The statistical relevance and effect of assuming pessimistic default overall thermal transmittance coefficients on dwelling energy performance certification quality in Ireland

Abstract In the EU, Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) are issued for dwellings whenever they are constructed, sold or leased. Where requiring data would be prohibitively costly, nationally applicable default-values for the thermal transmittance coefficients of the building envelope are employed. Use of such worst case default U-values ensure that a poor dwelling does not attain a better energy rating than is merited. In the absence of empirical data in Ireland thermal-default U-values, as in many other EU member states, are determined by the type and date of construction and then prevailing building codes. Using 463,582 dwellings representing 32% of the total Irish dwelling stock, this work assesses the relevance of current default U-values. Significant levels of retrofits have been found to lead to the default U-values used now being higher that is typical in reality, thus decreasing the accuracy, and hence credibility, of an EPC. Lack of certification accuracy also inhibits investment in energy efficiency.

[1]  P. Berkhout,et al.  Defining the rebound effect , 2000 .

[2]  Corneliu Munteanu,et al.  Managing Indoor Environments and Energy in Buildings with Integrated Intelligent Systems , 2015 .

[3]  T. H. Christensen,et al.  Energy retrofits of Danish homes: is the Energy Performance Certificate useful? , 2014 .

[4]  Luis Pérez-Lombard,et al.  A review of benchmarking, rating and labelling concepts within the framework of building energy certification schemes , 2009 .

[5]  J. Peter Clinch,et al.  Valuing improvements in comfort from domestic energy-efficiency retrofits using a trade-off simulation model , 2003 .

[6]  Brian Norton,et al.  Real-life energy use in the UK: How occupancy and dwelling characteristics affect domestic electricity use , 2008 .

[7]  S. Corgnati,et al.  Use of reference buildings to assess the energy saving potentials of the residential building stock: the experience of TABULA Project , 2014 .

[8]  L. M. López-González,et al.  Review of the energy rating of dwellings in the European Union as a mechanism for sustainable energy , 2006 .

[9]  Françoise Bartiaux,et al.  Do homeowners use energy labels? A comparison between Denmark and Belgium , 2007 .

[10]  Alan Meier,et al.  Accuracy of home energy rating systems , 2000 .

[11]  Ray Galvin,et al.  Introducing the prebound effect: the gap between performance and actual energy consumption , 2012 .

[12]  Kirsten Gram-Hanssen,et al.  Retrofitting owner-occupied housing: remember the people , 2014 .

[13]  Horace Herring,et al.  Energy efficiency—a critical view , 2006 .

[14]  Henk Visscher,et al.  Theoretical vs. actual energy consumption of labelled dwellings in the Netherlands: Discrepancies and policy implications , 2013 .

[15]  W. Dixon,et al.  Introduction to Mathematical Statistics. , 1964 .

[16]  Ciara Ahern,et al.  State of the Irish housing stock—Modelling the heat losses of Ireland's existing detached rural housing stock & estimating the benefit of thermal retrofit measures on this stock , 2013 .

[17]  Brian Ó Gallachóir,et al.  Development of a modelling framework in response to new European energy-efficiency regulatory obligations: The Irish experience , 2009 .

[18]  Kevin J. Lomas,et al.  Carbon reduction in existing buildings: a transdisciplinary approach , 2010 .

[19]  Joshua C. Hall,et al.  Ireland , 1907, The Hospital.

[20]  Robert Lowe,et al.  Addressing the challenges of climate change for the built environment , 2007 .

[21]  Luis Pérez-Lombard,et al.  A review on buildings energy consumption information , 2008 .