This theme has three criteria that assess the holistic nature of building codes including their total performance with regard to end use, primary energy and GHG emissions.The assessments consider whether a performance-based approach has been adopted, taking into consideration how much energy is included and whether integrated or bioclimatic designs are the basis for the energy efficiency code.
This criterion seeks to determine whether the code has adopted a holistic understanding of buildings in the sense that the main requests of the building code are based on total energy performance. This can either be based on a performance calculation or a figure based on metered consumption. The energy performance should include the balance and integration between different elements in the building and the technical system. The code will be assessed in order to determine whether the performance allows and stimulates integrated design or bioclimatic design principles adapted to the actual climate and whether it gives priority to passive design of buildings. The use of energy performance values should be mandatory.
This criterion is assessed based on the following questions:
Does the code set an overall performance frame for buildings (kWh/m2 per year)?
Does the code take primary energy use, GHG emissions or peak loads into account?
Does the calculation take passive heating, passice cooling, natural ventilation, natural light and shading or other natural elements into account?
Does the code actively encourage integrated or bioclimatic design of buildings?
Does the code have a clear definition of building performance?
This criterion assesses the energy uses included in the energy performance assessment of buildings as outlined by each code. The assessment includes energy used for heating and cooling, for lighting and for installed equipment and appliances. It will also assess on delivered or final as well as primary energy. Part of the assessment will focus specifically on lighting, dehumidification, hot water, elevators, pumps, transformers and appliances.
This criterion will be assesed using the following sub-criterion:
Do the requirements include most of the energy consumption in a building (i.e. heating, cooling, ventilation and dehumidification)?
Does the performance include domestic hot water?
Does the code include lighting requirements?
Does the code include energy consumption such as elevators, appliances, pumps and fans?
Does the code include conversion and transportation losses?
This point assess whether the building code encourages or mandates bioclimatic design and/or integrated design to optimise the use of passive energy. The focus will be to firstly reduce energy use and then to ensure that energy requirements are met by indirect/passive energy. The majority of this passive energy should be supplied by local active renewable sources with the remainder supplied as efficiently as possible. The assessment will also take into consideration use of overall lifecycle principles in design and implementation.
The following questions are designed to assist the above assessment:
Does the code significantly reduce energy needs for instance by setting requirements for the buildings efficiency and renewable energy?
Does the code require/strongly encourage efficient use of passive heating and passive cooling?
Does the code require/strongly encourage natural ventilation?
Does the code require/encourage daylight use?
Does the code require/encourage shading?
Does the code require/encourage a reduction for energy provided for renewable energy systems?
Does the code include life cycle assessment?
This theme has 3 criteria that assess the dynamic elements of the code in terms of regular updates. It assess past revisions of the code as well as future targets and zero energy goals. The scoring will further assess how codes encourage the implementation of levels beyond code, driving innovation and increasing efficiency of building beyond the bare minimum.
This criterion assesses whether a realistic target for having zero energy buildings as standard by a certain date has been set and whether an appropriate roadmap for achieveing this has been outlined. The assessment will also consider how much of the consumption is included in this definition. A target of this type is often set outside the code itself and should be adopted and strongly mandated. This assessment will have regard to such supporting regulations or agreements.
The following sub-criterion will be considered:
Has the path to ZEB performance/compliance been clearly set out for the future?
Are there binding targets based on a roadmap that are achieveable, realistic and relevant to the country/region and state of the market? Are there aspirational targets for revisions towards zero energy?
How quickly will a target for reaching net zero energy buildings be achieved (for instance by 2020 or 2030 been set)? Is this realistic given the actual state?
Are all end uses included in this target?
This criterion seeks to assess whether there is a clear and well documented process for ensuring regular updates of the energy requirements in building code. The clearer this process is mandated the better. It is also an advantage if goals or targets have been clearly defined as part of the process., such as aspirational targets. The code will be further assessed based on how the process involves and informs important stakeholders at an early state, as this will be critical to the use and acceptance of codes.
The following sub-criterion will support the assessment:
Does the code have regular and frequest revision cycles (max 3-5 years)? Has this process been followed in the past?
Are key stakeholders involved in the development of new requirements? Is the development of the code followed by training activities?
Does the code adoption take life cycle assessment into account? Are the requirements supporting a dynamic and ambitious development of codes by including economic rational and other benefits?
Does the code or legislation have aspirational targets for the future revisions that have already been defined? Are targets clearly set out and well defined at least 2-3 years in advance?