Economic assessment of energy efficiency investments in dwellings = Evaluación económica de inversiones de eficiencia energética en viviendas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20868/bma.2017.2.3552Keywords:
Dwelling efficiency energy, Energy efficiency investments, Energy retrofit, Economic appraisal, Eficiencia energética de la vivienda, Inversiones en eficiencia energética, Reacondicionamiento energético, Evaluación económicaAbstract
Abstract
In order to improve the energy performance of buildings, the need to value economically investments of energy efficiency associated with the rehabilitation of dwellings arises. This point of view provides an useful tool for analysts who start in the economic appraisal of energy efficiency investments. The present research gives a conceptual framework for the economic assessment of these types of investments in dwellings. As a result, it is possible to identify two techniques in the appraisals of this nature: dynamic and static approaches. Both methods contrast the benefits (energy savings) with the costs of investments over time. However, they differentiate the opportunity and the moment when investment must be carried out given an uncertainty scenario. This conceptual precision allows the study of several publications where different alternatives in retrofitting houses where evaluated, confirming the considerations that must be taken into account when economic modelling is made: the type of approach to be used (dynamic or static) and; at the definition of the investment alternatives and scenarios, the aspects of time, irrevocability and uncertainty.
Resumen
En pro de la mejora del desempeño energético de los edificios, surge la necesidad de evaluar económicamente las inversiones de eficiencia energética asociadas a la rehabilitación de viviendas. Este punto de vista trata de ser una herramienta útil para analistas que se inicien en la evaluación económica de inversiones en eficiencia energética. La presente investigación muestra un marco conceptual de la evaluación económica de este tipo de inversiones en viviendas. Como resultado, es posible identificar dos enfoques presentes en los análisis económicos de esta naturaleza: el dinámico y el estático. Ambos métodos contrastan los beneficios (ahorros energéticos) con los costes de las inversiones en el tiempo. Sin embargo, diferencian la oportunidad y el momento en que la inversión debe realizarse dado un escenario de incertidumbre. Esta precisión conceptual permite estudiar varias publicaciones donde se evaluaron diferentes alternativas de reacondicionamiento en viviendas, confirmándose las consideraciones que deben tenerse presentes en momento de realizar la modelación económica: el tipo de enfoque a usar (dinámico o estático) y, en la definición de las alternativas de inversión y escenarios, los aspectos de tiempo, irrevocabilidad e incertidumbre.
Downloads
References
British Petroleum. (2017). Recuperado el 1 de Enero de 2017, de BP Global - Statistical Review of World Energy: http://bp.com/statisticalreview.
Nejat, P., Jomehzadeh, F., Mahdi Taheri, M., Gohari, M., & Adb Majid, M. Z. (2015). A global review of energy consumption, CO2 emissions and policy in the residential sector (with an overview of the top ten CO2 emitting countries). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 43, marzo 2015, pág. 843-862.
Yau, Y., & Hasbi., S. (2013). A review of climate change impacts on commercial buildings and their technical services in the tropics. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 18, febrero 2013, Pág. 430-441.
Cárdenas, J. P., Muñoz, E., Riquelme, C., & Hidalgo, F. (2015). Simplified life cycle assessemt applied to structural insulated. Revista Ingeniería de Construcción, Vol. 30 N° 1, abril, pág. 33-38.
IDAE, I. p. (2015). Energy Efficiency Trends and Policies in SPAIN. España: IDAE.
Verbruggen, A., Al Marchohi, M., & Janssens, B. (2011). The anatomy of investing in energy efficient buildings. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 4, Issue 4, abril 2011, Pág. 905-914.
Ma, Z., Cooper, P., Daly , D., & Ledo, L. (2012). Existing building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-the-art. Energy and Buildings, Volume 55, December 2012, Pages 889-902.
Verbruggen, A. (2012). Financial appraisal of efficiency investments: why the good may be the worst enemy of the best. Energy Efficiency, Vol. 5, November 2012, Issue 4, pp 571–582.
Weitzman, M. (1998). Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 36, Issue 3, noviembre 1998, Pág. 201-208.
Weitzman, M. (1999). Just Keep Discounting, but. En P. Portney, & J. Weyant, Discounting and Intergenerational Equity (págs. 23-30). Washington DC: Resources for the Future.
Madlener, R., & Kumbaroğlu, G. (2012). Evaluation of economically optimal retrofit investment options for energy savings in buildings. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 49, Junio 2012, Pág. 327-334.
Morrissey, J., & Horne, R. (2011). Life cycle cost implications of energy efficiency measures in new residential buildings. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 43, Issue 4, Abril 2011, Pág. 915-924.
Ciulla, G., Galatioto, A., & Ricciu, R. (2016). Energy and economic analysis and feasibility of retrofit actions in Italian residential historical buildings. Energy and Buildings, Vol. 128, septiembre 2016, Pág. 649-659.
Coyle, D. (2016). An Investigation Into the Cost Optimality of the Passive House Retrofit Standard for Irish Dwellings Using Life Cycle Cost Analysis. Journal of Sustainable Design & Applied Research, Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 2.
Rasoul Asaee, S., Ismet Ugursal, V., & Beausoleil-Morrison, I. (2017). Techno-economic assessment of solar assisted heat pump system retrofit in the Canadian housing stock. Applied Energy, Vol. 190, marzo 2017, Pág. 439–452.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The originals of Building & Management magazine are property of the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, being necessary to cite the origin of any partial or total reproduction.
All the original articles published in Building & Management are subject to discussion and comments from our readers. Opinions should be sent to the journal's email address, within a period of three months, starting from the date of publication.
Authors retain the copyright of the papers and ensure B&M the right to have a Creative Commons license, Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), that allow others to share the article within an author recognition and non commercial use.
Authors can also establish independently aditional agreements for the not exclusive distribution of the article published versión in the e-journal (as, for example, to place it in an institutional repository or to publish it in a book).
Unless otherwise indicated, all contents of the electronic edition of Building & Management are distributed under a Creative Commons license and distribution.
< 
