Less is more: A review of low energy standards and the urgent need for an international universal zero energy standard

Abstract

There are in excess of 70 low or zero energy/carbon building definitions/standards in circulation around the world. However there are few zero energy or zero carbon buildings. This suggests that despite, or possibly because of, a continuing debate over definitions, aspiration has not been met by reality. In this paper the most important 35 standards are reviewed and a correlation between activity in standard generation and completed buildings is presented. Combining this with the requirement for an 80% cut in carbon emissions, a consideration of the proportion of humanity that live in countries without any standards and the ratio of new-build activity vs. pre-existing stock, leads to a conclusion that there is an urgent need for a binding international zero (rather than low) energy/carbon standard that can be adopted world-wide. It is argued this is only possible if carbon is ignored in favour of energy, and many lifecycle issues put to one side. In part this is because of changing national carbon intensities within the energy supply chain, but it is also due to unresolved issues in carbon and energy accountancy. It is hence suggested that such issues are left to optional additional local standards.

The coproduction of electric mobility: Selectivity, conformity and fragmentation in the sociotechnical acceptance of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) standards

“…We call upon the literature to take the more technocratic and invisible standards as serious as the general standards set by international institutions on for example financial practices (Bowden and Seabrooke, 2006), process and safety standards in the nuclear industry (David and Rothwell, 1996), or outcome standards on energy efficiency and environmental impact (Laskurain et al, 2015;Williams et al, 2016).…”

Towards active buildings: Rating grid-servicing buildings

“…Autarkic buildings can be viewed as a ‘pure’ example of zero-energy buildings, evoking the ideal of pre-industrial buildings. 6 This appears to be a viable approach only if the energy demand of the building is controlled carefully and its generation and storage systems are meticulously sized. 16 , 17 Although advantages include no utility bills and increased levels of resilience in regions with a poor infrastructure, it can lead to over-engineering, hence becoming an unattractive solution financially.…”

“…Going further, thanks to the integration of storage systems and the connectivity to electric vehicles, buildings could be more flexible components of the energy system, adapting to the needs of the electricity grid through load shifting and peak shavings. 4 However, there have been difficulties materialising these aspirations due to ambiguity of definitions, 5,6 and most implementations have neglected the potential buildings have to support the grid. 7 In the UK, the Government has an aspiration to halve the energy use of new buildings by 2030, 8b and Parliament now requires net zero GHG emissions by 2050, 9 as advised by the Committee on Climate Change.…”

Low/Zero-Carbon Buildings for a Sustainable Future

“…Looking at the report presented by European Commissions, it is predicted that minimum energy saving can be targeted by 2020 and the amount saved would be in the range of 60-80 Mtoe/year [37]. Moreover, the study carried out by Williams et al [4] focuses on the retrofit of the buildings in such a way that the expectation is considered to be 2.77 billion buildings in case the world population Low Carbon Transition -Technical, Economic and Policy Assessment stays stable. So, to attain the target of near zero carbon world in 2080, 43 billion buildings would need to be constructed or retrofitted based on the zero energy standards per year [4].…”

“…Urbanization-related environmental matters can be illustrated as pollution, the depletion of natural resources, climate change, and global warming. Especially climate change notably affects the biotic systems as it has cumulative impacts on the global environment such as terrible weather conditions and deterioration of natural ecosystem (serious decrease in fishery stocks and in the productivity of lands) [4].…”