Abstract
The debate on the relevance of the global sustainability (including energy, environmental, social, economic, and political aspects) of building stock is becoming increasingly important in Europe. In this context, special attention is placed on the refurbishment of existing buildings, in particular those characterized by significant volumes and poor energy performance. Directive 2012/27/EU introduced stringent constraints (often disregarded) for public administrations to ensure a minimum yearly renovation quota of its building stock. This study describes how Life Cycle Cost analysis (LCC) can be used as a tool to identify the “cost-optimal level” among different design solutions to improve the energy performance of existing buildings. With this aim, a social housing building located in the town of Pisa (Italy) was chosen as the case study, for which two alternative renovation designs were compared using the LCC methodology to identify the optimal solution. The two alternatives were characterized by the same energy performance—one was based on the demolition of the existing building and the construction of a new building (with a wooden frame structure, as proposed by the public company owner of the building), while the other was based on the renovation of the existing building. This study can provide useful information, especially for designers and public authorities, about the relevance of the economic issues related to the renovation of social housing in a Mediterranean climate.
Highlights
Since European Directive 2010/31/EU [1], known as the directive for the design of “nearly zero-energy buildings”, the concept of the “cost-optimal level” was introduced as a new performance requirement for buildings
The comparison of Life Cycle Cost analysis (LCC) A of the two alternatives shows that the activity of deconstruction and selective demolition have higher costs than those required for the mechanical demolition
The assessment of the economic sustainability of the competing design solutions conducted with the Life Cycle Cost analysis is, in essence, a method which makes the design process more complete, structured and, conscious in order to guide investors in their decisions
Summary
Since European Directive 2010/31/EU [1], known as the directive for the design of “nearly zero-energy buildings”, the concept of the “cost-optimal level” was introduced as a new performance requirement for buildings. The cost-optimal level is used to determine, among several competing design alternatives, the energy performance level which leads to the lowest cost during the life cycle of the building, during its use stage This cost is calculated by the cost-benefits approach and it is determined by taking into account the investment and construction costs, the maintenance and operating costs (including energy savings and earnings from energy produced), and the disposal costs. The report [4], of the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA), defined the minimum energy performance requirements for different types of buildings and climatic contexts, and, in this report, the current performance limits for the cost-benefit optimization during the design life cycle are appropriate for residential buildings. LCC analysis was used for a social housing building to identify the most cost-effective renovation solution between two alternative designs that were characterized by the same global energy performance—the demolition of the building and the construction of a new building with a wooden frame structure (solution proposed by the public company owner of the building) and the renovation of the existing building
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
