Case study of integrated decision-making for deep energy-efficient retrofits

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to focus on the decision-making process of integrated system design. Buildings can benefit from different system integration working toward the unified goal of providing the needed conditions and improving the comfort level of occupants. It is important to engage all system needs and priorities in the design by keeping goal into consideration. Even though there is vast potential in the coordination of system design decisions, there is a need to increase the transparency of the decision-making process by developing methods to incorporate multi-dimensional design attributes. Design/methodology/approach – This is achieved by considering all system design priorities with respect to decision attributes, as well as the inter-system inputs based on information and knowledge. Data were collected through interviews, collaboration meetings and design document reviews, which helped to facilitate triangulation. Findings – This paper presents the findings of a case study of deep retrofit design process that seeks to reduce energy consumption through integrated system decisions with several system combinations. In addition, such design decisions highlighted the fact that the values need to be flexible at the system level. Research limitations/implications – This paper presents an in-depth analysis of a single case study. Multiple case studies are being investigated for the future of this research. Practical implications – This paper presents the methods used for integrated design process priorities that will enable design teams to make decisions that lead to improved energy performance in retrofit projects. Originality/value – The case study building in this paper is a showcase building with cutting edge technologies and techniques, as well as a scalable and collaborative design process. It is an example of a best-in-class retrofit process designed through whole building design principles within the target budget. The paper demonstrates system design selection criteria that are embraced by value prioritization.

BIM for building refurbishment and maintenance: current status and research directions

“…mechanical, electrical and plumbing), besides systems that affect thermal comfort (e.g. exterior insulation) (Gultekin et al, 2014). The very few existing studies in this area highlight the integrative nature of BIM and explore the areas where BIM can be used to implement sustainable building principles in retrofitting/renovation (Hammond et al, 2014;SmartMarket Report, 2010).…”

Outsourcing energy retrofitting of hotel buildings: the decision-making process

“…Besides, Herrmann [21] added that when the number of alternatives is significant and, multiple criteria are relevant, formal techniques must be employed to identify the best alternative. Similarly, a wide range of technological options with varying benefits is available to increase the EE of buildings [22] and to evaluate such options and thereby to determine the best option a list of criteria can be used [11]. Hence, ER projects should be approached systematically to achieve maximum benefit out of those projects [23].…”

“…One of the critical steps in ER is the selection of most suitable ER measures among a large number of possibilities [22], for which organisations should: begin with a workable list of all the measures [26]; determine the criteria and factors that should be considered to analyse the ER measures [11]; analyse the identified ER measures [7,13]; and prioritise the ER measures based on the relevant energy-related and non-energy-related factors [7]. Though this particular case has performed all of these activities to determine most suitable ER measures, 'determining the criteria and factors that should be considered' is not being performed as a separate activity, slightly different types of criteria/aspects were considered while assessing the retrofit measures.…”

“…Despite the existence of a large number of building ER technologies [7] and numerous associated benefits [9], still, the level of implementation of ER is comparatively low [10]. This has been attributed, inter alia, to the absence of a clearly defined process for ensuring the delivery of ER, lack of proactive guidance for project teams to ensure that they make the right decisions to achieve the desired EE outcomes [11] and conducting ER projects in an ad hoc basis without a systematic decision-making process [12]. Hence, it is clear that informed decision-making is vital for improving the energy performance of existing buildings [13] as well as to propagate the benefits of retrofits [14].…”

The effective outsourcing of building retrofitting: key decisions and motivators

“…Despite their significant energy saving potential (Hendron, 2013), still existing buildings appear to be slow in embracing BEER (Friege and Chappin, 2014;Liang et al, 2016). This has been attributed, inter alia, to the absence of a clearly defined process for ensuring the delivery of BEER, lack of proactive guidance for project teams to ensure that they make the right decisions at the right time to achieve the desired EE outcomes (Gultekin et al, 2014) and execution of BEER projects on ad hoc basis without a systematic decision-making process (Hall, 2014). Hence, it is clear that informed decision-making is crucial for improving the EE of existing buildings (Ruparathna et al, 2016) as well as for propagating the benefits of retrofits (Swan and Brown, 2013).…”