Search results

The existing housing stock needs substantial adaptation to meet national and international carbon reduction targets. The largest proportion of housing is owner‐occupied, and will require improvement works which go beyond those measures provided through the Green Deal and similar programmes. Therefore, the motivation of owner‐occupiers to perform more substantial energy efficiency refurbishments is essential to facilitate greater action. This paper aims to address these issues.

A synthesis of the extant literature from a range of disciplines reveals the role of motivation and the factors influencing motivation and pro‐environmental action in the context of the home. Based on this synthesis of the literature, a new motivation model for energy efficiency refurbishment in the owner‐occupied housing stock is then described.

The study has found that multiple factors affect motivation to refurbish in the owner‐occupied housing stock. Key motivations for energy efficient refurbishment can be categorized into the broad themes of economic, social, and environmental motivations. These motivations will be affected by a wide number of interrelated internal and external factors and mediated by the emotions of the individual. The model presented demonstrates the relationship between the multiple factors that affect energy efficiency refurbishment in relation to specific contexts.

The study represents a potential addition to motivational theory and concepts for use within the field of energy efficient refurbishment of the owner‐occupied housing stock. Implications for future government policy and towards raising the motivation of owner‐occupiers are identified: it can be used to shape national and local policy and information campaigns to motivate energy efficiency refurbishment in the owner‐occupied housing stock. To be successful, this should take differing internal factors and contexts into consideration and the dynamic nature of owner‐occupier motivation. The model can also be used by industry professionals to better understand the owner‐occupier customer motivations for energy efficiency refurbishment and therein provide a better service.

This paper aims to, using a systematic mixed-methods based monitoring and evaluation approach, investigate the unintended consequences of physical and technical home improvements on energy use, indoor environmental conditions and occupant behaviour in community-led retrofits. The study is part of a UK Research Council funded research project on evaluating the impacts and effectiveness of low carbon communities on energy behaviours.

A graduated measurement, monitoring and evaluation framework has been developed and applied to gather quantitative and qualitative data on energy use and behaviours has been developed and applied to 88 households across the UK. A mixed-methods approach is used, including occupant interviews, questionnaires, activity diaries and continuous physical monitoring of energy use, environmental conditions and low-carbon technologies.

The study has uncovered a number of unintended consequences associated with home energy improvements, both beneficial and detrimental, including improved comfort levels in retrofitted dwellings and reduction in energy use but also an increased likelihood of overheating following fabric improvements, potential under-performance of low-carbon systems due to lack of understanding and inadequate installation and commissioning, along with adaptive energy behaviours leading to increased energy use and a widening gap between predicted and actual savings.

Although 63 case study households are involved, it is difficult to provide statistical analysis from the emerging findings.

This paper demonstrates the unintended consequences of home energy improvements. It aims to bring awareness of these issues to various sectors and stakeholders involved in delivering community retrofit programmes or the National Green Deal programme.

The paper fulfils an identified need to study the impacts of home energy improvements within existing homes through a robust, comprehensive M&E approach.

Pressure is growing globally for larger businesses to improve the energy performance of the buildings in which they operate. Property or facility managers are usually responsible for these improvements through energy‐led refurbishment. The number and complexity of possible interventions pose challenges that these professionals attempt to meet by using decision support tools (DSTs). The work aims to identify key features of DSTs for energy‐led building refurbishment and define an optimum approach.

A desk study examined ten DSTs reported in the available literature and evaluated them against a set of desirable attributes that a property or facility manager would value for this task.

The results of the desk study concluded that no DST offers every feature and that there is an opportunity for a new DST for energy‐led refurbishment. An optimum DST template is proposed, consisting of a seven‐step process from assessment of the existing state of the building through to continuous evaluation and improvement of the refurbished building.

The work combines the best features of available DSTs into a novel optimised strategy for energy‐led refurbishment of non‐domestic buildings, which is geographically non‐specific and could be applied anywhere in the world.

This work is initiated under the premise that reliable evaluation methods are necessary to ensure investments in energy conservation, and the purpose of this paper is to contribute to that literature. It describes some pilot changes and their impact in an actual field study oriented toward upgrading municipal public housing (MPH) units.

The research for this paper was connected to an MPH refurbishment project situated in northern Sweden. The overall energy efficiency goal within the project was a 40-50 percent reduction in the supplied energy for central electricity, domestic hot water and space heating. In order to evaluate if these goals were feasible, a measurement system was installed in a pilot building and in a neighboring building used as a reference. The evaluation was conducted by comparing the post-retrofit performance of the pilot building with the performance of the reference building when it was kept in its initial state (a comparison possible because both buildings had initial similarities).

Impacts could be quantified insofar as a reference (control) building in the same environment was sustained for comparison purposes. A 43 percent improvement was observed in energy utilization in the pilot building compared to its reference companion (99.8 vs 174.5 kWh/m² per year). When the approach described herein was applied to new construction, the present goal of 65 kWh/m² was approached as measured by Swedish standards.

Results should be of interest to academics in the housing field, professionals involved in refurbishment and residents themselves, renting MPH flats.

This study is unique in the following ways: first, it really was a field experiment with a control, thus it did not have any exogenous interference in interpreting results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind. The second interesting characteristic was that results were subsequently used in the refurbishment of other buildings in the complex and in the construction of others. The major value of the paper may be associated with its timing. It comes at a time when the Kyoto agreement has raised concerns about sustainability, but also at a time when many buildings are facing a need for refurbishment.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.