## 4 Results and Discussion
### Energy saving of Fibre-Reinforced LECA-LWAC Compared with NWC  
Figure 10 breaks down the percentage of energy savings of fibre-reinforced LECA-LWAC as compared with NWC when the building front is facing east (90\({}^{\circ}\) orientation) for Putrajaya, Istanbul and Lillhardal. In Putrajaya, HST0.75 + PP0.1 had the highest energy saving with 3.19%, followed by PP0.3 which had the best overall energy saving of 2.87% with respect to NWC and all other fibre configurations. In the ST category, ST0.25 had the highest energy saving of 1.77% compared with NWC. In the ST + PP0.2 hybrid category, ST1.0 + PP0.2 had the highest energy saving of 2.29% as compared with NWC. The order of energy-saving materials based on the category from high to low in Putrajaya was HST0.75 + PP hybrid \(>\) mono PP \(>\) ST + PP0.2 hybrid \(>\) mono ST \(>\) NWC \(>\) Brick.  
In Makkah, for the building with front elevation facing east (90\({}^{\circ}\) orientation), HST0.75 + PP0.3 (5.86%) had the best overall energy followed closely by HST0.75 + PP0.1 (5.85%). In the ST category, ST0.25 had the highest energy saving at 4.47%. In the ST + PP0.2 hybrid category, ST1.0 + PP0.2 had the highest energy saving at 4.81%. The order of energy-saving materials based on the category from high to low in Makkah was HST0.75 + PP0.1 \(>\) PP0.3 \(>\) ST1.0 + PP0.2 \(>\) ST0.25.  
In Istanbul, HST0.75 + PP0.3 (4.45%) followed closely by PP0.3 (4.43%) had the best overall energy savings compared with NWC and all other fibre configurations. In the ST category, ST0.25 had the highest energy saving of 3.11% compared with NWC. In the ST + PP0.2 hybrid category, ST1.0 + PP0.2 had the highest energy saving of 3.24% in contrast to NWC. The order of energy-saving material based on the category from high to low in Istanbul was HST0.75 + PP0.1 hybrid \(>\) mono PP0.3 \(>\) ST1.0 + PP0.2 hybrid \(>\) mono ST0.25 \(>\) NWC \(>\) Brick.  
In Lillhardal, PP0.3 provided the best overall energy saving of 12.79% followed closely by HST0.75 + PP0.3 with 11.32% as compared with NWC and all other fibres. In the ST category, ST0.25 had the highest energy saving of 9.24% as compared with NWC. In the ST + PP0.2 hybrid category, ST1.0 + PP0.2 displayed the highest energy savings of 8.39% with respect to NWC. The order of energy-saving material based on the category from high to low was mono PP \(>\) HST0.75 + PP hybrid \(>\) ST + PP0.2 hybrid \(>\) mono ST \(>\) NWC \(>\) Brick.  
In the cold sub-arctic climate of Lillhardal, the mono PP0.3 fibre performed better in terms of energy savings, whereas, in the hot-humid climate of Putrajaya and warm Mediterranean climate of Istanbul, the HST0.75 + PP was the best in terms of energy savings. The effect on energy savings of the use of fibre-reinforced LECA-LWAC was more significant in the sub-arctic region of Lillhardal with a substantial saving of 12.79%, followed by a temperate Mediterranean climate of Istanbul with a moderate saving of 4.45%. The tropical hot and humid climate of Putrajaya, Malaysia had the least savings with a margin of 3.19%. The use of fibre-reinforced LWAC had the most energy-saving benefit in areas with cold sub-arctic climate as Lillhardal.