The building sector is responsible for 39% of process-related greenhouse gas emissions globally, making net- or nearly-zero energy buildings pivotal for reaching climate neutrality. This article reviews recent advances in key options and strategies for converting the building sector to be climate neutral. The evidence from the literature shows it is possible to achieve net- or nearly-zero energy building outcomes across the world in most building types and climates with systems, technologies, and skills that already exist, and at costs that are in the range of conventional buildings. Maximizing energy efficiency for all building energy uses is found as central to net-zero targets. Jurisdictions all over the world, including Brussels, New York, Vancouver, and Tyrol, have innovated visionary policies to catalyze themarket success of such buildings, with more than 7 million square meters of nearly-zero energy buildings erected in China alone in the past few years. Since embodied carbon in building materials can consume up to a half of the remaining 1.5°C carbon budget, this article reviews recent advances to minimize embodied energy and store carbon in building materials.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. 1. 
    Energy Clim. Intell. Unit (ECIU) 2020. Net zero: the scorecard. Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit https://eciu.net/briefings/net-zero/net-zero-the-scorecard
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2. 
    Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner H-O, Roberts D, Skea J et al. 2019. Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  3. 3. 
    Fajardy M, Mac Dowell N 2017. Can BECCS deliver sustainable and resource efficient negative emissions. Energy Environ. Sci. 10:1389–426
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4. 
    Anderson K, Peters G. 2016. The trouble with negative emissions. Science 354:182–83
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5. 
    Grubler A, Wilson C, Benton N, Boza-Kiss B, Krey V et al. 2018. A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5°C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies. Nat. Energy 3:515–27
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6. 
    Ferreira M, Almeida M, Rodrigues A, Silva SM 2016. Comparing cost-optimal and net-zero energy targets in building retrofit. Build. Res. Inf. 44:188–201
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. 
    Harvey LDD. 2013. Recent advances in sustainable buildings: review of the energy and cost performance of the state-of-the-art best practices from around the world. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 38:281–309
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. 
    Horowitz CA. 2016. Paris Agreement. Int. Leg. Mater. 55:740–55
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Eyre N, Graham P, Harvey D, Hertwich E et al. 2012. Energy end-use: buildings. Global Energy Assessment—Toward a Sustainable Future R Banerjee, SM Benson, DH Bouille, A Brew-Hammond, A Cherp et al.649–760 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10. 
    Zhai J, LeClaire N 2011. Deep energy retrofit of commercial buildings: a key pathway toward low-carbon cities. Carbon Manag 2:425–30
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11. 
    Seto KC, Davis SJ, Mitchell RB, Stokes EC, Unruh G, Ürge-Vorsatz D 2016. Carbon lock-in: types, causes, and policy implications. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41:425–52
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12. 
    Creutzig F, Agoston P, Minx JC, Canadell JG, Andrew RM et al. 2016. Urban infrastructure choices structure climate solutions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 6:1054–56
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Rosenzweig C, Dawson RJ, Sanchez Rodriguez R, Bai X et al. 2018. Locking in positive climate responses in cities. Nat. Clim. Chang. 8:174–77
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14. 
    Bai X, Dawson RJ, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Delgado GC, Salisu Barau A et al. 2018. Six research priorities for cities and climate change. Nature 555:23–25
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15. 
    Lützkendorf T, Foliente G, Balouktsi M, Wiberg AH 2015. Net-zero buildings: incorporating embodied impacts. Build. Res. Inf. 43:62–81
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. 
    Dickinson M, Cooper R, McDermott P, Eaton D 2005. An analysis of construction innovation literature. Proceedings of the 5th International Postgraduate Research Conference, Salford, UK, April 1415 L Ruddock, D Amaratunga, G Aouad, R Haigh, M Kagioglou, M Sexton 588–604 Delft, Neth: CIB
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. 
    Prieur-Richard A-H, Walsh B, Craig M, Melamed ML, Colbert L et al. 2018. Extended version: global research and action agenda on cities and climate change science Tech. Rep., CitiesIPCC Edmonton, AB: Can. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10315.44323
  18. 18. 
    Carmin JA, Anguelovski I, Roberts D 2012. Urban climate adaptation in the global south: planning in an emerging policy domain. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 32:18–32
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19. 
    Marszal AJ, Heiselberg P, Bourrelle JS, Musall E, Voss K et al. 2011. Zero energy building—a review of definitions and calculation methodologies. Energy Build 43:971–79
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20. 
    Sartori I, Hestnes AG. 2007. Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article. Energy Build 39:249–57
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21. 
    Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla KK 2010. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build 42:1592–600
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22. 
    Longo S, Montana F, Sanseverino ER 2019. A review on optimization and cost-optimal methodologies in low-energy buildings design and environmental considerations. Sustain. Cities Soc. 45:87–104
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23. 
    Cabeza LF, Rincón L, Vilariño V, Pérez G, Castell A 2014. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29:394–416
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24. 
    Zimmermann M, Althaus H, Haas A 2005. Benchmarks for sustainable construction: a contribution to develop a standard. Energy Build 11:1147–57
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25. 
    Liu C, Xu W, Li A, Sun D, Huo H 2019. Energy balance evaluation and optimization of photovoltaic systems for zero energy residential buildings in different climate zones of China. J. Clean. Prod. 235:1202–15
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26. 
    Crawley D, Pless S, Torcellini P 2009. Getting to net zero. ASHRAE J 2009:18–25
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27. 
    Sartori I, Napolitano A, Marszal AJ, Pless S, Torcellini P, Voss K 2010. Criteria for definition of net zero energy buildings. International Conference on Solar Heating, Cooling and Buildings (EuroSun 2010), Graz, Austria, Sept. 28–Oct. 10 Freiburg, Ger: ISES
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28. 
    Martínez A, de Garayo SD, Aranguren P, Astrain D 2019. Assessing the reliability of current simulation of thermoelectric heat pumps for nearly zero energy buildings: expected deviations and general guidelines. Energy Convers. Manag. 198:111834
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29. 
    Cuce P, Riffat S. 2015. A comprehensive review of heat recovery systems for building applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47:665–82
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30. 
    Li DHW, Yang L, Lam J 2013. Zero energy buildings and sustainable development implications—a review. Energy 54:1–10
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31. 
    Sulzakimin M, Masrom MAN, Hazli R, Adaji AA, Seon TW, Izwan ARMH 2020. Benefits for public healthcare buildings towards net zero energy buildings (NZEBs): initial reviews. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 713:012042
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32. 
    Antonin VDB, Bernhard VM, Lou R, Markus O 2014. Role of building automation related to renewable energy in nZEB's Rep., Leonardo ENERGY Brussels:
  33. 33. 
    Kurnitzki J, Allard F, Braham D, Goeders G, Heiselberg P et al. 2011. How to define nearly zero energy buildings. REHVA J 48:6–12
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34. 
    Karsten V, Eike M, Markus L 2011. From low-energy to net zero-energy buildings: status and perspectives. J. Green Build. 6:46–57
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35. 
    European Parliament, Council of the European Union 2018. Energy Performance of Buildings Directive 2018/844/EU (EPBD). Off. J. Eur. Union 61:L156
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36. 
    Mihai M, Tanasiev V, Dinca C, Badea A, Vidu R 2017. Passive house analysis in terms of energy performance. Energy Build 144:74–86
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37. 
    Schnieders J, Hermelink A. 2006. CEPHEUS results: measurements and occupants’ satisfaction provide evidence for Passive Houses being an option for sustainable building. Energy Policy 34:151–71
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 38. 
    Badescu V, Staicovici MD. 2006. Renewable energy for passive house heating: model of the active solar heating system. Energy Build 38:129–41
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 39. 
    Int. Passive House Assoc. (iPHA) 2020. Passive House certification criteria. International Passive House Association https://www.passivehouse-international.org/index.php?page_id=150&level1_id=78
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40. 
    Glob. Alliance Build. Constr. (GlobalABC), Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2019. 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero-Emissions, Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector Paris: UN Environ. Progr.
  41. 41. 
    Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2019. World Energy Outlook 2019 Paris: IEA
  42. 42. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Cabeza LF, Serrano S, Barreneche C 2015. Heating and cooling energy trends and drivers in buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 41:85–98
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43. 
    Serrano S, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Barreneche C, Palacios A, Cabeza LF 2017. Heating and cooling energy trends and drivers in Europe. Energy 119:425–34
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44. 
    Allouhi A, El Fouih Y, Kousksou T, Jamil A, Zeraouli Y, Mourad Y 2015. Energy consumption and efficiency in buildings: current status and future trends. J. Clean. Prod. 109:118–30
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45. 
    Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2019. Energy Efficiency 2019 Paris: IEA
  46. 46. 
    Berardi U. 2017. A cross-country comparison of the building energy consumptions and their trends. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 123:230–41
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47. 
    Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2020. Buildings: a source of enormous untapped efficiency potential. International Energy Agency https://www.iea.org/topics/buildings
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48. 
    Feng W, Zhang Q, Ji H, Wang R, Zhou N et al. 2019. A review of net zero energy buildings in hot and humid climates: experience learned from 34 case study buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 114:109303
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49. 
    Eur. Comm 2020. Energy consumption per m². European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/energy/content/energy-consumption-m%C2%B2-2_en
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50. 
    Build. Perform. Inst. Eur. (BPIE) 2017. Factsheet: Germany. Current use of EPCs and potential links to iBRoad. Individual Building Renovation Roadmaps (iBRoad). http://bpie.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/iBROAD_CountryFactsheet_GERMANY-2018.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51. 
    Dascalaki EG, Droutsa K, Gaglia AG, Kontoyiannidis S, Balaras CA 2010. Data collection and analysis of the building stock and its energy performance—an example for Hellenic buildings. Energy Build 42:1231–37
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52. 
    Glob. Build. Perform. Netw. (GBPN), Cent. Environ. Plann. Technol. (CEPT) 2014. Residential buildings in India: energy use projections and savings potential Tech. Rep., GBPN Paris: https://www.gbpn.org/sites/default/files/08.%20INDIA%20Baseline_TR_low.pdf
  53. 53. 
    Iyer M, Kumar S, Mathew S, Stratton H, Mathew P, Singh M 2016. Establishing a commercial buildings energy data framework for India: a comprehensive look at data collection approaches, use cases and institutions Rep. LBNL-1006427, Lawrence Berkeley Nat. Lab Berkeley: https://eta.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/publications/lbnl-1006427.pdf
  54. 54. 
    Progr. Energy Effic. Build. (PEEB) 2019. Building sector brief: Mexico Rep., PEEB Paris: https://www.peeb.build/imglib/downloads/PEEB_Mexico%20Country%20Brief_March%202019.pdf
  55. 55. 
    Minist. Hous. Urban-Rural Dev. (MOHURD) 2016. Standard for energy consumption of buildings GB/T51161-2016. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56. 
    IPEEC 2019. International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation https://ipeec.org/
  57. 57. 
    Int. Partnersh. Energy Effic. Coop. Build. Energy Effic. Taskgroup. (IPEEC BEET) 2018. Zero energy building definitions and policy activity—an international review Rep., OECD, IPEEC Paris: https://ipeec.org/upload/publication_related_language/pdf/766.pdf
  58. 58. 
    Statistics Canada 2020. Government of Canada, Statistics Canada https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/start
  59. 59. 
    US Energy Inf. Admin. (EIA) 2020. 2012 CBECS survey data. US Energy Information Administration https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2012/
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60. 
    Shi X, Si B, Zhao J, Tian Z, Wang C, Jin X 2019. Magnitude, causes, and solutions of the performance gap of buildings: a review. Sustainability 11:937
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61. 
    Feist W, Ottinger O, Peper S 2016. Energy consumption—a comparison between predicted and measured performance. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference Improving Energy Efficiency Commercial Buildings and Smart Communities P Bertoldi 935–48 Brussels: EU Publ. Off.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62. 
    Int. Partnersh. Energy Effic. Coop. Build. Energy Effic. Taskgroup (IPEEC BEET) 2019. Building energy performance gap issues—an international review Rep., OECD, IPEEC Paris: https://www.energy.gov.au/sites/default/files/the_building_energy_performance_gap-an_international_review-december_2019.pdf
  63. 63. 
    EQ Build. Perform 2019. Sidewalk Labs Toronto Multi-Unit Residential Buildings Study: energy use and the performance gap Rep., EQ Build. Perform Toronto: https://be-exchange.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/SWL-MURB-Presentation-Final.pdf
  64. 64. 
    TranSitionZero 2019. Energiesprong works. ! TranSitionZero https://energiesprong.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Energiesprong-works_DEF.pdf The Energiesprong program reveals the extent of inefficiencies in conventional construction. Innovation enables better buildings at lower costs.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65. 
    Feist W, Peper S, Kah O, von Oesen N 2005. Climate neutral Passive House estate in Hannover-Kronsberg: construction and measurement results Rep. 18/19, Cost. Effic. Passive Houses Eur. Stand. (CEPHEUS) Darmstadt, Ger: https://passiv.de/downloads/05_cepheus_kronsberg_summary_pep_en.pdf
  66. 66. 
    Peper S, Feist W. 2015. Energy efficiency of the Passive House Standard: expectations confirmed by measurements in practice Rep., Passive House Inst Darmstadt, Ger: http://passiv.de/downloads/05_energy_efficiency_of_the_passive_house_standard.pdf
  67. 67. 
    Peper S. 2016. Energy monitoring of residential buildings in the Passive House city district of Heidelberg-Bahnstadt Rep., Passive House Inst. Darmstadt, Ger: https://passiv.de/downloads/05_heidelberg_bahnstadt_monitoring_report_en.pdf
  68. 68. 
    Ottinger O. 2017. Passive House quality police administrative building Rep., Passive House Inst Darmstadt, Ger: https://passiv.de/downloads/05_passive_house_police_administrative_building_short_version.pdf
  69. 69. 
    Passive House Institute 2020. Free technical literature and project reports. Passive House Institute https://passivehouse.com/05_service/03_literature/03_literature.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. 
    Passipedia 2020. The Passive House—definition. Passipedia: The Passive House Resource https://passipedia.org/basics/the_passive_house_-_definition
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71. 
    Delgado BM, Cao S, Hasan A, Sirén K 2018. Energy and exergy analysis of prosumers in hybrid energy grids. Build. Res. Inf. 46:668–85
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72. 
    Torcellini PA, Deru M, Griffith B, Long N, Pless S et al. 2004. Lessons learned from field evaluation of six high-performance buildings Rep. NREL/CP-550-36290, Nat. Renew. Energy Lab. Golden, CO: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36290.pdf
  73. 73. 
    Aelenei L, Gonçalves H. 2014. From solar building design to Net Zero Energy Buildings: performance insights of an office building. Energy Procedia 48:1236–43
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74. 
    Al-Saadi SN, Shaaban AK. 2019. Zero energy building (ZEB) in a cooling dominated climate of Oman: design and energy performance analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 112:299–316
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. 
    Ascione F, Bianco N, De Masi RF, Mauro GM, Vanoli GP 2015. Design of the building envelope: a novel multi-objective approach for the optimization of energy performance and thermal comfort. Sustainability 7:10809–36
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76. 
    Ascione F, Borrelli M, De Masi RF, de Rossi F, Vanoli GP 2019. A framework for NZEB design in Mediterranean climate: design, building and set-up monitoring of a lab-small villa. Sol. Energy 184:11–29
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. 
    Ascione F, Bianco N, de Rossi F, De Masi RF, Vanoli GP 2016. Concept, design and energy performance of a net zero-energy building in Mediterranean climate. Procedia Eng 169:26–37
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78. 
    Berggren B, Wall M, Flodberg K, Sandberg E 2012. Net ZEB office in Sweden—a case study, testing the Swedish Net ZEB definition. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 1:217–26
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79. 
    Jain M, Hoppe T, Bressers H 2017. Analyzing sectoral niche formation: the case of net-zero energy buildings in India. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 25:47–63
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80. 
    Morck OC. 2017. Energy saving concept development for the MORE-CONNECT pilot energy renovation of apartment blocks in Denmark. Energy Procedia 140:240–51
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. 
    Erhorn H, Erhorn-Kluttig H. 2014. Selected examples of nearly zero-energy buildings Rep. CT5, Concert. Action Energy Perf. Build., Cph., Den. http://www.rehva.eu/fileadmin/news/CT5_Report_Selected_examples_of_NZEBs-final.pdf
  82. 82. 
    Seinre E, Kurnitski J, Voll H 2014. Building sustainability objective assessment in Estonian context and a comparative evaluation with LEED and BREEAM. Build. Environ. 82:110–20
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83. 
    Shin M, Baltazar J, Haberl JS, Frazier E, Lynn B 2019. Evaluation of the energy performance of a net zero energy building in a hot and humid climate. Energy Build 204:109531
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84. 
    Sudhakar K, Winderl M, Priya SS 2019. Net-zero building designs in hot and humid climates: a state-of-art. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 13:100400
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85. 
    Sun X, Gou Z, Lau SSY 2018. Cost-effectiveness of active and passive design strategies for existing building retrofits in tropical climate: case study of a zero energy building. J. Clean. Prod. 183:35–45
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. 
    Throndsen W, Berker T, Knoll EB 2015. Powerhouse Kjørbo. Evaluation of construction process and early use phase. ZEB Proj. Rep. 25, Res. Cent. Zero Carbon Emiss. Build Trondheim, Norway: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/154671097.pdf
  87. 87. 
    Delta Electronics 2018. 2018 Delta Group CSR report Rep., Delta Electr., Taipei Taiwan: https://filecenter.deltaww.com/about/download/2018_Delta_CSR%20Report_EN.pdf
  88. 88. 
    Delta Electronics 2016. 2016 Delta group CSR report Rep., Delta Electr., Taipei Taiwan: http://www.deltaww.com/filecenter/about/download/2016_Delta_CSR_Report_EN.pdf
  89. 89. 
    Wang YC, Lin H-T. 2011. Energy-saving techniques of full-scale green building analysis research—Taiwan's first zero-carbon green building. Appl. Mech. Mater. 121–126:3058–66
    [Google Scholar]
  90. 90. 
    Wells L, Rismanchi B, Aye L 2018. A review of Net Zero Energy Buildings with reflections on the Australian context. Energy Build 158:616–28
    [Google Scholar]
  91. 91. 
    Wu W, Skye HM. 2018. Net-zero nation: HVAC and PV systems for residential net-zero energy buildings across the United States Air Conditioning Contractors of America. Energy Convers. Manag. 177:605–28
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 92. 
    Zavrl , Stegnar G 2017. Comparison of simulated and monitored energy performance indicators on NZEB case study eco silver house. Procedia Environ. Sci. 38:52–59
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93. 
    Zeiler W. 2011. Overview from Passive House schools and NZEB schools to Plus Energy schools. PLEA 2011: Architecture & Sustainable Development: Conference Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, 13–15 July, 2011 M Bodart, A Evrard 351–56 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belg: Press. Univ. Louvain
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94. 
    Zeiler W, Boxem G. 2013. Net-zero energy building schools. Renew. Energy 49:282–86
    [Google Scholar]
  95. 95. 
    Mathew G. 2012. Case study: first net-zero building in India Rep., TeamSustain, OutBack Power Technol Phoenix: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/34912804/see-this-case-study-in-pdf-outback-power-systems
  96. 96. 
    Lafarge 2011. Zero and net-zero energy buildings + homes. Eighth in a series of white papers on the Green Building Movement. White Pap. 8, SGC Horiz. LLC, Arlington Heights, IL. https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/rsf/netzero_energy_buildings_and_homes.pdf
  97. 97. 
    Noris F, Musall E, Salom J, Berggren B, Jensen et al. 2014. Implications of weighting factors on technology preference in net zero energy buildings. Energy Build 82:250–62
    [Google Scholar]
  98. 98. 
    Bojić M, Nikolic N, Nikolic D, Skerlic J, Miletic I 2011. Toward a positive-net-energy residential building in Serbian conditions. Appl. Energy 88:2407–19
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99. 
    Deng S, Dalibard A, Martin M, Dai YJ, Eicker U, Wang RZ 2011. Energy supply concepts for zero energy residential buildings in humid and dry climate. Energy Convers. Manag. 52:2455–60
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100. 
    Solanova 2020. Building for Our Future http://www.solanova.eu
  101. 101. 
    Hu S. 2016. Best Practice of China's Building Energy Conservation Beijing: China Archit. Build. Press
  102. 102. 
    Schnieders J, Eian TD, Filippi M, Florez J, Kaufmann B et al. 2019. Design and realisation of the Passive House concept in different climate zones. Energy Effic https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-019-09819-6. In press
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  103. 103. 
    Trimmel G, Bruckner N, Smole K 2014. KA 7 - Kaiserstraße: Innovative Sanierung eines denkmalgeschützten Gründerzeitgebäudes mit Innendämmung Rep. 23/2014, Bundesministerium Verkehr, Innov. Technol., Vienna Austria: http://www.gruenderzeitplus.at/downloads/Endbericht_Kaiserstrasse.pdf
  104. 104. 
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 105. 
    Schnieders J, Feist W, Rongen L 2015. Passive Houses for different climate zones. Energy Build 105:71–87This reference counters the common belief that colder climates require higher heating loads through facts.
    [Google Scholar]
  106. 106. 
    Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2018. The Future of Cooling: Opportunities for Energy-Efficient Air Conditioning Paris: IEA
  107. 107. 
    Mastrucci A, Byers E, Pachauri S, Rao ND 2019. Improving the SDG energy poverty targets: residential cooling needs in the Global South. Energy Build 186:405–15
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 108. 
    Miller A, Becque R, Hartley B, Uwamaliya A, Fleming P 2018. Chilling prospects: providing sustainable cooling for all Rep., Sustain. Energy All, Vienna Austria: https://www.seforall.org/sites/default/files/SEforALL_CoolingForAll-Report_0.pdf
  109. 109. 
    Econ. Intell. Unit (EIU) 2019. The cooling imperative: forecasting the size and source of future cooling demand Rep., EIU London: http://www.eiu.com/graphics/marketing/pdf/TheCoolingImperative2019.pdf
  110. 110. 
    Manu S, Brager G, Rawal R, Geronazzo A, Kumar D 2019. Performance evaluation of climate responsive buildings in India—case studies from cooling dominated climate zones. Build. Environ. 148:136–56
    [Google Scholar]
  111. 111. 
    Bhamare DK, Rathod MK, Banerjee J 2019. Passive cooling techniques for building and their applicability in different climatic zones—the state of art. Energy Build 198:467–90
    [Google Scholar]
  112. 112. 
    Anand S, Gupta A, Tyagi SK 2015. Solar cooling systems for climate change mitigation: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 41:143–61
    [Google Scholar]
  113. 113. 
    Passive House Inst 2016. Criteria for the Passive House, EnerPHit and PHI Low Energy Building Standard Rep., Passive House. Inst., Darmstadt, Ger. https://passiv.de/downloads/03_building_criteria_en.pdf
  114. 114. 
    Zhao D, Aili A, Zhai Y, Lu J, Kidd D et al. 2019. Subambient cooling of water: toward real-world applications of daytime radiative cooling. Joule 3:111–23
    [Google Scholar]
  115. 115. 
    Munday JN. 2019. Tackling climate change through radiative cooling. Joule 3:2057–60
    [Google Scholar]
  116. 116. 
    Li T, Zhai Y, He S, Gan W, Wei Z et al. 2019. A radiative cooling structural material. Science 364:760–63
    [Google Scholar]
  117. 117. 
    Feist W, Schnieders J. 2009. Energy efficiency—a key to sustainable housing. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 176:141–53
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 118. 
    Downing A. 2018. A closer look at the Saskatchewan Conservation House and four others. Sask. Res. Counc. (SRC) Blog Apr. 17. https://www.src.sk.ca/blog/closer-look-saskatchewan-conservation-house-and-four-others
  119. 119. 
    Feist W. 2006. 15th anniversary of the Darmstadt - Kranichstein Passive House. Factor 10 is a reality. Passivhaus https://web.archive.org/web/20140714052350/http://www.passivhaustagung.de/Kran/First_Passive_House_Kranichstein_en.html
    [Google Scholar]
  120. 120. 
    Iturbe S. 2012. CIEM BUILDING, Zaragoza. BUILD UP https://www.buildup.eu/en/practices/cases/ciem-building-zaragoza
    [Google Scholar]
  121. 121. 
    Barthelmes VM, Becchio C, Fabi V, Corgnati SP 2017. Occupant behaviour lifestyles and effects on building energy use: investigation on high and low performing building features. Energy Procedia 140:93–101
    [Google Scholar]
  122. 122. 
    Torcellini P, Pless S, Leach M, Torcellini P, Pless S, Leach M 2015. A pathway for net-zero energy buildings: creating a case for zero cost increase. Build. Res. Inf. 43:25–33
    [Google Scholar]
  123. 123. 
    Erba S, Causone F, Armani R 2017. The effect of weather datasets on building energy simulation outputs. Energy Procedia 134:545–54
    [Google Scholar]
  124. 124. 
    Schöberl H, Hofer R, Leeb M, Bednar T, Kratochwil G 2014. Österreichs größtes Plus- Energie-Bürogebäude am Standort Getreidemarkt der TU Wien Rep. 47/2014, Bundesministerium Verkehr, Innov. Technol Vienna, Austria: https://nachhaltigwirtschaften.at/de/hdz/publikationen/biblio/oesterreichs-groesstes-plus-energie-buerogebaeude-am-standort-getreidemarkt-der-tu-wien.php
  125. 125. 
    Besant RW, Dumont RS, Schoenau G 1979. The Saskatchewan Conservation House: some preliminary performance results. Energy Build 2:163–74
    [Google Scholar]
  126. 126. 
    Passipedia 2020. Saskatchewan Conservation House. Passipedia: The Passive House Resource https://passipedia.org/basics/the_passive_house_-_historical_review/poineer_award/saskatchewan_conservation_house
    [Google Scholar]
  127. 127. 
    Yudelson J, Meyer U. 2013. The World's Greenest Buildings. Promise Versus Performance in Sustainable Design London: Routledge. , 1st ed..
  128. 128. 
    Prianto E, Depecker P. 2002. Characteristic of airflow as the effect of balcony, opening design and internal division on indoor velocity: a case study of traditional dwelling in urban living quarter in tropical humid region. Energy Build 34:401–9
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 129. 
    Alfata MNF, Hirata N, Kubota T, Nugroho AM, Uno T et al. 2015. Field investigation of indoor thermal environments in apartments of Surabaya, Indonesia: potential passive cooling strategies for middle-class apartments. Energy Procedia 78:2947–52
    [Google Scholar]
  130. 130. 
    Lin H-T. 2011. Green Architecture: An Asian Perspective Hong Kong: Pace Publ.
  131. 131. 
    Wang JJ. 2016. Study on the context of school-based disaster management. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 19:224–34
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 132. 
    Mazria E. 1979. The Passive Solar Energy Book: A Complete Guide to Passive Solar Home, Greenhouse and Building Design Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press
  133. 133. 
    Build. Constr. Auth. (BCA) 2013.Singapore: leading the way for green buildings in the tropics Rep., BCA, Singapore. https://www.bca.gov.sg/greenmark/others/sg_green_buildings_tropics.pdf
  134. 134. 
    Cabeza LF, de Gracia A, Pisello AL 2018. Integration of renewable technologies in historical and heritage buildings: a review. Energy Build 177:96–111
    [Google Scholar]
  135. 135. 
    City of Boston 2020. 2020 Guidebook for Zero Emission Buildings (ZEBs) Boston: Dep. Neighb. Dev., City Boston
  136. 136. 
    Passivhaus Trust 2019. Passivhaus: the route to zero carbon. Passivehaus Trust: The UK Passive House Organisation https://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/competitions_and_campaigns/passivhaus-and-zero-carbon/
    [Google Scholar]
  137. 137. 
    N. Am. Passive House Netw. (NAPH) 2019. Policy resource guide: June 2019 Rep., NAPH New York: https://www.rockwool.com/syssiteassets/o2-rockwool/about/naphn19-policy-resource-guide.pdf
  138. 138. 
    BC Hous., Energy Step Code Counc 2018. 2018 Metrics research report Rep., BC Hous. Energy Step Code Counc Burnaby, BC, Can: http://energystepcode.ca/app/uploads/sites/257/2018/09/2018-Metrics_Research_Report_Update_2018-09-18.pdf
  139. 139. 
    King L, Purcell B, Lysenko N 2017. The City of Toronto. Zero Emissions Buildings Framework. Rep., City Plann. Div., City Tor., Tor., Ont., Can. https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9875-Zero-Emissions-Buildings-Framework-Report.pdf
  140. 140. 
    Vancouver City 2020. Staff Report to Vancouver City Council, March 10, 2020 Rep., Vancouver City Vancouver, BC, Can.:
  141. 141. 
    RetrofitNY 2020. Timeline and updates. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-Programs/Programs/RetrofitNY/Timeline
    [Google Scholar]
  142. 142. 
    Bernhard R. 2020. Personal interview with Lois Arena. Steven Winter Associates March 4
    [Google Scholar]
  143. 143. 
    Bernhard R. 2020. Presentation by Saul Brown, RetrofitNY Project Manager, NYSERDA Presented at the Residential Design and Construction Conference, Penn State Univ State Coll., PA: March 5
  144. 144. 
    Corvidae J, Gartman M, Petersen A 2019. The economics of zero-energy homes Rep., Rocky Mount. Inst Basalt, CO: https://rmi.org/insight/economics-of-zero-energy-homes/
  145. 145. 
    IEE PassREg 2012. Passive House regions with renewable energies. The success model of Brussels: case study. Rep., EnEffect. Sofia Bulgaria:
  146. 146. 
    Binns B, Standen M, Tilford A, Mead K 2013. Be.Passive: lessons learnt from the Belgian Passivhaus experience. Rep., Cent. Built Environ., Adapt Low Carbon Group Norwich, UK: https://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/UserFiles/File/BePassive%20Report.pdf
  147. 147. 
    Forde J, Hopfe CJ, McLeod RS, Evins R 2020. Temporal optimization for affordable and resilient Passivhaus dwellings in the social housing sector. Appl. Energy 261:114383
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 148. 
    Lucon O, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Zain Ahmed A, Akbari H, Bertoldi P et al. 2014. Buildings. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change O Edenhofer, R Pichs-Madruga, Y Sokona, E Farahani, S Kadner, et al 671–738 Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  149. 149. 
    Int. Renew. Energy Agency (IRENA) 2019. Renewable power generation costs in 2018 Rep., IRENA, Masdar City, Abu Dhabi, UAE. https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/May/IRENA_Renewable-Power-Generations-Costs-in-2018.pdf
  150. 150. 
    BloombergNEF 2019. New energy outlook 2019. Bloomberg https://about.bnef.com/new-energy-outlook/
    [Google Scholar]
  151. 151. 
    Murray P, Orehounig K, Grosspietsch D, Carmeliet J 2018. A comparison of storage systems in neighbourhood decentralized energy system applications from 2015 to 2050. Appl. Energy 231:1285–306
    [Google Scholar]
  152. 152. 
    Seljom P, Lindberg KB, Tomasgard A, Doorman G, Sartori I 2017. The impact of Zero Energy Buildings on the Scandinavian energy system. Energy 118:284–96
    [Google Scholar]
  153. 153. 
    Sánchez Ramos J, Pavón Moreno MC, Romero Rodríguez L, Guerrero Delgado MC, Álvarez Domínguez S 2019. Potential for exploiting the synergies between buildings through DSM approaches. Case study: La Graciosa Island. Energy Convers. Manag. 194:199–216
    [Google Scholar]
  154. 154. 
    Zepter JM, Lüth A, Crespo del Granado P, Egging R 2019. Prosumer integration in wholesale electricity markets: synergies of peer-to-peer trade and residential storage. Energy Build 184:163–76
    [Google Scholar]
  155. 155. 
    Gfk Belgium Consortium 2017. Study on “Residential Prosumers in the European Energy Union.” JUST/2015/CONS/FW/C006/0127. Framework Contract EAHC/2013/CP/04., 1–234. Rep., Eur. Comm Brussels: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/study-residential-prosumers-energy-union_en.pdf
  156. 156. 
    Int. Renew. Energy Agency (IRENA) 2019. Future of wind: deployment, investment, technology, grid integration and socio-economic aspects Rep., IRENA, Masdar City, Abu Dhabi, UAE. https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Oct/IRENA_Future_of_wind_2019.pdf
  157. 157. 
    Schmela M, Beauvais A, Chevillard N, Guillén Paredes M, Heisz M et al. 2019. Global market outlook for solar power, 2019–2023: mobilizing investments in emerging markets Rep., SolarPower Eur Brussels:
  158. 158. 
    European Parliament, Council of the European Union 2009. Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 52:L140
    [Google Scholar]
  159. 159. 
    Sultan SM, Ervina Efzan MN 2018. Review on recent Photovoltaic/Thermal (PV/T) technology advances and applications. Sol. Energy 173:939–54
    [Google Scholar]
  160. 160. 
    Yang T, Athienitis AK. 2016. A review of research and developments of building-integrated photovoltaic/thermal (BIPV/T) systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 66:886–912
    [Google Scholar]
  161. 161. 
    Zhang X, Yang J, Fan Y, Zhao X, Yan R et al. 2019. Experimental and analytic study of a hybrid solar/biomass rural heating system. Energy 190:116392
    [Google Scholar]
  162. 162. 
    Sarbu I, Dorca A. 2018. A comprehensive review of solar thermoelectric cooling systems. Int. J. Energy Res. 42:395–415
    [Google Scholar]
  163. 163. 
    Shirazi A, Taylor RA, Morrison GL, White SD 2018. Solar-powered absorption chillers: a comprehensive and critical review. Energy Convers. Manag. 171:59–81
    [Google Scholar]
  164. 164. 
    Reddy KS, Mudgal V, Mallick TK 2018. Review of latent heat thermal energy storage for improved material stability and effective load management. J. Energy Storage 15:205–27
    [Google Scholar]
  165. 165. 
    de Gracia A, Cabeza LF 2015. Phase change materials and thermal energy storage for buildings. Energy Build 103:414–19
    [Google Scholar]
  166. 166. 
    Cabeza LF, Miró L, Oró E, de Gracia A, Martin V et al. 2015. CO2 mitigation accounting for Thermal Energy Storage (TES) case studies. Appl. Energy 155:365–77
    [Google Scholar]
  167. 167. 
    Lizana J, Chacartegui R, Barrios-Padura A, Valverde JM 2017. Advances in thermal energy storage materials and their applications towards zero energy buildings: a critical review. Appl. Energy 203:219–39
    [Google Scholar]
  168. 168. 
    Krese G, Koželj R, Butala V, Stritih U 2018. Thermochemical seasonal solar energy storage for heating and cooling of buildings. Energy Build 164:239–53
    [Google Scholar]
  169. 169. 
    de Gracia A, Barzin R, Fernández C, Farid MM, Cabeza LF 2016. Control strategies comparison of a ventilated facade with PCM—energy savings, cost reduction and CO2 mitigation. Energy Build 130:821–28
    [Google Scholar]
  170. 170. 
    Kim W, Katipamula S, Lutes R 2020. Application of intelligent load control to manage building loads to support rapid growth of distributed renewable generation. Sustain. Cities Soc. 53:101898
    [Google Scholar]
  171. 171. 
    Petrichenko K. 2014. Net-Zero Energy Buildings: Global and Regional Perspectives Budapest, Hung: Cent. Eur. Univ.
  172. 172. 
    Petrichenko K, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Cabeza LF 2019. Modeling global and regional potentials for building-integrated solar energy generation. Energy Build 198:329–39
    [Google Scholar]
  173. 173. 
    Grove-Smith J, Feist W, Krick B 2016. Balancing energy efficiency and renewables. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference Improving Energy Efficiency Commercial Buildings and Smart Communities P Bertoldi 894–902 Brussels: EU Publ. Off.
    [Google Scholar]
  174. 174. 
    Solanki CS. 2019. Energy Swaraj: My Experiments with SOLAR Truth Chennai, India: Notion Press
  175. 175. 
    Perera ATD, Coccolo S, Scartezzini J-L 2019. The influence of urban form on the grid integration of renewable energy technologies and distributed energy systems. Sci. Rep. 9:17756Demonstrates how energy efficiency improves the quality of life and sustainability, even in simple buildings.
    [Google Scholar]
  176. 176. 
    Martín-Martínez F, Sánchez-Miralles A, Rivier M, Calvillo CF 2017. Centralized versus distributed generation. A model to assess the relevance of some thermal and electric factors. Application to the Spanish case study. Energy 134:850–63
    [Google Scholar]
  177. 177. 
    Doubleday K, Hafiz F, Parker A, Elgindy T, Florita A et al. 2019. Integrated distribution system and urban district planning with high renewable penetrations. Energy Environ 8:e339
    [Google Scholar]
  178. 178. 
    Acquah MA, Han S. 2019. Online building load management control with plugged-in electric vehicles considering uncertainties. Energies 12:1436
    [Google Scholar]
  179. 179. 
    Nefedov E, Sierla S, Vyatkin V 2018. Internet of energy approach for sustainable use of electric vehicles as energy storage of prosumer buildings. Energies 11:2165
    [Google Scholar]
  180. 180. 
    Cortés P, Auladell-León P, Muñuzuri J, Onieva L 2020. Near-optimal operation of the distributed energy resources in a smart microgrid district. J. Clean. Prod. 252:119772
    [Google Scholar]
  181. 181. 
    Int. Energy Agency (IEA) 2019. Material Efficiency in Clean Energy Transitions Paris: IEA
  182. 182. 
    Weiss M, Haufe J, Carus M, Brandão M, Bringezu S et al. 2012. A review of the environmental impacts of biobased materials. J. Ind. Ecol. 16:S169–81
    [Google Scholar]
  183. 183. 
    Chastas P, Theodosiou T, Bikas D 2016. Embodied energy in residential buildings-towards the nearly zero energy building: a literature review. Build. Environ. 105:267–82
    [Google Scholar]
  184. 184. 
    Moncaster AM, Rasmussen FN, Malmqvist T, Houlihan Wiberg A, Birgisdottir H 2019. Widening understanding of low embodied impact buildings: results and recommendations from 80 multi-national quantitative and qualitative case studies. J. Clean. Prod. 235:378–93
    [Google Scholar]
  185. 185. 
    Kovacic I, Reisinger J, Honic M 2018. Life Cycle Assessment of embodied and operational energy for a passive housing block in Austria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82:1774–86
    [Google Scholar]
  186. 186. 
    Dahlstrøm O, Sørnes K, Tveit S, Hertwich EG 2012. Life cycle assessment of a single-family residence built to either conventional- or passive house standard. Energy Build 54:470–79
    [Google Scholar]
  187. 187. 
    Stephan A, Crawford RH, De Myttenaere K 2013. A comprehensive assessment of the life cycle energy demand of passive houses. Appl. Energy 112:23–34
    [Google Scholar]
  188. 188. 
    Feist W, Pfluger R, Hasper W 2019. Durability of building fabric components and ventilation systems in passive houses. Energy Effic https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-019-09781-3 In press
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  189. 189. 
    Lupíšek A, Vaculíková M, ManL'ík Š, Hodková J, RůžiL'ka J 2015. Design strategies for low embodied carbon and low embodied energy buildings: principles and examples. Energy Procedia 83:147–56
    [Google Scholar]
  190. 190. 
    Attia S. 2016. Towards regenerative and positive impact architecture: a comparison of two net zero energy buildings. Sustain. Cities Soc. 26:393–406
    [Google Scholar]
  191. 191. 
    Sathre R, O'Connor J. 2010. A synthesis of research on wood products and greenhouse gas impacts Tech. Rep. TR-19R, FPInnovations Vancouver, BC, Can: https://www.canfor.com/docs/why-wood/tr19-complete-pub-web.pdf
  192. 192. 
    Univ. B. C 2016. Brock Commons time lapse—UBC Tallwood Building. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHtdnY_gnmE
    [Google Scholar]
  193. 193. 
    Cornwall W. 2019. Tall timber. Ecolibrium 18:219–25
    [Google Scholar]
  194. 194. 
    Createrra 2020. http://www.createrra.sk
  195. 195. 
    EcoCocon 2020. http://ecococon.eu
  196. 196. 
    Bojic M, Miletic M, Bojic L 2014. Optimization of thermal insulation to achieve energy savings in low energy house (refurbishment). Energy Convers. Manag. 84:681–90
    [Google Scholar]
  197. 197. 
    Pittau F, Iannaccone G, Lumia G, Habert G 2019. Towards a model for circular renovation of the existing building stock: a preliminary study on the potential for CO2 reduction of bio-based insulation materials. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 323:0121176
    [Google Scholar]
  198. 198. 
    Worrell E, Allwood J, Gutowski T 2016. The role of material efficiency in environmental stewardship. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41:575–98
    [Google Scholar]
  199. 199. 
    Smith P, Adams J, Beerling DJ, Beringer T, Calvin KV et al. 2019. Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal and their impacts on ecosystem services and the sustainable development goals. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44:255–86
    [Google Scholar]
  200. 200. 
    Hepburn C, Adlen E, Beddington J, Carter EA, Fuss S et al. 2019. The technological and economic prospects for CO2 utilization and removal. Nature 575:87–97Discuss how creation of appropriate methodologies to calculate embodied carbon is critically important given its impact.
    [Google Scholar]
  201. 201. 
    Intergov. Panel Clim. Change (IPCC) 2018. Summary for policymakers. Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty Geneva: IPCC http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf Discuss how creation of appropriate methodologies to calculate embodied carbon is critically important given its impact.
    [Google Scholar]
  202. 202. 
    Von Stechow C, McCollum D, Riahi K, Minx JC, Kriegler E et al. 2015. Integrating global climate change mitigation goals with other sustainability objectives: a synthesis. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 40:363–94
    [Google Scholar]
  203. 203. 
    UN Environ. Progr. (UNEP) 2011. A practical framework for planning pro-development climate policy Rep., UNEP, Nairobi Kenya: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/9566/Planning_Pro_Dev.pdf?sequence=3&amp%3BisAllowed=
  204. 204. 
    Creutzig F, Fernandez B, Haberl H, Khosla R, Mulugetta Y, Seto KC 2016. Beyond technology: demand-side solutions for climate change mitigation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41:173–98
    [Google Scholar]
  205. 205. 
    Khosla R, Dukkipati S, Dubash NK, Sreenivas A, Cohen B 2015. Towards methodologies for multiple objective-based energy and climate policy. Econ. Polit. Wkly. L49–59
    [Google Scholar]
  206. 206. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Kelemen A, Tirado-Herrero S, Thomas S, Thema J et al. 2016. Measuring multiple impacts of low-carbon energy options in a green economy context. Appl. Energy 179:1409–26
    [Google Scholar]
  207. 207. 
    Pachauri S, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Labelle M 2012. Synergies between energy efficiency and energy access policies and strategies. Glob. Policy 3:187–97
    [Google Scholar]
  208. 208. 
    Hänninen O, Asikainen A. 2013. Efficient reduction of indoor exposures—health benefits from optimizing ventilation, filtration and indoor source controls Rep. 2/2013, Nat. Inst. Health Welfare, Tampere Finland: https://www.julkari.fi/handle/10024/110211
  209. 209. 
    Chatterjee S, Ürge-Vorsatz D. 2017. Productivity impact from multiple impact perspective. ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings1841–48 Stockh., Swed: ECEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  210. 210. 
    Chatterjee S. 2018. Measuring the productivity impacts of energy efficiency measures PhD Thesis, Cent. Eur. Univ Budapest, Hung.:
  211. 211. 
    City of New York 2016. One city: built to last. Transforming New York City's buildings for a low-carbon future. Tech. Work. Group. Rep., Mayor's Off. Sustain New York: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/sustainability/downloads/pdf/publications/TWGreport_04212016.pdf
  212. 212. 
    Ribeiro D, Mackres E, Baatz B, Cluett R, Jarrett M et al. 2015. Enhancing community resilience through energy efficiency Res. Rep., Am. Counc. Energy-Eff. Econ Washington, DC: https://www.aceee.org/research-report/u1508
  213. 213. 
    Ginestet S, Aschan-Leygonie C, Bayeux T, Keirsbulck M 2020. Mould in indoor environments: the role of heating, ventilation and fuel poverty. A French perspective. Build. Environ. 169:106577
    [Google Scholar]
  214. 214. 
    Cheng Y, Zhang S, Huan C, Oladokun MO, Lin Z 2019. Optimization on fresh outdoor air ratio of air conditioning system with stratum ventilation for both targeted indoor air quality and maximal energy saving. Build. Environ. 147:11–22
    [Google Scholar]
  215. 215. 
    Torpy F, Zavattaro M, Irga P 2017. Green wall technology for the phytoremediation of indoor air: a system for the reduction of high CO2 concentrations. Air Qual. Atmos. Heal. 10:575–85
    [Google Scholar]
  216. 216. 
    Thema J, Suerkemper F, Couder J, Mzavanadze N, Chatterjee S et al. 2019. The multiple benefits of the 2030 EU energy efficiency potential. Energies 12:2798
    [Google Scholar]
  217. 217. 
    Kelly FJ, Fussell JC. 2019. Improving indoor air quality, health and performance within environments where people live, travel, learn and work. Atmos. Environ. 200:90–109
    [Google Scholar]
  218. 218. 
    Ghaffarianhoseini A, AlWaer H, Omrany H, Ghaffarianhoseini A, Alalouch C et al. 2018. Sick building syndrome: Are we doing enough. Archit. Sci. Rev. 61:99–121
    [Google Scholar]
  219. 219. 
    Al horr Y, Arif M, Katafygiotou M, Mazroei A, Kaushik A, Elsarrag E 2016. Impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant well-being and comfort: a review of the literature. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 5:1–11
    [Google Scholar]
  220. 220. 
    Heijmans N, Loncour X. 2017. Impact of the EPC on the property value Rep., Concerted Action EPBD. https://epbd-ca.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/12-CT3-Factsheet-EPC-impact-on-property-value.pdf
  221. 221. 
    Bertoldi P, Boza-Kiss B. 2017. Analysis of barriers and drivers for the development of the ESCO markets in Europe. Energy Policy 107:345–55
    [Google Scholar]
  222. 222. 
    Boza-Kiss B, Bertoldi P. 2018. One-stop-shops for energy renovations of buildings. Joint Res. Cent., Eur. Energy Effic. Platf. (E3P). https://e3p.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/one-stop-shops-energy-renovations-buildings
    [Google Scholar]
  223. 223. 
    Carmichael C, Krarti M. 2010. Greening tenant/landlord processes: demonstrating transformation in the industry. ASME 2010 4th International Conference on Energy Sustainability915–23 Phoenix: ASME https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ES/proceedings-abstract/ES2010/43956/915/348129
    [Google Scholar]
  224. 224. 
    Tuominen P, Klobut K, Tolman A, Adjei A, De Best-Waldhober M 2012. Energy savings potential in buildings and overcoming market barriers in member states of the European Union. Energy Build 51:48–55
    [Google Scholar]
  225. 225. 
    Altmann E. 2014. Apartments, co-ownership and sustainability: implementation barriers for retrofitting the built environment. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 16:437–57
    [Google Scholar]
  226. 226. 
    Menassa CC, Baer B. 2014. A framework to assess the role of stakeholders in sustainable building retrofit decisions. Sustain. Cities Soc. 10:207–21
    [Google Scholar]
  227. 227. 
    VolkerWessels 2020. http://www.volkerwessels.com
  228. 228. 
    Simson R, Kurnitski J, Maivel M 2017. Summer thermal comfort: compliance assessment and overheating prevention in new apartment buildings in Estonia. J. Build. Perform. Simul. 10:378–91
    [Google Scholar]
  229. 229. 
    Fosas D, Coley DA, Natarajan S, Herrera M, Fosas de Pando M, Ramallo-Gonzalez A 2018. Mitigation versus adaptation: Does insulating dwellings increase overheating risk. Build. Environ. 143:740–59
    [Google Scholar]
  230. 230. 
    Habitzreuter L, Smith ST, Keeling T 2020. Modelling the overheating risk in an uniform high-rise building design with a consideration of urban context and heatwaves. Indoor Built Environ 29:671–88
    [Google Scholar]
  231. 231. 
    Streicher W, Ochs F, Pfluger R, Malzer H, Gstrein H 2019. New and refurbished low cost Passive Houses in Tyrol/Austria—technology and results of measurements Presented at the 23rd International Passive House Conference 2019, Gaobeidian China: Oct 9–11
  232. 232. 
    Levine M, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Blok K, Geng L, Harvey D et al. 2007. Residential and commercial buildings. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change B Metz, OR Davidson, PR Bosch, R Dave, LA Meyer 387–446 Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  233. 233. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Koeppel S, Mirasgedis S 2007. Appraisal of policy instruments for reducing buildings’ CO2 emissions. Build. Res. Inf. 35:458–77
    [Google Scholar]
  234. 234. 
    Janda K. 2009. Worldwide status of energy standards for buildings: a 2009 update. ECEEE 2009 Summer Study Proceedings485–91 Stockh., Swed: ECEEE
    [Google Scholar]
  235. 235. 
    Shen L, He B, Jiao L, Song X, Zhang X 2016. Research on the development of main policy instruments for improving building energy-efficiency. J. Clean. Prod. 112:1789–803
    [Google Scholar]
  236. 236. 
    United Nations 2020. Promoting energy efficiency standards and technologies to enhance energy efficiency in buildings Energy Series 60, UN Econ. Comm. Eur Geneva: https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/energy/se/pdfs/geee/pub/ECE-ENERGY-121_energy-series-60.pdf
  237. 237. 
    Dep. Environ. Comm. Local Gov 2012. Towards nearly zero energy buildings in Ireland: planning for 2020 and beyond Rep., Dep. Environ. Comm. Local Gov Dublin, Irel: https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/migrated-files/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/FileDownLoad%2C42487%2Cen.pdf
  238. 238. 
    Dep. Hous. Plann. Local. Gov 2019. A nearly zero energy buildings (NZEB) future—Minister English reminds construction sector to be prepared for new building regulations on energy efficiency, Ireland. Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government https://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/building-standards/energy-performance-buildings/nearly-zero-energy-buildings-nzeb-future
    [Google Scholar]
  239. 239. 
    Minist. Hous. Urban-Rural Dev. (MOHURD) 2017. 13th five-year planning on building energy efficiency and green building Rep., MOHURD Beijing:
  240. 240. 
    Minist. Hous. Urban-Rural Dev. (MOHURD) 2019. Technical standard on ultra-low energy buildings GB/T51350-2019. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/
    [Google Scholar]
  241. 241. 
    Fu YJ, Xu W, Zhang S 2019. China's ultra-low-energy building policies Rep., Inst. Build. Environ. Energy, China Acad. Build. Res Beijing: http://www.gba.org.cn/h-nd-1264.html#_np=2_315
  242. 242. 
    Cappelletti F, Vallar J-P, Wyssling J 2016. The Energy Transition Chronicles. Brussels-Capital (Belgium), an urban laboratory of energy efficient buildings. Rep., Energy Cities Brussels:
  243. 243. 
    Veltkamp J. 2019. Green buildings market forecast Rep., Vancouver Econ. Comm Vancouver, BC, Can.:
  244. 244. 
    New York City Council 2020. Climate Mobilization Act. The New York City Council passed #GreenNewDeal4NY to mitigate the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. New York City Council https://council.nyc.gov/data/green/
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

Supplemental Material

Supplementary Data

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error