Abstract
ABSTRACTRenewable technologies often feature in policies to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. Designers introduce predicted energy values for specific technologies, but are surprised when the technologies fail to perform as expected. Three building projects are used to explore the effect of construction processes on the energy performance of building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) technology. In two cases BIPV failed to deliver expected energy generation, while in the third, dramatic changes in project processes and technical specifications were needed to achieve the specified output. A social construction of technology (SCOT) analysis documents how the energy generation of BIPV disappeared from view at certain points as actors focused on building features. A contribution is made to the theoretical development of SCOT by responding to two issues: privileging of cognitive closure mechanisms and the neglect of institutional analysis. The concept of inflection mechanisms is introduced as a second type of closure mechanism. More specifically, the role of institutional artefacts (e.g. planning requirements and schedules) in the construction process is found to contribute to the performance gap. To reduce the ‘performance gap’, practitioners need to focus on the distribution of design responsibility, sequencing of work and the location of expertise.
Highlights
This paper is about how plans for the energy generation of renewable technologies often fail to deliver due to a myriad of seemingly unconnected decisions and a succession of unintended consequences
A social construction of technology (SCOT) analysis documents how the energy generation of building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) disappeared from view at certain points as actors focused on building features
The paper contributes to the development of SCOT by expanding the range of closure mechanisms identified from those that depend on negotiation and consensus to more indirect inflection mechanisms
Summary
This paper is about how plans for the energy generation of renewable technologies often fail to deliver due to a myriad of seemingly unconnected decisions and a succession of unintended consequences. The construction sector is consistently identified as critical for sustainable development in general and for energy savings in particular (IPCC, 2007). While a wide range of technical solutions have been proposed (including better fabric design and renewable technologies), policy-makers and sustainably minded professionals are increasingly concerned by the failure of many of these formulae to deliver on their promise (Palmer, Armit, & Terry, 2016; Zgajewski, 2015). The term ‘performance gap’ captures this concern. While it is generally defined as the gap between the energy performance of a building as designed and as built, the term has come to signal a general frustration with the underperformance of supposedly green buildings. Renewable technologies occupy pride of place for both their promise and the disappointment over their performance in use
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
