hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Energy renovation versus demolition and construction of a new building—a comparative analysis of a Swedish multi-family building
Division of Energy Systems, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Division of Energy Systems, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Energy Systems and Building Technology. Division of Energy Systems, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3472-4210
2019 (English)In: Energies, ISSN 1996-1073, E-ISSN 1996-1073, Vol. 12, no 11, article id 2218Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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. © 2019 by the authors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
MDPI AG , 2019. Vol. 12, no 11, article id 2218
Keywords [en]
Demolition, Energy performance, Energy renovation, Energy use, Life cycle cost, Multi-family buildings, New construction, OPERA-MILP, Optimization, Renovation, Cost benefit analysis, Costs, Energy conservation, Energy efficiency, Integer programming, Life cycle, Optimal systems, Lifecycle costs, New constructions, Construction
National Category
Energy Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-30547DOI: 10.3390/en12112218ISI: 000472635900185Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85067238560OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-30547DiVA, id: diva2:1344985
Funder
Swedish Research Council FormasAvailable from: 2019-08-22 Created: 2019-08-22 Last updated: 2019-08-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Moshfegh, Bahram

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Moshfegh, Bahram
By organisation
Energy Systems and Building Technology
In the same journal
Energies
Energy Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf