Abstract
Buildings in Europe are the largest consumers of energy, since they are responsible for 40% of energy consumption and 36% of pollutant gas emissions. The energy efficiency, the consequential economic savings and the reduction of environmental impacts must necessarily consider the design of improvements that affect the opaque vertical envelope of a building. The vertical envelope generally constitutes the largest dispersing surface. In this paper, a comparative evaluation of different ETICS (External Thermal Insulation Composite System) solutions through the application of a multicriteria decision support method is proposed. The criteria at the basis of the procedure relate to the energy, environmental, indoor comfort, and economic aspects. Through the application to the case study, consisting of two types of vertical walls with reference to three different climate zones, the ETICS alternative that achieves the best compromise between the various evaluation criteria is highlighted and the solidity of the method itself is tested. The potential of the methodology in the analysis of the alternatives in adherence to individual subcriteria and the possibility of implementation with additional indicators as the needs change are also highlighted. The social impact is undoubtedly one of the expected effects of the application of the method, since a better performance of the building envelope leads to an increase in comfort and liveability of indoor spaces. Moreover, all studies aimed at increasing the performance of the building or parts of it, consequently, lead to greater accessibility by the most vulnerable members of society, in line with the principles of sustainability and inclusiveness of the United Nations 2030 Agenda.
Highlights
IntroductionPublisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
“WF” (Figure 6); in most simulations, the second “optimal” system is the one that provides for insulation with cork (Figure 6 and Figure 9); the ETICS alternative with rock wool generally occupies the third position in the preferential ordering of alternatives (Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 9)
The thethe retrofit interventions of of the walls of the building envelope that best meet the criteria of energy-environmental the walls of the building envelope that best meet the criteria of energy-environmental sussustainability, comfort during thedesign designphase phaseofofaanew new building building or or tainability, comfort during the energy requalification of an existing building and economic sustainability
Summary
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Scientific research [1,2] claims that the construction sector uses 50% of the raw materials processed across the planet and is responsible for the production of 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. Intervening in the construction landscape, with particular emphasis on the existing building stock, represents a correct strategy for the reduction of significantly impacting anthropogenic activities. This direction has been taken by the United Nations (UN) since 2015 when the member countries signed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [3] that includes 17 ‘Sustainable Development Goals and targets’ (SDGs), including ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all (Goal 7); making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable (Goal 11); acting urgently to combat climate change and its impacts (Goal 13)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
