ArticlePDF Available

A Tool to Evaluate Different Renovation Alternatives with Regard to Sustainability

MDPI
Sustainability
Authors:

Abstract and Figures

In Sweden and in other countries, building owners are encouraged to help reduce energy consumption, both in order to contribute to national energy saving goals and, in terms of their own interests, to reduce the costs of heating and operation of the building. However, it is important to pursue the most optimal strategy available so as to achieve cost-effective energy usage while simultaneously maintaining excellent indoor environments, without sacrificing the architectural quality or negatively affecting the environment. Building managers often do not have the time or expertise required to make a proper evaluation of the available options before making a final decision. Renovation measures are often considered in the light of repaying investments in a short time rather than taking into account life cycle costs, despite the fact that a thoughtful, comprehensive renovation is often more cost-effective in the long run. This article presents a systematic approach for evaluating different renovation alternatives based on sustainability criteria. A methodology has been developed to evaluate different renovation alternatives from environmental, economic, and social perspectives. The benefit of using the proposed methodology is that building managers who face a major renovation work are provided with a clear comparison between the different renovation options, viewed from a sustainability perspective, this may facilitate, in the long run, a culture in which renovation measures which involve marginally increased costs, but are seen to lead to significant environmental and social benefits, will be considered and carried out.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Sustainability 2014, 6, 4227-4245; doi:10.3390/su6074227
sustainability
ISSN 2071-1050
www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Article
A Tool to Evaluate Different Renovation Alternatives with
Regard to Sustainability
Kristina Mjörnell 1,2,*, Anna Boss 1,†, Markus Lindahl 1,† and Stefan Molnar 1,
1 SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden, Box 857, S-501 15 Borås, Sweden;
E-Mails: anna.boss@sp.se (A.B.); markus.lindahl@sp.se (M.L.); stefan.molnar@sp.se (S.M.)
2 Department of Building Physics, Lund University, Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden
These authors contributed equally to this work.
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: kristina.mjornell@sp.se;
Tel.: +46-10-516-50-00 (ext. 57-45).
Received: 30 March 2014; in revised form: 26 June 2014 / Accepted: 27 June 2014 /
Published: 8 July 2014
Abstract: In Sweden and in other countries, building owners are encouraged to help
reduce energy consumption, both in order to contribute to national energy saving goals
and, in terms of their own interests, to reduce the costs of heating and operation of the
building. However, it is important to pursue the most optimal strategy available so as to
achieve cost-effective energy usage while simultaneously maintaining excellent indoor
environments, without sacrificing the architectural quality or negatively affecting the
environment. Building managers often do not have the time or expertise required to make a
proper evaluation of the available options before making a final decision. Renovation
measures are often considered in the light of repaying investments in a short time rather
than taking into account life cycle costs, despite the fact that a thoughtful, comprehensive
renovation is often more cost-effective in the long run. This article presents a systematic
approach for evaluating different renovation alternatives based on sustainability criteria.
A methodology has been developed to evaluate different renovation alternatives from
environmental, economic, and social perspectives. The benefit of using the proposed
methodology is that building managers who face a major renovation work are provided
with a clear comparison between the different renovation options, viewed from a
sustainability perspective, this may facilitate, in the long run, a culture in which renovation
measures which involve marginally increased costs, but are seen to lead to significant
environmental and social benefits, will be considered and carried out.
OPEN ACCESS
Sustainability 2014, 6 4228
Keywords: sustainable renovation; decision-making; life cycle cost; life cycle assessment;
social indicators
1. Introduction
While there is a need to significantly increase the rate of extensive renovation of commercial and
residential buildings in Europe in order to comply with the need for decreased CO2 emissions, all
renovations are also required to reach certain economic, social, and environmental goals [1]. In a study
published by the Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE), renovation is considered to have a
key role in achieving the 2050 decarbonization goals for the construction sector of the EU [2].
Extensive renovation of buildings is needed due to not only the dilapidated condition of many, but in
order to counteract increasing energy costs and in response to environmental concerns. Building
development has also been undertaken with a view to functionality, which includes social and cultural
considerations as well as infrastructure- and service-related aspects. In recent years, stricter legislation
has increased the requirements regarding energy efficiency, which can often be achieved only as a
result of extensive renovation of the building envelope, including measures such as improving the
insulation, increasing air-tightness, and changing windows, as well as through installation of new
heating and ventilation systems which take renewable energy sources into consideration.
Building managers and tenants are required to reduce their energy consumption in order to fulfill
energy goals and to reduce the heating and operational costs of the buildings. It is, however, important
to pursue the most optimal strategy available to achieve cost-effective energy usage while maintaining
excellent indoor environments, without sacrificing architectural quality or negatively affecting the
environment. Building owners often do not have the time or expertise necessary for a proper
evaluation of the available renovation alternatives prior to making a final decision. An important factor
influencing these decisions is that renovation costs are more likely to be considered in the light of
repaying the investment in a short time than to take into account the life cycle costs of the materials
and products, despite the fact that a thoughtful, comprehensive renovation is often more cost-effective
in the long run. The framework presented in this article aims to provide a systematic approach for the
evaluation of renovation measures based on various sustainability criteria. The methodology developed
during the course of this project aims to evaluate different renovation measures from environmental,
economic, and social perspectives. There are currently only a few decision support tools available that
assist developers in the evaluation of different alternatives with regard to the aspects discussed above
during the early stages of a renovation project; these alternatives could involve anything from
changing windows or piping, to a complete overhaul of internal and external surfaces, replacing
technical systems, or upgrading the outdoor environments.
2. Current Decision-Making Methods
A literature review was carried out with the aim of providing an overview of existing decision
support tools, and the results demonstrated that there is a wide variety of such tools available;
however, none of these covers all of the different aspects of the concept of sustainability. Although a
Sustainability 2014, 6 4229
few of these, such as the Retrofit Advisor [3], consider all the required aspects, it is not possible to
adapt them to include parameters such as building characteristics and climatic conditions, as these
tools are developed based on national conditions. There are tools, which aid in performing economic,
environmental, technical, and (to some degree) social analyses, but few include all of these
dimensions, and it is often difficult to gain information on the assessment of individual parameters [4].
A workshop with representatives of housing companies, architects, consultants, contractors, and
tenants’ associations was arranged in order to learn more about how various organizations make
decisions regarding renovation measures. The results from the workshop indicate that renovation is
often carried out as a result of the discovery of technical shortcomings and problems, as well as in
response to the requirements of the residents. The results from the workshop indicate that most
property owners do not work proactively regarding renovation issues and often do not initiate
renovations until forced to do so by urgent technical problems or complaints from users or tenants.
Although most building owners bring in consultants to make decisions regarding which designs and
technologies to use for renovations, they often handle the financial calculations personally. Thus, a tool
that facilitates less complicated evaluations of architectural, cultural, and social values is needed, as
these are often difficult to deal with, particularly if they come into conflict with technical,
environmental, and economic values [4].
Andin (2011) [5] and Andin et al. (2012) [6] have presented early attempts at comparing different
energy efficiency measures for use with the exterior walls of a typical apartment block built as part of
the Million Homes Program, which involved the construction of around one million apartments in
Sweden between 1961 and 1973. Renovation measures included adding a new ventilated façade
insulated with mineral wool, upgrading the windows, and improving air-tightness; these measures
were evaluated based on energy efficiency, moisture control, indoor comfort, and cost to find the
optimal renovation solution. After implementation in a model representing a real reference building, a
number of parameters, such as energy consumption, thermal bridges, heat, moisture, and thermal
comfort, were compared for the different renovation measures. Energy consumption was evaluated
through simulations using the IDA Indoor Climate and Energy software, which is a dynamic multi-zone
simulation application for studying thermal indoor climates as well as the energy consumption of
entire buildings [7]. Thermal bridges were calculated numerically for stationary conditions using the
Heat2 software, which is a Windows application for the simulation of two-dimensional transient and
steady-state heat transfer [8]. Heat and moisture conditions in the wall were assessed through
numerical simulations using the WUFI® PRO 5.3 software [9]. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using
life cycle cost estimates, based on data presented by Janson et al. (2008) [10] and Gerdin and
Hammarberg (2010) [11]. Indoor thermal comfort was assessed by calculating the operating
temperatures, floor temperatures, and radiation asymmetry for different apartments; a comparison of
the results shows that the choice of input data, such as energy prices, is crucial, and that a small change
may affect the outcome significantly. It was found that, for parts of the year, options involving
well-insulated façades might lead to problems with overheating during certain hours of the day, which
should be considered in the design of sunscreens, etc. Andin (2011) [5] conducted thorough studies of
parameters such as energy, moisture, thermal comfort, and cost, but the effects of social aspects were
not included; this was due to the fact that they are of less importance when making decisions regarding
the renovation of a single wall than they are when planning the renovation of an entire residential area.
Sustainability 2014, 6 4230
3. Suggested Decision Support Methodology
The methodology presented here aims to encourage and support building owners in evaluating
different renovation alternatives with regard to environmental, economic, and social aspects. In the
following section, tools for performing assessments based on these aspects are presented.
3.1. Environmental Aspects
In order to better understand how different renovation measures alter the environmental impact of
the building over its life cycle, a tool for performing an environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
was developed. The LCA tool enables comparisons between different renovation measures from an
environmental perspective, with a particular focus on primary energy usage and global warming
potential. For buildings, the environmental impact is normally related primarily to the use phase but,
due to decreasing energy consumption and increasing use of construction materials (e.g., the addition
of extra insulation), the environmental impact of the energy and resources used in the production and
end of life phases becomes more significant; thus, it is important to include these two phases in all
assessments of the environmental effects of a renovation.
3.1.1. Overview of the LCA Tool
At this stage, the LCA tool is primarily intended to compare renovation alternatives for multi-family
houses in Sweden. Up to ten different renovation alternatives may be compared simultaneously with
the tool, and high scores are awarded to alternatives that reduce the energy consumption of the
building, such as adding extra insulation or changing windows, heating system, or ventilation
equipment. Furthermore, all equipment and materials related to the different renovation alternatives,
such as pipes and ventilation ducts, have been included in the comparison. The tool is written in MS
Excel format.
The LCA tool compares the various renovation alternatives to a reference case, which is based on
the assumption that the energy consumption level remains constant, the building has the same heating
system throughout its life cycle, and no renovations are made; the results of the calculations are
schematically illustrated in Figure 1. During Year One, a renovation is carried out in order to reduce
the energy consumption of the building, causing an increase in emissions and energy consumption as
compared to the reference case, which is related to the production and transportation of the building
materials. By Year Two, however, the renovated building is more energy efficient than the reference
case, and this lower environmental impact accumulates over time, as indicated by the falling curve for
―Renovation 1‖ in the chart. For the last year of the comparison, the emissions caused by the waste
handling of the material of the two buildings have been included, which in this example results in a
relative increase in the environmental impact of the renovated building due to the fact that the
renovation added more materials and products to the building.
Sustainability 2014, 6 4231
Figure 1. Schematic chart of the accumulated environmental impact of a renovation
alternative as compared to the reference case.
3.1.2. Outcome of the LCA Tool Calculations
The results of the calculations performed by the LCA tool are summarized in tabular form and
depicted in six charts in the Excel document; two environmental impact categories, global warming
potential and primary energy usage, are presented here. The results are always given as a comparison
to the reference case described above.
Total environmental savings are obtained by calculating accumulated environmental impact over
the whole life cycle (production, transportation, use, and end of life treatment) for each renovation
alternative in a user-defined time frame. In the tool, environmental savings are presented both for the
whole life cycle and for each of the four phases. The environmental payback period represents the time
required for the increase in environmental impact caused during the production and end of life phases
to be repaid through reduction of the environmental impact during the use phase.
The total environmental impact (global warming potential) and the environmental payback period
(global warming potential payback period) for each of the renovation alternatives is presented in charts
in the tool; Figure 2 presents two examples of such charts. Here, results are presented for alternative
scenarios, each consisting of a combination of the following renovation measures: replacement of
heating system, enhancement of building envelope, and replacement of ventilation system. In Figure 2a,
the accumulated global warming potential for each scenario is compared to the reference case,
expressed as metric tons of CO2 equivalents. Figure 2b presents the global warming potential payback
time, expressed as years, for each scenario. The same charts are available for primary energy.
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 5 10 15 20 25
Environmental impact
Year
Renovation 1
Reference
Total environmental
savings
Environmental pay back
Sustainability 2014, 6 4232
Figure 2. Examples of the presentation of results. (a) Global warming potential over the
whole life cycle, presented by scenario; (b) environmental (global warming potential)
payback time presented as a comparison with the reference case.
(a)
(b)
3.1.3. Data Requirements of the LCA Tool
It is possible to include between one and ten renovation measures for each scenario. Initially, the
tool requires a set of general data to be provided; length of the calculation period (in order to be able to
summarize total environmental impact), area of the building, number of apartments, and, if district
heating is used, local environmental impact data (the tool provides a link to a website where this data
can be found) [12]. Next, data regarding the specific renovation scenario is entered, choice of heating
system (heat pump, district heating, pellet boiler, oil boiler, electric boiler, or electric radiators) and
annual heat demand.
Sustainability 2014, 6 4233
Following this, data pertaining to any or all of the following groups is provided and may take the
form of, for example:
Heating system
o Replacement of heating system
o New circulation pump
Building envelope
o Additional insulation (in any part of the envelope)
o Additional façade system (including insulation)
o New windows
o New doors
Ventilation system
o New ventilation ducts (supply and/or exhaust)
o New ventilation equipment (with or without heat recovery)
o New air distribution units, silencer, etc.
Radiators, piping and electricity
o New radiators
o New pipes (heating, water, sewage)
o Relining of pipes
o New electric cables
There are a number of options for each group, such as different materials or products, and the
amounts, distance of transportation, means of transport, and life expectancy must be included for each
material or product. For products, which improve the energy performance of the building, the expected
change in heating and, in some cases, electricity consumption must also be entered; this information
can be obtained by performing an energy balance calculation for the building.
3.1.4. Environmental Data
Environmental data regarding materials, energy, etc., was gathered from various reports, databases,
calculation software packages, and environmental product declarations (EPD). The results of the
calculations are presented for the categories global warming potential (expressed as tons of CO2
equivalents) and primary energy use (MWh). The global warming potential was calculated using the
Recipe Midpoint (H) V1.04/Europe Recipe H method, and primary energy according to the
Cumulative Energy Demand method, including total energy demand V1.05/Cumulative energy
demand. Calculations of environmental impact were performed using the LCA tool SimaPro 8.0.1 [13].
3.1.5. The Production Phase
The renovation measures included in each scenario are specified by the user, and a number of
options are presented for each product group (listed in Section 3.1.3), e.g., different insulation
materials. Most of the environmental data pertaining to these products and materials represent typical
Sustainability 2014, 6 4234
European products. Data regarding the building envelope and ventilation have primarily been derived
from the Ecoinvent database [14]. Façade systems consist of several elements such as boards,
insulation, and coating, and several of the options included in the tool represent commercially
available systems; environmental data regarding these were calculated using information for the
individual elements. Data on the environmental impact of various heating systems were derived from a
combination of information originating from various databases, environmental product declarations,
and reports, and experience accumulated during previous measurements; in some cases, these data
were extrapolated and adapted to suit a typical multi-family building in Sweden in terms of unit size.
Environmental data regarding radiators, piping, and electricity were based on environmental product
declarations, reports from trade associations, and various databases.
3.1.6. Energy Consumption during the Use Phase
In order to be able to calculate the effect of the reduction in energy consumption regarding heating,
the heating system used before the renovation must be entered into the system. The following options
are available: ground source heat pump, district heating, wood pellet boiler, oil boiler, electric boiler,
and electric radiators. The reduction of the environmental impact is calculated based on average data
for energy produced using these types of heating systems. Data relating to energy and electricity was
based on the Environmental Fact Book (2011) [15], and for electricity (and heat pumps), the average
Nordic generation mix from 2008 was used. Regarding district heating, the environmental impact
differs considerably for different areas depending on the local production mix; therefore, the
possibility of using area-specific data from the Swedish district heating association was included [12].
3.1.7. End of Life Treatment
The LCA tool includes the emissions and energy consumption related to the end of life treatment
for all materials used in the model in the calculations. The environmental impact of waste handling is
based on the report Environmental impact from waste (2010) [16], which presents environmental data
related to the treatment of a number of waste types in Sweden. Each material included in the LCA tool
is assigned to one or several of these types, which makes it is possible to estimate the environmental
impact caused by the end of life treatment of the materials.
3.1.8. Limitations
The aim of the tool is to present comparisons between different renovation measures for residential
multi-family buildings in Sweden. However, as representative data for typical Swedish products have
not always been available, particularly concerning many of the construction materials, data for
corresponding European products have been used instead. Energy data for the use and end of life
phases have a stronger Swedish focus and, regarding district heating, the tool is even capable of
including local data in the calculation. The tool does not take energy for cooling of the building or the
electricity consumption of domestic appliances and lighting into account; these parameters may be
added in the future. Further development of the tool could involve including the location of the
building and the manufacturer of and/or the production method used, as well as the inclusion of data
Sustainability 2014, 6 4235
for other countries. As the language currently used in the tool is Swedish, the latter suggestion should
involve translation of the tool.
3.2. Economic Aspects
3.2.1. Life Cycle Cost Tool
In order to compare the profitability of different renovation alternatives, a Life Cycle Cost (LCC)
tool was chosen for the calculation of the net present value, which was then executed in an MS Excel
spreadsheet. The following variables were used to calculate life cycle costs: investment costs, energy
consumption before and after renovation, energy prices, information on the cost of capital, and
calculation period. There are several calculation tools available which have been developed by real
estate or housing companies in order to evaluate different renovation measures; in this study, a LCC
tool developed by the Swedish real estate and housing companies Älvstranden Utveckling AB and
Framtiden Group was used [17]. In this tool, input values such as yield, cost of capital (depending on
the attractiveness of the area), energy consumption, and utility period of the investment are selected.
Investment costs occur only once and, although it is possible to choose when investments are to be
made, the value is always calculated as the present value of future costs. Reinvestments may involve
e.g., changing a fan in a ventilation system, which, although it recurs at set intervals, is not an annual
cost. In order to calculate the energy costs, data is required regarding energy consumption and average
peak power, together with information on potential annual average price movements and any annual
increases in district heating and electricity costs. The functions of investment subsidies and items are
similar to that of investment costs, the difference being that the items will always be negative,
regardless of whether the value entered is negative or positive. Here, it is possible to shift the revenue
in time and rental income, and loss of the same is calculated per square meter and year. The LCC
model has predefined fields for the input of data, which are grouped into five different areas, as shown
in Table 1. This data are based on the predicted costs of renovation measures and costs related to the
operation and maintenance of the building as shown in Figure 3, and are either provided by the
building owner or found in national data sources such as The cost for maintenance book (2014) [18],
which is a planning and calculation tool for alterations, repairs, and maintenance.
Table 1. Data required for Life Cycle Cost (LCC) calculations.
Overall conditions
Unit
Period for LCC calculations
year
Interest rate, calculated for costing purposes
%/year
Annual adjustment of charges
%/year
Area affected (i.e., the part included in the calculation)
m2
Cost of capital
%/year
Mortgage payments
%/year
Increase in prices (VAT, OH, etc.)
%
Investment costs
Investment items/entries
SEK, SEK/m2
Investment subsidies and revenue entries
SEK
Sustainability 2014, 6 4236
Table 1. Cont.
Reinvestment and replacements
Replacement interval or useful lifetime
year
Reinvestment costs
SEK, SEK/m2
Running management and maintenance
Management and maintenance costs per year, month, week
SEK/m2
Energy costs
District heating costs
SEK/kWh
Hot water costs
SEK/kWh
Electricity costs
SEK/kWh
Energy consumption, district heating
kWh/year
Energy consumption, hot water
kWh/year
Energy consumption, electricity
kWh/year
Rental income and loss of rental income
Space required by renovation measures (new shafts,
internal insulation, lifts, etc.)
m2
Change in income from rents per year
SEK, SEK/m2
Figure 3. Investment costs (dark blue) and Life Cycle Costs for energy (light blue) in
thousands of SEK over a period of 30 years, for three different renovation alternatives
(Alt 1, 2, and 3) compared with a reference case (Alt 4, no renovation carried out).
It is not necessary to fill out all fields in order for the calculation to be carried out. However,
the more information submitted, the more comprehensive the results of the calculation become. One
strategy is to input only those costs that differ between the different alternatives in the comparison and
leave the rest blank, although the user should be aware that this will only present the differences
between the two alternatives and will not provide an estimate of the total life cycle costs.
3.2.2. Evaluation of Different Renovation Alternatives
In order to simplify the calculation, LCC values that are the same for all renovation alternatives can
be removed, leaving only the costs and benefits that differ between alternatives. An example of this is
that thicker walls cause a reduction in the consumption of electricity, which in turn leads to lower
energy costs. Using a reference cost as a starting point for each renovation measure, it is possible to
3,115
2,117
2,063
8,193
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
Alt 1
Alt 2
Alt 3
Alt 4
Investment costs and Life Cycle Costs over 30 years
[thousand SEK]
Sustainability 2014, 6 4237
carry out a relative sensitivity analysis that will facilitate the implementation of the impact of various
parameters on the end result (percentage change per parameter by percentage change for the final
result). This analysis may also be carried out using an absolute value, such as a percentage of the
annual increase in energy prices, the accuracy of which will then rely on changes in the absolute
values. Based on the sensitivity analysis, an evaluation of the accuracy/probability of the most
important parameters can be made.
3.3. Social Aspects
3.3.1. Identification of Social Aspects Relevant for Renovation
The basis for social sustainability includes issues such as justice, trust, and civic participation, as
well as fair living standards and health. Environments should serve the needs of all those who use
them, which include e.g. the existence of relevant services in the vicinity of the building, access to
venues where it is possible for a varied social life to arise, and the environment having qualities that
people can easily relate to. The approach for assessing the social sustainability of different renovation
measures used in this article has as its basis a tool called the ―Knowledge Matrix‖, which was
developed by a group of public officials, employed by the City of Gothenburg, called the S2020 [19].
This group is tasked with encouraging the technical departments of the City of Gothenburg to give the
same priority to social issues as they do to economic and environmental ones in the planning of the
city. S2020 has conducted research and arranged dialogue activities with different groups of
stakeholders regarding issues concerning social sustainability in city planning, and one of the results of
these activities is the Knowledge Matrix, which consists of what is described as six vital ―themes‖ (in
this article, the word ―aspect‖ is used in place of ―theme‖) which should be taken into consideration
when planning for social sustainability in a city. This matrix is used by various municipal departments
to generate and analyze qualitative data related to the effects of a specific planning project from the
perspective of these six aspects and for five different scales; individual buildings, local areas,
neighborhoods, the city, and the region.
The approach of analyzing data qualitatively, with the help of the set of theoretically generated
categories used by the S2020, resembles the research methodology often referred to as ―qualitative
content analysis‖ [20]. However, the task of comparing the environmental and economic effects to the
social ones for different renovation measures, which is the aim of the tool described in this article,
requires a method for quantifying the latter. As a way of achieving this, a research overview of studies
dealing with the social effects of renovation was conducted, which yielded around twenty studies
focusing on concepts such as ―social effects‖, ―social impact‖, or ―social indicators‖, in connection
with the ―renovation‖ or ―retrofitting‖ of houses. A general conclusion is that, although the different
research studies present a diverse range of categories and indicators, most of them focus on the same
aspects as the Knowledge Matrix of the S2020 does, and the difference lies in the usage of words and
categorizations. Based on this, it was decided that the social aspects of the Knowledge Matrix were to
be used as a way of grounding the tool presented in this article in the practical, everyday experiences
of the public officials of the S2020 group and the citizens, associations, and companies that they meet
and collaborate with on a day-to-day basis. The aspects were, however, revised somewhat, and they
Sustainability 2014, 6 4238
were connected to indicators and operationalizations derived from the research overview. In the
section below, the aspects and indicators are presented.
3.3.2. Suggested Indicators for Social Sustainability
For every social aspect in the S2020 Knowledge Matrix, a number of indicators were developed
which were believed to provide greater understanding of the aspect in question. Two sources of data
were used to develop these, the first of which was the qualitative case studies presented in the
Knowledge Matrix in connection with each of the ―social aspects‖; information from these case studies
that was considered to be relevant for renovation projects was used to guide the development of the
indicators. The other data source was the twenty research papers on the social effects of renovation
projects, which provided additional information on how to develop the indicators for this purpose.
With the indicators as its basis, the first set of operationalizations, i.e., instructions regarding how to
perform measurements of the indicators [21], is currently under construction, and for this reason it is
not presented in this article. It is also very likely that the operationalizations will have to be adapted on
a case-by-case basis in order to fit the specific conditions of individual renovation projects, e.g., the
time, resources, and availability of data. The main contribution of this article is therefore the
development of the aspects and social indicators, which are presented below.
3.3.2.1. A Cohesive City
The first aspect is entitled ―A cohesive city‖, and deals with the effects of renovation projects on
social cohesion by focusing on variations in the housing supply and the effects they may have on the
achievement of a diverse demographic composition of the population. The indicators of this aspect are
as follows:
There is a variety of apartments of different sizes (varied selection of number of rooms).
There is variation in rent levels (ranging from minimum rent for the base offering, to higher rents
for a higher standard).
There is a variation in the forms of ownership (rental, condominium, private ownership).
There is accommodation suited to special needs (elderly, disabled, etc.).
3.3.2.2. Social Interaction, Teamwork, and Meetings
The second aspect deals with how a renovation project affects opportunities for social interaction,
teamwork, and meetings, and is assessed based on the following indicators:
There are physical environments such as indoor venues, collective farms, common spaces
connected to entrances and stairways, laundry rooms, gardens, allotments, barbecue facilities,
and playgrounds.
There are formal and informal groups, as well as organized activities and events such as garden
days, cleaning days, Christmas parties, and workshops.
Tenants are able to affect the ongoing renovation process. They have access to different channels
for their views, through arenas such as local tenants’ associations, open houses, apartment
Sustainability 2014, 6 4239
viewings, interest groups, and the possibility to respond to polls and participate in workshops.
Information must be available at information meetings with the tenants.
3.3.2.3. A Well-Functioning Everyday Life
The third aspect, ―A well-functioning everyday life‖, measures the effects that a renovation project
has on the ability of tenants to live their everyday lives, both during the renovation process and after it
has been concluded. The following six indicators are proposed for this aspect:
The renovation does not cause significant disturbance to the everyday life of the residents. This
includes the ability to continue living in their apartments during the renovation process, or the
possibility of moving into a temporary apartment. The effects regarding the performance of the
apartment and disturbances in terms of noise, dirt, and daylight are also important factors, along
with the duration of the renovation process.
The tenant receives adequate instructions and information about the renovated apartment.
The renovation results in a reasonable increase of the rent (which may be expressed as a percentage).
The standard and flexibility of the apartment is perceived as adequate (dishwasher, washing
machine, wardrobes, flexibility in the use of space for storage, utilization of bedrooms, rent, etc.).
The accommodation has easy access for the elderly and disabled (design of entrances, elevators,
bathrooms, lighting).
There is access to bike and stroller storage, parking facilities, and storage facilities.
3.3.2.4. Identity and Experience
The fourth aspect is entitled ―Identity and experience‖, and delves deeper into different
stakeholders’ identities, as well as their experiences of the geographical area and how these are
connected to the renovation project. The indicators suggested for this aspect are:
The building owner has conducted a dialogue with stakeholders (residents, visitors) to identify
the spirit of the area and different qualities and weaknesses, as well as the stakeholders’ desires
for the future.
The indoor environment is perceived as adequate.
The quality and standard of the apartment concerning e.g., material selection and workmanship
is perceived as adequate in comparison to similar apartments in other buildings.
Design qualities such as architectural, cultural, and environmental aspects are considered during
the renovation.
3.3.2.5. Health and Green Urban Environments
The fifth aspect is called ―Health and green urban environments‖, and concerns the interplay between
renovation projects and green, healthy environments. The indicators chosen for studying this aspect are:
There is access to surrounding areas for the purpose of recreation, such as walking trails, forests,
green areas, playgrounds, gardens, and places for farming and animal husbandry.
There is access to a balcony or terrace.
The noise level of the outdoor environment is low and not distracting.
Sustainability 2014, 6 4240
3.3.2.6. Safety, Security, and Openness
The sixth aspect to be taken into account when studying the social effects of renovation activities is
that of ―Safety, security and openness‖, which connects issues of social protection and a sense of
safety among citizens with qualities in the built environment. It can be studied by considering the
following indicators:
Places in the building or the surrounding area which are perceived as insecure have been
identified, e.g., through a safety tour.
Measures to reduce insecurity have been implemented (e.g., lighting, design of entrances,
laundry rooms, and walkways, access to an emergency telephone number).
Security staff is available in the area.
There is some form of organized neighborhood watch.
The response time in the event of damage is perceived as very short.
3.3.3. Social LCA
Thus far in this article, a number of social aspects and indicators have been described, all of which
can be studied in order to understand how a particular renovation project is related to the social
dimension. However, these aspects and indicators need to be connected to a wider research framework
when analyzing social impact. Several such frameworks exist, e.g., social impact assessment (SIA) [22],
Social Return on Investment (SROI) [23], and Cost-Benefit Analysis [24]; thus, there is more than one
option when analyzing the effects of renovation projects. In this article, Social LCA (Social Life Cycle
Analysis) is suggested as a suitable method for the task at hand for three reasons: (1) Social LCA takes
a holistic approach to and focuses on the entire life cycle of a product or service; (2) the framework
goes well with the life cycle perspectives of the LCC and the Environmental LCA frameworks, which
are also part of the framework presented in this article; (3) most of the research literature on Social
LCA follows a standard procedure, which means that this approach provides an opportunity to learn
from and compare different renovation projects to one another, although such comparisons are
generally difficult to perform.
As Social LCA follows the same procedure as Environmental LCA, the ISO 14040 and ISO 14044
standards for Life Cycle Assessment direct the research project through different phases, including
definition of goal and scope, life cycle inventory analysis, life cycle impact assessment, and
interpretation. The researchers’ tasks include, among other things, defining the system, the functional
unit, relevant indicators, subcategories, and impact categories, as well as engaging in data collection
and analysis of hotspots [25]. However, one of the differences between Social LCA and Environmental
LCA is that the former often requires data to be collected on-site and, as this often results in a
combination of quantitative, semi-quantitative, and qualitative data, Social LCA generally requires a
greater degree of stakeholder involvement than Environmental LCA does [25,26].
Using Social LCA to study a renovation project poses several questions, one of which concerns
how to define the functional unit, i.e., the utility or the role that the product (in this case the renovation
project) plays for the user. One simple way of defining the functional unit for a renovation project
would be as ―an apartment that offers certain standards for the person(s) who lives there‖; this would,
Sustainability 2014, 6 4241
however, require several different Social LCAs to be conducted for the same house with the same
functional unit, but focusing on different renovation alternatives. For each renovation alternative, an
interpretation would have to be made that considers the potential social effects with regard to the social
aspects and the indicators presented in Section 3.3.1.
Another important question relates to the choice of data collection methods. As stated by Benoît,
Mazijn, et al. (2009) [25], a combination of qualitative, quantitative, and semi-quantitative methods
should be used if possible, including e.g., surveys, interviews, participant observations, and literary
reviews. Using Social LCA as a part of the decision support tool, one would have to apply those methods
based on the available resources for that particular renovation project. Regardless of the choice of
method, the social aspects and indicators presented in this article would have to be focused on.
Finally, one would have to consider the application of the system for a real renovation project.
Ideally, the system studied would include everything from the actors, technologies, and resources that
are connected to the production of the materials which are used in each renovation alternative, along
with the actual renovation of the building, the use phase after the renovation is completed, and the
dismantling of the building at some point in the future. However, when using the decision support tool,
the production of the materials as well as dismantling of the building would likely be excluded, both
because of the difficulties in finding relevant data on the social effects of different materials, and due
to cost issues; the decision support tool needs to be cost-effective if building owners are to use it. Thus,
in reality, Social LCA would not capture the whole life cycle of the renovation process. It would have
to start when the actual renovation of the house starts and it would most likely end when the house is
next renovated, deconstructed, or demolished.
3.3.4. Some Final Remarks on Studying the Social Sustainability of Different Renovation Alternatives
There are many important questions and areas of research, which have been omitted in this article,
because the development of the decision support tool for renovation alternatives presented here is in its
early, exploratory stages, particularly in terms of the study of the social dimension. Both the social
aspects and indicators presented above and the reflection on how Social LCA can be used in the
process should be considered as early attempts at identifying ways of understanding the social effects
of renovation projects.
4. Evaluation of the Level of Sustainability of Different Renovation Measures
In order to choose the most sustainable renovation measure, all sustainability aspects must be taken
into account and the optimal solution be selected. Ostermeyer et al. (2013) [27] have described this
graphically and have evaluated a number of renovation measures from an economic and environmental
point of view, ranking them on a numerical scale from the least to most favorable. The measures differ
more or less mutually, which is represented by the distance between them. The results are plotted on a
graph with the economic indicator (LCC) on the y-axis and the ecological indicator (LCA) on the
x-axis. This provides a variety of points on a surface, which enables relations between items to become
visible and thus facilitates the making of small adjustments in engineering design, which may result in
e.g., large financial gains. In their evaluation, Ostermeyer et al. [27] only included two aspects (LCA
and LCC), but it is possible to incorporate the social through the use of three-dimensional graphs, as in
Sustainability 2014, 6 4242
Figure 4. In so doing, a number of steps must be taken: To begin with, the indicators and
operationalizations require further development to be carried out in conjunction with stakeholders such
as housing residents, property managers, and other researchers, using methods such as dialogue
meetings, surveys, and interviews. Furthermore, the analysis of Social LCA as a means of studying
renovation alternatives will need to be elaborated on concerning, for example, the definition of the goal
and scope of a project, as well as its system boundaries, the choice of methods for the collection and
interpretation of data, and how to assess the validity and reliability of a particular research project.
Finally, further development will be required in order to produce a functioning model for summarizing
and ranking the social aspects on a single scale, similar to that of the environmental and economic
aspects; in this model, each indicator will receive a value based on its perceived importance in relation
to the other indicators. The process of assessing the relative significance of the different indicators will
be based on a dialogue with multiple stakeholders, which is in progress; consequently, this part of the
tool is still under development.
When using the final tool for comparing different renovation measures, all values for a specific
measure will be summarized so that they may be given a place on a numerical scale, from 1100; as
this will be done for each renovation measure, the different measures will be distributed on a single
scale, thus becoming comparable to one another as well as to the ―status quo‖. This will be addressed
further once the methodology has been tested through case studies, and it may well be discovered that
this scale requires additional qualitative information in order to provide the analysis with the depth
required by any reliable description of social reality.
Figure 4. Visual presentation of the results, comparing the economic, environmental, and
social aspects of three different renovation alternatives (Alt 1, 2 and 3), as compared to a
reference case where no renovation is carried out. The larger the surface area, the more
sustainable the renovation alternative is.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
This article presents an overview of currently ongoing work on a decision-support tool for guiding
building managers towards choosing the most sustainable renovation alternatives. However, since the
evaluation of different renovation measures requires much preparatory work in terms of energy
balance calculations, calculations of material consumption for the building and its different parts, and
collection of economic and social data, many simplifications and assumptions have been made. On one
hand, the research community traditionally excels at performing cost estimates and energy estimates,
0
20
40
60
80
100
Economic
Environmental
Social
Visual presentation of the results
Reference case
Renovation alt 1
Renovation alt 2
Renovation alt 3
Sustainability 2014, 6 4243
and a comprehensive environmental assessment of different renovation alternatives is likely not far
away. On the other, conducting an assessment of social impact requires a different set of skills and a
dialogue process involving multiple parties. The social analysis must begin during the early stages of
the process; as shown in this article, Social LCA may prove to be a helpful framework which could
well complement the traditional environmental and economic assessments, thereby contributing to a
more holistic analysis. Thus, it will be possible to learn more about how to assess environmental
factors in conjunction with social and economic factors over time, for the benefit of developers or
building owners who are faced with major renovations; they will be able to make a clear comparison
between alternative renovation possibilities from a sustainability perspective and will possibly become
aware of options that provide significant sustainability benefits in return for a small increase in costs.
So far, the LCC and LCA tools have been tested only in a few cases, and the tool for assessing social
sustainability has not yet been tested in reality. The next step is to test the entire decision-support tool,
including the environmental, economic, and social aspects, in case studies involving residential
buildings that are approaching renovation, and allow building managers to use the tool in their
evaluation of different renovation alternatives.
Acknowledgments
The work presented in this paper has been funded by the Swedish Research Council Formas.
Author Contributions
Kristina Mjörnell came up with the project idea to develop a decision support tool for building
managers that would take into account environmental, economic, and social aspects in order to achieve
sustainable renovation, and she outlined the methodology presented in this article. Markus Lindahl
and Anna Boss further developed the LCA tool and adjusted it to suit various renovation conditions.
Stefan Molnar and Kristina Mjörnell elaborated on the social indicators and the use of Social LCA as
a framework.
References
1. Energy-Efficient Buildings. Multi-annual Roadmap for contractual PPP under Horizon 2020;
European Commission Directorate-General for Research & Innovation: Brussels, Belgium, 2013.
2. BPIE Europe’s Buildings under the Microscope, Executive Summary, a Country-by-Country
Review of the Energy Performance of Buildings; Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE):
Brussels, Belgium, 2011.
3. Zimmermann, M.; Bertschinger, H.; Christen, K.; Ott, W.; Kaufmann, Y.; Carl, S.; The early
design stage advisory tool Retrofit Advisor, Beta-version, November 2011. The final version
of the program and guide will soon be Available online: http://www.empa-ren.ch/A50/
A50Retrofit%20Advisor.htm (accessed on 3 July 2014).
4. Thuvander, L.; Femenias, P.; Mjörnell, K.; Meiling, P. Unveiling the process of sustainable
renovation. Sustainability 2012, 4, 11881213.
Sustainability 2014, 6 4244
5. Andin, E.M. Evaluation of energy improving exterior wall renovation measures for multifamily
houses built 19611975. Masters Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg,
Sweden, 2011.
6. Andin, E.M.; Zarrabi, A.B.; Mjörnell, K. Evaluation of renovation measures for improving the
energy performance of external walls in apartment built 19611975. In Proceedings of the
International Building Physics Conference IBPC2012, Kyoto, Japan, 2831 May 2012.
7. IDA energy calculation tool. Available online: http://www.equasolutions.co.uk/en/software/idaice
(accessed on 28 March 2014).
8. Building physics.com. Heat2A PC-program for two-dimensional transient and steady-state heat
transfer. Available online: http://www.buildingphysics.com/index-filer/heat2.htm (accessed on 28
March 2014).
9. WUFI® Pro. Available online: https://www.verlag.fraunhofer.de/wufi/?local=en (accessed on 28
March 2014).
10. Janson, U.; Berggren, B.; Sundqvist, H. Energieffektivisering vid renovering av rekordårens
flerbostadshus; Report EBD-R-08/22; Lund University, Energy and Building Design: Lund,
Sweden, 2008. (In Swedish)
11. Gerdin, C.; Hammarberg, L. Varr genomförs inte nsamma energieffektiva
investeringar?en studie av beslutsfaktorerna vid investeringar inom fastighetsbranchen.
Master’s thesis, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, 2010. (In Swedish)
12. Miljörden 2012 - Svensk Fjärrvärme. Available online: http://www.svenskfjarrvarme.se/
Fjarrvarme/Miljovardering-av-fjarrvarme/Miljovarden-2012/ (accessed on 24 March 2014).
13. PRé Consultants. SimaPro 8.0.1; PRé Consultants: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2013.
14. Ecoinvent Centre. Ecoinvent Data v2.0, Ecoinvent Reports No. 125; Swiss Centre for Life Cycle
Inventories: Duebendorf, Switzerland, 2007.
15. Gode, J.F. Martinsson, F.; Hagberg, L.; Öman, A.; Höglund, J. Miljöfaktaboken 2011 Uppskattade
emissionsfaktorer r bränslen, el, rme och transporter; Estimated emission factors for fuel,
electricity, heat and transports in Sweden; rmeforsk Service AB: Stockholm, Sweden, 2011.
(In Swedish)
16. Sundqvist, J.-O.; Palm, D. Miljöverkan från avfall Underlagr avfallsprevention och förbättrad
avfallshantering; IVL report B1930; IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet: Stockholm, Sweden, 2010.
(In Swedish)
17. LCC calculation tool in the form of an EXCEL spread sheet developed by Älvstranden Utveckling
AB. Available online: http://www.alvstranden.com/om-oss/hallbar-utveckling/dokument/ (accessed
on 3 July 2014). (In Swedish)
18. Underhållskostnadsboken 2014, the cost for maintenance book, 2014. http://www.incit.se/sv/
REPAB_Faktabocker/Underhallskostnadsboken/ (accessed on 14 May 2014). (In Swedish)
19. Kunskapsmatris S2020. Knowledge matrix 2020. Accessible online: http://kunskapsmatris-s2020.se/
(accessed on 2 January 2013).
20. Krippendorff, K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology; SAGE Publications, Inc.:
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2004.
21. Holme, I.M.; Solvang, B.K. Research methodologyOn qualitative and quantitative methods;
Studentlitteratur: Lund, Sweden, 1996. (In Swedish)
Sustainability 2014, 6 4245
22. Nessa, B.; Urbel-Piirsalua, E.; Anderberg, S.; Olsson, L. Categorising tools for sustainability
assessment. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 60, 498508.
23. Kuckshinrichs, W.; Kronenberg, T.; Hansen, P. The social return on investment in the energy
efficiency of buildings in Germany. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 43174329.
24. Sen, A. The Discipline of Cost-Benefit Analysis. J. Leg. Stud. 2000 29, 931952.
25. Benoît, C.; Mazijn, B. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products; UNEP/SETAC
Life Cycle Initiative: Paris, France, 2009.
26. Dreyer, L.C.; Hauschild, M.Z.; Schierbeck, J. A framework for social life cycle impact
assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass. 2006, 11, 8897.
27. Ostermeyer, Y.; Wallbaum, H.; Reuter, F. Multidimensional Pareto optimization as an approach
for site specific building refurbishment solutions applicable for LCSA. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass.
2013, 18, 17621779.
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
... By changing the focus of urban renewal assessment from an economic to a social-oriented approach (Wang & Zeng, 2010), there is a trend toward tackling challenges more comprehensively by placing greater emphasis on social goals. Researchers use various assessment tools to produce and examine data concerning the impacts of a particular planning project on five distinct levels: individual structures, local zones, neighborhoods, the city, and the region (Mjörnell et al., 2014). At the neighborhood level, the primary actors involved in sustainable building renovation can be categorized into two groups: those who require the services (such as building proprietors, users, and clients) and those who provide them (such as architects and contractors). ...
... Although critical social factors and corresponding indicators have been developed to evaluate the extent of sustainable urban renewal and heritage conservation, most of them focus on the same aspects as the Knowledge Matrix of the S2020, and the difference lies in the usage of words and categorizations. According to Mjörnell et al. (2014), for studying the social effects of renovation projects, the sixth aspect must be considered, including a cohesive city, social interaction, teamwork and meetings, a well-functioning everyday life, identity and experience, health and green urban environments, safety, security, and openness (Mjörnell et al., 2014). Regarding social sustainability, perceived safety is of critical importance for emerging at the neighborhood scale. ...
... Although critical social factors and corresponding indicators have been developed to evaluate the extent of sustainable urban renewal and heritage conservation, most of them focus on the same aspects as the Knowledge Matrix of the S2020, and the difference lies in the usage of words and categorizations. According to Mjörnell et al. (2014), for studying the social effects of renovation projects, the sixth aspect must be considered, including a cohesive city, social interaction, teamwork and meetings, a well-functioning everyday life, identity and experience, health and green urban environments, safety, security, and openness (Mjörnell et al., 2014). Regarding social sustainability, perceived safety is of critical importance for emerging at the neighborhood scale. ...
Article
Full-text available
Assessing industrial heritage adaptive reuse projects as a dynamic process in a broader social context such as a neighboring community facilitates a better understanding of their effects. The present study addresses this issue using a cross-lagged model and focuses on perceived safety and social cohesion as two aspects of social sustainability. From 2017 to 2022, 230 participants residing near the “Innovation Factory” project in Mashhad, Iran, participated in a four-wave longitudinal study. The results of paired sample t-tests showed a considerable decrease in perceived safety after the project opening and identified this time point as a weakness that threatens the surrounding community. However, increased social cohesion and perceived safety after renovation compared to before affirms that the occurrence of temporary social deterioration does not necessarily signify long-term social costs. Un-gating an industrial heritage area can provide green spaces, thereby increasing the potential for spontaneous interactions and fostering social cohesion. Comparing models with diverse hypothesized patterns of connections between perceived safety and social cohesion affirmed that the reciprocal effects model has better-fit indexes. This transactional relationship indicates that the two studied variables are interdependent and accumulating concepts, each having a predictive impact on the other.
... To achieve the 55% emission reduction target, the EU must prioritize substantial reductions in buildings' greenhouse gas emissions by 60%, their final energy consumption by 14%, and energy consumption for identified a need for enhanced tools to support integrated decision-making in sustainable renovation, while Cattano et al. [23] noted that unforeseen conditions during renovations often disrupt costs and schedules, presenting a significant barrier. Renovation measures are frequently evaluated based on short-term investment payback rather than life-cycle costs [24]. ...
... This indicates that long-term economic assessment tools, essential for evaluating investment feasibility and returns, are underutilized in the sector. These findings align with previous studies, showing that renovation measures are often evaluated based on shortterm investments [24], highlighting a gap in the application of comprehensive economic evaluation methods within renovation practices. ...
Article
Full-text available
Highlights What are the main findings? An overview of sustainable renovation practices in Sweden’s multi-family buildings was provided. Energy use and investment costs are key evaluation methods. What is the implication of the main finding? Standardized decision-making tools are needed. Findings highlight areas for improvement in current practices. Abstract Energy-efficient renovation of the existing building stock is essential for achieving the ambitious sustainability goals set by the European Commission for 2030. However, implementing sustainable renovation has proven challenging, as numerous studies have concluded. Multi-family buildings are a significant part of Sweden’s building stock and require renovations to meet energy efficiency standards. This study aims to provide an overview of sustainable renovation practices in Sweden’s multi-family buildings. A semi-open structured questionnaire was developed to examine the adoption of these practices, with data collected from 11 housing companies. The responses reveal that Swedish housing companies are well aware of the three key aspects of sustainability and actively consider them in their renovation projects. Notably, specific energy use and investment costs are the most commonly used methods for evaluating the environmental and economic aspects, respectively. However, there is a lack of a common method for assessing the social aspects of renovation projects. Additionally, this study highlights the need for standardized decision-making tools in multi-family building renovations.
... Renovation of existing buildings is a multi-criteria approach, in which, in addition to technical solutions, financial, social, and environmental aspects should be considered (Mjörnell et al., 2014;Pombo et al., 2016;Mjörnell et al., 2019;Galimshina et al., 2021). The EPBD requires that the energy performance requirements be cost-optimal. ...
... There has been intensive research and development of tools and systems to support the decision making, design, and evaluation of SBR projects [19][20][21], but only a few with a focus on project portfolios [22][23][24]. In addition, methods for assessing social sustainability are underdeveloped, as is the consideration of architectural and historical values [25], and there is a lack of integration in the assessment of different sustainability indicators. ...
Article
Full-text available
The public housing stock, called social housing, in Italy was developed between the 1950s and the 1980s. As of today, the first residential developments are almost nearing their end-of-life age and are in need of urgent and intensive renovation. The European Commission, with the Renovation Wave, has set a goal of doubling the rate of building renovation over the next 10 years, reducing emissions, improving energy performance, and promoting decarburization. Renovation interventions, including structural, functional, energy, and plant upgrading interventions, etc., are to be preferred over integral demolition and reconstruction interventions, which have significant repercussions in terms of managerial and social discomfort. The case studies examined concern renovation interventions aimed at energy efficiency, functional adaptation of housing, as well as façade restyling. The design variants analyzed were evaluated in terms of CO2e emissions, according to life cycle inventory (LCI) and Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) approaches. This approach has a twofold purpose: to propose design guidelines, with low CO2e emissions, through hypotheses of variants in the case studies, and to propose, to the economic operators, economically advantageous bidding scenarios in the procurement process.
... However, it is still unclear how these approaches for generating alternatives can be applied to mitigate the decision paralysis caused by numerous renovation options for making existing dwellings suitable for lower temperature supply from DH systems. In addition to that, insufficient knowledge regarding available renovation options, high costs and limited customisability [53], the lack of time and expertise to appraise the available renovation options properly [54], and limited decision support based on individual preferences [28,55] further contribute to the decision-making struggle towards selecting appropriate renovation solutions. Consequently, to alleviate this decision-making struggle, it is essential to eliminate the solutions that are not technically desirable to comfortably heat dwellings with LTH from DH systems, given the dwelling's context. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study presents an approach to determine the extent of renovation interventions required for existing Dutch dwellings aiming to transition to lower-temperature district heating (DH) systems. The proposed method is applied to a typical intermediate terraced house built before 1945 in the Netherlands, and it consists of two steps: first, assessing the potential of a dwelling to be heated with a lower temperature supply from DH systems and subsequently developing and evaluating alternative renovation solutions if necessary. This study defines a set of criteria for evaluating the readiness of a dwelling for lower-temperature heating (LTH), considering energy efficiency and thermal comfort as non-compensatory criteria. The application of the approach reveals that the case study dwelling is presently unsuitable for a medium-temperature (70/50 °C) and low-temperature (55/35 °C) supply compared to a high-temperature supply (90/70 °C), thus requiring energy renovations. Furthermore, this study indicates that moderate intervention levels are required for the dwelling to be lower-temperature-ready in both supply temperature goals. These interventions include strategies and measures that upgrade the building envelope to the minimum insulation levels stipulated by the Dutch Building Decree, improve airtightness, and replace existing radiators with low-temperature radiators. By systematically narrowing down renovation options, this approach aids in simplifying the decision-making process for selecting renovations for heating dwellings with LTH through DH systems, which could reduce stakeholders' decision paralysis.
... As thermal renovation of buildings is not a new area of research, several methodologies and tools are available to evaluate the renovation potential of buildings. These tools are usually made for a quick estimation of renovation possibilities based on a few characteristics of the energy demand [6][7][8]. In such tools, the lack of details in the demand evaluation and building thermal characteristics lead to generic solutions. ...
... Renovation in the construction industry is considered to be the primary area for achieving the goals set by the EU regarding energy and material resource savings, CO 2 emission reduction, increasing the renewable energy share, and improving social sustainability issues [95][96][97][98][99][100][101]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The EU’s low carbon transition relies on the building sector as one of its main pillars, given that around 85% of the 160 million buildings within the EU are thermally inefficient. The energy-sustainable renovation of building envelopes calls for a comprehensive approach from initial design phases to construction, while balancing a series of factors, e.g., function and aesthetics, energy savings and environmental concerns, as well as cost-effectiveness. This article develops a model for the energy-sustainable renovation of building envelopes based on a multi-criteria analysis method—the AHP method. The model facilitates problem solving and development of alternative designs. The AHP method is used for evaluating and narrowing down design variants considering the given building conditions and the adopted set of criteria. The developed model is also applied in a real case study—the envelope energy renovation of a typical residential building built after the 1950s in many suburbs of Belgrade, Serbia. The model developed in the paper may be used by professionals to facilitate and make more efficient the design process of the energy-sustainable renovation of buildings and can inspire further studies on this topic, which has grown in urgency amid the current global energy crisis.
Article
Full-text available
Supporting designers in making effective renovation decisions is urgently needed to address the ever-growing climate crisis. This requires developing tools that bring insight into the enormous set of design options at hand, where the efficacy of candidate renovation design options is evaluated using (potentially computationally expensive) simulations. Thus, a systematic, goal-driven design process is required that ensures “design space” diversity and coverage, while making careful and effective use of highly informative but time consuming performance simulations. To this end, we define twelve new concepts based on scenario (dis)similarity that give designers insight about pairs of scenarios, clusters of scenarios, and pairs of clusters, and apply these concepts in an iterative, goal-driven design process. We evaluate a software implementation of our design concept analyser using a real renovation case of a large residential building in Denmark.
Article
Full-text available
Construction and demolition waste constitute more than one-third of the total waste generated in the European Union. The pursuit of sustainable renovation must progress further to encompass elements that ensure reuse or recyclability. A fundamental transformation, involving extensive renovation and a transition to circular renovation practices, is indispensable in effectively addressing the pressing challenge of decarbonization for the entire building stock in Europe. In this study, we have developed a circular deep renovation solution using prefabricated modular external additional insulation elements to achieve a nearly Zero Energy Building (nZEB). Circular prefabricated modular external additional insulation elements were formulated, manufactured, and installed. The potential for disassembly and reutilization of materials was developed and demonstrated for both a prototype and the complete deep renovation. The analysed prefabricated modular solutions exhibited greater potential for circularity compared to the traditional External Thermal Insulation Composite System (ETICS) due to their superior demountability and reusability characteristics. The overall cost of the renovation, which included the installation of a new heating system, replacement of water and sewer pipes, addition of 50 kW photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof, installation of new balconies, addition of a balanced ventilation system with heat recovery, and replacement of the electricity system in common areas, amounted to 505 €/m². Following the deep renovation, the Energy Performance Value was measured to be 92 kWh/(m²·a), resulting in an EPC class of A. This implies that the building now meets the requirements for nZEB in accordance with Estonian legislation, with no performance gap.
Book
Full-text available
Behind the life cycle of a product, from the cradle to the grave, there is a story to tell. Not only about its potential impact on the environment, but as well in terms of social and socio-economic impacts - or potential impacts - of its production and consumption on the workers, the local communities, the consumers, the society and all value chain actors. Today’s value chains are often complex, global and because of it, faceless. Shedding light on the human relationships impacted by the life cycle of goods and services helps to re-establish the connection and identify ways in which social conditions can be improved. Therefore, there is a need for guidelines to complement Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (E-LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC), and by doing so contributing to the full assessment of goods and services within the context of sustainable development. These Guidelines present the Social and socio-economic Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), a powerful technique to assess and report about these impacts and benefits of product life cycle from the extraction of the natural resources to the final disposal. It provides an adequate technical framework from which a larger group of stakeholders can engage to move towards social responsibility when assessing the life cycle of goods and services.
Article
Full-text available
Renovation processes are complex and there is a risk of underestimating architectural, cultural, and social values in favor of exterior and interior upgrading, energy efficiency and financing. A synthesized, systematic process is needed for making decisions about renovation measures. The aim of this paper is to survey decision-making procedures aimed for sustainable renovation. We inventory existing tools and methodologies based on (a) a literature review and (b) results from a workshop with participants from the Swedish buildings sector, academia, and other stakeholders. Our results show that there are many tools available but few seem to have reached acceptance in renovation. None of the more established methods and tools addresses a complexity that balances material and immaterial values and they are often too specific. There is a need for simplified tools, especially for evaluating more intangible, experienced values. Instead of one comprehensive tool preferably a methodology for renovation should be developed with references to different tools. In the building sector, renovation should be considered a service-minded process rather than a merely technical one as often is the case in new construction. There is a need to clarify the process and the meaning of the terms, and that need is even more urgent when it comes to the values that are more difficult to define.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose This paper addresses the application and potential of LCSA in the built environment with a focus on refurbishments of residential buildings. It specifically addresses the phenomenon of interchange of building technologies efficiencies under different life time assessments from economy, ecology and social fields. An approach of optimization rather than hard target numbers is proposed as win–win–win situations are unlikely. Methods A multidimensional Pareto optimization methodology, using LCC, LCA combined with first stages of a social assessment in a feasibility study but potentially later full SLCA, is proposed, which site-specifically visualizes the interchange between different options in building design or modification, and evaluates optimal overall concepts. LCA and LCC are used to analyze a case study from an EU project named BEEM-UP in which solutions for large-scale uptake of refurbishment strategies are developed. Social frame conditions are taken into account by identifying the driving technologies and feeding the consequences of their implementation for the residents into the tenant involvement part of the project. Results and discussion The calculations prove that the general assumptions leading to the methodology hold true at least for this case study. A clear Pareto-optimal curve is visible when assessing LCC and LCA. The example buildings results show certain systems to be dominating clusters on the figures while others clearly can be identified as not relevant. Several of the driving technologies however fail to be applicable because of social frame conditions, e.g., clear requests by the tenants. Based on the conclusions, the potential for including SLCA as a third dimension in the methodology and possible visualization options are discussed. Conclusions The development in the field of social indicators in the building sector has to be strengthened in order to come up with a holistic picture and respectively with appropriate responses to current challenges. While some solutions identified in the LCC/LCA assessment also have good social characteristics, several others have not and solutions identified as lacking might have social advantages that are currently left out of consideration The upcoming Standards EN 15643-5 and ISO 15686-x are a promising step in this direction as is the work to create a conceptual framework for impact assessment within SLCA by the scientific community.
Article
Full-text available
Goal, Scope and Background To enhance the use of life cycle assessment (LCA) as a tool in business decision-making, a methodology for Social life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is being developed. Social LCA aims at facilitating companies to conduct business in a socially responsible manner by providing information about the potential social impacts on people caused by the activities in the life cycle of their product. The development of the methodology has been guided by a business perspective accepting that companies, on the one hand, have responsibility for the people affected by their business activities, but, on the other hand, must also be able to compete and make profit in order to survive in the marketplace. Methods A combined, bottom-up and top-down approach has been taken in the development of the Social LCIA. Universal consensus documents regarding social issues as well as consideration for the specific business context of companies has guided the determination of damage categories, impact categories and category indicators. Results Discussion, and Conclusion. The main results are the following: (1) Impacts on people are naturally related to the conduct of the companies engaged in the life cycle rather than to the individual industrial processes, as is the case in Environmental LCA. Inventory analysis is therefore focused on the conduct of the companies engaged in the life cycle. A consequence of this view is that a key must be determined for relating the social profiles of the companies along the life cycle to the product. This need is not present in Environmental LCA, where we base the connection on the physical link which exists between process and product. (2) Boundaries of the product system are determined with respect to the influence that the product manufacturer exerts over the activities in the product chain. (3) A two-layer Social LCA method with an optional and an obligatory set of impact categories is suggested to ensure both societal and company relevance of the method. The obligatory set of impact categories encompasses the minimum expectations to a company conducting responsible business. (4) A new area of protection, Human dignity and Well-being, is defined and used to guide the modelling of impact chains. (5) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights serves as normative basis for Social LCA, together with local or country norms based on socio-economic development goals of individual countries. The International Labour Organisation's Conventions and Recommendations, and the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, support development of the impact pathway top-down, starting from the normative basis. (6) The obligatory part of Social LCA addresses the main stakeholder groups, employees, local community and society. Recommendations and Outlook Social LCA is still in its infancy and a number of further research tasks within this new area are identified.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this paper is to provide a categorisation of sustainability assessment tools within the broader objective of lifting the understanding of sustainability assessment from the environmental-focused realm to a wider interpretation of sustainability. The suggested framework is based on three main categories: indicators/indices, product-related assessment, and integrated assessment tools. There is furthermore the overarching category of monetary valuation tools that can be used as a part of many of the tools listed in the three categories. The tools are also divided by their spatial focus and the level of nature–society system integration. Discussion focuses on if and how the tools fulfil the objectives from the more current understanding of sustainability assessment.
Conference Paper
In this work energy improving renovation solutions for exterior walls in a common Swedish multifamily house type from 1961-75 are studied. The solutions have been evaluated in terms of energy savings during a certain time of operation, moisture safety, thermal comfort and life cycle costs. The results show that these renovations can become so costly that they won’t be performed. The question is under what circumstances such measures are feasible to perform. Additional insulation is necessary in order to reach high energy efficiency. The so far gained results indicate that internal insulation is problematic both due to economy and to moisture safety. External insulation is advisable in certain cases but not in others, mainly for economic reasons but also for cultural heritage reasons. Improved air tightness of the building envelope is important for decreasing the heat losses and improving the indoor comfort (less draught). However, the importance depends on the type of ventilation system and ambition for energy and indoor comfort improvements.
Article
The German government has developed a variety of policy instruments intended to reduce national CO2 emissions. These instruments include a programme administered by KfW bank, which aims at improving the energy efficiency of buildings. It provides attractive credit conditions or subsidies to finance refurbishment measures which improve the energy efficiency of buildings significantly.The refurbishment programme leads to a reduction in energy use, which benefits private investors by reducing their energy bills. In order to estimate whether the programme benefits society as a whole, additional effects must be taken into account, such as the amount of employment generated and the impact on the public budget.The aim of this paper is to evaluate the social benefits of the German CO2 refurbishment programme for the years 2005–2007. An extended input–output model is used to estimate the effect of the refurbishment works on public revenue via taxes and social security contributions. The value of avoided CO2 emissions is approximated using a range of marginal damage estimates from the literature. From these social benefits, the programme cost is deducted. The net social benefit thus computed turns out to be positive. This finding suggests that the refurbishment programme is a reasonable investment of public funds.
Article
Problem: Why are not existing energy efficient techniques utilized? Which aspects influence the decision? Is the decision-making-process in need of a complementary tool for energy efficiency-profitability calculating? Purpose: The primary purpose of this report is to examine the critical elements of the decisions making process concerning energy efficient investments. The secondary purpose of this report is to present a complementary tool for energy efficiency profitability calculating. The tool is to be used as a complementary instrument when evaluating the economical effects of an energy efficient investment. Methods: The method of the report has been to through an abductive approach. Data has been collected through qualitative literature-studies and interviews with people within the ÅF Group, property owners, housing cooperatives and consultants within the industry. Conclusions: The critical elements within the decisions making process for energy efficient investments are: the structure of ownership, split incentives, information asymmetry, lack of economical knowledge and incomplete information from the Energy Declaration of Buildings. A complementary tool, that can be used to motivate energy efficient investments, has been developed. The model takes lifecycle-costs figures, cash flow, and payback-period into consideration, and provides information on how to understand and evaluate financial key data. The tool also prevents information asymmetry between the energy consultant and the customer. The tool further illustrates how the cash flow from profitable investments can be used in order to finance future required investments with an initially negative cash flow. Finally, it helps to create a positive energy attitude towards the user.
Article
Cost-benefit analysis is a general discipline, based on the use of some foundational principles, which are not altogether controversial, but have nevertheless considered plausibility. Divisiveness increases as various additional requirements are imposed. There is a trade-off here between easier usability (through locked-up formulae) and more general acceptability (through allowing parametric variations). The paper examines and scrutinizes the merits and demerits of these additional requirements. The particular variant of cost-benefit approach that is most commonly used now is, in fact, extraordinarily limited, because of its insistence on doing the valuation entirely through an analogy with the market mechanism. This admits only a narrow class of values, and demands that individuals be unconcerned about many substantial variations, ignored in the procedure of market valuation. The use, instead, of a general social choice approach can allow greater freedom of valuation and can also accommodate more informational inputs. Copyright 2000 by the University of Chicago.