IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i18p10189-d633988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review of Existing Energy Retrofit Decision Tools for Homeowners

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed Seddiki

    (Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, UK)

  • Amar Bennadji

    (Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, UK)

  • Richard Laing

    (Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, UK)

  • David Gray

    (Cultural and Creative Business School, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, UK)

  • Jamal M. Alabid

    (Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen AB10 7QB, UK)

Abstract

Energy retrofit tools are considered by many countries as one of the strongest incentives to encourage homeowners to invest in energy renovation. These tools help homeowners to get an initial overview of suitable retrofit measures. Although a large number of energy retrofit tools have been developed to inspire and educate homeowners, energy renovation by individual homeowners is still lagging and the impact of current tools is insufficient as awareness and information issues remain one of main obstacles that hinder the uptake of energy retrofitting schemes. This research extends the current knowledge by analysing the characteristics of 19 tools from 10 different countries. The selected tools were analysed in terms of energy calculation methods, features, generation and range of retrofit measures, evaluation criteria, and indications on financial support. The review indicates that: (1) most toolkits use empirical data-driven methods, pre-simulated databases, and normative calculation methods; (2) few tools generate long-term integrated renovation packages; (3) technological, social, and aesthetic aspects are rarely taken into consideration; (4) the generation of funding options varies between the existing tools; (5) most toolkits do not suggest specific retrofit solutions adapted to traditional buildings; and (6) preferences of homeowners in terms of evaluation criteria are often neglected.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed Seddiki & Amar Bennadji & Richard Laing & David Gray & Jamal M. Alabid, 2021. "Review of Existing Energy Retrofit Decision Tools for Homeowners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10189-:d:633988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10189/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10189/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alex González Cáceres & Carolina Recart & Rodrigo Espinoza & Ariel Bobadilla, 2016. "Simple Tool to Evaluate Airtightness in Chilean Homes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, October.
    2. Achtnicht, Martin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2014. "Factors influencing German house owners' preferences on energy retrofits," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 254-263.
    3. Chanoch Friedman & Nir Becker & Evyatar Erell, 2018. "Retrofitting residential building envelopes for energy efficiency: motivations of individual homeowners in Israel," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(10), pages 1805-1827, August.
    4. Lee, Sang Hoon & Hong, Tianzhen & Piette, Mary Ann & Taylor-Lange, Sarah C., 2015. "Energy retrofit analysis toolkits for commercial buildings: A review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 1087-1100.
    5. Ravetz, Joe, 2008. "State of the stock--What do we know about existing buildings and their future prospects?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4462-4470, December.
    6. Seddiki, Mohammed & Bennadji, Amar, 2019. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for electricity generation in a residential building," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 101-117.
    7. Rossano Albatici & Alessia Gadotti & Christian Baldessari & Michela Chiogna, 2016. "A Decision Making Tool for a Comprehensive Evaluation of Building Retrofitting Actions at the Regional Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marko Å ostar & Ines Å koko, 2024. "Unpacking the Complexities of Energy Renovation Programs for Family Houses: Case Study of Croatia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 12-25, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henrik Engelbrecht Foldager & Rasmus Camillus Jeppesen & Muhyiddine Jradi, 2019. "DanRETRO: A Decision-Making Tool for Energy Retrofit Design and Assessment of Danish Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Feser, Daniel & Bizer, Kilian & Rudolph-Cleff, Annette & Schulze, Joachim, 2016. "Energy audits in a private firm environment: Energy efficiency consultants' cost calculation for innovative technologies in the housing sector," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 275, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    3. Henningsen, Geraldine & Wiese, Catharina, 2019. "Do Household Characteristics Really Matter? A Meta-Analysis on the Determinants of Households’ Energy-Efficiency Investments," MPRA Paper 101701, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Feser, Daniel & Runst, Petrik, 2015. "Energy efficiency consultants as change agents? Examining the reasons for EECs’ limited success," ifh Working Papers 1 (2015), Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    5. Rachael Sherman & Hariharan Naganathan & Kristen Parrish, 2021. "Energy Savings Results from Small Commercial Building Retrofits in the US," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Shoaib Azizi & Gireesh Nair & Thomas Olofsson, 2020. "Adoption of Energy Efficiency Measures in Renovation of Single-Family Houses: A Comparative Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    7. Fischbacher, Urs & Schudy, Simeon & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Heterogeneous preferences and investments in energy saving measures," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    8. Florian Knobloch & Hector Pollitt & Unnada Chewpreecha & Vassilis Daioglou & Jean-Francois Mercure, 2017. "Simulating the deep decarbonisation of residential heating for limiting global warming to 1.5C," Papers 1710.11019, arXiv.org, revised May 2018.
    9. Rockstuhl, Sebastian & Wenninger, Simon & Wiethe, Christian & Ahlrichs, Jakob, 2022. "The influence of risk perception on energy efficiency investments: Evidence from a German survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Feser, Daniel & Runst, Petrik, 2016. "Energy efficiency consultants as change agents? Examining the reasons for EECs’ limited success," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 309-317.
    11. Tian, Shen & Shao, Shuangquan & Liu, Bin, 2019. "Investigation on transient energy consumption of cold storages: Modeling and a case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 1-9.
    12. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    13. Felipe Encinas & Carlos Marmolejo-Duarte & Carlos Aguirre-Nuñez & Francisco Vergara-Perucich, 2020. "When Residential Energy Labeling Becomes Irrelevant: Sustainability vs. Profitability in the Liberalized Chilean Property Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-17, November.
    14. Sun, Kaiyu & Hong, Tianzhen & Taylor-Lange, Sarah C. & Piette, Mary Ann, 2016. "A pattern-based automated approach to building energy model calibration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 214-224.
    15. Tu, Gengyang & Faure, Corinne & Schleich, Joachim & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte, 2021. "The heat is off! The role of technology attributes and individual attitudes in the diffusion of Smart thermostats – findings from a multi-country survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    16. Jun Dong & Dongxue Wang & Dongran Liu & Palidan Ainiwaer & Linpeng Nie, 2019. "Operation Health Assessment of Power Market Based on Improved Matter-Element Extension Cloud Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-25, October.
    17. Harmsen - van Hout, Marjolein & Ghosh, Gaurav & Madlener, Reinhard, 2013. "The Impact of Green Framing on Consumers’ Valuations of Energy-Saving Measures," FCN Working Papers 7/2013, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    18. Xin Liang & Geoffrey Qiping Shen & Li Guo, 2019. "Optimizing Incentive Policy of Energy-Efficiency Retrofit in Public Buildings: A Principal-Agent Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Alessia Buda & Ernst Jan de Place Hansen & Alexander Rieser & Emanuela Giancola & Valeria Natalina Pracchi & Sara Mauri & Valentina Marincioni & Virginia Gori & Kalliopi Fouseki & Cristina S. Polo Lóp, 2021. "Conservation-Compatible Retrofit Solutions in Historic Buildings: An Integrated Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    20. Park, Jiyong & Woo, JongRoul, 2023. "Analyzing consumers' willingness to purchase energy-efficient appliances in response to energy price changes: Case study of South Korea," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10189-:d:633988. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.