-induced vibrations captured by piezoelectric generators. Solar energy harvesting was the most studied RES, as has been mentioned in refs. [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,44,45,46,47,48,49], which accounted for 90% of the reviewed papers from the time interval between 2013 and 2024, highlighting the predominant use of PV technologies. PV technologies used include dynamic PV shading devices, solar tracking PV modules, and rooftop PV installation. Thermoelectric generation has been discussed in one study in ref. [43]. Thermoelectric generation uses blocks embedded in the walls to collect heat that is transferred through the wall throughout the day and night cycles. And only ref. [42] mentioned using piezoelectric energy generation through wind-induced actuation and vibrations. Figure 2 visualizes the distribution of each envelope system for the studied papers.
Most of the studied envelopes are located on the walls, specifically glazed façades. Some of these system’s components are located at different locations and others are located in the same shared space. For example, in ref. [37] PCM was used to reduce the size of the rooftop PV system. For dynamic PV systems, a general method used is multi-objective optimization due to the conflicting nature of having both the dynamic shading and energy generation in one shared location in the envelope. For most PCM systems, the energy saving from PCM contributes to the overall building energy system while being located in a different space from the PV modules.

3.3. Dynamic Envelopes

About 47% of the papers mention PCM in their study [32,37,38,39,40,43,45,46,48,49]. The topic of dynamic façades has slowly gained traction in the last few years, specifically in regard to dynamic facades with integrated RES (Figure 3). Adaptive PV has been the most widely used dynamic envelope system in recent years.

3.3.1. Kinetic Dynamic Envelopes

About 43% of the studied papers are about dynamic or adaptive PV systems with some sort of movement control [29,30,31,33,34,35,36,41,44,46]. Their system configurations and characteristics as well as objectives are described in this section.
The authors in ref. [29] proposed a dynamic, adaptive, and vertical photovoltaic integrated building envelope (dvPVBE) that consists of 24 aluminum alloy blind slats integrated with PV cells on a glazed façade. The slats act as a weather and occupant-responsive dynamic envelope system that provides thermal and visual comfort, and energy-saving potential. The slats can be controlled manually by indoor occupants or automatically by responding to weather conditions and occupants’ demands with three prioritization strategies: power generation priority (PGP), energy saving priority (ESP), and natural daylight priority (NDP). Researchers in ref. [44] introduced dynamic thin-film PV panels utilizing soft-robotic solar tracking technology to enhance the energy generation, heating, and shading performances of the building façade. In a similar case study, researchers in ref. [47] used the same dynamic envelope prototype as a prior research study. Researchers in ref. [36] implemented dynamic BIPV façade modules in a case study. The BIPV modules consist of 72 PV panels spread over two stories of glazed façade that each change their respective orientations to provide the maximum amount of solar irradiance on the cells while also minimizing the daylight illuminance values below 300 and above 3000 lux. Researchers in ref. [31] studied a dynamic PV façade employing a biomimetic design that copies the adaptive characteristics of nature. Each PV is an individual component, and the components are motorized for precise controls and for optimizing harvesting and saving energy. The study also employs a lighting control system to ensure adequate lighting levels are present in the room and sensors for occupancy and energy saving when the room is not used. The objective of the study is to optimize the energy generation potential with visual comfort in glazed office buildings using the dynamic PV façade.
Researchers in [30] studied the geometry and operation of a dynamic PV shading device (PVSD) in terms of reducing building energy loads and increasing PV energy generation to find the optimal geometry and operational configurations. Researchers in ref. [35] considered two Dynamic PV-integrated moveable shading devices (PVIMSD) and overhangs (PVIO). These dynamic envelopes are termed under the umbrella of Adaptive envelope Technologies (AET). The overhangs are situated atop windows to provide shading for energy saving and PV generation through dynamic position and angle changes throughout the year. They can change from vertical to horizontal states during winter and summer conditions, respectively. The PVIMSDs are deployed atop roofs to allow the cool roof surface to be shaded or exposed depending on the seasonal conditions. In the summer, the PVIMSDs are moved to shade the south façade of the building and expose the cool roof, while in the winter the PVIMSD is set to cover the cool roof and keep the façades exposed. Researchers in ref. [41] Introduced new PV-integrated dynamic overhangs in windows that have the ability to slide and rotate to provide shade and energy generation. Researchers in ref. [33] introduced a novel approach to sliding windows with PV and PCM to enhance the energy and thermal efficiency of the buildings. Researchers in ref. [34] introduced a similar concept of PVSDs to ref. [41].
Piezoelectric generators use vibrations to generate electricity. Only one paper mentioned the piezoelectric system in their study [42] that introduced a smart origami sunscreen system as a redesign of the dynamic sunscreen system that was developed for the Al Bahar towers in Abu-Dhabi. This new design utilizes an actuation and wind harvester that also acts as a dynamic sunshade for the building façade using piezoelectric generators termed Wind and Actuation Energy Harvesting Tensegrity Adaptive Building Screens (WTABS). The design uses 42 piezoelectric cables to generate energy in the sunscreens through wind-induced vibrations.

3.3.2. Passive Dynamic Envelopes

Passive dynamic envelopes primarily use Phase-Change Material (PCM) for their energy-saving potential and thermal performance enhancements by incorporating it inside walls, roofs, or PV modules. These systems effectively stabilize the thermal levels of the envelope and reduce cooling and heating demands. Researchers in ref. [37] used PCM to reduce the system size and costs of a hybrid solar system. The hybrid solar system consists of solar- and fossil-based systems to power the building. The Photovoltaic-Thermal (PVT) system is installed on the rooftop and is used to collect heat and generate electricity for the building, while the PCM is installed in the building façade to provide energy savings. Researchers in ref. [38] introduced a planet-based PCM to investigate the effect of electricity cost reduction using the PCM as a thermal battery instead of normal PV storage batteries. Their envelope system consists of PCM in the building insulation and a rooftop PV array. Their research studies the use of PCM in the wall on increasing the self-consumption of the rooftop PV modules. The study uses an optimization approach using a home energy management system (HEMS) to minimize building energy costs and maximize PV self-consumption.
Researchers in ref. [45] studied a Double Skin Façade (DSF) system energy performance with the addition of BIPV and PCM in the outer glazed façade. In ref. [49], a PV-PCM DSF envelope system was analyzed as part of the study with the PCM layer behind the PV layer. Researchers in ref. [48] introduced a PV-PCM glazed double skin façade building envelope similar to their previous study in ref. [49] with the PCM integrated behind the PV modules to absorb excess heat to improve thermal levels and reduce cooling loads by diverting and using that excess heat elsewhere. Researchers in ref. [32] introduced a double PCM building envelope with PV to improve the thermal and electrical efficiency of the building. The objectives of the study were to enhance PV efficiency by incorporating PCM, therefore reducing overheating and enhancing thermal insulation to minimize indoor energy use. Researchers in ref. [40] studied a PV Trombe wall (PV/TW) incorporating PCM for the thermal and electrical performances of the PV. Researchers in ref. [39] studied the thermal and electrical performance of a building envelope with PCM and a distributed PV system and compared it to a building with PV only. Researchers in ref. [46] introduced a BIPV with PCM behind the modules to enhance the thermal performance of the building and PV panels and termed it BIPV/PCM. Researchers in ref. [43] Utilized in their study a thermoelectric generator to utilize the potential of waste heat in the building walls to generate electricity to power sensors and circuits. A thermoelectric energy harvesting block was employed with PCM in building walls to harvest waste heat from the temperature difference and heat flow between building wall surfaces to generate electricity.

3.4. Method of Study

The methods used in the papers were also collected. These methods include experiments, simulations, or both performed in the same study. Experiments may include on-site, laboratory, or similar on-site experimentation. The experimental work has been performed with different types of dynamic components and systems and no experimental work is the same. The simulations conducted by the reviewed studies differ, some are numerical calculations and others perform the simulations using tools and software like Rhino3D and the Grasshopper Plugin, the TRNSYS tool, and other tools.
In total, 16 out of 21 papers conducted only simulations in refs. [29,30,31,32,34,35,36,37,38,41,42,45,46,47,48,49], 2 out of 21 conducted only experimental work [34,37], and 3 out of 21 did both experimental and simulations [33,39,44]. Figure 2 (right) shows the distribution of methods of the studies for all 21 papers. Researchers in ref. [29] used EnergyPlus simulations for the energy performance of the dvPVBE to calculate the heating and cooling loads, energy generation, and daylighting performance. Only the PGP and ESP control strategies were employed and the NDP strategy was left for future studies due to its dependency on occupancy which was not included in this study. Researchers in ref. [35] used EnergyPlus simulations to assess the energy efficiency of a prototype building under three combinations of dynamic shading configurations. The AETs are controlled via an Energy Management System (EMS) that provides high-level supervisory controls that are like those used in real buildings. The control strategy was set to maximize annual energy savings by adjusting the AET’s positioning for the dynamic roof and overhangs. Researchers in ref. [37] used the TRNSYS tool and numerical simulations to assess the three Es, energy, exergy, and economic impacts of the envelope system.
Researchers in ref. [38] conducted a numerical simulation with the use of HEMS to optimize the operation of the building HVAC system to reduce operation costs and maximize PV-self consumption. Using four simulation scenarios of fixed HVAC operation using deadband control without PCM, deadband control with PCM, HEMS optimized control without PCM, and HEMS control with PCM. The researchers in ref. [42] conducted a numerical simulation of the dynamic WTABS to simulate the actuation motions and wind-induced vibrations. Researchers in ref. [46] did a numerical simulation for correlating various parameters such as PCM and air gap thickness, PV height, and air mass flow rate to the energy production of the PV units. Using a Taguchi L9 method to optimize the objectives of maximizing the PV energy production and heat extraction and minimizing PV panel temperature. Researchers in ref. [32] conducted a parametric numerical simulations study using TRNSYS for the double PCM layer envelope and compared it to three system configurations: one with PV and no PCM, one with a single PCM layer near the PV, and a single PCM layer near the interior layer.
Researchers in ref. [45] considered climate conditions, orientation of the building, cavity width, and glazing type as the parameters studied for the DSF. A simulation was performed in the DesignBuilder software with and without PCM integration into the DSF for three cases without PCM, with PCM and PV integration, and with PCM but without PV integration. Researchers in ref. [47] did a similar case study to [44]; they developed a simulation framework to provide results that can help in the control strategies of the dynamic PV orientations. Researchers in ref. [49] did a numerical analysis to investigate the thermal and electrical performance of a PV-PCM integrated DSF system. The integration of PCM was used to provide the PV modules with a higher thermal efficiency. The primary goal of the paper was to develop a physical-mathematical modeling of the proposed PV-PCM DSF.
Researchers in ref. [36] did a multi-objective optimization (MOO) approach to obtain maximum irradiance on the dynamic BIPV modules while also minimizing both internal values of illuminance below 300 lux and above 3000 lux. The MOO approach was performed in the Rhino3D and Grasshopper software using a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-2) using the Wallacei Grasshopper plugin. Using Honeybee (Grasshopper plugin inside Ladybug tools), the illuminance and irradiance analysis were conducted. Researchers in ref. [31] conducted a simulation using Rhino/Grasshopper to model the problem parametrically and using the Honeybee plugin for the environmental and energy simulations with Radiance and Daysim to optimize between visual comfort and energy savings. Using Galapagos to do a MOO approach to optimize PV layer orientation and lighting system controls. The daylight factor (DF) and Daylight Glare Probability (DGP) are the two main indexes used in this paper for assessing the simulations. DF is used to provide an idea about the availability of natural sunlight in a space. The higher the DF means the better lit the room is. DGP is used to provide a metric for the probability of glare happening in space due to brightness contrast. Researchers in ref. [34] conducted parametric simulations using Ladybug tools in the Grasshopper ecosystem for simulating energy consumption and daylighting. Similar to ref. [41], they employed three dynamic control strategies: rotation, sliding, and a hybrid combination of sliding and rotation. Researchers in ref. [48] used a MOO approach to investigate the use of PV-PCM technology in a glazed DSF building envelope using MATLAB’s genetic algorithm framework with the goals of minimizing thermal loads and indoor temperature variations and used the results in the TRNSYS software. The goal of the optimization is to assess the effect of the parameters of ventilation flow rates and operation on the thermal and energy performance of the building.
Researchers in ref. [41] conducted a simulation and optimization to find the optimal configurations for the dynamic PV overhang to maximize energy production and minimize energy use through sliding and rotating overhangs located above windows. The authors investigated parameters such as depth and tilt angle for the overhang. Utilizing DOE-2.2 for the building thermal loads and the System Advisor Model (SAM) for simulating the PV energy production. The dynamic PV shading devices were compared with their static counterparts to assess their energy-saving potential. Three configurations were investigated: static, sliding only, and sliding-rotating overhangs with three options of no PV, load-tracking for maximum reduction in building loads, and PV-tracking overhangs for maximum energy generation. Researchers in ref. [30] utilized a parametric approach using Rhino3D and Grasshopper to optimize the geometric patterns of the PVSD and determined four case patterns for simulating. The four scenarios simulated included scenario A with a 4-panel configuration with limited motion control, B with 36 panels with limited motion controls, C with 36 panels with extended motion control, and D with 4 panels and precise and individual motion controls. Using Galapagos to optimize the objective functions.
The following studies used experimental work to conduct their research. Researchers in ref. [44] developed a real-scale dynamic envelope prototype to study the objectives of maximizing PV energy generation and reduction in building energy usage for their prototype dynamic envelope and simulated the energy production and saving performances for three other locations. Researchers in ref. [43] did experimental work to find the annual energy generation of the thermoelectric energy-harvesting block. They used the TRNSYS tool to simulate the outdoor environment and provided the resulting annual data to conduct the experimental work and simulate the day-night cycles. Researchers in ref. [39] did experimental work by building two small-scale building models, one without PCM and one incorporating PCM. They gathered data on-site and used it for the EnergyPlus input for the building model validation. Researchers in ref. [40] did experimental work to assess the impacts of PCM on the electrical and thermal performance of the PV Trombe wall with PCM integrated. They built two small-scale experimental models with a south-facing Trombe wall, one integrated with PCM and one without. Using a combination of temperature, voltage, current, and airflow sensors to assess the performance of the envelope system. Researchers in ref. [33] conducted experimental work and numerical simulations using ANSYS 2020 R2.

Site and Building Typology

This part summarizes the typology of the buildings and sites being studied. Each location and building type, commercial or residential, is summarized in this part. Table 2 summarizes the articles’ study types, building typologies, locations, and seasons. The experimental work or simulations were conducted in different seasonal or climate conditions. With how certain renewable energy source availability changes based on climate, geographical location, and seasonal changes affecting solar radiance intensity, the studies’ location and climate are detailed in this section. By providing this section, we can analyze what systems might work better in what climate or seasonal conditions compared with what might happen when it is somewhere else.
The authors in ref. [29] simulated their proposed dynamic vertical façade in the city of Beijing, China for a typical office building in the autumn, vernal equinox, and winter and summer solstices. In ref. [37], the researchers used a two-story residential building in Tabriz, Iran as an annual case study. And in ref. [38], the authors did an annual case study in Australia for five different cities including Syndey, Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth. They studied fifty residential homes in each city (10 for Perth) with real energy demand and PV generation data. Researchers in ref. [30] studied their envelope in a hot and humid climate on a typical sunny summer day condition in Houston, Texas. Researchers in ref. [44] used a case study for a prototype in Zurich, Switzerland in the summer conditions while also conducting simulations for Helsinki, Zurich, and Cairo. Similarly, the authors in ref. [47] conducted a simulation for the same case study in Zurich. Researchers in ref. [42] studied the dynamic sunscreen system as a redesign of an existing envelope of Al-Bahar towers in Abu Dhabi. Researchers in ref. [45] utilized three design scenarios and simulated them in six cities of Iran, Tehran, Tabriz, BandarAbas, Esfahan, Shiraz, and Yazd with different climates for a year-round simulation. In ref. [49] three climate conditions of Venice (Italy, warm), Helsinki (Finland, snow, fully humid), and Abu Dhabi (UAE, hot arid) were studied. Researchers in ref. [35] simulated a commercial office building in Denver as the baseline and compared it to the performance of buildings located in Tucson, AZ, El Paso, TX, Denver, CO, and Rochester, MN in the United States. Researchers in ref. [36] used the University of Technology Sydney in the city of Sydney, Australia as the case study for its dynamic BIPV envelope system. The times simulated are 8AM, 12PM, and 4PM for the solar analysis for the March equinox (Summer season in Australia). Researchers in ref. [31] simulated a south-facing glazed façade office space in Montreal, Canada. Researchers in ref. [48] did their simulation for the temperate climate of Venice, Italy in summer and winter conditions. The simulations were performed for the whole year. Researchers in ref. [46] used the weather of Arlington, Virginia for their numerical calculation simulations. Researchers in ref. [41] studied their dynamic PV overhang for the four types of climates of Chicago, IL; Boulder, CO; San Francisco, CA; and Phoenix, AZ in the US. Researchers in ref. [32] simulated their study for a south-facing room of a building in Guangzhou, China in the summer, winter, spring, and autumn seasons. Researchers in ref. [34] did their simulations in Qingdao, China for an office building room with a south-facing window façade. Their simulation was conducted in the whole year conditions. Most of these studies were conducted on singular buildings with no interaction with neighboring buildings.
Researchers in ref. [43] did their experimental and simulation analysis for the climate of Seoul, South Korea. Researchers in ref. [39] did their experimental work in Changsha, China for the summer and winter seasons. Researchers in ref. [40] did the experimental work in the city of Hawija, Iraq in the summer conditions with two Trombe wall systems with a south-facing façade. Researchers in ref. [33] did the experimental work in Egypt in summer conditions.

3.5. Building Performance Metrics and Outcomes

The energy-saving and generation results are summarized in this part. The performances include thermal, visual, and energy. Economic and environmental performance results are also included and summarized in this section. The type of results expected and used as an objective is mentioned for each study to obtain a general understanding of what type of dynamic envelope system is used for what performance objectives or goals. In the case of this review paper, it was important to understand whether each reviewed paper mentions net-zero or net-positive goals explicitly or not.

3.5.1. Energy Performance

The energy saving resulting from incorporating dynamic envelope systems with RES using various systems combinations and configurations are detailed in this section. Researchers in ref. [29] reported 131% of the annual energy for office rooms has been met, and there has been an increase of 226% in annual net energy output when using the dvPVBE compared to static PV blinds. The optimal slat angles ranged between 45° and 60° for the case in Beijing, China. Researchers in ref. [36] state the difference in energy generated potential was reported to be a 21.53% increase compared to the static envelope. An increase of 1.16% was also achieved by minimizing indoor illumination values above 3000 lux for the dynamic envelope compared to its static counterpart. Researchers in ref. [31] reported that the dynamic PV façade reduced the lighting and cooling loads in the summer months by more than 50%. Researchers in ref. [41] reported annual energy savings for the sliding-rotating overhangs relative to the no-overhang cases with savings of up to 105% for San Francisco and 92% for Phoenix, which are relatively hot climates, and savings of up to 40% and 56% for Chicago and Boulder, respectively, which are colder climates. Researchers in ref. [34] reported their hybrid control strategy reduced energy consumption by 50.38% while rotation and sliding only reduced it by 32.13% and 47.22%, respectively. The PV generation in the months of March and April exceeded building energy demands providing net-positive results. Researchers in ref. [35] reported annual site energy savings of 99% in Tucson, 109% in El Paso, 76% in Denver, and 47% in Rochester when combining dynamic shading devices with integrated PV energy generation. The paper reports on the tradeoff of the dynamic windows, in which they can reduce total energy use but affect the daylighting performance of the building.
Researchers in ref. [37] reported a 27.4% energy reduction for the heating and cooling loads was achieved when introducing PCM, a peak demand reduction of 28.57%, and an improvement of 18.4%, 13%, and 28.5% in fuel consumption, exergy efficiency, and unit cost of the system, respectively. The study reported a net-positive energy consumption in the 6 months from April to September (not explicitly mentioning net-positive), while the other remaining months did not produce enough energy to meet the building demand due to low solar intensity. It also reported a cost reduction of 20% with the addition of PCM. The overall plant cost was reduced by 39.8% with the introduction of PCM in the building envelope. Researchers in ref. [38] mention the results of their research and highlight that adding PCM does not increase the self-consumption of the rooftop PV system, rather it reduces it by about 1–3%. However, HVAC consumption was reported with a 30% decrease in all the cities. Researchers in ref. [48] reported that the addition of PCM reduced the cooling loads by up to 48% in the summer conditions. In winter, minimal ventilation provided a higher reduction in heating loads by keeping PCM in its solid state. While in summer, the extended ventilation improved the PCM performance and reduced the cooling loads. Researchers in ref. [39] reported peak cooling load reduction of 47% and a delay of 1 h in the summer season in August, and annual energy consumption reduction averages of 2.8%, 4.56%, and 0.53% in the summer and winter seasons, respectively, using only 5.2 vol% of PCM compared with the model without PCM. Researchers in ref. [40] presented results showcasing the impact PCM has on PV/TW systems with an increase in electrical and thermal efficiency of 4.8% and 0.3%, respectively. Researchers in ref. [32] mention that their proposed double PCM envelope results in reduced cooling loads of 7.94% compared to their first comparative case. PV had 8.5% higher power outputs in the summer compared to the first case. Researchers in ref. [33] reported a delayed peak temperature of 75 min and 2 h for heat flux.
Researchers in ref. [30] reported that the energy generation potential scenario A generated two times more solar energy than the static panels. Researchers in ref. [44] reported adding a static PV shading device improved the net energy consumption with a decrease of 37–73% and a further 6–19% if the PV shading device is made dynamic. As a retrofit solution, this PV shading device can provide up to 45–88% reduction in annual energy consumption for commercial office or residential buildings. Researchers in ref. [47] reported a net energy saving of 20–80% for the dynamic PV façade compared to static ones.
Researchers in ref. [42] reported the energy produced by the WTABS is 20 Wh/m2 and 0.263 mWh/m2 for the actuation and wind, respectively. Al Bahar Towers consist of 1000 WTAB modules, each having an area of 8.75 m2 that produces equal energy to that provided by 233 PV panels or 87 rooftop wind turbines with 1 m2 surface area. Researchers in ref. [43] reported passive energy generation of 2.1 kWh/m2 annually, with the highest for May generating 3.54 Wh/m2 daily, which is enough to power small-scale modern digital and radio circuits.
Researchers in ref. [45] investigated DSF energy performance with the addition of BIPV in the outer glazed façade integrated with PCM. The results indicate that the heating load is not reduced when applying the PCM into the DSF, but the cooling loads were significantly reduced by 10.38%, 5.38%, 9.62%, 6.48%, 9.2%, and 9.66% when applied in the western wall for the six cities of Tehran, Tabriz, Shiraz, Esfahan, Bandar Abbas, and Yazd. Researchers in ref. [49] reported that the addition of a PCM layer in the DSF provided a reduction of 20–30% of the monthly cooling loads. The PCM reduced the surface temperature of the PV, but this did not have major effects on the electrical efficiency. Table 3 below summarizes the key findings of the papers with climate zones of each study included based on the Köppen climate classification [50].
Table 3 above shows that studies with dynamic PV components report significant energy saving, reaching more than 50% in most cases and up to 100%, and considerable improvement in daylight performance with dynamic shading. PCM also provided significant savings in the range of 20–50% for the cooling loads, mostly in the summer conditions. Significant energy generation comes from using solar-based renewable energy sources. Thermoelectric and piezoelectric generators currently can only provide minimal energy generation to power things like sensors and circuits when installed on a small scale. Thermoelectric generators have low energy conversion efficiencies and are not suggested to replace PV power generation but only to utilize otherwise untapped potential to convert wasted heat into energy [43].

Net-Zero or Net-Positive Energy

Some articles mention reaching net-zero goals explicitly, while the results of others imply net-positive energy potential. Researchers in ref. [35] report annual positive net energy demand up to 109% when using the PV integrated with the roof and overhangs in El Paso, while the authors in ref. [41] proved that dynamic PV envelopes can provide net-positive results, particularly for apartment buildings in the San Francisco case. However, significant saving can also occur when using the sliding-only overhangs with angles closer to the latitude of the locations, which can result in a similar saving to the sliding-rotating overhangs with less complex operation. In addition, the authors in ref. [34] reported net-positive building energy for the dynamic PVSD in the months of March and April.

3.5.2. Non-Energy Metrics

Visual comfort and economic and environmental performance are reported in this section. The authors in ref. [44] suggest the use of the retrofit solution of their prototype due to its lightweight design and ease of application on any glazed façade. The researchers in ref. [35] investigated the cost-effectiveness of the AETs with PV integration using a breakeven cost analysis for the office buildings in the different US cities and reporting cost savings of up to $47,047 in El Paso. Researchers in ref. [31] provided the results for the visual comfort performance metrics and found that the dynamic PV façade improved the daylight distribution and reduced glare in the space. Their lighting control system contributed to energy savings of 10.7% to 20.9%, compared with using conventional occupancy sensors. Researchers in ref. [34] reported that their dynamic PVSD hybrid control strategy provides enhanced daylighting performance and visual comfort levels. Researchers in ref. [30] reported better daylight performance for the four scenarios with an increase of 25–30%, and 36% in Spatial Daylight Autonomy (sDA300/50%) for scenarios A and C, and a reduction in glare by 20% for A.

4. Discussion

4.1. Key Findings, Research Gaps, and Future Directions

Dynamic and renewable energy envelopes are a fairly new concept that emerged in recent years. This review highlights a few limitations in the current body of literature regarding these dynamic envelopes. A limited focus on achieving net-positive energy buildings and a lack of comprehensive analysis exploring differing combinations of dynamic system envelopes utilizing different renewable energy sources. Most of the studies lean heavily on Solar energy generation reflecting its natural abundance and availability year round. However, dynamic PVs are solar-based energy generation meaning they are inactive during the night emphasizing the need to incorporate other renewable energy sources like wind. This trend underscores the need to explore new avenues for RES integration other than solar. Further studies should consider this in their design of dynamic systems. Also, developing robust frameworks for simulating, analyzing, and implementing these systems will significantly advance future research endeavors. Establishing strategies or guidelines for envelope system selection based on climate conditions or energy needs is also essential. For example, locations without adequate solar intensity for PV generation to reach net-positive may incorporate additional wind energy harvesting ability.
Both solar energy utilization and phase change material in envelopes have been well established; however, dynamic PVSDs in theory can benefit from further integration with PCM. Utilizing dynamic PVSDs provided the highest energy savings for all the systems studied in this study. The inclusion of PCM with dynamic PVSD modules can theoretically further improve the performance of the building and PV module efficiency. Studies such as ref. [49] showcase the integration of PCM in static PV modules to enhance energy conversion efficiency by reducing overheating. However, this has not been studied cohesively with dynamic PVSDs, for example. Unfortunately, no studies talked about this integration of dynamic PVSDs and PCM to enhance both thermal and electrical efficiencies of the dynamic building envelope. The Authors in ref. [51] introduced a new concept of using PCM as a movable dynamic layer; otherwise, there is a lack of movable PCM integration studied with dynamic PV components. In addition to that, there is limited focus on other envelope avenues, such as the roof envelopes and opaque walls that can also benefit from RES integration. Currently, there is a heavy focus on the glazed façade for Dynamic PV and opaque walls for PCM. Moreover, there is no literature research conducted on the performance of PEDs incorporating DREBE on an urban cluster level. Combining such concepts in the early stages paves the way for better compatibility in installations before considering retrofit solutions for future PEDs.
The exploitation of natural greenery and vegetation can also help in reducing overall building energy consumption through the reduction in cooling loads in the summer conditions through natural shade. In addition, green building technologies offer significant CO2 reduction when applied extensively in dense urban areas to mitigate climate change [52]. Researchers in ref. [53] reviewed green building technology implemented in building envelopes and reported significant savings in the energy consumption of the building. In ref. [54], new green building practices on how to incorporate renewable energy sources in the building industry were investigated. These technologies can be combined with green spaces and green systems to increase the energy and thermal energy of the buildings. Furthermore, if applied in the urban context, they can help mitigate climate change and thermal comfort challenges like Urban Heat Island (UHI) effects that may be associated with dense urban environments.
Research articles that talk about how to achieve PEDs are scarce. This review paper provides insight into some technologies that can help in achieving the net-positive energy of PEDs, but future studies should implement frameworks for studying the combined effect of multiple buildings with dynamic façades on the overall efficiency of the PED and the electrical grid. This paper reviews building systems with RES integrations at the urban cluster level [55]. Another paper also reviews the urban cluster level incorporating RES but focuses on polishing the cluster methodology [56]. More studies need to focus on the implementation of existing technologies and optimizing placement with more smart system controls for further energy efficiency enhancement of existing infrastructure. Retrofit solutions of existing technologies must be studied and improved by making systems simpler to install and cost-effective while providing maximum energy savings and generation potential. The authors in ref. [57] provided a review of the modular construction of building envelopes. These modular envelopes can be used for future PED construction for easily installed envelope systems. The authors in ref. [58] conducted a systematic review of papers to determine differences in terminologies of adaptive facades and designs. On a similar note, the definition of PEDs shares the same function as some widely accepted terminologies such as near Zero Energy Buildings (nZEB), and there is still no consensus or specific analysis frameworks given for such a novel concept [59].
Utilizing RES in building envelopes to offset building operational energy demands can contribute to better space utilization when efficiently placed or designed on the building envelope or façade. Better utilization of shared space such as a roof or vertical façade can be further studied. With how limited space is in dense urban environments and how urbanization is exponentially increasing, the deployment of RES on-site contributes to efficient space utilization by employing RES locally. However, for certain contexts, space is very limited. In this case, high-rise buildings have very limited roof space, while large areas of vertical façade are primarily made of glazing material. Therefore, consideration of space optimization and system configuration must be implemented carefully. A paper presented an optimization model for integrating renewable energy into existing buildings as a retrofit solution to achieve near-zero energy buildings [60]. BIPV parametric models using Rhino3D+Grasshopper were used to assess their benefits of installing in existing buildings [61]. The visual and aesthetic characteristics of the envelopes should also be studied for more pleasantly looking building façades. User satisfaction and comfort with integrating dynamic facades in buildings were addressed in [62]. In addition, indoor user satisfaction studies regarding the dynamic PVSDs should be studied.
Future research can investigate the combination of multiple renewable energy sources and dynamic envelope systems and assess the viability and efficiency of such combinations and can conduct an economical assessment of the systems to provide the industry and policymakers with general cost-effective measurements of implementing these systems. Since these types of systems have not reached maturity in the industry, there is a general lack of long-term data and life cycle costs and maintenance that might be associated with keeping them up to date and working. To expedite the process of implementing these technologies, studies must first define their system to a standard set of terminologies agreed upon. Second, their implementation in both specific and general conditions that can be applied to more than one case that is different in climate or location and assess their viability should be studied. Third, compile and develop a general standard for dynamic envelope systems that can later incorporate climate/location and objective-specific components or types. Then, expand on the experimental work starting with simpler dynamic envelope systems and branching to variations in building typologies and envelope components other than glazed façades or rooftops. Finally, develop a standard for designing and implementing dynamic envelopes and introduce it to the general engineering industry.

4.2. Implications for Urban Sustainability

Retrofitting existing buildings with dynamic envelope systems can have an immense impact on urban sustainability. Such retrofits can potentially transform existing urban communities into positive energy districts, reducing dependency on the electrical grid and making communities self-sustained. Authors in ref. [37] used their hybrid-solar system as a two-way grid-connected system where surplus energy can be sold and electricity can be bought from the grid when the energy generated is not enough to meet the building demand. In ref. [36], the authors proposed their system as a climate-conscious retrofit solution that can provide greater energy efficiency for existing buildings.
The potential to save immense amounts of energy when implementing dynamic envelope systems should not be ignored. Each system provides significant energy savings by providing efficient systems that utilize natural environmental elements to improve the thermal, visual, and energy performance of the buildings. Utilizing RES on-site also reduces the dependency on the electrical grid, making each building/community independent in terms of energy consumption. The widespread implementation of such systems will yield greater energy efficiency for the buildings cluster/districts/communities and contribute to the reduction in GHG emissions. Using such technological innovations with efficient urban planning, newer emerging communities, and existing ones can transform from energy-inefficient environments to sustainable and greener environments. Continued research, development, and interest in this matter can help drive the transition to higher adoption of PEDs and sustainable cities.
Achieving sustainable goals for the future of the built environment requires gradual PED’s development across the globe or in this case the European union for the sustainable goals of 2050. The authors in ref. [63] mentioned the additional benefits PEDs can provide in the European cities of Evora, Amsterdam, and Espoo. Using PEDs with the integration of DREBE to reach net-positive potential is a great solution. DREBEs can be used to improve the overall efficiency of the building by providing high-efficiency systems and buildings through higher energy saving and renewable energy source (RES) utilization.

5. Conclusions

This review paper provides comprehensive summarization and meta-analyses of dynamic building envelope systems integrated with renewable energy sources, revealing insights into their significant potential to enhance overall building energy performance. The findings highlight the significant energy savings from adaptive systems such as dynamic PV shading devices and PCM for improving energy and thermal efficiency. Furthermore, systems like thermoelectric and wind-induced piezoelectric energy generation offer a newer alternative to solar-based energy production albeit a less efficient one.
While those systems can potentially allow buildings to reach net-positive energy, there are still challenges in implementing them in new or existing buildings due to the lack of economic analysis or standardization for general industry applications. Due to that, the study is limited in terms of discussing the DBE system’s applicability and economic concerns. Another limitation is that the review does not address the effects of DBEs on the outdoor urban environment in terms of Urban Heat Island effects. Addressing these challenges will pave the way for general application and provide considerable benefits to the building infrastructure. Therefore, future research can focus on developing strategies for implementing such systems on a wider basis with careful considerations of climate and location conditions.
Retrofitting dynamic envelope systems into existing buildings can help transform them into sustainable urban environments, and with wider application can potentially transition cities into positive energy districts. Visual and user satisfaction is also a necessary factor to consider when retrofitting. Immense efforts by researchers, policymakers, and industry specialists are needed to realize the completion of sustainable goals for the future. This review highlights the importance of advancing DREBE into higher efficiency systems while also gradually employing them in the real world for climate change mitigation and a sustainable future for the urban environment.

Funding

This research was funded by U.S. National Science Foundation grant number [1953004] and [2001207].

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

GHGGreenhouse Gas
PEDPositive Energy District
RESRenewable Energy Source
DBEDynamic Building Envelope
PVPhotovoltaic
BIPVBuilding Integrated Photovoltaics
BIPV/TBuilding-integrated Photovoltaic-thermal
PCMPhase-Change Material
DREBEDynamic and Renewable Energy Building Envelope
DSFDouble-skin façade
dvPVBEdynamic and vertical photovoltaic integrated building envelope
PVSDPhotovoltaic shading device
PVIMSDPhotovoltaic integrated moveable shading devices
PVIOPhotovoltaic integrated overhangs
AETAdaptive envelope Technologies
WTABSWind and Actuation Energy Harvesting Tensegrity Adaptive Building Screens
PV/TWPhotovoltaic Trombe wall
PVTPhotovoltaic-Thermal
HEMSHome energy management system
EMSEnergy Management System
DFDaylight factor
DGPDaylight Glare Probability
MOOMulti-Objective Optimization
SAMSystem Advisor Model
UHIUrban Heat Island

References

  1. Hannah Ritchie and Pablo Rosado. “Fossil Fuels” Published online at OurWorldinData.org. 2017. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels (accessed on 9 November 2024).
  2. Bosu, I.; Mahmoud, H.; Ookawara, S.; Hassan, H. Applied single and hybrid solar energy techniques for building energy consumption and thermal comfort: A comprehensive review. Solar Energy 2023, 259, 188–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. IEA. Buildings—Energy System. Available online: www.iea.org/energy-system/buildings (accessed on 9 November 2024).
  4. Gupta, V.; Deb, C. Envelope design for low-energy buildings in the tropics: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2023, 186, 113650. [Google Scholar]
  5. Resch, E.; Bohne, R.A.; Kvamsdal, T.; Lohne, J. Impact of urban density and building height on energy use in cities. Energy Procedia 2016, 96, 800–814. [Google Scholar]
  6. Derkenbaeva, E.; Vega, S.H.; Hofstede, G.J.; Van Leeuwen, E. Positive energy districts: Mainstreaming energy transition in urban areas. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 153, 111782. [Google Scholar]
  7. Badarnah, L. Form follows environment: Biomimetic approaches to building envelope design for environmental adaptation. Buildings 2017, 7, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wang, G.; Fang, J.; Yan, C.; Huang, D.; Hu, K.; Zhou, K. Advancements in smart building envelopes: A comprehensive review. Energy Build. 2024, 312, 114190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kunwar, N.; Cetin, K.S.; Passe, U. Dynamic shading in buildings: A review of testing methods and recent research findings. Curr. Sustain./Renew. Energy Rep. 2018, 5, 93–100. [Google Scholar]
  10. Boccalatte, A.; Fossa, M.; Ménézo, C. Best arrangement of BIPV surfaces for future NZEB districts while considering urban heat island effects and the reduction of reflected radiation from solar façades. Renew. Energy 2020, 160, 686–697. [Google Scholar]
  11. D’Ambrosio, V.; Losasso, M.; Tersigni, E. Towards the energy transition of the building stock with BIPV: Innovations, gaps and potential steps for a widespread use of multifunctional PV components in the building envelope. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rajoria, C.S.; Kumar, R.; Sharma, A.; Singh, D.; Suhag, S. Development of flat-plate building integrated photovoltaic/thermal (BIPV/T) system: A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 46, 5342–5352. [Google Scholar]
  13. Kazem, H.A.; Chaichan, M.T.; Al-Waeli, A.H.; Sopian, K.; Alnaser, N.W.; Alnaser, W.E. Energy Enhancement of Building-Integrated Photovoltaic/Thermal Systems: A Systematic Review. Solar Compass 2024, 12, 100093. [Google Scholar]
  14. De Luca, F.; Voll, H.; Thalfeldt, M. Comparison of static and dynamic shading systems for office building energy consumption and cooling load assessment. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2018, 29, 978–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hosseini, S.M.; Mohammadi, M.; Rosemann, A.; Schröder, T.; Lichtenberg, J. A morphological approach for kinetic façade design process to improve visual and thermal comfort. Build. Environ. 2019, 153, 186–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shi, X.; Abel, T.; Wang, L. Influence of two motion types on solar transmittance and daylight performance of dynamic façades. Solar Energy 2020, 201, 561–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wang, J.J.; Beltran, L. A method of energy simulation for dynamic building envelopes. Proc. SimBuild 2016, 6, 298–303. [Google Scholar]
  18. Goia, F.; Cascone, Y. The impact of an ideal dynamic building envelope on the energy performance of Low Energy Office Buildings. Energy Procedia 2014, 58, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Reddy, V.J.; Ghazali, M.F.; Kumarasamy, S. Advancements in phase change materials for energy-efficient building construction: A comprehensive review. J. Energy Storage 2024, 81, 110494. [Google Scholar]
  20. Al-Yasiri, Q.; Szabó, M. Incorporation of phase change materials into building envelope for thermal comfort and energy saving: A comprehensive analysis. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 36, 102122. [Google Scholar]
  21. Wang, P.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, X.; Hu, M.; Zhang, L.; Fan, J. Adaptive dynamic building envelope integrated with phase change material to enhance the heat storage and release efficiency: A state-of-the-art review. Energy Build. 2023, 286, 112928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rathore, P.K.S.; Gupta, N.K.; Yadav, D.; Shukla, S.K.; Kaul, S. Thermal performance of the building envelope integrated with phase change material for thermal energy storage: An updated review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 79, 103690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Narbuts, J.; Vanaga, R. Revolutionizing the Building Envelope: A Comprehensive Scientific Review of Innovative Technologies for Reduced Emissions. Environ. Clim. Technol. 2023, 27, 724–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Tripathi, B.M.; Shukla, S.K. A comprehensive review of the thermal performance in energy efficient building envelope incorporated with phase change materials. J. Energy Storage 2024, 79, 110128. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mohtashami, N.; Fuchs, N.; Fotopoulou, M.; Drosatos, P.; Streblow, R.; Osterhage, T.; Müller, D. State of the art of technologies in adaptive dynamic building envelopes (adbes). Energies 2022, 15, 829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Luo, Y.; Zhang, L.; Bozlar, M.; Liu, Z.; Guo, H.; Meggers, F. Active building envelope systems toward renewable and Sustainable Energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 104, 470–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Harry, S. Dynamic adaptive building envelopes—An innovative and state-of-the-art technology. Creat. Space 2016, 3, 167–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, 71. [Google Scholar]
  29. Zou, W.; Wang, Y.; Tian, E.; Wei, J.; Peng, J.; Mo, J. A new dynamic and vertical photovoltaic integrated building envelope for high-rise glaze-facade buildings. Engineering 2024, 39, 194–203. [Google Scholar]
  30. Oh, S.; Choi, G.S.; Kim, H. Climate-Adaptive Building Envelope Controls: Assessing the Impact on Building Performance. Sustainability 2023, 16, 288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Valinejadshoubi, M.; Athienitis, A.K.; Bagchi, A.; Abtahi, M. Integrated Dynamic Photovoltaic Facade for Enhanced Building Comfort and Energy Efficiency. Biomimetics 2024, 9, 463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cai, Y.; Huang, Y.; Shu, Z.; Liu, Z.; Zhong, H.; Zhao, F. Investigation of double-PCM based PV composite wall for power-generation and building insulation: Thermal characteristics and energy consumption prediction. Energy Built Environ. 2024; in press. [Google Scholar]
  33. Soliman, A.S.; Radwan, A.; Fouda, M.S.; Sultan, A.A.; Abdelrehim, O. Energy assessment of a sliding window integrated with PV cell and multiple PCMs. J. Energy Storage 2024, 86, 111341. [Google Scholar]
  34. Jiang, Y.; Qi, Z.; Ran, S.; Ma, Q. A study on the effect of dynamic photovoltaic shading devices on energy consumption and daylighting of an office building. Buildings 2024, 14, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dehwah, A.H.; Krarti, M. Energy performance of integrated adaptive envelope technologies for commercial buildings. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 63, 105535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Biloria, N.; Makki, M.; Abdollahzadeh, N. Multi-performative façade systems: The case of real-time adaptive BIPV shading systems to enhance energy generation potential and visual comfort. Front. Built Environ. 2023, 9, 1119696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Gholamian, E.; Barmas, R.B.; Zare, V.; Ranjbar, S.F. The effect of Incorporating phase change materials in building envelope on reducing the cost and size of the integrated hybrid-solar energy system: An application of 3E dynamic simulation with reliability consideration. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 52, 102067. [Google Scholar]
  38. Rahimpour, Z.; Verbič, G.; Chapman, A.C. Can phase change materials in building insulation improve self-consumption of residential rooftop solar? An Australian case study. Renew. Energy 2022, 192, 24–34. [Google Scholar]
  39. Sun, X.; Lin, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Li, J. Optimized design of a distributed photovoltaic system in a building with phase change materials. Appl. Energy 2022, 306, 118010. [Google Scholar]
  40. Abdullah, A.A.; Atallah, F.S.; Ahmed, O.K.; Daoud, R.W. Performance improvement of photovoltaic/Trombe wall by using phase change material: Experimental assessment. J. Energy Storage 2022, 55, 105596. [Google Scholar]
  41. Krarti, M. Evaluation of PV integrated sliding-rotating overhangs for US apartment buildings. Appl. Energy 2021, 293, 116942. [Google Scholar]
  42. Miranda, R.; Babilio, E.; Singh, N.; Santos, F.; Fraternali, F. Mechanics of smart origami sunscreens with energy harvesting ability. Mech. Res. Commun. 2020, 105, 103503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Byon, Y.S.; Jeong, J.W. Annual energy harvesting performance of a phase change material-integrated thermoelectric power generation block in building walls. Energy Build. 2020, 228, 110470. [Google Scholar]
  44. Svetozarevic, B.; Begle, M.; Jayathissa, P.; Caranovic, S.; Shepherd, R.F.; Nagy, Z.; Hischier, I.; Hofer, J.; Schlueter, A. Dynamic photovoltaic building envelopes for Adaptive Energy and Comfort Management. Nat. Energy 2019, 4, 671–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ziasistani, N.; Fazelpour, F. Comparative study of DSF, PV-DSF and PV-DSF/PCM building energy performance considering multiple parameters. Solar Energy 2019, 187, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kant, K.; Pitchumani, R.; Shukla, A.; Sharma, A. Analysis and design of air ventilated building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) system incorporating phase change materials. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 196, 149–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Jayathissa, P.; Luzzatto, M.; Schmidli, J.; Hofer, J.; Nagy, Z.; Schlueter, A. Optimising building net energy demand with dynamic BIPV shading. Appl. Energy 2017, 202, 726–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Elarga, H.; Dal Monte, A.; Andersen, R.K.; Benini, E. PV-PCM integration in glazed building. Co-simulation and genetic optimization study. Build. Environ. 2017, 126, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Elarga, H.; Goia, F.; Zarrella, A.; Dal Monte, A.; Benini, E. Thermal and electrical performance of an integrated PV-PCM system in double skin façades: A numerical study. Solar Energy 2016, 136, 112–124. [Google Scholar]
  50. Beck, H.E.; Zimmermann, N.E.; McVicar, T.R.; Vergopolan, N.; Berg, A.; Wood, E.F. Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution. Sci. Data 2018, 5, 180214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. de Gracia, A. Dynamic building envelope with PCM for cooling purposes—Proof of concept. Appl. Energy 2019, 235, 1245–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Dimitrijević-Jovanović, D.; Živković, P.; Stevanović, Ž. The impact of the building envelope with the green living systems on the built environment. Therm. Sci. 2018, 22 (Suppl. 4), 1033–1045. [Google Scholar]
  53. Lai, F.; Zhou, J.; Lu, L.; Hasanuzzaman, M.; Yuan, Y. Green building technologies in Southeast Asia: A review. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2023, 55, 102946. [Google Scholar]
  54. Chen, L.; Hu, Y.; Wang, R.; Li, X.; Chen, Z.; Hua, J.; Osman, A.I.; Farghali, M.; Huang, L.; Li, J.; et al. Green building practices to integrate renewable energy in the construction sector: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2024, 22, 751–784. [Google Scholar]
  55. Zhang, X.; Lovati, M.; Vigna, I.; Widén, J.; Han, M.; Gal, C.; Feng, T. A review of urban energy systems at building cluster level incorporating renewable-energy-source (RES) envelope solutions. Appl. Energy 2018, 230, 1034–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wilberforce, T.; Olabi, A.G.; Sayed, E.T.; Mahmoud, M.; Alami, A.H.; Abdelkareem, M.A. The state of renewable energy source envelopes in urban areas. Int. J. Thermofluids 2024, 21, 100581. [Google Scholar]
  57. Mohammed, M.A.; Budaiwi, I.M.; Al-Osta, M.A.; Abdou, A.A. Thermo-Environmental Performance of Modular Building Envelope Panel Technologies: A Focused Review. Buildings 2024, 14, 917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tabadkani, A.; Roetzel, A.; Li, H.X.; Tsangrassoulis, A. Design approaches and typologies of adaptive facades: A review. Autom. Constr. 2021, 121, 103450. [Google Scholar]
  59. Gondeck, M.; Triebel, M.A.; Steingrube, A.; Albert-Seifried, V.; Stryi-Hipp, G. Recommendations for a Positive Energy District Framework–Application and Evaluation of Different Energetic Assessment Methodologies. Smart Energy 2024, 15, 100147. [Google Scholar]
  60. Hassan, A.A.; El-Rayes, K. Optimizing the integration of renewable energy in existing buildings. Energy Build. 2021, 238, 110851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. De Freitas, J.; Cronemberger, J.; Soares, R.M.; Amorim, C.N. Modeling and assessing BIPV envelopes using parametric rhinoceros plugins grasshopper and ladybug. Renew. Energy 2020, 160, 1468–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Bakker, L.G.; Hoes-van Oeffelen, E.C.M.; Loonen, R.C.G.M.; Hensen, J.L.M. User satisfaction and interaction with automated dynamic facades: A pilot study. Build. Environ. 2014, 78, 44–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ntafalias, A.; Papadopoulos, P.; van Wees, M.; Šijačić, D.; Shafqat, O.; Hukkalainen, M.; Kantorovitch, J.; Lage, M. The Benefits of Positive Energy Districts: Introducing Additionality Assessment in Évora, Amsterdam and Espoo. Designs 2024, 8, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Designs 09 00041 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart [28].
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart [28].
Designs 09 00041 g001
Designs 09 00041 g002
Figure 2. Type of envelope components (Left) and method of study (Right).
Figure 2. Type of envelope components (Left) and method of study (Right).
Designs 09 00041 g002
Designs 09 00041 g003
Figure 3. Yearly trends of the reviewed papers.
Figure 3. Yearly trends of the reviewed papers.
Designs 09 00041 g003
Table 1. Summary of referenced studies.
Table 1. Summary of referenced studies.
ReferenceEnvelope TypeEnvelope LocationRenewable Energy SourceObjectivesPublication Date
[29]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarEnergy saving, generation, and daylight2024
[30]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarOptimal geometry for energy saving and generation2024
[31]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarEnergy generation and visual comfort2024
[32]PCMWallSolarImproving thermal and electrical efficiency2024
[33]Dynamic PVWindowSolarEnhance thermal and energy efficiencies2024
[34]Dynamic PVWindowSolarShade and energy generation2024
[35]Dynamic PVWindow/RoofSolarShade and energy generation2023
[36]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarMaximize irradiance on panels and minimize daylighting values2023
[37]PCMWallSolarReduce rooftop PV size2022
[38]PCMWallSolarElectrical cost reductions in PV system2022
[39]PCMWallSolarThermal and electrical performance analysis2022
[40]PCMTrombe WallSolarThermal and electrical performance analysis2022
[41]Dynamic PVWindowSolarShade and energy generation2021
[42]Dynamic sunscreenGlazed façadePiezoelectricShade and energy generation2020
[43]PCMWallThermoelectricEnergy generation2020
[44]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarShade and energy generation2019
[45]PCMDSFSolarEnergy performance analysis2019
[46]PCMWallSolarEnhance PV thermal performance2019
[47]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarShade and energy generation2017
[48]PCMDSFSolarEnergy and thermal pefromance analysis2017
[49]PCMDSF (on PV)SolarEnergy and thermal pefromance analysis2016
Table 2. Study type, building typology, and location of the reviewed papers.
Table 2. Study type, building typology, and location of the reviewed papers.
ReferenceStudy TypeBuilding TypeLocationSeason
[29]SimulationCommercial, OfficeBeijing, ChinaYearly
[30]SimulationCommercial, OfficeHouston, Texas, USSummer
[31]SimulationCommercial, OfficeMontreal, CanadaNS
[32]SimulationNSGuangzhou, ChinaYearly
[33]BothNSEgyptSummer
[34]SimulationNSQingdao, ChinaYearly
[35]SimulationCommercial, OfficeVariesNS
[36]SimulationEducationalSydney, AustraliaSummer
[37]SimulationResidentialTabriz, IranYearly
[38]SimulationResidentialAustralia, Varied citiesYearly
[39]BothResidentialChangsha, ChinaSummer and winter
[40]ExperimentationNSHawija, IraqSummer
[41]SimulationResidentialUS, varied citiesNS
[42]SimulationCommercial, OfficeAbu DhabiNS
[43]ExperimentationCommercial, OfficeSeoul, South KoreaNS
[44]BothOffice, ResidentialZurich, Switzerland, other citiesSummer
[45]SimulationResidentialIran, six citiesYearly
[46]SimulationCommercial, OfficeArlington, Virginia, USNS
[47]SimulationCommercial, OfficeZurich, SwitzerlandSummer
[48]SimulationCommercial, OfficeVenice, ItalySummer and winter
[49]SimulationCommercial, OfficeVariesNS
NS: Not Specified.
Table 3. Summary of key result findings for each studied envelope.
Table 3. Summary of key result findings for each studied envelope.
ReferenceEnvelope TypeEnvelope LocationRenewable Energy SourceClimateKey Findings
[29]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarMonsoon-influenced Humid Continental131% of office annual energy demand met
[30]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarHumid Subtropical2x times energy generation and up to 30% higher daylight performance
[31]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarWarm-Summer Humid ContinentalMore than 50% reduction in lighting and cooling loads
[32]PCMWallSolarHumid Subtropical, monsoon-influenced7.94% reduced cooling loads
[33]Dynamic PVWindowSolarHot DesertSignificant delay in peak temperature and heat flux
[34]Dynamic PVWindowSolarMonsoon-Influenced Humid SubtropicalUp to 50.38% energy consumption reduction
[35]Dynamic PVWindow/RoofSolarVaries47–109% energy savings reported for different cities
[36]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarHumid Subtropical21.53% increase in energy generation
[37]PCMWallSolarCold Semi-Arid27.4% heating and cooling load reduction
[38]PCMWallSolarVaries30% HVAC consumption reduction
[39]PCMWallSolarHumid SubtropicalUp to 47% peak cooling load reduction
[40]PCMTrombe WallSolarHot Semi-AridElectrical and thermal efficiency increase of 4.8% and 0.3%
[41]Dynamic PVWindowSolarVaries40–105% energy savings for different US cities
[42]Dynamic sunscreenGlazed façadePiezoelectricHot Desert1000 WTABS provide comparable generation to 233 PV
[43]PCMWallThermoelectricMonsoon-influenced Humid Continental2.1 kWh/m2 annual passive generation
[44]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarOceanic Climate, Varies45–88% reduction in energy consumption
[45]PCMDSFSolarVariesCooling load reduction between 5 and 10% in different cities in Iran
[46]PCMWallSolarHumid SubtropicalOptimum BIPV design configurations
[47]Dynamic PVGlazed façadeSolarOceanic Climate20–80% energy savings
[48]PCMDSFSolarHumid Subtropical48% cooling load reduction
[49]PCMDSF (on PV)SolarVaries20–30% cooling load reduction
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Almesbah, M.; Wang, J. Review of Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Technologies Utilizing Renewable Energy Resources. Designs 2025, 9, 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9020041

AMA Style

Almesbah M, Wang J. Review of Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Technologies Utilizing Renewable Energy Resources. Designs. 2025; 9(2):41. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9020041

Chicago/Turabian Style

Almesbah, Mohammad, and Julian Wang. 2025. "Review of Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Technologies Utilizing Renewable Energy Resources" Designs 9, no. 2: 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9020041

APA Style

Almesbah, M., & Wang, J. (2025). Review of Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Technologies Utilizing Renewable Energy Resources. Designs, 9(2), 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs9020041

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop