the azeb methodology: 17 steps to create affordable nearly ... · the azeb methodology: 17 steps to...

The AZEB Methodology: 17 steps to create affordable nearly zero energy buildings

The AZEB Methodology:

17 steps to create affordable nearly Zero Energy Buildings

November 2019


The AZEB Methodology: 17 Steps to create affordable nearly Zero Energy Buildings

November 2019

Work package 2| A methodology for developing Cost Effective nZEB with RES

Deliverable D2.4 | Common methodology for cost effective nZEB with RES (Process for Cost Reduction - 2.0)

Partners DNA in de Bouw, The Netherlands Obrascon Huarte Lain SA, Spain Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation, Spain Vivienda y Suelo de Euskadi, S.A., Spain Passive House Institute, Germany Association pour la Recherche et le Developpement des Methodes et Processus Industrielles, France Oberon Konzeptbau, Bulgaria Politecnico di Milano, Italy


Index Index ................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 7

Introduction and guide to the reader ................................................................................................ 8

1 Introducing the AZEB Roadmap ................................................................................................. 9

1.1 Why a roadmap for affordable (neary) zero energy buildings? ............................................... 9

1.2 For whom is the AZEB roadmap most useful? ........................................................................ 9

1.3 The basic approach: Going on a client journey with a multidisciplinary team ......................... 9

1.4 The three keys to success for creating affordable nZEBs ....................................................... 11

1.4.1 Key 1 of the AZEB methodology: Quality Assurance ................................................ 11

1.4.2 Key 2 of the AZEB methodology: Procurement ......................................................... 12

1.4.3 Key 3 to the AZEB methodology: Integrated project delivery .................................. 12

1.5 Overview of the 17 steps of the AZEB roadmap ..................................................................... 14

1.6 Recommendations on how to use the AZEB methodology ................................................... 15

2 | The AZEB methodology in the initiative phase: setting the stage (Step 1-6) ....................... 17

2.1 Step 1: Identify relevant contextual aspects ......................................................................... 18

2.1.1 Stakeholders and main activities for step 1 ............................................................... 18

2.1.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for Step 1 ................................................ 18

2.1.3 Example of the potential impact of step 1................................................................. 19

2.1.4 Categorization of Step 1: essential ............................................................................ 19

2.2 Step 2: Set balanced requirements ...................................................................................... 20

2.2.1 Stakeholders and main activities for Step 2 .............................................................. 20


2.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 2 ................................................................ 21


2.3 Step 3: Standardize costing practices ................................................................................... 22

2.3.1 Stakeholders and main activities Step 3 .................................................................... 22


2.3.3 Examples of the potential impact of Step 3 ............................................................... 23


2.4 Step 4: Install a quality assurance process ........................................................................... 24

2.4.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 4 ................................................................ 25

2.4.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for use in Step 4 ..................................... 25




2.5 Step 5: Conceive & select alternatives .................................................................................. 27

2.5.1 Stakeholders and main activities Step 5 .................................................................... 28




2.6 Step 6: Define practices for procurement and guarantees .................................................... 29



2.6.3 Examples of the potential impact of Step 6 ............................................................... 30


3 The AZEB methodology in the design phase: selecting and integrating solutions for creating an AZEB (Step 7-8) ............................................................................................................................ 33

3.1 Step 7: Involve a multi-disciplinary team ............................................................................. 34





3.2 Step 8: Design an optimized building ................................................................................. 36





4 AZEB methodology in the construction phase: efficiently organizing resources to deliver the AZEB as planned (Step 9-13) ............................................................................................................ 41

4.1 Step 9: Set up collaborative construction practices .............................................................. 42





4.2 Step 10: Teach on-site team practical nZEB skills .................................................................. 44

4.2.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 10 .............................................................. 44

4.2.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for use in Step 10 ................................... 45

4.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 10 .............................................................. 45

4.2.4 Categorization of Step 10: essential .......................................................................... 45

4.3 Step 11: Involve team in time, quality and cost control .......................................................... 46





4.3.4 Categorization of Step 11: optional ........................................................................... 47

4.4 Step 12: Commission the building services ........................................................................... 47





4.5 Step 13: Create a building dossier ......................................................................................... 50

4.5.1 Stakeholders and activities in Step 13 ....................................................................... 50




5 The AZEB methodology in the use & maintenance phase: monitoring, optimisations and end user behaviour (Step 14-15) ............................................................................................................ 52

5.1 Step 14: Monitor and optimize performance ........................................................................ 53





5.2 Step 15: Guide user behaviour .............................................................................................. 55



5.2.3 Categorization of Step 15: Essential .......................................................................... 56

6 Going the extra mile: Extend your impact (step 16-17) .......................................................... 57

6.1 Step 16: Evaluate and apply the lessons learned ................................................................... 58




6.1.4 Categorization of Step 16: Bonus ............................................................................... 59

6.2 Step 17: Integrate the value chain ........................................................................................ 60

6.2.1 Stakeholders and activities involved in Step 17......................................................... 60



6.2.4 Categorization of Step 17: Bonus ............................................................................... 61


Annex 1 | Assessing the impact of the AZEB Roadmap ................................................................... 62

Annex 2 | Factsheets with basic information on AZEB case studies ............................................... 66

Annex 3 | Overview of the AZEB project partners .......................................................................... 71

Annex 4 | References and acknowledgement ................................................................................. 73


Executive Summary The AZEB methodology was developed to provide a practical answer on how to make nZEB developments throughout Europe more affordable. Each project is depicted as a client’s journey towards their envisioned affordable nZEB, with a multidisciplinary team assisting the client to reach their targeted nZEB within the agreed boundaries of time, cost and quality. The AZEB approach brings clarity and simplicity to nZEB projects, guiding clients, project developers and project managers steadfastly through all critical decisions to achieve their goals. It consists of the 17 step AZEB roadmap, 3 keys for creating affordable nZEBs, a backpack with available tools, methods and references for implementation and a compass to keep the end goal in sight. In this report an elaborate introduction is given to the complete methodology including the steps, methods and tools. For further references and materials to deepen their knowledge, the reader is directed to the website www.azeb.eu. Through this site downloads are available, an e-learning environment can be accessed and opportunities for personal coaching and consulting are listed.

Figure 1 The AZEB roadmap with 17 steps

http://www.azeb.eu/


Introduction and guide to the reader The purpose of this report is to give the reader a complete overview of the AZEB methodology, as a starting point to get acquainted with it and prepare for application of the 17 steps and the associated activities and tools. We advise anyone interested to use the AZEB methodology, to first read this report completely in order to fully understand the basics of the method and the coherence between the various elements. For further deepening of your knowledge and skills, we encourage you to refer to our online learning environment at www.azeb.eu/learn, available from february 2020 onwards. There you can get access to a rich base of learning materials facilitating the actual implementation of each step in your own projects and daily activities. Also you will find references there for other relevant nZEB training. In addition there is an opportunity for personal coaching or consultancy or in-company training to apply the method in your project or organisation, from one of our partners. Details on this can be found on our website www.azeb.eu. In chapter 1 of this report we explain why the AZEB methodology was developed, which principles have been leading in its development and what the AZEB methodology contains. In chapter 2, 3, 4 and 5 we describe each step in detail for the initiation, design, construction and use&maintenance phase. For each step provide you with

a short summary an overview of suggested stakeholders to involve in this step suggested references, methods and tooling for use in this step, which are divided in general, azeb-specific1 and examples

of other relevant EU projects one or more examples to illustrate application and potential impact of the step a categorization of the step as essential or optional

These chapters contain 15 steps in total, for application during a project. In chapter 6 we challenge you to extend your impact beyond each single project, by implementing the 2 “bonus”-steps. In Annex 1 suggestions are given for indicators to measure the economic, social and environmental performance of your nZEB. In Annex 2 a factsheet for each of the five AZEB case studies is given, which are referred to in the examples throughout this report. In Annex 3 we give a short overview of the partners involved in the AZEB project. In Annex 4 acknowledgement and references are given for the contents of this report. We wish you an inspirational read and sincerally hope to meet you personally during your learning process.

1 The azeb specific tools and methods are available through www.azeb.eu and/or the AZEB e-learning platform.

Important note for the reader on interpretation of the steps in the AZEB Roadmap: The 17 steps are depicted serially in the roadmap. This is for readability reasons. In real projects, many steps are iterative. They will be initiated at a specific point and then revisited several times in the course of the project to update the information based on new developments or to involve new stakeholders. In the text for each step we suggest stakeholders and sources for information to involve. These are not always available yet when initiating a step, especially in the early phases. We did however choose to list them anyway, to make sure you consider them when organizing the step. When they are not yet available you have at least two options: 1. Involve them later in these activities as soon as they come on-board, or 2. Organize a representative for this role to at least be able to tap into their specific knowledge and this way improve your decision making.

http://www.azeb.eu/

http://www.azeb.eu/


1 Introducing the AZEB Roadmap 1.1 Why a roadmap for affordable (neary) zero energy buildings? Europe is currently failing at making nZEBs the standard. Largely because they are perceived by the market as too expensive, and having too many uncertainties regarding the return on investment. However, due to European Directives 2010/31/EU, 2012/27/EU and amendment 2018/844, the nZEB standard will be compulsary for every new building created from January 2021 onwards. This means every client and building professional will then need to deal with this challenge: How do we make nZEBs affordable, while maintaining the targeted long term environmental, social and economic performance? The good news is that many technical, organisational and legal solutions to do this are available. However, they are scattered around across disciplines and even industries and in practice are rarely integrated to achieve the synergy needed for creating affordable high-performing nZEBs. Clients and building professionals alike, are often overwhelmed by the possibilities, do not know how to integrate these and how to assess the associated opportunities and risks and therefore often resort to the old ways of working. It seems that what is needed is a clear roadmap with a compass and a toolkit to guide client, investor and projectmanagement to the targeted affordable nZEB step by step. This is exactly what the AZEB approach does. This report explains and visualizes the rational behind and the 17 steps within the roadmap and the associated tools and methods. Through the website www.azeb.eu a dedicated e-learning environment as well as the AZEB project support services can be accessed. The AZEB approach brings clarity and simplicity to guide your project steadfastly through all critical decisions. It will help you transform the vast and complex range of potential solutions into an optimized and affordable nZEB project. 1.2 For whom is the AZEB roadmap most useful? The AZEB roadmap is set up firstly for clients, investors and project managers to ensure that when developing an nZEB, no critical activities or information are overlooked or omitted and nZEB performance according to requirements can be contractually guaranteed. The main risks for clients, investors and projectmanagers are investment cost overruns, often due to failure costs in the various project phases, and underperforming nZEBs causing client and/or user dissatisfaction and possibly overruns in operational costs. Of all project stakeholders, clients, investors and project managers have most vested interest in the integrated outcome of the project: the environmental, social and economic performance of the nZEB. They also have the responsibility and authority to organize and guide the numerous stakeholders throughout the project such as architects and designers, contractors, users, engineers, tradespeople at the construction site, maintenance professionals, commissioning authorities, suppliers of materials and services, energy consultants, energy service companies, energy companies, financial consultants et cetera. The AZEB roadmap covers all necessary roles and critical activities for delivering an affordable nZEB. This means that all roles involved in the building project will find interesting material to learn how to perform their activities better. The AZEB roadmap and the associated e-learning and project support services greatly facilitates clients, investors and project managers to organize their projectmanagement and involve, guide and educate their stakeholders optimally towards affordable high-performing nZEBs. 1.3 The basic approach: Going on a client journey with a multidisciplinary team Within AZEB we identify two main stakeholder groups for the execution of building projects: decision makers (clients) and professional experts. Decision makers can be professional clients, like housing corporations or project developers, or investors. They may also be private clients like home owners. Professional experts can be architects, engineers, tradespeople, financial consultants et cetera. When a project is initiated, a specific client (decision maker) embarks on a journey together with a group of experts. But both have quite distinct roles. The client (decision maker) is the initiator of the journey, driven by a set of needs which is translated into a vision, a dream of the end result.The journey of the client can be characterized by a chain of decisions that need to be made during the lifecycle of the project. The success of creating an affordable nZEB mainly depends on the quality of the decisions which are made on that journey

http://www.azeb.eu/


by this decision maker. Decisions made early in the project, in the initiative and design phases, are even more critical for eventual success than decisions made in later phases as we will explain later. The decision maker will be happy and satisfied when the physical end result of the journey (the actual building in use) fulfills the needs that drove the decision maker to embark on this journey in the first place. The journey of the group of experts may be characterized as being servants to the client. In the different stages of the journey they provide the client with the right information, materials, tools and methods to make the best possible decision at each crossing in order for him or her to reach his or her wishes. And they offer their skills to execute the decisions along the way, so the journey can progress. The experts are happy and satisfied when two boundary conditions are met. In the first place they are happy when the client is happy. This implies that the needs and wishes of the client need to be kept in view during all project phases so they can be met in the realized building. The second condition for experts to be happy and satisfied at the end of the journey, is when their own organizational and personal needs have received proper attention on the way; in effect this means the project has created healthy profits and fulfilling work for each expert involved. With the AZEB Roadmap and associated tooling and project support we help clients, investors and projectmanagers and their multidisciplinary teams on their journey to reach an affordable new (nearly) zero energy building. We offer the team the following:

The AZEB approach is visualized in figure 2.

Figure 2 The AZEB approach: A client journey with a multidisciplinary team

• A compass to ensure the view of the end target: clear environmental, social and economic indicators of the building’s performance

• A roadmap with all significant milestones on the way: 17 steps to be taken in the development of the affordable nZEB

• Three keys to better understand why these specific steps are taken • A backpack containing useful knowledge, skills and tools to use on the way in each activity or step:

downloads of information, online lessons, IT-tools et cetera


1.4 The three keys to success for creating affordable nZEBs The AZEB roadmap contains 17 steps to guide the project team in developing affordable nZEBs. Affordability can be achieved in one of three ways, or a combination of these:

1. reducing investment costs 2. increasing environmental, social and economic performance in relation to investment costs 3. guaranteeing performance at building level and paving the way for investments schemes based on lifecycle costs

Obviously creating an nZEB demands proper technical knowledge on how to design, build and maintain an nZEB. Technical knowledge however is not enough to create affordability. The AZEB methodology offers the additional knowledge and skills to do this by providing three general types of solutions2:

In the following paragraphs the rational behind each key is shortly explained and the associated steps are depicted.

1.4.1 Key 1 of the AZEB methodology: Quality Assurance All buildings should in essence be performing according to specifications on at least three areas: environmental (e.g. energy and water use), social (e.g. comfort and health) and economic (e.g. investment costs, operational costs, real estate value). A specific challenge with nZEBs is that nZEB performance depends much more than conventional buildings on the integrated functioning of a range of elements, building services and materials and even user behaviour. This requires specific nZEB knowledge and skills from a variety of stakeholders to ensure the targeted performances, for example: Designers need to mitigate many potential conflicts, which may arise when integrating active and passive measures in the architectural design as these can influence all performance areas. Also, nZEBs require specific practical skills in the construction phase to ensure the critical details are indeed executed according to design. Then, specific knowledge and skills on the commissioning of the building services is needed to deliver the project and enter the use and maintenance phase. Finally, the user is encouraged to operate and maintain the building and its facilities in the intended way to ensure proper functioning. An appropriate measurement and verification procedure is needed to check the performance, particularly if it is contractual. Since the required nZEB knowledge and skills are not yet common practice in the building sector, attention for clear performance targets and contineous quality assurance throughout the various project phases is specifically important when managing nZEB projects. This way trade-offs between various options and performance areas can be substantiated for improved decision making and potential performance gaps will be identified in an early stage, enabling cost-effective mitigation measures. Also costs of failure will be greatly reduced in each project phase. The following steps in the AZEB roadmap are about quality assurance:

2 This division in three keys was inspired by PHD dissertation of Mikko Kantola: Managing the delivery and commissioning of nearly zero energy building projects, 2015, Aalto University available online at: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/17810

Key 1: Quality assurance Key 2: Procurement Key 3: Integrated project delivery

https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/17810


1.4.2 Key 2 of the AZEB methodology: Procurement Procurement practices, like tendering, contracting and choice of reimbursement methods greatly influence the collaborative conditions in a building project. Modern methods aim to stimulate collaborative behaviour in the various project stakeholders, like working towards a common goal by sharing ideas, minimizing competition and creating mutual dependancies in managing risks and achieving success. As should be clear by now, in the case of nZEBs this multi-disciplinary collaboration is critical to achieve affordability. Examples of modern procurement methods are best value procurement, qualification based selection (QBS), DBFMO contracts (design-build-finance-maintain-operate), multi-party agreements (MPA) and open-book compensation structures. The choice for the optimal procurement method for a specific nZEB project is dependant of the project’s contextual aspects (step 1) performance targets (step 2), the preferred alternative (step 5) and the preferred project delivery system (see next paragraph). The following step in the AZEB roadmap is about the procurement:

1.4.3 Key 3 to the AZEB methodology: Integrated project delivery Integrated project delivery can be defined as a collaborative alliance of people, systems, business structures and practices into a process that harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimize project results, increase value to the owner, reduce waste, and maximize efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication, and construction3. A combination of the right processes, tooling and attitudes is required to achieve this. To further emphasize the value of this integrated approach to increase the affordability of nZEBs, we elaborate a little on this in this paragraph. When costs of any building project, also the nZEB projects, are analyzed along their lifecycle, it can be concluded that most costs incur in the construction phase and in the use and maintenance phase4. When analyzing available solutions to reduce the costs in these two phases, it soon becomes clear that most of these solutions should be applied in the initiative phase and design phase of the project. These cost-effective solutions are for example in the areas of design principles, choice of location and orientation of the building, integrated design processes and value chain integration.

3 Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_project_delivery 4 Two case studies that demonstrate this point are described in AZEB report “Life cycle costs and environmental performance for case study NZEB’s in operation”, available at www.azeb.eu.

Steps in the AZEB Roadmap for using Key 1: Quality Assurance Initiative phase: Step 2: Set balanced requirements

Step 4: Plan validation and verification Construction phase: Step 12: Commission the building services

Step 13: Create a project dossier Use and maintenance phase: Step 14: Monitor and optimize performance Extend your impact: Step 16: Evaluate and apply lessons learned

Step in the AZEB Roadmap for using Key 2: Procurement Initiative phase: Step 6: Define practices for procurement and guarantees

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_project_delivery

http://www.azeb.eu/


This implies that to reduce overall lifecycle costs of nZEB’s, more investment may be needed in the initiative and design phase to eventually reduce investments in the construction and operational costs in the use phase. As the costs actually incurring during these two phases are low in relation to the overall costs, this extra investment in the initiative and design phase usually pays off many times in the phases after. When we conclude that most solutions for cost reduction should be applied in the initiative and design phase, we do not mean that all knowledge of the construction, use & maintenance phases should be assumed with the experts traditionally associated with these first two phases. On the contrary. The main knowledge about potential cost reductions in the construction and use & maintenance phases is assumed to be with the experts related to these phases: construction specialists, maintenance professionals et cetera. Therefore, if we wish to capture the full potential for cost reduction of nZEBs, we need to involve these professionals from the later phases in the initiative and design phases. We organize an integrated design process with a multidisciplinary team. By choosing to work integratedly in the design phase we can implement ideas from specialists into the design to optimize it for cost effectiveness in the building phase. This may for example mean we design to use fewer materials in a specific detail, so we might among other things reduce the transport movements on the building site, reduce the amount of workers involved and reduce the potential of on site waiting lines and stock. In addition, we might implement ideas from maintenance specialists in the design, so we optimize it for cost effectiveness in the maintenance phase. We might for example choose a building service that has more than one functionality, so that only one mechanic periodically needs to service one installation, instead of two or more. Also, we may already design with the building’s end-of-life in mind. We may apply circular principles and involve material suppliers and even a demolition expert in the design, to help us determine which materials will be easily disassembled and re-used and how their characteristics may fit our project’s requirements. The figure below demonstrates this approach schematically. Figure 3 Schematic representation of workload distribution vs influence on cost and quality in the project's lifecycle

In traditional building projects, contrary to many other industries, integrated design processes including experts from multiple disciplines are not common practice yet. In steps 1, 3, 5, 7 and 8 of the AZEB Roadmap we offer methods and tooling to implement integrated project delivery in the initiative and design phase. In the construction phase, improving affordability through integrated project delivery revolves around efficient and effective collaboration between the client, projectmanager, various (sub-)contractors, tradespeople on-site, suppliers, commissioning


authority and building operator. Their intensive collaboration can prevent waste of time, energy, materials, and prevent rework and costs due to failure. Involving and motivating the entire team applying methods such as project start-ups, lean planner, daily scrum-sessions, on-site training and building information modelling creates the incentives, knowledge and skills for all participants to achieve and maybe even increase the value of the nZEB for the client. In steps 9-11 of the AZEB roadmap we offer methods and tooling to implement integrated project delivery in the construction phase. Step 15 in the use and maintenance phase ensures proper involvement of the user. The above describes integrated project delivery at the project level. However, even bigger impact can be achieved on nZEB environmental, social and economic performances, when collaborative practices and integrated project delivery are implemented at an organisational level by integration of the value chain. Tools and methods for this ambitious approach are given in step 17 of the AZEB Roadmap. The following steps in the AZEB roadmap are about integrated project delivery:

1.5 Overview of the 17 steps of the AZEB roadmap The AZEB Roadmap for a large part actually follows the regular phases and activities for any building project. However, we often propose another way of performing these regular activities, so we may achieve an affordable (nearly) zero energy building at the end of the project. In figure 4 on the next page the 17 steps of the AZEB methodology are shown, organized per project phase. Most steps are serial, some are in parallel and, obviously, it may happen in real life that one needs to revisit a step which has already been done, due to new developments. The steps are intended to help the projectmembers to have a clear overview of all that needs to be adressed during the project to achieve an AZEB. We stressed before that an integrated perspective is essential for success, and having this overview from the start aids in keeping this integrated perspective throughout the project. All participants are encouraged to continuously realize that no step can be performed in isolation as all steps are interrelated. And they are encouraged to consider these relationships and the consequences associated, with every step they take. In chapter 2-5 of this report, each phase and its associated steps will be addressed, to explain per step the specific AZEB approach in more detail.

Steps in the AZEB Roadmap for using Key 3: Integrated project delivery system Initiative phase: Step 1: Identify relevant contextual aspects

Step 3: Standardize costing practices Step 5: Conceive & select alternatives

Design phase: Step 7: Involve a multi-disciplinary team Step 8: Design an optimized building

Constrction phase: Step 9: Set up collaborative construction practices Step 10: Teach on-site team practical nZEB skills Step 11: Involve on-site team in time, quality and cost control

Use and maintenance phase: Step 15: Guide user behaviour Extend your impact: Step 17: Integrate the value chain


Figure 4 The AZEB roadmap with 17 steps

1.6 Recommendations on how to use the AZEB methodology Ideally the AZEB methodology is used from the start of the project. This way the full potential of the step-by-step approach can be seized. However, several case studies5 have shown that the AZEB approach can still create significant added value when a project has already progressed into the design, construction or even operational phase. Our recommendations for use of the roadmap are slightly different in these two situations. Recommendations for use when applying the roadmap right from the project start:

• Read this report and go through the AZEB steps in a chronological order to get to know their content • Study the relevant material in the e-learning environment: www.azeb.eu/learn (available from february 2020 onwards) • Decide if you wish to get project support for the implementation of the AZEB Roadmap • Download the AZEB workbook for your project (available from february 2020 onwards) • Download the communication kit to inform and motivate other stakeholders with regard to the AZEB Roadmap

(available from march 2020 onwards) • Implement the steps by following the roadmap and using suggested tools and methods • Evaluate results regularly and keep track of the lessons learned in your workbook

5 See for reports on the various case studies performed to demonstrate the application and impact of the AZEB methodology www.azeb.eu/cases

http://www.azeb.eu/learn

http://www.azeb.eu/cases

Stavrev, Dr. Atanas

Idea from David: change the color of the points for each step, depending on the importance of the step: essential – red, advanced – blue, optional - green


• Implement your lessons learned in new projects and improve your organisational processes

Recommendations for use when applying the roadmap while the project has progressed into design, construction or operational phase:

• Read this report and go through the AZEB steps in a chronological order to get to know their content • Study the relevant material in the e-learning environment: www.azeb.eu/learn (available from fabruary 2020 onwards) • Compare the current project progress and situation with the grouping of the steps according to project phases • Identify the relevant steps and assess

o what has already been done o what has not been done but can still be implemented o what has not been done which might have negative effects on performance o what can still be done now to mitigate these potential negative effects

• Decide if you wish to get project support for the implementation of the AZEB Roadmap • Download the AZEB workbook for your project (available from february 2020 onwards) • Download the communication kit to inform and motivate other stakeholders with regard to the AZEB Roadmap

(available from march 2020 onwards) • Implement the remaining steps and actions by following the roadmap and using suggested tools and methods • Evaluate results regularly and keep track of the lessons learned in your workbook. • Implement your lessons learned in new projects and improve your organisational processes

We recommend the AZEB Roadmap especially for public and private construction project developers and any type of project managers and coordinators who are responsible for the integrated project result, to guide their project management activities spanning the various project phases. Please refer to our project’s website for further information and guidance on how to apply the AZEB methodology: www.azeb.eu.

http://www.azeb.eu/learn


2 | The AZEB methodology in the initiative phase: setting the stage (Step 1-6)

In the initiative phase the main boundary conditions are set, within which the project takes place. Viewed from the perspective of decision quality, there is an emphasis on creating the appropriate frame and clear values and trade-offs. Setting these boundary conditions wrongly, or too tight, may lead to suboptimal processes, decisions and limited opportunities in later phases, which can strongly affect the ultimate cost-effectiveness of the project. The AZEB Roadmap proposes 6 critical steps in this initiative phase to ultimately achieve an AZEB. These steps are: Step 1: Identify relevant contextual aspects Step 2: Set balanced requirements Step 3: Standardize costing practices Step 4: Install a quality assurance process Step 5: Conceive & select alternatives Step 6: Define practices for procurement and guarantees In the following paragraphs each of these steps will be explained in detail.

Figure 5 The initiative phase in the AZEB roadmap


2.1 Step 1: Identify relevant contextual aspects

Contextual factors can greatly influence your nZEB’s performance over its lifecycle. Analyze the economic, social, physical, legal and organizational context. List all relevant risks and opportunities for your specific nZEB project. Include potential mitigation measures: How do you prevent risks occurring? How will you seize opportunities? Update the list regularly during your project.This issue list will improve subsequent project decision making.

2.1.1 Stakeholders and main activities for step 1 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, early advisor, (potential) users, policy makers (city planning, economic counsels, national and local regulators), branche organisations, owners and users of adjacent buildings/neighbourhood. The early advisor is responsible for initiating this step, consulting and involving the right stakeholders and sources for information and leading the activities listed below. Later in the project, a projectteam will take over this responsibility. The client is responsible to facilitate the resources and time for implementing this step, should participate in the process and is the ultimate decisionmaker with regard to the output of this step. Main activities:

Formulate the general project goals Do desk research to identify relevant stakeholders and sources for information Perform one or more workshops supplemented by interviews to identify and analyze relevant contextual factors List all relevant risks and opportunities for the project Include mitigation measures: how will you prevent risks occurring and seize opportunities in your project? Make sure to update this list regularly in the course of the project and use it as input when preparing critical decisions.

2.1.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for Step 1 General:

• Desk-research • Risk assessment techniques (see e.g. here) • SWOT analysis • Stakeholder analysis and profiling techniques (see marketing literature) • Business Model and Value Proposition canvasses (see e.g. here) • Process management techniques to increase stakeholder involvement

AZEB specific:

• AZEB checklist: Critical contextual factors for affordable nZEBs • AZEB guide: Organizing project start-ups and team sessions for AZEBs

Step 1 is part of key 3: integrated project delivery

https://www.garp.org/

https://www.strategyzer.com/


Examples of other relevant EU projects:

• Multiple benefits approach (for businesses) www.mbenefits.eu

2.1.3 Example of the potential impact of step 1 For a Spanish social housing project in Vitoria-Gasteiz, a multistorey appartment nZEB was developed with 176 flats. A high level of insulation was combined with two high performance natural gas boilers, complemented by cogeneration engines with electric power of 5,5 kW and thermal power of 12,5 kW each. Also included was a photovoltaic installation with a power of 59 kW. Currently, the cogeneration is not used and the electricity generated by the photovoltaic panels is delivered to the grid. This is due to the fact that the users of the dwellings are generally poor and do not wish to spend money on use of energy. They leave the heating off and minimize electricity use. This means that, unless the use of the installations will change, investment costs for these installations has been wasted. Also, the maintenance of these large installations is relatively expensive and in this case increases operational costs without delivering value to the user. Another form of waste. How could this have been prevented? Contextual social factors could have explicitly been studied in the initiative phase. Social housing agencies who are experienced in working with this specific target group as well as some potential users could have been involved to create a reliable user profile as one of the starting points for the design. The project team now chose a design which caused performance of the building to be dependant on user behaviour. At hindsight they might have been more cost-effective creating a design with use of more passive technologies and leaving the large installations out. Or they could have implemented specific contractual or communication measures with the current design, which would have guided users towards the preferred behaviour. Currently the project has not only done a misinvestment (incurring costs which deliver no added value for the owner or user), but also the public image of highly energy efficient buildings has been negatively affected for at least this target group and possibly the social housing agencies involved with them: it does not appear to be worth the investment this way. This example shows how contextual factors such as cultural characteristics of the users can impact economic, environmental and social performance of the developed nZEB.

2.1.4 Categorization of Step 1: essential Step 1 is essential for each project to reach an affordable nZEB. The level of depth of identifying and analyzing contextual factors may differ per project. The first risk and opportunity analysis, in combination with the client’s ambitions, is a good indicator to decide on needed depth. Changing circumstances during the project can also stimulate further investigation in time. This step is good to revisit more then once throughout the project lifecycle.


2.2 Step 2: Set balanced requirements

Clear and complete requirements describe your nZEB’s targeted performance. Create a balanced Program of Requirements including all relevant indicators for social, environmental and economic performance of the nZEB building. Update these requirements and indicators in every project phase and with every critical decision in the project’s lifecycle. This program of requirements is like a compass for your client and project team, helping them on each step of the journey to align their efforts towards the ultimate destination. It is also one of the most important documents which connects the client’s perspective and language with the professional’s perspective and language.

2.2.1 Stakeholders and main activities for Step 2 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, user, early advisor, projectmanager, architect, design specialist, construction specialist, commissioning specialist, maintenance specialist, demolition specialist. The advisor, or in a later stage, the projectteam is responsible to do the stakeholder analysis, to lead the process and create a correct and complete Program of Requirements. After this the projectteam is responsible to keep it updated, including the needed formal approvals from the relevant stakeholders when any changes are made. The client is responsible to facilitate the resources and time for the projectteam to do this, should participate in the process and is the ultimate decisionmaker with regard to the output of this step. Main activities:

Interview the client Organize a workshop with all relevant stakeholders to formulate the needs and wishes in all relevant areas Translate these needs and wishes into quantitative or qualitative, measurable indicators Create the initial program of requirements using a standardized format or specialized tooling Discuss this initial program of requirements in a second meeting with the relevant stakeholders Finalize this initial program of requirements as input for steps 3 to 6. Update the program of requirements regularly, in all project phases, specifically when critical decisions are made. Be sure to explicitly track changes in the requirements: what, when, why, initiatied by whom, approved by whom. This

way the history and rationale of the decision making is registered, so stakeholders involved later in the project can always track the origins of certain design or building specifics.


• Interviewing techniques • Workshop techniques for stakeholder involvement • Requirements engineering (see e.g. here) • Requirements tooling (for a comparative assessment of 21 requirements tools see here) • Client journey mapping and -tools (see e.g. here and here)

Step 2 is part of key 1: quality assurance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirements_engineering

https://assets.cdnma.com/13314/assets/Website%20Downloads/2016-Seilevel-RequirementsTool-Evauation-Report-FINAL.pdf

https://www.smaply.com/

https://uxpressia.com/


AZEB specific: For professionals:

• AZEB guide: Creating client requirements and V&V plans for nZEBs • AZEB format for Program of Requirements • Animation video on essential AZEB energy indicators • AZEB report: Definition of indicators and assessment methods for cost effective nZEB and Energy+ Buildings

• AZEB guide; Organizing project start-ups and team sessions for AZEBs • AZEB User misbehaviour guide – to better understand how buildings might be used • Factsheets with informational material for nZEB users (on e.g. thermal comfort, domestic hot water, lighting and

sharing common spaces)


• ALDREN; delivering a framework to translate the variety of indicators to financial value of the building: www.aldren.eu

2.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 2 At the Dutch-German border two municipalities, Winterswijk (NL) and Vreden (DE), are in the initiative phase to create a three storey utility building, intended to be used as a service center and multi-business office building stimulating cross-border collaborations. Before going into the tendering phase considerable time and effort has been dedicated to creating a balanced initial program of requirements, covering all relevant areas of performance for creating an affordable nZEB. This project was a case study for implementation of the AZEB Roadmap6. These actions were done by the stakeholders:

o Using the AZEB format for requirements and V&V measures o Filling it based on combined input from stakeholder workshop, the risk analysis session, the initial program of

requirements (by the municipalities), and more general AZEB methodology insights (e.g. D2.1) o Doing a workshop with project managers and experts from the municipalities to assess the suggested requirements

for being correct, and for their status (“must, want, nice to have”) o Rewriting first concept based on the workshop o Reviewing new concept in project management-team o Deciding on clearer signaling which requirements are actually required and which are “to inspire” the parties which

will make offers in the tendering process. o Final concept to be discussed with the interested project developers at the market consultation. o Final adjustments will be made before tendering.

These tools were used for these activities: o AZEB format for requirements o AZEB recommended indicators (report D2.1) o Stakeholder workshops to create and improve requirements

This was the estimated impact on cost and energy reduction compared to conventional projects and regular nZEB projects: o Conventional approach: In a conventional approach, much less attention would have been given to balancing

requirements from the side of the municipalities. Most likely they would have limited the set of requirements for the tendering and contracting of project developers to the main functionality, esthetics and possibly a cost category. This could have resulted in one-sided optimizations of for example costs and functionality, without considering issues like broader environmental impact, comfort and health, maintainability and flexibility of the building.

o nZEB approach: A regular nZEB approach would have added criteria for energy performance to the set of requirements. That would have been an improvement from the conventional approach. However, there would still

6 More information on this and other AZEB case studies is available at www.azeb.eu


be a risk of suboptimization in design and construction, which could for example result in a suboptimal user experience during the use phase.

o AZEB approach: The AZEB approach stimulated setting more elaborate and integrated criteria for energy performance, considering the lifecycle perspective. Also, it ensured to take up relevant indicators to optimize user experience, total environmental impact and lifecycle costs as well as value and occupancy rate of the building over its lifecycle. Finally, the AZEB approach stimulated some additional process requirements to add to the contract with the project developer, to make sure an integrated approach (step 7) will be used in the design phase of the project where most optimizations in cost and performance will be prepared and to ensure that proper validation and verification will take place during the complete project’s lifecycle.

As can be seen in this example, creating a balanced set of requirements can impact many project decisions and greatly influence the ultimate performance of the building over its entire lifecycle.

2.2.4 Categorization of Step 2: essential Essential. This step ensures a good compass and a common language for all players and is the main connection between user needs and professional solutions. No project should go without, and creating an AZEB is nearly impossible without this: Reducing costs without keeping track of the consequences on all relevant performance areas, can lead to faulty decisions with major impact on vital building performances. 2.3 Step 3: Standardize costing practices

Accurately assessing the affordability of your nZEB requires clarity on lifecycle costs. Each project stakeholder should estimate, calculate and report costs the same way. Use harmonized definitions of building elements, agree on clear definitions of costing parameters used, describe explicitly the relations between costing parameters, share a common digital costing tool and use proper nZEB references for costing estimates. Costing should not be just a thermometer to put in every now and then, but an integrated part of the project management process. Involve a costing expert right from the start, to enable reliable nZEB decision making.

2.3.1 Stakeholders and main activities Step 3 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, early advisor, project-team, costing expert, suppliers, (sub-) contracted parties. All stakeholders of the project that hold a relation to the financial aspects of the project should somehow be involved in this step. The early advisor, or in a later stage, the projectteam is responsible for implementing this step and involve the relevant stakeholders. Costing experts bring in their costing knowledge, their experience with costing in other projects and possibly their access to referential databases to ensure a higher reliability of the cost estimates (early in the project) and cost calculations (later in the project). The client is responsible to facilitate the resources and time for the projectteam to do this, should participate in the process and is the ultimate decisionmaker with regard to the output of this step.



Main activities

involve costing expertise in every phase of the project as a specific specialism in the multidisciplinary team set up an appropriate costing process for each project phase:

o adopt a lifecycle perspective on costs o choose proper nZEB references for estimates in the early project phases o use harmonized definitions of building elements as basis for all costing practices o agree on clear definitions for the costing parameters used o describe the relations between the various parameters o decide on a shared digital costing tool to report and communicate on costs

include the agreements on costing practices in relevant contractual documents further in the process


• EN-16627:2015 (LCC) • International Construction Measurement Standards (ICMS), see here • ISO 9836:2017(E) • Balanced scorecard • General accounting, budgetting and costing methods • Lean accounting • Available tools for lifecycle costing

AZEB specific:

• AZEB report: Definitions on Indicators and assessment methods for cost-effective nZEB and energy+ buildings, chapter 3 • AZEB report: Life cycle costs and environmental performance for case study nZEBs in operation • AZEB report: Overview of solutions for cost reduction throughout the building supply chain • Factsheet AZEB TCO tool • Demo AZEB TCO tool • AZEB exemplary standardized cost database


• Cravezero: have created a recent overview of existing tools for life cycle costing, created their own LCC tool and an LCC database for nZEBs. www.cravezero.eu

2.3.3 Examples of the potential impact of Step 3 As an example of the importance of a lifecycle perspective when making decisions in an nZEB project, we might look at the conclusions from the comparative LCC (life cycle costing) studies which have been performed on three projects, respectively in Spain, Bulgaria and The Netherlands. 7 In all case studies it was shown that initial investement (design and construction costs) is responsible for the majority of costs throughout the building’s lifecycle, followed by the product replacement and energy costs. The relative importance of energy costs is obviously much lower in nZEBs than in conventional buildings, coming to 8% of total lifecycle costs in the Bulgarian study and lower than 20% in both other studies. Initial investments can seriously improve the lifecycle economic performance of nZEBs. As an example, for the Spanish case study an analysis was done on the return on the initial additional investment to reach nZEB performance throughout the lifecycle of the building. The 3% extra investment costs

7 For detailed information, see the AZEB report: “Life cycle costs and environmental performance for case study nZEBs in operation”, available as a download at: www.azeb.eu

https://icms-coalition.org/


turned out to cause a saving of 67% of operational costs for the users. This means that this investment had an economic payback time of 6 years and an IRR (intenral rate of return) of over 10%. When making decisions to invest in nZEBs or provide mortgages to nZEB owners a life cycle perspective like this should be leading instead of just an initial investment perspective, which is common practice now in policies and regulations. As an example for the importance of involving cost experts early in the project and including them as part of the multidisciplinary team, we refer to the evaluative lean study performed with a group of costing and procurement specialists8. They conclude that in the many and varied projects they worked in they were often consulted too late to be able to create fundamental impact in the decision making based on their knowledge of reference costs and costing practices. Often the main design choices had already been made and opportunities to avoid costs by e.g. another choice on orientation or by using a smart combination of elements were limited. In addition, especially in a project with more than one (sub-) contractor, several different ways of defining cost elements and of cost estimating and calculating can be applied. These can then easily lead into complicated and even (unnoticed) incorrect aggregations. Especially in big projects this can lead to serious deviations between planned and realized costs. As a simple example, one contractor may state the mounting of windows as a cost element including the creation of the window sill, where another might exclude the window sill and add these costs to the cost element of the facades. If we now try to optimize building costs in the project based on their combined functionality, especially with large and more complex projects, this can lead to suboptimal decisions from a life cycle costing perspective. Harmonized costing elements across all building partners, preferably combined with a shared digital tool like BIM which is preprogrammed with these harmonized definitions, will prevent communicative problems in costing and their associated failure costs.

2.3.4 Categorization of Step 3: essential When striving for affordability of nZEBs it is essential to thoroughly understand how lifecycle costs are estimated, calculated and communicated in the project so that it may genuinely support decision making in every project phase. When designs are optimized for lifecycle costs, as is the case for affordable nZEBs, clarity in this area is a basic boundary condition to succeed. 2.4 Step 4: Install a quality assurance process

You have set your goals to achieve your affordable nZEB in step 2. Now you need to start your quality assurance by implementing a validation and verification plan connected to your program of requirements. In each project phase and for each critical trade-off and decision, you can now validate the suggested solutions to check whether they fulfill the clients needs. And you can verify results to check if the planned specifications and performances are being met. Do not forget to set up an explicit quality reporting system with the plan. Implementing clear quality assurance in each project phase improves decision making and prevents failure costs. Explicit quality assurance from the start helps you create your affordable nZEB.

8 For more information see the AZEB report “Overview of solutions for cost reduction throughout the building supply chain”, available for download on www.azeb.eu



2.4.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 4 Stakeholders and suggested sources for information: Client, investor, early advisor, project-team, costing expert, suppliers, (sub-) contracted parties, various specialists such as: energy specialists, architects, engineers, financial specialists, policy specialists, maintenance specialists, construction and demolition specialists, commissioning experts. The initial advisor and/ or the projectmanager should facilitate the process to come to a solid validation and verification (V&V) plan and manage it during the complete project. The client and/or investors should facilitate resources to create this plan and has an important role in accepting the plan and specifically the chosen V&V methods and reporting process. Also the client is the main decision maker when V&V results during the project’s lifecycle deviate from the targeted performances. To decide on suitable indicators, appropriate norms and measurement methods for each requirement, different specialists for different project phases may be involved in creating the plan. Main activities:

Interview the right specialists and/or organize a workshop to determine: o for each requirement the appropriate qualitative and/or quantitative measurement methods in each project

phase o which project partner is responsible for performing and reporting each V&V activity o what costs are involved with performing each activity o how and when V&V reporting will take place

Involve clients, investors and (potential) users in this process for input and decision making Finalize this initial V&V plan as input for step 5 and 6 Use a standardized format or specialized tooling for listing and tracking these V&V activities in relation to the Program

of Requirements Be sure to include (parts of) the V&V plan in the (sub-)contracts to follow Update the V&V plan regularly, in all project phases, specifically when critical decisions are made. Be sure to explicitly track changes in the V&V plan: what, when, why, initiatied by whom, approved by whom. This way

the history and rationale of the decision making is registered, so stakeholders involved later in the project can always track the origins of certain design or building specifics.

2.4.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for use in Step 4 General:

• Systems Engineering (see e.g. here) • Quality Management (ISO9000:2015) • M&V protocols like IPMVP, see for example here. • Building commissioning, see e.g. here and here

AZEB specific:

• AZEB guide: Creating client requirements and V&V plans for nZEBs • AZEB report: Definitions on Indicators and assessment methods for cost-effective nZEB and energy+ buildings

Examples of other relevant EU projects • Built2Spec project: http://built2spec-project.eu/

2.4.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 4

https://www.incose.org/

https://evo-world.org/en/products-services-mainmenu-en/protocols/ipmvp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New-construction_building_commissioning

https://www.bcxa.org/

http://built2spec-project.eu/


An important part of the quality assurance process is to create a plan on how to validate, measure and verify whether requirements are being met. This plan should include appropriate indicators, norms and measurement methods for each project phase. As an example of this we take a project where the requirement for energy performance is set on maximum 15kWh/y/m2 for the indicator “non-renewable primary energy” for heating, cooling and hot water services. The quality assurance process in relation to this energy performance goal could be described as follows:

• In the initiative phase a qualitative judgement will be made of the building alternatives which are considered (step 5 of the AZEB roadmap). This judgement is done by an nZEB specialist who will assess for each alternative the main critical building aspects to enable this performance, like orientation and compactness.

• An M&V plan is proposed also in the initiative phase which will describe procedures to follow through the different phases of the project to verify and report energy performance.

• In the design phase the design will be verified to reach this performance by using energy efficiency calculation and simulation tools and perfoming a detailed analysis of energy performance under expected usage conditions. This analysis will serve as a baseline for the M&V process. The M&V document will be concluded detailing monitoring equipment to be installed, as well as commissioning procedure.

• In the execution phase the building and building process will be verified for the targeted energy performance by doing blower door tests, applying stop-and-go review moments at the building site at the start and finish of crucial detailing . The monitoring equipment will be placed and the commissioning of the building is conducted following M&V plan.

• In the use and maintenance phase, measurements and analysis of the actual energy performance will be carried to to verify whether the targeted energy performance of the building is being met, and user questionnaires will be implemented to validate the requirement: does the targeted energy performance indeed satisy their original needs and wishes regarding energy costs.

A good way to organize the information in this plan can be to create a V&V matrix based on the requirements set in step 2. In a simple version it may look like this:

Table 1 Examplary set-up of a V&V matrix for quality assurance

No Requirement Initiative ph. Design ph. Construction ph. Use & Maintenance ph. 1 Non-renewable

primary energy use for heating, cooling and hot water <15kWh/y/m2

Qualitative expert judgement By: … Report: … M&V plan outlined

PHPP energy simulation of design By: … Report: … Project Baseline Energy Use By: … Report: …

• Blower door test By: … Report: … • Stop-and-go at

building site By: … Report: … • Monitoring

equipment is installed

By: … Report: … • Commissioning

authority at commissioning

By: … Report: …

• Calculation of Post Construction Energy Use

By: … Report: … • User

questionnaires By: … Report: … • Yearly analysis and

optimization first 3 years

By: … Report: …

2 … … … … … The quality assurance plan should at least describe:


• Which requirements will be validated, measured and verified • What the method and thresholds are for validation, measurement and verification • Who performs each activity and when • How the results are to be reported and to whom • What should be done if the results do not match the requirements set In the AZEB case study of Gaxel a V&V plan was made very early in the initiative phase, based on the initial requirements9. The AZEB approach in this case study stimulated the municipalities to apply an explicit and integrated plan for validation and verification of the complete set of requirements throughout the project’s lifecycle. Also, the V&V measures are now based on building physics rather than just national standards. In this case the AZEB approach not only requires the municipalities to perform certain monitoring and inspecting actions, it also (contractually) requires the project developer to create a V&V plan, perform V&V activities throughout the project’s lifecycle and report on these to the municipalities to ensure their adherence to the initial project goals. As the requirements were carefully set by the municipalities to balance the interests of all stakeholders involved and integrate existing knowledge on cost-optimizing buildings (AZEB), the V&V plan greatly improves explicit cost and performance control throughout all project phases. The AZEB case study of Santurtzi is a good example of how a V&V plan was created specifically for installations, based on IPMVP protocols, LCC analysis and thermal dynamic simulation tooling. The immediate goal was create a solid V&V plan to reduce all costs associated with the installation process. The higher goal of developing this plan was to create a cost-effective standard which can be used in future tenders launched by the developer, for similar buildings. They also included in their plan how to use the V&V results to educate users and positively influence their behaviour in relation to the building installations (addressed in step 15 of the AZEB roadmap).

2.4.4 Categorization of Step 4: essential Creating an affordable nZEB building can only be done by carefully balancing and optimizing solutions within the system, because solutions are often interrelated and have direct and indirect impact on multiple requirements when implemented. A V&V plan assures the project team and the client keeps track of the true and complete impact of big and small decisions in the project. 2.5 Step 5: Conceive & select alternatives

Get creative and explore the alternative building characteristics to fill in your clients need and wishes as described in the program of requirements. No details yet, but main-line alternatives: Location and neighbourhood: in the city or in the country, district, level ground or on a slope, orientation…? Building type: residential or non-residential, new or renovated, multi- or single storey …? Preferred building process: built on-site or prefab, catalogue design or unique … ? Each alternative creates specific boundary conditions, risks and opportunities. Use your validation and verification plan to create a good trade-off matrix and then select the best option for your affordable nZEB.

9 See for detailed information this and other case studies Azeb report “NZEB demonstration buildings optimization process for energy and cost reduction”, available as download on www.azeb.eu



2.5.1 Stakeholders and main activities Step 5 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, early-advisor, costing expert, specialists from a range of fields (technical, legal, financial). The decision maker(-s) in this step will most likely be the client and when applicable, the investor. Their main role is to gain a good understanding of all the information, the consequences of each possible decision and then weigh the options and decide. The other main stakeholder involved in this step will be the advisor or projectmanager, whose task is to coordinate the activities listed below and organize a comparative assessment for the decisionmaker in order to facilitate an optimal decision. This professional is also responsible for proper recording and archiving of the process and the results, as the exit point for professionals later in the project and in case any other questions or even conflicts arise later in the project. Main activities:

Select and invite relevant stakeholders to join the creative process,the risk and opportunity analysis from step 1 can help decide on who could or should be involved in this step 4

Organize one or more workshops to o generate ideas for the main building characteristics o decide on a short-list of main line alternatives o validate and verify the alternatives against the social, environmental and economic performances specified in

the Program of Requirements o have the decision makers(-s) choose the best alternative for them

Explicitly record and archive the options considered, the trade-offs made and the results of the decisionmaking process Use this information as input for step 6 and further.


• Desk-research • Decision supportive processes such as morphological design and decision making analysis (see e.g. here) • Decision supporting tools for comparative assessments such as Multiple Criteria Analysis (see e.g. here). • For exploring examples of nZEB buildings, see e.g.:

o Passipedia o Passive House Database o Passive House open days

• Catalogue buildings • Prefabricated buildings and lean building processes

AZEB specific: • AZEB report: Definition of indicators and assessment methods for cost effective nZEB and Energy+ Buildings. • Factsheet and demo AZEB TCO-tool


• Train-to-nZEB, http://www.train-to-nzeb.com/ and it’s e-learning: https://elearning.passivehouse.com/course/view.php?id=19

https://sdg.com/course-type/courses-in-sdgs-decision-making-process/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-criteria_decision_analysis

https://passipedia.org/

https://passivehouse-database.org/

https://passivehouse-international.org/index.php?page_id=262

http://www.train-to-nzeb.com/

https://elearning.passivehouse.com/course/view.php?id=19


2.5.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 5 In the Bulgarian AZEB case 10 study the client-users had a specific site on which they wished to develop a house with additional office functionality. After thorough desk research and consultation with their architect, they decided, instead of having a unique building designed for them, to choose from already existing and realized (certified passive house) designs and just do minor exterior adjustments to make it fit for their specific site. Their choice for this mainline alternative in comparison to a unique house saved significant design costs and they reduced performance risks and possibly associated failure costs. Another example for conceiving and selecting alternatives comes from the AZEB case study of Santurtzi. A comparative assessment made for a variety of installation concepts in this case led to an explicit selection process for the most optimal solution for this project. The project developer in this case study regularly develops social housing appartment buildings. They did a thorough LCC and LCA analysis of their current installations in the first building of a development project of in total three similar buildings. They assessed from a lifecycle perspective the economic and environmental impacts of the installations and compared these with calculated impacts of alternative solutions. Also they considered the impact of the difference in target group to occupy the first building compared with the other two buildings. These analyses led to a change in the floor plan as well as a change in the selection of the main-line alternative for the installations in the next two buildings. This is now expected to result in higher comfort for the users, better efficiency of the energy systems, reduction of CO2 emissions and reduced lifecycle costs.

2.5.4 Categorization of Step 5: essential The choice for the optimal alternative as the scope of a specific AZEB project, can have a major impact on ultimate cost efficiency and performance of the building. Some exit points in for example orientation or compactness of the building, when chosen for a suboptimal variant, can never be compensated completely by the design or execution choices to be made later on in the project without significant extra costs. This way “mistakes” in the choice made for the alternative in the initiative phase, can cost one dearly in the end. 2.6 Step 6: Define practices for procurement and guarantees

Create the best possible boundary conditions to stimulate maximum collaboration and integrated project delivery. Carefully select the appropriate tendering and contracting practices for your project, and if possible, use building-level performance guarantees. Use as input the information you gained from step 1 through 5 and look forward to step 7 through 17. Suitable practices for procurement and guarantees will greatly facilitate the project management to achieve your affordable nZEB.

10 See for detailed information this and other case studies Azeb report “NZEB demonstration buildings optimization process for energy and cost reduction”, available as download on www.azeb.eu

Step 6 is part of key 2: procurement


2.6.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 6 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information Client, investors, early-advisor, procurement expert. Main activities:

Look back at all the information assembled and decisions made in step 1 through 5 Look forward to the steps that will follow after the contracting of a team Now define together:

o which type of professionals should be involved in the next phases and steps o what their roles preferred will be o what the preferred roles of the client and possibly other relevant stakeholders will be o what type of collaboration is aimed for o whether building-level guarantee is desirable o what risks are involved

Make a comparative assessment of the various options for tendering and contracting Decide which type of contract(-s) is most supportive for this specific project Decide which type of tendering and contracting processes will be applied to select and contract the appropriate partner(-

s). Prepare the tendering and contracting documents Implement the process Carefully document and archive all relevant information and decisions for possible later use.


• Procurement (e.g. purspective.com, nextlevelpurchasing.com, cips.org) • PM-BOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge, see here) • SPSM-BOK (Strategic Procurement and Supply Management Body of Knowledge)

AZEB specific:

• AZEB factsheet: Comparative assessment procurement practices for nZEBs • AZEB Manual for performance guarantee contracting


• Transition ZERO, http://transition-zero.eu/: on performance contracting approach and specifications, structural financing for social housing

2.6.3 Examples of the potential impact of Step 6 In one of the earliest AZEB case studies a workshop was held to evaluate process and results in a finished Spanish social housing project11. Participants of the workshop were representatives from organisations throughout the building value chain: developers, construction specialists and exploitation- and service managers. The most important conclusions from the workshop were 1. End-user characteristics should have been a starting point in the design, 2.Contractors for construction and the professional housing agency operating the building should have been involved much earlier to prevent the many rounds of redesign (and associated overruns of time and costs) and

11 See for details on this workshop the AZEB report “Overview of solutions for cost reduction throughout the building supply chain, available at www.azeb.eu.

http://www.purspective.com/

http://www.nextlevelpurchasing.com/

http://www.cips.org/

https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards

http://transition-zero.eu/

http://www.azeb.eu/


3.The contract types participants were familiar to work with do not stimulate or even allow for integrated project delivery and working with multidisciplinary teams from the start. One of the main results from this evaluation effort was that the project developer decided to try out more appropriate tendering and contracting practices in the AZEB case study of the Santurtzi building. Although they did not tender and contract explicitly for the integrated design process yet, they did make a big change for the contracting in the construction phase to stimulate integrated design and to ensure an integrated approach to construction and prevent many unnecessary costs in the construction phase. In essence it was a two-step design-and-construct contracting process. The procurement process was divided in two steps for the two main parts of the project: 1. Architectural project and construction works direction and 2. Construction works execution. First, the developer (AZEB-partner Visesa) worked internally in a so-called Basic Project where the general requirements for the building and the urban planning of the area were defined. This basic project is not enough to initiate the construction works itself but serves as a first approach of what the developer expects from this building and, at the same time, allows to apply for the necessary municipal licenses.

Then, the developer launched a first public tender for the so-called Execution Project with this Basic Project as a basis. The awarded architectural firm would then draft a completely detailed Execution Project that must fulfil Basic Project’s requirements and drive the construction works. This awarded architectural firm should, as well, assume the direction of the construction works. This firm knew from the start that they would be the contracting partner for the second phase also, hence was stimulated extra to think through the consequences of their design for construction (-costs), which they could themselves choose to solve by actually involving a construction company for advise or relying on their own knowledge and experience. Once the Execution Project had been carried out by the architectural firm, a second public tender was launched for

construction companies to apply for the execution of the construction works. At the moment when the second tender was awarded and a Construction Company had been put in charge of the building works, a first multidisciplinary team was formed among a) Facultative Direction with the chief architect and construction engineer from the architectural firm awarded in the first tender for project drafting and works direction, b) Construction company awarded in the second tender for construction works execution, and c) VISESA itself as developer. This Facultative Direction (from the architectural firm) is the only entity which with whom the developer signed a contract for the works execution. This means that the main relationship along the whole construction project will be held between the developer and the Facultative Direction, and the developer will play a supervising role. Then, the Facultative Direction will subcontract its own installers and workers for specific tasks. The result of this contracting was that from the very beginning of the constructions works a broader interdisciplinary team was created with representation of architects, designers, building engineers, developer, installers and specialized workers to enable the day to day decision making process. Another example comes from the AZEB case study of Gaxel. Here the AZEB team assisted two municipalities in using step 1 to 6 to create an optimal tendering and contracting strategy for this project. Also, to better understand how the AZEB approach can impact decisions, we estimated what the outcome of the decision would have been in a conventional approach and in a basic nZEB approach (without the specifics of the AZEB approach). The following was concluded: - What actions were done by which stakeholder:

o In this case study, working from the viewpoint of the two municipalities, this mainly concerns deciding on the organization of the responsibilities and activities of both municipalities over the lifecycle of the project. This also includes their relationship with the other stakeholders such as the project developer, in each project phase. The main activities in this step were choosing the tendering and contracting practices to apply in the initiative phase and a contract management plan for the municipalities for the design, construction and use phase.

- What tools were used: o AZEB factsheet Comparative Assessment procurement practices for nZEBs


o Format AZEB contract management plan - Impact on cost and energy reduction:

o Conventional approach: For conventional buildings, lacking the nZEB or AZEB ambition, a conventional tendering and contracting process would most likely be chosen, based on maximizing the ground price or lease received by the municipality within acceptable performance limits like national building regulation and zone plans. This in no way stimulates the market to perform beyond regulations and does not stimulate innovations in technique or process to improve cost and quality of buildings or adopt a lifecycle perspective. Municipalities would often choose the project developer with the best financial offer as long as it stays within minimum requirements. The contract chosen would in this case most likely be just to sell the ground to the developer or lease out the ground against standard conditions.

o nZEB approach: In a conventional nZEB approach, similar as discussed with the previous steps, the municipalities would most likely add the condition of nZEB according to national standards to be part of the tendering and contracting process in addition to the practices as described for the conventional building. Although this will probably lead to buildings with the proper national energy label, there is no assurance that the building is (cost) optimized for the overall performance indicators in this scenario. Developers will have much room for suboptimization over specific indicators and could then unnoticeably be jeopardizing the achievement of environmental and social policy goals of the municipalities, other than the relative energy performance.

o AZEB approach: With the AZEB approach in this case study a careful analysis is done of the various tendering and contracting alternatives, based on all previous AZEB steps and knowledge of the AZEB steps still to come, and the expected effect of these alternatives on the ultimate integrated value to be created by the projected nZEB building. The tendering and contracting alternative chosen reflects the scenario expected to create the most beneficial boundary conditions for all relevant stakeholders to cocreate a cost-effective and well performing nZEB. In the Gaxel case study the final choice is still to be made, but is expected to be either a ground lease with a specific contract towards AZEB, or a DBFMO contract (design, build, finance, maintain and operate) which is in effect an integrated performance contract. Both create an opportunity for the municipality to steer on specific integrated performance and at the same time leave much space for the developer to generate their own preferred solutions to reach these performance targets. They however are different in the demands of the municipal organizations during the lifecycle of the building: The ground lease being minimum involvement and the DBFMO contract being large and specialized involvement demanding new knowledge and skills. The contract management plan to be created will be based on the chosen contract.

In the Bulgarian case study the designer was hired by the contractor (which was the same party as the client-user) and then worked closely together as one team. For subcontractors a type of contract was chosen to allow the off-set of responsibility and unforeseen costs to them and this way intended to prevent these to influence the project’s budget. It also motivated the subcontractors to learn about the specifics of constructing a passive house building. The above examples are various ways to define nZEB procurement practices in order to create optimal boundary conditions for (integrated) collaboration and time, cost and quality control during the various project phases.

2.6.4 Categorization of Step 6: essential This step must be implemented in any project. The choice made for the project organisation and the contractual arrangements to support this, is very consequential for the way the project can be managed. Making this decision consciously and explicitly, whatever option is chosen, ensures that any risks and opportunities for the AZEB project can be managed explicitly in the steps which follow.


3 The AZEB methodology in the design phase: selecting and integrating solutions for creating an AZEB (Step 7-8)

In the design phase most attention goes to creating doable variants for the chosen alternative. Active and passive measures must be chosen, integrated and balanced to optimize the performance on all requirements, within the lifecycle budget. During this phase there are two main decision moments for the decision maker: first to choose the preferred variant from the created “sketch” designs and then, after this variant has been transformed to a final, detailed design with corresponding budget, decide on this design to go to the construction phase.

The AZEB methodology proposes 2 critical steps in this design phase to ultimately achieve an AZEB. These steps are: Step 7: Involve a multidisciplinary team Step 8: Design optimized buildings In the following paragraphs each of these steps will be explained in detail.

Figure 6 The design phase in the AZEB Roadmap


3.1 Step 7: Involve a multi-disciplinary team

Designing an affordable nZEB requires synergy between multiple disciplines. Not only from designers, architects and various engineers, but also from constructors and installers, maintenance experts, commissioning experts, users and building operators. Involve all relevant disciplines from the project’s lifecycle in an early stage. Use creative processes like morphological design, serious gaming or backcasting to harvest truly creative and integrated solutions for your affordable nZEB.

3.1.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 7 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, project manager, building user, architect, city planner, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, commissioning specialist, construction contractor, maintenance specialist, energy consultant, building operator, interior designer, cost specialist, suppliers, professional facilitator. The client and/or investor are the ultimate decisionmaker and facilitate this step by supplying appropriate resources and deciding on the boundary conditions through the various steps in the initiative phase. Also, the client and targeted users are part of the multi-disciplinary team, participating in the design and decision-making process. The projectmanager coordinates the activities listed below. Main activities:

Select the relevant stakeholders and experts for the design phase of your project Choose an appropriate (design) process to harvest the synergy between the variety of perspectives, knowledge and skills Choose a competent facilitator to guide the process from a neutral position Involve the complete team in several workshops during the design phase to

o Generate creative technical and process concepts and solutions for application in the building’s lifecycle o Identify and create subsystem interactions o Identify risks and opportunities, mitigate and seize them o Improve specifications o Validate and verify design options against the requirements set o Make comparative assessments of the various options to prepare decision making

Record and archive the process and all results for later reference.


• Handbook for charrettes (downloadable here) • Processes for organizing creativity (an overview can be found e.g. here) • Systems engineering (see e.g. https://www.incose.org/) • Value engineering (see e.g. https://www.value-eng.org/) • Scrum techniques (see e.g. this scrum guide) • Methods for integrated project delivery (see e.g. this download for ipd-guide)


https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy09osti/44051.pdf

https://www.designmethodsfinder.com/methods/search/all

https://www.incose.org/

https://www.value-eng.org/

https://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2017/2017-Scrum-Guide-US.pdf#zoom=100

https://leanipd.com/integrated-project-delivery-an-action-guide-for-leaders/


AZEB specific:

• AZEB guide: Organizing project start-ups and team sessions for AZEBs Examples of other relevant EU projects:

• PROF-TRAC, http://proftrac.eu/ Maps necessary knowledge and skills for nZEBs.

3.1.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 7 One relevant example to demonstrate the potential impact of involving a multidisciplinary team is the AZEB case study of an Italian public school to replace an existing school. The design of the new school shows very high performance levels and respects the mandatory amount of energy provided via the exploitation of renewable sources in order to satisfy the nZEB requirements. A multidisciplinary team had already been created for the current design: the construction company, architects, BIM specialist, building services designers. However, they had not involved yet nZEB or energy efficiency specialists. Before the executive design phase (creating the documentation for the construction phase), the construction company has required the additional support of a research group specialized in energy efficiency interventions, nZEBs and PassivHaus to further improve the efficiency level of the building and reduce the energy consumption. Being part of the AZEB project, the researchers chose this case study to investigate if, through the application of the AZEB methodology, additional improvements in terms of energy and comfort and especially cost reductions could have been obtained in a case study which has already been designed with a very high level of attention to energy efficiency and affordable measures. The involvement of the group specialized in energy efficiency led to suggested measures on the ventilation system, the artificial lighting and the DHW supply system (low-flow shower dispenser) which will allow additional energy and cost reductions in the use phase. Other suggested measures (e.g. on the envelope, improved disposition of openings to allow natural ventilation) have not been implemented because of the state of progress of the project and the researchers’ rather late involvement. The missed potential benefits of these suggested measures highlight the importance of including all relevant disciplines in the multidisciplinary team from the beginning of the design process as underlined in the AZEB methodology. For nZEBs that at least includes specialists in nZEBs design and construction.

3.1.4 Categorization of Step 7: essential To create affordable nZEBs requires synergy between a variety of disciplines, to enrich the decision making process with their collective lifecycle perspective and specialist knowledge and experience. No single discipline, even when educated in a generic way, can have all needed technical and non-technical knowledge and skills for optimizing the building’s performance. This means some level of multidisciplinary team or setting is ademant for creating an affordable nZEB. And the more advanced one gets in this step, by study and experience, the more the potential of the multidisciplinary team will be used and the higher your building’s performance will be over its lifecycle.

http://proftrac.eu/


3.2 Step 8: Design an optimized building

Optimize your design with integrated creativity, appropriate tooling and intelligent comparative assessments. Use cost-effective design principles and methods to create an integrated design which optimizes environmental, social and economic performance of the nZEB following the requirements and weights set in the V&V plan.

3.2.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 8 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information Client, investor, project manager, building user, architect, city planner, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer, commissioning specialist, construction contractor, maintenance specialist, energy consultant, building operator, interior designer, cost specialist, suppliers, professional facilitator. The client and/or investor are the ultimate decisionmaker and facilitate this step by supplying appropriate resources and deciding on the boundary conditions through the various steps in the initiative phase. Also, the client and targeted users are part of the multi-disciplinary team, participating in the design and decision-making process. The projectmanager coordinates the activities listed below. Main activities:

Implement the chosen multidisciplinary design process as discussed in step 7 use cost-effective design principles like airtightness, orientation and compactness select and use available tooling to create and optimize your design, for example:

o building performance calculation, simulation and optimization tools o LCA tooling o LCC tooling o BIM

design for use, design for construction, design for commissioning, design for maintenance, design for demolition systematically validate and verify all options against the program of requirements using the V&V plan apply value engineering processes to further optimize your design with the multidisciplinary team for the final design create instructions and manuals for construction, commissioning, use, maintenance and demolition carefully record and archive all design decisions and design documents for future reference

3.2.2 Suggested tools, methods and references for use in Step 8 In addition to all tools, methods and references suggested to step 7 (paragraph 3.1.2): General:

• building energy efficiency calculation and optimization tools (see eg PHPP ) • energy efficiency calcualtion and optimization tools for districts (see e.g. DistrictPH) • LCA tooling • LCC tooling


https://passivehouse.com/04_phpp/04_phpp.htm

https://passivehouse.com/04_phpp/07_districtph/07_districtph.html


• BIM tooling (more info e.g. here and here) • Comfort and IAQ (indoor air quality) evaluation tools • Components database (see e.g. here) • User experience (UX) theory and standards (see e.g. ISO standard 9241 series for Ergonomics of Human-System

Interaction) • Guidelines on creating user manuals (see e.g. here) • Software to easily create user manuals (see e.g. here and here) • Client journey mapping and tools (see e.g. here and here) • Various PHI training opportunities online and classroom:

o Passive house Fundamentals o PHPP online course o designPH o BIM2PH o See for full offering here

• Passipedia • nZEB / passive house exhibitions (see e.g. here)

AZEB-specific:

• Factsheet: Overview cost-effective design principles for AZEBs • Factsheet : Value engineering for AZEBs • Factsheets on various design optimization tools • AZEB design optimization tools, available through:

o Thermal Bridge tool (PHI) o Commissioning tool (PHI) o Cooling systems tool (PHI) o Heat pump tool (PHI) o Ventilation tool (PHI) o Window tool (PHI) o Hygiene tool (PHI) o TCO-tool (DNA)

• AZEB report: Cost-effective solutions for building services • AZEB report: Cost-effective solutions for renewable energy sources • AZEB report: Guidelines for quality checks for commissioning of the building • AZEB user misbehaviour guide – to better understand how buildings might be used • AZEB collection of factsheets with informational material for users


• Sinfonia, http://www.sinfonia-smartcities.eu/ • CraveZero, www.cravezero.eu

3.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 8 One way to cost optimize a design is to have a variety of functions performed by a single element. A great example of this can be found in the AZEB case study of Santurtzi. This social housing apartment building had, among others, the following five requirements/challenges to deal with: 1) create a sustainable nZEB, 2) avoid building overheating during the warm season,3) create noise protection for nearby road and maritime freight port, 4) closing the building envelope quickly during the construction process to prevent exposure to extreme site-specific weather conditions and 5) creating an attractive design. Based on experience in other projects and considering the current requirements, the developer decided to choose for the façade prefabricated concrete shadowing elements allocated above the windows along the whole perimeter of the building. The chosen solution combines the following functionalities to add significant value to the owner, user and contractors on all five mentioned requirements and even more (safety and comfort of workers):

https://bimexcellence.org/

https://passivehouse.com/04_phpp/06_bim2ph/06_bim2ph.html

https://database.passivehouse.com/en/components/

https://www.userfocus.co.uk/articles/usermanuals.html

https://www.swipeguide.com/platform

https://stepshot.net/manuals/



https://cms.passivehouse.com/en/training/

https://passivehouseconference.org/en/exhibition/

http://www.sinfonia-smartcities.eu/

http://www.cravezero.eu/


• Produced by a nearby supplier reducing transport costs and CO2 emission • Enabling an early closing of the building to protect it from the wheather influences • Avoiding, at the same time, cost of scaffolds to enclose the building and protect the workers • Bringing greater safety and comfort for the works to be done inside the building avoiding eventual extra-costs related to illness and injuries • Provide the necessary shadow in the summer months to prevent overheating of the building • Giving a good-looking and modern appearance to the building • Bringing additional protection for noise coming from the nearby road and maritime freight port

This is an example of value being engineered into the building by using the perspective and experience of a variety of disciplines: even if the element costs of the panel would have been higher than an alternative façade solution (which is not the case), the added value is such that the ratio cost/functionality would even then probably have been much higher.

Another type of optimization in the design phase is to use energy efficiency calculation and optimisation tooling to assess the predicted performances of the design over its lifecycle and search for optimization in environmental, social and economic performance. Such a study has been done for the design of the Bulgarian case study. Thermal simulation and life cycle assessment complemented the PHPP calculation for NZEBs and Passive House buildings which was done for the original design, by evaluating comfort aspects and environmental impacts of the project. According to these calculations, night ventilation and solar protection allow a satisfactory level of comfort to be reached considering a typical meteorological year. Life cycle CO2 emissions are around 13 kg CO2/m2/year, which can be compared to a benchmark elaborated in the French context: around 10 kg CO2/m2/year for the best practice and around 120 kg CO2/m2/year for the worst house in the building stock (without insulation, single glazed). Multicriteria optimisation gives the possibility to reduce costs for a given performance. So two rounds of optimization were performed using a genetic algorithm. Two criteria have been considered in a first step: the final energy balance, as only electricity is consumed and produced, and the construction cost. Construction cost was selected instead of life cycle cost (LCC) because the main constraint on the development of NZEB is the initial investment and because of the low amount of energy consumption reducing costs in the use stage. The design parameters considered were insulation thicknesses in walls, floors and roofs, type and area of glazing, type of ventilation (with or without heat recovery) and area of photovoltaic modules. These parameters have been chosen according to previous sensitivity studies allowing the most influential parameters to be evaluated and a discussion with the decision maker. The simulations were done using the available LCA tool Pleiades, because LCA is linked with energy simulation and optimisation, but the methodology can be applied using other tools. In this first optimization round 3 1012 possibilities were assessed. A second optimization was performed with the two optimisation criteria being the minimization of GHG emissions and construction cost. The first criterium was chosen to ensure the aim of NZEB energy performance is compatible with environmental criteria. In this optimisation the parameters space has been refined with more possibilities of insulation thickness and glazing areas compared to the first case leading to 2 1019 possible designs. After this, performance under uncertainty scenarios of thousands of NZEB solutions found during the optimisation procedure were analysed in order to give insights about robustness. Robustness is another criterium that comes into play to assess the performance of a building in future or uncertain conditions, for example concerning volatile energy prices, change of national energy mix and change of occupancy of the building. Based on deviation of the GHG emissions considering uncertainty scenarios, it may lead to choose other solutions than if only GHG emissions are accounted for. Thus, adding this criteria in the analysis can widen the perspective and help choosing among solutions. While such a tradeoff between cost reduction, GHG emissions and robustness is related to a decision of the client, robustness assessment based on a complete set of uncertainty scenarios can be


insightful in the decision process. The final tradeoff depends on the client's priorities. For instance in this case study the construction cost could be reduced, while keeping the same total primary energy use (with compensation), by implementing lower insulation thickness in some walls, double instead of triple glazing in some windows, but higher PV module area. An example of what results may look like in optimizations is in the picture below. During the optimisation procedure of the Bulgarian case study 2987 NZEB designs were found and 22 of them are optimums with regard to GHG emissions and construction cost. These solutions are shown on figure 5. Relatively to the base case (green dot on the graph, initial passive design relocated in France), most of NZEB solutions are both cheaper and produce less GHG emissions.

In this Bulgarian case, the optimisation process with three rounds, led to the selection of three solutions of interest. These are shown in the table below. Solution 3 is the cheapest solution with relatively low GHG emissions but higher deviation. Solution 2 costs a bit more but has both lower GHG emissions and deviation. Solution 1 is more expensive than Solution 2, this additionnal investment seems not to be worth because it only reduces deviation while increasing GHG emissions. Furthermore, the table shows a clear relation between heating needs (related to insulation thickness and glazing type), construction cost, solar PV area and deviation. Such a multicriteria analysis can be helpful to the decision maker, who can select a solution in terms of the prorities given to the different criteria: cost, GHG emissions and risk. Table 1 Design characteristics of three solutions of most interest

Solution 1 Solution 2 Solution 3 Life cycle GHG emissions (kg CO2eq./m²/yr) considering French electricity production

8.88 8.36 8.60

Deviation of GHG emissions (kg CO2eq./m²/yr) 0.27 0.33 0.46 Construction cost reduction vs reference (€/m²) -46 -150 -170 Heating needs (kWh/m²/an) 17 36 57 Annual net electricity consumption (kWh/m²/yr) -0.3 -0.6 0.9 Photovoltaic electricity production (kWh/m²/yr) -33 -38 -41

Initial design

Figure 7 Ensemble of ZEB designs, Pareto front of GHG emissions/construction cost optimisation and initial design


PV panels surface (m²) 48 55 60 Insulation thickness in exterior walls 20 12 6 Insulation thickness in interior walls on crawl space 14 8 10 Insulation thickness in attic floor 12 12 6 Insulation thickness in terrace floor 8 9 10 Insulation thickness in floor on ground 20 3 3 Insulation thickness in floor on crawl space 20 7 6 Insulation thickness in garage exterior walls 0 0 0 Insulation thickness in attic exterior walls 16 0 0 Glazing type North Triple glazing Double glazing Double glazing Glazing type South Triple glazing Double glazing Double glazing Glazing type East Triple glazing Double glazing Double glazing Glazing type West Double glazing Double glazing Triple glazing Glazing area North (difference with initial design) 0% +30% +30% Glazing area South (difference with initial design) 0% +30% +30% Glazing area East (difference with initial design) +20% +30% +30% Glazing area West (difference with initial design) +30% +20% +30% Included in global Pareto front No Yes Yes

All details on this optimisation can be found in the AZEB report “NZEB demo buildings environmental impact through LCA”, available at www.azeb.eu.

3.2.4 Categorization of Step 8: essential When developing affordable nZEBs there are many factors to consider, sometimes with complex interconnections. No single person can oversee all relevant information. A multidisciplinary team offers great opportunities, but also challenges. Available and appropriate tooling should therefore be implemented to facilitate information management and analytics, and to reduce complexities and mistakes in communications, both of which can lead to serious failure costs in any of the steps throughout the project’s lifecycle.

http://www.azeb.eu/


4 AZEB methodology in the construction phase: efficiently organizing resources to deliver the AZEB as planned (Step 9-13)

In the construction phase the two main factors which may positively influence the lifecycle costs of an nZEB are firstly quality control and secondly cost and time control. Resources such as workers, materials and machines, should be organized as efficiently as possible to avoid costs due to waste of time, materials et cetera and to increase labour productivity. This requires good training, planning and using digital technology to facilitate collaboration. Also quality of materials, equipment, systems and execution must be controlled efficiently to prevent performance gaps of the realized building and the associated lifecycle costs. The AZEB methodology proposes 5 critical steps in this construction phase to ultimately achieve an AZEB. These steps are: Step 9: Set up collaborative construction practices Step 10: Teach on-site team practical nZEB skills Step 11: Involve on-site team in time, quality and cost control Step 12: Commission the building services Step 13: Create a building dossier In the following paragraphs each of these steps will be explained in detail.

Figure 8 The construction phase in the AZEB Roadmap


4.1 Step 9: Set up collaborative construction practices

Cost effective execution of the nZEB design requires intensive on-site collaboration. Preparation is key to achieve synergy at the building site. Set up a complete team and align the (sub-)contracts with the project goals. Install lean processes and integrated communication tooling for all partners. Plan to train and inform the complete on-site team in start-up sessions. Now you have created the boundary conditions for successful nZEB construction.

4.1.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 9 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, contractor, subcontractors, suppliers, commissioning authority, quality controllers. The client and/or investor are the ultimate decisionmaker and facilitate this step by supplying appropriate resources and deciding on the boundary conditions through the various steps in the initiative phase. The projectmanager responsible for the construction phase coordinates the activities listed below. Main activities:

Identify the main on-site players for the construction phase Decide on which collaborative processes to implement Decide on the communication tooling to implement for this phase Re-address the program of requirements, V&V plan and all design records for implications for procurement and for

preparing the start-up sessions If this has not been done yet in step 6, choose and implement the right procurement activities Create the optimal (sub)contracts for the procurement phase, possibly including performance guarantee clausules If possible, form longterm partnerships for continuous learning, quality improvement and cost reduction. Make a contractmanagement plan: how will you manage the (sub-)contracts in the construction phase to assure

targeted performances? Prepare start-up sessions to train and involve the on-site team in the specifics of executing an nZEB design


• Lean planning (see e.g. here) • BIM methods and tooling (more info e.g. here) • Procurement (see for references step 6, paragraph 2.6.2) • Contract management (more info and references here) • Methods for integrated project delivery (see e.g. this download for ipd-guide)


https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Last_Planner_System

https://bimexcellence.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_management



AZEB specific: • AZEB factsheet: Comparative assessment procurement practices for nZEBs • AZEB Manual for performance guarantee contracts

• AZEB guide: Oganizing project start-ups and team sessions for AZEBs


• Bim-speed

4.1.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 9 A straightforward example for a single house project comes from Bulgaria. A l ong-term collaboration had been created already before this project, between architect, building services company and construction company. The collaboration was based on mutual interest and investment in energy-efficient projects. In this collaboration these parties regularly work together in projects, and agreeing on realistic fees. The longterm collaboration enables better planning which in turn allows for example long-term investment in equipment and long-term sourcing of materials. This way, for procurement of materials best prices and various discounts can be used. The exact impacts on this procurement of materials are hard to quantify, but in average the partners estimate between 1 and 5% reduction in raw material costs (bricks, plaster, insulation) and costs for construction elements (windows). Also their collaboration and shared sustainability goals lead to state-of-the-art design and building service solutions to be used in order to support optimal energy reduction. In addition to this longterm partnership, in this case study project the design team used contracts, such that the responsibility for successful execution and certification of key elements in the building is owned by the corresponding sub-contractor, e.g. ventilation and heat-pump installation by the building services company, PV panels and solar thermal collectors installation by the vendor and windows delivery and mounting by the vendor. Unforeseen costs in construction and installation would be prevented for the client, because if rework or a new component was needed, it was agreed in the contract that it was the responsibility and costs for the sub-contractor. In this case study there was one relevant incident in relation to this: A mistake was made with the mounting of a window. As the subcontractor assumed responsibility as agreed, prevented (failure-) cost for the client was 1.000 Euro. This might seem a minor nominal amount, but one can understand that this can add up significantly, especially in larger projects. Sharing responsibilities and risks with (sub-)contractors this way can motivate teammembers to plan and work with higher quality and collaborate intensively to prevent these extra costs occuring. A different type of example comes from a well-known Dutch wholesale company for building materials: RaabKarcher. As they visited many building sites for their material deliveries, they started noticing how inefficiently organized many of these site were. Materials were regularly moved from one spot to the next because they got in the way of building activities, workers often had to walk quite a long way or even had to wait to get extra materials, tools and equipment for their work, waste materials piled up, many instances of theft occurred and the many transportation movements for deliveries on and around the building site were a burden to the neighbourhood. A few years ago they started envisioning how they could use their expertise and knowledge of material logistics to be a more valuable partner for these projects. As a result they established their service of “Leanworks”12. When applied as a full service this means:

1. they partner with a building project before the start of the construction activities 2. they lead a thorough lean-planning effort with all subcontractors and suppliers involved. This results in a precise plan of

which and how much materials are needed exactly when and exactly where at the building site and which waste is being created, how and where this can best be seperated and collected

3. they create a hub at one of the RaabKarcher facilities, where all materials and equipment needed are delivered and sorted and stored clean and dry until they are needed on-site. On-site storage this way is limited to a minimum.

4. they bundle the on-site deliveries to fully utilize the space in each truck and to deliver “just-in-time”, achieving up to 75% reductions of transport-movement for on-site deliveries

12 See for more information their website: https://leanworks.nl/

https://www.bim-speed.eu/en

https://leanworks.nl/


5. they use so-called “runners”, trained personnel with specialized tooling, to every morning bring the materials from the truck to the exact place where the worker will be that should use them, even on hights. This just-in-time and just-in-place delivery saves the worker a lot of time and effort throughout the day: worker productivity is raised, building time is shortened.

6. When the delivery truck has unloaded the supply materials, it can take back with it the waste materials, which raab karcher disposes of. This ensures a clean and efficient workplace, no big waste containers and it reduces transporting costs for waste materials.

This service can only be provided if all partners, RaabKarcher and the (sub-)contractors collaborate intensively. They have applied this service in a number of projects, renovation and newbuilt, and on average they achieve an improvement of productivity of about 15%. As one can see in the various examples above, there are many opportunities to collaborate more efficently in the construction phase to achieve significant cost reductions.

4.1.4 Categorization of Step 9: essential A large part of the project costs occur in the construction phase. Also, the activities in the construction phase can be a major source of failure costs, which add to the planned expenses. Good collaboration between the organisations and on-site workers active in this phase can prevent many failure costs and even better, it may optimize the procurement and delivery processes in such way that even certain planned costs are actually decreased in the process. Contract management ensures that all partners keep checking whether all are still doing what was agreed to do and facilitates early interventions to prevent the occurrence of specific risks to quality and costs of the end-result. Even if only implemented in a “light”form, this step is essential for achieving an affordable nZEB. 4.2 Step 10: Teach on-site team practical nZEB skills

Teach the on-site team the practical skills to ensure your nZEB’s performance. Show them how to create airtightness and prevent thermal bridges. Teach them to apply insulation and install ventilation with heat recovery. Show them how to optimize joineries and implement monitoring equipment and teach them to use testing tools such as the blowerdoor test. These and other practical skills will help the team to build the nZEB conform design and ensure the targeted quality and performance. Investing in on-site skills helps you achieve your affordable nZEB as planned.

4.2.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 10 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, projectmanagement, designer, contractors, subcontractors, commissioning authority, suppliers, trainers/teachers. Based on the contracts chosen, either the client and/or investor, or the contractor(s) will provide the resources to implement this step. The projectmanager is responsible for coordinating the activities listed below. Designer and trainers/teachers can help shape and perform the training and/or coaching sessions. Main activities:

Organize training and/or coaching on the job for the on-site workers based on the current design



Involve their management to create higher level commitment and proper daily incentives Perform the training and/or coaching on the job Verify in practice whether the workers have mastered what has been taught


• Passive house tradesperson trainings (see here) • Specialist workshops by suppliers (e.g. how to apply their tapes for airtightness)

AZEB specific: • AZEB Checklist: Critical practical construction skills for nZEBs

Examples of other relevant EU projects: • Build up skills: https://www.buildup.eu/en • Train-to-nZEB: http://www.train-to-nzeb.com/ • Fit-to-nZEB: http://www.fit-to-nzeb.com/ • Proftrac: http://proftrac.eu/

4.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 10 An illustrative example for this step was in the Bulgarian case study. By way of classroom training and practical demonstrations, the construction company provided regular training the on-site team on practical nZEB skills. They invited architects to give short practical explanations of the key elements for energy-efficient construction and how to execute them on the construction site. With these upportive actions, the team was enabled to optimize the costs of labour for activities done on-site and to prevent rework and additional effort. It was an important prerequisite for the optimal involvement of the on-site team in the next step, which eventually led to significant cost reductions in the construction phase (see paragraph 4.3.3).

4.2.4 Categorization of Step 10: essential To be in control in an AZEB project, and thus have control over the results in quality and costs, all participants should be aware of the specifics of the contract they are working under and how this influences their roles and activities. To create affordable nZEBs non-traditional behaviour is demanded at certain times and all participants in the project should be aware of this in order to act on it and in order to spot deviances when they occur.

https://passivehouse.com/03_certification/05_certified-tradesperson/05_certified-tradesperson.htm

https://www.buildup.eu/en

http://www.train-to-nzeb.com/

http://www.fit-to-nzeb.com/

http://proftrac.eu/


4.3 Step 11: Involve team in time, quality and cost control

NZEB success is a collaborative effort. Stimulate the team’s internal motivation and tap into their resourcefulness by involving the workers in one or more collective project start-up sessions. Share the project goals and its environmental, social and economic requirements. Explain how the design fulfils these various requirements and what the criticalities are in their specific work to reach the nZEB performances. Involve the team in a lean planning process and train them to use relevant tooling such as BIM. Teach them to follow the validation and verification plan and report on quality. Assign technical support for your team for critical on-site decision making. Now your on-site team is fully equipped to make your affordable nZEB a reality.

4.3.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 11 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, projectmanagement, designer, costing expert, contractors, subcontractors, commissioning authority, suppliers. The client, investor and/or contractor should provide the resources to implement this step. The projectmanager is responsible for coordinating the activities listed below. Management of the involved parties should be aware of the importance and facilitate active participation of their personnel. Main activities:

Organize one or several sessions at the beginning of the construction phase for the on-site team and their direct management as well as their office support to:

o Inform them of the specific project goals, requirements and design o Involve them by exploring with them how they can contribute to these goals in their work o Challenge them to find additional opportunities for cost reduction or quality improvement o Identify with them how they need to be facilitated by projectmanagement to perform at their best o Teach them to use the selected (digital) tooling for sharing information (e.g. BIM tooling) o Teach them to report on quality according to the V&V plan (and why this is important)

Agree with all on-site workers and their management on the on-site collaboration and processes to follow Organize regular integrated planning sessions (e.g. the method of last planner, which originates in the lean approach)

and/or follow-up sessions, to help maintaining team involvement in time, quality and cost control all along the construction phase

Have a technical nZEB expert with authority stand-by for assisting the workers in practical on-site decision making due to contextual changes which may occur during the construction phase


• Lean planning (see e.g. here) • Methods for integrated project delivery (see e.g. this download for ipd-guide)

AZEB specific:

• AZEB guide: Organizing project start-ups and team sessions for AZEBs • AZEB guide: Creating good client requirements and V&V plans


https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Last_Planner_System



• AZEB manual for performance guarantee


• Built2Spec project: http://built2spec-project.eu/

4.3.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 11 In the AZEB case study in Bulgaria, the construction company set-up a plan for cost control based on the LCC calculations of the design and their procurement practices, and appointed someone at the construction site to be responsible for cost-control. This person was reporting current cost situation every day and requesting mitigation and decisions if necessary. Also, a stand-up meeting was held daily to gather feedback from the on-site team on time, quality and cost issues. This routine had considerable impact, since possible suboptimal activities were regularly identified and resolved up-front. Although it is hard to quantify the impact by implementing these steps 10 and 11 from the AZEB roadmap precisely, the current project was optimally executed, resulting in an estimated 10% time saving in the execution phase and between 5 and 10% labor cost reduction compared to regular projects. In the Spanish case study of Santurtzi cost control was carried out systematically during all the construction process by the developer and the facultative direction. They created a document called “Plan Sheet”, which includes a detailed monthly planning for all the payments that the developer has to do to the construction company as building phases go by and the construction project is deployed. As soon as a building chapter is finished and certified, the payment is done. Early in the project the initial Plan Sheet is created, taking the tendered and approved budget as a basis. It is explained to the team and someone is appointed to implement this sheet. From that point onwards it is adjusted with every modification done. Most modifications can be directly approved by the Construction Site Manager, upon communication and agreement with the developer. If they are below a certain threshold and above a specific percentage, the proposed modifications must be approved by the developer’s management team. This way, the project team assumes cost control during the whole duration of the building project.

4.3.4 Categorization of Step 11: optional Involving the on- and offsite workers in time, quality and cost control during the construction phase is a great opportunity to further reduce costs and improve value. It is however not necessary to create an affordable nZEB. One could be satisfied by giving clear instructions to the workers on what to do. The cost saving potential of the knowledge and experience of these practical people will then largely stay untapped. Also, the risk should be managed that due to misunderstanding or lack of motivation, ad hoc decisions are made on site which negatively impact the performance of the end-result. 4.4 Step 12: Commission the building services

Performance gaps in energy, comfort and health can occur in the nZEB use phase. These gaps are usually caused by insufficient integration of systems. Help the on-site construction team with clear commissioning instructions created in the design phase. Install, test and optimize the building services as one entity. Verify if the building services fulfil design objectives and specifications. Install monitoring equipment for optimization in the use phase and in case of complex building services, involve an NZEB commissioning specialist. Provide a clear user manual on how to use, maintain and operate the nZEB. Commissioning is needed to optimize performance of your nZEB in the use phase.




4.4.1 Stakeholders and main activities in Step 12 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Client, user, investor, designer, (sub-) contractors, commissioning authority. The client and/or investor should provide the resources to implement this step. The projectmanager is responsible for coordinating the activities listed below. Designer and commissioning specialist provide necessary knowledge and specialist commissioning skills in the process. Main activities:

Use as input the V&V plan and the manual for commissioning as created in step 8 (design an optimized building) Ensure required monitoring and analyzing equipment is installed Test, monitor and analyze the individual and collective performance of the various building services Compare the results to the program of requirements Optimize the systems settings until required performances are met Record and archive the commissioning process and results according to the V&V plan Provide or update an operation and maintenance manual for the building services for use in the use & maintenance

phase Officially release the building services for the use phase


• Building commissioning, see e.g. here and here • M&V protocols like IPMVP, see for example here. • ASHRAE commissioning guidelines, see e.g. here and here

AZEB specific:

• Factsheet for Commissioning tool • AZEB report: Guidelines for Quality checks of the commissioning of the building • AZEB manual for performance guarantee • AZEB guide: Creating client requirements and V&V plans for nZEBs


• Built2Spec project: http://built2spec-project.eu/

4.4.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 12 It is not easy to extract statistical data with specific percentage of savings due to the fact of applying a commissioning protocol, although there are some studies in the USA which have quantified that the operating expenses of an office building without any commissioning process are between 8 and 20% higher than the case if a Commissioning Methodology would have been applied. This savings can be broken down in a reduction of energy consumption between 20 and 30% and maintenance costs between 15 and 35%13. When commissioning the building services before going into the use phase, at least some key parameters are to be assessed. These include ventilation, heating, cooling, hot water and shading. Within the AZEB project, a checklist has be created to aid the

13 IEA ECBCS ANNEX 40 Project Summary Report: Commissioning tools for improved building energy performance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New-construction_building_commissioning

https://www.bcxa.org/

https://evo-world.org/en/products-services-mainmenu-en/protocols/ipmvp

https://www.ashrae.org/professional-development/all-instructor-led-training/instructor-led-training-seminar-and-short-courses/ashrae-guideline-0-the-commissioning-process

https://www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/free-resources



designer, contractor and/or commissioning authority in organizing, executing and reporting the commissioning activities.14 All key parameters are included in the checklist. In the table 2 at the next page you can see an examplary excerpt from this checklist. This checklist should be created in the planning phase of the project and used and updated throughout the construction and use&maintenance phase. Eventually, with the reports created according to column 3, this checklist and the results should be included in the building dossier (step 13 of the AZEB roadmap). In step 14 a practical example of commissioning, monitoring and optimization will be given including the impacts to building’s energy performance and costs (paragraph 5.1.3). Table 2 Example from AZEB "commissioning checklist"; excerpt from table for ventilation non-residential

Planning Commissioning Documentation/operation file Optimisation of operation

Efficiency of the ventilation unit

Specify the units and the required level of efficiency

Device data:

• Manufacturer/Type

• Heat recovery efficiency

• Specific electrical power consumption during standard operation

• Certificates

Air volume Adjustment:

Creation of a balancing template:

• Specification of design values for the air volume per valve (in standard operation).

• Documentation of design values for additional operating stages e.g. basic ventilation, party operation (recommendation)

Air volume measurements (supply air and extract air):

• Adjustment during standard operating stages

• Optional: verification of additional operating stages

• Recommendation: Volume flow measurement at the valves using the zero pressure compensation method

• The difference between the sum of the supply air and extract air volume flows should not exceed 10%.

Documentation of the adjusted volume flows

Documentation of adjustments/modifications of the valve settings

4.4.4 Categorization of Step 12: essential A system can only deliver the expected performances when properly commissioned.

14 Checklist available at www.azeb.eu


4.5 Step 13: Create a building dossier

Create a building dossier to facilitate traceability of all critical project information. After the construction phase, a large part of the project team usually leaves. And with them the knowledge of project history and results. Clients, users, operators, maintenance workers and commissioning agents will confront situations in the use phase when they need this information. A complete and well organized building dossier comforts your client and is a sound basis for the final AZEB steps to create your affordable nZEB.

4.5.1 Stakeholders and activities in Step 13 Suggested takeholders and sources for information: Client, investor, projectmanagement, multidisciplinary design team, commissioning authority, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, maintenance specialists. The client should provide resources to create a building dossier. The projectmanager is responsible for coordinating the steps listed below. The other stakeholders provide the input for the dossier. Main activities:

Create a digital and/or physical repository for the building dossier (following the V&V plan) Structure the repository for easy retrieval (following the V&V plan) Organize access rights (following the V&V plan) Fill the repository with all relevant documentation (following the V&V plan) on at least:

o Program of requirements and V&V plan and reports, including tracked changes o Information on critical decisions made throughout the project and the comparative asessments underlying

them o Building’s performance ratings and/or certifications o Designs as-built, including e.g. floor plans, detailling, schemes of piping and electrical networks o Costing reports o Overview of components and materials used (e.g. materials passport) o Manuals for commissioning, use, maintenance, demolition o Contracts, past and on-going o List of involved organisations and their contact persons o


• Tooling for project dossier building • Materials passport, see e.g. www.madaster.com. • Certification schemes, e.g. PHI building certification


https://passiv.de/downloads/03_building_certification_guide.pdf


AZEB specific: • AZEB checklist: NZEB building dossier


• Bamb2020, www.bamb2020.eu: about materials passports. • IBroad, https://ibroad-project.eu/, and BPIE, on building renovation passports

4.5.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 13 More and more projectteams discover BIM (building information modelling) as a working method and digital tool for sharing information between (often many) different building partners along the project’s lifetime. Elements and designs are included in the model and all sorts of data and information can be attached to these, e.g. technical specifications, performance specifications, information on how it can be disassembled, reused or disposed of, and information on lifecycle-costs. When a projectteam makes full use of a BIM model and uses optimal tooling for it, the result can be used to form a (big) part of the building dossier. This way the BIM application not only increases multidisciplinary collaboration in the design and construction phase, but also supports the activities for the use and maintenance and even end-of life phase and can be a major part of the quality assurance process needed for e.g. performance guarantee contracts.

4.5.4 Categorization of Step 13: essential Ensuring the traceability of the relevant building information is necessary to ensure proper future decision making, operation and maintenance of the building from the user phase onwards. It is especially important when under a building performance guarantee contract.

http://www.bamb2020.eu/

https://ibroad-project.eu/

http://bpie.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Building-Passport-Report_2nd-edition.pdf


5 The AZEB methodology in the use & maintenance phase: monitoring, optimisations and end user behaviour (Step 14-15)

In the operational phase of use & maintenance the main decisions to be made which influence costs and performance, involve guiding users towards appropriate behaviour, optimizing the functioning of the buildings and its components, and monitoring to validate and verify if the targeted performances are being met. The AZEB roadmap proposes 2 important steps in this use and maintenance phase to ultimately achieve an affordable nZEB. These steps are: Step 14: Monitor and optimize performance Step 15: Guide user behaviour In the following paragraphs each of these steps will be explained in detail.

Figure 9 Use & Maintenance phase in AZEB Roadmap


5.1 Step 14: Monitor and optimize performance

Continued nZEB performance can be ensured through monitoring and optimization. It can be done informally, or within a performance guarantee or service contract. Collect data on parameters like energy use, costs, user comfort and health. Verify whether performance objectives and specifications are being met. Analyse the causes of performance gaps and apply appropriate interventions. Finally: optimize the performance of the building services as one entity. These activities complete the quality assurance for your affordable nZEB.

5.1.1 Stakeholders and activities in Step 14 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information Client, user, contracted service provider, commissioning expert, suppliers. The client, the user and if applicable the contracted service provider will be involved to provide relevant information on use and behaviour for accurate interpretation of the monitoring results and for verification and validation against the set of requirements. Also they will aid in in implementing and possibly financing any optimization activities. The commissioning authority will lead the process of monitoring, interpretation, verification and optimization. Suppliers can be consulted for specific information or concerning contractual issues. Main activities:

In case of an energy performance guarantee contract (EPC): follow the agreements in the contract Use the maintenance and commissioning manuals from the building dossier Collect data on parameters like energy use, costs, user comfort and health Supplement technical measurements with data on the actual user experience Verify whether performance objectives and specifications are being met Analyse the data to find the causes of any performance gaps Apply appropriate interventions Optimize the performance of the building services as one entity Ensure user and service provider are up-to-date with any new use or maintenance requests Record results and add these to the building dossier


• IPMVP protocols • Sensor and monitoring techniques • Energy performance simulation tooling • Energy performance guarantees (see e.g. here) • Evaluation methods for user experience


https://e3p.jrc.ec.europa.eu/articles/energy-performance-contracting


AZEB specific:

• AZEB Factsheet: Building optimization tool • AZEB report: Guidelines for quality checks for commissioning of the building • AZEB guide: Guidelines for comfort and motivation end-users questionnaires • AZEB Manual for energy performance guarantees

Examples of other relevant EU projects: There are a variety of projects where financing energy efficiency is the main aim, but monitoring and optization of performance is explained as a key task for success:

• Enerinvest, www.enerinvest.es • FPI, www.fpih2020.eu

5.1.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 14 An example of extensive commissioning and monitoring is given by the Passive House indoor swimming pool project "Bambados" in Bamberg, Germany, which was consulted and monitored by PHI after an extensive research project. Due to monitoring and commissioning a significant reduction of operational cost could be achieved. An example of this is that due to adjustment of the ventilation units of the adjoining areas, the volumetric flows were adapted to the actual demand and 50 % of the electricity demand (and costs) could thus be saved.

Figure 10 Bambados: Due to adjustment of the ventilation units of the adjoining areas, the volumetric flows were adapted to the actual demand and 50% of the electricity demand and costs could thus be saved

The research and monitoring report on the investigation of the passive house indoor swimming pool "Bambados" documents the results of the detailed monitoring over several years including the optimisation of the passive house indoor swimming pool and its positive effects on the operating conditions. The analysis of the energy consumption values of the different areas makes it possible to give concrete recommendations for action. The project was supported by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Energy (BMWi). The report can be downloaded at the website of the Passive House Institute in German language. An English guideline “Passive

http://www.enerinvest.es/

http://www.fpih2020.eu/

https://passiv.de/downloads/05_hallenbad_bambados_monitoring_endbericht.pdf


House concept for indoor swimming pools” commissioned by the German Federal Environment Foundation (DBU, Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt) will be available in near future.

Another, very different interesting example on the implementation of this step can be foud in a renovation project in Arnheim, in The Netherlands. Here a social housing apartment building was refurbished to reach nZEB standard. After delivery extensive monitoring took place. The specificatons turned out to be met in the use phase: the building was performing technically as it had been designed. However, users were also interviewed to assess their level of satisfaction with their renewed apartment. One of the technical performances addressing comfort of the building, was that building installtions ensured that room temperature was kept on a constant 21 degrees Celsius in all rooms all year round. The assumption had been that users would find that to be very comfortable. However, the monitoring crew found out that there was a significant number of users that did not like that high a temperature at all, especially in their bedrooms. And within this building and installations design, they could lower this temperature only by opening the windows. This however then led to a higher energy loss and undesirable raising energy costs. This example shows why technical measurement and verification is sometimes insufficient to draw conclusions (the conclusion in this case would have been that the building is comfortable to its users because it technically performs as agreed). Validation measurements, such as post-occupancy questionnaires or interviews with users and operators of buildings, addressing “subjective” questions concerning their personal experiences in the building are just as important. These are needed to ensure that the building reaches its ultimate goal: satisfied clients and users.

5.1.4 Categorization of Step 14: essential If one wishes to stay in control throughout the lifecycle of the project, monitoring and optiming in the use & maintenance phase is indispensible. The depth with which to implement this step can of course vary from basic to very advanced. 5.2 Step 15: Guide user behaviour

User behaviour can influence nZEB energy performance, affect IEQ comfort and consequently costs. Guide users to stimulate energy-conscious behaviour. Create awareness in occupants by providing easy-to-understand informational material. Explain the material through personal contact, preferably ‘at the kitchen table’. Offer the user opportunities for practical instructions and training. Emphasize the values created by optimal nZEB operation and maintenance. Spark their enthusiasm for a personal contribution to a better world, while comfortably living in their affordable nZEB.

5.2.1 Stakeholders and activities in Step 15 Stakeholders and sources for information: Client, user, projectmanager, (sub-)contractors, suppliers, contracted service provider(-s). In any project phase, but specifically when a building is commissioned and when maintenance activities are being performed during the use phase, the involved professionals can increase the awareness of users and influence their behaviour by proactively informing, communicating and educating them. Clients and users (which may or may not be the same person) must take responsibility in digesting this information and putting it into practice.



Main activities:

If possible involve the user as early as possible in the project development (initiative, design and construction phase) Provide the user with the manuals for use and maintenance as created during the design and construction phase Provide a variety of materials to account for varying learning and communication styles (e.g. written guides, pictoral

guides, video, questionnaires) Organize an individual or collective user session to inform and educate when the building is taken into use Consider (automated) emailing or social media use to regularly reinforce their knowledge and motivation Utilize each instance of contact in the maintenance phase to reinforce user’s nZEB knowledge and motivation Make them proud of their nZEB


• Climate psychology (see e.g. here) • User experience (UX) theory and standards (see e.g. ISO standard 9241 series for Ergonomics of Human-System

Interaction) • Guidelines on creating user manuals (see e.g. here) • Software to easily create user manuals (see e.g. here and here) • Client journey mapping and -tools (see e.g. here and here)

AZEB specific:

• AZEB collection of factsheets with informational material voor nZEB users • User misbehaviour guide -to better understand how a building might be used • Examples of user explanations on video (Italian): here • Examples of a “user manual on video” (Spanish): here


• Beneffice, http://www.beneffice.eu/The-project • Encompass, http://www.encompass-project.eu/ • Entropy, https://entropy-project.eu/treasure-hunt-game/

5.2.3 Categorization of Step 15: Essential As with any product delivered to a customer, a manual should be provided and effort should be made to inform the customer how to use the product. For a building it should not be different. In case of an affordable nZEB it is extra important, because user behaviour can affect various aspects of environmental, social and economic performance in the operational phase.

https://www.climatepsychologyalliance.org/

https://www.userfocus.co.uk/articles/usermanuals.html

https://www.swipeguide.com/platform

https://stepshot.net/manuals/



http://www.enerpop.polimi.it/consigli-per-gestione-termica/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pti2FqgNmXk

http://www.beneffice.eu/The-project

http://www.encompass-project.eu/

https://entropy-project.eu/treasure-hunt-game/


6 Going the extra mile: Extend your impact (step 16-17)

The above 15 steps of the AZEB methodology are applicable at project level within any organisation and within the current structure of the building sector. When you are serious about making a difference with your projects, you can actually extend your impact beyond the project level. By translating the lessons learned in your nZEB projects into improved standards and processes within your company and, better still, across company borders by transforming the structure and collaborative practices throughout the value chain, you will be able to quantum leap in cost-effectiveness and performance. The AZEB Roadmap proposes 2 critical steps for extending your impact. These steps are: Step 16: Evaluate and apply the lessons learned Step 17: Integrate the value chain In the following paragraphs each of these steps will be explained in detail.

Figure 11 Extend your Impact phase in the AZEB Roadmap


6.1 Step 16: Evaluate and apply the lessons learned

The basis for all cost and value optimization lies in how you organize your resources.People, knowledge, skills, tools, processes, finance, marketing and much more. Creating an affordable nZEB in a project is just a first step. Now thoroughly evaluate the project. Pinpoint all opportunities to improve processes in your organization. Improve collaboration with your partners. Increase the depth and accessibility of your knowledge base. This way, with each nZEB and each project evaluation you can seize opportunities and structurally increase your environmental, social and economic impact.

6.1.1 Stakeholders and activities in Step 16 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: Anyone involved in the project. At least (if applicable): Clients, investors, users, projectmanagement, design team, (sub-) contractors, suppliers, commissioning expert, certification bodies. Any party wishing to learn and extend their impact beyond the project can initiate and coordinate the activities below. Main activities:

Choose an impartial facilitator to lead the evaluation process and document the findings for further use Organize an evaluation session for all relevant stakeholders

o Address at least the three keys to affordable nZEBs: quality assurance, procurement and integrated project delivery, use the AZEB roadmap for explicitizing and organizing the participants’ findings

o Evaluate the environmental, social and economic results as well as the collaboration process o First assemble individual views, then create interaction o Brainstorm and analyze the opportunities for improvements in company processes, worker’s skills, and inter-

company collaborations o Choose the best and doable actions and put these in an action list including action owner and due dates (this

action can be done for each company individually, regardless if there will be other projects with the same team in the near future)

Implement the findings in your organisation In addition: add all building performance results to a database to create specific nZEB baseline references for future

projects (e.g. costs, energy, health, comfort)


• Methods for investment evaluation, for an overview see e.g. here


https://ceopedia.org/index.php/Project_evaluation_methods


• Continous improvement techniques to use in workshops, e.g. from the lean and agile movement: o The 5 why’s – to identify root causes of problems o Kanban – visual method to improve work processes o A3 – 7 step method to analyze prblems and implement solutions

AZEB-specific: • AZEB guide: Organizing project start-ups and team sessions for nZEBs


• Not currently known by AZEB team.

6.1.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 16 In the duration of AZEB project several workshops have been carried out with the team of the Spanish case study from developer and AZEB partner Visesa. These sessions included the essential stakeholders such as the facultative direction, engineers, architects and installers. More and less structered processes have been followed in these workshops. For example, one workshop used lean techniques like value stream mapping as a basis for evaluation of the process and results. Some of the conclusions derived from these workshops have been the main input for some critical decisions made for sequential building projects and some new working standards have been developed for the organisation of Visesa, to implement in future similar projects. By taking their lessons learned in an individual project to transform some of their organisational working standards, Visesa expects to reach structural improvements in performance of their buildings as well as in total company performance.

Another example is the Bulgarian partner Oberon Konzeptbau, who documented the achieved results and lessons learned by using the methodology in the Bulgarian case study and uses this as reference for future projects, to show the clients what can be achieved.

6.1.4 Categorization of Step 16: Bonus This step is often skipped in organisations due to other priorities being chosen based on issues of the day and because the benefits of this step are seized in the long-run and cannot be seen immediately. However, creating time for this step can have significant impact on the economic, social and environmental performance of all projects still to follow. It might save many resources internally and externally now and in the future. Not an urgent step, but potentially very important.


6.2 Step 17: Integrate the value chain

This final step in the AZEB Roadmap is about doing a quantum leap to exponentially raise the environmental, social and economic value of nZEBs. Implement well-known cross-organisational optimization processes, normal in most other industries, still largely foreign to the building industry. Create ultimate impact by increasing labour productivity and product quality. Initiate a system shift and integrate the building value chain. Start from a customer’s perspective and optimize the client journey. Use lean methods to minimize waste and maximize value. Standardize integrated project delivery across the supply chain and implement innovative integrated collaborative contracts. Move towards industrially produced, customized, high quality products and deliver through seamless interactive services with a standard performance guarantee. Ready for the true next level? Be an AZEB hero and travel to zero!

6.2.1 Stakeholders and activities involved in Step 17 Suggested stakeholders and sources for information: All organisations in the building value chain, specialist consultancies in the domain of value chain integration. This step 17 is a huge endeavour which takes time, mental and organisational resilience, top-level commitment and many resources to complete from all involved companies in a construction industry value chain. However, as said, the gains can be spectaculair. Specialist knowledge and skills (often external) are required to lead this process. The leader(-s) of such initiative must at all times keep the big picture in sight for all and oversee and unite the variety of company and cross-company interests in this effort. A complex set of competencies is required. We do not list activities here, because of the compexity of this topic, which is dependent on many contextual factors. It is advised to consult a organisational change & value chain integration specialist for details.


• Organisational change (see e.g. here) • Supply chain management (see e.g. here) • Analysis and comparative assessments of the building sector’s productivity and general practices (see e.g. this McKinsey

report) • Lean production methodology to maximize customer value and minimize waste throughout the supply chain (a

standard work on this is the book “Lean Thinking - Banish waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation” by Womack, James P. and Jones, Daniel T.)

AZEB specific:

• AZEB report: Overview of Solutions throughout the building supply chain


• Transition Zero, http://transition-zero.eu/

6.2.3 Example of the potential impact of Step 17 To illustrate a farfetching example to restructure the building value chain for nZEBs, including financing, we take the project VVE Ellen te Assen, The Netherlands. In the Netherlands apartment buildings, like the building Ellen, often have an owners association in which the various appartment owners are united to make and finance decsions on collective buidling issues like maintenance. In the project Ellen, the owners wished to transform their building into nZEB standard, however were not able to finance this with

https://www.acmpglobal.org/

https://www.ascm.org/

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/reinventing-construction-through-a-productivity-revolution

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/reinventing-construction-through-a-productivity-revolution

http://transition-zero.eu/


the available resources. Under coordination of the municipality, and collaboration with a range of partners in the construction and financing sector, a project was started which eventually took 4 years to result in a completed and financed renovated building with nZEB standard. Several unique processes were put in place to achieve this and pave the way for similar constructions to make nZEB renovations possible on a large scale. An overview of the main characteristics of the development process in this specific project: Financing of the project

• Instead of the loan being tied to the owner, in this case the owner association of Ellen, the loan is tied to the building. This means that when an appartment is sold, the remaining loan and financing conditions automatically move to the new owner.

• Each owner in an owner association in The Netherlands pays a monthly “service-fee” for being a member. This money is saved for e.g. investments in the building and insurances at building level, and the amount is set by the members of the association. Unique in this project Ellen, is that for the first time in The Netherlands a financing institute agreed on giving a 30-year loan to be paid of by a raise of the monthly service-fee. This raise in turn, potentially causing higher monthly operational costs for the owners, was offset by the lower monthly energy costs for each owner, keeping monthly costs similar despite of the expensive refurbishment. For the financing institute, Triodos Bank, to agree on this, two more measures were needed:

o The building contractor operated under a performance guarantee contract on building level, so risks of performance gaps (causing unexpected higher operational costs for the user) were transferred from the bank to to the contractor

o The province agreed to a deposit as a guarantee to further mitigate the risk of the financer, because renovation costs are still significant and above traditional costs, due to the innovative character and lack of scale.

• To be able to provide a performance guarantee and reach acceptable investment costs the contracted builders collaborated intensively with clients, designers and suppliers to create a design which fully wrappes the building, even existing balconies and galleries were transformed to indoor spaces. Then the transformed the construction process using a prefabricated solution for heavy insulation of the façade plus installing just two small building installations per appartment and solar panels on the roof. The coordinated building process based on prefabrication made it possible to refurbish at a speed of one appartment per day.

Looking ahead from this initiative to transform the building supply chain to create affordabe nZEBs: The concepts applied are now taken as input for developing programs to apply this at a greater scale in The Netherlands (and possibly other countries). Plans are being made for a national guarantee fund for building-tied financing for owner-associations or possibly even other owners. This guarantee fund should be temporary, as scale up of these types of renovation concepts and processes will eventually lower the construction costs so this extra guarantee is no longer needed for financing institutes. Also opportunities for larger scale projects are actively sought out by a variety of key players in the Dutch building sector, to ensure a scale-up to happen. This initiative of project Ellen has received some nominations and awards already, due to its disruptive nature and high potential as a solution to our collective climate challenges. Many examples for the potential impact of supply chain integration can be taken from the automotive sector. There deep collaborations across the supply chain and even across competitors are commonplace. Car manufacturers are known for their cost-effective prefabricated yet customized products. The building sector can learn much from these business models, for example how so-called OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) and VARs (Value Added Resellers) take their roles in the automotive supply chain. OEMs (car manufacturers) usually assemble the car mainly out of products coming from partnered suppliers (who can be OEMs in their own scale). The local car dealer then sells the car to the consumer with the added value of customized services and guarantee. Organisations in the building supply chain could mimic this type of deep collaboration, value chain integration and standardization to deliver affordable customized, prefabricated and performance guaranteed buildings to their clients.

6.2.4 Categorization of Step 17: Bonus This is a step for the best in class to implement. Huge effort, impressive results and truly game-changing for the building industry.


Annex 1 | Assessing the impact of the AZEB Roadmap Every project intends to have a positive impact on several targeted goals. Energy and cost are never the sole indicators of success and making decisions to improve performances on energy and costs should always include a consideration of the other relevant performance areas. The AZEB methodology has been developed to achieve positive impact in at least six areas which are usually of interest for one or more stakeholders of the project: energy, (lifecycle)cost, environment, social sustainability, real estate value and occupancy rates. Not all steps will have impact on all areas, but collectively applied, a positive impact is expected in all of them. To demonstrate and measure these impacts, relevant indicators are important. In the AZEB report “Indicators and assessment methods for nZEBs and Energy plus buildings” a suggestion is done for indicators and assessment methods to use to assess the actual impact and explanations are given for each of them. This report is available at www.azeb.eu and for any details we refer to that report. Below the suggested indicators are summarized for each relevant performance area.

1. Indicators for improved energy performance of an nZEB.

The objectives served by paing attention to energy performance of a building are e.g. cost effectiveness from a lifecycle perspective, environmental protection and increase in user comfort. Energy performance is a rather complex topic and has many aspects which can be considered. Some suggested indicators for energy performance for nZEB projects are summarized in the table below. When we strive for affordable nZEBs, assessing the project in different phases on (some of) these indicators can help to make good decisions.

Energy, Quality of the building fabric - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area Energy needs for heating (kWh/y/m2) Energy needs for cooling (kWh/y/m2) Optional: Energy use for lighting (kWh/y/m2) Optional: air tightness (Ach at 50 Pa difference or equivalent) Energy, users' behaviour and appliances - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area Energy needs for Sanitary Hot water (kWh/y/m2)

Total internal gains (kWh/y/m2) - From lighting, appliances, IT equipment, people

Total primary Energy, (Building fabric + systems) - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area - On Hourly, monthly and yearly base Total Primary energy use (kWh/y/m2) Provide values for present national primary energy factors – PEF (3 values for each flow of delivered energy: total, renewable, non renewable) For renewable PEF distinguish between energy imported from the grid, self consumed or exported to the grid Renewable energy on-site generation , export and import - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area- On Hourly, monthly and yearly base Renewable Primary energy generated on-site (kWh/y/m2) Renewable Primary energy generated on-site and Self consumed (kWh/y/m2) Renewable Primary energy exported to the grid (kWh/y/m2) Non Renewable Primary Energy, or Global primary energy balance -Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area - On Hourly, monthly and yearly base Non Renewable Primary energy use without compensation for exported energy (kWh/y/m2) Non Renewable Primary energy use with 100% compensation for exported energy (consumption minus on-site generation in kWh/y/m2)

http://www.azeb.eu/


Renewable Primary energy use considering the 100% renewable scenario (kWh/y/m2). In this case it coincides with Total Primary energy use Ratio of renewable primary energy over the total primary energy use (with and without compensation) (%) Calculation time step (hour, month or year)

2. Indicators for reduced costs of an nZEB.

The objectives served with paying attention to the lifecycle costs of an nZEB are e.g. to stimulate efficient and effective processes to develop and maintain an nZEB, to stimulate the uptake of nZEBs by making them more affordable and to stimulate a fair share in profits for all professionals involved. Some suggested indicators for costs for nZEB projects are summarized in the table below. When we strive for affordable nZEBs, assessing the project in different phases on these indicators can help to make good decisions.

Costs - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area

Construction cost (€/m2) Life cycle cost (€/m2) Operational energy and energy related maintenance costs (€/m2 y)

3. Indicators for improved environmental performance.

The objectives served with paying attention to environmental performance of a building are, in random order, e.g. to preserve raw materials, save energy, save water, manage land use, limit toxic emissions,protect the climate, to protect fauna and flora, to protect forests, to protect rivers and lakes, to improve outside air quality, to reduce waste and to reduce radioactive waste. Indicators can be used to assess how a building contributes to these objectives throughout its lifecycle. Some suggested indicators for environmental performance for nZEB projects are summarized in the table below. When we strive for affordable nZEBs, assessing the project in different phases on (some of) these indicators can help to make good decisions.

LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) - Per unit of heated or conditioned floor area Greenhouse gases emissions (kg CO2/m2/y) Primary energy use (kWh/y/m2) Reference study period (years) Optional: Health

Mid-point indicators: • Climate change, Global warming potential (GWP) • Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP) • Formation potential of tropospheric ozone photochemical oxidants (POCP) • Radioactive waste

End-point indicator:


• Disability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY)

Ecosystems Mid-point indicators:

• Climate change, Global warming potential (GWP) • Acidification potential (AP) • Eutrophication potential (EP)


• Potentially Disappeared Fraction of species (PDF)

Resources Mid-point indicators:

• Primary energy demand (PED) • Use of net fresh water • Waste production


• Abiotic Resource Depletion Potential (ADP)

4. Indicators for improved social sustainability.

The objectives served with paying attention to social sustainability include e.g. user satisfaction throughout the building’s lifecycle, inclusion of all people in society, a safe living and working environment, socially responsible governance. Some suggested indicators for social sustainability in nZEB projects are summarized in the table below. When we strive for affordable nZEBs, assessing the project in different phases on (some of) these indicators can help to make good decisions.

Social indicators (Based on EN16309) - On Building level:

o Accessibility: approach to,

• entrance to • movement in

o Adaptability of the building for eventual forthcoming uses o Health and comfort

Acoustic comfort Indoor Air Quality Visual comfort Water quality Electromagnetic characteristics Thermal comfort (may be measured based on Fanger (steady-state) or adaptive approaches)

o Maintenance and maintainability o Safety and security

Against climate change consequences Intruders and vandalism Against supply disruption

o Impact on the neighborhood Noise Emissions Glare and shadowing Shocks and vibrations Localized wind effects

o Materials and service sources: sustainable sources o Involvement of stakeholders

- On Product level: o Safe construction materials use


- On Process level: o Socially responsible public procurement:

Community involvement Diversity and inclusion Environmental protection Ethics Health, Safety and Security

- On User level: o User’s characterization o User’s opinion

5. Indicators for improved real estate value

The objectives served with paying attention to real estate value includes increased user acceptance and increased uptake of nZEBs by investors and other financial institutes facilitating funding of nZEBs. For determining impact on real estate value in the AZEB project, we consider that value is not equal to price and there are many models how to define/ calculate value. For the case of NZEBs, the following contributions of nZEBs which may increase real estate value are crucial: - Contribution to uniqueness (e.g. realizing a building with the highest energy performance in a given district; realizing a

building which is identical to the others in a residential district, but requires twice lesser energy for heating and cooling) - Contribution to reduction of overall LC costs (e.g. heat pump investment vs. heating purely on electricity from the grid;

additional insulation thickness vs. additional energy for cooling and heating) - Contribution to better living conditions/social impact factors (e.g. comfort, air quality) - Contribution to less required maintenance in the future (e.g. preventing thermal bridges and air leakages in the building’s

envelope will increase the time intervals for cosmetic repairs of construction elements like exterior walls).

When we strive for affordable nZEBs, assessing the project in different phases on (some of) these indicators can help to make good decisions.

6. Indicators for improved occupancy rates.

Paying attention to the performance area of occupancy rates, serves the objectives of e.g. stimulating efficient use of space and the associated financial, environmental and social costs. An example would be that when installations can be placed in the building in an efficient manner, more space will remain for social activities, or the building can be made smaller, saving costs and materials. For occupancy rates, our definition and indicator within the AZEB project is: The ratio of rented or used space to the total amount of available space.


Annex 2 | Factsheets with basic information on AZEB case studies


Annex 3 | Overview of the AZEB project partners

The project AZEB is powered by a multi-disciplinary team of 8 partners from 6 countries. A short description of each

organisation and a link to their website is in this annex.

• DNA in de Bouw – The Netherlands (project coordinator)

DNA is a regionally operating network-organisation of innovative construction companies, architects and advisors in close partnership with public local authorities in regional sustainable development. All members are specialized in energy-efficient, ecological buildings. Established in 2012, DNA is a non-profit association of over 65 Small and Medium size Enterprises (SME’s). The purpose of DNA is to encourage and implement a new way of building design and construction in The Netherlands. Not only in the technical sense, with an emphasis on sustainable building, but also in the way that organisations and people cooperate, actively searching for and experimenting with new, innovative and viable business models for the building sector.

• OHL (Obrascon Huarte Lain) – Spain

OHL is one of the largest international concession and construction groups. It boasts a hundred years' experience and currently has significant operations in 30 countries across all five continents . The OHL Group is composed of five divisions: OHL Construcción, OHL Concesiones, OHL Servicios, OHL Industrial y OHL Desarrollos. OHL Construcción is: World leader in hospital and railway construction, 10th largest international transport infrastructure contractor, and 23rd largest international contractor, 4th main contractor in Latin America. Since its establishment in 1911, OHL has been involved in all types of activities in the construction field all over the globe.

The OHL Group considers research, development and innovation to be a cornerstone of its strategy given the contribution these activities make to improving the Group's productivity and competitiveness through the launch of new, more efficient and sustainable products, processes and services. Currently OHL’s architectural department is specialized in landmark buildings construction that, in parallel, reconfigure the urban structure from the point of view sustainability, improving traffic and energy efficiency at level district. OHL has built numerous public and cultural centers, corporate and institutional buildings, hospitals, and so on, designed by internationally renowned architects.

• TECNALIA (Fundacion Tecnalia Research & Innovation) – Spain

TECNALIA is a private, independent, non- profit applied research centre of international excellence. Legally a Foundation, Tecnalia is the leading private and independent research and technology organization in Spain and one of the largest in Europe, employing 1,319 people (198 PhDs) and with income of 94 Million € in 2014.

The whole team at TECNALIA has one goal: to transform knowledge into GDP, meaning wealth to improve people’s quality of life by generating business opportunities for industry. TECNALIA is committed to generate major impacts in economic terms, by means of innovation and technological development, addressed by 8 business divisions, covering economic sectors of Energy, Industry, Transportation, Construction, Health and ICT. TECNALIA has been granted over 250 patents and promoted more than 30 spin-off companies.

• VISESA (Vivienda y Suelo de Euskadi) – Spain

VISESA is a public-sector company attached to the Basque Government's Department of Employment and Social Policies. Its primary mission is to develop high-quality subsidized housing in the Basque autonomous community, as part of the regional government's determination to ensure the right to decent housing for all sectors of society. VISESA is also actively involved in urban regeneration, as well as in the rehabilitation of housing and public infrastructures, promoting accessibility, improvement of the people quality of life and the sustainable development of the region, from the perspective of territorial balance.

With a capital of around 37 million euros signed by the BASQUE GOVERNMENT and the main Basque saving banks , Kutxabank and Caja Laboral, VISESA has a healthy balance sheet that allows it to act as an engine for policy public housing, self-financing and therefore without posing a financial burden on the Basque Government.

http://www.dnaindebouw.nl/

http://www.ohl.es/

http://www.tecnalia.com/

http://www.visesa.eus/


VISESA was set up in 1990 and actually is the leading developer in the Basque region, with more than 17,260 homes completed or under construction. 2013 turnover 48, 2012 turnover 83 million, employing 66 people. VISESA is an equal opportunity employer. Current ratio of female/male employees is 60/40.

• Passive House Institute – Germany

The Passive House Institute is an independent research institute led by Dr. Wolfgang Feist with a continuously growing interdisciplinary team of staff. The PHI has played an especially crucial role in the development of the Passive House concept. The first pilot project (Kranichstein Passive House, Darmstadt, Germany, 1990) was Europe’s first inhabited multi-family house to achieve a documented heating energy consumption of below 12 kWh/(m²a), a consumption level confirmed through years of detailed monitoring. Since then, the Passive House Institute has assumed a leading position with regard to research on and development of construction concepts, building components, planning tools and quality assurance for particularly energy efficient buildings.

The Passive House Institute is constantly developing and improving upon algorithms and software tools for dynamic building simulations, the calculation of energy balances and the planning of Passive House buildings (for example, using the Passive House Planning Package). The Institute acts as an independent testing and certification centre for buildings and building components such as wall and construction systems, windows, doors, connections, ventilation systems and compact systems. PHI research staff also provides manufacturers of energy efficient components with in-depth consultancy on product development and optimization.

• ARMINES (Association Pour La Recherche Et Le Developpement Des Methodes Et Processus Industriels) – France

ARMINES is a private non-profit research and technological organisation (RTO) funded in 1967, having common research centers with the Ecoles des Mines: Paris (Mines ParisTech), Albi-Carmaux (Mines Albi-Carmaux), Alès (Mines Alès), Douai (Mines Douai), Nantes (Mines Nantes) and Saint-Etienne (Mines Saint-Etienne), gathering public and private personnel and means, to collaborate on an arms lengths basis and perform research contractual activities and academic research training. ARMINES currently shares 48 Joint Research Units (Common Research Centres) with the Ecoles des Mines.

The ARMINES/MINES ParisTech, common research centre “CES” (Centre for energy Efficiency of Systems) is involved in the AZEB project. Located in Paris/Palaiseau – France it is a research laboratory of about 50 people including 11 senior scientists, 7 post doc or research engineers, 28 Ph.Ds., 14 technicians and administrative personnel. The research is performed based both on simulation and tests carried out on test benches. The CES has been involved in improvement of energy efficiency in buildings, transport and industry since 25 years. The CES develops research with French, European and U.S companies.

• Oberon Konzeptbau – Bulgaria

Oberon Konzeptbau is a family company founded in 2003 in Bulgaria. It boasts long experience in all types of concrete building projects and currently has significant operations in Bulgaria and Germany. The OKB group has two divisions: OKB Bulgaria and OKB Germany. OKB relies on its long experience in Germany and is focused on delivering very high quality projects in Bulgaria, especially in the field of nZEB buildings.

• Politecnico di Milano (eERG-PoliMI) – Italy

The Politecnico di Milano is the most important Italian technology university. Part of the Energy Department, the end use Efficiency Research Group (eERG-PoliMI), consisting of a staff professor and five researchers, is dedicated to researching the technological, economics, and regulatory aspects of end use energy efficiency. Born on the efforts of the group leader, initiated twenty years ago at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories, California, the group is now one of the leading proponents of energy efficiency programmes in Italy.

The end use Efficiency Research Group (eERG), is dedicated to research, technology transfer and teaching about the efficient use of energy in buildings. In particular in the areas of: low energy buildings, passive cooling techniques, efficient lighting and daylighting; technical and economic analysis of energy- using products; evaluation and certification of energy savings in the context of liberalised energy markets.

http://www.passiv.de/

http://passivehouse.com/04_phpp/04_phpp.htm

http://www.mines-paristech.eu/Research-valorization/Fields-of-Research/Energy-and-processes/

http://www.oberonkbau.com/

http://www.eerg.it/


Annex 4 | References and acknowledgement

Firstly, we like to acknowledge the fact that the AZEB methodology is based on many, many existing solutions, insights and methods acquired by prolonging efforts by many, many organisations and individuals. We, the AZEB projectteam, are intensely grateful for all organisations and individuals who have in any way researched or experimented with technical and organisational developments in the building sector for the past years, decades and even centuries. They inspired us, taught us, helped us grow our own experiences and knowledge in the sector. Any list of references could never fully do justice to all.

This current report on the AZEB approach is based on the research of the past three years into existing solutions to achieve affordable nZEBs. Several reports have been written on a range of solutions and methods to be included in this AZEB methodology. These all include their own references and are available at www.azeb.eu. Also, throughout this current report we have included many links and references for specific suggestions and details.

The AZEB roadmap with the 17 steps is original work from the AZEB team, we have not included references for that. But this creative work could not have been done without our backgrounds being based on previously mentioned base of knowledge and experience.

The original material in this report is protected by a Creative Commons license. See for more information on this: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/?lang=en

http://www.azeb.eu/

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/?lang=en

the azeb methodology: 17 steps to create affordable nearly ... · the azeb methodology: 17 steps to...

Documents