Sustainable refurbishment in building technology

Smart and Sustainable Built Environment Sustainable refurbishment in building technology Navid Gohardani Folke Björk

Article information:

Downloaded by Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan At 01:52 18 August 2014 (PT)

To cite this document: Navid Gohardani Folke Björk, (2012),"Sustainable refurbishment in building technology", Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, Vol. 1 Iss 3 pp. 241 - 252 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20466091211287128 Downloaded on: 18 August 2014, At: 01:52 (PT) References: this document contains references to 65 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 596 times since 2012*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 380560 []

For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/2046-6099.htm

Sustainable refurbishment in building technology

Sustainable refurbishment

Navid Gohardani and Folke Bjo¨rk Civil and Architectural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

241


Abstract Purpose – The aim of this review article is to identify a number of key research efforts related to decision making tools in building refurbishment projects and selected energy efficiency efforts in the built environment. Following these findings a proposed research area with focus on energy in the building environment will be suggested for further investigation. Design/methodology/approach – Through a multilateral review study, a number of major research efforts in sustainable refurbishment are highlighted. The necessity of directing future research towards energy conservation is illustrated for a specific approach to developing the built environment. Findings – The findings of this article identify high performance thermal insulation solutions as one of the promising approaches to significant energy consumption reductions in buildings. Research limitations/implications – This review study is solely limited to the revisited research directions. Originality/value – This study successfully identifies a number of decision making tools related to building refurbishment and an initial research path in favor of building energy consumption reductions. Keywords Refurbishment, Retrofitting, Renovation, Building technology, Energy consumption, Sustainable development Paper type General review

Introduction Calls for sustainability and the lowering of the environmental impact of the existing building stock demands new building technologies for refurbishment. Given an increasing world population and well-defined environmental challenges, it is imperative to identify a number of major challenges and notable trends of building sustainability in the built environment. A broader glance at building refurbishment/ retrofitting/renovation and sustainable building technologies reveals that these research areas are typically energy related (Goldman, 1985; Voss, 2000; Dewick and Miozzo, 2002; Uihlein and Eder, 2010). Refurbishment may therefore gain a more central role in comparison to renovation, as older buildings need to be upgraded to new energy efficiency levels corresponding to today’s standards. The aim of this paper is to shed light on a number of research efforts that are representative of state-of-the-art sustainable built environment. The focal point of this review paper is particularly set on a limited research domain and three European countries: Cyprus, Denmark and Sweden, but major research trends and emerging technologies of other countries are taken into account as much as is required to obtain a balanced view of current research efforts. Building refurbishment The past century has witnessed an ongoing debate regarding the feasibility of demolition as compared to the refurbishment of older housing and buildings (Baker, 2005; Ka´rolyi, 2007; Power, 2010; Cha et al., 2011). Power (2008) argues that there are

Smart and Sustainable Built Environment Vol. 1 No. 3, 2012 pp. 241-252 r Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2046-6099 DOI 10.1108/20466091211287128

SASBE 1,3


242

Figure 1. A hierarchical process toward zero carbon refurbishment

significant economic, social and environmental benefits of refurbishment in comparison to demolition. These benefits include reduced landfill disposal, transportation costs, greater reuse of materials, retention of community infrastructure and additional benefits of local economic development and neighborhood renewal and management. Contrary to the mentioned advantages, building demolition requires higher capital costs, the need for more aggregates and subsequent new build than refurbishment and further includes embodied carbon inputs, noise and disruption. Moreover, a greater transportation need for materials and waste is observed for building demolition which also involves a polluting impact of particulates. Despite the exemplified disadvantages of building demolition, avoidance of demolition within the existing building stock is uniformly impractical in certain cases. In one representative example, achievement of the highest standards of energy retrofit in old buildings failing to meet the current requirements reflects one distinctly impractical case. Refurbishment can be seen as an opportunity not only to modernize a building’s appearance but also to enhance its overall technical performance (Douglas, 2005). The need for refurbishment emerges due to the increasing demands for better-quality housing and the quest for energy efficiency of commercial and industrial buildings. According to Douglas (2005), heavily used facilities in commercial premises and more cost conscious factories, hospitals, schools and businesses are likely to increase refurbishment along with the need to combat fabric deterioration. There is a wide interest for building refurbishment (Goldman, 1985; Guertler and Smith, 2006; Mickaityte et al., 2008; Furundzic et al., 2011; Davies and Osmani, 2011). Building refurbishment cuts across many different disciplines. Refurbishment includes among others structural considerations (Lawson et al., 1998; York and Pedreschi, 2000), waste and recycling (Osmani, 2011) and the use of floor space (Ravetz, 2008). In view of a finite reserve of fossil fuels and fuel dependency in the built environment, refurbishment toward zero carbon emissions has been proposed through a hierarchical process (Xing et al., 2011). This process is shown in Figure 1 and includes embedded techniques covering insulations, energy-efficient equipment and micro-generation. The zero carbon terminology can broadly be subjected to many different interpretations ranging from the operational energy for appliances to embodied energy. In this paper the adopted zero carbon is not entirely zero if embodied carbon is considered. Minimum energy performance is also proposed for the installation of new or the replacement of existing technical building systems, or their major retrofit (Dascalaki et al., 2012). Levine et al. (2007), performed a comprehensive review on residential and commercial buildings. Findings from this study indicate that there is a global potential to reduce approximately 29 percent of the projected baseline emissions by

Retrofit fabrics

More efficient equipments

• Emerging insulation materials

• Lighting sources • Heating sources • Ventilations

Source: Adapted from Xing et al. (2011)

Micro generation • Generation of zero or low-carbon heat and/or power to meet own energy demand on site

Zero carbon refurbishment


2020 cost-effectively in the residential and commercial sectors. Even though, the largest savings in energy use (75 percent or higher) occur for new buildings through design and operation as complete systems, the largest portion of carbon savings over the whole building stock by 2030 is in retrofitting existing buildings and replacement of energy equipment according to Levine et al. (2007). Energy performance of buildings and requirements for energy-using products has also been included in the European Union (EU) policies (EU – Commission of the European Communities, 2006) and these measures facilitate research efforts in the direction of sustainable refurbishment. In the following section, a number of research methodologies and toolsets related to building refurbishment will be discussed. Selected refurbishment tools and methods Building refurbishment modifies the human living environment. Hence, it is critical that the financial and technical visions by engineers, architects (Gohardani, 2011a) and technical experts does not impose restrictions on the living environment of the people. Following an approach to upgrade current comfort standards and to fulfill ecological demands in addition to achievement of optimal energy performance, Genre et al. (2000), highlighted energy performance, indoor air quality, retrofit (EPIQR) as a decision tool combining technical, financial, energy and comfort analysis for refurbishment. The details of the EPIQR methodology and decision-making approach is thoroughly discussed by Flourentzou et al. (2000a, b). Despite the fact that EPIQR does not make any specific decisions for the user, it also features several modules (Flourentzou et al., 2000a, b; Caccavelli and Genre, 2000; Wittchen and Aggerholm, 2000) designed for the treatment of collected data during a diagnosis survey and throughout various setup refurbishment scenarios. The flow of information from cost and energy performance characteristics enables the EPIQR user to make informed decisions regarding building refurbishment. The EPIQR toolset is, however, only an instrument and has its own limitations. Even though the EPIQR tool is rather powerful, it is possible that even larger numbers than those included 350 European residential buildings have to be considered as case studies and audited for input data. An interesting aspect of the EPIQR methodology is the involvement of tenants of the apartment buildings in form of questionnaires. This survey method gathers data on indoor environmental quality issues prior to any made suggestions for suitable refurbishment and retrofitting actions ( Jaggs and Palmer, 2000). A similar approach to include tenants in a refurbishment process was also made by Juan (2009). The remarkable growth of the refurbishment market in the last decade ( Juan et al., 2009), not only introduces opportunities but also a higher level of risk and uncertainty. Additionally, more complex coordination than new buildings is likely to cause asymmetric information between contractors and tenants in a refurbishment process, and further influence customer satisfaction or the project performance accordingly. This fact introduces additional ambiguities in the refurbishment process. Juan’s (2009) hybrid decision support approach to this problem enables tenants to select an optimal refurbishment contractor according to their customization. Conversely, this system also enables contractors to identify their inefficient factors to improve their business competitiveness. The EPIQR scheme has also been considered with cost assessment of building refurbishment needs (Flourentzou et al., 2000a). In a cost comparison study between seven European countries, where more than 800 itemized building refurbishments works were described and consequently priced, it was concluded that the most appropriate solution was the development of


243

SASBE 1,3


244

national costs databases, one for each participating country (Caccavelli and Genre, 2000). This recommendation was based on the fact that the shown cost variation between the countries was large enough to make the development of a European cost database irrelevant. MEDIC (Me´thode d’e´valuation de sceńarios de de´gradation probables d’investissements correspondants) is a proposal for a new method to predict the future degradation state of a building and calculates for each element regarded in EPIQR the probability to pass from one qualitative condition class to another during time (Flourentzou et al., 2000b). In recognition of the fact that the European building stock is a major contributor to energy waste and carbon dioxide emissions (Tommerup and Svendsen, 2006; OECD/IEA, AFD, 2008; Uihlein and Eder, 2010), Zavadskas et al. (2008), proposed a three-step approach with regards to the development of a decision-making model for sustainable building refurbishment. The initial phase of this methodology relates to a formulation of the energy efficient management concept in sustainable buildings refurbishment. The second phase presents the decision-making process, while the final phase underlines the decision-making model for sustainable building refurbishment from an energy efficiency viewpoint. Currently, there are many multivariate designs and multiple criteria developed tools available for retrofit of buildings (Asadi et al., 2012; Kaklauskas et al., 2005; Balaras et al., 2007; Olofsson and Mahlia, 2012; Balaras, 2004). ECBCS retrofit advisor represents one of these instruments that allow a simple evaluation of retrofit options for apartment buildings (Zimmerman, 2010). TOBUS, is a decision-making tool for selecting office building upgrade solutions (Caccavelli and Gugerli, 2002). With aims of elaborating consistent refurbishment scenarios and estimation of reasonable investment budget in the early stages of a refurbishment project, this method complements EPIQR (Balaras, 2002). Different indoor environmental quality aspects of office buildings (Saari et al., 2006) can also be investigated through TOBUS (Bluyssen and Cox, 2002). XENIOS, represents a proposed methodology for performance of a preliminary hotel audit and an initial assessment of cost-effective energy efficient renovation practices, technologies and systems (Dascalaki and Balaras, 2004). In consideration of all the revisited research paths in building refurbishment, the following section will seek to shed light on a selected number of research endeavors related to three specific European countries and various energy saving approaches. A regional glance at building refurbishment The existing building stock in European countries accounts for over 40 percent of final energy consumption in the EU member states, of which residential use represents 63 percent of total energy consumption in the buildings sector (Balaras et al., 2007). Energy conservation measures are thus important to comply with the Kyoto Protocol and reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Uihlein and Eder (2010), identified that in the EU-27 residential building stock, the installation of roofs or windows that exhibited high-thermal efficiency outside major renovations offer a large improvement potential. Furthermore, substantial additional energy savings were shown for two proposed policies of measures that required high-energy efficiency standards once roofs or windows had to be replaced, or measures that accelerated the replacement of building elements. One of the distinctive indicators for various building refurbishment measures was communicated in the previous section where selected refurbishments tools and methods were discussed. Within this large spectrum of tools and methods, certain


approaches were explicitly aimed for utilization in colder (e.g. Olofsson and Mahlia, 2012) and other for warmer climates (e.g. Balaras et al., 2007). As evident in the exemplary case of suggested national costs databases and abandonment of a European cost database (Caccavelli and Genre, 2000), it is important to realize that regional differences bear great importance in multinational research studies and should not be overlooked. Despite this fact, it is beyond the scope of this paper to identify all the regional disparities between the three selected countries. Therefore, only a very limited aspect of the regional disparities between these nations will be considered herein. The choice of including selected research investigations related to Cyprus, Denmark and Sweden, in this review study is rooted in the sheer advancement of a preliminary step toward the identification of regional disparities. In a representative case, one of the aforementioned disparities marks the restoration needs in relation to the adopted building technology (McNicholl and Lewis, 2001). Climate factors such as the number of heating degree days per country represent another example that influences energy savings, in relation to building refurbishments. In Table I, a comparison of two different factors is shown. Perceived as a measurement designed to reflect the demand for energy needed to heat a residential complex, the average annual heating degree days indicate that the energy demand in Cyprus and Denmark are 14 and 64 percent of the energy demand in Sweden, respectively. Panayiotou et al. (2010) highlighted the residential building stock of Cyprus in terms of energy consumption with aims to assist policy makers in formulating targeted measures for energy efficiency. From the analysis of the results of 500 residential buildings, the primary energy and the energy demand was shown to be lower than that of other European countries. Furthermore, findings from this research study also revealed that the age of residential buildings does have a low correlation with the energy demand while in contrast with other northern and central European countries; the contribution of cooling energy requirements to the overall energy demand is rather substantial. Further insight into policy making with regards to refurbishment can also be traced in the Nordic countries. In 2006, stricter energy requirements were introduced in Denmark. As a result of these measures, energy-efficient single-family houses were built irrespective of economic and building technology difficulties (Tommerup and Svendsen, 2006). These new houses were able to meet future energy demands effectively and illustrated a typical interaction between policy making and building technology. Perhaps one of the most remarkable eras in Swedish building technology was brought to light through the Million Homes Program (Hedman, 2008). The underlying motivation behind this program was a rapid need for new housing and the Swedish

Country

Population density (inhabitants/km2)

Average annual heating degree days

Cyprus Denmark Sweden

124.7 124.7 21.8

782 3,503 5,444

Note: The annual heating degree days are calculated relative to a set point temperature and mathematical procedure as explained by Eurostat-European Commission (2010) Source: BPIE (2011)


245

Table I. Comparison of population density and average annual degree days for Cyprus, Denmark and Sweden

SASBE 1,3


246

parliament’s decision to build a million new dwellings in the period 1965-1974 (Hall and Videń, 2005). Halfway through the program, however, the housing shortage was replaced by housing surplus and although the program had successfully achieved its objective, critics voiced concerns about uniform and poor architecture. Despite the fact that most of the buildings from this era are fully functional even until this very day, reports about buildings with severe refurbishment needs from this period have also been made. The severity of the latter cases exposed that routine maintenance measures partially or entirely had failed and cases of demolition had occurred. In anticipation of a growing housing shortage in a number of major cities in Sweden, refurbishment lessons from the past are of vital importance for future building technology. At the current rate of energy efficiency investments, however, the ambitious energy saving objectives for buildings are unlikely to be reached in Sweden, according to Ho¨gberg et al. (2009). Thus, an initiative was taken to report the early findings of how real estate owners reason and act in energy efficiency investment decisions. This study by Ho¨gberg et al. (2009) concluded that the considered companies could be divided into four ideal types that elucidated the differences in energy efficiency ambition and strategies; the strict profit maximizing company, the little extra company, the policy led ambitious company and the administration led ambitious company. Consequently, the aforementioned strategies impact how companies would respond to incentives to invest in energy efficiency. Energy efficiency measures could indeed have tremendous impact on energy intensity. Dubois and Blomsterberg (2011) recently concluded that there is an energy saving potential for electric lightning in office buildings within a north European context. A number of suggested strategies for reducing energy utilization of electric lighting included: ballast and luminaire technology, improvements in lamp, utilization of task/ambient lighting, improvement in maintenance and utilization factor, reduction of maintained illuminance levels and total switch-on time, use of manual dimming and switch-off occupancy sensors. Energy savings aspects for a European country in a warmer climate zone could in certain cases possibly coincide with chosen energy efficiency measures. Balaras et al. (2007) identified that the most effective energy conservation measures of the Hellenic building stock were the insulation of external walls (33-60 percent energy savings), weather proofing of openings (16-21 percent), the installation of double-glazed windows (14-20 percent), the regular maintenance of central heating boilers (10-12 percent) and the installation of solar collectors for sanitary hot water production (50-80 percent). These findings represent vital refurbishment data from a European country in a warmer climate zone. Countries in warmer climates zones, such as Cyprus, undoubtedly have a different energy demand in comparison to for instance the Nordic countries. From a broader vantage point, however, both the aspect of insulation of external walls and electric lighting are captured by the hierarchical process in Figure 1. Hence, one distinctive challenge in conducting multinational building refurbishment research studies is to choose an appropriate research methodology. Following this step, regional disparities and energy demand levels have to be recognized with aims to make a fair assessment of the countries in warmer and colder climate zones. Refurbishment: a suggested path forward Subsequent to the visited milestones of building refurbishment underlined in this paper, the question about an initial approach to building refurbishment is


a legitimate one. Table II lists a number of assessment criteria for building retrofits. As shown by this table, the majority of the available tools only address a limited number of refurbishment criteria and thus the need for a more robust approach is needed. One possible approach is to adopt a methodology for zero carbon refurbishment (Xing et al., 2011), according to Figure 1. This methodology starts with consideration of emerging insulation materials. As communicated through the revisited refurbishment methodologies of this paper, zero carbon refurbishment is not the only refurbishment option available. In fact, the pursuit of zero carbon is not entirely zero if embodied carbon is taken as a principal metric in consideration of whole-life sustainability (Ayaz and Yang, 2009). Despite these shortcomings, tailoring all the steps of the suggested methodology could lead to energy savings on the expense for increased embodied carbon. Due to the prospect of energy saving potentials associated with emerging insulation materials (the first block in Figure 1) it is worthwhile investigating the zero carbon methodology even further. Adequate thermal insulation allows for a building to retain its generated heat within. The indirect heat generated sources are heat stored in thermal mass or direct solar gain, whereas human body heat and other heat generating activities such as cooking contributes to additional heat within a building. Vacuum insulation (Gohardani, 2010; Baetens et al., 2010a; Alam et al., 2011; Gohardani and Gudmundsson, 2011b), aerogel (Baetens et al., 2011), multiple-layer insulation (Eames, 2009), transparent insulation materials (Wong et al., 2007; Haller, 1999) and gas-filled panels (Baetens et al., 2010b) mark five emerging insulation materials. These different materials exhibit characteristics that may prove to be suitable for different types of buildings and refurbishing scenarios ( Jelle, 2011). A further insight into the advantages and disadvantages of these thermal insulation materials is needed for a better understanding of the refurbishment needs in building technology. This knowledge may provide a suitable platform in the path toward zero carbon refurbishment. Conclusively, one of the early steps toward zero carbon refurbishment is to consider retrofitting fabrics. Hence, a profound analysis of thermal insulation materials provide an early step approach in the quest for zero carbon refurbishment. Enhanced insulation materials are partially integrated with the objectives of making thinner insulation feasible or reducing the extent of internal space loss as walls are insulated from the inside. Conclusion In this paper a selected number of research endeavors related to decision-making tools in building refurbishment and energy aspects related to buildings were revisited. Moreover, refurbishment tools and methods were illuminated from different perspectives along with a limited research domain related to refurbishment and energy saving approaches in Cyprus, Denmark and Sweden. The key findings of this review study are summarized as follows: .

Refurbishment has notable economic, social and environmental advantages in comparison to demolition.

.

Refurbishment may modernize a building and enable additional energy saving measures.

.

There are many multivariate design and multiple criteria developed tools available for building refurbishment.


247

| | | | | |

| |

|

| |

| | |

|

Solar system Waste and recycling and desalinations management

Notes: The number column refers to different publications by different authors, as follows(– Flourentzou et al. (2000b), 3 – Caccavelli and Gugerli (2002), 4 – Balaras (2004) Source: Carlyle et al. (2004)

EPIQR MEDIC TOBUS Hotel buildings

1 2 3 4

Table II. A selected number of systems or tools considered for buildings retrofits

System or tool

Electromechanical installations

248

Number

Residual life criteria Building element degradation Functional Fiber-reinforced Indoor including residual obsolescence polymer structure environmental Energy life of building strengthening quality consumption


SASBE 1,3


.

Given the fact that the majority of the available refurbishment systems and tools only address a limited number of refurbishment criteria, an alternative approach is needed.

.

Regional disparities may carry great importance in multinational refurbishment research studies and should therefore not be neglected.

.

High-performance thermal insulation solutions exhibit promising results in terms of significant energy consumption reductions in buildings.

.

The adopted research methodology in a multinational refurbishment study should be able to capture the major disparities between the nations with aims of a fair research comparison and assessment.

.

Zero carbon refurbishment is one of the promising refurbishment methodologies available for future housing. This methodology should be analyzed in further detail for identification of its advantages and disadvantages. The quest toward zero carbon refurbishment requires an insight into retrofitting fabrics irrespective of geographical location.

Nomenclature EU: European Union EPIQR: energy performance, indoor air quality, retrofit MEDIC: Me´ thode d’e´valuation de sceńarios de de´ gradation probables d’investissements correspondants TOBUS: a decision-making tool for selecting office building upgrading solutions XENIOS: a methodology for assessing refurbishment scenarios and the potential of application of renewable energy sources and rational use of energy in hotels References Alam, M., Singh, H. and Limbachiya, M.C. (2011), “Vacuum insulation panels (VIPs) for building construction industry – a review of the contemporary developments and future directions”, Applied Energy, Vol. 88 No. 11, pp. 3592-602. Asadi, E., Gameiro da Silva, M., Henggeler Antunes, C. and Dias, L. (2012), “Multi-objective optimization for building retrofit strategies: a model and an application”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 44, January, pp. 81-7. Ayaz, E. and Yang, F. (2009), “Zero carbon isn’t really zero: why embodied carbon in materials can’t be ignored”, Design Intelligence, September 1, 7pp. Baetens, R., Jelle, B.P. and Gustavsen, A. (2011), “Aerogel insulation for building applications: a state-of-the-art review”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 761-9. Baetens, R., Jelle, B.P., Gustavsen, A. and Grynning, S. (2010b), “Gas-filled panels for building applications: a state-of-the-art review”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42 No. 11, pp. 1969-75. Baetens, R., Jelle, B.P., Thue, J.V., Tenpierik, M.J., Grynning, S., Uvsløkk, S. and Gustavsen, A. (2010a), “Vacuum insulation panels for building applications: A review and beyond”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 147-72. Balaras, C.A. (2002), “TOBUS – a European method and software for office building refurbishment”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 111-2. Balaras, C.A. (2004), “Decision support software for sustainable building refurbishment”, ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 110 No. 1, pp. 592-601. Balaras, C.A., Gaglia, A.G., Georgopoulou, E., Mirasgedis, S., Sarafidis, Y. and Lalas, D.P. (2007), “European residential buildings and empirical assessment of the Hellenic building stock,


249

SASBE 1,3


250

energy consumption, emissions and potential energy savings”, Building and Environment, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1298-314. Baker, N.C. (2005), Handbook of Sustainable Refurbishment: Non-Domestic Buildings, Earthscan/ RIBA Publishing. Bluyssen, P.M. and Cox, C. (2002), “Indoor environment quality and upgrading of European office buildings”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 155-62. BPIE (2011), Europe’s Buildings under the Microscope – A Country-by-Country Review of the Energy Performance of Buildings, Buildings Performance Institute Europe. Caccavelli, D. and Genre, J.-L. (2000), “Diagnosis of the degradation state of building and cost evaluation of induced refurbishment works”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 159-65. Caccavelli, D. and Gugerli, H. (2002), “TOBUS – a European diagnosis and decision-making tool for office building upgrading”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 113-9. Carlyle, B., Grierson, S. and Gilligan, M. (2004), “Delivering a re-life project – preliminary literature review & methodology”, CRC Construction Innovation. Cha, H.S., Kim, K.H. and Kim, C.K. (2011), “Case study on selective demolition method for refurbishing deteriorated residential apartments”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 138 No. 2, pp. 294-303. Dascalaki, E. and Balaras, C.A. (2004), “XENIOS – a methodology for assessing refurbishment scenarios and the potential of application of RES and RUE in hotels”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 36 No. 11, pp. 1091-105. Dascalaki, E.G., Balaras, C.A., Gaglia, A.G., Droutsa, K.G. and Kontoyiannidis, S. (2012), “Energy performance of buildings – EPBD in Greece”, Energy Policy, Vol. 45, June, pp. 469-77, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.058. Davies, P. and Osmani, M. (2011), “Low carbon housing refurbishment challenges and incentives: architects’ perspectives”, Building and Environment, Vol. 46 No. 8, pp. 1691-8. Dewick, P. and Miozzo, M. (2002), “Sustainable technologies and the innovation – regulation paradox”, Futures, Vol. 34 Nos 9-10, pp. 823-40. Douglas, J. (2005), Principles of Refurbishment, Building Adaptation, 2nd ed., ButterworthHeinemann, Oxford, pp. 351-407. ˚ . (2011), “Energy saving potential and strategies for electric Dubois, M.-C. and Blomsterberg, A lighting in future North European, low energy office buildings: a literature review”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 2572-82. Eames, P. (2009), “Multi-foil insulation”, Department for Communities and Local Government. EU – Commission of the European Communities (2006), “SEC(2006) 138/2”, Annex to the communication from the commission – Fourth national communication from the European community under the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC). Eurostat-European Commission (2010), “Metadata in energy statistics – heating degree days”, Eurostat-European Commission. Flourentzou, F., Brandt, E. and Wetzel, C. (2000b), “MEDIC – a method for predicting residual service life and refurbishment investment budgets”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 167-70. Flourentzou, F., Droutsa, K. and Wittchen, K.B. (2000a), “EPIQR software”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 129-36. Furundzic, K.A., Kosoric, V. and Golic, K. (2011), “Potential for reduction of CO2 emissions by integration of solar water heating systems on student dormitories through building refurbishment”, Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 50-62. Genre, J.L., Flourentzos, F. and Stockli, T. (2000), “Building refurbishment: habitat upgrading”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 155-7.


Gohardani, N. (2010), “Vakuumisolering vid byggnadsrenovering och tilla¨ggsisolering”, MSc thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm. Gohardani, N. (2011a), “Architecture and design research: reflections in relation to the design process”, Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 107-15. Gohardani, N. and Gudmundsson, K. (2011b), “Sustainable building renovation and refurbishment with applications of vacuum insulation panels”, Proceedings, Vol. 2, World Sustainable Building Conference, Helsinki, October 18-21. Goldman, C.A. (1985), “Measured energy savings from residential retrofits: updated results from the BECA-B project”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 137-55. Guertler, P. and Smith, W. (2006), “Energy efficiency in the sustainable refurbishment of high-rise residential buildings: mapping out an integrated policy approach”, Energy for Sustainable Development, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 37-44. Hall, T. and Videń, S. (2005), “The million homes programme: a review of the great Swedish planning project”, Planning Perspectives, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 301-28. Haller, A. (1999), “Solar renovation concepts and systems – a report of task 20 ‘Solar energy in building renovation’ Subtask F ‘Improvement of solar renovation concepts and systems’. Hedman, E. (2008), A History of the Swedish System of Non-Profit Municipal Housing, 1st ed., Boverket – Swedish Board of Housing, Building and Planning. Ho¨gberg, L., Lind, H. and Grange, K. (2009), “Incentives for improving energy efficiency when renovating large-scale housing estates: a case study of the Swedish million homes program”, Sustainability, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 1349-65. Jaggs, M. and Palmer, J. (2000), “Energy performance indoor environmental quality retrofit – a European diagnosis and decision making method for building refurbishment”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 97-101. Jelle, B.P. (2011), “Traditional, state-of-the-art and future thermal building insulation materials and solutions – properties, requirements and possibilities”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 2549-63. Juan, Y.-K. (2009), “A hybrid approach using data envelopment analysis and case-based reasoning for housing refurbishment contractors selection and performance improvement”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36 No. 3, Part 1, pp. 5702-10. Juan, Y.-K., Perng, Y.-H., Castro-Lacouture, D. and Lu, K.-S. (2009), “Housing refurbishment contractors selection based on a hybrid fuzzy-QFD approach”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 139-44. Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E.K. and Raslanas, S. (2005), “Multivariant design and multiple criteria analysis of building refurbishments”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 361-72. Ka´rolyi, E. (2007), “Refurbishment or demolition? The fate of a 1930s housing complex in Athens remains pending”, Docomomo Journal, Vol. 37, September, pp. 64-7. Lawson, R.M., Pedreschi, R., Falkenfleth, I. and Popo-Ola, S.O. (1998), “Over-cladding of existing buildings using light steel”, SCI-P-247. Levine, M.D., U¨rge-Vorsatz, K., Blok, L., Geng, D., Harvey, S. and Lang, G. (2007), “Residential and commercial buildings”, in Metz, B., Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R. and Meyer, L.A. (Eds), Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, NY. McNicholl, A. and Lewis, J.O. (2001), “Energy efficiency and solar energy in European office buildings: a mid-career education initiative”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 213-17. Mickaityte, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A. and Tupenaite, L. (2008), “The concept model of sustainable buildings refurbishment”, International Journal of Strategic Property Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 53-68.


251

SASBE 1,3


252

OECD/IEA, AFD. (Eds) (2008), Promoting Energy Efficiency Investments – Case Studies in the Residential Sector, OECD/IEA, Paris. Olofsson, T. and Mahlia, T.M.I. (2012), “Modeling and simulation of the energy use in an occupied residential building in cold climate”, Applied Energy, Vol. 91 No. 1, pp. 432-8. Osmani, M. (2011), “Chapter 15 – construction waste”, in Letcher, T. and Vallero, D. (Eds), Waste, Academic Press, Boston, MA, pp. 207-18. Panayiotou, G.P., Kalogirou, S.A., Florides, G.A., Maxoulis, C.N., Papadopoulos, A.M., Neophytou, M., Fokaides, P., Georgiou, G., Symeou, A. and Georgakis, G. (2010), “The characteristics and the energy behaviour of the residential building stock of Cyprus in view of Directive 2002/91/EC”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42 No. 11, pp. 2083-9. Power, A. (2008), “Does demolition or refurbishment of old and inefficient homes help to increase our environmental, social and economic viability?”, Energy Policy, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 4487-501. Power, A. (2010), “Housing and sustainability: demolition or refurbishment?”, The ICE Urban Design and Planning, Vol. 163 No. 4, pp. 205-16. Ravetz, R. (2008), “State of the stock – what do we know about existing buildings and their future prospects?”, Energy Policy, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 4462-70. Saari, A., Tissari, T., Valkama, E. and Seppa¨nen, O. (2006), “The effect of a redesigned floor plan, occupant density and the quality of indoor climate on the cost of space, productivity and sick leave in an office building – a case study”, Building and Environment, Vol. 41 No. 12, pp. 1961-72. Tommerup, H. and Svendsen, S. (2006), “Energy savings in Danish residential building stock”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 618-26. Uihlein, A. and Eder, P. (2010), “Policy options towards an energy efficient residential building stock in the EU-27”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42 No. 6, pp. 791-8. Voss, K. (2000), “Solar energy in building renovation – results and experience of international demonstration buildings”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 291-302. Wittchen, K.B. and Aggerholm, S. (2000), “Calculation of building heating demand in EPIQR”, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 137-41. Wong, I.L., Eames, P.C. and Perera, R.S. (2007), “A review of transparent insulation systems and the evaluation of payback period for building applications”, Solar Energy, Vol. 81 No. S1, pp. 1058-71. Xing, Y., Hewitt, N. and Griffiths, P. (2011), “Zero carbon buildings refurbishment – a hierarchical pathway”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 229-3236. York, C.B. and Pedreschi, R. (2000), “The influence of geometry on the strength of shear wall panels in light steel construction”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 277-85. Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A., Tupenaite, L. and Mickaityte, A. (2008), “Decision-making model for sustainable buildings refurbishment”, Environmental Engineering, pp. 894-901, ISBN: 978-9955-28-256-3. Zimmerman, M. (2010), “EC ECBCS annex 50 prefabricated systems for low energy renovation of residential buildings”, IEA ECBCS Annex 50 – Prefab Retrofit of Buildings, Presentation: ECBCS Technical Day, Copenhagen, June 16. Corresponding author Navid Gohardani can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints