See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264006180

From high performing buildings to nearly zero energy buildings

Data · July 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 105

4 authors:

Cristina Becchio Stefano Paolo Corgnati

Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Torino
45 PUBLICATIONS   251 CITATIONS    175 PUBLICATIONS   2,468 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Valentina Monetti Enrico Fabrizio

Politecnico di Torino Politecnico di Torino
19 PUBLICATIONS   225 CITATIONS    161 PUBLICATIONS   1,053 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

POLITOWARD View project

International Energy Agency Energy in Buildings and Communities Programme, Annex 66, Definition and Simulation of Occupant Behavior in Buildings View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cristina Becchio on 18 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

FROM HIGH PERFORMING BUILDINGS TO NEARLY ZERO

ENERGY BUILDINGS: POTENTIAL OF AN EXISTING OFFICE
BUILDING
Cristina Becchio1, Stefano Paolo Corgnati1 Valentina Monetti1 and Enrico Fabrizio2
1
DENERG, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abbruzzi 24, 10124, Torino, Italia
2
DISAFA, University of Torino, Via Leonardo da Vinci 44, 10095 Grugliasco (TO), Italia

Corresponding email: cristina.becchio@polito.it

SUMMARY

The EPBD recast establishes that by the end of 2020 all new buildings must be nearly zero-
energy buildings (nZEBs), that are defined as buildings with a very high energy performance
and that require a nearly zero amount of energy, a very significant extent of which should be
covered by renewable sources. As no minimum harmonized requirements are fixed by the EU
Directive, on this regards, the US high performing buildings represent a starting point to look
at as a reference. The aim of this paper is to some guidance to EU Member State into nZEB
roadmap by examining a set of US high performing buildings. Especially the energy
performance of an existing high performing office building was analyzed by means of
dynamic energy simulation and additional efficiency solutions have been applied to it in order
to adapt it to the current day and to make it converge towards a nZEB.

INTRODUCTION

The energy consumption ascribed to the building stock amounts approximately to 40% of the
whole Europe’s energy needs [1], even far more than the transport sector [2]. Thus, it’s urgent
to decrease this high energy consumption. With regard to this urgent issue and in connection
to the 20-20-20 targets, the European Union set a binding legislation in terms of buildings
energy performance, referred to as the European Directive 2010/31/EU or Energy
Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD recast). It especially requires Member States to
define proper national path to improve the energy performance of their building stock moving
forward to reach nearly zero energy targets. The Directive addresses both new and existing
buildings but, due to the noted low efficiency rate of the existing dwellings and the low
replacement rate of old dwelling by new buildings, (around 1-3% per year) [3], retrofit actions
on the existing stock represent a crucial and major step to deal with. While new buildings can
be constructed with high performance levels, existing buildings that represent the vast
majority of the European building stock, are predominantly characterized by very poor energy
performances and consequently in need of renovation work [4]. The renovation of existing
buildings stock offers significant potential for both cost-effective CO2 emissions mitigation
and substantial energy consumption reduction, with a minimum energy savings estimable to
60-80 Mtoe/year in final energy consumption by 2020. Therefore existing buildings
renovation more than new buildings construction is the Europe’s biggest resource in terms of
energy and emissions savings and with its potential to reduce energy consumptions and
emissions of greenhouse gas and other pollutants, they can have a crucial role in hitting 2050
targets.

72
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nevertheless, it remains unclear which concrete actions and legislative measures are
necessary at the EU level to reach these long-term targets. To this end, the EPBD recast on the
energy efficiency of buildings [1] requires Member States to improve buildings energy
performance aiming to the nearly zero energy target by 2020. The Directive does not give a
technical definition of nearly zero-energy buildings (nZEBs) but simply describes nZEBs as
buildings that have a very high energy performance. The nearly zero or very low amount of
energy should be covered by renewable sources. Since the EPBD does not define clearly
minimum harmonized requirements, it will be up to Member States to establish a national
framework for the definition of a very high energy performance.
On this regard an ad hoc Rehva Task Force was established to support Member States experts
providing them with a proper technical nZEB definition [5]. Nearly zero energy buildings
were defined as technically and reasonably achievable national energy use of > 0 kWh/(m² a)
but no more than a national limit value of non-renewable primary energy achieved with a
combination of best practice energy efficiency measures and renewable energy technologies
which may or may not be cost optimal. This definition allows to take into account local
national conditions and to use the comparative calculation framework as defined by EPBD
guidelines.
Similar concerns have aroused also in United States, where buildings consumes as well 40%
of primary energy and 71% of the US electricity [6]. US Department of Energy (DOE),
together with the collaboration of ASHRAE are taking concrete steps towards this issue and
aimed the net zero energy buildings (NZEBs) to be the market-viable standard by the 2030,
where, NZEBs are buildings that produce as much energy as they use. This plan, referred to as
ASHRAE Vision 2020 [6] is a critical milestone to be achieved. However a strong strategic
plan together with helpful tools (e.g. Design Guides and Standard) and reference project have
been set by ASHRAE to guide the building community.
In order to fulfill this target US high performing buildings (HPBs) represent a starting point to
look at as a reference. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 [7] defines a high
performance building as a building that integrates and optimizes on a life-cycle basis all major
high performance attributes, including energy conservation, environment, safety, security,
durability, accessibility, cost-benefit, productivity, sustainability, functionality and
operational considerations. A high performance building can thus be seen as the first step to
be taken towards NZEBs. Moreover, to assist professionals to design high-performance
building ASHRAE has developed the Standard 189.1P for high-performance green building
and a certification program. A Database on HBPs project has also been developed by the U.S.
DOE and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), as a shared resource for the
building industry [8].
To deal with HPBs in Europe, it is not so clear as in US. First in Europe the high performing
building term and definition is not harmonized. Rather than it other terms are used for
indicating buildings with low energy consumptions. The most used ones are “low energy
house”, “passive house” and “energy saving house” [9]. The main difference between
European terms and the US ones is that in Europe they are mostly informal and descriptive.
They are not accompanied by benchmarks and not have harmonized calculation
methodologies. On this account the US approach represents a good lesson to be learnt by
European Member States, also on the way to define their national roadmap, on the basis of the
EPBD framework, towards the nZEBs.
This paper aims to examine some recognized US high performing buildings and to provide
some guidance to European Member States into nZEBs roadmap. In particular, an existing

73
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

high performing office building was analyzed. Since the case study represents a high
performing building for its construction period, additional efficiency solutions have been
applied in order to make it converge towards an European nZEB. The energy consumptions of
the selected building and the impact of the efficiency measures have been assessed by means
of dynamic simulation within the EnergyPlus code.

U.S. HIGH PERFORMINH BUILDINGS VS EUROPEAN nZEB

This study reviewed various office buildings, new and renovated ones, referred to as high
performing buildings and published from 2010 up to now in the ASHRAE HPBs magazine. In
particular 16 existing buildings, mainly located in United States but also in Northern America
and a few European sites, were selected and analyzed in order to provide additional guidance
on the energy-saving strategies to be adopted in the European context.
All case studies shared similar design intents as they all aimed to design new sustainable
office with a low environmental impact and low energy consumptions. Providing a high
quality and comfortable office working environment was also one of the main goals pursued
in all projects as the workers productivity had not to be comprised but indeed enhanced by all-
around applied energy saving and sustainable strategies.
A special attention to the environmental issues in the design process was also aroused by the
intent of accomplishing good rating scores in well-known certification protocols [10,11] . In
fact almost all case studies managed to achieve outstanding rating scores in LEED protocol or
similar ones. In regards to that, advanced dynamic simulation tools were used to assess the
building energy performance and the related obtainable energy savings. The evaluated energy
consumption was compared to real data and when, in some cases, they were not verified, the
building operation and system efficiency were checked. The not compliance of real
consumptions with simulated data was often due to the building operation, later altered on the
basis of the real building occupancy.
Moreover the use of advanced simulation programs allowed to optimize the building envelope
and form.
In general the design strategies adopted to achieve these goals can be outlined as follows:
- Design of a high-performing building envelope;
- Optimization of lighting system to reduce the related energy consumptions;
- Maximize the use of daylight;
- Design the HVAC system to minimize the energy use;
- Use of control points to operate the building systems to ensure high-level comfort to
maximize the systems efficiency and to reduce the energy consumptions;
- On-site energy production from renewable sources.
Furthermore almost all buildings designs were associated with commissioning to ensure that
the operation of all systems works properly. This is the case for example of the simulated
energy savings to be verified with the monitored ones.
The case studies analyzed are not characterized by energy efficiency measures highly
different from the ones usually adopted in the design of an European low energy building.
Nevertheless, if a difference has to be point out, in regard to the building envelope
performance, the minimum requirements of U-values are usually stricter in the European
countries than in US. For example the exterior walls U-value set by Italian regulation [12] is
0.33 W/m2K in climate zone E while the mean value in HPB analyzed is 0.45 W/m2K as
shown in Figure 1. For the design of a nZEB the U-values are even lower.

74
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Furthermore what in particular marks all projects is a special attention to minimize the energy
delivered to heating and cooling systems, trying to avoid the use of such systems thanks to
correct bio-climatic and passive design strategies. When needed the HVAC and ventilation
systems were designed to be simple and high-efficient systems and operating on the basis of
the real building occupancy through the use of Building Automation and Control Systems
(BACs).

Figure 1. U-value of the main envelope components of the HPB analyzed.

The lesson that can be learnt from US HPBs and applied to the European is that a major
implementation of BACs and a correct design and sizing of buildings systems are strongly
pursued also due to the building commissioning.

THE CASE STUDY

Project description

The case study hereby analyzed, called “Grand View”, is the new headquarters [13] of one the
most important Canadian consulting firm dedicated to the design of green buildings. Located
in central-east of Canada, in the Ontario province, the office buildings was designed aiming to
an healthy and sustainable environment, achieving a triple LEED Platinum certification under
the New Construction, Commercial Interiors and Existing Buildings: Operations and
Maintenance rating systems in 2011. The office building was completed and occupied since
September 2009. First years consumptions were monitored and compared to the estimated
one, simulated.

75
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

The three-storey office building has approximately 2000 m2 with a 12 m footprint and a East-
West orientation to optimize the exposures. The building has a rectangular plan with a
distribution area in the center and open and cellular offices ones.
With regard to the design of the building envelope, insulated concrete forms were used for
façades together with triple-glazed, low-emissivity and argon filled fiberglass windows.
The mechanical system has been designed to be simple and functional, guaranteeing high
energy efficiency. The heating/cooling system and the ventilation one have been designed to
be and operate separately. Three air-source heat pumps are located on the roof and serve one
floor each. The ventilation system operates with energy recovery ventilators for each different
zone. The air handling unit is also connected to a geothermal system to decrease the amount
of energy needed to heat the air to be introduced in indoor ambient. Moreover the heating
produced by the computer server rooms is used to preheat the building domestic hot water
demand. Building automation and control systems are fully adopted to customize the building
system operation on the basis of the real and not estimated occupants. Occupancy sensors are
thus set for the heating and cooling system control as well as for turning on/off the lights
when the space is unoccupied. The artificial lights are dimmed automatically when, due to
specific sensors, the daylight is sufficient and they are turned off when the space is
unoccupied.
Additionally with a roof rainwater collection system, the office building achieved a 82%
savings in the use of domestic hot water. Rainwater is thus used as non potable water to flush
toilets.

Energy Modeling

The building energy performance was assessed by means of dynamic energy simulation
through the EnergyPlus program (version 8.0). The energy model was calibrated on the basis
of the real energy consumptions of the first year of operation in order to have a suitable model
to be use for the nZEB implementations. The objective of the energy evaluation was to
determine the annual overall energy use in term of delivered energy (divided by sources) and
primary energy, which includes energy use for heating, cooling, lighting and equipment.
The simulations were run in standard weather conditions with the Typical Meteorological
Year (TMY) data of London near Ontario, Canada [14].
The building was modeled in 18 thermal zones overall: 17 conditioned zones and 1 non
conditioned basement. The real project does not have a basement since the company
philosophy aims its worker to use public transit providing them a discount on it. As this study
aimed to compare HPBs to European nZEBs, a basement was added to the original model to
customize it to Europe. The ground floor and the first floor are composed of five thermal
zones each while the second floor is divided in four ones. The distributive areas, (stairs,
entrance and services) are respectively modeled as a unique zone for all three floors. The open
office area is modeled separately from the cellular offices, located in the North and South
façades. The offices interior partitions were defined as internal mass.
In order to carry on accurate dynamic simulations, the influence of the surrounding urban
context was taken into account and modeled as shading surfaces with their own reflectance
properties. In particular the presence of a grove in the building site was considered especially
during the summer season. For the envelope characterization, its components were modeled
and defined on the basis of their noted R-values. Due to the lack of information about the real
building usage of electrical equipment, the schedules regarding the internal gains were

76
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

defined on the basis of rule of thumbs distinguishing the zones respectively by working and
service areas. The occupancy, lighting and equipment schedules and the power densities were
extracted from the reference building models database developed by the US Department of
Energy laboratories [15]. Lighting power densities were set to 4.6 W/m2 based on the actual
metered data, which is quite low compared to the Standard 90-1 requirements but it is due to
the usage of daylights sensors.
The heating system has been assumed to be operating from the 1st of October to the 30th of
April in order to guarantee the occupants comfort. The interior temperature set point was
differentiated for office areas (21°C) and service area (20°C). The cooling system was
assumed to be operating in the remaining months. The interior temperature set point was set
to 24°C from the 1st of May to the 30th of June and during September. From the 1st of July to
the 31th of August, due to higher outdoor temperatures, the cooling temperature set point was
set to 25°C. The heating and cooling system were assumed to operate depending on the
building occupancy. During weekdays, the outdoor air flow rate, always operating, was set at
11 l/s per person.

Figure 2. Axonometric view of the case study with the subdivision in thermal zones.

From HPB to nZEB: energy efficiency measures and results

The energy evaluation performed demonstrated the building energy performance could be
improved to reach a nearly zero standard. A few energy efficiency measures were studied and
applied to the original project, referred to as baseline HPB, in order to point out the real
feasibility to make the selected case study an “acceptable” nZEB, as defined in [5].
In particular, as highlighted previously in the second paragraph, envelope performances
represent the first issue to point at. The “Grander View” building envelope components are
characterized by stricter U-values than the HPBs ones analyzed previously, but they can still
be improved. For instance, in Europe the Passive House guidelines [16] suggest all building
opaque components should be so well-insulated that their U-values do not exceed 0.15
W/m2K.

77
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1. Thermal features of the case study (HPB baseline) and of the case study highly
insulated
U-value [W/m2K] U-value [W/m2K]

HPB higly
insulated
baseline

Walls 0.20 Walls 0.14

HPB

Windows 1.36 Windows 1.2

Roof 0.17 Roof 0.15
Ground slab 0.52 Ground slab 0.16

On this account, with regard to Italian context, the optional U-values of Turin city regulation
[17] were applied to the building model. Table 1 lists the thermal features (U-values) of the
main envelope components of the case study as it is (HPB baseline) and of the case study
highly insulated, in compliance with [17].

The only improvement of the thermal insulation hasn’t brought to a drastic reduction on the
space heating energy consumptions, as shown in Figure 3. In a country like Canada, where
there is a quite cold climate, the heating energy need represents one of the first issue to look at
when designing a building. However in the case study, the building typology and the shape
did reduce the effect of such thermal insulation improvement on the heating energy needs.
The building envelope was modified to be highly insulated but the heating energy
consumptions was reduced only by the 15% on the overall. This proved the building was still
far from zero goals.

Figure 3. Annual end uses consumptions.

In order to reduce the energy consumptions and to drive the building energy performance
towards nZEB ones, the next step dealt with the production from renewable sources. In
particular, as the HPB baseline produces onsite energy from renewable source with a PV
system installed on the flat roof. A PV panel with an efficiency of 21 % was selected. To
increase the production of energy from system, additional efficiency configuration of PV
panels were studied:
- covering of almost the entire roof (the atrium roof was excluded), approximately 580 m2,
with PV panels (power: 124 kWp).
- covering of one half of the roof, 330 m2, with PV panels (power: 71 kWp);
- covering of a quarter of the roof surface, 150 m2, with PV panels (power: 33 kWp).

78
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

In Table 2 the results of the simulation carried on with the different PV system configuration.
The total covering of the roof accomplished to cover the electricity needs for the lighting and
the equipment system together with the HVAC system. The heating energy consumption was
thus not covered, and needtherefore further energy efficiency measures to be reduced.

Table 2. Energy production on-site and electric coverage

Net Electricity Surplus Electricity Total On-Site Percent
Coming From Coming From Electric Sources coverage
Utility [kWh] Utility [kWh] [kWh] electricity
HPB Baseline+PV10% 144327 0 4430 3%
HPB insulated+PV10% 144327 0 4430 3%
HPB insulated+PV25% 105361 5955 43395 27%
HPB insulated+PV50% 51871 28317 96885 65%
HPB insulated+PV100% -3440 68660 152197 100%

CONCLUSION

Nowadays high performance buildings, low energy performing building or also the so called
green buildings are still few and cutting-edge. Even if the energy policies all-world-wide
strive to reach net zero target, these new generations of buildings are still a bit of a handful
compared to the whole existing building stock. Among them, the LEED-certified buildings
are the most famous ones also due to the market differentiation that has grown around.
U.S. and ASHRAE approach in supporting the net-zero goal applied to the building stock, has
also been successful thanks to a high money investment. In particular an outstanding example
of these design representative and showpiece buildings is the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) campus in Colorado. It was design to be the first and largest truly net-
zero energy facility in the United States.
The analyses carried on within this study demonstrated that US high performing building are
still far from been considered as a first step nZEB o NZEB. Especially, taking in
consideration the age of the analyzed HPBs, the energy performance of these buildings
nowadays is not as good as estimated. The HPBs studied are in fact 5-6 years old and most of
them do not comply with the European standard in terms of energy regulation (e.g. Passive
house requirements). To this end, it is thus more difficult to reach a net zero target, taking as a
starting point an even though recent high performing building, than considering a new
construction or also an existing, but actually “aged” building.
Drawing a better picture at the European level, the existing building stock is quite old and a
large share of it was built before 1960s [4], when there were no regulations in terms of energy
requirements or they were quite low. The insulation levels of the existing building stock are
thus inefficient and together with old system leave a great improving margin on the building
energy performance to be exploited.
The analysis carried on within this study took an existing high-performing building, that
achieved a triple LEED Platinum certification, considered a quite good building in terms of
energy behavior and compared it to an European nZEB, as defined in [5]. By the way,
considering it is now 4 years old, its energy performance cannot be considered as good as
before and the efforts carried on to move it towards a nearly zero target proved it difficult to

79
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

be considered like that. Energy efficiency measures were applied to the original project in
order to improve the building energy performance. Firstly a higher insulation level was
applied to the building to make it comply with the European and in particular the Turin
regulation in terms of energy policy. Although the building envelope performance was
modified optimally in terms of thermal insulation, this measure proved the building was still
far from zero targets due to the low significant reduction on the space heating consumptions.
Taking in consideration that automation controls have been applied to the original project
(e.g. natural light sensors, occupancy sensors, etc), the next energy efficiency measures intent
to improve the production of renewable energy on site to cover the building electrical energy
need. It was found that, with the current level of performance and even with the PV systems
implementation on the roof, the office building could not accomplish the nZEB goal as the
heating energy consumption were still too high. The nZEB target was thus not feasible with
these simple analyses. Further nZEB strategies needed to be carried on in order to optimize
the building energy performance.
Furthermore this study tried to develop a list a lessons, in terms of positives aspects and
failures from the office building studied and from the set of HPBs selected too, with the
intention of defining a list of recommendations and best practices to be followed for the
design of nZEBs. In particular a significant lesson that can be learnt regards the strong
motivation that drives the owner to decide pursuing a low energy building. The decisions are
usually not driven by cost but mostly motivated to advertise the building as an outstanding
example for others. Additionally this kind of HPBs or low energy buildings do not always
perform as expected, therefore the monitoring need to have crucial role in the building
operation.

REFERENCES

1. European Parliament, Council. 2010. Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings. Official Journal of the
European Union.
2. ENEA, Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic
Development 2013. RAEE 2011, Energy Efficiency National Report, Executive Summary,
ISBN 978-88-8286-279-4. Roma, Retrieved from www.efficienzaenergetica.enea.it.
3. Ma Z, Cooper P, Daly D, Ledo L 2012. Existing building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-
the-art, Energy and Buildings (55) 889–902, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.018
4. Becchio C, 2013. Assessment of energy and cost effectiveness in retrofitting existing buildings,
Doctoral dissertation, Politecnico di Torino.
5. REHVA, 2013. REHVA nZEB technical definition and system boundaries for nearly zero
energy buildings. REHVA Report No 4.
6. ASHRAE, 2008. ASHRAE Vision 2020, Producing Net Zero Energy Buildings: Providing tools
by 2020 that enable the building community to produce market-viable NZEBs by 2030.
ASHRAE Report, January 2008.
7. Energy independence and security act of 2007, Public Law 110-140, 110th Congress
8. U.S. Department of Energy. High Performance Buildings Database
http://buildingdata.energy.gov/
9. Erhorn, H and Erhorn-Kluttig, Terms and definitions for high performance buildings, Detailed
report. Concerted Action, Energy Perfomance of Building, January 2001.
10. U.S. GBC LEED website http://www.usgbc.org/leed
11. Energy Star web portal http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=new_homes.hm_index

80
 CLIMAMED VII. Mediterranean Congress of Climatization, Istanbul, 3-4 October, 2013
TURKISH SOCIETY OF HVAC & SANITARY ENGINEERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

12. Decreto Legislativo n.311 del 29 Dicembre 2006 - "Disposizioni correttive ed integrative al
decreto legislativo 19 agosto 2005, n. 192, recante attuazione della direttiva 2002/91/CE,
relativa al rendimento energetico nell'edilizia".
13. Carpenter, S. 2011. Simply Grand. In High Performing Buildings, ASHRAE, Spring 2011.
14. U.S. Department of Energy. EnergyPlus energy simulation software, Weather data.
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/weatherdata_about.cfm
15. U.S. Department of Energy. Commercial reference buildings
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial/ref_buildings.html
16. Passive House Guidelines. http://www.passivehouse-international.org/index.php?page_id=80
17. Agenzia Energia e Ambiente di Torino. Allegato energetico – ambientale al regolamento
edilizio della città di Torino. Allegato alla deliberazione n. 2010-08963/38. Agosto 2009.
Regione Piemonte.

81

View publication stats