Energy Efficiency and Energy Savings: A View from the Building Sector
A survey of senior building sector executives on the feasibility of implementing energy efficiency measures across their sector in China, Europe, India and the U.S.
7 result(s) found
A survey of senior building sector executives on the feasibility of implementing energy efficiency measures across their sector in China, Europe, India and the U.S.
Briefing
A survey of senior building sector executives on the feasibility of implementing energy efficiency measures across their sector in China, Europe, India and the U.S.
Highlights
A survey of senior building sector executives on the feasibility of implementing energy efficiency measures across their sector in China, Europe, India and the U.S.
Case Study
A survey of senior building sector executives on the feasibility of implementing energy efficiency measures across their sector in China, Europe, India and the U.S.
There are indications that energy-retrofitted buildings can create risks for indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and therefore for health and comfort of occupants. A review was conducted to identify and verify those risks, within three themes: building envelope, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC)-systems, and occupants. Publications from the last five years in major peer-reviewed journals from different fields (energy, buildings, indoor air, social sciences) were found by using a variety of keywords (health effects, occupant behaviours, energy-efficient retrofitting, etc.).
Many recent major studies, including the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, have attested that energy efficiency is humanity’s prime option to combat climate change in the short- to mid-term. The potential to avoid CO2 emissions cost-effectively has been reported to be significant through efficiency policies. However, the review of global research findings on the quantification of cost-effectiveness of opportunities through improved efficiency has highlighted that there is a major shortcoming in the vast majority of such calculations.
Co-benefits rarely enter quantitative decision-support frameworks, often because the methodologies for their integration are lacking or not known. This review fills in this gap by providing comprehensive methodological guidance on the quantification of co-impacts and their integration into climate-related decision making based on the literature. The article first clarifies the confusion in the literature about related terms and makes a proposal for a more consistent terminological framework, then emphasizes the importance of working in a multiple-objective–multiple-impact framework.