The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review
Energy efficient buildings are viewed as one of the solutions to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment. However, studies worldwide indicate that there is a significant gap between building energy targets (as-designed) and the actual measured building energy consumption (as-built). Sever...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Mary Ann Liebert
2020
|
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166372 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/80906 |
| _version_ | 1848764286947557376 |
|---|---|
| author | Eon, Christine Breadsell, Jessica Byrne, Joshua Morrison, Gregory |
| author_facet | Eon, Christine Breadsell, Jessica Byrne, Joshua Morrison, Gregory |
| author_sort | Eon, Christine |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Energy efficient buildings are viewed as one of the solutions to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment. However, studies worldwide indicate that there is a significant gap between building energy targets (as-designed) and the actual measured building energy consumption (as-built). Several underlying causes for the energy performance gap have been identified at all stages of the building life cycle. Focus is generally on the post-occupancy stage of the building life cycle. However, issues relating to the construction and commissioning stages of the building are a major concern, though not usually researched. There is uncertainty on how to address the as-designed versus as-built gap. The objective of this review article is to identify causes for the energy performance gap in buildings in relation to the post-design and pre-occupancy stages and review proposed solutions. The methodology applied in this research is the rapid review, which is a variant of the systematic literature review method. Findings suggest that causes for discrepancies between as-designed and as-built energy performance during the construction and commissioning stages relate to a lack of knowledge and skills, lack of communication between stakeholders and a lack of accountability for building performance post-occupancy. Recommendations to close this gap during this period include better training, improved communication standards, collaboration, energy evaluations based on post-occupancy performance, transparency of building performance, improved testing and verification and reviewed building standards. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T11:16:57Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-80906 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T11:16:57Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | Mary Ann Liebert |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-809062021-01-08T07:54:27Z The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review Eon, Christine Breadsell, Jessica Byrne, Joshua Morrison, Gregory Energy efficient buildings are viewed as one of the solutions to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment. However, studies worldwide indicate that there is a significant gap between building energy targets (as-designed) and the actual measured building energy consumption (as-built). Several underlying causes for the energy performance gap have been identified at all stages of the building life cycle. Focus is generally on the post-occupancy stage of the building life cycle. However, issues relating to the construction and commissioning stages of the building are a major concern, though not usually researched. There is uncertainty on how to address the as-designed versus as-built gap. The objective of this review article is to identify causes for the energy performance gap in buildings in relation to the post-design and pre-occupancy stages and review proposed solutions. The methodology applied in this research is the rapid review, which is a variant of the systematic literature review method. Findings suggest that causes for discrepancies between as-designed and as-built energy performance during the construction and commissioning stages relate to a lack of knowledge and skills, lack of communication between stakeholders and a lack of accountability for building performance post-occupancy. Recommendations to close this gap during this period include better training, improved communication standards, collaboration, energy evaluations based on post-occupancy performance, transparency of building performance, improved testing and verification and reviewed building standards. 2020 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/80906 10.3390/su12166372 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166372 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Mary Ann Liebert fulltext |
| spellingShingle | Eon, Christine Breadsell, Jessica Byrne, Joshua Morrison, Gregory The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title | The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title_full | The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title_fullStr | The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title_short | The Discrepancy between As-Built and As-Designed in Energy Efficient Buildings: A Rapid Review |
| title_sort | discrepancy between as-built and as-designed in energy efficient buildings: a rapid review |
| url | https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166372 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/80906 |