LÓPEZ, M.; YÁÑEZ, A.; GOMES DA COSTA, S.; AVELLÀ, L ... · The investment costs of the energy efficiency measures were calculated assuming current market costs. The economic assessment

LÓPEZ, M.; YÁÑEZ, A.; GOMES DA COSTA, S.; AVELLÀ, L., (Coord.). Actas del Congreso Internacional de Eficiencia Energética y Edificación Histórica / Proceedings of the International Conference on Energy Efficiency and Historic Buildings (Madrid, 29-30 Sep. 2014). Madrid: Fundación de Casas Históricas y Singulares y Fundación Ars Civilis, 2014. ISBN: 978-84-617-3440-5

Edited by

Fundación de Casas Históricas y Singulares

Fundación Ars Civilis

Coordinated by

Mónica López Sánchez. Fundación Ars Civilis

Ana Yáñez Vega. Fundación de Casas Históricas y Singulares

Sofia Gomes da Costa. Fundación de Casas Históricas y Singulares

Lourdes Avellà Delgado. Fundación Ars Civilis

© Copyright

2014. Texts: the respective authors (or their employers); Proceedings: the coordinators and editors.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014

More contents on http://energyheritage.wordpress.com/

International Conference ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN HISTORIC BUILDINGS

- 5 -

TTaabbllee ooff ccoonntteennttss

PRESENTACIÓN ............................................................................................................... - 11 -

Eficiencia energética y edificación histórica: un reto del presente..................................... - 13 - Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines y Mónica López Sánchez. Fundación Ars Civilis

Eficiencia energética y edificación histórica: un reto del futuro ........................................ - 14 - Ana Yáñez Vega. Fundación de Casas Históricas y Singulares

Committees .................................................................................................................... - 15 -

Programme ..................................................................................................................... - 16 -

Governance, management, participation and mediation..........................................- 21 -

SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACTION FOR WORLD HERITAGE MANAGEMENT ............................ - 22 - RONCHINI, C.; POLETTO, D.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND URBAN RENEWAL OF A UNESCO-LISTED HISTORICAL CENTER: THE CASE OF PORTO .......................................................................................... - 38 -

SANTOS, Á.; VALENÇA, P.; SEQUEIRA, J.

HISTORICAL HERITAGE: FROM ENERGY CONSUMER TO ENERGY PRODUCER. THE CASE STUDY OF THE ‘ALBERGO DEI POVERI’ OF GENOA, ITALY .................................................. - 45 -

FRANCO, G.; GUERRINI, M.; CARTESEGNA, M.

IMPROVING ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN HISTORIC CORNISH BUILDINGS – GRANT FUNDING, MONITORING AND GUIDANCE ........................................................................ - 61 -

RICHARDS, A.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND BUILDINGS WITH HERITAGE VALUES: REFLECTION, CONFLICTS AND SOLUTIONS ............................................................................................ - 75 -

GIANCOLA, E.; HERAS, M. R.

PROPUESTA METODOLÓGICA PARA LA REHABILITACIÓN SOSTENIBLE DEL PATRIMONIO CONTEXTUAL EDIFICADO. EL CASO DEL CENTRO HISTÓRICO DE LA CIUDAD DE MÉRIDA, YUCATÁN / Methodological proposal for the sustainable rehabilitation of context heritage building. The case of the historic downtown of Merida, Yucatan ............................................................................................................. - 82 -

MEDINA, K.; RODRÍGUEZ, A.; CERÓN, I.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 6 -

Traditional and technological knowledge: concepts, techniques, practices, uses,

materials, methodologies ........................................................................................- 99 -

SUSTAINABLE REFURBISHMENT OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS: RISKS, SOLUTIONS AND BEST PRACTICE .............................................................................................................. - 100 -

HEATH, N.

EFICIENCIA ENERGÉTICA Y VALORES PATRIMONIALES. LECCIONES DE UNA INVESTIGACIÓN Y UN SEMINARIO / Energy efficiency and heritage values. Lessons of a Research and a Seminar ............................................................................................. - 110 -

GONZÁLEZ MORENO-NAVARRO, J. L.

ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRATION OF PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS. THE CASE STUDY OF SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA .......................................................... - 118 -

LUCCHI, E.; GAREGNANI, G.; MATURI, L.; MOSER, D.

HISTORIC BUILDING ENERGY ASSESSMENT BY MEANS OF SIMULATION TECHNIQUES ..... - 135 - SOUTULLO, S.; ENRIQUEZ, R.; FERRER, J. A.; HERAS, M. R.

DESIGN OF A CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN A WALL-HEATED CHURCH: SANTA MARIA ODIGITRIA IN ROME ................................................................. - 145 -

MANFREDI, C.; FRATERNALI, D.; ALBERICI, A.

EXEMPLARY ENERGETICAL REFURBISHMENT OF THE GERMAN ACADEMY IN ROME "VILLA MASSIMO" ........................................................................................................ - 160 -

ENDRES, E.; SANTUCCI, D.

SISTEMA MÓVIL INTEGRADO PARA LA REHABILITACIÓN ENERGÉTICA DE EDIFICIOS: LÁSER 3D, TERMOGRAFÍA, FOTOGRAFÍA, SENSORES AMBIENTALES Y BIM / Integrated mobile system for building energy rehabilitation: 3D laser, termography, fotography, environmental sensors and BIM .................................................................................... - 169 -

SÁNCHEZ VILLANUEVA, C.; FILGUEIRA LAGO, A.; ROCA BERNÁRDEZ, D.; ARMESTO GONZÁLEZ, J.; DÍAZ VILARIÑO, L.; LAGÜELA LÓPEZ, S.; RODRÍGUEZ VIJANDA, M.; NÚÑEZ SUÁREZ, J.; MARTÍNEZ GÓMEZ, R.

CONSECUENCIAS CONSTRUCTIVAS Y ENERGÉTICAS DE UNA MALA PRÁCTICA. ARQUITECTURAS DESOLLADAS / Energy and constructive consequences of a bad practice. Skinned architectures ..................................................................................... - 186 -

DE LUXÁN GARCÍA DE DIEGO, M.; GÓMEZ MUÑOZ, G.; BARBERO BARRERA, M.; ROMÁN LÓPEZ, E.

EL BIENESTAR TÉRMICO MÁS ALLÁ DE LAS EXIGENCIAS NORMATIVAS. DOS CASOS. DOS ENFOQUES / Thermal comfort beyond legislation. Two examples. Two approaches ................................................................................................................... - 201 -

DOTOR, A.; ONECHA, B.; GONZÁLEZ, J. L.

LA MONITORIZACIÓN Y SIMULACIÓN HIGROTÉRMICA COMO HERRAMIENTA PARA LA MEJORA DEL CONFORT, PRESERVACIÓN Y AHORRO ENERGÉTICO DE ESPACIOS PATRIMONIALES. EL CASO DE LA IGLESIA DE SAN FRANCISCO DE ASIS, MORÓN DE LA FRONTERA / Measurement and hygrothermal simulation model, a tool to enhance thermal comfort, preservation and saving energy of heritage site. Case study: the church of San Francisco of Asís in Morón de la Frontera ................................................. - 210 -

MUÑOZ, C.; LEÓN, A.; NAVARRO, J.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 7 -

TERESE3: HERRAMIENTA INFORMÁTICA PARA LA EFICIENCIA ENERGÉTICA MEDIANTE LA SIMULACIÓN CALIBRADA DE EDIFICIOS / TERESE3: informatic tool for the energetic efficiency through the calibrated simulation of buildings ............................................... - 226 -

GRANADA, E.; EGUÍA, P.; MARTÍNEZ, R.; NÚÑEZ, J.; RODRÍGUEZ, M.

EFICIENCIA ENERGÉTICA Y ANÁLISIS TÉRMICO PARA SISTEMAS DE AIRE CENTRALIZADO: UN CASO DE ESTUDIO / Energy Efficiency and thermal analysis for centralized air heating systems: a case study ................................................................. - 238 -

MARTÍNEZ-GARRIDO, M. I.; GOMEZ-HERAS, M.; FORT, R.; VARAS-MURIEL, M. J.

ANALISIS ENERGETICO DEL MUSEO DE HISTORIA DE VALENCIA MEDIANTE DISTINTAS HERRAMIENTAS DE SIMULACIÓN / Energy assessment of the History Museum of Valencia using various simulation tools ......................................................................... - 249 -

TORT-AUSINA, I.; VIVANCOS, J.L.; MARTÍNEZ-MOLINA, A.; MENDOZA, C. M.

APROVECHAMIENTO SOLAR PASIVO EN LA RETÍCULA URBANA DE LA CIUDAD HISTÓRICA. EL CASO DE CÁDIZ / Passive solar gains in the urban grid of the historic city. The case study of Cadiz .......................................................................................... - 257 -

SÁNCHEZ-MONTAÑÉS, B.; RUBIO-BELLIDO, C.; PULIDO-ARCAS, J. A.

TECHNICAL SYSTEM HISTORY AND HERITAGE: A CASE STUDY OF A THERMAL POWER STATION IN ITALY ......................................................................................................... - 275 -

PRETELLI, M.; FABBRI, K.

ANALISIS ENERGÉTICO Y PROPUESTAS DE MEJORA DE UNA CASA EN REQUENA MEDIANTE PROGRAMAS DE SIMULACIÓN / Energy analysis and improvement proposal of a house in Requena (Spain) using simulation software ................................. - 281 -

TORT-AUSINA, I.; VIVANCOS, J.L.; MARTÍNEZ-MOLINA, A.; MENDOZA, C. M.

UNA REVISIÓN DE PUBLICACIONES EN EDIFICIOS DESDE EL ASPECTO ENERGÉTICO / A review of papers in buildings from the energetic perspective ......................................... - 292 -

TORT-AUSINA, I.; MARTÍNEZ-MOLINA, A.; VIVANCOS, J.L.

MORTEROS MIXTOS DE CAL Y CEMENTO CON CARACTERÍSTICAS TÉRMICAS Y ACÚSTICAS MEJORADAS PARA REHABILITACIÓN / Lime-cement mixture with improved thermal and acoustic characteristics for rehabilitation ................................... - 303 -

PALOMAR, I.; BARLUENGA, G.; PUENTES, J.

NEAR ZERO ENERGY HISTORIC BUILDING. TOOLS AND CRITERIA FOR ECOCOMPATIBLE AND ECOEFFICIENT CONSERVATION .............................................................................. - 318 -

BAIANI, S.

INTEGRANDO RENOVABLES EN LA CIUDAD HEREDADA: GEOTERMIA URBANA / Integrating renewable in the inherited city: urban geothermal ....................................... - 329 -

SACRISTÁN DE MIGUEL, M. J.

ANÁLISIS Y PROPUESTAS DE MEJORA DE LA EFICIENCIA ENERGÉTICA DE UN EDIFICIO HISTÓRICO DE CARTAGENA: ANTIGUO PALACIO DEL MARQUÉS DE CASA-TILLY / Analysis and proposals for improving the energy efficiency of a historical building in Cartagena: the former Palace of the Marquis of Casa-Tilly ............................................. - 344 -

COLLADO ESPEJO, P. E.; MAESTRE DE SAN JUAN ESCOLAR, C.

REHABILITACIÓN ENERGÉTICA DE EDIFICIOS DE VIVIENDAS BAJO EL PLAN ESPECIAL DE PROTECCIÓN DEL PATRIMONIO URBANÍSTICO CONSTRUIDO EN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN / Building energy retrofit of dwellings under the special plan of urban built heritage protection in Donostia-San Sebastian ....................................................... - 357 -

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 8 -

MARTÍN, A.; MILLÁN, J. A.; HIDALGO, J. M.; IRIBAR, E.

IS TEMPERIERUNG ENERGY EFFICIENT? THE APPLICATION OF AN OLD-NEW HEATING SYSTEM TO HERITAGE BUILDINGS ................................................................................. - 366 -

DEL CURTO, D.; LUCIANI, A.; MANFREDI, C.; VALISI, L.

TERMOGRAFÍA INFRARROJA Y EDIFICIOS HISTÓRICOS .................................................... - 380 - MELGOSA, S.

SIMULATION MODEL CALIBRATION IN THE CONTEXT OF REAL USE HISTORIC BUILDINGS .................................................................................................................... - 388 -

ENRÍQUEZ, R.; JIMÉNEZ, M.J.; HERAS, M.R.

THE THERMOPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF TECHNICAL ELEMENTS IN THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE: EXPERIENCES IN PALERMO .................................................... - 397 -

GENOVA, E.; FATTA, G.

ENERGY EVALUATION OF THE HVAC SYSTEM BASED ON SOLAR ENERGY AND BIOMASS OF THE CEDER RENOVATED BUILDING ............................................................ - 407 -

DÍAZ ANGULO, J. A.; FERRER, J. A.; HERAS, M. H.

Legal and technical regulation and historic buildings ............................................. - 419 -

OLD BUILDING, NEW BOILERS: THE FUTURE OF HERITAGE IN AN ERA OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY ................................................................................................................... - 420 -

JANS, E.; ICOMOS, M.; KOPIEVSKY, S.; AIRHA, M.

HISTORIC WINDOWS: CONSERVATION OR REPLACEMENT. WHAT'S THE MOST SUSTAINABLE INTERVENTION? LEGISLATIVE SITUATION, CASE STUDIES AND CURRENT RESEARCHES ................................................................................................................. - 432 -

PRACCHI, V.; RAT, N.; VERZEROLI, A.

ENERGY RETROFIT OF A HISTORIC BUILDING IN A UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE: AN INTEGRATED COST OPTIMALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT............................ - 450 -

TADEU, S.; RODRIGUES, C.; TADEU, A.; FREIRE, F.; SIMÕES, N.

PARQUE EDIFICADO O PATRIMONIO EDIFICADO: LA PROTECCIÓN FRENTE A LA INTERVENCIÓN ENERGÉTICA. EL CASO DEL BARRIO DE GROS DE SAN SEBASTIÁN / Built Park or Built Heritage: Protection against energy intervention. The case of Gros district of San Sebastian ................................................................................................ - 464 -

URANGA, E. J.; ETXEPARE, L.

SIMULTANEOUS HERITAGE COMFORT INDEX (SHCI): QUICK SCAN AIMED AT THE SIMULTANEOUS INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORT EVALUATION FOR PEOPLE AND ARTWORKS IN HERITAGE BUILDINGS ............................................................................. - 478 -

LITTI, G.; FABBRI, K.; AUDENAERT, A.; BRAET, J.

PROBLEMÁTICA DE LA POSIBLE CERTIFICACIÓN ENERGÉTICA CON CE3X DEL PATRIMONIO ARQUITECTÓNICO: EL CASO DEL ALMUDÍN DE VALENCIA / Difficulties found in the possible energy certification of heritage by using the CE3X software: the case of El Almudín of Valencia ....................................................................................... - 495 -

CUARTERO-CASAS, E.; TORT-AUSINA, I.; MONFORT-I-SIGNES, J.; OLIVER-FAUBEL, E. I.

PROTOCOL FOR CHARACTERIZING AND OPTIMIZING THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS: CASE STUDY OF POZUELO DE ALARCÓN MUNICIPALITY ................... - 506 -

RUBIO, A.; MACÍAS, M.; LUMBRERAS, J.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 9 -

Promotion, training, education .............................................................................. - 513 -

THE WORK OF THE SUSTAINABLE TRADITIONAL BUILDINGS ALLIANCE AND AN INTRODUCTION TO THE GUIDANCE WHEEL FOR RETROFIT ............................................. - 514 -

MAY, N.; RYE, C.; GRIFFITHS, N.

TRAINING OF EXPERTS FOR ENERGY RETROFIT AT THE FRAUNHOFER CENTRE FOR THE ENERGY-SAVING RENOVATION OF OLD BUILDINGS AND THE PRESERVATION OF MONUMENTS AT BENEDIKTBEUERN .............................................................................. - 528 -

KILIAN, R.; KRUS, M.

SPECIALIZED ENERGY CONSULTANTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE ............................ - 535 - DE BOUW, M.; DUBOIS, S.; HERINCKX, S.; VANHELLEMONT, Y.

RENERPATH: METODOLOGÍA DE REHABILITACIÓN ENERGÉTICA DE EDIFICIOS PATRIMONIALES / RENERPATH: Methodology for Energy Rehabilitation of Heritage Buildings ....................................................................................................................... - 543 -

PERÁN, J. R. ; MARTÍN LERONES, P.; BUJEDO, L. A.; OLMEDO, D.; SAMANIEGO, J.; GAUBO, F.; FRECHOSO, F.; ZALAMA, E.; GÓMEZ-GARCÍA BERMEJO, J.; MARTÍN, D.; FRANCISCO, V.; CUNHA, F.; BAIO, A.; XAVIER, G.; DOMÍNGUEZ, P.; GETINO, R.; SÁNCHEZ, J. C.; PASTOR, E.

LEVANTAMIENTOS ARQUITECTÓNICOS EN EL MEDIO RURAL / Architectural surveys in rural areas .................................................................................................................... - 553 -

HIDALGO, J.M.; MILLÁN, J. A.; MARTÍN, A.; IRIBAR, E.; FLORES, I.; ZUBILLAGA, I.

AUTHORS INDEX .................................................................................................... - 567 -

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014

More contents on https://energyheritage.wordpress.com/


- 450 -

EENNEERRGGYY RREETTRROOFFIITT OOFF AA HHIISSTTOORRIICC BBUUIILLDDIINNGG IINN AA UUNNEESSCCOO

WWOORRLLDD HHEERRIITTAAGGEE SSIITTEE:: AANN IINNTTEEGGRRAATTEEDD CCOOSSTT

OOPPTTIIMMAALLIITTYY AANNDD EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT

TADEU, S.; RODRIGUES, C.; TADEU, A.; FREIRE, F.; SIMÕES, N.

TADEU, S.: Department of Civil Engineering, FCTUC, University of Coimbra. Coimbra – Portugal. [email protected]

RODRIGUES, C.: ADAI – LAETA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, FCTUC, University of Coimbra. Coimbra – Portugal. carla.rodrigues [email protected]

TADEU, A.: Department of Civil Engineering, FCTUC, University of Coimbra. Coimbra – Portugal. [email protected] FREIRE, F.: ADAI – LAETA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, FCTUC, University of Coimbra. Coimbra – Portugal.

[email protected] SIMÕES, N.: Department of Civil Engineering, FCTUC, University of Coimbra. Coimbra – Portugal.

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

Energy retrofitting of historical buildings may contribute to the environmental sustainability of the

building stock and also promote economic attractiveness to achieve optimal levels of profitability for retrofit

investments. This paper aims to develop an integrated cost optimality and environmental analysis by

combining alternative retrofit packages for a mixed-use building (residential and services) from the 1900s.

This building is representative of the building stock located in the old city center of Coimbra, recently

classified as World Heritage by UNESCO. A life-cycle (LC) model was implemented to assess different energy

efficiency measures: roof, exterior walls and floor thermal insulation, windows replacement and two

different heating systems. The operational energy was calculated using thermal dynamic simulation and

seasonal steady-state methods. The investment costs of the energy efficiency measures were calculated

assuming current market costs. The economic assessment complied with the European Directive 2010/31/EU,

which established a comparative methodology framework for calculating cost-optimal levels of minimum

energy performance requirements for buildings and building elements. A sensitivity analysis was performed

for different energy prices and discount rates. This study assumed a life span of 30 years. The results show

that optimal life-cycle environmental performance is obtained for insulation thicknesses lower than 80 mm,

which are also cost-optimal. It is also shown that extra insulation does not provide significant improvement

in energy efficiency or overall cost reduction. This paper demonstrates that, even though historical buildings

in Portugal do not have to comply with building energy codes, significant energy efficiency improvements

can be achieved without changing their historical character. It was also concluded that both economic and

environmental costs can be minimized by choosing the most appropriated retrofit energy efficiency

measures.

Keywords: Building Retrofit, Cost Optimality, Environmental Impacts, Historical Building, Life-Cycle

Assessment (LCA), Thermal Dynamic Simulation

1. INTRODUCTION

Building sector is an important source of carbon dioxide emissions not only during the construction phase but mainly due to the long term impact of energy use during its life span. The residential and services sector in Portugal accounted for 17.7% and 12%, respectively, for final energy use in 2010 [1]. The use phase has been claimed as the most contributor phase for the energy use and environmental impacts during buildings life-cycle [2]–[4]. However, users´ preferences and life styles are usually not considered in most life-cycle and cost optimality studies.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 451 -

Given the long life span of buildings, it is required that buildings fulfill energy performance requirements according to local climate when there is a major retrofit. The European Directive 2010/31/EU (EPBD) [5] requires that all EU state-members define a comparative methodological framework for the calculation of cost optimality levels for the energy performance requirements of buildings. However, buildings located in world heritage sites are not obliged to fulfill these requirements since the fulfillment of such requirements could change its architectural and historic value.

About 25% of the existing building stock in Europe was built in the middle of the 20th century. Most of those buildings have an architectural, cultural or even historical value and are representative of the unique character and identity of the European cities, but they are one of the highest contributors to the low energy performance of the building sector. Due to the high life span of building, retrofit not only represents a high benefit in the short term but also a great potential in energy savings in the long term.

As major building retrofits can be costly, different strategies can be used to promote the fulfillment of sustainability criteria in order to achieve an optimum balance between the profitability of the investments, energy cost savings and minimization of environmental impacts during the buildings life-cycle. In 2012, the Delegate Regulation (EU) nº 244 [6] (complementary to EPDB) was published defining rules to compare energy efficiency measures using a cost optimality approach. This methodological framework is based on the primary energy performance and costs of each measure using both macroeconomic and financial perspectives. Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a methodology that addresses the potential environmental life-cycle (LC) impacts of products and systems (ISO 14040:2006) [7]. It can be used to identify the most critical components of the environmental performance of existing buildings evaluating the potential benefit of different retrofit strategies.

The combination of environmental and economic assessments is known in the literature, mainly applied to products/services (e.g. energy systems, materials, etc. [8]–[10]) and recently also to buildings. Several studies have performed economic assessments of energy efficiency retrofit measures but very few incorporate an environmental assessment, and fewer regarding existing or historic buildings. Lollini et al. [11] studied the optimization of opaque components regarding energy, environmental and economic impacts. Anastaselos et al. [12] created a tool to perform an integrated energy, economic and environmental evaluation of thermal insulation solutions. Kim et al. [13] assessed carbon emissions and costs of apartment buildings and Kneifel [14] assessed energy efficiency measures in new commercial buildings. In the Portuguese context, Silvestre et al. [15] performed an environmental, energy and economic assessment of building assemblies for new residential buildings.

Regarding the energy assessment, the integration of thermal dynamic simulation in LCA studies have been addressed in the literature to assess the potential contribution of the occupants’ preferences not only in the operational energy use of buildings, but also in the assessment of trades-offs between embodied and operational energy [16]. The occupancy level of a building influences the operational energy use and the contribution of the different phases to the overall life-cycle of a building [16], [17]. De Meester et al. [18] and Azar & Menassa [19] emphasized the need to properly account for occupancy during the design phase to provide more reliable building energy performance estimates.

This paper aims to develop an integrated cost optimality and environmental analysis by combining alternative retrofit packages of an historic building located in the city center of Coimbra, Portugal, recently classified as an UNESCO World Heritage Site. Knowing that historic

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 452 -

buildings does not have to fulfill energy performance requirements, this research intend to study the potential improvements in energy efficiency and reduction of environmental impacts in a cost-effective way without changing their historical and architectural value. A sensitivity analysis was performed to compare the results from a thermal dynamic simulation and a steady-state method based on the Portuguese thermal regulation [20]. This analysis allows applying a coefficient of reduction to the seasonal method results when assuming a specific occupancy pattern (calculated in the thermal simulation method).

2. METHODOLOGY

The methodology applied in this study starts from the selection of the main energy efficiency retrofit packages, without meeting certain minimum energy performance requirements would unacceptably change the character or appearance of the building. The retrofit packages combine roof, exterior walls and floor thermal insulation, windows replacement and heating systems. Each package was calculated for three different locations (HDD (Heating Degree Days) 1000, 1304 and 2000). The combination of these parameters resulted in 17576 retrofit packages calculated for each location (52728 in total). A life cycle model was developed to 24 selected packages (within the cost optimal band) to evaluate alternative insulation materials to identify optimum thickness levels in terms of primary energy and emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). An integrated energy, environmental and cost optimality life-cycle assessment is performed

2.1. Cost Optimality Assessment

The economic assessment (heating systems, insulation and windows) follows the EN 15459 standard providing the comparison between heating and domestic hot water systems, in €/kWh and building envelope retrofit measures (thermal insulation and windows), in €/R (R - thermal resistance). A software was developed to assess the profitability of energy efficiency measures in buildings in order to apply the equations defined by the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) n º 244 [6]. This software assesses different combinations of energy efficiency measures that allows to fix optimum levels of profitability both in a macroeconomic (including benefits for the society) and financial (only accounting for the return of investment) perspectives. All costs (materials, systems, operation and maintenance) used in this assessment were obtained from a market search using price sampling in order to assess the viability of the current market costs.

2.2 Environmental Assessment

An integrated life-cycle approach combining LCA and thermal dynamic simulation was implemented to assess energy and environmental performance of energy efficiency retrofit measures. LCA addresses the potential environmental life-cycle (LC) impacts and was organized in four interrelated phases: goal and scope definition, life-cycle inventory (LCI), life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and interpretation (ISO 14040:2006) [7]. Thermal dynamic simulation was implemented to calculate operational energy requirements. Two complementary LCIA methods were applied: CED (Cumulative Energy Demand) measured the non-renewable life-cycle primary energy requirement, in order to address energy resource depletion, while ReCiPe [21] assessed climate change (CC). Environmental impacts are presented at midpoint level (problem-oriented) in order to avoid the high uncertainty associated with impacts at endpoint level (damage-oriented).

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 453 -

2.3. Energy Assessment

The energy needs of the building during the use phase were calculated using both seasonal and dynamic methods. The dynamic method was used to calculate the energy requirements assuming a specific occupancy pattern (average occupancy pattern for Portuguese residential buildings). This specific occupancy pattern generated a coefficient of reduction when comparing to the seasonal method results. Since residential building do not have a permanent occupancy in most cases, this coefficient was applied to the 17576 combinations (for each location) in order to obtain energy requirements closer to the actual use of residential buildings. Energy Plus software was used for the thermal dynamic simulation, which is a state-of-the-art open-source tool promoted by the U.S. Department of Energy. During this first stage, collection and analysis of relevant data was carried out. A detailed whole building performance simulation was done by inserting the geometry, construction, internal loads, weather parameters and HVAC systems. The seasonal and steady-state method used to calculate the energy requirements was translated from the European standards [24] [25] to national regulations [16]. Due to the small variation in the heating and domestic hot water systems costs, the research focused on the influence of the variability of the insulation costs on the cost-optimal retrofit packages.

3. HISTORIC BUILDING: MODEL AND INVENTORY

This section presents the building characteristics (3.1.) as well as the economic (3.2.), energy and environmental (3.3.) inventory.

3.1. Building Characteristics

The historic building assessed is located in the city center of Coimbra and is organized in five floors (sub-basement, basement and ground floor for commercial use and first and second floor for residential use with four independent apartments). This building is integrated in a UNESCO World Heritage site. These sites present several constraints for the building stock, such as volume, façade height, materials and design, etc. in order to preserve their historical and cultural value. The main features of the building are single-glazed wood windows, non-insulated stone walls (60 cm of thickness on average) and a traditional wood frame roof with ceramic tiles.

Table 1. Dimensions (m2) and air changes per hour (h

-1) of the apartment

Af 70 m2

h 2.85 m2

Ae 70.5 m2

Aw 17.15 m2

Ar 57 m2

rph 0.4 h-1

This article focuses on an apartment (with 119 m2 of living area) as to be representative of dwellings located in historical city centers in Europe. Table 1 presents the dimensions of the apartment, where A is the living area in square meters, h the ceiling height in meters and f, e, w and r represents the floor, walls, windows and roof, respectively. The heating and domestic hot water systems defined for the existing building have a coefficient of performance of 1.0 and 0.6, respectively. The 17576 retrofit packages combine roof, exterior walls and floor thermal insulation, windows replacement and two different heating systems. Table 2 presents the

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 454 -

description of the building opaque envelope assemblies (roof, walls, floor and windows) characterized by their thermal parameters, such as heat transfer coefficient U and heat solar gains factor gw.

Table 2. Building opaque envelope assemblies (roof, walls, floor and windows) characterization (thickness in mm and heat transfer coefficient – U (W/m2.ºC)

Roof (m2) 73.00 Walls (m

2) 158.70 Floor (m

2) 119.00

Windows (m

2)

17.15

Thickness Ur Thickness Ue Thickness Uf gw Uw

(mm) (W/m2.ºC) (mm) (W/m

2.ºC) (mm) (W/m

2.ºC) (W/m

2.ºC)

- 2.10 - 1.84 - 1.40 0.85 5.10

40 0.63 40 0.60 40 0.55 0.66 1.53

60 0.47 60 0.45 60 0.42

80 0.37 80 0.36 80 0.34

100 0.31 100 0.30 100 0.29

120 0.26 120 0.26 120 0.25

140 0.23 140 0.23 140 0.22

3.2. Economic Inventory

The energy price trends are estimated by the EU until 2050 [25].The energy costs associated with the electricity and natural gas prices were obtained from the Portuguese Regulator for Energy Services (ERSE) [26] and also from current market prices analysis. The CO2 emissions factor used was 0.144 kg CO2/kWh for electricity and 0.202 kg CO2/kWh for natural gas, according to Portuguese regulations (Despacho (extrato) n. 15793-D/2013 in portuguese). Final and primary energy conversion factors used were 2.5 kWhep/kWh for electricity and 1 kWhep/kWh for solid, liquid and gaseous fuels [24].

The economic assessment was performed considering the most used solutions in the Portuguese market, regarding insulation and heating systems. The current market costs were obtained from [27] and manufacturers’ associations to estimate the initial costs of investment and maintenance costs (after retrofit). A 6% discount rate was considered for the financial perspective. A cost optimality assessment was performed to 17576 retrofit packages for each location in order to identify which packages belong to the cost-optimal band.

3.3. Energy and Environmental Inventory

A range of 24 retrofit packages were selected from the cost-optimal band defined in a preliminary economic assessment to be assessed in detail in terms of environmental impacts. The packages defined for the environmental assessment combine roof and exterior walls insulation and different locations. All 24 packages consider a double-glazed window and a heat pump heating system. Given the world heritage protected character of the building, all exterior features cannot be altered. Inventory data for the alternative scenarios regarding material production and transportation was obtained from Kellenberger; Spielmann; and Althaus [28]–[30] and Spielmann et al. and Hischier et al. [31]. The thermal insulation material used was expanded polystyrene (EPS).

A life-cycle model was developed for the apartment including the following main processes: removal of the original components, construction and use phase (heating, domestic hot water and maintenance). The end-of-life phase of the new roof was not considered (dismantling scenarios

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 455 -

and waste treatment after service life) because these are not accurately predictable and are considered of minor importance for the residential sector. The functional unit selected for this study was 1 square meter of living area over a period of 30 years. The model and life-cycle inventory were implemented using SimaPro 8 software (www.pre.nl).

A thermal dynamic simulation model was implemented to calculate the energy needs of the whole building. Each apartment and commercial areas were modeled as a thermal zone with different thermal behavior and a specific occupation pattern (internal heat gains and occupancy schedules). As this research focused on one single apartment, the operational energy considered was the heating requirements of that apartment.

A heat pump, with a coefficient of performance (COP) of 4.3 was adopted for the heating system. The heating season begins in November and ends in mid-May (6.3 months, representing 1304 [°C.day] (heating degree days - HDD)). The heating set-points was fixed at 18ºC and 25ºC, respectively, and a natural ventilation rate of 0.4 air changes per hour was considered, in keeping with Portuguese building thermal regulations [20]. The cooling requirements were not considered since the overheating period of this house is minimized (heat gains factor is higher than the reference value according to the Portuguese Building Thermal Regulations [20]).

Table 3. Environmental retrofit packages heating requirements for the apartment (119 m2) per location and energy efficiency measure with a low occupancy pattern obtained from the dynamic simulation

(kWh/(m2.year))

Location HDD 1304 (Coimbra, central region of Portugal)

Roof (mm of insulation)

0 0 0 40 80 100 40 40

Exterior walls (mm of insulation)

0 40 80 0 0 0 40 80

Heating 72.1 58.6 56.9 71.9 71.8 71.8 60.0 57.0

Location HDD 1000 (south region of Portugal)


0 0 0 40 40 40 60 80


0 40 60 0 40 80 0 0

Heating 43.3 33.8 32.4 43.2 36.3 33.4 43.3 43.3

Location HDD 2000 (north region of Portugal)


0 0 0 40 40 40 60 80


0 60 80 40 80 100 0 0

Heating 127.4 106.1 104.5 112.9 102.8 101.5 125.9 125.7

The Portuguese climate is classified as a maritime temperate climate with a Mediterranean influence under the Köppen-Geiger classification system (Csa; C: hot temperate climate; s:dry summer; a: hot summer) [32]. The internal heat gains for the dynamic simulation were computed taking into account the number of estimated persons in each thermal zone (occupancy density) and their metabolic activity, as well as the schedules defined for lighting and appliances. A four-person family with a low occupancy level (representative of a Portuguese household) was considered, with loads mainly at night on weekdays and all day on weekends. The heating system was only partially activated during occupied hours. The schedule defined for this apartment was from 6 to 8 am and from 10 pm to 12 am within the defined set-point.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 456 -

The building was also simulated in two other locations besides Coimbra (HDD 1304), a city in the north region of Portugal with HDD 2000 and a city in the south region with HDD 1000. Table 3 shows the results of the heating requirements for the three locations. The occupancy profile used by the dynamic method represented a decrease of 54-68% (depending on the location) for the heating needs in comparison with estimated needs by seasonal method. Thus, it was applied multiplicative factor of 0.54 (HDD1000), 0.66 (HDD1304) and 0.68 (HDD2000) to each of the 17576 packages to consider the impact of the occupancy profile on the estimates of the steady-state method. This percentage represents the difference between a permanent and a low occupancy pattern. This analysis allows understanding how overestimate is the energy needs calculated in a steady-state method since the houses are not permanently occupied as assumed in this method.

The main maintenance activities considered are associated with the conservation of the interior and exterior finishes of the building during the 30-year lifespan.

4. RESULTS

The selected strategies analyzed in this paper resulted from a preliminary environmental and economic analysis. The insulation material selected (EPS, 0.036 [W/m.°C]), was defined as the most profitable material for building retrofit [33].

The economic assessment analyzed the behavior of the cost-optimal curves of cost per thermal resistance both in the lower bound (9.81 [€/R]) and upper bound (26.96 [€/R]). These bounds represent all costs ranges in the Portuguese market. The heat pump was considered as the most profitable heating system with a cost of 0.089 € per kWh. Despite the ISO 15459 [13] defines different percentages for maintenance costs, 1% index is predominant in relation to the initial investment. This value was adopted in this research in all the analyses. The insulation costs include 2.3 € per thermal resistance [€/R] and 17 € per square meter that represents the installation costs (labor and other materials). The floor insulation measure was not in the cost optimal band because it is a non-profitable measure. The high installation cost of this solution (34 € per square meter) is one of the reasons for its low economic performance. So, this measure was not considered in the environmental assessment. A preliminary economic assessment defined a range of thicknesses from 40 to 160 mm. It was concluded that thicknesses from 80 to 160 mm were not viable economically since the marginal energy savings were very low.

4.1. Cost and environmental integrated assessment

The variation of the insulation cost led to several analyses regarding the behavior of the cost-optimal curves. The results show that the behavior of the cost-optimal curves changes when a lower bound (9.81 [€/R]) or an upper bound (26.96 [€/R]) is defined, for the location with HDD 1304 (Coimbra) and considering a heating system with high coefficient of performance. It can be observed in Figure 1 that, for the same insulation thicknesses, the upper bound of costs led to more vertical curves than the lower bound, discouraging the investment in larger thicknesses. The insulation cost-optimal in the financial and macroeconomic perspectives (Fin = 6%, Mac = 3%) present substantial changes.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 457 -

a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250

Glo

ba

l co

st p

er

squ

are

me

ter

of

livi

ng

are

a [€

/m²]

Primary energy needs [kWh/(m².y)]

Fin 6%

Mac 3%

b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250

Glo

bal

co

st p

er

squ

are

met

er

of

livin

g ar

ea [

€/m

²]


Fin 6%

Mac 3%

Figure 1. Global costs (€/m

2) and primary energy (kWh/m

2.y) results of 17576 retrofit packages HDD 1304

(Coimbra) considering the a) lower bound insulation costs 9.81 [€/R] and b) upper bound insulation costs 26.96 [€/R]; per one square meter of living area over a period of 30 years

The interaction between cost and thickness [€/R], operation cost of the heating system [€/kWh] and coefficient of performance [η] is crucial for the cost-optimality calculations. Figure 2 shows that the behavior of the cost-optimal curve changes when considering a narrow bound of

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 458 -

the operation cost of the heating system and varying the insulation cost and the coefficient of performance of the system.

LOW

ER B

OU

ND

= 9

,81

[€

/R]

HEATING

HIGH EFFICIENCY - COP = 4,3 LOW EFFICIENCY - COP = 1,0

INSU

LATI

ON

UP

PER

BO

UN

D =

26

,96

[€

/R]

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 2500

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 2500

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250 Figure 2. Global insulation (€/R) and heating energy (€/kWh) costs HDD 1304 (Coimbra) considering the

lower and upper bound insulation costs for high (COP=4.2) and low efficiency (COP=1) heating systems; per one square meter of living area over a period of 30 years

The range of thicknesses selected as the most profitable ones correlates with results from previous studies [33], [34]. The environmental and economic optimal insulation thickness depends on the component of the building envelope, roof or exterior wall, and on the location of the building. The insulation of the floor was not considered in the environmental assessment, since it was not defined as profitable measure in the economic assessment. Figure 3 shows, for HDD 1304 (Coimbra), the optimal insulation thicknesses for the roof range from none to 80 mm and from 40 to 80 mm for the exterior walls. For HDD 2000, the optimal insulation thicknesses for the roof range from none to 80 mm and from 60 to 80 mm for the exterior walls. For HDD 1000, the optimal insulation thicknesses for the roof range from none and 40 mm and from none to 60 mm for the exterior walls. In all locations, for thicknesses larger than 80 mm, both for roof and exterior walls, the environmental and economic benefits are very low (less than 3%).

The embodied impacts account for 50% of total LC impacts in HDD 1304, 35-40% in HDD 2000 and 65-70% in HDD 1000. The low operational energy requirements in HDD 1000 led to a higher relative impact of the embodied requirements. The embodied impacts are similar in all locations; the main difference is due to transportation (40% and 55% higher in HDD 2000 and 1000, respectively, than HDD 1304). Transportation accounts for about 10% of the total embodied impacts.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 459 -

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0+0

0+40

0+80

40+

0

80+

0

100+

0

40+

40

40+

80

0+0

0+60

0+80

40+

40

40+

80

40+

100

60+

0

80+

0

0+0

0+40

0+60

40+

40

40+

80

60+

0

80+

0

HDD 1304 (Coimbra) HDD 2000 HDD 1000

kg C

O2

eq

Climate Change

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

0+0

0+40

0+80

40+

0

80+

0

100+

0

40+

40

40+

80

0+0

0+60

0+80

40+

40

40+

80

40+

100

60+

0

80+

0

0+0

0+40

0+60

40+

40

40+

80

60+

0

80+

0

HDD 1304 (Coimbra) HDD 2000 HDD 1000

MJ Primary Energy (N-Ren)

Total Life-CycleImpacts

OperationalEnergy Impacts

EmbodiedImpacts

Figure 3. Climate change (GHG emissions) and primary energy life-cycle assessment of the retrofit packages (roof insulation thickness + exterior wall insulation thickness) in three locations (HDD 1304, 2000 and 1000);

per functional unit: one square meter of living area over a period of 30 years

4.2. Sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the variability of the energy prices and discount rates for each retrofit package. This analysis allowed assessing which variable has more influence in the cost-optimal performance. The retrofit packages should fulfill the minimum requirements and be more profitable than the original scenario (existing building), which means present better combinations between low primary energy needs and low life-cycle costs.

A 6% discount rate was used as reference for the financial perspective, which represents the rate used in Portugal for mortgages for retrofit projects [35]. Figure 4 shows the results for the cost-optimal retrofit packages using a 12% discount rate. Low energy needs estimates combined with high discount rates led to a discouragement to invest in packages with lower primary energy needs. A high energy cost is favorable to higher investments in retrofit due to a higher potential of energy savings.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 460 -

a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250

Glo

bal

co

st p

er s

qu

are

met

er

of

livin

g ar

ea [

€/m

²]


Fin 6%

b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 50 100 150 200 250

Glo

bal

co

st p

er s

qu

are

met

er o

f liv

ing

are

a [€

/m²]


Fin 12%

Figure 4. Global costs (€/m

2) and primary energy (kWh/m

2.y) results of 17576 retrofit packages for HDD

1304 (Coimbra) considering a 6% (a) and 12% (b) discount rate; per one square meter of living area over a period of 30 years

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 461 -

5. CONCLUSIONS

This paper aims to develop an integrated cost optimality and environmental analysis by combining alternative retrofit packages of an historic building located in the city center of Coimbra, Portugal, recently classified as an UNESCO World Heritage Site. This building can be representative of the Portuguese building stock from the beginning of the 20th century. The retrofit packages were selected from a preliminary economic assessment to be assessed for climate change and primary energy. The energy performance was assessed using an energy dynamic model to study different energy efficiency measures that combined create different retrofit packages. These packages combine roof insulation, exterior walls insulation, windows replacement, heating and domestic hot water systems, in different locations. The variables assessed in this research were the increase of thermal resistance in the building envelope (insulation thicknesses), coefficient of performance of the heating system, location (heating degree days – HDD) and costs.

A low occupancy pattern was used in the energy dynamic model to calculate the energy requirements. A software was used to perform the cost optimality analysis as defined by the European Commission for the calculation of cost-optimal solutions to be compared to the building energy performance requirements [6]. For this calculation method, a function is used to reduce the global cost and primary energy use which leads to better return of investments and lower environmental impacts. Finally a sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the variability of the energy price and discount rate.

The results show that, for HDD 1304 (Coimbra), in the central region of Portugal, optimum U values range from 0.36 to 0.63. The retrofit packages selected from the cost-optimal band present thicknesses ranging from 40 to 80 mm (when considering the lower bound of prices used in the Portuguese market). The variability of prices (from low bound to upper bound) influences the cost optimality of the retrofit packages which requires a constant reassessment to achieve expected return of investment. However, in warmer climate locations, there is no advantage in the use of greater thicknesses.

It was concluded that, firstly, there is a correlation between discount rate and the evolution of the energy price which is very important for the viability of investments in energy efficiency measures. Secondly, low energy needs estimates combined with high discount rates led to a discouragement to invest in packages with lower primary energy needs. Thirdly, insulation cost [€/R], heating system operation cost [€/kWh] and coefficient of performance influences directly the retrofit package performance. Lastly, the energy costs, significantly higher in the financial perspective due to taxes, promote higher investments in retrofit.

The optimal life-cycle environmental performance is obtained for insulation thicknesses lower than 80 mm, which are also cost-optimal. It was also shown that extra insulation does not provide significant improvement in energy efficiency or overall cost reduction. This paper demonstrates that, even though historical buildings in Portugal do not have to comply with building energy codes, significant energy efficiency improvements can be achieved without changing their historical character. It was also concluded that both economic and environmental costs can be minimized by choosing the most appropriated retrofit energy efficiency measures.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The first author (S. Tadeu) is thankful for the financial support provided by Ciência sem Fronteiras Program (Brazil) and acknowledge the support of CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) in Brazil. The authors are also grateful for the support

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 462 -

of Instituto de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Tecnológico em Ciências da Construção (ITeCons), ADENE and the municipality of Coimbra for data used in this research. C. Rodrigues is grateful for the financial support provided by FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia), under the program MIT Portugal – Sustainable Energy Systems, through the doctoral degree grant SFRH/BD/51951/2012. This work has also been framed under the Energy for Sustainability Initiative of the University of Coimbra and is supported by the Energy and Mobility for Sustainable Regions - EMSURE - Project (CENTRO-07-0224-FEDER-002004).

7. REFERENCES

[1] INE and DGEG, Inquérito ao Consumo de Energia no Sector Doméstico 2010. 2011.

[2] K. Adalberth, “Energy use during the life cycle of single-unit dwellings: Examples,” Build. Environ., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 321–329, Jul. 1997.

[3] I. Sartori and A. G. Hestnes, “Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: A review article,” Energy Build., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 249–257, Mar. 2007.

[4] C. Thormark, “A low energy building in a life cycle—its embodied energy, energy need for operation and recycling potential,” Build. Environ., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 429–435, Apr. 2002.

[5] EPDB (recast), “Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (recast),” Off. J. Eur. Union, vol. L153/13–15, 2010.

[6] EU, “Delegated Regulation (EU) N.o244/2012 of 16 January 2012 supplementing Directive 2010/31/EU

of the European Parliament and of the Council on the energy performance of buildings by establishing a comparative methodology framework for calculating cost-optim,” 2012, pp. 18–36.

[7] ISO (International Organization for Standardization), “ISO 14040: Environmental Management Life Cycle Assessment Principles and Framework,” Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.

[8] G. A. Norris, B. H. Road, and N. Berwick, “Integrating Life Cycle Cost Analysis and LCA InLCA : SeLected Papers,” Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 118–120, 2001.

[9] L. Gu, B. Lin, Y. Zhu, D. Gu, M. Huang, and J. Gai, “Integrated assessment method for building life cycle environmental and economic performance,” Build. Simul., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 169–177, Jun. 2008.

[10] M. Ristimäki, A. Säynäjoki, J. Heinonen, and S. Junnila, “Combining life cycle costing and life cycle assessment for an analysis of a new residential district energy system design,” Energy, vol. 63, pp. 168–179, Dec. 2013.

[11] Lollini, Barozzi, Fasano, Meroni, and Zinzi, “Optimisation of opaque components of the building envelope. Energy, economic and environmental issues,” Build. Environ., vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1001–1013, Aug. 2006.

[12] D. Anastaselos, E. Giama, and A. M. Papadopoulos, “An assessment tool for the energy, economic and environmental evaluation of thermal insulation solutions,” Energy Build., vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 1165–1171, Nov. 2009.

[13] S. Kim, S. Lee, Y.-J. Na, and J. T. Kim, “Conceptual model for LCC-based LCCO2 analysis of apartment buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 64, no. 2013, pp. 285–291, Sep. 2013.

[14] J. Kneifel, “Life-cycle carbon and cost analysis of energy efficiency measures in new commercial buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 333–340, Mar. 2010.

[15] J. D. Silvestre, J. de Brito, and M. D. Pinheiro, “From the new European Standards to an environmental, energy and economic assessment of building assemblies from cradle-to-cradle (3E-C2C),” Energy

Build., vol. 64, pp. 199–208, May 2013.

[16] P. Hernandez and P. Kenny, “Integrating occupant preference and life cycle energy evaluation: a simplified method,” Build. Res. Inf., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 625–637, Dec. 2010.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 463 -

[17] A. S. Nordby, “Carbon reductions and building regulations : the case of Norwegian mountain cabins,” Build. Res. Inf., no. December 2012, pp. 37–41, 2011.

[18] T. de Meester, A.-F. Marique, A. De Herde, and S. Reiter, “Impacts of occupant behaviours on residential heating consumption for detached houses in a temperate climate in the northern part of Europe,” Energy Build., vol. 57, pp. 313–323, Feb. 2013.

[19] E. Azar and C. C. Menassa, “A comprehensive analysis of the impact of occupancy parameters in energy simulation of office buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 55, pp. 841–853, Dec. 2012.

[20] REH and RECS, “DL 118/2013 - Regulamento de Desempenho Energético dos Edifícios de Habitação, Comércio e Serviços, Code of the energy performance of buildings (residential and commercial),” Ministry of Economy and Employment, 2013, pp. 4988–5005.

[21] M. Goedkoop and M. Huijbregts, “ReCiPe 2008, A life cycle assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level,” 2012.

[22] European Committee for Standardization, “ISO 13790 - Energy performance of buildings - Calculation of energy use for space heating and cooling,” 2008.

[23] “ISO 13789 - Thermal performance of buildings - Transmission and ventilation heat transfer coefficients - Calculation method.,” 2007.

[24] Ministério da Economia e do Emprego, “Decreto-Lei n.o118/2013 de 20 de agosto,” Diário da

República, 2013.

[25] Comissão Europeia, “EU Energy, Transport and GHG Emissions: Trends to 2050, Reference Scenario 2013,” 2013.

[26] Entidade Reguladora dos Serviços Energéticos, “Portal ERSE,” 2009. .

[27] S. A. CYPE Ingenieros, “Gerador de preços para construção civil,” 2013. .

[28] D. Kellenberger, H. Althaus, T. Künniger, M. Lehmann, and N. Jungbluth, “Life Cycle Inventories of Building Products,” Ecoinvent Rep. n.

o7, no. 7, 2007.

[29] M. Spielmann, C. Bauer, R. Dones, and M. Tuchschmin, “Life Cycle Inventories of Transport Services,” Ecoinvent Rep. n.

o14, v2.0, no. 14, 2007.

[30] H.-J. Althaus, C. Bauer, G. Doka, R. Frischknecht, N. Jungbluth, T. Nemecek, A. Simons, M. Stucki, J. Sutter, and M. Tuchschmin, “Documentation of changes implemented in ecoinvent Data v2.1 and v2.2,” Ecoinvent Rep. n.

o16, no. July, 2010.

[31] R. Hischier, B. W. Editors, H. Althaus, C. Bauer, G. Doka, R. Dones, R. Frischknecht, S. Hellweg, S. Humbert, N. Jungbluth, T. Köllner, Y. Loerincik, M. Margni, and T. Nemecek, “Implementation of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods,” Ecoinvent Rep. n.

o3, v2.2, no. 3, 2010.

[32] M. C. Peel, B. L. Finlayson, and T. A. Mcmahon, “Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification,” pp. 1633–1644, 2007.

[33] S. Tadeu, N. Simões, M. Gonçalves, and J. Ribeiro, “Energy efficiency measures in portuguese residential buildings constructed before 1960: a cost-optimal assessment,” in Energy for Sustainability

2013 - Sustainable Cities: Designing for People and the Planet, 2013.

[34] C. Rodrigues and F. Freire, “Integrated life-cycle assessment and thermal dynamic simulation of alternative scenarios for the roof retrofit of a house,” Build. Environ., vol. 81, pp. 204–215, Jul. 2014.

[35] Buildings Performance Institute Europe, “Implementing the cost-optimal methodology in EU countries,” 2013.

MADRID 29-30 | 09 | 2014



- 573 -

Documents

LÓPEZ, M.; YÁÑEZ, A.; GOMES DA COSTA, S.; AVELLÀ, L ... · The investment costs of the energy efficiency measures were calculated assuming current market costs. The economic assessment