Mid Sweden University stersund, Sweden MILEN International - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

MILEN International Conference, 22-23 Nov 2012, Oslo, Norway

Or Orga ganiza nizati tion

• nal persp

al perspec ecti tive ves on s on ad adop

• pti

tion

• n of
• f

en energ ergy effi y efficien ciency cy mea measu sures res in S in Swed wedish ish multi multi- store storey y ap apartmen artment t bu buil ilding dings Gireesh Nair and Inga Carlman Mid Sweden University Östersund, Sweden

Role of energy efficiency in mitigation of climate change

IEA, 2010

• A large number of energy efficiency measures are widely

available which provide net benefits (IPCC, 2007) “Nine out of ten technologies that hold potential for energy and CO2 emissions savings are failing to meet the deployment

• bjectives needed to achieve the necessary transition to a low-

carbon future.” (IEA, 2012)

However

Energy efficiency improvements

To address the energy efficiency gap....

• “An improved understanding of the human dimensions of

energy consumption, particularly in the residential and commercial sectors... will help policy makers to catalyse technology-based energy savings” (IEA, 2012)

• Government target: to reduce energy use/heated floor area by

50% from 1995 to 2050

• Various policy instruments are used to encourage building
• wners to adopt energy efficiency (EE) measures
• Addition of new houses to the existing stock happens slowly

Energy use in Swedish residential sector

• The final energy use for residential and service sectors in 2010

was 166 TWh (40% of the national final energy use)

• Approximately 60% of the sector’s energy use is for heating

and hot water

Source: Swedish Energy Agency, 2011

Final energy use in residential and service sector – 1970-2010 (TWh)

Atti Attitud tude to towar ards ds cli lima mate te cha hang nge

87 88 61 56 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Personally taken action to fight climate change Well informed about causes and consequences of climate change

Europe Sweden

% of respondents

Source: Europeans’ attitudes towards climate change; Eurobarometer, 2008

Multi Multi-stor storey ey apa partmen tment t bu buil ilding dings

• Owenership of multi-family apartment apartment buildings

30 % 30 % 40 %

Co-operative housing association Private housing companies Municipal housing companies

• Sweden has about 2.5 million multi-family apartments
• Heated floor space in 2010 was about 180 million m2

─ 85% apartments are heated by district heating system

Multi-family apartments

• Tenant-Ownership
• Approximately 26500 co-operative housing associations
• Executive board headed by chairperson makes decision
• Chairperson and board members are elected from

apartment owners Co-operative housing associations in Sweden

Methodology

• 2800 questionnaire were sent during June-October 2010
• Address were selected randomly from Bolagsverket
• Response rate – 24%

Overall Objective

• To better undersand the co-operative housing associations adoption

practices of energy efficiency measures in their buildings

Respondent category

• About 40% buildings were more than 40 years old
• Heating system – 50% district heating, 14% electricity heated, and the rest
• ther heating system

Objective and Methodology

Collection of Information Selection of an installation Physical condition, energy cost, old installation Mass media and interpersonal communication, change agents Perceived advantages

• Economic
• Maintenance
• Environmental

Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 1

Need for a new installation Post-purchase evaluation

Stage 4

Contextual factors Marketing activities

• f such external

actors as sellers/installers Subsidies Influencing factors

Stages in adoption of an end-use energy efficiency measure

Adapted from Rogers, 2003

Organizational characteristic Size Centralization Slack Complexity Formalization Interconnectedness System openness

• % of respondents who believed their annual heating and

electricity cost as high was 15% and 6% , respectively

• Still, for 55% and 38% of respondents, it was important to

reduce heating and electricity use, respectively Perception towards energy efficiency (EE) improvement However

• 76% of associations did not have any plan for energy efficiency

improvements in their buildings

Building envelope components % of respondents No Yes, within 3 years Yes, in 3-10 years Windows (N=578) 79 8 13 Attic insulation (N=555) 84 8 8 Basement insulation (N=534) 94 2 4 External wall insulation (N=548) 94 3 3

Plan to replace building envelope components

Goals % of respondents Agree Neither nor Disagree To keep monthly rent to its members as low as possible 79 17 4 To provide good indoor environment 86 13 7 To be an environmentally friendly association 67 24 9 To become an highly energy efficient association 65 27 8

Association’s goals

% of respondents

8 21 22 26 34 35 37 40 54 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Members of association does not support investments in EE measures Investments in EE measures are low priority compared to other measures Changing behaviour like switching off lights is more beneficial than investments in EE measures If the association reduce heat energy, district heating companies will increase energy price, thus making the effort worthless Financial constraints makes it difficult to invest in EE measures Time and effort required to collect necessary information is too high It is difficult to obtain reliable information about costs and benefits

• f EE measures

Uncertainty about future energy prices makes it difficult to invest in EE measures The board does not have own expertise to assess the benefits of EE measures (N=629)

Agree Neither nor Disagree

Issues regarding investment intensive EE measures in apartment buildings

33 32 37 43 42 59 60 70 88 88 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Small/no disturbance to residents (N=523) Reduce greenhouse gas emission (N=514) Technical limitation of buildings (N=510) Improve market value of property (N=525) Environmental benefit (N=523) Payback period (N=547) Improve indoor environment (N=540) Functional reliability (N=532) Investment cost (N=593) Reduce annual energy cost (N=597)

Agree Neither nor Disagree

% of respondents

Importance of various factors in respondents’ EE investment decisions

41 19 44 20 8 34 18 14 33 22 16

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Yes No Often Sometime Rarely Easy Neither nor Difficult Important Neither nor Not important

Board members responsible for energy issues Frequency: energy issues discussed in board meeting Board’s approval

• n energy

efficiency investments Energy efficiency and association’s image % of respondents

Plan for energy efficiency improvements

N=157 N=246 N=143 N=459 N=196 N=233 N=173 N=272 N=238 N=73 N=149

• Financial position

– 77% respondents reported that the financial position of their association is good

• Number of members in the board

– Surrogate indicator of the size of the organization

• Chairperson’s educational qualification and tenure duration

Factors that were not found to significantly influence association’s plan for EE

• More than 75% of associations do not have any plan to improve

the energy efficiency of their buildings

• Economic factors were important in influencing the decisions
• Only a small percentage of respondents consider their energy cost

burden as high

• A large number of respondents consider it important to reduce

energy use

• Majority of respondents reported that they did not have expertise to

assess the benefits of EE investment measures Conclusions

Th Than ank k yo you for your u for your atten attenti tion

• n!