Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Energy efficiency labeling program for buildings in Brazil compared to

the United States' and Portugal's
Alice do Carmo Precci Lopes a, Delly Oliveira Filho b,n, Leandra Altoe b, Joyce Correna Carlo c,
Bruna Bastos Lima c
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Vicosa, Vicosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil
b
Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Vicosa, Vicosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil
c
Department of Architecture and Urbanism, Federal University of Vicosa, Vicosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Regulations are being promulgated and reviewed in order to achieve the maximum energy savings in
Received 26 October 2015 buildings, both in developed and in developing countries. One important strategy employed to turn these
Received in revised form laws and regulations effective is through building certification. The benefit of such practice may reflect in
19 February 2016
energy savings, reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, to end-users and real estate owners. The objective
Accepted 7 July 2016
Available online 6 August 2016
of this study is to make a literature review concerning energy efficiency policies and regulations for
buildings, highlighting how the Brazilian labeling program can be improved compared to the United
Keywords: States and Portugal programs. It is important to point out that the Brazilian program is under con-
Energy savings solidation in comparison with the Portuguese and American ones. Furthermore, the assessment shows
Construction
that: (i) although it is an initiative in the interest of society and it is meant to several types of buildings,
Certification
the Brazilian labeling program does not inform suggestions for the building improvements; (ii) it is not
Energy label
Energy efficiency policy mandatory; (iii) it does not value net-zero energy building; (iv) it does not inform the CO2 emissions
Buildings energy regulation savings; and (vi) it is not sufficiently stringent to challenge the building industry to improve the effi-
ciency levels.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
2. The energy efficiency building certification policy in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
3. Building energy certification policy in selected countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
3.1. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
3.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
4. Comparison among the certification programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
4.1. What should be calculated in order to assess building energy efficiency?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
4.1.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
4.1.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
4.1.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
4.2. How should energy performance be calculated? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.2.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.2.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.2.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.3. How should the limit for energy efficiency be set? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.3.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.3.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.3.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.4. To what should the building energy efficiency be compared? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: delly@ufv.br (D. Oliveira Filho).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.033
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
208 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219

4.4.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213

4.4.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.4.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.5. How should building energy efficiency be labeled?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.5.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.5.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.5.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.6. What energy efficiency improvements should be recommended? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.6.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.6.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.6.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.7. What information should the energy certificate include? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
4.7.1. Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
4.7.2. Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
4.7.3. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
5. Results and discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
6. Final considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

1. Introduction minimum energy performance standards; (ii) net-zero energy

Electricity is essential to economic progress and quality of life
of humankind. Linked to social mobility and human development,
energy consumption is growing every year in Brazil and world-
wide. Statistics indicate that China is now the world's biggest
energy consumer, overtaking the United States in 2009 [1]. In this
year, of the world primary energy consumption, China's share was
about 18.7% compared to 17.8% of the United States [1]. Never-
theless, the China's GDP per capita is only one-eighth the U.S.; and
the residential energy use per capita in China is about one-ninth
the U.S. [1]. Fig. 1 shows the accelerated energy growth by China
over time compared to Unites States and Brazil.
While the U.S. primary energy consumption in buildings ac-
counted for about 41% of total energy consumption [2], in China
this figure was estimated around 23% [3]. On the other hand, in
Brazil, this value represents around 14% [4]. Nevertheless, almost
50% of the Brazilian electricity consumption is building related [4].
Furthermore, a building labeled can stimulate a reduction of 50%
in the final energy consumption [5].
International Energy Agency (IEA) developed a set of 25 energy
efficiency policy recommendations, in order to help its members
to promote energy efficiency measures across their countries.
These policies are oriented towards the following seven priority
areas: Cross-sectoral; Transport; Buildings; Industry; Appliances
and Equipment; Energy Utilities; and Lighting. In regarding to
buildings, IEA recommends: (i) mandatory building codes and
Fig. 1. Primary energy demand in Brazil, China and the United States, from 1980 to
2010, measured data and from 2010 to 2035, projected data [1].
consumption in buildings; (iii) improved energy efficiency in ex-
isting buildings; (iv) building energy labels or certificates; and
(v) energy performance of building components and systems [6].
The major contributors to energy consumption in buildings are
HVAC (Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning), water heating,
lighting, and appliances [7]. One of the measures applied to reduce
appliances energy consumptions is the 4E Program, Energy Effi-
cient End-Use Equipment, which is implement by the Interna-
tional Energy Agency (IEA) and aims to support policy towards the
promotion of energy efficient appliances worldwide [8]. The im-
portance on energy efficiency policies implementation relies on
energy security, economic development and greenhouse gas
emissions reduction. Moreover, energy efficiency measures on
appliances result in important energy savings, around 56 EJ, or
around 1340 Mtoe in 2011 by member countries of the IEA [9] and
savings about as €4 for each €1 invested [10].
Further, Ürge-Vorsatz and Novikova [11] argue that CO2 emis-
sions related to buildings is over a third of the world energy
emissions. These authors conducted a study about CO2 emissions
potential reduction related to buildings over 80 countries. They
found out a feasible potential of around 29% cut in emissions re-
lated to buildings by 2020, which means 3.2 GtCO2eq emission
reduction.
In the United States, the building-related emissions is about
776,090 thousand tons of CO2eq per year [12]; while in Brazil and
Portugal, these emissions are circa 19,923 thousand tons of CO2eq
per year [13] and 3292 thousand tons of CO2eq per year [14], re-
spectively. However, when analyzing these figures in terms of
primary energy, Brazil contributes less, with 1.54 tCO2eq/toe in
comparison to the United States, 2.34 tCO2eq /toe, and Portugal,
2.06 tCO2eq/toe [15]. The reason for the smaller Brazilian con-
tribution on CO2eq emissions lays down on its higher share of
renewable energy on the total primary energy consumption. The
share of renewable energy sources in Brazil, Portugal and USA is
39%, 24% and 6%, respectively [15].
In this context, energy conservation in buildings has great re-
levance. Moreover, with climate changes in the top of global
agenda, the inclusion of higher efficiency regulations applied to
the construction industry may contribute to a more sustainable
development.
Energy consumption in buildings is gaining a wider scale. Ac-
cording to Pérez-Lombard et al. [7], the growth rate in energy
consumption by buildings exceeded those of industry and
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
transport sectors between 1984 and 2004 in Europe. Furthermore,
final energy consumption in the building sector, around 37%, is
already the highest, the two other sectors main sectors – industry,
around 28% and transportation circa 32% [7]. The importance in
energy consumption in buildings might be explained by a crescent
demand for an improvement in the comfort levels of the buildings,
a greater time spent by people inside buildings, an increase in the
urban population, as well as in the per capita income [16].
Two mechanisms to achieve reductions in energy consumption
in building sector are through energy regulation and energy cer-
tification: the first one establishes a minimum energy perfor-
mance, and, the second aims to reach higher energy performances
[16]. In Brazil and worldwide various techniques and regulations
have been developed, tested and applied in order to contribute to
an improvement of the building sustainability, whether re-
sidential, commercial or industrial, through the introduction of
energy conservation measures in naturally and artificially condi-
tioned indoor environments according to its climate zone, and the
use of natural and local energy resources. Nevertheless, the energy
efficiency methods must be implemented cautiously, in order to be
truly effective [17].
Pérez-Lombard et al. [18] present seven questions which were
considered worthwhile to be further addressed and were used to
compare building energy labeling programs from analyzed
countries:
1. What should be calculated in order to assess building energy
efficiency?
2. How should it be calculated?
3. How should the limit for energy efficiency be set?
4. To what should the building energy efficiency be compared?
5. How should building energy efficiency be labeled?
6. What energy efficiency improvements should be recommended?
and
7. What information should the energy certificate may include?
This article aims to make a literature review concerning energy
efficiency policies and regulations for buildings, highlighting how
the Brazilian labeling program could be improved compared to the
American and Portuguese programs. Comparison among different
countries building labeling programs may contribute for a better
understanding of advantages and drawbacks of each approach.
2. The energy efficiency building certification policy in Brazil
The first public measure to promote the application of energy
efficiency measure in Brazil occurred in 1981, with the creation of
the Conserve Program. This program aimed to promote the energy
conservation in industries, the development of efficient products,
and the replacement of imported energy resources for national
ones.
In the following year, the Energy Mobilization Program (Pro-
grama de Mobilização Energética) was launched, which encouraged
the application of energy conservation measures and the re-
placement of oil for alternative energy recourses [19].
In 1985, the Ministries of Mines and Energy and of Industry and
Foreign Trade launched the Interministerial Ordinance No. 1877,
establishing the National Electric Energy Conservation Program –
Procel, which has been contributing until nowadays significantly
for energy conservation in Brazil [20].
The Law No. 8631/1993 [21] established that Brazilian Power
Plants should assign resources for expanding and improving the
public energy supply. Four years later, the Law No. 9478/1997 [22]
was approved, founding the National Energy Policy Council (Con-
selho Nacional de Política Energética – CNPE), whose goal was to
209
“promote the country's rational utilization of energy resources”. In
2000, the Federal Government stipulated a goal through the De-
cree No. 3330 to public buildings so in order to reduced their
electricity consumption “for purposes of lighting, cooling and en-
vironmental architecture” [23].
Nevertheless, in 2001 the most relevant law in the area of
energy efficiency in buildings was published: Law No. 10,295 [24].
It asks the Federal Government to “develop mechanisms to pro-
mote energy efficiency in buildings constructed in the country”
[24]. The reason for this law promulgation was the largest elec-
tricity rationing occurrence in Brazil's history, which took place in
2001. Among the factors that contributed to this condition, were
the lack of necessary investments in the generation and trans-
mission of electricity, as well as low levels of water storage in
reservoirs of hydroelectric plants (due to climatic conditions) [25].
In the same year, Decree No. 4059/2001 [26] was published,
regulating Law No. 10,295 and establishing “maximum levels of
energy consumption, or minimum levels of energy efficiency for
machines and appliances that use energy produced or sold in the
country, as well as the buildings ‘should be’ designed and built
based on technical indicators and specific regulations to be fixed”
[26]. In this context, the Action Plan for Energy Efficiency in
Buildings - Procel Edifica - was launched in 2003.
In 2009, the Technical Requirements on Quality of the Level of
Energy Efficiency of Commercial, Service and Public Buildings
(RTQ-C) [27] was published, as well as its supplementary docu-
ments, such as requirements for Compliance Assessment of the
Level of Energy Efficiency of Commercial, Public and Service
Buildings (RAC-C) [28]. In 2010, the Technical Requirements on
Quality of the Level of Energy Efficiency in Residential Buildings
(RTQ-R) [29] was published, as well as its supplementary docu-
ment, the requirements for Compliance Assessment of the Level of
Energy Efficiency of Residential Buildings (RAC-R) [30]. They are
part of the recent inclusion of buildings in the Brazilian Labeling
Program (Programa Brasileiro de Etiquetagem – PBE).
The Technical Regulations for Quality Level of Energy Efficiency
is applied for the evaluation of the building stages of design and
construction using either the prescriptive or the simulation
method [27,29]. At the end of the building assessment the Na-
tional Energy Conservation Label (Etiqueta Nacional de Con-
servação de Energia – ENCE) is issued. This label expires in five
years, and Fig. 2 shows a model of it.
Label level “A” guarantees special financial conditions by the
National Development Federal Bank for the building construction.
For commercial, service, and public buildings, the costs to evaluate
a project are around 15–20 thousand US dollars (about 30 to $40
thousand Brazilian reals) [5].
Labeling is still facultative for the most types of buildings, but it
is already mandatory for new federal public buildings that are
larger than 500 m2 or for federal public buildings that are retro-
fitted [31].
3. Building energy certification policy in selected countries
3.1. United States
Standards for energy efficiency have been applied in US for
more than thirty years, as an example of the development of the
Standard 90 – Energy Conservation in New Buildings Design and
the Title 24/1978 [32,33]. During the 90's, the Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA, developed the Green Lights program, in
order to apply more efficient lighting systems for commercial and
industrial buildings. A few years later, the Green Lights merged
with the Energy Star Buildings program, which use is voluntary
and has as main goal to contribute to the reduction of greenhouse
210 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
Fig. 2. Sample of national energy conservation label for commercial, service and
public buildings – Brazil (translated to English by the authors) [28].
gases. According to EPA, the benefit of this label is evident, as
certified buildings with Energy Star emit, in average, 35% less
carbon dioxide equivalent compared to similar buildings which do
not have the label [34].
In 2011 was launched in the United States the first phase of the
Building Energy Quotient Program – bEQ, developed by the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, ASHRAE and based on the European experience. The
first phase encompassed the “In Operation” label. In the sub-
sequent year was launched the “As Designed” label. Both are vo-
luntary and applicable to commercial buildings only, whether
existing prior or after bEQ was launched. The score of each label is
divided into seven categories, from A þ (net-zero energy) to F
(unsatisfactory) – Fig. 3. A certificate, an assessment report and a
plaque for public display is provided with the label, containing
detail information of the energy performance of the building and
suggestions for improvements to enhance building performance
[35].
There is no expiration date for the label, but ASHRAE re-
commends a rerating every three years. The cost of obtaining a
Building Energy Quotient from ASHRAE is $500.00 plus services,
which are established by an agreement between the owner and a
certified Building Energy Assessment Professional [37]. It is im-
portant to point out that both in Brazil and in some European
countries the energy efficient building label is valid for a given
number of years.
The bEQ Program brings innovations compared to Energy Star
Buildings, since bEQ promotes a better differentiation of high
performance buildings, emphasizing net-zero energy buildings,
Fig. 3. Sample of national energy conservation label for commercial buildings –
USA [36].
while the Energy Star Buildings concentrates on the buildings
energy use compared to their peers [38,39].
3.2. Portugal
Although one of the first standards regarding energy efficiency
dates back to 60's in Europe, the first legal instrument of Portugal
related to energy conservation in buildings was introduced by
Decree-Law No. 40/90 [40–42]. This was done with the publication
of Regulation of Characteristics of Thermal Behavior of Buildings in
1991, updated in 2006 by Decree-Law No. 80 [40]. Also in 2006,
the Portuguese government established the Decree-Law No. 78/
2006 [43], ensured the creation of the National System for Energy
and Indoor Air Quality Certification – SCE, observing the European
Parliament Decree No. 2002/91/EC [44]. In 2010, the European
Union reviewed the aforesaid law, publishing the Directive 2010/
31/EU [45], which states that, until 2020 all new buildings need to
be nearly zero-energy, that means, the building needs to meet a
high performance and have very low energy requirements, which
must be supplied by renewable energy generated on site or
nearby.
The label was introduced in stages, starting in 2007 for all new
residential and non-residential buildings with a floor area greater
than 1000 m2. In 2008, the second stage was initiated, including
all new buildings. The final stage (2009) included existing build-
ings when sold or rented. The buildings are labeled following the
guidelines imposed by the regulations and by different assessment
methods for residential and service buildings. The certification
provides a labeling system from A þ (high energy efficiency) to G
(poor efficiency); however, all new buildings must be between A þ
and B  labeling level [46]. A sample of the label is showed in
Fig. 4.
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
Fig. 4. Sample of national energy conservation label for service and residential
buildings – Portugal (translated to English and adapted by the authors) [47].
4. Comparison among the certification programs
Pérez-Lombard et al. [18] propose seven questions that should
be considered to develop energy certification programs. These
questions will outline the comparison of the three energy certifi-
cation program in analyses: Brazilian Labeling Program for build-
ings (Programa Brasileiro de Etiquetagem para edifícios, PBE),
Building Energy Quotient, bEQ from US, and the Portuguese Na-
tional System for Energy and Indoor Air Quality Certification, SCE.
In order to be able to compare the labeling system from Brazil,
Portugal and US, the following must be clear that:
1. In Brazil, the regulation studied, classified the buildings as:
commercial, service, public and residential ones. The re-
sidential buildings are subdivided into: multi-dwelling unit,
public areas of multi-dwelling unit and dwelling unit, which
one will be focused on this study;
2. In Portugal the regulation classified the buildings as: services
and residential ones; and
3. In US, the regulation studied classified the buildings as
commercial only.
So the comparison is limited since the building classification is
not exactly the same.
4.1. What should be calculated in order to assess building energy
efficiency?
4.1.1. Brazil
For commercial, service, and public buildings, the envelope,
lighting system, and air conditioning system are considered typical
for any building; therefore they were parameters selected to be
assessed in order to label the energy efficiency. The adopted in-
dicators were energy consumption for envelope (methodology
211
described by Carlo and Lamberts [32]), Lighting Power Density,
and the Coefficient of Performance for artificial HVAC systems. As
an alternative to allow the use of passive strategies, naturally
conditioned buildings can be assessed through simulation, which
indicator is the indoor thermal comfort, based on the following
international standards: ISO 7730, ASHRAE 55 or EN 15,251. The
latter evaluation method was provided due to the lack of building
information on whether artificial or natural air conditioning is
more relevant, although it is known that both are usual. It is im-
portant to highlight the weight of each assessed system from the
final score: 30% is due to the building envelope, 30% is the lighting
system and 40% is the air conditioning and ventilation. For all the
aspects both the passive and active characteristics are considered,
i.e. natural air circulation is valued, as well as, the artificial air
ventilation.
For residential buildings, the evaluation encompasses the water
system heating and the indoor performance when naturally ven-
tilated, since Brazilian residential buildings are mainly naturally
ventilated – only about 12% of dwellings in Brazil have artificial
HVAC system [48]. The indoor performance is assessed using de-
gree hours for summer and referential electricity consumption for
winter conditions. Artificially conditioned indoor environments,
which indicator is the referential electricity consumption, do not
influence on the final building score, unless the HVAC environ-
ment is assessed as bonus. Since the assessment of the building is
focused on electricity savings, and fossil fuel are not usual in the
residential sector, except for cooking, then fossil fuel consumption
is not taken into account for air conditioning purposes [29]. Pre-
sently, the lighting system is not included in the evaluation pro-
cess, except as bonus, because the regulation assumes that, it de-
pends on the building users after the label is issued. This regula-
tion hypothesis is questionable because lighting is an important
energy end-use and cannot be disregarded. The weight from each
assessed system varies according to the five geographic regions of
the country: the envelope weight can be 95%, 90% or 65%, while
the water heating system can be 5%, 10% or 35% from the final
score.
The energy labeling system may improve its level by bonus,
which are issued as a function of the: (i) For commercial, service,
and public buildings: local renewable electricity generation or
solar water heating, water use, and cogeneration or any techno-
logical innovations that result in energy savings, not previewed in
the regulation [5]; (ii) For residential buildings: maximization of
day lighting, efficient artificial lighting, natural ventilation, effi-
cient artificial HVAC equipment, water use and efficient domestic
appliances [29]. The efficient water use for both the residential and
commercial buildings is considered to be: (i) efficient water use
appliances; (ii) water re-use, e.g.: re-use of gray water for lavatory
flush or garden irrigation; (iii) and rain fall water utilization.
4.1.2. Portugal
For dwellings (with or without artificially HVAC systems) and
small service buildings without or with artificially HVAC systems
with lower 25 kW, the calculation includes the primary energy use
for acclimatization and for water heating. The regulation estab-
lishes as unit kilograms of equivalent oil per square meter per year.
In regarding to service buildings (large or small with 25 kW or
more of installed HVAC capacity), the calculations also include
energy use for lighting systems and to non-acclimatization non-
processes [40,49].
4.1.3. United States
The “As Designed” label is based on building design compo-
nents such as envelope, orientation and lighting system. The “In
Operation” label measures energy use of a building, based on a
combination of structure and features of the building; on how it is
212 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
operated; and on its actual utilities bills [35].
4.2. How should energy performance be calculated?
4.2.1. Brazil
The energy performance of a building is calculated through
prescriptive or simulation method. The prescriptive method pro-
vides an algorithm with a set of equations to determine directly
the building efficiency [27,29]. These equations take in con-
sideration the energy efficiency of the building envelope, lighting,
air conditioning and water heating systems. The result of these set
of equations refers to a total punctuation, which is correlated to the
building labeling scale.
The simulation method, on the other hand, makes comparisons
between two building simulation models: the proposed building
and a reference model which must “meet the conditions and
characteristics for the desired level of efficiency in the prescriptive
method” [50].
The prescriptive method of commercial, service, and public
buildings was developed based on simulation for the building
envelope according to the weather location. The lighting and
HVAC systems evaluation are based on the Standard 90.1 – ASH-
RAE 2007. Even in the prescriptive method, simulation must be
performed if natural ventilation is used as an air conditioning and
ventilation resource. Then, the efficiency of each system, i.e., en-
velope, lighting and HVAC. Afterwards, the bonuses are considered
in order to issue the building energy efficiency label [27].
The simulation for residential buildings does not integrate all
systems evaluated: the envelope is assessed by the BESTest soft-
ware, while the solar water heating is by the F-chart method. The
bonuses are not simulated; they are supposed to be analyzed by
the prescriptive method [29].
On the other hand, the simulation method for commercial,
service, and public buildings allows the integration of the systems
on an overall building efficiency or the evaluation of individual
systems using a software approved by the BESTest method –
Standard 140-2001 (Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of
Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs). The score of the
overall building efficiency is calculated by the comparison of the
electricity consumption of the reference building and the building
under evaluation, which is modeled with all the bonuses, except
water use that is included in the final score [28].
Currently, the simulation programs are imported, that means:
(i) they are not specific for the Brazilian reality and the Brazilian
building typology; and (ii) they have a high level of complexity,
requiring intensive training. Because of that, Brazilian researchers
are developing a computer simulation program for hygrothermal
and energetic building evaluation applied to the Brazilian reality –
Domus-Eletrobras [51]. This program will be very important for
the development and consolidation of the PBE in Brazil.
4.2.2. Portugal
The building energy performance can be calculated through a
software tool produced by National Institute of Engineering,
Technology, and Innovation; on a spreadsheet; or by any software
in compliance to ASHRAE Standard 140-2004 (based on IEA's
BESTest criteria). The choice of the assessment method depends on
the building type [46].
4.2.3. United States
The “As Designed” label is based on simulated energy cost
(ASHRAE Standard 90.1 2007), which the building under evalua-
tion should have costs equal or lower than a baseline model cost,
according to the Energy Cost Budget method. The “In Operation”
label is based on actual energy use and on operational and on
occupancy variables [35].
4.3. How should the limit for energy efficiency be set?
4.3.1. Brazil
A score from high energy efficient buildings to low energy ef-
ficient buildings was created to measure the energy efficiency of a
building using the simulated energy consumption of commercial,
service, and public buildings prototypes, according to its size and
activity: office buildings, retail, food services, accommodations,
educational and health services. The overall building energy range
have the following characteristics: (i) no minimum performance is
mandatory and (ii) the maximum efficiency level would be a net-
zero energy building, which was not reached until the present
moment. The residential efficiency limits, on its turn, were based
on an existing national survey which included constructive char-
acteristics and energy end use. The architecture features (envelope
and indoor requirements) are based on degree hours for summer
and on a consumption index for winter; the overall energy effi-
ciency range is a combination of the architectural and the water
heating variations. The results of the survey were used to define
the weight of architectural and water heating in the overall effi-
ciency level according to the five Brazilian regions, which latitudes
varies from 4°N to 33°S. Table 1 shows the overall energy effi-
ciency building rate according to the building total punctuation, Tp,
which the higher the Tp, the better the building energy efficiency.
This approach is valid for commercial, service, public or residential
buildings [27,29].
4.3.2. Portugal
For residential buildings (with or without artificially HVAC
systems) and for small service buildings (floor area smaller than
1000 m2 and with artificially HVAC systems lower than 25 kW or
without artificially HVAC systems), the energy demand is tran-
scribed to equivalent kilograms of oil per m2 and per year; the
ratio, R, between this value and its acceptable primary energy
defined by the dwelling consumption range, is calculated, giving
the energy scale of the building. The higher energy efficiency re-
presents the lower R. Table 2 presents the efficiency range for
buildings with HVAC systems lower than 25 kW or without any
HVAC. The smaller the building energy consumption the higher
energy performance, for a given efficiency level. For other building
types, indexes based on simulation, on building typologies and the
sum of the consumption of HVAC and lighting, also obtained by
simulation, are the variables of the equations developed to in-
dicate the efficiency level. It is important to emphasize that for
new buildings, the minimum efficiency level is set as B [49].
4.3.3. United States
The ASHRAE bEQ scale is the same basic scale used in the
European Union for commercial buildings: the net-zero energy –
score 0, is at the top and the typical building - score 100, is toward
the middle of the scale. Below the typical buildings are the worst
ones, with 125 or greater score [39]. The score represents the ratio
between the assessed building energy consumption and the
average energy consumption of its building type. Energy
Table 1
Energy efficiency building rate according
to range score – Brazil [27,29].
Range score Energy efficiency rate
Tpa Z 4.5 A
3.5 r Tp o 4.5 B
2.5 r Tp o 3.5 C
1.5 r Tp o 2.5 D
Tp o 1.5 E
a
Total punctuation.
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219 213

Table 2 compare the results among similar buildings according to the

Energy efficiency rate for residential buildings (with or without HVAC systems) and building type, within a size range and of the same occupancy type
small service buildings (with HVAC systems lower than 25 kW or without HVAC
within a climate zone [55]. In regarding to the “In Operation” label,
systems) – Portugal [49].
it is possible to compare the energy use to a peer group, usually
Ratio (R) Energy efficiency rate Consumption range taken from CBECS (Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey) database; it also makes possible to explore the whole
R r0.25 Aþ Caa r 0.25 Crb potential of energy saving of the building, since it does not con-
0.25 oRr 0.50 A 0.25 Cr o Ca r 0.50 Cr
0.50 oRr 0.75 B 0.50 Cr o Ca r 0.75 Cr
sider any occupancy behavior [35,56].
0.75 oRr 1.00 B 0.75 Cr o Ca r 1.00 Cr
1.00o Rr 1.50 C 1.00 Cr o Ca r 1.50 Cr 4.5. How should building energy efficiency be labeled?
1.50 o Rr2.00 D 1.50 Cr o Ca r2.00 Cr
2.00o Rr 2.50 E 2.00 Cr o Ca r 2.50 Cr
4.5.1. Brazil
2.50 oRr 3.00 F 2.50 Cr o Ca r 3.00 Cr
3.00o R G Ca 43.00 Cr Both the design and the constructed building should be as-
sessed by an institution certified by the National Institute of Me-
a
Energy consumption of the building under assessment. trology, Standardization and Industrial Quality (INMETRO) after
b
Energy consumption of the reference building.
the owner request. The evaluation is based on the Technical Reg-
ulations of Quality Level of Energy Efficiency for Commercial,
Table 3 Service or Public Buildings (RTQ-C) or for Residential Buildings
Building energy efficiency rate for ASHRAE, bEQ evaluation – USA [36].
(RTQ-R). The assessment must follow two steps: (i) first the
Score (S) Energy efficiency Description Consumption range building design must be assessed and then (ii) the existing
rate building is evaluated. Fig. 5 shows the label issue steps.

S r0 Aþ Net zero energy Caa r 0

1 rS r25 A High performance 1.00Cr r Ca r 0.25Crb
26 rS r50 A Very good 0.26Cr r Ca r 0.50Cr
51r Sr 75 B Good 0.51Cr rCa r 0.75Cr
76r Sr 100 C Fair 0.76Cr r Ca r 1.00Cr
101 r Sr125 D Poor 1.01Cr r Ca r1.25Cr
S 4125 F Unsatisfactory Ca 41.25Cr
a
Energy consumption of the building under assessment.
b
Energy consumption of the reference building.
consumption unit assumed is expressed as kBtus/sq.ft./yr
(4,089,633 J/m2/s) [36]. Table 3 shows the scale range related to
the rating system, again the smaller the building energy con-
sumption the higher energy performance, for a given efficiency
level in this classification system as well.
4.4. To what should the building energy efficiency be compared?
4.4.1. Brazil
Energy efficiency targets are being studied, having as base the
first published labels, in order to propose benchmarks [52]. A
pioneer survey was published in 2008 involving different com-
mercial buildings such as hotels, banks, supermarkets, education
institutions and hospitals, describing its final energy use and its
consumption patterns [53]. The residential benchmarks are more
developed in this requisite; researches about the final electricity
consumption by residential buildings has being done since 1988
[52,54]. The surveys were used to establish the energy use re-
quirements for the residential buildings on the simulation method
– RTQ-R [29].
4.4.2. Portugal
The certificate provides operational costs for residential build-
ings according to one of the 32 available typologies, to the year of
construction and to the location. A review of the certification re-
quirements is previewed for 2012/2013, which will include
building simulation of a proposed building model and a reference
model. The results might be compared to net-zero energy build-
ings, NZB, performance for different buildings typologies, since
NZB will be included in the review process [45].
4.5.2. Portugal
Qualified experts graduated in Architecture or Engineering
with at least five years of experience on HVAC systems are eligible
for energy audits after a training program [58]. The qualified ex-
pert assesses the existing or the new constructed building ac-
cording to the specific requirements (RCCTE or RSECE), issuing the
certificates, which are necessary for requesting the license for
building use, sale or renting. At the designed phase, the qualified
expert might issue a “pre-certificate” called Statement of Reg-
ulatory Compliance, which says that the building project is in
accordance with minimum requirements and can receive a license
to construction. Fig. 6 shows when the certificates must be issued
for the building design, construction or use [59].
4.5.3. United States
Through a professional certificated by ASHRAE (Building En-
ergy Assessment Professional Certification Program), the model is
evaluated for the asset rating “As designed” and the building is
audited and analyzed after one year of use for the operational
rating (“In Operation”) [60,61]. The procedures for obtaining the
operational label are summarized in Fig. 7.
4.6. What energy efficiency improvements should be recommended?
4.6.1. Brazil
No detailed recommendations are provided, but only a com-
pliance report is available to the owner along with the label, in-
dicating the parameters used in the calculations, as well as the
assessment results. The label is available for the public knowledge
while the report is exclusively for the owner.
4.6.2. Portugal
Besides recommendations for the building energy improve-
ments, the certification also shows the expected costs of the en-
ergy conservation measures implementation, the potential re-
duction on the energy bill, the payback time and the new building
classification if all the highlighted suggestions were applied. It also
presents detailed information about the measures for subsequent
budgets [60].

4.4.3. United States 4.6.3. United States

The “As Designed” label is designed to have a particular re- Through the certification program, it is possible to identify
levance for real estate transactions, expressing an integral measure potential energy savings opportunities, as well as the description
of the building's inherent energy efficiency. Thus, it is possible to of each opportunity, including an estimation of energy savings,
214 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219

Fig. 5. Process to obtain the energy efficiency building labels in Brazil for design and constructed buildings [57].

Fig. 6. Process to obtain the energy efficiency building label in Portugal, for design, construction and use [59].

Fig. 7. Procedures for obtaining the building energy efficiency “In Operation” label – USA [62].

budget implementation costs, and simple payback [35].
4.7. What information should the energy certificate include?
4.7.1. Brazil
Information included on the label varies according to the
building type. In general, the energy certificate indicates the en-
ergy efficiency level of the building according to an alphabetic
scale, from “A” – highest level - to “E” – lowest level. The certificate
also includes “partial labels”, indicating the efficiency level of each
assessed system. Therefore, for commercial, service and public
buildings, the partial labels refer to the envelope, the lighting
system and the HVAC system. For residential buildings, the partial
labels refer to the envelope performance during the winter, the
envelope performance during the summer and the water heating
system. The label also shows the final bonus score achieved using
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219 215

Fig. 8. Improvement measures proposal in the Portuguese certificate of energy efficiency and indoor air quality [58].

other systems, which also enhances the buildings energy effi-
ciency. In addition, other identification information is presented,
such as the building name, address, city, estate, bioclimatic zone,
orientation and the evaluation date [30].
4.7.2. Portugal
The Portuguese certificate is formatted as a report, with a
minimum of three pages. Alike the Brazilian label, some in-
formation included on the label varies according to the building
type. In general, the certificate includes the building identification,
the qualified professional who was responsible for the assessment,
the building primary energy use, and the amount of GHG emission
related to the assessed systems. The certificate also contains en-
ergy conservation measures to enhance the building energy per-
formance, costs and its payback time (Fig. 8). Other information
found on the following pages is for budget purposes. For building
service certificate, information about the indoor air quality is also
described [45,58].
4.7.3. United States
Besides the label provided to be set on site, the building's
owner also receives a report with more detailed information.
Among the information included on the certificate are the building
identification, energy use summary, suggested improvement
measures and the amount of carbon dioxide emission equivalent
(tons/year) [35,63].
5. Results and discussion
In the countries studied, building energy efficiency labeling
program employment is relatively new. The United States are the
pioneer (Energy Star – 1999; bEQ  2011), followed by Portugal
(SCE – 2006), and Brazil (Procel Edifica – 2009). Fig. 9 shows laws
and programs about energy efficiency in buildings, from 1970 to
2011, adopted by each studied country. While in the United States
an important regulation regarding building energy efficiency dates
back to 70's – ASHRAE 90, in Brazil the most important law about
energy savings in buildings was promulgated only thirty years

Fig. 9. Buildings energy efficiency timeline in Brazil, Portugal and United States, from 1970 to 2011.
216 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
later, with the Law 10,295. In Brazil and Portugal, the government
is responsible for the labeling program. On the other hand, in the
United States the proposed program is regulated by a non-gov-
ernmental organization, ASHRAE. Even though ASHRAE exercises a
remarkable influence to society, only the U.S. Government may
turn regulations proposed as mandatory.
The main reason identified for the difference between the
Brazilian energy efficiency scale and the American and Portuguese
is that the first is directly related to the building performance,
while the other two programs are related to the energy con-
sumption. This difference may be to the absence of benchmark
data and a building stock market mainly composed of naturally
ventilated buildings, in Brazil.
In Brazil, there is a lack of data on energy use in buildings,
therefore, the PBE may have not taken into account the benchmark
scoring the efficiency of a building as other countries. In order to
overcome this gap, the evaluation is made according to the per-
formance of the building under evaluation. In other labeling pro-
grams, such as the bEQ (USA) and SCE (Portugal), the final score is
based on benchmarks. The benchmarks are in development in
Brazil by the Brazilian Sustainable Construction Council and it is
expected to bring enrichment to the labeling program, since the
energy efficiency of a building is a function not only of its physical
features, but also of how it is used [64].
The majority of the buildings in Brazil are naturally ventilated,
therefore, the methodology to evaluate the building energy effi-
ciency is correlated to the thermal comfort, based on international
standards, such as ASHRAE Standard 55, since it would be complex
to measure the energy consumption of a naturally ventilated en-
vironment (RTQ-C). The ventilation score is related to the per-
centage of occupied hours that the user is in thermal comfort. The
higher the percentage of hours in comfort of the occupied hours,
higher is the punctuation for the ventilation part of the final score
equation, which will lead to a higher value to the building energy
efficiency. In the United States and Portugal, the majority of the
buildings are artificially conditioned, which is easier to evaluate
the energy consumption.
Government role is important considering it can propel, by
public policies, the application of energy conservation in build-
ings; and, studies indicate that energy efficiency programs often
fails because there is no sufficient attention given by the govern-
ment to support the implementation of the program [65,66]. Be-
sides that, failure in applying energy efficiency measure lay on that
gap that separates the theoretical potential from what can really
be achieved practically; therefore it is important a cooperation
between governments, industries, business, associations, donors
and international institutions [66].
Labeling process in Portugal is already facing a more advanced
stage, comparing to the Brazilian labeling program; about 3000
new buildings and 15,000 existing ones are certified every month
in Portugal [66]. In Brazil this number is much lower: 125 com-
mercial labels and 2523 residential labels were issued until early
2015 [67]. The reason is not only the Brazilian labeling program
being at an initial stage, but also there are just three certifying
entities for the entire country [68]. Two of the three studied
countries adopt a voluntary labeling system. In Brazil, the trend is
the program becomes compulsory to all types of buildings over
time. Nowadays, the labeling in Brazil is obligatory for federal
public buildings only, what is a great beginning. With mandatory
labeling, it is expected a stronger valuation of labeled real estate
for rental and for sale, as well as an increase on market building
competition.
Implementation of a mandatory labeling system must be cau-
tious in Brazil, since (i) there are not enough professionals in the
area trained to certify buildings and there is just one entity al-
lowed to label buildings until now; (ii) the building assessment is a
lengthy process, sometimes requiring technical information from
third-parties, extending even more to issue the label; if a man-
datory program be launched without a consolidated infra-struc-
ture, the system might become overloaded, impairing the energy
labeling program efficacy; and (iii) in general, people might not be
aware of their homes energy consumption and neither the im-
portance of energy efficiency implementation [69].
According to [70], real estate owners would financially benefit
from building labeling programs, since they highlight less energy
demanding buildings, and, therefore, influence the sales and the
renting process. In fact, as [71] shows, the better the building label
score, the higher is the building value. However, according to the
same authors, the label score and market price variables are only
correlated, i.e., it is not possible to affirm that the label program
alone introduction is the reason of prices.
Buildings quality is likely to improve, providing a better en-
vironmental comfort to the end-user. Furthermore, with a man-
datory labeling, consumers will easily identify buildings with best
energy savings. It should be emphasized as well that the con-
struction of buildings which require less energy on its final use
may help to alleviate the investment growth in electric power
systems - especially in the electric generation.
Therefore, the influence of occupancy behavior in energy effi-
ciency in buildings is another issue that is being intensely re-
searched [17,72]. Much of the energy is wasted during non-
working hours, because of human inadequate behavior, i.e., many
occupants left the lights on after work [72]. Additionally, an in-
crease in the energy efficiency of a building may lead to an in-
crease in its energy consumption, since energy efficiency measures
can propel social and economic development, especially in de-
veloping countries [17]. Thus, for a more accurate rating energy
system, the Brazilian Labeling Program should consider the occu-
pancy on its assessment, so the energy efficiency assessment
would represent more faithfully the real energy consumption of
the building.
In order to boost the labeling program in Brazil, research cen-
ters are developing a faster assessment method that uses simpli-
fied spreadsheets. This new methodology is very important, since
Brazil is a huge country and lacks of capable professionals for la-
beling buildings, i.e. the simplified spreadsheet aims to reduce the
complexity of training new professionals. Although, if a more ac-
curate assessment is required, it is still possible to issue the label
using the Brazilian software, Domus-Eletrobras [51]. This last one
takes longer to assess the building and requires financial and
knowledge resources, since it must be created a model of the
building for further simulation, which can take several days of data
processing.
Like the other programs, the Brazilian one transforms the
whole assessment into an equivalent number, which classifies the
building within a range varying from A to E. That is a simple and
marketable way of showing the energy efficiency of a building.
Although, while the Brazilian Labeling Program goal is to achieve
the maximum of energy efficiency; in U.S., the bEQ aims to achieve
the net-zero building; additionally, it is already a goal in Portugal
to achieve new net-zero energy buildings by 2020 [69]. Therefore,
to enhance more the PBE, another category should be created
(Aþ þ , for example) to value net-zero energy buildings, even
further when considering the Brazilian buildings potential to
generate energy from the solar power and the Brazilian Electric
Energy Agency Resolution 482/2012 promulgation [73].
The cited Resolution establishes general conditions for access of
micro and minigeneration distribution systems of electric power
in Brazil, including solar, wind, small hydro and biomass power
generation systems [73]. The resolution applies the power com-
pensation system, in which excess energy produced by a consumer
unit generates discounts on its energy bill. It is expected that the
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
Resolution 482/2012 encourages decentralized electric energy
generation in the country, applying various renewable sources.
While in Brazil buildings must be assessed by Accredited In-
spection Entities, in U.S. and in Portugal it may be certified by a
professional responsible for the building assessment. The Accre-
dited Inspection Entities tends to be more general then a single
specialist. A multidisciplinary group will give a broad evaluation,
what may include approaches from architects, mechanical en-
gineering, electrical engineering, and renewable energy specialists.
On the other hand, the creation of a certification entity takes a
long time compared to licensing professionals. Naturally, an ex-
piration date must be set to the professional license, so the expert
must get refresh course, since the labeling programs are being
constantly improved.
Comparing the Brazilian label to the North-American and Por-
tuguese labels, the Brazilian Program lacks some information. A
detailed documentation about improvements measures should be
taken into account on the Brazilian PBE. A study launched by the
Energy Portuguese Agency pointed out from the people who made
some renovation or maintenance on their homes, the majority
took into account the improvement suggestions listed on the
certificate [74]. The study shows not only how well the energy-
certification program was accepted by the population, but also
how important are the descriptions of the suggestions for
improvement.
Although the usefulness of the inclusion of suggestions for
energy efficiency improvement on the certificate, the PBE would
face some barriers: (i) need to adapt of a consolidated labeling
program - the PBE started during 1980, covering the certification
of appliances, pumps, vehicles, and other products, based only on
measuring the energy performance of a product; and (ii) possible
market competition, consultants in energy efficiency in buildings.
The authors think that those barriers are smaller than the ad-
vantages to publicize in the label, suggestions to the buildings
energy efficiency improvements since: (i) Brazilian Labeling Pro-
gram for Buildings must accommodate enhancements even
though it had been shown that had accomplished some degree of
success, and (ii) building energy efficiency consultants will be
continuously to be demanded to calculate the improvements
suggested and others to be proposed independently.
It is important to highlight that CO2 emission is not considered
on the Brazilian label as it is on the Portuguese and U.S. ones. Some
reasons might be (i) the Brazilian energy grid which is majority
composed of renewable sources, while in Portugal, and in coun-
tries of the Northern Hemisphere, it is mostly composed of fossil
fuels; (ii) the Brazilian Labeling Program for Buildings does not
look to analyze the energy grid but only energy consumption; and
(iii) it is at an initial stage, needing to consolidate as a reliable
assessment method.
Finally, the building energy efficiency assessment methods
discussed in this paper take into account the building as single
element, not considering the influence of surrounded environ-
ment, such as the influence of trees and other buildings around
the evaluated one. Therefore, as [75] discuss, more research is
needed to cover the gap between the urban and the building scale,
and enhance the building energy efficiency certification process.
6. Final considerations
Currently, the world is in a globalization pressure, where the
desire for economic growth often prevails. The development of
mechanisms that contribute to environmental sustainability and
do not impact the economy negatively is the synthesis of sus-
tainable development challenge. Therefore, the countries are fa-
cing with the key questions: Does the labeling system that value
217
the high efficient building a priori in order to save energy a pos-
teriori really means to promote a more sustainable development?
Does the energy expend for the construction of a high efficient
building is paid in the building life expectancy? Labeling buildings,
already adopted by several countries, is becoming an option for
both development and sustainability to grow entwined. The ap-
plication of labels that evaluate how economic, in terms of energy,
a construction is seems to be a promising idea, however there
must be a careful analysis on this matter. Positives points and
drawbacks must be highlighted, so continuous improvements in
the energy efficiency labeling field are possible.
Forecasts indicate that future energy savings and reduced car-
bon emissions from sustainable buildings are promising for
countries more dependent on non-renewable energy; however, it
requires a joint effort of governments, the private sector and
society.
Finally, it must be clear that the implementation of energy
saving program for buildings must be cautious. Therefore, in fact,
this idea can become a reality, benefiting the environment; the
final end user who might have fewer expenses on power and more
indoor comfort; and the government, which might need to face a
lower demand of electricity by conventional power plants. The
final goal mixtures economy and natural resources, and seems to
be a typical Integrated Resource Planning task.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank FAPEMIG, UFV-CREDI and
ELETROBRAS for the financial support.
References
[1] IEA. International Energy Agency. World energy outlook 2010. Executive
summary. Available at: 〈http://iea.org〉; 2010 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[2] DOE. World primary energy consumption and population, by country/region.
U.S. Department of Energy. Available at: 〈http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.
gov〉; 2012 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[3] Fridley DG, Zheng N, Zhou N. Estimating total energy consumption and
emissions of China's commercial and office buildings LBNL-248E. Available at:
〈https://china.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbl-248e-commercialbuildingmarch-2008.
pdf〉; 2008 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[4] EPE. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética (Energy Research Company). Balanço
energético nacional (Nacional energy balance). Available at: 〈https://ben.epe.
gov.br〉; 2014 [Date accessed: 15.03.15].
[5] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology). INMETRO revisa
regulamento de eficiência energética em edificações comerciais (INMETRO
reviews the energy efficiency regulation for commercial buildings) (2012).
Available at: 〈http://www.inmetro.gov.br/〉; 2012 [Date accessed 18.03.15].
[6] IEA, International Energy Agency. 25 Energy efficiency policy recommenta-
tions; 2011.
[7] Pérez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Pout C. A review on buildings energy consumption
information. Energy Build 2008;40:394–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2007.03.007.
[8] IEA, International Energy Agency. 4E Programme. Available at: 〈http://www.
iea-4e.org/about-4e〉. [Date accessed 18.02.16].
[9] International Energy Agency. Energy efficiency market report: executive
summary. Energy Effic Mark Rep 2014;39:11–2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
icrp.2009.12.007.
[10] International Energy Agency. Capturing the multiple benefits of energy effi-
ciency. Capturing Mult Benefits Energy Effic 2014:18–25.
[11] Ürge-Vorsatz D, Novikova A. Potentials and costs of carbon dioxide mitigation
in the world's buildings. Energy Policy 2008;36:642–61. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2007.10.009.
[12] EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency. Greenhouse Gas In-
ventory Data Explorer. Available at: 〈http://www3.epa.gov/〉 [Date accessed
06.02.16].
[13] APA, Agência Portuguesa do Meio Ambiente (Portuguese Environment Agen-
cy). Inventário Nacional de Emissões Atmosféricas (National Inventory of At-
mospheric Emissions). Available at: 〈http://www.apambiente.pt/〉; 2015 [Date
accessed: February 06, 2016].
[14] MCTI, Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (Ministry of Science,
Technology and Innovation). Estimativas anuais de emissões de gases de efeito
218 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
estufa no Brasil (Annual estimates of greenhouse gas emissions in Brazil).
Available at: 〈http://www.mct.gov.br/〉 [Date accessed 06.02.16].
[15] IEA, International Energy Agency. Energy Balances. Available at: 〈http://www.
iea.org/statistics/〉. [Date accessed 05.02.16].
[16] Casals XG. Analysis of building energy regulation and certification in Europe:
their role, limitations and differences. Energy Build 2006;38:381–92. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2005.05.004.
[17] Santos HC, Fagá MTW, Santos EM. The risks of an energy efficiency policy for
buildings based solely on the consumption evaluation of final energy. Electr
Power Energy Syst 2013;44:70–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijepes.2012.07.017.
[18] Pérez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, González R, Maestre IR. A review of benchmarking,
rating and labeling concepts within the framework of building energy certi-
fication schemes. Energy Build 2009;41:272–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2008.10.004.
[19] MME. Ministério de Minas e Energia. (Ministry of Energy and Mines). Plano
nacional de eficiência energética. (National energy efficiency plan). Available
at: 〈http://www.orcamentofederal.gov.br/〉; 2011 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[20] Brazil. Interministerial ordinance No. 1877, December 1985. Established the
national electric energy conservation program. Available at: 〈http://infoener.
iee.usp.br〉; 1985 [Date accessed: 27.04.12].
[21] Brazil. Law No. 8631, March 4, 1993. Provides for the establishment of fee
levels for public service of electric energy, extinguishes the guaranteed re-
muneration regime and other measures, Brasilia. Available at: 〈http://www.
planalto.gov.br〉; 1993 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[22] Brazil. Law No. 9478, August 6, 1997. Provides for a national energy policy, the
activities related to the petroleum monopoly, establishing the national Energy
Policy Council and the National Petroleum Agency and Other Measures, Bra-
silia. Available at: 〈http://www.planalto.gov.br〉; 1997 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[23] Brazil. Decree No. 3330, January 6, 2000. Provides for the reduction of energy
consumption in public buildings of the federal public administration and
other measures, Brasilia. Available at: 〈http://senado.gov.br〉; 2000 [Date ac-
cessed: 27.04.12].
[24] Brazil. Law No. 10295, October 17, 2001. Provides for the national policy for
conservation and rational use of energy and other measures, Brasilia. Available
at: 〈http://planalto.gov.br〉; 2001 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[25] CEA. Bardelin. Os efeitos do racionamento de energia elétrica ocorrido no
Brasil em 2001 e 2002 com ênfase no consumo de energia elétrica (The effects
on electrical energy rationing occurred in Brazil in 2001 and 2002 with em-
phasis on electric energy consumption). Dissertation. Polytechnic School of
University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo. Available at: 〈http://www.teses.usp.br/〉;
2004 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[26] Brazil. Decree No. 4059, December 19, 2001, Maximum levels of energy con-
sumption, or minimum levels of energy efficiency for machines, Brasilia.
Available at: 〈http://planalto.gov.br〉; 2001 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[27] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology), Decree No. 53,
February 27, 2009, Regulamento técnicos da qualidade para o nível de efi-
ciência energética de edifícios comerciais, de serviços e públicos (Technical
requirements on quality of the level of energy efficiency of commercial, ser-
vice and public buildings). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INMETRO. Available at: 〈http://
www.procelinfo.com.br/〉; 2009 [Date accessed 18.09.15].
[28] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology), Decree No. 185, June
22, 2009, Regulamento de avaliação de conformidade do nível de eficiência
energética para edifícios comerciais, de serviços e públicos (Compliance as-
sessment of the level of energy efficiency of Commercial, service and public
buildings). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INMETRO. Available at: 〈http://www.procelinfo.
com.br/〉; 2009 [Date accessed: 18.10.15].
[29] Brazil. Brazilian National Institute of Metrology, Standardization and Industrial
Quality (Brazilian National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology),
Decree No. 449, November 25, 2010, Regulamento técnico da qualidade para o
nível de eficiência energética de edificações residenciais (Technical require-
ments on quality of the level of energy efficiency in residential buildings). Rio
de Janeiro, RJ: INMETRO. Available at: 〈http://www.procelinfo.com.br/〉; 2010
[Date accessed 18.10.15].
[30] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology), Decree No. 122,
March 15, 2011, Regulamento de avaliação de conformidade do nível de efi-
ciência energética para edifícios residenciais (Compliance assessment of the
level of energy efficiency of residential buildings). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: IN-
METRO. Available at: 〈http://www.procelinfo.com.br/〉; 2011 [Date accessed
18.10.15].
[31] Brazil. Instrução normativa (Normative instruction). No. 2, June 4th, 2014.
Brasília: Diário Oficial da União. Available at: 〈http://www010.dataprev.gov.br/
〉; 2014 [Date accessed 18.09.15].
[32] Carlo JC, Lamberts R. Development of envelope efficiency labels for commer-
cial buildings: Effect of different variables on electricity consumption. Energy
Build 2008;40:2002–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.05.002.
[33] Carlo JC, Lamberts R. Parâmetros e métodos adotados no regulamento de
etiquetagem da eficiência energética de edifícios – parte 1: método prescritivo
(Parameters and Methods adopted in the Regulation of Labeling of Energy
Efficiency in Buildings - Part 1: Method prescriptive). Ambiente Construído
2010;10:7–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-86212010000200001.
[34] EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Celebrating a decade of energy star
buildings. Available at: 〈https://energystar.gov〉; 2011 [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[35] RE. Jarnagin. ASHRAE Building EQ. ASHRAE J. Available at: 〈http://buildingen
ergyquotient.org〉. 51; 2009, p. 18–9 [Date accessed: Oct. 18, 2015].
[36] ASHRAE. As designed evaluation. Available at: 〈http://buildingenergyquotient.
org〉; 2015 [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[37] ASHRAE. What's the cost and what will the owner receive? Available at:
〈http://buildingenergyquotient.org〉; 2015 [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[38] EPA, Environmental Protection Agency. The energy star for buildings & Man-
ufacturing plants. Available at: 〈http://energystar.gov〉; 2012 [Date accessed
13.03.15].
[39] RO. Nelson. Building Energy Labeling: A Path to improved energy performance
for commercial buildings. Master's thesis, The University of New Mexico, New
Mexico. Available at: 〈http://repository.unm.edu〉; 2010 [Date accessed
17.10.15].
[40] Portugal. Decree-law 80/2006, regulation of characteristics of the thermal
behavior of buildings. Available at: 〈http://dre.pt〉; 2006 [Date accessed: May
01, 2012].
[41] Waide P, Lebot B, Hinnells M. Appliance energy standards in Europe. Energy
Build 1997;26:45–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(96)01013-4.
[42] Wiel S, Egan C, Cava M della. Energy Efficiency standards and labels provide a
solid foundation for economic growth, climate change mitigation, and re-
gional trade. Energy Sustain Dev 2006:54–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S0973-0826(08)60544-X.
[43] Portugal. Decree-law 78/2006, National Energy Performance Certification
System and Indoor Air Quality in Buildings (SCE). Available at: 〈http://85.25.
117.7/publications/32279?CommunityId ¼ 2554〉; 2006 [Date accessed:
18.09.15].
[44] EU (2002). Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,
December 16, 2002, Energy performance of buildings. Available at: 〈http://
eur-lex.europa.eu/〉; 2002 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[45] EU (2010). Directive 2010/31/EU, Energy Performance of Buildings. Available
at: 〈http://eur-lex.europa.eu/〉; 2010 [Date accessed 18.09.15].
[46] Santos P, Mateus P, Maldonado E. Implementation of the EPBD in Portugal:
status and planning - March 2008, Country reports 2008, Pan European: EPBD
Buildings Platform. Available at: 〈http://buildup.eu〉; 2008, p.169–74 [Date
accessed: 18.09.12].
[47] ADENE. Agência para a energia (Agency for energy). Certificação de edifícios
(Buildings certifying), Exemplos de certificados (certificate examples). Avail-
able at: 〈http://www2.adene.pt/〉; 2012 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[48] Fedrigo NS, Ghisi E, Lamberts R. Usos finais de energia elétrica no setor re-
sidencial Brasileiro (Final electrical energy use in the residential sector in
Brazil). In: X Encontro Nacional e VI Encontro Latino Americano de Conforto
no Ambiente Construído, Natal. Available at: 〈http://www.labeee.ufsc.br/node/
480〉; 2009 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[49] ADENE. Agência para a energia (Agency for energy). Questions & answers
about the National System for Energy and Indoor Air Quality Certification.
Available at: 〈http://www2.adene.pt/〉; 2009 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[50] Carlo JC, Lamberts R. Parâmetros e métodos adotados no regulamento de
etiquetagem da eficiência energética de edifícios – parte 2: método de si-
mulação (Parameters and Methods adopted in the Regulation of Labeling of
Energy Efficiency in Buildings - Part 2: Simulation Method). Ambiente Con-
struído 2010;10:27–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/
S1678-86212010000200002.
[51] Brazil. Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. Instituto Nacional de
Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian National Institute of Metrology,
Quality and Technology). Programa de simulação higrotermoenergética de
edificações (Hygrothermal and energetic building simulation program). DO-
MUS – Eletrobras. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INMETRO. Available at: http://www.pro
celinfo.com.br/〉; 2013 [Date accessed 18.10.15].
[52] Fedrigo NS, Ghisi E, Lamberts R. Usos finais de energia elétrica no setor re-
sidencial Brasileiro (Final electrical energy use in the residential sector in
Brazil). In: X Encontro Nacional e VI Encontro Latino Americano de Conforto
no Ambiente Construído, Natal. Available at: 〈http://www.labeee.ufsc.br/node/
480〉; 2009 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[53] ELETROBRAS, PROCEL. Pesquisa de posse de equipamentos e hábitos de uso –
Ano base 2005. Classe comercial - Relatório Brasil. (Survey on appliances
ownership and electricity consumption – base year 2005. Commercial Sector -
Brazil Report). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Eletrobras and Procel, Brazil. Available at:
〈http://www.procelinfo.com.br/〉; 2008 [Date accessed 18.10.15].
[54] ELETROBRAS, PROCEL. Pesquisa de posse de equipamentos e hábitos de uso –
Ano base 2005. Classe residencial – Relatório Brasil. (Survey on appliances
ownership and electricity consumption – base year 2005. Commercial Sector -
Brazil Report). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Eletrobras and Procel. Available at: 〈http://
www.procelinfo.com.br/〉; 2007 [Date accessed 18.10.15].
[55] ASHRAE. ASHRAE building energy labeling program, Draft – Implementation
report. Available at: 〈http://unep.org〉; June 2009 [Date accessed 30.09.15].
[56] CBECS. Commercial buildings energy consumption survey, benchmarking
data. Available at: 〈http://buildingbenchmarks.com〉; 2012 [Date accessed
30.09.15].
[57] Brazil. Ministry of Mines and Energy, Etiquetagem de eficiência energética em
edificações (Building energy efficiency labeling program). Rio de Janeiro, RJ:
Ministério de Minas e Energia. Available at: 〈http://www.procelinfo.com.br/〉;
2009 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[58] ADENE. Agência para a energia (Agency for Energy). Guia prático do certifi-
cado energético da habitação (Energy Certification Guide). Available at:
〈http://www2.adene.pt/〉; 2012 [Date accessed 01.05.12].
[59] ADENE. Agência para a energia (Agency for Energy). Etapas da certificação
 A.d.C.P. Lopes et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 66 (2016) 207–219
(Certification Steps). Available at: 〈http://www2.adene.pt/〉; 2012 [Date ac-
cessed 01.05.12].
[60] JC. Carlo. Desenvolvimento de metodologia de avaliação de eficiência en-
ergética do envoltório de edificações não-residenciais (Development assess-
ment methodology for energy efficiency of non-residential buildings envel-
ope), PhD Thesis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (Federal University
of Santa Catarina), Florianópolis, Santa Catarina. Available at: 〈http://labeee.
ufsc.br〉; 2008 [Date accessed 18.10.12].
[61] ASHRAE. Building Energy Assessment Professional. Available at: 〈http://buil
dingenergyquotient.org/〉; (2015) [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[62] ASHRAE. Steps to earn a label. Available at: 〈http://buildingenergyquotient.
org/〉; 2015 [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[63] IEA. International Energy Agency. Energy Efficiency Governance, Handbook.
OECD/IEA. Available at: 〈http://iea.org〉; 2010 [Date accessed 27.04.12].
[64] Borgsteina EH, Lamberts R. Developing energy consumption benchmarks for
buildings: Bankbranches in Brazil. Energy Build 2014;82:82–91. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.028.
[65] Sudhakara Reddy B, Assenza G. Barriers and drivers to energy efficiency? A
New taxonomical approach Energy Convers Manag 2007. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2013.06.040.
[66] IEA. International Energy Agency. Policy pathway, energy performance certi-
fication of buildings. Available at: 〈https://iea.org〉. [Date accessed 30.09.15].
[67] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology). Tabelas DE consumo/
eficiência Energética (Tables Consumption/Energy efficiency). Available at:
〈http://inmetro.gov.brhttp://www.inmetro.gov.br/consumidor/pbe/edifica
219
coes.asp〉; 2015 [Date accessed 18.03.16].
[68] Brazil. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Brazilian
National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology). Organismos Acre-
ditados (Accredited Organizations). Available at: 〈http://inmetro.gov.brhttp://
www.inmetro.gov.br/organismos/consulta.asp〉; 2015 [Date accessed 13.03.15].
[69] P Santos, P Mateus, E. Maldonado. Implementation of the EPBD in Portugal,
Status in November 2010, Country Reports 2010, European Union. Available at:
〈http://www.epbd-ca.org/〉; 2010 [Date accessed 13.06.12].
[70] Batista NN, Roverea EL, J. C. R. Energy efficiency labeling of buildings: an as-
sessment of the Brazilian case. Energy Build 2011;43:1179–88. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.11.010.
[71] Stavins RN, Schatzki T. An economic perspective on building labeling policies.
Harvard University; 2013.
[72] Masoso OT, Grobler LJ. The dark side of occupants' behaviour on building
energy use. Energy Build 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2009.08.009.
[73] ANEEL. Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica (National Agency for Electric
Energy). Resolution No. 482. Available at: 〈http://www.aneel.gov.br/〉; April 17,
2012 [Date accessed: Oct. 18, 2015].
[74] ADENE. National Agency for Energy. Estudo sobre certificação energética e
melhoria do edificado (Energy certification and building improvement study).
Available at: 〈http://www2.adene.pt/〉; 2011 [Date accessed 18.03.15].
[75] Anderson JE, Wulfhorst G, Lang W. Energy analysis of the built environment –
a review and outlook. Renew Energy Rev 2015;44:149–58. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.027.