Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report

MSc Renewable Energy and Architecture
UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM
The key driver for GHG mitigation
Existing Buildings
Retrofitting
Borja San Martin
#S
Student ID: 4260382
#S
Submission Day: 02/09/2016
#S

I
ABSTRACT
Climate change is a fact that no one can deny. Modern society has become in a greedy monster
hunting energy which can’t cease to consume it. The rapid rise in temperature during the last
200 years are attributed to anthropogenic causes and as a consequence, countless natural
disasters are occurring, Natural disasters are destroying cities, forests and micro climates all
over the world. Building sector is the biggest emitter by contributing to 47% of global GHG
emissions and 49% of the total energy consumption. International agencies have already started
to move towards a sustainable future by setting rules globally. These goals are very ambitious
and today the most of the countries are very far for achievement. Sustainable development is a
solution for this issue because it can provide society economic, environmental and social
benefits. This transition won’t be possible if we are not able to reduce emissions from buildings.
Due to existing buildings account for the majority of the building stock and they have been
designed and implemented based on poor energy standards, Existing buildings retrofitting is
called to be as a key driver for GHG reductions needed to meet environmental goals.

II
TABLE OFCONTENTS
ABSTRACT......................................................................................................... I
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................... IV
INTRUDUCTION...............................................................................................1
1. IS CLIMATE CHANGE REAL?...............................................................3
1.1 HISTORY OF GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND GLOBAL WARMING ..................3
1.2 NATURAL OR ANTHROPOGENIC CAUSES? ......................................................4
1.3 GLOBAL WARMING AND CONSEQUENCES .....................................................6
2. ENERGY WORLD CONSUMPTION ....................................................10
2.1 GLOBAL REACTION .............................................................................................13
2.1.1 GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONS..........................................................................13
2.1.2 CO2 BIG PRODUCERS’ POLICIES................................................................14
2.1.3 EUROPEAN UNION GHG EMISSION REDUCTION...................................15
2.1.4 GLOBAL SITUATION.....................................................................................17
3. BUILDINGS IMPACT ON CLIMATE CHANGE ................................18
3.1 RESIDENTIAL SECTOR ........................................................................................19
3.2 CURRENT AND FUTURE SITUATION................................................................22
4. NEED FOR GREEN BUILDINGS ..........................................................24
4.1 GREEN BUILDINGS...............................................................................................25
4.1.1 WHAT IS A GREEN BUILDING?...................................................................25
4.1.2 GREEN BUILDING EXAMPLES....................................................................26
4.1.3 GLOBAL SITUATION AND TRENDS...........................................................30
4.2 TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ................................................35
5. BUUILDING RETROFITTING ..............................................................38
5.1 WHAT IS RETROFITTING?...................................................................................38

III
5.2 RETROFITTING POTENTIAL ...............................................................................39
5.3 HISTORY, EVOLUTION OF RETROFITTING.....................................................40
5.4 RETROFITTING PROCESS....................................................................................42
5.4.1 LOOKING FOR THE BEST RETROFITTING METHODOLOGY ...............42
5.4.2 BUILDING ENERGY AUDITING ..................................................................48
5.4.3 LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS ................................................................................50
5.4.4 CODES, STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATIONS .........................................53
5.4.5 RETROFITTING TOOLS.................................................................................57
5.5 RETROFITTING BENEFITS ..................................................................................62
5.5.1 ECONOMIC BENEFITS ..................................................................................62
5.5.2 IMPROVED COMFORT ..................................................................................63
5.5.3 GHG REDUCTIONS.........................................................................................63
5.5.4 NEW OPORTUNITIES FOR EVERYONE .....................................................64
5.6 RETROFITTING BARRIERS..................................................................................64
5.6.1 FINANCIAL BARRIERS .................................................................................64
5.6.2 INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS.........................................................................65
5.6.3 TECHNICAL AND COMMUNICATIVE BARRIERS IN THE PROCESS...65
5.6.4 AWARENESS, ADVICE AND SKILLS BARRIERS .....................................65
5.6.5 SPLIT INCENTIVE BARRIERS......................................................................66
REFERENCES..................................................................................................68
APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................76
APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................77
APPENDIX C ....................................................................................................78
APPENDIX D ....................................................................................................91

IV
LIST OFFIGURES
Figure 1 Greenhouse effect caused by human’s activities......................................................................3
Figure 2 Temperature behaviour over the last 1000 years. (Crowley, 2000)..........................................4
Figure 3 Antarctic Temperature and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations over the last 800.000 years (NRC,
2010).......................................................................................................................................................5
Figure 4 CO2, CH4 and N2O patterns over last 2000 years (Melillo, 2014)..........................................6
Figure 5 Global events created by severe weather (Service, 2015) ........................................................9
Figure 6 Place and cost of the losses (Service N. , 2015) .......................................................................9
Figure 7 World Energy Consumption 1990-2040 (E.I.A, 2016) ..........................................................11
Figure 8 World Energy Consumption by region 1990-2040 ................................................................11
Figure 9 World Energy Consumption by Energy Source .....................................................................12
Figure 10 Energy related CO2 Emissions.............................................................................................13
Figure 11 Gas Emissions by UNFCCC perspective .............................................................................14
Figure 12 Carbon Dioxide Emissions from energy consumption US and China (E.I.A, 2016) ...........15
Figure 13 Total Green House Emissions 1990-2014 (Eurostat, 2016) .................................................16
Figure 14 Annual growth from 2012 to 2040 .......................................................................................18
Figure 15 Energy demand by sectors in Qatar......................................................................................20
Figure 16 Primary Energy use in Iceland 1940-2010 (Energy, 2012) ..................................................20
Figure 17 CO2 Emissions by sector (Yudelson, 2010).........................................................................21
Figure 18 European Energy demand by sector ( BPIE, 2011)..............................................................21
Figure 19 Hong Kong Energy Production by Source ...........................................................................22
Figure 20 Residential and Commercial Energy Consumption Trends in OECD 2012-2040 (E.I.A, 2016)
..............................................................................................................................................................23
Figure 21 Residential and Commercial energy consumption trends in non- OECD 2012-2040 (E.I.A,
2016).....................................................................................................................................................23
Figure 22 The Crystal ...........................................................................................................................27
Figure 23 Phipps' Center.......................................................................................................................27
Figure 24 Pixel Building Melbourne ....................................................................................................28
Figure 25 Bullit Center in Seattle .........................................................................................................28
Figure 26 Public Library Beitou Branch, Taipei (Taiwan)...................................................................29
Figure 27 Green Building Sector Development....................................................................................30
Figure 28 Percentage of respondents whose firms have done more than 60% green projects..............31
Figure 29 Age categorization of housing stock in Europe....................................................................32
Figure 30 Heating average consumption in European existing buildings.............................................33
Figure 31 U-Value and Air Tightness of Bulgarian buildings..............................................................33
Figure 32 Energy Consumption of the U.S Homes...............................................................................35

V
Figure 33 Draft of the sustainable plan carried in the city....................................................................36
Figure 34 View of the Green City of Freiburg......................................................................................37
Figure 35 Retrofitting levels by final energy saving reduction.............................................................43
Figure 36 Whole retrofitting process by phases....................................................................................44
Figure 37 Retrofitting process (Technology Strategy Board, 2014).....................................................46
Figure 38 Environmental impact of the retrofitting measures in Brno (Czech Republic) ....................48
Figure 39 Energy Audit Process ...........................................................................................................50
Figure 40 15-Year NPV of Package versus cumulative CO2 Savings .................................................53
Figure 41 European Outcomes by Retrofitting Depth in 2020 and 2050..............................................53
Figure 42 BEA tools by type of building (Appu Happio, 2007)...........................................................60
Figure 43 Phases of the Life Cycle (Appu Happio, 2007)....................................................................61
Figure 44 Premium that corporate occupiers are prepared to pay for sustainable real state.................63
Figure 45 Low energy housing retrofit technical and design challenges..............................................66
Figure 46 Natural loss events worldwide..............................................................................................76
Figure 47 Economic losses caused by Natural Disasters......................................................................76
Figure 48 Biggest Producers of Oil, Natural Gas and Coal..................................................................77
Figure 49 Request for Qualification form.............................................................................................79
Figure 50 Request for Proposals form ..................................................................................................90
Figure 51 BEA Tools by developer ......................................................................................................91

1
INTRUDUCTION
According to the majority of the environmental scientists, Global Warming is a fact that is
slashing humanity by causing hundreds of natural disasters and huge economical losses. Even
though some scientists, engineers and politicians believe that Global Warming is not caused by
anthropogenic activities, this paper has gathered solid information from acknowledged
professional which provides solid results and conclusions that Global Warming has been
massively boosted by human activities. Building sector is the most emitter of GHG emissions
in the world due to the high amount of electricity that occupiers demand to meet living comforts
and the inefficient building designs, materials and systems. As a result, they are responsible for
47% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 49% of the world’s energy consumption with an
increasing trend for the coming decades. Since the most of the new building stock is designed
and executed based on more environmental codes and standards, the majority of the buildings
are old and inefficient, which makes retrofitting building activities as a key driver to reduce
GHG emissions and therefore meet environmental goals by 2050.
As a building engineer I feel responsible to learn, investigate and apply the most appropriate
techniques for buildings to contribute to reduce their global emissions and at the same time to
provide and improve occupier livings comfort. Along this academic year coursing the
Renewable Energy and Architecture MSc, I have been able to acquire some knowledge of low
energy strategies applied in buildings needed to guarantee human comfort by not
compromising the environment. Technical, economic and ethical fundamentals have been
provided by professors through different modules. After some research carried out during
K14RMS Research Methodologies module, it was figured that retrofitting of existing buildings
could be such an interesting topic to put all these skills and fundamentals together.
I have investigated the retrofitting of existing buildings with the hope of addressing its
potential, impact and the best practices needed for correct implementation within the society.
In order to achieve this, has been essential to research in climate change patterns and its causes.
Chapter 1 outlines global temperature and its causes as well as its consequences in the society.
Chapter 2 analyses global consumption and its environmental impact. This analysis has
identified main sectors and factors related to GHG emissions by countries. Some of the main
movements carried from governments and organizations to tackle this issue has been examined,
to find out the willingness and compromise of the world. In Chapter 3, building energy
consumption has been studied with the objective of discovering global trends within developed

2
and developing countries. The information in chapter 3 has been crucial to determine the
potential of green buildings mostly in developing countries and retrofitting mostly in the
majority of developing countries. After identifying the necessity for environmentally friendly
buildings, Chapter 4 summarizes green building characteristics, benefits and global trends.
New building stock apparently is more efficient and less GHG emitter due to new and more
sustainable standards. This fact makes existing buildings be directly linked to the majority of
the current emissions, being retrofitting a key driver for GHG reductions. Chapter 5 studies
what retrofitting activities are, by explaining its evolution, application, processes, benefits and
barriers.

3
1. IS CLIMATE CHANGE REAL?
During the las decades Global Warming has become in one of the most topical subjects in the
society. Global Warming debates, are gaining more and more strength in all scenarios, to the
extent that policy makers have already gotten down to work in order to solve the irreversible
consequences that this issue can cause if we don’t act responsibly and effectively from now on.
Some of the Global Warming effect facts that have been described in the following, might have
been the reasons for what society has already begun to address this phenomenon as a one of
the big issues of the century.
1.1 HISTORY OF GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND GLOBAL WARMING
By 1896, a Swedish scientist called Svante Arrhenius, discovered that the average surface
temperature of the earth was around 15°C and this temperature was caused by the capacity of
water vapour and carbon dioxide to retain infrared ways. Based on this, he studied the relation
between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and temperature and he foresaw that fossil
fuel combustion may eventually result in enhanced global warming. At that time this research
didn’t have too much relevance because, no one expected that human practices were going to
reach the significant influence that now a days have on global warming.
After many researches along the past century corroborating this fact, it wasn’t until 1980’s
when people begun to question this theory due to the abrupt increased of the mean temperature.
Figure 1 Greenhouse effect caused by human’s activities

4
1.2 NATURAL OR ANTHROPOGENIC CAUSES?
The Earth global temperature has suffered such a great amount of fluctuations over the history.
These changes according to natural research have been attributed to some factors such as solar
irradiance and volcanic activity. These changes have been balanced by the natural effect of
Earth’s surface and oceans (IPCC, 2013) . But now, what the most of the environmental and
climatic scientist are currently wondering is if the pattern temperature is changing due to
anthropogenic causes. Since 1950’s many researches are relating rise of temperature to
human’s activities after the industrial revolution as shown in the following
Figure 2 Temperature behaviour over the last 1000 years. (Crowley, 2000)
Figure 2 shows the fluctuations in temperature over the last 1000 years. Since 1000 to 1900
can be seen a steady temperature pattern rounding between 0.7 and 0.9 °C. During the last part
of the century, the temperature variation is increasing out of the boundaries in which has been
recorded over the last millennium.
The vast majority of the scientist in the world are virtually certain that the most of the change
observed over the last 50 years has human fingerprints. According to Thomas J. Crowley, one
of the most transcendental environmental scientist with more than 100 papers on climate
research (North, 2014) mentioned that only about 25% of the 20th
-century temperature increase
can be attributed to natural factors, while the 75% remaining is attributed to anthropogenic
factors which have made GHG rise in a sudden way. (Crowley, 2000). A group of scientist

5
from different universities and institutes of the world (USA, Canada, Australia and Norway)
joined forces in order to determine the causes of rise in temperature since the 1860’s to the
beginnings of the 21st
century by means of a sophisticated techniques based on analysing signal
strength patterns. This research justifies the important role that human activities are playing in
recent climate change. (Benjamin D. Santera, 2013)
Since 1750, when the industrial revolution begun, human activities have contributed
substantially to climate change by adding CO2 emissions and other heat-trapping gases to the
atmosphere.
Figure 3 Antarctic Temperature and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations over the last 800.000 years (NRC, 2010)
Figure 3 depicts the relation between the earth surface temperature and carbon dioxide
concentrations. Until the past century, natural factors caused atmospheric CO2 to vary within
a range of about 180 to 300 parts per million by volume (ppmv). Warmer periods coincide with
CO2 peaks. Others GHG such as Methane or Nitrous Oxide are mostly produced by human
activities and also are such important contributors for the global warming. In the next figure
can be seen the increase of GHG during the last 2000 years, reaching their maximum limits
after industrial revolution.

6
Figure 4 CO2, CH4 and N2O patterns over last 2000 years (Melillo, 2014)
Figure 4 shows the results of a different research carried out by a team of more than 300 experts
guided by a 60-member Federal Committee. The U.S. Global Change Research Program has
issued its 3rd
National Climate Assessment which presents the CO2, CH4 and N2O trends
emissions during the last 2000 years. Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration has risen from
pre-industrial levels from 280 ppmv to about 396 ppmv in 2013, in other words, by more than
40%. Methane has also followed this pattern by having an increase of 2.5 times pre-industrial
levels. Nitrous Oxide however, hasn’t taken the same extreme rise as their competitors, but its
20% increase since 1800 results quite worrying. (IPCC, 2013)
All this said, scientist know with total certainty that the observed dramatic increase in the
atmospheric concentrations of GHG gases since pre-industrial times has been caused by human
activities, mostly due to burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) activities, and to a
lesser extent, deforestation. (IPCC, 2013).
1.3 GLOBAL WARMING AND CONSEQUENCES
There is no doubt that the earth is getting more and more warm. In 2015, According to the
NOAA, the global mean temperature was recorded as the highest ever, surpassing the 2014
records, since the time series began back in 1980. One of the reasons for this increase in
temperature has potentiated El Niño effect, causing drastic consequences in South America,
the Caribbean, north-western America, and broad swathes of southern Africa (Faust, 2015)
.Scientist have already foreseen drastic effects in some 100 physical and 450 biological
processes. For instance, the rise in temperature is melting the permafrost, causing debacle on
building foundations in the Russian Artic. Floods and droughts are more extremes because

7
storms and heat weaves are more and more intense. The freezing and melting normal course of
rivers is also being affected thus, its ecosystem is being drastically altered. Glaciers are melting
producing an important rise of the sea level which is affecting multitudes villages on shores all
over the world (IPCC, Climate Change 2001; Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, 2001). In
the following, some global signs of global warming have been gathered;
 Heat waves: The 25 warmest years have all occurred in the last 28 years (NOAA, 2016).
At least 27.000 people died as a result of the persistent heat, breaking all records around
the world. Besides the medical cost, droughts and wildfires related to heat weaves,
European economies lost around £10.000 in agriculture, forestry, and electric sector
(United Nations Environment Program. DEWA and GRID, 2003).
 Rains and Flooding: High temperatures increase the quantity of water vapour in the air,
producing heavier rainfall. In Vargas, Venezuela, thousands of people died due to the
most severe rainfall in the last 100 years (Grant, 2009).
 Droughts: Many parts in the planet have suffered several droughts due to high
temperatures. Warmer ocean temperatures also contribute to potentiate droughts.
Between 1998 and 2002 was the warmest time for Pacific and Indian oceans (Martin
Hoerling, 2003). Millions of people have already died in the 20th century because of
droughts. One of the most affected area was Sahel region of Africa, which covers parts
of Eritrea, Ethiopia and the Sudan. The years 2004-06 also hit the UK and have been
recorded as one of the driest periods in the island. Areas such as South East England is
particularly vulnerable due to its 13 million people population. The demanding for
water had to be met by water reservoirs which haven’t been replenished because of the
dry winters. (Too little water - droughts, n.d.)
 Forest and Wildfires: The U.S has been one of the most hit countries in the world by
wildfires. The Alaska summer in 2004 was truly warm and a total of 701 fires
demolished over 2 million acres of forest (Mooney, 2015). What seemed to be a
catastrophe caused by natural disasters connected to normal cycle of earth’s
temperature, last year records surpassed the 2004 incidents when 3.1 million acres were
burnt due to the hottest temperature never seen before (Fantz, 2015). Canada is also one
of the most affected countries due to the great amount of forest and the change
temperature it is suffering lately. Fort McMurray is a Canadian city located in the north
west of Alberta and it is well known to be field of many oil sand companies’ practices.

8
On May 2016, 90,000 city’s residents were force to evacuate in the wake of a massive
wildfire. The blaze consumed around 2,000 homes and buildings. 3 months later,
torrential rains flooded the city, causing important economic losses for the residents
(Canadian city ravaged by wildfires hit with heavy flooding, 2016).
Obviously these catastrophes are having such a negative impact not just on worldwide
economies, also in the environmental cycles which are needed to balance humans and animals
lives.
 Damage to coral reefs: Coral bleaching has had a huge increased and again, most
evidence indicates that it is linked to global warming. Many parts around the world such
as Hawaii, Florida Keys, Maldives or Reunion Islands are being subject of this
phenomenon, having severe repercussions for the 25% of all marine species and 500
million people livelihood and income worth over $30 billion are at stake (Global Coral
Bleaching, 2016)
 Wild animal: Over 80% of the species, ranging from fish to mammals and from grasses
to trees are changing in the direction expected for a warming climate. Polar bear for
instance, are suffering significant health problems due to the melting ice sheet in artic
areas such as wester Hudson Bay (M.G. Dyck, 2007). South America is also suffering
a loss of animal species, this time in terms of amphibious due to a decrease in amount
of mist, along with an increase in the occurrence of higher clouds (James Wang, 2005).
In the following, some data taken from a research led by Munich Re is showing the total loss
events worldwide occurred from 1980 to 2014.

9
Figure 5 Global events created by severe weather (Service, 2015)
Figure 5 shows the loss events pattern caused by the weather during the last 34 years which
can be clearly linked to the temperature increase pattern. Unfortunately, 2015 has been a year
in which loss events have raised, reaching the number of 1060 (Service N. , 2015). This pattern
can be clearly related to the increase of temperature pattern as shown in figure 1.
Figure 6 Place and cost of the losses (Service N. , 2015)

10
Figure 6 represents overall worldwide catastrophes and losses by continent and cause. Learn
more about catastrophes and economic losses in Appendix A.
CONCLUSION
After some research, is easily comprehensible that global warming will not only be felt from
the next decades on. Global warming is already happening and its effects and consequences
are clearly evident. Although the causes of global warming are not entirely anthropogenic and
natural causes such as volcanic eruptions and solar radiation are also behind this aspect, the
linkage between the raise in anthropogenic GHG emissions, rise in temperature and rise in
natural disasters at the same time during the last 2 centuries, makes human being behaviour be
the main factor to change the situation. Substantial progress is being made by international,
state, and local levels.
2. ENERGY WORLD CONSUMPTION
Since the industrial revolution humans have been able to find the way to expand economies. A
new era for humans had already started and burning fossil fuel seemed to be the ideal
technology to power the economy. After 200 years, fossil fuels have showed that they are very
reliable technology to provide energy but it has also been demonstrated that fossil fuels
activities are destroying our planet. During the last 50 years we have structured our day-to-day
lives around energy consumption habits and customs, which has made the society be totally
dependence on fossil fuels. We are facing such a huge economic, scientific, consumption habits
and environmental problem which must be solve as soon as possible to guarantee prosperity to
further generations.
Energy consumption worldwide has grown by 37% during the last 25 years according to The
International Energy Outlook 2016 issued by U.S. Energy Information Administration.

11
Figure 7 World Energy Consumption 1990-2040 (E.I.A, 2016)
Figure 7 references the significant growth in worldwide energy over the 28-years period from
2012 to 2040. Total world consumption of marketed energy expands from 549 quadrillion
British thermal units (Btu) in 2012 to 629 quadrillion Btu in 2020 and to 815 quadrillion Btu
in 2040. Much of the world increase in energy demand occurs among the developing non-
OECD, where strong economic growth and expanding populations lead the increase in world
energy use (E.I.A, 2016).
Figure 8 World Energy Consumption by region 1990-2040

12
On Figure 8 can be seen that non-OECD demand for energy increases by 70% from 2012 to
2040 while in OECD countries total energy demand is increased slower, around 20%, due to
these countries have already been economically exploited. This pattern is due to the demand
for appliances and transportation equipment, and growing capacity to produce goods and
services for both domestic and foreign markets. (E.I.A, 2016).
Figure 9 World Energy Consumption by Energy Source
Figure 9 shows the trend of global energy consumption by energy. It can be seen how fossil
fuels still being the main energy source. Policies set for GHG reductions make coal use slows
its growth while renewable energies take a step forward. Natural gas and liquids keep their
continuous growth since 1990, while nuclear is supposed to maintain growing very slowly.
The complex task of measuring the impacts that energy demand has on global warming, has
been tried to explain in the following by reflecting CO2 emissions produced in energy
production. Billions of CO2 metric tons are released yearly due to fossil fuel combustion
needed to meet energy demand. These emissions will never cease as long as we stop demanding
energy or change our ways of producing energy by clean methods such as renewable energy.
The Energy International Outlook 2016 also shows the relation between energy demand and
CO2.

13
Figure 10 Energy related CO2 Emissions
Figure 10 shows exactly the same pattern as figure 8, and that energy consumption trends, can
be linked to CO2 emissions. World energy-related CO2 emissions are supposed to increase
from 32 billion metric tons in 2012 to 43.2 billion metric tons in 2040.
2.1 GLOBAL REACTION
2.1.1 GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONS
The frightened facts collected so far, have provoked a global reaction in the society with the
creation of some movements designed to mitigate GHG emissions. The first step in this regard
was the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This
organization is an international environmental treaty which was negotiated at the Earth Summit
in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. In 1997, the UNFCCC issued the Kyoto Protocol and the last
December the Paris Agreement was adopted (UNFCCC, 2016). Kyoto Protocol was adopted
in Japan in 1997 which committed 154 nations to reduce and stabilize greenhouse gas
concentrations. It was entered into force on 16 February 2005. The Paris Agreement gathered
196 Parties with the objective of holding the rise temperature below 2 or 1.5. This treaty
required all Parties to put forward their efforts through Nationally Determined Contributions
(NCD’s) which consisted in a real plan to implement strategies to avoid global temperature
rises more than 2 degrees. The Agreement will enter into force 30 days after 55 countries that

14
account for at least 55% of global emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification.
Today, only 22 Parties have been ratified (UNFCCC, 2016).
Figure 11 Gas Emissions by UNFCCC perspective
Figure 11 shows the emissions levels until 2030 under current policy projections and submitted
INDC’s compared with least-cost 1.5°C and 2°C consistent pathways. The emissions gap
ranges only reflect the uncertainty in the pledges and INDC’s scenario. 2°C consistent median
and range: Greater than or equal to 66% chance of staying within 2°C in 2100. 1.5°C consistent
median and range: Greater than or equal to 50% chance of being below 1.5°C in 2100. Both
temperature paths show the median and 10th
to 90th
percentile range. Pathway ranges exclude
delayed action scenarios and any that deviate more than 5% from historic emissions in 2010
(Louise Jeffery, 2015).
2.1.2 CO2 BIG PRODUCERS’ POLICIES
More than 40% of CO2 global emissions are emitted by countries as United States and China.
Both cases are into the spotlight because their INDC for GHG mitigation are still unclear
because they haven’t specified emissions caps and other policies details. The United States has
recently announced an INDC between 26% and 28% below its 2005 level by 2025. China’s
INDC however, reflects 5 years’ delay compare to the American’s. Chinese have proposed
reach their goal in 2030 by obtaining 20% of the energy by non-fossil fuels.

15
Figure 12 Carbon Dioxide Emissions from energy consumption US and China (E.I.A, 2016)
Figure 12 depicts the biggest CO2 emitters trends from 1990 to 2012. Total carbon emissions
in China equalled U.S. emissions in 2007 due to the huge amount of electricity that the most
populated country in world demands in a developing process time. However, the rate per capita
still lower than the United States but approaching levels of the E.U. countries. Whole-year hot
and dry weather countries such as Qatar, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates are surpassing U.S.
rates due to the high demand of energy required by citizens in order to meet the highest standard
living conditions. Carbon emissions are mainly result from fossil fuel combustion activities
needed to energize our day-to-day life style. In China for instance 90% carbon emissions are
due to fossil fuel combustion (Liu, 2015), while in the U.S. CO2 emissions count for about
80% (E.I.A, 2016). Although both have already presented their intentions for GHG reductions,
there is such a great deal of scepticism if we based on latest CO2 emissions data.
2.1.3 EUROPEAN UNION GHG EMISSION REDUCTION
Greenhouse gas emissions in the EU-28 were down by 22.9% or 1.136 million tonnes of CO2
compared with 1990 levels. European goals are set in cutting emissions by 20% by 2020 and
by 40% by 2030 regarding 1990 levels.
On Figure 13, the GHG trends of the EU-28 since 1990 to 2014 are represented. Germany due
to its big industry and population is the most contaminant country. United Kingdom is the
second GHG emitters while France is the third in the rank. EU-28 members such as UK and
Romania have reduced their emissions by 31% and 55% respectively. Romania is a very good
example because its economy has risen at the time that GHG have been reduced (Fund, 2015).

16
Countries such as Germany and Belgium stay in 22% reductions or the average of all countries,
while Spain has increased by 17% during the last 24 years. Spain peak emissions was reached
in 2005 when the housing bubble boosted the Spanish economy. Since 2005 to 2014 emissions
have decreased because of the financial crisis.
Figure 13 Total Green House Emissions 1990-2014 (Eurostat, 2016)
On the top of the figure 14 is represented a bar-chart with the total GHG emissions by countries
in the year 2014. At the bottom of the figure, two pie-charts are showing the GHG broken down
by sector in 1990 and 2014. A few changes are observed in terms of sector assignations. Just a
small reduced in Fuel combustion from 62.5% to 55.1% and therefore an 8% increase in
transport.

17
Figure 14 EU-28 Total GHG emissions
However, European goal presents some uncertainties when data is recollected and analysed.
IEO 2016 takes into consideration some countries such as Turkey or Norway whereas Bulgaria,
Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta and Romania are not on IEO 2016 statistics. According to
IEO statistics, OECD Europe’s energy-related carbon dioxide rise slightly after 2040 which is
associated with the European Emissions Allowance credits (E.I.A, 2016).
2.1.4 GLOBAL SITUATION
According to IEO 2016, reduction measures taken today by countries, are not enough to reduce
the great amount of CO2 that humans have released so far and solve the big problem that
humans are facing this century.
Figure below represents the annual growth average by country, where the only plan reduction
which really enable a decrease in 2040 is the Japanese and US taking the U.S. Clean Power
Rule (CPP) in to account. This plan has been published 5 months later than the INDC for the
UNFCCC by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in August 2015. This plan
focuses on a coal-fired generation reduction by 33% regarding with the current plan.

18
Figure 14 Annual growth from 2012 to 2040
Figure 14 also shows how non OECD surpass by 5 the average of OECD with CPP. Countries
such as India, Cambodia or Viet Nam are going through a quick developing process in which
agriculture sector is shifting into services (Bank, 2013).
CONCLUSION
Global energy consumption has become in a big problem for the environment since the most
energy production derives from burning-fuels. Developed countries have promoted fossil fuels
as a way to meet society needs for economic evolution. Developing countries have the chance
to learn from the mistakes made by developed countries and they should promote innovative
energy production techniques and measures for their respective developing process. This
chapter enable us to know that every country in the world must invest in clean and low CO2
emissions technology no matter in which developing process is. Developed countries should
rectify and improve old fashion measures which have been used so far whereas developing
countries have the opportunity to start from the scratch and build an efficient, solid and
environmentally friendly society.
3. BUILDINGS IMPACT ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Building sector has become in the most important driver for global GHG emissions reduction.
Our need to be safe from environmental external conditions and create comfortable
atmospheres at work, home or leisure places, have made society invest huge amount of money
on this field. Buildings occupy a key place in our lives because they are homes of people and
they transmit such an important emotional and architectural value. However, energy efficiency
of global buildings is generally quite low, to the extent that the most CO2 and other GHG

19
emissions such as Black Carbon, CH4, HFCs, SF6 or OH are intrinsically related to the level
of energy demand within this sector.
The International Energy Outlook 2016 has enable to gather building energy consumption data
around the world. According to the IEO2016, the energy consumed by the building sector
accounts for the 20.1%. This study, apart from the current situation, allows us to predict the
energy consumption trends year by year from 2012 to 2040. Results are obtained by the
application of current policies, and their accuracy will be eventually diminished as long as new
and more severe policies enter into account. Building sector can be broken down in two
branches, residential and Commercial.
3.1 RESIDENTIAL SECTOR
Energy consumed in building sector is all energy related to heating, cooling, water heating, and
consumer products which are commonly or daily used by individuals or households for private
consumption. Energy demand depends on the quality of the building elements, household
appliances efficiency, climate, availability of energy sources, family incomes and our sense
and education about energy demand consequences. As a result, energy demand considerably
varied depending of the countries. Colder countries understandably have a relatively higher use
of energy because more energy is needed for heating and vice versa in warm climates with air
conditioning. Energy producer countries have a high energy use, partly because energy tends
to be much cheaper or free as a part of the citizenship right. Countries as Qatar in which its
cities have been mostly developed with modern but at the same time with very energy
demanding high-rises during the las 15 years, reaches percentages around 60% as shown in
figure 15 (Nasser Ayoub, 2014). Qatar is one of the highest energy user per capita with a
consumption of 14911.1 oil Kg a year. Hot conditions make Qataris demand countless kW/h
of energy in order to activate air conditioners and provide such comforts over the populations.
Due to Qatar is one of the countries which more barrels of oils export in the world, energy is
given free for citizens and they are not worry about habits, consequences, and alternative ways
from renewable sources which can reduce environmental impact. The best example is Iceland,
whose population is the most consuming energy in the world, ahead of Qatar and Trinidad and
Tobago with 18774.97 Oil Kg in 2012. Building sector in Iceland also demands tones of energy
to keep living standards over the society, but the energy produced there, comes mostly from
renewable energies. Figure 16 shows that more of the 80% of energy is from a renewable source
such as geothermal and hydropower. People could think that Qatar doesn’t meet proper
landscape conditions as Iceland in terms of geothermal grounds or water reservoirs but,

20
nevertheless Qatar and Trinidad and Tobago receive such a great amount of sun radiation
during the whole year which could be harnessed and use to supply building sector demand.
Figure 15 Energy demand by sectors in Qatar
Figure 16 Primary Energy use in Iceland 1940-2010 (Energy, 2012)

21
Many studies have indicated that all forms of buildings, residential and none residential,
contribute 48% of the total carbon emissions in the United States as shown in the next figure
Figure 17 CO2 Emissions by sector (Yudelson, 2010)
Keeping comfort levels in U.S. buildings takes nearly the 70% of all electricity produced in the
country and since the most electricity is generated by fossil fuel combustion, buildings
contribute to a significant GHG emissions which has been vital to emphasize global warming.
Besides, depends on the location and the building, some boilers and stoves provide energy on-
site by contributing direct emissions. Another indirect impacts such as building materials,
office and industrial supplies and waste disposal can be shown on the table located on the right
of figure 17 (Yudelson, 2010).
In Europe for instance, around 68% of the total final energy used in buildings is associated to
heating, cooling, hot water, cooking and appliances, being space heating the dominant reason
( BPIE, 2011).
Figure 18 European Energy demand by sector ( BPIE, 2011)
Countries as Hong Kong, has developed its economy since late 1980s and the 1990s before it
reunified with China. During this time Hong Kong companies have earned a reputation over

22
the years in rapid construction of quality high-rise apartment blocks and office (RCH, 2015).
The building consumption in this country is one of the biggest in the world, accounting for the
90% of the total energy and for 60% of the total GHG emissions (Aarshi, 2014). Electricity has
been a necessity to allow the country to take population in to a modern life and a basic
requirement for continued social and economic development. However, energy production
techniques haven’t been based on alternative and renewable sources as in Iceland. Instead, they
have relied on really pollutant and radioactive ways such as coal, natural gas and nuclear power
(CLP, 2012) Hong Kong is one of the riskiest countries in terms of radioactive pollution when
natural disasters such as tsunamis take into action, destroying nuclear plants as in Fukushima,
Japan, in 2011.
Figure 19 Hong Kong Energy Production by Source
Figure 5 shows energy generated by source in Hong Kong in 2012. On the right, a picture of
the city during the night time, shows the big amount of energy demanded to light and keep
liveable conditions for all the buildings in the city. The city of Hong Kong has already reached
its carrying capacity for new building (Yeung, 2010).
3.2 CURRENT AND FUTURE SITUATION
In Figure 20 is represented the OECD annual energy trends from 2012 to 2040 in the building
sector. The chart on the left represents the residential trends while the chart on the right shows
the commercial building energy tendencies in the same period of time. For the OECD countries,
residential energy consumption rises the amount of 0.6% per year. For the commercial energy
consumption, countries as United States, suffers a slow growth even though demand increases.
This fact is due to federal efficiency standards bring technological improvements in end-use
equipment and limitations in energy consumption growth. In Europe the commercial sector
growth is predicted to be 1.3% per year. Mexico and Chile lead this ranking due to both are

23
growing and developing as countries, harnessing their potential for building constructions and
infrastructures. Countries within western Europe, or Canada and United States present smaller
rates due to their potential has been already exploited during last decades, however their energy
consumption is bigger because of the great deal of infrastructures demanding for energy.
Higher rates of annual GDP in countries such as Mexico and Chile than European countries
and United States or Canada, are related to the big increase in demand (E.I.A, 2016).
Figure 20 Residential and Commercial Energy Consumption Trends in OECD 2012-2040 (E.I.A, 2016)
Figure 21 Residential and Commercial energy consumption trends in non- OECD 2012-2040 (E.I.A, 2016)
Figure 21 represents the Non-OECD building sector energy consumption between 2012 to
2040. India itself represents the biggest growth in both, residential and commercial. That means
the big potential of this country in this sector and which is going to develop year by year. China

24
still showing its strength in this sector and his potential for next 28 years even though it is going
through a slight recession. This recession might be related to the commercial rate which is the
same as its residential energy consumption rate. The rest of these countries show a superior
rate in commercial energy demand because they are considered a developing thus, they are
suffering stronger activity by creating new buildings for new enterprises related to the service
sector. Due to non-OECD countries are still growing up and their annual rate is considerably
major than OECD countries, overall consumption is less than a half of the total building sector
energy use in 2012. According to the I.E.O. 2016, predictions for 2040 is that the total energy
demand in the building sector to be 55% for non-OECD and the remaining 45% for OECD
(E.I.A, 2016).
CONCLUSION
Building sector are responsible for 47% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 49% of the
world’s energy consumption. Research augur eventual increase for the coming decades.
According to Navigant Research, global building stock is expected to grow from 151.8 billion
m2 in 2014 to 171.6 billion m2 in 2024 (Navigant Research, 2014). Different sources such as
International Energy Agency (IEA), foresees a double energy demand coming from buildings
by 2050. This fact put us in a critical situation to immediately undertake this challenge. Due to
a vast part of the energy associated with the power used in operating these buildings is
consumed needlessly, emissions can be cut through cost-effective measures. The potential of
energy efficient technologies and strategies must be developed and applied in order to help
achieve significant reductions in energy consumption and carbon emissions on a global scale.
4. NEED FOR GREEN BUILDINGS
According to the UNFCCC Paris treatment, we need to reduced our greenhouse gas emissions
by at least 50% to avoid irreparable consequences created by climate change. As it was
explained in chapter 2, eight months ago in Paris, 177 nations promised to ensure the world’s
average temperature did not rise by more than 1.5°C above the pre-industrial level. The
temperature is already 1.3°C above the pre-industrial levels and climate change is slashing on
our society faster and further than almost anyone predicted. In one respect, scientists were
wrong when they foresaw a climate crisis in the second half of this century because it’s already
here (Monbiot, 2016). After the frightening data collected and reflected on last chapters, we
can see that conventional buildings utilise great amount of energy, land, water, and raw

25
materials for their construction and operation. They are also responsible for large greenhouse
gas emissions and other wasted materials created in the construction and demolition process,
having such a serious impact on plants and wildlife (Howe, 2010). This fact has made building
be the most potential driver for greenhouse gas mitigation in every national climate change
strategy. In other words, countries will not meet the carbon emissions goals unless buildings
have a minor impact on the environment. Such buildings are called green or sustainable
buildings and they are environmentally responsible and source-efficient from cradle to grave.
4.1 GREEN BUILDINGS
The origins of green building begun back in the midst of the industrial revolution, when Henri
Becquerel was the first witnesses in the transformation of solar energy into electrical energy,
known as photovoltaic power. This fact caused the utilization of solar panels to spin turbines
and produce green energy. This trend wasn’t spread over the society until 1970 when the first
energy crisis occurred. Since then, green building moved from research and development to
reality. Builders and designers begun experimenting new ways to reduce the reliance of
building and homes from fossil fuels. One of the most common technique used for clean
electricity in houses was the installation of solar panels. This pioneering technique never was
part of the mainstream due to its high initial cost and its relatively low efficiency compare to
fossil fuels (Wilson, 2006). After a lot of research and improvement in renewable energy
technology and low carbon strategies for buildings since the 1970’s, the beginning of the
twenty-first century has ushered in the era of green buildings.
4.1.1 WHAT IS A GREEN BUILDING?
This term has been defined by multitude agencies, and all of them come more or less to the
same conclusion.
The Office of the Federal Environmental Executive defines this term as:
“The practice of increasing the efficiency with which buildings and their sites use
energy, water, and materials, and reducing building impacts on human health and the
environment, through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and
removal – the complete building life cycle” (Office of the Federal Environmental
Executive)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) comes across with this definition:

26
“The practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally
responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building’s life-cycle from siting to
design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation and deconstruction. This
practice expands and complements the classical building design concerns of economy,
utility, durability, and comfort. Green building is also known as a sustainable or “high
performance building” (E.P.A, n.d.)
The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) concludes that green building is
a holistic concept that starts with the understanding that the built environment can have
profound effects, both positive and negative, on the natural environmental, as well as the people
who inhabit of these effects throughout the entire life cycle of a building.
“Is the planning, design, construction and operation of buildings with several central,
foremost considerations: energy use, water use, indoor environmental quality, material
section and the building’s effects on its site” (L.E.E.D, 2014)
One of the most important characteristic of a green building is that its impact is evaluated by a
life cycle assessment (LCA). LCA consists in such a powerful tool capable of investigating and
valuating different impacts of the parts involved in a building such as environmental, economic,
and social. LCA can label a building the grade of green and if the investment is worth (I.S.O.,
2008). Certifications on green buildings such as LEED, Green Globes, BREEAM, guarantee
that dwellings meet defined criteria of a standards created by organizations such as American
National Standards Institutes (ANSI), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or
American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning (ASHRAE) approved by
governments. In the following, some of the best worldwide green buildings examples have
been referenced.
4.1.2 GREEN BUILDING EXAMPLES
The Crystal, London, (UK)
As it seen on Figure 22 important companies such as Siemens has already started to invest in
green buildings. The Crystal is an urban sustainable landmark that draws thousands of visitors
each year due to its futuristic and sustainable design. Wilkinson Eyre Architects have been able
to build one the greenest building by mankind. The building’s roof acts as a collector of
rainwater, while the sewage is treated, then recycled water is purified and converted as drinking
water (archdaily, 2012).

27
Figure 22 The Crystal
Phipps’Center for Sustainable Landscapes, Pittsburgh (USA)
Figure 23 Phipps' Center
The Center for Sustainable Landscapes (CSL) in Pittsburgh is shown in figure 23 and is a great
example of green building because it uses different sources of energy such as solar, wind and
geothermal. It also recycles wastewater at the time that rainwater is collected to be a net-zero
water building (When on Earth, 2015).

28
Pixel Building, Melbourne (AUS)
Figure 24 Pixel Building Melbourne
Figure 3 shows the Australian masterpiece in green buildings located in Melbourne. This
building is recognised to be the first building in achieving the perfect Green Star score. It is
100% carbon free and it uses a systematic method called ‘carbon neutrality which enables to
offset the carbon of the materials used in the construction process (When on Earth, 2015).
Bullitt Center, Seattle (USA)
Figure 25 Bullit Center in Seattle

29
The example in figure 25 is a building which was built in 2013 in the city of Seattle, located in
the north west of the US. This office building has been designed with the purpose of lasting
250 years of ideal lifespan. Interesting water and sewage systems have been installed to make
it be independent from the municipal grid. Other systems such as photovoltaics panels have
been also installed on the roof, to contribute the clean energy generation to achieve the carbon
and energy neutral building (When on Earth, 2015).
Public Library Beitou Branch, Taipei (Taiwan)
Figure 26 Public Library Beitou Branch, Taipei (Taiwan)
Taipei public library is one of the most emblematic green building located in the Taiwanese
capital. Its innovative design and unique architecture and furniture has created a trend for new
design concepts in the country (Tseng, 2008). One of the technique it uses to save electricity is
the great amount of windows and their large dimensions. Sun radiation is allowed to pass
through the windows, creating the ideal light conditions inside of the building. Most of
windows are open to ease air flow within the building and minimize the use of HVAC. The
roof is equipped with photovoltaics panels for electricity needed in the building and with a
catch rainwater system which store water to eventually use for toilets. This brilliant building

30
was the first in getting the highest diamond rating under its government’s EEWH certification
system (When on Earth, 2015).
4.1.3 GLOBAL SITUATION AND TRENDS
4.1.3.1 NEW STOCK
With green building movement sweeping across the world, innovative technologies are being
developed to keep the pace with increasing shift towards sustainability. The use of
biodegradable, recycled, recyclable and renewable materials in the construction of buildings,
and the clean energy techniques production systems in the building site, are attracting great
attention due to its environmental, social and economic advantages.
Figure 27 Green Building Sector Development
The picture above shows the quantifiable benefits which sustainable development in building
sector can bring to the society. Reduction in bills such as water, fuel and electricity. The lower
demand of energy implies CO2 reductions thus, environmental and human health. Green
technology ensures ethical and sustainable business around the world and therefore respect for
the environment and future generations. Investment in green technology can also bring jobs
and prosperity for society (Environment Agency, 2005).
Too many are the reasons for what green building is already widely worldwide adopted, with
an increasing trend in most countries, especially within the developing world. According to the

31
World Green Building Trends 2016, the percentage of firms expecting to have more than 60%
of their projects certified green. Companies are supposed to double this trend by 2018 regarding
the last data gathered in 2015.
Figure 28 Percentage of respondents whose firms have done more than 60% green projects
Figure 28 shows the great potential of developing countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Colombia,
South Africa or India in which the investment for green is latent for the oncoming years. This
effort from developing countries, is considered like very crucial for GHG reductions unlike all
the capitalist countries which their economic growth was based on inefficient and non-
environmental infrastructures, being a serious problem for climate change and its
consequences. These results have been drawn from survey respondents from 69 countries from
around the world. The results of the most significant 13 countries (developed and developing)
have been displayed in the picture above. This survey has consisted in identifying objectives
such as:
 Triggers and obstacles relating to the adoption of green building
 Measure past, current and future levels of activity in green building
 Important construction sectors for growth in green building
 Measure the impact of green building practices on business operations
 Profile the use of green building products and/or methods
 Uncover trends in the industry through comparison with relevant findings from last
Global Trends in Green Buildings reports
The participants (architects, engineers, contractors, owners and specialists/consultants) were
required to be employed and to have non-building projects account for no more than 50% of
their office’s revenue (World Green Building Trends 2016, 2016).

32
4.1.3.2 EXISTING BUILDINGS
Existing buildings are playing such an important role in this transition, the transition towards
the sustainable development. Existing building stock is well known for its high density around
the world and for being inefficient. For these reasons, retrofitting building stock has enormous
potential to provide huge benefits to the society (see figure 6). The 70% of the EU’s existing
building stock is highly inefficient which makes people increase energy demand and therefore
contribute for the vast amount of GHG emissions.
Figure 29 Age categorization of housing stock in Europe
Figure 29 shows the European building stock represented by zones. Intense blue represents the
oldest building in the continent and we can see that around 40% of the buildings are older than
55 years old. Around 16% of the stock is between 1991–2010 which means that a very few
buildings have been constructed under sustainable methods and measures (BPIE, 2011).
On figure 30 can be seen that building sector is one of the main driver for energy consumption
in Europe. In 2009, European households demanded the 68% of the total final energy use in
buildings. Heating for warming up buildings during cold winter, is basically the main reason
for what buildings demand such big amounts of energy. In the figure above is estimated the
consumption (kWh/m2) reduction as buildings get newer. Older stock tends to consume more
energy because of their low performance levels. This lack of energy conservation in buildings
is related to high levels of U-Values and air tightness of the envelope. In the figure below has
been represented an example of Bulgarian buildings characteristics which the U-Values and air
tightness of the envelope are connected to the building energy demand (BPIE, 2011).

33
Figure 30 Heating average consumption in European existing buildings
Figure 31 U-Value and Air Tightness of Bulgarian buildings
In the States around 80% of the housing stock is 15 years old or older. These buildings were
rarely built to be energy efficiently. According to the research written by Amory B, Lovins, the
reasons for this massive market failure have to do with the institutional framework within
which buildings are financed, designed, constructed, and operated. Many factors such as

34
fragmented and commoditized design, false price signals, and substitution of obsolete rules-of-
thumbs for true engineering optimization have made building stock be less comfortable, more
energy use and more cost to build. Real-estate developers and investors, who are frequently in
the position of making large financial commitments on a speculative basis typically want fast
and cheap buildings. Time is money and feasibility is an obstacle if interest increase ahead the
rents. This mentality has brought tremendous consequences in buildings which must be solved
in order to meet environmental goals set by 2050. Moreover, in 1990 two-thirds of the new
U.S. single-family houses were built for the speculative market which means that this stock
was designed to generate tons of dollars to the developer instead of having been designed to
provide comfortability, bill savings to habitants and contribute to solve the energy crisis in
which we are submerged (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1991). The fact that in 1989 only
the 5% of the houses built in the U.S., were stick-built entirely onsite, reveals that the remaining
95% were houses built by prefabricated modules according to first cost, reliability, familiarity,
and convenience under manufacturer interest (Browning, 1989). Design process and methods
Negligence has been committed in the U.S existing buildings. According to William
McDonough, one of the most relevant pioneer architect in the world sustainable development
due to his transcendental and influential books and reports, “Most U.S. buildings of the past
few decades are monuments to the designer’s ignorance of where the sun is”. These words
assure that something wrong was going on when, with just proper choice of architectural form,
envelope and orientation can often reduce more than a third in energy bills with no extra cost
(Lovins, 1992). The evidence in the U.S. is that existing buildings are a lack of ethical,
professionalism and sense works which are being the main driver towards the ecological
overshoot that we, as humans, are living. But the saddest part of this, is not the irresponsibility
for what professionals in the construction sector have executed in the past, is the irresponsibility
we are still committing. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, newer
homes in the U.S. are 30% larger but consume about as much as energy as older homes (see
figure below).

35
Figure 32 Energy Consumption of the U.S Homes
In figure 22, the results from EIA’s Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) show
that homes built in 2000 and later, only consume 2% more energy on average than homes which
were built before 2000 (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013). As shown in the
figure, the increase of energy efficiency in space heating due to more sophisticated equipment
and improvements in walls required by new codes, are not enough to combat environmental
goals posed by 2050. Here is the best example to see that codes don’t work to face GHG
mitigation. It looks, this is the time to call policy makers and governments for strengthening of
the building codes.
4.2 TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
A sustainable development is the solution to guarantee prosperity to our society. Too many are
the benefits carried by this technique. They are not just environmental benefits, which are
needed to not deplete natural resources, they are also economic and social benefits such as jobs
creation and healthy places. Since buildings are one of the biggest drivers for energy
consumption, both, new buildings and existing building must be designed and retrofitted by
low energy technologies application. The right combination between new buildings designed
under sustainable technologies and the retrofitting of existing buildings based on low energy
efficient technologies will guarantee economic, environmental and social benefits needed for
human prosperity.
Freiburg is a city situated in the south west of Germany which is the best example of
Sustainable Development. This case is a real model for the reconciliation of “soft” ecology and

36
“hard” economics. Since 1970’s the population of the city fought against nuclear power
installation due to the high environmental risk this plan could eventually bring if project had
been finally carried out. From that moment onwards, city development took a turn towards
environmental sustainability. Environmental policy, solar technology, sustainability and
climate protection became the main drivers of economic and political growth along with urban
development. Many have been the sustainable invests during the end of the 20th
century. In
1981, the city founded the Institute of Solar Energy System. 10 years later, the Waste
Management Concept was adopted while in 1992 low-energy construction methods for
buildings standards were implemented. But this is not all, because with the onset of the 21st
century new projects and plan have been carried out to meet the goal of being a neutral city by
2050.
Figure 33 Draft of the sustainable plan carried in the city
In figure 33 are shown the critical drivers needed for the transition into a sustainable
development. First of all, high grade of political and citizen commitment is needed to achieve
general intended goal. Then, investment in good education and training of citizens will bring
educated people capable of solving economic and comfort problems without jeopardizing the
environment. Application and development of the technologies to achieve energy savings and
climate protection by energy efficient buildings or retrofitting.

37
Figure 34 View of the Green City of Freiburg
The figure 34 highlights the importance of retrofitting in the buildings of the city. The picture
shows the new totally integrated PV roof installed in a sector of the city. The Solar Settlement
in this part of the city generates 420 MWh, being 0.445 MW peak per year. This generation
can be saved 200,000 litres of oil and 500 tons of CO2 every year. These kind of practices are
definitely needed to meet the plans and codes set by the council; in order to the city to be 100%
powered by renewable energy by 2050. Apart from that, there are around 12,000 people from
the City of Freiburg and the region who are employed in the environmental and solar industries.
There are also around 2,000 firms apart from medicine and healthcare which play a key role
by contributing around €650 million to value creation and to the positive image of the region.
The city then, ranks with the best in terms of economic growth, job creation and population
growth. (City of Freiburg Council, 2014).
CONCLUSION
It has been shown that the application of low energy technology in buildings can provide
economic growth, GHG reductions and safety for the society. Education, cooperation, and
determination in the society are crucial to move towards a sustainable system in which the
quality of the current and future living standards can be higher. Green buildings have such a
huge potential to cooperate towards a sustainable development. Due to new buildings are
constructed in compliance with modern codes which apparently are requiring higher levels of

38
efficiency, the main problem emerge in the majority of the building stock or existing buildings
which have shown being massively inefficient. Existing buildings are the biggest responsible
of energy consumption thus, GHG emissions.
5. BUUILDING RETROFITTING
Since the building sector accounts for the most energy consumption and therefore is the biggest
contributor for GHG emissions in the world, building efficiency is key to capping millions of
metric tonnes of GHG needed to meet UNFCCC Paris Agreement. The building sector is the
current most potential for delivering significant and cost-effective GHG reductions. It is said
that countries will not meet reductions targets without a change in buildings energy
performance of the new and existing stock so governments and policy makers should prioritise
commitment to this sector by enhancing policies and incentives to ease the building transition
towards energy neutrality along this century. Although green building represents the next
generation of buildings, and this generation can bring about energy performance with
competitive prices, the vast majority of buildings are not green, without any symptom of energy
efficiency as it can be seen after the research carried out in the last chapter. Most of the housing
stock that will exist in 2050 (the year widely referred to as the target for 80% reduction in
carbon emissions) already exist today (Dadeby, 2012). These buildings will continue to be used
for many years, and they are playing such an important role when it comes to target the
environmental goals. These improvements that existing buildings must undertake, are carried
by a process called retrofitting.
5.1 WHAT IS RETROFITTING?
There is no agreed standard definition of retrofitting, neither for refurbishment and renovation
in the context of building obsolescence. Richard Hyde, professor of Architectural Science at
University of Sidney, Australia and author of Sustainable Retrofitting of Commercial Building
for warm climates does a distinction between these terms (Richard Hyde, 2013)
“Refurbishment may be defines as retouring the building, or its systems, to their
original condition, addressing the forces of physical obsolescence”
“Renovation takes refurbishment one step further by incorporating changes to the
physical parameters of the building”
“Retrofitting is the replacement and upgrading of systems and technology to address
technological or environmental obsolescence”

39
If you ask building engineers in the U.S. about retrofitting, they would probably answer it by
associating this term with “green retrofitting”. The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)
defines it, as an any kind of upgrade at an existing building that is wholly or partial occupied
to improve the energy and environmental performance, reduce water use, and improve the
comfort and quality of the space in terms of natural light, air quality, and noise (Iain Campbell,
2009).
In the UK for instance, refurbishment or retrofit terms refer to superficial changes, such as new
kitchen, bathroom or decorative changes, rather than addressing any backlog in maintenance
of the existing fabric or services. These terms anyways, provide the opportunity to improve the
building’s energy performance for environmental and cost-effective reasons and the most of
the cases are interchangeable. For this exercise, the term retrofit has been chosen to describe
the process in which existing buildings are adapted to low-energy standards (Janet Cotterell,
2012).
5.2 RETROFITTING POTENTIAL
In 2012 were recorded 670 million m2 of commercial building in the United States (EIA, 2012)
while in EU27, Switzerland and Norway the building stock was about 25 billion m2 (BPIE,
2011). China is the biggest polluter in the world and this is mostly because of its 50 billion m2
of buildings. The majority of these buildings have been built 5 years ago or earlier based on no
efficient energy performance standards. If the new buildings are not following the voluntary
environmental code standards, retrofitting of the 100% of the existing buildings today, might
be eventually a fact to meet environmental goals by 2050.Said that, retrofitting becomes in an
obligation exercise for existing buildings, which must be taken before demolition. There are
three valid reasons for retrofitting rather than demolition: Preservation of historic buildings;
lower economic cost and environmental impact than demolition and new build (Richard Hyde,
2013). Another expert in sustainable projects including architectural, historic preservation, and
community revitalization, the American architect Carl Elefante, mentioned in one of his reports
back in 2007 that the greenest building is, the one that is already built (Elefante, 2007). The act
of demolishing all the existing building stock and replace them with new sustainable buildings
is not possible and this fact makes retrofitting as the alternative to suit environment and
society’s needs (Aarshi, 2014)

40
5.3 HISTORY, EVOLUTION OF RETROFITTING
A building doesn’t have to be new to be efficient. Great examples of retrofitting projects have
showed the entire world environmental, economic and social achievements which reflect that
a sustainable future can be possible. While most buildings owners still pursue single technology
improvements, market leaders bundle together energy saving technologies to get deeper
savings in more comprehensive approach. Strategies such as water consumption reduction,
reused of demolition waste for construction materials, occupancy patterns evaluation for
system sizing, natural ventilation, renewable energy for energy generation, shadings and high
performance of the envelope, have been deeply studied to find the best economic and
environmental option (Paradise, 2012). The investment in efficient technologies also, has
naturally become attractive due to possible problems such as fuel price fluctuation. Experts
have found renewable energy as good stabilizer to meet energy demand when fossil fuels prices
have increased to unaffordable levels (Krozer, 2011). By saying that, retrofitting can be the key
and main driver towards environmental future if it is implemented correctly.
However, retrofitting is not simple and it encapsulates great amount of factor which must be
carefully analysed and implemented to generate the best for environment preservation,
occupiers, and practitioners. Retrofitting is not an only player winner game, retrofitting consist
in finding the best cost-effective solution for occupier living comfort while energy
consumption and GHG emissions of the building are lowered. The optimization of all these
factors needed to determine, implement and apply the most cost-effective technologies, low in
emissions for human comfort, makes retrofitting be a difficult exercise to deal with.
Retrofitting activities begun when building users wanted to reduced high electricity and water
bills every month. They realized that the poor performance of their building, could eventually
cause big economic losses during the entire life cycle of the building. Lighting retrofitting was
one of the first measure used for these purposes. In the early 1980’s Pennsylvania Power &
Light was subject of an entirely lighting system retrofitting which delivered important energy
and bills reduction every year. Another great example of lighting retrofitting as a main measure
occurred in 1986 in Reno, Nevada. The Reno Post Office was selected by the federal
government to receive a renovation that would make it a “minimum energy user”. It was
thought that lighting retrofit based on low consumption bulbs would brought cheaper electricity
bills and very attractive economic returns. The architect in charge for the project, Lee
Windheim, thought that energy bills might also be reduced by lowering high ceilings in order
to create smaller spaces to make rooms easier to heat and cooling. The reduction of ceiling

41
clearance, also play an important role to favour acoustic conditions in the working atmosphere
especially in the areas where re-punching noisy machines were located. Once the complete
renovation was finished, energy savings outcomes came to about $22.400 a year. The ceiling
installed also brought an additional savings of $30.000 annually because of the lower
maintenance needed compared to the old one. But the most impressive and unexpected fact
was the increasing of productivity from warehouse workers. Under new lighting installation,
employees did their jobs better and faster (Joseph J. Romm). After seeing the effects and the
potential of retrofitting, bodies involved in the building sector such as architects, engineers,
developers, tenants and occupants started to take this activity as a priority for their works,
investments, researches and own homes.
As every activity which arouse interest within the society, becomes in fundamental subject of
study, research and development. Retrofitting is not an exemption and with the passage of time
new techniques, materials, methods, strategies and policies were developed in order to provide
the most accurate results and reliable service to customers. Retrofit activities have become
more and more common in all type of buildings from vernacular settlements in remotes places
(Marwa Dabaieh, 2015) to heritage historical buildings (Filipi, 2015), passing for social
housings (A. Gagliano, 2013), residential buildings (Olatz Pombo, 2015), commercial
buildings (Daniel Daly, 2014), hotels (Theocharis Tsoutsos, 2013) and football stadiums (City
of Freiburg Council, 2014). Since a successful retrofit encompasses reduction in energy
demand by providing ideal conditions for users, a wide range of strategies can be adopted.
Envelope U-values reductions measures such as efficient insulations or windows have been
largely used and showed great outcomes. Indoor air quality is one of the most common
problems in old buildings when fenestrations and indoor spaces haven’t been designed
properly. Heat recovery systems can avoid air stagnation and reduce cooling and heating loads
depending on the season (Janet Cotterell, 2012). Energy production site measures such as PV
panels, Solar thermal panels, Combine Heat and Power systems (CHP) or Heat Pumps units
have shown that if they are correctly sized, they are such magnificent energy sources for
electricity and hot water supply. These technologies are very efficient and with the exemption
of the CHP, all emit zero GHG emissions to the environment during their operation. Despite
CHP systems produce some emission due to their fuel combustion during operating time,
emissions are very reduced compare to traditional techniques and the system is very reliable
(Fulvio Ardente, 2010). Since water demand has become greater than water supplying sources,
and therefore is causing a shortage in some areas of Africa, China, California or UK, rain water

42
harvesting for final used in toilets, basins, showers and washing machines have been a common
measure implemented in retrofit activities, bringing substantial reductions in water bills
(Miguel Angel Lopez Zavala, 2016). Many studies have assessed the environmental impact of
retrofitting measures implemented in buildings by using a technique called Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) (Fulvio Ardente, 2010). Attractive retrofitting definitely occurs when a
financial gain from undertaking retrofit measures is achieved. The process to carried out the
economic feasibility of retrofitting is called Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and some critical
parameters such as payback period, and risk analysis can be determined. LCC is such a crucial
point to rule whether retrofitting is worth it or not (Zhenjun Ma, 2012). During the whole
retrofitting evolution, has been determined that the better interaction between all factors
explained above, the better chances to achieve successful retrofits. This interaction is managed
by process which are broken down in to several phases depending on the standard applied
(Technology Strategy Board, 2014). Incentives such as tax rebate, Value-Added Tax (VAT)
removal for refurbishment or Feed-in-tariff (FIT’s), have had an important impact to make
people move towards retrofitting trends. In Spain for instance, where renewable energy systems
were successfully implemented in both, retrofitting and new building due to FIT’s incentives
provided by the government, came to sudden halt when in 2012 FIT’s incentives were removed
from the Royal Law (Margarita Ortega, 2013).
5.4 RETROFITTING PROCESS
As has been explained above retrofitting process is a complex task which requires to deal with
multiple technological, environmental, economic and social factors. These factors can vary
drastically depending on the type of building, countries and standards. In the following, a
holistic retrofitting process is explained step by step based on the global retrofitting literature
review.
5.4.1 LOOKING FOR THE BEST RETROFITTING METHODOLOGY
Methodology is the part of the retrofitting process which plans tidily the tasks required to
achieve the best outcomes. Retrofitting planning is about getting the project right from the
beginning. It must be designed to synchronize every factor involved in the process and put
them together and see the best method for further development. Some analysis such as building
energy efficiency and energy consumption will be required to address thermal losses and CO2
gas emissions. These values will determine the possible retrofitting strategies to improve
building envelope and/or installing one or more energy efficient generation systems. Once the
right strategy is designed, LCA and LCC will be carried out with the objective of meeting

43
environmental aspects set by standards and economical customer aspirations agreed in the
beginning of the process. Once all the parties are satisfied, the process proceed with the phase
of commissioning and site implementation. When the retrofitting is finished a post
measurement and validation must be follow through in order to determine final energy
reduction. The level of retrofitting can be broken down in to 4 different levels depending on
the energy saved at the end of the process (BPIE, 2011). It will depend on the basic standards
retrofitting codes and the willingness of customer to go green.
Figure 35 Retrofitting levels by final energy saving reduction
Figure 35 depicts the level of retrofitting by final energy consumption reduction. On the right
of the figure is reflected the average cost per square meter by level of renovation. These values
have been taken from a study whose purpose has been to find the retrofitting drivers in Europe
for possible scenarios towards EU 2050 emission targets.
After some research, I have found such an important gap in holistic retrofitting methodologies.
Although retrofit has been an emerging field which has been developed massively during the
last 40 years, whole retrofit planning is still being an object of study. The majority of the
researches are entirely focus on specific parts of the whole retrofitting process without any
pairing between phases. Victor Olgyay mentioned the importance of pairing life cycle cost
analysis with a variety of possible engineering options. Then he recommends to meet the needs
with passive design strategies. Only after meeting as many needs as possible through passive
solutions, is when retrofit engineers must search for efficient systems if loads haven’t been met
(Victor Olgay, 2010). What Victor Olgay utters is a cost-efficient with no emissions plan to
solve energy demand with passive solutions when possible. This strategy references very well
the statement said by the architect William McDonough who was cited in the previous chapter
for his discontent about the most U.S buildings design.
“Less bad is not good”
William McDonough

44
Although Victor Olgay proposes such a really efficient and professional idea looking for the
most effectives outcomes, he doesn’t mention prior required steps such as customer survey or
building energy auditing needed to know customer expectations and major energy wastes
within the building.
Zhenjun Ma et al. in a research published in 2012, do reference the whole retrofitting process
by breaking down in to 5 phases which embrace all the tasks required to make factor involved
work out together (Zhenjun Ma, 2012),
Figure 36 Whole retrofitting process by phases
Figure 36 represents the task required for each phase. Tasks reflecting have been very well
selected and systematically organized to provide a quality retrofitting service to customers from
the beginning to the end. Phase I is ideal to roughly define the scope, targets, budget and
customer expectations. It can be seen as a first contact meeting between engineers/customers
to determine if engineering service can meet customer demand. If first meeting
engineers/customers has been successful, the retrofitting process proceeds with Phase II. This
phase consists in a performance assessment of the building to address energy wastes, efficiency
of the current energy systems, the performance of the materials used and energy consumption
of the building under customer’s habits. Phase III is one of the most critical task in which
strategies must be designed based on customer’s needs and retrofitting standards. The Skills of
the engineer in designing the most cost effective set of retrofitting measures will bring the most
attractive investment returns which will be determined through the LCC and risk assessment.
If LCC of the retrofitting strategy is economically viable, retrofitting process steps to the Phase
IV. In this phase is when retrofitting is implemented and proper adjustments of the new
equipment for the best operation are done. Phase V includes a monitoring period which
evaluates the performance of the retrofitting measures already implemented. A comparison

45
between energy auditing carried in phase II and V must be done to certify if goals have been
achieved.
The methodology proposed by Zhenjun Ma et al, is really complete from the planning task to
the last energy assessment after implementation. It guides you through a very well organized
phases strategically design to care important factors involved in the retrofitting process.
However, some phases look a bit weaker in terms of liaising with customers and professionals
involved in the process. Life cycle assessment hasn’t been mentioned thus, there is no
possibility to determine the environmental impact of the process which must have the same
degree of importance as economic and energy consumption factors.
The Technology Strategy Board, now called Innovate UK has issued a guide which examines
40 homes from the Retrofit for the Future programme. It helps engineers, designers, main
contractors, energy consultants and clients how to act in the retrofitting process. In this manual
has been located another interesting whole retrofitting process carefully explained step by step
by highlighting the most essential factors to take into account during the process with their best
practical ways to deal with. This guide, apart from mention the huge potential of retrofitting
and the huge benefits in energy use and carbon emissions reduction (they can be as much as
80%), it emphasizes the importance of the integration between all the components to get the
best results.
“Think about a house and its residents as a single energy system”
Innovate UK, Retrofit for the future
In order to achieve the cohesion between components, some important points such as
collaboration and communication, engage with residents, tailor the retrofit strategy, pay close
attention to controls and care of small details must be taken for retrofitting success (Technology
Strategy Board, 2014).

46
Figure 37 Retrofitting process (Technology Strategy Board, 2014)
Figure 37 shows critical points that Retrofit for the future has considered for the retrofitting
process. In the figure can be seen the degree of connection between main themes that
retrofitting process covers. The thickness of each arrow shows how often the connection
occurs. Engaging residents from the start can increase their understanding of retrofitting,
needed for success. Some technical, environmental and especially behavioural aspects during
the operational time are to be followed by occupiers. A continual engagement with residents
during the whole process is represented by ending the lines in to Engaging residents point.
The procedure follows a clockwise order starting from a retrofit planning which can be seen at
the top left of the picture and finishing at the working on site, on the bottom left.
Retrofit planning: This phase covers energy and construction solutions; pre-design and project
planning; performance targets; procurement; engagement of the right people at the right time;
and planning the time to document, learn and share lessons. This starting point can be seen as
the first meeting between teams and customers involved. This meeting is needed to help
understand existing conditions of the building as well an overall strategy based on
environmental and energy demand reduction. This point really emphasizes the importance of
addressing air tightness by an energy auditing.

47
Building fabric: This phase is based on the fact that almost all the projects have significantly
reduced heat loss by improving the building envelope. This strategy supports Victor Olgay
theory of assessing first, how far retrofitting improvements can go with passive solution such
as insulating the fabric (walls, roof, floors, windows and doors).
Indoor air quality: In this section is studied how to fix the possible discomforts such as
condensation, odours or unwanted air penetration to achieve an optimum indoor comfort.
Airtightness keeps warmth in the home so insulation must have gaps, construction joints need
to be sealed and service penetrations also carefully sealed. Good ventilation will be essential
for indoor comfort, being mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR) an option when
passive measures are not capable of moving the needed amount of air to guarantee comfort.
Services: Factors such as design, sizing, procurement, installation, positioning and interface of
services are determined in this phase. The major goal in this phase is achieve the best
interaction between heating and hot water systems, lighting, renewable energy systems and
controls. Passive design measure will be value before taking any active design measure. An
operating manual of services implemented in the retrofit process will be issued and provided
to customers.
Working on site: A high quality of retrofitting is not just achieved by planning, designing and
sizing the best cost-effective and environmental measures. This is achieved when all the prior
work is properly delivery on site. There is no point to size the best cost-efficient system when
it is eventually installed wrong. This phase is focused on providing the best retrofitting
execution on site. Some tasks such as good coordination and communication between workers
and designers will be the key of success.
Although this guide offers detailed information about six themes that you can’t overlook when
a retrofit process is carried out, there are some critical aspects such as economic feasibility,
environmental impact and operation assessment after implementation which have been
ignored.
Fulvio Ardente et al, presents a study in which energy and environmental impact are
determined in several public buildings as a result of retrofit actions. Is one of the few papers
which analyses the Gross Energy requirement (GER) and Global Warming Potential (GWP)
over the entire cycle of a building. Another standing out characteristic of this research regarding
traditional LCA studies is that direct and indirect environmental impacts of the retrofitting
measures are taking in to consideration. This approach shows the way to analyse the

48
environmental impact of each retrofitting measure thus, address the best and worst
environmental-effective retrofitting measures (Fulvio Ardente, 2010).
Figure 38 Environmental impact of the retrofitting measures in Brno (Czech Republic)
Figure 38 gathers the environmental impact determined by the technique proposed by Fulvio
Ardente et al. According to the results building insulation has the biggest environmental impact
with a payback period of 1.5 years in GWP. The most environmental efficient measure in this
retrofitting process is the low-e window with payback period of 0.2 years. This retrofitting set
made of PV, Insulation, Low-e windows and HVAC system foresees great reductions of GHG
compared to the no retrofitting building version. If environmental impact doesn’t meet
standards or/and customer’s aspirations, engineers task of amending any measure in the
retrofitting set, will be an easy matter thanks to this LCA method.
After analysing some of the most relevant retrofitting papers with the aim of looking for the
most holistic, comprehensive and solid retrofitting methodology, there is no any research which
entirely meets these expectations. However, if the methodology proposed by Zhenjun Ma et al.
is combined with the Retrofitting for the future methodology, some weakness such as lack of
customer’s interaction can be strengthened and therefore improved service quality. This
product would miss an environmental assessment which can be solve if we apply the technique
developed by Fulvio Ardente et al. which allows engineers to figure the environmental impact
of the retrofitting set design in prior phases.
5.4.2 BUILDING ENERGY AUDITING
Building energy audits are considered such a powerful tool for uncovering critical
malfunctioning systems and main energy wastes through the building envelope. A good energy
audit can allow us to design operational and equipment improvements that will save energy,
reduce energy cost and lead the building to a higher performance.
The objective of buildings energy audits is to determine where, when, why and how energy is
used during the building operational phase. Audits normally begins by gathering historical, and

49
current energy consumption data of the building which is compared with the same data of
similar buildings (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2011).
Energy audits generally examine the whole building approach. They also can be specifically
focused on each element such as walls, lighting or heating, ventilation and air conditioning.
The depth of the audit will depend on the building data previously examined and the customer’s
aspirations for the building retrofitting. See request for qualification and proposals forms in
Appendix C.
According to the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE), energy audits can be organized in 3 levels.
Level 1: Site Assessment or Preliminary Audits which identifies a general view of
potential capital improvements.
Level 2: Energy Survey and Engineering Analysis Audits which provides an in-
depth analysis of energy cost, energy usage and building characteristics and more
accurate assessment through energy use surveys.
Level 3: Detailed Analysis of Capital-Intensive Modification Audits which provides
economic feasibility of solid ideas for capital investments. Monitoring, data collection
and engineering analysis are carried out regarding Level 1 and 2.
Energy audits are crucial to identify sustainable retrofitting strategies. They can help to
understand the energy performance of a building and its energy systems based on the building
data gathered during the audit and therefore find out the potential retrofit (Alajmi, 2012). In
the following building energy audit is explain regardless the level of depth set by ASHRAE.
Figure 39 depicts the building audit process recommended by the U.S. Department of Energy.
The first step to undertake, consists in obtaining utility data of the building at least during the
last 2 years. All forms of energy (electricity, gas, oil and water) used in the building will be
gathered and analysed by using Energy Utilization Index (EUI). This index allows auditors to
benchmark building data with others data of similar buildings and therefore estimate potential
magnitude of energy opportunities. The Site Assessment is the second step to take in the
process and some tasks such as building maintenance staff and visual inspections are performed
with the objective of knowing how the building operates. During the third step, all the energy
date collected and evaluated in economic terms to determine potential savings based on the
implemented measures. 5 step will summarize all the information collected in the process and

50
it will address energy and economic potential conclusions for further design decisions (Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory, 2011).
Figure 39 Energy Audit Process
5.4.3 LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS
When green building was previously defined at the beginning of the chapter, definitions
mentioned that green building design is based on a minimum environmental impact. For
retrofitting makes the same effect, being Life Cycle analysis as an important studio to carry out
within the process. The concept of life cycle studies begun to be used since 1970’s and after
45 years they have suffered a massive evolution being considered fundamental tools for green
buildings (Elefante, 2007), (Sharma A, 2011).Life Cycle analysis is divided in 3 different
studies which determine the environmental and economic impact of the retrofitting process
practice. They are called Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Energy Analysis (LCEA)
and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) (Luisa F. Cabeza, 2013).
5.4.3.1 LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA)
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a method of assessing the environment impact of a product or
service from cradle-to-grave. The LCA in the retrofitting practice, the environmental

Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report

Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report

Similar to Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report (20)

Building Existing Retrofitting A key driver for GHG mitigation_Report