A Study of Thermal Performance Analysis of Low-Income Housing in Jordan: Case of SOS Buildings

Introduction

Jordan faces significant energy challenges due to its reliance on imported fuels and increasing demand for electricity, particularly heating and cooling in residential buildings. With harsh summers and cold winters, thermal comfort in housing is a critical concern, especially for low-income families who struggle with energy costs. This study examines the thermal performance of low-income housing units in Jordan, focusing on buildings constructed by SOS Children’s Villages, a nonprofit organization providing housing for vulnerable families.

The research evaluates how design, materials, and construction affect energy efficiency and indoor comfort. Given Jordan’s economic constraints and climate conditions, improving thermal performance in affordable housing could reduce energy consumption, lower utility bills, and enhance living conditions for residents.

Background and Context

Jordan’s climate varies from arid to semi-arid, with extreme temperatures—summers reaching above 35°C and winters dropping below freezing in some regions. Most low-income housing lacks proper insulation, relying on inefficient heating (electric or gas heaters) and cooling (fans or basic AC units), leading to high energy expenses.

SOS Children’s Villages builds simple, cost-effective homes, but these structures often prioritize affordability over energy efficiency. This study investigates whether these buildings meet thermal comfort standards and identifies potential improvements.

Methodology

The research employs a mixed-method approach:

1. Field Measurements – Temperature and humidity data were collected inside and outside sample SOS housing units over different seasons.

2. Simulation Software – Tools like DesignBuilder and EnergyPlus were used to model thermal performance, accounting for factors like insulation, ventilation, and solar gain.

3. Resident Surveys – Feedback from occupants provided insights into perceived comfort levels and energy usage patterns.

4. Comparative Analysis – The study compared SOS buildings with traditional Jordanian low-income housing and modern energy-efficient designs.

Key parameters analyzed included:

• U-values (thermal transmittance of walls, roofs, and windows)

• Thermal mass (ability of materials to absorb and release heat)

• Orientation and shading (impact of building placement on solar heat gain)

• Ventilation effectiveness (natural airflow for cooling)

Findings

1. Poor Insulation and High Heat Transfer

   • Walls and roofs in SOS buildings were found to have high U-values, meaning they allowed significant heat transfer. Concrete blocks with minimal insulation led to excessive heat gain in summer and heat loss in winter.

   • Single-glazed windows contributed to thermal leakage, unlike double-glazed or thermally broken alternatives.

2. Overheating in Summer, Underheating in Winter

   • Indoor temperatures often exceeded 30°C in summer, forcing reliance on cooling systems.

   • In winter, insufficient insulation caused indoor temperatures to drop drastically, increasing heating demands.

3. Limited Passive Design Strategies

   • Traditional Jordanian architecture uses thick stone walls, courtyards, and strategic shading for natural temperature regulation. However, SOS buildings often lacked these features due to cost constraints.

   • Proper shading (e.g., overhangs or vegetation) could reduce summer cooling loads by up to 20%.

4. Occupant Behavior and Energy Use

   • Residents frequently used electric heaters and fans, leading to high bills. Many were unaware of simple energy-saving practices (e.g., closing curtains during peak heat).

Recommendations for Improvement

1. Enhanced Insulation

   • Adding low-cost insulation materials (e.g., polystyrene or rock wool) to walls and roofs could significantly reduce heat transfer.

   • Reflective coatings on roofs could minimize solar absorption.

2. Window Upgrades

   • Double-glazed windows or solar films would improve thermal resistance while remaining affordable.

3. Passive Cooling and Heating Techniques

   • Cross-ventilation designs and thermal mass optimization (e.g., using dense materials that absorb heat during the day and release it at night).

   • Incorporating shaded outdoor spaces and green roofs to reduce indoor temperatures.

4. Renewable Energy Integration

   • Solar water heaters and photovoltaic panels could offset electricity use, especially given Jordan’s high solar potential.

5. Policy and Awareness

   • Government incentives for energy-efficient social housing could encourage better construction standards.

   • Educating residents on energy-saving habits (e.g., optimal thermostat settings, sealing gaps).

Conclusion

The study highlights a critical gap in Jordan’s low-income housing: the trade-off between affordability and energy efficiency. While SOS buildings provide shelter, their thermal performance falls short, burdening residents with high energy costs. Simple, cost-effective retrofits—such as better insulation, shading, and ventilation—could dramatically improve comfort and reduce energy consumption.

Future research could explore the long-term economic benefits of these upgrades, proving that investing in energy-efficient design ultimately pays off for both residents and the environment. Given Jordan’s energy crisis, integrating sustainable practices into social housing is not just beneficial—it’s essential.

Also Read: A Report on Real Estate Financing in Nepal