Energy-led refurbishment of non-domestic buildings: ranking measures by attributes

Abstract

In the context of the energy-led refurbishment of traditionally-constructed non-domestic buildings, the purpose of the work was to identify the attributes that professionals consider to be important in the selection of energy performance improvement measures, and to establish their relative importance. Methodology A questionnaire-based Delphi exercise was carried out in order to draw up a set of attributes agreed among a small panel of experts. Subsequently a paired comparison questionnaire was completed by the experts to establish the relative importance ascribed to the attributes. Findings 22 assessment attributes, relevant to different stages in the building's life-cycle, were agreed as important by the expert panel. Measures fell into one of three broad groups, expressed on a weighting scale of 0-100, such that the sum of the weights of all 22 measures was 100. Measures of relatively high importance (7-9%) included capital cost, potential energy and carbon savings, financial payback and impact on the building's vapour permeability. Measures of medium importance (4-5%) were impact on internal air movement, loss of significant original building fabric, impact on internal layout, appearance and occupant 2 comfort, environmental impact and availability of grants or subsidies. Eight further measures were ranked of low importance (2-3%). Originality/value This paper is the first attempt to draw up a ranking order of the attributes of energy performance improvement measures, applicable to non-domestic buildings. It confirms that more attributes must be considered by professionals with decision-making responsibility than merely cost, energy performance and payback on investment, and suggests that policy instruments targeting or incentivising a single or a restricted range of attributes risk failure to deliver the desired improvements.

A validated low carbon office building intervention model based on structural equation modelling

“…The use of standardized PMs and KPIs as a systematic method of building energy performance evaluation, have also been linked to energy saving and improvement in BEP in a previous study (Wang et al, 2012). Still, there exist barriers to office BEP such as lack of regulatory framework, building energy codes, energy management policy etc., which often confronts owner and facilities managers (Strachan and Banfill, 2017). Also, lack of human and institutional capacities to encouragement management decisions, lack of management focus on energy efficiency, lack of energy use and consumption data, lack of technical skills for identifying, developing and implementing EE measures etc., (Mckane et al, 2017) are identified barriers to BEP.…”