Impact of financial assumptions on the cost optimality towards nearly zero energy buildings - a case study
Abstract
4 result(s) found
The ultimate test of the business case for high performance low carbon building is to consider how the human benefits of these buildings could be reliably quantified to prove beyond all doubt the positive Return on Investment (ROI). After all, staff costs, including salaries and benefits, typically account for about 90% of business operating costs.
The existing residential building stock accounts for a substantial portion of worldwide energy consumption and greenhouse emissions. Improvements to the thermal performance of existing buildings is a vital activity to mitigate climate change, and often has additional benefits in the form of improved comfort, health and well-being for occupants. Despite the extensive body of literature in this area, it remains a difficult task to assess the performance of retrofit packages in occupied residential buildings.
Energy efficiency (i.e., the ratio of output of performance to input of energy) in office buildings can reduce energy costs and CO2 emissions, but there are barriers to widespread adoption of energy efficient solutions in offices because they are often perceived as a potential threat to perceived comfort, well-being, and performance of office users. However, the links between offices' energy efficiency and users' performance and well-being through their moderators are neither necessary nor empirically confirmed.