This study addresses the life cycle costs (LCC) of energy renovation, and the demolition and construction of a new building. A comparison is made between LCC optimal energy renovations of four different building types with thermal performance, representing Swedish constructions from the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, as well as the demolition of the building and construction of a new building that complies with the Swedish building code. A Swedish multi-family building from the 1960s is used as a reference building. LCC optimal energy renovations are identified with energy saving targets ranging between 10% and 70%, in addition to the lowest possible life cycle cost. The analyses show that an ambitious energy renovation is not cost-optimal in any of the studied buildings, if achieving the lowest LCC is the objective function. The cost of the demolition and construction of a new building is higher compared to energy renovation to the same energy performance. The higher rent in new buildings does not compensate for the higher cost of new construction. A more ambitious renovation is required in buildings that have a shape factor with a high internal volume to heated floor area ratio.

Improved energy efficiency in the building sector is a central goal in the European Union and renovation of buildings can significantly improve both energy efficiency and indoor environment. This paper studies the perception of indoor environment, modelled indoor climate and heat demand in a building before and after major renovation. The building was constructed in 1961 and renovated in 2014. Insulation of the façade and attic and new windows reduced average U-value from 0.54 to 0.29 W/m²·K. A supply and exhaust ventilation system with heat recovery replaced the old exhaust ventilation. Heat demand was reduced by 44% and maximum supplied heating power was reduced by 38.5%. An on-site questionnaire indicates that perceived thermal comfort improved after the renovation, and the predicted percentage dissatisfied is reduced from 23% to 14% during the heating season. Overall experience with indoor environment is improved. A sensitivity analysis indicates that there is a compromise between thermal comfort and energy use in relation to window solar heat gain, internal heat generation and indoor temperature set point. Higher heat gains, although reducing energy use, can cause problems with high indoor temperatures, and higher indoor temperature might increase thermal comfort during heating season but significantly increases energy use.

In this case study, the energy performance of a secondary school building from the 1960s in Gävle, Sweden, was modelled in the building energy simulation (BES) tool IDA ICE version 4.8 prior to major renovation planning. The objectives of the study were to validate the BES model during both occupied and unoccupied periods, investigate how to model airing and varying occupancy behaviour, and finally investigate energy use to identify potential energy-efficiency measures. The BES model was validated by using field measurements and evidence-based input. Thermal bridges, infiltration, mechanical ventilation, domestic hot water circulation losses, and space heating power were calculated and measured. A backcasting method was developed to model heat losses due to airing, opening windows and doors, and other occupancy behaviour through regression analysis between daily heat power and outdoor temperature. Validation results show good agreement: 3.4% discrepancy between space heating measurements and simulations during an unoccupied week. Corresponding monthly discrepancy varied between 5.5% and 10.6% during three months with occupants. Annual simulation indicates that the best potential renovation measures are changing to efficient windows, improved envelope airtightness, new controls of the HVAC system, and increased external wall thermal insulation.

12.9% of the energy use in the EU originates from the commercial and public sector. It has therefore become a priority to optimize energy efficiency in these buildings. The purpose of this study has been to explore how energy demand in a new office building is affected by different internal heat gains, location, orientation, and façade design, and also to see how different indicators can change perspective on energy efficiency. The study was performed with simulations in IDA-ICE with different façade design and changes in internal heat gains (IHG), orientation, and location. Energy demand was then compared to two different indicators. Using a façade designed to lower solar heat gains had little effect on energy demand in the north of Sweden, but slightly more effect further south. The amount of internal heat gains had significant effect on energy demand. Making deeper studies on design and internal heat gains should therefore be prioritized in the beginning of new building projects so the most energy-efficient design can be chosen. When the indicator kWh/m² was used, the cases with low internal heat gains were perceived as the most energy efficient, while when kWh/(m² × hpers) (hpers = hours of use) was used, the cases with high occupancy and low electricity use were considered to be the most energy efficient. Therefore, revising the standardized indicator is of great importance.