This working paper brings together the findings of the first stage in this study, which focusses on the identification of 'macro-objectives' for the environmental performance of the EU building stock. This stage is intended to provide an initial 'top down' view of what the strategic priorities (the 'macro-objectives') should be for the building sector.

Executive Summary Scope and objectives This report provides the findings from the stakeholder-mapping stage the EnergyFit Homes Initiative phase 1. The objectives of this phase were to develop a map of the relevant stakeholders and to understand their perspectives of the need, scope and implantation of a national home energy efficiency information framework. A secondary objective of this stage was to begin to build consensus and a coalition of support for options to be built on in the next stage. This is the penultimate research stage of Phase 1.

This document is the companion to parts 1 and 2 of the guidance on how to use Level(s). In part 1 a general introduction to Level(s) is provided, together with in Part 2 an overview of the macro-objectives, performance indicators and the three Levels of performance assessment (Level(s) - Part 1 and 2). The three Levels are:

Cities are increasingly taking actions such as building code enforcement, urban planning, and public transit expansion to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide in their communities and municipal operations. However, many cities lack the quantitative information needed to estimate policy impacts and prioritize city actions in terms of carbon abatement potential and cost effectiveness. This report fills this research gap by providing methodologies to assess the carbon abatement potential of a variety of city actions.

This report is the Interim Technical Report for the Building Code Energy Performance Trajectory Project. It accompanies the Interim Synthesis Report for the Building Code Energy Performance Trajectory Project, entitled The Bottom Line – the household impacts of delaying improved energy requirements in the Building Code and which was published on the 8th of February 2018, providing more detail on the assumptions behind and the preliminary results from the underlying modelling work.

The report provides the following key items:

State-level building energy codes have been around for over 40 years, but recent empirical research has cast doubt on their effectiveness. A potential virtue of standards-based policies is that they may be less regressive than explicit taxes on energy consumption. However, this conjecture has not been tested empirically in the case of building energy codes.

Designers can use superior building design and energy management strategies to create buildings that produce at least as much energy as they consume. These are called zero energy buildings (ZEBs). ZEBs exist in the United States and Canada now; however building energy codes will have to be continuously improved to achieve widespread ZEBs by 2030, a common goal of many cities and some states.

Buildings that emit no greenhouse gas emissions during their operation are vital to meeting the SDGs and Paris Agreement targets. But in the past, zero carbon buildings have been assumed to be only attainable by technologically advanced or wealthy countries. New WRI research finds there are policy pathways to reach zero carbon buildings regardless of location or development status. The report identifies eight pathways countries can take to reach zero carbon buildings by reducing energy demand and cleaning energy supply.

In 2017, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) developed its 2016 Stretch Code Supplement to the 2016 New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code. Since 2017, NYSERDA has continued to develop the 2018 edition, as part of the efforts to achieve a statewide Net Zero Energy Code by 2028.

In 1978, California adopted building codes designed to reduce the energy used for heating, cooling, and water heating in buildings. Using a rich dataset of hourly electricity consumption for 158,112 California houses during 2012-13, this paper estimates that single-family homes built from 1980 through 1982 consumed on average 13% less electricity for cooling than premises constructed between 1975 through 1977. This estimate is similar to projected cooling-energy savings made using engineering models at the time the codes were enacted.

This report is a product of the collaborative research project ‘Validating and Improving the BASIX Assessment Tool for Low-Carbon Dwellings’. Initiated by the Cooperative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living, the University of New South Wales (UNSW) and the New South Wales Government, this project addresses the policy need for post-occupancy evaluation of the BASIX tool by measuring the actual energy consumption of BASIX-compliant dwellings.